Dr. Cub

We're a drive thru society, baby!!

Classic.

Been calling since 10, multiple windows open, and haven't got squat, and I'm loving it!!!

I have my doubts as to the level of havoc it causes being anything but minimal, but MLB pitchers have commented on the fact that they sometimes pitch differently or pay too much attention to the runner. The fact that I love my wife and child is no less true because I can't show proof that I do.

Is it just me, or is Prior wishing he hadn't tried the "spicy special" at the very questionable local Thai place. EDIT: Slidin' into first and you're feeling something burst.......

Ditto. We all appreciate what you are doing whether we agree with the policy or not. Stay safe. Very well said. I concur.

If they can get him on the cheap, and get something of value for Walker, I'd be much more satisfied with the 2B depth chart of Vidro, Hairston, Perez, instead of Hairston, Perez. I envision that to be a rather big if. Wrong. This is a big IF. :wink: How about this IF? I stand corrected; THAT is a big IF.

If they can get him on the cheap, and get something of value for Walker, I'd be much more satisfied with the 2B depth chart of Vidro, Hairston, Perez, instead of Hairston, Perez. I envision that to be a rather big if. Wrong. This is a big IF. :wink:

The contents of the post include much disrespect.

If it's not likely, why would you ever say "Murton will hit 30 HR this year". No, personally, I believe that the difference between "Murton will hit 30 HR this year" and "Murton won't hit 30 HR this year" isn't semantics. Which is why I included it only as a secondary argument thrown in at the end. It's called scouting by the way. And it works, to an extent. It has limitations. But so do statistics. Don't need to [expletive]-foot around it or anything. First bolded part: Please show me where I wrote this. So it was TheGilesBros that said it. You just took the baton from him and ran with it without me noticing. Sorry. And your argument is slightly different, even if it's based on the exact same flawed premise that, as you yourself put it, "He had 140 AB's with 7 HR. If you extend those numbers over the season he could reach 560 AB's with 28 HR." So direct the first bolded part to Giles then. No, here's what you originally wrote to me... Thinking that it was you that originally had said "Murton will hit 30 HR this year", I wrote what I did. You wrote something else about semantics to Raven. Why not? You questioned my numbers, all I did was show you how I arrived at them. I don't know, something tells me it wouldn't have gotten through quite as effectively as what I did end up posting. I mean, now you're not questioning my numbers and saying stuff like "if Murton's power increased by the same amount as it did between 2004 and 2005 he'd hit 25 HR in a full season next year", which you did say, and which was wrong unless you think that Murton will get 755 plate appearances next year. Hey, you brought the subject up with your "very abstract and meaningless" comment. Thanks, I practice regularly on stupid arguments. Murton will not hit 30 HR this year. Sorry, but it wasn't a compliment. Regardless if you're correct or incorrect about a point it makes you a complete ass. What's really sad is that I've read a ton of your posts on this board (and gained some great insight along the way) and you have a lot of great knowledge that many would appreciate. However, too often it appears it's only presented to belittle someone else or "prove" your correct. No discussion really; just your snide, vile remarks that do nothing good. I'm sure you'll come back at me with a wickedly clever, condescending remark, and that's okay. I used to be the exact same way, and then I realized one day that being a caustic ass was doing nothing to improve my life. I hope you see that soon also.

