logan82

Any dope did win with Johnson and Schilling. Unfortunately, much like with evaluating pitching, some people value wins as a good judge of talent with managers.

The graphs looked better in Excel, but didn't transfer when uploaded to Google Docs. I added a trendline for each graph and the line moved closer to the ideal line as I went from K>BB>HR>BA>OBP>SLG>OPS. The line on the K graph was almost flat and the line on the OPS was almost identical to the ideal line. I remember the post you are talking about. It was somebody talking about how SLG had a higher correlation to runs scoread and was therfore more valuable than OBP.(they didn't like people weighting OBP almost twice as much as SLG) OPS came in around a 96% correlation I think with SLG and OBP around 92% then a drop to 86% for BA. Sorry to go off topic. I think we should resign Cameron. TLB had a good post in the "What should we do with our outfield next year?" thread that broke down all the top CFers and what they were making. $10M turns out to be a pretty good deal. I will look it up when I get a chance unless somebody beats me to it.

I am earning money right now in Fable 2. I think if you liked the first Fable you would like the second one. It appears that the only ways to make money is to find it in chests, do lame mini game "jobs," or buy property. You get money every 5 minutes when you buy property even when you are not playing. This of course has led to people unplugging their Xboxes from their internet and changing the dates to earn millions of dollars without doing anything.

Here is a sheet(link at the bottom) I made up a few weeks back looking at strikeouts and other stats vs runs scored. I ranked all the teams 1-30 with the least K's being #1 and the most #30. If runs are related to the stat the points should make a line starting in the lower left corner and going to the upper right corner. The closer to that ideal line the more a stat is related to runs scored. What you see is good strikeout teams will rank all over the place in runs. Good OPS teams rank almost where they do for runs. To me that means that srikeouts have very little to do with runs and we should be looking at OPS instead. Link

Off hand without looking into anything( I know this is going to come back and bite me) I would have to credit the Braves with having a pretty good farm system and strong pitching(Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine) over a long period of time moreso than anything Cox did.

Good luck Jack Z. I think this is a perfect opportunity to do a little tweaking on our drafting philosophy.

Am I the only one who no has enthusiasm whatsoever in this manager hiring process? Macha looks to be the best candidate so far and he doesn't even look that enticing. What has Macha done outside of Oakland? By most accounts it sounds as if he was just following Beane's instructions on managing more than doing it himself. What do we know about his managing style except the players didn't like him on his way out of Oakland? Edit: I meant NO enthusiasm whatsoever.

The only part of a Hall/Counsell/Branyan platoon Escobar has a chance of out hitting is the Counsell vs RHP part. He has almost no chance at all of out hitting any platoon combination of those players.

Comments like that are exactly what got me thinking about Hardy vs Weeks on defense. Not to pick on logan, but I find this statement to be rather ironic and part of the problem with this whole discussion. The stats say one thing, but subjectively, we think the opposite is true (so we don't trust the stats). Yet people will use the stats to say player X's range is better/worse than player Y. I don't think it is picking on me to state your opinion. I don't think we can use stats to compare guys at 2 different positions. I think that they are a useful tool when comparing guys at the same position. When comparing guys at 2 different positions I think we have to use the defensive matrix. C-SS-2B-CF-3B-RF-LF-1B(you can leave C out of it if you like since the catching position is highly specialized compared to the rest) If guys are close you take the guy the furthest to the left on the matrix. If you asked most BF.net posters to describe JJ as a defender my guess is that most of the responses would be something along the lines of +Good hands +Strong accurate arm -average range That's what troubles me about the OOZ and RZR stats. How does JJ have 15% more OOZ plays than the next closest guy when many posters would agree that his range is average? In my opion it points at a huge flaw in how the stat is done. It should take where a player is positioned into consideration when making a judgement on whether the player should have made the play or giving credit for an out of zone play. Since it is closely related to how RZR is done it points to a flaw in that as well since it also doesn't take positioning into consideration.

I think so, but it is hard to get a definitive answer on it. If a metric is reliable I think that it would account for shifts. I am not sure if RZR accounts for shifts either. If that is the case it wouldn't give Hardy credit for balls hit to the SS position when he is shifted and give him a lower RZR. At least that's how I would interpret the stats being opposite of what we expect. The other thing with RZR is that it might be low for Hardy because his range is so bad he can't get to balls he should within his zone. I doubt that though. I don't know enough about the defensive stats to make a good call on them.

