CM happy with Theriot

[Sammy Sofa]

theriot is a terrible lead off hitter.

Um, no he's not. He's a little guy that plays shortstop. Leadoff hitters can only come from the SS and CF positions. Occasionally a second basemen can bat leadoff, but usually they bat 2nd. So I'll take Theriot batting leadoff over Pie anyday.

 

This is sarcasm, right?

[Tracer Bullet]

theriot is a terrible lead off hitter.

Um, no he's not. He's a little guy that plays shortstop. Leadoff hitters can only come from the SS and CF positions. Occasionally a second basemen can bat leadoff, but usually they bat 2nd. So I'll take Theriot batting leadoff over Pie anyday.

 

Guys, I have an awesome idea. Lets take our worst hitter and give him the most at bats and then follow him with our best hitters!!!!!

 

coughjunapierrecough

 

junapier?

[Soul]

theriot is a terrible lead off hitter.

Um, no he's not. He's a little guy that plays shortstop. Leadoff hitters can only come from the SS and CF positions. Occasionally a second basemen can bat leadoff, but usually they bat 2nd. So I'll take Theriot batting leadoff over Pie anyday.

 

This is sarcasm, right?

 

I'm not so sure...

[nick23]

theriot is a terrible lead off hitter.

Um, no he's not. He's a little guy that plays shortstop. Leadoff hitters can only come from the SS and CF positions. Occasionally a second basemen can bat leadoff, but usually they bat 2nd. So I'll take Theriot batting leadoff over Pie anyday.

 

This is sarcasm, right?

 

I'm not so sure...

You guys have obviously never played baseball before. Your fastest guy always leads off. It's common sense.

[David]

theriot is a terrible lead off hitter.

Um, no he's not. He's a little guy that plays shortstop. Leadoff hitters can only come from the SS and CF positions. Occasionally a second basemen can bat leadoff, but usually they bat 2nd. So I'll take Theriot batting leadoff over Pie anyday.

 

Is this a serious post?

[David]

theriot is a terrible lead off hitter.

Um, no he's not. He's a little guy that plays shortstop. Leadoff hitters can only come from the SS and CF positions. Occasionally a second basemen can bat leadoff, but usually they bat 2nd. So I'll take Theriot batting leadoff over Pie anyday.

 

This is sarcasm, right?

 

I'm not so sure...

You guys have obviously never played baseball before. Your fastest guy always leads off. It's common sense.

 

 

OK. Definitely sarcasm.

[javy knows my name]

Someone's drinking the Muskat Kool-aid.

Theriot leading off is worse even than Taveras leading off and Tulowitski hitting 7th in a world series lineup.

[Derwood]

The Follow Up:

 

Regarding your comment about Ryan Theriot and shortstop being "solid offensively," the evidence is to the contrary. The NL average OPS (on-base plus slugging) at shortstop was .758 in 2007. Theriot was at .672. That's minus-86 compared to the NL average at the position, by far the largest differential on the club in '07. No other position was close to that in terms of substandard compared to league average. There's no reason to infer that Theriot will be better in '08. Alex Rodriguez is unrealistic, but the best way to improve the '08 Cubs offense is at shortstop. It's a hole offensively.

-- Mark K., Washington, D.C.

 

Yes, the shortstop position for the Cubs was weakest in terms of OPS in comparison to the NL average and the Major League average. It wasn't the only offensive hole. The Cubs also were deficient at catcher (.039 points below the league OPS) and at center field (.049 points below league OPS). Derrek Lee plus Aramis Ramirez plus Soriano did well enough to bring them back to the league average, and the Cubs ended up eighth in runs scored and eighth in OPS.

 

(If you're scratching your head, Jeff Chernow at STATS Inc. says OPS corresponds more closely to run production, mathematically speaking, than pretty much any other offensive statistic.

 

Wow, she understands!

 

When Theriot subbed in the leadoff spot for Soriano and hit .321, I got a zillion e-mails from people saying that Theriot should bump the $136 million outfielder at the top of the order. Theriot provides a lot of intangibles that don't show up in the stats -- like energy -- and he and Mike Fontenot provided a spark in June and July. Theriot just ran out of gas in the last month. I didn't say Theriot was a superstar, I said he was solid, and I still believe that.

 

Wow, just kidding.

[BigSlick]

The Follow Up:

 

Regarding your comment about Ryan Theriot and shortstop being "solid offensively," the evidence is to the contrary. The NL average OPS (on-base plus slugging) at shortstop was .758 in 2007. Theriot was at .672. That's minus-86 compared to the NL average at the position, by far the largest differential on the club in '07. No other position was close to that in terms of substandard compared to league average. There's no reason to infer that Theriot will be better in '08. Alex Rodriguez is unrealistic, but the best way to improve the '08 Cubs offense is at shortstop. It's a hole offensively.

-- Mark K., Washington, D.C.

 

Yes, the shortstop position for the Cubs was weakest in terms of OPS in comparison to the NL average and the Major League average. It wasn't the only offensive hole. The Cubs also were deficient at catcher (.039 points below the league OPS) and at center field (.049 points below league OPS). Derrek Lee plus Aramis Ramirez plus Soriano did well enough to bring them back to the league average, and the Cubs ended up eighth in runs scored and eighth in OPS.

 

(If you're scratching your head, Jeff Chernow at STATS Inc. says OPS corresponds more closely to run production, mathematically speaking, than pretty much any other offensive statistic.

 

Wow, she understands!

 

When Theriot subbed in the leadoff spot for Soriano and hit .321, I got a zillion e-mails from people saying that Theriot should bump the $136 million outfielder at the top of the order. Theriot provides a lot of intangibles that don't show up in the stats -- like energy -- and he and Mike Fontenot provided a spark in June and July. Theriot just ran out of gas in the last month. I didn't say Theriot was a superstar, I said he was solid, and I still believe that.

 

Wow, just kidding.

 

:evil: :evil: :evil:

 

These guys (and gals) are being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to field a winning team, and they value OPS with "intangibles"

[Soul]

The Follow Up:

 

Regarding your comment about Ryan Theriot and shortstop being "solid offensively," the evidence is to the contrary. The NL average OPS (on-base plus slugging) at shortstop was .758 in 2007. Theriot was at .672. That's minus-86 compared to the NL average at the position, by far the largest differential on the club in '07. No other position was close to that in terms of substandard compared to league average. There's no reason to infer that Theriot will be better in '08. Alex Rodriguez is unrealistic, but the best way to improve the '08 Cubs offense is at shortstop. It's a hole offensively.

-- Mark K., Washington, D.C.

 

Yes, the shortstop position for the Cubs was weakest in terms of OPS in comparison to the NL average and the Major League average. It wasn't the only offensive hole. The Cubs also were deficient at catcher (.039 points below the league OPS) and at center field (.049 points below league OPS). Derrek Lee plus Aramis Ramirez plus Soriano did well enough to bring them back to the league average, and the Cubs ended up eighth in runs scored and eighth in OPS.

 

(If you're scratching your head, Jeff Chernow at STATS Inc. says OPS corresponds more closely to run production, mathematically speaking, than pretty much any other offensive statistic.

 

Wow, she understands!

 

When Theriot subbed in the leadoff spot for Soriano and hit .321, I got a zillion e-mails from people saying that Theriot should bump the $136 million outfielder at the top of the order. Theriot provides a lot of intangibles that don't show up in the stats -- like energy -- and he and Mike Fontenot provided a spark in June and July. Theriot just ran out of gas in the last month. I didn't say Theriot was a superstar, I said he was solid, and I still believe that.

 

Wow, just kidding.

 

Hehehe.

 

I assume she said "if you're scratching your head" because she assumes a large portion of her readership doesn't understand the value of OPS -- which in 2007 pretty much means you either don't pay attention to baseball, or just don't care to understand much about it.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

I'm in the boat with those who think we should back off CM.

 

She is a PR specialist. Who really cares what she writes about? Serioulsy? I'm a Bears fan and I don't go to Bears.com to read analysis. No official team site is going to, at any time, offer critical analysis. That isn't how business is done. So seriously, enough with the

 

 

"OMFG CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT CARRIE MUSKAT JUST WROTE!!" threads.

Edited October 30, 2007 by GoCubsGo!!

[Mizzou]

I'm in the boat with those who think we should back off CM.

 

She is a PR specialist. Who really cares what she writes about? Serioulsy? I'm a Bears fan and I don't go to Bears.com to read analysis. No official team site is going to any time of critical analysis. That isn't how business is done. So seriously, enough with the

 

 

"OMFG CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT CARRIE MUSKAT JUST WROTE!!" threads.

Seriously. Why does anyone even read her columns? We're all smart enough to know what she's going to say. Reading her articles and then complaining about them is just a waste of time and energy.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

double post

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm in the boat with those who think we should back off CM.

 

She is a PR specialist. Who really cares what she writes about? Serioulsy? I'm a Bears fan and I don't go to Bears.com to read analysis. No official team site is going to any time of critical analysis. That isn't how business is done. So seriously, enough with the

 

 

"OMFG CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT CARRIE MUSKAT JUST WROTE!!" threads.

Seriously. Why does anyone even read her columns? We're all smart enough to know what she's going to say. Reading her articles and then complaining about them is just a waste of time and energy.

 

I have a bad Cubs addiction and read just about anything that is written about them.

 

Regardless of whether we know the motives, the fact is they/she tries to pass the stuff off as journalism and it bothers me. I don't read much of the stuff, unless I see a link to it elsewhere or am really bored/desperate for crap to read. Call me a fool for reading it in the first place (you'd probably be right), but I can't help but react to the ridiculous stories. And to top it off, it's an opinion that's often shared by many. If she was a rogue voice, that would be one thing. But she pretty much echoes the sentiments of the majority. And that's troubling.

[Sammy Sofa]

I'm in the boat with those who think we should back off CM.

 

She is a PR specialist. Who really cares what she writes about? Serioulsy? I'm a Bears fan and I don't go to Bears.com to read analysis. No official team site is going to any time of critical analysis. That isn't how business is done. So seriously, enough with the

 

 

"OMFG CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT CARRIE MUSKAT JUST WROTE!!" threads.

Seriously. Why does anyone even read her columns? We're all smart enough to know what she's going to say. Reading her articles and then complaining about them is just a waste of time and energy.

 

I have a bad Cubs addiction and read just about anything that is written about them.

 

Regardless of whether we know the motives, the fact is they/she tries to pass the stuff off as journalism and it bothers me. I don't read much of the stuff, unless I see a link to it elsewhere or am really bored/desperate for crap to read. Call me a fool for reading it in the first place (you'd probably be right), but I can't help but react to the ridiculous stories. And to top it off, it's an opinion that's often shared by many. If she was a rogue voice, that would be one thing. But she pretty much echoes the sentiments of the majority. And that's troubling.

 

But again, is that really her fault? You keep insisting otherwise, but I don't see how she could possibly publish anything that isn't towing (toeing?) the company line. If people choose to only go to the official site for their Cubs news, well, they're gonna get what they seek out. If they choose to ignore the dozens of other quality sites/blogs/boards out there that provide contrary opinions and perspectives, well, she has no control over that. Cubs.com is never going to have the content that most of us would prefer to see it have...CM is just the mouthpiece du jour.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

But again, is that really her fault? You keep insisting otherwise, but I don't see how she could possibly publish anything that isn't towing (toeing?) the company line. If people choose to only go to the official site for their Cubs news, well, they're gonna get what they seek out. If they choose to ignore the dozens of other quality sites/blogs/boards out there that provide contrary opinions and perspectives, well, she has no control over that. Cubs.com is never going to have the content that most of us would prefer to see it have...CM is just the mouthpiece du jour.

 

that's the mouthpiece of the day

 

Yes, it really is her fault when she interjects her opinions and they're terribly wrong. When a reader asks her about upgrading at SS and she says how solid Theriot is instead of some generic line about how they'll evaluate areas for improvement is a mistake. I'll bet Ryan Theriot himself would wet his pants to have ARod take his job.

[Sammy Sofa]

But again, is that really her fault? You keep insisting otherwise, but I don't see how she could possibly publish anything that isn't towing (toeing?) the company line. If people choose to only go to the official site for their Cubs news, well, they're gonna get what they seek out. If they choose to ignore the dozens of other quality sites/blogs/boards out there that provide contrary opinions and perspectives, well, she has no control over that. Cubs.com is never going to have the content that most of us would prefer to see it have...CM is just the mouthpiece du jour.

 

that's the mouthpiece of the day

 

Yes, it really is her fault when she interjects her opinions and they're terribly wrong. When a reader asks her about upgrading at SS and she says how solid Theriot is instead of some generic line about how they'll evaluate areas for improvement is a mistake. I'll bet Ryan Theriot himself would wet his pants to have ARod take his job.

 

But to me it reads exactly like someone who is basically told what they can and can't say. The tone on Cubs.com has always been to spin current players as fixable or decent or whatever.

[jersey cubs fan]

But again, is that really her fault?

 

Yes, it is her fault. She doesn't have to write stupid stuff. She chooses to. She chooses to work for cubs.com, and whether or not they pressure her to write stupid stuff or she chooses to write it, it does not matter. She puts her name on the story, she answers the questions of readers. When you put your name on the story your credibility is on the line. You can't just sit back and say "they made me write it" to defend your ignorance.

 

 

I think there is absolutely no doubt that she thinks Ryan Theriot is a very solid SS who should be the Cubs 2008 SS and that he is not in any way shape or form, a weak spot on the team. I also feel that the vast majority of Cubs fans buy that nonsense as well, and it's bothersome.