Hey Bruce, Nice job on TV!

[Hacking Out Machine]

Bruce,

 

One other thing. On the radio today, Jim Hendry stressed that he considers the most important offensive statistic to be hitting with RISP. He said something like, "For me, that's what it's all about offensively".

 

One would assume that, since this is philosophy, he would attempt to acquire players who do well in this area. Do you think that Jim realizes that BA with RISP is almost entirely a random statistic? My guess is no, since they continue to value players whose offensive upside is limited to the largely random event of hitting singles.

 

There you go; I think you answered your own question. It's the same stat he brought up when they signed Jeromy Burnitz. As you say, the stat is entirely random and varies from year to year with each player. All I can do is keep beating the OBP drum and maybe talking with some of their inside people about this silly notion. I did hear the interview today on the way to the park.

 

In my opinion, Bruce, the SLG drum is just as important. Hendry also touched on this today(you probably heard), saying that they used to have a team that led the league in HR, but that didn't get them anywhere in terms of winning a championship. Well, that's true, but that offense('03-'04) sure did score a lot more runs than this one does. He was in rare form today. It's absolutely shocking that a GM could be so clueless as to what attributes lead to a good offensive team.

[CP_414]

Bruce,

 

One other thing. On the radio today, Jim Hendry stressed that he considers the most important offensive statistic to be hitting with RISP. He said something like, "For me, that's what it's all about offensively".

 

One would assume that, since this is philosophy, he would attempt to acquire players who do well in this area. Do you think that Jim realizes that BA with RISP is almost entirely a random statistic? My guess is no, since they continue to value players whose offensive upside is limited to the largely random event of hitting singles.

 

There you go; I think you answered your own question. It's the same stat he brought up when they signed Jeromy Burnitz. As you say, the stat is entirely random and varies from year to year with each player. All I can do is keep beating the OBP drum and maybe talking with some of their inside people about this silly notion. I did hear the interview today on the way to the park.

 

In my opinion, Bruce, the SLG drum is just as important. Hendry also touched on this today(you probably heard), saying that they used to have a team that led the league in HR, but that didn't get them anywhere in terms of winning a championship. Well, that's true, but that offense('03-'04) sure did score a lot more runs than this one does. He was in rare form today. It's absolutely shocking that a GM could be so clueless as to what attributes lead to a good offensive team.

 

Why did Hendry change his gameplan on how to build a team. The 2003 team was built around power on offense and ptching. They were 5 outs from the WS. The 2004 team had the same idea, but was even more talented than 2003. They won 1 more game than 03, and should have made the playoffs. Then in 2005 he let a lot of power go in Sosa/Alou and he didn't replace it. Now in 2006 there is almost no power and it is all speed and defense. What the hell happened? It can't all be the White Sox, because this trend has been moving this way for 2 years now. Not to mention the fact the Sox led the Al in HR's last year. Hendry had the Cubs going in the right direction in 03-04, why did he change course?

[jtownie]

Bruce,

 

One other thing. On the radio today, Jim Hendry stressed that he considers the most important offensive statistic to be hitting with RISP. He said something like, "For me, that's what it's all about offensively".

 

One would assume that, since this is philosophy, he would attempt to acquire players who do well in this area. Do you think that Jim realizes that BA with RISP is almost entirely a random statistic? My guess is no, since they continue to value players whose offensive upside is limited to the largely random event of hitting singles.

 

There you go; I think you answered your own question. It's the same stat he brought up when they signed Jeromy Burnitz. As you say, the stat is entirely random and varies from year to year with each player. All I can do is keep beating the OBP drum and maybe talking with some of their inside people about this silly notion. I did hear the interview today on the way to the park.

 

In my opinion, Bruce, the SLG drum is just as important. Hendry also touched on this today(you probably heard), saying that they used to have a team that led the league in HR, but that didn't get them anywhere in terms of winning a championship. Well, that's true, but that offense('03-'04) sure did score a lot more runs than this one does. He was in rare form today. It's absolutely shocking that a GM could be so clueless as to what attributes lead to a good offensive team.

 

it just amazes me that he doesn't realize with a team that has a high-OBP the "clutch" hits and RISP will happen more often. It's as if they forget that you need runners on and in scoring position before you can have clutch hit. One begets the other but it doesn't work vice versa. That's a point I'd like someone to bring up. You can beat the OBP drum as much as you want but you have to prove why it's the right drum to beat.

[CubinNY]

Bruce,

 

One other thing. On the radio today, Jim Hendry stressed that he considers the most important offensive statistic to be hitting with RISP. He said something like, "For me, that's what it's all about offensively".

