CuseCubFan69

last time i checked, perry is a different person from clines while rothschild is the same person as rothschild. he may have a doppelganger, but i doubt it. True but as I told gooney he may have been in contact with someone over the winter or it's also possible that Novoa knew that Baker was the man and did what he wanted and not Rothschild. Is a doppelgnager like that pitch that Matsuz throws for Boston?

Yes, they show you who has the best chance, but not who will win. Ok...now is it always right? No. It gives you the best chance and that's it. Now, for what we were talking about earlier the variables that happen during a game that are not measured by numbers. A pitcher that is a starter his whole career and struggles late and is an alcoholic. He stops drinking gets traded and is one of the greatest closers of all time. What stat told me this was going to happen? i'm sorry CCF, but this is almost not worth responding to. this has nothing to do with what we're talking about. It does and it doesn't. It has something to do with unknown variables and trends and how you would react if you were a GM in that instance.

Invisable trends? What is an example of that sully?

Yes, they show you who has the best chance, but not who will win. Ok...now is it always right? No. It gives you the best chance and that's it. Now, for what we were talking about earlier the variables that happen during a game that are not measured by numbers. A pitcher that is a starter his whole career and struggles late and is an alcoholic. He stops drinking gets traded and is one of the greatest closers of all time. What stat told me this was going to happen? What are you talking about? That's not a variable that happens during a game. Alright I'll go to a game situation then even though that scenerio helps my case. Maddux gets a comebacker in the pitching hand in the 3rd inning after allowing 3 runs and 5 hits and he has to leave the game. Now, Novoa comes in and throws 5 innings of 1 hit baseball and Dempster comes in the 9th to preserve a 5-3 win. What do your stats say about that? Do they tell me if Maddux will pitch in his next turn? Will he be as effective as he would be if he didn't get hit? Why did Novoa pitch well when he's struggled all year? Maddux always pitches late farther into the game, what stat says he got hit in the hand?

I agree. He's had a nice 3-year run, and a very good age 27 (peak) season. But he doesn't hold up in comparison with the elite SS, and is going to be coming off lower highs than others, in his 30's. Maybe he and GM Jr went to the same drug store.

He was quite fun to watch play defense when he first started with the Mets.

I'm not really counting on Jones or Soriano learning enough to actually improve. But the big difference is those are actually decent ballplayers. Novoa is just another hard throwing wild man. I don't see how Lou's presence could possibly change that. Maybe not Lou but somebody over the off season. Didn't he pitch over the winter? I just believe to not always have preconcieved ideas on how good a player is either. Personally, I've been burned by that and I've learned not to do it. Hard throwing wildman...I can just picture what that type of player would look like! I think you're more likely to get burned thinking a bad pitcher will suddenly improve, than assuming he has not. I agree but you don't just write it off until you find out all the facts. Another thing, what makes Novoa a bad pitcher? Has he always had a 1.8 WHIP the whole time because there has to be a reason why Hendry traded for him in the first place.

Yes, they show you who has the best chance, but not who will win. Ok...now is it always right? No. It gives you the best chance and that's it. Now, for what we were talking about earlier the variables that happen during a game that are not measured by numbers. A pitcher that is a starter his whole career and struggles late and is an alcoholic. He stops drinking gets traded and is one of the greatest closers of all time. What stat told me this was going to happen?

no, because none of those 162 games are playoff games. But aren't the percentages for the team with the best record say they should win? What? The percentages say which team has the best chance to win, not who "should". What's the difference between best chance and should? the way you're using "should" implies the absolute. Should isn't an absolute, even in that statement. look and answer my last post to you in the discussion we were having. and, btw, you were using "should" as a synonym for "will". Then replace it with best chance then. And...answer what last post?

no, because none of those 162 games are playoff games. But aren't the percentages for the team with the best record say they should win? What? The percentages say which team has the best chance to win, not who "should". What's the difference between best chance and should? the way you're using "should" implies the absolute. Should isn't an absolute, even in that statement.

no, because none of those 162 games are playoff games. But aren't the percentages for the team with the best record say they should win? What? The percentages say which team has the best chance to win, not who "should". What's the difference between best chance and should?

I'm still getting used to midday updates from Bruce and the DH. Nice to see. Mmmm....I'm fat and happy right now.

