Lifted this from ESPN.Angel Hernandez called two of them strikes.
Q: how many pitchouts did Cubs pitchers throw in 2015?
A: three
The game has changed.
And if Baez and Soler hit like they may be able to to, 97-wins-per-year with 1500K may be an annual and acceptable thing.
...Cubs leading league in Ks by huge margin in an era of Ks dwarfing other eras in Ks--no, I would not assume that's inevitable. Just get it down to something a bit more manageable. Reduce Ks by near 200 and you can do this. ...
Certainly true that Ks going way up in last 10 seasons. Average NL team Ks: 2015: 1278 (Cubs 1518)
....
Haren is currently in Bill James top 50 pitchers list.
Is it unreasonable to expect young players to meaningfully improve their K rates with more ML experience?
Good chance we do. K's are at a historic record league-wide, no? Especially if Baez remains part of the core or gets incorporated into the core; Baez/Bryant/Schwarber/Russell, hard to compile a more K-oriented core than that. A max-K core in a max-K era, historically high K's may be almost inevitable? I imagine in past, a max-K group would get reshuffled to address that. If they were to keep a Baez/Bryant/Schwarber/Russell core together for 5-6 years, isn't it almost more probable than not that the Cubs should be expected to compile the highest 5-year K-collection in baseball history?
Dan Haren ranks seventh all time in strikeout-to-walk ratio.
I hate the offseason
http://www.imaginesports.com/
Extending Arrietta makes a lot of sense from the Cubs' perspective - except for the cost. He may be almost 30 but he has low mileage and won't be carrying a TJS anniversary in a few years. If it were possible to lock him up for the long-term at a remotely reasonable cost I don't know why you wouldn't do it. But it's almost certainly not going to be possible.
Extending Arietta makes no sense and isn't going to happen this winter. Completely unrealistic.
Not advocating giving 700 PAs to Tommy La Stella but there are productive players out there who strike out less than 100 times and when you have positions striking out 165-189 times, why not fill those vacant spots with guys who do some things that your power guys don't do well.
I don't get the idea of spending big bucks on a corner OF
While Boras/Arrieta may not be interested in an extension, it seems to me to make a lot of sense for the Cubs to try to do so. What am I missing?
Extending Arietta makes no sense and isn't going to happen this winter. Completely unrealistic.
(Also, I'm not sure who we have to extend, other than Fowler and Cahill. Hammel? Motte? Wood?)
I don't get the idea of spending big bucks on a corner OF......I'd be looking to spend money in house on extensions first.
Get a CF. See if you can pry away Kimbrel and Cashner from SD. See what you can do on the FA pitching market. Keep your cheap, team-controlled talent in house.
If the Cubs really don't like how one of Soler, Baez, etc., projects, great, trade them and maximize value. But you can do that without making an enormous commitment to a FA OF. I'd be looking to spend money in house on extensions first.
Reb, I don't disagree that the Cubs are going to look to decrease K's. I disagree with you about how meaningful the change is going to be.
Let's say the Cubs bring in 2/3 of Span/Heyward/Zobrist. If I read your numbers correctly that would reduce the Cubs K's by 168. Let's give them a BABIP of .330 on those K's now balls in play. I'll round up and say that will add 56 hits. That would be an extra 0.35 hits/game. With a decrease in HR's it is certainly possible that the Cubs could score less runs. Unless you are going to get the Cubs into Royals/Giants territory of K%, it is just making improvements on the margins.
Another way to look at this is you could give the Cubs a hit/inning (single/double/triple) in every games and increase their hit totals by 1,458 and you wouldn't guareentee the Cubs one extra run without proper sequencing.
So the idea, I take it, is that this is in concert with Contreras at C and Almora at CF, right?
Cubs absolutely can significantly reduce team Ks---not just at margins. Certainly by 2017.
In 2015:
CF 165 Ks
RF 189 Ks
C 178 Ks
If Cubs choose to trade Soler, these positions are open in 2016/2017. You can reduce each position by 50 Ks. 150 K reduction at these positions. Bryant struck out 199 times---would have been about 210 if didn't miss early April. Think he can easily get down to 170 or less. Russell can reduce too.
Now, you are down to where Pirates are in Ks and maybe 40-50 more Ks than NL average. Absolutely doable if Theo makes an effort.
....Something to consider when comparing these numbers
Cubs pitchers 374 PA .114/.148/.164 .313 OPS
Cubs PH 287 PA .201/.274/.317 .590 OPS
Royals DH 646 PA .287/.353/.477 .830 OPS
Royals PH +P= 67 PA
....So, some can moan and groan about bad hitting luck in NLCS and try to obfuscate what is actually going on, the truth is that ridiculously high Ks is something to avoid, if possible, and 2-strike counts suck.
Let's keep the homers and walks and do something about the weaker components of the offense. We know what those are.
I think it's preferable for a young hitter to err on the side of patience (ala Bryant) rather than overaggressiveness. Viewed in that way, it isn't too surprising that they were often in difficult 2-strike counts. As they gain experience, they will learn to take fewer meatballs early in the count without becoming overaggressive. That will translate into better postseason success.
So I wanted to see what the besides the difference in OPS what the runs production and strike outs for the Cubs was
Cubs- 689 runs
2 strikes 233 runs, 1518 K's
0 strikes 220 runs
Batter Ahead 243 runs, 234 K's
Even 271 runs, 459 K's
Pitcher Ahead 175 runs, 825 K's
Royals- 724 runs
2 strikes- 239, 973 K
0 strikes- 234 runs
Batter Ahead- 274 runs, 144 K's
Even 264 runs, 257 K's
Pitcher Ahead 186 runs, 572 K's
With 2 strikes 6 runs, with the pitcher ahead 11 runs.
Seemed like too many ABs during course of season in which a Cubs hitter would take a pitch early in count--and I would say to myself "probably going to be best pitch to hit this AB"--and then a poor outcome to AB. Those are the pitches Cubs hitters need to attack...and put in play more often. Easier said than done. Maybe fouled off too many good pitches to hit too.
Deep counts can be a good thing. But even 3 and 2 isn't a good hitting count because of all the Ks. Great walking count (30% of 3-2 counts result in walks) but overall NL hitters batted .208 and slugged .334 even at 3 and 2. Obviously, other two-strike counts were worse.
Said this a million times on the board over the years: converse of a strikeout is a ball put in play--not an out in some other form. Put the ball in play and sometimes good things happen. Not to say that Cubs should emulate Royals: different ballpark, different core of players. Yes, Cubs great core is going to K quite a bit but you take that and work around it at open positions and get different profile guys for those spots. Maybe trade a high K guy or two, other than the key core guys. More of a balance. No, don't want crappy low-K guys either but Theo can work with this.
...... Cubs OPS is awful (.466), but even the Royals are still only .573, and the crafty Cardinals .515....
If David Price goes to hell in year three of a 6 year contract, but fails to help us win a WS, was it worth it?
If David Price goes to hell in year 3 of a 6 year deal but helps us win a WS in year 2 was it worth it?
I think yes.
From PSD Hoyer last week on ESPN 1000;
"I mean Javy Baez might be one of our better outfielders. He's phenomenal out there and will probably give him some reps out there as well."
Hoyer also said KB will continue to take reps in the OF and Russell will probably still get some reps at 2B as well.
I hope we don't spend outrageous money on Price, that's all I'm saying. It often works out poorly.
I would sometimes go along with Mom to the store. Why did I have to stand in line? I could just go over to the newspaper/magazine area and look in the Sporting News to see which Cub guys were in the minor league leaders.
Pre-Baseball America, Sporting News was only source for minor league news. Thick with baseball news and columns. Essential for the day.
Is it realistic to have had one of those under the Epstein administration, though? Has there been enough time?
The veterans of 2003 were bitchy?
My favorite moment, Strop high steppin' the Bryant walk-off.Jake Arrieta's no-hitter
The veterans of 2003 were bitchy?Yeah, I didn't get that either. And it seemed like the "mercenaries" of 7 and 8 almost cared too much, in my opinion. Other than that I agree with the 2015 assessment.
Terrific goodbye to the 2015 Cubs:
http://www.obstructedview.net/saying-goodbye-to-the-2015-cubs-is-hard/
Let's try this experiment: look at the pitch!
I'm pointing out a fact that a trained chimp can see.
Ah, a semantical argument.
The pitch was a dead fish, how bout that? It had no movement and spun just below the center of the zone, a perfect pitch for Bryant and his upper-cut swing to drill. Had absolutely nothing in common with the changeups that Bryant was missing all series.
It wasn't a good pitch. It wasn't a hanging meatball, if that is a hanging meatball almost all of the strike zone is going to be a meatball. His change up had 8-11 inches of vertical movements in that inning. The one Bryant hit out had 9 inches. It was a poorly located pitch that caught too much of the plate.
Just let him wallow, CBJ. We all have to cope somehow.
Is it archived anywhere? Cubs.com, maybe?
This isn't 2003, this team will be back...
Yeah, a great season. Hope we remember more beating Cardinals in division series than poor showing in NLCS. Fun sharing the season with all of you.Those of us in Cardinal country will have no problem doing so...
It was the most joyous baseball since 1984 ("AH You might as well just JUMP!"). Made me fall in love, all over again.good goc I'll have that song running through my mind all day now
David Kaplan @thekapman 18m18 minutes ago
Derek Johnson coached @DAVIDprice14 at Vandy. Cubs have heavy interest in adding a star arm. Price/Greinke at top of their list.
David Kaplan @thekapman 20m20 minutes ago
Looks like the Cubs are going to lose Derek Johnson, their minor league pitching coordinator. He's about to be named Brewers pitching coach.
From the late, great Mike Royko:
Sins Of The Fathers Make Fans Suffer
October 06, 1989|By Mike Royko.
They were walking about 20 feet ahead of me, a youngish father holding the hand of his son. The boy was about 8. Both wore Cubs caps. They had just left Wrigley Field after the first-game slaughter.
We were several blocks from the ballpark and the crowd had scattered, so there were few others on the quiet street.
Suddenly the father and son stopped. The boy had his head down and a hand over his eyes. As I caught up with them, I could see that he was sobbing.
The father dropped to one knee, put his arm around his son`s shoulders, and said: ``Hey, it`s okay. Come on, it`s not over yet. They can come back tomorrow. It`s just one game. You watch, they can do it.``
If you told me at the start of the season the Cubs would win 97 games, beat the Pirates and Cardinals in the postseason and make the NLCS I would have been very happy with that. Sucks to lose to Mets like we did, but the team outperformed what everyone thought they would do. They are still very young, better things are ahead.
When the AL gets rid of the DH, then it is about integrity. Until then it is about keeping NL teams at a competative disadvantage.
Since the DH came about AL has a 22-19 advantage in the World Series.
And for some reason, most Cubs fans want to continue letting pitchers "hit." Schwarber at DH would be the biggest competitive advantage the Cubs have ever had. But most Cubs fans, they prefer to see an automatic out every 3 innings.
And for some reason, most Cubs fans want to continue letting pitchers "hit." Schwarber at DH would be the biggest competitive advantage the Cubs have ever had. But most Cubs fans, they prefer to see an automatic out every 3 innings.
Levine seems to think the Cubs will let Fowler go and try to sign Heyward. That would be interesting. His defense didn't look great playing CF for the Cardinals. I imagine they'd try to squeeze 2-3 seasons from him in center and then move him to a corner spot depending on what happens with Soler/Schwarber. He still struggles a little against lefties but would be a great bat to leadoff and cut back on some of the strikeouts. He seems to hit well at Wrigley. I'm on board as long as it doesn't stop them from acquiring two starting pitchers as well. Sounds like they'll have some interest in Lackey too. Hopefully he brings his spitball if he joins the Cubs.
http://www.bnd.com/sports/mlb/st-louis-cardinals/cheap-seats-blog/article40475505.html
At this moment, I would be very happy to see the series reach a seventh game, regardless who is starting for the Cubs in that game.
I guess if the Cubs don't finish off the Mets in 6 games, this puts Hendricks in line to pitch Game 7? Not sure how I feel about that.
Kyle Hendricks - S - Cubs
Cubs manager Joe Maddon announced Sunday that Kyle Hendricks will start Game 3 of the NLCS against the Mets.
Hendricks allowed three runs over 4 2/3 innings in Game 2 of the NLDS. Maddon also indicated that Jason Hammel is likely to pitch in Game 4 of the series, though that could change depending on how the next two contests play out.
Tim Wilken leaving Cubs for DBacks.To work with Tony LaRussa?
https://mobile.twitter.com/MLBBruceLevine/status/655136592189857793
Tim Wilken leaving Cubs for DBacks.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MLBBruceLevine/status/655136592189857793
Interesting Wall Street article on the Cubs resurgence:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
"Under Epstein, the Cubs became one of the first teams to use neuroscience computer tests to evaluate prospective draft picks. The tests, which resemble crude video games, measure how adept hitters are at recognizing pitch types and deciding whether or not to swing.
>
Bad news: Russell is out for the NLCS. Baez will be the shortstop.
I don't hate the Cardinals like some here. But I must say that in the clips I've seen from Matheny and others (except for Piscotty), I have been a little surprised by the absence of congratulatory comments about the Cubs ... you know, the "those guys are just a really good team" or "we were beaten by a really good team" kind of comments that seem like conventional comments by losing teams. Maybe it's just that the clips left that part out. I hope so.one thing I noticed last year when the Giants eliminated the Cardinals, Matheny stood at the rail watching the Giants celebrate and tipped his cap to Boche. I noticed last night he stood at the rail while the Cubs celebrated but the camera cut away so I don't know if he tipped his cap but he didn't run into the tunnel like a lot of guys do.
Arrieta has never pitched more than 157 innings in a season--and zero post-season add-on innings. He has been so phenomenal late, of course, so seems counter-intuitive that might be tiring just a bit if pushed too far---- but maybe, just maybe, it would be a good thing having him pitch with normal rest for two starts in NLCS and leave it at that.
Lester, on other hand, has had multiple 200+ inning seasons and, of course, post-season add-ons. He in not Arrieta in top-form, of course, but think maybe he can handle 3-day rest start(s) just fine relative to his top form. So, makes sense to me if he goes game #1.
Not an obvious call either way.
Lackey on Baez HR.
"If I had that one pitch to go back, I would definitely do something different," Lackey said. "I threw a pitch, kind of over the plate, to a hacker. And he ran into one."
Bitter much.
I get the logic. But it begs the question - would you want Lester on short rest, when he hasn't been dominant on normal rest?
I don't buy not starting Arrietta on normal rest in Game 1. Even if he doesn't pitch Game 4, you want him back out sooner rather than later. And if he pitches game 5, he could give you a couple of innings in a Game 7 on two days rest.
As Ron notes, if there is a game 7, Hendricks would be in line for that start--assuming everybody goes on regular rest. Game 2 starter would pitch a game 6 and game 1 starter would be on two days rest for game 7 after pitching game 5.
So, that's a bullpen stint for latter guy in a game 7 and, with Hendricks starting, would expect to see that happen.
By the way, if Dodgers win tomorrow, Greinke won't pitch in first two games of NLCS and Kershaw would probably go in game 2 on regular rest. Three days rest if pitches game 1, which seems unlikely--unless they want to have Kershaw pitching on short rest for entire series.
No games started on short rest, please.
Sure seemed like Maddon could barely contain himself getting Hammel out of the game yesterday. Just seems like Maddon has lost confidence in Hammel....
Fifty years ago today, pitching on two days rest, Sandy Koufax shutout the Twins 2-0 to win the World Series. I was there.
Before we say don't do it, the alternative has to be considered.
Arrieta has never pitched more than 157 innings in a season--and zero post-season add-on innings. He has been so phenomenal late, of course, so seems counter-intuitive that might be tiring just a bit if pushed too far---- but maybe, just maybe, it would be a good thing having him pitch with normal rest for two starts in NLCS and leave it at that.
Lester, on other hand, has had multiple 200+ inning seasons and, of course, post-season add-ons. He in not Arrieta in top-form, of course, but think maybe he can handle 3-day rest start(s) just fine relative to his top form. So, makes sense to me if he goes game #1.
Not an obvious call either way.
Sure seemed like Maddon could barely contain himself getting Hammel out of the game yesterday. Just seems like Maddon has lost confidence in Hammel.
So, anybody think there is any chance that Cubs substitute Haren for Hammel to make that one start in the NLCS? Not advocating that, but wonder if it's a realistic possibility.
No games started on short rest, please.Fifty years ago today, pitching on two days rest, Sandy Koufax shutout the Twins 2-0 to win the World Series. I was there.
No games started on short rest, please.
I think, somehow, Maddon has turned around some of the Cubs disadvantages into advantages.
But, Maddon emphasizes process for the players. Go about your business. Never mentions "winning" to his players. Only concern yourself with next AB and fielding the next grounder. So, think Maddon came in well aware of insulating his players from the collective baggage we, the fans, all have. Different than most every other franchise. Don't ignore it--have to deal with it and so far, so good.
I always worry about the historical baggage. Think might have played a role in 2007 and 2008 division series---after the 2003 meltdown. Players must feel that when they go about their business around town and fans stop them to chat. But, have to put that in the trash can and Maddon is doing a good job with that. Hope it can continue.
...... I think maybe because it is so unbelievable that this would have happened so quickly, with such young and inexperienced players....
Ross (from Stark's piece):
"I'm holding onto the memories right now," he said. "I'm holding onto each moment that I'm never going to get back. So I want to take it in. I want to enjoy it. I want to relish it, for these guys but for myself, too. It just doesn't happen every day. It doesn't happen where you change the culture in an organization, a clubhouse and a city, where all of a sudden, winning is expected. That doesn't happen every day. And that's what's happening here."
Including post-season, Cubs are THIRTY games over .500 in last 68 games. Less than 1/2 of a season.
49-19.
Pinch me.
Including post-season, Cubs are THIRTY games over .500 in last 68 games. Less than 1/2 of a season.8-6 the rest of the way would be nice.
49-19.
Pinch me.
Wasn't it just 1 game in the playoffs?
He hasn't done so in a long time, but Lackey in the postseason on short rest actually had a pretty good track record. I probably would have gone back to Garcia myself, given how few pitches he threw on Saturday.
Matheny continues to defend starting Lackey, but history says Lackey on short rest and away from Busch is a disaster. Of course, around here they're already making excuses. They had injuries, and, yes, they did, probably losing Martinez was the most difficult to overcome, but arrogance won't allow them to concede that the Cubs are becoming a monster machine.
Matheny continues to defend starting Lackey, but history says Lackey on short rest and away from Busch is a disaster. Of course, around here they're already making excuses. They had injuries, and, yes, they did, probably losing Martinez was the most difficult to overcome, but arrogance won't allow them to concede that the Cubs are becoming a monster machine.
A VERY animated Theo in video and Stark piece on Cubs.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2015/story/_/page/playoffs15_CubsWinNLDS/cubs-win-big-one-wrigley-field
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsQT2qjOjyw&sns=em
I recognized Maddon, Bryant and Rizzo. Can anyone identify the rest?
It was still early Monday afternoon when Kyle Schwarber walked up into the stands of Wrigley Field. He slipped into a seat in an empty stadium and tried to picture what was about to unfold in the storied ballpark all around him.
"I just sat in the stands," he would say later, "thinking about what it would be like."
He imagined the noise and the bedlam. He imagined the brilliance of the ace who was about to take the mound. He imagined the electricity of a pivotal October baseball game between the Chicago Cubs and the St. Louis Cardinals, two longtime rivals who had never met before in Wrigley in a game of this magnitude.
"So I'd say it exceeded my expectations," Schwarber said, afterward, "by infinity."
Jayson Stark on Cubs.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2015/story/_/page/playoffs15_CubsRockWrigley/cubs-historic-slugging-rocks-wrigley-field-game-3-win
Apparently Rondon was locked in the bullpen bathroom for about 5 minutes in game 1.
One thing the Cubs should be prepared for is more bunting on Jon Lester. The scout of one playoff team says one team has a plan to bunt (a lot) on Lester to the third base side. Lester is a great pro with an even greater postseason record. But the scout suggests the goal is to "frustrate" him via the bunt ... The Cubs are expected to take a look at the big starters who are free agents such as David Price and Jordan Zimmerman, but perhaps their biggest contract meeting will be with sudden superstar Jake Arrieta, who they will try to lock up this winter, if possible. While Arrieta has Scott Boras, he also was previously in a place where it didn't work at all, and seems to understand it wouldn't be such a bad idea to stay in Chicago ... Joe Maddon is moving into the all-time great category. "He creates an atmosphere where guys play loose," one rival scout said, admiringly. (One quibble: Tommy La Stella is not a No. 5 hitter but a "seven or right hitter," one scout said) ... The Cubs have made a lot of brilliant moves but they may have caught a break in the draft a couple years ago when the Astros picked Mark Appel No. 1 , leaving Kris Bryant for Chicago. The Cubs love college hitters high for their predictability (they took Kyle Schwarber the next year), so they may still have taken Bryant, but it's no certainty they would have. Bryant ("so agile, so instinctive," says one scout) has turned out to be a brilliant all-around star, with the cutting down on strikeouts only area for improvement ... Center field will be an area of need, and they haven't ruled out a run at Dexter Fowler, who is said to have been "awesome" in the clubhouse, as well as on the field. Denard Span and Austin Jackson, who is a backup for them now, are two more center field options. Prospect Albert Almora, a former No. 1 pick out of high school in Miami, is a couple years away.
The bar with Cubs fans (who either weren't paying attention to the game or flipping off the camera) the telecast kept cutting away to.... The last couple times the announcer referred to it as the "draft kings Cubs fan bar". As if there wasn't enough advertising during the commercials..
one more....you lost me on this one
- The "Draftkings" Cubs bar made me want to throw something through the television.
Interview with Theo after the game. He says that two weeks ago Schwarber told him he was going to hit a HR off Cole into the river.
http://www.csnchicago.com/video_content_type/theo-epstein-jake-was-domiant
Interview with Theo after the game. He says that two weeks ago Schwarber told him he was going to hit a HR off Cole into the river.
http://www.csnchicago.com/video_content_type/theo-epstein-jake-was-domiant
If the Ross were on the Cubs in 2013 and 2014, do you think they would have made the playoffs?We'll never know, but many teams that shouldn't do well, do. My personal opinion is that the best team in baseball in terms of talent hasn't won the WS in years. This year some of the best teams in baseball on paper didn't even make the playoffs. There are intangibles that tip the scales.
Anyone who doesn't believe in the "intangibles", or whatever you want to call what a guy like Ross brings to a team (especially a young team like this one), is a fool.
Intangibles can be extremely important to a team with good players.Instant proof.
They are worthless to a team with bad players.
Good read about David Ross:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13824211/their-backup-catcher-176-hitting-david-ross
"If I could call Cubs games in the World Series, it would be the highlight of my career," Buck said.
When pressed if he wasn't being a bit hyperbolic given all that he's done at Fox, which includes being on the call for four World Series in his hometown of St. Louis, Buck reiterated his statement.
"When people say, 'What's the one thing you want to do?' that's my answer: Cubs in the World Series," Buck said. "I don't want to do an NBA Finals or a Kentucky Derby or moderate a presidential debate, as if that would happen. I want to sit at Wrigley Field, look out and know that a World Series game is about to start. It would be the cherry on top."
Make them move even by dumping the AL DH.
Those rankings sure don't appear to pass the smell test.Make them move even by dumping the AL DH.
I'm still not confident about the playoff game (the Pirates were 53-28 at home!), but I'll be happy no matter how things turn out. In any season before 2012 ('11? when did they add the second WC?), the Cubs wouldn't be in the post-season at all.
80 sporadic (at best) AB's...means little...
Cubs finish 46-19 since that Cole Hamels no-hitter in Phillies sweep.
Recall mood here was low after that game. Go figure.
Would've been hard to match a .550 OPS. Yes, he improved his BA, but it was an empty .740 OPS. Maybe we're talking baby steps here, but 1 homer, 4 RBI, and 3 unintentional walks in 80 PA's doesn't inspire confidence in me. Perhaps I'm the only one.
Well, he's also improved his BA, OBP, SLG and OPS. Don't those count?
The number of at-bats isn't important. The point was to show pace. His stats aren't any more flattering if you extrapolate to 300 or 400 AB's.
I like his defense a lot, but there's been an assertion of improvement of his offense and I don't really see it w/ the slight exception of strikeouts.
No Cub had 600 AB this season. Fowler came close, but he is the only one. Anything's possible, so maybe Baez would end up with 190 Ks and only 8 HRs for a full season, but I doubt anyone else thinks that is going to happen. His strikeout rate is high at 29% but it's not outrageous like it was last season. I'll be shocked if power is a problem with Baez over time.
I suppose that the sky-high expectations of Baez, with such a singular focus on his gargantuan HRs, has caused some to be dismissive of his potential contribution to the Cubs, especially in comparison to Kris Bryant. But I'm pretty encouraged by what I've seen this season. Excellent defensive middle infielders don't grow on trees, especially ones who can hit. Seems to me that he's shown more potential for being able to hit major league pitching over time this season than last season. He's still only 22 years old and having shown a willingness and ability to make adjustments at the plate, I'm hopeful he can be a good, maybe really good all-around major league player.
Baez ends up with a 600 AB pace for 8 homers, 32 RBI, 32 walks, and 190 K.
Baez ends up with a 600 AB pace for 8 homers, 32 RBI, 32 walks, and 190 K.
..l It has already been noted that the Cubs pitchers have set a major league record for strikeouts...
This has been a pretty satisfying season so far, on a number of fronts.
From Muskrat, Kris Bryant leads all rookies in HR, RBI, runs scored, and 2B. Only other rookie to do that is Ted Williams.
Question: Hendricks has had two good outings, Haren one, and Hammel one since we clinched a playoff spot. Has something clicked or is it because the pressure is off?
