Stoney on The Score

[CubbieRich]

Stoney was on The Score for 4 hours on Sunday afternoon and was at his critical BEST. Here are some of things he discussed:

 

Kerry Wood-Cubs are kidding themselves by doing anything but starting him. He says they should shut him down, clean up his shoulder and prepare for 2006. He says that Kerry is still throwing across his body and will continue to have arm problems. At $12 million next year, he is too expensive for anything but starting. Mentioned that Texas has money and is in desperate need of starting pitching, but won’t deal for him until they are assured he can start with no problems.

 

Ronny Cedeno-Likes what he sees with Cedeno and feels he is the Cubs SS of the future.

 

Matt Murton-Will not be everyday player. Thinks Red Sox discovered something about his play that they did not like. Doesn’t have power for the corner OF position.

 

Jeromy Burnitz-Team option of $7 million+ for 2006. They will let him go.

 

Aramis Rameriz-Must correct laziness in fielding and running out ground balls. Knock on him in Pittsburgh was lack of hustle and attitude. Feels he’s suffering from groin or lower leg problems right now that must get healed.

 

Felix Pie-Real deal. Once he recovers from injury and gets back into shape, should be called up. The question is can the team count on him in 2006 to hit well enough to get on base a lot against Big League pitching?

 

Corey Patterson-Still hasn’t figured out what kind of player he is-speed and contact or HR/strikeout. Until he does, he will struggle. Stoney mentioned that the Yankees have shown interest with Bernie Williams being phased out and need for speed in CF. CPatt has low salary and could be dealt if he shows something in remaining 6 weeks. He said if the Cubs are showcasing him this year, he will be brought up before St. Louis series.

 

Dusty-Isn’t going to be fired by Cubs. Hendry’s reputation is on line. However..Grady Little is waiting in the wings and wasn’t hired to be roving instructor. Feels that Dusty has played Perez and Macias far too much in starting lineup-they are complimentary players. Macias is CF was a mistake. Players need to take it upon themselves to be motivated.

 

Hendry-Needs to have the minor leaguers come up and play every day. Will have a lot of money in 2006 for weak FA class.

[cbbryan]

Dusty-Isn’t going to be fired by Cubs. Hendry’s reputation is on line. However..Grady Little is waiting in the wings and wasn’t hired to be roving instructor. Feels that Dusty has played Perez and Macias far too much in starting lineup-they are complimentary players. Macias is CF was a mistake. Players need to take it upon themselves to be motivated.

 

I think Hendry's reputation is exactly why Dusty may be fired. Just for speculation, if the Cubs get swept by the Reds at home........Dusty should be fired before the start of the St. Louis series!

 

Corey Patterson-Still hasn’t figured out what kind of player he is-speed and contact or HR/strikeout. Until he does, he will struggle. Stoney mentioned that the Yankees have shown interest with Bernie Williams being phased out and need for speed in CF. CPatt has low salary and could be dealt if he shows something in remaining 6 weeks. He said if the Cubs are showcasing him this year, he will be brought up before St. Louis series.

 

I'm really cheering for CPat. I hope he does well when he comes back. I guess he's suppose to be activated today. So maybe he'll be in the line-up.

 

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20050809&content_id=1163229&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc

[CubfaninCA]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

[YearofDaCubs]

Dusty-Isn’t going to be fired by Cubs. Hendry’s reputation is on line. However..Grady Little is waiting in the wings and wasn’t hired to be roving instructor. Feels that Dusty has played Perez and Macias far too much in starting lineup-they are complimentary players. Macias is CF was a mistake. Players need to take it upon themselves to be motivated.

 

I think Hendry's reputation is exactly why Dusty may be fired. Just for speculation, if the Cubs get swept by the Reds at home........Dusty should be fired before the start of the St. Louis series!

 

Corey Patterson-Still hasn’t figured out what kind of player he is-speed and contact or HR/strikeout. Until he does, he will struggle. Stoney mentioned that the Yankees have shown interest with Bernie Williams being phased out and need for speed in CF. CPatt has low salary and could be dealt if he shows something in remaining 6 weeks. He said if the Cubs are showcasing him this year, he will be brought up before St. Louis series.

 

I'm really cheering for CPat. I hope he does well when he comes back. I guess he's suppose to be activated today. So maybe he'll be in the line-up.

