CubColtPacer

Womack Pierre Walker Ramirez Jones Cedeno Bynum Blanco Maddux 6-5 win. Pierre Theriot Jones Murton Mabry Blanco Moore Cedeno Marshall 14-6 win

I agree. He got ripped off. If he'd have waited for FA, he easily could have gotten $100 million over the 8 years. It has to be remembered that 3 of these 8 years are years in which the Brewers can pay him the minimum salary in baseball if they so desire (which goes up slightly with every year of experience). Then you have 3 more years in which open bidding can not drive your contract up, and your money is somewhat limited by a certain scale based on your performance. If Braun doesn't sign this deal, there's no way that he makes 100 million over the next 7+ years. He might have made 70-75 if he was really good, but that's kind of doubtful.

I thought he had a good chance of being terrible, I was very glad to be proven wrong. And yes, he could be terrible the rest of the season, but that would still likely mean he was average over the course of the season unless he truly blows up. He's also been a bit lucky about who he faces. He missed the Phillies and the Rockies. He's faced 3 teams (Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Cincy) who are much better against left-handers than right-handers a total of 6 times, and he's also faced the Padres and Nationals. Cincy is the only team that should give Dempster trouble out of that group of 5 teams, and unsurprisingly they have in his 2 starts against him. The only really good offense so far this year against right-handers he's faced is Arizona, and even they are much better against left-handers. The teams we need Dempster to avoid facing are teams like the Braves, Marlins, Cardinals, Diamondbacks, Phillies, Reds, and Rockies. The Braves and Marlins especially are prime candidates for the Cubs to throw all their left-handers against.

I am going to guess because the hitting coach normally isn't a topic of conversation unless the offense is sputtering, and then the conversation is when is the hitting coach going to be fired. I agree though that I love watching this Cubs offense, and Loue and Perry deserve credit for the turnaround. I don't know about that. The same logic should apply to the pitching coach, yet Rothschild is in the media much more. Maybe Perry just isn't a good interview or something like that. Kind of like Soriano, ever notice how Soto, Lee and others get interviewed alot but they never talk to Fonzie? Either they don't like interviewing him, or he's dumb as a box of rocks so they just leave him alone. It's not really either. It's mostly because he's really, really hard to understand, so that hurts his TV interviews quite a bit. I've seen quotes from him more in print, but I've noticed they're usually talking about him when that's the case, and tend to go to the 4 "spokesmen" of the team (Lee, Z, DeRosa, Theriot) when they have a team issue and are looking for a quote. As for Perry and Rothschild, part of that is just the nature of a hitting coach and pitching coach. Hitters tend to be viewed as going through slumps that they themselves have to work through, and pitchers have mechanical issues that you run to the pitching coach to get a quote from. Add to that Lou has been much more high-profile in working personally with certain hitters (Jones, Pie to name 2) while he knows much less about how to fix pitchers, and Perry can get lost in the shuffle sometimes.

The Brewers are saving 10-15 million on this deal....if he doesn't get hurt. While he was under team control, if he was hurt or started tanking, they could have gotten out from him and not have to paid nearly as much. That option has now disappeared. Now, they're saving 10-15 million if he's pretty good, and losing 20-35 million if he's not for some reason or another. It's still probably a pretty good deal, because Braun isn't that high of a risk. But it's certainly IMO not a steal.

Yup...and that would automatically disqualify him in the eyes of the Cubs organization, regardless of availability... I just LOVE our front office!! meh :cray: 2010:$21M, 2011:$23M, 2012:$21M, 2013:$21M, 2014:$21M That right there is what should automatically disqualify him. Yup, plus he had a .706 OPS last year, and has a .787 OPS so far this year. 4 of his last 5 seasons have been less than an .810 OPS. He's basically Soriano's contract without nearly as much productivity to back it up, even accounting for the positional difference. Simply a horrible option.

My guess is with everyone else that Blanco and Edmonds both get the start tomorrow, especially in the case of Edmonds because the Cubs will face 3 more lefties over the weekend. If Blanco does start, it will be interesting to see if Fukudome moves up to the 2 spot tomorrow, or if they save that for a day when the 8 spot is not full already. If they don't move Fukudome, then the logical place in the lineup for Edmonds would be 7th IMO giving you this: Soriano Theriot Lee Ramirez Fukduome DeRosa Edmonds Blanco Dempster Of course if Soto starts, Fukudome will go to 2nd, Theriot to 8th, and Edmonds to 5th. With Blanco the same thing might happen except Theriot would bat 7th, not 8th.

I wouldn't be against sitting him tomorrow. Soto, too. That would be an interesting lineup: Soriano Theriot Fukudome Ramirez Ward Edmonds DeRosa Blanco Dempster

It's really strange with Lou on Marmol. He gives him proper rest so that he doesn't throw too many 3 days in a row, doesn't throw 2 innings the day after he threw 2 innings, etc. He's very concerned about that, but he isn't concerned about his overall pace of innings for the season. I don't know. Maybe pitchers aren't that big of risk for problems throwing 100-110 innings if they're properly spaced out. It's hard to say because we've had so few cases like that. Usually managers either hold relievers to 80-85 innings, or throw them 4+ days in a row regularly and run them into the ground.

Unless the Cubs build up about a 15 run lead here, my guess is that Marmol would go back in. It's too bad, but I don't see much way that it doesn't happen.

Not to mention only 8 baserunners in 6 innings of work, along with only 1 extra base hit given up, and that was a double.

His OPS has risen by over 200 points in the last 5 days (updated through the end of the 4th tonight). If you discount pinch-hitting appearances, he's gotten a hit in 17 out of the last 18 games he's started. The last 4, he has 2 hits or more, and the last 3 he's had home runs in. Basically, this is Soriano. The roller coaster will continue to ride all season, and you never quite know if he's going to end up with very good production or just average.

Well, he did give you the walk you wanted :D. Unfortunately, I've noticed a really disturbing trend with Colvin that I hope when I finally break down and review all the game logs becomes just my perception and not reality. My perception though is that Colvin really is terrible in games he walks in. He either hits or he walks. He doesn't seem to be able to do both in the same game. I believe it was true last year (in the rare times he did walk, but of course he hit a lot more last year) and I'm almost certain it has been true this year.

No, that's exactly the point. You said that was a possible argument, and I showed that it is a ridiculous argument. There is no manipulation in showing that Cedeno's minor league career was immensely more impressive than Fontenot's. You've done nothing to show that there are logical arguments for the things I listed. How about this: However much Cedeno's minor league numbers show he's a better prospect, Fontenot's minor and major league numbers show that he's more likely to produce this year, which is why he was projected to have better stats than Cedeno by most of the projection systems. As others have mentioned, PECOTA leads the way in that, but is joined by Bill James, Tango, and ZIPS. Add to that Fontenot has been rather unlucky with his balls put into play so far (a 27.7% LD percentage translating into a .304 BABIP) and Cedeno has been rather lucky (a 19.6% LD percentage, and he has a .400 BABIP) and that their difference in their stats is only 2-3 bloops falling for Fontenot or a couple ones caught for Cedeno. Plus if you're arguing over the last couple of weeks, you also have to add in that Fontenot is red hot while Cedeno is scuffling. I believe they are similar options hitting wise now over the course of the season thanks to Cedeno's improved approach (with Cedeno being the better overall player due to his capable defense at short) but if you're going to play one at second as part of a double switch, going with the hot hand or the left/right matchups is the way to go. Right now, that's been Fontenot quite a bit, and he probably has matched Cedeno so far this season in hitting the ball. It's just that a few more of Cedeno's have fallen in.

Said the same thing about Kendall And it was true. Kendall was quite a bit better in Chicago than in Oakland. In fact, his numbers in Chicago were a little above average for catchers last year, but it didn't justify both 1) his arm and 2) the fact that he was keeping Soto down.

I agree completely (other then the throwing Marquis off a bridge comment :D). Hill probably is at least close to being one of the Cubs 5 starters right now (he probably is on productivity, probably won't be on how deep he can get into a ballgame considering every team for a while is going to try to wait him out). I'd rather keep throwing him in AAA, let it get worked out, become the #2 starter again, and then come up. Pitching him in the majors right now is probably going to result in some more short starts, and that's going to cause a longer adjustment period for him. That doesn't preclude you from replacing Marquis though, who definitely is not one of the top 5 starters in the Cubs organization right now.

