No offense Bud Girl but...

[Duke]

Does anybody think that Ausmus will catch 120 to 130 games next year?  I believe that he will be 38.

[schlumburger04]

he better not

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:
he better not

Or what?

[hostros7]

120 is probably at the high end of the range, but maybe the most important factor (other than health of course) is what starting pitchers return.  More of the vets come back, the more they will want Brad behind the plate.  If we have a lot of new guys, expect to see another catcher phased in more

[Assmunch]

I hope not, he's a waste of space.

[BudGirl]

Quote:
I hope not, he's a waste of space.

Much like many of you.

Brad will catch when he is in the line up.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
he better not

Or what?

or we'll suck

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
he better not

Or what?

or we'll suck

"We" suck whether Ausmus catches or not.  So what's the difference?

(Pssst: "we" as in you and me... not as in "the Houston Astros")

[schlumburger04]

you, me, and the houston astros will suck if he catches

me and the stros would be badass if he doesnt

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
you, me, and the houston astros will suck if he catches

No they won't... but we still will.

Quote:
me and the stros would be badass if he doesnt

Because whoever *catches* will hit better... right? *snicker*

[JimR]

the trolls are back. please get them out of here.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
the trolls are back. please get them out of here.

Looks like I picked a good time to sit in for a while (been too busy).  It's still incredible to me that while watching the wonderful defense provided by the catcher for the Cardinals, that the value of a good to great reciever is lost to the run of the mill baseball fan.  Molina is praised for his game winning, seventh game NLCS homerun (if it were Pujols, it would be the death of Heilman for sure because every post season jack by Albert is legendary it seems... or so sez the FoxSports hype machine prior to the World Series game at hand... but I digress).

One reason a great defensive catcher helps a team win is that pitchers do not have to shelve pitches and go with stuff a catcher won't botch.  Wainwright's almost meltdown in game seven was helped tremendously by having a reciever who catches a 12/6 curveball well (including framing it perfectly).  Mr. 100 million Central Gardner was no match for a pitcher and catcher who worked him like Wainwright and Molina did to secure the NLCS pennant.  Any lesser catcher and Beltran is sitting dead red and hitting it hard somewhere.

The value of a good catcher... still lost to today's baseball supposed fan.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
the trolls are back. please get them out of here.

Looks like I picked a good time to sit in for a while (been too busy).  It's still incredible to me that while watching the wonderful defense provided by the catcher for the Cardinals is lost to baseball fans.  Molina is praised for his game winning, seventh game NLCS homerun (if it were Pujols, it would be the death of Heilman for sure because every post season jack by Albert is legendary it seems... or so sez the FoxSports hype machine prior to the World Series game at hand... but I digress).

One reason a great defensive catcher helps a team win is that pitchers do not have to shelve pitches and go with stuff a catcher won't botch.  Wainwright's almost meltdown in game seven was helped tremendously by having a reciever who catches a 12/6 curveball well (including framing it perfectly).  Mr. 100 million Central Gardner was no match for a pitcher and catcher who worked him like Wainwright and Molina did to secure the NLCS pennant.  Any lesser catcher and Beltran is sitting dead red and hitting it hard somewhere.

The value of a good catcher... still lost to today's baseball supposed fan.

the value of a catcher that can hit is lost to old traditionalist baseball fans.

oh but he knows how to "frame a pitch." sorry but theres more to the position than just catching the damn ball

[JimR]

there is nothing more to catching than defense, little boy.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
the value of a catcher that can hit is lost to old traditionalist baseball fans.

What does *catching* have to do with *hitting*?  What is *lost* is the odd relationship some put on offense to a position on the field.  If you're talking about a lineup position, then let's do it.  But for goodness sake, where the player plays on defense has nothing to do with where he bats in the lineup.  You're essentially saying, when it's all distilled down to it's bare essence:

The Astros will suck if thier #8 hitter is Brad Ausmus.  REPEAT, thier #8 hitter.  Again, the #8 hitter will dictate how much the Astros will *SUCK*.

Now *THAT* is excellent baseball analysis!

Quote:
oh but he knows how to "frame a pitch." sorry but theres more to the position than just catching the damn ball

Yeah, there is blocking the plate, calling pitches, et. al.   Glad to know you *understand* the *catchers* position so well!  Good job!

[JimR]

the high school students are back.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
What is *lost* is the odd relationship some put on offense to a position on the field.

Alright let me enlighten you here. Offense from the catching position is more valuable than the same amount of offense from first base. Offense from short stop is more valuable than the same amount of offense from a left fielder. You see, its just alot easier to get offense from first base and LF than it is from a SS or C.

and if you dont realize that then im sorry for you.

Quote:
The Astros will suck if thier #8 hitter is Brad Ausmus. REPEAT, thier #8 hitter. Again, the #8 hitter will dictate how much the Astros will *SUCK*.

If we didnt have such a sucky hitter for a catcher our 8 hitter could be the sucky hitter known as everett. But because our sucky hitting catcher hits 8 then our sucky hitting SS has to hit 7. and yes 4 straight(willy included) sucky hitters at the end of the lineup will make us suck.

Quote:
Yeah, there is blocking the plate, calling pitches, et. al. Glad to know you *understand* the *catchers* position so well! Good job!

well thats just awesome! and ausmus is the only person that can do such things? oh but you think hes the best at those right?

[JimR]

bullshit. your post is hilarious.

take this crap to astrosdaily.com. you'll be a hero there.

[Reuben]

 

Quote:


well thats just awesome! and ausmus is the only person that can do such things? oh but you think hes the best at those right?

 

Ask Andy Pettitte how good of a catcher Ausmus is. Or maybe Roger Clemens. Perhaps you don't care what they think? Do you think Clemens was more bothered by the fact that Brad Ausmus didn't hit well last year, or by the fact that the middle of the order was so weak that in several games guys like Chris Burke and Jason Lane were hitting 3rd or 4th.

By the way, your posts are shit and reek of arrogance, immaturity and stupidity.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Alright let me enlighten you here.

This should be good...

Quote:
Offense from the catching position is more valuable than the same amount of offense from first base.

Why is said value higher?

Quote:
Offense from short stop is more valuable than the same amount of offense from a left fielder. You see, its just alot easier to get offense from first base and LF than it is from a SS or C.

Again, why is the value higher?

Quote:
and if you dont realize that then im sorry for you.

Stand in line, you'll have plenty of company.

Quote:
If we didnt have such a sucky hitter for a catcher our 8 hitter could be the sucky hitter known as everett.

Logic be damned!  The question put to you was "why would the Astros suck if he played".  I said they wouldn't suck, because he'll be right back at #8 and if the Astros go without a viable cleanup hitter again next year, who cares who hits #8 or #7 and no, it will not be the fault of those hitters in that part of the lineup.  However, if the Astros were to get middle of the lineup help and the lineup works, would the Astros still "suck" with Ausmus behind the plate?  No, not at all.  So try to be truthful about roles a player can provide for a team game, instead of the fantacrap bullshit you've tried to pass off here so far.

Quote:
But because our sucky hitting catcher hits 8 then our sucky hitting SS has to hit 7. and yes 4 straight(willy included) sucky hitters at the end of the lineup will make us suck.

Adam Everett should be hitting #2 in all honesty, but that's a different discussion that you'll not be able to keep with anyhow.  But be that as it may, you are exhibiting a very keen sense of not understanding roles within a lineup construction.  Sucky hitters, I'm assuming, to you are guys who don't hit like superstars, instead of guys who can produce within a well constructed lineup.  If the lineup was broken last year, it was due to the performance or lack thereof of the men charged with being run producers (Ensberg, Lane and Wilson).  Lineups have a cascade effect, so the symbiotic relationship of a #3 to a #4 and so on is one that must be constructed correctly in order to use the player personnel on the team correctly.  Simply saying four guys were sucky is nice at the cafeteria talk I'm sure you enjoy with your playmates, but it hardly passes for anything resembling an understanding of the needs for the Houston Astros in 2007 and most certainly how that pertains to the value of a good catcher like Brad Ausmus within said system.

Quote:
well thats just awesome! and ausmus is the only person that can do such things? oh but you think hes the best at those right?

Nope.  Never said that and if you spent your time actually reading what folks say instead of acting like a petulent little kid, you'd realize that this was a direct give and take about Ausmus in the parameters you set forth... if Brad Ausmus catches for the Houston Astros, they will suck.  No one talked about Ausmus being the only viable candidate for the defensive position nor being the only one who can provide such.  What was in question was your inadequate (to date) rationalization about why Brad Ausmus would cause the team to "suck" in 2007.  I still have not heard one rational thought coming from you on the subject you were asked about because you brought it up, not I nor anyone else.

[stubbyc]

Quote:
Adam Everett should be hitting #2 in all honesty, but that's a different discussion that you'll not be able to keep with anyhow.

Yea this is where you lose me. Our lineup would have 2 of its 3 worst hitters getting the most AB's. Adam Everett almost never hits the ball on the ground to the right side. Berkman would come up with no one on and 2 outs a lot. The Cubs put Corey Patterson and Neifi Perez in front of Derrek Lee in '05 and he had just 107 RBIs despite 46 homers and good RISP numbers. Bay's '05 was also very similar with 2 guys who couldn't get on base in front of him.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
Adam Everett should be hitting #2 in all honesty, but that's a different discussion that you'll not be able to keep with anyhow.

Yea this is where you lose me. Our lineup would have 2 of its 3 worst hitters getting the most AB's. Adam Everett almost never hits the ball on the ground to the right side. Berkman would come up with no one on and 2 outs a lot. The Cubs put Corey Patterson and Neifi Perez in front of Derrek Lee in '05 and he had just 107 RBIs despite 46 homers and good RISP numbers. Bay's '05 was also very similar with 2 guys who couldn't get on base in front of him.

Adam Everett almost never hit the ball to the right side because most of the time he was batting 7th.  Behind guys like Preston Wilson and Morgan Ensberg.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Alright let me enlighten you here. Offense from the catching position is more valuable than the same amount of offense from first base.

This is 100% crap.  It doesn't matter if the offense comes from the catcher, the first baseman or the pitcher.  It all counts the same.  

Quote:

You see, its just alot easier to get offense from first base and LF than it is from a SS or C.

You're almost close to having a point here, but you can't seem to get your foot out of your mouth.  What you mean is first base is an easier defensive position to play; therefore, it's a place you can stick guys who can hit but can't do much else.  But offense is offense is offense.  It's no more valuable from the catcher than it is from anywhere else.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Adam Everett should be hitting #2 in all honesty, but that's a different discussion that you'll not be able to keep with anyhow.

Yea this is where you lose me. Our lineup would have 2 of its 3 worst hitters getting the most AB's. Adam Everett almost never hits the ball on the ground to the right side. Berkman would come up with no one on and 2 outs a lot. The Cubs put Corey Patterson and Neifi Perez in front of Derrek Lee in '05 and he had just 107 RBIs despite 46 homers and good RISP numbers. Bay's '05 was also very similar with 2 guys who couldn't get on base in front of him.

I don't think we're officially ready to have this conversation... yet.  But since you like numbers, what are Adam Everett's numbers (albeit, low sample size I'm sure) hitting at the #2?  Also, consider that *approach* changes everything, not just what performance tells you.

(It's what I mentioned in the Ensberg/Huff thread below: performance and approach should never be mistaken for the same thing)

[stubbyc]

Quote:
I don't think we're officially ready to have this conversation... yet.  But since you like numbers, what are Adam Everett's numbers (albeit, low sample size I'm sure) hitting at the #2?  Also, consider that *approach* changes everything, not just what performance tells you.

(It's what I mentioned in the Ensberg/Huff thread below: performance and approach should never be mistaken for the same thing)

He hit well there. He hit .290/.330/.402 and stole 13 bases in about 2/3 of a season in '04. However, some of that might have been a carryover from '03 when he finished the season very strongly offensively hitting 8th. Williams had him in the 2 hole to bunt though, not to hit and run. Garner doesn't strike me as the sac bunt in the first inning type manager. The sac bunt is less necessary because Taveras can take 2nd on his own.

Everett was pretty much a pull hitter even while hitting 2nd and it was why Garner has removed him from the 2 hole. He even hit leadoff at the start of '05 until eventually flip flopping with Taveras.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
I don't think we're officially ready to have this conversation... yet.  But since you like numbers, what are Adam Everett's numbers (albeit, low sample size I'm sure) hitting at the #2?  Also, consider that *approach* changes everything, not just what performance tells you.

(It's what I mentioned in the Ensberg/Huff thread below: performance and approach should never be mistaken for the same thing)

He hit well there. He hit .290/.330/.402 and stole 13 bases in about 2/3 of a season in '04. However, some of that might have been a carryover from '03 when he finished the season very strongly offensively hitting 8th. Williams had him in the 2 hole to bunt though, not to hit and run. Garner doesn't strike me as the sac bunt in the first inning type manager. The sac bunt is less necessary because Taveras can take 2nd on his own.

Everett was pretty much a pull hitter even while hitting 2nd and it was why Garner has removed him from the 2 hole. He even hit leadoff at the start of '05 until eventually flip flopping with Taveras.

Can we save this discussion for later?  I'm not saying I don't want to talk about it, because I do.  But right now, my own impression of what the Astros intend to do is work from the middle out.  Meaning they will find a cleanup hitter first, then perhaps another run producer and then work out from there.  Who hits leadoff and who hits #2 will be predicated on what happens to the middle first.

So, let's just say that I firmly believe Adam Everett is a candidate (and nothing more) for a top of the order position in the lineup.  Whether he goes beyond just candidate status is not firm yet and it may never be.  If you're assertion is that Everett isn't even a candidate, then we disagree and we should leave it at that.

But we can really have fun with this one at a later date than today.  Time will tell us what moves will be made and the possible ripple effects there after.  A ripple effect that may involve moving Everett up... or perhaps not.

P.S. Garner didn't remove Everett from the #2 hole, a broken wrist did (courtesy of Tomo Okha of Montreal).  Garner quickly inserted Carlos Beltran to #2 from the #3 spot and move Bagwell back into #3... thus moving Berkman back to cleanup).  As to why Everett did not get put back to the #2, lineups for Garner had different constructions for him in 2005 and also 2006.  But we can talk about that more later I'm sure.

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
What you mean is first base is an easier defensive position to play; therefore, it's a place you can stick guys who can hit but can't do much else.

YES! There you go, now someones understanding.

 

Quote:
But offense is offense is offense. It's no more valuable from the catcher than it is from anywhere else.  

Offense from the avg. 1b is so much more productive than the avg. offense from a C. Thats unarguable. So doesnt it make sense that a catcher with 30 homers would be more valuable than a 1b that hit 30 homers? Because no catcher in baseball hit 30 homers this year while countless 1bs did. So are you honestly gonna think if we had 30 homers from a catcher it wouldnt be more valuable than 30 homers from a 1b?

Oh but it doesnt matter that those 30 homers come from the catcher you say? Well you see if we had that kind of production from a catcher then it shouldnt be hard to find some fat guy that can hit to play 1b cause those are a dime a dozen.

 

Quote:
  Lineups have a cascade effect, so the symbiotic relationship of a #3 to a #4 and so on is one that must be constructed correctly in order to use the player personnel on the team correctly. Simply saying four guys were sucky is nice at the cafeteria talk I'm sure you enjoy with your playmates, but it hardly passes for anything resembling an understanding of the needs for the Houston Astros in 2007 and most certainly how that pertains to the value of a good catcher like Brad Ausmus within said system.

A lineup doesnt just need two superstar 3 and 4 hitters to be good. It needs atleast capable offense from most of the hitters. A lineup depending on just a couple of people doesnt make sense. Go ahead and look at all the teams with the best offenses this year. Youll notice they all get production from weak positions such as SS, C, or CF. Teams that have offensive black holes at all 3 of these positions will have a sucky offense.

[D.WARD]

You are wrong. Catching is just a bit more than "framing the damn ball". Catching is calling the game, blocking a slider in the dirt with runners on, throwing base stealers out. A good defensive catcher is a rare commodity. A good defensive catcher makes his whole team better by being able to call a good game and give the pitchers the confidence to throw a curve, slider, splitter, etc, knowing that his catcher will not let the ball get by to allow the runner to advance. I would take Brad's defense over a catcher who can hit anyday. Unless, there is a catcher out there who can hit for power and call a good game.

[pravata]

Quote:
You are wrong. Catching is just a bit more than "framing the damn ball". Catching is calling the game, blocking a slider in the dirt with runners on, throwing base stealers out. A good defensive catcher is a rare commodity. A good defensive catcher makes his whole team better by being able to call a good game and give the pitchers the confidence to throw a curve, slider, splitter, etc, knowing that his catcher will not let the ball get by to allow the runner to advance. I would take Brad's defense over a catcher who can hit anyday. Unless, there is a catcher out there who can hit for power and call a good game.

There's more than framing?  Makes me crazy to watch guys snap at the ball.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:


well thats just awesome! and ausmus is the only person that can do such things? oh but you think hes the best at those right?

 

Ask Andy Pettitte how good of a catcher Ausmus is. Or maybe Roger Clemens. Perhaps you don't care what they think? Do you think Clemens was more bothered by the fact that Brad Ausmus didn't hit well last year, or by the fact that the middle of the order was so weak that in several games guys like Chris Burke and Jason Lane were hitting 3rd or 4th.

By the way, your posts are shit and reek of arrogance, immaturity and stupidity.

No i really dont care what they think. I know its a hard concept to understand, but trust me, theyd live without ausmus. They did somehow function before they came to houston you know.

And by the way, i also dont care how you think my posts sound. You disagree so you hate the shit out of me  its the norm with all the posters here.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Offense from the avg. 1b is so much more productive than the avg. offense from a C. Thats unarguable.

There you go again.  This is absolutely ridiculous.  Offense is offense, it doesn't matter from where it comes.  What you mean is the average firstbaseman produces more offense than the average catcher does.  But the value of the offense is equal from all positions.

Quote:

 So doesnt it make sense that a catcher with 30 homers would be more valuable than a 1b that hit 30 homers?

Not necessarily.  Playing catcher is about defense.  If a guy can hit 30 HRs AND play good defense at catcher, he's likely more valuable than a guy who can hit 30 HRs and *not* play good catcher defense.  But hitting and defense are two totally separate things.

Quote:
So are you honestly gonna think if we had 30 homers from a catcher it wouldnt be more valuable than 30 homers from a 1b?

Correct.  30 HRs are 30 HRs, it doesn't matter if they are hit by the catcher or the first baseman or the pitcher.  They all count the same.

Quote:

Oh but it doesnt matter that those 30 homers come from the catcher you say? Well you see if we had that kind of production from a catcher then it shouldnt be hard to find some fat guy that can hit to play 1b cause those are a dime a dozen.

I think you've been drinking.

 

Quote:
  Lineups have a cascade effect, so the symbiotic relationship of a #3 to a #4 and so on is one that must be constructed correctly in order to use the player personnel on the team correctly. Simply saying four guys were sucky is nice at the cafeteria talk I'm sure you enjoy with your playmates, but it hardly passes for anything resembling an understanding of the needs for the Houston Astros in 2007 and most certainly how that pertains to the value of a good catcher like Brad Ausmus within said system.

What the hell was that?

Quote:
Go ahead and look at all the teams with the best offenses this year. Youll notice they all get production from weak positions such as SS, C, or CF.

I'm sure they do.  But the teams with the best offense aren't always the teams with the best record.  It's not about scoring the most runs, it's about winning the most games.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Quote:
You are wrong. Catching is just a bit more than "framing the damn ball". Catching is calling the game, blocking a slider in the dirt with runners on, throwing base stealers out. A good defensive catcher is a rare commodity. A good defensive catcher makes his whole team better by being able to call a good game and give the pitchers the confidence to throw a curve, slider, splitter, etc, knowing that his catcher will not let the ball get by to allow the runner to advance. I would take Brad's defense over a catcher who can hit anyday. Unless, there is a catcher out there who can hit for power and call a good game.

There's more than framing?  Makes me crazy to watch guys snap at the ball.

Most of the yahoos out there wailing about "framing pitches" don't even know what the term means.

[D.WARD]

I thought that we were going to go after an outfielder who can hit 30 homeruns? Why are we picking on Brad Ausmus all of a sudden? Offense is offense. A good defensive catcher is something that not all teams have. Lets leave Brad alone and get a left fielder.

[pravata]

Quote:
I thought that we were going to go after an outfielder who can hit 30 homeruns? Why are we picking on Brad Ausmus all of a sudden? Offense is offense. A good defensive catcher is something that not all teams have. Lets leave Brad alone and get a left fielder.

Lot easier to find the left fielder too.  He can stand out in the outfield, swinging his air bat.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
YES! There you go, now someones understanding.

He wasn't understanding you, he was correcting you.  Your point about value difference on offense is still a head scratcher.

Quote:
Offense from the avg. 1b is so much more productive than the avg. offense from a C. Thats unarguable. So doesnt it make sense that a catcher with 30 homers would be more valuable than a 1b that hit 30 homers?

No.

Quote:
Because no catcher in baseball hit 30 homers this year while countless 1bs did. So are you honestly gonna think if we had 30 homers from a catcher it wouldnt be more valuable than 30 homers from a 1b?

Okay, so you think that the only way to keep the Astros from sucking in 2007 is to find a catcher who can hit possibly 30 homeruns, even though you admit it's an impossible thing to find?  Whaaa?

Quote:
Oh but it doesnt matter that those 30 homers come from the catcher you say? Well you see if we had that kind of production from a catcher then it shouldnt be hard to find some fat guy that can hit to play 1b cause those are a dime a dozen.

Oh deere lowered!  This is fantasy baseball at it's worse!  Even the 1927 Yankees had excellent players who did not hit like Gehrig or Ruth but contributed to winning baseball by playing thier role perfectly.  You devalue the roles a team game needs and go for sluggers in positions arbitrarily and call that sound judgement?  Especially if you're trying to defend your original point that having Brad Ausmus catching for the 2007 Houston Astros would make them suck.  You have yet to prove that point with anything solid and this little diddy about fat guys at first and 30 homerun catchers (who are rare in the majors by your own admission) is supposed to be your solid foundation for why having Ausmus at catcher will lead to suckitude?

Quote:
A lineup doesnt just need two superstar 3 and 4 hitters to be good. It needs atleast capable offense from most of the hitters.

Capable offense?  What does that mean?  A leadoff hitter needs to provide "capable offense"... how?  Same with a #2, or a #7 or a #8... even a #9?

Quote:
A lineup depending on just a couple of people doesnt make sense.

But your argument is that the lineup should be all about something called "capable offense" and in reality it is about hitting in the situations that the lineup will produce if the right personnel is placed in the proper position to perform the role that said lineup calls for.  Once a lineup is no longer in vogue during a game, then the situation at hand will dictate what a lineup will do to help the team score runs.  Conversely, a defensive position is constructed to help the team prevent runs from scoring.  The name of the game in total is: Score more than the other team (at least one more) and prevent the other team from scoring more than you.

It is a simple concept that plays entirely into how to construct a total team oriented club.  Those who play like a team, win... does who do not, don't.

Quote:
Go ahead and look at all the teams with the best offenses this year. Youll notice they all get production from weak positions such as SS, C, or CF. Teams that have offensive black holes at all 3 of these positions will have a sucky offense.

You know what, go away.  No, honestly, you're not going to find it to your liking here with this sort of fantasy baseball talk.  It's weak and very childish and frankly I fear how hard it will be for you to be a participant here.  I'd rather advise you to just leave kindly and never look back, because if this is what you're going to bring in here, it will not be long before you're going to cry about everyone being mean and ugly towards you and of course you'll post some sort of whack manifesto about free speech and your rights and how this place is horrible.

And you'll never get it either.

[D.WARD]

Not to mention, probably a bit cheaper as well.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I thought that we were going to go after an outfielder who can hit 30 homeruns? Why are we picking on Brad Ausmus all of a sudden?

*Golf Clap*  

[schlumburger04]

"30 HRs are 30 HRs, it doesn't matter if they are hit by the catcher or the first baseman or the pitcher. They all count the same."

But no catchers in baseball hit close to 30 homers while thats almost an avg. number of homers for a 1b. What is so hard to understand about that fact? 30 homers is RARE for a catcher yet AVERAGE for a first baseman. Therefore its just fact to say the 30 homer catcher is more valuable than the 1b with 30 homers.

And if your gonna talk about defense thats a whole different arguement. Im just explaining why offense from a catcher is more valuable than offense from a 1b or LF.

 

Quote:
 What the hell was that?

I really dont know, ask noe.

 

Quote:
But the teams with the best offense aren't always the teams with the best record.

Well youre just changing the subject now. Im showing a reason why those teams have good offenses not why theyre good teams.

[Alkie]

Wait.  Last week, he promised to teach me a thing or two about baseball.  I don't understand it, you see, and he is here to help me.

We will not win with a rotation of Oswalt, Pettitte, Zito, Schmidt, Anyone.  We must get a lot more offense.  He put me in my place.  The 2nd best pitching team in the league is not in the playoffs.  

I'm still waiting to learn.  I hope tonight was lesson #1.  

30 HRs from Catcher worth more runs than 30 HRs from 1B.  Got it.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
  Lineups have a cascade effect, so the symbiotic relationship of a #3 to a #4 and so on is one that must be constructed correctly in order to use the player personnel on the team correctly. Simply saying four guys were sucky is nice at the cafeteria talk I'm sure you enjoy with your playmates, but it hardly passes for anything resembling an understanding of the needs for the Houston Astros in 2007 and most certainly how that pertains to the value of a good catcher like Brad Ausmus within said system.


What the hell was that?

He cut and paste what I said in a different post and answered you (for some reason).  I think you're right, he's been drinking way too much tonight.

[Alkie]

Quote:
Im showing a reason why those teams have good offenses not why theyre good teams.

Lesson #2.  Winning not important, only scoring.  Got it.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Im showing a reason why those teams have good offenses not why theyre good teams.

Lesson #2.  Winning not important, only scoring.  Got it.

Ooooohhhhh, so when he says that the Houston Astros in 2007 will *suck*, he means only on offense and nothing else, because winning is not importnat only scoring!  Got it!  Now I see, it's about scoring a tons of runs and only that!

Well hell, what we have in our midst is a Texas Rangers fan!

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

But no catchers in baseball hit close to 30 homers while thats almost an avg. number of homers for a 1b. What is so hard to understand about that fact?

Nothing.  But apparently it's hard for you to understand that a HR from a catcher counts as one run, same as it does if hit by a first baseman.  

Quote:
Therefore its just fact to say the 30 homer catcher is more valuable than the 1b with 30 homers.

No, it's not.  It's pure ignorance.

Quote:

Im just explaining why offense from a catcher is more valuable than offense from a 1b or LF.

You're not explaining anything.  Repeating something over and over again doesn't make it any less stupid.  

Quote:

Well youre just changing the subject now. Im showing a reason why those teams have good offenses not why theyre good teams.

I'm not changing the subject.  The subject is whether or not the Astros would be better off with or without Brad Ausmus.  Winning is the only thing that matters.  Offense, defense, and pitching are all just a means to that end.

[Alkie]

Quote:
I think you're right, he's been drinking way too much tonight.

But we're learning so much about baseball, Noe!  By morning, we may be able to properly watch this sport and not be total neanderthals.  

I look forward to Game Three of the World Series, where I can use my new knowledge and better understand what I am watching for a change.  You should feel lucky.

[D.WARD]

Why is 30 homeruns better from a catcher than it is from a first baseman or left fielder? The last time I checked, 30 homeruns from a catcher is equal to the 30 homeruns that a first baseman or left fielder hits. If not many catchers hit 30 homeruns, they are going to be a bit expensive, right? Why dont we use that money to get a left fielder and maybe another pitcher and let Brad handle the pitching staff?

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
Okay, so you think that the only way to keep the Astros from sucking in 2007 is to find a catcher who can hit possibly 30 homeruns, even though you admit it's an impossible thing to find? Whaaa?

Jesus christ thats not what im saying at all. Its just an example of why offense from a catcher is valuable

 

Quote:
Capable offense? What does that mean? A leadoff hitter needs to provide "capable offense"... how? Same with a #2, or a #7 or a #8... even a #9?

Yes capable offense. Meaning average to good, which is not what we have now

 

Quote:
It's weak and very childish and frankly I fear how hard it will be for you to be a participant here. I'd rather advise you to just leave kindly and never look back, because if this is what you're going to bring in here, it will not be long before you're going to cry about everyone being mean and ugly towards you and of course you'll post some sort of whack manifesto about free speech and your rights and how this place is horrible.  

No you see i havent insulted or made any bad comments about anyone here but i have been taking alot of it. Im just disagreeing with you and providing information that is proving you wrong whether you like it or not. Its not my fault youre completely narrow minded

[Alkie]

Quote:
Im just disagreeing with you and providing information that is proving you wrong whether you like it or not. Its not my fault youre completely narrow minded

Trust us, son, you've proven nothing.

Here's a simple question for you...who won the 2005 NL Pennant?

[D.WARD]

30 homeruns from a catcher is not more valuable to a team than 30 homeruns from another position! The only thing more valuable is the price tag! I don't know about you, but I would like to have a left fielder that can hit for a little power and some pitching! We already have a catcher.

[Alkie]

Alright, Herr Professore, riddle me this...Mike Piazza has hit 30+ HRs 9 times in his career, making him the Greatest Player Ever by your standards.

How many teams with Mike Piazza made the playoffs?

How many teams with Brad Ausmus made the playoffs?

[D.WARD]

Another question for our friend, who was catching the pitchers who pitched our way to the 2005 pennant?

[Alkie]

I just asked him that question.

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
If not many catchers hit 30 homeruns, they are going to be a bit expensive, right? Why dont we use that money to get a left fielder and maybe another pitcher and let Brad handle the pitching staff?  

Ah, good question. Yes, a 30 homer catcher would indeed be expensive cause they are quite rare. But i could live with a guy like bengie molina who can hit and isnt a total shitbag behind the plate and wouldnt cost much more than ausmus. And considering its almost a consensus in baseball that Lee is foaming at the mouth to come to houston id definitly hear him out.

[D.WARD]

The last time I checked, Piazza was not much of a defensive catcher....Brad has won a gold glove or 2 in his day.

[stubbyc]

Quote:
Another question for our friend, who was catching the pitchers who pitched our way to the 2005 pennant?

There are valid points that can be made about the difference between Ausmus and Piazza defensively, but this isn't one of them. Who was catching the pitchers who pitched their way to the 2000 NL pennant? The "Count the Rings" and similar arguments can get really lame.

[pravata]

Quote:
Alright, Herr Professore, riddle me this...Mike Piazza has hit 30+ HRs 9 times in his career, making him the Greatest Player Ever by your standards.

How many teams with Mike Piazza made the playoffs?

How many teams with Brad Ausmus made the playoffs?

Never mind all that.  The Astros need to get busy acquiring Mauer, Pierzynski, Kenji Johjima, or Josh Willingham.

[Alkie]

Uh, I just checked.  Bengie Molina has never hit 30 HRs.  For that matter, Bengie Molina has never hit 20 HRs.  Until this season, he had never hit more than 15 HRs.

Care to revise your post?

[D.WARD]

I am not seeing an answer either....Maybe I can answer it for him. It was the lowly .250 batting average Brad Ausmus.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Another question for our friend, who was catching the pitchers who pitched our way to the 2005 pennant?

Ausmus of course, but i got no doubt in my mind that we would of won the WS with a guy like mccann or mauer. But catchers like that are just impossible to get.

[D.WARD]

Piazza is a great player, but I just tend to block out any success he had with the steM.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Uh, I just checked.  Bengie Molina has never hit 30 HRs.  For that matter, Bengie Molina has never hit 20 HRs.  Until this season, he had never hit more than 15 HRs.

Care to revise your post?

Youre really missing my point about 30 homer catchers but whatever. I would rather have 15 homers than 2.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Jesus christ thats not what im saying at all. Its just an example of why offense from a catcher is valuable

The value a player brings to an offense is a direct correlation to the lineup position he is responsible for.  Not towards the position he plays on defense.  If Brad Ausmus is the cleanup hitter, then it is very necessary for him to drive in a lot of runs and also score runs himself.  Usually, the threshold is 100 rbi/100 runs scored.  You've gotten a very valuable contribution from your cleanup man at that point because he will have produce in the role given to him.  Is it *more* valuable than a leadoff man?  Not entirely so, because if a leadoff man fails to produce in his given role *in the lineup posiiton he mans*, then the chances of the cleanup man producing the numbers you want from his position in the lineup go down.  That is why stats such as RBI are considered team oriented.  However, that this sort of production comes by way of homeruns, high slugging percentages or high average will bear itself out in the end.  The value will be weighed accordingly by the organization, and it will not be because of the defensive position you play.

Having said that, many corner defensive players are more likely to be candidates for the middle of the lineup positions in the lineup.  On occasion, a middle defensive player can be a run producer.  See Piazza, Mike if you'd like or Kent, Jeff.  However, the value of their position in terms of defense for the club is not weighed by how much they produce on offense unless the team feels they can afford to have a poor catcher defensively or a second basemen who is lacking defensively.  Tradiitionally, you don't sacrifice up the middle defense for offense unless the offense is so ungodly you can't afford not to. But finding a Piazza or a Kent is not that easy, so it's easier to find corner men who are less prone to play defense at a gold glove level and maintain your up the middle defense solid.  It all plays towards winning.

Winning around here is the idea, not fantasy baseball scoring.  Winning is what we talk about all the time.  It usually also means talking about team and not individual offense fantacrap bullshit. Winning is also about reacting to someone saying that the 2007 Houston Astros will suck if Brad Ausmus catches for them.  See, catching contributes to winning around here.  Catching has it's framework for discussions.  Offense has it's framework as well.  The sooner you understand that you're not impressing anyone with your pablum fantacrap talk, and especially you're not teaching anyone about anything related to baseball around here either, the better off you'll be.

Or you can just leave now and we'll pretend you were never here to begin with.

Deal?

Quote:
Yes capable offense. Meaning average to good, which is not what we have now

Yes, that's why we speak of middle of the lineup hitters in thier proper context and not just go for Brad Ausmus as the panacea.

Quote:
No you see i havent insulted or made any bad comments about anyone here but i have been taking alot of it. Im just disagreeing with you and providing information that is proving you wrong whether you like it or not. Its not my fault youre completely narrow minded

Be sure to re-read this when you're patting yourself on the back about the high road you've taken.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Alright, Herr Professore, riddle me this...Mike Piazza has hit 30+ HRs 9 times in his career, making him the Greatest Player Ever by your standards.

How many teams with Mike Piazza made the playoffs?

How many teams with Brad Ausmus made the playoffs?

Are you really gonna bring up a hall of fame catcher? Another tip for you, baseball is a team sport this isnt basketball.

Since youre bringing up the Greatest Player Ever, ill take Arods 50 homers and GG defense at shortstop.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Alright, Herr Professore, riddle me this...Mike Piazza has hit 30+ HRs 9 times in his career, making him the Greatest Player Ever by your standards.

How many teams with Mike Piazza made the playoffs?

How many teams with Brad Ausmus made the playoffs?

Are you really gonna bring up a hall of fame catcher? Another tip for you, baseball is a team sport this isnt basketball.

Since youre bringing up the Greatest Player Ever, ill take Arods 50 homers and GG defense at shortstop.

Take them where?

[BudGirl]

Quote:
The last time I checked, Piazza was not much of a defensive catcher....Brad has won a gold glove or 2 in his day.

'01 and '02 to be exact.

[Alkie]

Lesson #3, Baseball is a team sport, unlike basketball, where 5 players must find a way to play together as a unit to win (or perhaps you're not familiar with Allen Iverson).  Baseball - team sport.  Basketball - individual sport.

I hope you're this helpful all day long.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
Jesus christ thats not what im saying at all. Its just an example of why offense from a catcher is valuable

The value a player brings to an offense is a direct correlation to the lineup position he is responsible for.  Not towards the position he plays on defense.  If Brad Ausmus is the cleanup hitter, then it is very necessary for him to drive in a lot of runs and also score runs himself.  Usually, the threshold is 100 rbi/100 runs scored.  You've gotten a very valuable contribution from your cleanup man at that point because he will have produce in the role given to him.  Is it *more* valuable than a leadoff man?  Not entirely so, because if a leadoff man fails to produce in his given role *in the lineup posiiton he mans*, then the chances of the cleanup man producing the numbers you want from his position in the lineup go down.  That is why stats such as RBI are considered team oriented.  However, that this sort of production comes by way of homeruns, high slugging percentages or high average will bear itself out in the end.  The value will be weighed accordingly by the organization, and it will not be because of the defensive position you play.

Having said that, many corner defensive players are more likely to be candidates for the middle of the lineup positions in the lineup.  On occasion, a middle defensive player can be a run producer.  See Piazza, Mike if you'd like or Kent, Jeff.  However, the value of their position in terms of defense for the club is not weighed by how much they produce on offense unless the team feels they can afford to have a poor catcher defensively or a second basemen who is lacking defensively.  Tradiitionally, you don't sacrifice up the middle defense for offense unless the offense is so ungodly you can't afford not to. But finding a Piazza or a Kent is not that easy, so it's easier to find corner men who are less prone to play defense at a gold glove level and maintain your up the middle defense solid.  It all plays towards winning.

Winning around here is the idea, not fantasy baseball scoring.  Winning is what we talk about all the time.  It usually also means talking about team and not individual offense fantacrap bullshit. Winning is also about reacting to someone saying that the 2007 Houston Astros will suck if Brad Ausmus catches for them.  See, catching contributes to winning around here.  Catching has it's framework for discussions.  Offense has it's framework as well.  The sooner you understand that you're not impressing anyone with your pablum fantacrap talk, and especially you're not teaching anyone about anything related to baseball around here either, the better off you'll be.

Or you can just leave now and we'll pretend you were never here to begin with.

Deal?

Quote:
Yes capable offense. Meaning average to good, which is not what we have now

Yes, that's why we speak of middle of the lineup hitters in thier proper context and not just go for Brad Ausmus as the panacea.

Quote:
No you see i havent insulted or made any bad comments about anyone here but i have been taking alot of it. Im just disagreeing with you and providing information that is proving you wrong whether you like it or not. Its not my fault youre completely narrow minded

Be sure to re-read this when you're patting yourself on the back about the high road you've taken.

Oh so youre just pissed off about the we'll suck with ausmus comment. Well i stand by that statement but it looks like youre starting to understand why offense is more valuable at certain positions so whatever.

[Alkie]

Can I ask you a very real question?  How old are you?

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Alright, Herr Professore, riddle me this...Mike Piazza has hit 30+ HRs 9 times in his career, making him the Greatest Player Ever by your standards.

How many teams with Mike Piazza made the playoffs?

How many teams with Brad Ausmus made the playoffs?

Are you really gonna bring up a hall of fame catcher? Another tip for you, baseball is a team sport this isnt basketball.

Since youre bringing up the Greatest Player Ever, ill take Arods 50 homers and GG defense at shortstop.

Take them where?

to my team

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Can I ask you a very real question?  How old are you?

22, how old are you?

[Alkie]

Ah.  Ha.

[loganck]

stick around, man.  you can learn a lot.

just stop posting for a while.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Lesson #3, Baseball is a team sport, unlike basketball, where 5 players must find a way to play together as a unit to win (or perhaps you're not familiar with Allen Iverson).  Baseball - team sport.  Basketball - individual sport.

I hope you're this helpful all day long.

I take it you never watched MJ play, or watched the finals last year

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Ah.  Ha.

in other words: old

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Another question for our friend, who was catching the pitchers who pitched our way to the 2005 pennant?

There are valid points that can be made about the difference between Ausmus and Piazza defensively, but this isn't one of them. Who was catching the pitchers who pitched their way to the 2000 NL pennant? The "Count the Rings" and similar arguments can get really lame.

The irony of 2000 is of course that Brad Ausmus was not on the Houston Astros, Mitch Melusky was.  Houston traded Ausmus to Detroit the previous year because Dierker had a running fued with Ausmus.  Mike Hampton, further irony since we're talking Piazza here as well, would not negotiate with Houston in the offseason of 1999 because he felt Dierker had lessened the team by getting rid of Ausmus.  So he went to Shea Stadium, an another pitchers haven (that not even Piazza's poor defense could hinder) akin to the Astrodome and Chavez Ravine.

In 2001, while flying to the winter meetings in Nashville, the Astros braintrust (Hunsiker, Tal Smith and Larry Dierker) discussed what the team's #1 need was for the upcoming season.  The had experience thier pitching staff getting shell shocked at the new Enron Field.  Plus they knew they were going to go with younger pitchers instead of the veterans like Holt or Lima.  So they decided they needed a great catcher similar to what they had in Brad Ausmus to help the team's pitching get back in order.  After more discussion, they decided it was worth a try to talk to Detroit about actually re-acquiring Ausmus.  This caught Ausmus by surprise because he felt Dierker did not like him at all.  So Brad and Dierker cleared the air and Brad consented to come back to the team for 2001 (including a contract renegotiated in order for him to waive his no-trade clause).

In 2001, Houston went back into the playoffs with Brad Ausmus as the starting catcher.  Roy Oswalt had his rookie season that year, and Wade Miller became a great young hurler for the Houston Astros team as well.

[BudGirl]

I find it absolutely amazing that the one position some "fans" think has to be changed for more offense is catcher.  Never mind that a certain RF and 3B didn't produce enough offense.  (And no, I don't mean Huff, if Ensberg and Lane had done their job the Astros wouldn't have traded for Huff.)  If the 1-6 hitters aren't doing their job and "fans" start blaming the 7-8 hitters there are bigger problems on a team.  But hey, Ausmus is an easy fault to find, all you have to do is look at his low BA and lack of HRs and you have a reason the Cards are in the World Series and Brad is out surfing in San Diego.

If I remember correctly, and I'm sure someone will tell me if I remember wrong, after Chavez was sent down/cut/or whatever last season Oswalt was vocal about being upset about his catcher being gone.  I also remember that Oswalt ERA went down when Ausmus starting catching for him.

I guess a lower ERA by the pitching staff means shit if the catcher can't hit .300 with 15 homeruns.

Since the Ausmus discussion has been regurgitated again, does this mean the Everett one is scheduled for tomorrow?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Oh so youre just pissed off about the we'll suck with ausmus comment.

Nope.  Just amused at how stupid you are.

Quote:
Well i stand by that statement

I'm not surprised.

Quote:
but it looks like youre starting to understand why offense is more valuable at certain positions so whatever.

Whatever?  Are you a pre-teen?  And I will never understand offense having value differences.  Offense is offense, end of story.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I guess a lower ERA by the pitching staff means shit if the catcher can't hit .300 with 15 homeruns.

Quick, name Roger Clemens' best ERA season in the majors?

Quote:
Since the Ausmus discussion has been regurgitated again, does this mean the Everett one is scheduled for tomorrow?

Looks like it from here.  Nevermind Everett played perhaps the best shortstop in the National League next to Omar Vizquel.  It's amazing how Vizquel pulled out one of his best season ever on defense.  Of course, he played a park nuetral stadium in San Francisco while Everett try to help keep the run scoring down at Minute Maid park, the one time called Ten Run Field.

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
Quick, name Roger Clemens' best ERA season in the majors?

The season where he didnt have to pitch to a DH???

 

Quote:
Whatever? Are you a pre-teen? And I will never understand offense having value differences. Offense is offense, end of story.

Youre acting as if im argueing my opinion. Its not my opinion that this is so, its fact. Catchers dont hit, firstbasemen do. Therefore, a catcher that can hit as well as a firstbaseman is more valuable that the firstbaseman. Jesus, not even my 5 year old nephew would have a problem grasping such a concept.

Now do you want to argue with me why the sky isnt blue?

[Craig]

Quote:
Now do you want to argue with me why the sky isnt blue?

Who cares why the sky isn't blue? Just close the roof. Dumbass.

[JimR]

"catchers don't hit first basemen do"

now THAT is a brilliant statement.

[CarolinaStro]

Holy shit you guys must not be fans of MNF.  That was over four hours of your life that are gone forever.  However, it makes for entertaining Tuesday morning reading.  My only question is whether you guys were trying to be noble and pass on some knowledge or just toying with the little genius?  I bet he won his fantasy league this year, so maybe we should be thanking him for the advice.

My humble view...Ausmus is coming to the end of his fine career so it is time to either go with Gimenez at least with two pitchers or bring in another (Estrada from Ariz?) and start him with up to three pitchers.  Ausmus becomes mentor to the young guys and personal caddy to Andy, RC,and maybe RoyO...then one day pitching coach...then one day maybe manager.

Maybe then the Stros won't suck.  Hilarous.

[Phil_in_CS]

Quote:
Holy shit you guys must not be fans of MNF.  That was over four hours of your life that are gone forever.  

Speaking of a couple hours gone forever.... I watched the first half of MNF. Hard to top the Cowboys in suckitude.

Couple more World Series games then I think its time to turn the TV off for a couple months.

[Outlawscotty]

Maybe they need a better catcher?  Or is it pitcher?

[Alkie]

Quote:

Quote:
Ah.  Ha.

in other words: old

In any words, you are a child with almost no idea of how major league baseball seasons are won.  Congrats on winning your fantasy league.  We're not interested.

The  kiddie pool is here, but JimR is right; if you want to receive validation for your fantasy baseball based ideas, you'll be knighted by sundown  here.

Now, in all seriousness, either go away, or stop posting.  I'm not sure if you've noticed, but you're not teaching anyone anything other than the fact that you're not ready for this forum.

[lc_db]

Quote:
"catchers don't hit first basemen do"

now THAT is a brilliant statement.

Ask John Roseboro...

 ...a swing and a miss

[Limey]

Jumping in late here...

Quote:
It's still incredible to me that while watching the wonderful defense provided by the catcher for the Cardinals, that the value of a good to great reciever is lost to the run of the mill baseball fan.

The problem is that his opposite number is Pudge, who is the hitting catcher who every mouthbreathing fan thinks his team should have.  Shit, most of 'em would take Piazza for next season, actual catching be damned!

[Limey]

Quote:
Lot easier to find the left fielder too.  He can stand out in the outfield, swinging his air bat.

I see your Derek Bell, and raise you Roger Cedeno.

[Duke]

This is exactly to my point.  I wasn't bringing up the offensive v. defensive catcher.  Ausmus is our regular quy, but at 38 can you count on him to catch 4 games out of 5 a week?  It is pretty amazing that his knees haven't already given out

[pravata]

Quote:
Holy shit you guys must not be fans of MNF.  That was over four hours of your life that are gone forever.  However, it makes for entertaining Tuesday morning reading.  My only question is whether you guys were trying to be noble and pass on some knowledge or just toying with the little genius?  I bet he won his fantasy league this year, so maybe we should be thanking him for the advice.

My humble view...Ausmus is coming to the end of his fine career so it is time to either go with Gimenez at least with two pitchers or bring in another (Estrada from Ariz?) and start him with up to three pitchers.  Ausmus becomes mentor to the young guys and personal caddy to Andy, RC,and maybe RoyO...then one day pitching coach...then one day maybe manager.

Maybe then the Stros won't suck.  Hilarous.

One from column A, and one from column B.  A lot can be learned from this website, but if you have an agenda, you're lost.  I also think Brad is going to be surfing in 08 (coaching in 09), but he'll likely catch 120 games in 07.  Purpura has said that he'd like to get some offense at catcher.  They're not as clueless as some of these stat geeks believe.  The thing about Ausmus is that they reacquired him after trying a young catcher whose skills were primarily offensive.  Literally.  

Ausmus came back to a team with guys like Alou, Bagwell, Kent, Biggio.  His offensive contribution was not needed.  Fitting parts of a team is a lot more complicated than getting 30 homeruns at every position.  

If the Astros could trade for a catcher like that it would be great.  However, they have many other problems with easier solutions.

[Limey]

Quote:
Ausmus of course, but i got no doubt in my mind that we would of won the WS with a guy like mccann or mauer. But catchers like that are just impossible to get.

I agree with you.  I'm sure there's no doubt in your mind that we would've won the WS with someone like mccann or mauer.

Just a question, though:  Who was the biggest black hole on offense during the WS?

[MikeyBoy]

Quote:
I find it absolutely amazing that the one position some "fans" think has to be changed for more offense is catcher.  Never mind that a certain RF and 3B didn't produce enough offense.  (And no, I don't mean Huff, if Ensberg and Lane had done their job the Astros wouldn't have traded for Huff.)  If the 1-6 hitters aren't doing their job and "fans" start blaming the 7-8 hitters there are bigger problems on a team.  But hey, Ausmus is an easy fault to find, all you have to do is look at his low BA and lack of HRs and you have a reason the Cards are in the World Series and Brad is out surfing in San Diego.

Exactly, BG. It takes zero baseball acumen to lay the failures of the team at the feet of management and the light hitting defensive specialists and what gets me is the manner in which these gems are paraded around like they just discovered remnants of the lost Mayan civilization.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:
This is exactly to my point.  I wasn't bringing up the offensive v. defensive catcher.  Ausmus is our regular quy, but at 38 can you count on him to catch 4 games out of 5 a week?  It is pretty amazing that his knees haven't already given out

You are right, he is amazing.  However, if they look to "replace" Ausmus, don't expect Piazza.  If anything, it will be another player like Ausmus, defense first (because the Astros value defense at the catcher position over run production) and any offense is a bonus.  Unless they can find that rare commodity of a good catcher who can also hit.  FYI, it's going to cost alot to land that player.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Ah.  Ha.

in other words: old

In any words, you are a child with almost no idea of how major league baseball seasons are won.  Congrats on winning your fantasy league.  We're not interested.

The  kiddie pool is here, but JimR is right; if you want to receive validation for your fantasy baseball based ideas, you'll be knighted by sundown  here.

Now, in all seriousness, either go away, or stop posting.  I'm not sure if you've noticed, but you're not teaching anyone anything other than the fact that you're not ready for this forum.

No its clear you and others like you have been brainwashed by the narrowminded views of certain head hanchos of this board, i doubt youve been a real indepth baseball fan for that long of your life. Youve yet to develop an opinion of your own on the subject.

Oh but booo hoooo i dont agree with everyone so why i dont i just leave cause thats how message boards work. Everyone agrees with everyone about everything or fuck off. Please

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Ah.  Ha.

in other words: old

In any words, you are a child with almost no idea of how major league baseball seasons are won.  Congrats on winning your fantasy league.  We're not interested.

The  kiddie pool is here, but JimR is right; if you want to receive validation for your fantasy baseball based ideas, you'll be knighted by sundown  here.

Now, in all seriousness, either go away, or stop posting.  I'm not sure if you've noticed, but you're not teaching anyone anything other than the fact that you're not ready for this forum.

No its clear you and others like you have been brainwashed by the narrowminded views of certain head hanchos of this board, i doubt youve been a real indepth baseball fan for that long of your life. Youve yet to develop an opinion of your own on the subject.

Oh but booo hoooo i dont agree with everyone so why i dont i just leave cause thats how message boards work. Everyone agrees with everyone about everything or fuck off. Please

Of course. It's not the feebleness of your, I was going to say "understanding", but that can't be right, that has failed to enlighten us.  We don't agree with you cause we all been hypmotized.

[Ty in Tampa]

Quote:
Of course. It's not the feebleness of your, I was going to say "understanding", but that can't be right, that has failed to enlighten us.  We don't agree with you cause we all been hypmotized.

I think it might be time for 'strosrays 'progressions of the troll' checklist.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Ah.  Ha.

in other words: old

In any words, you are a child with almost no idea of how major league baseball seasons are won.  Congrats on winning your fantasy league.  We're not interested.

The  kiddie pool is here, but JimR is right; if you want to receive validation for your fantasy baseball based ideas, you'll be knighted by sundown  here.

Now, in all seriousness, either go away, or stop posting.  I'm not sure if you've noticed, but you're not teaching anyone anything other than the fact that you're not ready for this forum.

No its clear you and others like you have been brainwashed by the narrowminded views of certain head hanchos of this board, i doubt youve been a real indepth baseball fan for that long of your life. Youve yet to develop an opinion of your own on the subject.

Oh but booo hoooo i dont agree with everyone so why i dont i just leave cause thats how message boards work. Everyone agrees with everyone about everything or fuck off. Please

Of course. It's not the feebleness of your, I was going to say "understanding", but that can't be right, that has failed to enlighten us.  We don't agree with you cause we all been hypmotized.

no brainwashed/lobotomized, theres a difference

[Phil_in_CS]

Quote:

Oh but booo hoooo i dont agree with everyone so why i dont i just leave cause thats how message boards work. Everyone agrees with everyone about everything or fuck off. Please

It always amazes me that people somehow think that this site, and millions of others like it, are any but private clubs. Someone pays the rent on this place, someone does the maintence, someone sets the rules.

And they let the rest of us in to play, and for that I'm quite thankful.

If you walked up to a house with a group of guys watching a game on TV, and barged in, they'd kick your ass or call the cops. If you showed up with a 12 pack, they might let you in. But if you pick a fight and call them idiots, you're back to getting your ass kicked. There's no ass kicking in the virtual world, but you can get banned.

And if you think people around here always agree with each other, you haven't been reading much.

[Limey]

Quote:
No its clear you and others like you have been brainwashed by the narrowminded views of certain head hanchos of this board, i doubt youve been a real indepth baseball fan for that long of your life. Youve yet to develop an opinion of your own on the subject.

Oh but booo hoooo i dont agree with everyone so why i dont i just leave cause thats how message boards work. Everyone agrees with everyone about everything or fuck off. Please

We are all lost causes.  Your time would be better spent saving others from their ignorance elsewhere.

[das]

 

Quote:
I hope not, he's a waste of space.  

After being gone a few days, I come back and am a mere 5 posts down in this thread of 5 or 6 pages and thought I would pause for a moment to say, "this is the single greatest post in storied TZ history".  It's just perfect on so many levels.  Thanks.

[homer]

 

Quote:
Oh but booo hoooo i dont agree with everyone so why i dont i just leave cause thats how message boards work. Everyone agrees with everyone about everything or fuck off. Please

You have an opinion which everyone seems to think is full of shit, mainly because you can't back it up. Also, you aren't the first person to have this opinion, nor the first person to come to this forum and try to sell the opinion... unsuccessfully. Search on barzilla.

I don't think that anyone here wants to deny you of your opinion. You can think whatever the fuck you want. The people here, however, have tried to educate you as to why your opinion is full of shit.

Jim has been not so nice, but that is the way it is. If that bothers you, use the ignore feature of the forum.

Hudson and Noe have been somewhat patient. Once again, they aren't here to hold your hand and make sure everyone feels included... they are here to talk about baseball.

pravata has given you the facts.

Alkie has been Alkie.

Through all of this, you continue to insist that others must agree with you or somehow validate your opinion. And then you whine about it when they don't. And then you want to criticize the lack of give and take on the message board because we are all hypnotized and unable to recognize your brilliance... This is why you can fuck off. This is why spack will pay a visit.

Several people have suggested you read more and post less. I think you should heed their advice. You might accidentally consider a possibility that hadn't occured to you before, and consequently learn something.

As an aside, Alkie's suggestions of other places to visit can be taken as an insult, but they are valid. barzilla (I hope you took the time to search on him) found his home at Astrosdaily, and I am sure that everyone (here and there) is happier for it.

[pravata]

Quote:
...no brainwashed/lobotomized, theres a difference

I think you'll find that on the subject of the effect of Brad Ausmus on the Astros offense, the opinion in the TZ is very different from what you'll hear from the vasty goober universe of baseball talk.  In fact, the consensus of these mouth breathers most resembles what you're trying to foist on us. Are you just scraping around for more zombies for your gooberverse?

[Alkie]

Quote:
No its clear you and others like you have been brainwashed

Let me explain how this works.  Everyone is free to not only think what they want, but choose how to learn it.  Me?  I like to use a handy little thing called the Scientific Method.  Observable, repeatable, testable.  That sort of thing.  

I've been a full time religious fan of baseball longer than you've been alive.  

In those years, I have learned from people who played the game, managed the game, umpired the game, wrote about the game, administered the game, accounted for the game, called the game, turned a profit on the game, lost money on the game, and most importantly won the game.

Do I think that what I know is the end-all-be-all?  Not by damn sight.  I have thoughts that could evolve into better ways of observing the game of baseball.  But not from you, apparently.

What you have failed to understand from the beginning of your time here is this...we aren't the brainwashed ones here, Junior, you are.  We all started where you are right now; most of us in Little League or younger.  Thru the years of education and experience, we have learned that what you are trying to "teach us" is not only backwards and small-minded, but not very well thought out.  Your ideas?  They're not your's.  

We aren't brainwashed here by the leaders of some cult, you dumbass.  We're here because we want to be with like-minded people who aren't just casual fans of the game, or who did well in fantasy league last year.  You, at this point in your posting career, are a rank amateur.  Your posts are poorly constructed, unsubstantiated, arrogant, ignorant, and most of all...wrong.  

Do you think Gerry Hunsicker was a moron?  I'm actually asking you.  Did you think he was a MORON.  Do you think he didn't know what he was getting when he REaquired Brad Ausmus?  When he said "we'd like that back now, please"?  

Your "understanding" of how a team is put together to win games, when put in real life, real world situations (were you aware that baseball is a business?  I didn't think so) is lacking.  

For the billionth time, we aren't here to "talk baseball."  That's what those other two sites are for.  Use them.  They'll LOVE you there.  We are a group of like-minded people here who respect each other's opinions about the Astros, Houston, life in general, turtles, whatever.  

You not only don't respect anyone here, you have done nothing to earn our respect.  You are a child, and not because you are younger than us.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
...no brainwashed/lobotomized, theres a difference

I think you'll find that on the subject of the effect of Brad Ausmus on the Astros offense, the opinion in the TZ is very different from what you'll hear from the vasty goober universe of baseball talk.  In fact, the consensus of these mouth breathers most resembles what you're trying to foist on us. Are you just scraping around for more zombies for your gooberverse?

And i think thats exactly why youre in love with ausmus, because its public opinion that he sucks. I dont like dumbass public opinion either but they just happen to be right in this case.

Itd take godly historical D to make up for a .230/.308/.285 line, which ausmus is no where near. You can make a case for everett, but ausmus is just laughable.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
No its clear you and others like you have been brainwashed

Let me explain how this works.  Everyone is free to not only think what they want, but choose how to learn it.  Me?  I like to use a handy little thing called the Scientific Method.  Observable, repeatable, testable.  That sort of thing.  

I've been a full time religious fan of baseball longer than you've been alive.  

In those years, I have learned from people who played the game, managed the game, umpired the game, wrote about the game, administered the game, accounted for the game, called the game, turned a profit on the game, lost money on the game, and most importantly won the game.

Do I think that what I know is the end-all-be-all?  Not by damn sight.  I have thoughts that could evolve into better ways of observing the game of baseball.  But not from you, apparently.

What you have failed to understand from the beginning of your time here is this...we aren't the brainwashed ones here, Junior, you are.  We all started where you are right now; most of us in Little League or younger.  Thru the years of education and experience, we have learned that what you are trying to "teach us" is not only backwards and small-minded, but not very well thought out.  Your ideas?  They're not your's.  

We aren't brainwashed here by the leaders of some cult, you dumbass.  We're here because we want to be with like-minded people who aren't just casual fans of the game, or who did well in fantasy league last year.  You, at this point in your posting career, are a rank amateur.  Your posts are poorly constructed, unsubstantiated, arrogant, ignorant, and most of all...wrong.  

Do you think Gerry Hunsicker was a moron?  I'm actually asking you.  Did you think he was a MORON.  Do you think he didn't know what he was getting when he REaquired Brad Ausmus?  When he said "we'd like that back now, please"?  

Your "understanding" of how a team is put together to win games, when put in real life, real world situations (were you aware that baseball is a business?  I didn't think so) is lacking.  

For the billionth time, we aren't here to "talk baseball."  That's what those other two sites are for.  Use them.  They'll LOVE you there.  We are a group of like-minded people here who respect each other's opinions about the Astros, Houston, life in general, turtles, whatever.  

You not only don't respect anyone here, you have done nothing to earn our respect.  You are a child, and not because you are younger than us.

In other more simpler words: Im old, youre not so im right and youre wrong. Ok i got it, thats all you had to say.

[Alkie]

Quote:

In other more simpler words: Im old, youre not so im right and youre wrong. Ok i got it, thats all you had to say.

If that's what you read from my post, you're dumber than I ever imagined.  

Read the last line again.

Your age is somewhat irrelevant at this point.  Your inability to construct a single valid point is what pisses us off.

[Trey]

Quote:

In other more simpler words: Im old, youre not so im right and youre wrong. Ok i got it, thats all you had to say.

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, is it?

[Alkie]

Well, neither was punctuation, but I was willing to let that go.

[Lefty]

Quote:
In other more simpler words: Im old, youre not so im right and youre wrong. Ok i got it, thats all you had to say.

Except that's exactly *not* what he said.  You're either illiterate or disingenuous.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:

In other more simpler words: Im old, youre not so im right and youre wrong. Ok i got it, thats all you had to say.

If that's what you read from my post, you're dumber than I ever imagined.  

Read the last line again.

Your age is somewhat irrelevant at this point.  Your inability to construct a single valid point is what pisses us off.

No thats exactly what you mean and you know it.

Yeah you really showed me wrong with your OWN valid points huh? Please

[BudGirl]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
No its clear you and others like you have been brainwashed

Let me explain how this works.  Everyone is free to not only think what they want, but choose how to learn it.  Me?  I like to use a handy little thing called the Scientific Method.  Observable, repeatable, testable.  That sort of thing.  

I've been a full time religious fan of baseball longer than you've been alive.  

In those years, I have learned from people who played the game, managed the game, umpired the game, wrote about the game, administered the game, accounted for the game, called the game, turned a profit on the game, lost money on the game, and most importantly won the game.

Do I think that what I know is the end-all-be-all?  Not by damn sight.  I have thoughts that could evolve into better ways of observing the game of baseball.  But not from you, apparently.

What you have failed to understand from the beginning of your time here is this...we aren't the brainwashed ones here, Junior, you are.  We all started where you are right now; most of us in Little League or younger.  Thru the years of education and experience, we have learned that what you are trying to "teach us" is not only backwards and small-minded, but not very well thought out.  Your ideas?  They're not your's.  

We aren't brainwashed here by the leaders of some cult, you dumbass.  We're here because we want to be with like-minded people who aren't just casual fans of the game, or who did well in fantasy league last year.  You, at this point in your posting career, are a rank amateur.  Your posts are poorly constructed, unsubstantiated, arrogant, ignorant, and most of all...wrong.  

Do you think Gerry Hunsicker was a moron?  I'm actually asking you.  Did you think he was a MORON.  Do you think he didn't know what he was getting when he REaquired Brad Ausmus?  When he said "we'd like that back now, please"?  

Your "understanding" of how a team is put together to win games, when put in real life, real world situations (were you aware that baseball is a business?  I didn't think so) is lacking.  

For the billionth time, we aren't here to "talk baseball."  That's what those other two sites are for.  Use them.  They'll LOVE you there.  We are a group of like-minded people here who respect each other's opinions about the Astros, Houston, life in general, turtles, whatever.  

You not only don't respect anyone here, you have done nothing to earn our respect.  You are a child, and not because you are younger than us.

In other more simpler words: Im old, youre not so im right and youre wrong. Ok i got it, thats all you had to say.

Damm kids.

[Alkie]

Quote:

There are valid points that can be made about the difference between Ausmus and Piazza defensively, but this isn't one of them. Who was catching the pitchers who pitched their way to the 2000 NL pennant? The "Count the Rings" and similar arguments can get really lame.

Totally agree with you.  The Count the Rings game is somewhat silly and not a very good judge of who is more talented, or in this case, better for their teams.  

But what IS a decent judge, is how often that team made the playoffs.

Why?

Because the teams that won rings performed well in a short series (or two or three).  Anything can happen in those short series.  The best team doesn't always win.

But in a full season of 162 games, which takes 6 months to play, I think it's pretty safe to say that the best team ALWAYS wins (and makes it to the playoffs).  Even with the Cards collapse at the end of the year, they won the division because over the course of the season, they were a better team, who won more and loss less than the Astros.

My point about how many playoff appearances Piazza had vs Ausmus is still somewhat invalid, however it is relevant.  It is relevant because it shows that over almost 15 years, a team has been just as likely to make the playoffs with Brad Ausmus as it's every-day-catcher as with Mike Piazza.  They fill different roles, but my point was...Brad Ausmus doesn't keep his team out of the playoffs any more than Mike Piazza keeps HIS team out of the playoffs.

That was why I brought that up.

It takes a moron to say Jeff Conine is a "better player" than Jeff Bagwell because he has more rings; so you were absolutely right about that.

[BudGirl]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

In other more simpler words: Im old, youre not so im right and youre wrong. Ok i got it, thats all you had to say.

If that's what you read from my post, you're dumber than I ever imagined.  

Read the last line again.

Your age is somewhat irrelevant at this point.  Your inability to construct a single valid point is what pisses us off.

No thats exactly what you mean and you know it.

Yeah you really showed me wrong with your OWN valid points huh? Please

Technically, he did, you just chose to ignore it.

[Alkie]

Quote:
No thats exactly what you mean and you know it.

Yeah you really showed me wrong with your OWN valid points huh? Please

Oh, I get it.  I used actual valid points to prove why no one is listening to your argument, but because they don't agree with you, you will be a sallypants little pussy and say "whatever!" and "pu-lease!".  

I said what I meant and meant what I said.  

Let me say what I mean again:

You are a dumbass and an imbecile.  Not to mention, a gigantic hypocrite.  You not only don't understand what you're talking about, you're incapable of seeing that you are wrong, need learning, and have the charisma of a screaming child in a fancy restaurant.  

I don't dislike you because you are 22.  I dislike you because you think and talk and act like a 15 year old who has just figured out how online forums work and want to make sure the world knows just how brilliant you are.

[Bench]

Quote:
Well, neither was punctuation, but I was willing to let that go.

At least he finally figured out how to capitalize words.

[Alkie]

See!  He IS learning something here.

OWA worked for me!

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
...no brainwashed/lobotomized, theres a difference

I think you'll find that on the subject of the effect of Brad Ausmus on the Astros offense, the opinion in the TZ is very different from what you'll hear from the vasty goober universe of baseball talk.  In fact, the consensus of these mouth breathers most resembles what you're trying to foist on us. Are you just scraping around for more zombies for your gooberverse?

And i think thats exactly why youre in love with ausmus, because its public opinion that he sucks. I dont like dumbass public opinion either but they just happen to be right in this case.

Itd take godly historical D to make up for a .230/.308/.285 line, which ausmus is no where near. You can make a case for everett, but ausmus is just laughable.

OK, as I was saying about the Astros offense...HANG ON!... What. The. Hell. Is. This.?.!.  Do you mean to tell me that Brad Ausmus is NOT a great batsman?  How freakin long has this been going on?  Quick, call the Astros, they need to know this immediately.  What a revelation! And you used only three of those, what are they called? numb-bers? to point it out.  Bless you.  We might have gone years without figuring out Brad Ausmus wasn't carrying the Astros.  You're a certifiable genus.

[Limey]

Quote:
Itd take godly historical D to make up for a .230/.308/.285 line, which ausmus is no where near. You can make a case for everett, but ausmus is just laughable.

The Astros needed more offense, no one is disputing this with you.  If they could acquire a catcher who could handle his defensive job somewhere close to Ausmus' talent, and hit better, then the offense would be upgraded and almost everyone (but not everyone) would be happy about that.

But offense is far easier to find in players you can play in the corners of the outfield or on the corners of the infield.  In these positions, the Astros consistently fielded a combination of the following:

Berkman
Lamb
Scott
Ensberg
Huff
Burke
Lane

Ignoring Berkman, Lamb and Scott who hit well, the other 4 ranked from barely adequate to downright horrendous.  Now, given that catcher is a very difficult and specialised defensive position, wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to upgrade the offense by replacing one of these players?

[Alkie]

Limey, we've already figured out that our new friend here isn't interested in winning, he is interested in value.

[Limey]

Quote:
Limey, we've already figured out that our new friend here isn't interested in winning, he is interested in value.

I'm talking about winning.  I haven't forgotten watching the White Sox pitch around Berkman to get to a clueless Ensberg.  In that series, the Astros would've been better with Ausmus at 3rd, HH catching and Ensberg at home.

[Alkie]

What was HH's EqA that year?

[Limey]

Quote:
What was HH's EqA that year?

Deuce...deuce and a half.

[Alkie]

Well, our new friend left.

Now what are we going to play with until February?

[das]

What is that picture?  That's horrific.

[Alkie]

Are you fucking kidding?  You don't know what that is?

That's the Dandy going to work on the Holmes here with a baseball bat and a blowtorch.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
Itd take godly historical D to make up for a .230/.308/.285 line, which ausmus is no where near. You can make a case for everett, but ausmus is just laughable.

The Astros needed more offense, no one is disputing this with you.  If they could acquire a catcher who could handle his defensive job somewhere close to Ausmus' talent, and hit better, then the offense would be upgraded and almost everyone (but not everyone) would be happy about that.

But offense is far easier to find in players you can play in the corners of the outfield or on the corners of the infield.  In these positions, the Astros consistently fielded a combination of the following:

Berkman
Lamb
Scott
Ensberg
Huff
Burke
Lane

Ignoring Berkman, Lamb and Scott who hit well, the other 4 ranked from barely adequate to downright horrendous.  Now, given that catcher is a very difficult and specialised defensive position, wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to upgrade the offense by replacing one of these players?

Oh sweet, someone asked me a question without calling me names.

You see if ausmus wasnt signed to a crazy 2 year deal, his 4 million would be off the books and we could upgrade to someone like molina for probably 6 or 7 mil. This offensive upgrade ALONE could make up for LF deficiencies youd think wed have in left field.

So lets say scott could hit around .300 and give us about 25 homers in left field for next year(which isnt asking a whole lot) and molina could give us about 20 homers and numbers a little better than his career avg. which also isnt much considering mmp. Now instead of carlos lee and brad ausmus, you have luke scott and bengie molina in your lineup.

The offensive upgrade molina gives you over ausmus is just as good as the offensive upgrade lee gives you over scott. And you didnt have to spend 15 mil a year for 5 years to get it. This then brings me back to my point about how we need competent hitters throughout the lineup rather than just 1 or 2 superstars like everyone here suggests.

And this isnt even factoring in that scott plays LF better than lee and molina is a better defensive catcher(with a ring alkie!) than ausmus.

But considering ausmus makes a guaranteed 4 mil this year we're gonna have to overspend to get lee if we're gonna upgrade the offense. Now if we can get molina AND have lee, well that would be gravy.

[Alkie]

I don't know why, but I'm going to assume the ring line directed at me was a joke.

Ok, so you get your Lee and your Molina.  Who is going to pitch for this team?

[Alkie]

Let's start over.

Say, suprisinglylongnickname, if you could put together the 07 Astros, who would you have?

[das]

My baseball (and Astros) experience began in 1979 and kicked on in earnest during the last month of '80.  Most of my "fan-ness" has been looking forward.  I understand references to the '27 Yankees and appreciate the accomplishments of JR Richards through stats but have no tangible experience with either or the myriad baseball histories before '79.

[Alkie]

Got it.

I don't remember the lead-up, but when the Giants were playing the hated Dodgers, Juan Marichal felt the need to go LAPD on Johnny Roseboro (the Dodger catcher).  It was pretty incredible, as the photo shows.

[EasTexAstro]

Quote:
You see if ausmus wasnt signed to a crazy 2 year deal, his 4 million would be off the books and we could upgrade to someone like molina for probably 6 or 7 mil. This offensive upgrade ALONE could make up for LF deficiencies youd think wed have in left field.

So lets say scott could hit around .300 and give us about 25 homers in left field for next year(which isnt asking a whole lot) and molina could give us about 20 homers and numbers a little better than his career avg. which also isnt much considering mmp.  

This is a joke, isn't it?

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
I don't know why, but I'm going to assume the ring line directed at me was a joke.

Ok, so you get your Lee and your Molina.  Who is going to pitch for this team?

oswalt, pettitte, hirsh, FA(lilly, meche, someone like that), and sampson

qualls, nieve, wheeler, lidge, estrada, t-mills, and wood in the pen. yes THAT wood

ausmus can catch pettitte every 5th day if pettitte bitches at me

[BudGirl]

Quote:

Quote:
I don't know why, but I'm going to assume the ring line directed at me was a joke.

Ok, so you get your Lee and your Molina.  Who is going to pitch for this team?

oswalt, pettitte, hirsh, FA(lilly, meche, someone like that), and sampson

qualls, nieve, wheeler, lidge, estrada, t-mills, and wood in the pen. yes THAT wood

ausmus can catch pettitte every 5th day if pettitte bitches at me

What if Oswalt bitches about it?  

Does t-mills=Trevor Miller?

[Phil_in_CS]

Quote:
Got it.

I don't remember the lead-up, but when the Giants were playing the hated Dodgers, Juan Marichal felt the need to go LAPD on Johnny Roseboro (the Dodger catcher).  It was pretty incredible, as the photo shows.

I hadn't heard of it either.  The Link

[Alkie]

You just lost 96 games and came in 4th in the NL Central.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
You just lost 96 games and came in 4th in the NL Central.

Haha, and which 3 teams have a better roster than that?

Coards have more holes than us, cubs suck, and the rest disgusts me

[Phil_in_CS]

Wikipedia says Roseboro caught 4 Dodger World Series, of which they won 3. He batted .157 in those series.

hum......

[Limey]

Quote:
You see if ausmus wasnt signed to a crazy 2 year deal, his 4 million would be off the books and we could upgrade to someone like molina for probably 6 or 7 mil. This offensive upgrade ALONE could make up for LF deficiencies youd think wed have in left field.

This goes to the heart of my question:  why concentrate on upgrading the offense you get out of catcher, where the incumbent bats at #8, when you have Ensberg and Huff sucking wind at the traditional slugger's position of 3B, and Huff, Lane and Burke sucking wind at the traditional slugger's positions of the corner outfield?

Oh, and Molina's club has an option on him for 2007, so he might not even be available.  Free agent catchers this year  (to date) are: Sal Fasano, Ken Huckaby, Javy Lopez, Mike Mahoney, Greg Myers and Keith Osik.

Quote:
So lets say scott could hit around .300 and give us about 25 homers in left field for next year(which isnt asking a whole lot) and molina could give us about 20 homers and numbers a little better than his career avg. which also isnt much considering mmp. Now instead of carlos lee and brad ausmus, you have luke scott and bengie molina in your lineup.

Or the Astros could field better outfielders than Burke and Lane, or a better 3Ber than Ensberg or Huff.

Quote:
The offensive upgrade molina gives you over ausmus is just as good as the offensive upgrade lee gives you over scott. And you didnt have to spend 15 mil a year for 5 years to get it. This then brings me back to my point about how we need competent hitters throughout the lineup rather than just 1 or 2 superstars like everyone here suggests.

So why are you fixated the most specialised defensive position, when there are SIX other positions (i.e. excluding pitcher and wherever berkman plays) from where the Astros could really do with getting more production?  You are twisting yourself like a pretzel to justify replacing Ausmus (with Molina who, again, may well not be available), when you could just get a left-fielder who can hit better than Huff and/or a third baseman who can hit better than Ensberg.

Quote:
And this isnt even factoring in that scott plays LF better than lee and molina is a better defensive catcher(with a ring alkie!) than ausmus.

So are you arguing for or against getting Lee?  I'm confused. And Molina still has that club option hanging over his head.

Quote:
But considering ausmus makes a guaranteed 4 mil this year we're gonna have to overspend to get lee if we're gonna upgrade the offense. Now if we can get molina AND have lee, well that would be gravy.

All of this predicated on getting Molina as a free agent - which he isn't - and for 7 million tops - which is unlikely (he has a ring, you know).

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Oh sweet, someone asked me a question without calling me names.

This is childish.  If you want to make your point, I suggest you get to it quickly because most people around here will ignore you if this is how you start your post.

Quote:
You see if ausmus wasnt signed to a crazy 2 year deal, his 4 million would be off the books and we could upgrade to someone like molina for probably 6 or 7 mil. This offensive upgrade ALONE could make up for LF deficiencies youd think wed have in left field.

Context.  You are ignoring the context that led to that "crazy 2 year deal".  One Roger Clemens repeatedly stated he wanted Brad Ausmus as his catcher.  You can question the logic of cow-towing to someone like Clemens.  I don't.  Do I like the drama?  Hell no.  But I do like watching him pitch.  Second, you may want to re-evaluate the offensive upgrade Molina would provide.   In scoring position at bats, Ausmus generated 37 RBI compared to 40 RBI for Molina (that's in a relatively comparable number of ABs too 121 for Ausmus, 113 for Molina).  

I would also suggest you reassess your knowledge of the role of catcher before you conclude that Molina is as good, let alone better, than Ausmus.  Catchers responsibilities inlude framing pitches, calling pitches (in some situations), blocking pitches, knowledge of opposing hitters, knowledge of pitchers mechanics, and holding runners.  There are others but I think I've captured the primary areas.  Ausmus no longer throws out runners at the rate he used to, although that does not consider the pitchers role in that challenge.  However, he is among the best (Matheny being the only one close) at the rest.  Don't dismiss that so easily.  

Quote:
So lets say scott could hit around .300 and give us about 25 homers in left field for next year(which isnt asking a whole lot) and molina could give us about 20 homers and numbers a little better than his career avg. which also isnt much considering mmp. Now instead of carlos lee and brad ausmus, you have luke scott and bengie molina in your lineup.

Actually, asking Scott to give that much is asking alot.  Considering he had only 200 ABs last season, you can't expect him to produce at that level for an entire season.  As it is, his avg and OBP dropped 100pts each over the last month.  At some point, the league develops a "book" on every hitter.  How well he succeeds over the long haul will be determined by how well he adjusts to the "book" that is developed on him.  I'm not saying Scott is not promising, but he's a long way from guaranteed production at the levels you suggest.  

Molina has never hit 20 homeruns in a single season in his career.  Stop assuming MMP is an easy place to hit.  

Quote:
The offensive upgrade molina gives you over ausmus is just as good as the offensive upgrade lee gives you over scott. And you didnt have to spend 15 mil a year for 5 years to get it. This then brings me back to my point about how we need competent hitters throughout the lineup rather than just 1 or 2 superstars like everyone here suggests.

This is all pre-supposition that Scott produces at that level and Molina hits 20 homeruns.  Looking at RBI, Molina drove in 17 more runs in 2006.  That was roughly in the same number of ABs (although Ausmus walks a whole lot more) over 117 games(20 games fewer than Ausmus).  That is, roughly 1 RBI more than Ausmus, every 8 games compared to Ausmus . Is that going to make a difference over what Ausmus does offensively?  I doubt it.  

Everyone here agrees, this team needs better hitters in the lineup.  Catcher, Ausmus specifically, is not the problem.  Ensberg, Wilson before his release, and Lane did not produce.  You could even include Biggio and yes, most people here recognize he's not producing like he used to.  That's not why he gets PT at this point.  

Quote:
And this isnt even factoring in that scott plays LF better than lee and molina is a better defensive catcher(with a ring alkie!) than ausmus.

But considering ausmus makes a guaranteed 4 mil this year we're gonna have to overspend to get lee if we're gonna upgrade the offense. Now if we can get molina AND have lee, well that would be gravy.

Now you want to discuss positional defense?  LF is a position the Astros do not emphasize defense so much as offensive production.  In other words, they are more likely to put a defensively limited LF in the lineup if he hits like Lee, or Scott over his short season.  There are also other reasons why a RH power hitter is critical to this team, which Noe could explain far better than I.  In summary, it involves late inning strategy regarding the team's best hitter, Berkman, and the ability to turn him around with a LH reliever, and not have to worry about pulling the lefty specialist because  the #4 and #5 hitters are left handed hitters.

[Limey]

Quote:
Haha, and which 3 teams have a better roster than that?

Coards have more holes than us, cubs suck, and the rest disgusts me

The Brewers will have a better rotation, perhaps even the Pirates.  And I think the Astros have ambitions to be competitive outside the NL Central.  Like in the playoffs.

[pravata]

Quote:
... Catchers responsibilities inlude framing pitches, calling pitches (in some situations), blocking pitches, knowledge of opposing hitters, knowledge of pitchers mechanics, and holding runners.  There are others but I think I've captured the primary areas.  ...

You forgot being a pitching coach on the field with the ability to go to the mound as much as the home plate ump will allow.  During one game this season, Garner was ejected, Ausmus reminded Cecil Cooper what the dugout signs were and relayed them to the players and coaches.

[Alkie]

Quote:
Haha, and which 3 teams have a better roster than that?

Coards have more holes than us, cubs suck, and the rest disgusts me

This is not a real answer.  Try again.  The rotation you just gave us is worse than the Brewers, the Cards, and the Reds.  

Plus, your "disgust" of the other teams could not be less relevant.

[Alkie]

Ok, answer this for me.

You have two baseball teams in which one team gets to use the DH and one does not.

Both teams, except for the DH and the starting pitchers, are essentially the same team both defensively and in the lineup.  

The team with the DH gets to use ARod, Ortiz, whoever you want, but has Ted Lilly starting.  The other team has no DH, but has Barry Zito starting.

Which team do you think will win more often if this game is played, let's say, 162 times?

[Bench]

Quote:
Wikipedia says Roseboro caught 4 Dodger World Series, of which they won 3. He batted .157 in those series.

hum......

I can't believe that he only got an 8 game suspension and a $1750 fine for clubbing a guy over the head with a bat opening up a 2 inch gash requiring 14 stitches. If that happened now, the guy would be publically crucified. People wanted to suspend Delmon Young an entire season for tossing a bat at a minor league replacement ump. I can't imagine the media frenzy and "he needs to be made an example of" reaction that would occur today.

[Alkie]

While we're at this, answer this question for me as well: which correlates more to wins, better pitching/defense, or more runs-scored?

What I mean is...do teams that "score more" or teams that "keep the other team from scoring less" have a better chance of having a better record at the end of the year?  

There's a real answer to this using real (simple) statistics.  Don't fuck this up by trying to get cute.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
Haha, and which 3 teams have a better roster than that?

Coards have more holes than us, cubs suck, and the rest disgusts me

This is not a real answer.  Try again.  The rotation you just gave us is worse than the Brewers, the Cards, and the Reds.  

Plus, your "disgust" of the other teams could not be less relevant.

the coards whole rotation besides crapenter are FAs no one really knows what their rotation is and im sure whatever junk they find wont be better than ours. the reds rotation is overrated and i really dont like it. brewers rotation could be ok but they wont be much better than they were in 05.

 

Quote:
The team with the DH gets to use ARod, Ortiz, whoever you want, but has Ted Lilly starting. The other team has no DH, but has Barry Zito starting.

Which team do you think will win more often if this game is played, let's say, 162 times?  

If i got to pick any lineup i wanted, zitos team would be lucky to win more than 30 or 40 times. zito really isnt that much better than a healthy lilly to begin with so i dont see why youd even ask that. whoever gives zito 90 million is incredibly stupid cause he just isnt that great, roy kicks his ass and zito will still make much more than him

 

Quote:
What I mean is...do teams that "score more" or teams that "keep the other team from scoring less" have a better chance of having a better record at the end of the year?  

Pitching wins? Is that want you want me to say? Ok pitching wins whatever its not like im saying it doesnt.

Ive been giving you reasonable moves we could make to help us get better. Shit yeah id want zito and schmidt in our rotation but to even think about that scenerio is just a dream so im not gonna bother with it.

And if you really want to waste so much money on pitchers lets spend it on someone thats actually pretty good: The Link

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
This goes to the heart of my question: why concentrate on upgrading the offense you get out of catcher, where the incumbent bats at #8, when you have Ensberg and Huff sucking wind at the traditional slugger's position of 3B, and Huff, Lane and Burke sucking wind at the traditional slugger's positions of the corner outfield?

Because its simply the easiest and cheapest position to fix. Let me know if you can find a cheap available thirdbaseman that can provide as much of an upgrade over ensberg or huff that molina does over ausmus. Same for our other weaks spots, there just arent any easy and cheap ways to upgrade without really overspending or trading guys we need. I havent really looked at CF free agents but if there was someone we could get cheaply and could hit significantly better than taveras than id want him too. And burke should be at 2b the day after biggio gets 3000.

 

Quote:
Oh, and Molina's club has an option on him for 2007, so he might not even be available. Free agent catchers this year (to date) are: Sal Fasano, Ken Huckaby, Javy Lopez, Mike Mahoney, Greg Myers and Keith Osik.

The jays GM has already said they arent picking up his option so its only a formality now. He could still resign i guess but i doubt it.

[Alkie]

Quote:
If i got to pick any lineup i wanted, zitos team would be lucky to win more than 30 or 40 times.

You're really not very good at reading are you?  Let's try again.

TWO TEAMS.  They both have the SAME DEFENSE and the SAME LINEUPS EXCEPT for the DH.  Are you following me?  You're not picking the LINEUP, see, you're picking THE DH ONLY.  The rest of the team is the same as the team with no DH.  

NOW, try again.  Would a team starting Ted Lilly ("healthy" if it makes you feel better) and a DH of your choosing win more or less games than a team with no DH, but with Barry Zito starting?

Tell me 30-40 again, because I want a good reason to completely write you off.

I do like, however, how you manage to admit that you've learned (there's that word again) in here that pitching is more likely to win games than offense.  

Your inability to read the entire text of posts before replying is highly annoying.  I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt before I set you to "ignore."

[Alkie]

Quote:
Because its simply the easiest and cheapest position to fix.

Bengie Molina, hitting a lot higher in the batting order, created 8 more runs last year offensively than Brad Ausmus.  8.  That's worth an extra $3m a year?  Uh huh.

Wait a second, you're one of those guys that thinks that runs created by HR are worth more than other runs, aren't you?

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
If i got to pick any lineup i wanted, zitos team would be lucky to win more than 30 or 40 times.

You're really not very good at reading are you?  Let's try again.

TWO TEAMS.  They both have the SAME DEFENSE and the SAME LINEUPS EXCEPT for the DH.  Are you following me?  You're not picking the LINEUP, see, you're picking THE DH ONLY.  The rest of the team is the same as the team with no DH.  

NOW, try again.  Would a team starting Ted Lilly ("healthy" if it makes you feel better) and a DH of your choosing win more or less games than a team with no DH, but with Barry Zito starting?

Tell me 30-40 again, because I want a good reason to completely write you off.

I do like, however, how you manage to admit that you've learned (there's that word again) in here that pitching is more likely to win games than offense.  

Your inability to read the entire text of posts before replying is highly annoying.  I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt before I set you to "ignore."

oh i get it now

yeah i think pooholes would make a big enough difference for lilly to win more games. lilly pitches in the AL east while zito pitches in the craptacular al west and their numbers still arent tremendously apart

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
Because its simply the easiest and cheapest position to fix.

Bengie Molina, hitting a lot higher in the batting order, created 8 more runs last year offensively than Brad Ausmus.  8.  That's worth an extra $3m a year?  Uh huh.

Wait a second, you're one of those guys that thinks that runs created by HR are worth more than other runs, aren't you?

He created just 8 more runs? Thats odd, baseball reference tells me he created 25 more runs.

[Alkie]

Quote:
oh i get it now

yeah i think pooholes would make a big enough difference for lilly to win more games. lilly pitches in the AL east while zito pitches in the craptacular al west and their numbers still arent tremendously apart

Ok, so to recap:

Taveras
Biggio
Berkman
Encarnacion
Huff
Scott
Everett
Ausmus
Zito

Pitcher: Barry Zito

would lose more games than win against this team:

Taveras
Biggio
Berkman
Pujols
Encarnacion
Huff
Scott
Everett
Ausmus

Pitcher: Ted Lilly

That's what you're saying, right?

(To be very clear to everyone, I do not want Encarnacion, I am not advocating Encarnacion, I just needed an "average" RF to plug in.)

[Alkie]

Quote:


He created just 8 more runs? Thats odd, baseball reference tells me he created 25 more runs.

I'm using real runs, not some fantasy world bullshit.  Still don't get this, do you?  We're dealing in REAL RUNS, REAL WINS, REAL NUMBERS.  WE.  DON'T.  CARE.  ABOUT.  YOUR.  FAKE.  FANTASY.  STATS.

Last season, Brad Ausmus had 37 runs, 39 RBI, and 2 HR (runs created = 74).  Bengie Molina had 44 runs, 57 RBI, and 19 HR (runs created = 82).  82-74=8.

I don't care how many points he gave you in the Yahoo Fantasy Leagues.

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
That's what you're saying, right?  

Yeah, is that so hard to believe? Is there a reason why i shouldnt think that?

 

Quote:
 Last season, Brad Ausmus had 37 runs, 39 RBI, and 2 HR (runs created = 74). Bengie Molina had 44 runs, 57 RBI, and 19 HR (runs created = 82). 82-74=8.

runs created = ((hits+walks) x total bases))/(atbats + walks)

you see, smarter guys than either me or you have put alot of thought into how to value a hitter. forgive me if i take their word and not yours.

your formula makes no sense whatsoever, runs scored isnt really up to a hitter, rbi depend on opportunities and to subract homers from their total well that just makes me giggle

[austro]

Where is he subtracting home runs?

And you're right, RBI is lineup-dependent.  But, if anything, Molina's lineup circumstances should have offered him more opportunities than Ausmus' did.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Where is he subtracting home runs?

And you're right, RBI is lineup-dependent.  But, if anything, Molina's lineup circumstances should have offered him more opportunities than Ausmus' did.

His formula is RC = rbi + runs scored - homeruns

[Alkie]

Yep, we're done, you and me.  

You don't like baseball.  You like fantasy baseball.

If runs scored + runs driven in minus the stat that means duplication of those doesn't make sense to you, then I'm done.

I'm not even going to beg you to post less and read more.  I'm begging you to go away.  

Go somewhere where you can talk to the people who created meaningless made-up statistics and you can all feel better.

Wanna complete your journey of pissing off everyone in here?  Explain to us how your "runs created" translated to real actual on-the-field runs that helped a team win baseball games.

You were able to figure out that runs depend on someone else driving you in, were you not able to figure out that this meant you had to get yourself on in the first place?

[Alkie]

Quote:

Quote:
Where is he subtracting home runs?

And you're right, RBI is lineup-dependent.  But, if anything, Molina's lineup circumstances should have offered him more opportunities than Ausmus' did.

His formula is RC = rbi + runs scored - homeruns

He wasn't asking about MY formula, super genius, he understood me because mine made perfect sense.  REAL RUNS again, SEE?  He was asking where your mensa friend was subtracting HRs.

[Alkie]

Quote:
and to subract homers from their total well that just makes me giggle

You are actually a fucking moron.

You don't see why HRs would be subtracted??  Do you think those count as EXTRA runs??  Have you ever watched an actual game?

Edited to add: Let me ask you a question.  A man hits a solo HR.  He now has 1 run and 1 RBI.  How many runs did he create?  

[Alkie]

Quote:
runs created = ((hits+walks) x total bases))/(atbats + walks)

See what you have here?  This is the AVERAGE NUMBER OF BASES per PLATE APPEARANCE THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE SACS or HBP.  That's not creating runs.  That's bases per plate appearance.

At the end of the game, does the official scorer tally up the total average bases per plate appearance or the number of actual runs scored to figure out who won the game?  I'll give you a few minutes to figure this out.

Edited to add: See, using your formula, a man hitting one solo HR in one plate appearance has somehow created 4 runs.  You'll have to explain that to me.

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
Yep, we're done, you and me.  

Then quit asking me questions alkie, its obvious you care about what im telling you and want to learn more. If youre gonna ask me a question im gonna answer it, simple as that. Sorry if you dont like my opinion though

 

Quote:
Explain to us how your "runs created" translated to real actual on-the-field runs that helped a team win baseball games.

Its just a simple stat to help determine the quality of a hitter. RC is something really really simple, if youd like to hear the actual complicated stats ill look that up for you.

 

Quote:
 You were able to figure out that runs depend on someone else driving you in, were you not able to figure out that this meant you had to get yourself on in the first place?

Yes but once youre on base, things start to become out of your control on whether or not you get home. So you see, runs scored isnt a great stat to determine how good a person can hit. But obp is good to determine how well someone gets on.

 

Quote:
You are actually a fucking moron.

You don't see why HRs would be subtracted?? Do you think those count as EXTRA runs?? Have you ever watched an actual game?

Edited to add: Let me ask you a question. A man hits a solo HR. He now has 1 run and 1 RBI. How many runs did he create?  

Yes you asked the perfect question for why your forumla doesnt make sense. By your formula that man has 1 "runs created" but what does that tell you? If he gets 99 more atbats and doesnt get on base a single time then he still has 1 "runs created." So by your forumula that man has the same value of someone who just had 1 at bat with 1 homer which really isnt true.

By the real formula, a person who had 1 at bat with a homer would get a RC of 4. A person with 100 at bats and only 1 homer and nothing else has a RC of 1. You see this way you can tell that the guy with the 100 ab's is shittier, it doesnt depend on weak measurables like runs scored or rbi.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
runs created = ((hits+walks) x total bases))/(atbats + walks)

See what you have here?  This is the AVERAGE NUMBER OF BASES per PLATE APPEARANCE THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE SACS or HBP.  That's not creating runs.  That's bases per plate appearance.

At the end of the game, does the official scorer tally up the total average bases per plate appearance or the number of actual runs scored to figure out who won the game?  I'll give you a few minutes to figure this out.

Edited to add: See, using your formula, a man hitting one solo HR in one plate appearance has somehow created 4 runs.  You'll have to explain that to me.

I shouldnt of bothered with the complicated broken down version of it, its really just OBP times total bases.

Its really simple, someone who gets on base alot and hits for power is gonna have a RC higher than someone who doesnt. Someone who gets on base alot and hits for power is better than someone who doesnt. Thats just a simple way of determining how good a hitter is

[Alkie]

Quote:
weak measurables like runs scored or rbi.

Ok, chief.

You are aware that the weak measurable of "runs" is how we decide the winner of the game, yes?

Seriously, for both of us...let's just agree we think the other one is a blithering idiot and be happy with that.

[CarolinaStro]

Alkie. remember anger is a gift...

[Alkie]

Quote:
Thats just a simple way of determining how good a hitter is

Aaagh!  NO!  It's NOT.  It's an overcomplicated way to make up a number to make people feel better about not being able to watch a fucking game and tell you what they saw.  Your stat is MUCH less meaningful than "runs".  

Ok, here...do you think you're the first person to ever wander in here and try to show these "new school" stats to us?  Like, were you afraid we weren't aware they existed?  Or is it that you think we just don't understand them?

Let me show you again.

You came in here with a stat called RUNS CREATED.  

A man goes to the fucking plate and hits a solo HR.  According to your "runs created" he has 4 runs created.  According to my runs created he has 1 run created.

And you are telling me with a straight face that the formula you chose makes more sense.

Right.

[Alkie]

Quote:
Alkie. remember anger is a gift...

That's funny.  I was listening to that album on my way to vote yesterday.  First time I had pulled out that CD in about 8 years.  For some reason, it seemed appropriate.

[CarolinaStro]

Quote:

Quote:
Alkie. remember anger is a gift...

That's funny.  I was listening to that album on my way to vote yesterday.  First time I had pulled out that CD in about 8 years.  For some reason, it seemed appropriate.

Yea in sorta of the same scenario, I rewatched their live performance at the DNC in 2000.  Unfortunately, even RATM gives me no clarity in such matters....

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
Aaagh! NO! It's NOT. It's an overcomplicated way to make up a number to make people feel better about not being able to watch a fucking game and tell you what they saw. Your stat is MUCH less meaningful than "runs".  

Someone with a RC of 140 suggests they get on base alot and they have good power. Someone with a RC of 50 suggests they dont get on base very much and doesnt have much power.

Now if the person with a RC of 50 had enough opportunities he could easily get to 100 rbi even though he wasnt very good. And the person with a RC of 140 could be on a real shitty team and just not get very many opportunities and only get 100 rbi even though hes awesome.

Someone looking at just how many rbi they have would be mistaken to say theyre just as good as each other cause they have the same # of rbi.

 

Quote:
Ok, here...do you think you're the first person to ever wander in here and try to show these "new school" stats to us? Like, were you afraid we weren't aware they existed? Or is it that you think we just don't understand them?  

Well you seem so fascinated by said stats so i guess i did think that. I dont even know why im argueing about runs created its not even that great but its a better indication of a good hitter than rbi and runs scored.

[Alkie]

Ok, then let's use your awful stat for a second, then back into real world numbers.

You think, because Baseball Reference tells you the difference in runs created is 25, that if we signed Bengie Molina, he would actually create 25 more runs than Brad Ausmus?

Again, don't give me some bullshit metric that some geek cooked up to make himself feel better.  I want to know how many more wins we can expect with Molina instead of Ausmus based solely on offense.  I'm not even going to get into the defense side of it because you've already admitted that the observable part of the game (seeing/hearing) is meaningless to you.

[Limey]

Quote:

Quote:
This goes to the heart of my question: why concentrate on upgrading the offense you get out of catcher, where the incumbent bats at #8, when you have Ensberg and Huff sucking wind at the traditional slugger's position of 3B, and Huff, Lane and Burke sucking wind at the traditional slugger's positions of the corner outfield?

Because its simply the easiest and cheapest position to fix. Let me know if you can find a cheap available thirdbaseman that can provide as much of an upgrade over ensberg or huff that molina does over ausmus. Same for our other weaks spots, there just arent any easy and cheap ways to upgrade without really overspending or trading guys we need. I havent really looked at CF free agents but if there was someone we could get cheaply and could hit significantly better than taveras than id want him too. And burke should be at 2b the day after biggio gets 3000.

 

Quote:
Oh, and Molina's club has an option on him for 2007, so he might not even be available. Free agent catchers this year (to date) are: Sal Fasano, Ken Huckaby, Javy Lopez, Mike Mahoney, Greg Myers and Keith Osik.

The jays GM has already said they arent picking up his option so its only a formality now. He could still resign i guess but i doubt it.

Catcher is quite simply not the cheapest and easist position to "fix", by which you mean add offense.  And I did not limit my options to just third base.  There's two corner outfield spots that were, save Wilson's decent RBI numbers for part of the year, horrible.  The cheapest and easist way to improve the offense would be to add a right-handed power stick who can stand in LF without making a prick of himself.  He only has to out-slug Burke, Huff or Lane.

Big hitting catchers are an extreme rarity in baseball, perhaps only half a dozen in the majors.  Slugging outfielders are not - each team has at least two and should have three or four.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Ok, then let's use your awful stat for a second, then back into real world numbers.

You think, because Baseball Reference tells you the difference in runs created is 25, that if we signed Bengie Molina, he would actually create 25 more runs than Brad Ausmus?

Again, don't give me some bullshit metric that some geek cooked up to make himself feel better.  I want to know how many more wins we can expect with Molina instead of Ausmus based solely on offense.  I'm not even going to get into the defense side of it because you've already admitted that the observable part of the game (seeing/hearing) is meaningless to you.

Runs created is a RATE, remember, not a measurable. with a difference in 25 thats a 65% increase in RC. Now is that 65% in offensive production? I dont know exactly, but its a way of determining that molina is definitly a significant offensive upgrade over ausmus. Significant enough to assume it would of won atleast 2 more wins for us this year, which could mean wed still be playing ball right now rather than the shithead coards.

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
The cheapest and easist way to improve the offense would be to add a right-handed power stick who can stand in LF without making a prick of himself. He only has to out-slug Burke, Huff or Lane.  

Who would you suggest that can out slug huff enough to make up for keeping ausmus? Someone under the 10 million mark preferably

 

Quote:
Big hitting catchers are an extreme rarity in baseball, perhaps only half a dozen in the majors. Slugging outfielders are not - each team has at least two and should have three or four.

Yeah thats what ive been trying to explain here and been flamed for

[MRaup]

Quote:

Quote:
The cheapest and easist way to improve the offense would be to add a right-handed power stick who can stand in LF without making a prick of himself. He only has to out-slug Burke, Huff or Lane.  

Who would you suggest that can out slug huff enough to make up for keeping ausmus? Someone under the 10 million mark preferably

 

Quote:
Big hitting catchers are an extreme rarity in baseball, perhaps only half a dozen in the majors. Slugging outfielders are not - each team has at least two and should have three or four.

Yeah thats what ive been trying to explain here and been flamed for

You're being flamed because you're a complete and total moron. You want to upgrade a part of our lineup that doesn't need upgrading (the 8 hole, who also happens to play catcher). Everyone else wants to upgrade the MIDDLE OF THE LINEUP, which happens to play 3rd base and corner outfield.
Its not rocket science.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
The cheapest and easist way to improve the offense would be to add a right-handed power stick who can stand in LF without making a prick of himself. He only has to out-slug Burke, Huff or Lane.  

Who would you suggest that can out slug huff enough to make up for keeping ausmus? Someone under the 10 million mark preferably

 

Quote:
Big hitting catchers are an extreme rarity in baseball, perhaps only half a dozen in the majors. Slugging outfielders are not - each team has at least two and should have three or four.

Yeah thats what ive been trying to explain here and been flamed for

You're being flamed because you're a complete and total moron. You want to upgrade a part of our lineup that doesn't need upgrading (the 8 hole, who also happens to play catcher). Everyone else wants to upgrade the MIDDLE OF THE LINEUP, which happens to play 3rd base and corner outfield.
Its not rocket science.

Alright, thanks for repeating what 20 people here have already told me. why dont you be bigger than them and actually give me cheap and easy ways to help the offense. Lets hear it

[MRaup]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
The cheapest and easist way to improve the offense would be to add a right-handed power stick who can stand in LF without making a prick of himself. He only has to out-slug Burke, Huff or Lane.  

Who would you suggest that can out slug huff enough to make up for keeping ausmus? Someone under the 10 million mark preferably

 

Quote:
Big hitting catchers are an extreme rarity in baseball, perhaps only half a dozen in the majors. Slugging outfielders are not - each team has at least two and should have three or four.

Yeah thats what ive been trying to explain here and been flamed for

You're being flamed because you're a complete and total moron. You want to upgrade a part of our lineup that doesn't need upgrading (the 8 hole, who also happens to play catcher). Everyone else wants to upgrade the MIDDLE OF THE LINEUP, which happens to play 3rd base and corner outfield.
Its not rocket science.

Alright, thanks for repeating what 20 people here have already told me. why dont you be bigger than them and actually give me cheap and easy ways to help the offense. Lets hear it

Because I'm a petty petty person that takes pleasure in watching idiots like you get slow-roasted over the coals here for a week or two before people get tired of your dog and pony show and just stop responding.

You spout off fantasy baseball drivel, and its bullshit. You want everyone to quantify their arguments, but at the same time you just keep plugging your fingers in your ears and yelling the same tired and incorrect information over and over. Theres no reason to try and discuss anything with you. You've made your idiotic point at least a dozen times, and you don't want to near why you're wrong. You want to be the matyr.

Well, its not going to happen. There are actually informed baseball fans here, so its not going to work.

[Outlawscotty]

Quote:
Runs created is a RATE, remember, not a measurable. with a difference in 25 thats a 65% increase in RC. Now is that 65% in offensive production? I dont know exactly, but its a way of determining that molina is definitly a significant offensive upgrade over ausmus. Significant enough to assume it would of won atleast 2 more wins for us this year, which could mean wed still be playing ball right now rather than the shithead coards.

Your numbers/metrics are skewed because Molina plays for a different team, in a different lineup, in a different league.  Ausmus has a pitcher to follow him in the lineup, which sometimes bats better than he does but regardless.  If Ausmus is what your stud pitchers want, that's what you give them.  Last I recall, this is a TEAM game.

[Alkie]

Quote:
Runs created is a RATE, remember, not a measurable. with a difference in 25 thats a 65% increase in RC. Now is that 65% in offensive production? I dont know exactly, but its a way of determining that molina is definitly a significant offensive upgrade over ausmus. Significant enough to assume it would of won atleast 2 more wins for us this year, which could mean wed still be playing ball right now rather than the shithead coards.

Ok, dammit, you keep doing it.  See, that 65% number you just pulled completely out of your ass?  Where did you get it from?  Explain it to me nice and slow so I can see what the fuck is going thru your head.  I want you to prove to me that Molina is 65% better offensively than Ausmus.  

Let's put that fantasy baseball bullshit aside for just a minute.

Last year, Bengie Molina had 433 ABs, Brad Ausmus had 439 ABs.  I'd say that's so close, that we can look at their numbers comparably (when put in to context) because they played essentially the same number of games on offense.  Can you agree with that?  433 is roughly the same as 439?  Ok.

Let's stop using the term "runs created" and start using the real phrase, which is "runs accounted for" (that being the formula I've been using; you know, with real world numbers).  

Bengie Molina accounted for 10.1% of the runs on his team.  Brad Ausmus accounted for (are you ready for this?) 10.1% of the runs on his team.  I couldn't have made up numbers more perfect.  Why does this prove even more how wrong you are?  Because Bengie Molina was hitting FIFTH or SIXTH in his lineup and Brad Ausmus was hitting EIGHTH in his.  WITH AN ALMOST AUTOMATIC OUT FOLLOWING HIM.  

Is this making any sense to you?  Not really?  Because I'm using real numbers and not some rough metric that provides you with some meaningless average?  

Let's try again then.

On a team that scored .46 runs more per game than the Astros, Bengie Molina, hitting in a RUN PRODUCING SPOT IN THE LINEUP (you see this, right?), accounted for .05 of those runs per game (about 11%, or one in 9, and remember, there are only 9 freaking guys in the goddamn lineup; he barely pulled his own weight in the middle of the lineup in an "average" sense).  

Bottom line: Bengie Molina was worth a total of .05 runs more per game last year than Brad Ausmus, but on a team that scored .46 runs more per game than the Astros.  So, going back to your argument that runs scored isn't necessarily yours (because someone behind you has to drive you in), I could argue that Bengie Molina (wait for it) is NO MORE FUCKING PRODUCTIVE OFFENSIVELY THAN BRAD AUSMUS.  

"Pu-lease!" you say!  

Last year, Brad Ausmus had 121 ABs with a runner in scoring position and drove in 37 runs in that situation.  Hitting 8th.  Bengie Molina had 113 ABs with a runner in scoring position (same-same, see?) and he drove in a whopping...40 runs.  Ooo-wee!!  3 EXTRA RUNS!  In a WHOLE SEASON!  

Worth 2 extra wins?  No.  Gets us into the playoffs?  No.  Clemens and Pettitte are demanding Bengie Molina behind the dish?  No.

So, again...Bengie Molina es menos que Brad Ausmus.  Worse?  No.  But when looking at the entire package (see, they don't just hit, they also have to play half the game in the field), Brad Ausmus STILL.  ISN'T.  THE PROBLEM.

STILL.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Quote:
Runs created is a RATE, remember, not a measurable. with a difference in 25 thats a 65% increase in RC. Now is that 65% in offensive production? I dont know exactly, but its a way of determining that molina is definitly a significant offensive upgrade over ausmus. Significant enough to assume it would of won atleast 2 more wins for us this year, which could mean wed still be playing ball right now rather than the shithead coards.

Ok, dammit, you keep doing it.  See, that 65% number you just pulled completely out of your ass?  Where did you get it from?  Explain it to me nice and slow so I can see what the fuck is going thru your head.  I want you to prove to me that Molina is 65% better offensively than Ausmus.  

Let's put that fantasy baseball bullshit aside for just a minute.

Last year, Bengie Molina had 433 ABs, Brad Ausmus had 439 ABs.  I'd say that's so close, that we can look at their numbers comparably (when put in to context) because they played essentially the same number of games on offense.  Can you agree with that?  433 is roughly the same as 439?  Ok.

Let's stop using the term "runs created" and start using the real phrase, which is "runs accounted for" (that being the formula I've been using; you know, with real world numbers).  

Bengie Molina accounted for 10.1% of the runs on his team.  Brad Ausmus accounted for (are you ready for this?) 10.1% of the runs on his team.  I couldn't have made up numbers more perfect.  Why does this prove even more how wrong you are?  Because Bengie Molina was hitting FIFTH or SIXTH in his lineup and Brad Ausmus was hitting EIGHTH in his.  WITH AN ALMOST AUTOMATIC OUT FOLLOWING HIM.  

Is this making any sense to you?  Not really?  Because I'm using real numbers and not some rough metric that provides you with some meaningless average?  

Let's try again then.

On a team that scored .46 runs more per game than the Astros, Bengie Molina, hitting in a RUN PRODUCING SPOT IN THE LINEUP (you see this, right?), accounted for .05 of those runs per game (about 11%, or one in 9, and remember, there are only 9 freaking guys in the goddamn lineup; he barely pulled his own weight in the middle of the lineup in an "average" sense).  

Bottom line: Bengie Molina was worth a total of .05 runs more per game last year than Brad Ausmus, but on a team that scored .46 runs more per game than the Astros.  So, going back to your argument that runs scored isn't necessarily yours (because someone behind you has to drive you in), I could argue that Bengie Molina (wait for it) is NO MORE FUCKING PRODUCTIVE OFFENSIVELY THAN BRAD AUSMUS.  

"Pu-lease!" you say!  

Last year, Brad Ausmus had 121 ABs with a runner in scoring position and drove in 37 runs in that situation.  Hitting 8th.  Bengie Molina had 113 ABs with a runner in scoring position (same-same, see?) and he drove in a whopping...40 runs.  Ooo-wee!!  3 EXTRA RUNS!  In a WHOLE SEASON!  

Worth 2 extra wins?  No.  Gets us into the playoffs?  No.  Clemens and Pettitte are demanding Bengie Molina behind the dish?  No.

So, again...Bengie Molina es menos que Brad Ausmus.  Worse?  No.  But when looking at the entire package (see, they don't just hit, they also have to play half the game in the field), Brad Ausmus STILL.  ISN'T.  THE PROBLEM.

STILL.

No offense Alkie but I think I said, roughly, the same thing yesterday.  Might I suggest the ignore feature?

[EasTexAstro]

Quote:
see, they don't just hit, they also have to play half the game in the field

Hold on there, Alkie. The catchers spends half the game in the field, but not half the game at bat or on the bases. 50% of the time on defense, 11% of the time, or so, on offense. Who is better at sitting on the bench the other 39% of the time? I've heard that Brad balances the federal budget using sunflower seeds, chewing gum, and pine tar. He would have been done by now, but Lance keeps taking the seeds.

[Alkie]

Quote:

No offense Alkie but I think I said, roughly, the same thing yesterday.  Might I suggest the ignore feature?

I'm not sure why you thought I'd take offense to that, but you're absolutely right!  There it is.  

Dammit.

Sorry man, wasn't trying to steal your work.

[Limey]

Quote:
Who would you suggest that can out slug huff enough to make up for keeping ausmus? Someone under the 10 million mark preferably

Why Huff?  Because he has the best SLG% of those players I listed as sub-par on offense?  Surely I would be replacing the worst slugger of the group, Jason Lane, whose SLG% is lower than JD Drew's OBP.

And why 10mil?  Just to make it harder for me?  So that I couldn't say "Carlos Lee"?

So your argument is that you want the Astros to dump one of their long-term, best liked, clubhouse leaders so you can get probably the best hitting catcher available this year for a sum of money that you've pulled out of your arse; while I have to pull a rabbit out of a hat.

I'll tell you what I'll do.  I'll put a straw man in LF, and he'll hit better and cost less than anyone else you can mention.  Then we'll be even.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Yes you asked the perfect question for why your forumla doesnt make sense. By your formula that man has 1 "runs created" but what does that tell you? If he gets 99 more atbats and doesnt get on base a single time then he still has 1 "runs created." So by your forumula that man has the same value of someone who just had 1 at bat with 1 homer which really isnt true.

What???  Do you have any clue as to the lunacy of this statement?

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Its really simple, someone who gets on base alot and hits for power is gonna have a RC higher than someone who doesnt. Someone who gets on base alot and hits for power is better than someone who doesnt. Thats just a simple way of determining how good a hitter is

The flaw in your logic is that you don't recognize reality.  You deal strictly in hypotheticals, and not in the real world.  I'm sure your fantasy league appreciates that, but the Houston Astros are a real baseball team.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Runs created is a RATE, remember, not a measurable.  

Bullshit.  Runs created are a tangible measurable sum total.  It is not by any stretch a rate.  Batting average is a rate.  Runs scored is a measurable.  See how that works?

[Alkie]

Quote:

What???  Do you have any clue as to the lunacy of this statement?

Let me explain it to you.

A man steps to the plate and hits a solo HR.  He has created 4 runs, not 1.

Another man steps to the plate and hits a grand slam, but then strikes out in his next 3 ABs.  He has created 1 run, not 4 runs.

Get it?

[MusicMan]

9 pages, and all I know now that I didn't 15 minutes ago is that I need to short SLB stock.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Quote:

No offense Alkie but I think I said, roughly, the same thing yesterday.  Might I suggest the ignore feature?

I'm not sure why you thought I'd take offense to that, but you're absolutely right!  There it is.  

Dammit.

Sorry man, wasn't trying to steal your work.

Oh, I didn't take it that way.  I figured you were just reiterating it with some additional detail.  My point is, he's ignoring it to antagonize you.  While we all enjoy your rage and the ensuing rants, I was attempting to  express concern for your overall health!

[Bench]

Quote:


Let me explain it to you.

A man steps to the plate and hits a solo HR.  He has created 4 runs, not 1.

 

Actually, I think it only counts as 4 runs if it's hit by a catcher. If it's hit by a left fielder it would just be 1 run.

[Taras Bulba]

Quote:
9 pages, and all I know now that I didn't 15 minutes ago is that I need to short SLB stock.

Well, you're either on the inside or on the outside.  Which is it, Sport?

[Alkie]

Quote:
Actually, I think it only counts as 4 runs if it's hit by a catcher. If it's hit by a left fielder it would just be 1 run.

Well, you're only sort of right.  It isn't that it changes the runs created, which is a rate, it would change the value of the player.  For example, the catcher with the 4 runs created is worth more than the 1B with the 1 run created in 1 AB, leading off an inning.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
I don't know why, but I'm going to assume the ring line directed at me was a joke.

Ok, so you get your Lee and your Molina.  Who is going to pitch for this team?

oswalt, pettitte, hirsh, FA(lilly, meche, someone like that), and sampson

qualls, nieve, wheeler, lidge, estrada, t-mills, and wood in the pen. yes THAT wood

ausmus can catch pettitte every 5th day if pettitte bitches at me

"Anyone speculating that Wood (Yes, THAT Wood) will recover from a partial tear in his right rotator cuff and return as the closer next season is jumping the gun."

"I don't know that anybody can say what he'll be until he can throw the ball," Cubs pitching coach Larry Rothschild said of the right-hander, who is rehabbing in Arizona.

"It'd be kind of foolish to say that [Wood will be the closer]. We have to see him get back to releasing the ball the way he's capable of and anything beyond that is getting ahead of yourself."
The Link

[Alkie]

Well, the other thing I was wondering about with this bullpen our new friend had created was...why are we moving a catcher to the bullpen?

[Limey]

Quote:
Well, the other thing I was wondering about with this bullpen our new friend had created was...why are we moving a catcher to the bullpen?

Have you seen Suba's RC?

[Alkie]

You bring up an interesting point.  Maybe he was suggesting that Estrada would be that much more valuable because he'd be a reliever who hit like a (pretty good hitting) catcher.

The circle is complete.

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
See, that 65% number you just pulled completely out of your ass? Where did you get it from? Explain it to me nice and slow so I can see what the fuck is going thru your head. I want you to prove to me that Molina is 65% better offensively than Ausmus.  

ausmus had an RC of 38, molina of 63. thats a 65% increase in RC.

.230/.308/.275 with 2 homers vs .284/.319/.467 and 19 homers, i really shouldnt have to explain who is by far the better hitter. That difference is atleast 2 wins whether you want to believe it or not.

oh but molina only got 20 more rbi than ausmus batting 6th while ausmus hit 8th! thats funny ausmus had more at bats with runners in scoring position though...

 

Quote:
Last year, Brad Ausmus had 121 ABs with a runner in scoring position and drove in 37 runs in that situation. Hitting 8th. Bengie Molina had 113 ABs with a runner in scoring position (same-same, see?) and he drove in a whopping...40 runs. Ooo-wee!! 3 EXTRA RUNS! In a WHOLE SEASON!  

yes thanks for bringing this up i was about to get to that. all this shows me is that ausmus had nearly ZERO ability to drive in a run when no one is in scoring position. 37 of his 39 rbi compared to 40 of 57 for molina. hmmmmm maybe it DOES help to have a little power.

 

Quote:
Well, the other thing I was wondering about with this bullpen our new friend had created was...why are we moving a catcher to the bullpen?  

i really hope thats just a joke and you know who im talking about.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I don't know why, but I'm going to assume the ring line directed at me was a joke.

Ok, so you get your Lee and your Molina.  Who is going to pitch for this team?

oswalt, pettitte, hirsh, FA(lilly, meche, someone like that), and sampson

qualls, nieve, wheeler, lidge, estrada, t-mills, and wood in the pen. yes THAT wood

ausmus can catch pettitte every 5th day if pettitte bitches at me

"Anyone speculating that Wood (Yes, THAT Wood) will recover from a partial tear in his right rotator cuff and return as the closer next season is jumping the gun."

"I don't know that anybody can say what he'll be until he can throw the ball," Cubs pitching coach Larry Rothschild said of the right-hander, who is rehabbing in Arizona.

"It'd be kind of foolish to say that [Wood will be the closer]. We have to see him get back to releasing the ball the way he's capable of and anything beyond that is getting ahead of yourself."
The Link

you honestly wouldnt give wood an incentive based contract for next year? the reward would be much greater than the risk

[schlumburger04]

 

Quote:
 And why 10mil? Just to make it harder for me? So that I couldn't say "Carlos Lee"?

Well youre exact words were that it would be easier and cheaper to fix LF. Sorry but i dont consider lee cheap.

I just want to know who youre considering that can hit significantly better than scott or huff thats also cheap.

[Alkie]

Quote:
ausmus had an RC of 38, molina of 63. thats a 65% increase in RC.

We've finally reached the point where I'm bored with this.  

Good luck with your mission man.  In all seriousness, you're really better off moving on.  You're just not going to make any friends here making the kind of statements like the one I quoted here.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:
ausmus had an RC of 38, molina of 63. thats a 65% increase in RC.

We've finally reached the point where I'm bored with this.  

Good luck with your mission man.  In all seriousness, you're really better off moving on.  You're just not going to make any friends here making the kind of statements like the one I quoted here.

yeah im tired of talking to a wall and youre really better off just not worrying about what i do

[Alkie]

You know what the worst part is?  I actually agreed with two of your opinions (I'm not going to tell you which ones), but had to change my mind because of the way you went about arguing your side.

Since it's obvious you won't just leave, if you're going to keep trying to convince people here of anything, don't just pull bullshit metrics out of your ass, try explaining (I'm being serious here) why they would translate to real wins.  

The "runs created" you use doesn't actually mean "runs created," it means something that is no more useful than, say, "batting average".  All you've done is come in spouting numbers that don't translate to anything but fantasy league points.  

That's why no one here is listening to you.  That's it.  Only reason.  Knock it off.

[VirtualBob]

Quote:
All you've done is come in spouting numbers that don't translate to anything but fantasy league points.  

That's why no one here is listening to you.  That's it.  Only reason.  Knock it off.

Exactly.

Also, it might be useful for you (scumburger) to look at how many people restrained themselves from piling on to your idiocy.  Look through some of the active threads in the past that did NOT result from your kind of lunacy and see how many people chimed in with opinions ... and how varied the opinions were.  The posts may not all have been "polite" but I expect that you will find mostly differences of relatively informed opinion.  

I have no interest in actually testing my hypothesis on this (even suspecting in advance that you will jump on that statement), but I would venture to guess that 75% or more of the folks who did NOT jump into this conversation were mostly amazed at Alkie's patience and persistence.

[Arky Vaughan]

Why do you think runs created is a rate stat?

[Arky Vaughan]

I don't think the statistics for offensive evaluation are useless, but I think they can be easily misread, and I don't think the question of whether Molina is a better hitter than Ausmus is really the issue here.

[Alkie]

Of COURSE it isn't.  Like I said in my last post, it wasn't his underlying opinion, it was how he presented it.

I think we all know how you feel about stats and I think everyone by now knows that I'm more than willing to use stats as LONG as it seems to MEAN something.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
You know what the worst part is?  I actually agreed with two of your opinions (I'm not going to tell you which ones), but had to change my mind because of the way you went about arguing your side.

Since it's obvious you won't just leave, if you're going to keep trying to convince people here of anything, don't just pull bullshit metrics out of your ass, try explaining (I'm being serious here) why they would translate to real wins.

Simply because molina is a much better hitter than ausmus. Significant enough to assume hed of given us 2 more wins. I cant really explain it any simpler than that.

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
Why do you think runs created is a rate stat?

you can read all you want to know about it here: The Link

 

Quote:
I don't think the statistics for offensive evaluation are useless, but I think they can be easily misread, and I don't think the question of whether Molina is a better hitter than Ausmus is really the issue here.  

yeah i understand everyone knows hes better, the arguement is that no one believes their difference in offense is large enough to compensate for anything youd lose on defense.

[JimR]

go fucking away, fantasy boy. you have spent three days on this. take it someplace else.

[Limey]

Quote:
Also, it might be useful for you (scumburger) to look at how many people restrained themselves from piling on to your idiocy.  Look through some of the active threads in the past that did NOT result from your kind of lunacy and see how many people chimed in with opinions ... and how varied the opinions were.  The posts may not all have been "polite" but I expect that you will find mostly differences of relatively informed opinion.

I was deliberately playing the good cop to Alkie's bad.  Dealing with someone who is simply regurgitating the same previously debunked justification ad nauseam is not usually my strong suit.  I must be getting old or something.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
Why do you think runs created is a rate stat?

you can read all you want to know about it here: The Link

 

Quote:
I don't think the statistics for offensive evaluation are useless, but I think they can be easily misread, and I don't think the question of whether Molina is a better hitter than Ausmus is really the issue here.  

yeah i understand everyone knows hes better, the arguement is that no one believes their difference in offense is large enough to compensate for anything youd lose on defense.

Please describe what you think the Astros would lose on defense if they didn't have Ausmus as their catcher.

[Trey]

This is how I feel about this thread

This is how I feel about our new friend

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I don't know why, but I'm going to assume the ring line directed at me was a joke.

Ok, so you get your Lee and your Molina.  Who is going to pitch for this team?

oswalt, pettitte, hirsh, FA(lilly, meche, someone like that), and sampson

qualls, nieve, wheeler, lidge, estrada, t-mills, and wood in the pen. yes THAT wood

ausmus can catch pettitte every 5th day if pettitte bitches at me

"Anyone speculating that Wood (Yes, THAT Wood) will recover from a partial tear in his right rotator cuff and return as the closer next season is jumping the gun."

"I don't know that anybody can say what he'll be until he can throw the ball," Cubs pitching coach Larry Rothschild said of the right-hander, who is rehabbing in Arizona.

"It'd be kind of foolish to say that [Wood will be the closer]. We have to see him get back to releasing the ball the way he's capable of and anything beyond that is getting ahead of yourself."
The Link

you honestly wouldnt give wood an incentive based contract for next year? the reward would be much greater than the risk

His pitching coach thinks he may not even pitch next season.  Why do you think you have more information than this?

[schlumburger04]

Quote:
This is how I feel about this thread

This is how I feel about our new friend

cool, heres my impression of jim r: The Link

[schlumburger04]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I don't know why, but I'm going to assume the ring line directed at me was a joke.

Ok, so you get your Lee and your Molina.  Who is going to pitch for this team?

oswalt, pettitte, hirsh, FA(lilly, meche, someone like that), and sampson

qualls, nieve, wheeler, lidge, estrada, t-mills, and wood in the pen. yes THAT wood

ausmus can catch pettitte every 5th day if pettitte bitches at me

"Anyone speculating that Wood (Yes, THAT Wood) will recover from a partial tear in his right rotator cuff and return as the closer next season is jumping the gun."

"I don't know that anybody can say what he'll be until he can throw the ball," Cubs pitching coach Larry Rothschild said of the right-hander, who is rehabbing in Arizona.

"It'd be kind of foolish to say that [Wood will be the closer]. We have to see him get back to releasing the ball the way he's capable of and anything beyond that is getting ahead of yourself."
The Link

you honestly wouldnt give wood an incentive based contract for next year? the reward would be much greater than the risk

His pitching coach thinks he may not even pitch next season.  Why do you think you have more information than this?

it was a yes or no question

[BudGirl]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I don't know why, but I'm going to assume the ring line directed at me was a joke.

Ok, so you get your Lee and your Molina.  Who is going to pitch for this team?

oswalt, pettitte, hirsh, FA(lilly, meche, someone like that), and sampson

qualls, nieve, wheeler, lidge, estrada, t-mills, and wood in the pen. yes THAT wood

ausmus can catch pettitte every 5th day if pettitte bitches at me

"Anyone speculating that Wood (Yes, THAT Wood) will recover from a partial tear in his right rotator cuff and return as the closer next season is jumping the gun."

"I don't know that anybody can say what he'll be until he can throw the ball," Cubs pitching coach Larry Rothschild said of the right-hander, who is rehabbing in Arizona.

"It'd be kind of foolish to say that [Wood will be the closer]. We have to see him get back to releasing the ball the way he's capable of and anything beyond that is getting ahead of yourself."
The Link

you honestly wouldnt give wood an incentive based contract for next year? the reward would be much greater than the risk

His pitching coach thinks he may not even pitch next season.  Why do you think you have more information than this?

it was a yes or no question

No.

[Spack McGrimm]

Teens should never find the key to Dad's liquor cabinet because this is what usually happens.  I blame the parents.