metsmarathon

i'm cool with a quick and dirty yes/no on the clear cut choices. the borderline guys deserve more thoughtful analysis than "i wasn't feeling him" what have you looked at that has changed your perspective? what exactly does bp say about closers? if you're voting rice and dawson in, what does that have to do with parker? shouldn't the comparison be with someone else you keep out? or did we run out of slots on the ballot?

Nymr83 wrote: agree 100% with vic sage. good defense can push you over the top, particularly at a tough defensive spot. i'd be hard pressed to think of a player who i'd keep out because his defense was "bad" but would put in if he had managed to be "below-average to average" with the same offensive production. i'm not saying this player could not hypothetically exist just that i cant identify him. what's your stance on DH's?

the only thing i would add to vic's analysis is to continue out the math as such: offense (50%) + defense (50%) = everything (100%) offense (50%) = defense (50%) offense (50%) = pitching (37.5%) + fielding (12.5%) offense = 4 x fielding (because its all still being divided up amongst 9 guys) so offense is 4x the value of fielding, lets say. but the runs count the same, right? if my defense is so bad that it costs the team a run, that's made up for by my offense being so good that is gains my team a run. there's no 4:1 ratio of defensive runs to offense runs, only that, ostensibly, the opportunity to contribute offensively is greater than the opportunity to contribute defensively. and if i give up that run as a poor fielding shortstop or a poor fielding pitcher, its still the same run that my poor fielding has given up. so if we were to presume that we could measure defense well enough, and quantify it in terms of runs, then this would provide a measure by which we could compare a player's offense to his defense, and measure his entire contribution, and compare that whole-game contribution to the whole game contribution of another player. and then it doesn't matter what position, necessarily, a player played - if his position is more important, he's had greater opportunities to save or cost runs, and the number of runs saved or cost would be determined by the quality of his play at that position. and so a player who cost his team 10 runs in left field would have had the same defensive contribution as a player who cost his team 10 runs in shortstop. and a player who created 90 runs with his bat, but cost his team 10 runs with his glove will have contributed similarly to a player who created only 70 runs with his bat, but saved 10 runs with his glove. now, the latter player might not be as noteworthy, but his contribution to his team was no less.

if a player played shoddy defense, would it be fair to say that that should detract from his legacy?

="Nymr83"]Kiner's 10 years were hall-worthy. He is 26th on the career OPS list (36 on OPS+.) Puckett doesn't come close to Kiner's production and doesn't have the longevity to get around that. so then you place no value on defense as a means whereby a player could augment his merit?

to address your desired expulsion of kirby puckett, i would ask how you would evaluate the candidacy of one ralph kiner.

we should play "if you could, who would you remove from the hall of fame?" wouldn't that be fun?

="Nymr83"]i've read her before and come away with the opinion that she is racist. If Pettite was white she'd be defending him just as she has defende Bonds and Vick in the past. just what color is andy pettitte? also, i hate when people get paid for typing things like "riiiiighhhttt" use italics or something instead, fer chrissakes. there's better ways to put sarcastic emphasis in text that just by doing the drawn out spelling shit. and even if that's really what you want to do, what's with the extra h's and t's, with regulation r's and g's? the drawing out is done all on the i. nobody's getting their money's worth by overpronouncing the t. having not read her words on bonds and/or vick, i can only say that i agree with her on handy andy's "apology"

metirish wrote: ="Edgy DC"]Jaw-dropping: http://blog.silive.com/yankeeswatch/2007/12/pettitte_once_again_shows_noth.html WOW, needs to be read to appreciate how bad this is. ]The report was incomplete and if you can't expose every last former user, names shouldn't have been included. and yet, the blogger in question goes on to name players HE suspects. i would ask, if he cannot identify all of the players that he considers PED suspects, then he should also refrain from naming any PED suspects. also, the logical extension of his argument is that we would never, ever know who had taken PEDs, as it would be impossible to prove that every former user has been identified. the report is incomplete, certainly. but that doesn't invalidate what content is has. in his perfect world, there would be no baseball, and being a yankee would be meaningless, as what would the yankees be without competition? a bunch of guys wearing matching shirts. and do we really really want just to be a bunch of guys wearing matching shirts? that's just gay.

you mean players taking steroids to improve upon their abilities and performances isn't the same thing as players and managers possibly predetermining the outcome of games, including world series games, under pressure from gamblers? no!

i believe that to be frequently cited as the seeming majority of players who've actually tested positive have been latin, specifically dominican, iirc. that's a problem in itself that the mitchell report doesn't really touch on.

i'd wait for a formal announcement, or the start of spring training, or the point where the contest becomes decided anyways and therefore the last few points don't matter in determining the winner. i need to get back to updating this thing! frig!

not matt franco!

