Cedeno stinks and stinks hard

[goonys evil twin]

What I look for primarily is improvement and the ability to make adjustments. And that's where I'm distressed by Ronnie's performance to date. Here are his BA's by month:

 

but I'm still disturbed by his inability to adjust to what pitchers are doing to him this season. If he continues to get weaker through Aug & Sept, then I'd plan on him being nothing more than a utility guy in the future.

 

I don't think you can expect linear progression. Guys are going to have ups and downs. Expecting him to get better each month, or expecting him not to have consecutive bad months, is not a very good way to judge a player.

[RichHillIsABeast]

What I look for primarily is improvement and the ability to make adjustments. And that's where I'm distressed by Ronnie's performance to date. Here are his BA's by month:

 

but I'm still disturbed by his inability to adjust to what pitchers are doing to him this season. If he continues to get weaker through Aug & Sept, then I'd plan on him being nothing more than a utility guy in the future.

 

I don't think you can expect linear progression. Guys are going to have ups and downs. Expecting him to get better each month, or expecting him not to have consecutive bad months, is not a very good way to judge a player.

 

It seems to me that he's looking at trends, not linear progression/regression. Cedeno is trending downward. Murton had one horrible month, but other than that, he's been pretty solid. If Cedeno even had a marginal uptick the last couple of months that would be something. However, his D has been worse than advertised while he's offered nothing with the lumber.

[Soriano12]

For those curious, here are more complete monthly

 

Cedeno:

 

APR - .308/.341/.474/.816
MAY - .276/.294/.305/.598
JUN - .234/.265/.340/.606
JUL - .200/.217/.250/.467
AUG - .207/.233/.310/.544

 

Cendeo has pretty much been an automatic out since June 31.

 

man that is terrible

[UMFan83]

For those curious, here are more complete monthly

 

Cedeno:

 

APR - .308/.341/.474/.816
MAY - .276/.294/.305/.598
JUN - .234/.265/.340/.606
JUL - .200/.217/.250/.467
AUG - .207/.233/.310/.544

 

Cendeo has pretty much been an automatic out since June 31.

 

man that is terrible

 

Roughly 78% of the time yes.

[goonys evil twin]

It seems to me that he's looking at trends, not linear progression/regression. Cedeno is trending downward.

 

Yes, he has been trending downward, but that is not necessarily a sign a player can't handle it. We're looking at a snapshot of his first season, at age 23, a year and 4 months younger than Matt Murton. Many of us are quick to support Murton, despite pointing out his weakness and the likelihood that he will never be a star corner OF. This is based on nice, but not spectaculiar minor league numbers. But Ronny's 2004 and 2005 at AA and AAA are very comparable to Murton's 2004 and 2005, at high A, AA and AAA, and Murton was older at each level.

 

Ronny can't stay where he's at, and he can't decline. But we cannot make a final judgement such as "he can only be a utility player" based on a downward trend in his rookie year. Guys need to make adjustments, but they don't necessarily have to happen in their first year for them to have a chance. I think Ronny was probably rushed a bit and could have used some more seasoning along the way. You can't end a guy's progression because he's not doing very well at 23 in the majors.

[Backtobanks]

I think we need to be patient with a 23 year old player, but with Theriot, Fontenot, and Patterson around, Ronny has to improve. I do think Hendry will be making a blockbuster trade during the off season and Ronny (or Murton) could be part of the package along with a few of our young pitchers for an impact bat.

[Guest]

It seems to me that he's looking at trends, not linear progression/regression. Cedeno is trending downward.

 

Yes, he has been trending downward, but that is not necessarily a sign a player can't handle it. We're looking at a snapshot of his first season, at age 23, a year and 4 months younger than Matt Murton. Many of us are quick to support Murton, despite pointing out his weakness and the likelihood that he will never be a star corner OF. This is based on nice, but not spectaculiar minor league numbers. But Ronny's 2004 and 2005 at AA and AAA are very comparable to Murton's 2004 and 2005, at high A, AA and AAA, and Murton was older at each level.

 

Ronny can't stay where he's at, and he can't decline. But we cannot make a final judgement such as "he can only be a utility player" based on a downward trend in his rookie year. Guys need to make adjustments, but they don't necessarily have to happen in their first year for them to have a chance. I think Ronny was probably rushed a bit and could have used some more seasoning along the way. You can't end a guy's progression because he's not doing very well at 23 in the majors.

