MLB ST 2008-09

[bobbob1313]

I know who Matt Wieters is. I have a feeling everyone else in my (keeper) league does too. Anyone else have thoughts on resources for an auction day crash course? Up to the minute depth charts, etc.? Is the closer in Texas CJ Wilson or Frank Francisco?

 

Also, I am going to go ahead and slap the keeper tag on Alexei Ramirez with his $1 salary (pats self on back).

 

I've got a baseball prospectus subscription, if you want to check out the PECOTA projections.

 

I understood what he meant, bobs! I don't disagree. I was just providing a possible explanation.

 

I know. I wasn't mad. Stop yelling.

 

And I'd just like to repeat since I know accusing a Sock hero of using might get under some skin here, I don't think he used.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

I'm actually crying

 

 

tears of joy!

[jenbobblehead]

Roger Clemens isn't black and he got hit with the steroid stick. Is it because he's an asshole?

[bobbob1313]

Roger Clemens isn't black and he got hit with the steroid stick. Is it because he's an asshole?

 

He got caught in the mitchell report and has been combative and an asshole his whole career.

[Moss]

LOL, my Zambrano photoshop made it to the front page of The Cub Reporter

 

Awesome.

 

How about this kid. Here's hoping he goes to the Rockies, 20 years old and hitting 101MPH

 

Strasburg

[Lammycat]

I really feel like Joe Sheehan gets it when it comes to steroids:

 

 

 

That being said, he thinks he's a hall of famer, but as usual he does a great job of pinpointing some of the inherent hypocrisy in the steroid era. Note, he's not accusing Schilling of using.

So Sheehan is saying because of who he's played for, his verbosity, and his skin tone that he's free from suspicion? Not because he's never been even hinted at as using? I'm not sure I agree with the take.

 

As to Schilling's career being a more improbable path than Bonds', I disagree, too. While Bonds was a great player prior to the years he's assumed to have started using, his years after that are absurd for an aging ball player. I wouldn't call Schillings numbers absurd compared to his younger years. His velocity consistently went down as he aged, as well.

[Sir Stewart]

Where did Sheehan mention Bonds?

[Lammycat]

Where did Sheehan mention Bonds?

He didn't, I was responding to B2's take:

If anything Schilling's career followed an even less predictable path than Bonds', as Bonds was great (all time type of great) before he was older whereas Schilling never really put it together until he was older.

[Sir Stewart]

Ahh.

Anyway, I love the Irresistible Force (Red Sox Fan) vs the Immovable Object (Red Sox Hater) game.

[Guest Jules]

Awesome.

 

How about this kid. Here's hoping he goes to the Rockies, 20 years old and hitting 101MPH

 

Strasburg

http://forums.viachicago.org/index.php?s=&...t&p=1298932

[PigSooie]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/25/dining/25yanks.html

 

March 25, 2009

Yankee Stadium Has a Full Plate

By FLORENCE FABRICANT

 

WHEN the new Yankee Stadium opens April 3, the choice of food will be a bit more varied than before. There will be chains like Johnny Rockets and Brother Jimmy

[bobbob1313]

Most player's careers follow some type of curve that peaks around 27-31 and steadily declines from there.

 

Curt's best years were age 34, 36, 37. he struck out 300+ batters at 30, 31, and 35.

 

His point was just that there are other players (not necessarily Bonds) who people have been suspicious of because of a late career peak, and that Schilling isn't one of them. Again, he wasn't saying Schilling did or didn't, just that there are always going to be some players for a variety of reasons who will never have that suspicion. Is there any proof that Sosa took steroids? His career is no less strange than Schilling's, but Sosa's got a lot of suspicion.

 

I think a big thing he didn't mention is that Schilling was a pitcher. Pitchers rarely get that type of speculation, and neither, really do anyone but big power hitters.

[KevinG]

Most player's careers follow some type of curve that peaks around 27-31 and steadily declines from there.

 

Curt's best years were age 34, 36, 37. he struck out 300+ batters at 30, 31, and 35.

 

His point was just that there are other players (not necessarily Bonds) who people have been suspicious of because of a late career peak, and that Schilling isn't one of them. Again, he wasn't saying Schilling did or didn't, just that there are always going to be some players for a variety of reasons who will never have that suspicion. Is there any proof that Sosa took steroids? His career is no less strange than Schilling's, but Sosa's got a lot of suspicion.

 

I think a big thing he didn't mention is that Schilling was a pitcher. Pitchers rarely get that type of speculation, and neither, really do anyone but big power hitters.

 

He wasn't juicing, he was probably doctoring the ball. Which we all know is ok.

[Guest Hollinger.]

I have no problem with what Joe said, he makes a great point. It's similar to Bill James' comment in last year's Bill James Gold Mine article on "Atypical Seasons":

 

Two of the greatest home run under-producers of all time were teammates: Kirby Puckett and Gary Gaetti in 1984. Puckett hit no home runs (-16), Gaetti hit only 5 (-19). Suggesting the possibility that the Twins’ two World Championships may have been aided by their team being among the first to discover…well, I’d better not go there. Nor will I point out that Gaetti was bald and had acne and Puckett died young.

[stagerug]

Is there any proof that Sosa took steroids?

 

You're right... no. There is no evidence. But as a life-long Cubbie fan, and an advocate of common sense, he was no doubt on the juice. I do not see the correlation between he and Shilling. Sammy started out as a skinny, fast, base-stealing, doubles hittter and ended up a giant, slow, huge, 60+ HR slugger. Not a normal progression for an athlelete. Sammy was the best, but he was as needled-up as Pinhead. Period. If Shilling was using, it was for recovery only... obviously... nobody would have been throwing dollar bills his way in the locker room.

[bobbob1313]

Actually, if you take into account the fact that Sammy was a major league regular by the age of 20 and had his peak years during what you would expect to be a player's peak (28-32, as opposed to 34-37 for schilling, 32-37 for McGwire, or 27-39 for Bonds), his career progression isn't that off. He actually hit more home runs than 2B every year from 24-36. His career is only really anomalous because of the dumb amount of home runs he hit, not the progression he followed. His career follows a pretty standard progression except that it has an unusual, though not impossible spike in the prime.

 

And this is the problem with using anecdotal evidence for something like this. In all likelihood, Sosa used. But the anecdotal evidence for Sammy is no stronger than it is for any number of guys who might not have used. Going just by the sight test, or the Justice Stevens "I know it when I see it" test doesn't really pass here, especially if we're going to be keeping guys out of the hall, as Sammy most assuredly will be forced to wait, if he ever gets in.

 

Hank Aaron's career high in home runs was set in his age 37 season, when he played in just 139 games. If he had did that in 2001 instead of 1971, the cries of steroids would have been unbelievably loud.

[The High Heat]

I have no problem with what Joe said, he makes a great point. It's similar to Bill James' comment in last year's Bill James Gold Mine article on "Atypical Seasons":

Gaetti hit for power before '84 (in the minors, too), though. And Puckett? Well...no power, then 31 HR's. Considering his post-career behavior, I wouldn't put anything past him. What to make of Boggs' HR surge for one season in '87? 1987 seems to be the year when steroids became an "in" thing to try. Perhaps Canseco coming up the year before and being rewarded for juicing was the force propelling its rapid increase in use.

[bobbob1313]

Gaetti hit for power before '84 (in the minors, too), though. And Puckett? Well...no power, then 31 HR's. Considering his post-career behavior, I wouldn't put anything past him. What to make of Boggs' HR surge for one season in '87? 1987 seems to be the year when steroids became an "in" thing to try. Perhaps Canseco coming up the year before and being rewarded for juicing was the force propelling its rapid increase in use.

 

Well, part of Boggs' spike can be explained away by a leaguewide jump of 21 SLG points from 86 to 87, and then a drop of 32 the following season, though it is certainly possible that was the first time many players experimented, and their usage was anomalous enough to cause a spike because the rest of the league hadn't caught up.

[Winston Legthigh]

You're right... no. There is no evidence. But as a life-long Cubbie fan, and an advocate of common sense, he was no doubt on the juice. I do not see the correlation between he and Shilling. Sammy started out as a skinny, fast, base-stealing, doubles hittter and ended up a giant, slow, huge, 60+ HR slugger. Not a normal progression for an athlelete. Sammy was the best, but he was as needled-up as Pinhead. Period. If Shilling was using, it was for recovery only... obviously... nobody would have been throwing dollar bills his way in the locker room.

Could have been the corked bats... Does his use of corked bats (oh yeah, they were only for batting practice, because everyone knows how useful it is to practice with a cheaters bat during batting practice, then use the "real" bat during the game) cast further doubt on the issue of his juicing?

[Lammycat]

He wasn't juicing, he was probably doctoring the ball. Which we all know is ok.

Not "o.k." but on the same level as (ahem) corking a bat....

 

ed. ^ what winston said, too.

[Lammycat]

Actually, if you take into account the fact that Sammy was a major league regular by the age of 20 and had his peak years during what you would expect to be a player's peak (28-32, as opposed to 34-37 for schilling, 32-37 for McGwire, or 27-39 for Bonds), his career progression isn't that off. He actually hit more home runs than 2B every year from 24-36. His career is only really anomalous because of the dumb amount of home runs he hit, not the progression he followed. His career follows a pretty standard progression except that it has an unusual, though not impossible spike in the prime.

 

And this is the problem with using anecdotal evidence for something like this. In all likelihood, Sosa used. But the anecdotal evidence for Sammy is no stronger than it is for any number of guys who might not have used. Going just by the sight test, or the Justice Stevens "I know it when I see it" test doesn't really pass here, especially if we're going to be keeping guys out of the hall, as Sammy most assuredly will be forced to wait, if he ever gets in.

I agree that the sight test is weak. The spikes in numbers, however, usually draw concern. Inflated numbers for a short spell late in a career don't automatically mean suspicion. Absurd spikes usually get people talking/accusing, though. Sosa's spike was absurd, as was McGwire's and Bonds'. Was Schillings career arc/rise absurd by normal standards? I don't think it was, particularly when compared to known users like Clemens; which makes the Sheehan comments about skin color, verbosity, whatever seem less weighted to me.

[bobbob1313]

Hank Aaron put up pretty absurd numbers late in his career, if you don't look at them in context.

[Lammycat]

Hank Aaron put up pretty absurd numbers late in his career, if you don't look at them in context.

Were they absurd, though? Save for HRs (which look to be pretty consistent throughout his career, btw) he really tapered off in almost all categories the last 5-6 years of his career.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/aaronha01.shtml

[bobbob1313]

Well, people usually only look at home runs when using the eye test, and he hit 243 home runs from age 35 on, that's pretty absurd.

 

Of course, he moved into a favorable hitters, park, but that is what I mean about context. Much of the overall offensive explosion in the 90's came after expansion, and expansion always causes fluctuations in offensive levels for a few years, not to mention the greatest hitters park in the game. Sosa's numbers start to look a little less (a little) ridiculous when you look at what everyone else was doing.

 

Now, I should repeat that he probably did take steroids.

[Central Scrutinizer]

Actually, if you take into account the fact that Sammy was a major league regular by the age of 20 and had his peak years during what you would expect to be a player's peak (28-32, as opposed to 34-37 for schilling, 32-37 for McGwire, or 27-39 for Bonds), his career progression isn't that off. He actually hit more home runs than 2B every year from 24-36. His career is only really anomalous because of the dumb amount of home runs he hit, not the progression he followed. His career follows a pretty standard progression except that it has an unusual, though not impossible spike in the prime.

 

And this is the problem with using anecdotal evidence for something like this. In all likelihood, Sosa used. But the anecdotal evidence for Sammy is no stronger than it is for any number of guys who might not have used. Going just by the sight test, or the Justice Stevens "I know it when I see it" test doesn't really pass here, especially if we're going to be keeping guys out of the hall, as Sammy most assuredly will be forced to wait, if he ever gets in.

 

Hank Aaron's career high in home runs was set in his age 37 season, when he played in just 139 games. If he had did that in 2001 instead of 1971, the cries of steroids would have been unbelievably loud.

I think to an extent you're right -- although looking at Hank in his later years, one would deduce that he was indulging in things other than steroids.

 

There are other factors IMHO that came into play during Sammy's peak years -- there were arguments of a tighter ball which helped add to everyone's home run totals (some of it, I've read, was the movement from sourcing balls from Haiti during the embargo to Dominican Republic and elsewhere. But again, all circumstantial.

 

If baseball had done a better job of stepping in earlier, there wouldn't be so much hanging over the heads of some players.