Ryan Theriot becoming a favorite of mine.
Ryan Theriot seems to find someway to impress me each and every game and it all starts with the little things. Ryan doesn't try to be the "hero" everytime he approachs the plate. Instead the man trys to find anyway he can possibly get on base.
First off, we all know that Theriot is going to be the last guy of resort towards power and he even knows that himself. Theriot reminds me of a David Eckstein type though. You know the scrappy type of player that does the little things such as getting on base, stealing bases, setting up possible runs, and making contact.
Ryan has an excellent glove by the way and I just think that it might be time to part with Ronny Cedeno via trade and stick to having Ryan Theriot as are everyday shortstop. The guy comes to play everyday and he might not stick out huge on the boxscore at the end of the game but if you take the time too just watch the way that he plays his game you will understand where I am coming from.

I don't know if any of you realize the way he has started such rallies with just making contact and not trying to hit the damn ball over the fence everytime he gets up.
For example, If you didn't watch tonights game against St. Louis
Ryan Theriot did pretty much what I stated about him. In the top of the seventh with 2 outs and nobody on, Theriot just makes contact and just happens to be hit towards Gold Glover 3rd Baseman Scott Rolen.
A rare error occuring by Rolen ends up continuing the 7th and he ends up coming around to score on an Aramis Ramirez 2 out single to make it 3-2 now.
Last, to go into the top of the ninth with two outs again, Theriot drawls a walk. Now with him on first base he decides to steal second and has converted 17 out of 20 times on the year for stolen bases. With that he set up a chance to go up by two and with the scrappy play of Theriot it turned up to be huge.
Derek Lee ended up connecting on a two out single which allowed Theriot to score and now the Cubs be up against the Cardinals 4-2.
With that run it turned out to be monumental towards the outcome of the game and the Cubs ended up winning 4-3 with the almighty Albert Pujols grounding out to...
RYAN THERIOT!
Obviously, Ryan makes a great number two hitter and possibly a leadoff hitter. Personally I would rather see him leading off with Alfonso Soriano batting second because I like to see a number two hitter with power.
I just love the way the guy plays because of his desire to be on the field and the way he hustles on every play.
Feel free to comment as I am anxious to know what my fellow Cubs fans think.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation, Bleed Cubbie Blue, or Al Yellon, editor-in-chief. FanPost opinions are, however, valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
0 recs |
182
comments
Comments
I don't think there's much debate
To provide some debate, I'll nitpick and say that you can't use the 7th inning error to support the case that Theriot does whatever he can to get on base. It was an error. He should not have got on base and he only did because Rolen let it happen. Now, you could argue that Theriot is a great guy to have that happen to - because of his speed and his smart baserunning, helping get him around from first to home eventually. But you can't credit him for getting from home to first.
But this is half-hearted debate. I agree - Ryan is The Riot.
by JohnM on Jul 25, 2007 4:28 AM CDT 0 recs
Theriot at Short
Fontenot on 2b
by Laven on Jul 25, 2007 7:30 AM CDT 0 recs
For the Riot fans
www.addisonstation.com
Good Riot wear.
by Kinky Reggae on Jul 25, 2007 8:13 AM CDT 0 recs
Theriot well grounded in the fundamentals
by Cajuncub on Jul 25, 2007 8:16 AM CDT 0 recs
not a straight up this or that guy
Other than that competition is great for both players.
by Ivy Walls on Jul 25, 2007 8:31 AM CDT 0 recs
yeah
Theriot's OPS is under .700, making him one of the most overrated baseball players by some people on this site. He really isn't very good.
by Thelonious on Jul 25, 2007 9:19 AM CDT 0 recs
However...
And don't say he didn't contribute or that he wasn't one of the biggest reasons for both of them, because he was.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 9:37 AM CDT
up
0 recs
And wasn't Eckstein the World Series MVP?
by dat cubfan daver on
Jul 25, 2007 9:52 AM CDT
up
0 recs
I'm not sure he's overrated, just unexpected
I might agree that maybe he's getting a bit too much adulation but he's getting the job done at a position that we've been deficient at for too long.
by stelmodad on
Jul 25, 2007 9:49 AM CDT
up
0 recs
re: yeah
Granted, Ryan did go through a cold spell of sorts in the last month or so (around the time Fontenot got so hot). But it seems to me, overall, he has been pretty good at baseball.
He works counts, he steals bases, he scores runs, he fields his position adequately -- and, overall, it seems like he's done this with pretty good consistency since coming to the Cubs late last season.