All true. But let's not overstate the nature of these increases... 2003: 2 HR in 227 PA (0.88 HR per 100 PA) 2004: 13 HR in 514 PA (2.53 HR per 100 PA) 2005: 16 HR in 548 PA (2.92 HR per 100 PA) The 2003 numbers aren't really that relevant to be honest. Anyway, hitting 30 HR in a full season (which we'll call 600 PA) would mean hitting 5 HR per 100 PA. So the increase in his HR power would need to be about 5 times as great as the increase in his HR power from 2004 to 2005. And the increase would need to be made while facing much more advanced pitching, a longer season, and so on. So it's not just a stretch, it's an enormous stretch. Statistically. And that's not to mention that Murton doesn't even have a 30 HR physique, a 30 HR swing, a 30 HR anything. Not sure where you are getting your 2005 numbers, but I come up with 16 HR in 487 AB's for a 3.29 HR per 100 AB ratio. Read. Difference between 2.92 and 2.53 is 0.39. Difference between 5.00 and 2.92 is 2.08. 2.08 divided up 0.39 is 5.33. So the size of the increase in Murton's home run power would need to be 5.33 times greater than the increase that he made between 2004 and 2005 by measure of HR per 100 PA for him to hit 30 HR next year. If you really want to look at things from a HR per 100 AB perspective, instead of a HR per 100 PA perspective... 2003: 2 HR in 189 AB (1.05 HR per 100 AB) 2004: 13 HR in 455 AB (2.86 HR per 100 AB) 2005: 16 HR in 487 AB (3.29 HR per 100 AB) So, if we took a full season before to be about 600 PA, then that equates, for Murton, based on his entire minor league career, to about 525 or so AB. 30 HR in 525 AB is 5.71 HR per 100 AB. Difference between 3.29 and 2.86 is 0.43. Difference between 5.71 and 3.29 is 2.42. 2.42 divided by 0.43 is 5.63. So the size of the increase in Murton's home run power would need to be 5.63 times greater than the increase that he made between 2004 and 2005 by measure of HR per 100 AB for him to hit 30 HR next year. You're right. It would need to be more than that. It would need to be more than five times as great. 5.33 or 5.63 depending on whether you use PA or AB as the denominator. The only argument you have against this is that using 525 AB or 600 PA is not enough to qualify as a full season. Still, if we use 600 AB or 700 PA or whatever, the increase is still going to have to well in excess of four times the increase between 04 and 05. Or whatever. Actually, it wouldn't. No, actually, it's still an enormous stretch. Fair enough. Unfortunately you messed the statistics bit up completely. If it's not likely, why would you ever say "Murton will hit 30 HR this year". No, personally, I believe that the difference between "Murton will hit 30 HR this year" and "Murton won't hit 30 HR this year" isn't semantics. Which is why I included it only as a secondary argument thrown in at the end. It's called scouting by the way. And it works, to an extent. It has limitations. But so do statistics. Don't need to [expletive]-foot around it or anything. First bolded part: Please show me where I wrote this. Second bolded part: As far as semantics go, I was referring to when Raven wrote "stretch". Did you seriously not understand that? There really was no need to add the numbers up and do simple arithmetic for me. You simply could have pointed out that I used AB instead of PA when looking at 2005, and then used those numbers against what you had for the previous years. What is this new-fangled "scouting" you speak of? You didn't invent being condescending, but my, you sure are good at it.

The 30 homers is a bit of a stretch. I don't think it's a stretch. He had 140 AB's with 7 HR. If you extend those numbers over the season he could reach 560 AB's with 28 HR. It surely isn't a given, but he demonstrated he does have the ability/power. It is a stretch. The guy has not hit a combined 20 homers on any professional level during any season. 2003 - 2 HRs in 227 ABs 2004 - 13 HRs in 514 ABs 2005 - 17 HRs in 543 ABs Does that mean he won't continue to improve? No. Does that mean he can't develop that power? No. Is it a stretch to say he will hit 30 homers in his first full MLB season? Yes. I would rather him try to keep above a .350 OBP for the entire year than worry about trying to hit 30 home runs. I never suggested I wanted the opposite. I surely don't want him to focus on hitting HR, especially at the expense of his OBP. Is it a given that he will hit 30 HR this year? No. Do his numbers from the minors to the majors show continuing power increases? Yes. Is it then a stretch to think that with his good plate discipline, and his continuing trend of increased power numbers that he could hit 30 HR this year? No. Wow, that answer you're own question thing as they were absolute truths is fun. EDIT: Did Murton play A ball last year? I don't see it, and minorleaguebaseball.com has him with the following stats: AA 34 AB's with 1 HR AAA 313 AB's with 8 HR MLB 140 AB's with 7 HR Those numbers total to 487AB's with 16 HR, which is a better ratio of HR per AB than the 2005 numbers you have. Am I missing some numbers somewhere? I never suggested that you wanted him to develop power over OBP. I just listed my personal preference to end the note. To say someone will nearly double his previous power output in the highest form of professional ball in their first full season is a little bit of a stretch IMO. I would be weary of proclaiming that for people that have proven they are more adept for HRs in previous levels of play. It also begins to set expectations too high IMO as well, which leads to people unfairly criticizing people for something they should have never been held accountable for in the first place. I'm not saying that person is you, but I think there are quite a few people out there with the ability to exert that line of thinking. I thank you for not lumping me in with "those people", as I am most definitely not one. I can completely understand, and agree that that line of thinking may arise from those expectations. Like I posted to Diffusion, maybe it's just semantics, and how I interpret "stretch" in this context. While I don't think it likely, I wouldn't be too suprised if he hit 27-30 HR in a full season next year.

