Cubs OF

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

It's not about the comparison of specific pieces on your team. It's the overall composition that makes you win.

 

Our SS and RF are crap. pure and simple. Our pitching is the most worrisome aspect of our team. We could absolutely dominate if Wood, Prior, and Miller all get healthy and pitch like they can (unlikely considering the injuries/surgeries they have had).

 

The Cards don't have those question marks. We have the potential, but their situation is more realized potential and not hopes and dreams of healthier days.

 

I still don't understand how our young players are question marks while teams like the Brewers have all future stars. Murton looks like the real thing and Cedeno has been successful at every level. Jones makes too much money, but is an "adequate" OF.

 

Murton does look like the real deal. I agree.

 

However, Cedeno has not been successful at every level. Take a look at his stats:

 

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/ronny-cedeno.shtml

 

Cedeno got his butt kicking in A ball, put up a mediocre showing in AA, and got it together for 245 AB in AAA. His VWL was two sided. His D was shoddy (that's putting it nicely) and his K/BB ratio was in the toilet. Then he had 80 AB in the bigs. Nice, but even Dubois did well in the beginning. It's not just a Dustyism to say that pitchers don't have the book on him. Cedeno is in for a rough season b/c he doesn't have plate discipline. He carries his offensive woes into the field and we'll be seeing Neifi every day by the ASB.

 

Our guys are question marks b/c our organization has a very poor track record of developing successful position players. The Braves are the extreme opposite. Murton is less of a question mark, given his skillset. Cedeno had one good year. One.

Edited April 5, 2006 by Meat&PotatoesMan

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Cedeno is not crap, plain and simple. You don't get lucky through AAA, the big leagues AND the winter league. One, maybe. Not all 3.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Cedeno is not crap, plain and simple. You don't get lucky through AAA, the big leagues AND the winter league. One, maybe. Not all 3.

 

When no one knows how to pitch you? Yes, you do get lucky.

[goonys evil twin]

I've maintained my doubts on Cedeno, and don't have anything like the faith I have in Murton that he'll make it as a productive big leaguer. But he's not crap.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Cedeno is not crap, plain and simple. You don't get lucky through AAA, the big leagues AND the winter league. One, maybe. Not all 3.

 

When no one knows how to pitch you? Yes, you do get lucky.

 

I'm quite sure all of his hits did not come because pitchers were throwing down the middle because they didn't know where his holes were.

[gus_dog]

Pujols is a monster who consistently puts out.

 

:shock:

 

Insert Edmonds joke here.

 

 

FWIW, I also think it's jumping the gun to label Ronny "Crap."

 

Insert what? :shock:

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Cedeno is not crap, plain and simple. You don't get lucky through AAA, the big leagues AND the winter league. One, maybe. Not all 3.

 

When no one knows how to pitch you? Yes, you do get lucky.

 

I'm quite sure all of his hits did not come because pitchers were throwing down the middle because they didn't know where his holes were.

 

When Cedeno tanks, you'll have your proof. :(

[schutll]

I have a question about the true value of the slugging percentage. If a player gets 2 doubles in a bats, won't his slugging percentage be greater that a player who hits 2 singles in 4 at bats, but then steals second base after each hit? If that is the case, isn't it faulty to compare the slugging percentage of a power hitter with a base stealer, and the other intangibles?

[gus_dog]

Neither Cedeño nor Murton are crap. They are yet unproven as MLB players.

 

Jones is Jeromy Burnitz all over again - adequate.

 

I would like our team to get a stud OF'er.

[goonys evil twin]

I have a question about the true value of the slugging percentage. If a player gets 2 doubles in a bats, won't his slugging percentage be greater that a player who hits 2 singles in 4 at bats, but then steals second base after each hit? If that is the case, isn't it faulty to compare the slugging percentage of a power hitter with a base stealer, and the other intangibles?

 

A stolen base is tangible.

[goonys evil twin]

Jones is Jeromy Burnitz all over again - adequate.

 

Burntitz was not adequate, and I have a feeling Jones won't be either.

[Catman61]

Does anyone else expect another fairly down year from Edmonds...I just don't expect him to be at his career numbers. He turns 36 in June...hit only .250 last year (Still great OBP) and had measurable drop offs in Power, RBI and BB #s last year. He'll still likely be the best out of the 6 or 7 we're talking about...

 

Gotta love a "down" year with an OPS of .918

 

I fully expect him to exceed all his career averages, well maybe not batting average.

