86'd
today is opening day for the cardinals: they play the cubs in the Sporting News' 1986 season replay via strat-o-matic. it's a promotion for TSN's online fantasy-sports division, and a lotta recognizable names are involved. the red sox will be managed by none other than curt schilling (who, by the way, is nearing a deal that would keep him in boston); former big leaguer doug glanville will be leading the phillies; howard stern sidekick baba booey is skippering the mets; and a lotta well-recognized bloggers (including 7 from SB Nation) are taking part. st louis will be managed by Deadspin editor will leitch. put yourself in his shoes for a second: after enduring the trials of the 2007 season, he's gotta spend all winter with an injury-riddled, slump-prone team that finished 79-82 . . . . . little bit of a Groundhog Day thing going there for him, no? lord knows why TSN chose to replay that particular season. never mind that it was worthless from a st louis standpoint; there wasn't a single compelling pennant race in 1986. in the nl, the mets won by 21.5 games and the astros won by 10; boston and california put the american league races away in early september. i hope they didn't go all fox sports on us and choose '86 solely for its large-market appeal. . . .
here's the box score from the real 1986 opening day. my older brother called me from one of the loge boxes at busch that night (i was at school in california); while we were on the phone, the cardinals got their only 2 hits of the game and scored their only 2 runs, which held up for a 2-1 win. most of us have forgotten by now that the cardinals got out of the gate 7-1 that year. whiteyball was at its height: the cards were the defending nl champs, coming off their 2d pennant in four years and their first 100-win season in nearly 20 years; happy memories. things fell apart in a hurry in 1986, but there was still some decent baseball left in that team.
news, notes etc.:
- the cards turned down the option on so taguchi. altho mozeliak holds out the possibility that the outfielder might return on a renegotiated deal, gooch's career is likely over. he was an ideal fit for the 2004-05 teams, and he delivered one of the most important hits of the 2006 postseason --- the game-winning hr off billy wagner in game 2 of the nlcs. he can still play a little bit (good speed, decent on-base ability), but he's 38 years old and the cardinals need to give that roster spot to somebody with upside. thanks for the memories, gooch.
- john dewan posted the best/worst fielders by position at his Fielding Bible site. the good news first: albert pujols had the highest score in all of baseball at +37, which means he made 37 more plays than an average 1bman would have. this is an extremely sophisticated, play-by-play-based system that accounts for the location and speed of each batted ball; this rating means that an average first baseman, given the exact assortment of batted balls that came albert's way, would have made 37 fewer plays. that's a rather phenomenal stat, and it translates into a savings of nearly 30 runs; i wouldn't believe it except for the fact that nearly every other advanced fielding system says pretty much the same thing. . . . . rolen was the only other cardinal with an outstanding fielding score (+15); both eckstein (-14) and edmonds (-10) were among the worst defenders at their position. my only quibble w/ dewan's system is that it's purely cumulative; there's no rate-stat conversion (such as, say, runs saved per 150 games) that would let us compare part-time players such as schumaker or ryan to a full-time counterpart.
- i've been keeping an eye on South Side Sox lately, watching for any tidbits that might surface re the chisox's interest in eckstein. the other day The Cheat posted his officially sanctioned off-season plan for the white sox roster; that franchise is in almost exactly the same position as ours. read a few excerpts:
- the other chicago team is said to be hot after kosuke fukudome and hiroki kuroda.
