Careless

Because when Soriano steals a bag, it's really hurting our offense! :roll: That's as silly a response as "Because when Soriano strikes out, it's really helping out offense! :roll: " Neither of these statements have anything to do with what he posted. try harder. He obviously didn't understand what I meant by that. I subscribe to the feeling having a nagging threat on the bases clogs a pitchers mind. If you or he do not agree with that, please don't mock with your holier than though attitute and talk to posters like they are dumb just because they beleive something other than what you THINK you know is true. That bolded part is very true. Baseball: No one doubted that he believes that. Giles: then you need to work a lot on your writing, because that was nowhere in your post.

Does it make me stupid that I played the game for 16 years of my life and don't have a clue as to what the hell y'all are talking about? What the crap is WARP?? playing the game for 16 years and not knowing WARP is quite a bit less odd than being on this board for 3.5 years and not knowing it

Because when Soriano steals a bag, it's really hurting our offense! :roll: That's as silly a response as "Because when Soriano strikes out, it's really helping out offense! :roll: " Neither of these statements have anything to do with what he posted. try harder.

Apologies for the impending massive arm injury

Pretty excpected since reports they were sticking Soriano in Right

It frightens me.

That's not really the case. Run production and run prevention are equally important. The thing is, at the major league level, the vast majority of run prevention occurs on the mound, as the difference between the best and worst major league fielders at a given position is relatively small, especially when compared to the difference between the best and worst hitters at the same position. So, when choosing a player, defense should be given some consideration, but much more consideration should be given to his offensive skill set, as that's where he's much more likely to be beneficial, with very rare exception. Yup, that makes solid sense. People shouldnt say that defense doesn't matter though. I believe middle infield/outfield range can make a large impact on hits/runs that a pitcher may or may not give up. More than most people think. Its not something that you can debate with stats though. Which is why no one says that except in that baseball guy's imagination.

Every time I see you write this, I will have to point out that Kenny williams has NEVER HAD A BELOW .500 TEAM. Jim hendry is well below .500 for his career. It's a bad, bad, bad comparison.

I don't get that at all. If he struck out once, he'd be getting $17 million per strikeout. Even if you assume that strikeouts are a very bad thing, there's no way to rate strikeouts and dollars and have it make sense.

I don't think anyone has been so head and shoulders ahead of the rest of their conference in a while like the Bears are this year. Maybe the Rams in 2001 but that's about it. As far as record? The Colts last year, the Eagles the year before that come to mind as teams who were so far ahead that they clinched the conference a month ahead of time. The Bears are enjoying a similar run this year, and it should be an easy run to HFA-my question to Bears fans is, do you want to rest starters or not? It's a very tough issue. Certainly play Benson more and get griese some snaps. Well I'm excited for this game!

But your order is wrong. Their worst month was May. Dusty questioning, injuries aside from Lee, Dempster collapsing, they're all things that happened after the team went into the toilet. They actually got better once these things you're bringing up started happening. Wow, they had more 1-run losses in may than they had wins.

Arod money.

And ramirez wishes that he had actually taken advantage of free agency

Ok, no team contending for play-offs should have an 8 game winning streak. If you have a 40% winning percentage. It wont' matter if you have 10 8 game loosing streaks. . ok, and we weren't contending last season. In 2003 we had no long losing streaks (or winning streaks, we were improbably unstreaky). In 2004 we had none longer than 5 games. In 2005, when we didn't contend, we had 2 8 games, 1 7 game. I wonder why a positive mental attitude doesn't create long winning streaks Or was 2003 a bad chemistry year?

Yea, but the posting price was still $51M. Either way, 0 mil/0 years comes to the same problem. Players will be throwing out unreal numbers! I want the square root of negative 64 million! I'm never coming to the transactions forum again if a player gets signed to a contract involving $i

Why? he's not a FA, the red sox have him over a barrel. that situation is too disconnected to make a big impact, I'd think why would a FA sign a deal when there is someone out there that plays the same position and is on a deadline to get a deal done? obviously we cant look at what Mats signs for and equate it to what the market will bear, but it will give a general ballpark range. adding Mats posting price to the total deal he recieves and dividing by years is where i'd expect the bidding to begin for my services, if i were Schmidt. yes the sox have him over a barrel, but when you consider that they have already commited 50+ million to sign him, the Sox are going to be paying alot/year to retain his services. as an established front line starter, Schmidt would be a fool to take less...i dont see him signing anywhere till the other deal(Sox/Mats) is doneBecause Boston has leverage that no other team will have with a top pitcher. Can have with a top pitcher. They lose nothing by not signing him as long as their offer is respectable. And what's respectable? Hard to say, isn't it? He's a rookie, and they usually don't make $15 a season. Add in that this guy is much younger than the other pitchers and the huge posting fee, they're going to try to sign him to a much longer contract than anyone should be willing to give schmidt. I just think his situation is too different

why should no team ever have an 8 game losing streak? if you have a 40 winning percentage, the odds against you losing 8 in a row are about 60 to one against. That's in any 8 game period. that means what, you hvae a 94% chance of having at least 1 8-game losing streak in a season

Doesn't this mean they'll be giving pierre a bigger contract than 80% or so of the type A FA's? heh

Homerun Inn. And how did this poll get made leaving off the most popular (tombstone) and the best options?

Why? he's not a FA, the red sox have him over a barrel. that situation is too disconnected to make a big impact, I'd think

Arod money for Soriano? I don't think that's reasonable. I hope that Hendry doesn't think that's reasonable.

It easily has the "meaningless content" award locked up. You weren't around for the old "chit-chat" threads in social. Yeah, this thread needs about 40 times as much content, then it might be close. Pages? yes. Content? no.

Your opinion has my curiosity piqued. I would truly be grateful if you expounded upon it so as to further enlighten me. Only when an observation has been repeatedly validated can it be considered a fact. Even then I'd stick an asterisk by it. You also need compitent data takers, which is not a given in a "stat" for it to become a "fact." A stat is very close to becoming a fact, but I don't think you can make that leap in confidence. It's a minor point, but since this thread has run amok, I thought I'd throw that in there. I don't have a problem with stats. They're wonderful things, but you have to be careful about the conclusions you draw from your data. you're incredibly off-base here, which is weird since your definition is ok. A stat is a fact. You're confusing "fact" and "prophecy" in the second part though. While stats can be used predictively, they can not be used perfectly so.

he is a good player, but he's also overrated. he's being paid like one of the best players in baseball, and he clearly isn't. How is he overrated? Please no stats involved. Your opinion. And I agree with you that he doesn't deserve to get a $136 million dollar contract. But I will never consider him to be overrated. So you agree that he is overrated? Maybe overpaid, but that does that mean overrated? Who are these raters anyway? GMs don't pay more than they think a player is worth. If they don't think they're worth the money, they wouldn't pay it. Isn't overrated when the rater thinks a player is more valuable then he actually is? yep, that's why being paid too much means that at least 1 person (Hendry) is overrating him

I love this thread