Jehrico

I'd be interested to see if Hairston's OBP last season was inflated by his HBPs. He'd definitely be a better option than Neifi. AB R H 2B 3B HR TB RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS Hairston 380 51 98 24 2 4 138 30 31 46 0.258 0.332 0.363 0.695 If you subtract out Hairston's 11 HBP's, that OBP drops to .314. what if he's just good at getting hbp? a walk is a walk. should people count that against guys like Bonds or Biggio too? I second that. On Base Percentage is not a statistic looking forward, it's a statistic that looks at what you've done. It doesn't matter if getting hit by a pitch is a skill. All that matters is that you were hit by the pitch and that you got on base. Getting rid of HBP from on base percentage would be like taking triples out of batting average because triples are fluky, lucky hits that don't happen often. If Hairston had gotten hit 30 times, then it would be a valid point in projecting what he could do going forward. The hitter has much less control over a HBP than hitting a triple, or even drawing a walk. If a guy has a high number of HBP, then it's a logical and worthwhile point to see if it's flukish. Is it that much more flukish than BABIP? Couldn't that fluctuate just as much if not more than getting HBP? Doesn't it seem like the same guys always seem to be getting HBP? It may not necessarily a skill but it seems like it would be a result of an approach to hitting. If a player is not likely to change his approach to hitting shouldn't his HBP remain relatively constant? I think getting HBP can be directly linked to four things: one, their willingness to "take one for the team," two, their ability to make an ump believe they tried to avoid getting hit (see Biggio), three, how much they crowd the plate (Sammy never got hit much since he stood in another zip code), and four, how much are pitchers willing to pitch to them (i.e. everyone stays away from Bonds, so he gets fewer inside pitches that could end up hitting him. If he stunk and he crowded the plate the way he does, he'd get hit 40 times a year). Given those things, I don't think a guys HBP numbers can be somewhat predictive if the guy has been in the league for awhile. I don't think it's totally flukish.

I am sure you will be home shortly after they win, because on that day world peace will be declared. Or humanity, as we know it, will end. Either way, it'll be a great day when the cubs win it all.

Who says it's a wait and see? He's assuming the decision hasn't already been made privately to let Baker ride his contract out, and replace him next offseason.

My unit is going back to Iraq, with a flight date projected in mid October. Since I won't be around anywhere to catch the second half of the postseason, that must mean they'll make it. I'm resigned to the fact that I am somehow smitten as a Cubs fan, and this is just the icing on the cake. For historical reference, I was in the field and unable to catch any games in Korea in '03 when they beat the Braves to advance to the NLCS, and I missed the first four games of the Marlins series. I came out just in time to catch games 5, 6 and 7. Everyone run and place your bets in Vegas.

Interesting article on Cedeno http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dssports/pro/231sd3.htm Cedeno hit a combined .211 over three years in the A Ball leagues before linking up with Von Joshua in AA in '04. Little bet Von Joshua a steak dinner that he'd never hit over .230, but Von Joshua said all along he had the tools to be a very good hitter. It explains a couple of tweaks that Von Joshua made with his stance and his approach that turned him around in '04. Cedeno responded by hitting .274 in AA, and .355 in AAA (and of course, .300 in his first 81 ABs at the ML level). We need this guy up here instead of Clines. This article backs up why I think he's got All-Star potential...he's got the tools, he just needed someone to tell him what he was doing wrong when he was in A ball. He's got a quick swing, strong forearms and wrists, and is very coachable. That's why I feel confident he's going to continue to hit at this level. Anyone wanna bet a steak dinner over it?

http://www.suntimes.com/output/cubs/cst-spt-cub23.html If you read this article, it supposes that Hairston might win the 2b job over Walker. In the third paragraph, the article mentions that he didnt' find his stride until the second half, and it goes on a little more about it after that. Are they talking about the same Hairston that had a .361 OBP before the break, and a .303 OBP after the break? I thought he was a lot better when he was playing his native position than when he was trying to adjust to a new position in CF (he had a .364 OBP when he played 2nd, a .327 OBP when in the outfield, and a .200 OBP as a pinch hitter). The article just stood out as odd, that's all...

You forgot Williamson in that group. Except for Howry, I think he'd be the one to close over all those other relievers. I think Wuertz could be closer material if he were ever thrown into the role.

Sort of like de-signing the guy? sort of...Is exile an option?

Trading Murton for Soriano would be tantamount to trading our best outfielder with no replacement in the wings for a marginal upgrade (if that) at 2B. Regardless of whether you think Soriano has value or not (which I don't), it's a dumb move, period.

