Cubs Offense

[kroth1342]

 

Good organizations, while they might find a place for an organizational soldier like Theriot, do not confuse a 26 year old minor league lifer (in relative terms) with a legitimate prospect based on a 100 at-bat late season call-up.

 

Co-sign

[Guest]

no, he would definitely be a stopgap trying to take advantage of his prime seasons.

[A New Era]

We should try to convince Miller to stay in Chicago. Then we have Zambrano, Hill, and Miller to build around. Hendry will need to either sign or trade for 1 very good pitcher. But I agree we need to go for offense too. In other words we need atleast 1 very good pitcher and 1 very good offense machine.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Ronny Cedeno hit .300 in 90 PA at the tail end of last season. This after hitting .355 in Triple A the same year. We all know how that one turned out.

 

Just because one guy failed doesn't mean that the next guy will. You have to give young players a shot. That is why teams like the Braves, Marlins, A's, and twins have been good for years now.

 

It's ok to give young guys a shot when you've built a team that is not dependent upon their success.

 

The problem with handing secondbase over to Theriot is that the Cubs do not have an offense that can sustain success if he doesn't succeed. The Braves have been able to work kids into the line-ups because they had teams that could sustain success with the gamble. The Twins and Marlins have done it more out of payroll necessity than desire, though at times it has worked out.

 

If the Cubs had better offense in the outfield, or a hitter like Tejada or Young at short, then they could take a chance with Theriot.

 

As it stands, the Cubs have two bonafide power hitters in Lee and Ramirez, and some nice complementary hitters in Barrett, Murton, and Jones. Izturis provides nothing offensively. Centerfield and secondbase have to be better in order for this team to score enough runs. Theriot doesn't bring enough of what this team needs, unless we upgrade from Jones in right or Murton in left.

 

Look at it this way. Because of what this team needs, we're left with the choice of either keeping Murton as a starter or Theriot as a starter. I think that choice is an easy one. Now, if the Cubs were considering Theriot at SS, then I'd have a much different view on where he fits.

[Abe Frohman]

That is good stuff, Lance.

 

Concerning Minor League statistics translating into Major League stats, it is usually hard to tell, but some things don't change. For instance, Corey Patterson never really walked, but did strike out a lot. You won't learn plate discipline in one year at the ML level. Ronny Cedeno and Felix Pie are the same - low BB, high K ratios. That is an indicator that the hitter is not patient, or is totally bewildered. I can't really think of anyone that has really improved a lot in turning the ratio around except for Sammy Sosa.

 

It is pretty easy to understand that a hitter who walks a lot is going to score more runs. Ryan Theriot and Ronny Cedeno is a perfect comparison (as I stated earlier today on another thread). Ronny swings the bat with no discipline, yet has a lot of potential. Theriot swings the bat with more discipline, and less potential. The fact is that potential is basically meaningless unless it is being cashed in.

 

As it stands, Theriot has scored 24 runs in 100 at bats, while Cedeno has scored only 47 in 496 AB's. That's an equivelant of Theriot scoring about 120 runs in as many at bats.

 

I'd go with Theriot until he proves he can't handle the job. Besides, I just like the way he plays baseball and his approach.

[mg420]

That is good stuff, Lance.

 

Concerning Minor League statistics translating into Major League stats, it is usually hard to tell, but some things don't change. For instance, Corey Patterson never really walked, but did strike out a lot. You won't learn plate discipline in one year at the ML level. Ronny Cedeno and Felix Pie are the same - low BB, high K ratios. That is an indicator that the hitter is not patient, or is totally bewildered. I can't really think of anyone that has really improved a lot in turning the ratio around except for Sammy Sosa.

 

It is pretty easy to understand that a hitter who walks a lot is going to score more runs. Ryan Theriot and Ronny Cedeno is a perfect comparison (as I stated earlier today on another thread). Ronny swings the bat with no discipline, yet has a lot of potential. Theriot swings the bat with more discipline, and less potential. The fact is that potential is basically meaningless unless it is being cashed in.

 

As it stands, Theriot has scored 24 runs in 100 at bats, while Cedeno has scored only 47 in 496 AB's. That's an equivelant of Theriot scoring about 120 runs in as many at bats.

 

I'd go with Theriot until he proves he can't handle the job. Besides, I just like the way he plays baseball and his approach.

 

NO! YOU CANT LIKE HIM! HE DOESNT HAVE THE MINOR LEAUGE #'S! YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY INSANE! THE #'S TELL ALL!

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

You can like him all you want, but for those who want Theriot at second, then you must make either one of two choices:

 

1. Replace Murton with a power bat in left.

 

2. Accept the fact the Cubs will not contend in 2007.

 

Considering the number of secondbaseman who will be an improvement at second on the FA market, I can't see going with Theriot.

