Sox walk, Cubs don't

[TB_11]

For the series:

 

Total Sox walks: 17

Total Cubs walks: 2

 

Jeebus.

[anemic offense]

Everybody walks when they face our pitching staff.

 

Just 2 walks for the Cubs the entire series?? Pathetic.

[UMFan83]

Pathetic isnt it

[Balsa]

They had good pitching, we didn't.

 

I really don't think there's much more to it.

[Banghart]

They had good pitching, we didn't.

 

I really don't think there's much more to it.

The Cubs have a 110 BBs total this season. That places them at 26th overall in the majors at drawing walks. The White Sox pitched well, but I think there is a bigger trend at work here.

 

-Banghart

[Balsa]

They had good pitching, we didn't.

 

I really don't think there's much more to it.

The Cubs have a 110 BBs total this season. That places them at 26th overall in the majors at drawing walks. The White Sox pitched well, but I think there is a bigger trend at work here.

 

-Banghart

 

Mmmk. True enough. But we faced three good starters from the Sox. Contrearas especially was pounding the strike zone.

 

And when you look at their walks, you're counting 5 walks in 5.2 IPfrom Maddux (which is close to unheard of), Hill gave up 5 walks in 4 IP, and Zambrano gave up 3 in 7 IP.

 

That's two out of three starts where the Cubs pitching was wild and inconsistent, which does not describe the Sox pitching.

[sunnydoo]

I think that Hawk and the other guy actually got something right (believe me, i cant believe the idiots actually were this brilliant).

 

During the broadcast today, they were talking on the Cubs not taking pitches against Contreras. Hawk says you really cant take pitches against someone who you know is good and is going to be around the zone. Got to get on them before they put you in the hole.

 

Then the color guy said, well they have been doing it all year to everyone.

 

 

Think about it. The Cubs only beat good, established pitchers. Good, established pitchers are good because they hit the zones with their pitches, or are around the zone. Impatience probably pays off against them.

 

However, young pitchers are usually everywhere. Going after them would usually lead to frustration, because half the time they arent hitting their spots and probably are not in the zone as much.

 

I think this is the teams #1 problem over the last decade. We just dont have a hitting coach that has been smart enough to figure it out.

[Soul]

I'm giddy. It's a miracle we even took one game from the Sox.

 

You all should be too. That was the high point of our season.

[Balsa]

Looking at the box score, I'm astounded.

 

Contrearas threw 98 pitches, 73 of which were strikes. That's an outstanding ratio. No wonder the Cubs were swinging so much.

[Sammy Sofa]

That's pretty much what happened to Wood against the Nats...throwing too many strikes.

[Mark Priors Calves]

Looking at the box score, I'm astounded.

 

Contrearas threw 98 pitches, 73 of which were strikes. That's an outstanding ratio. No wonder the Cubs were swinging so much.

 

But also remember that a pitch that normally should be taken because its a ball, counts as a strike if its swung at.

Edited May 22, 2006 by Mark Prior's Calves

[Balsa]

Looking at the box score, I'm astounded.

 

Contrearas threw 98 pitches, 73 of which were strikes. That's an outstanding ratio. No wonder the Cubs were swinging so much.

 

But also remember that a pitch that normally should be taken beacuse its a ball, counts as a strike if its swung at.

 

You know, that makes sense now that you say it, but it never before occured to me. Alrighty then. There's no way Contrearas was that good.

[A New Era]

Everybody walks when they face our pitching staff.

 

Just 2 walks for the Cubs the entire series?? Pathetic.

 

Gotta tip your hat dude. Those batters were patient against us. I've never seen hitters that patient. (I certainly don't coach players that patient).

[BigSlick]

For the series:

 

Total Sox walks: 17

Total Cubs walks: 2

 

Jeebus.

 

I love how Dusty likes to limit the importance of walks for our organization...yet they end up biting us in the butt every single time.

[Andy]

I think that Hawk and the other guy actually got something right (believe me, i cant believe the idiots actually were this brilliant).

 

During the broadcast today, they were talking on the Cubs not taking pitches against Contreras. Hawk says you really cant take pitches against someone who you know is good and is going to be around the zone. Got to get on them before they put you in the hole.

 

Then the color guy said, well they have been doing it all year to everyone.

 

 

Think about it. The Cubs only beat good, established pitchers. Good, established pitchers are good because they hit the zones with their pitches, or are around the zone. Impatience probably pays off against them.

