Castro Set to Join Illustrious 200 Hit, 21-and-Under Club

Unless Starlin Castro goes 0 for the rest of the season, he'll get his 200th hit sometime over the next 6 games and when he does, he'll be the 10th such major league to do it before their age 22 season.

Rk Player H Year Age Tm G PA AB R 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS BA OBP SLG OPS Pos
1 Lloyd Waner 223 1927 21 PIT 150 683 629 133 17 6 2 27 37 23 14 0 .355 .396 .410 .806 *87/4
2 Alex Rodriguez 215 1996 20 SEA 146 677 601 141 54 1 36 123 59 104 15 4 .358 .414 .631 1.045 *6
3 Ty Cobb 212 1907 20 DET 150 642 605 97 28 14 5 119 24 57 53 0 .350 .380 .468 .848 *9
4 Buddy Lewis 210 1937 20 WSH 156 733 668 107 32 6 10 79 52 44 11 5 .314 .367 .425 .792 *5
5 Joe DiMaggio 206 1936 21 NYY 138 668 637 132 44 15 29 125 24 39 4 0 .323 .352 .576 .928 789
6 Hal Trosky 206 1934 21 CLE 154 685 625 117 45 9 35 142 58 49 2 2 .330 .388 .598 .987 *3
7 Vada Pinson 205 1959 20 CIN 154 706 648 131 47 9 20 84 55 98 21 6 .316 .371 .509 .880 *8
8 Garry Templeton 200 1977 21 STL 153 644 621 94 19 18 8 79 15 70 28 24 .322 .336 .449 .786 *6
9 Al Kaline 200 1955 20 DET 152 681 588 121 24 8 27 102 82 57 6 8 .340 .421 .546 .967 *9
Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Play Index Tool Used
Generated 9/21/2011.

That's 4 Hall-of-Famers, 1 if-they-ignore-the-steroids-Hall-of-Famer, 2 guys whose careers were deflated by World War II (Trosky and Lewis), and 2 guys with very solid and long major league careers (Pinson and Templeton). The only shortstops of the group are A-Rod and Templeton and well, no one is comparing Castro to A-Rod. And I don't think too many people are comparing him to Templeton either, whom I remember as more of a slap-hitting switch-htter whose bad knees got the better of him. Nonetheless, it wouldn't be a terrible career for Castro if he ended up north of 2000 hits and a few All-Star selections, although we are all certainly expecting more.

For what it's worth, if you expand it to age 22 and younger, another 15 instances are added. They include repeats by Pinson, A-Rod, Waner, Cobb and Dimaggio. Then add 6 more Hall of Famers (Stan Musial, Cal Ripken Jr., Freddie Lindstrom, former Cub Billy Herman, Frankie Frisch and Hank Aaron). Two more guys with very solid careers (Harvey Kuenn and Dick Allen), yet another great career interrupted by WWII (Johnny Pesky) and then one guy who took advantage of all the good players serving during the War (Dick Wakefield). So I think it's pretty safe to say that even better days are ahead for the Cubs occasionally absent-minded shortstop.

Return to Homepage

Comments

Is that Little Poison or Big Poison?

Arod's 20 year old year has to be greatest by that age, right?

Phill Bourbon Rogers with good piece on Aram situation and guess where he's booking WS hotel location?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball...

Lloyd is Little Poison, Paul is Big Poison.

Thx

There needs to be a special annex in the Hall of Fame for great players like Hal Trosky

Interestingly, assuming Castro finishes with the same slash line (.307/.343/.435 OPS: .777), he'll finish with the lowest BA, the 2nd lowest OBP, and the 3rd lowest SLUG, leaving him with the lowest OPS on the list.

Eh...so Castro isn't as good as A-Rod, ty Cobb...Joe DiMaggio, Al Kaline...

you're better than that...

OPS+ at 113 would be better than Lloyd Waner's (110), Buddy Lewis (103) and Templeton (110).

Fair enough... I didn't look very closely.

I'm certainly not trying to minimize Castro's very impressive season. I really like him, and have very high expectations for his progression. I just thought it was interesting at quick glance.

This will really help his trade value. Castro for Randy Winn straight up.

According to Espn berkman agrees to one year deal w cards

For those who want to feel bad again about 2003, Bartman doc on ESPN Tuesday.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/m...

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2011/09/21/moneyba...

