Small Sample Size All-Star Hak Ju Lee

by the nth on Apr 29, 2011 1:24 AM CDT

As long as people are getting in a huff about Sam Fuld based on a small sample size, how about the numbers Hak Ju Lee has put up in high A ball for Tampa Bay?

.425 BA, .521 OBP, 1.259 OPS, 31 Total Bases in 50 Plate Appearances

Obviously, like Fuld, these numbers will come down, but I think Cub fans will rue the day Hak Ju Lee was included in a trade for a pitcher in his prime when the Cubs are two to three years from being a good team. Yes, because the division sucks there's a chance they could contend this year, but that is no way to build a team. You build a team by making it as strong as it can be for as long as it can be and hopefully, you get a few good young players from your organization that don't cost you a fortune.

Dollar per win, Garza will not be worth the players given up plus the money paid him. And even if he goes 18-0 the rest of the way, it probably won't matter. With 40% of the starters on the DL and Dempster in free fall, I don't see the Cubs contending even in this rotten division.

Give me your young, strong and cheap! Give me a future to look forward to! As Jerry Rubin said - "Don't trust anyone over 30."

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.

Tweet Comment 36 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The Cubs have done an excellent job scouting the Pacific Rim.

This is proof. And whatever happened to that dude who killed an endangered bird with a baseball? He’s proof too.

I admit I do like Jae-Hoon Ha.

Also, Fernando Perez is hitting 189/358/226 at Iowa. Garza? His ERA+ is 104 at the moment, right in line with the other nine who make up the top 10 pitchers in baseball; therefore, your argument is irrelevant.

GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.

by shoemile on Apr 29, 2011 3:26 AM CDT reply actions

And whatever happened to that dude who killed an endangered bird with a baseball? He’s proof too.

That’s Jae-Kuk Ryu. He’s been out of baseball since 2008. So I wouldn’t call him “proof” — he was pretty bad.

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Apr 29, 2011 8:17 AM CDT up reply actions

In their baseball preview issue

ESPN the magazine declare that the Cubs were the #1 team in signing talent out of Korea.

by Josh Timmers on Apr 29, 2011 11:16 PM CDT up reply actions

Lee was the one

I thought was going to be a star out of the players we gave up.

"It's easy to do what's ordinary, it's difficult to do what's deemed impossible -- I guess that explains why my life is so hard, because nothing is impossible for me"

by Unique on Apr 29, 2011 8:09 AM CDT reply actions

+1

Good thing there’s that Castro guy.

by SenorGato on Apr 29, 2011 8:29 AM CDT up reply actions

Too bad there's two middle infield positions...

by bdlugz on Apr 29, 2011 8:58 AM CDT up reply actions

Post about this again in a month or so.

Then we’ll see.

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Apr 29, 2011 8:16 AM CDT reply actions

Or three years from now.

by jpeters407 on May 1, 2011 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions

we should at least wait until we trade Garza

/sarcasm

Chronologically inept since 2060
Q: Why did Chuck Norris cross the road?
A: Ditka
Ditka's mustache can block a Chuck Norris round house
Ditka's mustache can kill two stones with one bird

by Cubbie-Tim on May 1, 2011 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions

You see, with Lee it was understood we were giving up a future regular major leaguer for Garza

because, as you know, we are built to WIN NOW!!! It’s the fact that all the other guys in the trade are already outperforming expectations that have the Cubs looking extra-dumb.

by Jerry Mumphrey on Apr 29, 2011 8:29 AM CDT reply actions

i'd argue

its the fact the Cubs believe they’re built to win right now that looks dumb.

Hopefully they have a strong plan in place to make this team a real contender during the years Garza is here, because they’re not close to one now and weren’t when they made the trade

follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com

by DartmouthCubsFan on Apr 29, 2011 8:55 AM CDT up reply actions

That's exactly it.

I was/am not wild about what we gave up for Garza, but I’m more upset that we traded away young talent in a win-now trade. I’m not a ledge jumper by any means, but this team is simply not going to be in contention this year. Why not wait until our team is closer to competing before trading away two strong prospects?

I’ve gone from neutral to anti-JH this past offseason. Someone in this organization needs to be clear-headed when assessing where this team is and where it needs to go. I really hope we are aggressive sellers towards the deadline.

by Kansas25 on Apr 29, 2011 9:11 AM CDT up reply actions

The Garza move was not a win now move.

They have him 3 yearsx.

Excuse the Cubs for trying to put some watchable talent on the team this year.

by SenorGato on Apr 29, 2011 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions

Agree and disagree.

I think anytime you give up two of your top-five prospects it should be interpreted as a win-now move. On the other hand, and more to your point (I think), Garza is a younger pitcher and will be somewhat cost controlled until 2014. Most estimates I have seen project that the three years of Garza will cost about 25 million dollars.

As for your final comment, I’m not wild about management looking “to put some watchable talent” on this team. I’d rather they formulate a long-term vision for this team and commit to the process. Whether the Garza deal is part of a plan, I do not know. Whether the Cubs have had a logical long-term plan previously, I am dubious. I think I’m in the minority, but I would have rather the Cubs committed more towards 2012 and 2013 this season than make a pseudo attempt to be competitive this season.

I will be happy to admit I was wrong if Garza is a centerpiece to a competitive Cubs team in the future though.

by Kansas25 on Apr 29, 2011 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions

The real problem is not that the Cubs are in a win now mode (because clearly they are not).

Its that Jim Hendry is in a win now mode. Hendry has to produce a decent team or he’s going to be fired after this season or his contract won’t be renewed after 2012. That seems like it would be a pretty strong motivation to “win now”

by magicblue on Apr 29, 2011 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions

On that...

I agree 100 percent. And I think it’ll manifest itself poorly in the near future.

by Kansas25 on Apr 29, 2011 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions

Not exactly

Hendry AND the Rickets are in a win now mode. There was no way the Ricketts would have accepted even the appearance of a team that was not in contention.

"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either

by Doggie Stalker on Apr 29, 2011 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions

Few things:

I think anytime you give up two of your top-five prospects it should be interpreted as a win-now move

Sure, in the sense that it should make the team better. No one player, especially a pitcher, could turn this roster’s fortune around. I’m not even sure I believe that the Cubs believed that when they made the trade. This was done on an eye on 2012-2013 when we should have new FAs and new young players (led by Jackson as early as this year).

As far as your second paragraph….I’d think it’s obvious Garza is part of the plan. They didn’t trade for a 27 year old workhorse who served as the 2-3 starter on a top teir team in the AL for JUST 2011, when the roster is filled with aging vets and bad contracts.

by SenorGato on Apr 29, 2011 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Well...

to make Garza a part of the plan they’re going to need to be pretty aggressive the next offseason. I guess I just don’t have faith that Pujols/Fielder are really coming here.

by Kansas25 on Apr 29, 2011 7:32 PM CDT up reply actions

To make anyone part of the plan

they have to be aggressive this offseason. This would be more true if they sat aroud stockpiling prospects hoping to one day be the Royals and dominate the minor league prospect rankings.

by SenorGato on Apr 30, 2011 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

Paying fans want to see a competetive team

not just a young team.

by cubswin on Apr 30, 2011 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions

I would contend that over-achieving, underpaid, steadily improving call-ups are eminently more watchable

that mid-career guys with fat contracts. At least that seems to be the formula behind fan favorites. Imagine if the Cubs slashed payroll, played the kids, and parlayed the revenue savings into lower prices at the park and more games on WGN. No one would decry the lack of mid-tier talent aquired via trade or free agency if the future at least held promise.

by Jerry Mumphrey on Apr 29, 2011 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions

But they won't do that.

Even if they did slash payroll and played “the kids”, whoever that turns out to be, do you think they would really lower ticket prices?

Me either.

Check out Chicago sports coverage at SB Nation Chicago

by Al Yellon on Apr 29, 2011 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions

thats like saying that once the gov wont sty in your pocket once they are in it

i mean, the toll way was only a temporary thing

Chronologically inept since 2060
Q: Why did Chuck Norris cross the road?
A: Ditka
Ditka's mustache can block a Chuck Norris round house
Ditka's mustache can kill two stones with one bird

by Cubbie-Tim on Apr 30, 2011 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions

I would contend that the long term payoff in such a move...

probably sucks. Not only that, but you make it sound ridiculously simple to execute.

Pay attention to the roster…there’s a whole bunch of young kids and players here…the problem is that there’s still bad contracts, declining vets, and a general lack of top tier talent. Garza was a step in the direction of aiming for top players from top teams. Did they pay a crazy price? Depends on how much you value a 27 year old C still in AAA, a highly talented SS all the way down in Low A, a 5th OFer, a two pitch SP prospect who we made a legit prospect in the first place, and another potential backup OFer. Personally, I’ve felt this place has overrated the crap out of The Traded 5 since Day 1, and this is someone who was pimping Lee and Archer long before most had any clue who they were.

by SenorGato on Apr 29, 2011 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

Probably a lot of the people whining about losing Archer

whined when the Cubs got Archer in the DeRosa deal.

by Not Bruce Froemming on Apr 29, 2011 5:57 PM CDT up reply actions

If that makes you feel better about yourself.

by Kansas25 on Apr 29, 2011 7:37 PM CDT up reply actions

Doesn't make me feel better about anything

except my assessment of meatball Cubs fans.

by Not Bruce Froemming on Apr 29, 2011 7:57 PM CDT up reply actions

I wouldn't be shocked.

A little over a year ago it was mostly, “who the heck is Chris Archer?” Now he’s got as much upside as Matt Garza, and therefore shouldn’t have been traded for him.

by SenorGato on Apr 30, 2011 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions