UK1679666180

I know this isn't related to the Cubs, but I think there is some interesting info in this 3 part interview. Especially, considering Schuerholz has been the most effective GM dating back to the O's (Dalton) of the late 60s-70s. Part I: http://www.talkingchop.com/story/2005/12/4/215940/326 Part II: http://www.talkingchop.com/story/2005/12/11/222434/05 Part III: http://www.talkingchop.com/story/2005/12/29/133254/47

Any guaranteed contract to him and it's a horrible move. He isn't close to being as good as Hairston, that factors in Hairston's poor defense in the OF. I'd rather see NRIs used more wisely though.

The health of the pen is going to be a concern as the season progresses. The Cubs haven't had a healthy pen since '03 and usage patterns should be looked at as part of the reason why.

You shouldn't have to be forced show a successful team using the process, I assume it is an informative paper, rather than persuasive. Cleveland fits the bill with an front office of Ivy League grads, but I see no problem w/mentioning Riccardi as far as Toronto not being as successful, yet. Mention the failures of LA, it's not a bulletproof system and mentioning why LA did not work under Depodesta, might be a great way to further metnion the success of Oakland, as one team has a large budget and the other a small budget, yet the small budget team performed much better. Mention the detractors out there, it's part of the process as well. This hasn't been embraced w/open arms.

Also, you should tell where the SABR world is going. Has there been a backlash with firing of Depodesta, Riccardi on the hot seat, Epstein stepping down? Will the "renegade" thought process become the norm as teams look for better fiscal responsibility? Discussing the future should be part of the conclusion.

I think the person who buys a WS shirt is more likely to go to a Sox game or watch them on TV. Why is that trip to Walgreens more difficult than a Citgo? :)

I'll avoid the grammar discussions, simply b/c I work on spreadsheets all day. But, I think it is incorrect to include ATL into the sabermetric realm as you have Oak., Bos., etc. They're probably the most scout heavy team in MLB, there's no other team that would weigh that they're from GA and grew up a Braves' fan into deciding whether or not to draft him. Also, if you mention Beane, you should mention Sandy Alderson as he's the one that started it and Beane has tweaked it along the way. While Rickey hired the first statistican, Earnshaw Cook (mech. engineer) in 1964 came out with a book called Percentage Baseball, it was the 1st one of its kind and questioned the way baseball was run.

Buying a hat or a WS shirt is different than actually deciding to take the family to the ballgame or turning it on in the 6th inning to get the score and decide, if you're going to watch it or hope for a reality show to come on.

They've been significantly better year after year. They haven't regressed enough, and the Cubs haven't improved enough to make up the difference. Jones is not better than whoever they throw out there in right, Encarnacion is very similar, and quite possibly better since he's younger and coming off a better season in a pitchers park. Pujols is likely going to be much better than Lee this year. Lee is probably going to regress from last year a bit, with Pujols staying the same (although he has a shot to be even better). I'm not about to guarantee Cedeno will hit as well as Eckstein, and besides, Neifi will get a lot of time out there, and guarantee less production than Eck. Likewise, Murton, and whatever hack veteran Dusty replaces him with are not guarantees to outproduce STL LF. You can't compare offenses with simple ><= looks at each position. Agreed, plus Edmonds will simply dwarf Pierre as far as production, regardless of role.

If everything fell into place, they could win more than 88 games, but I can't see it occuring. Every season has regression as Lee, Barrett, and Murton are prime candidates. Every season has injuries as Ramirez, Walker, and Wood are prime candidates. Every season has breakout seasons Wuertz & Cedeno are prime candidates. They'll definitely improve.

I've always liked Soriano, but if there was a different option in RF right now, I'd have no problem bringing him in. But, he'll be expensive, soon to be FA, and the low OBP doesn't mix well hitting in front of Jones. Of course, they'd have to have Murton hitting 2nd.

If the season started today, the Cubs would battle Houston and a slim chance battle w/Milwaukee for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. None would make the playoffs, and Houston and the Cubs will likely finish around 85 wins. 88 is the max # of wins I have this having.

How he is not better? Better contract, better player. There's no chance that Jones will outproduce Sanders, none. It'll take some sort of fluke year from Jones that hasn't happened in about 3 years for him to get close to Sanders. I'd love to see how Jones was a better option. It doesn't exist. Defense doesn't make up that difference. Those 90some games Sanders played last year don't impress me whatsoever, and Cardinal numbers are as inflated as Coors numbers. He broke his leg on a collision. I'd love to hear how his Cardinal numbers are as inflated as Coors. Did they bring the fences in to Little League dimensions during his ABs? Those numbers are something that Jones will likely never see in a Cubs uniform.

They could've likely had Jason Michaels as well for what they gave Florida. :) (I haven't forgotten)

Everytime Walker is at 1B and is unable to steal 2B, then Dusty forgets that they have to get on 1B 1st. :)

I would put him on a Maddux-like pitch count and consider using a 6 man rotation.

It won't happen, this is still a Cubs town. The bandwagon aspect will fall off. I've always viewed Chicago as a 2-1 ratio of Cubs fan to Sox fan, I think the Sox brought in more of the passive fans that really didn't follow either team before the great year the Sox had. The dynamics of Chicago baseball really hasn't changed. Regardless, of how sports writers try to portray it. Most fans in general are fairweather, Chicago has a boatload on either side of town and in all sports.

I'll end my end of the discussion on this note, this is just wasting our time. They signed him b/c hoping for a miracle, hoping that he develops a work ethic that being described as anything but lazy. He has an arm, hasn't been able to use it recently, b/c he prefers sitting a table or a bar. Milton was terrible, he could do better than me as well, what does that say? It means that I would suck on the mound. He's going to platoon in AZ. They have Green, Gonzalez,a nd one of the best OF prospects out there, he'll be a platoon/4th OF'er. He'd also be the 3rd best option out there. Byrnes is better than Taguchi, Rodriguez, and Bigbie. I said he has been fat, lazy, drinks too much, and dumb. Let's see... He's trying to lose weight this off-season, been constantly known for having a poor work ethic and he's gone into rehab. Where am I wrong? Sorry, I don't coddle him. Also, quit trying to shade the stats to favor your argument. Mentioning career numbers and avoiding what matters most. Why not mention the last two years? Listing the career ERAs of Johnson, Tomko, Elarton, what did they do during the last years and what did Ponson do? What are the criminal records like? What are their work ethics like? You missed my point, he justified it solely based on dollar amount, which is a poor way to justify any signing.

How he is not better? Better contract, better player. There's no chance that Jones will outproduce Sanders, none. It'll take some sort of fluke year from Jones that hasn't happened in about 3 years for him to get close to Sanders. I'd love to see how Jones was a better option. It doesn't exist. Defense doesn't make up that difference.

Beyond Giles, there was Wilkerson, Bradley, Sanders, etc... RF wasn't an all or nothing proposition between Giles and then Jones, there were plenty of options between that were avail. and were better.

He'll do better in Washington b/c of the park. He'll probably finish with a record slightly below.500 and an ERA in the mid to high 4s.

I'd rather see him get the 3-4 starts as the #5 starter and out Rusch in the pen, while Kerry build up endurance. Let it be known I am strictly against skipping the #5 starter, despite the many days off early on in the season. Marathon, not a sprint. the way they're treated early on impacts the season down the road.

He finished in the top 10 in SH 5 times and he had no hits in one AS AB.

Just a quick study w/inserting Kent into the line-up... 1st, what the Cubs production was last year. Batting Order: 1).658 2).739 3).978 4).876 5).859 6).811 7).708 8).699 Using ZiPs projection for '06; 1)Pierre-.709 2)Murton-.771 3)Lee-.951 4)Ramirez-.879 5)Kent-.775 6)Jones-.747 7)Barrett-.781 8)Cedeno-.739 Assuming days off, I used 145 days for each starter and a .700 OPS replacement level for the back-ups. For Barrett, I used 120 games as a starter and the replacement .700 OPS for the back-up during the remaining days. Overall, there was a .24 point improvement in OPS with the '06 lineup. I wanted to insert Walker instead, you'd get a .764 OPS and a .13 improvement with OPS.

They've improved the team, there's no doubt about that. But, I don't think they've improved enough and their talent still doesn't equal the amount they're paying for that talent.