Because of all this, I had an expectation for this movie that would have been — in the words of Rob Lowe — QUITE LITERALLY impossible to fulfill. I have written often about my expectation formula for movies, how it is the hope (or lack of hope) that you have going into the movie that helps define how you felt about the movie coming out. Going into Moneyball, my hope was that the movie would be pitch-perfect for intense baseball fans AND that it would make for great entertainment for people who care little to nothing about baseball.

But no movie can be all that. Great courtroom movies generally don’t impress lawyers with their accuracy. Great medical dramas don’t often leave doctors thinking, “Oh yeah, that’s just how it is.” I have spent more than one night at dinner going over the absurd and obvious flaws of the sportswriting life in Everybody Loves Raymond or The Odd Couple. Authenticity and entertainment don’t often go well together.

"I have spent more than one night at dinner going over the absurd and obvious flaws of the sportswriting life in Everybody Loves Raymond or The Odd Couple."

Sounds delightful.

Hopefully it was with other sportswriters.

I am going to see it tomorrow night - I think I'll like it because I like movies and the lead actors, but just with any adaptation if you go in with the intent to say "The book was much better", it will be a self fufilling prophecy.

Any time I see a book movie, as the people file out I loudly proclaim "That was so much better than the book!", just to get the bibliophiles all worked up... maybe this time I will say "That was so much better than the Kindle!"

the book was flawed enough...even if they followed it to the letter it'd still be an eye roller on the truth side of things.

Didn't realize you were working there for the the A's at the time... do tell.

I also heard that Michael Ohr didn't make the NFL and Tony LaRussa doesn't drink.

moneyball..the book..has been picked apart for almost a decade.

it's got nothing to do with me.

now you're told.

Yeah, Scouts Honor was a great read.

Now you're told.

that makes no sense and has nothing to do with Moneyball.

alderson does. the 1997 draft does (college heavy, wait beane didn't champion that?). what actually happened vs. fictionalized accounts in Moneyball does. i got plenty of others, but if you'd fire up a web browser you might be able to find that "plenty of others" on your own.

Moneyball was a very dramatic book that took liberties with situations and what was really going down...and it ignores years of A's history handing it to Beane as his own.

Regardless, it's Brad Pitt and baseball, it will do very well at the box office. Here's hoping it leads to a few more baseball movies, but good ones, not more Disney Angels in the Outfield crap, or some Vampires as baseball players movie, which would explain why the Cubs suck.

yeah, im just wondering how much pitt + the ad blitz will actually draw.

it's a curiosity.

A big part of the "add buzz" is because you watch baseball and men's TV shows, most likely.

they advertised this on hgtv and food network if you believe it.

Its Brad Pitt, what do you expect?

He's purrrty. I like his mouth.

tracking in the $18M-$20M range, likely #1, those are very good September numbers fwiw.

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/weekend...

probably not, baseball movies, well sports movies in general do poorly in the international box office.

it cost around $55M to make, my guess is $10M in advertising. Sony will hope to break even on the initial run and then make its profit on DVD rentals, Video on Demand, selling it to cable and if by luck it gets any award consideration, that'll give it a bit of a boost as well.

The best baseball movie ever made is still The Natural and Brad Pitt will always be a 2nd rate Robert Redford.

Why no Hank Aaron movie?

Baseball, success in breaking hallowed record, racial undertones, good character guy ... I'd watch that.

Also would enjoy Terry Gilliam's take on Doc Ellis's no-no.

terry gilliam movie sounds awesome...

YES!!!!!!!!!!

As long as we get Python-esque animation from Ellis' point of view on the mound. Perhaps a player opening his mouth and eating the ball.

Forget Gilliam, I think I want to make this movie.

so you mean it took a certain point of view?

the audacity of some authors

but really, what are the "fictionalized" acounts? I'm genuinely curious. Did Lewis make up a quote, did he relate a story that didn't actually happen?

those are relatively serious accusations...

it took a false point of view in some cases. it also gave beane king status for things he didn't start.

the fictionalized accounts include beane getting pissed and working out in the weight room to blow off steam...which beane himself said was just a dramatic device. just check around on "da net" for comments...the book is a decade old and so are the points picking it apart.

i'm not even bringing into view post-Moneyball book realizations like his drafts being weak upon review...especially his much celebrated-in-book 2001 draft.

...also alderson was moneyball before moneyball...and in oakland, even.

I'm sure they exist, but a half hour of google searching for Moneyball, Billy Beane, mistakes, inaccuracies, lies and so on, hasn't come up with much.

