CarolinaCubFan

Shouldn't it be that any player is eligible UNTIL there is substantial proof they've used steroids? Your idea seems sort of backwards. That's the way it SHOULD be. Year - HR 1993 - 33 1994 - 25-prorated to 40 over 162 games 1995 - 36-41 over 162 1996 - 40-52 over 162 1997 - 36-41 over 162 1998 - 66-age 29 1999 - 63-age 30 2000 - 50-age 31 2001 - 64-age 32 2002 - 49-age 33-53 over 162 2003 - 40-age 34(hit in the head with pitch affecting his approach at the plate)-47 over 162 2004 - 35-age 35-45 over 162. Why that almost looks like a natural progression or something. Babe Ruth was roided out of his mind. You're funny. Show me a list of players to put up Sosa's lines. On that list, those stats can't come from 1998-2001.

Shouldn't it be that any player is eligible UNTIL there is substantial proof they've used steroids? Your idea seems sort of backwards. That's the way it SHOULD be. Year - HR 1993 - 33 1994 - 25 1995 - 36 1996 - 40 1997 - 36 1998 - 66 1999 - 63 2000 - 50 2001 - 64 2002 - 49 2003 - 40 2004 - 35 I've been watching baseball since the early 80's, here's my idea of a power hitter - 30-40 HR's - power hitter 40-50 HR's - elite power hitter 50+ - elite power hitter having a career year I'm all for giving a guy the benifit of the doubt, but there are some things I personally just can't turn a blind eye too. I have to agree with Abe, Sosa and McGuire pretty much reek with guilt.

Restraining order forcing you to Iowa? :) WELCOME TO THE FORUM! :lol:

I became a fan of Cuban's after he bought the Mavs. I like Cuban for the same reason I like Zambrano so much, the fire and passion. I have to say, I lost a little respect for the guy after the whole reality show venture, but I'd love to see him buy the Cubs. Money isn't the issue with Cuban for me. He's a business man, but he's not in it to make money - what a concept haha. Cuban would inherit a HUGE Cub Fan base that will generate plenty of cash to restructure this organization from top to bottom. I think he'd be a great man for the challenge. We were looking good a few seasons ago, and since, watched players like Vlad go through FA. We've had the money, it's just been poorly managed. I don't think Cuban would have spent his money the same way. The Trib has been good to us, but I'm ready for a change.

I agree. Fact of the matter is, this is Kerry's last year to prove he's worth the money he's making. He's made some good money, but he's not in that class anymore. I'm 50/50 on Wood. I'd love to see him have a healthy CY season and 50% of me thinks he will do it. He has a lot riding on this season and I think he'll meet the challege. On the other hand, he might break down again and be a memory of a couple good seasons and a stellar game.