 

One would assume that, since this is philosophy, he would attempt to acquire players who do well in this area. Do you think that Jim realizes that BA with RISP is almost entirely a random statistic? My guess is no, since they continue to value players whose offensive upside is limited to the largely random event of hitting singles.

 

There you go; I think you answered your own question. It's the same stat he brought up when they signed Jeromy Burnitz. As you say, the stat is entirely random and varies from year to year with each player. All I can do is keep beating the OBP drum and maybe talking with some of their inside people about this silly notion. I did hear the interview today on the way to the park.

 

In my opinion, Bruce, the SLG drum is just as important. Hendry also touched on this today(you probably heard), saying that they used to have a team that led the league in HR, but that didn't get them anywhere in terms of winning a championship. Well, that's true, but that offense('03-'04) sure did score a lot more runs than this one does. He was in rare form today. It's absolutely shocking that a GM could be so clueless as to what attributes lead to a good offensive team.

 

Why did Hendry change his gameplan on how to build a team. The 2003 team was built around power on offense and ptching. They were 5 outs from the WS. The 2004 team had the same idea, but was even more talented than 2003. They won 1 more game than 03, and should have made the playoffs. Then in 2005 he let a lot of power go in Sosa/Alou and he didn't replace it. Now in 2006 there is almost no power and it is all speed and defense. What the hell happened? It can't all be the White Sox, because this trend has been moving this way for 2 years now. Not to mention the fact the Sox led the Al in HR's last year. Hendry had the Cubs going in the right direction in 03-04, why did he change course?

 

That's just it, there is no coherent plan. Things happen to the Cubs. The Cubs don't make things happen.

 

Look at the Yankees, Red Sox, A's, Braves, or any successful organization in baseball. They get guys to fit their plan or philosphy. They may have different philosphies on how to get to the top but they stick with one.

 

The thing they all have in common is that they build around guys who get on base. Then they get two or perhaps three sluggers and then fill in the rest of the line up with the BPA.

 

Hendry and the Cubs don't seem to understand that.

[DiamondMind]

Bruce,

 

Nice job on TV!

 

Do you think Pierre re-signs or will we go a different direction in CF?

 

The Cubs would prefer to keep Pierre, believing that what they've seen since June is the real Juan Pierre. I'm not aware of any serious talks, of late.

 

Thanks...an offense that has Pierre, Cedeno, and Izturis is going to be scary impotent, don't you think?

 

It's not so bad if you hypothetically have C. and D. Lee in the middle, aRam, and a Murton/Jones platoon.

[UK1679666180]

The best Cubs offense in my lifetime was '84. 6 players w/80+ RBIs. The ability to draw BBs, work the count, hit for power, while having higher OBP and speed at the top with the punch to knock them in.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/1984.shtml

 

There's an ideal blueprint for any team.

[Hacking Out Machine]

The best Cubs offense in my lifetime was '84. 6 players w/80+ RBIs. The ability to draw BBs, work the count, hit for power, while having higher OBP and speed at the top with the punch to knock them in.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/1984.shtml

 

There's an ideal blueprint for any team.

 

Agreed. And don't forget one of the best OBP guys on that team was none other than Sarge himself. Hard to believe a guy would hold an opposite viewpoint as a coach from what worked very well for him as a player.

[Hacking Out Machine]

Bruce...last thing(if you happen to make it back to this topic)...Have you ever introduced this site to Hendry? I know that there are some less than flattering things said about his moves here, but it is mostly filled with logical posts and thoughts by people who bleed Cubbie blue. If I had my druthers, I'd have a number of posts from guys like Goony, Tim, Big Bad B, Outshined One, etc printed out for him to take a look at.

[NewUserName]

When I heard Hendry today on with Murph I was thinking about in 1985 when Don Mattingly was the MVP in a landslide. His numbers were .324/.371/.567 with 145 rbis. Which of course is great especially in 1985. George Brett though contributed a .335/.436/.585 but only 103 rbis. I really dont think that Mattingly hit that better with runners in scoring position. It may have been the fact that Mattingly hit behind jRickey Henderson who had a .419 obp and Brett hit behind Willie Wilson who had a .319 obp.

 

Bruce I know you do a great job and thank you for taking time and answering questions here. I was just wondering do you ever get enough time with Hendry to sit down with a pencil and piece of paper and explain to him how having increased opportunities to hit with runners on will make how a team hits with risp not so important? Like if you have a team obp of .350 you can hit about .210 with runners on and still score the same amout amount of runs as a team that has a team obp of .310 and hits .260 with runners on. Also could you have him name a player who in his career has hit consistently better with risp. Dont let him just say big Papi, have him actually have stats to prove it. I know you really dont want to put him in a corner or anything. I was just wondering if you could in a polite manner speak with him about these things.

[TXCubsFan]

When I heard Hendry today on with Murph I was thinking about in 1985 when Don Mattingly was the MVP in a landslide. His numbers were .324/.371/.567 with 145 rbis. Which of course is great especially in 1985. George Brett though contributed a .335/.436/.585 but only 103 rbis. I really dont think that Mattingly hit that better with runners in scoring position. It may have been the fact that Mattingly hit behind jRickey Henderson who had a .419 obp and Brett hit behind Willie Wilson who had a .319 obp.

 

Bruce I know you do a great job and thank you for taking time and answering questions here. I was just wondering do you ever get enough time with Hendry to sit down with a pencil and piece of paper and explain to him how having increased opportunities to hit with runners on will make how a team hits with risp not so important? Like if you have a team obp of .350 you can hit about .210 with runners on and still score the same amout amount of runs as a team that has a team obp of .310 and hits .260 with runners on. Also could you have him name a player who in his career has hit consistently better with risp. Dont let him just say big Papi, have him actually have stats to prove it. I know you really dont want to put him in a corner or anything. I was just wondering if you could in a polite manner speak with him about these things.

 

I thought one of the best posts on the subject of OBP and runs scored on this board was the percentage of baserunners that scored, by team, for the NL Central. The percentages were almost identical across teams, which meant that the most important stat was getting runners on base, period.

 

Jim Hendry, remember, you can't steal first.

[MembersOnlyJacket]

Hi Bruce,

I was about to turn the TV until I heard you would be on. Does everyone think that Izzy was that great a pickup or are they just drinking the cool aide?

 

Well, you know how the Cubs value defense. Others, myself included, remain skeptical.

 

Ahh, this is a gem:

 

“I don’t think in numbers the same way you guys think in numbers,” Baker said, referring to the media. “We look at him just getting better. This guy’s young, playing-wise. On-base percentage is very, very important.

 

“We’re looking for him just to play ball, be a ballplayer. Get on, score, steal, advance runners. Do what ballplayers do.”

 

In other words, those media guys (Bruce) didn't play this game. They just sit there with their numbers and think about how stupid it is to focus on speed and batting with RISP.

 

I'm a ballplayer, can I play ?

[wade]

The best Cubs offense in my lifetime was '84. 6 players w/80+ RBIs. The ability to draw BBs, work the count, hit for power, while having higher OBP and speed at the top with the punch to knock them in.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/1984.shtml

 

There's an ideal blueprint for any team.

 

Agreed. And don't forget one of the best OBP guys on that team was none other than Sarge himself. Hard to believe a guy would hold an opposite viewpoint as a coach from what worked very well for him as a player.

 

Joe Morgan is the same way, isn't he? It's strange.

[Scott G. F.]

If I were you, I would have used my screentime to tear in half a picture of Dusty Baker while screaming, "Fight the real evil!"

 

Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

 

Nah, but I got my plugs in for Wuertz, Walker and OBP.

 

 

Funny that I noticed that you did too. Keep pushing the OBP. That'll help the most.

[thedaymen]

Guys, I think your asking a lot of Bruce to patiently explain to the GM of the team how he should run the team. Sadly, that isn't the role of a reporter. Bruce's service to us is that he does a great job covering the team, asking the right questions, and writing the stories and opinion pieces that support our POV.

 

And for that, I'm very grateful.

[C.C.]

The best Cubs offense in my lifetime was '84. 6 players w/80+ RBIs. The ability to draw BBs, work the count, hit for power, while having higher OBP and speed at the top with the punch to knock them in.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/1984.shtml

 

There's an ideal blueprint for any team.

 

The 1984 was the best Cubs team I've seen in my lifetime. That was my first crushing Cubs heart-break. I was devasted! Just a fun professional team. Would've been a fun World Series with the Tigers...

[goonys evil twin]

Guys, I think your asking a lot of Bruce to patiently explain to the GM of the team how he should run the team. Sadly, that isn't the role of a reporter. Bruce's service to us is that he does a great job covering the team, asking the right questions, and writing the stories and opinion pieces that support our POV.

 

And for that, I'm very grateful.

 

Somehow I don't feel the problem is that Bruce is being asked to do too much. I think the problem is that no matter what he did, Hendry and his "baseball men" are still going to dismiss him as a stat geek writer who "never played the game".

 

 

 

speaking of rain delay theatre, Gary Hughes. Mr. Hughes looked........ differently than I pictured him. But in retrospect, that should have been my picture of him all along.

[NewUserName]

Funny thing is in 1984 we were just as close to getting to the World Series as we were in 2003. We had the lead in all of the games in the 1984 playoffs. The Padres bullpen was great and ours wasnt. Also Leon Durhams error in Game 5

[UK1679666180]

That '84 team overall was a better team than the '03 Cubs. The '03 Cubs had better pitching, but offensively that '84 team was the best offense the Cubs have had since '35.

 

That's more of a hot team doing well in a short amount of time and cooling off in '03 than the '84 team which controlled the division from the beg. of Summer on.

[10man]

The best Cubs offense in my lifetime was '84. 6 players w/80+ RBIs. The ability to draw BBs, work the count, hit for power, while having higher OBP and speed at the top with the punch to knock them in.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/1984.shtml

 

There's an ideal blueprint for any team.

 

Agreed. And don't forget one of the best OBP guys on that team was none other than Sarge himself. Hard to believe a guy would hold an opposite viewpoint as a coach from what worked very well for him as a player.

 

Joe Morgan is the same way, isn't he? It's strange.

It's Joe Morgan. For him strange is normal.

[jwhatti]

Guys, I think your asking a lot of Bruce to patiently explain to the GM of the team how he should run the team. Sadly, that isn't the role of a reporter. Bruce's service to us is that he does a great job covering the team, asking the right questions, and writing the stories and opinion pieces that support our POV.

 

And for that, I'm very grateful.

 

Why don't we have every NSBB member wrap up and ship our copies of Moneyball to Jim Hendry with a little note asking him politely to read it? Maybe then he will sit down, read a book and get some semblance of OBP.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Guys, I think your asking a lot of Bruce to patiently explain to the GM of the team how he should run the team. Sadly, that isn't the role of a reporter. Bruce's service to us is that he does a great job covering the team, asking the right questions, and writing the stories and opinion pieces that support our POV.

 

And for that, I'm very grateful.

 

Why don't we have every NSBB member wrap up and ship our copies of Moneyball to Jim Hendry with a little note asking him politely to read it? Maybe then he will sit down, read a book and get some semblance of OBP.

 

 

There are better books for Jim to read than Moneyball. I'd prefer he start with the Hidden Game of Baseball and work from there.

[goonys evil twin]

Guys, I think your asking a lot of Bruce to patiently explain to the GM of the team how he should run the team. Sadly, that isn't the role of a reporter. Bruce's service to us is that he does a great job covering the team, asking the right questions, and writing the stories and opinion pieces that support our POV.

 

And for that, I'm very grateful.

 

Why don't we have every NSBB member wrap up and ship our copies of Moneyball to Jim Hendry with a little note asking him politely to read it? Maybe then he will sit down, read a book and get some semblance of OBP.

 

 

There are better books for Jim to read than Moneyball. I'd prefer he start with the Hidden Game of Baseball and work from there.

 

Moneyball would just antagonize him and make him more stubborn.

[Banedon]

Guys, I think your asking a lot of Bruce to patiently explain to the GM of the team how he should run the team. Sadly, that isn't the role of a reporter. Bruce's service to us is that he does a great job covering the team, asking the right questions, and writing the stories and opinion pieces that support our POV.

 

And for that, I'm very grateful.

 

Why don't we have every NSBB member wrap up and ship our copies of Moneyball to Jim Hendry with a little note asking him politely to read it? Maybe then he will sit down, read a book and get some semblance of OBP.

 

 

There are better books for Jim to read than Moneyball. I'd prefer he start with the Hidden Game of Baseball and work from there.

 

I'm betting he'd dismiss Moneyball out of hand anyway.

[jwhatti]

Guys, I think your asking a lot of Bruce to patiently explain to the GM of the team how he should run the team. Sadly, that isn't the role of a reporter. Bruce's service to us is that he does a great job covering the team, asking the right questions, and writing the stories and opinion pieces that support our POV.

 

And for that, I'm very grateful.

 

Why don't we have every NSBB member wrap up and ship our copies of Moneyball to Jim Hendry with a little note asking him politely to read it? Maybe then he will sit down, read a book and get some semblance of OBP.

 

 

There are better books for Jim to read than Moneyball. I'd prefer he start with the Hidden Game of Baseball and work from there.

 

Well any book on OBP would due. Just start sending him everything we got. Maybe after awhile he will be bored and pick one up and have a eurika (sp?) moment.

[FergieJ31]

I dimly recall Hendry being asked his opinion on Moneyball on a radio call-in show once -- he might have admitted he didn't read the whole thing (not sure if I recall that correctly), but I remember him saying something perfunctory like "It's an interesting baseball book, and Billy Beane has done a wonderful job for the Oakland A's".

 

Anyone else remember this? It was maybe a year or two ago.

 

I remember thinking that he did not acknowledge or address any of the central themes of that book; the importance of OBP, how to properly value baseball players, the systematic mispricing of baseball talent, etc.