Cedeno Over Cintron / Fontenot Over Murton - Paul Sullivan

[soapy]

Just weighing in to say, if Murton is not going to make the team, I'd rather he get regular at-bats at Iowa than be traded for peanuts.

 

I'd definitely prefer they go with 11 pitchers or send Fontenot down instead though.

[Lefty]

Well Lou said last night that he would really like to see Murton get a major league job. And of course the context was that it would not be with the Cubs.

[davearm2]

I'm not trying to excuse all of Hendry's past mistakes.

 

What I'm trying to do is shift the focus away from Hendry's general merits as a GM, and keep it focused on Murton's career path with the Cubs specifically.

 

I'll say it again -- Murton is a good ballplayer, a legit starting LF in this league, and a guy that's very likeable to boot.

 

But one thing he's not is a guy that keeps you from pursuing the premiere free agent in baseball, especially when you're coming off of a disastrous season, as the Cubs were after the 2006 season.

 

Now is Hendry largely to blame for the disaster? Of course he is.

 

Nevertheless, the course of action he chose at that time, given the mess he was complicit in creating, was not only understandable but probably correct as well -- the proof is in the pudding as they say, and in 2007, Soriano was instrumental in the Cubs rebounding all the way from 90 losses to the postseason. Had he passed on Soriano to go with Murton, the Cubs are watching the NLC champ Brewers in the playoffs last year.

 

As was suggested by another poster, declining to pursue Soriano because of Murton's presence would be directly comparable to the decisionmaking that led to the Cubs passing on Tejada because of Alex Gonzalez, passing on Beltran because of Corey Patterson, and passing on Furcal because of, uh, who exactly?

 

So many here were so thrilled to be rid of that mindset with MacPhail's departure, yet here's the same philosophy being preached once again.

 

The bottom line is if you want to break the padlock off of the wallet and go get impact players in free agency, then "complimentary" players like Murton are going to be victims. The alternative is to pass on the impact guys, go with the complimentary guys, and watch October baseball on TV.

 

I'll remind you that this path started when you suggested that Murton's demotion was a result of coincidence and not Hendry's decisions.

 

I've never said Murton should prevent you from signing the premiere FA. Though it would be nice if that premiere FA were actually elite or at least great. When the premiere FA is wildly overpaid for what he brings to the table and his age, it's having a complimentary player like Murton at the same position that allows you to pass on him and better allocate your resources. Of course, you can only pass on him if you haven't spent the last 5 years making horrible decisions about how to build a baseball team. B/c if Hendry hadn't done that, we wouldn't need Soriano - or at least hopefully Hendry wouldn't think we needed him - and we'd have a lot more money to spend on a lot better players where we have no useful alternative (for the last several years, CF, SS, and C w/ the exception of Barret's few good/really good years, SP would be a good one this year).

So we agree then: given where the Cubs were after the 2006 season, signing Soriano was the right move, even though it came at the expense of Matt Murton's shot at an everyday role on this team.

 

And I maintain that the latter was indeed a coincidence and not a conscious choice to phase Murton out of the picture. Look the guy they needed most happens to play Murton's position. That's an unfortunate coincidence, because as you have said, Murton's a useful complimentary player.

 

And I'll remind you that how the Cubs got to where they were after the 2006 season, and the decisions Hendry made that led them there, is a separate topic entirely.

[CubinNY]

I'm not trying to excuse all of Hendry's past mistakes.

 

What I'm trying to do is shift the focus away from Hendry's general merits as a GM, and keep it focused on Murton's career path with the Cubs specifically.

 

I'll say it again -- Murton is a good ballplayer, a legit starting LF in this league, and a guy that's very likeable to boot.

 

But one thing he's not is a guy that keeps you from pursuing the premiere free agent in baseball, especially when you're coming off of a disastrous season, as the Cubs were after the 2006 season.

 

Now is Hendry largely to blame for the disaster? Of course he is.