That's just the Kool Aid talking. If Cedeno & Murton managed to put up OBP's of .358 and .378 respectively, that woluld bring the team OBP into the .335 to .336 range. Now, that's light years better than last year, but still light years away from pushing .350. No, to get 6 players hitting .300 would push Pierre and Jones into that .350 as well. certainly walker and barrett wouldn't drag them down that much. I find the kool-aid reference quite offensive by the way. why add that - does it somehow contribute to your argument or is it just meant to irk me? I am sorry that you took offense. My intention was not to irk you at all, but rather to contribute to my argument by illustrating that your view is that of an overly optimistic fan. One of the few times you'll see that reference used approriately. I made the following analogy a few weeks back in another thread. Starting with Zips' projections, and adjusting Patterson's & Perez's counting stats (but keeping their rate stats constant) downward to reflect the fact that they're not going to be starters on this team, and adding in the pitching staff's actual numbers from '05. Now, I realize that Patterson has since been traded away and it shouldn't be that hard to improve on his .298 OBP. Name P AVG OBP SLG G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS Pierre* cf .293 .346 .364 162 676 92 198 22 10 2 61 50 41 52 22 Walker* 2b .277 .336 .435 125 451 60 125 26 3 13 57 40 49 1 2 Lee 1b .309 .398 .582 159 593 104 183 44 2 38 114 84 121 14 5 Ramirez 3b .302 .359 .541 142 549 83 166 33 1 32 104 45 75 1 2 Jones* rf .261 .319 .433 145 541 71 141 26 2 21 76 42 121 11 7 Barrett c .276 .342 .468 125 410 47 113 29 4 14 58 37 60 0 3 Murton lf .289 .350 .430 137 470 64 136 16 4 14 56 42 77 10 5 Cedeno ss .287 .332 .412 113 345 46 99 15 2 8 40 20 63 13 4 pitchers p .202 .219 .277 162 336 25 68 12 2 3 18 6 97 1 2 Blanco c .204 .258 .351 81 225 22 46 12 0 7 27 15 39 0 2 Hairston 2b .273 .350 .378 98 333 44 91 22 2 3 31 31 39 9 9 Patterson* cf .252 .298 .418 57 220 29 55 9 2 8 27 14 57 9 3 Perez# ss .259 .288 .353 55 188 18 49 10 0 2 18 7 17 2 1 Mabry rf .240 .295 .407 112 246 26 59 15 1 8 32 20 63 0 0 Totals .274 .330 .431 162 5583 731 1529 291 35 173 719 463 919 123 67 2005 CUBS .270 .324 .440 162 5584 703 1506 323 23 194 674 419 920 65 39 Raising the estimates on Cedeno (.332 to .358) and Murton (.350 to .378) will only add about .006 to the estimated team OBP. Finding another .010 to .012 in OBP to bring this roster up to where they're pushing .350 is, in my opinion, overly optimistic. Hey Fred, just for fun, what would it be if we were able to swap Jones for Abreu as well?

What's everyones opinion of when we may see Epatt in Chicago? And what type of numbers does he project? He looks impressive so far.

In your opinion, is he getting squeezed sometimes and overcorrecting by coming back to much over the plate, or has he just lost some of the touch? I ask because many games last year were a battle of wills between him and the ump. If Maddux could keep nipping at the outside (to a right hander) and get the ump to give it to him early it seemed like he would be in for a good outing. I don't think Maddux was squeezed more than any other pitcher. He just had too much of the plate on pitches that were meant for the corners. When that happens, you'll see higher HR ratios as well as H/IP. Hey UK, I agree with your assesment. I've only seen Maddux's conditioning mentioned once though. Greg pitched like a 40 year old when he was just getting his start, power pitching hasn't ever been a part of his game. Saying that, I personally feel Maddux could pitch into his mid 40's with success. If Maddux has truley worked hard on his conditioning, I think he could suprise a lot of us.

I don't mean to nitpick, Soul, but in 2004 Aramis didn't really miss any extended time beyond 5-6 games straight games due to injury, and in 2003 he was pretty healthy for both Pittsburgh and us. 2001-158 games 2002-142 games 2003-159 games 2004-145 games 2005-123 games It's not like he's a china doll. If he's worked on his flexibility and lower body this winter, you shouldn't see any nagging injuries this year. No, I totally agree. And he's still young, too. Alot of times a young ballplayer will pick up the offseason discipline as his career progresses. There's definitely alot to look forward to with ARam as long as he plays his cards right. I remember 2004, and he did play. But I remember many of those games he was in pretty bad shape. He tried to tough it out which is a good sign as well. I just want to see the kid take the next step and become the perennial superstar he has the talent to be. I think it's time for him to make that move. He's too young to be this slow, too-----men in their late 20's need not become slow pokes no matter what they do for a living. Im 2005 he ran slower than Fred McGriff in a lot of games. In the really bad ones he didn't even run, he just jogged, and his defense was lame too. I'd love to see Aram get his legs back under him. It's constantly argued speed has little affect on the game, Aram has the OBP and SLG, but I personally feel his game would move to the next level with healthy wheels. I'm sure someone will try to argue something about Aram and SB's, speed is speed.

