Cesar has a sore hamstring

[abuck1220]

gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove!

 

Sarcasm or not, I'm in the camp of in any sport, defense wins championships.

 

Unfortunately, our GM and manager are also in that camp.

 

And we'll see where it leads. 2006 isn't a fair gauge of the plan's success due to excessive injuries.

 

why not? regardless of injuries, the team's defense has been good. shouldn't that be winning them a championship (or at least 4th place)?

[DiamondMind]

 

oh, and defense doesn't win championships in baseball.

 

What does? Sabrmetrics?

 

hitting and pitching. show me some proof that defense wins championships, and maybe i'll get on board. until then, it's just a lovely sounding cliche that you can put on t-shirts and such.

 

It's hard for me to crunch and collect numbers and give you some sort of numerical proof that anything wins championships. Generally a well rounded team wins more than anything. I just think defense plays an important role.

[fromthestretch]

 

oh, and defense doesn't win championships in baseball.

 

What does? Sabrmetrics?

 

Focusing on the right things is a good first step. Defense wasn't close to being the biggest problem with this team before they got Izturis, so it's not like he's filling some big hole in the infield.

 

Improve the offense and get healthy pitching before you begin to worry about the defense.

 

If the Cubs are going to keep Izturis, they should probably look for better production at 2B. Even if Cedeno improves, a middle infield of Cedeno and Izturis is not going to provide much offense. You can live with having one of them, but not both, especially with Neifi as the primary backup for both positions. Out of the two, I'd keep Cedeno and try to deal Izturis to a team that over-values his defensive ability and can afford his salary for the remainder of his contract.

[Caryatid]

 

no, their defense won't save more runs than their lack of offense costs. the cubs problem is lack of offense - there is no reason to accept overpaid subpar performance from any position.

 

Respectfully disagree - the Cubs problem is not a general lack of offense, but lack of offense from the corner positions. Murton and Jones are both 4th OF in my opinion, Ramirez had a terrible first half, and Lee has been disabled for most of the season.

 

The Cubs were 5th in baseball in defensive efficiency before trading for Izturis, thus his defense can only improve them marginally. Furthermore, regardless of what the team "can" spend, they will only spend somewhere in the $100 million range. As such, you can't waste $4 on a defensive player who provided minimal offense when you've already got that same player on the roster (Perez). Perez's defense is roughly equivalent to Izturis', as is his offense (.650 OPS). You simply can't have two of the worst offensive players in baseball occupying the same roster because they might happen to save a run with their defense every third or fourth game.

 

Furthermore, when a team is last in the league in runs scored by over 100 runs, I would say the team's problem is a lack of offense in total, not just from the corner positions.

[DiamondMind]

 

why not? regardless of injuries, the team's defense has been good. shouldn't that be winning them a championship (or at least 4th place)?

 

Not when you are dead last, or near the bottom in walks earned and walks allowed. Not to mention a total lack of power production from key positions. Add on top of that our pitching staff has been depleted by injuries, and obviously inexperienced pitchers are more prone to allow the fly ball in ratio to the ground ball.

[DiamondMind]

If the Cubs are going to keep Izturis, they should probably look for better production at 2B. Even if Cedeno improves, a middle infield of Cedeno and Izturis is not going to provide much offense. You can live with having one of them, but not both, especially with Neifi as the primary backup for both positions. Out of the two, I'd keep Cedeno and try to deal Izturis to a team that over-values his defensive ability and can afford his salary for the remainder of his contract.

 

I too am concerned with Cedeno. Izturis' D is vastly better, and I don't care what Ronny hit in Arizona or Winter league or whatever - his offense has been anemic so far.

[abuck1220]

 

It's hard for me to crunch and collect numbers and give you some sort of numerical proof that anything wins championships. Generally a well rounded team wins more than anything. I just think defense plays an important role.

 

that's a lot different than saying defense wins championships, don't you think?

 

the reason you can't crunch and collect numbers to prove your point is because those numbers don't exist.

[fromthestretch]

For those who are really unhappy with Izturis, I have a question. What numbers offensively would you acccept from him to make him a decent overall player for the team that brings value to the team? What are the numbers he needs to reach?

