Just a thought...Garret Anderson?
by snowyman28 on Nov 25, 2008 9:18 AM CST
Email
PrintOne name that I haven't seen mentioned much in the free agent bonanza that is the off season is Garret Anderson. I've seen Raul Ibanez mentioned more and I couldn't help but think that is a horrible idea--he can't play defense in a stadium that isn't affected by the weather as much as Wrigley, can you imagine him trying to run down a fly ball being driven different directions by the wind? Anderson has a better glove and his power numbers seem to be similar--for a more detailed comparison, see baseball-reference.com--but Anderson's career numbers .296/.327/.469 compare favorably with Ibanez's .286/.346/.472. Both are the same age--Ibanez is actually 28 days older, and both fit the "left handed hitter with pop" image. Anderson also has extensive post season experience -- just don't look at those numbers, they are a little frightening. Thoughts?
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.
99 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Another LF'er who can't play RF
He did play CF in 2004 but apparently that didn’t sit well.
Unfortunately the plan that Pie would be taking over CF has effected the Cubs. A RF’er is a valuable player. The other problem is an All Star RH 1B where it is a position player you like to stick a LH power bat.
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
agreed
It’s hard to find someone who hits left handed who doesn’t play the outfield or first base. It’s even harder to find a player like that with any power. How many switch-hitting shortstops with pop can you name? It’s a short list.
Sori and Lee are entrenched, so the Cubs essentially lose two positions where it would be easier to put a left-handed power hitter (Dunn, Garret Anderson, etc.). Add in the fact that Fukudome — last off-season’s solution to this problem — is making $38 million over the next three years, and the Cubs don’t have a lot of money to throw around (in addition to all the other big contracts).
That’s why I’ve been advocating that the Cubs find a left-handed bat to play middle infield. I’d rather spend $12+plus million on Furcal than $9 million on Raul Ibanez.
It’s not a perfect solution, because it creates a right-handed 2-3-4-5-6 (depending on Fukudome and Fontenot) in the lineup. But it gets Soriano out of the leadoff spot, it makes the team faster and it could move Theriot from short and improve the defense.
And MAYBE if Fukudome turns it around, he hits fifth next year, giving us this lineup against right-handers.
Furcal
DeRosa
Ramirez
Soriano
Fukudome
Lee
Soto
Fontenot
Not saying this will happen. I just think that it beats Mark Teahen hitting fifth or Raul Ibanez battling the winds in right.
Lou could easily ...
flip Lee and DeRosa in this lineup.
Yea I have thought for a while that D-Lee
would be a great number 2 hitter. He is patient and good at going to the opposite field. He will most likely see more fastballs in the 2 hole and will likely ground in to fewer DPs. He would probably be the most feared number 2 hitter and to start the game Furcal Lee Ramirez or Soriano Lee Ramirez would be pretty scary for opposing pitchers.
Also, I just dont think he is a number 3 hitter anymore like he was in 05. Either move him to number 2 or in the 5,6,7 spot.
I'd really like to see Lee
pushed to lead-off and urged to rework his approach accordingly.
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.
FWIW, the odds of Furcal becoming a Cub appear minimal.
Or say says Gordo in today’s Sun-Times. Quoth Wittenmyer:
According to various reports, Furcal has four-year offers ranging from $48 million to $52 million — well beyond the Cubs’ taste.
Of course, one wonders what those “various reports” really are.
"I see I'm not the only one around here who can't hold his water." - Last words of the leaky pipe in the visiting team dugout, Dodger Stadium, October 4, 2008.
"Cubs tatste"?
Not questioning you, daver, but I have a hard time buying that about the Cubs’ taste, or at least, I have a hard time accepting it.
Unless ALL the Cubs are planning on doing is adding a Teahen-type player, I think they will add someone who makes close to $10 million per. I know — Furcal is more expensive than that, and he might want more years than an Ibanez. Regardless, I’d rather spend $12 million a year on a Furcal than $10 million a year on Ibanez.
Frankly, I’d rather bring Edmonds back than Ibanez. He’s better defensively and he’ll cost a LOT less.
Yes...
Finding a versatile left-handed bat in the 3-5 million range, and maybe some bullpen help is about all most expect the Cubs to do this off-season.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 25, 2008 10:20 AM CST up reply actions
So are we going to have the exact same team from last year?
Okay I know it won’t be exactly the same, but with the subtraction of Wood and Howry and addition of Gregg, this is essentially the same team that got swept from the playoffs.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
true
There are some other possible moves (Marquis, the bullpen, the departure of Ward). But you’re right — it would essentially be the same team.
Assuming the Cubs don’t sign Furcal or a real impact bat (maybe Abreu?), I’m in favor of bringing (essentially) the same team back — e.g. re-signing Edmonds instead of trading for Teahen or signing Ibanez. That would basically allow Pie and/or Fukudome chances to right their ships, while the 97-win team stays near the top of the division. Then, if the RF-CF four-man system (Edmonds, Pie, Fukudome, RJ) doesn’t work out, the Cubs can go get someone midseason.
What I don’t like is the band-aid on a head wound approach (Teahen, Ibanez). But I doubt Hendry and Lou will listen to me.
+1
I don’t want them to sign Ibanez or Teahen-trade just to do something. Tough situations like this are why they get paid the big bucks. On one hand they’ve got a 97 win team. On the other it’s the same team that was swept out of the playoffs.
We seem to be one or two good players from the promise land.
I’ll reiterate what I said since the offseason ended. Because the options out there do not match up well with what we need, our best option is to go get Roberts and move Derosa to our everyday right fielder. This allows us to move Sori down the lineup. It makes too much sense to me.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
+2
I agree. If you’re thinking about signing Ibanez or Teahan, I would vote for Jimmy Ballgame instead. And I’d definitely like to have a leadoff batter like Roberts. But assuming Roberts declines a long-term extension from the O’s, I think it’s wiser to go after him next year when he’s a free agent and DeRosa’s contract is also up.
Lou thinks Soriano is the right leadoff hitter for now, but if he’s not getting on base and Lou decides to use 3 different #2 hitters in the NLDS, no wonder the only Cubs who hit in the NLDS (Lee, DeRo, and Soto) didn’t drive in any runs. I know Theriot has his weaknesses (range, arm strength, smart baserunning), but if he hits the ball in 09 like he did on 08, I would call him a pretty productive leadoff hitter. I don’t see why Lou doesn’t see Theriot as a possible solution there.
Also the same team that dominated the NL for 162 games.
Which means FAR more than what happened in a three game series against the Dodgers.
No it doesn't
In fact it means nothing. Hell we could go 162-0 and get swept out of the playoffs and it wouldn’t mean a damn thing to me.
Now if you are saying we still have a good team, I completely agree. But bringing back the same team isn’t the improvement we need to prevent another ’08 post season.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
What?
What’s more likely to happen if the Cubs were to field the exact same team as last year? A) they have the best record in the NL again or B) they get swept out of the playoffs again? The answer, clearly, is A.
The playoffs are a complete crapshoot. It’s about getting hot at the right time. Unfortunately the Cubs went cold, just like they did right after the ASB. What does that mean for 2009? Absolutely nothing.
Sorry
But I believe you are in the minority if you are comfortable with putting the exact same squad from 2008 out there in 2009.
With that being said, I don’t think major moves are needed. Only smaller tweaks.
If I had it my way, I would trade for Roberts, move Sori down in the lineup and give Derosa the everyday job in right.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
I don't think you can call
trading for Robers a “smaller tweak” since it has been rumored since last year and has not happened. I think that would be a major move if it happened. Correction. That WOULD be a major move.
Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow
by PurpleLineToWrigley on Nov 25, 2008 12:04 PM CST up reply actions
I thought someone might point that out after I posted
It falls somewhere between major move and minor tweak. But I hear what you’re saying.
BTW, there is a chance Mizzou and Iowa could meet up in a bowl game. Although it isn’t a great chance.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Yeah, according to Sports Illustrated,
Alamo Bowl, right?
Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow
by PurpleLineToWrigley on Nov 25, 2008 12:10 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
Iowa gets the benefit of having a great following reputation. So it’s a possibility.
Keep in mind we have lost 4 games by a grand total of 12 points. Our record can be deceiving, so I think it would be a pretty good match up.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Very true.
Although we still have a game on December 6 that will have a huge impact on where we are going bowling :)
Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow
by PurpleLineToWrigley on Nov 25, 2008 12:24 PM CST up reply actions
Not a small tweak
When you take into consideration this teams dire need for a lead off hitter. (Make no mistake of it, this team needs one)
Because they lost 3 games?
Do you realize how big of a crapshoot the playoffs are? Wanting to make roster changes based off of a three game playoff sweep is just as silly as suggesting that a player be traded or benched for having three straight bad games.
The 2008 Cubs were a great team, unfortunately they just got cold at the wrong time.
But it's not just 3 games
It’s three games in the playoffs. Two years in a row! Maybe I would think about things different if the NLDS went 3-1 or 3-2, but it didn’t. We got SWEPT. Something with this team needs to change and simply bringing back the exact same team is not going to change the previous results.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
They should field the best team possible...
…regardless of what happened in a 3 game series the previous season.
I couldn't disagree more
This team has gotten swept from the playoffs two years in a row. SOMETHING needs to change.
And stop saying it’s a 3 game series like it’s any ole 3 game series. It’s not.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Its a playoff series
But that doesn’t mean the games aren’t subject to the same randomness we would expect form “any ole 3 game series”.
Steve Phillips on his computer use as Mets GM, "I played solitaire on my computer in my office."
Oh c'mon
Are you seriously trying to tell me that a playoff series is the same as a series during June?
They aren’t. There is something about this Cubs team that can’t get it done in the post season. Whether it be the “it” factor or a true leader or whatever. The Cubs don’t have it.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
there's more pressure
but the random “cubbie occurance” factor is about the same.
In 07, the team wasn’t prepared. In 08, I think, they were overconfident.
third times the charm?
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on Nov 25, 2008 2:23 PM CST up reply actions
Not at all
It means more, much more. But more things are alike between the two than are different. The wind still blows the same, umpire judgement calls are the same, fluke errors are the same. Sometimes balls fall just out of reach and turn into doubles and other times they are caught to end the inning. Sometimes a weak Theriot grounder finds a hole, sometimes it doesn’t.
Sometimes an Edmonds flyball goes into the basket and sometimes it gets caught on the warning track. These things are not affected by the “playoff aura”. Either they happen or they don’t, and that is why the game is so random. To attribute these things to anything else is absurd.
This argument is an ongoing one, and I doubt either one of us will be swayed, but I think you aren’t looking at the entire picture.
Steve Phillips on his computer use as Mets GM, "I played solitaire on my computer in my office."
Yeah
And remember, I agree with you that this is still a very good team.
But two years without winning one stinking playoff game is enough for me to believe that it’s no longer just bad luck. Something is fundamentally wrong with this core group of guys and something needs to be changed.
N/T
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
So what do you suggest then?
Get guys who suck in the regular season but are great in the playoffs? Get a bunch of players who are loose? Those are both terrible ideas.
If you’re a major league GM, your goal should be to field the best team that you can and then hope that they play to their capabilities in the playoffs.
Oh please
Why even suggest that I want the Cubs to sign “guys who suck in the regular season but are great in the playoffs”. Your starting to sound ridiculous.
If you’re a major league GM and your team has been swept out of the playoffs two years in a row, you need to realize that something needs to change.
What do I suggest? I think Hendry should do the following. Resign Blanco. Sign Beimel. Trade for Roberts. Are these earth shaking moves? No. Does this keep the same core group of guys that won 97 games last year together? Yep. Let me repeat myself one more time in case you still aren’t clear on my position. The Cubs have an excellent team. However there is clearly something missing that doesn’t allow this group to be successful in the playoffs, therefore bringing back the 2008 Cubs will not get us to the WS.
If you don’t agree with me, fine. But stop posting ridiculous things like this last one.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Now, I would like you to explain...
… how bringing in those three players is going to get the Cubs to the World Series.
Be specific.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Okay
Here’s why I think bringing on three guys in will get us to the promise land.
Let’s start off with the two that have a much smaller impact than the third.
Blanco has proven to be the best back up catcher in the league. Moreover he is an excellent mentor for Geo.
Joe Beimel fills a hole that we all know exist in our bullpen, a lefty stopper. He’s still fairly young (31) and with the current market place he should come to the team around $3 million a year. He has had four very solid years in a row, posting an ERA of 3.27, 2.96, 3.88 and 2.02. In short, he’s the ’06 Scott Eyre for the ’09 Cubs.
Now the big one, Brian Roberts. Let’s just get one thing out of the way. I know just as much as anyone else this is easier said than done. I hope that goes without saying at this point.
Brian Roberts would bring a lot to the Cubs, both tangible and intangible. The tangibles are available for anyone to Google. As our new lead off guy he has a high OBP, solid average, true threat to steal, and is a left handed bat.
Is he the left handed bat we were looking for this off season? Nope. But I’m at the point where I look at the available field and think no one these guys match up well with what we need. If we got any of them, we would be doing it just to do something.
The intangibles are the key reason to acquire Roberts. Having a guy like him on the team, completely changes the make up of our team and hopefully would help to set the right tone for the playoffs. It’s my opinion that having someone like that will reduce the pressure felt by Rami, Sori, and DLee.
Let me put it a different way. When was the last time we had success in the playoffs? Who was at the top of the order then? Roberts reminds me a lot of that guy.
Getting Roberts allows us to have a true lead off hitter, gives us another left handed bat, allows Derosa to move to right filling a hole there, and gives Lou cover to move Soriano down the lineup.
Responses?
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
You said...
The intangibles are the key reason to acquire Roberts. Having a guy like him on the team, completely changes the make up of our team and hopefully would help to set the right tone for the playoffs. It’s my opinion that having someone like that will reduce the pressure felt by Rami, Sori, and DLee.
What are these intangibles? You know I believe in those, but what are Roberts’ intangibles? It can’t be playoff experience, because he has none.
Beimel has a bit of postseason experience, but his main value is, as you mention, as the LOOGY we need.
We are in agreement on Blanco.
But you still haven’t said what those three will specifically do to turn last year’s 97-win team into a WS winner.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Re: You said
Beimel and Blanco are not going to be the difference in winning a WS or not. The Cubs don’t have many holes left to fill, I was just suggesting what we ought to do with the few that remain.
Let me repeat, they are a great team that won 97 games last year. Drastic changes are NOT necessary.
One of the main reasons we suck in the playoffs is we play tight. It’s my opinion that having a true lead off guy reduces the pressure felt by the big bats. This is intangible.
I think the Cubs teams of the past two seasons have waited for something bad to happen the post season. If we have a guy who can come in and get things jump started, maybe that lets the other guys relax.
I think having a speedy guy like Roberts on the basepads puts the pressure on the other team. Intangible.
The Cubs would be a better team with Brian Roberts. It upgrades 2nd, allows Derosa to play everyday in right, gives Lou cover to move Soriano out of the leadoff spot. I personally believe Dome is going to get things turned around and will be our everyday center fielder, thus giving Lou his other left handed bat in the line up.
This just my opinion. I personally think the team that I assembled would be far better than your team with Millar and Hermida and without Dome.
Is this not specific enough? Are you looking for stats or what?
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
No...
… but if Roberts’ intangibles put so much pressure on the other team, why have the Orioles lost 90+ games in four of the six years he’s been their regular 2B?
Your team with DeRosa in RF would be defensively challenged.
I still don’t see how these three things put the Cubs in the World Series.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
It's not fair
to blame the Orioles crappy season on someone that has consistently put up good numbers. Was Arod a crappy just because the Rangers put up bad seasons?
Yes DeRosa is a downgrade defensively in right. But what are we going to do out there? Ibanez or Teahen? I know you don’t want that.
This is essentially the same 97 win team, but with the upgrade of Roberts. I’m not going to be convinced that having Roberts on our team wouldn’t be an upgrade.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
OK...
… but you still haven’t said specifically how Roberts is going to get the Cubs from 97 wins to 11 more wins in October.
Pressure on the other team because he can run? What if he has an October slump? What’s to prevent that?
I just don’t see him as “the answer”.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
well I don't see how you can say that any one thing, let alone three...
…will put you in the World Series until it actually happens.
Since a World Series appearance can’t be guaranteed, this thread will never pan out to your satisfaction.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Whoa whoa whoa
I NEVER said they would guarantee us a WS title. I’m not stupid.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
No, you're not.
But I asked you why making the three moves you suggested, would guarantee the Cubs a World Series. You still haven’t really answered that question.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Ugh
How many times can a guy say I’m NOT guaranteeing anything!
This is the last time I will say why I think adding Roberts will help.
- The 2008 Cubs didn’t have a true lead off hitter. Adding Roberts fills that.
- The 2008 Cubs wasted a lot of Soriano’s power by having him bat first. Adding Roberts gives Lou a reason to move him down the order.
- Roberts adds another left handed bat to the lineup. I know he doesn’t break up the lineup like we’d prefer, but the options available do not make us a better team.
- Adding Roberts gives us a lot more speed on the base pads than the 2008 Cubs had.
- Adding Roberts allows DeRosa to move to right. Sure this is a downgrade defensively, but it guarantees he gets the at-bats he has earned. And who is to say that DeRosa wouldn’t improve if he is there everyday. He strikes me as a guy who would work really hard to make the proper adjustments if he had an everyday position.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
I just don't see...
… how this gets us any farther than we got in 2008 — a 97-win division championship team.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
That's fine
I’m not trying to convert you.
I guess now I have to ask, do you think bringing back the ‘08 Cubs are going yield any better post season results? From your previous posts I don’t think you feel like that, so that’s a sincere question.
The ‘08 Cubs were so good, it’s highly unlikely we can do better. In fact, if I had to bet I would say we win fewer regular season games, regardless of who is on the team.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
I didn't say bring back the 2008 Cubs intact, did I?
And I don’t feel that way. And you may be right, winning fewer regular season games might be in the cards, while still making the playoffs.
The key is, how does a regular season champion win in October? I haven’t seen anything from you that shows me that.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Okay so what do you suggest?
At this point we agree bringing back the ’08 Cubs is not going to yield better post season results (which, let me remind you, was the original argument between Kanderber and myself).
I think we both agree that most of the free agents out there don’t match up well with what we need.
So what is your suggestion?
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
actually...
…I was responding to Al saying “I still don’t see how these three things put the Cubs in the World Series.”
Point I was trying to make was no one can say now what will put us in the world series because it hasn’t happened yet.
In other words, I think Al was putting you into an unfair situation by asking you to explain how Roberts is going to get us into the WS.
Asking how he could make us ‘better’ would be a fairer question.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Re: actually...
The formatting is getting all messed up here, so it’s hard to tell who is talking to who.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
It's true.
However, my question stands. The Cubs are a good team. Last year when the Roberts question came up, they were also a good team, and I didn’t think acquiring him, which would have been a marginal upgrade over what we had, would have made a bit of difference. Turns out that was right, because would the Cubs have won more than 97 games with Roberts? Probably not. Would they have won in the postseason? We’ll never know, but what I wanted to know was what Roberts (and Beimel and Blanco, the two other players that cubswynn mentioned) were going to do to get the Cubs into the WS. He was very specific about those three players as if they were difference makers.
I don’t know if they are. Clearly, the Cubs need something different, because they can’t seem to win a postseason game.
I’m not sure that any of us can define what that is.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Oh Good Lord.
Roberts and his intangibles will make the Cubs winners? What a bunch of nonsense.
How far did his intangibles take the Orioles? What intangibles did Jimmy Rollins provide to the Phillies this year?
Haha
Okay nothing was wrong with last years team. No upgrades are necessary. Let’s just keep getting swept out of the first round of playoffs, that’s really fun.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Sample size.
Jesus, is this really this heard? Why do you continue to look at a 3 game sample over a 162 game sample? This is fundamental.
As for the Cubs needing a leader, who’s to say they don’t have one? Seems to me that a number of guys are leaders — Soto, Dempster, DeRosa, Lee. You don’t know what goes on behind closed doors, and who is or isn’t “leading.”
So the playoffs are just the same as...
any of the mid-season series we play? Please please please tell me you don’t believe that.
You sorta make my point. The Cubs were a great team and then the post season comes and they CHOKED. Big time. Pitching didn’t show up, neither did the bats. There is something else going on with this team that they can be so consistent all year long and then absolutely fall apart when it means the most.
Two years in a row mind you.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
They do not have one
The closest thing they have to a leader is Zambrano, and pitchers can not be leaders. Soto maybe one day, But the others are definitely not. Look at all those years of Frank Thomas and he could not carry that team to a WS, I put DLee in that same category.
Ridiculous?
What exactly was ridiculous about what I posted?
Saying that there is “clearly” something missing that doesn’t allow the current group to win is ridiculous. Patently ridiculous. But I’ll play along… what’s missing? You said it’s clear — yet you don’t say what it is.
I’m sorry, but I just don’t follow your logic at all.
It's ridiculous to say
I want players that suck in the regular season and are great in the post season. You pulled that out of your ass and yes that’s ridiculous.
Missing from this team – a LOOGY and a true lead off hitter. I’m probably the biggest Sori fan around, but it’s time to move him down the lineup.
The other big thing that is missing from this team, a LEADER! I’m not saying Roberts fills that role, but the Cubs clearly need someone to play that role. Now.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
You are absolutely correct.
But I don’t think Brian Roberts is that one guy.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
I never said I was 100% committed to that.
Millar has played on a World Series winner. To me, that does count for something.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
I'm glad SOMEBODY feels DeRo
Should be moved to right permanently in favor of having Roberts at second. I’ve been saying this since August…
also the team that won
97 games in the regular season.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on Nov 25, 2008 1:02 PM CST up reply actions
what do you think ...
are the chances of that happening, Al? Seems like Edmonds has rarely been mentioned in any stories about the Cubs.
I think Muskat even
said the Cubs aren’t interested.
And Wittenmyer interviewed Piniella who says Ibanez is exactly the kind of guy they are hoping to get.
Yeesh.
My next sig line quote will also be from Lou Piniella, and the first word will be either "Look", or "Listen", followed by a comma.
Ibanez
does have a good rep as a character guy, and he wouldn’t require a long-term deal. But his defense is pretty scary.
I'd rather have Edmonds.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Your post would be better...
… if you gave it a title better than “Just a thought”. That doesn’t say anything about what’s inside.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
It's easily fixable, snowy.
How’ bout: “Just a thought: Garrett Anderson.”
"I see I'm not the only one around here who can't hold his water." - Last words of the leaky pipe in the visiting team dugout, Dodger Stadium, October 4, 2008.
I think Ibanez would be
a touch cheaper, and probably less injury prone. I think either would be a better option than Teahan, because they need a lefty in the middle of the order to split up the righties, and I don’t think Teahan is a middle of the order guy. Not with that .256 avg.
I think Ibanez could be had for $10 mil a year for 2 or 3. He’s pretty clutch. I’d take him.
Demp and Rich: proof that people that live in igloos and say "eh" can contibute!
by Canadian Cubs Fan on Nov 25, 2008 9:51 AM CST reply actions
Well, I appreciate your thinking...
and given that the Cubs have some options for late-inning defensive replacements, I’m one of those that think that they could tolerate a somewhat sub-par defender in right. However, neither option is very attractive, in my opinion. Too old, too slow, and frankly, just not very good; even in left field.
Everybody wants to go the party, but no one wants to clean up afterward. The Cubs need to either make a committment to Fukudome for the first few months of the season, or bite the bullet, and get a real right fielder. And that is definitely not Garrett Anderson.
Thanks for the comments
I fixed the title, at least a little. As for position players—its not as if we couldn’t try him in right. If he’s looking for a job and wants to play bad enough, its something he could and probably should consider. I do understand the difficulties in switching positions so late in a career, but it could extend his playing days somewhat. I really haven’t heard his name mentioned connected to much of anyone yet since the Angels bought out his contract. Granted, they could still bring him back, an American league team could be looking for a DH (after last year’s DH’ing debacle around the league, it wouldn’t surprise me), or any other number of things could happen. I thought it would be worth looking into, especially with so many people clammoring for Ibanez.
Time is an illusion--lunch time doubly so.
The new title is good.
"I see I'm not the only one around here who can't hold his water." - Last words of the leaky pipe in the visiting team dugout, Dodger Stadium, October 4, 2008.
I could be wrong
but I think Anderson’s arm in RF might make a few people wish for the days of Jacque Jones in RF.
Done and done
Here are the final pieces to the puzzle. Resign Blanco. Sign Beimel. Trade for Roberts.
Your 2009 Chicago Cubs.
Roberts 2b
Theriot SS
DLee 1b
Ramirez 3b
Soriano LF
Derosa RF
Soto C
Reed CF
Starters:
Zambrano, Harden, Lilly, Dempster, Marquis
Bullpen:
Marmol, Gaudin, Gregg, Beimel, Guzman, Samardzija
Bench:
Blanco, Cedeno, Fontenot, Fukudome, Pie, Hoffpauir
That was easy. Okay let’s throw out the first pitch.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Seriously...
I think getting Roberts is a lot taller order than you are assuming…
Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow
by PurpleLineToWrigley on Nov 25, 2008 12:05 PM CST up reply actions
That was easy
…and I bet it ends up being very close to the above.
