Verdict: Very-Goodwick
by DanUpBaby on Jan 13, 2009 5:49 AM EST
163 comments
The projections for Ryan X-Wick—sixty on the nose—are in, and despite my minimal Excel literacy I've managed to get the official VEB Community Projection spit out. If I had to pick one way to illustrate how our projections went, I think I would borrow the old Rob Neyer conceit of Player A and Player B. Consider these two parallel universe Ken Phelps all-stars, Ludwick A and Ludwick B:
| AB | H | HR | RBI | AVG | OBP | SLG | OPS | |
| A | 385 | 107 | 16 | 78 | .278 | .344 | .496 | .840 |
| B | 456 | 125 | 26 | 85 | .274 | .347 | .522 | .869 |
Ludwick B is Ludwick's ZiPS projection. Ludwick A is the absolute lowest projection we got. By OPS, interestingly enough, ZiPS is almost exactly equidistant between our low projection and the final average.
Obviously we are more optimistic about Ludwick's future than the "machine" projections—in aggregate, I guess, we saw something in the 2008 Ludwick that we're certain is real, even though it isn't contained within his recent numbers up to that point.
Here's the pertinent table. High OPS honors go to Cards Fan in Chitown; low OPS was courtesy jd is legend, who was surprisingly the only participant to dip below a .500 slugging percentage.
AB
H
HR
RBI
AVG
OBP
SLG
OPS
HIGH OPS
543
169
43
121
.311
.402
.569
.971
LOW OPS
385
107
16
78
.278
.344
.496
.840
HIGHS
595
174
44
123
.311
.402
.600
.971
2008
538
161
37
113
.299
.375
.591
.966
ZiPS
456
125
26
85
.274
.347
.522
.869
VEB
518
148
31
101
.285
.360
.537
.897
Interesting, useless fact: in terms of OPS, and the way that OPS is divided, the most similar hitter since 2000 might be the 2001 version of our very own Troy Glaus. Of course, he did it a lot differently; that year Glaus hit .250/.367/.531, with 41 home runs and 107 walks. A less Three True Outcomes-y season is Carlos Lee 2006; that year El Caballo hit .300/.355/.540 between Milwaukee and Texas.
That's the kind of player that congregates around the .900 OPS mark, stars-but-not- superstars. I don't think anybody would mind if Ryan Ludwick, who basically cost the Cardinals airfare to Spring Training back in 2007, were just a star.
#
At the P-D they've put together a bloggy roundtable discussing the Cardinals' place in the late-bloomer free agent market. Surprisingly—to me, at least—three of the four writers, none of them Derrick Goold, think a starter is more important than a reliever; apparently Mozeliak wasn't alone on that side of the ledger.
The longer things drag along the more likely it seems that the Cardinals are destined to end up with Joe Strauss's pick, Jon Garland, who fits the depth-pitcher profile the Cardinals are after almost disturbingly well, the notable exception being that he might not be a very good pitcher any more. Unless he's a Duncan Project, which would mean he isn't the Big Free Agent Move the DeWallet contingent wants, and the Cardinals are convinced he'll do better than he has in the last two years, he combines Joel Pineiro's marginal talent and nosediving strikeout rate with Jeff Suppan's durability. That's better than the AAA option when Carpenter or somebody else goes down, but it's not much better.
Another travel day for me; more substantial posts to resume soon.
0 recs |
163 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Which VEB poster was...
the most in tune with the entire community? Who was the closest to hitting the average right on the button? That was one thing that I really enjoyed seeing when the rankings came out for individuals last season.
by stlfan on Jan 13, 2009 7:31 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
could have been me
AB H HR RBI AVG OBP SLG OPS
VEB 518 148 31 101 .285 .360 .537 .897
Jack 524 148 29 96 .282 .369 .537 .906
Is that close enough? Anybody got me beat?
"Statistics mean nothing to the individual"
"You are what you eat and you clearly went out and devoured a big fat guy"
by jacksonian on Jan 13, 2009 1:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No Garland, thanks!!
If they want an easy pickup, better take Wolf than Garland, at least he’s a lefty that our rotation badly needs. If they want a righty, I’m pretty sure that Sheets will end up ok for 1 year + 1 year mutual option, to “bridge” to more favourable market conditions.
GO CARDS!!!
by SuperSeve on Jan 13, 2009 8:25 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Sheets 1 year plus option is a dream (though a good one)...
Are you stating that you don’t want Sheets? As bad as the market is, I still have my doubts he gets anything less than 3 years 40 million unless his shoulder is bad (and then we wouldn’t want him)*. I think we will be surprised what he ends up getting because I think that’s the low end (and Texas would LOVE to overpay for him – which is in a nice proximity to his LA home town and college). One year plus an option is probably the last thing he signs (and he wouldn’t have turned down arbitration if he only wanted 1 year).
*If we could get Sheets for 3 years 40 million (and he passes a physical, I’m all for it).
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 10:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The market is low
Tell me: what is the difference between making 15+M per and making 11M per? It’s not Sheet’s stuff, is that he needs to show durability. So why would you accept 3y40M when you can take 1y10M and then sign a 4+y60+M in a better market with lesser competition? Only if you don’t trust your arm. In this case, better pass.
GO CARDS!!!
by SuperSeve on Jan 13, 2009 11:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"what is the difference between making 15+M per and making 11M per?"
Ummm, at least $4MM! Let me say that again…. At Least Four Million Dollars. That is serious cheddar cheese.
And how can Sheets know that the market will be better next year?
It always fascinates me when people say things like this.
by Willie McGee's Twin on Jan 13, 2009 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There aren’t many FA SPs next year. There is no way he signs for 10 million for one though.
by ol Pete on Jan 13, 2009 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lowe is setting the market
Lowe is getting 20 million per year at 4 years and Sheets will be licking his lips. He won’t get that, but his price tag just went up.
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you mean $15M
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 2:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, typo...
You are correct sir.
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and by get that I mean years...
(and I meant 15 mil)
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What will Sheets get then?
2 years with an optin? I wouldn’t mind that contract. I would prefer not to got three years, but 2/$30mil with $16mil option $4mil buyout sounds good to me.
Sometimes I wonder,
"Why is that frisbee getting bigger?"
...and then it hits me!!
by cardzfanbub on Jan 13, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
agree
would rather get Wolf than Garland, would rather get Sheets the most though
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Still hoping for a trade
Phil Hughes for Rick Ankiel.
Also, thanks for the work on the Ludwick analysis. I think the guy will produce some pretty good numbers next year. At least, that’s the hope. We’re going to need them…
by JWO on Jan 13, 2009 8:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hughes for Ankiel
If the Yankees only get Ankiel for Hughes then Moz has some incremenating photos of a Steinbrenner. Think more Ian Kennedy ~ Ankiel (and maybe less than that until Ankiel proves healthy). Plus outfielders seem to be very plentiful this offseason (and everyone wants pitching). I think the Yankees will get a very good deal for whichever top pitching prospect they trade.
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 10:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not. gonna. happen.
Just last year, the Yanks refused to part with Hughes for Johan Santana. I’ll repeat for emphasis – The Yankees refused to part with Hughes for Future HOF’er Johan freaking Santana (who, like Ankiel, was one year away from FA).
Hughes was rated as the 2nd best prospect in all of baseball in 2007. He was also the second youngest player in the AL that year.
It’s debatable whether Rasmus is worth Hughes (and many debaters would say that Rasmus is NOT worth Hughes).
by Willie McGee's Twin on Jan 13, 2009 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and.then.hughes.got.bombed.
His trade value is lower now than it was last year. Probably not fallen THAT far, considering the massive hype surrounding Hughes to begin with, but he’s no longer a “sure thing”.
still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.
by SleepyCA on Jan 13, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He's PROJECTED to be a #3 now anyway
His stuff just isn’t that great. 89-92 touching a 93 94 with a decent curve and a changeup just isn’t that special. 87% contact rate against last year!
Not afraid to nitpick
by joker24 on Jan 13, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hughes pitched well..
after his injuries last year (which were like cracked rib and a pulled oblique, not career-altering). I also heard he pitched very well in the AFL. I have not heard that he’s now thought of as just an “average” prospect/pitcher (he’s only 22 or so after all) – where have you heard it?
In any event, I stand by my statement that the chances of Hughes being traded for Ankiel (w/o a bunch more added to the Ankiel side) asymptotically approaches zero.
by Willie McGee's Twin on Jan 13, 2009 7:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
where in that post did you get "average" prospect now?
He said he probably has not fallen THAT far, and that he is no longer " a sure thing". Just because he doesn’t think of him as a sure thing anymore doesn’t mean he was labeling him as an average prospect.
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
by mattyfrommo on Jan 13, 2009 8:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not exactly a ringing endorsement....
“His stuff just isn’t that great. 89-92 touching a 93 94 with a decent curve and a changeup just isn’t that special.”
“Isn’t that great” and “isn’t that special” are synonyms for average because “great” and “special” are above avg.
The original post was about the odds of Hughes being flipped for Ankiel. I think there’s no way that’s happening.
by Willie McGee's Twin on Jan 14, 2009 12:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now I'm getting...
From SomeoneWhoKnowsThings (™ by Bill Simmons), Hughes in the AFL was low 90s, a loopy curveball that he was tipping and a good change. “Like him, don’t love him”
Not afraid to nitpick
by joker24 on Jan 13, 2009 10:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also
It’s worth pointing out that, having signed Tex and displaced Swisher to the OF, the Yankees are now looking to trade an OF rather than trade for one. They’re not really a viable trade partner for us anymore.
by mojowo11 on Jan 13, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes and No
True they are looking to trade an OFer of either Swisher or Nady but they are still looking for a CFer. Now they won’t acquire one till they get rid of an OFer but if they do than Moz has to jump on that. I still think we should acquire Ian Kennedy for Ankiel. Than trade Fresse to MIN for one of their many cheap young starters they have. We have seriously no depth in the SP role. We are setting ourselves up for failure this year.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Freese
The only people that like Freese are Cardinal fans (I am one of them). The prospect lists don’t think to highly of him and I doubt we could get a cheap young pitcher (that isn’t terrible at least this year) for him. I don’t know which pitcher you are talking about (he could similarly not be thought highly of), so I may be wrong though.
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
I have talked it over with a couple Twins fans most of them would be ecstatic to get Fresse for someone like Boof Bosner. He is getting pushed to swingman in their rotation.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bonser
With an ERA+ of 68 and 85, I stand by my statement with the caveat that he is terrible. He had some decent minor league numbers though, so I guess there is a chance he has some upside as a #5. He also has a decent K/9.
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Those ERA+ stats are last year and 2007
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He did though have a FIP of 4.19
He seemed to have some bad luck last year with a BABIP of .342
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 2:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I will pray to the GOB
everyday for the rest of the offseason to prevent us from signing Garland. If we are looking for another Lohse-type pickup this offseason, let it be Randy Wolf.
Patiently awaiting the day Colby Rasmus does this: .275/.381/.551/.932, 29HR, in St. Louis...
by RunninRedbird on Jan 13, 2009 8:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Wolf > Garland > Doing nothing
www.salukihoops.com
by salukihoops on Jan 13, 2009 9:33 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
without knowing the dollars, you’re statement is impossible to evaluate.
by azruavatar on Jan 13, 2009 9:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The statement assumes market value rates.
If I had to estimate those amounts it would be…
Wolf- 2 years at ~16MM, Garland- 2 years at ~14MM
www.salukihoops.com
by salukihoops on Jan 13, 2009 11:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Doing Nothing > Wolf > Garland
at those prices, I wouldn’t touch any of them. If they’d take a Lohse 2008 deal, I’d consider it as a stop gap but neither of them is worth more than that.
by azruavatar on Jan 13, 2009 11:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I would rather sign Ohman and put Boggs in the rotation that pay Garland $14M over two years.
The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.
by thegodfather on Jan 13, 2009 11:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
Doing nothing means “Doing Nothing” not signing Ohman…
Putting the last of the FA dollars into a SP is the only way to compete this season.
www.salukihoops.com
by salukihoops on Jan 13, 2009 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let me rephrase that then
I agree as in I’d rather do nothing than sign Wolf or Garland to one of the above deals.
As a second point, if we aren’t signing another SP we may as well get Ohman.
Better?
The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.
by thegodfather on Jan 13, 2009 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ohman would not be as much of as an upgrade as you would think
Good read
<a href=" http://stl-sabr.bajink.com/fungoes/?p=1560" >Did the Cardinals improve their lefty relief? Another take
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thats weird why didn't the link work, It normally works
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Looks like there's a space between the first quotation and the link
The artist formerly known as...
Mr Redbird @ Viva El Birdos
PowerOfDixieland @ Track Em Tigers, other SEC blogs
by jd is legend on Jan 13, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i dunno about that article.
Manning’s PRC are inflated by a lone, rogue projection for Manning to create 27 pitching runs. I sure don’t buy the notion that Manning will be better than Miller by several runs. If you disregard that number, which seems unjustifiable, the more reasonable average for Manning’s other two projections is 19 runs created.
The same one says that Ohman is projected on average to be worth 26 runs. If Ohman can create 7 more pitching runs than Manning, surely that’s worth something.
by tom s. on Jan 13, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tyler Johnson is still a FA
Is he really in that bad of shape since surgery? Why are we not taking a flier on one of our own guys.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That is a good question. Maybe the medicals really look bad on him?
by tom s. on Jan 13, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps they’re questioning his judgement on marrying into the Hrabosky family.
by astrostl on Jan 13, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Are they all mad Hungarians?
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
by bgh on Jan 13, 2009 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yes
middle hungarian is mrs. johnson.
