early start on the excuses for grissom...

[abuck1220]

Veteran outfielder Marquis Grissom doesn't have to put up big numbers to make the team, even though he is a non-roster invitee.

 

"He doesn't have to have a great spring," Baker said. "Spring training is for the young, especially early because they're in shape in no time and, No. 2, most young guys hit fastballs. Pitchers aren't ready to throw good breaking balls. It's hard to throw them here in Arizona because of the air."

 

Baker said he would evaluate Grissom by his health, speed and bat speed.

 

"You want to see progress as spring goes on," Baker said. "I have a pretty good idea of what he can do. I'm looking for just what he has left."

 

he honestly can't be surprised when people say he doesn't like young players. his quote about how ST is for the young guys doesn't make any sense at all.

[Mizzou]

As long as Grissom isn't the first guy off the bench in every game, I hope he does make the team.

[Texas Goat Farmer]

He's making the team. As soon as I heard he had signed with the Cubs, I knew Dusty would have him on the squad.

[Balsa]

As long as Grissom isn't the first guy off the bench in every game, I hope he does make the team.

 

Exactly. No way am I yet convinced that Jones doesn't need a platoon partner.

[RynoRules]

Just so long as he doesn't cut into Matty's PT in any significant way...

 

[biittner77]

Veteran outfielder Marquis Grissom doesn't have to put up big numbers to make the team, even though he is a non-roster invitee.

 

"He doesn't have to have a great spring," Baker said. "Spring training is for the young, especially early because they're in shape in no time and, No. 2, most young guys hit fastballs. Pitchers aren't ready to throw good breaking balls. It's hard to throw them here in Arizona because of the air."

 

Baker said he would evaluate Grissom by his health, speed and bat speed.

 

"You want to see progress as spring goes on," Baker said. "I have a pretty good idea of what he can do. I'm looking for just what he has left."

 

he honestly can't be surprised when people say he doesn't like young players. his quote about how ST is for the young guys doesn't make any sense at all.

 

I don't see anything wrong with this. With young guys the question is are they ready with old guys it's can he still play. If Grissom can hit LH pitching and doesn't expect to start he could be decent player to have around.

 

The other part of the equation is who will he be keeping off the roster? Is someone like Sing better off riding the pine at Wrigley or playing every day in AAA?

[LoneStarCubFan]

Veteran outfielder Marquis Grissom doesn't have to put up big numbers to make the team, even though he is a non-roster invitee.

 

"He doesn't have to have a great spring," Baker said. "Spring training is for the young, especially early because they're in shape in no time and, No. 2, most young guys hit fastballs. Pitchers aren't ready to throw good breaking balls. It's hard to throw them here in Arizona because of the air."

 

Baker said he would evaluate Grissom by his health, speed and bat speed.

 

"You want to see progress as spring goes on," Baker said. "I have a pretty good idea of what he can do. I'm looking for just what he has left."

 

he honestly can't be surprised when people say he doesn't like young players. his quote about how ST is for the young guys doesn't make any sense at all.

 

I don't see anything wrong with this. With young guys the question is are they ready with old guys it's can he still play. If Grissom can hit LH pitching and doesn't expect to start he could be decent player to have around.

 

The other part of the equation is who will he be keeping off the roster? Is someone like Sing better off riding the pine at Wrigley or playing every day in AAA?

 

I completely agree with what you're saying. I think Grissom is a good guy to have coming off the bench if he can still hit.

 

With any other manager I don't think anybody would be griping about Grissom being on the team. The only problem is, the first time Murton goes hitless in a game he'll be on the bench for two weeks because Dusty wants to "protect" him.

[TheDude]

Veteran outfielder Marquis Grissom doesn't have to put up big numbers to make the team, even though he is a non-roster invitee.

 

"He doesn't have to have a great spring," Baker said. "Spring training is for the young, especially early because they're in shape in no time and, No. 2, most young guys hit fastballs. Pitchers aren't ready to throw good breaking balls. It's hard to throw them here in Arizona because of the air."

 

Baker said he would evaluate Grissom by his health, speed and bat speed.

 

"You want to see progress as spring goes on," Baker said. "I have a pretty good idea of what he can do. I'm looking for just what he has left."

 

he honestly can't be surprised when people say he doesn't like young players. his quote about how ST is for the young guys doesn't make any sense at all.

 

Why not? ST is for the young guys - they are trying to make the team and play. Aging veterans are looking to make the team with the expectation that they can extend their careers and contribute off the bench. You don't want the young guy making the team and then not playing, because then your hurting his development.

 

Grissom is a known quantity at this stage. Theriot (just throwing out a promising young name) is not. I think Baker makes sense here.

[goonys evil twin]

Grissom is a known quantity at this stage.

 

No he isn't. He was absolutely terrible last season. Completely worthless. He had three marginally successful seasons before last year, but those were after 2 absolutely terrible seasons.

