nymr83

seawolf17 wrote: What an unimpressive logo. agreed, i'd have used a cartoon of a zero where the baseball is.

if not for TWO YEAR (dumb dumb dumb) contract i could even see him gone by mid-year if he's unproductive because the Mets have guys just like him...as it is we're stuck with him and i expect him to get about 150 undeserved ABs

] It is funny, isn't it, that the exact opposite measures (putting in glove guys for your big offensive threats) is standard practice, practically a no-brainer, when you HAVE a huge lead, no? I'm not sure what the huge difference is here. going to defensive replacements in the LAST inning has no downside, just as pinch-hitting in your last at-bat has none, but to do it earlier is something i have criticized in the past.... i can remember Piazza specifically being pulled from games where the Mets had a small lead and then him not being there when it suddenly got tied up again.

]But is the reverse true? If you're down 12-1, can you switch to your best offensive lineup? Is defense less important when you're down by many runs? even if your sole objective is winning the game (ignoring everything about resting players etc) i still say no. your chances of scoring more runs may have gone up but your chances of allowing even more runs even if you do score has gone up as well, and i'd have to say that it has gone up even more than your chance to score, if not why isnt that guy starting in the first place?

Bret Sabermetric wrote: ="Nymr83"]I still think resting the regulars is the best thing you can do when you fall down by that many runs, How is putting Diaz, a good offensive/poor defensive bench player, into the game instead of Joe McEwing, a worse offensive/better defensive bench player, not giving your starting 2Bman the same exact amount of rest? you're trying to change my words around, its not going to work. i'm not putting diaz in the game INSTEAD of mcewing, i'm putting them BOTH in at different positions so as to rest MORE of my starters

]CBC claims baseball stats become historical facts when the game is completed. Major League Baseball claims it should have control over that information. The court didn't buy that crap from the NBA against Motorola, i doubt they'll buy it now

]I'm talking about putting Victor Diaz into the game instead of Joe McEwing at 2b and positioning him 100 feet further back Considering that Diaz was once a 2Bman he can't be bad enough there that you wouldn't just leave him in the infield... I still think resting the regulars is the best thing you can do when you fall down by that many runs, the better question YOU should be asking is whether this strategy of yours is at all viable in a situation where you aren't going to pull the regulars because you have a much better chance at a comeback (say down 2 runs.)

]Well, this is just "giving up." Not that there's anything wrong with giving up, but I'm arguing that in a give-up situation you try some different strategy that will get you back into a game. I don't understand why your weak-hitting 2B man (who plays in the field all the time) wouuld need less rest than a slugging outfielder. That makes no sense. He could of course need more rest, but he could just as well need less rest, too. my 2Bman will presumably be replaced by a backup IFer as well. Getting backups into games that are well out of reach serves not only to rest the starters but to get the backups some ABs and hopefully keep them a bit fresher.

Bret- my reasoning for NOT doig what you suggest is as follows- in a 162 game season every player is going to need some time off, and i'd prefer that my best players take that time at the least important times. down by 7 runs in the 7th inning i'd argue that the last 3 innings of that game will be amongst the least important of the season, so rather than replace my 2Bman with my 4th OFer i want to replace my best OFer with my 4th OFer and get him the rest of that game off.

Bret Sabermetric wrote: Not sure you mean Gwynn or Burrell here, but ALL of this team-killer stuff is luck, because even a lifetime of chances is a small sample. well, there could be reasons behind it such as the team he kills having bad pitching or their park being heavily biased towards righties/lefties

well within what would be expected given his stats, you'll get a few extra hits here and there against a team and its just luck...those aren't Chipper Jones numbers.

maybe we can sell LoDuca to Japan? He can turn into a perenial all-star like every other American reject player that goes over there.

its never been tried to my knowledge so i doubt theres a specific rule about it, but it smells of a team trying to get around the arbitration process and the union is sure to not like that.

hitting the cutoff man is in the same category of "dribbling without turning the ball over in your hand"....they just dont do it anymore.

time to put away the markers, kids...

it is not unreasonable to expect a "polished" college pitcher who is 21 or 22 to be in the majors in a year and a half, a 17-year old however is so far away from the majors (in general) that i wouldnt even talk about him. Its Wilpon's money so he can spend it how he likes but these 16 and 17 year old kids from nowhere seem to pan out alot less than college guys. but hey this guy didint cost a draft pick so who cares

Frayed Knot wrote: Charlotte is the Chi Sox top affliliate well it just sounded like something to blame on the braves, oh well.

fuckin braves affiliates.

the career numbers of any hitter who played after the the '94 strike are in serious doubt. Ripken and Gwynn aren't a problem because they played most of their careers before that time and didn't do anything significant (in terms of statistical production, not milestones) afterwards. Bonds was a hall of famer even if his post-strike years had matched his earlier ones. The problem is that there are going to be a TON of guys with very impressive stats (and questions about steroid use) and you can't just let them all in (i hope.) If i'm voting next year i induct Blyleven, Rice, Gossage, Gwynn, and Ripken. unfortunately the presense of these new guys will probably keep Blyleven and Rice out at least another year (when are they eligible until?) I have to wait in McGwire and hope to god that some more information on the 'roids comes out, if it doesn't i still don't regret keeping him out on the first ballot. Marris isn't in the hall either, there's no rule that a single-season record holder needs to be inducted. When is Edgar Martinez up for induction? the DH-debate should be fun.

congrats to Sutter but i still think Blyleven and to a lesser extent Rice are getting the shaft and have been for years.

i dont really even have a problem with the draft picks getting money, i just hate the idea that A) guys get picked lower than they should because the small market teams cant afford their demands and they can pull a JD Drew. i'm not sugesting that you slot the salaries to rip them off....base the slotting on averages from the past X years and adjust in the future.

Johnny Dickshot wrote: It's enough already to limit a player from negotiating with all but one employer. Now telling that potential hire there's a limit on what that single employer can pay him? I'm pretty sure if someone (Boras) wanted to challenge that legally he could bring down the whole freakin system. nobody brought down the NBA or NFL's systems.

thats a fuckin joke, the players are so overpaid it isnt even funny

its pretty bullshit the contracts that prospects can extort from major league teams. why havent they agreed on "slotted" salaries like the NBA has? it would theoretically benefit the union as much as the owners since minor league players arent union members and it would free up more money for big league players contracts.

Yancy Street Gang wrote: Yikes. David Wright's father is only four years older than I am. Since my oldest is only nine, it's easy to forget that I'm old enough to be the parent of an adult. Wright's younger brother is older than Valadius and Wright himself is only a few months older than i am.