Another 2009 Post

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 2:23 AM CDT Comment 90 comments

Been awhile since I posted here.

Anyhow, some random thoughts on 2009:

1. Use the assets that you have.

A lot of people want to push the payroll. Hey, if management is willing, fine. That said, we already have one of the highest payrolls in the game, and we have several backloaded deals. Spend only in key areas. For example, if you keep Wood, then I wouldn't do anything more than add a LOOGY to the pen (and that might cost 4 mil/year for a good one). Heck, if budget was really an issue, then just go with what we have internally as lefty options (Marshall, Cotts - although neither really are LOOGY's; Rich Hill, Casey Lambert, Jeremy Papelbon and so forth). Use the assets we have to fill out the pen, 5th starter, and the bench. There are options in our system fo ill out those areas.

2. Go young.

With the system lacking in impact talent that's ready, going young, looking for cost-controlled players is a thought. Now granted, you'd have to give assets to give assets, but this is a team built for the now. Look, I'm not averse to a firesale, but the chances of that happening, with the org leadership returning, is slim.

So, what does it mean to go young? You could be literal about it and target the rumored availability of Delmon Young. Or it could be, and this is my personal preference, making a run at a lefty OF like Jeremy Hermida, who is rumored available because of his struggles (mainly at home) this past year, the fact that all three Marlins OF's are hitting arbitration, and the development of Cameron Maybin allowing them the flexibility of contemplating moves (along with Mike Stanton and Logan Morrison both developing into potential sluggers). They also want to go to a more speed/defense lineup (makes sense for the park and the K's they racked up.

I don't know if we can win a bid, but I think we can make a competitive bid that keeps us in the game.

3. There are places to cut money if push came to shove.

If push came to shove, there are places to cut money. A little bit may make a difference. A guy like Randy Wells can be serviceable as a long man/spot starter/middle reliever if we need to save. I'm okay with going to Koyie Hill if they want to save 2.7 million on Henry Blanco. I am a huge DeRosa fan, but if we push came to shove and we needed to save a little by shipping him off, it's not the end of the world. Just something to keep in mind if a little savings need to happen, and if we land our targets (a lefty bat and a leadoff option would be mine).

4. Shark pen.

I'm not a big fan of Shark in the rotation. He has not had that many innings on his arm, and throwing him in the rotation might mean a strict count that limits the utility of such a move. Furthermore, if we resign Dempster (or get a comparable), then we are looking at a 5th starter, and too much is made of that role at times (for example, Marquis was fine for a 5th starter, although if we can dump his contract and save, we need to). Also, Shark may be more useful in the pen, as a 7th inning option to Marmol/Wood, and allowing Marmol/Wood to rest at times.

5. Be open to gambles.

As constituted, the team can compete in 2009. It won't be easy to fill areas of need, but we need to be open to ideas. The idea is to get over the hump ... not simply get to the hump and hope to get hot, which is what this team, as currently constituted, is, based on the offensive construction.

6. Change the equation.

The uneasy feeling I had about this team all year was that it was prone to cold streaks. Unfortunately, we hit one in the playoffs. To change this equation, we need not only more balance in the lineup, but also a leadoff hitter. Based upon the Theriot experiment at leadoff, I think we need a proven guy for Lou and Soriano to buy into it. I'm not sure Roberts will be available (gut guess says they extend him), and there aren't that many great options out there available. Ichiro might be, and I'd ask on it (although I'm lukewarm on Ichiro overall). That said, Ichiro also has 4/68 left, which is eh. Furcal is the obvious candidate that would work, but you'd need to construct a contract that makes sense for both sides, hence making it a gamble (that is, we need protection on his health; he might want years because of his health and particularly since he is 30 now). Along those lines, keep in mind number 5. If we land Furcal, my preference would be to shop Theriot, as his value is at a peak right now.

7. Resign Wood and Dempster.

The bullpen needs some veteran arms. Instead of spending on a couple setup arms to work on finding a fit with MArmol as the closer, keep Wood and Marmol as a strength, and use what we have.

Dempster is one of the top 5 FA pitching arms. Burnett and Lowe likely will get quite expensive (Yankees may pursue), and Sheets is a big ?. Sabathia is an unlikely target. If Dempster is willing to take a slight discount (perhaps an AAV in that 12/13 range, which sadly, is around middle of the rotation money these days), you might as well take it.

There's obviously more possibilities and ideas. A lot depends on the payroll. Even with some simple guesses on targets and target costs, we are looking in that 130-140 million range. It's hard to imagine that the payroll will go far beyond that.

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.

1 recs | Comment 90 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Very well written...

..and you make some very good points. However, a team that showed as much talent as this one should not even think about going young. I also disagree with the notion of Derosa being expendable to save money — Hank White can walk, but we’d be crazy to let Derosa go.

I agree with your leadoff argument. This team needs a proven leadoff hitter that gets the lineup going. Furcal, IMO, would be perfect for that; not to mention, he would be a HUGE defensive upgrade at short, and he would steal bases.

I disagree, however, on shopping Theriot. True, his value is huge now after hitting over .300, but doesn’t this team need help pinch hitting? I know Theriot doesn’t hit for power, but he can hit the ball in the gap and drive in runs. Seems to me that a Theriot type hitter would have helped more in ’08 than a Daryl Ward type.

Whatever happens, it should be an interesting offseason nonetheless!

"I never drink water because of the disgusting things fish do in it" -W.C. Fields

by calicubfan on Oct 10, 2008 3:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

"but doesn’t this team need help pinch hitting?"

TheRiot a Pinch Hitter? What are you drinking?

TheRiot and Pinch hitting do not belong in the same sentence and more so pinch hitting is an art. Heck we are not even sure if TheRiot can hit without regular At bats.

I agree that TheRiot’s value is at a high right now and it would be wise to trade him if possible.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree on shopping Theriot

You’ll never get more for him now than any other time. SS is the one spot that absolutely needs an upgrade. By getting a guy like Furcal you can get yourself both lead-off and defensive upgrades.