 

 

I hate the stupid idea that "proven veterans", once they make the big leagues, are just assumed to be big league material. Grissom could be absolutely terrible again this year. In fact, he probably will be, given his age and mediocre career. But it doesn't matter to Dusty (and apparantly many fans) because he was once decent, so we can just always assume he'll be decent, no matter what he does in the spring.

[TheDude]

Grissom is a known quantity at this stage.

 

No he isn't. He was absolutely terrible last season. Completely worthless. He had three marginally successful seasons before last year, but those were after 2 absolutely terrible seasons.

 

 

I hate the stupid idea that "proven veterans", once they make the big leagues, are just assumed to be big league material. Grissom could be absolutely terrible again this year. In fact, he probably will be, given his age and mediocre career. But it doesn't matter to Dusty (and apparantly many fans) because he was once decent, so we can just always assume he'll be decent, no matter what he does in the spring.

 

So you would rather have a young kid sit on the bench and get 150 ABs for the entire season? Man, that's great for that guy's development.

 

Whether Grissom or good or not, he is a known quantity. None of the points you made alter that fact. Dusty isn't the only manager that wants an older veteran bench presence. They all do.

[gflore34]

This has all the makings or settings of Hollandsworth/Dubois II and we all know how that turned out. I'll bet at some point last ST Dusty uttered the same rhetoric about Hollandsworth in relation to Dubois.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

So you would rather have a young kid sit on the bench and get 150 ABs for the entire season? Man, that's great for that guy's development.

 

If it makes the team better, yes. Especially if that kid is someone like Greenberg who is already looking at a not so hot future and will provide the same, but likely better, production.

[bmkhawk]

This has all the makings or settings of Hollandsworth/Dubois II and we all know how that turned out. I'll bet at some point last ST Dusty uttered the same rhetoric about Hollandsworth in relation to Dubois.

 

Please tell me you are not referring to Murton/Grissom in the same light.

[goonys evil twin]

So you would rather have a young kid sit on the bench and get 150 ABs for the entire season? Man, that's great for that guy's development.

 

Whether Grissom or good or not, he is a known quantity. None of the points you made alter that fact. Dusty isn't the only manager that wants an older veteran bench presence. They all do.

 

The only player that the development question pertains to is Pie. There are plenty of other younger candidates who deserve at least as much of a chance as Grissom, who is not a known quantity. A known quantity is a player whom you have a pretty good idea what he will do with the job. Grissom could be worse than Macias next year, or he could be an acceptable bench player, we don't know. His age and career path makes him an unknown. You'd be foolish to just hand him a job. If anybody should get the benefit of the doubt it's Restovich, who at least stands a chance to be good for a few years and contribute to the team.

[gflore34]

This has all the makings or settings of Hollandsworth/Dubois II and we all know how that turned out. I'll bet at some point last ST Dusty uttered the same rhetoric about Hollandsworth in relation to Dubois.

 

Please tell me you are not referring to Murton/Grissom in the same light.

 

 

I was referring to Murton/Grissom, given Dusty, can we really put it past him? Perhaps, its a little paranoia on my part. Maybe the more realistic picture is when Murton hits a little slump he'll be benched in favor of Grissom the "proven vet".

[LoneStarCubFan]

My concern isn't that Grissom would block a guy who should be in Chicago instead of Des Moines. Looking at the 40-man roster I see a bunch of guys who would be better off playing everyday for the I-Cubs than riding the pine in Chicago.

 

If Dusty kept Greenberg, for example, the kid would NEVER see the field. He'd be the absolute last resort as a PH and would rarely get to spot start. Was it Cedeno who was called up at one point last year and never got an at-bat?

 

My concern is that Dusty will find a way to play Grissom three-four times a week at Murton's expense. THAT's the problem. And I think Grissom would be a good guy to have coming off the bench if he hits at all.

[Soul]

So you would rather have a young kid sit on the bench and get 150 ABs for the entire season? Man, that's great for that guy's development.

 

Whether Grissom or good or not, he is a known quantity. None of the points you made alter that fact. Dusty isn't the only manager that wants an older veteran bench presence. They all do.

 

The only player that the development question pertains to is Pie. There are plenty of other younger candidates who deserve at least as much of a chance as Grissom, who is not a known quantity. A known quantity is a player whom you have a pretty good idea what he will do with the job. Grissom could be worse than Macias next year, or he could be an acceptable bench player, we don't know. His age and career path makes him an unknown. You'd be foolish to just hand him a job. If anybody should get the benefit of the doubt it's Restovich, who at least stands a chance to be good for a few years and contribute to the team.

 

Haha, I read this thread from the bottom and assumed when Grissom was mentioned as a "known quantity" it was referring to the fact that he will, indeed, suck.

 

It never occurred to me that someone would think he might return to his younger form. That would shock the hell out of me. I view him as a player who is finished, but just can't accept it.

[TheDude]

So you would rather have a young kid sit on the bench and get 150 ABs for the entire season? Man, that's great for that guy's development.

 

Whether Grissom or good or not, he is a known quantity. None of the points you made alter that fact. Dusty isn't the only manager that wants an older veteran bench presence. They all do.

 

The only player that the development question pertains to is Pie. There are plenty of other younger candidates who deserve at least as much of a chance as Grissom, who is not a known quantity. A known quantity is a player whom you have a pretty good idea what he will do with the job. Grissom could be worse than Macias next year, or he could be an acceptable bench player, we don't know. His age and career path makes him an unknown. You'd be foolish to just hand him a job. If anybody should get the benefit of the doubt it's Restovich, who at least stands a chance to be good for a few years and contribute to the team.

 

First of all, I'm not handing him the job. I don't even want him to make the team, because I honestly don't like him that much.

 

But I am defending Dusty's quote that Grissom doesn't need the ST evaluation as much as any of the kids who might fight for the same role.

 

I am still holding out hope for a late ST trade that nets a better bench option than Grissom without stunting the growth of young guy.

[BigbadB]

Grissom is a known quantity at this stage.

 

No he isn't. He was absolutely terrible last season. Completely worthless. He had three marginally successful seasons before last year, but those were after 2 absolutely terrible seasons.

 

 

I hate the stupid idea that "proven veterans", once they make the big leagues, are just assumed to be big league material. Grissom could be absolutely terrible again this year. In fact, he probably will be, given his age and mediocre career. But it doesn't matter to Dusty (and apparantly many fans) because he was once decent, so we can just always assume he'll be decent, no matter what he does in the spring.

 

So you would rather have a young kid sit on the bench and get 150 ABs for the entire season? Man, that's great for that guy's development.

 

Whether Grissom or good or not, he is a known quantity. None of the points you made alter that fact. Dusty isn't the only manager that wants an older veteran bench presence. They all do.

 

Why is the competition only between young Sing and old Marquis Grissom? What happened to Michael Restovich and any other veteran attempting to make the team?

 

I have to agree with Goony. You have to be productive in Spring Training and show you still have what it takes to be the 24th or 25th roster spot. I certainly don't want an old fat slob who doesn't think he has to work hard because of "past history" getting an auto berth onto a team roster. Prove that you still have what it takes or don't waste the teams time.

[goonys evil twin]

First of all, I'm not handing him the job. I don't even want him to make the team, because I honestly don't like him that much.

 

But I am defending Dusty's quote that Grissom doesn't need the ST evaluation as much as any of the kids who might fight for the same role.

 

I am still holding out hope for a late ST trade that nets a better bench option than Grissom without stunting the growth of young guy.

 

But Grissom does need ST because he has to prove he's better than he was last year. Why shouldn't he have to prove that? Why should it be assumed he's decent? Why should younger players have to prove themselves but oldy McGee doesn't?

 

And who are these people whose growth will be stunted on the bench? Pie is the only one. Everybody else has gone through the development process, and are either going to be a bench player anywhere, or never make it. Brandon Sing isn't going to be stunted if he's a bench player, and he's not going to develop anymore if he goes back to the minors. Restovich isn't going to be stunted, Greenberg isn't going to be stunted. We're not talking about a choice between a 33 year old still productive veteran and a 21 year old with less than 1000 pro plate appearances.

[UK1679666180]

There are certain potential advantages of having Grissom over Restovich, Greenberg, Sing, etc.. He has shown the ability to LH'ers and can play all 3 OF positions. Now, it's up to Baker and the rest of the staff to fairly evaluate him compared to the others.

 

Baker is correct in pointing that he does need to show the bat speed to prove he can still hit the FB, unlike younger players who need to show they can hit a major league breaking pitch.

 

The potentially troubling part of the quote is when Baker says, "Grissom doesn't have to have a great Spring".

 

He might not have to have a great Spring, but he should have to outperform the other candidates.

 

Would Sing, Greenberg, Restovich, Theriot, etc. have to play great in Spring to earn a roster spot? If I was involved with the media and had the chance to ask Baker that question, I would (Hint for Bruce :) ). Then depending on his answer, compare and contrast his answer about Grissom.

[goonys evil twin]

There are certain potential advantages of having Grissom over Restovich, Greenberg, Sing, etc.. He has shown the ability to LH'ers and can play all 3 OF positions. Now, it's up to Baker and the rest of the staff to fairly evaluate him compared to the others.

 

He has shown that ability, but he showed that years ago, when he wasn't a half broken down 38 year old. You'd be hard pressed to justify putting him in CF right now. I just hope somebody like Sing or Restovich has a great spring, and that they wise up and go with 6 relievers and keep Greenberg for 25th man duty as backup CF.

[UK1679666180]

And like I said, it's up to Baker to fairly evaluate if he still has those skills.

[goonys evil twin]

And like I said, it's up to Baker to fairly evaluate if he still has those skills.

 

I don't trust Baker to know when a guy can no longer help your team.

[UK1679666180]

Then you have a problem with who is doing the judging rather than the concept.