This season is already over.

C.C. · May 15, 2007

This season isn't over by a long shot, but we sure are playing like dog poo at the moment.

I wouldn't say a long shot. I don't really see our 'Pen getting any better.

RichHillIsABeast · May 15, 2007

This season isn't over by a long shot, but we sure are playing like dog poo at the moment.

I wouldn't say a long shot. I don't really see our 'Pen getting any better.

Cotts and Wuertz should be moved into the setup roles. Howry needs to be used cautiously until he figures it out. He's been too consistently good/great over the last several years to write him off.

Ohman is great as a LOOGY. Eyre can be hidden earlier in games. Demp has been pretty good so far.

The pieces are there. The pen just needs to be re-organized.

CubColtPacer · May 15, 2007

This season isn't over by a long shot, but we sure are playing like dog poo at the moment.

I wouldn't say a long shot. I don't really see our 'Pen getting any better.

Cotts and Wuertz should be moved into the setup roles. Howry needs to be used cautiously until he figures it out. He's been too consistently good/great over the last several years to write him off.

Ohman is great as a LOOGY. Eyre can be hidden earlier in games. Demp has been pretty good so far.

The pieces are there. The pen just needs to be re-organized.

I think Howry has figured it out for the most part. He looked absolutely awful the other day, but before that he had only given up 2 runs of his own in the past 11 appearances (13 2/3 innings-and both runs were in the same game), and I believe only one inherited run in that time (Dmitri Young single). That's a really good stretch, and I don't think an awful outing necessarily means he has lost it again. I agree with your other assesments.

Soul · May 15, 2007

Stone was just on the SCORE claiming that Hendry had asked Dusty to go easy on Howry & Eyre at the end of last season to preserve them for next year. Dusty proceeded to rack up high usage for both of them.

Those two are probably not going to get any better, and that's the core of our bullpen.

If the BP is going to suck all year, we're going to be mighty frustrated Cub fans this year...

JeffH · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

Ding Dong Johnson · May 15, 2007

professional sports continue

Amen.

Derwood · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

what do the Arizona Cardinals have to do with anything?

Amazing_Grace · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

what do the Arizona Cardinals have to do with anything?

I thought he was talking about the Clippers.

CubinNY · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

what do the Arizona Cardinals have to do with anything?

I thought he was talking about the Clippers.

I don't know about other sports, but to me the Cubs are the clear favorite for worst run organizations in baseball. They're efficency is mind bogglingly bad. And they keep having the same problems over and over and over. The one constant is Hendry. He needs to be gone as soon as the ink is dry on the new owners mortage note.

It just goes to show us that working hard is much less important than working smart and having a good strategy.

CubColtPacer · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

what do the Arizona Cardinals have to do with anything?

I thought he was talking about the Clippers.

I don't know about other sports, but to me the Cubs are the clear favorite for worst run organizations in baseball. They're efficency is mind bogglingly bad. And they keep having the same problems over and over and over. The one constant is Hendry. He needs to be gone as soon as the ink is dry on the new owners mortage note.

It just goes to show us that working hard is much less important than working smart and having a good strategy.

I would say the Mariners are worse run then the Cubs. They have about the same payroll as the Cubs. Their 5 million or more players are Sexon with 14 million, Beltre 11.5 million, Ichiro 11.5 million, Washburn 9.85 million, Weaver 8.9 million, Vidro 7.5 million, Guillen 7.25 million, Johjima 5.65 million, Batista 5.5 million.

Who among those players is a true impact player?

To me, they are in worse shape and have been run worse than the Cubs have-they haven't even had that much of a problem with injuries the past couple years, and yet they still are mediocre at best (Felix is hurt, but that could be partially their fault).

NCCubFan · May 15, 2007

I can't believe the Detroit Lions aren't getting any love as the worst-run team.

CubinNY · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

what do the Arizona Cardinals have to do with anything?

I thought he was talking about the Clippers.

I don't know about other sports, but to me the Cubs are the clear favorite for worst run organizations in baseball. They're efficency is mind bogglingly bad. And they keep having the same problems over and over and over. The one constant is Hendry. He needs to be gone as soon as the ink is dry on the new owners mortage note.

It just goes to show us that working hard is much less important than working smart and having a good strategy.

I would say the Mariners are worse run then the Cubs. They have about the same payroll as the Cubs. Their 5 million or more players are Sexon with 14 million, Beltre 11.5 million, Ichiro 11.5 million, Washburn 9.85 million, Weaver 8.9 million, Vidro 7.5 million, Guillen 7.25 million, Johjima 5.65 million, Batista 5.5 million.

Who among those players is a true impact player?

To me, they are in worse shape and have been run worse than the Cubs have-they haven't even had that much of a problem with injuries the past couple years, and yet they still are mediocre at best (Felix is hurt, but that could be partially their fault).

http://www.onestopbaseball.com/TeamPayroll.asp

Cubs win.

94 million (66-96) Last place 1.4 million/win

87 million (78-84) Last place 1.15 million/win

I'd venture to guess that the Cubs are worst on 3year averages too. Either way it's not good company in which to do business.

Amazing_Grace · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

what do the Arizona Cardinals have to do with anything?

I thought he was talking about the Clippers.

I don't know about other sports, but to me the Cubs are the clear favorite for worst run organizations in baseball. They're efficency is mind bogglingly bad. And they keep having the same problems over and over and over. The one constant is Hendry. He needs to be gone as soon as the ink is dry on the new owners mortage note.

It just goes to show us that working hard is much less important than working smart and having a good strategy.

I would say the Mariners are worse run then the Cubs. They have about the same payroll as the Cubs. Their 5 million or more players are Sexon with 14 million, Beltre 11.5 million, Ichiro 11.5 million, Washburn 9.85 million, Weaver 8.9 million, Vidro 7.5 million, Guillen 7.25 million, Johjima 5.65 million, Batista 5.5 million.

Who among those players is a true impact player?

To me, they are in worse shape and have been run worse than the Cubs have-they haven't even had that much of a problem with injuries the past couple years, and yet they still are mediocre at best (Felix is hurt, but that could be partially their fault).

http://www.onestopbaseball.com/TeamPayroll.asp

Cubs win.

94 million (66-96) Last place 1.4 million/win
87 million (78-84) Last place 1.15 million/win

I'd venture to guess that the Cubs are worst on 3year averages too. Either way it's not good company in which to do business.

It will be interesting to see if it gets any better this year. We are almost certain to win more games than in 2006, but how many more would we have to win to improve the ratio given how much we've spent.

EDIT: Nevermind I just calculated it based on the payroll thread in transactions. With a 109.3M payroll, to do better than 1.4M per win, the Cubs will have to win 79 games. 78 wins would make it a virtual tie with last year. This is assuming, of course, that the Cubs don't salary dump at the deadline or bring in another big contract.

CubColtPacer · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

what do the Arizona Cardinals have to do with anything?

I thought he was talking about the Clippers.

I don't know about other sports, but to me the Cubs are the clear favorite for worst run organizations in baseball. They're efficency is mind bogglingly bad. And they keep having the same problems over and over and over. The one constant is Hendry. He needs to be gone as soon as the ink is dry on the new owners mortage note.

It just goes to show us that working hard is much less important than working smart and having a good strategy.

I would say the Mariners are worse run then the Cubs. They have about the same payroll as the Cubs. Their 5 million or more players are Sexon with 14 million, Beltre 11.5 million, Ichiro 11.5 million, Washburn 9.85 million, Weaver 8.9 million, Vidro 7.5 million, Guillen 7.25 million, Johjima 5.65 million, Batista 5.5 million.

Who among those players is a true impact player?

To me, they are in worse shape and have been run worse than the Cubs have-they haven't even had that much of a problem with injuries the past couple years, and yet they still are mediocre at best (Felix is hurt, but that could be partially their fault).

http://www.onestopbaseball.com/TeamPayroll.asp

Cubs win.

94 million (66-96) Last place 1.4 million/win
87 million (78-84) Last place 1.15 million/win

I'd venture to guess that the Cubs are worst on 3year averages too. Either way it's not good company in which to do business.

It will be interesting to see if it gets any better this year. We are almost certain to win more games than in 2006, but how many more would we have to win to improve the ratio given how much we've spent.

The payroll figures only have the Cubs at 6 million more than last year.

By the way, I don't know why CubinNY had the Cubs as last in money per win in 2005. The Yankees spent 2.192 million per win that year. Boston spent 1.30 million per win. The Mets spent 1.22 million per win. The Dodgers spent 1.16 million per win. The Mariners spent 1.27 million per win. The Giants spent 1.20 million per win. Out of all the big market teams, the Cubs were about middle of the pack in efficiency that season, so I don't know how they can be seen as last for 2005.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/a-look-inside-the-2006-open-day-payrolls/

Amazing_Grace · May 15, 2007

The worst organization in professional sports continues to add to its resume.

what do the Arizona Cardinals have to do with anything?

I thought he was talking about the Clippers.

I don't know about other sports, but to me the Cubs are the clear favorite for worst run organizations in baseball. They're efficency is mind bogglingly bad. And they keep having the same problems over and over and over. The one constant is Hendry. He needs to be gone as soon as the ink is dry on the new owners mortage note.

It just goes to show us that working hard is much less important than working smart and having a good strategy.

I would say the Mariners are worse run then the Cubs. They have about the same payroll as the Cubs. Their 5 million or more players are Sexon with 14 million, Beltre 11.5 million, Ichiro 11.5 million, Washburn 9.85 million, Weaver 8.9 million, Vidro 7.5 million, Guillen 7.25 million, Johjima 5.65 million, Batista 5.5 million.

Who among those players is a true impact player?

To me, they are in worse shape and have been run worse than the Cubs have-they haven't even had that much of a problem with injuries the past couple years, and yet they still are mediocre at best (Felix is hurt, but that could be partially their fault).

http://www.onestopbaseball.com/TeamPayroll.asp

Cubs win.

94 million (66-96) Last place 1.4 million/win
87 million (78-84) Last place 1.15 million/win

I'd venture to guess that the Cubs are worst on 3year averages too. Either way it's not good company in which to do business.

It will be interesting to see if it gets any better this year. We are almost certain to win more games than in 2006, but how many more would we have to win to improve the ratio given how much we've spent.

The payroll figures only have the Cubs at 6 million more than last year.

By the way, I don't know why CubinNY had the Cubs as last in money per win in 2005. The Yankees spent 2.192 million per win that year. Boston spent 1.30 million per win. The Mets spent 1.22 million per win. The Dodgers spent 1.16 million per win. The Mariners spent 1.27 million per win. The Giants spent 1.20 million per win. Out of all the big market teams, the Cubs were about middle of the pack in efficiency that season, so I don't know how they can be seen as last for 2005.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/a-look-inside-the-2006-open-day-payrolls/

You're right about the Yankees, so I guess the Cubs were next to last in wins per dollar. As for 2007 payroll. I'm just going by what's been posted in the transactions thread.

Soul · May 15, 2007

I can't believe the Detroit Lions aren't getting any love as the worst-run team.

Inept yes, but it's kinda cute, they keep trying.

Gotta have owners who have given up trying to make the shortlist, I think. Blackhawks are the worst IMO, and it's not particularly close. I think they miss many people's listing because they are so atrocious people prefer to forget that they even exist.

C.C. · May 15, 2007

I can't believe the Detroit Lions aren't getting any love as the worst-run team.

Inept yes, but it's kinda cute, they keep trying.

Gotta have owners who have given up trying to make the shortlist, I think. Blackhawks are the worst IMO, and it's not particularly close. I think they miss many people's listing because they are so atrocious people prefer to forget that they even exist.

True. The Black Hawks are the worst. Do they even draw anymore?

CubinNY · May 16, 2007

By the way, I don't know why CubinNY had the Cubs as last in money per win in 2005. The Yankees spent 2.192 million per win that year. Boston spent 1.30 million per win. The Mets spent 1.22 million per win. The Dodgers spent 1.16 million per win. The Mariners spent 1.27 million per win. The Giants spent 1.20 million per win. Out of all the big market teams, the Cubs were about middle of the pack in efficiency that season, so I don't know how they can be seen as last for 2005.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/a-look-inside-the-2006-open-day-payrolls/

2006 was last year. 2005 was the year before last year. This year is 2007

I didn't include organizations that win close to 100 games and make the playoffs each year.

It's clearly stupid to include division winners and WS contenders year in and year out with the likes of the Cubs.

The Cubs were not about in the middle of the pack. They finished LAST and spent the MOST to do so.

Why do you continue defend the Cubs at every turn?

And yes, I'd put the Blackhawks at the very top of the bottom of sports franchises.

CubColtPacer · May 16, 2007

By the way, I don't know why CubinNY had the Cubs as last in money per win in 2005. The Yankees spent 2.192 million per win that year. Boston spent 1.30 million per win. The Mets spent 1.22 million per win. The Dodgers spent 1.16 million per win. The Mariners spent 1.27 million per win. The Giants spent 1.20 million per win. Out of all the big market teams, the Cubs were about middle of the pack in efficiency that season, so I don't know how they can be seen as last for 2005.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/a-look-inside-the-2006-open-day-payrolls/

I'd didn't include organizations that win close to 100 games and make the playoffs each year.

It's clearly stupid to include division winners and WS contenders year in and year out with the likes of the Cubs.

The Cubs were not about in the middle of the pack. The finished LAST and spent the MOST to do so.

Why do you continue defend the Cubs at every turn.

I'm not defending the Cubs completely. They are one of the more inefficient big market teams, and it's something that they have to get better at if they want to compete year in and year out. I just happen to not think they are the worst organization.

This is the part of your post I was debating:

87 million (78-84) Last place 1.15 million/win

I agree with you on 2006-other than the Yankees, I'm pretty sure the Cubs were the most inefficient money/win, and the Yankees went to the playoffs so the Cubs obviously did a worse job.

2005 is a different story though. Some of the names on my list were not division winners or anything like that in 2005. The Mets spent 101 million to win 83 games. The Giants paid 90 million to win 75. The Mariners spent 87 million to win 69 games that year. The Cubs were not the most inefficient team in 2005 like you claimed they were.

You also suggested that the Cubs would most likely be last in dollars per win if you look at the past 3 years. Just looking at my suggested team, the Mariners says that is not true. The Mariners spent 257.2 million to pick up 210 wins over those 3 seasons-that's 1.22 million per win. The Cubs spent 272.5 million over those 3 seasons and won 234 games for an average of 1.16 million per win.

I'm sure if I took the time to look at the numbers I could maybe find 1 or 2 others. Yes, the Cubs have been very inefficient, just not to the extent that you said.

There can really only be a comparison anyway to the big market teams-obviously a team with a 40-50 million dollar payroll is going to have a better efficiency ratio than a team with a 100 million dollar payroll (the threshold is so much lower-a 50 million dollar team winning 60 games (an awful season) would have to be matched by a 100 million dollar team winning 120 games, which has obviously never been done before). Throwing out the Yankees (who are in a class by themselves) there are so many teams to compare the Cubs to. Of those, the Cubs are closer to the inefficient side then the efficient side, but they are not the worst. It may be semantics, but that's really all I'm claiming.

Edit: And after all this time, I finally realized what you meant-you were comparing the Cubs in 2006 to the Mariners in 2006. I am really, really sorry for the confusion, but I think my point about the Mariners overall stands. They have had a high payroll and been absolutely terrible the last few years.

I am going to keep the post here, because I worked a while on it, and it still has a little bit of info in it. Again though, I'm sorry for misunderstanding you-it was my fault completely, and I can't believe I did that.

Soul · May 16, 2007

I can't believe the Detroit Lions aren't getting any love as the worst-run team.

Inept yes, but it's kinda cute, they keep trying.

Gotta have owners who have given up trying to make the shortlist, I think. Blackhawks are the worst IMO, and it's not particularly close. I think they miss many people's listing because they are so atrocious people prefer to forget that they even exist.

True. The Black Hawks are the worst. Do they even draw anymore?

I believe the Wolves still regularly outdraw the Hawks.

Larry Horse · May 17, 2007

And now 1.5 behind Houston......

Soul · May 17, 2007

And now 1.5 behind Houston......

Looks like Houston has an easier stretch right now. From here, they're playing Texas, SF (again, in SF park this time), AZ.

Not a real taxing May for them. Let's see what happens to them when they play decent competition again.

We're still 6 behind the Crew, that's better than 8.5.

Fro · May 17, 2007

I'll be pretty happy splitting with the Mets on the road, considering Lee being out.

AlwaysaCub · May 17, 2007

Now this season is officially over methinks. wowzers.

YearofDaCubs · May 17, 2007

Season Over!

This season is already over.

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