Bull
-
Posts
4,028 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Bull
-
Wasn't it great when we thought our favorite Cubs were the best. Ignorance was bliss. Stupid numbers are the cause of my misery.
-
Manny: I'm staying in Boston
Bull replied to kroth1342's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Perhaps Manny should have your login name -
Personally, I believe that clutch exists, but that MLB hitters operate at such a high mental state that there is very little margin for improvement for most of them, and therefore virtually no possibility for clutch hitting. given that, I consider anti-clutch as proof of clutch. (in other words, it has a smaller impact on hitting in the majors than other levels) Very interesting take; I like it. In essence ALL major leaguers are good under pressure or they would have been weeded in the minors or their rookie year. No situation is more pressurized than your debut. Perhap clutch stats would be valuable in evaluating prospects...except you don't know if they're facing quality prospects or carrreer minors guys. Alas, the world may never know. *sigh*
-
No, I'm arguing from the team's point of view. You give yourself the opportunity to avoid his first year of free agency by guaranteeing him more up front. It's give and take. I'd love to offer just 3/15. But he's not going to sign that. He might not even take a 3/27-30, because in that time period he could earn more than 27-30 by going one year at a time. And he might not want to give the team that one year option because in 3 years he might expect to sign a 5 year deal that averages $15m per year. so on some level we almost agree. Its okay, it doesn't hurt to agree. Honest :wink:
-
I'd try and sign him for around 3/27-30 with a 4th year team option around $14-15m (which could easily be a bargain for the team by then) and maybe $1-2m buyout. Too much. He's arb eligible, not a Free Agent. Ozwalt Got 2 years/16.9 last year. 3/25 is top dollar for arb. eligible pitchers and I think Prior would ask for and get 5 in arb. 3/25 is generous at this stage in his carreer. He could get 5 easily this year, 8-10 by next year, and 10+ the third year of arbitration. You give him a little more now so that he'll put off his first year of free agency. Sounds like you're arguing the agent side and I the team side. I think that given his performance the team will persue him for three near what I outlined, and being unimpressed with that, and knowing his potential, Prior will try to sign a one year deal at around 5.
-
As I understand it, James is saying that due to the small sample size of 'clutch' at-bats per year and the high amount of luck involved in every at-bat, it is impossible to compare yearly 'clutch' numbers - there is too much luck involved. Exactly, there's way too much variation for performance in 'clutch' situations to be predictive or more than an afterthought in player evaluation. That's not what he's saying at all. He's saying that all studies to date have failed to prove "clutch" AND have failed to disprove it. James believes the methods used to determine if clutch exists were flawed. He seems open to the idea that someday there may be a study that proves clutch, but the right metric has yet to be discovered. Sorry, I was referring to noisesquared's comment below the quote, I had already read the article previously. Maybe I should have responded to noisesquared and not you. But my point is that James is not saying that study has disproved clutch, or that there's too small a sample size. He's saying it HAS NOT been disproven, and that there is not yet a metric to measure it. In essence -stretch- he's saying its an intangible.
-
I'd try and sign him for around 3/27-30 with a 4th year team option around $14-15m (which could easily be a bargain for the team by then) and maybe $1-2m buyout. Too much. He's arb eligible, not a Free Agent. Ozwalt Got 2 years/16.9 last year. 3/25 is top dollar for arb. eligible pitchers and I think Prior would ask for and get 5 in arb. 3/25 is generous at this stage in his carreer.
-
As I understand it, James is saying that due to the small sample size of 'clutch' at-bats per year and the high amount of luck involved in every at-bat, it is impossible to compare yearly 'clutch' numbers - there is too much luck involved. Exactly, there's way too much variation for performance in 'clutch' situations to be predictive or more than an afterthought in player evaluation. That's not what he's saying at all. He's saying that all studies to date have failed to prove "clutch" AND have failed to disprove it. James believes the methods used to determine if clutch exists were flawed. He seems open to the idea that someday there may be a study that proves clutch, but the right metric has yet to be discovered.
-
link plz. Probably found their info in Hoops' thread.
-
wilson signs with houston
Bull replied to stitchface's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Agreed. I think we are distingusihing the contract Jones got from the one Wilson has apparently recieved. Regardless of money (and years for that matter) I like Jones over Wilson. Jones has at least some upside. I wouldn't wan't Wilson in my outfield next year if he signed for a nickel. -
wilson signs with houston
Bull replied to stitchface's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
If I recall correctly, Wilson and Encarnacion have been the "worst case" around here. We can't have it both ways. -
I can't take one more reference to Andy Sisco. :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
-
Grissom signs with the Cubs.........