Has anyone thought of possibly pursuing Brian Giles? I know he nixed the Red Sox trade, but I wonder if he would be willing to go to the Cubs to start a new year. He could play right and lead off, and Lou could juggle Dome/Reed/Pie in center.

by dr stabbingworth on Oct 10, 2008 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not real big on Brian Giles

Personally, I don’t think he wants to leave home. He’s close to done, so I think he’ll stay put. That said, if we are going to make a run at Giles, I’d rather just go after Abreu and save assets to make a run elsewhere.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let me be clear

I’m not talking about going young in terms of a firesale. I’m saying that we should look at cost-controlled guys to perhaps gamble after.

Put it this way – Bobby Abreu on say, a 3 year deal or perhaps swinging a trade for a guy like Jeremy Hermida? I’d lean to the latter.

I love DeRosa, and in an ideal world, we keep him. It’s just, after running the numbers, if we are to land an impact bat or impact players, the payroll is going to rise dramatically. Are we really going to see a 150-160 million payroll? Hey, if ownership’s willing to pay (and in the end, it would be the fans), I’m okay. But that seems a bit high, and we have to find ways to dump Marquis’ contract. All I’m saying is to keep an open mind on ideas.

As for Theriot, I think (if we sign, say, Furcal).

a) His trade value is at a peak
b) Bench bats within the system can be found, and middle infield bench bats can be found
c) He’s more a rhythm guy to me … I have questions on how effective he would be as a bench guy

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

DeRosa makes ~$4 million for the next year

I don’t see that making much difference when throwing $15-20 million over 4-6 years at a guy.

For his production, I think he should stay, even if he doesn’t repeat his performance.

by dr stabbingworth on Oct 10, 2008 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree....

This piece is well written, and full of info. We need an upgrade at short as well as the other glaring spots. Theriot’s defense on the throw to second, on a steal alone is terrible. He has no range, and with our third and second base guy’s we gotta upgrade. His value now is at its peak, let’s do something with it. I’m not saying to empty the bank on a leadoff guy, but,is’nt Fonzie the typical four hole guy(strike out,or homerun) maybe that’s to old school for today’s game, see(Reggie J.,here). As far as the rest of the playoffs, I can’t watch, we should have been there.

ernie81

by ernie81 on Oct 10, 2008 4:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Lineup thought

If we find that leadoff hitter, I’d like to move Soriano to the 5 hole, where historically, I think he’s had some success (too lazy to check splits right now). I’d like Aramis at 3, and I’d like to plug a lefty bat in at 4.

Now, that’s probably dreaming a bit, as that leaves Lee for the 2 or 6 spots.

Honest guess at what would happen if we landed a leadoff guy? My guess is that Lou (again, not what I want) moves Soriano to the 2 hole.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 11:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Trust me...

…if Soriano hit 5th next year and matched his career numbers in that position, he would be one of the more productive 5 hole hitters in baseball.

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

by MPH73 on Oct 10, 2008 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Soriano

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?n1=soriaal01

Scroll down to see his splits by batting position. 5th is his second best spot. Batting 1st is his best by far.

by dr stabbingworth on Oct 10, 2008 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jeremy Hermida

Yes!

The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.

by DGU on Oct 10, 2008 8:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Would love to get Hermida

that road split (and his 2007 season as a whole) looks really nice.

by SouthernCub on Oct 10, 2008 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't understand

Why the rumors suggest the Marlins have soured that quickly and hard on Hermida. Now, I didn’t follow them all that closely this year, so maybe there’s something underlying. But he had good road splits, he’s young, and heck, he’s a lefty.

That said, with 3 more cost-controlled years, he’ll be expensive to get. My best guess at a competitive bid would be either

A) Jose Ceda and 2 from Pie/Castillo/Colvin

B) Ryan Theriot, Jose Ceda, and one from the Pie/Castillo/Colvin

(rationale: Marlins are desiring a more speed/defense oriented lineup as they had too many K’s this past year. They also could use a young pen arm, despite having Lindstrom, and John Baker isn’t exactly a young catcher. Theriot might interest as a 2nd baseman to them (although they have Chris Coghlan close to ready, but maybe they want to buy Coghlan another year).

I think that gets us in the game … don’t know if that’s enough to win a bid (but hey, I’ve been wrong on trade markets before, so maybe he costs more, or preferably for us, less).

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i bet

they’d do it for Pie straight up. The Marlins have liked Pie for a long time

Pie has 5 more cost controlled years than Hermida and has similar overall value.

The fans down here have soured significantly on Hermida and the organization included him in the Manny talks which is why his “name” is out there

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I doubt they'd do it for Pie straight up

Pie’s value in a corner OF spot is significantly less, and Maybin has rights to CF for the forseeable future. Also, Hermida has produced more in the bigs than Pie has, which will be a factor.

Btw, his name has been tossed out beyond the Manny conversations. The writers down there have been hinting at it for the past month.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

they traded Miguel Cabrera

for Maybin + Miller

Miggy had done a whole lot more at the ML level than either of those two players

and he’d done a whole lot more than Jeremy Hermida.

Hermida is entering the same time frame as Cabrera (though he’s less expensive and less productive) I bet Pie + low level prospect would get it done.

Seriously look at the trades around the league these days. Pie + 2 mid level pitching prospects apparently can get you Johan Santana these days (don’t tell me Carlos Gomez is any better of a prospect than Pie)

We’re talking about Jeremy Hermida, not an established star. A young former top prospect who is about to start getting more expensive and the team has fallen out of favor with him (Hermida constantly rode pine in September).

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

So you really think that

a) They’d acquire Pie to play, say, LF straight up for Hermida?
b) That the market wouldn’t generate more than Pie in a trade? I can think of a lot of teams that would jump in on Hermida.