Seriously, stop trying to fit some group of posters with some preconceived notion you have. No one is running away with one metric here. You're crying out for balance when it is already there. I don't agree TT. Maybe the moneyballers need to expand their views a little. It's not just one person who feels moneyballers are running away with only one metric. I think you are smarter than most on this board, but I also read your posts as being "extreme" on the whole moneyball thing. I don't see the balance you talk of.

well, you do have sample size on your side. seriously, all you guys that like to make snide, smart ass remarks about moneyball, beane and OBP are just making yourself look stupid. NOBODY includes that stuff in their posts more than you. either you're imagining everybody mentioning beane, moneyball and james in their posts or you're just reading your own posts, which are littered with references to those things. enough playing the 'woe is me, i'm the poor guy in the minority on every issue that everyone hates...i'm such a martyr' card. no one's buying it. lol. glad you didn't get personal, and hendry's done several things wrong... ah, the final piece of your typical posting plan. 1. determine what the majority opinion on an issue is. 2. take the opposite of that opinion in snide, quick, baseless, inflammatory remarks. usually add a rolling eyes smiley. 3. wait for someone to call you out on your post that you have to know is ridiculous and has no support. 4. claim that your post is just being attacked because your a rogue, independent minded, outside the box, free thinker who doesn't fall into everybody else's follow the leader mentality. 5. wait for someone to call you out on that. 6. whine about being personally attacked (even though you technically personally attacked everyone who you claim to be part of the group think) and usually throw it out there that the mods are allowing the personal attack because the poster 'attacking' you is part of the in crowd. 7. shrug it all off because, well, that's just what you do. someday we'll see the err of our ways and realize you were right. so is the life of a martyr. This is the kind of post that really turns me off of this board. Tim should change the name from NSBB to the "Billy Board". I'll admit, Beane is onto something, but it is far from a perfected philosophy. Statheads like to spit out a stat and call it gospel, all the while, there are numorous variables that play into that stat that are considered "unimportant". :roll: :roll: :roll:

the only way a player can elevate his OBP over his BA is by taking walks. i don't really understand what you're saying here. I just personally don't like the high walk to low hit ratio. I'd like to see it even out a little. It really turns me off Dunn for some reason. Just one of the many dumb things that makes me tick.

I'd love to have Dunn and his OBP, but he just doesn't excite me. OBP has to be the primary stat, and with him being 26 years old, he looks great on paper. How he gets that OBP is what concerns me. I don't care how you try to spin it, I'll never be convinced that a walk is of equal value to a hit. Overall, I'd take Dunn and his OBP, but I think I'd rather see if Hill, Williams, Pie, Murton, and likes can break out. I think Murton has so much upside, I hate to regret trading him away. Dunn's size and build concerns me as well, he's still only 26, but a big cornfed boy like that could be a really old 30.

Link? Sarcasm dude. Link? See how it works? Nice =D>

I concur. I don't hate Perez, I hate the way he is used. I'd just prefer not to have him on the team. Come to think of it, I'd keep Neifi on the roster, if we got rid of Baker.

wait, you mean to tell me they didn't win by playing "fundamental" baseball? i don't believe it. they won because they executed more squeeze plays than anyone else! You and your fundamentals Sulley. Learning the strike zone is a basic fundamental of the game. Without that basic fundamental, you never get your OBP.

I'd like to see these charts on D. Lee. 2005 and a couple years back, I'd like to see if he did fix the whole in his swing.

