neely crenshaw

pretty sure that when you originally ripped him, he hadn't played a game yet, so luck was tough to judge. Yes, he will obviously fall on his babip...that's above hamilton and kemp territory by a lot. As that falls, it will effect his average and possibly some slugging (don't know what ones will be caught) But I find it tough to disregard a player based on 40 games of great babip, when he has 5-6 years of stats that say he should improve his OB% and OPS over last year. you totally disregard data because it goes against your thought and grab a stat that "may" help your argument. Evidently we should stop spending money on scouts and just look at babip for the start of a season and get those players. I only injected Trumbo into the conversation to attempt to point out that you can actually be incorrect on a player. As can anyone, Theo and Scioscia included. Now I see that you were actually right on Trumbo and despite his start, he won't be a player, and he won't improve on last year. We certainly should have held onto to Marmol and not taken a flyer on a 26 year kid that I thought showed some promise because we are so stacked with young guys. Oh and we are paying Mather 10k less than Trumbo makes. How stupid of me!

So have I. And I've discussed it myself. you also said there's no way way this teams losing 100, or actually that it only wins 65 (so 97 losses). I found this painfully clear this week. If you guys like or support and argument on a certain player then certain stats matter. If you take the opposite side then different stats matter or there is a reason that "his stats" don't matter. His OB% went up every the 2nd season at every level. Showing improvement at 3 different levels.So outrageous that he may just improve this year. I know someone will have a theory that explains how despite getting better every time, that it really says that he won't. His PCL stats were his best, but he drew 58 walks in 139 games. His slugging was up about 70-75 points over his average. Which did put his OPS in a very high 900's rating but if he slugged his norm , he still would have been in the 800's. He has 12 walks this year-almost half of last years total. Stewart has 15. He has 6 hrs. Stewart has 4. He hit 29 last year. His last 4 years in the minors (only 1 in PCL) his totals are: 32, 26. 15, 36. Not sure where his power is lacking. I'm sure his slugging and ob% will drop some but why would you think he'd finish .330, and somewhere .450-470 which is the least he's had since first year in A ball. That would put him in a 24 hr, high 700 to 800 OPS. which again outside of A ball he has had that EVERY SEASON. Stewart has had a high of .785, and then .781 Exactly what stats matter? What history matters? Scioscia (a meat head, really?)may have missed a few, but he is one of the most respected managers. Should we bring up names like Lackey, or Crawford, or Scutaro? Everyone can miss on a player All this because I dared to have the opinion that maybe we should trade Marmol to the Angels, who had a new first baseman and badly lacked a closer. (they are on their 4th one now I believe, currently using scott downs and frieri) It so pains you to just admit that He may of actually been right.

Southside, I am not sure how you took it, but of course I didn't mean he hits nothing but soft line drives. If it came off like that, I didn't mean it that way. He has hit some rockets right at people. In watching almost every game, I see him hit lots of soft grounders and fly balls. I truly don't know where you would find the stats on how hard each contact was, so I am simply going with my feeling. I said in one of a previous post that I could be seeing negative because I expect things to go badly, while you guys are looking at the positives, or potential positives. I was the one that said, "you see what you want to see" that includes me. So if you guys see the bullets being caught, I may focus on the soft grounder to short. Is that fair? Also some of you that have posted arguments without insults have at least shown me some hope. I still have a negative feeling on it but I will give you that I feel far less sure about that, and he could reach his norms, or slightly above, Of course this is the cubs and when he does he will probably tear something and miss the last 40 games. So let's see what happens, and revisit this in say the next 150 at bats, say around July 1? And just wondering, why is there no validity in Trumbo's start but there is in Stewart's hot streak? It's a small sample size and he could fall flat on his face but couldn't he keep it up to some extent? Like I said I put a lot of credence into what Scioscia says, not just his PCL stats.

Good point. In the last four pages of the Castro thread, walks were mentioned once. Lots of discussion going on. Tons of concern being expressed. Oh wait. I bet that's the wrong place to look too. Call MR a rapist!! hey southside, how's Trumbo looking? If anyone's curious(and why would you be, why would anyone compare the 2??), here are the numbers on Trumbo and Stewart. Trumbo: BB% 9.3 K% 21.7 LD% 19.3 BABIP .402 Stewart: BB% 9.7 K% 18.8 LD% 17.9 BABIP .221 so you don't like his games stats at all? I know your point was that his goods stats were at PCL even you have to admit he has far outdistanced what you thought he would do. Yes, I know it's a small sample and could change a lot. The Angels are 2nd favorite team and I follow/watch them alot. When Mike Scioscia sings a hitters praises and says he has to have him in the line-up I tend to believe him. The kid is good, and should continue to improve on last year's rookie numbers. Just based on Marmol falling apart and his contract I take that trade in a heartbeat, of course hindsight is 20/20