 

Murton in LF > Theriot at 2b. Also, there are more upgrades available on the market this winter for 2b.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

That is good stuff, Lance.

 

Concerning Minor League statistics translating into Major League stats, it is usually hard to tell, but some things don't change. For instance, Corey Patterson never really walked, but did strike out a lot. You won't learn plate discipline in one year at the ML level. Ronny Cedeno and Felix Pie are the same - low BB, high K ratios. That is an indicator that the hitter is not patient, or is totally bewildered. I can't really think of anyone that has really improved a lot in turning the ratio around except for Sammy Sosa.

 

It is pretty easy to understand that a hitter who walks a lot is going to score more runs. Ryan Theriot and Ronny Cedeno is a perfect comparison (as I stated earlier today on another thread). Ronny swings the bat with no discipline, yet has a lot of potential. Theriot swings the bat with more discipline, and less potential. The fact is that potential is basically meaningless unless it is being cashed in.

 

As it stands, Theriot has scored 24 runs in 100 at bats, while Cedeno has scored only 47 in 496 AB's. That's an equivelant of Theriot scoring about 120 runs in as many at bats.

 

I'd go with Theriot until he proves he can't handle the job. Besides, I just like the way he plays baseball and his approach.

 

NO! YOU CANT LIKE HIM! HE DOESNT HAVE THE MINOR LEAUGE #'S! YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY INSANE! THE #'S TELL ALL!

 

Your point that we don't know everything by the numbers is well-known. But it's a risk vs reward situation. While you are right, Theriot may exceed what his MiLB numbers indicate. It could be possible that his 100 ABs this season are more relevant than his entire career. Maybe. It is more likely that this is a hot streak, and that Theriot will revert to what the projections of his MiLB numbers indicate. No one knows for certain which is the case. But it seems a little risky in my opinion to risk that Theriot will perform at a level much higher than his MiLB equivalents indicate, especially in a market flooded with proven performers at secondbase.

 

Liken to this: Which would be a better retirement option, investing in a mutual fund or buying lottery tickets. The mutual fund is safe, though not a sure thing, safer than lottery tickets. But, someone has to win the lottery, and if you do, the payout will be tremendous. However, the odds are more in favor of the positive result, though with a lower ceiling and greater cost, to invest in the mutual fund. I don't know too many people who would make lottery tickets their investment choice, so I'm having a hard time understanding why people want to gamble 2007 with Theriot.

[A New Era]

"Cubs Offensive"

 

There, fixed it for ya.

[jmajew]

That is good stuff, Lance.

 

Concerning Minor League statistics translating into Major League stats, it is usually hard to tell, but some things don't change. For instance, Corey Patterson never really walked, but did strike out a lot. You won't learn plate discipline in one year at the ML level. Ronny Cedeno and Felix Pie are the same - low BB, high K ratios. That is an indicator that the hitter is not patient, or is totally bewildered. I can't really think of anyone that has really improved a lot in turning the ratio around except for Sammy Sosa.

 

It is pretty easy to understand that a hitter who walks a lot is going to score more runs. Ryan Theriot and Ronny Cedeno is a perfect comparison (as I stated earlier today on another thread). Ronny swings the bat with no discipline, yet has a lot of potential. Theriot swings the bat with more discipline, and less potential. The fact is that potential is basically meaningless unless it is being cashed in.

 

As it stands, Theriot has scored 24 runs in 100 at bats, while Cedeno has scored only 47 in 496 AB's. That's an equivelant of Theriot scoring about 120 runs in as many at bats.

 

I'd go with Theriot until he proves he can't handle the job. Besides, I just like the way he plays baseball and his approach.

 

NO! YOU CANT LIKE HIM! HE DOESNT HAVE THE MINOR LEAUGE #'S! YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY INSANE! THE #'S TELL ALL!

 

Your point that we don't know everything by the numbers is well-known. But it's a risk vs reward situation. While you are right, Theriot may exceed what his MiLB numbers indicate. It could be possible that his 100 ABs this season are more relevant than his entire career. Maybe. It is more likely that this is a hot streak, and that Theriot will revert to what the projections of his MiLB numbers indicate. No one knows for certain which is the case. But it seems a little risky in my opinion to risk that Theriot will perform at a level much higher than his MiLB equivalents indicate, especially in a market flooded with proven performers at secondbase.

 

Liken to this: Which would be a better retirement option, investing in a mutual fund or buying lottery tickets. The mutual fund is safe, though not a sure thing, safer than lottery tickets. But, someone has to win the lottery, and if you do, the payout will be tremendous. However, the odds are more in favor of the positive result, though with a lower ceiling and greater cost, to invest in the mutual fund. I don't know too many people who would make lottery tickets their investment choice, so I'm having a hard time understanding why people want to gamble 2007 with Theriot.

