chopsx9

Pessimism? LOL j/k Optimism?

Define established. Marquis is rumored to be in the talks, he's been around a bit, and has established the fact that he's just a mediocre pitcher, no better than Williams. Well I would be just as astonished if Marquis were the centrepiece of an Abreau trade. Pie was included in rumours for Pierre and I am (hopefully) confident that has no chance of happening. To be fair Marquis has a little more history behind him, not stellar history by any means, but that has to count for something, though not near enough to equal Abreau. (and no I am not saying that makes him better than Williams)

I'd be astonished if the Phillies can't get a more established starter than J. Williams. I am not saying give them Prior, but I can't believe any package that starts with Williams is going to get it done. In an environment with contracts like Furcal's, BJ Ryan's (and Eyre and Howery for that matter) Abreau's almost seems like a bargin. The Cubs aren't going to be able acquire Abreau for spare parts.

The five years are the last five, so he doesn't qualify.

I grew up in the Bahamas and in 1982 we bought one of those old school 16 foot satelite dishes. (certainly illegal but down there everyone had them) I used to watch Scooby Doo on WGN after school...except one day I get home and what the heck is on...but baseball??? Cubs baseball?? Oh No!! Soon learnt the error of my ways and 23 years later here I am. This why I am saddened by the drop in games carried by WGN. If not for WGN I certainly would not be a Cubs fan and probably not a baseball fan. (Although this seems difficult for me to comprehend)

I grew up in the Bahamas and in 1982 we bought one of those old school 16 foot satelite dishes. (certainly illegal but down there everyone had them) I used to watch Scooby Doo on WGN after school...except one day I get home and what the heck is on...but baseball??? Cubs baseball?? Oh No!! Soon learnt the error of my ways and 23 years later here I am. This why I am saddened by the drop in games carried by WGN. If not for WGN I certainly would not be a Cubs fan and probably not a baseball fan. (Although this seems difficult for me to comprehend)

Great! So the Cubs won't get into a bidding War for Giles but will for Pierre? Unconcievable! (no reference to the Princes Bride intended) Grreeaat Movie.....but it's inconceivable.....and i before e except after c......and I'm being anal.....um.....Go Cubbies!!

Looks like he was traded to San Diego for a PTB or Cash. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/transactions/today.html

It might be worthwhile (or not??) to point out that the palyers voted Jones the player of the year in the NL beating out both Lee and Pujols.

The general conceit (with DC anyway) is that Batman WILL find away to take down his opponent and he is the one guy Superman is afraid of. There is a great line in the recent Identity Crisis series that goes something like - ...and there was something different in his voice, usually only reserved for his conversations with Bruce (Batman),.. it was fear.

Saw this on our Bloomberg service at work. How does this bode for Lee's chances in the MVP? Anyone know what the correlation between this and the MVP has been in the past?

Most productive and most valuable aren't the same thing. They can be. If Pujols drives in 200 runs, but when you break down the numbers 175 of those were driven in when his team was already ahead by 3 runs - is he still the most valuable? Obviously a very extreme example but it shows that the two aren't always interchangeable. Hey, I'll be extatic if Lee wins. I don't think he will and think he may even end up third (not saying I agree with that).

Obviously you need to try to win every game and April's games count just as much as October's; I don't think that is what he was talking about. There are going to be games where the team plays as well as it can and they are still going to lose akin to a pitcher throwing a "perfect" pitch and it still getting hit for a homerun. The opposite also holds true. These are the extremes I am not saying all 60 wins or losses are games like this. You could field a team of all the best players and they are still going to lose more than few games. The difference is a good team will execute in those other 42 games and win virtually all of them and a mediocre or bad team will not, and lose more than they win. You can argue about the 60-60-42 split, but historically they hold up pretty well. Obviously it's not exact but I think it's a pretty fair statement. I think it would be pretty tough to go back and determine which games were which but there are lots of games, especially this season, that you could look back and say they could have gone either way. (Most one run games would be good examples)

I just noticed Lee has good shot at 100 extra base hits (3 short I think). I took a quick look and did not look like anyone else had a realistic shot this year. Bonds and Sosa did it once each and were not all that close in other years. Arod has not done it, nor Griffey, Vlad or Manny. Does anyone know how rare this is? Or which other players have reached 100?

I like that theory. He was so concerned about Jin and Sun's relationship on LOST that he couldn't mentally or physically prepare for games until June. I know I was pretty focused Sun.....Jin not so much. (I really hope I got that the right way around)

I wondered this myself over the last couple of years and came up with a (obviously highly speculative) possibilty. Maddux is not a big hulking pitcher ala Clemens. So I am assuming he has never been a big work out guy. When he was younger, because of the type of pitcher he is, he did not need to worry too much about getting into shape each prior to each season. (I am thinking strength training as opposed to cardio) Now that he is older, and less physically strong, maybe he needs to do more strength training in the offseason to get ready. He pitches better in the second half because his workouts with the team and his starts get him to that necessary level of fitness. I am not saying he does not do anything in the offseason to keep himself fit, but maybe as he is older he needs to change the form that preperation takes. Or maybe he loses focus until the summer TV reruns begin.

What about Nomar at second and Cedeno at SS? Or the other way around? Not that I am eager to trade Walker by any means, it would depend entirely on what they got in return.

