Uh-Oh: Cubs offer for Jones confirmed

[BigbadB]

Just thought I'd throw in Zip's projections for 2006 for the afore mentioned lineup.........

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Pierre*      cf  .293  .346  .364 162 676  92 198 22 10  2  61  50  41 52 22 
Walker*      2b  .277  .336  .435 125 451  60 125 26  3 13  57  40  49  1  2 
Lee          1b  .309  .398  .582 159 593 104 183 44  2 38 114  84 121 14  5 
Ramirez      3b  .302  .359  .541 142 549  83 166 33  1 32 104  45  75  1  2 
Barrett      c   .276  .342  .468 125 410  47 113 29  4 14  58  37  60  0  3 
Murton       lf  .289  .350  .430 137 470  64 136 16  4 14  56  42  77 10  5 
Cedeno       ss  .287  .332  .412 113 345  46  99 15  2  8  40  20  63 13  4 
Patterson*   cf  .252  .298  .418 146 564  73 142 23  4 21  68  36 147 23  8

 

I'm not a stat guy, but those projections don't look bad. Am I wrong?

 

Oh yeah, they're bad. 2 guys even remotely close to 100 RBI's is not good. That's 569 runs scored by your starting 8. Somewhere, you would need another 134 runs from the rest of your team just to equal the run production as the horrible 2005 team.

 

Ughh.

[USSoccer]

I just think that if the Cubs get Tejada, such a deal will tick of a lot of people cause he'll basically have to deal off most of the farm for him. Same goes for Abreu.

 

Sure as hell won't tick off me.

 

I'd rather go for broke and trade for an impact player than tread water and be in a position to count on luck and health for us to contend. If that means we gut the minors to a point, so be it. This window of opportunity the Cubs have has maybe 2 or 3 more years in it anyway. It's not 2002 anymore.

[frostwyrm]

Just thought I'd throw in Zip's projections for 2006 for the afore mentioned lineup.........

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Pierre*      cf  .293  .346  .364 162 676  92 198 22 10  2  61  50  41 52 22 
Walker*      2b  .277  .336  .435 125 451  60 125 26  3 13  57  40  49  1  2 
Lee          1b  .309  .398  .582 159 593 104 183 44  2 38 114  84 121 14  5 
Ramirez      3b  .302  .359  .541 142 549  83 166 33  1 32 104  45  75  1  2 
Barrett      c   .276  .342  .468 125 410  47 113 29  4 14  58  37  60  0  3 
Murton       lf  .289  .350  .430 137 470  64 136 16  4 14  56  42  77 10  5 
Cedeno       ss  .287  .332  .412 113 345  46  99 15  2  8  40  20  63 13  4 
Patterson*   cf  .252  .298  .418 146 564  73 142 23  4 21  68  36 147 23  8

 

I'm not a stat guy, but those projections don't look bad. Am I wrong?

 

I'd like to see their projections for Neifi, because he will be the real starter.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Just thought I'd throw in Zip's projections for 2006 for the afore mentioned lineup.........

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Pierre*      cf  .293  .346  .364 162 676  92 198 22 10  2  61  50  41 52 22 
Walker*      2b  .277  .336  .435 125 451  60 125 26  3 13  57  40  49  1  2 
Lee          1b  .309  .398  .582 159 593 104 183 44  2 38 114  84 121 14  5 
Ramirez      3b  .302  .359  .541 142 549  83 166 33  1 32 104  45  75  1  2 
Barrett      c   .276  .342  .468 125 410  47 113 29  4 14  58  37  60  0  3 
Murton       lf  .289  .350  .430 137 470  64 136 16  4 14  56  42  77 10  5 
Cedeno       ss  .287  .332  .412 113 345  46  99 15  2  8  40  20  63 13  4 
Patterson*   cf  .252  .298  .418 146 564  73 142 23  4 21  68  36 147 23  8

 

Wow, that's an awful line for Walker. I wonder how they came to that conclusion?

 

Maybe it assumes he plays a full season against lefty pitching?

 

edit - i mean no platooning

Edited December 20, 2005 by CardsFanInChiTown

[goonys evil twin]

Just thought I'd throw in Zip's projections for 2006 for the afore mentioned lineup.........

