cubbieinexile

You see these kind of articles/notes all the time during spring training. Doesn't mean a thing, I think an SI writer ESPN.com writer wrote a column once that listed all the standard cliche stories of spring training and learning a new pitch was one of them. Dempster has been in the league for 8 seasons and over 1000 innings and unless he is just now taking steroids this is who he is. What will matter much much more then any learned pitch is whether or not he is healthy. The new pitch is fluff.

Correct on Juan Gonzalez in 1996. That year he barely beats out ARod for the MVP, Ken Griffey probably had something to do with that.

Correct on Yount in 1989. Finally an AL non all-star. That year the AL voters perferred Kirby Puckett and Devon White over Yount, and took Plesac as their Brewer representative.

Correct on Gibson in 1988. In a continuing theme the voters of the NL decided they would rather watch Vince Coleman and Rafael Palmeiro then Kirk Gibson. How about that for odd? Who would have guessed that Rafael was an all-star player with the Cubs? The Cubs had two starters. Andre Dawson and Ryne Sandberg. On top of that they also had Rafael Palmeiro, Vance Law, and Dunston on the bench and Maddux in the pitching staff. A whole lot of all-stars for team that would end up with a losing record. I guess it pays to wait until you past the half-way mark before you collpase. 45-40 before the break, 32-45 after the break including a 9-20 September.

Correct on Pendleton in 1991. That year the NL voters felt that Chris Sabo was more worthy to be in the All Star game then Pendleton.

Correct on Don Newcombe. Yep that year the NL decided they would rather have Clem Labine on the team then Don.

Name the players who did not make the all star the year they were named MVP. And since some of these players are multiple MVPs please give the year.

Last year we got .330 OBP from the catching spot. You have to remember that Barrett's backup is going to get some playing time. Whoever it is is going to be drag on Barrett. Before I lost my position by position recap I wrote that I felt that we would see a slight drop because a) Blanco had one of his bests years with the bast last year and I didn't think he was going to do it again, while Barrett would maintain his level of performance or drop very slightly. For second I mentioned the uncertainty of the position, who is going to play who is going. On top of that the best player available is Todd Walker and he is on the wrong side of 30 and has been able to stay healthy the last couple of years. On top of that second bases numbers last year got boosted a bit by Neifi and his stretch of good play. That isn't going to happen again so I put down a conservative .330/.420 for second with the right to change it when we know more in spring training.

I should say that I don't expect the run drop from expectation to be all Dusty only that the way this team is put together I think it will underperform its RC again this year, some of that is the style of hitters and some of it is Dusty. Dusty's teams tend to underperform according to their Run Created numbers. His teams and style tend to not reach what RC expects out of those numbers. Even if we look at BP's EqR his teams in recent years underperform by about 20 runs or so.