Goony,

 

I'm putting the stats out there to back up what I'm seeing with my eyes. Cedeno has had a very difficult time adjusting to what MLB pitchers are doing to get him out. If he still can't adjust any better than he has so far by the end of the year, the odds aren't great that he'll ever be able to. I'm not looking for him to hit .320 over the final month. I'm just looking for a glimmer -- for some reason to hope that he's figuring things out. Otherwise, I don't see any way to go into 2007 counting on Ronnie to be a starter for the team. Put him on the bench in a utility role, see if he can figure things out from there.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I think the interesting question asked in this thread is, "How long do you give a minor leaguer a chance to prove himself at the major league level?"

 

Unfortunately, this is asking for a black and white answer to a question with innumerable shades of gray. What I look for primarily is improvement and the ability to make adjustments. And that's where I'm distressed by Ronnie's performance to date. Here are his BA's by month:

 

APR - .308
MAY - .276
JUN - .234
JUL - .200
AUG - .207

 

That's not a good trendline. Now, his other stats (such as SLG) don't show as clean a downward progression, but I'm still disturbed by his inability to adjust to what pitchers are doing to him this season. If he continues to get weaker through Aug & Sept, then I'd plan on him being nothing more than a utility guy in the future. However, if he can make an adjustment and finish strong, then I'd be more inclined to give him a chance as a starter next year.

 

The only issue with that is that Izturis is going to start at SS if he's on the roster in 2007. And if I have to choose between Murton or Cedeno to be a starter next season, I'm choosing Murton all the way and seeking to improve at second by signing Soriano at whatever cost is required.

 

Would trading for Giles instead of signing Soriano be a better option?

[goonys evil twin]

I'm putting the stats out there to back up what I'm seeing with my eyes. Cedeno has had a very difficult time adjusting to what MLB pitchers are doing to get him out. If he still can't adjust any better than he has so far by the end of the year, the odds aren't great that he'll ever be able to. I'm not looking for him to hit .320 over the final month. I'm just looking for a glimmer -- for some reason to hope that he's figuring things out. Otherwise, I don't see any way to go into 2007 counting on Ronnie to be a starter for the team. Put him on the bench in a utility role, see if he can figure things out from there.

 

I think if he doesn't show any signs of adjustment and improvement the odds will keep getting longer that he'll get better in the future. And if the Cubs keep the rest of the roster as is, then they can't go with him at 2B. But there's no reason they can't improve elsewhere and stick with Cedeno for another year.

[Guest]

I think the interesting question asked in this thread is, "How long do you give a minor leaguer a chance to prove himself at the major league level?"

 

Unfortunately, this is asking for a black and white answer to a question with innumerable shades of gray. What I look for primarily is improvement and the ability to make adjustments. And that's where I'm distressed by Ronnie's performance to date. Here are his BA's by month:

 

APR - .308
MAY - .276
JUN - .234
JUL - .200
AUG - .207

 

That's not a good trendline. Now, his other stats (such as SLG) don't show as clean a downward progression, but I'm still disturbed by his inability to adjust to what pitchers are doing to him this season. If he continues to get weaker through Aug & Sept, then I'd plan on him being nothing more than a utility guy in the future. However, if he can make an adjustment and finish strong, then I'd be more inclined to give him a chance as a starter next year.

 

The only issue with that is that Izturis is going to start at SS if he's on the roster in 2007. And if I have to choose between Murton or Cedeno to be a starter next season, I'm choosing Murton all the way and seeking to improve at second by signing Soriano at whatever cost is required.

 

Would trading for Giles instead of signing Soriano be a better option?

Soriano. Giles just has a hard time staying at 100%, even when he's on the field.

[Guest]

I'm putting the stats out there to back up what I'm seeing with my eyes. Cedeno has had a very difficult time adjusting to what MLB pitchers are doing to get him out. If he still can't adjust any better than he has so far by the end of the year, the odds aren't great that he'll ever be able to. I'm not looking for him to hit .320 over the final month. I'm just looking for a glimmer -- for some reason to hope that he's figuring things out. Otherwise, I don't see any way to go into 2007 counting on Ronnie to be a starter for the team. Put him on the bench in a utility role, see if he can figure things out from there.

