frostwyrm

Phil Rogers gets diarrhea every time he eats Cheetos, but he still eats them every day because he enjoys the stability of steady dependable diarrhea.

Then, depending on what those four players bring to the table as far as slugging, mix them in the 4-8 spots (4-9 if you're in the AL) in the order. Nobody expects every player to put up a .350 OBP. However, the leadoff hitter is the guy batting ahead of the heart of the order. Even if he's not leading off an inning, he's still batting in front of the guys that you pay to drive in runs. Might as well put a guy that gets on base in that spot to increase your chances of having someone on when the big hitters come up. The problem is, many of your top OBP guys are also your top slugging players. There are not enough #1 and #2 hitters left over to put up a .350 OBP for every team. Pierre is a little under that, but he makes up for the difference in OBP with the problems he creates on the basepaths. Pierre's arm creates problems on basepaths too.

May the demons feast on the flesh of the hippies.

According to my math: crappy OBP + crappy SLG = crappy offense According to your math: crappy OBP + crappy SLG + the proper leadoff man = good offense No, just that he is the best thing for the offense. That does not mean it makes the offense good, just better than it was before. So we should just accept crappiness of OBP and SLG as inevitable and sign a leadoff man with that in mind, the aim being to build a less sucky but nonetheless bad offense?

According to my math: crappy OBP + crappy SLG = crappy offense According to your math: crappy OBP + crappy SLG + the proper leadoff man = good offense

see my point in the other thread about using defense to bash one player, but discounting it when someone else tries to defend a different player. Regardless, I still think it's worth mentioning that Pierre's supposedly greatest offensive asset -- his ability to take extra bases -- is exactly what his arm allows opponents to do. He's like a pickpocket who constantly has his own pocket picked.

Exactly, thank you I forgot to make that point. The fact that we are a bad slugging team only enhances our need to have somebody like Pierre. His speed becomes even more valuable on a team who is only able to score 1 run at a time. That is what I am saying about the low OBP team..they are not going to string enough hits together to score very often, so Pierre's speed creates the extra bases needed to at least drive him home some of the time. If Pierre is leading off, sometimes a hit behind him is not even needed. He can lead off, steal second, and proceed to home with 2 outs being recorded. For a team who can't get on base very well, and can't hit home runs, this ability to score with basically one hit can become very important. Instead of trying to find a leadoff man who's a good fit for a team with crummy OBP and SLG wouldn't it be a more sound strategy to try to stop being a team with crummy OBP and SLG?

This is not only strange logic, it's illogical logic. The best leadoff man for a team with bad OBP is a leadoff man with bad OBP? Pierre can score from 1st base on any hit? Why isn't he making $20+ million dollars per year? I'm arguing that when a team has bad OBP behind him, speed becomes the next important thing. Pierre creates runs with his speed. Let's take an extreme example of this. A player who is so slow he can only advance one base at a time has a 1.000 OBP. He walks every single time, so the team puts him at leadoff. The team behind him only has a .200 OBP, so they are only going to knock him in about 1 out of every 10 times. A player like Pierre with a .750 OBP only gets on 3 out of 4 times, but he only needs 1 hit to get him home, not 3. Therefore, the team knocks him home more often statistically then the player with the 1.000 OBP. Yes, this is absolutely absurd, but it works just as well with actual team numbers. A player with a .400 OBP is wasted if the team behind them can not string together hits to get them home, and so a player like Pierre with a .330 OBP is actually statistically more likely to get home with one hit from the hitters behind him with his speed. The best scenario is to get a lineup who has great OBP hitters, but for this team Juan Pierre has the best statistical chance of scoring per at bat. Pierre can score from 1st base on any hit? Why isn't he making $20 million dollars per year? Not on any hit, but you have to agree that Pierre's speed makes it much more likely to have him score from 1st base on a double. It also makes him much more likely to steal second, and tag up on fly balls. While this does not offset all OBP differences, it does start to make up for a lower OBP, and speed is much more valuable statistically when factored into a team with a low OBP then a high one because that is the one of the main ways for a team with a low OBP to create runs. Opposing baserunners constantly take extra bases off of Pierre's girlie arm, so Pierre has to steal just to get back the bases his arm gives away. He also gets caught way too often. I'd rather have Corey. When he steals a base it's not just a way to make up for what his arm gave away.

What blows me away is how Dusty can continue giving the bunt sign on the first pitch after Pierre gets a single. That might be the dumbest call in the history of sports, and he does it frequently. Why? Waste an out to get a guy to 2nd base that 9 times out of 10 Pierre can get without anyone else's help. Not only is this team horrible in relation to OBP, but they also waste precious outs way too often when they do have runners on base. I especially like a sac bunt with Pierre already on 2nd base. It's also fun to see mega-free-swinging Neifi with the green light to foul away pitches while Pierre tries to steal.

This is not only strange logic, it's illogical logic. The best leadoff man for a team with bad OBP is a leadoff man with bad OBP? Pierre can score from 1st base on any hit? Why isn't he making $20+ million dollars per year? I'm arguing that when a team has bad OBP behind him, speed becomes the next important thing. Pierre creates runs with his speed. Let's take an extreme example of this. A player who is so slow he can only advance one base at a time has a 1.000 OBP. He walks every single time, so the team puts him at leadoff. The team behind him only has a .200 OBP, so they are only going to knock him in about 1 out of every 10 times. A player like Pierre with a .750 OBP only gets on 3 out of 4 times, but he only needs 1 hit to get him home, not 3. Therefore, the team knocks him home more often statistically then the player with the 1.000 OBP. Yes, this is absolutely absurd, but it works just as well with actual team numbers. A player with a .400 OBP is wasted if the team behind them can not string together hits to get them home, and so a player like Pierre with a .330 OBP is actually statistically more likely to get home with one hit from the hitters behind him with his speed. The best scenario is to get a lineup who has great OBP hitters, but for this team Juan Pierre has the best statistical chance of scoring per at bat. Pierre can score from 1st base on any hit? Why isn't he making $20 million dollars per year?

I refuse to vote for either of these.

Pearl Jam begat Creed.

Don't you remember Dusty saying "you got to reward the guys who got you here" as a pretext for playing Neifi Perez everyday after the Cubs were out of the race last year? This is not the right manager for a retooling period. Every day he remains he hurts our chances in 2007.

Not an REM fan.

No, that would be Pearl Jam. "Should I Stay or Should I Go?" is a pretty dumb song though.

Randall Simon.

We've become spoiled. The average baseball fan would be ecstatic to have a $94 million payroll for his favorite team. Cubs just need to spend more wisely, not spend more.

It's Clapton man....CLAPTON! The guys in Cream were really good players but their songwriting was very weak. By and large the songs were vehicles for the guys to show off their chops. That doesn't excite me. Put the greatest musician in a jam rock band and the results are still boring.

The Pixies would have been more competitive here.

I saw the Bon Jovi "Runaway" video on the VH1 Classic channel last night. Now that is a fine piece of aged cheddar.

What type of music do you like? It's a serious question; I'm not trying to be a jerk. I just remember a lot of "I hate X" or "X sucks" posts (some of which I've agreed with). Maybe I'm just not remembering the "I love X with all my heart" posts. X is a band that would get my vote over most of the field of 64. I'd vote for X over many of these bands too. Especially if X were Wolf Parade. I was thinking of the X with John and Exene.

Cream is way too close to being a 'jam rock' band to get my vote. Jam rock ain't exactly my favorite flavor of rock.

Too bad Priest's 70's stuff doesn't get radio play because some of it is brilliant. Sad Wings of Destiny, Stained Class, and Unleashed in the East are classics and quite different from the 80's stuff that everyone has heard. Cream, on the other hand, embodies everything I find BORING about bluesy classic rock. Clapton's guitar stylings may have sounded fresh 30 years ago but they are absolutely tedious now.

DLR era Van Halen was the shiznit. Too bad all their stuff is so horribly overplayed, but they have my vote nonetheless.

What type of music do you like? It's a serious question; I'm not trying to be a jerk. I just remember a lot of "I hate X" or "X sucks" posts (some of which I've agreed with). Maybe I'm just not remembering the "I love X with all my heart" posts. X is a band that would get my vote over most of the field of 64.