jjgman21

the efficient use of resources is the reason I think Murton has to be given every chance to develop his power and the ability to hit right handed ML pitching. again, the presence of a catcher who produces like a leftfielder allows you to get away with this. Murton + Barrett out produces just about any LF/C combo in baseball. then all you need to do is get traditional rightfield production out of rightfield, which can be done by adding a right handed platoon option, as few have argued with. that leaves center, and there have been any number of suggestions. I like DeJesus from the Royals, just my opinion, but keeping Murton as a full time player, getting a platoon partner for Jones leaves the team with alot more resources (pay and/or players) to improve center. to me, keeping Murton in left allows you to limit the number of difficult transactions that need to be made, and has the added benefit of bringing Murton along. I also think a small adjustment that gets him squaring up on the ball instead of hitting the top of the ball when he's pulling the pitch would instantly turn him into a .365/.485 hitter. I don't know what that adjustment would be, but I would think a competent ML hitting coach should be able to figure it out.

I think "exposed" is the wrong word with loaded connotations, but as I said on the previous page, I think he deserves some criticism from all points of view. yes, he has a low payroll, but a large chunk of it is taken up with two players who suck, not an efficient use of resources. the young guys who have come to the ML level are not the diamond in the rough/Moneyball type draft picks, they are players that any GM would have taken, so yes he's drafted players that came to the major leagues, but at no greater clip as any other GM who would have had 10-12 first round draft picks in two years. he does keep his teams competitive, but in a division that has fallen off precipitously in the past few years, and the strength of his team is generally NOT derived from the strength of the offense, it has generally been pitching, by pitchers who, again, any GM would have taken. his good signs and trades have been equalized by his bad signs and trades. and I think one thing that always gets left out of the discussion of Beane is the position he is in. doesn't really matter what the team is doing, they generally draw the same number of fans in Oakland...not alot. he doesn't have to deal with the sort of 'win now' mentality of the fan base and local sports journalists as in Anaheim, Arlington, Seattle, New York, Chicago (northside). that allows him to sit back and cherry pick, where other GMs could not. where I think he may have been "exposed" is the weakness of preaching patience. as I alluded to in a couple of other threads, patience makes no difference if the players OBP sucks. patience is a means to an end, not an end. the point of patience is getting a good pitch to hit and then hitting said pitch, and if said pitch does not come, getting on base anyway. a .80 difference between ave and obp is of little value if the player is batting .225. that is what Beane is experiencing right now. guys who can draw all the BB/PA you want, but who can't hit. edit for one more criticism - his payroll has risen significantly the past couple years, both in terms of amount and relative to other teams, yet he has not been able to parlay that into success on the field. still operating lower than most teams also, I think he is a fine GM, but not the boy genius he's been made out to be.

I really wish Cubs fans would be a little more patient with a guy who has a half season of ML before making a determination that he is best utilized as a platoon player. people should stop calling for running good players out of town or out of the lineup for the sake of the here and now. one little adjustment and the guy will be a masher. give him a little time, some good coaching, rely on getting corner outfield production from your catcher, and let the kid play and develop. if he has the same numbers at this point of next year or the year after, fine. until then, let the guy keep getting on base at a good clip and develop his power.

yes, they have had their share of missed time. but if you're going to excuse their performance because of injuries, I don't want to see you turn around and bitch about Hendry and Baker making injury excuses. the missed time of the A's also hasn't been that significant. respective PAs (approx) of the players you listed: 235, 350, 325, 275, 122. of the players you listed, only Bradley and Ellis have missed significant time, and Lee missed comparable time as Bradley and Barrett missed comparable time as Ellis (due to injury and suspension). and the expected offensive production of Lee/Barrett >>>> the expected offensive production of Bradley/Ellis, so the Cubs injuries have aruably hurt more than the A's injuries. There's a difference between relying on healthy guys that get hurt after you bring them in and bringing in/relying on guys that have a history of getting hurt to be key parts to your team. Also, even though Chavez hasn't missed significant time, he's playing hurt. Tendinitis in both forearms can really impact a player's ability to swing a bat. Ask Brad Wilkerson that. well there's two problems with your retort. 1. I said nothing about pitchers. neither Lee nor Barrett had any injury history whatsoever before this year. 2. Bradley, Thomas, Crosby, Ellis, Harden = key parts of the A's Beane relied on even though they have a history of getting hurt.

yes, they have had their share of missed time. but if you're going to excuse their performance because of injuries, I don't want to see you turn around and bitch about Hendry and Baker making injury excuses. the missed time of the A's also hasn't been that significant. respective PAs (approx) of the players you listed: 235, 350, 325, 275, 122. of the players you listed, only Bradley and Ellis have missed significant time, and Lee missed comparable time as Bradley and Barrett missed comparable time as Ellis (due to injury and suspension). and the expected offensive production of Lee/Barrett >>>> the expected offensive production of Bradley/Ellis, so the Cubs injuries have aruably hurt more than the A's injuries.

Oakland is 2nd from the bottom in runs scored in the AL, and have still outscored the Cobs, 411-376 Exactly-so our strategy is definitely wrong, but it doesn't mean their strategy is right-don't you think we would have about the number of runs they have if Lee was here the entire season though? We'd still be bad-and we still need to make changes, but so do they. Oakland is also over 500 and currently in 1st place. So maybe we should be looking at their pitching philosophy, but not their hitting philosophy. not really. we should look into doing both better. more BBs and HRs hit and fewer BBs and HRs allowed. attempt to have the offensive players also provide decent D and a little speed. the problem with the A's is similar to what I said about Brian Anderson in Sulley's thread. all the patience in the world is of little value if the hitters aren't getting on base. if I am not mistaken, the A's have great isolated patience, but terrible overall obp.

Oakland is 2nd from the bottom in runs scored in the AL, and have still outscored the Cobs, 411-376 which is about exactly what one would expect the run differential would be between a bad team who sends a pitcher and a pinch hitter up 4 times a game and a bad team that sends a thumper (DH) up 4-5 times every game. 411/9 = 45 or so runs generated by each lineup slot on average 376/8.5 = 44 or so runs generated by each lineup slot on average in other words, the A's are just as bad offensively as the Cubs and the difference is accounted for by the leagues they play in.

This is the same Steve Philips who last night said the A's are interested in trading for Alphonso Soriano. If there's an player who's the antithesis of BillyBall, it's Soriano. Not only that, but he said that Soriano would fit perfectly with Billy Beane's aggressive style of play. . . :shock: the second part, fitting in with Beane's aggressive style of play, is absurd. but it is not beyond Beane to go out and get a player that doesn't fit his overall philosophy to make a playoff push. we are talking about the guy who repeatedly traded for a proven closer. that's one of his strengths imo, the willingness to do what is necessary in a given moment, even if it doesn't fit in with what he preaches. I've been thinking about Beane lately, and think he deserves some criticism, or at least whether his roster in the macro fits some of his overall philosophies needs to be looked at. it appears he chose the wrong guy to keep in Chavez. Tejeda and Giambi continue to put up great numbers, while Chavez has had a couple of down years. he may get nothing out of the last of his aces, Zito. a huge chunk of his payroll is taken up with two players who aren't earning their money, Loiaza and Kendall. furthermore, the only minor leaguers who seem to come up and make an impact are players that traditional scouts salivated over. not saying Moneyball or SABR or Beane is wrong. I just think the job he's done over the past three years needs to be reexamined and is deserving of some criticism.

all the patience in the world is of little value (note I said little, not "no value") if it does not result in the player getting on base. whether generated through walks or hits, Anderson's OBP is still in Neifiland. Pie could come up right now and put up a .282/.332 line, and is 4-5 years younger. again, 2 trades for players on major league rosters, 2-3 FA signings, a couple in house moves, and a few trades for minor league sticks, and this team is set up to make the playoffs next year, and set up to be very good for several years to come. this team doesn't need to be blown up. it needs a new coaching staff and some tinkering at a couple positions. I agree that Jones is not a run producer if playing every day, but with the right platoon, right field could be a run producing position for the Cubs for the duration of Jones' reasonably priced contract. if he is going to be traded, you're right, now's the time.

I had no expectation of the Bears winning that game, nor do I think the coaching staff prepared for that game with any sort urgency. I wished the Bears made a better showing, but to me that game was no big wup.

Yeah, I know a lot of us were disappointed in the draft, but really the key was keeping everyone together. The Bears are young enough to actually get better. However, I do worry about Hillenbrand, Vasher, and the DEs repeating their seasons from last year. just chuckling at Hllenbrand. I know what you meant. I actually thought the DEs had a bit of a down season, as did Tommie Harris. Vash, I'm confident he'll repeat, and the entire offseason was dedicated to depth at the position it seems.

the three of us putting all these names and positions together, injuries were worse than I remember and they came out of it pretty ok. sure woulda been nice to have a healthy Brown over the top in the playoffs though.

offense - some offensive line problems, quarterback in pre-season, rookie first round running back, rookie second round receiver, third receiver, Muhammed was banged up all year, fullback, second tightend. defense - not alot, but a very important one, Mike Brown. edit - forgot about Zoom, and I think Peanut was banged up all year.

then look at both sides of the SABR / traditional debate with a critical eye. I completely agree that traditional anaylsis deserves more critique, but I don't think you have ever said anything critical about any SABR notion or study. you lap up every dish of "traditional is wrong" that is put in front of you, without looking to see if you're eatting horse meat. Nice to see more of that "seem to" crap floating around. Puts a great emphasis on your point. whatever. again, if you don't have a valid point, save the keystrokes. how about this...FIXED

Why? The only time I think overpaying makes sense is when you are getting back a pre-prime stud (Cabrera). And who says you have to overpay for Freel, his GM doesn't seem to want full value for his players. other posters in this very thread have so advocated. "overpay" is a relative term. I don't think the Cubs should overpay for anyone, but I think you need to make a very attractive offer for a young, talented player like DeJesus. if he develops power, great. if he just continues his obp, you have a great leadoff man for 3 years to come.

then look at both sides of the SABR / traditional debate with a critical eye. I completely agree that traditional anaylsis deserves more critique, but I don't think you have ever said anything critical about any SABR notion or study. you seem to lap up every dish of "traditional is wrong" that is put in front of you, without looking to see if you're eatting horse meat. I've stated many times that alot of what SABR claims to have measured hasn't been properly measured. you take issue when I so state, completely discounting that Bill James has backed off the conclusion that clutch doesn't exist until there are better studies, or the inherent admission of failure to properly measure the value of defense through the study that NY states.

The problem as "saber" people phrase it is that they don't have a good way to measure defense, not that it is unimportant. But some stat companies have now started to employ scores of young people to pour through video and plot a multitude of information. I think in a few years people who are interested in such things will come up with a usefull metric. Whether baseball men who played the game will see value in them remains to be seen. that's awesome. can't wait to see the results of those studies.

That's freaking absurd. Your anti-sabr bias completely clouds your ability to have a rational conversation. If you insist on making asinine claims such as this, then there is nowhere else to go with this and any other conversation. A lot of what these guys try to do is to find and exploit inefficiencies in the market. why can this guy constantly do this and not be chastised by the mods? like your pro-sabr bias allows such an objective analysis. in case you didn't notice, my plan in the other thread is completely OBP intensive. my problem with SABR is many of the theories are taken too far. I'm a total advocate of using stats to identify the players who should be acquired. I'm a total advocate of taking advantage of inefficiencies. your accusation is without basis and presented with a tone that should not be acceptable. both sides in any debate will unfairly discount what the other side says. if you think SABR is immune from that you're on crack. make a legitimate dispute to the notion that SABRs often fail to ask a scientific questions before giving a scientific answer, or be through with this before you post this garbage.

I wasn't aware of that. that makes him a little more difficult to get, but I think overpaying for a player like DeJesus rather than overpaying for a player like Freel makes alot more sense, and makes tons more sense than trying for Abreu, who will require tons in terms of talent and payroll.

I agree. Cruz Jr. is a creative platoon option for Jones, but what's the point of him and Wilson? I'd rather start Wilson in left and platoon Murton with Jones. Use the Maddux deal to acquire somebody with a bit of a future. I'm not sure how accurate, or realistic your cost estimates are. What's the total you are assuming? This might be a decent lineup, and pitching has a chance to be better, just not sure of the likelihood of pulling that all off. the point of both players is depth, 08, flexability, and most importantly, getting something for Maddux. I don't think he fetches anything better to be honest. Wilson also serves as back up at three positions that Cruz can't/doesn't play and as a part of the 08 plans. I think the cost estimates are pretty close. I tried to use Vance's figures from the FA thread to give me an idea. even if wrong, I don't think it goes over 100M.

Moneyball, SABR, and all the adherents thereto. I personally agree with much of those peoples' assessment of defense and it's lack of importance in the big picture (with the exception of absolute butchers). what I can't stand is people sitting on both sides of the fence when it suits their current argument. I don't believe that anyone has said that defense isn't important. A lot of people have said that it isn't as important as some other things. There's a big difference. If defense wasn't considered important, why then would "Moneyball, SABR, and all the adherents thereto" constantly try to devise ways to better measure defense? I think the devices they come up with are for two purposes. first, because that's what they do, measure. second, and I also don't think this can be disputed either, is that they set about doing such studies in order to prove the lack of value defense has. I think alot of the SABR studies don't seek to prove a theory. they seek to disprove 'traditional baseball analysis' under the guise of a search for objectivity. they're protecting there own jobs now too. for instance, when comparing the value of speed, the most widely sited study compares Cameron and Griffey. the analysis imo is basically worthless as they fill different roles on a team (run scorer vs. run producer) and they choose two players who don't vary vastly in speed. there is no comparison of say Wilkerson v. Pierre as leadoff hitters, which would do a better job of helping us understand the value of speed. I'm not saying their conclusions are wrong, but the way the ask the question they seek to answer and go about proving it is often flawed, imo.

Dejesus - I actually think it might take a little more, but I think he is worth it. he is not the 'prototypical' lead off man. he's the type of leadoff man a team should seek. developing power, and great/developing patience/obp Cruz - because you need to get something for Maddux, he can play all the outfield really well, mashes lefties. a one year platoon of Jones/Cruz puts up great numbers out of rightfield. Wilson gets 90 starts at 5 positions, is the #1 batter off the bench, and provides the rightfield platoon in right in 08 is Jones isn't gone by then. nobody would trade a player younger than 30 with any talent for Maddux. it's a trade that could go down which provides a benefit to the team.

I hope he gets traded to an NL team that comes to Wrigley in August or September. he will be the first Cub in years to be cheered on his return to Wrigley, and perhaps that will ring a little bell in managements head as to the type of player Cubs fans want.

hey guys, please see my latest post in Sulley's thread.

edit - replied to wrong post. I did a report on the scandal in eighth grade. if I am not mistaken, the guilty players all agreed the had to keep it from Ray because he would've reported it immediately. with all the talent, he was by all accounts the 'heart and soul' of that fanastic ballclub. a steadfast, straight and good man, great leader, etc etc etc. I also think he won a civil suit agains the eight. shouldn't have because there is no way they could prove they would have won and generated greater earnings, but I think he won.