cheapseats

If you watch only one team, how do you know they have talent. Even with Lee healthy, this is not a team with enough talent to win anything but a footrace.

I hate the idea of bringing in Lou Piniella. But other than that, for once, Marriotti wrote something worth reading. If anything, he doesn't go far enough. ie, perhaps it's not just bad luck that we can't count on Wood and Prior to be healthy? What role did Baker's overuse of his starters in 2003 have on their current health? What role does the Cubs' training staff play in our constant injury problems? Do we take longer to get injured players back on the field? Are our players more likely to have a serious injury during the season? Or what about the role of the front office? Do we sign more injury-prone players than other clubs?

How are Murton and Cedeno different than the vast majority of athletes in every sport? They are not going to peak at 24 or 25 in their 1st or 2nd year in the big leagues. They may very well peak by age 27, though. And maybe we're just arguing over semantics. I do expect both to be better players in three or four years, but I don't believe either will be significantly better. When I said that they're likely as good as they're going to be, I meant that I do not expect improvements that will raise their value to the team above where it is now. In other words, if Murton hits 12 homeruns this year, 14 in 07, and 15 in 08, I don't see that as significant improvement. If Cedeno were to raise his OBP by 10 points over the next two years, I wouldn't see that as significant improvement. FWIW, I did cite the PECOTA projections for each player, and neither is expected to produce at significantly higher levels over the next 5 years. We can debate the accuracy of PECOTA, especially when used to forecast performance of players without much time in hgher levels of the minors, but it's not as if my expectations are low simply because I'm pessimistic. There are some interesting names on Murton's comparables list. His #2 comparable is Rondell White, and Xavider Nady and Bernie Williams appear on the list as well. I'd love it if Murton had a career like Bernie. Ronny's #1 comp is Luis Rivas, with Jack Wilson, Dave Concepcion, and Jose Castillo appearing on the list. I absolutely agree with goony about the way to use players like Murton and Cedeno. They should be complementary players. I'd have no problem if we had a team so good that Ronny should be hitting at the bottom of the order. I'd have no problem with Matt in left field if we had a big bat in RF (right now we have half of one). And I'd hate to pay veterans 5 or 6 times what Matt and Ronny make for the same production or worse, which has been the Cub way of late. I do think it would be ridiculous to consider these guys untouchables. There are some on this board that probably overvalue Ronny and Matt because they are (to some extent) homegrown players, and we all remember how awful it was to have Neifi and Holly in the lineup everyday.

Because he's 24 years old, and Ronny is 23. Guys improve in their early 30's, unless they suck and flameout. I'm not guaranteeing these guys will turn great, but if they stick around it will be nearly impossible for them not to improve. Your numbers at 23 and 24 are rarely the same as your numbers at 26, 27 and 28. Peak age is something that's often debated, but I find the evidence compelling for the argument that most hitters reach their peaks at 27. Will Murton develop power? Will Cedeno remember how to take pitches? I'd expect to see signs of development with both sooner rather than later. They'd be nice complementary players on a contending team, but seeing as the Cubs are not a contending team - and appear to be several players short of being one - I'd be willing to trade either if another club overvalues them.

I mostly agreed with the notion that neither Cedeno or Murton are cornerstones and untouchable. But that 2nd sentence is nonsense. As good as they'll ever be? They're never going to improve? Actually, goony, although I usually find a lot of value in your posts, I don't in this case. So it's "nonsense" to believe Murton and Cedeno are about as good as they're going to get? Why do you project improvement? PECOTA sees Murton improving from a 2.7 win player this year to a 3.1 win player next year. That's as good as he's projected to be. His power is not projected to improve significantly. He has a higher likelihood of collapse than improvement. A few days ago, someone at Baseball Info Solutions identified Murt as #2 in the NL in groundballs this year, behind only Juan Pierre. Do you think he's going to start hitting more line drives in the future? If so, why? Murton's greatest strength is his OBP, and unless he develops some power, it's unlikely that his OBP will get much higher than it is now. Pitchers throw more strikes to players who aren't threats (see Juan Pierre), so the value of Murton's good eye can only be maximized if he can keep pitchers honest. Like I said, though, I do like the idea of Murton batting leadoff. He may not be our Youkilis, but he'd be close enough. Ronny is just a little younger, and he's more difficult to predict. But the fact that he sees so few pitches in not encouraging. Plate discipline is not often learned at the major league level (see Patterson, Corey). I'm rooting for them, and I'd love to see them succeed. I just don't see any reason to believe that they'll move up to higher levels of production in the future.

Question for all: Do we overvalue Cedeno and Murton? Cedeno is currently ranked 15th among shortstops in VORP, so he's middle of the pack offensively, and he's slumping right now, so he could drop into the bottom third. Defensively, his range is great, but his throwing accuracy has been a problem. He's ranked as very below average defensively by Clay Davenport's fielding metric. As the season progresses, I expect him to get past the wildness, but it may not happen. His OBP has been extremely average-driven. He's in the bottom 9 in all of MLB in pitches per plate appearance, joining notorious free-swingers like Vlad Guerrero and Jeff Francoeur. PECOTA projects Ronny to be worth about 3 wins above a replacement player this year. That looks good to Cubs fans because it's better than Neifi Perez, but it's not that great, either. And PECOTA doesn't see him improving much if at all over the next 5 years. Murton has been a slightly below average fielder in left (his awkward fielding makes him look worse than he actually is). His OBP is great, but his slugging isn't what you want from a corner outfielder. He is among the league leaders in ground balls (last I heard, he was right behind Juan Pierre). Like Cedeno, Cubs fans support Murton because he's so much better than what we saw in LF for much of last year. If Murton can keep his OBP up, he might make a good leadoff hitter, but if he's a starter, the Cubs would need to pick up some power at a position in which power is not normally expected (SS, 2B, CF, etc). I don't understand why people would get on Cedeno or Murton at this point. Basically they are rookies and still learning their way around the league. At the same time, whenever I suggest trading Hill or Guzman, people emphasize that they are rookies and show great potential. I think Cedeno and Murton can be solid major league players for many years, but they aren't immune to slumps. Note that I wasn't "getting on" Cedeno or Murton. The point I was making is that both are likely as good right now as they're ever going to be. They certainly aren't bad players to have on a team, but neither are players to build a team around. Murton's ceiling is probably a third outfielder, and Cedeno projects to be an average shortstop. I'd love for them to prove the projections wrong, but it probably won't happen.

What's sad about this is that the most surprising part about that list is that we're actually beating someone in home runs and slugging. San Diego. The team that just swept us. But I would guess that we're the fastest team in the national league, so the offense will turn around soon.

If only our offense could play small ball as well as the Sox. :cry:

What would you do differently than every other manager in major league baseball? Note: I wouldn't even interview anyone who played before 1969.

I for one feel more compelled than ever to watch on TV. I am really intrigued to see how bad this team can be. Like watching a car wreck...

If that's called giving up, then the Cubs gave up during the entire 2004 and 2005 seasons, when they led the major leagues in swinging at the first pitch. Fixing the problem would require more than simply firing the major league hitting coach, though.

Question for all: Do we overvalue Cedeno and Murton? Cedeno is currently ranked 15th among shortstops in VORP, so he's middle of the pack offensively, and he's slumping right now, so he could drop into the bottom third. Defensively, his range is great, but his throwing accuracy has been a problem. He's ranked as very below average defensively by Clay Davenport's fielding metric. As the season progresses, I expect him to get past the wildness, but it may not happen. His OBP has been extremely average-driven. He's in the bottom 9 in all of MLB in pitches per plate appearance, joining notorious free-swingers like Vlad Guerrero and Jeff Francoeur. PECOTA projects Ronny to be worth about 3 wins above a replacement player this year. That looks good to Cubs fans because it's better than Neifi Perez, but it's not that great, either. And PECOTA doesn't see him improving much if at all over the next 5 years. Murton has been a slightly below average fielder in left (his awkward fielding makes him look worse than he actually is). His OBP is great, but his slugging isn't what you want from a corner outfielder. He is among the league leaders in ground balls (last I heard, he was right behind Juan Pierre). Like Cedeno, Cubs fans support Murton because he's so much better than what we saw in LF for much of last year. If Murton can keep his OBP up, he might make a good leadoff hitter, but if he's a starter, the Cubs would need to pick up some power at a position in which power is not normally expected (SS, 2B, CF, etc).

The Cubs offer excuses as if some of the responsibility for injuries doesn't fall on the organization. Why is it that White Sox or Brewers don't tend to have the same injury problems that we do?

He'll probably trade the wrong guys....probably start with Walker. I'd be all for trading Walker. He won't be back next year, anyway. We may as well get something for him. The Mets, Pirates, Blue Jays, Rockies and Giants all have poor offensive numbers at 2nd. Possible trades?

I think Pierre will be among a number of Cubs traded if we don't pull out. The only question is will Jim have the balls to start the firesale early enough to maximize value. But his track record in getting value isn't so good lately. Could we have done a worse job of trading Sosa? Farns? Patterson? I wonder what we could have gotten for Hill in the offseason or for Patterson if we had traded him last May.

Pierre didn't hustle. :cry:

Next Cubs manager? lol...FIRE! INTENSITY! Well, he'd probably help Z calm down a bit.

Next Cubs manager?

What about Koronka? According to BP's VORP stats, he'd be the second most valuable pitcher on the Cubs staff at this point. Why stick with the kids? Let's get Nomar back since we're going with do-overs. Although they were "clubhouse cancers," I wouldn't have minded keeping Alou and Farnsworth. Farns especially is a jerk, but Farns > Novoa. I've always liked Farns. I still remember hearing about the trade on the radio and wondering if Hendry had lost his mind. Novoa hasn't been horrible, but we didn't get close to equal value.

What about Koronka? According to BP's VORP stats, he'd be the second most valuable pitcher on the Cubs staff at this point. Why stick with the kids? Let's get Nomar back since we're going with do-overs. Although they were "clubhouse cancers," I wouldn't have minded keeping Alou and Farnsworth. Farns especially is a jerk, but Farns > Novoa.

What about Koronka? According to BP's VORP stats, he'd be the second most valuable pitcher on the Cubs staff at this point.

That's actually not unusual even when they're doing well. I went to 25 games last year and usually didn't pay face value. Tickets for Cardinals and White Sox games will always sell at a premium, but it's pretty easy to go to other games for cheap.

If Baker gets fired, but we never get back into it this year, would you still be interested? If baker gets fired, neifi would be the only one terribly upset Think about Darren. Dusty has a family to feed! :twisted:

I guess I'm not a true traditionalist As someone now planning to sell my bleacher tickets for upcoming St Louis and White Sox series, I am against the bleacher expansion as well. How much are you asking for em? Just out of curiousity. :) I dunno. We'll see if my apathy holds up enough for me to actually be willing to miss going to the games. If I did give them up, I wouldn't ask for more than actual costs if giving them to NSBB members.

I guess I'm not a true traditionalist As someone now planning to sell my bleacher tickets for upcoming St Louis and White Sox series, I am against the bleacher expansion as well.