Fatter than Joey

McBush? I prefer "McBung" I agree with everyone that this is a laughably bad idea. The "road" is a composite of 15 stadiums. Some Bush has struggled in, others he has pitched well in. I could understand manipulating the rotation against specific teams or parks, but at the end of the day, those probably have more to do with players than they do park location. The concept that Bush is a ~2.50 ERA guy at home, and a ~6.00 ERA guy on the road is a bad one. Suppan has similarly large home/road splits.

So do I see DK or Hellboy2

Yes, if Cameron hits .230 for the season I will disappointed. As would I, and is part of the reason I graded him lower at this point. But at this stage in his season the difference between .250 and .230 is 4 hits Did you know the difference between gold and lead is 4 protons? -- I understand what you are saying, however, the fact that 4 hits = .020 points ia sort of an inherent given when discussing midseason grades. I'm thinking he'll make up that 4 hit deficit and be right around .250-.260 by the end of the year. I think so, and as I stated before I think Cam can still rake at a .270ish level -- I have High Hopes!

I make outrageous claims fueled by my pure hatred.

My point is that if he is above the league average in offense and playing good defense, which he has besides a few misplayed balls this year that stick in all of our minds, then he's right at where I expected him and I'm very satisfied with that. I think 2007 was universally considered a bad year for Cam, and he had a 103 OPS+. I expect Cam to be considerably above the league average. I would lean towards those statistics as indicators and not just batting average. I have clearly not exclusively used BA in my arguments, and you seem at this point just to be regurgitating things posted on this message board in bygone threads. How do you feel about the walks Cameron is taking? Batting average doesn't take that into account. I am a big OBP guy -- and basically OBP has 2 components -- hits & walks. Cam's OBP is down with Cam's walk rate right about what it should be, therefore the culprit is BA. When you look at BA, I think you have 2 ways of questioning it -- is a player getting unlucky? or is a player struggling? Looking at Cam's data, the first thing that should jump out at the reader is his increased K rate -- this is an indication to me that he struggled mightily in May/June, rather than getting lots of line drive outs. I think the crux of our disagreement is that you expect Cameron to be a league average player (OPS+ 100), such as Kahlil Greene in 2007. I expect Cameron to be better.

The Twins are only 1.5 games out of first place -- I can't imagine that they would keep Liriano in AAA unless there were very real health issues.

No, not if his OPS+ is 108. OPS+ measures his production against the rest of the league -- If you think 100 is a good benchmark for Cameron, then you are undoubtedly pleased -- I think he should be further removed from the average. I'm not concerned about batting average. You should be, it is a primary component of OPS. You cannot toss around OPS+ and disregard BA. There are better statistics to look at out there. Such as? It seems to me anyway our disagreement lies entirely in expectation and not in statistical usage.

Walla walla sweet onion rings; These are insanely good -- they will make your heart stop on all sorts of levels. If those onion rings were available year round, OR would be the fattest state in the NW.

I'm saving my copy for when my kids are mature enough to read it in 25 years. How old are your kids, -6? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

I'd say for a .250 career hitter, it is as likely he will hit .270 some year as it is he will hit .230 in another year. So would you consider .230 disappointing for a season (for Cameron)?

He's considered the best improviser in the country. Better than me?

