vance_the_cubs_fan

My guess is Vidro will bring more in a trade than Sori once health is established. He's cheaper and signed for longer. Teams will more than likely be willing to give better players for someone they can control for longer. I think it's very clear Soriano intends to test the free agent waters.

I think that every player who was a bulked up slugger from the steroid era will be held to such scrutiny. I think we will see that for many players (Bonds, Sosa, etc) where suspicion exists. Now will some players skip out on the scrutiny? Certainly. There are a number of players where the cloud has never hung over. Does that mean they were not users? No....but by nature of not having ever been suspected, they will avoid scrutiny. On the other hand, the eye of suspicion will be cast on a number of the players from this generation. What is unique in McGwire's case is that he had a chance to speak his mind. He had a chance to give information and chose not to. Was he worried about prosecution? Was he worried he'd have to rat out team mates? We'll never know. So, he didn't want to testify under oath. Why not hold a press conference and come clean now? Why not explain his testimony? Yes, K-Town, I know you'll say he doesn't have to. I know you'll say that to hold him to this level isn't fair. I know you'll say he doesn't want to be bothered. All that may be true, but these voters want answers. My guess is they'll want them from players who come after McGwire too. Surely, not all. But if you don't think this same debate will rage on five years after Sosa retires or Bonds or Sheffield or any other player with HOF stats that the cloud of suspicion has covered, you're wrong. I'm pretty certain it will. Will the voters believe those players denials? I don't know. But at least they will have those denials. Will players like Gwynn, Ripken, Alomar, Biggio, Clemens, Frank Thomas, Griffey and others have to endure the same scrutiny? No. Simply because they have never been suspected or connected to the cloud of doubt in any substantial form.

I still don't like Neifi...even though Rubby has tried to persuade me otherwise. I did tell Rubby that I'lll give Neifi one more chance to sign my ball this year...but if he doesn't I'm going to begin my all-out smear compaign to label Neifi the worst player in the history of the game.

I guess Soriano could be a mid-season acquisition , but I doubt before then. His cost in money and prospects right now would be prohibitive.

Neifi was the only Cub not to sign my team baseball in 2005. That's all the reason I need.

Players have "peak" or "fluke" seasons quite often. It's not as much a rarety as you would think. Do I think Eckstein will drop all the way to his career norms? Maybe not, but i'd think the safer bet is that he'll perform closer to his career norms than his 2005 numbers. Vance - Do you have the same feeling about D. Lee? I figure there will be some regression, yes. I'd guess he will also perform closer to his three-year average than he will his 2005 numbers.

Players have "peak" or "fluke" seasons quite often. It's not as much a rarety as you would think. Do I think Eckstein will drop all the way to his career norms? Maybe not, but i'd think the safer bet is that he'll perform closer to his career norms than his 2005 numbers.

That's cool. I'm definitely going to get one of those.

I don't think that's true. I believe he was shot prior to the 2002 season. He had a bad 2002, but then bounced back for a very good 2003. I don't think the gun shot injury had anything to do with his horrendous numbers in 2004 and 2005.

Pierre's career numbers are skewed because he played in Colorado. That's why I used OPS+ numbers, which reflect park factors. Pierre performed pretty much as last year as he's performed (on average) for his career. "Three year averages" are good, but they're not everything. Like I said, I wouldn't be surprised if Pierre is as good as Eckstein, but to imply that it's a "no brainer" that he'll probably be better is blind reasoning, in my opinion. But his last three seasons he played in Pro Player, hardly a hitter's park. And his numbers from last season were considerably lower than the two seasons previously. Last year showed that it is possible for Eckstein to be the better player, but when considering the totality of the evidence and not the most recent samples, I think the case is likely that Pierre will be better. As an aside to prove my point: Who do you suspect will be better in 2006: Pujols or Lee? If we judge strictly on 2005 numbers, they will be about as equal a player as you can get. If we judge along three-year averages, there's no question Pujols will be better. I would agree with that. While I don't expect Lee to regress down to his numbers prior to last year, I in no way expect him to reach 2005 numbers either. I'd expect him to produce somewhere in line with his three-year average. Also, in your assessment of Rolen's ability, how much do you factor in 2005 numbers? Would you say Rolen would perform closer to his career or closer to 2005?

I think there's lots of reasons to assume he'll be as good and likely better. Three-year averages are often a better indicator than looking at just one season. When looking at the three-year averages of Eckstein and Pierre, you'll notice that Pierre has a higher average 303 to 276, a higher OBP 354 to 344, and a higher SLG 378 to 354. In addition, Pierre adds a threat on the bases that Eckstien doesn't. Assuming both players perform closer to their three year average which is just, if not more likely than to focus on one season, then there isn't one area in which Eckstein outperforms Pierre. Considering that Pierre pretty much performed right around his career averages last year, I wouldn't expect much improvement. Eckestein? Hard to say. Some might say that the change of scenery and a better approach has helped him. Others might say he got "lucky". :wink: Could go either way, in my opinion. Pierre performed lower than his career average in all three significant metrics. His BA was 19 points below his career, hs OBP was 29 points below career average, and his SLP was 21 points below career average. On the other end of the spectrum, Eckstein's BA was 18 points above average, OBP 24 points above average, and SLP 63 points. You can attribute it to change of scenery or that he had a career year and that he'll revert back to the mean. I've found that while players do imrove and and often can enter a whole new plane of performance, that three-year averages if adjusted for trends, age, etc are often the truest indicators. The three-year averages of both playes indicate that Pierre will be better.

