Diamondbacks to hold press conference at 130 PT (1 Viewer)

[MrPhoenix]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

 

[guru_007]

Dude, you're right on all accounts. I really cannot believe you are not already a major league GM. Your astute baseball knowledge is overwhelming and you are obviously one of the finest purveyors of baseball talent known to this board. I give up on my futile argument.

 

[ThisGuy]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

 

[MrPhoenix]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

 

[MrPhoenix]

Dude, you're right on all accounts. I really cannot believe you are not already a major league GM. Your astute baseball knowledge is overwhelming and you are obviously one of the finest purveyors of baseball talent known to this board. I give up on my futile argument.

Did I ever claim to be some sort of uber-expert?

 

[ThisGuy]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

No really, pick one.

 

[The Man from Laramie]

Dude, you're right on all accounts. I really cannot believe you are not already a major league GM. Your astute baseball knowledge is overwhelming and you are obviously one of the finest purveyors of baseball talent known to this board. I give up on my futile argument.

Are you talking about me or Mr. Phoenix?:fingerscrossed:

 

[MrPhoenix]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

No really, pick one.

Drew, barely. Higher BA, OBP, HR's, RBI's for his career leading up to 2007. And even now, Drew only has .007 less OBP than Superstar Byrnes. Drew's lack of power in 2007 is alarming, plus he doesn't have HUSTUL!!!11!!1!1!one

 

[The Man from Laramie]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

No really, pick one.

JD Drew. He has had a number of seasons better than Byrnes' best, including some in the pitcher's park of Dodger Stadium before moving to Fenway.He has a 5 year deal at $14MM a season, but if injuries are significant (which they always are with Drew), it essentially becomes a three year deal.I'd rather pay $14MM for a guy that'll give a contending team 4-5 additional wins a year than $10MM for a guy that likely will provide fewer than that on a team that gives up more runs than it scores.

 

[guru_007]

There are other factors involved furthermore. Service time. Some GM's like to keep players in the minors a year longer so they will not have to offer arbitration/free agency until the player is in their late 20's. If Arizona was not playing for next year, don't you think they would keep Upton in the minors for a year instead of getting his feet wet this year? Plus, you cannot go into a season with an offense full of never proven players.

2003 Marlins down?

2003 Florida Marlins Roster:Ivan Rodriguez catcher

Derrick Lee - First

Luis Castillo - second

Mike Lowell - third

Juan Encarnacion - of

Juan Pierre - OF

All of which were at least 27 at the time and had 1500+ plate appearances

 

[MrPhoenix]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

No really, pick one.

JD Drew. He has had a number of seasons better than Byrnes' best, including some in the pitcher's park of Dodger Stadium before moving to Fenway.He has a 5 year deal at $14MM a season, but if injuries are significant (which they always are with Drew), it essentially becomes a three year deal.I'd rather pay $14MM for a guy that'll give a contending team 4-5 additional wins a year than $10MM for a guy that likely will provide fewer than that on a team that gives up more runs than it scores.

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

 

[guru_007]

Dude, you're right on all accounts. I really cannot believe you are not already a major league GM. Your astute baseball knowledge is overwhelming and you are obviously one of the finest purveyors of baseball talent known to this board. I give up on my futile argument.

Are you talking about me or Mr. Phoenix?:fingerscrossed:

Honestly, you're both pretty big blow hards who think you know a hell of a lot more than you really do. But, that makes up about 15,000+ members here no?

 

[MrPhoenix]

Dude, you're right on all accounts. I really cannot believe you are not already a major league GM. Your astute baseball knowledge is overwhelming and you are obviously one of the finest purveyors of baseball talent known to this board. I give up on my futile argument.

Are you talking about me or Mr. Phoenix?:fingerscrossed:

Honestly, you're both pretty big blow hards who think you know a hell of a lot more than you really do. But, that makes up about 15,000+ members here no?

Welcome to The Shark Pool, v2.0

 

[ThisGuy]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

No really, pick one.

JD Drew. He has had a number of seasons better than Byrnes' best, including some in the pitcher's park of Dodger Stadium before moving to Fenway.He has a 5 year deal at $14MM a season, but if injuries are significant (which they always are with Drew), it essentially becomes a three year deal.I'd rather pay $14MM for a guy that'll give a contending team 4-5 additional wins a year than $10MM for a guy that likely will provide fewer than that on a team that gives up more runs than it scores.

Injuries haven't been an issue so far. So you're willing to pay $40 million more for about the same production for 2 longer years than Byrnes for a guy who is a year older?

 

[Sea Leopard of Death]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

 

[The Man from Laramie]

There are other factors involved furthermore. Service time. Some GM's like to keep players in the minors a year longer so they will not have to offer arbitration/free agency until the player is in their late 20's. If Arizona was not playing for next year, don't you think they would keep Upton in the minors for a year instead of getting his feet wet this year? Plus, you cannot go into a season with an offense full of never proven players.

2003 Marlins down?

2003 Florida Marlins Roster:Ivan Rodriguez catcher

Derrick Lee - First

Luis Castillo - second

Mike Lowell - third

Juan Encarnacion - of

Juan Pierre - OF

All of which were at least 27 at the time and had 1500+ plate appearances

Except for Pudge and Lowell, NONE OF THEM WERE OLDER THAN 27. This is my point. The Marlins brought in I-Rod and Juann Pierre, the rest was home grown. 3 years from now, the D-Backs might be at the stage to do something like this, but not if they're throwing 10 million dollars at league average players.

 

[The Man from Laramie]

Dude, you're right on all accounts. I really cannot believe you are not already a major league GM. Your astute baseball knowledge is overwhelming and you are obviously one of the finest purveyors of baseball talent known to this board. I give up on my futile argument.

Are you talking about me or Mr. Phoenix?:fingerscrossed:

Honestly, you're both pretty big blow hards who think you know a hell of a lot more than you really do. But, that makes up about 15,000+ members here no?

Aren't you one of those Tigers fans who didn't even care about baseball until August of last year?

 

[guru_007]

There are other factors involved furthermore. Service time. Some GM's like to keep players in the minors a year longer so they will not have to offer arbitration/free agency until the player is in their late 20's. If Arizona was not playing for next year, don't you think they would keep Upton in the minors for a year instead of getting his feet wet this year? Plus, you cannot go into a season with an offense full of never proven players.

2003 Marlins down?

2003 Florida Marlins Roster:Ivan Rodriguez catcher

Derrick Lee - First

Luis Castillo - second

Mike Lowell - third

Juan Encarnacion - of

Juan Pierre - OF

All of which were at least 27 at the time and had 1500+ plate appearances

Except for Pudge and Lowell, NONE OF THEM WERE OLDER THAN 27. This is my point. The Marlins brought in I-Rod and Juann Pierre, the rest was home grown. 3 years from now, the D-Backs might be at the stage to do something like this, but not if they're throwing 10 million dollars at league average players.

Interesting, because I thought you meant the 2003 season which begins in April of 2003. The year 2003 less 27 years of age means that anyone born before April of 1976 would have been older than 27 in the 2003 season......Juan Encarnacion born March 8, 1976

Derrick Lee born September 6th, 1975

Luis Castillo born September 12th, 1975

Seems my math was fuzzy...cause all of those guys seem to me like they were at least 27

not to mention anything of the 1,500+ plate appearances which really wouldn't depend on age now would it.

Sorry...you had me confused in that I thought you were refuting my insinuation that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

 

[guru_007]

Dude, you're right on all accounts. I really cannot believe you are not already a major league GM. Your astute baseball knowledge is overwhelming and you are obviously one of the finest purveyors of baseball talent known to this board. I give up on my futile argument.

Are you talking about me or Mr. Phoenix?:fingerscrossed:

Honestly, you're both pretty big blow hards who think you know a hell of a lot more than you really do. But, that makes up about 15,000+ members here no?

Aren't you one of those Tigers fans who didn't even care about baseball until August of last year?

That was me Dr. Detroit can vouch for me.

 

[The Man from Laramie]

There are other factors involved furthermore. Service time. Some GM's like to keep players in the minors a year longer so they will not have to offer arbitration/free agency until the player is in their late 20's. If Arizona was not playing for next year, don't you think they would keep Upton in the minors for a year instead of getting his feet wet this year? Plus, you cannot go into a season with an offense full of never proven players.

2003 Marlins down?

2003 Florida Marlins Roster:Ivan Rodriguez catcher

Derrick Lee - First

Luis Castillo - second

Mike Lowell - third

Juan Encarnacion - of

Juan Pierre - OF

All of which were at least 27 at the time and had 1500+ plate appearances

Except for Pudge and Lowell, NONE OF THEM WERE OLDER THAN 27. This is my point. The Marlins brought in I-Rod and Juann Pierre, the rest was home grown. 3 years from now, the D-Backs might be at the stage to do something like this, but not if they're throwing 10 million dollars at league average players.

