Jehrico

Any GM who trades for Marquis will likely get us to eat a couple of million at least. So, for 7 mil, you can get a league average starter who will likely rate good enough of a FA to get at least one, if not two draft picks next year when the contract expires. You could certainly do alot worse, especially considering the deals that some guys got last year, like Carlos Silva.

In the playoffs, I don't think Peavey is that much of an upgrade compared to a good RF (if one can be had). In the playoffs, you're not upgrading from Marquis, as you only have a four man rotation. What you're doing is bumping either Demp or Lily for Peavey. I don't think getting Peavey is critical to making the playoffs next year, as were already a good bet to get back. I can understand why someone would prefer that we upgrade the OF first. That said, I believe you never pass on a rare talent like Peavey when you can get him on the cheap.

Gregg Sucks even compared to Howry. And Hendry is not a good GM. http://www.fangraphs.com/comparison.aspx?playerid=1793&playerid2=237&playerid3=&position=P&page=3&type=full so K/BB is the best way to judge pitchers now? I missed the memo You miss a lot of things. It's one of the more important stats when judging a relief pitchers. However, Howry's been better than Gregg in almost every category save for last year. I don't like Howry, but Gregg is terrible. Howry was a good pitcher before last season, but he no longer can throw 95 plus. I don't think you realize how much GM's value ERA and saves. I'm not saying I agree with it, but thats now things work in baseball. The Hendry is a bad GM stuff is just stupid, name me the last GM who's won 3 division titles in his first 6 years? Or worse signings are guys like Glendon Rusch and Neifi Perez. We could do alot worse then Hendry, and he's far from a terrible GM or even one of the worse in the league. Anybody who thinks Hendry is terrible wouldn't be happy with any GM. Hendry is like everything else in life...you take the good with the bad. He has a penchant for overpaying overvalued role players like Neifi, but he's also has 100% success keeping the good guys we want to keep that could have killed on the market at reasonable deals, and his success rate of coming out ahead on trades is pretty damned good. He has also been able to get the Trib to open up their pocket books more than ever, which is pretty amazing when you consider how badly that company has been bleeding money for some time now. He's by no means perfect, but when compared to other GMs in the league, his positives outweigh his negatives.

We have a two-week per round playoffs in our league. That's good for me, because I started Rogers, Portis, Gore, Cotchery, Evans, Boldin, Dallas Clark, Nedney, and the TB Defense this week. Horrible to mediocre production this week from everyone but Rogers. Thankfully, I had built up big enough of a lead after the last week to where I was able to whether the storm. Now, hopefully I don't have another egg-laying week across my team.

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread I think it's pretty significant that they are trying to move Lee. Think of the second order effects besides Peavy... We don't know that they're "trying" to move Lee. They might just be "willing" to move him. There's a big difference. Either way, the context in which Churchill told me that implied that it was part of a Peavy trade, so I posted it in here. Earlier this month, one of Chicago's beat writers (I don't remember which) said Hendry was going to try to trade Lee, so this seems to corroborate that. That's part of why it's significant. What were his exact words? Again, there is a huge difference between "trying to trade" someone and just listening to offers. I remember the article you're talking about and I think it was more of a "they're open to trading Lee" type thing. Do you remember the exact quote or the article? I think you're splitting hairs at this point. I don't recall the exact quote because I can't recall which writer it was. I can't recall if it was a trib, suntimes, or herald writer either. Anyone else out there remember? I don't really think it's splitting hairs. I'm sure there are a lot of guys on the team that they'd be willing to trade if it helped them get somebody else they really wanted. That doesn't mean they're trying to trade them. I'm not sure which of those categories Lee falls into, but I bet it's the latter. The team displayed unsolicited interest in trading Lee previously. I think the intent is pretty clear, they don't want to be stuck with him for the rest of his contract.

