Since my last post, the Cubs lost three of four to the Cardinals, won two of three from the really awful Astros, then lost last evening to the really awful Brewers. There isn't much you can say about these games that has not already been said about most of the other games. The Cubs were competitive in all but one of the the Cards games, but they could not score runs.
The bigger news occurred off the field. Earlier in the week, Epstein and Hoyer refused to blame Sveum for losing a bunch of games because of dumb decisions. Essentially they said it was not his fault that he had an awful team to work with. Of course, this rather begs the question of whose fault it is then, doesn't it?
The Cubs took one of the major sources of fan frustration off the board by designating Carlos Marmol for assignment. Evidently the desire to employ his services in situations where the outcome of the game was on the line was something Sveum and his advisers found irresistible. Better for all concerned to take it away. I can't argue with the call, though. Nobody wanted the guy. Someone might sign him off waivers.
The other guy to suffer management's wrath was Ian Stewart. I guess I don't understand some of the kerfuffle about his tweets. I have to assume the Cubs made some promises to Stewart that just got steamrolled by his injuries. In the same position, I suppose I would have assumed I'd get some playing time at Iowa, especially given the execrable performance of Josh Vitters there and in the big leagues.
Right now speculation is in high gear about who is going to get traded in July. Everyone's favorite to go is Matt Garza. Presumably he wants a better deal than Edwin Jackson, so that's got to be it, doesn't it? I mean, he can pitch when he is healthy. Jackson cannot. So the choice is obvious. Stick with Jackson.
Also, anybody who has had a half-decent first half is on the bubble because he has value that can be exchanged for prospects. I've got nothing against a shrewd manipulation of your roster to build for lasting success, but, lets face it, Cubs fans, the record so far is pretty bleak for this regime, and no amount of chatter about master plans is going to make it better until we see results instead of promises.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Thursday, June 20, 2013
My Problem with the Cubs Plan
The Cubs lost Sunday to the Mets when Carlos Marmol blew a 3-0 lead in the bottom of the ninth inning. Alfonso Soriano knocked over a garbage can after eating dinner and opined that Marmol used to be a good pitcher. So it goes. I remember two years ago when Zambrano made similar remarks and Soriano leaped to Marmol's defense.
Anyway, I didn't catch most of the game, though I gather Garza gave one of his better efforts. After the game, fans started calling in with bitter feelings, especially concerning Marmol. The radio "experts" urged them to stay the course. So it goes.
The fans have a point, though, and I do not know why it is so hard for this message to get through to the experts and the front office. The Cubs have blown fourteen saves this year, and the bullpen has lost enumerable other games, Marmol and Camp accounting for the most spectacular meltdowns. So just assuming they might have won half of them, the team would now be three games over .500 and no one would be talking about another July fire sale.
Actually, this is one thing I don't get with respect to the so-called expert opinion and how this is the only way to build a competitive team, from the ground up, keep exchanging assets for younger assets, etc. Isn't this just what Pittsburgh and Kansas City and Seattle and Cleveland have been doing for the last ten or twenty years?
Cincinnati and St. Louis and Tampa have been successful at renewing themselves from within their farm systems, but even they have to occasionally dip into the free agent market to fill holes. Also, especially respecting the Cards and the Rays, they have a certain style of play and a rigorous developmental program the Cubs in general lack.
Now the Cubs brass pays lip service to the idea of player development and nurturing both defensive and offensive discipline, but so far there is little evidence of results. It is probably too early to assess the player development aspect of things, but so far as instilling any idea of fundamental, disciplined, smart baseball habits, a quick look at the minor league stats doesn't seem to show much progress.
Granted these hot shots like Baez and Almora are down in A ball, but year to year they are not taking walks and they are striking out a lot. I think Almora has walked like five or six times in his professional career. Looking at the stats, some of the lesser hyped prospects in AA ball strike me as more likely candidates for successful major league careers, maybe not as superstars, but potentially worthwhile players. I'm thinking here of the outfielders Matt Szczur and Jae-Hoon Ha and the shortstop Arismendy Alcantara.
But anyway, the real problem I have with the so-called plan is that it is basically a business plan, not a baseball plan. The first assumption is that you are going to stink for two or three years. Not only is this an insult to the fans who pay good money to see a dreadful product, but it has an adverse effect on the development of the team as a whole. If you are Starlin Castro and you land a fat, multi-year contract, what's the incentive to continue to improve and become the player people think you are capable of being? So you hit into a double play with the game on the line after reaching out for a pitch ten inches outside. You were going to lose anyway, and, if not that game, then the next. This attitude starts to rub off on everyone around, especially the rentals and stop-gap players who are just waiting around to be traded anyway. These seasons have become an exercise in learning to lose.
The second assumption is that a way to build a team is to arbitrage assets, mostly by trading them to contenders at the trade deadline. I'm not saying the Cubs should not trade players of ability if they can get a fair return. However, if one thing is certain, it is that teams rarely get a fair return at the trade deadline. What they really get to do is to dump salary.
Think about it, sellers at the deadline invariably engage in trades with buyers or renters, good teams that are contenders and so are not going to give up players who are likely to help them right now or next year. These are the players the Cubs need.
So the Cubs wind up trading genuine major league players like Dempster and Maholm and Johnson for kids who may or may not ever develop or players who are iffy in some other way, like being disabled and subject to a chancy rehab regime (Vizcaino).
The real deals of veteran talent for near-term prospects happens in the off-season. So the best trades made by Epstein/Hoyer have been Marshall for Wood and Cashner for Rizzo. If you look at the deals the masters of this kind of team building make, Beane and Friedman, they are almost always off-season deals. That's when teams are willing to take near-term chances, and that's when you can deal with anyone, not just the contenders.
It is, incidentally, why I cannot figure out the zeal with which people speculate on the positive worth of trading Matt Garza, a pretty good pitcher who will reach free agency status only at the end of the season. The time to deal Garza was two years ago when Epstein and Hoyer were hired. He was worth something then. Now he is worth nothing. The Cubs would be better served by extending him or making him a qualifying offer at season's end, which would at least bring them a good draft choice in return.
Anyway, I didn't catch most of the game, though I gather Garza gave one of his better efforts. After the game, fans started calling in with bitter feelings, especially concerning Marmol. The radio "experts" urged them to stay the course. So it goes.
The fans have a point, though, and I do not know why it is so hard for this message to get through to the experts and the front office. The Cubs have blown fourteen saves this year, and the bullpen has lost enumerable other games, Marmol and Camp accounting for the most spectacular meltdowns. So just assuming they might have won half of them, the team would now be three games over .500 and no one would be talking about another July fire sale.
Actually, this is one thing I don't get with respect to the so-called expert opinion and how this is the only way to build a competitive team, from the ground up, keep exchanging assets for younger assets, etc. Isn't this just what Pittsburgh and Kansas City and Seattle and Cleveland have been doing for the last ten or twenty years?
Cincinnati and St. Louis and Tampa have been successful at renewing themselves from within their farm systems, but even they have to occasionally dip into the free agent market to fill holes. Also, especially respecting the Cards and the Rays, they have a certain style of play and a rigorous developmental program the Cubs in general lack.
Now the Cubs brass pays lip service to the idea of player development and nurturing both defensive and offensive discipline, but so far there is little evidence of results. It is probably too early to assess the player development aspect of things, but so far as instilling any idea of fundamental, disciplined, smart baseball habits, a quick look at the minor league stats doesn't seem to show much progress.
