« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62 63 ... 257   Go Down

Author Topic: Cubs in '11  (Read 57475 times)

Cactus

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #900 on: May 27, 2011, 09:06:48 am »
Quote from: JR on May 27, 2011, 09:00:04 am
I knew the injury excuse would be coming out sooner or later.

Granted, there's a little bit of truth in that, but our GM could have done a lot better job planning for injury contingencies and maybe keeping one of the pitchers he gave away this offseason instead of relying on Casey Coleman, James Russell, and Doug Davis.
You mean plan ahead like a couple years ago when the Cubs went into spring training with only one player who could play third base?
Logged

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #901 on: May 27, 2011, 09:11:19 am »
Quote from: Playtwo on May 27, 2011, 08:51:38 am
It's embarrassing that these "athletes" can't play a non contact sport like baseball without being hurt over and over.

Because, of course, players on other teams never get injured.
Logged

JR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13682
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #902 on: May 27, 2011, 09:11:36 am »
Or have a better backup than Koyie Hill for your starting catcher who has missed 57 and 60 games the last two years?
« Last Edit: May 27, 2011, 09:29:07 am by JR »
Logged

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #903 on: May 27, 2011, 09:22:20 am »
Quote from: brjones on May 26, 2011, 06:43:51 pm
If Hendry had done this a month and a half ago, the Cubs might still be in this race.

I wonder what this means for Davis once Wells and Garza are both back.

One of Hendry's more serious failings as GM is his inability to react in season in a timely manner to a glaring personnel need.  He has made some very good moves during his time as GM, but I don't believe he has EVER done even a decent job quickly reacting to a glaring roster need which developed as a result of either injury or a surprising failure to perform to expectations.
Logged

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #904 on: May 27, 2011, 09:26:13 am »
Quote from: davep on May 26, 2011, 01:43:51 pm
"The converts to the total rebuild approach just keep growing."

Hardly a convert.  As a fan, I have always maintained that I would rather come in last place than third of fourth.  For the high draft choice, of nothing else.

However, as a fan, it isn't MY money that is at risk.  If I were the owner, and heavily in debt, the last thing I would do is gut the team to the extent that you advocate.  From the point of view of a continuing business, Ricketts seems to be doing what he has to do.  Build for the future, but stay in business so there IS a future, at least for the Ricketts family.

Yes, Scotti posted the same thing several times, and while I understand that it is their money and that they can do with it however they please,  the savings in payroll, not just during a full rebuild, but also during the first several years after ending it and relying on the talent pool of prospects inexpensively filling the major league roster, and then having a strong winning team for several years without relying greatly on FA signings (not to say there would be none, but not to the extent the Cubs have needed), should actually end up being a net positive.
Logged

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25899
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #905 on: May 27, 2011, 09:33:08 am »
Rodrigo Lopez is not good.  But when we look back on this season, I suspect taking a month and a half to get him will be Hendry's biggest failure this year (and maybe the reason he gets fired).  It'll be at least as bad as taking a month to get Nevin in 2006...possibly worse, because this team was in a better position to contend than the 2006 team.

The Cubs have a bad run differential of -23 right now.  But if you look just at games started by the intended starting five, the run differential is +21 with a record of 19-14.  The team only has a negative run differential when Garza pitches (because his starts are when the defense goes on vacation). 

But when Davis, Coleman, and Russell start, the run differential is a putrid -44 with a record of 3-12.  If Hendry had gotten Lopez in here within a few days after Wells and Cashner went down, they could easily be 5-10 or 6-9 right now...still bad, but that would have the Cubs at or just above .500.  Given the Braves' depth at starter, I have little doubt that a trade could've been worked out a month ago.  Just inexcusable for a GM to let things be that bad for that long.
Logged

Cactus

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #906 on: May 27, 2011, 09:59:18 am »
 
Quote from: Phil Rogers
  Here's hoping we see more of Tony Campana this weekend against the Pirates. His 3-for-4 on Thursday in his first start continued a trend in which he's produced no matter how Mike Quade uses him. He should be in the lineup on Friday and Sunday, when the Pirates are starting right-handers -- although in fairness to Campana, you don't hit over .300 in the minors without being able to hit lefties and righties. Quade has to balance Reed Johnson's experience and strong early contributions vs. Campana's potential. Few in the organization ever argued that Campana could be an everyday big-leaguer, but as recently as mid-March conventional wisdom had Darwin Barney's ceiling being as a backup shortstop and utility infielder. He's looking like a guy who could be a regular at second base for years to come. You never really know how a guy is going to play in the big leagues until you let him play a while.   