I know I know
In my head I know it’s not likely we’ll end up with Roberts, but a guy can always hope. Right?
From Lou’s comments today, it sounds like he’s serious about getting Ibanez.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Yeah he had some good things to say about him...
Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow
by PurpleLineToWrigley on Nov 25, 2008 12:11 PM CST up reply actions
Respectfully...
… I doubt the Cubs get Roberts. Soriano will continue to lead off simply because we do not have the resources to get him, and that’s lower on the priority list.
Hendry will get a lefty bopper in RF to split up the lineup 3-5. The very issue that Piniella had an issue with is now worsened by the lineup you have. Piniella doesn’t want Lee-Ramirez back-to-back, let alone Lee-Ramirez-Soriano back-to-back-to-back!
Where’s Woody? Oh, wait, that’s another thread(s). ;-)
In Hendry We Trust
Soriano
I suppose it doesn’t matter where he hits if the results are the same, but it does kind of set a tone. Two years in a row, the opposition has refused to throw him strikes, and he’s swung anyway.
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 25, 2008 12:32 PM CST up reply actions
I agree, I doubt we see Roberts on the Cubs next year
Because of the way Hendry and Lou have talked this off season. However, I am giving my personal opinion on what should happen.
I’m convinced all the left handed power options all blow. So why go out and spend money on someone that doesn’t improve our club? One of the few spots where I truly think we can improve is by trading for Roberts, which allows Sori to move down the lineup and move Dero to right.
You’re correct about having all those right handed bats back to back to back is not ideal. But what else would you do? Our priorities simply do not match well with the things that seem to be available.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
You're Right...
… ideally, trade Lee for prospects that could yield Roberts. Then, sign Texiera. Then you’ve got a balanced lineup with Ramirez-Tex-Soriano.
Realistically, though, that’s not gonna happen.
In Hendry We Trust
Yabbut
Isn’t a deal for Roberts MUCH more likely than signing Texiera.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
I Think...
… splitting up two of the three right-handed boppers is more important than a top of the order move. Hendry/Piniella agree.
I guess that makes all of this moot.
We were distinguishing between a personal preference and reality. What I wrote was an unrealistic dream. My opinion is that getting Roberts is also unrealistic.
In Hendry We Trust
Pie/
I keep coming back to this guy, because he needs a real chance to play. More than 40 to 50 at bats a month. He is much better defensively than anyone available, and will probally hit over .250 with some pop if given a real chance. Pie/Johnson in center, and Fuku/Dero in right will probally be close to league ave. at both positions, and provide flexibiliy. There are no better realistic options!
Pie!
I love pie. Especially key lime pie!
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
by Al Yellon on Nov 26, 2008 9:00 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Wrong thread, Al.
This should go in the Thanksgiving thread.
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
It could have, but pie was mentioned.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
2 points
1) I think the Brian Roberts talk needs to end. Why? If we do get him there is no way he will be able to live up to expectations after all this time. I can see that whole situation being under a microscope. Just remember the Chicago media is about as tough as it gets.
2) The names that keep getting mentioned are retreads at best. I think we need to go into spring with the nucleus of what got us 97 wins and wait for the 2009 disappointing team’s fire sale and then steal the right piece to the puzzle. Hendry has a proven track record of being very savvy in those deals. We can stay in the hunt with what we have until then.
Anderson is not a good option...
For one, his numbers do NOT compare favorably to Ibanez’s numbers. Their career numbers are somewhat similar, but Ibanez has slightly better numbers (113 OPS+ compared to 105 OPS+). But if you look at the last five years, it’s really not close. Ibanez has an OPS+ of 115 or more in each of the last five years. Anderson on the other hand has an OPS+ of under 115 in each of the last six years, and under 100 in four of the past six years.
Defensively, I think Anderson is a shell of his former self. He has an arthritic back, which probably has a lot to do with his decline offensively. I haven’t seen any metrics, but I’d suspect that he’s no longer an adequate corner OF either.
In other words, you have two bad defensive players, but at least Ibanez can hit. I’m not saying Ibanez is a great option – just that he’s a much better option than Anderson.
I agree.
I think that Ibañez has several more good years as a hitter. Anderson, not so much…
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
MLB 12 The Show Marlins Park Trailer, complete with the monstrosity and the fish. Here's the link...
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
