Transmogrified Tiger

You know what I notice from that? A pitcher who had a .340 OBP against last season. And he was 31st out of 39 in K/9, so yeah, he's pretty allergic to strikeouts. (as a side note...I also noticed that only 39 pitchers qualified for the ERA title in the AL last year?!? Wow) He also put up a .317 and .308 OBP against the previous two years. Again, no one's saying Westbrook is amazing. Can you justify how Westbrook isn't a 3 caliber starter? By VORP he was the 42nd best pitcher in the game last year, and he had a terrible BABIP year. In 2004 he was 14th in baseball in VORP. I'm not wild about VORP for pitchers as a measurement. I think they do a better job measuring hitters with that stat. He's a three on many teams, yes. So are a bunch of the FA pitchers out there that we wouldn't have to give up talent to acquire. Which FA pitchers? And at what point is it worth giving up the (marginal) talent needed to get him as opposed to giving an obscene contract to the FA?

You know what I notice from that? A pitcher who had a .340 OBP against last season. And he was 31st out of 39 in K/9, so yeah, he's pretty allergic to strikeouts. (as a side note...I also noticed that only 39 pitchers qualified for the ERA title in the AL last year?!? Wow) He also put up a .317 and .308 OBP against the previous two years. Again, no one's saying Westbrook is amazing. Can you justify how Westbrook isn't a 3 caliber starter? By VORP he was the 42nd best pitcher in the game last year, and he had a terrible BABIP year. In 2004 he was 14th in baseball in VORP.

That is 16 less strike outs in 65 less innings. You do the math. That's what, 5 k's per year? In different leagues too? It doesn't really matter either way because it's tangent to the example you were using, but still, there's not much difference between those two in that aspect.

Are your standards for a "good #3 pitcher" to be worse than league average in ERA most years? What's your standard for a "good #3 pitcher"? Westbrook isn't a stud, but he doesn't walk people, doesn't give up home runs, throws a TON of ground balls, and (likely as a combination of the previously mentioned) has solid defense independent numbers. Well, my idea of a #3 starter on a championship team is someone who can actually generate a few outs on his own. At least once in a while! And he's given up 19 home runs in two of the past three years. He's not that good at avoiding the longball. It's not like Westbrook is completely immune to striking guys out. His HR allowed are at the bottom of the AL each of the last three years, he's pretty good at keeping the ball in the park. I don't think you're allowing much separation from "really good" starters and "bottom of the rotation" guys. Westbrook is a pretty solid 3.

Are your standards for a "good #3 pitcher" to be worse than league average in ERA most years? What's your standard for a "good #3 pitcher"? Westbrook isn't a stud, but he doesn't walk people, doesn't give up home runs, throws a TON of ground balls, and (likely as a combination of the previously mentioned) has solid defense independent numbers.

Mozzarella with honorable mention to American.

Coke. We changed from a Coke to Pepsi campus this year, I was/am not pleased.

Emphatic join.

I call BS. Blanco is a .657 career OPSer. He's not a high standard to live up to. What are your thoughts on Blanco? All you use is stats to judge a player. In this case, Blanco is a tremendous back up catcher. And as a back up catcher your role is not to be a great hitter, its to be one hell of a defensive player. My last post on the topic since it's late: Blanco is a good defender, he's terrible at the plate. Soto is a good defender too, he has the chance to not be terrible at the plate. There is not much of a difference, if any, between the two defensively. All the talk about Blanco's "handling" of the staff and game-calling is not much different than the sportswriting babble about clutch. They take the unquantifiable or not easily quantified and subjectively praise and criticize who they want. Of course, Soto has gotten this same praise, and the only thing keeping him from having this rep is the fact that he's not been in the big leagues for beat writers to heap cliches upon. Soto has a good approach at the plate, he takes walks and doesn't hit for power. Blanco will probably outslug him, but at a possibly large difference in OBP. Referring to Blanco as some sort of sure thing offensively while Soto is a mystery is misguided. Sure, Soto may be pretty bad, but interestingly enough, Blanco is so bad with the bat he doesn't set much of a bar to reach. And there's also the thing about Soto being younger, cheaper, under our control for longer, and a much better gamble for the duration of the contract we gave to Blanco.

Nope. You're persuasive, you... Haha, you are too. Thanks, yes I am. Blanco's defensive and game calling abilities are well documented as is the importance of both at the catcher position. I think that is rather persuasive, don't you? And Derek Jeter is a gold glove caliber shortstop. I need something more than reputation to claim Blanco is some sort of defensive legend. Soto has the same great defensive reputation, and he has experience with many of our young arms.

I call BS. Blanco is a .657 career OPSer. He's not a high standard to live up to.

Michigan State wins! wtg Drew Neitzel

that cuts both ways. you can use it to discredit Hendry, but you also have to use the fact that he was able to get the deal done and hence consummate the trade as something that he should be credited for. Not trying to use it for either purpose, it's relevant to what was being discussed though. so is what I said though. I think saying he only got Lee because of Baltimore's failings is giving half the story. somehow, someway, he succeeded where other GMs failed. the same goes for Aramis. sure, any team could have landed him in a salary dump. but LA, Seattle, Philly, and the Yankees all could have used a third baseman in the stretch run in 2003, yet none of them swung the deal. I'm nearly out of defending the guy, but like many things baseball, the bashing goes to illogical extremes. Okay. I wasn't saying anything in opposition to anybody, just putting the information out there.

that cuts both ways. you can use it to discredit Hendry, but you also have to use the fact that he was able to get the deal done and hence consummate the trade as something that he should be credited for. Not trying to use it for either purpose, it's relevant to what was being discussed though.

The Cubs got Lee because Baltimore couldn't sign him to an extension.

Mizzou handles Lipscomb, who is predicted to win the A-Sun this year, 89-69. Michigan State is on a 12-0 run and they lead #18 Texas by 7, under 12 minutes left on ESPN2

He's a corner outfielder, a .750 OPS and .111 IsoP are pretty awful.

So if Piniella wins the World Series this year with the Cubs, do you think it's automatic that he wins Manager of the Year? I'm almost positive they vote on that before the playoffs.

No. Peavy has never been as good as Zambrano has been, and Zambrano looks like he's still capable of getting more dominant. What about the control factor? Peavy's under contract for 2 more years, 3 with the option, at a very reasonable price. As we all know, Z's a FA after the season.

Peavy's health is a concern. The padres value Chris Young more than they do with Peavy. Yes, but you need more than 1 good pitcher to win and I honestly doubt they value Young over Peavy. Who is the one being traded? That's some of the worst logic I've ever seen.

Lefty One Out GuY

Well at least we get a 40 man spot out of it. ....or maybe not. When did Vazquez get taken off the 40? A couple of years ago. I should know stuff like this. Fare thee well Carlos, it was fun watching you in my trip to Lansing several years ago.

Well at least we get a 40 man spot out of it. ....or maybe not. When did Vazquez get taken off the 40?

Could Rapada have been worse? Was Aardsma that much a drain on the team? I don't get it.

Please save Hendry from himself, Pat Gillick.