Hahahahaha Johnny Damon

[TheDude]

Further, why create a potential block in CF when it is one of the few prospect replacement positions the Cubs have?

This is the only legitimate argument I have seen this thread for why the Cubs should not consider Damon's services.

 

Not one person has been able to substantiate claims of poor defense, declining production, poor future projections, etc.

 

I can respect a different psuedo-GM strategy such as what you presented (filling needs elsewhere and gambling on Corey until Pie can step up), but I can't respect claims that Damon doesn't fit a Cubs need and isn't worth a 4+ year contract.

[JC]

 

Not one person has been able to substantiate claims of poor defense, declining production, poor future projections, etc.

 

My impression of Damon as far as going and getting balls in CF is that he is pretty good. However, no substantiation is necessary with respect to his arm. Anyone arguing that Damon has even an average arm has never seen him throw. He is awful. Its not that it is inaccurate, it is that every relay from center field starts with a lob. His weak arm, and the corresponding negatives that it creates with respect to his defense, is indisputable.

[USSoccer]

 

Not one person has been able to substantiate claims of poor defense, declining production, poor future projections, etc.

 

My impression of Damon as far as going and getting balls in CF is that he is pretty good. However, no substantiation is necessary with respect to his arm. Anyone arguing that Damon has even an average arm has never seen him throw. He is awful. Its not that it is inaccurate, it is that every relay from center field starts with a lob. His weak arm, and the corresponding negatives that it creates with respect to his defense, is indisputable.

 

Did you know someone once tagged and scored from second on a fly ball to Damon?

 

He's got FA bust written all over him.

[goonys evil twin]

Let me be more clear - I acknowledge that Giles has been mor eproductive than Damon. But one of the arguments that has been made for not signing Damon is that he is 32 and wants a 5-year deal. Giles is 35 and I have read on several occassions on this bd. that many would be willing to sign him to a 4-year deal.

 

Thus, if you don't want Damon b/c of his age, but you want Giles in spite of his age, that appears to be contradictory. Its not a big deal, but if you don't want Damon and you are okay with Giles, I think you are better off sticking with the batting statistics as a justification.

 

Age isn't the reason I don't want Damon. Although it plays a part. Damon's game is based largely on speed, and speed is a young man's game. Giles OBP/SLG game is much more adaptable to an aging body.

 

But the main reason I would want Giles more than Damon is Giles blows him away in the production department.

But this isn't a fair comparison. They don't play the same position (meaning there is not a competition for one or other and they are not mutually exclusive) and they don't bring any of the same values to the table.

 

For production, compare Giles to another outfielder that produces. Damon is a leadoff hitter, what type of production are you expecting? As a leadoff hitter, he brings hits, OBP, respectable speed, and runs. He has scored 100+ runs per season for 8 consecutive years.

 

Honestly, I don't see why Giles and Damon are compared for production. They represent two seperate needs for the Cubs (a leadoff hitter and 4/5 hole hitter, CF and RF) and they represent the top FA for their services at each respective position.

 

The Cubs need production, plain and simple. They can plug Murton, Walker or Cedeno into the leadoff spot if they want. They need production, most importantly OBP production. Giles can be a 2 hole hitter wiith a .400 OBP, and solve any perceived problem for leadoff*. Damon is only a leadoff hitter because his manager put him there. He doesn't have to be one, he certainly isn't an ideal one. Production is needed, no matter what spot in the order it comes from. If the Cubs find the money for Damon and Giles, I wouldn't be upset, but if they pass on Giles and go hard after Damon, that would be incredibly stupid. Giles is the better player, and by all accounts will cost less.

 

 

*to clarify. If Giles is putting up a .400 OBP in the 2 hole, you don't need a super star leadoff hitter. A simple .330-.340 OBP would more than suffice. Between those two spots, Lee and Ramirez would get plenty of RBI opportunities.

Edited October 12, 2005 by goony's evil twin

[JC]

Did you know someone once tagged and scored from second on a fly ball to Damon?

 

He's got FA bust written all over him.

 

:shock: From second?!

 

I don't think he will be a bust, though a decline is likely. However, he is not the right fit for the Cubs whatsoever. It makes no sense for this team to tie itself to an aging centerfielder who relies on speed with the thick Wrigley grass.

 

It just doesn't make sense. As such, I expect him in blue pinstripes by December 15.

