anemic offense

Who cares? With the moves Hendry has been making (especially if the Tejeda rumors are true) does anyone think he'll get more than two C level prospects? Right now I don't.

Personally, I think all of these deals are TERRIBLE. Either we give up possibly the most talented pitcher in baseball from a staff that seems iffy at best, or we clean out our entire upper tier of the farm save for E Pat, and Pie. The Cubs would be initating the start of their own demise (if it hasn't happened already). But what's get lost on people is what this means for us. We've all come to the harsh reality Neifi is going to get CONSIDERABLE playing time. So one needs to ask themselves is Tejeda that much of an upgrade (talent, contract years, dollar wise) over Cedeno (who has the chance to be a good cheap player) since Niefi will pry play second in both scenarios?? Personally I think not. The Cubs chances of short term and long term success are probably significantly smaller if they make this deal. One also needs to consdier the ramifications even if this team does trun out to be good. If we needed to add a rent a player during the season what tradeable commodities would we have left? Of the players this team is willing to part with virtually ZERO. This trade is bad on so many levels its obominable. It makes the Jock Jones signing look golden. To put it bluntly, if Jim Hendry makes either one of these trades he needs to be immediatley fired. In the course of a couple weeks we will have lost our best pitcher, a chance at Furcal, seen an iffy RF signing, and at least 60% percent of our top prospects (at least those near the MLB level) lost in trades. And for what? Although this team COULD (and I stress) be better than last year's team, we will have DONE nothing which would make this any more assured. This is shaping up to be the worst off-season in Cub history.

I'd have to disagree. While Brown has come on STRONG of late, he was a relative non factor til around the Carolina game. Then all of a sudden, not only was he getting to the quarterback, but he began knocking down a SLEW of passes (I'd bet he leads the league among DLs in that department). Definately a strong 2nd half, just not as consistent from start to finish as Ogun. I'll have to say I'm fairly surprised we got this many in. All these guys were deserved, and I thought Ogun and Ayanbandejo (how did he NOT get in??) should have went as well. Five defensive starters is extremely impressive. Individually, the only "mild" surprise of the guys that got in was Harris. I'd say of all the positions, DT is the HARDEST to grade. A lot depends on the responsibilities the team delegates to that position (upfield penetreation, occupation of blockers, etc.). What probably assured Tommy of his spot was his ability to read the snap count. It used to be once every 2-4 games where'd he time the count so perfectly he'd almost take the handoff. Recently though he's been doing this once a game. I believe he did it againt the Pack (and caused a fumble), and against the Steelerls (he hit the QB instead of the back he handed off to). Its these unbelievable plays that stick in the voters' minds.

From my understanding, the Cubs forfeited their 2nd and 3rd round picks when they signed Eyre and Howry. With Jones now coming aboard, the Cubs gave away their 4th round pick as well (their 1st round pick was protected). That's one draft pick (unless we have multiples I don't know about) in the 1st 3 rounds. These FAs sure as hell better pan out.

I don't mean to pick here but what evidence do you have that would lead you to believe it could even work out REALLy well? Pass the peace pipe 'cause I need a hit of that! Honestly? Absolutely nothing. Maybe its the move from the Dome to Wrigley. Maybe its the excitement of playing on a new team. Maybe its the expertise hitting intstruction he'll get from Neifi. Maybe its the fact he should see some good pitches. Moreover, its just a hunch. Nothing more nothing less.

Not that I necessarily agree with what the original poster had to say, I liked his angle. This day in age (although usually for good reason) people are relying (almost exclusively) on the use of stats to the point its nauseating. And while I have serious doubts about his ability to contribute on this TEAM I appreciate the observation from someone who's seen play on a daily basis, even if the stat comparisions are a little "fuzzy". What I do gather from his information (the intended purpose of the post anyways) is that Jones has some usefulness that isn't expressed in his moribund stats. Personally (I cannot back this up whatsoever :lol: ), I think the Metrodome contributed to a lot of his futility, as well as the fact there was an absence of feared hitters in that lineup (although Jones isn't exactly to be feared himself). This lineup has Lee, Aram, and Barrett, which should be enough to assured that he's pitched to. Which is why I feel this will be a great or horrible signing. He'll either play well enough to easily justify is 5.5 million dollar a year salary (by today's ridiculous salary standards) or he'll be down right terrible. And while I can't really say with any certainty he'll be good I can't totally right him off either. He may for this reason (aside from our injury prone staff), be the biggest swing factor on this team. For no one else (assuming Cpats gone, and rookies aside) do I see the disparity between the high end and low end potential so large. Hopefully we'll see the former and not the latter.

Especially if they pitch for the Rockies.

A really disturbing thing I've noticed about Hendry and some of his deals is the apparent lack of forsight to "see" into the future. While it definately shouldn't be the determining factor, you should always be aware of other teams players/contract statuses (plural??), especially on the years where yours will run out. Over the last several seasons, many of the teams needs haven't been able to have been met due to weak markets and/or little to no payroll flexibility. This year we've got the money and no players. Last year we didn't have the money to go after the marquee (guys). Its really become annoying, as well as one of many reasons why Hendry's *ss is firmly on the hot seat. You just can't leave your team (one that HAS money) out to dry like this. It's bleepin terible.

This deal is either going to work out REALLY well, or its going to be a complete disaster. I don't even see a middle ground.

BTW, this was a GREAT discussion. :) Can't get this stuff ANYWHERE else.

OBP isn't just extremely important. it's the most important stat in the game. there is no stat that is more directly related to the scoring of runs than the one that reflects the failure to make an out. a team gets 27 outs in a game-giving them away is like moving your back pieces in a game of checkers. I never said that either. All I'm saying is that there are other supplementary aspects that factor hugely into games. OBP is without a dount a HUGE part of offesnive success. But you're making it out like I'm saying the Cards are strictly a small ball team. I didn't. What I'm saying is you have a baseball team that is adept at getting on base AND at playing small ball when they have to. Maybe its' not Rolen, Pujols, or Edmonds doing this specifically, but they're the ones who benefit when the other guys do. Furthermore you can't honestly tell me this Cub team didn't blow a TON of runs because they simply couldnt' move guys over (to get them into scoring position). You can try to diminish the importance of that all you want but it cost this team games. It may not have been the sole cause (it obviously wasn't and I've conceded that) but it hurt just the same. It's an area this team definately need to improve in. On the same token, I'll also concede it's IMPOSSIBLE to imperically quantify (wins losses wise) the importance of executing small ball (when you have to). Then again, I'm also a huge believer in chaos theory. One small change in events can cause a dramatic change later on. When you can eke out a run in a two run, one run, or tied game, it could mean the difference between a BP hack or a BP stud. And although your BP stud is going to blow some games sometimes, you've surely increased your odds of winning. This may only win you a handful of games (again I never made it out be the #1 reason for winning games), but as we've all seen every game is important. If this team can improve in some of these areas I GUARANTEE you (providing the pitching doesn't totally drop off) it will translate into wins. The exact number is completely abitrary but it will help. To deny this would be laugable. This is what I was trying to point out. Stats are an invaluable tool that go a long way to determining a players worth. While its the main thing, its not the only thing. There are some people on this board (and elsewhere) who get so enamored with a players stats, they totally neglect to factor in anything else. Take David Eckstein for example. In some areas his stats don't always jump out at you (although his OBP certainly was great last year). But when you watch him play you realize he plays pretty solid D, is heady on the basepaths, makes the pitcher work his a** off, and can situational hit when he needs to. Now the OBP (for a guy in his position) is the MOST important thing, but its the other things he does in conjuncture with that really make him stand apart. There in lies the issue. You need to SEE the players play as well as crunch their stats. Only then can you appreciate the player as whole. OBP may be the heart that runs the body (of offensive baseball) but its the other things that allow it to move. That's all I'm saying.

On the surface, I like this deal (from a Cub perspective). But then I start to think about all the other Tardinal deals that shouldn't have worked but did. Then I just feel sick.

I'd also feel much more confident/optimistic if we had an even remotely capable coaching staff (its pry the worst in baseball).

Define good chance. They have a slight chance at 90 wins. They are likely an 82-85 win team. The lineup will be no better than middle of the road in the NL, and could easily be in the bottom third if Neifi plays and Walker is gone. The pitching staff is possibly top 5, but probably not top 2. That doesn't equate to a good chance for 90 wins in my book. If both your hitting and pitching are top 5, then you have a good chance for 90, but that is not close to the case with the Cubs. I'd say we have a good chance. However the two biggest determining factors, IMO, are the BP and the starting pitching health. And although this IS a different season, we haven't had both in tandem since the 2001 season. If you predicate the chances based on that fact then I guess it may not be that likely (although I don't). The funny thing is, as SAD as our offense has been I don't even think that's the main problem. If the other aspects end up being okay, we just need to be fundamentally sound more than anything else(Our defense, speed, and baseball acumen seem to have improved dramatically). Personally, I see a good offense (assuming the other things take care of themslevses, for argments' sake) being the difference between a successful season (win wise), and a playoff caliber season. It's attainable, but it's BY FAR not a sure thing, if not a little bit of a stretch.

mmm....moldy cake. :lol: This shouldn't come as a surprise. Hendry recently talked about how Hairston, Neifi, and Cedeno were all viable options at 2nd base. He made no mention of Walker what-so-ever. Walker must have slept with Dusty's wife or something because I really don't understand why he's fallen from graces so quickly. I don't think anybody here is surprised. Disgusted is more like it. Although we ALL saw this coming I think most people were still holding onto that liiiittttttlllleee bit of optimism in hoping Neifi would just be a backup. Shame on us. This is why Cub fans, on an annual basis, are some of the STUPIDEST people on the planet. We routinely are toyed with, let down, stepped on , demoralized, etc, etc, yet we always come back for more. If this isn't the definition of idiocy I don't know what is. And shamefully, I'm probably NUMBER 1 on that list.

Okay, so who's the guy who makes this hire, Lynch? If it is him it makes sense on several levels. First and foremost the guy seems (I know little about him myself) like a good baseball guy. You can never have enough of those. Second, this may be a signal Hendry is on a VERRY short leash. If Jim's moves don't pan out this season, he's probably out the door. Lastly, and somewhat related to the aforementioned, this is a GREAT move for Wilken. If Hendry does get fired, he may be at the top of the line (and regardless of the recent lack of success this should be a coveted job). However, if Hendry does indeed score a rebound, then all this guy did was bolster his resume for a GM job somewhere else. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if this was discussed, both before and during his hire. It should be a win win proposition for all parties. I like deals like that.

STL and the Cubs were very close in sacrifice hits and sacrifice flies last year, in the middle of the NL pack. Sacrifices, and the little things, are not why STL had success. The big things are. The Cards ranked 3rd in OBP, and 3rd in runs scored. There's your correlation for offensive success. And they pitched extremely well. There's your overall success. Washington, San Francisco, Florida, Pittsburgh, and San Diego were among the most sacrificial teams in the league last year. Those little things are things that weaker offensive teams do, and they don't correlate to success. total sacrifices: chicago- 106 st louis- 112 walks: chicago- 419 (dead last) st louis- 534 but i'm sure that there was some special kind of magic in st louis sacrifices that gave them the out back or something. i'll say it again, wasting an out is stupid if it's not the pitcher making it. Maybe the official number of sacrifices is the same, but that doesn't mean they (the Cubs) were anything CLOSE to the Cardinals fundamentally speaking. Again, things such as first to thirds (they do this a LOT), situational hitting (moving runners over), SBs (in key situations), and overal base path awareness gives them a HUGE advantage over the opposition. While I'm on this subject I'd like to clarify a misperception many (not specifically) have. Just because 2 teams have about the same number of runs, the same number of hits, the same number of _____ (what have you) doesn't make them equal (and I'm not necessarily comparing the Cubs or Cards). There are times when these things are more importnat than others, namely close games. Tell me, how many times do the good "small ball" teams seem to eke out runs (situational hitting, bunts, sacrifices, SBs, etc.) in 1 run/ tied games? A hell of a lot more than the Cubs do. Point is those one to 2 runs every now and again ARE HUGE. Instead of having your "keep it close" BP guy in the game you have your closer. Instead losing the game you win. You multiply this out over the course of the season and I'm fairly confident it gives the good teams 6-7 (sometimes more sometimes less) wins. In contrast, it probably costs the inept teams at leat 3-4. What would you classify this team as??? I'd say inept. And I'd also say I'm 2,000,0000 and 10 percent confident in saying the lack of the above cost this team at LEAT a handfull of wins. It wouldn't have been enough to make this team contenders but they certainly would have been better. This is why I get frustrated (again not you just in general) when so many people get "tunnel vision" when it comes to OBP. There are so many things that can make a player better that stats don't quantify to where its idiotic to judge players solely on these stats (which is why I usually try not to comment on players I haven't see play). Things such as defense, awareness, baseball acumen, and fundamental hitting are such an imortant part of the game. OBP is EXTREMELY important too, its just not the only thing. Fact is this team was SOOOO BAADDD at so many things that every one contributed to its demise. If we can improve, not solve, all of these things this team will be pretty good. And I may also be in the minority in saying it may not take a whole lot. Young, seemingly fundamental palyers like Cedeno, Pierre, and Murton seem like a start, but they're definately not the finish. Then again we won't really know until June or July...if even then.

You don't build an offense around what you think guys could do if things work out. You build an offense, and a team, about what is likely to happen. And Ronny is not likely to surpass last year's numbers. I never said that, and I agree with the gist of what you're saying. However, my "man love" for Ronny Cedeno won't let me say he'll produce anything less than last year. I base this on very little (outside his rapid progression and fundamentally sound play), but I think he will trump that .350. There I said it. Now flame away. :lol:

As bad as our situation seems/is at times I'm glad I'm not a Mariner fan. With some of the contracts/players they have that team is set up to be DISASTROUS for many years. Beltre was unproducitve with a big contract. Sexson wasn't worth the money he got. Etc. etc. Unless these guys start living up to their paychecks and/or their farm system gives them a SERIOUS infusion of top tier talent, their outlook is dire...at best.

That depends. You'd definately want you're medical staff to thouroughly evaluate the situation before you pounced on him, but it'd definately be worth a look. But aside from the injury aspect it'd depend on the construction of our 40 man. With the seriousness of this he's SURELY not worth leaving a good prospect off the list. Howevrer, with the recent trades I think that would be a non issue.

What killed the offense was a lack of OBP almost everywhere, which was due to a lack of walks. It was not solely because of the 1 and 2 spots, no matter what Hendry tries to sell you this offseason. They sucked in the 4 or 5 spot (whichever one Burnitz was hitting from), and were an awful bottom of the order team as well. And they had absolutely no bench. They were a team full of 6 and 7 hitters. which is why we shouldn't get bogged down in this "filling important holes in the lineup" rhetoric. there are no holes in the lineup, we'll be batting 8 position players ahead of 1 pitcher come april. the problem is with overall organizational hitting philosophy. hendry's too busy hoping we'll all be dazzled by a big name like pierre and the proverbial hole he fills at leadoff to worry about hitting philosophy. this lineup needs a healthy dose of OBP, not at a single position, but at all positions. Starting line up as of now with OBP from last year Pierre 326 Walker 355 Lee 418 Ramirez 358 Barrett 345 Murton 386 Cedeno 350 Patterson 254 Assuming Pierre bounces back to the 340-360 range we only ahve one weak spot in our order right now and that is RF. I would have to say our lineup is improved over last year. I don't know how anyone can deny that. The simple fact that we don't have Nefi and Corey or Hairston batting one two improves the lineup. You also can't ignore that there's virtually no chance that Lee, Murton and Cedeno put up OBP's of .418, .386 and .350 over a full season next year. Murton probably won't, but I don't think Lee's will regress all that much. His batting average will probably drop but I bet his OBP is in the .390 - .410 range. Cedeno's a different story. He does SOOO many things well that I wouldn't be surprised if he duplicated that (though I wouldn't count on it). I actually think he could surpass it.