I think there's lots of reasons to assume he'll be as good and likely better. Three-year averages are often a better indicator than looking at just one season. When looking at the three-year averages of Eckstein and Pierre, you'll notice that Pierre has a higher average 303 to 276, a higher OBP 354 to 344, and a higher SLG 378 to 354. In addition, Pierre adds a threat on the bases that Eckstien doesn't. Assuming both players perform closer to their three year average which is just, if not more likely than to focus on one season, then there isn't one area in which Eckstein outperforms Pierre.

Steroids has often crossed my mind with Hidalgo. His decline has been pretty steep. If he's cheap and the Cubs are willing to cut bait if he doesn't produce, he wouldn't be a horrible option. On the other hand, I'd hate to be married to him for the season.

Apparenly, Ted Turner says he has no interest in re-purchasing the Braves. Link

I've brought up Hidalgo more than once this offseason. Here are some numbers on him: Richard Hidalgo 05: 221/289/416 c: 269/345/490 05-05: 262/331/486 03-05 v LH: 245/330/473 He doesn't have great splits against lefties, but in 2003 he had a great year. In that year, he hit 309/385/572 with 28 HR. However something happened in 2004. When he was traded to the Mets, he was hitting 256/309/412. For the Mets he hit 228/296/463. It was a bad year for him. Last year he played hurt and didn't play much. He was in a hitter's paradise and still only managed 221/289/416. He can play great defense, but I have to wonder why the decline is so steep from 2003 to 2005. If he could hit anywhere near his 2003 numbers, then we would have a bonafide stud in rightfield or wherever you played him. If he hits his 2005 numbers, he's not even worth a bench spot. I'm not against giving him a one-year deal, but management would have to be willing to cut bait if he is not better than he was last year.

Word out of Houston is that the Astros are planning to file an insurance claim and have told Bagwell he is not welcome at Spring Training. I don't have a link, but a friend in Houston is telling me it's being reported on the radio. I'll try to confirm when I can.

Did you get every one of those autographs personally or did you buy some stuff at card shows/memorabilia shops? I'd say 90% or more I've gotten in person. The ones from card shows are those that I paid for a ticket and watched the player sign my item. I have bought a select few items from memorabilia shops...but I'm so skeptical that I rarely do that.

Not for a guy who is only in his first season of arbitration. Dontrelle who is also in his first year signed for 4.35 million. I don't think anyone would argue that Dontrelle didn't pitch better than Prior last season. So, considering Prior should make a little less than Dontrelle, the figures look about right. (edited to make thoughts clear)

vance, I guess that ball has been devalued, huh? Pretty much.

I have some cool non-baseball stuff as well. My favorite is likely my 16x20 framed print bw print of Ali knocking out Liston that I got Ali's autograph on. I also have a cover of the SI from when Michael Johnson won four gold medals autographed by him. That was neat. I also have some signed photos and mini helmets from some of the Dallas Cowboys.

Yeah, I've never done much with the jerseys. That may be something I add later. My collection of cards that are signed is massive though. When I was in grad school, I lived 15 mins from the Rangers ballpark and some days, I'd just go and wait for the players to arrive, get some autographs and then come home. Now, I have to travel to get them and the older I get the harder it gets. I've given a lot of my duplicates to my nephew. It's fun though. You end up with a lot of cool stories and I still get excited over getting a minor player. Once it loses that thrill, I'll probably stop.

The only way I could afford mine is to marry a pharmacist... I kid. Actually, I've spent hours before and after games waiting on players to sign. Some I purchased tickets at shows to get signed, but most I got at ballparks.

One of the most unusual items I have in my collection is a plastic maraca that the Rangers gave out at a game on Cinco de Mayo. I had it signed by some of the Hispanic players. I also have a coupon for $2 off a buffet at Luby's signed by Cecil Fielder.

The reason I don't do jerseys so much is that I get a lot of my auots outside ballparks, etc...and it's just very hard to lug a jersey around like that without it getting messed up. Also, my wall space in my office has gotten very limited. In fact, I have a binder full of 8x10's I haven't framed and hung up yet because of that. I would love to get some jerseys signed, but baseballs are so much better space wise. Sammy was an easy autograph to get pre-1998, after that nearly impossible. I got a bunch of Sammy autos early in his career, but only one (on my 2004 team ball) since then. I heard he wouldn't sign jerseys...but now that his career is in the dumpster, he may become more fan friendly again. Your best chance is to let a kid or a hot chick give it to him. Once in Houston, he only signed for kids and hotties.

According to the St. Petersburg Times, the Cubs are still in talks for Lugo.