Btw, on the Johan trade – Gomez was probably considered a slight tick ahead of Pie but yes, they were close, but the key piece of that deal (and the one that struggled the most this year) was perhaps Deolis Guerra. He was the upside, ace potential kid (hasn’t panned out but Guerra had high value). People seem to have forgotten about him and simply remember Mulvey and Humber. That said, using the Santana trade as a measure is a bit flawed, as that trade had a limited market. Furthermore, most people acknowledge that Bill Smith screwed up in the Santana trade by continuing to stall, rather than taking the Yankees, or even the Red Sox, rumored package early on.

I think they would look to someone like Ceda perhaps moreso than Pie. Pie in LF or RF simply isn’t as intriguing as Pie in CF, and they like collecting arms.

Only time will tell, but the one thing to remember is that, you can use different trades as loose measuring sticks, but trades need to be viewed within their own individual environments.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

playing RF in Dolphins Stadium

is like CF in other parks.

Defensive value is huge to the Marlins OF because most NL East ballparks are also big as well.

I think Pie + say someone like Veal and Randy Wells or something could get it done. But yeah I don’t think we’d need to throw multiple big chips at the Marlins for Hermida

I’m telling you i live in South Fla and this team and this fanbase is very down on him. I don’t know if the organization is, but Hermida rode pine most of September.

As far as what the market dictates, I mean Pie IS the equivalent of a Top 50 prospect or so in baseball right? He is MLB ready or on the verge of MLB ready and he’s cost controlled for a max number of years

Is there a lot more that the Marlins would want?

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree.

A Pie – Maybin swap allows both teams to exchange players they have devalued for closer to full value.

He wouldn’t be a major piece in a deal, but the Marlins might also like Rich Hill who might gain a tiny bit of confidence pitching in a park that is nearly impossible to hit out of.

by DGU on Oct 10, 2008 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm assuming that was a typo

Maybin isn’t going anywhere.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah - I meant Pie - Hermida

by DGU on Oct 10, 2008 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Only time will tell

My guess on what Hermida might cost is still probably Ceda/Pie as a starting point. Here’ hoping you are right, because I’d trade Veal or Wells/Pie for Hermida any day of the week.

I don’t think Pie’s value is nearly as high as you think it is anymore. A couple years back, yes, but with his up and down big league stints, I think his value has somewhat slid a bit. He still has value, I’m not saying he doesn’t, but I don’t know if he’d equate to a top 50 prospect right now (put it this way, Josh Vitters and Shark are probably our only top 50 prospect for the upcoming year, and he’s likely in that 30-50 range, and I think most would consider Vitters and Shark with higher value than what Pie offers). There’s a chance Shark is higher on some lists, perhaps in that 20-30 range, but there’s also a chance he’s lower (depends on the evaluator). If Pie was on prospect lists right now, I’d guess he’d be in that 70-100 range.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Couple more comments

3 cost-controlled years of a young player has high value.

The Miguel Cabrera trade needs to be viewed with the understanding that the Tigers stepped up and ate Dontrelle’s contract when few were willing.

The trade was a very good one for the Marlins. I was a huge fan of it then, and am still a fan of it now. The team wasn’t winning anything the way it was constituted, Cabrera was supposedly causing issues down there, and they got back a potential ace and a potential stud CF, along with spare parts. That’s all you could’ve asked for, 2 impact potential type guys and someone was foolish enough to eat Willis’ contract along with it.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope Pie-Hermida could do it.

The Marlins also dump guys when they hit arb unless they think they are definite building blocks – and even then, they dumped MigCab.

by DGU on Oct 10, 2008 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hermida is an interesting idea

I’d be interested to hear what the Marlins would want in return

1. C Soto
2. C Blanco/someone as backup C
3. 1B Lee
4. 1B Hoffipaur
5. 2B DeRosa
6. 2B/SS Cedeno
7. SS Theriot
8. 3B Ramirez
9. LF Soriano
10. CF Pie
11. RF Fukudome
12. LF/RF Hermida
13. 2B Fontenot

That’s solid but what would the Marlins want for him? They are like the rich friend who has everything.

by FanBall on Oct 10, 2008 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Marlins

Are looking to make that lineup a bit more speedy/defensive oriented (particularly the OF). They have some infield options (Sanchez at first, Cantu/McPherson at 3rd, Cantu/Coghlan at 2nd). They’ll always be open to arms, despite being loaded with arms near the bigs (or young arms in the bigs). Catching could be a focus.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Youre not averse to a fire sale?

In what world is that even a possibility, furthermore, why would you want to totally dismantle the 2-time defending NL central champions?

Im all for making a few changes to get a real leadoff hitter and possibly moving Lee to get a lefty, but a fire sale? that just makes no sense.

I do like youre Jeremy Hermida idea, though he is the Rich Harden of hitters, one of the reasons for his inconsistencies is the fact that he cant stay on the field.

I think Samardzija is a starter, but probably not till 2009, but you said if we resign Dempster we are looking for a fifth starter. If they resign Dempster, there is no need for a fifth starter b/c it would be the same five as it was this year…..so Im not sure what you were getting at there.

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Oct 10, 2008 8:27 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

* not till 2010, when Marquis is gone*

i gotta pay more attention before I hit post.

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Oct 10, 2008 8:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just responding to what's online

Look around online and you’ll see a ton of posts asking for a firesale. It’s one of the more ridiculous notions out there, including coming from very knowledgeable Cubs fans, but I was just heading that off by the wayside. Also, that was my way of saying I don’t anticipate a Derrek Lee move, as many want that to happen.

Sorry, I should’ve been celarer on the starting rotation comment. I think if we resign Dempster, we’ll likely shop Marquis and hope to dump most of his contract, and thus, there will be a question on the 5th starter. That 9+ million on Marquis may make or break or ability to add someone.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

good post - here is where i disagree

#5: “The idea is to get over the hump … not simply get to the hump and hope to get hot, which is what this team, as currently constituted, is, based on the offensive construction.”

