Jim Hendry Scheduled to be on Bruce Levine's Show

[CaliforniaRaisin]

So, there have been 74 seasons in the history of the game in which a player has managed 88 or more extra base hits, and in only one of those seasons has a player accrued less RBIs than Derrek Lee did last year. And there's a good reason for that one player failing to do so: not only did Alfonso Soriano manage seven less XBHs than Lee, but he also spent the entire season batting leadoff!

 

 

For players with 99 or more XBH in a single season, average of 147 RBI that same year; for players with exactly 99 XBH, 133 RBI; for players between 97 and 101 XBH, 149 RBI; for player with 88 or more XBH, 145 RBI.

 

Amazing facts there, Diffusion. I had been under the impression that Dusty Baker probably screwed Derrek Lee out of an MVP award, now I don't think there's any question about it. Someone should really show this stuff to Lee. Getting the team's stars angry at Dusty would be the fastest way to get rid of him.

 

Let me just quickly do this properly...

 

 

All-Time (excluding Derrek Lee's 2005)

110 or more XBH, average of 173 RBI

105 or more XBH, average of 160 RBI

100 or more XBH, average of 155 RBI

95 or more XBH, average of 152 RBI

90 or more XBH, average of 145 RBI

85 or more XBH, average of 136 RBI

80 or more XBH, average of 128 RBI

75 or more XBH, average of 122 RBI

 

Post-1945 (excluding Derrek Lee's 2005)

105 or more XBH, average of 142 RBI

100 or more XBH. average of 141 RBI

95 or more XBH, average of 139 RBI

90 or more XBH, average of 133 RBI

85 or more XBH, average of 130 RBI

80 or more XBH, average of 123 RBI

75 or more XBH, average of 119 RBI

 

I think the post-1945 (an arbitrary cut-off point, but I think it serves its purpose) is more relevant.

 

Relative to the post-1945 average, Lee fell about 33 RBI short. And let's just say that, given that he hit .331/.480/.653 with runners in scoring position, the falling short wasn't Lee's fault.

 

Had Lee got those extra 33 RBI, he'd have easily led the league in RBI (as well as average), so he'd have been 6 home runs short of the Triple Crown.

 

Outstanding work. Just further shows that this management team is clueless.

 

Patterson, Neifi, Lawton and Macias combined for over 350 at bats in the lead off spot and sported .263, .263, .269 and .270 OBP's respectively.

 

Perez, Patterson, Neifi and Enrique Wilson combined for over 360 at bats in the 2 hole, and sported .300, .220, .286 and .200 OBP's respectively.

 

Murton and Cedeno both have done very well in their limited role at the top of the order, yet Hendry says they aren't ready to hit the top of the order yet. Apparently, you can't hit at the top of the order until you prove you can get your OBP to dip below .300.

 

That might also explain why Walker and Hairston have been long time members of Dusty's doghouse. They were the two guys who could actually get on base at a decent clip, yet Hairston got more bench time than he deserved, and they can't wait to trade Walker. I don't get it.

 

Really?

 

They each got almost 400 AB's last year despite both missing significant time with injuries.

 

Maybe Hairston's leg injury had something to do with him getting "more bench time than he deserved". By his own admission we was not 100% so running him out there every day may not have been a good idea.

 

Last time I checked Dusty isn't the GM so I don't see why Hendry wanting to trade Walker means he is in "Dusty's doghouse". (BTW - that would be a great name if Dusty wanted to start a hot dog joint in Wrigleyville :lol: )

 

It sounded like Dusty wasn't too fascinated with Walker at the convention and caravan stops. If he doesn't want to play someone, it'd be hard to believe he doesn't have some sort of sway with the GM that hired him.

 

But Hendry is definitely partly to blame. He has provided these players and Dusty has overplayed them. And Hendry's love affair with defense at the expense of a poor offense isn't going to help.

[JWCUB]

I want Manny :evil: LOTS of offense.

[Guest]

Relative to the post-1945 average, Lee fell about 33 RBI short. And let's just say that, given that he hit .331/.480/.653 with runners in scoring position, the falling short wasn't Lee's fault.

Not completely, though I don't think it would be fair to say it's completely the fault of Baker or the people he chose to hit in front of Lee, either.

 

Here's a table that focuses on Lee's time hitting 3rd or 4th in 2005. It shows the number of PA he had with each base state, the percentage of his total PA with each base state, the league average for 3rd and 4th hitters, and the difference between Lee's actual totals and the number of PA he'd have gotten if he'd had the same ratio of PA's in each base-state as other middle-of-the-order hitters:

 

State   Lee PA   Lee PA%   (L) PA%   PA Diff.
----------------------------------------------
0          359     57.1%     51.5%        35
1          116     18.4%     19.8%        -9
12          30      4.8%      7.4%       -16
123          6      1.0%      2.1%        -7
13          19      3.0%      3.6%        -3
2           63     10.0%     10.0%         0
23          10      1.6%      2.0%        -3
3           26      4.1%      3.6%         3
----------------------------------------------
Totals	   629    100.0%    100.0%        0

 

In short, Lee came up to bat with the bases empty 35 more times than the typical #3 or #4 hitter and had 23 fewer opportunities with runners in scoring position. Clearly his RBI production was hurt by the players hitting in front of him -- he had 73 fewer runners on base in his PA than average -- but exactly how much did his RBI total suffer? Let's look at how often Lee and other 3rd/4th hitters converted the various base-states to RBI in 2005:

 

State   RBI     RBI/PA   (L) RBI/PA   PA Diff.   RBI Diff.
0        31      0.086        0.040        35         3.1
1        12      0.103        0.100        -9        -0.9
12       11      0.367        0.302       -16        -6.0
123       5      0.833        0.744        -7        -6.2
13       13      0.684        0.467        -3        -2.3
2        13      0.206        0.191         0         0.0
23        7      0.700        0.501        -3        -2.0
3        15      0.577        0.373         3         1.9
Totals  107      -----        -----         0       -12.5

Had Lee gotten a base-state breakdown like a typical #3 or #4 hitter he probably would have had 10-15 more RBI. Of course the operative phrase there is "typical" #3 or #4 hitter on an average offense. The Cubs' offense was slightly below average for an NL team last year (703 runs vs. the league average of 721), so that explains some of the difference. The rest can probably be attributed to having extra-poor hitters in front of him, which in turn can mostly be blamed on Baker.

 

Still, it's unlikely that Perez and Patterson hitting 1st or 2nd cost Lee more than 10 RBI compared to having average top of the order hitters. Considering the average line of players batting 1st or 2nd was .276/.333/.405 the Cubs didn't have a lot of options better than average. Walker certainly qualifies, but he usually was used up top when he was in the lineup. (About 70% of his PA came out of the #2 slot.) Murton wouldn't have been a bad option, but he was only with the team for a couple months. That only leaves Barrett, unless you want to stick Aramis in the two hole.

 

Most of the blame for Lee's relatively low RBI totals pretty much rests on the fact that the Cubs were a poor offensive team last year. Hitting Perez and/or Patterson in front of Lee did cost him some RBI -- probably about 10 or 15 or so -- but I can't blame Baker for any more than that.

[stitchface]

I've been thinking this throughout this thread and BK pretty much brings it to light, firing Baker would only help the Cubs win a couple more games (and this only if a better manager was hired - a dubious proposition). Thus, if the team's offense continues to decline and perform subpar, Hendry should be the first to be fired, or perhaps MacPhail. You will gain more wins by changing the composition of the roster than you will be firing the manager.

 

I think Jim Hendry has suffered the Peter Principle - he was an asset in his role with scouting and the minor leagues. As a GM he is a liability.

[anemic offense]

- ability is there to get hits, but we didn't have timely hitting last year

 

The timely hitting was there, Jim. The guys who draw the walks in front of timely hitting were not.

 

I'm not so sure that the timely hitting was there. We left a lot of runners in scoring position including a number of basesloaded situations IIRC.

 

It's difficult to have timely hitting when there are not many guys on base to create timely hitting in the first place.

