chopsx9

I understand that the four prospects are rated pretty well but shouldn't somebody of Lee's caliber and contract status (especially) net one of the opposing teams top 3 prospects? I mean would Lee for Drabek straight up be a resonable trade? I wouldn't have thought so. Francisco is no star but he has some value. I don't know the Phillies prospects at all but unless whichever of the four is most highly rated (Carasco?) would be the #1 prospect for most other teams I think the Phillies got a bit of a steal. It reminds me of those Braves trades of the early 90's.

Aaron Hill is having the flashier season but I would say Marco Scutaro is the most underrated on that team.

I can. I remember a game against the Cubs, 2 years ago I think, where he cost the Reds three our four runs. He turned the wrong way on a very catchable ball that ended up going for extra bases with runners on; there was another very catchable ball he just didn't get to and there were a couple of other plays - he had a rough day and I don't think he was charged with any errors. Now obviously I don't see all his games so maybe that was his worst game ever - I doubt it - but I don't have a hard time rationalizing him costing his team 35 runs a year.

I'm not saying good Soriano absolutely should hit leadoff. I don't think he should drop below the top three to four hitters, though. In the Cubs' situation, Lee and Aramis were already entrenched in the 3-4 spots, leaving the top 1-2 spots for Soriano. I was fine with him hitting in either of those spots. As for Pujols, I wouldn't necessarily move him there from the #3 spot in the order, but I wouldn't find it outlandish to lead him off. Skip Shumaker played 110 games in the leadoff spot and had 536 PAs. Pujols played 143 games in the 3rd spot and had 636 PAs. Pujols had 100 more PAs in 30 more games. Had Schumaker played as many games as Pujols at the average number of PAs he was getting per game, Schumaker would have had 50 more PAs than Pujols. Not a huge difference, but imagine Pujols getting 50 more PAs a season. Moving Soriano from 1st in the lineup to 5th last year would have decreased his PAs by nearly 100. That's significant. I guess the weight of that argument would depend a little bit on on who got those 100 at bats instead. If they got on base a better clip than Soriano I wouldn't have too much of an issue - factor in more people on base when Soriano did come to bat and its pretty easy to rationalize a net gain. I wouldn't bat him second, and with Lee and Ramirez on the the team (and producing) I couldn't justify him hitting third or fourth - I could see an argument where you would move Lee to 2nd - in which case I would bat him 4th - ultimately I would disagree with the move of Lee but I understand the reasoning. FWIW I would find it outlandish to bat Pujols leadoff

2 for 4 with a BB tonight...he's a lefty... ...just sayin'

I never hear his name mentioned when prospects are mentioned but he seems to put up some quitely decent numbers. He maybe a shade old, but does he have a shot at all? What is his defense like?

I have a relative by marriage whose name is Perry Perry. Undrafted though.

Is that Dykstra in the Peroia game Lenny's boy? He can't hit for [expletive], but he sure can take a walk. (.212 avg .402 OBP) Although he's 6'5 so maybe not..

Saw a headline on ESPN that Wells would be part of the deal. It was an insider story. Anybody able to read it? Does this change the likely teams>

I don't think anybody said Dunn sucks (I'm not scrolling back to check); if they did they're wrong. I'd take Pujols over Mourneau everyday of the week and 9 times on Sunday.

I don't think you can say BA "DOESN'T MATTER"; absolutely it does not tell the whole story but to say it doesn't matter is a whole other thing. Lets assume you could replace Dunn's 2008 season with Morneau's 2008 in Cincinati's line up exactly - AB for AB. Which player do you think would drive in more runs?? I'd guess Mourneau. Actually somebody (smarter than me) could probably do this and get at least an idea of what the outcome would be - it wouldn't be all that robust as you wouldn't be able follow through on the impact as it rippled throughout the rest of line up - but it might be an interesting exercise nonetheless.

2005 was Morneau's first full year so I'd let him slide a bit on that. Regardless Mourneau has been better over the last three seasons and I'd take him every day of the week and 8 times on Sunday over Dunn.

Which gets back to what I said earlier, which is that it's close to a wash, depending on which one you use. I don't want to get dragged into reestablishing the wheel and the math behind all of these formulas because someone prefers the "sure thing" of the homer. But how could you not? That's like saying you'd prefer an unscratched lottery ticket to one that is scratched and has a winning jackpot. In any case there is no law saying we have to agree but I'd like thank yourself and "buckie" for discussing a topic we obviously don't agree on but doing so in a pretty civil manner. Certainly one the stronger draws to this site.

That's fine when the outcome is unknown but in this comparison when the outcome is known, and with the figures we are talking about, I think it is a different story. An out is also a known outcome. Yes, a HR is obviously better than a walk with all other things equal, because a HR contributes equally as a walk to the OBP. Making an out essentially means you've ended 1/27 of the game. Not making an out means you've extended the game without limitation. I disagree a bit with the "without limitation" although it may just be semantics. It fine to increase the number of AB's a team gets but the same hard stats tell you that extra AB is going to result in an out 60% of the time . So if you increase the number AB's without achieving anything the benefit is marginal. With this comparison were saying Braun traded 45 outs for 25 HRS I don't think it's that controversial to say that it would be a good trade off.