Absolutely makes sense. I have no problem with that approach. I don't feel it will happen BUT I certainly see where it's an indicator that it could. This is much more understandable position than saying that" time is telling" because he has a decent split for 20 games. I hope your right (except for this thread's sake) I don't dislike him. Part of my opinion is on the old eye test, which is very difficult to prove to anyone. As I said earlier, we see what we want to see and maybe I am biased by looking at all of his previous numbers and I "see" the negative of his game, while others see the positive. That could be the life long cub fan coming out! I certainly could have been the bigger man and just ignore the taunts and personal attacks, that was a childish but there was a lot of junk thrown mine way basically because I dared to disagree. My 2nd post did attempt to end the rift by simply saying time will tell, which for whatever reason made me a troll. Then people were taking part of what I posted and rip that, leading to others only reading those posts and ripping that- most accompanied with their own personal taunts. Hard to keep from responding to those, especially when you are also trying to explain what you actually said. How many people kept saying that I said so and so was better. I didn't say that in either thread and was never even part of the thread. It was frustrating, as I am sure it was for some on the other side. I do think that many missed what we started out with, and just attacked what they thought I has said, or my responses to posts. Obviously since we were up way to late the first night, we got some juices flowing...which takes some doing this season. can't resist one more, though Nuts and gum, it's either middle school or special services right? That level would certainly understand and appreciate your fart jokes and bad raps.

Time IS telling, and we can see reality. As pointed out, these are his numbers in May: .246 .338 .456 .795 Surely this will make you reconsider and... .......ohhhhhh. You're one of those. For the record this is your first response. Missing the "engaging" part. Hopefully you teach PE or maybe credit recovery. Funny, you teach in the Chicago area but don't know what ELL is? the last 7 games .167 .375 .167 .542 Surely this will make you reconsider and... I think it would be smart to let a little more time tell us which way this is going, it could go your way but it may not. Throwing a stat line for 20 games as proof doesn't do much.

He's trying to say that bad players are better than good players did not say once anyone was better than anyone. I did talk performance and higher POSSIBLE upside he refuses to admit that he's wrong or even simply walk away. It's hard to be wrong on an opinion. The problem was that many posters kept posting their opinion as FACT. I said I don't think it's bad luck, I think it will not turn around. I'll happily admit that if he posts an.800 ops for the season it would be solid. I did feel that the rest of his stat would show that would fall in a bigger sample size, especially with a severe dip over the last 2 weeks of his hot month. I seriously do not see a player with a .245 average, 3 2bs,3 hrs and 5 rbi for 21 games as good. A nice ob% but he did get hit twice, and intentionally walked twice- can we count on that each month? I didn't think so. he's criticized others for failure to comprehend the incomprehensible Yes, because as with this post you still do not comprehend what I said, If you did you would not say the above posts his posts either contradict each other or logic in general. I don't think saying a 6 year career vet who has a career average of .233 will probably not hit better than that and very well may hit worse than that, especially coming from colorado defies logic He's turned two threads into his own live chats of insanity that would be the other way around He's been downright condescending toward those pointing out the obvious flaws in his arguments No I am downright condescending to posters who choose to insult rather than engage, I had excellent give and take with cubcolt pacer, who actually made his points rather than talk down or say put farts in a jar From what I see the biggest bone of contention is the fact that I point out that a ops or ob% for 20 games is pretty meaningless. Stewart had a couple of nice games, that in my opinion were not an indication of coming around but just the fact that he is a major league hitter and is bound to hit sometime. His ops has dipped since and I think that shows he is returning to his norm. I fully understand that it could be just a blip downward because those happen also. It's just my opinion based on: his history, history of players leaving colorado and what I have seen from watching him. It's my opinion. Many times when you look at stats, they can go either directions. Many of you guys look at his babip and see tough luck and feel that he is due to turn around. I look at it and think, there is a reason that so many balls in play are being caught. Unfortunately most posters decided to attack me personally rather than intelligently state their thoughts BECAUSE no matter what, right now, they are only your thoughts and opinions because no one knows what is actually going to happen. We are looking at data and formulating opinions. If you actually "know", then you are wasting time on a message board. There is big money to made with that skill. Outside of cubcolt, the top argument that was put out was a 20 day stat line continually being posted, with no explanation, just the meaningless stat line for 20 days. This could have been a very good thread but instead it snowballed into "boers and bernstein attack mode" junk.

can we add the courtesy runner rule for the cubs? Man campana would be great as a full time pinch runner for our pitchers and catchers!

