goonys evil twin

Unless you were a really cheap owner that was more than willing to find excuses to run more expensive players out of town.

Just GMs just can't stop Gobbleing up the trash.

I don't like awarding jobs based on spring training numbers, especially when it ignores the big picture. However, if you're hoping for the best out of guys, I guess I'd like to see Cedeno and Patterson. If they are doing their best, they could be a great combo (RC - .310/.355/.400, EP - .320/.385/.450), and allow Theriot to slide into a great backup role to each, with DeRosa moving into a platoon with Jones in RF and Soriano plays CF. Although there's virtually no chance of any of that happening.

I don't think he was better than most realize. Everybody knows the hits/90's stat, it was reported ad nauseum. People have a good handle on what he was, a nice hitter, but a complementary guy at best. He provided very good AVG/OBP, but was lacking in the SLG, you needed to make up for his lack of power elsewhere in the lineup. He was like the opposite of Andre Dawson, who had the power, but not the OBP. Consistently well above average players that didn't have a whole lot of greatness in their overall games.

IIRC, Grace had more hits in the 90's than any other player in the game during that period. I could be wrong, though. That is true, but still doesn't make him hall worthy.

What is it about them? I'm guessing it's the same thing about the general population that does it all the time. Touche. But still you'd think with all that money they could get a cab or have a limo escort them around town. Obviously they could, but that's also true for the vast majority of DUIs, people could have paid 10-20 bucks for a cab ride instead. And if you can afford a Bentley, you'd probably want to drive it as well. It's irresponsibility. I don't have much respect for people who get up in arms when people get drunk, including groups like MADD who freak out about underage drinking. Underage drinking is not morally reprehensible, or even morally questionable. Drinking and driving is. Our country needs to do a better job promoting responsible drinking, which includes planning ahead for transportation options. The black and white way people think about alcohol in this country doesn't do any good. It's like promoting abstinence as the only way to avoid pregnancy and STDs.

I think the voting process would take care of that on its own.

What is it about them? I'm guessing it's the same thing about the general population that does it all the time.

It truly is a shame that ego and other non-baseball reasons will be used for not bringing in a guy like Sammy to platoon with Jones (or Floyd) in RF. That could be a remarkably productive combo. But it has no chance of happening.

Dammit. I just put together an in depth response to this part, but got sidetracked and was bounced out of NSBB when I hit submit. Anyway, I basically said you aren't necessarily being unreasonable, just overly optimistic. Teams really need huge improvements at positions to make that kind of bounce from year to year, like LA did from 2005-2006, when they replaced a .279 mess in LF with a .387, because of a great new young player and fantastic OBP from his backup. They also replaced an Izturis led SS position with a Furcal led one, that provided a 52 point bounce. Well, this version isn't going to be nearly as interesting, but I predict something closer to a .325-.330 range in team OBP (barring a shocking move in CF or SS), and middle of the NL pack. This is a Hendry team, and Hendry is not an OBP friendly GM. He's begun to acknowledge it's existence, but he's yet to acquire any true OBP stars. Middle of the pack in OBP would be an accomplishment for Hendry.

I don't know about by far. It's the same staff that started 2006, minus Maddux and plus Marquis. I'd say the pitching, as usual, has a wide range of possibilities. And terrible is quite possible. There's no guarantee Lilly or Marquis will be any better than people they are replacing, and last year's staff was terrible. Z Maddux Rusch Marshall Williams. no, even if your worst expectations are fulfilled, and barring injury of course, I doubt the staff is any where near the staff the Cubs started 2006 with. under worst case scenerio Z=Z Lilly Hill>>>Rusch Marquis=Marshall Prior/Miller/Guz/Marmol/Mateo/Marshall/Ryu>>>>>Williams the assesment for what transpired over the year would be about the same. Jerome Williams did not start 2006 in the rotation. His first 3 appearances was out of the pen. Regardless, what I meant was that they have the same bodies to choose from, minus Maddux and plus Lilly and Marquis. It's quite possible Lilly would be worse than Maddux, and Marquis will be at his worst, with both Miller and Prior incapable of providing help. I wouldn't predict that myself, but it's possible. The fact is it was terrible last year, and they haven't added anybody great, so, it could be terrible again.

I don't know about by far. It's the same staff that started 2006, minus Maddux and plus Marquis. I'd say the pitching, as usual, has a wide range of possibilities. And terrible is quite possible. There's no guarantee Lilly or Marquis will be any better than people they are replacing, and last year's staff was terrible.

I'm wondering why both of you are expecting sub 900 OPS out of Ramirez, and consider 930 or 905 as over-performance. He's coming off 3 straight years of 900 plus, averaging 930. I know he's been on a slight decline overall, but that was mostly about the slow start to 2006. He'll turn 29 next year. I'd say I would be somewhat surprised if he was below 900 this season. And I definitely would not characterize 905 or 930 as overperformance. That's what he should do. Below 900 is possible, but it would be a major disappointment.

Interesting. I don't see the point of the rule though.

There is nothing likely at all about that scenario. That's a pretty ridiculous outlook, IMO. 50 ABs? He had 319 vs. RH last year in 144 games, out of 455 ABs. If he gets plattooned, he likely gets about 400 ABs, of which 300 come against RH pitching. I don't see 50 AB vs RHP as most likely either. However, if Floyd plays well at all, I think it would be closer to the midpoint of 300 and 50. Last year 28.9% of Cubs PA came against LHP. Assume the Cubs get 695 PA out of LF next year (10 more PA than they got from the 5 spot last year). 28.9% of 695 is 201. Floyd would get some of those, but Murton will get most, let's say 90%. That's 191. Now you got 494 PA against RHP remaining. If Murton were to get 300 PA against those guys, that would leave 204 TPA for Floyd. There's no way that he'd play that little if he was healthy and mildly productive. More likely than not, Floyd would be getting 300-350 TPA. And it's not beyond reason to expect him to get more than 50%, based on the dominant presence of RHP. Then, with Ward getting a handful of starts out there, and quite likely the occasional late game pinch hitting opportunity for Murton if a tough RH in on the mound, that's at least 10-15 PA for Ward. Comparisons to last year are pointless, since there was no Cliff Floyd in the situation. Pagan and Bynum weren't a real threat to his playing time. So, even if Murton manages 60% of TPA, odds are, he won't have more than 225 or so PA against RHP. If Floyd plays like he has over the past 5 years total, then Murton will be lucky to get 100.

I believe you need to have ten years in the league to be considered for HOF. If Pujols has one more year typical of his production, he can probably play the next three at league average, retire, and still make it. . You believe that's a rule or that's just a belief of yours?

There's no need to worry about him individually. The point is though, that if Murton also platoons with Floyd, he's going to lose a significant portion of PA to him, and then another handful from Ward. It's going to be a small part of the total, but Ward will get some of that time.

Last year, Ward got 130 AB in 98 games. I assume he had a few 2-AB games following double switch type deal. I don't know where to get the pinch-hitting stats. But basically, that looks to me like he was basically a straight pinch hitter. If he started 8 games and got 35 AB in those 8, that would leave 95 AB for the remaining 90 games. So, pinch hit about 90 games, a couple of times stay in on a double-switch and get a second AB. Either way, it looks like he started less than ten games. I don't think Ward is going to provide any threat to Murton's playing time. Unless murton is really dying versus RHP. Floyd or Jones, different story. He had 62 AB as a pinch hitter.

