stitchface

Do you think Hairston has it in him to be a good full time 2B this year? what do you mean? why wouldn't he?

San Francisco is a severe pitchers park - but I don't disagree with your idea entirely. I would play Walker in SF because that park is death for right handed hitters. same at Petco. In Houston I would go with Hairston as the park greatly favors right handed hitters. You could do this on a park by park basis. I can't really see dusty going through that thought process though. although if it were made clear to him, he might.

bunting coordinator? classic - especially for this forum!

I think your pessimistic speculation is pretty far-fetched considering you are talking about Boras.

Congrats Mooch - hopefully your joy can cover our continuing suffering.

somehow, this kind of analysis is far more appealing than just EQrs and VORPs 29) Team- and situation-specific player valuation. As noted by many people in the performance analysis community, the process of assigning a single number value to players has been virtually exhausted. People still sometimes fight over that last little bit of accuracy, but for the most part, whether it's MLV, EqR, VORP, WARP or any of the multitude of metrics publicly available, virtually all of them are going to value most players very closely. That said, each player brings something different to the game and matching that skill set to usage is something that teams often fail at and performance analysts sometimes overlook. Because all players are paid in dollars and are up for the same awards, it's very handy to have a single number that contains their total value. But when constructing a roster properly--question #21--being able to deploy players of equal value in different situations increases the overall value of the team. Additionally, most metrics involving player valuation use average run values of different events or the change in run scoring by putting a player in an otherwise average lineup. However, inserting different players into different lineups may generate vastly different run outputs. How much does a speedster add to the plodding Boston Red Sox of 2003-04 (other than Dave Roberts and his famous steal)? Would the same player be worth more or less to a team like the 2005 White Sox or 1985 Cardinals? We have the data to determine if the Red Sox would be getting diminishing returns by signing another high-OBP, low-AVG player in 2003, and how that same player would add more to a different team. While it's easy and often highly informative to slap a single number on a player and call it his value, it's possible to quantify the value a player has specifically to his team.

I sure hope we see a team better than 2004.

is Patterson at AA? as an actual prospect, I would assume he would have preference.

Either the GM or the scouts/instuctors should be fired, if that's the case. huh? Why? High school pitchers are far more likely to get injured than reach the majors. I don't follow your argument.

I think the injury risk is a bigger factor than the scouting or development. What team doesn't draft any high schoolers?

great.

that's because they have two series against the white sox every year.

To me the bolded part is where the Cubs have to invest more in. I don't know if it is dollars or people or both. I was speaking in terms of drafting HS pitchers, some advocate staying away from HS pitchers especially early on in the draft, it's a thought process I've always frowned upon. I consider Beane to be part of it still, but he mentions the value he could get from drafting them, which is showing a trend towards more and more collegiate players. why do you frown upon risk management? This is simply a numbers game. High school pitchers have a huge risk associated with them. You can frown on it if you want, but the numbers are there and they don't lie. It's not risk management when you eliminate an entire sector. The concept of drawing a line in the sand, isn't a correct one. You can't say we'll never draft a HS pitcher, it's stupid to eliminate the best player based on the increased potential of lack of faith in your development program. maybe I don't get what you are saying, its not elimination, its selective distribution of resources to help the major league team.

Question: was the beane interview much more interesting or is that just because I'm an A's fan. JS has better initials though. Thanks for the post UK.

which goes to show the importance of walks as far back as 1907.

The real problem at coors is that the outfielders have to play very deep because of the extra flight on the ball.

the list seems to be ancient history biased.

part III is the most interesting by far - except for the idea of mcdowell as a pitching coach. he used to sit in the bleachers with us after he pitched (well he did it once at least).

To me the bolded part is where the Cubs have to invest more in. I don't know if it is dollars or people or both. I was speaking in terms of drafting HS pitchers, some advocate staying away from HS pitchers especially early on in the draft, it's a thought process I've always frowned upon. I consider Beane to be part of it still, but he mentions the value he could get from drafting them, which is showing a trend towards more and more collegiate players. why do you frown upon risk management? This is simply a numbers game. High school pitchers have a huge risk associated with them. You can frown on it if you want, but the numbers are there and they don't lie.

Or teenagers isn't that the same thing?

wow, those are pretty bad! they sound like a bunch of drunk, depressed, disillusioned cub fans.

Lugo is a very good defensive player. oh., the violence!

oh, Tim was just trying to screw you! :D

Ski season!

go 'Hawks!