R.I.P. Felix Pie's Career (2001-April 20, 2008)

[WilcoFan]

 

No, that's exactly the point. You said that was a possible argument, and I showed that it is a ridiculous argument.

 

You really didn't. You showed that there are complicating factors, sort of. You showed that you have a different set of criteria when judging the statistics of two players, and very little other than the raw data is what you use.

 

You're still really missing the point. What you choose to use as your evidence and what you choose to ignore is as biased as anyone else's (which is fine-its the basis of discussion), yet you continue to argue that somehow you have a monopoly on "facts" and that somehow anything that doesn't jive with your own biases is ridiculous. You have continued to prove my point.

[CubColtPacer]

 

I'm not sure why you are arguing Fontenot versus Cedeno...that had little to nothing to do with my point.

 

I'm amazed that, when I write a hypothetical post in which I allude to potential arguments that could be made (without (a.) claiming to believe them, or (b.) actually giving you a complete argument), you fall into exactly the category of people I was writing about when I made the original point. My point had nothing to do with Fontenot, Cedeno, Hill, or Marquis. My point had to do with the use of sample size and stat manipulation to make some condescending post that really doesn't have any more "facts" than any other post. Healthy discussion dies when one person tries to take their opinion (and the use of statistical analysis is still opinion, as the analysis is open to interpretation) and pass it off as fact.

 

Thanks for proving my point. I highlighted it above, as well as the points where you just embody the argument I've made to a tee.

 

No, that's exactly the point. You said that was a possible argument, and I showed that it is a ridiculous argument. There is no manipulation in showing that Cedeno's minor league career was immensely more impressive than Fontenot's.

 

You've done nothing to show that there are logical arguments for the things I listed.

 

How about this:

 

However much Cedeno's minor league numbers show he's a better prospect, Fontenot's minor and major league numbers show that he's more likely to produce this year, which is why he was projected to have better stats than Cedeno by most of the projection systems. As others have mentioned, PECOTA leads the way in that, but is joined by Bill James, Tango, and ZIPS.

 

Add to that Fontenot has been rather unlucky with his balls put into play so far (a 27.7% LD percentage translating into a .304 BABIP) and Cedeno has been rather lucky (a 19.6% LD percentage, and he has a .400 BABIP) and that their difference in their stats is only 2-3 bloops falling for Fontenot or a couple ones caught for Cedeno.

 

Plus if you're arguing over the last couple of weeks, you also have to add in that Fontenot is red hot while Cedeno is scuffling.

 

I believe they are similar options hitting wise now over the course of the season thanks to Cedeno's improved approach (with Cedeno being the better overall player due to his capable defense at short) but if you're going to play one at second as part of a double switch, going with the hot hand or the left/right matchups is the way to go. Right now, that's been Fontenot quite a bit, and he probably has matched Cedeno so far this season in hitting the ball. It's just that a few more of Cedeno's have fallen in.

[VanceJergins]

 

I'm not sure why you are arguing Fontenot versus Cedeno...that had little to nothing to do with my point.

 

I'm amazed that, when I write a hypothetical post in which I allude to potential arguments that could be made (without (a.) claiming to believe them, or (b.) actually giving you a complete argument), you fall into exactly the category of people I was writing about when I made the original point. My point had nothing to do with Fontenot, Cedeno, Hill, or Marquis. My point had to do with the use of sample size and stat manipulation to make some condescending post that really doesn't have any more "facts" than any other post. Healthy discussion dies when one person tries to take their opinion (and the use of statistical analysis is still opinion, as the analysis is open to interpretation) and pass it off as fact.

 

Thanks for proving my point. I highlighted it above, as well as the points where you just embody the argument I've made to a tee.

 

No, that's exactly the point. You said that was a possible argument, and I showed that it is a ridiculous argument. There is no manipulation in showing that Cedeno's minor league career was immensely more impressive than Fontenot's.

