Two Guy's we should think about

[davearm]

Dave, RZ and NovaO have provided in season reports on these guys. It is obvious to everyone else that the prospect status of Liz and Olson is higher than it was before the season.

It is also obvious to everyone else that Huber's status has gotten worse.

Do you agree with those 2 statements?

Liz and Olson have improved their stock.

Huber's stock hasn't risen, but personally I wouldn't drop it much, if at all. For all this talk about what a terrible year he had, he still put up a mid-800s OPS. I'd take that in a down year.

[Sports Guy]

Liz and Olson have improved their stock.

Huber's stock hasn't risen, but personally I wouldn't drop it much, if at all. For all this talk about what a terrible year he had, he still put up a mid-800s OPS. I'd take that in a down year.

Actually, he put up an 838 OPS(not mid 800's) and he did that in the PCL, so my guess is that would translate to the high 700's-low 800's in most leagues.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/H/Justin-Huber.shtml

[davearm]

Actually, he put up an 838 OPS(not mid 800's) and he did that in the PCL, so my guess is that would translate to the high 700's-low 800's in most leagues.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/H/Justin-Huber.shtml

I know you're working with a completely different playbook and everything, but how does 838 not meet the definition of "mid 800's"?

From 0 to 100, what exactly constitutes low mid and high?

Cripes, you argue just for the sake of arguing.

[Sports Guy]

I know you're working with a completely different playbook and everything, but how does 838 not meet the definition of "mid 800's"?

From 0 to 100, what exactly constitutes low mid and high?

Cripes, you argue just for the sake of arguing.

I don't know Dave...What is int he middle of 0-100? I am thinking 50. I wasn't a math major though so maybe you can tell me.

I would think somewhere from the 850ish range...I guess you could argue that 838 is close and that's fine but to me, you say mid 800's and it sounds better than what his OPS actually was.

BTW, the guy saw his OPS fall well over 100 points from the previous season in a HITTERS league at the age of 24 and you don't think his stock has dropped? I find that amusing.

[davearm]

I don't know Dave...What is int he middle of 0-100? I am thinking 50. I wasn't a math major though so maybe you can tell me.

I would think somewhere from the 850ish range...I guess you could argue that 838 is close and that's fine but to me, you say mid 800's and it sounds better than what his OPS actually was.

BTW, the guy saw his OPS fall well over 100 points from the previous season in a HITTERS league at the age of 24 and you don't think his stock has dropped? I find that amusing.

So mid 800s is 850. Gotcha.

Since you weren't a math major, here's another approach to consider.

100 divided by 3 is 33.

So that gives you the following:

Low: 0 to 32

Mid: 33 to 66

High: 67 to 99

Glad to be of help.

[davearm]

SG is a very precise person. Try this.

100 divided by 2=50

Low=0 to 49

Mid = 50

High = 51-100

This whole conversation has now officially hit an all-time low.

[davearm]

Only if you can't take a joke.

That was directed at all three of us...

[Dashiellx]

To Jump in here,

Huber's 838 OPS is below his career OPS of 873, but it was also in his first real full year at AAA.

My main concern is he was switched from being a catcher to a 1bman mid way thourgh his career. Was this just the Royals thought he would make a better 1b or was the a issue with his knees???

[Sports Guy]

To Jump in here,

Huber's 838 OPS is below his career OPS of 873, but it was also in his first real full year at AAA.

My main concern is he was switched from being a catcher to a 1bman mid way thourgh his career. Was this just the Royals thought he would make a better 1b or was the a issue with his knees???

I don't think he was that good of a defensive catcher, so it was easier to move him to first to preserve his bat.

First year in AAA or not, he was still old enough and was in a hitters league where he should have performed better. He should have had an OPS of at least 50 points higher than he did to maintain his prospect status...He didn't, so therefore is stock is unquestionably lower.

[Cokeman]

Bedard, Cabrera, Loewen, Penn, Ray, Olson, Liz, Hoey and Erbe are the O's chance to dominant. Yes, dominant.

NO, dominate.

[davearm]

I don't think he was that good of a defensive catcher, so it was easier to move him to first to preserve his bat.

First year in AAA or not, he was still old enough and was in a hitters league where he should have performed better. He should have had an OPS of at least 50 points higher than he did to maintain his prospect status...He didn't, so therefore is stock is unquestionably lower.

Curious how much you really know about what's behind that .838 OPS that you're so hung up on.

Huber got off to a fantastic start... .982 OPS in April (22 G, 67 AB).

Then the Royals called him up, and proceeded to sit him on the bench for 3 weeks (5 G, 10 AB).

Then when they sent him back down, he was out of whack from not playing... .666 OPS in June (26 G, 96 AB).

After the ASB, he got back into a groove... .873 OPS Post-ASB (36 G, 129 AB).

That's not to make excuses for the guy, but it helps to have the whole story here.

Bottom line is that if the Royals had just left him alone in AAA, or actually played him after calling him up, his final numbers would've looked much better. That 50 point higher OPS you mention in AAA would've been easily attained.

And that's why I'm not making the mistake of dropping his stock, and you shouldn't either.

[wildcard]

NO, dominate.

What he said. That's what I meant to say.

[Tony-OH]

I'd trade Liz for Johnson in a heart beat.

[Pedro Cerrano]

(POP!)

There goes that can of worms!

[DrungoHazewood]

I'd trade Liz for Johnson in a heart beat.

You know Liz is still pitching in Japan? He's only 32 and he pitched for Pittsburgh last year. Seems like a lifetime ago he was a prospect here.