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Pierre*      cf  .293  .346  .364 162 676  92 198 22 10  2  61  50  41 52 22 
Walker*      2b  .277  .336  .435 125 451  60 125 26  3 13  57  40  49  1  2 
Lee          1b  .309  .398  .582 159 593 104 183 44  2 38 114  84 121 14  5 
Ramirez      3b  .302  .359  .541 142 549  83 166 33  1 32 104  45  75  1  2 
Barrett      c   .276  .342  .468 125 410  47 113 29  4 14  58  37  60  0  3 
Murton       lf  .289  .350  .430 137 470  64 136 16  4 14  56  42  77 10  5 
Cedeno       ss  .287  .332  .412 113 345  46  99 15  2  8  40  20  63 13  4 
Patterson*   cf  .252  .298  .418 146 564  73 142 23  4 21  68  36 147 23  8

 

Wow, that's an awful line for Walker. I wonder how they came to that conclusion?

 

It should be noted that going off of Walker and Cedeno's games played projections, that leaves about 80-90 starts for Neifi. There would also be some 50 games started by the mystery corner OF (Mabry?). 20 games by somebody at 3B (Mabry?), plenty of time for Blanco to bring down the total C numbers, and that is a pretty significant 100 point OPS decline by Lee. I'm not happy with that offense.

[CuseCubFan69]

Just thought I'd throw in Zip's projections for 2006 for the afore mentioned lineup.........

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Pierre*      cf  .293  .346  .364 162 676  92 198 22 10  2  61  50  41 52 22 
Walker*      2b  .277  .336  .435 125 451  60 125 26  3 13  57  40  49  1  2 
Lee          1b  .309  .398  .582 159 593 104 183 44  2 38 114  84 121 14  5 
Ramirez      3b  .302  .359  .541 142 549  83 166 33  1 32 104  45  75  1  2 
Barrett      c   .276  .342  .468 125 410  47 113 29  4 14  58  37  60  0  3 
Murton       lf  .289  .350  .430 137 470  64 136 16  4 14  56  42  77 10  5 
Cedeno       ss  .287  .332  .412 113 345  46  99 15  2  8  40  20  63 13  4 
Patterson*   cf  .252  .298  .418 146 564  73 142 23  4 21  68  36 147 23  8

 

Where's the real lineup that has Perez batting second?

[jmajew]

Just thought I'd throw in Zip's projections for 2006 for the afore mentioned lineup.........

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Pierre*      cf  .293  .346  .364 162 676  92 198 22 10  2  61  50  41 52 22 
Walker*      2b  .277  .336  .435 125 451  60 125 26  3 13  57  40  49  1  2 
Lee          1b  .309  .398  .582 159 593 104 183 44  2 38 114  84 121 14  5 
Ramirez      3b  .302  .359  .541 142 549  83 166 33  1 32 104  45  75  1  2 
Barrett      c   .276  .342  .468 125 410  47 113 29  4 14  58  37  60  0  3 
Murton       lf  .289  .350  .430 137 470  64 136 16  4 14  56  42  77 10  5 
Cedeno       ss  .287  .332  .412 113 345  46  99 15  2  8  40  20  63 13  4 
Patterson*   cf  .252  .298  .418 146 564  73 142 23  4 21  68  36 147 23  8

 

I'm not a stat guy, but those projections don't look bad. Am I wrong?

 

Oh yeah, they're bad. 2 guys even remotely close to 100 RBI's is not good. That's 569 runs scored by your starting 8. Somewhere, you would need another 134 runs from the rest of your team just to equal the run production as the horrible 2005 team.

 

Ughh.

 

You have to take into considereing the number of games played in these predictions. That is why the runs are low. Just by looking at the OBP I don't think it is that bad.

[jmajew]

Our team OBP last year was 324. What should our goal be? 330-335?

[goonys evil twin]

I'll admit it I am being overly optimistic. I still don't see this offense being any worse than last years. Instead of having two guys in our lineup with and OBP of under 300 we will only have one, if we keep patterson in Right. To me that is automatically an improvement. Plus you also have to take into consideration that you won't have Holly and Dubois taking up time in left field with OBP of under 300. I understand that the upgrades have not been to the caliber that we had all hoped for but I see it as being slightly upgraded. I never said we were going to have a top of the line offense I just said it was upgraded.

 

I don't think it'll be any worse either. But I wasn't expecting this offseason to result in an offense whose biggest accomplishment was not being worse than last year's.

 

Dubois and Holly won't be out there, but the 900+ OPS Murton won't be out there either. And some scrub veteran will get time out there, possibly Mabry and his sub .300 OBP from last year. Remember, as bad as Holly and Dubois were, the total LF line last year was .265/.319/.418, 12th in the NL (compared to 16 and 15 for CF and RF, respectively). LF was not the biggest problem. And while Murton is likely to do better than .265/.319/.418, I'm not penciling him in for a whole heck of a lot more. And he won't be the only LF. Some veteran very capable of dragging that overall number down will get time out there.

