Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Worst Team Ever Projected?

The Riot's pregame interview on WGN radio.

I'm a long time reader of BCB and this is my first post. I was listening to the pregame show Friday night on WGN radio. Ron Santo was doing an interview with Ryan Theriot. Santo was asking the usual questions you would ask a guy who was just called up, but I found one question very interesting.

Santo asked him about his approach at the plate. Theriot explained that in the minors he focused on taking a lot of pitches and working the count. He said in the big leagues he needs to attack the first decent pitch he sees, because if you go deep in the count, big league pitchers will put you away.

This just confirmed for me that Dusty, Clines, Sarge, etc. tell these guys to go up to the plate and hack, hack, hack. This drives me up the wall. The Cubs approach at the plate is terrible.

Last night the difference between the Cubs and Rockies approach at the plate was glaring. The Rockies made Rich Hill work. They took a lot of walks, scored a bunch of runs, and wore down the Cubs pitchers. The Cubs swung at everything they could.

It's time for some new leadership on this team.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Comment 12 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Let's analyze
I agree.  This is horrible.  This approach hasn't worked.  But let's get specific.

What's wrong with the idea that "you need to attack the first good pitch you see, because in the majors, pitchers will put you away if you go deep in the count"?

I can see several possibilities.  
a) ML pitchers aren't that much better than AAA pitchers at hitting their spots
b) The advice presumes the hitter cannot hit a breaking ball (usually the "out pitch")
c) The advice presumes the hitter cannot lay off pitches outside the zone with two strikes
d) The hitter is assumed to have a relatively small hitting zone in which he can really drive the ball, as opposed to going with the pitch
e) It ignores the fact that forcing the pitcher to throw more pitches, while making it harder for any one batter to succeed, makes it easier for other batters to succeed, and more likely force the other team to use their middle relievers
f) It ignores the possibility that by watching a few pitches, a batter will improve his ability to follow the pitcher's release point and timing, improving the batter's contact
g) It overvalues hits relative to walks
h) It represents, for a batter like Theriot, a departure from the pattern that has made him successful, just at the point where he is already dealing with other major changes
i) It fails to see that hitting a "hittable" pitch from a groundball pitcher is likely to result in an out (Zambrano would love it if everyone swung and hit a first-pitch sinker)
j) It sets up an obvious tendency for a pitcher to take advantage of, rather than forcing him to come up with a specific game plan for each hitter
k) It suggests hitters should focus on the quality of the pitch (reactive), rather than preparing to hit any pitch that land in a hitter's favored zone (proactive)
l) It is an approach to hitting that cannot be practiced in the cage or batting practice, thus likely has a long learning curve

Please add others or comment on which of these you think is the real reason the philosophy fails.

by cubzfan on Aug 12, 2006 9:51 AM CDT reply actions  

Hitting as a philosophy
I am in my 40s.  While I retain many of the beliefs and habits learned from my parents, I have also changed major parts of my worldview and behavior.  These changes have almost NEVER come when confronted with the choice directly, or in public view.  Instead, at some quiet point of reflection, I realized that no longer believed X, but understood Y was a distinct possibility.  Or, in privacy, I tried something new, and found I liked it.  I'm not talking about developing new vices, just things like foods I never ate as a child, or political ideas.    

While Dusty has started talking more about OBA and being patient, I do not believe that he, Gene Clines, or Sonny Jackson will change their fundamental views of hitting "aggressiveness."  As a former hitting coach, Baker will also be incapable of leaving the coaching to someone else who has a different philosophy.  But a lot of us already think Dusty is gone at the end of the year.  My bigger concern is Jim Hendry.  His bosses do not understand how critical this issue is, but unless Hendry has been doing some serious thinking behind the scenes this year, I think he will have to be fired also for the Cubs' hitting philosophy to change.  

Mr. MacPhail, please change general managers.  

by cubzfan on Aug 12, 2006 9:59 AM CDT reply actions  

Hendry...
... was named GM on July 5, 2002, before Baker was even a blip on the radar screen. To set the scene, Andy MacPhail fired Don Baylor in what was his last act as GM (on July 4) and then stepped aside.

Hendry's first major decision was hiring Baker; after that he started acquiring players for the 2003 team. At no time did it seem as if Hendry was installing this "philosophy" in his acquisitions for the 2003 club.

