I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm excited about finally seeing the new playing field at the Friendly Confines in action tomorrow.  Since I wanted a preview, I went and checked out the webcam that's inside the ballpark.  Here's a representative photo:

For comparison, this is a shot of the old infield from an almost identical angle:

via www.geocities.com

 

I'm kind of disappointed that the infield itself looks different.  I always thought that Wrigley's infield had some unique features: it always looked a little "thin" in terms of where the outfield grass started, it had long "umpire paths" behind first and third (which exist in about a third of all major league parks, but are all shorter than Wrigley's old one), a straight dirt line instead of a rounded one in front of home plate, and even the relatively long "extra dirt" around first and third base.

Oh, and the fungo circles, on either side of the plate.

In short, the old infield had some character to it, and this one doesn't.  I know, this is not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things, but I kind of feel like the Cubs are just getting a cheap copy of everybody else's infield, and its no longer unique to Chicago.

Anyway, there are couple other changes that can be seen from that webcam, should you wish to take the time.  The first is that the warning track is not only larger, but it extends all the way around the entire field, including foul territory, so the bullpens consist mainly of dirt in between the mound and the plate.  The second major change is that the Cubs added a few rows of seats on the left-field side of their dugout, and it just squeezes the stands in a bit tighter on the field -- it looks like they may have moved the bullpen a bit closer to the foul line to compensate, but it's hard to tell from this angle.

Oh, also, that logo behind the plate is hideous.  "Opening Week"?  I know that MLB has been doing this for a few years, but, come on -- since when is "opening week" celebrated?

I've spent a decent part of this morning clicking around this webcam, generating personal excitement about tomorrow, opening day.  Only one more day to go, folks.  =)

Continue reading this post »

Nate Silver compares the merits of a Fukudome/Murton center/right combination against lefties, versus a Johnson/Murton combo:

However, there is another option in the form of Matt Murton, who is around .12 runs per game better than Johnson against left-handed pitching — the equivalent of about 20 runs per 162 games — and fully .20 runs better than Pie. Can Murton play center? Probably not in a way that most teams are willing to tolerate. But Murton could play right field — and Kosuke Fukudome could play center, which by most accounts he was able to handle competently in Japan. It’s hard to imagine that a Johnson/Fukudome outfield is fully 20 runs per season better with the glove than Fukudome/Murton; it’s not like Reed Johnson is Gary Maddox out thee. And here, the clubhouse externalities work in the opposite direction, because by acquiring Johnson, you’ve made clear to Murton just how unimportant a part of the club’s future he is.

It’s not a bad acquisition in the abstract so much as an uncreative use of resources, which has become something of a hallmark for the Cubs.

The last line really rings true, doesn't it?

Between all four of the players in question - Pie, Fukudome, Johnson, and Murton - Murton has the superior bat against lefties, and there's no reason to think he won't continue to do so.  Working him into the lineup against southpaws would be a benefit to the Cubs in those games.  Unfortunately, Murton is a defensive liability.

Baseball Prospectus has Murton and Johnson as about average fielders at left field (based on FRAA), although baseball wisdom holds that Johnson is, while not a terribly good CF, at least capable of credibly playing the position.  Murton is not.

The question is, how good of a center fielder is Fukudome?  A center/right field of Fukudome/Murton would be worse than Johnson/Fukudome, but by how much?  I'm tempted to say that it would not be enough to offset the real gains that Murton's projected .310/.380/.488 line against lefties would bring, over Johnson's .278/.346/.416 projection.

Worth pointing out: Johnson's projection doesn't match his career performance against southpaws, who he's hit .308/.371/.462 against in his career.  Murton's career split against lefties is just a touch better than his PECOTA projection.

Either way, Johnson definitely has value as a backup for the Cubs, as he's the only bench OF who can credibly play all three slots, though I guess Cedeno's supposed to be able to play center.

So what do you all think?  Murton or Johnson?

 

Poll

Which center field/right field combination should the Cubs use against left-handed pitching this year?

47%

Fukudome (CF) / Murton (RF)

76 votes

52%

Johnson (CF) / Fukudome (RF)

83 votes

159 votes | Poll has closed

Continue reading this post »

Over at The Hardball Times, there are five questions posed about the Cubs, which are then answered by the article's writer.  Here are the questions:

1. Dusty was rusty; Lou, too?
   
2. Is mediocre the new good? [about Lilly and Marquis]
   
3. Who is Alfonso Soriano?
   
4. How many games will Ryan Theriot play at second base?
   
5. Can the Cubs really expect a good season without the usual spring caveat: "If Wood and Prior stay healthy"?

It's worth looking at the entire article, but my favorite line from it has to be this: Once they signed Soriano, the Cubs examined their roster and failed to find Andruw Jones or Jim Edmonds. So, on March 1, Soriano stood in center field for the first time in his major league career as the Cubs played their first 2007 exhibition game.

Anyway, it's a nice little article that dissects some of the questions we have about the Cubs going into the season.  I liked it.  Hopefully some of it can stimulate discussion.  =)

I was watching last night's episode of Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, Aaron Sorkin's new show, when I caught this on the wall behind a character:

Looks like me like it says this:

1969
1984
1989
1998
2003

Wait til' next year, Jeff :-(

SOSA'S
JUICED
retired
a ranger

Just thought that was interesting.  Personally, I like Tony Almeida's Cubs mug on 24 better, but I'll take Cubs easter eggs wherever they come.

I've been looking around the net for some pictures of the Cubs at spring training, so I thought I'd share the only two good ones I found (both from Yahoo! News) with you guys.  They're both of Alfonso Soriano, and it's nice to see him in a Cubs uniform for real (even if it's the lame one with the goofy side paneling and the hat with ear stripes).

Soriano One

Soriano Two

As an aside, am I the only one who really, really hopes that people stop refering to Daisuke Matsuzaka as "Dice-K"?

Some of you might be interested to listen to this podcast, which features Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus interviewing Steve Stone.

I listened to it today while walking and riding on my way to catch a train to Wisconsin, and I highly recommend it.  Of particular interest to us Cubs fans is a few minutes spent discussing Kerry Wood and some reminiscing about Harry Caray, but the entire interview is worth a listen.  Steve Stone's not just a good analyst, but he's got a great voice and vocabulary for baseball.  It's nice to hear it again, even if he does accidentally call Derrek Lee "Derek Jeter".

The poll question I added is tangentially related to this diary.

Poll

Did you secretly wish that Bob Brenly would be named manager just because it might have paved the way for Steve Stone's return to the broadcast booth?

65%

Yes

49 votes

34%

No

26 votes

75 votes | Poll has closed

When looking at the Cubs' 2007 lineup, a few things can be assumed.  Alfonso Soriano is going to bat first, and the 3-6 slots will probably be filled by Derrek Lee, Aramis Ramirez, Jacque Jones, and Michael Barrett -- in that order.  The big question becomes, who is going to bat second, between Soriano and Lee?

There would seem to be four candidates, depending on the left field platoon.  Cezar Izturis and Mark DeRosa figure to be everyday players, with Matt Murton and Cliff Floyd sharing the duties in left.

Let me first say that under no circumstance should Izturis bat second.  I realize that the face he is a switch hitter makes it very tempting to put him there, but it's no secret that his offensive skills are less than spectactular.  While the chance of him putting up a Neifi-ish sub-.300 OBP seems slim, both PECOTA and ZIPS project his OBP to be around .320, and when coupled with the relatively small amount of pop in his bat, makes him a good candidate for the bottom of the order.

DeRosa will probably be a better hitter, but I am still somewhat concerned with his ability to get on base.  Remember, that second slot is important, with the heavy hitters coming up next.  I honestly think that it was the 2005 Cubs' inability to get their top of the order guys on base for Lee to drive in that cost him the MVP, and it is certain that it cost them runs.  It wouldn't upset me to have him in that spot, though, particularly if he's able to make contact and give Soriano a chance to run when he gets on base.  ZIPS thinks that his OBP will be comparable to Izturis'; PECTOA says 10-20 points higher.  Both projections could very well be wrong.  Last year was a career year for DeRosa, but he posted .296/.357/.456 line: if he can repeat those numbers, he will be more than acceptable at second base, and batting second.

The option I favor is having Matt Murton bat second, something that I haven't made much of a secret of over the last year.  His .297/.365/.444 line from last season is very close to DeRosa's numbers, except that Murton has been hitting like this his entire professional career.  His numbers have come down in the majors with increased competition, but he defied the fluke-cryers last year with a very solid season.  People question whether he will ever develop real power (13 HR in 508 ABs last year), but batting in the two hole, he's not going to be looking to drive a ton of runners home anyway.  His batting stats are likely to rise even higher with the dangerous baserunner Soriano in front of him and a healthy Derrek Lee waiting on deck.  Le's patience and ability to get on base are the marks of a good hitter, and a guy who could wind up scoring a lot of runs for the 2007 Cubs.  For what it's worth, PECOTA and ZIPS see almost the exact same batting stats for Murton as 2006.

And yes, I do realize that I have a level of man-love for Murton.  Deal with it.

The question then is what to do when Floyd is in the lineup?  He doesn't run very well, but his bat works fine.  He has more power than Murton, and while he doesn't have the long-term upside, he's probably about as valuable a player as Murton is, except he's a left-handed batter.  A platoon here makes a ton of sense, because Murton hits lefties significantly better than righties (OPS of .870 versus .782 in 2006).  Floyd's advantage over righties is even higher: in 2005 (his last healthy season) he posted an OPS of .915 against them, as opposed to .710 against left handers.  I would make the argument that the Cubs' best option against right handed starters would have Jacque Jones (.303/.358/.528 against RHP in 2006) moved into the #2 slot and Floyd batting fifth behind Ramirez.  Floyd is likely to sit out some games against righties, in which case Murton is probably better suited for the second spot in the order than Jones. Frankly, I think that it would be fine to have Murton and Floyd split time against righties, and have Floyd available off the bench .

In summation, I would favor the following starting lineups:

Vs. RHP, with Floyd in LF:
Soriano
Jones
Lee
Ramirez
Floyd
Barrett
DeRosa
Izturis

With Murton in LF:
Soriano
Murton
Lee
Ramirez
Jones
Barrett
DeRosa
Izturis

Every couple of years, Majestic changes the design of the batting practice jerseys.  The new ones can be seen here.  Putting away my feelings on a single template being applied to 30 MLB teams,  I'm glad to see that the Cubs appear to be returning their BP jersey to a Cubbie blue, instead of the navy they've favored recently.  I am not excited about the white-and-red side panels on the jersey, but I think it certainly looks better than the one it's replacing, which quite noticeably does not match the Cubs' hats.

I also like that the names being kept off of the jersey, which is something that a lot of teams that have names on all of their jerseys are planning to do with their batting practice jersey.

Source: The Baltimore Sun

Thank Hendry!  No more Bynum, ever, ever, ever!

The Baker era is slowly slipping away... and that's only a good thing for the Cubs.  Watching Bynum play in all those games was painful... I don't care how fast he was.  Maybe he should have gone into track and field instead of baseball.