 

I understand what you are saying Vance. I am just trying to look at this through a cost effective approach. I say we will upgrade our offense by getting a platoon for Jones and a CF like Lofton who can actually bat leadoff. I think a flier on Theriot is well worth it. Honestly do you think he will put up an OBP of less than 340 next year? Our offense has been better in the second half because our team OBP has gone up because guys like Murton and Theriot have gotten more playing time and because Pierre and Ramirez didn't stink it up like they did in the first half.

 

I believe a team OBP of 330 next year is obtainable with the few moves i have suggested. I know that isn't great but it is a huge improvement for us and shoudl translate in about 50-100 more runs.

 

The Cubs have 30 million to play with this offseason. Would you rather spend 15 mil a year on Soriano/Lee, then spend 4 mil on a 2b, and then only have 11 to work with the rotation. Or would you rather spend 3 mil on Lofton and 3 mil on Craig wilson and then spend 24 million on the rotation. I'd rather spend it on the rotation.

 

edit we probably will have even less to play with depending on raises to guys liek Zambrano and Ramirez. So expect only 25 mil to play with. So that would put it 6 mil for the rotation and 19 mil for the rotation.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

I understand what you are saying Vance. I am just trying to look at this through a cost effective approach. I say we will upgrade our offense by getting a platoon for Jones and a CF like Lofton who can actually bat leadoff. I think a flier on Theriot is well worth it. Honestly do you think he will put up an OBP of less than 340 next year? Our offense has been better in the second half because our team OBP has gone up because guys like Murton and Theriot have gotten more playing time and because Pierre and Ramirez didn't stink it up like they did in the first half.

 

I believe a team OBP of 330 next year is obtainable with the few moves i have suggested. I know that isn't great but it is a huge improvement for us and shoudl translate in about 50-100 more runs.

 

The Cubs have 30 million to play with this offseason. Would you rather spend 15 mil a year on Soriano/Lee, then spend 4 mil on a 2b, and then only have 11 to work with the rotation. Or would you rather spend 3 mil on Lofton and 3 mil on Craig wilson and then spend 24 million on the rotation. I'd rather spend it on the rotation.

 

edit we probably will have even less to play with depending on raises to guys liek Zambrano and Ramirez. So expect only 25 mil to play with. So that would put it 6 mil for the rotation and 19 mil for the rotation.

 

A team with a 100 million plus payroll doens't have to be too cost efficient. And no, I don't think platooning Jones and signing Lofton to go with what we have will be enough. Now, if the Cubs added Tejada or Andruw Jones, then we might could have Izturis and Theriot up the middle with Murton in left and Jones in right and be ok. Or, if we move Jones to CF and sign or trade for a bopper in right we might be ok with Theriot as a 2b.

 

But there's nothing that indicates Theriot can sustain that OBP in the majors and if he does, it still comes at the lack of slugging.

 

Furthermore, with the number of secondbasemen on the market: Kennedy, Walker, Durham, Soriano, Kent, Biggio, Castillo and others, it just doesn't make sense to gamble with Theriot.

 

For my buck, I'd sign Soriano for second and go cost efficient with either Pie in CF.

 

I have a thread somewhere around here where I show the Cubs with a 101 million payroll can afford both Schmidt and Soriano if they use Pie in CF. If they bumb to 108, they likely could have either Pierre, Cameron, or Edmonds in CF.

[jmajew]

 

I understand what you are saying Vance. I am just trying to look at this through a cost effective approach. I say we will upgrade our offense by getting a platoon for Jones and a CF like Lofton who can actually bat leadoff. I think a flier on Theriot is well worth it. Honestly do you think he will put up an OBP of less than 340 next year? Our offense has been better in the second half because our team OBP has gone up because guys like Murton and Theriot have gotten more playing time and because Pierre and Ramirez didn't stink it up like they did in the first half.

 

I believe a team OBP of 330 next year is obtainable with the few moves i have suggested. I know that isn't great but it is a huge improvement for us and shoudl translate in about 50-100 more runs.

 

The Cubs have 30 million to play with this offseason. Would you rather spend 15 mil a year on Soriano/Lee, then spend 4 mil on a 2b, and then only have 11 to work with the rotation. Or would you rather spend 3 mil on Lofton and 3 mil on Craig wilson and then spend 24 million on the rotation. I'd rather spend it on the rotation.

 

edit we probably will have even less to play with depending on raises to guys liek Zambrano and Ramirez. So expect only 25 mil to play with. So that would put it 6 mil for the rotation and 19 mil for the rotation.

 

A team with a 100 million plus payroll doens't have to be too cost efficient. And no, I don't think platooning Jones and signing Lofton to go with what we have will be enough. Now, if the Cubs added Tejada or Andruw Jones, then we might could have Izturis and Theriot up the middle with Murton in left and Jones in right and be ok. Or, if we move Jones to CF and sign or trade for a bopper in right we might be ok with Theriot as a 2b.