finally, here are the results of SBN's manager of the year voting:
| National League | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | Points | American League | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | Points | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bob Melvin | 10 | 5 | 2 | 67 | Eric Wedge | 16 | 3 | - | 89 | |
| Charlie Manuel | 3 | 5 | 4 | 34 | Joe Torre | 1 | 7 | 3 | 29 | |
| Clint Hurdle | 3 | 3 | 3 | 27 | Mike Scioscia | 2 | 4 | 6 | 28 | |
| Lou Piniella | 3 | 2 | 3 | 24 | Mike Hargrove | - | 1 | 4 | 8 | |
| Manny Acta | 1 | 2 | 3 | 14 | Terry Francona | - | 1 | 3 | 6 | |
| Bud Black | - | 3 | 2 | 11 | Ozzie Guillen | - | 1 | 1 | 4 | |
| Bobby Cox | 1 | - | 1 | 6 | John McLaren | - | 1 | - | 3 | |
| Ned Yost | - | 1 | 1 | 4 | Buddy Bell | - | 1 | - | 3 | |
| Tony LaRussa | - | - | 1 | 1 | Sam Perlozzo | - | - | 1 | 1 | |
| Bruce Bochy | - | - | 1 | 1 | Ron Washington | - | - | 1 | 1 |
my ballot went 1. melvin 2. piniella 3. hurdle; i'd have put la russa 4th. melvin's team improved by 14 games despite a 12 percent decrease in payroll, and he had very few push-button decisions; the dbacks had 1st- or 2d-year players at 5 of the 8 positions on the diamond, plus two rookies in the rotation and a bunch more youngsters on the bench. he deftly handled the kids while deflecting the loss of a veteran front-line starter (randy johnson). piniella was the cubs' most important new face for 2007, imho. he acted decisively to get dead weight off the roster (barrett, izturis, cedeno) and solved the bullpen problems that bedeviled the cubs early on, turning carlos marmol from a failed starter into a high-impact reliever. without sweet lou, the cubs don't win nuthin'. as for hurdle, there's something to be said for staying the hell out of the way. when the rockies got on a roll down the stretch and got themselves close, ol' clint didn't get himself in the middle of everything; he just showed up every day, made sure the lineup card got sent to home plate, and very consciously avoided waking his players from the incredible dream they were having. and he made some good personnel calls along the way --- changed closers at midseason (from fuentes to corpas), stuck w/ garret atkins while he hit his way out of his slump, dealt ably with three injuries in his rotation (hirsch cook and lopez). he's a terrible in-game tactician, but he did a nice job with this team. good man with a compelling personal story; it was nice to see him enjoy some success.
to close the loop on this entry: hurdle was a member of the 1986 cardinals that will leitch will be managing this off-season . . . .
0 recs |
106 comments
Comments
Give 'em hell, Leitch!
by Alxfritz on Nov 6, 2007 9:16 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Screw Lindeman and his 66 ops+
by Zubin on Nov 6, 2007 9:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Warning: I will stink
by williamfleitch on Nov 6, 2007 2:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As was LaVs.
by Alxfritz on Nov 6, 2007 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
avoid
perhaps in the interest of avoiding pudge and lake, you could start the secret weapon??? even though he didn't officially play a game at catcher until '88, offensively, he'd be a far superior option.
or, while he didn't play a game at catcher until '89, pinch-runner extraordinaire tom lawless would provide a more appealing option than one of the worst acquisitions in cardinal history - heath - he makes kennedy's year look strong.
by sdesserman on Nov 6, 2007 5:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Another good link - DG's blog:
Good stuff RE: the Cards' SS options.
"The Cardinals, chiefly manager Tony La Russa, are not ready to hand the keys to the middle infield over to Brendan Ryan for 2008. La Russa has described Ryan's role as "in the mix" for starts at shortstop, starts at second base and even starts at third base. They see him spending a full year as an apprentice of sorts -- getting a whole summer to learn to live, play and think like a big leaguer, not like a minor-leaguer given big-league playing time.
The followup question then is, Do they see Ryan as the shortstop of the future? Does that possible mean 2009?
If the organization believes that Ryan will turn this spring training into a spot on the big-league bench and turn that into a bid to be the everyday shortstop in the near future, then they should sign accordingly. That means a deal that covers `08 and possibly `09. That nixes some of the above trade talks -- Wilson too expensive; Peralta (if available) too long-term -- but heightens the attractiveness of Izturis, Vizquel (if unsigned) and, yes, Eckstein."
by silent_bob on Nov 6, 2007 9:20 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Shortsightedness
by Zubin on Nov 6, 2007 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
by JMedwick on Nov 6, 2007 9:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That isn't the point
by Zubin on Nov 6, 2007 9:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Defense first, right?
Put another way - how much better would any of those 1 yr solutions be?
by airhad on Nov 6, 2007 10:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say the OPS...
by cardzfanbub on Nov 6, 2007 11:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
his fast start
you're right. he's not going to draw enough walks and would have to have a batting avg supported OBP. Hmmm.