Nice piece on Arrieta by Jerry Crasnick.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13785255/jake-arrieta-chicago-cubs-all-perseverance-determination
Coghlan with three hits out of three ABs so far tonight: 3B
Coghlan is in a hitting slump. La Stella is red hot. My guess is that the lineup from last night's game is the one we'll see against Cole, at least to start.
Coghlan has had a decent year. Certainly not a great year. I would expect him to start in the outfield against Cole, but only because he is probably the best choice, not because he "has earned it".
Rizzo should start because he is hands down the best choice.
Bryant should start because he is hands down the best choice.
Russell should start because he is the best choice.
Montero and Fowler should probably start because they are the best choices.
You can even make the case that Castro is quite a bit better than the alternatives, although I can see LaStella starting against the right hander.
But if it comes down to "Coghlan or Schwarber", or "Coghlan or Soler", I don't think he is the clear cut choice.
But there's a reason we almost never see this and, when we do, it's driven by extraordinary circumstances.
Biggio was minus 39 Runs Saved 2005-2006-2007 when he returned to 2B. He was bad defensively there, but was an institution in Houston and, of course, a future HOFer. Lost his 2B skills, not surprisingly considering his age. Biggio is one of my all time favorite opposing players but he is yet another bad example and proves the opposite of your point.
Biggio was minus 39 Runs Saved 2005-2006-2007 when he returned to 2B. He was bad defensively there, but was an institution in Houston and, of course, a future HOFer. Lost his 2B skills, not surprisingly considering his age. Biggio is one of my all time favorite opposing players but he is yet another bad example and proves the opposite of your point.
Is that it? You keep saying anybody can do this and you have 115 years of baseball history to work with.
1. Craig Biggio played second base for eleven years (1992 through 2002), played the outfield 2003 and 2004 (exactly a couple of years, since that seems to be important to you for some reason), came back to play second base in 2005 through 2007..
You failed to understand the sarcasm I used about Rose's defense, so I won't use any here. Biggio was a good defensive second baseman earlier in his career, and came back to be a good second baseman after a couple of years in the outfield, in spite of your silly contentions. But of course, Bryant couldn't, because you say so.
Dave-I'll ask you again. You ignored the question that tests your argument. You say nobody could lose skills after being moved off a more difficult position to a less demanding position for a couple years and that returning to that position as a regular and playing well there is no problem.
So, with 115 years of baseball history since 1900, give me 5 or 6 examples. First you said Rose was good at 3B; now you concede maybe he wasn't. If anybody can do it, give me the examples. Simple question. You have from 1900 to 2015. Better if we leave out outlier Hall of Famers but that's a start. Waiting.
Myths? Players have been moving around on the diamond since 1875. When did anybody say that can't be done?
1. His bad year means he'll be really signable for relatively cheap? Bargain opportunity?
But, if you installed Mike Olt as your full time 3B and Bryant as full time LFer for couple of years
I suggest: Fowler, Coghlan, Bryant, Rizzo, Schwarber, Castro, Montero, Arrieta, Russell.
There are a number of myths in baseball, many of them to make the game more mystical and entertaining. Did Jim Edmonds have to dive on all those baseballs hit his direction, probably not, but it looked cool and sold tickets.
Growing up, it was always a big topic of conversation when a player changed position...oh, no, it will never work! He's a shortstop, no way he can play centerfield! But Robin Yount is in the HOF. I remember a lot of angst at all the moves that Pete Rose made...successfully. The myth is that players are best at one position and that moving them is dangerous, because, well, he's an expert at third base but knows nothing about left field! People forget that these guys, for the most part, have been playing other positions in practice, since Little League, in high school and college, etc. Joe Madden is the anti-Reb. He's moved Coughlan from left to right to second to first. Bryant has played all over. Maddon knows that somewhere, sometime, Herrera has played every position on the diamond. Everyone thought he was a genius for how he used Zobrist and others in Tampa. Actually, he just spit in the face of myth and tradition. It wasn't genius, it was distain. These are athletes; some are locked into a position because they excel at it or because of lefthandedness, but they can all move. Successfully.
From HeymanI predict Shark signs with the NYYankees and proceeds to suck in 2016 and then get into some type of controversy during the summer and the fans there will hate him.
Could the Cubs revisit Jeff Samardzija in the winter? David Price is expected to be their top pitching target due partly to the obvious Joe Maddon/Rays connection, but could Samardzija be a fallback guy? They offered him in the "low $80s (millions)," a few years back, and made multiple offers (though they included option years), that deal still looks reasonable considering his surprising struggles this year. Plus, he pitched best for them.
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/25324936/inside-baseball-nationals-to-let-williams-go-and-more-mlb-moves
...Could the Cubs revisit Jeff Samardzija in the winter? .... could Samardzija be a fallback guy? They offered him in the "low $80s (millions)," a few years back, and made multiple offers (though they included option years), that deal still looks reasonable considering his surprising struggles this year. Plus, he pitched best for them.....
Easy to have missed Bryant in CF. He has grand total of three chances out there.
CF is more valuable on defensive spectrum than 3B. But, hard to believe that, even if moved to CF as a regular, Bryant would play there very long. Would lose 3B skills in year or two and end up as corner OFer too soon and doubt Cubs want that given how solid he is playing at 3B. Think long-term.
Baez is very good at 3B. No surprise there considering he is a very good SS and a very good 2B. Baez is an up-the-middle player so should be very good at 3B. Same would be true for vast majority of all top middle IFers in game. Yes, it's enticing if see them there but doesn't follow that smart to move them there permanently.
From HeymanOh, good Goc.
Could the Cubs revisit Jeff Samardzija in the winter? David Price is expected to be their top pitching target due partly to the obvious Joe Maddon/Rays connection, but could Samardzija be a fallback guy? They offered him in the "low $80s (millions)," a few years back, and made multiple offers (though they included option years), that deal still looks reasonable considering his surprising struggles this year. Plus, he pitched best for them.
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/25324936/inside-baseball-nationals-to-let-williams-go-and-more-mlb-moves
Regarding some of Craig's thoughts above.
Cahill looking very good as a reliever. But, look at his recent contracts (as a starter). He won't get anything close to that but hard to believe he will be content as a middle reliever going forward. Think very likely will sign with club giving him clear rotation opportunity.
Why not pay Fowler fair-market price?
For me the reason is it would eliminate Price. The difference between Price and the next tier of starter is greater than the difference between Fowler and somebody like Jackson or other stop gap..
As usual, you ignore the point of the post and argue peripherals. Rose did NOT lose whatever skills he had as an infielder after playing a couple of years in the outfield. NO ONE loses their skills at playing infield after a couple of years in the outfield. To argue that is foolish. Even if they were a little rusty, it could easily be refreshed in a month of spring training.
You completely ignore Epstein's comments that the good thing about drafting infielders is that they can play anywhere on the field. What sense would there be in that if you are NEVER going to play them anywhere on the field.
It goes back to the discussion that we has several months ago. IF the Cubs wanted to play BOTH Olt and Bryant at the same time, and IF one had to be at third base and the other at left field, only an idiot would play Bryant at third and Olt in left field if that would be weaker defensively than the other way around.
Quite simply put, NO infielder in his early 20s is going to lose his infielding skills by playing the outfield for a couple of years. Barring injury, it just wouldn't happen. Nor would he lose trade value, since every GM in the country would realize that they could play him in the infield if they acquired him.
4. Fowler is an OBP guy at the CF position where we are otherwise most lacking. Why not pay Fowler fair-market price? Fowler is an excellent clubhouse guy, he's not old, and he knows he's part of a potentially magic recipe. The Cubs may not need to outbid the world to retain him; a reasonably fair-market market-competitive offer may well suffice. If you later on end up with a surplus in CF, you can always play Fowler or Almora in a corner; do the flexibility shuffle; or trade Fowler or Almora for fair value.
I'm really pretty turned off on going after any of the big name starters this offseason except maybe Price. ... I think the bidding war for him is going to go beyond what the Cubs will pay. I think they'll still be focused on a trade for a cost-controlled younger starter this offseason, even though it's going to cost a ton in a trade. Hopefully Baez has shown enough in the minors and in September that he can be a key part of a deal.
I also expect a high OBP leadoff type will be added in CF or at 2B. .... They'll try on Fowler (but may settle on Span or a trade). If they get their leadoff type in CF, Kendrick is an option at 2B (his name came up at midseason as a free agent target for the Cubs). If not, it could be Zobrist.
Read your own posts.
....I agree that Castro is the easiest to move (with all of that, really), and I expect that that's what will happen, but for me it would come down to what I could get in return. I'm not going to just give him away, and I don't know that I would head into the offseason trying to trade him. There were apparently no takers for him at the break, so are teams really going to be clamoring for him now? Good Castro is a real asset and fun to watch. If I don't get what I think is good value for him, I'm keeping him. Joe likes flexibility and is probably the best manager there is at making that kind of situation work....