[USSoccer]

Did you know someone once tagged and scored from second on a fly ball to Damon?

 

He's got FA bust written all over him.

 

:shock: From second?!

 

I don't think he will be a bust, though a decline is likely. However, he is not the right fit for the Cubs whatsoever. It makes no sense for this team to tie itself to an aging centerfielder who relies on speed with the thick Wrigley grass.

 

It just doesn't make sense. As such, I expect him in blue pinstripes by December 15.

 

As others have pointed out, I doubt Hendry will do anything to block Pie. They aren't going to move Damon or Pie to a corner, so that tells me they won't be going near him. If we're going to sign a speed guy, it's going to be Furcal.

 

And we need Bruce Miles to start sounding the bell for Brian Giles, posthaste!

[TheDude]

The Cubs need production, plain and simple. They can plug Murton, Walker or Cedeno into the leadoff spot if they want. They need production, most importantly OBP production. Giles can be a 2 hole hitter wiith a .400 OBP, and solve any perceived problem for leadoff*. Damon is only a leadoff hitter because his manager put him there. He doesn't have to be one, he certainly isn't an ideal one. Production is needed, no matter what spot in the order it comes from. If the Cubs find the money for Damon and Giles, I wouldn't be upset, but if they pass on Giles and go hard after Damon, that would be incredibly stupid. Giles is the better player, and by all accounts will cost less.

I can buy every part of your argument here except where you throw in, "Damon is only a leadoff hitter because his manager put him there. He doesn't have to be one, he certainly isn't an ideal one."

 

Damon's numbers prove otherwise. There is no dispute.

 

The entire reason I took issue and defended Damon in this thread is the absolute dismissal people showed for him stating he is worth 5 years and puts butts in seats. Clearly I think he is worth it and his numbers could do all the talking for him if there wasn't a microphone in front of him.

 

Now the "fit" factor with respect to the Cubs came after, and that is something I am torn on personally. If the Cubs fill my personal desire for a bonifide leadoff hitter elsewhere, I'll be happy even if they show no interest in Damon.

[NorthsideAvenger]

Let me say I am about the furthest from understanding the statisical parts of the game, ie vorp, etc, etc. So no, I am not a statisical geek (I apologize to those who be offended). So, I usually trust my eyes, instead of numbers, and what I see from Damon is the following:

 

Poor arm (maybe poorer then Bernie Williams)

Declining speed.

a holier then thou arrogance.

 

He still gets on base at a good pace, but if he doesn't still bases, he's more of a #2 hitter/#6 type hitter then a leadoff hitter. The Cubs need someone who scares the daylights out of the pitcher, with his speed. Someone who takes the pressure off the middle of the order. And the older Damon gets more and more station to station player he becomes. And by the end of his "new five yr deal" (you know the Yanks are going to pay it), Damon is going to be a station to station player.

 

So, imo, I'd just stay away from CAPTAIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNN CAAAAAAAAAAVVVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEEMAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. I'd still think Adam Greenberg could be the Cubs version of Scott Podsenick. It's time to trust your farm system.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I'd still think Adam Greenberg could be the Cubs version of Scott Podsenick. It's time to trust your farm system.

 

If that's the case, then we need to trade him to the ChiSox pronto for their minor league version of Carlos Lee.

[TheDude]

Did you know someone once tagged and scored from second on a fly ball to Damon?

 

He's got FA bust written all over him.

Those two sentences have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Damon isn't even close to having FA bust all over him, and if your justification is a throwing arm, you really need to remember to add the sarcasm smiley.

 

I would argue Damon is a low risk chance to bust. 31 isn't knocking down the crypt, and he is one of the most diligent people I've met in the baseball world at taking care of his body. He's never had a serious injury and the fewest number of game he has played for his career as a starter is 145 (twice back in KC).

[goonys evil twin]

The Cubs need production, plain and simple. They can plug Murton, Walker or Cedeno into the leadoff spot if they want. They need production, most importantly OBP production. Giles can be a 2 hole hitter wiith a .400 OBP, and solve any perceived problem for leadoff*. Damon is only a leadoff hitter because his manager put him there. He doesn't have to be one, he certainly isn't an ideal one. Production is needed, no matter what spot in the order it comes from. If the Cubs find the money for Damon and Giles, I wouldn't be upset, but if they pass on Giles and go hard after Damon, that would be incredibly stupid. Giles is the better player, and by all accounts will cost less.

