Will Cedeno be good?

[soccer10k]

2003 to 2005:

Lefties: .159/.317/.280/.597

Righties: .253/.357/.461/.818

 

Using your example of 2004:

Lefties: .167/.268/.278/.546

Righties: .261/.381/.469/.850

 

Also from 2003 to 2005 he hit 38 HR's and 36 of those were against righties. The guy can't hit lefties. Face it and admit it. I'm not debating that he can sometimes hit righties, but he can't hit lefties to save his life.

 

AB's against lefties:

 

2003: 17 AB

2004: 36 AB

2005: 29 AB

 

82 AB's total vs. lefties

783 AB's total vs. righties

 

Wow. He just can't hit lefties. It's been proven. In three years, with 82 AB's, he did squat.

 

Hmm... let's do some numbers here on those HR's. 36 HR's in 783 AB's... is 1 HR every 21.75 AB's. 2 HR's in 82 AB's... that's 1 HR every 41 AB's. That's the worst split ever. Okay, not really. It's not even all that surprising. Of course, given the size of, dare I say it, the sample, I find it hard to draw any such conclusion that Choi cannot hit lefties. Indeed, I surmise that if the Cubs had not acquired Karros in 2003, Choi would have had a greater chance against lefties and perhaps, as his minor league career indicated, he would have hit just fine against them.

 

Shouldn't you also ask the question: Why did the Cubs even acquire Karros? Maybe because something was wrong. Every sign out there proves that Choi can't hit lefties. He is average against righties, but he can't hit lefties. You can cite sample size (and yes I have taken a couple statistics classes) but Choi hasn't given me any reason to believe that he'll ever hit left handed pitching well at all. Definately not well enough to play every day.

 

Also, for those of you that think the Cubs should bring Choi back to Chicago, Pittsburgh has 3 left handed starters, Milwaukee has 3, St. Louis has 1, Houston has 2, and Cincinnati has 2. That's 11 out of 25 left handed starters. Choi is not the answer.

[soccer10k]

lol @ the "contrarian" label. seems i'm in agreement with almost everyone else in baseball, but nice try.

 

just recently i've changed my opinion on pierre & rusch. some people called it, so what, i'm wrong.

 

Holy dear lord, you've changed your opinion. It's magic, I say, magic.

 

Nice try, my foot. You are a contrarian, CubsfaninCA, and you regularly skirt the line of trollish behavior pretty regularly. You've been a dropping into threads in such a fashion almost since you joined the board.

 

I'm all for different opinions and I like a good debate. I don't like when people reiterate the same opinions time again without sufficient support for the argument. Additionally, it's pretty clear that "almost everyone else in baseball" doesn't mean much of anything since we don't have access to their thoughts. I would add the argument, too, that it's pretty clear that there are a lot of baseball clubs that really don't know how to maximize their winning potential.

 

The Cubs are, and have been, a great example of how not to assemble a baseball team.

 

that's really rich.

 

when the information doesn't back one's opinion go personal.

 

take the next lecture to pm.

 

Keep dodging, ducking, dipping, diving and dodging. You may not like it, but you are contrarian. It's not personal and it's not an attack. You take pride in fighting the conventional wisdom of the board. You like pointing out how stats can't do this, and stats can't do that, and how your eyes told you that Choi sucked as a Dodger.

 

Oh, and by the way, since you never read the last PM I sent you, why would I bother sending you any more?

 

If you don't like what I have to say, in what forum I say it, how I behave as a Mod, how and when I moderate, or if you have a problem with me personally, please feel free to contact Tim or 1908.

 

Let him disagree with the board. What's the big deal with it?

[brinoch]

2003 to 2005:

Lefties: .159/.317/.280/.597

Righties: .253/.357/.461/.818

 

Using your example of 2004:

Lefties: .167/.268/.278/.546

Righties: .261/.381/.469/.850

 

Also from 2003 to 2005 he hit 38 HR's and 36 of those were against righties. The guy can't hit lefties. Face it and admit it. I'm not debating that he can sometimes hit righties, but he can't hit lefties to save his life.

 

AB's against lefties:

 

2003: 17 AB

2004: 36 AB

2005: 29 AB

 

82 AB's total vs. lefties

783 AB's total vs. righties

 

Wow. He just can't hit lefties. It's been proven. In three years, with 82 AB's, he did squat.

