fromthestretch

Then, depending on what those four players bring to the table as far as slugging, mix them in the 4-8 spots (4-9 if you're in the AL) in the order. Nobody expects every player to put up a .350 OBP. However, the leadoff hitter is the guy batting ahead of the heart of the order. Even if he's not leading off an inning, he's still batting in front of the guys that you pay to drive in runs. Might as well put a guy that gets on base in that spot to increase your chances of having someone on when the big hitters come up. The problem is, many of your top OBP guys are also your top slugging players. There are not enough #1 and #2 hitters left over to put up a .350 OBP for every team. Pierre is a little under that, but he makes up for the difference in OBP with the problems he creates on the basepaths. If Pierre was at his career average (approx. .350 OBP), I could accept it. I'd like it to be higher, but I could accept it. As it stands now, he is currently 75 points behind Kevin Youkilis and has 27 more stolen bases. Pierre has also been caught stealing 10 times, while Youkilis hasn't been caught in five attempts. Brady Clark has an OBP of .379 and only two stolen bases, and I'd prefer him at the top of the order over Pierre. There is no way that Pierre's speed can make up for that big of a difference in OBP.

Dejesus - I actually think it might take a little more, but I think he is worth it. he is not the 'prototypical' lead off man. he's the type of leadoff man a team should seek. developing power, and great/developing patience/obp Cruz - because you need to get something for Maddux, he can play all the outfield really well, mashes lefties. a one year platoon of Jones/Cruz puts up great numbers out of rightfield. Wilson gets 90 starts at 5 positions, is the #1 batter off the bench, and provides the rightfield platoon in right in 08 is Jones isn't gone by then. nobody would trade a player younger than 30 with any talent for Maddux. it's a trade that could go down which provides a benefit to the team. I think you could get a younger outfielder with a skillset similar to Cruz in exchange for Maddux. Now getting an outfielder with the hype that Cruz had when he was younger is a different story. But Cruz today isn't the same as Cruz five years ago. He's still solid, don't get me wrong. But I'd rather take a chance on some kid in his early-to-mid 20s with a similar skillset.

There are 8 players who have batted at least 100 at bats in the leadoff spot this year that have a .350 OBP or better. 8. That's your starting point? In fact, Jose Reyes only has a .357 OBP. Does that mean he is barely a decent leadoff hitter? Now that I look at the stats again, Pierre is probably going to get to a .340 OBP. If a .335 OBP from your leadoff hitter is horrible, and a .350-.360 is only decent, then I guess there are only 2 good leadoff men in the game. The fact that a lot of other teams have medicrity out of their leadoff spot doesn't mean the Cubs should settle for it. I'd also be curious to know how many players with over .350 OBPs aren't batting leadoff and why. Obviously, there are middle-of-the-order types that have OBPs well over that. But there are probably some guys batting second for some teams that have a better OBP than their leadoff hitter (i.e. Todd Walker). Some teams probably have players that should be batting leadoff but aren't. Take a look at the Nationals. Jose Vidro has spent most of the season splitting time between the #2 and #3 spots in the order, while Soriano leads off. To his credit, Soriano has a respectable OBP this year, but I'd be inclined to bat Vidro first, with Soriano somewhere in the middle of the order. Put his power to use when people are on base in front of him. The funny thing is, Soriano has the best OBP leading off in the league of people who lead off most of the time-.378 That may be true, but I think it would be more effective to put Vidro, who has been better throughout his career at getting on base, in the leadoff spot, and put Soriano down around 4th or 5th. Of course, now they have Lopez, so there are even more options. Maybe go with Lopez, Vidro, Johnson, Soriano, Guillen, etc.

Then, depending on what those four players bring to the table as far as slugging, mix them in the 4-8 spots (4-9 if you're in the AL) in the order. Nobody expects every player to put up a .350 OBP. However, the leadoff hitter is the guy batting ahead of the heart of the order. Even if he's not leading off an inning, he's still batting in front of the guys that you pay to drive in runs. Might as well put a guy that gets on base in that spot to increase your chances of having someone on when the big hitters come up.

There are 8 players who have batted at least 100 at bats in the leadoff spot this year that have a .350 OBP or better. 8. That's your starting point? In fact, Jose Reyes only has a .357 OBP. Does that mean he is barely a decent leadoff hitter? Now that I look at the stats again, Pierre is probably going to get to a .340 OBP. If a .335 OBP from your leadoff hitter is horrible, and a .350-.360 is only decent, then I guess there are only 2 good leadoff men in the game. The fact that a lot of other teams have medicrity out of their leadoff spot doesn't mean the Cubs should settle for it. I'd also be curious to know how many players with over .350 OBPs aren't batting leadoff and why. Obviously, there are middle-of-the-order types that have OBPs well over that. But there are probably some guys batting second for some teams that have a better OBP than their leadoff hitter (i.e. Todd Walker). Some teams probably have players that should be batting leadoff but aren't. Take a look at the Nationals. Jose Vidro has spent most of the season splitting time between the #2 and #3 spots in the order, while Soriano leads off. To his credit, Soriano has a respectable OBP this year, but I'd be inclined to bat Vidro first, with Soriano somewhere in the middle of the order. Put his power to use when people are on base in front of him.

