jackie hayes

Tejada's bat hasn't slipped all that much. He never put up a very consistent line. Around that MVP year he put up .475 slg, this year he put up a .444 slg. Okay, that's not nothing, but it's not a pattern. (His obp isn't out of line with his career.) Remember, he's going to be 32 next year -- some fall-off should be expected now. You can't really fault him on the counting stats. The injury really affects those, and remember, he's on the Orioles. And he broke a bone when he was hit by a pitch. It's a freak injury that could happen to anyone. I wouldn't call that "breaking down". Especially when he came back to have his best month of the season. The bigger concern is his fielding. There's been some talk in Baltimore about moving Mora to lf and shifting Tejada to 3b. And it's not like Baltimore has a hot shot prospect pushing him -- he's just slowed down so much that he's become a liability. But his bat is still good enough that he'll be expensive. They won't dump him for Contreras + rejects. Bedard is not gonna happen. They'll want young players, much better than any we have.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2007 -> 08:44 AM) I thought that was just what liberals did on weekends? Wow -- it shows how far right the GOP has moved when even Cheney gets labeled a "liberal".

QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Oct 16, 2007 -> 01:02 AM) Yeah, but they got Dick Pole. hammerhead! Long time, no see. Dick Pole, huh, interesting. Why, you know what else is interesting, I'm sure you just haven't had time to get around to it, but there's a fantasy baseball winner's thread. Link happily provided. Pretty cool, you should definitely check it out. Y'know, congratulate the winner in your league, whoever that was (I'm sure I don't know!). Feel free to reflect at length on his genius, his brilliant, unorthodox moves -- that sort of thing. Hey, I bet you did pretty well! Did YOU win, hh? Well, either way, a very worthwhile thread. Cheers!

Forgot a few 0s there, Tex. Eww..., Balta.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Oct 14, 2007 -> 04:18 PM) http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/gor...1696238792.html *stirs the pot a little* That is, without doubt, the most useful link I've ever seen. Not for the substance of the article, which is horses***. But otherwise I never would have found a link to this story: NZ women most promiscuous: survey Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.

QUOTE(Chombi and the Fungi @ Oct 14, 2007 -> 04:28 AM) well...it happens. The crow is bs. Those guys are down or they're anot. It's stupid at minimum os we can hcilkll Wrong thread.

QUOTE(MurcieOne @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 07:00 PM) saultry is like sultry but..... involving a guy name saul..... he lubes up in baby oil etc... is a circus.... im trying to reinvent the genre. A Jewish Penthouse forum...oy vey...'The shiksa got all shlemiel on my shmekel.' I guess if you gotta go niche, this isn't a bad one. Better than midget Panamanian troglodytes. How was your September, anyway?

QUOTE(MurcieOne @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 06:36 PM) just wait until is start my own sub-topic board "Murcie's Taxi Cab Confessions" its gonna be hawt, sexy, saultry, and follow the Dear Penthouse Forum format. "Dear Murcie, I never thought it would happen to me.... I got this saucy bridgeport skank to give me a hummer in the shower behind the left field bleachers." Gotta say, I've seen hawt, I've seen sexy, I've seen sultry. I've never seen saultry. Looking forward to it. Although the followup letter in which 'one reader' explains to you that a "hummer" need not be an expensive suv might be a little dull. Then your whole disbelief ("wait, they'll actually DO that?! THAT?!!!") will get a bit old. But okay. Baby steps.

QUOTE(MurcieOne @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 06:27 PM) I have been posting more..... I knew there was a reason it fell from 4000%.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 12:17 AM) I'd still call Garland better than league average. A bad month after the ASB really cost him a sub 4 ERA this season, and the guy pitches half his games in argubly the worst pitchers park in the MLB today. Perhaps I'm aiming too high, but the Sox are dealing from a position of strength here, and we need to be targeting these type of impact prospects if we want to rebuild quickly into the future (I'm talking like Flash here). The Sox could always include a Ryan Sweeney for example, to give the Cards a possible replacement for Rasmus. I'm not settling for Reyes and Anderson for Garland. I've rather head to the Dodgers and ask for Hu or Furcal in some sort of deal instead, or talk to Seattle and see if they would trade their stud OF prospect (Batemian I think his name, not Adam Jones). Wladimir Balentien. Rasmus is younger and puts up better numbers, puts up great numbers. Sweeney's stock fell really far this year -- he doesn't cushion the loss much at all. I mean, by all means, ask for Rasmus. But our need for impact players won't make other teams stupid enough to trade them. At least Seattle has Bavasi...

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 12:02 AM) If LaRussa and Dave Duncan leave St. Louis as well, they may target more "sure things" in terms of SP, instead of the high risk guys in Kip Wells, Mark Mulder, Brandon Looper etc. I'd target at least 2 out of Reyes, Rasmus and Anderson in a trade for Garland, with Rasmus a must include. Because teams like Seattle will probably offer you a lot of talent for JG this off-season, just remember the Jason Jennings deal for comparisons sake. It's fine to demand Rasmus, it just means no deal will get done. An elite of prospect on a team that still needs bats long-term (no matter what happens with Ankiel) for a league average pitcher in his walk year is going to be a deal breaker.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 11:43 PM) They dont have really any trade chips at all, their farm system is worse than ours and I have no idea who is on their major league team that we would want... well besides Pujols obviously which they aint giving up lol. In the minors, they have Colby Rasmus, Jaime Garcia, and Bryan Anderson. Figure Rasmus is offlimits, prolly not the other two. They don't really have any relievers we'd want. They won't trade Wainwright, but you might get Reyes after his awful year. Not much. (All this is just me guessing -- I haven't read/heard anything lately.)

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 07:18 PM) Serious question, if this trade goes down do we keep Contreras? If not do we have 3 of our rotation members from the Danks, Floyd, Gio, Eggy camp? The more I think about trading Garland(and I am fine with dealing him, though I admit I've flip flopped on this issue many, many times), I think we need to get at least someone else who can step right into the rotation and be a league average starter. The fa market is just so bad sp wise that there just aren't many choices out there. My problem with this trade is it basically fills a hole and creates another at the same time, if we're trading Konerko or Garland then I think we need to fill at least 2 holes, not none. That's just me thinking out loud there, like I said before, this trade intrigues me but there needs to be more imo. I agree with Balta -- I don't think there's much that can be done about Contreras, except maybe prayer. But along the line you brought up, you wonder if there's a 'Jason Jennings deal' out there for Garland. Since it WAS there for Garland last year, and Jennings was in his walk year, and Garland is no worse a pitcher than Jennings was. If you can pull off a similar deal for Garland (Hirsch + Buchholz combined give you that league-average pitcher) and swap Konerko separately, or keep him, are you better off than with this deal? Are there any projections yet for Kotchman in 2008? I dunno -- not that home runs are the end-all, be-all of power, but you have to at least ask if a guy who's never hit home runs, not even in the minors, can maintain a consistently high slugging percentage. That's my serious question -- anyone know? Mark Grace had a nice slugging percentage in his second season, but it didn't hold up. Mauer wasn't the same threat this year. Of course, an obp sniffing .400 would be pretty nice even if the slg takes a small hit...

Mack Strong's career comes to an end. Good luck to one of the more underrated role players in the NFL.

Some jerk in my league already nabbed him...

QUOTE(bmags @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 08:18 PM) say what you want about arcade fire, they made an album that is "the" album for a lot of kids my age, our ok comp, our slanted and enchanted, our whatever yers was. I gave it a few more listens, and I grew to like Neon Bible somewhat, but I just can't get into Funeral. I just don't get it. If you guys are that hard up for music, we'll share OK Computer with ya, we're generous like that...

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 03:32 PM) As you can probably see in some of the threads, we have a few winners up. Jackie Hayes was victorious in league 2. Buehrle the Ace prevailed in League 3. Jackie Hayes was victorious in league 2. And of course the real reason I started this thread, Zoom takes down the title in Leagues 1, 5, and the Keeper league. Jackie Hayes was victorious in league 2. Unfortunately I drafted like crap in League 4, and Vandy125 took the title Jackie Hayes was not victorious in leagues 1, 3, 4, 5, or the keeper. I believe that's a repeat champion only because he limits himself to the strongest league. Congratulations to all the winners! Feel free to fill in any other results even though they won't be as important as the fact that Jackie Hayes was victorious in league 2. See what a simple proofreading can do?

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 11, 2007 -> 05:03 PM) f***!... I thought I'd at least make the middle rounds, so I didn't pay much attention to preranking after the first few dozen names. Then I get caught in a St Pat parade traffic jam for 1 whole f***ing hour. Clemens and Pedro and Lee? My pitching is teh suck. Great!... I know I'll have a great team. I'll probably win the championship. That came up aces! Fixed. Gotta read between the lines, but I'm pretty sure that's what I was really thinking. Great year, guys. You know what made it great? That fact that I f***ing won. Come on, you know you me. I'm your hero. And if you want me to your ass again next year, I'll be here. I'm already thinking up team names. How's The Lincecum Era sound to you? I dunno, it just came to me... Seriously, great league, let's do it again next year. Especially that last part, where I win.

Actual guidelines given to voters: So unless you think that any season with a last-place finish has absolutely zero value to the team itself, you have to consider players on those teams. A last place team still wins games, that's still a goal. Players who contribute to that goal should be judged on those contributions. Anyone really believe the Marlins would have had an equally rewarding season with some talentless schmuck like me out there playing ss?

I'm not saying sign nobody, just...be careful. No big deals, try to stick with younger guys, nothing beyond 3 years, and that only with the best options. I wanted the Sox to offer Riske arbitration, mostly in the hope of getting picks, but thinking that he'd have a spot in the bullpen even if they got stuck with him. It depends what the other choices are for that money. If you have to jettison Crede to sign two 30+ relievers, is that a good tradeoff? (The money will probably be close.) On the other side, suppose you can have 4 or 5 'risky' relievers for the price of 1 'reliable' vet (salary-wise, that's about right). I doubt the risk is much greater with the kids as a group (only one has to pan out), and you have the added upside risk that you may actually get a star on the cheap for many years. (Like the Sox did with Jenks.) Jmho.

QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 01:26 PM) I agree to a certain extent. However, you evaluate your talent based on performance from the year before as well. You can't just hope your bullpen turns it around. At the end of 2004 Cotts and Pollitte started to get a lot of guys out, that carried over to 2005. Based on this year the only guy who got alot of guys out was Jenks. Thorton started off good but started to walk alot of hitters, same as MacDougal and Bukvich and Aardsma and Massett and Sisco etc... You have to evaluate your talent from the previous year and go out and get guys to fill the remaining holes. I believe there is still two holes in the bullpen. Oh, I'm sure there are holes; whether there are 1 or 2 or 5, I don't think anyone can be sure of now. I just think the #1 dumbest reaction to this season would be to sign the next Danys Baez. Stick with youth & cheap 'rebound' types, please.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 01:12 PM) Question: so how exactly did San Diego do it? Don't they have a kickass bullpen? I remember reading earlier some interview with their pitching coach and his philosophy in maybe ESPN magazine or something. Maybe their scouts have a great eye for relievers, but none of their star relievers were sure things when they were acquired. Linebrink was taken off waivers. Bell was acquired in a minor player/spare parts trade. Meredith was acquired along with Josh Bard when they had the Red Sox over a barrel (the second Mirabelli trade). Even Hoffman was acquired, way back when, in the middle of his rookie season. I'm only defending the overall strategy of getting good, cheap, young players, as opposed to getting vets. Obviously the Sox didn't acquire the right young pitchers. (Though I still like Aardsma, long term.) But the solution isn't to acquire 'reliable vets'. Bell looked a lot more risky than Aardsma to start the season.

QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 12:15 PM) So KW needs to go and get: 2 reliable relievers (NO MORE Aardsma, Sisco, Massett experiments) Oxymoron. A bullpen can blow up in your face no matter if you go about it like the Sox did (stockpiling hard-throwing young guys) or like the Orioles did (trying to sign every good veteran reliever in fa). Only the Sox aren't paying $10+ mil a year for their bad luck.

Peavy, ARod, and Braun are automatic. For AL CY, it's so close between Carmona, Lackey, Haren, Beckett, and Sabathia, that I'll go with the guy who provided more innings, Sabathia. Whatever small advantage Beckett may have in effectiveness isn't equal to the extra 40 innings, imo. I was really pulling for Bedard, here. NL MVP is very tough. My first reaction is to go with Hanley Ramirez. I never liked the idea that a MVP must be on a playoff team, and he hit better than Rollins this year. Rollins collected more pas, but not enough to make up for a big dropoff in obp and a small one in slg. The other candidates, in my mind, are Holliday, Utley, Fielder, Chipper Jones, Pujols...and I think that's it. I do penalize Holliday for the home/away splits, some. AL RoY goes to...flip a coin. Pedroia or Bannister. Actually, I'd probably go with Pedroia, too, I'd just rather see Bannister nab it. Manager of the year, I just don't care. Hell of a year for NL rookies...again.

What?! Noone in chat???!!!