Granted these hot shots like Baez and Almora are down in A ball, but year to year they are not taking walks and they are striking out a lot. I think Almora has walked like five or six times in his professional career. Looking at the stats, some of the lesser hyped prospects in AA ball strike me as more likely candidates for successful major league careers, maybe not as superstars, but potentially worthwhile players. I'm thinking here of the outfielders Matt Szczur and Jae-Hoon Ha and the shortstop Arismendy Alcantara.
But anyway, the real problem I have with the so-called plan is that it is basically a business plan, not a baseball plan. The first assumption is that you are going to stink for two or three years. Not only is this an insult to the fans who pay good money to see a dreadful product, but it has an adverse effect on the development of the team as a whole. If you are Starlin Castro and you land a fat, multi-year contract, what's the incentive to continue to improve and become the player people think you are capable of being? So you hit into a double play with the game on the line after reaching out for a pitch ten inches outside. You were going to lose anyway, and, if not that game, then the next. This attitude starts to rub off on everyone around, especially the rentals and stop-gap players who are just waiting around to be traded anyway. These seasons have become an exercise in learning to lose.
The second assumption is that a way to build a team is to arbitrage assets, mostly by trading them to contenders at the trade deadline. I'm not saying the Cubs should not trade players of ability if they can get a fair return. However, if one thing is certain, it is that teams rarely get a fair return at the trade deadline. What they really get to do is to dump salary.
Think about it, sellers at the deadline invariably engage in trades with buyers or renters, good teams that are contenders and so are not going to give up players who are likely to help them right now or next year. These are the players the Cubs need.
So the Cubs wind up trading genuine major league players like Dempster and Maholm and Johnson for kids who may or may not ever develop or players who are iffy in some other way, like being disabled and subject to a chancy rehab regime (Vizcaino).
The real deals of veteran talent for near-term prospects happens in the off-season. So the best trades made by Epstein/Hoyer have been Marshall for Wood and Cashner for Rizzo. If you look at the deals the masters of this kind of team building make, Beane and Friedman, they are almost always off-season deals. That's when teams are willing to take near-term chances, and that's when you can deal with anyone, not just the contenders.
It is, incidentally, why I cannot figure out the zeal with which people speculate on the positive worth of trading Matt Garza, a pretty good pitcher who will reach free agency status only at the end of the season. The time to deal Garza was two years ago when Epstein and Hoyer were hired. He was worth something then. Now he is worth nothing. The Cubs would be better served by extending him or making him a qualifying offer at season's end, which would at least bring them a good draft choice in return.
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
This is One Awful Team
I actually went out to Wrigley Field last night to see this wretched assortment of AAA rejects go through the motions of playing baseball. A lovely night, but...
Garza did not have command of his breaking ball, but he did keep them close enough (down 3-1into the sixth inning). Then Votto hit a line drive directly at Scott Hairston who proceeded to play the ball into a triple (actually scored as a single and a two-base error). He had misjudged and misplayed a similar ball earlier, but managed to catch it by half kneeling down and bending backwards. Tried the same thing this time.
I don't know if he saw the ball, but whatever. Garza was obviously steamed, doing his best impersonation of Carlos Zambrano trying to hold it all in. Somehow or other, the Cubs bench never seems to pick up on this sort of thing. You would think they could at least send the catcher out there to calm things down. Anyway, after that it was all over. Six runs later, Sveum pulled the plug.
Actually the Cubs made four errors officially on the night, having especial trouble fielding bunts and soft grounders. Maybe I'm grousing because I am out over $100 on the night even though I got tickets on StubHub, but it seems Cubs fans are just way too understanding of the whole rebuilding process. Lets face reality: this team is a disgrace.
More about the rebuild later. In other news, the Cubs finally picked up a decent first round pick to play third base in Chris Bryant. They have also picked up Henry Rodriguez from the Nats. He has to be better than the dreck they have in the bullpen currently. They should also try to claim Zack Duke. Duke can get lefties out and would allow the Cubs to use Russell in a more adventurous role.
They claim to have had a great draft and to have populated the minor league system with quality arms. We'll see. Right now they are a bunch of guys you never heard of and probably won't hear about again.
