Base Clogging version 2.0

[goonys evil twin]

Ummmm...So we agree that Hendry has been a disappoinment?

 

Oh yeah, definitely. I'm just saying this shouldn't be a shock to us. He's as old school of a baseball guy as Dusty, just without having been on deck when Hank Aaron hit a ball hard. I let him fool me into thinking he could get it done his way.

[CubColtPacer]

The same with the Nomar trade-what does Nomar do better than Gonzalez first and foremost? get on base.

 

Dusty is not correct on the order, but he is not nearly as far off as is being said-all he's saying here is that you need to have a good SLG to make a good OBP worth it, which is again not correct but at least better than many things he's said before.

 

Again, you're giving him too much credit. He's proven he doesn't care about OBP. He's proven it over and over. Why somebody would be willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt that he actually wants better OBP is beyond me. He doesn't care about OBP. If he has more of it, great. If he has less, so what.

 

 

Nomar is not know for OBP ability. He's as big a free swinger as there is. The difference is he's really good at it and has a great SLG. He's one of the very few players that actually fit the Hendry/Baker mold, and are successful. The problem is those guys are very rare.

 

 

 

Undervaluing it is very much different than putting no value on it. Neither is what you want, but one is much better than the other.

 

No, it really isn't. MLB is about competing against 29 other teams. It's not enough to win games. You have to win more games than everybody else. It's not enough to score some runs. You've got to score more runs than the others. Everything in baseball is about how you stack up against the others. You could make that argument that Neifi Perez is actually a really good baseball player. The problem is he's one of the worst players in MLB. You could pretend Dusty would like a little more OBP, the problem is he doesn't place enough value in it to get more of it than everybody else.

 

Dusty doesn't value OBP, it's clear as day. To think otherwise is to lie to yourself. There's evidence that he actually thinks OBP is bad, hence the clogging, but that's debatable. What is not debatable is that Dusty doesn't see the value of OBP, doesn't see the need for OBP and that the lack of OBP has been killing this team's offense.

 

I agree with most of what is said here-I don't give him the benefit of the doubt, I just see no need to continue to villify him at this point for a quote that when looked at closely is one of his tamer ones over the last few years. You are correct that he does not value OBP enough, and that is one big reason among several others that he should be shown the door at the end of this year.

[goonys evil twin]

I agree with most of what is said here-I don't give him the benefit of the doubt, I just see no need to continue to villify him at this point for a quote that when looked at closely is one of his tamer ones over the last few years.

 

It only looks that way if you look at it without context (and even then it's hardly tame, it's blatantly ignorant of the value of OBP).

 

Dusty is a moron. He doesn't value OBP. The Cubs suck. Their offense has been lacking in OBP for a long time. And even now, with the team at such a low, Dusty is refusing to admit it's a problem, or that more OBP could help.

 

I see no reason for you to keep making excuses for him and glossing over this issue.

 

It is the number 1 problem with Dusty Baker's managerial style, from an offensive standpoint. It stands right up there with his pitcher abuse. The only difference is pitcher abuse usually has repercussions down the road, while ignoring OBP kills you right away.

[gflore34]

Dusty's just sounds so old school. The game has pasted Dusty by. I'm just amazed that Jim Hendry doesn't see the importance of OBP? He's a young GM that has coached and been around baseball his whole life. I can't believe he's not looking at the past 4 years and not seeing the one consistent this offense has lacked? I'm not really surprised by Dusty midset, but Hendry has really been a disappointment.

 

Hendry isn't a young man. He's 5 years younger than Dusty. And he was around the college game most of the time. As far as I can tell, college baseball is even more "old school" in its approach than MLB. There aren't too many Beanes in NCAA. Hendry is a "baseball man", the kind of guy with relationships throughout the sport, and a complete unwillingness to think his contemporaries are anything but the best at what they do.

 

I had high hopes for Hendry, largely because I ignored all the signs that he completely undervalued the walk (both in terms of negative value associated with giving them up, and positive value when taking them).

 

And the fact he coached at the college level has shown up in some of his acquisitions. I may be way off but, if Hendry had a choice between a good Baseball player and an athlete who currently isn't a good Baseball player but loaded with potential, he'd choose the athlete 10 out of 10 times. As a college coach you'll take a chance on a good athlete and try turn him into a good Baseball player however, it’s not a wise thing to do at the Major League level that is, if you're interested in winning.

[stitchface]

this goes beyond obp - dusty and jim just don't value outs. they give them away with sacrifices, caught stealings etc. there is a complete lack of understanding of how teams score runs.

[gflore34]

this goes beyond obp - dusty and jim just don't value outs. they give them away with sacrifices, caught stealings etc. there is a complete lack of understanding of how teams score runs.

 

How can something so simple be beyond them? Scoring runs begins and ends with baserunners, the more you have the greater are chances you'll score runs.

[jmajew]

I'm just going to point out a few facts here. Certain teams offensive numbers. Runs, AVG, OBP, SLG.

 

A's 583, 253, 333, 399.

KC 594, 271, 335, 419

Nats 582, 260, 339, 423

MIL 582, 260, 331, 423

Cubs 540, 253, 319, 421

SF 589, 261, 327, 418

LAD 629, 277, 348, 424

 

Use these numbers to make up your mind. It appears to me as if teams that have similar slugging to us but have a higher OBP all have scored more runs. I hope that speaks for itself.

[CubColtPacer]

I'm just going to point out a few facts here. Certain teams offensive numbers. Runs, AVG, OBP, SLG.

 

A's 583, 253, 333, 399.

KC 594, 271, 335, 419

Nats 582, 260, 339, 423

MIL 582, 260, 331, 423

Cubs 540, 253, 319, 421

SF 589, 261, 327, 418

LAD 629, 277, 348, 424

 

Use these numbers to make up your mind. It appears to me as if teams that have similar slugging to us but have a higher OBP all have scored more runs. I hope that speaks for itself.

 

I don't think anyone here is going to disagree with that. Approx the same in one category and better in the 2nd category is going to make that team better than the other. (Of course that doesn't work for the 2 teams that we've had a slightly better OBP and slightly better SLG and still have less runs than). Increasing either of them will help your team-the Cubs need OBP more, but only increasing one or the other this offseason won't help the Cubs be anything but average offensively. We need to increase both to have a good offense.

[gflore34]

I'm just going to point out a few facts here. Certain teams offensive numbers. Runs, AVG, OBP, SLG.

 

A's 583, 253, 333, 399.

KC 594, 271, 335, 419

Nats 582, 260, 339, 423

MIL 582, 260, 331, 423

Cubs 540, 253, 319, 421

SF 589, 261, 327, 418

LAD 629, 277, 348, 424

 

Use these numbers to make up your mind. It appears to me as if teams that have similar slugging to us but have a higher OBP all have scored more runs. I hope that speaks for itself.

 

Anyway we could put these statistics in front of Hendry?

[jmajew]

I'm just going to point out a few facts here. Certain teams offensive numbers. Runs, AVG, OBP, SLG.

 

A's 583, 253, 333, 399.

KC 594, 271, 335, 419

Nats 582, 260, 339, 423

MIL 582, 260, 331, 423

Cubs 540, 253, 319, 421

SF 589, 261, 327, 418

LAD 629, 277, 348, 424

 

Use these numbers to make up your mind. It appears to me as if teams that have similar slugging to us but have a higher OBP all have scored more runs. I hope that speaks for itself.

 

I don't think anyone here is going to disagree with that. Approx the same in one category and better in the 2nd category is going to make that team better than the other. (Of course that doesn't work for the 2 teams that we've had a slightly better OBP and slightly better SLG and still have less runs than). Increasing either of them will help your team-the Cubs need OBP more, but only increasing one or the other this offseason won't help the Cubs be anything but average offensively. We need to increase both to have a good offense.

 

Look at the A's. They have a slugging about 30 pts lower and an OBP 14 pts higher and they have scored 43 more runs. Simply looking at the OBP appears to be more important.

[CubColtPacer]

I'm just going to point out a few facts here. Certain teams offensive numbers. Runs, AVG, OBP, SLG.

 

A's 583, 253, 333, 399.

KC 594, 271, 335, 419

Nats 582, 260, 339, 423

MIL 582, 260, 331, 423

Cubs 540, 253, 319, 421

SF 589, 261, 327, 418

LAD 629, 277, 348, 424

 

Use these numbers to make up your mind. It appears to me as if teams that have similar slugging to us but have a higher OBP all have scored more runs. I hope that speaks for itself.

 

I don't think anyone here is going to disagree with that. Approx the same in one category and better in the 2nd category is going to make that team better than the other. (Of course that doesn't work for the 2 teams that we've had a slightly better OBP and slightly better SLG and still have less runs than). Increasing either of them will help your team-the Cubs need OBP more, but only increasing one or the other this offseason won't help the Cubs be anything but average offensively. We need to increase both to have a good offense.

