Transmogrified Tiger

Yeah, if I was Lovie, I'd consider waving the white flag. It takes a special group to score on a drive that nets -1 yards.

Now that the Bears have seen the Bucs offense first hand, I totally understand if they just don't want to come out for the second half.

ahahahaha, you just can't make this stuff up.

You aren't looking very far then.

Well, Crumpler didn't have a good day and the Dallas defense went off, but I got TO to match Romo so it wasn't all bad. I believe I'm down 13 heading into tomorrow's action.

I'm just trying to get as close to a net zero result from tonight's game (TO + Crumpler v. Romo + DAL Defense). A TD from Crumpler would do just that by my count.

The NCAA Volleyball championship comes on in 40 minutes. :shrug:

I've read that twice now and I don't see what the indications are that he failed a physical. The Sox have 39 people on the 40 man, and in the last several days they've added Lugo, Matsuzaka, Mirabelli, Donnelly, and Romero, maybe they don't want to make themselves unable to sign another FA without dropping one.

that's insane. coming to a stadium near you, the next most overrated, overpaid player in baseball. i can't believe that ricciardi would pay him that much money. if his batting average dips to around his career level, you're looking at a 18 million dollar, moderately above average player. He's significantly younger and as productive as Soriano. And there isn't a question about his defense. So, while it's probably overpaying for less than steller production, it's not the most overrated overpaid player in baseball. okay, i'll give you that soriano is more overpaid, but vernon wells is definitely more overrated, whatever that means. people are calling him a "budding superstar" which is completely inaccurate. anyone who thinks of wells as anything more than simply a good baseball player is believing whatever hype web gems feeds them. It's not that bad, it's more of a lack of identification of a career year. If he could repeat his .360/.540 production he'd definitely be a stud in CF.

Z-O-U! You know what would be really cool, is if Mizzou didn't fall behind by 3 touchdowns before starting to play well this year. Also, on a juvenile note, Mizzou has played the '[expletive] and the Beavers in consecutive bowl games.

I don't understand why we're gambling on the 34 year old Floyd coming off of injury to return to his splits against RHP rather than gamble on Murton(who put up very good minor league numbers against primarily RHP) coming close to repeating his .338/.398/.530(~165 PA's) line against RHP from the second half.

Welcome back Larry Hughes. Big game @ Orlando tomorrow on the second half of a back-to-back. The Cavs take a half game lead over Detroit for best record in the East.

You're gonna hurt Alfonso's feelings saying things like that.

They shouldn't rush Pie. Because, you know, rushing Patterson had such fantastic results. I think the situations have a chance to be quite different. Patterson had less than 1000 pro PA before his first callup. Patterson skipped high A ball. Patterson had only a partial season of AAA under his belt (and it was really bad) - and his numbers regressed as he got promoted. Patterson got the yoyo treatment, both in terms of callup, and usage. He sat the bench a lot as well. And I believe the biggest problem was that when he was drafted, they said "despite the fact that he's a fast CF, he's not a leadoff hitter, he's more of a middle of the order guy", and then they let silly old school managers try to turn him into a slappy leadoff hitter. Felix has well over 2000 pro PA. He's been in rookie ball, low A, high A, AA and AAA (with an extremely brief stop in short season ball). Felix's numbers improved at each level from low A to AA, and his AAA numbers improved as the season went along. Pie has had professional developmental people for 5 years, compared to Corey's 2.5. If the Cubs callup Pie, and hit him 7th everyday this season, with a couple rest days against really tough lefties and/or when he's in a funk, I don't think he will necessarily have teh same fate as Patterson. Thank you. Agreed on all counts.

No it's not. It's in the context of three consecutive posts where he disagreed with/criticized three other posters(me being one of them).

Really? I see it as close to 100% that Pie will suck offensively. How will that increase his trade value----when he's posting .280 OBPs and whiffing more than once per game? I don't get it. I don't see how you can see it as close to 100% that he'll suck. If Pie played regurlarly in the bigs next season I would put the over/under at .260 / .315 / .425 for his stat line. No real formula, just my best guess. I don't think that's entirely unrealistic. Do you think that qualifies under "sucking offensively"? I wouldn't, which is why I doubted the absolute declaration he'd be terrible. I think there's a very small chance he'd be good, but also a sizable probability that he won't be terrible. Oh, I agree that would not suck. The question in my mind is can we acquire someone on the relative cheap to play CF who would be more productive? I think Crisp would be a smart acquisition. I also think it's a good matchup of needs as well, since they have an excess of outfielders and are looking for bullpen guys.

