CubsWin

And counting... More importantly, he has 4 walks in 38 ABs since returning from Iowa. His line since returning is now .316/.372/.474, with 9 runs scored, 8 driven in and 4 stolen bases without being caught in just 9 games. All this talk of intangibles and hitting behind his friend is neither here nor there, but those numbers are real, tangible production. Unfortunately, they are only over 38 ABs. There is reason for hope and excitement, but I want to see him keep producing for longer than 9 games. Still, this stat continues to amaze me. The Cubs without Pie on the roster are 10-23. With him, they're 18-11. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'...

Those look a lot like his numbers at AAA this season. That tells me that this time around he has probably relaxed, isn't making such a big deal out of being in the bigs and is just doing what he was doing at AAA. Either that or he is just getting lucky. Obviously, those numbers will come down, but if his batting eye can continue to mature, the Cubs could be looking at an excellent defensive CFer with a bat and speed game similar to Jose Reyes of '06. I'd take that.

That's a huge red flag for me. The guy isn't going to learn plate discipline with the Cubs, and he isn't going to handle those pitches against pros. If we have another 4:1 K:BB guy on our hands, he won't help at all. its a real red flag when a prospect is compared to vlad guerrero.... It's a red flag to me when people talk about a guy's ability to hit a pitch thrown anywhere. The reason is that Vlad and very few others have been able to carry over that skill into major league success. If they think he can hit all sorts of pitches, that means he swings at all sorts of pitches. And aggressive free swingers don't exactly flourish in the Cubs system. Having the ability to hit anything is nice and all, but if you're confident in your ability to do so, major league pitchers are likely to exploit that. It makes me think of guys like Pedro Felix and Ty Wiggington, guys who may be halfway decent in the counting stats, but are brutal in the rate stats thanks in large part to free swinging low walk taking approaches. it clearly says he can handle any type of pitch, not swing at any type of pitch. it says nothing about being a free swinger. Wasn't Vitters ranked 2nd among all high school position players for plate discipline? Where is all this concern over his plate discipline coming from?

This nonsense again? I like how everytime people question a move by the Cubs they are being illogical pessimists. No one is saying that. Questioning the moves of any team is every fan's right, but if the questions are shown to be illogical, then it reads like pessimism. No one is taking issue with questioning the Cubs draft choices. They are taking issue with the legitimacy of some of the more illogical questions or concerns. I would expect someone praising the Cubs to have a solid argument for his beliefs, so why shouldn't we expect the same of someone who is being critical?

That's odd, the Cubs didn't have a pick in the 2nd round.

I'm pretty sure this was in the game thread, but did anyone else here the NSBB mention on the TV broadcast today? They were talking about how Sean's dad broke the news before anyone else did that Sean was getting called up in a post on this site in this thread. Pretty cool. I thought Sean did well in his debut. I was impressed despite mixed results. I think he has a bright future. Congrats Gallaghers! EDIT: D'oh, raw just beat me. Congrats are in order, anyway...

He deserves more time before any final judgement is made. But I can't understand how anybody could think it's too early to express any concern. There is nothing wrong with be concerned. Because there are so many extenuating circumstances with his brief time in the majors (batting in front of hitters like Lee and Ramirez, pitchers wanting to challenge him and see what he's got, him seeing major league pitching for the first time and needing to make the adjustment from AAA pitching, etc.), there just isn't much regular about Pie's first 70 ABs. When you add in his track record established over much more regular playing time in the minors, the reasons for waiting a bit to see how he adjusts and how pitchers adjust to him before expressing concern outweigh the reasons to assume that his first 70 ABs are indicitive of his play to come over the course of his career.

Reyes is definitely the poster child for overly aggressive speed guys who flip a switch and really turn things around. But I don't know if I trust the Cubs to wait out the 4 years it took him. I think they will with this kid. The man-love they have shown and his demeanor and presense will buy him more patience than Patterson, Murt or anyone else could have gotten from this club. I mean seriously.... he's the Michael Jordan of Baseball! according to Vince Coleman It is important to remember that Pie has a track record already established at the minor league level. Its not a great track record when it comes to drawing walks, but its not nearly as bad as an IsoD of .010 either. The low walk total to date this season in the major leagues is in direct contrast to a great K/BB ratio in AAA so far this season. It probably has a lot to do with pitchers wanting to challenge Pie and see what he can do at this level before they respect him by trying to get him to swing at something off the plate. It also may have something to do with not wanting to walk the very speedy Pie in front of Lee and Ramirez. The sample size is still pretty small. I think he deserves a bit more time before expressing any concern on his walk rate being this low. For now, let's rely on his established minor league numbers which aren't terrific, but are passable.

