Let's round out the Bench

[WrigleyField 22]

I'd like to see this bench:

 

Geovany Soto C

Mark DeRosa 3b/2b/ss/lf/rf

Ryan Theriot ss/2b

Craig Wilson 1b/of

Kenny Lofton of

Scott Moore 3b

 

who is in CF with this bench? lofton might be better than the starter! :cry:

i dont know anything about derosa, but fontenot may be able to play those positions and cost much less.

 

Haven't read the Tribune yet today, but a buddy of mine said Paul Sullivan wrote something in the Cubs Bits about the Cubs possibly being interested in Tony Graffanino as a utility guy next year. I have not followed Tony's career that much since he left the White Sox, but my recollection is that he's consistently been in the high seven hundreds OPS-wise.

 

OPS since 2001

777

757

759

667

791

791

His value as a utility doesn't really mean much as our only position thats not filled which he can cover is 3B, and I'd rather see more power out of that player. Now, if by way of trades, there are openings on the bench at 2B,3B, and SS and we could get him cheap, I'd go for it, otherwise no.

This does sound like a Cubs move so I wouldn't be surprised.

[WrigleyField 22]

Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically, I want them to go all kids on the bench. You don't need a veteran bench. You need 8 good starters. You need 5 good pitchers and 4 good relievers. It'd be nice to have a good bench, but you're just as likely to get a fluke good year out of a kid like Theriot or Moore as you are out of the vast majority of veteran bench players you can sign.

And you absolutely do not make defense a focal point of your bench. Your bench should be filled with guys who can be a threat to hit. Versatility on defense is vastly overrated, because if all you're after is a guy who can play 8 positions, all you are going to get is a guy who does nothing well. Get a couple middle infielders. Get a couple corners guys, and somebody who can backup CF. Get a backup catcher. If there is room left over, then you can get another one of the first two groups.

 

Other than possibly Moore we really don't have any kids that could provide good power off the bench. Pagan might provide okay power, but not the kind of power I would want when I need a big hit late. One or possibly two, depending on Moore vets would be useful for that purpose.

 

As far as the bolded part, I don't think thats neccessarily true. If you go after a bench player who has had only one or two good seasons that both came in the last 2-3 years then it would be true. If it is a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers off the bench other than one or two years he is a better bet to do well than a rookie who is not used to coming off the bench and is used to being an everyday player.

 

Restovich comes to mind. Does Brandon Sing or any of our stud 1st base prospects play any other positions like 3rd. I agree with saving money. I'd keep Pagan as the CF backup. We need a starter and trade for a big outfield bat.

 

Sing can play some LF, not sure how well, but after this years numbers I wouldn't be willing to save a spot on the bench for him.

 

Restovich, I'm not so sure about. Part of me thinks he just needs to be given a chance, while the other side of me thinks hes an AAAA player. The truth is probably somewhere in between and he would be a decent bench guy, but not someone you can count on to be a big bench off the bench. I'd certainly give him a long look during Spring Training, but wouldn't plan on him having a role on the bench.

[WrigleyField 22]

Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically, I want them to go all kids on the bench. You don't need a veteran bench. You need 8 good starters. You need 5 good pitchers and 4 good relievers. It'd be nice to have a good bench, but you're just as likely to get a fluke good year out of a kid like Theriot or Moore as you are out of the vast majority of veteran bench players you can sign.

And you absolutely do not make defense a focal point of your bench. Your bench should be filled with guys who can be a threat to hit. Versatility on defense is vastly overrated, because if all you're after is a guy who can play 8 positions, all you are going to get is a guy who does nothing well. Get a couple middle infielders. Get a couple corners guys, and somebody who can backup CF. Get a backup catcher. If there is room left over, then you can get another one of the first two groups.

 

Other than possibly Moore we really don't have any kids that could provide good power off the bench. Pagan might provide okay power, but not the kind of power I would want when I need a big hit late. One or possibly two, depending on Moore vets would be useful for that purpose.

