The Cubs finally managed to extricate themselves from the Soriano albatross after nearly seven seasons. I suppose this is something of an achievement for the front office. I was really surprised to see all the tearful farewells and tributes from the players.
I imagine this illustrates the differences between the perceptions of the players and that of the fans and students of the game. To me, Soriano was always the epitome of a dumb and selfish player. How many years did it take to persuade this guy to practice fielding flyballs in left field and to consent to bat other than leadoff when it was obvious he never got on base?
In any case, he is gone. I gather the trade has caused a bit of a controversy in New York where the GM, Brian Cashman, has declared he was opposed to the acquisition from the beginning and it was done only after his strong objections. I'm glad the Cubs pulled this off, but he is right in the long run and probably in the short run as well. How old can the Yankees get and still stay competitive? Are we seeing the invisible hand of Jim Hendry at work behind the scenes in the Bronx?
The Cubs managed to pull out a tough win last night. This game, like so many others involving teams with serious flaws, turned on luck. Jackson pitched well, but fell behind when he gave up a bloop double in the seventh. The Cubs came back and scored on a botched grounder - admittedly hard hit - from Rizzo.
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Way to Go, Skipper!
By which I mean, how could a 6-0 laugher go to a nail-biter extra-inning contest in two short (actually agonizingly long) innings? I'll tell you how in two words. Dale Sveum.
Some managers have a seemingly innate ability to handle their pitchers and the bullpen. Some don't. Dale falls into the latter category.
Last night the Cubs took a 6-0 lead into the bottom of the fifth inning. With a six run lead, generally all you have to do is throw strikes and hang on, but this is something Jeff Samardzija seems to be incapable of doing. Maybe it is the principal difference between him and Matt Garza. I don't know, but Samardzija had struggled all night long and, staked to a big lead, proved once again that he has a long ways to go toward becoming the dominant pitcher people seem to think he can one day become.
Sveum stuck with Samardzija through the fifth, whether it was to give him the chance to notch a win or to give him a learning experience trying to get out of trouble with a big lead, who knows. Samardzija was both lucky and unlucky to escape with a 6-2 lead, lucky because he pitched so poorly he deserved to get smacked, unlucky because the double-play ball he induced clipped second base causing Barney to muff it with two runs scoring as a result.
What is simply unconscionable was letting Samardzija hit in the top of the sixth and then go back out there. Needless to say, the result was a disaster. Samardzija struggled once again and left with runners at second and third and Paul Goldschmidt due up.
I've mentioned before that Sveum is really a rigid and timid sort of manager for all his swagger. He wants six innings from his starter no matter what. He also has bullpen guys with assigned roles. So his sixth inning guy now is Blake Parker, formerly the eighth inning guy until he started getting cuffed around the second time through the league.
Now Samardzija had struck out Goldschmidt, probably the best hitter in the NL West on all five previous encounters. However, magic Dale pulled Parker out of the hat with predictable results, namely a three-run homer.
For my money, the Cubs cannot trade Gregg soon enough as he is starting to revert to his previous levels which are not at all good. Gregg blew the save for the umpteenth time in July. Still, the Cubs pulled it out in the twelfth inning, thanks to a solid AB from Rizzo to draw a key walk and another heroic double from Schierholtz to cap off a career night.
A final bit of news: Alfonso Soriano has asked for a couple of days to think over his options respecting a trade to the Yankees, although he seemed in the pathetic locker room interview they showed on TV to say he had already agreed, sort of, I mean, the Yankees were on the list, right, and he had agreed to the list, or maybe to think about the list and, yes, he had approved the list, so you might say he had agreed to the list or to think about the list, whatever a list is and depending on how you define lists, agreements, and thought.
Some managers have a seemingly innate ability to handle their pitchers and the bullpen. Some don't. Dale falls into the latter category.
Last night the Cubs took a 6-0 lead into the bottom of the fifth inning. With a six run lead, generally all you have to do is throw strikes and hang on, but this is something Jeff Samardzija seems to be incapable of doing. Maybe it is the principal difference between him and Matt Garza. I don't know, but Samardzija had struggled all night long and, staked to a big lead, proved once again that he has a long ways to go toward becoming the dominant pitcher people seem to think he can one day become.
Sveum stuck with Samardzija through the fifth, whether it was to give him the chance to notch a win or to give him a learning experience trying to get out of trouble with a big lead, who knows. Samardzija was both lucky and unlucky to escape with a 6-2 lead, lucky because he pitched so poorly he deserved to get smacked, unlucky because the double-play ball he induced clipped second base causing Barney to muff it with two runs scoring as a result.
What is simply unconscionable was letting Samardzija hit in the top of the sixth and then go back out there. Needless to say, the result was a disaster. Samardzija struggled once again and left with runners at second and third and Paul Goldschmidt due up.
