jersey cubs fan

Murton needs to play regularly to get comfortable, rather than being jerked around with pinch hits and spot starts. and how long do you put a guy in and watch him flail away? You're not serious are you? yeah, I am. Murton wasn't great last year and he's been bad this year. My bigger problem with him is not that he's hitting poorly, but that his approach sucks. I don't care that he's not hitting great, but he's just going up and hacking at everything. The problem is that Pie and Floyd are doing the same crap. I'd be playing Murton regularly, but I'd tell everybody that if they don't start seeing more pitches and getting on base more, then I'll find somebody else who will. Murton can be a nice player, but he's not talented enough to hack away at everything and still be productive. That's fine and all, but it's hard to draw conclusions about the approach of a guy who had a nice approach last year when playing very often, who is now a 5th outfielder that rarely plays. He's got the 10th most at bats on the team, and will be passed soon by Pie, who is playing far more frequently. I'd have to throw him out there for a month before I decided his approach was unacceptable.

This is ridiculous, although par for the course. Just like Cubs not taking walks and losing games.

How do you figure they should be top 6? 10th in OBP outweighs the 6th SLG and 6th OPS. At best, such a stat line should give you something like the 7th or 8th best teams. But this early in the season, it's hard to correlate what those stats say should be their record, and their record. One 12-run game throws everything off. The Cubs might be 6th in runs, but I know at one point they were 4th. The Cubs are 9th in runs scored right now, but one game could vault them to 6th or drop them to 12th. It's just not useful right now. The Cubs are 13th in walks taken this year, a trend that has gone on for far too long, and is likely to continue. And they have just 3 guys who aren't hitting poorly. Three guys, Lee, Ramirez and DeRosa, are propping up this lineup. It's not hard to understand why they fail so often "when it matters" because more often than not, the hitter at the plate "when it matters" isn't any good. One guy is getting on base frequently (Lee), one guy is getting on at a good pace (Ramirez). DeRosa and Theroit have gotten on at an okay rate, but for Theriot at least, that was all yesterday's doing. Everybody else has a terrible OBP. If you are counting on 2 guys to carry your team, then it's not hard for teams to avoid losing the game to them. THE CUBS ARE MAKING OUTS FAR TOO FREQUENTLY. That shouldn't surprise anybody, since that is the single category that has consistently dogged this team for years.

Probably the same reason they haven't hit well in any situation for years. They are dumb. They have a dumb approach to hitting, and keep finding more guys with dumb approaches. They are a swing first and ask questions later organization. Occasionally they jump all over a starting pitcher with that approach, but if a guy is good enough to make it through one, he can usually get through them all. Alsonso Soriano is the epitome of the stupid but talented hitter. He gets himself out all the time because he swings at everything. That's the type of guy Hendry holds on a pedestal. They've got Lee with a good approach and Ramirez whose production masks a mediocre approach, but just about everybody else that plays frequently has a terrible approach. Theriot was a little different, but he just doesn't have enough talent to be all that productive.

Legislating morality and policing personal lives is firing you for going to a strip club or being gay. A highly public entertainment company that relies heavily on public good will has the right to punish their extremely high paid employees for conduct that reflects poorly on the organization. Not all jobs are the same, and not all employee/employer relationships are equal.

I can't stand this, "if you guys knew how good we had it, you'd stop all the bellyaching and learn to be accepting of whatever the Cubs do" concept. You're getting on people for complaining about the OF problems because they aren't the same OF problems they used to have? We're supposed to satisfied with the fact that the Cubs are still under .500 during Hendry's regime and he's seriously put the future in jeopardy with his freewheeling spending spree on what everybody is hoping will be an above average team? Frankly I don't see how any Cubs fan could be happy with anything less than a team that looks like it's pretty much a lock for 95 wins and a deep playoff run. I didn't get the giddiness over back to back .500 seasons and I don't get the satisfaction with the OF depth problem being "solved".

I'm not upset about it. I just wanted clarification. IMHO if we could have traded Jacque before the draft maybe things would have been different and Hamilton would be wearing Cubbie Blue. Having a talented player with drug issues finally turn things around is in no way comparable to the lottery.

I think this is complete BS nonsense. The Cubs didn't lose because of a lack of depth. They lost because the team sucked, and the team sucked because the GM sucks. Hendry didn't rectify problems, he put together a patch work desperation plan hoping to get lucky and catch a down division. The Cubs sucked because their outfield couldn't produce, there were black holes in the lineup, and the pitching was shaky. Depth was not the problem. Not enough front line production, has been, and still is, the single greatest problem out there. You don't lose because of 4th outfielders and 5th starters. You lose because your best players just aren't good enough and your worst players are just too freaking terrible. You don't lose 90 games because of depth issues. You don't go 4 years with a top payroll for your league without ever winning 90 games because of depth issues. A GM doesn't have a sub .500 record because of depth issues. This isn't about having enough backup outfielders. It's about a clueless GM who can't realize he's making the same mistakes over and over and over again.

The NFL's stand on DUI's isn't really all that harsh, compared to their stance against other behavior. I think there should be an automatic suspension for DUIs, although the union would fight that. The problem is far too many people view DUIs as a victimless crime akin to speeding or parking tickets, only with harsher penalties. Teams need to step up and better police their guys after hours. Stress the importance of taking cabs after drinking. What they can't do is just brush aside DUIs like some sort of groin pull, an unfortunate, but inevitable nuisance that can't be avoided.

