CubColtPacer

I understand what you mean about quality of team, but I'd call leading with 8 minutes to go in the national title game pretty close. I sort of don't want Pearl because of all the talk. Feuds in the Big 10. Fans calling into to shows complaining about his offensive style. He doesn't unite the fanbase, which I think is a big key to this hire. Alford is a double whammy. He isn't a great coach, and he causes a civil war within the fanbase. Please stay away from him at all costs. Bennett is probably a very good hire. His coaching style is such that the Knight crowd will like him. He's a very good coach and not a Knight, which means that the people who have moved on from Knight will like him. I'd also really like Miller. I think he's a fantastic coach, and all of IU's fans could get behind his coaching philosophy So I'm looking for 2 criteria. 1 is a great coach, and another is one who can appeal to all parts of IU's diverse fanbase. Some people may say that if you get number 1, you'll get number 2, but I just don't think that's the case in this situation.

I'm quite convinced that an option between leaving directly out of high school/having to stay in college for 3 years would be disasterous for both college basketball and the kids. Many more kids would come out that under the old rules would have passed down the opportunity to come out, but had never planned on staying more than a year or two in school. Many more kids would not be ready for the NBA and flame out. Baseball does well with this rule because most kids know they aren't going to be ready before 21 for the pros, and so they choose whether to go to school or not on other factors. That's simply not the case in basketball. At the same time, college basketball would lose all those potential good players and the year or two they put in, along with the great players that are forced to stay after high school now.

That offseason is one of those strange ones where Marquis's contract is not good, but it was one of the better pitching signings of the offseason. I'd rather have Marquis's contract than Zito, Schmidt, Eaton, Padilla, Igawa, Mulder, and Woody Williams. Suppan is a tossup. He got paid more money last year, put up worse basic production, and is signed for 1 more year than Marquis. However, he got hurt by the bad Brewers defense, and he's a likely candidate to be better than Marquis going forward. We'll also see on Daisuke. He certainly wasn't special in year one, but he was pitching in a really tough division and it was his first year in the U.S. He'll have to improve significantly to be worth 6 years and over 100 million dollars though. Lilly and Meche are the only 2 success stories out of all those pitchers so far (I'm throwing out Mussina and El Duque because they were never truly on the market). Miguel Batista would have been a little better than Marquis as well. Teams were a lot more careful with pitching this year, although part of that was due to a weak crop. Only 2 pitchers got multi-year deals: Silva and Kuroda.

:rotfl: This was posted on page 3. I'm pretty sure that was when the initial reports surfaced about Hill and Pie being those two players, which was quickly shot down by both sides.

I like them all, including the forceout rule. I absolutely hate the forceout. I'm not a huge fan of the forceout, but I feel the defense has too big of an advantage otherwise. In college you only need 1 foot, and in the pros you can't get shoved out if you were going to have 2 feet inbounds. To have neither means that many of the routes that are run on both levels won't work anymore.

I absolutely want wildcard teams to potentially have homefield over division winners. It creates an incentive for both wildcard teams and division winners to keep playing at the end of the year. I actually like all the potential rule changes except for the forceout rule being eliminated.

Isn't the drop in EqA for Theriot entirely because of PECOTA projecting his stolen bases will drop? I think they have his OBP and SLG numbers almost exactly the same as last year. I found his OBP and SLG: Theriot had a .266/.326/.346 line last year. PECOTA is projecting .270/.330/.347 this year. Basically the same line before you factor in steals, and I think that's very hard to project. Then, it comes to if you believe Cedeno's translations. I do not, but only because I believe a player like Cedeno, who has an obvious hole in his approach that throwing it to very specific spots can get him out, is one of the hardest players to translate that there is. Cedeno murders bad pitching and always has. Most AAA pitchers cannot consistently get it to a spot where Cedeno wants to swing at it but can't hit it. My fear is that many MLB pitchers can.

Theriot has abysmal range. His arm is so poor that he's playing in a few steps, which severely hampers his ability to get to anything. He's solid on what comes right at him... but he wont get to anything else. Theriot also has quick instincts to respond to the ball being hit, which allows him to get to a few more balls even when playing in. I wouldn't call his range good, but it's probably average. And I was one of the ones who thought he'd be absolutely terrible defensively there.

Regardless of who could win in a track meet, Fontenot is the overall better baserunner. Murton is way too hesitant, especially at third base.

I suspect that Belkast doesn't grasp the meaning of the word "brilliant". I suspect Belkast is full of it. A stopped clock has a better record than he does. His "guy" is probably the Oriole equivalent to a janitorial Roast -- a workerbee who finds scratch paper in trash bins he's cleaning. Belkast has caused much of the trouble this offseason (he was the one who was spearheading the trade is close both times) and he doesn't all the track record built up as much as some of the others either. Even if you put much stock into any of them, I wouldn't put much stock into his source whatsoever.