Sunday, June 2, 2013
Reason for Hope?
After losing every game for an entire week, the Cubs righted the ship at least briefly by coming from behind to beat the Reds in extra innings, then blowing away the White Sox in three straight and knocking off the Diamondbacks on Friday.
The key to the surge has been pitching, actually starting pitching, as well has home runs. Sooner or later, though, the wind stops blowing out and you find it necessary to do some of the basic things you need to do to win consistently.
That happened last night when the Cubs wasted a nice start from Samardzija. In this case, it was the bullpen that failed them. Russell, usually reliable, could not rescue Samardzija. Then, of course, the Cubs unaccountably called on the execrable Carlos Marmol to pitch the eighth after they evened the game in the bottom of the seventh on a Schierholtz homer.
Bad decision. And a strange one. Carlos Villanueva came in to get the last out in the previous inning and was due up first the next, so the need to bring in Marmol is hard to understand. Obviously it was the wrong move.
Looking at the Cubs now, they are still a mediocre team that will continue to have streaks when, largely due to superior pitching, they will be competitive, and other streaks, largely due to their awful bullpen and lack of discipline at the plate. Also because they seem to have streaks where they cannot execute routine defensive plays, such as today when they have played appallingly in the field.
I, for one, continue to think the outlook is pretty bleak. They are likely to continue to trade useful veteran pitching for dubious or distant prospects. This underlines an obvious pitfall in the Cubs approach. You don't get real value for players like this at the deadline. You get it in the off-season.
The other problem is the bullpen. Teams usually build this through free agency and bringing along strong and young pitchers who lack the repertoire to start. The Cubs don't have this as they have almost nothing in the minor leagues to develop. They were unlucky to lose Fujikawa so soon as he seemed to be rounding to form. Right now, the only relievers they can count on are Villanueva, Russell, and Gregg. Lean times there, I'm afraid.
The key to the surge has been pitching, actually starting pitching, as well has home runs. Sooner or later, though, the wind stops blowing out and you find it necessary to do some of the basic things you need to do to win consistently.
That happened last night when the Cubs wasted a nice start from Samardzija. In this case, it was the bullpen that failed them. Russell, usually reliable, could not rescue Samardzija. Then, of course, the Cubs unaccountably called on the execrable Carlos Marmol to pitch the eighth after they evened the game in the bottom of the seventh on a Schierholtz homer.
Bad decision. And a strange one. Carlos Villanueva came in to get the last out in the previous inning and was due up first the next, so the need to bring in Marmol is hard to understand. Obviously it was the wrong move.
Looking at the Cubs now, they are still a mediocre team that will continue to have streaks when, largely due to superior pitching, they will be competitive, and other streaks, largely due to their awful bullpen and lack of discipline at the plate. Also because they seem to have streaks where they cannot execute routine defensive plays, such as today when they have played appallingly in the field.
I, for one, continue to think the outlook is pretty bleak. They are likely to continue to trade useful veteran pitching for dubious or distant prospects. This underlines an obvious pitfall in the Cubs approach. You don't get real value for players like this at the deadline. You get it in the off-season.
The other problem is the bullpen. Teams usually build this through free agency and bringing along strong and young pitchers who lack the repertoire to start. The Cubs don't have this as they have almost nothing in the minor leagues to develop. They were unlucky to lose Fujikawa so soon as he seemed to be rounding to form. Right now, the only relievers they can count on are Villanueva, Russell, and Gregg. Lean times there, I'm afraid.
Saturday, May 25, 2013
Random Thoughts
- Whose side is Dale Sveum on? Last night, the Cubs claw back to within one run of the Reds in the top of the eighth. Granted that Chapman is warming up for the save, but, come on, Sveum leaves Rondon in to give up two more runs when he has Fujikawa, Marmol, and Gregg available. Almost a reprise of Tuesday's loss when Sveum went to the scrubs instead of major leaguers after Garza' brilliant start.
