fromthestretch

His OBP would be a welcome addition to the top of the order. However, he would most likely rot away batting seventh because Dusty would view him as not having enough speed to lead off.

Not sure, but his first 40+ homer season was in 1993...his first year in San Fran (539 at-bats). Edited to add: His previous career high was 34 the season before that in Pittsburgh. He did that in only 473 at-bats (only 140 games). The one constant in his career is a very high number of walks. He had his first 100-walk season in 1991 at age 26. He had 93 walks in each of the previous two seasons. If anything, he's shown throughout his career (pre and post Conte, depending on when you think he started using steroids) that he will wait for his pitch. Looking at his 1994 season, he was on pace for 49-50 homers that season. He had 391 at-bats in 112 games...nearly 3.5 at-bats per game (3.49 to be exact). If he plays 150 games that year (which of course wouldn't have been possible due to the strike), he would have had 523 at-bats. If my math is correct, that put him on pace for 49-50 homers.

Not sure, but his first 40+ homer season was in 1993...his first year in San Fran (539 at-bats). Edited to add: His previous career high was 34 the season before that in Pittsburgh. He did that in only 473 at-bats (only 140 games). The one constant in his career is a very high number of walks. He had his first 100-walk season in 1991 at age 26. He had 93 walks in each of the previous two seasons. If anything, he's shown throughout his career (pre and post Conte, depending on when you think he started using steroids) that he will wait for his pitch.

He's always used a bat shorter and lighter than the normal ones used by sluggers, and still chokes up on it. Amazingly fast bat speed + unbelivable pitch recognition = best hitter of our era. if steroids didn't help him, then why did he take them? from some of you guys' analysis, you make it seem they're totally irrelevant to his success. he must have felt they were doing some good. I'm not sure this is the best argument to make. Some players cork bats because they think it helps, despite the fact that it really doesn't help. I'm not saying steroids don't help. Just pointing out that a player might do something because they think it will give them an advantage, whether it actually does or not. I do agree that steroids have probably been most beneficial to Bonds by allowing him to stay in peak physical condition at a point in his career where his body most likely wouldn't be able to handle the physical strain of a 162-game season. However, I have heard that he does work his butt off in the offseason to stay in shape. Of course, the steroids just add to that.

Apparantly with every meal. The fact that he's still playing at that age (and playing well) amazes me. His reported age is 47, yet there are still a few people who think he may be a little older. Even if he is "only" 47, what he's accomplished is impressive. He doesn't show any signs of slowing down either. Certainly some people will be physically blessed (ignoring the fact the comparison is flawed since Franco is not a better player today than when he was 26), but we know Bonds "unknowingly" used steroids from his grand jury testimony. Actually, his numbers (percentages) over the past five years tell me that he's slightly better with the bat than he was when he was 26...and 27 for that matter. Granted, I don't know how his body would hold up playing everyday now, but he really hasn't slowed down much at all offensively. As for Bonds, I'm not going to argue that he didn't use steroids. However, since we know that others have used steroids (some who have had great careers and some who haven't) and we don't know how many pitchers Bonds faced that were on steroids or some other performane-enhancing substance, I have to look at his stats as they are.

So what illegal supplements do you think Nolan Ryan was on? No way his body holds up for an average of 200+ innings/year for 6 years age 40-45, right? Julio Franco must just drink steroids. Apparantly with every meal. The fact that he's still playing at that age (and playing well) amazes me. His reported age is 47, yet there are still a few people who think he may be a little older. Even if he is "only" 47, what he's accomplished is impressive. He doesn't show any signs of slowing down either.

If you are a gm, and you know for a fact that your pitchers hate throwing to your catcher, you replace him. If the catcher is so bad that the pitchers are complaining about him being behind the plate, then you either have the whiniest pitching staff ever, or you have a catcher who is complete garabge. If your catcher is that bad behind the plate, chances are his overall contribution is going to be less than league average. Before that, I'd probably ask the pitchers why. There has to be a reason, whether it's poor defense, inability to frame pitches, not on the same page as far as pitch selection, he kicked the pitcher's dog, etc. It would be nice to know if it's a reason that can be easily addressed or not before anyone gets traded/released/sent down.

You tell them to suck it up and do their job. Barrett has done nothing to warrant that much disrespect. If a pitcher doesn't have enough confidence in his own stuff to get people out with Barrett behind the plate, then that pitcher has bigger problems than the person catching him.

I'm sure certain pitchers feel more comfortable with certain catchers. I'm just saying that shouldn't be a factor. I understand that certain factors outside of a pitcher's control (defense from the other eight guys on the field, run support, umpire calls, etc.) will always be in the back of his mind. When I pitch, those things are always there. But the back of the mind is where they should stay. If a pitcher starts thinking about those things while he's on the mound, it's only going to lead to trouble. If a pitcher is constantly worried about those things everytime out, then a coach needs to step in and talk to him. Agreed.

