Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Jon's other site:
Screen Jam
TV and more ...
1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with
It's going to be very interesting to see whether the Dodgers can get good years out of relief pitchers Takashi Saito, Jonathan Broxton and Joe Beimel in 2008, after each performed well in 2006 and 2007. With the exception of Eric Gagne, the team arguably has not gotten three consecutive quality seasons from a relief pitcher this decade.
This dovetails with my conclusion that with only scattered exceptions, relief pitcher excellence does not repeat from year to year.
For that SI.com report, I used the Adjusted Runs Prevented statistic from Baseball Prospectus. Today, I tried a different approach. I used BP's WXRL, which the site defines as "expected wins added over a replacement level pitcher, adjusted for level of opposing hitters."
What follows below is a chart of WXRL per nine innings pitched. I did not include pitchers who started a significant number of games in a given season. Note that some of the players on this list pitched very few innings, including Gagne in 2005 and 2006.
| Player | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terry Adams | 0.21 | ||||||||
| Victor Alvarez | -0.01 | ||||||||
| Danys Baez | -0.01 | ||||||||
| Joe Beimel | 0.29 | 0.31 | |||||||
| Yhency Brazoban | -1.99 | -0.04 | 0.11 | 0.26 | |||||
| Troy Brohawn | 0.21 | ||||||||
| Jonathan Broxton | 0.31 | 0.27 | -0.20 | ||||||
| Buddy Carlyle | -0.28 | ||||||||
| Giovanni Carrara | -0.07 | 0.13 | 0.28 | -0.01 | 0.21 | ||||
| Lance Carter | -0.03 | ||||||||
| Steve Colyer | 0.05 | ||||||||
| Elmer Dessens | 0.33 | 0.05 | -0.15 | ||||||
| Darren Dreifort | 0.19 | ||||||||
| Brian Falkenborg | -0.07 | ||||||||
| Mike Fetters | 0.17 | 0.44 | |||||||
| Eric Gagne | 0.45 | 0.73 | 0.87 | 1.01 | 0.90 | ||||
| Tim Hamulack | -0.13 | ||||||||
| Roberto Hernandez | -0.35 | ||||||||
| Matt Herges | 0.25 | 0.21 | |||||||
| D.J. Houlton | 0.07 | ||||||||
| Eric Hull | 0.00 | ||||||||
| Masao Kida | 0.06 | -0.00 | |||||||
| Jonathan Meloan | -0.10 | ||||||||
| Tom Martin | -0.08 | 0.39 | |||||||
| Onan Masaoka | 0.10 | ||||||||
| Alan Mills | -0.10 | ||||||||
| Guillermo Mota | 0.42 | 0.35 | 0.09 | ||||||
| Terry Mulholland | -0.08 | 0.11 | |||||||
| Rodney Myers | 0.08 | 0.08 | |||||||
| Jose Nunez | -0.30 | ||||||||
| Gregg Olson | -0.06 | -0.16 | |||||||
| Jesse Orosco | 0.31 | -0.33 | |||||||
| Franquelis Osoria | 0.11 | 0.16 | |||||||
| Antonio Osuna | 0.07 | ||||||||
| Scott Proctor | 0.21 | ||||||||
| Paul Quantrill | 0.35 | 0.21 | |||||||
| Al Reyes | -0.17 | 0.43 | |||||||
| Takashi Saito | 0.81 | 0.63 | |||||||
| Duaner Sanchez | 0.19 | 0.11 | |||||||
| Steve Schmoll | 0.05 | ||||||||
| Jeff Shaw | 0.49 | 0.33 | |||||||
| Paul Shuey | 0.30 | 0.08 | |||||||
| Rudy Seanez | 0.09 | ||||||||
| Scott Stewart | -0.11 | ||||||||
| Mike Trombley | -0.41 | ||||||||
| Chin-Hui Tsao | 0.22 | ||||||||
| Mike Venafro | -0.33 | ||||||||
| Jeff Williams | -0.02 | 0.04 | -0.36 | ||||||
| Kelly Wunsch | 0.23 |
1) Eric Gagne (0.87, 1.01, 0.90)
2) Takashi Saito (0.81, 0.63)
3) Jeff Shaw (0.49, 0.33)
4) Guillermo Mota (0.42, 0.35)
5) Joe Beimel (0.29, 0.31)
6) Jonathan Broxton (0.31, 0.27)
7) Paul Quantrill (0.35, 0.21)
8) Mike Fetters (0.17 0.44)
9) Matt Herges (0.25, 0.21)
10) Giovanni Carrara (0.13, 0.28)
11) Paul Shuey (0.30, 0.08)
12) Yhency Brazoban (0.11, 0.26)
I'm probably reading this totally wrong, but wouldn't then Mike Fetters be in the top 12, too? Or am I looking at that wrong? Granted, it's Mike Fetters, but ...