I'm not sure about your first point. Baltimore fans seem to love him. He is a flashy leadoff hitter that steals bases, plays the game "the right way", and is a big community guy. That's a big draw to bring in the casual fan in any market. As far as trade value, I agree completely. I think his trade value will only get down because he'll be getting closer to the end of his contract, and then the Orioles won't be able to re-sign him in 2 years. The only reason to keep him is to placate the fans for the next couple years.

Wow, pretty bold prediction for Soto, with Martin, Molina, McCann all young and in the N.L. Offensively, I say he is SIGNIFICANTLY better then Molina, about equal to McCann and Martin. Defensively, Soto is clearly better then McCann and Martin, and is on par with Molina. So it is definately a possibility Soto could make the ASG, considering he is playing for a major market team, he should get enough publicity. I wouldn't call Soto on Molina's defense level quite yet. Soto is a good defender behind the plate, but he can't completely stop the running game like Molina can. He is probably about at Martin's level defensively, and better than McCann. And as for offense, I think most people would be thrilled if Soto matches Martin or McCann's averages over the last 2 years, but he certainly will be better than Molina offensively unless Molina's season last year was the start of a quick improvement with the bat.

Pie was never platooned in the minors, though. Nor do I think he was platooned early in his winter-league stints. So if his farm and winter stints so large and somewhat consistent splits, it may be harder to blame them on sample size or opportunity. I don't know how Pie's career will play out. He got a couple of hits versus LHP the other day, and my impression was that while he was bad versus LHP this winter league, he was actually even worse versus RHP. So maybe he's going to be fine or no worse versus lefties than versus righties. I don't know. But there are numerous LH hitters who don't hit LHP well, even when afforded extended opportunities. It's hardly "old school" ignorance to recognize that not-uncommon reality. Will Pie be one of them? I don't know. But it's certainly possible. And even if we knew right now that Pie was going to spend his career as an .850-OPS guy versus RHP but a .680-guy versus LHP, a guy who should rightfully play his career in a platoon if used right, I don't think that being "only" a platoon guy should mean we should trade him right now. A good lefty platoon player is very valuable. Pie's had a grand total of 58ABs againt LHP in MLB. And those at-bats match what Pie did in Iowa against left-handers in 2006 and 2007, and in West Tennessee in 2005 (there are no split numbers available for any farther back than that). Pie has had more than a 200 point split between right-handers and left-handers in each of those years, and he hasn't been platooned at any of those spots. It's been a dramatic and repeated split. If it were just the major league numbers, I would completely agree with you. When the extremely limited major league numbers match what all the available minor league numbers have been consistently saying for years, it becomes a much bigger issue.

I disagree completely. Johnson's production against left-handers is much better than Pie's, which addresses a struggle the Cubs have had for years. Pie's overall numbers also look better if it's not being brought way down by all those left-handers, which makes the Cubs less likely to replace him and gives him a better chance to get a fair shot. I don't like the idea of a platoon partner for Pie. Letting him play only against LHers is not giving him a fair shot. The Cubs have to let him play. This is the same tired old story year after god forsaken year with the Cubs. Wait . . . you mean RHers, right?? And since that's the majority of pitchers, I'd say that IS a fair shot for Pie. Rest him against LHers (that he's going to do poorly against anyway)and put him in positions that he may well excel in . . . Yea I meant RHers. Thanks for the clarification. A platoon is not a good idea for the development of young player aside from it being a terrible waste of assets. How is Pie going to get better if he never (or rarely) faces LH pitching? They might as well trade him while his value is high b/c once he get the "platoon" label he will fetch pennies on the dollar. There are several LH hitters who continually are in platoons. Curtis Granderson got sat down by Detroit against about half the left-handers they faced last year. Brad Hawpe was benched against over half of the left-handers Colorado faced. There are many, many more with significant splits...productive players who get platooned. Pie isn't likely to become a decent option against left-handed pitching. It's certainly possible, but he's very likely to become the latest left-hander in the major leagues who has a huge split difference. Give him half the bats against left-handers. If he suddenly becomes much better, give him more. He has a much better chance of succeeding in this league if he doesn't play against most of the left-handers, and he can still be a very productive player starting 135 games as Granderson and Hawpe do. And that's a bunch of bs. It's a sample size issue that old-timey baseball minds can't get there brain around. Huh? What's the sample size issue? I made a lot of statements in there. Which one was based on a bad sample size?

No, that's not the only thing that let it not go on for long. They didn't like doing it. Agreed, they certainly didn't like it. But they didn't complain everyday about it like they did with the 11 pitcher thing. The Cubs did it from the 5th of May until the 15th of May. On the 15th, they brought up an IF and sent down the 12th pitcher. 3 days later, they were already ready to bring the 12th pitcher back up, and they sent down the 2nd IF. On June 3rd, they DL'd Ward and brought up Pie. So at that point they only had 1 backup for any of the 4 IF positions, and they had 3 backup OF's. Floyd went on the bereavement list on the 8th, and they weren't going to replace him until Aramis got hurt on the 10th. That moved DeRosa to 3rd and Fontenot came up to play 2nd. So there was still only 1 backup IF. When Ramirez came back on June 22nd, they had 2 backup IF's again and only 11 pitchers. Lou complained about it every single day until the All-Star Break and promised they would rectify it soon. One main reason that they kept the 2nd IF at this time was because Aramis was getting regular rest and was never sure to play the next day. By July 20th, they had gone back to 1 IF again. They traded Izturis and Jake Fox was selected to replace him. So now they're down to 1 middle IF again. The only reason this didn't last long? Ward gets hurt later that day and goes on the D.L. By the time Ward comes back, Pagan is on the D.L. Even with that, Cedeno only remained on the roster until Monroe is acquired, and then the Cubs went down to 1 backup IF again until rosters expanded. The Cubs may not have liked it, but they were certainly willing to do it. They did it in May and June. When Ramirez was gimpy, they brought up the 2nd IF as insurance. When he was a little less gimpy in July, they traded Izturis and went back down to 1 where they likely would have stayed at a while if Ward doesn't immediately get hurt. By the time Ward comes back and makes the bench situation complicated again, Pagan is gone and allows the 2nd IF to stay, and even then they decided they'd have yet another platoon OF rather than the 2nd IF when they traded for Monroe. Whenever push comes to shove, the Cubs have shown that they are willing to get rid of their 2nd IF before they're willing to give up any of their other parts. The biggest indication of that came on July 20th. They trade Izturis, and they had plenty of room to put another infielder on the roster. Instead, they put Jake Fox on the roster, which made their bench Ward/Fox/Pagan/Fontenot/Blanco. If the Cubs valued a limited player like Jake Fox's addition over a 2nd IF, how can it be said they were desperate to add one?

I disagree completely. Johnson's production against left-handers is much better than Pie's, which addresses a struggle the Cubs have had for years. Pie's overall numbers also look better if it's not being brought way down by all those left-handers, which makes the Cubs less likely to replace him and gives him a better chance to get a fair shot. I don't like the idea of a platoon partner for Pie. Letting him play only against LHers is not giving him a fair shot. The Cubs have to let him play. This is the same tired old story year after god forsaken year with the Cubs. Wait . . . you mean RHers, right?? And since that's the majority of pitchers, I'd say that IS a fair shot for Pie. Rest him against LHers (that he's going to do poorly against anyway)and put him in positions that he may well excel in . . . Yea I meant RHers. Thanks for the clarification. A platoon is not a good idea for the development of young player aside from it being a terrible waste of assets. How is Pie going to get better if he never (or rarely) faces LH pitching? They might as well trade him while his value is high b/c once he get the "platoon" label he will fetch pennies on the dollar. There are several LH hitters who continually are in platoons. Curtis Granderson got sat down by Detroit against about half the left-handers they faced last year. Brad Hawpe was benched against over half of the left-handers Colorado faced. There are many, many more with significant splits...productive players who get platooned. Pie isn't likely to become a decent option against left-handed pitching. It's certainly possible, but he's very likely to become the latest left-hander in the major leagues who has a huge split difference. Give him half the bats against left-handers. If he suddenly becomes much better, give him more. He has a much better chance of succeeding in this league if he doesn't play against most of the left-handers, and he can still be a very productive player starting 135 games as Granderson and Hawpe do.

I don't see how that is possible. The only way that happens is if they go with 1 backup middle infielder, and I don't see anyway they pull that off. .... With the normal 5-man bench, if one is a catcher and you burn one on a 1B-man (Ward), that leaves you 3 guys to cover infield and outfield. Either it's one outfielder (Johnson covering all three spots, supplemented by Ward or Cedeno), and two infielders (Cedeno and Cintron). Or it's one infielder (Cedeno) and two outfielders (Murton and Johnson). Personally I don't see why going with Cedeno only wouldn't be just fine. When's the last time a team went into a season with 1 backup infielder? When's the last time the Cubs even considered it? It's not going to happen. Cedeno only is impossible because of the "what happens if 2 go down in the same game" question. You can always throw Ward into the OF if need be, or DeRosa, but there's nobody on that roster that can step in at 3rd, SS or 2B if needed. The smart thing to do is not waste a roster spot on a 7th reliever. The Cubs didn't start the season last year with only 1 backup infielder, but they did go with only 1 backup for over a month in May/early June last year, and then again in July for a few days, and then again in August for 10 days. Lou doesn't like it that much, but he's shown that he's willing to do it for quite a while. And it was really for the same situation last year. The Cubs wanted a platoon OF (Pagan) a 4th OF (Murton), Ward, and a backup catcher (Blanco/Hill) on the same roster. That only left 1 IF on the squad. Only injuries to Ward and Pagan made that not go on much longer than it did.

I disagree completely. Johnson's production against left-handers is much better than Pie's, which addresses a struggle the Cubs have had for years. Pie's overall numbers also look better if it's not being brought way down by all those left-handers, which makes the Cubs less likely to replace him and gives him a better chance to get a fair shot.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but I am going to mention something along the lines of what is being discussed in this, and many threads......but here goes....why haven't the Cubs talked to the Dodgers about the right handed CF? I mean, the Dodgers have AJ/Pierre/Kemp/Either/Young/Repko in the OF, and I almost positive they wouldn't mind moving one of those OFer. I mean, AJ ain't going anywhere. They can't give Pierre away. They shouldn't trade Kemp, but I believe Either (I know he's a basically an older Felix Pie) could be had (and he would make Pie expandable), and would make landing a RH CF less of a priority. Repko and Young, are decent enough 4th/5th OFers that wouldn't threaten Pie's job, plus I doubt it cost the Cubs a farm to acquire any of the three. So again I am thinking out loud, how come the Cubs haven't had discussion with the Dodgers? How does Ethier help the Cubs situation? He's only a corner outfielder, and the Cubs already have one of those in Murton. Repko would be a better option, although he's basically a worse version of Jay Payton for what the Cubs need him for without the contract. Delwyn Young is a new OF who has never played CF that I can find. So I can see Repko as a cheap alternative, but he's really not ideal at all.

Hmm, well let's see. He would have made 11.3 million this year without this deal. Let's say 15 next year in arbitration. So that essentially makes this a 6 year extension worth 21.26 million per year. That sounds pretty fair. He's definitely a guy with concerns going forward, but he has tremendous production right now and is still young.

The Brewers are one of the best matchups for Dempster. He has significant splits with right and left-handers, and so the Brewers heavily right-handed based lineup gives him a better chance of success. Then again, Lieber is the same way :D.

Sounds good guys. Thanks for the help. I'll post my entire team just to clear up some of the questions you guys had (5x5 league with OBP instead of average) C: Geovany Soto 1B: Travis Hafner 2B: Brian Roberts SS: Jose Reyes 3B: Garrett Atkins OF: Vladimir Guerrero OF: Adam Dunn OF: Brad Hawpe Util: Carlos Pena Util: Jason Bay Bench: Nick Swisher, Orlando Cabrera, Orlando Hudson, Mike Napoli SP: Jake Peavy SP: Chris Young RP: Brandon Lyon RP: George Sherrill P: Rich Hill P: Pedro Martinez P: AJ Burnett Bench: Joe Blanton If you have any other comments that you want to add, I'd greatly appreciate it, about the closers or any other issues you see about my team. Now that I look at it, should I pick up both Wilsons and drop two people?

Are you in a different group than I am? Because I'm tied for dead last in the nsbb group with 19 out of 32. I have not picked 2 8/9 games right in 8 years. This year, I managed to miss all 4 of them. i'm in group # 20875 That's the same group. You're tied for 38th. I'm tied for 50th.

Other guys to keep an eye on are Troy Percival and Brian Wilson. Only thing with Wilson is the Giants won't win many games. I picked up Lyon (Percival and Accardo both got drafted). Is C.J. Wilson or Brian Wilson a better option? Should I pick up either? I've got Blanton as a 6th starting pitcher after Peavy, Young, Hill, Pedro, Burnett in a 1250 IP max league. If I want to pick up a 3rd closer, I'd either have to drop Blanton or my only backup at 2nd or C, Orlando Hudson or Mike Napoli.

this is a poor assessment. Why? Do you not agree that most people's expectations of Hill last year were extremely out of whack? He had a tremendous finish to the 2006 season and I think too many expected him to pick right up from that point. In April he was very good. In May-June he was average. In July-August he was slightly above average. In September he was slightly below average. In his defense it was his first year as a full time starter at the ML level, he should improve. I just believe that his ceiling is a solid #3 guy. He needs to develop another pitch to go along with his curveball. When he doesn't have his curveball he has nothing else to rely on. His fastball isn't strong enough to get by when he doesn't have his curveball. He was toying with a changeup last year, I hope that is something that has improved this year. A changeup can be tremendously effective even if it is just average. I haven't been on the Hill train either, but his ceiling is going to have a hard time being a solid #3 guy when he was a solid #2 last year.