Group A: Adam Dunn Group B: Prince Fielder, Adrian Gonzalez Group C: Carlos Pena, Luke Scott, Aramis Ramirez Group D: Victor Martinez, Adam Jones, Carl Crawford, Alexei Ramirez, Joe Mauer WC: sending
This begs the question... does Olney get his intel from NSBB conventional wisdom or does NSBB get its conventional wisdom from Olney intel? They seem to be more or less in complete agreement. How do you figure this, o swami.
I have no idea. It's certainly possible he stays in that range. So why not let him bat 2nd so that he gets more PA instead of being banished to the doldrums of the lineup? Why would you WANT him batting 6-7 in the lineup? For a player that doesn't fit into the Cubs' long term plans to hit #2 instead? If you've got a player who is this important and is, hopefully, as skilled as he seems then I'd rather see what he can do in more important roles sooner rather than later. I'm not really worried about his "role" in the lineup. Hitting is hitting. The number of at-bats he gets this year out of a lower spot, with regular playing time, should be plenty for his development. I think the Cubs are close enough to contention that they shouldn't be throwing away runs unnecessarily playing suboptimal lineups. But I guess I have my answer. Why? Because he's developing for the future. Hitting isn't just hitting regardless of where you are in the lineup. Dismiss it if you will, but I'd rather he get as many PA as possible hitting 2nd instead of 7th. Plus pitchers are going to approach him differently if he's batting in front of the heart of the lineup as opposed to the mess at 2B and then the pitcher.
I could be wrong, but I'm not expecting him to be one of the better hitters in the lineup. He stands a pretty decent chance of being our 6th or 7th best hitter. Seriously?? Last year, he was definitely worse than Soto, Fukudome and Soriano. He was pretty much even with Byrd. Throw in bounceback years from Pena and Ramirez, and he'd be the 7th best hitter in the lineup. Obviously there can be a lot of variance in the upcoming year, but I don't think that's unreasonable to guess. You're looking at him like he's 25-year-old Blake DeWitt instead of 20-year-old Starlin Castro. The only benefit to batting someone else there this year is in the short term. We should want and expect the Cubs right now to be looking at the long term future of the team.
I have no idea. It's certainly possible he stays in that range. So why not let him bat 2nd so that he gets more PA instead of being banished to the doldrums of the lineup? Why would you WANT him batting 6-7 in the lineup? For a player that doesn't fit into the Cubs' long term plans to hit #2 instead? If you've got a player who is this important and is, hopefully, as skilled as he seems then I'd rather see what he can do in more important roles sooner rather than later.
I could be wrong, but I'm not expecting him to be one of the better hitters in the lineup. He stands a pretty decent chance of being our 6th or 7th best hitter. Seriously?? He's a very young, relatively inexperienced player entering his second season. There's a very good chance that he has a shaky year. That said, I see him ideally projecting to be a #2-ish hitter later on, and I'd rather the Cubs take advantage of having an "in between" team to let him get more PA by batting near the top of the order instead of burying him.
Sadly, Byrd was probably the Cubs' second best hitter last year after Soto. That doesn't mean he merits hitting in the middle of the lineup this year. You mean 1-2? I'd rather have Fukudome and Castro getting that most days. Soto should be hitting 5th.
I maybe would kill to see footage of Prince playing basketball. Both Kevin Smith and Charlie Murphy verified on separate occasions that he has insane game.
Keep in mind that was the offseason we traded DeRosa for Archer/Gaub/Stevens, so you'd have to take into account the opening at second. I meant had we kept things as were. DeRosa would have been at second. Pass. That was definitely a much smarter move as it played out than if they had kept him. It's nice when the Cubs actually sell high for once when they can. The only problem was inexplicably settling on Aaron Miles afterwards, which they certainly didn't have to do. I don't think Edmonds coming back would have been a good move. I firmly believe there was a good reason nobody signed him in 2009, and it was probably injury-related and he needed that time off just to be able to come back in 2010 in the limited capacity that he did.