Frayed Knot

No Joe Buck, the home-field edge IS a small advantage. Citing the winner of WS series that didn't go seven games is meaningless to your point since the HF advantage never comes into play. In fact, if a Series is won in Five games then the team WITHOUT the HF edge actually gets a HF edge which runs specifically contrary to your point.

Good Lord Kevin James is fat!!

I first went to Nats Park like three or four years ago and noticed at that time that they had exactly four advertisers each of which had two small signs at different locales in the stadium (like one on the wall and one attached to the scoreboard or something similar). I know they've added more since and possibly even more this year based on last year's on-field success. The larger point being here, it's not like all stadiums that have less advertising signage are that way because they make some sort of aesthetic decision to limit things. Sometimes it's because they have trouble attracting more and if they could cover more places they would. I'm sure the Nats would have loved to open their new park with more advertising than what could be placed on an average bedroom wall but probably found companies either unwilling to back a new venture or (knowing that town a bit) if they did want to attach themselves to sports were probably already in the huge line of folks trying to hitch their wagon to the Redskins. And, yes, I've long gotten a kick out of the idea (noted somewhere up above) that modern advertisements are often considered to be crass commercialism but things like the Abe Stark: 'Hit Sign - Win Suit' sign, or 'Ballantine Blasts' and White Owl Wallops' are treated as warm nostalgia.

Well, it's both foolish and against the rules to announce their targets before they are available. But how else are they going to SHOW US THE PLAN!!!!? I used to get a kick out of the discussions on the old MoFo that would break out following each GM appearance on WFAN, inevitably starting with the complaint that, "he didn't tell us anything!", as if they expected him to make a public pre-announcement along the lines of: 'yeah, after we release everyone on the squad who's not paying well right now we'll be dealing Smith & Jones to the _______ next week for X. Y, & Z, all of which will set us up to sign Johnson & Perez in this winter's FA market'.

Of Atlanta's broken outfield, as of yet they've only DL'd one of the Uptons (BJ) but not the other or Heyward. And speaking of injured NL East OFers, Philly CF Ben Revere broke his foot and is shelved for at least six weeks. Looks like Mayberry in CF with Young & Brown in the corners for the time being.

MFS62 wrote: But if they can't ... and must be traded to improve the team, why can't they be replaced with a new pair for whom I have high hopes? They certainly CAN, in fact they can be replaced by anyone of a number of options. The part you're being cautioned on is the claim that Puello & Flores; "will both be ready to become regulars by next year". Davis & Duda have already achieved ML regular status yet many have decided that they no longer "gotta believe" in them. Thinking that a pair of untested rookies will both not only be able to fill in but presumably improve on what we're getting now is a bit of the 'grass is always greener' theory being applied. Besides, the purpose of the thread is to make you choose between which you'd jettison.

Harvey - 2.2 Torres - 1.0 Aardsma - 0.7 Edgin - 1.0 Parnell - 1.0 Rice - 0.2 Burke - 0.4 Young - 1.5 Buck - 0.8 Byrd - 0.7 Murphy - 0.5

There's no sport/activity that Chris Berman can't make worse simply by his presence.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The problem with Keith is that he was once Keith Hernandez. The other problem is that MLers/ex-MLers tend to believe that results from clutch situations CAN be easily disseminated and that they themselves have/had that ability to raise their games at such times. IOW, I don't believe Keith is particularly unique here. A lot of it, I suspect, is selective memory. As Joe Morgan often (inadvertently) made clear during his announcing days, player memories of their careers, or of specific instances within those careers, are often at odds to those 'fact' things that tend to get in the way of a good story. I remember reliever Rob Brantley yapping on TV one time (MLBN I think) about how he surely had bad days out of the pen 'but if the game was on the line ...' he never failed - or something along those lines, I forget his exact claim. But at the time I looked up his record and of course it didn't back up what he was saying was stone-cold fact. There's probably also a healthy dose of constant reinforcement from those around them (media, fans, managers, relatives, agents, etc) telling such players how truly special they are/were that it probably becomes hard for them Not to believe it.

Harper hitting 9th, eh? Sounds like Bochy is a 'pay your dues kid' kind of guy.

RBIs are more a byproduct of your hitting than a measure of it. This statement implies that there is no human element to the game whatsoever. I'm pretty sure that, deep down, you know that is not true. It's not that a human element doesn't exist, it's more that simple RBI numbers are an inaccurate way of showing it because there are just too many other factors involved. And, again, succeeding in RBI situations over and above the norm is certainly a fine thing to do. The problem is that such prowess is rarely repeatable over time. We've already seen that with Davis last season when his lousy 1st half produced RBIs at a greater rate than his much better 2nd half - and we're not even talking about different players with different psyches here, this variation was all just from one player within one season. Another example: when Hidecki Matsui was in his early years with the Yanx, Mike Francesa and other Yanqui fans marveled at his "clutch hitting ability" and usually cited his RBI stats as proof of such. Now 'Godzilla' was a very good hitter in those days at the prime of his career so, yeah, that makes him a great guy to have in the middle of your lineup. But unmentioned in the RBI stats was the fact that Matsui was 1st, 2nd, and 1st in all of baseball in having runners on base at the time he came to bat in those first three NYY seasons. Obviously, more runners on base equals more opportunities for RBIs giving him an advantage over equal or possibly even superior hitters based on just opportunity alone. What was NOT true was that his hitting suddenly improved, or, put more accurately, that he was not consistently better in those situations; in some years he was but in others he was not. And that's the overall problem with believing in "clutchness" as some kind of innate trait; if it's not repeatable or consistent it's tough to say that it really exists in the first place. The bottom line is, when I want runs driven in and I'm given the choice of a so-so hitter who is rumored to possess some sort of ability to suddenly out-perform his usual self in given (and often poorly defined) situations, or a guy who's just plain the better hitter -- give me the better hitter.

