TooLiveBrew

I'll give the Nats 50 wins, but I wanna say 45.

This is the most important thing to keep in mind. Especially addressed to Big Reed. After people (me included) tried a cordial approach with jondoe, he stuck out the barbs and brushed any subtle hints toward patience and knowledge off as not worth his time. I was never hazed when I started here, nor do I see 'hazing' on this site. This is just a prime example of the Golden Rule. If jondoe had come in wanting to discuss, instead of rant and instigate, that would have been another great, informative thread on Dave Bush. But he didn't. I'm not saying that we, as responding posters, were 100% amicable, but that's what happens when you greet people with saber-rattling (forgive the pun). Sometimes they have one too.

I liyyyyke!

Agreed. I especially like sbryl's point that there should be somewhere to point the newbies when questions of stats, etc. arise How 'bout some links to baseball-reference.com, thebaseballcube.com, fangraphs.com, etc.? A "Stats Links" page? I know I only discovered many of the baseball reference pages from BF.net, and they've done nothing but enhance my 'understanding' of the game!

Sounds great.... that thread's sweet & hilarious

If that deal's available, I jump at it. One word of warning: Mackowiak doesn't exactly fit the "cutting down on Ks" priority reiterated time and again by Doug M. Career K/BB rate = 498/193, or roughly 5/2. That's not good, and I'm sure Doug's aware of this. That said, I again say that I'd love to see this deal, if it can happen. Rob M. can play seemingly every position on the diamond, save SS, C, & P. I'd love that. A grown-man's (and MLB lifer's) Vinny Rottino

Not venting on him, but I worry that our collective hopes for 2007 for both he and Hart are too lofty. But even more, I hope that I'm proved wrong, and Hall eclipses 40 2Bs & 40 HRs, while Corey chases down 30/30 status.

Bill's bat is live as ____. His OBP increased last year, largely due to his focus on upping it - and he's talked this off-season about how he intends to continue to strive for higher & higher OBP. I'd guess we'll see him with a higher BA & OBP this year, with his SLG% down. I attribute that last part to the fact that pitchers know he's a legit HR threat now. I'd expect to see Hall's 2Bs rate go up (in relation to his HRs dipping), so his SLG% shouldn't suffer too much... But I'm not 'stats-head', and these are just guesses from watching baseball over the years. Any gurus care to agree/disagree? I'm guessing Hall will be around .275-.285, with his 2Bs outweighing his HRs. Maybe .280/.355/.525/.890, with 90-100 RBI? I vent that too many BF.netters have Billy pegged for 40 HRs, and Corey Hart breaking out with a near 30-30 season. I hope both these are true, and I trust said prognosticators, but sheesh!

I think it's important to remember that it's simply Rosenthal's job to speculate in this manner. Is there any validity to this notion - which it seems Rosenthal created by, let's call it an "educated guess"? I'd guess, educatedly, no, there isn't. Just as there hasn't been any validity to 99% of what he and other sportswriters speculate. That's just their job -- they need a story. Nothing wrong with that, but I think baseball fans tend to take that as, "Oh! They must have talked to a GM!" See: Manny Ramirez rumors, earlier 'Mench for Liber' rumors, etc. Esp. the Manny stuff. I, among many, was convinced that trade was simply 'going to happen'. We treat these reporters, and especially ESPN (or FOX), as though they are infallible sources. Where, exactly, would Lieber or any LAD trade candidate go? If it's a RP (esp. LHRP), sure, I'm all for it. But if we trade for a starter, that leaves no real room for Vargas. And unless he's sent packing, that makes no sense. And if he is, we'd sure as heck better get more back than just Lieber (although I'd prefer him to Vargas) or some other middle-of-the-pack SP -- which is essentially what Vargas is, and we've already got him, and at a much cheaper price (than Lieber)

True, but until this most recent post of yours, you didn't even acknowledge that I had some facts to prove what I was talking about. Bradyo, I want to make sure to come revisit this discussion near or at the end of the 2007 season. We'll have a lot to talk about, I'd bet. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif Ok, this is still a major sticking point for me, and one from which you will not quit. Try this on for size: "So Tim Hudson walked almost 80 batters in 2006, and had a career-worst 1.44 WHIP. That doesn't take away from the fact that he still won 13 games." Ask any ATL fan what they thought of Hudson's 2006. He had career worsts in many categories (ERA, ERA+, WHIP, HRs, ERs, Losses). But if you ignore what the player can control, and focus only a category which the entire team determines, then you can make Hudson look pretty good, with: "Tim Hudson won 13 games in 2006, and had a winning % over .500." That's 'accurate', but it misses the real truth. In the categories up to him exclusively, Hudson was not sharp. And to generalize a player like "Well, shoot 100 RBI, he must be better than Fielder" is silly, no offense intended. You, IMO, prove my argument for me to show that, in spite of Francoeur's poor individual stats, the team-determined stats (R, RBI) were still good. That tells me his teammates are better than Fielder's were in 2006, and if you know both these teams, it's pretty clear that's what's going on here.

I agree we can agree to disagree, but I just feel like you're ignoring objective information in order to form your opinion, where I'm taking care to be well-informed. If, in my search, I had found Francoeur to be the better producer, I would have readily admitted it.

about "feared": semantics. I should have stuck with his place as the 3d or 4th hitter, and the 'surrounding hitters' stuff As far as this... You forgot to say "facts and evidence." I just got done comparing "things that have happened" in BOTH players' careers. Included in that is displaying how you are wrong to cite Francoeur as the one that has "done it." Actually, the things you said about Francoeur were to conveniently fit your argument & sentiment, and I think I pretty well showed you how Fielder is, has been, and in all likelihood will be --- objectively --- the better hitter. Actually, I provide a ton of unbiased evidence as to why I say these things, and make safe assumptions. I asked you to tell me if you felt I was being unreasonable, not whether or not I was forecasting Fielder to surpass his .830 OPS from 2006, or if there's some "has already happened" stat to prove that he has done something which, by nature, is in the future. To help prove to you why Fielder will do so, I gave you an overwhelming body of evidence that you have seemingly ignored (note there's no negative connotation in that form of the word...) And all you can come back with is unsubstantiated claims? "The things I stated about Francoeur are things that have happened..." Yes, and I showed you how Fielder has already proven to be the better hitter, and additionally showed you why I doubt Francoeur to ever be near Fielder, yet you still claim "Opinion! Lack of information!' I understand if you found my post too long (or too convoluted) to read, but don't make the claim that I'm the one lost in sentiment, when it seems pretty clear you refuse to acknowledge the facts of the matter. I don't want to leave a hostile tone -- I really enjoy this discussion bradyo. I just find it incomprehensible that you still claim -- after having it essentially proved against you -- that Francoeur is equal or better. It's like handing a jury the body, murder weapon, fingerprints, motive, opportunity, and a witness.... and having the verdict read, "Not guilty!"

One last note -- Francoeur was asked by the Braves to focus on drawing more BBs in 2006, and posted that atrocious 23/132 (BB/K) ratio - which, sadly, wasn't even a statistical improvement from his rookie year 11/58. This inability to make any change in his approach, coupled with the declining results posted in 2006, suggests to me that we will never see Francoeur draw any more than maybe 40 BBs in a season. His professional max, to this point was 30 BBs over 524 ABs at low-A ball in 2003 (K'd 68 times) I want to make abundantly clear that I am acutely aware of the difference between patience at the plate and OBP. The two are related, but not the same. They are indicators of each other, but not explicitly tied. While I can begrudgingly accept that you want a guy to go up hacking, I can't accept you saying that OBP is overrated. That's like saying BBs don't really matter for a pitcher. Both cases the player is essentially only relying on himself - not teammates - and the stat is a critical determinant in said player's success.

Slugger lovin...havin' some fuuuuunnnnn....

Sorry about that, I didn't mean it with any sense of negativity, whether anyone believes that or not. I meant it in the sense of ignoring what's really present. So for a civilized rebuttal: With your good knowledge of the game, you should be the first to admit that runs scored and runs driven in relies too heavily upon teammates. This is like evaluating a pitcher primarily on his wins or ERA -- it's not entirely accurate. Andruw Jones, Chipper Jones, and Brian McCann are all better offensive options than Francouer, where Fielder is his team's #3 or 4 hitter (and was for a bulk of 2006). Francoeur is not feared in his lineup (or accounted for) the way Fielder is in his. As far as the hitting .300, well, that was nice, but it was a mid-season call-up, where his opposing pitchers were not familiar with Francoeur. Once they were ready for him in 2006, his BA dipped 40 points. That's a more accurate sample space, if you ask me, especially for a guy that has a career .282 minor league BA. BA aside, even you, bradyo, can acknowledge that OBP is a better indicator at the plate, since it accounts for both hits and BBs. Francoeur's OBP at the major league level is a woeful .305, to Fielder's .344. Since you may discount this fact for some unknown reason, let me also point to Fielder's better minor league OPS & SLG% (.922 to .808; .524 to .478 ) In addition to that, Fielder's superiority continues, at the MLB level: an .825 to Jeff's .782 OPS, and both the SLG%s & OBPs, not surprisingly, are also Fielder's categories Well, here's why: Fielder, over 1635 minor league ABs, boasts a BA of .297 (& and OBP of.398 ) , to Francoeur's .282 (& .330 OBP). I think you'll be "seeing it" in the pretty near future. All Francoeur "proved" is that he could hit .300 off pitchers that didn't know his scouting report. Once they did, he "proved" he could barely surpass .250. He's neither a .300 nor a .250 hitter, but somewhere in between -- as his minor league stats point to, and MLB stats reinforce. But your sentiment (of cheapening OBP/'patience') ultimately wrecks your argument to me. If you want to argue results, we can start that you admitted the two players are essentially equal, right now, at the plate. But if you continue in a fair & safe estimation, you can see that Fielder's power numbers will improve this year, and we are likely to see an OPS above his 2006 .830. If you think I'm wrong to forecast this, please tell me. But at least consider Fielder's track record as opposed to your sentiment(s) On the other hand, Francoeur needs to prove he can replicate his 2005 numbers, which stand out as an anomaly, given his minor league track record. The only time he matched or surpassed his .885 OPS (MLB 2006) was in 147 ABs in Rookie Ball (.930). Fielder's .830 MLB OPS from 2006 was lower than any year in the minor leagues. In fact, Fielder's .764 OPS in 59 ABs in 2005 was his worst total since a .704 OPS in 112 ABs in Beloit (A Ball) as an 18-y-o rookie. The next year, Fielder promptly mashed a .935 OPS over 500+ ABs at Beloit. So I see your assessment that Francoeur is in Fielder's neighborhood in terms of offense as ignoring the facts in front of you. You may like Francoeur better, and feel that his defensive skill makes him the better overall player. But he's not even close to being the same, let alone the better, hitter -- at this point, or any point in their young careers. And, to echo Colby, I don't see any reason to expect Francoeur to eclipse Fielder offensively at any point in their careers, unless Prince's body goes the way of Cecil's

Your last post illustrates your ignorance of reality, and causes me to question your 'authority' in assessing ballplayers. I've got work to take care of, but will be back on later to explain myself.

How much money would that be? I'd take that bet. But something tells me you'd be using your own method of interpretation as opposed to widely used and recognized standards, so something tells me that no matter what you'll view yourself as coming out ahead. Fielder will have more HRs, and better numbers across the board in terms of hitting. That's how most people evaluate a player's career. I admitted readily that Franc. is the better defender, but you seem unwilling to recognize that Fielder is the superior offensive player. I don't think that's simply my opinion (though I doubt you'll admit to that)

A hit is not always better than a walk. That's asinine to suggest. You obviously ignore the value in making a pitcher pitch -- aside from the plain fact that a single has entirely equal value to a BB w/o runners on base. It works not just for the 'right now' at bat (which seems the only way you analyze), or the 'right now batter'; it works for his teammates, and himself when he comes up again. It wears pitchers down to have a team full of guys that work the count. That's just simple arithmetic. Seeing more pitches does so many more things than just draw walks, and I think that's obvious. Do you want a player that will go out and hit? Obviously; but until you can get around your 'can't wait' mentality, you take your Jeff Francoeurs and I'll take my Prince Fielders, thank you very much. The best pitch a hitter sees is the one he's looking for. This is done by analyzing a pitcher's pattern(s), and anticipating his pitch selection. Yes, you have to hit the ball where it's pitched, but when you're looking offspeed, have made the pitcher throw 4 or 5 pitches in that AB, and he hangs a breaking ball -- that's where the big runs are scored. Aside from that, just being ready for a guy's heat or offspeed makes the batter much more effective. So going up to hack 0-0, hoping you get that 'get me over pitch' is a gamble, and Brewer fans have seen that mentality fail all too often in the past. Colby, this is exactly what I meant.

well said I think a new term has been coined

Yes, they do. But what I found that made me lean towards ISP is that simply finding a player's XBH% doesn't necessarily incorporate his power (obviously). That's not to say there isn't value in a guy like Overbay's great XBH%. However, it's only fair (to both players) to note that a guy like Pujols, who may not (don't have time to stat-check, sorry) have as high an XBH% as Overbay (or Hall), has a more impressive ISP. What I, personally, was looking for in asking about XBH% was precisely what's captured in ISP. But, as mentioned, XBH% is a useful stat, too -- highlighting the strong value of a doubles hitter that may not crush out HRs (it shows you how valuable all XBHs are, not just the chick-diggable long ball) http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

Not to hijack the thread, but this is pretty short-term thinking. Was Francoeur the better hitter at that moment? Perhaps, maybe probably. Isn't it safe to say the Brewers' scouting assessment was right-on? Francoeur has almost zero patience at the plate (2006: 651 ABs, 23BB/132K), while Fielder continues to develop his discipline, patience, and power. Francoeur has an incredible arm and decent range in the OF, I'll grant that advantage over Prince. But at the plate these two are no longer comparable players, IMHO

No Hall love? I get what you're saying about overvaluing highlight-reel plays, but sheesh. What's a guy gotta do to win your respect? Play all over the field, wherever his team needs him? Lead his team in HRs & RBI? Become actively involved in both Milwaukee's and his hometown's community? .....

When I asked about XBH%, I found the responses made it very clear that ISP is slightly better in order to evaluate. I see the value in XBH%, but ISP makes it sharper

You're right to point out that Selig takes far more than his fair share of criticism & blame on the steroid issue. You're tragically wrong, however, to suggest that his hands were completely tied. Everyone -- repeat, EVERYONE -- raked in the dough from turning away while players abused steroids. One rumor around the time of Selig's shift from interim commisioner to official titleholder was that he was chosen bc the other owners knew him, and felt he was their buddy (read: can be manipulated) Selig is, to be sure, a genuine believer in the purity and joy of baseball. What he isn't is a man doomed by inescapable surroundings and circumstances. Bud looked the other way as players abused, and so did we, the fans So, more specifically, my 'vent' is that I'm sick and tired of fans acting as though they had no part in this whole process. We, as fans, are constantly looking for "Who's to blame?" in this saga. The reality is that we are every bit as culpable as anyone

I'm guessing Dave Bush