 

However, young pitchers are usually everywhere. Going after them would usually lead to frustration, because half the time they arent hitting their spots and probably are not in the zone as much.

 

I think this is the teams #1 problem over the last decade. We just dont have a hitting coach that has been smart enough to figure it out.

Great post, hadn't thought of it this way.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

First let me point out that the Cubs OBP last year was .324 and the White Sox was .322. With adding only Thome the Sox are at .353 this year, and I attribute most of that to a weak early schedule. It will drop.

 

Pitching has been our biggest problem. We are 12th in era, 8th in whip, and 1st in walks allowed. In the last 22 games we have given up 5 runs or more 14 times (6 or more 12 times). We’re 0-14 in those games. Maybe if we were hitting better we could have pulled out a few of those but we would still be sucking. We’re 5-3 in the other games.

 

Our starting pitching has kept us out of most games, which shows that a healthy Wood and Prior mean more then a few more walks.

[BigSlick]

I think that Hawk and the other guy actually got something right (believe me, i cant believe the idiots actually were this brilliant).

 

During the broadcast today, they were talking on the Cubs not taking pitches against Contreras. Hawk says you really cant take pitches against someone who you know is good and is going to be around the zone. Got to get on them before they put you in the hole.

 

Then the color guy said, well they have been doing it all year to everyone.

 

 

Think about it. The Cubs only beat good, established pitchers. Good, established pitchers are good because they hit the zones with their pitches, or are around the zone. Impatience probably pays off against them.

 

However, young pitchers are usually everywhere. Going after them would usually lead to frustration, because half the time they arent hitting their spots and probably are not in the zone as much.

 

I think this is the teams #1 problem over the last decade. We just dont have a hitting coach that has been smart enough to figure it out.

Great post, hadn't thought of it this way.

 

You hadn't thought about it that way because it really doesn't make much sense.

 

If beating established pitchers just came to swinging at everything, they wouldn't be established pitchers. Its not the fact that they throw strikes, its the fact that they throw strikes that are hard to hit. Every pitcher can throw strikes, but hitting them isn't the same as batting practice.

 

Yes, the Cubs may not draw a lot of walks, but I don't buy this "they are more successful against good pitchers because they swing nilly-willy" theory. Sample-size anyone?

[BigbadB]

First let me point out that the Cubs OBP last year was .324 and the White Sox was .322. With adding only Thome the Sox are at .353 this year, and I attribute most of that to a weak early schedule. It will drop.

 

Pitching has been our biggest problem. We are 12th in era, 8th in whip, and 1st in walks allowed. In the last 22 games we have given up 5 runs or more 14 times (6 or more 12 times). We’re 0-14 in those games. Maybe if we were hitting better we could have pulled out a few of those but we would still be sucking. We’re 5-3 in the other games.

 

Our starting pitching has kept us out of most games, which shows that a healthy Wood and Prior mean more then a few more walks.

 

Yes, the White Sox OBP was pretty putrid last year, also. But, they made the best of their situation. They had an OBP of .338 from the lead off spot, and .335 from the #2 spot, right in front of their big bats.

 

The Cubs, on the other hand, had an OBP of .299 from the lead off spot and a .314 OBP from the #2 hitter, right in front of the big bats.

 

Check this out. The Sox #3 hitters were basically pretty atrocious last year, combining to hit .234 AVG for the season in 624 at bats.

 

The Cubs #3 hitters combined to hit .308 AVG in 633 at bats. Much better than the White Sox, yet the White Sox got more RBI out of the #3 position in the batting order than the Cubs by 10. Suppose that .299 OBP and .314 ahead of them might have had something to do with it? I sure do.

 

Imagine Todd Walker and Matt Murton batting 1/2 (two guys with very respectable OBP's) in the line up most of last year instead of Neifi Perez and Corey Patterson. How many more RBI's would Derrek Lee have put up with his amazing season.

 

That's the difference. The White Sox scored 741 runs last year to the Cubs 703. The Cubs did have a better OBP, but Guillen recognized the importance of putting decent OBP guys in front of the more productive hitters, and they scored more runs than the Cubs.

 

If the Cubs had a clue, they would have focused their energy this offseason on getting guys that are good at getting on base instead of focusing on guys who can catch the ball or on guys who are speedy.

