ZZ Thorn

OBP and Ks are two distinct stats. I've been a fan for Dubois for years (I bet I've even been a fan longer than Vance, tho I grant Vance has a real passion for the Creature), I wish he was our starting LF. But I also am pretty sure he'll whiff a lot. I think other stats will help offset that, and I hope he won't K as much, but call me old school: he was on pace for 150 Ks in AAA last year, so we're talking what, 175 Ks in the bigs over a full year and 175 Ks in one year is a lot of Ks. You K that much and I call you Dutch - cuz yer a wind machine. For the record, I want to see Dubois get mucho PT. As I said, I wish he was the starting LF, but I can understand why Dusty is, I hope, easing him in. Dubois does have to earn PT - he's not some 5 tooler like CP who it's fine to take some lumps with. Dubois is 26 already. He's had what, maybe 50 lifetime ABs? We're trying to win the series here - if a proven commodity like Holla plays fine the whole year and Dubois never gets extended PT I'm fine with that. I'm rootiing for the Cubs, not the Duboises. Anyway, Holla will get hurt and that's when, a la Lou Gehrig, Dubois will get his chance to prove he's a full time MLB player. That's the way it works for non 5 toolers. Anyway, Dusty uses everyone on the bench so Dubois will keep from getting rusty. Anyway part 2, the Cubs organization seems to agree that Dubois has nothing left to prove at AAA so as long as he's as good as we think he is he's here to stay. I don't agree with everything Dusty does, but it seems like some people are totally flabbergasted as to why Dusty does some of the things he does. All I usually do is just try to understand it, which is different from agreeing with it and totally different from following Dusty blindly. Waaah, stop categorizing me, you're hurting my feelings! J/k.... It's not that I'm a Dusty Luster, I just try to keep some perspective on Dubois - I mean the guy's name is clearly of French origin and should be pronounced 'Doo-bwa." It's fine if your a guy like W.E.B. DuBois, but Dubois is no DuBois, let's keep some more perspective. Despite his shortcomings, he's been balling for years in the minors and I say give him a chance. And I think, in stages, he'll get his chance this year. You know Holla will get hurt....

I just checked the stats - we're arguing about two guys, Hairston and Macias, who have a whopping 23 ABs between them. Sweet Mary! Hairston has more (12) by the way, and anyway, we all know Macias sucks. Come June the wheat will seperate from the chaff. And, Macias only has more ABs than Blanco, the terrible hitting backup catcher, and Dubois, the rookie whiff machine. If someone just read this thread they'd come away with impression that Dusty was having Macias bat 4th daily. The guy is the 24th man. Dubois starts at the bottom, he's no CP coming up to the bigs at 20 with a pedigree, if he can't beat out Macias in the very few ABs these guys get he doesn't deserve anything more than being the 25th man. I bet by June Dubois is the 24th man. Unless he totally blows it, i.e. pulls a Bellhorn, cuz he only has to beat out Macias.

Dude, you're talking stats now. Not your strong suit. Speaking of stats, I have some question for you: A) If we were to start Neifi in 100 double headers, how many times do you think he would go 6 for 9 or better? B) If we were also to start Hairston in 100 double headers, whom do you believe is likely to be the more productive player - Neifi or Hairston? C) Should questions A and B influence Dusty's decisions on playing time for the rest of the season? 100 double headers? So Neifi is playing over say 70 seasons? Or he's playing a 200 game season? Geez, not that well. He'd really get worn down around the 30th doubleheader. I keep saying that stats are a general predictor of future outcomes. There are many variables that need to be taken into account, many of which are unaccounted for by stats. Who's the starting pitcher in these doubleheader? What are the conditions? What position are they playing. How are they feeling personally? What stadium are they playing in? Etc. As I've repeatedly said, bench guys HAVE TO PLAY SOMETIMES - didn't Macias get his first start just friggin yesterday? In a DH? What's the problem? Hairston started the other game. Is the problem cuz Hairston didn't play first? If it is, standing on ceremony is for royaty and egoists, not baseball players. And again, this decision can easily be exscused by a manager playing his hunches, which are based on variables and knowledge that many presume to have, but I am certain do not. THEY BOTH PLAYED, what's the problem? So Frosty, Dusty has repeatedly said Hairston is going to get plenty of starts. I will bet you with 1,000,000 to 1 odds he gets more starts than Macias, so just take it easy. Everyone knows Hairston is better, including Dusty. It's still April, if the almighty stats show that Hariston is still getting less PT than Macias in June then we'll have as big problem as you think there is.

and amazingily enough the Cubs have scored 7 runs by the 3rd inning. Lets try to make sure that the moves are poor before we discount them Hindsight is 20-20. Benching A-Ram, Barrett, and Nomar for Prior's first start is a really bad way to build his confidence, in my opinion. Waiting to see how it turned out isn't exactly fair, is it? This is like when Dusty would do something stupid in 2003, have it work out, and Chip Caray would say, "Dusty pushes the right button again!" Those drinking birds can push buttons, too. Yet we use hindsight all throughout this thread to take issue with Dusty's decisions. totally wrong. Dusty bashers complain about what dusty is doing beforehand either here or in gamethread/flashchat. dusty supporters wait until neifi gets a hit to say anything here. BINGO. Give me a break. You guys rip just about everything he does and then whenever it turns out badly for him you make a big deal about how right you were and how stupid he is. However, whenever it turns out to be a good move you say either he was just lucky or have no comment. It doesn't even make for good conversation, because there is obviously an axe to grind that will not allow the Dusty bashers to engage in any give and take. It is either you agree that Dusty is an idiot or then obviously you don't know anything about baseball and statistics. I know! Frosty and Careless are so way off its hilarious. Have they been visiting baseball discussions? To me, game thread and flash chats aren't places with solid baseball info. It's the nature of the mediums to be over-emotional and stupid. [/b]

Quit categorizing people who don't agree with Dusty's stupid decisions as people who don't want to see the Cubs succeed. I rooted for all of Neifi's weak bloop singles and bunt hits to fall. No jury would convict me....

and amazingily enough the Cubs have scored 7 runs by the 3rd inning. Lets try to make sure that the moves are poor before we discount them I don't think you get it: statistics are never wrong - and infalliably they predict future events. I have a stat here that said Neifi was going to go 6 for 9 today. I do. No I'm not going to show it to you. It's secret. I bet $10 mil on Neifi going 6 for 9 today and now I have all the money in the world, thanks to statistics. Here's my impression of some: "Dammit - Neifi did good! The Cubs frickin won....man that sucks!' Here's my impresion of some others: "Yes, I was right today! That means all the other times I was wrong and will be wrong in the future, which will prove to greatly outnumber the time I was right, don't matter!" Well that's just baseball. You get a hit 33 times out of a hundred and you're an all-star.

and amazingily enough the Cubs have scored 7 runs by the 3rd inning. Lets try to make sure that the moves are poor before we discount them I don't think you get it: statistics are never wrong - and infalliably they predict future events. I have a stat here that said Neifi was going to go 6 for 9 today. I do. No I'm not going to show it to you. It's secret. I bet $10 mil on Neifi going 6 for 9 today and now I have all the money in the world, thanks to statistics. Here's my impression of some: "Dammit - Neifi did good! The Cubs frickin won....man that sucks!'

Conversely, you can't solely look at baseball in it's totality - you ignore the things that it takes to make it day to day. Very often a fielder's choice, an out, wins the game - where's the stat for that? There are things that stats can't explain or comprehend. I don't think I'm some knee-jerk reactionary. I appreciate what the new stats are bringing to the table, but I also see some of their limitations. What I see all the time is blind allegiance to numbers over the accumulated first hand knowledge of the lifetime practitioners. I used the analogy of the chemist telling the farmer what to put in his soil a while back: sometimes he's right, sometimes the farmer's time-tested ways are right. The new stats are the arrogant chemist who is sometimes rights but very often seems to forget that the farmer didn't get to where he is by sowing manure instead of seeds.

I blame Dusty for this rain-out.

Fine, I'd say that just looking at 162 game stats and projections obscures the day-to-day neccesities of winning games, but this thread is about Adam Dunn and Sauce's love for him, so feel free to ignore my objections, conjectures and observations about Dunn. Last thing I'll say - A) I hope Dunn does bad cuz he's a Red II) He might do very well this year and become a Sexon 3) He probably won't hit his weight, that may make him less valuable, but only to me and probably not Mrs. Dunn or Sauce. Go Cubs!

The answer I got? Somone needs to tell Carrie that Macias cannot make better contact than Dubois. And when Macias does make contact it is usually a weak ground out or fly out. There's a reason he has a career OBP as low as he does. He sucks! It kind of makes sense to me, note the kind of - Dubois was on pace to whiff 150 times over 600 ABs in AAA last year. So what does that translate to in the bigs - 175 Ks? I think the prevailing notion among baseball managers is that someone who whiffs that much doesn't make contact regularly. This whiffing/lack of contact is really Dubois' only glaring weakness. I think if he wasn't such a wind machine he'd be our starting LF this year. (Yes I know, Dusty stil wouldn't play him, he hates rookies, that's still my story.) Dubois' strike-outs have nothing to do with his not playing left. And what's even more amazing, even with striking out 175 times, he could still get on base more than Macias. And Macias has a pretty high strike out rate himself without the benefit of any power. You don't think Dubois' very high K rate (if he started the whole year he'd probably finish with the most Ks of any starter, and on a team with CP that's pretty high) have anything to do with Dusty's perception of him? The guy plays good enough D, has very good power, his main weakness is his inability to keep his Ks down and make contact. You don't think this is a factor? I bet yer thinking it's just cuz he's a rook, which may be the main reason. But the Ks are an important secondary reason I figure. Just my two cents.

The answer I got? Somone needs to tell Carrie that Macias cannot make better contact than Dubois. And when Macias does make contact it is usually a weak ground out or fly out. There's a reason he has a career OBP as low as he does. He sucks! It kind of makes sense to me, note the kind of - Dubois was on pace to whiff 150 times over 600 ABs in AAA last year. So what does that translate to in the bigs - 175 Ks? I think the prevailing notion among baseball managers is that someone who whiffs that much doesn't make contact regularly. This whiffing/lack of contact is really Dubois' only glaring weakness. I think if he wasn't such a wind machine he'd be our starting LF this year. (Yes I know, Dusty stil wouldn't play him, he hates rookies, that's still my story.)

Nilodnayr, personal attacks aren't allowed here. we all know im well aware, ill take a break from this thread for a while, until there are some decent posts instead of just stupid stories I try...but they keep pulling me back in!

I predict a massive coronary for Don before the season is over. We'll tell Dusty to lay some flowers on your grave.

I think some posters are stat worshippers, or Stat Suckers if you will. You give them stats, however few, they bow and say 'Case closed, the stats have spoken.'

Fine. Ignore the fielder's choice like it never happened or had any affect on the ballgame.... Better yet, reply and pedantically point out that the game was 'won' by an error. Continue to ignore the main point...life will be easier.

I'd really call someone who thought stats were the answer to every situation, who didn't take into account circumstances and particulars, to be the dense one.

That offer nothing...yeah. Neifi did terrible today. You guys hit the nail on the head. All those posts that were so certain, they really offered me a ton.

It must really rankle you Dusty Busters that Dusty Baker is more successful than you'll ever be. He's better paid, more well-liked, probably had more and better gals then you, and when it's all said and done and it's in the history books he will be remembered as a good manager. And no one will remember you. And on top of this, he's ruining your Cubs. And he'll probably finish out his contract - your protests are going to go totally unheeded. LOL, it's such a waste of energy! It's kinda sad, when I put it in these real life terms, isn't it? I feel for you. Me, I give Dusty credit when it's due, like with Neifi today, and I'd rather elevate than denigrate anyway, makes me happier. To point out every little flaw doesn't do it for me either. What it comes down to for me, is that when y'all can't even give credit to the guy when a move he makes turns out well, that's just sad.

How can Hairston be tired, did he ride his bike from Naperville? Way to take my stuff out of context. Are you trying to understand at all, or are you just totally closed to other opinions. If you look at the paragraph that preceeded the one you quoted you'd see I was making an example of the stat philosophy. Take it out of context, focus on the most insignificant and in fact not truthful point (that Hairston was tired) and you come out looking correct. Way to go, that's real tough to do. "That is the silliest thing I've read in a long time. It shows you just think stats are the end-all be-all. You really must think that because you have a book full of stats you are qualified to be a professional baseball manager. Your statement just defies basic understanding of the practicalities of a 162+ game baseball season - practically nobody plays 162 games a year, as the manager you have to decide when to pull the string on a bench player. " The bolded part was the point. People aren't taking practicality into account, they're just looking at stat sheets and assuming them to be infalliable, when they're only general when prediticting future behaviors.

Why do I even bother to bring up Dusty's successes to the Dusty Busters? Even when he makes the right move, they won't say it was the right move. Whatever they would have done would have been more productive. The arrogance of these people who think they're so much better than Dusty is annoying. I wouldn't imagine they'd be successful high school coaches much less profesional managers, LOL. They'd have to call time before every pitch to consult their stat texts. And they'd still be wrong a bunch of the time, not that they every think they can be wrong. Whatever.

See, again you are exaggerating. I'm not talking about the grand scheme. I'm talking about one play in one game where getting the bunt down and the runner over for your 3-4-5 guys to knock in is a success. Neifi did it. He didn't hit a home run, but that's much harder to do than get a bunt down, which is still hard to do. The ability to bunt a player over wins and loses a lot of games, I don't know who would disagree with that.

wow. you do realize i mentioned using a large enough sample size, right? with a large enough sample (which hairston and neifi's career plate appearances will suffice for), it's going to include appearances against guys like johnson and guys like scott downs. now, if statistics are as worthless as you're trying to claim they are, please inform me, oh omniscient one, what is better for predicting who will more likely get a hit or get on base? My point is, there's more variables to take into account in a real life situation. There are variables, that if you understand them, like say how a player does against soft-tossing lefties, for which there is no stat, you can increase your odds of success. Is that so hard to see? The stats cover everything, but they don't cover specific situations very often. There are plenty of things that can't be found in box scores....

I don't care if Neifi went 12 for 12 and hit an 8 run homer, putting him in over Hairston was stupid. I really dont see how you can defend this. That is the silliest thing I've read in a long time. It shows you just think stats are the end-all be-all. You really must think that because you have a book full of stats you are qualified to be a professional baseball manager. Your statement just defies basic understanding of the practicalities of a 162+ game baseball season - practically nobody plays 162 games a year, as the manager you have to decide when to pull the string on a bench player. What are your stats for that? Oh, you'd just play your best players 162 games a year, cuz there's no stat for 'tiredness'. Even in the hot Wrigley summers. Like the '69 Cubs. God, it's not as simple as you believe it to be. Sometimes Perez over Hairston is the right move. God, the arrogance of the stat worshippers....

Your points are rife with exaggerations and impossible situations. Neifi has been able to hit in his life. So toss your first paragraph out as over-emotional mumbo-jumbo. I bet we can go the whole year and never be in this ARam/Perez situation. Why don't you give me something I can use? In the very plausible choice of Neifi/Perez/Dubois to PH - I would look at many factors. I can't say flat out who I would always choose cuz they're all, at this point, at the same ability level.