I can buy every part of your argument here except where you throw in, "Damon is only a leadoff hitter because his manager put him there. He doesn't have to be one, he certainly isn't an ideal one."

 

Damon's numbers prove otherwise. There is no dispute.

 

The entire reason I took issue and defended Damon in this thread is the absolute dismissal people showed for him stating he is worth 5 years and puts butts in seats. Clearly I think he is worth it and his numbers could do all the talking for him if there wasn't a microphone in front of him.

 

Now the "fit" factor with respect to the Cubs came after, and that is something I am torn on personally. If the Cubs fill my personal desire for a bonifide leadoff hitter elsewhere, I'll be happy even if they show no interest in Damon.

 

So you think Damon puts butts in seats? I don't. But I don't think that matters.

 

An ideal leadoff man, is somebody who routinely puts up a .300 AVG and .375+ OBP, and probably puts up huge SB numbers with great efficiency, while walking more than he strikes out. Many say ideal leadoff men don't exist anymore. Fine, then don't go so hard after them and prop up lesser ones into stars when they are not. Damon could just as easily put up a .340 as he could a .375 OBP. He's nowhere near consistently great in that department. He is usually relatively productive, and yes, he is worth a good contract. But he's not somebody you hang your hat on to turn around an offense.

[JC]

He's never had a serious injury and the fewest number of game he has played for his career as a starter is 145 (twice back in KC).

 

Maybe not serious, but he has admitted to still having linger effects from his Damian Jackson concussion. That is kind of spooky.

 

Further, it seems like he is starting to suffer more frequently from pulls and strains. Perhaps that is a peception problem on my part. Regardless, these conditions concern me.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Did you know someone once tagged and scored from second on a fly ball to Damon?

 

He's got FA bust written all over him.

Those two sentences have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Damon isn't even close to having FA bust all over him, and if your justification is a throwing arm, you really need to remember to add the sarcasm smiley.

 

I would argue Damon is a low risk chance to bust. 31 isn't knocking down the crypt, and he is one of the most diligent people I've met in the baseball world at taking care of his body. He's never had a serious injury and the fewest number of game he has played for his career as a starter is 145 (twice back in KC).

 

Damon will be 32 next year, the majority of his next contract will be played past his prime. He benefits from his home park, and even with that he's not a top notch offensive outfielder. Paying more than 8 million and/or for more than 3 years will make him a bust. Again, there are few players worth 10 million dollars on the FA market, and Damon certainly isn't good enough to be one of them.

[goonys evil twin]

He's never had a serious injury and the fewest number of game he has played for his career as a starter is 145 (twice back in KC).

 

And once in Boston, then only 148 this year.

 

Your superstars have to routinely play 150+ to justify the mega deals.

[oldcubsfan]

J D Drew?

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Damon puts butts in the seats?

 

How many more butts can fit in Wrigley than routinely show up? Damon isn't worth it, just looking at dollar figures. Arguing production is another thing.

[USSoccer]

Did you know someone once tagged and scored from second on a fly ball to Damon?

 

He's got FA bust written all over him.

Those two sentences have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Damon isn't even close to having FA bust all over him, and if your justification is a throwing arm, you really need to remember to add the sarcasm smiley.

 

I would argue Damon is a low risk chance to bust. 31 isn't knocking down the crypt, and he is one of the most diligent people I've met in the baseball world at taking care of his body. He's never had a serious injury and the fewest number of game he has played for his career as a starter is 145 (twice back in KC).

 

Those two sentences have to do with the comments they were in response to, which were about his OF defense, of which arm strength is a part of, and about his value as a FA.

 

If you don't think CF is primarily a defensive position, I don't know what to tell you. This is why offense from a CF is considered a premium, since the position is important defensively. I don't think Damon's offense would be worth watching runners routinely score from second on singles up the middle. I don't think his offense would be worth blocking Pie or signing Damon at the expense of a real RF.

[RynoRules]

There are good arguments both ways on this. I wouldn't mind having Johnny in Chicago. That said, it would have to be for less than he is alleging he wants.

 

At the end of the day, the mkt will determine his value, and Georgy-boy is likely to want him, so this is all academic.

 

But poor Johnny will have to cut his hair to be a Yankee...

