CubColtPacer

I'm guessing that means there are 3 unique streaks longer than theirs, not just 3 teams with longer streaks. Cause if it's the latter, well I just have no faith in statistics anymore. Why would that be? There are only 13 teams left that are undefeated this season. It is not unlikely that only 4 of them finished last season winning their last few games as well to have a longer current winning streak. Reason for Edit: Sorry, I am just counting them up. I had 11, but I counted 13 just now. Still though, a great number of those teams I know lost their bowl game (USC, Oregon, Michigan, Georgia at least just on a quick look)

Not to brush this praise aside, but the pitching staff said the same thing about Oscar Acosta when he was canned, and the pitchers from those teams didn't suddenly forget how to throw. Interesting that Hill is quoted as a supporter. If I recall, he was one of the pitchers that was rumored to constantly ignoring Rothschild and that it wasn't until he quit listening to him that he started to perform at the ML as he did in the lower levels. I think Hill is probably playing the PC game after his AJ/Barrett comments rubbed management the wrong way. I don't doubt that Larry has done some good things, but the failures to prevent serious injuries to Wood and Prior (well, he can't stop Giles and Hawpe) are so large that we can't risk having him back. Maybe Baker just didn't listen to Larry. Bruce did say something to the effect of on this board the other day that Baker should have listened to Larry more than he actually did.

He's doing all right, but not quite as prolific as last year. Most of that though is due to 2 factors 1) Teams are double teaming him 2)ND has played a pretty tough schedule so far He might start racking up the huge numbers in the next few weeks. We'll know better than-I think he would be the 2nd or 3rd receiver drafted if he was just playing football-he'll drop significantly with the two sports thing though.

That play early in the game where Kent and Drew got tagged out at home on the same play still has me laughing a little bit.

I understand what your point is, but there are plenty of playoff caliber offenses have 2 holes in the lineup or more. The Cardinals, for example, have Molina, Miles/Belliard who have been absolutely terrible overall, and Encarnacion doesn't have an OBP above .320, which OBP was what you were measuring in this post (although Encarnacion has been alright for them overall with his slugging-not good, but not a huge drag to the offense). The Cardinals are not the only team with these kinds of holes, either. Oakland has a player exactly like Pierre in Mark Kotsay. Jay Payton has similar numbers, Mark Ellis has worse numbers, Dan Johnson is about the same with a little worse, and Crosby has much worse numbers. These players have 502, 557, 441, 286, and 358 at bats in the regular season. That's 2144 at bats out of 5 players that are around or worse than Pierre (Jay Payton is the only one better than Pierre this year with 5 points worse in OBP and 30 points better in SLG). Playoff caliber teams in both leagues regularly have 2 or 3 holes in their offense. Do we need to, or should we sign Pierre to be one of them? No-is signing Pierre going to kill our playoff chances? No.

That's a little extreme. Neither one was playing much in August (Theriot-38 AB's, Bynum 28) and Theriot had 80 AB's in September next to Bynum's 34. That platoon ended up only happening for something like 3 to 3 1/2 weeks-Theriot was played over Bynum all of the last couple weeks of the season even though both of them were having monster Septembers (not saying I disagree with that at all-just pointing it out).

That's based on the average situation though. The run expectancies with a below average hitter at the plate would be different. This is coming from somebody who thinks that sacrificing with your 2 hitter is crazy though. If you feel the need to sacrifice with your number 2 hitter, then the team is basically saying that the number 2 hitter is a significantly below average hitter-which begs the question of why are they batting them number 2 then? I agree with what you are saying. Sacrificing with the pitcher is fine. Sacrificing with the number 2 hitter, not so much. Remember when Baylor would have Gutierrez sacrifice Eric Young from second to third with nobody out in the first inning? Good times. :x Yeah, ugh. Sacrificing from 2nd to 3rd is definitely worse. At least sacrificing from 1st to 2nd one takes out the DP, and a runner does not usually advance from 1st to 2nd on an out (and they advance to third on a hit less than a runner from 2nd would come home). With a runner on 2nd and no outs, if you want to give up an out, at least have the hitter hit it to the right side-they should be able to have the bat control for that, and at least that has a greater chance of finding a hole.