fourth attempt - anyone? anyone? Anderson. Anderson. Bueller. Bueller. damn. I got everyone riled up. bumping once more trying to get this to the top. bumping cuz I don't think anyone saw this in their haste to argue with me. I haven't looked at those threads since my last posts in them. I'm done with those arguments. come on guys. let's talk about what could be done. we know the sports journalists read this message board. maybe they filter some of the great ideas we come up with back to the front office. .... alright, enough of the Rusch for tat in other threads. I worked my way to this plan over the weekend, and I think it is not only a good plan to put the organization back together quickly, it is also feasible. I hoped for comments or argument to help me flesh it out (like earlier in the thread, thanks TT). what does everyone think? edit - lmao at the auto edit I think you're overpaying for DeJesus. While he'd be a welcome presence at the top of the order, his skill set doesn't justify trading away that much for him. As for Cruz Jr., why? If you're going to sign Craig Wilson, platoon him with Jones in RF. If you're going to deal Maddux, at least get someone on the right side of 30.

Except he doesn't create run opportunities especially well and his lack of OBP is what matters most, much moreso than his speed. His speed does not offset his lack of OBP. Then quantify it. How many SB's, and speed does it take to make up for how much OBP lost? What would be the point where his speed would offset the lack of OBP? It's not just stolen bases but also the success rate in a runner's attempts to steal a bag, take that extra base, etc. Regardless of speed, I'd prefer to have a leadoff hitter that, at the very least, gets on base 35% of the time. That's the starting point.

When you consider who is batting behind Pierre as opposed to who is batting behind Ramirez, Jacque and Murton, that percentage looks even worse. Not really-Neifi batted behind Pierre a decent amount of the time. Ramirez, Jacque, and Murton have each other-and for a player like Jones, 15 of his 38 runs have been driving in himself. Also, now that Pierre has been hot, his #2 hitter Walker has been ice cold, and Lee has been pretty cold himself. The bottom of the order has been the better part of the order all season-Barrett, Jones, and Murton spent a great deal of the season hitting 5/6/7, and that is where most of the runs came from. Don't blame Pierre for Dusty's refusal to move players hitting well up the order. Forgot to add that while I won't dispute the lack of production from the #2 spot in the order, Neifi has only hit in that spot in 15 games this season. And oddly enough, he's been fairly productive in his 54 at-bats there.

Actually, I think that goony disputed it quite well... And the "it takes one hit to score from first?" comments help clarify someone's position. Do they really mean that, is it hyperbole, or am I just mis-reading it? gooney's point is a great illustration of the hypocrisy I am talking about. we all know that runs scored and RBI are team oriented stats, but when assessing a player that is not likes, suddenly the team related stats go out the window. no attempt is made to isolate Pierre's ability. this is illustrated quite well with Cubscolts post immediately above. I think you're reading way too much into goony's post. He's simply responding to the claim that as a baserunner, Pierre is better at getting himself across the plate than others. We all know the Cubs lineup is pretty pathetic and that runs and RBI are not the best individual stats. I think goony's comments actually help prove that runs scored is a more team-related statistic.

When you consider who is batting behind Pierre as opposed to who is batting behind Ramirez, Jacque and Murton, that percentage looks even worse. Not really-Neifi batted behind Pierre a decent amount of the time. Ramirez, Jacque, and Murton have each other-and for a player like Jones, 15 of his 38 runs have been driving in himself. Also, now that Pierre has been hot, his #2 hitter Walker has been ice cold, and Lee has been pretty cold himself. The bottom of the order has been the better part of the order all season-Barrett, Jones, and Murton spent a great deal of the season hitting 5/6/7, and that is where most of the runs came from. Don't blame Pierre for Dusty's refusal to move players hitting well up the order. Even if the #2 hitter doesn't get Pierre in, he still has the middle of the order behind him (Ramirez, Lee, Barrett, and Jones...the guys that are supposed to be driving in runs). He has the most "thunder" in the lineup behind him, as opposed to anyone else on the team. Murton on the other hand, has spend most of his time in the 5th, 6th, and 7th spots (mostly 7th) in the order. That means he's followed by a #8 hitter, then the pitcher, then Pierre, who doesn't drive in many runs.

Moneyball, SABR, and all the adherents thereto. Hooray for generalizations. Hooray Beer!!! http://derekstubbs.com/wp/images/redstripe.jpg

Moneyball, SABR, and all the adherents thereto. I personally agree with much of those peoples' assessment of defense and it's lack of importance in the big picture (with the exception of absolute butchers). what I can't stand is people sitting on both sides of the fence when it suits their current argument. I don't believe that anyone has said that defense isn't important. A lot of people have said that it isn't as important as some other things. There's a big difference. If defense wasn't considered important, why then would "Moneyball, SABR, and all the adherents thereto" constantly try to devise ways to better measure defense?

