Suntimes: Cubs seek righty bat

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Murton's 2006

 

May: .286/.358/.393/.751

June: .212/.257/.227/.484

 

Murton's 2007

 

April: .250/.313/.295/.608

May/June: .253/.341/.360/.701

[Soul]

Well, whatever, it's semantics. Obviously 350 isn't 500, 350 isn't full-time and isn't really even "regular".

 

But in my opinion 300+ is "quite a bit". The proration shows that relative to the games in April and May, he was playing at least half of the time.

 

Yes, but he didn't actually get 300+. He got 100, and has been in the minors for weeks now. You're dealing in projections. Murton got ABs at the very beginning, but then started to get subbed out and eventually just got the boot. He's had nowhere near the play time we figured he would get.

 

Also, he had 455 ABs last year, so even if by some miracle he did wind up with 350 that would still represent quite a dropoff. Not what most around here were hoping for.

[jersey cubs fan]

There are several angles on this. 1) No man can produce at all as a hitter unless he is playing full-time, or "regular", or "a lot", and half-time isn't enough. 2) A guy can be playing half the time and maintain a good hitting stroke.

 

I'm obviously suggesting the latter perspective, and you guys the former.

 

What's with the black and white nonsense? "No man can produce at all as a hitter unless..." is a loaded statement meant to engender sympathy to your side of the discussion.

 

It's not about "no man". It's not about full-time, etc. It's about Matt Murton barely playing at all this year. He was the 5th start much of the year. He began as the starter, but the first sign of trouble sent him to the back of the line. Jacque Jones got a much longer leash.

 

The fact of the matter is Murton is still in the learning curve part of his career. Jones and Floyd have shown all they can do and don't require much in terms of times to get right. Murton was on a short leash from the start and he knew it. Realistically he probably figured the Cubs were not all that interested in his career path once Soriano came on board, and especially not after Floyd was signed. Murton got less and less playing time as the days went on, while guys who weren't doing any better were getting more. He obviously struggled, but the fact is you have to give guys, especially young guys still learning at the major league level, time to work through struggles. Murton never got that. He stumbled, but was not allowed a chance to get back on his feet.

[CubColtPacer]

Murton's 2006

 

May: .286/.358/.393/.751

June: .212/.257/.227/.484

 

Murton's 2007

 

April: .250/.313/.295/.608

May/June: .253/.341/.360/.701

 

Murton has always been a much better second half guy than first half. I hope that happens again this year. If Floyd goes on the DL later this week, Murton might get his chance again to show the team why they can't send him down.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce, if you're there, is there a realistic shot that Soto gets a call up at some time soon or is that just a pipe dream?

 

It's not a pipe dream. The Cubs acknowledge that he's done quite well. Bringing him up doesn't seem imminent, however. But Soto could force their hands sooner rather than later.

[abuck1220]

i'd have thought that bowen/hill would have forced their hand by now.

[Soul]

i'd have thought that bowen/hill would have forced their hand by now.

 

It's got to. The stink coming from behind the plate is unbearable.

[Shilzzz]

you have to be realistic about the catcher situation, though. if hendry is willing to trade one of the best offensive catchers in all of baseball for a defensive catcher, then why would he turn around and call soto up, while sending one of bowen/hill back down?

 

 

obviously hendry is wrong here, but that notwithstanding i don't understand why he would make that move.

[craig]

What's with the black and white nonsense? "No man can produce at all as a hitter unless..." is a loaded statement meant to engender sympathy to your side of the discussion.

 

It's not about "no man". It's not about full-time, etc. It's about Matt Murton barely playing at all this year. .... Jacque Jones got a much longer leash.... Realistically he probably figured the Cubs were not all that interested in his career path once Soriano came on board, and especially not after Floyd was signed. Murton got less and less playing time as the days went on, while guys who weren't doing any better were getting more. He obviously struggled, but the fact is you have to give guys, especially young guys still learning at the major league level, time to work through struggles. Murton never got that. He stumbled, but was not allowed a chance to get back on his feet.

 

I agree with most of that.

 

Mine was "loaded", obvious hyperbole. I think it's silly to say that a guy can't hit if he's only playing half-time, that he needs to play full time. I think it's silly to blame the GM and the manager and everybody else but the player if he's playing half-time and he can't produce. Either blame nobody (these things happen, it can happen to anybody), or else blame the player. But I think all the Murton-victim-blame-it-all-on-management is kind of silly and unrealistic.

 

Murton had the total opportunity in first half April, he stumbled it away. he had the total opportunity in second-half April, he stumbled it away. he had the total opportunity in first half May, he stumbled it away. he had the opportunity 2nd half May, he stumbled it away. it's too bad, for him and for us fans.

 

My basic argument is againt the idea that he was mistreated and that management obviously is to blame and bungled it all. Opportunity knocked for two months, and he couldn't answer. He's a younger guy with options, Jones has a guaranteed contract, that's the way the business works. O well, go down and play and get your stroke fixed, Matt. Opportunity will knock again if you can fix it. It just won't be as wide a window of opportunity next time.

 

Given the narrower window, if posters want to argue that half-time isn't enough AB for him to produce, then he's not likely to come back with a better window than he had the first time. If management made the window too small for success in April and May, I doubt that window will be any wider when he comes back, unless he pushes it wider by producing when he gets the chance to play.

 

If nobody is arguing that he can't hit with half-time opportunity, then don't fix all the blame on management that he didn't hit for the two months of half-time opportunity that he got. If others are arguing that he never hits till July, then it's smart to send him down till such time when he will produce. Maybe we should do that every year as long as he's got options left? (I don't think that's true, but if that's the argument...)

 

Is management smart? No. But I'm not sure the Murton case is the prover.

 

Finally, as to loaded statements: I said that his half-time play was a fair-bit of opportunity. You reason that my statement is extreme, loaded.

 

But then you say that he was "barely playing at all"!

 

Half-time action is barely playing at all? That is loaded and extreme. And I assume is an intentional exaggeration. So we appear to be using the same kind of hyperbole in our argumentation, no?

[Illini Iceman]

What's with the black and white nonsense? "No man can produce at all as a hitter unless..." is a loaded statement meant to engender sympathy to your side of the discussion.

 

It's not about "no man". It's not about full-time, etc. It's about Matt Murton barely playing at all this year. .... Jacque Jones got a much longer leash.... Realistically he probably figured the Cubs were not all that interested in his career path once Soriano came on board, and especially not after Floyd was signed. Murton got less and less playing time as the days went on, while guys who weren't doing any better were getting more. He obviously struggled, but the fact is you have to give guys, especially young guys still learning at the major league level, time to work through struggles. Murton never got that. He stumbled, but was not allowed a chance to get back on his feet.

 

I agree with most of that.

 

Mine was "loaded", obvious hyperbole. I think it's silly to say that a guy can't hit if he's only playing half-time, that he needs to play full time. I think it's silly to blame the GM and the manager and everybody else but the player if he's playing half-time and he can't produce. Either blame nobody (these things happen, it can happen to anybody), or else blame the player. But I think all the Murton-victim-blame-it-all-on-management is kind of silly and unrealistic.

 

Murton had the total opportunity in first half April, he stumbled it away. he had the total opportunity in second-half April, he stumbled it away. he had the total opportunity in first half May, he stumbled it away. he had the opportunity 2nd half May, he stumbled it away. it's too bad, for him and for us fans.

 

My basic argument is againt the idea that he was mistreated and that management obviously is to blame and bungled it all. Opportunity knocked for two months, and he couldn't answer. He's a younger guy with options, Jones has a guaranteed contract, that's the way the business works. O well, go down and play and get your stroke fixed, Matt. Opportunity will knock again if you can fix it. It just won't be as wide a window of opportunity next time.

 

Given the narrower window, if posters want to argue that half-time isn't enough AB for him to produce, then he's not likely to come back with a better window than he had the first time. If management made the window too small for success in April and May, I doubt that window will be any wider when he comes back, unless he pushes it wider by producing when he gets the chance to play.

 

If nobody is arguing that he can't hit with half-time opportunity, then don't fix all the blame on management that he didn't hit for the two months of half-time opportunity that he got. If others are arguing that he never hits till July, then it's smart to send him down till such time when he will produce. Maybe we should do that every year as long as he's got options left? (I don't think that's true, but if that's the argument...)

 

Is management smart? No. But I'm not sure the Murton case is the prover.

 

Finally, as to loaded statements: I said that his half-time play was a fair-bit of opportunity. You reason that my statement is extreme, loaded.

 

But then you say that he was "barely playing at all"!

 

Half-time action is barely playing at all? That is loaded and extreme. And I assume is an intentional exaggeration. So we appear to be using the same kind of hyperbole in our argumentation, no?

 

Murton's numbers at the plate were weak and he also looked bad. To make things worse he was making defensive lapses. Seems to me that Hendry was a big Murton supporter. However, fact of the matter is he did not perform at a time when the team desperately needed offensive help. Floyd stepped in and did a good job. If they give Murton another chance he better get in there an mash the lefties. If he can't even do that (like he didn't earlier this year) then why in the world should they bench a productive Floyd against righties in his favor?

[Have a seat, Neifi]

you have to be realistic about the catcher situation, though. if hendry is willing to trade one of the best offensive catchers in all of baseball for a defensive backup catcher, then why would he turn around and call soto up, while sending one of bowen/hill back down?

 

 

obviously hendry is wrong here, but that notwithstanding i don't understand why he would make that move.

Fixed.

[Soul]

you have to be realistic about the catcher situation, though. if hendry is willing to trade one of the best offensive catchers in all of baseball for a defensive catcher, then why would he turn around and call soto up, while sending one of bowen/hill back down?

 

 

obviously hendry is wrong here, but that notwithstanding i don't understand why he would make that move.

 

From what I've seen of Hill, he's at least marginal defensively too. Probably better than Barrett, but I think it's a stretch to say Hendry went with obvious defensive advantages. It seems more to me that he made a knee-jerk, desperate move and prayed Hill and/or Bowen would give him something.

 

We all agree getting Blanco back will be a good thing for this ballclub. Stop and think about that for a moment -- that, my friend, is how bad it's gotten.

[A New Era]

you have to be realistic about the catcher situation, though. if hendry is willing to trade one of the best offensive catchers in all of baseball for a defensive catcher, then why would he turn around and call soto up, while sending one of bowen/hill back down?

 

 

obviously hendry is wrong here, but that notwithstanding i don't understand why he would make that move.

 

From what I've seen of Hill, he's at least marginal defensively too. Probably better than Barrett, but I think it's a stretch to say Hendry went with obvious defensive advantages. It seems more to me that he made a knee-jerk, desperate move and prayed Hill and/or Bowen would give him something.

 

We all agree getting Blanco back will be a good thing for this ballclub. Stop and think about that for a moment -- that, my friend, is how bad it's gotten.

 

Atleast Blanco has shown he can have a really hot month or two in the past.

[NCCubFan]

If Floyd goes on the DL later this week, Murton might get his chance again to show the team why they can't send him down.

I think it's more likely that would just get Pie a stay of execution and keep him up when a 12th pitcher is added. Otherwise a position player would have to go and, barring a trade, I think Pie would be the most likely.

[soapy]

why is it okay to dismiss Murton because of 100 bad at-bats (and admittedly poor defense in RF) to start this season? he hasn't earned a little lee-way by performing the last two years (and all through the minors)?

[soapy]

If Floyd goes on the DL later this week, Murton might get his chance again to show the team why they can't send him down.

I think it's more likely that would just get Pie a stay of execution and keep him up when a 12th pitcher is added. Otherwise a position player would have to go and, barring a trade, I think Pie would be the most likely.

 

I tend to agree with NC. I think it will buy Pie some more time on the roster with DeRosa and Jones splitting time in RF and Fontenot at 2B.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

why is it okay to dismiss Murton because of 100 bad at-bats (and admittedly poor defense in RF) to start this season? he hasn't earned a little lee-way by performing the last two years (and all through the minors)?

 

I agree here. I think his 590 previous AB's should weigh a whole lot more than his 119 sporadic AB at the beginning of this season.

[soapy]

I feel the need to illustrate this again:

 

Jones

2007: .233/.294/.335 (215 ABs)

2006: .285/.334/.499

 

Murton

2007: .252/.331/.336 (119 ABs)

2006: .297/.365/.444

 

Murton= sent down to the minors because he's "not ready" and he "hasn't produced" in his mere 119 ABs this season.