I want to know why he thinks speed is so valuable. He's said that we need a speed guy, never explained why, then said that speed is underrated. I know what I think and I want to know why he has such convictions. This subject gets me fired up. I agree with the other dude, speed is undervalued now days. I've read this argument so many times on this board. Tim put up some cool stuff back when Beltran was a FA in a thread we were discussing speed, I'll see if I can't find it. Everything around here gets argued to the extreme. I'm not saying that speed is how you win a World Series, but so many stat heads around here discount it as a non factor - at least that's how I feel they portray it. I've got 16 years experience on the ball diamond, and when I hear someone talk as speed being something not important, I seriously wonder if some of these folks have ever played baseball. I've seen speed: break a pitchers concentration on the mound... it increases defensive range... decrease hitting into double plays... put pressure on defenses causing errors... I could probably go on, there are so many variables, it's almost imposible to assign definite value to speed. Here's a question, who'd you rather have on 1B if Lee hits a line drive to the gap, Barrett or Pierre? and then why? I put speed in with fundamentals - hitting the cutoff man, laying down a bunt, smart baserunning, and on and on and on. These are basic fundamentals you are taught in little league. Speed is a tool, a great tool, but tools and fundamentals will never be the biggest part of the pie on win shares. OBP is such a wonderful stat! OBP, pitching, defense, and power are essential. A good team can survive without speed, but not OBP. Here's the thing though, if you have a solid team built around OBP, tools and fundamentals will only make that team better. I have no idea how many wins it may play a part in, using all the different variables. Even if it were just a game or two, that could be the game or two that cost us a trip to the playoffs. That's why I value speed. I wouldn't sacrifice OBP for speed, but if I can get OBP with speed, I take it. If I can get OBP, power, and speed in a player, I get excited. I really enjoy reading your posts TT, they are usually pretty solid and right on. I don't know that I've read your opinion on this before though. this is a good post. but no one's saying that speed doesn't have any value. it's nice to have a team that can run. however, i will take a team of derrek lees before i take a team of juan pierres. if i had to choose, it wouldn't even be a decision. as far as beltran goes, beltran's not just fast, he's smart. he's a much smarter and more effective basestealer than pierre. although he slipped last year a bit, he still stole 42 bases in 45 attempts in 04 and 41 in 45 attempts in 03, that's an incredibly valuable asset. pierre is nowhere near beltran in terms of baserunning. pierre's faster, but beltran's better. speed without intelligence probably hurts the team more than not. i don't buy the idea that baserunners bother big league pitchers all that much. by the time they reach the majors, they've seen their share of speedy guys on the basepaths and have often developed ways of dealing with them. as far as juan pierre goes, he often makes the pitcher's job easier by taking off prematurely and getting thrown out. as far as bunting goes, there's no evidence at all that it creates any more runs than a team would score anyway. major league baseball is an entirely different beast than high school baseball, college baseball, and even minor league or semi-pro ball. major league baseball is played over 162 games. and to counter your questioning of whether some of us who've never played organized ball above high school really know what we're talking about, i'd argue that people too close to the game often get inundated with subjective BS to have any other kind of perspective on the game. billy beane has done a great job relying on statistical analysis and has been successful hiring folks who've never played the game before. sometimes that's what you need--someone to come around and say: "that's a funny way to do that", or "wait, there's no possible way that the earth could be the center of the universe". a lot of folks close to the game can't think any other way--it's positive to have a different perspective. and only a stat can tell you that 1 hit a week is the difference between .250 and .300 Sulley, you're still going too extreme. I agree with you guys that speed alone is not the answer, but I still argue that speed and fundamentals hold enough value that it should be part of who Hendry scouts. Mention speed, and Pierre's name gets thrown about. He's got speed, but I also consider D. Lee, Abreu, Vlad, and Arod as speed guys. They all have above average speed for their posistion. These guys all have high OBP's, power, and.....tools and fundamentals. Along with the OBP and power, they also have Gold Gloves, speed, and a good grasp of the fundamentals. I can't agree with you more that speed used unwisely could be counterproductive, but if you have good fundamentals, you won't be using that speed unwisely. Sulley, come on man. How many times have you been watching our beloved Cubs and cussed the TV out because a pitcher like Farnsworth is goofing with a runner on first, and can't throw a strike. I've seen a lot of big innings get started this way. A pesky baserunner may have no effect on Roger Clemens, but this league isn't full of pitchers like Roger Clemens. A young, short reliever in a high pressure situation is a good time to see how speed can effect a pitcher. Bunting is hard to argue, but it is a fundamental of the game. I'd always heard laying down a bunt can help you snap out of a slump. I've had success with that, no where near 100%, but enough that I believe it's more than just myth. Bunting is a valuable tool when used in the right situations. Thing is, we don't get to see it used in the right situations on a regular basis unless we are watching teams like the Cardinals. I envy how the Cardinals always seem to execute all the fundamentals. I can't agree with you more on your last paragraph. I'm not trying to Dusty Bash, but Baker is a prime example. I'm not gonna join in on the Bean butt kissing, but he plays a big part in "new" baseball. I support the logic behind statistical analysis, but I get the impression from so many posts, that "moneyballers" want to forget about the basics. Old baseball survived depression, scandal, wars, and lockout. It's an amazing game. Like I said, I'm in favor of new baseball, but I will be a big fan of the first team that builds an old school baseball team, with a perfect mix of players based on statistical analysis - Cubs or not. It is positive to have a different perspective, but it's also positive to improve on what works. Good post Sulley, I enjoy the conversation.

So you think the Cubs need "another speed guy" to pair with Pierre as well? Speed is overrated. Speed is completely worthless without other, more important aspects of the game in your repertoire. Speed is way down the list of necessary ingredients to be a good baseball player. Being an average runner is not a setback in the least. There are a ton of crappy ballplayer's whose speed has hypnotized baseball people into keeping them in the game long past their expiration dates. Speed is nice to have, and all else being equal you'd have to take the faster guy. But all else usually isn't equal, and often times dramatically outweighs the difference speed will make. Did I say that? I also consider D. Lee a "speed guy"

I want to know why he thinks speed is so valuable. He's said that we need a speed guy, never explained why, then said that speed is underrated. I know what I think and I want to know why he has such convictions. This subject gets me fired up. I agree with the other dude, speed is undervalued now days. I've read this argument so many times on this board. Tim put up some cool stuff back when Beltran was a FA in a thread we were discussing speed, I'll see if I can't find it. Everything around here gets argued to the extreme. I'm not saying that speed is how you win a World Series, but so many stat heads around here discount it as a non factor - at least that's how I feel they portray it. I've got 16 years experience on the ball diamond, and when I hear someone talk as speed being something not important, I seriously wonder if some of these folks have ever played baseball. I've seen speed: break a pitchers concentration on the mound... it increases defensive range... decrease hitting into double plays... put pressure on defenses causing errors... I could probably go on, there are so many variables, it's almost imposible to assign definite value to speed. Here's a question, who'd you rather have on 1B if Lee hits a line drive to the gap, Barrett or Pierre? and then why? I put speed in with fundamentals - hitting the cutoff man, laying down a bunt, smart baserunning, and on and on and on. These are basic fundamentals you are taught in little league. Speed is a tool, a great tool, but tools and fundamentals will never be the biggest part of the pie on win shares. OBP is such a wonderful stat! OBP, pitching, defense, and power are essential. A good team can survive without speed, but not OBP. Here's the thing though, if you have a solid team built around OBP, tools and fundamentals will only make that team better. I have no idea how many wins it may play a part in, using all the different variables. Even if it were just a game or two, that could be the game or two that cost us a trip to the playoffs. That's why I value speed. I wouldn't sacrifice OBP for speed, but if I can get OBP with speed, I take it. If I can get OBP, power, and speed in a player, I get excited. I really enjoy reading your posts TT, they are usually pretty solid and right on. I don't know that I've read your opinion on this before though.

=D>

God that'd be sweet. I've been thinking the same thing. The contract extension talk got quiet in a hurry. Maybe Hendry and Baker will begin to show a little urgency, be it two years too late. If it means playing smart baseball, great, but if it means acts of desperation i.e. Prior trade talks, I'm a little concerned.

You may see it that way, I see it as "Because he's survived Dusty Baker for two full years. Bash the guy if you want, but I hate the way this Cpatt situation has played out.

Do ya mean "intention" there Dan? I'm not the best speller in the world, but I even caught that one. I was thinking to myself, is this a fake article? I saw Boston Harold in the link and felt better about my spelling. :D

I wouldn't be suprised if Cpatt goes somewhere else and blossoms under a good manager. Cpatt gave us reason to believe, it was upon Baker's arrival that his struggles started. I hate to give up on him, but I like the guy too much to make him stay in Chicago. Just a few years ago, we had a bright future with our young kids like Cpatt, Wood, Prior, and Zambrano. What are they now? Cpatt has busted under BAKER. On his way out. Prior went from the next great thing, to our #2 starter. His name being floated in trade rumors crushes the Cub fan in me. There is either trouble with Prior's health, or Hendry is desperate. Either way, I'm not confident Prior will stay with the Cubs. Zambrano has been the workhorse. My favorite player on the team. He's gonna give us great numbers, but when it's time for him to get paid, see ya! Wood. :( Sisco. #-o I could go on and on. I personally can't find it in me to give Hendry credit for anything anymore. I'm ready for Hendry and Baker to catch that 9 o'clock train out of town CuseCubFan was talking about in a baseball discussions thread.