Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Sammy Sofa

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    98,030

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    206

 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 Sammy Sofa

  1. Sammy Sofa
    And, of course, Quade doesn't pull Marmol.
  2. Sammy Sofa
    Beautiful. Expect to see Hill tomorrow despite Soto's 3 hits because of that.
  3. Sammy Sofa
    Alright, Marmol has been garbage, but what a squeeze on that 1-1 pitch.
  4. Sammy Sofa
    What indications were these? None. OK, it seemed clear to me we wouldn't be loading up on huge, long contracts like we used to, but I acknowledge I could be wrong. Why is it clear to you? I'm honestly asking, because then you're privy to information the rest of us don't have.
  5. Sammy Sofa
    Thank you! Proves my point. These hitting coaches show more of a tendency, in either the minors or majors, toward better plate discipline than Joshua, Duncan, and Barbaro did during their careers. Wait, what? Did you actually read what you replied to?
  6. Sammy Sofa
    No, I really don't, mainly because none of us know what the threshold is. OK, so he does it his first 3 AB. Then they shift back and all of a sudden he's not bunting. Do they shift back into the shift? I just don't see managers falling for it. They're too stubborn that way, nor do I see a slugger willing to try such a thing. It's just never going to happen. You think they're too stubborn to play a straight up defensive alignment? It's not like the shift takes 300 points off the hitter's OPS. Managers would absolutely make that change, the fans and media would rake them over the coals if they got beat by it over and over and over. But that's my point; there's too many factors going against it even being attempted for any kind of sustained period of time for anyone to be beat over and over by it. Nobody's going to try it in the first place.
  7. Sammy Sofa
    No, I really don't, mainly because none of us know what the threshold is. OK, so he does it his first 3 AB. Then they shift back and all of a sudden he's not bunting. Do they shift back into the shift? I just don't see managers falling for it. They're too stubborn that way, nor do I see a slugger willing to try such a thing. It's just never going to happen.
  8. Sammy Sofa
    I'm not sure I agree with you, but that's the best case scenario for the Cubs if they don't adjust. Eventually, one of these power hitters is going to commit to it and whichever person does it his team will benefit greatly from it. I really don't think so. It's a combination of managers not being ballsy/smart/whatever enough to try it, players putting their egos aside to pull it off, and opposing teams not having an actual threshold as to which they'll stop shifting.
  9. Sammy Sofa
    But they wouldn't adjust.
  10. Sammy Sofa
    Think of it this way. Defensively, would you want to achieve the scenario where the #4 hitter walks 75% of the time? The only way giving away bunt singles all the time is effective for the defense is if the guy is a Bondsian hitter. Again, I'm not talking about Pena in a vacuum; I'm talking about Pena on the Cubs. And we're talking about a hypothetical scenario that has zero chance of happening. There isn't a breaking point where teams are going to say "gee, maybe the shift isn't such a good idea, let's shift back" because of how many times Carlos Pena bunts his way on base.
  11. Sammy Sofa
    Then I would say good luck to them! They aren't valuing OBP correctly if they do that. They would think you'd be crazy if you suggested intentionally walking Pena every time he came to the plate, but they'll let him get on because of a bunt 75-80 percent of the time? Sure, they'd probably be OK either way, since the Cubs aren't very good and Pena is one of their few offensive threats.
  12. Sammy Sofa
    I think it would just encourage the shift to continue. I'm sure any team would gladly give a bunt single to Carlos Pena almost every time he was at the plate instead of having him swing away. If it's luring a dangerous hitter to only bunt his way on, why stop?
  13. Sammy Sofa
    I don't know. I'd happily take a baserunner from my #4 hitter in many situations (which is also why I'm happy almost all the time when the #4 hitter walks). Sure, you have to pick your spots, but the bunt against the shift is so valuable precisely because of that. Pena can choose to do it when you're leading off an inning, but not when there are baserunners or when you come up with 2 outs/nobody on. Pena can choose to do it when there's a left-hander on the mound. He can choose to do it when he's slumping. It's already useful, but using it when he's less likely to get a hit/the team needs a baserunner makes it a big weapon. I personally think he should do it a little more than he does. No. I agree that if a guy is slumping it can help mix things up, but the last thing I want Pena doing when he's hitting is bunting, especially on a team this bad. Ultimately, however, he's much more valuable and team is probably more likely to score if he's trying to hit than if he's just getting on 1B for Byrd or Soto or Soriano.
  14. Sammy Sofa
    I flipped a coin to decide between Freeman and Espinosa. I hope it chose well.
  15. Sammy Sofa
    Yeah, but even then it should only be done once in a blue moon (if at all) because they're so much more useful swinging away and you're counting on them to drive people in, not just move people up a base. It's not like most teams are stacked enough where you want your #4 hitter bunting.
  16. Sammy Sofa
    Whatever. They're all named Juan, right? Their moms are lazy that way.
  17. Sammy Sofa
    Not quite sure what you're getting at here. A player's on field performance has little to do with what they evangelize as a coach. Take Joe Morgan for example. If there was ever a player who understood the value of a walk, Morgan and his career .121 IsoD should be that guy. But you listen to him stumble his way through broadcasts and it's clear he doesn't understand the concept at all. The opposite is true as well, people can understand the value of the walk but not be able to execute for a variety of reasons(lack of talent, pitch recognition, etc). Right, that seems like a really faulty way to point out the Cubs failings when it comes to developing players. Look around most of the minors and I'm very confident that most of the coaches who were former players had sub-.350 OBP's.
  18. Sammy Sofa
    Holy [expletive]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marty_Bergen_%28baseball%29
  19. Sammy Sofa
    Wow, never seen an ERA like this before: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/k/kammebo01.shtml
  20. Sammy Sofa
    Koyie Hill might not be the best candidate of all the backup catcher playing today, let alone all-time. It's hard to tell catcher's defensive ratings very well, but Hill is not particularly close to being the worst offensive catcher in the league. WHUT BUT ONLY THE COBS AND THE FUTILITY AND THE MANGLED HAND AND HENDRY LIKES DONUTS I guarantee you there's at least one person here who honestly believes that Soriano should be on this list. I don't know who that person is...but they're out there.
  21. Sammy Sofa
    Yeah, looking at him as the 6th or 7th starter is ultimately largely redundant. The point still stands that a series of events had to go very, very wrong (arguably to an unusual degree) for the idea of Gorzelanny being traded being a truly damnable decision by Hendry. Like TT said, Gorzelanny did not figure into the Cubs long-term plans, they had multiple options besides him at the time, and dealing him would net them a group of intriguing prospects and free up a couple million dollars. It ended up that having Gorzelanny would have lessened the pain of this year (though likely not by much), but personally I don't see trading him as being particularly egregious.
  22. Sammy Sofa
    KARMAKARMAKARMA
  23. Sammy Sofa
    No, it's not a strawman; I honestly can't get worked up over the idea of moving someone like Gorzelanny. Again, most teams are able to ride out a major pitching injury going the route the Cubs took this season. I mean, trading Marmol before this season ideally would have lessened the talent of the team going into this season, but I would have been all about that. Trading DeRosa before 2009 technically lessened the talent of the team before the season but it was a good move. If the Cubs wanted to go the route of selling relatively high on a mediocre pitcher and save a bit of money in case they needed to spend during the season, meh, really doesn't bother me. A LOT of things had to go wrong for Tom [expletive] Gorzelanny to start suddenly looking so good.
  24. Sammy Sofa
    Nice. I went with Rollins, hoping he'd have a bounceback year playing for a new contract. Not a bad first half, but I'm ripping off your pick instead.
  25. Sammy Sofa
    Am I reading this right? You would trade Marmol for Colby Rasmus? He's a career .259 hitter, doesn't get on base at a real good level, doesn't steal bases, and is only a 20 HR power guy. I've got to believe you're massively overrating his trade value.. Maybe I am wrong? I mean, I think Jackson could be brought up and put up similar numbers w/ a bit less power. He's only 24, and was very good in his age 23 season. He's regressed somewhat this year, but again, only 24, so this is the time to buy low on a player (if he's truly on the outs with the Cardinals) with that much promise and who was that highly rated as a prospect (#3 before 2009 and #5 before 2008). A player like that is much more valuable than an expensive closer.
×
×
  • Create New...