Actually, no. I'm not making that assumption. What I'm assuming is that pitchers are professionals and that if they've made the major leagues they no how to go about their job. If a catcher is so bad that you're worried on every pitch whether he is going to catch it or not, then that person shouldn't ever be catching. Barrett is nowhere near that bad. He's adequate. He has four passed balls this year in just over 930 innings. Blanco has two passed balls in just under 370 innings. Blanco's ratio is actually worse. In fact, Barrett is actually on the low end as far as number of passed balls when you look at catchers who have caught 800 innings this season. I'll admit, his throwing does leave a bit to be desired, but there are a lot of catchers that don't throw well. Kendall, V. Martinez, and Lieberthal have been as bad, if not worse, at throwing out base-runners. Zaun, Lo Duca, Vartiek, and Pierzynski haven't been much better. Sure, a certain level of comfort comes with having a defensively-gifted catcher. A certain level of comfort also comes knowing that you have one less weak spot in the lineup when Barrett is playing. I think his mistakes get magnified on this board, since most of us see him play more than other catchers around the league. However, I'd bet that at worst he's probably middle of the pack or (more likely) just slightly below that when compared to other starting catchers at the major league level. *edited to correct the fact that Varitek does not have a "z" in it

I'm still trying to figure out why everyone blames a catcher for pitch selection when it's the pitcher that ultimately throws it. Everyone says the catcher needs to study the team they're facing, know how to approach each hitter. More of that should fall on the pitcher. The starting pitcher has four freaking days to prepare. He's the one who should know exactly how he wants to approach each hitter. I'd also like to think that a pitching coach is involved in this aspect of the game. As for framing pitches, Barrett's caught enough games to the point where he's not going to blow a game because he didn't frame a pitch properly. Not sure about this year, but Nomar's range has been above average for his career. If it's down this year, that might have something to do with a certain muscle that was torn from the bone. Walker has had average range throughout his career. Aramis is Aramis. He'll have his good days and his bad. I would wager that if he could get healthy, his glovework would improve a bit. Having nagging leg problems can throw a person's game off a bit. I agree that defense is important, but I think a lot of people make the Cubs defense out to be worse than it really is. Yes, the infield defense could be much better, but the Cubs would probably have to sacrifice quite a bit offensively to improve defensively. At that point, we can have a long thread about how much worse we are offensively.

If you're that worried about the catcher, then either the catcher is much worse than Barrett defensively, or you're paranoid. The baserunning argument has some merit. However, with Blanco behind the plate, don't you worry about run support a little more? As long as the guy behind the plate can catch the ball, can manage to get his body in front of balls in the dirt, and can avoid throwing the ball into center field on throws down to second, then a pitcher should be comfortable.

Because Barrett makes a good scapegoat. Unless the catcher is dropping everything and not blocking anything in the dirt, the pitcher can't blame him for mistakes. And I don't think that any pitcher should complain about a catcher's pitch selection for two reasons: 1. If the signs are coming from the dugout, that's not the catcher's fault. 2. If the catcher is calling the game, the pitcher has every right to shake him off. I can understand a pitcher having a certain level of comfort with a specific catcher behind the plate. However, Barrett has caught enough games that he knows what he's doing back there. He's not going to win a Gold Glove, but he isn't the reason the Cubs lose. As far as the pitcher should be concerned, having Barrett or Blanco behind the plate shouldn't matter. A strike is still a strike, and if you can't locate your pitches, you're not going to fare too well.

What does Arizona plan to do with Scott Hairston next season (he's currently recovering from shoulder surgery)? From everything I've heard, they plan to make him a corner outfielder since his defense at 2B was terrible. Just another guy that they have in the mix.

Ever since they gave Clark that contract extension, I've been wondering what their plans are. The Cubs really should look into some sort of deal with them for outfield help. I think Glaus and Jackson are staying put. I would think that they'd be open to trading Clark if someone made them a good enough offer (calling all AL teams looking for a DH), but I imagine he'll be back. If they were smart, they'd try to deal Gonzalez or possibly Green. However, I could see them dealing Tracy. He's a third baseman (albeit a bit shaky with the glove there), who's blocked at that position by Glaus for the next three years. If they keep Clark, Tracy won't be playing much first base for the next two years, since Clark won't be playing any other position. Tracy has played some outfield, mostly in right. I'm not sure how good/bad he is defensively in the outfield, but he wouldn't be a bad guy for the Cubs to acquire for LF (if he's not a complete butcher defensively). That said, I'd probably prefer Quentin.

