USSoccer
-
Posts
17,655 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by USSoccer
-
Ideally we'd be able to put that in every spot, but considering that we aren't low on players that can slug(Lee, ARam, Barrett), I'll take more slugging from the guy on our team that will get the most PA's. So why not hit him 2nd? That would be a better balance. After all, as the argument goes, a leadoff hitter is only once per game. If it were me, I'd put Walker and Murton 2nd or 6th. but then who hits first? I was operating on the assumption that we land Pierre. If things end up as they are now, the best possible lineup would have Walker and Murton 1-2, but I think we'll end up with one of the 4 "leadoff" guys that are out there. oh, i assumed that we were arguing about walker's leadoff merits because we were seeing if he was a better leadoff option than Pierre. If Pierre is on the team, I guess you hit him first and Walker second. Though, if things play out like last season, id rather do Walker first, Murton second and Pierre 8th. I tend to think Pierre will have a year closer to his career norms than last season. Probably in the neighborhood of a .350-.360 OBP.
-
I think yes, if there is an abundance of slugging. In Walker's case, he doesnt really have enough to be a serious run producer, but he has enough to consistently get himself into scoring position. Hes not going to steal bases, but he has doubles power, so he can get himself to second base that way. Or you can look at it like since he has doubles power, you could hit him 2nd or 6th and drive in your better OBP options out of the 1, 3 and 4 holes. who are the better obp options? Assuming we end up with one of the "leadoff" guys, he'd be 1st, and then Lee and Ramirez 3 and 4 have very good OBP's.
-
Ideally we'd be able to put that in every spot, but considering that we aren't low on players that can slug(Lee, ARam, Barrett), I'll take more slugging from the guy on our team that will get the most PA's. So why not hit him 2nd? That would be a better balance. After all, as the argument goes, a leadoff hitter is only once per game. If it were me, I'd put Walker and Murton 2nd or 6th. but then who hits first? I was operating on the assumption that we land Pierre. If things end up as they are now, the best possible lineup would have Walker and Murton 1-2, but I think we'll end up with one of the 4 "leadoff" guys that are out there.
-
I think yes, if there is an abundance of slugging. In Walker's case, he doesnt really have enough to be a serious run producer, but he has enough to consistently get himself into scoring position. Hes not going to steal bases, but he has doubles power, so he can get himself to second base that way. Or you can look at it like since he has doubles power, you could hit him 2nd or 6th and drive in your better OBP options out of the 1, 3 and 4 holes.
-
Ideally we'd be able to put that in every spot, but considering that we aren't low on players that can slug(Lee, ARam, Barrett), I'll take more slugging from the guy on our team that will get the most PA's. So why not hit him 2nd? That would be a better balance. After all, as the argument goes, a leadoff hitter is only once per game. If it were me, I'd put Walker and Murton 2nd or 6th.
-
If Pierre returns to a .360 OBP next year and steals at a 75 percent success rate -- is that acceptable? I'm not saying he will ... just wondering what you'd think about those numbers. say he does put up those #'s. it won't matter anyway because w/o good prospects to trade w/, the cubs are going to have jones, burnitz, wilson in rf, and the team will struggle to win 85 games. then pierre bolts for 7 year deal from the yankees and the cubs have nothing to show for trading 2-3 very good prospects. so no, that wouldn't be acceptable. I don't know about that. Our power numbers were good enough last year, it was our RS that killed us. A properly constructed lineup with good OBP players at the top likely would mean we'd be in contention again.
-
Let's say Pierre does well and Pie struggles at AAA, the Cubs get to enter a bidding war for Pierre the following year. Or they sign him to a long-term deal this Spring to prevent him from becoming a FA and then let the battle begin. I can tell you right now, Pie is better defensively than Pierre at this moment. If Pie struggles at AAA, do you want him up at the ML level? He's pretty young still, so why rush him? No, I don't want him rushed, but it doesn't be completed by only Pierre. It isn't a Pierre or bust scenario, there are better options. My problem isn't with Pierre, he's an upgrade, he's just not the biggest upgrade out there. Are you still thinking of Michaels?
-
CPatt- Isn't a better slugging player best used lower in the order to drive in runs?
-
Just to reinforce something frmo the original Levine report, Hill was not thought to be part of this deal. It should just be the 2 pitchers.
