17 Seconds

the wnhl

bs

another badass kill

stupid seabrook

kill this and get more momentum

i really don't like that it's only 2-0 after the penalties.

Are your outfield standards really this low? For a veteran outfielder who got 30 million and never stays on the field, hell yea an .830 OPS is meh, I don't care where you're playing. You don't pay that much money for production like that, especially when you're only getting it for like 100 games that season Uhh, this is exactly what I'm talking about the overblown park factors. A .900 OPS hitter turns into an .830 OPS hitter if he goes to LA? Come on. I'd believe that for Petco. For Dodger stadium that's a whole lot of hyperbole. I don't see what this has to do with anything. He said I was silly for using career averages and compared it to calling Ramirez an .845 OPS hitter. Like I said, that's a riduclous comparing. Ramirez has performed well above those average for 5 consecutive years. bradley has only 3 "seasons" in his entire career where he's better than his career numbers. He's done it 3 out of the last 5 years, and is now on his way to his 4th in the last 6. Just a littttleeeee bit different than Ramirez. No you just need to keep it in context. Of course that doesn't "blow" but, when it's from a corner outfielder who is making 3/30 and only gives it to you for like 100 games in a season..... yeah, it does. He doesn't blow... the value does.

yay zambrano is better than hamels i guess seriously thought this list is all sorts of messed up.

I don't understand how Soriano to second is a better option that just bringing up Fox to play third. Doesn't really matter though. Even if he tries it we know Lou will panic immediately. Soriano probably wouldn't make it past his first attempt to turn a double play.

He should have had hits in all 3 of his last at-bats tonight, and probably doubles on at least 2 of them.

Here's the reason I keep citing career numbers. It's not just because they're "career numbers!", it's because he's played right to that level so many times in his career, including not that long ago. It's not like I'm talking about a guy who struggled early in his career before becoming consistently good and has a deceiving career line to show for it. Like Aramis. He has an .845 career OPS, but he's been way better than that for many consecutive years now. His numbers are just brought down from when he sucked early in his career. Bradley has not followed that career line. He has 3 good "seasons" mixed in with a much higher amount of ones that were mediocre or bad. I mean, we can agree that it's pretty likely that Milton finishes this season with an OPS around .840-.850 or below, right? I mean, that would be good. Well, that would mean that Bradley had performed to about his career averages in 4 of the last 6 seasons. That's why those numbers are so relevant. He performs that way a lot. I don't understand why those are the fluke seasons and his few good seasons, which have occured at a much lower rate, are not. I think people want Bradley to be a lot better than he is. Everybody says he's good. Hitting coaches love him. The media makes him out to be a guy with mental issued but a dominant bat. At time, he's outstanding. He takes walks. All these things make you want to believe he's awesome, but if you actually look at the way his career has gone, you'll see that he's not that good that often.

Comparing Aramis to Bradley is pretty ridiculous. First of all, and I've already said this several times, I didn't expect Bradley to be an .825 OPS guy. I expected high .800's. I just said it wouldn't have surprised me if he wasn't that good. I was actually on board with signing Milton...but only if it was at the right price and only if we didn't trade DeRosa. I said that all along. This has nothing to do with me hating the move, it's about the fact that people pretend Milton is some badass stud hitter, when I don't think he is. He can be, but for most of his career he hasn't been. Comparing him to Aramis is silly. Bradley has had exactly 3 "seasons" where he finished with an OPS above .835. Here they are- 2003- .923 (.377 AB) 2007- .947 (209 AB) 2008- .999 (414 AB) Not only are there only 3 seasons of him being legitmately good, but they aren't even full seasons. That's basically 2 full seasons of being good. In between those good seasons, there were 3 straight years of his "meh" numbers I'm talking about. Now let's compare to Ramirez... 04- .951 (547 ab) 05- .926 (463 ab) 06- .912 (594 ab) 07- .915 (506 ab) 08- .898 (554 ab) Not only does Ramirez have 5 straight seasons with an OPS of .898 or higher, but he's stayed relatively healthy for the majority of that time, only failing to reach 500 at-bats once. So you think it's okay to compare a guy who stays on the field and has been well over his career averages for 5 years in a row to a guy who has played to his career averages 3 times in the past 5 years? Not to mention the season where bradley was good weren't even full seasons. Seriously, come on. Ramirez hasn't had even a mediocre year since 03. He's been awesome every year. He's established that he is a great hitter. Bradley hasn't done that. He's shown to be a great hitter for about the last 600 at-bats, most of which came in Texas. The previous 3 seasons, he's blown. He'd have to have 4 straight full badass seasons before you can compare him to what Aramis is right now. I don't even understand how you could try to compare the 2. I think people are using the home/road stuff as a crutch and overblowing it. I agree that his numbers are skewed a bit, but not enough to make some kind of huge difference... which is shown in his careers splits.

