CubinNY

I thought they were going to try and lock-up Pierre long term. This doesn't mean they can't. They've done this lots of times _ avoid arbitration and then sign a guy to a multiyear deal in spring training. Let's hope this is not that case this time. I want to see what he does b/f the Cubs offer him a muliti year deal.

What didn't they see in Sisco that other did? The fact that Cedeno was protected does not validate anything. Even a blind dog finds a bone every once in a while. The recent past suggests that Hendry has done a terrible job of managing the 40 man roster. It's not just Sisco but many others as well. I wish the search was available b/ce we've discussed this ad nauseum. Is it really that difficult to give credit where credit is due? As for Sisco, at the rate he was going with for the Cubs, he wasn't progressing. He had bad work habits and was overweight. While the talent was there, his attitude was not. I can certainly see why they didn't think that he would be able to stick on a major league roster last year. Being exposed to the draft might have been the best thing for him. All indications show that he used that experience to put a chip on his shoulder and gain some focus. We'll see how he does the next few years...to see if he does or does not revert back to his old form. It is not hard to give credit. I dont't see why Hendry should be given credit for sticking a guy on the 40 man who had the numbers Cedeno did. a) no one would have drafted him b) he wasn't going to stick on a ML roster. You can hide a pitcher you cannot hide a SS. If that is the case I want credit for driving 80 mph in a 45 zone and not getting a ticket. In other words, just because the outcome worked out alright does not make what was done a good idea.

What didn't they see in Sisco that other did? The fact that Cedeno was protected does not validate anything. Even a blind dog finds a bone every once in a while. The recent past suggests that Hendry has done a terrible job of managing the 40 man roster. It's not just Sisco but many others as well. I wish the search was available b/ce we've discussed this ad nauseum.

13 days left until pitchers and catchers report. =P~

Don't even think it 'cuse.

I tend to agree. As long as there is a healthy profit going forward, then a Tribune purchaser may chose to retain the asset. The likelihood of a national media outlet retaining the Cubs is further increased by the fact that the Cubs have a rare national following that raises there value to a national media outlet. I don't know much but I think the Cubs are not that profitable from a coprorate perspective. I think I read something to the extent that they saw a profit of 4 million dollars in 2003. That is not big money. Most of the owners own teams not to make money but as a vanity project. I think the era of corporate baseball will end soon. They just don't make enough money.

Blasphemer!!!!!!!!!!!!! sorry :wink: I know. Ron is absolutely terrible. He is so bad, well, he is so bad, he is good. I love listening on the computer but I have to monitor the game thread here to know eaxactly what is going on. I love listening to Pat and Ron becuase the greatness of one is completely mitagated by the badness of the other. They are the yin and yang of radio baseball. To me listening to the two of them is high entertainment. Especially when the Cubs are playing poorly. Nobody whines better than Ronny. However, I can see where people would disagree.

Blasphemer!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are they really that proud, or is that a media creation? Or, are they proud of the record, but realize that having that record means players won't fear going to arbitration and risk having to settle for the lower offer if they lose? I think they are more interested in the cash than the record of no arbitration, nobody gives out prizes for never going to arbitration. I've heard, on more than a few occasions, both Hendry and MacPhail mentioning this tidbit as something they're seemingly proud of. I don't really see the big deal, unless protecting your players from criticizism is that important. I've heard them talk of it as something they are seemingly proud of, I just think it might be a stretch to say they are so so proud of it. People are making it seem like it's their biggest goal, or among their biggest goals. My guess is that they'd be willing to go to arbitration if they thought the player's asking price was way to high and that the midpoint was out of whack with what they thought of as top dollar. I agree. And who better to go to arb. with than a guy who is easily replaceable. It's always the mid level talent that is made the example of.

I know you wrote Carlos would disagree, I was merely replying after seeing a few posts that questioned Hoops for writing what he wrote. It appeared to me that many thought he was nuts for thinking some GM's would think what he wrote they might think, and I happen to agree with his theory. That was me. I still think the notion is ridiculous. I'll eat my hat if the deal as proposed goes through

Perception is probably reality on this one B to B! Regardless of what the numbers and sabermetrics may actually show, there is surely a perception among GMs around the league that from July through October Jose Contreras was the best pitcher in baseball. With all due respect Hoops, The GMs around the league are, for the most part, not stupid. July -Oct. is hardly the way to measure a pitcher. Especially one with Contreras's track record. And then Jermanie Dye? He has been washed up for for a while.

If this deal comes to fruition I will write a check for $50 to the GOP

Absofreakinglutly What is Williams doing, giving other GMs a date rape drug and then taking pictures?

I don't like this WBC but I have to admit I am fired up for baseball. I will watch

These gas guzzlers are coming out just in time for the highest gas prices ever. Detroit should've done this 10 years ago.

I can say Maddux's control is still there because the walk total is the same and he still gets a healthy number of strikeouts his way. By the way, the HR total is too high (as I already stated), but I don't attribute it all to loss of control - umps have taken back some of the generous zone he had in the 90's and the division has been/is full of sluggers and small/hitters ball parks. And ERA is the least of the critical pitching stats that matter. There isn't statistical evidence to support the claim that Williams is better unless you predict Williams growth and Maddux decline. Maddux has been steady at his declined value from career norms for three years now. It suddenly won't just fall apart. So Williams will have to get significantly better, particularly with regards to k/walk ratio. I hope you're right, but I wouldn't put money on it. You win, I don't know where to begin.

I think that sources prediction was a bit unrealistic, expecting improvement out of a pitcher Maddux's age. But he's going to have a better year if only because he'll be given a spot all year long, while Williams will have to unfairly battle with Rusch for time. The key for Maddux is to keep that HR total down. The control is still there, but that HR total doubled from career norms in the 2003-2005 timespan. [edit - I mean doubled per year, not doubled the career total] BTW - Didn't the Bill James endorsed pitching prediction give Maddux a similar 2006 line? I wouldn't get too excited about any PECOTA predictions on pitching. They are not accurate, historically. They have very little predictive validity, a correlation of about .4 which is very weak. I don't know how you can say Maddux still has the control when he gave up taters like he did last year. He gave up the home run because he was missing his spots but his pitch stayed in the hitting zone and got thwacked, especially up in the zone. If Williams is given consistent starts I expect he will have a better ERA then Maddux.

Conspicuously absent is talk of Zambrano's contract. I hope that is a good sign that they are close to terms

15 Two weeks and a day!

I'm not UK but I will take a crack on my theory. Scouting is a talent that is very difficult to teach, it is more of an art then a science. Some people are virtuosos and some people are one step below and so on on down the line. I think the Braves have some virtuoso scouts. I think they also probably have good player development. Bottom line, unless a team is planning to hire away the same scouts as the Braves they probably shouldn't rely on that formula. There is only one Yo Yo Ma or Motzart. And there is only one Schuerholz. I think the Braves have proved that they are the exception to the rule. For every Braves team there are teams like the Cubs, Mets, Reds, Royals, amd Tigers that try to copy the Braves.

Which myth is that Sully? Take your pick 1. Speed distracts the pitcher so he is not as effective 2. Speed distracts the catcher 3. You have to have speed at the top of the order 4. Small ball wins 5. "fundamentals" win related to 4. I don't think there is anything necessarily wrong with people holding those opinions. But when evidence is presented to the contrary and then people pick at the evidence or at the messenger or make mistatements about the what the messenger wrote, those are problems.

No that is not correct. I actually believe that is correct. This year, anyway, Blanco was set up to catch on Prior's starts. I don't know if they kept with it, but that was the plan, and I seem to remember that being more or less accurate (someone who actually knows where to find this out for sure, could you look this up?). Plus, Barrett's numbers are significantly skewed because of catching Maddux all season long. If we got rid of Barrett, do you realize how truly terrible this lineup would be? I really think that's a bad idea. I stopped counting after getting to Blanco 19 Barrett 4 in Prior starts. It started pretty even, but after the injury went clearly in Blanco's favor. Maybe Prior did whine about Barrett then. Maybe my memory is off but I thought Barrett caught the majority of all the pitchers in 05. If my memory is off, I appologize for being wrong. But my point still stands.

No that is not correct. I actually believe that is correct. This year, anyway, Blanco was set up to catch on Prior's starts. I don't know if they kept with it, but that was the plan, and I seem to remember that being more or less accurate (someone who actually knows where to find this out for sure, could you look this up?). Plus, Barrett's numbers are significantly skewed because of catching Maddux all season long. If we got rid of Barrett, do you realize how truly terrible this lineup would be? I really think that's a bad idea. I am not advocating that at all. I think the Cubs should keep Barrett, at least for now. I think Hendry's, "I like guys who can the ball" stuff is bs. Or at least schizophrenic as catcher is arguably where you would want to be the strongest in defense. Look at Barrett's passed ball and the # of wild pitches when he is behind the plate. They are patheticly bad. I guess my main point is in Hendry's lust for defense this off-season he forgot to upgrade the position on the filed where defense means the most, arguably. Again, I am for keeping Barrett but given Hendr's statements, he shouldn't be.

No that is not correct. Barrett is a terrible reciever of the ball. He hops around too much before the pitch, he sets up way too late a lot of the time, and has terrible footwork. He lunges for ball to his left and often releases the ball way too high when thowing down to second.

I wrote at the beginning of the off-season after the "I like guys who can catch the ball" press release that if that is true the Cubs should have gotten rid of Barrett. I don't want to get rid of barrett but hendry should have. He is a HUGE liability behind the plate. I am surprized that Prior wasn't whining about him too.