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread I think it's pretty significant that they are trying to move Lee. Think of the second order effects besides Peavy... We don't know that they're "trying" to move Lee. They might just be "willing" to move him. There's a big difference. Either way, the context in which Churchill told me that implied that it was part of a Peavy trade, so I posted it in here. Earlier this month, one of Chicago's beat writers (I don't remember which) said Hendry was going to try to trade Lee, so this seems to corroborate that. That's part of why it's significant. What were his exact words? Again, there is a huge difference between "trying to trade" someone and just listening to offers. I remember the article you're talking about and I think it was more of a "they're open to trading Lee" type thing. Do you remember the exact quote or the article? I think you're splitting hairs at this point. I don't recall the exact quote because I can't recall which writer it was. I can't recall if it was a trib, suntimes, or herald writer either. Anyone else out there remember?

except he's eclipsed those numbers 2 of the past 6 years, which means it's hardly a lock. he adds probably 15 runs a year with his glove and plays a position where even average offensive players (o. cabrera) get paid $10M. paying jack wilson an average of $7M per year has very, very little to do with why the pirates have been so bad. Wilson was 27th out of 32 SSs with at least 300 PAs in VORP last year. His VORP was 2.7, which puts him at only slightly more productive than the average replacement player. Not worth it. He was 14th in 2007, 23d in 2006, 27th again in 2005, 6th in 2004, and 24th in 2003. So, only once in his career, in 2004, was he in the top third of all SSs in the league, once he was in the bottom third. The rest of his career he has been mired in the bottom third of all SSs. VORP does not include defense. you guys keep throwing out stats to show that he's lousy offensively; we already know that. I know that. That's why I made a point that SSs historically don't tend to keep up their range into their mid-30s, greatly reducing Wilson's projected value going forward if you're interested in projecting more than maybe one year out. If he's contributing significantly below average with the bat, he's not worth 7-8 million a year going forward. There's no shortage of slick fielding, can't hit SSs in AA and AAA that could be had for the league minimum instead.

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread I think it's pretty significant that they are trying to move Lee. Think of the second order effects besides Peavy... We don't know that they're "trying" to move Lee. They might just be "willing" to move him. There's a big difference. Either way, the context in which Churchill told me that implied that it was part of a Peavy trade, so I posted it in here. Earlier this month, one of Chicago's beat writers (I don't remember which) said Hendry was going to try to trade Lee, so this seems to corroborate that. That's part of why it's significant.

Bids are due, but I don't necessarily think that means the ownership issue will be "settled."

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread I think it's pretty significant that they are trying to move Lee. Think of the second order effects besides Peavy...

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread.

except he's eclipsed those numbers 2 of the past 6 years, which means it's hardly a lock. he adds probably 15 runs a year with his glove and plays a position where even average offensive players (o. cabrera) get paid $10M. paying jack wilson an average of $7M per year has very, very little to do with why the pirates have been so bad. Wilson was 27th out of 32 SSs with at least 300 PAs in VORP last year. His VORP was 2.7, which puts him at only slightly more productive than the average replacement player. Not worth it. He was 14th in 2007, 23d in 2006, 27th again in 2005, 6th in 2004, and 24th in 2003. So, only once in his career, in 2004, was he in the top third of all SSs in the league, once he was in the bottom third. The rest of his career he has been mired in the bottom third of all SSs. His primary attribute is his glove. What percentage of defensive specialists have been able to maintain above average production defensively at the position of SSs? I don't know the number, but I know it's lower at SS than any other position. The guy's on the downside of his peak years, and is only going to go up in cost. Would you really give up any kind of talent like Pittsburgh was asking for on the gamble that Wilson will be able to maintain his glove into his mid-30s, while maybe once peaking and giving you league average production for his position offensively? Pittsburgh is dumb for not trying to move him for a realistic return.

OPS+ year-by-year: 40 67 70 104 74 77 105 77 well using this stat only, ozzie smith was a lousy baseball player who has no business being in the hall of fame. here's my statistical breakdown: defensive importance of shortstop, relative to other positions on the baseball field, year-by-year: most important most important most important most important most important most important most important most important Jack Wilson is no Ozzie Smith defensively. Not even close. And Smith shouldn't have been a first vote HOFer either. Bad argument.

He edited his, now you might want to edit yours... 8-)

I'd go with Slaton and Winslow. I need help with my flex spot...pick one of Willie Parker, Maurice Morris, Jerricho Cotchery or Braylon Edwards? Probably Cotchery Pick two of Andre Johnson, Megatron (TEN), and Roddy White (SD) Cotchery is who I was leaning towards too.As for your pick, I'd go with Johnson and White. I look for Tennessee to have a little extra motivation after taking their first loss and take it out on the lowly Lions.

I'd go with Slaton and Winslow. I need help with my flex spot...pick one of Willie Parker, Maurice Morris, Jerricho Cotchery or Braylon Edwards?

http://mlbtr.blogs.sportsline.com/mcc/blogs/view/8691437 No mention of how much he wants, but Milwaukee seems adamant that they're only going to offer one year. He's a type B, so he wouldn't cost any picks. Anyone else think he's worth a two year deal? He's old, but he was one of the best LOOGYs in the league the last two years. I don't have much faith in Cotts, and I don't want Marshall tied up in the bullpen if needed to start because we have no other good options for that role. I normally wouldn't entertain Shouse for two years, but since we don't have any decent LH options in house for the pen outside of Marshall, who has much more value as a long man or starter (or trade bait...), I might be open to it. What other good LOOGY candidates are out there besides him?

No, because your opinion is based on an extremely narrow way of evaluating the two.

To be fair, Angelos is the one with a hard on for Roberts and not MacPhail. Also, I can understand why the Orioles are hesitant about trading Roberts, as he is a very good player. Wilson, on the other hand, flat out sucks, and there is no reason to be holding out for anything more than a b-level prospect. They should have just tried to snag Hu from the Dodgers, and then jumped for joy if they agreed to it.

Exactly. He's only stating the obvious when he says we don't NEED another starting pitcher. This is true. We have an excellent rotation one through five as it stands right now, we don't need another starter. That doesn't mean we won't upgrade if the right deal comes along, just that we don't have a hole that we HAVE to fill right now. As far as Peavy is concerned, I'm beginning to think that Towers has no choice but to trade him, and he will, but his hands are tied by Peavy's NTC so the market is limited. He's doing his job as best he can by dragging this out and seeing if he can get a better return by getting Hendry to get a 3rd team involved. There's no immediate need to deal Peavy now. If he comes back in a month and accepts whatever package it was that Hendry had already proposed, I'm sure Jim won't tell him the offer is off of the table, as the deal would obviously favor us.

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.

Apparently, the Dodgers were interested in trading for Jack Wilson. Why, I have no idea. The Pirates asked for Chin-Lung Hu, Delwyn Young and a third prospect. The Dodgers have cut the talks off as a result. Considering what he's due to get paid, the Pirates should have been happy if they would have taken him for free just to ditch his salary. Wilson is horrible. I guess new management is just as delusional as the old management over the same crappy players.

I didn't realize until now that Kosuke out-OPSd Teahan last year, even though the NL Central has stronger pitching than the AL Central.

I couldn't disagree with you less. Hendry can still make some trades. That salary limit doesn't really come into play until the budget is spent. If Wood accepted arbitration, then he could either a) trade Wood once that process was settled, or b) trade someone else. Hendry is not without his flaws, but look around the league. He's hardly a bad GM. There's no guarantee his replacement would be better. Heck, I'd say it's more likely than not that his replacement would do a worse job than him. I don't understand the strong sentiment to get rid of him, especially after the seemingly endless string of crappy years we endured prior to his tenure. He's won the division half the time since becoming GM.

Yes, they sometimes do. I don't understand how you are trying to incorporate the players association into this argument.