Bull replied to Bgbird68's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Yeah, and his last good year against lefties was 2004. The last time before that was 2003. The last time before that was 2002... and so on. His last good year was '96? . how was 96 good (.838 ops) and 2002 (.831) not good? I always thought an .831 ops for a CFer was pretty good (2002) .790 in 03 and .794 in 04. League average in 2004 was .752. Good enough for a fourth OFer in my book. Add in the facts that his splits against lefties are even better, I don't think its terrible that they signed him to a minor league contract. -
Exactly. The most credible people are the dorm room GMs with the most time and the most posts. Your fault for not realizing that. If by credible you mean recognizable and memorable, then, yeah, the people who post often are memorable for what they say (whether accurate or inaccurate) There was this guy over at cubs.com named Tom27... oh skip it.
-
What about those who used half their last name?
-
brionch you know you're my boy, but how .950 OPS right-fielders were available this offseason? There were only 3 .950+ OPS outfielders in all of baseball last year. Brian Giles wasn't one of them. Manny, Bay, Guererro. Unless your suggesting the Cubs trade Prior for Manny. (don't do it...I got eyerolled off the board for suggesting it would be better than Tejada for Prior---still not good, but better.) Tejada at .865 is nothing to sneeze at. You were (we all were) spoiled by good Sammy into thinking that 1.100 OPS should be expected from your RF. I still don't give up Prior for Tejada. No eyerolling here MrWood, you are right on. This is what we pay Dusy for. To control uncontrollable players. Everyone was on the Bradley bandWGN. Manny is MUCH MUCH MUCH better than Bradley. Again, just look at his numbers. They speak for themselves. Difference: Bradley wouldn't have cost you Prior. I'm not suggesting trade Prior for Manny, just that its better than Prior for Tejada.
-
I was looking at it the other way. The study shows what a worthless (read: luck related/teammate dependant) stat ERA is. For relievers, at least. True. Much better for starters. They finish 90+% of their innings. And if they ARE pulled in the middle of an inning (especially in th e NL) its their own darn fault, and I hope their runners DO score!
-
brionch you know you're my boy, but how .950 OPS right-fielders were available this offseason? There were only 3 .950+ OPS outfielders in all of baseball last year. Brian Giles wasn't one of them. Manny, Bay, Guererro. Unless your suggesting the Cubs trade Prior for Manny. (don't do it...I got eyerolled off the board for suggesting it would be better than Tejada for Prior---still not good, but better.) Tejada at .865 is nothing to sneeze at. You were (we all were) spoiled by good Sammy into thinking that 1.100 OPS should be expected from your RF. I still don't give up Prior for Tejada.
-
I was looking at it the other way. The study shows what a worthless (read: luck related/teammate dependant) stat ERA is.
-
No. I hope not, but i think so... sadly, yes.
-
Oh noes. PRIOR IS NOT FREAKIN INJURY PRONE. He got hit in the arm by a freak line drive. NOT INJURY PRONE. Therefore the chance that his arm falls of is highly highly highly HIGHLY unlikely. Then again, Dusty could always trot Prior out there and set all kinds of pitch count records. Great mechanics or not, there is the Baker Factor to take into account. He could do that to every pitcher. does that mean we should have 25 position players on our team to stop that from happening? hmmm now there's an idea. We knew Hendry would find a way to Dusty-proof this team. That hendry; he's smart.
-
There is no likelyhood that he will have to move positions. Why does age 31 equate to inability to play SS at the same level? Because history has shown us that middle infielders often have to switch, or risk turning into defensive question marks. He probably won't have to switch at 31, but by 32 or 33 the likelihood increases quite a bit. Ripken waited until he was 35, but wasn't any good in the field from 32-34. Banks moved at 31. Yount moved at 29/30. Larkin had a very tough time being an everyday SS in his 30s. Tony Fernandez went from an everyday SS in his 20s to a part time 3B, part time SS, part time 2B in his 30s. All time great middle infielders make their career in their 20's, and usually take a significant step back in their 30s. It's much easier for slugging first baseman and corner outfielders to age gracefully, the demand on the body isn't as great. No wonder there was no love for nomar this offseason. BTW this is the best argument against this trade that I have seen so far.
-
I take what I can get these days! :D ....... :cry:
-
Unfortunately that's probably a random stat with no predictive value. Such is the problem of signing middle relievers after their "breakout" season. I understand that, but the point is that Eyre's ERA was better than it looked last year. He was excellent at holding inherited runners on base, which is what you want relievers to do. Put another way, we need not worry when Dusty puts him in in the middle of an inning. So many discussions here (particularly about Remmy) noted that certain pitchers were only effective if they started an inning. This shows that Eyre is valuable with runners on. That's what you want from a LOOGY.
-
The link is to NL pitchers here is all: