MLB 2008

[jlhoots]

Go Cubs!

You & Nessa are ganging up on me.

[Dan Gould]

Go Cubs!

You & Nessa are ganging up on me.

GO CUBS!

[BERIGAN]

that giant sucking sound your hear coming from north of the border is Houston Street's career. Maybe the nicest guy in MLB but.. maybe that is his problem you need to be tough as nails and a bit nuts to be a closer.

Au contraire, mon frere:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/080805

Everytime I see highlights of Street pitching, he looks like a guy that has serious arm issues.

As for saves being overrated....sounds like its from the same school of thought that if your OBP isn't high, you are worthless. (Was reading some Keith Law chat where someone asked why there was little love for David Murphy from Law, and the dumb ass said basically who cares about him and his .317 OBP....I guess those 74 RBI's don't mean a thing, he should walk 30 more times, drive in 30 less, and be a real star)

Teams that don't have a guy who can "save" the game in the 9th, don't win, period. The Cards would be in first place if Isringhausen hadn't blown 7 saves. If they had Brad Lidge,(0 blown saves this year) they wouldn't be a lot better off???

Edited August 7, 2008 by BERIGAN

[Big Al]

Go Cubs!

You & Nessa are ganging up on me.

Well, I don't want you to die.

[tkeith]

that giant sucking sound your hear coming from north of the border is Houston Street's career. Maybe the nicest guy in MLB but.. maybe that is his problem you need to be tough as nails and a bit nuts to be a closer.

Au contraire, mon frere:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/080805

Everytime I see highlights of Street pitching, he looks like a guy that has serious arm issues.

As for saves being overrated....sounds like its from the same school of thought that if your OBP isn't high, you are worthless. (Was reading some Keith Law chat where someone asked why there was little love for David Murphy from Law, and the dumb ass said basically who cares about him and his .317 OBP....I guess those 74 RBI's don't mean a thing, he should walk 30 more times, drive in 30 less, and be a real star)

Teams that don't have a guy who can "save" the game in the 9th, don't win, period. The Cards would be in first place if Isringhausen hadn't blown 7 saves. If they had Brad Lidge,(0 blown saves this year) they wouldn't be a lot better off???

Sure, but that has more to do with the way they are using the bullpen than it does with the personnel. His example of Gossage (and Fingers, for that matter) highlight that perfectly. Those guys went multiple innings, and with the game on the line, might come in during the 6th. Consider a close game today, say Josh Beckett vs. Scott Kazmir. It's likely there won't be a lot of scoring in that game, so if you have a 2-1 lead and Beckett suddenly gets in trouble after 5-2/3, does it make more sense to go to Manny Delcarmen or Jonathan Papelbon? It's not a cut-and-dry answer, but I'd argue that if Kazmir looks like he's going to be done after 6, I want my best out there to put the lid on a potential big inning *now*. His example of Putz appearing twice in 14 days while his team fell from contention makes this point perfectly. Next to Don Fehr, Scott Boar-Ass and steroids, the LaRussa-ization of pitching has had the worst effect on the game.

[Dan Gould]

that giant sucking sound your hear coming from north of the border is Houston Street's career. Maybe the nicest guy in MLB but.. maybe that is his problem you need to be tough as nails and a bit nuts to be a closer.

Au contraire, mon frere:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/080805

Everytime I see highlights of Street pitching, he looks like a guy that has serious arm issues.

As for saves being overrated....sounds like its from the same school of thought that if your OBP isn't high, you are worthless. (Was reading some Keith Law chat where someone asked why there was little love for David Murphy from Law, and the dumb ass said basically who cares about him and his .317 OBP....I guess those 74 RBI's don't mean a thing, he should walk 30 more times, drive in 30 less, and be a real star)

Teams that don't have a guy who can "save" the game in the 9th, don't win, period. The Cards would be in first place if Isringhausen hadn't blown 7 saves. If they had Brad Lidge,(0 blown saves this year) they wouldn't be a lot better off???

Sure, but that has more to do with the way they are using the bullpen than it does with the personnel. His example of Gossage (and Fingers, for that matter) highlight that perfectly. Those guys went multiple innings, and with the game on the line, might come in during the 6th. Consider a close game today, say Josh Beckett vs. Scott Kazmir. It's likely there won't be a lot of scoring in that game, so if you have a 2-1 lead and Beckett suddenly gets in trouble after 5-2/3, does it make more sense to go to Manny Delcarmen or Jonathan Papelbon? It's not a cut-and-dry answer, but I'd argue that if Kazmir looks like he's going to be done after 6, I want my best out there to put the lid on a potential big inning *now*. His example of Putz appearing twice in 14 days while his team fell from contention makes this point perfectly. Next to Don Fehr, Scott Boar-Ass and steroids, the LaRussa-ization of pitching has had the worst effect on the game.

Except that the bullpen by committee - no set roles, use your "best" guy in the "most important" moment of the game - rarely if ever works. Heck, it doesn't even make sense in your example - Tampa has an extremely good bullpen, and even after Kazmir leaves the game, runs are unlikely to be easy to come by. Therefore, a close game is likely to remain a close game, and if you've got a one run game in the ninth and have already used Papelbon earlier, then guess what?

You lose your membership card in the Manager's club, because you've proven yourself an idiot.

The key to success is having a bullpen that is well-stocked with effective pitchers so that more times than not, the set-up corps does its jot to get the game to the closer.

Count me on the side that believes that the last three outs are extra crucial, everyone knows that getting three outs in the ninth isn't as easy to do as it is in the sixth or seventh or eighth, and your best reliever should be getting those outs. If it were that easy to get those outs, LaTroy Hawkins wouldn't be working for his fifth or sixth organization.

Now, is the save statistic screwy? Of course it is. But in the end that is only something that the BWAA has to deal with, because "closers" are on the HoF ballot and they are still struggling with what it means to be an "all-time great" closer.

[Big Al]

DAMN!!! Lose to the Yankees on national TV. Figures.

DOUBLE-DAMN!!! Lose David Murphy to a likely season-ending injury after he crashed into Pudge Rodriguez at the plate. Our offense went cold when Murphy went down. This does not bode well at all. Even Marlon Byrd acknowledged that "this will kill us."

[Dan Gould]

I thought it was a strain and not a tear of a knee ligament ... but there isn't much time for him to get healthy. On the other hand Milton Bradley is due back, isn't he? That will help a bit.

[zen archer]

Dan,

You gotta be happy with LOWRIE or what ?.....This kid has delivered BIGTIME in the last 6 games.

Yesterday on EEI Francona hesitated a little when they asked if a player who is injured can lose their job.

[Big Al]

I thought it was a strain and not a tear of a knee ligament ... but there isn't much time for him to get healthy. On the other hand Milton Bradley is due back, isn't he? That will help a bit.

Yeah, but Murphy's still out 2-4 weeks. Murph's production has been far better than Bradley's. Still, a healthy Bradley is better than an unhealthy one, so I'll take what I can get.

[tkeith]

You lose your membership card in the Manager's club, because you've proven yourself an idiot.

You know, Dan, I've got pretty thick skin, and I love to trash talk. If you want to degenerate this into a competition of who can be a bigger asshole, I can certainly come up with creative ways to verbally establish your credentials as a fuckhead, but I'd really rather have a discussion of the topic.

If you believe the modern use of the bullpen is correct and effective, that's fine. I happen to disagree, and that's as someone who's played the game quite a bit. Having clearly defined roles in the bullpen definitely makes some sense, but I think the role of 'closer' should be one of 'stopper' as it was in the 70s. LaRussa created the era of specialization out of necessity -- he had a weak pitching staff (excepting one top-notch starter -- Dave Stewart). To his credit, he managed to take an aging, fledgling starter and exploit his weaknesses into a strength by making him a one-inning pitcher. As lights out as Eck was in the ninth, it was the guys leading up to him that did the harder job in most cases. If you have great starting pitching, the 7-1-1 or 6-2-1 format makes a lot of sense. If not, you should adapt. Do you *really* like to see Tito remove John Lester and insert Delcarmen or Timlin into a clutch situation? I sure as hell don't.