He still seems in the ballpark offensively with most of the realistic options out there - Jack Wilson, Ceasar Izturis, Omar Vizquel.
Not the same with the glove clearly.
by airhad on Nov 6, 2007 11:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But that would have taken precious at bats away
by outraged on Nov 6, 2007 10:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a little troubled by the note
by MdRedbirdFreak on Nov 6, 2007 10:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Longterm can still be done
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 6, 2007 11:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Adam Kennedy can be traded for a sleeve of tennis
by gonzostl on Nov 6, 2007 12:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How about Vizquel from SF?
by Red Blazer on Nov 6, 2007 3:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Gooch
by Zubin on Nov 6, 2007 9:37 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I've heard
by liam on Nov 6, 2007 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
by Zubin on Nov 6, 2007 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Albert Taguchi
by BigJawnMize on Nov 6, 2007 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
(amid PA echoes and crowd noise)
by cardschinmusic on Nov 7, 2007 4:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Regarding the defensive stats
Couldn't you simply take the cumulative score and divide by innings played at that position to calculate a reasonable rate stat? Since you're comparing players to others at the same position, the varying frequency of chances by position (i.e. SS's get many more chances than pitchers) would take care of itself.
Not only would this allow you to compare full time vs. part time players (and players who missed games due to injury), but it would also allow you to analyze players who play multiple positions to see where they are the most effective defensively (e.g. Miles is average at 2B, but below average at SS). You could compare players to a position average to see at which positions they are above or below average.
by Knish on Nov 6, 2007 10:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
You can't just divide by innings
by azruavatar on Nov 6, 2007 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What about
ex:
10% of Schumaker's plays would not have been made by the avg. fielder whereas (maybe) 5% of Duncan's plays wouldn't have been made by the avg. fielder.
Why would this not work? (I'm sure there's a reason as I'm just going off the top of my head right now.)
by chuckb on Nov 6, 2007 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Each play isn't created equally
Maybe I'm totally off base here, the more I'm thinking about it the more I'm running myself in circles. Having a +- = 0 means that you were, on balance, neither a detriment or a help on the field. I think that's distinguished from what the fielder SHOULD actually do. If they make some excellent plays but biff on some easy ones, they can total out to zero. (If I remember right, 2 years of defensive stats has the same predictive value as 1 year of hitting stats.)
So, trying to tie this back to your suggestion, the # of plays that an average player would have made would be dependent on the degree of difficulty of the plays in their zone (i.e. an average right fielder should make 97% of the 1 degree plays, 80% of the 2 degree plays, etc.) plus an average number of opportunities for each difficulty (i.e. an average right fielder sees 300 degree 1 plays, 75 degree 2 plays, etc.) then if you normalized for the difficulty and expected number of plays you could create a relative scale. Just looking at the cumulative scores though may not tell the whole story.
(I hope that made sense. . .I'm kinda of rambling and thinking as I type. Again, I'm not an expert on the +/- system by any means so don't take my thinking as fact.)
by azruavatar on Nov 6, 2007 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ignore the italics
by azruavatar on Nov 6, 2007 4:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why not?
So it's not as simple as dividing by innings played at a given position, but you could get a pretty reasonable approximation after making a few simple adjustments...
by Knish on Nov 6, 2007 3:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
couple reasons
b) your assuming that each player is receiving the same degree of difficulty in their plays
c) if you want an accurate representation, you'd want to adjust for FB/GB, handedness of the pitcher, park factors (both infield and outfield), etc. I don't know how you could have any degree of certainty about those adjustments without being able to compare them to the actual answer (in this case the number of opportunities).
The innings method would be really skewed for part time players because those variances in opportunties are much less likely to be near the expected value. I don't think it would be as easy or accurate as you think. (Although, I've been wrong before.)
by azruavatar on Nov 6, 2007 4:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I see what you're saying...
a) I'm not assuming that each inning contains a comparable pct of opportunities. I am assuming, however, that with a large enough sample size, that is accounted for. So the measure isn't relevant for someone who played 1 game (9 in) at one position. But for someone like Miles who played a large enough number of innings at 2 positions, I think you could derive a pretty estimation.
b) Regarding each player receiving the same degree of difficulty in their plays, with sample size, I imagine that that would get accounted for in the stat itself. The very nature of the stat is that it accounts for the difficulty of opportunities.
c) I hadn't considered park factors and I think you're right. Obviously for the OF. Less so for 1B, 3B and C (foul territory), probably not that important for SS, 2B and P. At the extreme, I suppose you'd want to account for park attributes like length of the infield grass. But that seems pretty secondary to me. But accounting for park factor would be a relatively straightforward adjustment by position--e.g. Petco increases LF opportunities by x%, Fenway decreases LF opportunities by y%.
Handedness of the pitcher seems unnecesary, but handedness of the hitter seems more interesting.
Anyway, all good points certainly. But I still think that once you account for these variables, you could develop a rate stat based on innings played.
by Knish on Nov 6, 2007 8:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yost above La Russa?
GO CARDS!!!
by SuperSeve on Nov 6, 2007 10:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Got to say
by cardsgirl95 on Nov 6, 2007 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not to bring this up again, but...
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/11/yankees-aiming-.html
by WiscCard on Nov 6, 2007 10:39 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
interesting...
- What can he be expected to do next year? i.e. what are we missing out on?
- What type of return can we get on whoever we spend the newfound cash on?
- What's his trade value? What's the return?
- Who replaces him?
by airhad on Nov 6, 2007 11:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good lord, Schilling signed for only $8m?
by sdrone on Nov 6, 2007 10:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think the dude just fell in love
by MdRedbirdFreak on Nov 6, 2007 10:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the royal Schilling
by Snacks LaPoint on Nov 6, 2007 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
C'mon
It's pretty clear to me that he wanted to write about he and his family not having to uproot again and mangled the production.
by liam on Nov 6, 2007 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Funny link
And I'm still glad he's not on our payroll. He wouldn't have come here for $8M, and there are many more effective ways to spend that money.
by Snacks LaPoint on Nov 6, 2007 4:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe he knows he's on Mitchell's List
Speculation on these points figures to twist quit a few negotiations. Imagine signing a guy for only one year for safety, and ending up only being able to play them for half of that.
by Birds on the Bat on Nov 6, 2007 1:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Leitch
Regarding Ryan- He looked completely lost and/or overwhelmed at times this past season, so I see absolutely nothing wrong with an "apprenticeship" for a year, if you will, especially if he's going to be part of their youth movement. In the interim, if they can sign or trade for a veteran(even Eckstein), I see nothing wrong with it.
by cardsrul on Nov 6, 2007 11:00 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Trading Rolen
Also, see above. If our fielding is near the bottom of the majors with Rolen and his +15 plays, how will it look without him? Plus, without good infield defense (and it's already tough to argue Kennedy adds anything up the middle), the whole groundball philosophy of the pitching staff is out the window.
by Red in Chicago on Nov 6, 2007 11:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
agreed...
btw - where in Chicago? I live near Wicker Park. Went to Sedgwick's (cards bar) when we won the world series and enjoyed a champagne shower there.
by airhad on Nov 6, 2007 11:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rolen...
IF you WANT to trade SCOTT ROLEN.
If the Cards are out of it, he might welcome a trade to a contender.
by cardschinmusic on Nov 7, 2007 4:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
BINGO
Couldn't agree more, despite the fact that I loathe the idea of trading Rolen. (Since I am optimistic that he will return to all-star caliber form in '07, albeit perhaps "unrealistically optimistic." But, hey, isn't that what optimism is all about?)
by Mr Clean on Nov 7, 2007 6:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
AL MOY
by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 6, 2007 12:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
LOL
by cardsgirl95 on Nov 6, 2007 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think some courageous owner
by MdRedbirdFreak on Nov 6, 2007 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Great. There are fantasy leagues to test it
by Birds on the Bat on Nov 6, 2007 1:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Grinders
If anyone gets 670 the Score out of Chicago they will probably get this.
