Clem Fandango

He looks like he's popping a squat. And he appears to not be wearing any pants. And there's what appears to be bathroom tile behind him...... :-k He looks like Robin Williams... perhaps it's time for a biopic about Honus Wagner?

Well now you're a dime a dozen, you'll never make it to the bigs.

If there was a "No I don't think he'll make it, but I think he deserves to go" option I would've selected that

0.2 I don't even know what it was supposed to mean. It means IMB! is a 16-year old japanese girl with a wicked knuckleball

That plus his GIDP was unquestionably one of the worst things about his 2008 EDIT: Let's stop talking about Derrek Lee in the Peavy thread before it gets derailed :)

I was half joking, I was being serious about his production numbers, and I think that there's not a big deal to be made between 2007 and 2008. The whole "It would be unfortunate if Hoffpauir put up 2008 Lee stats" is not really that unfortunate, IMO. In fact I would be very satisfied if a rookie, regardless of age, put up those numbers his first full year in the bigs. I was jackalacking around with the extra AB tirade, though. Although now I'm trying to look up some gamelog info, just so I can stick it to the masses (I'm not going to find what I'm looking for, don't worry)

SLAM! umm, actually he wasn't agreeing with you BOOYA!

SLAM!

Yup, that's exactly what I'm saying. Because 300 extra AB is the same as 56. Look it up in the brittanica, it's there somewhere

probably not. extreme exaggeration. but that's hitless in 56 AB over a 623AB scale, I'm not saying he went 0-56 over the course of 5 straight games. 56AB spreado ut over a full season where he didn't get a hit. That's all

No, not joking. You're talking about how Lee was SO much better in 2007, but he only seems better in 2007 because he had less AB to fail or succeed. He put up the exact same production numbers in almost every offensive category in 2008 as he did in 2007. His AVG/OBP/SLG looks better because he had fewer AB over a slightly lesser amount of games, and also due to a less potent offense in 2007. It's not hard to understand. What's hard to understand is the notion that Lee has lost it, despite putting up nearly the exact same numbers from 2007.

What else could it mean? I wasn't speaking in code. No, I'm wondering why you are implying that his last 2 seasons have been similar when they aren't even remotely close. I think you thought his 2007 was bad when really it was his second best of his career. Eh, now that I look at his stat sheet, you're right. Didn't realize his 2007 was that good. Yeah, I'd be thrilled if we could get those kind of numbers. Unfortunately I think we're going to get closer to the 2008 lee You know what the difference between 2008 Lee and 2007 Lee was? 5 games. 5... games. 2007 Lee: 150G 567AB 91R 180H 43-2B 1-3B 22HR 82RBI 6SB 71BB 114SO .317/.400/.513 291TB 2008 Lee: 155G 623AB 93R 181H 41-2B 3-3B 20HR 90RBI 8SB 71BB 119SO .291/.361/.462 288TB 5 extra crappy performances in 2008 made 2007 seem light years better. He virtually put up the same numbers, stop looking at his OPS+ to determine if it was better. It was THE SAME, it only looks better because of a slightly smaller sample size EXACTLY. Somehow he must have went 0 for 56 in those 5 games though. Well, quite simple really. Assume he got at least 4 AB in those 5 games, that's 20AB right there, then assume that with the Cubs high powered and OBP crazy offense, he got 36 extra AB throughout the year via high scoring games. Fairly simple. And with Lee, it's not hard to imagine he went 0-4 over an extra 5 games in each game.

What else could it mean? I wasn't speaking in code. No, I'm wondering why you are implying that his last 2 seasons have been similar when they aren't even remotely close. I think you thought his 2007 was bad when really it was his second best of his career. Eh, now that I look at his stat sheet, you're right. Didn't realize his 2007 was that good. Yeah, I'd be thrilled if we could get those kind of numbers. Unfortunately I think we're going to get closer to the 2008 lee You know what the difference between 2008 Lee and 2007 Lee was? 5 games. 5... games. 2007 Lee: 150G 567AB 91R 180H 43-2B 1-3B 22HR 82RBI 6SB 71BB 114SO .317/.400/.513 291TB 2008 Lee: 155G 623AB 93R 181H 41-2B 3-3B 20HR 90RBI 8SB 71BB 119SO .291/.361/.462 288TB 5 extra crappy performances in 2008 made 2007 seem light years better. He virtually put up the same numbers, stop looking at his OPS+ to determine if it was better. It was THE SAME, it only looks better because of a slightly smaller sample size

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CARRIE MUSKAT BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

That's a shame, I think he could've still pitched well enough over the course of a couple more seasons to get to 300. He must be really tired of the grind at this point in his career. Good pitcher. I don't think he'll make the HOF though, sadly. If he does, it will have to open the door for a lot of players who don't fulfill the milestones. He didn't get 300 wins. He didn't get 3000 strikeouts. He never won a Cy Young. He was 20 game winner once. He was just a really good consistent pitcher for so long but never the best. Not sure if the Hall will recognize that as being hall worthy, which sucks cause I think he SHOULD go, but I don't think he will

Screw his antics, I want to punch him in the face

seconded I think I hate him more than any other baseball player. Fourthified

I brought that idea up in the old Peavy thread, just to throw it out there. My answer is no. I think Harden is one of the Top 5 best pitchers in all of baseball when he's healthy, and his numbers when he's healthy are hard to dispute that idea. If he stays healthy this year, he has the ability to be one of the 3 best pitchers in the NL. The other two being Johan Santana and Jake Peavy. Now imagine having one of them in our rotation as well. I would dare say Harden is better than Peavy, but Harden's injury history puts him out of most discussions about the best pitcher in baseball, even though his stuff is absurdly good and worthy of the recognition. I wouldn't want Peavy if it means we lose Harden. Especially when all signs point to use making a deal for Peavy without losing him. Harden is costing us $7 million next year. He's the lowest paid starting pitcher in the rotation, and he's the best pitcher on the team. If we got Peavy, I'd go so far as to say Harden would still be the best pitcher in the rotation... if he remains healthy. Having Peavy without Harden in our rotation wouldn't have as much foam-at-the-mouth appeal to it. If we got Peavy we'd have the greatest 1-5 rotation in all of baseball, and perhaps one of the best in the recent history of the game if they can remain healthy and fulfill their expectations

Whose fault is it? Matt Kemp's

He would've been a 20 game winner this year had the bullpen not blown some of the leads he left the game with. This does not even include games where he got crummy run support that the Cubs later won after he was pulled

If the guy was already a Cub, I might see the point in trying to look on the bright side of things. But I don't see the reason why you'd want to pretend a bad trade target is better than he is. Just trying to shake things up a bit... that plus I wasn't breast fed as a child You weren't Rusch-fed? And would I be correct in inferring that "shake things up" is really a horrible pun? ... oh yeah, Dejesus, please. Probably :-))

If the guy was already a Cub, I might see the point in trying to look on the bright side of things. But I don't see the reason why you'd want to pretend a bad trade target is better than he is. Just trying to shake things up a bit... that plus I wasn't breast fed as a child

He hasn't even hit his prime years yet. Perhaps he could benefit from Gerald Perry's advice? I don't know, I'm not big on acquiring him either, I'm just trying to be optimistic. He turned 27 this fall. Most agree prime years are generally somewhere between 26-29. If a hitter isn't capable of producing by the time he's 26/27, I'm not sure how much realistic hope there is for him to produce in his later 20's. Well it seems like his numbers are like a rollercoaster sinceh is breakout year in 2006. In 2007 his power numbers were zapped (18HR in 393AB to 7HR in 544AB) but he still hit .285 with a .353 OBP, which is solid although admittedly not so much for a corner OF'er. But this year his power came back a little bit but at the expense of his contact (15HR to his .255 AVG and .313OBP) which is unacceptable. I think that perhaps it may be more of the fact that he has the talent but not the approach. Perhaps Perry could help him with that? Like I said, just trying to be optimistic on him and I'm not much for acquiring him, but if the rumor has truth to it, might as well try and look on the bright side of things

He hasn't even hit his prime years yet. Perhaps he could benefit from Gerald Perry's advice? I don't know, I'm not big on acquiring him either, I'm just trying to be optimistic.

LOL, seriously? jeez man, take a joke That's what I thought it was, couldn't tell