 

 

measurable drop offs in BB?

BB by year in STL

103

93

86

77

101

91 (10th in MLB)

 

RBI's? 3 less than ARam in 4 more AB. I would think a Cub fan of all people would realize RBI's are very dependent on OPPORTUNITY. Edmonds batted .302 with an OPS of 1.028 with runners on and .297 with an OPS of 1.008 with RISP.

 

Power? yep, it was down but still was top 25 in the majors

[moorecg]

The man is 23 freakin years old. Has he really been in our system for 6 years? and Regardless...he's 23 freakin years old....I don't think it would be shocking to say he started to learn to hit professional pitching at age 22.

 

I don't know your background re: whether your a big proponent of giving the young kids a chance or what your mo is regarding the situation...but I think most would agree that while we would have liked to have had Furcal, that money was insane and Ronny was a good option. Are you seriously saying that you'd rather have Neifi out there?

 

Ronny is so young I'd say its darn near impossible to tell what kind of player he will ultimatly become, but given his performance I also think its WAY to early to lable him "crap." Now Neifi..at age 32...you can call him crap if you'd like. But to give Ronny that label is just crazy talk.

 

Nope. I'm saying 3M/year (the difference in Furcal's salary and what we offered) is worth having Pinto, Nolasco, and Mitre in our system. Oh and the added bonus is that Pierre wouldn't be around to block Pie. Pierre does not suck, but the price we paid is too high, especially considering that moving Pie to a corner OF spot severely diminishes his offensive value.

 

Murton is awesome. He won his spot fair and square. He has ridiculous plate discipline. Cedeno does not. Low batting average = low OBP for Cedeno. A younger Neifi. Sweet.

 

I could care less about Cedeno's age. It's his skill set as of this moment that should/should not give him a starting job on a 100M club. He's not the SS of the future. Maybe he'll be a viable utility player. The offense just isn't there (based on his whole pro career, not just one fluke year split between 3 leagues where no one had the time to learn his holes).

 

It may not be shocking to find out Cedeno suddenly learned to hit, but it's not something you gamble a starting role on a ballclub with, especially when your next option is Neifi Perez. I don't want Neifi out there. He should never sniff the starting SS role ever again, but b/c of poor offseason decisions, we're faced with that very real possibility.

 

We'll see. I personaly think you're being WAY to hard on Cedeno considering what he's shown us so far. While I would have liked to have seen Furcal over there I think $13 mill a year was too high and I'm not upset with Hendry for not doing it.

 

Pierre isn't blocking anyone just yet...there is no guarantee that we'll sign him to an extension and I think we place a different value on Pinto Nolasco and Mitre. Sergio got 18 starts with us over the past 3 years and didnt' exactly grab hold of the Job and I'm not sure if/when we could have ever expected Pinto and Nolasco to be in Chicago.

 

I think giving Ronny this shot is a positive move by the Cubs. I'd much rather have Ronny than Neifi, or Alex Gonzalez or anyone of that ilk. Are there better SSs in the Bigs? Yes. But I think Ronny has more than earned the chance to be a starting SS and I'm glad the Cubs have given it to him.

[goonys evil twin]

I fully expect him to exceed all his career averages, well maybe not batting average.

 

 

I don't predict a big drop off by Edmonds. But expecting him to exceed all his career averages is irrational.

 

career .291/.384/.543

2005 .263/.385/.533

 

Career OPS+ 138

2005 OPS+ 136

 

I doubt he'll surpass all his average. My guess is he'll be a little below his 2005 numbers, but still very productive and better than any Cubs outfielder.

[Catman61]

I have a question about the true value of the slugging percentage. If a player gets 2 doubles in a bats, won't his slugging percentage be greater that a player who hits 2 singles in 4 at bats, but then steals second base after each hit? If that is the case, isn't it faulty to compare the slugging percentage of a power hitter with a base stealer, and the other intangibles?

:roll:

 

Oh boy, here we go again

 

OK, I'll ask a simple question. What are the odds of the player hitting the 2 doubles of being out at 2B? Zero or next to zero?

 

And the odds of the 2 singles and stealing second? about 1 in 4

[moorecg]

It's not about the comparison of specific pieces on your team. It's the overall composition that makes you win.

 

Our SS and RF are crap. pure and simple. Our pitching is the most worrisome aspect of our team. We could absolutely dominate if Wood, Prior, and Miller all get healthy and pitch like they can (unlikely considering the injuries/surgeries they have had).

 

The Cards don't have those question marks. We have the potential, but their situation is more realized potential and not hopes and dreams of healthier days.

 

I still don't understand how our young players are question marks while teams like the Brewers have all future stars. Murton looks like the real thing and Cedeno has been successful at every level. Jones makes too much money, but is an "adequate" OF.

 

Murton does look like the real deal. I agree.

 

However, Cedeno has not been successful at every level. Take a look at his stats:

 

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/ronny-cedeno.shtml

 

Cedeno got his butt kicking in A ball, put up a mediocre showing in AA, and got it together for 245 AB in AAA. His VWL was two sided. His D was shoddy (that's putting it nicely) and his K/BB ratio was in the toilet. Then he had 80 AB in the bigs. Nice, but even Dubois did well in the beginning. It's not just a Dustyism to say that pitchers don't have the book on him. Cedeno is in for a rough season b/c he doesn't have plate discipline. He carries his offensive woes into the field and we'll be seeing Neifi every day by the ASB.

 

Our guys are question marks b/c our organization has a very poor track record of developing successful position players. The Braves are the extreme opposite. Murton is less of a question mark, given his skillset. Cedeno had one good year. One.

 

In his first two years he was 18 and 19 years old...and playing in Boise and Lansing...last time I checked both of those places are a LONG way from Carabobo (cool name for a town) Venezuela for a kid just out of high school...He hit damn near .280 by the time he turned 21 in AA. These stats aren't doing anything to convince me that he's crap.

[moorecg]

Does anyone else expect another fairly down year from Edmonds...I just don't expect him to be at his career numbers. He turns 36 in June...hit only .250 last year (Still great OBP) and had measurable drop offs in Power, RBI and BB #s last year. He'll still likely be the best out of the 6 or 7 we're talking about...

 

Gotta love a "down" year with an OPS of .918

 

I fully expect him to exceed all his career averages, well maybe not batting average.

 

 

measurable drop offs in BB?

BB by year in STL

103

93

86

77

101

91 (10th in MLB)

 

RBI's? 3 less than ARam in 4 more AB. I would think a Cub fan of all people would realize RBI's are very dependent on OPPORTUNITY. Edmonds batted .302 with an OPS of 1.028 with runners on and .297 with an OPS of 1.008 with RISP.

 

Power? yep, it was down but still was top 25 in the majors

 

While he was 10th in the ML...it was about a 10% drop off. He was still GREAT in that catagory...don't get me wrong...but I consider 10% a little significant (although maybe its attributable to the fact that he didn't have Rolen behind him last year. He's a good player...but I think its fair to say that he's past his prime.

[Catman61]

I fully expect him to exceed all his career averages, well maybe not batting average.

 

 

I don't predict a big drop off by Edmonds. But expecting him to exceed all his career averages is irrational.

 

career .291/.384/.543

2005 .263/.385/.533

 

Career OPS+ 138

2005 OPS+ 136

 

I doubt he'll surpass all his average. My guess is he'll be a little below his 2005 numbers, but still very productive and better than any Cubs outfielder.

Why is it irrational?

 

You posted his career averages and has been said ad nasuem Edmonds had a "down" year yet was right on his career averages sans batting average

 

2000 .295/.411/.583 - 148

2001 .304/.410/.564 - 150

2002 .311/.420/.561 - 163

2003 .275/.385/.617 - 161

2004 .301/.418/.643 - 173

2005 .265/.385/.533 - 136

 

career avg .291/.384/.543 - 138

 

so if he has just a slight bounceback from his "down" year, he exceeds all his career avgs (again my only reservation is batting avg)

 

What is really so irrational about that?

 

PECOTA - .285/.407/.582

ZIPS - .287/.402/.588

Rotogenuis .272/.389/.550

 

ZIPS & PECOTA have Edmonds avg close to .291 and well over career numbers in OBP & SLG

[goonys evil twin]

It's irrational for two reasons:

 

1) You said ALL his averages. Guys usually don't exceed all their averages except for in their best years.

 

2) He's old, some decline is expected. Last year wasn't a fluke down year, it was a normal decline for an old player.

 

You don't expect 36 year olds to outperform their previous year when their previous year was up to expectations.

[Danny82]

I have a question about the true value of the slugging percentage. If a player gets 2 doubles in a bats, won't his slugging percentage be greater that a player who hits 2 singles in 4 at bats, but then steals second base after each hit? If that is the case, isn't it faulty to compare the slugging percentage of a power hitter with a base stealer, and the other intangibles?