"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa
by adiueordie on Jan 13, 2009 4:48 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I would like
to take a flyer on Johnson, depending on the price and his condition.
by Toddius on Jan 13, 2009 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that the team was upset with his conditioning and work ethic
Especially following his injury.
by mojowo11 on Jan 13, 2009 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1. We get Sheets, maybe Pettite. If neither is available,
1) cough up the money for Ohman.
2) Wait till March. Sign whoever isbest among remaining unsigned credible starters to a one year, $4m, $5m deal.
by tom s. on Jan 13, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the only way? Seriously?
still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.
by SleepyCA on Jan 13, 2009 3:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
Wolf is SO over rated. Everyone talks how fragile Sheets is but he has out pitched in quality and innings Wolf in every year for the last 5.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
of course it would be better to get Sheets
but Wolf better than Garland, no?
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 1:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am not so sure anymore
I am looking deeper at Garland’s number. I have been comparing his 07 season to his 08 season. All his 08 numbers look comparable or better.
His 08 K’s are down, BB’s are Up, and HR’s are Up. But when you dig deeper it doesn’t make a lot of sense why.
His HR/9 were up from .82 in 07 to 1.05 in 08. Which doesn’t make a lot of sense he was U.S. Cellular Field with is 35% more likely than average to give up a HR to Angel Stadium which is 7% below average.
So I assumed he was giving up more Fly Balls but that is the farthest thing from the truth. He was giving up 37.7 % in 07 but lowered it to 27.8 % in 08. His GB went from 39.4 % in 07 to 49.9%. With a higher than normal BABIP of .315 in 08.
So I assumed maybe he is just losing something off his pitchs. Which isn’t true either. His FB was faster in 08 than it was in 07 and 06 by over a 1MPH. Than I looked at his K. His O-Strike(swinging at pitch outside the zone) was 29.1% which was his career high.
I like to look at his Pitch/FX data if anyone knows where you can get it.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Great analysis!
N/M
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
from small ball to long ball
pitcher and batter cards. google it
by ball in play on Jan 13, 2009 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well just looking at his HR data it makes more sense
13 out of his 23 HR’s were Just Enough or Lucky with the League Average being 27. While he was at 56. He also seemed to give HR’s in bunch’s on the same day.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 2:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Could he be losing the skill to locate?
With age, is he leaving more watermelons up in the zone?
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
by bgh on Jan 13, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Could be a good point...
He may have been trying to throw to hard instead of locate (see the 1 mph more). Pitchers don’t usually start throwing harder at his age.
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thats what I thought also
Maybe he was just trying to hard since he was in a contract year and just got traded
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 3:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
use the pitch fx tool, select hr, and pitch type for garland
shows it in strike zone graph from
by ball in play on Jan 13, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How old is that data
When I did HR’s only 17 came up and it doesn’t show what year it is
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
since fx started
07 and 08 cards. realize all games do not have pitch fx in place
by ball in play on Jan 13, 2009 3:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ty
was hoping you could do that for me
by ball in play on Jan 13, 2009 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If we can get a one year deal from either
i think Garland wold be more valuable to the team despite the lower K rate and worse FIP just because Wolf is soooo unlikely to have another 190+ innings year. the last time he threw more than 103 IP was 2004…Garland will be as likely as anyone we have to give us 200 innings at league average production maybe a little better with our defense and his GB%. Wolf just looks to be throwing money away because he will more than likely get injured. anything more than a year i dont think either is worth it but maybe he wants to try and improve his value and would take it. truthfully, i would rather give KMac a shot over either with Boggs or Todd as a back up.
"Baseball is dull only to dull minds." - Red Barber
by nomar34 on Jan 13, 2009 9:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Wolf-160 IP, 4.4 FIP = 1.8 wins
Garland-190 IP, 4.6 FIP = 1.7 wins
Take whichever you can get the cheapest/least amt of years, unless you feel comfortable believing Wolf can throw more innings than 160.
I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9
by erik on Jan 13, 2009 9:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
something wrong with your site today, or is my computer just giving me a hard time?
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
by scoot on Jan 13, 2009 10:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
seems OK to me
I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9
by erik on Jan 13, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
must be connection
trying to navigate while listening in class
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
by scoot on Jan 13, 2009 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
FR and it's writers assume no responsibility
for any decline in your grades.
I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9
by erik on Jan 13, 2009 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jan term classes
Are a joke- grades based mainly off of busy work. No reason why I shouldn’t have a 4.0 in the 2 classes. But, if for some reason I make a B, I will not blame FR or VEB
"Baseball is like Church, many attend, few understand" - Wes Westrum
by scoot on Jan 13, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But someone has to pitch those other 30 innings for Wolf
If you calculate a replacement level pitcher in for the last 30 innings the total FIP goes up to 4.7 FIP = 1.65 wins. It’s not a whole lot of difference, but if Wolf throws fewer than 160, then we’re looking at giving 50-100 replacement level innings. I don’t think it does the club any good to sign him unless they are reasonably sure he can throw more than 150 innings.