Good point. In the last four pages of the Castro thread, walks were mentioned once. Lots of discussion going on. Tons of concern being expressed. Oh wait. I bet that's the wrong place to look too. Call MR a rapist!! hey southside, how's Trumbo looking?

you think his babip indicates he should or could rise. very possible, I think with his historically low ld% it might mean there is a reason his babip is low. possible also. Thanks for reading and considering. I just wanted to address this point. His LD percentage is not that low. It's a little lower than his career, and it's definitely lower than major league average but he's not among the very bottom. For example, among qualified players the median line drive percentage is about 20.5%. Stewart ranks 134th out of 175 qualified players with 17.9%. In BABIP, the median is about .302. Stewart is 166th out of 175 with a .221 BABIP. So the difference between median LD and median BABIP is about .097 (which is a little smaller than normal). Stewart's is .042 which as you can see is less than half the average. That's where the bad luck has come into play. His BABIP should be at least in the .270's based on his LD if not higher (as noted, the fact that his ground ball/fly ball ratio is so high should raise his BABIP a little more since ground balls are more likely to find holes). I don't think anybody is saying he will work out for sure. His strikeout rate could easily rise again and he could turn out to be not that useful of a player. But so far he's played well and gotten unlucky. If he can keep playing just as well, his numbers should improve. I don't know if he will keep up this improved play or not. You actually give me some hope he may turn around some but then I am really torn between wanting to be right on this and having the cubs so any improvement.

Do you add anything pertinent to any thread you post in? Seriously between the rap attempt and this, I'm wondering are you 14? Don't you have middle school tomorrow?

do you know what that is?

went back and read, and it is exactly the type of answer that can be discussed and is based in some sort of data. I have taken all of that into consideration, and in the end you could be right, and I could be wrong. all good points. I was leaning more toward the smaller sample size, and coors field helping rather hurting his stats. Although it is still a large sample of 1000 at bats. So might the cream rise if a full season is played. possible, could it drop, possible also strikeouts are down as good note, could be OR does that mean he's bound to return to his norm? could be either. you think his babip indicates he should or could rise. very possible, I think with his historically low ld% it might mean there is a reason his babip is low. possible also. May stats are better. BUT as I attempted to explain the only great stat is his ops which when you look at his actual month, it means very little. he had 5 very good games and was below feeble in 15 others. to me that says it's more likely we see the bad over the long haul, especially when his career stats, and definitely his recent career stats lean to the bad. Barney's spit for that exact time frame is much better but that is dismissed while Stewart's was held up glowing as proof that I was clueless. now that's how the thread could have gone, thanks for being rational cubcoltpacer.

What? Yes, this certainly addresses his LD% for 2012. and I have comprehension problems? Typing slow again for you. If his career stats are similar to his current stats, it becomes a trend. Not a certainty, but a trend. If his LD% was greatly different you would probably guess it would revert back to his norm. I'll try to make it elementary for you. if he hits 17% line drives for 1000 at bats, and then he hits around 17% line drives for his first 150 at bats, It's not a certainty but it's kind of likely that in his next 150 at bats he hits about 17%, and for the 150 after that, and so on. Now don't make that mistake and decide that if he hits 50% line drives for 10 at bats that it's a new trend. Chances are he will return to his norms over a large sample. That is kind of how means and medians are used as predictors. They aren't "for sure" but they are a good place to start, especially with a large scale. do you understand?

So what don't I comprehend? Your idiot babbling that stewart hits in bad luck? that his babip average is low so despite it being right where it has been, his luck will change now. Or that his 5 game ops means he good now but his last 2 weeks don't count. How about you guys know he is a .233 hitter, for 6 seasons in colorado, but say that he will hit better away from colorado, he will hit better than his career averages, and I am dumb because I doubt this. cut to the chase: Is Stewart good? I say no Has he been good historically? I say no For whatever your reasons, will he hit his career averages this year? I say no He really has hit in bad luck all year, and all career and that will even out this year? (ok,hard to prove) I say absolutely ludicris to think bad luck stretches out an entire season, let alone several and one final one just for me, Can a players ops be greatly skewed in a small sample size. I say there is no doubt that in small samples size ops is a terrible indicator of performance because 1 game,1 week,heck 1 hit can change things from 40-500 points You all scoffed, you put me down, so answer. We will see when the season plays out. Super-intelligent poster guys put it in writing. Insulting people doesn't help you win an argument. I'm dumb, I'm a toddler, I have no comprehension skill, I don't know baseball, etc. So please tell me where my thinking is wrong

I kept holding out that he would at least return to last years quality. If he had, he would be as good as any we have in the pen now. It really burns me that guys like bernstien were ranting about him taking a roster spot from some of the kids. Facts didn't matter. Grabbing guys off waivers, and off the unemployment line to fill our didn't matter, kerry was taking someone's spot. right now, there is a good chance that camp's arm will fall off from pitching everyday. judging from the "guys" we brought in, and brought up, he took no ones spot. also when he kept ranting about why is everybody making a big deal he wasn't good. Damn, that pissed me off. Maybe he wasn't Hall of Fame, maybe he wasn't all that we hoped he would be, he was good, and at times very, very good. anyone who pitches in the majors for 14 years is good. His 6 years as a starter were very good. 67 wins, era somewhere around 3.40, k per 9 innings off the chart.3/1 k to walk ratio, winning record every year but 1(8-9) with teams that finsihed 6th, 3rd, 5th and 3rd to go along a 2nd and a division title. Can't help that his body gave out a bit but I would his stats as a starter against a whole lot of pitchers.

Despite a lack of home run power, he always had a great bat. He's only 24, so there's still room for him to improve on his 2B defense, and for this reason he should be given as many opportunites to play the position as they can and use Barney as a utility guy which pretty much everyone knows he'll ultimately end up. that makes sense and despite what was being painted I am not all about Barney as the nest big thing. He's not a problem, He's not a strength. At this point in a season, you don't have a lot of options to improve. It's a flier but you sign what is out there and see what happens..I get that. Obviously if we had options we would grab other spots but if they aren't there, they aren't there. we may see more on the wire after the draft. Former prospects may run into age limits, others being pushed up the ladder because of money considerations to make room for draftees, which will push older "prospects" out, could be some guys out of options and someone has to take their 40 man spot.

See if Lahair can be Glenallen Hill-like in LF and put Rizzo at 1B. Campana likely isn't going to keep it up, not enough bat speed nor ability to take walks to make up for his lack of power. Hopefully, Jackson can start hitting again and pushes Campana into a 5th OF/pinch-runner type role. I have that feeling on Campana too. I really hope he can continue but I think when teams see him and his style a 2nd and 3rd go round, things will drop. It would be nice to have a few less holes to fill with free agents though. If we had Campana close to his .300 .360 clip, we could certainly deal with that if LaHair, Rizzo and Jackson all hit like we hope. It's probably a stretch though.

i'd opt to use a 6 hitter. Assume Soto/Clevenger/Lalli/Wrona/Castillo/(Cubs version) Benito Santiago are hitting 6th. george mitterwald busy?

he also has 30 more plate appearances which you must factor in to the equation. in 150 at bats, barney has 58 total bases. if he had 61total bases he would have a slugging percentage of .420

Since we rearranging the deck chairs...where does Rizzo go? does he play first and La Hair go to left? where does Jackson go? if Campana continues, which I hope he does but have my doubts, does that move out Dejesus? obviously they can run a 4-man platoon situation but overall doesn't it make sense to play those 3 and not Dejesus for future considerations? IF all that worked out, you might actually have 6 or 7 major league hitters on the field. that's a huge "if" though.

Thanks rooster for the info. Of course that raises the question if he is cut because of his defense, why are we putting him in a spot where defense is usually slightly more important than offense?

That was a money thing. Is it wrong to wonder why a bad offensive team would just give up on a 24 year old former 1st round pick? I don't know. Maybe it was options, maybe he had a bonus coming. Maybe he slept with someones wife. It just makes me wonder, which I think is pretty sensible. It doesn't mean I thinks it's dumb, It doesn't mean I think it's a sure failure, just gives me cause to question it- not the pick up but why they would cut him. Nothing wrong to question it as I wonder why as well, but it also not wrong for the other side of the coin as far as why would the Cubs sign him given his numbers as well as what Baseball America seen/heard about in him in prior to the start of '11. It's also not wrong to question whether or not he'd be more productive than Barney based on those factors. that i can agree with, but couldn't the same be said for the underperforming Stewart at third, which is listed as another of his positions, as is left field. I look at it as we have many problems. too many to list. Barney isn't a problem, not necessarily a strength but not a problem. So why are we not looking at one of the more problematic areas? We have no young 3b that is to close to being ready. If Cardenas is better offensively than barney, then you have to say he'd probably be better than stewart. it would be nice if he could catch!

You're missing a whole lot of singles there. bobby boy, batting average doesn't count. that has been what I have been told at every turn on this thread, and board. OB% and obp matter, can't change that to fit your argument now You are the worst. what are you stuck in the 1980's? that's what I was told when talking about batting average... in this case if you both get on base at a .325 clip, and the difference in slugging is so small, what is the difference in performance? castro got singles where barney got walked...outcome? both on first. so, 3 bases is the difference in their slugging, and the slugging is the difference in their OPS.

That was a money thing. Is it wrong to wonder why a bad offensive team would just give up on a 24 year old former 1st round pick? I don't know. Maybe it was options, maybe he had a bonus coming. Maybe he slept with someones wife. It just makes me wonder, which I think is pretty sensible. It doesn't mean I thinks it's dumb, It doesn't mean I think it's a sure failure, just gives me cause to question it- not the pick up but why they would cut him.