syhuang

A 2nd and a 7th. SI.com

Bruises?? Are you really sure about this? Based on this report, there is no evidence at all: The 20-year-old Emeryville woman made inconsistent statements to police, and some allegations she made in an application for a restraining order that was granted by a judge Friday didn't match what she told officers, said Kim Hunter, an Alameda County senior deputy district attorney. A friend of both Lynch and the woman told police that the incident described by the woman didn't happen, and the woman, who said she had been choked, didn't show signs of injury, Hunter said. Also, there were no photographs that could document what she said, the prosecutor said.

Titans likely to cut Henry Saturday

Apology accepted. So now you admit that you didn't stay on topic, which is "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR" Remind me again what's your question regarding to ganesh's comments. Don't forget that you asked him to read the subject of the thread and even said "The argument was about Moulds cutting it as a #2 receiver". Do you mind to show that how a comparison between Moulds and Price stays on the subject of the thread? Just in case you forget, the subject of the thread is "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR" Moulds and Price are both below league average as #2 WRs. However, comparing Price to Moulds has nothing to do with the topic "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR". It may relate to the evaluation on the decision of replacing Moulds by Price, but it's not related to the evaluation of Moulds' individual ability and performance as a #2 WR. You're welcome to hijack the thread to take the discussion to anywhere you want and call it in-depth, however, your claim of staying on topic is simply wrong.

typo, it should be "unable" ..... As usual, when Dawgg is losing a football argument, he starts to find other people's typo and avoids talking about football anymore. This is the only thing Dawgg good at. And this is the statement from Dawgg at post 48 in this thread. Dwagg asked people to read the subject of the tread. Which tread? Shoe tread or tire tread? Anyway, it is boring to find others' typo. Back to football, the post should be: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ You seems unable to distinguish "Moulds' performance" and "The decision of replacing Moulds by Price", where only the latter needs to take Price's performance into account. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Furthermore, when evaluating Moulds' performance as a #2 receiver, we look at his performance. When evaluating the decision of replacing Moulds by Price, we look at both Moulds' and Price's performance. These two evaluations are different, here, the topic is "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR".

No, it's not just my opinion. It is called common sense. Read the topic again, "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR". Moulds' ability and performance at Houston has nothing to do with Price's performance at Buffalo. You seems inable to distinguish "Moulds' performance" to "The decision of replacing Moulds by Price", where only the later needs to take Price's performance into account.

You weren't the one bringing up Price, like I said, you CONTINUE to compare Moulds to Price. Your replay to Ramius' post was "Maybe you're right... but Peerless was even worse in terms of YPC!" This has nothing to do with the topic. Did you read the topic again? let me remind you, the topic is "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR". You didn't stay on topic as you claim. No, it is not relevant to the topic, which is "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR". No matter how Price performs, it doesn't justify Moulds being a good #2 WR or not. Do you really think how good Moulds is as a #2 WR depended on how good Price is? No matter how Price plays, it doesn't affect Moulds' ability and performance. It only affects how good the DECISION of replacing Moulds by Price is.

You may follow the thread, but you do not stay on topic. Speaking of staying on topic, why do you continue to compare Moulds to Price when the topic is "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR"? I don't see "Buffalo Bills" or "Peerless Price" in the topic. BTW, since when does Price become the standard of a good #2 WR that the comparison of their YPC has anything to do with "Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR"? Why do you compare Moulds to Price (and Price only) to justify Moulds' performance as a #2 WR? You do know there're other #2 WRs in NFL, right? There're 25 WRs who did NOT lead their teams in receiving yards last season but had more receiving yards than Moulds (557). Do you want to take a guess how many of them have better YPC than Moulds? Let me tell you, ALL of the twenty five. Again, these are not the #1 WRs. So, come again, why do you compare Moulds to Price only and still claim you stay on the topic ("Moulds not cutting it in Houston as a number #2 WR") when there're many #2 WRs having better YPC than Moulds? Oh, I see, you just happened to pick a #2 WR having worse YPC than Moulds. Last, if you want to criticize the decision of replacing Moulds by Price, you should (1) Read the subject of this thread again, and (2) Take the impact on cap room into consideration

However, Transition Tag is basically non-existed in current NFL era. After Hutchinson's and Burleson's mess last year, teams can create "poison pill" in the contracts to make the original team impossible to match the offer.

No, it would not. It's 1st-and-15 at Colts 18 yard line. A 10 yard gain would become 2nd-and-5 at 8 yard line. You seems confused it to the third down play in the same series when looked at play-by-play. ---------------------------------- 1-15-IND18 (8:38) T.Brady pass incomplete short right to R.Caldwell [G.Brackett]. 2-15-IND18 (8:34) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short middle to H.Evans to IND 10 for 8 yards (R.Morris, C.June). 3-7-IND10 (7:50) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short right to R.Caldwell. 4-7-IND10 (7:45) S.Gostkowski 28 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-L.Paxton, Holder-M.Cassel. ---------------------------------- Comeback kid finally falls short The lead might have been bigger had Reche Caldwell not dropped his second pass of the game while wide open. With first-and-15 at the Colts 18, he was left uncovered and Brady quickly threw to him along the right sideline. But Caldwell took his eyes off the ball and the Patriots settled for Stephen Gostkowski's 28-yard field goal and a 31-28 lead.

You're wrong!!! In November of his rookie season Peters began working at offensive tackle with offensive line coach Jim McNally while making contributions on Sundays on special teams. McNally has called Peters one of the most athletic offensive linemen he has ever coached, putting his athletic ability on a par with Hall of Fame Cincinnati tackle Anthony Munoz

Again, you confuse ranking players to ranking players' offensive abilities. In your original question, you explicitly specified "offensive". Then, you dodge my questions regarding how you made your statement the third time: ----------------------------------------------------- Ok, then when you asked "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't", what method did you use to compare players in different era? No method at all?? If you think players can be compared, how? You can be picky on the sabermetrics methods, however, these method are widely acceptted in baseball analysis, either you like it or not. Now, you don't like these methods but can not provide any better ways. You just simply asked a dummy question and wasted people's time. ----------------------------------------------------- If you simply made the statement based on your feeling and couldn't think of a better way to compare players, just say it. Last, Ripken's and Vaughan's adjusted offensive numbers are not even close that some insignificant factors can overcome the difference. See my example in last post and check their stats and league averages in their times.

Didn't I just tell you the key word is "significant"? No one said it's not important, it is about the degree of importance. For example, better control or higher striking rate may help pitchers more than an experience catcher talking to them on the mound. Of course, what caused better control or higher striking rate can be analyzed, maybe catcher, maybe pitching coach, or maybe the pitcher becomes more mature. Like I said, it is not about people believe it or not. It's about scientific proof. Many people believe one thing doesn't make it correct when there's no proof. Not long time ago, most people believed earth is flat and is the center of universe. Face your own question "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't" and how do you compare players in different era? If you wanted to discuss sabermetrics methods, we can do it later. First thing first, what is you comparison method when you made the statement? No method?? just your feeling !?!? Again, you continue to ignore the part you aren't able to respond and keep talking something else which has nothing to do with these players' offense. You confuse ranking players to ranking players' offensive abilities (or pitching/defensive abilities), they are different. The remaining of my previous post you ignored is ---------------------------------------------- Ok, then when you asked "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't", what method did you use to compare players in different era? No method at all?? If you think players can be compared, how? You can be picky on the sabermetrics methods, however, these method are widely acceptted in baseball analysis, either you like it or not. Now, you don't like these methods but can not provide any better ways. You just simply asked a dummy question and wasted people's time. ---------------------------------------------- Don't dodge the questions.......again...... No, people can watch baseball and study sabermetrics. One doesn't contradict the other. Studying baseball history and watching old films can help to adjust players' ranking. However, speaking of "offense" only, like in your question "offensive shortshop", it can be ranked, especially on this case. Ripken's and Vaughan's adjusted offensive numbers are not even close that some insignificant factors can overcome the difference. Would you ask me to consider some insignificant factors when I tell you that Jeter is a better offensive shortstop than Hanley Ramirez this year based on VORP or win shares? (Note: I'm not saying the difference between Ripken and Vaughan is like Jeter and H.Ramirez, this is just an example to show you the idea.) If you think the difference between Jeter and H.Ramirez is big enough that the insiginificant factors won't affect the result, then try to look at Ripken's and Vaughan's offensive numbers and corresponding league averages in their times. You may still think these relative insignificant factors should be included, however, you never mentioned what method you used while making your original statement or what factors you want to add to the current method when comparing the offensive abilities of two shortstops.

Ok, then when you asked "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't", what method did you use to compare players in different era? No method at all?? If you think players can be compared, how? You can be picky on the sabermetrics methods, however, these method are widely acceptted in baseball analysis, either you like it or not. Now, you don't like these methods but can not provide any better ways. You just simply asked a dummy question and wasted people's time. No one says it is unimportant or unexisted. It is just that the impact is not significant enough to show up on pitchers' numbers. The key word here: significant.

Impact to league isn't equal to offensive display. Where Ripken batted already reflects on his numbers. "Every" shortstop? We are talking about Ripken's offensive display, not the shortstops after him. Are you implying that pitchers became more careful when pitching to Ripken? The same thing can be said to Wagner and Vaughan. Why don't you say that maybe Vaughan always pee twice before the game and its impact doesn't reflect on the stats? We are talking about the offensive display on field!! No, I say there's no scientific proof that what you said does help pitchers. What you think or what you feel doesn't mean it is right. Not long time ago, lots of people believed earth is flat. It actually can be done, but need time to setup database and write proper queries. However, it can be quickly done manually to compare two or three players without going through the whole thing. You failed to respond most of my previous post, let me post it again: -------------------------------- There're methods to compare players in baseball. There are books and articles about them. You don't even understand them before throw them away. Furthermore, you don't accept sabermetrics doesn't mean players in different era can not be compared. These methods are already widely used in baseball analysis. Ok, by your standard, you can NOT compare players in different era and you just asked a dummy question (by your standard) to waste everyone's time. -------------------------------- Just answer if you think players in different era can be compared or not. Stop shifting the focus.

You are shifting the focos again. Read you original question "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't"? Do you see "offensive" there? What does "impact on baseball" have anything to do with it? There're methods to compare players in baseball. There are books and articles about them. You don't even understand them before throw them away. Furthermore, you don't accept sabermetrics doesn't mean players in different era can not be compared. These methods are already widely used in baseball analysis. Ok, by your standard, you can NOT compare players in different era and you just asked a dummy question (by your standard) to waste everyone's time. And no, it's not about fantasy baseball. Only people who don't know sabermetrics try to tie it to fantasy game.

Read my post again and stop shifting the focus. You asked "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't", why do you keep ignoring this statement? No one says sabermetrics can measure every detail, especially the ones without scientific proof and only based on people's feeling. However, it can measure overall offensive performance as asked in your original question. ----------------------------- Again, I brought up sabermetrics was to answer your question of "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't.". It has nothing to do with HOF voting and why Ripken didn't get all the votes. Don't confuse one with another or keep shifting the focus. I even told you I agree both Ripken and Gwynn should go to HOF, however, I don't agree with your statement above I just listed. You seems trying to tie sabermetrics to anti-Ripken (which is not what I'm doing) and ignoring your "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't" statement. -----------------------------

"would say"? No, you're completely wrong. You have this impression because you don't know sabermetrics and only look at traditional stats. For your information, Kendall is number two in win share defense. There are catchers better than him, however, he is still above replacement level. No, I didn't say sabermetrics can measure every detail. Furthermore, there's no proof yet that what you described does help pitchers' performance. This is another topic though. If you wanted to discuss it, you're welcome. However, right now, the discussion here is "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't". I did say sabermetrics can measure overall offensive performance as asked in the original question "Name 2 better offensive shortstops ......".

Yes, you can, in sabermetrics. His VORP is 22.0 for his 0.300 AVG, 0.332 OBP, 0.437 SLG. Pudge's offensive performance is not as good as people think, even looking at his traditional number can figure this out. However, people think he's very good on offense because he is famous. Here are the top catchers on VORP and their traditional stats: Mauer 66.9 (.347 AVG, .429 OBP, .507 SLG) McCann 54.8 (.333 AVG, .388 OBP, .572 SLG) V.Martinez 47.8 (.316 AVG, .391 OBP, .538 SLG) Posoda 38.0 (.278 AVG, .375 OBP, .494 SLG) Please note this is the offense measurement. There're also stats for defense and stats for combinations of offense and defense, for example, win shares. Pudge's win share is 25 in 2006 season, 26th overall. Only Mauer's 31 is better than him at catcher position. Pudge's ranking on win share is higher mainly because his defense win share is the best one among major leaguers, 11.5. Again, I brought up sabermetrics was to answer your question of "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't.". It has nothing to do with HOF voting and why Ripken didn't get all the votes. Don't confuse one with another or keep shifting the focus. I even told you I agree both Ripken and Gwynn should go to HOF, however, I don't agree with your statement above I just listed. You seems trying to tie sabermetrics to anti-Ripken (which is not what I'm doing) and ignoring your "Name 2 better offensive shortstops that preceded Ripken. You can't" statement. Last, VORP is "Value Over Replacement Player" in case you're interested.

Apology accepted.

For example: VORP, Win shares, SLG+. Not just me, the sabermetrics world. Try to learn what the stats above mean. Of course, you can choose to keep living in your small world by saying something with nothing to back up. Keep opening your mouth with nothing useful but words like 'fukking' or 'dork'. Now, I can understand why you always lose to Holcombs_Arm in other threads.

You got it, but unfortunately, some still don't... Furthermore, these people don't bother to check (advanced) stats to compare players in different era. Most of them don't even realize there're such stats existed and can only come up with something like "the players are different" or "the times are different". News Update: these factors are all taken into account in sabermetrics long time ago.

Same can be said to other players in different era. For your information, the avdanced stats above take league average into consideration so this factor is not a real issue. This is the extra credit like 2632 consecutive games as I mentioned before. It has nothing to do with offensive power. Again. Honus Wagner and Arky Vaughan are definitely better offensive shortstops than Ripken. Period.

Indeed, I didn't realize you're talking about a webite when we're discussing stats. However, it doesn't change the fact that Honus Wagner and Arky Vaughan are definitely better offensive shortstops than Ripken.

I see, from that website. And do you realize that HOF and offensive power are not equal? For example, a player who played 2632 consecutive games does get extra credit on HOF voting/ranking.