The Jeromy Burnitz of Cubs blogs. | ||
mrschroeder08 partyvancaptain pee_callus25 Tags 5 Million Dollar Black Hole AAAA Aaron Heilman Aaron Miles Alfonso Soriano Andres Blanco Angel Guzman Aramis Ramirez B.J. Ryan Baltimore Orioles Bobby Scales Bonehead Booing Brett Jackson Bullpen Canadian Concoction Captain Kneejerk Cardinals Carlos Marmol Carlos Silva Carlos Zambrano Chad Fox Cleveland Indians Cold War Contracts Cubs-Cardinals Rivalry Cubs sale Cubs Curtis Granderson Daniel Herrera David Patton Derrek Lee Designated Hitter Disabled list Dominance ERA+ ERROR ESPN Sucks Eternal frustration Eternal Optimism Farewell Farney Free Agency Future Gatorade Geovanny Soto Gerald Perry Grades I-Cubs Injuries Jake Fox Jason Marquis Jason Waddell Jeff Samardzija Jim Hendry Joey Gathright John Grabow Jose Ascanio Kerry Wood Kevin Gregg Kevin Hart Koyie Hill Legendary Lineup Los Angeles Dodgers Lou Piniella Luis Vizcaino Man Crush Mark DeRosa Marlon Byrd Micah Hoffpauir Middle Infield Midwestern Bias Milton Bradley Minor Leagues MLB 2K9 Neal Cotts October Offseason OPS+ Payroll Pittsburgh Pirates Playoffs Randy Wells Rant Rich Harden Ryan Dempster Ryan Freel Ryan Theriot Sam Fuld Sam Zell Sammy Sosa San Francisco Giants Sandy Alderson Sean Marshall Steroids Strikeouts Suckiness Tampa Bay Rays TBS Tom Gorzelanny Tom Ricketts Trade Tribune Company Von Joshua Waivers Walks WTF RSS Feed The eleven month saga of Milton Bradley's Cubs career is now over. The whole thing was a disaster from jump street, and continued to be bad, right up until the end. In the end, the Cubs owe $15 million and have a useless asset. It is pretty much akin to flushing money down the toilet, only without the need for a plumber. So I suppose that's a plus. Milton Bradley was traded to Seattle for pitcher Carlos Silva and, the most important part of the deal, $9 million. There was a $3 million difference in contracts between the two players, so the Cubs end up freeing $6 million over 2 years. They also open up a hole in the lineup while filling a need for the all-important seventh starter. It looks like Marlon Byrd will be the man to patrol center next year. Of all the remaining options left (Byrd, Ankiel, Podsednik, Damon and Fuld), he is probably the best remaing, but more on that later. In the meantime, let me just reiterate how terribly bad the Milton Bradley signing was. The man had issues in Cleveland, Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego and Texas. Even when he lead the AL in OPS with Texas, they didn't want him back. How is that not a red flag? Like clockwork, Bradley imploded in Chicago, and the Cubs did nothing to help the situation. The eventual suspension, as well as the badmouthing and back talking by teammates continued to murder what would already be a thin market. To top it all off, the Cubs had a stated goal of getting rid of Bradley, which killed all leverage they had in potential deals with Tampa and Texas. Why would those teams bail the Cubs out if they knew the Cubs *had* to unload this headcase? The Cubs basically painted themselves into a corner where they had to accept a garbage for garbage trade to get any money back. That, my friends, is a classic example of buying high and selling low. Jim Hendry will never be a stock trader. Carlos Silva has no place on the Cubs, even with Ted Lilly's injury. With Zambrano, Dempster, Wells, Gorzelanny, Marshall and Samardzija the Cubs have six starters. Lilly makes seven. Silva had his best year in 2005, with a 3.44 ERA a 7.89 K/BB, and a 1.173 WHIP, but that is now five years ago. After a decidedly average year in 2007, Seattle inexplicably gave him a monster contract. He has responded with numbers that make him among the worst starters in baseball (5.97 fielding-independent ERA). He has been injured, which could explain some of his issues, but ultimately the Cubs have many better options already, making you wonder where Silva will end up. There is always the chance of a pitcher turning it around, especially going from the AL to the NL. He is a sinker ball pitcher, which could help at Wrigley. Bill James even predicts him to have an ERA under 5 this year! As a Cubs fan, I've held out hope for much more improbably things, so maybe Silva will end up being a solid fifth starter. Or maybe the Cubs can flip him (or one of their other arms) in spring training when injuries start affecting other teams plans. My prediction is actually the latter, with Marshall or Gorzelanny being the starter traded to possibly bring back a fourth outfielder. Meanwhile, Marlon Byrd seems to be inevitably coming to Chicago. The Cubs have an array of average options available to them, with Byrd having the best 2009, so I suppose that is the tiebreaker. I cannot argue with this move now, but there were better options that, once again, the Bradley situation ruined. Granderson was probably a pipe dream for what he ended up being traded for, but Mike Cameron was a great stopgap option. Those damn Red Sox snatched him up, however, and now anything the Cubs put in centerfield will be underwhelming. At least with Byrd you have some idea with what you are getting. Ankiel had a horrible 2009 and has been linked to performance-enhancing drugs. Podsednik had a very improbable 2009, but still demonstrated the baseball IQ of a labradoodle with the White Sox. Fuld has absolutely zero power and will probably kill himself running into the bricks if given enough time in center. Byrd will not give you great power (career high 20 HRs last year). He will probably not get on base at a great rate (.340 career OBP). His defense is nothing to write home about (-2.7 UZR last year). Anything more than 2 years at about $6 to $7 million is way too much, and even those figures are stretching. The Cubs need another outfielder however, so they will need to overpay a bit. Finally, this offseason is starting to take shape. Goal one was to undo the 2008-09 offseason. Goal two was to plug any holes left by goal one. That means there will be no great additions. The Cubs will ultimately be relying on bounce back years from Soriano and Soto, and they will sink or swim with those two. With that said, I do expect some measure of improvement from both of them. In baseball, ultimately you look to make the playoffs, and anything can happen from there. This team is already a decent bet to compete and win the division, despite all its troubles. It is also a decent bet to flame out again. What will be really interesting is in one years time with Lee and Lilly having contracts ending and Ramirez having an option to opt out of his final year. I think we will see much more moving and shaking then, but for now, tweaking will have to be the name of the game for the Cubs. Posted in: Milton Bradley, Carlos Silva, Marlon Byrd The title of the post seems to reflect the sentiment of many Cubs fans after today's trade with the Oakland athletics. All I can do is shake my head, because this trade is not nearly as bad as some people are making it out to be. Obviously getting rid of most of that Aaron Miles contract (even though it is only $1.7 million being saved ultimately) is a positive, but people seem to think trading Jake Fox is the second coming of Brock for Broglio. Let me put it simply: Jake Fox had a bit of value, but nearly as much as many Cubs fans think. He is a 27-year-old right-handed hitter with no defensive position. He can hit a fastball a mile and a half, but he is also pretty ineffective against anything else. After peaking in July, pitchers started to figure out Mr. Fox, and by September, he OPSed a measily .543. Am I saying he won't be a decent player for Oakland? No, but he wasn't going to lead the Cubs to the promised land, nor was he going to be the centerpiece in a trade for Roy Halladay or Curtis Granderson. On the plus side, the Cubs rid themselves of a very unnecessary piece in Aaron Miles, saving a bit of money, and got three prospects in the deal. Neither of those prospects will set the world on fire. Jeff Gray, a 28-year-old pitcher, will probably spend some time in the bullpen in 2010, and eat some innings. He had a decent year in Oakland's bullpen, and it can never hurt to have the extra arm. Matt Spencer, 23, showed some pop between A and AA last year, and could be a left-handed Jake Fox in a year or two, so fret not Fox fans. Finally Ronny Moria is the obligatory low-level project pitcher that the Cubs will try to turn into something. The Cubs have had a decent history with pitching prospects, so it could happen. Overall, not a blockbuster trade that will bring the organization to the next level, but it is also by no means a bad trade. Jake Fox was vastly overrated by Cubs fans, and I say that fully admitting he can be a productive player. Ultimately it opens up some bench spots. My scorecard now has the Cubs bench as Hill, Hoffpauir, Blanco and possibly Fuld. I do expect a trade or signing to fill another spot or two, and just pray Jim Hendry doesn't overpay for those players, like he did with Aaron Miles. Finally, and I have to admit I find this amusing, but I have never seen a GM totally undo an offseason's worth of work the very next year like Jim Hendry is doing now. Think about it: the big acquisitions after 2008: Kevin Gregg, Aaron Heilman, Aaron Miles, Luis Vizcaino and Milton Bradley. Not but one year later: Gregg is a free agent, Heilman is in Arizona, Miles is in Oakland, Vizcaino was gone before May and Bradley is being shopped like Hendry's first-born is at stake. In other words, the Cubs are now spending an offseason primarily undoing the last offseason. The winter meetings are coming up, so I expect a resolution on this Bradley situation soon, for better or for worse. Posted in: Aaron Miles, Jake Fox, Farewell One weekend about a month and a half ago, I was doing what any hip, young dude in California would be doing on a Friday night. I was browsing the Cubs forums online. Rudy Jaramillo was about to step into the ever-dangerous Cubs hitting coach position, and people were trying to gauge what this ultimately meant for the team. I usually lurk and don't post much because you ultimately get into an argument with someone, no matter how correct you may be, and arguing on the internet usually ranks somewhere between arguing with a 2-year-old and arguing with a wall. But one ridiculously misinformed poster said the following: "The Cubs want to be more sabremetrically (it needs to be sabre too so I can kill myself on it)inclined so they bring in Jaramillo to teach our hitters that strikeouts are OK in most situations. Has Hendry ......... gone BERSERK ?" I ultimately jumped in, because that statement is ridiculously full of ignorance it's sad. Ultiamtely, nothing came of it. A poster who many believe is the Len Kasper jumped in to my defense, and even copied one my posts nearly word-for-word. Points were intentionally misconstrued. People were called names. I told people my dad could beat up their dad. Just another internet forum debate. But ultimately I only grew in my belief that strikeouts (from a hitting perspective) are ridiculously overvalued as a stat. People want to stay away from hitter-X "because he strikes out too much". People like batter-Y because "his strikeout rate is low". Ultimately those people miss the bigger picture. Here was part of my first reply, disproving that strikeouts directly correlate to offensive output: "2009: The Diamondbacks led the NL with 1298 strikeouts, and scored 4.44 runs per game (right around the NL [average].) Meanwhile the Mets had the least strikeouts with 928, but scored 4.14 runs per game, and the Astros struck out 990 times and scored 3.97 runs per game. 2008: Florida led the NL with 1371 strikeouts, and scored 4.78 runs per game (above the NL average). That is right around the runs per game (4.81) that the Cardinals had. They had the least number of strikeouts at 985. 2007: Florida again led the NL with 1332 strikeouts, and scored 4.88 runs per game (again above the NL average). The Dodgers struck out the least, 864 times, and scored 4.54 runs per game." Now that is just the last three years, but keep going back and you will see more of the same. There is simply no correlation. If I tell you the Dallas Cowpokes struck out more than the Idaho Taters in 19-aught-3, you could not reasonably tell me which team scored more often that year. That is at the team level. At the player level, it should be even more evident that production is not tied to K-rates. Yet people would pass on Adam Dunn because of his big strikeout numbers. Later on in the chat (right before I was ready to give up and punch myself in the face for even attempting to argue this) I pulled out numbers about one famous ball player (his name rhymes with Abe Sooth) and his strike out numbers/rankings. For the record, this was duplicated later by the poster who is allegedly Len Kasper. So, yeah, I kick ass and should be doing play-by-play. 1918 AL--58--1st 1919 AL--58--2nd 1920 AL--80--2nd 1921 AL--81--2nd 1922 AL--80--2nd 1923 AL--93--1st 1924 AL--81--1st 1925 AL--68--2nd 1926 AL--76--2nd 1927 AL--89--1st 1928 AL--87--1st 1929 AL--60--4th 1930 AL--61--5th 1932 AL--62--9th 1933 AL--90--2nd 1934 AL--63--9th The dude struck out more often than anyone in his years playing. Yet he is THE name when it comes to baseball lore. Why is this? Alright, here goes: Striking out ultimately is negligible compared to making other outs. There are certain situations where yes, you would rather have a ball in play than an out. Down one run with two outs in the bottom of the ninth of game 7 of the World Series with a runner on third, maybe Adam Dunn would be a scary person to have at the plate, yes. But