 

We had no timely hitting, and when we did it was from the 3 and 4 spots. Unfortunatly though we had the worst 1-2 combination in the league and D Lee's season was about 75% of what it should have been had we had a competant lineup.

[frostwyrm]

Relative to the post-1945 average, Lee fell about 33 RBI short. And let's just say that, given that he hit .331/.480/.653 with runners in scoring position, the falling short wasn't Lee's fault.

Not completely, though I don't think it would be fair to say it's completely the fault of Baker or the people he chose to hit in front of Lee, either.

 

Here's a table that focuses on Lee's time hitting 3rd or 4th in 2005. It shows the number of PA he had with each base state, the percentage of his total PA with each base state, the league average for 3rd and 4th hitters, and the difference between Lee's actual totals and the number of PA he'd have gotten if he'd had the same ratio of PA's in each base-state as other middle-of-the-order hitters:

 

State   Lee PA   Lee PA%   (L) PA%   PA Diff.
----------------------------------------------
0          359     57.1%     51.5%        35
1          116     18.4%     19.8%        -9
12          30      4.8%      7.4%       -16
123          6      1.0%      2.1%        -7
13          19      3.0%      3.6%        -3
2           63     10.0%     10.0%         0
23          10      1.6%      2.0%        -3
3           26      4.1%      3.6%         3
----------------------------------------------
Totals	   629    100.0%    100.0%        0

 

In short, Lee came up to bat with the bases empty 35 more times than the typical #3 or #4 hitter and had 23 fewer opportunities with runners in scoring position. Clearly his RBI production was hurt by the players hitting in front of him -- he had 73 fewer runners on base in his PA than average -- but exactly how much did his RBI total suffer? Let's look at how often Lee and other 3rd/4th hitters converted the various base-states to RBI in 2005:

 

State   RBI     RBI/PA   (L) RBI/PA   PA Diff.   RBI Diff.
0        31      0.086        0.040        35         3.1
1        12      0.103        0.100        -9        -0.9
12       11      0.367        0.302       -16        -6.0
123       5      0.833        0.744        -7        -6.2
13       13      0.684        0.467        -3        -2.3
2        13      0.206        0.191         0         0.0
23        7      0.700        0.501        -3        -2.0
3        15      0.577        0.373         3         1.9
Totals  107      -----        -----         0       -12.5

Had Lee gotten a base-state breakdown like a typical #3 or #4 hitter he probably would have had 10-15 more RBI. Of course the operative phrase there is "typical" #3 or #4 hitter on an average offense. The Cubs' offense was slightly below average for an NL team last year (703 runs vs. the league average of 721), so that explains some of the difference. The rest can probably be attributed to having extra-poor hitters in front of him, which in turn can mostly be blamed on Baker.

 

Still, it's unlikely that Perez and Patterson hitting 1st or 2nd cost Lee more than 10 RBI compared to having average top of the order hitters. Considering the average line of players batting 1st or 2nd was .276/.333/.405 the Cubs didn't have a lot of options better than average. Walker certainly qualifies, but he usually was used up top when he was in the lineup. (About 70% of his PA came out of the #2 slot.) Murton wouldn't have been a bad option, but he was only with the team for a couple months. That only leaves Barrett, unless you want to stick Aramis in the two hole.

 

Most of the blame for Lee's relatively low RBI totals pretty much rests on the fact that the Cubs were a poor offensive team last year. Hitting Perez and/or Patterson in front of Lee did cost him some RBI -- probably about 10 or 15 or so -- but I can't blame Baker for any more than that.

 

I would agree with your analysis if Lee had put up average numbers for a #3 or #4 hitter, but he didn't. He put up MVP calibre numbers, so I think you're underestimating his lost RBIs if you compare him to all 3-4 hitters as a group. Diffusion has already shown that hitters who produced as many XBHs(99) as Lee did in 2005 have historically produced 133 RBI, and I'm sure that some of those players weren't on great teams, just as Lee wasn't.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

I would agree with your analysis if Lee had put up average numbers for a #3 or #4 hitter, but he didn't. He put up MVP calibre numbers, so I think you're underestimating his lost RBIs if you compare him to all 3-4 hitters as a group. Diffusion has already shown that hitters who produced as many XBHs(99) as Lee did in 2005 have historically produced 133 RBI, and I'm sure that some of those players weren't on great teams, just as Lee wasn't.

BK was right on in his analysis. Yes it might have been a few more, but there is no garuantee that the extra base runners wouldn't have been on base the majority of the time he made an out. Also, batting order does not have a large effect on total team offense.

[CuseCubFan69]

I would like to see this team have another manager to remove doubt that about Hendry. Baker just has too many faults when combined that just make for a poor manager.

 

We'll see how the last two World Series winners have the shaped the Cubs. They should have the chemistry of the 2004 Red Sox and the pitching and defense of the 2005 WhiteSox and this seems to have been one of Hendrys goals. He's going to sink or swim in it this year....I hope, because this 78-84 win thing is not the way to go.

 

I think how the 2 and 5 slots do in the order so will the Cubs. If the Cubs do not get at worst average production out of those spots I think we'll see another of those 78-84 win seasons unless the pitching is spectacular and healthy.

[DiamondMind]

I don't understand why MacPhail doesn't catch more flak about the failings recently. 2003 was a success, 2004 was a decent team, and 2005 was just horribly unlucky. I have been impressed with Hendry, and I'm on the fence with Baker. If someone really asked me who to blame, the finger goes right to MacPhail. Mismanagement starts at the top and trickles down.

[CuseCubFan69]

I don't understand why MacPhail doesn't catch more flak about the failings recently. 2003 was a success, 2004 was a decent team, and 2005 was just horribly unlucky. I have been impressed with Hendry, and I'm on the fence with Baker. If someone really asked me who to blame, the finger goes right to MacPhail. Mismanagement starts at the top and trickles down.

 

I agree. It's time for him to turn this thing up or move over and let someone else do the job.

[Guest]

I would agree with your analysis if Lee had put up average numbers for a #3 or #4 hitter, but he didn't. He put up MVP calibre numbers, so I think you're underestimating his lost RBIs if you compare him to all 3-4 hitters as a group.

I didn't really make it clear, but those numbers were based on Lee's RBI production during each base state, not the league average. (So, for example, having 16 fewer AB with runners on first and second cost Lee about 6 RBI because he averaged 0.367 RBI per PA in that situation last season.) I included the league averages to show that Lee was in fact more efficient at converting opportunities than your typical middle of the order hitter. I was only using typical #3 and #4 hitters to compare number of opportunities, not success rates in those opportunities. Sorry for any confusion.

[craig]

hendry did say that murton and cedeno could be 2 hole hitters in the future, kind of implying that they weren't ready quite yet. ...

i just don't want neifi batting 2nd, lol.

 

Thanks for the recap of the comments.

 

The notion that perhaps Murton and Cedeno wouldn't be used at #2 this year could be a good thing.

 

There has been considerable angst that Neifi would start ahead of Cedeno. With the comments Hendry has now made repeatedly, and that Baker made on several occassions at convention and caravan, that seems to be a non-concern. Cedeno is the man, and he'll probably need to take a Bobby-Hill type nosedive to lose it.

 

Now there is angst that Neifi will start at 2nd.

 

Let's assume two options.

1) Cedeno or Murton bat 2nd. 2b bats low in order. If you figure it's bottom of order, Neifi's hitting may not seem so unacceptable. A reasonable chance that they'll consider him to play a lot.

 

2) Cedeno or Murton not to be used batting 2nd this early. And lets assume Barrett won't, either. So who does that leave? Whoever is playing 2B. When deciding who to play at 2B, if he's got to bat 2nd, who do you choose? Neifi's bad offense/bad OBP doesn't help his chances of being the choice.

 

If you want Neifi to *not* play very much, that is much more likely is the 2B is required to bat 2nd than if the 2B bats 8th.

[goonys evil twin]

When deciding who to play at 2B, if he's got to bat 2nd, who do you choose? Neifi's bad offense/bad OBP doesn't help his chances of being the choice.

 

They don't hurt his chances with this regime in charge. They think he's good, and couldn't give a crap about his OBP.