[Dan Gould]

You lose your membership card in the Manager's club, because you've proven yourself an idiot.

You know, Dan, I've got pretty thick skin, and I love to trash talk. If you want to degenerate this into a competition of who can be a bigger asshole, I can certainly come up with creative ways to verbally establish your credentials as a fuckhead, but I'd really rather have a discussion of the topic.

If you believe the modern use of the bullpen is correct and effective, that's fine. I happen to disagree, and that's as someone who's played the game quite a bit. Having clearly defined roles in the bullpen definitely makes some sense, but I think the role of 'closer' should be one of 'stopper' as it was in the 70s. LaRussa created the era of specialization out of necessity -- he had a weak pitching staff (excepting one top-notch starter -- Dave Stewart). To his credit, he managed to take an aging, fledgling starter and exploit his weaknesses into a strength by making him a one-inning pitcher. As lights out as Eck was in the ninth, it was the guys leading up to him that did the harder job in most cases. If you have great starting pitching, the 7-1-1 or 6-2-1 format makes a lot of sense. If not, you should adapt. Do you *really* like to see Tito remove John Lester and insert Delcarmen or Timlin into a clutch situation? I sure as hell don't.

Number one, I didn't realize you were a card-carrying member of the Manager's union, so my apologies.

:rolleyes:

Number two, if you want to verbally establish my credentials as a fuckhead, have at it. I couldn't give two shits what you think.

Number three, I'd far less like to see Papelbon come in during the seventh inning of any game, because then I'd be left to wonder:

1. Who the fuck is pitching the ninth, or even perhaps the tenth should this game to extra innings? The ninth inning of a tie game or a game that is a save situation is far higher leverage than the seventh inning of a close one.

2. What the fuck is Francona doing, is he going to run Papelbon into the ground by asking him to get five or eight outs?

You said it yourself - the guys in front of Eckersley had the tougher job. But they are the ones to do it, or fail at it. You can't ask a closer to cover your ass in the seventh inning and leave yourself open to losing the game in the ninth. You can't use your closer in the seventh inning and risk losing the game or heading to extra innings having to use your worst reliever right out of the chute.

The only time the usage pattern may change is during the post-season, when there are no more games to play for. Then you may (as in fact we did) see Papelbon come into a close situation before the ninth. If you get lucky (as in one game we did) your offense puts some runs on the board and Papelbon is safely removed from the game. If not, you do run him into the ground to get that win, and deal with the consequences afterward.

Let's flip that situation around, slick. Let's say that Papelbon comes into the seventh inning of a one-run game (regular season), no outs, bases loaded, and preserves the lead. How do you feel when Delcarmen comes in to pitch the ninth, with the same one run lead, and Francona's fall back plan is Timlin?

How do you feel about that? You feel good about that situation, Mr. Manager?

I'm betting you don't, but then again I'm just a fuckhead.

[tkeith]

You lose your membership card in the Manager's club, because you've proven yourself an idiot.

You know, Dan, I've got pretty thick skin, and I love to trash talk. If you want to degenerate this into a competition of who can be a bigger asshole, I can certainly come up with creative ways to verbally establish your credentials as a fuckhead, but I'd really rather have a discussion of the topic.

If you believe the modern use of the bullpen is correct and effective, that's fine. I happen to disagree, and that's as someone who's played the game quite a bit. Having clearly defined roles in the bullpen definitely makes some sense, but I think the role of 'closer' should be one of 'stopper' as it was in the 70s. LaRussa created the era of specialization out of necessity -- he had a weak pitching staff (excepting one top-notch starter -- Dave Stewart). To his credit, he managed to take an aging, fledgling starter and exploit his weaknesses into a strength by making him a one-inning pitcher. As lights out as Eck was in the ninth, it was the guys leading up to him that did the harder job in most cases. If you have great starting pitching, the 7-1-1 or 6-2-1 format makes a lot of sense. If not, you should adapt. Do you *really* like to see Tito remove John Lester and insert Delcarmen or Timlin into a clutch situation? I sure as hell don't.

Number one, I didn't realize you were a card-carrying member of the Manager's union, so my apologies.

:rolleyes:

Number two, if you want to verbally establish my credentials as a fuckhead, have at it. I couldn't give two shits what you think.

Number three, I'd far less like to see Papelbon come in during the seventh inning of any game, because then I'd be left to wonder:

1. Who the fuck is pitching the ninth, or even perhaps the tenth should this game to extra innings? The ninth inning of a tie game or a game that is a save situation is far higher leverage than the seventh inning of a close one.

2. What the fuck is Francona doing, is he going to run Papelbon into the ground by asking him to get five or eight outs?

You said it yourself - the guys in front of Eckersley had the tougher job. But they are the ones to do it, or fail at it. You can't ask a closer to cover your ass in the seventh inning and leave yourself open to losing the game in the ninth. You can't use your closer in the seventh inning and risk losing the game or heading to extra innings having to use your worst reliever right out of the chute.

The only time the usage pattern may change is during the post-season, when there are no more games to play for. Then you may (as in fact we did) see Papelbon come into a close situation before the ninth. If you get lucky (as in one game we did) your offense puts some runs on the board and Papelbon is safely removed from the game. If not, you do run him into the ground to get that win, and deal with the consequences afterward.

Let's flip that situation around, slick. Let's say that Papelbon comes into the seventh inning of a one-run game (regular season), no outs, bases loaded, and preserves the lead. How do you feel when Delcarmen comes in to pitch the ninth, with the same one run lead, and Francona's fall back plan is Timlin?

How do you feel about that? You feel good about that situation, Mr. Manager?

I'm betting you don't, but then again I'm just a fuckhead.

Ignoring your attempts to goad me (I mean, why? Why you gotta be like that?), in your scenario, I let Pap pitch right through to the ninth if I have to (think back to the World Series matchup of Mesa vs. Wohlers, each going 3-innings all out). Yeah, I probably don't have Papelbon available the next two nights, but I've got my key win. If you rely on one guy, you're likely not going to get very far over the long haul anyway. Specialization of relief has hurt the game in a number of ways, perhaps most of all in the length of games. Baseball has done a terrible job of renewing its fan base. Kids, the future fans, and working people cannot stay up till midnight every night following their team. Sox games have always been notoriously long, but long used to mean three hours, not four. This era of specialized relief is just that, an era. It will change, in what way, nobody knows. But nobody was doing this until the mid-late 80s, so it's not like it's set in stone. We'll probably not see the 4-man rotation again (which is a shame) but I wouldn't be surprised to see a change to a Japan-style 6-man rotation (particularly as players from that system become more common in MLB). I would guess that that is when we will see a change in the usage of relievers. If you have to pitch once a week, it's more likely that you'd be pitching 7-8 innings, then the relievers will become less specialized.

[tkeith]

Well spank my ass and call me Charlie! Lookie whose about to got to a closer-by-committee approach:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3522627

[zen archer]

The Sox claimed Brian Giles off waivers ?

[Dan Gould]

You lose your membership card in the Manager's club, because you've proven yourself an idiot.

You know, Dan, I've got pretty thick skin, and I love to trash talk. If you want to degenerate this into a competition of who can be a bigger asshole, I can certainly come up with creative ways to verbally establish your credentials as a fuckhead, but I'd really rather have a discussion of the topic.

If you believe the modern use of the bullpen is correct and effective, that's fine. I happen to disagree, and that's as someone who's played the game quite a bit. Having clearly defined roles in the bullpen definitely makes some sense, but I think the role of 'closer' should be one of 'stopper' as it was in the 70s. LaRussa created the era of specialization out of necessity -- he had a weak pitching staff (excepting one top-notch starter -- Dave Stewart). To his credit, he managed to take an aging, fledgling starter and exploit his weaknesses into a strength by making him a one-inning pitcher. As lights out as Eck was in the ninth, it was the guys leading up to him that did the harder job in most cases. If you have great starting pitching, the 7-1-1 or 6-2-1 format makes a lot of sense. If not, you should adapt. Do you *really* like to see Tito remove John Lester and insert Delcarmen or Timlin into a clutch situation? I sure as hell don't.

Number one, I didn't realize you were a card-carrying member of the Manager's union, so my apologies.

:rolleyes:

Number two, if you want to verbally establish my credentials as a fuckhead, have at it. I couldn't give two shits what you think.

Number three, I'd far less like to see Papelbon come in during the seventh inning of any game, because then I'd be left to wonder:

1. Who the fuck is pitching the ninth, or even perhaps the tenth should this game to extra innings? The ninth inning of a tie game or a game that is a save situation is far higher leverage than the seventh inning of a close one.

2. What the fuck is Francona doing, is he going to run Papelbon into the ground by asking him to get five or eight outs?

You said it yourself - the guys in front of Eckersley had the tougher job. But they are the ones to do it, or fail at it. You can't ask a closer to cover your ass in the seventh inning and leave yourself open to losing the game in the ninth. You can't use your closer in the seventh inning and risk losing the game or heading to extra innings having to use your worst reliever right out of the chute.

The only time the usage pattern may change is during the post-season, when there are no more games to play for. Then you may (as in fact we did) see Papelbon come into a close situation before the ninth. If you get lucky (as in one game we did) your offense puts some runs on the board and Papelbon is safely removed from the game. If not, you do run him into the ground to get that win, and deal with the consequences afterward.

Let's flip that situation around, slick. Let's say that Papelbon comes into the seventh inning of a one-run game (regular season), no outs, bases loaded, and preserves the lead. How do you feel when Delcarmen comes in to pitch the ninth, with the same one run lead, and Francona's fall back plan is Timlin?

How do you feel about that? You feel good about that situation, Mr. Manager?

I'm betting you don't, but then again I'm just a fuckhead.

Ignoring your attempts to goad me (I mean, why? Why you gotta be like that?), in your scenario, I let Pap pitch right through to the ninth if I have to (think back to the World Series matchup of Mesa vs. Wohlers, each going 3-innings all out). Yeah, I probably don't have Papelbon available the next two nights, but I've got my key win. If you rely on one guy, you're likely not going to get very far over the long haul anyway. Specialization of relief has hurt the game in a number of ways, perhaps most of all in the length of games. Baseball has done a terrible job of renewing its fan base. Kids, the future fans, and working people cannot stay up till midnight every night following their team. Sox games have always been notoriously long, but long used to mean three hours, not four. This era of specialized relief is just that, an era. It will change, in what way, nobody knows. But nobody was doing this until the mid-late 80s, so it's not like it's set in stone. We'll probably not see the 4-man rotation again (which is a shame) but I wouldn't be surprised to see a change to a Japan-style 6-man rotation (particularly as players from that system become more common in MLB). I would guess that that is when we will see a change in the usage of relievers. If you have to pitch once a week, it's more likely that you'd be pitching 7-8 innings, then the relievers will become less specialized.

That's a neat trick - change the terms to "key game" and reference a world series, for cryin out loud.

And on top of that, I specifically mentioned post-season games as potentially requiring that the "rules" be thrown out the window in favor of making sure that you get the win.

So let's go back to the scenario you introduced: How do you feel when Lester is relieved in the seventh inning by Delcarmen or Timlin. I answered that question, leaving you with this question:

How do you feel when Papelbon is finished and Delcarmen is trying to close the game out in the ninth? Or do you intend to use Papelbon whenever the mood strikes, for three innings and then not have him for two days at a time? Is that really what you are saying? You're ready to get that one win in the bag in exchange for MDC/Timlin/Oki throwing away the next two games?

That is completely nuts unless you are down to the final games of the regular season with no assurance of a post-season spot or you're in the post-season itself.

And as far as your statement about a six man rotation, is there enough pitching to go around, and factoring in injuries, for strong five man rotations? Six men rotations is 30 more starters in the majors That's like a five team expansion in the league. Ignoring the fact that starting pitching prospects aren't evenly distributed in the minors, do you really look forward to seeing the thirty best minor league pitchers as starters?

[Dan Gould]

Dan,

You gotta be happy with LOWRIE or what ?.....This kid has delivered BIGTIME in the last 6 games.

Yesterday on EEI Francona hesitated a little when they asked if a player who is injured can lose their job.

Its astonishing to see the stat in the Globe that in 100 ABs, Lowrie has any many RBIs as Lugo has in 260+. And on top of that, with 23 RBIs, that extrapolates to a 100 RBI season for your number 7 or 8 hitter! And that's based only on his first 100 ABs - you should expect to him better going forward. And on top of that, I've seen him make a couple of plays showing more range than expected. I hope Tito is smart and realizes that Lowrie makes the team better - period. and if necessary, Theo should just admit his mistake and designate Lugo for assignment. With the money coming off payroll next year, they can afford to pay Lugo 9 million to play somewhere else (and it would take that anyway for them to trade him).

[tkeith]

So let's go back to the scenario you introduced: How do you feel when Lester is relieved in the seventh inning by Delcarmen or Timlin. I answered that question, leaving you with this question:

How do you feel when Papelbon is finished and Delcarmen is trying to close the game out in the ninth? Or do you intend to use Papelbon whenever the mood strikes, for three innings and then not have him for two days at a time? Is that really what you are saying? You're ready to get that one win in the bag in exchange for MDC/Timlin/Oki throwing away the next two games?

That is completely nuts unless you are down to the final games of the regular season with no assurance of a post-season spot or you're in the post-season itself.

And as far as your statement about a six man rotation, is there enough pitching to go around, and factoring in injuries, for strong five man rotations? Six men rotations is 30 more starters in the majors That's like a five team expansion in the league. Ignoring the fact that starting pitching prospects aren't evenly distributed in the minors, do you really look forward to seeing the thirty best minor league pitchers as starters?

The extra pitchers are coming from other leagues (as we've already seen start happening), and those leagues mostly use the 6-man rotation. It makes sense to adapt to their style and you might be able to see increased quality with more rest (most pitchers perform better on more rest). So you're talking about 28-30 starts for a typical starter as opposed to 32-35. But if you get the same number of quality starts, it might be worth it. I think it's coming, I could be wrong, but I won't be surprised if it happens.

I answered your question about what I would do in that scenario. I would use Pap 3 if I had to -- a big league pitcher should be able to pitch 3 innings. He's not going to be available for two days, but that's a risk I'm willing to take. Of course, Goose would go multiple innings multiple days in a row -- it can be done, but it requires a change in mindset.

And that's based only on his first 100 ABs - you should expect to him better going forward.

Huh? Not likely. Don't get me wrong, I like what I see in this kid (you had more faith than me, but he's impressed me), but I'm not prepared to say he's going to get *better* than 23 RBI in 100 ABs moving forward. Or am I misreading your statement?

Edited August 7, 2008 by Thom Keith

[Chuck Nessa]

Cubs didn't play today.

Series with the Cards starts tomorrow.

Geez, I love to see pitchers hit.

What a shame the other league is afraid to do that.

Ruins the game.

[Dan Gould]

So let's go back to the scenario you introduced: How do you feel when Lester is relieved in the seventh inning by Delcarmen or Timlin. I answered that question, leaving you with this question:

How do you feel when Papelbon is finished and Delcarmen is trying to close the game out in the ninth? Or do you intend to use Papelbon whenever the mood strikes, for three innings and then not have him for two days at a time? Is that really what you are saying? You're ready to get that one win in the bag in exchange for MDC/Timlin/Oki throwing away the next two games?

That is completely nuts unless you are down to the final games of the regular season with no assurance of a post-season spot or you're in the post-season itself.

And as far as your statement about a six man rotation, is there enough pitching to go around, and factoring in injuries, for strong five man rotations? Six men rotations is 30 more starters in the majors That's like a five team expansion in the league. Ignoring the fact that starting pitching prospects aren't evenly distributed in the minors, do you really look forward to seeing the thirty best minor league pitchers as starters?

The extra pitchers are coming from other leagues (as we've already seen start happening), and those leagues mostly use the 6-man rotation. It makes sense to adapt to their style and you might be able to see increased quality with more rest (most pitchers perform better on more rest). So you're talking about 28-30 starts for a typical starter as opposed to 32-35. But if you get the same number of quality starts, it might be worth it. I think it's coming, I could be wrong, but I won't be surprised if it happens.

I answered your question about what I would do in that scenario. I would use Pap 3 if I had to -- a big league pitcher should be able to pitch 3 innings. He's not going to be available for two days, but that's a risk I'm willing to take. Of course, Goose would go multiple innings multiple days in a row -- it can be done, but it requires a change in mindset.

So you believe there are 30 major league starters in other leagues, and that Papelbon is better used for three innings in a single game than to save, say, three in a row. And with a "different mindset" he could go three innings multiple days in a row. Yes, it would take a different mindset - a mindset that says "screw what the medical staff says - he can handle it!"

[PHILLYQ]

Cubs didn't play today.

Series with the Cards starts tomorrow.

Geez, I love to see pitchers hit.

What a shame the other league is afraid to do that.

Ruins the game.

I'm a Yankee fan and I'd like to see the DH abolished. Play the game the same in both leagues IMHO.

[Dan Gould]

And that's based only on his first 100 ABs - you should expect to him better going forward.

Huh? Not likely. Don't get me wrong, I like what I see in this kid (you had more faith than me, but he's impressed me), but I'm not prepared to say he's going to get *better* than 23 RBI in 100 ABs moving forward. Or am I misreading your statement?

I don't think Lowrie has shown the best hitting skills he will possess in his first 100 ABs. I doubt that any batter who lasts any length of time shows his best performance in his first 100 ABs. Whether that means more RBIs than 23 per 100 ABs, who knows? As you and I know, RBIs are a function of who gets on base in front of you. Should he get a bunch of at bats with Crisp and Varitek in front of him, he probably won't maintain the RBI rate.

[tkeith]

As you and I know, RBIs are a function of who gets on base in front of you. Should he get a bunch of at bats with Crisp and Varitek in front of him, he probably won't maintain the RBI rate.

Good point. Per the closer discussion, if the scenario is that Pap is going to *save* three games in a row, I'd agree with you. But if we're asking if he's going to pitch in three games where he gets a save, that's a different question. Given that we DON'T know in advance what the circumstance will be, I think you have to play the game for today. If you consider the Putz example, I think it's likely that if he'd entered a close game in the 7th during that two week skid the M's had, pitched 2-1/3, and maybe picked up a W instead of a save, that might have been enough to inspire a listless team. Instead, he was reserved for his 9th-inning role, as the team hopped right in the toilet without a life jacket.

[tkeith]

Cubs didn't play today.

Series with the Cards starts tomorrow.

Geez, I love to see pitchers hit.

What a shame the other league is afraid to do that.

Ruins the game.

Testify, brother.

[papsrus]

Looks like a nice pick-up:

Aug. 8--SEATTLE -- A week after the non-waiver trade deadline passed with no movement by the Rays, they made a potentially significant addition Thursday.

Tampa Bay acquired veteran reliever Chad Bradford from the Orioles for a player to be named, installing the most proficient groundball pitcher in the game in front of one of baseball's best defenses.

Thanks in part to an unorthodox submarine delivery in which his knuckles nearly scrape the ground on each pitch, Bradford induces 4.89 grounders for every fly ball -- a trait that should make him a natural fit for the Rays.

Don't know much about him other than what I've seen in games. Can't argue with fortifying an already solid bullpen. And the way they lost in Seattle last night, they could have used him.

It's a numbers game at shortstop, but it'd be nice to see Zobrist stick somehow.

Was also glad to read they benched Upton for a game for not running out a ground ball. And even Longoria got a little talking-to in the dugout in Seattle last night after jogging to first on a single to left. I'm pretty certain Longoria will get the message, hope Upton does, too.

Edited August 8, 2008 by papsrus