davearm2

I think just like any of these monster contracts, the team hopes the player fulfills expectations for the first 4-6 years, and isn't a complete disaster the last 2-3 years, even knowing that by that point he'll be overpaid. Well the Cubs could be entering into that twilight phase with Soriano, where overpaid is a given.

The only positive I see to starting Barney is that he's a plus defender (from everything I've heard). At the same time, there is no plus part of DeWitt's game. He's better offensively overall than Barney, but isn't particularly good either. Thus, since you're going with a young guy anyway, the reasoning would be to go with the guy that already features a plus skill and hope the other side comes around enough. Barney, it sounds like, is Theriot with much better defense and a slightly worse bat. That said, I'd prefer to go with DeWitt. Both are young but DeWitt has shown more offensive potential. With Aramis, Starlin and Pena around the infield, we have good to very good defense at 3 of 4 positions and can afford to put up with poor 2B defense with the hopes that DeWitt's bat comes around. There are plenty of good reasons to prefer DeWitt to Barney, but the makeup of the rest of the infield defense isn't one of them. If over the course of a season Barney's superior defense turns X additional balls in play into outs, then the run-value of that improvement is whatever it is, regardless of what anyone else on the field is doing.

This is purely my (surely vague) recollection, but I don't remember Soriano being late on swings last year. In fact he seemed to hook screaming liners foul down the LF line pretty regularly. Now it could be that he's starting his swing earlier to compensate, and thus being making himself that much more susceptable to the dirtball sliders that he swung at too much already.

In that scenario Byrd starts and Soriano sits? Interesting. Defiinitely could happen, especially with Quade calling the shots.

It's not baseless, and I don't irrationally hate Soriano. I just don't think he's going to be very good this year, based on a number of factors. I readily admit I could be wrong. I really hope he does great though, even if it means I have to see him do that John Cena thing 40 times this year. Most of the suggested lineups I've seen have Soriano hitting 7th, so you're definitely not alone in being bearish on the guy. And if the Cubs had a good 2B, I bet you'd see some folks putting him 8th. He obviously wouldn't be that low if there was optimism that the .900ish OPS of '06-'08 was still reasonably plausible.

This Agreed. It's the worst thing ever. I think fans everywhere can agree with this. The fans that paid a premium for opening day tickets might not agree, when the game has to be rescheduled due to weather. That's the rationale for having that open date in the first place, so that they can just bring everyone back the next day if the weather doesn't cooperate.

Well the problem here is that you feel his ceiling is no higher than a fringe backup catcher. It's more like good backup/bad 2nd division starter. Think of a cross between Chris Snyder and John Buck. Ramirez tore the cover off the ball his entire minor league career until the last 10 games of 2008. Yeah, his offense has taken a step backwards the last couple years but that seems to happen with young catchers from time to time... they hit the upper level of the minors and turn their focus to improving their defense and gamecalling at the expense of their offense. Not exactly shocking for a guy who just transitioned to the position in 05 that he might not have everything figured out in 4 years. Why not see if we've got something with him? He can't be worse than Hill. He could certainly be better. The fact that the Cubs kept Hill and placed Ramirez at the same level as Castillo would seem to me to suggest that they don't like Ramirez' catching prospects all that much. Of course it could just simply be a numbers crunch, but they certainly don't seem to be too intent on promoting Ramirez' development behind the plate. Maybe he'll get a lot of action at Iowa and prove me wrong, but it doesn't appear things are going that direction.

This begs the question... does Olney get his intel from NSBB conventional wisdom or does NSBB get its conventional wisdom from Olney intel? They seem to be more or less in complete agreement.

IIRC opening day has been split up for awhile now. For a long time the first game was always in Cincinnati, then recently ESPN came along and made the first game a Sunday Nighter. What's great is that this year the Cubs don't have an off day after the opener. Win or lose, that day before game #2 was always a loooong one.

That's awesome to hear your insider take. I have to confess that when I heard this was happening, my first reaction was, "I guess we can close the book on Kyler Burke's career". It seems these transitions are rarely successful. I sure hope your brother turns out to be the exception to the rule. We'll be pulling for him (still).

I would be stunned if he was a Cub. We have 3 second baseman on the roster already, and all have more upside than whatever Castillo could give us offensively and defensively. The only reason he would become a Cub is if Jim Hendry's fetish for collecting broken down second basemen returned. We have three underwhelming young guys who don't offer anything we might be able to call consistent. Just knowing what you're gonna get is something Hendry seems to place a premium on. Hendry will send DeWitt down to AAA, platoon Castillo and Baker, and let Barney play backup MI. He'll then look to upgrade the position with an Aaron Hill or Kelly Johnson (maybe even a Jose Reyes) around the deadline if we're still in it. proclamation> I've never understood certain GM's fascination with getting plays because they know what they are going to get. If you know a player is probably going to give you an OPS of .620, but you aren't quite sure about another second baseman, isn't the smart choice to go with the unknown? I would think most AAA 2B can at least pull that number off, if not higher. But because you don't want to be surprised you will just go with the definite. Stupid decision making. You're being silly. No GM is thinking, "yeah give me the guaranteed .620 OPS." If they think they know what they're going to get, they obviously have their sights set higher than that.

It'll be interesting to see how they divvy up the AAA at-bats. My guess is that Ramirez will get quite a few at-bats at somewhere other than catcher and I'm not sure that he would necessarily be the first one called up if there was an injury. The Cubs took Ramirez off of the 40-man roster. So there's first the issue of opening a roster spot if/when he's called up. Second, if the Cubs were to call up Ramirez, then they'd have to pass him through waivers again if/when they wanted to return him to Iowa -- he can't just be moved up and down as easily as a guy that was optioned. Two more reasons why he might not be the first callup in the event of an injury. EDIT: somehow I missed that NCCubfan just said all of that :banghead:

It was refreshing to hear; I was thinking it was the most outspoken I've ever heard Hendry. However, you really have to wonder how big of a vagina Hendry actually was with Silva and letting him in on this info. I know the Cubs don't owe Silva anything other than his $$, but Hendry's comments really lead me to believe Silva had no chance from the start. Silva's an idiot and I'm happy, but I'd probably be a little pissed if I were him as well. I would be curious to know Hendry's true evaluation of Silva at the time of the trade. "What he's done for the last few years in his career, except for a two-month period, is way below major league standards" was pretty revealing. Sounds like Hendry expected Silva to suck right out of the gate, and may have been expecting to cut him loose before now.

It was refreshing to hear; I was thinking it was the most outspoken I've ever heard Hendry. However, you really have to wonder how big of a vagina Hendry actually was with Silva and letting him in on this info. I know the Cubs don't owe Silva anything other than his $$, but Hendry's comments really lead me to believe Silva had no chance from the start. Silva's an idiot and I'm happy, but I'd probably be a little pissed if I were him as well. To me, the only way Silva truly had a right to be pissed was if he had came out and pitched great this spring, Cashner didn't, and he STILL got passed over. Then, I could see him having a reason to be upset. But, he didn't.(thank the lord) It all goes back to when we traded a turd sandwich for a giant douche. Hopefully Hendry learned his lesson with that one. What lesson was that? I won't repeat BeertownCubbie, but Hendry did just fine in that situation, given the options he had.

It's funny you say that Rob. The sentence you're referring to from my post originally said something like "typical messageboard poster", but I changed it to "casual fan" to tone it down a notch. Regardless, it's semantics, and if there is any meaningful distinction, the point I'm making applies to both groups.

It sounds like you're ultimately spinning an anti-sabermetric approach in the context of this nigh-mythical group of "casual fans" who are even aware of the types of stats you're describing, much less who are "throwing them around." Where are you encountering these people? And why are you talking about them like they're somehow less informed or more mistaken or whatever than the vast, vast majority who don't even fully understand basic things like BA, RBI, OBP, SB/CS, pitching W/L or ERA? It would be a joyous miracle if there was a bunch of fans out there casually using things like WARP or VORP or UZR because it would likely mean they at least fully "got" the easy stuff. "Nigh-mythical group" huh? Well you're in it pal. From a recent discussion of the 100 best players in baseball: Fielder's a lot lower than I would have assumed. VORP is position-adjusted, so the number is relative to others at the position. So, a player that plays SS that had Fielder's stats would have a significantly higher VORP than Fielder does at 1B. So, whlie his numbers overall are pretty good in comparison to the rest of the league, he's just the 9th most effective 1B. OK, that makes more sense than what I was remembering VORP as. Thanks. You go ballistic on anyone that has anything bad to say about sabermetrics, and spout off with your smarter-than-thou smugness, but yet display a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the most basic and widely-used sabermetrics... not realizing VORP is position-adjusted. Priceless. And exactly what I'm talking about.

Sometimes the "anti Saber crowd" (which by the way is a complete mischaracterization) understands the advanced stats even better than most, and feel compelled to point out the limitations and shortcomings of said advanced stats when they see said advanced stats being either over-used or mis-used, with said limitations and shortcomings ignored. Now before I get mauled for posting that, I realize that the "true" sabermetricians don't do this. It's the more casual fans that throw around WARPs and VORPs and UZRs left and right with only a limited understanding of how those numbers are computed that are guilty of this. It's a mischaracterization only because you're confusing the "responsible use of stats" crowd with the anti-saber crowd who think the game was best understood by their high school coaches who taught them decades ago. All I know is that I get lumped in the latter group all the time, so the confusion you mention is certainly not only mine.

Sometimes the "anti Saber crowd" (which by the way is a complete mischaracterization) understands the advanced stats even better than most, and feel compelled to point out the limitations and shortcomings of said advanced stats when they see said advanced stats being either over-used or mis-used, with said limitations and shortcomings ignored. Now before I get mauled for posting that, I realize that the "true" sabermetricians don't do this. It's the more casual fans that throw around WARPs and VORPs and UZRs left and right with only a limited understanding of how those numbers are computed that are guilty of this.

It's not all that inconceivable that a non-contender would use him as a 5th outfielder so they'd have the rights to keep him, especially if he has a good 2011. That seems to happen a lot more with pitchers than hitters though, right? Andy Sisco for example. My sense is that con-contender teams might burn a bullpen slot, and use the guy to mop up, but burning a bench slot is a tougher pill to swallow.

It seems to me that Szczur would have to have an awfully good year, and climb a few levels quickly, before we'd even have to worry about him being lost in the Rule 5 draft. Nobody really thinks this a guy that might be ready to be in the bigleagues all year in 2012, right?

I dunno if a guy that has a ton of trouble finding the strikezone is the guy you want out there in a high-leverage one-out situation. He's walked 1 in 10 lefties in his career. He has walked 1 in 7 righties. If that's the yardstick then just imagine what an awesome LOOGY Silva would be.

I dunno if a guy that has a ton of trouble finding the strikezone is the guy you want out there in a high-leverage one-out situation.

Although I'm interested, I'm not sure the situation is all that much better here: Aramis Ramirez and Pena entrenched (albeit for just a year), Max Ramirez and Baker available, and no DH in play.

There really is no reason to attack someone personally because you don't like their opinion. Way back when I first joined at NSBB, the #1 rule was "attack the argument, not the poster" but somewhere along the way that fell by the wayside. You know, the same could be said for someone who engages in personal attacks--- if you really feel that negatively about what is said, either put the poster on ignore or find someplace else to post. That works both ways. From my vantage point, it seems that more often that not, when someone like Mojo cuts down a foolish post, he does it scathingly but without a personal attack. But the original posted gets all vulnerable and defensive, and THEY tend to be the ones who make it personal. Case in point - one poster offered an opinion that the majority disagreed with, and the most vocal of them hurt his feelings (without getting personal). This person lashed out and started calling people jerks and elitists and sheep and now the thread has gone to hell. While I don't disagree that things like what you've stated do happen, you can't deny that a lot of times an unpopular opinion is met with either a personal attack or some sort of snide comment aimed at someone (but does not name anyone in particular) that's sort of an "under the radar" personal attack. Nope, I can't deny that. But I do believe that my scenario above happens more often than not. I wouldn't guess about the more often than not part, but the defensive, reactionary attack (counterattack?) is surely a real phenomenon.

Are we even talking about the same messageboard? All of the above allegedly "faulty assumptions" happen with regularity here.