 

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20050809&content_id=1163229&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc

Patterson over Macias? Any day of the week. I really hope Corey figures it out.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Stoney, one guy who's not afraid to tell it like it is. Gotta love him for that.

 

I agree with everything he said, except for the not firing Baker thing. If Hendry's reputation is on the line, then sticking with a lost cause isn't going to help it. Dump Dusty, take the $4 million hit, and move on.

 

I was shocked by the Murton comment about the Red Sox. But if you think about it, it makes sense. Maybe we can correct whatever they didn't like and turn him into one hell of a major leaguer.

[XZero771679666304]

Speaking of Stone, I liked this bit from today's Sun-Times article:

 

On Dusty Baker's demeanor and how you judge a manager:

"Dusty chewing on his toothpick has no bearing on what happens on the field. Every manager has a different style. ... What's a reflection of the manager is when you take a look at a baseball team and they can't execute rundowns and they can't hit cutoff men and they can't make relay throws and they can't lay down a bunt when they have to and they don't hit-and-run particularly well and they don't do all of the little things that it takes to win baseball games when you either don't throw a shutout or don't hit the ball out of the ballpark. That is a reflection of the manager more than what he's doing on the bench during the inning."

[sonofsamiam]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

 

I think it's pretty speculative for Stone to say the Red Sox "didn't like" Murton. Perhaps they just did what they felt they needed to do to achieve a short-term goal: finishing a huge deal that put pieces in place that were considered necessary to contend for a World Series. And that short-term goal worked out pretty well.

 

I like Murton for the future because he's so outside the mold of the "typical" Cubs hitter. I could actually see him being sort of Grace-esque in the future at the plate; contact hitter for average, good amount of walks, lots of doubles, power numbers are gravy.

 

Maybe (?) we'll find out some day for sure.

[cbbryan]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

 

I think it's pretty speculative for Stone to say the Red Sox "didn't like" Murton. Perhaps they just did what they felt they needed to do to achieve a short-term goal: finishing a huge deal that put pieces in place that were considered necessary to contend for a World Series. And that short-term goal worked out pretty well.

 

I like Murton for the future because he's so outside the mold of the "typical" Cubs hitter. I could actually see him being sort of Grace-esque in the future at the plate; contact hitter for average, good amount of walks, lots of doubles, power numbers are gravy.

 

Maybe (?) we'll find out some day for sure.

 

You'll probably never know exactly what the Red Sox thought about Murton for sure. He's not Babe Ruth or anything, but he has a nice approach at the plate and he swings at good pitches. I've enjoyed watching him, although it's been in very small samples.

[Fanzones trumpet]

Stoney was on The Score for 4 hours on Sunday afternoon and was at his critical BEST. Here are some of things he discussed:

 

Kerry Wood-Cubs are kidding themselves by doing anything but starting him. He says they should shut him down, clean up his shoulder and prepare for 2006. He says that Kerry is still throwing across his body and will continue to have arm problems. At $12 million next year, he is too expensive for anything but starting. Mentioned that Texas has money and is in desperate need of starting pitching, but won’t deal for him until they are assured he can start with no problems.

 

Ronny Cedeno-Likes what he sees with Cedeno and feels he is the Cubs SS of the future.

 

Matt Murton-Will not be everyday player. Thinks Red Sox discovered something about his play that they did not like. Doesn’t have power for the corner OF position.

 

Jeromy Burnitz-Team option of $7 million+ for 2006. They will let him go.

 

Aramis Rameriz-Must correct laziness in fielding and running out ground balls. Knock on him in Pittsburgh was lack of hustle and attitude. Feels he’s suffering from groin or lower leg problems right now that must get healed.

 

Felix Pie-Real deal. Once he recovers from injury and gets back into shape, should be called up. The question is can the team count on him in 2006 to hit well enough to get on base a lot against Big League pitching?

 

Corey Patterson-Still hasn’t figured out what kind of player he is-speed and contact or HR/strikeout. Until he does, he will struggle. Stoney mentioned that the Yankees have shown interest with Bernie Williams being phased out and need for speed in CF. CPatt has low salary and could be dealt if he shows something in remaining 6 weeks. He said if the Cubs are showcasing him this year, he will be brought up before St. Louis series.

