Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 36 of 38 FirstFirst ... 263435363738 LastLast
Results 526 to 540 of 570
  1. #526
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,239
    Baez hater back lol...heís been disappointing me lately. He hasnít taken a walk in forever, and I know heís flashy, but Iíd still take Addyís D over him anyday. Obv his RBI production and 10 Homerís has been awesome, I hope he can keep it up...not so sure he can tho. Meanwhile Addys OBP keeps creeping up.

    I still think overall Russell is better then Baez.

  2. #527
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    1,611
    Quote Originally Posted by Iceman85 View Post
    Baez hater back lol...heís been disappointing me lately. He hasnít taken a walk in forever, and I know heís flashy, but Iíd still take Addyís D over him anyday. Obv his RBI production and 10 Homerís has been awesome, I hope he can keep it up...not so sure he can tho. Meanwhile Addys OBP keeps creeping up.

    I still think overall Russell is better then Baez.
    Look at his last three years. Has he ever not kept it up? He's got the best track record out of any of them (the Russell, Schwarber, Happ, Heyward group).

  3. #528
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    1,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Iceman85 View Post
    Baez hater back lol...heís been disappointing me lately. He hasnít taken a walk in forever, and I know heís flashy, but Iíd still take Addyís D over him anyday. Obv his RBI production and 10 Homerís has been awesome, I hope he can keep it up...not so sure he can tho. Meanwhile Addys OBP keeps creeping up.

    I still think overall Russell is better then Baez.
    Please stop.

    There is no argument as of this second who is better. Addison is a AAA hitter right now.

    Baez hit 2 rockets today, one had a 90% hit chance, that Inciarte ate up. The other was a 110 mph rocket that Camargo dove for. If even one of those gets through at worst we are in extra innings.

    Javy was better in the 16' playoffs, all of 17' and easily so far in 18'. He's pretty much had this offense on his back so far.

  4. #529
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    41,488
    Russell has a 310 wOBA. That's not a AAA hitter, Buffalo. Would you call Baez a AAA hitter in 16 and 17?
    Last edited by WOwolfOL; 05-15-2018 at 01:42 AM.

  5. #530
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    1,611
    People can have Russell, that's fine. I like Russell, too. But I'll take Javy over him all day long - at short, too. I'm glad we have both, though.

    Not that the Orioles would do it, and it would be contingent on signing him, but I'd trade Russell, Schwarber and maybe Happ, maybe someone else, for Machado in the blink of an eye.

    (I have no interest in Harper)

    I'd target A.J. Pollock for a three year deal for left field next year and then in 2020 I would target Nolan Arrenado for third and move Bryant to left or right.

    In 2020:

    1B - Rizzo
    2B - Baez
    SS - Machado
    3B - Arrenado
    LF - Pollock
    CF - Almora
    RF - Bryant
    C - Contreras

    Total fantasyland, but whatever. I've seen much dumber things around here so I might as well join the club. Most already consider me in anyway.

  6. #531
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    5,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Seyton View Post
    People can have Russell, that's fine. I like Russell, too. But I'll take Javy over him all day long - at short, too. I'm glad we have both, though.

    Not that the Orioles would do it, and it would be contingent on signing him, but I'd trade Russell, Schwarber and maybe Happ, maybe someone else, for Machado in the blink of an eye.

    (I have no interest in Harper)

    I'd target A.J. Pollock for a three year deal for left field next year and then in 2020 I would target Nolan Arrenado for third and move Bryant to left or right.

    In 2020:

    1B - Rizzo
    2B - Baez
    SS - Machado
    3B - Arrenado
    LF - Pollock
    CF - Almora
    RF - Bryant
    C - Contreras

    Total fantasyland, but whatever. I've seen much dumber things around here so I might as well join the club. Most already consider me in anyway.
    Why do you want Machado but have no interest in Harper? I'm pretty much the opposite. I want Harper and have little interest in MM long term. Pollock isn't signing a 3 year deal. I'd guess something along the lines of Lorenzo Cain's deal is fair. How are they paying Machado, Pollock, and Arenado in this fantasy?

    And since I'm asking questions, I noticed you used bWAR for Quintana's 2017 rather than fWAR, why do you like bWAR better?

  7. #532
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    1,611
    Quote Originally Posted by CP_414 View Post
    Why do you want Machado but have no interest in Harper? I'm pretty much the opposite. I want Harper and have little interest in MM long term. Pollock isn't signing a 3 year deal. I'd guess something along the lines of Lorenzo Cain's deal is fair. How are they paying Machado, Pollock, and Arenado in this fantasy?

    And since I'm asking questions, I noticed you used bWAR for Quintana's 2017 rather than fWAR, why do you like bWAR better?
    With respect to Machado vs. Harper: I like Machado's overall results and consistency better than Harper's. I think Machado's WAR is better, too, if I'm not mistaken and he plays terrific defense at a premium position.

    Harper's had, to my mind, only one eye-popping season and a couple of very good, if not abbreviated ones - he's only played more than 140 games twice in six seasons and one of those was only 147. One poor season and a couple of just good seasons. I don't trust his ability to stay on the field and I don't think his past performance when he's been on it warrants the money he's going to get.

    I think you'll get better results from Machado at a position that is harder to fill than Harper's.

    As for Pollock - I don't know if he wouldn't take a three year deal or not. He's a prove it guy to me - and his ability to stay on the field has been much, much worse than Harper - or most guys for that matter. But for him I'd take that risk because I think that will hold his money and years down as well as the weak outfield class on the market this winter.

    I think they can find a way to pay Machado, right? Just like most think there's a way they can pay Harper. I don't know what it is, though. I addressed Pollock above and Arrenado? I'm not sure, but they not paying Russell, Schwarber and Happ might help as well as possibly moving some big contracts if they're able to. The new TV deal? Zobrist coming off the books? Accepting the luxury tax for a couple of years? I'm not going to lie - I'm not entirely sure. Maybe some guys arrive in the next couple of years.

    In terms of bWAR vs. fWAR, at least for pitchers, I like RA9 vs. FIP. FIP is too general for how I view the game and how my brain works. Yes, there can be some "unlucky" hits, but there can be a lot of bad pitches that get murdered and are just swept away by FIP. And I don't buy that a pitcher is as in control of his strikeouts and walks as much as FIP assumes - bad calls or 50/50 calls by umpires influence that. And is it good pitching or bad hitters that lead to strikeouts and what is the split (percentage) and vice versa for walks? Like I said, it's just how my brain works - too many spiderwebs (questions of questions of questions) for me.

    I much prefer RA9 because I want my pitchers to prevent runs period. That is the goal. I like ERA, but I'm not a fan of how it's calculated. If something bad happens I want my pitchers to get out of it - not let three runs across and not get charged with them. That's empty to me. It's straight forward - at the end of the day I only care about how many runs they give up and while FIP takes into account defense, or the lack of it as it treats it, pitchers would be a lot worse off without it, wouldn't they? I think it's silly to say that pitchers have no control over balls in play. Their location, their velocity, their pitch selection, etc. are all things they can control. Or that defense hinders the pitcher's success. In the micro, why play the shifts that our guys hit into all the time? In the macro, as jokingly asked above, why play defense at all, then?

    I just don't like FIP. I'm more interested in not allowing runs and if bad things happen, making pitches to get out of trouble or minimize damage. Just because a pitcher didn't walk someone or give up a homerun doesn't mean he did well.
    Last edited by Seyton; 05-15-2018 at 12:49 AM.

  8. #533
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    4,654
    WOWOWOWOW

    Quintana is so great, great trade!!!11!
    Quote Originally Posted by La_bibbers View Post
    You're way more likeable

  9. #534
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    9,313
    Quote Originally Posted by WhyCantWeWin View Post
    WOWOWOWOW

    Quintana is so great, great trade!!!11!
    That is the most positive thing you have ever said on here.

    Just think about that for a moment.

  10. #535
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10,492
    Quote Originally Posted by Seyton View Post
    People can have Russell, that's fine. I like Russell, too. But I'll take Javy over him all day long - at short, too. I'm glad we have both, though.

    Not that the Orioles would do it, and it would be contingent on signing him, but I'd trade Russell, Schwarber and maybe Happ, maybe someone else, for Machado in the blink of an eye.

    (I have no interest in Harper)

    I'd target A.J. Pollock for a three year deal for left field next year and then in 2020 I would target Nolan Arrenado for third and move Bryant to left or right.

    In 2020:

    1B - Rizzo
    2B - Baez
    SS - Machado
    3B - Arrenado
    LF - Pollock
    CF - Almora
    RF - Bryant
    C - Contreras

    Total fantasyland, but whatever. I've seen much dumber things around here so I might as well join the club. Most already consider me in anyway.
    Wait! You would trade all of Russell, Schwarber and Happ and maybe someone else for Machado? Is this what you are suggesting? Or do you mean one of those and someone else. All of them is absolutely ridiculous for 1/2 a season of Machado. Even if they sign him they sign him they would be losing all those players for just 2018. They can always wait and sign him this off season.

  11. #536
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10,492
    Quote Originally Posted by WhyCantWeWin View Post
    WOWOWOWOW

    Quintana is so great, great trade!!!11!
    I think most here can agree Quintana has not been good this year. More bad then good, anyway. But when people suggest he has not been good since the Cubs traded for him that is just not true. When he came over he went 7-3 with a 3.74 ERA, a 1.103WHIP, and averaged over 10 K's per 9 innings while walking only just over 2 per 9. Hate to say it to those who want to hate him, but those are good numbers.

    As for the nonsense that the Cubs should have had Cole, the fact is at the time of the deal Q was the better buy. Easy to second guess now. But that is just not fair. Nor is it fair to say Q has sucked since they got him. Because it is just not true.

    I get the frustration with him. He bugs the heck out of me too, this year. But when cutting him down there has to be some fairness and not some ridiculous rants like I have seen.

  12. #537
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,103
    Quote Originally Posted by CubsRule08 View Post
    Looks like Cishek should be getting a letter in the mail soon

    The league does not want to admit that black or white are shades and not colors.

    Idiotic. It's not that they are wearing a color other than their own teams.

  13. #538
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    5,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Seyton View Post
    With respect to Machado vs. Harper: I like Machado's overall results and consistency better than Harper's. I think Machado's WAR is better, too, if I'm not mistaken and he plays terrific defense at a premium position.

    Harper's had, to my mind, only one eye-popping season and a couple of very good, if not abbreviated ones - he's only played more than 140 games twice in six seasons and one of those was only 147. One poor season and a couple of just good seasons. I don't trust his ability to stay on the field and I don't think his past performance when he's been on it warrants the money he's going to get.

    I think you'll get better results from Machado at a position that is harder to fill than Harper's.

    As for Pollock - I don't know if he wouldn't take a three year deal or not. He's a prove it guy to me - and his ability to stay on the field has been much, much worse than Harper - or most guys for that matter. But for him I'd take that risk because I think that will hold his money and years down as well as the weak outfield class on the market this winter.

    I think they can find a way to pay Machado, right? Just like most think there's a way they can pay Harper. I don't know what it is, though. I addressed Pollock above and Arrenado? I'm not sure, but they not paying Russell, Schwarber and Happ might help as well as possibly moving some big contracts if they're able to. The new TV deal? Zobrist coming off the books? Accepting the luxury tax for a couple of years? I'm not going to lie - I'm not entirely sure. Maybe some guys arrive in the next couple of years.

    In terms of bWAR vs. fWAR, at least for pitchers, I like RA9 vs. FIP. FIP is too general for how I view the game and how my brain works. Yes, there can be some "unlucky" hits, but there can be a lot of bad pitches that get murdered and are just swept away by FIP. And I don't buy that a pitcher is as in control of his strikeouts and walks as much as FIP assumes - bad calls or 50/50 calls by umpires influence that. And is it good pitching or bad hitters that lead to strikeouts and what is the split (percentage) and vice versa for walks? Like I said, it's just how my brain works - too many spiderwebs (questions of questions of questions) for me.

    I much prefer RA9 because I want my pitchers to prevent runs period. That is the goal. I like ERA, but I'm not a fan of how it's calculated. If something bad happens I want my pitchers to get out of it - not let three runs across and not get charged with them. That's empty to me. It's straight forward - at the end of the day I only care about how many runs they give up and while FIP takes into account defense, or the lack of it as it treats it, pitchers would be a lot worse off without it, wouldn't they? I think it's silly to say that pitchers have no control over balls in play. Their location, their velocity, their pitch selection, etc. are all things they can control. Or that defense hinders the pitcher's success. In the micro, why play the shifts that our guys hit into all the time? In the macro, as jokingly asked above, why play defense at all, then?

    I just don't like FIP. I'm more interested in not allowing runs and if bad things happen, making pitches to get out of trouble or minimize damage. Just because a pitcher didn't walk someone or give up a homerun doesn't mean he did well.
    I disagree with much of this, too much to really get into today, but I appreciate the thoughtful response.

  14. #539
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    506
    Javy's rankings in the NL....

    5th in HR's
    1st in RBI's
    1st in triples
    2nd in slugging
    3rd in total bases

    Impressive!

  15. #540
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Seyton View Post
    With respect to Machado vs. Harper: I like Machado's overall results and consistency better than Harper's. I think Machado's WAR is better, too, if I'm not mistaken and he plays terrific defense at a premium position.

    Harper's had, to my mind, only one eye-popping season and a couple of very good, if not abbreviated ones - he's only played more than 140 games twice in six seasons and one of those was only 147. One poor season and a couple of just good seasons. I don't trust his ability to stay on the field and I don't think his past performance when he's been on it warrants the money he's going to get.

    I think you'll get better results from Machado at a position that is harder to fill than Harper's.

    As for Pollock - I don't know if he wouldn't take a three year deal or not. He's a prove it guy to me - and his ability to stay on the field has been much, much worse than Harper - or most guys for that matter. But for him I'd take that risk because I think that will hold his money and years down as well as the weak outfield class on the market this winter.

    I think they can find a way to pay Machado, right? Just like most think there's a way they can pay Harper. I don't know what it is, though. I addressed Pollock above and Arrenado? I'm not sure, but they not paying Russell, Schwarber and Happ might help as well as possibly moving some big contracts if they're able to. The new TV deal? Zobrist coming off the books? Accepting the luxury tax for a couple of years? I'm not going to lie - I'm not entirely sure. Maybe some guys arrive in the next couple of years.

    In terms of bWAR vs. fWAR, at least for pitchers, I like RA9 vs. FIP. FIP is too general for how I view the game and how my brain works. Yes, there can be some "unlucky" hits, but there can be a lot of bad pitches that get murdered and are just swept away by FIP. And I don't buy that a pitcher is as in control of his strikeouts and walks as much as FIP assumes - bad calls or 50/50 calls by umpires influence that. And is it good pitching or bad hitters that lead to strikeouts and what is the split (percentage) and vice versa for walks? Like I said, it's just how my brain works - too many spiderwebs (questions of questions of questions) for me.

    I much prefer RA9 because I want my pitchers to prevent runs period. That is the goal. I like ERA, but I'm not a fan of how it's calculated. If something bad happens I want my pitchers to get out of it - not let three runs across and not get charged with them. That's empty to me. It's straight forward - at the end of the day I only care about how many runs they give up and while FIP takes into account defense, or the lack of it as it treats it, pitchers would be a lot worse off without it, wouldn't they? I think it's silly to say that pitchers have no control over balls in play. Their location, their velocity, their pitch selection, etc. are all things they can control. Or that defense hinders the pitcher's success. In the micro, why play the shifts that our guys hit into all the time? In the macro, as jokingly asked above, why play defense at all, then?

    I just don't like FIP. I'm more interested in not allowing runs and if bad things happen, making pitches to get out of trouble or minimize damage. Just because a pitcher didn't walk someone or give up a homerun doesn't mean he did well.
    I agree with the RA9 logic. To me, the pitcher has one job......preventing runs. How can we simply remove balls in play? Some balls are smoked, and some are dribblers. Good pitchers induce soft contact. I'm not interested in excuses why a pitcher gave up runs. Woulda, coulda, shoulda doesn't matter at the end of the day.

    As most on here, I do not like ERA at all either. If a runner gets on base via the error that would have been the third out, and then the pitchers gives up 5 runs, they don't go against him? Come on! Run prevention is the name of the pitching game.

Page 36 of 38 FirstFirst ... 263435363738 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •