CubColtPacer

See, that's a different story. The Cubs have the money to re-sign Z-now if they want to sign him for the money he's demanding, that might not happen. It won't be because of Lilly or Marquis's contracts though-if the Cubs let a pitcher like Z go, it's because Hendry won't give him 18 million, or a 7 year deal, or because of his injury risk, but not because he suddenly forgot that he had to sign Z when he went on his spending spree during the offseason.

Austin Kearns, Felipe Lopez, Ryan Wagner to Washington for Bill Bray, Gary Majewski, Brendon Harris, Royce Clayton and Daryl Thompson. Do you have any idea what I would have given up for Felipe Lopez and Austin Kearns? Bill Bray seems like a decent bullpen arm. Nothing more, nothing less. Gary Majewski is damaged goods. Brendon Harris is now a Tampa Bay Devil Ray, Royce Clayton is now a Toronto Blue Jay. I've never even heard of Daryl Thompson. That trade will rank as one of the worst ever when all is said and done. The worst ever? Kearns and Lopez will have to get better for that to be the case-they are nice major league players, but nothing more than that. Worst ever trades are when somebody trades a HOF or somebody like that for somebody who flames out, not when pretty good players are traded for nothing. Now, I will give you that it was one of the worst trades at the time of the trade I have ever seen, but we knew that back in July-not only did it not work out for the Reds, but it really never had a chance of working out for them.

What exactly is the hold up, then? The same holdup as Lee and Ramirez-negotiations. Hendry is trying to get the best deal he can, and sometimes that involves not locking up the player immediately. Plus, there are always a million details to work out. If Hendry had lowballed them, don't you think Z would have come out with that to get sympathy? They are probably a couple million and a year or two apart right now, and they are playing a little chicken and seeing which side breaks first.

Nobody knows exactly, but it seems to be somewhere around 115 million (that includes around 13.5 million for Z this year).

I know what you mean, but I disagree. When I think of motion controlled batting and pitching, I don't think of the most realistic representation of baseball at all, really. I think gimmicky (which I mean in the nicest way - it sounds fun). I've not played the wii, but I imagine it would use it's unique technology in a "fun" way, with "fun" being very subjective between me (a hardcore baseball simmer) and Nintendo (devloper of a console for kids, compared to the other companies). Nintendo is going to lose it's "kiddie" label very soon-there are some very mature games coming to the Wii. The Wii is really going to be a mix from games for everybody to the youngest to the most mature of games out there (even some criticized on other systems for being too mature)-they are really trying to give something for everybody. I think if somebody took the time to do the controls nicely for a baseball game on the Wii, it would be spectacular. There's so much you can do for the controller-it's just a matter of developing the code.

Have I missed something? I haven't seen anything that would even suggest that they don't want to sign Z over concern over the budget in the next couple years (2007, 2008, 2009)-so where is this all coming from about Hendry not knowing if there's money left for Z?

Wii has made me a fantastic bowler. On wii. With a decent coach, you could translate most of that sucess on Wii to the lanes pretty easily-the motion and the spin are the same, the things that would change would be 1) the weight of the ball and 2) the amount of oil on the lane. With a little practice, those things could be worked out-I think people will be better bowlers then ever with the help of the Wii system. Actually the spin isn't terribly similar. You can back spin the ball on Wii MUCH more easily than you ever could in real life. That said it's a pretty realistic simulation...and it does have me wanting to join a bowling league. Well-that's true. If the spin is what I think you mean, it becomes much more difficult with the weight of the ball in real life to turn your wrist in that unnatural way. My strike shot though is the exact same shot I use in real life (my average shot-in real life the oil patterns are different and change during the game, so you have to adjust every so often-that's why scores will be a little higher on Wii than in real life even for good bowlers) , and so are most of my spares. I have platinum on spares, but only gold on spin control-I can't get lane number 19.

Ohio State has shown a tendency to do this-remember the Michigan State game that they came back in the second half? That could really hurt the Buckeyes if they don't get it fixed before the tournament.

Wii has made me a fantastic bowler. On wii. With a decent coach, you could translate most of that sucess on Wii to the lanes pretty easily-the motion and the spin are the same, the things that would change would be 1) the weight of the ball and 2) the amount of oil on the lane. With a little practice, those things could be worked out-I think people will be better bowlers then ever with the help of the Wii system.

Are you saying this with something in support or is it just the pessimistic party line? Piniella mentioned candidates for the 2 spot, and Murton was not in there-that doesn't mean he won't change his mind though-he said he was going to re-evaluate everything in ST, and Lou is somebody who will change his mind on things quickly if he decides something is not working right.

I've always been under the impression that Jones wanted out, and Hendry tried to accommodate him. I'm glad he's coming back, and I'm equally glad he's withdrawn his request to leave. But, Jones should sit vs. LHP. That may not sit well with Jones, but I really don't think he has any clout in the matter. It will be interesting to see what they do about Jones and LHP. My guess is that he sits a few more days than last year, but still will bat against a decent amount of LHP.

I found the ZIPS projections from last year-here are a few notables: Williams-165.0 IP, 4.36 ERA, 104K/62BB Guzman-41.0 IP, 4.39 ERA, 28K/10BB Ryu-155.0 IP, 4.59 ERA, 110K/46BB Mitre-141.0 IP, 4.72 ERA, 111K/55BB Nolasco-154.0 IP, 4.73 ERA, 143K/56BB Hill-130.0 IP, 4.78 ERA, 156K/65BB Brownlie-110.0 IP, 4.91 ERA, 110K/67BB Koronka-151.0 IP, 5.01 ERA, 110K/67BB Marshall, Marmol, and Mateo were not listed. http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/2006_zips_projections_chicago_cubs/ I'll post the others if/and as I find them. Edit-BTW, Zips was found to be the most accurate system for pitchers last year-based on this study: http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/2006_projection_results/ The differences in the rs for the pitching projections really aren't significant. CHONE fell below Marcel (thats gotta hurt), but I think he made a lot of upgrades in the offseason. That's true. None of them were all that accurate last year (certainly not nearly the way it is with hitters), but they were all close to the same. I was just pointing that particular thing out just in case somebody came back with that zips just had a tough year picking pitchers, and some other projection was a lot better.

What was the Indinas' record in 1-run games? Hasn't it been accepted that one's record in 1-run games has a lot to do with luck? I think luck can play a big role in a team's overall record. How much of it is luck though? For example, hasn't it also been accepted that teams with very good closers will win more 1-run ballgames than those with terrible closers? I don't know to be honest. I am very curious on what their record in 1 run games is though. 18-26

By watching the higlights (and watching them 3-4 times to make sure I got everything)-it certainly looked like Toronto was the benefit of some favorable calls on the foul plus the time being as low as it was. Although, at the same time I thought the foul on Toronto on Gordon's drive was ridiculous-at the worst it was a no-call, and it could have been an offensive foul as well. It's hard to say if Toronto ended up getting more benefit in the last 12 seconds or if the benefits equaled out.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Piniella does not get ejected whatsoever in the regular season of 2007. Can you do that?

http://baseballcritic.wordpress.com/2007/01/22/zambrano-on-the-zito-trail/ I never saw that quote before. Is there a better source than a blog? Sure-here you go. http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/220720,CST-SPT-csep20.article

Actually, he probably is. PECOTA is projecting about a half run of ERA in Ryu's favor. CHONE predicts nearly an earned run Ryu's favor and ZiPS favors Ryu as well, although Dan sees them being pretty close. I keep forgetting to use ZiPS and CHONE when I make points about pitching. PECOTA may as well be the definitive source on projections for hitters... but its pitching lags behind (due to the very unpredictable nature of pitching itself). I will go out on a limb and say that all three will be wrong and Marquis will be about a run better than Ryu. Of course you will. You have no professional experience with projecting performances, nor do you have professional credibility that needs sustaining in order to ensure the money keeps coming in (at least not in this area). Not only that, but now Ryu has switched to the AL East. No offense intended of course, but I think I'll continue trusting the people that get paid to make these projections. After everything is said and done, I suspect Ryu's ERA will be slightly better after adjusting for league context. The big question I have with pitching projections are their minor league translations. It is already proven as a whole that pitching numbers are not nearly as accurate as hitting numbers. When I look at the ZIPS projections for 2007 and I see several minor leaguers who they project could have less than a 5 ERA right now in the majors (Mateo, Pignaitello, Lightenberg, Ryu, Pawelek, Guzman, Reith, Gallagher, O'Malley)-a couple of those have a decent chance of acheiving that, but a few of them would have a very small chance of hitting that number. That's the part that doesn't make sense to me-unfortunately, most of the time those projections never get to be tested, and when they are tested it's usually only with prospects who are absolutely ready. When a team has a situation like the Cubs did last year, most times I think those prospects from lower down in the minors or with lesser stuff-their numbers will not translate as well to the majors as the computers would say they would.

Again, did he even say that? I need to go back and look at these quotes again. I don't remember him saying he's definitely gone if they don't have the deal by opening day. He said that he must get a deal before the season, and if the Cubs don't sign him, he must go-that certainly sounds like it's definite unless he backs off of that statement.

Here's the wanting to be paid like Zito quote: http://baseballcritic.wordpress.com/2007/01/22/zambrano-on-the-zito-trail/

Teams don't throw at Vasher nearly as much as Tillman-I've heard that Tillman got thrown at twice as much as Vasher this year-in fact, Tillman was one of the league leaders at balls thrown his way. Because of this, it seems to reason that Tillman's stats would be a lot better than Vasher's, but he's not necessarily better. Edit: Here's the quote, from Football Outsider's Superbowl Preview: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2007/02/01/ramblings/game-previews/4913/

I found the ZIPS projections from last year-here are a few notables: Williams-165.0 IP, 4.36 ERA, 104K/62BB Guzman-41.0 IP, 4.39 ERA, 28K/10BB Ryu-155.0 IP, 4.59 ERA, 110K/46BB Mitre-141.0 IP, 4.72 ERA, 111K/55BB Nolasco-154.0 IP, 4.73 ERA, 143K/56BB Hill-130.0 IP, 4.78 ERA, 156K/65BB Brownlie-110.0 IP, 4.91 ERA, 110K/67BB Koronka-151.0 IP, 5.01 ERA, 110K/67BB Marshall, Marmol, and Mateo were not listed. http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/2006_zips_projections_chicago_cubs/ I'll post the others if/and as I find them. Edit-BTW, Zips was found to be the most accurate system for pitchers last year-based on this study: http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/2006_projection_results/

That is an amazing point and something I completely forgot about-that definitely makes me happier, as I have a good deal of trust in Wilken to generally pick people who have a decent chance of developing, and if he wants these two there must at least be a chance that they'll surprise and be really good, even if it's not a great one.

That's from this week's TMQ by the way-a very funny article about predictions: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/070213&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab3pos1

The Indiana-Purdue game has been pushed back to Thursday: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2764666 This basically makes it so that IU has to somehow find a way to get 1 of the 2 games this week-that's going to be a tough game at Michigan less than 48 hours after the game at Purdue.

Maybe there's a bias there, but I honestly think he's terrible. He's an obnoxious jerk who takes himself far too seriously, and he's just not good at describing the action, both in football and baseball. He's far more interested in being witty and cool than calling the game. I bolded the last sentence of goony's post for a reason. To me, that sentence perfectly describes Bob Costas these days. I used to think Costas did a great job whenever given play-by-play duties, regardless of sport. But these days, it's almost like he's trying too hard to make every single play seem dramatic. I liked Bob Costas doing games-the only thing I didn't like is what Pacers fans were his Bulls bias. I never bought into most of it, but one fact was unmistakeable-for a couple of years in the late 90's, Costas called just about every Bull by their first name, and called absolutely 0 Pacers by their first name-that was a little annoying to me. That didn't completely detract from his good announcing though-I haven't heard him enough lately to know if he's changed other than on the NFL pre-game show, where he seems fine.