chisox05 Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/gammons/story?id=1917404 Hopefully we can pull of a blockbuster- a good one that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Gammons now trying to put some humor in his articles. :sleep Now that someone has equipped the new Diamondbacks owners with laptops and taught them how to Googlesearch, do they realize they are going to have to trade Randy Johnson? Pedro already has a 2 year $25.5 mill offer with a $13 mill option on the table. Talk about setting the market. That's about the same type of deal as what Fartolo Colon got except he had a 4 year deal. Loved this stat too. Joe Crede OPS (.816, .741, .717) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Loved this stat too. Joe Crede OPS (.816, .741, .717) I was trying to figure out what that meant. Does that mean he's reached his lowest point? Does it mean he's going to get worse every year from here on out? Or does it mean we are looking at an improvement in the near future? And Peter...just so you know, this will be Crede's 3rd full year...I am not sure how you can count a half a season of work, but I guess. Not defending Crede, just wondering if Peter's point is legit. Also...KW got noted...in a bad way. Kearns move to 3B turning into a Ken Williams like disaster, or something to that extent. Ouch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 I was trying to figure out what that meant. Three year numbers are the ones that statheads use for projections, or comparisons between 2 players(as opposed to one year). Trending down is a bad thing. Trending up is good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox05 Posted November 7, 2004 Author Share Posted November 7, 2004 And Peter...just so you know, this will be Crede's 3rd full year...I am not sure how you can count a half a season of work, but I guess It was actually a little over a month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox05 Posted November 7, 2004 Author Share Posted November 7, 2004 Pedro already has a 2 year $25.5 mill offer with a $13 mill option on the table. Talk about setting the market. That's about the same type of deal as what Fartolo Colon got except he had a 4 year deal. To be honest, i thought that was a mild offer for pedro. I think he is a 14-15 million pitcher for 2 yrs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 It was actually a little over a month. or two Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox05 Posted November 7, 2004 Author Share Posted November 7, 2004 Three year numbers are the ones that statheads use for projections, or comparisons between 2 players(as opposed to one year). Trending down is a bad thing. Trending up is good. So r u saying, crede will continue to do worse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 To be honest, i thought that was a mild offer for pedro. I think he is a 14-15 million pitcher for 2 yrs. If Steinbrenner is desperate he could offer that. Otherwise it would probably have to be some other NL team unless Boston can resign him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 So r u saying, crede will continue to do worse? With the Cell becoming more of a hitters park over the last few seasons, Crede's stats should be going up, like Eric Chavez's did in his 1st 3 seasons, definitely not down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 So r u saying, crede will continue to do worse? No... See crede is still younger than "peak" age, but his three year trend is very disturbing. Three year OPS+ of 112, 94, 79 at age 26 and people think he's the future. Garland has a three year ERA+ of 101, 99, 100 at age 24, and people want to sell him off for a bag of peanuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 No... See crede is still younger than "peak" age, but his three year trend is very disturbing. Three year OPS+ of 112, 94, 79 at age 26 and people think he's the future. Garland has a three year ERA+ of 101, 99, 100 at age 24, and people want to sell him off for a bag of peanuts. Cheat, do you have a Hardball Times link explaining ERA+ and OPS+? Is that with park factor adjustments, or what makes the ERA+/OPS+ different from regular ERA/OPS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Three year numbers are the ones that statheads use for projections, or comparisons between 2 players(as opposed to one year). Trending down is a bad thing. Trending up is good. Kind of figured that. I will just say this...while I'm not a fan of Crede by any means, I do not feel the stat is valid. Half a year should not qualify. That being said...I wasn't counting on him having an OPS of much more then .700 next year anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 No... See crede is still younger than "peak" age, but his three year trend is very disturbing. Three year OPS+ of 112, 94, 79 at age 26 and people think he's the future. Garland has a three year ERA+ of 101, 99, 100 at age 24, and people want to sell him off for a bag of peanuts. The difference there is that Crede makes about $650,000 I think (only going off the top of my head) and Garland could make anywhere from $2.5 mill to $4 mill, that's why people are getting impatient with Jon. No way should we give him up though, even though he's been mentioned in the RJ deal, which is probably the only way he'll be moved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Cheat, do you have a Hardball Times link explaining ERA+ and OPS+? Is that with park factor adjustments, or what makes the ERA+/OPS+ different from regular ERA/OPS? Yeah it's just park adjusted ERA/OPS... 100 is average, above 100 = good, below = bad. http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/ba...y.shtml#special This season's stats for USCF may not compensate as much as they should. B-R uses a three year regression to come up with their park factor adjustments, so it will take three years to get a more accurate feel for how much of a hitters park the new configuration is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Kind of figured that. I will just say this...while I'm not a fan of Crede by any means, I do not feel the stat is valid. Half a year should not qualify. That being said...I wasn't counting on him having an OPS of much more then .700 next year anyways. KW still has that dream of Crede turning into Adrian Beltre of 2004. Most of us doubt it's gonna happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Cheat, do you have a Hardball Times link explaining ERA+ and OPS+? Is that with park factor adjustments, or what makes the ERA+/OPS+ different from regular ERA/OPS? They are adjusted to the park and how strong offensively the league is and how strong pitching wise the league is that year, etc. If a park is very much a hitters park, and the offensive game is very up for the year while the pitching is poor, and a pitcher puts up an ERA of 3.50 pitching his home games in that park, he's having a very good year. On the contrary, if the above conditions are still true, and a hitter puts up splits of .270 15 60 .750, his year is not nearly as good. As an example...Carl Yastrezmski's OPS in 1968(the Year of the Pitcher as it has been referred to) was .922. His Adjusted OPS for that year was 171. On the contrary, Manny Ramirez had an OPS of 1.014 last year(2003), yet his OPS+ was 160. The reason being it was much easier to put up a good OPS in 2003 then it was 1968. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 KW still has that dream of Crede turning into Adrian Beltre of 2004. Most of us doubt it's gonna happen. Surprisingly I'm not that down on Crede... If I was trying to build the best club I could for next season, I'd ship him out for whatever I could get, but I think he'll perform above, or at least at, league average next year. Then his make-or-break season in '06. That's when he either becomes a star, or just someone who's keeping the hot corner warm for Josh Fields. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Surprisingly I'm not that down on Crede... If I was trying to build the best club I could for next season, I'd ship him out for whatever I could get, but I think he'll perform above, or at least at, league average next year. Then his make-or-break season in '06. That's when he either becomes a star, or just someone who's keeping the hot corner warm for Josh Fields. Josh Fields could even be ready sometime in 2006. Could have a situation where Crede could be traded mid - season to make room for Fields if he doesn't produce. Now if Crede was to just listen to Greg Walker more abouit his swing, then Fields could become a DH for us possibly in the future if we still have Crede around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 ive heard somewhere that fields can even make a surprise appearance next season if crede is crappy again.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 ive heard somewhere that fields can even make a surprise appearance next season if crede is crappy again.... I wouldn't go that far. Realistically, a good season for Fields will see him start at Birmingham and produce well enough for him to finish off the year at Charlotte. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 heh i think he could do as well as crede has been doing although if we are still in contention i bet uribe would become the everyday SS if crede sucks on a side note since you seem to be on DBAHO how about those magic losing to charlotte thats got to bring you down after 2 francis game winners Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 heh i think he could do as well as crede has been doing although if we are still in contention i bet uribe would become the everyday SS if crede sucks on a side note since you seem to be on DBAHO how about those magic losing to charlotte thats got to bring you down after 2 francis game winners Uribe would undoubtedly replace Crede at 3B with Harris probably moving to 2B full time if Crede is bad again, and Crede would then probably be moved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Uribe would undoubtedly replace Crede at 3B with Harris probably moving to 2B full time if Crede is bad again, and Crede would then probably be moved. Of course that's under the assumption that willie is any good, which is far from a sure thing as of right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 7, 2004 Share Posted November 7, 2004 Of course that's under the assumption that willie is any good, which is far from a sure thing as of right now. That's true I think I should have said Willie starts at 2B against RHP and RHP only. We'd then have to find someone that could play 2B or 3B that could hit LHP too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.