I like how the "I just had an amazing and really long post, but I lost it so now I can't show you how awesome it was" line is becoming more and more popular. Anyways, comparing Aramis to Bradley is pretty ridiculous. First of all, and I've already said this several times, I didn't expect Bradley to be an .825 OPS guy. I expected high .800's. I just said it wouldn't have surprised me if he wasn't that good. Comparing him to Aramis is silly. Bradley has had exactly 3 "seasons" where he finished with an OPS above .835. Here they are- 2003- .923 (.377 AB) 2007- .947 (209 AB) 2008- .999 (414 AB) Not only are there only 3 seasons of him being legitmately good, but they aren't even full seasons. That's basically 2 full seasons of being good. In between those good seasons, there were 3 straight years of his "meh" numbers I'm talking about. Now let's compare to Ramirez... 04- .951 (547 ab) 05- .926 (463 ab) 06- .912 (594 ab) 07- .915 (506 ab) 08- .898 (554 ab) Not only does Ramirez have 5 straight seasons with an OPS of .898 or higher, but he's stayed relatively healthy for the majority of that time, only failing to reach 500 at-bats once. So you think it's okay to compare a guy who stays on the field and has been well over his career averages for 5 years in a row to a guy who has played to his career averages 3 times in the past 5 years? Not to mention the season where bradley was good weren't even full seasons. Seriously, come on. Ramirez hasn't had even a mediocre year since 03. He's been awesome every year. He's established that he is a great hitter. Bradley hasn't done that. He's shown to be a great hitter for about the last 600 at-bats, most of which came in Texas. The previous 3 seasons, he's blown. He'd have to have 4 straight full badass seasons before you can compare him to what Aramis is right now. I don't even understand how you could try to compare the 2. I think people are using the home/road stuff as a crutch and overblowing it. I agree that his numbers are skewed a bit, but not enough to make some kind of huge difference... which is shown in his careers splits.

yeah let's just throw away career stats, even though he's played to those numbers 3 of the past 5 seasons. .810 career home ops .833 career road ops yet he's some stud hitter because you can cherry pick some splits over recent years that make him look a lot better than he is. so how long do we give him before we admit that we're probably getting .840 OPS Bradley this season? another week? another months? next season? that'd be fine with me, he probably has to ops .950 the rest of the year to get back to .840 so i say bring it on. i don't think so. isn't his ops in the low .700's right now?

i've showed much more, including his numbers the last 5 seasons. it's just that peole are pretending like he was some badass hitter for all 5 of those years just because his road splits those years were good (and not even all of them were good), FOR HIS CAREER HE IS AN .833 OPS ROAD HITTER. stop acting like he's been crippled by home parks, especially when he pumped up all his stats by a monster career year in a park that has andruw jones OPSing 1.000 this season. was he affected by bad park luck most of his career? yes, obviously. i talked about that in the offseason when i was optimistic about him. but let's stop acting like all those crappy years he had were just the result of parks. all that means is that he would have been a little less mediocre those years. yay!

yeah let's just throw away career stats, even though he's played to those numbers 3 of the past 5 seasons. .810 career home ops .833 career road ops yet he's some stud hitter because you can cherry pick some splits over recent years that make him look a lot better than he is. so how long do we give him before we admit that we're probably getting .840 OPS Bradley this season? another week? another months? next season?

oh and since the only argument for bradley's career poor numbers is playing in bad parks career home- .810 career road- .833 i guess he was just unlucky in those 1611 at-bats. look, i'm not saying bradley is awful. i actually thought he'd be pretty good (i said .885ish OPS before the season started) but i also was very worried and wasn't sure why everybody thought it was such a sure thing that he'd rake. he has been inconsistent, at best, over his career. i wasn't only worried about his health and his head, i was worried about how good he might be. when you give 30 mil to a guy who can't stay on the field and is a headcase, he should be a better bet to be good than bradley is. bradley is a question mark all around.

Okay you're right. Bradley was an .890 OPS guy from 04-08. Except in 2004 and 2005 and 2006 and he only played like 2 months n 07 but dude was .890 opsing it like crazy show me where he said bradley has been an .890 ops guy on the road for the past 5 season also show me how many at-bats those totals are for. like 200 a year? okay, okay. this dude is awesome. but only sometimes and only on the road and that's only for small chunks of at-bats. seriously though, it shouldn't surprise me that you're defending him so hard and acting like he's some badass hitter. you were the one who kept saying he was hands down our best hitter before the season (ahead of ramirez) even though bradley has clearly been a mediocre hitter for his career. it was all "his early career numbers were when he was a different hitter. for the last 2 seasons he's clearly found it". now 2 months into the season and this guy looks absolutely brutal and we're still trying to rationalize. the bottom line is when you have career numbes as mediocre as bradley does and you're sturggling this much this deep into the season, you're probably not going to have a good year.

he's not a piece of trash, he's awesome. he just tends to suck most years

cute. no substance to your posts or even any effort whatsoever to actually argue what i said. standard post from you

either show me where what i said is wrong or just stop posting to me. that garbage is really old.

Okay you're right. Bradley was an .890 OPS guy from 04-08. Except in 2004 and 2005 and 2006 and he only played like 2 months n 07 but dude was .890 opsing it like crazy

His career numbers are mediocre (at best, for a corner outfielder) and the arguments for him being a great hitter all revolve around a few different chunks of at-bats over the course of his career, and I'm the one cherry picking stats? Righhttttttttt When you want to grow up and have a reasonable discussion using grown up logic, let me know.

it's .890 (.292/.390/.500) over the last five seasons. his age 22 suckitude means diddly poo; why you choose to continually embarrass yourself by citing career numbers is puzzling. Uhh, maybe it has something to do with the fact that he's played to those career numbers for many of the last several years. As in 2004, 2005, 2006, and part of 2007. Saying he's been an .890 OPS guy for the last 5 seasons is pretty ridiculous. He's been a 1.000 OPS hitter for the last 600 at-bats (before this season) spread out over the least 2 season and then played to his career totals the previous 3 seasons. for the better part of the last 5 years, he's played to his career totals. i just keep reading the phrase played to his career totals, whatever the hell that even means wait facts are ridiculous? It's obnoxious and misleading, and you know it. He hasn't been an .890 OPS guy for the last 5 seasons. He had a monster month or 2 in San Diego and then a monster 420 at-bats in texas. The previous 3 years he sucked.

Eff it. Just throw Fox at third. Right now the garbage we're running out there has been terrible on both sides of the ball from that position. It's at the point where I don't even care. I'm just sick of seeing the same garbage that we're rotating between 3b and 2b every day right now.