No criticism that I know of at GT. The only worry I have (and this COULD fall on the QB at Tech) is that he disappeared at times during big games when he wasn't thrown to early. I have no idea if he was shut down, or if he was pulling a Randy Moss and taking plays off. as others have born witness, it was reggie ball who disappeared, not johnson. When he was playing against WVU I was hoping that the Mountineers would put 5 guys on Johnson.

no, because none of those 162 games are playoff games. But aren't the percentages for the team with the best record say they should win? If you don't like that, say the Cubs and Cards are tied for first going into the last game of the season. The Cards are playing the Pirates who have the worst record in baseball. The Cubs are playing the Phillies who have the best record. The Cubs win and the Cards lose. Why? your stats told me that the percentages would be the other way around. sully, I just don't see how you can look at numbers as being absolutes like you do. Yes, they help and give you the best possible of chance of something happening but one of the beauty things of sports is that other factors can happen. A bad call. Remember that call by the ump in the playoffs last year with that fathom strike 3? Did a stat tell me that was going to happen then?

I'm not really counting on Jones or Soriano learning enough to actually improve. But the big difference is those are actually decent ballplayers. Novoa is just another hard throwing wild man. I don't see how Lou's presence could possibly change that. Maybe not Lou but somebody over the off season. Didn't he pitch over the winter? I just believe to not always have preconcieved ideas on how good a player is either. Personally, I've been burned by that and I've learned not to do it. Hard throwing wildman...I can just picture what that type of player would look like!

Preach it brother! My first and only time at Wrigley, Baylor got booted from the game against the Cards. I saw him just moments after the game shopping for shoes with his wife.

pretty much, if he is going to throw away games like last year, then its better to ship him the cubs very well couldve been a 76 win team last year if it wasant for Dempster blowing all those saves And screwed up that #3 pick!

If he's as dumb as Baker, he'll ignore past results and rely on his spring training results. I always hated Baker's "He has a clean slate with me" mentality when it came to players' abilities. Players have track records and those track records are the most important thing when it comes to evaluating what they are likely to do for you. God I hope he isn't and I really doubt he is. I personally would look at the whole picture and put past performance as a key part on my decision.

Okay, that's one thing, but Wuertz doesn't have to have a better spring than 2006 to win a job. That's the silly thing. It would be silly to option him just to keep Miller, unless Miller looks really good. Basically, the only reason he should be optioned is if everybody else is healthy and looks really good. That's the only point where he should be squeezed. And that's the least likely scenario. Miller, Wood and Prior are all wildcards at this point and they each could start on the DL for all we know. I'd love to have Wood + Prior on the opening day roster ready and healthy and to have this be a heck of a hard decision for Lou to make. As a new manager I wonder how Lou will look at Weurtz. Novoa has the sexy thing going for him with his fastball but we all know Weurtz does a better job of getting hitters out. I'm really curious on how Lou is going to look at this. novoa was a favorite of baker (little benitez, wth?), i'm not sure lou will see him in the same way. novoa showed some progress last season, but wuertz was far superior. he needs to work on his BB/K to crawl into the same discussion, imo. lou WILL look at last year's numbers in addition to performance in the spring. but i would be very surprised and disappointed if wuertz is not a key member of the BP in 07. I will be too but we don't know if Weurtz is 100% healthy and if Novoa hasn't added something to his arsenal or adjusted his pitching mechanics. Opps, sorry I don't have numbers for either of those thoughts. :D ouch. was that a shot at me? :wink: seriously, i don't know why we'd assume that novoa has added something to his arsenal. i'd settle for him walking less hitters, but as it stands, wuertz is much better, healthy or not. I'm just saying that because we all hope that Jones, Soriano ect. will learn something from Perry and Lou while who's to say that the light won't go on for a guy like Novoa? I'm not saying it will but sometimes guys just figure it out a little later than others. Again, I agree Weurtz has proven to be a more effective pitcher than Novoa and I like him in the pen, especially if Lou uses him correctly and not for 10 days and then for 3 in a row like Dusty seemed to do.

sully....you just said that one game doesn't show you a season. I went over the whole 162, wouldn't that by your terms, show me who would win the WS?

Okay, that's one thing, but Wuertz doesn't have to have a better spring than 2006 to win a job. That's the silly thing. It would be silly to option him just to keep Miller, unless Miller looks really good. Basically, the only reason he should be optioned is if everybody else is healthy and looks really good. That's the only point where he should be squeezed. And that's the least likely scenario. Miller, Wood and Prior are all wildcards at this point and they each could start on the DL for all we know. I'd love to have Wood + Prior on the opening day roster ready and healthy and to have this be a heck of a hard decision for Lou to make. As a new manager I wonder how Lou will look at Weurtz. Novoa has the sexy thing going for him with his fastball but we all know Weurtz does a better job of getting hitters out. I'm really curious on how Lou is going to look at this. novoa was a favorite of baker (little benitez, wth?), i'm not sure lou will see him in the same way. novoa showed some progress last season, but wuertz was far superior. he needs to work on his BB/K to crawl into the same discussion, imo. lou WILL look at last year's numbers in addition to performance in the spring. but i would be very surprised and disappointed if wuertz is not a key member of the BP in 07. I will be too but we don't know if Weurtz is 100% healthy and if Novoa hasn't added something to his arsenal or adjusted his pitching mechanics. Opps, sorry I don't have numbers for either of those thoughts. :D

okay, i was using hyperbole there. but you get the idea. and i disagree that numbers cannot catch nuance. in fact, the title of the book i quoted pretty much captures the point i'm trying to make. baseball must be looked at in perspective--the perspective of a 162 game season. numbers catch the invisibility of what actually is going on. So a number can tell me that an ump just called a ball when it was a strike? It can tell me the pitchers arm is sore? A hitter has a bad back? The SS slept with 4 hookers the night before and is exhausted and couldn't get to a slow roller up the middle? It's raining and the ball and field are wet? statistics would tell you that situations are static for everyone. bad backs exist for every major league team, umpires call the same strike zones, pitchers get sore arms, hitters who sleep with 4 hookers will tend to do that a lot and either learn to live with it or lose their jobs, and as far as i can tell, it rains in every major league city. that's part of understanding the game, what you're talking about is enjoyment. I disagree. Enjoying the game is the smell of the park and taste of a beer while listening to the PA announcing Wood is on the mound in the 9th. See, you're talking about the percentages and what will probably happen that day. Are you telling me that being in Chicago in April is the same as being in Florida in April? It doesn't rain the same amount in each city. 1. most of the cities where it rains more often have domes. 2. situations will even out. while a hitter has to bat in cold weather in chicago in april, a pitcher also has to pitch there. 3. this is exactly what i'm talking about, a season is 162 games, 1 game isn't even part of a snapshot of a season. So by your theory the teams with the best record play in the WS and the team with the best record wins?

Murton hitting second!!! OMG!!!!! Sweet! Man, things are going too good this Spring. Let's not get too excited. Murton might only be playing, and in the two hole, because we're facing a lefty. Which is a major bummer. I like the fact that Lou is putting out a productive lineup. I have no problem with him putting out a Floyd-Jones OF against a righty and let's wait and see how productive and healthy they all remain.

Okay, that's one thing, but Wuertz doesn't have to have a better spring than 2006 to win a job. That's the silly thing. It would be silly to option him just to keep Miller, unless Miller looks really good. Basically, the only reason he should be optioned is if everybody else is healthy and looks really good. That's the only point where he should be squeezed. And that's the least likely scenario. Miller, Wood and Prior are all wildcards at this point and they each could start on the DL for all we know. I'd love to have Wood + Prior on the opening day roster ready and healthy and to have this be a heck of a hard decision for Lou to make. As a new manager I wonder how Lou will look at Weurtz. Novoa has the sexy thing going for him with his fastball but we all know Weurtz does a better job of getting hitters out. I'm really curious on how Lou is going to look at this.

okay, i was using hyperbole there. but you get the idea. and i disagree that numbers cannot catch nuance. in fact, the title of the book i quoted pretty much captures the point i'm trying to make. baseball must be looked at in perspective--the perspective of a 162 game season. numbers catch the invisibility of what actually is going on. So a number can tell me that an ump just called a ball when it was a strike? It can tell me the pitchers arm is sore? A hitter has a bad back? The SS slept with 4 hookers the night before and is exhausted and couldn't get to a slow roller up the middle? It's raining and the ball and field are wet? statistics would tell you that situations are static for everyone. bad backs exist for every major league team, umpires call the same strike zones, pitchers get sore arms, hitters who sleep with 4 hookers will tend to do that a lot and either learn to live with it or lose their jobs, and as far as i can tell, it rains in every major league city. that's part of understanding the game, what you're talking about is enjoyment. I disagree. Enjoying the game is the smell of the park and taste of a beer while listening to the PA announcing Wood is on the mound in the 9th. See, you're talking about the percentages and what will probably happen that day. Are you telling me that being in Chicago in April is the same as being in Florida in April? It doesn't rain the same amount in each city.