Alternatives for Shortstop

cubfan1954 · November 27, 2006

It is obvious that many posters on this board feel an upgrade at shortstop is needed. My question is whether there is any indication that Hendry feels the same way. It appears to me that Hendry has decided (rightly or wrongly) that Izturis is the starting shortstop, and is focused on improving other areas (starting pitching, outfield). Is there anything that indicates otherwise?

CubinNY · November 27, 2006

It is obvious that many posters on this board feel an upgrade at shortstop is needed. My question is whether there is any indication that Hendry feels the same way. It appears to me that Hendry has decided (rightly or wrongly) that Izturis is the starting shortstop, and is focused on improving other areas (starting pitching, outfield). Is there anything that indicates otherwise?

No.

I don't think Hendry would have traded Maddux for Izturis if he didn't think Izturis was the man for the job. Obviously, I disagree, but I don't run the Cubs.

Hendry has given no indication he plans on pursuing an alternative. What is kind of funny though is that they are targeting a SS to play CF.

I just don't get Hendry.

Fred Hornkohl · November 27, 2006

Theriot obviously overacheived with the Cubs in 2006. Regardless, his pattern of hitting since he abandoned switch-hitting has been consistant: he knows how to get on base, and what to do on the basepaths.

Even when he was up with the Cubs in prior stints - he showed to be a tough out. Mind you, it really seemed like Dusty Baker was trying to give Theriot the chance to fail, instead of succeed. What I mean is Dusty was trying his damnedest to give 2nd Base to Freddie Bynum - but Theriot just came on so strong that even that idiotic platoon had to be squashed.

I just feel that Theriot has arrived. I wasn't real excited about the DeRosa signing (though I'm really glad to have him) because he was filling a position that was almost earned by an actual Cub prospect.

I think Theriot is much better a 2nd Baseman than a Shortstop, but I'd like to see him playing until he loses the job. At least.

Now just what is it about this 2005 line that makes you conclude Theriot's a tough out ??

04/04 - 10/02      AB    R    H   2B   3B   HR   TB  RBI   BB   SO     BA    OBP    SLG    OPS
Theriot            13    3    2    1    0    0    3    0    1    2  0.154  0.214  0.231  0.445

MPrior · November 27, 2006

Cedeno was a pretty awful minor leaguer until 2005, possibly 2004 if you consider a 729 OPS alright. I would say his peak is right about where Izturis is now. They're both awful players at this point and I'd rather see Lugo in...but Izturis > Cedeno IMO.

While I tend to agree with Rob - that Cedeno's possible upside is what makes him the better choice - your argument is valid. Izturis is probably just as likely to outproduce Cedeno as Cedeno is to outproduce Izturis.

The big difference to me is in their contracts - Cedeno for close to the minimum, Izturis for 4+ Million, and their production will likely be similarly awful.

However, if I were running the show, this would be a complete moot point, as Izturis would hopefully not be in the organization (traded for anything), and Cedeno would be back in AAA, or on the bench at best. I'd hopefully have upgraded SS through a trade or FA signing - and if not, Theriot would be my starter.

TheDude · November 27, 2006

It is obvious that many posters on this board feel an upgrade at shortstop is needed. My question is whether there is any indication that Hendry feels the same way. It appears to me that Hendry has decided (rightly or wrongly) that Izturis is the starting shortstop, and is focused on improving other areas (starting pitching, outfield). Is there anything that indicates otherwise?

No.

I don't think Hendry would have traded Maddux for Izturis if he didn't think Izturis was the man for the job. Obviously, I disagree, but I don't run the Cubs.

Hendry has given no indication he plans on pursuing an alternative. What is kind of funny though is that they are targeting a SS to play CF.

I just don't get Hendry.

Has hendry ever come out an stated outright that Izturis is the SS for 2007? I don't think he has. What he has said definitively though is the current team roster isn't the starting team for 2007.

Reading between the lines, Ramirez, Lee, and Soriano should be listed as givens to start. That leaves Izturis, Murton, Jones, DeRosa, and Barret as potentially replaceable parts.

I don't think Hendry signed DeRosa to be a part-time player. So I'll speculate that he's safe and at 2B. Hendry has also been very, very high on Murton. I'm betting he's safe (isn't it telling that Soriano was signed to play RF not LF?).

As I see it, that leaves Jones, Barret, and Izturis as players Hendry is likely to consider for trades at this point to upgarde - and of those three, I'd put it as Jones most likely, then Izturis, with Barret as a longer shot. You can't realistically upgrade over Barret offensively in this market.

I guess my point is that Izturis is as close to an available upgrade spot as the team has and I don't see how, at this stage, Izturis can be viewed as the starter at SS.

goonys evil twin · November 27, 2006

The only clear point about the Cubs and their shortstops is they have no true good option in house.

MPrior · November 27, 2006

However, Theriot is still not a great choice - his minor league numbers, even after he stopped switch-hitting, are far from stellar, and he's likely to struggle in a full year against major league pitching.

I've been trying to remember when Theriot quit switch hitting. Do you know?

Theriot has exhibited very good plate discipline throughout his career. If he could hit .280, I'd expect him to have a .350 OBP.

If I'm remembering correctly, it was about 2 years ago, but I could be off on that one. And I agree that his plate discipline is what makes him attractive, and a surer bet to at least contribute something offensively (in comparison to Cedeno and Izturis, who would probably have NO value). However, while you're probably right about the .280/.350 thing, I have my doubts as to whether he could hit .280 in a full ML season.

YearofDaCubs · November 27, 2006

However, Theriot is still not a great choice - his minor league numbers, even after he stopped switch-hitting, are far from stellar, and he's likely to struggle in a full year against major league pitching.

I've been trying to remember when Theriot quit switch hitting. Do you know?

Theriot has exhibited very good plate discipline throughout his career. If he could hit .280, I'd expect him to have a .350 OBP.

If I'm remembering correctly, it was about 2 years ago, but I could be off on that one. And I agree that his plate discipline is what makes him attractive, and a surer bet to at least contribute something offensively (in comparison to Cedeno and Izturis, who would probably have NO value). However, while you're probably right about the .280/.350 thing, I have my doubts as to whether he could hit .280 in a full ML season.

Maybe the numbers Theriot put up were a mirage but I'd rather take that risk than allow a player like Izturis to start for us.

Abe Frohman · November 27, 2006

Theriot obviously overacheived with the Cubs in 2006. Regardless, his pattern of hitting since he abandoned switch-hitting has been consistant: he knows how to get on base, and what to do on the basepaths.

Even when he was up with the Cubs in prior stints - he showed to be a tough out. Mind you, it really seemed like Dusty Baker was trying to give Theriot the chance to fail, instead of succeed. What I mean is Dusty was trying his damnedest to give 2nd Base to Freddie Bynum - but Theriot just came on so strong that even that idiotic platoon had to be squashed.

I just feel that Theriot has arrived. I wasn't real excited about the DeRosa signing (though I'm really glad to have him) because he was filling a position that was almost earned by an actual Cub prospect.

I think Theriot is much better a 2nd Baseman than a Shortstop, but I'd like to see him playing until he loses the job. At least.

Now just what is it about this 2005 line that makes you conclude Theriot's a tough out ??
04/04 - 10/02      AB    R    H   2B   3B   HR   TB  RBI   BB   SO     BA    OBP    SLG    OPS
Theriot            13    3    2    1    0    0    3    0    1    2  0.154  0.214  0.231  0.445

I actually remember a few of Theriot's at bats in that vast amount of plate appearances. Yeah the numbers kinda stink - but you do know that you can have a good at bat without getting on base, right?

sunnydoo · November 27, 2006

I've been trying to remember when Theriot quit switch hitting. Do you know?

Theriot has exhibited very good plate discipline throughout his career. If he could hit .280, I'd expect him to have a .350 OBP.

Think it was after/during the 2004 season at West Tenn. Hopefully, he is a late bloomer, because i was never impressed with him in the minors when i saw him play.