Pete Rose is a great example of that. He started out as a middle infielder, and then moved to the outfield, mostly corner outfield, for 6 years. Totally lost his third base skills. He had to fake it for many years after they moved him to third base. Everyone that saw him there marvelled at how he could play third base after losing all his skills.
Must have just been faking it.
Schwarber/Bryant/Soler could be HRod/Hill/Sosa bad on defense.
No...no, they could not...
But that said, now that he's presumably improved his trade value as well, I do think it's likely he will be traded.
Assuming the Cubs want to upgrade the team through trading, and that Castro is valued by other teams, he seems to me the natural guy to go. So much of his game just doesn't fit with the profile the Cubs want in their players. He's really not a very heads up guy, either at the plate or in the field, he does as well as he does because of his natural gifts
CF is more valuable on defensive spectrum than 3B. But, hard to believe that, even if moved to CF as a regular, Bryant would play there very long. Would lose 3B skills in year or two and end up as corner OFer too soon and doubt Cubs want that given how solid he is playing at 3B. Think long-term.
So, here's the plan:
1. Sign the best single rotation guy you can.
2. Resign Cahill and Richard, and retain Wood.
3. Go hard after one more good relief pitcher X, better than Hunter. Pen: Rondon, Strop, X, Grimm, Cahill, Wood, Richard.
4. Resign Fowler, 3-years + options.
Whatever adjustments Castro has made, his swing looks 1000 times better. Granted, he still has trouble recognizing the slider down and away. But he's got me trying to decide whether he is permanently fixed offensively or whether this is just a phase where he's seeing a lot of good hitter's pitches. His low BB rate is not much of a concern when he's batting over .400 as he has over the past month. But in the long run, it's still an issue. I think I'm leaning towards using this hot streak as leverage in trading him during the offseason. Let Baez start at 2B and Bryant at 3B for the most part next season. La Stella can be the versatile infield sub.
..Cahill looking very good as a reliever. But, look at his recent contracts (as a starter). He won't get anything close to that but hard to believe he will be content as a middle reliever going forward. Think very likely will sign with club giving him clear rotation opportunity.....
The WAR explained link is the current one on BR site, as far as I can tell. Cameron didn't say anything that contradicts what is in that link. If it's wrong in interpreting Fangraphs, hope they correct that.
Do you mean "now" instead of "not" in your second sentence above?
The link you gave is out of date. Fangraphs has not published how the treat park factors. In the past the adjusted for home starts (roughly half) as well as league. Would it be more accurate to do every park, sure. Will it amount to much of a difference no. The link you provided BR applies the park/league to the league average pitcher and not the pitcher himself. You also missed the point, when I was mentioning league/park adjustments I was talking about xFIP- which is league and park adjusted. If your going to compare to a career average this is the type of stat you want to use. Not just ERA or xFIP or whatever you want to use.
fWAR ignores actual parks where pitcher at issue pitches and ignores actual teams pitches against (see link). rWAR takes that into account. That's what I was referring to.
Not trying to keep score on any of this.
Regarding league differences and environments, ironic you would ask that question because you rely on fWAR--which totally discounts park factors and makes no league adjustments at all. I'm interested in that (are you?) and if we use rWAR we get 4.5 WAR for 2014 Fister, a career high. So, which is it..context of park and league or not?
1) At the time it was a much larger difference. The TJS surgery is the bigger thing, but that got lost.
2) In a world where Herrera can stick around for a year, Olt can stick with somebody on the bench. Herrera won't be here much longer anyway.
3) He's Ben Revere with better defense and less speed. I just don't like that type of player. Almora can easily be what he is.
4) When your comparing his 2014 to career are you taking into account the league difference and different offensive environments? Just comparing raw numbers is worthless and that is what you did. If you take the different factors into account those other seasons are above average and 2014 wasn't. ERA is dependent on a bunch of factors outside the pitchers control and everything about 2014 screamed it was a fluke. If you just look at ERA (which you are doing, even though you claim it is just me) sure it was his best year. When you look at the decreased GB% (lower velocity, easier to square up and elevate), lower K% even though he moved to the NL, abnormally low BABIP it screams as something to not want on your team, and xFIP- becoming below league average. I hope some other team gives him a ton of money, just not the Cubs.
5) When I mentioned it here, people thought I was crazy.
Curt Samardzija=Russell. Let go of the hate.
1) I never said deGrom was bad. He just wasn't someone I would target in a trade. The home/road splits and TJS surgery concern me.
2) I missed on Olt saying he'd be an interesting bench guy, I never predicted stardom for the guy. Just checked Olt has a higher wRC+ than Herrera with the White Sox.
3) I don't like low power, low walk players that are dependent on BABIP for their offensive value. I still wouldn't trade for him. I doubt the DBacks trade him either.
4) Comparing his xFIP to his career xFIP isn't how you do it. 2011 with Tigers it was 2.75. 2012 3.39, 2013 3.42. 2014 3.85. You compare it the ERA and 2014 sticks out like a sore thumb. His xFIP- has been below league average until 2014. Besides the forearm issues he also had shoulder issues in 2014. The guy is injury prone and isn't the pitcher he used to be.
5) If you want to give my "misses" I railed against Jackson, loved Samardzija, wanted Hammel as a FA and mentioned that Arrieta had ace stuff the day we traded for him.
6) I am also quite happy to be wrong about Castro turning it around with the Cubs. I thought he had a chance to do it somewhere else, but I've always liked him except for a 2 month span of sucking.
as Fister loses velocity he is going to be a less effective ground ball pitcher. What used to be ground balls will become harder hit balls. He'll have to reinvent himself as a fly ball pitcher. That takes excellent command because the margin of error is small. See Dan Haren.
You do realize that FIP, xFIP are more predictive of the future success than any stat you mentioned. So if your looking to see what the future holds don't you want to look at the stats that have the highest predictive value? Not your "real world" stats. fWAR is more predictive of the future than rWAR. 2014 he had an fWAR of 1.4.
His K% fell from 18% to 14.8%. His fastball velocity dropped from 88.8 to 87.9. His 2014 GB% was down from 2013. He lived off of a career low .262 BABIP. There was nothing to like about his 2014 season except for his ERA. Fister had forearm tightness this year. Previous injury is greatest predictor of future injury and forearm tightness can turn into TJS. He is any easy pass, I'd rather give a rotation spot to Wood, Cahill or Turner before I'd sign Fister.
I'm not saying that Fister and Weaver are similar pitchers. I'm saying that as Fister loses velocity he is going to be a less effective ground ball pitcher. What used to be ground balls will become harder hit balls. He'll have to reinvent himself as a fly ball pitcher. That takes excellent command because the margin of error is small. See Dan Haren.
Wada pitched one inning on September 4. He gave up 1 hit and 1 unearned run, but I don't think it was very impressive. Maybe he got hurt again.
"give a rotation spot to Wood, Cahill or Turner before I'd sign Turner. "
huh?
Too much sucky sucky.
His velocity dropped the year before to 87.8 as well as his strike outs, so it just wasn't this year. He outperformed his peripherals a lot in 2014. That is when the decline started. The slower his fastball gets the easier it is to hit. The easier it gets to hit, the harder contact he will give up. The harder the contact the less ground balls we will get.
Weaver and Young are both pitchers that don't have fastballs and don't strike people out. They do it by working in a small silver of the zone up high. If they miss it gets hit a long way. This just isn't the type of pitcher the Cubs should be going
after.
He averaged 89.6 in 2011 that is why I gave it the range, just getting back to 88 would be fine. I doubt that happens.
I think Hendricks would be best sandwiched between Arrieta and Lester...It would probably be best for all three in terms of variance in speeds. I have lost confidence in Hammel. I think there would be value in going after a few guys like Iwakuma, Leake, Buehrle, or Chapman (converting him to starter.)
Fister fastball is 86 and falling they last two years. Unless they have something to bring it back up to 88-90 he isn't the type of pitcher a contending team should go after. Fister was a guy that works low in the zone and gets ground balls. At 86 that isn't going to work. He will have to pitch up in the zone in an incredibly small area to get weak contact. Let another team feel the pain. Even Maddux reached a point where he couldn't get by at a low velocity.
Rickett's didn't say a whole lot. If the Cubs don't go after Price it will be more they don't want three expensive pitchers than what they can afford.
Think you're going to see lots of Fister rumors around baseball. Starting already.
Cameron piece concludes with him wondering if Doug Fister could be a comp for Hendricks. Interesting because Fister came up repeatedly on the board as Hendricks-upside guy when Hendricks was putting up very good numbers in minors.
Cahill will be a free agent at the end of the season.
Cahill will be a free agent at the end of the season.
....... I do sometime wonder whether a guy like Hendricks could become a real asset at a time when players are increasingly used to facing really hard throwing pitchers (so long as he is executing well).
Dave Cameron makes the argument for Kyle Hendricks.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-cubs-have-a-3-starter/
Wouldn't it be great if someday Cardinals fans would bitch ". . . that bastard Bosio will just get somebody off the scrap heap and turn him into the best pitcher in baseball again."
Very nice to have Hendricks with a really good game. I wonder if his stuff benefits from unfamiliarity? Division teams have seen his change a lot of times, does that perhaps help them adapt to it somewhat? But Kansas City, a little tougher? Or just a function of him pitching really well, and having his command sharp?
A lot of average pitchers can pitch very, very well on their sharp days when things are working. Sometimes playoff adrenaline brings out their best, sometimes it works against optimal command.
Honestly, I'm just happy the Cubs are in the playoffs, whomever they face. Hoping that they advance to the NLDS (especially since I can actually attend at least one game if they do). But if they don't this will have still been one Hell of a season and I am confident that it is only a taste of the future.:D :D :D
It's strange that you infer that from that post.
I'm with you, tico. With the season the Cardinals have had, beating the Cubs would be no big deal, but were we to take them out...the pain for the Cardinals would be unreal. One and out TO THE CUBS! YES!
Call me crazy, but I think it might be a good thing they lost today.I'm with you, tico. With the season the Cardinals have had, beating the Cubs would be no big deal, but were we to take them out...the pain for the Cardinals would be unreal. One and out TO THE CUBS! YES!
I'd much rather face the Cardinals in a one game play-in than the Pirates.
Pirates for NL Central Champs!
Losing yesterday took the fun out of clinching a spot.
It feels empty. Good but not as exciting.
I've been curious about how this works...did it say anything about if you will be eligible for future drawings if the Cubs go further? I couldn't find anything about that in the website.
I now have an even stronger (highly personal) desire for the Cubs to host the Wild Card game. I just learned that I will have an opportunity to purchase four playoff tickets (through the online lottery that was held) on Monday. Go Cubs!
Len Kasper talks to Jonah Keri:
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=13719365
That didn't have anything to do with your suggestion.I have unfriended you at Facebook. Well, if we were friends on Facebook, you would be unfriended.
Is that supposed to be in purple?
We'll see. I totally agree that often a voice can get old after a while, and a new guy with a fresh voice can be beneficial. Still, I wonder if Maddon might not perhaps have more staying power.
1. He was at Tampa for what, 9 years? And seemed to sustain pretty well there.
2. I think "tough guy" acts can wear thin after a while. But I'm not sure more positive ones wear out as fast.
3. Some of his stuff is perhaps rightly termed "an act", but I think there may be deeper enduring qualities that will sustain respect and trust. Just being smart. Loving the game. Being cheerful. Communicating well. Being a good decision-maker, such that players tend to trust, for good reason. Being consistently and perhaps sincerely pro-player, so that players don't distrust or come to think it's all a fake. Being consistently pro-fun, so that players don't think he's a killjoy. I think it's possible that he may be both respected and liked and trusted for a pretty long time.
I think a factor may also be the character of some of the lead players may be conducive to sustained success. Rizzo, Arrieta, Lester, Russell, Bryant, Schwarber, there seems to be a core of guys who seem to be pretty self-motivated. Not sure they totally need a domineering dictator manager to keep them motivated. Maddon's not a big rules-guy; success and no-rules can be a problem for some guys, but there are indications that the Cubs could have a pretty strong clubhouse, and may not all fall victim to wine-women-and-song even after they experience success, fame and fortune.
Yeah, the team morale effect or, put another way, the development of a winning culture, has been huge. Maddon just seems to hit the right notes.
Maddon has the advantage of being new to the organization. Think it's harder when he's been around awhile. He has a very specific kind of "act" and sometimes stuff doesn't wear as well over time. We'll see. ....Yeah, he's a genius---until the next disappointing Cubs season. Then, he'll be a bum.
71? Did you go to school with Curt's grandson?
I'm 71, and I've been a Cubs fan since I was nine.
I'm sorry to hear that your so ill, Cubsin.
I did not project the upward swing for Cubs.
My beef with some posters months ago was the lack of respect for the unpredictability of baseball, the history of surprising things that can happen, and the confidence some had that 2015 was just a trial for the future when the "real" Cubs rebuild would appear. "Nice to have a good 2015 but we won't win." One guy is still playing that line.
Forget Daury Torrez. What was the Cubs equivalent of what the Tigers actually got for Price? I expect that if I had it to do over again, I would have paid it.
This is true. I was reading an article a few days ago suggesting that it might be better for the Cubs if the one game playoff was played at PNC rather than Wrigley. The premise was that, since the fan base carries so much baggage, Wrigley might turn deathly quiet should the Pirates get out to an early lead.
I assume - and fervently hope - that Maddon and the team would dismiss that as absolute nonsense.
You may think that 2015 will be the only chance the Cubs have to get to the world series. I don't. I would rather have a reasonable chance for a dynasty than a 6.5 percent chance to win the world series once. Increasing the chances to 9.5 doesn't impress me very much.
But go ahead. Play to the jury.
...losing mentality of some Cubs fans can affect us all in strange ways.
.....I have no doubt that every other GM in the country would make that trade. I wouldn't.
Cmon man...a hundred Daury Torres couldn't land David Price.
Let's test that. I would not trade a valuable future piece for Price. That is under the assumption that the Cubs will not sign price either as a free agent or as a "home team discount".
The Cubs have at best a 6.25 percent chance to win the world series IF you assume that they are equal in talent to the other teams they will face. Price MIGHT raise that to 10 percent.
No, I would not make that trade today. Perhaps because I value Torrez more than you seem to.
I am NOT ignorant.
Well, let's test that.
Can you explain why you didn't want to trade Daury Torrez for David Price before the trade deadline? Do you have a different view now, in retrospect?
Agree that it's unlikely, but think his defensive skill set, which is at least solid average at 3B, *might* actually profile better in CF.
Many on the board, mid-season, were very, very skeptical that Cubs would be serious contenders for WS. Let's be real about that.
Dave, you ignorant slut...
Yes, CF is " higher" in defensive spectrum than 3B. But, moving a guy--Bryant--to CF is what defensive spectrum principles frown on. Bryant can fill in there, sure. Defensive spectrum doesn't speak to fill-in situations but to a regular basis for a significant period of time.
Think it is very, very unlikely that Bryant is Cubs regular CF in 2016.
I'm not sure who's missing the point anymore. Too many straw men and misquotes and misunderstandings. I don't recall anyone saying we should trade one of our top prospects for a Haren type pitcher. And when I say that probably someone gets traded this winter, I'm just going on what Theo says about using assets to obtain pitching rather than hitting. The goal, I thought, was not just to be good enough to make the playoffs but to be dominant. Clearly the signs are there that we are approaching that level, but I doubt the front office is going to stand pat. Most teams that stand pat start to struggle.
I'm not sure who's missing the point anymore. Too many straw men and misquotes and misunderstandings. I don't recall anyone saying we should trade one of our top prospects for a Haren type pitcher. And when I say that probably someone gets traded this winter, I'm just going on what Theo says about using assets to obtain pitching rather than hitting. The goal, I thought, was not just to be good enough to make the playoffs but to be dominant. Clearly the signs are there that we are approaching that level, but I doubt the front office is going to stand pat. Most teams that stand pat start to struggle.
My thought on Bryant in CF is that all of Baez, Russell, and yes, Castro, are probably better IF defenders than Bryant, all things considered. Baez simply has better instincts and athleticism, Russell is a great choice at SS, and Bryant just isn't a 2B, while Castro can be. Meanwhile, Bryant has good speed and a good arm, meaning that, in theory, he could play a good CF. From a defensive value perspective, good CF defense is worth at least as much, if not more than, good 3B defense. Moving Bryant to CF doesn't diminish his "value-potential." In fact, it may actually enhance it.I've been impressed with him in the OF. With his speed, if they worked him in CF next spring, I think he would star. If they re-sign Fowler, that's okay with me, too.
Yeah, Cubs not odds on favorite to win WS. Think some here have been so worried about COMPROMISING THE FUTURE that it must be a shock to realize Cubs actually have legit shot at World Series RIGHT NOW. Just try to enjoy it. Next year will still come.
Be Here Now.
I think during the steroid era that would be a defensible position. Pitchers where at a premium. It isn't like the Cubs aren't trying to develop pitchers either, they just aren't using first round picks to do it. I would much rather have a team built on bats though.He said that in the past, but the belief is still there. Good luck with that, Andy.