 

Depends on the lineup Hendry constructs next season. If the Cubs are getting decent offensive production from the rest of the lineup, then I won't be too upset if he repeats his 2004 numbers (although I do think $4 million is still steep for that). However, considering that he can run pretty well and has no power, it would be nice to see him get on base more.

[Warpticon]

 

oh, and defense doesn't win championships in baseball.

 

What does? Sabrmetrics?

 

"Defense wins championships" is a cliche that people recite out of sheer habit, and was established in sports like basketball and football that are more directly team-oriented than baseball can dream of being. Baseball is 90% the individual matchup of pitcher versus hitter. What wins championships in baseball is a balance of run scoring and run prevention, which is a much, much larger part pitching than it is fielding defense. The difference between a bad hitter (see: Izturis, also Neifi and the current production of Cedeno) and an average hitter in terms of the difference made to the team is much, much larger than the difference between an average defender and an exceptional defender, and this team isn't good enough to take an offensive hit like that in order to be a little better on defense at one position.

 

Lots of mediocre to bad defensive teams have won in baseball.

[abuck1220]

 

why not? regardless of injuries, the team's defense has been good. shouldn't that be winning them a championship (or at least 4th place)?

 

Not when you are dead last, or near the bottom in walks earned and walks allowed. Not to mention a total lack of power production from key positions. Add on top of that our pitching staff has been depleted by injuries, and obviously inexperienced pitchers are more prone to allow the fly ball in ratio to the ground ball.

 

eh, but still...DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS! i've heard many a high school coach (and several NO FEAR! t-shirts) tell me that.

[DiamondMind]

 

The Cubs were 5th in baseball in defensive efficiency before trading for Izturis, thus his defense can only improve them marginally. Furthermore, regardless of what the team "can" spend, they will only spend somewhere in the $100 million range. As such, you can't waste $4 on a defensive player who provided minimal offense when you've already got that same player on the roster (Perez). Perez's defense is roughly equivalent to Izturis', as is his offense (.650 OPS). You simply can't have two of the worst offensive players in baseball occupying the same roster because they might happen to save a run with their defense every third or fourth game.

 

Furthermore, when a team is last in the league in runs scored by over 100 runs, I would say the team's problem is a lack of offense in total, not just from the corner positions.

 

Again, I can't provide any sort of numerical backing just because it'd take a ton of time - but there's no way they'd only save "a run every three or four games". On top of runs prevented, what about helping keep a pitchers pitch count low due to them turning the DP, making exceptional plays, etc?

[DiamondMind]

 

It's hard for me to crunch and collect numbers and give you some sort of numerical proof that anything wins championships. Generally a well rounded team wins more than anything. I just think defense plays an important role.

 

that's a lot different than saying defense wins championships, don't you think?

 

the reason you can't crunch and collect numbers to prove your point is because those numbers don't exist.

 

True, I guess you got me caught up there. Maybe I should say I believe defense is important to winning a championship? It's just my opinion.

:) :)

[DiamondMind]

 

oh, and defense doesn't win championships in baseball.

 

What does? Sabrmetrics?

 

"Defense wins championships" is a cliche that people recite out of sheer habit, and was established in sports like basketball and football that are more directly team-oriented than baseball can dream of being. Baseball is 90% the individual matchup of pitcher versus hitter. What wins championships in baseball is a balance of run scoring and run prevention, which is a much, much larger part pitching than it is fielding defense. The difference between a bad hitter (see: Izturis, also Neifi and the current production of Cedeno) and an average hitter in terms of the difference made to the team is much, much larger than the difference between an average defender and an exceptional defender, and this team isn't good enough to take an offensive hit like that in order to be a little better on defense at one position.

 

Lots of mediocre to bad defensive teams have won in baseball.

 

I wouldn't infer that the reason I believe what I believe is out of 'habit'. It's out of watching years of baseball and it's just how I formed my opinion. I didn't see it on a poster somewhere and take it as my M.O.

[Caryatid]

gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove!

 

Sarcasm or not, I'm in the camp of in any sport, defense wins championships.

 

Cliches don't win championships. It makes for a cute little point on the championship video, but in baseball, defense makes very little difference.