Boers and Bernstein a show that runs from 2pm-6pm cover the "Grinder" joke all the time. They make fun of it saying that Grinders don't equate to being good.
by ICbirdfan on Nov 6, 2007 4:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can make an All-Scrappy Team
SS-David Eckstein
1B-Darin Erstad
OF-Eric Byrnes
C-AJ Pierzynski
3B-Jamey Carroll
2B-Aaron Miles
P-Josh Fogg
Byrnes would just run all over the outfield and be scrappy everywhere...I bet he's got the energy to do it anyway. I had to put Erstad in there but w/ Byrnes playing OF I had to move him to first. Josh Fogg is the pitcher b/c he's the dragonslayer...His presence on the mound beats the other team's ace as Tim McCarver never failed to point out.
by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 6, 2007 6:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It works sometimes, it doesn't other times
by Valatan on Nov 6, 2007 5:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There's a great take
by chuckb on Nov 6, 2007 5:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If a scrappy team
by ridgesee on Nov 6, 2007 8:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not a free agent but still a large deal
I think torre to me is a strange figure when you look athim as a whole..but i think if he can win in la it will cement him as a good manager who could win without the yanks payroll...It's also inetersting to me the higher those teams payrolls got the worse they have been...They needed the role guys of those great yanks teams..
by punchinjudy on Nov 6, 2007 12:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Torre maybe gets the media off the
by MdRedbirdFreak on Nov 6, 2007 12:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
thats kinda my point
by punchinjudy on Nov 6, 2007 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lbros and those who run the site
made me appreciate here you guys to a good job and the most part fans to as not passing stuff as fact on here when its a rumor..one of the many reasons i liek this site..keep up the great work.
by punchinjudy on Nov 6, 2007 1:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Rolen wanting out?
Oh boy. Story is that Rolen is willing to waive his no-trade clause to get out of St. Louis.
Story quoted below
St. Louis Cardinals third baseman Scott Rolen may waive his no-trade clause to escape manager Tony La Russa, the St. Louis Post Dispatch reported Monday.
Rolen, who has battled shoulder problems the last two years, was benched for a few games during the 2006 postseason, causing a rift between he and La Russa, who just signed a two-year contract extension.
The two claimed they had patched up any differences, but it was obvious there were problems between the two and according to the report, the club now acknowledges the problem.
"Scott's situation is still ongoing. We hope to address it internally," new Cards general manager John Mozeliak says. "It's fair to say there are some things out there."
Rolen, who is expected to participate fully in spring training after undergoing his third shoulder surgery since August 2005, hit .265 with eight homers and 58 RBI in 112 games.
However, any trade possibility is compromised by Rolen's shoulder and his contract, which provides him $36 million the next three seasons.
"(His agents) and I are trying to resolve this from within," Mozeliak says. "If for some reason it doesn't work, we'll pursue alternatives."
by Cybit on Nov 6, 2007 1:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Old news
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 6, 2007 1:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Foxsports article
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7400932
"St Louis, which converted two quality relievers into starting roles last year and paid the price"
So, the fact that we converted 2 bullpen guys to starters, who became our 2 best starters over the course of the year, and still had a stellar bullpen, how's that "paying the price"? Yes, our starting pitching sucked last year, but it wasn't because of AW and Loop. In reality, those 2 guys were the only thing about our rotation that wasn't a trainwreck. Seems a lot more accurate to say that we gained a cheap #2 and #4-5 starter without hurting our bullpen. I'm sure we would've been much better if those 2 guys were in the pen.
by CardFaninVA on Nov 6, 2007 1:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Nobody accuses FOX of Accuracy
by Birds on the Bat on Nov 6, 2007 1:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
oooooooooooo
YES!
Nailed it!
by fourstick on Nov 6, 2007 2:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Next!
Putiing Wells, Wellemeyer, Maroth and Reyes in the rotation?
by Zubin on Nov 6, 2007 3:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And Waino...
by saladdays on Nov 6, 2007 2:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I've never liked it when people say
No, we didn't. The bullpen thing was never anything more than short term for him.
by sdrone on Nov 6, 2007 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not necessarily
by chuckb on Nov 6, 2007 5:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I seriously doubt that
by sdrone on Nov 6, 2007 9:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Doubt it if you like
by chuckb on Nov 6, 2007 10:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tracy Ringolsby
by liam on Nov 6, 2007 2:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ringolsby
by flynn on Nov 6, 2007 4:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
why do these guys get paid so much
by erik on Nov 6, 2007 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're assuming
by chuckb on Nov 6, 2007 5:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"A Quality Bat"
That'd be a "transcendent" bat or something similar.
by liam on Nov 7, 2007 1:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Having played both
I remember back in 1988 getting Pursue the Pennant. I bet I replayed the 87 World Series a dozen times the first day I had it. I still have most of the cards from that 1987 season somewhere. I remember Jack Clark as having an enormous range where he could draw a walk.
by 26thMan on Nov 6, 2007 1:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Sometimes you have to step back and
Andruw Jones had a terrible year last year. He hit the low .200s, had one of his worst power years and found himself batting in the bottom half of the order for much of the year.
However, 30 year old players don't just forget how to hit.
Career Total (thru Age 30): 368 HRs
Average per full year: 34 HRs
Andruw Jones, despite his best efforts to hit as close to .200 as possible is still within reach of 700 HRs (baring injury).
Hank Aaron thru Age 30 hit 366 homeruns.
Barry Bonds thrus Age 30 hit 292 homeruns.
Willie Mays thru Age 30 hit 319 homeruns.
I think people need to factor into Andruw Jones free agency that he very well could be signing with a team that he will hit his 700th homerun with.
It's insane to think that a player who still has that potential is generally panned by baseball analysts and isn't the hottest ticket in the FA market.
I'm not saying he is going to be a world beater, but if JD Drew can get $14 M a year, Jones has to be able to get atleast $17. Some shrewd team will sneak in and get him on a 5 year deal at a below top dollar price and loaded with incentives.
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 6, 2007 2:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Jones
by StLHugo on Nov 6, 2007 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So you're advocating
by MdRedbirdFreak on Nov 6, 2007 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't advocating Andruw Jones
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 6, 2007 5:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
andruw needs to eat less
and stop trying to pull the ball
he wouldnt listen to anyone about hitting the other way last year
i say pass
but i would also like us to take a flyer on Kaz Matsui and return him to short if he hits the market rather than giving eck 2 or (gasp) 3 years
by benstl on Nov 6, 2007 2:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Interesting idea
If he can't bat leadoff, who's gonna do it? Our 2nd baseman, whomever that is?
by sdrone on Nov 6, 2007 3:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
kaz
by cdb on Nov 6, 2007 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Where would he fit
He used to play SS but I think they realized he just was not able to hack it in the big leagues.
I know we have Kennedy who I would not mind seeing leave, but we have this Hoffpauir that people think could be a decent player for a cheap price.
by ICbirdfan on Nov 6, 2007 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Plus/Minus Leaders
Grudzielanek +7 Could-a Would-a Should-a
Eck -14, Jeter -34......OK then
by 20 45 on Nov 6, 2007 3:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
New York fans
by Zubin on Nov 6, 2007 3:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good find, thanks for the link
by Birds on the Bat on Nov 6, 2007 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Looks like Johnny Mac got robbed.
by Red Blazer on Nov 6, 2007 11:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
lboros-groundhog day
by erik on Nov 6, 2007 5:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The best script of
And Murray was unreal.
"Are you drunk?"
"No, drunk is more fun."
by Alxfritz on Nov 6, 2007 5:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Groundhog Day....
by Timbo02 on Nov 6, 2007 6:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what no love for
by punchinjudy on Nov 6, 2007 6:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ned the head!
by erik on Nov 6, 2007 8:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And my favorite...
by Mr Clean on Nov 6, 2007 7:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am absolutely disgusted...
Russell Martin...seriously? What a joke. If I were Yadier Molina, I would just go to the press and declare myself the winner, and say %# Rawlings.
by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Nov 6, 2007 8:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
don't even bother with the media
by SleepyCA on Nov 8, 2007 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not Really News News
Not that he hasn't been to discussed to death by us over the past few weeks, just letting everyone know that he's officially on the table.
by stl tyler on Nov 6, 2007 9:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Since they re-signed Matt Stairs
by chuckb on Nov 6, 2007 10:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you
by stl tyler on Nov 6, 2007 11:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Again
I know Beane is the type that would see value in Reyes in a stadium like Oaklands.
Could we get Haren back? It's not like Duncan doesn't love him.
by Harknights on Nov 7, 2007 12:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs



