[Blueheart05]

Our team OBP last year was 324. What should our goal be? 330-335?

 

.335-.340 or higher in my book

Edited December 20, 2005 by Blueheart05

[CubfaninCA]

Hendry's done plenty wrong by sticking w/ Baker.

 

I just think that if the Cubs get Tejada, such a deal will tick of a lot of people cause he'll basically have to deal off most of the farm for him. Same goes for Abreu.

 

Maybe Hendry lucks into Floyd or Wilkerson, but I'm starting to lose hope. This is the Cubs afterall. :?

 

There might be people who wouldn't like that deal, but that would be THEIR problem, not yours or mine. Tejada is the type of player you sell the farm for, as is Abreu. Not Huff, not Wilkerson, not Mench.

 

Don't lose hope. Once you've lost hope, there won't be anyone left. j/k :D

 

Don't worry. Even w/ Jock Jones in RF and Nef @ SS, I still have hope. Prior, Z, Wood & JWill could be real tough, and I'm sold on Murton being quite good.

[Fred Hornkohl]

I'd like to see their projections for Neifi, because he will be the real starter.

 

Oh, man..... don't go there !!!

 

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Perez#       ss  .259  .288  .353 140 482  46 125 25  1  6  47  19  43  5  3 

[anemic offense]

That's crap. Again not to take away from their offensive superstarts, but this dimension of their game gives them SEVERAL runs a year. Is if the main reason for the success? Of course not. But when you have a team that does SEVERAL little things execeptionally well, it adds to the overall performance of the team. You can't tell me 1st to 3rds, hit and runs, bunts, and situational hitting aren't key cogs to this team's success. If you don't want to take my words for it ask the Cardinal fan's. I think you'd be surprised.

 

STL and the Cubs were very close in sacrifice hits and sacrifice flies last year, in the middle of the NL pack. Sacrifices, and the little things, are not why STL had success. The big things are. The Cards ranked 3rd in OBP, and 3rd in runs scored. There's your correlation for offensive success. And they pitched extremely well. There's your overall success.

 

Washington, San Francisco, Florida, Pittsburgh, and San Diego were among the most sacrificial teams in the league last year. Those little things are things that weaker offensive teams do, and they don't correlate to success.

 

total sacrifices:

 

chicago- 106

 

st louis- 112

 

walks:

 

chicago- 419 (dead last)

 

st louis- 534

 

but i'm sure that there was some special kind of magic in st louis sacrifices that gave them the out back or something.

 

i'll say it again, wasting an out is stupid if it's not the pitcher making it.

 

Maybe the official number of sacrifices is the same, but that doesn't mean they (the Cubs) were anything CLOSE to the Cardinals fundamentally speaking. Again, things such as first to thirds (they do this a LOT), situational hitting (moving runners over), SBs (in key situations), and overal base path awareness gives them a HUGE advantage over the opposition.

 

While I'm on this subject I'd like to clarify a misperception many (not specifically) have. Just because 2 teams have about the same number of runs, the same number of hits, the same number of _____ (what have you) doesn't make them equal (and I'm not necessarily comparing the Cubs or Cards). There are times when these things are more importnat than others, namely close games. Tell me, how many times do the good "small ball" teams seem to eke out runs (situational hitting, bunts, sacrifices, SBs, etc.) in 1 run/ tied games? A hell of a lot more than the Cubs do. Point is those one to 2 runs every now and again ARE HUGE. Instead of having your "keep it close" BP guy in the game you have your closer. Instead losing the game you win. You multiply this out over the course of the season and I'm fairly confident it gives the good teams 6-7 (sometimes more sometimes less) wins. In contrast, it probably costs the inept teams at leat 3-4. What would you classify this team as??? I'd say inept. And I'd also say I'm 2,000,0000 and 10 percent confident in saying the lack of the above cost this team at LEAT a handfull of wins. It wouldn't have been enough to make this team contenders but they certainly would have been better.

 

This is why I get frustrated (again not you just in general) when so many people get "tunnel vision" when it comes to OBP. There are so many things that can make a player better that stats don't quantify to where its idiotic to judge players solely on these stats (which is why I usually try not to comment on players I haven't see play). Things such as defense, awareness, baseball acumen, and fundamental hitting are such an imortant part of the game. OBP is EXTREMELY important too, its just not the only thing. Fact is this team was SOOOO BAADDD at so many things that every one contributed to its demise. If we can improve, not solve, all of these things this team will be pretty good. And I may also be in the minority in saying it may not take a whole lot. Young, seemingly fundamental palyers like Cedeno, Pierre, and Murton seem like a start, but they're definately not the finish. Then again we won't really know until June or July...if even then.

