Jehrico

Is that a record length for fight related suspensions? Obviously, drug related suspensions ar much longer, but I cant remember anyone getting a 6 or 7 game suspension. How long was Lees for the Chris Young slap fight? 3 games, right? Hopefully The Rays will appeal and hold the suspensions until we play them. Edited: we will at least miss Iwamura in the Rays series. Sure, hes not Carl Crawford, but hes the type of scrapper that hurts us big time. Unless appealed, the suspensions will be scheduled to begin on the following days: -Friday: Crisp and Lester; Shields and Gomes -Wednesday: Crawford - June 13: Jackson - June 14: Casey -June 17: Akinori Iwamura Who knows, maybe Shields, Gomes, and Crawford will appeal and we'll miss at least one of them. Didn't Barrett get 10 for AJP?

I never said he shouldn't stick around, I said I hate seeing guys hang around too long. I never felt that way until Jordan came back after his second retirement. He went out on top after hitting the winning short for the 6th and last title. I can't think of another superstar who has ever had such a picturesque ending. It was the most beautiful way someone who transcended the game like Jordan did could wrap up his career. It was the only appropriate ending to such a stellar career. It was disappointing when he came back with another team and was unable to even come close to recapturing that. That doesn't mean that I didn't think he should come back, just that I hated seeing him come back unable to recapture the glory we expected from him. Fans have every right to hate seeing their heros sucking when they get old. Who here enjoyed watching Sandberg put up an OPS+ of 83 while failing to get to so many balls in the field that he used to make easily? That's also not to say I would have hated not getting another year of Ryno at the same time. Hating seeing someone hang around too long isn't the same as criticizing the player for playing as long as he's able. Let's not confuse the two. It seems to me that it comes from a fan's belief that they somehow own the player's legacy, that the player owes them something. I hate that attitude. If Jordan wanted to come back today to be the 12th man on the Bobcats, that'd be fine with me. You're not getting it. There wasn't any criticism of the player. Players develop a legacy with the fans. As a fan, it sucks to watch a guy you hold very highly put in a neifi-esque performance. I hated watching Sandberg suck in 97. I never said any players owed us anything, just that it sucked to watch the good ones look like Macias or Neifi when they're old. Or maybe you do get it, and you enjoyed watching Ryno stink in 97, I don't know.

Bukie, can you please hook us up with a "What's gotten into the Brewers?". Maybe we can ride this wave through the playoffs. "What's gotten into the Red Sox?" I like kicking teams when they're down. How about a "What's gotten into the Yankees?" thread while we're at it?

Drink a little cool aid, and Flaherty sounds like the next Sandberg.

Diamondbacks and Brewers are now tied. Both teams have a 32-28 record. The Crew is making a move...

it's amounted to 14 more plate appearances in 58 games The only way the 8th slot gets more at bats in a game than the 9th slot is if the 8th slot ends the game (or gets the last out in the 8th, and the team doesn't need to bat in the 9th). If they're winning at the end of the game, who cares. If they're loosing, then that extra at bat is going to a pinch hitter, if the order hasn't already been shuffled due to a double switch. I can't see how the extra at bats a pitcher might get by batting 8th would realistically have a greater impact over the course of a season than having someone on base in front of Soriano (or Fuku or whoever bats second then, and then maybe Lee) more often.

He was mediocre until age 33 (with 1 big exception in '93). But his peak years were concentrated, they just weren't in the normal peak age. He pretty clearly peaked from 33-40 (again, with 1 exception - the bad year in 2000). Since then, he's back to mediocre. It really looks like an average player's bell-curve type career, just delayed about 7 years. I wouldn't call them concentrated, but maybe I'm using the word "peak" more loosely than you. He broke out in '93, then sucked again, then broke back out, had a bad year at 37 in 2000, then defied the odds with a renaissance from 38-40. Then he sucked again for a couple of years before putting up above average numbers in '06. I don't call that concentrated, that's several good to outstanding seasons with a few bad ones mixed in over a 13 year period. Quick bit of trivia on the side...have any other players ever appeared in an all-star game for the first time at age 40? Every other 40 year old I can think of that's made it had been there at least a few times before.

I never said he shouldn't stick around, I said I hate seeing guys hang around too long. I never felt that way until Jordan came back after his second retirement. He went out on top after hitting the winning short for the 6th and last title. I can't think of another superstar who has ever had such a picturesque ending. It was the most beautiful way someone who transcended the game like Jordan did could wrap up his career. It was the only appropriate ending to such a stellar career. It was disappointing when he came back with another team and was unable to even come close to recapturing that. That doesn't mean that I didn't think he should come back, just that I hated seeing him come back unable to recapture the glory we expected from him. Fans have every right to hate seeing their heros sucking when they get old. Who here enjoyed watching Sandberg put up an OPS+ of 83 while failing to get to so many balls in the field that he used to make easily? That's also not to say I would have hated not getting another year of Ryno at the same time. Hating seeing someone hang around too long isn't the same as criticizing the player for playing as long as he's able. Let's not confuse the two.

LMFAO! Dusty got one of his horses back.

From a performance standpoint, he's not tarnishing his career. When he's healthy, he's still as effective as he ever was during his career. Agreed, except I doubt his ability to come back effectively again after major surgery at 41 years. He was a bit younger last time.

Good post. Everyone seems to think he's the best hitter on the team. He's a very good hitter, but I would have to bestow that award to Aramis right now.

The problem with most of that last is that they're either: A. a risk for injury (Burnett, Harden) B. not a certifiable number 2 There are no names out there that I would think would be worth trading Pie/Hill or any of the other Cubs names mentioned. How about Mussina? If the Yankees continue to tank, I'd think he would be available as a half-season rental. Maybe the shift to the NL would benefit him. Why do the Cubs need another 5th starter? He's 39 and has had 1 decent year in the last 5. He's a 5 inning starter who is very hittable and gives up the long ball. He's been on championship teams and he knows how to win. If the Reds somehow put together a wildcard run, I could see Dusty campaigning for Jocketty to get him.

The issue with Tim Redding is that he's an absolutely terrible pitcher. As in, worse than Jason Marquis. Based on what? There's a difference between not being a healthy pitcher (like Mark Prior) and being a bad pitcher (like Marquis). Redding is not a terrible pitcher at all. Quite the opposite, he just hasn't been healthy. In 2003, his only relatively healthy season, he had an ERA+ of 119. He pitched in pain until he was shut down in 2004. He got in a whole 30 innings in 2005 before being set back and shut down again. He didn't pitch in 2006. Since coming back in the second half of '07, he's put together 27 straight starts with a combined ERA+ of around 115. My main concern with him is he's averaging just under 6 innings pitched an outing, but that should be expected given how little he pitched from the break in '04 to the break in '07. If you think Redding sucks, then you must think Prior sucks given his 2006 performance. You can't judge a pitcher as good or bad based on injury plagued seasons. If you want to assume that the only full season he's had is the only one that's actually indicative of his abilities, more power to you. Everything that he's done in his professional baseball career at any level suggest that he's pretty bad. I hope Jim Hendry won't use your line of thinking. If you want to assume that the whole 130 innings he had while hurt over 2004, 2005, and 2006 are more indiciative than the 386 innings before and after those injury-riddled periods, then more power to you. Everything that he's done in his professional baseball career at any level does not even begin to suggest he's pretty bad. I hope Jim Hendry does more homework and analytical thinking than you obviously have.

According to FoxSports, he's hoping to come back in '09. I hate seeing great players tarnish their careers by staying around too long.

The issue with Tim Redding is that he's an absolutely terrible pitcher. As in, worse than Jason Marquis. Yeah, Redding's pretty bad save for this season and one year with the 'Stros. What about last year?

The issue with Tim Redding is that he's an absolutely terrible pitcher. As in, worse than Jason Marquis. Based on what? There's a difference between not being a healthy pitcher (like Mark Prior) and being a bad pitcher (like Marquis). Redding is not a terrible pitcher at all. Quite the opposite, he just hasn't been healthy. In 2003, his only relatively healthy season, he had an ERA+ of 119. He pitched in pain until he was shut down in 2004. He got in a whole 30 innings in 2005 before being set back and shut down again. He didn't pitch in 2006. Since coming back in the second half of '07, he's put together 27 straight starts with a combined ERA+ of around 115. My main concern with him is he's averaging just under 6 innings pitched an outing, but that should be expected given how little he pitched from the break in '04 to the break in '07. If you think Redding sucks, then you must think Prior sucks given his 2006 performance. You can't judge a pitcher as good or bad based on injury plagued seasons.

What about Tim Redding? He's quietly having a solid year (3.71 ERA, 68IP so far, roughly 1.25 WHIP) for the Nats who aren't even close to doing anything this year. There's obviously the injury concerns, but he's in good form and shouldn't cost too much. I'd take another 10-15 starts from him and leverage the farm for the rest before throwing Marquis out there for another 22 or so starts.

Agreed. His walk rate is up because of his early season performance, not because of the last couple of weeks. I'd like to see him maintain the approach of making the pitcher give him something good to hit.

Moyer's career ERA+ is 105, which I would call slightly above average. He's had several very good years, but numerous bad years as well. What's helped him is that his best years weren't concentrated during his peak age years. They've been spread out, and he's had some of his best years in his late 30s which has kept him going. His success late in his career hasn't been a result of his physical abilities, but rather his pitching smarts.

In a heartbeat Ditto, +10. There's very, very few players in MLB I would trade Geo for straight up. He's one of them. And after making that trade, I'd spend alot of time second guessing myself.

Everyone assumes Stone's talking about CC...what other options could be out there? Seattle has to be reeling on the Bedard trade, any chance they might be willing to deal, and what would they need? Greinke has been mentioned. What other pitchers could be had later this summer?

Marmol hasn't looked as good in the last week. He's looking like a lower-end all-star instead of a hall of famer. I have no problem with this move. We need to lighten Marmol and Woods workload a little bit. Our bench is stacked without Hoff, it's a worthwhile tradeoff in the short term.

Presumably we'd get at the very least a strong indication of signability before making the deal. I wouldn't worry about it, we've never lost a player that we traded for and we wanted to keep. The only player we've ever lost that we wanted to keep that I can think of is Maddux, and that was due to the biggest idiot in the history of all baseball running the negotiations, Larry Himes.

They supposedly want Rose, right? Would they have any interest in getting another guard to go along with him? if they lose Wade, what do they have left in terms of guards? They'd be getting Rose and either Hinrich or Gordon, so there's two guards for them. They have no one else that's better than a league average backup at either guard position.

Thieves! They stole the idea from me... viewtopic.php?f=4&t=48652&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=283 If they don't want Hinrich, Gordon, or Deng, then flip one or two of those to other teams for players/picks that the Heat would want. I think it's doable.