 

If you'll look at defensive efficiency, fielding percentage, etc., you'll see that very few playoff teams, World Series teams, or World Series champions have been at or near the top in defense. Some have, but not nearly enough to draw some kind of correlation.

[DiamondMind]

gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove!

 

Sarcasm or not, I'm in the camp of in any sport, defense wins championships.

 

Cliches don't win championships. It makes for a cute little point on the championship video, but in baseball, defense makes very little difference.

 

If you'll look at defensive efficiency, fielding percentage, etc., you'll see that very few playoff teams, World Series teams, or World Series champions have been at or near the top in defense. Some have, but not nearly enough to draw some kind of correlation.

 

It's not a cliche just because it's repeated. Maybe it's repeated because professional sports people, with experience, generally believe it. Why else would you hear it so often?

 

edit: Again, I'd like to clarify that when I refer to defense I'm specifically referring to 'up the middle defense'; especially range in CF, the middle IF's ability to turn a DP, and the C's ability to call a game and manage a pitchers emotions.

Edited August 18, 2006 by DiamondMind

[fromthestretch]

If the Cubs are going to keep Izturis, they should probably look for better production at 2B. Even if Cedeno improves, a middle infield of Cedeno and Izturis is not going to provide much offense. You can live with having one of them, but not both, especially with Neifi as the primary backup for both positions. Out of the two, I'd keep Cedeno and try to deal Izturis to a team that over-values his defensive ability and can afford his salary for the remainder of his contract.

 

I too am concerned with Cedeno. Izturis' D is vastly better, and I don't care what Ronny hit in Arizona or Winter league or whatever - his offense has been anemic so far.

 

I'd rather give Cedeno the chance to improve. He's three years younger, makes a lot less money, and his OPS this season isn't too far off Izturis' career OPS. There's always a chance Cedeno won't improve. However, Izturis hasn't shown much at the major league level, and his minor league numbers certainly don't suggest that he has any offensive potential.

[Caryatid]

 

The Cubs were 5th in baseball in defensive efficiency before trading for Izturis, thus his defense can only improve them marginally. Furthermore, regardless of what the team "can" spend, they will only spend somewhere in the $100 million range. As such, you can't waste $4 on a defensive player who provided minimal offense when you've already got that same player on the roster (Perez). Perez's defense is roughly equivalent to Izturis', as is his offense (.650 OPS). You simply can't have two of the worst offensive players in baseball occupying the same roster because they might happen to save a run with their defense every third or fourth game.

 

Furthermore, when a team is last in the league in runs scored by over 100 runs, I would say the team's problem is a lack of offense in total, not just from the corner positions.

 

Again, I can't provide any sort of numerical backing just because it'd take a ton of time - but there's no way they'd only save "a run every three or four games". On top of runs prevented, what about helping keep a pitchers pitch count low due to them turning the DP, making exceptional plays, etc?

 

I think you can't provide numerical backing, because numerical backing for that position doesn't exist.

[CubColtPacer]

 

no, their defense won't save more runs than their lack of offense costs. the cubs problem is lack of offense - there is no reason to accept overpaid subpar performance from any position.

 

Respectfully disagree - the Cubs problem is not a general lack of offense, but lack of offense from the corner positions. Murton and Jones are both 4th OF in my opinion, Ramirez had a terrible first half, and Lee has been disabled for most of the season.

 

The Cubs were 5th in baseball in defensive efficiency before trading for Izturis, thus his defense can only improve them marginally. Furthermore, regardless of what the team "can" spend, they will only spend somewhere in the $100 million range. As such, you can't waste $4 on a defensive player who provided minimal offense when you've already got that same player on the roster (Perez). Perez's defense is roughly equivalent to Izturis', as is his offense (.650 OPS). You simply can't have two of the worst offensive players in baseball occupying the same roster because they might happen to save a run with their defense every third or fourth game.

 

Furthermore, when a team is last in the league in runs scored by over 100 runs, I would say the team's problem is a lack of offense in total, not just from the corner positions.

 

Over 100 runs from the next team? It's actually 14 runs-I understand your point though (although I still don't understand how we're 5th in defensive efficiency watching this team play defense everyday (especially the OF and catcher and the middle infield earlier in the season, and then see the differences when watching other teams, but that has been beaten to death :D). I happen to think that Izturis will surprise some people offensively next season, but for that we will have to wait and see.

[Sammy Sofa]

 

It's hard for me to crunch and collect numbers and give you some sort of numerical proof that anything wins championships. Generally a well rounded team wins more than anything. I just think defense plays an important role.

 

that's a lot different than saying defense wins championships, don't you think?

 

the reason you can't crunch and collect numbers to prove your point is because those numbers don't exist.

 

True, I guess you got me caught up there. Maybe I should say I believe defense is important to winning a championship? It's just my opinion.

:) :)

 

Nobody was saying it's not important. What people are saying is that "defense" was nowhere near being a problem for the Cubs and why they're doing so bad. Izturis slightly improves and area where the Cubs weren't hurting and does absolutely nothing to help the Cubs where they're REALLY hurting: offense. Numbers-wise, he's a more expensive Neifi. If Hendry had shored up the corner OF positions, hey, great, this is fine. But since he hasn't, and he's now pulled even more money away from fixing those problems, this isn't a terribly smart move.

 

And the "defense wins championships" is applicable in the other major sports, not baseball. Sure, it's important, but with hockey, football and basketball, the defense can take possesion and score on a moment's notice. Izturis can't dive and catch ball behind head and then touch home to score a run. He's a serious offensive liability on a team riddled with them.

[Caryatid]

gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove! gold glove!

 

Sarcasm or not, I'm in the camp of in any sport, defense wins championships.

 

Cliches don't win championships. It makes for a cute little point on the championship video, but in baseball, defense makes very little difference.

 

If you'll look at defensive efficiency, fielding percentage, etc., you'll see that very few playoff teams, World Series teams, or World Series champions have been at or near the top in defense. Some have, but not nearly enough to draw some kind of correlation.

 

It's not a cliche just because it's repeated. Maybe it's repeated because professional sports people, with experience, generally believe it. Why else would you hear it so often?

 

edit: Again, I'd like to clarify that when I refer to defense I'm specifically referring to 'up the middle defense'; especially range in CF, the middle IF's ability to turn a DP, and the C's ability to call a game and manage a pitchers emotions.

 

You're right: its not a cliche because its repeated. Its a cliche because it doesn't have any merit other than something people like to say because it sounds nice and team oriented. In fact, in baseball, defense means so much less than offense, especially when a player is one of the worst in baseball offensively, as are both Izturis and Perez.

[abuck1220]

 

no, their defense won't save more runs than their lack of offense costs. the cubs problem is lack of offense - there is no reason to accept overpaid subpar performance from any position.

 

Respectfully disagree - the Cubs problem is not a general lack of offense, but lack of offense from the corner positions. Murton and Jones are both 4th OF in my opinion, Ramirez had a terrible first half, and Lee has been disabled for most of the season.

 

The Cubs were 5th in baseball in defensive efficiency before trading for Izturis, thus his defense can only improve them marginally. Furthermore, regardless of what the team "can" spend, they will only spend somewhere in the $100 million range. As such, you can't waste $4 on a defensive player who provided minimal offense when you've already got that same player on the roster (Perez). Perez's defense is roughly equivalent to Izturis', as is his offense (.650 OPS). You simply can't have two of the worst offensive players in baseball occupying the same roster because they might happen to save a run with their defense every third or fourth game.

 

Furthermore, when a team is last in the league in runs scored by over 100 runs, I would say the team's problem is a lack of offense in total, not just from the corner positions.

 

Over 100 runs from the next team? It's actually 14 runs-I understand your point though (although I still don't understand how we're 5th in defensive efficiency watching this team play defense everyday (especially the OF and catcher and the middle infield earlier in the season, and then see the differences when watching other teams, but that has been beaten to death :D). I happen to think that Izturis will surprise some people offensively next season, but for that we will have to wait and see.

 

"watching this team play defense everyday" just isn't a reliable way to judge the team.

[DiamondMind]

 

I'd rather give Cedeno the chance to improve. He's three years younger, makes a lot less money, and his OPS this season isn't too far off Izturis' career OPS. There's always a chance Cedeno won't improve. However, Izturis hasn't shown much at the major league level, and his minor league numbers certainly don't suggest that he has any offensive potential.

 

I'm just not drinking the Cubs brass' kool-aid on Cedeno. I think a majority of the hype came from the failed Furcal acquisition, so hey, we have a great Cedeno already so who cares if we failed again at an impact FA signing.

[DiamondMind]

 

The Cubs were 5th in baseball in defensive efficiency before trading for Izturis, thus his defense can only improve them marginally. Furthermore, regardless of what the team "can" spend, they will only spend somewhere in the $100 million range. As such, you can't waste $4 on a defensive player who provided minimal offense when you've already got that same player on the roster (Perez). Perez's defense is roughly equivalent to Izturis', as is his offense (.650 OPS). You simply can't have two of the worst offensive players in baseball occupying the same roster because they might happen to save a run with their defense every third or fourth game.

 

Furthermore, when a team is last in the league in runs scored by over 100 runs, I would say the team's problem is a lack of offense in total, not just from the corner positions.

 

Again, I can't provide any sort of numerical backing just because it'd take a ton of time - but there's no way they'd only save "a run every three or four games". On top of runs prevented, what about helping keep a pitchers pitch count low due to them turning the DP, making exceptional plays, etc?

 

I think you can't provide numerical backing, because numerical backing for that position doesn't exist.

 

Just like you can't provide numerical evidence of speed's influence on a pitchers missed location, range in CF saving doubles and triples, etc. Doesn't mean it's not important, just not quantifiable.

[Caryatid]

 

no, their defense won't save more runs than their lack of offense costs. the cubs problem is lack of offense - there is no reason to accept overpaid subpar performance from any position.

 

Respectfully disagree - the Cubs problem is not a general lack of offense, but lack of offense from the corner positions. Murton and Jones are both 4th OF in my opinion, Ramirez had a terrible first half, and Lee has been disabled for most of the season.

 

The Cubs were 5th in baseball in defensive efficiency before trading for Izturis, thus his defense can only improve them marginally. Furthermore, regardless of what the team "can" spend, they will only spend somewhere in the $100 million range. As such, you can't waste $4 on a defensive player who provided minimal offense when you've already got that same player on the roster (Perez). Perez's defense is roughly equivalent to Izturis', as is his offense (.650 OPS). You simply can't have two of the worst offensive players in baseball occupying the same roster because they might happen to save a run with their defense every third or fourth game.

 

Furthermore, when a team is last in the league in runs scored by over 100 runs, I would say the team's problem is a lack of offense in total, not just from the corner positions.

 

Over 100 runs from the next team? It's actually 14 runs-I understand your point though (although I still don't understand how we're 5th in defensive efficiency watching this team play defense everyday (especially the OF and catcher and the middle infield earlier in the season, and then see the differences when watching other teams, but that has been beaten to death :D). I happen to think that Izturis will surprise some people offensively next season, but for that we will have to wait and see.

 

Yeah-there was a little hyperbole in there. Exaggeration for effect.

[Sammy Sofa]

 

The Cubs were 5th in baseball in defensive efficiency before trading for Izturis, thus his defense can only improve them marginally. Furthermore, regardless of what the team "can" spend, they will only spend somewhere in the $100 million range. As such, you can't waste $4 on a defensive player who provided minimal offense when you've already got that same player on the roster (Perez). Perez's defense is roughly equivalent to Izturis', as is his offense (.650 OPS). You simply can't have two of the worst offensive players in baseball occupying the same roster because they might happen to save a run with their defense every third or fourth game.

 

Furthermore, when a team is last in the league in runs scored by over 100 runs, I would say the team's problem is a lack of offense in total, not just from the corner positions.

 

Again, I can't provide any sort of numerical backing just because it'd take a ton of time - but there's no way they'd only save "a run every three or four games". On top of runs prevented, what about helping keep a pitchers pitch count low due to them turning the DP, making exceptional plays, etc?

 

I think you can't provide numerical backing, because numerical backing for that position doesn't exist.

 

Just like you can't provide numerical evidence of speed's influence on a pitchers missed location, range in CF saving doubles and triples, etc. Doesn't mean it's not important, just not quantifiable.

 

Or it's negligible.