Satch80

He seems to be at his worst when he gets off to a bad start like walking a batter or giving up a hit. Not always, but too often he slowly unraveled. He would have never been able to pull out that game that Dempster did against the Phils when he walked the bases loaded and a run in. Farns would have served up a dinger.

Farnsworth has dominant stuff except when he's not dominant. Basically, he's not predictable. Blowing a big lead in an elimination game is pretty uncloser like. He has a lot to prove in high stakes situations before he should earn top closer $$. Maybe he will get there, maybe he won't. I'm just glad we no longer have a front row seat.

I think I would have paid the 4 years for Pedro since the org. has a big payroll. The value of a Pedro going twice in a post season can't be over estimated. Esp since Schilling was doubtful. I would have signed Pedro and passed on Clement. Who needs a first half pitcher when you expect to go to post season? If Pedro doesn't make it year 3 or 4 as a starter maybe he could slip into the pen and still be valuable. Even if you have to blow off year 4, going deep into the playoffs or winning another WS. makes it worthwhile. What I would NOT have done was the Renteria contract, ridiculous for a SS with his nos. And I wouldn't have done the Varitek contract ( too old).

All we know about is the money spent on player and manager salaries and until recently, it wasn't even close to what it should have been. We have no idea what is/has been spent on player development, scouting, coaches etc. My guess is we have been an inferior team for so long because throughout the organization we have hired inferior people, people on the cheap as we have for too long bought players on the cheap. To hire the best you have to pay top dollar and the Cub's organization is not known for that. In order to put a top tier product on the field you need competence throughout the organization. The Cubs have never had that. This organization should be embarrassed at their years of futility and back seat to almost every other team that exists, new and old. It is beyond pathetic. But I do think, for the first time, there is an actual plan in place to turn the franchise around. We've been derailed the last two years by some bad luck and poor decisions but I think they're headed in the right direction. Anyway, no point in bailing out now. We've been through enough futility, time to reap some rewards.

"Francouer doesn't have plate discipline and it's going to catch up to him. " Possibly. But then there are exceptions like Vlade ( his hero) and some other very successful free swingers. But my point in bringing up the disciplne thing with Francoeur was that just because you end up with swing-at-everything players like Francoeur and Corey doesn't mean that's the Organizational philosophy. Most hitting coaches probably try to teach plate discipline at every level in every organization, but it's up to the player to adapt if they can. And that's where Organizational philosophies in drafting play a huge part in what type of player we end up with. In the Moneyball book, Beane states that he DRAFTS discipline hitters because this is a trait that cannot be effectively taught. So if an organization is paying more attention to tools or power and little attention to plate discipline then it's very possible to end up with players like Corey, with little plate discipline, not because it's not taught in our minor system, but because it can't be effectively learned. If you don't draft 'em, you don't get 'em. Boston probably drafted Murton with that aspect in mind. Without a sabermetrically oriented Organization this probably won't change. I don't have a problem with not having homegrown positional players in our lineup as long as we are drafting enough useful trading chips to upgrade our team and I think we have. St Louis has used this approach very effectively over the years. They have only Pujols and Molina from their system and Molina just this year. Probably the reason we have not drafted any super star type position player is that we have concentrated on pitching and I think that's the best approach. It is very very difficult to get top tier pitching unless you grow them yourself or spend megabucks on high risk FA. Just look at the Yankees. This is the model Atlanta started with and obviously proved very successful. Only in later years did they have to concentrate on drafting position players because success means drafting lower and lower and top tier pitchers are taken first. I think Hendry has the right idea. Draft and develop pitchers, plug in bats, use minor level arms and position players as trade bait. The problem has been injuries to these elite pitchers, an unlucky signing ( Nomar), not enough emphasis on defense, a Corey collapse, a grab bag bullpen and some poor managerial decisions ( Dusty). Most of these can be corrected. Injuries, of course, not included. Bottom line, I still feel good about the Cub's direction, and Hendry guiding the ship. I'm worried about Dusty because some of his decisions were absolutely beyond dumb, such as Corey/Nefi batting 1-2, Hawkins as closer, Holly an everyday player, Macias starting, etc. The only way around this is for Hendry to construct a lineup written in granite that stays healthy. Not likely to happen, so I'll worry about Dusty every season until he is gone.

I'm not convinced about the plate discipline argument. Francouer, Atlanta's best prospect came to the majors with absolutely NO plate discipline. So...do they not teach it in the Atlanta system either? Maybe it's more about the player. Eric Patterson has it Corey Patterson doesn't. Bobby Hill and Choi, two major prospects still haven't been able to be developed to their "potential" by other teams. Maybe their potential isn't what we thought it was. We have concentrated on drafting and developing pitching. We have fronline starters in Wood, Prior and Z. All home grown. We are not at the mercy of paying inflated $$$ for overpriced pitching on the free agent market. How many other teams can say that? Indirectly, we acquired Murton for Beltran ( homegrown). Hill ( homegrown) was part of what brought us Aramis and Choi ( homegrown) brought us Lee. I would say that's 3 homegrowners that really uphgraded our team.What more can you ask? Mitre, Weurtz, Welleyeyer, Hill, Novoa ( for homegrown Farnsworth) are all pitchers with good stuff that need to learn consistency in the majors. Some do, some never do, some take time. ( Like Garland) But the prospects are there and developing. The Cub's farm system doesn't seem too bad.

I don't think it's unreasonable to reserve a decision on Murton. Hendry is implying that he must continue to improve his defense ( and he is) and he needs to work hard in the off season to compete for the job in the spring. It's not going to be handed to him. Murton is hitting .380 (71 AB) against LHP and only .261 ( 69 AB) against RHP. Dusty platooned him for quite awhile, starting him only against LHP so his BA reflects equal AB against both. That won't be the case if he's the starter so we probably can't expect a .321 average. If his power continues to improve, the Cubs probably feel they can accept a .280-.290 hitter with average minus defense at the corner spot. One other note: Murton hit .258 Day games (26) and .378 Night games (25). Ouch! But Dusty's recent comment that you can't have poor defense in the infield because so many balls are hit there imply that the bats of Walker and Nomar are gone. Offense is going to have to come more from 1st,3rd and OF. Not sure what they plan to do about C but they certainly are going to rely on OF offense next year. This means that they probably will accept a bit of shakey defense from Murton but he's going to have to hit . If he can't hit RHP better than .261 and can't hit with corner power he'll find himself becoming a platoon player.

Corey is likely finished as a Cub and should be. For one thing, he seems to be uncoachable within the Cub's organization. No one has gotten through. He continues with the same failed approach over and over. Also, I think the fan base and organization both question his committment to the game. Tonight, failing to run out a strikeout when the ball goes to the wall is inexcusable and an example of spacing out. His lack of desire to play winter ball when his game has collapsed and needs work desperately shows little committment. Corey will continue to be booed at Wrigley. This won't help either. He needs to be gone.

"Furcal and Cedeno would not be a good offensive combo up the middle." True, but it would be a very good defensive combo. Preventing runs works also.

If Cedeno works out ok at 2nd during winter ball, he'll play 2nd and Walker will be gone. Dusty/Hendry aren't happy that we're so poor on the defensive stats. We have almost no range in the infield with Aramis, Nomar and Walker. Plus a terrible DP combo. Aramis isn't going anywhere. But Nomar ( and his injuries) and Walker are expendable. I think Hendry will try to sign Furcal and if he gets him, play Cedeno at 2nd. This takes care of leadoff and improving defense up the middle. If he doesn't get Furcal it's possible he'll take one more shot at Nomar and play Cedeno at 2nd. I just don't see Walker starting at 2nd next year unless Cedeno bombs during winter ball. Not because of his mouth but because of his slow feet and poor hands.

I watched every 2003 game and if your definition of "dominant" is a Farnsworth fastball, then no, he wasn't dominant. But if "dominant"means getting the job done, spotting his fastball and getting them to chase good breaking pitches, staying cool, not walking batters and giving up dingers, then he was a dominant closer. I remember him closing games against the St Louis heart of the order under a lot of pressure and getting it done. Joe's shoulder caused a loss of velocity. In 2003 his FB was decent and his slider was sharp. That's not smoke and mirrors.

Failing to cover first, to execute rundowns, to get bunts down, to run bases properly, to hit the cut off man., to block balls in the dirt, .to throw to the right bases....all failure in fundamentals. Swinging for the fences with two strikes, 3 batters making 1 pitch outs, swinging at the first pitch when the pitcher has walked the last two batters...all examples of thoughtless baseball. Yes, the Cub hitters need to walk more and their pitchers need to walk less but as long as at least some of the above is not corrected, at least in frequency of occurance, the Cubs will not play winning baseball. Players need to be held accountable for lack of focus, lapses and thoughtless/selfish baseball by placing their butts on the bench for a game or two to clear their head. Of course players on other teams make mistakes. I get MLB Extra Innings and watch a ton of baseball. I see them. But I certainly don't see it on winning teams to the extent we see this on the Cubs day after day. No way.

First of all, I don't think it Barrett Bashing to state the obvious. He is a poor defensive catcher. I like Barrett, in fact, Walker also. they're gamers who come to play every day and there's a lot to be said for that. But let's put a few fielding stats into perspective. I'll compare Barrett to someone we all agree has the best D, Ivan Rodriguez, and then to a young D catcher that the Cards ( who always value defense at catcher)have, Yadier Molina. 2005 Source: ESPN MLB Defensive stats. SB against Rodriguez 26 Y Molina 12 Barrett 64 CS % Rodriguez .567 Y Molina .657 Barrett .229 Granted, I am comparing him to the best older and younger defensive catchers but it should be obvious that Barret is not average in these departments. In fact, I could only find 2 catchers (Kendall and V Martinez) with worse stats in this department. These stats can be easilly quantified, but there are many that cannot. We have all seen Barrett make poor decisions, fail to block balls in the dirt, fail to block home plate properly, and fail to take charge on the infeld. I love a hitting catcher because it removes a dead spot in the lineup and I personally was happy about his signing. But after watching almost every Cub game the last two years I am convinced that his bat is less an asset than we think.

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games. Barrett is a liability behind the plate. He has trouble blocking balls in the dirt, throwing out runners, making plays at the plate and I'm not sure he's much good at framing pitches and calling games. Prior and Z prefer the 2nd string catcher. You figure it out. Yes he has a good bat for his position and if we had not also sacrificed defense for Nomar (poor range, throws) and Walker ( poor range, decisions and hands) and Aramis ( throws, slow footwork. poor range) we could probably absorb Barrett. But we can't have an entire infield with shakey defense ( except Lee) and expect to win. It just aint done.

I think it's possible to be proud of a pro team that's short on talent yet finished in the running by overachieving, just as it is possible to be proud of a marginal intellect that manages a "C" in a difficult course. But this team? A team that is a bottom dweller on defense, last in hitting with RISP, one of the least focused and fundamentally sound teams I've ever seen. A team that folds under pressure and blames everything but themselves. Proud of them? Ya gotta be kidding!