 

Dusty-Isn’t going to be fired by Cubs. Hendry’s reputation is on line. However..Grady Little is waiting in the wings and wasn’t hired to be roving instructor. Feels that Dusty has played Perez and Macias far too much in starting lineup-they are complimentary players. Macias is CF was a mistake. Players need to take it upon themselves to be motivated.

 

Hendry-Needs to have the minor leaguers come up and play every day. Will have a lot of money in 2006 for weak FA class.

 

Uniformed speculation by Stone IMO. Gordon Edes, loingtime Red Sox beat writer, repeatedly has said that the Red Sox liked Murton and didn't want to give him up; heck, they'd drafted him high just the year before and he hadn't done anything up to then to call that decision into question. The thing that allowed them to make the move was that Murton, as a LF, was excess for them; they had Ramirez locked up (and probably unmovable) for four years and other young outfielders (Murphy, Moss) in the system.

[CubfaninCA]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

 

I think it's pretty speculative for Stone to say the Red Sox "didn't like" Murton. Perhaps they just did what they felt they needed to do to achieve a short-term goal: finishing a huge deal that put pieces in place that were considered necessary to contend for a World Series. And that short-term goal worked out pretty well.

 

I like Murton for the future because he's so outside the mold of the "typical" Cubs hitter. I could actually see him being sort of Grace-esque in the future at the plate; contact hitter for average, good amount of walks, lots of doubles, power numbers are gravy.

 

Maybe (?) we'll find out some day for sure.

 

You'll probably never know exactly what the Red Sox thought about Murton for sure. He's not Babe Ruth or anything, but he has a nice approach at the plate and he swings at good pitches. I've enjoyed watching him, although it's been in very small samples.

 

I'd like see what Murton can do against right handed pitching. All this talk about Murton being the next Mark Grace is premature. He's mostly facing lefties. With Burnitz really slumping, Baker should give Murton a few more starts in left, with Lawton in right. Burnitz could be out of gas.

[USSoccer]

Stoney, one guy who's not afraid to tell it like it is. Gotta love him for that.

 

I agree with everything he said, except for the not firing Baker thing. If Hendry's reputation is on the line, then sticking with a lost cause isn't going to help it. Dump Dusty, take the $4 million hit, and move on.

 

I was shocked by the Murton comment about the Red Sox. But if you think about it, it makes sense. Maybe we can correct whatever they didn't like and turn him into one hell of a major leaguer.

 

Stone's act is wearing thin in my world. For one thing, much too much is being made of Aramis' "laziness". He's frickin hurt. How smart would it be for him to run flat out hard to 1B on an easy groundout, when he could easily be lost completely with one tweak? In my world, that would be pretty dumb. And don't give me the argument of "if he's so hurt, why is he playing"? If you call out players like Wood and Prior for not playing through pain, you have no right to carp about Aramis trying to gut it out for the benefit of the team. It's sooooo easy to rip on guys for not hustling, but the fact of the matter is that if the team weren't tanking right now, no one would care. Aramis ran the same way when we were winning as he does now, so what's the difference? Does Stone need a scapegoat for his sour grapes?

 

Second, so what if Boston traded him? They weren't projecting openings in the corner OF spots for a few years, so they had no need for him. SO just because the guy doesn't hit the ball 500 feet, he has no value? Does Stone not realize that command of the zone is more immprtant than raw power for a young playeR? Power comes with time; Murton has skills that aren't easily taught. Just ask Corey Patterson how easy it is to learn plate discipline.

 

Another thing: Why on earth would you call up Pie this year? There's no point in it. Let him recover from his ankle, continue and finish his year up in AA. Why start his option clock now, when it's no benefit to either party? Pie has the same plate discipline issues Patterson has, so why call him up now before he's refined? Impatience? Will Baker even bother to play him?

 

The only intelligent thing he said was that Wood should be shut down and get scoped now to be ready for 2006. But I'm sick to death of him being critical for the sake of it. His analysis lacks insight, and his snide remarks just smack of sour grapes.

[Derwood]

The very definition of being a sports analyst is to be critical. I don't think he's doing it out of sour grapes. I just think he is far more realistic than most people are. The original poster didn't mention the positive thing he said about Lee and others.

[XZero771679666304]

Stoney, one guy who's not afraid to tell it like it is. Gotta love him for that.

 

I agree with everything he said, except for the not firing Baker thing. If Hendry's reputation is on the line, then sticking with a lost cause isn't going to help it. Dump Dusty, take the $4 million hit, and move on.

 

I was shocked by the Murton comment about the Red Sox. But if you think about it, it makes sense. Maybe we can correct whatever they didn't like and turn him into one hell of a major leaguer.

 

Stone's act is wearing thin in my world. For one thing, much too much is being made of Aramis' "laziness". He's frickin hurt. How smart would it be for him to run flat out hard to 1B on an easy groundout, when he could easily be lost completely with one tweak? In my world, that would be pretty dumb. And don't give me the argument of "if he's so hurt, why is he playing"? If you call out players like Wood and Prior for not playing through pain, you have no right to carp about Aramis trying to gut it out for the benefit of the team. It's sooooo easy to rip on guys for not hustling, but the fact of the matter is that if the team weren't tanking right now, no one would care. Aramis ran the same way when we were winning as he does now, so what's the difference? Does Stone need a scapegoat for his sour grapes?

 

Second, so what if Boston traded him? They weren't projecting openings in the corner OF spots for a few years, so they had no need for him. SO just because the guy doesn't hit the ball 500 feet, he has no value? Does Stone not realize that command of the zone is more immprtant than raw power for a young playeR? Power comes with time; Murton has skills that aren't easily taught. Just ask Corey Patterson how easy it is to learn plate discipline.

 

Another thing: Why on earth would you call up Pie this year? There's no point in it. Let him recover from his ankle, continue and finish his year up in AA. Why start his option clock now, when it's no benefit to either party? Pie has the same plate discipline issues Patterson has, so why call him up now before he's refined? Impatience? Will Baker even bother to play him?

 

The only intelligent thing he said was that Wood should be shut down and get scoped now to be ready for 2006. But I'm sick to death of him being critical for the sake of it. His analysis lacks insight, and his snide remarks just smack of sour grapes.

 

Strangely enough, another excerpt from today's Sun-Times:

 

On whether Cubs third baseman Aramis Ramirez is giving his all:

"I just have a feeling, having seen Aramis as long as I have -- and knowing that he is a very good player -- that he's having either some back, groin or quad issues. ... When I see Aramis move at third, I have to believe he's having some problems with his lower body because the movement isn't there and the errors are piling up. If you want to give anybody a pass for not hustling on ground balls, it should be Aramis because I believe he is playing through some injuries that maybe other guys wouldn't be playing through."

[USSoccer]

The very definition of being a sports analyst is to be critical. I don't think he's doing it out of sour grapes. I just think he is far more realistic than most people are. The original poster didn't mention the positive thing he said about Lee and others.

 

Analyzing a situation doesn't mean you take cheap shots when not warranted, and it also means that you think critically, not be critical. Thinking critically, you would say that Aramis is playing through pain and thus shouldn't be expected to run flat out to 1B on a ground ball to third. His bat is more important that making it a close play, given the risk. Critical thinking tells you that Murton has command of the zone, and thus could be a valuable ML player, and at the very least is the best option in the OF right now when put against Holla and Macias. Critical thinking tells you that it's stupid to call up a guy who's missed 9 weeks with a bad ankle injury just for the sake of it.

 

Critical thinking. Not just criticism. I realize that one makes for better talk radio, but I'm tired of people taking Stone's word for gospel. It's not, and it's seeming more and more obvious that he has a big axe to grind with this organization.

[sonofsamiam]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

 

I think it's pretty speculative for Stone to say the Red Sox "didn't like" Murton. Perhaps they just did what they felt they needed to do to achieve a short-term goal: finishing a huge deal that put pieces in place that were considered necessary to contend for a World Series. And that short-term goal worked out pretty well.

 

I like Murton for the future because he's so outside the mold of the "typical" Cubs hitter. I could actually see him being sort of Grace-esque in the future at the plate; contact hitter for average, good amount of walks, lots of doubles, power numbers are gravy.

 

Maybe (?) we'll find out some day for sure.

 

You'll probably never know exactly what the Red Sox thought about Murton for sure. He's not Babe Ruth or anything, but he has a nice approach at the plate and he swings at good pitches. I've enjoyed watching him, although it's been in very small samples.

 

I'd like see what Murton can do against right handed pitching. All this talk about Murton being the next Mark Grace is premature. He's mostly facing lefties. With Burnitz really slumping, Baker should give Murton a few more starts in left, with Lawton in right. Burnitz could be out of gas.

