Bleed Cubbie Blue: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Sounder At Heart for Seattle Sounders Fans!

Shannon Stewart Claimed by Cubs...

.... according to ESPN 1000. This story is a couple of hours old, so I'm surprised it hasn't been posted yet.  The 48-hour clock is now ticking for the Cubs to work out a deal, the A's to pull Stewart back, or the A's to simply say "he's all yours."

Stewart is currently batting .298 with 9 HRs and 35 RBI, 35 BBs, .761 OPS.

Have at.

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.

0 recs  |  Comment 78 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Oh boy
This may swash MurtonMania.  I mean he has 2 homers now!
SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Aug 8, 2007 7:55 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

As usual
it's all about your insipid hatred of Murton. I guess Matt's game has been causing the losing streak, right?
Josh Kroeger. Remember the name. Stay tuned for the fame.

by tharr on Aug 8, 2007 9:16 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

funny how
you show up when the cubs start to lose...  
SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Aug 8, 2007 10:08 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Just because your mommy
didn't read you all the diaries, don't blame me. Maybe you can have your babysitter take over for her when she's too busy next time.
Josh Kroeger. Remember the name. Stay tuned for the fame.

by tharr on Aug 8, 2007 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

lol
I love this team!!!!!

by sue369 on Aug 9, 2007 6:57 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Five years ago...
... this would have been a spectacular acquisition.

Now, it's just "OK". Stewart has been Oakland's regular LF most of this year, but has hit only one HR since July 1 (SLG since then: .355). The Cubs need power, and Stewart used to have a little pop. He's hitting .289/.358/.397 vs. LHP so far this year. Maybe he can platoon in RF, although he's played very little RF in his career.

If you could get him cheap, it's probably worth it.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Aug 8, 2007 7:55 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

You told me
the Cubs didn't need any power.

by jazzypete on Aug 9, 2007 8:24 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Is this legit??
cubs now losing 3-0 think they needed a bigger lift than Shannon S. maybe just a stopgap...they have NO POWER what soever esp. with the "babying'' of Ramirez...what's wrong with him anyway?

by writerinwrigley on Aug 8, 2007 8:06 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

She could certainly help this team
by providing a lift off the bench.
"I never take a game home with me. I leave it in some bar along the way." -Bob Lemon, from Sweet Lou

by section229beer on Aug 8, 2007 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

This would be a good move
He hits .300 and can play every day.  How many Cubs can you say that about right now?

Shannon Stewart and Jaque Jones played on a Twins team together that fought to get into the playoffs.  I imagine they are close so if having Stewart around picks up Jones' spirit, all the better.  The A's are only paying him $1 million this year (with $1.5 in incentives) so it's not like he would cost alot and he's not someone we need to plan around if he pans out.

This team could use some more veteran playoff expierence.  Depending on who/what we trade, I love it.

by IllinoisCubs on Aug 8, 2007 11:05 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

He Hits .300?
He hasn't "hit .300" for a full season since 2004.  His OPS+ for the past two seasons is below 100.   His slugging for the past three seasons is down.  A reasonable analysis of his stats says that he has been in the decline phase of his career for the past three seasons and will continue to decline.  This is not surprising as he is at the age where a decline occurs.   Stewart's a typical "Cub" move.  A player who was better than league average -- several years before -- who is now in the decline stage of his career and now has a low ceiling but also an established floor -- rather than playing a young player or players with much higher ceilings, but also no established floor.

Stewart would be the kiss of death for this team as it would take more AB's away from players more likely to be productive.

by frustratedfan on Aug 9, 2007 8:07 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ditto
"You can't take life to seriously, you don't get out of it alive"

by wild bill on Aug 9, 2007 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i'm baffled
at the pro-Murton crowd.

The man is a career 4A player.
That's all he is.

Stewart is an upgrade in EVERY facet of the game.

You are comparing a major league ballplayer to a 4a player.

"You're fired." - Dallas Green to Billy Connors while Billy was staying in the hospital.

by jdoolsiu on Aug 9, 2007 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hmmm...
Don't you hate when facts get in the way?

