Perry Fired; Von Joshua to Replace Him (p. 2)

[Hawk4Hall]

Jim Hendry is the one who should be fired.

[Bull]

Hitting coaches do more than "emphasize patience and OBP"

 

clearly.

 

Holy Crap. I guy tries to crack a joke, throw Perry a bone, and remind folks what he meant to this team, and ends up at the wrong end of a noose with a growing mob around him.

 

Perry meant a change of philosophy in this organization. REVOLUTIONARY. That's the only thing I'm very serious about here. He rescued us from the evils of free-swinging, and to me will forever be a huge part of the championship teams of the last two years.

[RynoRules]

 

Read a few of my posts and you'll see that most of what I say is for humor value. Where do you get off slamming me like that. Clearly I know the value of Gerald Perry and his track record. What's wrong with me questioning the move?

 

I'll hold onto the fact that Perry represents a shift in emphasis to OBP. the best Joshua can do is more of the same. The worst is to move away from that. And I know what I'm talking about. Everywhere Perry has gone he has taught patience and increased OBP. With Seattle, with Oakland, and with the Cubs. took them from very impatient teams to very patient teams.

 

the original statement was mostly humor, but the point behind it stands.

 

Hopefully Joshua continues to emphasize patience. Clearly Perry did.

 

No you don't, b/c while you may know something about Perry, you appear to know nothing about Joshua.

 

again the whole neo-dustianism was not a jab at Joshua, mostly an attempt at humor which was clearly lost on you. Perry did symbolize a shift in organizational philosophy.

 

I said: The best he (Joshua) can do is more of the same (emphasizing patience and OBP)

 

lighten up

 

I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt here....

 

Wait, no I won't.

 

Go look up the Sox teams that he coached in the late 90's and early 00's. He taught guys like Mags Ordonez, Carlos Lee and Paul Korneko how to hit and how to take a walk. Your argument that Joshua can do no better than Perry doesn't hold water.

[Bull]

 

Read a few of my posts and you'll see that most of what I say is for humor value. Where do you get off slamming me like that. Clearly I know the value of Gerald Perry and his track record. What's wrong with me questioning the move?

 

I'll hold onto the fact that Perry represents a shift in emphasis to OBP. the best Joshua can do is more of the same. The worst is to move away from that. And I know what I'm talking about. Everywhere Perry has gone he has taught patience and increased OBP. With Seattle, with Oakland, and with the Cubs. took them from very impatient teams to very patient teams.

 

the original statement was mostly humor, but the point behind it stands.

 

Hopefully Joshua continues to emphasize patience. Clearly Perry did.

 

No you don't, b/c while you may know something about Perry, you appear to know nothing about Joshua.

 

again the whole neo-dustianism was not a jab at Joshua, mostly an attempt at humor which was clearly lost on you. Perry did symbolize a shift in organizational philosophy.

 

I said: The best he (Joshua) can do is more of the same (emphasizing patience and OBP)

 

lighten up

 

I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt here....

 

Wait, no I won't.

 

Go look up the Sox teams that he coached in the late 90's and early 00's. He taught guys like Mags Ordonez, Carlos Lee and Paul Korneko how to hit and how to take a walk. Your argument that Joshua can do no better than Perry doesn't hold water.

 

I've done my reading, thank you. Ordonez credits Joshua with helping him learn to go the other way. That's why I earlier mentioned He probably had a good effect on Theriot. FWIW in Joshua's first two years on the south side OBP went DOWN (only very slightly) and took a significant jump in the third year if I remember correctly.

 

I don't know why I'm still here, and still awake. I've already made it clear that I'm not serious about this.

 

You're trying to back me in a corner. I'll make my stand at this:

 

Perry was the catalyst of a revolutionary change in hitting philosophy that made this team the offensive juggernaut it was last year and I think we should all recognize that before we throw him under the bus on this year.

 

Also, as I mentioned earlier, I wasn't at all serious about this until you challenged me on it. I didn't have time for this argument tonight.

 

Also, also, I'm not nearly as funny on message boards/to this crowd as I am in real life. Either that or my mother was just being nice laughing at m banter all these years. Curse you, mother. Or maybe you and a couple others here don't have a sense of humor. You choose, I'll go with whatever you say, in light of the fact that if I don't you'll keep me up the rest of the night arguing the point.

 

Goodnight. This is probably my highest posts per day in the six years I've been posting here. I have a mysterious and ancient reputation to uphold and you're not helping.

 

Goodnight all.

[Cubfanintheknow]

Mr. Wood,

 

This was your first post in this thread:

 

Thus ended the "Patient Cubbies Era". Signal the birth of "Neo-Dustianism" aka "being aggressive".

 

which eventually came around to this:

 

Holy Crap. I guy tries to crack a joke, throw Perry a bone, and remind folks what he meant to this team, and ends up at the wrong end of a noose with a growing mob around him.

 

Perry meant a change of philosophy in this organization. REVOLUTIONARY. That's the only thing I'm very serious about here. He rescued us from the evils of free-swinging, and to me will forever be a huge part of the championship teams of the last two years.

 

For those of us reading these posts, it's impossible to read into the first post what you actually meant in the second. Impossible.

 

As for the switch from Perry to Joshua, I look at it this way; Typically, minor league coaches work on short contracts, always hoping the next year will bring them one step closer to getting to (or back to) the big leagues. Joshua is 61 years old and by all accounts is doing a heckuva job in Iowa. It would have been great to keep him there. But there was also a pretty fair chance he would have been on his way to another organization at the end of this year. So at least he stays with the Cubs and has a chance to work guys he's familiar with. And the players have someone who they're familiar with.

[Magnetic Curses]

i'm just wondering which players showed a "revolutionary" level of improvement in isod under perry's tenure, and i'm not talking about a marginal, no significant deviation improvment.

 

i beat the patience drum for years before i came to the realization that there is no secret ingredient, players in the majors generally get walks because they are respected, they aren't respected simply because they take walks.

 

the change in organizational philosophy can be more attributed to hendry than perry. hendry anointed soto, acquired soriano, fukudome, fontenot, johnson, derosa and edmonds. theriot worked on hitting the ball to where he could be effective hitting it----the opposite way, and because of that insistence on hitting to right, he frustrated a lot of pitchers into walking him. ramirez and lee haven't really changed much, except lee can't hit the ball out anymore.

 

the cubs hitters simply aren't hitting, and i don't think that they'll magically lose their patience at the plate because it never was a huge issue to them anyway.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Stannis

[Arnold Layne]

the cubs hitters simply aren't hitting, and i don't think that they'll magically lose their patience at the plate because it never was a huge issue to them anyway.

 

 

Sure it was. They were consistently below league average in team OBP for I think almost every year except 2008 under the Hendry tenure despite having a payroll in the top five NL in that time.

[soapy]

my feelings are similar to many already posted. i hate to pin the 2009 struggles on Perry after so much success in the second half of 2007 and all of 2008, offensively. having said that, Von Joshua is certainly worthy of the post and i guess i'm happy for him to have the chance, even though my first choice would be to keep him in the minors working with the guys coming up through the system.

 

interestingly enough the cubs are seeing 3.9 P/PA in 2009 v. 3.88 in 2008 (thanks, Fred). that's certainly not the end-all/be-all. just thought it was worth noting.

 

purely anecdotal (i.e. my eyes may be lying to me) it seems a few guys have been less aggressive in the zone this year. Soto and Fontenot in particular come to mind as guys watching very good pitches go down the middle of the plate. at some point i start to wonder if they're just taking pitches for the sake of taking pitches. or, maybe they just haven't been seeing the ball as well as they'd like.

 

fwiw:

fontenot is seeing 4.21 P/PA v. 3.99 in 2008

soto is seeing 4.14 v. 3.98 in 2008

[fromthestretch]

Getting rid of Miles and Patton isn't going to change the offense unless you're bringing in Utley to replace Miles.

 

Getting rid of Miles could improve the offense at least a little. Addition by subtraction in this case. The guy has an OPS+ of 28 in 123 plate appearances. He has no power and no patience, giving him very little offensive value.

[Fred Hornkohl]

P/PA              2009    2008
Fontenot          4.21    3.96
Ramirez           4.19    4.03
Fukudome          4.16    4.29
Scales            4.09
K. Hill           4.09    3.91
Bradley           4.07
Soto              4.04    3.98
D Lee             4.03    3.96
Soriano           3.86    3.72
Gathright         3.80
Fox               3.79
Hoffpauir         3.73    3.75
Miles             3.72
Theriot           3.69    3.76
Blanco            3.58
Freel             3.55
Johnson           3.43    3.75

CUBS              3.90    3.88

[Magnetic Curses]

the cubs hitters simply aren't hitting, and i don't think that they'll magically lose their patience at the plate because it never was a huge issue to them anyway.

 

 

Sure it was. They were consistently below league average in team OBP for I think almost every year except 2008 under the Hendry tenure despite having a payroll in the top five NL in that time.

 

and the addition of edmonds, fukudome, and soto, over 1/3rd of the cubs regular position players, had nothing to do with it?

 

like i said, tell me which cub regulars showed significant improvement in isod from 2007 to 2008.

[javy knows my name]

the cubs hitters simply aren't hitting, and i don't think that they'll magically lose their patience at the plate because it never was a huge issue to them anyway.

 

 

Sure it was. They were consistently below league average in team OBP for I think almost every year except 2008 under the Hendry tenure despite having a payroll in the top five NL in that time.

 

This post pretty much proves you didn't read Sully's post

[dew1679666265]

the cubs hitters simply aren't hitting, and i don't think that they'll magically lose their patience at the plate because it never was a huge issue to them anyway.

 

 

Sure it was. They were consistently below league average in team OBP for I think almost every year except 2008 under the Hendry tenure despite having a payroll in the top five NL in that time.

 

and the addition of edmonds, fukudome, and soto, over 1/3rd of the cubs regular position players, had nothing to do with it?

 

like i said, tell me which cub regulars showed significant improvement in isod from 2007 to 2008.

 

Most of our regulars did improve their isod, but likely not enough to be considered "significant."

 

Soriano improved from .038 to .064

Aramis improved from .056 to .091

Theriot improved from .060 to .080

DeRosa improved from .078 to .091

 

Interestingly, Lee fell from .083 to .070

 

There was definitely a trend upwards from four of the five primary regulars between 07 and 08, but no huge gains either.

[Old Style]

Here's a brief synopsis of Von Joshua's career, courtesy of the Sun-Times' Tony Ginnetti.

 

Joshua, 61, was in his fourth season as Iowa's hitting coach, the I-Cubs currently ranking sixth in the Pacific Coast League in hitting with a team average of .277, an on-base percentage of .342 and a .436 slugging percentage. Before Iowa, he was the organization's Class AA hitting coach. He has been a hitting coach since 1984 following his 10-year major league career, working in the Dodgers and Toronto Blue Jays organization.

 

He joined the White Sox organization in 1993 as a minor league coach and was promoted to major league hitting coach 1998, remaining until 2001.

He's 61????? Is this the same guy that played for the Phillies in the 80's?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

He's 61????? Is this the same guy that played for the Phillies in the 80's?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/joshuvo01.shtml

[Old Style]

He's 61????? Is this the same guy that played for the Phillies in the 80's?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/joshuvo01.shtml

Not at all who I was thinking of. I was thinking of a white dude that played in the mid 80's. Damn, now I'm confused as to the name of the guy in my mind.

[Old Style]

He's 61????? Is this the same guy that played for the Phillies in the 80's?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/joshuvo01.shtml

Not at all who I was thinking of. I was thinking of a white dude that played in the mid 80's. Damn, now I'm confused as to the name of the guy in my mind.

Von Hayes is the guy. Please ignore me.

[hossdriver]

While Perry MAY have been instrumental in patience (i don't buy it), he wasn't very instrumental in key situational hitting.

 

There are a couple problems with the Cubs right now, and it isn't patience. Even the hitters that are down around .220-.250 are still over .300 in OBP. They're taking walks.

 

The lineups are incredibly inept at sacrificing, moving runners, baserunning and getting the all important hit with RISP. Some of this has to do with the lack of play calling from Piniella.

 

I think Fukudome and Soto had more to do with the Cubs spike in OBP in 2008 than anything else. Theriot, Lee, and Ramirez were getting on base at good clips in 2007.

 

However, under Perry, the Cubs have always been all-or-nothing slugging teams in the old AL mold. Yes, they scored the most runs in the NL, and won the most games, but they also were very weak against good pitchers who kept the ball in the park. They were 16-50 in 2008 when scoring 3R or less. They didn't do the little things (small ball) to win games against good pitching. Hence, they are 0-6 in 2 playoff appearances...

 

I've been saying for a month now that Perry should be fired in lieu of Joshua just for the sake of trying to get his former pupils (Soto, Fontenot, Theriot) back in line. He may even be able to help Bradley.

