TheDude

Soriano's late inning defense has cost this team either certain wins or broken ties 3 times since he came off the DL. The criticism was easily valid. When you hold your breath every time a ball is hit to LF, some light-hearted ribbing is warranted.

How does either of your offers improve the Indians roster? They want to win now, like the Cubs. They don't want to gamble on semi-prospects.

He probably realized the Cubs are stupid and aren't going to give him a decent shot, so he just gave up. If he truly has that attitude, and I doubt highly he does, then he doesn't deserve a shot. He should be more hungry and motivated right now than anyone. He should have a huge, unquenchable chip and a desire to prove Hendry and Piniella wrong, to rub it in their face even.

Not the least bit worried. This team is a couple of Soriano misplays from being above .500 on the road.

Fukudome was billed as somewhere between Ichiro's batting control and Matsui's power. Hideki Matsui's rookie 2003 season: .287 /. 353 / .435 / .788 You need to give the guy time to adjust. Thus far, he looks a lot more like Ichiro than Matsui, unless you look at Matsui's rookie year. The lack of HR power is a little surprising but not alarming. He demonstrates that he belongs in the MLB with his plate discipline alone. He already has that control you can't teach. If he ends up being a 10 HR guy in his 2nd or 3rd year with a .400 OBP, he becomes a prototypical 2-hole threat. But much, much more important: he is everything the Cubs franchise has needed for years. I know the whole Brian Roberts business was overblown, but I still can't help thinking how awesome Roberts-Fukudome would be at 1-2 in front of Lee and Ramirez in the comic style alternate universe.

There was a front page article on the Cubs franchise turnaround regarding walks a few weeks back. "They" is just one writer, and not the talking head for all sports writers covering the Cubs. In fact, every Cubs game ESPN has televised recently, the primary topic discussed has been the Cubs plate discipline and patience. I expect more of the same from the tv crew again tonight. So media, including ESPN, has been writing/talking about it. Just not this article.

Back to back 'I know you are but what I am' one liners from you pretty much concedes the argument. Wish I could even say well played, but it wasn't.

That's pretty faulty logic. Actually it is really faulty. A GM and a manager's job is to put their team in the best position to win. If one doesn't look at the underlying reasons why they are winning, and more importantly refuses to question the basic assumptions of a strategy, winning will not long last. As fans it doesn't matter what we think, but when the numbers even out, what Hendry and Lou have done will matter. Hendry and Lou has been extremely lucky that this division is populated with some of the worst decision makers in baseball. You state it's faulty logic then build your own strawman argument to support the point. The role players are not the "underlying reasons" this team is winning. I don't believe they are even in the top 5 reasons and I never stated anything in my post to make it seem like that was case. So it does you no good to use that as your one supporting point to why my logic is faulty. This team wins because the 3-6 spots in the lineup are good; sustained and dependable good. It wins because the ace is a reliable stud. It wins because the bullpen has a show-stopping lead holder in Marmol. It wins because of depth: a 30-40 HR guy like Soriano isn't even considered in the top two hitters on the team. It wins because middle starters are good enough to put out quality outtings most of the time. Role players come and go on every team. When they are hot, they earn playing time. When they are not, managers usually let a battle ensue, often including a young guy that has potential in that battle. If the young guy gets a chance and performs, he plays more. If you're going to claim my role player logic is faulty, you need a much better argument. And make sure the point you're debunking is one I actually made, and not one you created for me. Strawman :stickman: You need to look it up lol. Wikipedia has a nice entry. The context of my original post was role players and whether or not their playing time is meaningful for a winning team. You attacked that claim, then gave no supporting evidence, stating only that winning doesn't last if built on poor strategy and a throw away comment about luck. I can only assume, remaining in the context of my claim (because you gave no other context), that you attributed the current winning to a faulty strategy of overusing the current role players and not allowing the kids a chance to play, and that you believe that strategy will not hold up, and lead to less winning. You gave me no other way to interpret your post relative to mine, and since you were specifically attacking my statement, I have to assume your points are in my context. So I addressed your attack using the only tidbit you left out there. I used your terminology and remained on point to it. Not even close to a straw man.

For me, it's not a defense of Hendry. It's a moderate view that doesn't cry about Pie's career being forever ruined at age 22. I prefer to see Pie, not Edmonds, and I disagree with the move. But I also recognize that the situation is of little significance overall, and that is where I'm coming from. My argument is really that this is a pea-shooter dent in Hendry's reputation, not a shotgun blast. And do you know why record matters? Because it's the number one argument against Hendry and any thread whose topic is more or less 'should Hendry be replaced?' or 'I hate Hendry and here is why'. Inevitably, folks cite the budget he has to work with and the net results in w/l. I agree with this approach, though I also put weight in post-season appearances regardless of record. The reason record serves as a 'defense' for Hendry, is that it cannot simultaneously be the primary measure of a GM when it supports an argument, but also meaningless when it does not. The team he constructed for 2008 right now, and likely the rest of the season, is very good. And the record will reflect this. So, assuming the season plays out according to trend, the complaints over the management of Pie will remain small and petty in the overall scheme of the 2008 season and the regular season results. Honestly, with regards to 2008, what do you think the projected Win Share differential of Pie/Johnson vs. Edmonds/Johnson? Substantial? I doubt it.

If you were to ask Hendry why he signed Edmonds, he might quote your line here word for word. Don't you believe that he believes he is maximizing the team's potential? While the team is hot and winning, he went after a player he believes becomes an asset for the team and fills a perceived need since ST, which falls precisely in the bounds of your idea of team building. You can disagree with the scouting assessment of the move (whether or not Edmonds is an asset), but not the motivation.

That's pretty faulty logic. Actually it is really faulty. A GM and a manager's job is to put their team in the best position to win. If one doesn't look at the underlying reasons why they are winning, and more importantly refuses to question the basic assumptions of a strategy, winning will not long last. As fans it doesn't matter what we think, but when the numbers even out, what Hendry and Lou have done will matter. Hendry and Lou has been extremely lucky that this division is populated with some of the worst decision makers in baseball. You state it's faulty logic then build your own strawman argument to support the point. The role players are not the "underlying reasons" this team is winning. I don't believe they are even in the top 5 reasons and I never stated anything in my post to make it seem like that was case. So it does you no good to use that as your one supporting point to why my logic is faulty. This team wins because the 3-6 spots in the lineup are good; sustained and dependable good. It wins because the ace is a reliable stud. It wins because the bullpen has a show-stopping lead holder in Marmol. It wins because of depth: a 30-40 HR guy like Soriano isn't even considered in the top two hitters on the team. It wins because middle starters are good enough to put out quality outtings most of the time. Role players come and go on every team. When they are hot, they earn playing time. When they are not, managers usually let a battle ensue, often including a young guy that has potential in that battle. If the young guy gets a chance and performs, he plays more. If you're going to claim my role player logic is faulty, you need a much better argument. And make sure the point you're debunking is one I actually made, and not one you created for me.

Pie is still young, and there is no reason to believe his career is over or mismanaged to minutia. What surprises me is so that so many people around here are surprised by this move. Hendry and Piniella have repeatedly stated a desire to find a left-handed HR potential to plug in the 5-spot. Pie, even is if he excels in his limited role so far, doesn't fit the bill for this season (emphasis on this season). It is debatable, obviously, whether or not Edmonds fits the bill, but clearly management feels he has a better shot this year than Pie at satisfying the need. I don't see this as being about approval or disapproval of Pie's production. It's about the 2008 lineup puzzle that Piniella and Hendry obsess over. They want that lefty HR potential in the middle. Switching gears: should Edmonds get in the lineup and produce at all, it's likely Fukudome finally moves up to 2-spot and Theriot down to the 8-spot, which means we might see Lee and Ramirez hitting in the first inning with Fukudome on about 40% of the time all season long. I like that quite a bit.

Your post belongs in that photo, as it is the very definition of short-sighted. You cannot accurately make a definitive evaluation before the guy has played one game. You're vision doesn't even extend into game one of a sample size. It may be likely and trend-supported that Edmonds turns out to be a terrible signing, but it's not a fact and can't be judged at this point with the worst Hendry moves. There is a chance that now playing for a winning team in a ballpark he has raked his whole career (.918 OPS career at Wrigley) results in an .800+ OPS and a dozen HR for a part time player.

If you posted something that was deleted, is it really wise to post it again?

I get so tired of people calling everyone that criticizes Lou or Hendry arrogant. Yeah I have trouble figuring out what being critical of hapless Cubs management has to do with arrogance. Because it seems petty when the Cubs have a .600 winning percentage, 2nd best in baseball. It's arrogant to think Joe Fan can build and lead the Cubs to better than a .600 winning percentage. People always state that the bottom line win record is what you use to judge a team's management. If you're inclined to dis Hendry as a GM, all you have to do is list Hendry's overall win/loss record as a GM as the thesis to emphasize the point, then throw out individual moves to support your case. But now that the team is winning, with a strong likelihood to maintain that success given the way its built, somehow the record is no longer the bottom line or central factor, and that is the disconnect. If this team gets to WS, that is how the management will be judged. Pie and Cedeno are young. They aren't going anywhere soon and their careers are not in jeopardy. As long as the team continues to win, the petty and overblown complaints will remain petty and overblown; particularly since Lou has proven to be a manager that will play anyone that delivers for him. The role players with the playing time right now likely play themselves back into role players, at which time Lou probably gives a kid a shot again.

Both guys may have finally adapted to MLB pitching and I hope they both continue to grow as hitters. If Theriot can continually force pitchers to pitch and hit line drives and grounders and not the lazy Fly Balls, that would be a very good thing. Me too. It's just hard to trust Cedeno's numbers. He had 25 walks in 741 plate appearances from 2005-2007 (5 of which were IBB, which is 20%). His #p/pa is those plate appearances hovered around 3.52. Now he has 7 walks in 55 plate appearances, with a 4.2 #p/pa. Those are both dramatic changes and honestly unlikely to be sustained. But I have my fingers crossed.

Well run teams do this all the time, whether right or wrong. As for trading Pie for CF, I don't think it's likely. What is more likely is trading Pie and/or guys like Gallagher for a left-handed power COF and moving Fukudome to CF. That is what the organization is dying to do. Lou really wants the following: 1 - Soriano RH LF 2 - Fukudome LH CF 3 - Lee RH 1B 4 - Ramirez RH 3B 5 - (insert power RF) LH This also squeezes Johnson out of the starter's role to a solid 4th OF and moves DeRosa back to 2B where his offense is maximized in value. If we see any trades from now to the deadline, I'm guessing it's for a power LH COF.

People in this thread keep talking about Theriot's avg and babip, but he is also walking at a higher rate than last year (same rate as his limited '06 sample size). He also has a career high #p/pa at 3.73. So while his avg is floated, and he is still a 2/1 gb/fb singles guy, he is having better at bats this year and demonstrating more mature plate presence. As others have pointed out, all of these characteristics are true for Cedeno also, but I have to wonder if Cedeno's plate patience is as real and longterm as Theriot's, because the shift in numbers doesn't look like subtle growth the way Theriot's do - it's quite dramatic and honestly unexpected. Overall Cedeno will be the longer term starter. Maybe not in '08, but he's young and growing and will work his way into that role in the next couple of years.

I'm not a fan of Marquis, but the Cardinals did get lucky last night. If I'm not mistaken all 6 hits against Marquis were groundball hits through the infield - the hardest hit balls were outs. He likely only gives up two Runs without all the damn walks. It certainly is annoying that retreads get longer leashes on competitive teams than young guys, but that's all of baseball, not just the Cubs. Anybody that tries to claim this as a problem specific to this organization doesn't know baseball very well.

Greene for Pie right now makes a lot of sense. Those concerned about 'giving up on the future' need to recognize this team has the talent to win now. I will take the risk of moving Pie for solid talent like Greene if it makes an already favored team even better.

That's what a 19-run outburst will do. They also lead all of MLB in OPS (.828), OBP (.375), and are 2nd in SLG (.452). When was the last time a Cubs team closed April dominating baseball in offense (and with one of its stars out or actually pulling the numbers downward)?

DeRosa did bat 2nd last year, 51 ABs. And his numbers there were excellent. As far as I can tell, Lou isn't as high on speed at number 2 as he is on old school notions of 'pesky'. Lou wants a guy that makes contact, excels at hit-and-run type of ball placement, and/or generally puts the ball in play even on outs. This is the reason Theriot has had so many looks at number 2. The way Ronnie has handled the bat, it would not surprise me to see him get that slot if he keeps it up. The only puzzling thing is why Lou hasn't put Fukudome there. He is as pesky as they come and fits the Piniella mold of a number 2. [edit - it would also give Lou his coveted left-right-left-right when he inevitably PHs Ward for the pitcher.]

Who says they have given up on him? The comments from Lou and the extra work he is putting in with Pie himself suggests otherwise. The Cubs have given up on Pie and hate Murton, haven't you been reading? I limit my reading to the non-reactionary non-extremist stable sky posters and/or sources personally. So I haven't seen anything to suggest the organization has given up on Pie. And Murton just seems to be the hard luck odd-man out.

Lou <> Dusty. This statement was ignored.

Pretty much the same deal as Johnson. The Blue Jays sure do enjoy paying people to play elsewhere.