Cubs looking at Orlando Hudson?

[Schwarber Fan]

Sources also say the Cubs are keeping tabs on Orlando Hudson, a Type-B free agent. While the team has Blake DeWitt, Jeff Baker, and Darwin Barney, Hudson has always been a favorite of Jim Hendry and would give the team a lefty at the top of the order to pair with Starlin Castro.

 

http://www.mlbdailydish.com/2010/11/29/1842409/cubs-keeping-tabs-on-open-market

 

Would be a big upgrade at 2B and a possible "leadoff hitter"

[Northside Blues]

"You can never have too many second basemen."

 

- Jim Hendry

[Cubswin11]

Hudson, Pena and Webb wouldn't be a terrible off-season.

[rawaction]

Would be a big upgrade at 2B and a possible "leadoff hitter"

 

Says who? Orlando Hudson is going to be 33 years old in 2 weeks and is coming off a season of a .338 OBP. And nearly all of his PAs came hitting in front of Joe Mauer.

 

Hudson (2010)- .338 OBP, .372 SLG

DeWitt (2010)- .336 OBP, .373 SLG

 

They are almost literally the same player offensively. Hudson's strong defensively, but he also cost $5Mil vs. DeWitt at 410K.

[Post Count Padder]

I've always been a fan of O-Dog, but DeWitt has more upside and makes a lot less.

[shnsajax]

Another nice move if it was 2007.

[Geech]

Would be a big upgrade at 2B and a possible "leadoff hitter"

 

Says who? Orlando Hudson is going to be 33 years old in 2 weeks and is coming off a season of a .338 OBP. And nearly all of his PAs came hitting in front of Joe Mauer.

 

Hudson (2010)- .338 OBP, .372 SLG

DeWitt (2010)- .336 OBP, .373 SLG

 

They are almost literally the same player offensively. Hudson's strong defensively, but he also cost $5Mil vs. DeWitt at 410K.

 

Those are raw numbers that don't consider league or park effects. Hudson's 2010 wOBA was .320 compared to .311 for DeWitt. Furthermore, this was a down year for Hudson, and the lowest wOBA he has posted since 2005. His career total is .337, and the Bill James Handbook projects him to hit to the tune of .332 wOBA next year. DeWitt's .311 is right in line with his relatively short career, .312, and the Handbook project him to post a .312 wOBA next season as well.

 

Since UZR typically likes Hudson at second a whole lot better than DeWitt, and you yourself noted the gap in defense, Hudson's 2010 WAR ended up being 3.1 vs DeWitt's .8. In other words, Hudson at 5 million is a bargain upgrade over DeWitt.

[Sammy Sofa]

Hudson, Pena and Webb wouldn't be a terrible off-season.

 

It's really getting annoying how many ways the Cubs will find to spend Dunn's money on mediocrity. They don't need Hudson, they don't need Webb and if they sign Dunn they don't need Pena. THIS ISN'T COMPLICATED, CUBS.

[dew1679666265]

Those are raw numbers that don't consider league or park effects. Hudson's 2010 wOBA was .320 compared to .311 for DeWitt. Furthermore, this was a down year for Hudson, and the lowest wOBA he has posted since 2005. His career total is .337, and the Bill James Handbook projects him to hit to the tune of .332 wOBA next year. DeWitt's .311 is right in line with his relatively short career, .312, and the Handbook project him to post a .312 wOBA next season as well.

 

How much of that is accounting for age, though? Hudson is going to be 33 and his 2010 numbers could be a sign that he's trending downwards. Dewitt is significantly younger and has the upside to improve on his numbers. I've been a fan of Hudson in the past, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if those wOBAs were a whole lot closer than James is projecting.

[UMFan83]

Hudson, Pena and Webb wouldn't be a terrible off-season.

 

It's really getting annoying how many ways the Cubs will find to spend Dunn's money on mediocrity. They don't need Hudson, they don't need Webb and if they sign Dunn they don't need Pena. THIS ISN'T COMPLICATED, CUBS.

 

Agreed. I am not completely opposed to Webb because if he can regain his 08 form, he's a steal and you can always use more starting pitching. Even if he pitches to only 90% of what he was before, he immediately becomes the staff ace, and a pitcher that teams don't want to face in a potential postseason series. As decent as the Cubs starting pitching was last year, no current Cubs starter has that type of stuff.

 

Back to the point, while that is all great, I think I'd rather have a Dunn then those 3. Hudson is nice but not our biggest need. Our biggest need is a legit middle of the order monster that teams have to plan ahead for when their lineup spot comes up. We have Ramirez, and we have Soriano when he's hot, but other than that, no one really strikes fear into opposing pitchers. Dunn would give our lineup a lot of legitimacy, and would give us that lefty power bat that we've always dreamed about. We are getting a pretty sure thing with Dunn while Hudson is potentially declining, Webb is still throwing in the 80s and a big risk to get back to his old self, and Pena qualified for the batting title and hit under .200 last year.

[Geech]

How much of that is accounting for age, though? Hudson is going to be 33 and his 2010 numbers could be a sign that he's trending downwards. Dewitt is significantly younger and has the upside to improve on his numbers. I've been a fan of Hudson in the past, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if those wOBAs were a whole lot closer than James is projecting.

 

Any projection system worth its salt is going to have some kind of adjustment for age. That being said, I honestly don't know what kind of age-related adjustments the Handbook might make. We can see what the other systems say about them, but I highly doubt any system would justify employing DeWitt over Hudson.

 

I don't think DeWitt has what it takes to justify being a regular player at second, especially next season. If his bat develops a lot more in the next couple of years, he might be a decent option for a bargain third baseman, but he's getting old enough that it doesn't seem very likely. I'm not saying he won't improve at all, but I don't think he'll improve enough.

[Cubs Fan Dan]

How much of that is accounting for age, though? Hudson is going to be 33 and his 2010 numbers could be a sign that he's trending downwards. Dewitt is significantly younger and has the upside to improve on his numbers. I've been a fan of Hudson in the past, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if those wOBAs were a whole lot closer than James is projecting.

 

Any projection system worth its salt is going to have some kind of adjustment for age. That being said, I honestly don't know what kind of age-related adjustments the Handbook might make. We can see what the other systems say about them, but I highly doubt any system would justify employing DeWitt over Hudson.

 

I don't think DeWitt has what it takes to justify being a regular player at second, especially next season. If his bat develops a lot more in the next couple of years, he might be a decent option for a bargain third baseman, but he's getting old enough that it doesn't seem very likely. I'm not saying he won't improve at all, but I don't think he'll improve enough.

 

I am having a hard time believing this, if Hendry wanted Hudson there was a need for him 2 years ago and Hendry could have signed him. This sounds like the Padilla speculation. I would not get my panties in a bunch over this rumor.

[Hall7810]

Hudson, Pena and Webb wouldn't be a terrible off-season.

 

It's really getting annoying how many ways the Cubs will find to spend Dunn's money on mediocrity. They don't need Hudson, they don't need Webb and if they sign Dunn they don't need Pena. THIS ISN'T COMPLICATED, CUBS.

 

Seems like there's still some "catch the ball" residue left in Hendry's brain.

[dew1679666265]

Any projection system worth its salt is going to have some kind of adjustment for age. That being said, I honestly don't know what kind of age-related adjustments the Handbook might make. We can see what the other systems say about them, but I highly doubt any system would justify employing DeWitt over Hudson.

 

I don't think DeWitt has what it takes to justify being a regular player at second, especially next season. If his bat develops a lot more in the next couple of years, he might be a decent option for a bargain third baseman, but he's getting old enough that it doesn't seem very likely. I'm not saying he won't improve at all, but I don't think he'll improve enough.

 

If it's purely Dewitt vs Hudson, I agree Hudson is the right choice. But how confident can we be that last year's dropoff was a fluke and not age-related? I'd want to be pretty confident to hand out $5+ million in possibly a two year deal.

[Geech]

If it's purely Dewitt vs Hudson, I agree Hudson is the right choice. But how confident can we be that last year's dropoff was a fluke and not age-related? I'd want to be pretty confident to hand out $5+ million in possibly a two year deal.

 

I hear what you're saying. However, between DeWitt's poor defense at second, and Hudson's offensive superiority, such as it was, I think he's still totally worth the difference in money. It would take a precipitous decline in performance next year to close the gap.

 

For all the talk of the need to fill first base, the team also had a big hole at second last year, and Blake DeWitt is probably going to be more of the same. Hudson may not be a perfect player, but he is a very good player. If he can be signed to a 2 year deal for 5 million, the Cobs really need to look into it.

[questionmarkgrace]

And the annual search for a middle infielder begins.

 

A couple years back he would have been a great short term signing. i'm not exactly sold on Dewitt as an everyday starter but id rather have him than an aging oft injured middle infielder.

 

Chalk this up to jimbo wanting a leadoff guy

[soapy]

Hudson, Pena and Webb wouldn't be a terrible off-season.

 

It's really getting annoying how many ways the Cubs will find to spend Dunn's money on mediocrity. They don't need Hudson, they don't need Webb and if they sign Dunn they don't need Pena. THIS ISN'T COMPLICATED, CUBS.

 

And yet it's something we all saw coming. Sign a bunch of mediocre or worse players who don't fill a need to contracts they don't deserve and then ratchet up the "[Good Player] was just too expensive" rhetoric.

[Guest]

I haven't run the numbers, but I can't imagine there's much of a difference between Dunn/DeWitt/SP(you pick, Silva/Cashner/Coleman/etc) and Pena/Hudson/Webb.

[Dr. Cub]

Another nice move if it was 2007.

 

 

This just in.....Jim was recently seen with a bandage on his forehead riding around in a 1988 DeLorean.

[SouthSideRyan]

I haven't run the numbers, but I can't imagine there's much of a difference between Dunn/DeWitt/SP(you pick, Silva/Cashner/Coleman/etc) and Pena/Hudson/Webb.

 

You're getting a whole lot more cost certainty with the first group

[Guest]

I haven't run the numbers, but I can't imagine there's much of a difference between Dunn/DeWitt/SP(you pick, Silva/Cashner/Coleman/etc) and Pena/Hudson/Webb.

 

You're getting a whole lot more cost certainty with the first group

 

Perhaps, but you're likely getting more payroll flexibility with the 2nd group, and with the second 3 you have a much better shot at 1 or more going nuts for a year than with the first group.

[dew1679666265]

I hear what you're saying. However, between DeWitt's poor defense at second, and Hudson's offensive superiority, such as it was, I think he's still totally worth the difference in money. It would take a precipitous decline in performance next year to close the gap.

 

For all the talk of the need to fill first base, the team also had a big hole at second last year, and Blake DeWitt is probably going to be more of the same. Hudson may not be a perfect player, but he is a very good player. If he can be signed to a 2 year deal for 5 million, the Cobs really need to look into it.

 

I'm not really arguing that we shouldn't seek a replacement for Dewitt if one is out there. I'm more questioning how confident we should be that Hudson constitutes enough of an upgrade to be worth the extra cost.

 

Hudson signed a 1-year, $5 mil deal with the Twins last year and I'd say that's what we're looking at for him this year. Is a max of 2 wins worth $5 mil and can that money be used more efficiently elsewhere or for a different player?

[jersey cubs fan]

I haven't run the numbers, but I can't imagine there's much of a difference between Dunn/DeWitt/SP(you pick, Silva/Cashner/Coleman/etc) and Pena/Hudson/Webb.

 

You're getting a whole lot more cost certainty with the first group

 

Perhaps, but you're likely getting more payroll flexibility with the 2nd group, and with the second 3 you have a much better shot at 1 or more going nuts for a year than with the first group.

 

How?

[Geech]

Hudson signed a 1-year, $5 mil deal with the Twins last year and I'd say that's what we're looking at for him this year. Is a max of 2 wins worth $5 mil and can that money be used more efficiently elsewhere or for a different player?

 

First of all I don't think 2 wins is the max, but even if it is, 2 wins is absolutely worth 5 million. Absolutely. Where would you spend that money more efficiently?

[Guest]

I haven't run the numbers, but I can't imagine there's much of a difference between Dunn/DeWitt/SP(you pick, Silva/Cashner/Coleman/etc) and Pena/Hudson/Webb.

 

You're getting a whole lot more cost certainty with the first group

 

Perhaps, but you're likely getting more payroll flexibility with the 2nd group, and with the second 3 you have a much better shot at 1 or more going nuts for a year than with the first group.

 

How?

 

Shorter duration, smaller amounts for the individual players. It's easier to unload 2 guys making 5 million than it is 1 guy making 10 million.