 

Jones= we better give him another chance despite his numbers being equal to or worse than Murton's last year, and worse this year in almost twice as many ABs

 

Yes, I understand Jones has the ability to play CF (sort of). I don't think it justifies the difference in treatment. Factor in the their respective ages and Jones' poor 2005 and it's a no-brainer.

[A New Era]

Arod's a righty bat. :D

[craig]

I feel the need to illustrate this again:

 

Jones

2007: .233/.294/.335 (215 ABs)

2006: .285/.334/.499

 

Murton

2007: .252/.331/.336 (119 ABs)

2006: .297/.365/.444

 

Murton= sent down to the minors because he's "not ready" and he "hasn't produced" in his mere 119 ABs this season.

 

Jones= we better give him another chance despite his numbers being equal to or worse than Murton's last year, and worse this year in almost twice as many ABs

 

Yes, I understand Jones has the ability to play CF (sort of). I don't think it justifies the difference in treatment. Factor in the their respective ages and Jones' poor 2005 and it's a no-brainer.

 

soapy, I'm not sure I follow. My understanding is that Hendry was so eager to get Jones off the roster that he was planning to pay $6 of Jones salary for Florida to get him off our roster before Tribune bosses nixed the deal.

 

Your numbers show how Murton and Jones were comparably good last year and comparably good this year, except that Jones can play some center.

 

One might well argue that the Cubs are treating Murton much more favorably, by sending him to Iowa, giving him a chance to rediscover his stroke, letting him practice his RF defense, and declining trade inquiries from San Diego. Compared to totally humiliating Jones and trying to pay $6.5 million to Florida to take Jones off our hands.

 

I'd think that the actions suggest they are much more down on Jones than on Murton.

 

But, major league guaranteed contracts and Tribune bosses make a difference. Not everything is based on merit in mlb.

[Banedon]

I'd think that the actions suggest they are much more down on Jones than on Murton.

 

Jones has been pushing for a trade pretty hard too though. He hasn't wanted to be in Chicago for quite some time now, and I think it's affected his play and his attitude. If Jacque wanted to be here, they may take a different approach.

[UBlink]

The Cubs' first preference will be to stay in house, i.e., somebody from the system.

 

I thought I would throw this in again - who besides Murton would they be looking at? While Soto is RH, his splits are significantly better against RHP. The Cubs have enough RH bats that can't hit lefties.

[Banedon]

The Cubs' first preference will be to stay in house, i.e., somebody from the system.

 

I thought I would throw this in again - who besides Murton would they be looking at? While Soto is RH, his splits are significantly better against RHP. The Cubs have enough RH bats that can't hit lefties.

 

Cedeno would be another possibility.

[CubColtPacer]

I feel the need to illustrate this again:

 

Jones

2007: .233/.294/.335 (215 ABs)

 

 

 

 

2006: .285/.334/.499

 

Murton

2007: .252/.331/.336 (119 ABs)

2006: .297/.365/.444

 

Murton= sent down to the minors because he's "not ready" and he "hasn't produced" in his mere 119 ABs this season.

 

Jones= we better give him another chance despite his numbers being equal to or worse than Murton's last year, and worse this year in almost twice as many ABs

 

Yes, I understand Jones has the ability to play CF (sort of). I don't think it justifies the difference in treatment. Factor in the their respective ages and Jones' poor 2005 and it's a no-brainer.

 

You don't think Jones's ability to play center changes things significantly? If Murton could play center, he would be on the MLB roster and at least platooning with Jones and possibly starting. If Jones can only play right, there is no way that he's getting back off the bench. Jones is only getting another chance because the Cubs are not happy with their production in center, while they are at least decently happy with a Floyd/DeRosa platoon in right.

 

Second is MLB economics as Craig stated. If the Cubs could have gotten Jones off the major league roster easily like they did with Murton, they would have done so a long time ago.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The Cubs' first preference will be to stay in house, i.e., somebody from the system.

 

I thought I would throw this in again - who besides Murton would they be looking at? While Soto is RH, his splits are significantly better against RHP. The Cubs have enough RH bats that can't hit lefties.

 

Jake Fox.... :thumleft: