cobaincola

You're right... I never saw the way McGwire was in Oakland. I'm just basing this on the limited footage I've seen of him talking with the media (aside from his homerun chase in 1998, where he was extremely media friendly). And you mentioned something I meant to ask Cobaincola as well.. He has already accused Bonds a couple of times of beating his wife.. Where the hell did that come from? 694006[/snapback] http://fl.bna.com/fl/19990427/75328.htm 694047[/snapback] Umm... you don't expect me to read that entire thing do you? I think you confuse this forum with a job, cobain.. I find it hilarious all the time you put into finding links and this and that... I come here to talk baseball dude.. To have a good time with some other baseball fans... i don't come here to do what I have to do at work... Knock yourself out with all the links and all the research you do.. God bless you for having the time. As for me, you will always win a battle when it comes to providing sources, cause I honestly don't care as much as you do and cannot put the time into it that you do. Now, to quickly address your link, cause I know how you get when people avoid your questions or comments. I didn't read it, but at a quick glance it just looked like Bonds was being charged with something.. Whatever the charge was, that's all it is.. a charge. By no stretch of the imagination does that mean he's guilty.. It's pretty evident that you really really don't like Barry. We get it. Your point is well taken. I understand... 694077[/snapback] All the work to find links? Everyone knows he's had spousal abuse charges filed against him, all it took was going to yahoo.com and then typing: Barry Bonds Spousal Abuse... It was very arduous. We get it that you like Bonds. So much so that you will stand behind him no matter how many times he lies to you as fan because you're that stupid. I understand....

Damn...I wonder why Griffey was so loved during the 90s...must have been a white man in a black man's body. did i ever say that a black player can't be given a good image? No, but they do have to suck up to the media for that. A white player doesn't You'd have to a huge idiot to suggest that Aaron and Bonds' struggles are comparable.? Most of the hate toward Aaron was racial and he still held his head high.? He was never involved in steroids, he never abused his spouse, he never issued racial comments, he was never full of himself, never had a mistress.? He conducted himself like a true professional day in and day out.? Bonds isn't worthy to be in the same sentence as Aaron. Aaron molested children. Yeah, that's not true, but that's about the same as you saying Bonds was a wifebeater or had a mistress. You've never heard Aaron talk about the racist stuff he went through? What about Aaron using amphedamines, which was/ still is against the law? Bonds alledgedly used THG, which wasn't against the law at the time he alledgedly did it. And Bonds is a professional. He's never broken any rules, never gotten into trouble with the law, is one of the most dedicated and hardest workers in pro sports, and does his job better than anyone. If that's not professional, I don't know what is. To suggest that Barry is going through the same thing Aaron did is belittling to the term 'racism' I'd only expect a comment on that level from a true racist ala Bonds but I guess a Bonds' lackey shouldn't be all that wiser. Like Aaron, Bonds received death threats when going after McGwire's record. The crap that BOnds got is fueled by the same reason why Aaron got crap: racism. Why wasn't John Rocker liked?? I guess he is an example of a black man in a white man's body.... 693823[/snapback] 693970[/snapback] Wow. Aaron molesting small children is the same as Bonds having a mistress? http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/3394142 It's the same as Bonds molesting his wife? http://fl.bna.com/fl/19990427/75328.htm Let me get something straight, despite the fact that the media loved Griffey I am suppose to believe that they prefer white players? On what basis do you have making this claim? Could have sworn that Sosa was one of the most beloved sports figure in America during that historic season as well. He doesn't look very white to me. You're a hypocrite, sure you'll dismiss the links as speculation but when people ask you for anything of a substantial as to why black players in baseball get a bad media rap you have absolutely no proof except that the target of alot of scorn in baseball is a man that has at the very best a very questionable moral character. A man who has had spousal abuse charges against him, a man who has an alleged mistress, a man who has used steroids, who issues racist statements and an incredibly arrogant man. You don't think any reasonably intelligent person could dislike Bonds for anything other race? You don't think any of those previously mentioned things could factor into their dislike for him? Try to think for once in your life.

You're right... I never saw the way McGwire was in Oakland. I'm just basing this on the limited footage I've seen of him talking with the media (aside from his homerun chase in 1998, where he was extremely media friendly). And you mentioned something I meant to ask Cobaincola as well.. He has already accused Bonds a couple of times of beating his wife.. Where the hell did that come from? 694006[/snapback] http://fl.bna.com/fl/19990427/75328.htm

if barry bonds didnt play the race card every day and wasnt such a blatent racist, i might actually like the guy. 693471[/snapback] all he's doing is calling a spade a spade. If Bonds was white would he get any crap? Nope. Why else was/ is McGwire beloved and Bonds is it? Because McGwire is white, and Bonds isn't. What Bonds is going through is very similar to what Aaron went through when he was going for the home run record. That press conference gave me even more respect for him, that he called out all these a**holes for their bulls*** and repetitiveness. He's had to deal with them for months. Bonds should be admired for the fact that he's never beat the s*** out of one of these scumbags. 693711[/snapback] Wow... Are we having nominations for the most blatantly stupid posts made on this board? I would really like to nominate this fine piece of work MaysBonds Damn...I wonder why Griffey was so loved during the 90s...must have been a white man in a black man's body. You'd have to a huge idiot to suggest that Aaron and Bonds' struggles are comparable. Most of the hate toward Aaron was racial and he still held his head high. He was never involved in steroids, he never abused his spouse, he never issued racial comments, he was never full of himself, never had a mistress. He conducted himself like a true professional day in and day out. Bonds isn't worthy to be in the same sentence as Aaron. To suggest that Barry is going through the same thing Aaron did is belittling to the term 'racism' I'd only expect a comment on that level from a true racist ala Bonds but I guess a Bonds' lackey shouldn't be all that wiser. Why wasn't John Rocker liked? I guess he is an example of a black man in a white man's body.... Jesus man...you're pathetic.

Cabs is a complete team player... Sign him long-term now!

Weird I always thought you were older...like really older... Anyhow you should go where you have the best opportunity. If FSU is the best school for what you want to do, then go for it. University of Miami isn't going to give a rat's ass that you went to FSU. Plus, I'd imagine it being somewhat entertaining being a Canes fan in FSU land.

Twins at 90 seems a little high 693127[/snapback] They have a really strong team and play in a weak division, I wouldn't be surprised to see them get to 94 wins with all the promising players getting starting jobs .

"You guys, it's like, what, I mean, you can't -- it's almost comical, basically. I mean, we've got alcohol that's the No. 1 killer in America and we legalize that to buy in the store. You've got, you know, you've got tobacco number two, three killer in America, we legalize that. There's other issues. You guys are going to be the same people next week as some tragedy happened, how we need to save our children and everything else and next week, you're the same people sitting there coming, how we should be doing this and how we're evil people, or, you know, you guys, it's one thing after another. You know, pick one side or the other. Are y'all going to be good people or are you all going to be who you are and make the game or sports what it is? It's become "Hard Copy" all day long. Are you guys jealous? Upset? Disappointed? What?" It's a shame that with that kind of intelligent and coherent discourse that he never ran for public office. "Q. Through all of this controversy, it has to have taken an emotional toll on you. Have you lost sleep over this? BONDS: You know, the part that I lose sleep over is my family and my family and my kids and what pain -- which I say -- should I blame you guys for it? There's no facts on Barry Bonds, but should I blame you? Who should I blame? Who should I blame for the things that go on that my kids have to listen to, who should I blame? You know, I don't. I tell my kids, you know what, just don't be famous. You don't want it, don't be famous. You know what, let people say whatever they are going to say. " Who should he blame? Perhaps himself...grow some balls. You abuse your spouse, you spout off racist comments and you use steroids to get an advantage in a game...why is the media's fault that his kids find out their dad is an idiot?

People need to get off Barry Bonds...what other supposed juicers are having press conferences before Spring Training with the national media there. The only reason Giambi is a story is because he's a Yankee. Will there be backlash for Clemens among others who are known users? Probably not as bad as Barry....Go Bonds, I support you 100% 693294[/snapback] Clemens is a known user? Do your sources implicate JP too?

My fantasy draft just ended and here is my team: C: Jason Kendall 1B: Sean Casey 2B: Mark Loretta 3B: Troy Glaus SS: Carlos Guillen OF1: Miguel Cabrera OF2: Ichiro Suzuki OF2: Scott Podsednik (for the SB's) UTIL: Jack Wilson Bench1: Jeromy Burnitz Bench2: Frank Thomas Bench3: Mark Kotsay Bench4: Jermaine Dye Pitchers: Jake Peavy AJ Burnett El Duque Russ Ortiz David Wells Tom Glavine Trevor Hoffman Juan Rincon Here are the stats that matter: Offense; HR, RBI, BA, SB, Runs Pitching; Wins, Saves, ERA, SO, WHIP How do you guys think I did, and would you recommend any trades? 692950[/snapback] How many teams? It's a good 12 team league team It's maybe a bit average for a 10 team league.

Reporter: "Barry, do you think using steroids in baseball is cheating" Barry: "I don't know what cheating is." 692628[/snapback] LOL.. Well duh Mr. Juicer... LOL

That would be awesome, there isn't anyone in the league that would deserve it more than him.

Bound to happen, it was just a matter of time before people started hacking cellphones, think what you might but you have to respect for those that started doing it.

It isn't that simple, the club would have been more financially weighed down if we decided to keep Pudge and Lee, chances are we probably wouldn't have resigned, signed, or even extended arbitration to some of the players we have the last couple of seasons. Pudge in 2003 was good, but he wasn't that good. It's almost even. Pudge is a better hitter than LoDuca by about the same magnitude that Delgado is a better hitter than Lee...in 2003 at least. Defensively we would have been a bit better with Lee and Pudge, not because of Lee because a first baseman doesn't carry all that significant defensive value especially with Castillo at second. But Pudge is a good deal better than LoDuca defensively, but if LoDuca can have a good season...800 OPS I think it's about even.

If our bullpen is struggling, we can make a move in June or July. 690864[/snapback] So it wouldn't bother you if our bullpen struggled for a month or two since it's not that long...I understand. It wouldn't irritate me either.. if I wasn't a Marlins fan. :plain 690871[/snapback] Our bullpen looks fine to me. Every team (even the Yankees) has issues with its bullpen coming into the season. The addition of Delgado means more than the addition of one or two more arms in the pen. Besides, with Delgado here, several more games may not come down to the bullpen as they would if he wasn't here. 690885[/snapback] Our bullpen is not fine...we lost a key pitcher in Benitez and Mota will never be able to pitch the way Benitez did last year. Our bullpen this upcoming year will be worse than our bullpen last year IMO. And what I'm sacred of with the bullpen is that even though we have Delgado we may get the lead early in the game and give it up and lose in the end with the bullpen. And don't compare our bullpen to the top spenders in the leauge bullpen...please. The Yankees dont use their money wisely but theyre still good. 690900[/snapback] Our offense was one of the worst in the league last year. Getting someone like Delgado allows it to jump into a notch below elite. Our bullpen is alot deeper than last year's pen. We lost Benitez, Mota won't be as good as Benitez got our pen as a whole will be better because it's deeper. Tired of people that don't appreciate what the bullpen is. It's alot more than just a closer. Mota has incredible stuff, was the best set-up man in baseball pitching more innings than any closer. He'll be fine. We also added a collection of veteran arms, two of which should have good - great seasons next year and with Spooney making a big splash during the second half, the pen will be fine. Plus again back to Baseball Economics, bullpen help is CHEAP and is available always through trades during the middle of the season. Fish made the obvious and best choice by securing Delgado rather than add yet another bullpen arm.

Given the free agent market this past year, we didn't overpay.? Sexson got 50 million over 4 years... I think Delgado's better than Sexson. 690826[/snapback] ok...very nice...good for you. Sexson got overpaid...so did JD Drew and many others...but that doesn't mean that we have to overpay for our players. If you look around at some of the guys signed then you'll see that there were an ample sum of fantastic players that got paid a puny amount of money that we could have easily offered. 690842[/snapback] You obviously don't understand how the market works. Many other free agents got more overpaid than Delgado yet Delgado is still overpaid? Players got 'overpaid' because the market landscape changed. Looking at the manner at which the market operated at this offseason, Delgado was hardly a rip-off. Second of all you are talking out your ass. There weren't many 'fantastic' players out there that got puny contracts. Who are you talking about? Sexson? Glaus? Beltre? Drew? Beltran? They all got big money comparable with Delgado and the majority of them if not all of them haven't performed at Delgado's level for as long as he has.

Anyone else not surprised Pierre reported early? Dude's a workhorse. 689734[/snapback] I'm surprised he didn't just live in the clubhouse during the offseason. Isn't there an award for a guy like him? 689735[/snapback] Hopefully another great season and appreciation from the fanbase

From ESPN Marlins are ranked # 4 behind Yanks, BoSox & Cards in a preseason ranking. Here's what the blurb says for us: They could be very, very good -- but they'll only go as far as Josh Beckett, A.J. Burnett and Guillermo Mota lead them. 689395[/snapback] Maybe a little high, but it's nice to get props.

ESPN's Peter Gammons recently said that the Astro's are interested in acquiring Mike Cameron of the Mets, but would need to involve a 3rd team because the Mets would want a corner outfielder in return, so maybe the Marlins could move Encarnacion to the Mets --> Cameron to the Astros --> Prospects or Players to the Marlins, and this should be a low risk move for the Marlins, especially since most of the fans are apathetic to Encarnacion in general... 689285[/snapback] No, we're not helping the Mets out, not under any circumstances. If they were a bad team with no expectations, then fine, deal with them, but when they're a team who could potentially threaten us, we don't want to make it any easier. Personally, I don't think Encarnacion will be traded unless he's part of something "big" (IE, Sheets or Zito where we have to take a bad contract back in addition to giving up prospects). Conine's health is way up in the air, and neither he nor Conine seem to overwhelmingly scream for the starting job in right field. I mean, I can think of arguments in favor of either of them starting. He's going to be here through at least S.T.... 689288[/snapback] How does that help the Mets? Trading Cameron for Encarnacion? If it means that we'd have available money that will allow us the possibility of trading for a top tier relief pitcher near the deadline then we should do it. Encarnacion has absolutely no trade value, we'd have to atleast give up the same quality of prospects if we wanted to land a stop starter later in the season if not more to counteract his salary. 689297[/snapback] It gets a pissed off Mike Cameron out of the clubhouse, gives them a guy (Encarnacion) who is expected to be 100% by opening day (unlike Cameron who isn't expected to be back until May), plus a Gold-Glove caliber right fielder, Cameron has yet to play right and nothing says he's a sure fire Gold Glover over there. Not to mention, they actually shave close to $2 million off their payroll this season, and close to $9 million overall doing Encarnacion for Cameron. I'd call that help. 689310[/snapback] Encarnacion is a good defensive outfielder, that's it. Cameron has two gold gloves playing a more demanding outfield position. To think that he would be able to walk a few feet over and and continue to perform as a great oufielder is hardly a stretch. He's a better hitter than Encarnacion and money is hardly an issue with the Mets. We have alot more to gain than the Mets is what I'm saying. If we dump Encarnacion we free up some money that might be a factor in triggering a deal during the middle of the season for a top tier relief pitcher or another starter. Plus Encarnacion has hardly any trade value, thinking we can save him and them ship him elsewhere for a player like Sheets or Zito in a package is just funny. You take Encarnacion out of the equation and you would probably have to give up less minor league talent.

Before you attack me on the name, yes, it's a joke. Well, let me start off with why I'm doing this. I haven't had much to do this week, and I picked up Moneyball for a cheap price on Saturday after FanFest. Well, I've gotten to reading it, and it's really fascinating. There really isn't anything I didn't know, but it has been a source of interest and inspiration. I got to thinking, how could you build a dynasty without having much in the financial department? How could you take winning an unfair game to the next level? I started thinking about building my own economic model for how to perfectly quantify a players value in all aspects of the game, and be able to apply this value to the economics of the both the draft and the open market. This, however, is a long long process that was broken up into a few parts. The first stage was finding what parts of the game were poorly represented by numbers that were used to rate players. And I thought to myself, why does no one try to say anything about baserunning? Sure, stolen bases and runs scored are pretty, but they don't tell an accurate story of how good a baserunner someone may be. So now, the fun part. In the past three days I've come up with three different stats for baserunning or something involving baserunning: TRA (Total Bases per BaseRunning Attempts), TOP (Total Offensive Production), and BRI (Base Running Index). I know, original names right? Well, what do they do? The first is the simplest IMO (believe it or not). To calculate TRA, you simple take the Total Bases of a player and divide them by the number of times they reached base (be it by a walk, hit, reaching base by error, HBP, pinchrunning (you'd only get counted if you advanced a base in this part), grounding into a fielder's choice with less than two outs, or anything else of the sort). The formula would look like this: Total Bases / Times Reaching Base Of course, I realize some problems arise from this. Homers count for 4 total bases here, because you are reaching base, even though you didn't technically run the bases. However, my figuring in not eliminating homers in this early stage of TRA are this: A) in a long season, I figure the homers will even out if you can't run the bases any other way and B) I'm doing this by myself and I really don't have the time to stop and remove homers in the testing stage. Stat #2 is a variance of OPS. My opinion of OPS is that it is a solid stat for middle of the order hitters, and it does show what you do while you're at the plate. However, it doesn't tell the whole story of an inning. What good having an OPS of 1.246 when you don't get past second base? I needed to come up with something that would tell me what a player does for the offense as a whole, not what happens just when holds a bat. The problem, of course, is that TRA by nature is a stat between 1 and 4. I needed to trim this, so after thinking alot I figured out that I was a moron and there was an obvious solution: OBP + (TRA / 4) = TOP The higher the total, the better offensive weapon the player is as a whole. The stat not only tells you how good a player is at not creating an out, but also tells you what he does after he fails at creating the out the other team so desperately wants. Is it a perfect way to quantify a hitter? Naw, but I'd like to pretend it is to temporarily boost my self esteem. But I'm sure you'll all hate it. Now, both these stats bring up a dilemma I'm sure you've all noticed. This must all be affected by the stats of the hitters behind them, right? If the hitters behind you are jacking them out of the park and you're always walking, you only earned one out of the four bases. So here's my first crack at getting rid of this advantage (I warn you, BCS-like creativity coming up): (TRA / 4) + (SB% / 100) - {[(TRA1 + TRA2 + TRA3) /3] /4} - {[(SLG1 + SLG2 + SLG3) /3] /4} = BRI Yeah, that seems complicated. Let me try to explain it piece by piece. Part A is simple, take the player's TRA and divide by 4 to reach the number from the previous equation. Part two is so that stolen bases kings get to prove they are good baserunners, but it's their percentage. It is divided by 100 so it is as a decimal. Part C is where it gets complicated. Add together the TRAs of the three hitters immediately after the player, and divide by 3 to reach the average TRA for the hitters. Then divide this number by 4 to get a number comparable to parts A and B. For part D, take SLG of the next three hitters, and divide by three to average them. Divide it by 4 to reach a comparable number (I'm unsure of this part, but I decided it is necessary for now) and then subtract both C and D from the sum of A and B. Out pops your stat for total baserunning efficiency at the moment. The last stat is a problem - I'm not sure if the subtraction will kill the number because it has yet to be tested. But I figure it should work like that, and if not I can tinker with it later. BRI is the least of my worries at the moment, that baby is going to take a while and I recognize that. This is all part of a larger model, which is yet unfinished. I just wanted to see your guys' take on what I've done now, and any criticism minus the "OMG dork" or "you have no life OMG" are accepted. And no, none of the girls in my life know about this. I'd like to keep it that way, thanks. If someone has done something similar, sorry. I'm not familiar with advanced baseball math AT ALL. 688934[/snapback] I really don't get the TRA. What do you want to use it for? Aside from homers, you have also have for example stand up doubles. If you are trying to come up with some base-running stat, I'd argue that these things are perhaps the most important SB percentage, # Stolen Bases, # of Triples (you really can't get these without great baserunning) As for how much you should weight each and what not...I don't know, I think Bill James did some study in the 80s where you are only contributing to your team if you steal at a clip of 66 percent or so. Else you are actually hurting your team.

LOL... He was obviously joking...

ESPN's Peter Gammons recently said that the Astro's are interested in acquiring Mike Cameron of the Mets, but would need to involve a 3rd team because the Mets would want a corner outfielder in return, so maybe the Marlins could move Encarnacion to the Mets --> Cameron to the Astros --> Prospects or Players to the Marlins, and this should be a low risk move for the Marlins, especially since most of the fans are apathetic to Encarnacion in general... 689285[/snapback] No, we're not helping the Mets out, not under any circumstances. If they were a bad team with no expectations, then fine, deal with them, but when they're a team who could potentially threaten us, we don't want to make it any easier. Personally, I don't think Encarnacion will be traded unless he's part of something "big" (IE, Sheets or Zito where we have to take a bad contract back in addition to giving up prospects). Conine's health is way up in the air, and neither he nor Conine seem to overwhelmingly scream for the starting job in right field. I mean, I can think of arguments in favor of either of them starting. He's going to be here through at least S.T.... 689288[/snapback] How does that help the Mets? Trading Cameron for Encarnacion? If it means that we'd have available money that will allow us the possibility of trading for a top tier relief pitcher near the deadline then we should do it. Encarnacion has absolutely no trade value, we'd have to atleast give up the same quality of prospects if we wanted to land a stop starter later in the season if not more to counteract his salary.

Glad to hear... Atleast you are consistently idiotic... 688480[/snapback] How? Even comparing Cabrera's 2004 season to Wright's projected 2004 full season they're amazing similar players. 688488[/snapback] LOL... 'Projected' That's the problem with a small sample size, they aren't projectable... Did you project Reyes 2004 season from that great sample size in 2003 as well? Wright isn't at Cabrera's level YET. Just like Reyes wasn't at Castillo's level last year.

Mutt fans have to be the biggest homers. I remember hearing that Reyes was going to outplay Castillo in 2004 because of all his potential..... Wonder what happened... Wright could be a great player, and in fantasy baseball I'd try to pick him because of his potential. But until he actually acts on that potential, shows something he isn't on the same level as Cabrera. Cabrera is younger and already has a full season of 30 - 35 homers, 110 + RBIs with almost a .300 average.

Glad to hear... Atleast you are consistently idiotic...