Interesting stat. The Cubs without Pie on the roster are 10-23. With Pie, they are 15-9. Maybe there is something to that "infectious energy". :wink:

Wolf-7 GS, 41 IP, 44 H, 44K/13BB, 4 HBP, 6 HR, 4.61 ERA, 1.39 WHIP Padilla-7 GS, 42 IP, 40 H, 17K/21BB, 3 HBP, 8 HR, 4.93 ERA, 1.452 WHIP Of course a lot of people wanted Schmidt+ rookie-that wouldn't have worked out too well. Also, here's one more pitcher that was wanted over the offseason: Westbrook-6 GS, 27 1/3 IP, 32 H, 18 K/14 BB, 1 HBP, 6 HR, 7.90 ERA, 1.683 WHIP Not to mention, Westbrook has also been placed on the DL. Hendry and Rothschild are looking like friggin' geniuses right now...right now. This team is 1 game over 500 with one of the top payrolls in baseball. Lets not get carried away. I'll make you a deal, I won't get carried away if you look at the context of the comments you respond to. Look at the thread you are in. It is in reference to the signing of Marquis and not those other guys. So, right now, he is looking like a friggin' genius. Right now.

Wolf-7 GS, 41 IP, 44 H, 44K/13BB, 4 HBP, 6 HR, 4.61 ERA, 1.39 WHIP Padilla-7 GS, 42 IP, 40 H, 17K/21BB, 3 HBP, 8 HR, 4.93 ERA, 1.452 WHIP Of course a lot of people wanted Schmidt+ rookie-that wouldn't have worked out too well. Also, here's one more pitcher that was wanted over the offseason: Westbrook-6 GS, 27 1/3 IP, 32 H, 18 K/14 BB, 1 HBP, 6 HR, 7.90 ERA, 1.683 WHIP Not to mention, Westbrook has also been placed on the DL. Hendry and Rothschild are looking like friggin' geniuses right now...right now.

Here's confirmation from Chicagosports.com. Pie is sent down. Right move at the right time. It had become clear he wasn't getting the playing time he needed. Edit: Just beat me.

Besides the awful analogy, what you are basically saying is that everything that went wrong for the Cubs was beyond Hendry's control. Injured players were beyond Hendry's control, even if they had a history of injury prior to being acquired. No other teams ever had to account for injury problems. Players with poor strike zone judgment was a coaching issue, not an organizational philosophy issue. Even if those players never had good strike zone judgment, it was up to the coaching to make sure they developed it, and it had nothing to do with Hendry's philosophy on acquiring and developing hitters. Same with pitchers with poor command. Totally out of Hendry's control, and purely a coaching issue. Not Hendry's fault that the players in the Cubs system were incapable of throwing strikes consistently, and not Hendry's fault that the players he acquired had the same problem. Again, nobody is saying Hendry is solely responsible for everything bad happening with the Cubs system. The ones that have a problem with Hendry are criticizing that his organizational philosophy is incorrect, and it hasn't helped the Cubs do what they should be doing as an organization with the funding and farm system they had. No, one person is and that is who I was responding to in the above quote. I don't think Hendry should be held blameless, but there are certain things that are beyond any GMs control. I listed them in a previous post. The injuries to superstars like Prior, Lee and Ramirez, and other important role players, the larger than normal amount of games missed by injury concerns like Wood and Nomar, the unforeseeable and freakish collapses by Patterson, Dempster and others. These are things that every GM will have to deal with, but not to the abnormal extent that the Cubs GM had to over the last couple of seasons. I hold Hendry responsible for not doing what it took to sign Beltran, for not making the necessary moves to get the Cubs into the playoffs in '04, for not emphasizing OBP more than he has, for not having a back-up plan for Wood sooner, for not handling the Sosa trade with more forsight or candor and other things. I don't think he is the greatest GM, but I think he has obviously improved this team and is improving and learning on the job. Should he be kept on after this season? If the Cubs make the playoffs? Yes. If not, probably not, but would depend on the big picture and the circumstances involved.

If I continue to invite you over every time I invite my friends and you do the same thing each time I think I have to share in the blame, and I wouldn't blame my friends if they passed on my invitations. Truer words, my friend, truer words...

In fact it is that simple. If you throw in all the BS excuses people like to give Hendry, you complicate the story. The fact is Hendry has done a poor job. I don't mean to be flip, but you just restated your opinion without providing any reasons why it should hold up under logical scrutiny. I can make an argument why it is fair and accurate to take into account the state of the team at the time the GM takes over and why it is hard to fault a GM for catastrophic injuries. Can you make an argument for why it is more fair and accurate to judge a GM on one statistic? If you need something to backup the claim that results are what matters in sports then you just don't understand sports. There's nothing else to say. Hendry has been in charge for many years. And before he was in charge of the whole thing he was in charge of the minors. He had as much money and resources to work with as any GM could possibly expect, and he failed. Those people who are willing to accept mediocrity as a goal are satisfied with somebody like Hendry in charge. Those people who want to see a championship are not. It's quite simple. No need to muck it up with the nonsense. There is no logical scrutiny that can tear down the argument that Hendry has done a poor job. There is only BS and lies. Sure there is. Let's say you spent all evening cooking a really good dinner for your friends. And just before they arrived, I showed up and smashed up the plates and poured tons and tons of cayenne pepper on everything. When your friends arrive, all they see is a messy table and terrible tasting food that is so spicy they choke on it. Do you deserve any credit for making a really good meal? BS and lies? Simple and obvious logic says otherwise. It occurs to me that your mind is painfully closed and made up on this issue. I'm done talking to you about it.

If you think that the teams Hendry has put together over the last two or three seasons were terrible and doomed to failure because of the crappy decisions he made and that the injuries to superstars Prior, Lee and Ramirez, plus some important role players, and the larger than normal amount of games missed by injury concerns Wood and Nomar, and the unforeseeable and freakish collapses of Patterson, Dempster and others had little to no effect on the won-loss record of those teams, then yes, he doesn't deserve any credit. But if you think he put together teams that could have contended if it weren't for a lot of freakish stuff happening, then he deserves more credit than you and some others are giving him. If you choose to only look at the total won-loss record over 4 years and not take into account that it looked a whole lot better after his 3rd year before a disasterous season felled by an unusual amount of injuries to key superstar players, then yes, he doesn't deserve any credit. But if you allow yourself to remember the records of the teams before he took over and see how much better his teams were in his first two or even three years combined, even withstanding a rapidly declining superstar and injuries to key players over those seasons, then he deserves more credit than some are willing to give him. From where I'm looking at it, that seems clear to me. Am I missing something that you're seeing?

In fact it is that simple. If you throw in all the BS excuses people like to give Hendry, you complicate the story. The fact is Hendry has done a poor job. I don't mean to be flip, but you just restated your opinion without providing any reasons why it should hold up under logical scrutiny. I can make an argument why it is fair and accurate to take into account the state of the team at the time the GM takes over and why it is hard to fault a GM for catastrophic injuries. Can you make an argument for why it is more fair and accurate to judge a GM on one statistic?

Injuries like Lee, yeah. But the whole Prior/Wood thing it took him years to come up with a contingency for, and he's the one who enabled Dusty to drive our pitchers into the ground. Wood, yes. But that seems like revisionist history on Prior. Did anyone see '04 coming? And after he started 27 games in '05 finishing 11-7 with a 3.67 ERA with 19 consecutive starts from June 26th through the end of the season, did anyone have reason to believe he wouldn't be ready to go for '06?

I agree. If you don't take into account all of the circumstances of a GM's tenure and attempt simplify everything down to a bottom line of wins and losses, you aren't making a fair or accurate judgement. It would be nice if it were that simple, but its just not. When I look at the big picture, I see a flawed GM who has done many things that I wouldn't have done. Some of them have failed miserably and I feel like I can point at them and go "see, I told you so" but then other moves that I was against have worked out. When I look at the big picture, I see a GM who inherited a team without much, young or in-their-prime talent that was built almost entirely around a steadily declining superstar in Sammy Sosa. When you take into account the starting point for Hendry's tenure and the various other circumstances the team has been dealt over the last 4+ seasons, he has without a doubt improved the team. Does that make him a great GM? No. A great one would have sold the ownership on the importance of outbidding the Mets for Carlos Beltran. A great one would have had a contingency plan for Wood years earlier. A great GM wouldn't have hired Dusty Baker. And, in my estimation, a great GM would have improved the team's OBP more than he has despite the rapid decline of the team's greatest OBP man, Sosa. But Hendry is far from the idiot that he often gets cast as. The moves he has made have greatly and undeniably improved the Cubs roster on paper even if they haven't always resulted in an improvement in their won loss record. That said, the bar should be set high for Hendry given his payroll. And if he fails to return the team to the playoffs this season, the team should consider firing him...based on the big picture and all the circumstances, of course. :wink:

you better run while you have the chance, as the pro-murton freaks are sharpening their pitchforks and lighting their torches I would just say that Murton has shown enough to be every bit the everyday player Jones is, and probably better. There's really no justification for your claim, other than the fact that Lou isn't using him as an everyday player. Unfortunately that's the type of tag that can stick on a guy for his career. Couldn't agree more. Murton has proven to be a better hitter than Jones minus a little HR power. He seems to be just as good of a defender, too. The only difference is he is lacking the experience at and possibly the speed to play CF as well as Jones can. I think that last point is why Jones is being played more than Murton right now, not because he is that much better.

i don't understand why it's a big deal if the cubs have three lefties in the rotation. teams have 4-5 righties in the rotation all the time and no one says anything about it. There are more right-handed hitters in most (all?) lineups than there are left-handed hitters. The NL hit .265/.340/.426 against LHP last year, and .264/.332/.428 against RHP. What matters is who is the better pitcher, not if you have too many LH, or not enough. That is awesome, mind-blowing information. Bring on Marshall!

Clearly Carlos is a confident pitcher and expects success, but this isn't just about having confidence, its also about how you handle yourself when your confidence is shaken and you get frustrated. If you're saying that Z doesn't get frustrated, then I'd look again. I've seen several instances when one walk seemingly leads to another because he isn't pitching with a calm, cool and collected attitude but is pitching out of frustration. He could certainly benefit from practicing letting the past be in the past and pitching in the here and now. And that is also what this method seems to be teaching. And its not just Carlos that would likely benefit. Lots of ballplayers would. They are all incredibly gifted athletes otherwise they wouldn't be there. But what sets the great ones apart, besides that next level of athleticism, is their ability to focus, their preparedness and their mental attitude towards the game and the act of competition. I always expected Hill to be good, but not this good. Taking on mastering the mental aspects of the game certainly seems to be paying off for him.

5 in a row and 8 of 9. What a shame it all came too late...

I want to see him play, too. But since the Cubs have other worthy options in the OF, its a tough one. Jones isn't really a CFer. Pie is the only true CFer of the 5 options. Murton, Floyd and Jones are all performing well and fairly well proven at the major league level, so I think we are likely to continue to see Pie being worked in as part of a rotation until Hendry is able to trade one of the other OFers, likelky Jones. I understand they have too many options for the OF thats why I was behind sending Pie down to get him at bats every day. I dont like him sitting on the bench 4 days a week. So now we have Izturis(haha) and Theriot who can play short . They don't have too many options in the OF. They have 5 good, worthy-of-playing-time options, but because only one of them, Pie, is a true CFer, you can't accurately say that they have too many. That's the whole reason why Cedeno was sent down and Pie wasn't. Pie is the team's only real CF, while Cedeno, with the emergence of Theriot as an option at SS, was the third infielder who could play in the hole. Pie is also hitting better than Cedeno is right now, so the choice was clear. He might not be starting every day consistently, but he certainly wouldn't be the first top prospect rookie to be worked into the major leagues at a slightly slower pace than a full on starter. So long as he is in the rotation on a consistent basis, he should be fine. In the rotation? Has he even started this week? I think hes had maybe 3 ab's this week. Maybe Im missing a game but I dont think I am You've got to give Lou a little more time. I'm with you, if he's not in the rotation. But we can't really tell yet, can we? If he doesn't start in the next three games. Then he should be sent down. Pie coming off the bench as a pinch runner/defensive replacement/pinch hitter is dumb. He needs to play more than that. At this point, don't we have to sit back and see? Cedeno just got sent down. I was dissapointed with the choice to start DeRosa in RF today, however. With Pie on the team and Cedeno in Iowa, the Cubs can afford to keep DeRosa in the infield.

I'm not such a big fan of trading Zambrano unless the return is really, really good. Z's been struggling at the start of this season, but I'm confident he will soon be the Z he's been over the previous 3 seasons. That's not Cy Young worthy, but he's still be pretty darn good. If the Cubs could improve their rotation by trading Zambrano, I'd do it. If they could acquire a better starter than Z, by trading Murton and prospects, which I highly doubt, I'd do it. Otherwise, I'd hang to Z. Marquis will return to earth. Lilly and Hill will, too, but to a lesser degree. The Cubs weakness is still their rotation. The offense is looking good, especially with the emergence of Theriot as a legit starter. The Cubs can't afford to trade Z without getting someone better in return. Now, if Guzman can emerge the way some people think he can, we'll talk, but I'm skeptical when it comes to him. I agree with Vance in that the Cubs areas of improvement are SS, RF and CF, but not long term in center. I wouldn't count out catcher, though. Barrett's bat will return, but he is coming to the end of his contract and he's not a strong defensive catcher. If the right opportunity presented itself to Hendry, I can see him acquiring a catcher. I would love to see the Cubs get a SS, but not many GMs can afford to trade one away. Does any team have two really good, starting SSs on their roster? All that said, I can see, barring injury, the Cubs dumping Jones on somebody for some minor leaguers and then being happy with Sori in left, Pie in center and Murton and Floyd sharing right the rest of the season. Should Dye become available, I'd certainly look into it. The only other trade I see happening is for a starter. I'm assuming that Guzman just isn't ready yet. The most likely move I see on the horizon is packaging some prospects for a reliable veteran starter with short time left on is contract.