Re: Projecting the 2013 Cubs

[KingCubsFan]

Less than half a WAR 6 weeks before the season? Yeah, somewhere between there and 5 WAR is a reasonable range.

 

I kind of want the front office that's proven it's capable of taking care of the little things to actually take care of the little things, because their failure to do so sort of implies that they just don't care.

 

I want my front office to take some gambles when they know in ST that the team will suck. Some of those gambles turn out to be useful trade pieces. Some turn out to be Joe Mather. Still a good decision to take the flier even if the result turns out to be a horrible baseball player. They're not going to hit on every bet.

 

I get what you're saying, but since Kyle's issue is that they're putting a player that is known to be bad on the roster and that he wants somebody better in that role, why would that bad player be a better gamble than someone who is better?

He was good just two seasons ago. Kyle is acting like he's Yuniesky Betancourt, when in reality he's just as bad as every other 25th man. Good players don't sign to get 150 at bats in a season, and good organizations don't plug talented players into the 6th infielder slot. Lillibridge has a shot to be not-terrible with the bat, and that's about all you can ask.

[davell]

At any rate, we're not even a bad team. Which I guess is why Kyle is milking Lillibridge here, trying to inch our way into contention. Personally, if Castillo plays decently, Castro and Rizzo advance a bit, 3B isn't bottom 10% in MLB, and we get 60 starts out of Shark, Garza, and E-Jax(thru July)we'll be buyers, in my opinion.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

He was good just two seasons ago. Kyle is acting like he's Yuniesky Betancourt, when in reality he's just as bad as every other 25th man. Good players don't sign to get 150 at bats in a season, and good organizations don't plug talented players into the 6th infielder slot. Lillibridge has a shot to be not-terrible with the bat, and that's about all you can ask.

 

He was bad every season except for two seasons ago. Significantly below repalcement bad. He's a worse player than Betancourt.

[Guest]

Projection systems have Lillibridge as pretty dead-on for a 25th man offensively. Defensively he spent the vast majority of his time last year at 3B and OF where he was average to above average, and away from the middle infield where he's been bad to terrible. Given the current roster I'd say he has the most opportunity for playing time in 3B and CF against LHP. That stacks up to him likely being a normal 25th man, give or take a couple runs here or there. Again, not an egregious decision, or one worth spending pages of time lamenting.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Projection systems have Lillibridge as pretty dead-on for a 25th man offensively. Defensively he spent the vast majority of his time last year at 3B and OF where he was average to above average, and away from the middle infield where he's been bad to terrible. Given the current roster I'd say he has the most opportunity for playing time in 3B and CF against LHP. That stacks up to him likely being a normal 25th man, give or take a couple runs here or there. Again, not an egregious decision, or one worth spending pages of time lamenting.

 

We're all full up on outfielders and we've got Valbuena for 3b. He doesn't make sense on the roster for either of those roles.

[Sammy Sofa]

GEE, IT'S LIKE HE MIGHT NOT EVEN MAKE THE TEAM, LIKE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING.

[Guest]

GEE, IT'S LIKE HE MIGHT NOT EVEN MAKE THE TEAM, LIKE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING.

 

I'm pretty sure he's making the team.

[davell]

Actually, either Sappelt or Hairston will likely platoon in CF, with the other one in RF. We're kind of set up in a way the 25th guy is even less important than most. I guess it could have been optimal to look at as good of a pinch hitter as possible, for the role.

[Sammy Sofa]

GEE, IT'S LIKE HE MIGHT NOT EVEN MAKE THE TEAM, LIKE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING.

 

I'm pretty sure he's making the team.

 

But what if he's absolute garbage in ST? Then surely Kyle would want him not making....ooooohhhhh, riiiiiiiiiight, he hates that, too.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

GEE, IT'S LIKE HE MIGHT NOT EVEN MAKE THE TEAM, LIKE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING.

 

He's making the team.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

GEE, IT'S LIKE HE MIGHT NOT EVEN MAKE THE TEAM, LIKE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING.

 

I'm pretty sure he's making the team.

 

But what if he's absolute garbage in ST? Then surely Kyle would want him not making....ooooohhhhh, riiiiiiiiiight, he hates that, too.

 

He shouldn't be making the team no matter what he does in spring training. But if we somehow luck into the right decision through a bad process, I'll call it a draw.

[Tracer Bullet]

I want my front office to take some gambles when they know in ST that the team will suck. Some of those gambles turn out to be useful trade pieces. Some turn out to be Joe Mather. Still a good decision to take the flier even if the result turns out to be a horrible baseball player. They're not going to hit on every bet.

 

Yeah, I don't want that at all. I don't want them giving up on teams in spring training.

 

Taking a gamble on the 25th man is hardly giving up. Maybe they thought they could tweak something to make him useful and it seemed to be working in ST but didn't work out. Who knows. So he sucked. Meh. Mather isn't the reason we missed the playoffs.

[Guest]

What's crazy is that I remember Mather being lauded for being surprisingly good and getting big hits and stuff early in the season. He must have been really, really bad thereafter.

[Sammy Sofa]

GEE, IT'S LIKE HE MIGHT NOT EVEN MAKE THE TEAM, LIKE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING.

 

I'm pretty sure he's making the team.

 

But what if he's absolute garbage in ST? Then surely Kyle would want him not making....ooooohhhhh, riiiiiiiiiight, he hates that, too.

 

He shouldn't be making the team no matter what he does in spring training. But if we somehow luck into the right decision through a bad process, I'll call it a draw.

 

You shouldn't be calling it anything. It's essentially a non-issue.

[Tracer Bullet]

Less than half a WAR 6 weeks before the season? Yeah, somewhere between there and 5 WAR is a reasonable range.

 

I kind of want the front office that's proven it's capable of taking care of the little things to actually take care of the little things, because their failure to do so sort of implies that they just don't care.

 

I want my front office to take some gambles when they know in ST that the team will suck. Some of those gambles turn out to be useful trade pieces. Some turn out to be Joe Mather. Still a good decision to take the flier even if the result turns out to be a horrible baseball player. They're not going to hit on every bet.

 

I get what you're saying, but since Kyle's issue is that they're putting a player that is known to be bad on the roster and that he wants somebody better in that role, why would that bad player be a better gamble than someone who is better?

 

If there was an obviously better player available with no long term implications, great. If there's a couple of bad players and you think you can catch lightning in a bottle with one for a couple months and flip him in a trade, it was worth it.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If there was an obviously better player available with no long term implications, great. If there's a couple of bad players and you think you can catch lightning in a bottle with one for a couple months and flip him in a trade, it was worth it.

 

Well, enjoy the spring training pics, because there's literally nothing else for you here Cubs-wise. That philosophy is so generic it can be used to justify every move ever made by any front office. "Well, they think there's something there."

[Tracer Bullet]

Your inability to think and read critically while arguing about the exaggerated implications of the 25th man on a 100-loss team is a baffling combination.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Your inability to think and read critically while arguing about the exaggerated implications of the 25th man on a 100-loss team is a baffling combination.

 

Ironic as always.

[Tracer Bullet]

You got your several pages of attention for a non-issue. Mission accomplished. I blame myself for contributing.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You got your several pages of attention for a non-issue. Mission accomplished. I blame myself for contributing.

 

If everyone would stop disagreeing when I'm right, we could have settled this early.

 

I know it's pointless to generalize about groups of people that do not have homogenous opinions, but I find it a little bewildering that the section of Cubs fandom that used to destroy guys like Neifi Perez or Jose Macias suddenly don't care when the team puts really bad players on the roster, or at least appears to intend to.

[sneakypower]

If there was an obviously better player available with no long term implications, great. If there's a couple of bad players and you think you can catch lightning in a bottle with one for a couple months and flip him in a trade, it was worth it.

 

Well, enjoy the spring training pics, because there's literally nothing else for you here Cubs-wise. That philosophy is so generic it can be used to justify every move ever made by any front office. "Well, they think there's something there."

if it spares us your pathetic histrionics and manufactured outrage, then yeah, simply just enjoying the ST pics is definitely the preferable option

 

oh hey and speaking of pathetic, i see we've gotten to the familiar point where you weirdly declare yourself "right"; with any luck this will end things and we'll all be spared more of your pointless bilge

Edited February 19, 2013 by sneakypower

[Guest]

You got your several pages of attention for a non-issue. Mission accomplished. I blame myself for contributing.

 

If everyone would stop disagreeing when I'm right, we could have settled this early.

 

I know it's pointless to generalize about groups of people that do not have homogenous opinions, but I find it a little bewildering that the section of Cubs fandom that used to destroy guys like Neifi Perez or Jose Macias suddenly don't care when the team puts really bad players on the roster, or at least appears to intend to.

 

You know damn well that had a lot more to do with the fact that we had a manager who would and did play those guys frequently and even start them regularly.

 

And hit them high in the order frequently.

 

Ugh. That was so bad. I'm pretty sure Rey Ordonez was our 2 hitter for a game or two.

[Guest]

I'll care when he's on the roster.

[davell]

Not to mention, Perez was making 2.5 mill a year.

[Tracer Bullet]

Mather didn't bat lead off in front of an MVP candidate in a year where cubs fans expected the team to be a playoff contender.

 

Do you even know what I'm saying when I say think critically? How can this distinction be so hard to understand?