I’m not saying we should sign Garland, but he’s changing leagues is probably worth some better numbers for him over the course of the first half of the season, and I think that he can provide league averageness over the entire 2009 season, so he may be a good option. I wouldn’t sign him to a 3 year contract or anything, because his peripherals are going to wrong way and he won’t have the element of surprise going for him in 2010.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Jan 13, 2009 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
By definition rep level starters provide 0 WAR no matter how many innings they throw.
What are you using for rep level ERA?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Jan 13, 2009 4:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I used rep level FIP = 5.50
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Jan 13, 2009 6:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
With 30 IP at 5.50 and 160 at 4.40, I get a weighted FIP of 4.57, not 4.70...
Yes, the WAR appears to go down from 1.77 to 1.73, but that’s a small error in my spreadsheet.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Jan 14, 2009 11:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i think 160 is a pretty big stretch in itself
five years ago is the last time he did that before last year…that is why i would take Garland on a one year over Wolf. If i thought we could get 160-180 i would take Wolf and not think twice because he is a better pitcher.
"Baseball is dull only to dull minds." - Red Barber
by nomar34 on Jan 13, 2009 10:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
they may as well have offered looper arbi
if it’s come down to garland
I'll be the one overrating these Faberge' eggs, thank you very much!
Future Redbirds / PAH9
by erik on Jan 13, 2009 10:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
i agree with you...
both times…
"Baseball is dull only to dull minds." - Red Barber
by nomar34 on Jan 13, 2009 10:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hell
I’d rather them sign Looper to a 1 year deal than Garland or Wolf
The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.
by thegodfather on Jan 13, 2009 11:24 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
why?
when we probably can get looper or his equivilant for less than his arb number. the thing to remember is that arb numbers dont take the economy into account so he would be guaranteed a raise if he had accepted arb regardless of what his current value in free agency is.
by FunkeeC on Jan 13, 2009 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Rec'd
I agree…with the state of the market, if they bring back Looper it will probably be at the same price or cheaper than he was last year….
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Jan 13, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt he would be cheaper.
He was being paid as a reliever, remember? This time he’ll get paid as a starter. Probably just a marginal increase, though.
by spants on Jan 13, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I realize that
But he made $7.5M last year with performance incentives. I don’t think he’ll get that this year if the market stays the way that it is.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Jan 13, 2009 6:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that is what i was thinking
when i made the above comment as well
by FunkeeC on Jan 13, 2009 7:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Community projections always tend to be optimistic...
… and they tend to overrate good recent performance.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Jan 13, 2009 10:16 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
You're right...
but you must admit that Ludwick is a very difficult player to project. There is no need to go over his playing (and injury) history again for this audience. I think almost everyone here realizes that there will be some regression – how much is the debate.
What do you project for Ludwick?
by IA Card on Jan 13, 2009 10:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No idea.
I’d put my faith in CHONE/PECOTA, though, which is going to do a weighted average of the past few years plus an aging thing.
I’d put their projection up against the community projection containing fan optimism. If you somehow “corrected” for the optimism factor and just used fan input for their other insight (however you’d do that), I’d call it a coin flip.
I’m no projection expert. I just think nobody really is.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Jan 13, 2009 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's difficult to...
find comparables to Ludwick’s breakout in 2008. In some ways it is similar to Carlos Pena’s incredible 2007 season but Pena had been a semi-valuable player in Detriot for 3 years before falling off a cliff in 2006. Unfortunately for us Cardinal fans, Pena’s OPS dropped by .167 points from 07 to 08. If that drastic of regression occurs with Ludwick, he will OPS .799 next year. Ouch
Also, Pena and Ludwick were once involved in the same transaction. This doesn’t mean anything but it is interesting.
by IA Card on Jan 13, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
pena is also the guy who hurt ludwick
luddy slid on a pickoff play at first base, and pena fell on him, fracturing his hip and nearly ended his career.
still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.
by SleepyCA on Jan 13, 2009 7:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
but projection systems are useless
for players whose career paths do not have large populations of comperable players.
FWIW, we didn’t do a Ludwick projection last year. but we did Rick Ankiel, who is in the same “population”. His 2008 predictions:
actual: .264/.337/.506 delta CHONE .249/.300/.461 .015/.037/.045 (.082 OPS points) PECOTA .257/.315/.474 .007/.022/.032 (.054 OPS points) VEB .266/.319/.501 .002/.018/.005 (.023 OPS points)
VEB prediction was most optomistic by far and over twice as precise as the real world result. Fan optomism, FTW.
still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.
by SleepyCA on Jan 13, 2009 6:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the wrench in the works is injuries.
by ol Pete on Jan 13, 2009 6:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
oops, replace "real world result" with "best projection" above
And add some more projections:
actual: .264/.337/.506 delta marcels .280/.330/.480 .016/.007/.026 (.033 OPS points) James .257/.301/.498 .007/.036/.008 (.044 OPS points) ZIPS .241/.285/.458 .023/.052/.048 (.100 OPS points)
still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.
by SleepyCA on Jan 13, 2009 6:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ludwick has plenty of comps. he’s been healthy the last three years, so this isn’t hard.
by greenback06 on Jan 13, 2009 7:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not really
Getting close to even measuring the true talent of a “typical” player is tough enough; getting close to a guy like Ludwick is impossible, especially as of 1 april 2008. true, there is probably a small population of players that could have been used to try to predict Luddy or ankiel’s performances. assuming you could write an algorithm to identify them, that population will 1) be vastly smaller than the population of players who can be used to model, say, troy glaus, and 2) the variation in performance among players in that population will be much higher, increasing the uncertainty in measuring the population skill level, causing regression to the mean to be less effective.
The 2009 predictions should be better because after 2008 there is a larger set of data to work from, and the injury-plagued years (IE, bad data) are farther away, so they are weighted less. But they’ll still not be as good as they would be for someone else, because of all the time he missed.
still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.
by SleepyCA on Jan 13, 2009 10:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ankiel and Ludwick are not the same population.
Ankiel’s a pitcher who converted to a hitter/fielder late in his career.
I think the claim that Ludwick doesn’t have a lot of comparables is BS, honestly. He’s a guy who always had a lot of potential who finally busted out in his late twenties. Sure, you can throw some injury things in there, too, I guess.
Is it really that hard to believe that Ludwick’s projection shouldn’t look like Pena’s career path or many other similar career paths? He probably won’t hit like last year, but he’ll be better than his previous levels.
Also, it’s a PROJECTION. Even if we could peg his actual talent level EXACTLY, it’s quite likely his actual performance is well above or below his talent level.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Jan 14, 2009 11:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
sigh
“Is it really that hard to believe that Ludwick’s projection shouldn’t look like Pena’s career path or many other similar career paths? He probably won’t hit like last year, but he’ll be better than his previous levels.”
Well, duh? The point is, it was impossible for the projection systems to predict, last year, what Luddy would do this year. Same with ankiel. They simply cannot work, given the information that was available for those players, and they didn’t work. If they HAD worked, it would have been luck, not good design. actually, the fact that they didn’t work is an artifact of “good” design.
And again, this isn’t an attack on the systems, just an acknowledgment that you have to understand the tools you use and recognize that projection systems work well for large groups of players but poorly for individuals. Anfd Luddy and Ank are about as “individual” as you can get, in the pantheon of major league ballplayers.
still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.
by SleepyCA on Jan 17, 2009 12:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Plus
if you consider that Ank was hitting .282/.347/.543/.890 when he suffered what should have been a season-ending injury then the projection were even further off with CHONE and PECOTA both being off by over .100 OPS points.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Jan 14, 2009 11:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Offense: CHONE over Marcel? Rally kinda cried uncle the last I saw.
Is there a site or place where the projection systems are regularly compared?
Love to see competition in this area. I’d be happy to hear if CHONE is beating Marcel too.
by astrostl on Jan 14, 2009 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That mini-study only included players with lots of at-bats and 4+ years in the majors.
And every system basically tied. When you start talking about players with less playing time and fewer years in the majors, CHONE (and others) pulls ahead. I mean, at the very least, CHONE is Marcel plus minor league data.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Jan 15, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True, and I wasn’t looking at this in the context of Ludwick specifically whose Minor League data would seem to still really matter at this point. It was really more a question of whether you felt that CHONE was better for offense across the projection board.
If you want a counter-case on fan optimism, check out the Wainwright projection thread :) There seem to be plenty of people calling for him to be near the top of Cy Young voting.
by astrostl on Jan 16, 2009 12:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course they do...
But I happen to think this one is justified. As someone said yesterday, Ludwick hit .312/.391/.610/1.001 in the second half of the season last year, which also corresponds to the point where he became a regular fixture in the lineup. He put up an .818 OPS in his first stint in the big leagues in 2007, so I think that it’s justified to predict him at around a .900 OPS for the full year in 2009, especially if you think that he can avoid the injury bug.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Jan 13, 2009 10:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
as opposed to the unjustified Greene rankings
those were pretty out there
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I’m not sure that I threw up a post in that particular thread.
I probably would have put Greene at around .260/.310/.450 or so. I think his ISO is going to be around .190 to .200 in a ballpark that isn’t PetCo, but his free-swinging ways aren’t going to just disappear.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Jan 13, 2009 1:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to see some sort of analysis of this on VEB
Can someone who has more time/mathematical prowess than me pull together the projections from the last few years (both ours and ZIP/PECOTA/etc) and the actual players’ productions and see where VEB projections rank in accuracy?
by mojowo11 on Jan 13, 2009 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't have that kind of time...
But just from what I remember from the Ankiel, Ludwick, Izturis, and WW projections from last year, we were much more bullish on our own players than the “computer” projections were. I think we had Ankiel about right in terms of power numbers and AB’s, and everyone was way off on Ludwick — his season truly did come out of nowhere. Most of us thought he’d be better, but none of us thought he was going to be that good.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Jan 13, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you aim low, you never get disappointed :P
What do you mean is surprising, DanUp? That I’m the only commenter to post a sub-.500 SLG or that anyone at all posted a sub-.500 SLG?
The artist formerly known as...
Mr Redbird @ Viva El Birdos
PowerOfDixieland @ Track Em Tigers, other SEC blogs
by jd is legend on Jan 13, 2009 11:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
that you were the only
I mean, .591 is .591, but the guy posted a sub-.500 slugging percentage last year.
by DanUpBaby on Jan 13, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
this is a hard one to predict...
I look at both the high and low and could easily see each of them being right, ludwick has a lot to prove this year, and if he even repeats his perfomance from ’08 I will be happy as can be
Is it weird that I would rather the payroll be more like the Marlins than the Yankees?
by ForesterShane on Jan 13, 2009 11:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Braves sign Lowe
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/01/braves-sign-der.html
sigh…
if you can’t trust a southern lawyer cooking a kosher meal in a dumpster,
well, then, the world has grown far too cynical
by RosevilleRedbird on Jan 13, 2009 12:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
That doesn't quite cover it
Needs more emphasis…
SIGH!!!!!!!
Does that capture an adequate amount of exasperation?
by mojowo11 on Jan 13, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
much better, thank you!
if you can’t trust a southern lawyer cooking a kosher meal in a dumpster,
well, then, the world has grown far too cynical
by RosevilleRedbird on Jan 13, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Mixed emotions for me...
I would have liked to have added Lowe, but at 4/$60 mil I think I’m glad we didn’t. Weren’t we hoping for something in the 3/$40 range?
Sometimes I wonder,
"Why is that frisbee getting bigger?"
...and then it hits me!!
by cardzfanbub on Jan 13, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably Closer to
1 year/$7 MAYBE 1year/$8 if DeWitt was feeling frisky
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 1:00 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Hahaha
Difference between what WE were hoping and what was actually being considered.
The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.
by thegodfather on Jan 13, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Right...
should have been more specific. By we I meant VEB.
Sometimes I wonder,
"Why is that frisbee getting bigger?"
...and then it hits me!!
by cardzfanbub on Jan 13, 2009 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually..
We probably offered him 4 years 39 million. We’re good at coming in second.
"Live like you are going to die tomorrow. Learn like you are going to live forever." John Wooden
by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2009 2:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
looper
rather than garland or wolf, if they were to sign the exact same deal.
ankiel for phil coke (as a lh swingman) works for me, don’t know about the yankees.
by ball in play on Jan 13, 2009 12:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Jon Garland has family in Saint Louis
Just to throw this out there
I know Garland has family in Saint Louis for sure. His uncle works with my father and they are always talking about him. Not sure what that means but just wanted to throw that out there.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 1:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
oooh
now I think maybe we get Garland instead of Wolf. but rather have Sheets, or even Looper, although I think Looper is miffed with us maybe
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...
I hope his uncle doesn’t read this site.
by Toddius on Jan 13, 2009 2:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
midwestcoastbirdwatcher
What you say about my nephew!
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 2:41 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
wouldn't that be
mississippiriverbankbirdwatcher?
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jan 13, 2009 9:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
speak of the devil.
cards organization roster matrix
really cool link, but my point is to scroll down to the comments…
!!!
i’ll take what he’s having.
"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa
by adiueordie on Jan 14, 2009 3:34 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
trade Skip
for even more guys to throw into the bullpen competition, or maybe unproven 2B prospect.
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 1:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
or,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,SKIPPY CAN PLAY 2ND!!!!
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jan 13, 2009 9:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i know right? what's it gonna hurt?
MO should have had Oquendo working with him all winter long to see if he could really play it or not
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jan 13, 2009 9:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I just find Viva El Birdos group on Facebook
I joined
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 1:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
What are 10 Friends worth to you?
What would you do for a free WHOPPER®? Would you insult an elected official? Would you do a naked handstand? Would you go so far as to turn your back on friendship? Install WHOPPER® Sacrifice on your Facebook profile and we’ll reward you with a free flame-broiled WHOPPER® Sandwich when you sacrifice 10 of your friends*.
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that stupid
I don’t even know how to remove friends on there anyways
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i have no internet friends unless you count VEB
of course i’m not on facebook, twitter or myspace
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jan 13, 2009 9:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ditto
I only have one post on twitter though, it’s my own little joke
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 11:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that could be a problem
blocking you from internet friends, I could be wrong
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 11:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i have email, i have a cell phone, i have text, what else do i need?
if people want to get a hold of me, they can
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jan 14, 2009 1:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
true
my prediction is this: if we don’t sign a starter, Brad Thompson will be in the starting rotation and be better than pinata
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 14, 2009 2:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the second part...
of your prediction (better than pinata), not so much the first part (Thompson in the rotation). Didn’t Puppykicker make the rotation out of ST last year over Reyes?
Sometimes I wonder,
"Why is that frisbee getting bigger?"
...and then it hits me!!
by cardzfanbub on Jan 14, 2009 9:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
it would probably be too much to ask to see the better pitcher of the two be in the rotation.
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 14, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Anti-BBWAA Tidbit of the Week
While not ever giving a single nominee 100% of the vote is absurd, the flip side of that is equally as revealing. Statspeak, which is a very enjoyable baseball blog with wonderful virtual roundtables conducted via the internets, provides this assessment of this year’s HOF vote. My favorite part:
But the most fun part of the annual HOF balloting are the random guys who get a vote or two. This year, the honors go to Jay Bell, and Jesse Orosco. Two separate people actually looked at Jay Bell and said, “This guy was a Hall of Famer.” Please re-read that sentence.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
by bgh on Jan 13, 2009 2:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Interesting + Not enough for a diary = threadjack!
Just read a fascinating article at Beyond The Boxscore abouthow club performance/location dictates player salaries.
The article itself is fascinating enough, but I do love this little tidbit:
Three players that projected to an actual negative salary (they should have paid the team that signed them to play): Emil Brown, Jason LaRue, Jason Jennings
defy, cards, defy. hey logic --- you suck.
by effin fisk on Jan 13, 2009 2:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hmm. Hit "Post" instead of "Preview"
…Anywho…
It says LaStache really should’ve paid the Cardinals more than $325k to play for us last season. Made me laugh.
defy, cards, defy. hey logic --- you suck.
by effin fisk on Jan 13, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Instead, we're paying him again for this upcoming season. Great.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
by bgh on Jan 13, 2009 3:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was rather unlucky last year
Hardball Times PrOPS had him at .784 vs his real OPS of .643. Making him the unluckiest guy on our team with over 150 AB’s
Stat Whore
by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 13, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
interesting methodology.
OTOH, Fangraphs player valuation model shows that he was worth $2M.
still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.
by SleepyCA on Jan 13, 2009 4:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What can I say?
I’m in the middle of readying “Baseball Between The Numbers,” so everything is fascinating to me right now.
defy, cards, defy. hey logic --- you suck.
by effin fisk on Jan 13, 2009 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I should get ready to read that!
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 13, 2009 9:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's good.
I didn’t put it down for two days.
by spants on Jan 13, 2009 9:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i was just reading a portion of that yesterday
FWIW… the entire paperback edition is available for reading on google books (free!)
I'd rather my sister be a prostitute than my brother a Cub fan.
by _pistol_ on Jan 14, 2009 11:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
never mind
to good to be true, a large chunk of the book is not viewable.
I'd rather my sister be a prostitute than my brother a Cub fan.
by _pistol_ on Jan 14, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ugh
*too good to be true
I'd rather my sister be a prostitute than my brother a Cub fan.
by _pistol_ on Jan 14, 2009 12:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Link on SI
Kudos to the Editors of Vivaelbirdos. This entry is linked to the Cardinals home page on Sports Illustrated.
by ubeddie on Jan 15, 2009 12:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- After locking up of AL MVP, it's time for Twins to lock up Mauer
- November means R&R for Raiders fan CC Sabathia and others
- D12: Honeymoon over for big Bobby Jenks and Ozzie Guillen?
- Timmy is so wicked: Lincecum's hair grows with his legend
- D12: Strasburg feels 'pop' in knee, scares Nationals to death
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
