Abe Frohman

I fixed the glaring flaw in your lineup, dude.

Personally, his defense hasn't really impressed me this season. Especially of late....

Amen.

You may have nailed it on the head with the bad wheels. Ryan Howard has around 20 doubles with 56 HR, about the same ratio. That is pretty odd, though.

It all went to hell when Stoney left.

Please tell me your kidding right? I really dont' feel like dropping my laundry list right now...there is probably only so much space on the server. I am kinda rethinking that when I consider signing Jones to a 3 year deal, and the unbelievable salaries he gave Rusch and Neifi. Maybe I am putting myself in the running for the "Nut Hair" award.

What exactly has Hendry done/not done that makes him so hated? Did he overwork his young arms? I am in the minority, but I still think he has been a good GM. This year was a gigantic snowball, but there wasn't much of a Free Agent crop out there last offseason. He has made some great pickups the past few years, and he is strapped with a bum manager. I wonder how close he was to actually getting the Cubs Beltran and Furcal.

Baker had tremendous help from Hendry, though. But I would never call the 2003 team one of the best Cub teams. They got extremely lucky to win the division....er ..... I mean they got lucky that Houston lost the division. I disagree. Everything was covered with that team: Starting pitching, good defense, strong bench, solid lineup with power AND a leadoff man. Bad breaks doomed them. That team was solid.

It is amazing how one man can manage, within 4 years, one the franchises WORST and BEST teams. I honestly wonder if Dusty Baker spent this season trying to get fired.

There is not much to love about this team. They play crappy baseball, and I actually did not watch the game the other day so I could run some errands. It sucks. I do like: *Juan Pierre's 2nd half. The way he is playing now is why he was signed. *Ryan Theriot. Big LSU fan. Hung out with this guy in the past and love seeing him doing well. Never really thought he would be higher than a AA player, but glad he proved me wrong. *Matt Murton. I love how one of the few guys hitting around .300 with a high OB% is shafted as much as him. With this lineup, Murton should be hitting 3rd. Personally, that is about it. I like to tune in to the beginning of each game just so I can see the lineup and laugh at the way Dusty Baker uses this team. I honestly think the man has been trying to get fired all year. Seriously. Baker gets the "Nut Hair Award" for 2006. Hands down.

Howard hits oppo HR like it is nobodies business. Look at these little gems.... http://images18.fotki.com/v339/photos/4/41654/2548020/MARUCCIbats08022006003-vi.jpg

I believe Theriot is a better option starting at 2B than Cedeno. Good enough defense and a much better approach at the plate. His level of improvement at different Minor League levels show me that he could be a .300 avg/.370 OB/30+ SB player.

That is a great tape. That was a great year.

Any time you make the 1st or 3rd out at Third Base, it is a mistake. It is an unwritten baseball rule that you never do that. It isn't a "young mistake," becaue kids know that in High School. Theriot made a bad decision. What he was thinking is the question. There is a difference between aggressive baserunning and intelligent baserunning, no?

It's also pretty basic baseball that leadoff hitters don't come up that often with runners on, so that really shouldn't be much of a consideration when deciding which of two players to lead off. Yes, good things can happen when making contact, but not enough to offset a significant difference in measurable production. We're not talking a slight difference here--we're talking a 40 to 60 point difference in SLG. That means that Fontenot is worth an extra 1/20th of a base every time he has an at-bat versus what Theriot provides, whether he strikes out or not. That's very, very significant. How significant is the extra contact Theriot makes? THe stuff supposedly beyond the numbers? Let's see. Theriot is striking out once per 8.24 at-bats. Fontenot K's once per 4.92 ABs. Over a 550 at-bat stretch, those numbers extrapolate to 112 K's for Fontenot and 67 K's for Theriot. That's a difference of 45 strikeouts. So how much extra opportunity is Fontenot getting to be productive in those 45 additional times making contact? Not much. First of all, an out is only productive with runners on, and usually with them in running position, as tags on fly balls or advances on grounders are rare with a man on first, and most of those turn into double plays--certainly not a productive out at all. So the situation that becomes meaningful is when a runner gets in scoring position. Obviously all of those 45 at-bats won't be with runners in scoring position. In fact, history shows that usually around a quarter or less will be, and it's even more futile for a leadoff hitter. So that's a maximum reasonable expectation of 12 or 13 at-bats in which Theriot would have a chance to advance a runner that Fontenot could not have over the course of an entire season. I don't have access to the productive out/productive out opportunity rates to guess how successful Theriot would be, but it's safe to say he won't be successful every time. Even assuming he had a 100% success rate, you're still talking about advancing 12 or 13 more runners per year, max, than Fontenot. And for all that extra production, you gave up a better OBP and a significantly better SLG? Sorry, I'm not buying what you're selling. If I shaved $20 off the top, would you consider it?