 

You've done nothing to show that there are logical arguments for the things I listed.

 

How about this:

 

However much Cedeno's minor league numbers show he's a better prospect, Fontenot's minor and major league numbers show that he's more likely to produce this year, which is why he was projected to have better stats than Cedeno by most of the projection systems. As others have mentioned, PECOTA leads the way in that, but is joined by Bill James, Tango, and ZIPS.

 

Add to that Fontenot has been rather unlucky with his balls put into play so far (a 27.7% LD percentage translating into a .304 BABIP) and Cedeno has been rather lucky (a 19.6% LD percentage, and he has a .400 BABIP) and that their difference in their stats is only 2-3 bloops falling for Fontenot or a couple ones caught for Cedeno.

 

Plus if you're arguing over the last couple of weeks, you also have to add in that Fontenot is red hot while Cedeno is scuffling.

 

I believe they are similar options hitting wise now over the course of the season thanks to Cedeno's improved approach (with Cedeno being the better overall player due to his capable defense at short) but if you're going to play one at second as part of a double switch, going with the hot hand or the left/right matchups is the way to go. Right now, that's been Fontenot quite a bit, and he probably has matched Cedeno so far this season in hitting the ball. It's just that a few more of Cedeno's have fallen in.

 

There...that's reasonable. I still think Cedeno is a much better option, but what you said didn't make me cringe.

[Tracer Bullet]

 

Yep. With as many "Lou's an idiot" posts and responses I see here you'd think he starts 5 players in the field every game. I almost laugh when people criticize him after EVERY lineup because of no Pie and Cedeno.

 

The "over the topness", constant complaining and arrogance on this board is amazing.

 

I get so tired of people calling everyone that criticizes Lou or Hendry arrogant.

[javy knows my name]

 

Yep. With as many "Lou's an idiot" posts and responses I see here you'd think he starts 5 players in the field every game. I almost laugh when people criticize him after EVERY lineup because of no Pie and Cedeno.

 

The "over the topness", constant complaining and arrogance on this board is amazing.

 

I get so tired of people calling everyone that criticizes Lou or Hendry arrogant.

Yeah I have trouble figuring out what being critical of hapless Cubs management has to do with arrogance.

[TruffleShuffle]

Everyone deserves to be respected, but healthy discussion -- including the exchange of ideas in the form of debate -- is why people post here.

 

Being wrong on purpose doesn't foster intelligent debate.

 

right but everyone has different ideas about what is wrong. i was ridiculed for supporting theriot over cedeno in the starting lineup, including people saying "you're better than that" and accusing me of supporting theriot just to rile other people up.

[Tracer Bullet]

Everyone deserves to be respected, but healthy discussion -- including the exchange of ideas in the form of debate -- is why people post here.

 

Being wrong on purpose doesn't foster intelligent debate.

 

right but everyone has different ideas about what is wrong. i was ridiculed for supporting theriot over cedeno in the starting lineup, including people saying "you're better than that" and accusing me of supporting theriot just to rile other people up.

 

As well you should have been. Cedeno should be starting over Theriot this year. The fact that Theriot is playing well offensively is great, but it doesn't change the fact that it made more send on April 1 for Cedeno to be the starter heading into the season.

 

And, at least for me, it had a lot less to do with your position than your rationale.

[waffle]

trade him to a perennial doormat so that he can pile up the AB's. I could see him having a soriano type career path.

[TheDude]

 

Yep. With as many "Lou's an idiot" posts and responses I see here you'd think he starts 5 players in the field every game. I almost laugh when people criticize him after EVERY lineup because of no Pie and Cedeno.

 

The "over the topness", constant complaining and arrogance on this board is amazing.

 

I get so tired of people calling everyone that criticizes Lou or Hendry arrogant.

Yeah I have trouble figuring out what being critical of hapless Cubs management has to do with arrogance.

 

Because it seems petty when the Cubs have a .600 winning percentage, 2nd best in baseball. It's arrogant to think Joe Fan can build and lead the Cubs to better than a .600 winning percentage.

 

People always state that the bottom line win record is what you use to judge a team's management. If you're inclined to dis Hendry as a GM, all you have to do is list Hendry's overall win/loss record as a GM as the thesis to emphasize the point, then throw out individual moves to support your case.

 

But now that the team is winning, with a strong likelihood to maintain that success given the way its built, somehow the record is no longer the bottom line or central factor, and that is the disconnect. If this team gets to WS, that is how the management will be judged.

 

Pie and Cedeno are young. They aren't going anywhere soon and their careers are not in jeopardy. As long as the team continues to win, the petty and overblown complaints will remain petty and overblown; particularly since Lou has proven to be a manager that will play anyone that delivers for him. The role players with the playing time right now likely play themselves back into role players, at which time Lou probably gives a kid a shot again.

[CubinNY]

As long as the team continues to win, the petty and overblown complaints will remain petty and overblown; particularly since Lou has proven to be a manager that will play anyone that delivers for him. The role players with the playing time right now likely play themselves back into role players, at which time Lou probably gives a kid a shot again.

That's pretty faulty logic. Actually it is really faulty.

 

A GM and a manager's job is to put their team in the best position to win. If one doesn't look at the underlying reasons why they are winning, and more importantly refuses to question the basic assumptions of a strategy, winning will not long last. As fans it doesn't matter what we think, but when the numbers even out, what Hendry and Lou have done will matter.

 

Hendry and Lou has been extremely lucky that this division is populated with some of the worst decision makers in baseball.

[TruffleShuffle]

Everyone deserves to be respected, but healthy discussion -- including the exchange of ideas in the form of debate -- is why people post here.

 

Being wrong on purpose doesn't foster intelligent debate.

 

right but everyone has different ideas about what is wrong. i was ridiculed for supporting theriot over cedeno in the starting lineup, including people saying "you're better than that" and accusing me of supporting theriot just to rile other people up.

 

As well you should have been. Cedeno should be starting over Theriot this year. The fact that Theriot is playing well offensively is great, but it doesn't change the fact that it made more send on April 1 for Cedeno to be the starter heading into the season.

 

clearly our definition of this word is very different

[Tracer Bullet]

 

Yep. With as many "Lou's an idiot" posts and responses I see here you'd think he starts 5 players in the field every game. I almost laugh when people criticize him after EVERY lineup because of no Pie and Cedeno.

 

The "over the topness", constant complaining and arrogance on this board is amazing.

 

I get so tired of people calling everyone that criticizes Lou or Hendry arrogant.

Yeah I have trouble figuring out what being critical of hapless Cubs management has to do with arrogance.

 

Because it seems petty when the Cubs have a .600 winning percentage, 2nd best in baseball. It's arrogant to think Joe Fan can build and lead the Cubs to better than a .600 winning percentage.

 

People always state that the bottom line win record is what you use to judge a team's management. If you're inclined to dis Hendry as a GM, all you have to do is list Hendry's overall win/loss record as a GM as the thesis to emphasize the point, then throw out individual moves to support your case.

 

But now that the team is winning, with a strong likelihood to maintain that success given the way its built, somehow the record is no longer the bottom line or central factor, and that is the disconnect. If this team gets to WS, that is how the management will be judged.

 

Pie and Cedeno are young. They aren't going anywhere soon and their careers are not in jeopardy. As long as the team continues to win, the petty and overblown complaints will remain petty and overblown; particularly since Lou has proven to be a manager that will play anyone that delivers for him. The role players with the playing time right now likely play themselves back into role players, at which time Lou probably gives a kid a shot again.

 

This is one gigantic pile of BS.

 

The bottom line (W/L record) is not always the best way to judge a GM. It depends on the circumstances and what they had when they arrived (I'm thinking DD in Detroit) and some luck. The criticism of Hendry is he's in a weak division where he's had tons of cash and a great farm system and he's yet to produce consistently good/great teams. Part of that is his inability to hire managers that give young prospects a chance to produce or develop. The other part is his fascination with signing bad players (Marquis, Floyd, Johnson, Eyre) and giving them major roles.

 

Why is there a strong likelihood that this team will have years of success? Is it because we've developed a lot of young cheap talent that is producing for us? No, the one cheap source of average or better production we had was replaced (at times by Cliff Floyd). We have Soto now and that's great, but that's 1 (and, before last year, he didn't have a lot to suggest he was going to be good in the majors). We have refused to let young players that have raked in the minors, preferring to play Reed Johnson or Jim Edmonds or Theriot/Fontenot. Our SP is a mess. We have a very solid top starter locked up, but the 2nd best pitcher on our team last year struggled this year when they messed with his mechanics and is now at Iowa. The rest of our rotation is Lilly (fine) and some combination of Marquis, Dempster, and Lieber. There's some promise with the Seans and other young guys, but Lou's consistently given first dibs to crappy veterans (see a theme?). The offensive guys locked up long term (Lee, ARam, Soriano, Fukudome) are on the wrong side of 30 (ARam will be in a month). Some will produce near prime level for multiple seasons yet, but not likely all of them. And we don't really have any shining stars in the minors looking to take their place in 2-3 years. If this team gets to the WS in the next year or two, that's great. But it's built to win now, not sustained 3 years from now.

 

What gives you any reason to think Pie or Cedeno will get a look in the future? As has been stated on this board several times, this was the perfect year to give both of these guys a prolonged look. But Pie was yanked around after just a few ABs and has now been demoted so we can get more Reed Johnson & Edmonds. Theriot sucked last year and Cedeno tore up AAA. So coming into this season, you would think Cedeno (who is also younger and has a higher upside) would have the advantage. But Lou stuck with the scrappy guy, even after Cedeno came up huge in big situations, Lou still didn't give him more starts - preferring Fontenot. Now Fontenot is the "hot hand" and Cedeno is barely getting any ABs. Not to mention, with the offense clicking as it is, now is the time you can have a "hole" in the lineup and let Pie learn to hit ML pitching (or fail, but at least give him a very long look w/ several weeks of starting 6 games a week).

 

Again - pile of bs.

[Tracer Bullet]

Everyone deserves to be respected, but healthy discussion -- including the exchange of ideas in the form of debate -- is why people post here.

 

Being wrong on purpose doesn't foster intelligent debate.

 

right but everyone has different ideas about what is wrong. i was ridiculed for supporting theriot over cedeno in the starting lineup, including people saying "you're better than that" and accusing me of supporting theriot just to rile other people up.

 

As well you should have been. Cedeno should be starting over Theriot this year. The fact that Theriot is playing well offensively is great, but it doesn't change the fact that it made more send on April 1 for Cedeno to be the starter heading into the season.

 

clearly our definition of this word is very different

 

you're blowing me away with your semantic nit picking. Couldn't you find a grammatical error to bolster your argument?

[SouthSideRyan]

 

Yep. With as many "Lou's an idiot" posts and responses I see here you'd think he starts 5 players in the field every game. I almost laugh when people criticize him after EVERY lineup because of no Pie and Cedeno.

 

The "over the topness", constant complaining and arrogance on this board is amazing.

 

I get so tired of people calling everyone that criticizes Lou or Hendry arrogant.

Yeah I have trouble figuring out what being critical of hapless Cubs management has to do with arrogance.

 

Because it seems petty when the Cubs have a .600 winning percentage, 2nd best in baseball. It's arrogant to think Joe Fan can build and lead the Cubs to better than a .600 winning percentage.

 

People always state that the bottom line win record is what you use to judge a team's management. If you're inclined to dis Hendry as a GM, all you have to do is list Hendry's overall win/loss record as a GM as the thesis to emphasize the point, then throw out individual moves to support your case.

 

But now that the team is winning, with a strong likelihood to maintain that success given the way its built, somehow the record is no longer the bottom line or central factor, and that is the disconnect. If this team gets to WS, that is how the management will be judged.

 

Pie and Cedeno are young. They aren't going anywhere soon and their careers are not in jeopardy. As long as the team continues to win, the petty and overblown complaints will remain petty and overblown; particularly since Lou has proven to be a manager that will play anyone that delivers for him. The role players with the playing time right now likely play themselves back into role players, at which time Lou probably gives a kid a shot again.

 

Reed Johnson's been playing his way into a role player for the past month. Lou's solution to put him back in that role was to get an old corpse to take his spot.

 

Just because we're winning doesn't mean we can't be critical. Would Brewers fans have been wrong to call Yost functionally [expletive] while the Brewers were out to a 24-10 start last year? Yost didn't become a terrible terrible manager starting at game 35 last year, he was the whole way, the team was just playing very well. Maybe if Yost hadn't been an idiot for the first 34 games the Brew coulda won a few more games and they'd have made the playoffs last year. You should be worrying about maximizing your team's potential year round, not just when it starts to lose some games.

[Sammy Sofa]

Reed Johnson's been playing his way into a role player for the past month.

 

He has? For the last month, he's been playing as his career numbers indicate...decent against lefties, horrible against righties.

[TheDude]

As long as the team continues to win, the petty and overblown complaints will remain petty and overblown; particularly since Lou has proven to be a manager that will play anyone that delivers for him. The role players with the playing time right now likely play themselves back into role players, at which time Lou probably gives a kid a shot again.

That's pretty faulty logic. Actually it is really faulty.

 

A GM and a manager's job is to put their team in the best position to win. If one doesn't look at the underlying reasons why they are winning, and more importantly refuses to question the basic assumptions of a strategy, winning will not long last. As fans it doesn't matter what we think, but when the numbers even out, what Hendry and Lou have done will matter.

 

Hendry and Lou has been extremely lucky that this division is populated with some of the worst decision makers in baseball.

 

You state it's faulty logic then build your own strawman argument to support the point. The role players are not the "underlying reasons" this team is winning. I don't believe they are even in the top 5 reasons and I never stated anything in my post to make it seem like that was case.

 

So it does you no good to use that as your one supporting point to why my logic is faulty.

 

This team wins because the 3-6 spots in the lineup are good; sustained and dependable good. It wins because the ace is a reliable stud. It wins because the bullpen has a show-stopping lead holder in Marmol. It wins because of depth: a 30-40 HR guy like Soriano isn't even considered in the top two hitters on the team. It wins because middle starters are good enough to put out quality outtings most of the time.

 

Role players come and go on every team. When they are hot, they earn playing time. When they are not, managers usually let a battle ensue, often including a young guy that has potential in that battle. If the young guy gets a chance and performs, he plays more.

 

If you're going to claim my role player logic is faulty, you need a much better argument. And make sure the point you're debunking is one I actually made, and not one you created for me.

[CubinNY]

Reed Johnson's been playing his way into a role player for the past month.

 

He has? For the last month, he's been playing as his career numbers indicate...decent against lefties, horrible against righties.

YES. That is pretty much the definition of a role player. His role: hit against LHP.

[TheDude]

You should be worrying about maximizing your team's potential year round, not just when it starts to lose some games.

If you were to ask Hendry why he signed Edmonds, he might quote your line here word for word. Don't you believe that he believes he is maximizing the team's potential? While the team is hot and winning, he went after a player he believes becomes an asset for the team and fills a perceived need since ST, which falls precisely in the bounds of your idea of team building.

 

You can disagree with the scouting assessment of the move (whether or not Edmonds is an asset), but not the motivation.

[SouthSideRyan]

You should be worrying about maximizing your team's potential year round, not just when it starts to lose some games.

If you were to ask Hendry why he signed Edmonds, he might quote your line here word for word. Don't you believe that he believes he is maximizing the team's potential? While the team is hot and winning, he went after a player he believes becomes an asset for the team and fills a perceived need since ST, which falls precisely in the bounds of your idea of team building.

 

You can disagree with the scouting assessment of the move (whether or not Edmonds is an asset), but not the motivation.

 

I'll never argue that Lou and Hendry aren't trying to maximize the team's potential. I think I'm well within my right to say they're idiots for the way they're going about it, no matter what the team's record happens to be. That's what I was arguging, not that the team seems content because they're winning. Although Lou's comments about Reed Johnson scare me that he seems to be content with the crap line he was putting up.

[Careless]

Reed Johnson's been playing his way into a role player for the past month.

 

He has? For the last month, he's been playing as his career numbers indicate...decent against lefties, horrible against righties.

except he's been hitting really badly against lefties, too. his l/r OPS are .001 apart. (much higher obp for lefties, slg for righties)

[CuseCubFan69]

Reed Johnson's been playing his way into a role player for the past month.

 

He has? For the last month, he's been playing as his career numbers indicate...decent against lefties, horrible against righties.

except he's been hitting really badly against lefties, too. his l/r OPS are .001 apart. (much higher obp for lefties, slg for righties)

 

Then he should choke up a little more then.

[bukie]

Reed Johnson's been playing his way into a role player for the past month.

 

He has? For the last month, he's been playing as his career numbers indicate...decent against lefties, horrible against righties.

except he's been hitting really badly against lefties, too. his l/r OPS are .001 apart. (much higher obp for lefties, slg for righties)

 

Yeah, the HR was against a righty. Which is the sole reason the OPS's are anywhere close.

[CubinNY]

As long as the team continues to win, the petty and overblown complaints will remain petty and overblown; particularly since Lou has proven to be a manager that will play anyone that delivers for him. The role players with the playing time right now likely play themselves back into role players, at which time Lou probably gives a kid a shot again.

That's pretty faulty logic. Actually it is really faulty.

 

A GM and a manager's job is to put their team in the best position to win. If one doesn't look at the underlying reasons why they are winning, and more importantly refuses to question the basic assumptions of a strategy, winning will not long last. As fans it doesn't matter what we think, but when the numbers even out, what Hendry and Lou have done will matter.

 

Hendry and Lou has been extremely lucky that this division is populated with some of the worst decision makers in baseball.

 

You state it's faulty logic then build your own strawman argument to support the point. The role players are not the "underlying reasons" this team is winning. I don't believe they are even in the top 5 reasons and I never stated anything in my post to make it seem like that was case.

 

So it does you no good to use that as your one supporting point to why my logic is faulty.

 

This team wins because the 3-6 spots in the lineup are good; sustained and dependable good. It wins because the ace is a reliable stud. It wins because the bullpen has a show-stopping lead holder in Marmol. It wins because of depth: a 30-40 HR guy like Soriano isn't even considered in the top two hitters on the team. It wins because middle starters are good enough to put out quality outtings most of the time.

 

Role players come and go on every team. When they are hot, they earn playing time. When they are not, managers usually let a battle ensue, often including a young guy that has potential in that battle. If the young guy gets a chance and performs, he plays more.

 

If you're going to claim my role player logic is faulty, you need a much better argument. And make sure the point you're debunking is one I actually made, and not one you created for me.

Strawman :stickman:

[VanceJergins]

Man, there are a lot of horrible arguments to defend Lou/Hendry. The Cubs have a good record, Lou and Hendry try hard, rabble rabble rabble.

[javy knows my name]

Man, there are a lot of horrible arguments to defend Lou/Hendry. The Cubs have a good record, Lou and Hendry try hard, rabble rabble rabble.

Seriously. When people start defending them by citing good intentions and accusing you of overlooking said intentions, it makes me want to throw up