The 2010 Offensive Puzzle: Who Fits?
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 7:42 AM CDT
552 comments
How do the Cubs improve their offense in 2010? One answer is simply, "Get healthy," although it seems unlikely that Jim and Lou will accept that. For one thing, they'll be dumping at least Bradley, and maybe more. One strategy would be simply to get the best player at each position that you can and let the offense work itself out. I don't expect that to be this team's strategy either. Rather, I expect the Cubs to try and craft an offense that fits together. With that in mind, I wanted to look at the players we already have and consider how each fits or doesn't fit.
First Level - The Guys We Just Aren't Likely to Improve Upon
Aramis Ramirez - For the past few years, even as other 3B have slipped in or out of this category, Aramis Ramirez has undoubtedly and consistently been a top 5 3B in the MLs. Since coming under Lou's tutelage, Ramirez has added more patience to his game, making him a more complete hitter, and a guy you can build an offense around. He can bat 3-4-5 and fits perfectly.
Derrek Lee - He just had his second best career-year, remaking the kind of hitter he has been by keeping the ball off the ground at a rate that reversed his GIDP-infested 2008. With this resurgence, D-Lee gives good value at his salary, and it's hard to see the Cubs moving him, despite the fact that 1B is the easiest place to get a LH slugger. His defense, his leadership, as well as his bat (also able to play 3-4-5) fits.
Second Level - Imperfect Fits Who Will Be Hard to Improve Upon
Alfonso Soriano - It was a bad year, but at least we have an explanation. He should return to a slugging presence from the 5 or 6 hole, a place where he actually fits fairly well, possibly even ending up a great fit there if his speed can return. We should remember two things about Soriano - much of our frustration stems from his misfit as a leadoff hitter or from a guy who tried to play through pain and injury to help this team make the playoffs. The second thing to remember is that the contract is a sunk cost. Yes, he's overpaid. But, he's still likely to be a better LF than we can get by unloading him and looking for another option. The only reason you move him this off-season is if soneone comes asking for him and is willing to take the whole contract without qualifications.
Geovany Soto - It was a bad year, and we don't necessarily have an explanation to encourage expectations for a return to 2008 production. Cubs management will be in a better position than we to gauge Soto's health and desire. If they aren't confident in a rebound, they could trade him. But his upside and price make that scenario seem unlikely.
Kosuke Fukudome - 2008 showed us he wasn't the LH #5 hitter we wanted. 2009 showed us he wasn't the CF we need. But enough of what he isn't. He's a LH on-base machine and superb RF that can bat 1-2 and the Cubs need all three of those things. He fits if we put him where he fits.
Third Level - You Get What You're Paying For, Upside Class
Jeff Baker - Is he the new Fontenot - a guy who looks like the answer in part-time play, but who has gotten to this age (28) without a full-time job for a reason? In Baker's case it's partly because he's a natural 3B blocked by Colorado's plethora of solid corner options. Baker's now logged over 225 innings at 2B and has an above-average UZR. Baker totally fits as a utility man (and/or RF platoon mate) and has the upside to make him, combined with Mike Fontenot in an unorthodox platoon, as a decent 2B option. I wouldn't hand him the starting job, but then I'd rather give him a lot of 2B playing time than spending the acquisition costs on several discussed options (e.g. Uggla, Lopez). So, Baker totally fits in some way, the key will be in seeing just how he fits.
Mike Fontenot - He flopped this year, and maybe it was that he was asked to do too much, playing everyday at a foreign position. And maybe he's also just not cut out for more than part-time play. But he's still the guy who hit .305/.395/.514 last year. Keep him to part-time play only at 2B, and maybe he can approach that production again. Given that he's left-handed and a good defender at 2B, he could fit depending on whether there is room for him.
Fourth Level - You Get What You're Paying For, Hopefully
Ryan Theriot - The Riot tried to take himself to the next level this year, adding power to his game for a brief few weeks. His monthly splits tell his story. He started out on the '08 track, getting on base at a nice clip, with minimal slugging. But then he dropped the OBP from his game and became a Soriano clone (classic Soriano, that is). The league figured him out and he became worthless for a month. So, he tried to go back to what worked, but couldn't keep it up at his previous levels. Now he goes to arbitration where his SBs and counting stats, padded by prime lineup placement, will inflate his dollar cost. At the league minimum, Theriot fit. As a part-time middle IF, he could fit depending on his arbitration cost. But his OBP, post-SLG-experiment isn't good enough to bat 1-2 and he's more and more looking like a player who doesn't really do anything well, just a lot of things ok.
Sam Fuld - Great season at the majors in short work for Fuld, but he doesn't have the minor league pedigree to make ongoing success seem likely. Tell that to Casey McGehee, right? Yeah, anyone can surprise, but the Cubs shouldn't go into 2010 expecting starters to surprise.
Jake Fox - I actually buy into Fox being able to provide value in a more regular role, but the Cubs clearly do not given the playing time allotment down the stretch . I also figure they know better than I do. Fox fits as a bat off the bench, but seems more likely to be trade bait.
So, how does this puzzle fit together? We've got a likely skeletal lineup of:
Leadoff hitter - Fukudome RF - Lee 1B - Ramirez 3B - Slugger - Soriano LF - Soto C - Middle IF (with the 1-2 and 7-8 spots flippable)
Part of this puzzle is easy - CFs and middle IFs are prime positions for finding lead-off hitters. But part is more difficult - CFs and middle IFs aren't often the place to find sluggers who can bat between Aramis Ramirez and Alfonso Soriano. Additionally problematic is that the SLGing CFs we could look at tend to be hitters susceptible to strikeouts (Granderson, Ankiel, Cameron). That could lead to three strikeout victims in a row with Soriano and Soto. I told you this is a puzzle!
Below I'll start going through some of the free agents and see how they fit or don't fit. And, of course, I look forward to seeing the rest of BCB's ideas and how they might fit.
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.
11 recs |
552 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Chone Figgins
As a free agent, Figgins should be available as a switch-hitting lead-off man. Offensively Figgins is like a souped-up Ryan Theriot, but trading in a lot of that value for defensive weakness. UZR has him below average everywhere on his career, and really poor at CF and 2B the past few years he’s played there. On the other hand, he has picked up at 3B and been good the past two years, which means he’s likely to be a better fit for another team bidding on his services than for us.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 8:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Figgins will be overpriced.
The Cubs can do better elsewhere.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 8:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
Teams in need of a 3B should be willing to pay more than we should be.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed as well.
Chone Figgins is shaping up to be one of those sexy names that many fans and mainstream pundits (hello, Phil Rogers!) will be lusting after, but I’m hesitant to endorse him wholeheartedly.
Defensively, the only position he appears to really excel at is third base – but the Cubs don’t need a third baseman. They don’t even need a backup third baseman, as I believe Jeff Baker can fulfill that role just fine. (I voted for the “super utility” option above.)
And offensively, Figgins’ OPS has been pretty inconsistent throughout his career. He has put up a pretty nice OBP consistently for the last three years, which many will say is all that matters from a top-of-the-order guy who steals a lot of bags. And they wouldn’t be entirely incorrect. Still, I think the Cubs’ money would be better spent or saved elsewhere.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 7, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree...
…and I just don’t see Ricketts approving any big contracts right out of the chute with the money they have tied up in a handful of players. The last thing he wants is to start right out with another long term deal that doesn’t pan out, and have an even bigger (and expensive) cleanup on his hands down the road.
I think DGU did an excellent job summarizing the talent already on board, and I’d think success next year is going to be based 90% on several players simply having better years vs big acquistions or trades. There will be trades, but I would guess the probability of the Cub’s getting an “impact” guy in one of those deals as unlikely.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 7, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it would be difficult for them to do better...
but then again, that’s why he’ll probably cost a lot.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 9:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Figgins was worth 5.9 WAR this year
2.4 the year before and 3.1 the year before that. Unless he gets more than 12 million annually, he won’t be overpriced.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 8, 2009 11:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he'll be overpaid...
but I do think he’ll be priced at a level that the Cubs cannot afford, especially if they’ll also be adding a “power bat.”
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 2:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On this...
… I think we agree. I’d rather see the Cubs’ money go elsewhere. They already have a leadoff man — Kosuke Fukudome.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 9, 2009 7:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm fine with Dome leading off.
But then we don’t have a #2 hitter. Figgins would play a role if you buy him as a decent 2B.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 7:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe.
I’m still not convinced Figgins is worth the money and years he’ll be asking for.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 9, 2009 8:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Neither am I.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It depends on the market for him.
He’s certainly a wonderful fit. The question comes down to price. If you can sign him for 2 years @ $10M each, I’d definitely do it.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the thing, though...
Lou has come out and said he wants to make the team “more athletic” and has hinted that he would like to see Fukudome batting 2nd, with someone else leading off.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I swear he's said the "more athletic" thing every year.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has and that is the one area Hendry
has tried to address. He signed Dome. Bradley was the most “athletic” of the Burell, Abreu, Ibanez, Dunn crowd. Fontenot had more speed than DeRosa. For all the faults, this is the one area they said they’d address and have tried to accomplish.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 9, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And at the risk of re-opening this can of worms...
…Hendry traded away Felix Pie, who is perhaps the most purely athletic of all of them.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yabbut, he signed Gathright who could jump a car!
And then he traded Marquis, the most athletic of the pitchers.
Thanks daver, but I was just referring to everyday players or those intended for everyday.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 9, 2009 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's right.
Gathright did make the team more athletic. Unfortunately, that’s about all he was able to accomplish in his time with the team.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most Athletic Bench, EVER.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 9, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even Johnny would agree...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 9, 2009 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm tired of this "we have to do this, we have to do that".
The minute Lou got focused on that “more athletic, more lefthanded” thing last winter, that was the minute the 2009 team was doomed.
Get better players. Period. This “athletic” thing is just silly.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 9, 2009 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Spoken like a true-blue Adam Dunn supporter.
(just kidding)
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but those players have to be an improvement.
You could get a good 3rd baseman, and it wouldn’t help you one bit.
I agree they don’t necessarily have to be more “athletic.” But they do have to at least play positions that need an upgrade.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On that, I will agree.
But my point was, don’t focus on a single characteristic of a player when there might be a better player at a position you do need to upgrade.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 9, 2009 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I knew what you meant...
I was trying to clarify, not correct what you said. It was mis-worded a bit on my end…
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I knew what you meant, too.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 9, 2009 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I sense an infinite loop developing...
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see what you both mean
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 12, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For Chone
And for a few other free agents, for me it really comes down to what their contract length demands are. Give me a 2 year deal with a club option for a third, and I’m all for it, regardless of the price. Admittedly, he’s probably looking for more than that, but it’s time to start cutting down on the length of the contract.
Last year Hendry was wise to only give Bradley a three year deal, likely due to his injury history, and that’s something I hope will continue with other prospective free agents.
by shoemile on Oct 7, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Figgins
Btw, great job DGU.
On Figgins
a) Defense. I’m loathe to read too much into UZR on his 2nd base numbers, as the sample size is awfully small and when a guy gets shifted around a lot, they don’t have time to settle in and learn the nuances of the position. I think he could be decent enough defensively.
b) I’m not sure the “souped-up” Theriot really says enough. Figgins has far more baserunning instinct than Theriot, along with more pure speed. More than that, he’s tremendously improved his discipline. There’s very few folks that I’ve read that think Figgins speed will start rapidly declining soon, but the point is, even if it does decline a bit, he’s developed enough as an offensive player to think that he can maintain a high OBP and be solid leading off for say, the next 2-3 years.
So? Short of it is this – in an offseason with few ideal fits, Figgins is a solid fit, IMO. Is he going to be overpriced? Sure. How far would I go to land him? Well, put it this way, I wouldn’t go balls crazy to land Chone Figgins. I’d ponder a 4 year deal (the idea that he’s blocking our talent is a very flawed idea – he can handle 2nd for a couple years, where the only block is Jeff Baker, who is a question in his own rights, and if someone develops, he could move to CF for a year. Even as a backup, pinch runner for one year, it’s not the worst thing).
In saying that, I’m not sold the Angels let him leave. With Morales development, they aren’t in a rush to force power in, and Figgins is still their only leadoff option. I could see him stick at 3rd there, or perhaps be shifted to the OF to give Brandon Wood PT, but my betting money would still be Figgins with the Angels for 2010.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Rec'd
Good case for Figgins. I guess I’m inclined to believe the reports I’ve heard over and over that he has stone hands. But I’m more interested after your case.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't get me wrong
I’m not trying to suggest that I think Figgins would be solid at 2nd. I’m just saying I think the defensive UZR numbers shouldn’t be read too deeply and that, moving for him is a move for offense, and that I think he could probably be passable/decent enough defensively that his defensive problems wouldn’t outweigh the offensive ability that you hope to net. I don’t know what his +/- is either.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chone Figgins isn't coming.
Chone Figgins has already said that he wants to go back to the Angels, if they will have him. If he says anything about liking the Cubs it’s only because he wants to drive up the eventual salary that the Angels will pay him. Plus, I don’t think he’s the solve-all for this line-up.
by TheGrinch13 on Oct 8, 2009 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Vladimir Guerrero
Also a free agent, Guerrero should be available as a near-perfect middle of the order thumper. Vlad’s RH, but he doesn’t have big splits on his career. What he does do is put the ball in play without striking out that often. His incredible plate coverage makes him a nice transition in the lineup from Ramirez to Soriano. Unfortunately, again, defense is a problem. Vlad’s been really bad in the field for three straight years and relegated to DH by the Halos this year. If the year off the field and recovering health make him an option as RF again, he could be a name we hear more about this off-season. Otherwise, he doesn’t appear to fit.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 8:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Vlad's been a great bat throughout his career, but with his salary needs and
inability to play CF, I can’t imagine an overpriced outfield of Soriano, Fukudome, & Guerrero is a fit for 2010.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 7, 2009 9:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right.
I forgot to mention that. If we signed Vlad, it would necessitate that we trade two of our three OFs and sign a young, rangey CF. He’d be a tough fit.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Vlad is Bradely without the 'tude
Not a good RF, with some decent pop and no wheels. We had that already and unless we are signing with intent of having a bunch of #2 hitters then I don’t they spend for him
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Oct 7, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um...
Bradley without the ’tude is one heck of a player.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 9:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And how many #2 hitters do we need?
And how many RF we going to tried that have bad wheels?
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Oct 8, 2009 8:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not that I want Vlad
but he is not a #2 hitter.
by rlpete on Oct 8, 2009 9:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most RF won't have great wheels...
… otherwise they’d be CF. And If we signed more of a slugger, you could ask “how many all-or-nothing hitters to we need?”
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes but I expect them to be able to jog a little bit
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Oct 8, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, fine.
I agree that I want at least a decent defender in RF.
Your comparison is still way off.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 8:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes completely different
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Oct 8, 2009 8:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok
1) This is a chart that shows nothing but OBP.
2) This is a chart that shows Vlady to be a consistent performer and Bradley to be less consistent.
So, I can’t say it proves the point you’ve been making.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 7:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?
You are saying Vlad Guerrero and Milton Bradley are the same based on one statistic? Based on that logic Ichiro and Bradley are the same player too. They have almost the same lifetime OBP and both play RF. Wow.
Guerrero (depending on his real age) has a chance at 500 HR’s. Guerrero has a lifetime slugging of 100 more than Bradley.
How are they the same again?
by rlpete on Oct 9, 2009 9:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess you could imply that yes, but no I was saying due to one stat they are the same
What I am saying is what I’ve said below, and AL DH can not play RF in Wrigely. Yes his bat would be a decent addition, if we needed just a bat, but we need a RF so he should not be the choice for the cubs
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Oct 9, 2009 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That I will agree.
Guerrero needs to remain in the AL where he can get 25% of his AB’s in the DH spot.
by rlpete on Oct 9, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have a good point.
I think you just mis-stated it at the beginning. I don’t think Guerrero is a good fit, for the reasons you posted here. But he’s no Bradley. They’re two very different types of hitters.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just not sure it fits
I’m not sure he fits for us with his defensive limitations. You could probably stomach him in corner OF provided his bat stays good, but then our OF defense would be Soriano/Fukudome/Guerrero … not ideal to say the least.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
I think if you decide to sign Vlad, you have to trade Dome, too. I do think Dome is tradeable, but it’s an awful lot to expect Jim Hendry to trade two OFs and probably trade for someone else.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope.
I like the bat, but I don’t think he fits because of the defense/injury issues.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We've tried the AL DH as a NL RF and the results didn't turn out so good...
Let’s go beyond any personal issue MB had with anyone. Do we really want to bring another DH in to play RF in Wrigely? If it isn’t that big of a deal on playing defense in RF, then move Sori over there and use Fox in LF. But I’ve read on this site, posted by several people, that RF at Wrigely is kind of screwy and you need to be able to cover some ground to play it.
Due to this reason, Fukudome is a great choice for RF. We still need CF’er who can hit lead-off or someone to play 2B who can be lead-off
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Oct 8, 2009 7:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the overall argument
if not the details. I’d like to see Dome in RF, too.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 7:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
we already have a guess hacking corner outfielder
Geovany Soto is the new 2008 Derrek Lee
by jesus christos on Oct 8, 2009 7:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Guerrero hasn't been good in a couple of years
He’s old, has lost a lot of power, can’t play defense, and needs to be subbed out regularly to stay healthy.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 8, 2009 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm optimistic on Guerrero short-term
because of his second-half splits.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 7:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
C'mon DGU
You know those have almost zero predictive value.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 9, 2009 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But not zero.
