UK1679666180

I think they will regress as well, just not much. It's difficult for any team to remain at 95+ wins as well as the repeat health from their starting rotation, even with Morris gone. I see two players that have a higher probability of injury in Reyes and Carpenter, regression from Eckstein, and a dropoff at 2B. Pujols will be just as great if not better, Edmonds will cont. to decline, Rolen will likely be a big lift (depending on his shoulder) and they'll take a hit from not having Walker/Sanders despite the lack of GP. I don't think the bullpen is as strong even with a full year from Thompson. They'll likely win the division, but they won't be the class of the NL. I see a 5-10 win drop-off, likely around 92 wins, good enough to win the division.

The two advantages Eckstein has over Pierre are two-strike hitting and pitch recognition. Pierre is good at both, but Eckstein is better at both than Pierre. Pierre is a better pure hitter, bunter, and has more speed to beat out IF grounders. For me, going into next year I value Pierre's better hitting ability and speed moreso than Eckstein's advantage with the two strike hitting and working the count. I predict based on that, Pierre will be the more productive leadoff hitter next year.

Craig, now what do you think could be done as far as improving the lack of position prospects within the system? If they made a greater commitment in Latin America, could they allocate more early draft picks towards the collegiate picks while spending more internationally on the typically younger, less disciplined, more athletic position prospects? Would they justify it as getting collegiate position players quicker to the majors to help the major league club in a shorter amount of time?

While Zambrano doesn't have ideal mechanics, I think he's more sound mechanically than Carpenter.

Isn't this just semantics? It can't be taught but in can be improved? Well, that undefined mental aspec tot hitting shows up in the kids who can't go from tee-ball to little league no matter how hard they try, or from little league to high school. Those without the undefined mental aspect are weeded out early. A combination of natural ability and teaching will determine how far up the weeding out ladder you climb. No, nothing sematical about it. It's one of the absolutes, I've seen plenty of hitters in HS who try and get by w/out pitch recognition, they're typically good enough in the field or sound at other fundmentals to stick on a HS team. There has to be a core there, 1st, and from that core comes from the improving. You can improve a pitcher's velocity and you can do so with a pitcher who doesn't have the arm to get to the next level, but you can't improve it to get to the next level.

Weaver's deal should best Byrd's deal. Their numbers are nearly identical, with Weaver producing more K's and only a slightly higher ERA. And Weaver has been more durable in his career. I don't see any reason why Weaver wouldn't get at least Byrd's money and years, but logic doesn't always/usually apply in baseball. Weaver's deal should be greater than Byrd's, but it doesn't appear to be falling into place like that. The Angels right now are the favs to ink him, but the media reports them as only offering a one year deal compared to the 2 that Byrd rec'd. Byrd is slightly over 7 mil per, which could be surpassed by Weaver, but might not be. I agree that I'd rather have Weaver at this stage over Byrd, simply b/c of Byrd's medical history dotted with arm trouble.

Aside from better than average eyesight and foot speed I cannot think of one tool that a baseball player can be born with. However, the question is, can pitch recognition, plate discipline, and hittiing for power be developed later in life then little league? I would have to anwser yes. If not, why have coaches? Patence can be taught, pitch recognition can be taught. I had really crappy little league coaches but when I got to high school our coach preached plate discipline and "hitting your pitch". We practiced it. During BP we were not encouraged to swing away even if it mean we only took 5 or 6 swings in 40 pitches. Patience/pitch recognition can't be taught, it can be improved upon though. I agree w/Craig, there's an undefined mental aspect to hitting that can limit their abilities or those who do not have this mental block can maximize their approach. I believe Zone Hitting is one of those ways to improve a hitter's approach, the younger, the better. There's a steep learning curve to hitting, the older they get, the more difficult it becomes for them to improve and the less likely the hitter will improve. dramatically.

I agree with Sing and Dubois, but not Patterson, he did K too often for my taste as well as others, but he is a couple of levels ahead of the likes of Sing/Dubois type of hitters as far as his natural hitting ability, who don't have the short stroke to maintain a higher avg. but generate more power. He'll likely have to become a better two strike hitter as he progresses to maintain that avg., the odds of him reducing his Ks to a more satisfactory level are greater than those of long-armed 6'4" 230LB hitters. I think you've seen the Cubs draft collegiate players that have better plate recognition that the more toolsy HS players. Obviously, Sing, Soto, and Coats are the exception rather than the norm. Many of the collegiate players have pitch recognition as one of their strengths, I would consider someone like Nic Jackson as the exception rather than the norm as far as the Cubs drafting collegiate position players, he's obviously more toolsy than fundamentally sound. I don't think you can get drafted and not be a good contact hitter, it's improssible for a scout to watch a hitter like Patterson in Kennesaw, GA and have him predict that Patterson will not be a good contact hitter. Even at various showcases where the talent is multiplied greatly, I'm sure Corey was head and shoulders above all the pitchers he faced. Statistically, it's impossible to look at, I'm almost positive Corey throughout his HS career has more BBs than Ks and a low amount of KS, while hitting mostly nothing but line drives. It's the hardest part of scouting, it's something all scouts look for and all position players must do well at, but it certainly doesn't guarantee that'll carry over to the next level. Obviously, college and 3 additional years of advanced comp. gives a scout a much clearer picture. You're not going to turn a frog into a prince, but you can improve upon it. There are certain absolutes when drafting a player, there's a core that expected to be there, if a scout makes a mistake, it'll be almost impossible to mold the player into something useful. I think when looking at players like Mallory, there's something to be molded from their abilities and the possibility was there for his faults to be improved upon. There's no guarantee of anything that could've been done, but I think the absolutes were there to build from.

They'll be banking on him trying to keep up with the same pace offensively, and not too much decline defensively over last year. It'll be safe in terms of years for a catcher in his 30s.

No, between the two, Harvey was the right choice.

You've seen some development of positional prospects with a good eye at the plate. Choi, Harris, Theriot, Fuld, Dubois, Hill, etc. Of course, you'll see a parallel there, they've come from more structured forms of instruction beyond HS. The Far East typically has more advanced HS hitters than the US or Latin America. You haven't seen that much from the toolsy HS prospects, is Coats the one toolsy HS draftee with the best eye at the plate? Unlike Craig, I do think some blame is needed by the Cubs for not developing a better eye at the plate. While the task is difficult to develop plate recognition, it does stand a chance of occuring, the earlier they address, the better off everyone will be. But, if you promote a player w/out addressing it enough, it'll probably not improve and will be exposed more frequently, the higher he goes based on his natural abilities. I do agree w/Craig that they need a more balanced approach as far as drafting positional players.

I don't think Anaheim wanted to match that deal Byrd rec'd, which was very lucrative. Despite the season Byrd had, many still question his durability as he probably hasn't been able to stay healthy often enough to merit a long-term deal to some. Weaver has had the track record of staying healthy and will likely rec. a shorter deal with similar or possibly less dollars.

They'll be counting on some fortunes of good health to validate that spending. Especially Burnett, who's being teamed up with Arnsberg again. They have some nice pieces in a very tough division.

You can say that about most SUVs.

Seattle had two terrible endings for each half. Congrats to Pitt. (I guess)

The sad thing is the NFL will do nothing about these officials. I remember a couple of years ago when Berrian caught a TD against Detroit that was a clear TD that was called incomplete (or feet were out) and they challenged the play which was not reversed. The NFL commented later in the week that it was the correct call. Horrible, how gutless the NFL really is. Between putting diapers on QBs and watching this crap from the refs, leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

Ward will likely get the MVP.

I've been rooting for Pitt., but these refs have made it difficult to want to see them win.

They want to win, I want them to win. Sure, they're pleased the Cubs' fans generate plenty of revenue for them. They're deeply disappointed they haven't lived to their end of the bargain so far and brought something to Cubs' fans that hasn't happened for a couple of generations. To suggest that they don't care about winning or that they prefer the revenue over the results on the field is crap. Maybe various Trib execs and shareholders care more about profit, but from MacPhail on down, they want to win just as much as the most devoted Cubs' fans want them to win it all.

I hope the refs dominate the post-game press conference, b/c if they're the best NFL has to offer, it's even worse than my already low opinion of their abilities.

It would be a success in regards to avoiding arby with the players again, but not in the overall success of the team. I'm sure all of the Cubs management felt like '05 was a complete failure, regardless if they inked everyone before arbitration. You shouldn't be comforted of the fact that they've avoided arbitration, I think MacPhail just doesn't like the arby process and prefers avoiding it (as most agents do). 3rd parties in MLB, I assume are often frowned upon, especially with those whose last name has a long history in MLB.

Anything from Miller should be considered a luxury at this stage, coming off a shoulder operation is still an iffy proposal if he'll be able to contribute much for the year. This is odd considering they signed him to a 1yr deal and not a team option for year 2. I wouldn't trade him at this stage or any stage around the start of the year, you'd have to see more progression from Hill and trust the health of Guzman as well as whether or not he would be able to handle AAA. This pitching depth doesn't exist right now with a rehabbing Wood & Miller. That's w/out factoring that once they come back, it would be a small miracle if the rest of the rotation remained healthy as well as Wood and Miller not returning to the DL at some point.

If the only thing you can do to motivate a guy is to not protect him, you probably aren't any good at motivating people. Or Sisco is unresponsive to that type of motivation. If you only use one type, it's your own fault. Every sports organization has to deal with a wide range of motivationals tools for their many different athletes. Agreed, the best way for self-improvement is to look at what went wrong and you could've done better as an instructor/organization when a player fails to live up to your expectations. Casting the blame off immediately onto that player is failing to realize any improvement for a possible flaw that could happen again. While it might not have been your mistake, take advantage of a bad situation and learn from it.

Personally, inserting fielding % is quite simple as well.

http://stats.mostvaluablenetwork.com/general/a-detailed-comparison-of-defensive-metrics/ Combine Range and Zone Rating: Interesting and simple idea.