kroth1342

Since when did minor league statistics=major league statistics? I must have missed this. If true, our offseason should revolve around doing anything possible to get Jack Cust. We'd have a future MVP. If he played like garbage while he had been up here I would say he isn't capable of doing this. But since he has had 100 at bats up at the big show and has had an OBP of 412 I feel fairly confident in saying he is capable of maintaining his minor league stats. You're right. Let's ignore his minor league history in favor of 100 at bats at the end of a season. You are contradicting yourself. You said "since when did MiL stats = ML stats?" but then you came back and said that minor league stats are indicative of what a player is likely to do in the ML level. Make up your mind. Theriot's MiL OBP's from 2003-2006 were .352, .367, .365, and .367. He's shown the ability to get on base consistently. That trend has continued to the ML level. I don't think he's going to consistently put up a .412 OBP like he has right now, but .360 is realistic. While minor league stats can be indicative about how a player will perform in the majors, they certainly need to be translated (usually with some reduction) in order to project over a full major league season. That being said, it doesn't seem out of the question that Theriot may produce an OBP of around .330-.345 over a full major league season. However, it may be that we are seeing Theriot's peak years, as he will be 27 next year, and while players on average peak in their age-27 season, I believe Nate Silver performed an analysis that showed second baseball peak earlier. I wouldn't want to commit to Theriot in his decline, it could be ugly.

Is this an indictment of Pierre? If so, how is it? I'm not being a smartypants; I was under the impression that runs are much like RBI in that they are not representative of an individual stat. It serves a dual purpose: 1) by showing that Bellhorn's superior OBP ability put him in position to score more runs in fewer ABs than Pierre 2) the Cubs offense this year has been so poor that even when Pierre gets on, he is less likely to score

Baseball Prospectus: It's a good thing for the Cubs Juan Pierre has played somewhat better in the second half than he did in the first. Driven mostly by a better batting average, he has improved from .275/.321/.361 before the All-Star Game to .313/.347/.415 since. It's good because he may well set an Expansion Era record for the greatest percentage of his team's Plate Appearances hogged. When Pierre moved to Chicago, Baker left him right there at the top every single day, even though he spent the first part of the season not getting on base very regularly. He's now in a position where he'll get 200 hits for the fourth time in his career and everyone will marvel at that, even though it's being done with an EqA of .250. Meanwhile, he's walking less than ever. A more forward-thinking manager--and if one is a Cubs fan one hopes that is what will be at the helm in 2007--will drop Pierre to the bottom of the order if he keeps him at all. At that point, his days of copping one of every eight or nine of his team's chances will come to an end. This is yet another way to explain the facts: Juan Pierre, resigned to the Cubs in 2007 and beyond, at a salary over $6-8 million per year, is a horrible, horrible idea.

Again, WE ARE AN NL TEAM. We compete against teams in the NL for the playoffs. We play in a division with 5 other NL teams. Every single NL team has a gaping hole in the pitchers spot. You know that no matter who you pick up and don't pick up, that the pitcher still has to bat. Ok you made your f****** point. FOR THOSE OF US WHO DIDN'T KNOW, THE CUBS ARE IN THE NL!! Regardless, we need to upgrade our team on offense and pitching this off-season. If we better one at the expense of the other, we still may not be in the playoffs, hitting pitchers be damned.

This lineup would also look good if we got Andruw Jones: 1b: Lee 2b: Neifi Perez SS: Izturis 3b: Ramirez LF: Murton CF: Jones RF: Jones C: Barrett Either way, we'd still have a huge hole So you don't think those lineups are capable of scoring runs and aren't playoff quality lineups? No, I think those lineups are capable of scoring runs, but with potentially three holes in the lineup (2B, SS, P) - they probably won't score enough. Combine that with average or below average pitching, and you've got problems. You can't cite the pitchers spot as a gaping hole because there is no better option. The Cubs are in the NL. The pitcher has to bat. How do you know the Cubs will ave "average or below average pitching" as well? You don't. That lineup plus a decent rotation (depending on who they pick up) equals a contending team. I'm describing the Cubs pitching as average or below average because that's what it is right now - and I can't see it changing in the near future, barring significant moves. If we want Andruw Jones, we'll have to trade for him, and we'll probably trade some of our young pitchers away, thus reducing our depth even further. I could play your game and say that a team of 1B Lee 2B Below average player SS Below average player 3B Ramirez LF Murton CF Jones RF Jones C Barrett SP Zambrano SP Zito SP Prior SP Liriano SP Carpenter is good too, but that's projecting too much now isn't it?

This lineup would also look good if we got Andruw Jones: 1b: Lee 2b: Neifi Perez SS: Izturis 3b: Ramirez LF: Murton CF: Jones RF: Jones C: Barrett Either way, we'd still have a huge hole So you don't think those lineups are capable of scoring runs and aren't playoff quality lineups? No, I think those lineups are capable of scoring runs, but with potentially three holes in the lineup (2B, SS, P) - they probably won't score enough. Combine that with average or below average pitching, and you've got problems.

What people are saying is that our offense is so bad we can't afford to give him that chance. And if we give up on next season, then there are players more deserving than Theriot that should get a shot. Why would we even consider giving up on next season? Ridiculous. If the choice was between Ronny Cedeno or Ryan Theriot starting at second base next year, who would you pick? I wouldn't think twice before choosing Theriot. We've seen what Cedeno can do playing full time and .612 OPS is horrendous. 23 year-old middle infield prospects typically don't have great offensive seasons in their first full year, particularly when they have been rushed and have had only 1/2 a year of AAA. I think you're giving up on Cedeno too early. While I agree with many that having an Izturis/Cedeno combo would be horrible offensively, I'd rather have it than a Theriot/Izturis combo, simply because Cedeno has more potential. If you're going to rebuild, you should have the players out there with the most potential. And if you're going for the playoffs, you probably shouldn't have either out there with Izturis. Let's just throw out a hypothetical here. What if the Cubs acquired Andruw Jones? A starting lineup of... 1B: Lee 2B: Theriot SS: Izturis 3B: Ramirez LF: Murton CF: Jones RF: Jones C: Barrett would be a solid lineup. Three big bats in the middle along with J. Jones, Barrett, and Murton. You are making it sound like we need a lineup like the Yankees here. This lineup would also look good if we got Andruw Jones: 1b: Lee 2b: Neifi Perez SS: Izturis 3b: Ramirez LF: Murton CF: Jones RF: Jones C: Barrett Either way, we'd still have a huge hole http://www.londonist.com/attachments/Hazel/ether.JPG Straight ETHER!!!!!

What people are saying is that our offense is so bad we can't afford to give him that chance. And if we give up on next season, then there are players more deserving than Theriot that should get a shot. Why would we even consider giving up on next season? Ridiculous. If the choice was between Ronny Cedeno or Ryan Theriot starting at second base next year, who would you pick? I wouldn't think twice before choosing Theriot. We've seen what Cedeno can do playing full time and .612 OPS is horrendous. But we've only seen around 110 AB from Theriot, who knows what would happen in the next 500.

Luis Castillo: .722 Mark Ellis: .704 Placido Polanco: .684 Mark Loretta: .723 Ryan Theriot (Minor Leagues): .684 Assuming Theriot's minor league numbers simply translated into major league numbers (which they wouldn't), he'd still be tied for the worst OPS. This isn't a very good argument. Just because some good teams have mediocre 2b doesn't mean we should stick some 27 year-old minor league veteran into our lineup and still expect to win. In addition, the aforementioned teams perform much better than we do in certain areas of the game be it pitching (OAK, MIN, DET) or offense (BOS, DET, STL) and therefore can get away with those players at 2B. We are bad at everything, hence we need to upgrade everything if possible. If Theriot will keep perform at this level or just below it, that is an upgrade.

I'd still prefer if they traded away the big guns that they get a better IF prospect than Cedeno or Theriot as part of the influx of players. Theriot does nothing for you as a starter on ANY kind of team. I never stated that I would prefer Theriot or Cedeno to talented IF and OF prospects our organization desperately needs. I'm just speaking in hypotheticals, but I see your point and don't disagree.

While you make some good points, I think the important thing to determine first is what kind of aspirations the Cubs have for next year. I'm fairly pessimistic about the team's chances in the short run, considering Hendry and MacPhail's mismanagement the past two years. If the team is blown up (as I think it should be if Aramis leaves), then trying Theriot might not be such a bad idea. Alternatively, if the Cubs make a big offseason splash at OF/SP (their biggest needs), then maybe Theriot can have one year to prove himself, much like Cedeno did. An interesting situation though.

I don't know, but a .991 OPS ain't bad.

No you just put him 4th, ahead of several pitchers more qualified. Thats all.

Matt Cain?? How about Oswalt and his 3.06 ERA and 148 Ks? You lost. I can name some more pitchers with better numbers than Matt Cain: Jason Schmidt, for instance. Josh Johnson. Bronson Arroyo...

Thanks for the thread, Fred. Good info.

Matthews, Jr - a lifetime .333 OBP / .415 SLG having a fluke career year at age 31? Edmonds - 37 years old next year, injury risk, SLG has gone from .643-.533-.475 from 2004-06? Cameron - an above-average CF, but that's about it; what will he cost on the open market? NO THANKS The problem is that this Cubs team has deeper problems than finding a CF with good OBP and SLG. I consider that more of a luxury, something that would have pushed the 2004 team over the top, not this team. While different teams have different needs (more power, more defense, etc.), defense is the number one skill of my ideal CF, followed by OBP. SLG is a nice bonus.

are they? How do you figure Papelbon will be traded with the Red Sox payroll? ARod is much more expensive, older, and does not play LF. Peavy would be a nice addition but pitchers are too risky to make a huge investment. Cabrera would be a great addition and is far more likely to be traded than Bay. What exactly is your point anyway? You wouldn't want Bay or a Baylike player? I'm not entirely certain why people feel inclined to make sarcastic comments in these threads - the fact that Bay is under contract through 2009 is now well documented. That doesn't change the fact that he would be a perfect fit for the Cubs and Hendry should be on the lookout for how to obtain such players. QUIT http://www.users.muohio.edu/rothkr/catching%20feelings%20copy.jpg

Because those are so easy to find.

Gotta say that this is more offensive terminology to me then most swear words. QUIT http://www.users.muohio.edu/rothkr/catching%20feelings%20copy.jpg

This sums it up for me... http://www.richardaberdeen.com/images/king2.jpg from the horrors of Neifi in the two spot!!!

This has to be it: http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5388 Some choice parts: Since 2004, this is the breakdown of what teams do when they draw zero through 10 walks per game: BB W L PCT. ------------------ 0 257 602 .299 1 670 1223 .354 2 1116 1429 .439 3 1180 1172 .502 4 1105 881 .556 5 851 562 .602 6 543 279 .661 7 336 162 .675 8 188 67 .737 9 98 24 .803 10 45 9 .833 Of course, a pure walk count exists in a vacuum. Drawing five walks is nice but not as nice when your pitching staff is coughing up seven. Let's look at the success rate of teams based on walk differentials. This next chart shows how teams fared when they out-walked their opponents by specific amounts: Diff W L Pct. ----------------- 0 926 926 .500 1 947 694 .577 2 895 549 .620 3 642 324 .665 4 510 160 .761 5 301 93 .764 6 165 33 .833 7 96 9 .914 8 34 8 .810 9 24 3 .889 10+ 9 1 .900 Kind of lessens the blow of all those guys "clogging the bases", doesn't it?

Threadstarter lost

I don't think Prior could get any of these players, and I don't know how anyone would rather have Upton or Dukes over Young. I'll take a 20 year-old hitting .348 in AAA with a .900+ OPS and 30/30 potential any day. I'll take a guess and assume it's because he only has 10 walks. That line was straight http://www.londonist.com/attachments/Hazel/ether.JPG!

everyone needs to STOP http://www.users.muohio.edu/rothkr/catching%20feelings%20copy.jpg

You all need to STFU with your whiny, defeatist attitudes. They don't add anything to the situation; we don't know any facts about either injuries, so just wait before you cry the sky is falling.