 

As far as the bolded part, I don't think thats neccessarily true. If you go after a bench player who has had only one or two good seasons that both came in the last 2-3 years then it would be true. If it is a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers off the bench other than one or two years he is a better bet to do well than a rookie who is not used to coming off the bench and is used to being an everyday player.

 

That's pretty much why I said "Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically".

 

If you can find a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers, go ahead and get him.

 

I guess where we differ is our believe in the ability for the Cubs to find those players. Hendry's record has shown he wont, with Hollandsworth being his only good bench signing. I think there are enough good bench guys out there, they just need to have a big hit in a playoff game so Hendry will notice them.

[goonys evil twin]

I guess where we differ is our believe in the ability for the Cubs to find those players. Hendry's record has shown he wont, with Hollandsworth being his only good bench signing. I think there are enough good bench guys out there, they just need to have a big hit in a playoff game so Hendry will notice them.

 

I don't think we differ in our belief in the ability of the Cubs to find those players.

[WrigleyField 22]

I guess where we differ is our believe in the ability for the Cubs to find those players. Hendry's record has shown he wont, with Hollandsworth being his only good bench signing. I think there are enough good bench guys out there, they just need to have a big hit in a playoff game so Hendry will notice them.

 

I don't think we differ in our belief in the ability of the Cubs to find those players.

 

So instead of agreeing to disagree, I'm disagreeing to agree? :)

[thedaymen]

The problem is Jim assumes that bench players are going to get 40-100 starts because our entire team has leprosy and since he believes that defense is key; we get a bunch of players that are average/below average defensively (because he doesn't know how to evaluate defense) and are terrible offensively.

[goonys evil twin]

The problem is Jim assumes that bench players are going to get 40-100 starts because our entire team has leprosy and since he believes that defense is key; we get a bunch of players that are average/below average defensively (because he doesn't know how to evaluate defense) and are terrible offensively.

 

He's way too infatuated with jack of all trade types, as opposed to masters of one. He needs to get guys who are good at something, not just mediocre at everything. He thinks a bench is there for defensive backup, and doesn't even think about the need for offense, accept for finding guys who can put it in play and bunt (because Dusty actually used pinch hitters to sac bunt on a regular basis).

[Backtobanks]

The problem is Jim assumes that bench players are going to get 40-100 starts because our entire team has leprosy and since he believes that defense is key; we get a bunch of players that are average/below average defensively (because he doesn't know how to evaluate defense) and are terrible offensively.

 

He's way too infatuated with jack of all trade types, as opposed to masters of one. He needs to get guys who are good at something, not just mediocre at everything. He thinks a bench is there for defensive backup, and doesn't even think about the need for offense, accept for finding guys who can put it in play and bunt (because Dusty actually used pinch hitters to sac bunt on a regular basis).

 

Preferably the one thing they are good at would be delivering a pinch hit. Who needs a .220-hitting defensive SS on the bench? One backup middle IF, one backup C, one player who can play 1B & 3B, and 2 OF should make up the bench. It would be nice to have at least 1 lefty and 1 righty who have some power. By signing Craig Wilson and you fill a lot of holes .....RF platoon, backup 1B, right-handed power off the bench (left-handed power off the bench when Jones is sitting). Theriot can certainly fill the substitute middle IF role and I think Soto can fill the substitute C

role.

[MajikRat]

I figure 2.5 million for DeRosa, 4 million for Wilson, and 3.5 million for Lofton.

 

CBS Sportsline lists DeRosa's salary this year as 675K, so that seems to be a more then fair jump in pay. Considering we paid 53 year old John Mabry 1M+ to drive in 24 runs and hit a whopping .203, DeRosa would be a bargain by Cubs standards. Go get him Jimmy!

[CubColtPacer]

Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically, I want them to go all kids on the bench. You don't need a veteran bench. You need 8 good starters. You need 5 good pitchers and 4 good relievers. It'd be nice to have a good bench, but you're just as likely to get a fluke good year out of a kid like Theriot or Moore as you are out of the vast majority of veteran bench players you can sign.

