Transmogrified Tiger

You think Wilkerson will out perform Soriano offensively? I think a move to the outfield will only improve Soriano's defensive numbers. 2B is too important for a player with his defensive deficiencies. However, Wilkerson would still probably out perform him defensively. I think it's pretty likely Wilkerson outperforms Soriano, especially given that they just swapped ballparks on opposite ends of the spectrum. I'm talking about offensive ability. I do agree that Soriano's power numbers will likely be affected in his new home park (that is if he takes the field or isn't traded). My point is, Soriano is a much more productive offensive player than Wilkerson. And that's not really true. Soriano slugs, but can't get on base very much. Wilkerson is going to get on base at a good clip, and if his (shoulder?) injury is behind him he will likely slug very well too(moving from RFK to Arlington can only help that).

You think Wilkerson will out perform Soriano offensively? I think a move to the outfield will only improve Soriano's defensive numbers. 2B is too important for a player with his defensive deficiencies. However, Wilkerson would still probably out perform him defensively. Three-year OPS plus. Wilkerson 2003: 104 2004: 128 2005: 105 Soriano 2003: 131 2004: 98 2005: 110 It's possible that Wilkerson could outproduce him. Wilkerson played last year with a lingering injury. If he's healthy, he could produce an OPS+ of 110-120. That would be the range I'd expect of Soriano. Also worth considering, OBP ranks higher than SLG in importance, and Wilkerson blows Soriano out of the water in that category.

You think Wilkerson will out perform Soriano offensively? I think a move to the outfield will only improve Soriano's defensive numbers. 2B is too important for a player with his defensive deficiencies. However, Wilkerson would still probably out perform him defensively. I think it's pretty likely Wilkerson outperforms Soriano, especially given that they just swapped ballparks on opposite ends of the spectrum.

I don't really think it's Murton people are questioning. I would probably be considered someone that questions Murton. I don't think he has the XBH ability to be a good corner OF.

what happened? He hit a home run, then popped out twice. And then an RBI double? The original comment was made before the game ehen he was in the #2 spot. Did he double since then? I haven't been back to the game thread. I read the comment then went to see what he did, the timing was a little off I guess.

what happened? He hit a home run, then popped out twice.

Someone berate Neifi for swinging for the fences plz

The math isn't 100% accurate, but pretty close and as close as we can figure when comparing the two. The point of all of this is to illustrate the importance of defense and the fact that these two players are pretty close to each other in value while the general opinion of fans would lead one to believe Walker is much better. No, it's not close at all. There's way too much variance to even consider that an apt comparison. Neifi is an above average defender, Walker ranges from slightly below average to below average, depending on the year. Walker is a good hitter, especially for a second baseman. Neifi is an awful hitter, no matter what the position. His defense doesn't bridge the gap for his offensive deficiencies, not by a long shot.

Theoretically, if Neifi keeps the other team off the bases one more time a game, and Walker gets on base one more time a game than Neifi...wouldn't it be a net wash between the two of them? With a possible edge to Neifi as the extra out would save our staff pitches which historically seems to be an issue with us. (Note, I'm not advocating Neifi...just speaking hypotheticals here) The original math is faulty. You can't just multiply for a full season and compare, because the numbers were compiled under different circumstances. Common sense dictates that there are only so many balls the second baseman gets each game, and the number that Neifi can get to more than Walker is less than one full chance per game.

That's not quite an accurate example. They aren't making him a vendor, they're changing his defensive position.

The numbers only prove that you're wrong with respect to Wuertz's ability in 2005 to induce swings at pitches that crossed the plate outside of the zone. They do not however necessarily say anything about whether he's hurt more of less than others by control issues. Because, if you think about, getting hitters to swing at pitches outside the zone requires that you're able to trick them into thinking that the pitch will cross the plate inside the zone. Therefore, even a slider that drops out of the strike zone (and would, if taken, be a ball) can be representative of good control. So, statistically, it's extremely difficult to say whether or not Wuertz is more or less dependent upon other pitchers upon good control. Theoretically, at least, the better your stuff the harder it is to hit, regardless of where you locate it. Theoretically. And Wuertz's stuff is pretty good. Nay, extremely good. Anyway, this conversation is pretty irrelevant, because I think it's entirely clear that if Wuertz wants to succeed, he has to throw strikes, or at least pitches that hitters think are strikes. Limiting the number of walks he allows, if he can maintain the rest of his game, will undisputedly make him just flat out nasty. But there's something to be said for the observation that because Wuertz relies on hitters chasing sliders out of the strike zone to rack up his dominating strikeout numbers, and so throws sliders out the strike zone, pitches that would be balls were they not swing at, he's more likely than most to walk hitters, especially if they're patient. It would seem to make sense then that Wuertz would be able to be effective as a closer using the same logic that some have used with Dempster. Batters are less patient when save situations come about, are more likely to chase pitches, which plays into the strengths of Wuertz(and Dempster for that matter). Continuing to think out loud, if Wuertz shows some ability to not walk people and continue the great K rate, along with the Cubs falling out of the race, what would Dempster bring at the deadline(assuming he hasn't fallen off the face of the earth)?

Texas is up 14 with under 10 mins left, OSU is down 8 with under 4 left, why am I getting the Texas game? EDIT: Thank you CBS

This Nova-Arizona matchup looks like it could be a fun game to watch.

I don't think so. Wuertz's success is based on his control, as he constantly attacks the edges of the zone. It's not based on overpowering stuff. I'd expect him to start off ST like this until he fine tunes his control. I'd be more worried if he isn't sharper at the end of ST. Actually, Wuertz has pretty good stuff, especially his slider. Someone posted some interesting data about contact that Wuertz gets a tremendous amount of swings and misses.

Wuertz has looked bad. It's making the Howry signing look even better. Last year, had Wuertz performed like that, I would have been worried. Now, with Dempster closing and Howry, Eyre, Williamson, and Ohman ahead of Wuertz in the pen, his role is not nearly as important. If no one gets hurt, this should be a pretty good pen, especially when compared to last year. That's a big IF though. And if they pitch well, that's an important if too.

NW St made a run, but it doesn't look like it's going to be enough.

George Mason starts the second half with an 8-0 run to lead UNC by 1.

Blue I-Cubs Tee Road to the Show Tee(personal favorite)

Atlanta and Oakland regional semis/final are on Thursday/Saturday, DC and Minneapolis are on Friday/Sunday. I do not believe times are scheduled yet. According to ESPN, Duke/LSU is at 1 ET on Thursday, with Gonzaga/UCLA at 4 ET. Those are the only times listed.

I have no interest in this UK-UConn game, take me to Bucknell-Memphis plz.

This might be the worst myth I've ever heard. Which good Big 10 team is physical? Illinois? No, they shot more than half their shots in last year's tourney behind the arc, and shot 130 more threes than their opponents this year, and fewer free throws than their opponents. Indiana? No, I don't even remember the last good low-post presence they had. They've been very perimeter-oriented, going back to when they used Tom Coverdale's hot streak and great team 3-point shooting to run to the finals against Maryland. They shot 107 more threes than their opponents but fewer free throws. Iowa? OK, they actually shot fewer threes and had a lot more free throws than their opponents. And this held true in the first round game as well. Ohio State? Maybe, based on a big free throw differential, but they also took 40% of their shots from beyond the arc and launched more than 150 more threes than their opponents. Michigan State? Possibly, b/c they had fewer threes and more free throws than their opponents. But they were ripped all year for being soft, at least around here. Wisconsin? Their numbers are less skewed than in recent years, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who watched them play the last few years and consider them a physical team with a big inside presence. When I think of teams that are physical, I think of teams like UNC last year with Sean May, or Maryland with Lonny Baxter and Chris Wilcox, or UConn with Okafor, and Ben Gordon driving a lot, and Josh Boone and Rudy Gay. It's hard to name good big guys in the Big 10, or guys who are good slashers. Instead, you've got a lot of teams that live and die by the perimeter game. When I think of a hard-nosed conference, I probably think of the Big East first. The Big Ten doesn't seem particularly physical to me. And if it makes anyone feel better, Ohio State and Iowa had the free throw edge on their first-round opponents by a large margin. IMO, when you talk about physicality, the first thing that comes to mind is defense. Illinois and Iowa played great man D this year, MSU and Wisconsin are known for it(MSU was not as strong as they typically are, don't know about Wisconsin), plus Indiana and OSU are far from Gonzaga or West Virginia levels of defensive presence. I don't know if it was specifically for the Big 10, but it's a possibility officials were instructed to call a tighter game, or make sure things didn't get out of hand, or however you want to phrase it, and that would definitely hurt the Big11Ten

Northwestern State is clearly a better basketball team than Iowa....

I don't think it's too terrible to use wins in conjunction with other players to show that a player has been consistent, but you don't see that when the topic arises. It's only when trying to discredit pitchers that you see it, and in the cases it's brought up it's basically the only knock against the pitcher. I can't agree that a pitcher deserves credit for "winnability", there's just too many variables outside the pitcher's control that matter a lot for it to be worthwhile.

"Sticking to the facts" is a pretty dense way of looking at it. That's like calling Prior's line drive off the elbow a "May 27 injury" or a "Wrigley Field injury" or a "Cubs home pinstripes" injury. Yeah, all those things are true, but qualifying the injury as such is ultimately inaccurate. It wasn't some special circumstance, like an awkward fall(Lee), or being overworked as a pitcher during the WBC(virtually impossible with the restrictions), and like others have brought up, you don't just throw a bad pitch, or even 50, and suddenly need TJS.

imo = in my opinion jmo = just my opinion