 

Nevertheless, the course of action he chose at that time, given the mess he was complicit in creating, was not only understandable but probably correct as well -- the proof is in the pudding as they say, and in 2007, Soriano was instrumental in the Cubs rebounding all the way from 90 losses to the postseason. Had he passed on Soriano to go with Murton, the Cubs are watching the NLC champ Brewers in the playoffs last year.

 

As was suggested by another poster, declining to pursue Soriano because of Murton's presence would be directly comparable to the decisionmaking that led to the Cubs passing on Tejada because of Alex Gonzalez, passing on Beltran because of Corey Patterson, and passing on Furcal because of, uh, who exactly?

 

So many here were so thrilled to be rid of that mindset with MacPhail's departure, yet here's the same philosophy being preached once again.

 

The bottom line is if you want to break the padlock off of the wallet and go get impact players in free agency, then "complimentary" players like Murton are going to be victims. The alternative is to pass on the impact guys, go with the complimentary guys, and watch October baseball on TV.

 

I'll remind you that this path started when you suggested that Murton's demotion was a result of coincidence and not Hendry's decisions.

 

I've never said Murton should prevent you from signing the premiere FA. Though it would be nice if that premiere FA were actually elite or at least great. When the premiere FA is wildly overpaid for what he brings to the table and his age, it's having a complimentary player like Murton at the same position that allows you to pass on him and better allocate your resources. Of course, you can only pass on him if you haven't spent the last 5 years making horrible decisions about how to build a baseball team. B/c if Hendry hadn't done that, we wouldn't need Soriano - or at least hopefully Hendry wouldn't think we needed him - and we'd have a lot more money to spend on a lot better players where we have no useful alternative (for the last several years, CF, SS, and C w/ the exception of Barret's few good/really good years, SP would be a good one this year).

So we agree then: given where the Cubs were after the 2006 season, signing Soriano was the right move, even though it came at the expense of Matt Murton's shot at an everyday role on this team.

 

And I maintain that the latter was indeed a coincidence and not a conscious choice to phase Murton out of the picture. Look the guy they needed most happens to play Murton's position. That's an unfortunate coincidence, because as you have said, Murton's a useful complimentary player.

 

And I'll remind you that how the Cubs got to where they were after the 2006 season, and the decisions Hendry made that led them there, is a separate topic entirely.

No, signing Soriano wasn't a good move. It will look even worse with each succeeding year until Soriano retires.

[apete6]

So we agree then: given where the Cubs were after the 2006 season, signing Soriano was the right move, even though it came at the expense of Matt Murton's shot at an everyday role on this team.

 

And I maintain that the latter was indeed a coincidence and not a conscious choice to phase Murton out of the picture. Look the guy they needed most happens to play Murton's position. That's an unfortunate coincidence, because as you have said, Murton's a useful complimentary player.

 

And I'll remind you that how the Cubs got to where they were after the 2006 season, and the decisions Hendry made that led them there, is a separate topic entirely.

 

I don't necessarily think signing Soriano was a good move, in fact, his contract will be putrid in about 2 more years, but, that didn't really signal the end for Matt Murton.

 

Piniella didn't trust him in RF after Soriano couldn't hack it in CF. For whatever reason, Lou thought that POS Cliff Floyd was a better option in RF the majority of the 2nd half of last season. Once it was clear that Jones was going to be the every day CF, the outfield should have been Soriano, Jones, and Murton. Uncle Lou crapped the bed with playing Floyd and Fontenot (with DeRo moving to RF) instead of Murton.

 

As much as Hendry sucks, Lou could have played Murton nearly every day last season, especially in the 2nd half, but he went primarily with Cliff freaking Floyd (whom Hendry probably should have not signed) instead of Murton.

[Tracer Bullet]

I'll remind you that this path started when you suggested that Murton's demotion was a result of coincidence and not Hendry's decisions.

 

I've never said Murton should prevent you from signing the premiere FA. Though it would be nice if that premiere FA were actually elite or at least great. When the premiere FA is wildly overpaid for what he brings to the table and his age, it's having a complimentary player like Murton at the same position that allows you to pass on him and better allocate your resources. Of course, you can only pass on him if you haven't spent the last 5 years making horrible decisions about how to build a baseball team. B/c if Hendry hadn't done that, we wouldn't need Soriano - or at least hopefully Hendry wouldn't think we needed him - and we'd have a lot more money to spend on a lot better players where we have no useful alternative (for the last several years, CF, SS, and C w/ the exception of Barret's few good/really good years, SP would be a good one this year).

So we agree then: given where the Cubs were after the 2006 season, signing Soriano was the right move, even though it came at the expense of Matt Murton's shot at an everyday role on this team.

 

And I maintain that the latter was indeed a coincidence and not a conscious choice to phase Murton out of the picture. Look the guy they needed most happens to play Murton's position. That's an unfortunate coincidence, because as you have said, Murton's a useful complimentary player.

 

And I'll remind you that how the Cubs got to where they were after the 2006 season, and the decisions Hendry made that led them there, is a separate topic entirely.

No, signing Soriano wasn't a good move. It will look even worse with each succeeding year until Soriano retires.

 

CubinNY beat me to it, but no, I don't agree that signing Soriano was the right move. Among the things about which we disagree is whether Soriano is an elite or great player. Signing Soriano was bad b/c his contract is huge compared to the value he brings. The fact that we had a perfectly acceptable alternative for his position only makes it worse.

 

Choosing to sign a FA that is overpaid that plays the position Murton plays is a choice Hendry made. The fact that it would block Murton is not coincidence. It was an obvious result of the decision he made. Why you maintain that Hendry's decisions regarding the makeup of this team and Murton's lack of position on the ML team are separate issues, I have no idea.

[NewUserName]

I think it's too easy to say "Hendry is bad because he signed Soriano."

 

The one thing we don't know is what Hendry's actual options were. Who else was realistically available to him as opposed to Soriano. Honestly, we don't win the Central last year without Soriano.

 

 

 

I'm like everyone else and get caught up in the bashing of the GM and manager, but I do try and remind myself that we have a very very limited knowledge of what's going on.

 

 

Soriano was the best available. The problem is that the Cubs are trying to win a crappy division instead of winning a World Series. Truthfully I am pretty sure almost any GM can outspend the NL Central right now and win with the Cubs. However they are not even close to competing with the Tigers, Indians, Red Sox, Angels, and Yankees. Truthfully the Cubs are not even better than the White Sox. I dont think players like Murton will help you compete with these teams. However at least he isnt making 18 mill. while being a middle of the road LFer. So its not so much of who is better. The question is could the Cubs have been more patient and found a better player at a position of bigger weakness to sign with that money? Maybe not last offseason but this offseason or some sort of trade maybe.

 

We arent outspending the Red Sox and Yankees and we dont produce players through our system as well as they do. How are we ever going to beat them? Worse of all we give out too many slaps on the back for being the worse team in the playoffs last year. So yes I would just assume we had a $48 mill payrole and were playing Matt Murton in left. At least we would have more flexibility to actually try to win a World Series. As opposed to this $120 million pile of mediocrity with very little room to improve.

 

That is a ridiculous statement. You must have forgotten already that the Cubs were one of the hottest teams in baseball over the second half of last year, and many people were predicting that they would go to the World Series when the playoffs started. The fact they got swept by the Diamondbacks was unfortunate, but even a great GM can't prevent his team from slumping at any given time.

 

I'm not saying Hendry is a great GM, but he is far from terrible. In regard to your waiting for the right person, Jim Hendry is probably like the rest of us and doesn't have a crystal ball to tell him which players are going to want to come to the Cubs. We have found out over the last few years, not every player in MLB fantacizes about being a Cub or playing in Chicago. That leaves Hendry with option to take a player that wants to come or sit around and wait for players that may never come.