- Sveum and the Cubs are baffled by their apparent inability to perform against left-handed pitching. This has been a perennial problem for the Cubs. Even guys who are acquired because they kill lefties, viz., Scott Hairston, stink in this regard. A few years ago, during the Piniella era, it was revealed the Cubs had no left-handed batting practice pitcher, so they never took BP against lefties. It appears they now have a left-handed BP pitcher, but they don't feel comfortable with that routine. Sveum says things like, well, you know, they have a routine, and so on. OK, they have a routine and a comfort level, but it doesn't work, so maybe they should change their routine or else they don't play. When Castro was questioned about how badly he was hitting against lefties, he said he had the same approach to hitting against everyone, that he doesn't change his approach, and he does not intend to change it. That's why he is having a bad year. Ultimately, these things are not just player issues, they are management issues and management needs to be judged at least equally responsible for failure and lack of progress.
- I happened to be listening to the early part of the broadcast yesterday. Len and JD discussed the fact that the Reds had nearly ninety more walks than the Cubs thus far in the season. That's more than two more men on base per game. So it is no wonder these guys do not score runs. The Reds have scored 232 runs to the Cubs 183. They have 15 more hits thus far. The difference is in the walks. As a general rule, teams can expect to score about a third of their base-runners. So if you consistently have numbers like this, you are going to average around 600 runs a year. Winning teams score 800 times. As long as the Cubs recruit and obtain and nurture brainless, impatient hitters, they will continue to lose.
- If I remember correctly, the Cubs hit the skids around this time last year and then everybody was OK with trading away any veteran talent that might fetch even a minimal return. There is already a drumbeat to trade Garza and Feldman and DeJesus and just about anyone who is perceived to have value in exchange for low-level prospects. The Cubs should make some trades, but so far their strategy is just non-productive. Last year they traded Maholm, Dempster, and Johnson at the deadline in return, essentially, for Aroldys Vizcaino and several marginal low-level prospects. Trading Dempster was justifiable. He was an aging free agent whom the Cubs were unlikely to sign at a reasonable price. Trading Johnson was relatively meaningless, though it should be noted that his replacement, Hairston, acquired as a free agent, is a complete bust. Trading Maholm, a solid pitcher with four or five more seasons in his future and who is performing well for the Braves, was a mistake. They just had to replace him with similar free agents in the off-season and received no immediate return (Vizcaino).
- The Cubs off-season moves have not been earth-shattering either, though they have added useful talent. The biggest trades were Marshall for Wood and Cashner for Rizzo, trades that gave up talent for equivalent or more useful talent. I've got no problem with these deals. Nor do I really have issues with the mid-level free agents. By and large they have been useful additions, especially the pitchers. Their one major foray, Earnest Jackson, is so far a bust.
- The Cubs should either trade Castro while he still has perceived value or send him to the minors until he starts focusing. I know this is controversial and it is a cardinal tenet of Cubs fans belief that Castro is a major talent, but this just isn't the case at all. Castro may have all the talent in the world, but he has actually regressed since he was promoted to the majors.
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
The Garza Start
Garza was dominant for five innings of one-hit, shutout ball. He left leading 3-0. Then the master, Dale Sveum, took over. I wouldn't ordinarily harp on this point, but tonight's game rather illustrates some disturbing trends concerning this year's Cubs.
One thing I neglected in the earlier report card post was Cubs coaching and management. You would have to give the on-field management and coaching a rating of near zero. First off, as a game strategist, Dale Sveum is just simply a dunce. Tonight's game demonstrates this fact. Garza was sitting around 80 pitches after five innings. He was supposedly on a pitch count of 90 so you might have allowed him to at least start the sixth.