:roll:

 

Oh boy, here we go again

 

OK, I'll ask a simple question. What are the odds of the player hitting the 2 doubles of being out at 2B? Zero or next to zero?

 

And the odds of the 2 singles and stealing second? about 1 in 4

 

Not true re: Pierre. He has a 74% career stealing percentage. Assuming that his percentage is approximately the same for stealing second or third, the odds of him stealing second two consecutive times is 55%

[Catman61]

I have a question about the true value of the slugging percentage. If a player gets 2 doubles in a bats, won't his slugging percentage be greater that a player who hits 2 singles in 4 at bats, but then steals second base after each hit? If that is the case, isn't it faulty to compare the slugging percentage of a power hitter with a base stealer, and the other intangibles?

:roll:

 

Oh boy, here we go again

 

OK, I'll ask a simple question. What are the odds of the player hitting the 2 doubles of being out at 2B? Zero or next to zero?

 

And the odds of the 2 singles and stealing second? about 1 in 4

 

Not true re: Pierre. He has a 74% career stealing percentage. Assuming that his percentage is approximately the same for stealing second or third, the odds of him stealing second two consecutive times is 55%

Thanks for posting the EXACT thing I just said, however the wording may have been confusing. However the context of my question was how often in the guy hitting the doubles out at 2nd base, virtually nil but the guy hitting 2 singles and stealing 2nd will be out at 2nd 25% of the time. And you wrote that Pierre's stealing % is 74 which means he is out stealing 25% of his attempted steals or about 1 in 4

 

batter hits 2 doubles, virtually 100% safe at 2nd base or 2 of 2 on 2nd

batter hits 2 singles attempts steals of 2nd, 1.48 of 2 times on 2nd

 

Lets stretch that out to 40 doubles/40 singles

singles hitter times successfully on 2nd of 40 attempts 29.6 rounded to 30. So now do you not only NOT have a runner on 2nd, you don't have a runner on 1st either and 1 less out to work with that inning. (and no I am not downplaying steals, just making a point in the context of the question re SLG %)

 

The problem with your chosen scenario is you IMPLY 100% success rate (but then steals second base after each hit?)

[Backtobanks]

Jones is Jeromy Burnitz all over again - adequate.

 

Burntitz was not adequate, and I have a feeling Jones won't be either.

 

Look at the Cards' corner OFs: Encarcion, Bigbie, Taguchi, and Rodriquez. I don't see anyone there that i would consider better than "adequate". The Astros have Lane in RF......adequate at best. While I'm not defending Jones (or Burnitz), an "adequate" RF is okay if you have enough balance in other positions and decent pitching. Burnitz was not the reason the Cubs had a lousy season last year and Jones won't be the deciding factor in the Cubs success (or lack of it) this year.

[Danny82]

I have a question about the true value of the slugging percentage. If a player gets 2 doubles in a bats, won't his slugging percentage be greater that a player who hits 2 singles in 4 at bats, but then steals second base after each hit? If that is the case, isn't it faulty to compare the slugging percentage of a power hitter with a base stealer, and the other intangibles?

:roll:

 

Oh boy, here we go again

 

OK, I'll ask a simple question. What are the odds of the player hitting the 2 doubles of being out at 2B? Zero or next to zero?

 

And the odds of the 2 singles and stealing second? about 1 in 4

 

Not true re: Pierre. He has a 74% career stealing percentage. Assuming that his percentage is approximately the same for stealing second or third, the odds of him stealing second two consecutive times is 55%

Thanks for posting the EXACT thing I just said, however the wording may have been confusing. However the context of my question was how often in the guy hitting the doubles out at 2nd base, virtually nil but the guy hitting 2 singles and stealing 2nd will be out at 2nd 25% of the time. And you wrote that Pierre's stealing % is 74 which means he is out stealing 25% of his attempted steals or about 1 in 4

 

batter hits 2 doubles, virtually 100% safe at 2nd base or 2 of 2 on 2nd

batter hits 2 singles attempts steals of 2nd, 1.48 of 2 times on 2nd

 

Lets stretch that out to 40 doubles/40 singles

singles hitter times successfully on 2nd of 40 attempts 29.6 rounded to 30. So now do you not only NOT have a runner on 2nd, you don't have a runner on 1st either and 1 less out to work with that inning. (and no I am not downplaying steals, just making a point in the context of the question re SLG %)

 

The problem with your chosen scenario is you IMPLY 100% success rate (but then steals second base after each hit?)

 

It's not MY chosen anything. I was just cleaning up the percentages in your post because the wording WAS confusing...your wording made it sound like a player would only be able to steal second after a single two times in a row 1/4 of the time. Now I see what you were really saying, but it didn't come off that way in the post to which I responded.

 

I think we have things cleared up now though.

[moorecg]

It's not about the comparison of specific pieces on your team. It's the overall composition that makes you win.

 

Our SS and RF are crap. pure and simple. Our pitching is the most worrisome aspect of our team. We could absolutely dominate if Wood, Prior, and Miller all get healthy and pitch like they can (unlikely considering the injuries/surgeries they have had).

 

The Cards don't have those question marks. We have the potential, but their situation is more realized potential and not hopes and dreams of healthier days.

 

I still don't understand how our young players are question marks while teams like the Brewers have all future stars. Murton looks like the real thing and Cedeno has been successful at every level. Jones makes too much money, but is an "adequate" OF.

 

Murton does look like the real deal. I agree.

 

However, Cedeno has not been successful at every level. Take a look at his stats:

 

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/ronny-cedeno.shtml

 

Cedeno got his butt kicking in A ball, put up a mediocre showing in AA, and got it together for 245 AB in AAA. His VWL was two sided. His D was shoddy (that's putting it nicely) and his K/BB ratio was in the toilet. Then he had 80 AB in the bigs. Nice, but even Dubois did well in the beginning. It's not just a Dustyism to say that pitchers don't have the book on him. Cedeno is in for a rough season b/c he doesn't have plate discipline. He carries his offensive woes into the field and we'll be seeing Neifi every day by the ASB.

 

Our guys are question marks b/c our organization has a very poor track record of developing successful position players. The Braves are the extreme opposite. Murton is less of a question mark, given his skillset. Cedeno had one good year. One.

 

In his first two years he was 18 and 19 years old...and playing in Boise and Lansing...last time I checked both of those places are a LONG way from Carabobo (cool name for a town) Venezuela for a kid just out of high school...He hit damn near .280 by the time he turned 21 in AA. These stats aren't doing anything to convince me that he's crap.

 

Just an update. Ronny was a crappy 2 for 3 with another run scored.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

It's not about the comparison of specific pieces on your team. It's the overall composition that makes you win.

 

Our SS and RF are crap. pure and simple. Our pitching is the most worrisome aspect of our team. We could absolutely dominate if Wood, Prior, and Miller all get healthy and pitch like they can (unlikely considering the injuries/surgeries they have had).

 

The Cards don't have those question marks. We have the potential, but their situation is more realized potential and not hopes and dreams of healthier days.

 

I still don't understand how our young players are question marks while teams like the Brewers have all future stars. Murton looks like the real thing and Cedeno has been successful at every level. Jones makes too much money, but is an "adequate" OF.

 

Murton does look like the real deal. I agree.

 

However, Cedeno has not been successful at every level. Take a look at his stats:

 

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/ronny-cedeno.shtml

 

Cedeno got his butt kicking in A ball, put up a mediocre showing in AA, and got it together for 245 AB in AAA. His VWL was two sided. His D was shoddy (that's putting it nicely) and his K/BB ratio was in the toilet. Then he had 80 AB in the bigs. Nice, but even Dubois did well in the beginning. It's not just a Dustyism to say that pitchers don't have the book on him. Cedeno is in for a rough season b/c he doesn't have plate discipline. He carries his offensive woes into the field and we'll be seeing Neifi every day by the ASB.

 

Our guys are question marks b/c our organization has a very poor track record of developing successful position players. The Braves are the extreme opposite. Murton is less of a question mark, given his skillset. Cedeno had one good year. One.

 

In his first two years he was 18 and 19 years old...and playing in Boise and Lansing...last time I checked both of those places are a LONG way from Carabobo (cool name for a town) Venezuela for a kid just out of high school...He hit damn near .280 by the time he turned 21 in AA. These stats aren't doing anything to convince me that he's crap.

 

Just an update. Ronny was a crappy 2 for 3 with another run scored.

 

Like I said before, wait until the book is out on him. I'm glad you can throw out 2 years of baseball, but then cite 3 AB as proof of your argument. Convinced me. Totally.