Have you watched Theriot's at-bats? He works the pitcher just like you say. He doesn't seem to be a Nomar up there swinging at the first pitch. I don't know, I just find it refreshing to see a "young player" getting good at-bats. Just something I have noticed in Theriot. Being a LSU fan, I guess I am just a little biased (despite the fact that Theriot and Fontenot were teammates for LSU). I honestly never thought Theriot would be anything more than a A+ or maybe AA player. You never know how a guy will develope, though.

But you can't quantify "productive" at-bats by comparing the number of strikeouts for two random hitters. Using your scenario, how does the number of strikeouts a person has correlate with the number of times they advanced a runner from second to third? Since we are talking about Theriot and Fontenot, my point is this: both have good OB% over the course of their minor league careers. Fontenot has more power, but strikes out more. Theriot has less power, but makes more contact (strikes out less). It is pretty easy to see who puts the ball in play more. That is all I am saying. Not that one is better than the other, but that I will take a contact hitter that gets on base a lot over a guy who gets on base a lot despite the propensity to strike out a lot. Unless his name is Jim Thome.

Fontenot, in my opinion, is not a leadoff type. He has a lot more pop than Theriot, and tends to get a little "homer happy." Theriot and Fontenot are both pretty good prospects, which means we will never know their potential with Dusty Baker running the team. I was disgusted to once again see Neifi Perez in the 2-hole tonight, despite his success against the Astros. Would have been nice to see Theriot get a little consistant action. Fontenot also gets on base at a better clip, which is why he's better for any role in the lineup. That said, neither are great prospects considering their age and other shortcomings(Theriot's complete lack of power, Fontenot's defensive shortfalls/inflexibility), ideally they should be bench players on a good team. Fontenot probably is a better overall prospect, and he does get on base at a better clip, but he strikes out a lot for a would-be leadoff man. He has good power for a guy his size - but I just don't think he is the leadoff type. The Cubs need a leadoff hitter in 2007 (assuming they do not sign Pierre - who will cost them $5-10 million a year), and could stand to give Theriot a consistant shot at 2nd Base the rest of the way in 06. I just think that Theriot is a better fit than Fontenot for what the Cubs need. He can play SS and 2B, and most likely would be an average or better leadoff man. Why does it really matter how many times a leadoff man strikes out as long as he's getting on base consistently? Really? Contact is always a better option. Well, nearly always. It allows the defense to make errors, and it can sometimes result in moving a runner over into scoring postion. It can also mean a double-play, but a strikeout is an out 97% of the time. Contact makes things happen. Besides, if you look at Theriot's statistics, it is hard not to see how much he has improved offensively as he was bumped up to higher levels. More often than not, the leadoff hitter will come up with nobody on base because they are either hitting behind the lowest OBP guys on the team or they are leading off the game. So, making contact in order to advance a runner is not as big of a deal as you make it seem in that case. As for your argument about contact allowing the defense to make errors, I know this has been discussed many times on this board in the past, and it has been shown that errors just aren't a big enough part of the game where it even makes a difference. I don't have the stats to back that up, but I'm sure somebody on here can provide a source to corroborate this argument. Correct. You won't see a guy who makes more contact suddenly jump more in OBP because of errors. In fact, the opposite is true since often times guys who strike out a good bit are also the most patient and walk more. Sometimes, a productive at bat does not show up in a hitter's average and OB%. When you ground out 4 to 3 with a runner on 2nd who advances to third, that is still an 0-1, but you have moved the runner over. My point is, Theriot makes more contact than Fontenot, yet still has about as good an OB%. Fontenot hits for a little more power, but is a 100+ strikeout guy. When you have a man in scoring position, striking out never helps. A ground ball or fly ball can. That is pretty basic baseball.