All true. But let's not overstate the nature of these increases... 2003: 2 HR in 227 PA (0.88 HR per 100 PA) 2004: 13 HR in 514 PA (2.53 HR per 100 PA) 2005: 16 HR in 548 PA (2.92 HR per 100 PA) The 2003 numbers aren't really that relevant to be honest. Anyway, hitting 30 HR in a full season (which we'll call 600 PA) would mean hitting 5 HR per 100 PA. So the increase in his HR power would need to be about 5 times as great as the increase in his HR power from 2004 to 2005. And the increase would need to be made while facing much more advanced pitching, a longer season, and so on. So it's not just a stretch, it's an enormous stretch. Statistically. And that's not to mention that Murton doesn't even have a 30 HR physique, a 30 HR swing, a 30 HR anything. Not sure where you are getting your 2005 numbers, but I come up with 16 HR in 487 AB's for a 3.29 HR per 100 AB ratio. So the increase would not need to be nearly five times as great, as you stated it would. An increase similar to the increase from '04 to '05 would likely put him about 25HR with 600 AB. So instead of an enormous stretch, it becomes an unlikely possibility. I'm not sitting here arguing for Murton as though he were some monster power hitter, and I want him swinging for the fences. I suggested that statistically, his increases would suggest that it wouldn't be a stretch for 30 HR. Not likely mind you, but a possibility nonetheless. Maybe we're just arguing semantics. What exactly does a 30 HR physique look like? Something like Chase Utley? Or maybe Biggio? Maybe Morgan Ensberg is closer? Saying Murton doesn't have a 30 HR physique or a 30 HR anything seems very abstract and meaningless, to me at least.

I agree that he probably won't on both accounts. However, I don't think it is a stretch that he could hit 30 HR. I do think it is a stretch that he keeps that line, especially considering he had a pretty crazy BABIP last year.

Not that you need another opinion on the matter, but I've had MLB EI for 4 years, and I love it. I would say that between MLB EI, ESPN, and WGN I get to see about 150-155 games a year. I feel that it has been worth every penny.

The 30 homers is a bit of a stretch. I don't think it's a stretch. He had 140 AB's with 7 HR. If you extend those numbers over the season he could reach 560 AB's with 28 HR. It surely isn't a given, but he demonstrated he does have the ability/power. It is a stretch. The guy has not hit a combined 20 homers on any professional level during any season. 2003 - 2 HRs in 227 ABs 2004 - 13 HRs in 514 ABs 2005 - 17 HRs in 543 ABs Does that mean he won't continue to improve? No. Does that mean he can't develop that power? No. Is it a stretch to say he will hit 30 homers in his first full MLB season? Yes. I would rather him try to keep above a .350 OBP for the entire year than worry about trying to hit 30 home runs. I never suggested I wanted the opposite. I surely don't want him to focus on hitting HR, especially at the expense of his OBP. Is it a given that he will hit 30 HR this year? No. Do his numbers from the minors to the majors show continuing power increases? Yes. Is it then a stretch to think that with his good plate discipline, and his continuing trend of increased power numbers that he could hit 30 HR this year? No. Wow, that answer you're own question thing as they were absolute truths is fun. EDIT: Did Murton play A ball last year? I don't see it, and minorleaguebaseball.com has him with the following stats: AA 34 AB's with 1 HR AAA 313 AB's with 8 HR MLB 140 AB's with 7 HR Those numbers total to 487AB's with 16 HR, which is a better ratio of HR per AB than the 2005 numbers you have. Am I missing some numbers somewhere?

The 30 homers is a bit of a stretch. I don't think it's a stretch. He had 140 AB's with 7 HR. If you extend those numbers over the season he could reach 560 AB's with 28 HR. It surely isn't a given, but he demonstrated he does have the ability/power.

Dude needs a new razor. Either that or to shave more than once every 4 days. The thing is; is that he just shaved 3 hours before that picture. The dude grows hair like a damn werewolf.

Could you please stop letting facts and common sense get in the way of not improving this team? Sheesh.

Could you please stop letting facts and common sense get in the way of not improving this team? Sheesh.

Why are Cards fans taking a Cubs fan to task for mocking the White Sox on a Cubs board? Because it was always the lack of those kind of posts that made me like this forum. So say that instead of responding in kind. You're right. Two wrongs don't make a right. You're right, but four lefts do.

Wow, look, it's a talking goat!! Huh? It's dark, I cannot see you, come closer. Hello? What's superimposed?

Wow, look, it's a talking goat!!

I have to agree with Vance on this one. Making the "hole" available for games is asking for trouble. Can you imagine the mob when the Cubs play the Sox, or if the Cubs were in a pennant or wild card race? Fights would be constant. It would be anarchy.

I've got to agree with goony on this one. It's definitely low risk, but it is not high reward. Jason has been mediocre to flat out awful in his time in the majors.