If he convinced Jacque to use them, Juan could perform a great service to the team. ...by either: A) enhancing Jaque's performance or B) getting him baninated from the team Baninated? Derwood's a farker. I was guessing somewhere along the lines of the fact that it would be so cool if we could somehow undo this whole Jones Fiasco, remove him from the roster without owing him money, that it would deserve a new term all on its own.

I love the comments below Will Carroll is a good writer when he stays in his lane. When he tries to imitate Peter Gammons, he ends up with his foot in his mouth. He's not a scooper, and needs to stop trying to play beat reporter. He's a medical analyst, and should stick to it.

I agree. I see Murton evolving into a Kirby Puckett style ballplayer with maybe a little less power.

It's not that shocking since in the team-by-team rankings, Pawelek was ahead of Cedeno. The reason Cedeno is lower is because he doesn't have a long record of sustained success while Pawelek has a higher ceiling. BA is always enamored with the toolsier, higher-ceilinged player. I agree with the order they ranked Pie, Pawelek and Cedeno. That doesn't completely explain it though...If BA is more enamored with toolsier guys, that was always Cedeno until he hit AA. He was a young guy in his leagues who was a stud defensively but hadn't figured it out offensively. He always fit the toolsy high ceiling description until he found success at AA and up. In terms of ceiling and tools, Cedeno isn't in Pawelek's league. Let me ask you this then: If Cedeno was on another team, would you trade Pawalek for him? I would in a heart beat. 18 yr old high ceiling high school pitchers are a dime a dozen, such a small percentage don't pan out. Cedeno is worth well more than Pawalek at this point in both of the players stages of development. Thus, I'd rank him quite a bit higher. If that were the only basis of evaluating a prospect, the highest rated ones would be at AAA, then AA, etc. The point of evaluating and rating prospects is to determine which player is most likely to be the most successful in the big leagues. The prospects who are higher up the ladder are more likely to reach the big leagues than ones lower, but that doesn't mean they will be the better player in the big leagues. You have to account for the players ceiling, physical tools, ability and current production too. Otherwise, you're getting an incomplete picture. Of course, the question is how much do you weigh each of these categories. There is no doubt Pawelek is less likely to become a big leaguer, let alone a starter, than Cedeno is. But I also believe Pawelek is more likely going to be a perrenial all star than Cedeno. I wouldn't trade Pawelek for Cedeno. Let's not forget, there are still questions as to whether or not Cedeno can be a successful everyday major leaguer. I understand how they rank prospects. But you're acting like Cedeno's ceiling is that of a utility guy, when it's more like potential all-star candidate, and he's ML ready now. This is the same guy that had everyone scratching their heads when Hendry put on the 40 man roster when he was what, 19 or 20, and not hitting well in Daytona? When he was put on the 40 man roster, that was because of his tools and ceiling, not because of his performance or proximaty to the bigs. In order for Pawalek to be rated higher while being so young and just beginning his minor league career, his ceiling would have to be more like that of a multi-Cy Young winner. I haven't seen him pitch nor do I know that much about him so I'm not going to dispute accounts of his ceiling, but that would be a huge assertion regardless. In my book, Pawalek = somewhat higher ceiling than Cedeno, while Cedeno = much higher likelihood of reaching his ceiling. I would trade Pawalek for Cedeno 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.

If he convinced Jacque to use them, Juan could perform a great service to the team. ...by either: A) enhancing Jaque's performance or B) getting him baninated from the team Baninated?

I remember being screaming mad at Baylor for bunting all of the darned time. I don't recall Baker bunting nearly as much as Baylor did. With Neifi, it's alright to bunt alot because you know he's probably not going to ground into a DP when he bunts.

I'd be interested to see if Hairston's OBP last season was inflated by his HBPs. He'd definitely be a better option than Neifi. I wouldn't be disappointed if Hairston wound up starting 150 games at 2b. I think he could have a break out year if that happens. His OBP increased each year from 2001 to 2004 (.305, .329, .353, .378). He regressed when he switched leagues. Walks usually account for about 70 points of his OBP, which is pretty solid, which indicates he should still be capable of putting up a .350+ OBP, especially since he's more familiar with the league now. The main concern is his ability to play 150 games without getting hurt. He's not quite Nomar-fragile, but he's probably about as durable as ARam is right now. I'd rather see Walker, but I still think he gets traded before opening day, and Hairston is a very good 2nd option after TWalk. The only other problem with Hairston at 2nd is we don't have anyone else that can back up CF. That means Neifi gets significant time if either JP or Hairston go down to injury (or even Cedeno, for that matter, knock on wood...), and that is not good. Fortunately, Pierre doesn't take too many games off or get injured much. Yeah, but he wasn't a Cub before...