Hendry has said he wants a short-term CF, and that he wants a LH OF help. He's said this even after acquiring Ward. And it's been rumored by everybody that Floyd would come here, eventually. It's been assumed that Soriano is the RF, and it's safe to assume he'll play everyday, or very close. Ward is basically a LF or 1B option. You can rest assured he will get starts this year, and unless Lee misses 50 games, some of those starts will come in LF. If Floyd is here, he will get spots in LF. As far as I know, the Cubs haven't come out and said Murton will platoon with somebody in LF. But every action and every word they have spoken has indicated that Murton will share time out there. Whether it's a strict platoon, where he's get maybe 30% of the time, a 50/50 platoon where he faces some RH, or a situation where he still gets 75% of the PA, is unclear. But if Floyd is signed, you can pretty much guarantee Murton will not play LF everyday.

Floyd wouldn't have to suck to make this a bad situation. Basically, they need him to produce a 900+ OPS against RHP for it to make sense. It's very possible that a 34 year old Floyd would be healthy enough to play in 80 games, get 350 PA, but only be somewhere around an 800 OPS. That's not helping the team from just playing Murton. It doesn't matter if they "say" they are going to use a 3-man position. Murton, Floyd and Ward on the Cubs would guarantee that all 3 get some time in LF. Ward doesn't have to get 50 starts to account for part of the platoon, even if he gets 10, he's cutting in. And he will get 10. Your claim that there is no danger of stunting his growth is completely bogus. There is clearly danger. If Murton starts less than half the games, getting about 300 PA, that would very possibly stunt both his potential value in a trade, and his development as a player. Young guys need to keep playing a lot. Note, I'm not predicting a disaster if Floyd comes aboard. Overall, I think it can be helpful. I just don't believe it'll help all that much, and I'm pointing out there could be serious drawbacks. This isn't a no-brainer good move by any stretch.

You don't see a difference between Murton fighting for time with Ward, and fighting for time with Ward and Floyd. I do, but it's because Ward isn't up to par for that kind of situation, not Floyd or Murt. I thought this thread was about complaining that we were acquiring Floyd. Sounds like the real beef should be with Ward. I thought the thread was about the Cubs interest in Floyd and the pros and cons that go along with it. The beef is with splitting up Murton's potential 700 PA of solid production among 3 guys, who, when combined, might be no better than Murton alone. The negative to that is you have a need for help in other spots, and 3 guys who aren't going to play any other position. Plus, you are hurting Murton's value by putting the platoon player stigma on him, or, by failing to let him develop as a full-time player.

It's not as simple as picking a number and saying good or bad. I think if Murton is only getting 300 PA, that's really bad, for anybody who wants Murton to be the regular LF soon. But if he's platooned with somebody who puts up a 900+ OPS in the other 400 LF PA, then it's not bad for the Cubs. It's about a balance. Then I don't see what we're arguing. Floyd's last healthy season yielded a .863 OPS---close to your .900 bar. He hit 34 HR and had 98 RBIs in 2005. That's a decent injection of power. If he's not healthy, then Murt plays anyway. If we want to throw Ward into the mix, then that's fine----I don't like that. But it's because WARD can't hold up the other end of the bargain, not Murt or Floyd. A Murt/Floyd platoon just doesn't sound all that bad to me. Sure, it doesn't address CF, but I didn't think that's what we were talking about. You are making the assumption that Floyd is either not going to play, or play really well. I don't think it's that simple. There's a very real chance that he could see 400 PA and not be very good at all. In general, the concern is that the Cubs could get and 825-850 OPS out of Murton alone, with the added benefit of getting him developed for the future. And that splitting Floyd/Murton/Ward, you might end up with a minimal improvement, say 840-875. There is no guarantee that a Floyd who is is healthy enough to play, is going to be good. Plus, there's the added concern that while we all know we need more offense, we're trying to add it in one of the few places we don't need much help.

You don't see a difference between Murton fighting for time with Ward, and fighting for time with Ward and Floyd.

It's not as simple as picking a number and saying good or bad. I think if Murton is only getting 300 PA, that's really bad, for anybody who wants Murton to be the regular LF soon. But if he's platooned with somebody who puts up a 900+ OPS in the other 400 LF PA, then it's not bad for the Cubs. It's about a balance.

I gotta disagree with you. People are explaining how they'd feel given a series of scenarios.