Dr. Cub

Forgive me if this has been posted, I did not see it. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AllVeXfFiXwp_KhP5hq_PD0RvLYF?slug=ap-cardinalslawsuit&prov=ap&type=lgns Looks like a nasty situation.

I'm still having abit of trouble understanding this potential move. How does replacing Walker with Lugo IMPROVE this team? Now if Lugo replaced Cedeno at SS I can see how that helps the team, but Lugo for Walker seems a lateral move at best.

I'm not worried about Cedeno not having good OBP. He should have anywhere from .350 to .380 OBP. Murton can match or even surpass that, but his higher SLG% is better suited for driving in runs. I think if you're expecting an OBP in the range you mentioned; you're going to be disappointed at seasons end. That would pretty much make him one of the top 7-10 Shortstops in the game, wouldn't it? I thinks that's INCREDIBLY unrealistic, fwiw. Let's put it this way; there were 6 SS in all of the major leagues last year that sported a .350 OBP or better. Jeter was tops with a .389 OBP.

I'm not worried about Cedeno not having good OBP. He should have anywhere from .350 to .380 OBP. Murton can match or even surpass that, but his higher SLG% is better suited for driving in runs. I think if you're expecting an OBP in the range you mentioned; you're going to be disappointed at seasons end.

I haven't been exactly enamored with the moves Hendry has made, and they have left me scratching my head, but this would take the cake. If Hendry had knowledge that Giles "wouldn't" come to Chicago so didn't bother pursuing him, and yet pursues Soriano even after Soriano has said he's going back to the AL the first chance he can, Hendry is even more incompotent than I thought.

Those stats show that the Cubs haven't gotten any significant production production out of their recent shortstops, and shouldn't be used to backup any point about why Neifi isn't that bad. Here are more relevant statistics: Out of all NL shortstops who had 500 PAs last year, Neifi ranked 10th out of 11 in OBP Out of all NL shortstops who had 500 PAs last year, Neifi ranked 7th out of 11 in SLG. He is a poor hitter and we all know that. What people here hate isn't Neifi, it's that even with his pathetic offensive production Dusty still batted him at the top of the order, preventing Derrek Lee from turning his doubles and HRs into more runs. That being said, I like him on my team as a 25th guy. I hate him being used as an everyday player batting in front of Derrek. =D>

Now granted my copy is older and wearing out, but I can't seem to find Bill James name on the cover. Joe, is that you? Seriously though, I'd say very FEW people here HATE Neifi. What they cannot stand is the fact that DFB has used such a poor player in such a horrific fashion.

The big picture for me is Hendry hasn't built a great team yet, and he's been awful the past two offseasons. Unlike some fans, and apparantly the Cubs management, I'm not satisfied with mediocrity. It's hard to have a great team when you build the team around dominant pitching only to have your dominant pitchers not stay healthy. Not to mention when two of your middle of the order guys can't stay on the field consistently. If Wood, Prior, and Z each make 30 starts this year and we don't win 90 games then Hendry is to blame. But until we can keep our best players on the field I don't think Hendry is entirely at fault. well maybe if hendry relied a little bit more on building a team with a top 5 OBP, we wouldn't have to rely so much on pitching. I'll take dominant pitching over top 5 OBP always. Dominant pitching wins championships not top 5 OBP. The two of them together build crazy, beautiful dynasties.

The difference is the lack of walks, and therefore low OBP, and subsequently lower runs scored has been an ongoing problem that relates directly to a poor organizational strategy. The pitching decline was due largely to injury, and could be fixed with very little change. There's also several arms available from within the organization to help with that problem. There aren't many bats in the system that can help this team, and improved health won't do much either. The only reason pitching caused so much more grief last year was because people expected so much more out of that group, and just came to expect lackluster offense. The Cubs need to have both solid pitching and hitting. The pitching is right there and could be great with the current core, while the hitting is still a long way from being among the best in the NL, let alone all of baseball. It seems to me that the best way to improve the team is to improve the area of the team that his most consistently disappointing. I agree with you completely. That's also the reason I didn't mention anything in sulley's first post where he just said walks. It was his second post that he mentioned getting on base that was the issue. Either way in my opinion the pitching hurt us most last year, and yes it was due to injury, so little to no change is needed there. I also agree that improving our offense is the best place to improve the team overall. My last sentence was more a comment to let Sulley know I share in his frustration about the lack of plate discipline in this team, and how it's a disease organization wide.

Actually, this team lost primarily because it pitched poorly, but its deficiency in getting on base was a huge problem. you're partially right. although i believe that we pitched well enough to give the team a chance to win if we could have just gotten on base more often. Our starting pitchers ERA has gone from 3.69 (2003), to 3.72 (2004), to 4.19 (2005), and in that same period our OBP's were .323 (2003, .328 (2004), and .324 (2005). So our ability to get on base hasn't changed much, while our starting pitching was horrible last year. It just so happens that last year we failed to compete at all. Don't get me wrong, we're in agreement that the plate discipline of this team is atrocious. I just feel that our pitching is the issue which caused us so much grief last year. The fact that Cubs management cannot grasp the concept of OBP, and how it relates to runs, or how to wisely spend money is a whole different issue. No it's very relevant. If you are gonna argue that the team needs better pitching, you have to point out that they walked too many hitters. 5th in the majors is BAA, but walked the 7th most hitters. For a team that again led the planet in K's from their pitchers, walking hitters is just a bad idea. If guys can't make contact, don't help them out by walking them. I never argued for better pitching. I said that our pitching was what hurt us most last year. It was obviously due to injury. In addition I don't understand how what you said relates to my point. What is relevant? The issue of what hurt us most last year, and the issue of Cubs management failing to see how to improve this teams offense are completely seperate.

Actually, this team lost primarily because it pitched poorly, but its deficiency in getting on base was a huge problem. you're partially right. although i believe that we pitched well enough to give the team a chance to win if we could have just gotten on base more often. Our starting pitchers ERA has gone from 3.69 (2003), to 3.72 (2004), to 4.19 (2005), and in that same period our OBP's were .323 (2003, .328 (2004), and .324 (2005). So our ability to get on base hasn't changed much, while our starting pitching was horrible last year. It just so happens that last year we failed to compete at all. Don't get me wrong, we're in agreement that the plate discipline of this team is atrocious. I just feel that our pitching is the issue which caused us so much grief last year. The fact that Cubs management cannot grasp the concept of OBP, and how it relates to runs, or how to wisely spend money is a whole different issue.

This is where you'd need a follow-up. Okay, so he said you couldn't do more damage, but given the likelihood that Wood will not be ready for opening day, would you not have been better off having him get the surgery a month earlier and starting his rehab earlier? And even though the doctor said he wouldn't suffer anymore damager, wouldn't common sense tell you that a pitching injury could be made worse by pitching? And given your terrible track record of having pitchers stay healthy, and get back to healthy after injuries, don't you think that taking the cautious approach with this one, would have been the wise approach? [crickets chirping] [crickets chirping] [long pause] (Drew Rosenhaus appears from underneath the table) NEXT QUESTION!!

RF should be at minimum something like .290/.350/.500, and probably higher than that, given the weakness of the rest of the positions. Jacque Jones sucks. He's been bad for quite some time. He could significantly outperform expectations and still hurt this team by underperforming compared to what a RF and middle of the order guy should be doing. It was a bad signing by Hendry, especially the 3 year part. Jones would have to outperform his career averages by a wide margin every year of his deal for me to say Hendry was right. The Cubs were desperate for a bit bat and they settled on mediocrity, once again. You do realize not a single NL RF with over 400 PA's hit that minimum mark you set, right? Two guys (Giles & Jenkins) hit over .290, five had an OBP over .350, and one guy (Jenkins) had a SLG over .500. While I agree with you wholeheartedly on Jones (he does suck, and will likely continue sucking) the numbers you set as a minimum for RF are a bit lofty. I know you qualified it with the fact that the other positions are weak, but you stated that it should be even higher because of that. I just don't think those numbers are realistic. In essence you are saying our starting RF should have to produce at a level above all other RF's, as a minimum. Edit: If you lower it to 200 PA's, you add 1 guy to AVG, 4 to OBP, and 3 to SLG. Still no one meets the .290/.350/.500 line. You're right that the 850 OPS guy may be tough to get, but we shouldn't settle for someone who equalled the 757 that Burnitz put up last year. Without a doubt.

looking at positional holes is primitive and too conventional. you must look at what team holes he needed to fill, mostly OBP, which he did not come anywhere near upgrading enough. this is a team that will hit for a decent average, not get on base any other way besides hitting the ball, and finish in the bottom half of the league in runs scored. did he upgrade the bullpen? maybe, but that wasn't the area we needed to upgrade. a team that leads the NL in hitting should not finish 9th in runs scored, that's pitiful and hendry's a freaking blind man if he can't connect the dots. I think he did improve this team in OBP as well. Barrett, Lee, Walker, and ARam are pretty good in OBP. Murton is an improvement over anything we had in LF last year. Pierre is an improvement over CPatt and Hairston. Cedeno will at the very least meet Neifi's numbers. Jones has the potential to outdo Burnitz. Hendry did bring in players that could improve OBP( Pierre Jones) and name players starters who shoudl as well (Cedeno Murton). judging from last year's numbers, pierre is a slight upgrade in OBP, but jones is not. their combined OBP from last year is .324, which is exactly what our team OBP was from last year. the combined OBP from hairston/patterson (in CF) and burntiz was .300. so it looks like somewhat of an upgrade. however, when you take into account that this team didn't even look at giles, and passed on bradley in CF. those two had a combined OBP of .396, a SIGNIFICANT upgrade. I don't get this. Why is it okay to use one bad year as some sort of evidence against a player you dislike, but if it's a player you covet it can be written off, and three year trends are the most important and telling?

RF should be at minimum something like .290/.350/.500, and probably higher than that, given the weakness of the rest of the positions. Jacque Jones sucks. He's been bad for quite some time. He could significantly outperform expectations and still hurt this team by underperforming compared to what a RF and middle of the order guy should be doing. It was a bad signing by Hendry, especially the 3 year part. Jones would have to outperform his career averages by a wide margin every year of his deal for me to say Hendry was right. The Cubs were desperate for a bit bat and they settled on mediocrity, once again. You do realize not a single NL RF with over 400 PA's hit that minimum mark you set, right? Two guys (Giles & Jenkins) hit over .290, five had an OBP over .350, and one guy (Jenkins) had a SLG over .500. While I agree with you wholeheartedly on Jones (he does suck, and will likely continue sucking) the numbers you set as a minimum for RF are a bit lofty. I know you qualified it with the fact that the other positions are weak, but you stated that it should be even higher because of that. I just don't think those numbers are realistic. In essence you are saying our starting RF should have to produce at a level above all other RF's, as a minimum. Edit: If you lower it to 200 PA's, you add 1 guy to AVG, 4 to OBP, and 3 to SLG. Still no one meets the .290/.350/.500 line.

I'm still in the "denial" stage right now. So if you could, I would appreciate you refraining from that kind of hurtful post.

You took the words right out of my mouth. Very simple, straightfoward, and true.

No, to get him you'll have to give up something that hurts. So you're saying I can't watch the Cubs play baseball anymore?

See, I'd think that, but considering most Cardinals fans on this board would be pleased to see the Cubs make this move and most of the rational White Sox fans over on WSI also would like to see the Cubs make this move, I'm inclined to doubt that. Although I wouldn't do the deal, by no means is it a ripoff. A few thoughts: 1) I think most NSBB members overlook is Prior's injury history too much. The fact is he hasn't *proven* to be durable. After coming back from his freaky elbow injury he didn't look right. Anyone should agree that Prior hasn't proven to be durable. He's had a few non-freak, pitching motion-related injuries since '02 (his Achilles heel injury in 04 has to be counted as pitching motion-related). But I disagree that he didn't look right after he came back last year: The Cubs were 7-2 in the games he started before his injury; his WL record was 4-1. Then he got hurt. In his first 7 starts back he was 2-2 but the Cubs were 5-2 in those starts including big wins against the Cards & White Sox. It looked to me like he didn't miss a beat even if he didn't go deep into games, hence the no-decisions. Except for a clunker in Atl, he was very strong -- sometimes dominating -- in most of his post-injury starts until Aug & Sept. He went 4-4 in Aug & Sept with a couple of dominating starts against Col and Mil, but he generally looked relatively weak those two months, I admit. When he went down his ERA was 2.93 and when the season was over it was 3.67. Anyone have his ERA after the injury on May 27? Here's a breakdown by months: April '05: 19.0 IP, 0.95 ERA May '05: 39.1 IP, 3.89 ERA June '05: 6.0 IP, 0.00 ERA July '05: 37.2 IP, 4.30 ERA, 6GS, 4QS August '05: 36.0 IP, 5.00 ERA, 6GS, 5QS Sepember '05: 28.2 IP, 3.45 ERA, 5GS, 3QS (Others 5IP/3ER, 5IP/1ER) I realize quality starts are pretty ridiculous in and of themselves, but in this situation they give us an indication of how the ERA came about. While Prior did not look himself post line drive, he was decent with the exception of blowups in Atlanta and in Philly. In 108.1 IP he gave up 49 ER (post line drive). The two blowups consisted of 9.0 IP and accounted for 12 ER. That being said, I don't trade Prior for Tejada AND Bedard.

Que?

So should we start taking bets on who will suck the most? My money is on Jones. Mostly because he won't have little red birds on his uniform, but also because he's really, really, really, really bad.

im much more amenable to trade guys like pie for tejada now that prior's name has been thrown around Begin Rant: Now that you bring that up I'm thinking that Hendry does have a plan this offseason. When he signed Eyre I thought it was a bad idea. When he traded Pinto, Nolasco, and Mitre for Pierre I thought to myself "dang, the Eyre signing doesn't look so bad now." Then he goes out and proclaims he's excited that Jacque Jones is going to be our starting RF for the next three years. At this point I'm saying to myself "Gee, I'm actually kind of glad we have Pierre now and that Eyre signing looks like a bargain." Just a few days later Hendry "leaks" news that he's using Prior as trade bait to try and get Tejada. By now a kick in the craw and a can of Natty Light sound pretty good. If we only end up losing Pie, Hill, Williams, and Guzman for Tejada we'll think it's the biggest steal since D.B. Cooper's heist. It's pure genius. Just keep making progressively worse and worse deals and your previous transactions look better and better. Eventually Cubs fans will be dancing in the street because we have Neifi Perez locked up for a few million a year. End Rant. Absolute pure genius. I literally have been discussing this very thing with some friends today.

I would not do this deal. I agree, however Tejada/Bedard for Prior would make the Cubs a lot better in 06. i fully expect a Cy Young season from prior next year, and if he's traded, that's a lock. Why do you fully expect that? I do as well because he's healthy. A healthy Mark Prior > nearly all other pitchers. Hyperbole I'll even use young pitchers... Dontrelle Willis Jake Peavy Roy Oswalt Johan Santana A.J. Burnett Carlos Zambrano Josh Beckett Any of those guys are pretty much equal. Santana is the best pitcher in baseball hands down. Come on. Burnett? Not in this lifetime. Neither for Peavy, Oswalt, or Beckett. The others are equal. Remember, he said a "healthy" Prior is NEARLY better.

I have to agree with some of the others that have posted in this thread about the strong possibility of Murton having a bit of a decline in his numbers. Checking into some numbers, I found that last year the Cubs produced the following numbers at LF, CF, and RF, respectively: .738 OPS, .643 OPS, and a .757 OPS. If Murton fell into the .760 OPS range, and Pierre fell from his career average OPS by .020, and we got JJ production from last year in RF, we would still have an increase of .103 in OPS from our outfield. I don't really know how these numbers make me feel. At first I was excited, then I cried because of how putrid our OF was last year. Then I was sad because even with the increase the OF offense is likely to be horrible. Finally, I threw up at the thought of a team with our large payroll and minimal production from it.

Here we have the first on-topic post in the thread, deep into page 2. :) I think the other offer on the table is for Wilkerson myself. I believe you're right on with the Wilkerson idea. I think that while he may not seem like a typical Hendry guy, he does fit the mold of a talent that had a down year. Which is something JH seems to like to go after.