CubColtPacer

Pedro-when you look at the past results of the two players, how can you believe that Cedeno will have a better year? Really-Cedeno would have to improve 59 points in OPS just to make it up to Izturis's year so far this year. If you take out the 3 months that Izturis played with the injury last year, he has improved every single year of his career-every single year until this year in which he is coming back from the injury. I am not basing it off of grit or hustle or anything else, but simply the stats-which show that Izturis has gotten better every year he's been healthy. If you think the reason is that he is not going to be healthy next year, then say so. Otherwise, I don't know how a detailed look at the stats doesn't reveal that he will probably continue to improve (although at a slower rate-it's much easier to progress at a fast rate when you're going from terrible to bad). So why do people think he is suddenly going to start to regress again? So I portrayed him as something as he is not by saying that he has gotten better every healthy year? That is easily proven when looking at his stats.

Pedro-when you look at the past results of the two players, how can you believe that Cedeno will have a better year? Really-Cedeno would have to improve 59 points in OPS just to make it up to Izturis's year so far this year. If you take out the 3 months that Izturis played with the injury last year, he has improved every single year of his career-every single year until this year in which he is coming back from the injury. I am not basing it off of grit or hustle or anything else, but simply the stats-which show that Izturis has gotten better every year he's been healthy. If you think the reason is that he is not going to be healthy next year, then say so. Otherwise, I don't know how a detailed look at the stats doesn't reveal that he will probably continue to improve (although at a slower rate-it's much easier to progress at a fast rate when you're going from terrible to bad). So why do people think he is suddenly going to start to regress again?

They did say they were planning to air both games before they left for the evening..I'm in the same boat, so I'm very happy to see both games.

Two things: one, Izturis hasn't played any SS this year-so the numbers don't matter very much. Second-is there even a possibility that FRAA could be off? Sure, they might give gold gloves to people sometimes when there are other people who deserve it more. Do you truly think people are dumb enough though to give a gold glove to a person who is below average at his position? This can be backed up by looking at other players. Ichiro in 2004 only recieved a 1-so does that mean he was only a slightly above average defensive player in 2004? In fact, Barry Bonds had a 0 that year-so Ichiro and Barry were approximately equal defensively that year? Also, Sammy got a 7 in 2004. So, in 2004-Sammy Sosa was significantly better than most of the right fielders in defense-do you really want to claim that? I think these numbers can be taken roughly, but with a serious grain of salt when numbers like this pop up.

That's weird, since he said essentially the exact opposite on here the other day. No-on page 3 of the Bruces latest article thread from the other day, somebody asked him if prospects were truly available, and he said: "Couple things from above as I roast at the ballpark: Yes, Tim Wilken did have signficant input. Hendry mentioned that yesterday. It was Hendry, not the Dodgers, who initiated the prospect route. The Dodgers wanted none of it." I'm sorry I'm not sure how to link the thread, but if you go to that thread: Bruce's Latest Article 8/1: it's there

By the way, Bruce did say that Hendry could not get prospects from the Dodgers the day after Hendry's interview-so if you believe Bruce, no prospects were ever available.

They are two veterans anyway..don't you want to play the hot hand? July Nevin (45 ABs): .244/.327/.489 Mabry (29 ABs): .280/.440/.560 Now-I realize that's limited at-bats, but many of those for Mabry were I think at the end of the month. We might as well play Mabry a little longer until he cools down.

That's what I'm thinking-the quote doesn't necessarily mean that Izturis will be in the 2 spot next season any more tham it is assured that Cedeno will be at second next season or that all the young pitchers will be in the rotation. I like Izturis in the 2 spot for this season-the more at-bats we give him in the next 2 months, the more of an idea of how healthy he is and what he will do when healthy-we can probably almost triple his number of at-bats for the season. Can you please explain this? How can the #2 spot in the lineup hit three times as often as the #8 spot? Sure. I meant that he will get more at-bats in the 2 spot than in the 8th spot. The reference to tripling his at-bats was that he only has had 123 AB's after his injury this season-we should be able to almost triple that number of at bats if we start him the rest of the season, and especially if we get the few extra plate appearances that the top of the order gets. 350 at bats gives us a lot clearer picture of what he can do when healthy in 2007 than 123 does. Gotcha. I read that as we'd get him 3 times the number of at bats from here out in the #2 slot compared to #8. Which is obviously impossible. I'd also like to get a large number of AB's to Ronnie from here on out to see what we've got in him and if he can adjust to what the league is doing to him. His avg and obp have gone down each and every month of the season. I would like to see him out there each and every single day, get him the reps and see if he can turn it around by the end of the year. If not, then we know we need a new 2B for next year. I think we can be pretty certain that Jim's going to stick with Izzy, given his excitement about getting him in the first place. I would definitely agree with that-we need to know what we have in Cedeno, and we have to play him everyday to figure that out-so if he's not what we're looking for we don't spend 2007 figuring that out. For the rest of this season, I hope that we see Izturis and Cedeno at shortstop and second.

Point by point, bolded: -If you're basing your desire to have Izturis on the fact that you need a good glove at SS, why trade for Tejada? He wouldn't play 3B for Anaheim in a pennant race. He's not going to move to 2B for Cesar Izturis in Chicago. If Izturis moves to 2B, what does his glove at SS matter? -Cedeno will sometimes not make the routine play based on what? -The third bolded bit makes you sound like Joe Morgan. He's not fast, but you think he's a good baserunner? Based on what? -Knowing when to run is waaaaay low on the list of qualities you want in a ballplayer. -Again, why trade the cheap guy who would be willing to move to 2B (which you've already implied is the easier defensive position) in favor of the expensive guy who doesn't really hit better than the cheap guy, and only has an advantage as long as he plays SS, which, in your Tejada scenario, he wouldn't? If the Cubs wanted to trade for Tejada, the only scenario where aquiring Izturis makes sense is if the Cubs flip Izturis to Baltimore and move Cedeno to 2B. I can't see us having enough to land Tejada in any case, and I don't know why Baltimore would want Izturis. Keeping Izturing AND dealing for Tejada makes little sense financially and defensively. Cedeno has not made the routine play some times. I watch the Cubs believe it or not. I seen him boot, miss play, miss judge, a flyball, and a groundball, that is routine for the majority of ss in the league. Baserunner is very important. Take it look at Alou, and Jones. Getting doubled off on a flyball to the outfield when standing on second is unexceptable. You can blame coaching, but really its the player who has been taught since day one, to freeze on a line drive or a flyball since. Tejeda is the guy I want to play SS. Im willing to move Izturis to 2b in favor of Tejeda. In my opinion Iztruis is more valuable than Cedeno is. Iztuirs wont throw the ball in the dugout, when time wasnt called. You could blame youth on that, but really that is unexceptable. Cedeno has shown no signs of being a patient hitter. He wont be a big power guy either. If Izturis can return to his 04, and first half of 05 form, then im taking Ituris over Cedeno anyday. When has Izturis been patient or a power hitter? If my aunt had testicles, she would be my uncle. The first half of 2004 and 2005 he was an average shortstop for XBH. .381 slugging for a SS is about the median of shortsops, and he had a .425 slugging in the first two months of 05, and that would have been between 8th-15th every year for shortstop slugging. Also, his patience in 2004 was about average for a SS, and his patience through the first two months of 05 was very similar to 04. So, he may never have been the best at either of those two areas-but he was average for a shortstop in those two areas-which at least right now, Cedeno is not close to that.

Izturis wasn't an all-star in 2004-he was in 2005.

Uhh.... given the current roster, Murton makes a much better option for the 2-hole. I don't see that changing next year -- Murton will still be a better choice than Neifi or Izturis in 2007 too. Murton dosent hit enough to stay in the lineup everyday. He is more of a 4th outfielder on the Cubs. Quality of hitters on the Cubs active roster: 1) Ramirez 2) Barrett (I could buy him at #1, but I believe ARam is a better hitter overall) -- gap -- 3) Murton 4) Jones -- gap -- everyone else. The interesting thing is that Pierre and Murton's numbers are getting closer and closer. They might actually be very similar by the end of the year-not sure about and predictive value that might have, just an observation.

That's what I'm thinking-the quote doesn't necessarily mean that Izturis will be in the 2 spot next season any more tham it is assured that Cedeno will be at second next season or that all the young pitchers will be in the rotation. I like Izturis in the 2 spot for this season-the more at-bats we give him in the next 2 months, the more of an idea of how healthy he is and what he will do when healthy-we can probably almost triple his number of at-bats for the season. Can you please explain this? How can the #2 spot in the lineup hit three times as often as the #8 spot? Sure. I meant that he will get more at-bats in the 2 spot than in the 8th spot. The reference to tripling his at-bats was that he only has had 123 AB's after his injury this season-we should be able to almost triple that number of at bats if we start him the rest of the season, and especially if we get the few extra plate appearances that the top of the order gets. 350 at bats gives us a lot clearer picture of what he can do when healthy in 2007 than 123 does.

That's what I'm thinking-the quote doesn't necessarily mean that Izturis will be in the 2 spot next season any more tham it is assured that Cedeno will be at second next season or that all the young pitchers will be in the rotation. I like Izturis in the 2 spot for this season-the more at-bats we give him in the next 2 months, the more of an idea of how healthy he is and what he will do when healthy-we can probably almost triple his number of at-bats for the season.

It's no doubt Boston needs a catcher on the news that Tek has a torn meniscus in his knee and will need surgery. That's usually a 6 week limitation to starting physical activity. Blanco is a nice idea given need for a good signal caller and defender. ? I heard it was just a cartilage tear. About the same thing..the meniscus is made up of cartilage.

How many teams have the worst-hitting middle infield in baseball? Once again, we don't have the worst hitting middle infield in baseball-at least not this year. Check out the A's-Ellis and Crosby are worse. And again, those 2 guys make about as much as one of Perez or Izturis. That matters. Yes it does-and so if the people said we have the worst value hitting middle infield, then that would be correct. We don't have the worst hitting middle infield though. Here are the numbers: Crosby: .229/.297/.339 Ellis: .219/.289/.320 Cubs: Izturis: .260/.308/.366 Cedeno: .254/.279/.338 Ellis and Cedeno are pretty close-that's pretty much a wash, and Izturis is better than Crosby in every category.

How many teams have the worst-hitting middle infield in baseball? Once again, we don't have the worst hitting middle infield in baseball-at least not this year. Check out the A's-Ellis and Crosby are worse.

Five year PECOTA projections from BP: Year AVG OBP SLG VORP WARP 2006 .262 .305 .337 5.2 3.3 2007 .265 .308 .245 6.3 3.3 2008 .260 .309 .335 4.5 2.8 2009 .265 .312 .341 6.1 2.9 2010 .257 .304 .334 2.5 2.0 Doesn't look good. How would he get these numbers? That .245 slugging for example-the lowest slugging he has ever had in his career was .303-and that was when he was 22 and breaking into the league. Somebody brought up the point of why people would think he would improve-the simple answer is that he has improved every year in his career until he got hurt. His OBP went from .253 to .282 to .330 in 3 years, and was at .387 the next year-and then he played hurt, and it dropped down to the .302 number. We can't be sure about this years numbers yet-he hasn't had enough at-bats. For example, his OBP jumped 6 points tonight-and if he goes 0 for 4 tomorrow, it could go down those 6 points just as fast. So now that he's coming back healthy from the surgery, we simply expect him to keep improving like he did every year right up to the injury. Is it a sure thing that he will do that? Of course not-but it is perfectly reasonable that a man who improved every single year from 22 years old till 25 will continue to improve now that he is healthy again.

And just as I post that, the strikeout. Way to get out of it.

That's just what I was thinking-it really hurt his confidence last time out when he couldn't put Rolen away in the 2nd when he got him down and then eventually walked him.

Did they say that he had changed his stance, or does he just look different when he bats? They said he changed the angle of his head.

Perhaps Cedeno is still working on his switch to 2nd base? Taking grounders or what ever. I'm trying here guys... Pretty inexcusable. That's easily the worst offensive middle IF in baseball. Except the A's middle infield of Ellis and Crosby has been worse than Izturis and Cedeno, which means we're not the worst middle infield even for these two months. Except that it's Izturis and Perez I was talking about. OK, well Perez's OPS is 3 points higher than Cedeno's this year, so it's still better than the A's.

Perhaps Cedeno is still working on his switch to 2nd base? Taking grounders or what ever. I'm trying here guys... Pretty inexcusable. That's easily the worst offensive middle IF in baseball. Except the A's middle infield of Ellis and Crosby has been worse than Izturis and Cedeno, which means we're not the worst middle infield even for these two months.

Well, if we're judging defense by purely subjective measures, wouldn't you agree that it would be difficult to judge it's effect? I could say that the Cubs have the best defense in MLB. How would you refute that? By saying "Nuh uh?" We need to focus on concrete known issues like our lack of OBP and SLG. Izturis doesn't provide any of these things. That's why it's a bad trade. So basically you just said if you can't measure it, it's not worth anything? Are you being deliberately obtuse? It's not up to me to prove that defense has no impact, it's up to you to prove that it does. Other than making up some stuff about Izturis saving 40 runs a year, you haven't proven much. If I have to prove to you that it matters, then obviously it doesn't to you-which makes my statement correct that you said we shouldn't focus on it because it cannot be measured by objective means. If you feel we shouldn't focus on it, then you must not have much of a value on it, because if it truly was important to you we'd still need to try to measure it in order to win.

Well, if we're judging defense by purely subjective measures, wouldn't you agree that it would be difficult to judge it's effect? I could say that the Cubs have the best defense in MLB. How would you refute that? By saying "Nuh uh?" We need to focus on concrete known issues like our lack of OBP and SLG. Izturis doesn't provide any of these things. That's why it's a bad trade. So basically you just said if you can't measure it, it's not worth anything? Try reading the post again. That's not at all what he said. He said two things in the post. 1) Defense cannot be measured by objective means-therefore we shouldn't focus on it-and 2) If a player like Izturis does not have a benefit in concrete statistics, he shouldn't be playing-therefore the reason he called it a bad trade. If both of these are true, these concrete issues are the only thing that matters, and things like defense that cannot be measured well should not be focused on because it is not important.

Well, if we're judging defense by purely subjective measures, wouldn't you agree that it would be difficult to judge it's effect? I could say that the Cubs have the best defense in MLB. How would you refute that? By saying "Nuh uh?" We need to focus on concrete known issues like our lack of OBP and SLG. Izturis doesn't provide any of these things. That's why it's a bad trade. So basically you just said if you can't measure it, it's not worth anything?