ORS

And the hits just keep on rolling for Washington. To start the 2nd half, they sacked Bledsoe twice causing a fumble to get the ball on the Dallas 21. Then they shoved it in for a 35-0 lead. As I typed this, they sacked him again on 2nd down of the next possession. This is the most dominating (sacked again on 3rd down) performance I've seen from the 'Skins in a while.

The 'Skins are stomping a mudhole in the Cowboys, 28-0 with 0:12 left in the first-half. It's not just on the scoreboard though, they are beating the crap out of them on both sides of the ball.

I picked with my head not my heart in the WAS/DAL game, and boy was I wrong thus far. The 'Skins D is hounding the Dallas offense right now. I can take a loss in my picks to see my team play this well.

The Cowboys' Keith Davis just flattened the 'Skins Robert Royal. If you aren't watching the game and missed it, you will see it on post-game highlights. He wasn't injured, but it was brutal.

I'm 8-3, both spread and straight, going into the afternoon games. Nothing to sneeze at, but nothing to brag about either. It's interesting that Houston won and SF lost. If both lose next week (Hou vs. Jax, SF @ StL) then the Bush Bowl will be played in SF the last week, with the loser winning .

MLB - Red Sox NFL - Redskins NHL - Capitals NCAA FB - Hokies NCAA BB - Duke Explanations: Duke because a lot of their recruits in the '90s came from schools in my area. VA Tech because I'm from the Northern VA D.C. suburbs, and it is the school I was going to go to out of HS if I wasn't so interested in partying. Skins and Caps because of where I'm from. Sox because my father and grandfather (Mom's side, he was born and raised in Eastham on the Cape) were fans, and they raised me right.

Some sabermetric stat terms from Baseball Prospectus that you may see used here: EqA - Equivalent Average. A measure of total offensive value per out, with corrections for league offensive level, home park, and team pitching. EQA considers batting as well as baserunning, but not the value of a position player's defense. The EqA adjusted for all-time also has a correction for league difficulty. The scale is deliberately set to approximate that of batting average. League average EqA is always equal to .260. EqA is derived from Raw EqA, which is (H + TB + 1.5*(BB + HBP + SB ) + SH + SF) divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH + SF + CS + SB ). REqA is then normalized to account for league difficulty and scale to create EqA. EqR - Equivalent Runs; EQR = 5 * OUT * EQA^2.5. In the fielding charts, the estimated number of EqR he had at the plate while playing this position in the field. In Adjusted Standings, EqR refers to the total number of equivalent runs scored by the team. VORP - Value Over Replacement Player. The number of runs contributed beyond what a replacement-level player at the same position would contribute if given the same percentage of team plate appearances. VORP scores do not consider the quality of a player's defense. WARP1 - Wins Above Replacement Player, level 1. The number of wins this player contributed, above what a replacement level hitter, fielder, and pitcher would have done, with adjustments only for within the season. WARP2 - Wins Above Replacement Player, with difficulty added into the mix. WARP3 - WARP-2, expanded to 162 games to compensate for shortened seasons. Initially, I was just going to use (162/season length) as the multiplier, but this seemed to overexpand the very short seasons of the 19th century. I settled on using (162/scheduled games) ** (2/3). So Ross Barnes' 7.4 wins in 1873, a 55 game season, only gets extended to 15.2 WARP, instead of a straight-line adjustment of 21.8. RARP - Runs Above Replacement, Position-adjusted. A statistic that compares a hitter's Equivalent Run total to that of a replacement-level player who makes the same number of outs and plays the same position. A "replacement level" player is one who has .736 times as many EqR as the average for the position; that corresponds to a .351 winning percentage. Used when fielding data is unavailable. FRAA - Fielding Runs Above Average. FRAR - Fielding Runs Above Replacement. The difference between an average player and a replacement player is determined by the number of plays that position is called on to make. That makes the value at each position variable over time. In the all-time adjustments, an average catcher is set to 39 runs above replacement per 162 games, first base to 10, second to 29, third to 22, short to 33, center field to 24, left and right to 14. Rate - A way to look at the fielder's rate of production, equal to 100 plus the number of runs above or below average this fielder is per 100 games. A player with a rate of 110 is 10 runs above average per 100 games, a player with an 87 is 13 runs below average per 100 games, etc. Rate2 - See Rate. Rate2 incorporates adjustments for league difficulty and normalizes defensive statistics over time. Pythagorean Record - A modified form of Bill James' pythagorean formula. Instead of using a fixed exponent (2, 1.83), the "pythagenport" formula derives the exponent from the run environment - the more runs per game, the higher the exponent. The formula for the exponent was X = .45 + 1.5 * log10 ((rs+ra)/g), and then winning percentage is calculated as (rs^x)/(rs^x + ra^x). The formula has been tested for run environments between 4 and 40 runs per game, but breaks down below 4 rpg. The original article is here. After further review, I (Clay) have come to the conclusion that the so-called Smyth/Patriot method, aka Pythagenpat, is a better fit. In that, X=((rs+ra)/g)^.285, although there is some wiggle room for disagreement in the exponent. Anyway, that equation is simpler, more elegant, and gets the better answer over a wider range of runs scored than Pythagenport, including the mandatory value of 1 at 1 rpg. Go here for more. NOTE: The league average for runs per game [RPG=(RS+RA)/G] is usually around 9, so one can usually quickly use 10 as the runs per win (RPW) in analyzing how the run metrics (VORP, RARP, FRAA, etc.) affect wins. However, if you wish for a clearer picture, the RPW formula is as follows: RPW = 2*(R-RA)*(R^x + RA^x)/(R^x - RA^x). Where R is the average runs scored per game and RA is the average runs allowed per game. For the complete BP glossary, click this link: BP.com

Sure, no problem, give me a few minutes because I'm going to cut-and-paste from BaseballProspectus.com, as they have a glossary for their metrics.

