Transmogrified Tiger

I wouldn't hesitate one second to sign him to a 2-year deal. As for 2B, I'd like us to acquire Kent or Soriano. Todd Walker doesn't do much for me. I'm surprised to hear you say that Hoops. Walker has been very good this year, better than Soriano by some metrics. Kent has been better, but is he 5 million dollars plus the cost to acquire him better than Walker?

I agree we can find a corner outfielder. Question is can we find two? Unless Lawton is kept or Murton starts we are stuck having to find two corner outfielders for next year. In a weak FA class and not wanting to sell the farm I really think that an outfield of Nomar/Patterson/Giles or Nomar/Patterson/(Kearns or Huff etc.) could put up some acceptable power numbers. While maybe not perfect it will be far better than what we have now. I think that Nomar can easily put up better numbers than Lawton and Murton in Left. But then we have to overpay for a SS who probably won't produce as much as a healthy Nomar. Nomars prodution would be average for a LF'er, plus you're asking him to play a position he's never played before. He could take to it quite well, but the chances are equal that he could be absolutely brutal, too. I'd rather have Nomars numbers at short and abover-average production in left than average to below average production for a LF'er and below average at short. you're not going to find anyone in this offseason better than Nomar at short. Lawton BA OBP SLG .269 .370 .421 Nomar BA OBP SLG .320 .368 .544 If Lawton is considered average than Nomar would be above average for OF. Plus Lawton isnt exactly a GG caliber OF either. Nomar hasn't hit that well since 2000. Lawton has put up numbers better than his career marks this year, and Nomar's numbers have declined for several years running. Fortunately, Nomar is falling from such a high level that he'll still be above average for a SS, but not for a corner OF.

You're team looks pretty solid. One of those rookie RB's comes up big and you're in very good shape.

I agree KC is a good fit, but they moved the fences back prior to last season, making it more of a pitcher's park than a hitter's haven.

I am going to disagree with you and say this is vastly oversimplified and thus incorrect. You must consider the player in question. There are plenty of hitters, some power hitters included, that can still clear the fence with a cut-down swing. Homeruns that come as a result of bat speed more than power. A high percentage contact hitter can easily hit a gapper with a cut-down swing. Power hitters that are also BA-minded can increase bat speed instead of increasing bat power. To say the options for a cut-down swing are Out-PO-Single is just wrong. I'm glad to see Beane adjusting. The biggest issue I have always had with his approach was the lack of situational application. Good managers and baseball thinkers will recognize that building a team capable of playing different styles of baseball against various opponents and situations is what wins ballgames. Box thinking or 'all the eggs' will not win championships. The idea is that you lower the likelihood of the worst thing happening, but also the likelihood of the best thing happening. My point is that a K is not that much worse than other outs that it's worth sacrificing the possibility of the best possible outcomes.

It's .343...with 1 HR and 1 RBI. Pretty expensive to pay $8 million+ for a singles hitter with a fading glove. He's a singles hitter based on his first 20-something at bats back? More like 32 AB..since he got back. He's not the Nomar of old by any stretch and not worth the $8 million+ he is making now and will seek next year. Wentzville, huh? I used to call on customers off of Highway N near 40. How can you say that he's not the Nomar of old? He's always hit for great average and good power for a SS, and he's already off to a great start hitting for average since his return. Funny you mention N, I think I may be headed there later today.

I'm going to have to disagree with you. Take a look at the pic and tell me Nomar wasn't pretty well put together. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/features/cover/2002/jinx/00s/030501lg.jpg I agree that Nomar is ripped in that picture, but that article was all about how Nomar got that body, explaining his workouts in great detail.

Actually the argument does make some sense because you can't know before the fact whether you will have a productive out or a DP. Now if you know your hitters' tendencies to pull or go the other way, or groundball vs. flyball, you can try to figure it out. But at that point you're not guessing anymore. The A's are always looking to use new information. That's what makes them different. Your plan to build a winner by hitting into force outs is very novel. I never said that was a plan. I said give me a bunch of speedy, contact guys. At least with a ground ball, you put it into play. If you have a guy fast enough (like Patterson), odds are they can leg out those slow rollers to short or third. You can't outrun a strikeout. you should try to force the defense to get you out. And if you put the ball into play, if you put it in the right place, at least something came out of your out, instead of nothing. I thought of this last night, let me see if this better helps illustrate what I'm talking about. Here is the spectrum of possiblities when you let a hitter swing away: [---Strikeout---Out---Productive Out---Single---Extra base hit---Home Run---] Here is the spectrum of possibilities when a player cuts down on their swing to make contact in an effort to avoid K's: [---Out---Productive Out---Single---] This is slightly exaggerated, but it illustrates the point. By trying to cut down on K's, or just put the ball in play, you reduce the likelihood of the most successful of outcomes.

Different era. If Gibson faced today's hitters, he'd get rocked.

It's .343...with 1 HR and 1 RBI. Pretty expensive to pay $8 million+ for a singles hitter with a fading glove. He's a singles hitter based on his first 20-something at bats back?

The Lil' Jon pictures.

I don't think there's any guarantee that Nomar will be more productive than Walker at 2B, and we have Walker on the cheap next year. I like Nomar(with a little Cedeno) + Walker better than Cedeno + Nomar.

Nomar's been hitting .393 since he returned. That's not exactly a shell of his former self.

Last night Morris didn't look to sharp to me. Getting hit in the hand had a lot to do with the last 2 runs being given up, but it looked to me like he was missing in the zone quite a bit. I recall at least 3 or 4 Cubs hitters hitting high deep flyballs that they just got under. As for what is wrong with him, he just seems to be going downhill in every capacity. Before the break he was holding hitters to a .246 average with a 4.5 K/BB rate. Since the break, he's been getting hit more(.310 BAA), K'ing fewer guys, and walking more guys(2.1 K/BB). I don't watch him pitch, so I don't know if he's just wearing down, or there's something mechanically wrong with him(not that I could figure that out anyway), but he's definitely been a different pitcher in the second half. Also, I hayt him.

The Cubs also got Nomar, Wood, and Williamson.

The problem is that 3/4 isn't good enough. The Cubs need to play .800 ball in order to win the 93-95 games it's going to take to win the WC. I'm not sure if any team has ever maintained that level of play for that long of a stretch. In order for the Wild Card leading Astros to win 93 games, they have to play .667 ball from here on out, with 10 of those games against the Cubs. If the Cubs make a run, they won't need to win 93-95 games to win the WC.

Why would the Cards trade him? He's signed through 2007 with an option for 2008.

You seem to understand the idea perfectly. Geez, reading some of the posts, it seems like some feel betrayed that he changes his philosophy. People take Moneyball as a bible and all it really was is a book about a year in baseball. I don't think people are "feeling betrayed". They are interested though because many regard Beane as a smart guy, and are interested to find out more when his philosophies differ from their own, or he changes course on an issue.

Here's my issue with that. A hitter's mentality has gone from "try to get a hit/get on base", to "hit it to this side of the field/hit it with this elevation, so if I make an out something good will happen". The hitter is no longer focused on success, he's trying to make sure his failure isn't as bad. Does that make sense? This is the best post here. And yes, it makes sense. I don't want players changing their approaches at the plate just because a runner is on 2nd with none out. Everyone used to bag on Sammy for striking out and not cutting down his swing to go to the right side on these situations. But to me, that's much more of a waste than a strikeout. If you try to hit the ball to the right side, that's exactly what you are gonna do. Best case scenario, runner moves up 1 base....1 more out is on the board. If the hitter keeps his same approach, best case scenario is a HR. Worst case scenario is a strikeout or doubleplay. In it's simplest form, more good can come out of a normal approach than a limiting approach. More bad can come also. But the difference between having a run or 2 on the board already (after runner on 2B, with none out) and having a runner at 3B with 1 out, is MUCH GREATER than the difference of having that runner on 3B with 1 out and having him at 2nd with 1 out. Oh, I agree with CPatterson completely. I'm not saying a player should go up there with the "well, I should hit it to the left/right side" mentality, they should just go up there and forget about trying to pull it or whatever. They should look for a pitch they can make good, solid contact on and go for that. But, if they do make an out, a productive one is better than nothing. Other than a sac bunt, you shouldn't be aiming to make an out. Simply try to take a pitch to drive somewhere. I just don't get CPatt's argument at all. Is a batter actually trying to make an out? Who says that? He's just NOT striking out while he does it. He's putting the ball in play, making the defense work, and trying to get hits. A K accomplishes nothing. A contact hitter isn't necessariy trying to hit a sac fly, but he's a hell of a lot more likely to hit one if he puts it in play rather than K's. He's still trying to get a hit when he hits it. And I don't think it's rare that the situation comes up where a ball in play is much better than a K. I can't believe that people actually think the number is negligible. I'm saying that in the effort to avoid a K, a hitter lowers the likelihood of hitting well(i.e. extra base hits). I'll take some K's with some doubles and HR's over fewer K's with some sacrifice flies, sacrifice groundouts, and some singles.

Pujols = Hedo Throw a floater...

haha, terrible call by Froemming. Thank you.

LOL! Sorry about not knowing, but why would he?.. Nomar pinch hit the other day, and Tavarez came in to face him, hit him, then left the game.

LOL!

It's David DeJesus of Kansas City, but I don't know of any relation. Sorry.

Cause Ray King can't see the ground around him when the bunt comes to him.