Guess the poster!!!!

Magnus, Robot Fighter wrote:
> (The header) I KNOW IT IS STILL EARLY IN THE SEASON BUT:
>
> but it might get late soon for Coco Crisp. Tonight's pukable 0-5 with
> 2 K's
> and zero balls hit out of the infield made me look this up:
>
> Crisp .121 .171 .182 2 doubles, 0 HR, 33 AB
> Church .342 .419 .632 5 doubles, 2 HR, 38 AB
>
>
> I know the above doesn't mean that Church will have a better year than
> Crisp
> when all is said and done. But I bet he will. Sadly I will also bet
> that any
> chance of trading Coco for Ryan has vanished faster than one of Coco's
> spaghetti swings. We all must admit he looks terrible. Since we are
> seemingly stuck with him I hope he soon will look like the 04-05 Coco,
> but I
> wouldn't bet on that. Meanwhile, where is the love for Wily Mo? He hit
> over
> .300 last year. Can't he at least begin to share the position with the
> totally ineffective Crisp?
>
>
> When he was with the Dodgers J.D. Drew said CF was his favorite
> position. So
> a corner outfielder could also replace Coco.

Gnork

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Given that Coco's not a Gold Glover in CF, I wouldn't be that
> uncomfortable with Peña playing there. The stats say they're about
> even defensively there, but I don't trust those numbers completely.
> I'd still give Coco an edge, but not a huge one, and if his bat stays
> noodle-like, then it'd be a no-brainer to replace him with WMP.

Bob-Nob?

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I dunno...I like having the speedy but fragile Drew in RIght and the
> speedy yet horrible at the plate Coco in Center.
>
> I think putting Drew in center is bad for health reasons and putting
> Wily Mo in center is out of the question.
>
> Also while undoubtedly Wily Mo will slug better than Coco, i'm not
> sure his OBP would be that much higher. I don't think the defensive
> trade-off is worth it.

No idea.

> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I would put Wily Mo out there before I acquired another center
> fielder.
> I'd love to see Wily Mo out there regularly.

That's me, I think.

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Yes. I'll predict we'll see Ellsbury starting in CF by the ASB, with
> Crisp riding pine. WMP may platoon with Ellsbury some.
>
> We'll make room for Ellsbury by dumping a pitcher, since we have one
> too
> many as it is. Hopefully it'll be Timlin who goes.

Gnork.

--
Griffin
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

Griffin venit, vidit, et dixit:
> Magnus, Robot Fighter wrote:
>> (The header) I KNOW IT IS STILL EARLY IN THE SEASON BUT:

<snip>

>> Given that Coco's not a Gold Glover in CF, I wouldn't be that
>> uncomfortable with Peña playing there. The stats say they're about
>> even defensively there, but I don't trust those numbers completely.
>> I'd still give Coco an edge, but not a huge one, and if his bat stays
>> noodle-like, then it'd be a no-brainer to replace him with WMP.

> Bob-Nob?

It might be, though my first guess was that it was someone else
(perhaps Bismo).

*checks*

Yep, I was right. 'Twas not I, but Bismo.

Catch you later.
--Robert Machemer

--
Robert Paul Aubrey Machemer | For each time he falls, he shall
Amherst College, Math & Classics | rise again, and woe to the wicked!
IF22: Cliff wins best film, cast | --Don Quixote (Man of La Mancha)
"Can't complain; had his chance, and in modern parlance, blew it."
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

"Griffin" <ENTERMYNAMEHEREFIRSTANDLASTNOSPACE.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1KydnQJqloB4MxDbnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Yes. I'll predict we'll see Ellsbury starting in CF by the ASB, with
>> Crisp riding pine. WMP may platoon with Ellsbury some. We'll make room
>> for Ellsbury by dumping a pitcher, since we have one
>> too many as it is. Hopefully it'll be Timlin who goes.
>
> Gnork.
>

I was thinking Dan C.
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

"Jim Tiberio" <jimtiberio RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5f614oF3avldkU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Griffin" <ENTERMYNAMEHEREFIRSTANDLASTNOSPACE RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote in
> message news:1KydnQJqloB4MxDbnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yes. I'll predict we'll see Ellsbury starting in CF by the ASB, with
>>> Crisp riding pine. WMP may platoon with Ellsbury some. We'll make room
>>> for Ellsbury by dumping a pitcher, since we have one
>>> too many as it is. Hopefully it'll be Timlin who goes.
>>
>> Gnork.
>>
>
> I was thinking Dan C.
>

I thought that Gnork was the conductor on the "12 pitchers is one too many"
train.
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

"Fred Burton" <fburton.RemoveThis@starfire.mv.com> wrote in message
news:f6lc7f$15ha$1@pyrite.mv.net...
>
> "Jim Tiberio" <jimtiberio.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5f614oF3avldkU1@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> "Griffin" <ENTERMYNAMEHEREFIRSTANDLASTNOSPACE.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in
>> message news:1KydnQJqloB4MxDbnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Yes. I'll predict we'll see Ellsbury starting in CF by the ASB, with
>>>> Crisp riding pine. WMP may platoon with Ellsbury some. We'll make room
>>>> for Ellsbury by dumping a pitcher, since we have one
>>>> too many as it is. Hopefully it'll be Timlin who goes.
>>>
>>> Gnork.
>>>
>>
>> I was thinking Dan C.
>>
>
> I thought that Gnork was the conductor on the "12 pitchers is one too
> many" train.
>
>

"Timlin" screams Dan though.
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

Jim says:
<<"Timlin" screams Dan though. >>

Except it didn't use Dan's favorite word for Timlin.

--
DON !!!
"Save the cheer leader!!!
Save the world"!!!
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

<DonFromBarre.RemoveThis@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:5794-468E61AF-472@storefull-3113.bay.webtv.net...
> Jim says:
> <<"Timlin" screams Dan though. >>
>
> Except it didn't use Dan's favorite word for Timlin.
>

True, maybe it is Gnork.
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

On Jul 6, 10:23 am, "Bob-Nob" <bobno... RemoveThis @SPaMol.com> wrote:
> Bob-Nob venit, vidit, et dixit:
>
> > jes.t... RemoveThis @hexduxhmp.org venit, vidit, et dixit:
> >> Magnus, Robot Fighter <M... RemoveThis @key.com> wrote:
> >>> Church .342 .419 .632 5 doubles, 2 HR, 38 AB
> >> Gave it away there
> > Incidentally, for the curious, Church's current numbers...
> > .252 AVG, .339 OBP, .416 SLG, 102 OPS+
> > Crisp's current numbers...
> > .265 AVG, .320 OBP, .389 SLG, 86 OPS+
> > Church has still been better offensively (and, I'd guess,
> > overall, though I'd also guess that Crisp's defense would
> > likely narrow the gap somewhat), but the offensive difference
> > between them appears to be shrinking, for whatever that's
> > worth.
>
> Of course, if we really want to amuse ourselves...
>
> An "anonymous" fan's trade proposal (posted February 8, 2007)
> along with some of their more relevant numbers...
>
> Beckett (130 ERA+ as starter)
> Tavarez (102 ERA+ as starter)
> Lopez or Romero -- Washington's choice (Lopez has 130 ERA+)
> Edgar Martinez (3.79 ERA in AAA)
> Crisp (86 OPS+)
> Lowell (130 OPS+)
> Pena (68 OPS+)
>
> for
>
> Nick Johnson (has been injured all year)
> Chad Cordero (144 ERA+ as closer)
> Ryan Church (102 OPS+)
>
> Baseball Prospectus's VORP can give us a sense of how much
> value the Sox would have traded away and how much received.
>
> player VORP player VORP
> Beckett 26.2 Johnson 0.0
> Tavarez 9.4 Cordero 10.6
> Lopez 3.7 Church 7.9
> Crisp 5.7 ---------------
> Lowell 25.1 TOTAL: 18.5
> Pena -3.5
> (Romero 6.1)
> Martinez 0.0
> ----------------
> TOTAL: 66.6 (or 69, if the Nats had taken Romero)
>
> Of course, this is a very simplistic way of looking at the
> trade. Figuring salary into the mix, the Sox would have
> shed about $40 million in total contracts (about $15
> million in 2007 contracts, I think). And along with the
> above trade, the poster suggested moving Papelbon into
> the rotation -- it's certainly possible that Papelbon
> in the rotation and Cordero in the pen might have provided
> more value than Beckett in the rotation and Papelbon in
> the pen. (It's possible, though I'm not sure I'd have
> bet on it, given how well Beckett has pitched).
>
> I think it's fairly likely that the Sox would be weaker
> now on the field if the above trade had happened (if for
> no other reason than because they'd have to replace
> Lowell's bat with a replacement level first baseman's,
> given Johnson's injury, though there might be plenty of
> other reasons to think the Sox would be weaker as well).
> They'd have a fair bit of money still available to them
> (for possible use in midseason trades). They might still
> be first in the AL East, but the lead would almost certainly
> be less than what it currently is.
>
> Make of it what you will.
>
1. You can't trade guys on the DL
2. Johnson could not have passed the physical

Therefore that trade would never have happened.
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

jes.t.er DeleteThis @hexduxhmp.org venit, vidit, et dixit:
> Magnus, Robot Fighter <Me DeleteThis @key.com> wrote:

>> Church .342 .419 .632 5 doubles, 2 HR, 38 AB

> Gave it away there

Incidentally, for the curious, Church's current numbers...

..252 AVG, .339 OBP, .416 SLG, 102 OPS+

Crisp's current numbers...

..265 AVG, .320 OBP, .389 SLG, 86 OPS+

Church has still been better offensively (and, I'd guess,
overall, though I'd also guess that Crisp's defense would
likely narrow the gap somewhat), but the offensive difference
between them appears to be shrinking, for whatever that's
worth.

Catch you later.
--Robert Machemer

--
Robert Paul Aubrey Machemer | For each time he falls, he shall
Amherst College, Math & Classics | rise again, and woe to the wicked!
IF22: Cliff wins best film, cast | --Don Quixote (Man of La Mancha)
"Can't complain; had his chance, and in modern parlance, blew it."
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

Bob-Nob venit, vidit, et dixit:
> jes.t.er RemoveThis @hexduxhmp.org venit, vidit, et dixit:
>> Magnus, Robot Fighter <Me RemoveThis @key.com> wrote:

>>> Church .342 .419 .632 5 doubles, 2 HR, 38 AB

>> Gave it away there

> Incidentally, for the curious, Church's current numbers...

> .252 AVG, .339 OBP, .416 SLG, 102 OPS+

> Crisp's current numbers...

> .265 AVG, .320 OBP, .389 SLG, 86 OPS+

> Church has still been better offensively (and, I'd guess,
> overall, though I'd also guess that Crisp's defense would
> likely narrow the gap somewhat), but the offensive difference
> between them appears to be shrinking, for whatever that's
> worth.

Of course, if we really want to amuse ourselves...

An "anonymous" fan's trade proposal (posted February 8, 2007)
along with some of their more relevant numbers...

Beckett (130 ERA+ as starter)
Tavarez (102 ERA+ as starter)
Lopez or Romero -- Washington's choice (Lopez has 130 ERA+)
Edgar Martinez (3.79 ERA in AAA)
Crisp (86 OPS+)
Lowell (130 OPS+)
Pena (68 OPS+)

for

Nick Johnson (has been injured all year)
Chad Cordero (144 ERA+ as closer)
Ryan Church (102 OPS+)

Baseball Prospectus's VORP can give us a sense of how much
value the Sox would have traded away and how much received.

player VORP player VORP
Beckett 26.2 Johnson 0.0
Tavarez 9.4 Cordero 10.6
Lopez 3.7 Church 7.9
Crisp 5.7 ---------------
Lowell 25.1 TOTAL: 18.5
Pena -3.5
(Romero 6.1)
Martinez 0.0
----------------
TOTAL: 66.6 (or 69, if the Nats had taken Romero)

Of course, this is a very simplistic way of looking at the
trade. Figuring salary into the mix, the Sox would have
shed about $40 million in total contracts (about $15
million in 2007 contracts, I think). And along with the
above trade, the poster suggested moving Papelbon into
the rotation -- it's certainly possible that Papelbon
in the rotation and Cordero in the pen might have provided
more value than Beckett in the rotation and Papelbon in
the pen. (It's possible, though I'm not sure I'd have
bet on it, given how well Beckett has pitched).

I think it's fairly likely that the Sox would be weaker
now on the field if the above trade had happened (if for
no other reason than because they'd have to replace
Lowell's bat with a replacement level first baseman's,
given Johnson's injury, though there might be plenty of
other reasons to think the Sox would be weaker as well).
They'd have a fair bit of money still available to them
(for possible use in midseason trades). They might still
be first in the AL East, but the lead would almost certainly
be less than what it currently is.

Make of it what you will.

Catch you later.
--Robert Machemer

--
Robert Paul Aubrey Machemer | For each time he falls, he shall
Amherst College, Math & Classics | rise again, and woe to the wicked!
IF22: Cliff wins best film, cast | --Don Quixote (Man of La Mancha)
"Can't complain; had his chance, and in modern parlance, blew it."
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!! 

Bob-Nob venit, vidit, et dixit:

> Bob-Nob venit, vidit, et dixit:
>> jes.t.er.DeleteThis@hexduxhmp.org venit, vidit, et dixit:
>>> Magnus, Robot Fighter <Me.DeleteThis@key.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Church .342 .419 .632 5 doubles, 2 HR, 38 AB
>
>>> Gave it away there
>
>> Incidentally, for the curious, Church's current numbers...
>
>> .252 AVG, .339 OBP, .416 SLG, 102 OPS+
>
>> Crisp's current numbers...
>
>> .265 AVG, .320 OBP, .389 SLG, 86 OPS+
>
>> Church has still been better offensively (and, I'd guess,
>> overall, though I'd also guess that Crisp's defense would
>> likely narrow the gap somewhat), but the offensive difference
>> between them appears to be shrinking, for whatever that's
>> worth.
>
> Of course, if we really want to amuse ourselves...
>
> An "anonymous" fan's trade proposal (posted February 8, 2007)
> along with some of their more relevant numbers...
>
> Beckett (130 ERA+ as starter)
> Tavarez (102 ERA+ as starter)
> Lopez or Romero -- Washington's choice (Lopez has 130 ERA+)
> Edgar Martinez (3.79 ERA in AAA)
> Crisp (86 OPS+)
> Lowell (130 OPS+)
> Pena (68 OPS+)
>
> for
>
> Nick Johnson (has been injured all year)
> Chad Cordero (144 ERA+ as closer)
> Ryan Church (102 OPS+)
>
> Baseball Prospectus's VORP can give us a sense of how much
> value the Sox would have traded away and how much received.
>
> player VORP player VORP
> Beckett 26.2 Johnson 0.0
> Tavarez 9.4 Cordero 10.6
> Lopez 3.7 Church 7.9
> Crisp 5.7 ---------------
> Lowell 25.1 TOTAL: 18.5
> Pena -3.5
> (Romero 6.1)
> Martinez 0.0
> ----------------
> TOTAL: 66.6 (or 69, if the Nats had taken Romero)
>
> Of course, this is a very simplistic way of looking at the
> trade. Figuring salary into the mix, the Sox would have
> shed about $40 million in total contracts (about $15
> million in 2007 contracts, I think). And along with the
> above trade, the poster suggested moving Papelbon into
> the rotation -- it's certainly possible that Papelbon
> in the rotation and Cordero in the pen might have provided
> more value than Beckett in the rotation and Papelbon in
> the pen. (It's possible, though I'm not sure I'd have
> bet on it, given how well Beckett has pitched).
>
> I think it's fairly likely that the Sox would be weaker
> now on the field if the above trade had happened (if for
> no other reason than because they'd have to replace
> Lowell's bat with a replacement level first baseman's,
> given Johnson's injury, though there might be plenty of
> other reasons to think the Sox would be weaker as well).
> They'd have a fair bit of money still available to them
> (for possible use in midseason trades). They might still
> be first in the AL East, but the lead would almost certainly
> be less than what it currently is.
>
> Make of it what you will.

And in the interest of fairness, here's a trade I proposed
(in theory -- it was intended as an example of the sort of
trade I thought the Sox might explore if they decided to
trade Ramirez, given that Ramirez's combination of talent
and high salary makes him difficult to trade in a 1-to-1
deal. The trade ignored the fact that Kennedy was a free
agent, which alone made it an impossible deal. I suggested
"Replace Kennedy with some other mediocrity if you prefer.
It's still the same trade").

That said, here's the theoretical trade I suggested...

to the Angels:
Ramirez: 2006 VORP = 61.2, current age = 34, current salary = $18.3 mil

to the Red Sox:
Kennedy: 2006 VORP = 8.5, current age = 30, current salary = $3.4 mil
Figgins: 2006 VORP = 7.9, current age = 28, current salary = $2.3 mil
Shields: 2006 VORP = 25.5, current age = 31, current salary = $2.1 mil
Kotchman: 2006 VORP = -11.6, current age = 23, current salary = $0.3 mil

(I would have also then explored ways to trade Mike Lowell).

Here's what they've done in 2007...

Ramirez: .289 AVG, .389 OBP, .473 SLG --> 126 OPS+

Kennedy: .213 AVG, .281 OBP, .256 SLG --> 46 OPS+
Figgins: .316 AVG, .366 OBP, .404 SLG --> 109 OPS+
Shields: 1.81 ERA in 44.2 IP --> 234 ERA+
Kotchman: .298 AVG, .373 OBP, .504 SLG --> 135 OPS+

So it would have been a good thing that I couldn't possibly have
traded for Kennedy, hunh?

In all seriousness, I didn't really want Kennedy per se. I knew
the Angels needed to throw someone else into the deal, and Kennedy
seemed a likely name. He's reported to be strong defensively (or
he has had that reputation in the past). Like I said in my original
post -- insert mediocrity here.

My real eye was on Kotchman, whom I thought the Angels might give
up for Ramirez, though Shields and Figgins would have been the big
"names" in the deal. Kotchman was coming off a year in which he
played little, but not because of injury but because of a bad case
of mono, which I hoped for his sake would not really affect his
development. Whether it did or not, he's done pretty well so far
this year.

player VORP player VORP
Ramirez 20.1 Kennedy -12.3
Figgins 13.7
Shields 20.0
Kotchman 19.4
---------------
Total: 40.8

Plus the Sox would have freed up about 10 million dollars
of payroll (depending on how much of that would have been
used to supplement a Lowell trade). I'd guess that the
defense would have been improved overall. At that point,
the Sox had not signed Lugo (I made this suggestion at
the end of last September), and I'm not sure I would have
advocated trying to sign him, though I might have, depending
on whether or not I thought Pedroia could handle the position.

Again, there are plenty of complications that the above
doesn't take into consideration. The Sox might well have
traded Lowell away in a lousy deal and been worse off.
They might have used Figgins to bury Pedroia when the latter
started off poorly and been worse off now as a result.
Who knows? Really though, I was looking to trade Ramirez
for whichever prospect (or prospects) I thought I could get
from the Angels and free up as much payroll as possible
(while still acquiring some veterans to make the trade seem
palatable to the fans who value such things).

Dunno. But I'd feel better if the Sox had made my trade
than if the Sox had made the aforementioned Church trade.
(Especially if the Sox can avoid acquiring someone as
bad as Kennedy has turned out to be this year). Still,
the year isn't over, and I think Ramirez is going to
bounce back in the second half. I certainly hope he does!

Catch you later.
--Robert Machemer


--
Robert Paul Aubrey Machemer | For each time he falls, he shall
Amherst College, Math & Classics | rise again, and woe to the wicked!
IF22: Cliff wins best film, cast | --Don Quixote (Man of La Mancha)
"Can't complain; had his chance, and in modern parlance, blew it."
 >> Stay informed about: Guess the poster!!!!