 
That is true with some, but not all, players.
Logged

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #907 on: May 27, 2011, 10:02:02 am »
Perhaps for true bums, but there is little certainty about most players who actually have the ability to make it to the majors.
Logged

JR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13682
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #908 on: May 27, 2011, 10:31:29 am »
I'm always amazed how a couple of extra hits or a couple of more extra base hits can really make a difference in a player's stat line. 
 
Look at Darwin Barney's stats in April and May.  Same number of AB's, but he has 2 fewer base hits in May and 6 fewer of his hits going for extra bases.  Yet, that's difference between a strong looking .800 OPS in April and a pretty punchless .660 OPS in May. 
 
I think it also gives a lot of credence to br's concerns a while back.  A guy like Barney without walks and much pop doesn't have a big margin for error.  Hopefully the "true" Barney has some extra base pop that falls somewhere between what he did in April and what he's done in May.

 
By Day/MonthABRH2B3BHRRBIBBHBPSOSBCSAVGOBPSLGOPS
April89152942114401011.326.351.449.800
May8811272001031520.307.330.330.660
« Last Edit: May 27, 2011, 10:34:43 am by JR »
Logged

Cactus

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #909 on: May 27, 2011, 10:34:35 am »
 
Team          W L    Pct      GB    Last 10  Streak
St. Louis     30 21 .588     -       8 - 2      L 1
Milwaukee   27 23 .540    2½    8 - 2      W 6
Cincinnati    26 25 .510    4       2 - 8      L 2
Chi Cubs     22 26 .458    6½    5 - 5      W 1
Pittsburgh   22 26 .458    6½    4 - 6       L 3
Houston      19 31 .380  10½    4 - 6      W 1
Logged

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25899
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #910 on: May 27, 2011, 10:47:12 am »
Quote from: JR on May 27, 2011, 10:31:29 am
I'm always amazed how a couple of extra hits or a couple of more extra base hits can really make a difference in a player's stat line. 

Yeah, I think that's something that is really good to keep in mind with Ramirez.  On the first couple of homestands of the year, he had 4-5 balls that would've been home runs later in the season but were caught on the warning track.  If two of those had gone out and nothing else changed, he'd be hitting .302/.360/.426 right now.  Certainly not anything spectacular, but that would be well above average for a major league third baseman. 

And given that he's always been a second half home run hitter (136 HR in 3,181 AB in the first half; 154 HR in 2,716 AB in the second half), he'd be pretty much on track to have the kind of season you'd expect from a guy with his history entering into the decline phase of his career.
Logged

Cactus

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #911 on: May 27, 2011, 12:23:12 pm »
To make room for Rodrigo Lopez on the 40-man roster, RHP Robert Coello was designated for assignment.
Logged

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25899
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #912 on: May 27, 2011, 12:53:34 pm »
That's kind of surprising.  Not that Coello seems to be any big loss, but you'd think they'd try to push off the decision for a while by moving Cashner to the 60 day DL.
Logged

Clarkaddison

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1789
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #913 on: May 27, 2011, 01:12:14 pm »
It looks like they expect Cashner to be back before the end of July.
Logged

JR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13682
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #914 on: May 27, 2011, 01:14:13 pm »
I guess they may as well DFA Coello now while he's looking bad, since that will reduce the chances he actually gets taken.  If you wait a while and he miraculously starts pitching well, sneaking him through waivers might be a little trickier.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62 63 ... 257   Go Up
« previous next »