 

I think if he doesn't show any signs of adjustment and improvement the odds will keep getting longer that he'll get better in the future. And if the Cubs keep the rest of the roster as is, then they can't go with him at 2B. But there's no reason they can't improve elsewhere and stick with Cedeno for another year.

Improve where, though? The best FA available happens to play the same position as Cedeno. Given the makeup of the rest of the team, it seems as though to improve the offense, one of this year's rookies needs to be bumped. Murton is not only providing better offense at his position that Cedeno in 2006, he's showing more promise of being able to make the adjustments required to continue improving in the future.

[goonys evil twin]

Soriano. Giles just has a hard time staying at 100%, even when he's on the field.

 

OPS+ 2003-2005

Giles - 140, 112, 112

Soriano - 128, 98, 110

 

If you want to make the case that Giles' injuries are a concern, fine. Or if you want to say Soriano's 2006 is just too far beyond Giles to compare the two, fine. But Soriano doesn't have any better of a history of "staying at 100%", he's had his ups and downs. Soriano is also 2+ years older.

 

Throw in the fact that Soriano will likely cost 5/65+ this offseason, while Giles might be acquired for relatively little talent in return, and there's at least room for debate.

[goonys evil twin]

Improve where, though? The best FA available happens to play the same position as Cedeno. Given the makeup of the rest of the team, it seems as though to improve the offense, one of this year's rookies needs to be bumped. Murton is not only providing better offense at his position that Cedeno in 2006, he's showing more promise of being able to make the adjustments required to continue improving in the future.

 

I too prefer Murton. But your argument is based on the idea that the Cubs only option is to sign one free agent (who, by the way, they most likely won't even come close to getting). There's also the little issue of whether it makes any sense to move Soriano back to 2B, or if he even would. He seems pretty comfortable out there now, and if money isn't the issue, I could see him wanting to stay in LF. Then again, if you do sign Soriano, you could let Pierre go and move Jones to CF, allowing you to keep Soriano out there. You could also trade Izturis and put Cedeno back at SS. All I'm saying is it would be foolish to get locked into the notion of having to replace Cedeno because he was bad in his first extended stay in the majors at 23.

[Guest]

Soriano. Giles just has a hard time staying at 100%, even when he's on the field.

 

OPS+ 2003-2005

Giles - 140, 112, 112

Soriano - 128, 98, 110

 

If you want to make the case that Giles' injuries are a concern, fine. Or if you want to say Soriano's 2006 is just too far beyond Giles to compare the two, fine. But Soriano doesn't have any better of a history of "staying at 100%", he's had his ups and downs. Soriano is also 2+ years older.

 

Throw in the fact that Soriano will likely cost 5/65+ this offseason, while Giles might be acquired for relatively little talent in return, and there's at least room for debate.

I see that 2006 is conveniently left out of your comparison.

 

Games planed & WARP totals for 2003-2006:

 

Giles:

 

145 - 10.6

102 - 5.2

152 - 8.0

112 - 3.2

 

Total - 27.0

 

Soriano:

 

156 - 8.0

145 - 4.2

156 - 4.3

125 - 7.3

 

Total - 23.8

 

There is certainly room for argument here.

 

• Even though Giles has had a hard time staying on the field, he has added more cumulative value than Soriano playing full-time.
  
• Soriano's contract may well end up being obscene, but will only cost a second round draft pick to acquire.
  
• Durability does matter. If Giles replacement is putting up a negative value when he's on the DL, then the overall value of the position goes down.
  
• The specific needs of the team matter, too. The team needs help getting on base and slugging. Giles helps more with the former, Soriano with the latter.

 

I'm certainly not against Giles. I'd prefer Soriano because I get the sense of Giles' body breaking down and I think that even though Soriano is older that he'll age better. But I'd be plenty happy if the Cubs are putting Giles at the top of the lineup in 2007.

[Guest]

Improve where, though? The best FA available happens to play the same position as Cedeno. Given the makeup of the rest of the team, it seems as though to improve the offense, one of this year's rookies needs to be bumped. Murton is not only providing better offense at his position that Cedeno in 2006, he's showing more promise of being able to make the adjustments required to continue improving in the future.

 

I too prefer Murton. But your argument is based on the idea that the Cubs only option is to sign one free agent (who, by the way, they most likely won't even come close to getting). There's also the little issue of whether it makes any sense to move Soriano back to 2B, or if he even would. He seems pretty comfortable out there now, and if money isn't the issue, I could see him wanting to stay in LF. Then again, if you do sign Soriano, you could let Pierre go and move Jones to CF, allowing you to keep Soriano out there. You could also trade Izturis and put Cedeno back at SS. All I'm saying is it would be foolish to get locked into the notion of having to replace Cedeno because he was bad in his first extended stay in the majors at 23.

I strongly doubt that the Cubs will move Izturis during the offseason. Which is a shame, because I'd rather play Cedeno at SS next year, even with my doubts about his ability to adjust. I'd love to move Jones to CF and get another corner OF, but who is out there? I can't see the Cubs putting either Carlos Lee or Murton in RF, so who does that leave? Once again, I'm tremendously upset that we didn't take the opportunity to get Abreu at the deadline.

 

I'm not locked into replacing Cedeno. But his will be the easiest position to upgrade this winter.

[Guest]

One more note there...

 

I don't believe I've talked in absolutes anywhere here (that I recall, anyway). It isn't that the ONLY available option is to upgrade second base. It is just the easiest one as there are FA & trade options available and Cedeno has been absolutely horrid at the plate in 2006.

 

I also think that Cedeno in 2007 would be an upgrade over Cedeno in 2006. But given what has transpired so far this year, I'm not hopeful that he's going to grow by enough to make the difference we need on this team.

[goonys evil twin]

Soriano. Giles just has a hard time staying at 100%, even when he's on the field.

 

OPS+ 2003-2005

Giles - 140, 112, 112

Soriano - 128, 98, 110

 

If you want to make the case that Giles' injuries are a concern, fine. Or if you want to say Soriano's 2006 is just too far beyond Giles to compare the two, fine. But Soriano doesn't have any better of a history of "staying at 100%", he's had his ups and downs. Soriano is also 2+ years older.

 

Throw in the fact that Soriano will likely cost 5/65+ this offseason, while Giles might be acquired for relatively little talent in return, and there's at least room for debate.

I see that 2006 is conveniently left out of your comparison.

 

I didn't think OPS+ numbers were available until after the season. And I did address their respective 2006 seasons.

 

The point was you insinuated Soriano is a much more stable producer, when in fact, both players have had their ups and downs.

[Derwood]

http://www.simleaguebaseball.com/derwood/rcedeno.jpg

 

PROOF!!!!

[NCCubFan]

If he continues to get weaker through Aug & Sept, then I'd plan on him being nothing more than a utility guy in the future. However, if he can make an adjustment and finish strong, then I'd be more inclined to give him a chance as a starter next year.

Regardless of how he does the rest of this year, I might give him a chance next year if the Cubs hire a new manager and hitting coach that teach a different approach to hitting. However, I'd want to be sure that they have someone else capable of starting as a Plan B in case he can't improve significantly even with a different approach.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Improve where, though? The best FA available happens to play the same position as Cedeno. Given the makeup of the rest of the team, it seems as though to improve the offense, one of this year's rookies needs to be bumped. Murton is not only providing better offense at his position that Cedeno in 2006, he's showing more promise of being able to make the adjustments required to continue improving in the future.

 

I too prefer Murton. But your argument is based on the idea that the Cubs only option is to sign one free agent (who, by the way, they most likely won't even come close to getting). There's also the little issue of whether it makes any sense to move Soriano back to 2B, or if he even would. He seems pretty comfortable out there now, and if money isn't the issue, I could see him wanting to stay in LF. Then again, if you do sign Soriano, you could let Pierre go and move Jones to CF, allowing you to keep Soriano out there. You could also trade Izturis and put Cedeno back at SS. All I'm saying is it would be foolish to get locked into the notion of having to replace Cedeno because he was bad in his first extended stay in the majors at 23.

 

The Cubs believe defense up the middle is of paramount importance, even with flyball and strikeout pitchers. Soriano is a butcher at 2B. I don't see Hendry going with Soriano at 2B, especially at the price Soriano is going to get in FA.

 

As bad as Cedeno has been offensively, the Cubs org is probably in the crowd that thinks defense is 30-50% of the game. Cedeno has the label of being a slick fielder (I haven't seen it other than his great range), so i wouldn't doubt he and Izturis are our MI of the future. :(

[dalgreen]

If he continues to get weaker through Aug & Sept, then I'd plan on him being nothing more than a utility guy in the future. However, if he can make an adjustment and finish strong, then I'd be more inclined to give him a chance as a starter next year.

Regardless of how he does the rest of this year, I might give him a chance next year if the Cubs hire a new manager and hitting coach that teach a different approach to hitting. However, I'd want to be sure that they have someone else capable of starting as a Plan B in case he can't improve significantly even with a different approach.

 

I don't like Baker or the coaches, but I'm also one who doesn't blame everything on them without giving them credit when it may be due. I'm not going to say Cedeno needs another manager and coaches when Murton has seemed to turn it around and I'm sure he didn't do it alone, so I think Cedeno is going to have to make the adjustments as Murton has. After all, it just be that Cedeno may end up being yet another young Cub player who put up good minor numbers but wasn't able to transfer that to the major leagues.

 

I also think this is just another example of the poor Cub management and decision making. Ronny was rushed. This time last year, I don't recall anyone, whether it was on here or the media or Cub brass, this time last year talking about Cedeno as the starter. I think the Cubs were thinking that Nomar or Furcal would be our SS and didn't have a good plan if either one of those two didn't play for the Cubs in 2006. There was even more talk about Tejada possibly being at SS back in December more than Cedeno. Just as Patterson was rushed (sorry for bringing that name up), I think Cedeno was rushed.

[goonys evil twin]

I'm not going to say Cedeno needs another manager and coaches when Murton has seemed to turn it around and I'm sure he didn't do it alone, so I think Cedeno is going to have to make the adjustments as Murton has.

 

Murton came into it with a great approach. Cedeno doesn't have one, and is not going to learn one with these guys.

[Jehrico]

I think the interesting question asked in this thread is, "How long do you give a minor leaguer a chance to prove himself at the major league level?"

 

Unfortunately, this is asking for a black and white answer to a question with innumerable shades of gray. What I look for primarily is improvement and the ability to make adjustments. And that's where I'm distressed by Ronnie's performance to date. Here are his BA's by month:

 

APR - .308
MAY - .276
JUN - .234
JUL - .200
AUG - .207

 

That's not a good trendline. Now, his other stats (such as SLG) don't show as clean a downward progression, but I'm still disturbed by his inability to adjust to what pitchers are doing to him this season. If he continues to get weaker through Aug & Sept, then I'd plan on him being nothing more than a utility guy in the future. However, if he can make an adjustment and finish strong, then I'd be more inclined to give him a chance as a starter next year.

 

The only issue with that is that Izturis is going to start at SS if he's on the roster in 2007. And if I have to choose between Murton or Cedeno to be a starter next season, I'm choosing Murton all the way and seeking to improve at second by signing Soriano at whatever cost is required.

 

This is what really ticks me off with Baker still being around. Cedeno's walk rate is a little over half of what it has been thoughout the minors. I think it's a sign that Dusty's over-aggressive approach being pushed on him, and doesn't work with him. I'd like to see how he does after a couple of months with someone who preaches patience before making a determination one way or another. We could find that out this year if this was the case if Hendry would have canned Baker and brought someone else in, but I suppose there's no guarantee that the interim manager for the rest of the year would be any better or have any different of an approach.

 

I don't like going into next season with the big question mark over him, but I also think it's premature to give up on him. As far as I'm concerned, this offseason is a crossroads for the Cubs and Ronny, and both directions are no-win situations.

[soapy]

I think something else to consider is that relegating Cedeno to utility infielder next year does not necessarily constitute giving up on him. If the Cubs upgrade at 2B, Cedeno can go to the bench in 2007, but take over the full time SS gig in 2008 when Izturis is gone. I'm sure he could get plenty of playing time in 2007 filling in at both SS and 2B. He's still young and one year of part-time duty doesn't mean he can no longer be considered a possibility as an everyday middle-infielder at some point.

 

I would rather move Izturis and pencil Ronny in at SS in 2007 (with an upgrade at 2B), but I just don't think that's something Hendry is going to consider. You really can't have Cedeno and Izturis in the same lineup unless you make a MAJOR upgrade in the OF.

[goonys evil twin]

I think something else to consider is that relegating Cedeno to utility infielder next year does not necessarily constitute giving up on him.

 

This is true.

 

If the Cubs upgrade at 2B, Cedeno can go to the bench in 2007, but take over the full time SS gig in 2008 when Izturis is gone.

 

This is probably not true. Hendry is probably going to try and keep Izturis around as long as possible.