Fontenot, in my opinion, is not a leadoff type. He has a lot more pop than Theriot, and tends to get a little "homer happy." Theriot and Fontenot are both pretty good prospects, which means we will never know their potential with Dusty Baker running the team. I was disgusted to once again see Neifi Perez in the 2-hole tonight, despite his success against the Astros. Would have been nice to see Theriot get a little consistant action. Fontenot also gets on base at a better clip, which is why he's better for any role in the lineup. That said, neither are great prospects considering their age and other shortcomings(Theriot's complete lack of power, Fontenot's defensive shortfalls/inflexibility), ideally they should be bench players on a good team. Fontenot probably is a better overall prospect, and he does get on base at a better clip, but he strikes out a lot for a would-be leadoff man. He has good power for a guy his size - but I just don't think he is the leadoff type. The Cubs need a leadoff hitter in 2007 (assuming they do not sign Pierre - who will cost them $5-10 million a year), and could stand to give Theriot a consistant shot at 2nd Base the rest of the way in 06. I just think that Theriot is a better fit than Fontenot for what the Cubs need. He can play SS and 2B, and most likely would be an average or better leadoff man. Why does it really matter how many times a leadoff man strikes out as long as he's getting on base consistently? Really? Contact is always a better option. Well, nearly always. It allows the defense to make errors, and it can sometimes result in moving a runner over into scoring postion. It can also mean a double-play, but a strikeout is an out 97% of the time. Contact makes things happen. Besides, if you look at Theriot's statistics, it is hard not to see how much he has improved offensively as he was bumped up to higher levels.

I guess I am the only one who likes the blue jerseys. I don't understand the navy BP jerseys, and navy BP hats. I love the blue alternate jerseys, and never could stand solid greys.

Fontenot, in my opinion, is not a leadoff type. He has a lot more pop than Theriot, and tends to get a little "homer happy." Theriot and Fontenot are both pretty good prospects, which means we will never know their potential with Dusty Baker running the team. I was disgusted to once again see Neifi Perez in the 2-hole tonight, despite his success against the Astros. Would have been nice to see Theriot get a little consistant action. Fontenot also gets on base at a better clip, which is why he's better for any role in the lineup. That said, neither are great prospects considering their age and other shortcomings(Theriot's complete lack of power, Fontenot's defensive shortfalls/inflexibility), ideally they should be bench players on a good team. Fontenot probably is a better overall prospect, and he does get on base at a better clip, but he strikes out a lot for a would-be leadoff man. He has good power for a guy his size - but I just don't think he is the leadoff type. The Cubs need a leadoff hitter in 2007 (assuming they do not sign Pierre - who will cost them $5-10 million a year), and could stand to give Theriot a consistant shot at 2nd Base the rest of the way in 06. I just think that Theriot is a better fit than Fontenot for what the Cubs need. He can play SS and 2B, and most likely would be an average or better leadoff man.

Fontenot, in my opinion, is not a leadoff type. He has a lot more pop than Theriot, and tends to get a little "homer happy." Theriot and Fontenot are both pretty good prospects, which means we will never know their potential with Dusty Baker running the team. Good point, however, on the state of the Cub offense. I am thinking 2007, when hopefully the Cubs can land Carlos Lee, or someone of that calibre. I think the Cubs could still deal Ronny Cedeno and get back some of the pitching prospects they lost for Pierre. The Marlins have a rich pitching crop - and Miguel Cabrera (free agent after this season, right?). They also have a great prospect in Sean West (6'8 lefty with good control and a 95+ fastball), though I am not sure they will let him go despite their plethora of good arms. Time for the Cubs to start utilizing the farm a little, instead of dumping it for nothing. I was disgusted to once again see Neifi Perez in the 2-hole tonight, despite his success against the Astros. Would have been nice to see Theriot get a little consistant action.

I don't think it has been discussed too much, but why not lead off Ryan Theriot next year? I am not down on Juan Pierre, but that would free up a lot more money to get a BIG hitter, which the Cubs could surely use. Theriot has proven over the course of his professional and collegiate career that he understands the OB% thing. He was a leadoff hitter for the LSU Tigers, and I am sure that he would at least be effective as he is a good baserunner and takes a lot of walks. Cedeno will never be a top of the order hitter, and could still play some shortstop. Just a thought worth discussing, not that it would make a difference what I think.

I have a nice Dusty Baker BP jersey for sale. Anyone interested?

He should have played for the 93 Phillies. Would have fit right in with those loons.