[Careless]

The Cubs need production, plain and simple. They can plug Murton, Walker or Cedeno into the leadoff spot if they want. They need production, most importantly OBP production. Giles can be a 2 hole hitter wiith a .400 OBP, and solve any perceived problem for leadoff*. Damon is only a leadoff hitter because his manager put him there. He doesn't have to be one, he certainly isn't an ideal one. Production is needed, no matter what spot in the order it comes from. If the Cubs find the money for Damon and Giles, I wouldn't be upset, but if they pass on Giles and go hard after Damon, that would be incredibly stupid. Giles is the better player, and by all accounts will cost less.

I can buy every part of your argument here except where you throw in, "Damon is only a leadoff hitter because his manager put him there. He doesn't have to be one, he certainly isn't an ideal one."

 

Damon's numbers prove otherwise. There is no dispute.

obviously there is. You're engaged in it, you should know.

[TheDude]

If you don't think CF is primarily a defensive position, I don't know what to tell you. This is why offense from a CF is considered a premium, since the position is important defensively. I don't think Damon's offense would be worth watching runners routinely score from second on singles up the middle. I don't think his offense would be worth blocking Pie or signing Damon at the expense of a real RF.

We're speaking about different things here. You seem to consider the throwing arm as the defining element of a player's defense. I consider defense to be playing the field with an arm as a bonus.

 

I do consider defense important, especially up the middle, and in fact I have had to defend my importance on defense many times. I'm old school. If I'm an amateur GM, I want defense and pitching.

 

But throwing arm is just a small fraction of defense for me, and in Damon's case, is the only drawback. He doesn't commit many errors in the field, has solid range (top 5 in MLB in RF, middle-of-the-pack in ZR), and has a fearless attitude.

 

It is a poor and inaccurate statement to say Damon is a poor defensive player. He is a better-then-average defensive player with a poor throwing arm.

[NorthsideAvenger]

I'd still think Adam Greenberg could be the Cubs version of Scott Podsenick. It's time to trust your farm system.

 

If that's the case, then we need to trade him to the ChiSox pronto for their minor league version of Carlos Lee.

 

First: I meant that Greenberg could provide the spark that Pods did for the Sox.

 

Second: the Cubs already have their "Carlos Lee" in Matt Murton.

[XZero771679666304]

If you don't think CF is primarily a defensive position, I don't know what to tell you. This is why offense from a CF is considered a premium, since the position is important defensively. I don't think Damon's offense would be worth watching runners routinely score from second on singles up the middle. I don't think his offense would be worth blocking Pie or signing Damon at the expense of a real RF.

We're speaking about different things here. You seem to consider the throwing arm as the defining element of a player's defense. I consider defense to be playing the field with an arm as a bonus.

 

I do consider defense important, especially up the middle, and in fact I have had to defend my importance on defense many times. I'm old school. If I'm an amateur GM, I want defense and pitching.

 

But throwing arm is just a small fraction of defense for me, and in Damon's case, is the only drawback. He doesn't commit many errors in the field, has solid range (top 5 in MLB in RF, middle-of-the-pack in ZR), and has a fearless attitude.

 

It is a poor and inaccurate statement to say Damon is a poor defensive player. He is a better-then-average defensive player with a poor throwing arm.

 

But a throwing arm is an integral element of defense, whether you choose to acknowledge that or not.

[TheDude]

But a throwing arm is an integral element of defense, whether you choose to acknowledge that or not.

I never said otherwise. If you read, I clearly acknowledge it is an aspect of defense. I am just noting that it isn't the critical aspect of defense, to the point it turns a man into an overall poor defensive player. My statement was in response to someone elses implication that throwing arm defines defensive prowess.

[XZero771679666304]

But a throwing arm is an integral element of defense, whether you choose to acknowledge that or not.

I never said otherwise. If you read, I clearly acknowledge it is an aspect of defense. I am just noting that it isn't the critical aspect of defense, to the point it turns a man into an overall poor defensive player. My statement was in response to someone elses implication that throwing arm defines defensive prowess.

 

You said a good throwing arm is a "bonus".

 

I consider defense to be playing the field with an arm as a bonus.

 

It isn't.

 

It is an integral part of defense, not just a small fraction.

[nilodnayr]

I'd still think Adam Greenberg could be the Cubs version of Scott Podsenick. It's time to trust your farm system.

 

If that's the case, then we need to trade him to the ChiSox pronto for their minor league version of Carlos Lee.

 

Brian Anderson please...and that trade worked out well for both teams.