CubinNY

That almost worries me. If the Cubs like him, there must be something wrong with him. Vance can correct me if I'm wrong since he's been on the Freddie bandwgn for a long time, but I think they interviewed him before they hired Dusty.

The Treatment- Retarding the development of a young player by giving the player selcted playing time and subing for him in late innings. http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/cubs.asp you decide?

If you're talking payroll, the Cubs are much closer to the Yankees than the Marlins are. As for Girardi, all he's done is guide a team that started a ton of rookies and had a $15 million dollar payroll to third place in the NL East and a 54-61 record. I understand that the record doesn't sound like anything special but that team was expected to have one of the worst records in the major leagues this year. I would take Girardi. Talent wins managers do not. All a manger can do is place his team in the best postion to win. From what I've seen Joe likes to waste outs. He's criticized his best every-day player on multiple occasions for "not hustling" even though this player is putting up spactacular numbers. The Cubs are much closer to the Yankees for sure. But that's is like saying that the bag boy at Krogers is much closer to being a millionare than the guy who is cashing in cans to buy a bottle of Thunderbird.

Prior has probably been injured since last year. I don't think he's brittle. He's been misused, of that I'm sure. At the same time Hendry and Co. have done nothing to quell the rumors that he's soft. Soft. Soft in the sense that he's tried to pitch through injuries for the better part of two seasons.

I don't really want Giardi managing the Cubs. I think he needs more experience. The Marlins aren't the Yankees and neither are the Cubs. I also haven't seen anything that would make me want him to manage the Cubs. Admitedly, I haven't seen the Marlins much. I'd rather have Derkier or Bobby Valentine.

I just don't see how anyone involved in this entire organization can just allow this to continue on unchanged. It's completely unfathomable to me. It's like you park your car on a hill, and get out and it starts rolling because you forgot to put it in gear, but rather than try to get back in and stop it, you let it slowly gain momentum and just hope it stops on it's own eventually in a perfect spot so it's undamaged, when reality is that it's probably going to end up hitting a telephone pole. Man I'm coming up with some crazy analogies lately. I think they (Hendry, Hughes, etc.) have as much contempt for the media as Dusty. I think they don't really care what Dusty says because of that contempt. I'm sure they are nice. The kind of nice I get when I talk to a good ole' boy in South Alabama. They tolerate me, but I will never understand becuase I'm a Yankee. Just the same way a beat reporter can't understand becuase he never played The Game. Look at Dusty's innane comments throughout his tenure. From Black players playing better in the heat and on and on.

Yeah...I'm not enjoying Z's race for the Cy Young award right now. All individual awards in baseball are good for is the player's next contract/arbitration. I hope Z doesn't come up lame this year or next.

Len getting a little frisky with the moron radio dudes. I love it.

Hill hater :D Seriously, I think GMs value lefties with upside more than any other *intangible* tool (I know, I know) Obviously, the rankings are heavily dependent on performance for the rest of 2006 2007 Marshall Hill Marmol Guzman Trade value Hill Marshall Guzman Marmol Long term Guzman Hill Marmol (as a closer) Marshall

I was comparing him to other leadoff hitters in the NL. Ok, he's 10th out of 16 teams in the NL. That doesn't sound any better does it?

You really should qualify that better - he's 10th in the NL in OBP among qualified CF's. If he were 10th in the NL, we'd be very happy with his .398 OBP. Unfortunatley for us, ol 43 is 74th in the NL in OBP. That's simply horrific for a lead-off hitter. No he's 10th in the NL in OBP among qualified Leadoff hitters... The positon in which the manager chooses to place a batter is irrelevent. He is 74th in OBP.

It's not spin, it's reality. Winning a few games in the 2nd half will change nothing. In the short-term it's nice to see a win. In the long-term, a "respectable" 2006 is about the worst case scenario. I'm more interested in the long-term success of this team, which will require massive changes in strategy. A respectable finish will only reinforce their misguided belief that they are headed in the right direction. This arguement is a fine line. Do you just want to the Cubs to pack it in and lose and lose bad from here on out? Doesn't that reinforce our losing mentallity for the past 99 years? Why waste the year away when at least you can use this year (2nd half) as a positive learning expirence for the youth of this ballclub. That would be fine, if they were using this portion of the year to evaluate the youthfull talent they have. This winning thing has coincided with somewhat of a youth movement, but I don't know if the brain trust is noticing this. I wouldn't be a bit surprized if Angel Pagen is the starting in LF next year, when in almost every measureable way he is inferior to Murton.

The problem is that it will be viewed as a trememdous accomplishment, by the media, by Dusty, by Hendry and management. They will all pat themselves on the back and try the same failed crap next season, mistakenly thinking that 3 months of success will carry into 6 months of success next season. That reinforces that mediocrity is still an acceptable goal for the team. Exactly. They will talk about injuries and being "snake bitten".

The thing about Mutron that I like is his bat speed. IMO, he'll always hit for a decent to high average, and with his plate discipline he will be a valuable player. The main problem, IMO is the outdated idea that a corner outfielder must hit a high number of HRs. His swing is not likely to do that. He's a line drive hitter who will hit lots of doubles but not a lot of HRs. With a guy like Murton in LF a team will have to look for power somewhere else. For that reason, I think he'll have a long career with a lot of teams. I don't think many Baseball Men who played The Game will have the foresight to build a team without a power hitter in a traditional power hitting position. I don't think that idea is outdated at all. You need to get power in your lineup, and LF is at the bottom of the defensive spectrum, making it easier to stash a big bat there. Obviously it's not an absolute, but if you have a player that struggles to get to an .800 OPS like Murton, it puts a lot of stress on positions that it's much more difficult to get offense from. I understand where you are coming from, but if you have a guy like Murton, you have to think a little differently. He's not in Tony Gwyn's class but Gwynn was a corner outfielder. George Brett wasn't a HR hitter, neither was Don Mattingly, for the most part. Obviously, I'm not suggesting that Murton will have a career like those three but two of the three guys played on WS teams. Edit: I just saw the Andrew Jones talk in transactions. Trade for Jones and work out a deal with Aramis. Then you have three legitimate power hitters: CF, 3rd, 1st. Throw a boat load of cash at Soriano and put him at 2nd and you'd have four. Murton Soriano Lee A.Jones Aramis Barrett JJ Izturas That would be a pretty decent every day line up. Nice line-up, but that is adding at least an extra 40 million (Jones, Soriano and Lee) to payroll without addressing pitching. I'm all for it, but I don't see the Tribune opening up the checkbook that much. D. Lee not C. Lee. I want no part of that bloated overpaid player.

The thing about Mutron that I like is his bat speed. IMO, he'll always hit for a decent to high average, and with his plate discipline he will be a valuable player. The main problem, IMO is the outdated idea that a corner outfielder must hit a high number of HRs. His swing is not likely to do that. He's a line drive hitter who will hit lots of doubles but not a lot of HRs. With a guy like Murton in LF a team will have to look for power somewhere else. For that reason, I think he'll have a long career with a lot of teams. I don't think many Baseball Men who played The Game will have the foresight to build a team without a power hitter in a traditional power hitting position. I don't think that idea is outdated at all. You need to get power in your lineup, and LF is at the bottom of the defensive spectrum, making it easier to stash a big bat there. Obviously it's not an absolute, but if you have a player that struggles to get to an .800 OPS like Murton, it puts a lot of stress on positions that it's much more difficult to get offense from. I understand where you are coming from, but if you have a guy like Murton, you have to think a little differently. He's not in Tony Gwyn's class but Gwynn was a corner outfielder. George Brett wasn't a HR hitter, neither was Don Mattingly, for the most part. Obviously, I'm not suggesting that Murton will have a career like those three but two of the three guys played on WS teams. Edit: I just saw the Andrew Jones talk in transactions. Trade for Jones and work out a deal with Aramis. Then you have three legitimate power hitters: CF, 3rd, 1st. Throw a boat load of cash at Soriano and put him at 2nd and you'd have four. Murton Soriano Lee A.Jones Aramis Barrett JJ Izturas That would be a pretty decent every day line up.

The thing about Mutron that I like is his bat speed. IMO, he'll always hit for a decent to high average, and with his plate discipline he will be a valuable player. The main problem, IMO is the outdated idea that a corner outfielder must hit a high number of HRs. His swing is not likely to do that. He's a line drive hitter who will hit lots of doubles but not a lot of HRs. With a guy like Murton in LF a team will have to look for power somewhere else. For that reason, I think he'll have a long career with a lot of teams. I don't think many Baseball Men who played The Game will have the foresight to build a team without a power hitter in a traditional power hitting position.

There you go; I think you answered your own question. It's the same stat he brought up when they signed Jeromy Burnitz. As you say, the stat is entirely random and varies from year to year with each player. All I can do is keep beating the OBP drum and maybe talking with some of their inside people about this silly notion. I did hear the interview today on the way to the park. In my opinion, Bruce, the SLG drum is just as important. Hendry also touched on this today(you probably heard), saying that they used to have a team that led the league in HR, but that didn't get them anywhere in terms of winning a championship. Well, that's true, but that offense('03-'04) sure did score a lot more runs than this one does. He was in rare form today. It's absolutely shocking that a GM could be so clueless as to what attributes lead to a good offensive team. Why did Hendry change his gameplan on how to build a team. The 2003 team was built around power on offense and ptching. They were 5 outs from the WS. The 2004 team had the same idea, but was even more talented than 2003. They won 1 more game than 03, and should have made the playoffs. Then in 2005 he let a lot of power go in Sosa/Alou and he didn't replace it. Now in 2006 there is almost no power and it is all speed and defense. What the hell happened? It can't all be the White Sox, because this trend has been moving this way for 2 years now. Not to mention the fact the Sox led the Al in HR's last year. Hendry had the Cubs going in the right direction in 03-04, why did he change course? That's just it, there is no coherent plan. Things happen to the Cubs. The Cubs don't make things happen. Look at the Yankees, Red Sox, A's, Braves, or any successful organization in baseball. They get guys to fit their plan or philosphy. They may have different philosphies on how to get to the top but they stick with one. The thing they all have in common is that they build around guys who get on base. Then they get two or perhaps three sluggers and then fill in the rest of the line up with the BPA. Hendry and the Cubs don't seem to understand that.

Dollars to donuts that Cedeno is traded in the off-season for a "proven" 2nd baseman. So, not only will Hendry have traded away a less expensive player, he will trade away the better player. Folks, get ready for a Little Ceaser, Neifi (or if you prefer Neifi Jr., Neifi)double play tandem at least 60 games next year. Between these two and the pitcher's spot, that will make three almost automatic outs in the line-up. It will strike fear in the hearts of the NL.

How's Memphis? We're not there yet. I am in Radke VA at a Holliday Inn. So far the south is fricken hot. ps> sorry for the delay. Go Rich Hill!!!

Go Rich Hill!!!!!!!! I love the modern age. Internet in the hotel!! Go modern age!!!!!

According to XM 175 as of now Tejada WILL NOT agree to play 3rd. That could change with extra money though.

A washed up Garry Sheffield??? for 3 for 45???

Nice post Fred. Well done. Winning and stability are directly proportional. With the Wrigley family it was often a matter of money. Since the tribune took over that hasn't been the case. I don't know the amount of money the Cubs put into scouting, player development, and instructiors so I can't say they aren't getting the bang for the buck, but they've really failed in this area. To me that is the biggest problem. As much as I think Dusty needs to go, I'm not sure how much impact a manager has at improving the talent given to him. Dusty was clearly the wrong type of manager for a young team with a lot of talent. That's not to say that he wouldn't do a good job with a veteran team.

and driving in 4 runs.

That's not a bad idea at all. I wonder about G. Maddux though. Has he expressed any interest in coaching? He seems like a guy who would try to hone his golf game to the point where he could join the Senior PGA.