 

This year, the Cubs have an even worse OBP and are at or near the bottom in runs scored. It's not really rocket science. Instead of signing poor OBP guys like Jacque Jones, bring in guys who can get on base. Juan Pierre was coming off a season in which his OBP was .326. They traded 3 prospects for a guy who just had a lousy season.

 

The Padres traded Mark Loretta for Doug Mirabelli, a back up catcher. Loretta is an OBP stud. Hendry couldn't come up with a better offer than that? I certainly believe he could. The problem isn't that he couldn't. It's because he doesn't recognize the value of drawing a walk. And that's truly amazing when you consider how many of our very own pitchers give up walks that eventually turn into runs for the OTHER team.

 

If the Cubs pitching staff was completely healthy and they were as dominant as they all can be, this team would still be hovering around .500 because Hendry focused on speed and defense instead of the ability to get on base.

 

There were players who had speed, good defense AND a tremendous ability to get on base that were available this past offseason, and they are playing for other teams. Milton Bradley and Coco Crisp to name a few.

 

This Cubs management team is blind in one eye and can't see out of the other when it comes to what recognizing how to put a winning team on the field. That's because they do not value a walk.

 

Mark Bellhorn will probably end up as the best lead off hitter this team had in the decade of 2000-2009. He's not fast and he's not all that great defensively. But, the guy sure could get on base. And he scored a ton of runs as a lead off hitter. The best lead off option in 2005 for this Cubs team was Todd Walker. How many times did he bat lead off last year? He logged 2 at bats in the lead off spot last year. Murton had 10 at bats there and had a .364 OBP. The two best options last year to bat first logged 12 at bats, or the equivilent of 3 games.

 

Todd Walker had 228 at bats in the lead off spot in 2004 and in a total of 60 games. His OBP? .370

 

He scored 45 runs in 60 games. What team wouldn't want a lead off hitter that gets on base 37% of the time?

 

Apparently, the Cubs. Interestingly enough, the Cubs already had their answer at lead off. He makes less than half as much as the guy they traded 3 prospects to get. And he would have been a whole lot better than the guy they traded for. Interestingly enough again, Hendry and Co. tried everything they could to get rid of Walker during the offseason.

 

What should that tell you? Could you imagine how how much worse this team would be without Todd Walker on the roster? I shudder to think. Of course, this team makes me shudder enough as it is, so I'll stop thinking about it.

[BigbadB]

Yep, the White Sox had OBP problems last year too. But, they went out and added an OBP stud. Who did the Cubs get? Jacque Jones, he of the OBP impaired.

 

When the White Sox pitching struggles, their offense will pick them up occasionally. They have tremendous balance now. The Cubs pitchers need to throw shut outs everyday if they want to win.

[Backtobanks]

For the series:

 

Total Sox walks: 17

Total Cubs walks: 2

 

Jeebus.

 

It's kind of hard to get walks when you don't take any pitches. There was a streak in the middle innings where Contreras threw something like 8 pitches, 6 pitches, and 9 pitches. This is a great strategy for facing a pitcher that is only good for about 100 pitches an outing.

[Hacking Out Machine]

Big Bad B-

 

Your post is terrific. I agree with you 100%. It's obvious that the Cubs organization is probably the most bass-ackward organization in MLB when it comes to organizational offensive philosophy. They are loaded with players who can't get on base and have no power, and they think this is a good thing. Also, it sure is a good thing the Cubs are among the toughest teams to strike out in MLB isn't it? When you don't walk and don't hit for power, your only way of having any offensive success is if you get 3 singles in an inning, and 4 or 5 for a crooked number. Even teams with GOOD hitters find this hard to do on a consistent basis. You're depending on what is largely a random event for most of your offensive output. Even Allard Baird has an emphasis on OBP in his recent drafts.

 

Unfortunately, the Cubs have stocked their entire organiztion with players similar to the ones they acquired for the big league club. Look around for OBP in the minors. Good luck finding it. SLG for that matter as well. Unless there is an organizational epiphany, I don't think the Cubs will field a decent offense any time soon.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

First let me point out that the Cubs OBP last year was .324 and the White Sox was .322. With adding only Thome the Sox are at .353 this year, and I attribute most of that to a weak early schedule. It will drop.

 

Pitching has been our biggest problem. We are 12th in era, 8th in whip, and 1st in walks allowed. In the last 22 games we have given up 5 runs or more 14 times (6 or more 12 times). We’re 0-14 in those games. Maybe if we were hitting better we could have pulled out a few of those but we would still be sucking. We’re 5-3 in the other games.

 

Our starting pitching has kept us out of most games, which shows that a healthy Wood and Prior mean more then a few more walks.

 

Yes, the White Sox OBP was pretty putrid last year, also. But, they made the best of their situation. They had an OBP of .338 from the lead off spot, and .335 from the #2 spot, right in front of their big bats.

 

The Cubs, on the other hand, had an OBP of .299 from the lead off spot and a .314 OBP from the #2 hitter, right in front of the big bats.

 

Check this out. The Sox #3 hitters were basically pretty atrocious last year, combining to hit .234 AVG for the season in 624 at bats.

 

The Cubs #3 hitters combined to hit .308 AVG in 633 at bats. Much better than the White Sox, yet the White Sox got more RBI out of the #3 position in the batting order than the Cubs by 10. Suppose that .299 OBP and .314 ahead of them might have had something to do with it? I sure do.

 

Imagine Todd Walker and Matt Murton batting 1/2 (two guys with very respectable OBP's) in the line up most of last year instead of Neifi Perez and Corey Patterson. How many more RBI's would Derrek Lee have put up with his amazing season.

 

That's the difference. The White Sox scored 741 runs last year to the Cubs 703. The Cubs did have a better OBP, but Guillen recognized the importance of putting decent OBP guys in front of the more productive hitters, and they scored more runs than the Cubs.

 

If the Cubs had a clue, they would have focused their energy this offseason on getting guys that are good at getting on base instead of focusing on guys who can catch the ball or on guys who are speedy.

 

This year, the Cubs have an even worse OBP and are at or near the bottom in runs scored. It's not really rocket science. Instead of signing poor OBP guys like Jacque Jones, bring in guys who can get on base. Juan Pierre was coming off a season in which his OBP was .326. They traded 3 prospects for a guy who just had a lousy season.

 

The Padres traded Mark Loretta for Doug Mirabelli, a back up catcher. Loretta is an OBP stud. Hendry couldn't come up with a better offer than that? I certainly believe he could. The problem isn't that he couldn't. It's because he doesn't recognize the value of drawing a walk. And that's truly amazing when you consider how many of our very own pitchers give up walks that eventually turn into runs for the OTHER team.

 

If the Cubs pitching staff was completely healthy and they were as dominant as they all can be, this team would still be hovering around .500 because Hendry focused on speed and defense instead of the ability to get on base.

 

There were players who had speed, good defense AND a tremendous ability to get on base that were available this past offseason, and they are playing for other teams. Milton Bradley and Coco Crisp to name a few.

 

This Cubs management team is blind in one eye and can't see out of the other when it comes to what recognizing how to put a winning team on the field. That's because they do not value a walk.

 

Mark Bellhorn will probably end up as the best lead off hitter this team had in the decade of 2000-2009. He's not fast and he's not all that great defensively. But, the guy sure could get on base. And he scored a ton of runs as a lead off hitter. The best lead off option in 2005 for this Cubs team was Todd Walker. How many times did he bat lead off last year? He logged 2 at bats in the lead off spot last year. Murton had 10 at bats there and had a .364 OBP. The two best options last year to bat first logged 12 at bats, or the equivilent of 3 games.

 

Todd Walker had 228 at bats in the lead off spot in 2004 and in a total of 60 games. His OBP? .370

 

He scored 45 runs in 60 games. What team wouldn't want a lead off hitter that gets on base 37% of the time?

 

Apparently, the Cubs. Interestingly enough, the Cubs already had their answer at lead off. He makes less than half as much as the guy they traded 3 prospects to get. And he would have been a whole lot better than the guy they traded for. Interestingly enough again, Hendry and Co. tried everything they could to get rid of Walker during the offseason.

 

What should that tell you? Could you imagine how how much worse this team would be without Todd Walker on the roster? I shudder to think. Of course, this team makes me shudder enough as it is, so I'll stop thinking about it.

First, I’m not trying to argue that OBP isn’t important. I am just pointing out that the offense did pick a good time to slump since the pitching was the biggest problem. Unless they became the Yankees they were still going to lose most of those games.

 

Second, batting order does not have a great effect on runs produced. Yes it would have added individual numbers to Lee’s RBI totals, but would not have been a huge difference in runs scored by the team. 38 runs difference between the Cubs and Sox has more to do with the DH instead of a pitcher then batting order. We will have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

Last, do you really believe that this is a .301 obp team? Yes they are obp challenged, but on paper it should be slightly above last years .324. It’s only 43 games into the season and after a horrendous 3-week team slump.

 

Walker was being moved only when it was anticipated that we were acquiring Furcal and moving Cedeno (not Neifi) to second. When the deal fell through Walker stayed. Doesn’t sound like anything wrong to me. Where would we have played Loretta with Walker still on the team?

 

I know you feel strongly about Giles, but all we know is neither side seemed interested in the other. Giles at 35 is being paid 33 mil over 3 years. I have no problem with Hendry not trying to outbid them.

 

Anyway, I’m not arguing obp; just that it won’t matter until the pitching is better.

[BigbadB]

First, I’m not trying to argue that OBP isn’t important. I am just pointing out that the offense did pick a good time to slump since the pitching was the biggest problem. Unless they became the Yankees they were still going to lose most of those games.

 

Second, batting order does not have a great effect on runs produced. Yes it would have added individual numbers to Lee’s RBI totals, but would not have been a huge difference in runs scored by the team. 38 runs difference between the Cubs and Sox has more to do with the DH instead of a pitcher then batting order. We will have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

Last, do you really believe that this is a .301 obp team? Yes they are obp challenged, but on paper it should be slightly above last years .324. It’s only 43 games into the season and after a horrendous 3-week team slump.

 

Walker was being moved only when it was anticipated that we were acquiring Furcal and moving Cedeno (not Neifi) to second. When the deal fell through Walker stayed. Doesn’t sound like anything wrong to me. Where would we have played Loretta with Walker still on the team?

 

I know you feel strongly about Giles, but all we know is neither side seemed interested in the other. Giles at 35 is being paid 33 mil over 3 years. I have no problem with Hendry not trying to outbid them.

 

Anyway, I’m not arguing obp; just that it won’t matter until the pitching is better.

 

I know there are many people that would argue with me regarding putting people in specific spots in the line up and how it would affect run scoring or producing over a long season. And we will have to agree to disagree.

 

A DH typically hits somewhere in the middle of the batting order. The 9th spot hitter in the AL is typically going to be the worst hitter on the roster. In the NL, yes, the pitcher bats. But, he also gets pinch hit for late in games. I would venture to guess that over the course of a long season, unless a team has 9 solid hitters, the production of lefty/righty pinch hit match ups combined with the pitchers at bats would provide nearly equal production, but the edge would go to the AL #9 hitter.

 

But, there is another reason that teams don't bat the pitcher first in a ball game. Poor OBP. If that reason isn't enough, then consider the fact that the lead off hitter will get another at bat before any other player on the team. Considering this fact, it makes all the sense in the world to bat someone who does a much better job of getting on base than someone who isn't so good at getting on base.

 

I don't find it the slightest bit coincidental that Derrek Lee's 107 RBI was far and away (and not even close) the worst RBI production of any of the players who achieved 99 XBH's or more in a season. I would venture to guess that you could follow down that list all the way to 90 at bats and not find someone with so few RBI's for a guy with that kind of production. If you do find someone who matches that kind of RBI production, I'll bet that person suffered the same lack of OBP.

 

If Lee is the most productive person at driving home runners, I think it would make a tremendous impact on his RBI opportunity if you have sub .300 OBP guys hitting directly in front of him and two .350+ OBP guys hitting directly in front of Henry Blanco and Neifi Perez. Is Perez going to drive in 100+ RBI's with two .350+ OBP guys hitting directly in front of him? If that's the case, why isn't he batting 3rd or 4th in the order? I think what will really happen, is that you boost the amount of GIDP's Perez will ground into.

 

I will agree that moving a bunch of poor OBP guys around in the order isn't going to have as much impact as it would to get rid of the poor OBP guys, but Hendry doesn't appear all that interested in getting good OBP guys. He'd rather have the Juan Pierre's and Jacque Jones and Neifi Perez's in the line up than have good OBP guys. And because of that, this team is going to suffer. I like Ronnie Cedeno, but I knew his OBP was not going to be good. That's what made him the ideal #8 hitter in this line up. A good AVG, but lack of discipline. A bat like that should not be hitting in a key spot in the line up. A bat like that shouldn't be taking up umpteen spots in the line up either, and the Cubs have that with Cedeno, Perez, Jones and Pierre.

 

Did I know they were going to be this bad? No. Do I think they will be better? Yes. Better than last year? Not necessarily. Pierre was coming off a .326 season. Jones has never put up good OBP. All the talk in preseason was that Neifi would be manning 2nd base regularly. I was around the entire offseason. You better believe they were still shopping Walker after the Furcal deal fell through. There was talk of trading him a week before the season started. Cubs brass considered him a malcontent and wanted to be rid of him. He isn't a malcontent. He just wants to win. He does open his mouth more than he should, but most of what he says is dead on. But, what he says is an embarrassment to the people who pay his salary, and they apparently can't have someone pointing out the obvious like that.

 

Where do you play Loretta? 2nd base. If you have Walker and Loretta, you have depth. Something this team completely ignored in the offseason. The bench that Hendry put together this offseason has to be among the very worst in baseball. The San Diego Padres 65m payroll features bench guys that are actually pretty good at being bench guys. Geoff Blum, Eric Young, Mark Bellhorn, Adrian Gonzalez, Ben Johnson and Josh Bard. Gonzalez was thrust into the 1b job when Klesko left for surgery. The Padres didn't miss a beat. They had depth to cover 1b when someone got injured. That team beat the Cubs 7 straight games. And they did it with some rookie pitchers mixed in with veteran pitchers. Most of those pitchers don't hold a candle to the Cubs pitchers, but when Neifi Perez is your replacement for Derrek Lee (instead of Gonzalez for Klesko), what do you expect?

 

Yeah, I felt strongly about Giles. I felt strongly about getting any guys who provided a good OBP, bonus if they also had a good SLG.

 

Jones sucked before they signed him. He still sucks now. What you are seeing out of him today is pretty much his plateau. If that's the best he can offer, pass on the 3 year deal. Swing a deal with the D'Backs for Shawn Green. Swing a deal with some other team looking to move a fairly large contract that provides decent production. Offer the world to Brian Giles. I totally disagree with anyone who says he's in decline. His numbers aren't as good as when he played in a more hitter friendly division (Central), but they are still better numbers than most players on the Cubs provide. But, that argument has been made too many times to get into it again.

[CubfaninCA]

BBB, you mention Loretta, Bradley and Crisp. Cmon now.

 

The Cubs kept Walker @ 2b, so no need for Loretta.

 

Oakland gave up Ethier, who is tearing it up in LA, for Bradley.

 

Boston had to give up Marte, a top 5 prospect, for Crisp.

 

You really wanted to give up Pie for Bradley or Pie & another prospect for Crisp?

 

Some of the other options bounced around here were Huff and Floyd who have really sucked. Altogether, we should be happy w/ Jones. Walks aren't nearly as important as batting average and power anyway.

[BigbadB]

BBB, you mention Loretta, Bradley and Crisp. Cmon now.

 

The Cubs kept Walker @ 2b, so no need for Loretta.

 

Oakland gave up Ethier, who is tearing it up in LA, for Bradley.

 

Boston had to give up Marte, a top 5 prospect, for Crisp.

 

You really wanted to give up Pie for Bradley or Pie & another prospect for Crisp?

 

Some of the other options bounced around here were Huff and Floyd who have really sucked. Altogether, we should be happy w/ Jones. Walks aren't nearly as important as batting average and power anyway.

 

Yep. I mentioned Loretta, Bradley and Crisp. And I could go on and on with players with better OBP's than the scrubs the Cubs gathered this offseason. I just listed a bunch off the top of my head.

 

Ethier tearing it up is hindsight, plain and simple. Don't even go there. Marte is a great prospect. So is Pie. So is a combination of Nolasco and Marshall.

 

Look at tonights box score. How many walks did the Marlins draw? How many did the Cubs draw? How do the walks compare with the outcome of the game. Sure, batting average and power are good too, but a whole team of guys who have no clue about patience at the plate will give you exactly what you are getting from this Cubs team.

 

I don't want a whole team of guys who do nothing but walk. Don't even go there with me. I want guys who can hit, can draw a walk when there is nothing good to hit, and when they do hit, they hit for a respectable average. A 100m payroll team can afford to have those kinds of players throughout their line up. Heck, the Florida Marlins appear to have more patient hitters than the Cubs, and these guys are all fresh out of the minor leagues.