Transmogrified Tiger

Never heard that before. Is that why they did the same thing Holtz's first year? I dunno, that was before my time. Also, some Spartan fans would bet their lives that ND flag planted during one of the last two wins in East Lansing(I don't remember which one), but no pictures of it have been found, just accounts from people at the game.

Awesome, it's great that he's producing as a freshman like that. Thanks.

It's not his age, but his brittleness that bothers me. Aren't you all about us going after Drew? :P

Well yeah, I'm just trying to pimp Durham for 2B at every turn.

Durham

petition to ban rolleyes

You can see it in his eyes! He wants to be hurt!

FTR, the flag was planted because ND didn't even bring the megaphone trophy to the stadium, since they weren't planning on giving it up(Weis also supposedly guaranteed a win before the game). That may not change what people think of it, but it's the rationale that was used.

I'd wait til the end of the week to make sure Portis is good to go, and if he is bench Driver.

Memberlist --> Select Sort Method: Total Posts --> Order: Descending

I'm pretty sure Michael Wuertz invented pitching.

Point of order: Walrond is still averaging 2 K's an inning.

ahhahahahahahahaha, you can't even make this stuff up Giambi this month: .163/.357/.233/.590 A-Rod this month: .345/.437/.707/1.144

I'm also looking to upgrade at RB. If you think you might be able to get a haul for a upper level back, make me an offer, you might be surprised.

It must really suck to be a Phillies fan watching Walrond strike out 2 guys an inning.

Anyone got the park factors there?

Welcome!

That is just a fantastic thread title. Someone should photoshop that onto a Dr. Seuss book or something.

Since 03, Hudson has become MORE hittable, he gives more walks, he strikes out few and few. In other words....as of 2006, Tim Hudson is a VERY MEDIOCRE #2 pitcher, and more likely at this stage is closer to being a #4 pitcher, then a #2. Wade Miller can give same type of production at a fraction of the cost. So unless ATL is willing to eat over 60% of Hudson's contract, I wouldn't even talk about trying to get Hudson. That's just not true. 2003 was a career year for Hudson, using that going forward as a comparison to show a decline is pretty deceiving. His K's have stayed similar, his walks have stayed similar since coming to the NL, and his BAA has been similar. His peripherals show his 2006 ERA and WHIP are pretty unlikely to repeat, that he's more than a 4 starter, and that he's most certainly better than Wade Miller. The move to the NL has masked a bigger decline in the numbers since any pitcher should get an increase in K's and a decrease in other numbers when moving to the NL and facing pitchers in around 5-9% of at bats. Point is that since he's gone to the NL his peripherals haven't declined from year 1 to year 2. I'm not saying that 2006 is a fluke in that he's going to return to his top form from Oakland, I'm saying you're more likely to see the ERA and WHIP return to '05 performance than this year going forward.

Since 03, Hudson has become MORE hittable, he gives more walks, he strikes out few and few. In other words....as of 2006, Tim Hudson is a VERY MEDIOCRE #2 pitcher, and more likely at this stage is closer to being a #4 pitcher, then a #2. Wade Miller can give same type of production at a fraction of the cost. So unless ATL is willing to eat over 60% of Hudson's contract, I wouldn't even talk about trying to get Hudson. That's just not true. 2003 was a career year for Hudson, using that going forward as a comparison to show a decline is pretty deceiving. His K's have stayed similar, his walks have stayed similar since coming to the NL, and his BAA has been similar. His peripherals show his 2006 ERA and WHIP are pretty unlikely to repeat, that he's more than a 4 starter, and that he's most certainly better than Wade Miller.

Crap, I can't seem to find it. I swear it's real though. You may not have liked it anyways, since they were using UZR as the basis of their comparison. The conclusion with regards to DT's is that they were the least accurate of the group, but I can't remember what other metrics were in there.

Then here's another question. Is there a team in the major leagues that doesn't have a solid defense? At the Major League level, I'd argue that very few pitchers worry about poor defense behind them, except in rare circumstances like a player already committing several errors in a game, and even then the effect on performance is probably minimal.

This brings me to a different point, which I don't have time to flesh out right now. Is Pete Rose really an all-time great? His career .303/.375/.409, 113 OPS+ line is Rusty Greer-esque. Was he merely a good player who just stuck around forever? I'm not claiming anything either way, I was just shocked by how pedestrian Rose's rate stats were.

That's the point I'm getting at. "Pitching and defense wins championships" is cliche because you can almost replace "defense" with "having an awesome mascot". Pitching is far, far more important to run prevention.

Just for the sake of argument, let's split it into two categories. Scoring runs(offense) and preventing runs(pitching and defense). How much of preventing runs is pitching and how much is defense?