Breaking: Marlins Trade Entire Team to Blue Jays

by JohnBowen

In spite of not winning the World Series, the Miami Marlins have decided to engage in yet another fire sale. Jeffrey Loria, in his customary fashion, has agreed to the following trade with the Toronto Blue Jays:

Blue Jays Get:

Jose Reyes (SS)

Mark Buehrle (SP)

Josh Johnson (SP)

John Buck (C)

Marlins Get:

Yunel Escobar (SS)

Adeiny Hechavarria (SS)

Update: Marlins also get: Jeff Mathis (C), Henderson Alvarez (P), Jake Marisnick (OF)

The deal is not yet official, as details are pending. The Marlins may be getting one other player.

Essentially, the Marlins have traded their entire team except Giancarlo Stanton, who tweets:

“Alright, I’m pissed off!!! Plain and Simple.”

In agreeing to this deal, the Blue Jays are taking on about 165 million dollars in total salary, including over 50 for next year alone.

Johnson and Buck are both free agents after season’s end, with Jose Reyes signed through 2017 and Mark Buehrle signed through 2015.

The Miami Marlins – just when you thought they couldn’t be less likable, will gain the services of noted homophobe Yunel Escobar. Escobar struggled in 2012, putting up a 75 OPS+ in his age-29 season, but was fairly solid the year before, posting a .290/.369/.413 line for 4.4 WAR. He is signed through 2013, with a pair of team options that Miami is certain to either decline or trade.

The Miami Marlins were supposed to make a run at a pennant in their new stadium in 2012, having brought in Ozzie Guillen to manage the likes of recent acquisitions Reyes, Buehrle and Heath Bell, along with carry-over stars Josh Johnson and Hanley Ramirez and rising stars Giancarlo Stanton and Logan Morrison.

At this point, everyone who makes significant money for the Marlins has been dealt.

Look for the Marlins to lose 100 games in 2013; for the dozens of fans who continue to provide this miserable franchise with patronage, remember: the only good moments you’ll see will be home runs from Giancarlo Stanton, and even those will be canceled out by this monstrosity.

Recent Posts

451 Responses to “Breaking: Marlins Trade Entire Team to Blue Jays”

  1. Raul Says:

    No chance Stanton signs any kind of Evan Longoria-esque deal in Miami.
    This kid is gone the second he comes up for FA.

    Also, this kind of goes to Chuck’s point about no self-respecting manager wanting to go there.

  2. JohnBowen Says:

    The Marlins blew the shot of a Longoria-like deal with Stanton a long time ago.

    Longoria was signed to that extension basically a week into his MLB career.

    The time to sign Stanton to that deal would’ve been after reading Chuck’s article…three years ago.

    At this point, I think Stanton is stuck in Miami for a 2013, but if he repeats his prowess from these past couple years (he’ll hit his 100th career HR in April, as a 23 year old), I think he’ll effectively price himself out of Loria’s cheap-ass price ceiling and get traded out 3 years before becoming a free agent.

  3. JAD Says:

    OK Blue Jays!

  4. Raul Says:

    Born today:

    Curt Schilling, who is a douchebag but managed some nice seasons as a major leaguer with the help of illegal medicines.

    Also, Willie Hernandez

  5. Chuck Says:

    Players going to Miami are:

    SS Yunel Escobar, C Jeff Mathis, P Henderson Alvarez, plus OF prospect Jake Marisnick and SS Adeiny Hechevarria.

  6. JohnBowen Says:

    Thanks, Chuck.

  7. Bob Says:

    The Tigers signed Torii Hunter to a 2-year deal . Wonder if they trade Avasail Garcia now.

  8. Raul Says:

    I suppose Hunter is a lot better than Delmon Young, even at his age.

  9. Chuck Says:

    Hunter’s a RF.

    I suppose they could move Boesch to left.

  10. Bob Says:

    Before Hunter their outfield depth chart.

    1. Jackson
    2. Garcia
    3. Dirks
    4. Berry
    5. Boesch

  11. Raul Says:

    Alex Gordon’s salary jumps to 9 million in 2013, from 6 million in 2012.

  12. Bob Says:

    In other words if KC is out of it come late July, he is a goner.

  13. Raul Says:

    Well he is going to be expensive…for the Royals, anyway…but the rest of the team is being paid in gum balls so they could probably manage it.

  14. Chuck Says:

    “In other words if KC is out of it come late July, he is a goner.”

    161st St.and River Ave.

  15. Bob Says:

    Congrats to Dickey and Price. See you tomorrow.

  16. Raul Says:

    Love that @HighHeatStats said Verlander was about to be the first repeat Cy Young champ in the AL since Pedro, then never sent a follow-up tweet admitting he was wrong.

    These people never retract shit.

  17. Mike Felber Says:

    And you will not regarding Schilling & PEDs, despite the fact that there is like not even serious accusations that this most outspoken of Anti-PED critics ever used anything illegal. Chuck dislikes him much, many have issues with his personality, conservative politics…But I know of nobody else who insists he used.

    Not only innocent until proven guilty, you smear him due to what, staying healthy & getting consistently good in his 30’s, you can do so for many others. Certainly Ryan, not just could have, might have been more than his early-adapter weight training-guilty without evidence.

  18. Raul Says:

    Lots of accusations on Schilling, Mike. It’s just that nothing is ever good for you. Besides, you really think out of all the dirty players called to testify in front of Congress, that Curt is the clean one? Funny guy.

    You still think Bagwell is clean, which is funny, because I recently had a conversation with my uncle who was close to the Kissimmee Cobras in the 90s and I heard some interesting things about that whole franchise. For the record, Bagwell never played for the Cobras, but you weren’t even aware that was a minor league affiliate, did you? Of course not.

    Anyway, turns out a bunch of those Florida guys were on the juice, but the day he really flipped his shit was when he saw Luis Gonzalez in the 2001 World Series.
    He thought he was looking at Jerry Seinfeld in a puffy pirate shirt. It was laughable how big he got…especially considering this:

    But Gonzalez wasn’t in the Mitchell Report so I’m sure he just said his prayers and took his vitamins, eh Mike?

  19. Chuck Says:

    Interesting description of the AL MVP discussion:

    “The war on WAR”

    The “V” in MVP stands for doesn’t stand for Triple Crown or highest WAR.

    I have two says Cabrera..the other Trout. They both had great seasons are are each worthy in their own way.

    I guess the question to ask is if Cabrera finished second in one of the TC categories, would you still vote for him anyway?

    I would.

    Do I think Cabrera’s going to win?


    Would I have a problem if Trout won?


  20. Chuck Says:

    Under today’s birthdays”

    “1952: Randy Poffo, minor league catcher, outfielder and designated hitter (d 2011)”

    Better known as “Macho Man” Randy Savage.

  21. Chuck Says:

    I can’t believe the AFL season ends today..seems like it just started.

    Dellin Betances yesterday..2 IP..0H 0R 0BB 0K.

    14 pitches, 12 strikes.

    I’m guessing his three week shut-down was to work on something..have no idea what it is, but whatever it was, he’s been lights out effective his last two or three appearances.

    There might be hope for the kid yet.

  22. Bob Says:

    I think Cabrera will win as well, and one reason is the fact he played in 161 games vs. 139. Trout gets 11 more games and the Angels make the playoffs, the voters would be placated.

  23. Chuck Says:

    Yankees trade ARod (and 90% of his money) to the Marlins for Stanton?

    Just read the suggestion on some site called “Bleeding Yankee Blue”. First (and likely last) time I’ll go there…..

  24. JohnBowen Says:

    @23, that certainly sounds insane.

    Until you get into the mindset of Jeffrey Loria.

    If Giancarlo Stanton stays in Miami until free agency, he would make more than 10% of ARod’s salary through arbitration, right?

    Hell, he might make that in his FIRST arbitration year (2014). If we’re talking about 90% of the money, that’s only 11.4 million dollars for 5 years of ARod. And ARod would be far more marketable, and therefore a bigger crowd draw in Miami, than Stanton, even though Stanton will be the significantly better player.

    All Loria cares about is money. Hopefully, for the 8 Marlins fans that haven’t deserted the franchise, the Marlins GM will explain to Loria how the potential return on Stanton will be exponentially higher than 5 twilight years of ARod.

    The other catch, of course, is that ARod gets 30 million dollars in marketing bonuses for HR’s 661, 715, 756, and 763 (I think). Loria would probably want the Yankees to cover those.

  25. Chuck Says:

    I think that’s what would make sense for Florida..ARod would be worth more in ticket sales than what % Loria would have to pay out.

    It’s all hypothetical anyway, seeing as ARod has a full no trade and wouldn’t in a million years play for the Marlins.

  26. JohnBowen Says:

    I dunno. He’s got his ring. He’d be a God down there. In New York, he’s just the scapegoat for anything that goes wrong. Granderson, Cano, Swisher go a combine 3-for-the-playoffs? ARod’s fault.

  27. Bob Says:

    He would be a God down there only if he out-performs Stanton for the next 5 years. And that probably will not happen. I can see ARod going to the Marlins next year, just not for Stanton. And the Yanks would still have to eat the bulk of his contract.

  28. Chuck Says:

    Another reason to root for Cabrera..

    Watching Brian Kenny melt-down on CH today.

  29. Lefty33 Says:

    “Certainly Ryan, not just could have, might have been more than his early-adapter weight training-guilty without evidence.”

    Ryan? PED’s? Stop.

    The only thing that he was suspected of late in his career, and I think rightly so, was for scuffing the baseball to get the action that he got on his change.

    That thing broke down so hard and inside to a right-handed hitter that there is no way that is was natural.

  30. Chuck Says:

    Going to Reading on Saturday for the big unveiling Lefty?

    “Reading Phitin’ Phillies”

  31. Raul Says:

    I guess the stat head would argue that a player’s WAR literally is a 1-Stop embodiment of value. So they might say the highest WAR every year is the MVP.

    If Trout wins, good for him. He was deserving.
    If it comes out that he won because voters were looking at advanced metrics, then we have to consider future HOF voting since these are the same guys casting votes.

  32. Raul Says:

    Phitin’ Phillies?

    What a phucking pholly.

  33. Chuck Says:

    Trout, statistically, may have had the better year.

    Cabrera..clearly, was the most valuable to his team.

    Any saber slanted person who ignores that fact and votes for Trout solely on the premise that it may add credibility to the sabermetric movement, is a phuckin’ idiot.

  34. JohnBowen Says:

    “Trout, statistically, may have had the better year.

    Cabrera..clearly, was the most valuable to his team.”

    Bull. Fucking. Shit.

    You wanna know what Trout having the better “statistical year” means? It means he had the best year. It means he added the most value. It means he helped the team the most. Period. End of story.

    The Angels were *fucked* before Trout got called up. They went 81-57 after he got called up, after starting sub-.500.

    Here’s the great thing: you can make an argument for Trout without using any statistics whatsoever.

    I DARE you to do that for Cabrera. Argue that he should be MVP without mentioning statistics. You can’t do it. You’ll talk about his batting average, home runs, and RBI. That’s literally your only argument.

  35. JohnBowen Says:

    Raul: “So they might say the highest WAR every year is the MVP.”

    See, I disagree.

    Look at the NL race. Buster Posey is #1 in WAR at 7.2, and then you have McCutchen at 7.0 and Braun at 6.8, Molina at 6.7 etc.

    I happen to think Posey is MVP, but him having the highest WAR doesn’t really matter – you have 5 guys within half a win of each other. You could give it to any of them. It’s not definitive proof that Posey was more valuable than Braun, just an educated guess, really. Any one of those guys would make a fine MVP (so, naturally, Justin Morneau is gonna win it somehow).

    Hell, Cabrera is 1.3 WAR behind Cano, and I still think Cabrera was a little more valuable. There’s a lot of leeway, this stuff isn’t Gospel.

    In the AL? The difference between Trout and Cabrera was the same as the difference between Cabrera and David Murphy. That’s beyond any reasonable doubt.

    There’s comparing a Ferrari to a Lamborghini, and then there’s comparing a Ferrari to a Toyota Corolla.

  36. Chuck Says:

    “Here’s the great thing: you can make an argument for Trout without using any statistics whatsoever.”

    Go ahead.

  37. Raul Says:

    It’s bullshit to try and give credit to Mike Trout because he missed 20-something games.
    Not his control over when he gets called up.

    Who is to say he wouldn’t have gone 5-for-70 in those first 3 weeks if he did play?
    The Angels didn’t suck in April because Mike Trout wasn’t there. They sucked in April because the best hitter on the planet had the worst slump of his entire life. And the rest of the team wasn’t hitting much either.

  38. Lefty33 Says:

    @30- Raul said it best in #32.

    Phuck no.

  39. JohnBowen Says:

    “And the rest of the team wasn’t hitting much either.”

    Oh, and Trout showed up, and they all magically started driving in runs?

  40. JohnBowen Says:

    “Go ahead.”

    Mike Trout was an outstanding hitter, outstanding base-runner, and outstanding center-fielder.

    Miguel Cabrera was an outstanding hitter, slow base-runner, and mediocre third baseman.

  41. Lefty33 Says:

    That’s about as good as the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders.

    At least in Scranton I get why they’re doing it.

    No one goes to see the team there because the stadium was one of the biggest piles of dog shit in minor league baseball and because the local folk have never supported the team ever since the Phillies pulled out and the Yankees moved in.

    But considering the small and depressed area that they play in, the remodeled stadium will help but I still can’t imagine they draw much more then before the renovation.

    The Reading thing is a real head scratcher.

    The team draws very well and are making gobs of money the way things are now.

    Trying to re-brand I guess is a great gimmick but quite honestly the PA Dutch locals that are the backbone of their season ticket base are not very big on change (which is why the team hasn’t tried to build a newer/larger stadium, yet) and the first few years they’re going to have an uphill battle getting people to accept a new name/logo.

  42. Bob Says:

    Gerald Laird signed with the Braves.

  43. Chuck Says:

    They’ll always be the Reading Phillies..tough to change something after what, 46 years.

  44. Raul Says:


    The Angels were so bad, even if Trout was on base as he was, it wouldn’t have made a difference in April.
    There ain’t too many 1-0 games won in the 9th on 4 straight walks.

  45. Raul Says:

    Who won MOY?
    I didn’t see that come out.

  46. Bob Says:

    Johnson and Melvin

  47. Bob Says:

    Selig is “reviewing” the Jays-Marlins deal.

  48. Raul Says:

    Well how about that?
    Bob Melvin’s daughter, Alexi, is an actress. And not bad-looking either.
    She hasn’t been in much, but she appeared (uncredited) in Duplicity (2009).
    I didn’t see that movie though.

  49. Mike Felber Says:

    You made a few indisputable errors in your claims Raul.

    1) A number of things are “good enough” for me. I had to remind you/folks here before that I said Big Mac was dirty when he did not testify in front of Congress in any meaningful way, NOT as claimed when it came out later.

    2) After all I said about Bagwell you still do not have straight what I said? Not that he was definitely clean-anyone could have used, someone bulking up a lot certainly could have-just that there is no substantive evidence he did, & in Talmudic detail I showed how he could have added that muscle in that amount of time clean.

    3) That I (& very few) know about the Kissemmee Cobras means nothing to the argument.

    4) Where did I ever suggest that I only accept the Mitchell report as evidence? There are tests, reports, SOMETIMES a guy gets so big so fast-when already strong is especially damning, & when not young-that it is overwhelmingly likely they are dirty. Like Bonds, a fitness fanatic who had near maxed out his natural potential by ‘98.

    5) Even more importantly, you provide NO evidence that Schilling juiced. Even Chuck, who you overwhelmingly agree with, dislikes Curt, thinks the bloody sock was a fraud-will not say more than he COULD have used. As anyone could have.

    6) So WHAT evidence? I see nothing substantive, you make a claim, & an outlier one few ever suggested at that, the burden of poof uis upon you to show it.

    7) The Big Hurt also was very outspoken against PEDs, & clearly bigger & stronger than Schilling. Must he be dirty, at least if testifying in front of Congress?

    8) Motivation: Schilling long complained about guys suddenly bulking up & adding 7 or so MPH to their fastball (one example). AND he loves the limelight. And is fine if considered a gadfly or jerk. It is highly plausible he would be clean & testify, much less so a hypocritical liar, & at least shut up if using.

    9) To conclude he is guilty is beyond being careless with the facts. It is fantasy, based upon negative emotions, & deeply unfair. Show me who else who is respectable agrees with you?

    Anything is possible. But based upon youir reasoning we could all be put away for murder, rape, serial killin’: based on vague notions or association be even a significant degree of separation!

  50. Raul Says:

    I forgot how long-winded this guy is.

  51. Raul Says:

    Gotta love this dWAR bullshit.

    They gave Mike Trout a 2.1.
    They gave Alexei Ramirez a 2.3.
    And the leader? They gave Brendan fucking Ryan a 3.6.

    You know how many times Ozzie Smith got as high as 3.6? Once. In 1989.
    Fucking Cal Ripken Jr never had a 3.6.

  52. John Says:

    0.5 is the over/under on the number of times Raul watched Brendan Ryan play SS this season.

  53. Raul Says:

    According to you, I wouldn’t even have to watch Brendan Ryan play SS.
    I can tell his value from looking at a spreadsheet, right John?

  54. John Says:

    It’s an estimate. No more, no less.

    But you’re condemning it, having probably watched zero Brendan Ryan all year.

  55. John Says:

    Imagine if the same standard were applied to ANY OTHER STAT:

    “Jose Bautista hit 54 home runs in 2010? Neither Hank Aaron nor Lou Gehrig ever hit that many. What a bullshit stat!”

    “Miguel Tejada had 150 RBI in 2004? Barry Bonds and Willie Mays never did that!”

  56. Raul Says:

    …except HR and RBI are straightforward and easy to quantify.

    Saying your team would lose 3.6 games without Brendan Ryan isn’t only guesswork, it’s wildly inaccurate and un-provable.

  57. Raul Says:

    For Chrissakes, you hype of Robinson Cano as Jesus with a glove, and you watched him play all but 9 games in the postseason.

  58. John Says:

    You say it’s inaccurate.

    You’re the same as the conservative pundits who were saying that Nate Silver’s projections were off. How does that feel?

  59. John Says:

    I watch a fair amount of Yankee games, and yes – Cano is that good.

    Maybe not if you have a pre-ordained bias against him like some people here.

  60. Raul Says:

    I actually agreed with Nate Silver saying there was something like a 76% chance Obama gets re-elected.

    You’re the guy who thinks boycotting is un-american and a waste of time. A funny belief coming from a party that jizzes over the mere mention of free speech.

  61. John Says:

    See, I’ve never said that.

  62. Raul Says:

    Buster Posey won the NL MVP.
    And he missed so many more games than Mike Trout over the last year!

  63. Raul Says:

    trout is on mlb network

    so…guess he won?

  64. Raul Says:

    Pretty ridiculous to cite team wins as a reason to choose an MVP.

    Angels won 89
    Tigers won 88

    That much I agree with. They don’t ever cite team wins when deciding who was the best base-stealer.

  65. Raul Says:

    and Joel Sherman had Molina above McCutchen in his NL MVP voting.

    Maybe a monkey should just choose these awards from now on

  66. John Says:

    Molina was a perfectly viable candidate.

  67. Raul Says:

    Really dude?
    Ahead of McCutchen?

    Well, christmas is coming soon. I suppose I could send you an oxygen tank.

  68. Raul Says:

    Cabrera wins it.

    Wow. How was it not that close? that was bullshit

  69. John Says:

    Yes. As evidenced by him finishing THREE POINTS BEHIND.

    But, that’s right, defense doesn’t matter in baseball. At all. Not one bit.

  70. Raul Says:

    Like you would know about defense.
    Your two favorite sports teams might as well not even line up in the field when it comes to defense.

    Anyway, the voting disparity of that AL MVP is ridiculous.

  71. Raul Says:

    yeah that fake buster olney account blaming shitty division for AL MVP is nonsense.

    Neither Miguel Cabrera nor Mike Trout pick their opponents.

  72. John Says:

    Cabrera got rewarded in part because he played in a crap division and won said division.

    Trout played in the hardest division in baseball. And his team won one more game.

  73. Raul Says:

    it’s pointless though.

    Why would you give a guy credit for playing in a harder division? How does he even control that?

  74. Raul Says:

    It would be like taking verlander down a peg because he pitched in a crappy division.

    It’s ridiculous

  75. John Says:

    Sure, but you shouldn’t give a player extra value for making the playoffs in a weak division.

  76. JohnBowen Says:


    MVP-caliber season for Cabrera. Would’ve deserved to win in a lot of years. Congrats to him.

  77. Bob Says:

    John Lowe of the Detroit Free Press

    1. No Cano.
    2. Jim Johnson 3rd
    4. Rodney 7th
    5. Ibanez 10th most valuable.
    6. Fuck me

  78. JohnBowen Says:

    That’s incredible.

    Someone voted Raul Ibanez ahead of Robinson Cano.

  79. Bob Says:


  80. Raul Says:

    that is disgraceful @ 77

  81. Raul Says:

    Wait, how did Raul Ibanez get a 10th place vote?
    Was his ballot sent in after the ALDS?

  82. Bob Says:

    if you desire.

  83. Raul Says:

    If I emailed him, I’d just come across as Frank Costanza yelling at George Steinbrenner.

  84. Bob Says:


  85. Chuck Says:

    Every Walmart in the country will be busier than shit tomorrow, what with all the sabermatricians having to buy new panties.

  86. Chuck Says:

    Cabrera led the AL in putouts and finished third in assists.

    He sucks.

    He finished third in FP and RF.

    He sucks.

  87. Raul Says:

    I just can’t believe how butthurt Trout supporters are.
    So many tweets and articles about how this somehow sets back society or some shit because Miguel Cabrera won an award and Mike Trout didn’t.

    I’ve seen so many passionate, angry things said about this MVP race. And more strawman arguments about Cabrera supporters than I can count.

    The whole thing is ridiculous.

  88. Chuck Says:

    Waiting for the statheads to riot and go all Rodney King…they’ll all head down to Central Park and throw marshmallows at the pigeons.

  89. Chuck Says:


  90. Raul Says:

    David Schoenfield writes on

    The American League MVP debate was billed along the lines of new-school stathead nerds versus old-school traditionalists. Did you like Mike Trout’s WAR or Miguel Cabrera’s Triple Crown? Shake hands and let the brawling ensue.

    I believed that was a little bit of a simplistic mindset. The MVP voting isn’t so much about statistics and numbers as it is about storyline. After all, who votes on the award? Baseball writers. What do writers like? A good story. That’s what made this debate one of the most heated in years: You had two compelling narratives, both historic in nature.

    He goes on to say that statistically, it wasn’t close and that Trout should have won easily. Frankly, that’s up for debate.

    But where I think his article has some merit is in that part about the narrative. Cabrera’s season does lend itself to a much more interesting and powerful narrative. And if you think that doesn’t matter, well, consider baseball’s reluctance to define valuable. Consider baseball’s reluctance to create a separate award from the MVP (think, Player of the Year).

    This isn’t something new. Baseball has always had that as the background of awards voting; that argument between raw numbers and subjective value. For better or worse, it’s what makes baseball what it is.

    Some years it’s raw numbers. Some years there is a great story that draws the voters in.

    If I have one gripe with SOME of the stat heads, it is that. That some tend to view things as black and white. X-player produced Y-value more than Z-player, so he is the winner.

    To paraphrase from Joe Torre: Never forget that this game has a pulse.

  91. John Says:

    My question for you then: what part of the “pulse” argument was Trout missing compared to Cabrera.

    The Angels weren’t doing so hot. They probably would’ve regressed to .500ish without Trout, but still…Trout shows up and all of a ssudden they catch on fire, go 81-57, and finish a game better than Detroit.

    Miguel Cabrera had an amazing year. A year that wins MVP a lot. Remember, I had him SECOND. As in, of the 400+ players that participated in the American League last year, Cabrera was better than all but freaking one of them.

    I don’t buy that Cabrera “kept the pulse going” or “made his teammates better” than Trout did.

    For me, it was very simple: one person excelled in one aspect of the game, another in every aspect of the game.

  92. Raul Says:

    pulse in terms of that of the fans and writers.

    it turns out, voters identified with the cabrera narrative more than they did with the trout narrative.

    apparently that isn’t only unsatisfying for a lot of people, it’s infuriating.
    personally, i think that kind of emotion is ridiculous

  93. John Says:

    Established veteran superstar leads his team to an 88-win playoff appearance just one year after finishing…first, with 95 wins.

    Sorry, I don’t see how that makes for a better “narrative” than:

    “20 year old kid puts a struggling team that hasn’t made the playoffs in 3 years ON HIS BACK and drags them back into contention, dominating in all aspects of the game.”

  94. John Says:

    @86, if you think Cabrera is a good defensive player, than you should really watch some tape. Maybe observe him.

    Again…can’t make an argument for Cabrera as MVP without statistics. It cannot be done.

  95. Raul Says:

    1) it doesn’t really matter if that narrative didn’t suit you. It suited the voters, which was the point.

    2) this idea that Mike Trout single-handedly carried the Angels, as if Albert Fucking Pujols didn’t exist is ludicrous. Were you in a submarine all summer?

  96. John Says:

    This was Pujols’s worst year by far. He ended up putting together a solid season, but dude. The playmaker was Trout.

  97. Raul Says:

    Right. Cuz it’s not like Pujols slugged around .600 for 3 months or anything.

    The point isn’t who had the better year between Pujols and Trout. But let’s not act like Trout was born in a cabin he built himself, to borrow a line from Bill Clinton. He didn’t drive himself in for all those runs.

  98. John Says:

    For this year:

    A Jackson was more responsible for Cabrera’s RBI than Pujols was for Trout’s run scored totals.

  99. Raul Says:

    I think we’ve said our piece on this MVP stuff.

    Anyway, no truth to the rumor Jeffrey Loria traded his wife to the Mariners for 20 kilos of Alaskan halibut.

  100. Mike Felber Says:

    A sad Trifecta for Raul. Avoided any defense of an absurd statement that a player juiced, or even cited anyone else who believes so, when nobody here, & no credible human believes it. Pretended to forget I make detailed arguments. And seemingly still tries to show contempt, though addressed respectfully, by not answering “that guy” directly.

    Pithy enough for you Raul?

    I do agree that folks need not be infuriated by an academic argument of value here, though ironic coming from you. John is right about the overall production & appeal of narrative.

    That a player does not control his context is irrelevant to whether to consider things like strength of opposition. The whole point is they do not control era, park, line up, thus we consider what the production means. If a guy pitches or bats against measurably better or worse competition, how does that NOT effect what he would have produced compared to a neutral context?

    It makes a difference.

  101. Raul Says:

    Why would anyone defend anything to you Mike?
    You don’t even watch baseball. You never played it. You don’t know anyone in it.

    If you think I’m really sitting here concerned with proving anything to you, clearly you haven’t learned anything in your time on this site. If you want to take a non-response to your questions as a way of winning the Internet, by all means…let that soothe your ego.

    Doesn’t change the fact you don’t know what you’re talking about. At all.

  102. Mike Felber Says:

    You would defend an argument if you cared to show me or anyone here why you were right, regardless of what you believe about me. If you really believed that it was senseless to do so,m you would have never debated with me the numerous times you did previously.

    You have zilch on Schilling. Not even the beginnings of an argument that he likely used. You are alone here & most everywhere in this belief. So you remain silent on this issue.

    I canceled TV long ago so I would spend more time doing more productive things, so I only catch parts of games, & highlights, here & there. I have watched somewhat in the past That says nothing about my knowledge of baseball.

    Like much else, you just copied whole cloth what Chuck said about me “not learning anything on this site”. Meaning largely I find merit in advanced stats, so those who differ must be wrong. That is not a tenable argument.

    My ego is & was not hurt. I am not trying to “win the Internet”. I made a detailed, dispassionate argument in good faith. You did not respond ion kind.

    There is no serious forum, Internet, debate, political, social…That would accept as meaningful & intelligent a case dependent upon only repeating that the other person knows nothing. When you present no argument or evidence, it suggests that you are ignorant or without ammunition on the subject.

    Which is why on earth would you ever presume that Curt Schilling used PEDs? You will procure no support here on that. Though since there are haters galore in life, I am sure you can find some who hate Schilling, Boston, or those who are outspoken, & also insist, evidence-free, he must be a hypocritical liar.

    Though Those folks are likely to accuse those they hate of almost any crime, short possibly of those against humanity. They are not neutral or rational.

  103. Mike Felber Says:

    Played? Not beyond street & a couple years of Little League. Those at all levels of experience can be right or wrong, & some with the greatest & similar experiences disagree vehemently. Once again, it is actual evidence & logic that applies. Otherwise Joe Morgan would be a near baseball savant, instead of just an all time great player.

  104. Chuck Says:

    If you’re personally offended Trout didn’t win, then you really should find another hobby.

    The Keith Laws/Rob Neyers of the world are the minority..always have been, always will be.

    The vote totals don’t reflect anything but the fact the overall belief in sabermetrics to be insignificant.

    It’s like when you were in high school and you brought a girl home for some makeout time and you couldn’t because your pain in the ass little brother kept interfering.

    The saber community is the little brother of insignificant, meaningless pain in the ass who if you ignore him long enough will head back to his room and try and invent another meaningless piece of shit stat.

    If sabermetrics DID matter, Billy Beane would have five rings, and every ML general manager would have a masters degree in math from MIT, instead of their stat departments being run by a $17k a year intern who shares office space with the fucking janitor.

    The biggest sabermetric argument is a stat they can’t justify…LOL.

    You don’t like it Trout lost?

    Then go to your room.

  105. John Says:

    I live how “played the game” equates to “appreciating triple crown statistics.”

    Chuck keeps saying sabermetrics is a fad. He’s wrong. It’s firmly embedded in the game, if not all the writers.

    There’s a reason Billy Beane has pulled off what he has SIX TIMES while Dayton Moore, with a similar payroll, never ever ever will.

  106. Chuck Says:

    “It’s firmly embedded in the game, if not all the writes”

    Embedded in the basement, yeah.

    You statheads take criticism of sabermetrics personally, which, quite frankly, is dumb.

    You KNOW it’s all bullshit..otherwise, why get all bent?

    Something that is built on a solid foundation stands by itself and doesn’t need support.

    Instead of spending all your energy on defending sabermetrics, you should be spending it on figuring out why it’s all crap.

  107. Chuck Says:

    Dbacks released LHP Mike Hampton, who was then named AA pitching coach for the Rockies.

    Royals signed free agent 3B Brandon Wood.

  108. Mike Felber Says:

    Chuck, can’t you make the argument without trying to juvenilze & mock those who disagree with you?

    You get highly bent out of shape about them all the time, bring it up, express great aggravation-does that mean you know your side is all BS?

    The fallacy is that anything “does not need support”. Any argument not accepted by everyone needs to be advocated for, & if they did not, you would say they had no argument. Both sides use #s as support, since we live in the real world.

    Though I agree some folks get too upset, & in no way is Cabrera a horrible pick. It is just with fielding & base running, Trout is the better pick. Let’s see if he does like Allen, a historic rookie year with some excellent others without putting up better than a bottom tier HOF career, or is a Griffey-esque or potentially better player.

    Because with his skills, I think this will encompass the range he will perform at.

  109. Lefty33 Says:

    “There’s a reason Billy Beane has pulled off what he has SIX TIMES while Dayton Moore, with a similar payroll, never ever ever will.”

    Pretty hard for Moore to do anything six times seeing as he just finished his 6th full season in KC where as Beane has been in Oakland for 15.

    Not exactly an even, correct or fair comparison.

    The truth about Beane is that there is an amazing double standard with him.

    No other GM would be allowed to stay in a job for 15 years without a WS appearance, without winning an ALCS game, and with only getting bounced (sometimes embarassingly)at best in the DS.

    And during most of his run in Oakland the AL West has been the armpit of the AL if not all of baseball. Put Oakland in the AL East and they would have been fighting for the cellar for the majority of Beane’s 15 seasons.

    Any other GM would have been fired by now but because he’s “Billy Beane” he gets a pass on accountability. If Beane were so smart and actually wanted to win a ring he would have left Oakland years ago because they will never win a ring playing in the dump of a building they play in with as cheap an owner as they have and with someone like Beane as the GM.

  110. Chuck Says:

    “Chuck, can’t you make the argument without trying to juvenilze & mock those who disagree with you?”

    Nope..if you’re not smart enough to figure out why something doesn’t work, then you bring this on yourself.

    You can go to your room too. :)

  111. Chuck Says:

    “since we live in the real world.”

    You DON’T live in the real world Mike, that’s the problem.

    You live in an artificial world where your opinions are controlled by what the computer tells you.

    You’re like a Frankenstein, in which all your movements and speech is controlled by Bill James’ remote.

    This is like the Presidential election, people who supported Romney couldn’t be swayed on what a douchebag he is despite the evidence.

  112. Chuck Says:

    “No other GM would be allowed to stay in a job for 15 years without a WS appearance..”

    Let’s not forget the fact Beane holds an ownership stake in the team, which is job security..what’s he going to himself?

  113. Chuck Says:

    Here’s a thought..

    If Melky didn’t get suspended and hung on to win the batting title, would Posey have been MVP?

  114. Chuck Says:

    Keith Law said he was “embarrassed” as a member of the BBWAA.

    Do us all a favor dumbass..quit.

    Stick to blog about “Top Chef” episode recaps.

  115. Lefty33 Says:

    @112- I don’t know how the A’s ownership is set up but I assume that Beane is only a limited partner/minority owner with maybe a few shares at best.

    In that situation he’s has very little power and rights and the managing partner/majority owner can dump at any time without recourse.

    He would simply be disposed of with a lump sum payment made for his shares in the team and he’s gone like any other GM.

  116. Lefty33 Says:

    “You live in an artificial world where your opinions are controlled by what the computer tells you.”

    Planet Felber?

  117. Lefty33 Says:

    @112- Beane has a 4% stake in the team that according to Forbes would currently be valued at under $10 million.

  118. Raul Says:

    Happy Birthday, Dwight Gooden!

    Also…Pete Rose Jr.

  119. Raul Says:

    It’s good to be Buster Posey.
    He’s 25 and has a ROY award, the MVP, and two World Series titles under his belt.

  120. Chuck Says:

    And should be playing in which case he’d have none of those.

  121. Raul Says:

    Consider that.

    The Tampa Bay Rays drafted Evan Longoria in 2006.
    They drafted David Price in 2007.
    They could have drafted Buster Posey in 2008.

    How sick would that franchise be right now if things turned out that way?
    Hell, Tampa could have taken Eric Hosmer in 08.

  122. Len Says:

    Wow, I forgot the Rays were still abysmal as late as 2007 and had the number 1 overall pick in 2008. They drafted a HS kid named Tim Beckham who plays SS. Baseball America doesn’t even have him as a top 100 prospect in 2011 or 2012. He has a career .709 ops in the minors which puts him in the Alexi Ramirez, Erick Aybar, or Alex Gonzalez category in the majors. I don’t know about his fielding.

    He was suspended for 50 games for Marijuana use which seems rather ridiculous.

    There were some other good players in that 2008 draft: Miley, Kimbrel, Lance Lynn, Ike Davis and Brett Lawrie.

    Maybe Chuck has some information on him and his chances to be anything other than an average SS in the majors.

  123. Raul Says:

    we all know about Tim Beckham.
    He stinks.

    He was only drafted because he was sign-able

  124. Chuck Says:

    Beckham played 2B in the AFL. I saw him last year and he’s not a ML caliber SS, although at second he looked pretty good.

    The move was probably a utility move for him, IF he ever makes it to the majors it will be as the eventualy replacement when the Rays dump Ben Zobrist over half a million dollars.

    Raul has it at #123.

  125. Raul Says:

    The average minor leaguer makes around $1,000 a month.
    And the season is only 5 months long.

    Talk about doing it for the love of the game.

  126. Chuck Says:

    So, I ended up seeing 9 AFL games live and another three on TV.

    The schedule really wasn’t favorable to me this year, I saw four games in Peoria, last year I saw 19 games, 17 were in Surprise.

    Not a big year talent wise across the board, last year we had Trout, Harper, Mike Olt, Nolan Arenado, Gerritt Cole, Danny Hultzen, etc, this year there honestly wasn’t one “holy shit” guy in the whole league.

  127. Raul Says:

    Could be one of those classes where a low-end guy comes out of nowhere

  128. Chuck Says:

    There were some good players here obviously, but no one who jumped at me.

    Didi Gregorious, the Reds’ SS, has ridiculous hands and a plus arm, but, like Brandon Crawford, is offensively challenged.

    I think his bat is under-stated, he consistently pulled the ball on the ground, so the pitch recognition/bat speed is there.

    If you’re hitting popups to the opposite field, that tells a much different story, but if you can show the ability to pull, then you have a chance.

  129. Raul Says:

    So what’s your prediction on his Hamilton kid?
    All this hype over his steals. But can he perform at the ML level?

  130. Chuck Says:

    I don’t like Mike Zunino, the Mariners’ #1 pick this year.

    He’s lazy behind the plate and has a slow bat..I understand fatigue does play a factor in the AFL, but having nine passed balls isn’t a reflection of laziness.

  131. Raul Says:

    It’s amazing to me how sometimes wiry, fit players struggle at the catching position, and Sal Fasano…a man built like a Hummer, could be so agile.

  132. Chuck Says:

    Consensus from what I saw and the handful of people I talked to, Hamilton, as it stands now, has no chance.

    What just about everyone said is he should give up switchhitting (only started two years ago?). He’s fast enough where the extra step isn’t necessary, but he has no driveability from the left side, teams almost play the infield in on him even with no one on base.

    Defensively he looked better yesterday than he did the first time I saw him last month, but he still has issues with reads. Speed makes up for a lot of mistakes (Ellsbury), but he’s not quite there yet. His arm is pretty short..but he’s learning a new throwing motion so he gets a pass on that.

    The Reds want him to start opening day in AAA as the centerfielder..that would be a mistake.

    I’d start him in AA and give him a month getting used to a new position in games that actually matter.

  133. Raul Says:

    Why would he switch-hit if he has no power?

  134. Chuck Says:

    I hate when catchers backhand balls on their glove side.

    If the pitch hits the side pads or heel, forget it, it’s a wild pitch. It takes nothing to slide over a foot and catch the pitch fingers up.

    I went to a tryout camp my senior year of high school, one of the guys who went with us was an all-city catcher.

    The camp started at 8, by 8:30 he was taking his gear off.

    Why’d he get cut?

    Because he backhanded balls in a bounce drill instead of sliding.

  135. Chuck Says:

    I don’t know.

    If you’re good enough a hitter/player to be drafted, then there’s no real reason to change unless what you have isn’t good enough to compete at a higher level.

  136. John Says:

    “I hate when catchers backhand balls on their glove side.”

    On their glove side? How do you even instinctively do that? and why?

  137. Raul Says:

    You pretty much never backhand balls if you’re a catcher. You just take it off the chest and if a guy tries for an extra base, let him risk it.
    Infielders…that’s a different story. You don’t try to backhand but sometimes it’s unavoidable.

  138. Chuck Says:

    Hamilton’s listed at 6′1″, 160..I think that’s an inch and ten pounds on the generous side.

    If he gets hit by Troy Tulowitzki on a play at second, Hamilton will explode, they’ll have to bring out the grounds crew to clean the mess.

    Speed doesn’t do you any good walking back to the bench.

  139. Chuck Says:

    “You don’t try to backhand but sometimes it’s unavoidable.”

    You backhand to your throwing arm side, not your glove side.

    An infielder or outfielder really has no choice at times, a catcher should never really be in a position to backhand unless he’s crossed up or he’s catching a throw from a position player.

  140. John Says:

    @137 I get that. And yeah – ball in the dirt, keep that shit in front of you.

    But who does a backhand on their glove-side ever? Did Chuck mean throwing hand side?

  141. Raul Says:

    I physically can’t backhand a ball on my glove side. I’m left handed. My glove is on my right side.

    To backhand a ball to my right would break my wrist.
    But I suppose Chuck means a ball just off the center to my right side. People will turn the glove so the fingers are pointed down and your palm is out.

    I’ve seen guys do it. But like…I was a first baseman. If a ball came in low on a hop to my right side, I’d just scoop it up, or worst case, slide over and take it off my chest. Or field like a ground ball.

    I might not have explained that right.

  142. Chuck Says:

    Brewers released ST schedule John.

  143. Raul Says:

    When you backhand to your glove side…there’s just too much risk that even if you touch the ball, you could wind up slapping it 50 feet away from you.

  144. Chuck Says:

    As a catcher, you’re in your crouch and the pitcher throws the ball off the plate on your glove side.

    Intead of lifting the glove with your hand and catch the ball in the pocket with your fingers pointing up, you lift the glove with your elbow and kind of slap at the ball, kind of like you pushing a door shut.

    Kind of like a sweep tag or catch, your left elbow is pointing at the third base dugout and your fingers are pointed towards first base.

    Drives me nuts.

  145. Chuck Says:

    Wonder what Felber thinks about this. :)

  146. Raul Says:


  147. Bob Says:

    The Jays signed Melky.

  148. Raul Says:

    I certainly didn’t expect Melky to sign before other prominent free agents.

  149. Raul Says:

    Toronto gave Melky a 2 year contract for 16 million. Not an outrageous amount of money, but seems very high for a player who was a bench guy prior to taking steroids.

  150. Chuck Says:

    That contract shocks me.

    I would have been OK with 2/8, but 2/16 is extreme, even if Melky was clean.

  151. Bob Says:

    Yeah. I think 1/6 would be fair with a team option and maybe a buyout for a mill.

  152. Chuck Says:

    So, surfing the net for some reactions to the MVP thing, and I came across something on SBNation called “Beyond the Boxscore” (nice name).

    A couple of articles, but nothing like I expected to see, I guess in general the saber community knew Cabrera would win and waved their white flags beforehand.

    Anyway, there’s this guy who writes something called, “SaberScouting”, some prospect evaluation series with a saber slant.

    Went to the Brandon Nimmo report, and there was a quote from some Mets’ blogger who said Nimmo had made some setup and swing adjustments since signing,

    “….but he still has his hands very high which can lead to a long path to the ball.”


    The higher the hands, the shorter the path.

    See, this is the kind of stuff that bothers me. This guy, who apparently only swung a bat in order to knock the cat off the picnic table, makes a statement which clearly shows he’s clueless, then attempts to saberize it, which can only lead to a false result.

    You have to have some knowledge of your subject. It’s why medical students practice on cadavers in school, it’s why chefs serve internships on cruise ships.

    When you try and sound smart, the opposite actually happens.

  153. Bob Says:

    I believe Neyer writes for them or is in charge of the site, possibly both.

  154. Chuck Says:

    He’s the lead writer for the Baseball Nation site, but each sub site, like Minor League Ball and BTB have their own managers and rarely cross-over.

    It’s a nice gig to have, don’t get me wrong.

    These guys all manage their sites from home, and while they don’t exactly rake in the cash, between book deals and TV appearances they do alright.

  155. Bob Says:


  156. Chuck Says:

    Raul..set the DVR…AFL Championship game tomorrow 3:10 EST on MLBNetwork.

  157. Raul Says:

    “….but he still has his hands very high which can lead to a long path to the ball.”

    Someone confiscate his computer. Immediately.

  158. Chuck Says:

    Do people not realize when someone says a player has a long swing, they’re not talking about his BAT?

  159. Raul Says:

    The guy is writing under a SCOUTING REPORT header and he doesn’t even know what a long swing is.

  160. Mike Felber Says:

    Am I tired of correcting the same errors of logic Chuck? Where you make repeat on autopilot lazy & stereotypical assumptions? More disappointed than anything.

    1) Stating a premise without any evidence-whatsevcer I allegedly “cannot figure out”.

    2) That even if you/someone was right, it would justify or even slightly excuse mean & disdainful treatment to sincere interlocutors. That is a maturity issue of sorts.

    3) Your stereotyping with me & anyone you think is saber sensitive is absurd. And wrong on the facts. Many times, AND recently I stated things I strongly differed with James about, including & not limited to rankings of Hornsby & Allen. Plus I keep writing hesitations & questions about stuff like WAR.

    But you will not be happy unless we automatically mock & dismiss the “enemy”. That is robotic & lockstep my friend. (apply Middle Eastern accent for extra lamenting impact).

  161. Chuck Says:


    Not only do I have no friggin’ idea what that is supposed to mean or imply, I would really appreciate it if you didn’t attempt to explain yourself.

    I’m guessing everyone else who’s left around here feels the same way.


  162. Chuck Says:

    So, our old friend Shaun strongly believes if AL front office personnel voted for AL MVP, the result would have been different.

  163. Raul Says:

    Who gives a shit?
    The voters voted. Cabrera is the guy.
    That’s it.

    These guys are being whiny little bitches.

  164. Bob Says:

    1. Mike Ditka had a minor stroke.
    2. Red Wings defenseman Ian White called Gary Bettman an idiot. Good for White.

  165. Raul Says:

    Gary Bettman and the NHL owners are jerks.
    To be fair, it’s not like the NHLPA having Don Fehr is helping.

  166. Mike Felber Says:

    I am replying to the comments you addressed to me around posts #110 & 111. They are clear & directly responsive, I cannot see how you would be confused.

    It is outrageous that you would not only attempt to speak for others, but actually ask me not to “explain myself”. On no other forum would that be accepted or respected. Maybe that is the largest part of the reason we have minimal traffic here-a couple have been abusive & nasty in ways that no respectable forum would permit, this is allowed, AND the “leader” here, while he has reformed that conduct for himself…

    Tries to shut up any “explanation:, which could mean anything said: after making negative & false statements directly TO me!

    You have got to be kidding me. It is especially outrageous when you repeat erroneous & insulting comments, & expect no response.

    Nobody looking from outside would find that decent or rational.

  167. Chuck Says:

    “I am replying to the comments you addressed to me around posts #110 & 111.”\

    Nothing I said was either incorrect or inaccurate.

    If you have a point to make, get on with it.

  168. Raul Says:

    John Farrell can’t seem to catch a break.

    He probably should have been the manager in Boston while they still had a fragmented, yet talented team.

    And now he’s out of Toronto just as they get a massive gift from the Miami Marlins.

    On paper, it will be tough for teams to face Josh Johnson, Mark Buehrle, Ricky Romero, and Brandon Morrow.

  169. John Says:

    It’s kind of random that Toronto just took on all that payroll suddenly.

  170. Chuck Says:

    They’re not keeping everyone, John.

    Jake Marisinick is playing in the AFL championship game in a Toronto uniform, so the trade isn’t even official yet.

    Both Buerhle and Reyes have threatened to file grievances over the trade because they had “gentleman’s agreements” they wouldn’t be traded.

    I can actually see Selig killing this deal.

  171. John Says:

    A gentleman’s agreement? Get that shit in writing.

  172. Chuck Says:

    Marlins don’t give no-trades, but according to Buerhle and Reyes, they were promised they’d be around and part of the rebuilding.

    Which lasted a year.

  173. Mike Felber Says:

    I not only made my points, & clearly showed how you were wrong, such as examples contradicting of disagreeing with Bill James, giving lie to the stereotype that I follow Bill James Slavishly-I ENUMERATED the 3 points in post 160.

    I have had to many times show how you assert premises without evidence. But I cannot do better than enumerate points very clearly, & this time briefly.

  174. Chuck Says:

    So, Mike, instead of pissing into the wind, what DO you think about catchers backhanding pitches?

  175. Mike Felber Says:

    Arguably I am pissing into the wind in terms of you doing more than backing off on coldly contemptuous &/or censorious impusles. But this, & efforts towards reason that cannot be opposed, are worth it.

    Where is this question about backhanded pitches coming from? I am not quite naive enough not to know that it is asked to try to expose a presumed lack of practical baseball knowledge. Which has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

    But I am happy to admit I have no strong opinions & am open to arguments either way on the matter.

  176. Jim Says:

    How can you have a gentleman’s agreement with Jeffrey Loria? It will be interesting to see what the rational is for any grievance.

    Can’t see a reason why Selig would hold up this deal. If he were to invoke the “for the good of baseball” clause, he should do so to force out Loria, not scrub the deal.

  177. Chuck Says:

    Good point Jim, tough to have a gentleman’s agreement when one of the people involved doesn’t qualify.

  178. Chuck Says:


    Comment about baseball, or don’t comment at all.

    You’ve been warned about the lecturing/preaching in the past.

  179. Raul Says:

    I think Buck Showalter had a gentleman’s agreement with Steinbrenner after he was fired in ‘95.
    How’d that work out?

  180. Mike Felber Says:

    I addressed YOUR comments to me about BASEBALL Chuck, where you somehow seemed to not notice my points or corrections, though delineated #1, 2, & 3.

    You make provocative & insulti9ng comments, & when I even BRIEFLY address them, that is lecturing/preaching? Yet you can say whatever you like, & expect me to not defend my self or points, whether about my character or baseball?!

    No way man.

    And you know others are commenting, peaceably, about other things than baseball. As are you. It is a kind of malpractice to presume to shut down anyone you engage-& sometimes in a personal way-& it was about Bill James/baseball.

  181. Chuck Says:

  182. Raul Says:

    That link froze my computer but I did see something about the Rays.

    Are they playing some games in San Juan next year?

  183. Raul Says:

  184. Chuck Says:

    The article suggest they should move there.

  185. Chuck Says:

    I sat down yesterday to write something up about the most impressive guys in the AFL, and as I went through my list I realized there really weren’t any.

    So, I scrapped it.

    Pitching especially. Outside of Kyle Gibson and Robbie Erlin there wasn’t anyone I saw who had me wanting to see them pitch more than once.

  186. Len Says:


    How about: Nate Roberts, Heathcott, Prince, M. Oneill, Collier, Schoop, Kiermaier, Rendon, Alberto, T. Thompson, N. Franklin, M. Skole, A. Santos, G. Springer, K. Pillar, or C. Walsh?

    Did you like anything about one of these guys or did nothing really stand out?

  187. Len Says:

    As far as pitchers go, what did you like about Erlin?

    How about: Kaminska, T.J. House, Siegrist, R. Perry, J. Marks, C. Gloor, S. Blair and C. Anderson?

  188. Chuck Says:

    Thanks, Len. It’s always better when I’m talking about players you’re interested in.

  189. Bob Says:

    Actually, how did Rendon look?

  190. Bob Says:

    News Corp, the parent company of Fox will purchase a 49% stake in the Yes Network.

  191. Chuck Says:

    Nate Roberts: Won AFL batting title and led league in OBP and SLG. That said, I don’t think he’s much more than a fourth OF, especially with how deep the Twins are.

    Heathcott: With all his injury problems I really didn’t know much about him other than the comparisons to (gag) Brett Gardner. Heathcott is not Brett Gardner. Heathcott’s good. The shoulder surgeries have killed his throwing so he’s probably going to be a corner rather than a CF, but the kid goes balls to the wall all the time. He hits too much off his front side for my liking and strikes out a bit too much for a leadoff hitter, but I think he’ll end up being a pretty good player.

    Collier: Juan Pierre

    Schoop: Probably a second baseman long-term, but he could be pretty good.

    Rendon: Guy can hit and is a better defensive player than I had thought. No question he’ll be a solid regular..maybe not All Star like Ryan Zimmerman, but good enough.

    Thompson: I assume you mean Trayce. Don’t like him. Not to say he can’t play, but there’s more than one thing that bugs me. High K rate, jumps slow in the OF, etc.

    Nick Franklin: I love Franklin, always have. Dustin Ackley better watch his back because he’s about sixty days from being a bench player, if not sooner.

    Skole: If the Nationals don’t re-sign LaRoche, Skole is the most likely candidate to replace him. For a guy who was just moved he looks good. He was Nationals’ MiLB POY this year.

    Springer: I like him better than most, actually. I don’t think he’ll be much more than a .260 hitter, but if he can bring his K’s down he could end up a 25-30 HR guy, and his OF play was better than I thought. He should steal some bases, too.

    Walsh: Replacement for Skip Schumacher, good utility value.

    Prince, O’Neill, Kiermaier, Alberto, Santos and Pillar I either didn’t see or don’t remember, and I don’t have my notes with me.

  192. Chuck Says:

    I like Erlin, he’s not very big and doesn’t throw hard, but his curve is ridiculous, right up there with Kershaw’s.

    Siegrist: Lefty reliever/spot starter, throws pretty hard for a lefty.

    Perry: Don’t like him.

    Anderson: Could be the Dbacks version of Joba, a hard throwing middle relief type.

    Don’t recall seeing the others, but, again, don’t have my notes with me.

  193. Len Says:


    It seems like the Mariners have a 2b & SS who are both very good fielders but can’t hit. Any chance they trade Brendan Ryan who is 30 and try Nick Franklin at SS? Ackley is still pretty young (24) and was a big prospect for the Mariners. Ackley hit in 2011 but struggled when he became a starter in 2012. I would think the Mariners would hold on to him and give him a few more chances. Ryan could be interesting trade bait for a contending team with a lot of offense that needs help with a good fielding SS.

    It’s going to be interesting with the Nationals if Rendon & Skole can contribute on the major league level.

    What is it about Kyle Gibson you like? Is it his K/9 rate? or that he didn’t give up a HR in 23 1/3 innings? Or was it something about his delivery or his command, fastball speed, or pitch movement, etc? His 3-2, 5.40 era and 1.67 whip doesn’t look that impressive but he did have 28 k’s, 8 BB, 0 hr in 23 1/3 innings.

  194. Chuck Says:


    I doubt they’d trade Ryan, some of those advanced metrics had him as the best defensive SS in the AL.

    I’ve never been an Ackley fan, this future batting champ stuff is way overblown. And let’s not forget, Franklin was the Mariner’s #1 pick in 2009, the year after Ackley. How many people know that?

    I’ve heard during the AFL that the Mariners patience with Ackley is starting to run out, and that’s why Franklin was moved..if Ackley doesn’t start hot he’s the one likely on the trading block.

    I have no questions about Rendon, Skole I’m not sold on.

    All of the above with Gibson.

    He has more than one swing and miss pitch, there are guys in the majors making good money with none.

    He seemed to lose command at times here and that resulted in some big innings, but he really didn’t get hit all that hard and his defense was shaky at times, so I really wouldn’t read too much into his peripherals.

    Plus, he’s coming off Tommy John and hadn’t pitched much, so he was working on command and regaining his stuff and stamina as much as anything.

    There are different kind of results than what appears in a boxscore, and I’m confident the Twins are ecstatic at his performance.

  195. Bob Says:

    I say Ackley will be fine with the new dimensions, though Franklin may well be superior. Good depth by the Mariners, to go along with some young pitching.

  196. Chuck Says:

    Bringing the fences in ten feet won’t turn Ackley into Babe Ruth.

    Franklin is better both offensively and defensively than Ackley, and is two and a half years younger.

  197. Bob Says:

    Selig approved the trade.

  198. Len Says:


    As far as Gibson goes, you’re right in that 23 innings is kind of a small sample size to get an accurate idea with rate stats. With one bad inning your ERA can skyrocket. I think what’s good about Gibson is he finished 3rd in K’s in the AFL. He had a decent walk rate and he also didn’t give up a HR. I think he was one of only 5 pitchers to throw 20+ innings and not give up a HR. Blair, House, Kaminska, and Rienzo were the other four.

    I forgot he was coming off Tommy John surgery so yeah, you bring up some good point as to what the major league clubs are looking at.

  199. Raul Says:

    Read an article about how the Royals could improve for 2013.
    It alluded to a possible trade with the Mariners that would give Seattle Billy Butler and bring Danny Hultzen to Kansas City.

    Doubt it.

  200. Bob Says:

    I doubt the Mariners trade Walker or Hultzen. Team those 2 up with Felix, play 19 games against the Astros, and see what happens. James Paxton perhaps could be had.

  201. Bob Says:

    The Jays hired John Gibbons to manage.

  202. Raul Says:

    The feeling behind the rumor is that the Mariners already have doubts about Jesus Montero. And Billy Butler presents a major upgrade at the DH position.

  203. Bob Says:

    I have no issues with the Mariners targeting Butler or having issues with Montero, I just think Hultzen is a steep price to pay. Over the past 16 months, the Mariners have traded away starting pitchers Pineda, Fister and Bedard as they grew more comfortable with the progress of Hultzen and Walker, and to a lesser degree Paxton.
    And now someone is advising they give up a cost-controlled legit starting pitching prospect for a DH, and one who may struggle in a new field and a tougher division? If Pujols struggled initially in the AL West, one should expect Butler to somewhat struggle, right? The Mariners should stand pat with Hultzen and see if Montero and Ackley improve in the revamped Safeco Stadium.
    Again, if they trade Paxton for Butler, I would have no issues

  204. Chuck Says:

    “The feeling behind the rumor is that the Mariners already have doubts about Jesus Montero.”

    No way, really? I’m shocked

  205. Chuck Says:

    It’s going to take more than Hultzen or Paxton to get Butler.

    Royals don’t need Montero..they have Clint Robinson to DH.

    Montero’s future is at DH, especially with Zunino coming up. If they get Butler, then what?

    If the Mariners trade for Butler, then Montero has to be in the deal, no? Or at least be moved separately before spring training.

    The Royals could DH Francoeur and bring up Wil Myers, or they could DH Clint Robinson..either way, they don’t need Montero.

    So, I don’t see that happening any time soon.

  206. John Says:

    Jeff Francoeur, DH?


  207. Raul Says:

    Wil Myers is going to be a full time player. There’s almost no doubt about it.

  208. Bob Says:

    I heard a rumor or two that the Royals are open to trading him. Which begs the question

    1. Are those rumors BS?
    2. Is there a guy out there they truly crave?
    3. Is Bubba Starling going to be better than him a year from now?

  209. Raul Says:

    So Newscorp, the company I hate most after Monsanto, bought 49% of the YES Network.

  210. Raul Says:

    Bubba Starling has a lot to prove, but he is the future of the franchise.

    Myers won’t be traded. The Royals’ pitching hasn’t materialized as they had planned, and if anyone goes to bring them some starters, it’s going to be high cost guys like Butler and Gordon.

  211. Raul Says:

    The guy I think still may be traded is Cliff Lee.
    Though the Dodgers (his best fit) took themselves out of any trades after they bought the Red Sox.

  212. Bob Says:

    Or Hosmer

  213. Raul Says:

    Hosmer had a rude awakening in 2012. But I still think he has the tools to be a top 7-8 first baseman in the majors.
    I mean in a dream world where it was financially feasible, the Yankees would give up Teixeira for Hosmer in a second.

  214. Raul Says:

    The Hoz isn’t going to hit 40 homers playing in KC, but .310 with 25 HR and 40 doubles every year is possible.

  215. Raul Says:

    What I want to know is, will Zack Wheeler make the Mets rotation out of Spring Training?

  216. Bob Says:

    And that would make him a top 7-8 first baseman.

    1. Pujols is aging
    2. I love Fielder
    3. Adrian Gonzalez
    4. Joey Votto
    5, Who am I missing? Not Ike Davis or Teixeira

  217. Chuck Says:

    The World’s Least Credible Man says the Royals are “2/3 of the way” to acquiring a starting pitcher, with the giveaway being prospects.

    1. Are those rumors BS? Everyone’s name gets floated around this time of year.

    2. Is there a guy out there they truly crave? I’m sure, but no one they’d trade Myers for.

    3. Is Bubba Starling going to be better than him a year from now? No.

    “Though the Dodgers (his best fit) took themselves out of any trades after they bought the Red Sox.”

    They’re also going to overpay for Greinke.

    I like Hosmer, but his swing is so fucked up Ted Williams couldn’t fix him. The Royals fucked with Gordon when he first came up and should have sent him down way before they did, if Hosmer sucks the first two weeks of ST, I’d cut him.

    Let him start the season in AAA.

  218. Chuck Says:

    “What I want to know is, will Zack Wheeler make the Mets rotation out of Spring Training?”


    Texieira’s not a top eight first baseman? Holy shit, you know Shaun Payne?

  219. Bob Says:

    @ 215.

    1. Dickey
    2. Santana
    3. Harvey
    4. Niese
    5. Dillon Gee or Zack Wheeler?
    6. Revisit that question around the Ides of March

  220. Bob Says:

    I said not Davis or Teixiera. And no, Shaun and I have never met. I went 4 deep, and because I did not research it , I assumed I was omitting somebody obvious.

  221. Raul Says:

    Oh yeah.
    I forgot about Harvey.

    That kid is going to be better than Wheeler.
    Saw a game this year where Harvey shut down the Reds for 7 or 8 innings. I was really impressed.

  222. Bob Says:

    Ryan Howard was the guy I was trying to remember.

  223. Raul Says:

    So if you sign a contract with the Marlins, do you ever unpack your suitcase?

  224. Raul Says:

    So I followed that Tyler Austin kid on twitter. Yankees prospect.
    Never seen a guy so lovey dovey with his tweets about his girlfriend. I assume he lost his virginity last week.

  225. Bob Says:

    LOL @ 224

  226. Raul Says:

    Just to get it out of the way early, since who knows who will be around, hope you all have a nice and safe Thanksgiving.
    Me? I’ll be bitching about how my family always cooks the same foods around this time of year. But in all seriousness, one does have a lot to be thankful for. Especially considering that a few miles away, thousands of people are still struggling in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy.

  227. Bob Says:

    @ 226. Ditto. Today will be my last day here for about 4-5 days.

  228. John Says:

    Happy Thanksgiving y’all.

  229. Bob Says:

    Which reminds me. Cameron, I hope you read this and can chime in over the next few days.

  230. Chuck Says:

    I have to work Thanksgiving this year. I’ve been lucky at dodging bullets the last few years but I finally caught one.

    Off Christmas though, which is the better of the two anyway, so it could be worse.

  231. Chuck Says:

    For the second time in four days I sat down to write an AFL review and scrapped it.

    The interest is there, but not the desire.

    Haven’t done anything really since June, going on six months.

    First time since 2005 I’ve gone longer than a couple of weeks.

    I remember saying earlier than June that I was losing interest in the whole internet/blogging thing..I could feel it coming.

    I don’t know if it’s one thing in general, or a combination, but I can’t put my finger on it.

    If I could, I’d try and fix it.

    I interviewed Dave Hilton last week for the SABR Bio Project and haven’t started it yet, so it’s not just the blogging/Twitter thing. (Hilton’s 1972 rookie card is worth $400+ mint).

    Anyone want to buy a used laptop?

  232. Bob Says:

    Recipe for rejuvenating yourself.

    1. Take a week off of baseball altogether. No books, blogs or papers.
    2. Every night for a week, have 2 drinks. No more, no less. No shots. Mix rum with coke, vodka with juice, or simply 2 beers.
    3. You have a pooch, take him for a walk with some Chicago blasting away.
    4. See you in a week

  233. Bob Says:

    1. The Tigrs released Ryan Raburn.
    2. The Mariners acquires Robert Andino for Trayvon Robinson.

  234. Raul Says:


    THAT’S how far Trayvon Robinson’s stock fell? He got traded for Robert Fucking Andino?
    Did the Orioles throw in a box of Junior Mints, too?

  235. Chuck Says:

    Royals DFA’d Clint Robinson.

    Really hope Brian Cashman is paying attention to the waiver wire today.

    Bye bye Swisher, Chavez, Fat Andruw.

    Robinson’s a bad defense, .300 hitter who walks more than he strikes out and is a friggin’ lock for 30+ bombs in Yankee Stadium.

    Biggest no-brainer in the history of earth.

  236. Raul Says:

    Makes too much sense for the Yankees. Anything that is obvious seems to always go over their heads.

  237. Bob Says:

    And for those of you you have yet to try this, do it this year.

    1. Acorn squash with either lobster bisque or cream of shrimp inside. With the soup in the squash. no need to add brown sugar. Awesome

    2. Off to get some acorn squash and egg nog!!!

    3. Have a great Thanksgiving and go Lions!!!

  238. Chuck Says:


    Ever try coquito? It’s homemade Puerto Rican/Latin eggnog with rum. Raul, I’m sure you’ve indulged.

    Big time Christmas drink…you want the recipe let me know.

    WARNING: You gain ten pounds over Christmas week, not on me.

  239. Chuck Says:

    6/98 for BJ Upton?

    Holy Overpay, Batman.

  240. Raul Says:

    I’ve had it. Not my favorite drink. I’ll stick to the beer or whiskey.

    Sigh @ BJ Upton. Just when I thought teams learned from Carl Crawford…

  241. Mike Felber Says:

    You guys have some ambitious food & libation indulgences! Enjoy the long Holidaaaze weekend. Seeing my Sister & young family in NJ will be a joy.

    Anyone interested in the non-controversial aesthetic pleasures, My 2nd arts & cultural magazine 216 page issue will be out next month. New fb page has link to a sneak peak-my highly biased opinion is the layouts are are beautiful mini-gallery designs. .

    If you can stand it I will drive some artist sports fans here. :-)

  242. Lefty33 Says:

    @239 & 240 – The Upton story is false, for now.

    Fake story from a fake Twitter account.

  243. Chuck Says:

    “I’ve had it. Not my favorite drink.”

    You haven’t had mine. :)

  244. Chuck Says:

    “Fake story from a fake Twitter account.”

    See, Bob, why you shouldn’t read MLBTradeRumors.

  245. Raul Says:

    I hope so, because Upton is worth half that amount.

  246. Raul Says:

    The Mariners cut Chone Figgins and will eat the remaining 8 million of his contract.
    I was amazed that the news was trending nationally last night on Twitter. I felt bad for the guy. Being cut and performing poorly is one thing. The entire country making fun of your woes is another.

  247. Raul Says:

    For like the 5th year in a row, I have to sift through articles about how Grady Sizemore could be a huge sleeper pick.


  248. Raul Says:

    LaHair and Clint Robinson were cut loose.

    Word is LaHair is going to Japan.

  249. Raul Says:

    I have an idea….

    You know all those Miami Marlins players that didn’t really respond to a fiery manager like Ozzie Guillen?
    Let’s trade for them and then hire an even more fiery manager that we previously fired!

  250. Chuck Says:

    “Word is LaHair is going to Japan.”

    Maybe he could take Figgins with him.

  251. Raul Says:

    Isn’t the ball smaller in Japan? If he couldn’t make contact here, he’s not hitting that golf ball there

  252. Chuck Says:

    It used to be, I thought I read somewhere they’re not playing with the same ball we do here.

  253. Chuck Says:

    They ARE playing with the same ball.

  254. Raul Says:

    I’m amazed Kuroda re-signed.
    Still, I think it’s silly to think Pettitte will continue to pitch well even if he does return.
    And Sabathia is due to decline now. He will still be good, but all it takes is for a guy to go from a 3.38 ERA to 3.60 and pretty soon all you have is a 20-million dollar 14 game winner.

  255. Chuck Says:

    I’m surprised Kuroda got $15 million, unless that’s yen.

  256. Raul Says:

    I think he turned down 13.5M in arbitration or something.

  257. Raul Says:

    To be fair, 15 million might only get you a 700 sq foot apartment in Japan. Lol
    It’s pricey there.

  258. Chuck Says:

    I’ve never been to Japan, and have no desire to go to Japan.

    I’m not a big flyer or traveler in general. Flying from Phoenix to San Juan is a pain in the ass, thankfully I won’t have to do that again anytime soon.

  259. Raul Says:

    I like traveling to different places. It’s a pain to get some places, but once you’re there, it’s not too bad.

    Oddly enough, I’ve never been to PR

  260. Chuck Says:

    San Diego’s a 45 minute flight.

    You have to get to the airport an hour early, it’s 45 minutes to the airport, by the time you deal with the luggage/rental car when you get there it’s another hour, then 15-20 minutes checking in.

    That’s three hours.

    For a 45 minute trip.

    That’s the shit I hate.

  261. Raul Says:


    isn’t the drive from phoenix to san diego 3 hours anyway?

  262. Chuck Says:

    Five and a half.

  263. Chuck Says:

    For the love of shit..what is wrong with people?

  264. Raul Says:

    Not surprised at all.

  265. Mike Felber Says:

    You want to see a boxing forum with some really knowledgeable folks & great theoretical match ups-some in the trade, & “Evolution” has sparred with Foreman, Tua, Lewis & others, check here.

  266. Chuck Says:

  267. John Says:

    Your hero starts by bitching about Felix Hernandez winning the Cy Young Award with a 13-12 record.

    In other words, he’s the literal definition of an idiot.

  268. John Says:

    “I trust my eyes!” = “I look at statistics, but only ones that are entirely reliant upon teammates”

  269. Chuck Says:

    “In other words, he’s the literal definition of an idiot.”

    Actually, you’re the literal definition of an idiot for not realizing “Bernadette” is a chick.


    “I trust my eyes!”

    Don’t knock it til you try it.

  270. John Says:

    Yes, I’m sure “using your eyes” entails more than using them to see who has the highest RBI or win total.

    Oh wait. No it doesn’t.

  271. Raul Says:

    The idea that traditional scouts only look at BA/HR/RBI is as ridiculous ad the idea that anyone who delves into complex stats lives in his mother’s basement.

  272. John Says:

    Not scouts, Raul.

    Writers and commentators who use the term “mother’s basement” though?

    Let me just ask you this…did you read one Miggy MVP article which left out statistics – specifically the triple crown?

    They may claim to be using their eyes and evaluating abstract things like “pulse” – what they’re really doing is reading off the leaders for the statistics that they learned about first.

  273. Mike Felber Says:


  274. Chuck Says: you believe if Cabrera didn’t win the Triple Crown..say Hamilton beat him by one homer..that he wouldn’t have been MVP?

  275. Chuck Says:

    In return for winning the AFL MVP award, the Rangers rewarded Chris McGuiness by exposing him to the Rule V draft.

    I didn’t know this until after the league started, but McGuiness is the PTBNL the Rangers got from the Red Sox for Jarrod Saltlamacchia.

    Guaranteed he gets claimed.

  276. John Says:

    I maintain that no case would be made for him that didnt involve (bad) statistics.

  277. Chuck Says:

    That’s awesome John.

    How about you answer the question now?

  278. Raul Says:

    To answer your question, John…I made up my mind in the MVP debate weeks ago.
    We all agreed that Trout was our pick.

    I read one article about the AL MVP race. One.

    I’m not outraged that Trout didn’t win. I guess that’s my only beef. I can’t understand the anger that…maybe you don’t hold, but many others do, that Cabrera won the MVP.

    I would have chosen Verlander over Price for Cy Young. Many others would have also. No outrage over that one? How come?

  279. John Says:

    It’s not outrage about Cabrera – one of the best hitters I’ve ever seen – winning an MVP. Or really even beating Trout, dumb as that was.

    It’s the notion that those who “actually watch the games instead of burying their heads in laptops” can possibly make an argument without involving batting average or RBI’s.

    Without any numbers, it should be clear to those of us that watch the game that a great hitter/baserunner/fielder ccontributes more to a winning effort than a guy who was just a great hitter.

    In other words – it’s the “Trout crowd” that gets the big picture, that watch the games and appreciate what being a well-rounded player can bring to the game.

    It’s the “Cabrera Crowd” that just looked at stats…bad ones at that.

    Happy thanksgiving y’all. Go Texans, Redskins, and … Tebow Punt Protectors?

  280. Chuck Says:

    The notion that the “watchers” could actually watch Trout and not see what a great overall season he had is actually dumber than the idea Cabrera only won because of the TC.

  281. John Says:

    Find me a single, solitary argument for Cabrera that didn’t mention his statistics.

    Can’t be done.

  282. Raul Says:

    Why are you pressing that?
    Is anyone arguing for Trout without mentioning stats?

    And what does it matter what Cabrera’s RBI were?
    If someone says that they voted for Cabrera because they watched him over the season and felt he had the biggest impact on his team and carried them to the playoffs, that is an argument that doesn’t hinge on stats.

    I suspect that argument wouldn’t be good enough for you.
    Honestly, that’s fine.
    But you can’t ask for such an argument, KNOWING that you’re going to dismiss it.

  283. John Says:

    I’d be happy to argue.

    But if your whole argument revolves around stat nerds are destroying baseball and your only argument involves (bad) statistics, then you’re probably Mitch Album, Rob Parker, or some other idiot.

  284. Raul Says:

    I don’t care much about the statistical argument anymore.
    People made their points. One guy won. It’s over with.

    Personally, I have little beef with advance stats themselves as much as I have with some of the arrogance that comes with the people who preach them.

    Every year I get less interested in these awards. Everyone is boiling the poetry of the season into a surgical procedure about numbers. And it’s boring to me.

  285. Chuck Says:

    You never answered the question there, Fred Astaire..would Cabrera have won the MVP without the Triple Crown?

  286. John Says:

    I have no idea.

    Either way, the TC statistics were what was used to evaluate his performance, not some abstract bullshit eye test.

  287. Chuck Says:

    All awards are stat based, the argument for Trout is no different.

    “I have no idea.”

    No shit.

  288. Raul Says:

    Well, I certainly drank better than I ate. And the food was good.

    Some Dominican rum, some Johnny Walker Gold, and lots of other good stuff.
    Happy Thanksgiving, you guys!

  289. Mike Felber Says:

    I think he would not have won without the TC. But if close to it, it would have been fairly close-close.

    I hope you all enjoyed the Holiday. Homemade food is good indeed, but seeing the niece & nephew best by far.

  290. Chuck Says:

    The vote totals indicate otherwise, Mike.

    If the voting was closer, you could make an argument some people based their own opinion on the TC only, but with such a wide margin between them it doesn’t appear, at least to me that the TC carried that much weight.

    I know it’s a built in defense mechanism to support sabermetric principles at any cost.

    This has been the biggest sabermetric debate that I can recall in recent years, and like in previous cases, the stat movement fails.

    Andy asked me to come back and start posting on HHS stats again, Mike. It’s not the right place for me obviously, and with me cutting back on internet activity as a whole not sure if I can/want to.

    I told him thanks for asking and I’d consider it, but at this point probably not.

    Unless some douchebag writes a “Chet Lemon for the HOF” article, then the gloves come off.

  291. Chuck Says:

    They started last week with the Gene Tenace nonsense, that was enough.

  292. Chuck Says:

    Am I the only one who can’t seem to drum up any sympathy for Hector Camacho?

  293. John Says:

    “Like in previous cases” such as Greinke, Lincecum, and King Felix’s Cy Youngs, the HOF induction of a basically .500 piitcher, or the relative success of the A’s and Rays compared to other teams with similar payrolls?

  294. Chuck Says:

    “built in defense mechanism “

  295. Chuck Says:

    There were no debates about Greinke’s Cy Young or either of Lincecum’s wins, and the vote totals of Hernandez indicate he would have won even if Bill James hadn’t been born.

    There aren’t that many sabermetric slanted voters to make a difference in anything other than where to go for lunch.

  296. Raul Says:

    Camacho got shot at 4am in a car with 10 bags of cocaine and his drug dealer.
    It’s regrettable when anyone gets killed, but far as I know, drug dealers aren’t exactly a beacon for safety. Shootings….that’s the kind of thing that happens around them. It’s not a shock.

  297. John Says:

    Compare those Cy Young votes to 1993 AL or even 2005.

  298. Chuck Says:

    If you’re implying that either one of those votes would be different today……

  299. Raul Says:

    Sure seems to me that WAR (or maybe just baseball reference) overrates walks quite a bit.

    I generally don’t think pitchers deserve MVP awards, but hard to suggest Denny McLain didn’t deserve the MVP in ‘68.
    Though his WAR was significantly lower than Yastrzemski’s. Sort of the same difference between Trout and Cabrera this year.

    Consider the difference in WAR between Yaz and Frank Howard.
    I’ll give you that Yaz was a great defender. But more than double Howard’s WAR because he doubled his walk total?
    It’s not like Yaz drove a ton more in or scored way more runs.

    I mean look, once you deem that simply getting on base is more important than getting to home plate, you’ve got a problem. Getting on base correlates to winning. Scoring runs correlates more.

    Don’t get me wrong here.
    I’m not saying Howard was more valuable than Yaz.
    Yaz was the better player to have. And him finishing 9th in ‘68 was wrong. But he wasn’t more than twice as valuable as Frank Howard. That’s just bullshit.

  300. Raul Says:

    I mean Yaz and Howard in ‘68

  301. John Says:


    Jack McDowell: 22-10, 125 ERA+, 1.286 WHIP, 4.1 WAR beats Kevin Appier (18-8, 179 ERA+, 1.106 WHIP, 9 WAR)

    Absolutely no way that happens today. Looks at either of Lincecum’s Cy Youngs, or Greinke’s or Felix’s. The days of blindly giving the award to the person with the most wins is over. So, some progress has been made.

    The real defense mechanism is with people who refuse to accept innovation and stubbornly cling to record players and RBI.

  302. Raul Says:

    Isn’t 1993 kind of a cherry pick?

  303. Chuck Says:

    Sorry John, but as usual you’re wrong.

    I know you’re used to it and all, but come on man, you’re an intelligent guy.

    The question isn’t about wins and losses, it’s about whether things would be different today, and they wouldn’t.

    McDowell pitched for a playoff team and received 21 of 28 first place votes. There aren’t enough voters who think differently to make a difference in the result.

    Giving a 22 game winner an award over a 19 game winner and two 18 game winners isn’t that earth shattering.

    But, yes way, it happens today.

  304. Chuck Says:

    Of course it’s a cherry pick.

    That’s what saber guys do, they pick a handful of bad votes while ignoring 150 good ones.

  305. John Says:

    Raul, just looked at it.

    The difference between the two with the bat was negligible. Which makes some sense, Yaz won the batting and OBP titles, Howard got the slugging title.

    But: defense matters! A lot. You’re talking about +2 for Yaz and -3.5 for Howard. So, offensively tied, defensively, Yaz increased his value by 20%, Howard reduced his by like 40%.

  306. Raul Says:

    By the way, Kevin Appier was a really good pitcher once.

  307. Raul Says:

    I agree, John.

    I guess Yaz should have placed in the top 4 at least in ‘68

  308. John Says:

    @303, no, it doesn’t happen.

    Greinke was on a last place team and won 16 games compared to 19 for Verlander, Sabathia, and King Felix.

    The next year, Felix was on a last place team and won 13 games, 8 fewer than CC Sabathia.

    Lincecum won with 18 and 15 wins, beating Webb (22) & and Carpenter+Wainwright (17 and 19).

    The baseball community has basically accepted how useless pitching wins are. RBI’s are next. Enjoy the ride.

  309. John Says:

    MCLain was probably the right choice…his WAR being a little lower was the product of a freaky year, just in terms of how pitching dominated across the league.

    Realistically, regardless of pitching dominance league-wide, it’s not realistic to think that a pitcher could put up a 0.95 ERA and 0.750 WHIP, which is what he would have needed to exceed Yaz.

    This distortion is extremely rare and only happens in seasons that are big time anomalies.

  310. Raul Says:

    Sure seems like sinkerballers fall apart once they get injured.
    Chien Ming Wang, Brandon Webb, Ramiro Mendoza. Ok. Maybe not star names. But guys with relative success for short periods.

    Derek Lowe is the only one who seems to have avoided catastrophic injury.

  311. John Says:

    @304, you want me to praise the BBWAA for correctly making Clemens the 1997 winner?

    Many times, the best player also puts up the best traditional stats, if also surrounded by good teammates.

    If the BBWAA makes the right choice on accident, I’m not about to cup their balls.

  312. John Says:

    That’s really the key to Lowe’s “success.” Hanging around. I wonder if any team will throw a deal his way. 1/3M or something.

  313. Raul Says:

    I think people tend to look at ERA more than wins, if you’re going look at one stat…traditionally.
    But ERA always gets looked at with IP.

  314. John Says:

    I dunno man. Look at 1990, between Bob Welch and Roger Clemens. Hell, Clemens even won 21 games (but not 27).

  315. Chuck Says:

    I give you the fact sabermetrics has at least given people the idea that there are other stats than just what appear on the back of a baseball card.

    But the stats people are looking at are still the traditional stats, no one voted for Felix solely because of WAR.

  316. John Says:

    Not solely, but dude.

    He was 13-12.

    For a last place team.

    25 years ago? He not only doesn’t win, he probably doesn’t get a single 3rd place vote.

  317. Chuck Says:

    RBI’s aren’t useless, dumbass.

  318. Raul Says:

    Some numbers just stand out.
    27 wins…you kind of notice something like that. Not saying that’s a reason to give a guy an award, but it’s note-worthy.

    Look, I will say this much…if you picked the MVP by WAR…or just looked at the rankings each year by WAR, it’s certainly interesting.

    Everyone had the 1998 NL MVP going to either McGwire or Sosa. Sosa won it.
    The leader in NL WAR that year? Kevin Brown.
    Next? Barry Bonds.
    3rd? JOHN OLERUD!!!

    Could you have imagined if Olerud would have won the NL MVP in 1998? That would have been amazing to me…if only for the sheer chaos that would have followed.

  319. John Says:

    Except they are.

  320. Chuck Says:

    I get that, John, not disagreeing with you at all on that.

    Neither of us know more than one or two BBWAA voters, and even if voting results are now public, their reasonings behind them aren’t.

    No one, you, me, Raul, Mike (OK, maybe Mike) would need WAR to tell us Felix was the best pitcher, W/L aside.

    I applaud the fact the voters got that one right, how they individually came to their decisions doesn’t matter to me at all.

  321. Chuck Says:

    Voting solely on one or two stats is wrong, regardless of which one’s you use.

    Whomever gave Wilin Rosario a first place ROY vote should have his credentials revoked because his vote had nothing to do with what he did on the field.

  322. Raul Says:

    It’s probably not a stretch to say that wins meant more back when pitchers actually finished what they started.

    A person can find it in their heart to truly credit a guy with a win when he pitches the entire game and gives up fewer runs than the other guy.

    But when a guy leaves the game in the 6th inning with 1 out and runners on base…and the reliever preserves a 4-2 lead and you end up winning the game….well…it’s hard for people to feel like you won that game.

  323. Chuck Says:

    David Price received more Cy Young votes than Justin Verlander, who received more MVP votes than David Price.

  324. Chuck Says:

    “It’s probably not a stretch to say that wins meant more back when pitchers actually finished what they started.”

    Completely agree.

  325. Len Says:

    I think Cabrera would have won even without the triple crown because of what he did in August & September/Oct compared to what Trout did.

    Cabrera: .344/.410/.669, 19 HR, 54 RBi, 42 runs, 73 hits, 25 BB, 142 TB

    Trout: .286/.382/.500, 12 HR, 28 RBi, 49 runs, 66 hits, 34 BB, 115 TB, 18/20 stolen bases.

    On a side note, who the hell gave Raul Ibanez a vote? Also the Rafael Soriano & Jim Johnson votes were terrible. On the N.L. side in the WTF category, someone gave Hunter Pence an MVP vote? They should have their vote taken away. Chipper Jones got a lifetime achievement vote. Why the hell did Alfonzo Soriano get 8 votes? Allen Craig got 10 votes for some reason and Jay Bruce had a 10th place finish for some reason.

    I agree with Raul’s take in that I become less and less interested in award voting each year, I feel like it takes away my enjoyment of the regular season.

    I also agree with Raul in that I don’t have a problem with advanced stats but rather I have a problem with many of the people that act like friggin religious zealots in that only their version and exact interpretation of War or Win Shares or whatever is the one True advanced metric.

    I used to post on “The Baseball Think Factory” quite a bit until I realized that most of the posters were friggin A-holes. They have a thing called “The Hall of Merit” which is a kind of pseudo HOF. I don’t have a problem with people creating their own HOF but some of those people took it so seriously and treated it like it was the word of God. You could basically never criticize the choices or decisions they made or you would be attacked and labeled as a heretic.

  326. Chuck Says:

    “On a side note, who the hell gave Raul Ibanez a vote?”

    See, that doesn’t bother me at was a tenth place vote and made no difference at all.

    Ibanez probably bumped into the guy on a road trip somewhere and picked up his dinner tab…the writer gave him a vote to thank him.

    Stuff like that happens all the time.

  327. Raul Says:

    Well it’s like that whole Gene Tenace thing a week ago with High Heat Stats.

    Tenace was a good player. Nice OPS+ or whatever. Got on base a lot. I guess if you look at other catchers in baseball, Tenace does look favorable. But he’s not in the HOF. People didn’t really value him that highly back then. And so he isn’t in.

    Maybe he would have been a fringe candidate. I mean it’s not Yogi Berra we were talking about.

  328. Chuck Says:

    “I also agree with Raul in that I don’t have a problem with advanced stats but rather I have a problem with many of the people that act like friggin religious zealots in that only their version and exact interpretation of War or Win Shares or whatever is the one True advanced metric.”


    “It’s not sabermetrics, it’s sabermatricians”.

  329. Raul Says:

    When I saw that Ibanez vote, I could have sworn that ballot was sent in after the ALDS

  330. Len Says:

    In fairness to Olerud, he had a hell of a year in ‘98:

    .354/.447/.551, 197 hits 22 hr, 36 2b, 97 runs, 93 rbi, 96 bb, 307 total bases, 297 times on base. Plus he played excellent defensive 1b and should have won the GG. They kept giving the GG to J.T. Snow during those years.

  331. Chuck Says:

    Len’s right..

    When someone sits down and decides he’s going to re-invent the HOF or MVP voting, you should have enough common sense to realize if it spits out Gene Tenace or Chet Lemon, it’s YOUR formula that’s fucked up.

    If you publish it, then whatever crap that’s thrown at you is deserved.

    Next time, fix the formula first.

  332. Raul Says:

    I love Olerud. He was one of my favorite players back then.
    I just think his season got lost in that Sosa/McGwire race.

  333. Len Says:

    Well Tenace is an odd case because he was greatly underrated during his playing days because people didn’t pay attention to walks and on base percentage back then. He has a lifetime .388 on base which is pretty amazing. The problem with Tenace was that he only played about 55% of his career at catcher and the rest mostly at 1b. Even if you did look at him as a catcher he’s a marginal HOF candidate at best. I really only see two catchers deserving of a HOF spot: Joe Torre and Ted Simmons. Torre is going to get in as a manager so it’s a moot point but I’ve always thought Simmons was deserving.

    After Torre and Simmons I would rather choose Munson and Freehan who at least were full time catchers and more deserving than Tenace.

  334. Chuck Says:

    Walks may have been somewhat undervalued then, but they’re overvalued today.

    Guys who always look for a walk, or are afraid to make an out swinging the bat are filtered out of the system in the 10th grade.

  335. Chuck Says:

    It takes more than being really good at one or two things to get into the Hall of Fame.

  336. Raul Says:

    I just find this interesting…

    1998 Nomar Garciaparra

    37 doubles
    8 triples
    35 home runs
    122 RBI
    111 runs
    12/6 Stolen bases/Caught stealing
    33 walks
    62 strikeouts
    140 OPS+

    1998 Derek Jeter

    25 doubles
    8 triples
    19 home runs
    84 RBI
    127 runs
    30/6 Stolen Bases/Caught Stealing
    57 walks
    119 strikeouts
    127 OPS+

    1998 Nomar Garciaparra: 1.8 dWAR
    1998 Derek Jeter: 1.1 dWAR

    1998 Nomar Garciaparra: 6.8 WAR
    1998 Derek Jeter: 7.3 WAR

    Essentially, Nomar appeared to have outplayed Jeter in every capacity except for stolen bases and walks, so Jeter was more valuable?

  337. Len Says:

    Well walks are important and drawing walks is a good skill but I think the problem I see today is that they’re trying to make every batter “look” for walks rather than attack a first pitch, 2-0 or 3-1 count. I think guys like Tenace and Mike Hargrove were unique players in that they were extremely patient and had great plate discipline and could just draw a ton of walks. I don’t think you can just turn every player into a Mike Hargrove nor should you.

    In fairness to Tenace he got stuck in two pitcher’s parks in his career and he had very good power for a catcher and walked a ton. But like I said he was an odd hybrid type player and not really a full time catcher and I don’t think you can make any kind of legitimate HOF case for him.

  338. Chuck Says:

    “I think the problem I see today is that they’re trying to make every batter “look” for walks rather than attack a first pitch, 2-0 or 3-1 count”

    The issues are clearly not on-field.

    No major or minor league teams preach walks over contact.


  339. Len Says:


    Don’t you think teams are preaching working counts and taking pitches to boost pitcher’s pitch counts, etc.?

  340. Chuck Says:


  341. Len Says:


    Jeter outplayed Nomar in on base percentage by 20 points and they were essentially tied in batting average. Jeter reached base 30 more times than Nomar, 265-236. Nomar also played in a better hitter’s park than Jeter so that might account for the difference.

  342. Raul Says:

    There’s a difference in the recent focus in the Dominican Republic to get players to work the count, and ask them to walk.

    A kid at a tryout or workout for a scout isn’t going to look at 4 pitches in a row. He’s trying to showcase his ability. He’ll swing the bat.

    There is this feeling that a lot of kids don’t get into real game situations until they’re much older, so they don’t learn to develop their selectivity as much. That’s why you have guys like Wily-Mo Pena who can hit the the ball to Africa…but also strike out 180 times a year.

    You think Albert Pujols is taking a 2-0 fastball down the pipe? No.
    But he may take 2-0 curveball down the middle. It just depends on what he’s looking for…how he’s been pitched…etc.

    Manny Ramirez was well-known to lay off pitches to set up the pitcher for a bomb in a later at-bat.

    There is a…well, possibly subtle, difference between taking walks and working the at-bat.

    Going up to the plate trying to get a walk is like driving to the hole trying to get fouled. You have to try to score, but if you do things right, you end up with an added bonus in freethrows…or in the case of baseball…a consolation prize of a walk

  343. Raul Says:

    Fair point @ Len.

    But Nomar was better defensively. And the Yankees scored a lot more runs than the Red Sox.

    I have to think the sheer greatness of the yankees mitigates whatever offensive prowess the Red Sox’s opponents showed in Fenway Park.

  344. Chuck Says:

    “mitigates whatever offensive prowess the Red Sox’s opponents showed in Fenway Park.”

    Even if they were juicing…

  345. Chuck Says:

    “There is a…well, possibly subtle, difference between taking walks and working the at-bat.”


  346. John Says:

    Drawing walks is the natural byproduct of working the count.

  347. Chuck Says:

    And that’s why you see so many strikeouts and too many times during a game with guys hitting behind in the count.

    I don’t think guys coming up today know how to work counts.

    Kids coming up today got into baseball as kids during the steriod era and believe the only way to be productive is to hit the ball 500 feet.

    I don’t think it’s a universal way of teaching, it’s still an individual thing.

    Some of the great hitters of all-time had power, some power hitters today couldn’t hit water if they fell out of a boat.

    I read somewhere the top five HR hitters played a combined 111 seasons and had two 100 strikeout seasons between them.

    It’s mindboggling to me how guys accept strikeouts today.

    When I grew up playing, the more you struck out, the less you played..and I liked to play.

  348. Chuck Says:

    “Drawing walks is the natural byproduct of working the count.”

    Not really..the byproduct is getting into a better count which would give you a better pitch to hit.

    Walks are more on the pitcher than the batter.

  349. John Says:

    You don’t draw 100 walks by lucking into crappy pitchers for a full season.

  350. Chuck Says:

    You don’t draw 100 by standing at the plate with the bat up your ass either.

  351. John Says:

    Right, because someone has totally suggested that.

  352. Chuck Says:

    Ryan Braun sucks.

    Set a career high in walks last year…with 63.

    Averages 56 per year.

    Dude should really stop getting 190 hits a year and walk more.

    Maybe if he walked more he’d drive in fewer runs. WTF is he thinking?

  353. Raul Says:

    I wasn’t alive 100 years ago, but I suspect Babe Ruth walked 100 times a year for a different reason than Adam Dunn walks 100 times a year.

  354. Chuck Says:

    And don’t even get me started on Jeter..holy crap, what does he have, seven 200 hit seasons?

    Can you imagine how much better he’d be defensively if he didn’t waste all that energy hitting the ball?

    He should have just friggin’ paced himself and walked another 20 useless times per year..putting the ball in play is soooooooooooooooo old school.

  355. John Says:

    Have you seen who has hit behind Ryan Braun for his career?

    60 walks is about right for a great hitter who hits in front of another great hitter.

    But I know you would rather have a guy with 200 hits and 30 walks than a guy with 170 and 120.

    The second guy would, unquestionably, be better for the team.

  356. Len Says:

    It’s interesting if you look at some of the National League numbers from the past 40 odd years.

    Walks have essentially stayed the same since the early 70’s. Basically the N.L. averaged about 3.1-3.3 BB/9 innings since 1971. There’s only a small spike around 1999-2000 3.7-3.8 bb/9. From 1997-2009 there was a small blip overall about 3.3.-3.5 bb/9. Maybe players are taking more pitches but they’re not really drawing any more walks.

    Two things changed dramatically since the early 70’s. One was pitches used in a N.L. game.

    In the 1970’s that number averaged about 175 pitches. In the 80’s it went up to about 188 pitches in a game. In the 90’s that number shot up to about 260 pitches in a game and in the 2000’s your dealing with about 350 pitches in a game. Last year the N.L. averaged 374 pitches in a game as compared to 1982 when they averaged 179! That’s approximately an extra 200 pitches thrown in a game in only 30 years time. That’s why these games take so long. Part of it is the use of relief pitchers and part of it is the increase in K’s.

    In the 1970’s-1980’s N.L. games averaged about 5.5 k’s per game. In 2012 that number was 7.6 k’s per game.

  357. Chuck Says:

    “But I know you would rather have a guy with 200 hits and 30 walks than a guy with 170 and 120.”

    Are you hungover or something?

  358. Chuck Says:

    “60 walks is about right for a great hitter who hits in front of another great hitter.”

    He missed his career high in strikeouts by one.

    Conversely, Prince Fielder set a career low in walks and missed his career LOW in strikeouts by one.

    So, yeah, Fielder is clearly being protected by a better hitter than he was in Milwaukee.

  359. John Says:

    Maybe Joey Votto should stop getting on base so much and focus on swinging as early in the count as he can. He’ll stop drawing so many selfish, team damaging walks and won’t clog up the bases by reaching base so often.

  360. John Says:

    @358, so Ryan Braun had a shit year by striking out a lot? I guess you’re right. All those strikeouts led to him barely leading the entire league in home runs.

  361. Lefty33 Says:

    “Drawing walks is the natural byproduct of working the count.”

    aka having some form of plate discipline.

    Why do you think that no-hitters are becoming more prevalent?
    Why do you think that offense around the league is in the toilet?

    To a point it’s the lack of juice in the league compared to 10-15 years ago but it’s also the extreme lack of discipline and fundamentals at the plate. Hitters today are making pitchers job’s easier because they’re giving them so many free strikes and free cheap outs that it’s ridiculous.

    Twenty years ago you, short of Rob Deer, would never see guys swinging their heels down 1-2 or 0-2 and now it happens practically every AB from guys you would expect like Mark Reynolds down to a guy like Jimmy Poppins.

    In 2000 17 guys walked at least 100 times. This past year, there was one.

    In 2000 58 guys K’ed at least 100 times. This past year, there were 111.

    I mean hell, Ryan Howard played in a little more then 40% of the Phillies games in 2012 and he struck out 99 times. If he would have played the whole season he would have blown Reynolds “record” from ’09 out of the water.

    Look at the trend from the prior two WS winners:

    In 2011 the Cardinals had the least number of K’s in the NL while they were 3rd in walks.
    In 2012 the Giants were 15th in the NL in K’s while they were in the upper half of the league in walks.

    The way they both won is the new blueprint for success in MLB and it’s why the NL has won five of the last seven WS. The whole Earl Weaver approach of sitting back and waiting for three run HR is dead. While it’s fun to watch guys take that approach in the end when teams do that they have no chance at winning anything meaningful with how the game is currently structured.

  362. Chuck Says:

    “@358, so Ryan Braun had a shit year by striking out a lot? I guess you’re right. All those strikeouts led to him barely leading the entire league in home runs.”

    He’d hit more homers if he struck out less.

  363. Raul Says:

    I feel like we get into this argument all the time.

    Hits are better than walks.
    Walks are better than strikeouts.
    Strikeouts are bad.

    I don’t know if we can agree at which point strikeouts become REALLY BAD…but I imagine once you start approaching 100-120, it’s getting inexcusable. Unless you hit for a lot of power.

    Frankly, if you get up over 130, you’re a disgrace to the game. But that’s just me.

  364. Raul Says:

    Also, let’s not act like the alternative to Mark Reynolds is Ernie fucking Riles.
    There is middle ground.

  365. Lefty33 Says:

    This topic, like most here, has been beaten to death ad nauseum which is quite asinine because the answer is pretty easy:

    Walks > K’s

    Hits > K’s

    Being safe on an error > K’s

    Anything else is better because at least either contact is made or a runner is put on base so the inning can continue and other possibilities can occur.

    A strikeout is flat out useless because it’s no more then a big offensive zero.

    “There is middle ground.”

    Increasingly there really is less and less middle ground as more and more guys that have no business getting K’ed 100+ times a year are.

    Even lightweights like Everth Cabrera are whiffing 110 times, in 2/3 of a season.

  366. Raul Says:

    Lou Brown: What are you doing?
    Willie Mays Hayes: I’m going deep. I buffed up this winter.
    Lou Brown: You needed to, to wear all that jewelry. You’re our lead off hitter. Keep the ball on the ground.

  367. Chuck Says:

    “This topic, like most here, has been beaten to death ad nauseum..”

    And, yet, here we are again. Why?

    Because of the people who think Bill James invented baseball or only know Billy Beane from Moneyball refuse to learn anything, then blame someone else when another hairbrained idea blows up on them.

  368. Chuck Says:

    A hitter’s job is to get on base, it’s not to walk.

    If he fails in his attempts to put the ball in play in the previous half dozen pitches and the pitcher fails to do his job and a walk results, then take it.

    Because it is better than striking out..or getting drilled.

    Just barely.

  369. Chuck Says:

    I was looking at Mike Montgomery’s periperals today.

    Over his last ten games, left-handed hitters were clipping him at .370. Montgomery is a lefty thrower.

    How is that possible?

    Double A lefty hitters shouldn’t be that comfortable against a 6′5″ lefty, especially a guy with a drop down delivery.

    You’d almost have to think he’s tipping something.

  370. Raul Says:

    Yeah. Maybe a team could pick up on tipped pitches. But for lefties to hit .370, the whole goddamn league has to know about it.

  371. Chuck Says:


    Maybe he’s not throwing something too. You know how some lefties don’t like to throw changeups to lefties?

    Take a pitch away that increases the odds of guessing right.

  372. John Says:

    Chuck thinks a walk is “just barely” better than a strikeout.

    What pure idiocy.

    If you want to find out if a team scores a lot of runs, you can look at their walk totals and see a *direct* correlation.

    If you want to find out if a team scores a lot of runs based on their strikeout totals, you might as well just be guessing.

  373. Chuck Says:

    It’s not a soft .370 either.

    Over his last ten games, he faced 456 right handed hitters and gave up 12 homers..he faced 96 lefty hitters and gave up six.

    32% of the lefty hitters he faced reached base either via hit or walk.


  374. John Says:

    The four best teams at avoiding strikeouts watched the postseason on their couches, while 4 of the top 7 in striking out made it.

    By comparison, the 12 worst teams at drawing walks all missed the playoffs.

    This happens every year folks.

  375. Chuck Says:


    Nick Swisher’s wife is pregnant.

    She was born and raised in Tampa..the Yankees train in Tampa. The Yankees don’t want anything to do with him.

    The Rays PLAY in all year.

    Swisher wants a Jayson Werth contract.

    Jayson Werth makes more than the entire Rays roster..almost.

    I think Swisher would be a good fit in Tampa..everyday first baseman.

    Two years..$30 million?

  376. Mike Felber Says:

    So much to say when I get the time, but while some exaggerate value of their favored stats & approaches, it is crazy to say walks are barely better than any out. Ks are more subtle, since while some are too casual & lose out & we can never no for sure how much they could have gained doing so, the direct effect of a K is not much worse than a regular out, measuring all effects.

    Chuck your hated Bill James took the best offensive season to date, Ruth’s, “sweetened” it slightly, then compared the productivity to an avatar who walked every time up. And he did so on a low scoring team, which obviously favors the slugging, not OBP heavy, players.

    Guess which one produced more value? Not by a lot, but clearly. Though this is not teh same as always looking to walk-not realistic & you need to hit, but it shows the great value of getting on base & avoiding walks. You do not need to be a saber fan to confirm this truth.

  377. Chuck Says:

    Anyone who thinks Theo Epstein or anyone else sits around a table and says, “Let’s sign that dude because he walks alot” are kidding themselves.

    Billy Beane didn’t invent anything new, he didn’t make some magical discovery, what he did is look at buying value at below market cost.

    Beane was able to come to this conclusion while guys like Brian Cashman were unable to because he PLAYED the game.

    Beane didn’t sign Scott Hatteberg because he walked alot or hit 20 homers a year, he signed him because he was cheap.

  378. Chuck Says:

    “it is crazy to say walks are barely better than any out.”

    True or False.

    A sacrifice fly is better than a walk?

  379. John Says:

    Look at a run expectancy matrix and you should have your answer.

  380. Chuck Says:

    Afraid to answer?

  381. John Says:

    Is it late in a 1-run game? If so, than true.

    If not, then false, as evidenced by ALL THE EXTRA RUNS THE WALK LEADS TO.

  382. Chuck Says:

    How do you know how many extra runs the walk will lead to?

    You have no idea of what the next hitters will do.

    Nobody manages a game based on expectations or formulas, they manage on matchups.

  383. Chuck Says:

    Jesus, John, what a dumb answer.

  384. Chuck Says:

    No wonder why you avoid answering direct questions.

    I would too if all I could do was drool on the front of my shirt.

  385. John Says:

    How do you know one run will be enough?

    You don’t.

    So, it behooves more if you put yourself in a position to score more runs, since a single run is almost never enough.

  386. Chuck Says:

    What does “late” matter?

    A walk in the third inning has nothing to do with what happens in the seventh.

    You always take the guaranteed run.

  387. Chuck Says:

    “How do you know one run will be enough?”


    Again, always, without hesitation or question, take the run.

    I care about the inning I’m in now, not four innings from now.

  388. John Says:

    How is the 7th inning different than the third? Um, I dunno. Maybe the fact that the other team has fewer chances to come back, dumbass.

    The guaranteed run has been proven, over and over again, to be less valuable than the extra baserunner in terms of the runs it leads to.

    The reason Beane and others won so much was that the rest of the league thought as Chuck does now.

    Those kinds of people are dinosaurs of the game, largely extinct except in the franchises that finish last year after year (Mariners, Royals).

    The teams that innovated and accept the importance of reaching base are the same ones that magically make the playoffs every year.

    Enjoy your tape player and type writer old man. The rest of baseball has moved on.

  389. Chuck Says:


  390. John Says:

    Cool, 4 innings from now you’ll be losing 4-1, so good job playing for the sure run.

    If one run is all you play for, one run is all you will receive.

  391. Chuck Says:

    Your data sheets kick out numbers based off years of numbers and gives an average.

    Which means half have a higher likelihood, and half lesser.

    You manage to the situation.

    A run in the first off Roy Halladay is far more important than off Kyle Kendrick.

  392. Chuck Says:

    “Cool, 4 innings from now you’ll be losing 4-1, so good job playing for the sure run”

    And how do you know what the score will be, Carnac?

  393. Chuck Says:

    “The teams that innovated and accept the importance of reaching base are the same ones that magically make the playoffs every year.”


  394. John Says:

    No, see, 70% of the time it leads to a better result.

    Today, Arkansas took the sure points against LSU, 4th and goal from the 1.

    If they had gone for it, they had a 90+% chance of making it. But they took the sure points, and in an act of poetic justice, lost.

  395. John Says:

    Runners at first and third, 0 outs has an 87% chance of scoring at least 1 run, ergo the walk is as good or better than a sac fly 7 times out of 8.

    The expected gain after said walk is 1.85 , so more than 50% better than the sac fly on average. As good or better 87% of the time.

    In a tie game, with just one or two chances left? Give me the extra 30%.

    Otherwise, give me the extra 0.85 runs on average.

  396. John Says:

    Sorry, give me the extra 13%.

    But I guess it’s an extra 0.7 runs since you sometimes score with one out and no one on.

  397. Raul Says:

    Maybe we underrate the impact of a run?

    1-0 isn’t likely to hold up. But as Billy Martin used to say: you put up one, they need two to beat you.

    What was the average win difference this year? My guess it was something like a half run or something. One run means a lot.

    They say that a lead off walk leads to big innings. But it’s not because of the walk, but likely because of what a walk seems to indicate: poor pitching performance.

  398. John Says:

    Sure, 1 run is a significant difference. But the average team scored over 4 runs. I’d rather play for the opportunity to play for more than 1 early.

  399. Raul Says:

    Do we know what the chances of winning were when a lead was taken in the first inning? Or first few innings?

  400. Raul Says:

    Teams really do make a lot of money with interleague play.
    Otherwise, I’m sure teams would protest. Without it, the Yankees probably don’t make the playoffs in a lot of the past few years. Seems like they always win the division by a few games and the difference ends up being their massive dominance of the National League.

  401. John Says:

    @400, isn’t that level of dominance fairly constant throughout the AL? It’s just a better league.

    @399, the later a lead change, the greater the swing in win probability (for a given a lead), because the losing team has fewer chances to mount a comeback.

    Early on, the opportunity to increase your potential lead trumps your opportunity to manufacture a small lead. In later innings, you’re more concerned with simply getting ahead; therefore you trade an expected opportunity for multiple runs in exchange for a more probably chance at one.

  402. Raul Says:

    Not sure if the AL is all that much better.
    The National League has won a good chunk of the last few World Series.

    First and Second…nobody out. It’s easy to see why you’d swing away and hope for the HR. But it IS a gamble. One ground ball and you’re looking at man on 3rd with 2 outs. Talk about one shitty fucking inning.

    First and Second…nobody out. Sacrifice. Second and Third with 1 out. You’re almost guaranteed 1 run. And if there’s a base hit, definitely two.

    If that happens in the 1st inning, and you get 2 runs in a game where you’re going to be lucky to get 4 total (isn’t 4 the league average?)…well shit, you just reached half of the total you need to win the game right away.

    Maybe the math proves me wrong, but it sure seems like the guarantee of 1 run is more attractive than the jackpot of 3 runs. I just don’t like the risk of the double play in there.

    That said, I’m not calling on Cano to bunt with Jeter on 1st.

  403. Mike Felber Says:

    OK, a little housekeeping.

    It is very possible that Cabrera still wins MVP absent the TC. But dominating the vote in no way proves it. Len is correct that late season play made some impact, we do not know how much. But the whole point about the arbitrary stats of the TC & iot\\ts impact on voters shows that you fall a bit short in leading one stat, maybe you lose a ton of votes. That is not me reflexively defending SM: in fact, you could argue the opposite, because if true, it would show how still SM truths have not penetrated nearly far enough amongst BBWAA voters.

    if you have the time Chuck, go ahead & write for HHS. Any forum benefits from a variety of opinions. They do know much about baseball history, are a very bright & polite bunch, & though you could not call ‘em douchbags there, it is better to face the other side & be held accountable for assumptions all sides make.

  404. Mike Felber Says:

    Yaz & Howard: I have long noted how great Yaz was in ‘67 & ‘68, 10 & 12(!) BWAR. Is it justified? Seems so, or very close: a 193 OPS + playing a superb LF for 161 games in ‘67. John accounted for the huge discrepancy in value with their respective defenses, but there is one more factor: same OPS +, but Yaz had a much greater OBP. It just translates into more value, normally 1.8 OBP vs. 1.0 slugging describes the relative value of each offensive component. Also a .326 BA in ‘67 was superb. Yaz had what traditionalists like, OBP was BA heavy, & did not K much.

    But while that helps a bit, the high OBP is much more important. Also Howard struck out a ton more. Has some impact on offensive value, but most is OPS +, & more from OBP means a good deal.

    Yes Raul, runs clearly correlate more with winning than OBP. WHEN you are talking about what a player does to score runs. Trouble is, R & RBIs have so much line up, league, park & era noise, they have a very limited & imperfect reflection on what the man in question does. So there are tons of stats that measure offense, asjusted wins, adjusted runs, offensive win %, R/27…Or the simple balancing of the OPS + components, weighted OPS +.

    If you think I might need WAR to tell me King Felix deserved the Cy Young Chuck, this proves you have been paying little attention. I have talked in much detail about peripheral pitching stats, & basics like WHIP & ERA +, also accounting for team defense…

    I would only quibble with you John that Mr. 31 wins deserved the MVP. It being a freakish pitching year does not mean you cannot & should not account for how dominant a guy was in adjusted stats. But all those wins was going to carry the day. Just like Palmer was excellent, but without great teams & defenses, he has many seasons with wins in the late teens, not 20’s. A guy like him can be excellent but still overrated.

  405. John Says:


    Like you said,, it pretty much depends on where you are in the batting order (and where you are in the game).

    On average, you’re expected to score 1.556 runs with guys on first and second, 0 outs. That average drops to 1.447 with guys on second and third, 1 out. At the same time, however, your odds of scoring at least 1 run increase from 64 to 69% (but still not a guarantee!)

    Now, this kind of thing is based on league averages. If your 7 &8 hitters reach? Yeah, go ahead and bunt them over, because your #9 hitter produces a much lower expected result if he just swings away.

    The other thing to remember: bunts are no guarantee.

  406. John Says:

    Mike, I’m not saying we don’t evaluate for context – I’m saying that there’s a structural limit to how good a player, whether hitter or pitcher can be.

    Most years, this isn’t an issue.

    But if you have a year like 1968, then there’s a cap. McClain had a 1.91 ERA, sub-1 WHIP for 370 innings.

    Wins are a stupid stat, but in his case, 31 wins came from a combination of longevity and dominance. There’s a limit to how dominant a guy can be for that long, regardless of how pitcher-friendly the conditions are…and I think he was pretty close o that.

  407. Raul Says:

    LaHair signed a 2 year deal for 4.5 million in Japan.
    Don’t you think he could have gotten that kind of money here?

  408. Raul Says:


    Dave Cameron, who apparently writes for ESPN and FanGraphs wrote an article listing 3 players that could bounce back in 2013. They are:

    Rick Porcello
    Drew Stubbs
    Ryan Roberts

    …and they’re going to bounce back from what, exactly?

  409. Raul Says:

    Not to be outdone in galactic stupidity, I give you David Schoenfield…

  410. Chuck Says:


    Cherry one said anything about how many outs there were.

  411. Lefty33 Says:

    “The four best teams at avoiding strikeouts watched the postseason on their couches, while 4 of the top 7 in striking out made it.
    By comparison, the 12 worst teams at drawing walks all missed the playoffs.
    This happens every year folks.”

    Pseudo irrelevant argument John seeing as the team that has been WINNING the WS has been a team that has been a low K team.

    2012 – Giants were 15th in the NL in K’s.
    2011 – Cardinals were 16th in the NL in K’s
    2010 – Giants were 13th in the NL in K’s (yet they were terrible at drawing walks)
    2009 – Yankees were 13th in the AL in K’s

    And the same basic trend was present for the Phillies in ’08, Red Sox in ’07, and Cardinals in ’06.

    Why are the Rangers now are perennial playoff team?

    It’s because they stopped striking out.

    2007 – 2nd
    2008 – 4th
    2009 – 1st
    2010 – 11th (made playoffs)
    2011 – 14th (made playoffs)
    2012 – 11th (made playoffs)

  412. John Says:

    No, the Rangers are a perennial winner now because they have pitching, which they hadn’t had in years past.

  413. Chuck Says:


    No words.

  414. Lefty33 Says:

    No, the Rangers are a perennial winner now because they stopped wasting AB’s with strikeouts which they had done a lot of in years past.

  415. Lefty33 Says:

    @409- That was funny as hell.

    I liked the part about the Phillies and Rangers trade especially since Schierholtz isn’t under contract with the team for ‘13.

  416. John Says:



  417. Chuck Says:

    #412..even more cherry picking.

  418. John Says:

    In 2008, the Rangers gave up 944 runs; the year before, 844.

    They’ve given up between 675 and 710 runs each of the last 3 years.

    That’s why they keep making the playoffs.

    If, after losing a game 7-5, you think the issue was striking out instead of grounding out in a key spot – and not the whole giving up 7 runs thing – you need to re-evaluate your own evaluation skills.

  419. Lefty33 Says:




  420. Raul Says:

    I’m gonna have to say a combination of both.
    Those Rangers rotations back in the RA Dickey days were awful.

  421. Chuck Says:

    Hey Cherry 2007 the Rangers allowed 133 fewer runs over 2008, and lost four more games.

    So, yeah, that pitching theory’s not really holding up.

  422. Mike Felber Says:

    That is not a tenable argument John.

    1) Denny had 336 IP, not 370. His ERA + was 154, he did not lead the league.

    2) Meanwhile same year in the generally tougher (then) NL, Gibson had a 258(!) ERA + in 304 IP. Both had about the best performance they could for THEM, & Denny had an excellent year.

    3) ‘68 & ‘69, McClain had a 7.5 & 6.8 ERA +.
    Gibson had an 11.1 & 10.3.

    4) McClain had much better defenses helping him, & Gibby hit much better.

    5) There is no reason to believe that WAR, fully supported by peripherals like WHIP K/9, K/9 BB/9, hr/9 & the more advanced stats, does not basically represent his true value that year.

  423. Mike Felber Says:

    & h/9, Gibby 5.8 in ‘68.

  424. Mike Felber Says:

    Sorry, #3 above is obviously represents a WAR comparison, not ERA +.

  425. Raul Says:

    Amazing. Even the most diehard sabermatrician would be hard pressed to try and fuck McLain out of his Cy Young.
    Mike just burrowed down to a new level of statistical scumbaggery.

  426. Chuck Says:

    In 1971, pitching for a Padres team that lost 100 games, Dave Roberts posted a 7.0 WAR.

    McLain’s 1968 WAR was 6.8.

  427. Mike Felber Says:

    Looking it up, that was his career year. Which team was successful or terrible does not matter for WAR. Robers WAR was a bit better, much worse defenses, & he hit a bit. So this is plausible.

  428. Chuck Says:

    Watching ESPN Classic tribute to Macho Camacho.

    He became a grandfather at age 36.

  429. John Says:

    Lefty actually thinks “not striking out” is actually more important than having good pitching.

    It’s fucking incredible to me that someone – a pitcher no less – can have such a batshit retarded theory.

  430. John Says:

    @421, the Rangers scored 90 more runs in 2007 than 2008, accounting for the win difference.

    But yeah, the issue with a team that scored 901 runs and gave up 967 was striking out too much. Sure.

  431. Chuck Says:

    You’re clueless, John.


  432. Chuck Says:

    “Yaz had what traditionalists like, OBP was BA heavy..”

    What are you implying, Mike?

  433. John Says:

    The R^2 coefficient is a tool used to measure the correlation between variables. It varies between -1 and 1;

    The relationship between run differential and wins would be pretty close to 1, like 0.99.
    The relationship between WHIP and wins would have a strong negative correlation, like -0.99. The more baserunners you give up, the fewer games you’ll win.

    Strikeout avoidance has a historical correlation of 0.015 with run scoring. Basically 0. Slightly better than number of letters in the team name.

  434. Chuck Says:

    “The more baserunners you give up, the fewer games you’ll win.”

    Does that surprise anyone else? I never would have guessed that.

    Might take me a couple of days to fully does it work equally in the opposite direction?

    The more runners you get on base, the more runs you’ll score?


    So, in each inning, the first three guys walk and the next three guys strikeout.

    So that would be 27 base-runners and 27 outs…but no runs?

    So, I guess the theory doesn’t always work then?

    That’s the problem with averages…they’re averages.

    You don’t manage on averages, you manage on situations.

  435. Raul Says:

    I should apologize. I meant MVP, not Cy Young.

    Anyway, who is on the HOF ballot this year?

  436. John Says:

    If that’s your idea of a theory it’s a pretty bad one.

    Averages work out for a long period of time, say 162 games.

    You play 162 games, averaging 27 baserunners and 27 strikeouts, you would go like 149-13.

  437. Raul Says:

    27 baserunners is a lot of baserunners.

    I don’t think anyone is saying you’re a worthless player if you strike out. But 140, 150, 160…200 strikeouts?!?!?!!!

    There’s just no way. I mean just as a matter of pride you cannot allow yourself to strike out that much. You are a Major League Baseball player. It stands to reason that you reached the top of the mountain because you are able to make contact with the baseball…even if it’s weak contact. Last I checked, every rotation wasn’t stacked with Walter Johnsons.

  438. Lefty33 Says:

    “Strikeout avoidance has a historical correlation of 0.015 with run scoring. Basically 0. Slightly better than number of letters in the team name.”

    Who gives a shit about that pinhead?

    The point, your reading comprehension has been shown to be a bit shall we say….slow over the years so let’s try again, is that the game is always evolving and the way to win a WS now is by not striking out/manufacturing runs.

    Pretty hard to dispute that when the last seven WS winners have all had that as a common denominator.

    But let me guess, that’s just luck (I’m sorry, let me speak your language…..
    BABIP)or some other crazy reason/excuse that you’ll come up with.

    “It’s fucking incredible to me that someone – a pitcher no less – can have such a batshit retarded theory.”

    Theory = No Fact = Yes Batshit = No John is an acronym crazed dipshit = Yes

  439. Lefty33 Says:

    John actually thinks “striking out” is something every team should try more of in an effort to win a WS because having men on base and moving them along is apparently irrelevant to scoring.

  440. John Says:

    The FACTS suggest that striking out doesn’t matter that much. Historical correlation, looking at a far greater sample.

    Among the very best teams of all-time, you’ll find some that struck out a lot, and some that struck out little.
    Among the very worst teams of all-time, you’ll find some that struck out a lot and some that struck out a little.

    Your pointing to a handful of teams that had great starting pitching and weren’t even in the best teams in the league over the more statistically significant 162 game season. Look at the big picture. It’s not important. The Athletics set an AL record for strikeouts and won their division. They broke a record set by the 2010 Rays who also won their division.

    If you have great pitching and great bats, you’ll go far.

    If the best thing about your team is that they make their outs in a slightly more helpful way? Well, you’re probably the Royals and you haven’t made the playoffs in 27 years and won’t make it anytime soon.

  441. John Says:

    @437, to me, it depends on why you’re striking out that much.

    If it’s because you’re Mark Reynolds and you swing from the heels on every pitch and miss too often, I don’t really want to spend money on you.

    If it’s because you’re Adam Dunn and you take a lot of closer strikes and strikes that just weren’t what you were looking for (with 0 or 1 strike) then you can be a reasonably productive hitter since you work the count, gain more favorable counts, make solid contact by waiting for your pitch, and draw a lot of walks.

    Two guys, both with lots of strikeouts, but for completely different reasons.

  442. Lefty33 Says:

    “then you can be a reasonably productive hitter since you work the count”


    I don’t care how many walks you have because when you hit four points over the fucking Mendoza Line while striking out the second highest amount in the history of the sport’s 143 year history you are neither selective-productive or really much more then a caveman with a club swinging wildly at a Wildebeest.

    You want selective with K’s then bring up Thome who could K 185 times in a season while still hitting .291. But he and Dunn are not even in the same discussion.

  443. Lefty33 Says:

    “Look at the big picture. It’s not important.”

    I did and it’s called winning the WS and the teams that I mentioned have all done that. I don’t give a shit about the A’s getting bounced early, again, or the wannabe Rays.

    The big picture is winning the WS and neither team you mentioned has done it nor will they do it anytime soon.


  444. Mike Felber Says:

    Chuck I was just citing the irony that Yaz was so well rated by WAR & also did so well by the lights of traditional measures like BA (especially for the era).

    A few years where a team with greater success correlated with a factor like Ks means exponentially less when considered over 7 compared to 162 games Lefty. It does come down to sample size, the much larger one filters out coincidental factors & meaningless noise.

    There is a problem with guys striking out carelessly & not knowing how to face a count. Though some who K a lot just are due to skill sets that stress power hitting, & may be more productive yet unable to significantly effect Ks. It is not easy to tell except in extreme cases-granted there are more of them-how much Ks can be modified.

  445. John Says:

    The “wannabe A’s” and Rays have the lowest payrolls in baseball and both won at least 90 games last year.

    The “don’t strike out at any cost” Royals finished last, again.

  446. John Says:

    Actually they didn’t finish last…the Twins did, and they were also top-5 in MLB at not striking out. Marelvelous predictor Lefty.

  447. Chuck Says:

    It takes a combination of things to win a division.

    Ask the Atlanta Braves how much great pitching matters.

    Ask the Yankees about how much just run scoring matters.

    The only reason John’s arguing pitching is to argue.

    If Lefty had said pitching, then John would be arguing strikeouts.

  448. Chuck Says:

    Strikeouts is one stat, “pitching” is an accumulation of many.

  449. Raul Says:

    The all time hits leader board is more impressive than the all time strikeouts leader board.

    But whatever.

    My niece just sang me the ABC’s song. My Sunday is sweet…until the football games start. The Packers will probably smack the Giants.

  450. Mike Felber Says:

    Try getting it wrong & trying it repeatedly. “A B C G E F Genie, Hi I J OK…Throw in a TV & some extra cheese, end with a Y it’s so EZ…’lil kids delight in teaching you & this kinda comedy. I should patent that.

  451. Chuck Says:

    Holy crap..

Leave a Reply