|
|
#21
12-07-2006, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Gil Meche????
Bannister might be the best pitcher out of all those guys.
|
|
#22
12-07-2006, 03:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Gil Meche????
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Isn't their payroll something like 50M? [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, why they hell are they paying 1/5 their budget to a 28 year old righty with career stats of 4.48/1.43? [/ QUOTE ] This is revenue sharing. They had money to spend and their fans needed something. Anything. Now, the real debate can begin: Who would you rather have for five years, Meche or Matthews Jr.? I think think I'd prefer GMJ
|
|
#23
12-07-2006, 03:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Gil Meche????
Wow, Meche has been worse than I thought. There's nothing in his history to justify a contract at all like this. At least Gary Matthews Jr. posted a very good season last year.
Gary Matthews Jr 96 OPS+ Career, but he's a CF Gil Meche 96 ERA+ Career Wow. Gary Matthews Jr. is a way better value than this guy.
|
|
#25
12-07-2006, 03:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Gil Meche????
[ QUOTE ]
Now, the real debate can begin: Who would you rather have for five years, Meche or Matthews Jr.? I think think I'd prefer GMJ [/ QUOTE ] Meche is four years younger; with that in mind, total VORP over the past 3 years: Meche: 24 (this means he added about 2.5 wins to his teams total in 3 years). Matthews: 102 (72 on offense plus a conservative estimate on defense of 30). I'd have to take Matthews, which I think is the worse position player signing.
|
|
#26
12-07-2006, 03:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Gil Meche????
[ QUOTE ]
Don't worry, bro. I'm sure you'll have time to celebrate when the Cubbies drop a 4 year/$44M deal on Suppan! [/ QUOTE ] Sadly, I have to project that Suppan is going to get more per season than this. He's had 16 wins twice in the last three years, and was a playoff star last year. He's genuinely better than Meche as well: he has more than triple Meche's VORP over the last three years. I don't think the Cubs are interested, although they might be now that their are so few players to waste money on left.
|
|
#28
12-07-2006, 05:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Gil Meche????
[ QUOTE ]
Gil Meche 96 ERA+ Career [/ QUOTE ] I don't care for Meche or this deal (although he may be better than his numbers otherwise indicate *if* his improved health stays with him), but be careful with ERA+ and starters, as it is based on the league average ERA, which includes innings thrown by relievers and starters. Its much easier to relieve (mostly because they can throw all out for an inning or so, but also because they only face hitters once a game, because they often may only pitch a partial inning, and walkoff innings). The same pitcher does about .8 to 1 run /9 better reliveing as opposed to starting. ERA+ is the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. > 100 is above average and < 100 is below average. lgERA / ERA So ERA+ is an unfair baseline to compare starers against as the average starter's ERA is much worse than the baseline set by ERA+.
|
|
#29
12-07-2006, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Gil Meche????
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Gil Meche 96 ERA+ Career [/ QUOTE ] I don't care for Meche or this deal (although he may be better than his numbers otherwise indicate *if* his improved health stays with him), but be careful with ERA+ and starters, as it is based on the league average ERA, which includes innings thrown by relievers and starters. Its much easier to relieve (mostly because they can throw all out for an inning or so, but also because they only face hitters once a game, because they often may only pitch a partial inning, and walkoff innings). The same pitcher does about .8 to 1 run /9 better reliveing as opposed to starting. ERA+ is the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. > 100 is above average and < 100 is below average. lgERA / ERA So ERA+ is an unfair baseline to compare starers against as the average starter's ERA is much worse than the baseline set by ERA+. [/ QUOTE ] Even so, Gil Meche sucks.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