And you absolutely do not make defense a focal point of your bench. Your bench should be filled with guys who can be a threat to hit. Versatility on defense is vastly overrated, because if all you're after is a guy who can play 8 positions, all you are going to get is a guy who does nothing well. Get a couple middle infielders. Get a couple corners guys, and somebody who can backup CF. Get a backup catcher. If there is room left over, then you can get another one of the first two groups.

 

Other than possibly Moore we really don't have any kids that could provide good power off the bench. Pagan might provide okay power, but not the kind of power I would want when I need a big hit late. One or possibly two, depending on Moore vets would be useful for that purpose.

 

As far as the bolded part, I don't think thats neccessarily true. If you go after a bench player who has had only one or two good seasons that both came in the last 2-3 years then it would be true. If it is a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers off the bench other than one or two years he is a better bet to do well than a rookie who is not used to coming off the bench and is used to being an everyday player.

 

That's pretty much why I said "Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically".

 

If you can find a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers, go ahead and get him.

 

I guess where we differ is our believe in the ability for the Cubs to find those players. Hendry's record has shown he wont, with Hollandsworth being his only good bench signing. I think there are enough good bench guys out there, they just need to have a big hit in a playoff game so Hendry will notice them.

 

Technically, Todd Walker was a bench signing by Hendry also, but I understand your point that the bench has been consistently pretty bad.

[baseball7897]

Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically, I want them to go all kids on the bench. You don't need a veteran bench. You need 8 good starters. You need 5 good pitchers and 4 good relievers. It'd be nice to have a good bench, but you're just as likely to get a fluke good year out of a kid like Theriot or Moore as you are out of the vast majority of veteran bench players you can sign.

And you absolutely do not make defense a focal point of your bench. Your bench should be filled with guys who can be a threat to hit. Versatility on defense is vastly overrated, because if all you're after is a guy who can play 8 positions, all you are going to get is a guy who does nothing well. Get a couple middle infielders. Get a couple corners guys, and somebody who can backup CF. Get a backup catcher. If there is room left over, then you can get another one of the first two groups.

 

Other than possibly Moore we really don't have any kids that could provide good power off the bench. Pagan might provide okay power, but not the kind of power I would want when I need a big hit late. One or possibly two, depending on Moore vets would be useful for that purpose.

 

As far as the bolded part, I don't think thats neccessarily true. If you go after a bench player who has had only one or two good seasons that both came in the last 2-3 years then it would be true. If it is a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers off the bench other than one or two years he is a better bet to do well than a rookie who is not used to coming off the bench and is used to being an everyday player.

 

That's pretty much why I said "Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically".

 

If you can find a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers, go ahead and get him.

 

I guess where we differ is our believe in the ability for the Cubs to find those players. Hendry's record has shown he wont, with Hollandsworth being his only good bench signing. I think there are enough good bench guys out there, they just need to have a big hit in a playoff game so Hendry will notice them.

 

Technically, Todd Walker was a bench signing by Hendry also, but I understand your point that the bench has been consistently pretty bad.

 

Blanco is a very good back up catcher. Probably the best back up catcher in the league. I really hope Jim holds on to him.

[Flames24Rulz]

Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically, I want them to go all kids on the bench. You don't need a veteran bench. You need 8 good starters. You need 5 good pitchers and 4 good relievers. It'd be nice to have a good bench, but you're just as likely to get a fluke good year out of a kid like Theriot or Moore as you are out of the vast majority of veteran bench players you can sign.

And you absolutely do not make defense a focal point of your bench. Your bench should be filled with guys who can be a threat to hit. Versatility on defense is vastly overrated, because if all you're after is a guy who can play 8 positions, all you are going to get is a guy who does nothing well. Get a couple middle infielders. Get a couple corners guys, and somebody who can backup CF. Get a backup catcher. If there is room left over, then you can get another one of the first two groups.