I realize the guy has shortcomings, but I admire what he's done for this team.
by dat cubfan daver on
Jul 25, 2007 9:51 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Loud sustained applause
Theriot is the kind of player I have seen elsewhere (Lenny Dykstra, Eckstein) but haven't seen on the Cubs much in recent years. A scrappy, hustling athlete who would run over his own mother to score a run.
by danimal15 on
Jul 25, 2007 10:30 AM CDT
up
0 recs
And...
Sorry, statheads, but sometimes that's a fact.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 10:31 AM CDT
up
0 recs
well, I guess if you declare it a fact
I'm not even going to bother arguing with you, because you obviously don't want to understand statistics (proven by some of the baseless arguments above). Maybe if Theriot had a DECENT stat line I could agree with your completely unscientific gut assessment that Theriot's value doesn't show up in the box score, but (aside from his sb%) the stats he's put up have been nothing short of terrible. I do agree that he IS probably better than his stats indicate (because his stats indicate a Cedenoan (c. 2006) type year), but that doesn't mean he isn't still bad. Lucky for him, he's still much better than Izturis was, and hence he's currently our best option at SS (and made the Izturis trade possible).
And yes, I am saying right here, right now that david eckstein is a shitty baseball player, and his contributions to the cardinals are grossly overstated by you in your post above. The fact that he was world series MVP is essentially irrelevant when assessing his worth as a baseball player: Neifi Perez hit near 400 in his first month or so with the cubs. Even crappy baseball players have the ability to put up impressive numbers over short periods. Besides, the Cubs haven't had a need for a world series mvp in like one or 70 years, wouldn't you say?
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 11:28 AM CDT
up
0 recs
fact?
Pretty loose use of the word fact there. Since you cannot prove that his contributions to the team exist outside his stat line those contributions are not facts. They are your perceptions.
Differentiating fact from perception is a pretty important player evaluation tool.
by jacob on
Jul 25, 2007 1:40 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Thanks!
That's the kind of athleticism Ryan Theriot brings to the game of baseball.
by dat cubfan daver on
Jul 25, 2007 10:47 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Theriot is a baseball player
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 10:51 AM CDT
up
0 recs
what the hell are you talking about?
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 11:31 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Baseball skills vs physical skills
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 11:37 AM CDT
up
0 recs
and I suppose...
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 11:44 AM CDT
up
0 recs
No
But hey, whatever blows your dress up.
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 11:49 AM CDT
up
0 recs
good baseball players
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 11:59 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Mancrush?
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 12:04 PM CDT
up
0 recs
who on sports talk radio thinks that?
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 12:09 PM CDT
up
0 recs
So
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 12:13 PM CDT
up
0 recs
this is just a bullshit statement
Your argument still has nothing to do with Ryan Theriot. If anything, he obviously has LESS baseball specific skill than the players that are....uh.....skilled.
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 12:48 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You are free to think of it however you like
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 12:53 PM CDT
up
0 recs
thanks for the permission
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 1:00 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I don't do it for everyone
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 1:20 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Don't let the Drunk get to ya
by DTJchris on
Jul 25, 2007 12:03 PM CDT
up
0 recs
funny, I think you just made that up
A Rod has been the best player in baseball this year.
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 12:06 PM CDT
up
0 recs
oops, my bad
"but he has clearly been the best player in the nl"
is your exact statemet, not "most potent offensive force" but "best player in the nl".
by DTJchris on
Jul 25, 2007 12:13 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Yea, well
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 12:08 PM CDT
up
0 recs
OPS
He does almost everything else pretty well. None of them great, but all pretty well. Certainly better -- and that is the point of the poll I think -- than the other current option at SS. (I think Cedeno is the only other real option.)
by JohnM on
Jul 25, 2007 10:34 AM CDT
up
0 recs
brilliant
ON BASE plus slugging
In fact, OBA is weighted more than slugging in the most current metrics. Theriot has a good, but far from special OBA around 340. If he was getting on at a .380 clip, I wouldn't be having this discussion. His complete lack of slugging ability makes getting on base paramount.
And the reason OPS is important, is because team OPS correlates strongly with winning (taken independantly from pitching, of course). Why is it so hard for you traditionalists to connect the dots...high team OPS = wins. therefore players with high OPS = good.
Again, I do see the benefit of having high energy guys like Theriot (or gamers, or whatever the hell you want to call him), but his statistics have been so poor, that his "energy" doesn't make up the difference.
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 11:42 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Theriot's OPS+ of 83
FWIW, metrics like UZR by MGL seem to consider Theriot as a good defender:
Name, Retrosheet ID, Position ,Team, Chances (Outs an average fielder would make), Range Runs,Error runs,Total Runs,Defensive Games, Runs per 150
"Theriot, Ryan",therr001,6,chn,64, 5,1,5,24,34
For comparison, Adam Everett:
"Everett, Adam",evera001,6,hou,128,11,0,11,49,35
Derek Jeter:
"Jeter, Derek",jeted001,6,nya,214,-14,1,-13,82,-24
Miguel Tejada:
"Tejada, Miguel",tejam001,6,bal,168,-1,3,1,64,3
By UZR, over 150 games, Theriot is 58 runs better than Derek Jeter defensively, and 31 runs better than Miguel Tejada.
BPro's defensive metrics, which are less reliable than UZR, also believe that Theriot is a good defender: Runs Above Average of 3 in 46 games at SS, RATE of 108.
by rfloh on
Jul 25, 2007 12:04 PM CDT
up
0 recs
What are you thinking?!
oh, that's a sarcastic statement by the way...
by DTJchris on
Jul 25, 2007 12:07 PM CDT
up
0 recs
the adults are talking
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 12:12 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I agree
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 12:11 PM CDT
up
0 recs
furthermore
I do, however, object strongly to those here who think Theriot is an offensive force because he steals bases and provides energy. Any offensive metric you care to choose points to a BAD offensive player (hell, even bis batting average...the least statty offensive stat there is....points to a mediocre player).
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 12:24 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Obviously
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 12:26 PM CDT
up
0 recs
yes
Whether anyone out there understands how to decipher a given stat is irrelevant. The fact remains that almost everything in baseball shows up in some statistical form. The great challenge lies in deciphering meaning from copious data.
I don't get why this is so hard to understand. Everything that happens in a baseball game/season plays out like a massive computer program. Every event has a cause and effect. Winning depends on the outcome of numerous variables, causes and effects, and represents a macro-scale interaction between players on the same team, and players from opposing teams. As a result, every variable necessarily shows up in some statistical form.
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 12:38 PM CDT
up
0 recs
That's all I needed to know
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 1:43 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Exactly.
The simple fact is, and you, MPH73, having played the game, know that is simply not true. There are things about winning baseball that cannot be measured on a stat sheet. Period. That is a fact, and it is incontrovertible.
For Thelonious to call people names and use profanity in trying to explain his position is just plain wrong. We can disagree about things, but the fact is, baseball is played by human beings on a field, not by computers. Until it's played by robots, there will be things that win games that do not show up in any "metrics", advanced or not.
Finally, many of you who quote statistics to back up your positions ad nauseum are using stats as an end in themselves. That's just plain wrong.
But you go right ahead. David Eckstein may be a statistically crappy player. But he helped two teams win World Series by things he did on the field. That is a fact. And someday Ryan Theriot may do the very same thing.
I'm finished arguing about this.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 1:55 PM CDT
up
0 recs
as you say, "loud sustained applause"
Give me a grizzled old baseball vet that has been in the game for his entire life over a computer geek who's never seen a game in his life any day for determining a player's worth. And I'm not calling anyone here names or making any judgements on anybody on this board when I say that.
by DTJchris on
Jul 25, 2007 2:10 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Gary Hughes convinced Jimbo....
by tyger1147 on
Jul 25, 2007 2:37 PM CDT
up
0 recs
What's he played?
by MPH73 on
Jul 25, 2007 2:41 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Yes, 6 games do determine
by DTJchris on
Jul 25, 2007 2:43 PM CDT
up
0 recs
So you two will allow us, then...
You'll allow us to revisit this at the end of the year then?
by tyger1147 on
Jul 25, 2007 3:09 PM CDT
up
0 recs
uh...Sure
by DTJchris on
Jul 25, 2007 3:12 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I'm not a devout stathead
That said, the idea that you think you can look at Theriot on the field and have a clue as to what unmeasurable factors he brings to the table that really help a team is absurd. You are making an argument based on what you think you see the hour or so that Theriot is actually on the field.
It's an argument that you can rehash ad nauseum (as you do with your claim that Damian Miller was responsible for the 2003 NL Central Title), but it's an argument that cannot be backed up in any reasonable fashion. It's you making up what you think the impact of a player like Theriot or Eckstein has. When people respond with stats, you pronounce that stats don't prove anything. But the only other option is for people to say that they have a better way of measuring immeasurables than you do. Those kind of arguments are great for elementary school, but hardly make for good adult baseball discussion.
by Porfi on
Jul 25, 2007 2:11 PM CDT
up
0 recs
well said
I've been trying to say exactly that for quite a while here. The thing that consistently drives me nuts is the ends justify the means mentality.
It's used all the time here.
Eckstein is good cause the cardinals won the world series. A pitcher pitched well cause the team won the game. A hitter hit well cause his base hit came with men on base, etc, etc, etc.
It's just an entirely flawed attempt at reasoning. Luckily this is just baseball and nobody gets hurt. The worst that happens is a 96 million dollar team loses 96 games. Outside of baseball that kind of thinking is dangerous.
by jacob on
Jul 25, 2007 4:39 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Nominated!!!
Did you guys see how Eckstein hit that lazy pop fly to left-center where he knew the grass had been over-watered and Curtis Granderson would slip? Thus making it a big run-producing double than turned the game. It was Theriot-like.
Or how he willed his teammates to hit those bunts and weak grounders back to pitchers and then made them commit a number of errors? That's amazing.
I ask you to please name 3 things Theriot does, things that can't be measured in stats, that help his team win.
by tyger1147 on
Jul 25, 2007 2:36 PM CDT
up
0 recs
That's exactly the point.
But if something on the field happens that exemplifies this, it can easily be noted at the time that it does. It's called "doing the little things".
You may not be able to measure it, but managers notice. Teammates notice. And opponents notice.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 3:08 PM CDT
up
0 recs
YOU DARN WELL CAN MEASURE IT!!!
I notice those things, too, Al. But ya know what? I also notice when he K's in the last at-bat of the game. Or when he goes in a slump. Or when he gets lucky because one of the best 3B in the game makes an error.
I like theriot. He doesn't try to do more than he can. He plays to his strengths to minimize his weaknesses. But he's not that good of a player. There are probably 20-25 SS I'd rather have than him.
Aramis Ramirez doesn't hustle. He doesn't come to play every day. He has no plate discipline. Until this year, he was an average defender, at best.
You take 8 of the former. I'll take 8 of the latter. Who wins?
by tyger1147 on
Jul 25, 2007 3:19 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You know damn well..
I'll take people who perform on the field in various different ways, whether it's a Ramirez hitting home runs, or a Theriot hustling. Takes all types.
You go right ahead and put together a "team" of players who have good statistics. They'll look great on paper, and they might suck on the field.
If I have to explain the reasons why this is so, maybe you shouldn't be a baseball fan.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 3:32 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Now you're telling me what fan I can be?
You don't have to explain this, because I understand what factor luck plays into baseball. Apparently, you don't believe in luck?
And what's the quotes around "team" for?
It's rather unfortunate that someone who has such a popular baseball site really doesn't understand the game at all. It's sad. I feel sorry for the people who come her for knowledge and get sucked into lesser understanding than what they originally had.
If you don't get that, maybe you should do more movie reviews.
by tyger1147 on
Jul 25, 2007 3:38 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I don't understand the game at all?
Now go on back to one of the stat geek sites, where you can all congratulate each other on how statistically smart you are. Enjoy yourselves.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 3:40 PM CDT
up
0 recs
My point proven...
And the "you don't know baseball" thing was basically just a repeat of what you said to me. It doesn't feel good, does it?
by tyger1147 on
Jul 25, 2007 3:42 PM CDT
up
0 recs
this is Al at his most ignorant
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 3:08 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Nor is it worth my time...
Knock it off.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 3:09 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I'm hardly calling you names
by Thelonious on
Jul 25, 2007 3:15 PM CDT
up
0 recs
When you say "baseless statements"...
I just got finished saying that the value of a certain player, in some cases, cannot be measured by numbers on a spreadsheet.
That is, in truth, an incontrovertible fact. You cannot disprove my statement. Thus to call it "ignorant", is, in fact, wrong.
I could say it's "ignorant", but I choose not to.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 3:19 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You can even say...
"doing the little things" What are those little things? How can you say they exist if you don't even know what they are? I know what a friggin' unicorn is. I could at least describe it to you.
You're just saying these things to get your site hits up. I'm convinced of it.
by tyger1147 on
Jul 25, 2007 3:22 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You're so full of it....
Nothing could be further from the truth; however, how I do make money from this site is none of your business.
This is the last thing I will EVER say on this topic.
About the other thing you mention, yes, "little things" that are not measurable on stat sheets can win baseball games. Can I quantify what they are? No, I can't.
Go on back to your spreadsheets. Hope you enjoy them. Me, I enjoy ballgames played by human beings.
by Al on
Jul 25, 2007 3:31 PM CDT
up
0 recs