As good as the Cardinals nucleus has been I'd think you'd be surprised what their numbers would have been with this manager on last year's team. The Cards had better overall team speed while we had none. The Cards have LaRussa who is 3 times the manager Baker ever though of being. The Cards had a roster full of guys who could sacrifice, hit and run, and get on base. We had none. Again those three players are great players but some of what they are has been made by what's been around them. In contrast the Cubs have put forth the worst set of complimentary players in all of baseball. Lee, ARam, and Barret consistently produce, 1 guy is maybe average while the rest are so below average they bring evryone else down. How many of these guys have the Cardinals had? Point is some of their guys aren't great, but they don't bring the team down either. And I think their big dogs benefit (they also contribut to it to) from that. the cards success had nothing to do with sacrificing or hitting and running. they simply have 3 perrenial silver sluggers who take walks and hit the crap out of the ball. That's crap. Again not to take away from their offensive superstarts, but this dimension of their game gives them SEVERAL runs a year. Is if the main reason for the success? Of course not. But when you have a team that does SEVERAL little things execeptionally well, it adds to the overall performance of the team. You can't tell me 1st to 3rds, hit and runs, bunts, and situational hitting aren't key cogs to this team's success. If you don't want to take my words for it ask the Cardinal fan's. I think you'd be surprised.

What killed the offense was a lack of OBP almost everywhere, which was due to a lack of walks. It was not solely because of the 1 and 2 spots, no matter what Hendry tries to sell you this offseason. They sucked in the 4 or 5 spot (whichever one Burnitz was hitting from), and were an awful bottom of the order team as well. And they had absolutely no bench. They were a team full of 6 and 7 hitters. which is why we shouldn't get bogged down in this "filling important holes in the lineup" rhetoric. there are no holes in the lineup, we'll be batting 8 position players ahead of 1 pitcher come april. the problem is with overall organizational hitting philosophy. hendry's too busy hoping we'll all be dazzled by a big name like pierre and the proverbial hole he fills at leadoff to worry about hitting philosophy. this lineup needs a healthy dose of OBP, not at a single position, but at all positions. I don't know about that. Part of this team's problem isn't necessarily the amount of guys who have good OBPs as it is guys who have bad ones. Barrett, Lee, and Aram have all had pretty good to great OBP numbers the last few years. Todd's has been good. But after that we haven't even had guys who've been AVERAGE. Neifi?? Hah! KKKKPat? A joke. LF? A disaster til Murton got there. Backups? Substandard. Bernie was serviceable. Point is, when you have 3-4 players on the field everyday who are so below the NORM its mind boggling, they give the team NO CHANCE. Last year's team was the epitomy of this. Now look at the good teams. Yes some of them are loaded with superstars, but how many guys do they have that bring them down? I guarantee you they don't have 3-4 in their lineup everyday. What I'm trying to say is we don't necessarily have to have great players at every position, just guys who can produce. If we even had average, not good, but average production from our offensive blackholes the last couple of year's (epecially last) this team would have been pretty good. IMO this is the key to the offseason. We don't necessarily need the Tejeda, Furcals, etc. etc., we just CAN'T have the repeat pathetic performances of '05. It may be askig a lot, but if you elevate our CF, LF, SS, and BP to average, plus add SP health this team will be good. Great? Probably not, though it could be if our stars have good years. But it would be good.

As good as the Cardinals nucleus has been I'd think you'd be surprised what their numbers would have been with this manager on last year's team. The Cards had better overall team speed while we had none. The Cards have LaRussa who is 3 times the manager Baker ever though of being. The Cards had a roster full of guys who could sacrifice, hit and run, and get on base. We had none. Again those three players are great players but some of what they are has been made by what's been around them. In contrast the Cubs have put forth the worst set of complimentary players in all of baseball. Lee, ARam, and Barret consistently produce, 1 guy is maybe average while the rest are so below average they bring evryone else down. How many of these guys have the Cardinals had? Point is some of their guys aren't great, but they don't bring the team down either. And I think their big dogs benefit (they also contribut to it to) from that.

It's too bad this trade can never happen becasue it would be an extremely intriguing proposition for both teams. Honestly, if both teams saw the BEST from all the players involved the Cubs would win in this deal. I may be in the minority, but I'd do it in a heartbeat, if it could happen (I'm not a Wood fan myself).