Out of the Past

but be good time now to start looking pitcher we have farm team so we can look who can help us next year our pitching staff need to be redone with some good pitcher in farm system Well miamibaseball haven't you learned from our fellow posters that the reason we play like the Bad News Bears is because of injuries and bad luck? Next year we should have Olsen, Dontrelle and Mitre back and with Nolasco and Sanchez our rotation should be the league's best. Don't worry about anything. All the problems are injury and bad luck related.

The marlins lead the league in errors, that may have something to do with it... Your 3B has 18 errors Your SS has 16 errors The bats are Great no doubt, but that is rediculous. Cabrera has no business being a 3rd basemen with the weigt he put on. He needs to be moved to first. I know I will be flamed for that, but it is the truth. Cabs has lost about 10-15 lbs since his albatross days in April/May he's in much better shape than he was he doesn't need to be moved anywhere whatever, the #'s are the #'s, and you can tell me he lost 10, 15 pounds, but how many bases has he stolen this year compared to last? he is a gaping hole there at 3rd. There is no shame in moving him to first. not sure what SB has to do with anything but he ain't the gaping hole he was out there the first 2 months and it's not like we have someone to replace him at 3b He's not making the errors he was making early in the season but his defense is still below average. Jacobs is a below average with the glove and the bat. The only thing Jacobs has going for him is he plays for minimum wage and will continue to do so next year. I wouldn't mind if next year Cabrera or Hammer or even Hermida (hands down our worst defensive player) moved to 1B.

fire joe girardi huh? i guess pitching injuries don't help eitehr. I dunno, when my team loses 3/5 of it's starting rotation to injury, I fully expect them to improve on their record from last year. Mitre, Olsen and Willis were in the rotation when the season opened so the 3/5 excuse is nonsense no matter how many times it's repeated. The Nats can probably use the injury excuse more than us. Mitre was only in the rotation because of injuries to Nolasco and Anibal. Not true. Mitre statrted the season in the rotation as did Anibal. Nolasco started the season in the bullpen. If it makes you feel better than 3/5 are out go ahead and keep kidding yourself. Ok, 2/5 of our rotation to start the year, and 3/5 of our rotation from last year is out for the year, including 2 pitchers who had ERA's below 3.25. Also, 2 of our starters are pitching significantly worse than they did last year, and we've replaced ERA+'s of 152 and 139 with marks of 56 (Hurk), 63 (Obermueller) and 100 (BK). We've also seen Olsen and Willis' ERA+ drop from 107 and 112, to 77 and 85, respectively. But no, you are right it's because we lost Girardi. This has nothing to do with Girardi. It has to do with the "we're missing 3/5 of our rotation" nonsense. The Nats are the ones missing 3/5 of their rotation. We're missing 2/5 of our rotation. I wasn't a math major but I think 3/5 > 2/5 but I could be wrong.

fire joe girardi huh? i guess pitching injuries don't help eitehr. I dunno, when my team loses 3/5 of it's starting rotation to injury, I fully expect them to improve on their record from last year. Mitre, Olsen and Willis were in the rotation when the season opened so the 3/5 excuse is nonsense no matter how many times it's repeated. The Nats can probably use the injury excuse more than us. Mitre was only in the rotation because of injuries to Nolasco and Anibal. Not true. Mitre statrted the season in the rotation as did Anibal. Nolasco started the season in the bullpen. If it makes you feel better than 3/5 are out go ahead and keep kidding yourself.

Today MLB.com is doing a special about each teams most memorable home run (in honor of Barry B*nds). The Marlins' is of course Alex Gonzalez walk off shot in game four of the 2003 world series with honorable mentions going to Cabrera's blast of Roger Clemens in the same series, Hermida's pinch-hit grand slam in his first at bat and Devon White's grand slam to help win game three of the 1997 NLDS. Here is a link Notice how the announcers didn't care Anyway, can someone please youtube this because it is nowhere to be found and I want to be able to pull it up at anytime. Thanks. MLB.com would quickly yank it off youtube anyway He could put it up himself without putting a description on it so MLB wouldn't know it's there so they wouldn't yank it and he could watch it whenever he wanted.

fire joe girardi huh? i guess pitching injuries don't help eitehr. I dunno, when my team loses 3/5 of it's starting rotation to injury, I fully expect them to improve on their record from last year. Mitre, Olsen and Willis were in the rotation when the season opened so the 3/5 excuse is nonsense no matter how many times it's repeated. The Nats can probably use the injury excuse more than us.

Unless Im reading this wrong I don't see exactly where Rollins "disses" Hanley. That's what I was thinking Me too.

BTW, I know we won and everything, but anyone else think it was weird that Fredi put Woody in for Hammer in LF when Jake was at 1B and 0-19? yes, fredi being fredi. he's been thinking about a lot of stuff. There was so reason to make that double switch. If Fredi was going to have Miller pitch only one inning he could have kept Hammer in LF and could have PH Wood for Miller in the bottom of the inning.

They came to the conclusion in Baseball Between the Numbers that lineup configuration will mostly only lead to minor changes (like, 5-10 runs a season) If you agree with the analysis that lineup configuration only leads to 5-10 run differentials over the course of an entire season then I don't know why you would waste time arguing over how the lineup is configured given that 5-10 runs per season is next to nothing. I argue about it because i think it leads to a lot more than 5-10 runs. If line-up configuration really made that much of a difference, Runs Created wouldn't be as accurate as it is. OBP ? SLG ? AB If that's the formula, which it is per Wikepidia, I think putting your better hitters at the top and your weaker hitters at the bottom would lead to a much higher number of runs created than vice versa because the guys with the higher OPB and higher SLG will have more ABs at the top of the order than they would at the bottom. If you have time try running the '06 Marlins flipping the OBP and SLG numbers but not the ABs.. for example take the 1st's AB and apply it to the 8th's OBP and SLG .. then the 2nd's ABs and apply it to the 7th's OBP and SLG and so on and then add them up and see what you come up with compared to what you come up with with the regular formula. I would do it myself but work gets in the way.. They came to the conclusion in Baseball Between the Numbers that lineup configuration will mostly only lead to minor changes (like, 5-10 runs a season), but the optimal way to set up a lineup is in decending order of OBP, and this is because the guys at the top get the most at bats, so putting guys with high OBP will lead to less outs, and less outs means more runs. Their conclusion defies logic to such an extent that I don't believe it. The calculation shouldn't take too long.. I would rather test it myself than blindly believe what someone else says.

They came to the conclusion in Baseball Between the Numbers that lineup configuration will mostly only lead to minor changes (like, 5-10 runs a season) If you agree with the analysis that lineup configuration only leads to 5-10 run differentials over the course of an entire season then I don't know why you would waste time arguing over how the lineup is configured given that 5-10 runs per season is next to nothing. I argue about it because i think it leads to a lot more than 5-10 runs. If line-up configuration really made that much of a difference, Runs Created wouldn't be as accurate as it is. OBP ? SLG ? AB If that's the formula, which it is per Wikepidia, I think putting your better hitters at the top and your weaker hitters at the bottom would lead to a much higher number of runs created than vice versa because the guys with the higher OPB and higher SLG will have more ABs at the top of the order than they would at the bottom. If you have time try running the '06 Marlins flipping the OBP and SLG numbers but not the ABs.. for example take the 1st's AB and apply it to the 8th's OBP and SLG .. then the 2nd's ABs and apply it to the 7th's OBP and SLG and so on and then add them up and see what you come up with compared to what you come up with with the regular formula. I would do it myself but work gets in the way..

They came to the conclusion in Baseball Between the Numbers that lineup configuration will mostly only lead to minor changes (like, 5-10 runs a season) If you agree with the analysis that lineup configuration only leads to 5-10 run differentials over the course of an entire season then I don't know why you would waste time arguing over how the lineup is configured given that 5-10 runs per season is next to nothing. I argue about it because i think it leads to a lot more than 5-10 runs.

Some people that trash defensive stats, and rightfully so, then turn around and hang their hat on another stat that's comprised ~30% by a ridiculous defensive stat just because BP gave the first stat a really cool sounding name.

Ok, Festa. For example, Gonzalez backed disastrous reliever Jorge Julio far too long. And why not hit, say, Alfredo Amezaga (.270) second in the order and bump Dan Uggla (.255) to sixth? :notworthy Uggla has a higher OBP neither is the answer in the 2 hole though i agree that neither is the answer in the 2 hole, but uggla has a higher (and not by much) obp (.325) than alfredo (.320) hitting between superstars (understatement), as opposed to between the 2 worst hitting positions in the lineup (olivo/treanor and P). i'm sure you know this but isn't that a big deal? maybe amezaga would be around .350+ wedged in there. regardless, since uggla isn't the answer, other people should get a shot there. either amezaga or hermida should hit 2nd for a while. why not try it at this point? oh yeah, fredi likes his consistency (even if it means the player consistently fails to make contact in crucial situations) and amezaga turns the lineup over so well! Except that Amezaga isn't a good player. He hasn't had an OBP above .350 since a fluky 185 at bats at triple A as a 27 year in 2005. Uggla's got much more upside. So players don't progress? 29 year olds who haven't posted an OBP above .350 in a significant amount of at bats since 300 at bats at AAA in 2003 do not all of a sudden become .350 OBP players. Alfredo Amezaga is who he is, and that is a mediocre baseball player. He should've been hitting 2nd when he had his ridiculous hot streak, but now that he's back to earth, he's fine at the bottom of the order. And I don't buy into the "you need a certain type of hitter in a certain spot" argument. You want your best hitters at the top of the lineup. Uggla is a better hitter, thus, he should be higher in the lineup. I agree Uggla should be hitting higher than Fredo but neither should be hitting 2nd. Hermida / Hanley should be 1 and 2 followed by Miguel and Hammer and then Uggla. Fredo should be 7th or 8th. I thought the baseball prospectus "geniuses" believe that lineup configuration doesn't matter. Do you, for once, disagree with them?

A few of my favorites were already mentioned.. some that haven't: Sefton Sam Spade - Bogart version Betty Elms

I think a lot of people know Fredi is a puppet, and a nice puppet at that, and I think Beinfest deserves almost all the blame in the Julio and Benitez disasters but Fredi is the manager so he's the one who gets the blame for the game decisiosn even if he was doing what he was ordered to do. It may not be fair but that's how it is. I guess he shouldn't allow himself to be a puppet but maybe if he didn't allow himself to be a puppet he wouldn't have gotetn the job in the first place.

Even Tommy Hutton made a comment about Benitez. He was glowing about Amezaga and how it doesn't matter where you put him, he does his job and doesn't bitch and complain. And then he said, "And the same thing should apply to the bull pen. It doesn't matter which inning you're called upon to pitch. Get out there, do your job and shut up!" Me loves Tommy Hutton..... :notworthy Are you or Tommy implying Benitez complained about something? When did Benitez complain about anything? Has he pitched like crap? Absolutely. But I haven't heard of him complain about anything.. maybe I missed something but this has the feel of just kicking a guy when he's down. It's obvious to most people that Benitez shouldn't be pitching anything other than mop-up duty but unless he's dogging it there's no reason to stomp on him. The one who should be ripped is nice guy Fredi for throwing a reliever out there with games on the line when the reliever is struggling the way Benitez is right now.

bobbob, if you said that Hanley is having a better year relative to other SS than ARod's year relative to other 3B I may or may not agree with you, that would be debatable, but to flat out say that Hanley is having a better year than ARod is retarded because: - ARod has a higher OBP - ARod has a higher SLG - ARod has a higher OPS - ARod has a higher RISP OBP - ARod has a higher RISP SLG - ARod has a higher RISP OPS Average shortstop: .280/.336/.422 .758 Average third base: .284/.356/.482 0.838 That's a big difference. Arod: .295/.404/.626 1.030 OPS Hanley: .339/.392/.564 .954 OPS The difference between Hanley and the average SS is greater than the difference between Arod and the average third baseman. Though admittedly the difference isn't much in overall OPS, the ratio is more significant. I don't know where you're getting those numbers from but I have the numbers per ESPN below and the difference is not a large as you claim it is. It's only .045 OPS points, not the .080 you claim. Are your numbers "luck" adjusted or something? SS Average: .328 .400 .729 3B Average: .338 .437 .774 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggreg...ng&type=reg http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggreg...ng&type=reg

bobbob, if you said that Hanley is having a better year relative to other SS than ARod's year relative to other 3B I may or may not agree with you, that would be debatable, but to flat out say that Hanley is having a better year than ARod is retarded because: - ARod has a higher OBP - ARod has a higher SLG - ARod has a higher OPS - ARod has a higher RISP OBP - ARod has a higher RISP SLG - ARod has a higher RISP OPS

Can someone post Cabrera's VORP stat? Ask and you shall receive. Top 5 Position Players (By VORP) 1. Miguel Cabrera - 59.8 2. Hanley Ramirez - 58.5 3. Alex Rodriguez - 57.4 4. Chase Utley - 53.7 5. Magglio Ordonez - 52.8 Thanks Crimson. Wow, Miggy has a higher VORP than A-Rod? :o Do you have to be a member of Baseball Prospectus to get these stats? I think its more of WOW Hanley has a higher VORP than A-Rod. That's because VORP grades players on a curve based on what position they play. It's think it's kind of a joke because of it but it is what it is.

Of course bro, but I can't believe someone would even say something like that. And besides, white players have always dominated baseball, so saying the Babe wouldn't be good against blacks is like saying Gretzky wouldn't be good against blacks. That's ridiculous. Look at the top power hitters from 1950 to today and most of them are black. Nice job reading the rest of the thread. Of course bro, but I can't believe someone would even say something like that. And besides, white players have always dominated baseball, so saying the Babe wouldn't be good against blacks is like saying Gretzky wouldn't be good against blacks. Terrible comparison. Gretzky didnt play in a league with segregation, Ruth did. Of course hed still be great, but would he be as great if he played against all of the best competition? Would his numbers be the same? Who knows. Also, regarding "whites have always dominated baseball"...3 of the top 4 home run hitters of all time and one of the most complete players ever (Mays) are black. I meant that the game was domiated by the number of white players, not that whites were better than blacks. BTW, other side of the coin, all the top pitchers from 1950-today are white. All? What about Pedro, Marichal, Gibson, Newcome, Tiant, Blue and Jenkins? These 7 are probably among the top 20 pitchers since 1950.

Nice job reading the rest of the thread. Yes, I didn't read the entire thread.

Of course bro, but I can't believe someone would even say something like that. And besides, white players have always dominated baseball, so saying the Babe wouldn't be good against blacks is like saying Gretzky wouldn't be good against blacks. That's ridiculous. Look at the top power hitters from 1950 to today and most of them are black.

Last night I was watching Black Sunday in which some terrorist are plannign a terrorist attack during the Superbowl in the Orange Bowl. A couple of interesting thing in the movie was seeing the Miami skyline of 1977 and Joe Robbie has cameo of about a minute.

Preliminary findings on the best OBP / SLG ratio for OPS: In the interest of time and convenience, I relied solely on team runs scored, OBP, and SLG for this season, which makes small sample size alarms go off everywhere. I'll try to get a more in-depth analysis done soon where I look at those team stats for each season since the strike 1994-2007. I think it's probably the best period to use in terms of defining a particular era and having a big enough sample size. That said, I ran a multiple regression on where I use a computer to figure out the optimal values of A, B, and C for the equation: A*OBP + B*SLG + C = Runs Scored. The important thing is the values for A and B because B/A ought to give you the optimal ratio of OBP:SLG. Surprisingly, I got a rate of 1.342 OBP : 1 SLG as the best fit for the existing data. Additionally, my R-Squared value (which tells you how high the correlation is) was 0.89 (Perfect correlation = 1.0). Since I was kind of surprised that the coefficient for OBP wasn't higher, I decided to test the new formula against other variations of the OPS formula with different coefficients for OBP. The results are in the included graph. As you can see, the difference isn't all that significant although 1.342 remains the optimal coefficient. I'm going to see if I get the same thing once I include a wider sample size probably tomorrow. I've always thought the best ratio was 1.25 to 1 but I don't remember why. I must have read something a while back with that ratio and it must have made sense to me.

Ok bobbob, I did some quick math. Here is what I found: I did the following: -Used the 'Technical' Runs Created formula. Seen here -Took out the Pale Hoses' actual sac bunt, stolen base, and caught stealing totals and replaced them with the AL average in 2005. -Then did the formula, using the team's actual SH, SB, and CS totals for 2005. A 2005 ChiSox team managed by an 'average' AL manager: (1450+435-34+79-123) x (2349 + (.26 x (435-27+79)) + (.52x(32+49+83)) / 5529+435+79+32+49 = 730 Runs A 2005 ChiSox team managed by Ozzie Guillen: (1450+435-67+79-123) x (2349 + (.26 x (435-27+79)) + (.52x(53+49+137)) / 5529+435+79+53+49 = 715 Runs According to my method, Guillen's style of managing cost the ChiSox 15 runs in 2005. That's about 1.5 wins. :notworthy :notworthy That's a lot less than the 50 runs you said...