EVIL~! alkeiper

Its the open market. And I would say a player at the very top of his profession earns his pay.

Anyone want to make a wager on whether the Blue Jays resort to a position player on the mound? I'd give it a 30% chance.

Flaherty was the first hit batter of the game.

Terrible call from the Yankees/Blue Jays game, as Sean Douglass was tossed from the game for hitting a batter in the second inning. Even the Yankees announcers are calling bullshit.

Interesting Topic Phillies -------- Overrated: I want to say Larry Bowa, but I'm going with Chuck Klein. He made the HOF because he played in the hitter friendly Baker's Bowl in the 1930s. Underrated: My gut reaction is Bobby Abreu, but that seems too obvious. Let's take Roy Thomas. Largely forgotten today, he led the league in walks seven times, and played excellent defense in center field.

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball? Parker was among the best players in baseball in the late 70s. For two years, he was quite possibly the best player, although he never led baseball in Win Shares in any given year. He did lead the NL in 1977-78. 2. Was he the best player on his team? From 1975-79, Parker was the best player on the Pittsburgh Pirates. The '79 Pirates won the World Series. 3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position? Parker was easily the best right fielder in the National League in his prime. He was actually better than Reggie Jackson most years, but Ken Singleton was a better player. 4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races? In 1979, Parker hit 365/451/538 in September as the Pirates edged the Montreal Expos by two games. In 1985, Parker hit 386/435/667 in September and 375/423/875 in 24 October at bats, but the Reds lost out to the LA Dodgers. Over the course of Parker's career, he hit .310 in October. 5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime? Yes. Parker played until he was 40, and DH'ed for the 1989 Oakland Athletics, who won the World Series. 6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame? He's got an argument, but I think Ron Santo and Ryne Sandberg are more deserving. 7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame? Parker's two most similar players, Tony Perez and Billy Williams, are in the Hall. 8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards? Yes. Parker scores 26 on the Black Ink test (HOF average is 27), 145 on the Gray Ink test (average is 144), and he meets 41.1% of HOF standards. 9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics? Parker won three gold gloves, and had the pre-eminent arm of his day. Parker's throw home in the 1979 All Star game to nail Brian Downing at home plate is one of the greatest plays in baseball history. 10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame? Yes. 11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close? Parker won the MVP award in 1978, and finished in the top ten six times. He finished second once and third twice. 12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame? Parker played in seven All-Star games. 13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant? Yes. The Pirates won the World Series when Parker was their best player. 14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way? None apparent. 15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider? Parker was named in the cocaine scandal of 1985. Conclusion: Dave Parker was not a popular player. He feuded with teammates, fans, and the press. However, on the basis of his performance, he is a worthy HOF candidate. Ultimately though, I don't think he belongs. He was a great player, but he declined significantly after the 1979 season. He does not rank among the top 100 hitters in Win Shares, and does not rank even among the top 300 in Pete Palmer's Total Player Wins. I think there are other players who deserve consideration before Parker.

I believe eligibility is determined by each country's individual athletic departments. For example, we have USA Basketball, which determines which players we'll send. USA Baseball has their own department, and so on. Obviously, the Olympics not clashing with the NBA's schedule helps greatly in thie regard. We'll never see MLB players in the Olympics because of schedule disputes.

How exactly are win shares determined, Al? Especially when it comes to pitching where there are so many other intangibles affecting a pitcher's W/L record that don't necessarily have anything to do with how the pitcher performs? In short, Win shares take the team's actual wins, multiply them by three, and attribute them to individual players. Three is used because it results in useful integers. Full wins would be too vauge. The system makes allowances for era and park factors. So a hitter is not handicapped by playing in a poor hitters' environment, and vice versa. The win shares are divided between offense and defense. From defense, they are divided between pitching and fielding. To divide shares between pitching and fielding, Bill James uses fielding independant pitching statistics (Walks, Strikeouts, Home Runs), a few fielding statistics, and a modified defensive efficiency rating. Once the percentage of win shares are assigned to pitchers, they are then divided among individual pitchers. This is done mainly via runs allowed. The system also makes a small allowance for wins and losses, relief innings, and the pitcher's hitting record. Looking at the stats of Mulder and Santana, the Win Shares system likely chose Mulder based on his larger numbers of innings pitched, and less home runs allowed. Now keep in mind that these stats were last computed on August 1, the difference between Mulder and Santana was less than half a share, and Mulder pitched poorly on Tuesday. So it is likely that Santana has surpassed Mulder. The full Win Shares system takes over 100 pages to explain, most of which consist of fielding. The system makes many more small variances that I have not explained, nor have the time or energy to explain. If anyone has a specific question, however, I will be glad to answer it.

I'm gonna try doing these for individual series, rather than an entire week. Big time series this week between the A's and Yankees. Possible ALCS matchup? Other interesting series include Atlanta at Houston, and Anaheim at Minnesota.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1852664 My best guess is that the Sox will play Alomar at second, move Juan Uribe to short, move Jose Valentin to third, and bench Joe Crede. I doubt the PTBNL will be anyone important, so I can't fault the Sox for this move.

Getting a .312 slugging percentage from your second baseman will warm you up to Alomar in a hurry.

He misspelled Rantsylvania as well.

Yes. Rest assured, we will discuss the Olympics when it comes around, and it should receive its just due. But a OaO thread for the Olympics is bordering on insanity. There's a couple dozen different events occuring over a period of two weeks. No one wants to slog through 30 pages of posts to try and discuss the events.

I too am getting tired of the professional dream teams. Its not a matter of professionalism over amateurism. Its just that these rosters are little different than what we see in our professional sport leagues, except the rosters are re-shuffled.

I can't see it. Olerud doesn't have the counting stats needed, and he wasn't a dominant player at any point during his career. He was the best in baseball in 1993, but one season doesn't get you the Hall. There have been a glut of first basemen over the last fifteen years. Jeff Bagwell, Mark McGwire, and Frank Thomas are all more deserving candidates. Then you have Rafael Palmeiro, Fred McGriff, Jim Thome, and Jason Giambi. I can't see the 7th or 8th best first baseman of his era garnering induction.

The Dodgers have won 4 games in a row since trading their heart and soul, and are now 6.5 games up in the National League West.

When I printed the Win Shares leaders a few days ago, Mulder had a slight edge on Johan Santana. So its not quite a slam dunk for Santana even if you dig into the stats. Although I like Santana. I stuck with him on my fantasy squads, and its paying off big time.

Tyler Walker is going against Clement. Jason Schmidt starts Saturday versus Maddux.

I don't buy it. I have always believed contraction was never a serious consideration, and merely a ploy for the Twins to try and squeeze a new stadium from Minnesota.

Heh I'm nowhere near that point, quite yet.

Good evening everyone. Kingpk has been promoted to a global mod, and I have been asked to fill his position as moderator here at the sports forum. First off, I have some ground rules I would like to lay down..... 1. One and Only threads are hereby abolished. I feel if a topic is important enough to generate discussion it should have its own thread. And you should be able to come up with a paragraph to describe your thoughts. If it is a minor trade of which you have no substantial thoughts, don't bother posting it. 2. In place of the OaO threads, I am going to experiment with AIM chats, similar to the one employed on the TSM main page. These chats will serve as places to discuss game chatter, and whatever else is on your minds. They might provide a good outlet for your various thoughts, and save resources on the message board. 3. Posts of a certain type bitching about a certain team will no longer be tolerated. These posts will be summarily edited. If you have something to say about your team, say something constructive, meaningful, and that encourages subsequent discussion. This is not your personal venting stage. That's about the gist of it. We are here to engage in friendly discussion and debate. I hope I can create a condusive environment to both.

Some new rules I'm establishing...... 1. OaO threads should only be started by moderators, either myself or one of the global mods. If you feel something deserves an "official" or "OaO" thread, PM me. 2. No more "athletes you dislike" threads. We get them every 3-4 months, and they're all quite pointless.

If Billy Beane didn't see or get an offer which suited him, he shouldn't be in any rush to trade Zito. There's always time to trade him in the future.

Re: Barry Zito What would happen is that when he becomes eligible for free agency, the A's would decide whether to offer him arbitration. Let me try and make this easy to decifer..... Option 1: A's Do not offer arbitration The A's then lose the right to resign Zito, and he's a free agent. The A's receive no compensation. Option 2: A's offer arbitration The A's can continue to negotiate with Zito. If Zito declines arbitration and signs with another team, the A's receive draft picks. HOWEVER, Zito may accept arbitration, and he would then likely receive a high salary, which the A's would have to pay. So there's a risk involved.

The pros with Selig: - The Wild Card and Realignment - Standing firm on Pete Rose The cons with Selig: - The Expos - Contraction - This Time, It Counts - The Milwaukee Stadium Debacle Personally, I think he's due to be turfed as well, but he's not quite the anti-christ that most would make him out to be. Purists may hate it, but I really think the Wild Card has changed baseball for the better. I don't view the Wild Card and realignment as a positive. I am not a gung ho traditionalist, however, so its not automatically a negative either. At best I'd call it a push. I am more concerned with expansion of the playoffs. Here are my pros and cons: PROS -Continued rise of revenues -Expansion -New Baseball Stadiums CONS -1994 Baseball Strike and subsequent lockout in 1995 -Threats of contraction -Conning cities for new baseball stadiums -Pete Rose (he didn't stand firm, he simply didn't DO anything) -Interleague play (a fair idea, but it has become too prominant in the schedule) -The disgraceful situation of the Montreal Expos -Lying about the problem of competitive balance, and then when the problem fixes itself, claiming it was his solutions which fixed it. Competitive balance is chiefly brought on by the amateur draft. -Luxury Tax. It was meant to bring the Yankees back to Earth, and it accomplished the exact opposite. The tax is a dismal failure. -Giving in to Fox's postseason money at the expense of the game. -Attempting to sell advertising space on game equipment.