stitchface

pitching, defense and offense wins championships. this myth that preventing runs is more important than scoring them needs to be stopped. it simply isn't true. yes having great pitching is a component of being a great team - but its not the only component. you need to outscore your opponent - its that simple! you can either score a ton or not allow runs. either way works.

What if its good pitching against good pitching? wouldn't the better hitting team win more often than not? That statement is a myth. The team that scores more runs always wins. How many runs each team scores is entirely dependent on each team's offense and defense (pitching and defense). The other part wasn't directed at you but at the people who claim that the opinions of those on this board about OBP are from reading Moneyball. OPS+ has a better correlation because it accounts for the increased importance of OBP versus SLP. OPS in and of itself is not a pure stat anyway but I don't really disagree with you.

No, balanced schedule is bad. While it is argues that is unfair, I'd rather have more chances to gain ground against division foes than an extra series or two against the Padres or Nationals. If it's unfair, I think it should be removed. Especially with the wild card, the difference between divisions should be minimized as much as possible. It should be weighted, just 12-13 games within the division and 9 against out of division. how often has the wildcard come from a weak weak division? ever? seeing as how many wildcard teams have won the WS, I don't think this has been a problem. if you can show me it has, I'll change my mind.

Charlatans. where are the expos going?

I don't need to buy my love for this team. When they finally win I will etch my love on your bricks in a big pool of tears and vomit.

good question.

While this is true, the point is it doesn't have to be. while there wasn't much hope of improving the offense at SS (at least once furcal signed), this team could have been improved offensively to be less reliant on pitching. Pitching is far less reliable than hitting as pitchers are more likely to get hurt and because pitcher's performances tend to vary more from year to year. at the end of the day though, you just need to score more than your opponents and this should be how you evaluate roster moves. and moneyball was not about obp or how runs are scored. read the book.

the point of all this is not what teams winning the WS would do or even whether the cubs can win with neifi at SS. the point is that the cubs could get exactly what neifi provides for the league minimum or near it. ie therior, fontenot, cedeno could all fill these roles for much less. so no, neifi is not a good 25th man. he is not just misused, he shouldn't be occupying a roster spot. with cedeno at ss, the only real spot for him is as defensive replacement for walker. if cedeno gets hurt, you won't do much worse raiding the minors as playing neifi everyday. so why spend 2.5 million to keep him around? That 2.5 could be the difference between rusch or weaver every fifth day.

:shock:

I'd definitely rather have weaver than rusch. I'd take mota if he came with marte. say for . . . neifi.

he'd be a good platoon partner for jones . . . .hahahhahaha

And now he's crusading against Californians! When will it end??? are native californians allowed to criticize themselves? seriously, who gets pissed off because the value of their house goes up? Texans are freaks! oh, except you shane. :)

teachers corrupt our young! they cannot be trusted! actually, I was referring to the homphobic fellow.

Its not just likely - mathematically you will score more runs.

Steroids has often crossed my mind with Hidalgo. His decline has been pretty steep. If he's cheap and the Cubs are willing to cut bait if he doesn't produce, he wouldn't be a horrible option. On the other hand, I'd hate to be married to him for the season. The correlation with his plate discipline is very strong. He sure never looked like he was on steroids either. Its possible but I think he has mental problems maintaining his approach.

unfortunately, I think you have to play him full time to have any chance of regaining his form. would have been a worthy risk in RF.

Going from MM to Shea is part of the problem. He also started out really hot for the Mets hitting a bunch of homers in the first few weeks. He then totally lost his patience. The more I think about it, the better a one-year deal sounds. Too bad we signed Jones for three already.

this guy was amazing in 2000 and 2003 - you really wonder what happened. seems like he needs to learn patience again - probably not going to happen with the cubs but who knows. lest you think it was all ballpark, his road splits exceeded his home splits in 2003.

we can still discuss it even if its not going to happen.

oh, and I think I'd rather see him in RF than Jones.

He's such a streak hitter, I'd love to see him play everyday when he is hot. of course, how will he get hot if he isn't playing.

I want to know why he thinks speed is so valuable. He's said that we need a speed guy, never explained why, then said that speed is underrated. I know what I think and I want to know why he has such convictions. This subject gets me fired up. I agree with the other dude, speed is undervalued now days. I've read this argument so many times on this board. Tim put up some cool stuff back when Beltran was a FA in a thread we were discussing speed, I'll see if I can't find it. Everything around here gets argued to the extreme. I'm not saying that speed is how you win a World Series, but so many stat heads around here discount it as a non factor - at least that's how I feel they portray it. I've got 16 years experience on the ball diamond, and when I hear someone talk as speed being something not important, I seriously wonder if some of these folks have ever played baseball. I've seen speed: break a pitchers concentration on the mound... it increases defensive range... decrease hitting into double plays... put pressure on defenses causing errors... I could probably go on, there are so many variables, it's almost imposible to assign definite value to speed. Here's a question, who'd you rather have on 1B if Lee hits a line drive to the gap, Barrett or Pierre? and then why? I put speed in with fundamentals - hitting the cutoff man, laying down a bunt, smart baserunning, and on and on and on. These are basic fundamentals you are taught in little league. Speed is a tool, a great tool, but tools and fundamentals will never be the biggest part of the pie on win shares. OBP is such a wonderful stat! OBP, pitching, defense, and power are essential. A good team can survive without speed, but not OBP. Here's the thing though, if you have a solid team built around OBP, tools and fundamentals will only make that team better. I have no idea how many wins it may play a part in, using all the different variables. Even if it were just a game or two, that could be the game or two that cost us a trip to the playoffs. That's why I value speed. I wouldn't sacrifice OBP for speed, but if I can get OBP with speed, I take it. If I can get OBP, power, and speed in a player, I get excited. I really enjoy reading your posts TT, they are usually pretty solid and right on. I don't know that I've read your opinion on this before though. all these things speed does can be measured in other statistics - except range which is difficult to measure accurately.

the guy is a teacher! Lord help us.

they look like normal college kids.

I'm not sure he has a full season. however, he has reached a make it or break it age. his numbers indicate he is not likely to be a disaster at 2b so maybe its time to see what he can do. I would like to see him get time at 2b and in the OF.