 

In regard to Murton, sure it sucks for him personally that he got sent down to AAA. The fact that he is just a call up away is a great thing for the organization to have. Most people complaining about this move are saying he is a Major league ready OF, etc..... They should be ecstatic, that if Soriano or Fukudome is out for a prolonged period that Murton will be able to fill in and according to those people the Cubs lose little production. Sounds like a nice problem to have.

 

So basically I said that the Cubs are not an elite team. They dont have much payroll flexibility to improve. That is a ridiculous statement! When you pay an above average player(Soriano) elite player money, that is bad unless you are the Yankees. Also wasting ABs on the likes of Reed Johnson or starts on Dempster and Marquis is not smart use of resources. So basically the only reason that the Cubs are a playoff team is because they play in a crappy division. I think most of the pictured GMs could easily do the same job that Hendry has done.

[Lefty]

As I recall, I believe Soriano as a CFer emerged pretty quickly after his signing. It was the Floyd signing which turned Murton from the everyday LFer into a platoon player. The Soriano move to LF just moved the platoon to RF where Murton's defense, in Lou's eyes, hastened his demotion. While I can see the argument over Soriano both ways, the signing of Floyd, Hendry's total man crush manifesting itself, was the catalyst for all this. And that can be totally laid at Hendry's feet.

 

And now we have a new argument. Was Fukudome over Murton necessary or worth it?

[Post Count Padder]

Cubs released infielder Alex Cintron.

 

Cintron was signed primarily as an insurance policy in case Ronny Cedeno or Mike Fontenot was involved in a Brian Roberts trade. Now that those talks have cooled off, he was was deemed expendable.

[davearm2]

So we agree then: given where the Cubs were after the 2006 season, signing Soriano was the right move, even though it came at the expense of Matt Murton's shot at an everyday role on this team.

 

And I maintain that the latter was indeed a coincidence and not a conscious choice to phase Murton out of the picture. Look the guy they needed most happens to play Murton's position. That's an unfortunate coincidence, because as you have said, Murton's a useful complimentary player.

 

And I'll remind you that how the Cubs got to where they were after the 2006 season, and the decisions Hendry made that led them there, is a separate topic entirely.

No, signing Soriano wasn't a good move. It will look even worse with each succeeding year until Soriano retires.

 

CubinNY beat me to it, but no, I don't agree that signing Soriano was the right move. Among the things about which we disagree is whether Soriano is an elite or great player. Signing Soriano was bad b/c his contract is huge compared to the value he brings. The fact that we had a perfectly acceptable alternative for his position only makes it worse.

 

Choosing to sign a FA that is overpaid that plays the position Murton plays is a choice Hendry made. The fact that it would block Murton is not coincidence. It was an obvious result of the decision he made. Why you maintain that Hendry's decisions regarding the makeup of this team and Murton's lack of position on the ML team are separate issues, I have no idea.

So I see we're back to longing for the MacPhail Approach, in which any/every top-end free agent is passed over because of the pricetag, and seeking out affordable, serviceable guys is preferred to overpaying for impact guys.

 

Look "overpaid" and "free agent" are redundant terms, especially if you're talking about the upper end of the market. There are no bargain shopping opportunities here. Either you're in or you're out.

 

I'd prefer the Cubs be in, and as I said earlier, the real shame is that they didn't get in sooner on guys like Beltran and Vlad and Tejada. Better late than never, though.

[Tracer Bullet]

So we agree then: given where the Cubs were after the 2006 season, signing Soriano was the right move, even though it came at the expense of Matt Murton's shot at an everyday role on this team.

 

And I maintain that the latter was indeed a coincidence and not a conscious choice to phase Murton out of the picture. Look the guy they needed most happens to play Murton's position. That's an unfortunate coincidence, because as you have said, Murton's a useful complimentary player.

