User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.3485 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
No word on DiNardo
??? I think you mean Roberts, not Howard.
A BDD source says that Japanese news reports indicate that Richard Moss, agent for Tadahito Iguchi, said he is confident that the former Fukuoka Daiei Hawks speedy second baseman will end up signing with the Red Sox. So far Iguchi has received an offer from the Chicago White Sox for two years at $4M but Moss has dismissed that offer, referencing Kaz Matsui’s three year, $20.1M deal with the Mets.
Who knows if there's anything to this. If they'd be paying him more than 2/$4, they'd be looking to start him, which would mean Bellhorn is gone (or maybe he's a utility guy like at the beginning of last year)
Huh. I don't see this as a necessarily bad idea, especially (as JB H suggests) if Bellhorn becomes a utility guy; better yet, the legendary "super-utility" guy. If Bellhorn can play a little short or first, he could get his share of ABs. Still, there are more important holes to be filled.
besides, it's not like iguchi is a lock to be good. he went from a guy who could barely hit three or four years ago to a guy who started raking the ball in his late twenties. as public enemy once said, "can't trust it." he certainly doesn't project to be much better than vazquez, if at all.
1)Carlos Delgado via FA.
2)Getting rid of Manny hopefully via waivers where his contract is completely gone, or cover 5 mil of it each year and hopefully get some prospects back.
3)Trade Kevin Millar AND Doug Mienekiewc for an OF somehow (unlikely, nobody could POSSIBLY need BOTH of those guys)
the Todd Helton idea intrigued me too.
I'd say something like Manny and Doug for Todd Helton. (The Dollar Numbers should somehow even out), and then package Millar and a prospect for an everyday OF (Millar shoudl not be playing LF everyday, not to mention he's a giant #########). WE could sign Magglio, but then we just got Helton, and we'd have no money for that.
But the only way the deal works is if the Rockies meet the Red Sox halfway on the $$$. They'd have to get Helton down into the 7/95 range.
I'm not sure about Millar being better than Manny in LF. I just don't.
Season Helton Manny2005 12.6 20.0 (4)
2006 16.6 19.0 (4)
2007 16.6 18.0 (4)
2008 16.6 20.0 (4)
2009 16.6 -
2010 16.6 -
2011 19.1 -
2012 23/4.6 -
My guess is that the Drew signing pretty much locks in the Sox roster for next year. I could be wrong, but it all seems pretty set, and there don't seem to be many other options on the market. The Sox could get involved with Beltran, but I have to think there would have been one single rumor of that if it were a possibility.
I would tend to agree with your quick 'n dirty scouting report on Nakamura ("Nakamura sucks"), though only based on my very limited observations. I caught a couple of Japanese national team exhibitions in Italy just prior to the Olympics and he looked very vulnerable at the plate against pitchers who couldn't crack the Italian Olympic squad. Granted, it was a meaningless exhibition vs. mediocre talent, but he also looked a bit out of shape and isn't he fairly old? And who was it that signed him again?
I'd be interested in more detailed opinions if available. I was very impressed with Matsuzaka though, who was effortlessly hitting 96 mph and who's stuff seems filthy. Also, Jojima looked like an absolute stud behind the plate and with the stick. I'm sure he'd be an upgrade at catcher for half the teams in MLB.
In the last guaranteed year of his contract, Helton will be 37. He's a first baseman and hasn't missed any significant time due to injury since entering the majors. I don't think it's absurd to presume that he'll still be effective in 2011; at least no more absurd than presuming any other player will be any good in 2011.
Just for comparison's sake: Manny will be 36 at the end of his contract and hasn't really missed
much time due to injury. I think he's also a good bet to be a good hitter in the last year of his contract.
I think Kenny Williams.
*ROLFMAO*
I'm not sure about his plate discipline as I can't remember his OBP numbers.
Johjima IS a stud behind the plate. I-Rod arm. SOlid pitch-caller as well.
Btw, the radar gun at Athens was broken. Everybody was throwing fireballs, which is BS.
Pedro on the Mets + Varitek not re-signed = Financial flexibility. Even if they sign Varitek, they still have quite a bit (relatively). There just isn't a point anymore to trading an overpaid player who is rock hard consistently one of the better hitters in the league when you already have flexibility.
Probably because I keep bringing him up. Mancrush; what can I say?
But isn't the ENTIRE idea of trading Manny for financial flexibility
I'd say it's ~95% of the idea. There's also the fact that there are two players on the Sox roster - Manny and Ortiz - that produce similarly excellent results at the plate, but are liabilities anywhere in the field. It makes sense to keep one and trade the other for something more useful, and Ortiz is a bargain. Therefore, it makes sense to move Manny for a reason other than to free up money.
Both Theo and dePodesta are in danger of forgetting they're not playing Rotisserie ball any more.
You have a point about maintaining fan loyalty, but no matter what Theo does this offseason, the Red Sox are going to sell out every game, with or without Manny, Tek, Pedro, et al. The Dodgers, maybe not - but the idea that Sox fans will lose interest in the team because it's not the same team that won the WS is preposterous. And the comparisons to the 98 Marlins have got to stop. The Red Sox are not slashing payroll or lobbying for a new stadium and they are in no danger of losing 98 games next season.
Sox make offer to South Korean pitcher Lim Chang-yong.
Chang-yong sounds very pre-2004 BK-like.
However, would the Sox really offer a 5-yr deal?
<objected to losojng Nomar and will object to losing varitek if it happens. I would object even more to losing Manny, which appears to be every sabermetric Sox fan's wet dream.</b>
I'm still a big fan of both Nomar and Pedro despite everything the Boston media's written. I also consider myself a sabermetric Sox fan, but I don't want Manny to leave at all. I just like watching him hit. However, I recognize that if they do get rid of Manny, the Red Sox will still likely be a very good team and will bear no resemblance whatsoever to the 1998 Marlins.
The more important "marketing common sense" is to win ballgames. Fans will show up (and teams make money) to watch 25 Dave McCarty's play baseball if it was a winning ballclub.
The last team to put a high value on year-to-year player continuity was the 2002 Angels. No thanks.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1951927
I guess our rotation's set now. Unless he's completely toast, Miller should start the year in the rotation until Schilling gets back, and then they can make a decision on him vs Wakefield.
If he's healthy we'll have Schilling and four solid #2's in the staff. That would be nice.
Uh, did Nomar slip your mind?
Don't forget CHB either.
Clement is a middle of the rotation starter at best.
Wells performed like a #2 starter last year in the NL.
The chances of Miller pitching great is well, not that great.
Arroyo is back end starter material.
Wakefield... you don't know with knuckleballers.
What, you don't believe last year was for real? He pitched like a #2 last year.
The rotation worries me, however it's probably not as bad as I think, because the rotation would still be better than last years if theo found a crippled chimp to replace Derek Lowe.
VORP isn't a be-all end-all stat...I'm thinking more of his peripherals when I say that.
Ok, I know I'm making it a little obvious. But I like Clement.
At best, he's an ace. He has that kind of stuff. Most likely, the improvement in his control in 2001 was the only improvement he'll ever make, but if he gets with the right coach (or Schilling teaches him to watch his own mechanics) he could be one of the elite pitchers in the league.
I don't think it will happen for Clememnt, but you're selling the rotation a little short.
It isn't particularly useful to project anything, though, and shouldn't be used that way.
I disagree because it credits pitchers with things that they were mostly not responsible for. Not just unearned runs, but also good/bad defensive range.
At someone point, using this logic, just about any stat becomes meaningless.
At the end of the day, it is useful to look at a stat and say "this is what a player did." It isn't to say "this is what a player earned" or "this is what a player will do again." And, that has value if used descriptively.
[Tagent from the other thread] Similarly, it is useful to write "30% of catchers over 30 suffer significant decline." It is not useful to write "Varitek has a 30% chance of significant decline, as he is a 30 year old catcher," because the the two are not the same.[end tangent]
It is useful to write "so-and-so gave up 30 fewer runs than him-and-her;" it describes important events. We can then argue about who gets responsibility for what some other day.
(Oh, and if you celebrate that sort of thing, happy holidays.)
At some point, everything becomes meaningless.
It is useful to write "so-and-so gave up 30 fewer runs than him-and-her;" it describes important events. We can then argue about who gets responsibility for what some other day.
So it is okay to break down the stats far enough to attribute runs to pitchers, but not any further? Why are your distinctions (runs given up) okay, but attributing runs to fielders and/or the unknown is not okay?
Even if you are only looking backwards at stats, their predictive values are important because that's about the only way you a stat measure's something the player brings to the table.
Bronson Arroyo was a top #15 starter in tnhe AL last year. Period, and once he began starting, he never missed a start.
I composed a little post trying to say that VORP is a good way to tell a story from the past in numeric form. But I'm not sure what it would tell other than "so and so was on the mound when x number of runs were scored."
As that is all it tells me, it is a bit misleading to compare that to a "replacement player." The replacement player doesn't really replace our pitcher because he has average luck and average defense, while our pitcher may have neither (e.g., Bronson had well above average UR's 9/innings, not to mention his defense).
That's a really interesting observation. It's not that the part of VORP that estimates what the pitcher actually did is flawed, it's that the replacement level in VORP is flawed.
About as much as I see from batting average or RBI. It means something, and if a guy's VORP is consistently terrible from year to year, I'm willing to at least wonder if maybe DIPS doesn't apply to him particularly well.
I think both ways of looking at it have some value, but clearly, VORP has other problems.
Yes.
Completely for your entertainment, but I present to you the 2004 American League FIP-ORP leaders:
Name FIP ERA FIPORPSantana 2.95 61.5
Shilling 3.19 55.2
Martinez 3.51 45.3
Radke 3.61 43.3
Hudson 3.36 42.5
Escobar 3.77 37.4
[strong]Arroyo 3.64 34.8[/strong]
Rodriguez 1.76 33.9
Harden 3.82 33.0
Buehrle 4.23 31.6
I have no idea if this is right. I didn't park adjust. I calculated replacement as 1.2* each FIP component, for no particularly well thought out reason other than it is what Woolner did years ago. Oh, and I didn't include HBP as a BB, because it is a bit of a pain to do league totals from B-R that way, and I didn't want to take the time.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main