I've mentioned before that Sveum is really a rigid and timid sort of manager for all his swagger. He wants six innings from his starter no matter what. He also has bullpen guys with assigned roles. So his sixth inning guy now is Blake Parker, formerly the eighth inning guy until he started getting cuffed around the second time through the league.
Now Samardzija had struck out Goldschmidt, probably the best hitter in the NL West on all five previous encounters. However, magic Dale pulled Parker out of the hat with predictable results, namely a three-run homer.
For my money, the Cubs cannot trade Gregg soon enough as he is starting to revert to his previous levels which are not at all good. Gregg blew the save for the umpteenth time in July. Still, the Cubs pulled it out in the twelfth inning, thanks to a solid AB from Rizzo to draw a key walk and another heroic double from Schierholtz to cap off a career night.
A final bit of news: Alfonso Soriano has asked for a couple of days to think over his options respecting a trade to the Yankees, although he seemed in the pathetic locker room interview they showed on TV to say he had already agreed, sort of, I mean, the Yankees were on the list, right, and he had agreed to the list, or maybe to think about the list and, yes, he had approved the list, so you might say he had agreed to the list or to think about the list, whatever a list is and depending on how you define lists, agreements, and thought.
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
The Garza Trade
The Cubs finally pulled off the inevitable, sending Matt Garza to the Texas Rangers in exchange for several seemingly attractive prospects plus one or two more players to be named later.
On the surface, both teams got what they wanted. Whether they should have wanted what they have got is another question altogether.
Texas got a proven major league starter for the final stretch of the season. Garza bolsters a starting staff beset by injuries. No question he makes them legitimate contenders for at least a wild card spot and possibly the division title over Oakland if their other starters return from the DL in decent form. He is worth two to four wins over replacement to them down the stretch, and two to four wins make a lot of difference in a close race.
In return, the Cubs received a package not dissimilar to the one that obtained Garza in the first place. Mike Olt, perhaps the centerpiece of the deal, was once a key element in the Rangers plans and was regarded as untouchable. Olt was blocked at third base, his natural position, by Adrian Beltre, but it looked as if the Rangers were likely to try him at first base or right field, where they have legitimate holes to fill for the future.
Olt got a brief taste of the majors last season and didn't deliver. This isn't a big deal, as many youngsters are overmatched in their first taste of major league pitching. Of more concern is his performance this season. He was hit by a pitch in winter ball, suffered a concussion, then experienced vision issues at AAA. Apparently his right eye was unable to produce tears.
So his record this year is nothing to write home about and there is a legitimate question as to whether the problems have been corrected by eye medication. The Cubs seem to think so, but the Rangers clearly regard him as expendable. This is the kind of crapshoot situation you get into when you rebuild the way the Cubs have chosen to go.
In any case, if Olt delivers he solves the third base problem for the future. In the process, though, he creates other issues for the organization. The Cubs drafted a third baseman, Chris Bryant, with their first round selection.
Moreover, they have a bunch of third basemen coming though the system, as well as Javier Baez, of whom it was widely thought a change of position was in his future. So, all in all, it is hard to figure out what need Olt actually fills. It also probably indicates a lack of confidence in the ability of their existing future third base options.
The rest of the deal consists of pitchers. Starting pitchers, which the Cubs think they really need even though they have traded five legitimate major league starters in the course of the past two years, namely, Cashner, Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, and now Garza. I know there are other circumstances at play here, age and cost among them, but there is a certain odd tendency about the so-called plan that is somewhat troubling. That is, what is the plan anyway?
As far as the rest of the pitchers go, the Rangers thought enough of Jason Grimm to promote him to fill out the rotation when they were hit by several injuries. He is 7-7 with a really high ERA, mainly due to a couple of really rocky outings in July. He left his last start with forearm soreness and was to be relegated to the bullpen. Although the Rangers thought enough of him to bring him up, then again, the Cubs brought up Casey Coleman to fill a spot. It doesn't necessarily mean he deserved promotion.
The Cubs would be wise to send Grimm down to AAA to recover his confidence and to get healthy. The other named pitcher was C.J.Edwards. He is the Chris Archer of this deal. Edwards has been dynamite in A ball, but, of course, he is at least two and probably three years from the majors.
Apparently the Cubs can pick up another highly regarded prospect who is nearer to the majors, Neil Ramirez. Ramirez has done well at AA, but kind of flopped when he was advanced to AAA. He has had shoulder problems, so the hitch there is for the Cubs to determine whether he is healthy. If he is, he seems like a good acquisition who is near to being able to pitch in the majors. Otherwise, the Cubs get to pick two pitchers from A ball or lower that no one has ever heard of or is likely to ever hear about.
On a more positive note, it seems to Cubs are talking seriously about trading Alfonso Soriano to the Yankees. Do it and I'll take back some of the negativity I have expressed in these pages toward the plan. Some of it, mind you. Not all.
On another positive note, Junior Lake has been something of a revelation since he was brought up more or less to occupy space after Bogusevic was hurt until the Cubs could activate David DeJesus. Lake was kind of a strikeout machine in the minors and reminded one of a discount Starlin Castro.
However, so far he has been very impressive, so maybe there is talent down there for the Cubs to exploit. On the other hand, since you never heard anything about guys like this from the Cubs brass, you wonder whether they know it. Rusin pitched a nice game last night as well.
On the surface, both teams got what they wanted. Whether they should have wanted what they have got is another question altogether.
Texas got a proven major league starter for the final stretch of the season. Garza bolsters a starting staff beset by injuries. No question he makes them legitimate contenders for at least a wild card spot and possibly the division title over Oakland if their other starters return from the DL in decent form. He is worth two to four wins over replacement to them down the stretch, and two to four wins make a lot of difference in a close race.
In return, the Cubs received a package not dissimilar to the one that obtained Garza in the first place. Mike Olt, perhaps the centerpiece of the deal, was once a key element in the Rangers plans and was regarded as untouchable. Olt was blocked at third base, his natural position, by Adrian Beltre, but it looked as if the Rangers were likely to try him at first base or right field, where they have legitimate holes to fill for the future.
Olt got a brief taste of the majors last season and didn't deliver. This isn't a big deal, as many youngsters are overmatched in their first taste of major league pitching. Of more concern is his performance this season. He was hit by a pitch in winter ball, suffered a concussion, then experienced vision issues at AAA. Apparently his right eye was unable to produce tears.
So his record this year is nothing to write home about and there is a legitimate question as to whether the problems have been corrected by eye medication. The Cubs seem to think so, but the Rangers clearly regard him as expendable. This is the kind of crapshoot situation you get into when you rebuild the way the Cubs have chosen to go.
In any case, if Olt delivers he solves the third base problem for the future. In the process, though, he creates other issues for the organization. The Cubs drafted a third baseman, Chris Bryant, with their first round selection.
Moreover, they have a bunch of third basemen coming though the system, as well as Javier Baez, of whom it was widely thought a change of position was in his future. So, all in all, it is hard to figure out what need Olt actually fills. It also probably indicates a lack of confidence in the ability of their existing future third base options.
The rest of the deal consists of pitchers. Starting pitchers, which the Cubs think they really need even though they have traded five legitimate major league starters in the course of the past two years, namely, Cashner, Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, and now Garza. I know there are other circumstances at play here, age and cost among them, but there is a certain odd tendency about the so-called plan that is somewhat troubling. That is, what is the plan anyway?
As far as the rest of the pitchers go, the Rangers thought enough of Jason Grimm to promote him to fill out the rotation when they were hit by several injuries. He is 7-7 with a really high ERA, mainly due to a couple of really rocky outings in July. He left his last start with forearm soreness and was to be relegated to the bullpen. Although the Rangers thought enough of him to bring him up, then again, the Cubs brought up Casey Coleman to fill a spot. It doesn't necessarily mean he deserved promotion.
The Cubs would be wise to send Grimm down to AAA to recover his confidence and to get healthy. The other named pitcher was C.J.Edwards. He is the Chris Archer of this deal. Edwards has been dynamite in A ball, but, of course, he is at least two and probably three years from the majors.
Apparently the Cubs can pick up another highly regarded prospect who is nearer to the majors, Neil Ramirez. Ramirez has done well at AA, but kind of flopped when he was advanced to AAA. He has had shoulder problems, so the hitch there is for the Cubs to determine whether he is healthy. If he is, he seems like a good acquisition who is near to being able to pitch in the majors. Otherwise, the Cubs get to pick two pitchers from A ball or lower that no one has ever heard of or is likely to ever hear about.
On a more positive note, it seems to Cubs are talking seriously about trading Alfonso Soriano to the Yankees. Do it and I'll take back some of the negativity I have expressed in these pages toward the plan. Some of it, mind you. Not all.
On another positive note, Junior Lake has been something of a revelation since he was brought up more or less to occupy space after Bogusevic was hurt until the Cubs could activate David DeJesus. Lake was kind of a strikeout machine in the minors and reminded one of a discount Starlin Castro.
However, so far he has been very impressive, so maybe there is talent down there for the Cubs to exploit. On the other hand, since you never heard anything about guys like this from the Cubs brass, you wonder whether they know it. Rusin pitched a nice game last night as well.
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
Thoughts on the Garza Rumors
Or what's going on behind the curtain?
I'm continually reading about the potential Garza rumors. Two or three things stand out among all the fluff.
First off, most of them are nonsense. Garza is available for two months, then he is a free agent. So acquiring him is only an option to teams that are in desperate need of a quality starter to carry them to the playoffs. Or to teams that can afford to sign him to an immediate extension. Or both. That is to say that, under the best of circumstances, Garza is worth maybe three or four wins over what you have now. So you have to be that close for it to matter.
