fromthestretch

The .796 is what they got out of that position for the entire season, regardless of who was playing there. However, after Rizzo was called up, he started 86 of the remaining 89 games. Barring injury or a complete collapse in his performance, I think you can pencil him in for at least 150 games. Therefore, an .850 OPS (if he's able to reach that) would make for a nice improvement over last year's production at the position. No you are comparing 2 different stat lines. you are comparing the stat line for every player at first base from last year with only the games played by the starting first basemen this year. A bad 50 at bats by the sub would drop the overall ops by a lot. I know what I'm comparing. I spelled it out pretty clearly. The reason I'm comparing 2013 Rizzo to the overall 2012 stat line for Cubs first basemen is due to my belief that Rizzo will get about 95% of the playing time at first base. I'm too lazy to do the math right now, but I would imagine it would take a disastrous 40 or so plate appearances by the player(s) getting the remaining ~5% of playing time to drag down the .850 OPS too much. I'm in no way predicting an .850 OPS from Rizzo, but I'd like to think that a player of his age with his abilities should show some improvement in 2013. Also, considering how rarely Castro and Barney got a day off (Castro never did), I'm betting that Rizzo is going to be run out there pretty much every day. Jersey's concerns about how poorly Rizzo hit left-handers in 2012 is valid and would be magnified during the course of an entire season. However, I thought (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong) that Rizzo hit lefties pretty well in the minors. If he can improve his numbers against southpaws in 2013 even just a little, that would help.

The .796 is what they got out of that position for the entire season, regardless of who was playing there. However, after Rizzo was called up, he started 86 of the remaining 89 games. Barring injury or a complete collapse in his performance, I think you can pencil him in for at least 150 games. Therefore, an .850 OPS (if he's able to reach that) would make for a nice improvement over last year's production at the position.

LaHair's May stats are inflated by the carryover of how hot he was in April; he fell off pretty dramatically the last couple of weeks or so to really drag his numbers down. Far more importantly and relevant to this debate, Rizzo's average stats have a good chance of improve due to his talent and that he's still a developing player. It's faulty to approach his 2012 numbers like they're necessarily indicative of the player he'll be. I don't think it's a stretch to think he could be a .850+ OPS player next year. inflated? those stats are just the games he played in may, not his totals. I hope Rizzo is an 850+ guy, that being said our first basemen in the first half of the season was .890 ops guy and to be better that has to be replaced. try to look at it this way if as a team we hit for .890 ops last year in the first half and this year we hit for a .850 ops, would you guess we will win more games or less? it does not matter what happened after mid season in this comparison. Also if you look at earlier projections not everyone is as confident that Rizzo's stats will go up this year. The Cubs got a .796 OPS out of first base for the 2012 season. If Rizzo can put up an .850 OPS in 2013, that would be an improvement. It becomes a more significant improvement when you factor in defense and base-running.

The fact is there are a limited number of MLB television play-by-play jobs, and a ton of guys that would love to take them, and I'm not just talking about message board posters and radio callers here. Anyone who managed to hold down one of the most sought after jobs in sports for as long as Hawk Harrelson has suggests that he has clearly been doing a lot of things right, though none of those things has actually ever been witnessed. I'm sure that a lot of people would like to take his place, but the White Sox fans seem to like him, mostly anyway, and more importantly, ownership does. In Hawk's job, you can get by on that alone. A GM's responsibilities tend to be a bit more involved. You used Hendry's longevity as a GM as evidence that he was doing something right. Hawk has been the White Sox announcer for longer than anyone cares to remember, and pretty much everyone (except for the very biased of White Sox fans) will agree that he's horrible at it. Your ability to keep a job for a number of years doesn't necessarily make you good at it. It could simply mean your boss was too blind/incompetent/ignorant to remove you from that position sooner.

The fact is there are a limited number of MLB television play-by-play jobs, and a ton of guys that would love to take them, and I'm not just talking about message board posters and radio callers here. Anyone who managed to hold down one of the most sought after jobs in sports for as long as Hawk Harrelson has suggests that he has clearly been doing a lot of things right, though none of those things has actually ever been witnessed.