We lead the league in Runs, OBP, etc. We had a deep team that could beat you in pretty much every facet of the game. ALL TEAMS get hot and cold during periods of the season. This was not a team built around “hoping to get 85-90 wins” and sneak in and then get hot (like the ’07 team was). This was a team built for the long haul and it showed during 161 games.

For whatever reason the teams best players (outside of DLee) have been unable to hit during the playoffs the last 2 years. Whether this is an anomaly or a legitimate trend we can’t know for sure, but either way there isn’t much we can do about it without completely overhauling the team, and at that point I’d question whether we could really make ourselves better in the near term.

It’s a conundrum no doubt, but I don’t think you can say this team was built to “hope to get hot” during the postseason.

You tell me what typically works in the post-season and I bet the 2008 Cubs were among the league leaders in it during the regular season

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 8:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Lees postseason stats

In his only extended post season run, as hes only had 12 and 11 at bats with Cubs the past two postseaons, with the Marlins in 2003, he hit .250 against SF, .188 against the Cubs and then .208 against the Yankees in the 03 World Series.

So overall his post season batting avg is .263, .320 OBP and a .358 SLG…..so its no anomaly, Lee isnt exactly a playoff stud.

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Oct 10, 2008 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

those are AB's from 4 years ago

while they do count, i’m not sure “how” meaningful they are. With that said i’m not sure how meaningful the recent stats are either

but as a Cub, he’s been fine…. the others haven’t. I have no idea if this trend will continue or not

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"You tell me what typically works in the post-season"

What typically works in the post-season is good solid fundamental baseball. What typically works in the post-season is not making four errors in one inning or walking 7 in 4+ innings. Above all what typically works in the post-season is not allowing one bad pitch, one bad defensive play or one bad strike out get to your head and make you collapse.

We didn’t even show up in this post season to even debate about how we got beat. Heck we defeated ourselves in all three games. I believe that we never had a Plan B in the play offs and we waved the white flag a second after Loney’s Grand Slam. Soriano is a big ‘IF’ and we didn’t have a Plan B to mitigate that risk. It just looked like we didn’t have a darn plan. The pitchers have been pounding the outside corners and our hitters continued to pull and looked foolish.

It is simply not ‘bad luck’ or ‘untimely collapse’ that caused our defeat.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ummm... ok

so are you saying this Cubs team did all those things (that get you beat) throughout the regular season?

I’m not saying it was simply bad luck or an untimely collapse, whatever you call it… it really doesn’t matter. The point is the team that played 161 games looked nothing like the team that played the last 3, and the team that played 161 games was the BEST IN THE LEAGUE

So ho do you fix that? I don’t know necessarily.

My point was saying this team wasn’t built for the post-season seems silly when just two weeks ago we all thought we were built exactly for the post-season. We could win games with depth, with power, with fundamental baseball, etc.

For whatever reason it just didn’t happen for those 3 games.

If you make some massive overhaul you risk not being as good for the first 161, which is a problem as well.

Basically what we need to do is find a way to get the team that played those first 161 games to show up in the playoffs

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why are you comparing those 161 games with these 3 games?

You are comparing two statistical inequalities. If you can prove that never during the 161 games the Cubs hit less than 3 runs or never during the 161 games Soriano looked THAT bad then I would agree.

You know what may be if the NLDS is best of 25 or best of 51 the Cubs might not have looked this bad after that series. My whole point is that there is no real mystery associated with post season success like some point out (I used to think on the same lines till sometime back). Just like in any sport we have to play our best when facing the best when it matters. If the other team plays better than our best then it is OK. But we tend to play our worst under real Pressure and run like little kittens as soon as the opponent lands one punch.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

because

while they’re inequalities, they are LINKED.

You have to put together a team that performs well for both stretches.

Other than that my basic point is the same as yours, that we’ve played our worst during those stretches.

The only difference is you seem to have some magical formula that shows you which players are going to perform their best in those 3 games, and I’m saying I have no idea in hell how you know which players would make the best team for that 3 game series AND on top of that I don’t know how you’d construct a team for a 3 game series

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am not saying that I have a magical formula to win playoff games

All I am implying is that we need to have backup plans if our Plan A backfires of if we face unforeseen adversities. To give you an example one of the main problems is that the Cubs DEPENDED on Soriano to deliver. As we have seen so regularly during the 161 games Soriano is extremely unreliable and there is a huge probability that he will hit one of his cold stretches. We heard Lou mention that Soriano is the spark plug of our offense and his abject failure tanked the rest of the team. Now is Soriano failing in the post season a big surprise to everyone? No. Is Soriano the main reason for our failure in the post season? No. One of the main reasons is us lacking alternate plans to at least counter the adversities. If we had those we would have at least played some baseball after Loney’s Grand Slam.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually we have a big problem if we go into 2009

again thinking that Soriano is the Spark Plug for our offense. This is a huge fundamental mistake that should not be repeated.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

but what do you do

its 3 games!

After Game 1 do you just change everything you’ve done all season, declare Plan A backfired, and go to Plan B? Don’t you think that would put MORE pressure on the team if all of the sudden they had no idea what their roles were from day-to-day?

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"its 3 games!"

My whole point is that it is NOT those three games. As the season progresses you should be be able to identify the traits of each individual player and extrapolate that to the playoffs. This is what a baseball manager and other think tanks are paid to do. As an example let’s look at Soriano’s traits during the regular season. Soriano was extremely streaky and most unreliable in that no one can predict when he is going to get hot and when he will tank. Now we can talk about the holes in his swing his susceptibility to breaking pitches etc etc but from a generic perspective he is a streaky hitter who has done little in the post season in his CAREER. Now having known and observed all this don’t you think it is idiotic to ASSUME that he is a SPARK PLUG?