i would have thought their plan to replace him has become brad lidge

ryan church: ]An article in Sunday's paper about Baseball Chapel quoted Church as saying that he had turned to [chaplain Jon Moeller, an FBI agent who volunteers for Baseball Chapel, the Pennsylvania-based evangelical Christian group that provides unpaid ministers for many major and minor league teams] for advice about his former girlfriend, who was Jewish. "I said, like, Jewish people, they don't believe in Jesus. Does that mean they're doomed? Jon nodded, like, that's what it meant. My ex-girlfriend! I was like, man, if they only knew. Other religions don't know any better. It's up to us to spread the word," Church said. you see hate there? i see concern for the soul of someone who he was just told wouldn't get to heaven because of her beliefs. this concern would have been expressed had the person in question been muslim, buddhist, confucian, atheist, etc. and is rooted in teh belief that knowing and accepting jesus, etc. is the only way into heaven. now, the jewish part of the equation is currently considered incorrect, but had he asked if taoists were doomed and ineligible for heaven, would there have been the outrage? should there have been? would a taoist even care? a taoist should say, so? i don't believe in your heaven anyways. and a jew could make the argument that my christian ass isn't going to heaven either, because i've gone and split up a monotheistic god into three pieces! does that mean jews hate me? i hope not. but lets look back into the words of the immortal and prehaps heaven-ineligible john rocker. ]"So many dumb asses don't know how to drive in this town," he says, Billy Joel's New York State of Mind humming softly from the radio. "They turn from the wrong lane. They go 20 miles per hour. It makes me want -- Look! Look at this idiot! I guarantee you she's a Japanese woman." A beige Toyota is jerking from lane to lane. The woman at the wheel is white. "How bad are Asian women at driving?" ... On ever playing for a New York team: "I would retire first. It's the most hectic, nerve-racking city. Imagine having to take the [Number] 7 train to the ballpark, looking like you're [riding through] Beirut next to some kid with purple hair next to some queer with AIDS right next to some dude who just got out of jail for the fourth time right next to some 20-year-old mom with four kids. It's depressing." On New York City itself: "The biggest thing I don't like about New York are the foreigners. I'm not a very big fan of foreigners. You can walk an entire block in Times Square and not hear anybody speaking English. Asians and Koreans and Vietnamese and Indians and Russians and Spanish people and everything up there. How the hell did they get in this country?" ... In passing, he calls an overweight black teammate "a fat monkey." Asked if he feels any bond with New York Knicks guard Latrell Sprewell, notorious for choking coach P.J. Carlesimo two years ago, Rocker lets out a snarl of disgust. "That guy should've been arrested, and instead he's playing basketball," he says. "Why do you think that is? Do you think if he was Keith Van Horn -- if he was white -- they'd let him back? No way." Rocker is rarely tongue-tied when it comes to bashing those of a race or sexual orientation different from his. "I'm not a racist or prejudiced person," he says with apparent conviction. "But certain people bother me." y'know what, steve... you're right. its like they're the same person, isn't it? oy.

SteveJRogers wrote: ="Edgy DC"] Threatening to murder his wife, Steve. A woman has every right to place that beyond the pale of her tolerance. You equate that with Alfonzo maybe taking steroids, based on your speculation. No, the point I was making is that all franchises, heck all forms of entertainment, have people who you root for that have skeletons of various degrees. I didn't even say any of the stuff I mentioned was on the same level, what I was saying is that the Mets have plenty of examples where non-fans can point to you as a Met fan and say "How can you root for..." ah, but its in the degree where your point is lost. if hitler really was a met, you'd root for him?

ryan church expressing a belief that non christians might have a hard time getting into (christian) heaven and that it might be a good thing to do to enlighten them of that, is hardly the same as a) hating non christians and threatening to murder your wife.

i don't see a good reason to change it up. go with what works, but perhaps with a more set schedule (that i will be looking to file requests for exceptions for once my turn comes around)

the cost in terms of prospects should be mitigated by the cost in terms of dollars that hte mets would be getting back. not to mention the uncertainty inherent with both willis and pudge.

(other than steve...)

damn... well, i still suck in my other leagues, a fact that my newfound inability to access any and all fantasy sporting sites due to increased internet scrutiny at work will not be likely to ameliorate in any imagineable way.

sigh... my autodraft team in our league is doing very well - first place well in fact - but my live-drafted teams are sucking major ass. one is understandably so in that its a bunch of white guys with a late draft pick, and my other team which should probably be better is just all kinds of injured. this is totally going to skunk my yahoo profile, since i really don't think i'm attentive enough to maintain a full year in our number one spot!

if the yankees have indeed pulled out of the santana running over some overly early and curt deadline, allowing him to either reach the sox on the (slightly) cheap via trade or hit the free agent market next year, then hank might just become my favorite owner in all of sport.

why does it say "no post exists for this topic" if i click on the last page of the thread, currently on #6?