Jump to content
North Side Baseball

New Article: Don't Panic


Guest
Guests
Posted

After hearing of the severity of Derrek Lee's injury, I decided to quantify just how much it would hurt the Cubs' chances in 2006. What I found was slightly encouraging. Given the most plausible scenarios (those in which most of Lee's PA's are taken by some combination of Neifi, Hairston, and Mabry) it would seem as though the injury will cost the Cubs no more than a win or two. A definite setback, in other words, but not enough in and of itself to remove the Cubs from playoff contention.

 

Read the article here. (Also forgive any formatting problems the article may have. We're trying to get the bugs worked out of a new submission system.)

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
There is absolutely no way that replacing Lee with the combination of Hairston, Neifi, and Mabry will only cost us one or two wins. I know you have stats on this but I just don't believe that at all.
Posted
There is absolutely no way that replacing Lee with the combination of Hairston, Neifi, and Mabry will only cost us one or two wins. I know you have stats on this but I just don't believe that at all.

I'm hopeful, but I agree. Others are going to have to pick up the slack. Aramis, Murton, Barrett, etc. are really going to have to play huge.

Posted
A good analysis, but losing Lee's defense will also cost us some runs.

 

How many of more of Ronny's throws are going to get away from the replacement? I suggest a little extra throwing practice for Cedeno.

Posted
Well Baseball Tonight shall now be turned off, because they've thoroughly made me depressed while running over their stupid stats.
Posted
A good analysis, but losing Lee's defense will also cost us some runs.

 

How many of more of Ronny's throws are going to get away from the replacement? I suggest a little extra throwing practice for Cedeno.

 

I'm also concerned about Ramirez throwing over to first now.

Posted
A good analysis, but losing Lee's defense will also cost us some runs.

 

How many of more of Ronny's throws are going to get away from the replacement? I suggest a little extra throwing practice for Cedeno.

 

I'm also concerned about Ramirez throwing over to first now.

 

That's true. On Ronny's throws, like the one yesterday, nobody could have caught that ball. At least Aramis gets his close to the bag.

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Nice try to be optimistic, but losing a cream-of-the-crop player like Lee will cost more than 1 or 2 wins. Try 5-10
Guest
Guests
Posted (edited)
Before reading the article, does that mean if we lost Lee the whole season, it'd only cost us 2-4 wins?

It depends on what the baseline is. If you assme that Lee would have had another season like 2005 and he would be replaced with something approaching Hairston's career averages (~700 OPS) then the difference would be about five wins over a full season. (300 PA isn't half a season, it's closer to 35-40% depending on how often a player would have been rested.) I for one don't think that Lee would have duplicated his 2005 numbers anyway, so the difference could well be smaller than that.

 

A good analysis, but losing Lee's defense will also cost us some runs.

That's a good point. Losing Lee's glove for a couple months could well cost us another game or so.

Edited by Anonymous
Posted
Seemingly 1 out of every 3 Ramirez throws to first strike the dirt before going in Lee's glove... Let's see how Walker does with that.
Posted
Before reading the article, does that mean if we lost Lee the whole season, it'd only cost us 2-4 wins?

It depends on what the baseline is. If you assme that Lee would have had another season like 2005 and he would be replaced with something approaching Hairston's career averages (~700 OPS) then the difference would be about wins over a full season. (300 PA isn't half a season, it's closer to 35-40% depending on how often a player would have been rested.) I for one don't think that Lee would have duplicated his 2005 numbers anyway, so the difference could well be smaller than that.

 

A good analysis, but losing Lee's defense will also cost us some runs.

That's a good point. Losing Lee's glove for a couple months could well cost us another game or so.

 

Doesn't Lee play every single day though? So that would mean closer to half a season.

Posted

Nice post.

 

Is there a way to calculate what the loss of Lee will do to Walker batting in front of him and to the productivity of the rest of the lineup?

Posted
Seemingly 1 out of every 3 Ramirez throws to first strike the dirt before going in Lee's glove... Let's see how Walker does with that.

 

Walker will be fine picking balls in the dirt. Anyone with the hands and athletic ability to play 2nd base should have no trouble with that aspect of playing 1st. The big concern will be with the little things like fielding bunts or throwing to 2nd on a force play. That being said, it's important to remember that 1st base is the place they put people that can't play anywhere else.

 

We'll miss Lee's offense a lot more than his defense.

Posted
People seem to be missing the point which for once Rosenthal manages to make in his latest article. The cubs were short a bat anyway. To win the division we needed another bat in between or behind Aram and D-Lee. Now we have lost D-lee we are 2 huge bats short. IMO no amount of pitching can make up for this.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

×
×
  • Create New...