Mike Trombley = desperation time
I can, however, vividly remember Olson's 1989 Donruss rookie card with the Orioles:
http://tinyurl.com/2om8zh
vs LHB = Great
vs RHB = Not So Great
His greatest strength is his tendancy to not give up too many HRs.
vr, Xei
2 - I think usage is a big factor. Broxton is certainly more impressive than Beimel, and certainly has a brighter future.
Here are some of the players in the range for the Dodgers first round pick (15)
13. Aaron Hicks, of/rhp, Wilson HS, Long Beach
Owns a plus fastball and curveball, but he may have more value as a speedy center fielder.
14. Harold Martinez, 3b, Braddock HS, Miami
Currently a shortstop, he has Gold Glove potential as a third baseman and can do everything but run.
15. Buster Posey, c, Florida State
Made a smooth transition from shortstop to catcher as a sophomore, makes consistent contact as a hitter.
16. Ryan Perry, rhp, Arizona
Put two mediocre seasons behind him by blowing away Cape hitters with 94-98 mph heat.
17. Shooter Hunt, rhp, Tulane
Can move up this list if he learns to trust his plus fastball-slider combo and throw more strikes.
18. Jacob Thompson, rhp, Virginia
Has very good command of solid stuff, similar to 2007 Athletics first-rounder Justin Simmons.
19. Dennis Raben, of, Miami
His big-time power makes him stand out easily among lackluster college outfield crop.
20. Alex Meyer, rhp, Greensburg (Ind.) HS
Already touches 96 mph and has a lot of projection remaining in his 6-foot-7, 200-pound frame.
I would love to have a Dodger named Shooter.
And Grizzly Adams did have a beard.
I love that there is a town named Defiance, OH.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7125
For the 25 year olds, Russell Martin is 6th, 24 year olds, James Loney is 14th.
Broxton, Hu and LaRoche are on the honorable mention list.
Tomorrow, he ranks the 23 and 22 year olds. Chad Billingsley and Matt Kemp should rank pretty high.
It would be curious to look at BA's pre 2007 draft and compare it to the real draft to see if it means jack or if predicting what Junior HS pitchers are going to do in their senior year has any merit.
There is also a band named Defiance, OH
I don't have premium access to Baseball Prospectus, but I would imagine there are a ton of red and yellow lights in that report.
vr, Xei
Not really. Edmonds, Giles, Wolf, and Prior got the reds.
That's who I would have guessed. Did TCY get a yellow?
vr, Xei
Of the 30 players on the list, one, Scherzer, was signed prior to the draft, so there were 29 draft eligible players on that draft list.
22 of the 29 were drafted and signed in the first round (4 were correct as to where they would be drafted). The remaining 7 players were drafted later, 5 signed with those teams, 2 players did not sign.
UCLA: #2 seed (West)
Stanford: #3 seed (South)
Washington St: #5 seed (East)
USC: #8 seed (Midwest) -- with a rematch against Kansas in round 2
Arizona: #8 seed (West)
Arizona St: #12 (South)
ASU is one of his "last four in".
Oregon is one of his "last four out".
Cal is one of his "next four out".
Still an outside shot for the conference to get 7 teams to the tourney.
May 18th is a lot different then Feb before the high school season starts. By May you know what you know, nothing is going to change.
http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffarth/archives/2008/02/tramps_like_us.html
I think a lot will depend on how the top 5 teams do in their regular and conference tourneys, UCLA may well have to win their tournament or at least get to the final game as long as they win the regular season title, in order to secure a 1 seed.
I'm sure the article was written before Sweeney was signed (non guaranteed of course), but it's just funny because this article is "newer" than the Sweeney has signed article.
http://tinyurl.com/35j2ff
Yeah, I can see that. I wonder if Memphis would lose a #1 seed if they go undefeated in the regular season but lose in the conference tourney.
As a UTEP fan, it at least gives me some pleasure to know that the only two teams that have played Memphis remotely close are the Miners and an ex-Miners coach (Floyd).
A. "The band is on the field!"
B. "The Giants win the pennant!"
C. "Havlicek stole the ball!"
D. "Go Crazy, Folks!"
E. Other
Never mind, that's commentary. Or is it?
Except that the Yankees, Red Sox and Tigers won't give up anything of value for that draft pick, because they know they can sit back and let the expensive prospect fall to them anyway.
It sucks that the big-money teams have finally gotten smart about the value of their prospects and farm systems. That was one of the few ways that Billy Beane and the small-revenue teams were able to stay afloat. The Santana-for-peanuts trade disappointed me in more ways than one.
Which stinks.
And I went to all that trouble today with the Sweeneys.
And we go to Chicago!
YMMV, of course.
I can see why Jon might find my choices depressing, however, since two of the four choices were Dodgers losses and another was a Stanford loss.
"Oh, the humanity!"
Let's say its this year and they want Tampa Bay's pick.
If I am Tampa Bay, maybe I'll take Ellsbury or Pedroia, I know Bucholz is unavailabe and I don't want Lester.
The baseball draft is so different than other sports, there are no eqiuivalents to the Tim Duncan's, Shaqs, Mannings in other sports. Would a team be willing to trade something of value for a projection.
It could work and it probably would make fans more excited about the draft but here's the other thing, the wait, to say its rare for a draft pick to play within the first year of being signed would be giving a casual meaning of rare.
The first step will be ending slot bonuses recommendations and then free-agent compensation of picks. Once those two things end, we'll see about trading picks.
Like 'Disabled List' says and it was my point earlier, with only three (or so) teams in the mix there is very little incentive to trade or give up very much to move up.
vr, Xei
Legally, sports are allowed to hold drafts because they are considered ways for the industries to regulate who joins the unions in that sport.
If none of the leagues had unions, it would be harder to get a draft approved. Except for baseball, which can pretty much do whatever it wants.
yeah, yeah, it's six words.
I guess it could be "It gets through Buckner!"
Except, of course, set its own drug testing policy.
Also, it's tough to compare sports to the real world. In the real world, companies can compete against one another, and the less successful companies might go out of business, or two companies could merge. In sports, that would not be a very stable situation if teams folded all the time.
The best part of that call is "BEHIND THE BAG!".
Or maybe the way Scully's voice cracks when he says, "here comes Knight, and the Mets win it." (but that's more than 5 words of course).
If baseball were to lose its antitrust exemption, would it still be allowed to hold a draft?
Competitive balance is a repressive argument. You would pick the team who either paid you the most or gave you the best opportunity for advancement or was the most geographically desirable. Whichever was most important to you as an individual.
You should never be rewarded for being bad, and that is what the draft does. I suck at my job but because I suck at my job it gives me the right to take the best available talent and let civil rights of these 18 year old be damned.
How strange is it that foreign born ballplayers have more civil rights then American born players? They can pick and choose whatever team they want to play for. Since a large % of baseball players are now made up of foreign born players has it altered the landscape of "competitive balance"?
"They're all gone."
The NBA doesn't have an antitrust exemption and it has a draft.
On a smaller scale, I can't say I remember the call to the Brian Johnson HR in 1997.
In baseball, as in many things, the free market is not the answer to everything.
Without the draft, if a team ran out of assets, they'd just be finished unless some young talent decides out of the blue to be charatable and join the team. Eventually, people stop coming to the games, and the franchise folds. I don't think that's in anyone's best interests.
Well, that answers that. Thanks.
In 2000, Hiroshima had a park factor of 107, or the equivelant of Philadelphia or Cincinatti. In 2001, it had a park factor of 100, so it was neutral.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1330
If you eliminate 2), then 1) becomes worthless and the game will slowly die. I'm sympathetic to ToyCannon's argument, but the survival of the industry must be taken into consideration.
The main reason for the difference in operating budgets between MLB teams is the vast difference in how much each team's TV contract pays. But as James noted, if the Yankees play the Royals and it's getting beamed across the entire Eastern Seaboard, why do the Yankees have the legal right to keep all that money? There are two teams playing the game. The game cannot be played and cannot be televised unless the Yankees have an opponent.
Therefore, it stands to reason that for every game that's televised, the two teams should split the TV revenue derived from that game equally. MLB could devise new rules to this effect and it would probably go a long way toward evening the money imbalance, while not giving the poor teams anything that's not theirs by rights already.
vr, Xei
Rational economic theory, baby!
One thing you could do, maybe, is to put a salary cap on amateur signings. The union could be persuaded to accept this since those guys aren't union members anyway. Give every team a budget of, say, $3 million for amateur signings. Not only can they not spend more than this, but they can't spend less, either. Abolish the draft. Every player gets to choose where he signs, based on how much each team offers. If a team wants to blow 90% of its budget on Rick Porcello, hey, that's cool. If instead they want to use that money to sign 20 lesser prospects, that's fine too. The players get to go where they want to, talent is distributed evenly among all the teams, and everybody's happy. (Well, except for Scott Boras and George Steinbrenner.)
As it stands now, the Royals could conceivably charge more for ads on their broadcasts when the Yankees or Red Sox are one (more viewers), just like some teams charge a premium for tickets when NY or Boston is the opponent.
Now your talking. I'd make the budget much more and it would be tied to overall baseball revenue. Much like the basketball cap except it would only be used to cap the budget for amateur players and would encompass foreign and American players.
1. might those teams actually end up with a glut of talent leading to difficult roster decisions and some fascinating Rule V drafts, or more interesting veteran free agents?
2. wouldn't some players want to sign where they perceive a faster route to the major leagues? For example, if I'm a corner infielder prospect, do I sign with the Dodgers who already have Loney, LaRoche, Lambo, Baez, DeWitt, etc.?
Also, while the big-name Japanese talent seems to gravitate toward a few select places, aren't the Latin American amateur free agents spread all over baseball (admittedly many are signed young and cheap...)?
I could care less what FJM has to say. It is easy and not impressive to make fun of what others have to say either, in print or on the air.
Or, if you prefer, quire.
I don't care about free-market, my complaint was strictly a persons right to choose their future instead of having some monolithic entity decide it for them. Eric's plan meets the conditions of those who want to maintain competitive balance and will meet mine since the individual is free to choose which team they will sign with. In most cases it will always be who offers the most money but not everyone will, and those few should be given the chance to invoke their rights.
Unless we do a Seattle/Oriole like trade. That would open up some spots very quickly.
Cargill doesn't seem to visit here when there is no trade rumor going on.
How do you deal with the trade concept then? Only trades players that agree to move to another team?
-- trade Beimel & Saito or don't resign them?
-- find an experienced reliever coming off a bad year? Is there a way to predict which ones are ready for a comeback vs. which ones are in permanent decline?
Did the greatest relievers in MLB history defy this pattern? Is that where all the "scattered exceptions" are found?
Pretty much all I can recommend when signing relievers is just find guys with live arms, like Rudy Seanez, that you can get on the cheap.
http://cache.valleywag.com/assets/resources/screenclean.swf
Safe for work.
What does this mean for Kuroda if the D's have an unexpected surplus of adequate starters in '08. I think I am slightly biased toward Japanese pitchers by the Dodgers experience with them. But the meager info I have heard about Kuroda's personality makes him sound like a closer or set up man.
IP: 180
Hits: 184
HRs: 20
SO: 114
BB: 35
Using same set of projections Kuroda's most similar NL West pitchers are.
1. Maddux
2. Haren (HR/9, BB/9 almost identical, Haren has higher K/9).
3. Germano
Closest Dodger comp (based on 2008 ZIPS) is Derek Lowe.
Rates used: HR/9, K/9, BB/9
Not sure on Kuroda's GB/FB ratio.
vr, Xei
vr, Xei
Down to their last strike
The mustards off the hotdog
Dodgers, 2008 World Series Champs
vr, Xei
Yeah, the key will be if Beimel can keep inducing grounders back to the box at a superhuman rate. My head says he can't keep it up, but my gut/heart thinks/hopes he will at least be above average and thus effective.
I was thinking now might be too soon, but most other projection systems are already out so what the heck.
I'd be happy to compile the numbers and average them out.
Furcal: .289/.342/.426
Pierre: .297/.329/.360
Loney: .316/.377/.508
Jones: .255/.348/.501
Kent: .280/.366/.477
Kemp: .297/.349/.512
Martin: .301/.368/.462
LaRoche: .263/.371/.455
vr, Xei
1. Expensive superstars are probably undervalued. I'll expect to see a lot of team's good players total up to 20 million while they fill up the rest of the cap with Jose Guillen's. I might be able to make a killing early if I can take Pujols/A-Rod in the first two rounds.
2. Catchers are very scarce. Each team needs two, so there will be 60 starting catchers total. By my count, there are eight cost effective, productive catchers in baseball. Would it be a good choice to take two of Martin/McCann/Martinez in rounds one and two (I have the 26th and 35th overall picks).
3. The league doesn't seem too impressive, so I can probably hold off on pitching as long as possible and just take young guys with good arms.
4. Since closers are generally veterans, they tend to be expensive. I should probably jump on Saito or Putz early.
Any other ideas?
Furcal: .289/.342/.426
Pierre: .297/.329/.360
Loney: .316/.377/.508
Jones: .255/.348/.501
Kent: .280/.366/.477
Kemp: .297/.349/.512
Martin: .301/.368/.462
LaRoche: .263/.371/.455
Yeah, I plagiarized...
I actually have no confidence in making any projections of my own. I will say that sw's stab for Loney seems a little optimistic, for both patience and power.
PVL=Proven Veteran Liability, a whole new meaning?
Pierre: .280/.320/.345
Loney: .310/.365/.460
Jones: .250/.340/.460
Kemp: .290/.335/.490
Kent: .270/.355/.445
Martin: .290/.375/.455
LaRoche: .280/.360/.460
Draft to maximize your scoring and don't worry where the points come from.
Always fun to throw out AROD, bid him up, and hope a couple of owners keep bidding until someone overbids.
Pierre: .337/.389/.435
Loney: .305/.355/.470
Jones: .275/.360/.510
Kemp: .280/.345/.490
Kent: .270/.355/.445
Martin: .280/.365/.450
LaRoche: .260/.340/.440
Nomar: .290/.340/.400
Ethier: .285/.350/.415
I believe Scrappy McTryhard will channel the negative energy from this site into a run at the batting title.
I'd like to vote after work, so I can take my 7 yr old with me.
But then I don't get to wear my "I voted" sticker all day. Which bothers me in its own right and furthermore I expect will lead to do-gooders at the office bugging me over and over again.
I s'pose it's a sacrifice I have to make for the civic education of my son.
So far I have watched the 1959 & 1963 WS videos, and Vin Scully was narrating those. The name "Lew Fonseca" sounded so familiar that he certainly could have narrated some others.
I looked it up and he did in fact narrate some of the earlier videos, but it changed to the winning team's announcers sometime in the late 1950s.
http://weblogs.variety.com/season_pass/2008/02/friday-night-li.html
I loved their comment on Peter Crouch when the stork-like player couldn't put a header in: "He's jus' got no power in that neck!"
So Wallace (who they just said is the best foul shooter in Georgetown history!) makes the shots and that's it.
Ouch.
Martin - .285/.365/.460
Loney - .314/.371/.509
Kent - .281/.360/.458
LaRoche - .273/.351/.472
Nomar - .284/.342/.419
Furcal - .291/.357/.438
Ethier - .297/.361/.471
Pierre - .310/.347/.384
Andruw - .259/.346/.519
Kemp - .317/.362/.498
Abreu - .267/.314/.404
Penny - 3.47/1.35
Billingsley - 3.07/1.23
Lowe - 3.74/1.28
Kuroda - 3.91/1.37
Schmidt - 4.21/1.32
Loaiza - 4.78/1.48
Saito - 2.39/1.03
Broxton - 2.71/1.14
Beimel - 3.84/1.35
Proctor - 3.65/1.31
That was weird and strangely clairvoyant. You knew I was going to post right after to you!
Has anyone seen the Torre picture on the latest article at Dodgers.com? His mellon is HUGE. A gigantic brain like that must make you really really smart.
Plus Torre wears his caps like my dad used to -- almost sitting on top of his head.
I was checking the Australian players in the minors, and the Dodgers have only one as far as I can tell. Some teams, like the Twins and Phillies, have seven or eight. Is that just down to not having a scout here, or randomness?
Word over here is that MLB is going to subsidise a national baseball league, which for economic reasons, we have not had here for a while. That would be good.
Paul LoDuca spent some time playing the Australian Baseball League while he was a minor leaguer.
I wish I could go to baseball games.
That was one of the worst calls I have ever seen. Let them decide the game in overtime. The guy barely touched him.
I was fairly sure there had been a story sometime the last few years that one spring after Koufax retired, he donned cleats at Vero, cranked it up again, and even managed to hit 90 on the gun. And yea, apparently it came to pass-----
"Koufax, who lives in Vero Beach much of the year, was a no-show, but his name still resonates as much as ever.
"In spring 1986, 20 years after he was forced to retire because of arthritis in his pitching elbow, Koufax started to throw again. At age 50.
"There on a back mound, the man who is arguably the greatest left-handed pitcher of all-time brought back his high leg kick and blistering fastball. By the end of spring training he hit 90 mph on a radar gun.
"It absolutely stopped the camp," said Jerry Reuss, a Dodgers left-hander at the time.
"As great a pitcher as he was, Koufax is an equally talented student of the game. He would often come to spring training, make a few adjustments to a pitcher's delivery and vanish.
"Last spring, Jay Howell, the closer for the Dodgers' 1988 championship team, made a rare visit.
"As he left, Howell recounted how Koufax once suggested he change his grip on the ball.
'It added six years to my career,' he said. 'I never got the chance to say thank you.'
"That was the power of Koufax. The magic of one generation teaching the next. And the beauty of Dodgertown."
Other good stuff on Dodgertown also.
http://www.dailynews.com/sports/ci_8220160
Pierre: .301/.339/.352
Loney: .306/.352/.483
Jones: .267/.351/.504
Kemp: .302/.353/.521
Kent: .267/.338/.421
Martin: .281/.359/.464
LaRoche: .259/.344/.439
Nomar .319/.363/439
Ethier .293/349/441
Did you order in any more DVD's of Canadian shows?
I am about to say something nice about Juan Pierre.
The two best baserunners in all of baseball--by far--are Jose Reyes and Juan Pierre.
Here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/2xdmac
Hey, I teach the subject, 'kay? Doesn't mean I have to know it.
I started watching Corner Gas, but I am not a big fan. Has that common sitcom style of humor.
I have been watching two British shows, Garth Marenghi's Darkplace and Man to Man with Dean Lerner and those shows are brilliant! Richard Ayoade is going to be a big star one day. Hopefully, NBC picks up the American re-make of The It Crowd.
147 - Sam, if you're still awake by now, why not let your son "help" you vote and then wear the sticker? My little sister got to do that with my mom way back in '00 and we still give her a hard time for it!
Andy will struggle in his 1st season much like Cey did, but he will do enough that he is the main guy.
Nomar is going to get that lift in average by pounding LHP in a part time role. His slug % is still low. He will not be the starting 3rd baseman.
Of course, the first presidential election I got to do this for was 1972, which wasn't exactly a great example for coloring.
What happens if, after a candidate is officially nominated by his/her party at the Democratic or Republican convention, but before the general election, the candidate is incapacitated or dies? Does the party substitute a new candidate before the election? What if there isn't enough time to do that? Do the votes go to the VP on the ticket? What if both die?
Yes, I'm thinking oddly today.
But the lunch ladies are going to hound me during the day!
In 1912, the Republican candidate for VP, James Sherman (he was actually the incumbent VP) died on October 12, 1912. The Republicans substituted Nicholas Butler, president of Columbia University. William Howard Taft kept running.
It didn't matter as Taft finished third behind Wilson and Roosevelt.
In 1872, Horace Greeley was the Democratic nominee for president and he lost the election to Ulysses Grant. Greeley passed away after the vote, but before the date the electors met. So the electors pledged to Greeley, just picked whomever they wanted and some still voted for Greeley.
There are no other precedents. If the electors have not met, I would think that the National Committee of the party in question would select a new candidate to replace any deceased candidate.
Furcal: .289/.357/.431
Pierre: .291/.330/.355
Loney: .301/.355/.495
Jones: .270/.370/.540
Kemp: .295/.350/.515
Kent: .280/.360/.475
Martin: .290/.375/.470
LaRoche: .289/.381/.439
Nomar: .285/.340/.385
Ethier: .295/.355/.465
With Saito, you have to watch how his age affects his durability. I do think he's an exception to the rule, but mentally, we have to prepare ourselves for more blown saves this year.
I'd think Broxton should be fine. Few relievers hit the big time at his age.
Your question isn't odd either. Constitutional law scholars have written dozens of articles on the very subject you asked about.
I read those for fun!
I thought Jon preferred the version with Denzel Washington, Liev Schrieber, Meryl Streep, and Vera Farmigia.
Where does one find articles from Constitutional law scholars?
So far I have received 7 entries. 3 of them didn't include Nomar and Ethier. Reg & silverwidow (& by extension, GoBears), feel free to add those any time.
I was the only one to put in an Abreu projection, but it might be overkill to include him.
Presidential elections are based on the fact that we, the voters, trust them, the electors, to vote the way we want them to. They can always go rogue and go elect someone like Jon as president.
If you want to find articles on the topic, go to the library. You work at a big university and I'm sure you can find some in a database that BYU has access to.
Alternatively, you can just wait around until Slate.com runs an Explainer on the topic.
Actually you wouldn't have liked that version of the film. It was a pale imitation of the original.
http://www.slate.com/id/91839/
It's actually not all that annoying.
He did have some back problems last year from what I remember. I can't remember if it was back problems or shoulder tightness or maybe both.
http://tinyurl.com/2yq6uq
Jul 26, 2007: Missed 4 games (right shoulder injury).
Jul 23, 2007: Right shoulder injury, day-to-day.
Jun 8, 2007: Missed 4 games (left hamstring injury).
Jun 3, 2007: Left hamstring injury, day-to-day.
Jun 1, 2007: Missed 2 games (shoulder injury).
May 30, 2007: Shoulder injury, day-to-day.
La Roche - .285/.385/.525
Martin - .290/.370/.450
Loney - .300/.360/.500
Jones - .250/.350/.500
Kent - .285/.355/.485 (Rate2: 80)
Kemp - .290/.335/.495
Ethier - .290/.360/.460
Furcal - .290/.350/.430
Pierre - .310/.340/.390
Abreu - .280/.320/.430
Nomar - .270/.320/.385 (for LA)
Nomar - .300/.345/.480 (for NYY)
Sweeney - .270/.330/.410
Young - .290/.330/.475
Penny - 3.85/1.35
Lowe - 3.50/1.23
Bills - 3.25/1.10
Kuroda - 4.45/1.35
Schmidt - 4.20/1.28
Saito - 2.51/0.95
Broxton - 2.90/1.10
Beimel - 3.90/1.40
Proctor - 3.35/1.15
Brazoban - 4.50/1.25
Loaiza - 5.81/1.58
Seanez - 4.75/1.21
FYI, I'm only counting your LA numbers for Nomar. :)
The 2007 Rockies hit .280/.354/.437, and scored 5.28 runs per game.
The 2006 Red Sox hit .269/.351/.435, and scored 5.06 runs per game.
Hell, the 2006 Dodgers hit .276/.348/.432, and scored 5.06 runs per game.
I would say 5 runs per game isn't out of the question. The Dodgers averaged 4.7 runs per game from June 10 on (the date Loney came up -- Kemp was 2 days earlier).
Last week HBO had that film on at 2 in the morning and I could only see about 45 minutes of it. I have been waiting all week to see it, but I have yet to see it on TV again. Really want to finish watching it.
About a month ago, my brother made CrackerJack from scratch, and it was outstanding. He denied my request to have a small prize included with my snack.
Twerp. There is a tall tale that Koufax struck out the heart of the 81 Dodgers as well one spring. Actually the story I read or heard was that he struck out Garvey, Cey, Baker but Pedro G. took Sandy deep with an opposite field shot straight down the line. Not sure if it is true or if I have the story straight but I do recall reading/hearing an approximate version of it. Any one else hear a story like this one?
203 HBO On Demand if you have digital cable. You can watch most of the HBO movies they are showing that month. no cost for the feature. Same goes for Showtime, Movie Channel etc.
Nomar - .285/.325/.380
Ethier - .280/.335/.450
I think the only prediction that's been more pessimistic than any of mine is TC's LaRoche numbers.
HBO did not put it On Demand until today, so thankfully I can finally watch it.
In case you're skimming for these numbers:
Ethier: .280/.345/.450.
My point was if you have all those people at or above .800 (but not much over), the team OPS -- adding in a bench and pitchers hitting to lower the total -- will be slightly under .800.
The examples I used were numbers I think the Dodgers can be in the vicinity of this season.
I stand by the 5 runs per game. They averaged 4.7 per game once Kemp and Loney came up, and they can improve on the following:
1) Andruw replacing Gonzo ABs
2) A healthy Furcal
3) Production from 3B
4) Pierre getting something less than 100.0% of PA
That, and I'm not one of these people who believe the rulebook should just be chucked out the window in the final 10 seconds of the game. I'm weird like that.
http://www.denverpost.com/rockies/ci_8219026
"Oakland's asking price for pitcher Joe Blanton is steep. From the Dodgers, the A's want Andre Ethier, Andy LaRoche and a prospect."
Well there was a lot of debate about whether he was out of bounds or not too.
For these purposes I am just going to assume he was out of bounds. You said that the contact would not have normally been called a foul, which I agree with. But you said that GTown do not deserve to be punished since they did nothing wrong. Well if the guy plays good defense and forces that guy out of bounds, shouldn't his team be rewarded?
I do not buy that Beane would want Ethier from us. He wants middle infielders.
Yeah, he should. But that's not what happened. Instead, he bumped him to force him out of bounds. A small bump, but IMO it did make the difference in knocking Wallace out of bounds.
I think two replay angles clearly showed Wallace's foot on the line. And for what it's worth, it doesn't really matter whether he ACTUALLY stepped out, because it's clear that the ref THOUGHT he stepped out. Otherwise the foul wouldn't have been called.
As for people who disliked the call, I think the only legitimate argument they have is that the bump didn't negatively impact Georgetown, because they weren't going to have time to score anyway. That's obviously true, but I don't think it's enough to rationalize swallowing the whistle. Besides, the ref had no way of knowing at the time whether the call would negatively impact Georgetown. If you give the ball back to Nova with 1.2 seconds left, they have time to make a game-winning shot. But you can't do that -- you can't give them an illegitimate possession with time left on the clock. Instead it turned out there were 0.2 seconds left instead of 1.2, but we can't expect the refs to know that unless we're asking them to look up and analyze the clock situation before every blow of the whistle.
Like I said earlier, I hate it when the last 10 seconds of the game is played under a different set of rules than the first 39:50. It's by far the lamest thing about college basketball. I mean, what other sport just chucks the rulebook out the window at the most important time of the game? It's ridiculous and it needs to be stopped.
The baseball equivalent would be bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth, and the home plate umpire refusing to call a ball, even though the pitcher throws 7 straight pitches in the dirt, because he doesn't want the game to be decided on a walk. It's that ridiculous.
So this Georgetown victory is legit in my opinion. They still need to give back their win at West Virginia, though.
I watched the ending to the Rutgers/Tennessee game and a lot of people were really upset with that one. Granted, I did not see the replays, but the girl seemed to have gotten hacked so I have no problem with them calling a foul to basically end the game in that circumstance.
If the ump had been consistently calling a low strike zone, but then on the last batter of the game calls a high strike, I would be irritated.
Martin 288/366/454
Jones 263/342/497
Kemp 312/373/521
Loney 321/372/543
Kent 290/357/504
Eithier 295/357/464
Laroche 279/361/402
Nomar 283/328/371
Pierre 300/347/373
It's sad that no one project anyone even sniffing a .400 on base. Man I wish we had that type hitter ya know?
Having the 3 month old 206 it took me 3-4 days to watch the whole movie, but would watch bits at a time and was gripped. It may be better that way strangely. I thought of stuff in between. It was a book I guess. Love the narrator. I purposely stayed away from reading about it not to be spoiled so in general I don't know a thing about it.
Great film and typically not my type of movie (other than I will watch a great movie in any genre out of respect and curiosity)
I thought the call was crap myself. So many ticky-tack fouls either get called or missed throughout an entire game that it seems stupid to let one of the ones that does get called decide the game. Fouls during the last 5 seconds of a game should be restricted to truly obvious calls.
Andrew, I'll just send you a deposit. I trust your judgment.
Thus far everyone seems to be really close on their Martin projections. There is not a lot of variance. We all have a pretty similar idea of what we think Russ will do.
Keep the projections coming.
I thought the East German judge gave Pierre a "NINE!!!"
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.