Bull

So we're , uh, not doing this anymore?

Up to .320. But its a "soft" .320.

No team needs two McCutchens.

I don't know. We've got the baseball-reference link, but not any actual footage of the game. It may not have existed. Baseball reference conspiring to create box scores of games that never actually took place?!?! This could be bigger than steroids. I am quite sure that no one actually witnessed an Expos game in their last three years in Montreal. I defy anyone (besides the now VERY suspect BR) to prove otherwise.

at what point does the amount of day games theory gain some credence? (worn out, unable to find the "next gear"?

Does this hint that sabermetrics has hit a peak of usefullness, and that most of what we will glean from it, we already have? conventional wisdom is still a couple decades behind it, but does this hint at a chance that fewer "advancements' will lead to an opportunity for widespread understanding and wider acceptance?

That's it. He's not good enough defensively to play CF full time and doesn't hit with enough power to play one of the corner spots. From what I've seen in both the minors and with the Cubs his arm his strong and accurate and he's a decent route runner, but nothing spectacular. I'm not sure why so many people here are so down on him, I think he might be able to start on a team that gets power else where, but for most teams in the post steroid era he's likely to be a backup. In the steroid era not the "post steroid" era. The standards will change.

Try changing to the subsilver2 theme, if you aren't in it already. It worked. I was using the nexus theme. I liked it better, but I also like to quote. thanks.

I'm unable to quote anyone. only post a reply.

Any chance the angels pick him up, since they're paying him anyway?

looks like about a three hour window. 1/2 hr to clean up the field, 2 1/2 to get in at least the minimum 5..

any credit to Lou (or Trammell) for recognizing this guy's ridiculous splits?

think of it this way, at least you'll only have to do it once!

This guy: http://www.homeruncards.com/imagesrc/ricky-nolasco.jpg vs Mr Wells http://images.dailyradar.com/media/uploads/ballhype/story_large/2009/08/15/chicago_cubs_randy_wells_beats_reds_1.jpg lose losers.

I've been to 2 games at Fenway this year. The advertising is part of the experience. As long as they leave the Ivy and the scoreboard alone, I'm okay with it. If you mess with either of those, you might as well build new (to which I am also not opposed)

The only thing I can come up with is a little rest early in the year for Z so he's not over 200 innings by the stretch run and an extended audition for a trade for Gorz and Silva. That's all I got.

I just typed ten different half sentences, desperately trying to wrap my mind aound this move. I can't

unbe-stinkin-lievable.

This is where additional metrics help more than an elaborate way of refining current ones. In the same way that LD% w/ BABIP(and hopefully hit f/x someday) show the differences between the dribbler that gets through and the rope off the wall, all the different Swing and contact percentages help differentiate between the truly disciplined hitter and one who simply saw the right pitches at the right time. why not just do it right the first time, instead of an endless string of "yeah, but"s?

I specifically came to this forum in the first place to get more insightful discussion on baseball, because Cubs.com was at the time full of people arguing who had a cuter butt, Grace or Chipper. It all comes full circle, so to speak.

But this isn't about the course of a career, this is about being able to better qualify individual instances. seeking a way to say that this walk shouldn't count towards some imaginary stats like "quality OBP" because that pitcher was so wild that the hitter shouldn't get "credit" for the walk. all base hits are not created equal, all walks are not created equal, and anyone who pretends they are is kidding themselves. Statistics will never be as reliable a predictor as we would like them to be as long as a "Theriot Special"/roller up the middle that anyone with decent range could get to, counts the same as a rope off the wall that is limited to a basehit, because the runner on first was afraid to advance until it dropped.

Might be worth it for the league minimum. *ducks*

I certainly don't agree with people questioning a poster's masculinity because of what he posted, but I honestly find it odd that one can claim to not pay attention to a player when he is frequenting a thread about the player and has posted multiple statistical updates about said player. A point worth noting. once. maybe.

In my field there is a lot of discussion about whether offense (of-FENSE as in "I'm offended") is taken or given. Did you offend me, or did I take offense? There is a developing school of thought that offense is more often taken than given. As I sat in a seminar my thoughts drifted to Cubs baseball and I began to wonder whether offense (OF-fense) in baseball is taken or given. I read a Muskat mailbag/inbox article today (I know--first mistake) in which she showed no concern over Colvin's anemic walk rate, but seemed very concerned about the bullpens walk rate. I'm sure some of the regulars here will loathe the idea of rehashing the discussion, but there are new folks here every day. So here goes: Question 1: is there a way to differentiate between offense that is given and that which is taken? Will there ever be a way? It seems to me that some of the statistical anomalies could be eliminated if we knew that X number of Sammys home-runs in 1998 were meatballs served up to him by Jose Lima (intentionally or not), or that a new guy on the scene is hitting pitchers pitches for extra bases. Question 2: Is there a way to find out who is taking walks and who is being given walks, and similarly who is giving up walks vs who is being worked by elite-patience hitters? Bonus: if your take on the original premise (of-FENSE taken or given and the effects on community dynamics) finds its way into my next book.

I've got an idea! Let's all pile on a poster who did nothing but what has come to be expected in these parts: accompany his post with cold-hard stats. Regarding Bradley: the better he plays the less you'll hear about him. If he sucks again, it will get ugly. That is all.