His career stats indicate that his range factor is slightly above average. His fielding percentage for his career (entering this season) was right at league average. I'm not saying he's a gold glover, but outside of his year in Boston, he's not nearly as bad as people make him out to be. I think it's necessary to point out that he doesn't do this every single at-bat. I think it's also necessary to point out that several baseball players are guilty of this as well. I can't fault a guy for being mad that he didn't come through in an at-bat. And to be honest, I can't remember one time where he just stood in the batter's box while a play was (or even wasn't) made. I don't care if he slams his bat down, as long as he runs after he does it. If nothing else, he's honest...probably to a fault. The press knows that he'll talk, so they aren't afraid to ask him questions. Yes, he probably should tone it down a bit, but I think a lot of people here make him out to be a person that seeks out a microphone into which he can talk. Now I can't be certain, but I don't think that's the case. I think it's the people with the microphones seeking him out. That said, I wish he would keep his mouth shut when it comes to discussing the Cubs broadcasters. Someone get the man a cue card that says "no comment." I haven't seen anything showing that he doesn't work at it. Does that mean I should assume he's taking 500 ground balls a day? As for the bad rep, you can see how many people on just this site alone make the claim that he's a terrible fielder. I'd say he has every right to complain about that, considering that the numbers make him out to be about average, perhaps just slightly below at worst. There's certainly nothing wrong with criticizing players, coaches, or managers. But I find it difficult to make certain assumptions without having all the facts. Implying that Walker doesn't work on his defense is difficult to back up unless you're around him all year round. It's similar to those saying that Aramis doesn't hustle after seeing him "dog it" on some ground balls. Then it comes out that he's been playing with a leg injury for quite some time. Kind of puts things into perspective.

I think Radke would be a decent mid-to-back of the rotation starter, but not for $9 million. Opponents hit about .270 off the guy, and he'll give up 25-30 homers in any given season. The only thing he does really well is limit his walks. I wouldn't even consider giving up a second baseman that can hit .280-.300, get on base, and hit for some power from the left side (all for the low price of $2.5 mil) PLUS prospects in exchange for a less than stellar right-hander making $9 million. I'm more willing to give Jerome Williams the offseason to get back into shape and see what he can do for ohhh, say $500,000 than I am to pay $8.5 million more to Radke who might only be marginally better.

Even more bizarre is how some people can't see how he could be a valuable asset to have on the 2006 Cubs roster. Paying $2.5 million for a second baseman that can hit for a decent average with a bit of power from the left side while getting on base around 35% is a steal. If the right deal came along, then sure, trade him. Otherwise, there's no need to create another hole on this team by trading away one of the few players in the lineup that can actually get on base.

We should probably get Preston Wilson and Chan Ho Park too. Park used to be good, and Walker should have hired Wilson's agent. Cubs: "Holy Crap, Park used to be good? Sign him up!" Not sure what you mean here, but for clarification... Park was good when he signed his deal. Not outside of Dodger Stadium he wasn't. I believe his career road ERA was over 4.80 at the time he signed with Texas. Quite a few people predicted he would have a tough time there.

I could be wrong, but I think the Lugo incident turned out to be false accusations by his wife after further investigation. I don't know if they were false, or she simply recanted. It certainly is not unusual in domestic violence situations for the victim to recant. That is the reason for new domestic violence laws requiring testimony of victims and now allowing them to dismiss criminal charges. True. I just remember hearing numerous things about her actually being the one that attacked him and he acted in self-defense. I certainly don't know all the facts. If I remember correctly, they were in the middle of the divorce process when this all happened, so it's anyone's guess as to what really happened.

I could be wrong, but I think the Lugo incident turned out to be false accusations by his wife after further investigation.

I've been reading that site for about a week now. The best parts are the live blogs of the live chats that Morgan has on ESPN.

Try every 3-4 outings. If you look at his game log this season, his bad games are a bit more frequent than you claim. As for winning more games than Wood and Prior, let's not forget that Prior missed some time this season after taking a line drive off his throwing arm, which I don't think he can really be blamed for. And Maddux isn't the only person suffering from a lack of run support. Looking over the game logs, Prior could have 2-3 more wins this year and probably four more last year with some run support. I don't think it would be horrible to have Maddux as a fifth starter next year. In fact, I'd be fine with it. What I don't like is how much the Cubs would be paying him to be their fifth starter.

Would Gary the No-Trash Cougar be considered offensive? :P http://familyguy.wikicities.com/images/3/38/Garycougar.jpg

Good point. Skip next year's post-season... nevermind. That what the people from Thad Motta's hometown say about their high school nickname.....cornjerkers! Yikes. Now that's an awful nickname.