Rangers Sign Brandon Webb (p. 10)

[Ballgame64]

If the Cubs insist on having Marlon Byrd in the starting line-up, I don't want anything to do with the Marlon Byrd that batted third after Lee was traded. That was like having a pitcher batting 3rd. For those who don't remember, he batted 3rd 52 times last year (1/3 of a season) and posted this line .227/.272/.300/.572 with one whole home run and 17 rbis. Please tell me Mike Quade knows this.

 

Marlon was pretty good in the 4th or 5th spot but brutal in the 3rd spot. His contract is not bad, maybe he should be on the block as a trade while his value is high like DeRosa a couple of years ago.

 

As for Webb, shoulder injuries are tough to overcome but if he is healthy and can regain the sinker, he would be a very good addition.

[Cubswin11]

If the Cubs insist on having Marlon Byrd in the starting line-up, I don't want anything to do with the Marlon Byrd that batted third after Lee was traded. That was like having a pitcher batting 3rd. For those who don't remember, he batted 3rd 52 times last year (1/3 of a season) and posted this line .227/.272/.300/.572 with one whole home run and 17 rbis. Please tell me Mike Quade knows this.

 

Marlon was pretty good in the 4th or 5th spot but brutal in the 3rd spot. His contract is not bad, maybe he should be on the block as a trade while his value is high like DeRosa a couple of years ago.

 

As for Webb, shoulder injuries are tough to overcome but if he is healthy and can regain the sinker, he would be a very good addition.

Byrd should bat 5th or 7th for the most part IMO, maybe 2nd once in a while. Assuming we don't add/subtract any offensive players the rest of the year the lineup I like most is

 

Castro SS

Soto C

Pena 1B

Ramirez 3B

Byrd CF/Soriano LF

Fukudome RF

Soriano LF/Byrd CF

Dewitt/Baker 2B.

[Soul]

One or two year deals, or one year deals with an option, don't seem very risky to me, even if the dollars are fairly high.

 

I mean yes - you're putting payroll up for next year. But I don't think our problem has been finding money at all. It's been being locked in a cast-iron box by knowing we'll have to pay tons of wasted money for relatively low performers, for years on end.

 

 

I'd seriously consider Webb for short term money. Just like the Pena deal seems reasonable to me. Does Ricketts feel this way too? I don't know.

 

We're not a poor club. Just a club in need of sanity & flexibility from year to year.

 

God it's amazing how time flies. I can't believe it's been 2 years since Webb has been pitching.

[erik316wttn]

One or two year deals, or one year deals with an option, don't seem very risky to me, even if the dollars are fairly high.

 

I mean yes - you're putting payroll up for next year. But I don't think our problem has been finding money at all. It's been being locked in a cast-iron box by knowing we'll have to pay tons of wasted money for relatively low performers, for years on end.

 

 

I'd seriously consider Webb for short term money. Just like the Pena deal seems reasonable to me. Does Ricketts feel this way too? I don't know.

 

We're not a poor club. Just a club in need of sanity & flexibility from year to year.

 

God it's amazing how time flies. I can't believe it's been 2 years since Webb has been pitching.

 

I'd offer a low one-year base salary (5 million?) with a higher 2nd year vesting option based on IP and see if he takes it.

[davearm2]

I'd offer a low one-year base salary (5 million?) with a higher 2nd year vesting option based on IP and see if he takes it.

Heck I'd have no problem putting IP-based bonuses in this year's contract.

 

Give him a $5M base and an extra $1M for each additional 10 IP above, say, 160 or 170. If the guy's logging those sorts of innings in 2011 then there's a extremely high likelihood he's earning every penny and more.

[BigSlick]

Please don't lose to the [expletive] Nats again.

actually the last time we beat the nats we ended up with soriano's contract, so i hope they continue beating us on free agents

[17 Seconds]

If the Cubs insist on having Marlon Byrd in the starting line-up, I don't want anything to do with the Marlon Byrd that batted third after Lee was traded. That was like having a pitcher batting 3rd. For those who don't remember, he batted 3rd 52 times last year (1/3 of a season) and posted this line .227/.272/.300/.572 with one whole home run and 17 rbis. Please tell me Mike Quade knows this.

 

Marlon was pretty good in the 4th or 5th spot but brutal in the 3rd spot. His contract is not bad, maybe he should be on the block as a trade while his value is high like DeRosa a couple of years ago.

 

his performance has nothing to do with what spot in the lineup he bats.

[David]

 

Yeah, if all of that were to happen, the Cubs would win 110 games.

 

But it won't.

 

 

There's always a bunch of variables like that going into a season for most teams that can make or break years... especially when it's "if xxx has a monster year."

 

That said, the 08 team had a lot of that stuff go our way. DeRo had a great year, Dempster came out of nowhere to be a really good starter, Soto panned out, Harden had his one remotely healthy season and was pretty awesome, Aramis stayed healthy...

 

and the biggest one... Jim freaking Edmonds

 

 

just saying

[dew1679666265]

There's always a bunch of variables like that going into a season for most teams that can make or break years... especially when it's "if xxx has a monster year."

 

That said, the 08 team had a lot of that stuff go our way. DeRo had a great year, Dempster came out of nowhere to be a really good starter, Soto panned out, Harden had his one remotely healthy season and was pretty awesome, Aramis stayed healthy...

 

and the biggest one... Jim freaking Edmonds

 

 

just saying

 

Every team has those questions and variables, but one of the reasons I doubt this team's likelihood to make the playoffs is because of how many we have. Most teams have a couple here or there, but the for the Cubs there are four offensive positions that are reliable (CF, RF, 2B, C) and only three if we trade Fuku. Outside of Marmol and Marshall, the entire bullpen is a question and there's only 2 rotation spots that are reliable (Demp and Wells).

 

If everything pans out, we probably have another season like 08. If none of them go right, we probably struggle to win 60 games. My fear, though, is that too many have to go right than will for us to make the playoffs.

 

I hope I'm wrong.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm guessing there's some sort of typo on your positions you list as reliable. DeWitt's has a good chance of being our worst hitter.

[dew1679666265]

I'm guessing there's some sort of typo on your positions you list as reliable. DeWitt's has a good chance of being our worst hitter.

 

By reliable I meant we know what we're getting out of that position - be it good production or bad. My point was that we can gauge expectations more easily at those positions. At the other positions we may get great production or we may get crap production.

[jersey cubs fan]

Every team has those questions and variables, but one of the reasons I doubt this team's likelihood to make the playoffs is because of how many we have. Most teams have a couple here or there, but the for the Cubs there are four offensive positions that are reliable (CF, RF, 2B, C) and only three if we trade Fuku. Outside of Marmol and Marshall, the entire bullpen is a question and there's only 2 rotation spots that are reliable (Demp and Wells).

 

If everything pans out, we probably have another season like 08. If none of them go right, we probably struggle to win 60 games. My fear, though, is that too many have to go right than will for us to make the playoffs.

 

I hope I'm wrong.

 

On the other hand, Ramirez has been the most reliable hitter on the team for 7+ years. Soto is a bit more hit or miss, and plays a more dangerous position for injuries. I'm not sure why 2B is listed as reliable, unless you mean reliably weak.

 

I think it's more about there not really being a solid candidate for breakout stud production at his position. 2008 saw league leading production at C and CF, they also had near top of the league at 3B and 2B and not one "black hole" position. RF was below average OPS, but still had a .350 OBP. Most positions were at least above average.

 

The Cubs sufferered from a couple black hole positions last year, 1B and 2B. And they really didn't get top of the line production anywhere, thanks to Castro showing up late and backup catchers. Those might be the only guys who stand a real chance of top notch production this season.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm guessing there's some sort of typo on your positions you list as reliable. DeWitt's has a good chance of being our worst hitter.

 

By reliable I meant we know what we're getting out of that position - be it good production or bad. My point was that we can gauge expectations more easily at those positions. At the other positions we may get great production or we may get crap production.

 

Barring injury, I have a hard time seeing us getting crap production from the left side of the infield

[Ballgame64]

If the Cubs insist on having Marlon Byrd in the starting line-up, I don't want anything to do with the Marlon Byrd that batted third after Lee was traded. That was like having a pitcher batting 3rd. For those who don't remember, he batted 3rd 52 times last year (1/3 of a season) and posted this line .227/.272/.300/.572 with one whole home run and 17 rbis. Please tell me Mike Quade knows this.

 

Marlon was pretty good in the 4th or 5th spot but brutal in the 3rd spot. His contract is not bad, maybe he should be on the block as a trade while his value is high like DeRosa a couple of years ago.

 

his performance has nothing to do with what spot in the lineup he bats.

His career splits don't agree with you. So when do we use stats and when don't we? Ok, over a 162 game schedule we can expect certain things from Marlon based on his career averages. None of his numbers would suggest he is the type of hitter most people would bat 3rd.

[jersey cubs fan]

If the Cubs insist on having Marlon Byrd in the starting line-up, I don't want anything to do with the Marlon Byrd that batted third after Lee was traded. That was like having a pitcher batting 3rd. For those who don't remember, he batted 3rd 52 times last year (1/3 of a season) and posted this line .227/.272/.300/.572 with one whole home run and 17 rbis. Please tell me Mike Quade knows this.

 

Marlon was pretty good in the 4th or 5th spot but brutal in the 3rd spot. His contract is not bad, maybe he should be on the block as a trade while his value is high like DeRosa a couple of years ago.

 

his performance has nothing to do with what spot in the lineup he bats.

His career splits don't agree with you. So when do we use stats and when don't we? Ok, over a 162 game schedule we can expect certain things from Marlon based on his career averages. None of his numbers would suggest he is the type of hitter most people would bat 3rd.

 

While I would agree he is far from the type of guy you would ideally put in the three spot (kind of like most Cubs) his splits in different spots in the order are just meaningless.

[dew1679666265]

On the other hand, Ramirez has been the most reliable hitter on the team for 7+ years. Soto is a bit more hit or miss, and plays a more dangerous position for injuries. I'm not sure why 2B is listed as reliable, unless you mean reliably weak.

 

I think it's more about there not really being a solid candidate for breakout stud production at his position. 2008 saw league leading production at C and CF, they also had near top of the league at 3B and 2B and not one "black hole" position. RF was below average OPS, but still had a .350 OBP. Most positions were at least above average.

 

The Cubs sufferered from a couple black hole positions last year, 1B and 2B. And they really didn't get top of the line production anywhere, thanks to Castro showing up late and backup catchers. Those might be the only guys who stand a real chance of top notch production this season.

 

Ramirez's question is health, same largely as Z in the rotation. If Aramis is hurt, 3B production will likely be crap. If he's healthy, it should be top-notch.

 

Castro could be a breakout type candidate, or he could be a bit slow to adjust in his second year. Pena wouldn't be a breakout guy, but he could return to the heights of 2007 or so. Soriano could have a return to greatness for a year. I could see any of them providing top-notch production, but every one could really struggle as well.

 

If Quade would go with Castillo (or Chirinos) over Hill, we could potentially see our catcher spot be the most productive in the NL, as it was 4th last year.

 

As for second being reliable, look one post up from yours – I'm talking about knowing what production we'll get from there, whether good or bad, to more accurately gauge expectations.

[dew1679666265]

Barring injury, I have a hard time seeing us getting crap production from the left side of the infield

 

As I told goony, if Ramirez goes down for an extended period (very realistic), then we could get crap production from there. We were 7th in the league in wOBA at third last year and that was after a really hot second half by Aramis.

 

As for Castro, I wavered on whether to include him in the reliable positions or not, but the possibility of him being slow to adjust to the adjustments made to him in his second year could cause lesser production from him this year. Or he could just completely blow up and hit his ceiling this year. Basically, it's hard for me to say I know what to expect from a second year player.

[Moises a loo]

If the Cubs insist on having Marlon Byrd in the starting line-up, I don't want anything to do with the Marlon Byrd that batted third after Lee was traded. That was like having a pitcher batting 3rd. For those who don't remember, he batted 3rd 52 times last year (1/3 of a season) and posted this line .227/.272/.300/.572 with one whole home run and 17 rbis. Please tell me Mike Quade knows this.

 

Marlon was pretty good in the 4th or 5th spot but brutal in the 3rd spot. His contract is not bad, maybe he should be on the block as a trade while his value is high like DeRosa a couple of years ago.

 

his performance has nothing to do with what spot in the lineup he bats.

His career splits don't agree with you. So when do we use stats and when don't we? Ok, over a 162 game schedule we can expect certain things from Marlon based on his career averages. None of his numbers would suggest he is the type of hitter most people would bat 3rd.

 

While I would agree he is far from the type of guy you would ideally put in the three spot (kind of like most Cubs) his splits in different spots in the order are just meaningless.

I don't see how you can assert that. Can you prove those splits are meaningless? Because it seems to me that a hitter's mental approach would be a big factor in his effectiveness; are you saying that you know for a fact that hitters never change their approach based on where they're hitting in the lineup? I'm genuinely curious here.

[CubColtPacer]

If the Cubs insist on having Marlon Byrd in the starting line-up, I don't want anything to do with the Marlon Byrd that batted third after Lee was traded. That was like having a pitcher batting 3rd. For those who don't remember, he batted 3rd 52 times last year (1/3 of a season) and posted this line .227/.272/.300/.572 with one whole home run and 17 rbis. Please tell me Mike Quade knows this.

 

Marlon was pretty good in the 4th or 5th spot but brutal in the 3rd spot. His contract is not bad, maybe he should be on the block as a trade while his value is high like DeRosa a couple of years ago.

 

his performance has nothing to do with what spot in the lineup he bats.

His career splits don't agree with you. So when do we use stats and when don't we? Ok, over a 162 game schedule we can expect certain things from Marlon based on his career averages. None of his numbers would suggest he is the type of hitter most people would bat 3rd.

 

While I would agree he is far from the type of guy you would ideally put in the three spot (kind of like most Cubs) his splits in different spots in the order are just meaningless.

I don't see how you can assert that. Can you prove those splits are meaningless? Because it seems to me that a hitter's mental approach would be a big factor in his effectiveness; are you saying that you know for a fact that hitters never change their approach based on where they're hitting in the lineup? I'm genuinely curious here.

 

The splits might not be meaningless but many hitters have splits that extreme after a couple hundred at bats only to have those splits normalize as time goes on. Byrd hit very well in the 3 spot in 76 at-bats in 2009. The fact that he went through a major slump in the 3 spot in just over 200 at-bats this past year is almost certainly due to other factors than what spot in the lineup he was. Is it possible that he struggles in the 3 spot? Maybe. But there's no reason to change where he's batting until we have gotten much, much much more than a half season of evidence because history tells us that it's almost 100% chance to just be statistical noise.

[dew1679666265]

I don't see how you can assert that. Can you prove those splits are meaningless? Because it seems to me that a hitter's mental approach would be a big factor in his effectiveness; are you saying that you know for a fact that hitters never change their approach based on where they're hitting in the lineup? I'm genuinely curious here.

 

To expand on CCP's point, without a pretty significant number of at bats, stats can fluctuate pretty extremely. Byrd's had 323 plate appearances in the third spot in the order, not even a full half season worth of plate appearances. If he has another season like 2009 where he has a .904 OPS in the third spot, even over just 85 PAs, that overall OPS could change dramatically. You need a lot more PAs for the stats to be reliable.

 

It's the same as RISP stats, it's not that they're not important, it's that they're not reliable because they fluctuate too much.

[Northside Blues]

323 PAs is not a small sample.

[SouthSideRyan]

323 PAs is not a small sample.

 

What do you think changes about Marlon's approach when batting 4th compared to 3rd?

[Little Slide Rooter]

Please don't lose to the [expletive] Nats again.

actually the last time we beat the nats we ended up with soriano's contract, so i hope they continue beating us on free agents

 

As I recall, the Soriano sweepstakes was down to the Angels and Phillies who each had 4-5 year deals before Hendry swooped in with his atrocity of a contract.

 

Aramis had just opted out of his contract, and it appeared as though it was rebuilding time.

[17 Seconds]

If the Cubs insist on having Marlon Byrd in the starting line-up, I don't want anything to do with the Marlon Byrd that batted third after Lee was traded. That was like having a pitcher batting 3rd. For those who don't remember, he batted 3rd 52 times last year (1/3 of a season) and posted this line .227/.272/.300/.572 with one whole home run and 17 rbis. Please tell me Mike Quade knows this.

 

Marlon was pretty good in the 4th or 5th spot but brutal in the 3rd spot. His contract is not bad, maybe he should be on the block as a trade while his value is high like DeRosa a couple of years ago.

 

his performance has nothing to do with what spot in the lineup he bats.

His career splits don't agree with you. So when do we use stats and when don't we? Ok, over a 162 game schedule we can expect certain things from Marlon based on his career averages. None of his numbers would suggest he is the type of hitter most people would bat 3rd.

 

use them logically, for starters. then go from there

[dew1679666265]

323 PAs is not a small sample.

 

If Byrd has another season like 2009 in the third spot - .904 OPS in 85 PAs – his OPS would improve 110 points. You can start to see a trend, maybe, in 323 PAs, but it's not enough of a sample size to make a declarative statement because it can fluctuate a bunch in a minimal number of PAs.

 

You'll generally want at least a full season's worth of PAs to start getting a good, large sample size. Even then, if they're spread out over multiple different seasons (like RISP numbers generally are) you have to look at other factors such as if he just sucked overall in one year or had a breakout year in another or something. It's a lot more telling if you're looking at a full season's worth of PAs in no more than a season or two worth of time.