When you consider who is batting behind Pierre as opposed to who is batting behind Ramirez, Jacque and Murton, that percentage looks even worse.

Oddly enough, Hawpe's numbers on the road are much better than his home numbers this season.

I have to somewhat disagree with the bolded part. Although Walker hasn't really hit for much power this season, he does have more power than Pierre, Perez, and Cedeno. It's too early to tell just how much power Pagan and Bynum will hit for at the big league level, so I won't compare them to him. Mabry is comparable to Walker power-wise.

no. the ERA increases because of inherited runners. Kyle's WHIP has gone up as has ERA, although the average has stayed the same. That shows wildness. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your argument here, but inherited runners count against the ERA of the pitcher who put them on base in the first place. They do not count against the ERA of the pitcher who inherited them. As for his number of blown saves over his career, I'd be curious to know how many of them actually came when he was being used to close the game as opposed to coming in to face a hitter or two in the seventh or eighth inning. I hate the fact that a guy can come into the middle of a game - everyone knowing that he's not in there to finish the game, but rather just face a hitter or two or maybe just pitch one inning - and still get charged with a blown save.

I can't see the Braves dealing Betemit. I imagine they'll be unloading Giles first. As for Napoli, all the rumors I've heard about the Angels talk about Mathis potentially being traded due to the emergence of Napoli this season. I think Church could turn things around with a change of scenery, and Quentin really should be starting for a big league team somewhere. The D-backs would be wise to try to deal Gonzalez somewhere to make room for him.

Did Dusty brainwash him? Seriously, how can a GM say something like that?

Yes, because they're so close to winning it all with this current roster. The Cubs drought is already long-term. Time to try something new.

Do you really not understand the difference between predicting what will happen and hoping for a certain outcome? Those a two very different things. I've only seen one person in this entire thread actually say he'd like to see the Cubs lose 100 games so they'll feel the embarrassment. Everyone else is just making predictions. If you'd actually listen, you'll probably find that most people here want the Cubs to win. There aren't many people on this board that watch this team and follow them religiously, hoping they'll lose. Most people would love to see the Cubs play good baseball in the second half. And most of those same people want Baker gone. The problem is that a strong second half could very well lead to a contract extension for Baker, who really hasn't done a good job with this team. Chances are, if they continue to lose, Baker won't be back next season. If they continue to lose, they'll probably trade players who have no future with this team, and hopefully acquire some key players who can help turn things around for the long-term. Rebuilding can take a few years, but a team with a payroll of nearly $100 million can rebuild much faster than a team with a $35 million payroll. The Cubs can use some young players (ones they have now or ones they may acquire via trade) to trade for a big bat or maybe a good starting pitcher. If good players are available via free agency, they can use the money they saved by trading high-priced, mediocre vets to sign a few good players. You really have to figure out what's most important for you. Do you want the Cubs to have a great second half, which will likely not be enough to put them in the playoffs and could lead to fewer changes on what is not a strong team? OR would you rather they make significant changes that could lead to sustained success? I think we'd all rather have an extended period of winning over trying to salvage what is already a lost season. Does continued losing this season guarantee that the Cubs will make serious changes? Of course not, but it certainly increases the chances of it happening. Does a .500 record at the end of the season guarantee Baker will be back in 2007? No, but I predict that if the Cubs finish at or above .500 this season, which they won't (that's another prediction), Baker will be given the opportunity to return next year.

I think the Astros are more apt to get rid of Lane than they are to dump Ensberg.

What's the justification for it when teams with lower payrolls have better records? They just need to be smarter with their money. Giving this team an extra $25-30 million to spend isn't going to do much good if they keep using it to overpay for mediocrity.

Yep...playing time for younger guys to see what you have, instead of playing older guys because they're your "horses". I don't buy that argument. Dusty has been playing the "younger guys" to see what they have. Unfortunately, they were not quite ready to be played. Tell that to Angel Guzman, who essentially was a spectator for two weeks during his last call-up.

You remembered incorrectly. He was killed in the backseat of an automobile in Gary from a shotgun blast. I was challenged to produce one player who gave back contract money due to poor performance, irregardless of the reason for his poor performance. Looking over what vance had requested, that's not at all what you were asked to produce:

It's pretty easy to understand. Rehab starts in the minors take away starts from the young pitching. Oh please. Pushing a pitcher back one day in the Daytona rotation so someone can make a rehab start isn't going to stunt his growth. It's not like Wood was bumping a kid out of a minor league rotation for half a season. The thing that's been "pretty easy to understand" is your hatred for Wood. No one here is claiming that he's even come close to earning his contract, but his injuries are far from intentional.