You should expect a marginal decline in true talent every year after around 29-30. It's just not going to show itself so perfectly over a 600 AB season. I tend to agree with this -- however, I do not agree that: Cam35= Cam34 - decline. I think Cameron had a exceptionally bad year in 2007, and while I am sure his skills are declining, I don't think his 2007 drop is due entirely to his age. I think his talent level is closer to: 2005 .273 .342 .477 2006 .268 .355 .482 Or some sort of average of these two years. Now if we look at 2008: May .212 .262 .451 June .203 .324 .475 Those I hope we can agree are overall pretty disappointing. July .306 .432 .583 So he has had a comparatively great July (so far) -- now I dont think Cameron will finish the year hitting .306, but I think a .270ish BA for the 2nd half is a very reasonable expectation to have for Cameron. I think the reason for his bad OBP in May/June is because he is striking out way more than he should -- and at the expense of getting hits. This is probably somehow related to his suspension. Cameron was striking out at a 35+% clip in May/June, and so far in July he has lowered that to 25% -- which is more in line with what he has done in 2005-2008. It's kind of odd that you didn't copy the part that says that his higher than expected SLG makes up for that. I don't think so. I think his SLG, even in May/June is right where it should be -- I think the drain on Cam's production comes from the OBP side of the OPS -- I just find that obvious. The reason I graded Cameron lower up to this point in the season, is primarily because he has not been hitting the ball, as evidenced by his 35+% strikeout rate for May/June. I don't think you can chalk this up to luck, or randomness -- I think it needs to be chalked up to bad AB's for Cam. Thus my disappointment and a C-, based on what he has done until this point. If Cam keeps hitting like I think he can, and keeps his K-rate at 25% (last 3 yr. norm), his OBP will rise and I think he can hit in the .270ish range. but they (offensive #) aren't worse than his projection predicted. I think those projections weighed 2007 too heavily. Whoever made that projection can make their own grade, I don't fall in line or agree with every projection. You said this on your blog... And I agree with that -- I think a .252 BA is conservative, so when he is hitting .230ish -- I feel he is off the mark. No big deal that you aren't satisfied with his offensive numbers I am beginning to think that this is not the case.

Out in Oregon they have "Taco Time" places I prefer to Taco Bell.

People are truly insane. Sonic is pretty good but it's still just fast food, and it's not going anywhere. Yes they are. I was in Beaver Dam a couple of weeks ago.... They had just opened an Arby's, and the line circled the building and went out in the street. I realize that there is fascination with new restaurants, but hasn't everyone in Beaver Dam eaten at Arby's? I know if a Sonic opened local to me, I'd want to try it at some point, but I certainly would wait until the excitement died down.

I'm not sure if this was a Pedro thing or not, The guy who gave the tickets away initially requested that they not be resold, as he could have gotten some heat for that.

Johnny U?

Does 4 points below really warrant a disappointment? Sure, insofar as subjective grades are concerned. You have to expect some sort of decline by age 35 in your expectations. That seems arbitrary. A decline from 27 to 35 perhaps, but not from 34 to 35. Cam's OBP is a little lower than his projection Yep. Again, no one is saying he sucks.

Yes but his OPS is still the same if not better than his career average. I am not interested really in his career average -- if you look at his last three years, his production in 2008 is below those numbers. He may be hitting less, but that means he's hitting more for power He is hitting less, and that does not mean he is hitting for more power. and his OBP is back up to .320 I don't think a .320 is a decent/rewardable OBP. in my opinion Mike Cameron is a solid B Sure, it's a reasonable position. Striking out more doesn't really bother me, but apparently it bothers you. To some degree it does. Players striking out more and hitting less is a big problem. Strikeouts do stick into people's memories more than a simple flyout does, but unless it advances a runner, you didn't really lose anything I'd agree if a player has a similar BA/OBP -- where your argument fails, is that we are losing hits with the higher K rate, not flyouts. If you have a player with a .300 BA and 100Ks in 2007 and a player with a .300 BA and 150Ks in 2008, I would not be too upset. You are erroneously assuming that the results are predetermined -- I am more concerned when a player has a .300 BA and 100Ks in 2007, and a .280 BA and 150Ks in 2008. I would be curious to see how Mike Cameron's Runs Created per 27 outs this year compares to his career average, but I'm not sure where to check that. Again, I'm not interested in his career, but his RC/27 has dropped from the last 3 years.

but since his numbers this year are pretty much on par with previous years as far as OPS He is hitting less, and striking out more. your expectations of Cameron have been too high coming into this year if you expected more from a player at age 35 That seems entirely arbitrary. Lou Brock stole 118 bases at the age of 35, (stealing 70 in 34). Many, many players have had productive and have seen improvement in seasons at 35, baseball is not that simplistic where "everyone declines at 35". Furthermore, I was expecting a bump from leaving a pitchers park, and going to a hitters park in Milwaukee. If that's not condescending, then I don't know what is. You and TLB are rarely on the same page. It certainly made me go Hmmm.

Wow... I assume some of our users that are generous giving away tickets, could get in trouble from their ticket source, if the tickets are discovered on Ebay. Just like school on Saturday.... No class...

Cameron has an OPS about .060 points above league average. And he's a very good defender. That's an awfully stiff curve some of you are grading him on I am not grading him against the league average -- if you chose to do that, that is certainly one way to do it. My approach was to grade the player against what I had hoped they could bring to the table. I don't see any point in doling out grades to players based on their league rankings -- we have spreadsheet technology to do that for us. I thought the purpose of this thread was to be somewhat subjective -- which does not mean everyone has to do it that way, but certainly it adds some different approaches IMO and flavor to the discussion.

Seems like I am always running into casual baseball fans who are disappointed by a player who performs at a level consistent with his career. It's like marrying an alcoholic then being upset that your spouse is a drunk. Wow. I'll start with this. Generally speaking, I am not sure that comparing casual fans to alcoholics is necessary. Initially I would tend to agree with your admission to being foolish, -- expecting something from people that they are unable to provide -- however, upon further reflection I am convinced that you are in fact not foolish, rather you simply perhaps do not know what you are talking about or uninformed -- this is easily addressable and correctable. If Cameron had 70 hits he'd be hitting .320 right now! That's higher than he's ever hit in professional ball. You do not know this to be true. I am giving Cameron a "grade" based on 216 ABs. I suspect you have no idea if Cameron has ever hit .320 over a span of 216 ABs in his career. Furthermore, are you contending that it would have been impossible for Cameron to hit .320 over 216 AB span? -- I think that is a hard position to defend as well. Expecting a player, particularly one who has 6500+ plate appearances, to suddenly hit for a batting average 70 points higher than his career average is unrealistic, and frankly, silly I have never said I expected Cameron to hit .320-- that was an argument created to help argue against my grade for Cameron. I was responding to TLB's idea that if Cameron had 20 more hits, I'd certainly have given him a better grade. By definition, in this fun little thread, we are purposely grading players on small samples. We aren't trying to ascertain their value absolutely, or imply that a player is "good" or "bad" inherently, -- you seem to have not picked up on this aspect. Along the same lines -- I never expected McClung to pitch nearly as well as he has as a starter, and I am not convinced that he will maintain his performance -- however, up to now grading him on these 10 stars and BP innings -- he gets a high grade from me because he has far exceeded what I had hoped what he has done. Similarly -- Kendall would probably have gotten a "C-ish" grade from me as well, if he didn't blow me out of the water with his defense this year, and I ranked him higher, because he has really exceeded my expectations. It is almost as if you are contending that players cannot exceed their career norms in small samples -- this is a very shaky assumption to work under. The "C" grade is a baseline or average grade to me -- It's not bad necessarily. Cameron is overall below what I expected, and therefore gets a C-.

Yeah, I like the Eee's a lot. I have my eye on this one. I bought my 13 year old daughter one for about $350-$400 -- (I think mine may have had less RAM than Kat's object of affection) -- and it is one of my best purchases of the last few years, she uses it for WWW, IM, email, word processing for 7th grade type things, etc... It is incredibly efficient and durable. She needed a computer, and we didn't have the space for a desktop, and I didn't want to fork out for a HP/PB type laptop. I would certainly recommend the EEE for appropriate applications.

I would have asked for the head of Ned Yost, but that's just me...

If an A is around a .900 OPS, and a C- is .800-ish, that's a ton of variation within that range of .100 points 100 points is huge -- there is an immense difference between a .200 hitter and a .300 hitter. If Cameron had 20 more hits, (70 instead of 50) I'd think I'd grade him higher -- but he doesn't. He has been hitting less and striking out more, that sucks. Do you think his defense has been disappointing? He is certainly better than what we had last year -- but I think his D is a little less than I expected.