Murton's career line: .296/.365/.444
Stewart's line over the same period: .281/.338/.372

Stewarts career line: .299/.363/.436

Murton, OPS+:

  1. 135
  2. 103
  3. 84
Average: 107

Stewart, OPS+:

  1. 88
  2. 88
  3. 104
Average: 93

Stolen Bases:
Murton: 8 for 11
Stewart: 20 for 27

Runs created/9 (2005, 2006, 2007):
Murton: 7.53, 5.78, 4.46 (3 year span: 5.86)
Stewart: 4.35, 4.50, 5.21 (3 year span: 5.30)

While Stewart may be better defensively, and is  slightly better at stealing bases, I am baffled how you could say that Stewart is an "upgrade in EVERY facet of the game."  That is simply false.  Murton has been better in almost every hitting statistic.

by big_lowitzki on Aug 9, 2007 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

its no surprise this post hasnt been responded to
i love it when facts get in the way of opinions
Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Pretty much
shuts them up.
I love this team!!!!!

by sue369 on Aug 9, 2007 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i'm at work
I can't post all the time.

Shannon Stewart has MANY more MLB at-bats to go over as opposed to Matt Murton's.

Defense and speed are tough to quantify.

Matt Murton.  Is not.  A good baseball player, in the Year of our Lord, 2007.

He just isn't.
Hopefully, he starts going crazy, and hitting like nuts.

BUT, as of right now, you're talking about a LARGELY unproven MLB player.  Shannon Stewart is a proven player.  You know what you're going to get with Shannon moreso than with Matt.

That's truth.

"You're fired." - Dallas Green to Billy Connors while Billy was staying in the hospital.

by jdoolsiu on Aug 9, 2007 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

something else
.321
.297
.266

Murton's BA over the last three years.

.386
.365
.342
Murton's OBP over the last three

.521
.444
.367
Murton's power...
Don't worry folks..it's not the Titanic sinking.  It's just Murton slowly sucking.

"You're fired." - Dallas Green to Billy Connors while Billy was staying in the hospital.

by jdoolsiu on Aug 9, 2007 5:54 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

and another bit of info..
Murton's greatest asset for the Cubs WAS his ability to hit left handers...it seems to have left him in 2007, as he is only hitting lefties .274.

He provides little power, little speed, and little defense.

I guess I'm still missing the love.

"You're fired." - Dallas Green to Billy Connors while Billy was staying in the hospital.

by jdoolsiu on Aug 9, 2007 5:58 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

that's all well and good
but there is something to be said for having someone who has been through a pennant race before, and has played in the post-season.  Murton may have similar stats in his short career, but you don't know how he will respond to pressure he has yet to experience.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Aug 10, 2007 12:42 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

That was hilarious
No really it was.  Everything you said was true, but it doesn't apply to the situation at hand.  2005 and 2006 were not good years for Stewart.  He was injured and he didn't play full-time.  This year he has played in almost every game and is batting .298.  You realize that a 1-3 or 2-4 game would put him at or over .300, right?  Even last year when he was coming back from injury he hit .293.  This team needs hitting so much they are thinking about putting Kendall in the No. 2 spot.  

"A player who was better than league average -- several years before -- who is now in the decline stage of his career and now has a low ceiling but also an established floor -- rather than playing a young player or players with much higher ceilings, but also no established floor."

Did you not read the part about Stewart being under a one year contract?  If this doesn't work, he's gone at the end of the year.  

"Stewart would be the kiss of death for this team as it would take more AB's away from players more likely to be productive."

These younger OF players like Murton and Pie are NOT as likely to produce as much as Stewart in the next two weeks.  Murton is batting .256 and Pie is batting .214.  We don't have time for Pie and Murton to find their batting stroke.  Stewart is hitting almost .300 right now and knows what it takes to make it to the MLB playoffs.  

This is not a typical Cubs move because we aren't typically in the hunt.  If we were 10 games under .500, 15 games back from first, then yes play the kids, but this is the final stretch and the kids aren't cutting it.

Don't ignore the Jones effect either.  I think that could be a boost all around.  

by IllinoisCubs on Aug 9, 2007 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Low Ceiling
Yes.  I read the part about Stewart being under a one year contract.  He has a low ceiling -- this year.   He peaked in June and has been declining, and at a rather rapid rate since then.   Murton may only be hitting .256 at the moment, but much of that was in sporadic work at the start of the season and, more importantly, he lit up the place at Iowa once he got back into the mixture.  Murton has a much higher ceiling THIS year than Stewart.  He has had 29 games with 3 or more AB's.  He has gotten hits in 21 of those 29 games.  And 2 or more hits in 9 of those games.

But hey, if you want to see the Cubs continue to lose, lets wash, rinse and repeat the same path to failure that the Cubs have followed for decades.

by frustratedfan on Aug 9, 2007 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed
Stewart would be a fine addition.  His .360 OBP would look great in left field.  And his 9 HR are more than double what any other outfielder on the Cubs healthy roster have.  He'd certainly be an upgrade.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 8:53 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

just curious
im trying to find a difference between matt murton, and shannon stewart right now in left field...because i dont see how you are pro shannon stewart in left, and anti matt murton in left when they have similar (if murton doesnt have better).  Their career batting avg. are almost exactly the same and their career on base are almost exactly the same.  i guess stewart has a little more speed, but considering that they seem very similar, yet stewarts on the decline, and murton should only improve with age...

what do you see in stewart that you dont see in murton?

Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

similar power
was what i was getting at in the line that ended mid sentence.
Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 11:29 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree...
Stewart is, at this point, a low/mid-.700s OPS guy.  He's a .350-.360 OBP guy.  He hits about 10-12 HR per year, and doesn't drive in many runs.  He has a weak arm and isn't great defensively.  These are all the things that people complain about with Murton.

Even this year, when Murton was struggling either due to being figured out or due to lack of playing time, he's 4 singles short of matching Stewart's production (relative to their respective AB).

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Or if you take away
4 of his bloop singles he'd have even worse numbers relative to their respective ABs.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sure...
my point was that there's not a significant difference in their stats, with the exception that Stewart has been in the lineup much more often.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

More stats
Murton with RISP: .200/.282/286
Stewart with RISP: .315/.351/.435

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Stewart has
significantly better numbers this season, he's a much better baserunner, scores more runs, has more power, is a better defensive player, and he's more experienced and, thus, will be prone to fewer bone-headed mistakes down the stretch.  He's also shown he knows how to produce with sporadic playing time (which is what will happen when Soriano gets healthy), which, as I understand it, even the most ardent Murton supporters admit that he can't do.  I think he can help the Cubs if they're fortunate enough to get him.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not really...
He does not have more power.  He's a 10-15 HR per 500 AB guy, just like Murton.  So he in fact does not have more power.

Runs scored are a stat driven largely by spot in the batting order (and who hits behind you).  Given that the two have very similar OBP and OPS, one would expect that if Murton hit #1 or #2 like Stewart, he'd score more runs too.

And there's no evidence that he's actually a better defensive player.  He certainly has no better an arm.

And he has not put up significantly better numbers this year.  He has a .759 OPS.  If Murton got 4 more singles, he'd have a .763 OPS.  That is not significantly different.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 11:51 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

What if Murton
got 4 fewer singles, then what?  What if the sky was pink?  Gimme a break.  

Stewart has 9 HR's in 393 AB's while Murton has 2 HR's in 139 AB's.  As I said, Stewart has more power.

And as I said, Stewart is the better baserunner and scores more runs. I'm sure in a hypothetical universe where Murton has more hits and the sky is pink that's not true, but on this planet it is.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

You're confusing...
"has more power" with "has hit HR at a better rate this year."  Those are two VERY different statements.

You don't seem to realize (or acknowledge that you realize) my point that results can be highly variable.  Hence saying "significantly better" is not accurate.  He's had slightly better results, given 3 times the AB.  But it's not significant.

But again, this comes back to the same tired debate that you don't think Murton is a good hitter and thus ignore his good past, and I think Murton is a good hitter and thus rationalize his early-season struggles.

From this point forward this season, based on past history, I don't think Stewart would outperform Murton given similar playing time.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Murton
I love Murton and think he has a bright future still but he has not proven anything.

Walton had a great first year too.

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 9, 2007 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

What about the disparity
with RISP?  Is that significant?  Or are you gonna give me a stat-head explanation for why those numbers don't matter?  

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

its a valid point
but would be more valid if we batted stewart in the 6 hole rather than the 2 hole (and im just repeating two hole because thats where i heard he may hit).  late in a game i guess you would have to say you would rather have stewart in there, but setting the table, i think murton would do just as fine of a job.
Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Are you going to keep being a dick?
Yes, Stewart has an OPS of .935 over 3 years (230 AB) with RISP.  Murton's is .787ish (in 159 AB).  Thus, in about 25-30 chances w/RISP the rest of the way (which is about what they should expect to see in regular playing time), I'd expect a couple more hits from Stewart.

And my point was that moving forward, based on past history, I think Murton will put up similar numbers to those of Stewart the rest of the way overall.  Obviously that can't be proven with anything but time.