Then what was with all the "Soriano will play one position all year" talk? I think the plan, once they moved him to CF, was to keep him in CF. They blamed his slow start on the move and used the injury as an excuse to bail on that plan. But I don't think they ever planned on playing Soriano in CF until Pie was ready. You don't give a franchise caliber contract to a guy who you expect to keep a spot warm for a rookie.

No, they aren't. But you implied that he was both good and starting caliber. He is not. Soriano is an everyday type of LF, but he's not elite. Pie is an everyday CF, if both your corner OF spots are highly productive, the Cubs' are not. Jones is a decent platoon option, if the rest of your OF is settled. Murton is a nice cheap corner OF with decent production, if the rest of your OF is settled. Floyd is a good role player who can help out in LF if CF and RF are settled. Most really good offenses have at least one everyday natural OF who routinely puts up 900+ OPS numbers, and at least one guy who, if he isn't great in the OPS department, does have really good OBP. The Cubs have nobody that fits either bill, and the closest they do have is currently the 5th OF (Murton with the OBP). They could easily go through 2007 without a single OF putting up an OPS+ in excess of 105-110 (above average).

It's not really opposite though. It's similar, in that it's an unsettled OF situation, with guys playing roles they shouldn't have. Matt Murton was their best OF last year. I like Murton, but that's not good. They've gone from Pierre to Pie, and I'm not sure we'll see any more production. The opposite of last year's OF would be an established highly productive LF, and RF who does not need to be platooned against LHP, and a CF that at least gets on base a lot. The only way it's opposite is CF defense. Otherwise, it remains highly flawed, with no ideal OFers.

Reid, Gilmore, Clark and another guy named Angulo are on the roster.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the Bears had 3 all last year. I could see a lot of 3rd down situations where they have Clark and Olsen, Muhammed and Berrian, and Wolfe in the backfield providing a solid mix of deep, intermediate and short passing options while keeping the option of having one TE stay in to block. This already was going to be make or break time for Rex, and I think they've done a pretty good job of giving him solid tools to make the most of his skills.

Anytime you give franchise superstar money to a guy without knowing what position he'll play, and without any reasonable assurance that he'll produce at an elite level regardless of position, you're doing it wrong.

http://www.northsidebaseball.com/PremiumForum/viewtopic.php?t=40370 We see this thread come up a couple times a month during the season. It could be helpful to include a wrigley faq sticky atop baseball discussions, to direct people toward.

Imply what you want, but I don't think any of them are complaining about too many good players. The problem is too many flawed players.

I think some people involved with the team have also contributed to the negative press around Prior. The tough guys who don't believe abusing a pitcher is a real concept don't think for a second they did anything wrong, and believe Prior is a wuss. Some writers are feeding on that.

Well, they are on pace for about 104 wins, so I'd bet a lot of money they'll come back towards .500. Although they probably won't come back to .500. The Brewers definitely have a chance to put a crimp in any plan to win the division with 85 wins. They only have to win 54% of their remaining games to win 90. If they play 1-game over .500 the rest of the way they will end up with 85 wins.

I don't hear that. The problem is they don't have enough quality starting position players, so they have to mix and match with a bunch of less than ideal parts. What I'm hearing is that Floyd was a bad signing, given the rest of the roster. The implication is that the Cubs would be better off without him. Ergo, the problem with Floyd is that he gives the Cubs have too many quality, starting-caliber players. No, he gives the Cubs another not quite starting caliber, but decent if he platoons player, but with no platoon partner. The problem with Jones is he should only face righties. The problem with Floyd is he shouldn't play much. The problem with Murton is that while he's a nice OF at a cheap price, you should really have some serious quality in the other spots. They don't have a real CF on the roster without Pie, so they almost feel forced to put him out there, despite being a potential black hole bat. Soriano in left is the only guy you should feel comfortable starting no matter who else is starting in the other 2 spots.

One of the more egregious examples of Hendry just throwing money away. Blanco puts up an OPS+ of 80 and people think of it as a pretty big surprise on the upside. He's just brutally awful, and Hendry has now given him 2, 2-year contracts. Completely unnecessary nonsense.

Heaven knows we could use a few more right fielders. Or one real one.

don't bother. I think the Cubs win like 10-2, then lose by a run on Wednesday. That's not even a bet worth taking, since I'm pretty sure you have to bet $100 to win $1 if that sequence happens.

I don't hear that. The problem is they don't have enough quality starting position players, so they have to mix and match with a bunch of less than ideal parts.

What was wrong with his 2006? Kinda what I was thinking...he saved 30 games for a team that won only 70....he's no savior...but he'd be ok in the pen and just as importantly we'd clear up some of the outfield trainwreck. Alfonseca saved 45 for a team that won 79 in 2000. That's the kind of thinking that caused Hendry to foolishly go after him. I'm not saying Cordero is just like Alfonseca, just noting that saves is a pretty worthless way to judge a reliever. Generally speaking though, I'm not all that interested in giving up much talent for any reliever, let alone a soon-to-be free agent who Hendry is bound to overpay longterm. They'd be better off acquiring somebody whose value is not overinflated by a number of saves. But they'd be much better off concentrating on starting position players to help this team.