WrigleyField 22

That fact actually implies the opposite of what you think it does. How so? A player who has gotten better several years in a row is likely get worse in the immediate future, and vice-versa. But in determining who is more washed up, it presents a better argument for the player who isn't getting worse. I mean, really what you're saying is that the guy on a decline has a better chance of improving because he can't get worse. The player who is putting up better results will struggle to continue to improve. I don't want to focus on Bako necessarily because it probably wasn't the best example, but FWIW, taking his whole career, hitting wise, its pretty constant suckage. Yes, we have "the book" on Bako, but his book tells us he's acceptable as a backup catcher if you don't have better options. So last year we brought him in. His and Hill's spring training wasn't the biggest deciding factor, in fact probably one of the smallest, but it still plays a roll. Also its a really small sample, but in his limited at bats last year, Bako's OPS did go up again. Millar's book tells us he was acceptable at one time, and has been pretty steadily getting worse to the point where he doesn't have value. But not focusing on these two, a pretty common spring training scenario is you have two young guys coming from AAA who are fighting over the last bullpen spot. They each have at least comparable numbers. Close enough that an argument could be made for either. And since their young, developmentally there is still a lot going on with their skills, and despite a large number of minor league stats, spring training helps to determine if either has gained an edge.

The difference between major-league quality and below replacement-level quality is not noticeable visibly at that level. Thats a load of crap. We've all watched players get noticeably better or worse in their skills at some point. We see pitchers "stuff" come and go, you see players gain or lose weight, add or lose muscle, improve their defense changes in hitting or pitching mechanics, etc. There are a ton of things that you can pick up on. The amount you can learn in a short spring training is limited, but it's part of the puzzle, and in a limited cases can help decide position battles for those last couple spots.

That fact actually implies the opposite of what you think it does. How so?

Bako OPS 06- .489 07- .534 08- .626 Millar 07- .785 08- .717 09- .674 Neither are any good, but Bako was much more washed up than Millar is. Those numbers are telling, however one is competing for a spot as a backup corner OF/If where his hitting is a big priority. As a backup catcher, its more important to see what Bako could do behind the plate. And even if you do believe those OPS numbers matter, one is trending upward, while the other is trending downward. Bako is old and all, but his numbers haven't changed much from when he was 26 and OPS'd .667. And his competition was an pretty big unknown at catcher who recently mauled his hand with a circular saw. Millar is going up against better players with fully functioning digits.

When the actual play is semi-competitive at best, sure you can. What does the level of competition have to do with how a player has declined or improved. There has to be certain skill sets that you can evaluate in a vacuum, regardless of the completion level. I mean, you could throw a cardboard cutout at the plate and be able to tell what pitcher is pitching better. Now obviously, you'll still look at past results and trends, but those trends aren't definite. A player can improve or decline their skills.

Going away from the old batter example: Say you are hypothetically trying to decide between two pitchers for the last bullpen start. And lets say they each have an equally large "book" out on them. The stats they put up aren't going to matter, but you are going to be pretty worried about how they look. While advanced stats can give great predictions on a large scale level, when it comes down to a single position battle, you can't ignore the actual play and skill level thats going on.

+1. Spring training stats don't mean anything, but it helps to check guys out who you are deciding between. Millar shouldn't e on that list of guys to decide between, but take last year with Hill vs Bako, I'm sure it was quite helpful to see how each look to make a decision. But Bako was the same thing as Millar is, a washed up vet we already have a huge book on. Bako wasn't as washed up as Millar is, IMO.

+1. Spring training stats don't mean anything, but it helps to check guys out who you are deciding between. Millar shouldn't e on that list of guys to decide between, but take last year with Hill vs Bako, I'm sure it was quite helpful to see how each look to make a decision.

I've seen Robinson rated the highest, I do believe.

FWIW, that suggestion came straight from the suggestion of Mel Kiper.

With the Browns apparently traded Wimbley to the Raiders, i prolly would take Eric Norwood .. WEll its way past 24 hours, so I don't know if dew makes the pick in this situation, but that sounds like a consensus to me, lets keep this thing moving.

Okay, its nearing the 24 hour mark in a few hours. Any opinions on what the Browns would be looking for at this pick? Possibilities: Kareem Jackson , CB, Alabama Jahvid Best, RB, California Dominique Franks, CB, Oklahoma Jonathan Dwyer , RB, Georgia Tech Eric Norwood, OLB, South Carolina

I think Favre is coming back for 1 more year. Then I think the Vikes make a big splash again at QB. Why not go the Packers route and let him sit for a year or two? Why wait until Favre is gone and then throw a rookie in the fire? Agreed.

Well I originally thought this would be a WR pick, but they've actually done some work shoring up WR, so I think they'll wait, especially with the talent pool, better value later. So the Ravens are going to add some youth to the DL. Ravens select Carlos Dunlap, DE, Florida http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID27365/images/Carlos-Dunlap.jpg

Olsen has to be at least as athletic as Ricky Proehl, who saw some level of success under Martz in St. Louis. Olsen- WR. Problem solved.

I haven't had a lot of time to research this pick, but I would agree with raw to go OL. I'll take his word and go with Pouncey. So Steelers select Maurkice Pouncey http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2009/0401/ncf_i_pouncey_200.jpg

I think it's nearly a certainty that Olsen is gone. There's no way the Bears would keep Manumaleuna, Clark, and Olsen. When Clark wasn't released despite the roster bonus that spelled the end for Olsen.If that is indeed the case, it sucks how old we will have made the position in just a couple moves, especially since Kellen Davis likely doesn't have a future since he wasn't that good to begin with and also is a receiving type of TE.

Well in the situation, it is the best solution, but I never wanted Martz so I'm kind of pissed about it. Most other OC's would be able to/ want to use Olsen. As long as we get fair value for him though, it is what it is and I'll be okay with it. Oh and we need a WR at least as good as Olsen to replace him, so we better do that.

Is it? Maybe for a running back with a lot of carries on the odometer. 30 should still be right in the prime of many guys careers. For other sports. Football prime is 26-30 for 80% of the league. Maybe even younger than that. I'm really not so sure that's true for non-running backs without significant injury histories. I'm not saying most players are at the absolute apex of their careers at 30 but most guys that are perennial pro bowlers or on a Hall of Fame trajectory have dominant years after 30. Reggie White and Bruce Smith, for example, were dominant until their mid 30s. Strahan too. But those type of guys make up a pretty small majority of players. No telling if you'll get a guy past his prime, or the small percentage that stays dominant.

Is it? Maybe for a running back with a lot of carries on the odometer. 30 should still be right in the prime of many guys careers. For other sports. Football prime is 26-30 for 80% of the league. Maybe even younger than that.

I don't know what to think because I've never been so down on the Bears and I don't know if spending like crazy makes it better or worse.

Why hopefully? Hopefully Martz fixes this inept offense, which just happens to include a disappointing TE, and stays for a while. Okay, hopefully was the wrong word choice. Of course I hope it works out well. I just expect it to be bad, I just worry it will be below average, but not bad enough that he sticks around for way too long.

Okay lets just call Olsen a possession receiver and not get rid of a good young tight end for a OC who hopefully will be gone in a season or two.

Bulls cut Chris Richard instead of Jerome James. Why? We saved enough money today between the two deals to easily afford Richard. I mean he's not a good basketball player, but that is more than Jerome James.

Here's what I said about the free agent situation at RealGM So I don't know if any of you guys ever have bought a home or like me, watch HGTV. But for home buyers, there is the choice between the fixer upper and the move in ready homes. The move in ready homes offer instant satisfaction, but less room for improvement. The move in readys can charm you with potential, but often the changes that need to be made are overwhelming. When looking at the players in Free Agency, the Bulls are the most "move in ready". Yea we lack the potential to bring along a second max free agent, but with all the teams ready to blow a wad of money, the odds of ANY team landing two top players was pretty slim. And that ignores the fact that we are the only 2010 with an All Star already on the roster. Yea, technically someone who is joining Miami has Wade, but the Heat also have to get Wade to stay as well. We have all of our first round picks. We actually picked up a future pick. We have a defensive rebounding center. We have a good third option. We have one of the best rising stars in the league. We have a former All defensive player on the perimeter to defend the other teams stars. Other teams that are players have some of these things, but we have the most of these things. Sure you might need to freshen up the paint (some shooters) and get some furniture (rebounding big men), but those are relatively cheap fixes and can be done easily. So 2010 Free Agents, bypass the fixer-uppers that are bound to cause you pain and heart-ache. Join the inefficient move in ready home and have a nice smooth transition into your new home.