Stoney on The Score

[donobr]

Pujols jumped from single A.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

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.

 

There's where I'd prefer the philosophy of Bobby Cox to Baker. Cox believes that when you bring a kid up, you play him until he proves he can't not until he proves he can. And last I checked, Cox knows a lot more about winning than Baker.

[CubinNY]

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.

 

There's where I'd prefer the philosophy of Bobby Cox to Baker. Cox believes that when you bring a kid up, you play him until he proves he can't not until he proves he can. And last I checked, Cox knows a lot more about winning than Baker.

 

Exactly Vance. It is illogical to say that Dusty has put Murton in situations where he will succeed becuase he has yet to fail. Now if, Dusty gave Murton 100 ABs against both right and left handed pitchers and he fialed against righties. Baker might have a point, but as of now no one knows.

[CubbieRich]

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.

 

Please show me Bruce Levine's career MLB stats.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

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.

 

Please show me Bruce Levine's career MLB stats.

 

:roll:

[XZero771679666304]

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.

 

Please show me Bruce Levine's career MLB stats.

 

I really like Stone and agree with him most of the time, but that was as superfluous a statement as there is. Being a great ballplayer doesn't make you a great analyst, nor does having no experiece make you an inferior one. There are plenty of great players who don't have an ounce of insight.

 

And somehow I'm not surprised you turned this into a WSCR/ ESPN 1000 thing.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

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.

 

Please show me Bruce Levine's career MLB stats.

 

I really like Stone and agree with him most of the time, but that was as superfluous a statement as there is. Being a great ballplayer doesn't make you a great analyst, nor does having no experiece make you an inferior one. There are plenty of great players who don't have an ounce of insight.

 

And somehow I'm not surprised you turned this into a WSCR/ ESPN 1000 thing.

 

Joe Morgan is the poster child proof for this statement.

[CubfaninCA]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

[USSoccer]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

An 0-16 streak will only set him back as long as Baker's in charge. I recall a certain HOF 2B that started 1-23.....

[CubfaninCA]

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.

 

Please show me Bruce Levine's career MLB stats.

 

Thank you. The vitriol is getting a little thick in here. LOL @ the critical thinking reference. Critical thinking means not jumping to conclusions about Murton either way.

[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.

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

 

Please show me Bruce Levine's career MLB stats.

 

Thank you. The vitriol is getting a little thick in here. LOL @ the critical thinking reference. Critical thinking means not jumping to conclusions about Murton either way.

 

I agree, but, thinking critically about Murton tells you that, even if he hits .200 against RHP, his #'s against LHP and overall plate discipline would be a much better option than Hollandsworth or Macias were last week.

 

And as far as Bruce Levine's MLB stats, Jerome Holtzman, Bruce Miles, Jayson Stark, Peter Gammons, George Ofman, and countless others beg to differ with the assertion that you have to be a former MLB player to be an effective analyst.

 

And Joe Morgan, Steve Lyons, Bobby Valentine, Tim MacArver, and countless others serve as excellent examples of why former athletes are lousy analysts.

[CubfaninCA]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

An 0-16 streak will only set him back as long as Baker's in charge. I recall a certain HOF 2B that started 1-23.....

 

I'm sure a lot of guys who never made it for long had a 1-23 stretch. Did DuBois have one of those?

 

For the record, Murton looks good. I just want to see what he does over a couple hundred at bats versus both lefties and righties. With Burnitz looking awful, I hope Murton gets a shot in the St. Louis series. Time to put him in the deep end of the pool.

[USSoccer]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

An 0-16 streak will only set him back as long as Baker's in charge. I recall a certain HOF 2B that started 1-23.....

 

I'm sure a lot of guys who never made it for long had a 1-23 stretch. Did DuBois have one of those?

 

For the record, Murton looks good. I just want to see what he does over a couple hundred at bats versus both lefties and righties. With Burnitz looking awful, I hope Murton gets a shot in the St. Louis series. Time to put him in the deep end of the pool.

 

Oh, trust me, I'm not saying that just because Ryno weathered a bad start that Murton can. Dubois, I'm sure, had a long streak like that.

 

However, given where we are in the standings, now is the perfect time to see exactly what kind of player Murton could be, especially considering that there's no clear cut alternative that's better..

[XZero771679666304]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

Being a great hitter doesn't mean you will be a great hitting instructor. Dusty's prowess as a MLB player and his ability to assess and instruct can be mutually exclusive things. Dusty was a good hitter so he automatically knows what's best for Murton? BS.

 

It's like that in all facets of life. For example, I have met awesome golfers who couldn't teach you a thing about how to swing a club effectively. I knew awesome mathematicians who couldn't help me at all with my math. I am a pretty damn good writer, but I have a hard time imparting writing knowledge on to students I tutor.

 

The notion that if two people are analysts/managers and the one who has had success as a player automatically has more insight is a total and utter crock.

[dalgreen]

I'm very frustrated at this team right now, but at this point what difference does it make? Even if Murton were given an everyday job, he, alone, would not turn this pathetic offense into a seven run a game team. Our offense plain stinks. Our 2-6 hitters were 3-19 today. We need multiple players not just one new guy in there over one bad guy.

[XZero771679666304]

I'm very frustrated at this team right now, but at this point what difference does it make? Even if Murton were given an everyday job, he, alone, would not turn this pathetic offense into a seven run a game team. Our offense plain stinks. Our 2-6 hitters were 3-19 today. We need multiple players not just one new guy in there over one bad guy.

 

Well at least we could see what the kid can do (or not do) without there being any real ramifications for the team if he does badly. I don't think too many people are thinking in terms of getting back in the race at this point. Now is the perfect time to test our kids out, so we have a better idea of what we have to work with going into the offseason. It would be the prudent thing to do.

[CubfaninCA]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

Being a great hitter doesn't mean you will be a great hitting instructor. Dusty's prowess as a MLB player and his ability to assess and instruct can be mutually exclusive things. Dusty was a good hitter so he automatically knows what's best for Murton? BS.

 

It's like that in all facets of life. For example, I have met awesome golfers who couldn't teach you a thing about how to swing a club effectively. I knew awesome mathematicians who couldn't help me at all with my math. I am a pretty damn good writer, but I have a hard time imparting writing knowledge on to students I tutor.

 

The notion that if two people are analysts/managers and the one who has had success as a player automatically has more insight is a total and utter crock.

 

The Cubs are one of the best slugging teams in the NL, and Baker's the same guy who managed Bonds. I don't like Baker, mostly due to his incredible stubbornness and constantly changing lineups. However, he's not as bad as some on this board say. He probably knows a lot more about hitting than many of the armchair coaches on this board, who probably never got past high school ball.

[imb]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

Being a great hitter doesn't mean you will be a great hitting instructor. Dusty's prowess as a MLB player and his ability to assess and instruct can be mutually exclusive things. Dusty was a good hitter so he automatically knows what's best for Murton? BS.

 

It's like that in all facets of life. For example, I have met awesome golfers who couldn't teach you a thing about how to swing a club effectively. I knew awesome mathematicians who couldn't help me at all with my math. I am a pretty damn good writer, but I have a hard time imparting writing knowledge on to students I tutor.

 

The notion that if two people are analysts/managers and the one who has had success as a player automatically has more insight is a total and utter crock.

 

The Cubs are one of the best slugging teams in the NL, and Baker's the same guy who managed Bonds. I don't like Baker, mostly due to his incredible stubbornness and constantly changing lineups. However, he's not as bad as some on this board say. He probably knows a lot more about hitting than many of the armchair coaches on this board, who probably never got past high school ball.

 

Here's a fun little job for you. Go find one post on this board by someone who claims to be a better hitting instructor than Baker. Find one post by someone who has said that they could teach someone to hit better than Baker.

[Backtobanks]

I'm very frustrated at this team right now, but at this point what difference does it make? Even if Murton were given an everyday job, he, alone, would not turn this pathetic offense into a seven run a game team. Our offense plain stinks. Our 2-6 hitters were 3-19 today. We need multiple players not just one new guy in there over one bad guy.

 

Well at least we could see what the kid can do (or not do) without there being any real ramifications for the team if he does badly. I don't think too many people are thinking in terms of getting back in the race at this point. Now is the perfect time to test our kids out, so we have a better idea of what we have to work with going into the offseason. It would be the prudent thing to do.

 

I agree, play Murton for the rest of the year. According to Stone, Burnitz won't be back, so let Murton play everyday. If he does okay, you have a cheap, young OF with a decent OBP. If another young OF (Mench, Kearns) becomes available in the offseason, you package Murton with some pitching to obtain the player you want. Having him sit for the rest of this year doesn't answer any questions about the future.

[XZero771679666304]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

Being a great hitter doesn't mean you will be a great hitting instructor. Dusty's prowess as a MLB player and his ability to assess and instruct can be mutually exclusive things. Dusty was a good hitter so he automatically knows what's best for Murton? BS.

 

It's like that in all facets of life. For example, I have met awesome golfers who couldn't teach you a thing about how to swing a club effectively. I knew awesome mathematicians who couldn't help me at all with my math. I am a pretty damn good writer, but I have a hard time imparting writing knowledge on to students I tutor.

 

The notion that if two people are analysts/managers and the one who has had success as a player automatically has more insight is a total and utter crock.

 

The Cubs are one of the best slugging teams in the NL, and Baker's the same guy who managed Bonds. I don't like Baker, mostly due to his incredible stubbornness and constantly changing lineups. However, he's not as bad as some on this board say. He probably knows a lot more about hitting than many of the armchair coaches on this board, who probably never got past high school ball.

 

Bonds was great before Baker got anywhere near him. Slugging is great, but what about the other facets of hitting? We have a poor and inconsistent offense.

 

And Dusty's faux concern over R/L matchups is very transparent. It is funny how his view of it changes depending on the experience of the player. Remember how eager he was to pull Dubois when a RHP came in, but ver did the same to Holla when a LHP came in? Or today when Mercker came in to fave Burnitz while Murton watched. There is zero reason to think his keeping Murton away from RHP is anything other than an excuse to play his pet vets. Matt hit RHP and LHP with equal effectiveness in AA, so there's not reason to expect him to be suddenly traumatized by them now. There is no better time to see what Matt can do than the present.

 

As I pointed out in another thread, the Braves brought Francouer up from AA at the same time as Murton was brought up, and he has had more AB's against RHP than LHP. And Bobby Cox sure knows a heck of alot more about winning and successfully managing a team than Dusty ever will.

 

But since Dusty was a good hitter, he must know more about it than Bobby, huh?

[erik316wttn]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

An 0-16 streak will only set him back as long as Baker's in charge. I recall a certain HOF 2B that started 1-23.....

 

I'm sure a lot of guys who never made it for long had a 1-23 stretch. Did DuBois have one of those?

 

For the record, Murton looks good. I just want to see what he does over a couple hundred at bats versus both lefties and righties. With Burnitz looking awful, I hope Murton gets a shot in the St. Louis series. Time to put him in the deep end of the pool.

 

Oh, trust me, I'm not saying that just because Ryno weathered a bad start that Murton can. Dubois, I'm sure, had a long streak like that.

 

However, given where we are in the standings, now is the perfect time to see exactly what kind of player Murton could be, especially considering that there's no clear cut alternative that's better..

 

Exactly. No pressure, we're out of it anyway. Let's see what the kid can do.

 

But that would mean, with Corey coming back, in order for Murton to play Lawton or Burntiz would have to sit. Dusty wouldn't sit a vet liek Burnitz, and Lawton isn't sitting, so Murton will rot on the bench for the rest of the year.

[XZero771679666304]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

An 0-16 streak will only set him back as long as Baker's in charge. I recall a certain HOF 2B that started 1-23.....

 

I'm sure a lot of guys who never made it for long had a 1-23 stretch. Did DuBois have one of those?

 

For the record, Murton looks good. I just want to see what he does over a couple hundred at bats versus both lefties and righties. With Burnitz looking awful, I hope Murton gets a shot in the St. Louis series. Time to put him in the deep end of the pool.

 

Oh, trust me, I'm not saying that just because Ryno weathered a bad start that Murton can. Dubois, I'm sure, had a long streak like that.

 

However, given where we are in the standings, now is the perfect time to see exactly what kind of player Murton could be, especially considering that there's no clear cut alternative that's better..

 

Exactly. No pressure, we're out of it anyway. Let's see what the kid can do.

 

But that would mean, with Corey coming back, in order for Murton to play Lawton or Burntiz would have to sit. Dusty wouldn't sit a vet liek Burnitz, and Lawton isn't sitting, so Murton will rot on the bench for the rest of the year.

 

Yeah, unless someone gets traded, this debate is all about principle anyway.

[ConstableRabbit]

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.

 

Please show me Bruce Levine's career MLB stats.

 

Thank you. The vitriol is getting a little thick in here. LOL @ the critical thinking reference. Critical thinking means not jumping to conclusions about Murton either way.

 

When I saw this topic come up I myself had a little :roll: . I too get the impression that Stonie has a bone to pick with the organization. I'm not here to argue for or against his firing last year, but I don't think I was the only one who sensed a biting tone in his voice in the booth toward the end of last season. Also, broad and harsh statements suggesting that Wood consider selling used cars and that certain players are lazy doesn't make you sound like an objective analyst - it makes you sound bitter. Wheras I used to really respect what Stone had to say, these days, I can't help but get the notion that he feels like he's the guy with all of the answers to all of our woes all of the time. Is he upset that he was fired, or that he isn't our manager/pitching coach? If in fact he does know the answers, he should get in the dugout and put his advice to use- I'm willing to try just about anything.

[CubfaninCA]

LOL. You guys are relentless. I'm sure all you guys were better hitters than Baker. The kid came up from Double A, not Triple A. Maybe Baker can get him in there against Carpenter, Morris, Clemens and Oswalt in the next week and get him an 0-16 and set the guy back a year or two.

 

Being a great hitter doesn't mean you will be a great hitting instructor. Dusty's prowess as a MLB player and his ability to assess and instruct can be mutually exclusive things. Dusty was a good hitter so he automatically knows what's best for Murton? BS.

 

It's like that in all facets of life. For example, I have met awesome golfers who couldn't teach you a thing about how to swing a club effectively. I knew awesome mathematicians who couldn't help me at all with my math. I am a pretty damn good writer, but I have a hard time imparting writing knowledge on to students I tutor.

 

The notion that if two people are analysts/managers and the one who has had success as a player automatically has more insight is a total and utter crock.

 

The Cubs are one of the best slugging teams in the NL, and Baker's the same guy who managed Bonds. I don't like Baker, mostly due to his incredible stubbornness and constantly changing lineups. However, he's not as bad as some on this board say. He probably knows a lot more about hitting than many of the armchair coaches on this board, who probably never got past high school ball.

 

Here's a fun little job for you. Go find one post on this board by someone who claims to be a better hitting instructor than Baker. Find one post by someone who has said that they could teach someone to hit better than Baker.

 

It's implied everyday.

[imb]

So lets see one.