[Magnetic Curses]

the cubs hitters simply aren't hitting, and i don't think that they'll magically lose their patience at the plate because it never was a huge issue to them anyway.

 

 

Sure it was. They were consistently below league average in team OBP for I think almost every year except 2008 under the Hendry tenure despite having a payroll in the top five NL in that time.

 

and the addition of edmonds, fukudome, and soto, over 1/3rd of the cubs regular position players, had nothing to do with it?

 

like i said, tell me which cub regulars showed significant improvement in isod from 2007 to 2008.

 

Most of our regulars did improve their isod, but likely not enough to be considered "significant."

 

Soriano improved from .038 to .064

Aramis improved from .056 to .091

Theriot improved from .060 to .080

DeRosa improved from .078 to .091

 

Interestingly, Lee fell from .083 to .070

 

There was definitely a trend upwards from four of the five primary regulars between 07 and 08, but no huge gains either.

 

consider that soriano's isod was at .074 before joining perry on the cubs. it's also interesting to note that both ramirez and soriano suffered in the slg department in that time.

[fromthestretch]

I think Fukudome and Soto had more to do with the Cubs spike in OBP in 2008 than anything else. Theriot, Lee, and Ramirez were getting on base at good clips in 2007.

 

Really? You might want to check again, because looking at the stats, Theriot posted a .326 OBP in 2007. That's nowhere remotely close to "good".

 

However, under Perry, the Cubs have always been all-or-nothing slugging teams in the old AL mold. Yes, they scored the most runs in the NL, and won the most games, but they also were very weak against good pitchers who kept the ball in the park. They were 16-50 in 2008 when scoring 3R or less. They didn't do the little things (small ball) to win games against good pitching. Hence, they are 0-6 in 2 playoff appearances...

 

So you want to change the overall philosophy that led to the best offense in the league last season? That doesn't sound like a very good idea. A healthy dose of "small ball" is not going to jump start this offense.

 

The lineups are incredibly inept at sacrificing, moving runners, baserunning and getting the all important hit with RISP. Some of this has to do with the lack of play calling from Piniella.

 

I'd be very curious to know how you would go about improving the hitting with RISP.

[hossdriver]

I think Fukudome and Soto had more to do with the Cubs spike in OBP in 2008 than anything else. Theriot, Lee, and Ramirez were getting on base at good clips in 2007.

 

Really? You might want to check again, because looking at the stats, Theriot posted a .326 OBP in 2007. That's nowhere remotely close to "good".

 

However, under Perry, the Cubs have always been all-or-nothing slugging teams in the old AL mold. Yes, they scored the most runs in the NL, and won the most games, but they also were very weak against good pitchers who kept the ball in the park. They were 16-50 in 2008 when scoring 3R or less. They didn't do the little things (small ball) to win games against good pitching. Hence, they are 0-6 in 2 playoff appearances...

 

So you want to change the overall philosophy that led to the best offense in the league last season? That doesn't sound like a very good idea. A healthy dose of "small ball" is not going to jump start this offense.

 

The lineups are incredibly inept at sacrificing, moving runners, baserunning and getting the all important hit with RISP. Some of this has to do with the lack of play calling from Piniella.

 

 

I'd be very curious to know how you would go about improving the hitting with RISP.

 

Like you quoted, the Cubs had the MOST RUNS scored in 2008. However, they were one of the least consistent offenses going because on any given day they could put up 7+ (57 times!!!), and just as easily get shut out or held to one run (18 times, 0-18 record). They were barely above .500 on the road, and had a losing record against .500 or better ballclubs right up until mid to late September...

 

You don't change the 'overall' philosophy but you can do things to increase 'contact' when RISP... You don't have to reach back for the 3R homer. Case in point, the Cubs won yesterday on 3 singles and being aggressive 1st to 3rd. Theriot shortened up and went the other way.

 

You know Lowe, or Lincecum, or Santana, or Webb is on the mound and the wind is blowing in, yet the Cubs are hacking away and striking out swinging for Waveland... Play some small ball, and yes, the offense will get jump started. Do it in the early innings and set the tone.

 

16-50 is ATROCIOUS when scoring 3 or less and certainly won't win any games in October...

 

But if you'd rather lead the world in 'Runs' in the regular season and get shutdown in the playoffs, go right ahead...

[dew1679666265]

However, under Perry, the Cubs have always been all-or-nothing slugging teams in the old AL mold. Yes, they scored the most runs in the NL, and won the most games, but they also were very weak against good pitchers who kept the ball in the park. They were 16-50 in 2008 when scoring 3R or less. They didn't do the little things (small ball) to win games against good pitching. Hence, they are 0-6 in 2 playoff appearances...

 

Teams are going to do poorly overall when they score 3 runs or less. Let's look at two playoff teams last year, the Red Sox and the World Champion Phillies for evidence:

 

2008 W/L when scoring 3 runs or less for Boston: 10-45

 

2008 W/L when scoring 3 runs or less for Philadelphia: 12-47

 

Those are the only two I figured up, but I'd wager that most teams follow that lead. Combined playoff record for the two: 18-7, with the Phillies winning the World Series.

[dew1679666265]

the cubs hitters simply aren't hitting, and i don't think that they'll magically lose their patience at the plate because it never was a huge issue to them anyway.

 

 

Sure it was. They were consistently below league average in team OBP for I think almost every year except 2008 under the Hendry tenure despite having a payroll in the top five NL in that time.

 

and the addition of edmonds, fukudome, and soto, over 1/3rd of the cubs regular position players, had nothing to do with it?

 

like i said, tell me which cub regulars showed significant improvement in isod from 2007 to 2008.

 

Most of our regulars did improve their isod, but likely not enough to be considered "significant."

 

Soriano improved from .038 to .064

Aramis improved from .056 to .091

Theriot improved from .060 to .080

DeRosa improved from .078 to .091

 

Interestingly, Lee fell from .083 to .070

 

There was definitely a trend upwards from four of the five primary regulars between 07 and 08, but no huge gains either.

 

consider that soriano's isod was at .074 before joining perry on the cubs. it's also interesting to note that both ramirez and soriano suffered in the slg department in that time.

 

A lot of Soriano's high isod in 2006 was due to 16 intentional walks - the most in his career. In 2008, in fact, his isod was greatly helped by IBBs as well - he had 11.

 

That is interesting on the slugging too. I hadn't noticed that til now.

[David]

However, under Perry, the Cubs have always been all-or-nothing slugging teams in the old AL mold. Yes, they scored the most runs in the NL, and won the most games, but they also were very weak against good pitchers who kept the ball in the park. They were 16-50 in 2008 when scoring 3R or less. They didn't do the little things (small ball) to win games against good pitching. Hence, they are 0-6 in 2 playoff appearances...

 

Teams are going to do poorly overall when they score 3 runs or less. Let's look at two playoff teams last year, the Red Sox and the World Champion Phillies for evidence:

 

2008 W/L when scoring 3 runs or less for Boston: 10-45

 

2008 W/L when scoring 3 runs or less for Philadelphia: 12-47

 

Those are the only two I figured up, but I'd wager that most teams follow that lead. Combined playoff record for the two: 18-7, with the Phillies winning the World Series.

 

 

Who would have ever thought that teams had bad records when they scored fewer runs??

[hossdriver]

However, under Perry, the Cubs have always been all-or-nothing slugging teams in the old AL mold. Yes, they scored the most runs in the NL, and won the most games, but they also were very weak against good pitchers who kept the ball in the park. They were 16-50 in 2008 when scoring 3R or less. They didn't do the little things (small ball) to win games against good pitching. Hence, they are 0-6 in 2 playoff appearances...

 

Teams are going to do poorly overall when they score 3 runs or less. Let's look at two playoff teams last year, the Red Sox and the World Champion Phillies for evidence:

 

2008 W/L when scoring 3 runs or less for Boston: 10-45

 

2008 W/L when scoring 3 runs or less for Philadelphia: 12-47

 

Those are the only two I figured up, but I'd wager that most teams follow that lead. Combined playoff record for the two: 18-7, with the Phillies winning the World Series.

 

 

I understand that team will lose MORE games when scores 3 or less, the point is that the Cubs did it 66 TIMES, compared to 55 and 59 for the Sox and Phillies... The Rays did it 61 times.

 

You KNOW that that will be the case in the playoffs too when facing the likes of the Dodgers or Phillies staff. You either have to be HOT at the plate, which the Cubs weren't, or be practiced in small ball and manufacturing runs when you need to.

 

The Cubs DON'T do it. That's why they can't get bunts down, move runners, or score runs on a CONSISTENT basis.