I notice on Chicago Breaking Sports News that Lou Piniella seemed to get a little testy when someone grilled him about why it took two and one-half years to figure out that Alfonso Soriano was a lousy leadoff hitter. Well, I guess he finally did it, although he still seems to be under some sort of misconception about what leadoff hitters do. Leadoff hitters take pitches and get on base. Number two hitters hit and run and move runners. They don't necessarily steal bases, which seemed to be the primary reason for keeping Soriano there, i.e., he used to steal bases.
One of the best leadoff men in recent memory was Wade Boggs, who was as slow as molasses, as I recall. Anyway, Kosuke Fukudome has the best OBA on the Cubs, and he should bat first. Ryan Theriot does not take enough pitches, so he doesn't walk often enough. Batting him first subtracts from his natural talent, which is hitting to right field, and actually reduces his effectiveness as an offensive player. Lou proudly announced, of course, that he would bat Theriot first and Fukudome second, demonstrating once again why the Cubs eternal search for a leadoff man is so frustrating.
On a lighter note, A League of Her Own has a funny bit on Geovanny Soto. What is with the eyebrows, dude?
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Ugly Rumors
I honestly don't know who comes up with these rumors that are trumpeted in the daily press. Maybe these guys just make them up. Or could it be that Hendry and Piniella are even less competent than we thought?
The latest ones are the Cubs are pursuing Jose Contreras and Jermaine Dye. Contreras admits to being 38, hasn't had a decent year since 2006, nor a complete year since 2007. Even the White Sox gave up on him. The White Sox also gave up on Dye, who has had a nice career, but at 35 looks to be on the down side. Although he can no longer play the outfield and never was a gold-glove candidate to begin with, he is projected to platoon with Fukudome in RF and also DH even though the NL only uses a DH in road inter-league games. Duh?
OK, just sign Reed Johnson already. He is a legitimate platoon player, and he can actually catch the ball. That would give you solid defensive outfield backups with him and Fuld.
On the subject of Piniella, he does make, in his own labored way, an interesting point. The Cubs managed to win 83 games last year despite having Ramirez and Soriano on the DL for significant periods, the injury to Ramirez actually mattering a lot, and all kinds of distractions with the addition of Bradley. So maybe the core of the team isn't all that bad, especially the pitching, or the division isn't all that hard to win.
The latest ones are the Cubs are pursuing Jose Contreras and Jermaine Dye. Contreras admits to being 38, hasn't had a decent year since 2006, nor a complete year since 2007. Even the White Sox gave up on him. The White Sox also gave up on Dye, who has had a nice career, but at 35 looks to be on the down side. Although he can no longer play the outfield and never was a gold-glove candidate to begin with, he is projected to platoon with Fukudome in RF and also DH even though the NL only uses a DH in road inter-league games. Duh?
OK, just sign Reed Johnson already. He is a legitimate platoon player, and he can actually catch the ball. That would give you solid defensive outfield backups with him and Fuld.
On the subject of Piniella, he does make, in his own labored way, an interesting point. The Cubs managed to win 83 games last year despite having Ramirez and Soriano on the DL for significant periods, the injury to Ramirez actually mattering a lot, and all kinds of distractions with the addition of Bradley. So maybe the core of the team isn't all that bad, especially the pitching, or the division isn't all that hard to win.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Ben Sheets
Some of the Chicago journalists are reporting that the Cubs are interested in Ben Sheets. MLB Trade Rumors reports the rumor and then has a semi-denial attributed to Cubs brass to the effect that his contract demands do not fit in with the Cubs' budget. That's putting it mildly. Sheets apparently wants two years guaranteed at $10-12 M. Quite a deal for a guy who didn't pitch at all last year and is coming off elbow surgery.
Perhaps the Cubs really want to replace the injury-prone Harden with someone who can equal or exceed the latter's stays on the DL. Because here is the real record. Sheets has won 86 games in eight seasons against 83 losses. Admittedly the Brewers were not exactly a powerhouse team through any of that stretch, but he was arguably the ace of a really bad staff. His best year statistically was 2004 when, although he had a losing record, he pitched over 200 innings and had a great ERA, WHIP, and SO/BB ratio. The next three years, Sheets missed a lot of starts with a variety of injuries that seemed to be tied to a back muscle injury in 2005 before he recovered in 2008 with a 13 win season. But he broke down with elbow problems in September of that year and hasn't pitched since.
So I know that the usual suspects among the press have penciled him into the rotation, but if I were Hendry, I would think twice about rolling the dice on this guy. He is only acceptable if you get him cheap on an incentive-laden deal, but it's no good if the guy doesn't pitch, is it? He still takes up a roster spot and bumps someone out of the rotation while he is on the active roster. Assuming the Cubs go with Gorzelanny as the fifth starter, what you get at worst is probably a .500 pitcher who eats up 180 innings or so and wins 10 or 12 games. What do you want from a fifth starter?
What Hendry and Piniella get is an excuse. They evidently have no confidence in their evaluation process, so, in their minds, Lilly is a risk, Wells might not pitch as well as he did last season, Zambrano is inconsistent, etc., etc., etc. That's the nature of professional sport. But, hey, if you go out and spend money on a guy with a big reputation and he fails, well, there it is. You tried. Just like you tried with Bradley last year. Heck, he might have made a difference.
Perhaps the Cubs really want to replace the injury-prone Harden with someone who can equal or exceed the latter's stays on the DL. Because here is the real record. Sheets has won 86 games in eight seasons against 83 losses. Admittedly the Brewers were not exactly a powerhouse team through any of that stretch, but he was arguably the ace of a really bad staff. His best year statistically was 2004 when, although he had a losing record, he pitched over 200 innings and had a great ERA, WHIP, and SO/BB ratio. The next three years, Sheets missed a lot of starts with a variety of injuries that seemed to be tied to a back muscle injury in 2005 before he recovered in 2008 with a 13 win season. But he broke down with elbow problems in September of that year and hasn't pitched since.
So I know that the usual suspects among the press have penciled him into the rotation, but if I were Hendry, I would think twice about rolling the dice on this guy. He is only acceptable if you get him cheap on an incentive-laden deal, but it's no good if the guy doesn't pitch, is it? He still takes up a roster spot and bumps someone out of the rotation while he is on the active roster. Assuming the Cubs go with Gorzelanny as the fifth starter, what you get at worst is probably a .500 pitcher who eats up 180 innings or so and wins 10 or 12 games. What do you want from a fifth starter?
What Hendry and Piniella get is an excuse. They evidently have no confidence in their evaluation process, so, in their minds, Lilly is a risk, Wells might not pitch as well as he did last season, Zambrano is inconsistent, etc., etc., etc. That's the nature of professional sport. But, hey, if you go out and spend money on a guy with a big reputation and he fails, well, there it is. You tried. Just like you tried with Bradley last year. Heck, he might have made a difference.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Pitching
The Cubs are reportedly seeking another veteran arm for the bullpen. This is always a worrying thought lest they add another Gregg or Heilman to the mix, but if they are serious about this, they could do a lot worse than picking up Kiko Calero, who did a fine job for the Marlins last year, and should be pretty cheap.
There are also rumors that the Cubs have shopped Carlos Zambrano. That is a big, big mistake. In one stroke, they would go from having probably one of the best rotations in the league, and certainly the best in their division, to having one of the worst. In case nobody noticed, the only reason they finished a respectable second in the division last year was because of the quality of their starting pitching.
Moves like this, pushed by unusually ill-informed sportswriters and emotional fans, only make sense if you want to shed salary and rebuild, and then only if the highly paid pitcher happens to be coming off a series of good seasons. Now, I would argue that leaving aside his stints in the DL, Zambrano had his best season statistically in a couple of years last year, but even so, his perceived worth right now is nothing like that of a Roy Halladay, who was clearly moved by a cash poor team that was interested in a complete restructuring.
So, the Cubs now have a rotation of Zambrano, Dempster, Wells, Lilly, and one of three or four other contenders, viz., Marshall, Gorzelanny, Silva, and Samardzija. Not a bad setup. I don't expect much from Silva, and Samardzija, while he throws hard, does not know how to pitch and would benefit from a whole year at AA or AAA, but the other two would be OK. If the Cubs want a genuine starter, they could try to rehabilitate Sheets or Wang, but only on the cheap. Sheets seems to want a multi-year guaranteed contract as if he were still healthy, so the Cubs can afford to stand pat at least until the season gets going and they are in a position to assess their needs on the field.
Back to the bullpen. As I have noted, Calero is a potential pickup, but the question is where are you going to put him? Piniella usually likes to carry too many pitchers anyway, presumably because he cannot keep a good accounting of who is available and is not really good at double-switches. But right now, they have Marmol to close and Guzman and Grabow as the principal setup guys. Whoever loses the competition for the fifth starter slot, likely Marshall, Silva, and Samardzija, will wind up in long relief, although, as I said, Samardzija should go down to hone his skills.
So lets say they make this logical move, they have at best two slots left unless they carry thirteen pitchers, which makes no sense whatsoever. For some reason, they picked up Mike Parisi in the Rule 5 draft, so they are likely stuck with him unless they just release him. They also picked up Jeff Gray, who has shown signs he can actually pitch in relief, so he is likely to stay. Assuming they drop Parisi, they still have a bunch of young guys like Patton and Stevens and Berg and Caridad who might just work as the last man, especially the last two.
If the Cubs want to move salary, hey, think about Soriano, which is the really bad contract they are saddled with. But, of course, they do not even mention this because there is almost no scenario where he could be moved.
There are also rumors that the Cubs have shopped Carlos Zambrano. That is a big, big mistake. In one stroke, they would go from having probably one of the best rotations in the league, and certainly the best in their division, to having one of the worst. In case nobody noticed, the only reason they finished a respectable second in the division last year was because of the quality of their starting pitching.
Moves like this, pushed by unusually ill-informed sportswriters and emotional fans, only make sense if you want to shed salary and rebuild, and then only if the highly paid pitcher happens to be coming off a series of good seasons. Now, I would argue that leaving aside his stints in the DL, Zambrano had his best season statistically in a couple of years last year, but even so, his perceived worth right now is nothing like that of a Roy Halladay, who was clearly moved by a cash poor team that was interested in a complete restructuring.
So, the Cubs now have a rotation of Zambrano, Dempster, Wells, Lilly, and one of three or four other contenders, viz., Marshall, Gorzelanny, Silva, and Samardzija. Not a bad setup. I don't expect much from Silva, and Samardzija, while he throws hard, does not know how to pitch and would benefit from a whole year at AA or AAA, but the other two would be OK. If the Cubs want a genuine starter, they could try to rehabilitate Sheets or Wang, but only on the cheap. Sheets seems to want a multi-year guaranteed contract as if he were still healthy, so the Cubs can afford to stand pat at least until the season gets going and they are in a position to assess their needs on the field.
Back to the bullpen. As I have noted, Calero is a potential pickup, but the question is where are you going to put him? Piniella usually likes to carry too many pitchers anyway, presumably because he cannot keep a good accounting of who is available and is not really good at double-switches. But right now, they have Marmol to close and Guzman and Grabow as the principal setup guys. Whoever loses the competition for the fifth starter slot, likely Marshall, Silva, and Samardzija, will wind up in long relief, although, as I said, Samardzija should go down to hone his skills.
So lets say they make this logical move, they have at best two slots left unless they carry thirteen pitchers, which makes no sense whatsoever. For some reason, they picked up Mike Parisi in the Rule 5 draft, so they are likely stuck with him unless they just release him. They also picked up Jeff Gray, who has shown signs he can actually pitch in relief, so he is likely to stay. Assuming they drop Parisi, they still have a bunch of young guys like Patton and Stevens and Berg and Caridad who might just work as the last man, especially the last two.
If the Cubs want to move salary, hey, think about Soriano, which is the really bad contract they are saddled with. But, of course, they do not even mention this because there is almost no scenario where he could be moved.
Friday, January 1, 2010
Byrd
This is it? I mean, this is the final piece of the puzzle? I don't think so.
I have blogged earlier on the deficiencies of this acquisition, and I hope I am wrong, but the continued love affair between Jim Hendry and journeyman outfielders is still a bit worrisome. So, to set the record straight, Byrd is not a bad player. Nor is he a particularly good player, and therein lays the problem.
You can build a good team around role players, or with the addition of role players. But frankly, I don't see the role here. Maybe I am missing something, but Byrd seems to be a pretty ordinary bat and a pretty ordinary glove. He bats right-handed, but cannot hit lefties, so he is not a platoon player. So what is his role?
I suppose this is just another example of Hendry and the Cubs front office not having a real plan. I had to laugh when Hendry suggested that there was nothing wrong with having a predominantly right-handed lineup, since the whole point of the last post-season hunt that resulted in the addition of Milton Bradley was that the Cubs were too right-handed. Now it's not a problem, I guess. It is also a misconception on the Cubs part, because they had Edmonds and Fontenot playing against righties and they had good years, and they also had a left-handed bench.
Anyway, the problems for the Cubs offensively this off-season were obviously to get rid of Bradley and to somehow replace the production they lost in relation to 2008 in CF and at 2B. I don't think this does it. Byrd does not equal the platoon of Johnson and Edmunds. In this respect, I have to agree with the ESPN guy quoted on MLB Trade Rumors who just doesn't think Byrd is a championship caliber player.
I have blogged earlier on the deficiencies of this acquisition, and I hope I am wrong, but the continued love affair between Jim Hendry and journeyman outfielders is still a bit worrisome. So, to set the record straight, Byrd is not a bad player. Nor is he a particularly good player, and therein lays the problem.
You can build a good team around role players, or with the addition of role players. But frankly, I don't see the role here. Maybe I am missing something, but Byrd seems to be a pretty ordinary bat and a pretty ordinary glove. He bats right-handed, but cannot hit lefties, so he is not a platoon player. So what is his role?
I suppose this is just another example of Hendry and the Cubs front office not having a real plan. I had to laugh when Hendry suggested that there was nothing wrong with having a predominantly right-handed lineup, since the whole point of the last post-season hunt that resulted in the addition of Milton Bradley was that the Cubs were too right-handed. Now it's not a problem, I guess. It is also a misconception on the Cubs part, because they had Edmonds and Fontenot playing against righties and they had good years, and they also had a left-handed bench.
Anyway, the problems for the Cubs offensively this off-season were obviously to get rid of Bradley and to somehow replace the production they lost in relation to 2008 in CF and at 2B. I don't think this does it. Byrd does not equal the platoon of Johnson and Edmunds. In this respect, I have to agree with the ESPN guy quoted on MLB Trade Rumors who just doesn't think Byrd is a championship caliber player.
Monday, December 28, 2009
The Cubs Off-Season
Lots of folks are disappointed in the Cubs activities so far in the off-season. In a way, I am too. But in another way, I'm not. To understand this, you need to look at what the Cubs did last year, after a season in which they won 97 games and scored a lot of runs. What they did was dump their closer, Kerry Wood, initially with the idea that Wood was not all that reliable and that Carlos Marmol was ready. Except that they then went out and got a really awful closer in Kevin Gregg, whom they stuck with way too long and then demoted. So this off-season they have dumped him.
They also dumped Jim Edmonds, Jason Marquis, and Mark DeRosa. Marquis went on to have a pretty good year, but I can see letting him go as he was and is very inconsistent. DeRosa also had a good year until he was hurt and letting him go was goofy. Edmonds was done anyway. But all this really paved the way for the rest of Hendry's acquisitions, which were just mindless in most cases and disastrous in the case of Bradley.
So during the off-season last year, we added Bradley, Miles, Gathright, Gregg, and Heilman. They all stunk and they are all gone now. What's more, we knew they would stink to begin with. So part of me wishes the Cubs would make some moves, and most of me dreads the moves they are likely to make based on this track record, especially when you add in the numerous other duds we've signed or dealt for in the past, including Jones, Floyd, and Soriano, just to hit the highlights.
This is not the sort of past performance that inspires confidence. So maybe our New Year's wish should be that Hendry is stymied in all his efforts to continue his history of errors and is forced to sit tight for a while. The last time this happened was between the 2007 and 2008 seasons, and we made some late moves and had the most successful season we've had in many years.
They also dumped Jim Edmonds, Jason Marquis, and Mark DeRosa. Marquis went on to have a pretty good year, but I can see letting him go as he was and is very inconsistent. DeRosa also had a good year until he was hurt and letting him go was goofy. Edmonds was done anyway. But all this really paved the way for the rest of Hendry's acquisitions, which were just mindless in most cases and disastrous in the case of Bradley.
So during the off-season last year, we added Bradley, Miles, Gathright, Gregg, and Heilman. They all stunk and they are all gone now. What's more, we knew they would stink to begin with. So part of me wishes the Cubs would make some moves, and most of me dreads the moves they are likely to make based on this track record, especially when you add in the numerous other duds we've signed or dealt for in the past, including Jones, Floyd, and Soriano, just to hit the highlights.
This is not the sort of past performance that inspires confidence. So maybe our New Year's wish should be that Hendry is stymied in all his efforts to continue his history of errors and is forced to sit tight for a while. The last time this happened was between the 2007 and 2008 seasons, and we made some late moves and had the most successful season we've had in many years.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Good News
Matt Capps has signed with the Nationals. Good news because of my oft expressed lack of enthusiasm for this deal from the Cubs point-of-view. And even if Capps' performance for the past season and a half had not been dismal, it has been my observation that relief pitchers other than proven closers and maybe lefty specialists are worthless. Long and middle relievers are either young players waiting their chance or failed starters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)