cubfan1955

I like this one the best...though with Murton leading off and Soriano batting 5th. I'm also getting sick to death of Michael Barrett. I wish we had a catcher that could play defense and hit just a little bit. He costs us way too many games defensively and stumbling around the bases like a drunken sailor. At this point I'd just as soon Hll catch everyday. Z seems to like him.

Well there is the ball getting passed Barrett. Has he got picked off base yet tonight or do I still have that to look forward to?

They're 5-2 in the past week, and playing better than they've played in a long time. Soriano/ Pie are both thriving right where they are. But by all means let's screw with it just so people won't think we're stupid for batting a 40 homer guy at leadoff. No thank you. Can we at least wait until we lose a few games in a row first? Just in case ? So let throw out the won/loss record for the whole year. If I remember correctly we got into this hole with Soriano mostly batting leadoff. And started to turn it around when he finally got what he wanted: Left field, leading off, with his friend Pie hitting behind him and playing next to him. Who knows if it will last? The only way to find out is by leaving them there, which Lou will, because he's not stupid enough to change something that's actually working for once. They've turned nothing around. Don't let a mini streak of playing decently fool you. I do believe you are right that Lou will leave him in the leadoff spot. Not because he's not stupid enough to make the change though...rather because he's not smart enough to make the change.

They're 5-2 in the past week, and playing better than they've played in a long time. Soriano/ Pie are both thriving right where they are. But by all means let's screw with it just so people won't think we're stupid for batting a 40 homer guy at leadoff. No thank you. Can we at least wait until we lose a few games in a row first? Just in case ? So lets throw out the won/loss record for the whole year? If I remember correctly we got into this hole with Soriano mostly batting leadoff.

Since we're talking hypotheticals here, Murton for leadoff playing everyday, followed by Pie, Lee, Ramirez, and Soriano. Flip flop Ramirez and Soriano if you like. The options are less ideal if the Cubs insist on playing Jones in RF almost everyday but I'd still rather see Soriano and his bat in the middle of the lineup. I'd much rather have a 2 or 3 run homer in the first than a leadoff shot but that's just me.

Good point. Why move him while they're winning? Even in the two losses this week they scored 10 runs. The offense is looking pretty good; let's worry about the pitching. Last I checked they are 27-33 and 5-5 in their last 10 games. If you want to call that winning fine. I don't.

The right thing is to try to maximize your run scoring potential and gain victories over the opposition. I believe scoring more runs achieves this and I think the Cubs would score more runs with Soriano batting 5th than with JJ hitting there. (JJ should be on the bench or gone anyway but that's another thread.) Even if that means Soriano losing out on PAs? In the NL, a player batting 5th would have 60-70 less PAs in a given year than a player batting 1st. By that logic our best hitter (Lee) should be leading off to get him the extra AB's.

The right thing is to try to maximize your run scoring potential and gain victories over the opposition. I believe scoring more runs achieves this and I think the Cubs would score more runs with Soriano batting 5th than with JJ hitting there. (JJ should be on the bench or gone anyway but that's another thread.)

You get a different sense of things if you look at the none on/men on splits year by year. Over his last five seasons: 2002 Overall - .300/.332/.547/.879 None on (464 ABs) - .287/.322/.550/.872 Men on (232 ABs) - .328/.353/.543/.896 2003 Overall - .290/.338/.525/.863 None on (439 ABs) - .305/.348/.569/.917 Men on (243 ABs) - .263/.320/.444/.764 2004 Overall - .280/.324/.484/.808 None on (358 ABs) - .265/.308/.480/.788 Men on (250 ABs) - .300/.345/.488/.833 2005 Overall - .268/.309/.512/.821 None on (349 ABs) - .292/.340/.547/.887 Men on (288 ABs) - .240/.273/.469/.742 2006 Overall - .277/.351/.560/.911 None on (435 ABs) - .278/.326/.556/.882 Men on (212 ABs) - .274/.396/.566/.962 His career splits with nobody on vs. with men on are really skewed by two seasons (2003 when he had a good year and 2005 when he had a mediocre year). Of those five seasons, though, he actually had a higher OPS with men on base compared to nobody on in three of the five seasons. And that includes his career year, when he had a significantly higher OPS with men on base than he did when he came up with the bases empty (mainly because of a huge increase in walks). I really don't think there's any real statistical foundation to the belief that he's just a better hitter batting leadoff than hitting in the middle of the order. The idea that he can only do well batting leadoff just took off earlier, yet I have yet to see anything that makes me believe there is anything actually behind it. I don't see how breaking it down by year changes the fact that his OPS over his career is significantly higher with nobody on base. Solo homers offend my sensibilities too but that doesn't mean I have to ignore reality. The bottom line is that if they keep winning, he's probably gonna stay there, and I bet we can all agree that would be just fine. Those numbers show that his career splits do a pretty poor job of telling the whole story. While he may have better stats overall throughout his career with the bases empty than with men on base, if you look at the last five seasons, he was actually better with men on in three of those seasons than with the bases empty. Yet because his splits in the other two seasons were more pronounced, his overall numbers show him hitting better with the bases empty. What breaking them down by seasons shows, though, is that you cannot assume that he hit better with the bases empty throughout his career. Across his career, yes, but not throughout. Not when he actually hit better with men on base more often than he did with the bases empty over the last five seasons. As a hypothetical, let's say his OPS was .200 points higher with the bases empty in one season but in the other four seasons, his OPS was .020 higher with men on. While his overall splits would show him hitting better with the bases empty, would that accurately reflect how he hits in those situations? I'd be more likely to look at the other four seasons where his numbers were right around his overall line for each of those seasons and see that as what we should expect. The fact he actually hit better with men on during his career season probably carries a little bit more weight with me, as well. So yes, it may be a fact that he hit better with the bases empty over his career thus far, but it's also a fact that he hit better with runners on base more often (at least on the scale of a full season) than he did with the bases empty over the last five seasons. The statistical support for the idea that he has to hit leadoff just isn't there. BA DA BING! Thanks for posting THE facts. Paying a guy $136 million over 8 years to be your leadoff hitter when he has the potential to hit 40-50 homers a year is beyond stupidity. Words can't describe it adequately.

Good thing he's leading off. Wouldn't want to waste any of those HRs by having guys on in front of him. By putting Izturis and the P right in front of him, we've virtually guaranteed that 90% of the HRs he hits will be solo shots. Well done, Cubs. Well done. Yes, because only the Cubs have realized that Soriano hits best out of the leadoff spot. Those stupid, stupid Cubs. I'm sorry, but I don't believe that where he hits in the lineup makes a damn bit of difference. Of course he wants to lead off, he loves to swing the bat. He gets more chance to do so if he hits first. But would he suddenly be terrible hitting 3rd or 5th? I don't believe it. And frankly, there's no stats that "prove" in any real sense, that his spot in the lineup effects his performance. He had a great year last year hitting 1st. Would he have had the same production in his walk year hitting 3rd or 5th? I think so. It amazes me how many people say "he hits better in the leadoff spot" as if his position in the lineup determined the results of his ABs more than all the other factors at play. Yeah, agree completely. What a waste of run potential. 3 homers and 3 RBI and most people around here think that is great. Turns out the Cubs offense added in 6 other runs. It would not have been nearly as much fun if the Cubs had lost 4-3 which isn't all that unlikely.

The Fall of Brian Dopirak

Speaking of the Mets, if the Cubs were to trade Zambrano to the Mets by the trading deadline, what would be considered a fair deal? I'd take Reyes. :D

If they took a chance on Wade Miller they should take a chance on Mark Prior, even at that amount. Meh. I don't think he should get anymore than Wood's $1.75M They can't cut his salary that much per MLBPA. They can if he agrees to it. If they go to arbitration, it'll be higher. But if they negotiate before the date for arbitration tenders, they could get him to agree to a lower base, and add incentives as an enticement. Doesn't the MLBPA have to approve that also?

Maybe keeping it all private and inside the club house wasn't working so he went public.

If they took a chance on Wade Miller they should take a chance on Mark Prior, even at that amount. Meh. I don't think he should get anymore than Wood's $1.75M They can't cut his salary that much per MLBPA.

I agree, Lou has to find a way. But the buzz is the players don't like the way he does it. I guess he can try to adapt, but I thought lou was much more mellow than advertised until he finally went nuts. Also, i think this keeps going back to the point of saying "the manager" needs to find a way, why don't the players find a way? it's easier for 1 guy who's supposed to be a leader to adapt than it is for 25 guys to adapt. I think you are taking the word of Olney as the gospel truth. I think it's far from fact that any of the players are unhappy with Lou, let alone 25 of them.

Probably part of the trade agreement last year was that Jim agreed to trade for him back this year. Probably will trade that malcontent Zambrano for him! :twisted:

If they took a chance on Wade Miller they should take a chance on Mark Prior, even at that amount.

No one is saying the players don't shoulder most of the blame. They do. Where Lou comes in is that it's on him to find a way to get the most out of individual players. If the team isn't responding to his ways, he needs to find a way to get them to respond. Do you really believe he is not trying to do that?

Dusty needed to go because he put the wrong players in at the wrong times in the wrong positions to succeed. Lou needs to go because he puts the wrong players in at the wrong times in the wrong positions to succeed. I don't think anyone is saying that the players should not be held accountable. WOW Lou...the honeymoon is over. They're calling for your head already in less than 60 games. Welcome to Chicago. Meh...he might as well finish the season. He's a lame duck manager with new ownership likely to want to bring in their own management anyway. I was never a big fan of the Lou hire, and he certainly hasn't given me anything to change that. The honeymoon isn't over with me...there never was a honeymoon. Agreed. I wasn't a big fan of the hire either. He's here though and talk of "he needs to go now" are premature.

Move him down in the order and you might get 2 or 3 runs on that one swing of the bat. Pretty simple really. And it would be great to have a bat like Soriano hitting leadoff if we had Beltran in CF, Tejada at SS and Carlos Lee in RF. just because he hit a solo homer to lead off an inning doesn't mean he'll do anything with runners on base. you want your best hitters hitting early, so they get the most at bats. There are no guarantees anywhere on a baseball field. Just like no one can guarantee he won't hit .361/.424/.557/.981 batting 5th, I can't guarantee he won't hit .254/.314/.310/.623 batting 5th. But we'll never know if they don't try. We're losing a lot with the present lineup. What have we got to lose?

Lou is a major league professional manager; he shouldn't be needlessly tossing players under the bus under the guise of "accountability" and simultaniously absolving himself of accountability. Well I'm sorry but I don't see Lou absolving himself of accountability. (Dusty was the master at that) Lou doesn't drop flyballs or make errant throws or get picked off the bases at an alarming rate. What I have heard him say is the WE will got those things fixed. And I also don't think Lou is seeking out the media to bash players. He's replying to questions posed by the media.

Dusty needed to go because he put the wrong players in at the wrong times in the wrong positions to succeed. Lou needs to go because he puts the wrong players in at the wrong times in the wrong positions to succeed. I don't think anyone is saying that the players should not be held accountable. WOW Lou...the honeymoon is over. They're calling for your head already in less than 60 games. Welcome to Chicago.

Seriously, these guys are major leaague professionals. If they've quit on Lou 50 some games into the season that says a lot about them.

Move him down in the order and you might get 2 or 3 runs on that one swing of the bat. Pretty simple really. And it would be great to have a bat like Soriano hitting leadoff if we had Beltran in CF, Tejada at SS and Carlos Lee in RF.