 

Other than possibly Moore we really don't have any kids that could provide good power off the bench. Pagan might provide okay power, but not the kind of power I would want when I need a big hit late. One or possibly two, depending on Moore vets would be useful for that purpose.

 

As far as the bolded part, I don't think thats neccessarily true. If you go after a bench player who has had only one or two good seasons that both came in the last 2-3 years then it would be true. If it is a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers off the bench other than one or two years he is a better bet to do well than a rookie who is not used to coming off the bench and is used to being an everyday player.

 

That's pretty much why I said "Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically".

 

If you can find a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers, go ahead and get him.

 

I guess where we differ is our believe in the ability for the Cubs to find those players. Hendry's record has shown he wont, with Hollandsworth being his only good bench signing. I think there are enough good bench guys out there, they just need to have a big hit in a playoff game so Hendry will notice them.

 

Technically, Todd Walker was a bench signing by Hendry also, but I understand your point that the bench has been consistently pretty bad.

 

Blanco is a very good back up catcher. Probably the best back up catcher in the league. I really hope Jim holds on to him.

 

We have our backup catcher. His name is Geovany Soto. He'll be a much cheaper option than Blanco and we can use the money that we used on Blanco at someone more useful.

[baseball7897]

Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically, I want them to go all kids on the bench. You don't need a veteran bench. You need 8 good starters. You need 5 good pitchers and 4 good relievers. It'd be nice to have a good bench, but you're just as likely to get a fluke good year out of a kid like Theriot or Moore as you are out of the vast majority of veteran bench players you can sign.

And you absolutely do not make defense a focal point of your bench. Your bench should be filled with guys who can be a threat to hit. Versatility on defense is vastly overrated, because if all you're after is a guy who can play 8 positions, all you are going to get is a guy who does nothing well. Get a couple middle infielders. Get a couple corners guys, and somebody who can backup CF. Get a backup catcher. If there is room left over, then you can get another one of the first two groups.

 

Other than possibly Moore we really don't have any kids that could provide good power off the bench. Pagan might provide okay power, but not the kind of power I would want when I need a big hit late. One or possibly two, depending on Moore vets would be useful for that purpose.

 

As far as the bolded part, I don't think thats neccessarily true. If you go after a bench player who has had only one or two good seasons that both came in the last 2-3 years then it would be true. If it is a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers off the bench other than one or two years he is a better bet to do well than a rookie who is not used to coming off the bench and is used to being an everyday player.

 

That's pretty much why I said "Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically".

 

If you can find a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers, go ahead and get him.

 

I guess where we differ is our believe in the ability for the Cubs to find those players. Hendry's record has shown he wont, with Hollandsworth being his only good bench signing. I think there are enough good bench guys out there, they just need to have a big hit in a playoff game so Hendry will notice them.

 

Technically, Todd Walker was a bench signing by Hendry also, but I understand your point that the bench has been consistently pretty bad.

 

Blanco is a very good back up catcher. Probably the best back up catcher in the league. I really hope Jim holds on to him.

 

We have our backup catcher. His name is Geovany Soto. He'll be a much cheaper option than Blanco and we can use the money that we used on Blanco at someone more useful.

 

Soto is not ready yet. Blanco handles a pitching staff very well.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically, I want them to go all kids on the bench. You don't need a veteran bench. You need 8 good starters. You need 5 good pitchers and 4 good relievers. It'd be nice to have a good bench, but you're just as likely to get a fluke good year out of a kid like Theriot or Moore as you are out of the vast majority of veteran bench players you can sign.

And you absolutely do not make defense a focal point of your bench. Your bench should be filled with guys who can be a threat to hit. Versatility on defense is vastly overrated, because if all you're after is a guy who can play 8 positions, all you are going to get is a guy who does nothing well. Get a couple middle infielders. Get a couple corners guys, and somebody who can backup CF. Get a backup catcher. If there is room left over, then you can get another one of the first two groups.

 

Other than possibly Moore we really don't have any kids that could provide good power off the bench. Pagan might provide okay power, but not the kind of power I would want when I need a big hit late. One or possibly two, depending on Moore vets would be useful for that purpose.

 

As far as the bolded part, I don't think thats neccessarily true. If you go after a bench player who has had only one or two good seasons that both came in the last 2-3 years then it would be true. If it is a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers off the bench other than one or two years he is a better bet to do well than a rookie who is not used to coming off the bench and is used to being an everyday player.

 

That's pretty much why I said "Unless the Cubs can get somebody likely to put up an 800 OPS, and/or dominate against LHP or RHP specifically".

 

If you can find a guy who has consistently put up solid numbers, go ahead and get him.

 

I guess where we differ is our believe in the ability for the Cubs to find those players. Hendry's record has shown he wont, with Hollandsworth being his only good bench signing. I think there are enough good bench guys out there, they just need to have a big hit in a playoff game so Hendry will notice them.

 

Technically, Todd Walker was a bench signing by Hendry also, but I understand your point that the bench has been consistently pretty bad.

 

Blanco is a very good back up catcher. Probably the best back up catcher in the league. I really hope Jim holds on to him.

 

We have our backup catcher. His name is Geovany Soto. He'll be a much cheaper option than Blanco and we can use the money that we used on Blanco at someone more useful.

 

Soto is not ready yet. Blanco handles a pitching staff very well.

 

Why is Soto not ready? He's played a full season at AAA and word is that he handles pitchers well. With Barrett, the back-up catcher is only going to play every fifth or sixth day. There's no reason to spend 1.25 million on one when you have a player with equal skill set ready to take over.

[USSoccer]

Blanco is completely useless on this team in 2007. There's no excuse not to save the $1m and have Soto be the backup catcher. At worst he handles Rich Hill and Barrett catches everyone else.

[JeffH]

Blanco is completely useless on this team in 2007. There's no excuse not to save the $1m and have Soto be the backup catcher. At worst he handles Rich Hill and Barrett catches everyone else.

 

Ordinarily, I would agree. However, Barrett just had a pretty severe injury to his groin, which would seem to be a pretty important area for a catcher.

 

I would hate to find ourselves in a situation where Barrett has some serious carryover into next season and Geovany Soto becomes our starting catcher.

 

Of course, this really doesn't matter because the Cubs organization is garbage. As such, the chances of contending in 2007 are just slightly above zero.

[WrigleyField 22]

 

Soto is not ready yet. Blanco handles a pitching staff very well.

 

Why is Soto not ready? He's played a full season at AAA and word is that he handles pitchers well. With Barrett, the back-up catcher is only going to play every fifth or sixth day. There's no reason to spend 1.25 million on one when you have a player with equal skill set ready to take over.

 

In fact, hasn't it been two full seasons?

 

Also Soto, while having a whole lot less power than Blanco, has the good plate discipline that the team is so severly lacking.

 

Add the extra couple million in salary difference and its a no brainer.

[WrigleyField 22]

Ordinarily, I would agree. However, Barrett just had a pretty severe injury to his groin, which would seem to be a pretty important area for a catcher.

 

I would hate to find ourselves in a situation where Barrett has some serious carryover into next season and Geovany Soto becomes our starting catcher.

 

Of course, this really doesn't matter because the Cubs organization is garbage. As such, the chances of contending in 2007 are just slightly above zero.

 

I wouldn't call it a groin injury. It was in the groin region, but wasn't it quite literally a testicle injury? It's not like he hurt the muscle, correct?

 

And If Barrett isn't our starting catcher, I feel no more confident with Blanco starting.

 

Blanco made 2.5M right? Not a lot just alone, but an extra 2.5 a year could change a big time FAs mind (If we so decide to go that route) If it doesn't go to a starter it could be used to sign a bench player who could actually hit.