<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Limping Into The Break</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/</link>
	<description>Covering the MLB with a focus on the Toronto Blue Jays</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:15:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan the stat geek</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37158</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan the stat geek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 00:34:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37158</guid>
		<description>Post 97:

“According to fangraphs.com, he’s at -31.9 runs/150 games on defense. That’s 3 games lost purely on defense! It’s a not a 1-year fluke, either. Last year he was at -24.0 runs/150 games.”

MW: We’ve talked about Wells’ having lost a step or three a few times in this space, but to say he sucks on defense is going too far. You knew that, though.

His defense for the last year and a half has sucked. You really can’t sugar coat it. These fangraphs stats are very accurate, and are supported by STATS’s runs saved/lost, Baseball Prospectus’s Davenport translations. I suspect the decline is related to his injuries, but it is very real.

_____________________________



MW: There’s definitely been a decline, but to say Wells sucks is going too far. 

----------

Mike:

Vernon&#039;s UZR/150 is -31.9, which translates to just over 3 losses, and his defensive numbers have been on a slide since 2006.  The only other CFs with UZR/150 below -20 have not played more than 35 games in CF.  Well&#039;s numbers suggest he and Rios should switch in the field.

MW:  Yes, they certainly do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Post 97:</p>
<p>“According to fangraphs.com, he’s at -31.9 runs/150 games on defense. That’s 3 games lost purely on defense! It’s a not a 1-year fluke, either. Last year he was at -24.0 runs/150 games.”</p>
<p>MW: We’ve talked about Wells’ having lost a step or three a few times in this space, but to say he sucks on defense is going too far. You knew that, though.</p>
<p>His defense for the last year and a half has sucked. You really can’t sugar coat it. These fangraphs stats are very accurate, and are supported by STATS’s runs saved/lost, Baseball Prospectus’s Davenport translations. I suspect the decline is related to his injuries, but it is very real.</p>
<p>_____________________________</p>
<p>MW: There’s definitely been a decline, but to say Wells sucks is going too far. </p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</p>
<p>Mike:</p>
<p>Vernon&#8217;s UZR/150 is -31.9, which translates to just over 3 losses, and his defensive numbers have been on a slide since 2006.  The only other CFs with UZR/150 below -20 have not played more than 35 games in CF.  Well&#8217;s numbers suggest he and Rios should switch in the field.</p>
<p>MW:  Yes, they certainly do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37125</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 13:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37125</guid>
		<description>MW: That’s not true at all. And you owe Looch an apology. He doesn’t turn and go back to the dugout until the umpire calls him out, which is the right thing to do.

Isn&#039;t the right thing to do is run to first base when the ball eludes the catcher and then see what the ruling is?
He had a good chance of making it to first and you never know what kind of throw the catcher may make to first.

MW:  Not when the ball hits you on the foot and you can&#039;t run.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MW: That’s not true at all. And you owe Looch an apology. He doesn’t turn and go back to the dugout until the umpire calls him out, which is the right thing to do.</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t the right thing to do is run to first base when the ball eludes the catcher and then see what the ruling is?<br />
He had a good chance of making it to first and you never know what kind of throw the catcher may make to first.</p>
<p>MW:  Not when the ball hits you on the foot and you can&#8217;t run.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Norm</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37113</link>
		<dc:creator>Norm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37113</guid>
		<description>Mike, re Post #23 (&quot;practising&quot; injuries in LV).

The 51&#039;s Disabled List also includes pitchers Brian Bullington, Wade Miller and Brad Mills (but not, at the moment, Travis Snider)!

Re Post #79 (Paul Beeston&#039;s comments) -- I have just &quot;re-listened&quot; to this interview, and he did NOT say the Jays could/would &quot;spend as much as Boston&quot;.  What he said was that &quot;money would not be an issue in respect to signing Roy Halladay&quot;.  Bruce Arthur mentioned &quot;spending with Boston&quot; in passing, but Beeston did not rise to that bait at all.  The interview is in the Audio on Demand section of the Fan590 website, if you want to hear it again.

Finally, in respect to the argument as to whether or not the Jays make the playoffs if they had been in another division, the issue is not to compare the number of wins they HAD with the number that won the division(s), but rather &quot;how many more&quot; wins might they have had if playing the (current) unbalanced schedule against the weaker divisions.  I agree with Mike that they would have made the playoffs &quot;more than once&quot; playing in either the AL West or AL Central.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike, re Post #23 (&#8220;practising&#8221; injuries in LV).</p>
<p>The 51&#8242;s Disabled List also includes pitchers Brian Bullington, Wade Miller and Brad Mills (but not, at the moment, Travis Snider)!</p>
<p>Re Post #79 (Paul Beeston&#8217;s comments) &#8212; I have just &#8220;re-listened&#8221; to this interview, and he did NOT say the Jays could/would &#8220;spend as much as Boston&#8221;.  What he said was that &#8220;money would not be an issue in respect to signing Roy Halladay&#8221;.  Bruce Arthur mentioned &#8220;spending with Boston&#8221; in passing, but Beeston did not rise to that bait at all.  The interview is in the Audio on Demand section of the Fan590 website, if you want to hear it again.</p>
<p>Finally, in respect to the argument as to whether or not the Jays make the playoffs if they had been in another division, the issue is not to compare the number of wins they HAD with the number that won the division(s), but rather &#8220;how many more&#8221; wins might they have had if playing the (current) unbalanced schedule against the weaker divisions.  I agree with Mike that they would have made the playoffs &#8220;more than once&#8221; playing in either the AL West or AL Central.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kit</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37085</link>
		<dc:creator>kit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 05:10:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37085</guid>
		<description>&quot;I heard Paul Beeston on Prime Time Thursday night and he made the statement that the Jays are willing to spend as much money as the Red Sox. So my qeustion is, if that’s true then why the heck aren’t they doing it? If they want to keep Doc happy, bump the payroll up to 150 million or so and actually sign some free agents this winter.&quot;


MW: It’s not an unfair question.


You may not have noticed but a lot things that Paul Beeston says are gonna happen, don&#039;t actually happen.  Beeston and the Jays are in a &quot;saving face&quot; or damage control mode now.  Why not say they&#039;re gonna spend like the Red Sox.  It&#039;s only words.  They don&#039;t cost anything.

I suspect that Doc has told the Jays that he isn&#039;t re-signing with them or the Jays simply don&#039;t want to spend what it will take to re-sign him.  Maybe both are true.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I heard Paul Beeston on Prime Time Thursday night and he made the statement that the Jays are willing to spend as much money as the Red Sox. So my qeustion is, if that’s true then why the heck aren’t they doing it? If they want to keep Doc happy, bump the payroll up to 150 million or so and actually sign some free agents this winter.&#8221;</p>
<p>MW: It’s not an unfair question.</p>
<p>You may not have noticed but a lot things that Paul Beeston says are gonna happen, don&#8217;t actually happen.  Beeston and the Jays are in a &#8220;saving face&#8221; or damage control mode now.  Why not say they&#8217;re gonna spend like the Red Sox.  It&#8217;s only words.  They don&#8217;t cost anything.</p>
<p>I suspect that Doc has told the Jays that he isn&#8217;t re-signing with them or the Jays simply don&#8217;t want to spend what it will take to re-sign him.  Maybe both are true.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marlon</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37082</link>
		<dc:creator>marlon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 04:36:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37082</guid>
		<description>MW: Hill and Lind are two people, so it should be “aren’t” and no, only Lind qualifies.

If Lind is the only superman then he is just one person so it should be &quot;isn&#039;t&quot;.

MW:  You&#039;re too much.  You wrote  &quot;Isn’t the jays supermen Hill and Lind?&quot;.  Don&#039;t change your argument because you&#039;re shown to be wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MW: Hill and Lind are two people, so it should be “aren’t” and no, only Lind qualifies.</p>
<p>If Lind is the only superman then he is just one person so it should be &#8220;isn&#8217;t&#8221;.</p>
<p>MW:  You&#8217;re too much.  You wrote  &#8220;Isn’t the jays supermen Hill and Lind?&#8221;.  Don&#8217;t change your argument because you&#8217;re shown to be wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kit</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37080</link>
		<dc:creator>kit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 04:30:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37080</guid>
		<description>&quot;According to fangraphs.com, he’s at -31.9 runs/150 games on defense. That’s 3 games lost purely on defense! It’s a not a 1-year fluke, either. Last year he was at -24.0 runs/150 games.&quot; 


MW: We’ve talked about Wells’ having lost a step or three a few times in this space, but to say he sucks on defense is going too far. You knew that, though.


His defense for the last year and a half has sucked.  You really can&#039;t sugar coat it.  These fangraphs stats are very accurate, and are supported by STATS&#039;s runs saved/lost, Baseball Prospectus&#039;s Davenport translations.  I suspect the decline is related to his injuries, but it is very real.

_____________________________

MW: There’s not a chance the Jays get a #2 starter and a top prospect if Wells is included in the deal.


But you keep telling us that Vernon has trade value.  So Vernon + Doc has to net more than just Doc.  N&#039;est pa.

MW:  There&#039;s definitely been a decline, but to say Wells sucks is going too far.  And I don&#039;t keep telling you that Wells has trade value, I keep telling you that he&#039;s not untradeable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;According to fangraphs.com, he’s at -31.9 runs/150 games on defense. That’s 3 games lost purely on defense! It’s a not a 1-year fluke, either. Last year he was at -24.0 runs/150 games.&#8221; </p>
<p>MW: We’ve talked about Wells’ having lost a step or three a few times in this space, but to say he sucks on defense is going too far. You knew that, though.</p>
<p>His defense for the last year and a half has sucked.  You really can&#8217;t sugar coat it.  These fangraphs stats are very accurate, and are supported by STATS&#8217;s runs saved/lost, Baseball Prospectus&#8217;s Davenport translations.  I suspect the decline is related to his injuries, but it is very real.</p>
<p>_____________________________</p>
<p>MW: There’s not a chance the Jays get a #2 starter and a top prospect if Wells is included in the deal.</p>
<p>But you keep telling us that Vernon has trade value.  So Vernon + Doc has to net more than just Doc.  N&#8217;est pa.</p>
<p>MW:  There&#8217;s definitely been a decline, but to say Wells sucks is going too far.  And I don&#8217;t keep telling you that Wells has trade value, I keep telling you that he&#8217;s not untradeable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Renegade</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37079</link>
		<dc:creator>Renegade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 04:13:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37079</guid>
		<description>Phillies offer: Taylor/Brown, Drabek, Marson, Donald and Knapp/Carracso.

Jays offer: Halladay.


Do you bite.

MW:  Maybe, but I don&#039;t like what Donald is doing in AAA this year.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Phillies offer: Taylor/Brown, Drabek, Marson, Donald and Knapp/Carracso.</p>
<p>Jays offer: Halladay.</p>
<p>Do you bite.</p>
<p>MW:  Maybe, but I don&#8217;t like what Donald is doing in AAA this year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marlon</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37078</link>
		<dc:creator>marlon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 03:41:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37078</guid>
		<description>MW: For the Yankees and Red Sox, it’s because they can easily outspend their mistakes. I would have that that would be obvious. For the Rays, it’s because Ben Zobrist has become Superman.

Isn&#039;t the jays supermen Hill and Lind?  yet they still cant win.

MW:  Hill and Lind are two people, so it should be &quot;aren&#039;t&quot; and no, only Lind qualifies.  But you were asking why the Rays can win while Burrell struggles, and my answer was that Zobrist - out of nowhere - has come on to do the job Burrell was expected to, only better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MW: For the Yankees and Red Sox, it’s because they can easily outspend their mistakes. I would have that that would be obvious. For the Rays, it’s because Ben Zobrist has become Superman.</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t the jays supermen Hill and Lind?  yet they still cant win.</p>
<p>MW:  Hill and Lind are two people, so it should be &#8220;aren&#8217;t&#8221; and no, only Lind qualifies.  But you were asking why the Rays can win while Burrell struggles, and my answer was that Zobrist &#8211; out of nowhere &#8211; has come on to do the job Burrell was expected to, only better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marlon</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37076</link>
		<dc:creator>marlon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 03:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37076</guid>
		<description>MW: My answer is yes, and more than once. You do realize that the Cardinals won the World Series a few years back with 83 regular-season wins, right? Last year, there were division winners with 89 and 84 wins, in 2007 there were winners with 89 and 85, in 2006 88 and the aforementioned 83, in 2005 the Padres won the NL West at 82-80.

Mike, I was referring to the AL central and west not the NL. I thought that was obvious. No AL team has made the playoffs with less than 90 wins since 2001.  Blaming the yankees and sox for the jays failures is simply a convenient excuse.

MW:  Only if you don&#039;t want to see the big picture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MW: My answer is yes, and more than once. You do realize that the Cardinals won the World Series a few years back with 83 regular-season wins, right? Last year, there were division winners with 89 and 84 wins, in 2007 there were winners with 89 and 85, in 2006 88 and the aforementioned 83, in 2005 the Padres won the NL West at 82-80.</p>
<p>Mike, I was referring to the AL central and west not the NL. I thought that was obvious. No AL team has made the playoffs with less than 90 wins since 2001.  Blaming the yankees and sox for the jays failures is simply a convenient excuse.</p>
<p>MW:  Only if you don&#8217;t want to see the big picture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marlon</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37074</link>
		<dc:creator>marlon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 03:28:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/07/12/limping-into-the-break/#comment-37074</guid>
		<description>how come the yankees dont lose when they get nothing from wang, the sox dont lose when they get nothing from dicek and ortiz, the rays dont lose when they get nothing from burrell? or is that good teams dont need to make excuses?

MW: For the Yankees and Red Sox, it’s because they can easily outspend their mistakes. I would have that that would be obvious. For the Rays, it’s because Ben Zobrist has become Superman.

When ortiz struggled and dicek was injured the sox did not spend anything to replace them and yet kept winning so what is the &quot;obvious&quot; you are referring to?

MW:  The obvious is that their ability to spend more (both in the draft and in free agency, as well as in trades) means they can afford to be deeper.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>how come the yankees dont lose when they get nothing from wang, the sox dont lose when they get nothing from dicek and ortiz, the rays dont lose when they get nothing from burrell? or is that good teams dont need to make excuses?</p>
<p>MW: For the Yankees and Red Sox, it’s because they can easily outspend their mistakes. I would have that that would be obvious. For the Rays, it’s because Ben Zobrist has become Superman.</p>
<p>When ortiz struggled and dicek was injured the sox did not spend anything to replace them and yet kept winning so what is the &#8220;obvious&#8221; you are referring to?</p>
<p>MW:  The obvious is that their ability to spend more (both in the draft and in free agency, as well as in trades) means they can afford to be deeper.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