MFS62 wrote: Flores(1B) and Puello (RF) will both be ready to become regulars by next year. More than a bit speculative.

Little known fact, but curio display cabinets are always among the first things looted during riots.

Hefner - 4.5 Parnell - 1.0 Edgin - 0.3 Satin - 2.4 Young - 0.4 Brown - 0.5 Wright - 0.5 Byrd - 0.4

Being presented with an opportunity (in the case, men on base) and what you do with that opportunity is a measure of ability, is it not? I think that it is. Your hitting ability (that is to say your overall hitting ability) is the best measure of your hitting ability. The problem with throwing in RBIs is that it's often a measure of how often you come up with men on base (what's the rest of your lineup, where you hit within that lineup) and/or (mostly 'And') the timeliness of your hits. Again, RBIs are more a byproduct of your hitting than a measure of it. And if you ask; 'What's wrong with timely hitting?' ... well, nothing of course, except that it's usually random and not a repeatable skill. For example, even when Ike was lost in a forest during the first half of 2012 he was getting a surprising number of RBIs because the HRs that he was hitting usually came with men on base. He hit much better in the 2nd half but it's not like he had the ability to decide when those hit came. Look at these numbers: Ike 2012 - 1st half -- 268 ABs .201/.271/.388 (BA/OBA/SLG) with 12 HRs and 49 RBIs ... FORTY NINE RBIs!!! the dude was on pace for a 100 RBI season and we couldn't stop talking about how much he stunk!! Ike 2012 - 2nd half -- 251 ABs .255/.346/.542 with 20 HRs but just Forty-ONE RBIs He hit better--MUCH Better--post-ASB yet drove in fewer runs despite nearly twice as many HRs in virtually an equal number of ABs, and I don't think any of us would opt for his first half over his 2nd. The difference was all in when the hits came but if 'when' were a skill he would have simply chosen to direct those hits to ABs with better circumstances.

Mex17 wrote: Nymr83 wrote: Mex, RBI are about as stupid an individual stat as pitcher Wins and I find it hard to believe you'd want to use them to "bolster" your argument. No offense intended, but are you nuts? The problem with RBIs is that they're very team and lineup dependent; what team you're on at what time and where you hit in that lineup are all big factors. RBIs are, to some extent, an outcome based on one's circumstances rather than a measure of ability.

CASABRANCA -- Camera zooms in on a broken down pitcher staring into the bottom of his glass muttering to himself: "Of all the fastballs in all the ballparks in all the world, he has to run into mine" THE WIZARD OF ODDS -- The Pete Rose Story: The Managerial Years Give us a bit of dialog, a scene, a set-up, or maybe a sub-title that turns a non-baseball movie into baseball movie.

The brief radio reports I heard late Saturday night didn't mention any public tantrum although it did suggest that there wasn't exactly a parade of guys going over to him giving out the standard 'Hang with it kid' kind of pat-on-the-back send-offs that usually accompany such demotions.

Loney's got no power at a power position, and he's a poor fielder. I remember him as a good fielder (at least when he first came up, haven't seen him enough recently) but, yeah, the power is minimal* for his position. If we're trading or demoting Ike I'd prefer to stick Duda there and take a chance on him unless a better alternative from outside is available. I don't think Loney is significantly better. Duda's sudden problem is that an OF spot for him is completely gone right now unless Byrd is dealt and, even then, Young in RF and Duda in LF isn't as strong offensively or defensively as what we've got now. To the question that we first started to tackle here maybe two years back: Duda-v-Ike: Who do you keep?, the answer clearly has to be Lucas right now although the final answer may wind up being -- Neither! * IsoP = .123 for the cumulative years 2008-2012. That's below league average for all players and certainly below what you'd want from 1B

Even if he wasn't the final out, there no way you can over-emphasize how big getting Mercer was at that point with McCutcheon & Alvarez coming up behind him. I would have considered Parnell walking him to be a bigger sin there than just about anything.

Nice job by Gee keeping the Buccos down while the bats were busy trying NOT to score since the three-run 1st. Wish he had gotten just one more out though.

"[crossout:1056f4tk]Tough break[/crossout:1056f4tk] [u:1056f4tk]Bad[/u:1056f4tk] [u:1056f4tk]Play[/u:1056f4tk] there Danny boy. Picked off by a ground ball." I fixed your syntax for you. The net effect of that play was like [u:1056f4tk]UN[/u:1056f4tk]stealing two bases.

Mets have had Cole on the verge of being yanked from this game several times. But now they've hit into the last five outs on just six pitches starting with the Young GiDP to end the 4th.

I don't know that Turner is ready.

Nymr83 wrote: I guess its more moves coming after the break, a lot of innings lately they probably felt they needed help in the pen. Yeah, you can go one day without a backup SS and almost certainly get away with it (or press Wright into service if need be) so there's no harm is having an extra reliever for the day. I assume that after the break we'll see Germen demoted in favor of a position player - just who that is will be interesting.