But OK, he had a tough fifth, so I can see going to the bullpen. But come on, Hector Rondon, who is a mop up guy? Three of the next four batters for the Pirates were left-handed, so an obvious choice might have been Russell, but no, we go to the twelfth man Rondon. Bases loaded. Russell comes in to pitch around Alvarez and walks in a run. Then we go to, that's right, to the eleventh man, Shawn Camp, who is having a truly atrocious season, but who is one of Dale's bonafide favorites of all time. Well, you know what happens, and, of course, no one is warming up so that even after the grand slam puts the Pirates in command, we have to endure another bases loaded jam before the side is finally retired.
There were two moves. actually three if you count leaving Garza in, to be made there. One was to go straight to Russell. The other was to bring out Villanueva, whose turn Garza was taking, and who had not pitched in five days. He might have given you three innings if necessary. Go figure.
This game is not an isolated instance of certifiable dumbness. It happens every day. But it is not limited to just in-game decisions. By and large, the Cubs are not improving in the field or at the plate. Some of this must be due not merely to having dumb players, but to having poor instruction as well. If you watch these games on TV even, you will notice that throws from the outfield rarely go to the right base or the right cutoff man.
You will also notice that the Cubs rarely score unless they hit a home run or the pitcher drives in runners who are on-base. Similarly you will notice they rarely produce long, gritty, grinding at-bats until the ninth inning when the game is pretty much lost, but you can come in and whine in the post-game interviews about how you nearly pulled that one out, dadgummit.
One thing I neglected in the earlier report card post was Cubs coaching and management. You would have to give the on-field management and coaching a rating of near zero. First off, as a game strategist, Dale Sveum is just simply a dunce. Tonight's game demonstrates this fact. Garza was sitting around 80 pitches after five innings. He was supposedly on a pitch count of 90 so you might have allowed him to at least start the sixth.
But OK, he had a tough fifth, so I can see going to the bullpen. But come on, Hector Rondon, who is a mop up guy? Three of the next four batters for the Pirates were left-handed, so an obvious choice might have been Russell, but no, we go to the twelfth man Rondon. Bases loaded. Russell comes in to pitch around Alvarez and walks in a run. Then we go to, that's right, to the eleventh man, Shawn Camp, who is having a truly atrocious season, but who is one of Dale's bonafide favorites of all time. Well, you know what happens, and, of course, no one is warming up so that even after the grand slam puts the Pirates in command, we have to endure another bases loaded jam before the side is finally retired.
There were two moves. actually three if you count leaving Garza in, to be made there. One was to go straight to Russell. The other was to bring out Villanueva, whose turn Garza was taking, and who had not pitched in five days. He might have given you three innings if necessary. Go figure.
This game is not an isolated instance of certifiable dumbness. It happens every day. But it is not limited to just in-game decisions. By and large, the Cubs are not improving in the field or at the plate. Some of this must be due not merely to having dumb players, but to having poor instruction as well. If you watch these games on TV even, you will notice that throws from the outfield rarely go to the right base or the right cutoff man.
You will also notice that the Cubs rarely score unless they hit a home run or the pitcher drives in runners who are on-base. Similarly you will notice they rarely produce long, gritty, grinding at-bats until the ninth inning when the game is pretty much lost, but you can come in and whine in the post-game interviews about how you nearly pulled that one out, dadgummit.
Report Card
The season is about a quarter done now, so maybe it is time to take stock of the Cubs thus far. The verdict is probably that they are a little better than last year, but, of course, that makes matters all the more frustrating. Lets be realistic, this team is still likely to lose ninety games this season, and possibly more if they follow the same strategy as last season and trade veteran players, mainly pitchers, i.e., salary, for marginal prospects.
For what it is worth, however, here is an off-hand evaluation:
Starting Pitching: Better, especially starting pitchers. Wood has been exceptionally good. Feldman has been surprisingly good after a slow start. Jackson has been a disappointment. Samardzija has been inconsistent after a great start. Villanueva has pitched badly after a great start. Villanueva has been relegated to the bullpen with the anticipated return of Matt Garza. I would have to say the starting pitching is probably the strongest point of their game and likely to keep them reasonably competitive through the remainder of the season were it not for the seeming obsession of current management and the Chicago press that trading veteran pitching for minor league talent that is a long way from being ready for the major leagues is a recipe for long-term success. The likelihood of the Cubs repeating their July fire sale means we are likely to be giving the same assessment of matters this time next year.
Relief Pitching: Inconsistent at best, awful at worst. Marmol has been pretty bad. Fujikawa was hurt early and has not recovered his Japanese form. Gregg has been surprisingly good. I have my doubts about this trend continuing. Russell has been consistent, but they need another left-hander. Camp has been awful. He should have been released in the off-season. Bowden has rightly been DFAed to make room for Garza. Rondon is a work in progress . Villanueva will help stabilize things. He is, in any case, a substantial upgrade over Bowden.
Catcher: Another bright spot. Castillo has been very good defensively and as a hitter. Navarro is a terrible defensive catcher, but he can hit occasionally and is a decent veteran backup and pinch-hitter.
First Base: Rizzo has turned things around since a slow, homer-oriented, start. He seems to be able to handle left-handed pitching now. Undoubtedly the Cubs best player.
Second Base: Barney's injury set him and the Cubs back a lot. He is starting to come around to his usual hitting production, not spectacular, but acceptable enough given his superior defensive skills.
Shortstop: Sveum made a couple of perceptive remarks over the weekend that apply very much to Castro in particular. He said Castro could be as good a player as he wanted to be and that the Cubs in general should not be considered a young, inexperienced team. Castro is now in his fourth full season as the Cubs shortstop. His defense is still as inconsistent as it was when he came up from AA ball. His hitting approach, I would argue, is worse or, at best, unchanged. Castro now has a .273 BA with a .304 OBP and a .692 OPS. This puts him down in Soriano territory in terms of average and OBP without Soriano's home run power. Lets face it, unless Castro improves, he is a below average player right now. Maybe changing his position is the answer, but, right now, I would consider trading him while his perceived value and potential are still high.
Third Base: Valbuena and Ransom have provided a decent platoon at this position. Realistically, though, Valbuena is a good utility infielder and Ransom is likely to bottom out. If Vitters is the future of the franchise or if they have to rely on Stewart regaining his hitting form, the Cubs are in trouble long-term at this position until one of the lower minors prospects is ready or until Baez, still a lower minors prospect, changes position. Maybe they should have held on to Ramirez after all.
Right Field: Schierholtz has been a reasonable left-handed platoon player. Hairston has been an inadequate right-handed counterpart. This position is another weakness.
Center Field: David DeJesus has been fine here. He is a pretty good leadoff hitter. His defense is adequate. Right now I rather think he is better suited to a corner outfield position. The Cubs are likely to trade him before the deadline. Of all the Cubs players, he is probably worth most to a potential contender and the Cubs are well stocked with place-holders at this position in Sweeney and Borbon. Borbon, if he played everyday, might be more than a short-term solution.
Left Field: Soriano will probably come on as the weather warms up. If he does so, the Cubs need to get rid of him ASAP. Soriano is still a defensive liability and his approach to hitting, to the extent it rubs off on other players, is a bad influence, and, in general, an insult to everyone who knows how baseball should be played.
Bench: Adequate. We've pretty much covered everyone to the extent they are platoon players. Only good teams need a superior bench anyway.
AAA Call-ups: Not much to write about here. Vitters is hitting home runs since returning to the lineup, but he did that last year and flopped when he came up to the big leagues. Jackson has not turned it around either, still strikes out a lot. They don't seem to have a standout pitching prospect here.