We can bounce ideas about getting this type of hitter and that type of pitcher but in the end we need one or two true leaders in the club house. Playoffs are not going to be a walk in the park. Playoffs are all about responding to adversities. We played like mental midgets in 2007 and the same damn thing repeated again in 2008 and what is the guarantee that this will not be repeated again in 2009? We can simply ignore all this and say that it’s only three games. More than that we got swept in the playoffs for two straight years I am more concerned about HOW we lost.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

who are those players though?

you make it sound so simple when talking about capturing something that’s completely intangible

how do you identify a true leader when the players you’re assessing you’ve never seen them lead live (all your information is 3rd hand).

I understand your points and I don’t disagree with most of them. The Soriano thing is simple and we talked about it in the spring how he’s not a leadoff hitter, but that distinction needed to be made a lot earlier than just letting him play the whole season as the leadoff hitter and suddenly changing things in the playoffs. Lineup construction is on the manager and its an area you could say our manager didn’t give us the best chance to win and I couldn’t disagree.

But the other points on identifying a few clubhouse leaders and adding them to the mix, I just don’t know how you do it and you seemingly make it so simple. So i ask…

WHO
WHO are the leaders that we can target and everything will get turned around?

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"..but that distinction needed to be made a lot earlier ..."

I agree and that’s all I meant. If the whole world and the martians have the book on Soriano what was Lou thinking?

I don’t have answers for WHO that leader should be. I don’t know because of my distance between the action and where I am in real life. I don’t walk or talk in those close circles but I am sure that certain positions are being paid BIG money just for answering questions like this. Now from what I have seen that leader can be a much younger version of Jim Edmonds. Unfortunately the current version of edmonds cannot be an integral part of our 2009 plans. But let me tell you that DLee is NOT that leader that people make him out to be.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

who has made him out to be a leader?

i don’t think anyone has

my point on the whole is simple:

it’s really hard no matter who you are or how much you get paid to do it, etc to evaluate something that is COMPLETELY INTANGIBLE. Like leadership, chemistry, etc

I’m of the opinion that winning breeds chemistry, not the other way around. And I truly think this entire series turned in Game 1.

I think the team was playing loose and confident in Game 1, the only issue was our pitcher wasn’t throwing any strikes. Soriano made some nice running catches near the wall (Something he never did in the regular season), the defense was playing well and we had scratched across 2 runs against a pretty good pitcher. Everything was working and if we held onto that lead all the leadership, chemistry stuff would’ve been lauded.

What happened? Well we left in a pitcher who was GASSED to face not one but TWO LH batters who hit considerably higher against RH pitching despite having a lefty long man of all things readily available in the pen.

We all know what happened from there.

I guess my feeling on the whole thing is, I have no idea what it takes to overcome the enormous pressure of playing with the weight of an entire city on your shoulders. Could it be done with the addition of some different personnel into the mix? Sure I suppose. But I also think it could’ve been done if our confidence wasn’t shook early. I truly believe if this team gets out to a 1-0 lead in the series, its a whole different ball game. The team stays confident can play relaxed and keeps on motoring on.

Now you can say it’s not the right makeup if they can’t overcome one bout with adversity and I couldn’t say you were wrong. But I do think this team as structured as it was in ‘08 could’ve won this year’s World Series had they gotten off to a big start.

This team needed to be front-runners to win it and I think they had the talent to do so, but getting behind early it became a snowball rolling down the hill

and in game 2 when DeRo bobbled that ball it picked up speed significantly

I think adjusting the mix of players “could” change things, but I dont think looking back our team was so flawed we have no chance to win with them going forward. They won plenty of pressurized games in the reg season, including a 4 game sweep in MIL. I think they just needed to sustain momentum early on and front run (just like they did in that series in MIL)

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"I truly believe if this team gets out to a 1-0 lead in the series, its a whole different ball game"

Yeah remember what happened in the potential NLCS clincher in 2003?

“I’m of the opinion that winning breeds chemistry”

Why are you dragging in “chemistry” now? I thought we are talking about leadership. I haven’t mentioned and don’t think that there is anything wrong with this team’s chemistry. From your own words how can there be anything wrong with the chemistry of the league’s best team?

So according to you for the Cubs to make the slightest noise in the post season they absolutely have to win Game 1 and should get all the breaks early on? Give me a break. They didn’t look tight to you from pitch1 in game 1? For me they looked tensed. They looked like they were playing thinking that some hell is going to break loose anytime. I too despise those walks and errors but that was not an excuse for the offense to NOT SHOW UP at all. Again, I am more concerned with HOW they lost.

I agree that Lou should have woke up Rothschild from his lumber and sent to talk to Dempster well before those 7 walks but what about the offense? They decided to call it in after the Dodgers took a 2 run lead?

“They won plenty of pressurized games in the reg season, including a 4 game sweep in MIL”

The pressure in playoffs is on a completely different level when you compare that to the pressure in the regular season. When the cubs went to MIL they were not in danger of loosing a playoff spot. Heck they were a lock for at least the wild card and that series was no where close to one last chance and one last opportunity.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

read below

First 4 innings:

Cubs hitters: 6-18, 1 BB, 2 Runs

Last 5 innings once down 2-0:

Cubs hitters: 3-16, 1 BB, 0 Runs

The team wasn’t playing tight early on, they got tight after they got down 2-0

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ahh..we are running in circles...

The point is why the hell we got tight after falling behind by 2 Runs. Didn’t anyone talk about this possibility (falling behind early on) and how to approach the game in any of the team meetings? Do you think the Cubs assumed that they will blow the game apart after 2 innings and hence played tight after falling behind by 2 darn runs? What is the plan of approach to come from behind?

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i have no idea

i’m not privy to team meetings, if you are let me know

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That wasn't a question addressed to you

That was more like a exasperation.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 5:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Again..more than they got swept

It is how they played and whether they at least tried to respond to adversities. Forget all this, I wasn’t even sure if they didn’t collectively go into a comatose state after that grandslam.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I tend to agree...

…it is one thing to simply get beat by a team (who may have had a lessor record during the regular season) in the playoffs, but it is quite another to give them three straight games as a present. It is even more disturbing, to have it happen two straight years.