Ding Dong Johnson · November 27, 2006

you do know that you can have a good at bat without getting on base, right?

You can be wealthy without having money, but your bills won't get pad.

MustangMike · November 27, 2006

you do know that you can have a good at bat without getting on base, right?

You can be wealthy without having money, but your bills won't get pad.

awesome

cheapseats · November 27, 2006

However, Theriot is still not a great choice - his minor league numbers, even after he stopped switch-hitting, are far from stellar, and he's likely to struggle in a full year against major league pitching.

I've been trying to remember when Theriot quit switch hitting. Do you know?

Theriot has exhibited very good plate discipline throughout his career. If he could hit .280, I'd expect him to have a .350 OBP.

If I'm remembering correctly, it was about 2 years ago, but I could be off on that one. And I agree that his plate discipline is what makes him attractive, and a surer bet to at least contribute something offensively (in comparison to Cedeno and Izturis, who would probably have NO value). However, while you're probably right about the .280/.350 thing, I have my doubts as to whether he could hit .280 in a full ML season.

Well, that's the question. For what it's worth, his BABIP was maybe a little low considering his great line drive percentage last year.

If Hendry thinks Derosa can keep up his high line drive percentage, why not Theriot?

Fred Hornkohl · November 27, 2006

Theriot obviously overacheived with the Cubs in 2006. Regardless, his pattern of hitting since he abandoned switch-hitting has been consistant: he knows how to get on base, and what to do on the basepaths.

Even when he was up with the Cubs in prior stints - he showed to be a tough out. Mind you, it really seemed like Dusty Baker was trying to give Theriot the chance to fail, instead of succeed. What I mean is Dusty was trying his damnedest to give 2nd Base to Freddie Bynum - but Theriot just came on so strong that even that idiotic platoon had to be squashed.

I just feel that Theriot has arrived. I wasn't real excited about the DeRosa signing (though I'm really glad to have him) because he was filling a position that was almost earned by an actual Cub prospect.

I think Theriot is much better a 2nd Baseman than a Shortstop, but I'd like to see him playing until he loses the job. At least.

Now just what is it about this 2005 line that makes you conclude Theriot's a tough out ??
04/04 - 10/02      AB    R    H   2B   3B   HR   TB  RBI   BB   SO     BA    OBP    SLG    OPS
Theriot            13    3    2    1    0    0    3    0    1    2  0.154  0.214  0.231  0.445
I actually remember a few of Theriot's at bats in that vast amount of plate appearances. Yeah the numbers kinda stink - but you do know that you can have a good at bat without getting on base, right?

But your assertion was not that he was a good bat, but rather that he "showed to be a tough out", no?

goonys evil twin · November 27, 2006

Theriot obviously overacheived with the Cubs in 2006. Regardless, his pattern of hitting since he abandoned switch-hitting has been consistant: he knows how to get on base, and what to do on the basepaths.

Even when he was up with the Cubs in prior stints - he showed to be a tough out. Mind you, it really seemed like Dusty Baker was trying to give Theriot the chance to fail, instead of succeed. What I mean is Dusty was trying his damnedest to give 2nd Base to Freddie Bynum - but Theriot just came on so strong that even that idiotic platoon had to be squashed.

I just feel that Theriot has arrived. I wasn't real excited about the DeRosa signing (though I'm really glad to have him) because he was filling a position that was almost earned by an actual Cub prospect.

I think Theriot is much better a 2nd Baseman than a Shortstop, but I'd like to see him playing until he loses the job. At least.

Now just what is it about this 2005 line that makes you conclude Theriot's a tough out ??
04/04 - 10/02      AB    R    H   2B   3B   HR   TB  RBI   BB   SO     BA    OBP    SLG    OPS
Theriot            13    3    2    1    0    0    3    0    1    2  0.154  0.214  0.231  0.445
I actually remember a few of Theriot's at bats in that vast amount of plate appearances. Yeah the numbers kinda stink - but you do know that you can have a good at bat without getting on base, right?
But your assertion was not that he was a good bat, but rather that he "showed to be a tough out", no?

Yeah, me made a lot of outs, but they were all tough.

Abe Frohman · November 28, 2006

Theriot obviously overacheived with the Cubs in 2006. Regardless, his pattern of hitting since he abandoned switch-hitting has been consistant: he knows how to get on base, and what to do on the basepaths.

Even when he was up with the Cubs in prior stints - he showed to be a tough out. Mind you, it really seemed like Dusty Baker was trying to give Theriot the chance to fail, instead of succeed. What I mean is Dusty was trying his damnedest to give 2nd Base to Freddie Bynum - but Theriot just came on so strong that even that idiotic platoon had to be squashed.

I just feel that Theriot has arrived. I wasn't real excited about the DeRosa signing (though I'm really glad to have him) because he was filling a position that was almost earned by an actual Cub prospect.

I think Theriot is much better a 2nd Baseman than a Shortstop, but I'd like to see him playing until he loses the job. At least.

Now just what is it about this 2005 line that makes you conclude Theriot's a tough out ??
04/04 - 10/02      AB    R    H   2B   3B   HR   TB  RBI   BB   SO     BA    OBP    SLG    OPS
Theriot            13    3    2    1    0    0    3    0    1    2  0.154  0.214  0.231  0.445
I actually remember a few of Theriot's at bats in that vast amount of plate appearances. Yeah the numbers kinda stink - but you do know that you can have a good at bat without getting on base, right?
But your assertion was not that he was a good bat, but rather that he "showed to be a tough out", no?

Sort of both. My point was that Theriot may have been 2 for 13 or whatever, but some of his at-bats, if I remember correctly, were nice battles. But whatever - I think his 150-something at bats were a much better indicator of what he can do than those 13 the year before.

I have been impressed with Theriot, but that's just me.

Drew Doughty · November 28, 2006

Theriot obviously overacheived with the Cubs in 2006. Regardless, his pattern of hitting since he abandoned switch-hitting has been consistant: he knows how to get on base, and what to do on the basepaths.

Even when he was up with the Cubs in prior stints - he showed to be a tough out. Mind you, it really seemed like Dusty Baker was trying to give Theriot the chance to fail, instead of succeed. What I mean is Dusty was trying his damnedest to give 2nd Base to Freddie Bynum - but Theriot just came on so strong that even that idiotic platoon had to be squashed.

I just feel that Theriot has arrived. I wasn't real excited about the DeRosa signing (though I'm really glad to have him) because he was filling a position that was almost earned by an actual Cub prospect.

I think Theriot is much better a 2nd Baseman than a Shortstop, but I'd like to see him playing until he loses the job. At least.

Now just what is it about this 2005 line that makes you conclude Theriot's a tough out ??
04/04 - 10/02      AB    R    H   2B   3B   HR   TB  RBI   BB   SO     BA    OBP    SLG    OPS
Theriot            13    3    2    1    0    0    3    0    1    2  0.154  0.214  0.231  0.445
I actually remember a few of Theriot's at bats in that vast amount of plate appearances. Yeah the numbers kinda stink - but you do know that you can have a good at bat without getting on base, right?
But your assertion was not that he was a good bat, but rather that he "showed to be a tough out", no?
Yeah, me made a lot of outs, but they were all tough.

What about his years of minor league service?

I like Theriot as a utility guy, especially at league minimum, but I think starting him everyday is going to be a disaster.

Fred Hornkohl · November 28, 2006

Sort of both. My point was that Theriot may have been 2 for 13 or whatever, but some of his at-bats, if I remember correctly, were nice battles. But whatever - I think his 150-something at bats were a much better indicator of what he can do than those 13 the year before.

I have been impressed with Theriot, but that's just me.

There is an inherent danger involved in drawing statistical inferences from limited sample sizes. Case in point...... Cedeno's performace in 2005. I'd imagine you were equally impressed by that limited sample size, too, eh?

Soriano12 · November 28, 2006

Sort of both. My point was that Theriot may have been 2 for 13 or whatever, but some of his at-bats, if I remember correctly, were nice battles. But whatever - I think his 150-something at bats were a much better indicator of what he can do than those 13 the year before.

