Tailoring a roster to Wrigley's schizophrenic nature

[David]

We've heard a lot of talk from the new front office about a need to build a team here that can win whether the wind is blowing in or out at home.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-1112-hoyer-cubs-chicago--20111112,0,3167361.story

 

 

In reshaping the roster, Hoyer said Wrigley Field's unique characteristics have to be taken into consideration.

 

"It's a unique ballpark to put a team together for," he said. "Going to Petco Park (with the Padres), I knew it was a pitchers' park. (After) 10 to 15 years I still would be learning the nuances of it. So I don't pretend to know everything about how Wrigley plays. No matter how much research you do, seeing it day to day is important.

 

"This place is almost two different parks — in April and May, it's different with wind blowing in, wind blowing out. So clearly you have to score runs in many different ways.

 

"Having a team that can't manufacture runs, or can't hit homers, is probably a negative. We have to find a good balance because we have to play two different styles at home. That's unusual."

 

 

It looks like achieving this high level of lineup versatility is going to be a major priority. Thoughts on how it'll be done? Seems like you need lots of well rounded players...some power/obp guys... some speed (er, more accurately, high efficiency base stealers)/obp guys... and maybe one or two who have it all.

 

 

Pitching-wise, it doesn't seem that hard to figure out. Strikeouts and groundballs with a solid infield defense will win regardless of conditions. But maybe that's an oversimplification.

 

Basically, I just want to see how people on here smarter than me would approach this strategy.

 

 

Also, a couple of other misc. tidbits from that article...

 

A source said Epstein has had preliminary talks with Kerry Wood, who's expected to return.

And Carlos Zambrano told the Venezuelan newspaper Lider en Deportes that Epstein had called him in Venezuela, where he's pitching in the winter league, and the two will meet soon.

 

"We talked for a while. Now I'm waiting for him to tell me when we'll meet," Zambrano said. "It might be after the (GM) meetings.

 

"It'll be quick — to meet each other. Talk in person. That's very important. I'd like to build a relationship from scratch. Erase everything and start over."

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't know if this is actually all that realistically do-able, but it's nice to have a GM taking such a balanced, well-rounded approach to building a team instead of reactionary [expletive] like "we need to get more left-handed" or "we need guys who can catch the ball."

[biittner77]

It seems to me that having players that get on base/ don't make outs wins in any conditions.

[CubColtPacer]

It seems to me that having players that get on base/ don't make outs wins in any conditions.

 

The problem still becomes that the wind blowing in hurts offense in every form. It suppresses power by the wind blowing some balls back into the field of play for outs. It allows the pitcher to attack the hitter a little more aggressively which cuts down on walks. And it can let a fast defense cheat in a little bit to stop the line drives knowing that it's harder for teams to hit it over their heads. It's very hard in that sort of environment to get on base enough to score runs consistently. Now how many times does that happen? I'm not sure, but I do remember from looking at a couple years game logs that the wind tends to blow in at Wrigley more often than it does out (it blows across the field a fair amount as well).

[Backtobanks]

Maybe Bowden's speculation about Crawford to the Cubs will come true. Hopefully they will take Soriano, Zambrano, and still be sending along some cash.

[d_money]

I'll take Starting Pitching (3 #2's please), Defense and OBP...in that order.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Maybe Bowden's speculation about Crawford to the Cubs will come true. Hopefully they will take Soriano, Zambrano, and still be sending along some cash.

 

It would actually make some sense for Boston, as they'd essentially be getting off the hook for the last 4-5 years of Crawfords contract, and by the end he'll be lucky to be what Soriano is now. However, if this was a wink wink compensation deal for Epstein, for us, eating the bitter back end of Crawfords contract would not be at all a better option than giving them a few A ballers.

[Backtobanks]

Maybe Bowden's speculation about Crawford to the Cubs will come true. Hopefully they will take Soriano, Zambrano, and still be sending along some cash.

 

It would actually make some sense for Boston, as they'd essentially be getting off the hook for the last 4-5 years of Crawfords contract, and by the end he'll be lucky to be what Soriano is now. However, if this was a wink wink compensation deal for Epstein, for us, eating the bitter back end of Crawfords contract would not be at all a better option than giving them a few A ballers.

 

It won't happen, but I think I would do it if they throw in $15-$20 million spread over 2015-2017. It would free up $17 million now to go after Pujols/Fielder.

[shnsajax]

It doesn't matter what the wind is doing when Pujols is up to bat ;-).

[Backtobanks]

It doesn't matter what the wind is doing when Pujols is up to bat ;-).

 

But it does matter when Soriano (as opposed to Crawford) is up or in LF.

[rawaction]

I don't know if this is actually all that realistically do-able, but it's nice to have a GM taking such a balanced, well-rounded approach to building a team instead of reactionary [expletive] like "we need to get more left-handed" or "we need guys who can catch the ball."

 

It was done in 2008. That team got on base a lot. Was able to run a little. And had some power, but didn't live or die by it.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't know if this is actually all that realistically do-able, but it's nice to have a GM taking such a balanced, well-rounded approach to building a team instead of reactionary [expletive] like "we need to get more left-handed" or "we need guys who can catch the ball."

 

It was done in 2008. That team got on base a lot. Was able to run a little. And had some power, but didn't live or die by it.

 

I'm pretty sure that happened incidentally as opposed to Hendry actually constructing a good team.

 

And while they didn't lead the league in HR, they did lead the NL in slugging, so they definitely did a LOT of living by their power in addition to that sexy OBP.

[SouthSideRyan]

[expletive], that team was great.

 

I'd put this subject in rants if I had my druthers. I'm already sick of people talking about the challenges of playing at Wrigley. Good teams win, there's your challenge.

[Guest]

I'm already sick of people talking about the challenges of playing at Wrigley. Good teams win, there's your challenge.

Yep.

[Guest]

I'm already sick of people talking about the challenges of playing at Wrigley. Good teams win, there's your challenge.

Yep.

 

You guys think the venue that 50% of games are played in shouldn't be a significant factor in roster construction?

 

Theo talked about how they looked at Ortiz's numbers and batted ball data and thought he'd be an awesome green monster hitter. Hoyer has had to deal with one of the most extreme pitchers parks imaginable. I'd want whatever advantage that can be gleaned from something like this (analysis of the home field conditions) to be realized.

 

Yea, a lot of it is splitting hairs and for the most part, a good team is a good team. But if there is some advantage to be gained, I'd trust these guys to find it.

[Guest]

I'm already sick of people talking about the challenges of playing at Wrigley. Good teams win, there's your challenge.

Yep.

 

You guys think the venue that 50% of games are played in shouldn't be a significant factor in roster construction?

 

Theo talked about how they looked at Ortiz's numbers and batted ball data and thought he'd be an awesome green monster hitter. Hoyer has had to deal with one of the most extreme pitchers parks imaginable. I'd want whatever advantage that can be gleaned from something like this (analysis of the home field conditions) to be realized.

 

Yea, a lot of it is splitting hairs and for the most part, a good team is a good team. But if there is some advantage to be gained, I'd trust these guys to find it.

I don't mind them factoring it in, to be honest. I'm just not sure that there's anything so characteristic to Wrigley that you can really take advantage of it. Other than the left center power alley during the summer, that is.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm already sick of people talking about the challenges of playing at Wrigley. Good teams win, there's your challenge.

Yep.

 

You guys think the venue that 50% of games are played in shouldn't be a significant factor in roster construction?

 

Theo talked about how they looked at Ortiz's numbers and batted ball data and thought he'd be an awesome green monster hitter. Hoyer has had to deal with one of the most extreme pitchers parks imaginable. I'd want whatever advantage that can be gleaned from something like this (analysis of the home field conditions) to be realized.

 

Yea, a lot of it is splitting hairs and for the most part, a good team is a good team. But if there is some advantage to be gained, I'd trust these guys to find it.

 

There's no green monster here. The fact that the park plays so schizophrenically means you should pay even less attention to tailoring the team towards the stadium.

[Guest]

There's no green monster here. The fact that the park plays so schizophrenically means you should pay even less attention to tailoring the team towards the stadium.

 

I don't disagree... but then maybe versatility becomes more valuable. Maybe there are attributes that are unaffected by the wind that would become more valuable.

 

Maybe a certain type of power hitter (guys that hit more line drives) or something. Maybe high efficiency base stealing is more valuable to us than other teams because it's unaffected by that stuff...but then again it's still more valuable to the teams whose parks play like pitchers parks all the time.

 

So, [expletive] if I know. Yea, you're right.

Edited November 13, 2011 by David

[davell]

If anything, I'd think having 11 position players that could technically be considered "starters" would be what we need. Have 4 starting OFers, 3 starting MINFs and 3 starting CINFs. Just to keep everyone well rested. Athleticism is probably key here, as it's not like there are plenty of super utility guys roaming around. But, if you could keep your starters from much over 130ish games or so, I'd think everyone should still be extremely fresh for October.

[Guest]

I read those comments as "you need to have a strong offense and strong pitching/defense" more than something like "you need to have power and speed on offense". In other words, don't rely too heavily on one side of the ball.

[Guest]

I tend to think you shouldn't b/c if it's a 55/45 split or whatever for 81 games, you are building the team to win some percentage of 50 games. Wrigley isn't like Fenway b/c Fenway only plays one way.

 

However, I'd hire Rick Ruschle to teach all my minor leaguers to learn to throw a sinker.

[jersey cubs fan]

field the best 25 man roster you can. You will have success.

[seanimal]

yeah, i think that's kind of obvious. so it's colder and windier the first two months of the season? that applies to both teams. it's not like we play in the elements and our opponents are in some sort of neutral environment.

[Guest]

yeah, i think that's kind of obvious. so it's colder and windier the first two months of the season? that applies to both teams. it's not like we play in the elements and our opponents are in some sort of neutral environment.

 

 

well, the opposition could be built better to win with the wind blowing in (especially if the Cubs are built for the wind blowing out wrigley)... that said, i think it all makes some sense in theory but not much at all in practice.

 

all you can really do is not have a bunch of hitters who feast primarily on wind blown fly balls or something.

 

it does just come down to build the best team possible and let the chips fall.

[jersey cubs fan]

well, the opposition could be built better to win with the wind blowing in (especially if the Cubs are built for the wind blowing out wrigley)... that said, i think it all makes some sense in theory but not much at all in practice.

 

The problem I have with this is we've seen plenty of times where a team like Cincy comes in and Kearns or Dunn have no trouble going deep while the Cubs struggle. Just put a quality pitching staff together with a solid lineup and you will be fine. Don't worry about tailoring for Wrigley, worry about having a good roster.