-
Posts
129,737 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
79
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Balta1701
-
QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 11:03 PM) Yeah, I know, it was my mistake; see my edit in my post above. The point remains the same, however. It was not the Rays bullpen that improved; it was the defense behind them. Personally, I'd argue it was much more likely that both improved, but I'll leave it at that.
-
QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 10:49 PM) Edit: So as you can see in my post below, I was a bit off in my memory - SI did not predict the demise of the Rays in 09'; rather they explained their rise in 08'. However, the point remains the same. It wasn't their pitching that improved - it was their defense. So you're crediting a 273 run improvement in runs given up solely to the defense, and attributing zero of that improvement to the pitching staff?
-
QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 10:57 PM) From the article I was referring to: SI Vault That's comparing 07-08, I was talking 08 to 09.
-
QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 10:49 PM) Balta...I assume you mean 3.95 in 08'. I am saying the actual pitchers were the same. Secondly, you cannot forsee a situation wherein a worse defense would cause the same pitchers' ERA's to increase? Well, first of all, no they weren't, Edwin Jackson was gone. Ditto 1/2 a season of Kazmir. Secondly, the difference in their starters was about 65 runs. That seems like an awful lot of defensive downgrade to come up with that. The pitchers for the Sox were pretty much the same between 05 and 06. Maybe even better in 06 on paper. How would we compare those 2 staffs?
-
QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 10:32 PM) SI pointed out that their staff was basically the same in 08' than it had been the year before, however. I'd have to review the article, but I am pretty certain it argued it wasn't the bullpen at all, but rather, the defense. Their starters ERA was 4.54 last year and 3.95 in 2009. That's considered the same?
-
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 06:42 PM) As mentioned earlier, Hudson, Flowers and Viciedo could all take on more prominent roles (5th, C, 1B/DH)...then there's also Jordan Danks and perhaps CJ Retherford could challege Nix for the utility spot. With D2: the Mighty Danks, I think that at best, you pencil him in as a late-2011 callup unless someone gets hurt. He has serious work still to do in the minors.
-
QUOTE (scenario @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 09:33 PM) Looks like our AAA rotation could be: Hudson Harrell Torres Cabrera Hynick If so, should be a good season for Charlotte. Anywhere for Marquez to fit in?
-
Yay! Credit Default Swaps! I can't imagine anything bad ever happening because of more of those!
-
A lot of next offseason's work is going to depend on what we see out of Viciedo and Flowers this year. The 2 positions we're likely to need to fill next offseason are C and 1b. If those 2 guys have good years at AAA this year, then we won't be worrying that much.
-
QUOTE (hogan873 @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 03:25 PM) I like the SBs. I wonder, though, if Jones will get enough at-bats to hit 27 HRs...especially considering he's supposed to be splitting time as DH. I think he'll do well and end up getting more at-bats, but I wouldn't expect that if he was hitting .238. Jones's competition for the DH and OF at bats is going to be Kotsay and Vizquel. No matter how much I disagree with some of his decisions, Ozzie usually winds up recognizing that he can't keep playing someone everyday if they're flat out being outhit by someone else on the roster.
-
Official 2009-2010 NBA Thread
Balta1701 replied to southsider2k5's topic in Alex’s Olde Tyme Sports Pub
QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 02:32 PM) I can never not be biased, as I grew up during the Jordan era, so that time will always stand out to me. But we've got some special, special players in the league today. Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Melo, Durant, Paul, Howard, Paul, Nash, Bosh, ect. You made that list without mentioning DR1. I'm sad. -
QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 01:53 PM) Indeed. And how the heck is he invited to camp again? He is so awful. Frankly, we're really short on SS candidates at AAA.
-
Official 2009-2010 NCAA Basketball Thread
Balta1701 replied to ChiSox_Sonix's topic in Alex’s Olde Tyme Sports Pub
Linking to this paper makes me feel dirty. At least it took forever to respond for me. -
The Sunlight foundation is streaming the summit. And they're using modern technology to display, ever time a person speaks, the campaign contributions they've receivedf from the Health Care industry.
-
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 11:01 AM) Talk to the reporters who keep asking the same question. Why? Every time they ask it and he answers it, they get read.
-
I think Q goes for 50 this year.
-
QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 09:56 AM) You have to work within the parameters of reality here. Ozzie wants a second lefty to specialize in getting lefites out. Sometimes he'll use them that way, but occasionally, he'll keep them in for longer. There is no changing this. So the better way to look at things is... how did Williams do overall last year? And how do we think Threets would do in the same situation (facing 3/4 lefties and 1/4 righties, give or take)? It's not 3/4 lefties and 1/4 righties, that's my point. It's 52% lefties and 48% righties.
-
Official 2009-2010 NBA Thread
Balta1701 replied to southsider2k5's topic in Alex’s Olde Tyme Sports Pub
QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 09:51 AM) He'd be my pick if not for Lebron. You look at the combination of individual numbers and overall value to his team, I don't think anybody outside of Lebron tops Durant. Hell of a player. And Durant is a whopping 21 years old currently. -
QUOTE (Cknolls @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 09:39 AM) I am referencing your use of sources... I know, I was trying to figure out an amusing reply to your remark.
-
Harry Shearer's weekly radio show, posted usually early afternoon on Mondays at harryshearer.com.
-
QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 09:07 AM) or against having a LOOGY at all. Which, therefore, becomes an argument against Williams, because that's what he is.
-
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 09:09 AM) I am guessing the second is supposed to be LH? You are correct sir.
-
QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 24, 2010 -> 09:50 PM) All it takes is one. A lot of people thought the same thing about transplants and transfusions at one point in time. But...how many guys wind up having negative effects of HGH abuse that don't necessarily get connected to that?
-
QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 25, 2010 -> 08:23 AM) Why do you hope he doesn't? Because our manager doesn't understand that when a guy gives up an .868 OPS to RH hitters and a .549 OPS to RH hitters, he shouldn't have 37 PA against RH hitters and 43 PA against LH hitters.