That's fine when the outcome is unknown but in this comparison when the outcome is known, and with the figures we are talking about, I think it is a different story.

You did miss it, because you are discounting the double-value of the avoided out. It's a runner on base and it's not taking away an at-bat from a teammate. Every extra out Braun made is an at-bat he took out of the hands of a teammate. As I said I understand that. I'm saying 25 HRS more than compensates for 45 outs. I guarantee you the 45 batters that came to the plate after Giles walked did not hit 25 hrs nor did the next 45 nor did the next 45 all summed up. At some point an increased number of outs outweighs the additional 25 hrs; 45 isn't close to that number though. The batter after Giles walks is going get out, on average, 60% time (and I am being monumentally generous) Do the regression if you like and see what the expected production or even OBP is of the those extra (I would guess roughly 60) at bats would be. Then why do all the advanced statistical meausures disagree with you and say that Giles produced more offensive value? 'Cause their Wrong?? Joking. I understand the logic of not making outs. I think those stats heavily weight OBP for that reason. However, as in this case, when it can be demonstrated that, yes the batter gave up outs, BUT as a result produced at a significantly higher offensive rate (ie more HRs) the stats (I think) are missleading. Their stats are so similar that it makes the comparison (again in my eyes) very cut and dry. I don't know how often two players would have stats that mesh together so neatly. I am all for OBP and Ryan Braun would be a better player if he could increase his but not to the point where it cost him 25hrs a year. If he could increase it .050-.060 and only drop power a little then I would say he was better for it

You did miss it, because you are discounting the double-value of the avoided out. It's a runner on base and it's not taking away an at-bat from a teammate. Every extra out Braun made is an at-bat he took out of the hands of a teammate. As I said I understand that. I'm saying 25 HRS more than compensates for 45 outs. I guarantee you the 45 batters that came to the plate after Giles walked did not hit 25 hrs nor did the next 45 nor did the next 45 all summed up. At some point an increased number of outs outweighs the additional 25 hrs; 45 isn't close to that number though. The batter after Giles walks is going get out, on average, 60% time (and I am being monumentally generous) Do the regression if you like and see what the expected production or even OBP is of the those extra (I would guess roughly 60) at bats would be.

Yes You are missing an important stat. Probably the most important stat. Outs. Braun also made 49 more outs. I didn't miss it that is essentially where Giles 45 walks came from. Yes Braun made more outs but he was more productive with the ways he got on. Giles' 45 walks requires additional production (i.e 2 singles) from his teammates for the team to score. I'll take the 25 guarateed runs (not even factoring in any additional runs driven in that would be all but absent from the walks) In otherwords I'll take the sure thing over the possibility of scoring a run.

Are we saying .001 OBP > .001 SLG or a player with a high (relative) OBP is better than a player with a high (relative) SLG? Both. So you would rather have (2008 version) Brian Giles over Ryan Braun? (Offensively speaking) PLAYER TEAM AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS Ryan Braun MIL 611 92 174 39 7 37 106 42 129 .285 .335 .553 .888 Brian Giles SDG 559 81 171 40 4 12 63 87 52 .306 .398 .456 .854 Their stats are virtually identical except Braun had 25 more HRs and Giles had 45 more walks. So we are essentially saying 45 walks > 25 hrs ?

Are we saying .001 OBP > .001 SLG or a player with a high (relative) OBP is better than a player with a high (relative) SLG?

I think I have a relatively decent idea of what a "slumpbuster" is but is their some colour than can be added to the facts?

If he'd go for it, I'd be in favor. This is where a guy like DeRosa becomes even more valuable. With his versatility, you can sign an OF and keep him to 2nd, or do something like sign Furcal at SS, move Riot to 2B and DeRo to the OF, or if you trade Lee, you can put DeRo at first and upgrade in other places. Wost case scenario, you can start Fontenot at 2B and move DeRo to RF. It's a nice problem to have and you're not handcuffed to find help at any one position. You can upgrade pretty much anywhere and put DeRo in to fix just about any hole. Watching Dunn attempt to stretch and dig any ball out of the dirt would be hilarious. There was a scout quoted in ESPN last year that said Dunn was incapable of playing 1B. He`s certainly bad enough in the outfield that if there was any chance he could play 1B, he`d be there already.

Nobody is "writing off" OBP for anyone. What most disagree with is your continued insistence that it's THE stat people need to focus on. The flaw is focusing in on any one stat to begin with. Exactly. Can I have an Amen!! This drives me CRAZY!!

No mention of Adam Dunn though? Interesting.

No mention of Adam Dunn though? Interesting.