Interesting, because I thought you meant the 2003 season which begins in April of 2003. The year 2003 less 27 years of age means that anyone born before April of 1976 would have been older than 27 in the 2003 season......Juan Encarnacion born March 8, 1976

Derrick Lee born September 6th, 1975

Luis Castillo born September 12th, 1975

Seems my math was fuzzy...cause all of those guys seem to me like they were at least 27

not to mention anything of the 1,500+ plate appearances which really wouldn't depend on age now would it.

Sorry...you had me confused in that I thought you were refuting my insinuation that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

That's fine detectivew work proving those guys were a year older than I thought. I got my numbers here, and I don't understand why they're wrong.

 

[MrPhoenix]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

No really, pick one.

JD Drew. He has had a number of seasons better than Byrnes' best, including some in the pitcher's park of Dodger Stadium before moving to Fenway.He has a 5 year deal at $14MM a season, but if injuries are significant (which they always are with Drew), it essentially becomes a three year deal.I'd rather pay $14MM for a guy that'll give a contending team 4-5 additional wins a year than $10MM for a guy that likely will provide fewer than that on a team that gives up more runs than it scores.

Injuries haven't been an issue so far. So you're willing to pay $40 million more for about the same production for 2 longer years than Byrnes for a guy who is a year older?

Knowing what we know now, if, in the 2007 offseason both players were available, I'd take Byrnes. Before you jump on my screaming HYPOCRITE!!!, here's why:1. Drew is represented by Boras. Boras will take whatever market value Drew SHOULD have and increase it by about 2-3 mil per. So, you're guaranteed to be overpaying for Drew way too much.2. Drew's lack of power this season is alarming. 6 HR's in 327 AB's? Now, I'm no doctor and I'm not sure of the Red Sox doctors and personnel expected this kind of production this year, but this is alarming.If Drew was having the season he was having in 2006, I'd still take Drew, but maybe the injuries are catching up to him.

 

[ThisGuy]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

No really, pick one.

JD Drew. He has had a number of seasons better than Byrnes' best, including some in the pitcher's park of Dodger Stadium before moving to Fenway.He has a 5 year deal at $14MM a season, but if injuries are significant (which they always are with Drew), it essentially becomes a three year deal.I'd rather pay $14MM for a guy that'll give a contending team 4-5 additional wins a year than $10MM for a guy that likely will provide fewer than that on a team that gives up more runs than it scores.

Injuries haven't been an issue so far. So you're willing to pay $40 million more for about the same production for 2 longer years than Byrnes for a guy who is a year older?

Knowing what we know now, if, in the 2007 offseason both players were available, I'd take Byrnes. Before you jump on my screaming HYPOCRITE!!!, here's why:1. Drew is represented by Boras. Boras will take whatever market value Drew SHOULD have and increase it by about 2-3 mil per. So, you're guaranteed to be overpaying for Drew way too much.2. Drew's lack of power this season is alarming. 6 HR's in 327 AB's? Now, I'm no doctor and I'm not sure of the Red Sox doctors and personnel expected this kind of production this year, but this is alarming.If Drew was having the season he was having in 2006, I'd still take Drew, but maybe the injuries are catching up to him.

Basically, what I'm saying is, stats aren't always right. Drew might be a pretty dog with those #'s, but he is still a dog.

 

[MrPhoenix]

I will say one thing, arguing stats to dimwits who value hustle and one good year over career production is almost a useless gesture.

Quick! Better signing: JD Drew or Eric Byrnes?

C. None of the above.

No really, pick one.

JD Drew. He has had a number of seasons better than Byrnes' best, including some in the pitcher's park of Dodger Stadium before moving to Fenway.He has a 5 year deal at $14MM a season, but if injuries are significant (which they always are with Drew), it essentially becomes a three year deal.I'd rather pay $14MM for a guy that'll give a contending team 4-5 additional wins a year than $10MM for a guy that likely will provide fewer than that on a team that gives up more runs than it scores.

Injuries haven't been an issue so far. So you're willing to pay $40 million more for about the same production for 2 longer years than Byrnes for a guy who is a year older?