In Vlad’s case we know the man’s body has not been strong. That he could string together two good months after some time off meant something to me. This is part of why I don’t buy him in the NL anyway. He needs to DH and I hope we get to see him continue to take pitches no one can hit and turn them into HRs. He’s a special talent.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Orlando Hudson - Felipe Lopez - Akinori Iwamura
It’s the poor-man’s Brian Roberts club, a collection of LH 2B you can hope to hit for a .350 OBP and a .400 SLG. When he was a Blue Jay, Hudson was a top defensive 2B. The past two years, UZR has him below average. Lopez also is not know for his glove. And Iwamura’s a former 3B who has managed to become an average 2B. For the price, I’m not convinced any of these guys are worth it, although they would fit at the top of our lineup. Perhaps Jim should keep an eye on these guys and watch to see if any is left late in the free agent season as a bargain.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 8:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Placido Polanco
Rather than those LH guys, I’d keep my eye on Placido Polanco, who could easily end up cheaper than all of them, despite his solid defense and rock-bottom low strikeout rate. He’s RH and had a bit of a down year, but I’d like to see him put into our 2B mix if we could get him on a bargain price.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 8:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Polanco is an intriguing possibility.
His age is a factor. He’ll be 34 on Saturday. He’s likely to be looking for more dollars than the Cubs should be willing to spend on such a player.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 9:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because of his age and the other 2Bs available
I think he might get left out on the market and prices come down. I wouldn’t bid up on him, but I would keep my eye on him to swoop in should he look like a bargain.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
He could be the one left out during “Second base musical chairs,” much like Orlando Hudson was this year.
Polanco on a short-term, cheap deal, would be interesting.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Trey2317 on Oct 7, 2009 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt it
He seems to be undervalued a lot. He’s a heck of a player.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 8, 2009 11:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
At the right price
I’m game to that as well.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Polanco...I like
I’m just throwing this out there, but what about a trade of Polanco and Grandson for Bradley and fill in the blank or two? I like Baker as the Super utility.
Don't let anyone steal your Joy
by bigz38fan on Oct 13, 2009 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lopez or Iwamura would fit prefectly
Lopez being the ideal fit since he can play almost any spot and is a top of the order hitter. I could see him playing LF, then CF, then RF, then 3B, then SS, then 2B all the while hitting in leadoff. He would fit a super-ut perfectly for anyone. Of course you still have the whole at 2B where I think you put Polanco or Hudson in.
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Oct 7, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you like any of them enough
to pay full price?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 7:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It depends on what "full price" is.
Hopefully, the Cubs could get Lopez on the cheap and platoon him with Baker. That would make for an excellent 2B platoon, and two good utility players. But I don’t pay more than ~$5M/season for that. I’d probably pay the same for Iwamura, and Polanco is probably worth a little bit more – something like $8-10M per year. I probably wouldn’t sign Polanco to that deal because I don’t think the price will be worth the upgrade over Baker.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lopez is interesting because
there isn’t much separation between his splits v. RHP and LHP. So, I wouldn’t necessarily take him off the field v. LHP, and might just prefer to leave Baker in RF, platooning with Dome.
I can’t decide which of Hudson and Lopez I prefer, but I think Lopez gets the nod. I wouldn’t approach your suggested price tag for Polanco, but I do like that he could bring a different batting approach to the Cubs.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't want any three of them
Hudson’s overhyped/overrated now. He’ll likely get overpriced this offseason as well. Neither Lopez or Iwamura interest me that much unless it comes as a dirt cheap price. I don’t like Iwamura at the top of the order, and I think Lopez was very lucky this year and will come back to earth.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miguel Tejada
When it comes to SSs, you have to remember how shallow the pool is. I say that because it’s easy to look at Miguel Tejada’s stats and be underwhelmed. Despite a .313 AVG, he only managed a .340 OBP and a .455 SLG – and that was playing half his games with the Crawford Boxes sitting there tantalizingly. It seems like a 2010 Tejada removed from Houston could easily end up looking like the 2008 version who had a .314 OBP and a .415 SLG. And then there’s the defense which has been going back and forth each year for some time, alternating between bad and good.
So, remembering the SS context, you can do a lot worse than Miguel Tejada. The problem is that he just doesn’t fit. He’s not a top of the order bat and he’s not a middle of the order bat. He doesn’t strike out that much, so you could consider him a #6 hitter with Soriano #5, although that would leave us with RH batters 3-7 and possibly 3-8.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:05 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
My problem with Tejada is the OBP
If he put up his exact number from this season on a one year deal with us that would be fine with me though. Ryan Theriot leaving the regular lineup is music to my ears.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
SCRAP - IST!
"Manny Trillo is coming in to pinch run. You know, for a lot of teams, you would pinch run for Manny Trillo." - Harry Caray
by Archie on Oct 7, 2009 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tehada had a horrible 2nd half.
I’d probably stay away from him. I’ve thought he was done before, though.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 9:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't want Miggy
for the exact reason you note – not sure that he adds enough offensively.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for doing this.
And I just want to support what yout wrote about Kosuke. He’s probably not the Ichiro-like (lite?) superstar that we’d all hoped for, but he did improve overall in the second year of his contract and offers some key skills that the Cubs could use (high OBP, top-of-the-order patience, strong RF defense). Also, FWIW, he’s stayed healthy. (And I know…I know…he makes too much money.)
By the way, looking at his numbers, I noticed something kinda weird: Dome got exactly the same number of hits this year as he got last year (129) and scored exactly the same number of runs (79).
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 7, 2009 9:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Dome could improve again next year
if we cut his playing time, making sure he got regular rest. A full platoon would work well and we already have players who can platoon with him.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he could platoon, his numbers would look better...
of course, that would make him less valuable overall (and he’s already not earning his salary on the field). But yes, if you could platoon Fukudome and a RH hitter in RF, you’d have a pretty productive RF. That RF would need to be pretty cheap, because he’d only be asked to play around 1/4 of the games.
Of course, that would also mean finding a CF and trading Bradley (which I guess we assume will happen).
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Jeff Baker could do that job, much like Mark DeRosa did.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 7, 2009 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure what Baker can do in RF...
having never seen him play. I’m not sure about his arm. But he would seem like a possibility, sure. And he fits the type of player (i.e., cheap, not expecting a full-time starting job) that the team should be looking for. Probably worth a shot.
And if he could fill in at RF, LF, 3B and 2B as needed, that’d be terrific. I’m sure he can do fine at the other three – RF is my only question.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm pretty sure he's got the arm for it.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps he does...
I really have no idea. Just haven’t seen enough throws by him to know. If he does, it’s a great idea.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
cubs are going to work with baker in the outfield during ST
Geovany Soto is the new 2008 Derrek Lee
by jesus christos on Oct 8, 2009 7:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know this for sure?
Do you have a source? Just curious – it would be great news.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm.
The info is credited to “The Sports Xchange”. I have never seen that anywhere else. I’m skeptical.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 10, 2009 7:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've never heard of it either.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
From their site:
“…primary content and information providers for America Online, Foxsports.com, CBS SportsLine.com, MSN, MSNBC, Compuserve, Yahoo!, Lycos, DirecTV, Realteam.com, USAToday.com”
seems like a legit sports news aggregator.
I have no response to that.
by stelmodad on Oct 13, 2009 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the curious thing about Dome
was the slg percentages from month to month. Three great slugging months (April, July, August), one decent month (May), 3 horrible months. Makes me wonder what might happen if we could get a hitting coach that really connected with him. I mean … if he can slug .440-.450 for the season (not the biggest stretch), you could live with him in the 5th/6th spot, giving the Cubs more flexibility.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Dome's sliding SLG
is a sign of low endurance, which is why I keep pushing to sit him once at least once a week and have a strong 4th OF option.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree...
…I think he fries out physically and a bit mentally at times.
Last year was a prime example. When a guy can look so good and then so bad, mental and physical fatigue could be a factor.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 8, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do I have to be the one saying Fuld is not a starter ?
I don’t think anyone is going into 2010 expecting him to “surprise” as a starter anymore than they would Koye Hill. Fuld
is what he is, a great defensive OF with very good speed ( and the brains to use it right), extraordinary patience at the plate and a good contact hitter. In other words he should be a great bench player who gets a couple of starts a week.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Oct 7, 2009 9:20 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
I include Fuld because others have been talking about him starting.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's so hard to say what should become of Sam...
…until we know how this Milton thing is going to work out. For instance, if the Cubs-Giants did work out a Bradley for Rowand trade, then I’d say definitely hang on to Fuld to balance out a right-handed centerfielder.
Then again, if the Cubs could find a way to trade for a lefty CF, say Curtis Granderson (who will have plenty of time to rest up now!), then RJ would be a better fit. Or yet again, what if the Bradley trade nets us only prospects or an infielder? Then would a Fuld/RJ platoon still be feasible?
As you can see, I’m still really seeing centerfield as the position of need rather than right field, where I think Kosuke and Jeff Baker would be fine.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 7, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Has he been given the chance to start on a consistent basis at any level?
Assuming yes, has he failed miserably enough that being a starter is no longer an option?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 7, 2009 10:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He started at every level
and was having a great year at Iowa before being brought up. The problem is you don’t want to go " Fontenot" with him and go into the 2010 season ASSUMING he is the starting CF unless you add at least one really bad ass power hitter. I don’t think CF is a job you want to have a competition for in Spring Training. I remember asking Flieta at the Convention this year why the Cubs did not either have Fuld on the team or trade him as we was too good and frankly getting too old to play in the minors and he responded that they really liked Fuld and he was basically one injury away from making the team. He turned out to be right and when Fuld got his chance he really made the most of it. If you have Fuld on the bench then maybe he does get a chance to play everyday ( or at least platoon) if there is an injury. He may well be an “ace in the hole” but again I don’t think you can go into the season with him as the starting CF.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Oct 7, 2009 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well of course you don't want to ASSUME anything
Sure it’d be great if you went into a season with an All-Star at every position and a payroll north of $200M but we all know that’s never going to happen in the big-leagues, right? coughyankeessuckcough…
So it seems that we have question marks in CF, SS, 2B and perhaps C. By the way, is anyone else slightly alarmed that this violates the old “strength up the middle” maxim? Anyway, add in the stated need for another big bopper and I doubt we’re going to be able to filll all those spots with proven answers especially considering payroll constraints.
I’d be ecstatic if Hendry/Ricketts found a way to fill just two of those holes with big trades and/or FA signings. But then that means the other two holes have to be filled with what we already have. Giving Soto another chance at C seems like a no-brainer unless a perfect trade scenario involving Hanley Ramirez falls into Hendry’s lap.
And to me, a Fuld/Johnson platoon is a reasonable solution to our CF hole. Obviously it’s not ideal, and if we were to address all our other holes and still have money/resources left over to improve on that, that’d be great. But sometimes you do have to make educated “assumptions”.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 7, 2009 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Personally I would love a Johnson/Fuld platoon
but I don’t see it happening and am right now just hoping Fuld makes the team next year.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Oct 7, 2009 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd be concerned about Fuld's bat in that scenario...
especially if it were the standard platoon. I’d have to believe Johnson would get more than just the LHP games, which would be bad for Johnson’s value.
The problem is that Johnson is a great value against LHP and a poor value against RHP, and Fuld is probably also only suited to 4th/5th OF duty. Someone would have to play too much, and would probably get exposed.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Johnson’s been good, but with so many questions in our OF, we need an upgrade.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed...
I think CF needs to be a strong LH platoon option (in which case Johnson might be able to stay) or a full-time CF. I don’t think we can piece-meal CF with Fuld and Johnson, both of whom are probably best suited to 1/3 or 1/4 time roles (for different reasons).
The tricky part is that there aren’t a lot of outstanding options out there in CF. I’m intrigued by the idea of a Fukudome/Baker platoon in RF (if Baker has the arm), so CF is where I’d look to bring in someone new.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The lack of quality up the middle is a concern...
As is the fact that we’re weakest in the positions that are the least easy to fill via free agency, and the fact that the budget is going to be tight anyway.
I’m hopeful that the team will not go out and overpay for a free agent at one of these positions this offseason, because quite frankly the options aren’t that great.
I agree with those that have said that a lot of the improvement we’ll have to hope for is from better health for Ramirez and Soriano and better production from Soriano, Soto, and (maybe) Fontenot.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does it need to be said?
I thought it was obvious.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 7, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the question, then
Not directed at you, but in general. What exactly are the Cubs looking for? I would argue that 2 things the Cubs are looking for is a defensive upgrade in CF and a disciplined hitter at the top of the order that makes good contact, gets on base, and has good base running instincts.
Short of it is, I feel like I am coming off as a huge Sam Fuld fan. I’m not, but he fits for the Cubs in 2010. Would I go into the year with him alone as the clearcut starter? No. But he fits the Cubs needs for now. Do I expect the Cubs to go that route? No. I’m not even sure that Fuld will make the 25 man roster, to be honest, if the Cubs add a CF and resign Reed as well.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's the right question
I think they’re looking for 1) a CF defensive upgrade, 2) a disciplined top of the order hitter, as you describe, but also 3) “an RBI guy.”
If you think Fuld can be both #1 and #2 upgrades, he could fit, but I don’t think the Cubs expect to go into the season with Fuld as their #2 upgrade. So, I think we could go with Fuld, but not both Fuld and Theriot and get all three of the wish list items
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fuld?
I have no doubt Fuld would be a fine defensive CF, but to assume he can be an everyday top of the order guy is wishful thinking.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 8, 2009 5:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't disagree
it would take some guts to go into the year with Fuld as part of the answer to something in CF/leadoff, and I don’t see the Cubs doing that. It’s make or break time for the current leadership, and that’ll likely mean a veteran answer. The thing is, the offensive FA options as top of the order hitters might not be necessarily better than Fuld (more a knock on the available options). I mean, Orlando Hudson went .283/.357/.417. As I’ve said before, I could easily see Sam Fuld putting up, say, a .270/.370 BA/OBP combination, and he has some pop in that bat, enough to be more of a threat than a Juan Pierre-ish type guy as an offensive package.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 7:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you think Fuld can get a .370 OBP
then I’d be happy getting only Cameron, giving him 500 PAs, Fuld 350 (and more if he can maintain that OBP), platooning Dome with Baker, and resting Sori regularly.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 8:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see why he couldn't get around a .370 OBP
I’ll be curious what the projection models indicate when they come out, although they are but a tool. That said, his plus discipline, arguably the most disciplined player in our entire organization, along with decent wheels and the ability to play situational ball makes me think that he could do something like that. Now, the .370 OBP may be paired with say, a sub-.400 SLG (although I still think he could put up a low, maybe very low, .400 SLG number. This is assuming a full complement of AB’s.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 8:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You just don't...
…know until he gets day to day exposure to major league pitching as to what he could do in regards to OBP.
He has shown he can do it over a short period of time, but a lot of guys do and they get exposed with a heavier dose of AB’s.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 9, 2009 9:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sure
you never know about any young talent until they get the AB’s. And again, I’m not huge on Fuld as any long term answer. That said, look around at the options for adding another top of the order AB. It’s not an appealing group at any positions that we could possibly add said top of the order bat (MI/CF).
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe because he averaged less than .370 OBP in AA and AAA
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 9, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
um
a lot of arguments you could make against that, ranging from minor league stats being inconclusive, to an advanced hitter being able to take advantage of weak pitching, and so forth, but his OBP in AA/AAA in all the years in the minors was around .370 if not higher (I don’t have Sac Fly data in front of me right now, and without sac fly data, his obp was .375 in all the years he’s been at AA/AAA).
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nvm
with the sac fly’s from 07-09, his combined OBP for all his AA/AAA AB’s is .372.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh one more point
that’s with some bad luck, which the neutralized data suggests he had to deal with.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A lot of work
to show that expecting him to reach a .370 OBP in the bigs is a bit optimistic to say the least. He struggled to reach that number in the minors yet you blithely expect him to be able to duplicate against much tougher big league pitchers? I’m a glass half full kinda guy, but …
Unless the other seven position players are good to great hitters, the Cubs cannot rely on Fuld to be a starter next season. He is very unproven, and the Cubs do not have the luxury of starting too many unproven players.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 9, 2009 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what work?
the data’s out there … seriously, all it is adding and dividing. as for your new argument now, that’s a very fair argument. My counter to that would be that not all OBP’s are created similar. This is a guy with plus-plus discipline, if there is such a thing, and it’s been noted on his route up the minors. But definitely, that’s a more valid argument than the previous wrong one you put out.
As for whether or not Fuld will actually start, I’ve explicitly stated from the beginning that I do not believe the Cubs have the guts to go down that route. All I’m simply saying is that, Fuld might be closer in ability to the options in the market than most would assume (actually, more specifically, from what I’ve heard, Fuld is only a deep backup plan). Furthermore, as I’ve stated before, my secondary argument is that, even if we take a low expectation line for Fuld (.260/.350/.370 was what I proposed below as a low expectation line), that’s still close to a league average leadoff hitter, and my argument is that the move to get a leadoff hitter in this poor FA market, unless we land an elite guy (and only one guy this offseason would be classified as such, IMO, in the FA market, and to expect an elite one in a trade is expecting the unexpected – not impossible, but unlikely), then the cost (money and/or talent) in adding what likely is a league average leadoff hitter does not, IMO, justify the move if it infringes upon the Cubs ability to address other needs this offseason.
I’ve expressed all this before, but I’m doing it again to address your “blithely” comment.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The blithely comment refers to your assumption that Fuld will produce slightly better numbers at the big league level than he has produced at AA and AAA.
Your newly revised forecast for Fuld is curious. The numbers are worse than what Fukudome actually produced this season at the big league level, so how does Fuld help the team again?
Not starting Fuld is not a question of lack of guts, it is being smart. He has done precious little to warrant making him the starting leadoff hitter and CF.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 10, 2009 9:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's not enough offense for me.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Although, I will say...
that seems to be a “minimum expenditure” or “worst-case” scenario.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what?
DGU referenced my comment on a .370 OBP. We’re speaking solely on OBP, and it seems like you are saying that’s not enough, so that begs the question, what exactly are your OBP expectations, then, for a top of the order bat? Because a .370 OBP out of the leadoff spot is … uh … to say the least, pretty good (only 5 teams this year had higher than a .370 OBP out of the leadoff spot).
Now, if you don’t buy a .370 OBP, fine, but your statement is referencing that, and as such, it makes little sense.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um...
why is it that I have to be speaking of OBP specifically? I realize that’s what you were talking about, but that’s not the only component of offense.
How about this: that’s not enough power for me.
Happy?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sure ... just be clear next time
the only reason i asked what is because DGU and I were discussing OBP and you said that was not enough offense, and, thus, the common sense reaction is that you were referring to OBP, and as such, your comment made little sense. I mean, typically, when someone responds “that is not enough” in relation to a comment about something as specific as a .370 OBP, that typically means said response is in reference to the initial comment. Just be clear next time.
Moving on … the power argument, though, is also somewhat … odd. Unless you think he can’t maintain, say, a .370 SLG. Not ideal, and below average, sure. But MLB average for leadoff hitters SLG was .410. If you presume a .370ish OBP and a .370 SLG, he would be around an average leadoff hitter option. The .370 SLG almost seems like it would undersell Fuld. For his minor league career, he’s had a .407 SLG. Neutralized, it was still .407. Scouting report suggests he has enough pop to be more than a slap the ball threat. Going even further, NL Leadoff slugging was only .402 this past year. Heck, statistically, Fuld has had some poor luck in recent years, although minor league statistical analysis is very inconsistent.
That said, at the end of the day, no one would ask a Fuld type to anchor the middle of the lineup. Furthermore, we’re speaking on hypotheticals.
Riddle me this, though. Let’s take what I consider to be a low line scenario for Fuld with a full complement of AB’s, something like a .260/.350/.370 line. We’re talking basically a slightly below average leadoff hitter line there, but based upon the background on Sam Fuld, it seems fairly reasonable to guess that, with a full complement of AB’s, that he could probably do that.
a) Who do you propose getting for the top of the order that would outperform this? Let’s expand it to middle infielders as well, for now, leaving defensive value aside and focusing solely on offensively value as a top of the order candidate.
b) Let’s assume you find said individual. Names would be great, but we can speak hypothetically as well. Is said individual worth the additional cost in money and/or prospects? I assume that since Al hired you, you are more well-versed in statistical analysis than I am, so I’d be curious for a rationalized argument there.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
mind you
I’m not a Sam Fuld fan. I’ve long been saying that I think the Cubs CF of the future right now Hak-ju Lee or Logan Watkins (well, I don’t know if I’ve brought up Logan Watkins before), with an outside shot of Brett Jackson. Long run, the Fuld types are bench players. But again … let’s look at the entire spectrum: market, value, cost, fit, needs, and so forth. Labeling Sam Fuld as a worst-case scenario, minimum expenditure option as a leadoff hitter seems to be suggesting that you think we can find a leadoff option that is far better than Fuld.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
FWIW, I still find the idea...
…of platooning Fuld and RJ in centerfield and in the leadoff spot an at least feasible concept. Say this Burrell thing goes through – you could platoon Dome and Pat the Bat in right field and give Burrell some spot starts in left to rest Soriano.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a general thought
i’m usually very, very againt multi-platoons on a regular basis … but with the market the way it is, and with the guys we have here that might play a role next year, i am becoming more receptive to the idea for 2010. Long run, heck no. For example, I’d be open to a platoon in CF along with a platoon-ish situation at 2nd, where Baker is the “regular”, but maybe a lefty backup comes in now and again, with Baker covering at other spots (essentially, the DeRosa role).
There’s just very few ideal answers this offseason, so maybe the odd route isn’t the worst idea.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he'll put up those numbers.
I highly doubt he’ll post a .370 OBP and a .370 SLG. His MLE line last season was .227/.283/.313. Saying he’s achieved a .370 OBP at every level doesn’t mean he’ll be able to do it at the MLB level. If he can, I’d be fine with him in a platoon, particularly with his defense. I just don’t think he’s that good of a hitter.
And I was fairly specific. I said “that’s not enough offense,” not “that’s not enough OBP.” You mis-interpreted what I wrote because you assumed it was a counter to your post title, and not the list of players you proposed.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
certainly a fair argument
That said, I’ve found very few prospects whose final MLE lines actually represented what they were able to do in their early years, positive and negative. MLE line are simply one prediction tool, and a very useful one, but the general instability in using minor league statistics still exists (which is also a counter to my own argument).
As for the 2nd part, come on man, use some common sense. I work with kids all the time, and even they would tell you if you respond directly to something as specific as the discussion as DGU and I were having on OBP, that you are typically referencing it. Again, just be clear next time. It’s a bit childish to push the blame on someone else for your own mistake. Perhaps I shouldn’t have used “what?” as the title, but the direct relation you drew from the previous discussion, without being clearer, was inherently flawed. I made no assumptions other than to assume that you had an intent in responding to a post on OBP, which most would assume is a fair response. Again, pushing blame is quite childish for your own mistake in clarity.
As for the 3rd part, I have no idea what list of players I proposed that you are referencing, so I have no idea on how to respond to whatever you are referencing on that one. I only spoke on broad hypotheticals, and the only names I listed above were other Cubs minor league prospects, not in relation to anything dealing with 2010.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
anyhow, i'll leave the rest of it alone
I guess if we want to debate the respective merits of MLE lines, by all means, we can do that. You’d probably wipe the floor with me on that. I’ll leave the other part alone. Just because it’s a message board shouldn’t allow for childishness.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 6:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whatever....
so i wasn’t accurate enough with my language.
It’s really not that big of a deal.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
He’s a great defender and fourth outfielder, plus you could have him pinch run. He also doesn’t look intimidated by anyone when he’s batting, but I don’t think he’s a starter.
by TheGrinch13 on Oct 8, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Matt Holliday - Jason Bay
These guys can hit. If we added them we’d know two things – 1) the offense will be fine and 2) Mr. Ricketts likes to spend money.
The problem with these guys is that they’re LF, RH, and sure to be expensive. They’re also the reason no one is likely to take Soriano this year (if ever), so there’s no point in dreaming about trading Sori and signing one of these guys.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:27 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 7, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
has anyone seriously suggested that trading Soriano is possible?
by elgato on Oct 7, 2009 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just when dreaming.
"Manny Trillo is coming in to pinch run. You know, for a lot of teams, you would pinch run for Manny Trillo." - Harry Caray
by Archie on Oct 7, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so...no :)
"Manny Trillo is coming in to pinch run. You know, for a lot of teams, you would pinch run for Manny Trillo." - Harry Caray
by Archie on Oct 7, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I believe D98 has floated a scenario...
…in which the Cubs could eat a certain portion of Soriano’s salary, making him somewhat tradeable.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 7, 2009 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But why would you want that.
If you eat half his contract and trade him, you’re losing Soriano and saving $8 million a year. Name one player we could get for $8 million a year that would be an upgrade over a healthy Soriano.
by Poloplaya14 on Oct 8, 2009 12:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's an important qualifier in there...
and that qualifier is “healthy.”
I agree… I don’t think it makes sense to eat a large chunk of Soriano’s deal and then deal him. But that sort of move does make sense if you have a high level of certainty that he’s likely to produce at the level he did this season.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 2:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Soriano doesn't get healthy this offseason
I’m not even gonna watch the Cubs this year because they’d be done.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 8, 2009 7:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So Alfonso Soriano alone determines their fate in 2010?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not alone...
but it’s probably the single biggest factor impacting next year’s team.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They would be very hard pressed...
to find a way to compete next season without a healthy Soriano.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe this was D98 premise: That Soriano would continue to decline.
Should D98 happen along, I’m sure he can explain it better.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well I guess it all comes down to whether you think he will continue to decline.
If the answer is yes, than swallowing his contract and moving him is the best idea, but you have to be prepared to look like an idiot if he comes back healthy. I personally believe he’ll bounce back, at least to a certain extent. He had an injury that was presumably the cause of his decline, and he’s bounced back from injuries before. That said, if he has another bad year, we’re probably stuck with him….
by Poloplaya14 on Oct 8, 2009 11:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree - I think he'll have a better season next year.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the Cubs pretty much have to hope Soriano bounces back
it’s not as if they can trade him
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 9, 2009 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would love for Ricketts to make a splash and sign Holliday
But 1. It won’t happen and 2. Holliday in right could be an adventure for a month or so
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holliday is an above-average LF
Does anyone know what his arm is like?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why don't we just put Sori in RF
or move him back to 2b. That seems to take care of several problems. 2b would be a great fit for the lineup, don’t you think?
sarcasm
"Manny Trillo is coming in to pinch run. You know, for a lot of teams, you would pinch run for Manny Trillo." - Harry Caray
by Archie on Oct 7, 2009 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bay's net production is not as good as Holliday's.
Both can hit, but Holliday is worth more, especially if he stays in the NL. Bay is bad-awful defensively, and while I’d take him in a heartbeat, I’d much rather have Holliday.
Metal sharpens metal.
And this guy right here understands and knows what leadership is all about: The coach, the hall of famer......... Dick Butka! George Ryan
by dakoose on Oct 7, 2009 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I lumped them together because I expect they’ll get major deals and we won’t be in the bidding.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holliday would be great...
Bay is probably going to be overpriced because of his horrible fielding. I don’t think we can afford either, though.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 9:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who really knows
what the Cubs can and cannot afford? Getting Holliday would be a great pickup as it would improve the Cubs and hurt the Cards.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 8, 2009 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We don't really know...
but it’s hard to see payroll increasing THAT much in year 1. I hope I’m wrong.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess some assume
that the Cubs will be able to shed some high priced people to clear the financial deck.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 8, 2009 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But how?
Most of their high-priced contracts come with no-trade clauses. Sure they could deal Bradley, but that’s not nearly enough money to sign Holliday.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 8:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
darned if I know
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 9, 2009 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Johnny Damon - Bobby Abreu
Now these guys should be less expensive, are LH, and could fit into our lineup. You can count on OBP from them and might get good SLG, too. They’d probably be just as disappointing to Lou as Bradley and Dome were in the 5-spot, but their base stealing ability would fit at the top of the lineup. The Cubs passed on Abreu last year, possibly because his defense was atrocious in 2008. The defense came back in ‘09 to just below-average, so maybe he’d be on the Cubs’ radar. The problem is that both of these guys require re-adjusting the OF. Getting Damon would mean moving Soriano to RF, and then almost certainly trading Dome for a CF. Abreu could slot in RF, but again you’d have to trade Dome. So, in both cases you have to ask if it’s worth all the moves that would have to be made.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:40 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the Cubs could look elsewhere.
Damon and Abreu may be on the downside. If you could get them for a one-year deal, maybe.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is
that if you wait in the off-season to the point where they’d take a 1 year deal, you won’t have time to move Dome.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I swear Al...
give it up. Every year you say Abreu is done, and every season he goes out and gives someone a .400 OBP and 100 RBI. I wish most Cubs players could be so on the downside.
by Damen Jackson on Oct 7, 2009 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One of these years, he's gonna be right!
I agreed with him that this year’s production out of Abreu was not likely. Being in that Angels lineup certainly didn’t hurt.
by madcow256 on Oct 7, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A two year deal...
would be hard to object to with Abreu.
The question is: does anyone else offer him three?
"Bite my shiny metal ass!" -- Bender Bending Rodriguez
"Life is just one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead."
by The Jade Scorpion on Oct 7, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gut feeling says
both stay with their current squads. Yankees will likely offer arbitration to Damon. Damon lessens the need to fill 2 OF spots this winter for the Yankees, while also securing the top of the order for them. Abreu is too steady offensively for me to think the Angels move on. Now, if both of these guys want to break the bank, either with years or money (I doubt they get say, a 3 year deal), then maybe their respective squads move on.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
im pretty sure i read that the angels are talking with abreu for an extension
Geovany Soto is the new 2008 Derrek Lee
by jesus christos on Oct 8, 2009 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mike Cameron
Now you have a centerfielder who can play center, a run producer, and a five hitter. He shouldn’t be too overpriced either
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 9:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I like Mike Cameron a lot.
He’s an underrated CF who can field well and he hits consistently. He’s not going to wow you on offense, but he gets the job done. He does strike out a lot.
What I’d really like to see the Cubs do is come to an agreement with Cameron where he would play a lot, but not everyday. Then we could add another LH OF bat to balance out the lineup more.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So who could you get to grab 150 PA from him?
Would it be putting either Colvin or Fuld into that slot or another outside person?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd want to have him grab playing time from all the OFs
I think we need strong OF depth to rest and platoon the players we have, and also to cover expected injury recovery time.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sort of like Rocco was in Boston this year then
Is there a list of similar players to that. Starting OF talent but for one reason or another willing to come play fourth OF here? Right now that guy would be Reed Johnson for us, and I would certainly enjoy improving on that.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, you can try and pay for it, which might be worth doing;
or you can wait the market out and see if someone is left that we can get. The benefit in paying an older player like Cameron is that you get someone who fits really well.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There a lot of love...
between him and Lou. If the Cubs are at all interested, that deal gets done quickly.
by Damen Jackson on Oct 7, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Count me on board with getting Cameron for CF, too.
His defense is still strong and he’s acceptable offensively. Fuld could still back up the outfield, pinch run.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 7, 2009 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cameron hits consistently?
Isn’t he one of the streakiest players in the game?
by kanderber on Oct 7, 2009 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant from season to season.
He’s the anti-Bradley.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That may be true...
but I thought I remember hearing a Brewers announcer talking about how Cameron would go on a crazy hot streak then just be really bad for awhile… kind of like Soriano, but not as good.
by kanderber on Oct 7, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That may be.
His defense is a big selling point for me and that shouldn’t go in a slump.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Him and Soriano are similar in their streaks
Cameron strikes out at a rate the might cause some to attempt burning Wrigley, but at the end of the year he is a 4 WAR player.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 7:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not a bad idea
although the idea of Cameron/Soriano hitting 5th/6th in a lineup in some fashion makes me think that the middle of our lineup would be, to say the least, quite streaky.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not for a two-year deal.
He still plays good defense in centerfield and is decent enough with the bat.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 13, 2009 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fontenot ...
is someone I really wanted to suceed, but I think his value has diminished too much. I certainly wouldn’t class him in upside group.
If the assumption is that 2b will go to Baker, or someone new, then as a backup I would much rather have Blanco be the guy. Fontenot is just too limited as only 2b option. Blanco obviously gives you a defensive upgrade as a backup ss and 2b that is far more valuable than Fontenot’s potential on offense.
"The Cubs are due in sixty-two." - #14
by BatCubFan on Oct 7, 2009 10:02 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The reason I include Fontenot in "upside"
is because there’s a reasonable chance he gives us a lot more in 2010 than he did in 2009. That he has upside doesn’t mean he’s likely to hit it or should be given the opportunity.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Should the Cubs be targeting AL players to fill holes?
With the success of AL pitchers coming over to the NL, should the Cubs be targeting position players from the AL to fill holes?
It’s just something that has been sticking with me the last few days, and something I’m curious about – whether or not the correlation of successful pitchers moving from the AL to NL can be attributed to batters moving from the AL to NL.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Trey2317 on Oct 7, 2009 10:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What do you think about some of the trade options?
by thehat34 on Oct 7, 2009 10:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I figured I'd exhaust the free agents first since we have a lot less certainty about who's available, but
as a preview, I think Curtis Granderson is a fabulous option for us. My preference is to see an OF next year that mixes, matches, and gives regular rest to Soriano-Granderson-Cameron-Fukudome.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd love to have Granderson.
The price, I suspect, in terms of players would likely be too high. If not, then sure.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would imagine Cashner or Jay Jackson needs to start that conversation
and one of the top hitters might be needed to continue it.
Still given the issues Vitters is having, I think moving him this offseason is a good idea. Package him, Chris Carpenter, and two lower level guys and I think the Tigers do it.
OT: anybody having some issues with BCB letting you post today?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are server issues throughout SBN. They are working on them.
About Cashner/Jackson — I like Jackson, but if he were a piece of a Granderson deal, I’d do it. Vitters, not so much.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd go somehwat opposite
in that, if it was Vitters, I’d ponder it. I’m still not sure what to make of Vitters, but I’d ponder it. With Jackson, you have a top arm that’s close to ready. Remember the Braves dealing the Tigers Edgar Renteria? I’m not saying Jay Jackson will be as good as Jair Jurrjens, but those types of assets are highly valued (and I still think Jackson’s the best arm in the system) and Granderson isn’t coming off a good enough year for me to want to give up Jay Jackson for him.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Granderson is worth paying to get.
He adds a lot of things we could use – speed, youth, CF defense, LH power – he is the perfect package. Some will be concerned about his down year. Check this article at fangraphs to ease your mind. If Granderson is available, I’d pay what it takes to get him.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well,
I’ve no issue with trading Vitters — although I’m sometimes puzzled with those so enamored with a prospect that they often haven’t even seen play — but I would hope that the Cubs would wait to see what Aramis Ramirez does next off-season first.
For the sake of conversation though, what’s Detroit’s motivation to even entertain a Granderson trade discussion?
by Damen Jackson on Oct 7, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Detroit is expected to see a decline
in season ticket orders. Have big money tied up in old or underperforming players in Bonderman, Willis, Guillen, and Ordonez. Granderson and Verlander will be looking to get paid and the belief is they can’t keep both.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 7, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It may be possible to trade Bradley for Ordonez...
… that would help them clear off some dollars from next year’s payroll.
Perhaps that could be expanded to get both Granderson and Maggs.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That would be a nice deal to make
But one hell of a financial commitment.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes but just for 1 year.
I have been all about Granderson for sometime now. Mags and Dome could platoon right or maybe we could move Mags to somebody else. It all depends on how bad we want to get rid of Bradley.
by Cubsfan Waveland on Oct 7, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I Like Al's idea
Maggs would fit in perfect for the Cubs .. And Granderson in center field .. IMO is one of the better defenders in CF…
by CUBFANINAZ on Oct 13, 2009 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure we could get both.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 14, 2009 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Rickett's...
…could use Monopoly money to pay them, it might work.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 14, 2009 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
reminds me of a funny story
Many years ago, my Canadian cousin goes to New York City for a chess tournament. Between matches he steps outside for a smoke and then ducks into the corner deli for some food. Without thinking he pulls out a Canadian bill to pay for it. Guy behind the counter looks at it, throws it back at my cousin and says something to the effect of “Get this Monopoly money shit outta here”.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 14, 2009 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
♪♫ Oh, Canada! ♪♫
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 15, 2009 9:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not certain that..
this really answers the question, but thanks.
Granderson is modestly priced for the next season or two, and you should still see Verlander under 7 million for 2010. As a GM — especially given that many of those bad deals expire after next season — I start shopping them, even if I have to eat some money, rather than letting the people that the fans pay to see go.
If they go into flat rebuilding mode, I take it all back, but it’s pretty tough so see interest in moving Granderson.
by Damen Jackson on Oct 7, 2009 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the article from the Detroit News
suggesting the possibility. Perhaps a deal of Theriot + Prospects would save them money and help an off-season need.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting article...
… and that was from two weeks ago. If he’s available, he could solve the CF problem. Re-sign Reed Johnson to back up Fukudome in RF, keep Fuld as 5th OF, and you have an outfield.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Almost.
Granderson has severe platoon splits – so you really want to plan to platoon him and Dome; you could do that with RJ and Baker and still have a role for Fuld. But I’d really like to have a strong OF depth. That’s why I’d like to add a guy like Cameron into the mix, too.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The splits are the strange thing.
He appeared to have solved the disparity with his monster year last year, but his numbers against LHP dropped back to ’06 and ’07 levels.
Maybe this creates the opportunity to get him?
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 7, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah -
If the Tigers are disappointed with him – grab him. I’d rather have Upton, but at their prices, Granderson is probably more feasible.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's possible Granderson might hit better with Wrigley as his home park.
He has always hit better away from Detroit. This year he hit .267/.345/.516 on the road; careerwise he has hit .284/.353/.516 on the road. Both sets are significantly better than his numbers in Comerica Park.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
More positives about Granderson.
He’s a Chicago native who has a very strong community presence and has been very active in the community in Detroit. He’d be a real good clubhouse guy.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Those are more reasons I like Granderson.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yikes...
those numbers are crazy good. I’d love to get Granderson but it would cost a LOT to get him.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 10:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Me likey this, too.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 7, 2009 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not really seeing that as evidence the Tigers are interested in moving him...
just that Granderson’s market value has declined. In fact, that would seem to be evidence that they WON’T move him.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm skeptical about his availablity
It’s a columnist but these are her words:
His market value might also be tumbling. If it has, the Tigers have more trouble. They are staring at potentially critical losses during the off-season — in the middle of the infield, and in the bullpen — and trading Granderson, as perilous as it would be, might be the only way to secure two front-line players the team could desperately need in 2009.
Would I consider trading Marmol and Theriot for Granderson? Yes.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, if he was available, I'd love to get him...
I just suspect he won’t be available.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And then who closes? Guzman? Or yet another free agent who will fail?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I'm not thrilled by the idea of trading a cheap Marmol...
It would take that sort of trade or more (though different – I doubt they’re interested in Theriot) to get Granderson though. I don’t think he’s really available anyway, though.
But I agree – Marmol is still a cheap and often dominating arm. In a year or two, I’d trade him. But not yet.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kerry Wood
Cleveland wouldn’t take Bradley back, but maybe they’d help a team move him along in a three-way trade where we helped them by taking on Kerry’s contract.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, supposedly he did stop by Wrigley Field early yesterday morning
Heard that from one of the autograph hounds hanging out by the players parking lot. No idea what Wood would be doing there, though…
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 7, 2009 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably nothing more than...
visiting some old friends.
by kanderber on Oct 7, 2009 6:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He lives in the Chicago area year round.
So, probably back in town for the winter, and as kanderber said, visiting old friends.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 7, 2009 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with this, DGU.
They should work out something to get Kerry Wood back, and they should also sign Mark DeRosa. It’s time to fix the mess that Jim Hendry made, but he won’t do that as he’d be admitting that he was wrong in getting rid of them both.
by TheGrinch13 on Oct 8, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's already he's admitted he was wrong...
in terms of DeRosa. You should give the guy a little more credit.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 8:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't do that
You’d be trading for a very big question mark and opening 2 holes. Much as I am not gung-ho Riot guy, he was capable enough and if he’s used where he’s best suited, as a 8th hitter, I’m fine with that for another year and waiting on Starlin Castro. Giving up Marmol would mean huge issues for the pen. I wouldn’t trade Marmol straight up for Granderson right now. It isn’t a case of who’s better necessarily, but a case where I don’t think the values work.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
also
I think they are expecting Zumaya to bounce back and looking, like we are, to add a veteran presence or two in the pen to bridge to Joel.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?
You wouldn’t trade Marmol for Granderson, straight-up? Really?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
Getting this out of the way first – I know the WAR’s and the dollar value of the guys this past year easily leans toward Granderson.
a) Trades are as much about value as it is about talent, and Granderson’s value is down.
b) His defense, once a strength from 2006-2007, has slipped. He was bad, according to UZR, in 2008, and he was average this past year, but no where close to his heyday. He’s aging, and has been banged up.
c) What is he offensively? Sure, there was a little bad luck this year, but for his career, he’s basically been what I call a plus-platoon guy. A guy who is killer against righties, but has always struggled against lefties, but you can get away with that.
d) What role does he fit? He’s not really a top of the order bat, and is he protection enough for Lee/Ramirez? He’s a big cut, high K guy that will take some walks. Can he make the transition quick enough to the NL to not go through lapses?
e) I expect the goal for this offseason is to try to be competitive in 2010, whether one agrees with that or not. The youth movement likely won’t begin until 2011 at earliest. In saying that, dealing Marmol for a question mark in Granderson would also force you to add 2 late inning pen arms, if not more, and at least 1 guy with closing experience. The market’s alright, and there might be some trade options (Matt Capps comes to mind), but it’ll be costly.
This isn’t to say Granderson’s a bad player. This isn’t to say Marmol is more valuable than Granderson. This is simply to say, for me, the totality of the situation makes me question the idea of Marmol for Granderson due to where the team is right now, along with some questions I have on Granderson.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 9:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Granderson in a platoon with a strong RH option (in either CF or RF)
can most definitely backup Lee Ramirez if a healthy and productive Soto and/or Soriano stand behind Granderson, too. Plus, I’d love how Granderson and Soriano 5-6 could let us play small ball at the bottom of the order.
Additionally, my questions about Marmol exceed my question about Granderson. There has to be a 15% chance, at least, that Marmol never has a productive season again. Maybe my number is off, and yes, there’s that chance with every player, but Marmol seems especially liable to go bust.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 8:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hey
since you did this thread, maybe you want to do a 2010 pen picture as well. no real need for a 2010 rotation picture, as it’s likely to be one opening to look at and it can be discussed elsewhere, and the bench look is somewhat covered here.
As for Granderson/Marmol, well, i’ve really got nothing new to add that wouldn’t repeat the above. Could Marmol bust? Without a doubt, but in regards to 2010, what’s the backup plan on the pen? Angel Guzman got by a bit on smoke and mirrors, and asking John Grabow to set up is eh. Do we rush a kid, sign a vet? As for Granderson, I can’t help but be a tad concerned, and as such, makes me question the value of such a deal (not the value of the players). The first thing people will route to is the drop in the home splits, but is it simply a case of a guy pressing at home? Seems a bit odd to even type that, but he was a solid performer at home in previous years. I remember looking at numbers for Khalil Greene and Jeremy Hermida in recent years, and thinking, hey, the splits show some positive information. Certainly, the splits are something to lean on, but I’d have to dig at the pitch data to know how concerned I should be, along with the chase/aggressiveness data (can’t think of the term associated with that right now).
Anyhow, this might be a moot point, because while the Tigers system is weak, they can fill 2nd base with Sizemore, Magglio showed some improvement down the stretch, and the rotation has a solid 1-3 and may have the options to fill out the back end. That means that their only need may be to resign either Lyon (I wanted him last year over Gregg) or Rodney, maybe add another veteran arm, and hope Zumaya rebounds. Short of it is, their need to fill other positions may not be there, and if it isn’t, I think they’ll hold onto Granderson.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 8:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wanted Lyon over Gregg too
It still boggles my mind that Hendry traded for a worse pitcher than one who got a one year deal as a free agent.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 9:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with DGU.
Given Marmol’s history of control problems, I think if you can get value back for him in a trade this off-season, you do it. Especially if that value is as high as Granderson.
Simply put, Granderson is worth more than Marmol. Getting a player of his talent level is something you simply cannot do on the FA market. If you spent what a player of his caliber should make, you would have a shot at signing a couple of quality late-innings relievers.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't get me wrong, I don't thing Detroit is going to move
him just to save money for 2010. He’s not the cheapest, but manageable due 5.5 for 2010, 8.25 for 2011, 10 for 2012 and a 13 club option for 2013. I think they will entertain offers for him while he has max value.
Granderson’s 2009 fell short of expectations and I doubt the Tigers want to roll the dice that 09 was an abberation. Dombrowski has stated getting Verlander signed long term is the offseason priority and he’s the same goof who established the Tiger’s precedent for arb eligible pitchers with Bonderman and Willis. As Verlander is not comparable with those two, how much is needed to get him locked down?
The Tigers don’t was to rebuild, but will probably need to use blue chips like Granderson to help cycle albatross contracts to pare salary without rebuilding.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 7, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same author repeats the rumor/speculation
here
Key quote:
A blue-chip relief pitcher and middle infielder, perhaps, with maybe a replacement-level center fielder as part of a possible two-player acquisition for Detroit.
If there is one player who could be overpaid for in a trade, it’s quite possibly Granderson
So, Marmol, Theriot, and Fuld. I’m on board.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmmm....
Well, we’d be sacrificing our closer, which would drive the mainstream media nuts. But I would strongly consider this deal, too. What would you do at shortstop then? Work another trade? Roll with Blanco?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here are the FA SS's, via MLBTR:
Orlando Cabrera (35)
Alex Cora (34)
Craig Counsell (39)
Bobby Crosby (30)
Adam Everett (33)
Chris Gomez (39)
Alex Gonzalez (32) – $6MM mutual option with a $500K buyout
Khalil Greene (30)
Jerry Hairston Jr. (34)
John McDonald (35)
Marco Scutaro (34)
Miguel Tejada (36)
Omar Vizquel (43)
Jack Wilson (32) – $8.4MM club option with a $600K buyout
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jack Wilson might be available.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
oddly enough, I read somewhere that Pittsburgh ownership is making noises...
…about raising payroll. Well, that part isn’t odd, but Jack Wilson was specifically mentioned as someone they’d like to bring back. That strikes me as very odd.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 9, 2009 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly, I would start Andres Blanco...
…before giving a contract to Jack Wilson. Neither can hit but Blanco is younger, cheaper and I’d venture to guess just as good defensively.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a bit unlikely unless
Jack Zduriencik can land a better shortstop (JJ Hardy does come to mind). Short of it is, all indications from Mariners rumors/spec is that Wilson was brought in as much for 2010 as it was for 2009.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I've seen that list...
…and none of those names do much for me.
Historically, Cabrera is good defensively but I understand he wants to stay in Minnesota seeing as how he’s done so well there. And what exactly happened to him this year? His 2009 UZR numbers between Oakland and Minnesota are awful and in stark contrast to those he put up in previous seasons.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Counsell went to ND, and he's left-handed, so....
just kidding
It’s not a pretty list, unless you’re shopping for defense.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
money
clearing money from a guy who slipped badly this year, allowing them to fill other holes.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
expanding on that
their system is a bit lacking, and unless they can dump some contracts, they can’t address all their needs. Some of their contracts, like some of ours, probably can’t be moved. Granderson’s an asset with some value to him that would save some money and potentially land key pieces.
In saying that, Dombrowski’s latest comments make me doubt a Granderson trade. He suggests that Zumaya will be back to form, meaning a cheap veteran setup arm may be their main pen goal, and that Sizemore is ready, which could fill 2nd for them. I don’t think they move Granderson unless the deal makes a ton of sense for them.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would we think Granderson will be available?
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
guess we don't know till we know
but it’s been heavily rumored/spec’d that they will ponder dealing him.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with DGU
GRANDERSON would be a perfect fit ..
by CUBFANINAZ on Oct 12, 2009 7:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes - seems to be server/traffic issues
it either takes a really long time to post or I get the “try again” message.
But look on the bright side – now you know what it feels like to play behind Steve Trachsel… ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 7, 2009 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rick Ankiel - Randy Winn
Ankiel, Winn, and Dome appear to be about equal in CF defense. Ankiel and Winn also fell off the cliff offensively. Both are guys the Cubs could look at for limited roles if their scouts saw something – which is to say that if we heard the Cubs were interested, I’d be interested, but I wouldn’t campaign for either of them.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 10:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ankiel is an interesting case
I feel like he sells out his swing for power, but he might fit the description of the Rocco-type guy I mentioned above. If he is your fourth outfielder you could do way worse. Same with Winn, though not the power comment.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 7, 2009 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad to hear your perspective on Ankiel.
It wouldn’t surprise me if he’s done. I do have more faith in Winn being able to bounce back, but he was pretty bad this year, too.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 8:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Winn is a lot better of a defender than Ankiel
Ankiel is maybe average in a corner, and very bad in center. Of course Ankiel is probably a good bounce back candidate statistically, but watching him play it’s hard to see it.
by vivaelpujols on Oct 9, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So, we've mostly exhausted the free agents.
And there aren’t any perfect matches. Of course, our last two LH OF free agents have looked like pretty good matches and haven’t been what we hoped for. We already know that Jim Hendry has to do some subtracting, too, before he can add, so it’s tough to plan an off-season with 3 major trades. It’s not impossible, but how do you trade away a RF, trade for a CF, and trade for a middle IF, being sure to get what you want – and we’re just talking about the offense here.
So, a baseline free-agent only lineup could look like this:
2B Lopez/Hudson
RF Dome
1B DLee
3B Ramirez
LF Soriano
CF Cameron
C Soto
SS Theriot
As we move into talking about trades, I’ll be thinking about comparing to that lineup.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 12:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Rays
The Rays have a number of extra players at positions where we have need. They’ve been rumored to be up for considering trading one of Carl Crawford or B.J. Upton. Additionally, they’ve got an overstock of middle infielders. I’ll pencil in a 2010 IF of Ben Zobrist at 2B and Jason Bartlett at SS with Sean Rodriguez and Willy Aybar backing up. That leaves LH SS prospect Reid Brignac someone Hendry could ask about, although Tampa could easily leave Brignac in the minors. We’d have to offer something they want. What they want is a C. This is where puzzle pieces start to move. If we traded them Soto, we could ask for Dioner Navarro as part of the return. Navarro’s a switch-hitter, who’s had good years in 2005 and 2008, but really bad years in 2007 and 2009. There are also some possibilities for catcher on the free agent market. The Cubs could do worse than letting Gregg Zaun and Koyie Hill split time.
The real prize here, though, would be to get Upton – a CF who should be able to get on-base and hit for power if he can overcome his rough 2009. In other words, as a lead-off hitter in his mid-twenties, he could be Alfonso Soriano, without the negatives. If he’s available, I’d check the medical records, and if they don’t alarm me, he’d be my top off-season priority.
Others like Carl Crawford, but I don’t think he fits that well. He’d be moved to CF for us from LF which he’s played the majority of his career. His OBP for a lead-off man isn’t that good. I think he’s overrated and overrated enough that the trade cost would make him cost too much in trade to be worth it on a one year deal.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 12:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Wow, Upton's numbers read like
they were stolen from Granderson. Both have sub .200 BA versus LHP for 2009. Upton, had a better 2007 and both could hit LHP in 2008.
The best part of Upton is he only has 2.126 years of service time. My only question on your analysis is what makes you think Upton could succeed as a lead off hitter. His career BA is .190 with a OBP of .280 in the first inning and .248/.320 as a leadoff hitter. His numbers are only marginally better in the #9, AL leadoff wraparound spot, at .264/.330. He seems to thrive in the 2/3/4/5. His first batter of the game/lead off the inning numbers are well below career averages.
