Holliday to Oakland?

[batmagadanleadoff]

="Edgy DC"]I think going from 129 to 105 has kind of redefined extreme.

I know what you mean. I posted my message before I got through reading the entire thread. We'll see if 105 is a fluke or representsative of the new trend. I still hate Coors, though. The air is still thin ... it still reduces the break on a pitched ball. The place is just too odd for baseball at the major league level, if anyone asks me. (No one has). I'm also suspicious of this humidor thing and the way it's enforced. How does anyone know if the Rockies aren't getting livelier balls to hit?

[batmagadanleadoff]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: ="batmagadanleadoff"] ="Vince Coleman Firecracker"]I think Holliday gets exposed this season. He'll only be a cut above league average away from Coors. I love it when this stuff happens to a Rockie. I'm so sick of players from that team being regarded as if they were as good as Ted Williams. It's only a matter of time before the Rockies eventually do get the next legitimate Ted Williams. And that guy'll probably bat .500 with 70 home runs a season over there. If I was in charge of things, I would've never put a team in Denver in the first place. I realize that the city does a terrific job of supporting the Rockies, but I loathe the way the extreme atmospheric conditions in Denver distort the statistical end of the game. I totally disgree with this. I like that there's a team in Denver, because their fans support it first, but especially because it showcases the diversity of the conditions in our country. And seeing how the team can adapt to the advanrtages and disadvantages of its home park has always been a fun part of baseball. I care not for how fucked up the stats become. It's windy in San Francisco, humid in Miami, pleasant in SD, cold in Detroit, etc etc. That's baseball in the USA, I say.

I agree with every single point you made. Except the part about the stats.

[smg58]

Holliday could still post an OPS a bit above .900 playing in Oakland. It's a fair question, though, if one year of that from a leftfielder is worth an established closer, a young starting pitcher whose rookie year performance was better than his won-lost record by itself would suggest, and a toolsy outfielder who ranked high on most top prospect lists the last two years.

[Guest Edgy DC]

="batmagadanleadoff"] ="Edgy DC"]I think going from 129 to 105 has kind of redefined extreme. I know what you mean. I posted my message before I got through reading the entire thread. We'll see if 105 is a fluke or representsative of the new trend

It's been trending downwards since 2001.

="batmagadanleadoff"]I'm also suspicious of this humidor thing and the way it's enforced. How does anyone know if the Rockies aren't getting livelier balls to hit?

It's the umpire who decides which balls to put in play.

[batmagadanleadoff]

="Edgy DC"] ="batmagadanleadoff"] ="Edgy DC"]I think going from 129 to 105 has kind of redefined extreme. I know what you mean. I posted my message before I got through reading the entire thread. We'll see if 105 is a fluke or representsative of the new trend It's been trending downwards since 2001. ="batmagadanleadoff"]I'm also suspicious of this humidor thing and the way it's enforced. How does anyone know if the Rockies aren't getting livelier balls to hit? It's the umpire who decides which balls to put in play.

Is this entirely blind and random? How does the system work, exactly?. I'm asking because I'm not sure. I thought that the Rockies managed and supervised the humidor. My web search to determine precisely how the humidor balls are distributed, step-by-step was unsuccessful.