Knowing what we know now, if, in the 2007 offseason both players were available, I'd take Byrnes. Before you jump on my screaming HYPOCRITE!!!, here's why:1. Drew is represented by Boras. Boras will take whatever market value Drew SHOULD have and increase it by about 2-3 mil per. So, you're guaranteed to be overpaying for Drew way too much.2. Drew's lack of power this season is alarming. 6 HR's in 327 AB's? Now, I'm no doctor and I'm not sure of the Red Sox doctors and personnel expected this kind of production this year, but this is alarming.If Drew was having the season he was having in 2006, I'd still take Drew, but maybe the injuries are catching up to him.

Basically, what I'm saying is, stats aren't always right. Drew might be a pretty dog with those #'s, but he is still a dog.

Agree wholeheartedly. Drew is a high risk/moderate-to-high reward player who happens to be represented by one of the biggest dooshes in baseball.

 

[The Man from Laramie]

Basically, what I'm saying is, stats aren't always right. Drew might be a pretty dog with those #'s, but he is still a dog.

While the stats aren't always right, they are right more often than any other voice.

 

[ThisGuy]

Basically, what I'm saying is, stats aren't always right. Drew might be a pretty dog with those #'s, but he is still a dog.

While the stats aren't always right, they are right more often than any other voice.

OK so tell me again why this is a bad signing when there have clearly been worse signings in the last 2 offseasons.

 

[The Man from Laramie]

Basically, what I'm saying is, stats aren't always right. Drew might be a pretty dog with those #'s, but he is still a dog.

While the stats aren't always right, they are right more often than any other voice.

OK so tell me again why this is a bad signing when there have clearly been worse signings in the last 2 offseasons.

Because a bad signing isn't necessarily the worst.Byrnes will likely play like the lifetime .268/.329/.456 hitter he is. For a primarily corner outfielder, that's pretty awful. 40 year old Kenny Lofton is having a better year in the more difficult CF. He is making $6MM this year.David DeJesus, the 27 year old outfielder on the Royals is hitting .283/.365/.408. He makes $2MM a year. Shannon Stewart: .298/.360/.399, $1MM a year.Cliff Floyd: .290/.366/.382, $3MM a year.Milton Bradley: .329/.421/.543 $4MMMike Cameron: .254/.319/.437 $7MM, he is the closest player to Byrnes career numbers, and is overpaid compared to a lot of the guys I've mentioned thus far, he still is making $3MM less a year than Byrnes will be.Luis Gonzalez: .279/.356/.431, just north of $7MM.Randy Winn: .292/.347/.407 $5MMIn fact, I would guess that if you went around the league and looked at corner outfielders who hit similar to Byrnes career numbers, which he will likely regress to next year or in the two years after that while he's under contract, you will be hard-pressed to find many that make over $7.5MM or so. There will be examples, but they will be the exception.

 

[Sea Leopard of Death]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

:X Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

Explain "infidels", if you will. TIA

 

[MrPhoenix]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

Explain "infidels", if you will. TIA

Sure thing, sonny boy.

in·fi·del (nf-dl, -dl)

n.

1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam.

2. One who has no religious beliefs.

3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle

In your case, you doubt the veracity of stats.YWIA

 

[Sea Leopard of Death]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

Explain "infidels", if you will. TIA

Sure thing, sonny boy.

in·fi·del (nf-dl, -dl)

n.

1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam.

2. One who has no religious beliefs.

3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle

In your case, you doubt the veracity of stats.YWIA

Very good. Now show me where I doubted stats. I'll be waiting.

 

[MrPhoenix]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

Explain "infidels", if you will. TIA

Sure thing, sonny boy.

in·fi·del (nf-dl, -dl)

n.

1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam.

2. One who has no religious beliefs.

3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle

In your case, you doubt the veracity of stats.YWIA

Very good. Now show me where I doubted stats. I'll be waiting.

Byrnes career stats are average. As pointed out in Larime's post, Byrnes makes waaaaay more than he should, making him a bad value and it's something that will affect the ability for the D-Backs to spend money to improve in other areas (like pitching).I'd much rather have Quentin + improved pitching for 10 mil than I would just Byrnes at 10 mil.

How's that for you....doll?

 

[Sea Leopard of Death]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

Explain "infidels", if you will. TIA

Sure thing, sonny boy.

in·fi·del (nf-dl, -dl)

n.

1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam.

2. One who has no religious beliefs.

3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle

In your case, you doubt the veracity of stats.YWIA

Very good. Now show me where I doubted stats. I'll be waiting.

Byrnes career stats are average. As pointed out in Larime's post, Byrnes makes waaaaay more than he should, making him a bad value and it's something that will affect the ability for the D-Backs to spend money to improve in other areas (like pitching).I'd much rather have Quentin + improved pitching for 10 mil than I would just Byrnes at 10 mil.

How's that for you....doll?

AGAIN, show me where I doubted stats, fool.

 

[MrPhoenix]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

Explain "infidels", if you will. TIA

Sure thing, sonny boy.

in·fi·del (nf-dl, -dl)

n.

1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam.

2. One who has no religious beliefs.

3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle

In your case, you doubt the veracity of stats.YWIA

Very good. Now show me where I doubted stats. I'll be waiting.

Byrnes career stats are average. As pointed out in Larime's post, Byrnes makes waaaaay more than he should, making him a bad value and it's something that will affect the ability for the D-Backs to spend money to improve in other areas (like pitching).I'd much rather have Quentin + improved pitching for 10 mil than I would just Byrnes at 10 mil.

How's that for you....doll?

AGAIN, show me where I doubted stats, fool.

No. Do your own research sonny.

 

[Sea Leopard of Death]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

Explain "infidels", if you will. TIA

Sure thing, sonny boy.

in·fi·del (nf-dl, -dl)

n.

1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam.

2. One who has no religious beliefs.

3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle

In your case, you doubt the veracity of stats.YWIA

Very good. Now show me where I doubted stats. I'll be waiting.

Byrnes career stats are average. As pointed out in Larime's post, Byrnes makes waaaaay more than he should, making him a bad value and it's something that will affect the ability for the D-Backs to spend money to improve in other areas (like pitching).I'd much rather have Quentin + improved pitching for 10 mil than I would just Byrnes at 10 mil.

How's that for you....doll?

AGAIN, show me where I doubted stats, fool.

No. Do your own research sonny.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

 

[MrPhoenix]

Of course, be prepared to be laughed at by the infidels in this thread.

Infidels? INFIDELS?!!???

Explain "infidels", if you will. TIA

Sure thing, sonny boy.

in·fi·del (nf-dl, -dl)

n.

1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam.

2. One who has no religious beliefs.

3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle

In your case, you doubt the veracity of stats.YWIA

Very good. Now show me where I doubted stats. I'll be waiting.

Byrnes career stats are average. As pointed out in Larime's post, Byrnes makes waaaaay more than he should, making him a bad value and it's something that will affect the ability for the D-Backs to spend money to improve in other areas (like pitching).I'd much rather have Quentin + improved pitching for 10 mil than I would just Byrnes at 10 mil.

How's that for you....doll?

AGAIN, show me where I doubted stats, fool.

No. Do your own research sonny.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

Ok you win. Not sure what you win, but you win nonetheless.

 

[Sea Leopard of Death]

 

[MrPhoenix]

Wow, you totally owned me there. I will NEVER EVER doubt the market value of Byrnes again. He's the gr8est!!!11!1

 

[The Man from Laramie]

Please stop pissing in the baseball forum.

 

[MrPhoenix]

Please stop pissing in the baseball forum.

 

[The Man from Laramie]

baseballprospectus's take on the Byrnes signing:

Additionally, they grant a three-year, $30 million extension to team VORP leader Eric Byrnes; while he's having an outstanding year, handing out extensions to 31-year-olds who've yet to conclusively prove they can stay healthy and productive for an entire season is a surefire recipe for serving albatross at a Thanksgiving to be named later.

 

[Balco]

Wow, what a horrible signing. And I was just talking to a buddy about how the Cardinals seem to be building something really good there. You want a veteran clubhouse guy to help with the youngsters? Sign Kevin Millar for about 8 million dollars less than Byrnes. They could have used that cash on pitching, but wasted it on a corner outfielder having a career year at 31. I love Byrnes hustle just as much as the next guy, but 10 mil?

 

[Keys Myaths]

Basically, what I'm saying is, stats aren't always right. Drew might be a pretty dog with those #'s, but he is still a dog.

While the stats aren't always right, they are right more often than any other voice.

OK so tell me again why this is a bad signing when there have clearly been worse signings in the last 2 offseasons.

So, your logic is--if it's not the absolute WORST signing in two years, it's a good thing?Your standards need to come up a tad.