His movies are usually cheap to make and he has a cult following that will watch anything he makes so he gets to keep making them. Much like those Saw movies. As for what's bugging me, I paid $160 for an MP3 player and the "charging cable" is a 3" long USB to miniUSB cable. It may only be 2 1/2" long. Seriously, they couldn't have made it at least 6"?

Melvin's recent comment on how sometimes a manager is better the 2nd time around because of lessons learned from the first time Of course a manager is better the second time around. It is hard to get a managing job unless you have experience. You have to take any garbage job that you can get. Like managing the Brewers in 2003. Once you have experience you can pick and choose where you manage a bit and can put yourself in a position where you are managing a good team. Then you manage a good team and look smart because you are a "winner." Look at the hiring process so far. We are looking for an experienced guy who has had success at the MLB level. We should be interviewing guys and looking for a certain philosophy instead of hiring a guy just because he managed a good team.

I should have been clearer that this is what I meant. I think that if we put them both at the same position Hardy would be better. I brought this up to get people thinking about it a little more. Zone rating measures how many balls you get to within your zone. I am not sure how good the stats are for JJ. He led the league in Out Of Zone plays for a SS. He was 12th in RZR. I would think the opposite from watching him. He gets to balls in his zone very well, but not out of zone plays.

So much for offense being the problem. During Friday night's game they said that Connelly was working with a goalie advisor. Yes, not coach, advisor. And they said he was paying for it out of pocket. The whole thing sounded strange. Here is a link to an article from a couple months back about the goalie situation. They go off campus because Howard left. The guy helping them is a Howard student, but has a job that doesn't allow him to volunteer like Howard did.

SLG can be misleading as well. Players with a large BA/OBP split will have a lower SLG than the same player with a higher BA and the same OBP. Even if the only difference is the player with the higher BA had singles instead of walks.

The general consensus seems to be that Hardy is a better defender than Weeks. I wouldn't disagree with that. My question is, how much better is Hardy than Weeks? In my opinion they are pretty close on defense. I think that Weeks is still held back by coming up with a reputation of being a bad defender and Hardy the benefit of coming up with a good defensive reputation. When Weeks makes a mistake the general feeling is that Weeks should sit a few days. If Hardy would do the same thing the general feeling seems to be "go get them next time JJ." I think Hardy has better hands, a more accurate arm and turns the double play better. I think Weeks has better range. I think that a better 1B would put them on an even playing field. I don't remember most of Weeks throws being in the stands. They are usually in the dirt, but not drastically far off. Edit: I think it is harder for a 2B to turn a double play than a SS. The SS has the benefit of having everything in front of him and not having to make a turn to throw.

Things can get worse than they were with Yost.

I said that most of our players were better suited to play in the outfield regardless of where they were drafted. The only drafted player on our MLB team who should actually be playing in the infield is Hardy.

Escobar was signed as a free agent. I don't think Jack Z. has done a terrible job, but I think some tweaking needs to be done. We need more complete players and I have to think rushing most of our MLB players through the minors is part of the problem.(part of the reason I am in no hurry to see Gamel in the majors. I hope he can stick at 3B) The other part is most of our top players would be better suited to the outfield. We have drafted many players who are better suited to the outfield regardless of where they are playing now. Even our best all around infielder, Hardy, is solid at best defensively.

So Jenkins and Gross get to the World Series and the Brewers don't.

If we are going to move a guy to the outfield, I would prefer to start the guy in LF unless they are moved prior to making the MLB team. I think 2010 would be a good year to move Weeks to the outfield. That way we can have either Braun or Hart in CF. It also gives us a chance to see if Hart or Weeks will be a better player. I agree that Durham and Cameron will be pretty similar on offense next year. I am not sure Durham should be much more than a part time player anymore though. I also think Cameron should get a little more time off than he got this year. I don't think Weeks in CF and Durham would improve our defense over Weeks at 2B and Cameron in CF though.

Yeah I am not sure if it will affect them. I just wanted to let people know that there are limits so even the Yankees with their apparent limitless payroll are limited.

There are limits to how many Type A and B free agent you can sign in one year. Per Cot's Limits on free agent signings * If 0-14 players file for free agency under Article XX (B) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, no team may sign more than 1 Type A or B player. * If 15-38 players file for free agency, no team may sign more than 2. * If 39-62 players file for free agency, no team may sign more than 3, with the limits increasing accordingly for higher totals. * A club may sign an unlimited number of free agents who do not qualify as Type A or B free agents. * A club may sign as many type A and B free agents as it has lost, regardless of the limits above.

It almost looks like he is saying both Weeks and Hardy, but that would be ludicrous.

They are patterning it after BBTN, what else would they show.