For what it is worth, however, here is an off-hand evaluation:
Starting Pitching: Better, especially starting pitchers. Wood has been exceptionally good. Feldman has been surprisingly good after a slow start. Jackson has been a disappointment. Samardzija has been inconsistent after a great start. Villanueva has pitched badly after a great start. Villanueva has been relegated to the bullpen with the anticipated return of Matt Garza. I would have to say the starting pitching is probably the strongest point of their game and likely to keep them reasonably competitive through the remainder of the season were it not for the seeming obsession of current management and the Chicago press that trading veteran pitching for minor league talent that is a long way from being ready for the major leagues is a recipe for long-term success. The likelihood of the Cubs repeating their July fire sale means we are likely to be giving the same assessment of matters this time next year.
Relief Pitching: Inconsistent at best, awful at worst. Marmol has been pretty bad. Fujikawa was hurt early and has not recovered his Japanese form. Gregg has been surprisingly good. I have my doubts about this trend continuing. Russell has been consistent, but they need another left-hander. Camp has been awful. He should have been released in the off-season. Bowden has rightly been DFAed to make room for Garza. Rondon is a work in progress . Villanueva will help stabilize things. He is, in any case, a substantial upgrade over Bowden.
Catcher: Another bright spot. Castillo has been very good defensively and as a hitter. Navarro is a terrible defensive catcher, but he can hit occasionally and is a decent veteran backup and pinch-hitter.
First Base: Rizzo has turned things around since a slow, homer-oriented, start. He seems to be able to handle left-handed pitching now. Undoubtedly the Cubs best player.
Second Base: Barney's injury set him and the Cubs back a lot. He is starting to come around to his usual hitting production, not spectacular, but acceptable enough given his superior defensive skills.
Shortstop: Sveum made a couple of perceptive remarks over the weekend that apply very much to Castro in particular. He said Castro could be as good a player as he wanted to be and that the Cubs in general should not be considered a young, inexperienced team. Castro is now in his fourth full season as the Cubs shortstop. His defense is still as inconsistent as it was when he came up from AA ball. His hitting approach, I would argue, is worse or, at best, unchanged. Castro now has a .273 BA with a .304 OBP and a .692 OPS. This puts him down in Soriano territory in terms of average and OBP without Soriano's home run power. Lets face it, unless Castro improves, he is a below average player right now. Maybe changing his position is the answer, but, right now, I would consider trading him while his perceived value and potential are still high.
Third Base: Valbuena and Ransom have provided a decent platoon at this position. Realistically, though, Valbuena is a good utility infielder and Ransom is likely to bottom out. If Vitters is the future of the franchise or if they have to rely on Stewart regaining his hitting form, the Cubs are in trouble long-term at this position until one of the lower minors prospects is ready or until Baez, still a lower minors prospect, changes position. Maybe they should have held on to Ramirez after all.
Right Field: Schierholtz has been a reasonable left-handed platoon player. Hairston has been an inadequate right-handed counterpart. This position is another weakness.
Center Field: David DeJesus has been fine here. He is a pretty good leadoff hitter. His defense is adequate. Right now I rather think he is better suited to a corner outfield position. The Cubs are likely to trade him before the deadline. Of all the Cubs players, he is probably worth most to a potential contender and the Cubs are well stocked with place-holders at this position in Sweeney and Borbon. Borbon, if he played everyday, might be more than a short-term solution.
Left Field: Soriano will probably come on as the weather warms up. If he does so, the Cubs need to get rid of him ASAP. Soriano is still a defensive liability and his approach to hitting, to the extent it rubs off on other players, is a bad influence, and, in general, an insult to everyone who knows how baseball should be played.
Bench: Adequate. We've pretty much covered everyone to the extent they are platoon players. Only good teams need a superior bench anyway.
AAA Call-ups: Not much to write about here. Vitters is hitting home runs since returning to the lineup, but he did that last year and flopped when he came up to the big leagues. Jackson has not turned it around either, still strikes out a lot. They don't seem to have a standout pitching prospect here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)