 

Hmm... let's do some numbers here on those HR's. 36 HR's in 783 AB's... is 1 HR every 21.75 AB's. 2 HR's in 82 AB's... that's 1 HR every 41 AB's. That's the worst split ever. Okay, not really. It's not even all that surprising. Of course, given the size of, dare I say it, the sample, I find it hard to draw any such conclusion that Choi cannot hit lefties. Indeed, I surmise that if the Cubs had not acquired Karros in 2003, Choi would have had a greater chance against lefties and perhaps, as his minor league career indicated, he would have hit just fine against them.

 

Shouldn't you also ask the question: Why did the Cubs even acquire Karros? Maybe because something was wrong. Every sign out there proves that Choi can't hit lefties. He is average against righties, but he can't hit lefties. You can cite sample size (and yes I have taken a couple statistics classes) but Choi hasn't given me any reason to believe that he'll ever hit left handed pitching well at all. Definately not well enough to play every day.

 

Also, for those of you that think the Cubs should bring Choi back to Chicago, Pittsburgh has 3 left handed starters, Milwaukee has 3, St. Louis has 1, Houston has 2, and Cincinnati has 2. That's 11 out of 25 left handed starters. Choi is not the answer.

 

The Cubs didn't set out to acquire Karros. They set out to get rid of Todd Hundley. The price was taking Grudz and Karros -- and it was a pretty good deal, frankly.

 

Choi hit lefties fine in the minors. I, personally, suspect he would be fine against them today. Certainly, he wouldn't be any worse than the rest of this bunch. Again, would you rather have Choi and Walker playing or Perez/Hairston/Bynum and Walker?

 

I seriously hope that everyone would rather have Perez on the bench and not in the game.

 

If you can find a right-handed first baseman who mashes left-handed pitching, I'm fine with acquiring him -- particularly if they have the flexibility to play other positions or spend some time in the minors when Lee gets back. Craig Wilson would do, but I doubt he's available.

[goonys evil twin]

Shouldn't you also ask the question: Why did the Cubs even acquire Karros? Maybe because something was wrong. Every sign out there proves that Choi can't hit lefties.

 

Except for the fact that he hit them in the minors.

 

What does Karros's acquisition tell us? It tells us the Cubs wanted a nearly washed up veteran to hang around and "solidify" the position. That happens all the time, and it's usually a waste. Teams overpay for veteran stability when in reality they can get same or similar production for much cheaper out of pre-arbitration players. Also, Karros was part of the Hundley trade. It was more about getting rid of Todd than really wanting Karros.

[CubfaninCA]

lol @ the "contrarian" label. seems i'm in agreement with almost everyone else in baseball, but nice try.

 

just recently i've changed my opinion on pierre & rusch. some people called it, so what, i'm wrong.

 

Holy dear lord, you've changed your opinion. It's magic, I say, magic.

 

Nice try, my foot. You are a contrarian, CubsfaninCA, and you regularly skirt the line of trollish behavior pretty regularly. You've been a dropping into threads in such a fashion almost since you joined the board.

 

I'm all for different opinions and I like a good debate. I don't like when people reiterate the same opinions time again without sufficient support for the argument. Additionally, it's pretty clear that "almost everyone else in baseball" doesn't mean much of anything since we don't have access to their thoughts. I would add the argument, too, that it's pretty clear that there are a lot of baseball clubs that really don't know how to maximize their winning potential.

 

The Cubs are, and have been, a great example of how not to assemble a baseball team.

 

that's really rich.

 

when the information doesn't back one's opinion go personal.

 

take the next lecture to pm.

 

Keep dodging, ducking, dipping, diving and dodging. You may not like it, but you are contrarian. It's not personal and it's not an attack. You take pride in fighting the conventional wisdom of the board. You like pointing out how stats can't do this, and stats can't do that, and how your eyes told you that Choi sucked as a Dodger.

 

Oh, and by the way, since you never read the last PM I sent you, why would I bother sending you any more?

 

If you don't like what I have to say, in what forum I say it, how I behave as a Mod, how and when I moderate, or if you have a problem with me personally, please feel free to contact Tim or 1908.

 

i think i read a few of your pm's and got tired of the lectures.

 

obviously, it offends some that i question the dependability of moneyball. if that makes me a "contrarian," so be it.

 

i can admit i've been wrong on guys like rusch, pierre and walker. i doubt the moneyballers can ever admit error, since they can always claim small sample or gm's are dumb or "he didn't get a proper chance", etc. pot meet kettle.

[soccer10k]

Who cares about minor league pitching? Stop using that as an example. That point has already been stated about 15 in this thread. I GOT YOUR POINT ALREADY. Nobody makes a living hitting minor league pitching.

[soccer10k]

2003 to 2005:

Lefties: .159/.317/.280/.597

Righties: .253/.357/.461/.818

 

Using your example of 2004:

Lefties: .167/.268/.278/.546

Righties: .261/.381/.469/.850

 

Also from 2003 to 2005 he hit 38 HR's and 36 of those were against righties. The guy can't hit lefties. Face it and admit it. I'm not debating that he can sometimes hit righties, but he can't hit lefties to save his life.

 

AB's against lefties:

 

2003: 17 AB

2004: 36 AB

2005: 29 AB

 

82 AB's total vs. lefties

783 AB's total vs. righties

 

Wow. He just can't hit lefties. It's been proven. In three years, with 82 AB's, he did squat.

 

Hmm... let's do some numbers here on those HR's. 36 HR's in 783 AB's... is 1 HR every 21.75 AB's. 2 HR's in 82 AB's... that's 1 HR every 41 AB's. That's the worst split ever. Okay, not really. It's not even all that surprising. Of course, given the size of, dare I say it, the sample, I find it hard to draw any such conclusion that Choi cannot hit lefties. Indeed, I surmise that if the Cubs had not acquired Karros in 2003, Choi would have had a greater chance against lefties and perhaps, as his minor league career indicated, he would have hit just fine against them.

 

Shouldn't you also ask the question: Why did the Cubs even acquire Karros? Maybe because something was wrong. Every sign out there proves that Choi can't hit lefties. He is average against righties, but he can't hit lefties. You can cite sample size (and yes I have taken a couple statistics classes) but Choi hasn't given me any reason to believe that he'll ever hit left handed pitching well at all. Definately not well enough to play every day.

 

Also, for those of you that think the Cubs should bring Choi back to Chicago, Pittsburgh has 3 left handed starters, Milwaukee has 3, St. Louis has 1, Houston has 2, and Cincinnati has 2. That's 11 out of 25 left handed starters. Choi is not the answer.

 

The Cubs didn't set out to acquire Karros. They set out to get rid of Todd Hundley. The price was taking Grudz and Karros -- and it was a pretty good deal, frankly.

 

Nobody goes into a trade not caring who they get in return. Jim Hendry wanted Grudz and Karros in return. You don't just call up another GM and say "Hey I'm going to give you Todd Hundley, just give me whatever you want to in return. I don't care." You don't do that. Hendry had to have had some idea of what he wanted in return. If he didn't want Karros, he wouldn't have acquired him.

[goonys evil twin]

Who cares about minor league pitching? Stop using that as an example. That point has already been stated about 15 in this thread. I GOT YOUR POINT ALREADY. Nobody makes a living hitting minor league pitching.

 

Actually lots of people make a living hitting minor league pitching. It's just not a very prosperous one.

 

Just because you want to dismiss minor league production doesn't mean it can't be included in rational debate. You said all signs indicated he couldn't hit lefties. I think a large amount of minor league at bats can easily outwiegh a handful of major league at bats spread out over multiple years, as well as personel decisions made by the Cubs.

 

It's your opinion that he can't hit lefties, but you have no more evidence than those that say he might be able to if given a chance. It's been stated before in this thread because it's an important fact to remember, even though you insist on ignoring it.

[soccer10k]

Who cares about minor league pitching? Stop using that as an example. That point has already been stated about 15 in this thread. I GOT YOUR POINT ALREADY. Nobody makes a living hitting minor league pitching.

 

Actually lots of people make a living hitting minor league pitching. It's just not a very prosperous one.

 

Just because you want to dismiss minor league production doesn't mean it can't be included in rational debate. You said all signs indicated he couldn't hit lefties. I think a large amount of minor league at bats can easily outwiegh a handful of major league at bats spread out over multiple years, as well as personel decisions made by the Cubs.

 

It's your opinion that he can't hit lefties, but you have no more evidence than those that say he might be able to if given a chance. It's been stated before in this thread because it's an important fact to remember, even though you insist on ignoring it.