Of course they do, I think everyone can agree that a top anything is preferable. That said, I see no reason why Cora and Machado can't surpass 1.8 WARP next year, which gives the team exactly what it got this year, plus one of the top prospects in the game.

I can understand your concern about the Renteria trade, SFoC. It does create another hole in an offseason filled with uncertainty at several positions. But, the trade does make sense for a club that is trying to build a powerhouse for the future while maintaining some competitiveness for the present. Marte is a cornerstone-type prospect, and will be a big addition to a team who's farm system is deep in middle-of-the-field position players and pitching but is defficient in corner-power. As far as replacing Renteria goes, my best guess to their rationale would involve considering how poorly Renteria played last year. He had a horrible year defensively (-21 FRAA), and an average year offensively (.259 EqA; league average is set at .260), yet the Sox won 95 games despite getting only 1.8 WARP from him. If he was so bad, yet they still won games, then it's understandable for them to think that he was an expendable part of the teams composition.

The Khalil Greene idea is interesting. However, I wouldn't want to package Shopp in that deal. I think he has more value to us on the roster than he does in the trade market, so we should keep him. If we let him go, then we are looking at Huckaby every 5th game, and his offensive #'s stink. At least Shopp has some potential to do something at the plate for us. Plus, he's rated good defensively.

There seems to be no shortage of pitching on the 40-man right now. Wells for Roberts is looking more and more likely. He starts in CF if JD goes turncoat and dons pinstripes, or he's a good option for 4th OF/Nixon platoon-mate if Johnny is back next year. Either way, he's someone that fills a need, and the Soxs have to trade Wells if he's saying he'll retire if not traded. I've read reports of Boomer being on SD sports-radio stations saying just that.

I agree they should play to keep their rythm, but not playing the whole game to protect them from injuries is a prudent move at this point. The Broncos and Bengals pretty much need to lose-out for the Patriots to jump out of the #4 spot. Being healthy against the Jags is more important than beating the Jets or 'Phins right now.

They played the Central this year, they play the East next year, so in '07, the Dodgers should be on the schedule. Hopefully those games are at Fenway. Mueller's ovation as a visiting player will be a misty-eyed moment. EDIT: The Mets come to Fenway next year. If Pedro's on the hill in any of those games, the Fens will get a little dusty then too.

This should come as no surprise. espn.com

21-0. Impressive showing on both sides of the ball thus far.

While he has been improving, Chris Simms still has the ability to make average secondaries look good.

Good start for the Pats, 7-0. I love the NFL on Saturdays.

The Eagle-Tribune story was the reason this thread was created. Media outlets closer to the team, the Boston Globe and Boston Herald, include Arroyo as part of the trade, but neither include Marte. Boston Globe Boston Herald per RotoWorld Since Arroyo is mentioned in both the deal for Crisp and the deal for Reed, I doubt the Sox will be acquiring both, especially since it would require the Sox to deal two starters when there are legitimate injury concerns in the rotation. However, if they did somehow get both, I think you'd see Crisp in Fenway's huge RF, Reed in CF, and whoever remains of Manny/Nixon in LF.

I've read in several places that the Crisp deal was for Clement/Arroyo not Marte and Mota. I've also read that it was contingent upon Nomar coming to the Tribe. Since Nomar isn't likely to be headed to Cleveland, I don't think Crisp is still on the trading blocks.

Boston Globe

From the second paragraph....

You'd put Kyle Lohse and Joe Mays in the rotation instead of Jon Garland? Can you do me a favor and try to go work for the Yankees please. What do these numbers represent and what do they suggest? 5.17, 4.23, 3.88, 3.47, 3.15, 1.91 They are Garland's walk rates from 2000-2005, in order. They show a steady improvement in command, and he's still young enough to continue the improvement. Saying, "his control is terrible", may have been true at some point, but this trend suggests that it is most likely a thing of the past.

I like guapo's idea. The team has enough corner IFs to find a suitable combination IMO. There are much bigger concerns for the coming weeks. Namely, the Manny situation, CF, and SS. If something good falls in their laps, then act on it, but I don't think they should focus any time worrying about who is on the corners at this point.

No, because I think Lester's ceiling is pretty high. He and Garland have fairly similar H/9, BB/9, and HR/9 rates at the same levels in the minors, but Lester has a siginificantly better K/9 rate. Plus Lester is a lefty. Garland is good, but Lester should land a bigger fish. EDIT: My post defending Garland was mainly for those calling him a fluke or overrated, not to endorse any deal involving Lester.