Jump to content
Cubs and Reds, join our game thread! ×
North Side Baseball

Hairyducked Idiot

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    39,504

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    46

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Hairyducked Idiot

  1. Hairyducked Idiot
    I already addressed Byrd and Jackson. Soriano cleared the NL and MLB average for RF OPS last season, and he did it with a .266 BABIP. ONE clearing the ops average for your position by 11 points while sporting an obp 40 points below average does not make you an average offensive left fielder. TWO the numbers for the position as a whole are just that: for the position as a whole. if you are a starter and hit what the position as a whole hit, you are below average, as those numbers incorporate all sorts of other crap guys who got at bats there but weren't good enough to be starters. the cubs are going to have those guys too, and they are going to bring our numbers for the positions as a whole down as well. You are severely both effects, imo. Unless you aren't considering average to be a range and that a player who is a fractional run below the strict league average is a "below-average" player. Remember, we're taking this in the context of a conversation that says that with Ramirez or an elite 1bman, the Cubs offense will be soooo bad that they'll lose 90 games even without an elite pitching staff.
  2. Hairyducked Idiot
    Let's just say we spend the remaining $40 million on Wilson and someone middling like Oswalt. If we take Aramis Ramirez's mother's projections for his 2012 and assume that the Baker Brigade is replacement level, then you are still left with no more than a 4-win gap. A realistic projection is more like a 1-2 WAR gap. Assuming Pena drops back a little and Pujols recovers to his 2010 numbers, that'a 5-win gap. From Fielder to Pena is about 3.5. Using 2011 WAR (extrapolating to a full season for Oswalt), you get 5.8 WAR for replacing the fifth-starter horrors with CJ Wilson, and you get 3 wins for replacing Wells with Oswalt. There are many paths by which the Cubs' remaining $40 million can improve the team significantly. It's absurd to simultaneously argue that the Cubs are terrible and that there's only two ways that $40 million worth of players can improve them.
  3. Hairyducked Idiot
    Remember, we're not talking about we want. We're talking about your admittedly Ramirez-fan-fueled nightmare where we don't improve *anything* on the offense in free agency or trades and spend all of our extra money on pitching. Even in that scenario, the offense is within spitting distance of average.
  4. Hairyducked Idiot
    I already addressed Byrd and Jackson. Soriano cleared the NL and MLB average for RF OPS last season, and he did it with a .266 BABIP.
  5. Hairyducked Idiot
    Yeah, that was cheating a bit on Byrd. But Jackson's a legit projection. 2011 average NL CFer: .262 .333 .409 2012 ZIPS projection for Brett Jackson: .254 .335 .419
  6. Hairyducked Idiot
    Soriano/Jackson/Byrd Random Crap/Castro/Barney/Pena Soto That offense is above-average at C and SS, average at LF, CF, and RF, and below-average at 2b and 3b. I'm not seeing how that's a terrible offense. It's not a great offense, but it's an okay one, and this is in some sort of nightmare scenario where they fail to upgrade a single position.
  7. Hairyducked Idiot
    Brett Jackson and Geovany Soto would like a word with you, and in all likelihood they'll be bringing a friend or three.
  8. Hairyducked Idiot
    No one's saying it's ideal to miss out on Fieldjols. But if you think they can compete in 2012 with Pujielder, then it's a bit absurd to think that losing 3-5 wins at 1b by having to settle for Carlos Pena, and using the difference in money to improve elsewhere, will mean the team is dooooooooooomed.
  9. Hairyducked Idiot
    Pena, Soriano and Fukudome also had above-average OPS, and Soto and Byrd were just a tick below. The offense doesn't really have any bad players on it, position adjusted.
  10. Hairyducked Idiot
    The Cubs were an average offense last year. Losing Ramirez is not going to send it into some sort of death spiral.
  11. Hairyducked Idiot
    Not if we got some good development from guys like Castro and Headley (just now hitting his prime and was around a .500 SLG guy in the minors) and got healthy, bounceback years from Sizemore and Soto. It'd be a high risk team that could lose 90 games, but the rotation would be the best in the league hands-down and the offense would have some upside. Is that offense that much worse than this one? http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/SFG/2010.shtml
  12. Hairyducked Idiot
    You are incredibly overrating how much of an impact losing Aramis Ramirez has.
  13. Hairyducked Idiot
    3) something else - he means people who are like that who are *also good at baseball*. That's kind of implied, but a lot of people miss it.
  14. Hairyducked Idiot
    i'm not particularly excited to watch the 2012 cubs in which no position player slugs .500 I don't know how Cubbie Carmine weighs your excitement, so it's hard to figure that in to my projections.
  15. Hairyducked Idiot
    Would you be dumping Z in that scenario or simply not giving Wells / Cashner / Shark / etc. a place in the rotation? Assuming we dump Zambrano. The difference between Pena and Pujielder, assuming a very good year from them, is still only 3 or 4 wins.
  16. Hairyducked Idiot
    Carlos Pena + two good starting pitchers probably helps this team as much for 2012 as Pujols/Fielder + one good starting pitcher.
  17. Hairyducked Idiot
    I went over it here and in the Transactions thread, but it's hard to come up with a reasonable projection for Ramirez that is more than 3 WAR. It's annoying that the meatheads obsess over it, but it really is true that Ramirez gives back a ton of his offensive value on defense and baserunning. This team has too many other gaping holes, especially the rotation and 1b, to justify spending $15 million or whatever Ramirez is going to get. And that's even before we get into the risks of a multi-year deal for a guy entering his age 34 season.
  18. Hairyducked Idiot
    We should go with the sure thing and not risk getting some terrible line out of our 3b like 241/294/452.
  19. Hairyducked Idiot
    Unclutch has never meant "doesn't hit well in important situations." Like leadership and defense in the old days, it means "the difference between how good the numbers say he is and how much I like him."
  20. Hairyducked Idiot
    Even major market teams have to use their resources efficiently. Spending an extra $13 million to hopefully get an extra 1.5 WAR out of 3b is just plain inefficient. We can get a lot more bang for our buck at other positions.
  21. Hairyducked Idiot
    I think we can come close-ish on the cheap. Ramirez basically a 3-WAR player at this point in his career. I think we can easily put together a 1.5-WAR platoon and spend the $13-15 million we save on something else.
  22. Hairyducked Idiot
    1b, starting rotation. If you really wanted to, you could probably upgrade 2b or CF with a free agent as well.
  23. Hairyducked Idiot
    He's either got a good chance of staying, or Epstein is doing a very good job bluffing it in order to keep his trade value reasonable. Either way, I like it.
  24. Hairyducked Idiot
    "We wouldn't rule anything out, but given his position as the top third baseman, it seems likely that another team will offer him a contract he finds suitable and we'll be looking for a new solution at third ... reading the tea leaves it looks like he'll be gone." Ramirez is gone.
  25. Hairyducked Idiot
    Hahahaha, Jed Hoyer's answer on Zambrano. Goes on about how it would be premature before talking to Zambrano, but he finished with "It sounds like you've made your conclusion, but we haven't yet."
×
×
  • Create New...