imb

His knee is fine, it's his hammy that has teams bothered. His pro day was fine, aside from relatively slow 40 times. The "blowup" afterwards was overblown, I saw the entire interview and all he did was say that the medical staff misdiagnosed him (they did).

when i want to talk baseball history, i think of the social forum oh yeah, 5714 Ks will never be topped

i never saw him take flight, for one.

I would be shocked if Chris ever becomes a franchise player. At least a franchise player on a good team. Hell he barely was able to win 20 games in college his freshman year.

duh, you measure them

Nothing special, but not bad either. I don't see how that furthers either argument with such a small sample size. That's a smoking .649 OPS. It's bad.

Cubs discussions has about one s too many

http://www.stacksvinyl.com/store_images/shops/city/products/madonna_vogue_400.jpg

Is Crow going to pitch in the OU series? I might drive over there and see it.

i'm not so sure... 2004: 687 PA, 168 K (24.5% K/PA) 2005: 481 PA, 118 K (24.5% K/PA) 2006: 498 PA, 94 K (18.9% K/PA) 2007: 503 PA, 65 K (12.9% K/PA) So? Whether it's strikeouts, pop outs or ground outs, he still makes the same amount of them. Last year he struck out almost 30 times less than 2006 in only two less at bats and his OBP still dropped. the less one strikes out, the better chance one has to get on base. his BABIP was also down last year, as was his LD%. i don't know that he's necessarily the same hitter; he seems to have cut down his strikeout rate, but he doesn't draw any more walks and also seems to not be making as solid contact. i'm not really sure what to think about him. if he cut down the K rate to where it was last year but managed to keep up his batting average and his power, he'd actually be a decent player. Not necessarily, see Juan Pierre. Sometimes you can sacrifice Ks for contact and you just end up hitting 4-3s all day, which is what it looks like has happened to Corey. The Cubs always wanted to make him a slap hitter and it looks like that's what he's turned into. Not surprisingly, the end result is the same, if not worse.

I think his 700 point increase in OPS is for real

i'm not so sure... 2004: 687 PA, 168 K (24.5% K/PA) 2005: 481 PA, 118 K (24.5% K/PA) 2006: 498 PA, 94 K (18.9% K/PA) 2007: 503 PA, 65 K (12.9% K/PA) So? Whether it's strikeouts, pop outs or ground outs, he still makes the same amount of them. Last year he struck out almost 30 times less than 2006 in only two less at bats and his OBP still dropped.

It's not fluky power. He's always had power. The ability to put bat to ball has been Corey's problem. Thanks for the scouting report. You think he's going to hit 54 homeruns this year? It's a fluke, even with all the extra contact, he's hitting seven points less than last year and his OBP is the same.

Corey Patterson is still the same player he always has been. He's just been aided by some fluky power in the early going.

if i ever saw soriano out in the street i'd jack him right in the jaw his obp makes me that mad guys

I read this this morning. On the one hand, it's a bummer for Reid, considering how talented and hyped he was out of high school. And I definitely buy into the notion of Gundy as a Dbag. But the reality is that Reid couldn't stay healthy and couldn't keep Robinson off the field, and when Robinson got out there, he was a better player. It was actually a bigger issue around here than it played nationally, because for a while (at least on sports radio) it was a real racially charged thing.

howry vs top of the lineup? not feeling good

good hustle by zambrano, good slide by soto, olay by howard ugly run, but whatever

love soto's patience.

god, chip caray is awful and derrek lee saves the game

Is VORP a good stat to use for pitchers? Because last year he was 34th in the league. 34th among starters? That makes no sense. So he's a number 2? He said 34th in the league, not in baseball. If that's 34th among starting pitchers, then I don't get it. How could there have possibly been 33 starters in the NL ahead of him last season? Well, there are 30 teams, and if we go with the notion that each No. 1 is better than hill, that would rank him as the fourth best no. 2?

Is VORP a good stat to use for pitchers? Because last year he was 34th in the league. 34th among starters? That makes no sense. So he's a number 2?

Well, let's see. The National League average starter put up a 4.65 ERA last year. The average National League reliever put up a 4.06 ERA. So 200 innings of 3.75 and 80 innings of 4.06 gets you a 3.84 ERA out of both players combined. 80 innings of 2.00 and 200 innings of 4.65 gets you a 3.89 ERA overall. Of course, having those good innings all come in close games does give an extra benefit to the setup guy. At the same time, you have to add in that an average reliever costs you probably 1 million dollars and can easily be replaced if something goes wrong, while an average starter is going to cost you 3-6 million dollars at least and if they bust, they're much harder to find a replacement for. If I could lock in either of those two choices, I'd go for the starter. There is so much more flexibility in a bullpen to find a few good players and use them in all the important situations. In the Cubs case for example, Marmol going into the rotation moves Howry into Marmol's sport, Wuertz's into Howry's, and Eyre into Wuertz's. The guy who would replace Marmol wouldn't even have to be that good, because he'd be getting most of the mop up innings anyway. Of course, I have my doubts that Marmol could produce that much as either a starter or do it again as a reliever, but that's another discussion entirely. I'd take him as a reliever, simply because he's comfortable as a reliever. And if I am mistaken, he was developed a s a reliever in the minors. Which means, even if the Cubs wanted to move Marmol into the rotation, they'd prolly have to send him down to AAA for about a month or so, to stretch out his arm, and fine tune his mechanics. So nothing only would the Cubs be down an outstanding bullpen arm, but an outstanding arm all together for atleast a month. At this point, I much rather have Marshall/Gallagher/Veal/Smardz have the shot at starter in front of Marmol. Middle of the season is not a good idea to experiment. If the Cubs believe Marmol can be an outstanding starter, then let him make the transistion to starter in the OFFSEASON, not the middle of the season. Nonetheless, Piniella absolutely trusts Marmol in his current role, and thus is NOT about to move Marmol out of that spot. He was a starter in the minors. You're not going to make him a starter right now, but it's something I wish they would have done in the offseason.

That just makes it all worse. Also, I missed part of one of Banedon's post about season tickets being an investment. Baseball shouldn't be an investment, it's supposed to be a past time, and a system shouldn't exist that encourages investors at the expense of the common fans. That's just capitalism, baby.

Mario goes around the same place Russell Westbrook goes, imo. I kinda hope Westbrook returns solely so I can see how awesome a Westbrook-Jrue Holiday backcourt would be. While I like Chalmers a lot. Wesbrook will go much higher, imo. He is 6'5" and can play the point and has supreme athletic ability. He is all the things that get Hubie Brown and Jay Bilas excited. Length, oh god he has length and upside. ironically, nbadraft.net has him at no. 8 to chicago