UK1679666180
-
Posts
13,033 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by UK1679666180
-
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/5756 Would be a nice addition to the bench as a 4th OF'er/spot starter. Would likely be the 1st bat off the bench, can play LF/RF, and can hit lefties and righties. http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/16032797.htm Not at the top of the list as far as priorities, but the bench has to be improved.
-
Westbrook
UK1679666180 replied to Tim's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
He's nothing exciting, best quality is the ability to stay healthy and give you avg. production with high IP. Like you said, all depends on cost. I'm indifferent on him. -
There really aren't many cheap doubles in this game, most are obviously hit hard. BABIP accounts for doubles and triples putting too much emphasis on where the defense isn't compared to how hard he hit the ball, that's my beef with BABIP. '05 was a fluke year as well for HRs, of course you're using HRs in the discussions of BABIP. SLG% doesn't isolate singles or HRs from DBs and TRs. I'm more likely to consider a single not dependent on how hard a batter hit a ball compared to where he placed the single. I can't say the same thing for doubles, obviously no matter how hard you hit the ball, many times it will be hit at someone. But, over time the odds will favor the skill of a hitter (higher line drive %) compared to the essence of using BABIP (luck). If a hitter has similar BB/K, HR, and single ratios but the jump in his BABIP was caused by XBHs while having a higher LD%, I'm more inclined to use luck (BABIP) as the reason compared to he just hit the ball better than he ever had. That doesn't equate to him being able to do so again as well as him not being the answer to the Cubs 2 biggest problems on offense with limited chances to improve it.
-
How do explain his increase in DBs? I don't consider hitting DBs has much to do with hitting the ball where the defenders aren't compared to how well he hits the ball. You're not giving the hitter enough credit when you point out his BABIP when the increase has more to do with non HR XBHs moreso than singles.
-
But, Derosa did not have a jump in his singles. His statistical jump had to do with his increase in doubles more than anything else. His LD% had a nice increase as well. If it was a jump in singles, I would be more inclined to agree that it was a fluke. He did have a slight increase in BBs as well as Ks, which might have helped his BABIP as well. Obviously, it still can be a fluke but BABIP doesn't indicate that.
-
It doesn't show anything. I fail to see anything useful that can come from that stat. I tend to look mostly at BB/9, K/9, HR/9, as well as XBH/9. If I do that, I will have most likely eliminated the need to look at BABIP.
-
I'm not judging it by itself, I'm just trying to figure what it adds to any possible conclusion about a hitter's or pitcher's performance. Obviously it involves a luck or bad luck factor (espec. with a hitter), but unless a player has been able to keep that trend thru his career, it'll likely even out obviously. Take Derosa for example, beyond improvements in approach at the plate and XBH ratios, if those two remain similar do you need a spike in BABIP to show that his '06 might've been a fluke? If you're basing a pitcher's performance mostly on ERA, BABIP doesn't need to point out that flaw.
-
Neal Cotts for David Aardsma
UK1679666180 replied to JeffH's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Are you saying Aardsma showed anything even close to a hint that he'd be anything except a reliever? Because I sure never saw it. That's what makes the Garland comparison, on ANY level, pretty ridiculous. Aardsmaa has shown flashes of what he can do..the guy lacks control though..What go is throwing 97-100 MPH if you cant control it...He showed what happens by getting rocked plenty of times..Well just have to wait and see... This trade to me, is pretty much garbage for garbage..It means nothing.. When did he hit near 100? The difference between 97 and 100 is pretty substantial. -
But, it's not very valid. What does it tell you about a pitcher when he has a higher BABIP and a low ERA?
-
I don't pay any attention to the stat either for hitters or pitchers. Unless you have a production rating chart for each of the hitters and pitchers, I can't draw any conclusions from BABIP for a hitter or its impact on ERA or WHIP.
-
Doesn't that make the stat pretty much invalid?
-
Neal Cotts for David Aardsma
UK1679666180 replied to JeffH's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Good trade, of course, I've never thought too highly of Aardsma as he has a power arm in the mid 90s with a straight FB and below avg. breaking pitch and control. If I was the Cubs, I would still pursue two starters and use him in long relief. -
Blue Jays sign Frank Thomas
UK1679666180 replied to Balsa's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
He has only himself and his agent to blame for that one. His deal with the White Sox was long in years and short in cash. -
And what else? Hill is probably a good starting point.
-
Depends, I believe Prior was healthy and productive as well as Randy Johnson in his prime both had BABIPs in the .300s b/c of their high K ratios.
-
BABIP= H-HR/AB-K-HR HRs are eliminated from the equation. It's an interesting stat, not much value can come from it.
-
While they have Hellickson, Davis, McGee in the lower minors, they need some pitching prospects. For all the talk of trying to fleece TB, who do the Cubs have worth anywhere near what TB would be giving up? I don't see the Cubs giving up Rich Hill, who else is there worth anything? TB isn't going to give up anyone on the cheap, avail. and being able to acquire them are two diff. issues.
-
Cliff Lee, I assume.
-
Plus, with Upton/Longoria likely playing 3B in the long-term it gives TB very good options in the IF with an already strong OF and DH. They need time to reach their potential offensively.
-
The Cubs have 3 left at their disposal. There were more than 62 Type A/B FAs.
-
4 regardless of Pierre. For a team to get additional type A/B FAs they would have to lose 5 to get more than 4.
-
How do you figure? This should be interesting. Interesting enough?
-
:) I hope he starts at 2B.
-
I agree that this contract won't make or break the Cubs and their spending and he can be a quality super-sub, if he's starting, it will reduce the chances of the Cubs improving offensively in both of the areas where they need it most (top of the order hitter and middle of the order). As the starting 2B, he doesn't get on base enough to hit at the top and he doesn't hit for enough power to hit in the middle. He's a good btm of the order hitter and the Cubs have no one in CF, a bad hitting SS (cedeno Izturis), and the pitcher. Get A-Rod at SS and Roberts/Lofton in CF and it'll be fine. :wink:
-
Agreed, but Michaels would be in CF while the FA would be in LF (hopefully Drew/Soriano). Michaels will probably be non tendered. Even better. Michaels is no good and he is already 30 years old He's had 1 bad year (last year), 2 good years, and 2 ok years. He struggled last year, could be a cheap option in CF/LF if the Cubs get another real good OF'er (Drew/Soriano) while holding the spot till Pie is ready. Or where I'd like to see him, he can become an above avg. 4th OF'er rather than below avg. players like Pagan and Bynum roving the OF.