If it's a "false point of view" that upsets you, you should look up the definition of "point of view".

it's not "false point of view" that upsets me...it's the...ahem...false portrayal of incidents that makes me not take the thing seriously.

tensions were created out of thin air and fools were made that didn't exist...

try this search...yahoo returned a number of articles to mull over.

moneyball beane book inaccurate -movie

other searches turn up way too much movie info.

That only pulls up one relevant link, the first one and again, the person was either drunk when he read the book or drunk when he wrote his blog, because it's roughly 90% innacurate.

Seriously, did you read it?

yes...and we have different yahoo result returns, evidently.

Post some links, because I really would like to see some authorative source say things like "we didn't use Baseball America to draft" etc.

do your own work.

seriously, did you search it? =p

i don't get into things with you anymore...we've been through this...i learned my lesson 1000s of wasted words ago.

...or the more reasonable explantion, is that you're full of shit. Based on past history, I'll go with that one.

thank god.

You should have stopped several posts ago... You've already wasted hundreds of words...
There is no point carrying these things out with TRN. He is no doubt about to start calling you names...

I didn't really see anything from the Yahoo search either.

This article says that Grady Fuson challenged the book's accuracy, FWIW:

http://articles.sfgate.com/2003-05-18/sports/...

thanks.

Thanks as we'll, still that's a prety far way fromthe point of view crunc is pimping...a little more searching comes up with Fuson's ouster basically about money (note the irony) and that Bonderman was a decent pick but they passed on Youkiliis to take him.

i was more appalled that he spelled Erik's name wrong and got the wrong years on ownership.

What a shit editor he must have.

didn't we settle this already? i'm full of shit or something? i thought we...i mean, you...had this figured out already.

be consistent in something besides always having a need to be right. it's character building...

yahoo

People use yahoo for things other than fantasy sports?

heh...i still use my.yahoo.com for a starting point homepage.

it's basically a glorified RSS feed collection with a few "modules" built in that you can customize...nothing special, but it's fast and non-bloated with proper script/element-hiding rules for displaying the page.

I use yahoo also. Google is too vanilla. Both provide equal search results.

I am sort of thinking you didn't read it or have forgotten what it says, because it does give Alderson a lot of credit, basically saying that Alderson's study was the basic tenet that they built all their subsequent logic on... did you forget that part, or not understand it?

Is that on topic enough for you?

do tell us what in Moneyball the book was fabricated?

#29

"Any time I see a book movie, as the people file out I loudly proclaim "That was so much better than the book!"

Incidentally, The Right Stuff was much better as a movie than as a book.

Yeah, that was the whole point of Everybody Loves Raymond and The Odd Couple. All those other characters (Ray's wife, brother and parents, Felix Unger, the Pigeon sisters etc.) and the story lines were just filler.

The whole point of both pieces was to, once and for all, strip bare and present the true unfiltered life of the American sportswriter.

it's not just inaccurate...it's wildly inaccurate and out of step with baseball reality.

they made a baseball movie about baseball nerdism and left out the nerdism in favor of a false version of nerdism? ...and added witty banter between brad pitt and a little girl with an unfortunate haircut straight out of a Welch's Juice commercial.

they've spent millions on ad spots all over the spectrum the past 3+ months...good luck on that.

91% at rotten tomatoes now...

as Will Leitch said, "I suspect the more you like baseball, the less you'll like this movie. "

that's the thing...im not hearing anyone outside of the baseball community (that's mostly making excuses or calling out the movie) buzzing the film as something people want to see.

granted, it has a modest budget and they are blitzing the hell of this movie with advertising ventures...it shouldn't bomb money-wise.

i dunno if even the US take will cover the costs, though...and i wonder how much they've spent pimping the film.

i understand what went into the film, it's revisions, and why it ended up being a cussing-Disney style fluff piece...but i also understand it's a 2 hour exercise in Any Given Sunday gone wrong.

...also, Dolphin Tale has a 88% at rt.com...im sure if i was 6 i'd enjoy it.

Actually I have seen a variety of non-baseball people saying very positive things about the movie. Probably mostly from people who haven't read the book, and definitely mostly people who know nothing about statistical analysis in baseball.

I'd suggest you actually watch the movie before writing your reviews though.

a friend of mine was at the same press screening (unless SI went to the real screening with the real stars) and filled me in on watching 2+ hours of trying to make fake business seem like real business and real excitement.

there's only so many beane distraught, beane mad, and beane being a smarmy smartass scenes you can watch while he's sitting in a chair (when he's not throwing them) or riding around in his car.

unfortunately, he's also a baseball fan and had a hard time sitting through things he know didn't happen, aren't true, and are just plain stupid. he had a special place for the scenes of hatteberg character and coaches make believing moving a guy from C to 1st requiring a montage comparable of a person learning to ski and becoming awesome at it so they can save the ski lodge from the preppie bullies.

i was also told i'd be rather disgusted in how the scouts were portrayed and it's worse than what was shown in the commercials.

i'm interested to know if joe blow is actually going to plunk down $7+ for this.

it's not exactly the "Facebook movie" but it tries to be...and my boy claims that the actual baseball footage is pretty slim...which goes against what SI dude says...weird on that one.

btw, for those that go see this...it's a character study film more than a baseball film from what I'm told. JP from SI says otherwise, though. Dunno who to believe there, but I'm not selling an unnamed stranger to anyone over JP.

it's a shame the characters and situations they're put into aren't real...or slightly real...

you can do a little cheese and over the top while making it "real"...Any Given Sunday, again.

there's a lot more dialogue bouncing rather than baseballs bouncing...unless you count players/coaches/etc. talking to each other.

Seven dollars? is the Money Ball also showing in 2005?

$5 with a large popcorn - Groupon is your friend.

It's 100% Fresh according to the Top Critics at Rottentomatoes.. can't wait to see it tonight.

The chart makes me wonder... when was the last time a guy lead the league in stolen bases and RBI's like Cobb.

It will be interesting to see how he progress, Templeton was a pretty good player (traded for Ozzie) who may have even got some HoF consideration had he stayed a little healthier.

i wonder what the Tigers batting order was in 1907 with all those RBI's and so few XBH's. Seems Sam Crawford and Davy Jones were the only other ones to get on-base much.

fun note, 1907 Tigers got swept by the Cubs in the World Series.

Sam Crawford is a beast to have in Baseball Mogul.

.313 OBP and leading the league with 4.5 runs per game? Sounds like Jim Hendry's version of Nirvana. Runners must have taken a shite load of extra bases on the outfielders.

Far fences and big gaps in outfield?

I forget their slugging, but it was relatively low too. I think Cobb lead the league with hsi 42 in XBH's.

still fascinating, the led the league in SLG and 3B as well as OPS, but 3rd in SB's.

but they didn't lead by that much in those categories, but still nearly half a run better per game on runs scored.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL/...

a lot of singles and a lot of taking the extra base apparently...

Submitted by Rob G. on Thu, 09/22/2011 - 12:48pm.
still fascinating, the led the league in SLG and 3B as well as OPS, but 3rd in SB's.

but they didn't lead by that much in those categories, but still nearly half a run better per game on runs scored.

a lot of singles and a lot of extra bases apparently...

===================================

ROB G: Pre-1920, the ball was like a mushy 16-inch softball (i. e. "dead") and it was difficult to hit balls over the fence. So a premium was placed on defense, speed, base-stealing, and the ability to intentionally place hits where the fielders weren't located (i. e. "hit 'em where they ain't").

When Babe Ruth set what was then the single-season HR record in 1919 with 29, he broke a record that had stood for 35 years (which is one year longer than the Babe's later single-season HR record of 60 stood). And then when he hit 54 HR in 1920 (when the "live" ball was introduced), Babe (by himself) out-homered every A. L. club but one.

BTW, the single-season HR champion prior to Babe Ruth was the Chicago White Stockings (now Cubs) very own Ned Williamson, who hit 27 in 1884.

The White Stockings (Cubs) were playing in a ballpark (Lakefront Park) located at Randolph & Michigan (on the site of the former city dump) at that time, and the LF fence was only 180 feet from home plate (allowing Williamson Dingers to fly over the fence onto Michigan Avenue).

The park had the largest seating capacity of any major league stadium at the time (10,000), and also featured "sky boxes" for the high-rollers. The park was a multi-purpose stadium, too, and was used for bicycle races and other popular events (like Perry Como concerts).

The park was abandoned by the White Stockings after Williamson's record-setting HR season because it did not meet new minimum field specifications (at least 200 feet to all outfield fences) established by MLB post-1884. There were just way too many home runs being hit there.

