Take yourself back to the beginning of the offseason, and imagine this was the headline:
Cubs Trade Milton Bradley, Aaron Miles, and Jake Fox for Carlos Silva, Marlon Byrd, and Prospects
Now that doesn't sound too bad, does it? This is the extent of the Cubs major moves thus far in the offseason, and it's a pretty good set of maneuvers by the Cubs' GM, Jim Hendry. The Cubs came into the offseason with the following priorities: 1.) acquire a CF, 2.) move Milton Bradley, 3.) keep in mind payroll is capped at ~$140M. Jim Hendry did an admirable job accomplishing 1. and 2., and did so without significantly increasing team payroll in 2010 or 2011. Marlon Byrd and Mike Cameron were the best CF options on the free agent market, and once the Yankees swooped in and scooped up Curtis Granderson there weren't any eminently available CF options on the trade market, either. Once the Red Sox signed Cameron, Byrd was the only reasonable option left, and Hendry signed him to a 3-year, $15M contract. Byrd will make $3M in 2010, $5.5M in 2011, and $6.5M in 2012. When trading Bradley, the Cubs "acquired" Carlos Silva, and in the process lowered the team salary by $5M over the next two years, assuming they buy out SIlva's contract next year (Silva is owed $25M over the next two years, Bradley was owed $21M and the Cubs will get $9M from the Mariners). The Cubs freed an additional $1.7M by trading Miles (and Jake Fox) for prospects, meaning the net change in salaries for those 3 moves is an additional $1.8M over the next two seasons and an additional $6.5M in 2012. That's pretty good. Where do the Cubs project to finish the season now? Follow me below the fold to find out...
Well I had the Cubs projected to win 87-88 games (looking back, the Cubs are well on their way to running with "Plan C" in that post) assuming they kept last year's roster largely intact by re-signing Harden and finding a way to make amends with Bradley. By removing Bradley, shifting Fukudome to RF, and signing Byrd to play CF, the Cubs are projected lose about 12-13 runs on offense and gain about 12-13 runs on defense. Let's call that a wash. Fox will get a lot less playing time with the acquisition of Byrd and trading of Bradley, as Bradley's proclivity for injuries and suspensions reduced his projected playing time (and raised those of Fox). Besides, Fuld's glove and Colvin's left-handed bat are better fits for this team, as currently constructed. So while Fox did have some value, he has a lot less now that the Cubs signed Marlon Byrd and traded Bradley.
There's one other major change from last year's team to this year's team: no Rich Harden. Harden was projected to give the Cubs 2.68 WAR. The Cubs are (hopefully) replacing him with innings from Tom Gorzelanny, unless they roll the dice and win with another injury-risk pitcher like Erik Bedard or Ben Sheets. If that's the case, and Gorzelanny is only going projected to post ~1.5 wins less than Harden if given the same IP. That would leave the Cubs in the 85-87 win range. That's not a bad team, but it's not a playoff team, either. I'd like to see them make one more move to push that projected win total into the high 80's.
There are basically three places the Cubs can still significantly improve their projections:
SECOND BASE
If Kelly Johnson hadn't been signed by the Diamondbacks, he'd be the ideal acquisition. He's a LH bat that's primed for a rebound season. If the Cubs had signed him and moved Baker to the "DeRosa role" (platoon/utility player) they'd have a great shot at 88-90 wins. The only players left at 2B on the free agent market worth writing about are Orlando Hudson and Felipe Lopez. They're both switch hitters that could lead off, and both should be 2-3 win players, and would allow Baker to give the Cubs good versatility defensively. A 2-year, $6-$8M contract may get it done. That would bring the Cubs projected win total in the range of 87-90 wins, just below where you want to be if you plan to make the playoffs. The other option is to explore a trade for someone like Dan Uggla. Yes, he was brutal defensively last season but overall he's been slightly below average in the field, and well above it at the plate. He should be at least a 3-win player in 2010. If the Cubs acquired him, I'd be optimistic about 2010.
SHORTSTOP
I'm not a Ryan Theriot hater. But the Cubs seem ready to roll with Starlin Castro at SS for the forseeable future. If that's the case, you could sign a SS to a 1-2 year contract and move Theriot to second base. This would again move Baker to a utility role. Miguel Tejada is still available, and could produce 2-3 wins for the Cubs. I'm not sure what he's asking for in terms of contracts, but my guess is that number is too high. He'd still be offering a 1-2 year deal worth $6-$8M, but I'm not sure he accepts it. I'd also prefer the lead-off switch hitter type to the power-hitting RH bat Tejada carries. That's the extent of the free agent options I'd be interested in.
CLOSER
I'm not optimistic about Carlos Marmol's ability to close out games. He's wild. REALLY wild. In an ideal world, the Cubs would have paired the $3M/year or so they have left to spend with the $3.5M/year they already committed to John Grabow and go after a guy like Rafael Soriano or Mike Gonzalez. Still, with the options dwindling for him, maybe the Cubs can get Jose Valverde at a discount. A back end of Valverde/Marmol should be both obnoxious and effective.
STARTER
Finally, the Cubs could go after a pitcher that's an injury risk, such as Ben Sheets or Erik Bedard. I don't know how much money these guys are looking for, but they may fit into the Cubs budget. This would effectively replace Harden's spot as a highly effective pitcher of questionable durability. Gorzelanny would return to the 6th starter's role, and would fill in for Lilly at the start of the year. He'd also be a good replacement should Sheets/Bedard get injured. I really, really like this option, and hope the Cubs pursue it. Something like $4M in 2010 with incentives based on IP to bring it up to $10M would make sense, as if the Cubs get a full year of Sheets/Bedard they'll be in playoff contention and a good bet to pay off the extra $6M.
So thus far, it's the moves Hendry hasn't made that has been the problem with the offsason. He didn't get Gradnerson or Cameron. He didn't bring back Rich Harden, and he wasn't the guy that stole Cliff Lee for next to nothing. More generally, he hasn't gotten a second baseman or a shortstop. He hasn't gotten a left-handed bat. He hasn't gotten a closer or a starting pitcher. The good news is that there are good bargains still on the market, and Hendry only needs to make one or two of these moves to make the Cubs a contender. What's the saying around here for that?
1 recs | 534 comments
I dunno...
I’m just not as optimistic there is going to be enough offense.
Let’s hope Aram can pick up the slack, and Soriano rebounds, if that’s possible!
TyCubsfan - December 31, 2009
Soriano is the subject of my Maple St. Press article...
and I’m cautiously optimistic he’ll be a 2-3 win player again in 2010.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
posted this in the other thread...but I'll put it here too.
DeRosa circa 2006 and Byrd, 2009
doc_blume - December 31, 2009
That's pretty cool.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
i thought it was interesting to see the numbers side by side
and I remember people whining about DeRosa being signed and many of them whined about him being traded. I hope that the whining about Byrd has the same results
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
minus the trade
wrigleyrocker12 - December 31, 2009
depends
if we can get three cost controlled pitchers in year three of the deal after getting two valuable seasons out of Byrd, why not trade him when he is 35/36 and going into the the final season of his contract
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Exactly.
That would be the ideal outcome.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
and would be identical to DeRosa
two nice seasons as a Cub, moved in year three for three cost controlled pitchers.
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Yup.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
assuming of course, those three cost-controlled pitchers amount to something
IMO, jury’s still out on how good the DeRosa deal was.
ballhawk - December 31, 2009
i agree that the jury is out
and we cannot say it was good or bad for another 2 years IMHO
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
We got rid
of three problems (Bradley’s attitude, Miles ineptitude and Fox’s lack of a position) and got one player more inept than Miles (Silva) and another solid but unspectacular player in Byrd with too long a contract. I’d like to say we’re going to miss Rich Harden next season, but we missed him last season. We’re also praying that Randy Wells fairy godmother doesn’t show back up and chime midnight. I’m very worried about the back end of our rotation. Maybe Samardzija or Jay Jackson will step up—or maybe even Casey Coleman.
Still, it’s not like the Cardinal, Brewers or Reds are any great shakes. And the Astros and Pirates are just bad. So we’ve got a chance. But this off-season has been spent cleaning up last off-season’s mistakes—and we still haven’t completely recovered.
Josh Timmers - December 31, 2009
That's about how I feel.
But if the Cubs can sign another SP to add depth or another bat to improve the offense (preferably a lefty or switch hitter) they’ll be in good shape.
The other thing that will help, perhaps more than anything else, if for someone other than St. Louis to sign Matt Holliday.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
this team is currently depending on
people repeating fantastic seasons, and people bouncing back. its hard to tell what kind of season they’ll have
wrigleyrocker12 - December 31, 2009
What "fantastic seasons" are we expecting people to repeat?
The only truly unexpectedly great year last year belonged to Randy Wells.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
I think
this is just a perpetuation of the idea that 2008 was the outlier… and therefore we shouldn’t expect people (Sori, Soto, etc.) to repeat those seasons.
What I don’t get is why some can’t see the possibility of a happy medium. If our offense falls somewhere between 2008 and 2009, I don’t think 90 wins is out of the question at all.
fsuapollo - December 31, 2009
Soriano had about the same year in 2007.
In fact, the Cubs don’t make the playoffs in ’07 without him.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
You could make a case for Derrek Lee after April finally ended...
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
I'm pretty sure there's a strong case to be made there
He’s clearly not in steep decline, but expecting another year of that production will likely lead to disappointment.
madcow256 - January 1, 2010
Maybe a better version is "not so bad as all that seasons"
Soto bounces back to hit 15-20 HR and bat at least .260.
Soriano plays at least 130 games reasonably healthy, hits 30+ HR again and gets his BA back up to around .280.
Ramirez plays at least 130 games, while hitting at his normal level.
Zambrano gets back to 200+ innings with an ERA of 3.5 or so and wins 15-16 games.
Marmol gets his BB/inning back to about 0.5 and finds more of the action he showed in 2007 and 2008.
All these things are within the range of past accomplishments of these players, but are real improvements over what they did last year. If all of them happen, the Cubs win the division. More than 2 misses, or if players not listed have off years (Lee, Fukudome), the Cubs need a series of small miracles to contend.
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
A lot of those "down" years were due to bad luck, not bad performance.
More on that later….
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Injury was a key for several of those off years in 2009, which is somewhat riskier
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
It was both.
You shouldn’t expect to have quite as many injury issues this year AND you should expect better luck this year. Not good luck, just neutral luck. That would probably be an upgrade.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
there was a lot of good luck
on the pitching side though
IIRC the team FIP was 30 points higher than the actual ERA
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
coule be.
I probably sound more optimistic than I am. I like most of the moves Hendry has made this year (except the Grabow move and NOT offering Harden arb.). That said, I don’t think he’s done enough to make this team a contender in 2010, especially if the Cards sign Holliday.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Sam Fuld of course.
Doggie Stalker - January 1, 2010
...This is the extend of the Cubs... Huh?
But seriously, even if you put a warm light on the moves since the end of the season, my gut feeling just isn’t sooo good. If everything goes well we should do better than last year, but if the injury bug pops up again, then we might end up seeing how “lucky” we were in 2009, and somehow the current trades don’t make me feel very optimistic right now. Imho, the only really highly positive move is MB is gone.
Have a Happy New Year, keep the faith and maybe this will be The Year!
eths - December 31, 2009
The problem is...
they only had $140M to spend, and most of that was already committed to players on the roster. I think Hendry has done an great job given what he had to work with.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
I understand the limitations, and they are mostly of his own doing...
Even if his latest moves are the best considering the circumstances, they still do not “feel” good.
eths - December 31, 2009
Fair enough, but that has more to do with past off-seasons than this one.
It’s been a relatively good offseason given the circumstances. The mistakes were made before this year.
And I don’t think the Cubs aren’t a contending team as is. But I also don’t think Hendry is done yet. I think he’s got one or two more moves up his sleeve.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
I hope you're right,
and as far as contending is concerned, there is a bit random chance involved too, so who knows…
eths - December 31, 2009
yep - at this point, you just have to treat the past off-seasons as stunk costs and focus on this one.
the thought of giving Byrd a 3 year deal still makes my stomach turn, turn, turn, but at least it wasn’t an overly expensive one.
But if I find out Hendry gave him a NTC, I’m gonna hire Doggie go all Worf on Jimbo at the convention.
ballhawk - December 31, 2009
Stunk costs?
Freudian slip…or intentional?
Goodie1969 - December 31, 2009
either way, it's a keeper
Emelie - December 31, 2009
Yes
One of my many bad typos lead poor Eyre to be nicknamed Stumples.
Doggie Stalker - January 1, 2010
well, of course now I'm going to say it was intentional...
…after getting the Good Em Seal of Approval! ;-)
but yes, it was intentional – as was the musical reference elsewhere in that comment. But that’s something I expect only us old fogeys would get.
ballhawk - December 31, 2009
You will now be known as the Sweetheart of the Rodeo
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
Projections versus reality
You project the Cubs to win 85-87 games, but that’s not really worth much. I’m pretty sure last years Cubs were projected to win more than 83 games. Projections don’t account for the human aspect of the game, like the injuries the Cubs dealt with and guys under performing.
I take projections with a huge grain of salt.
All that said, I’d take 87 wins…might get them in. Plus, to expect more from this group would be unfair.
Canadian Cubs Fan - December 31, 2009
Sure, there's a lot of uncertainty in projections...
but that’s no reason to throw them out. They’re better than a “wild guess,” and that’s the point. This gives you a good estimate of what to expect out of the team, it doesn’t tell you what the team will do. And if you want to make the playoffs, you should build a team that is expected to win 90 games.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
really?
a very similar group won 97 games in 08
wrigleyrocker12 - December 31, 2009
Actually Al...
regarding your opening question, that sounds like a horrible trade to me.
Let’s be honest here, this offseason has sucked to this point. Fortunately we’re in the NL Central, and we underachieved quite a bit last year, so a huge offseason wasn’t exactly necessary in order to compete in 2010.
kanderber - December 31, 2009
This wasn't my post, it's Shawn's.
And I’d have taken that trade, especially now that we know Byrd won’t make all that much in 2010 or 2011. Byrd wasn’t my first choice, but he is hardly a bad player.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
Right. He's hardly a good player, either...
but they’re not playing him to be good or bad. His salary is that of a below-average player, and he should be league-average.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Not Al, Shawn...
and what don’t you like about that deal? The Cubs netted +/- 0 projected WAR, and in the process got rid of a guy that didn’t seem to get along with teammates, fans, or media members. And you do all that without increasing payroll? That’s win-win-draw.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
or maybe draw-win-draw.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Because while doing so...
they acquired possibly the worst pitcher in baseball, who we’re on the hook for this year and next, and didn’t get better in the process of moving these parts around. At all. In summary, yes, I would turn down a deal that A) doesn’t make the team any better and B) at the same time weakens the most important piece of the puzzle (the pitching staff).
kanderber - December 31, 2009
The Cubs didn't acquire Silva
He was just the guy the Mariners designated to deliver the $6MM that was saved by moving Bradley.
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
Wait - are you saying we got...
…the Six Million Dollar Man???
I can hear Rothschild now… “We can rebuild him. Faster… Stronger… Better than before!”
ballhawk - December 31, 2009
No, we got the $6 million
the man was thrown in for free……..
But if Rothschild can add some bionic parts cloned from Nolan Ryan, that would be fine with me!
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
Except the 6 million
will be down to 5.5 with the cost of feeding him in Spring Training before they cut him.
Doggie Stalker - January 1, 2010
That's outstanding.
davidalanu - January 1, 2010
It didn't weaken anything.