 

Look at the A's. They have a slugging about 30 pts lower and an OBP 14 pts higher and they have scored 43 more runs. Simply looking at the OBP appears to be more important.

 

Like I said though, there are two teams the Cubs have higher OBP and higher SLG numbers this year, and less runs. It's hard to tell from just those individual numbers because of the variances (the fact that other things factor in that can influence run totals) We know a higher OBP increases runs-we know a higher SLG increases runs. I believe OBP is more important, but not by that much.

[thedaymen]

I think you all are missing the point on whats truly sad here. Its that this offseason, the Cubs aren't going to get guys that will increase either OBP or SLG. We already know Barrett, Lee, Izturis, and Jones are back. We assume Murton, Cedeno, Aramis and Pierre will be back....whats that leave? Nothing.

 

Here's the Cubs' plan for next year.

 

Assume Cedeno and Murton improve.

Assume Barrett and Lee's career years are the norm.

Assume Pierre and Jones are the players they appear to be when they have a good month.

Drive in runs with the gloves of the middle infielders.

[cjbucks]

Kind of off the subject a little but there is a good article at FJM about not needing obp,ops,etc. to know that Babe Ruth and Ted Williams were good hitters. All you need for stats are avg, hr and rbi to tell if a hitter is good or not.

 

Meant to add - I know we shake our heads about these kind of viewpoints but they are probably (sadly) not the minority viewpoint.

 

 

 

http://firejoemorgan.blogspot.com/

[EricG]

The Cub philosophy of "homeruns and base hits are more exciting than walks, sure every once in a while the offense is shut down because they are swinging at pitches outside the strikezone, gotta tip your cap" has been around for a while. If Dusty preaches that it is better to go down swinging and then backs it up with giving extra playing time to Neifi Perez then that effects the whole team. "Gee if I don't swing maybe I won't be in the lineup again this week."

[SoonerCubFan]

I think you all are missing the point on whats truly sad here. Its that this offseason, the Cubs aren't going to get guys that will increase either OBP or SLG. We already know Barrett, Lee, Izturis, and Jones are back. We assume Murton, Cedeno, Aramis and Pierre will be back....whats that leave? Nothing.

 

Here's the Cubs' plan for next year.

 

Assume Cedeno and Murton improve.

Assume Barrett and Lee's career years are the norm.

Assume Pierre and Jones are the players they appear to be when they have a good month.

Drive in runs with the gloves of the middle infielders.

 

I agree, this is the real issue, and your assessment is correct. To me, the whole focus on Baker is missing the larger point as Hendry is far more instrumental in maintaining or changing the philosophical approach than Baker. This starts with not accepting at least 2 of the above positions as concrete. If he doesn't, it doesn't matter who the manager is, and all of your assumptions are indeed all there is left to hope for.

[goonys evil twin]

I agree, this is the real issue, and your assessment is correct. To me, the whole focus on Baker is missing the larger point as Hendry is far more instrumental ...

 

I don't think the focus on Baker is missing the point on Hendry. The problem is Hendry is already signed through 2008. People just don't want to compound the problem by bringing Baker back as well. Sure there's the poetic justice thing of having the guys go down together. But I'm just holding out some hope that Hendry will do something right since he's already going to return. Baker is not.

 

And don't think for a second that Baker was a wallflower when it came to deciding what strategies to go after with this team.

[Irrelevant Dude]

Nobody has even mentioned my favorite part of this quote...

"I've always said since I started managing that I'd like to have a team full of young guys and young players who you can teach to play the game the right way"

Which is it Dusty, do you want young players or do you want your horses?

[NorthsideAvenger]

I think we can agree on a couple of facts:

 

1: Dusty was taught to manage by Paris Hilton.

2: The slow guys who can get on at a good rate is better then fast he gets on at a below average rate.

 

Personally, I think that Hendry/Baker are being condescending when they talk about OBP. They know, that the Cubs fans know that the best teams in baseball have very good OBP, and that the Cubs have an OBP lower then some little league teams. I find it insulting.

[soccer10k]

I didn't feel like reading the whole thread so I apologize if I say something that somebody else already said.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't a knock on the Cubs a few years ago that even though the were near the top of the league in HR's hit, they hit too many solo HR's and were subsequently not near the top of the league in runs scored?

 

Just checked:

2005: 7th in HR's and 20th in R in the ML, 2nd and 9th in the NL

2004: 3rd in HR's and 16th in R in the ML, 1st and 7th in the NL

2003: 14th in HR's and 20th in R in the ML, 8th and 9th in the NL

2002: 5th in HR's and 22nd in R in the ML, 1st and 11th in the NL