Fred, I love these stats so much, and maybe you can't do this-but is there any way you can sort out the games where Lee came back in the middle of the season? As we know, Lee was never himself at all in that stretch, and so that could possibly affect the numbers pretty drastically. If you can't, that will be fine-I'm grateful just for this. I just wondered if you could easily do that.

That's based on the average situation though. The run expectancies with a below average hitter at the plate would be different. This is coming from somebody who thinks that sacrificing with your 2 hitter is crazy though. If you feel the need to sacrifice with your number 2 hitter, then the team is basically saying that the number 2 hitter is a significantly below average hitter-which begs the question of why are they batting them number 2 then?

Well, while Izturis was out for a year the Dodgers signed their shortstop in Furcal. They would have stayed with Izturis before he got hurt, but now they really don't have a spot for him. Whatever value he has at short (and that is a completely separate issue) he has almost no value at second base, and that is why the Dodgers wanted to get rid of him.

That's kind of a chicken and egg type of argument though. Part of the reason some of the terrible teams are high up on the list of sac bunts is that they have some absolutely terrible hitters in their order who it makes slightly mor e sense to sacrifice bunt with. For example, the Rockies are more likely to sacrifice in their order with Clint Barmes than any Phillies hitter would be likely to sacrifice, because Barmes is a terrible hitter who can put down a bunt. What I'm saying is that the worst offenses have some terrible hitters in their lineup-to compensate they have to play small ball and try to manufacture some runs. The good to great offenses in the NL don't have that terrible hitter until the 7 or maybe 8 spot, where it makes little sense to ever sacrifice in front of the pitcher-therefore their number of sacrifice bunts are lower.

How did you end up getting on, CCP? Why-were all of you trying to make sure I wouldn't :D Seriously, it was almost an accident. I clicked on the premium message board link-the message popped up about how I wasn't authorized to get on the premium board, and the link for the regular interface was there. I clicked that link, and it took me to the board.

Yeah, I keep getting that message also..in addition, I couldn't get on to the board till about half an hour ago..going in the way I usually went (clicking message board on the main site) was giving me an error every time. I had to find another way around to get on, so there could be many people who don't know the board is actually up right now.

He said at the end of the season it doesn't say by your name how many injuries you had that year, but only what your win loss record was that year, and no matter what happens that's all that matters.

I have a feeling Hendry is gonna do some big things this off season....knowing his job is in serious jeopardy. Don't count on it. Agreed. What bargaining chips does he have to work with now? He's completely drained the minor leagues, and his major league ballclub is chok-full of junk nobody wants or bad contracts. The Trib's not going to open the coffers so he can spend his way out of this hole, that's for sure. I think he has enough money or trading chips to do the following things: 1)Sign/Trade for an impact starting pitcher (a #1 or a #2 guy) 2)Sign/Trade for either an impact CF or an impact 2b 3)Sign/Trade for a decent one of the one you didn't get in #2..probably a stopgap CF (because I think 2b will be easier to fill with a good to great player than CF, if not Andruw Jones) 4)Sign/Trade for a platoon partner for Jones 5)Sign/Trade for a back end of the starting rotation starter (#3, #4, #5) If we have to sign all of those players, we won't have quite enough money, unless the Tribune expands the payroll. If one of these is a trade or two, then all of this is possible.

Jones' OPS over the last three years at the Metrodome was .746. You and others totally dismiss the fact that it was possible his OPS was low due (at least in part) to playing in the Metrodome. I think that's a great point. Here are his numbers for 02-05, and 06 home and away. 2002- Home-.721 Away-.977 2003- Home-.822 Away-.770 2004- Home-.699 Away-.784 2005- Home-.722 Away-.793 2006 (at Wrigley) Home-.841 Away-.821 Jones moved from a park that was terrible for him, where 3 out of 4 years there was a significant OPS difference between his home park and on the road, in fact the 3 largest differences of those 4 years. Now, he's probably in an easier division for the pitchers against him (this one is just a hunch that hitting in the NL Central has been easier than the AL Central the last couple years, taking out the teams he has been on-I might be wrong on this). Also he has moved to a home park that suits him a great deal better-with that, and knowing that his lowest away OPS in the last 5 years was .770, that should probably be the lowest we should expect him out of next year. With .770 being the lowest he would be at, I think it would be reasonable for him to be close to or above .800 again next year, which for Jones salary is as I posted better than most teams in value.

How would you rank the players as far as production for the money this year out of 13 I have listed above?

I was just thinking there was some room for hope in that regard. He has been with the organization for a long time, though, so hard to say if opinions have already been calcified. At the risk of being a contrarian, I think the Cubs have been excellent at times in player evaluation. They traded Choi, Bobby Hill, and Brendan Harris while acquiring DLee, Aram, and Murton. Unlike most of this board, the Cubs were on target about Jacque's abilities. The problem isn't scouting, it's not relying on stats as well as scouting. Finding a platoon partner for Jacque, batting high OBP guys #1 and #2, etc. The management team needs balance, not a complete overhaul. *sigh*...the problem with Jones, for the millionth time, wasn't that people thought he wouldn't perform well this season. It was that we didn't think he was obtained at a good price, and for a reasonable length of time. If he maintains this same level of play for 3 years, then maybe you'll have a point. Well, this day in age I think his production was just fine for only 5 M/year. But that's THIS YEAR! Forget this year. In the last year of his deal, will he perform well enough for his salary? That's the argument. Ok, I hear you, but you can only go by what he has done so far. Nobody know what he will do in year 3, its kind of pointless to argue that right now. You can only discuss what he has done so far, which was a pretty good year. Let's sign him to a 40 year $6 billion contract What, you don't know how he'll do, he hasn't done it yet. edit: oh, and yay, I guess. All he's saying is that so far, it's been a good contract. Through one year, he has done better than comparable value for his position. Taking out all the right fielders who have not hit free agency yet (obviously, they are getting better bang for their buck) here are the qualified RF's this season: (Salaries all from ESPN-I know Jacque's is about 1 mil off, so others may be a little off as well, but for the sake of time I'm using their numbers) 1-Jermaine Dye, 5 million, 1.006 OPS 2. Vladimir Guerrero, 13.5 million, .934 3. J.D. Drew, 11.4 million, .891 4. Bobby Abreu, 13.6 million, .886 5. Jacque Jones, 4.033 million, .833 6. Magglio Ordonez, 16.2 million, .827 7. Geoff Jenkins, 7.83 million, .791 8. Ichiro Suzuki, 12.5 million, .786 9. Shawn Green, 10.2 million, .776 10. Brian Giles, 7.67 million, .771 11. Juan Encarnacion, 3.5 million, .760 12. Jay Payton, 4 million, .743 13. Randy Winn, 5 million, .721 Jacque has performed much better than his contract so far compared to the rest of the league at the position right now. Will he have worse numbers? Maybe-but if his production is at market value next year and below it the year after that, then it will be an average signing. This year, he gave greater than market value-and with the right platoon partner, the pair should hopefully give greater than market value for the next 2 years as well.

That was an unbelievable play-you've taken a great deal of heat this year Ronny, but that was a great diving catch.

It's still a baseball game where the team you support is down by 8 runs and comes back to tie the game. For the people at the game, that's still exciting-if they don't get excited about a game like this, then they wouldn't have gone at all-let them have their fun!

BTW, give a great deal of credit to both Murton and Jones in that 9th inning..Murton with the 9 pitch at bat to draw the walk and keep the game alive, and Jones battling and getting the key hit off of a tough lefty to tie the game.

Well, free baseball for the few who are watching..I have to admit, I've only seen about 2-3 innings myself :D

Hmm..I just opened his blog again, and these are the two sentences that jumped out at me. To clarify, he's talking about adding an outfielder to the current Astros team, not necessarily a general rule..but I still found it interesting.

I'm pulling for ND, but you have to admit that penalty was BS. Yeah, that was a bad call..didn't end up affecting anything though, thankfully. (Well, maybe not so thankfully for us ND fans-but I would have hated to see a bad call spring a late score at the same time)

And I hope he realizes that scoring one run at a time with speed and sacrifices isn't going to win a lot of ballgames (unless your pitching staff is remarkably good) The beauty part of that was there were no sacrifices for that run. Theriot turned a double into a triple and scored on an infield grounder. A run scoring ground out is as much of a sacrifice as a grounder to the right side that moves a runner over. Everybody applauds it, but a double or HR would have been much better. The difference is, a sacrifice is giving an intentional out-and I don't think Ramirez intended to ground out to 3rd-Theriot just took advantage of the situation.