Really? I see it as close to 100% that Pie will suck offensively. How will that increase his trade value----when he's posting .280 OBPs and whiffing more than once per game? I don't get it. I don't see how you can see it as close to 100% that he'll suck. If Pie played regurlarly in the bigs next season I would put the over/under at .260 / .315 / .425 for his stat line. No real formula, just my best guess. I don't think that's entirely unrealistic. Do you think that qualifies under "sucking offensively"? I wouldn't, which is why I doubted the absolute declaration he'd be terrible. I think there's a very small chance he'd be good, but also a sizable probability that he won't be terrible.

What does this even mean? Why would anyone even challenge your right to say something is unrealistic? But sure, I'd do so. Anything to avoid the continuing vague "you all" stuff that's been happening. First of all, this is unrelated to my initial point about making sweeping generalizations. That said, you're making it sound like there is a pro-stat cabal out to get everyone with an opposing opinion. Everyone here agrees with other people on some things, and disagrees with others on something else. Is there a lean towards statistics? Yes, because they help harbor objective/rational discourse. Many of the same pro-stat people you're talking about are the ones who scour the minor league forum to find updates from BA about how Patterson's defense looks according to scouts, and what velocity Gallagher's been hitting. It's about information. And when people come up with something that challenges that, especially if they're not prepared to defend their position, it's going to be met with opposition. It goes the both ways as well, and failing to see examples of people harping on the misuse of statistics would be(dare I say) "clueless to your posting environment" as well.

Really? I see it as close to 100% that Pie will suck offensively. How will that increase his trade value----when he's posting .280 OBPs and whiffing more than once per game? I don't get it. I don't see how you can see it as close to 100% that he'll suck.

That's not what I said. If you disagree or think something isn't right, then say so when it happens, instead of vague generalizations that don't accomplish anything more than you coming off with condescension. Haha, where in the world did you get that? I'm talking about making remarks about groups of people as a whole, whether they're pro-stat, anti-stat, or think stats aren't real. But if it makes you feel better to invent a pro-stat task force that snuffs out any opposing opinion, feel free. There's a lot of people who debate here passionately, if you don't bring it strong(no matter what your opinion is), people are going to call you on it.

I'm Chase Squared.

Yeah, most of his ABs have come in the 9-spot. When I have a little time, I'll go through the boxes and figure out how he's done against lefties and righties. milb.com has his splits through October, but they haven't updated since then.

Welcome!

First point of order. The proposal you're mocking was Murton, Marshall, Dempster, and Ohman for Dunn. Hardly the poster(DKWG for anyone that cares) living in a fantasy land trying to rip off another team. If you're going to use a hyperbolic example to make a point, please get it right. What really rubs me the wrong way is when people make generalizations like you just did about the entire board. Do people come up with unrealistic trade scenarios? Of course. Do people bash Hendry for a lack of moves? Of course. However, those are not all the same people. This is a very large message board, literally thousands of people are registered. Just because you see a lot of ill-advised trade proposals and see a lot of Hendry bashing does not mean it's the same people. And then, even if it is the same people, it's not even close to an arrogant POV. A lack of moves by Hendry does not prove that there wasn't anything worthwhile available. A person can have the opinion that Hendry should have made moves to improve the team, and simultaneously suggest a trade that he/she thinks will improve the team(however realistic or unrealistic they are). A great point. An obvious point. And one that could stand to be considered a little more often here. You got that, stupid people? It's unfortunate that you went that route in responding to my post. What's truly unfortunate is you continually posting digs at the entire posting community. It would be one thing if you continually tried to explain that some/most suggested proposals were realistic and were ignored before saying something like this, but that's not even the case. If you think someone is being unreasonable, then say so, state your case. Don't pull crap like "people on this board are.....". That doesn't accomplish anything. And even if you thought every last person had a wrong outlook on this topic, it would be much more civil to suggest that "we could stand to consider..." instead of from a condescending angle of you educating the ill-informed masses of everybody.