ultimately those situations only comprise a small number of plate appearances. With that said, putting the ball in play by no means guarantees a hit. That further reduces the impact of striking out vs. putting a ball in play. But this is key: hitters who do good things (work deep counts, hit for lots of power) DO tend to strike out a lot. That doesn't mean the strikeout itself is great; it simply means players who do good things sometimes strike out more. This is where you can differentiate between two players who strike out a lot. Example: Player A struck out 168 times in 687 player appearances. Player B struck out 181 times in 704 plate appearances. They are roughly the same value, right? Come on, you knew this was a loaded example. Player A is Corey Patterson (2004 version) who only walked 45 times and did hit an admittedly respectable 24 home runs. Of course we know what happened to ol' Corey after this year. Player B is Ryan Howard (2006 MVP year) who also walked 108 times and hit 58 home runs. You see, Patterson strikes out a lot because he has no idea how to lay off a high fastball. Howard strikes out a lot because he works deep counts (which inherently means he has more 2-strike counts) and will rarely cut down on his stroke (which pays dividends when he hits ridiculous amounts of home runs). The point is, do not look at a hitter's or a team's K-rate alone to determine their offensive potential. The original post that set me off dismissed the idea of the Cubs' offense striking out more as bad. In the end, you really need to not focus so much on that one stat. If the Cubs tomorrow traded for Adam Dunn, Mark Reynolds and Ryan Howard, they would have a ton more strikeouts. But you know what else they would have? A ton more runs. Just to drive the point home for Cubs fans everywhere, I give you one last hyperbolic example. You and I both have cloning machines with which we will make 9 clones of one player (and somehow they can play all defensive positions). We have our choice of two players to clone. Player model NP has only struck out 503 times in 5110 plate appearances (9.8% strikeout rate!!!). Player model MT has struck out 808 times in 4368 plate apperances (17.4% strikeout rate- BOOOO!!!!!) You being the savvy baseball savant you are, abhor strikeouts and choose model NP. HA! You just chose Neifi Perez over Mark Teixeira! I totally win my own hypothetical situation! Posted in: Strikeouts Still trying to figure out that clever title thing. So the Cubs have begun their attempt at eliminating that stench that is still strong following the 2009 season. Yesterday, two moves were made by Jim Hendry. Based on at least one of them, I fear he still has not learned. First, Aaron Heilman's reign of terror is over. He was dealt to Arizona for two medium-to-low level prospects. That is admittedly a fine move, as you are not going to get much for a reliever of Heilman's caliber. The thing that I find interesting is that it was apparently a purely cost-cutting measure. Now for a cost-cutting measure, I suppose the Cubs got as good a haul as they could expect. Still, I would be shocked to see either guy make an impact, like, ever. But the Cubs are clearly trying to reduce salary. Here's another hint: don't sign relievers like John Grabow to deals worth $7.5 million! Now granted, I was expecting this, and I was expecting the Cubs to overpay, like always. And ultimately, this move will not kill any chances at a World Series title. Grabow isn't even that bad. My question is why does Jim Hendry keep on taking very shallow looks at players before signing them? It was clear he was doing this based on the good ERA Grabow posted last year. Fangraphs has a great article about that. Ultimately Grabow has probably been fairly lucky as he walks a lot of hitters and doesn't have the dominating strikeout numbers a Carlos Marmol has. Maybe he keeps it up, and as a Cubs fan, I hope so. But, like Aaron Miles last year, the Cubs probably could have found a much cheaper option to get the same production, such as John Gaub. Again, ultimately this move probably isn't a big deal. It is just disappointing to see that Jim Hendry is still sticking to his archaic guns when it comes to building a team. But hey, it has worked 50% of the time. Here's hoping this is in that 50%. Posted in: John Grabow, Aaron Heilman In 2007-08, it was Brian Roberts. In 2008-09, Jake Peavy was the name. Could the hot rumor of the 2009-10 Cubs offseason be Curtis Granderson? The Detroit Tigers are looking to shed payroll, and Granderson, a Chicago native, could be one of the players leaving. Granderson had an off year last season and has 3 years at $25.75 million left on his deal. The Angels and Yankees are rumored to be interested in the 28-year-old as well. I've read some opine that Granderson would be simply a left-handed Soriano. That is an extremely narrow view of him. First of all, to compare Soriano and Granderson defensively is to compare night and day. Granderson has shown a ton of range in a spacious center field in Comerica park. Not to mention the added benefit of moving Fukudome back to right, where he is an above-average defender. Second, the Granderson's WARP, even in a down year, was at 3.4. Fangraphs computes him to have been worth $15.2 million, which makes his salary a bargain (still). Why is this? Though Granderson's OBP was just below league average, he still showed tons of power in a big park. His OPS+ ultimately ended up about average, but he did not have the lopsided K/BB rate of Soriano, nor did he have the minus-minus-defense. Ultimately, if the Cubs were somehow able to pull this off, I think it would be great. He is just entering his prime years, so his physical abilities could still be reaching their full potential. Defensively alone, he would be a tremendous pickup. And at Wrigley Field, he could really do some damage with the bat. I mean, come on, 30 HRs with 81 games at Comerica. The one issue, pointed out by Keith Law, is that Curtis Granderson is pretty much an Aaron Miles against left handed pitching, OPSing a putrid .484. With Fukudome also having trouble against southpaws, a trade like this would suddenly increase the need for a right handed outfielder, maybe two. That would probably mean a return for Reed Johnson. There are definitely hidden costs to this trade. Ultimately, I do not think the Cubs have the resources, be they financially or in the farm system, to pull this off. If by some off chance, they do, I really hope Jim Hendry looks past Granderson's high strikeout totals (which should not be a factor) and can pull this off. The much greater chance is a free agent pickup. I had originally predicted Mike Cameron, but it looks like Marlon Byrd might be the man. To that I say "meh", he is an alright hitter. His K/BB was not impressive last season, but he did hit for much more power. In 2008, he had a great OBP, but not as much power. If he could put it together, then I would think this is a steal. And who knows, maybe Rudy Jaramillo (his former hitting coach) is the guy to help him do just that. Ultimately, the Cubs could do worse. But even though they are probably a pipe dream, these Granderson rumors make me wonder if they could do much, much better. (Stats from baseball-reference.com and fangraphs.com) Posted in: Curtis Granderson, Marlon Byrd, Offseason I saw this on Deadspin this evening, and I will be having nightmares tonight: http://www.life.com/image/92778412 I would say that someone should tell Sammy that Halloween was last week, but I fear that this was not a costume. Gross. Posted in: Sammy Sosa, WTF Boy howdy, the Yankees have done it against all odds. What a classic underdog story, what with the NINE year drought they were suffering through prior to the 4-2 series victory over the previous champion Philadelphia Phillies. Now if only we could get the Cubs to spend money. Speaking of money, the Ricketts family has spent a lot of it in acquiring our beloved team, and last week, the family said pretty much all the right things. That is if you strike out the awkward comment Todd made about Jim Hendry asking the team to eat money on contracts in trades (*cough*Bradley*cough*). Anyways, the main point that was made was that payroll is not an issue with the Cubs (bingo). Spending is not an issue (bingo). The big issue here is how money is spent. And this isn't just Jim Hendry spending like a drunken sailor. This is the scouting and development constantly failing to develop quality talent. This is the state of the facilities, both in Mesa and at Wrigley. For being one of the premier brands in baseball, the Cubs have a lot of catching up to do as far as being one of the better organizations in baseball. That is why I think Tom Ricketts is attacking this from the right angle. He cannot just raise payroll, because you can bet that money will at best provide a very short-term fix. At the root of all the Cubs problems, in my eyes, is the farm system. Think about the position prospects this system has churned out. It is pretty poor for a team that has the resources that the Cubs have. The lack of quality home-grown talent has lead to the bad contracts that have strangled this team. Ideally the Cubs will have a healthy payroll. Even with that payroll, they will have a solid core of young players, many of whom are under team control and are cheaper than a similar player found on the free agent market. This frees up a ton of payroll which can then be used to plug holes. That is essentially the Boston Red Sox, the St. Louis Cardinals and the Philadelphia Phillies for you. Anyways, I feel like I've made this diatribe before, so I will move on from that point to talk about this offseason. Let's start with the farm system's role in this offseason. Starlin Castro is the new hot prospect on the block. This guy is on the fast-track supposedly, with some saying he could be up in 2010. He is very young and still developing, and some people have even said he could be a Hanley Ramirez when he realizes his potential. To those people, I say sloooooow down. Now while I cannot discount that Castro has a good chance at being an impact player, the one knock on him is his plate discipline (is there ever a Cubs prospect that doesn't have that issue?). People write that off as a small flaw, but I think people underestimate how that small knock can get worse and worse as a player has progresses through the system. (Cubs fans should know that better than most.) Now Castro is still above average at getting on base, and has that promise of pop- so he still has a good shot. If things go well early on (emphasis on if), we could get our answer as to whether he's the real deal sometime in 2010. Castro probably will not figure into opening day plans, but he could be seen later on. The certainties the Cubs have right now are Soto, Lee, Theriot, Ramirez, Fukudome and Soriano in the lineup, Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly and Wells in the rotation and Marmol, Guzman and Chad Fox (just kidding... kinda) in the bullpen. Kevin Gregg, Rich Harden and Milton Bradley are almost locks to be gone. Everything else is up in the air. Second base will probably be an in-house competition between Mike Fontenot, Jeff Baker and Andres Blanco. Fontenot and Baker bring (potentially) average bats and average gloves. Blanco brings a plus glove and a minus bat. There will be no superstar contributions here most likely, but the Cubs don't need one. They need someone who can pull their weight, and I think the option is there. My personal favorite is Jeff Baker, who has a bit more power and a bit more patience, but he definitely doesn't outclass Fontenot in either of those categories. The fifth starter will boil down to Jeff Samardizja, Tom Gorzelanny and Sean Marshall. Though I think Marshall is sort of becoming increasingly entrenched in that bullpen. I actually think John Grabow's return could be tied to this thing. If the Cubs feel Samardzija is the man, Gorzelanny could move to the bullpen as a second lefty and Grabow could be sent packing. I expect the Cubs to offer Grabow arbitration, and I actually expect him to ultimately return. That will leave Samardzija and Gorzelanny to compete in the Spring with the loser getting Gaudin'ed (though Gaudin now has a WS ring... hmm...). I guess the bottom line is, I do not expect a new face to be brought in here either. So where do I see new faces being brought in? Simple, outfield and bullpen. If a Milton Bradley trade does not net an outfielder, such as Pat Burrell or Aaron Rowand, I really expect Mike Cameron to be a prime target. He won't command huge money, he still is a plus defender in centerfield and he is also a productive bat. There will be no Jason Bay or Matt Holliday here, so Cameron would be a realistic option that I could live with. The other benefit is pushing Fukudome back to right field, making 2/3's of the outfield pretty good defensively. With Marmol, Guzman, and two of Marshall/Grabow/Gorzelanny taking four of the bullpen spots, the Cubs probably have three spots open. I was highly impressed with Esmailin Caridad, who posted a 1.40 ERA, 0.93 WHIP and 17 strikeouts to 3 walks. He doesn't even need to keep up those numbers to make the team, but it wouldn't break my heart if he did keep them up. Aaron Heilman has a shot at returning, which is, meh, about average in my book. Keep him away from the setup role and I'll live with him. The last spot could go to a free agent: Kiko Calero might be the only decent option there. If Calero is not an option, I'd be inclined to stay with a youngster like Mitch Atkins or Justin Berg, as any reliever brought in with a major league deal almost certainly will not be worth it. Also of note, David Patton no longer has to stay on the 25-man, so I don't expect him to be there opening day. Finally on the bench: Koyie Hill may be back, but there was talk of the Cubs wanting a bit more offense from the backup catcher. To me that is like saying, "I want a bit more water out of this desert". Don't expect miracles there. Jake Fox will probably have a spot. Aaron Miles could get one last shot, but the Cubs have to say goodbye to one of Fontenot, Miles, Baker or Blanco, and you know who I would vote off that island. Finally, Micah Hoffpauir and Sam Fuld will probably battle it out for the last spot IF Reed Johnson is allowed to walk (which should probably happen). Realistically, no one should be signed for this bench as there are plenty of candidates around already. Signing a free agent here just doesn't make sense, just like it didn't make sense to get Aaron Miles last year. So for me, realistically it boils down to this. Do not expect sweeping changes. I see one or two new position players and maybe one or two new arms. That all depends on what happens with the Bradley situation. With that said, I still think this team can bounce back and be good in 2010. You had down years from Soriano and Soto and injuries plaguing the rotation. If nothing else, the bullpen will lose Kevin Gregg, which is a win any way you slice it. Posted in: Offseason Holy crap... so that's what it was like to be a Cardinals fan in October '07 and '08. I am now convinced there is a TBS playoff curse on the NL Central (1-12 record for NL Central teams in playoff games on TBS- the one win being Milwaukee last year.) In a couple of days, I will finally do my post-mortem on this year from a Cubs perspective. But for now I am actually enjoying October. It is sad when you can enjoy October more when your team is NOT in the playoffs. Posted in: Cardinals, Playoffs, TBS Jim Hendry suspended Milton Bradley for the rest of the year today, due to his terrible attitude with reporters this week as well as his propensity to blame the fans and their "negative attitude" for his sub-par year. It only took Hendry five and a half months to figure this out. This pretty much means the end of Milton Bradley in Chicago. This is reminiscent of Jose Guillen's departure from the Angels in 2004, when despite being the RBI leader on a team in a pennant race, manager Mike Scioscia suspended him for his poor attitude. Jose Guillen had been removed for a pinch runner and publicly expressed resentment towards that decision. That would be the last he be seen in an Angels uniform. So now what? Chances are the Cubs will have to eat a good amount of the money left on this deal. With Harden probably leaving, and Zambrano possibly being traded (though I think odds are against that), will the Cubs have payroll to spend in right field? If so, the options are few and far between. Mike Cameron is a slightly above average hitter with good defense in the outfield and he would not break the bank. Bobby Abreu will be available once again, and again will probably not command a giant deal. Some rumors have Tampa Bay shopping Carl Crawford and B.J. Upton, but the Cubs will not have the pieces that other teams can offer there. So does this go back to the topic of the "kids" that I wrote about last night? If the Cubs have no viable options via trade or via free agency, will it be Jake Fox's job next year? Or Micah Hoffpauir's? Or Sam Fuld's? None of those sound particularly appealing. Maybe Tyler Colvin can come out of nowhere. Now I think I am dreaming. The bottom line here is last offseason, the Cubs had a perceived hole to fill. Four players could have filled that hole. Three players probably would have performed well enough, and not been complete ass-hats in the process. The Cubs had a 75% shot at getting that right, and in typical Cubs fashion, they found the one player that would fail to fill the 5-year-old black hole in right field. Hey, it only took 25 years to find a long term third base solution after Santo was traded to the Southside. By my math, we only have 20 more years to go until the Cubs finally figure this one out. Posted in: Milton Bradley Listen, Milton, I'm really happy for you, and I'm going to let you finish, but Todd Hundley was the greatest free agent bust of all time. </Kanye> Well there is not much left to say about what has ended up being a very, very mediocre season. Soriano finally got shut down, and Bradley may not be far behind. Randy Wells is coming back to earth, and in a week's time, the door may officially be closed. Looking forward to 2010 is not fun, either, what with the back loaded contracts and whatnot. Zambrano will reportedly be on the trading block this winter, and with Harden probably leaving via free agency, the rotation suddenly looks pretty thin at best. I am not going to talk about the rotation today however. Today, I am going to put to rest the idea that the Cubs should let the "kids" (very loosely used term here) play next year. I have been reading a lot of fans who are begging for an outfield of Fuld, Fox and Hoffpauir next year, claiming that that outfield will win more games. The pure insanity of that thought cannot be overstated. Sure, that would be an outfield cheap enough for a Pittsburgh Pirates payroll, but I guarantee that you will get Pittsburgh Pirate production out of it. My first reason is this: LOOK AT THE AGES ON THESE PLAYERS. These are not spry young players that normal organizations churn out. Hoffpauir is 29 (will be 30 before the 2010 season starts), Fox is 27 and Fuld is 27 (nearly 28). It would take a very strange circumstance for players that took that long to make it to the show to be even adequate full-time players. There are good reasons these players didn't start seeing many at-bats until their late 20's, a time when they should be PEAKING as major leaguers. For Micah Hoffpauir, it's as simple as his OBP. Batting average is a terrible way to look at a player. On base percentage tells A LOT more. Micah is below .300 in that category, and that is simply terrible. He has raw power, I will give him that. The thing is, you cannot have a player that makes outs at that rate in your every day lineup. It is one thing to rake against minor league pitching, but if there is a major hole in your swing, major league pitchers will go after it like Serena Williams going after that line judge. If you look at Micah's WARP to this point in his career, you will see that the average replacement-level player would be more valuable. That's not to say Micah isn't valuable. He is fine as a pinch hitter type, but as an everyday player, no thanks. Sam Fuld is an opposite case. In limited time, he has shown decent patience and a great eye, accumulating 13 walks to 10 strikeouts, giving you a respectable .379 OBP. But he has NO power. Kosuke Fukudome, despite looking like a hammer thrower at times, gives you the same OBP (.370 this year) plus some gap power. He has been among the league leaders for OPS by a CF. Yes, he is overpaid, but that money will be paid to him anyways. He is a better player than Fuld, and if Piniella uses him in a leadoff spot (where his OBP can be utilized) you've got a fine player. Fuld would be a good backup, but you cannot have two everyday players with little to no power, and the Cubs would have that with Fuld and Theriot (looks like his surge has ended). Finally, and this is tough to say, but Jake Fox is NOT the answer. His defense is suspect, and he has shown himself to look pretty foolish on certain offspeed pitches. Yes he has power, but again, you have to be wary of a player coming on at this age, with little to no hype. He is having a good stretch, but even so, his OBP is barely at the league average, and with more exposure, pitchers will find the holes in his swing. He is a perfect candidate to show off to an AL team, but I am not sure you would find too much through that route. Meatball fans are going to be clamoring for these "kids" all winter long. Well let me tell you of a player who came into his first major chunk of big league time at the age of 27. He had a good season, as a part time player, at the age of 28, with an OPS of .909, including 9 home runs in only 284 plate appearances. He was deemed to be ready for a full time role this year, only to fall off the map: a .691 OPS eventually losing that full time role. That player is of course, Mike Fontenot. The three players deemed "the future" by some fans are very much similar to Mr. Fontenot. They came up at a later age, and did a very good, if not decent, job in part time action. However they showed huge gaps in their game. For Fontenot, Fox and Hoffpauir, it is an absolutely hideous reaction to the offspeed and breaking stuff. For Fuld, it is a gigantic lack of any sort of power. Given full time roles, these three would probably not give many people what they want. I guess long story short, if you want to replace players on this Cubs team, the answer is NOT currently on this team. But hey, maybe the Pirates will want them. Posted in: Jake Fox, Micah Hoffpauir, Sam Fuld, Future, AAAA | ||