How reliable is this fielding statistic? 

I've seen a lof of people here using it, but I find it hard to interpret. I know what it means. The problem is that there is so much fluctuation for many players that I don't know what to make of it. Look for example at Coco Crisp's UZR/150 (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1572&position=OF). In 2007 he has 22.4, in 2008 it's -15.4 and in 2009 you have 19.6. So he has gone from a fantastic fielder, to a horrible fielder, to a fantastic fielder in a 3 year period. That's expectable for offensive numbers, but for defense? I see the same pattern for a lot of players and it's a bit disconcerting. 

How much should I rely on it? How can interpret these types of results?

Kerry Wood - Not doing well

Felix Pie - Not doing well

Mark DeRosa - Not doing well

Michael Wuertz - Lights out

The indians made a bad decision with Wood because he had a limited track record as a closer, is injury prone and even last year wasn't lights out. For similar kind of money they could have gotten Francisco Rodriguez, a guy that has done it for his entire career, and done it better.

Felix Pie is still the same and even Baltimore is limiting his at-bats.

Mark DeRosa has 87 or so OPS+ so far. I think the arms we got back could be valuable and they are doing very good in the minors so far. The problem, I believe, was not trading DeRosa, but rather signing Aaron Miles, and to a ridiculous deal on top of that. I firmly believe Neifi was a more valuable baseball player.

Michael Wuertz? Never understood why they traded him. The guy had been a consistent and good reliever for some years and they basically gave him away for a Tyler Colvin type and an Aaron Miles type. Why?? Wuertz, at career norms, is far more valuable than that, especially making 1 million.

It was strange that they traded Wuertz, but even more troubling for whom they traded him for.

Reading thecubreporter.com I became aware that Bradley had an extremely high BAbip last year, .388 or .65 higher than his career mark. Now, if you assume that his career mark is a good indicator of his "true" BAbip and the added .65 is just luck then his numbers from last year in terms of OPS should have been quite close to his career mark of .827 rather than the 1.000 number he flirted with.

This is the first time I read this... was it discussed here and I just missed it?

Rich Hill has the following line in the Venezuelan league (maybe he was already released, I don't know):

23BB on 21IP tells pretty much the whole story. He also hit a batter with the bases loaded his last appearance as a reliever (he inherited the runners), and then followed that up with a couple of walks. Seems like he is really done.

Felix Pie:

Again, BB pretty much tell the story here too. 2BB in 56AB translates to roughly 20BB in a full season for him. His numbers are pretty bad overall, no power and his average is pretty much all a result of a .356 or so BABIP. Adjust the BABIP to a normal value and his numbers are awful as well (Btw, Jake Fox has an OPS of .939 while playing for the same team). Seeing as Pie is not a big power guy his lack of plate discipline pretty much kills all his value as a hitter (he can't steal bases if he can't get on base). All the evidence in the majors as well as the dominican league suggest Pie will not be a good pro hitter, and I think the Cubs are doing exactly what they should in seeking another outfielder. If they sign a guy who has injury concerns or is bad defensively then Pie can have a role as defensive sub in the outfield.

How reasonable is it to expect a healthy Harden for the playoffs next year?

I mean, the Cubs gave Harden as much rest as you could give a pitcher without putting him on the DL and he still came to the playoffs injured. Given that surgery was at least mentioned this offseason, how optimistic can we realistically be? The one positive I can think of is that 2009 is his contract year and maybe that will boost his performance.

Probably the one place where the Cubs went very wrong this year was regarding the 100 year drought. The strategy the Cubs chose was to try to distance themselves from history or to make it seem as if was irrelevant to the team´s play. I believe that was a sensible mistake. History does weigh down on you. If you had collapses in the past they certainly will influence you in the future, and this even if the collapse was by other players from your organization.

That kind of history does add pressure and what we are seeing now is pretty much a result of it. The Cubs have weaknesses, that is not in doubt, but these are not weakness we are seeing, we are seeing a team that is playing scared and doing things that it had basically not done all year, especially in back to back important games. And perhaps, just perhaps, one contributing factor is trying to minizime or take the importance off something that is definitely huge. Maybe if they acknoweledged that the 100 year drought and the past failures do indeed add pressure to the players and creates a more difficult atmosphere, maybe that way they would have been able to really take some pressure off. The route they chose probably ended up having the exact opposite effect.

Anyway, that´s my opinion and if you don´t like it (I´m sorry to say) I don´t have others :P

I remember watching the baseball ESPN crew in 90's for the wednesday's games and really liking them, especially Gary Thorne. I don't think he's mentioned amongst the great commentators but he was one of my favorites. His calls during HRs (at the wall, Goodbye, Home run!!) were electrifying. I also saw him do NHL games and even though I don't follow hockey I thought he was great there to.

Any other guys who are great but aren't usually mentioned as being of the best?

I'm really wondering if we have the kind of offensive players that can respond under pressure. What the offense is going through right now could just be a collective slump or it could be a sign of cracking under pressure. Given what happened in 2004 and in the 2007 playoffs I think it's a fair question to ask. The history of futility of the Cubs also adds pressure even if it's constantly played down by everybody. The 2003 championship series is a prime example.

I'm not trying to be an alarmist or blow out of proportion something that may just be a slump. But I have to be honest and say that I'm really wondering if these guys are going to be able to respond offensively under pressure. Today Ryan Theriot swong at 3 pitches out of the zone with a man on second and the game on the line. I have no faith whatsoever in Soriano. I don't know what to think about Lee and Ramirez, especially Lee which has not produced as we expected. Soto? Fukudome? Can these guys withstand the pressure to come? I'm really worried that the team will go back to hackalicious mode if the going gets though.

What do you think?

Very interesting article at ESPN.com on what the future for steroid testing might be like: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?id=3408399

In short, rather than focusing on detecting the steroids per se, the longitudinal testing means establishing a baseline for a person's blood levels / metabolism and then determining steroid use from fluctuations of those baseline levels.

Also important of note is the number of players that have been blood tested numerous times by the World anti doping agency (WADA) and have had their tests come back clean and then later admitted to taking steroids. If that is with blood testing you can pretty much conclude that what is being done in baseball and the other profesional sports is basically a PR move and nothing more.

The government has 103 positive tests (and the corresponding names associated with the samples) from the anonymous testing done in 2003. These are 103 major leaguers, who probably used many different suppliers and different types of steroids. If the final legal ruling is that they can use this info to subponea each of them you may see a can of worms open. Different suppliers named, then they are questioned and more connections may be made. Not to mention that these are 103 positive tests from major leaguers who can't come up with the same lame excuses we've heard before (especially since the government will know for what substance they tested positive and I'm sure many of those aren't in your everyday food and drink).