 

But there's nothing that indicates Theriot can sustain that OBP in the majors and if he does, it still comes at the lack of slugging.

 

Furthermore, with the number of secondbasemen on the market: Kennedy, Walker, Durham, Soriano, Kent, Biggio, Castillo and others, it just doesn't make sense to gamble with Theriot.

 

For my buck, I'd sign Soriano for second and go cost efficient with either Pie in CF.

 

I have a thread somewhere around here where I show the Cubs with a 101 million payroll can afford both Schmidt and Soriano if they use Pie in CF. If they bumb to 108, they likely could have either Pierre, Cameron, or Edmonds in CF.

 

That is my point. I don't think Schmidt alone will make our pitching staff good enough. We need to add two quality starters. We need a Schmidt and a Vincente Padilla. Our rotation has been just as bad if not worse than our offense.

 

100 million dollar payroll is what we can expect next year. I believe we already have somewhere around 70 million guarenteed for next year. I"m going to do some research and figure out exactly how much.

 

What makes you think Theriot cannot sustain his MiLB numbers from the past two years? What evidence do you have? I have evidence that since he stopped switch hitting he became a much better hitter and that was why his numbers weren't nearly as good when he was younger.

 

Edit: Found some salaries at Cubsnet.com. They have the Cubs down for 53.8 million next year. That however does not include the salaries of Murton, Zambrano, Prior, Theriot, Pagan. So 70 million is a safe assumption in my opinion. Zambrano will make atleast 8 and Prior will prolly make around 4.

Edited September 20, 2006 by jmajew

[A New Era]

Vance' situations are agreeable. I don't know how you could argue with that.

 

Either you have Andrew in CF and Theroit at 2B -or-

 

Soriano at 2B and Pie in CF.

 

You can go cost effective with one of either Pie or Theroit if you can get that huge contract player. The reason you play Theroit at 2B is so you can afford someone like Andrew. Vice versa for calling up Pie to play Soriano at 2B.

[jmajew]

Can someone explain to me why the Cubs have had the 12th best offense in baseballe in the second half? If we are so bad offensively? Why can't this stretch be continued?

 

I believe if you build a team around strictly offense you will be setting yourself up for a major letdown. They may get to the playoffs but they most likely won't win unless they have a dominant pitching staff. My philosophy is you build an above average offense, which ours has proved to be in the second half and then get a top end pitching staff. If you have an offense in the top 15 and a staff in the top 7 in baseball odds are you will make the playoffs. Then when you get to the playoffs you can ride your staff to the title. The Yankees the past 6 years have had great offenses but becasue they have no pitching they cannot win. You need a balance. An offense of Lofton, Theriot, Lee, Ramirez, Jones/Platoon, Murton, Barrett, Izturis should be that above average offense. A rotation of Zambrano, Schmidt, Hill, Padilla, Prior should be extremely dominant.

 

A Lineup of Murton, Barrett, Lee, Ramirez, Soriano, Jones, Theriot, Izturis should be better than the other one but not by that much. A rotation of Zambrano, Schmidt, Hill, Prior, Marshall/Guzman/Marmol/etc is acceptable however, we will have two question marks in the rotation. Unless the Cubs can build a top 5 offense I don't see why we would waste money on Soriano or CLee.

 

You have a better chance of winning a world series with an average offense and great pitching then you do with a great offense and average pitching. I know you are gonna say the Red Sox won but they had a pretty good starting rotation. They just had a bad bullpen besides Foulke and Timlin. There staff was in the top 4 in the AL that year and they had the best offense.

Edited September 20, 2006 by jmajew

[A New Era]

Was anybody advocating not going after top pitching? I think we need pitching AND offense. One thing I beleive, that we absolutely HAVE to land a top starter via FA or trade. Then guys like Hill, Miller, Prior, Mateo ect. . can fill in the bottom couple spots in the rotation.

[A New Era]

Was anybody advocating not going after top pitching? I think we need pitching AND offense. One thing I beleive, that we absolutely HAVE to land a top starter via FA or trade. Then guys like Hill, Miller, Prior, Mateo ect. . can fill in the bottom couple spots in the rotation.

 

I don't think you realize how bad our pitching staff is. WE have the second worse pitching staff in the NL right now. We need to upgrade that. One new starter won't solve our problems. We can't count on Prior/Marshall/Guzman/Wood/etc to fill out those last two spots. We need to sign two pitchers. If we go after a big bat we won't have the money to do so.

 

I don't think you read my whole messege. Wade Miller would be another signing. .

 

If I had my choice we'd sign Shmidt and Miller and have a rotation of. .

 

Zambrano

Schmidt

Hill

Miller

Prior/Mateo/Guzman/Marshall

 

And I think we WOULD have the money to sign Schmidt and Miller if we could dump Pierre's salary and just used Pie instead and went after Soriano with the money saved on Pierre. Then you use all the money saved off of Wood/Perez/Maddux/ect. money saved to afford you your pitching solidifying moves. .

[WrigleyField 22]

For reference sake, let take a look at some of the teams competing for the wildcard in the NL and their lineups(for simplicity we'll base on most PAs at the lineup spot... that gets tricky with trades ie-Philly, but it gives an idea)

San Diego

Roberts .365 .401

Cameron .354 .482

Giles .380 .400

Piazza .338 .503

Gonzalez .352 .499

Greene .320 .430

Castilla .254 .321/Jeoff Blum .298 .387

Barfield .322 .428

 

Philedelphia

Rollins .334 .462

Utley .369 .513

Abreu .427 .434

Burrell .377 .484

Howard .414 .671

Rowand .321 .425

Bell .345 .398

Nunez .287 .270

 

San Francisco

Winn .319 .390

Vizquel .369 .400

Finley .323 .398

Bonds .457 .532

Durham .362 .537

Hillenbrand .282 .428/Alou .344 .524

Feliz .293 .447

Alfonzo .301 .460/ Matheny .276 .338

---This was real tricky because with a lot of guys with only partial season numbers I had to split up a lot and slightly modify the lineup

 

Numbers for guys who spent the year on multiple teams have just that teams numbers shown.

 

Now after seeing that, lets explore some possible lineups we might put together and some guesses at numbers

______________

Murton .360 .450

Lee .400 .550

Ramirez .350 .550

_____________

Barrett .340 .475

Jones .320 .450

Izturis .300 .340

 

Now out of those three wildcard teams they all have their weakspots at OBP, nearly all have a lot of power. We need to fill 2B and CF and a leadoff/#2 hitter and a middle of the order guy. While Sorianos OBP might drop he's a good bet for high SLG, so he is the middle of the order guy and can potentially fill either 2B or CF. Now if we can agree that Theriot would have an OBP of at least .335-.340 he could hit at the top of the order, but his SLG is one we would expect out of a #8 hitter. Overall he probably doesn't have a place. If Hendry is a little more creative he might be able to pass at the #7 spot because his OBP is respectable.

The first idea that pops into my mind is to find a platoon partner for Jones.

If you are opting to choose another player for Theriot, your funds are limited, but a couple million could get a nice stop gap(Loretta?).

 

Now that only looks at half the game, obviously we need to solidify the pitching, but that should be doable as well.

I know that the premis of this post was to "compete for the wild card" which doesnt sound as exciting as going for it all, but with the way the NL is mediocre teams can make the wild card. And once your in the playoffs, its just a matter of getting hot at the right time. That leaves a lot up to chance, but if you make moves that don't hinder the future, even if you miss next year, you should have a strong base of players to add on to that could take the whole NL in 2008.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

That is my point. I don't think Schmidt alone will make our pitching staff good enough. We need to add two quality starters. We need a Schmidt and a Vincente Padilla. Our rotation has been just as bad if not worse than our offense.

 

100 million dollar payroll is what we can expect next year. I believe we already have somewhere around 70 million guarenteed for next year. I"m going to do some research and figure out exactly how much.

 

What makes you think Theriot cannot sustain his MiLB numbers from the past two years? What evidence do you have? I have evidence that since he stopped switch hitting he became a much better hitter and that was why his numbers weren't nearly as good when he was younger.

 

Edit: Found some salaries at Cubsnet.com. They have the Cubs down for 53.8 million next year. That however does not include the salaries of Murton, Zambrano, Prior, Theriot, Pagan. So 70 million is a safe assumption in my opinion. Zambrano will make atleast 8 and Prior will prolly make around 4.

 

 

Here's the numbers again from my previous post. I may be off on a few, but many of these came from Cot's and I'm using the consensus from a yahoo.com article on what it may take to sign the FA.

 

C Barrett- 4.5 million

1b Lee - 13 million

2b – Soriano (signs 5/70 deal)- 14 million

SS Izturis – 4 million

3b Ramirez- 13 million (4/52 extension)

LF Murton- 350 K (est)

CF Pie- 330 K

RF Jones- 4 million

SP Zambrano- 10 million (est)

SP Schmidt (4/45- structured 10,11,12,12)- 10

SP Prior 4.5 million (est)

SP Hill 350 K

SP Marshall/Mateo/Marmol/Ryu/Guzman- 350 K

 

Bullpen: Dempster (5 million), Howry (4 million), Eyre (3.5 million), Ohman (1 million- est), Wuertz (350 K), and Aardsma (350 K)

 

Bench:

Soto- 330 K

Theriot- 330 K

C. Wilson (2 year 7.5 million contract)- 3.5

Pagan – 350 K

DeRosa (2 year 4.5 million contract)- 2.25

 

That’s a total payroll of 99.76 million.

After, eating Rusch's 2.5 million I'm a little over 100 million. I think adding Schmidt will be enough to make the pitching tremendously better.

 

With this rotation, we're counting on Hill, but at 26 years old, he should be ready. There is a risk with Prior as well. With the number of arms vying for the fifth spot, there should be adequate depth so that there's no need to spend the additional money on Padilla. However, if the Cubs wanted to bump payroll into the 105-107 range, it would be feasible to dump Wilson or DeRosa and then sign Padilla. I'm just not for the move.

 

Furthermore, this line-up doesn't account for any trades. A trade of a surplus pitcher and a player like Cedeno could net another player or two for depth purposes.

 

As this line-up shows, there is no need to be "cost efficient" with second. If you think Soriano is too expensive and want to sign Padilla, fine. Then sign Padilla and use the left over to sign Ray Durham. I've allocated 14 million for Soriano. I'm sure that's enough to get both Padillla and Durham.

[jmajew]

 

That is my point. I don't think Schmidt alone will make our pitching staff good enough. We need to add two quality starters. We need a Schmidt and a Vincente Padilla. Our rotation has been just as bad if not worse than our offense.

 

100 million dollar payroll is what we can expect next year. I believe we already have somewhere around 70 million guarenteed for next year. I"m going to do some research and figure out exactly how much.

 

What makes you think Theriot cannot sustain his MiLB numbers from the past two years? What evidence do you have? I have evidence that since he stopped switch hitting he became a much better hitter and that was why his numbers weren't nearly as good when he was younger.

 

Edit: Found some salaries at Cubsnet.com. They have the Cubs down for 53.8 million next year. That however does not include the salaries of Murton, Zambrano, Prior, Theriot, Pagan. So 70 million is a safe assumption in my opinion. Zambrano will make atleast 8 and Prior will prolly make around 4.

 

 

Here's the numbers again from my previous post. I may be off on a few, but many of these came from Cot's and I'm using the consensus from a yahoo.com article on what it may take to sign the FA.

 

C Barrett- 4.5 million

1b Lee - 13 million

2b – Soriano (signs 5/70 deal)- 14 million

SS Izturis – 4 million

3b Ramirez- 13 million (4/52 extension)

LF Murton- 350 K (est)

CF Pie- 330 K

RF Jones- 4 million

SP Zambrano- 10 million (est)

SP Schmidt (4/45- structured 10,11,12,12)- 10

SP Prior 4.5 million (est)

SP Hill 350 K

SP Marshall/Mateo/Marmol/Ryu/Guzman- 350 K

 

Bullpen: Dempster (5 million), Howry (4 million), Eyre (3.5 million), Ohman (1 million- est), Wuertz (350 K), and Aardsma (350 K)

 

Bench:

Soto- 330 K

Theriot- 330 K

C. Wilson (2 year 7.5 million contract)- 3.5

Pagan – 350 K

DeRosa (2 year 4.5 million contract)- 2.25

 

That’s a total payroll of 99.76 million.

After, eating Rusch's 2.5 million I'm a little over 100 million. I think adding Schmidt will be enough to make the pitching tremendously better.

 

With this rotation, we're counting on Hill, but at 26 years old, he should be ready. There is a risk with Prior as well. With the number of arms vying for the fifth spot, there should be adequate depth so that there's no need to spend the additional money on Padilla. However, if the Cubs wanted to bump payroll into the 105-107 range, it would be feasible to dump Wilson or DeRosa and then sign Padilla. I'm just not for the move.

 

Furthermore, this line-up doesn't account for any trades. A trade of a surplus pitcher and a player like Cedeno could net another player or two for depth purposes.

 

As this line-up shows, there is no need to be "cost efficient" with second. If you think Soriano is too expensive and want to sign Padilla, fine. Then sign Padilla and use the left over to sign Ray Durham. I've allocated 14 million for Soriano. I'm sure that's enough to get both Padillla and Durham.

 

I guess there is nothing I can really say to this. We have a difference in opinion on how to build a consistently good team for years to come. I think you have to take educated risks. Theriot I think will be a pretty good ballplayer if given the chance. I don't think Pie will be ready next year and I think tossing him in would only hurt him. I think in order to win a World Series you need to have 3 top of the line starters, or atleast guys who pitch like that. I think with Schmidt and Zambrano you have two. Then between Hill, Padilla, Prior we have a pretty good chance for one of them to step up.

[wastra]

Ideally, I'd like to see about two new faces on offense next year.

 

The best positions to looks for that will be:

 

SS

2B

LF

CF

RF

 

1B, 3B, and C should be set.

 

Now, upgrading SS or RF will require a trade of a current player, or benchign a fairly highly paid player which would be a poor use of resources. Upgrading Left Field would be to give up on matt Murton, who I feel has been our 3rd best hitter this season. Still, it's the easy option as there should be 2-3 impact LF bats available and Murton is easily benched or traded to make room.

 

There aren't a ton of CFers out there, but upgrading there would be a simple FA signing if one is available. 2B would be easy as well if viable ptions are out there on the FA wire. But we know the IMPACT type of bats will be hard to find at SS, 2B, and CF.

 

It's an infuriating problem, because I can see what WILL happen is probably not going to be the ideal situation.

 

Instead of trying to find new homes for Izturis or Jones, they'll likely, (given Hendry's track record) stick with Theriot and/or Cedeno at second, re-sign Pierre, and sign a mediocre LF rather than a top-tier bat. EVEN THAT is do-able IF they hit homeruns (pardon the pun) with pitchign upgrades.

 

 

If I had complete god-like control, but still wanted to work within the realm of some semblence of reason, I would seek a power corner outfield bat for RIGHT field, and upgrade EITHER CF or 2B while trading JONES, not Murton.

 

And i would make the pitching staff my utmost priority. I would ALWAYS make the pitching staff my 31 offseason priority. Even with a mediocre offense, you can find some success with great pitching and try to add bats during the season. Bad pitching = bad win/loss record no matter how you slice it.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

I guess there is nothing I can really say to this. We have a difference in opinion on how to build a consistently good team for years to come. I think you have to take educated risks. Theriot I think will be a pretty good ballplayer if given the chance. I don't think Pie will be ready next year and I think tossing him in would only hurt him. I think in order to win a World Series you need to have 3 top of the line starters, or atleast guys who pitch like that. I think with Schmidt and Zambrano you have two. Then between Hill, Padilla, Prior we have a pretty good chance for one of them to step up.

 

I agree that long term contention requires teams to fill in spots with young player. With the current market for secondbasemen, there really isn't a reason to take that risk this season.

 

Padilla isn't an ace. He can be a valuable pitcher on a staff, but he isn't a top of the line starter. To take a step down in offense to add Padilla when there are a slew of young arms, many with higher ceilings than Theriot and have proven more in their minor league careers than Theriot is ridiculous.

 

I agree with taking a chance. I also think Marshall, Ryu, Guzman, or Mateo can be pretty good when given a chance. In fact, each of those has a greater chance of being an impact pitcher than Theriot has of being a valuable asset in the line-up.

 

 

The difference in our plans is where we're taking the risks and the impact of those risks on the team.

 

In your plan, you are hoping that 2006 Padilla is the real deal and not 2005 Padilla. You'll be gambling around 7 million for three years to take that gamble. Even if he is the Padilla of the 4+ ERA of this season, he's not an ace, but surely a valuable third. You still have to hope Hill or Prior steps up along with Zambrano to have a legitimate three front line starters.

 

Your offense is placing a huge gamble. Outside of Lee and Ramirez, there are no sure-fire run producers. You're hoping Theriot can at least post respectible OBP, because if he doesn't , we'll have a bottom third offense with Theriot and Izturis along with less than ideal slugging in the outfield. If Theriot doesn't work, you haven't wasted any money, but the alternatives are Cedeno, bringing up Patterson, or finding a Tony Womack like retread. Your pitching staff will have lots of depth in case Padilla doesn't work or in the case of injury, but there will be lots of cash gambled with it as well.

 

In my plan, the risk is more balanced. I'm spending a great deal of risk spending on Soriano. I'm trying to limit some of that risk by having a deeper bench. Signing DeRosa would help as would keeping Theriot around.

 

My pitching lacks the depth, but only my subtracting Padilla. I'm counting on one of Marshall, Guzman, Ryu, or Mateo to step up and perform. My risk is spread over four high ceiling pitchers, while yours is in one low ceiling secondsacker.

 

You attack mine for not looking at the long term. In my plan, I'd block a player (Theriot) that scouts have long believed was a utility player, while signing Padilla blocks a number of high ceiling pitchers.

 

Why do you have more faith in Theriot than you do in Marshall/Ryu/Guzman/Mateo/Marmol?

[wastra]

Why do you have more faith in Theriot than you do in Marshall/Ryu/Guzman/Mateo/Marmol?

 

 

While I don't necessarily disagree with most of your post, or the main gist of it, I think you're missing an important consideration in the line above.

 

I have more faith that Theriot could provide adequate play at 2b NEXT YEAR than I do in many of our young pitchers providing adequate play as starters NEXT YEAR. But I have more faith that one or more of those young pitchers will provide above average play as starters a couple years down the road than I do that Theriot will ever be more than just adequate.

 

Plus, with our injury history, it's probably a certainty that there will be plenty opportunities to get starts at the major league level next year for these guys even if they begin the year in AAA.

 

Yet I don't think Padilla is necessarilly the best option.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Why do you have more faith in Theriot than you do in Marshall/Ryu/Guzman/Mateo/Marmol?

 

 

While I don't necessarily disagree with most of your post, or the main gist of it, I think you're missing an important consideration in the line above.