 

Just for clarification, I never said Murton was the next Mark Grace. But he has an approach to hitting similar in ways to Grace's, which in itself was quite dissimilar from that of most Cubs of, oh, the last 2 decades.

 

I of course agree that Baker should start Murton more consistently, and should have been starting him ever since Hairston got hurt, and some before then. (You don't know if you've got a Rookie of the Year unless you play a rookie.) But of course we all know this isn't going to happen.

[USSoccer]

Stoney, one guy who's not afraid to tell it like it is. Gotta love him for that.

 

I agree with everything he said, except for the not firing Baker thing. If Hendry's reputation is on the line, then sticking with a lost cause isn't going to help it. Dump Dusty, take the $4 million hit, and move on.

 

I was shocked by the Murton comment about the Red Sox. But if you think about it, it makes sense. Maybe we can correct whatever they didn't like and turn him into one hell of a major leaguer.

 

Stone's act is wearing thin in my world. For one thing, much too much is being made of Aramis' "laziness". He's frickin hurt. How smart would it be for him to run flat out hard to 1B on an easy groundout, when he could easily be lost completely with one tweak? In my world, that would be pretty dumb. And don't give me the argument of "if he's so hurt, why is he playing"? If you call out players like Wood and Prior for not playing through pain, you have no right to carp about Aramis trying to gut it out for the benefit of the team. It's sooooo easy to rip on guys for not hustling, but the fact of the matter is that if the team weren't tanking right now, no one would care. Aramis ran the same way when we were winning as he does now, so what's the difference? Does Stone need a scapegoat for his sour grapes?

 

Second, so what if Boston traded him? They weren't projecting openings in the corner OF spots for a few years, so they had no need for him. SO just because the guy doesn't hit the ball 500 feet, he has no value? Does Stone not realize that command of the zone is more immprtant than raw power for a young playeR? Power comes with time; Murton has skills that aren't easily taught. Just ask Corey Patterson how easy it is to learn plate discipline.

 

Another thing: Why on earth would you call up Pie this year? There's no point in it. Let him recover from his ankle, continue and finish his year up in AA. Why start his option clock now, when it's no benefit to either party? Pie has the same plate discipline issues Patterson has, so why call him up now before he's refined? Impatience? Will Baker even bother to play him?

 

The only intelligent thing he said was that Wood should be shut down and get scoped now to be ready for 2006. But I'm sick to death of him being critical for the sake of it. His analysis lacks insight, and his snide remarks just smack of sour grapes.

 

Strangely enough, another excerpt from today's Sun-Times:

 

On whether Cubs third baseman Aramis Ramirez is giving his all:

"I just have a feeling, having seen Aramis as long as I have -- and knowing that he is a very good player -- that he's having either some back, groin or quad issues. ... When I see Aramis move at third, I have to believe he's having some problems with his lower body because the movement isn't there and the errors are piling up. If you want to give anybody a pass for not hustling on ground balls, it should be Aramis because I believe he is playing through some injuries that maybe other guys wouldn't be playing through."

 

That blurb is a far cry from the shots he and the Score hosts have been taking at ARam's lack of "hustle" or "heart". It's not right to speak the Sun Times blurb out of one corner of your mouth while questioning his committment out of the other.

[erik316wttn]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

 

I think it's pretty speculative for Stone to say the Red Sox "didn't like" Murton. Perhaps they just did what they felt they needed to do to achieve a short-term goal: finishing a huge deal that put pieces in place that were considered necessary to contend for a World Series. And that short-term goal worked out pretty well.

 

I like Murton for the future because he's so outside the mold of the "typical" Cubs hitter. I could actually see him being sort of Grace-esque in the future at the plate; contact hitter for average, good amount of walks, lots of doubles, power numbers are gravy.

 

Maybe (?) we'll find out some day for sure.

 

You'll probably never know exactly what the Red Sox thought about Murton for sure. He's not Babe Ruth or anything, but he has a nice approach at the plate and he swings at good pitches. I've enjoyed watching him, although it's been in very small samples.

 

I would have absolutely no problem whatsoever if Matt Murton turned into a Mark Grace type hitter.

[OleMissCub]

I would have absolutely no problem whatsoever if Matt Murton turned into a Mark Grace type hitter.

 

Indeed. Power hitters in the infield can make up for a lack of power in an OF spot. I see no problem.

[JC]

 

Strangely enough, another excerpt from today's Sun-Times:

 

On whether Cubs third baseman Aramis Ramirez is giving his all:

"I just have a feeling, having seen Aramis as long as I have -- and knowing that he is a very good player -- that he's having either some back, groin or quad issues. ... When I see Aramis move at third, I have to believe he's having some problems with his lower body because the movement isn't there and the errors are piling up. If you want to give anybody a pass for not hustling on ground balls, it should be Aramis because I believe he is playing through some injuries that maybe other guys wouldn't be playing through."

 

I'm glad you included this because I was going to do the same. The original post didn't do justice to Stone's feelings about Aramis.

 

I think Stone's commentary continues to be spot on. That said, I'm not going to get into another Stone debate.

[Iceblink]

Grady Little? Me no likey.

[CubfaninCA]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

 

I think it's pretty speculative for Stone to say the Red Sox "didn't like" Murton. Perhaps they just did what they felt they needed to do to achieve a short-term goal: finishing a huge deal that put pieces in place that were considered necessary to contend for a World Series. And that short-term goal worked out pretty well.

 

I like Murton for the future because he's so outside the mold of the "typical" Cubs hitter. I could actually see him being sort of Grace-esque in the future at the plate; contact hitter for average, good amount of walks, lots of doubles, power numbers are gravy.

 

Maybe (?) we'll find out some day for sure.

 

You'll probably never know exactly what the Red Sox thought about Murton for sure. He's not Babe Ruth or anything, but he has a nice approach at the plate and he swings at good pitches. I've enjoyed watching him, although it's been in very small samples.

 

I'd like see what Murton can do against right handed pitching. All this talk about Murton being the next Mark Grace is premature. He's mostly facing lefties. With Burnitz really slumping, Baker should give Murton a few more starts in left, with Lawton in right. Burnitz could be out of gas.

 

Just for clarification, I never said Murton was the next Mark Grace. But he has an approach to hitting similar in ways to Grace's, which in itself was quite dissimilar from that of most Cubs of, oh, the last 2 decades.

 

I of course agree that Baker should start Murton more consistently, and should have been starting him ever since Hairston got hurt, and some before then. (You don't know if you've got a Rookie of the Year unless you play a rookie.) But of course we all know this isn't going to happen.

 

I'll give Baker some credit on Murton. He's put him in situations where he's at an advantage. Murton came up from Double A, so you don't want to throw him in the middle of the water right away. People can scoff at this, but Baker was a major league hitter and knows a little something about hitting.

[USSoccer]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

 

I think it's pretty speculative for Stone to say the Red Sox "didn't like" Murton. Perhaps they just did what they felt they needed to do to achieve a short-term goal: finishing a huge deal that put pieces in place that were considered necessary to contend for a World Series. And that short-term goal worked out pretty well.

 

I like Murton for the future because he's so outside the mold of the "typical" Cubs hitter. I could actually see him being sort of Grace-esque in the future at the plate; contact hitter for average, good amount of walks, lots of doubles, power numbers are gravy.

 

Maybe (?) we'll find out some day for sure.

 

You'll probably never know exactly what the Red Sox thought about Murton for sure. He's not Babe Ruth or anything, but he has a nice approach at the plate and he swings at good pitches. I've enjoyed watching him, although it's been in very small samples.

 

I'd like see what Murton can do against right handed pitching. All this talk about Murton being the next Mark Grace is premature. He's mostly facing lefties. With Burnitz really slumping, Baker should give Murton a few more starts in left, with Lawton in right. Burnitz could be out of gas.

 

Just for clarification, I never said Murton was the next Mark Grace. But he has an approach to hitting similar in ways to Grace's, which in itself was quite dissimilar from that of most Cubs of, oh, the last 2 decades.

 

I of course agree that Baker should start Murton more consistently, and should have been starting him ever since Hairston got hurt, and some before then. (You don't know if you've got a Rookie of the Year unless you play a rookie.) But of course we all know this isn't going to happen.

 

I'll give Baker some credit on Murton. He's put him in situations where he's at an advantage. Murton came up from Double A, so you don't want to throw him in the middle of the water right away. People can scoff at this, but Baker was a major league hitter and knows a little something about hitting.

 

The flaw in that logic is that Murton hit left and right handed pitchers in AA with equal success. Given how bad our OF was over the last week, there's no reason for him to have had 3 AB's against PHI and NYM.

[JC]

Putting a player in "position forhim to succeed" is just another contradiction by Baker. What happened to the major leagues not being the place to develop players? If Murton is on the team, it means that management thinks he is good enough to contribute.

 

For God's sake, give the kid his credit. He is helping the team succeed, or is at least doing his part toward success. Rather, just say, "I don't want him playing against right handers because my Old Man's Book of Baseball Truisms says rookie righties can't hit righties."

 

The fact that he came from AA isn't important. The league is full of players jumping levels. Murton has demonstrated his ability. Now, its up to Dusty to stop worrying about Hollandsworth, Macias, and Burnitz's feelings, and play the better OFer.

[sonofsamiam]

If the Cubs are under .500 by the end of the year, and Baker's not gone, the Trib should fire both Hendry and Baker. It takes a big man to own up to mistakes, and if Jim Hendry can't do so, can him.

 

As for Murton, could Theo Epstein and Bill James have made an error?? Ok probably not. :)

 

I think it's pretty speculative for Stone to say the Red Sox "didn't like" Murton. Perhaps they just did what they felt they needed to do to achieve a short-term goal: finishing a huge deal that put pieces in place that were considered necessary to contend for a World Series. And that short-term goal worked out pretty well.

 

I like Murton for the future because he's so outside the mold of the "typical" Cubs hitter. I could actually see him being sort of Grace-esque in the future at the plate; contact hitter for average, good amount of walks, lots of doubles, power numbers are gravy.

 

Maybe (?) we'll find out some day for sure.

 

You'll probably never know exactly what the Red Sox thought about Murton for sure. He's not Babe Ruth or anything, but he has a nice approach at the plate and he swings at good pitches. I've enjoyed watching him, although it's been in very small samples.

 

I'd like see what Murton can do against right handed pitching. All this talk about Murton being the next Mark Grace is premature. He's mostly facing lefties. With Burnitz really slumping, Baker should give Murton a few more starts in left, with Lawton in right. Burnitz could be out of gas.

 

Just for clarification, I never said Murton was the next Mark Grace. But he has an approach to hitting similar in ways to Grace's, which in itself was quite dissimilar from that of most Cubs of, oh, the last 2 decades.

 

I of course agree that Baker should start Murton more consistently, and should have been starting him ever since Hairston got hurt, and some before then. (You don't know if you've got a Rookie of the Year unless you play a rookie.) But of course we all know this isn't going to happen.

 

I'll give Baker some credit on Murton. He's put him in situations where he's at an advantage. Murton came up from Double A, so you don't want to throw him in the middle of the water right away. People can scoff at this, but Baker was a major league hitter and knows a little something about hitting.

 

The flaw in that logic is that Murton hit left and right handed pitchers in AA with equal success. Given how bad our OF was over the last week, there's no reason for him to have had 3 AB's against PHI and NYM.

 

EXACTLY. At this point, I want a little more proof that Murton has trouble with righties other than Dusty's conventional wisdom. He certainly can't do worse than Macias or Hollandsworth, even against righties, and the experience should do him good.

[oldcubsfan]

The very definition of being a sports analyst is to be critical. I don't think he's doing it out of sour grapes. I just think he is far more realistic than most people are. The original poster didn't mention the positive thing he said about Lee and others.

 

Analyzing a situation doesn't mean you take cheap shots when not warranted, and it also means that you think critically, not be critical. Thinking critically, you would say that Aramis is playing through pain and thus shouldn't be expected to run flat out to 1B on a ground ball to third. His bat is more important that making it a close play, given the risk. Critical thinking tells you that Murton has command of the zone, and thus could be a valuable ML player, and at the very least is the best option in the OF right now when put against Holla and Macias. Critical thinking tells you that it's stupid to call up a guy who's missed 9 weeks with a bad ankle injury just for the sake of it.

 

Critical thinking. Not just criticism. I realize that one makes for better talk radio, but I'm tired of people taking Stone's word for gospel. It's not, and it's seeming more and more obvious that he has a big axe to grind with this organization.

Excellent post and very well said. His bitterness isn't hidden by his claims of objectivity.