As long time readers of Bleacher Nation probably know, we have our own fountain of secret wisdom.
I'm not sure when he first appeared, and I can't honestly say that I remember all his predictions, but he has gotten the reputation for being accurate enough that he might, just might, have legitimate inside info.
Probably his biggest prediction was calling the Soler signing, complete with contract terms, a couple of weeks before it was announced. But there have been others.
And I think he has had some misses, too.
The point is, I don't really remember. I know he makes predictions and that it seems like he is right an uncanny amount of the time, but I don't know for sure.
So let's find out. We're heading into what is likely to be a very busy rumor season. We know he's active and is passing on bit of information, so I propose we track his predictions and see just how accurate this guy (girl? sentient computer?) is. I don't mean this in any hostile sense, but more out of curiosity.
Post Assman22 predictions in this thread as they appear, and we'll see how well he does this year.
The front office, despite shopping for much of the postseason in the bargain aisle, actually built a roster that (if we assume all players are performing as expected per talent level) would be in contention for a Wild Card.
The Rays would have no interest in Vitters or Rusin, I think. Baez+Jackson+second tier prospect+spare parts probably gets that deal done. Remember that the Cubs only gave up two starting-caliber prospects to land Garza (Archer and Lee (Guyer projected as a 4th OF, and Chirinos as a backup catcher)). Baez is a better prospect than Archer or Lee, so any package containing Baez is better than the Garza package almost by definition.
I don't see Cano reaching free agency. And I'm not convinced Kershaw or Sandoval will. It may take a trade to land either of those.
I don't know why, but this is tremendously fun. I hope this never ends.
Eh. The Message Boards deserve a better troll than this guy. A truly good troll never resorts to childishness, name calling, or the sort of overt stupidity wallowed in by this imbecile.
He needs to spend a decade or two studying under Die Hard the finer points of subtle derailment and non-obvious baiting before he's ready to handle the responsibility of being the Message Boards Troll.
So what if we drop losses altogether and compensate for it by slightly increasing the penalty for runs allowed. Frankly, if the only defense for keeping losses is that Fleaflicker uses them, then they need to go.
And then, how about we set Wins, Quality Starts, and Holds equal in value. Keeping wins can help the relievers, so I suppose we should hang on to them, but there is no way they should be more valuable than Quality Starts. Raising Holds to that same level may not make sense from real baseball standpoint, but if we are going make relievers worth rostering we've got to pump them up somewhere.
A hitter's homer should not stay at 15 points, but that's a different topic.
Taking Option 1, I'd replace Wins with Quality starts. I would also be in favor of removing losses entirely. We already penalize pitchers for giving up runs; I think that should be sufficient. Punishing them for losses seems to me too much like punishing the pitcher for having a bad defense, a crappy offense, or a weak bullpen.
I'm not a big fan of double counting or double punishing in general. On offense we award points for hits, home runs, and total bases. Why? Why not either award points for each hit type (maybe basing the point values on the wOBA weightings), or award a certain number of points per total base? Why both?