-
Let's say Pierre does well and Pie struggles at AAA, the Cubs get to enter a bidding war for Pierre the following year. Or they sign him to a long-term deal this Spring to prevent him from becoming a FA and then let the battle begin. I can tell you right now, Pie is better defensively than Pierre at this moment. If Pie struggles at AAA, do you want him up at the ML level? He's pretty young still, so why rush him?
-
Not to nitpick, but that doesn't matter a lick. I'd rather make trades based on tangibles. I agree with you on Pie, though.
-
Pinto is the 2nd or 3rd best LHP in our system. Nolasco had a breakout year this past year, but IIRC doesn't project to be better than a #3-4 starter. Personally, I don't think that's the case any more. 1) Mark Pawelek 2) Rich Hill 3) Sean Marshall 4 is a tossup between Pinto and Veal. Nolasco's breakout year was last season in AA. He was bumped up to AAA before being ready and got knocked around accordingly. He had a pretty darn good year in AA this past season, though. I thought it was: Pawelek Marshall Pinto Hill
-
Perhaps they think that between Lee, ARam and Barrett, they have enough power to get by, but need OBP from the top 2 slots, and feel that all they need is a 6 hole hitter from RF. Just trying to think like Hendry. Who would bat 5th? Barrett becomes one of the worst #5 hitters on a team with a thought of making the playoffs. Murton will probably below avg. and then factor Dusty and Pierre Walker (assuming he's still w/the Cubs) Lee Ramirez ?-SS RF'er Murton Barrett I would assume the lineup would be Pierre Murton Lee Ramirez Walker RFTBNL Barrett Perez/Cedeno But your point is well taken. I suppose if we couldn't land a RF in a trade, you'd be staring at Preston Wilson as your #5 hitter-which would cause me to puke daily.
-
Pinto is the 2nd or 3rd best LHP in our system. Nolasco had a breakout year this past year, but IIRC doesn't project to be better than a #3-4 starter.
-
No doubt you're correct, but I think Nolasco AND Pinto might be a tad too much. I think it might not be the best use of those 2 in a deal. Having said that, if it goes down, at least we filled one hole in the lineup.
-
Perhaps they think that between Lee, ARam and Barrett, they have enough power to get by, but need OBP from the top 2 slots, and feel that all they need is a 6 hole hitter from RF. Just trying to think like Hendry.
-
And what if it's .326 like it was last year? That's the chances you have to take. At least it's about .200 points better than Patterson right? ;) why is that a chance you have to take? that makes no sense. From Hendry's point of view, Pierre is the safest available move he could make for the "leadoff" spot. Bradley is a little injury prone, and a possible ticking time bomb. Wilkerson probably strikes out too much and doesn't have enough speed. Lugo plays a position they like Cedeno and Neifi for. So, from Hendry's point of view, Pierre makes sense. He holds CF for 2006, ensuring Pie doesn't get rushed like Corey, he has speed, has a track record as a leadoff guy, and has the illusion of being good defensively.
-
I don't care about Pierre's SLG% as much as other do, but if his OPB is below .360 next year then we overpaid.
-
If he has any clue about how best to maximize the lineup, then it should be Murton.
-
That's how I feel, too. I don't think either will crack our rotation, but I think we could get more for them in a deal than Pierre. I find it hard to believe, for instance, than those 2 plus one more couldn't get Lugo and Huff.
-
Nolasco I can stand to part with. I'm not thrilled with parting with Pinto. I think those two could be used better than getting Pierre.
-
agreed 100%. You can't want tangibles out of Pierre and other players like him, but then cite intangibles as reasons why Pie is untouchable.
-
Benson to the Royals
USSoccer replied to Rob's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Wow. Anna is going to be so mad. I'm not sure if that's good or bad for Kris. -
Why? Was Dusty on the radio too? No, but basically what Rogers said was Baker had a meeting with the media and somebody asked him what he thought about Murton and Cedeno and Baker's response was something like"If I dont play them I dont play young people." and then went on to justify how he plays young people like the bull pen and back in his days with the Giants. Typical Baker. If he doesn't at least play Murton everyday then he should be absolutely fried in the media until he does, or until he leaves.
-
I just find it odd, Cuse, that Hendry would be so careful as to talk up Hill's potential value, while he's done little to increase the value of other trading chips in the past and present. As far as Hill goes, I move him if it nets us an impact bat. Our window of opportunity isn't going to be open for more than the next 2-3 years, so we might as well go for it.