There's definitely a lot of stupid going on in those comments. It's nice to see a few people on there though that actually get it. Unfortunately, they are outnumbered by the "OMG you can't trade reed he hustles and is awesome!" people.

Make fun of Heymen all you want, but one day you might wake up and there won't be a Heymen and you will be disappointed. Or more likely: you'll awaken to him standing over you bed wielding a knife sporting a vintage poodle skirt. Or you won't. Stay tuned. ETA: Dammit. Goony beat me to it.

[expletive] it, I'll say it. I was even sad to see Reed go. I had nothing against Reed...more indifferent than anything.

I've always been a fan of Geo. It didn't bother me one bit when they showed Reed Johnson shaking hands in the dugout after he was pulled from the game, but I was a little sad when Soto was doing the same thing, knowing he had just played his last game as a Cub.

Because of course they drafted a guy with his physique thinking that they could fall back on his speed and defense if the bat didn't come around.

He has more steals this season than any major league team currently does. The Marlins are closest with 66 steals as a team.

Hamilton's displayed the ability to draw a walk once in awhile. Also, at 6'1", I'd think he would have more power potential than the 3'6" Campana.

Wil Myers has 24 this year between AA and AAA.

It would be wonderful if he could get that OBP into the .350 range.

It's great to want a .370+ OBP out of every position, but even the greatest offensive teams didn't have that. Castro does many other things very well and should improve in that department at least a little as he matures as a player. I don't see Castro completely falling apart as a hitter, so even if his walk totals don't increase a lot, he'll still remain a very valuable player. Having an aggressive hitter like that in the lineup doesn't mean that every hitter in the lineup is going to follow that same approach. You can get better OBP out of other positions on the field. Hell, even the 2004 Red Sox only got a .308 OBP out of the shortstop position, and they scored 949 runs that season. I realize that's an extreme example, but you can have an aggressive hitter in your lineup and still be a very productive team.

Maybe he could just use a day off. He has played basically every inning of every game the Cubs have played this season. Sometimes people just need a mental break.

:shock: Someone got a logical explanation for that? That entire team got hit a lot...98 HBP as a team. They had another guy that was hit 14 times and three other guys that were hit at least 10 times.

Casey McGehee and the 2011 Brewers say hi.

Yep. A lot like Ryan Theriot in that respect. Without the noodle arm. Or the stupid attitude. And a brain on the base paths. I have never seen a player run into more outs on the base paths than Ryan Theriot. Have you forgotten about Moises Alou? I seem to recall Alou getting doubled off second on fly balls three times within the span of like a month. He was terrible on the base paths.

It would take exactly one season to balance it out. Yeah if they went 104-58 in 2014 it would bring them back to .500. Of course that's assuming they only lose 100 this year and they improve by 15 games next year. No one is going to give a rat's behind that Theo's Cubs lost 100 games in 2012 if the Cubs win a World Series while he's here. Hell, just getting to a World Series will help people forget this season. That's a big "if". It's only big when you increase the font size by 20x. Otherwise, it's a pretty standard "if". Sure, if the Cubs lose 100 games this season followed by several mediocre seasons with maybe a few decent ones sprinkled in, it won't look all that great. It would look like the Hendry era. My point though is that it won't take several seasons to balance out a 100-loss season, when a World Series would pretty much make people forget about a 100-loss season.

It would take exactly one season to balance it out. Yeah if they went 104-58 in 2014 it would bring them back to .500. Of course that's assuming they only lose 100 this year and they improve by 15 games next year. No one is going to give a rat's behind that Theo's Cubs lost 100 games in 2012 if the Cubs win a World Series while he's here. Hell, just getting to a World Series will help people forget this season.

You know...I listen to a lot of Cubs games on SiriusXM at work. When it's a Cubs' home game, SiriusXM will begin airing the home broadcast about five seconds before first pitch. However, since this is a Cardinals home game, they're broadcasting the entire damn "opening day" ceremonies. Figures.

All I remember was that it was in 1987 and Jerry Mumphrey hit a home run.

Guy has to pay for those high-priced hookers somehow.

Since this has never happened before, I thought it might be newsworthy... Purdue baseball is now nationally ranked in all four major national polls at the same time for the first time in program history.