Silva isn’t a great pitcher. Let’s assume for the moment that he’s below replacement level and the Cubs cut him, getting nothing at all out of him. They still are even in the OF from where they were, and haven’t added any salary to the club. Plus, they got rid of a guy that was a bad fit (Bradley). At worst, they’re not any better or worse talentwise. Then the “tiebreaker” is chemistry, which is a net positive, no matter how small.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
+1
its not like Lou is going to keep running Silva out there if he is getting lit up like the past few years. His impact on the team’s 10’ performance will lilkely be minimal.
DC Cubbie - December 31, 2009
Bob Howry
would like a word.
drewishdrewid - January 1, 2010
What are you talking about?
Carlos Silva is absolutely awful at baseball. He makes ANY team worse when he becomes a member of it. It’s that simple.
kanderber - January 1, 2010
Uh huh.
You mean like the 2004 Twins, for whom he was a key member of the rotation?
How about we consider the possibility that he could lose weight, get in shape and be a decent 5th starter?
How about waiting till the actual games are played before we reach this conclusion?
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
2004? Really?
Six years ago? That’s your argument for how he might somehow be useful?
Carlos Silva sucks. Period. I’m glad Bradley is gone, but somehow implying that Silva might actually contribute this year is silly.
kanderber - January 1, 2010
Silva has been no good since being a Mariner.
The Mariners pitcher coaching stinks. So, no longer being a Mariner helps. But even then he has significiant hurdles to cross to be valuable as a starter. kanderber is likely to be right in the end, but there are signs that Silva might be useful as a ROOGY. Let’s see how he is in camp.
DGU - January 1, 2010
I prefer to wait and see until the man actually pitches until I dismiss him.
Real easy to say this from the comfort of your keyboard on New Year’s Day.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
So you choose to...
just completely ignore the information right in front of you? The fact that he was pathetic the last two years? The fact that his ERA the last four years is 5.60? The fact that the Mariners were so happy to get rid of him, that they took on Milton Bradley in exchange? The fact that he’s continued to suck in winterball? The guy just isn’t good at baseball, I don’t get why you refuse to acknowledge that.
kanderber - January 1, 2010
I acknowledge he's been bad the last two years.
I said that above, I said it when the trade was made.
Why you refuse to admit that there is even a tiny chance that he might get in shape and improve, I have no idea.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Of course it's possible...
Anything is possible. I could win the lottery, but it’s highly unlikely. Just as Carlos Silva could be decent, but it’s highly unlikely.
kanderber - January 1, 2010
Hendry will have a different result needed
under Ricketts than under the Trib. Remember under the Trib the “powers that be” want to see black not red, and do not care about wins/loses. That is gone with a person instead of a corporation owning the Cubs now, and you have to give Hendry a chance to adjust to that and make proper moves now.
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
Umm, ok?
I don’t see what that has to do with the post of mine which you responded to, but alright.
kanderber - January 1, 2010
its another reason to stop your tirade against JH
hard to believe that his bosses might actually have told him to do or not to do things based on stockholder interests when owned by a corporation, and now that has changed, he deserves a chance to make adjustments etc
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
I never said it was likely.
I said it was possible. I’d like to see how he does in games vs. actual major league competition before I label him a complete failure.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Well, for consistency's sake...
are you willing to admit there was a tiny chance that Bradley might have gotten his head in shape and improve if he had stayed on the Cubs for 2010?
ballhawk - January 2, 2010
It has nothing to do with how good/bad Silva is...
and everything to do with how much they’re paying him compared to what they were going to pay Bradley. The Cubs are better off for having made that trade. Worst case scenario, Silva sucks and the Cubs cut him. That’s probably a better outcome than the Cubs cutting Bradley.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
Correct!
And there’s at least a chance he might improve to be at least a decent #5.
And they got $6 million back in the deal, too.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
it does...
require the assumption the Cubs would be willing to cut him
there are scenarios in which the Cubs keep him on the roster because of the salary committment hoping to flip him and he hurts the team. It’s not like that’s not a possibility, i admit its a small one, but its worth noting. It’s not like its impossible that he can hurt the team
DartmouthCubsFan - January 1, 2010
It's not impossible...
but people that think this is a bad deal are assuming the opposite: that the Cubs will hold onto him and play him just because he’s getting paid a hefty salary. I don’t think that’s the case with this particular player.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
The saying be..... (yes, I put be on purpose)
M
I
T J
I E
T N
E O
G D
Cubbiegoon - December 31, 2009
It messed up
Awwwwww.
Cubbiegoon - December 31, 2009
I figured it out anyway.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
me too :-)
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
i liked it
was a nice twist on the same ol
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Now that most major issues are settled
with CF done, I think another move may do the trick. I was thinking of picking up someone in spring training like we did with Reed Johnson. That worked out well. If nothing happens before we break camp, I would search for a piece that may help. Or, just trade/sign next week. ANYTHING PLEASE!
mrcubsfan - December 31, 2009
Build a pen from within
The Cubs don’t need to be burned by another cash deal for a closer. Who’s to say Marmol hasn’t developed to the best of his ability? They’ve already signed set-up help. Let’s try to keeps costs down with a home-grown closer.
If Valverde can be acquired at a discount, go ahead. The Padres have always assembled a bullpen to compliment Trevor Hoffman with spare parts. Heath Bell was a spare part and became a closer. They realized they didn’t have to spend millions and millions on Trevor Hoffman.
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - December 31, 2009
Yeah I'm not in favor of spending money on the bullpen, usually.
I just don’t trust Marmol to be the closer. If he can find the plate in 2010, the bullpen will be fine as-is.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
And if he can't, Guzman or Grabow can close.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
or Cashner
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
Right.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
Yeah I like the idea of Cashner closing.
I’m just not sure the Cubs do.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
judging by the way Pinella
handled the closer situation last year, i’d be surprised to see anyone other than Marmol in the 9th (barring injury)
Andronicus - December 31, 2009
Me too.
And I’d rather that “one guy” be someone else.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
same here.
i like Marmol more in the 8th and would love to see Velverde locking down wins.
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
I know they don't want to do this
but Cashner can close—maybe even next season.
Josh Timmers - December 31, 2009
Sometimes...
…. as I posted last week, you have to start trusting the guys from your own system, instead of throwing untold amounts of money at free agents.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
No argument from me
But I think the reason the Cubs don’t want to do that isn’t that they’re rushing Casher, but more that they think he’s a starter and not a reliever. Pushing him to the pen and we have the Samardzija situation all over again.
Josh Timmers - December 31, 2009
Yeah, my reticence has nothing to do with a lack of confidence in $ner...
just in the Cubs confidence in him.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
If he becomes the closer, leave him in the bullpen
And if Spellcheck doesn’t have a solid third pitch by mid-season in Des Moines, convert him back t a reliever, too. In today’s market closers have value equivalent to starters, anway.
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
Agree on 2B
I’d have really liked Kelly Johnson, and would be really happy with Uggla, but I don’t know if the Marlins need to move him this season, or if they can afford to wait. Uggla would really make the lineup that much nicer, and it would also really improve the bench, and therefore, depth for 2010. Acquiring Uggla would likely make for a very nice offseason (depending on the price, of course).
I am still nervous about the back of the rotation, and I was really hoping that Hendry landed Capps because Grabow does not instill confidence, and while Marmol isn’t going to get shelled, he’s likely to pitch himself into trouble a ton. I think a gamble on Bedard / Sheets would be a good idea at the right price, but I don’t think picking up Tejada would really be beneficial.
I don’t hate the Byrd signing, it could certainly be much worse. But I echo DMC’s sentiment that it would really be nice to see the organization emphasize an actual philosophy, particularly one that didn’t involve investing in middling FAs to fill holes. FA should really be used to sign elite players and/or players that “put you over the hump”. While I think Hendry and the Cubs will get reasonable value out of Byrd, it is all to similar to the signings of recent years. Byrd and Grabow are certainly not moves to get excited about.
WittyUserName - December 31, 2009
Kelly Johnson
is a HACK. I know a die-hard Braves fan, and he never liked Johnson, and said 2009 was the real McCoy. Hudson had over 50 extra base hits last year, and is also considered a great presence in the clubhouse. If he’s still unsigned in 2 or 3 weeks, go grab him.
Canadian Cubs Fan - December 31, 2009
He's already signed, to a $2.3M, 1 year deal.
But make no mistake, 2009 wasn’t the “real” Kelly Johnson. It’s more likely the opposite is closer to the truth. He has pretty bad luck in 2009, which explains his poor season.
He’d be a perfect fit. Unfortunately, he’s off the market.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
well as
long as you had a friend who never liked Johnson then we totally should avoid signing him.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
I have quite a few friends that have never liked johnson...
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
TW... nah - too easy... ;-)
ballhawk - December 31, 2009
that was sort of where i was going with that one...
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
touché
not used to a stat guy having a sense of humor…
I keed, I keed… ;-)
ballhawk - December 31, 2009
I learned it from Triumph, who is 5 LAR (laughs above replacement)
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
but that 5 LAR
is based on his 6 BPHH (beers per happy hour) right?
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Hah. That's about $25/hour.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
so 5 LAR = +/- $25/hr?
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
something like that.
plus you have the cover charge (contract bonus)
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
I think he meant
if Hudson is unsigned in a couple weeks…I wouldn’t mind that either although I think he is a bit overrated…
airweino - December 31, 2009
Umm
I’m a Braves fan, and I am here to tell you:
Kelly Johnson is a HACK. If you really enjoy watching middle infielders boot routine ground balls, Johnson’s your guy. Wanna watch someone strike out on four pitches with RISP and none out – can’t get a better guy for that than Johnson. Wanna watch that same guy K on three pitches instead? Make sure it’s RISP and two outs…
Everything, and I mean, everything terrible we say about Theriot here, we’d be saying about Theriot and Johnson.
No. Thank. You.
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
well
he wasn’t a hack in 2007 or 08.
Look, Fontenot is better than Johnson. Same kind of bat, only Fontenot plays a really good 2B whereas Johnson does not. That doesnt mean that Arizona made a mistake giving the guy a shot.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
Arizona is welcome to him
I hope they can turn him around, but I am not optimistic about that happening.
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
I think I'd still rather have Johnson on the roster.
Between the two, one of them (Johnson or Fontenot) should work out.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
I would like Uggla
a lot, but the cost of prospects might be too high. That being said, I’d take Lopez over Hudson. Hudson’s wrist injuries concern me. And i think Johnson is a goner, so the rumored move for Spilbourghs interests me.
MDavis - December 31, 2009
I agree with MDavis
On Uggla .. If price isn’t too high .. Just looking at Uggla’s stats … Approx 90 rbi’s per season the last three seasons along with 32 homeruns .. last year 282 BA . Would sure like to see his bat in the Cubs lineup . I know his glove isn’t the greatest , but IMO his bat would add more runs than he would give up in the field
CUBFANINAZ - December 31, 2009
We'd have to give up talented prospects...
…and pay the 8 million he’s likely to win in arbitration. Too steep.
carmen_fanzone - January 1, 2010
Adam Dunn
Is this the time for the Cubs to see what it would take to get Dunn? It seems to me that the Cubs still seem to need some serious middle of the order power, and preferably from the left side. I’m sure that the Nats are more than willing to move Dunn, but what could the Cubs offer to make it happen?
I wouldn’t mind to see Fukudome included in that deal, but I think that would just complicate matters. However, if the Cubs were to keep Fukudome, he could be used as a platoon partner with Byrd and a defensive replacement for Dunn.
jerry morales rules - December 31, 2009
The answer to your question is no.
I’d love to see the Mariners make a move for Dunn, but he’s projected to be -18 runs “above” average in RF over a full season. That’s a 2.3 win downgrade from Fukudome, washing out the advantage he has over Kosuke on offense.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
The Nationals are not more than happy to move Dunn
They like him. He is slotted as their starting 1st baseman right now.
rlpete - December 31, 2009
and he has more value at 1st than in RF.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
I didn't say that they didn't like him
I’m sure they do. However, the Nationals aren’t going anywhere next year and Dunn’s deal is over after that. I’m sure they’d be willing to move Dunn in order to get some young talent that could help them in the future.
jerry morales rules - December 31, 2009
I know what you are saying but
the Nationals got killed locally for not even trying to be competitive last season. Of course, they would listen to a deal but it won’t go over well to trade one of their best players for some prospects. They’ll also get two draft picks if he does leave so whatever is offered would have to be good.
I’m not saying that it couldn’t happen but it would be difficult unless the Cubs overpay.
rlpete - December 31, 2009
And they have a competent GM now with Bowden gone
One of Rizzo’s first moves was acquiring Morgan from the Pirates.
rlpete - December 31, 2009
Yeah
Morgan would have been a very nice fit for the Cubs in CF.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
I am not saying the Nats win the East
however they did try to do something this offseason, signed Capps, Marquis, and Pudge. That is why they would not move Dunn unless they get a really good return.
Grockcubs - December 31, 2009
Yeah I've liked their offseason thus far.
If they’re really smart, they’ll trade Dunn to an AL team, where his value will be maximized.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
No...
that was LAST off-season…
airweino - December 31, 2009
who do you guys like more: Hudson or Lopez?
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
I think I like Lopez more... but I'd be happy with either one.
So my answer is: whichever one costs less.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
i hate Felipe Lopez
and I would prefer the Cubs to leave 2B as is. One of Baker/Fontenot will perform.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
I agree.
Again, simply throwing money at a free agent, even the “costs less” one, just because he’s there, is sometimes counterproductive.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
Our of curiosity...
where would you spend the Cubs remaining $$$ this year?
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Getting Robert DiNiro
to play Lou Piniella in the movie of the Cubs miraculous 2010 World Series Championship.
Josh Timmers - December 31, 2009
You want DeNiro?
I’m thinking Joe Pesci.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
Too short
But otherwise OK
Josh Timmers - December 31, 2009
if short is ok
why not Danny DeVito?
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Or, speaking of Italian actors...
… how about Al Pacino? We could bulk him up a bit.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
"I'm just getting waarrmmm" "Hooooaaahhhh"
JB 23 - December 31, 2009
Pacino or DeNiro as mgr would be great
for post game interviews
“you talk to me, you double guessing me (whack)”
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Yes!
DiNiro could repeat his famous speech about Baseball from “The Untouchables.” Any guesses as to who would end up on the other side of Piniella’s bat?
Josh Timmers - December 31, 2009
on a CubbieTim statue
/sarcasm
Honestly, I sit on it til mid season and then see what additions can be made. Gives JH some flexability for an injury replacement as well as a trade to upgrade if one is available
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Another starting pitcher
rlpete - December 31, 2009
I'd like that...
and the market is still flooded with them, so you should be able to sign one at a bargain price.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Agreed.
I’m not sold on our rotation at this point, and it’s a shopworn axiom, but still true:
You can never have enough pitching.
Goodie1969 - December 31, 2009
agree
pitching, starting pitching. See if Sheets hangs out there, I would sign him to incentive laded deal. With Lilly hurt, I think the Cubs would be wise to get a starter. Silva, Shark, Gorzo and Marshall make up our 4-5, and Wells as our 3. Do we know what he will do after the league has an idea about him?
Grockcubs - December 31, 2009
Agreed as well
I’d love Sheets on a incentive-laden deal…
airweino - December 31, 2009
Seems like Sheets needs a serious reality check, though
He’s supposedly looking for around $12 million for 2010. I’d be surprised if anyone did even half of that on a guarantee.
davidalanu - January 1, 2010
Yep
That’s where I’d go.
DGU - December 31, 2009
I think I'd save it for a midseason acquisition.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
Hah! I figured you'd say that...
and I almost suggested it. ;-)
My contention is you spend a little more now, in hopes that your team contends. If it does, then you go ask for a little more money from Daddy Ricketts.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
+1
fsuapollo - December 31, 2009
Spend for the sake of spending?
On what?
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
SP
As someone noted elsewhere… if the market continues to fall, would Sheets or Bedard take a 1 year $4M base with another $4-6M of incentives?
Wouldn’t that be worth a shot? If they make the incentives, the team is likely doing very well and extra revenue covers the cost.
fsuapollo - December 31, 2009
i would not mind seeing a trade at midseason with Seattle
for Cliff Lee
now will he be available, and if so at what cost, i do not know, but it could be a real possibility
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
That is a fine dream and I endorse it heartily
but it ain’t going to happen. If you can trade for Lee in mid-season, you will get the Seattle GM’s head on a platter as a throw-in on the deal.
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
cant say never gonna happen
since one never knows what the midseason brings, and what is or isnt offered. if Seattle is going nowhere fast, and got a good offer, their GM woujld be dumb to not listen to it and atleast consider it
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Or Brandon Webb
Arizona is less likely to be a contender so he has a better shot to be traded.
Zy Toro Young - January 1, 2010 via mobile
same idea
save the $$$ and lets make a move midseason to shore things up
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
The stuff I put above.
I agree that it’s best to use home-grown talent. But a lot of our options (such as Fontenot and Marmol) are far from sure things, and their downside is pretty low. I’d like to see the team spend a few $$$ on a player that has the same upside as Fontenot. Why would I do this when we already have a player like that on the roster? Simply put, because if you flip a coin twice you’re more likely to end up with “tails” at least once.
In other words, It’s more likely that /either/ Fontenot /or/ Lopez pans out than it is Fontenot pans out.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
stregnth in numbers
its less likely for two to fail than one to fail
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
me too
just wait until midseason- that or give Wilken another 3 mill to sign draftee’s
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
+3M to sign draftees...
would be a good option.
It would have been better if we had offered Harden arb. Oh, well…
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
this is the correct answer
go significantly above slot for some reaches in later rounds and hope they sign
fischisgod - December 31, 2009
Well, they still need a 4th OF
Reed Johnson or someone with a similar profile to serve as platoon for Fukudome and/or injury replacement. The exception to that would be if Colvin or another young player is ready, but that part-time role is not really well suited to a new player trying to get a base of ML experience. I think Fuld is probably still a 5th outfielder – useful and he probably sees significant playing time, but there needs to be someone ahead of him in the rotation.
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
Perhaps Fuld becomes the primary 4th OF
with Baker able to fill in on the corners, as well. That would allow them to maybe do something else with some of the innings at 2B (or even better, Fontenot be productive and earn the time).
fsuapollo - December 31, 2009
I'm not sure you haven't committed more than 100% of Baker
Platoon at 2nd, back up 3rd, back up 1st (?), semi-regular outfield fill-in. Then Fuld is the platoon for Fukudome and backs up in both CF and LF. It really looks to me like the Cubs need one more reliable OF. It does make sense to let the 4th/5th pecking order be determined in spring training. But I don’t think it makes sense for Colvin to fill one of those roles, unless he is the rare young player who can keep his hitting stroke with sporadic playing time.
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
Disagree on Baker's time.
If Rami is healthy, he’s playing 145+ games. So that would be 17 starts at 3B for Baker.
If Fukudome plays against the RHP, let’s call that 120 starts (roughly 3/4 time). So that would be 42 starts in RF for Baker (or a few for Fuld or even a small sample, like 5-8, for Hoff if he is a bench guy).
If Baker and Fontenot did a “straight” platoon at 2B (predicated on Fontenot being more effective, of course) that would be 81 starts.
That’s a total of 140… which essentially makes Baker a full-time player.
I’m not totally opposed to another OF (Reed on the cheap, Spillbourghs from COL has been mentioned), but I’m not sure it is totally necessary.
fsuapollo - December 31, 2009
My sketch on playing time is a little different
I think a number somewhere around 130 may be more likely for Ramirez, and I am hoping that Soriano can get to that number. Byrd will probably need 20 or more games off, too, (and I suspect 140-145 is all you want to push Lee for.
ClarkFan - December 31, 2009
I'll bet you a dollar
that the backup OF is Hoffpauir.
drewishdrewid - December 31, 2009
I disagree
Lopez improves the offense at second tremendously and his defense isn’t too bad. Hudson is a plus plus plus defender and a much better bat than either Baker or Fontenot. The Cubs are not getting to the World Series or winning it if Jeff Baker and Mike Fontenot are platooning at second base.
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
Actually Lex
Orlando Hudson USED to be really great at 2B. The last 3 years he has been slightly below average. Fontenot on the other hand can really pick it at 2B.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
but do you honestly think the Cubs can win a WS with
Baker and Fontenot at 2nd base?
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
or even better ... Orlando Cabrera at SS and Theriot at 2nd
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
How about Blanco at SS and Baker at 2B?
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
Blanco
You can’t have a team give Andres Blanco starting AB’s even if he is fun to watch with the glove.
Honestly guys, the way the MI is right now is as good of a combo as we are going to have until Starlin Castro is ready.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
But what a nice glove it is!
Anyway, yeah – I’m not huge on the guy’s bat. Maybe some time with Jaramillo can straighten that out.
I’m not even drinking yet. That needs to change, obviously.
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
hahahah
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
lol
Not even Rudy can give Andres help. But hell yeah, he was a fun guy to watch on defense. Some of the sickest picks I have seen were from him last year at 2B.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
You had plenty of time.
Me, unfortunately, I was stuck at work….
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
he might be ready already
fischisgod - December 31, 2009
I like that
except i’m not a big fan of Baker.
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
me either
last years hot run does not seem sustainable at all. But I don’t think Fontenot is as bad as he played last year and one of those two guys will probably turn in a league average season.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
Fontenot proved that he's not an everyday starter
I don’t think Lou will be eager to retry that experiment
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
First
we moved the guy around alot last year.
2nd, he was unlucky, his BABIP was .285 which is much lower than any other season from him. You can expect that BA to rise and his power stayed around the same.
Finally, with Baker Lou can sit Mike during a slump or vs tough LHP. If handled correctly Fontenot should provide good value and great defense.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
this is so crazy that it might work ... jk
but honestly Hendry is known to show his love for Khalil Greene. He definitely has the potential to be a pretty good SS. He strikes out way too much but i think he can produce (2007). Maybe the Cubs take a risk in signing him to let Rudy work with him. He’s a great defensive player.
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
actually according to the stats, he sucks. lol
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
Greene
might be done with baseball. He had alot of mental issues last year in StL. I read several reports stating he wanted to retire.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
what a waste of talent if he does ....
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
I hope he is able to get the help he needs.
Regardless, a big market team like the Cubs would not be the best fit for a player with anxiety issues.
cowsarecool220 - December 31, 2009
Orlando
like Hudson is no longer the defensive force he used to be. He has declining defense, a weak bat and clubhouse issues. Pass.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
He's not *that* bad defensively...
and his bat more than makes up for it. He’s probably above-average, and a 2-2.5 win player. And he’s much more of a sure thing than Fontenot/Baker.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
more on the O-dog's D.
He’s averaged around -3 RAR at 2B over the last 3 years. That’s also what his age-adjusted UZR projections have him posting in 2010. He’s projected to be ~+6 RAR with the bat. And he’s a switch hitter than can play at the top of the lineup. He seems to fit well, and to have a lower “floor” than Fontenot/Baker.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
I don't think
there is a reliably better chance that Hudson outperforms the guys we already have.
And we wont win or lose the WS based on whoever ends up at 2B.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
Here's my problem with Fontenot/Baker.
You have two players whose ceilings are both “platoon players” and Fontenot was horrible last year, even against RHP. He’s projected to not be good at the plate, and even if you apply splits to those projections it doesn’t look good. I’d be OK if the situation were reversed (Fontenot as the righty and Baker as the lefty) but as-is the more sure thing is going to only get 25% of the ABs.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
That's where Baker's ability to play multiple positions
comes in handy. That’s how the Cubs used DeRosa to some degree. They’d move him to another position when Fontenot played 2nd and sit whomever DeRo was filling in for (due to injury or just a day off.)
cowsarecool220 - December 31, 2009
That may be a place where the team needs to see what opens up after the season starts
The current FA options are pretty meh – really too expensive for what they have left in the tank. But if a team realizes as the season passes that their aspirations were misplaced, better options may become available.
ClarkFan - January 1, 2010
How about Uggla ?
The more i look at his hitting stats the more I like him in the lineup .. IMO 280 something batting average , 30 to 34 homeruns , 90 to 95 RBI ’s ,
CUBFANINAZ - December 31, 2009
I like Uggla...
but the more I think about it, I want Orlando Hudson. Good clubhouse guy, he can hit at the top of the order, he’s a switch hitter, and it gives the Cubs LOTS of flexibility off the bench.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
you gotta a good point
I also agree good post Shawn .. just with Hudson’s bad second half ..Not sure I like him that much . I keep thinking of Uggla’s bat . IMO think the Cubs could shoot to 89 -90 wins with Uggla’s bat
CUBFANINAZ - December 31, 2009
Here's the big problem with Uggla:
Theriot®
Byrd®
Lee®
Ramirez®
Soriano®
Uggla®
Soto®
Fukudome (L)
That’s way too unbalanced.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
gah... (R) = RHB.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
And here I had thought all their names were registered trademarks!
Pretty cool effect, though. ;-)
ClarkFan - January 1, 2010
Was reading
On MLB.com on Byrd signing .. Rudy the Cubs hitting instructor claims the Right handed batting is way over hyped . Per Rudy on todays MLB.com article
CUBFANINAZ - December 31, 2009
Now thats starting
to look like a good lineup
CUBFANINAZ - December 31, 2009
It would certainly work...
and as you point out, Rudy has a good track record of reducing hitters’ platoon splits. That bodes well for Baker/Fontenot.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
I didn't know they had gotten registered trademarks on their batting!
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
With Hudson
The Cubs would have their leadoff hitter they need .. Still I like Uggla’s bat . 90 to 95 RBI’s …
CUBFANINAZ - December 31, 2009
Uggla would be a better fit...
if the Cubs already had a lefty bat in CF.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
As already stated...
the BIG problem with Uggla is arbitration – he earned $5m in 2009 and will get more in 2010…too expensive…
airweino - January 2, 2010
2009 took a lot of the life out of me.
I’m a lot less emotional about this team going forward, and I’d like to think they’ll be slightly better than last year, but I’m content to watch the moves play out some before I get too invested.
I’m actually excited to see the emerging crop of youngsters continue their climb through the minors almost more than I’m looking forward to the MLB club at this point. Given the current state of the economy, I’m probably more likely to go watch some of our farmhands in action than the big league club anyway, and I suspect I’ll have a lot of company.
Also: Good post, Shawn.
Goodie1969 - December 31, 2009
thanks! And my expectations are low, too....
for now. Let’s see what Hendry does with the rest of the offseason.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Yes Shawn
good post. To much freaking negativity that roams the board on occasion. Lets see how early 2010 turns out, maybe Lopez, maybe a starter who knows. I don’t think Hendry is done.
Grockcubs - December 31, 2009
I's be happy with Lopez
He’s underrated and could probably come cheap.
wrigleyrocker12 - December 31, 2009
Actually, I think Lopez is overrated...
… and some reports indicate he’s not a great clubhouse guy. Been there, done that.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
I've heard
the clubhouse stuff as well. Plus he has a running feud with Ted Lilly.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
you know what they say about keeping enemies closer
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Ted
would eat Lopez and steal his wife. Between innings.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
O-Dog then
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
pass on the O-Dog
declining defense and overrated offense.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
Then go get O-dawg, whose supposed to be great in the clubhouse.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Long time before ST...
…but I still say the Cub’s fortunes in 2010, will be based on; Soriano, Soto and Zambrano improving their performance, and Ramirez staying in one piece.
Beyond that, I think most of what they have done, or will do in the next couple of months is window dressing.
MPH73 - December 31, 2009
Agreed & rec'd.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
agreed.
add the fact that Miles and Patton will not be on your opening day 25 man roster, you are likely to have improved production from those spots. (A 23 man roster would be an improvement)
My wish continues to be for change at SS. Our middle infield defense has been mediocre forever. It just seems like Hendry and Lou don’t make this a priority. We have pitchers who can induce grounders, but a crappy middle infield to fetch ‘em. It’s like Cub management thinks we still have the slow infield with 6" grass. Wrigley has a fast infield now and we don’t have a defense to play to the current conditions.
I think the starting and relief pitching can be improved in house. I say we have one major need left to plug:
PLEASE ADDRESS THE MIDDLE INFIELD JIM!
LAcarl519 - December 31, 2009
make it green
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
green'd
JB 23 - December 31, 2009
Sure
One exception would be if the Cubs got a player like Bedard or Sheets and he stayed healthy and productive. There are multiple ifs there, but a lot of upside.
DGU - December 31, 2009
Right, but its been poor, ugly window dressing so far
bren - December 31, 2009
Depends on whether one of the "recovery project" starters breaks down and take a high incentive 1-year deal.
ClarkFan - January 1, 2010
ITYM “extent”. HTH.
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
Good post Shawn.
I’m of the mind that we definitely need another OF pick up. I wouldn’t mind Reed Johnson back, but there may be better options.
I also would love to take a risk on Ben Sheets or Bedard, as I suspect that their asking price has to come down given the market. We’ll see I guess. But either would be a great pickup with high pay-off potential. (I’d prefer Sheets I think)
At this point, I still don’t see us contending unfortunately, but there’s still time to add some pieces and of course we may have some rebound performances next year.
Oh, and lastly I did get a lil chuckly out of this:
I imagine you’re correct and Fox will have trouble getting playing time with the Cubs…unless we can get some sort of special arrangement with Billy Beane. :)
CubsWin!Oregon - December 31, 2009
if Hendry
can land Ryan Spillbroughs that would make a decent OF.
CalCalender - December 31, 2009
But then we all have to learn his name
Or cop out and call him something like “Spilly”. shudder
Clutch16 - December 31, 2009
lol
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
I prefer "Borgh."
You will be assimilated.
Goodie1969 - December 31, 2009
Wrong.
We are the Borgh. Lower your gloves and surrender your bats. We will beat you in our ballpark and yours.
Resistance is futile.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
Ryan Spellcheck?
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Why 3 years?
Is/was this Byrd’s market value? Or was this another case of JH bidding against himself again? It’s a solid signing, but the length wasn’t necessary based on his age.
propheteer - December 31, 2009
no one knows why
maybe Byrd wanted $15m range and JH said ONLY if you accept 3, i cannot do that over 2
maybe the third is an option
maybe other teams were bidding and it took a third to sign him
none of us know why, and only in time will we have a better idea about why.
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
I think if there's a *single* reason it's this:
Hendry wanted to only spend $3M or so this season so he’d have room to make another room, and so much money is coming off the books the next few years. If he’s only spending $3M next year he was going to have to pay more than $5M down the line. Maybe he could have gotten $3M/$8M or something but I doubt it.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
That makes good sense
Payroll is limited this year, and the Cubs can afford a higher salary the next two years.
propheteer - January 1, 2010
Hendry seems to have a love affair with Luis Castillo
I think he ends up with the Cubs all said and done. The Mets need to shed off payroll after the signing of Bay.
Fukudome, Castillo, Lee, Ramirez, Soriano, Byrd, Soto, Theriot, pitcher …. not bad
lexmarklover - December 31, 2009
What?
Where did you come up with that? I’ve never seen the Cubs linked to Castillo other than maybe a way to unload Bradley. The Cubs won’t be getting Castillo unless the Mets are sending lots of money.
rlpete - December 31, 2009
Doesn't matter
If Holliday signs with the Cards, we’re screwed.
Ace Venom - December 31, 2009
But not if...
BLou says we’re not screwed. If that happens, we might start drinking turpentine.
Ace Venom - December 31, 2009
if they sign Holliday
and then cannot afford to pay Pujols and lose him, then its a great move IMHO. I would rather see Holiday for the next 8 years instead of Pujols
Cubbie-Tim - December 31, 2009
Me too.
But I think they can probably afford both. We’ll see… If they don’t sign Pujols I know who the Cubs should dedicate Lee’s and Ramirez’s money to.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
doesnt really matter. If they pay both of them that will be somewhere around
48 million committed to two players. Thats insane. I am assuming that Pujols will get about 30 million a year. I actually kind of want to see him get to free agency. 10yr/300 million?
fischisgod - December 31, 2009
that would be crazy.
but i could see it happen. maybe 12/300M?
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
no one player
can make that difference. Holliday will still actually have to PLAY. What if Pujols gets injured? What if Soriano returns to 2007-2008 performance? In the end, you have to play the games.
drewishdrewid - December 31, 2009
I wouldn't mind seeing Rick Ankiel in a deal.
A poster at BCB (Suburban Kid) suggested looking at Ankiel as a 4th OF. With his solid D, good left-handed bat and high upside I think that would be an excellent move, assuming he doesn’t cost much most than a couple million.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
I think he'd cost too much.
For that kind of price, I’d rather have Reed Johnson.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
Five worst deals of the MLB offseason:
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/five-worst-deals-of-mlb-offseason
Andronicus - December 31, 2009
this writer needs a course in economics...
Besides MB v Silva, the Cubs also got $6 million.
To get rid of this clubhouse cancer was important and Hendry did the best he could given the original sin Jimbo committed. There is probably a 25% or less chance that Silva pans out in some role with the Cubs, but I believe Bradley had 0% chance of helping the Cubs and a 100% that he would destroy the team’s chemistry. So to get $6 million on top of these odds seems worth it to me.
LAcarl519 - December 31, 2009
LOL.
That’s hilariously bad logic. Releasing Bradley and paying his entire contract is better than trading him for a player with a lesser salary? Even if Silva is the worst player in the history of all sports and athletics, that’s still a good deal. Just cut the worse player and you’re eating less salary.
Stupid.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Silva
Do you really think this organization is smart enough to just dump Silva and eat the contract? I have no confidence the Cubs will open the season without Silva on the roster. And the way Lou loves veteran, he’s going to get the chance to blow some of that $6 million he “saved us.”
jameslcrockett - December 31, 2009
I'll take Hendry's word on it:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-19-cubs-carlos-silva-dec19,0,4614263.story
It doesn’t sound like Hendry’s set on giving him a spot on the team. My guess is he’ll start the season in the rotation if Lilly is on the bench, and then move to the bullpen when Lilly returns. This is one of the reasons pursuing a SP is a good idea. It moves him out of the rotation altogether (and likely makes Gorzelanny the “6 starter”).
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
No kidding
Silva is just one large bit of window dressing that saved the Cubs six million. If he does not totally suck and can make the roster fine but otherwise have a nice trip home and thanks for the money. Really, Really stupid “logic”.
Doggie Stalker - January 1, 2010
It reminds me of a NBA type trade
ol Pete - January 1, 2010
Thats pretty astute to me
and a great summation of why this man should be fired
bren - December 31, 2009
If you think that's astute...
… then you should re-read the deal between the Cubs and the Mariners. Worst-case scenario, the Cubs saved money on this deal.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
And, used some of that money to sign Marlon Byrd.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
exactly.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
Great, we got an over 30 year old OF coming off a career year
in a hitters paradise signed to a three year deal, no MB comparison intended at all, this just wont end well.
Every move he’s made recently has been to cover up one of his previous F ups, we need to cut bait and start over with a fresh perspective on the organization
bren - January 1, 2010
Let's say we had done what you wanted -
cut bait at the end of 2009. What would the new GM have been doing? The same thing – moving Bradley, finding a CF, trading one of Miles/Baker. Bringing in a new GM fresh in the Fall isn’t the best time to do it. He doesn’t have enough time to get to know his own squad.
It’s time to move past 2009 and focus on what’s coming together for 2010 and beyond.
DGU - January 1, 2010
an intelligent GM
…wouldn’t have signed a mediocre, low-upside CF to a 3-year contract, while bidding against himself. He then creatively backloaded the deal so he can waste even more of the next GMs money.
I don’t know much about Tom Ricketts, but if he wanted my respect, the first thing he would have done is fire Jim Hendry for going to the winter meetings and getting absolutely nothing done. He didn’t sign or trade for anybody to improve the team and didn’t get rid of Milton Bradley until it was too late.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
That's so wrong I don't even know where to begin.
Fire someone for “doing nothing” at the winter meetings? Then maybe 2/3 of major league GM’s should have been fired after the meetings, because they didn’t do anything, either.
What does “too late” mean in terms of getting rid of Bradley? He got someone to take him, got a player who has not been good the last two years but MIGHT come back, and saved $6 million. If I’m Tom Ricketts, I buy him dinner for doing that.
Man, are you bitter.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Maybe it's the
crappy weather we’ve had. Just guessing.
sue369 - January 1, 2010
Agreed.
That’s just wrong at every level.
Marlon Byrd was the best CF fit on the free agent market for the Cubs – and we’re paying him the same amount for three years that Mike Cameron is being paid for two.
DGU - January 1, 2010
Whats the cut off then?
What does Hendry have to do before he’s held accountable? Can you perpetually say ‘oh, nows not a good time to change managment’
no of course not, but the way Hendry is half stepping, and whether its being guided by Ricketts or not, we cant say, but there is a core in tact, a core which is only viable for another 2 years or so, and Hendrys half assed moves to cover up his previous mistakes arent moving the organization forward towards a title and theyre not laying the ground work for the next generation, so to speak.
theyre half stepping, medicore go nowhere moves. And yes, it was a minor miracle he was able to save any money on the Bradley trade, I’ll give him that much. But if his moves over the past 24 months are screaming for his job, then i dont know how much longer you wait. Better to get a new GM and let him examine things for a year then act, a new GM couldve simply reupped with Johnson for a year or two, rather than committing three to a player whos sure to disappoint.
bren - January 1, 2010
Hendry has clearly been given one more year to clean up this mess...
… and get the team back to the playoffs.
For all those of you who would have fired him “during the winter meetings”, or for the Bradley trade, or for signing Byrd, man, I would hate to work for you.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Well Hendry isnt running a Taco Bell
Hes at the helm of one of the biggest teams in all of sports, so our expectations, and the guys employing him, should be higher, no?
I just think the writings on the wall, so better to hire someone new and let him feel out the roster for a year and make his own moves in 2011 and hope the team can stay in it through 2010
bren - January 1, 2010
But that's not what Ricketts said he would do.
You expect him to say one thing and two months later do another?
Like I said, I’d hate to work for you — instead of being held accountable, I’d be constantly on edge, thinking every move I make would cost me my job.
If things don’t improve in 2010, I’m sure Hendry will be gone. Until then, he deserves a chance to clean up his mess.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
rec'd
too many want his head, and forget that in life we too make bad decisions or choices that in hindsight we should not have but we expect a chance to fix out mistakes, so why should we not give JH the same respect
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
There are two separate arguments here -
1) argument one is that it’s better to change GMs after the in-season trade deadline before the end of the season. That gives the new GM time to learn his new roster and system before looking at new player acquisitions.
2) argument two deals specifically with Jim Hendry – you talk about 24 months, which is odd – you want to fire him for averaging 90+ wins over the past two seasons? If you want to talk accountability, then wins is apparently not what you use as a guide.
DGU - January 1, 2010
Right.
In general, unless a GM makes huge, egregious mistakes, he is not going to be fired during the season.
Now, granted, Hendry did make some huge mistakes. His boss is giving him a chance to fix them. I don’t have a problem with that.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
FYI, he's also heading to a hitter's paradise...
in a weaker league.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
not to rain on the parade and love-fest here
but when considering this offseason a success, I think you have to at least acknowledge the ENTIRE offseason has been spent trying to correct all the mistakes made last offseason
The basic agenda heading into the offseason:
1) Rid selves of Milton Bradley (problem created by signing Milton Bradley)
2) Rid selves of Aaron Miles (problem created by signing Aaron Miles)
3) Find a CF (problem created by trading away future CF for uselss relief pitcher)
4) Find more bullpen help (problem created by trading away Michael Wuertz for nothing)
5) Find more SP depth (problem created potentially by releasing Chad Gaudin, obv Gaudin’s no solution but he was a cheap alternative to both the pen and the rotation)
If we’re going to be objective about how well the offseason has gone it should be noted that everything done has been done to make up for mistakes made last offseason
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
this is what i get for skimming
now i see Josh posted the same thing above… argh
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
Totally agree.
Fraggin Judge - December 31, 2009
I agree with all that.
I also don’t think Hendry is done.
It’s no love-fest. I would categorize the series of moves that I posted (trading Fox, Miles, and Bradley for Silva and prospects + signing Byrd) can be summed up as follows:
The Cubs got rid of Bradley without making the team any worse and without increasing payroll. That’s a significant achievement given Bradley’s value (and contract) heading into the offseason.
But make no mistake, the Cubs need to more than that. They haven’t upgraded the talent on the roster yet. All they’ve done is maintained the talent while improving the atmosphere. That’s a small win. Now they need to improve the talent on the roster. I hope that happens with the signing of a starting pitcher.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Totally agree.
Fraggin Judge - December 31, 2009
they've maintained talent
while committing more resources
this is the issue, we continue to outlay more resources and not get any better. That’s a problem
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
How have they committed more resources?
The salaries are roughly where they were at before the offseason started, and they haven’t used up any extra slots on the 40-man roster.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
further committments
for 2011
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
They've committed an extra $1.8M between this year and next.
That’s peanuts.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Oops, I forgot Grabow's deal...
which I’m against. That’s always been Hendry’s biggest weakness, though… and it’s not the end of the world.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
repeating the same mistakes over and over again
is not small peanuts, its a legitimate problem
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
I agree Hendry has a "middle reliever addiction issue"
and that it hurts the team. But it’s far outweighed by his strengths as a GM.
You keep acting like the offseason is over. It’s not. Sure, Hendry only has $3-6M left to spend, but in this market he could score a 2-3 win player in that salary range.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Here's the question -
does signing middle relievers like Howry, Eyre, and Grabow – relievers their managers are comfortable with – help save your prospects from getting jerked around? There’s some value to that.
DGU - December 31, 2009
a lot of success stories on prospects
have come from those that have worked the prospects in through the pen
happy new year everyone
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
On the other hand -
had that work out with Shark last year?
Happy new year!
DGU - December 31, 2009
ok
in ’08, not as well in ’09
i’m not really a fan of anecdotal evidence and hypotheticals to make arguments
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
also see my reply to you above.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Yes, that's true, but...
… it had to be done. Mistakes were made. Some GM’s wouldn’t admit it, and stonewall their team into last place.
At least Hendry admitted the mistakes and has attempted to fix them.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
True.
Fraggin Judge - December 31, 2009
It's nice that he's
a standup guy, but how many seasons does he get to correct the previous year’s mistakes?
Every year it seems he is making moves primarily to correct his errors of either ommission or commission in the past.
Everything we hear about Hendry is that he a really ncie guy to deal with. But couldn’t we hire a GM who doesn’t make colossal mistakes every season and have GM work in the PR department?
tomas21 - December 31, 2009
That's what he should be doing.
Every GM should look at the roster they’ve constructed and ask themselves: “What is missing here?” and then go out and try to get that.
Hendry is probably the best GM the Cubs have had in a long, long, long time. Dumping him would be a mistake. But that’s a debate for another day/thread.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
woah woah woah
here’s where i disagree
the GM should have a long-term plan, the plan should not be to try to react to what happened the previous year and target FA’s in those spots. This is why we never land a legitimate game-changer in FA, because instead of planning to keep resources and roster spots open for those types of names we’re just dedicating to the best guy available that year (even if he’s the worst guy available at that position in a 3 year span)
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
Soriano.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Soriano
is my perfect example, he wasn’t an ELITE player. He was the best player in a FA class
he wasn’t a game-changer. He was an above average player coming off of an elite year.
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
Without Soriano...
the Cubs probably don’t make the playoffs in 2007 or 2008.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
2007 yes
2008.. no
we made the playoffs by 8.5 games, Soriano was a 3.1 WAR player
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
Fair enough.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Does Ted Lilly choose the Cubs
if we don’t sign Soriano? Do we instead end up with Gil Meche?
DGU - December 31, 2009
you love these
crazy hypotheticals…
what is the benefit of trying to evaluate this question?
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
You're really confusing me...
you complain about the mid-tier signings, and the one top-tier signing the cubs have made you’re against because… he wasn’t en elite player? What?!?! He was a 5+ win player in his contract year and totalled 8 wins in his first two seasons with the Cubs. Sure, he’s going to be a burden later in his contract… but that’s what happens when you sign elite free agents! If they get to the FA stage, they’re at the end of their prime and you’re going to end up signing them to a long-term deal that overpays them at the end of it.
You can’t have it both ways: either say the Cubs should sign big-name FA’s or they shouldn’t. But don’t complain about them not doing it and then also complain about the one big-name guy they did sign.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
To use an example from this year...
Matt Holliday is going to be one of the better corner OF’s on the FA market for a few years. The best offer on the table right now is 5 years, $80M. Since contracts are almost always backloaded to some degree and even more so in down economic years, you’re likely paying him in the $20M/year range by the end of his contract. There’s a good chance the end of that contract is going to sting when Holliday is up there in age.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
FWIW,
Holliday is better than Soriano was at the same age. And he would have signed a bigger contract if the economy hadn’t tanked, so he isn’t the best example. But given the economy he’s going to get “screwed.”
Here’s the comparison of the two, by age:
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
The news I heard suggest Holliday is going to get over $100 mil
just saying
DC Cubbie - December 31, 2009
I hear it is also up to 8 years.
Doggie Stalker - January 1, 2010
soriano
was also a sub 2 win player the previous 2 years before his contract season and he was going on 31 and given an 8 year deal
8 year deals should be reserved for guys who are 26-29 and play a position where aging won’t take as large of a toll (like 1B), going to 8 years on him was ridiculous
now you’re seeing the example set (which you use below) on someone like Holliday where teams are going 5 years, Bay went 4 years (and he’s definitely not an elite player either)
So yeah I don’t view Soriano as the kind of guy you empty the wallets for and certainly not the kind of guy (athletic guy relying on speed for some of his value) EIGHT years. Few elite FA’s are signed beyond 5 years and the ones that are usually can be DH’d at the end of the contract. The Cubs overcommitted in years and dollars to the wrong guy
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
OK, that much I agree with.
But to be fair, the markets were quite different when the Cubs offered Soriano’s his contract.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
they were different but that shouldn't excuse stupidity
Beltran got a 7 year deal but he was 27 when he signed
Tex got an 8 year deal last year but he was 28
Soriano was 30, you’re not paying for 2-3 years of prime production that other teams were paying for. It was so incredibly stupid to think you’d get much at all in the 2nd half of the contract. It was a wild overpayment
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
Yeah, I agree.
You should also try to give the long contracts to SS’s, C’s, and CF’s that can move down the defensive spectrum as they age.
I think you and I agree on all this. I just think we disagree as to how big of a deal all of this is. None of this is going to keep the Cubs from being a 90 win team in 2010 or beyond.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
where i disagree
is that if the organization and the GM continue to operate the same way every year, how am i supposed to assume they’ll correct it when they have the financial flexibility again beyond 2010?
What do i have to point to that doesn’t suggest they’re going to extend Aramis, Lilly, Lee to large extensions, committ big years and dollars to them and then continue to try to fill the pieces around them through FA????
That’s my concern. I admit nothing they’ve done now hurts us beyond 2010, but nothing they’ve done this offseason has shown me they’ll be able to focus on opening up a new window when this one closes (which i think it already has)
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
I can see that worry...
but what they do going into 2011 and beyond is simply unknown at this point. Until they commit money to those years, that flexibility remains. And at some point, you want to apply those funds to the talent on the field.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
i just think its unrealistic
to expect mistakes made repeatedly in the past to suddenly change with GMs
Ed Wade makes the same mistakes no matter where he goes
I’m afraid Jim Hendry has the same problems
- overpay middle relievers
- defer too much to the manager on personnel decisions
- hand out NTC and player options like they’re tic-tacs
All these issues have been repeated over and over again
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
He has his weaknesses...
but I’d argue he’s, on balance, a good GM. The Cubs have had one of the best decades in team history under his rule, and it looks like he’s finally gotten some of the scouting/development issues worked out.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
to be fair
they also significantly increased payroll in the 2nd half of the decade. They never had this kind of edge on the rest of the division in terms of dollars spent
Personally I think Hendry is adequate, and I prefer to hold a higher standard than adequate. If he was improving in any of the weaknesses i’ve noted I’d be ok with him, but i think he is what he is at this point
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
I also think if we're looking at him over time...
you’d have to say he’s corrected some of his own flaws as a GM. The scouting/development has gotten better in his regime after he brought in TIm Wilkens, and he values OBP more (and AVG less) than he used to.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
i don't hold him responsible
for the scouting development aspect, as i recognize he likely has little real impact in that
the OBP thing… i suppose we can say he values it but i’m still not sure how much. He still seems to rely pretty heavily on ERA (how else could you explain the Grabow signing?)
His best moves have certainly been more “scouting” oriented (Michael Barrett, Dempster, etc) than stat-oriented
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
Hendry used to have a weakness
for low-OBP players. He learned and has changed radically in that regard.
Your examples all together don’t add up to the importance of that single issue.
DGU - December 31, 2009
examples?
who has he valued of late other than MB that provided OBP
Byrd is coming off a .329 OBP last season
aaron miles was obp-inept
what other OBP signings has he made other than bradley?
fukudome’s signing was brought in as a power guy, the OBP wasn’t the focus their it was filling the LH Power role
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
So, are you just forgetting or are you intentionally trying to re-write history on the Fukudome signing?
Here’s a reminder. Also, here. for Lou’s two cents on what they were looking for.
But there’s also the fact that the Cubs chose Theriot’s OBP over Izturis’ switch-hitting, defense, and speed, and again over Cedeno’s preferrable scouting pedigree.
The players coming up from the farm are all showing more OBP. Colvin was asked to remake himself as a hitter.
Cliff Floyd and Jim Edmonds and Reed Johnson were also OBP sources, as opposed to speedy, glove players.
Of the CF options, Ankiel, Cameron, Byrd, and Podsednik, Byrd’s projected OBP is highest (tied with Pods).
DGU - January 1, 2010
i'll give you some of that
the article is written with a focus on OBP but Hendry’s comments refer to OBP being downplayed as the focal point of the signing
theriot over izturis was a lou decision as lou eventually chose theriot over izturis after half a season. Hendry brought in izturis with the maddux trade before pineilla got his hands on the roster
johnson was coming off a .305 OBP season in TOR and has been an average OBP guy throughout his career with the exception of one anomaly in TOR
Floyd’s a good example
I thought multiple times here you’ve given Lou the credit for not wanting to play Pie and pitted Lou as the guy wanting Edmonds, Hendry as the guy wanting Pie
DartmouthCubsFan - January 1, 2010
For me it was never Pie v. Edmonds
I was pro-Edmonds from the get go – calling it a great risk. By the time Edmonds came, the writing had been on the wall re: Lou and Pie. It was Reed v. Pie. Once Lou chose Reed, it was clear we needed someone else. Maybe you argue there weren’t other choices, but Hendry did choose Edmonds.
You got me to take a second look at Reed’s #s, which weren’t as good as his 2008 with the Cubs had me thinking they were. His 2008 was also a good OBP year – not just his Toronto year, but I can concede Reed without losing what remains a strong case overall.
I don’t read that article as having Hendry downplay OBP at all. Their press release had used OPS for the first time and Lou had been talking about wanting to add OBP. So the reporter was led to ask a natural question – does this mean the Cubs now value OBP more. Hendry answered that they value OBP more than people think, but that they’ll still value players who do other things but don’t excel at OBP. He went on to suggest that people will skew certain statistics as being more important, thereby undervaluing the complete player. As an example he suggested that people might conclude Dome didn’t have enough power for RF, ignoring all the rest of his game.
Now that turned out fairly prescient, didn’t it. Blind squirrel finding his nut, I guess.
DGU - January 1, 2010
I always tried to split the Soriano contract in two
I’ve always tried to split the Soriano contract into two contracts; a five year contract and a three year extension. The best I could have hoped for was that he would be good for five years and decent for three. It could be looked at like this; we signed him for five years and at the end of the contract extended the deal three years. If everything worked out, that wouldn’t be all that bad. Only the three year contract would be viewed as a mistake.
But now I’m concerned that his production will drop off well before that. If his best days are behind him, it will be considered a bad deal well before five years. Even if he rebounds a bit in 2010, his performance will likely be less as the years go by.
JimAnchower - December 31, 2009
I also believe you think things are more "set in stone"
than they are. This offseason is a great example. Bradley’s value was totally trashed, yet Hendry was able to maneuver his way into opening up a hole in CF. Had he been able to trade for Granderson we may not be having this conversation right now. He wasn’t able to do that, so he did the next best thing.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
i'm probably somewhere in the middle
set in stone is too black and white, but i do think their should be an overriding organizational philosophy that should dictate the following things:
1) player evaluation
2) contract negotiation
3) FA approach
4) draft approach
Every year is going to bring about different circumstances that need to be dealt with, i agree. But maintaining flexibility to address those issues in more significant ways is what i’d like to see the Cubs do. Much of the Cubs “different circumstances” have been tied to their self-induced lack of flexibiltiy (both financially and roster-wise)
This is what i found so interesting about the Yankees and their refusal to go with anything other than a low-cost short-term solution in LF. They recognize the only thing that can get them in trouble is tying their own hands up
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
I agree with that, too.
But you do realize how much flexibility the Cubs have starting next offseason, don’t you? In terms of flexibility, Hendry has done a really good job of keeping his options for the future open, this offseason included.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
i do
i covered this in my response to the other post above
i’m concerned there’s been no indication they’ll keep the flexibility and recognize how important it is
every year we spend up until the last dime we have and then the next year we figure it out again
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
meh..
$101M committed to 9 players in 2011 (while losing arguably your best pitcher and position player)….tough to get giddy over that flexibility….
Andronicus - January 1, 2010
I think Ramirez opts out...
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
maybe...
but i don’t think that’s a guy you’re happy to lose
Andronicus - January 1, 2010
No, he's not.
But that’ll increase the amount of money available, and make it so your 2 best position players are free agents.
Next year’s offseason should be exciting for the Cubs. They will have lots of flexibility and lots of need/room for improvement.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
2011 3B market is not pretty:
Garrett Atkins (31) – $8.5MM club option with a $500K buyout
Wilson Betemit (29)
Geoff Blum (38) – $1.65MM mutual option
Jorge Cantu (29)
Eric Chavez (33) – $12.5MM club option with a $3MM buyout
Craig Counsell (40)
Bill Hall (31) – $9.25MM club option with a $500K buyout
Pedro Feliz (36)
Troy Glaus (34)
Wes Helms (35)
Brandon Inge (34)
Mike Lowell (37)
Jhonny Peralta (29) – $7MM club option with a $250K buyout
Ty Wigginton (33)
Andronicus - January 2, 2010
But Eric Chavez is left-handed.
DGU - January 2, 2010
and a swell clubhouse guy
Andronicus - January 2, 2010
Which is part of the reason I think Ramirez will opt out...
of course, that assumes a contract extension isn’t in place. The Cubs could extend him before he makes a decision on that option.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
Here's an interesting question -
was Soriano an elite player from JH’s old perspective? If you don’t care about OBP, Soriano did it all.
DGU - December 31, 2009
Lilly
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
You should have a long-term plan...
and a short-term one. I think Hendry’s deals this off-season fit into both.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Probably just one year.
I don’t agree with your ‘every year’ characterization. You wouldn’t have said that after 2006 or 2007.
It’s real simple. The guy screwed up last year. He’s admitted it and is trying to fix it. If it doesn’t work, he’ll probably be out of work next winter.
I’m OK with that.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
He's kind of
been chasing his tail to find a CF and lead off man every year.
He lost out on Carlos Beltran, then the following year gave up 3 nice young arms to get Juan Pierre.
Juan Pierre didn’t work out, so he signed Alfonso Soriano do a historically large contract to play CF and lead off. Then we found out Soriano couldn’t play CF, so we had to move him to left and dump Matt Murton.
We filled in for awhile with Pie and Edmunds, then decided that Fukudome could play CF. This meant that we needed to find a full time RF. So we decided on Bradley, then had to trade away Marquis and DeRosa to pay for him. The hole left by DeRosa meant we had to sign Miles.
Now we have to dump Miles and Bradley because they’re contracts are terrible, and sign ANOTHER patchwork CF, Byrd, to a contract, while not unbearable, that we’ll probably have to eat in 2 years.
This is not the work of a GM with a plan or with foresight. This is the work of a GM trying to save his job each year with the best FA he can fit in his budget, and fits it in with a contract as backloaded as he can make it. He does this because he isn’t concerned with the future, he’s concerned with making the team look good enough that year to keep him employed. The problem comes in years like this and the next when the team is so over-burdened with these bad contracts for aging players that there is no room for error and little likelihood of conteding.
Jim Hendry is treading water. I’d rather have a GM who can swim.
tomas21 - December 31, 2009
this is my general feeling
though perhaps a bit stronger than i feel, but in the same general ballpark for sure
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
I'm not a Hendry hater
but I had to rec this just because I couldn’t really argue with any of it.
Goodie1969 - December 31, 2009
If this were true
then you don’t trade DeRosa for prospects, giving playing time to Fontenot. If it was true you don’t give away Felix Pie for the sake of his career, you keep him as a backup for Bradley being injured. If it was true you trade Castro for Granderson. If it was true you don’t say no to Peavy.
Jim Hendry is willing to try and be creative. Sometimes it works – converting Dempster to a closer and then back to a starter. Sometimes it doesn’t – Soriano in CF. But I don’t blame Hendry for trying Soriano in CF. Why should we? It was never intended to be a long-term plan. Hendry believed Pie was going to take over in 2008 or ’09 at the latest.
Pie and Lou ending up incompatible was the real unravelling of Hendry’s long-term plan, because Pie was the CF, LH down-order hitter, and speed source Hendry expected to balance this lineup. In retrospect, the Pie-Bradley decision looks really bad. But we were a 97-win team and had the payroll room to add Bradley, so we went for it.
DGU - December 31, 2009
You can add to that
2. Get rid of Aaron Miles (problem created by dumping DeRosa to pay for Bradley)
3. Find a CF (problem created multiple times by signing guys to enormous contracts thinking that since they are athletes, they’ll be able to play CF, finding out they can’t, then trying to find places to hide these guys while you sign another big ticket CF).
5. SP depth (problem also created by trading Marquis for Luis F Vizcaino)
tomas21 - December 31, 2009
marquis and derosa
would’ve been FA’s so they’re not applicable for the 2010 roster without re-committing excess dollars to them
that’s why i didn’t include them
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
The offseason has been a waste considering it's about correcting mistakes.
Mistakes made last season that never should have happened. Like MB, for instance.
The corrections so far have been good off-season moves by a GM who should not be here under stable and experienced ownership. Once the Rickett’s fascination and rookie attitude goes away I predict new management (another GM in a few years).
In any case, let’s hope for more good moves and a playoff contender for 2010. Happy new year, everybody!
Fraggin Judge - December 31, 2009
Hindsight is 20/20
Milton Bradley was a bad signing because of his personal history. He had a major off year and he acted like a big baby because of it.
Ace Venom - January 1, 2010
Poll added to the right sidebar re: the Byrd signing.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
I'll bet I can guess the options... ;-)
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
LOL
What other options could I have used?
I’m voting “Meh”, FWIW.
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
That's not a criticism, FWIW.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Thank you
for a very sane and rational post.
Damen Jackson - December 31, 2009
I find Shawn's posts to be the some of the best here
and on anothercubsblog.net
THe one thing i disagreew with you Shawn is about Marmol.
I THINK he will be effective and reliable. Just my opinion. I think he was pissed when he didnt win the job after I believe outperforming Gregg last year. He shouldnt have sulked but for that type of position you need to be the guy.
fischisgod - December 31, 2009
He should be good...
I just think he’s a high-risk player, and would like some insurance. Maybe that insurance policy is Cashner. I’m happy if that’s the case.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
my biggest issue
is backing him up with Grabow (who has the same command issues). At the very worst you need to diversify the types of relievers you have a bit in the pen.
DartmouthCubsFan - December 31, 2009
That I agree with.
If you’re going to spend money on the pen, spend it on the lights-out guys. I’d be much happier spending $7M on Rafael Soriano than $7M (over two seasons) on Grabow.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
or...
Mike Gonzalez or Billy Wagner… even Jose Valverde. Unfortunately to contend next year, the Cubs needed Grabow and one of those guys. So far, they’ve repeated the same mistake they made last year.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
They didn't need Grabow.
But one of those guys would have been nice, instead, even at the higher cost.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
oh, and thanks!
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
Happy New Year!
Hopefully 2010 is better than 2009 in Cubville…
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - December 31, 2009
The same to you!
Happy New Year, JibJab Style!
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
My Apologies to the Apologists
The only way this offseason looks like a win is from an Cubs front office sycophant who has some kind of sick need to have their blind loyalty abused while the Cubs counts the millions they make off of you.
The team has done the same thing they did last year… make the team worse on paper from the year before while saving themselves money.
Carlos Silva, (over-paying and over-committing to) Marlon Byrd and prospects for Milton Bradley, Aaron Miles and Jake Fox(!) is a horrible, horrible result for this offseason when they needed to put a lot of work in just to keep pace with the Cardinals, with or without Matt Holliday, and stay ahead of the Brewers.
If the team isn’t going to go all out and act like the big market team they are, I’d rather they stop trying to placate with these half-effort, peace-meal signings such as Marlon Byrd, just so they can say, “hey, look, we spent some money. Happy now?”
I’m done drinking the kool-aid… but thinking of dumping the team I’ve loved my whole life because of they way they’ve drowned the dreams I’ve had of seeing them win… has me thinking of taking up drinking other beverages.
jameslcrockett - December 31, 2009
Again, we have explained why they can't "go all out" right now.
Debt service. There isn’t an unlimited amount of money. Maybe in a couple years, there will be.
You’re far too negative. “Drowned the dreams of seeing them win”? Seriously? Before a single game has been played? Geez, why are you even a fan?
Al Yellon - December 31, 2009
Why do all fans have to be completely positive?
If hes not happy with the current state of affairs, is he not allowed to complain? Isnt that the point of such message boards?
The organization does have a “have your cake and eat it too” method of operation, they like to pretend theyre a big market/big move team, but theyre the worse run of the major market teams, and I think he’s right, Marlon Byrd/John Grabow/Aaron Miles/ Aaron Heilman….these are half ass moves.
And we are in debt service b/c we have an incompetent GM with little to no forsight. Quite frankly, I dont know how anyone can be rosey about the Cubs future after 2011 or so.
I just dont think its right to question someones fanhood if they complain about the state of affairs
bren - January 1, 2010
However inept the Cubs have been recently, they are not the worst-run of the big market teams
The Mets take that prize and no finishes second.
In fact, the Cubs even have fewer “OMG, why did they do that?” contracts than the Tigers.
ClarkFan - January 1, 2010
Mets
say what you want about them… but they have a World Series win and another appearance in my lifetime.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
100 + years isnt a coincidence
theres been some serious mismanagement here, and the past few years when they’ve had the resources to spend, theyve been spent blindly with little to no concern about the future.
Im no expert on the Tigers, but I’d feel more comfortable giving 9 figures to Miguel Cabrera than I would Soriano
bren - January 1, 2010
The Tigers' problems are the 8-figure contracts to Willis and Ordonez
But Cabrera looks risky too – could be eating/drinking himself into DH status. I actually hope he wakes up – it would be a shame to see that happen to a player as good as he is.
ClarkFan - January 1, 2010
CASE CLOSED!
Ricketts, Hendry, et al. haven’t won a title in a 100 years
They sux!
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
Boy, they look good for being that old!
ClarkFan - January 1, 2010
If you are quitting because of the last 12 months, you never had the constitution to be a Cubs fan
Not dissin’, just sayin’
ClarkFan - January 1, 2010
Did you think like this during the 2006 season?
I would not dump the Cubs, and I did not dump them in the 2006 season, and that season tested my resolve as a Cubs fan in a way no other season for any of my sports teams.
If you dump the Cubs, that is your prerogative. But you are not a true Cubs fan if you do so.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
2006 has nothing on
1990-1997 those were horrible
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
1997 was horrible.
But the Cubs did have a couple of decent years in the early and mid 1990’s.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
2005
I started to question Jim Hendry’s competence following the 2004 season, especially when he didn’t fire Dusty Baker.
I don’t make judgments based on Ws and Ls… I didn’t care that they didn’t get back to the playoffs in 2004. I thought Hendry was great that year, bringing back Greg Maddux, trading for Derrek Lee and Michael Barrett, signing Ryan Dempster, trading for Nomar Garciaparra AND Ben Grieve.
The end of that season was a debacle and it had nothing to do with Hendry. Dusty Baker proved himself an idiot at making managerial decisions and couldn’t keep his players focused on the games.
Hendry not only did nothing about that, he gave Baker even more ammunition to show how moronic he could be by letting him give 600 ABs to Neifi Perez, 200 ABs to Jose Macias… and giving him the worst outfield I’ve ever seen (until 2006, of course).
All of that bothered me to no end… however, what had me banging my head against a wall for a month was The Great Switcharoo. They spent all spring preparing Ryan Dempster to be a late-inning reliever and Glendon Rusch to be in the rotation… and then had them switch for some logically-awful reason. This led to more reliance on LaTroy Hawkins at closer, which cost the team several games in April and eventually led to his trade to San Francisco (which would have been a fantastic trade had they not dumped David Aardsma for nothing). I will never ever forget Hawkins blowing the last game of a road trip against Houston and Milwaukee (that saw three such bullpen disasters) and Baker putting him back out there the next day to do the same thing against Philadelphia. One of my more traumatic experiences at a baseball stadium… I was literally close enough to the field to spit on Hawkins that day (not that I did, because that’s not how I roll).
For as bad as they were, there was a point in June where all you had to do was switch a couple of those Hawkins blowups and they were right in the wild-card hunt. Hendry, however, did absolutely nothing to improve the team, bringing in no help for the pitching staff and only Matt Lawton to help on offense.
Jacque Jones. Juan Pierre. Bobby Howry. Scott Eyre. Neal Cotts. Cesar Izturis. Cliff Floyd. Freddy Bynum. Tony Womack. Alfonso Soriano. Jason Marquis. Kosuke Fukudome. Milton Bradley. Aaron Miles. Aaron Heilman. Kevin Gregg.
I’ll give him Ted Lilly, Mark DeRosa, Jim Edmonds and Rich Harden (even though he let him walk for nothing), but it doesn’t make up for the bad-to-disastrous moves he made… and the moves he didn’t make.
It’s a new decade. We need some new-decade thinkers in here or guys like Jack Zduriencik are going to keep kicking our asses until all of our grandfathers and grandchildren have missed out on seeing the Cubs win a World Series.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
Quite simply, you're wrong.
Last year they made themselves better on paper, and ended up being much worse on the field. This year, they’re a little worse on paper, but the offseason isn’t over yet.
I think there are good reasons to be skeptical of the degree to which this team is going to invest money on the on-field product in the future, but saying they made themselves worse on paper compared to the year before is an inaccurate statement.
I also question the logic of anyone that uses “the team” amorphously when speaking of a desire to just “rob the fans” when there are two different owners in place. It’s not the same group. You could make a comparison between the two groups, but it’s different people at the very top now.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
How can you say that?
Kerry Wood >>> Kevin Gregg
Mark DeRosa >>> Aaron Miles
Michael Wuertz >>> Aaron Heilman
Exactly in what area did they improve?
If Angel Guzman and Randy Wells hadn’t come out of nowhere, this team wins 75 games tops.
I don’t have to sit here and say I was wrong about Milton Bradley. I hated the signing from the start because they committed three years to him, bid against themselves like they did with Soriano and don’t have smart enough people in the organization to manage either his talents or his detriments. Not to mention there were players out there that didn’t cost that much more and proved they were worth that money.
There’s no justification for looking at the team that ended 2008 and saying you’d rather have the team that started 2009.
I think they are done improving the team this year. Even if they sign a Bedard or Sheets, it doesn’t add that much value to the team… especially not compared to Rich Harden.
They’re worse this year in the rotation. They’re even worse this year in the bullpen (which is saying a lot). They’re worse this year in position players (I’d rather have Reed Johnson and Sam Fuld than Marlon Byrd).
BTW… did I miss them firing the president, GM, etc.? It’s the same people running this team, right? The same people who for years who have been making as much as possible off of us while putting in as little effort as possible. When things change at the top, then we can start making comparisons. The only thing that’s changed is the guy who pays the checks… not who’s cashing them.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
well if you
would rather have Sam Fuld over Marlon Byrd thats your problem buddy.
CalCalender - January 1, 2010
thankfully...
it’s not the Cubs’ problem. :-)
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
Bye
sue369 - January 1, 2010
Bordering on troll territory
I think you are just looking to get a rise out of people.
Since 2007, the Cubs have finished above the Brewers in the standings. We don’t have to fight to stay ahead of them, we already are.
As for the Cards…
Wainwright, Carpenter, Pineiro and Franklin pitched way over their heads in 2009. Wainwright pitched over 240 IPs, Carpenter is a 35 year old pitcher with arm problems who had a career low in HRs (7 HRs allowed in almost 200 IPs – tying his rookie season where he allowed 7 HR in 81 IPs), Pineiro and his 200 IPs of 3.49 ERA work are gone, and Franklin, 37, had his first sub 3.00 ERA season in his career.
Just like the people who added up the production of Jim Edmonds and Mark DeRosa in 2008 and questioned where those runs were going to come from for the Cubs in 2009, the Cardinals have A LOT of questions of where their quality innings are going to come from in their SP.
To think we are so far behind the Cardinals is to not take a real look at their roster or their 2009 season.
IllinoisCubs - January 1, 2010
Cubs cruise past brewcrew easily this year?
ol Pete - January 1, 2010
I think so
Why do you think they won’t?
IllinoisCubs - January 1, 2010
Cubs seem to be going backwards a bit
I like what Muhwawkee has been doing.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
and we'll wave
as it happens.
drewishdrewid - January 1, 2010
You’re that guy Drew.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
I have no problem
being that guy.
drewishdrewid - January 2, 2010
That guy never does. Its part of what makes him that guy.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
the brewers?
we haven’t finished behind them in some time.
Carlos Gomez is worse than Cameron, Escobar is worse than Hardy and after Wolf and Yovani Gallardo (who never seems to pitch deep into games) their rotation is a joke.
CalCalender - January 1, 2010
I’m a huge JJ fan and I’m excited for a full year of Escobar. I can tell you’re not a fan of defense. It’ll be interesting to see what the rotation is this year. Maybe they’ll end up using a AAAA guy like Narveson.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
JJ
Hardy was excellent at defense.
CalCalender - January 2, 2010
Except at the Cubs-Brewers game I went to in June 2007.
Hardy committed two errors, and it could have easily been four.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
Errors, as you know, aren't the best defensive metric.
Neither is citing one game.
Al Yellon - January 2, 2010
I agree
Escobar is better. Gomez is supposed to be a whiz as well.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
And neither one
can hit. Especially Gomez
CalCalender - January 2, 2010
Escobar can't hit?
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
I doubt
he will be much more than league average next season. His only value is hitting for average.
For all the talk of Starlin Castro being overrated consider after Escobar’s age 19 season he posted a .602 OPS in A ball. Castro just posted a .700 + OPS and getting over 100 AB’s in AA. Clearly to this point Castro is a much better prospect than Escobar was. He had better be the genius with the glove that he has been billed to make himself worth dumping Hardy.
CalCalender - January 2, 2010
The Brewers are worse than they were last year...
and made one of the worst trades of the offseason. Their GM is a joke.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
Yep, same as always.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
You have a very, very short memory
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
ok
not to be mean or anything but since the Brewers came to Central when have they ever been any good? This window of theirs the last few years seems to be closing and even at their best (08) the Cubs were much better.
CalCalender - January 2, 2010
I don't really see the window closing
and the idea that the Cubs were better in 08 is interesting to say the least.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
ok
in what way were the Brewers better in 2008?
CalCalender - January 2, 2010
The 2008
Cubs won 7 more games, scored 105 more runs, allowed 18 less runs, won the division, famously swept Milwaukee in a 4 game series at Miller Park and won the series record.
So yeah, the only reason to think that Milwaukee had the better team is your personal opinion.
CalCalender - January 2, 2010
Yes, ol' Pete.
You will listen to CalCalender.
He speaks the truth.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
A Packers/Cubs fan – forgive me but that is strange.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
There are others here.
Clutch16, Doggie Stalker, nji232, bheidge are people here at BCB who are Packers fans who I can think of off the top of my head.
I used to live in Wausau, I imagine you know where that is.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
A group makes it very, very strange.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
Not nearly as strange as being a Packers fan and a Brewers fan...
And hanging out all the time on a Chicago Cubs blog.
Now that’s strange.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
If the team isn’t going to go all out and act like the big market team they are, I’d rather they stop trying to placate with these half-effort, peace-meal signings such as Marlon Byrd, just so they can say, "hey, look, we spent some money. Happy now?"
And what would you have suggested?
drewishdrewid - January 1, 2010
Al
Why do you think you can tell me how to be a fan? Why are you a fan? Why do they deserve you being their fan? They don’t deserve me being their fan. The way they’ve run this team, they don’t deserve the 31+ years I’ve already put into it.
“Before a single game has been played?” This isn’t an expansion franchise, Al. You act like I woke up yesterday and discovered the Cubs and then rejected them… that this is the first time they’ve squandered opportunities… plead poverty while still rolling in money… preyed on the adoration and open-wallets of emotionally and financially-strapped human beings all over the world with their heads firmly in the sand, while sycophantic drumbeaters clamor for us to wait ’til next year and believe and be patient.
They’ve done this year after year after year… I’ve lost an aunt and an uncle this year, Cubs fans their entire, too-short lives. My Grandfather is approaching 80. I’m only 31. I can make different choices. I don’t have to wait until I am as old as you are before a team I’m emotionally invested in wins something. I can choose not to waste my life on a team that only loves and respects me as far as they can profit off me. I’m writing this year off because the Cubs front office wrote this year off… but they did it in a way that doesn’t work towards any future success.
I’ve seen the full crowds paying ridiculous prices for the tickets and beer and merchandise. I can’t allow them to tell me they can’t afford the best. And the ones who can’t afford the “very best”, make much smarter moves with what they have. I’ve been alive long enough to see teams in New York, Boston, St. Louis, Detroit, L.A., Oakland, Miami, Atlanta, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, etc… and, yes, Chicago win the World Series…. but not my team. They can’t even get to one. Heck, I have a 15-year old cousin that’s seen teams that didn’t even exist when he was born win. He’d have something to show for being a fan of the Diamondbacks or Devil Rays, but, nope, he was born a Cubs fan like me.
It was a wake-up call the other day when I went through my closet and, because of a work situation, I had more Mariners gear in there than Cubs gear. I never wear the Mariners gear outside of work, but that’s not why there is less. There’s less because in three years since I moved here I have yet to feel even the slightest inspiration to buy more… to give more money to a team that hasn’t earned it.
I was born a Cubs fan, but I can think for myself. And there’s nothing that says I have to stay a fan of a team that doesn’t want me. You can fool yourselves all you want, but they don’t want any of you either… just your money.
Someone subsequently mentioned constitution… and that’s pretty much right. I’ve lost the will to fight the feeling that I’m a fool for being a fan of this organization. They’re ineptitude has sucked a lot of life out of me. I’ve only been through 31 years of it… and I spent my time in the early 90s ignorantly cheering for a team that was so very, very bad and enjoyed every second of it with my head held high. I’m having a much harder time doing it lately, and I feel like the curse has finally got to me.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
Recommended..
If only because this habit of questioning someone’s fanhood is old, tired, and something that I hope went out with the new year.
Damen Jackson - January 1, 2010
The Yankees will take you
Waagh!
rlpete - January 1, 2010
While I understand your sentiment
There are greater tragedies in life than your favorite baseball team not winning the world series.
For love of the game is why I am a fan. I happen to be a fan of the Cubs, but it is the game that keeps me coming back every year, not who is playing centerfield for the Cubs.
I really feel sorry for you if the Cubs make you feel as horrible as your post makes you sound.
DMCub - January 1, 2010
Now this I can recommend
It is supposed to be a pastime and enjoyment. The Cubs W-L record does not impact the well-being of me, my family or friends.
rlpete - January 1, 2010
I think he's more upset that the team doesnt put forth the effort that the fans do
And I am scared that we have a pure business man running the team now, he can say all he wants about how his family are Cubs fans, but he’s a capitalist pure and simple, and they do make obscene amounts of money off fans….and we’re supposed to be excited or happy that theyre signing Marlon Byrd? please, theres a reason the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels and Phillies have been constantly competitive in recent years, b/c theyre run more efficiently and wiser than the Cubs.
bren - January 1, 2010
It's fine to be upset with how the organization is being run.
But if a statement like “They’re ineptitude has sucked a lot of life out of me.” is true, then again, I truly feel sorry for him.
I can’t put into words how sad it is that a fan can actually let a sports team ‘suck the life out of them’, and apparently literally. Someone should get Merriam-Websters on the phone – we need a new definition for insanity.
DMCub - January 1, 2010
Im sure that was hyperbole
But would the Cubs be in the position they are financially and having a coast to coast fan base, were it not for people being so emotionally attached? Sure its a Catch-22, but I tend to believe that statement was somewhat facetious.
The thing that gets me most frustrated is that they have the financial where with all to compete with anyone save the Yankees, but they seem to spend like drunken sailors on shore leave, and continually give ludicrous deals to marginal players.
So will I switch teams? of course not, but it wont stop me from griping
bren - January 1, 2010
Your assumption is incorrect.
New ownership just went into deep debt to buy the team. To assume they have Yankee-like money ignores reality.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
I said they have the same resources as anyone
but the Yankees. Its not as if Fenway holds 70K seats, and Im sure the Red Sox charge just as much as the Cubs do for seats….so one could assume their revenue stream should be reasonably close, but the way it is spent differs vastly.
Im sure Hendry wouldve given Jason Bay a 12 year deal if he were Theo Epstein
bren - January 1, 2010
The Red Sox have much higher ticket prices than the Cubs do...
… and have a Jumbotron.
I know the Cubs want to emulate the Red Sox model, but to think their revenue streams are “reasonably close” is also false thinking.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Im sure the information is available
And how much money does a Jumbotron yield? If its significant, its another example of how the Red Sox are better run than the Cubs, after all Fenway is older and more historic than Wrigley, yet they’ve modernized it to an extent w/o jeopardizing its historic appeal.
To imagine a team like the Cubs who have fans all over the country cant compete with Red Sox is false thinking….afterall arent the Cubs a top five payroll team as it is?
bren - January 1, 2010
Yes.
You seem to want everything to be fixed the moment the Ricketts took over. Business just doesn’t work that way.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
No just some indication they will make changes
And run the team the way an organization w/ its resources should be run.
Granted, its too early too tell, Im just in the camp that thinks the first change shouldve been the GM…if I havent made that clear already..ha
bren - January 1, 2010
Maybe we just need a new word – call it “infanity”.
ballhawk - January 2, 2010
It's a little early to be assessing exactly how they will run the team.
thehat34 - January 1, 2010
+1
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
ugh...
I meant baseball life… and sports life. You probably glossed over the part where I experienced real tragedy in the last year. I used to write about sports and baseball for a living, but ever since 2005, I’ve lost the desire and drive and passion to do so… except like this. And I’m tired of thinking like this… and I don’t think it’s too much to ask to have my teams give me reason to think otherwise. I can’t remember the last time the Cubs inspired me… and I can’t figure out for the life of me why they inspire any of you.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
Ok
So they haven’t sucked any real life out of you…that is good to know.
However, that doesn’t change my opinion that while being a Cub fan can be very frustrating at times, the bottom line is – it’s a game.
As far as inspiration? Well, I’m not much for drawing inspiration from games, but the 2008 regular season was damn exhilirating.
DMCub - January 1, 2010
Well, suit yourself.
Enjoy the Mariners and Milton Bradley. Seriously, if the Cubs are making you this bitter, I think you should stop being a fan of theirs.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Further...
… if the Cubs really make you feel this way — you absolutely should stop being a fan of theirs. Being a fan of a team is, yes, about winning. But it is also about faith and enjoying the game and everything that surrounds it. If the Cubs have sucked all that out of you — go.
Me, I’ll have that hope until the W-L column tells me it’s impossible. Sports teams sometimes work in strange and unexpected ways. If you go, we’ll miss you. And if the Cubs pull a miracle this year, and you’ve written them off? Do you then get to jump back on the bandwagon?
Careful what you wish for.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Precisely
Recommended with ease
leothelip - January 1, 2010
to me being fan
means I enjoy it. Win, lose, or draw, the enjoyment of the game itself is greater than the Cubs win and loss record
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
Faith...
is exactly what it takes to be a Cub fan. You have to have faith in something that hasn’t won a World Series since 1908. People have faith in religion and yet they’ve never seen their deity or the described after life. I follow the Cubs because I have faith that it can and will happen.
You can question moves by the management all day but in the end if a person can’t have faith in this team then they’re following the wrong one.
HoSs. - January 1, 2010
I, for one, hope to enjoy the Mariners and Milton Bradley this year...
in person no less.
But that’s not going to keep me from being a Cubs fan. And I’ll be rooting for the Cubs when they come to town in June.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
You do realize....
that ownership changed in the last year, right?
For better or worse, “the Cubs” isn’t some amorphous constant. Sure the President, GM, and Manager are the same but the ownsership is different.
At the least, you should make acknowledge the new ownership and make a “don’t get fooled again” reference. Or something like that.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
They’ve done this year after year after year… I’ve lost an aunt and an uncle this year, Cubs fans their entire, too-short lives. My Grandfather is approaching 80. I’m only 31. I can make different choices. I don’t have to wait until I am as old as you are before a team I’m emotionally invested in wins something. I can choose not to waste my life on a team that only loves and respects me as far as they can profit off me. I’m writing this year off because the Cubs front office wrote this year off… but they did it in a way that doesn’t work towards any future success.
That’s fine. You get to be the fan you want to be. But why bother to write a dissertation here about it?
Because you’re looking for a reaction.
drewishdrewid - January 1, 2010
its more of the same
like “i been suffering for 40 years” kind of posts.
if its such a bad part of your life, stop making it a part of your life
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
Or like, "I've been
a die hard Cub fan since 1977." ;-)
sue369 - January 1, 2010
took the words right out of my mind... ;-)
ballhawk - January 2, 2010
History of the Cubs and Winning
Many others and we continue to armchair analyze, speculate, and guess, and hope that someday the Cubs will win it all. We all want to be “right” with our thoughts and ideas.
I love, enjoy, and look forward to most of the excellent and thought-provoking analysis, discussions, and debates on BCB; however flawed someday be in logical arguments – my own included.
I have resigned myself and gained an acceptance that maybe, just maybe, the Cubs will finally win it all when we really least expect it, when we have “written them off” late or early in the season, and something very special, almost" miraculous" happens. I am NOT a proponent of “curses” or superstitious behavior or a common definition of “luck.”
However, I enjoy and often manage to relax more about my all-time favorite baseball team, by not “owning” their “salvation,” unless there is something I can directly DO that is worthwhile and have a positive impact in their eventual Championship outcome.
That being said, despite all my continue frustrations and disappointments, I guess I am saying that I have overall come to an acceptance of the Cubs – no matter what!
“Someday,,,”
GeneticCubsFan - January 1, 2010
Edit: Please substitute: "some may" for "someday" in the fourth line
n/t
GeneticCubsFan - January 1, 2010
FWIW
i posted this in the other thread, but Keith Law isn’t a big fan of the Byrd signing
http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=4786032&name=law_keith
DartmouthCubsFan - January 1, 2010
To be honest
Law isn’t really a fan of any free agent signing unless it’s a short bargain basement deal like Bobby Abreu signed last year.
He has a point, although I think he’s a bit dogmatic about it. However, he does admit in that article that the deal “isn’t going to sink the Cubs.”
Josh Timmers - January 1, 2010
i think the problem is
Cubs fans expectations are so low that “isn’t going to sink the Cubs” is viewed as a good thing around here
DartmouthCubsFan - January 1, 2010
Cubs' fans expectations low?
What team have you been following recently?
DGU - January 1, 2010
they're low
They’re low in comparison. Many fans might even realize they have lowered expectations. When this offseason looks like even a little bit like a win, that’s low expectations.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
people here
are excited about John Grabow and Marlon Byrd
the expectations are low
DartmouthCubsFan - January 1, 2010
No one is "excited" about them.
But neither do we think they are the devil, as some here do.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Byrd and Grabow
are ok players .. I am not excited by either one . I was really hoping the Cubs could have gotton in trade Granderson . I would put money on him to have a great breakout year .. and just plays a great ‘D’ in the outfield . Now it just seems we are signing marginal players , just average players , .. I know the Cubs have no big money to spend this year , thanks to Hendry’s crazy spending , I was still hoping the Cubs could have one BIG signing to get us excited .. But as of now this off season seems boring for the Cubs fans . Yankees , Red Sox , and Phillie’s are all shoring up on their short comings , in which the Cubs are just holding pat . Then I read about Theo Epstien of the Red Sox thinking about not just 2010 but the future in trying to trade for Adrian Gonzales , young stud 27 years old . Gonzales could be a fixture too for the Cubs for the next 7 or 8 years .. I know we have Lee for 2010 with a no trade clause but lets get creative and try to trade for the future ..
CUBFANINAZ - January 1, 2010
Well I presume any trade discussion of that magnitude
would begin and end with Castro, which is a hot button issue around here, and many other Cubs blogs Im sure. Gonzalez is a hell of a player, but i wasnt expecting anything of that sort this year, just not a repeat of prior mistakes. Grabow is just the pitching version of Aaron Miles, hell we might as well have kept Miles, he’s thrown a few innings in the bigs.
bren - January 1, 2010
You're out of your mind if...
you think Cubs’ fans, in general, have low expectations.
kanderber - January 1, 2010
Who's excited about those signings?
What message board are you reading?
Meanwhile, we had a winning season despite having half the offense injured all season long and everyone calls that a failure worth firing a guy who just provided three straight seasons of winning baseball and back-to-back playoff appearances. If that’s not high expectations, I don’t know what is.
DGU - January 1, 2010
the general nature of this entire thread
is how great the offseason has been
i think that represents low expectations
DartmouthCubsFan - January 1, 2010
the OP is saying
that when you look at the offseason in aggregate so far, it’s not as terrible as people have been making it out to be. That’s hardly “look how great the offseason has been!”
drewishdrewid - January 2, 2010
i think
most of the fanbase has high expectations for the production on the field and low expectations for the offseason transactions
In general i think the majority of Cubs fans are overly optimistic of the players we have and overly critical of the team’s results. It’s probably because we have a larger fan base than most, but I think most of our fans have little grasp of the reality of the situation.
DartmouthCubsFan - January 1, 2010
Thats interesting
I never thought of it that way. I think a lot of Cubs fans are like me and were so taken aback by 2007 and 2008 and the expectations for 2009, that we except the rug to be pulled out from under us at any minute, which creates a sense of urgency and makes every move that much more critical. Which I think it is given the demographics of this team
bren - January 1, 2010
The Cubs aren't dead
They’re resting.
ClarkFan - January 2, 2010
backloading
since they’re not putting any real money into the team this year, which means they’ll have left-over from their budget… the backloading of the contract could “sink the Cubs” more than you think.
Re: Abreu. There are probably 29 teams in baseball wishing they had signed Abreu to that bargain-basement deal. The bigger picture is if you sign a guy to a short-term deal and it doesn’t work out, they’re not going to crucify you as much as if you keep signing guys like Zambrano and Soriano. If you sign a guy to a deal like that, it’s almost impossible to get full value out of them.
I don’t want GMs avoiding those kind of deals just so they don’t end up on a list of bad contracts of the decade, but there are other ways to build a winning team.
jameslcrockett - January 1, 2010
Yeah, Keith Law doesnt seem to like any moves anyone makes
bren - January 1, 2010
Wake me up when the 2011 season begins
Marlon Byrd? A mid-30s 245 friggin pound outfielder who hits from the RIGHT SIDE OF THE PLATE is the solution to this team’s woes. And in infamous Genius Jim fashion, Byrd is granted a 3 year backloaded contract.
So the lefty bats on this roster will be…ahem…Kosuke Fukudome, Mike Fontenot and Sam Fuld?!?!
75 wins max people. It’s going to be very ugly at Wrigley Field in 2010. I imagine the chorus of “Ryno, Ryno, Ryno” will start by May 15th when its Carlos Silva bobblehead day and he is on the mound working on a 17-hitter.
BLou - January 1, 2010
How have the Cubs lost 8 wins from last year
Last year the Cubs won 83 games. You are saying their CEILING for this next year is 8 games lower than their total wins last year.
You must be projecting that most of the positions will contribute what they did last year and in addition, some positions will get worse. Where are we going to get worse than last year?
IllinoisCubs - January 1, 2010
Well...
This roster is an umitigated disaster folks. That is my growing opinion. The pitching is going to be where this team really has problems…oh that and a piss poor defense and a riduculously insane virtually all right handed lineup.
Anybody want to lay odds that Lou Piniella doesn’t even show up for spring trainign?
BLou - January 1, 2010
Fair enough, but I'm not seeing a huge difference
2009:
Our ABs leaders in 2009 are as follows:
Player ABs OPS
Theriot: 602 .712
Lee: 532 .972
Fukudome: 499 .796
Soriano: 477 .726
Bradley: 393 .775
Fontenot: 377 .677
Soto: 331 .702
Ramirez: 306 .905
Hill: 253 .636
Hoffpauir: 234 .727
Fox: 216 .779
Baker: 203 .810
Johnson: 165 .742
Miles: 157 .466
Scales: 124 .723
Blanco: 123 .644
Fuld: 97 .821
What are your projections for 2010?
I’m guessing our leaderboard for ABs is going to be
Theriot
Lee
Ramirez
Fukudome
Soriano
Byrd
Soto
Fontenot
Baker
Hill
Outside of Marlon Byrd for Milton Bradley, you basically have the same top hitters. I have serious doubts about Derek Lee hitting .975 OPS, but other than him, I think Theriot, Soriano and Soto can’t get much worse and should get better. Ramriez’s ABs will increase and I think his production will stay the same. Fukudome will probably repeat at about what he did, Baker’s ABs over Fontenot should increase, and Soto’s ABs over Hill will increase too. I don’t think the Cubs offense could do worse than what it did last year but I’m open to you explaining where the holes will be in the offense to transform them into a 75 team are.
IllinoisCubs - January 1, 2010
Well wouldnt a 75 win team be easier to fix?
Let go of Lee, shop around Ramirez and Zambrano and bring up the younguns. If we are treading water near .500, I would fear there would be more offseasons like this one, full of yawn inspiring moves, most likely headed towards 85 wins or so
bren - January 1, 2010
Sure it would
But I’m just trying to figure out how the team falls from 83 wins. I figured the team started with that base of 83 wins going into the season because the team hasn’t changed that much and I don’t see how the team could perform worse than they did in 2009.
Perhaps you could help me out here, where do you see the team falling short of their 83 win total from last year?
IllinoisCubs - January 1, 2010
The bullpen seems worse
If you could imagine that. We only have 2 proven starters who will actually be pitching when the season starts. Ramirez is coming off an injury, one which hes had before, Soriano is Soriano, Soto is coming off an epic sophmore slump etc etc.
I never claimed we’re gonna be at 75 wins, I think we’ll miss out on the playoffs by a hair, which would be far more frustrating
bren - January 1, 2010
And the core
of the Cubs are getting older ..
CUBFANINAZ - January 1, 2010
As opposed to...
getting younger?
kanderber - January 1, 2010
yes
Soto is the only core guy under thirty .. now the Cubs sign 32 year old center fielder .. The window of oppurtunity is getting smaller . Hendry in his signings have to start thinking of younger players , in which you have speed ..
CUBFANINAZ - January 1, 2010
Pitching?
Looking over the hitting, again outside of Lee, I don’t see how any Cub could have a HUGE reduction in offense. Soriano, Theriot, Soto would have to plunge below .700 OPS and Blanco, Scales, and Hill can provide at least .650-.700 OPS so the offense can’t get much worse versus 2009. You must think that the pitching is going to fall?
Name IP ERA
Dempster 200 3.65
Lilly 177 3.10
Zambrano 169 3.77
Wells 165 3.05
Harden 141 4.09
Marshall 85 4.32
Marmol 74 3.41
Heilman 72 4.11
Gregg 68 4.72
Guzman 61 2.95
Gorzelanny 38 5.63
Samardzija 34 7.53
Patton 27 6.83
I’m guessing for 2010 our top contributors will be:
Dempster
Lilly
Zambrano
Wells
Marshall
So outside of Harden for Marshall, it’s the same. The SP in 2009 was very good, but the IPs total were a little on the low side. Only Dempster hit 200 IPs, and Zambrano and Wells were closer to 150 than to 200. I could see Dempster/Lilly/Zambrano/Wells/Marshall all pitching over 150 next year and 3 of those 5 pitching over 175 IPs if not 200+. But with those sub 4.00 ERAs for our top 4, I could see some room for failing but certainly the bullpen couldn’t get worse, right?
So are we losing all 8 wins from last year by the bullpen and offense repeating what they did last year and the SPs all falling to 4.00 ERAs? Hmmm, and 75 wins is the ceiling too? The max? That must the numbers. Please tell me if I’m wrong. I’m just trying to figure out where you are getting the numbers from so I know best where to aim my GM critiques at.
IllinoisCubs - January 1, 2010
Rebuttal
The 2009 Cubs were blessed with inordinantely good starting pitching. In fact, it was surprising in nearly every respect. Unfortunately the offensive and defensive struggles of this ballclub combined with a bad bullpen sabotaged good starting pitching near-completely.
The law of averages says the Cubs will not get as good of starting pitching in 2010. Especially with the cast of characters on hand.
BLou - January 1, 2010
the Cubs suck the life out of you, we fkin get it BLou
maybe you should stop paying attention to them and find a new hobbyv
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
the law of averages also says
that the Cubs’ offense and defense will be better in 2010, as well. You can’t have it both ways.
drewishdrewid - January 2, 2010
yabbut they were also cursed with inordinately bad luck on offense...
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
The number 75 is picked from thin air as a portent of doom
Don’t look for a lot of supporting analysis, other than “xxxxxx will go to hell in a handbasket in 2010.”
ClarkFan - January 2, 2010
By the way, 75 wins "tops" is about the dumbest projection I've ever heard...
This team is as likely to win 95 games as they are to win 75 games. And I don’t think they have much of a chance to win 95 games. So putting an estimate of 75 out there is pretty bad. And then saying that’s the “max” is even worse. That means you think this team will end up at what? 67 wins? 65?
This team has problems, but given their weak division and the degree to which their “problems” aren’t that huge, you’re blowing things out of proportion.
Chill…
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
You're trying to counteract bombast with logic.
You should know that never works.
Al Yellon - January 2, 2010
THE CUBS WILL WIN 95 GAMES NEXT YEAR!!!!
(is that better?)
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
Loud, but not quie bombastic enough!
;-)
Al Yellon - January 2, 2010
quie=quite
Al Yellon - January 2, 2010
You forgot to add
MINIMUM!
Goodie1969 - January 2, 2010
Sandbagger - it will be 99, easy
ClarkFan - January 2, 2010
I assume as soon as the NHL season is over...
…you will be updating your signature with your “75 wins max” mantra?
ballhawk - January 2, 2010
Jacque Jones is going to seem like Billy Williams compared to Marlon Byrd
This really is a nightmare come true. Jim Hendry gives a 4th outfielder a 3 year contract to pretend to play center field. The lineup card includes TWO potential left-handed bats folks…Kosuke “don’t call me So Taguchi” Fukudome and Mike “Papa Smurf” Fontenot. TWO.
The offense is going to be BAD. The defense is going to be BAD. The outfield is tied up on bad contracts until the next millenium. The bullpen is scary looking. The backend of the rotation is a derby between Silva, Gorzelanney and Samardizija.
75 wins ABSOLUTE max folks.
BLou - January 1, 2010
So much for "Happy New Year", huh?
You must not enjoy sports very much.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
I wouldn't call him subtle, that's for sure
ol Pete - January 1, 2010
I don't think he enjoys anything very much
I have yet to see him make one positive post.
Ace Venom - January 1, 2010
He's made only a few.
I remember a positive post he made in the series at Colorado in August.
But I have seen hundreds of posts by him, and that was the only one that was actually positive. Other posters on BCB were acting as if Hell had frozen over when they saw his positive post.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
I guess that on the outside of every silver lining, there is a dark cloud....
ClarkFan - January 1, 2010
he is the anti Ernie Banks
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
Try "Unhappy New Year,"
Much like every day is with him.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
Yeah...
Most if not nearly all of his posts could be catagorized as “The Sky is Falling, The Sky is Falling”
Endrick - January 2, 2010
The defense is going to be better than last year...
perhaps as much as 30 runs better, just from the OF moves.
I think you’re wrong about the 75 win projection. It could certainly happen, but I think this team is more like 84-win material at the moment.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 1, 2010
Disagree
The lineup card could be frighteningly bad. There is no left-handed run production to speak of, which is highly problematic. Also, this is yet again a station to station lineup card.
What nobody and I mean nobody wants to talk about also is the bullpen. If Marmol can’t close then a potentially bad bullpen could turn out downright awful. Marmol, Guzman and Grabow followed by four open slots to be decided in spring training is not comforting to contemplate.
A back-end of the rotation that includes Gorzellaney, Silva, Samardizija as the principle combatants is not good. And God save the queen if Randy Wells turns back into his former non-prospect stuff or the aging Ted Lilly is less than his usual reliable 6 inning self upon his return.
75 wins MAX. It could be worse than that. As in 95 loss bad. They laughed at thoughts like this to enter the 2006 season too.
BLou - January 1, 2010
There was little LH run production in 2008.
Didn’t stop the offense from leading the NL in runs.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Al, you truly expect to get thru to him?
Cubbie-Tim - January 1, 2010
No, of course not.
But I felt it needed a rebuttal.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Help me understand the virtues of the following lineup card and bench over 162 games..
1. Fukudome (until that is Lou moves Soriano back to leadoff to break up all the righties)
2. Theriot
3. Lee
4. Ramirez (the injuries have started to be chronic and you have worry about his standard of production level going forward)
5. Byrd (sigh)
6. Soriano (where o’ where do you hide him and his eroding bat speed?)
7. Baker or Fontenot (whoopie)
8 Hill and Soto
To be suppported by a “bench” that probably includes Fuld (sigh), Hoffpauir (sigh), Blanco (sigh) and Fontenot.
BLou - January 1, 2010
So full of $#(*
Aramis and his “chronic” injuries?
He hurt his shoulder last year. He never had any problems with it before and in the 3 years before last he appeared in over 90 % of possible games.
Do you even bother to question yourself before you type?
CalCalender - January 1, 2010
Cal, you
know the answer to that.
sue369 - January 1, 2010
Of course he doesn't.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
why would he start now?
Cubbie-Tim - January 2, 2010
I'm not sure I'd call him chronically injured
But he’s had time off for shoulder, calf, back, wrist, knee, quad, ankle, groin… I think he had a problem or problems with that shoulder in Pitt too.
He sure seems a notch or two less than durable. He can hit though.
ol Pete - January 2, 2010
90 %
speaks for itself. He isn’t Cal Ripken Jr out there but you can depend on him to play his fair share of games.
CalCalender - January 2, 2010
What, you think he will actually listen to logic?
Not a chance.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 1, 2010
Lee, Ramirez and Soriano are all a year older
Also, Soto was figured out. And alas, how did that wondrously right-handed one dimensional lineup card work when the playoffs came around against the Dodgers?
Sorry, but I won’t overrule what my head says on the matter. I’m looking hard for the silver linings and hope for this 2010 squad and don’t see it. Rather I see bad replay of 2006. Yes, I am starting to see a 95 loss type of ballclub.
BLou - January 1, 2010
You seriously believe that nonsense about RH hitters losing the 2008 playoffs?
Nonsense. This team is far better than the 2006 team.
Al Yellon - January 1, 2010
Fundamentally disagree
The lineup card is scary one-dimensional. But that is not what really worries me the most. Nope, that would be reserved for the pitching staff. Cubs got suprisingly good production out of that rotation in 2009. Given the names on hand that is not likely to repeat itself, especially with Harden gone and Lilly getting older and rehabbing himself back to his old 6 inning self for probably the first half of the season. And like I said, all hell breaks lose if Wells turns back into a pumpkin.
Also, how can you look at that pen and feel good right now? The only two pitchers I feel reasonably confident in what to expect are Grabow and Marshall. The rest are a crapshoot, plus there are as many as 4 job openings.
BLou - January 1, 2010
A "one-dimensional" lineup led the NL in runs in 2008.
Would be nice if you took facts into the equation before you make your comments here.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
It's not nonsense...
BLou does have a good point or two that he’s blowing out of proportion. The handedness of the lineup card IS a problem. Splits do exist, and in a short series they do matter. I’d like to see a left-handed hitter in there somewhere, but Granderson was the only legit option for that, and I’m guessing it would have required giving up Castro to top the Yankees’ offer for him.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
Interestingly enough...
… had the Cubs kept the RH-heavy lineup, and faced the Dodgers in the 2009 playoffs (which they would have if they had been NL Central champs), they would have faced a pitching staff that was heavily lefthanded.
Put together a GOOD team and it shouldn’t matter what side they hit from.
As far as Granderson was concerned, I think the Tigers wanted a ML-ready CF in return, and the Cubs didn’t have that to give.
Al Yellon - January 2, 2010
Don't get me wrong...
it’s not the most important thing you can do for a team. You get the best players available. But if you have a lineup heavily tilted towards one side or the other and you have two roughly equal options use the handedness as the tiebreaker. In the case of Byrd, there wasn’t a good LH option on the market, so I’m fine with signing him. But I also think making an offer to Orlando Hudson (who seems to be a great clubhouse guy) would be a good idea. Baker is then your super-utility guy that can play almost every position and maybe even platoon with Fukudome. Fontenot is either a LH-bat off the bench or trade bait.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
Again, I think that...
…. just throwing money at thirtysomething free agents because they’re there, is a wrongheaded philosophy.
Al Yellon - January 2, 2010
Let's say
Hudson would take 4 M 1 yr – what would you rather do with that money? or that playing time? I think there are legit reasons not to take that deal, but I’m asking because it seems like there’s a growing embarassment at BCB that so much of the massive amount of profit the Cubs take in is going to payroll, and I just don’t get that. Shouldn’t fans be glad this money is going towards winning, and not just lining the pockets of the Trib?
DGU - January 2, 2010
It's not because "they're there"
it’s because they’re a good fit for the team’s needs. The Cubs still need a high OBP guy Lou trusts at the top of the lineup, they could still use a left-handed bat (or switch hitter), and SS/2B are the only places to put that player. Hudson fits the mold.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
I'd also like to see the Cubs offer Sheets a contract.
How about this for an offer?
1 year contract with $3M guaranteed and a team option for a 2nd year at $12M that can be bought out for $1M.
In year 1 of the deal, Sheets gets an additional $3M for every 10 starts he makes, including playoffs.
If Sheets makes more than 30 starts in year 1, the option vests and becomes a player option.
That’s a 1 year deal worth essentially $4M if Sheets doesn’t start a game. If he is healthy for a full season, it’s a 2-year, $24M deal. But in that case, the Cubs should make a playoff run and should have a shot at the extra dough to afford the contract.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
That might actually work.
It doesn’t seem as if Sheets has a lot of offers out there. Maybe it’s worth exploring something like this.
Al Yellon - January 3, 2010
I've changed my tune on this...
one of Baker and Fontenot should pan out OK. I still think they should go get a SP or RP (or both), but not a 2B.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
It would also be reasonable to look at Ryan Church if he is healthy
Has hit decently when in good shape, can back up all three OF positions and do it pretty well. Wonder how much of 2009 was fallout from the Mets botching his concussion in 2008?
ClarkFan - January 2, 2010
I'd like that, too.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
Nor did it stop Jimbo from tinkering
bren - January 1, 2010
Jessica, I hope you saw this.
He has finally gone off after Lilly here.
I knew it was only a matter of time.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
So your brackets on the Cubs season...
is they’ll finish somewhere between 67-95 and 75-87? So you’ve basically got the Cubs as a 71-win team? That would mean they’d only pile up 21 WAR over the course of the season.
Let’s assume Soriano is a replacement-level player
Let’s assume Lee falls back to his 2008 levels and only produced 3 WAR
Let’s assume Soto repeats his year from last year, 1 WAR
Let’s assume Ryan Theriot and Fukudome fall off and only produce 1.5 WAR each (3 WAR total)
Let’s assume Marlon Byrd is as bad as you (incorrectly) think he is, and only produces 1 WAR
Let’s assume the Baker/Fontenot platoon doesn’t work out and they only produce 1 WAR
Let’s assume Ramirez misses a third of the season with injury and only totals 3 WAR
Let’s assume Lilly misses the whole season, and is replaced in the rotation by Silva, who also pitches at replacement level (0 WAR)
Let’s assume Wells is just a league-average pitcher, and racks up only 2 WAR
Let’s assume Zambrano duplicates his worst seasons to date and only is worth 3 WAR
Let’s assume Dempster has his worst season in 3 years and is only worth 2 WAR
Let’s assume Gorzelanny falls short of expectations and is only worth 1 WAR
Let’s assume Marmol can’t find the plate and is only worth 1 WAR
Let’s assume none of the other arms pan out AT ALL and aren’t worth anything.
That’s still a total of 21 WAR, in a season where every player falls short of expectations. That’s your 71-win team. All it would take to top 75 wins would be for Ramirez to not get hurt and Soriano to be a league-average player. Or for Lilly to return to the rotation in May, as expected.
71 wins is just an asinine projection. You could project the Cubs to win 90 games and you’d probably end up closer to the truth.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - January 2, 2010
Go Rec it on the mountains
over the hills and everywhere…
DGU - January 2, 2010
This one must turn green!
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
Comment fail.
Hadn’t hit refresh in a while. This one, as it turns out, is already green.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
So, let me see if I get this straight:
Career averages: not counted.
Statistical projections: not counted.
Career-worst years: counted.
Update your Blue Mike scorecards, everyone.
Vermont Cubs Fan - January 2, 2010
Bad defense, bad offense, bad pitching. Bad, Cubbie, bad!
But maybe, “they’re bad, they’re bad, they’re nationwide.”
ClarkFan - January 2, 2010
Sooo...is it safe to say that Hendry is largely done making moves?
I sorta doubt Reed Johnson comes back at this point. Maybe Hendry picks up some spring training competition for utility infielder and the bullpen, but other than that is he done? I’m kinda thinkin’ yes.
BLou - January 1, 2010
I'm reading that there's another pitching move to be made at least.
And I’d like to see another OF added – Ryan Church if he’s healthy.
DGU - January 1, 2010
I guess that I am your choir saying "amen" to that idea
ClarkFan - January 2, 2010
Getting Rudy
might prove to be the most important move we made this offseason.
Adam U - January 3, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bleed Cubbie Blue to post a comment.