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

by MPH73 on Oct 10, 2008 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think what he is trying to say...

…is the club wasn’t built mentally for the post-season, at least that is what it has looked like on the field the last two years.

Let’s just take a look at what happened in 07 and 08. In 07, the Cubs had the best record in the NL since June, and it certainly looked like they should beat the Dbacks if they played like they did the 2nd half. What happened in the playoffs made it look like a completely different club than we saw in June, July, Aug and Sept. This year was the samething, only magnified. The clubs performance in the playoffs, couldn’t have been worse compared to what they did in the regular season.

If you look at both playoff performances, the team really played below expectations in all facets of the game, and it wasn’t just one area that let them down. There is something in tennis called “unforced errors”, and if they had that in baseball, both the 07 and 08 teams would have been off the charts.

So, how do you analyze the two straight years of poor playoff performances? I think Hendry has to look at both the physical makeup of the club and the mental makeup as well. Clearly, the second is much more difficult to address, but I think it is real. From a lineup standpoint, we have seen what an inconsistant leadoff hitter can do to make the opposing teams life easier and that needs to be fixed. We have also seen the heavily right handed lineup can make things a little easier on a good pitcher, and that needs to be addressed. I don’t think it was by mistake, that the Phillies eventually wore down Lowe last night, because he had to concentrate the whole game with going back and forth in the zone between lefties and righties. At the right moment, a lefty jumped all over a mistake and the whole complexion of the game changed in one pitch.

On the mental side, I have no magical answer, but I think it would be a good thing to look at that as it would help to change the culture of how the club goes into the playoffs and also responds in those games when things aren’t going your way.

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

by MPH73 on Oct 10, 2008 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i understood the point

my point is i have NO IDEA how you address that. Across all sorts of sports its been a mantra thats stood for a long time that changing culture (or mindsets) is the toughest thing to do.

My whole point was I don’t know how you do it with this current team and I don’t know that you can completely revamp things around to have a whole new team without making yourself worse for the regular season

Just as a side note…

Lowe vs. the Phillies 5 2/3 IP, 7 base-runners, 2 ER’s
Lowe vs. the Cubs 6 IP, 8 base-runners, 2 ER’s

he got ONE more out vs. the Cubs than he did against the Phillies and allowed 1 less base-runner.

To suggest in any way that the Phillies “wore him down” any differently than the Cubs is just flat out WRONG

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know the stats look similar...

…but they are different because of how the game evolved. The Phillies got him later in the game when it had a much bigger impact on the outcome. You just never got the sense once the Cubs fell behind 4-2, that they were going to do anything with Lowe or anyone else, and they didn’t.

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

by MPH73 on Oct 10, 2008 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the runs scored were the same

the difference was the runs allowed…. Lowe had no impact on that. Talk to James Loney and Ryan Dempster

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understand...

…but it is not always how many runs you score, but when you score them to help change the momentum of the game.

I don’t know about you, but I got the sense that the Phillies would eventually find a way to get enouph runs to take the lead against Lowe and I never got that sense with the Cubs.

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

by MPH73 on Oct 10, 2008 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i didn't watch that game....

but looking through the boxscore, the Phillies generated 5 base-runners in the first 5 innings

the Cubs generated 7 base-runners in the first 4 innings.

I have no idea what you’re feelings are based off of, but the facts seem to indicate if it looked like ANY team was going to breakthrough against Lowe early it was the Cubs

Maybe you’re just a pessimist when viewing the Cubs and an optimist when viewing other teams

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm basing it on...

…watching how the hitters responded and also how Lowe responded. There is no question in my mind, Lowe was not nearly as comfortable pitching against the Phillies and it was probably their lefties that could do damage. I realize the runs scored were about the same, but that doesn’t always tell you the whole story.

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

by MPH73 on Oct 10, 2008 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ok... i don't know what to say

we had a lot more base-runners on
we made him throw more pitches
we scored the same number of runs

i’m sorry you didn’t “feel” as if we were going to get to him or not.

In the end the games are decided by the Runs column, not people’s feelings at home or in the stands.

If the Dodgers hadn’t scored against Dempster maybe you would’ve felt differently, who knows.

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I could be completely wrong...

…but I just had the sense Lowe was never frazzled against the Cubs. Against the Phillies, it seemed to be different.

If you asked Lowe which lineup he would rather face, I would bet he would pick the Cubs every time.

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

by MPH73 on Oct 10, 2008 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Does it really matter if we have 100 base runners in the game

but score only 2?

Tell you what, we did all that but still crapped our pants when it mattered. As we sit and analyze all this today it doesn’t matter what we ‘felt’ then because now we have concrete facts.

What we are expressing is not pessimism, it is called realism. Forget about Dempster for a second, we still scored 2, 3 and 1 in the whole darn series. I don’t think Dempster was supposed to boost our run total.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

it does

if the other team scores 1!

The point of criticism came at the heralding of the phillies approach in game vs. Lowe compared to the Cubs

The Phillies put 2 ER’s, the Cubs put up 2 ER’s, the only difference in the result is the amount the Dodgers scored

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope you are watching game 2 :-)

If you are, you would amuse yourself with so many ‘differences’

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

right and the phillies had a 1-0 lead in the series

which as i said is a big difference playing from ahead than playing from behind….

maybe this is the DODGERS getting tight, Billingsley grooving fastballs etc, or the Phillies playing with great confidence

bottom line its another example of team front-running well, which i thought the Cubs could’ve done

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also...

…did you notice Lowe’s body language in both the 5th and 6th? You could tell they were getting to him (even though they hadn’t scored runs). He was taking a lot of time, numerous meetings with the catcher etc. etc.. You could tell he was less comfortable with those lefties coming up, and it caught up with him at an opportune time for the Phillies.

I never got the feeling that once the Cubs got the 2 early runs on a wind blown homerun, they ever had him needing to dig down deep to get out of innings.

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

by MPH73 on Oct 10, 2008 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

what does it matter

what does it matter Lowe’s “feelings”. He left the game having allowed 2 ER’s (3 runs total thanks to Furcal’s error) at basically the same point

I bet had the Dodgers scored 4 runs he would’ve left the game smiling and happy

what the heck does that matter?

all that matters is the end result

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The mental makeup

I would like to see another fiery leader in the clubhouse. Don’t know who might be available, but there needs to be some energy at times, but the team’s current makeup seems very focused on Lou. There needs to be an emotional heart to the team, and I’m not sure who that is. DeRosa?

That said, I’d address the talent components first (leadoff hitter, lefty middle of the order type bat).

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

The Cubs were actually 2nd in terms of BP’s postseason possibilities.

Let me explain that comment a bit better -

The way the team is currently constituted, I believe we are in a situation where, until we add a leadoff hitter, we need to hope to get hot at the right time. Reason being

a) The lineup – Soriano and X at the top of the order means if they hit into some rough patches, we are in a dangerous situation

b) The starting rotation – Zambrano and Harden wear down. Harden has historically, and we’ve seen Zambrano wear down.

What does this mean? For the latter, if they can limit the heavy wear and tear those guys go through, that’ll be a big help. For the former, landing a leadoff guy would be an idea.

But … by gamble, I’m also referring to making a run at a guy like Jeremy Hermida (just using that as an example, a young hitter who maybe has had some struggles, but has quality upside). That to me is a gamble in many respects, but a worthy gamble.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Soriano and X at the top of the order means if they hit into some rough patches, we are in a dangerous situation"

Thank you. With Soriano at the top we took a huge gamble in the playoffs and we will be taking another huge gamble if we continue with Lee in the 3 spot in 2009. Now can we spin a magic formula to be successful in 2009? No. Can we plan better to mitigate any potential risks for 2009? Yes.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

and what if you're "true leadoff hitter" slumps?

i understand wanting a leadoff hitter and how that can improve us

but it wasn’t just 1 player who performed poorly, it was practically everyone (except DLee and DeRosa)

the lineup does not matter when 7 spots aren’t hitting. It doesn’t. i’m sorry.

We had 7 spots in the lineup with an OPS below .700. No matter how you shake them up you weren’t scoring enough runs to win Games 1 or 2

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I can't enough emphasize that it's all about probability.

Look you can’t be 100% sure about anything. Even in a slump, Soriano never bunts, never moves a runner over and doesn’t do all the simple things to contribue WHILE he is in a slump. The whole head scratcher is that he is ALL or NOTHING.

by cubsnlinux on Oct 10, 2008 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

that's fine

but if Soriano batted 5th or 7th or 8th in this series, it doesn’t matter…. we weren’t winning with 6 other guys hitting like they did

the bottom line is this team was playing fine when they had the lead in Game 1, then they got REALLY tight. THE WHOLE TEAM

First 4 innings:

Cubs hitters: 6-18, 1 BB, 2 Runs

Last 5 innings once down 2-0:

Cubs hitters: 3-16, 1 BB, 0 Runs

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What runners do you want him to move over?!?!

There aren’t a lot of man on first, no out situations for a guy who hits behind the pitcher!

I has a blog. | Ask a sabermagician!

by cwyers on Oct 10, 2008 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

also don't agree with re-signing Dempster

yes he’s one of the Top 5 arms in the FA market BASED ON 2008 ALONE. Why re-sign him? Why not go after one of the other guys who has a career with more certainty attached to it, and is younger???

Plus you gain an extra pick out of the equation!

You give our 1st rd pick, we get back a 1st rd pick and a supplemental

I’ll take the other FA pitcher who has more of a consistent track record built up over Dempster and the extra early round pick, over keeping Dempster

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 8:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Right, but how likely is that?

They, Hendry and Co. love him and he loves the Cubs….so Im afraid reason might not dictate this decision, though resigning him wouldnt be the worst idea, I do like your idea, however.

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Oct 10, 2008 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

how about we stop as an organization operating on emotion

emotion clouds decision, always has, always will

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree on Dempster

For once you and I agree on something. I firmly believe that signing Ryan Dempster to a 4 year deal for $50 million or so will go down as massive blunder. I like Ryan Dempster but it is my strong view that he had a career year in 2008 where he happened also to be blessed with great luck. Luck coming in the form of doing very well at home (what happens if the wind blows out on more of his starts in 2009?) and getting lucky with all of those walks not coming back to bite.

"What pressure should I have on me? There's no pressure on me." -- Lou Piniella (10/3/08)

by MDBNIU on Oct 10, 2008 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

we agreed on Harden starting Game 1 as well

not sure we would’ve been right on that though, given he was clearly hurt at the end of the season

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 10:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1 - offer him arbritration

If he takes it, great. If he doesn’t take it, great.

by dr stabbingworth on Oct 10, 2008 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay

Let’s look at the other options:

CC Sabathia – Do we really have that money available? Look, if we do, I say yes, despite my concerns on his wear and tear. I’ll go CC before Ryan any day, but I just don’t know.

Okay, the non-CC possibilities:

Ben Sheets – I’m not sure I want to revisit Wood/Prior 2.0 with Harden and Sheets. One of the, fine. And Sheets likely won’t be cheap either.

AJ Burnett – Wants to say east coast, rumored to want a 5 year deal, and AL East teams will push hard for him.

Derek Lowe – Okay, I’d be intrigued with this one. He’s durable, he’s consistent, yes, I’d be open to it.

______________

In saying all this, I wouldn’t throw a blank check at Ryan. I probably wouldn’t give him market rate. If he’s willing to take a discount, I’d be open to it. I think he can put up solid middle of the rotation numbers.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What the lineup craves is simple

A true “professional hitter” and bonafide run producer from the left-side of the plate. Great example would be a Jason Giambi or Bobby Abreu in their prime. Assuming that commodity can be found and working under the following presumptions…

A. Derrek Lee stays (groan)
B. Alfonso Soriano is immovable

Then the following is conceivable…..

1. Theriot — SS
2. DeRosa — 2nd
3. Ramirez - 3rd
4. * Left handed Hitting Run Producer described above * - RF
5. Soriano — LF
6. Soto — Catcher
7. Lee — 1st
8. Fukudome / Johnson — CF

"What pressure should I have on me? There's no pressure on me." -- Lou Piniella (10/3/08)

by MDBNIU on Oct 10, 2008 9:54 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Not sure what that mark out line is all about ???

"What pressure should I have on me? There's no pressure on me." -- Lou Piniella (10/3/08)

by MDBNIU on Oct 10, 2008 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Assuming the mark-through is just a glitch...

I guess I’d be fine with this approach. I’d love to get a LH run producer to bat third or fourth (I’m fine with Ramirez cleanup, too).

That said, I wouldn’t count on a repeat of the .380+ OBP from Theriot, which might make his spot at leadoff precarious. But, like this year, we’d have such depth in the lineup that it might not matter too much if Theriot puts up, say, a ~.340 OBP instead.

by SouthernCub on Oct 10, 2008 10:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think you move Lee UP in the order

not down. At his age and with his decline he’s losing SLUG not OBP. Generally you want high OBP, low SLUG guys at the top and low OBP, high Slug guys at the bottom.

Assuming no change at all here’s what i’d like to see:

Theriot
DLee
Ramirez
Soto
Soriano
DeRosa
Pie/Johnson
Fukudome

by batting Fukudome 9th you also take advantage of the high OBP at the bottom of the lineup so hopefully DLee has some runners on base occasionally as well.

Moving DLee down in the lineup doesn’t take advantage of his still greatest strength (OBP) and might continue to maximize his greatest weakness GIDP’s

Heck i’d even consider this lineup, though it leaves our bottom half extremely week

DLee
DeRosa/Fontenot
Ramirez
Soto
Soriano
Fukudome/DeRosa/Fontenot
Pie/Johnson
Theriot

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

An offseason plan

Trying to be realistic a bit, which is nearly impossible when this post starts with these words: "If I was GM, I’d… "

1) Re-sign Wood; offer arb to Demp, Howry, RJ; let Edmonds walk. Buy out Blanco; let Snyder and Koyie fight it out for backup C.
2) Sign Hitoki Iwase as lefty for ‘pen. Seek another top lefty not named Fuentes.
3) Seek high-upside but risky SP like Sheets or K. Saito; prep Marshall and Samardzija to go back and forth between rotation and ’pen. Go to 11-man ’pen. (Did that just make it totally unrealistic? I don’t see why when you’d have two long men and Lou lets his 12th man sit in the ’pen for weeks at a time. Plus you can rotate through the 11th man of Ascanio – Hart – Piggy, etc.)
4) Seek switch-hitting SS – Furcal if available, but also Asdrubal Cabrera – would they take DeRosa + something? or Jed Lowrie – would they take Derrek Lee + something?
5) Get Jeremy Hermida for Pie+Veal+any other minor leaguers named after food.
6) Talk to the Angels – do they want any of our RH sluggers not named Aramis or Geovany? If they do, keep Adam Dunn on line 2.
7) Fwd all calls from Baltimore to new staffers. Tell them to ask about Markakis and then snicker.

Harden
Zambrano
Sheets/Saito
Lilly
Marquis

Wood
Marmol
Iwase
Ascanio/Wuertz/whomever
Marshall
Samardzija

Derrek Lee 1B
Fontenot-Theriot 2B
Alfonso Soriano LF
Aramis Ramirez 3B
Jeremy Hermida RF
Geovany Soto C
Fukudome-Johnson CF
Asdrubal Cabrera SS

Brad Snyder/Koyie Hill C
Ryan Theriot 2B-SS
Reed Johnson LF-CF
Someone Fast CF-PR
Russel Branyan 4-Co
Kevin Millar 1B

by DGU on Oct 10, 2008 1:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

RE:

I don’t think Boston is dealing Lowrie. They’ll move Lugo this offseason and give Jed the fulltime shortstop job, I think, with Alex Cora or someone as a veteran middle infield guy to backup both spots. I also don’t htink Asdrubal Cabrera, after getting hot down the stretch, is going anywhere, although they may ponder it for some pitching (Shapiro hinted, and I fully agree, that he isn’t comfortable with their pitching).

Um, has Brad Snyder been a catcher before? I’m pretty sure he was an OF/1st type, but maybe he was a catcher a long time ago and I just don’t remember.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where in the world did I get the idea that Snyder was a C?

Maybe looking at his AAA #s I thought he had to be a C? You’re right. I’m clueless.

So, I amend my above comments to suggest that we also kick the tires on Josh Bard and Gregg Zaun.

by DGU on Oct 10, 2008 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

thinking of Chris Snyder and Koyie Hill?

as DBack catchers, may have lumped in Brad Snyder for some reason…

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good link...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-08-cubs-jim-hendry-chicagooct08,0,6243427.story?page=1

from the Trib about the questions Hendry is facing this offseason.

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Oct 10, 2008 3:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

those questions scare me

“Cubs will try to re-sign Dempster”

“Rich Hill can’t pitch for Pineilla”

by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 10, 2008 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The unfortunate thing about Rich Hill's situation

is that we could’ve utilized him in some way. That is, rather than spending 4 million/year (if not more) on someone like Aaron Fultz, along with a long term deal, I wouldn’t mind seeing if Rich Hill could be a LOOGY. Use the assets we have after all, and neither Marshall nor Cotts are really LOOGY’s. Here’s hoping that maybe an offseason away from the game allows Rich to settle down and find some role. Much as I have never been high on Rich Hill, he has value that could be useful for us, even if it’s not in the rotation.

by toonsterwu on Oct 10, 2008 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs