08-10-2009, 09:18 PM
<!--quoteo(post=56799:date=Aug 10 2009, 04:18 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Aug 10 2009, 04:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=56797:date=Aug 10 2009, 04:05 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Aug 10 2009, 04:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Butch, PCB said Stevens had been good in the pen. You used a BS statistic to disprove that. Stevens HAS been effective, except his outing yesterday skewed his ERA. I showed you how I could also use a BS statistic to disprove one of your holy tenets. DeRosa has been more effective than a .222 average and a .276 OBP would indicate.
Although I will admit that you motherfuckers sure piss and moan a lot about losing a guy with a sub .800 OPS this year.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The point is, regardless of how well he has pitched, is that he's pitched 7 innings -- certainly not enough to determine how awesome he's going to be. And again, I don't see him making much of an impact on the 2009 Chicago Cubs. As an aside (but pretty relevant to my point), Stevens will be 26 next month. That's pretty fucking old for a prospect.
How about this, BT? Instead of arguing around the perimeter of this discussion, let me ask you two questions, because I'm curious.
Did you like the DeRosa trade when Hendry made it?
Do you like the DeRosa trade now?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll answer them, but they are fairly pointless questions without context.
Did I like the trade when he made it? No. No one would like a competitive team trading a starter for 3 prospects. So the deal in a vacuum doesn't help us. But it doesn't matter if I liked it when he made it. A more pertinent question is:
Did I like the trade of DeRosa if it freed up money to sign Bradley? Yes, I did. And since we don't live in magic Butcher land, where we get to keep everyone AND sign Bradley, it think that is a more relevant question.
Do I like the trade now? No. Again, without context, it really doesn't mean much. I don't like the trade now because Fontenot has sucked worse than I thought possible, Ramirez has been hurt most of the year, and Bradley's OPS is .200 points lower than it has been the last 2 year, and the worst it has been since 2004. Those are 3 things (and that totally puts aside the struggles of Soriano and Soto)I didn't expect to happen, let alone all 3. If Bradley was slugging the way he has in virtually every other season of his career, I still wouldn't have a problem with the deal. So not liking the deal, because in retrospect it hasn't worked, doesn't really tell us anything.
Although I will admit that you motherfuckers sure piss and moan a lot about losing a guy with a sub .800 OPS this year.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The point is, regardless of how well he has pitched, is that he's pitched 7 innings -- certainly not enough to determine how awesome he's going to be. And again, I don't see him making much of an impact on the 2009 Chicago Cubs. As an aside (but pretty relevant to my point), Stevens will be 26 next month. That's pretty fucking old for a prospect.
How about this, BT? Instead of arguing around the perimeter of this discussion, let me ask you two questions, because I'm curious.
Did you like the DeRosa trade when Hendry made it?
Do you like the DeRosa trade now?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll answer them, but they are fairly pointless questions without context.
Did I like the trade when he made it? No. No one would like a competitive team trading a starter for 3 prospects. So the deal in a vacuum doesn't help us. But it doesn't matter if I liked it when he made it. A more pertinent question is:
Did I like the trade of DeRosa if it freed up money to sign Bradley? Yes, I did. And since we don't live in magic Butcher land, where we get to keep everyone AND sign Bradley, it think that is a more relevant question.
Do I like the trade now? No. Again, without context, it really doesn't mean much. I don't like the trade now because Fontenot has sucked worse than I thought possible, Ramirez has been hurt most of the year, and Bradley's OPS is .200 points lower than it has been the last 2 year, and the worst it has been since 2004. Those are 3 things (and that totally puts aside the struggles of Soriano and Soto)I didn't expect to happen, let alone all 3. If Bradley was slugging the way he has in virtually every other season of his career, I still wouldn't have a problem with the deal. So not liking the deal, because in retrospect it hasn't worked, doesn't really tell us anything.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.