Since you see his struggles early this year as evidence of being figured out and I see it as evidence of not getting regular playing time, I don't think either side is going to convince the other of anything.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I apologize for that last subject...
inappropriate comment.  I took offense to the flippant tone you take whenever I point out things you say that aren't true.  But I shouldn't have called you a dick, and I apologize.

If you'd stuck with the "in the clutch" argument, you have a pretty defendable argument.  Any other aspect of their offensive games is speculative at best, and can be argued against pretty reasonable.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

No problem
Apology accepted.

I don't believe I've said anything untrue.  You seemed to quibble with the word "significant", which is a subjective term.  But even you can't deny Stewart's numbers are better this season.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think you understand my stance...
Firstly, here are the things you said that aren't true (or aren't in any way clearly proven):

Stewart has more power
Stewart is a better defender
Stewart has been significantly better this year

As for my stance, I've never said Stewart hasn't put up better numbers so far this year.  I'm saying that they aren't significantly better.  And thus, considering (1) the relative closeness of their overall offensive performance this year and (2) their results the past two seasons, I would  expect Murton to put up similar (very possibly better) numbers than Stewart over the next two months.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

And to avoid cycling through our
usual doe-si-doe on this topic again, I'll go ahead and say that I'm fully aware we have differing opinions on the relevance of 2005 and 2006 stats.  Since that's a large part of the basis of my opinion, it's pretty much a waste of both of our breaths to try to convince the other.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

No problem
You're the one who keeps raising the issue.  If you don't want to talk about it stop bringing it up.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I understand you perfectly
You still haven't shown anything I've said to be untrue.

Just because you don't think Stewart's hitting home runs at a higher rate doesn't indicate Stewart has more power doesn't mean it's not true.

You've never really disputed my opinion that Stewart is the better defensive player.  And that is subjective anyway, so I don't see how you can characterize it as untrue.  You may disagree with it, but it doesn't make what I said untrue.

I further said Stewart had significantly better numbers than Murton.  (I never actually said he was significantly better this year.)  As I pointed out, you can quibble about the word "significantly", but you must admit Stewart's numbers are better.  Again, nothing I said here is untrue.

You keep repeating your projections of Murton going forward, then you say the debate about these projections is tired.  I agree.  But you're the one who keeps bringing it up.  You know I completely disagree with you about Murton magically turning into a good player so stop bringing it up.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not true...
Perhaps I should have said "non-factual" and not "not true."  You've provided your opinions, but they're each VERY debatable.  And since they can easily be argued against, that makes them not truths (i.e., not factual).

Hitting HR at a higher rate THIS YEAR does not mean more power.  It just means he's happened to hit HR at a higher rate this year.  Over a much larger sample, both players have exhibited similar power.  That's why I said it isn't true that Stewart has more power.  You can believe he has more power if you want, but it's at best speculative, and EASILY argued against.  It's in no way a truth.

As for the significant thing, that is simply untrue.  He has put up better numbers, but not significantly better numbers.  Take away "significantly" and it's a true statement.  Put it in, and it's just not true.

And you've never provided any evidence to support your claim that he's a better defensive player, therefore I've not debated it.  Until you can provide support for this opinion, it's not a fact.  You personally believe that Stewart is better defensively, but there's nothing factual to support that belief.

So yes, you in fact said things that were not true in each of these cases.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I never claimed anything
to be a truth.  I simply offered my opinion.  You disagreed with it.  Fine.  Then you claimed that you pointed out things I said were untrue.  That is bullcrap.  Nothing I said was untrue.  I offered my opinion and you disagreed with it.  

You seem to be changing the definition of the word "untrue".  By your definition everything you're saying is untrue also since it can easily be argued against.  But of course that's not a proper definition of the word.  Please look it up.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

definition of "untrue"
"not according with the facts"

you said "Stewart has more power"

the facts are this,

HR/AB Stewart: 1/47
HR/AB Murton: 1/33

your statement is "not according to the facts" and therefore it is "untrue."

Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

But if you look at this season
it's absolutely true.  Stewart's got 9 HR's to Murton's 2.  Thus, my statement is according to the facts.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

ha, no it is not
if that was your intention then you would have needed to qualify it by saying "so far this season, stewart has shown more power"  you simply said "stewart has more power" which is untrue.
Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ugh
Whatever you say professor.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 2:02 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

haha
absolutely classic, i didnt know you needed a degree to bring facts into an argument.  this is just pointless now because you have been proven wrong, and simply are not big enough of a person to admit it.  another day, another murton basher thwarted.  time to go back to work.
Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

LOL
Love it.
I love this team!!!!!

by sue369 on Aug 9, 2007 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

To the idiotmobile!!!

(I know that was a bit of an insult and I'm sorry but I couldn't resist.)

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

haha
cubsbak, im really not sure what that was refering to...and even though we generally disagree with everything, i dont not like you because for the most part ive never seen you argue by saying mean spirited things, and hell you are a cubs fan so youve got that going for you.  who knows which one of us is right (well, i do know that stewart doesnt have more power than murton, but anyways...) but if in september murton is producing for us just like he has the last two septembers, and if he is a key part of a playoff berth, then i want you to appologize, to him.  until then...

i think this convos over.

Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fair enough
and if the big red head takes advantage of his opportunities and becomes the player many people around here think he is then I'll be happy to admit that I'm wrong about the guy.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

No, actually that's not correct...
that is your interpretation of data.  One could also argue that it's a case of random variation due to smallish sample sizes.  You can absolutely say "Stewart has hit more HR this year" and that is true, but saying he has more power this year is not necessarily true.

For example, Pagan has as many HR and more extra base hits than Floyd in way fewer AB.  Does that mean he has more power than Floyd?  Remember that you scoffed at somebody who suggested this argument a week or so ago.  But it's the same exact argument you're suggesting here.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Whatever
This is splitting hairs.  What a bunch of nonsense.  Fine, I'll change my statement to "Stewart has hit more HR's this year and, therefore, has shown more power this season."

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

the above stats
are career numbers.
Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Are they true?
Are any of those three things you said true?  No.  They could very easily be false.  That's what I meant by untrue.

Again, as I said in a previous post, I chose a poor word for what I meant.  For that I apologize.  But it doesn't change anything about what I'm saying.

You seemed to present those three statements as facts.  They are not in any way factual.  That's why I responded.  You seemed to get contentious after that, with the whole "if the sky is pink" thing, which led to my unfortunate choice of words.

It all comes back to the fact that we look at the same stats differently.  I don't think either viewpoint is unreasonable.  We'll see who's right with time.

by SouthernCub on Aug 9, 2007 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes
we'll see.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Read above...
I further said Stewart had significantly better numbers than Murton.

Read above... I dealt with the silly assertion that Stewart has/had better offensive numbers than Murton.

by big_lowitzki on Aug 9, 2007 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

But you just pointed out
that based on past history Stewart is better, at least with RISP.  So what's your argument again?  That Stewart will only outperform Murton by a little bit?

And please stop with the name calling.  I expect that from a lot of people around here, but I'm pretty surprised that you'd sink to that level.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

tonites game
Much Maligned Matt Murton Goes Deep

by BigZ 4 Cy on Aug 9, 2007 10:56 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

One more thing
As I've pointed out above, Stewart is SIGNIFICANTLY better with runners in scoring position.

by cubsbak on Aug 9, 2007 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

How about
How about Murton has shown an ability to hit last year and an ability not to this year while Stewart has shown it over a career?

I love Matt don't get me wrong but this love affair with him has gone too far.

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 9, 2007 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

its not a love affair
its just a defense.  i dont think one single murton supporter has started a thread "matt murton for president 2008!"  any murton support has come in the face of murton bashing, and i think the defense is so heated because myself (and others) dont understand how people bash a career .300/.365/.444 hitter who is still developing and has shown a history of significantly better production in the second half of the season.

now cubsbak did bring up some good poitns about the risp, and you cant argue with that.  but at the same time, is stewart going to hit in a position to drive in runs?  i dont htink he is, as far as number 2 hitters go, i would say murton would be just as good hitting behind theriot as stewart would.

Big Z on Cuban: "Plus, I can be signed by him. You know, I know he has the money for me. Hopefully he can buy the Cubs."

by kylejo on Aug 9, 2007 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

ARGH!
How about the Cubs trade Jones for Stewart?  Or DFA Jones after acquiring Stewart?  Jones should have no future with the Cubs.

by FrankSereno on Aug 9, 2007 1:46 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

murton
everybody loves to bash murton.i guess everyone is happy with floyd and his 4 home runs.give murton the at bats and he,ll do well.or go get willy mo.

by NOMAR on Aug 9, 2007 6:55 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

get him
whatever.  the way this team is playing I would take anyone who may bring something new besides losing to the Cubs!
MMMMM...Hebrew National

by Kinky Reggae on Aug 9, 2007 8:04 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

I've got no problem with this deal...
 I would prefer more interesting targets personally, but this is the RH bench bat that we really should have gotten three weeks ago.

by Damen Jackson on Aug 9, 2007 9:12 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Do we need more outfielders?
Even with Pagan and Sori out for a while.  We've still got a huge influx of outfielders.

by Arbusto on Aug 9, 2007 9:24 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Hendry likes to spread the wealth
last year he collected 2nd baseman, this year, it's outfielders.

Anyway, he needs to do something, and Stewart looks like the best thing you are going to get off the waivers.  Who knows, maybe he catches fire and plays out of his ass.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Aug 9, 2007 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hendry
needs to collect a rf and some pitching.
The deadline has come and gone. Looks like our Triple A Hall O Famers will have to lead us to the promise land.

by cubbyblue137 on Aug 9, 2007 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Do what he always does
sell low and ship 'em to Baltimore or Florida or San Diego.
The deadline has come and gone. Looks like our Triple A Hall O Famers will have to lead us to the promise land.

by cubbyblue137 on Aug 9, 2007 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Stewart
Do I go out and buy series tickets because of this move?  No.  I did when they got Kendall (j/k)

Are the Cubs a better team with this addition?  Yes.  How much better remains to be seen.

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 9, 2007 12:10 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

This has nothing to do with Murton
Is Stewart > Eric Patterson today?  Yes
Is Stewart > Felix Pie today?  Yes
Is Stewart > Ronny Cedeno today?  Yes

Last time I looked, all three of these guys are on the 25-man roster.  One will go back down when Ward comes back. That still leaves two guys for whom Shannon Stewart right now as a rental for the next two weeks is a better option.

Even if he's only going to be your 5th OF, if you can rent Stewart for a B/B- prospect, you do it.

If you're worried about backing up Jones in CF, keep Patterson up as he can stand at 2B about as well as Soriano could, and send Cedeno and Pie both back to Iowa until 8/31 (when you might bring them up early to be on the 25-man playoff roster as you will not need 12 pitchers in a 7-game series).

by Invalid User on Aug 10, 2007 1:01 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

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
Start posting about the Cubs »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Chicagocubs1914_small
OT: Big-Ten, Vista-Demolition, Bad-News-Bears, Anything-Goes-on-a-Weekend Game Thread
Jake_fox_small
Cubs Should Go After Rich Hill
Chicagocubs1914_small
Last Out to First Pitch – The 2009-10 Offseason IT'S HAPPENING!!!??? Contest
Small
More From the Cubs in Winter Ball
Small
Don't Make the Mistake of Dumping Bradley

Recent FanPosts

Small
Should we trade him, or should we not?
Madduxflag_small
Starlin Castro Vitters etc LIVE Sat night
Helmet_small
Az Fall League Cubs
4167bqf31ml
Five tool player available!
Self-portrait-4_small
This Might Be A Long Shot...
Madduxflag_small
Convention Sold Out
P272649reg_small
OT: Why not name a field after Ernie?
Cubs_sweatrshirt_on_gravestone_small
Vernon Wells - prepping to be a Cub

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

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

Recommended FanShots

Gomez to drink your Brew, Hardy to eat your Twinkie
BP interviews Sam Fuld. Great read!
Who was the best MLB player born on your birthday?
Gary Matthews Jr.
Kerry Wood Says Black Players Got Hate Mail

Recent FanShots

OT: Lidge to have surgery
OT, sexist and imho funny
J.J Putz's Option Declined by Mets.
Does Soriano's defense at 2B really cost more runs than in LF?  He makes a lot fewer errors in LF since misplays and mental mistakes aren't figured into the stats, but I have to imagine that his mistakes are more physical at 2B.  Any thoughts?  Is there a statistic on this?
Sosa pays tribute to Michael Jackson?
Harden, Johnson File For Free Agency
Brett Myers released by the Phillies
Mark Teahen to Chicago....White Sox
More On The Dodger Divorce

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

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!

SPONSORS

Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges

Yelloncard_small
Ticket Exchanges: Cubs Convention 2010
Yelloncard_small
Ticket Exchanges: General 2009 Ticket Exchange
Yelloncard_small
Ticket Exchanges: September 29-October 4 Homestand

Managing Editor

Yelloncard_small Al

Editorial Cartoonist

Toonmike_small toonmike

Contributors

Dsc_0139_small holy mackerel

100px-boisehawkscaplogo_small Josh77

Small shawndgoldman