So the presence of the Toronto Blue Jays and San Diego Padres in this mix makes little sense. Similarly the Indians and Pirates make no sense here because, although he would help either of them a lot, the idea they might sign him next year is pretty remote, so they are unlikely to come up with the kind of prospect or prospects that could benefit the Cubs. Not that the Cubs are above making dumb trades.
So who's left? The AL East, mainly the Red Sox, Yankees, and Orioles. Then the Rangers. Finally the Dodgers and Diamondbacks. All of these teams are contenders who could use Garza's services and all of them could afford to extend him or sign him next year as a free agent. However, one wonders who they have in their systems that would make for a reasonable return to the Cubs. Mike Ott? Give me a break.
Which brings us to the second point, namely, what is Garza really worth? And what is what Garza is really worth really worth to the Cubs?
Back in 2010, the Cubs traded away four highly regarded prospects to Tampa Bay in exchange for Garza. At the time, people, myself included, rather thought the trade made no sense, given the Cubs were a mediocre team tending toward the truly awful team they became.
But actually, it turns out the Cubs gave up relatively little in the deal. Chirinos, the catcher, was their second best catching prospect, but he hasn't made it. Similarly Guyer, the outfielder, has flopped. Fuld, the other outfielder, was kind of a throw in who served as a backup defensive player, but nothing more. Lee, the Cubs second best shortstop prospect behind Castro, was thought to be a key to the deal. Although he has shown signs of being ready to make the jump to the bigs, he was hurt this year and has missed the whole season.
The only real acquisition turned out to be Chris Archer, who was probably the Cubs best pitching prospect at AA. Archer has finally made it to the majors and he is doing pretty well. He has started nine games, going 4-3 with an ERA under 3 and a really good WHIP.
So actually, the Rays swapped Garza for a potentially equal replacement who made it to the majors in three years time. Bear in mind, the Rays had plenty of pitching that was close enough to the major leagues they could afford to be patient. The Cubs would be lucky to get such a player in exchange for Garza now. At the time of the trade, Garza was under team control for three years, not two months.
Which leads me to the third observation, which is that the Cubs are all about money and making it on their own terms, a kind of business school sports model run off the tracks. Read the Sullivan interview with Epstein in the Tribune this morning and tell me if I am not right.
Now I know that baseball is a business and all that. But the Cubs are still the most profitable team in baseball despite declining attendance and the lack of the sort of high-profile amenities other teams have. And it is possible to retain fan interest and field a reasonably competitive team whilst rebuilding the organization. Last time I looked the Red Sox were in first place even after picking up the pieces following an epic collapse and a throw-away season.
Anyway, a close reading of the article reveals that the Cubs want to succeed only on their own terms. They will only act like a major market franchise when they can finance that activity from increased profits. So as far as the Garza deal goes, if they trade Garza, they are essentially saying they cannot afford to sign him for four years and the $15 or $16MM per year it would take to do it. Or they don't believe they will be serious contenders in 2015, more like 2017 or 2018, which is bad news for the fans, to say the least.
I'm continually reading about the potential Garza rumors. Two or three things stand out among all the fluff.
First off, most of them are nonsense. Garza is available for two months, then he is a free agent. So acquiring him is only an option to teams that are in desperate need of a quality starter to carry them to the playoffs. Or to teams that can afford to sign him to an immediate extension. Or both. That is to say that, under the best of circumstances, Garza is worth maybe three or four wins over what you have now. So you have to be that close for it to matter.
So the presence of the Toronto Blue Jays and San Diego Padres in this mix makes little sense. Similarly the Indians and Pirates make no sense here because, although he would help either of them a lot, the idea they might sign him next year is pretty remote, so they are unlikely to come up with the kind of prospect or prospects that could benefit the Cubs. Not that the Cubs are above making dumb trades.
So who's left? The AL East, mainly the Red Sox, Yankees, and Orioles. Then the Rangers. Finally the Dodgers and Diamondbacks. All of these teams are contenders who could use Garza's services and all of them could afford to extend him or sign him next year as a free agent. However, one wonders who they have in their systems that would make for a reasonable return to the Cubs. Mike Ott? Give me a break.
Which brings us to the second point, namely, what is Garza really worth? And what is what Garza is really worth really worth to the Cubs?
Back in 2010, the Cubs traded away four highly regarded prospects to Tampa Bay in exchange for Garza. At the time, people, myself included, rather thought the trade made no sense, given the Cubs were a mediocre team tending toward the truly awful team they became.
But actually, it turns out the Cubs gave up relatively little in the deal. Chirinos, the catcher, was their second best catching prospect, but he hasn't made it. Similarly Guyer, the outfielder, has flopped. Fuld, the other outfielder, was kind of a throw in who served as a backup defensive player, but nothing more. Lee, the Cubs second best shortstop prospect behind Castro, was thought to be a key to the deal. Although he has shown signs of being ready to make the jump to the bigs, he was hurt this year and has missed the whole season.
The only real acquisition turned out to be Chris Archer, who was probably the Cubs best pitching prospect at AA. Archer has finally made it to the majors and he is doing pretty well. He has started nine games, going 4-3 with an ERA under 3 and a really good WHIP.
So actually, the Rays swapped Garza for a potentially equal replacement who made it to the majors in three years time. Bear in mind, the Rays had plenty of pitching that was close enough to the major leagues they could afford to be patient. The Cubs would be lucky to get such a player in exchange for Garza now. At the time of the trade, Garza was under team control for three years, not two months.
Which leads me to the third observation, which is that the Cubs are all about money and making it on their own terms, a kind of business school sports model run off the tracks. Read the Sullivan interview with Epstein in the Tribune this morning and tell me if I am not right.
Now I know that baseball is a business and all that. But the Cubs are still the most profitable team in baseball despite declining attendance and the lack of the sort of high-profile amenities other teams have. And it is possible to retain fan interest and field a reasonably competitive team whilst rebuilding the organization. Last time I looked the Red Sox were in first place even after picking up the pieces following an epic collapse and a throw-away season.
Anyway, a close reading of the article reveals that the Cubs want to succeed only on their own terms. They will only act like a major market franchise when they can finance that activity from increased profits. So as far as the Garza deal goes, if they trade Garza, they are essentially saying they cannot afford to sign him for four years and the $15 or $16MM per year it would take to do it. Or they don't believe they will be serious contenders in 2015, more like 2017 or 2018, which is bad news for the fans, to say the least.
Sunday, July 7, 2013
Breaking Cubs News
The Cubs didn't waste any time after Scott Hairston's late inning near heroics in trading him to the Nationals for an unnamed Class A pitcher. I can't say I fault this deal, whatever it is worth. Hairston hit 8 home runs, but he was otherwise not much of a factor. He was hitting less than .200 and hardly ever played. When he did play in the field, he was pretty awful. Plus their minor league system has a whole bunch of right-handed hitting outfielders waiting in the wings, so it is not like they need the guy for even the near-term future. The Cubs pick up a net savings of between $2.5 and $3MM in the deal, depending on how much of Hairston's salary they have to pick up. Reports show it isn't much.
Kevin Gregg blew the save, but the Cubs managed to come back in the 11th to pick up the win Sunday. Despite Gregg's flop, the bullpen, at least temporarily, has benefited from being retooled. Guerrier has picked up several quality innings, as has Strop.
The Cubs play the White Sox Monday night and then host the Angels for two games before the Cardinals series that leads to the All-Star Break. With Garza, Wood, and Samardzija set to start the first three games, the Cubs look like they might extend their mini-streak of victories, at least until the Cards come to town.
Kevin Gregg blew the save, but the Cubs managed to come back in the 11th to pick up the win Sunday. Despite Gregg's flop, the bullpen, at least temporarily, has benefited from being retooled. Guerrier has picked up several quality innings, as has Strop.
The Cubs play the White Sox Monday night and then host the Angels for two games before the Cardinals series that leads to the All-Star Break. With Garza, Wood, and Samardzija set to start the first three games, the Cubs look like they might extend their mini-streak of victories, at least until the Cards come to town.
Saturday, July 6, 2013
The Best Damned Dominican Sandlot Team Money Can Buy
OK, I'm being sarcastic here, but lets focus on what is going on here. The Cubs have added a new wrinkle to the Epstein myth. Right now they are dumping salary like mad in hopes of acquiring enough international monopoly money credits to avoid substantial penalties they might incur as a result of signing a bunch of sixteen year old kids from the Dominican Republic and Venezuela.
I'm sure these kids project to be awesome prospects and all, but this is rather taking building for the future to a whole new level. Here is a link to a good summary of the Cubs activity as well as the rules of the game.
I was reflecting a bit the other day while listening to some sports radio talk in the car. A lot of people have a fundamental misunderstanding of the so-called moneyball strategy, especially as it applies to teams like the Cubs. Moneyball was really a system devised by Billy Beane to build competitive teams in a small market within a limited budget.
The system takes advantage of market aberrations, some of which no longer exist to the extent they did in the earlier years of the decade simply because other teams have figured out the same imbalances as well. The whole scheme is based on being able to develop a steady stream of young talent through your minor league system, develop and exploit their talent to the point they become too expensive to retain, then swap them off for similar pieces who are nearly ready to take their places.
The relevance of this setup to a major market team like the Cubs with lots of money and very little marketable talent escapes me. If anything, Epstein and Hoyer are building an organization that may, in the future, be able to implement a system similar to moneyball. Bear in mind, of course, that the system itself is entirely irrelevant to their own situation. If that is the case, Cubs fans are in for some really lean years.
Anyway, in the version of the big leagues that inhabits the friendly confines, the Cubs have suffered two more losses. In the final game at Oakland, they lost a heart-breaker 1-0. Wood pitched a shutout through six innings, only to have Guerrier throw it away in his first outing as a Cub.
Castro was thrown out at home plate on a play on which virtually any runner at second would have scored easily. There is a bit of controversy about whether Castro took the right route or ran hard or got a late jump. Most of the defensive statements are just fluff. If you watch the video replay from the Oakland announcers, you know that from right off they recognized Castro was just jogging. You cannot see what kind of lead or jump he got, but he is a good ten feet from third base when Cespedes closes on the ball.
Yesterday, Castro was caught napping and picked off second base. Didn't matter to the result, but there is definitely something wrong with this kid. He is just not paying attention to the game most of the time. Maybe this is another indication of how hard it is to develop players on a team that is designed to lose or maybe it just means Castro is just not the player or the personality people think he has the potential to become.
I'm sure these kids project to be awesome prospects and all, but this is rather taking building for the future to a whole new level. Here is a link to a good summary of the Cubs activity as well as the rules of the game.
I was reflecting a bit the other day while listening to some sports radio talk in the car. A lot of people have a fundamental misunderstanding of the so-called moneyball strategy, especially as it applies to teams like the Cubs. Moneyball was really a system devised by Billy Beane to build competitive teams in a small market within a limited budget.
The system takes advantage of market aberrations, some of which no longer exist to the extent they did in the earlier years of the decade simply because other teams have figured out the same imbalances as well. The whole scheme is based on being able to develop a steady stream of young talent through your minor league system, develop and exploit their talent to the point they become too expensive to retain, then swap them off for similar pieces who are nearly ready to take their places.
The relevance of this setup to a major market team like the Cubs with lots of money and very little marketable talent escapes me. If anything, Epstein and Hoyer are building an organization that may, in the future, be able to implement a system similar to moneyball. Bear in mind, of course, that the system itself is entirely irrelevant to their own situation. If that is the case, Cubs fans are in for some really lean years.
Anyway, in the version of the big leagues that inhabits the friendly confines, the Cubs have suffered two more losses. In the final game at Oakland, they lost a heart-breaker 1-0. Wood pitched a shutout through six innings, only to have Guerrier throw it away in his first outing as a Cub.
Castro was thrown out at home plate on a play on which virtually any runner at second would have scored easily. There is a bit of controversy about whether Castro took the right route or ran hard or got a late jump. Most of the defensive statements are just fluff. If you watch the video replay from the Oakland announcers, you know that from right off they recognized Castro was just jogging. You cannot see what kind of lead or jump he got, but he is a good ten feet from third base when Cespedes closes on the ball.
Yesterday, Castro was caught napping and picked off second base. Didn't matter to the result, but there is definitely something wrong with this kid. He is just not paying attention to the game most of the time. Maybe this is another indication of how hard it is to develop players on a team that is designed to lose or maybe it just means Castro is just not the player or the personality people think he has the potential to become.
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
Too Clever by Half?
There are some bright sides to the Cubs deals of yesterday. They picked up guys who are healthy and ready to fail in the majors, so we are spared the expected ordeal of waiting for them to heal or disappoint in the distant future. Also the Cubs picked up some extra international bonus money, which they promptly invested in three or four of the top five or six prospects on the international market.
The thing here is that these kids are sixteen years old, so even though they look pretty good now, it will undoubtedly be many years before they mature into big league players. So a lot can happen in the interval. Anyway, is it just me or is there something a little sinister in building the future on a foundation that can only charitably be perceived as a form of indentured servitude?
The Cubs brass has correctly concluded that the real bargains in impact players are offshore, but you kind of get the impression they must be spending all their time high-fiving each other about how smart they are in pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. They might want to watch some major league games as an antidote.
Last night the cleverness extended to the embattled Dale Sveum, who snatched defeat from the precipice of victory by inserting the slumping and overused James Russell in the eighth inning with two outs, a two run lead, and a runner at first and the game seemingly well in hand. A walk and a home run later, the game was for all intents and purposes lost.
I know that Sveum has little to work with, but sometimes you just have to keep it simple and leave well enough alone. The Cubs are carrying seven relievers, but actually Sveum has shown confidence in only four of them, viz., Russell, Camp, Gregg, and lately Parker. The confidence shown in Camp has always seemed to be puzzling, as his performance this year has been consistently worse than anyone in the bullpen including Marmol.
Before the game, there was a bit of good news, though, and I do not mean that Guerrier and Strop reported, though to be fair, they cannot be any worse than the rest of the bullpen. What I do mean is that Sean Camp was designated for assignment. Sveum was almost tearful before the game making the announcement, which makes you wonder what is going on in his head.
Anyway, in the actual game, Sveum had Garza pitch his arm out for eight innings until he could get to Gregg to save a 3-1 win. He had any number of pitchers warming up in the seventh and eighth, but it now seems his confidence is limited to a single player, Gregg. Actually, I was rather happy he stuck with Garza. Granted he was getting tired and had thrown a lot of pitches, but taking the game deep is what money pitchers are supposed to do. Garza delivered. Which is also another reason to keep this guy in Chicago if it is at all possible.
The thing here is that these kids are sixteen years old, so even though they look pretty good now, it will undoubtedly be many years before they mature into big league players. So a lot can happen in the interval. Anyway, is it just me or is there something a little sinister in building the future on a foundation that can only charitably be perceived as a form of indentured servitude?
The Cubs brass has correctly concluded that the real bargains in impact players are offshore, but you kind of get the impression they must be spending all their time high-fiving each other about how smart they are in pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. They might want to watch some major league games as an antidote.
Last night the cleverness extended to the embattled Dale Sveum, who snatched defeat from the precipice of victory by inserting the slumping and overused James Russell in the eighth inning with two outs, a two run lead, and a runner at first and the game seemingly well in hand. A walk and a home run later, the game was for all intents and purposes lost.
I know that Sveum has little to work with, but sometimes you just have to keep it simple and leave well enough alone. The Cubs are carrying seven relievers, but actually Sveum has shown confidence in only four of them, viz., Russell, Camp, Gregg, and lately Parker. The confidence shown in Camp has always seemed to be puzzling, as his performance this year has been consistently worse than anyone in the bullpen including Marmol.
Before the game, there was a bit of good news, though, and I do not mean that Guerrier and Strop reported, though to be fair, they cannot be any worse than the rest of the bullpen. What I do mean is that Sean Camp was designated for assignment. Sveum was almost tearful before the game making the announcement, which makes you wonder what is going on in his head.
Anyway, in the actual game, Sveum had Garza pitch his arm out for eight innings until he could get to Gregg to save a 3-1 win. He had any number of pitchers warming up in the seventh and eighth, but it now seems his confidence is limited to a single player, Gregg. Actually, I was rather happy he stuck with Garza. Granted he was getting tired and had thrown a lot of pitches, but taking the game deep is what money pitchers are supposed to do. Garza delivered. Which is also another reason to keep this guy in Chicago if it is at all possible.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
The Deals
The Cubs launched Rebuild 2.0 today, not exactly with a big bang. They traded DFAed relievers with the Dodgers, dumping the much maligned Carlos Marmol for the probably washed up Matt Guerrier. Guerrier was a decent enough long reliever/setup guy for the Twins, but he has been a complete bust with the Dodgers. He is 34 years old. I don't know what the exact financial arrangements are here, but neither guy is signed for next season. Marmol made about $9MM for the Cubs and Guerrier was taking down $4MM from the Dodgers, so on the surface, the Cubs save the pro-rated difference between the two for the rest of the year.
The Cubs also dealt the surprisingly effective Feldman and the half-decent utility player when he isn't hurt Steve Clevenger to the Orioles in exchange for two pitchers of indifferent ability who earn next to nothing. Jake Arrieta was once a much-hyped prospect who never amounted to much with the Orioles. He started the year in the rotation, but was so bad, he got sent down to AAA.
The thing is that Arrieta is 27 years old, which is no spring chicken even for baseball pitchers. I'm sure the Cubs think he has the potential to become another Travis Wood. My own inclination is to consider him more likely to be another Chris Volstad.
The other pickup in the Feldman deal was Pedro Strop, a 28 year old reliever. Strop had a good year in 2012, but has been a bust this year, more than likely because the Orioles used him in 70 games last year.
The real key to these deals is money. Feldman was making around $7MM, the other guys were all being paid around the MLB minimum. Once again, I would argue that irrespective of the potential of any of the players exchanged here, what we are seeing is the playing out of a business scenario that has little if anything to do with building a successful baseball team at the major league level.
The Cubs also dealt the surprisingly effective Feldman and the half-decent utility player when he isn't hurt Steve Clevenger to the Orioles in exchange for two pitchers of indifferent ability who earn next to nothing. Jake Arrieta was once a much-hyped prospect who never amounted to much with the Orioles. He started the year in the rotation, but was so bad, he got sent down to AAA.
The thing is that Arrieta is 27 years old, which is no spring chicken even for baseball pitchers. I'm sure the Cubs think he has the potential to become another Travis Wood. My own inclination is to consider him more likely to be another Chris Volstad.
The other pickup in the Feldman deal was Pedro Strop, a 28 year old reliever. Strop had a good year in 2012, but has been a bust this year, more than likely because the Orioles used him in 70 games last year.
The real key to these deals is money. Feldman was making around $7MM, the other guys were all being paid around the MLB minimum. Once again, I would argue that irrespective of the potential of any of the players exchanged here, what we are seeing is the playing out of a business scenario that has little if anything to do with building a successful baseball team at the major league level.
Monday, July 1, 2013
It's not You, It's Me!
Theo and Jed have been making the rounds of print and radio media more or less defending their plans and their embattled manager in advance of the launch of Rebuild 2.0, or maybe 4.0, I've lost count.
Rebuild 1.0 saw the Cubs dump veterans Ryan Dempster, Paul Maholm, Geovanny Soto, and Reed Johnson for, essentially, Aroldys Vizcaino, the perpetually injured Atlanta prospect who has yet to throw a pitch, and several bags of baseballs.
As I have noted before in these pages, I have nothing against trading vets for prospects per se, but these guys are just dumping salary and they ought to admit it to everyone and move on from there. And I think trading Maholm was an short-term error. (Maholm is 9-6 with an ERA under 4, which is pretty much where he was last year with the Cubs when he was traded).
As for Sveum, you can say what you like about him having been dealt a bad hand - and, of course, this begs the question of who dealt that hand - but all you have to do is study his bullpen management of the Friday Seattle game to realize he is not ready for prime time. Playing in an American league park, use your long man Villanueva for 2/3rd of an inning, then bring in Russell to face some lefties even though he has appeared in consecutive games, then stick with the rookie Parker for three innings, and turn to the worthless Sean Camp to finish things off.
In any case, the Cubs did take the series in Seattle even though they made heavy weather of the final game and blew the lead in Saturday's game before picking up an extra-inning victory. Again the bullpen was the ostensible culprit, but really, this team doesn't score runs or add on. By and large, they are pretty much done by the fourth inning even when they have the lead.
I saw another piece in the press (USA Today) that may point to some internal dissension on the team. Samardzija is quoted to the effect that all this talk about rebuilding is an insult to the players.
You have to admit that he has a point. Garza is a good example of this kind of front office double talk. Garza is only one year older than Samardzija and, of course, his career is full of significantly more achievement that Samardzija's, yet, almost from Day 1 of the new regime, there has been relentless speculation on where he will be traded and when he will be traded and how obvious it is that he has to be traded.
Give me a break. This guy is a good pitcher and he is 29 years old. Plus the Cubs are always talking about how hard it is to get good pitching and how they have no good pitching in the system. So why don't they just shut up about Garza and sign him to an extension? Because they are too cheap.
Rebuild 1.0 saw the Cubs dump veterans Ryan Dempster, Paul Maholm, Geovanny Soto, and Reed Johnson for, essentially, Aroldys Vizcaino, the perpetually injured Atlanta prospect who has yet to throw a pitch, and several bags of baseballs.
As I have noted before in these pages, I have nothing against trading vets for prospects per se, but these guys are just dumping salary and they ought to admit it to everyone and move on from there. And I think trading Maholm was an short-term error. (Maholm is 9-6 with an ERA under 4, which is pretty much where he was last year with the Cubs when he was traded).
As for Sveum, you can say what you like about him having been dealt a bad hand - and, of course, this begs the question of who dealt that hand - but all you have to do is study his bullpen management of the Friday Seattle game to realize he is not ready for prime time. Playing in an American league park, use your long man Villanueva for 2/3rd of an inning, then bring in Russell to face some lefties even though he has appeared in consecutive games, then stick with the rookie Parker for three innings, and turn to the worthless Sean Camp to finish things off.
In any case, the Cubs did take the series in Seattle even though they made heavy weather of the final game and blew the lead in Saturday's game before picking up an extra-inning victory. Again the bullpen was the ostensible culprit, but really, this team doesn't score runs or add on. By and large, they are pretty much done by the fourth inning even when they have the lead.
I saw another piece in the press (USA Today) that may point to some internal dissension on the team. Samardzija is quoted to the effect that all this talk about rebuilding is an insult to the players.
"As a 28-year-old, the word rebuilding sends chills down your spine. The word rebuilding is a total front office-type thing. Those words don't resonate down to the team. To tell you the truth, it's disrespectful to even say to the team."
You have to admit that he has a point. Garza is a good example of this kind of front office double talk. Garza is only one year older than Samardzija and, of course, his career is full of significantly more achievement that Samardzija's, yet, almost from Day 1 of the new regime, there has been relentless speculation on where he will be traded and when he will be traded and how obvious it is that he has to be traded.
Give me a break. This guy is a good pitcher and he is 29 years old. Plus the Cubs are always talking about how hard it is to get good pitching and how they have no good pitching in the system. So why don't they just shut up about Garza and sign him to an extension? Because they are too cheap.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)