Vic Sage

if i had dropped my pants anywhere in the vicinity of the tv, that no-hitter would not have happened. ask anybody. as for my favorite moment this year, i'd have to say it was sometime in March when i looked at the team we had compiled in ST and just knew it wouldn't be worth shit this year and decided, at that moment, that the Wilpons would not get one red cent from me this season.

i don't think Staub ever did it for NY; but i'm pretty sure Fonzie did it, a couple of times.

Mazz

I agree; i didn't think he pitched enough to get anything other than an "incomplete", but if you were going to give him an actual grade on his 3 starts and 20 IP, then it would be around a B, based on his results. The F seems to blame him for getting injured AND the poor results from an assortment of incompetent starters trying to fill his slot (schwinden, Batista, Heffner, McHugh, etc). Or its just a hangover from past hate.

PITCHERS = 15 [u:34dotrnc]starters:[/u:34dotrnc] Dickey - A Niese - B+ Harvey - B+ Young - C Gee - C Santana - C- Heffner - D Batista - F [u:34dotrnc]relievers:[/u:34dotrnc] Parnell - B Rauch - C+ Byrdak - C- R. Ramirez - C- Edgin - C- Francisco - D Acosta - F [u:34dotrnc]"Incomplete":[/u:34dotrnc] Pelfrey Schwinden Mejia McHugh Familia E. Ramirez Hampson Carson Beato Carrasco Egbert G.Olson PLAYERS = 15 [u:34dotrnc]starters:[/u:34dotrnc] Wright - A Davis - B- Murphy - C+ Tejada - C Duda - C- Torres - D Thole - F Bay - F [u:34dotrnc]Bench:[/u:34dotrnc] Hairston - B+ Baxter - B Cedeno - C+ Valdespin -C Turner - C Nieuwenhuis - C- Nickeas - F [u:34dotrnc]Incomplete:[/u:34dotrnc] Shoppach Quintanilla Johnson Rottino Lewis Lutz Satin

1 game out of the money, gosh darn it. To think, right now i could not be drinking Korbels i don't have.

bmfc1 wrote: Attn seawolf17: Adam Rubin ?@AdamRubinESPN Marlins will start Stony Brook U./New Rochelle H.S. product Tom Koehler against the Mets in the season finale, while using entire bullpen With me being a SB alum and with my daughter going to New Roc HS, and my son a few years from there (and with a Mets loss tying me for the win in the "predict the Mets" thread), I'm cheering for Koehler today. Go Fish!

kimbrel's been great... over the course of 61.2 INNINGS! Now while i don't absolutely rule out the CY for relievers (cough, cough... own award... rolaids... cough cough), i would only consider it in a year where there were no dominant pitchers... um, i mean, starting pitchers. And this year, there are more than enough starters with legit candidacies not to have to consider guys who've thrown 60 innings. Similarly, while King Felix showed its possible (and appropriate) to win the CY with relatively few wins when you absolutely dominate all the meaningful pitching stats (as he did that year over Price and Sabathia), but where those stats are in the same ballpark, its not inappropriate to use wins as a tie breaker, if there is a distinct difference in that category. Kershaws 12-9 record isn't enough with his small edge in some of the other categories over the 20 game winners. And Gio's 1-game lead over Dickey isn't meaningful, given Dickey's dominance in so many categories. Cueto is a legit dark horse, but he lost the WAR lead and its hard to put his numbers in a park-adjusted context that's comprehensible to most voters. Plus Dickey is the best story. So I still think it's going to be R.ightful A.ward-winner Dickey.

i like Verducci's list.

A pitcher's winning % vs his team's W%. I think that is an overlooked evaluation marker; to the extent "W"s tell us anything, i think this offers some insight when evaluating a particular season for a pitcher.

MFS62 wrote: The old stats VS valuable discussion, and the reason why the Sporting News used to (do they still?) name a "Player of the Year Award" , usually to the player with the best stats, instead of an MVP. You could say the Silver Slugger Awards do the same thing. I hate to say it, but if you take Captain Intangibles out of the Yankee lineup this year, IMO they wouldn't be anywhere close to winning their division. But if you just condider Trout and Cabrera, the record of the Halos with and without Trout in the lineup is a similar situation. Later i'm not quite sure i understand your point, but if its about that notion many MVP voters have that "valuable" means the best hitter on a division winner, then i beg to disagree. "most valuable player" was a phrase created in a more genteel time; it has a literary, metaphorical quality, as was the fashion. It wasn't taken literally, beyond the notion that certainly the best player in the league would be most valuable to his team. In 1911, the first 2 MVPs, TY Cobb and Frank Schulte, both played for 2nd place teams. Even after the award changed and was taken over by the BBWAA in 1931, early winners might be found on non-1st place teams (Chuck Klein, Jimmy Foxx, Charlie Gehringer, Joe Medwick, etc.). It's only in the modern era that voters began to take that phrase literally, overlooking better players for those that were good on good teams. It's frankly moronic. Every team has an MVP; so just let the 2 pennant winners pick their own MVPs and they get the award. And we can continue to overlook the best players in the league. yeah, that's sensible. Or we can get truly literal and think of "most valuable" as that player who created the most win shares per dollar of salary. Because if "value" can't be quantified into a dollar sum, i don't know what can. ON that basis, too, i'm sure Trout beats Cabrera.

This race is becoming a real "old school" vs "moneyball" debate. The old-schoolers are saying a triple crown for a division winner should be an automatic MVP, and the Metrics crowd poo-poos the importance of RBI (too lineup and team-dependent) and BA (doesn't measure anything well; OB% and SLG% are better), pointing to WAR instead. The facts are that (1) triple crown winners have failed to win MVPs in the past, (2) the triple crown stats are flawed and don't measure other aspects of a player's game (like Trout's excellent defense in CF and game-changing speed on the bases), (3) the triple crown is an arbitrary standard for an MVP (if Hamilton outslugs him by 1 HR, denying him the triple crown, should his case for MVP really be diminished?), and (4) while Cabrera has carried Detroit to a division title (which was partially due to a ChiSox collapse), Trout similarly turned CA's season around, having the best record in the league since his arrival, with a better record than Detroit overall. So without even getting into a debate about the utility of WAR, I would still make the case for Trout as the best overall player (not just hitter) in the AL. When you factor in his huge edge in WAR, that just verifies my estimation.

The prediction thread goes into its final series. Mets currently have 73 wins with 2 games to go. * if they win 0, no one will have called it exactly, so it will be a 3-way tie between me (at 72) and G-Fafif and Irish (both at 74); * If they win 1, it's a 2-way tie between G-Fafif and Irish (both at 74); and * If they win 2, HahnSolo is the Solo winner (at 75). May the worst team win!

of course he can do this. Neither the team nor the union can enforce indentured servitude, no matter how well paying. They passed all those constitutional amendments about that sort of thing in the mid-to-late 1860s. and also, of course, there is no way in hell he is going to do this, unless his concussions are starting to have chronic effects and he becomes concerned about dementia.

i called it for Saturday and he screwed me. So you're on your own now, Mr. Wright.

is that near big rock candy mountain?

existential survival tale; beautiful, ugly, sad. But it could've used more character development; given that the whole thing is about a bunch of guys stuck together (often around a fire in the dark), you'd think they'd have the time to differentiate the characters and allow us to care a bit. but they didn't and i didn't. still, Neeson carries it on his back.

It might be shit but, heck, I'd watch Clint talk to an empty chair.

Under the rules, Cabrera didn't accumulate enough ABs to qualify for a batting title. There is an exception to the rule (allowing ABs to be added to his total, lowering his average), but upon his request, the union and MLB agreed to suspend the exception. I agree with this decision. The exception was created to allow guys who were close to qualifying but fell short for legitimate reasons beyond their control (injury, trade) to still compete for the award. If they fell short because they were suspended for league rules violations, I don't see why they should get the benefit of that exception, particularly when the player himself not only agrees with that view but initiated it. This would have been a tougher question if he had actually qualified for the batting title and then was retroactively made ineligible. That has the Orwellian quality of rewriting history that is being referred to here. But that's not what happened. He did not qualify. And rather than allowing the league to create a FICTIONAL BA for him by adding ABs he didn't get just to make him eligible, the player chose not to do so. Good for him, despite it being an obvious ploy to curry favor and rehabilitate his reputation.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. This has been my mantra since April.

i would opine that posting a few pages of a script that's probably over 120 pages is a "de minimis" and "non-commercial" use, putting it within the fair use exception to copyright law. however, there may be "confidentiality" requirements for employees and others receiving the script that prohibits them from posting any portion of it, as a matter of contract.

i see it happening this weekend against the Marlins. Maybe Saturday, just before 4pm. [tea time] A hard grounder past Reyes to drive in the winning run in the 9th. You heard it here first, kids.

HahnSolo wrote: I almost hate to imply this, but don't overlook all that scrappy white-ness Trout has. one would have to expect that, just as recent CY voting has indicated a new generation of younger writers comprise the voting majority (as demonstrated by elections of CYs with fewer wins and better SABRmetric profiles), that such new voters would be less and less influenced by the sins of their fathers. except, you know, if they're choosing between a pale scrapper and a melanin-rich malingerer...

Cabrera has a small lead in OPS+ and Runs Created, but Trout has such a huge lead in WAR (10.3 to 6.3), that it would take a September collapse for Cabrera to catch him overall. And that might be happening, with Trout cooled off and Cabrera red-hot in the midst of a division & WC race. If that keeps up, Cabrera is a lock.

Hamilton will be a FA?, big payday ahead. yeah cuz there's no risk with him!