Pre-1920, the ball was like a mushy 16-inch softball (i. e. "dead") and it was difficult to hit balls over the fence. So a premium was placed on defense, speed, base-stealing, and the ability to intentionally place hits where the fielders weren't located (i. e. "hit 'em where they ain't").

yeah, i knew and get all that. I'm marveling at the gap between them and the rest of the league in runs scored despite not really leading by all that much in the categories that get you there. Besides taking the extra base, they must have also had great numbers with runners on and RISP compared to the rest of the league.

"other popular events (like Perry Como concerts). "

HAHAAHA! Awesome

"Pre-1920, the ball was like a mushy 16-inch softball (i. e. "dead") and it was difficult to hit balls over the fence."

I have no citation for this, but I was under the impression that the "dead" ball was prior to 1911 and that the current "lively" ball was introduced that year (with occasionally fluctuating levels of "liveliness" from time-to-time since then). In 1920, the spitball was outlawed, plus scuffing and discoloration and general pitcher abuse of the ball was also nixed due to the Ray Chapman fatal beaning incident.

Okay, now my curiosity has got the better of me. It being 1:00am, I'm not inclined to do too much research, but a quick Google search turned up this page on Baseball Reference: http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Bas...(equipment)

"when was the last time a guy led the league in stolen bases and RBI's like Cobb?"

Cobb did it three times, as did Honus Wagner. Cobb did it last in 1911.

In my quick search, I didn't see anyone else.

I looked a little more carefully at the 1950s and later, because the names (and the skills associated with the names) are more familiar to me. I didn't actually find anyone in the last 60-odd years who led the league in RBI in one year and SBs in another, let alone the same year--except, oddly enough, Jackie Jensen, with 116 RBI in 1955 and a paltry but league-leading 22 SBs in '54.

Also odd that Mays, who led in SBs four straight seasons, never led in RBI. He did have Aaron, Banks and others to contend with, also Tommie Davis who knocked in 153 in 1962 to Mays's 141. That was a huge RBI number for Mays. My recollection is that he batted third in an era when sluggers usually hit fourth, so that may have put him at a competitive disadvantage, RBI-wise.

Barry Bonds led in RBI once (1993, with 123), SBs never.

Thanks, Phil.

I didn't know about Mays, I guess SB's, like everything else are cyclical.

i still think people give CM a bad wrap...sure her "mailbag" articles are mostly a joke, but she does some good writing and gets her quotes.

indded, her incredible ability to transfer from audio recorder to word processing software is unheralded!!!

yes, she's obviously not the queen of journalism and top dog i painted her to be.

maybe i spoke too strongly saying such lofty things as "she does some good writing and gets her quotes."

i'll save such hard hitting praise for Tom Wolfe and Gore Vidal. my apologies to the both of them for linking CM in with them.

nah, I was just confused at praising her ability to get quotes while working for cubs.com.

No one is gonna turn her down or have the option to turn her down. I guess props for being good enough to get the job in the first place.

and then there's the part where (probably due to pressure from her bosses) to not relate many of the less-than-flattering quotes.

Or to put it in terms you may understand, put them in a false point of view to make the people she works for and work for them look better than they should.

getting quotes is something too many writers don't do anymore...they give us 1000 words of their commentary and a press conference (usually post-game) sound bite.

CM gets her quotes on the ground. it helps to have access...but some other MLB.com writers don't even use that access.

I'll tell you why I like Muskat. She gets to know the players and sometimes writes interesting stuff about their histories--Campana's battle with childhood lymphoma, for example. I find ballplayers interesting--potentially, at least--otherwise I wouldn't be a fan.

It's not that she reports the feminine side of things, so much as that male beat-writers have hangups that she doesn't have. A guy like Sullivan knows he's a professional jock-sniffer, so to combat that image (and self-image) he keeps the players at a distance and affects a tone of snark and superiority toward them, with the result that from one year to the next he doesn't come up with anything interesting.

sure, no one does fluff pieces like Muskat and cubs.com.

also fluff pieces generally don't sell papers, Sullivan's editor or Wittenmyer's or Miles are probably not asking for such pieces and thus they're not looking for them too often.

Sullivan, in particular, does let his grudges get in the way unfortunately. Very surprised he hasn't been reassigned by this point to cover another Chicago team. Not like his contacts are getting him any kind of scoops.

There's an important distinction between Muskett and real reporters. She's essentially part of the PR department, unlike other reporters who work for external companies and have different agendas (sell papers). Muskett's agenda is to publicize the Cubs players to increase ticket, jersey and MLB.TV demand.

A little Muskat love, crunch?

fear and sigh and lol and *guitar solo*

i just like how she chases down quotes and does personal pieces other mlb.com writers don't do. too many just mail in their press corps post-game stuff that any beat reporter can write.

she's "written" 2 books using her skills to get MLB people to open up to her and tell stories.

her work used to be a lot more lazy than it's been in the past few years...though that mailbag is still weak as hell.

That mailbag is the basis for some compelling and snarky deconstructions over at HireJimEssian.com. They have brightened many a dull day for me.

nicely done...

I was somewhat awed by Garza's 9th inning yesterday. How about you?

wow..leo nunez suspened and placed on the resticted list.

they are dead set on scaring away FA's over there...wonder wtf he did. after the logan incident it's probably something major because they took a lot of heat for that from fans and peers.

Restricted list yes, but I doubt they suspended him.

He's gone back to the D.R. to take care of some personal problems.

im just going on what the miami herald reported earlier...some newer articles are just reporting he's on the restricted list.

the real reasons should leak out soon enough...nunez's agent isn't saying anything yet.

from a marlins beat writer twooter update...

Juan C. Rodriguez
#Marlins closer Leo Nunez placed on restricted list. NOT a discipline issue.

bwahahah...via rotowurld via AP

"According to the Associated Press, Leo Nunez was sent back to the Dominican Republic this week because he was found to have been using a fake identity."

"According go the AP's sources, the right-hander's real name is Juan Carlos Oviedo and he's actually a year older than his listed age of 28. The Marlins have reportedly known about the issue for several months, but it's not yet clear how they plan to resolve it."

They should probably start by notifiying the INS.

apparently it was some debilitating migraines that derailed his career, just happened to occur around the time of the War. He never served, although he wanted to, but was deemed unfit because of the headaches.

http://bioproj.sabr.org/bioproj.cfm?a=v&v=l&b...

as much as I'd prefer the higher draft pick for the Cubs, I'd prefer the Cardinals missing the playoffs even more.

so go Cubs this weekend.

Yeah, things are lining up for the Cards for the wildcard. They must be stopped. In their last two series they won 3/4 from the Phillies and 2 in a row now from the Mets--one more to go. Then they finish against the Cubs and the hopeless Astros.

On the other hand the Braves have lost their last two series to the Mets and Marlins and face the Nationals and Phillies.

Wow! This is almost exciting.

on cue, blow a 4-run lead in 9th and down 8-6 heading to the bottom half

-edit-
and lose

Cardinals now have their own Victor Diaz day to celebrate.

No "Kids Day" this weekend.

f'n awesome.

Scully added " If shit would have gone down, I would have dropped Zim faster than Pedro did."

Totally didn't see that punchline coming.

Cerca '89, I would have like Zim's chances.

It amused me when you say it in the Scully voice.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospect...

Golden(10), B. Wells(12), Pin-Chieh Chen(14), Z. DeVoss(17)

Chen is profiling offensively a bit like HJ Lee, steals bases and takes walks, but K's at a healthy rate and maintains a good average with a high BABIP.

Speaking players from Kaohsiung it's a shame Chia Chia never got a shot at MLB. I watched him play a couple of times live, and a on TV some and he seemed like a major leaguer to me

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peng_Cheng-min

I'd love to hear Steve Wilson's take on him.

3-year extension for Walt Jocketty

Good?

for the Cubs only if he keeps Baker...

I figured there's a big group of Cubs fans who think the man who put together the '04 Cardinals would be a prime candidate for our job.

There some chatter about them trading Votto, maybe as early as this off-season. That would keep his phone ringing.

maybe, but seems he's very anti-stats, and it seems Ricketts is not looking for that.

I can't even imagine what it would take to get Votto.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Moneyball-...

The ouster of Walt Jocketty as Cardinals GM occurred in part because of conflicts that arose between Jocketty and Jeff Luhnow, who rose through the organization to become the head of both scouting and player development.

The Cardinals had initially turned to Luhnow in 2003, seeking someone with a strong background on the analytical side.

“We were trying to build up that part of the organization because of all of the new data that was coming in,” DeWitt says. “We weren’t geared up for putting it all together. We hired Jeff to put it all together and integrate it.”

I can't even imagine what it would take to get Votto.

--

Probably Castro and Mullet-Ninja, and perhaps a pitching prospect we don't have.

not from the Cubs, they'd never be able to land Votto. I don't think Castro, B. Jackson, McNutt would even be enough.

I was speaking in general...talking something like 2 5-Star prospects probably and another 4-star maybe.

Hosmer, Moustakas and a decent pitching prospect or something like that.

I think some of the low-salaried KC hitters will end up in Tampa for a SP. I know Tampa keeps claiming they won't trade a pitcher, but they have no offense and KC says they are looking for a top SP.

Castro SS, Barney 2B, LaHair RF, Pena 1B, Soriano LF, Byrd CF, LeMahieu 3B, Hill C, Dempster P

Operation 10-15 200IP marches on!

Good god why are we still seeing so much Soriano?

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-mlb-dodge...

MLB asks bankruptcy court to force McCourt to sell Dodgers

Anything that reduces demand for the big two FA first basemen is a good thing.

certainly not as good as the work of Muskat, but Goldstein chases down some quotes from the A's powers-that-be on how they're evaluating players in the minors and draft nowadays and other such things.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php...

“The highest-paid statistic right now in major-league baseball in on-base percentage,” explained Beane. “That just wasn't the case 10 years ago. The universe gets back in order, and you are never going to monopolize any arbitrage for an extended period of time.”

“I don't think much has changed in the way we make decisions,” said David Forst, who has been with Oakland for more than a decade, and the assistant GM since 2004. “What we do is different, but more so now than before. At the end of the day, we are trying to acquire the same players as other teams.”

It's not that Oakland has changed in the last decade as much as the industry catching up to their way of thinking, leaving the future of the Athletics a far greater challenge than Beane and company faced heading into the new millennium.

“We have our hands full,” explains Beane. “It's tougher now, but we've done it before. You asked me how things have changed. Well, we had a bad market and a bad venue 10 years ago, and now it's worse. The frustration is part of the deal, the challenge is fun to a point, but we've been trying to get a new stadium for 20 years, and now we're the last ones in line. Next year, once Florida moves into their new park, we will be the only shared facility in the game.”

Anaheim is looking for a team.

Talk about a natural fit for the Big A.

you got a thing about muskrat, huh?

speaking of goldstein and the A's...here's your chuckle-box article of the day

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/chat/041...

you got a thing about muskrat, huh?

it appears you did actually, I was more poking fun at you for applauding her quote-getting abilities.

speaking of goldstein and the A's...here's your chuckle-box article of the day

granted I skimmed, but I don't get it

i made 1 true and not-that-praise-heavy statement...it seems to stick with you...

you made a rant afterwards about her that far exceeded anything i said...something about a PR machine talking head etc.

mouthpiece is the word you're looking for...talking head would imply she's on television just regurgitating what's on the teleprompter.

my "rant" was a 1-line joke actually, it appeared that you were offended by it afterwards and it then further escalated.

obviously...i keep bringing it up. wait.

"i still think people give CM a bad wrap...sure her "mailbag" articles are mostly a joke, but she does some good writing and gets her quotes."

"CM gets her quotes on the ground. it helps to have access...but some other MLB.com writers don't even use that access."

--- and ---

"indded, her incredible ability to transfer from audio recorder to word processing software is unheralded!!!"

"nah, I was just confused at praising her ability to get quotes while working for cubs.com."

"No one is gonna turn her down or have the option to turn her down. I guess props for being good enough to get the job in the first place....and then there's the part where (probably due to pressure from her bosses) to not relate many of the less-than-flattering quotes."

"sure, no one does fluff pieces like Muskat and cubs.com."

"certainly not as good as the work of Muskat, but Goldstein chases down some quotes from the A's powers-that-be"

I count 3 replies on that earlier Muskat thread by you, 3 by me, one of which is to what VA Phil wrote. I then made the Goldstein joke which apparently hurt your feelings. you also selectively excluded the comments in-between by you and VA Phil that I was replying to and made it look like I just kept bringing it up.

Do you know how the comments on a blog work? People write something, other people have the opportunity to reply to it.

If you don't want people to comment on it, don't write it. If you don't want to continue the conversation, don't reply back.

i have no idea how comments on blogs work. i bet it's a lot like magnets. f'n miracles everywhere.

I like magnets (especially magnetic schedules), somehow mine doesn't work on the south pole though.

X
  • Sign in with Twitter