Marquis looks like a completely different pitcher right now than even his inconsistent self last year. His sinker hasn't worked for more than a batter or two at a time, which is completely different from last year. Yes, he probably still is and can put up 5th starter numbers, but the Jason Marquis we're seeing on the mound right now is most definitely not the best option for the starting staff. Before, there was a question. Right now, there's none, but I just don't know what they will be able to do about it.

Yes, it does.

Is that Tom Goodwin's little brother? No, but he is cousins with both Walter Payton and Gary Payton. Curtis did well for himself getting over 1000 at-bats in the major leagues considering he had a career .609 OPS.

Since April 27th: Fontenot: .444/.643/.722 Cedeno>Fontenot Both at bat and in the field. The difference between them so far this year is approximately 2 singles, and Fontenot was projected for better numbers before the season. Not to mention, as has been pointed out, the Padres pitcher currently in is much better against right-handers than left-handers.

Since April 27th: Fontenot: .444/.643/.722

Doesn't matter. He's not even close to the best kicker in the NFL now and never should have been close to the highest paid. Whether that lasts a week or a season is inconsequential. It's irresponsible cap management and bad business. For a team that talks about prioritizing contracts and paying their own, it's absurd that they reward a mediocre kicker who skipped voluntary workouts with an inflated contract while they have meaningful players in need of deals. He most certainly is close to the best kicker in the NFL. Maybe our coverage unit is just that good but his kickoffs haven't really hurt us and his FG kicking has been excellent. Among the best in the league over the last two years. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamst.php http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamst2006.php Where Gould is involved, our kicking game has been pretty much undeniably excellent over the last two seasons. FO measures FG efficiency/effectiveness based on the percentage of attempts that are successful from that distance and adjusted for field and weather conditions. If you want to argue about Gould's contract in terms of an opportunity cost with respect to other needs, that's fine. Saying he's mediocre simply isn't valid. Personally I think the whole "highest paid in the leauge" angle is being overblown in light of an ever increasing salary cap and the fact that he's pretty damn good. Yup, he was helped by a little bit of down year in kicking overall last year. Taking a quick look at the numbers, it looks like he finished 3rd in field goal effectiveness both years.

He was only among the most accurate in 2006, and the only reason his percentage is high is because he never even attempts long ones. He's a high percentage kicker on chip shots and extra points. That's dime a dozen stuff right there. Gould doesn't kick a lot of chip shots (35 yards and less). He's way down the list in the 30 yards or less categories. He's 24 out of 28 the last 2 years on kicks between 40 and 49 yards (12 out of 14 each year). That's the most attempts in the entire league from that distance. Gould connected at a 85.7% rate from that distance each of those years, while league average was only 74.2 in 2007 (I didn't take time to calculate league average for 2006). And you should be happy he doesn't kick a lot from 50+. Those kicks are really bad bets, and shouldn't be used for anything but buzzer beating situations or any situation where you absolutely need a field goal to win or tie.

Definitely Kaz Matsui. He was going to get a 3 year deal at the position the Cubs have the most players at, and he's worse relative to average than Marquis is at his position. His contract is also higher relative to other second baseman, while Marquis's contract is below average for a starting pitcher. Neifi was just designed to be a backup and was a good defender at the hardest position on the field to cover. Womack, Wilson, and Podsednik were just supposed to be fill-ins. Burnitz signed a 1 year deal at average salary, and was around an average right fielder. Jones had a better history of production than Matsui and Marquis, and honestly the Cubs probably got the 12 million dollars in production they paid for him. Edmonds would be tops if he had a contract that the Cubs couldn't get rid of quickly, but since he does, the risk becomes a lot less. Rusch was actually a somewhat defensible move that went horribly wrong (the re-signing). It still likely was bad, but the chance of success was better than some of the other players on this list. Baker was bad, but it wasn't immediately obvious to most people, so that makes it less dumb then some of the other names on this list.

I have to think Marquis will get 1 more start after this one at the very least. If they had wanted to bring Hill up this week, they wouldn't be starting Gallagher on Friday. Marshall isn't fully ready quite yet from stretching out. Lieber just got demoted, so Lou isn't likely to throw him in there in place of Marquis. So I think Marquis will start today and Sunday. If Gallagher and Hill pitch well and Marquis pitches poorly, he might be gone. If Marquis pitches ok, and Gallagher pitches ok, I think Gallagher will be the one taken out when Hill comes back.