This by far the most disheartning statement I have read in sometime. I had really hoped they weren't even on the same book. I'm pretty sure Dusty's is a My Little Pony coloring book so hopefully JH is just being supportive publically.

I'll agree I think he gets more than 3mil, 5 seems about right for a guess maybe more if he finishes strong. It wouldn't be a huge streach to see a team give him more; approaching 600 and all. Whether he's actually worth it or not at this stage is a different discussion.

You know, you're cruising for a bruising. Seriously. I have no patience for this kind of posting. If you really want to tangle, we can get into it, but if you continue deliberately misrepresenting my words and refuse to read the context of my post, I will end this debate because I simply refuse to participate in ridiculous bantering and misinterpretation. I don't really have any issue with anything in your original post other than the strawman argument. Those posts you cite in the Dunn argument, the ones where people are saying that walks are better than hits -- please, find them and cite them. So, then, how is this a debate between you and me? Why are you being a smart-ass and trying to irritate me for no purpose or gain? Read my post. I'm knocking down a strawman that rears its head time and again about the "preference of the board" with respect to walks and hits. My chart is a simple support of your contention, though you evidently didn't recognize it. There's a reason I didn't quote posts -- I wasn't singling out one poster or post. Now, your exaggerated statement that "some on this board seem to think otherwise" is something I don't agree with, and serves as a strawman argument -- which is not acceptable. I really don't think anyone on this board believes that walks are better than hits. And if you think some do, then I challenge you to demonstrate such a preference, rather than making a claim unsupported. Some other random, variable thoughts: 1. Saying a walk is as good as a hit is not the same as saying a walk is better than a hit. I agree with you, that a hit is better than a walk, as was ably demonstrated in my post: Hit>Walk>Out. Obviously, as both hits and walks are better than outs, both would be acceptable outcomes. However, a hit is preferable, all in all. 2. OBP inflated by AVG is poorly phrased. I think, from the context, that O_O means an OBP inflated by high AVG only supported by an abnormal BABIP, but I could be wrong. I do not agree that anyone's OBP can be "inflated" by AVG -- or walks. Given that they are both rather integral parts of OBP, I find it difficult to accept the contention that either "inflates" OBP. 3. Can you find me a statement in my post that says anything about chopsx says walks are bad? Right. Because I didn't make that statement; nor did I attempt to slyly infer it. 4. I will not tolerate insulting statements which denigrate my reading comprehension. Nor will I accept hostile, inflammatory responses looking to create reaction. I can read and understand, thank you very much. Indeed, I read your post and understood it just fine. First, I'm not going to scroll through hundreds of posts..Cpatt has already acknowledge that a discussion took place in at least one instance .. however if it makes you feel better to think I am making it up...then please go right ahead. Now your response to my post was condescending, "a real simple chart" and antagonistic "ridiculous strawman argument". So if you would prefer to be addressed in a polite manner I suggest you post in the manner you would like others to post. Now if you are saying that your post was in no way referencing mine, and was simply conincidental then you have my heartfelt apologies. Nowhere did I make any suggestion as to what the "preference of the board" was and inferring that from my post is erroneous. Your 1. This was exactly my point. However the statement in the original post I quoted was in direct contradiction to this. (Which is an example of the "some" you are looking for.) 2. As I stated in my post the original statement could simply have been poorly phrased, although I did not think so. 3. OK you are correct on this. I can admit and apologize. 4. My response was in direct response to the tone of yours. In my original post I disagreed with the previous poster but was able to do so in what I feel was a cordial and non-confrontational manner. See the first lines of this post again for more.

There was some debate about this in the Dunn thread(s), but I can't remember if anyone said what he claims, or whether that a walk can be equal to or better than a hit. In regards to the components of OBP, the reason to prefer a higher walk rate is consistency. Walk rate is one of the more predictable stats. The higher that is, the more likely a player has to have a consistently high OBP. Also, like you say, a high average that props up an OBP can be attributed to an abnormally high BABIP, making it less likely for a player to repeat that production. EDIT: Obviously there are players that defy the above statement by hitting .300 or better with a decent walk rate for a good portion of their careers, Pierre and Nomar prior to this year are good examples. Both are on the wrong side of 30 though, and with that means a drop in bat speed, and without the walk rate, a drop in production. Again the point was if players have the same OBP, the player with higher average is preferable. Your comments in your EDIT are examples of that and that was the point. There was no discussion about possible future production, potential trade targets etc.

You are welcome.

Also where did I say a majority of the board - I said "some" - please do not put words in my mouth. Simple Chart: 1

So the statement saying his OBP is "inflated" by average is not saying that?? That is exactly what that statement is suggesting. The statement (paraphrased) it doesn't matter how you get on base as long as you do, a hit is as good as a walk; has been used more than once on these boards. Check the numerous Dunn threads and you will find several examples of this. Where in my post did I say a walk was a bad thing?? I am not sure what the point of all your player comparisons are as in my post I stated "all things being equal". So if two players have identical OBP's I'll take the one with the higher batting average everyday of the week; again "all things being equal". So if one of them has 60hrs and the other has 2hrs....well then that changes things. Maybe you don't have to stand for the argument but maybe you can pull up a chair and give it a better read next time.