 

And I'll remind you that how the Cubs got to where they were after the 2006 season, and the decisions Hendry made that led them there, is a separate topic entirely.

No, signing Soriano wasn't a good move. It will look even worse with each succeeding year until Soriano retires.

 

CubinNY beat me to it, but no, I don't agree that signing Soriano was the right move. Among the things about which we disagree is whether Soriano is an elite or great player. Signing Soriano was bad b/c his contract is huge compared to the value he brings. The fact that we had a perfectly acceptable alternative for his position only makes it worse.

 

Choosing to sign a FA that is overpaid that plays the position Murton plays is a choice Hendry made. The fact that it would block Murton is not coincidence. It was an obvious result of the decision he made. Why you maintain that Hendry's decisions regarding the makeup of this team and Murton's lack of position on the ML team are separate issues, I have no idea.

So I see we're back to longing for the MacPhail Approach, in which any/every top-end free agent is passed over because of the pricetag, and seeking out affordable, serviceable guys is preferred to overpaying for impact guys.

 

Look "overpaid" and "free agent" are redundant terms, especially if you're talking about the upper end of the market. There are no bargain shopping opportunities here. Either you're in or you're out.

 

I'd prefer the Cubs be in, and as I said earlier, the real shame is that they didn't get in sooner on guys like Beltran and Vlad and Tejada. Better late than never, though.

 

Yes, you've got me figured out. I've been saying all along that what I want is the Cubs to spend nothing and just run out league-average players at all positions. I haven't said that we shouldn't have overspent for Soriano because those resources could be better allocated elsewhere. I haven't said Hendry should have made better choices all along in building this team so that he didn't feel compelled to sign a 30+ overrated LF coming off a career year to a contract that will pay him well into his upper 30s.

 

You don't have to bargain shop to spend wisely. Lee's contract, ARam's contract, heck, even Lilly's contract - better decisions. Soriano's contract was Hendry trying to save his own butt pure and simple. Soriano is not the upper end of the market. He may have been the "best" FA last year, but that only says bad things about last year's market. Hendry's inability to construct this team and complete lack of foresight made signing Soriano appear to be his best option - then he went out and signed him to an inexplicable 8 year deal.

 

You're either intentionally misconstruing my posts or you're acting very dense.

[davearm2]

So we agree then: given where the Cubs were after the 2006 season, signing Soriano was the right move, even though it came at the expense of Matt Murton's shot at an everyday role on this team.

 

And I maintain that the latter was indeed a coincidence and not a conscious choice to phase Murton out of the picture. Look the guy they needed most happens to play Murton's position. That's an unfortunate coincidence, because as you have said, Murton's a useful complimentary player.

 

And I'll remind you that how the Cubs got to where they were after the 2006 season, and the decisions Hendry made that led them there, is a separate topic entirely.

No, signing Soriano wasn't a good move. It will look even worse with each succeeding year until Soriano retires.

 

CubinNY beat me to it, but no, I don't agree that signing Soriano was the right move. Among the things about which we disagree is whether Soriano is an elite or great player. Signing Soriano was bad b/c his contract is huge compared to the value he brings. The fact that we had a perfectly acceptable alternative for his position only makes it worse.

 

Choosing to sign a FA that is overpaid that plays the position Murton plays is a choice Hendry made. The fact that it would block Murton is not coincidence. It was an obvious result of the decision he made. Why you maintain that Hendry's decisions regarding the makeup of this team and Murton's lack of position on the ML team are separate issues, I have no idea.

So I see we're back to longing for the MacPhail Approach, in which any/every top-end free agent is passed over because of the pricetag, and seeking out affordable, serviceable guys is preferred to overpaying for impact guys.

 

Look "overpaid" and "free agent" are redundant terms, especially if you're talking about the upper end of the market. There are no bargain shopping opportunities here. Either you're in or you're out.

 

I'd prefer the Cubs be in, and as I said earlier, the real shame is that they didn't get in sooner on guys like Beltran and Vlad and Tejada. Better late than never, though.

 

Yes, you've got me figured out. I've been saying all along that what I want is the Cubs to spend nothing and just run out league-average players at all positions. I haven't said that we shouldn't have overspent for Soriano because those resources could be better allocated elsewhere. I haven't said Hendry should have made better choices all along in building this team so that he didn't feel compelled to sign a 30+ overrated LF coming off a career year to a contract that will pay him well into his upper 30s.

 

You don't have to bargain shop to spend wisely. Lee's contract, ARam's contract, heck, even Lilly's contract - better decisions. Soriano's contract was Hendry trying to save his own butt pure and simple. Soriano is not the upper end of the market. He may have been the "best" FA last year, but that only says bad things about last year's market. Hendry's inability to construct this team and complete lack of foresight made signing Soriano appear to be his best option - then he went out and signed him to an inexplicable 8 year deal.

 

You're either intentionally misconstruing my posts or you're acting very dense.

Soriano's deal isn't inexplicable. It's the going rate in this neighborhood. Like I said, you're either in or you're out. MacPhail's Cubs were always out, and the results speak for themselves.

 

I for one am glad they're trying a different approach, even at the expense of collateral damage to serviceable guys like Matt Murton.

[MustangMike]

Well Lou said last night that he would really like to see Murton get a major league job. And of course the context was that it would not be with the Cubs.

 

is it better to have 2 IF backup players than 2 outfield backup players? I understand that you don't really want to platoon Fukadome,but chances are they are going to platoon pie so Johnson will get some plate apperances.

What I worry about is the health of Soriano and the consistancy of the other two outfielders, especially Pie. If one goes down, you need another outfield...and I'm thikning about Soriano.

 

I'd rather have Murton on this team as the the first bat off the bench than Cedeno. I don't see Cedeno as a good PH off the bench, and you have fontenot as a backup to give derosa or theriort a day off. If someone in the outfield gets hurt, then you call up cedeno, but it seems to me having a bench with Murton over Cedeno is the smart choice.

[TruffleShuffle]

Now Lou is saying the "catch the ball" crap.

 

"One thing I do like about our team is we're going to catch the ball," Piniella said. "This year we're encouraged about our defensive thing."

 

the cubs made the playoffs last year because they "caught the ball" and the brewers didn't.

[davearm2]

Well Lou said last night that he would really like to see Murton get a major league job. And of course the context was that it would not be with the Cubs.

 

is it better to have 2 IF backup players than 2 outfield backup players? I understand that you don't really want to platoon Fukadome,but chances are they are going to platoon pie so Johnson will get some plate apperances.

What I worry about is the health of Soriano and the consistancy of the other two outfielders, especially Pie. If one goes down, you need another outfield...and I'm thikning about Soriano.

 

I'd rather have Murton on this team as the the first bat off the bench than Cedeno. I don't see Cedeno as a good PH off the bench, and you have fontenot as a backup to give derosa or theriort a day off. If someone in the outfield gets hurt, then you call up cedeno, but it seems to me having a bench with Murton over Cedeno is the smart choice.

Sending Cedeno to AAA isn't a choice though. He's out of options.

[Roast]

So Okay, correct me if I'm wrong - but as of right now this looks to be our Opening day 25-man, correct?

 

Zambrano

Lilly

Dempster

Hill

Marquis

 

Lieber

Wuertz

Hart

--Someone to replace Eyre--(piggy/Marshall)

Howry

Marmol

Wood

 

Soto

Lee

DeRosa

Theriot

Ramirez

Soriano

Pie

Fukudome

 

Johnson

Fontenot

Cedeno

Ward

Blanco

[YearofDaCubs]

So Lahey is going to be sent back to the Twins?

[davearm2]

So Lahey is going to be sent back to the Twins?

I've been wondering that myself.

 

There's been some speculation that possibly the Cubs and Twins can work something out that would make Lahey the PTBNL leftover from the Monroe trade.

[Post Count Padder]

So Lahey is going to be sent back to the Twins?

I've been wondering that myself.

 

There's been some speculation that possibly the Cubs and Twins can work something out that would make Lahey the PTBNL leftover from the Monroe trade.

Oh yeah, forgot about that.

[Derwood]

they can usually work out some sort of cash transaction to keep lahey

[brinoch]

So I see we're back to longing for the MacPhail Approach, in which any/every top-end free agent is passed over because of the pricetag, and seeking out affordable, serviceable guys is preferred to overpaying for impact guys.

 

Look "overpaid" and "free agent" are redundant terms, especially if you're talking about the upper end of the market. There are no bargain shopping opportunities here. Either you're in or you're out.

 

I'd prefer the Cubs be in, and as I said earlier, the real shame is that they didn't get in sooner on guys like Beltran and Vlad and Tejada. Better late than never, though.

 

Yes and no. You're right that it's better late than never, but frankly Soriano isn't as valuable as Beltran, Tejada and Guerrero when you compare the contracts and the production levels. The problem is that Hendry got into the top-end free agent game at the wrong time and with the wrong guy.

[javy knows my name]

Now Lou is saying the "catch the ball" crap.

 

"One thing I do like about our team is we're going to catch the ball," Piniella said. "This year we're encouraged about our defensive thing."

 

That's not really "crap." He's just saying he likes the team's defense, and that's a good thing. This isn't like when Hendry said he wanted to find players who can "catch the ball."

 

I don't see any reason to jump on Lou for this comment. Defense is a huge part of preventing runs.

This sounds like something John Madden would say

[Tyrant]

Now Lou is saying the "catch the ball" crap.

 

"One thing I do like about our team is we're going to catch the ball," Piniella said. "This year we're encouraged about our defensive thing."

 

That's not really "crap." He's just saying he likes the team's defense, and that's a good thing. This isn't like when Hendry said he wanted to find players who can "catch the ball."

 

I don't see any reason to jump on Lou for this comment. Defense is a huge part of preventing runs.

This sounds like something John Madden would say

 

Why? Preventing runs is about defense and pitching. Lots of people overlook the "defense" part of that.

[javy knows my name]

Now Lou is saying the "catch the ball" crap.

 

"One thing I do like about our team is we're going to catch the ball," Piniella said. "This year we're encouraged about our defensive thing."

 

That's not really "crap." He's just saying he likes the team's defense, and that's a good thing. This isn't like when Hendry said he wanted to find players who can "catch the ball."

 

I don't see any reason to jump on Lou for this comment. Defense is a huge part of preventing runs.

This sounds like something John Madden would say

 

Why? Preventing runs is about defense and pitching. Lots of people overlook the "defense" part of that.

Seriously? Others combine the two as part of "defense" and your statement comes out sounding like "run prevention is the key to preventing runs" or "the team who scores the most points will probably win this game."

[Tyrant]

Now Lou is saying the "catch the ball" crap.

 

"One thing I do like about our team is we're going to catch the ball," Piniella said. "This year we're encouraged about our defensive thing."

 

That's not really "crap." He's just saying he likes the team's defense, and that's a good thing. This isn't like when Hendry said he wanted to find players who can "catch the ball."

 

I don't see any reason to jump on Lou for this comment. Defense is a huge part of preventing runs.

This sounds like something John Madden would say

 

Why? Preventing runs is about defense and pitching. Lots of people overlook the "defense" part of that.

Seriously? Others combine the two as part of "defense" and your statement comes out sounding like "run prevention is the key to preventing runs" or "the team who scores the most points will probably win this game."

 

Whatever you say, man.