Heading into this season I initially thought this team doomed to mediocrity and the moves they made doing very little for their cause. A couple years ago I did this for one the other cubs teams and was almost exactly on with the predictions, so I decided to look closer and here is my prediction for next year, Like I said above initialy I thoght this team doomed from the start but after looking at last year I have some hope. It turns out that several spots in the lineup were just sinkholes. Now I know that isn't a shocker but I never realized how bad they were, and it also shows how little the Cubs have to do to improve even a little for this year to be better. Meaning it doesn't tkae the acquisition of Alex Rodriguez to improve upon a .307 OBP and .369 SLG. Or finding Willie Mays to improve upon a .281/.362 Simply getting a guy with a .330 OBP and .380 SLG would improve a spot tremendously. So there is reason for a good burst of offense even if some players decline from highs. AAAAAAAAAAAArgh! Got half way through my position by position recap and prediction when I accidently hit a delete button and lost most of it. Don't even feel like retyping it all. So heres a quick summary of what I think each position will do next year. Position-OBP/SLG C: .320/.450 1B: .380/.550 2B: .330/.420 3B: .355/.550 SS: .320/.385 LF: .340/.450 CF: .340/.385 RF: .320/.425 PH: .300/.350 Anyway last year the Cubs were absolutely horrible in CF, SS, and PH, and to some degree Right Field. This year with the transactions I think the Cubs will improve in all three and possibly stay the same in right field. The Cubs should lose ground at first and second, while slightly slipping at C, and either maintain or improve at third. Last year the team scored 703 runs, runs created says they should have scored around 780 runs. Part of the gap in runs and rc I think has to do with lineup construction and some severe black holes, with this prediction I think they should score about 820 runs but if we compensate for some Dustyism to seep into the lineup I would say that we should expect around 760 to 780 runs for this offense. I think one should expect a nice bounce back for this offense compared to last year. So what about the pitching and defense? Lets get the defense out of the way first. I would say that the defense is going to be about the same or perhaps slightly better. So that leaves the pitching, last year they allowed 714 runs to score, 671 earned. RC says that they should have allowed 691 runs to score, DIPS says 680 runs allowed. I would say that the Cubs are going to allow about 700 to 720 runs this year. Even with some question marks this isn't a staff that is likely to be bad, and it does have the possibility of being very good. So to sum it up I think the offense will score 760 to 780 runs with an outside chance of scoring over 800 runs. I think the pitching staff will allow 700 to 720 runs with a better chance to allow less then 700 then offense has to score more then 800. Best case scenario is 780-700, worst case 760-720. Using the pyth that puts the cubs wins between 85 to 89 wins. I personally think think the Cubs will do around the 780-700 mark and through a little luck hit the 90-91 win mark. Thats the hopeful side of me, the number cruncher in me sees around a 88-90 win season. Of course who knows what will happen during the season, injuries, trades, playing some players, not playing others, and so on. If Todd Walker gets traded for a bag of baseballs and they hand second base to Neifi I would lower the expect to wins down a good deal. So what do you think? How many wins do you think the Cubs will have.

Just bought my Cubs-Brewers tickets today and when they put you on hold they replay highlights from last year. And guess which highlight I heard while on hold? Jeff Cirillo hitting a home run to beat the Cubs. I thought it a nice twist of the knife, considering that Cub fans are probably the second largest fan base for the Brewers.

First problem is the playoff weighting. A team that only has to play one series has an easier time racking up that high % while a modern team has a more difficult time doing. What is more impressive the 1998 Yanks going 11-0 or a team going 4-0 in 12 or so? second problem is that in a league of 8 teams playing in an era of poor infrastructure, resource management, and improper/inadequate governing body it is easier for one team to separate from the pack then in newer times. Teams of the early 20th century were able to rack up the wins because team building and team maintenance overall was so horrible. And everything he is using to measure teams exacerbates the problem. Run differentials are going to be greater when teams can't build and maintain quality teams. Separation from the pack will be greater, and in imbalance in leagues is likely to occur which will favor the team who is built better then the best team in the sister league. One small quibble is that for some reason he uses teams ERA instead of runs allowed. Not sure why he would do this. This also helps early 20th century teams out because it hides an enormous amount of runs allowed while not masking any of the runs scored. For instance the 1907 Cubs had 264 earned runs, while they actually allowed 390 runs to score. The teams hitters scored 3.7 runs per game. They had a 1.73 ERA, but actually allowed 2.52 runs to score. A huge difference, a difference that dissipates as the years move on and the defenses improve. In fact the more I think about it the more I realize that it isn't a small quibble but another major mistake

Sweeney didn't call Giambi out. He said that some of his friends approached him. It's the armchair Sherlock Holmes who are the ones that are claiming it was Giambi.

Hank Sauer's 1954 season Ron Cey's 1986 season Monte Irvin's 1956 season Cap Anson's 1894 season

On top of that the Padres actually were not the ones who signed him to that stupid contract. The Toronto Blue Jays did that. The Padres in a rather stupid move picked Myers off of waivers after the trade deadline because they feared the Braves might snag him and would hurt their chances in the playoffs. Perhaps the Padres thought the Blue Jays wouldn't let him go, though I doubt it because in the end they worked out a trade in which a minor leaguer went to the Blue Jays.

Little late but I would read Twice around the bases first. Only because I haven't read it yet. Curve ball was tedious and not a very good read, Felber's was just not interesting, and Hidden game is an old book thats info has been out there now for years and years and has become common knowledge. Not a bad book but if you have reading and talking stats for awhile now then all of it has been covered already

secondary average was created by Bill James. OPS was probably created or at least coined by John Thorn and Pete Palmer back in the early 80's.

Orginally Harrington was with Tanzer after several botched negotiations in which he turned down almost 4.5 million dollars because he wanted 5 Matt fired Tanzer and then signed on with Boras. With Boras he rejected a 1.25 million dollar deal with the Padres the next year. Then he was drafted by the DRays the next year for very little. He turned them down too. Then the Reds drafted him the next year he turned them down. The next year the Yankees drafted him, not sure if he signed. I don't think he did.

Yes hypocrisy is which is why its odd that the folks at BP would revel in it. The Boston Red Sox didn't win becuase they were smarter or because they used new-fangled stats. New fangled stats don't get you to win a series after you are down 3 games to none. Curt Schilling, Derek Lowe, and Pedro Martinez are not gems that stat-head only unearthed. Jason Varitek and Manny Ramirez were not on that team because some stat-guru crunched the numbers and found them. Keith Foulke despite what Jerry Manuel thought was a good closer who many liked. Johnny Damon was a highly coveted player ever since the Royals put him up on the trading block. BP and other guys went running around for years defending Oakland and its playoff failures then when a team that sort of has that stathead feel to it wins and wins largely because of luck they chalk it up to design, It wasn't, the same reasoning that they used to defend Oakland has to be applied to Boston's success. Nor does it matter that Boston's grand way of doing things netted them a first round loss this year in which they did not have Lowe, Pedro, or Curt. Boston in 2004 had money, had luck, had pitching, had a weak division, and had great talent on offense. Mark Bellhorn, Kevin Youklis, and Bill Mueller are not the reason they won 98 games, went to the playoffs and won it all.

Rob Neyer is coming out with a book next spring about baseballs biggest blunders, it will probably have some of these. Anyway I recall a draftee pitcher holding out for some high bonus a few years back, never got it renetered the draft asked for a high sum again never got it, and a few years later ended up playing minor league ball for a few thousand. He walked away from several million dollars because he wanted more and ended up never getting it. I believe Colorado was one of the teams that drafted him, anyone remember him?

No I would bve considered a new guy, and I found them smug because they are crowing after the fact. These same authors ran around for years saying the playoffs were a crapshoot, that it was luck, and that even though Oakland didn't win it didn't mean their theories were not sound. Then Boston wins it all and suddenly its because of Sabremetrics and smart thinking. All the excuses get thrown out the window and its all hail smart guys. BP and there authors are the same guys that wanted to run Kenny Williams out of town and thought he was a fool, yet him and his stupid ways won it all. The authors didn't bust any myths, heck they didn't even come out with anything original, the basic tenants of sabremetrics were laid down many many decades ago. They didn't invent the wheel or even reinvent it.

I haven't gotten around to checking out Mind Game yet, perhaps I'll check out my local library for it. The description and attitudes of the writers are just a little too smug for me. Every year before that we heard about Oakland and how the playoffs are a crapshoot, and then suddenly the Red Sox win it and its because they were so smart and were applying sabermetrics. Yeah some of the little things worked but luck, the wild card, and a whole lot of money helped too.

Yeah something to that effect, heck I just got my hands on a first edition copy of Total Baseball and within 24 hours have already gotten more new info from a book that is over 15 years old then Felber's book. Books I recommend: Clearing the Bases by Barra Lords of the Realm by John Helyar Bill James New Historical Abstract Veeck-As in Wreck Slouching toward Fargo Ball Four by Jim bouton Foul Ball by Jim Bouton Numbers Game Essential Cubs Paths to Glory by Armour & Levitt Baseball Dynasties by Neyer Eight Men Out Money Ball

Bad Book, about 10 years too late. I thought I wrote a book review on it but the search engine has been disabled.

All the Cubs have really done is put themselves right back where they started when the Tribune bought them. Okay a couple of years after they bought them. Mid 80's talent on the ballclub with talent percolating in the minors. Injuries and stupid decisions waste it all to the point where by the mid 90's they are at rock bottom in terms of talent on the team and talent in the farm club. They rebuild 5 or 6 years later they are back to mid 80's form and now we begin are descent into the 90's. Injuries, stupid signings, minor league talent wasted or undeveloped.