[jjgman21]

Hendry's going to get ripped apart regardless of what he does.

 

Not true. You and I have butted heads all offseason, so while you are under the impression I am all gloom and doom while I'm under the impression you believe Hendry can do no wrong, there is a middle point most likely for both of us.

 

....I said right after the offseason ended to give me a line up with .350+ OBP throughout and this team will win more games than it loses.

 

so would any team, but that's simply not realistic. name five teams that had 8 .350 OBP regulars in the history of baseball. the 2004 RedSox only had seven, and that includes having the DH instead of a pitcher.

 

 

Burnitz, Preston Wilson, Jacque Jones, Juan Encarnacion, etc.. cannot provide a .350+ OBP. I could honestly deal with a year of Jacque Jones if we had Abreu or Tejada or both playing in the same line up. However, the "improvements" I have seen this offseason are a .326 OBP lead off hitter, the resigning of a sub .300 OBP of Neifi Perez, Cedeno will be lucky to be anywhere close to .350 in his rookie year, Murton will likely make it, but he has no back up in place if he gets hurt, Patterson is sub .300 OBP, and the trade Walker rumors haven't gone away completely.

 

the bolded part is exactly what you constantly do to make your point. pluck out the worst case scenerio stat to rip on the player you are talking about. nevermind the three and a half seasons of OBP over .361, and his career .355. we'll focus on the year his OBP was .326 and the year it was .332. unless of course we are talking about a player you want, then we ignore the worst stats (ie. noone ever mentions Abreu's 100 point plummet in OPS last year).

 

you have great baseball accumen, why not use it to give a balanced, objective opinion about players instead of cherry picking stats?

[BigbadB]

Just thought I'd throw in Zip's projections for 2006 for the afore mentioned lineup.........

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Pierre*      cf  .293  .346  .364 162 676  92 198 22 10  2  61  50  41 52 22 
Walker*      2b  .277  .336  .435 125 451  60 125 26  3 13  57  40  49  1  2 
Lee          1b  .309  .398  .582 159 593 104 183 44  2 38 114  84 121 14  5 
Ramirez      3b  .302  .359  .541 142 549  83 166 33  1 32 104  45  75  1  2 
Barrett      c   .276  .342  .468 125 410  47 113 29  4 14  58  37  60  0  3 
Murton       lf  .289  .350  .430 137 470  64 136 16  4 14  56  42  77 10  5 
Cedeno       ss  .287  .332  .412 113 345  46  99 15  2  8  40  20  63 13  4 
Patterson*   cf  .252  .298  .418 146 564  73 142 23  4 21  68  36 147 23  8

 

I'm not a stat guy, but those projections don't look bad. Am I wrong?

 

Oh yeah, they're bad. 2 guys even remotely close to 100 RBI's is not good. That's 569 runs scored by your starting 8. Somewhere, you would need another 134 runs from the rest of your team just to equal the run production as the horrible 2005 team.

 

Ughh.

 

You have to take into considereing the number of games played in these predictions. That is why the runs are low. Just by looking at the OBP I don't think it is that bad.

 

True, but who will be getting the other at bats? Neifi (-.300 OBP), Blanco (-.300 OBP), Mabry (-.300 OBP last year), Hairston (.336 OBP last year), Jacque Jones (.319 OBP last year), etc...

[jmajew]

Our team OBP last year was 324. What should our goal be? 330-335?

 

.335-.340 or higher in my book

 

That would give us the second highest OBP in the NL.

[Fred Hornkohl]

Our team OBP last year was 324. What should our goal be? 330-335?

 

.335-.340 or higher in my book

 

For what it's worth, the league average last year was .330. Just replacing Neifi in the lineup with Pierre puts us at league average. Where we go after that, depends mostly on who Hendry acquires to play right field.

[goonys evil twin]

Our team OBP last year was 324. What should our goal be? 330-335?

 

.335-.340 or higher in my book

 

For what it's worth, the league average last year was .330. Just replacing Neifi in the lineup with Pierre puts us at league average. Where we go after that, depends mostly on who Hendry acquires to play right field.

 

Since when do Neifi and Pierre play interchangable positions?

[nick23]

That's crap. Again not to take away from their offensive superstarts, but this dimension of their game gives them SEVERAL runs a year. Is if the main reason for the success? Of course not. But when you have a team that does SEVERAL little things execeptionally well, it adds to the overall performance of the team. You can't tell me 1st to 3rds, hit and runs, bunts, and situational hitting aren't key cogs to this team's success. If you don't want to take my words for it ask the Cardinal fan's. I think you'd be surprised.

 

STL and the Cubs were very close in sacrifice hits and sacrifice flies last year, in the middle of the NL pack. Sacrifices, and the little things, are not why STL had success. The big things are. The Cards ranked 3rd in OBP, and 3rd in runs scored. There's your correlation for offensive success. And they pitched extremely well. There's your overall success.

 

Washington, San Francisco, Florida, Pittsburgh, and San Diego were among the most sacrificial teams in the league last year. Those little things are things that weaker offensive teams do, and they don't correlate to success.

 

total sacrifices:

 

chicago- 106

 

st louis- 112

 

walks:

 

chicago- 419 (dead last)

 

st louis- 534

 

but i'm sure that there was some special kind of magic in st louis sacrifices that gave them the out back or something.

 

i'll say it again, wasting an out is stupid if it's not the pitcher making it.

 

Maybe the official number of sacrifices is the same, but that doesn't mean they (the Cubs) were anything CLOSE to the Cardinals fundamentally speaking. Again, things such as first to thirds (they do this a LOT), situational hitting (moving runners over), SBs (in key situations), and overal base path awareness gives them a HUGE advantage over the opposition.

 

While I'm on this subject I'd like to clarify a misperception many (not specifically) have. Just because 2 teams have about the same number of runs, the same number of hits, the same number of _____ (what have you) doesn't make them equal (and I'm not necessarily comparing the Cubs or Cards). There are times when these things are more importnat than others, namely close games. Tell me, how many times do the good "small ball" teams seem to eke out runs (situational hitting, bunts, sacrifices, SBs, etc.) in 1 run/ tied games? A hell of a lot more than the Cubs do. Point is those one to 2 runs every now and again ARE HUGE. Instead of having your "keep it close" BP guy in the game you have your closer. Instead losing the game you win. You multiply this out over the course of the season and I'm fairly confident it gives the good teams 6-7 (sometimes more sometimes less) wins. In contrast, it probably costs the inept teams at leat 3-4. What would you classify this team as??? I'd say inept. And I'd also say I'm 2,000,0000 and 10 percent confident in saying the lack of the above cost this team at LEAT a handfull of wins. It wouldn't have been enough to make this team contenders but they certainly would have been better.

 

This is why I get frustrated (again not you just in general) when so many people get "tunnel vision" when it comes to OBP. There are so many things that can make a player better that stats don't quantify to where its idiotic to judge players solely on these stats (which is why I usually try not to comment on players I haven't see play). Things such as defense, awareness, baseball acumen, and fundamental hitting are such an imortant part of the game. OBP is EXTREMELY important too, its just not the only thing. Fact is this team was SOOOO BAADDD at so many things that every one contributed to its demise. If we can improve, not solve, all of these things this team will be pretty good. And I may also be in the minority in saying it may not take a whole lot. Young, seemingly fundamental palyers like Cedeno, Pierre, and Murton seem like a start, but they're definately not the finish. Then again we won't really know until June or July...if even then.

 

You must watch a lot of Cardinal games.

[jmajew]

Just thought I'd throw in Zip's projections for 2006 for the afore mentioned lineup.........

 

Name         P    AVG   OBP   SLG   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Pierre*      cf  .293  .346  .364 162 676  92 198 22 10  2  61  50  41 52 22 
Walker*      2b  .277  .336  .435 125 451  60 125 26  3 13  57  40  49  1  2 
Lee          1b  .309  .398  .582 159 593 104 183 44  2 38 114  84 121 14  5 
Ramirez      3b  .302  .359  .541 142 549  83 166 33  1 32 104  45  75  1  2 
Barrett      c   .276  .342  .468 125 410  47 113 29  4 14  58  37  60  0  3 
Murton       lf  .289  .350  .430 137 470  64 136 16  4 14  56  42  77 10  5 
Cedeno       ss  .287  .332  .412 113 345  46  99 15  2  8  40  20  63 13  4 
Patterson*   cf  .252  .298  .418 146 564  73 142 23  4 21  68  36 147 23  8

 

I'm not a stat guy, but those projections don't look bad. Am I wrong?

 

Oh yeah, they're bad. 2 guys even remotely close to 100 RBI's is not good. That's 569 runs scored by your starting 8. Somewhere, you would need another 134 runs from the rest of your team just to equal the run production as the horrible 2005 team.

 

Ughh.

 

You have to take into considereing the number of games played in these predictions. That is why the runs are low. Just by looking at the OBP I don't think it is that bad.

 

True, but who will be getting the other at bats? Neifi (-.300 OBP), Blanco (-.300 OBP), Mabry (-.300 OBP last year), Hairston (.336 OBP last year), Jacque Jones (.319 OBP last year), etc...

 

I just want to say this. The Cubs need a manager this year who is willing to play the young guys and let them struggle. If Baker isn't willing to do that then we should cut ties and bring someone in who would. Our best chance to win this year is to play the rooks all year if Baker doen'st realize this he doesn't fit this team.

 

It seems like everyone is saying that Baker is going to play all of these horrible reserves too much. No one has once said that Murton and Cedeno are not upgrades. It seems like everyone agrees Baker is the problem.

[Blueheart05]

Our team OBP last year was 324. What should our goal be? 330-335?

 

.335-.340 or higher in my book

 

That would give us the second highest OBP in the

 

NL.

 

A number of teams in the NL were between .330ish -.339 with Philly leading the way at .348

 

The Cubs inability to walk (last in the NL) as a team is largely accountable for their subpar OBP.

[hankp101]

Unless I screwed something up (entirely possible), that would give our current 8 "regulars" a projected line of .287/.344/.457. That wouldn't be the end of the world.

[jmajew]

Our team OBP last year was 324. What should our goal be? 330-335?

 

.335-.340 or higher in my book

 

For what it's worth, the league average last year was .330. Just replacing Neifi in the lineup with Pierre puts us at league average. Where we go after that, depends mostly on who Hendry acquires to play right field.

 

Thanks. That is a really interesting stat.

[TB_11]

One has to think that Dusty will put the guys out there who will give us the best chance to win. Those guys in my opinion are Murton and Cedeno.

 

Neifi, Macias, and Dusty would disagree with you.

[BigbadB]

Hendry's going to get ripped apart regardless of what he does.

 

Not true. You and I have butted heads all offseason, so while you are under the impression I am all gloom and doom while I'm under the impression you believe Hendry can do no wrong, there is a middle point most likely for both of us.

 

....I said right after the offseason ended to give me a line up with .350+ OBP throughout and this team will win more games than it loses.

 

so would any team, but that's simply not realistic. name five teams that had 8 .350 OBP regulars in the history of baseball. the 2004 RedSox only had seven, and that includes having the DH instead of a pitcher.

 

 

Burnitz, Preston Wilson, Jacque Jones, Juan Encarnacion, etc.. cannot provide a .350+ OBP. I could honestly deal with a year of Jacque Jones if we had Abreu or Tejada or both playing in the same line up. However, the "improvements" I have seen this offseason are a .326 OBP lead off hitter, the resigning of a sub .300 OBP of Neifi Perez, Cedeno will be lucky to be anywhere close to .350 in his rookie year, Murton will likely make it, but he has no back up in place if he gets hurt, Patterson is sub .300 OBP, and the trade Walker rumors haven't gone away completely.

 

the bolded part is exactly what you constantly do to make your point. pluck out the worst case scenerio stat to rip on the player you are talking about. nevermind the three and a half seasons of OBP over .361, and his career .355. we'll focus on the year his OBP was .326 and the year it was .332. unless of course we are talking about a player you want, then we ignore the worst stats (ie. noone ever mentions Abreu's 100 point plummet in OPS last year).

 

you have great baseball accumen, why not use it to give a balanced, objective opinion about players instead of cherry picking stats?

 

You are correct. I cherry picked last year's OBP. Honestly, it will likely be better, if for no other reason he's in his contract year. I don't know why it dipped to .326, but it makes me nervous whatever the reason. If Neifi Perez is batting 2nd, I won't be happy. For whatever reason, I'm not a real big fan of Pierre.

 

As far as the .350+ OBP thing, it might be something rare, but it was an achievable goal nonetheless if Hendry really wanted to put emphasis on improving the offense. We already had Walker, Lee, Ramirez, Barrett. If they signed Giles, they wouldn't have needed .350+ from all the positions. But, trading for Bradley and Wilkerson while signing Furcal (unrealistic now, but the potential was there at the time) with Murton putting up close to .350+ gives you 8 guys with the potential to provide .350+.