 

My point on minor league hitting is that just because some guy tears up minor league pitching doesn't mean that he's going to tear up major league pitching. It's the "what have you done for me lately" line. What has Choi done against left handed pitchers at the major league level? Absolutely nothing.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Nobody goes into a trade not caring who they get in return. Jim Hendry wanted Grudz and Karros in return. You don't just call up another GM and say "Hey I'm going to give you Todd Hundley, just give me whatever you want to in return. I don't care." You don't do that. Hendry had to have had some idea of what he wanted in return. If he didn't want Karros, he wouldn't have acquired him.

 

Jerry Hairston, Mike Fontenot, David Crouthers

[goonys evil twin]

My point on minor league hitting is that just because some guy tears up minor league pitching doesn't mean that he's going to tear up major league pitching. It's the "what have you done for me lately" line. What has Choi done against left handed pitchers at the major league level? Absolutely nothing.

 

And what kind of chance has he been given to do anything against them in the majors? Practically none.

 

You can't say a guy can't hit lefties if he isn't given a chance to hit lefties. I can't say he definitely can hit major league lefties just because he hit them in the minors. I can say it's stupid not to give a guy the chance in the majors though.

[CubinNY]

Judging by Jim Tracy's track record, I'd have to say his refusal to play Choi against lefties is no indictment of Choi's ability.

 

IMO, he is one of those players who never really got a fair shake.

[RyCubsFan]

On the subject on hand,

 

I've been very impressed with Cedeno so far. It's clear that defensively he is a major league caliber shortstop. On the offensive side of things, I like his swing. He doesn't slap at the ball, like Pierre. He tends to make decent contact. And he can hit the ball the other way as easily as he can pull it. I'd say, in spite of his recent slump of sorts, that Cedeno should be manning the Cubs ss for several years. Yould make the case that he has been the biggest bright spot on the team this year.

[CubinNY]

On the subject on hand,

 

I've been very impressed with Cedeno so far. It's clear that defensively he is a major league caliber shortstop. On the offensive side of things, I like his swing. He doesn't slap at the ball, like Pierre. He tends to make decent contact. And he can hit the ball the other way as easily as he can pull it. I'd say, in spite of his recent slump of sorts, that Cedeno should be manning the Cubs ss for several years. Yould make the case that he has been the biggest bright spot on the team this year.

 

Cedeno is kind of a pre-steriod, pre-Arod/Tejada/Nomar/Jeter throw back. I think he will be a good-not-great SS for a long time.

 

Both He and Murton have more than held their own so far in their first full season.

[soccer10k]

On the subject on hand,

 

I've been very impressed with Cedeno so far. It's clear that defensively he is a major league caliber shortstop. On the offensive side of things, I like his swing. He doesn't slap at the ball, like Pierre. He tends to make decent contact. And he can hit the ball the other way as easily as he can pull it. I'd say, in spite of his recent slump of sorts, that Cedeno should be manning the Cubs ss for several years. Yould make the case that he has been the biggest bright spot on the team this year.

 

Cedeno is kind of a pre-steriod, pre-Arod/Tejada/Nomar/Jeter throw back. I think he will be a good-not-great SS for a long time.

 

Both He and Murton have more than held their own so far in their first full season.

 

I agree and think Cedeno will definately be solid major league player. Maybe not great, but he'll have a long career.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

On the subject on hand,

 

I've been very impressed with Cedeno so far. It's clear that defensively he is a major league caliber shortstop. On the offensive side of things, I like his swing. He doesn't slap at the ball, like Pierre. He tends to make decent contact. And he can hit the ball the other way as easily as he can pull it. I'd say, in spite of his recent slump of sorts, that Cedeno should be manning the Cubs ss for several years. Yould make the case that he has been the biggest bright spot on the team this year.

 

Cedeno is kind of a pre-steriod, pre-Arod/Tejada/Nomar/Jeter throw back. I think he will be a good-not-great SS for a long time.

 

Both He and Murton have more than held their own so far in their first full season.

 

It's about the walks right now for Cedeno. His BABIP is pretty high, but not completely unsustainable. He put up a .050 IsoD for his minor league career, if he gets it up to .040 he should be around a .330 OBP and around a .740 OPS, which would be pretty fine for his rookie season.

[brinoch]

lol @ the "contrarian" label. seems i'm in agreement with almost everyone else in baseball, but nice try.

 

just recently i've changed my opinion on pierre & rusch. some people called it, so what, i'm wrong.

 

Holy dear lord, you've changed your opinion. It's magic, I say, magic.

 

Nice try, my foot. You are a contrarian, CubsfaninCA, and you regularly skirt the line of trollish behavior pretty regularly. You've been a dropping into threads in such a fashion almost since you joined the board.

 

I'm all for different opinions and I like a good debate. I don't like when people reiterate the same opinions time again without sufficient support for the argument. Additionally, it's pretty clear that "almost everyone else in baseball" doesn't mean much of anything since we don't have access to their thoughts. I would add the argument, too, that it's pretty clear that there are a lot of baseball clubs that really don't know how to maximize their winning potential.

 

The Cubs are, and have been, a great example of how not to assemble a baseball team.

 

that's really rich.

 

when the information doesn't back one's opinion go personal.

 

take the next lecture to pm.

 

Keep dodging, ducking, dipping, diving and dodging. You may not like it, but you are contrarian. It's not personal and it's not an attack. You take pride in fighting the conventional wisdom of the board. You like pointing out how stats can't do this, and stats can't do that, and how your eyes told you that Choi sucked as a Dodger.

 

Oh, and by the way, since you never read the last PM I sent you, why would I bother sending you any more?

 

If you don't like what I have to say, in what forum I say it, how I behave as a Mod, how and when I moderate, or if you have a problem with me personally, please feel free to contact Tim or 1908.

 

i think i read a few of your pm's and got tired of the lectures.

 

obviously, it offends some that i question the dependability of moneyball. if that makes me a "contrarian," so be it.

 

i can admit i've been wrong on guys like rusch, pierre and walker. i doubt the moneyballers can ever admit error, since they can always claim small sample or gm's are dumb or "he didn't get a proper chance", etc. pot meet kettle.

 

Well, then, since you're tired of the lectures on trollish behavior, I would suggest not acting the troll. And if a Mod sends you a warning PM, even if you are "tired of their lectures," I suggest you read it. If you are acting inappropriately with respect to the rest of the board, and you do not heed the warning, public or private, of a Mod or Admin, then don't blame me (or anyone else but yourself) if you get banned.

 

And, since you seem to be the NSBB incarnation of Joe Morgan, let me set the record straight: I am not a Moneyballer. I am an adherent of SABR. Moneyball is fictional book by Michael Lewis about one small market team's efforts in finding economic efficiencies in the game of baseball. The A's discovered that OBP was undervalued, and so focused their efforts in that direction. Nowadays, after Moneyball, OBP isn't undervalued. Indeed, it's perhaps overvalued in terms of contract sizes. Frankly, I'm not interested in maximum efficiency. My team, the Cubs, do not need to be especially efficient. They can have all the high OBP/SLG guys they want. I want to see the Cubs win games.

 

I believe in statistical analysis. I believe in discovering new information, looking at new data, examining baseball from new directions and trying to discern the best way to make the Cubs a better team. I believe that baseball's conventional wisdom is often wrong, and should be questioned. Despite this, I think scouts are extremely valuable because, indeed, statistics cannot tell you everything about a player. And, perhaps most importantly, I believe that in the face of nearly one hundred years of futility, a new approach should be adopted. If the Cubs were winning with this approach of "conventional wisdom", I'd be happy. Because I care more about them winning than doing things the way I'd much prefer.

 

I've maintained this attitude throughout my life. Questions are good. Learning for yourself is good. It has served me very well in my professional life and has proved an invaluable boon to my career.

[CubinNY]

On the subject on hand,

 

I've been very impressed with Cedeno so far. It's clear that defensively he is a major league caliber shortstop. On the offensive side of things, I like his swing. He doesn't slap at the ball, like Pierre. He tends to make decent contact. And he can hit the ball the other way as easily as he can pull it. I'd say, in spite of his recent slump of sorts, that Cedeno should be manning the Cubs ss for several years. Yould make the case that he has been the biggest bright spot on the team this year.

 

Cedeno is kind of a pre-steriod, pre-Arod/Tejada/Nomar/Jeter throw back. I think he will be a good-not-great SS for a long time.

 

Both He and Murton have more than held their own so far in their first full season.

 

It's about the walks right now for Cedeno. His BABIP is pretty high, but not completely unsustainable. He put up a .050 IsoD for his minor league career, if he gets it up to .040 he should be around a .330 OBP and around a .740 OPS, which would be pretty fine for his rookie season.

 

I would love if Ronny developed more selectivity at the plate. He is still young but I don't know if he will ever develop much patience.

 

That brings up a question I've had for a long time.

 

Is it out of the ordinary for a player to develop plate discipline in their first few years in the bigs?

[BigbadB]

Is it out of the ordinary for a player to develop plate discipline in their first few years in the bigs?

 

A player? Not at all.

Every player? Yes.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

On the subject on hand,

 

I've been very impressed with Cedeno so far. It's clear that defensively he is a major league caliber shortstop. On the offensive side of things, I like his swing. He doesn't slap at the ball, like Pierre. He tends to make decent contact. And he can hit the ball the other way as easily as he can pull it. I'd say, in spite of his recent slump of sorts, that Cedeno should be manning the Cubs ss for several years. Yould make the case that he has been the biggest bright spot on the team this year.

 

Cedeno is kind of a pre-steriod, pre-Arod/Tejada/Nomar/Jeter throw back. I think he will be a good-not-great SS for a long time.

 

Both He and Murton have more than held their own so far in their first full season.

 

It's about the walks right now for Cedeno. His BABIP is pretty high, but not completely unsustainable. He put up a .050 IsoD for his minor league career, if he gets it up to .040 he should be around a .330 OBP and around a .740 OPS, which would be pretty fine for his rookie season.

 

I would love if Ronny developed more selectivity at the plate. He is still young but I don't know if he will ever develop much patience.

 

That brings up a question I've had for a long time.

 

Is it out of the ordinary for a player to develop plate discipline in their first few years in the bigs?

 

I'm just talking about Cedeno returning to his previous minor league performance in terms of discipline, or something similar.

[CubinNY]

Is it out of the ordinary for a player to develop plate discipline in their first few years in the bigs?

 

A player? Not at all.

Every player? Yes.

 

Can you cite any examples. I'd really like to know if there is hope.

[stitchface]

Is it out of the ordinary for a player to develop plate discipline in their first few years in the bigs?

 

A player? Not at all.

Every player? Yes.

 

Can you cite any examples. I'd really like to know if there is hope.

 

sammy sosa. to me cedeno seems able to identify strikes most of the time so I'm not as worried. plate discipline isn't about taking walks, its about identifying pitches to hit.

[CuseCubFan69]

I would expect a 250/290-280/330 type of career for Cedeno. A decent career but nothing spectacular. If this team had some decent hitters Cedeno would fit in fine but since Hendry decided to get a CF and RF that are below average Cedeno's struggles will stick out more.

[stitchface]

I would expect a 250/290-280/330 type of career for Cedeno. A decent career but nothing spectacular. If this team had some decent hitters Cedeno would fit in fine but since Hendry decided to get a CF and RF that are below average Cedeno's struggles will stick out more.

 

exactly - this team has too many role players and not enough great players.

[RynoRules]

That doesn't make a lot of sense. If he is as good as you say; was on waivers, meaning anyone could have gotten him; and there are several teams that could use him at DH or 1B, then why didn't one of those teams pick him up?

 

I agree Choi has a good eye and decent approach, but I always thought he had a pretty slow bat. May be that's the rap on him now.

 

Poor management? Bad decision making? It's not like the Cubs have the market cornered on those two things.

 

I am not saying that's not a possibility, but I think its less likely than my theory. I don't want to hijack this thread, but your argument implies that the majority of the trained pros making personnel decisions are "poor managers" and "bad decision makers". While I agree they exist, I have a hard time believing that this is true of 50% or more of them.

 

My argument doesn't imply that at all. I said there are some teams that he could be starting for. A lot of teams already had players in place that were as good, if not better. Other teams have rookies that deserved a shot. There are plenty of reasons. But there are teams that he could be starting for. He also would have been a good insurance policy for some teams that were opening the season with rookies starting at 1B or DH.

 

Florida, Tampa Bay, and Kansas City could use him. He certainly couldn't do any worse than Johnson has so far at first base for Oakland, although I think Johnson should be able to turn it around. LaRoche in Atlanta isn't exactly an All-Star.

 

I honestly think he'd be good in a platoon at first base with Niekro in San Francisco.

 

OK. I think he makes the most sense for a team like KC or TB, and San Fran is interesting idea as well. Actually he makes a lot of sense in San Fran.