I have been impressed with Theriot, but that's just me.

There is an inherent danger involved in drawing statistical inferences from limited sample sizes. Case in point...... Cedeno's performace in 2005. I'd imagine you were equally impressed by that limited sample size, too, eh?

Theirot is a much better player than Cedeno.

Rob · November 28, 2006

Sort of both. My point was that Theriot may have been 2 for 13 or whatever, but some of his at-bats, if I remember correctly, were nice battles. But whatever - I think his 150-something at bats were a much better indicator of what he can do than those 13 the year before.

I have been impressed with Theriot, but that's just me.

There is an inherent danger involved in drawing statistical inferences from limited sample sizes. Case in point...... Cedeno's performace in 2005. I'd imagine you were equally impressed by that limited sample size, too, eh?

.300/.356/.375 in 89 PA

.328/.412/.522 in 159 PA

I sincerely hope nobody was equally impressed by those two lines.

Fred Hornkohl · November 28, 2006

Sort of both. My point was that Theriot may have been 2 for 13 or whatever, but some of his at-bats, if I remember correctly, were nice battles. But whatever - I think his 150-something at bats were a much better indicator of what he can do than those 13 the year before.

I have been impressed with Theriot, but that's just me.

There is an inherent danger involved in drawing statistical inferences from limited sample sizes. Case in point...... Cedeno's performace in 2005. I'd imagine you were equally impressed by that limited sample size, too, eh?

.300/.356/.375 in 89 PA

.328/.412/.522 in 159 PA

I sincerely hope nobody was equally impressed by those two lines.

The point was not that Theriot's & Cedeno's numbers are equal, but rather, each sample size was far too small to make the kind of judgement about the player(s) that have been made. Sorry I didn't state that more clearly.

Mephistopheles · November 28, 2006

Well to be fair, the probability that a .262 hitter hits at least .328 in 134 ABs is just 5.2%. Granted, his BABIP was flukishly high at .368, but not all that much higher than his .347 BABIP in AAA.

Oddly enough apparently his AAA BABIP translates to a .300 MLB BABIP and the chances of that figure getting .368 over 113 (ABs - HR - K) is .005% or roughly 1 in 20,000.

Granted it is a small sample size, but it does tell us that the MLE's are lowballed and that he's probably decent.

NorthsideAvenger · November 28, 2006

All these stats are hurting my head. Here is what I know, both Theriot and Cedeno could be turn into serviceable players, IDK. Right now, I'd take Theriot over Cedeno, only because Theriot seems to have "hustle" factor, and Cedeno seems abit like Corey Patterson, in that he is abit too laid back to ever improve. Cedeno looked both clueless and loss last yr, as a starter, and IMO, should start 2007 as a the starting SS of the Iowa Cubs. He was NEFTI bad.

But I'd prefer to send Cesar Izturis to the White Sox for the guy who works the hot dogs stands and a janitor to be named later, and go after a INF who can ACTUALLY contribute to a big league teams' success.

Abe Frohman · November 28, 2006

Sort of both. My point was that Theriot may have been 2 for 13 or whatever, but some of his at-bats, if I remember correctly, were nice battles. But whatever - I think his 150-something at bats were a much better indicator of what he can do than those 13 the year before.

I have been impressed with Theriot, but that's just me.

There is an inherent danger involved in drawing statistical inferences from limited sample sizes. Case in point...... Cedeno's performace in 2005. I'd imagine you were equally impressed by that limited sample size, too, eh?

Actually, I was a little. His 2006 performance pretty much took care of that, though.

killthegoat06 · November 28, 2006

Benmaller.com:

"Julio Lugo may take longer, though the Red Sox have clearly signaled their desire for the former Devil Rays shortstop, who had a .373 on-base percentage before being dealt to the Dodgers in midseason. The Giants and Cubs, along with the Orioles, are teams with interest, in addition to the Sox, and the Dodgers are expected to offer Lugo arbitration."

Finally, the rumors are coming back ...

Alternatives for Shortstop

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs