brfahey

The fact that you picked 5 words out of that post and repeated them over and over while completely ignoring the overall message means that you have very little interest in actually discussing the merits of the call to replace Barrett. You actually used "odds are" twice in that post. I don't know about a call to replace Barrett; it's just that his defense is not so good and I consider that more of a serious detriment than the offensive -minded posters out there.

That was a pretty weak attempt at reading what I wrote. I never said it was OK that he screwed up. My point is Barrett's defense isn't costing this team wins. Keep the team the same, and replace him with a real live catcher who is available, and this team is no better. There just isn't a catcher who is overall better than Barrett that you can get. All of you ripping him, and yes, you are ripping him, and making it quite clear you want him replaced, are ignoring the very important fact that you would have to replace him with a catcher that is available. And that's just not very likely to happen. What does "odds are, they still lose" mean? And if he is being ripped so what. I didn't know you couldn't rip a player on these boards.

It may be speculation, but it isn't idle. There is no definitive way to know it, but that doesn't make it unworthy of exploring. Numbers are a good guide, not a be all and end all. If there's no definitive way of knowing, why bother exploring it? If there's no answer, there's no use for the question. What are you going to do? Have Bruce Miles ask Prior if he is afraid to pitch to Barrett? Please, it's a waste of time. You're not much on philosophy, are you? When you are using it as an arguement against a player without any proof that it is actually true I do have a bit of a problem with it. Have you ever heard one of the Cubs pitchers in the last two years say that they don't like to throw to Michael or that his defensive abilities sometimes worries them and decreases their effectiveness? No, and I haven't heard any of the Cubs be quoted for attribution saying that patterson sucks, although I suspect a lot of them share that opinion.

Youu said it can't be answered definitively so don't even ask it. That is a very uncurious (Incurious?) position, that's all. And I don't think it's a matter of fear for the pitchers, it's confidence in the catcher.

It may be speculation, but it isn't idle. There is no definitive way to know it, but that doesn't make it unworthy of exploring. Numbers are a good guide, not a be all and end all. If there's no definitive way of knowing, why bother exploring it? If there's no answer, there's no use for the question. What are you going to do? Have Bruce Miles ask Prior if he is afraid to pitch to Barrett? Please, it's a waste of time. You're not much on philosophy, are you?

It may be speculation, but it isn't idle. There is no definitive way to know it, but that doesn't make it unworthy of exploring. Numbers are a good guide, not a be all and end all.

Barrett is average, maybe a little below. Blanco is very good. Barrett plays about 2.5 times as much as Blanco, put those together and I see above average. If you want to say average, fine. Either way, they are fine in the catchers spot overall. Defense has not killed this team all year. There have been bad episodes. However, bad pitching and poor approaches at the plate have been far more damaging to the team. It's nont like they were a few less mistakes from taking the division. Everybody likes to point out specific times when defensive lapses lost games, but opponents' defensive lapses have also won games for the Cubs. And when you talk about things like Barrett in Philly, who in their right mind could say the Cubs would have won if he didn't make that mistake? Odds are they still lose. It's not like they were winning and he let in the tying and winning run with stupidity. Simply improving defense is not nearly enough to make this team better. Odds are, when you improve the defense, the lineup will decline, and more times than not, that offensive decline will be greater than the defensive improvement, because of many factors previously discussed. Yes, defense is important, but it's clearly 3rd on the list. You can't win just with defense, you must pitch and hit first and second. The total OF production, hitting and fielding combined, has been the biggest problem on this team. The catcher position is fine overall. Not great, but fine, and I've yet to hear any realistic option to improve it, while improving the team as a whole as well. It's OK that Barrett brain-locked and acted like a little leaguer because "odds are, they still lose?" What kind of argument is that? Why even try to get the other team out because "odds are" you are going to lose about forty perent of the time, even in a good year." Why improve the offense? "Odds are" they will still make outs 7 times out of ten. Using that "odds are" crap as an excuse for poor play is weak.

It's not average defense, it's below average defense. And, as has been discussed above, catcher is the most crucial defensive position on the field. You got bad catching defense chances are you are going to have poor team defense.

I think you, and all the others dogging Barrett, are the ones going to extremes. Those of us that are addressing the need for balance, are acknowledging that Barrett has his pluses and minuses. He's a top line offensive catcher, and just average defensively. Overall, with Blanco and Barrett, the Cubs are getting top line offense out of catcher (2nd in NL in OBP and OPS), and above average defense. That's pretty good balance. Those of you ripping Barrett to shreds and begging for a replacement to solidify up the middle defense are completely ignoring offense. Because quite frankly there is no realistic option to significantly upgrade the Cubs overall catching defense without significantly decreasing their offensive production, thus, throwing off the balance. I can't believe I have to fall on the side of Barrett defense. I never liked his acquisition. But the fact is catcher is not a trouble spot on the Cubs, and the chances of upgrading there are slim to none. Other problems are far more pressing, and much easier to address. A couple of things: I don't think anyone is "ripping Barrett" to shreds." I will leave that stuff to those obsessed with neifi and macias. Barrett's defensive lapses are being brought up as they relate to the Cubs weakness as a team. Second, unless it's all due to Blanco, where do you get the Cubs have above average defense at catcher. I don't think there's a knowledgeable baseball person who would tell you Barrett is above average defensively. Catcher may not be the most pressing spot to fill but it ain't far off. Our defense has killed us all year. We are a stupid team on offense and defense and Barrett is a part of that. Finally, offense does not erase defense. If a Barrett defensive lapse lets in a rn which costs us a game, him hitting a homer the next night does not even the scales. Every run you give up means you have to score two to overcome it.

i agree with most of this, aside from the liking boston thing. they annoy me a lot. especially schilling. zip it. DIDN'T YOU SEE! HE PITCHED WITH A BLOODY SOCK! Oh god, that was beyond nauseating last season. I wanted him to just get a shellacking so I could laugh at him for being such a "warrior" and a general nuisance about the entire situation. Cub fans would have been lining up to have Mark Prior's babies if he pitched in the playoffs with a detached tendon in the ankle. This Cub fan wouldn't, particularly if Prior dove in front of every camera in the world to tell us about it, like Schilling did. That guy and his media acolytes (especially those at ESOXPN) need to shut up.

Why is it that the starters seem to prefer having Blanco catch them?

The Cubs won more games with Barrett in 04 than they did in 03 when they didn't make the playoffs. Winning player is a contrived notion that can only be defined after the fact. Would Derek Jeter be a winning player if he was drafted by Tampa? That kind of talk just clouds the facts. Luis Sojo has multiple World Series, and because of that many NYers consider him a "real winner". But the fact is both Jeter and Sojo won because they were on great teams. Guys like Barrett take up roster spots on every single world series winning team. Mark Bellhorn was considered by many to be a stupid ballplayer with no instincts or real position. He ended up playing a crucial role on the Red Sox. Juan Encarnacion is no baseball genius, and he's got a terrible approach at the plate, yet Florida won with him. No, Barrett isn't ideal. But he's no worse for this team than 15 other guys. The Cubs can win with MB catching 130 games a year. I'd be fine with upgrading defensively at catcher and taking a hit offensively. However, the only way you do that is by substantially improving the offense elsewhere. They already need multiple offensive upgrades even with MB on the team. If they downgrade the offense from C that just adds another need to the list. I'd prefer to not make things more difficult than they already are. They won more games but finished twenty games out of first and imploded in the wild card race, with Houston winning it after Barrett woke them up by placing a personal feud with Oswalt above the team. That game was the beginning of the beginning for Houston. None of the other guys youmentioned is a catcher. I don't think the importance of that position can be overstated. With the exception of pitcher, the ctahcer is the most involved player on the field. Cathcing affects pitching. Can you state that the Cubs pitching has improved since Barrett took over? And I happen to think Luis Sojo is a winning player. he got the game winning hit in 2000 World Series Game 5. 15 other guys on the Cubs don't catch. We have got to get stronger there defensively or we will continue to struggle.

He's no worse than Posada defensively. Jorge was routinely roasted in the NY papers for his "unsavvy" play behind the plate. He'd make stupid decisions, fail to block blockable pitches, and occasionally lose games. No team fails to make the playoffs because of one bad defensive player, unless that player is just extraordinarily awful. MB is not that bad defensively. You have to make choices when building a team. There are very few great defenders who hit a ton, ARod, Tejada, Lee and Pujols come to mind. If you got a great lineup, you can sacrifice some O in certain spots to insert the D. However, the Cubs do not have a great lineup, and they need Barrett's O. If they find two stud corner OF, a capable CF and somebody other than Neifi at short, then I'm all for dealing MB. But until they do that, they must find a way to get by with him in the lineup. And they can. Just to be clear: I didn't say Barrett's bad defense is the only reason the Cubs won't make postseason. Rather, I think he represents the type of player who looks godd statistically and whom fans like but is not often on a winning team. Subpar defense, not many baseball smarts. I just don't think he's a winning player.

I don't want Blanco being the everyday catcher either. As to moving Barrett to the outfield, he already is below average defensively at his position (catcher). My point is I would rather have a below average defensive outfielder than catcher. As to his offense as an outfielder I agree that he might be considered less than average. maybe a platoon (with Burnitz?). The overriding point is that the Cubs have to get better defensively and catcher is a good place to start.

Sorry but I disagree. It's not like this guy is Barry Bonds or something. he's got what, 55 RBIs? His defense is well below average. He's 3nd in the freaking majors (1st in the NL) in OPS among catchers with more than 200 ABs!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not the offense of a guy who is "ok, at times" OK. But let me make this prediction, this team will never make the playoffs with Barrett as its principal catcher. I know there are host of reasons why teams don't do well and I am not placing the lion's share of the blame on him. I just think he exemplifies the type of player we have had in the past two years who, for whatever reason, just don't do the things necessary to win or conversely, make the mistakes which keep you from winning. Stats look good but we don't win. Could make similar statement about walker.

Sorry but I disagree. It's not like this guy is Barry Bonds or something. he's got what, 55 RBIs? His defense is well below average.

A) The only place we could put him is the outfield. Catchers, not being the fastest guys on the team, sometimes have trouble in the OF catching up to balls. B) Tell me where you're going to find a better offensive catcher that is available and cheap as Barrett. C) Work on his D next spring training. Your B) ignores the argument. Catching is a crucial defensive position. The cathcer should be the savviest guy on the field. Barrett ain't never going to be that guy. His offense is OK, at times. No argument. With regard to C) haven't they been working on his D very year? And didn't Montreal try him at third after he came up as a catcher (I think). As to A), the ourfield is where you hide your butchers.

This topic has been discussed previously (at least by me), but here goes. Barrett gives an indication every so often that he is not the most instinctual or shall we say smartest baseball player in the world. Botches a rundown last night ina very tight game situation. Directly cost us a game in Philly under similar circumstances. He seems to brainlock at the worst times. This is to say nothing of his oft atrocious receiving skills, on display agin last night when he just failed to catch a pitch which about two feet off the ground. I know he has good looking offensive numbers and does have pop in his bat from time to time. But, again, he seems to tighten up in game situations. See previous discussion of defensive/rundown lapses. And last night, I believe Burnitz walked to load the bases with two outs in the ninth. Barrett saw two itches and swung at them both. Not trying to generalize from the one at-bat but to me he looked like he was ready to jump out of his skin up there. And, again, I am aware that he has a decent average with the bases loaded, but as I pointed out in an earlier thread a review of the actual at-bats shows the hits coming when the Cubs are already well ahead in games and strike outs and popups coming when the Cubs are tied or trailing. Given his defensive "skills" why not explore a position switch for this guy.

Thanks for the censorship.

This thread is probably a long time overdue. There was a similar discussion in yesterday's game thread though. The point I made there and the one I believe some are making here is not that Neifi is a great player; rather he has contributed quite a bit this year and people still villify him like no one else on the team. I know everyone will not agree with this, but, in terms of relative suckiness, Neifi has been way overcriticized relative to Patterson. While lately the Patterson defenders have been quiet (no other choice), there were plenty of excuses being made for him earlier in the year as he flailed away and played with his head up his ass. I am not saying there wasn't any criticism of Patterson; it's just that there wasn't enough of it compared to the grief perez received. Man, how sensitive can you get. Maybe a little sorry you adopted that moniker? People just seem to hate Perez's game no matter what he does. That's fine. But if you hate his game PLEASE do not say a single word defending Patterson or making any excuses for him. But it's okay for you and others to bash Corey and defend Neifi? Give me a break. Patterson has sucked this year, and there are a multitude of reasons why that could be. It could be his new swing, it could be him taking the same approach and pitchers adjusting, it could be him being a selfish jerk and trying to do things his way, whatever. Most of the defending of Patterson that's been done this year has been done against ridiculous attacks on his character. No one's ever accused Neifi of being stubborn even though he put up bad numbers this year and has put up awful numbers his entire career. Yet Patterson, coming off consecutive seasons that gave us reasonable production for a CF at a reasonable price with good D, gets villified because he won't change that approach. People get so much more frustrated with Patterson simply because of strikeouts. While they are a result of a problem in his approach, people just don't tolerate them as much as other outs, even though the majority of the time they act as the same thing as another out. I can almost guarantee you if you switched Neifi's and Patterson's rate stats for the year, people would still be more upset with Patterson because of the blasted strikeouts. And finally, the claim that Patterson hasn't been criticized in proportion with Neifi is entirely untrue. People have been on Corey's case for years just like others have been on Neifi's case since he was signed. Perhaps the fact that Patterson was demoted and therefore has 100 less AB's has something to do with this perception.

This thread is probably a long time overdue. There was a similar discussion in yesterday's game thread though. The point I made there and the one I believe some are making here is not that Neifi is a great player; rather he has contributed quite a bit this year and people still villify him like no one else on the team. I know everyone will not agree with this, but, in terms of relative suckiness, Neifi has been way overcriticized relative to Patterson. While lately the Patterson defenders have been quiet (no other choice), there were plenty of excuses being made for him earlier in the year as he flailed away and played with his head up his ass. I am not saying there wasn't any criticism of Patterson; it's just that there wasn't enough of it compared to the grief perez received. People just seem to hate Perez's game no matter what he does. That's fine. But if you hate his game PLEASE do not say a single word defending Patterson or making any excuses for him. And please, no more calling him CPatt.

I'm just glad to see that Patterson's absolutley pathetic strikeout got as much play here as Macias' absolutley pathetic strikeout.

I agree that he has come up with some timely hits. Unfortunately, with a better hitter at the top, DLee's RBIs increase, putting us in fewer critical late game situations. What the hell does that mean? someone who gets on base hitting at the top of the order means we score more runs so we aren't tied 2-2 in the 8th So hits in the late innings like Perez just got don't mean anything? One has nothing to do with the other. It sounds like people will say anything rather than give Perez credit for anything. Neifi has a .310 OBP (which at times was below .300 earlier this season). He's been bad. Not as bad as Corey, but Neifi hasn't gotten on base. Being placed in the 2-hole for much of the season has hampered the offense. I agree that Neifi should not be hitting in the 2 hole @ anytime. However, he has been much better this year than I would ever have expected. Some people here won't acknowledge the good things Neifi has done for this team b/c of the unexcusable hate they have for him. He has been a far better asset for this team than has Corey & it's not even close. Exactly. And here again, we start talking about how he has bad stats rather than acknowledge that the guy just got a big 2-out hit.

I agree that he has come up with some timely hits. Unfortunately, with a better hitter at the top, DLee's RBIs increase, putting us in fewer critical late game situations. What the hell does that mean? Sorry, that wasn't very clear. A better OPS in the #2 hole = more runs = 4-2 lead instead of 2-2 tie = we don't need a big hit by Neifi late in the game to win. OBP. I did mean OPS. Some extra base hits instead of slap singles wouldn't hurt. Great. Now explain why he shouldn't get credit for getting that hit in the 8th.

I agree that he has come up with some timely hits. Unfortunately, with a better hitter at the top, DLee's RBIs increase, putting us in fewer critical late game situations. What the hell does that mean? someone who gets on base hitting at the top of the order means we score more runs so we aren't tied 2-2 in the 8th So hits in the late innings like Perez just got don't mean anything? One has nothing to do with the other. It sounds like people will say anything rather than give Perez credit for anything.