I like BJ Upton as a CF option, but don’t believe he solves any leadoff questions. In fact, his leadoff ability may be just like the Fonz.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 7, 2009 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting points
My take on Upton as a leadoff hitter was that he put up OBPs in the .380s two years running before ‘09. But I don’t have a problem batting him 2nd behind Dome if he needs to see the pitcher first.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
reid brignac
I would love to see the cubs inquire about him. LH SS with power, would be perfect for the cubs to slot in at the bottom of their order with hopes he could produce and move up. Im guessing it would take a pretty strong return to get him though, and I don’t see the Cubs wanting to sell low on somebody like Soto. Still, I hope Hendry inquires and sees if there is a match.
by zambrosa on Oct 7, 2009 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Brignac would fit perfectly at the bottom of our order to develop.
And, yeah, he’d take a strong offer to get.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't be surprised
if Zobrist moves to the OF with Brignac taking over 2nd. Ben Z can play CF, although he’s better suited for a corner role.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
as for trading for upton
I’d be game for that. Not sure where he would fit, but the talent level is enough to take the risk, imo. With their needs and what the Cubs need, I don’t see it coming together.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LH hitting CF with upside?
is this what we’re looking for?
I believe he can be found in the corpse of Aaron Heilman
I’m still bitter.
by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 7, 2009 3:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, let's ask that -
how realistic is it to trade back for Pie? He’d fit with us and Baltimore doesn’t really have room for him with Reimold hitting. What do you think he would cost?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
its not plausible
Pineilla would refuse to play him again instead opting for Reed Johnson
if I was Hendry and saw what Pineilla thought of Pie, there’s no way I could give up ANYTHING of value for him, knowing my manager would essentially play with a 24 man roster
by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 7, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
which by the way
is one of the same reasons I don’t get the Granderson ideas
If we acquired Granderson isn’t anyone else afraid that Lou will start to tinker with Granderson’s approach and ask him to do things he’s never done well before (bunt, make more contact, etc)
Granderson’s approach is nearly identical to Pie’s. They’re early count fastball hitters who can hit mistake breaking balls
by DartmouthCubsFan on Oct 7, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You'd have to hope that Granderson's track record of success
and Hendry having seen it happen once would keep it from happening again.
I also think Lou can learn from his own mistakes. I wonder, though, if he thinks he made a mistake with Pie.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's the difference
Granderson’s approach has been successful at the major league level. We can argue all day about Pie’s potential, but in the short time he spent with the cubs his approach wasn’t.
by shoemile on Oct 7, 2009 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed...
Lou doesn’t tinker with the guys who’ve proven themselves. He tinkers with the young guys or guys who have prolonged slumps (like Bradley and Fukudome). If the guy has a history of hitting and hits within a reasonable amount of time, Piniella leaves him alone.
The problem (if it is actually a problem – there will always be debate there) with Pie was that Piniella didn’t show patience. That was because Pie had no track record. He gave a much longer leash to Bradley before intervening, and he’d do the same for Granderson.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They also have...
Luke Scott, who is now in his arbitration years.
Between Pie, Reimold, and Jones their OF is set for a long time. They play Scott at 1st and also have Ty Wigginton as their DH. Plus, they have a rich recent history of dealing with the Cubs, particularly since McPhail took over there.
A deal of Bradley, Fox, and cash for Scott and Wigginton may make sense for all involved. The O’s play Fox at 1st and Bradley at DH, and the Cubs upgrade RF and get a solid utility player.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 10:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That trade does make sense.
I’d be on board for that move. Depending on how much money on Bradley’s deal the Cubs ate, it could really save the Orioles some money, too.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Trey2317 on Oct 8, 2009 8:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would have to be a lot of cash...
Breaking down that deal and looking at it from O’s perspective – I’d rather have Wigginton than Fox, wouldn’t you? So that tells me Bradley ought to outweigh Scott in value. Well, Bradley without the ‘tude is probably a lot better than Scott and being a DH minimizes the health risk, but how you gonna guarantee that MB loses the attitude? You can’t. If I’m MacPhail, do I take that risk?
Their pitching sucks but there’s finally a glimmer of hope with some of their young position players – I’d much rather nurture that with guys like Scott and Wiggy than take my chances with Bradley.
Unless of course, like I said – there’s a lot of money involved. Money I can put towards improving other parts of the team.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 8:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you
I know what the Cubs are saying about Bradley and how many teams are interested. I just have a sense that it is going to be harder to trade him than the Cubs are letting on. When you eliminate the teams where he has already burned bridges plus the teams that want no part of him, you don’t get many options. I still think the only way they move him is for a bad contract in return. Hendry is not going to send Bradley, a few million and a prospect and get much back in return.
by rlpete on Oct 8, 2009 8:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There have already been teams inquiring after Bradley.
I don’t think it will be that hard to deal him — especially to a team that has contracts it wants to dump.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 8, 2009 9:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then we basically agree
It will likely involve a bad contract in return. Thinking that Bradley and a few parts/money might turn into something like BJ Upton as has been mentioned is wishful thinking to me. Teams know that Hendry is desperate to move Bradley, they will try and take advantage of that.
by rlpete on Oct 8, 2009 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
At the same time....
… there’s always a team that thinks, “We can fix that.” They’re never right, but they always think so. Some team will take a chance on Bradley if they can dump someone else’s contract — and that player might have a chance to help the Cubs, just as Karros and Grudzielanek did in 2003.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 8, 2009 9:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't disagree
They might get someone who can help but the contract might not be pretty. Someone like Rowand would help but that is a lot to eat.
My comment is more to the point of thinking the Cubs can get out of Bradley’s deal pain-free. I don’t think a few million and a marginal prospect will get them out of it. Sending a lot of money or assuming a lot of contract is what I think will be needed to get it done.
by rlpete on Oct 8, 2009 9:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't say...
“never” right. Maybe in Bradley’s case, but not all together.
by Kansas25 on Oct 8, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I have no doubt he's tradeable
but as you’ve pointed out – it’ll likely be to a team that wants to dump a bad contract of their own or a team that thinks “we can fix that”.
I think we’ve covered the “bad contracts” ad nauseum here and I don’t see any of those on the Orioles. And MacPhail and Trembley don’t strike me as the Milton-whisperers type that would be willing to take on that project.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't get too excited...
…because I think the initial inquiries are because teams know the Cubs are desperate to move him and they are hoping to pick up Bradley with the Cubs picking up most of the tab.
When it comes down to actually dealing him, the deal probably won’t be the best for the Cubs, because they are in a very weak negotiating position on this one.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 8, 2009 10:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
and the Cubs are in a difficult position in terms of gauging the free agent market. If you don’t rush to trade Bradley and then Bay or Holliday sign a fat contract for 5 years, then Bradley’s 2 years will suddenly look like a great way to try and get Bay-type production for much less commitment.
But if those guys hold out and the market is slow like last year and the Cubs let this drag on and team after team says, “No, we’re not looking to take on Bradley,” their negotiating power will weaken. It will take foresight and a deft hand to pull off a Hundley-type trade, but it’s a good sign what we’re hearing so far. So long as the multiple team story has legs, the Cubs have some negotiating power.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But does the multiple team story have legs?
I know we’d like to think that and I respect Hendry’s integrity, but what else is he gonna say? The only other GM I’ve heard that said he’d be interested in Bradley just got fired (Towers). I know the Texas manager said he’d have no problems with bringing him back but I’m pretty sure his GM (Daniels?) squashed that one early.
I realize nobody is going to say a whole lot due to tampering issues but I also think we should take Hendry’s comments about multiple teams with a huge grain of salt as well. I mean, Boras does that every time he’s talking up one of his guys but do you ever believe him?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
... or
you trade him to a team where you pay his salary.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look at it this way...
They go from having Scott at 1B to having Fox there. That’s roughly a lateral move. Then they go from having Wigginton at DH to having Bradley there. That’s a big upgrade. They lose Wigginton’s versatility, but the Cubs could afford to throw Fontenot into the deal. He’s not really useful to the Cubs — particularly if they acquire Wigginton — and although he slumped at the plate he’s still a very good defensive player. The O’s could make him their utility guy.
Also, Wigginton had a down year last season and his value depends in part on how heavily the O’s and other teams weigh recent seasons.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some good discussion here
but my question is why would the O’s do this? First, they don’t have money issues as MacPhail has cleared lots of junk off the roster. Secondly, they are a very young team. That is just the kind of team I’d want to keep Bradley away from. I really can’t see them agreeing to take Bradley just to get a chance at Jake Fox. There is also a good chance that Wiggington starts the season in the 3rd base mix as Mora is gone. If the Cubs want Scott or Wiggington I expect they could one of them but not for Bradley.
The O’s have a long uphill climb in that division but they have a lot of promise. I’d be much more interested in some solid veteran leadership if I was MacPhail.
by rlpete on Oct 8, 2009 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think an additional factor is that McPhail might not want to take one more of Hendry's throwaways.
Pie worked out, but Sosa, Patterson, and Hill weren’t worth it for them.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's tough to say that...
those guys didn’t pan out, but they didn’t give up a ton for any of them. Fontenot was perhaps the best of the bunch, and he wouldn’t have had a role in BAL anyways.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 8:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lateral?
I’m taking a “wait on more AB’s from Fox” approach for now. Scott’s developed into a solid player and there’s a lot we don’t know about Fox’s future yet.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Jake seemed to be struggling quite a bit...
…to hit breaking stuff toward the end of the season. He looked particularly lost against Doug Davis. Just my decidedly non-professional opinion.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He looked clueless
against Matt Cain’s power stuff, especially high heat out in SF.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 8, 2009 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hm, interesting idea - and a fresh one at that.
Scott would definitely bring more pop to right field, though we’d be sacrificing OBP. What would you do in centerfield, though? Stick with Kosuke and Reed Johnson? And do the Cubs really have a need for Wiggington? He’s essentially a backup third baseman, no? We already have that in Jeff Baker.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wiggy is a little more than that. Versatility-wise he's like DeRosa. 3B, 2B, 1B and the corner OFs.
Heck, he even played a few games at SS this year.
Yes, we already have that in Baker – at least the 2B and 3B part. But I think Wiggy is a little more proven in the outfield than Baker. Both seem to be great clubhouse guys.
I guess it would depend on what the Cubs do with Baker – if they want to give him 2B full time, then you’d want a super-sub type like Wiggy.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think
Scott is expected to take a regular role, and they might not want Bradley with all the youngsters.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Angels
The Angels have a ton of great middle infield options – Howie Kendrick, Erick Aybar, Maicer Izturis, and Brandon Wood. I’d be glad to snag any one of those guys. Aybar and Izturis are switch-hitting SSs with good defense – if the Cubs could get one, they should. Howie Kendrick is strictly a 2B and shouldn’t be available. Brandon Wood has been tearing up AAA pitching for a while – he’s a RH SS with power, but hasn’t been able to hit over .200 in the limited but multiple ML opportunities he’s been given.
So, what would they want? Well, they’ve got some prime pieces eligible for free agency in Vlad, Abreu, Figgins, and Lackey. Corner OF and DH will be open, but I think it’s too much to hope that Jake Fox could even be half the price of one of these infielders. Maybe Fox and some quality pitching could entice them. Any one else with other ideas?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 3:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Not sure I see much there either
First off, the Angels just don’t trade much. I expect they will be the front-runner to resign Abreu. He has done a good job and they seem to like him. They’ll spend the money for him. Vlad is another question. If they do plan to resign him I don’t see much interest in Fox (not that they would in any case) as Vlad needs the DH spot. The thing about Guerrero is that his options will be limited. He has to stay in the AL so how many teams will pay him a good salary? The White Sox will have money but Guerrero would make them too RH. I wouldn’t be surprised if he returns to the Angels on a short contract.
One thing they need are young outfielders. Most of theirs are getting old and they don’t have any ready prospects. The Cubs don’t match up there. The Angels might have some interest in young pitching but not sure who might be available of their infielders.
by rlpete on Oct 7, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, the Angels aren't big on the trades...
And I agree – they don’t match up particularly well with us in terms of trades.
If they let Figgins walk, then they’ll probably go with Wood at 3B and let Izturis back up 2B, SS, and 3B. If they resign Figgins, then they’ll have to trade one of Aybar/Izturis/Wood.
Of the three, I think Izturis or Wood would be the ones traded. Izturis wouldn’t cost too much, but I don’t think he’s really worth too much either. Not much different than Theriot really, and he’s more expensive. Wood would be interesting, but you run into the same concerns re: Piniella as we saw with Pie. It’d be a big roll of the dice.
And that, again, assumes the Angels would be even willing to trade Wood. They’ve REALLY had a tendency to avoid trading prospects.
by SouthernCub on Oct 7, 2009 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Izturis better than Theriot at every skill.
Plus he’s a switch-hitter and while I think the Cubs overdid the LH thing, I do think lineup balance is worth attaining.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you overvalue Izturis a bit...
Yes, Itzuris has slightly more power than Theriot (though not enough to be worth anything). But he has slightly less speed and similar BB and K rates. Fangraphs has them with virtually identical wOBA for their careers (though Izturis was way better this year than Theriot).
If all you are saying is that Izturis is a slightly better player than Theriot, then I agree. He is a bit better than Theriot overall. But I don’t think he’s a big enough upgrade to warrant trading for him and paying him more money than we’d pay Theriot.
If we’re going to dump Theriot, I want it to be for a substantial upgrade. There’s a very reasonable probability that Theriot will outperform Izturis, and he’ll do it at a reduced price.
I’m not sure that this is the offseason to try to upgrade at SS. However, next season, when Theriot’s salary goes up even further and there are perhaps more options available, I’d be all about it. But I think that SS is lower on the list of needs to address this offseason, and I don’t think Izturis is a good solution.
by SouthernCub on Oct 8, 2009 7:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maicer v. Ryan
On their careers, Izturis has hit .278/.343/.393 in Anaheim, a tough park for hitters. That includes a bad 2008, that I see as an outlier because of injuries. He’s also a 5.5 UZR career SS. He also hits RHP better than LHP. Theriot has hit .288/.356/.369 in Chicago, a good park for hitters. That includes a career year in 2008, that I see as an outlier. He’s a 3.6 UZR career SS. He also hits LHP much better than RHP.
So, I’ll stand by what I’ve said as well as suggesting that a platoon makes their combined work an even stronger upgrade. Really, what I’d like to see is the Cubs keeping their current crop of 2B and adding Izturis, who can play every IF position. That way, if Fontenot outplays Theriot, you can play Izturis at SS and if Theriot keeps outplaying Fontenot and Baker, Izturis can play 2B. I prefer this scenario a lot to keeping nothing more than Theriot and Blancoo as SS options and putting all our upgrade chips into 2B.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 7:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I forgot to add
that for me, a big problem with Theriot is that he doesn’t fit. He’s not a 1-2 hitter and as it stands now, we have some upside options who can play 2B, but who can’t be counted on to bat 1-2. You’re right that we have bigger fish to fry than fixing SS this year, but there’s a lot more upside to a strategy that fixes SS than one that pays for an established 2B.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 8:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
somewhat random topic drift... but why is Wrigley considered a good park for hitters?
especially scrappy slappy hitters like Theriot?
Shouldn’t be the wind as I think it’s been proven the “whole wind blowing out all the time” thing is more a myth than anything.
I think the dimensions are smaller than most parks, especially in the power alleys, but for non-power scrappy hitters, wouldn’t less ground to cover by the outfielders make it more difficult for the dinky hits to drop in?
Less foul territory than other parks? Ok, I can see that being a positive if true. But what else? Is it the day games? the grass? the kind, gracious and oh so polite bleacher fans? ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 9:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are a number of factors that come into play for park effects.
For example, I believe the batters’ eye and visibility in AZ is supposed to be supreme. Foul ground dimension is one thing, as you said. Grass length can be another effect, one we used to hear more about at Wrigley than we do today. Here’s an older article from THT.
Anyway, I think you’re right to raise the question of how much a park effect helps or hurts an extreme one-dimension hitter like Theriot, although it does come into play for this past year since Theriot tried to expand his dimensions.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 11:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fox might not fit there
With Morales development at first, and the likelihood that at least 1 older OF (Abreu) will be there, and maybe 2 (Vlad).
That said, a guy like Izturis wouldn’t cost that much and the two clubs could likely find a fit if the Cubs wanted to go down that route. As for the rest, I’m less inclined to think that they’d deal Kendrick/Aybar/Wood now unless they got a really sweet deal.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd heard something to the effect that they might trade Aybar
but I can’t remember where and I don’t think it was recent.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Braves
The Braves have a few options we might be able to entice them to trade. Take a look at Kelly Johnson’s monthly splits - he had a crazy season. The Braves seem to prefer other options and I wonder if a Fox-Johnson deal could work.
Last year Yunel Escobar was on the block; he’s a good SS and top-of-the-order hitter, but one who has character issues – I’m guessing we don’t want to go down that road again. And even if we did, I’m not sure he’s still available.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 4:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Will Z waive his NTC?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 7:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
NO
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 7, 2009 7:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd do that deal in a second...
The Braves, however, would hang up the phone immediately.
by kanderber on Oct 7, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doubtful.
Lowe underperformed quite a bit this year, and just signed a 4 yr/60 mil deal that I would not be surprised if the Braves wanted to get away from.
by Kansas25 on Oct 7, 2009 10:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the Braves need offense and should be going for it
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 7:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Braves are playing musical chairs with their starting pitching
- They have two excellent low-cost options in Jurriens and Hanson – they’re not going anywhere.
- Small sample size alert, but Hudson put up good numbers in his post-rehab stint at the end of the year – plus team has good history with him. Club has $12M option for 2010 or $1M buyout.
- I’m pretty sure they like Kenshin Kawakami – his numbers were decent and his salary ($6-7M) is reasonable.
- Vazquez just had a monster year and signed thru next year at $11.5M.
- And then there’s Lowe (4yr/$60M thru 2012).
So that’s 6 starters for 5 spots – and that’s not even counting who they might invite to ST or could pick up off the scrap heap for the 5th spot.
I dug around Atlanta media a bit earlier this year and talk was while they might want to get out from under Lowe’s deal (especially with Hudson coming back strong), they would not be adverse to dealing Vazquez, thinking the return could be a lot better on Javy than Derek.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
My trade proposal isn’t exactly far off. We wouldn’t need to eat MB’s salary…but….we would need to take on Lowe’s.
I think the main deterrent for the Braves is that they usually shy away from strong and disruptive personalities.
by Kansas25 on Oct 8, 2009 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
side note
they did bring Sheffield in before … but overall, I doubt they go the MB route, with Heyward perhaps close to ready.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would the Cubs want more starting pitching
Especially a highly paid, not as good as he used to be veteran?
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 8, 2009 7:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can never have too much starting pitching
Just ask the Red Sox this year
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 8, 2009 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's an excellent question...
especially considering the Cubs are apparently not going to offer Harden arbitration. If you want more SP, you try to go with the relatively inexpensive in-house option first.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Easy.
1) They want the best deal possible for MB. I don’t think there are any qualifiers to that assumption.
2) There’s a good chance Harden won’t be on the 09 roster.
3) If you buy any of the “trade Z” talk, then this would open the doors.
4) Starting pitching depth is always essential, especially given that Wells is no sure thing YET, and the entire pitching staff has faced injury problems in the last 2 years.
by Kansas25 on Oct 8, 2009 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Escobar/Johnson
not sure Escobar was ever really available unless it was a blockbuster, Jake Peavy deal. As for Johnson, I don’t see a huge difference between him and Fontenot, at least, not enough to make a deal.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Brewers
Obviously this would be a challenge being in-division, but J.J. Hardy is someone I would go after. See this article. The Brewers are looking for starting pitching and I’d trade Sean Marshall for Hardy. And if we could get them to take Aaron Miles, somehow…
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 4:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hmmmm....
Well, I’ve always been a Sean Marshall fan, but I think I might make that deal, too. It would be a gamble given J.J.’s struggles at the plate this year, but Hardy is a true-blue shortstop whereas I think Theriot is more of a natural second baseman who has overachieved at the position. I wonder whether Marshall would be enough, though.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I were the Brewers, I'd make that deal
They’ve been looking to move Hardy for a long time to make room for their wunderkid who I can’t remember at the moment (Escobar?) but frankly they’ve been pretty favrish about it. First they say they will, then they ask for too much, then they pull him back, etc. etc.
Given the state of their pitching staff, yeah I’d take Marshall if I were them. But first I’d make the rounds again and see if I could do better than Marshall. If not, then division foe be damned – I’d pull the trigger and move on.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is actually one deal
that really makes sense to me for both teams. Hardy seems odd man out in Milwaukee and they need pitching. The Cubs could afford to move Marshall especially if they resign Grabow.
Intradivision is tough though.
by rlpete on Oct 8, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, as much as I've rooted for Sean over the last few years...
…I still don’t see him going much higher than a middle-of-the-rotation starter at best, so I don’t think he’d hurt the Cubs too much. Plus now that the Cubs have Da Gorz on board, Marshall becomes a little more expendable. Both of them seem like guys who can start, go long, pitch out of the pen, whatever. If the Brewers want a little more, perhaps the Cubs could throw in a Triple A arm – Mitch Atkins, maybe? (Not sure why I’m suggesting him – the name just flew into my head.)
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
They have enough arms that could fill the end of the rotation role that Marshall would fill. Hardy’s value is down, and they won’t get enough value in return, in all likelihood, but … not sure why you think the Brewers should make the deal for Marshall, who I like.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I realize ERA is not the best of indicators of a pitchers' value...
…but when 5.22, 5.29, 6.36, and 6.38 are the ERAs of 4/5ths of your starting rotation, I gotta believe Marshall would be an improvement on at least one of those.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 4:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sure, he might be
but is that enough value for a shortstop? We’re talking about an end of the rotation arm for a guy who could still be one of the better shortstops out there, and arguably, one of the better shortstop options that might be potentially available this offseason. Also, they have some end of the rotation options in the minors.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What would you offer for Hardy?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, if the Brewers all of sudden decided to trade Hardy, I might have agreed with you...
…but they’ve been dangling him for quite some time now – that tells me that they’re down on him for some reason. They just haven’t shat or got off the pot yet.
And again, one team’s end-of-the-rotation arm could very well be another team’s middle-of-the-rotation guy.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
They didn’t really shop Hardy during the year, IIRC.
Look, if they’d take Marshall for Hardy, I’d do it in a heartbeat. And furthermore, they might. I’m just saying that I don’t think that they would, I don’t think it makes much sense for them to, and that I think they could likely find better. The thing is, while I like Marshall, most systems have Marshall like arms, and they have a lefty in the upper level that profiles similarly. Furthermore, they need more solid starters than anything, and Marshall, due to how the Cubs used him, hasn’t really had the chance to show that.
To answer DGU above, for the right price, I’d be curious on any guy. The SS situation right now, though, in the organization, makes me lean against selling out hard for Hardy, which we’d likely have to go to convince Melvin to make a deal. Theriot’s passable enough for another year as an end of the lineup guy, with Castro close enough.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 7:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm concerned Theriot never gets his OBP over .350 again.
Sell high.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 8:11 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
ideally
sure i’d love to address shortstop. but with the main offensive needs being protection in the middle and a top of the order bat, i’m not real sure hardy is enough to go into the season with as an upgrade from last year, and as such, i wonder if that means we’d still have to fill 2 offensive holes.
I’m not big on Theriot and I like Hardy. I’m just not sure the timing is right for us to make the move. But if a good deal comes, I’m game.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 8:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
High is relative
I wouldn’t expect there is much of a market for Theriot. No team would view him as anything but a stopgap.
by rlpete on Oct 9, 2009 9:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
But he’s cultivated his image, is only one season removed from a .380 OBP, and is cost-controlled.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But he's a relatively inexpensive, above-average player.
Those types of guys have value, and his will likely never be higher.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree...
…and I think you have seen the absolute best you will out of Theriot.
He has also floated by without getting too overly exposed at SS, but I have a feeling that won’t last forever.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Oct 9, 2009 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure
that would be enough. Even off a down year, and with Alcides, JJ should have value due to position. Also, they are rumored to be willing to shop Mat Gamel, believing Casey McGehee can man third long term (I don’t buy it, nothing personal against Casey). Shopping Gamel could net them a much needed starter, and if they can shore the pen up again, along with a healthy Weeks, they could be dangerous in 2010.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Mets
In 2008, Luis Castillo had a bad year with the bat and glove. It was clear the Mets wanted to trade him, but why would anyone bite while Orlando Hudson was hanging around without a job? In 2009, Castillo regained his OBP and AVG, but still no SLG or defense. One thought is that the Cubs might be able to swap Bradley for Castillo without having to eat any of MB’s contract. In this way, the Cubs would get a 2B, a lead-off hitter who has a great rate of success at stealing bases, and a switch-hitter. That could be the case, but Castillo scares me and I’d expect more 2008 than 2009 to follow in 2010 and possibly worse.
It’s the other switch-hitting middle IF on the Mets I’d really like. It can’t be likely, although Reyes is on the last year of his contract, Omar’s said he wants to add power and is willing to change his core, Tejada’s available, and I’d be willing to give Zambrano to get him…
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 7:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
On the topic of the Mets
I could see the trying to generate a three-way trade to get Roy Halladay from Toronto. If NY is willing to deal Reyes or Beltran, the Cubs should be interested. Toronto would be mostly interested in prospects, but might take on one short-term salary.
Fontenot (fon-te-no): Cajun for "scrappy"
by zambranofan on Oct 7, 2009 7:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can't help but think of this everytime I hear Castillos name
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 7, 2009 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I always think of
that damn foul ball.
"Was you ever punched in the face five hundred times a night? It stings after a while." ~Rocky Balboa
by Goodie1969 on Oct 7, 2009 11:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Marlins
Chris Coghlan was a great LF for the Marlins this year – the good news for the Marlins is that he’ll be an even better 2B, which makes the growing-in-price Dan Uggla a near certain trade candidate this winter. I didn’t think I’d be interested in Uggla, but his defense wasn’t as bad as I thought and his down year in ‘09 looked a little unlucky. The price has to be right, though. The Cubs have also been connected to Jeremy Hermida in the past and I’d still bite if the trade price was cheap enough; the Marlins might be interested in Jake Fox, of all teams – they’ve taken players like him in the past. Jim Hendry has matched up with the Marlins often, so we could see one of those two come over this year.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 7, 2009 8:56 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Uggla and Hanley Ramirez...
also had issues this season, making Uggla an even bigger trade candidate.
>cues Al to say we could get them to throw in Hermida<
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 9:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, so Hermida regressed this year.
Is there any chance he’s still young enough to get better?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 8, 2009 8:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I haven't given up on Hermida totally
but I’ve gone from expectant to skeptical. I’d take the risk that he could break out in a new organization, but only at a limited cost.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 8:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ditto
I’d be interested in him as a 4th outfielder and go from there but I wouldn’t count on him as a starting RF’er next year.
by rlpete on Oct 8, 2009 9:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with that.
4th OF seems right unless and until he has his “breakout” season.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Putting him in the mix
in an OF of Soriano, Cameron/RaDavis, and Dome could work well. You can slide Dome over to CF every once in a while and sit all of them a fair bit just for rest.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 2:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I poke fun at the idea...
but it’s not a horrible one. You’d probably need to find a platoon partner for him… and the team already seems to want to employ one for Fukudome.
I think the only way it makes sense to give him up is if the Cubs also send Bradley + cash to cover most of his salary.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uggla has been discussed
I think most people agreed his average and fielding were too bad. I however, wouldn’t mind him.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 7, 2009 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Id take Uggs in a heartbeat...
…anytime you can upgrade from Fontenot to Uggla, its a HUGE upgrade. Uggs is a solid, middle of the order (2-3-4-5-6) type of hitter…. What’s not to like?
Everyone keeps harping on defense, but the Cubs had issues this year with OFFENSE… Lets win shootouts rather than lose close defensive games.
One thing you learned as a Cubs fan: when you bought you ticket, you could bank on seeing the bottom of the ninth.
Joe Garagiola
by Ryan at Cubshub on Oct 7, 2009 10:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd take him too
If he can hit 250, and belt his normal 30 home runs, that’s great production from any player, much more from a second basemen.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 8, 2009 7:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The question shouldn't be what problems did we have in 2009
The question should be what problems we expect to have in 2010. If the Cubs are healthy in 2010 (that’s an if), will offense still be the problem? Plus, solid defense tends to help more in the playoffs, which comes back to why I’m reluctant to pay too much for Uggla.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 7:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Offense rebounds, bad defense is forever.
No thanks to Uggla.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defense never slumps
unlike hitting.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 8, 2009 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dat's what I'm sayin'.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rosenthal does not include Cubs in list of interested parties
for Uggla. I have to admit I’m relieved. Despite being less turned off after looking into his stats, I still just don’t want Uggla, especially for the price he will command. I’d rather give Baker a shot to be a poor man’s Uggla, and more than that, I’d rather have a strong defense at both middle infield spots.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is dealing for Uggla
and giving up talent, along with spending more, worth it? I’d rather give Baker the twirl than go after Uggla. Is Uggla better? Perhaps, but enough to justify a move, from where things stand right now? Not for me.
I’d pass on Hermida. I was high on him last year, thinking he could turn it around. Not sure what to think right now.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The way I see it...
…the Cubs should go hard after Danny Uggs (Dan Uggla). Say what you will about the defensive struggles he’d have, his offense would MORE than offset those.
Beyond that, I’d expect a similar Cubs lineup with the exception of Right Field. I think the Cubs could (or should) swap Bradley and cash (or a prospect) for Dunn and then a prospect or two for Uggla.
Fukudome (CF), Dunn (Rf), Lee (1b), Ramirez (3b), Soriano (Lf), Uggla (2b), Soto ©, Theriot (ss). Seems like a strong 1-8 to me.
I realize that this is unlikely, but I dont see any reason why the Cubs cant get one of the two players I suggested.
One thing you learned as a Cubs fan: when you bought you ticket, you could bank on seeing the bottom of the ninth.
Joe Garagiola
by Ryan at Cubshub on Oct 7, 2009 9:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I really don't want Dunn.
If the NL were to adopt the DH next year, I’d love to have him on the team. But his defense is brutal. And I’m not talking Jake Fox or Soriano brutal. It’s much, much, much worse than that.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 10:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ill take brutal...
Dunn had a .267/.398/.529 line this year with 38 bombs and 105 RBI.
If I thought the Cubs could get away with it, I’d trade MB for Dunn and then let Dunn sit in a lawn chair behind 2nd base and just move Soriano and Fukudome in the gaps.
In all seriousness, Dunn would instantly be the best offensive player on the team, which would transform right field from a negative this year into a massive positive next year.
Side note, stats guy, have you seen Dunn’s career numbers at Wrigley? They’re INSANE!
One thing you learned as a Cubs fan: when you bought you ticket, you could bank on seeing the bottom of the ninth.
Joe Garagiola
by Ryan at Cubshub on Oct 7, 2009 10:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know the guy is awesome at the plate...
and he was equally as bad in the field this year. He negated all his positive value as a hitter with his glove. And given how good he was with the bat, that says a LOT.
Dude is straight awesome at the plate, and would be a perfect fit for this team offensively. Unfortunately, he’s a horrible fit defensively.
However, I would like my newly adopted AL team — the Mariners — to get him.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 10:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you serious?
Dunn only had 8 errors in roughly half a season in the outfield. Soriano had 11 and only played in 30 more games. Both average an error every 10 games or so, which I’ll concede is horrible. That being said, Dunn is a MONSTER with his OBP/Slugging skills.
Dunn has 63 career games at Wrigley and has 24 HR, .281/.414/.654, 45 RBI and 51 runs. Project that over a full season worth of home games and his home numbers alone will win him the NL MVP.
In all seriousness, if he’s averaging an error in 1 out of every 10 games and a bomb in one out of every 3, and the Cubs offense is the issue, then where is there an issue?
One thing you learned as a Cubs fan: when you bought you ticket, you could bank on seeing the bottom of the ninth.
Joe Garagiola
by Ryan at Cubshub on Oct 7, 2009 10:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I'm serious.
Maybe “butcher” isn’t the right word. Maybe I should use… statue, as the issue is in the balls he never has the chance to drop. He may even be a little bit better than Soriano at catching balls, but even while playing on a bum leg most of the year Soriano was the far superior defender in 2009. Dunn was probably twice as bad as Soriano in terms of fielding value… And Soriano was bad.
Dunn is a fantastic hitter, but not all “bad outfielders” are equal. Soriano is bad. Dunn is a walking disaster… and stress the “walking” part of that.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 11:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what if he kept "little Sammy Fuld" in his back pocket? ;-)
and when a ball was hit out of Dunn’s range, wee little Sammy jumps out and runs it down? He could be Dunn’s lucky leprechaun, kinda like Finlay and Hornswoggle in the WWE
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ummm...
What’s he doing to that leprechaun?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 8, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't tell? They're reenacting that scene from Titantic... ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I give that idea the:
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Errors are not an accurate way to judge defense.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dunn isn't going to be traded
Forget it unless you are overpaying. The Nationals dumped one problem child from the Bowden years in Milledge. They won’t take Bradley along with Dukes.
Dunn was my pick to be the “Brian Roberts” of this off-season. He is going to be mentioned a lot but he won’t be coming.
by rlpete on Oct 7, 2009 10:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was one of the Brian Roberts of LAST off-season...
…so I guess he’s going back-to-back.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
B2B BR PV
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ISWYDT
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your proposed lineup
looks like a bad beer league team defensively. I know you don’t think much about defense, but baseball people do.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 8, 2009 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Agreed.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 8, 2009 11:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah...
that would be a great offensive club, but probably the worst defensive team in the league.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 8, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your right, I know nothing about baseball.
But the 2009 Cubs could have been the best defensive team in baseball for all I know (since i know nothing about baseball) but they didnt hit enough to matter.
The Yanks have less than steller defensive outputs in most positions (Posada, Damon, Cano, Jeter, ARod and Matsui arent even CLOSE to winning any gold gloves) and look where they are.
I get that defense is important, but if you’re winning games 7-6 its better than having 3 web gems and losing 3-1. Seriously, fix the offensve before you claim a need for a solid defense. Even the best defensive team cant do anything against a dinger.
"... we get to think of life as an inexhaustible well. Yet everything happens only a certain number of times, and a very small number, really. How many more times will you remember a certain afternoon of your childhood, some afternoon that's so deeply a part of your being that you can't even conceive of your life without it? Perhaps four or five times more. perhaps not even that. How many more times will you watch the full moon rise? Perhaps twenty. And yet it all seems limitless." - Paul Bowles
by Ryan at Cubshub on Oct 10, 2009 12:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gold Gloves aren't an accurate way to measure defense either.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your post proves one thing
You are correct when you said: “Your right, I know nothing about baseball.” Wheh you imply that players like Jeter and ARod are marginal defensive players, you really prove your ignorance. Thanks for making my case.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 10, 2009 9:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How does Jeter compare to other SS?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 12, 2009 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jeter this season
6.4 UZR and a 5.3 UZR/150
He was a disaster in 2007 (-15.3), and this was his first year in the positive of SS UZR since Fangraphs started showing it. He ranks 10th in baseball.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 12, 2009 10:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is one thing about UZR that makes me uncomfortable.
The way certain players’ numbers can swing drastically from season to season. Another example: Aramis Ramirez.
In 2007, he played 1,091.1 innings of third base and put up an outstanding 9.0/10.2 UZR/UZR 150. Yet just a year later he played 1,282.2 innings of third base and put up:
-3.2/-3.8 UZR/UZR 150. Is it just the random nature of defense that some players swing so much from positive to negative?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 13, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I figure part of it is randomness
but also part is an actual shift in defensive performance which can come from injuries, drive, and the surrounding players, whose small or large range affects who gets to which balls. But that’s just my unstudied take.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 13, 2009 10:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it makes sense.
Injuries, serious or not, can affect one’s range pretty easily. And, teams don’t always disclose every physical ailment a player has.
Jeter has actually spent the past few years working to increase his range at SS in order to be effective at an older age. When you take that into consideration, his jump in UZR doesn’t seem so far-fetched. Even then, he’s not one of the best defensive SS’s in the game, and this is his first decent season in almost a decade.
The 2009 White Sox....like a 40 degree day.
by Ozzie Montana on Oct 13, 2009 9:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about Rajai Davis?
OAK may be one of the few places that would take Bradley back, as he was supposedly happy there and vice versa. Davis would be an outstanding 4th OF and may be good enough to start in CF every day. He’s a heck of a fielder and in his first full season starting he went .305/.360/.423. His BABIP was unsustainably high, but that’s more than offset by the move from the AL to the NL and the move from OAK’s cavern of a ballpark to Wrigley. Plus, he’s an outstanding defender.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 7, 2009 10:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I thought about him too
But I don’t think Oakland would bite, nor do we have the young talent to make it happen.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 8, 2009 7:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd trade Bradley for Davis
Davis fits the role I like to see Cameron play – super 4th OF with top CF defense. Davis also adds speed to the package. He might even be preferrable to Cameron.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 7:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would Oakland take Bradley?
I doubt it, as they’ve already had him before.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Trey2317 on Oct 8, 2009 8:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anyone who thinks Beane would take MB back
has not been paying attention
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 8, 2009 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Michael Barrett? ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 8, 2009 10:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 8, 2009 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt Beane would take that MB back either
but Barrett did not rip Beane on his way out the A’s clubhouse door, unlike Bradley.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 8, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley burned his bridges with Billy Beane, so I'm guessing that's not happening.
Which is kind of sad considering Bradley played very well there, and the fans were happy with him.
The 2009 White Sox....like a 40 degree day.
by Ozzie Montana on Oct 8, 2009 9:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Soto
My opinion is that Soto’s typical offensive production is going to be somewhere between his 2008 numbers and his 2009 numbers. For me and for most teams that would probably be okay for a catcher considering he also handles the pitching staff well and he appears to be decent defensively behind the plate. If the Cubs are still expecting him to be a middle of the order hitter, which I think was the thought process going into the 09 season, I am afraid they are going to give up on him and we are going to be stuck with a journeymen catcher who bats barely above the mendoza line, hits for little to no power and makes the 8th spot a black hole in the lineup. To me, the only scenario where I would even consider trading him is if I could use him to get a legit bat for the Outfield or MI.
"All I want is food and creative love" - Rusted Root
by TheRiot Police on Oct 7, 2009 10:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't know why, but I have a good feeling that Soto will come back strong.
Maybe not 2008 levels, but strong. Nothing to base that on-just a gut feeling. I hope they don’t trade him.
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
by katie casey on Oct 8, 2009 8:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm just hoping your "gut feeling" is a
less gut Geo.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 8, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow-that pun was unintended
It’s almost as good as when my son said that the movie “Sweeny Todd” was tastefully done.
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
by katie casey on Oct 8, 2009 9:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Yankees
The Evil Empire has a lot of contracts coming off the books this off-season. I think they are a potential landing place for Milton Bradley, and I think that Bradley could fit in the Bronx. Maybe we could get back one of the Yankees young but underwhelming CFs, Melky Cabrera or Brett Gardner. Gardner strikes me as not much different than Sam Fuld. Maybe I’m underselling him. I’ve always had interest in Melky, who’s just 25, but he’s looking more and more like a 4th OF and nothing more.
Of course, there’s also Nick Swisher, who we talked about last off-season. This off-season, he just doesn’t seem to be the right fit. Anyone want to make a case for him?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 2:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yankees
I think there’s very little chance the Yankees would ponder moving Nick Swisher. They already will have OF quesitons next year, and Swisher rebounded, as many expected.
Gardner is too much like Fuld. Might as well give Fuld a twirl, and Fuld’s got more pop than Gardner. I’m not too interested in Melky.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh
I’m also not sure the “new” Yankees regime would take on Milton Bradley.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley would be eaten alive by the NY media.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 8, 2009 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he would even register on their radar
At first they would talk to him, maybe try to stir the pot, but that team is so loaded with leaders that it wouldn’t be an issue. Jeter and company can deflect attention like crazy.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aha... so that's how it works...
When someone starts to feel a little pressure from the media, the Yankees circle the wagons and the big boys draw straws – short straw has to go out and create a diversion.
Jeter – Mariah Carey? check
ARod – Madonna? check
Giambi – golden thong? check
ARod – stripper/madame/expensive divorce? check
btw, who says ARod’s not a team player… ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 9, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
See A-Rod can take one for the team
Though with Milton it might take a stripper/cocaine/ 0 hit postseason from A-Rod to distract the media at first.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Media attention in NY seems focused on the
can’t miss prospects, superstar free agents, and uber personalities.
If MB was acquired in a trade for someone considered a role player and not touted as anything other than a value acquisition, he’ll be fine.
With Jeter, A-Rod, Tiexera, Joba, CC, Posada, and the rest, MB will be boring. Couple that with Girardi’s “kind and nurturing personality” and MB’s need to fly under the radar to get another contract, he’ll be fine.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Oct 9, 2009 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is exactly why I think they would be a good MB destination
He just isn’t big enough to matter to them (the media), they have a huge clubhouse where he can hide all he wants, just get a locker next to Jeter.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget:
ARod – Kate Hudson/Jay-Z? Check!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Still agree with this!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's good to know i'm not alone
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Has anyone ever considered Shin Soo Choo in right?
He quietly had a fantastic year in Cleveland, with 20 homers and a 300 average. His only 26 and defense is above average too. I bet we could pry him from Cleveland for 3 young players.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 8, 2009 4:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'd consider him.
I just wasn’t expecting him to be available. Why do you think they might be up for moving him?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 8, 2009 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No theory
Just a thought. Like I said, he’s still young, so he’s probably one of the centerpieces of rebuilding that team, unless they want to go Pirates style and trade away everybody.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 8, 2009 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way they deal Choo, IMO
They’ve been clear that he’s one of the pieces they are building with, as part of their young core there.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 7:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
let me rephrase
highly unlikely they deal choo … i mean … if they get a “we’d be stupid to turn it down” deal, then perhaps, but then, well, that’d be foolish for the Cubs, as solid as Choo is.
by toonsterwu on Oct 8, 2009 7:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would love to have him
I’ll bet it takes Soto, Marmol, Theriot, and a prospect
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 7:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Rockies
The Rockies are overflowing with OF talent. They can’t play all of Seth Smith, Dexter Fowler, Carlos Gonzalez, and Brad Hawpe. The good news is that the Cubs could use any of those players as they are either LH sluggers or CFs. The bad news is that they’ll cost a lot to get. Jim Hendry’s matched up with Colorado before. Anyone want to make a suggested offer for one of those hitters?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 9:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
missing one name that could be pondered on the rockies
eric young jr. Fowler is their future in Cf, and Young’s defense at 2nd is iffy. He has some top of the order skills. That said, he’s also cheap as a bench asset.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think they'll give up EY2.
I think Hawpe is the guy that will go there, and he should go to an AL club. He’s Dunn-esque on defense, although I’ll admit I wonder how much of that is due to playing in Coors.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should say...
I think EY2 is a great fit. I just don’t see the Rockies dealing him.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Swapping some conversations with folks - Spec/Rumors
Nothing new, but got some interesting emails today and thought they were mildly interesting. The implication seems to be that the Cubs are gearing up to try and make a big splash to secure the top of the lineup, and that it might be prioritized over a middle of the lineup bat in terms of which issue to tackle first.
My own 2 cents is that this really suggests a hard and heavy push at either Chone Figgins, or some sort of blockbuster trade. I worry about an “all the eggs in one basket” scenario in the former leading to a poor decision that could create the latter (akin to the Furcal/Pierre scenario from several years back).
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 2:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting -
Who might be the trade options? I’d love it if we grabbed Jose Reyes.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ha, i'm not important enough to pry that out of people
i really wish i knew or could pry that out of people. Would make following the offseason easier, that’s for sure.
I’ve got no ideas in all honesty, outside of the usual names that have been discussed.
If you find out, let me know.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
btw, I think we've discussed this name
I don’t think the Dodgers would do it (Torre values him too much, and Torre likes his veterans), but I’d call and see if they were willing to move Furcal and what it might cost. Granted, the Dodgers might not budge on that one, and he has a limited no trade clause. But Furcal seemed to finally find his bat in the 2nd half, and the speed is still solid enough. Anyhow, seems quite doubtful the Dodgers would move him.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um...
Jose Reyes is a Met, not a Dodger
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 12, 2009 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um...
…. toonster was discussing Furcal, not Reyes.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 12, 2009 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I should have read through the comments first
Oh, well
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 12, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's got to be a CF...
and if the talks are already happening, it’s not likely for Figgins or Furcal, who are still playing. It’s more likely Granderson or Reyes, both of which would be outstanding players.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
most rumors
and this has nothing to do with the individual I was trading some emails with, but most rumors/spec point to the Cubs looking for a power hitting OF and a leadoff hitting MI.
Furthermore, I really wouldn’t want Granderson as a leadoff option. As I’ve expressed elsewhere (not in this thread, Granderson was discussed ad nauseum in another thread recently, which I can’t find right now), I think I can be fine with him as a middle of the order option. Leadoff? Bleh.
I don’t buy the Mets moving Reyes. Ihaven’t heard anything to suggest one thing or another, but they don’t have a replacement in line. Ruben Tejeda is a good year or two away. Wilmer Flores isn’t a shortstop. They also lack a top of the order option, and moving Reyes would exacerbate their overall problems, where they need a middle of the order bat, at least one more starter for starters.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To get Reyes, the Mets have to buy into a need for personality shift
in the same way the Cubs do wrt MB. And if they buy into that, Theriot has the anti-Reyes image down pat. Plus, if you don’t plan to bring Reyes back at the end of his contract, swapping him for Riot gets you that SS going forward. Remember, the Mets really wanted David Eckstein’s scrappiness at 2B, but Eckstein refused to play 2B and rejected their offer.
Of course, the Cubs should have to give up more than Riot for Reyes, but Omar isn’t the swiftest GM out there.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 7:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would start any Reyes offer with Theriot
Not saying he is the main prize for the Mets in such a deal, just that he fills their hole right away. Is Theriot and Soto too high a price for us to pay? What about Theriot, Vitters, and Chris Carpenter?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what'd he use for bait?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 10, 2009 12:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couldn't have taken very long.
He’s not that tall.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It doesn't matter if you want Granderson as a leadoff option...
what matters is if the Cubs do.
And frankly I don’t care where he hits in the order. Wherever he hits, he’d be an enormous upgrade.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Personally I'd rather not have Granderson leadoff
It feels to me a lot like the Soriano thing all over again. Now I was fine with Soriano leading off, but that kind of puts you in the same position IMO.
I’d still deal for Granderson in a heartbeat, that same Theriot, VItters, Carpenter package might get it done (really I’ll keep mentioning those names because I think they have value to teams yet won’t kill us to lose them).
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 11:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Others have said it...
but Theriot is a part of any trade for Reyes.
I’m not saying Reyes is by any stretch likely. I think it’s quite unlikely the Cubs get him. But it’s still much more likely (or much less unlikely) that they’re discussing a Reyes deal than they are discussing the players you mentioned, who are still playing in the playoffs.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hopefully any sort of trade we make
Doesn’t give up our pitching depth for the sake of getting an out making leadoff man. If you want to sell high on Randy Wells- awesome, but don’t do something stupid. IMO good hitting is easier to find than good pitching, and while we have a lot of pitching potential in the minors I don’t know that you can use that next season AND contend.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is an interesting question.
How many people feel we could trade Randy Wells this off-season and be selling high?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 9, 2009 10:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd love it if the Cubs did that...
provided they got a “selling high” return on him. Wells was excellent this season, but I don’t think he’ll continue to be this good.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tough call there
We’re all incredibly shocked and happy with the numbers he put up this year, but the consensus seems to be that he’s a middle of the rotation guy. If we can fool someone into believing he’s not, then I guess we might as well go for it. I’m not well versed enough to gauge what that would exactly bring us in return, but it might be something worth looking into and then possibly signing a decent pitcher to a one year deal.
by shoemile on Oct 9, 2009 11:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am not sure you would get all that much for him
While I believe there is no shortage of teams who would like to have him, two big questions would keep his trade value down:
1. is he a one year flash in the pan? and
2. did he throw too many innings this season (a career high) and will that come back to hurt him (literally and figuratively) next season?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 10, 2009 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah
Young pitching is at a premium, even if it’s MOTR – Wells would bring back something; it just may not be worth enough to cover the loss of value he gives us by keeping him.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Royals
Last year there was buzz about a Teahen deal and we were all sure we didn’t want to give up Fontenot for him – ironic as had we made that trade, the Cubs might have signed Orlando Hudson, passed on the switch-hitters of doom, and the Royals might have been trying Fontenot at 3B when Gordon went down.
That said, I’m glad we didn’t get Teahen, who to me, looks now like a poor man’s version of Jeff Baker (but LH). No thanks, either, to David DeJesus, who keeps getting worse. But let’s think outside the box here. Maybe the Royals could be convinced to give up Alex Gordon with both Teahen and Callaspo liked at 3B. I’d offer Randy Wells to start, and not, Gordon wouldn’t fit at 3B for us, but for a talent like his, we could play him in RF for a season, getting starts back in the infield from time to time resting our corner men, and then decide next year where he goes long-term. No, he doesn’t fit, exactly, but he’s the kind of misfit I’d try and I have a hankering he could be dislodged from KC this year.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 2:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That should read
“And no, Gordon wouldn’t fit…”
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
as much as gordon has stalled
I’m hard pressed to think they’d move on from him, particularly since he had an injury riddled year last year. They need offense, more than anything, as the system has enough stopgap pitching at the top, and it has one of the more talented pitching staffs in the low minors. Add in that, with Greinke at the top, assuming they keep Meche and Hochevar in there, their rotation has a shot at being decent (I still wish they’d just move Soria to the rotation and find another closer).
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It definitely wouldn't make sense for them to do it.
I just have a sense they might do it. The Royals do have one of the worst GMs in baseball, so I’d be glad just to hear Jim is talking to the Royals.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But wouldn't a LH version of Jeff Baker...
be a good fit? If Teahen can be had for relatively little, I say go for it. You would have three versatile middle-infield defenders (Teahen, Baker, and Blanco), and a good backup for 3rd base. It would be better if Teahen could play a credible 2B, but this wouldn’t be the worst idea.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see the point of Teahen
although as noted above, I am open to essentially a loose multiple platoon situation. Okay, maybe this wouldn’t be that, but it would be a versatile bench that would allow mix and match. That said, I don’t see the particular point on Teahen’s addition to the bench. Teahen wouldn’t add much off the bench, as he provides very little pop and is a poor defender. I’d rather keep Fontenot as the backup over Teahen. A touch of bad luck happened this year, but he also started pounding the ball into the ground a lot more. I just don’t see a big difference between the two.
by toonsterwu on Oct 9, 2009 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on what you see Baker as for us.
If you think Baker can hit .280/.350/.450 in 400 PAs, and Teahen would cost no more than Baker did, then, yeah, I’ll take two, please. But even if you think they’ll both do that, where do you plan to play them? Where do you plan to play them if you still want a #5 hitter and a lead-off hitter?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 7:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frankly,
I don’t think the Cubs can add both a #5 hitter and a leadoff hitter. Unless I’m wrong about how much money the Cubs will have to spend (and I hope I am) they’ll have to make one major and one minor upgrade. I think given Baker’s performance you find a platoon partner for him, and then go add a big bat in the OF.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They could
if they can find a taker for Bradley
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 10, 2009 9:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get to see the Royals a little bit
Really the players I would most want from them are Butler, Grienke, and Soria all of whom have to be untouchable.
I’d be interested in Gordon more if he had played outfield before. Turning our team into a Tony LaRussa-like plug a play toy is going to lead to some horrid defensive days. Certainly not worth giving up Randy Wells for Gordon the way he’s played so far in his career.
I was on the Tehan bandwagon earlier, but now I don’t think so.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 7:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still believe in Gordon
but I think he has to get out of that organization. I believe in him enough that it’s worth trying him at a different position, just to get his bat in the mix.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think a change of scenery helps him a ton
But I don’t know that the Cubs are in a position to handle major growing pains while remaining contenders. Putting him in right means you probably have the worst OF defense in baseball, and his bat doesn’t really make up for it right now.
He is definitely a good candidate to get a lot better at hitting given a new home and a chance to play (his health hurt him this season), I just don’t want to give up anything of value to get a project.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 7:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good points
and I think you’d have to move Dome, too, and get a real CF if you were going to try a guy like Gordon.
Either way, I don’t think it’s very likely.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 8:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To take a small point and start a new one
Assuming Dome waives his NTC (not saying he would, just saying forget it for a moment) what would the market on him be?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 8:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure we'd get much for him
but I don’t think we’d have to eat salary at all.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading with the Diamondbacks
Would the Snakes actually give us something else if we were willing to trade Bradley for Byrnes, contract for contract? We could try Byrnes as an over-priced Reed Johnson replacement. Sure, it’s a bad contract, but we might have to eat all of Bradley’s contract anyway and we need a RH platoon partner for Dome anyway.
So, what else would we want? toonsterwu, want to make a case for Gerardo Parra? Could he play CF?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 9, 2009 8:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Someone posted a thread here last week...
saying there were scouts at the D-Backs games looking at Chris Young. I’d like the Cubs to consider that as an option.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 10:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Young would be a good buy low guy
He should be able to handle Wrigley’s center a lot easier than Arizona’s. Also he seems to hit well (at least for power) at Wrigley. He should be cheap so that isn’t a bad guy to ask about
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 9, 2009 11:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"...he seems to hit well (at least for power) at Wrigley."
I’ll say.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 9:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
me too. ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 10, 2009 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought about Young.
And I thought he could be the type of hitter the Cubs would steer clear of right now. But he’s got great talent and I’d be glad if the Cubs could add him.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 6:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't quite know what to make of Chris Young.
He appears to be a good defensive centerfielder but his career UZR numbers are awful and he’s only had one adequate season defensively (2008) per UZR. His offensive numbers are less than thrilling, too. Wouldn’t he be kind of like Felix Pie redux?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Felix Pie redux
It’s a good comparison and question.
The difference is that we know AZ had incompetent hitting coaching; there’s no way so many highly regarded prospects all failed to hit w/o the hitting coaching at least partially to blame. And then AZ fired the hitting coach themselves bolstering this view. So, there’s a decent chance that getting Young out of AZ might help, whereas with Pie, we already know he didn’t match up with our coaches.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe Lou would give Young...
…more of a shot becausse he (Lou) has seen Young produce – hitting those bombs in the ‘07 playoffs and in that last Cubs-D’backs series.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
put his locker next to Lilly's?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 10, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Every time Young walked in the clubhouse...
…Ted would slam his glove down.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He'd "THROW IT ON THE GROUND!"
With the rest of the birthday cake.
Fontenot (fon-te-no): Cajun for "scrappy"
by zambranofan on Oct 10, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alternatively
Lou’s coaching might actually be just what Young needs.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about Chad Tracy as a utility IF?
by shawndgoldman on Oct 9, 2009 11:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I've lost faith in Tracy.
Last season I would have said yes.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 6:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm going to be hiking tomorrow...
so I want to throw this out there.
What about the Tigers? They have 3 contracts they want to get rid of, beside Granderson’s:
Magglio Ordonez is slated to make $18M this year, and that’s been discussed.
But what about Dontrelle Willis? He’s going to make $12M this season. The Cubs could try to turn him into a closer.
Also, Miguel Cabrera has a behemoth contract. But if the Cubs traded Bradley for Cabrera, they’d only be adding $10M to next season’s salary. After 2011 the Cubs could move him to 1st with Lee’s departure.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 10, 2009 2:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I should have said...
they have 3 contracts they MAY want to get rid of…
by shawndgoldman on Oct 10, 2009 2:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Miguel Cabrera is available, you get him.
(And then you tell Dempster to take Cabrera and Soto running up the mountain.) I’d hope that Mr. Ricketts could be convinced to sign off on any temporary bump in salary needed to bring him in. But don’t you think that if Cabrera was available that the Red Sox and Mets would be in on that?
I won’t be surprised at all if Jim Hendry brings back Dontrelle as part of the dump Bradley campaign. But closer? With the problems Dontrelle’s been reported to be having?
The other contract I wonder if the Tigers want to unload is Carlos Guillen’s, but I’m not sure he really fits us better than he fits them given his defensive woes. But I’ll ask this – would Carlos Guillen be a worse 2B than Dan Uggla?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 6:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember...
… Willis’ problems are similar to Zack Greinke’s. I would hope that if the Cubs want to take a chance on him, they could get him the help he needs.
As long as Willis has been around, he is still young — he will be 28 in January. Might be worth a shot, even in the rotation mix.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 10, 2009 7:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm rooting for Willis, whatever team he's on.
Yes, the problems are similar, but the people are different. There’s no guarantee that Willis will feel comfortable pitching in Wrigley, and if he failed at Wrigley, I cringe to think what the response might be.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to be insensitive or overly skeptical
but I’m pretty sure the whole anxiety disorder thing was made up by Detroit to get Willis off the active roster… Not saying it couldn’t be true, but his comments and the diagnosis make that sound pretty sketchy.
by Bradsbeard on Oct 13, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm very tempted to agree with this
In fact I’m concerned that more and more teams are going to do this. I hope they don’t, but it gives a way to “fake DL” somebody
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 13, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, Miguel Cabrera for Milton Bradley?
I’ve gotta file that under “too good to be true.” Seriously, I would sculpt and bronze a statue of Jim Hendry myself if he could pull that off.
The Ordonez thing is worth looking into, though it would leave Kosuke out of position in CF. Still, if Mags rebounds, he could be the slugging RF Lou has been longing for.
The Dontrelle idea isn’t bad either. I don’t think he’d displace Marmol as closer, though. But if he could become the new Carlos Marmol-esque set-up guy. Great.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where do you play Cabrera?
Yeah, he hits a ton, but he is a poster boy for DHing. There is nowhere the Cubs can put him. But as fpr Ordonez, if the Cubs could deal Bradley for Maggs straight up, that would make more sense. Maggs showed late in the season he can still hit and he can move into Bradley’s RF spot.
As for Willis closing … wow, that shows some real imagination, not much reality, but a lot of imagination. Pick him up and let him try to win a spot, but expecting him to be able to handle closing is out there.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 10, 2009 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You play Miggy in RF
and you trade both Dome and Bradley.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 10:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds good to me.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 10, 2009 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cabrera played 100 games in right field...
…for the Marlins in 2004. So, uh, it’s been awhile, but he’s been out there. I’m guessing his range wouldn’t be great, but he’d presumably have the arm for it being a former third baseman and all. It would definitely be another big defensive risk, but, geez, the guy can hit. Still, it’s really hard to envision this happening. The Mags thing is more likely, I’d guess.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 10, 2009 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cabrera a RF?
Yes, he stood in the grassy area to the right of CF with a glove on his hand, but that hardly makes him a RF. An outfield with Soriano in LF and Cabrera in RF? Seriously, you think that is a good idea?
Oh yeah and one more thing, itnot only was it was five years ago, but how many pounds ago did Cabrera play RF?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 10, 2009 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm telling you, you have to make him run mountains,
But more to the point, here’s a Tigers’ fans perspective.
He thinks the Tigers should trade Bonderman for Bradley, which is a better return than I expected.
He says Cabrera is going to be in Detroit a very long time; he believes Cabrera is serious about getting his personal issues together. If the Tigers believe that, there’s what’s the motivation to trade him?
He also says Granderson isn’t going anywhere and that the other rumor we’ve read is plain baseless nonsense. So, I’m putting all my hopes on a Jose Reyes acquisition.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 10, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Talking to a Mets fan I know
He would love to see Reyes go, the deal with him is that he “isn’t a winner”. I don’t know what that means, and it sounds bad, but I think escaping New York and coming here might help him.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 10, 2009 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe he'll wear an eyepatch and we can call him "Snake" Reyes...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Oct 10, 2009 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
MB for Bonderman?
in a heartbeat. I doubt the Tigers would do it, but if they made the offer it would be a no-brainer. Bonderman is a risk, much like Harden, another former A’s righthander with overpowering stuff but oft-injured, but his stuff makes him worth the risk. Besides getting rid of MB alone is addition by subtraction.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 11, 2009 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is why we don't want Adam Dunn
The difference is that Cabrera is a) 10 times the player Dunn is and b) can move to first base after one season and we know he is a solid glove at first
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 10, 2009 10:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did I say it was a good idea?
I noted it would be a big defensive risk. But Miguel Cabrera is an elite hitter. You get him on a conditioning program and get him out there as often as possible in spring training. Oh, and as I also noted, such a deal would probably never happen so you don’t really need to do anything at all.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 12, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Woah...
I’m not suggesting a Bradley for Cabrera deal. The Cubs would have to give up a lot more than that. Bradley for Mags and/or Willis is more likely.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 10, 2009 9:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, you wrote...
…“…if the Cubs traded Bradley for Cabrera” so, yeah, it did appear you were suggesting that. But no biggie – I learned a little bit more about Cabrera by discussing the idea. Hope your hiking trip went well.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 12, 2009 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ordonez
I think a Fukudome/Ordonez platoon (while extravagant financially) would be highly effective. Ordonez could also split time in left with Soriano, giving plenty of time off for our aging corner outfielders. This way you limit Ordonez to 350 at bats or so and keep his $15M option for 2011 from vesting. It’s an expensive option, but in the long run it might be cheaper and more productive than dumping Bradley’s contract. However, you would need to find a pretty cheap center fielder. Maybe even end up with a Fuld/Johnson/Colvin platoon, but that could work.
by Bradsbeard on Oct 13, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting idea.
I guess the only problem I see is whether Mags himself would be happy in a platoon. It doesn’t appear like he’s ever been in one before, and I wonder whether Lou would actually do it. After all, under that arrangement, Fukudome would get most of the ABs. Plus, would the player’s union cry foul if they caught on to the plan to limit his ABs?
If a Bradley-for-Mags trade does go down (and it’s one of the better ones on the imaginary table), I’d expect he’d be the full-time right fielder with Dome and Johnson (assuming he’s re-signed) in center. Not sure what would happen to Sam Fuld.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 13, 2009 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fuld probably sticks as the 5th outfielder.
Soriano, Fukudome, Johnson, Ordonez, Fuld: that’s a pretty good outfield.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 13, 2009 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
If Soriano and Mags both bounce back – the Cubs could have some nice power in the corners with high OBP guys (Dome, RJ vs. LHP, Fuld?) to play up the middle and back up left and right.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 14, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Johnson?
I wouldn’t suggest they resign him, due to injuries, and the ability of Fuld.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 14, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Magglio is interesting
His second half was solid this season and I think he will put up good numbers next year. Doesn’t he have another vesting option for 2011 or is that wrong.
If his contract is done after 2010 I’m all for it
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 10, 2009 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ordonez has a club option for 2011 at $15m.
It vests if he has 135 starts or 540 PA next year.
If he has that many starts next year, it’d probably mean he was good and it might be worth it.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 10, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Banking on two years of productivity and health is a bit risky IMO
Though with Magglio you don’t pick up any of Milton’s salary. I’d probably still take him, but that option is a gamble.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 10, 2009 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Given the circumstances...
… it may be worth the risk. Maggs hit .401/.460/.557 in 187 PA after August 1. No power — but .400 for two months? We’d take that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 10, 2009 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We also have reason to believe this is reasonable...
as multiple sources had this deal as being something the two teams were considering during the season.
There are enough bad contracts on the Tigers that I think Detroit is where MB ends up.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 10, 2009 9:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Other bad fits for Detroit
What about Carlos Guillen? Is he out of the infield because his legs won’t hold up under it or because his defense was deemed too bad?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 11, 2009 8:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mark DeRosa
Ken Rosenthal has a what’s-next article up for the Cardinals. Good news here is pessimism that the Cardinals will be able to extend Pujols quickly or cheaply. Rosenthal also says,
For now, re-signing DeRosa should be a priority…. But they should not overreact the way the Cubs did after getting swept by the Dodgers in last year’s Division Series, and change who they are.
So, here’s a question – does Mark DeRosa fit? Did he give the Cubs an identity it’s worth re-acquiring, even if we have a player in Jeff Baker who can do on the field much of what DeRosa (at this age) can do? Those are questions we’ve discussed before, but they take on a new tack considered in the light of the Cardinals pursuing him. Would we want to make sure the Cardinals couldn’t have DeRosa?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 11, 2009 9:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
My answers to those questions are all "yes"...
… if you could reacquire him for a reasonable cost. I wouldn’t break the bank, but there is clearly value in having him on your team — and there’s no guarantee that Jeff Baker will do what DeRosa can. I like Baker, but as of now, he plays only 2B and 3B.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 11, 2009 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm still bullish on Jeff Baker.
I think (admittedly, without much evidence) that he can play right (and left) field as well as second base and third base – and that he may be able to do everything DeRo can at less cost. And as great a clubhouse guy as Mark is, given the Cubs payroll problems, I would lean toward more financially prudent moves such as this. That said, if the Cubs decided to bring Mark back at a reasonable cost, I would welcome him.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 12, 2009 10:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Baker's younger too
If they get DeRo however, Baker needs to go.
"That pitch wasn’t down and in, that pitch was down and up." Tim McCarver
by wrigleyrocker12 on Oct 12, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, they would be redundant.
Maybe Baker could be traded. MLBTR mentioned the other day on Twitter that the Phillies were in the market for a utility infielder. I’m sure there are other teams as well.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 12, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A player like Baker would make a lot of sense for Philly
with all their LHers; he might even steal a lot of playing time at 3B.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 12, 2009 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How 'bout a player like Aaron Miles...nudge, nudge, wink, wink?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 13, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Baker fits?
John Perotto who works the Pittsburgh beat and at Baseball Prospectus said in a chat:
Matt (Chicago ): Do you see the Cubs making a move for a 2B/SS type to play at the top of the order? If so, who do you see as logical targets? It seems to me that there may be several low-cost options on that front.
John Perrotto: I know the Cubs have been impressed enough with Jeff Baker that he may be their second baseman next season, though he’s not a leadoff guy. If they do go the free-agent route, Orlando Hudson would make sense for a middle infielder.
I have to say that I’d love it if we’d give Baker a shot, with Fontenot backing up against some RHP and to give defensive boosts now and then; I didn’t think it was likely, because Baker’s not the #5 guy and not the lead-off guy. So, if Perotto is right that the Cubs like Baker, it suggests upgrading SS may well be on the table.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 11, 2009 10:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hudson would probably be overpriced.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 11, 2009 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hudson is just Perotto's speculation.
What’s interesting to me is the news that the Cubs may have been impressed enough with Baker to give him the job. I think that we have as good a chance to get solid production from Baker/Fontenot as we do paying money for one of the 2B available.
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 11, 2009 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dave Cameron's solid piece
on roster construction theory
Applying this to the discussion here, Figgins was a 5.9 WAR player in 2009, and a 3.6 WAR player on average over the past three years. On the other hand, Jeff Baker was a 1.9 WAR player in 250 PAs this year and Mike Fontenot was a 3.1 WAR player in 285 2008 PAs.
Is the commitment in time and dollars to Figgins (assuming for the moment he would play an adequate 2B) worth it given what the Cubs already have on roster?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 13, 2009 8:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
My feeling is...
… if you constructed a roster strictly on WAR and using NO other factors, you would not have a winning team.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Oct 13, 2009 8:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WAR is just a short hand stat; it's not meant to tell a detailed story.
That said, if I constructed a roster strictly on WAR, it would be:
Ichiro Suzuki RF
Derek Jeter SS
Joe Mauer C
Albert Pujols 1B
Matt Holliday LF
Evan Longoria 3B
Ben Zobrist 2B
Franklin Gutierrez CF
Zach Greinke
Justin Verlander
Tim Lincecum
Roy Halladay
Felix Hernandez
Jonathan Broxton (CL)
And your position is that this team would not break .500?
It seems to me that this is an overreaction to Milton Bradley’s high base stats and the case made for him on those stats. So, my question is – how did the Cubs, a team with bad enough chemistry that the GM had to suspend a player for nothing that was done publicly how did that team end up with a .516 winning percentage, despite so many injuries?
Inspector #23 certifies that the above post is sarcasm free, most certainly not what she said, and chock full of intangibles, although regressing to the intangible mean, as you'd expect.
by DGU on Oct 13, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This team would win 120 games
Our record this season despite getting such bad performance from two of our most important players tells me that this is the best team in NL Central as far as talent is concerned.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Oct 13, 2009 9:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've always wondered what 350 million dollars could buy.
The 2009 White Sox....like a 40 degree day.
by Ozzie Montana on Oct 13, 2009 10:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That...or a tropical island.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Oct 14, 2009 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You should never just use just ONE stat...
but if you forced me to use just one, it would be WAR.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 14, 2009 1:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
... or, if I'm budget-constrained...
I’d use WAR/$.
by shawndgoldman on Oct 14, 2009 1:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WAR
♪What is it good for♫
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Oct 14, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs