Nevin to the Cubs

[Danny82]

What I'm saying is that trading for Neivin to improve the bench is not a very big deal.

Is anyone in this thread saying that it is?

 

Yes. And more than once.

 

I never said this was a terrible move or one that shouldn't be done. To me it is a so what trade at best, and a what were they thinking trade at worst.

 

But he comes cheap and if he helps the bench great, but the Cubs could have used the help about 8 weeks ago.

 

It makes the team better. Isn't that the bottom line? And if so, why complain???

 

It's obviously not some sort of blockbuster deal, but it gives them a better chance to win from here on out.

 

Sometimes the nitpicking gets old.

 

Sometimes the losing gets old.

 

It could make the team better, but not appreciably better. And it could serve as an excuse not to make a deal that would actually make a difference. Hendry's first excuse was nobody else wanted to deal. When that was proved wrong, he made a move for a guy who can only help in minimal ways. So when people beg him to get the bat, he can say he already did, and his apologists will tell us not to be greedy.

You do realize that it is highly unlikely that Hendry could have made the current deal 3-4 weeks ago, right?

 

And also, he never said "no one wanted to deal."

 

Finally, how 'bout we hold off a little bit on criticizing the deal because of the myriad of negative "coulds" that could possibly stem from the trade until those "coulds" actually happen? Otherwise, it just looks like posters trying to find whatever negative inferences they can glean from the situation. Which, honestly, isn't all that uncommon on the board sometimes.

[goonys evil twin]

To be fair, Levine reported this morning that Hendry continues to work the phones with other GMs. I think your comment is a bit speculative.

 

Every writer and reporter who covers the Cubs talks about how addicted Hendry is to working the phone. Of course I'm speculating, and I'm basing it on the results of all those past phone conversations.

[Careless]

[

I can't speak for CubinNY, but I think some people may have just lost faith in Dusty's ability to think clearly enough to make that obvious choice.

Dusty fails to make the obvious choice on a daily basis. He is, however, both stupid and irrational, so it is difficult to predict how he will behave.

Stupid, irrational and obvious.

 

Wow, well I guess you should know since you have access to all the inside workings of the Cubs clubhouse and know everything there is to know about baseball. Because, to me, thats what it would take to make such a bold statement. Certain aspects of baseball may seem simple to us, but I bet if you talk to a lot of major league managers today, they will say that there are very few "obvious" choices in baseball except for the ones the fans tell us about.

 

Of course, I could very well be wrong and baseball actually is a simple game with obvious choices that truly boils down to numbers and doesn't really involve human beings, but I'm certainly not smart enough or exposed to enough inside information to know this for sure. If you are, more power to ya.

 

As far as this thread is concerned, I guess we'll see who is right when Dusty either starts Nevin in place of Murton on a regular basis or doesn't and uses him as a fill in for Lee and a platoon with Jones.

Read the sections I've bolded, Cubswin.

[BigbadB]

There aren't many players that the Cubs could have traded for that would have hushed the critics. Nevin isn't one of them.

 

Although I do find it odd that Hendry traded for a guy who doesn't fall anywhere near the "guys who can catch the ball" description.

[goonys evil twin]

You do realize that it is highly unlikely that Hendry could have made the current deal 3-4 weeks ago, right?

 

And also, he never said "no one wanted to deal."

 

Finally, how 'bout we hold off a little bit on criticizing the deal because of the myriad of negative "coulds" that could possibly stem from the trade until those "coulds" actually happen? Otherwise, it just looks like posters trying to find whatever negative inferences they can glean from the situation. Which, honestly, isn't all that uncommon on the board sometimes.

 

It's not unlikely, he just didn't get to make the deal exactly the way it's structured now. And since when was Nevin the only opportunity? And why wasn't there a RH with pop on the roster from the very beginning?

 

My negative inferences are based on 4 years of failure with Hendry, the last 2 being utter disgraces. I don't see the point in lapping up all the BS about what a nice job Hendry did to fill a need that shouldn't have been there in the first place.

[Brian]

Although I do find it odd that Hendry traded for a guy who doesn't fall anywhere near the "guys who can catch the ball" description.

 

The teams that have real good records right now aren't doing it by "speed and defense". Mostly they're hittiing it out of the park.

[goonys evil twin]

Although I do find it odd that Hendry traded for a guy who doesn't fall anywhere near the "guys who can catch the ball" description.

 

The teams that have real good records right now aren't doing it by "speed and defense". Mostly they're hittiing it out of the park.

 

And it would be just like Jim to be late to the party.

[BigbadB]

Although I do find it odd that Hendry traded for a guy who doesn't fall anywhere near the "guys who can catch the ball" description.

 

The teams that have real good records right now aren't doing it by "speed and defense". Mostly they're hittiing it out of the park.

 

It's a combination of hitting it out of the park and drawing walks. I know there are people who don't buy much into walks being all that valuable, and they are welcome to their opinion. But, look at this amazing stat:

 

Cubs pitchers so far in 2006 have held the opponent to a BAA of .243

Cubs opponents have a BAA against the Cubs of .252

 

The Cubs have amassed 22 more hits than the opponents at this point in the season. The Cubs have been outscored by 61 runs. Cub opponents have drawn 100 more walks than the Cubs.

 

The combination of OBP and SLG is why the Cubs are near the bottom in nearly every offensive category. Cubs pitching has been quite dominant if the walk was excluded from the overall picture. Unfortunately, you can't just discount walks, because they are part of the game.

 

I wish they had an easy way to figure out what percentage of players who draw a base on balls end up scoring per walk.

 

Yes, AVG with RISP is an important stat as well, but is that stat any more important than team OBP? Would or could the AVG with RISP be better if there were more guys getting on base?

[CubinNY]

What I'm saying is that trading for Neivin to improve the bench is not a very big deal.

Is anyone in this thread saying that it is?

 

Yes. And more than once.

 

I never said this was a terrible move or one that shouldn't be done. To me it is a so what trade at best, and a what were they thinking trade at worst.

 

But he comes cheap and if he helps the bench great, but the Cubs could have used the help about 8 weeks ago.

 

It makes the team better. Isn't that the bottom line? And if so, why complain???

 

It's obviously not some sort of blockbuster deal, but it gives them a better chance to win from here on out.

 

Sometimes the nitpicking gets old.

 

You know what gets old, having to repeat one's self for those that come to a thread late and fail to read any posts before the one they are responding to.

 

Who is nitpicking?

 

The bench has been putrid for a number of years. Lee went down six weeks ago. Hendry is just now dealing with it.

 

Someone wrote that getting Nevin is a big deal. Then there was the suggestion to look at the number of ABs by the bench. Given current trends Nevin's @ 1.93 ABs per game off the bench doesn't really help that much.

[Guest]

If I I understand things correctly, the people being negative in this thread aren't necessarily complaining about this move, right? It's more of a general complaint that:

a) the roster was set up with a lousy bench to begin with

b) not enough was done when Lee went down

c) there's little confidence Nevin will be used properly when Lee returns

d) Nevin blocks Restovich, who didn't get a proper chance

e) there's little confidence that Hendry will ever acquire a difference maker

f) Hendry may have false hope of competing this season, preventing him from improving the team's chances in 2007

 

Is that a pretty accurate summation?

 

 

In contrast, I think the people saying this was a good move are saying:

 

a) The move improves the lousy bench in a significant way

b) The move wasn't soon enough, but better late then never

c) If used properly, Nevin will be much more of an asset to this team than Hairston

d) Restovich should still be called up to platoon with Jones and should replace one of the other redundant "slappy and speedy" players on the bench

e) This move doesn't block Hendry from seeking a difference maker in any way and improves the chances that one will be needed this season

f) The hope for this season may be slim, but we don't want a GM who would throw in the towel at this point instead of improving the team in any manner possible, whether incremental or major

[goonys evil twin]

Probably an accurate assessment.

 

But I don't get what this is supposed to mean:

 

e) This move doesn't block Hendry from seeking a difference maker in any way and improves the chances that one will be needed this season

 

Acquiring Nevin improves the chances that one will be needed? They've needed a difference making bat for years now, I don't see how Nevin's arrival affects that fact at all.

[Banedon]

Probably an accurate assessment.

 

But I don't get what this is supposed to mean:

 

e) This move doesn't block Hendry from seeking a difference maker in any way and improves the chances that one will be needed this season

 

Acquiring Nevin improves the chances that one will be needed? They've needed a difference making bat for years now, I don't see how Nevin's arrival affects that fact at all.

 

I think the argument is that it helps them get back into a place record wise where a difference making bat can....well...make a difference. But that's just my interpretation of that.

[goonys evil twin]

 

I think the argument is that it helps them get back into a place record wise where a difference making bat can....well...make a difference. But that's just my interpretation of that.

 

They'd have to go 32-21 between now and July 31 (better than .600) just to get to 52-53, still under .500 overall. They traded for Nomar in 2004 with a record of 56-47. I highly doubt Nevin can influence the record much at all between now and then. What, maybe 2 wins if we're lucky? This was the marginal type acquisition that could have helped in the offseason, when everybody knew we needed bench help, especially power, and not a bunch of speedy second baseman.

[frostwyrm]

Given our roster I don't see why Nevin shouldn't start against all lefties. It's just unfortunate that Hendry took so long to see the need for better RH hitting on the bench

[CubfaninCA]

It probably took awhile to hammer out the finances on the deal.. The Cubs didn't want to spend money, which is why Conine was the first option when Lee went down.

 

Nevin >>>> Hairston

 

The Cubs will be better.

[USSoccer]

What I don't get is why Hendry gets the optimism pass, when he's clearly responsible for the mess he's made of this team. What reason has he given us as fans to give him the benefit of the doubt?

[wastra]

This is a move that doesn't b other me in the least. He's going to be a right-handed John Mabry...something we need. he won't hit for average, but he's got very good power. And even when Lee returns, we have no idea if he'll be able to play everyday or not, so we'll need a better backup than Mabry anyway.

 

The problem is that I think he'll be grossly misused.

 

I envision lineups without Todd Walker, and with Neifi at second. I envision him starting instead of Murton, rather than platooning with Jones.

 

If used correctly, this is not an awful deal. I just have little faith he will be.

 

 

I meant he will play basically the same role...corner infielder off the bench with some pop and the ability to spell the corner outfield spots in a pinch. He SHOULD be a better version of Mabry, obviously (or hopefully), and right-handed.

We don't need another "Mabry", the one we have now can't hit.

[Brian]

Although I do find it odd that Hendry traded for a guy who doesn't fall anywhere near the "guys who can catch the ball" description.

 

The teams that have real good records right now aren't doing it by "speed and defense". Mostly they're hittiing it out of the park.

 

It's a combination of hitting it out of the park and drawing walks. I know there are people who don't buy much into walks being all that valuable, and they are welcome to their opinion. But, look at this amazing stat:

 

Cubs pitchers so far in 2006 have held the opponent to a BAA of .243

Cubs opponents have a BAA against the Cubs of .252

 

The Cubs have amassed 22 more hits than the opponents at this point in the season. The Cubs have been outscored by 61 runs. Cub opponents have drawn 100 more walks than the Cubs.

 

The combination of OBP and SLG is why the Cubs are near the bottom in nearly every offensive category. Cubs pitching has been quite dominant if the walk was excluded from the overall picture. Unfortunately, you can't just discount walks, because they are part of the game.

 

I wish they had an easy way to figure out what percentage of players who draw a base on balls end up scoring per walk.

 

Yes, AVG with RISP is an important stat as well, but is that stat any more important than team OBP? Would or could the AVG with RISP be better if there were more guys getting on base?

 

my post was semi-sarcasting. After '04 he jumped on the chemistry bandwagon of the Red Sox, after '05 he jumped on the speed and defense bandwagon the White Sox were known for. So i'm thinking maybe he realizes now that with all of that you actually have to score runs!

[SCCubbieFAN]

Probably an accurate assessment.

 

But I don't get what this is supposed to mean:

 

e) This move doesn't block Hendry from seeking a difference maker in any way and improves the chances that one will be needed this season

 

Acquiring Nevin improves the chances that one will be needed? They've needed a difference making bat for years now, I don't see how Nevin's arrival affects that fact at all.

 

I think the argument is that it helps them get back into a place record wise where a difference making bat can....well...make a difference. But that's just my interpretation of that.

 

My interpretation is that Nevin, in all probability, will not help the team much so the team will still need a difference maker this season.

[Guest]

Probably an accurate assessment.

 

But I don't get what this is supposed to mean:

 

e) This move doesn't block Hendry from seeking a difference maker in any way and improves the chances that one will be needed this season

 

Acquiring Nevin improves the chances that one will be needed? They've needed a difference making bat for years now, I don't see how Nevin's arrival affects that fact at all.

 

I think the argument is that it helps them get back into a place record wise where a difference making bat can....well...make a difference. But that's just my interpretation of that.

 

My interpretation is that Nevin, in all probability, will not help the team much so the team will still need a difference maker this season.

Kinda both, actually.

 

Without making changes now, we may not be in a position where a difference maker can make a difference anymore when one becomes available. So making the move to incrementally improve the team now makes it more likely that the Cubs will be good enough to go after a difference maker down the road.

 

On the other hand, getting Nevin now doesn't make the team good enough to not need one later, either.

[Banedon]

Probably an accurate assessment.

 

But I don't get what this is supposed to mean:

 

e) This move doesn't block Hendry from seeking a difference maker in any way and improves the chances that one will be needed this season

 

Acquiring Nevin improves the chances that one will be needed? They've needed a difference making bat for years now, I don't see how Nevin's arrival affects that fact at all.

 

I think the argument is that it helps them get back into a place record wise where a difference making bat can....well...make a difference. But that's just my interpretation of that.

 

My interpretation is that Nevin, in all probability, will not help the team much so the team will still need a difference maker this season.

 

Just was giving my interpretation of the particular "argument" above...didn't mean to imply that I thought that was true.

 

It's a case of too little too late for me. I'm not upset with the Nevin trade, but neither am I excited about it. It's like the Titanic sinking with a ton of other ships nearby, and instead of asking for a lifeboat from one of them, we ask for a deck chair.

[Guest]

Probably an accurate assessment.

 

But I don't get what this is supposed to mean:

 

e) This move doesn't block Hendry from seeking a difference maker in any way and improves the chances that one will be needed this season

 

Acquiring Nevin improves the chances that one will be needed? They've needed a difference making bat for years now, I don't see how Nevin's arrival affects that fact at all.

 

I think the argument is that it helps them get back into a place record wise where a difference making bat can....well...make a difference. But that's just my interpretation of that.

 

My interpretation is that Nevin, in all probability, will not help the team much so the team will still need a difference maker this season.

 

Just was giving my interpretation of the particular "argument" above...didn't mean to imply that I thought that was true.

 

It's a case of too little too late for me. I'm not upset with the Nevin trade, but neither am I excited about it. It's like the Titanic sinking with a ton of other ships nearby, and instead of asking for a lifeboat from one of them, we ask for a deck chair.

Well, at least it's one of those deck chairs with the floaties and a cup holder. :D

[Banedon]

Well, at least it's one of those deck chairs with the floaties and a cup holder. :D

 

It's just not as floatie as it used to be. :P

[Schwarber Fan]

Someone please remove the "?" mark

[Fro]

.924 OPS against Lefties the last 3 years... can play 1st/corner OF spots... Texas eating his salary.

 

It's a good trade.