It's not that shocking since in the team-by-team rankings, Pawelek was ahead of Cedeno. The reason Cedeno is lower is because he doesn't have a long record of sustained success while Pawelek has a higher ceiling. BA is always enamored with the toolsier, higher-ceilinged player. I agree with the order they ranked Pie, Pawelek and Cedeno. That doesn't completely explain it though...If BA is more enamored with toolsier guys, that was always Cedeno until he hit AA. He was a young guy in his leagues who was a stud defensively but hadn't figured it out offensively. He always fit the toolsy high ceiling description until he found success at AA and up. In terms of ceiling and tools, Cedeno isn't in Pawelek's league. Let me ask you this then: If Cedeno was on another team, would you trade Pawalek for him? I would in a heart beat. 18 yr old high ceiling high school pitchers are a dime a dozen, such a small percentage don't pan out. Cedeno is worth well more than Pawalek at this point in both of the players stages of development. Thus, I'd rank him quite a bit higher.

I'd be interested to see if Hairston's OBP last season was inflated by his HBPs. He'd definitely be a better option than Neifi. I wouldn't be disappointed if Hairston wound up starting 150 games at 2b. I think he could have a break out year if that happens. His OBP increased each year from 2001 to 2004 (.305, .329, .353, .378). He regressed when he switched leagues. Walks usually account for about 70 points of his OBP, which is pretty solid, which indicates he should still be capable of putting up a .350+ OBP, especially since he's more familiar with the league now. The main concern is his ability to play 150 games without getting hurt. He's not quite Nomar-fragile, but he's probably about as durable as ARam is right now. I'd rather see Walker, but I still think he gets traded before opening day, and Hairston is a very good 2nd option after TWalk. The only other problem with Hairston at 2nd is we don't have anyone else that can back up CF. That means Neifi gets significant time if either JP or Hairston go down to injury (or even Cedeno, for that matter, knock on wood...), and that is not good.

It's not that shocking since in the team-by-team rankings, Pawelek was ahead of Cedeno. The reason Cedeno is lower is because he doesn't have a long record of sustained success while Pawelek has a higher ceiling. BA is always enamored with the toolsier, higher-ceilinged player. I agree with the order they ranked Pie, Pawelek and Cedeno. That doesn't completely explain it though...If BA is more enamored with toolsier guys, that was always Cedeno until he hit AA. He was a young guy in his leagues who was a stud defensively but hadn't figured it out offensively. He always fit the toolsy high ceiling description until he found success at AA and up.

I can't believe Cedeno is soooo far down the list, he almost didn't make it. They lose a little credibility in my book with that diss. Once he figured it out in AA, he hit well there, tore up AAA, and hit .300 in his limited first experience in the bigs. He plays a premium position, is excellent defensively, and is young for his progress. How can you put him that low? He should have been ahead of Pawalek, at least, and not far behind Pie, if you ask me.

What kind of question is this? there's a budget. Paying more in contracts means we're closer to maxing out that budget (or, maybe, we're already close enough that we can't go that much higher anyway). That's like saying "I make $50k a year, what difference does it make if I eat at McDonalds each day or Rosebud each day for this entire month, since the total costs will each be a small percentage of my income for the year." "Maxing out" for who? Matt Lawton was the best guy available last trade deadline. Last I saw, the Cubs are at $96 million. They can afford to go to $105. They picked up Nomar (and Murton) the year before because they had flexibility. They got Aramis the year before that, because they had the financial flexibility. But you're right, all we got last year was Lawton, we shouldn't worry about being able to pick up a big bat midseason.

I like the fact he's a little crazy...that's gotta keep hitters from digging in against him. Kind of like in Bull Durham after he hit the bull...

I think TX found a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Durazo for just a minor league contract? Even if he's not healthy this year, I'd give him a guaranteed contract, put him on the 60 day DL, and hope to get a full healthy 07 out of it. It'd be worth a million in '06 to do that. The guys a lock to put up an OBP over .360 if healthy, and would be capable of putting up a .400 OBP on a good year.

If that happens, I will buy you and your girlfriend/wife dinner! Promise! Is that girlfriend OR wife, or girlfriend AND wife? Sounds like you're trying to get someone in trouble...

Soriano arguably is the worst, most overpaid 30/30 guy ever. That's not considering his defense, me-first attitude, or the fact that he stated that he does not intend to stay with his team beyond this one season before he even reported to ST. He has no intent on being a good teammate over there at all. Murton for an overpaid-one year wonder would go down in history alongside with the Brock and Willis trades.