From ESPN:
[MacPhail has an overall reputation as a pitcher hunter, and in the past, he's been quoted as saying, "Buy the bats. Grow the arms." John Manuel of Baseball America, who spoke with Salisbury about the pitchers that could be waiting for the Phillies next June, projected Florida's A.J. Puk and high school duo Jason Groome and Riley Pint to make up the top three pitchers in next year's draft class.]
What I found interesting is that is the opposite of what Theo has stated.
From ESPN:
[MacPhail has an overall reputation as a pitcher hunter, and in the past, he's been quoted as saying, "Buy the bats. Grow the arms."
What I found interesting is that is the opposite of what Theo has stated.
Striking out at 28 percent of at bats is SUBSTANTIALLY less than last year.
Batting average of .320 is SUBSTANTIALLY higher than last year.
His walk rate is not much lower than last year.
His fielding has been gold glove caliber at two positions.
Certainly a tiny sample size, but if he keeps this up, I can wait for the power to come back.
I see no need to roster Lester for the wildcard game. He would be the last guy used as he will start the NLDS 2 days later.
The Cubs are keeping left-handed pitcher Eric Jokisch and catcher Taylor Teagarden active in Arizona in case either is needed. If the Cubs clinch a playoff spot relatively early, Jokisch could get a start in the final days of the season.
Out of 84 qualified starters in MLB this year, Dan Haren started today #80 in fWAR. And with today's outing, he'll probably fall another spot or two.Grizzle, br. Grizzle. We need Grizzle. Didn't you get the memo?
Just end that experiment and go back to Richard or Wood.
Anyone who gives Cespedes an MVP vote should have their voting privilege revoked.
It appears to be official ESPN policy that all of their talking heads promote Cespedes' candidacy.
Anyone who gives Cespedes an MVP vote should have their voting privilege revoked.It appears to be official ESPN policy that all of their talking heads promote Cespedes' candidacy.
Sure, but do we know how Cubs manage their payroll? How they allocate payroll money from year-to-year?
Absent that knowledge, how else to compare opening day payrolls other than what we do know? What we know for certain are the official numbers. Anything else is, I think, speculation.
1. reb, not sure how relevant it is how cots or mlb accounts for payroll. How Cubs manage their budget is what really matters.
2. Blue, well noted that with Lester's bonus, the actual spending last year was higher than Cots etc. But, good chance the same will apply to Price, and that he too will get an offer with a large first-year bonus.
You don't know. So, better that we stick with what is known: the official payroll numbers. Anything else is pure speculation.
The Comcast deal ends AFTER 2019. That's when we may see the big revenue push, not before. Money from other modernization Wrigley sources---doubtful you'll know how much that is. Won't stop the pure guesswork. Overwhelming likelihood is that we'll continue to see incremebtal increases---not the huge increase you assume for 2016. Going to be very difficult in the extreme to fit Lester, Price, and Arrieta into a 2018 budget. Think you know that.
It's not $144. Money is always--every season irrespective of opening day payroll amount-- held back for in-season moves. Apples to apples is opening day payroll to opening day payroll.
Cots 2015 opening day payroll listing already includes a pro -rated portion of the Lester signing bonus. That's the official MLB accounting (for luxury tax purposes). The remainder of that bonus is part of the Tanaka money---an accounting carryover from previous seasons. But for that carryover, Cubs would not have budgeted as high as $122 in 2015. So, the "real" opening day budget was not $144 but actually somewhat less than $122 (taking into account the accounting carryover).
As to the Tribune days, that was Sam Zell shorting Peter to pay Paul to boost his selling price. That has less than zero relevance to anything going on today.
Regarding media reports linking Price to Cubs--maybe true, maybe not. We both hope it's true. But, as you know, most of these kind of reports come from player agents boosting the player's market.
Last point. Can you explain how Cubs fit Lester, Price, and Arrieta as a FA, into 2018 budget--two years before a new cable deal (also when Bryant and Russell and Hendricks become arb eligible)? Is Comcast going to cancel their deal two years early.
Soler has also spent about half his professional career on the DL. I think that's a far bigger concern than any of the other potential issues.....
I'm not too keen on shopping Soler. He could be come a monster offensively. And we need to have a RH hitting corner OFer to balance Schwarber/Coghlan.
Cardinals have four in Cincy and three in Milwaukee next. Not likely to get much help.
I'm betting on the Cards going 3 and 4 in those games. It's a smell.Well, they've already lost 3. They may not even win 3! The smell is getting stronger!
Rosenthal video from today, "The Cubs have had a long standing interest in David Price, even prior to Joe Maddon coming on board."
The Cubs shorted the ameatuer budget back when the Tribune was selling the team to spend more money on the MLB team. The Cubs will be limited for at least the next two years on spending in the international market. It will either go to the MLB team or the Ricketts. I have zero problem with the Ricketts making money, but I think there is a good chance it gets shifted to the MLB team.
What the Cubs spent this year isn't that far off from what even your talking about. $122 million opening day, $15 million signing bonus and extra $7-8 million in trades and it gets you to $144 million + the money spent on the IFA and draft that won't be as high next year.
First year are guys aren't going to get a ton of money. Arrieta at $10 is in line with what Price got as a third year super two guy.
I left off Coghlan because there would be no place to play him. Schwarber starts in LF. And Soler in RF. Zobrist would get time in the OF and INF.
Castro also would become redundant with Zobrist, so he goes too. Paying Castro nearly $8 million or Coghlan nearly $4 million to be a pinch hitter or rare DH makes little sense and there is better uses of that money. Now if Schwarber was the starting catcher, you could find the playing time for one of them by moving Bryant to the OF platooning Coghlan in LF.
Wood is getting paid as a starter this year. Very few non closers are making $6 million/year, so he is either going to get DFA'd or sign a cheaper extension. Richard has been getting the high leverage innings of late, FWIW.
Even with your numbers a $170 million payroll is $20 million more than what the Cubs have paid this year to get pro and amateur talent. With higher revenues coming in that wouldn't be a problem.
Over his last 26 games, Castro's OPS is over .900!
Schwarber was the first Cub to homer in both the first and second innings since .......................................July 4
Okay, let's use your numbers for sake of discussion (think you're a bit light on arb Grimm and Rondon, but fine), you have $152.58, including E. Jackson dead money. But, you left out Coghlan ( I have at about $3.5). Think Coghlan stays as all around guy who will get significant ABs. That pushes you close to $156. That is your bottom line.
But, you also assume T. Wood is non-tendered. Sure seems like he's a go-to guy for Maddon. That is debatable. He adds about $6 arb. My sense is that Maddon will push to keep him for 2016. Now, we're at $162.
Then, of course, no Castro at $7.85 or so. Maybe he goes--I think he goes--but maybe Cubs take a contract back to move him, maybe he stays as some suggest here. If he stays, you're at just under $170.
This $156-$170 range, using your numbers, is a huge increase from 2015. Think it's a bit fanciful to assume that kind of payroll. Where's the evidence for that? Not seeing a hint of that in media, at least so far. Hope you are right, but a dubious assumption, seems to me.
Okay, let's use your numbers for sake of discussion (think you're a bit light on arb Grimm and Rondon, but fine), you have $152.58, including E. Jackson dead money. But, you left out Coghlan ( I have at about $3.5). Think Coghlan stays as all around guy who will get significant ABs. That pushes you close to $156. That is your bottom line.
But, you also assume T. Wood is non-tendered. Sure seems like he's a go-to guy for Maddon. That is debatable. He adds about $6 arb. My sense is that Maddon will push to keep him for 2016. Now, we're at $162.
Then, of course, no Castro at $7.85 or so. Maybe he goes--I think he goes--but maybe Cubs take a contract back to move him, maybe he stays as some suggest here. If he stays, you're at just under $170.
This $156-$170 range, using your numbers, is a huge increase from 2015. Think it's a bit fanciful to assume that kind of payroll. Where's the evidence for that? Not seeing a hint of that in media, at least so far. Hope you are right, but a dubious assumption, seems to me.
7. Bottom line, we're looking at somewhere between $160 and $172 payroll, with Price and Zobrist and couple of new relievers.
Baez says his favorite position is CF...
Two things some of seem to be overlooking are as follow:
1) Alberto Almora. It is unlikely the Cubs would want to tie up much money for very long on a CFer when they likely still view Almora as a high quality, low cost option available for multiple years beginning in 2017. Considering his speed, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw Baez in CF for at least 30 games in 2016, helping to bridge the gap to Almora.
I don't think Maddon would look at Castro as the utility player. Just a couple of days ago, Maddon was gushing about Baez' versatility, how he can do everything and play everywhere. I think there is a good chance, better than 50-50, that unless the Cubs get an offer that blows them way this winter, they will keep Castro, and plan on Baez as a super utility player, infield and OF, with the prospect of more than 140 starts in that role, even if no one went down to injury, forcing him to become the temporary regular at a position.
I wouldn't be shocked if Fowler doesn't re-up on an offer, Bryant may end up in CF. Just a wild guess.
I think right now the chances are pretty low that the Cubs are going to sign any specific free agent. My only point is it won't be for a lack of money.
Where is the "plenty of room" to cut salary.
Think you're assuming Montero is traded--likely wrong assumption--and that Cubs save almost entirety of Fowler's salary filling CF--also likely wrong assumption.
Arb guys go up year to year, especially big Arrieta bump and arb newbies Rondon and Grimm. Other arb guys too. E. Jackson still on book for 2016. Lester and Montero and Soler contracts go up. Maybe Wood is non-tendered--I doubt it. Already mentioned the low cost FAs leaving. Where is the plenty of room to cut payroll?
Think you're assuming Montero is traded--likely wrong assumption--and that Cubs save almost entirety of Fowler's salary filling CF--also likely wrong assumption.
Arb guys go up year to year, especially big Arrieta bump and arb newbies Rondon and Grimm. Other arb guys too. E. Jackson still on book for 2016. Lester and Montero and Soler contracts go up. Maybe Wood is non-tendered--I doubt it. Already mentioned the low cost FAs leaving. Where is the plenty of room to cut payroll?
Other than attendance bump, where are purported revenue jumps for 2016 coming from? And, I've never heard that int'l signings affect big league annual payroll. Doubt there's any meaningful correlation.
Almora
Kind of interesting that a month ago folks here worried Cubs couldn't give Castro away....
Where is the "plenty of room" to cut salary.
Think you're assuming Montero is traded--likely wrong assumption--and that Cubs save almost entirety of Fowler's salary filling CF--also likely wrong assumption.
Arb guys go up year to year, especially big Arrieta bump and arb newbies Rondon and Grimm. Other arb guys too. E. Jackson still on book for 2016. Lester and Montero and Soler contracts go up. Maybe Wood is non-tendered--I doubt it. Already mentioned the low cost FAs leaving. Where is the plenty of room to cut payroll?
Other than attendance bump, where are purported revenue jumps for 2016 coming from? And, I've never heard that int'l signings affect big league annual payroll. Doubt there's any meaningful correlation.
Don't know if 2016 payroll can accommodate Price or not, in addition to other moves Cubs might undertake (Zobrist? reliever(s) to replace Motte and/ or Wood? But, think it's fanciful to simply assume payroll can accommodate another $25-30 pitcher, given upward bumps from guys on hand.
Think it's unlikely Castro is back in 2016. Cubs can take pose, as Craig posits, that don't have to trade him...but, as practical matter, awkward for everybody to keep him as a utility guy going forward. Castro has been good trooper for tail end of this season but wouldn't assume that for 2016.
More broadly, don't think we'd see all the current positional shuffling if Soler was healthy. Maddon has gone from a stifling 4-man bench to an 8-man bench. He loves that, fun for him, and keeps the regulars fresh. But tougher to do with the usual 4-man bench to open 2016.
Cubs began this season at about $120 payroll. Coming off books from 2015 opening day for 2016 are Motte and Wada (each $4), and Denorfia, Castillo, Coke (at combined about $7).
But, Lester goes up by $5 for 2016, Montero by $2, Fowler by $6 (if accepts QO), Soler by $1, Rondon and Grimm enter arb for first time from near-minimum, Strop, Coghlan, Wood (non-tender?) get arb increases, and, if course, major arb increase for Arrieta (from paltry $3.6 in 2015.
Trading Castro deletes about $7. Still, looks like a net payroll increase--before any additions.
2016 payroll? Who knows, but adding Price--on top of status quo increases--seems to require more than a $20 payroll bump.
.......There is plenty of room to cut salaries on the roster and plenty of new money coming in. If Price signs elsewhere in the off season it won't be because the Cubs can't afford him.
Think it's unlikely Castro is back in 2016. Cubs can take pose, as Craig posits, that don't have to trade him...but, as practical matter, awkward for everybody to keep him as a utility guy going forward. Castro has been good trooper for tail end of this season but wouldn't assume that for 2016.
More broadly, don't think we'd see all the current positional shuffling if Soler was healthy. Maddon has gone from a stifling 4-man bench to an 8-man bench. He loves that, fun for him, and keeps the regulars fresh. But tougher to do with the usual 4-man bench to open 2016.
Didn't forget Fowler. Included him, with salary bump. Think expectation is QO for him--probably won't accept, but somebody has to play there. Pretty sure Cubs won't save his entire 2015 salary for CF.
Think very unlikely Montero is traded and Schwarber assumes starting catcher to open 2016. Yeah, that would save lots of payroll money, but that impacts handling of pitching staff and Schwarber not ready for all that. Think we have to figure Montero's 2016 salary (with bump too).
Cots includes a $5 bump for Lester.
Also, keep in mind that the $120 for 2015 supposedly included big bucks "saved" from the Tanaka non-signing. That has now been spent.
I was just going through MLB Trade Rumors and Gordo had a piece that the Cubs are estimating a 275,000 increase in fans this year and that could lead to an extra $20+ million in revenue.
Patrick Mooney has a piece on Bryant in the OF, with quotes from Maddon, that is pretty interesting.
http://bleacherreport.com/tb/dhgBt?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=chicago-cubs (http://bleacherreport.com/tb/dhgBt?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=chicago-cubs)
the other award (under any name) for the best position player.
That goes back to Branch Rickey (and Ralph Kiner's salary).Hmmm...I tended to recall it had something to do with Calvin Griffith, so I went to Wikipedia. Hysterical. Consider the Atlanta Hawks owner and the guy with the Clippers. How would this quote float today:
There's also the old Bob Horner quote: "We finished last with you, we can finish last without you".
There's also the old Bob Horner quote: "We finished last with you, we can finish last without you".
The Cubs were 76-85 in 1987.Correct. How many games would that horrible team have won without the Hawk?
There's also the old Bob Horner quote: "We finished last with you, we can finish last without you".
Where would the 1987 Cubs have been without Dawson? How many games worse?The Cubs were 76-85 in 1987.
There seems to always be a debate about the definition of the MVP. What does the ballot say?
Dear Voter:
There is no clear-cut definition of what Most Valuable means. It is up to the individual voter to decide who was the Most Valuable Player in each league to his team. The MVP need not come from a division winner or other playoff qualifier.
The rules of the voting remain the same as they were written on the first ballot in 1931:
1. Actual value of a player to his team, that is, strength of offense and defense.
2. Number of games played.
3. General character, disposition, loyalty and effort.
4. Former winners are eligible.
5. Members of the committee may vote for more than one member of a team.
You are also urged to give serious consideration to all your selections, from 1 to 10. A 10th-place vote can influence the outcome of an election. You must fill in all 10 places on your ballot. Only regular-season performances are to be taken into consideration.
Keep in mind that all players are eligible for MVP, including pitchers and designated hitters.
The top one is indeed Russell.
The bottom one is Barry Larkin's first full season...he had 160 or so AB's the season prior.
Put him on it. You can make room by putting Schwarber on the 60 day DL.Hell, just cut him if he can't catch.
I have nothing to say on the subject.
JeffH, we haven't heard from you in a while. How do you assess the Cubs at this point in the season?
| G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB K BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ AGE 117 438 400 52 97 24 1 13 44 2 3 32 127 0.243 0.302 0.405 0.707 91 21 125 488 439 64 107 16 2 12 43 21 6 36 52 0.244 0.306 0.371 0.678 76 23 |
The Cubs will open 2016 on the road against the Angels and Diamondbacks. It'll be nice not to have to worry about weather postponing half the games in the first week.Great way to start 2016
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-bits-cubs-cardinals-spt-0908-20150907-story.html
Yeah, they play 19 games total so it'll definitely be the head-to-head tie breaker. Can't split an odd number of games.
I have very pleasantly surprised with Baez's first week. I've been something of a skeptic, and obviously 16 AB doesn't prove much.
But the small sample has been encouraging. He doesn't look overmatched at the plate early on, and he looks professional. He looks like he's ready for the majors.
I don't recall that assertion, but I don't memorize every post.
I think in a 1-game playoff you go with your best starter and hope your other starters rise to the occasion if you advance.Ordinarily, I agree with you 100%, but Maddon doesn't think like the rest of us...
Arrieta's run would seem to end any remaining ambiguity about who would start in a wild card playoff game.Of course, assuming it's against the Pirates, Maddon may figure that if he can't start Arrieta twice against the Cardinals, we'd be up against it, so gamble with Lester, then have Arrieta twice and Lester once against the Cards. It'll be interesting. Yes, we have to get to the Cards first. Understood.