 

I have more faith that Theriot could provide adequate play at 2b NEXT YEAR than I do in many of our young pitchers providing adequate play as starters NEXT YEAR. But I have more faith that one or more of those young pitchers will provide above average play as starters a couple years down the road than I do that Theriot will ever be more than just adequate.

 

Plus, with our injury history, it's probably a certainty that there will be plenty opportunities to get starts at the major league level next year for these guys even if they begin the year in AAA.

 

Yet I don't think Padilla is necessarilly the best option.

 

But the issue becomes if Padilla or someone like him is brought in, that pitcher will be here for three years in all liklihood. If Zambrano is signed long term, and Prior works out his issues, then a number of those pitchers will have to be let go. If they aren't able to establish value in the majors, many will be let go cheaply to realize that possible ceiling somewhere other than Chicago.

 

I'm willing to gamble that one of a possible five can become valuable next season more so than I'm able to gamble that Theriot will become something than no one has ever really projected him to be.

[jmajew]

Why do you have more faith in Theriot than you do in Marshall/Ryu/Guzman/Mateo/Marmol?

 

 

While I don't necessarily disagree with most of your post, or the main gist of it, I think you're missing an important consideration in the line above.

 

I have more faith that Theriot could provide adequate play at 2b NEXT YEAR than I do in many of our young pitchers providing adequate play as starters NEXT YEAR. But I have more faith that one or more of those young pitchers will provide above average play as starters a couple years down the road than I do that Theriot will ever be more than just adequate.

 

Plus, with our injury history, it's probably a certainty that there will be plenty opportunities to get starts at the major league level next year for these guys even if they begin the year in AAA.

 

Yet I don't think Padilla is necessarilly the best option.

 

But the issue becomes if Padilla or someone like him is brought in, that pitcher will be here for three years in all liklihood. If Zambrano is signed long term, and Prior works out his issues, then a number of those pitchers will have to be let go. If they aren't able to establish value in the majors, many will be let go cheaply to realize that possible ceiling somewhere other than Chicago.

 

I'm willing to gamble that one of a possible five can become valuable next season more so than I'm able to gamble that Theriot will become something than no one has ever really projected him to be.

 

The clear difference between both of us is the value of Theriot. I really think he will be a David Eckstein type of player, hopefully with a higher OBP.

 

I think our arms have too much value on the trade market right now. I'd be more than willing to trade 3 of Marshall/Ryu/Guzman/Mateo/Marmol for a CF. Either Vernon Wells or Andruw Jones. I would even throw in Pie for one of them, preferably Wells since he is only 27. Heck we could then go sign Schmidt.

 

I guess I just don't like Soriano. I don't think he is a good fit and I think he will make way too much. My bet is we could sign Wells if we trade for him to a 5/55 or 5/60 type of deal. If we get wells for 11 mil a year I think it would be more likely we could get schmidt and Padilla still.

 

Theriot, Barrett, DLee, Ramirez, Wells, Jones/Platoon, Murton, Izturis looks good to me. Zambrano, Schmidt, Hill, Padilla, Prior also looks good.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

The clear difference between both of us is the value of Theriot. I really think he will be a David Eckstein type of player, hopefully with a higher OBP.

 

I think our arms have too much value on the trade market right now. I'd be more than willing to trade 3 of Marshall/Ryu/Guzman/Mateo/Marmol for a CF. Either Vernon Wells or Andruw Jones. I would even throw in Pie for one of them, preferably Wells since he is only 27. Heck we could then go sign Schmidt.

 

I guess I just don't like Soriano. I don't think he is a good fit and I think he will make way too much. My bet is we could sign Wells if we trade for him to a 5/55 or 5/60 type of deal. If we get wells for 11 mil a year I think it would be more likely we could get schmidt and Padilla still.

 

Theriot, Barrett, DLee, Ramirez, Wells, Jones/Platoon, Murton, Izturis looks good to me. Zambrano, Schmidt, Hill, Padilla, Prior also looks good.

 

What gives you the impression that Theriot can perform at an Eckstien level?

 

Eckstein in college and with the exception of one half season in the minors posted OBP in excess of 400.

 

Theriot has not come close to that. Why do you think Theriot projects to have those numbers other than the fact he's scrappy and white like Eckstein?

 

The cost of your team if you get Wells or Jones will greatly exceed mine. If I could get Wells or Jones, I would as well. I still wouldn't get Padilla and if I had those, I'd likely pursue Durham which would still be a better option than Theriot.

 

I like Ryan. As an LSU fan, I hope he will suceed as a Cub, but there's nothing in his history that projects to anything like what Eckstein has done. Your hopes for Theriot are based on a measley 100 AB's.

 

It's pie-in-the-sky thinking. Cedeno has just as much liklihood of becoming Tejada as Theriot has of becoming Eckstein.