It was only after Baker was hired that "hackers" like Tom Goodwin, Lenny Harris, Jose Macias, Rey Ordonez, Enrique Wilson and our favorite whipping boy, Neifi, were acquired.

Point here is: it seems as if the tail is wagging the dog. Baker has to go, because what he's done is infuse the entire organization, Hendry included, in this "aggressive hitting" nonsense. Once a new manager is hired -- and it ought to be Fredi Gonzalez, who could bring along some coaches who are actually professional and good at their jobs, instead of the manager's old pals -- this philosophy can and will change.

by Al Yellon on Aug 12, 2006 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions  

I appreciate your take
It would be nice if Hendry could distance himself from Baker and this philosophy, but he doesn't seem to be doing so lately.  And has he ever?

Let's look at what Hendry did in late 2002.  He acquired Damian Miller and Paul Bako.  He then traded Todd Hundley for Eric Karros and Mark Grudzielanek.  He signed Mike Remlinger, Troy O'Leary, and Shawn Estes as free agents.  In January, he signed Rod Beck, Dave Veres, and Mark Guthrie along with Tom Goodwin and Lenny Harris.  That's a lot of veteran suckitude.

Grudz had just delivered a .301 OBP (career .330) and Karros a .323 (career .325).  Miller was better, with a .340 (career .332).  

At what point did it seem that Hendry DID NOT follow Baker's philosophy?

Earlier in 2002, Hendry oversaw a minor league system which dealt Adam Morrissey and Adam Melhuse, two hitters known primarily as on-base threats.  After becoming GM, Hendry chose not to retain Bill Mueller, dealing him to the Giants.  Nearly all the moves I have just listed were minor.  I'm not claiming that Adam Morrissey should be the Cubs' left-fielder today, or that they should have gotten more for Hundley or Mueller.  But I don't see any reason to think that Hendry valued a patient hitting philosophy.

by cubzfan on Aug 12, 2006 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions  

Many many many good points
by both you and Al. I have two negative takes on Jim.

#1. He is a bottom feeder when it comes to acquisitions. He takes guys coming off injuries and gets them cheap, hoping they'll reappear as their once glorious self. I only recall Dempster as a positive out of many instances. This could also blend into his belief that the injuries to Prior, Wood and Miller were nothing to be concerned about. Thus he had no backup plan. You don't shop at Kmart and expect to be named best dressed man.

#2. Hendry is a groupie and Baker is his superstar. So whatever Dusty proposes, he disposes. If you read Hendry's statements closely, you'll find a correlation between that and Baker's beliefs. I truly believe that Hendry is a very nice guy but he feels he's out of league. Thus he defers to Baker for making decisions.

Finally, the comments by Theriot are one of the biggest reasons I believed Baker should already be gone now rather than the end of the year. He is screwing with the heads of the young guys and there will be a carryover effect. Cedeno is a perfect example. While he wasn't a great OBP man, he used to work the count well on many occasions. Now he's more often than not a one pitch out. It seems Theriot will ride the pines until he learns the team's hack approach to hitting.

Players win awards but teams win championships.

by tharr on Aug 12, 2006 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions  

This is the first DIRECT evidence...
... that he's screwing around with hitters who would otherwise be patient. I agree completely with point #2, and at this point, this club would be far better served with Baker gone, and Hendry hiring someone who he can work WITH rather than work "under", as he apparently is now.

I don't think at this point -- especially since it has been stated by Hendry that he WON'T fire Baker -- it's going to make that much difference in players like Theriot (and Murton). They're young enough that they can shed this nonsense once the regime is changed.

by Al Yellon on Aug 12, 2006 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions  

The tail & the dog are both wagging
on this one.

At what point did it seem that Hendry DID NOT follow Baker's philosophy?

I agree that Hendry doesn't value plate patience as much as he values "good hitters."  

To play some devil's advocate, you could point to the acquisitions of Aramis/Lofton and Derrek Lee as moves that improved OBP, but it seems to me that their ability to get on base was not a main consideration.  The Cubs literally had no one left to play CF, and my dog could have put up a better OBP at 3B than what the Bellhorn/Martinez/Harris/ Hernandez 3Bsquadron was posting.  Derrek Lee was Hendry cutting bait on Choi and being able to afford the salary.

Hendry is very much like Dusty in that he emphasizes speed at the top of the order (CF/2B) prefers high-avg players over high-obp players across the board, and dislikes strikeouts to the extent that he has worked systematically to rid the team of high-K players.  

Even if you believe otherwise -- that Hendry is beholden to Dusty's philosophy -- why the heck would anyone want to retain such a milquetoast weak-minded visionless GM?  He's either as wrong-minded as Dusty is or he's too weak-minded to function effectively.  Either way, he needs to catch the same train out of town that Dusty should be on.

What does not kill you makes you stronger.

by Pa on Aug 12, 2006 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions  

I wasn't saying that he did...
... I was saying that he wasn't a slave to Baker's philosophy as he appears to be now. Some of those guys -- particularly Goodwin and Harris -- had been Baker favorites from years gone by.

The Hundley deal was still a good one, wasn't it?

by Al Yellon on Aug 12, 2006 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions  

Analytically challenged
Baker's problem is that he only sees what's on the surface. To him, one of the worst things you can do as a hitter is get called out on strikes. But most of us know that if you are going to mine the gold that is out there as a reward for taking pitches, you are sometimes going to get rung up.

But Baker fails to see that this is only one outcome. You're challenging the umpire to make that call, and of course, even if you are rung up it doesn't mean you would have gotten a hit had you swung. In fact, the chances are very good you STILL would have made an out. That doesn't mean you're just up there looking for a walk, either, it just means your sitting on the meat of the strike zone and taking your chances with the fringes of the zone and anything else just outside the zone. And if the pitcher knows you are willing to take a called third strike and not swing at the fringes, this increases the chances that he will give you something good to hit.

It's similar to when the third-base coach sends the runner and he's thrown out at the plate. It doesn't mean that runner would have scored had you held him at third. Likely, with two outs he would not have scored - even with a good hitter at the plate. Funny how the third base coach is never held accountable for holding a runner at third that would have required a perfect throw to gun him down. This is where more runs are lost.

by cubz1963 on Aug 12, 2006 11:58 AM CDT reply actions  

Just curious
At any time during this interview did Theriot expressly say this is what he was told to do by his big league coaches or did he say he came to the conclusion about hitting the first decent pitch on his own? Or did that not get addressed at all?

by BeerCub on Aug 13, 2006 9:08 AM CDT reply actions  

I also heard the interview
Theriot said he was working with "Geno" (Clines) to change his approach at the plate to be more aggressive.  That lead into the talk about being patient vs aggressive.

It was obvious from the context that he was changing his approach under the direction of the coaches.

What does not kill you makes you stronger.

by Pa on Aug 13, 2006 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bleed Cubbie Blue, the Chicago Cubs blog for the SB Nation, created on February 9, 2005 by Al Yellon

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Img_0001_small
Value of Various Plate Approaches
284_small
Cubs' Fantasy Camp 2012 as seen by a Player's Wife
P7200073_small
Randy Hundley Fantasy Camp 2012

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Nice article about Ernie Banks
Yankees Hire Jim Hendry
Dale Sveum Meets Early Arrivals At Camp Buss

Recent FanShots

Ranking the Farm Systems
WGN Releases Season Schedule
MLB.com Cubs Top 20 prospect list
A position ranking of the NL central by ESPN.
Draft Pick Currency and the Cubs
Yoenis Cespedes
Cubs designate IF Blake DeWitt for assignment
Cubs Claim Adrian Cardenas
The Story Of Theo Epstein And A Broom
OT: Angels GM Jerry Dipoto handwrites a fan

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

Featured Poll

Poll
Andrew Cashner for Anthony Rizzo!
Yea!
1167 votes
Nay!
95 votes
Meh
164 votes

1426 votes | Poll has closed

It Is Only...

It Is Only...

Cubs By The Numbers

Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.

Click here to order your copy, available now!

Recent Stories in Other Reviews


Managing Editor

Alyellontoppscard_small Al Yellon

Front Page Contributors

Primary_fc_small Josh Timmers

Marvin_the_martian_small Shawn Domagal-Goldman

Other Contributors

Dsc_0139_small David Sameshima

Toonmike_small Mike Bojanowski