Take a moment and think about it, the 2009 season ended just eight days ago. Baseball's off-season is in full swing and the winter is shaping up to be very interesting throughout the game ... and especially on the North Side of Chicago.
The GM meetings concluded on Wednesday with Milton Bradley still a Cub and a lot of rumors to digest. While it would have been nice to see Jim Hendry scratch his top priority of the winter off his list (at least reported top priority), that was an unrealistic expectation. Hendry has a lot of work to do and said he felt he made progress over the last three days.
Here's the latest from the mill and news of a departure from the Cubs' front office ...
Jim Hendry
The Cubs' GM sounded upbeat about the progress he made in talks with other teams at the general managers' meetings. From the Tribune:
"It's kind of the way I anticipated. You feel like there's some business that will be done in the next few weeks. Hopefully you can do something before you get to Indianapolis (for the Dec. 7-10 winter meetings)."
"Last night, in an environment here at the hotel, I probably talked to seven or eight clubs, just the normal things."
"Like I've always said, we need a few moves. We don't need mega-moves. We feel there will be some things that will help some other clubs, but you just have to grind it out. I've had really good meetings. It was really a good environment after all. A lot of people were in the same spots, and it was easy to find guys to talk to."
According to a report from Bruce Levine, the Rangers, Rays, Mets and Tigers were among the teams Jim Hendry met with on Tuesday night. Hendry and his staff had "five hours of conversation with various teams."
Marlon Byrd
The Tribune reported once again on Wednesday night that Marlon Byrd "appears to be the Cubs primary centerfield target." The Tribune contradicted reports earlier in the week and stated "sources said Hendry will be able to sign another outfielder even if he hasn't traded Milton Bradley yet."
John Grabow
The Cubs and John Grabow are closing in on a deal ... and it appears to be just a matter of time at this point. Reports suggested Grabow could ink his new deal by early next week. Bruce Levine reported, "the parameters of an agreement began at two years and $7.5 million." The Cubs are not expected to allow Grabow to hit free agency.
Grabow's new contract could include an option for a third year.
Curtis Granderson
The Chicago native made headlines on Wednesday when a report from the New York Post indicated the Tigers could trade Curtis Granderson this winter. The Tribune indicated the Cubs are "likely to explore a deal that would obviously have to include Bradley because Granderson is owed $25.75 million over the next three years."
The Tribune brought up the Internet rumor started by Dave Kaplan and Steve Stone in the summer that had the Cubs trading Bradley to the Tigers ... and Jim Leyland's reaction to the rumor.
Curtis Granderson is a very good player but as Keith Law reported at this point he is a platoon player "that is still perceived as an everyday player." Granderson hits right-handed pitching without a problem, brings speed and above-average defense but the Cubs will need to have a platoon partner for him ... and Kosuke Fukudome.
Last season Granderson hit just .249 with a .327/.453/.780 line in 160 games with 23 doubles, eight triples and 30 home runs. Here are his splits:
- RHP - .275/.358/.539/.897 with 19 doubles, eight triples and 28 home runs
- LHP - .183/.245/.239/.484 with four doubles, no triples and two home runs
For his career against southpaws, just a .210/.270/.344/.614 line.
Granderson has three years and a club option left on the contract he signed prior to the 2008 season.
- 2010 - $5.5 million
- 2011 - $8.25 million
- 2012 - $10 million
- 2013 - Club option for $13 million with a $2 million buyout
Club option in 2013 increases to $15 million if finishes in the top five in MVP voting in 2011 or 2012 ... can increase to $14 million if an All-Star in 2011 or 2012 or to $13.5 million if All Star selection in 2011 or 2012.
Curtis Granderson is guaranteed at least $25.75 million over the next three seasons counting the $2 million buyout in 2013.
The Blue Island native will turn 29 on March 16 ... and would solve two of the Cubs' needs against right-handed pitching.
Bruce Levine reported, "Both the Cubs and the White Sox would appear to have the young players that could satisfy some of the Tigers' needs, but it is unknown at this time what Dave Dombrowski wants back and whether he has talked to either team."
Phil Rogers is convinced the Cubs should go after Curtis Granderson ... and said they should send Carlos Marmol and Starlin Castro to Detroit in return. Consider the source.
Milton Bradley
According to a report from Bruce Levine, Jim Hendry met with Bradley's agent, Seth Levinson, Tuesday night "to update him on negotiations and let him know about possible future destinations for Bradley and his two-year, $21.5 million contract."
Jon Heyman, on the MLB Network Wednesday night, said the Rangers are the likely destination for Milton Bradley. Texas would pay around $5 million to Bradley over the next two seasons. Heyman said the Cubs would have to cut a check to Texas for around $15 - $16 million.
Heyman reported on SI.com that the Cubs would like to "recover as much as half of the money left" on Bradley's contract.
Cubs Payroll for 2010 and Mike Fontenot
Speculation continued on Wednesday on the dollar amount Jim Hendry will have to work with in 2010. Reports have varied from $140 to $150 million and the Tribune tossed out $145 million Wednesday night.
The Cubs payroll took another hit on Wednesday when Mike Fontenot became a Super Two and is now arbitration eligible. Fontenot took the last spot for players between two and three years of service time.
Cubs Arbitration List for 2010
- Carlos Marmol
- Jeff Baker
- Sean Marshall
- Ryan Theriot
- Koyie Hill
- Angel Guzman
- Tom Gorzelanny
- Aaron Heilman
- Neal Cotts
- Mike Fontenot
Ed Lynch
The Cubs' former GM, who has been in the organization serving as a special assistant to Jim Hendry, is no longer employed by the Cubs ... Ed Lynch left the Cubs for a job with Major League Baseball.
Other Rumors
According to a report from the Sun-Times, the Cubs are not looking at Dan Uggla.
Follow the CCO on Twitter ...
A quick reminder to check the CCO's Community Blog ... excellent posts and different opinions from the Faithful.
If you don't have an account on the CCO ... sign-up for one to share your thoughts and interact with the rest of the Faithful.
Well, that's the latest ... and I'm sticking to it!
As we discuss moves to be made....Here are some important dates to remember:
December 1st is the deadline for teams to offer arbitration to its "ranked" free agents in order to be eligible for compensation if that player signs elsewhere.
December 7th is the deadline for a player to accept arbitration from his former club--so we may see some free agents at this time.
December 10th is the Rule V draft....there can be a player or to who is an impact player from this draft. Dan Uggla was a rule V draft by the Marlins when the Rockies left him unprotected in 2005. Shane Victorino was a rule V pick two times--once by the Padres from the Dodgers in 2002 and then again by the Phillies from the Dodgers. Even funnier than him being drafted twice was that the Dodgers refused to take him back when the Phillies didnt want to keep him in the majors. Also Johna Santana was a rule V draft by the Twins from the Astros, and we all know Josh Hamilton was a rule V draft pick by the Chicago Cubs who agreed to pick on behalf of the Reds. So there are a few gems to be found in the rule V draft.
December 12th is the deadline for clubs to offer 2010 contracts to any of its unsigned players. This is generally for players who are eligible for arbitration. Teams that feel the player is not worth what he may receive at arbitration will "non-tender" the player. This is where there is expected to be a large number of available players this year.
So, it's not until December 12th that the list of available players really shakes itself out. All this nonsense about Hendry not doing anything or whatever is not fair nor accurate.
Hopefully something shakes out with Bradley before or at the Winter Meetings.
As for Granderson....as stated this guy is a platoon player at best. We already have out hands full with Fukudome needing to be platooned. He certainly is NOT worth the money he's being paid to perform that poorly against lefties. Phil Rogers of the Tribune mustve bumped his head saying to trade Castro and Marmol for him. I laughed when I read that article. Also laughed though when he called Shawon Dunston an "impact player".
As for Byrd....considering the options we have he's not the worst option out there. He figures to get 3 years and 15-16 million.
I stated in a previous post, I believe the Cubs need to use Fox and Hoffpauir in trades. They can manage to get something for them. There are teams who are cutting costs or who always keep low payrolls who those two could easily start for.
I say the Cubs should non-tender Little Babe Ruth. With the raise he will get in arbitration he is too costly for the Cubs as a back up.
Joe, Thanks for the important dates....twice.
I agree with you re Fontenot...but think the Cubs would have held him if not for super 2.
I like both Fox and Hoffpauir...It still rankles me how Lou used them last season.
He actually ruined their value.
For their sakes, not ours, I hope they get an opportunity elsewhere....I believe they could flourish...if given the right opportunity. It won't happen here.
Sorry, but I have to disagree on moving Fox. I'm tired of the Cubs claiming that the guy doesn't have a position on the team, or that he's really a DH kinda player. Well, the kid was in the Cubs system, and that's still the National League. And he raked at every level in the system and only fell off when he went into Lou's well-documented doghouse and ultimately sat on the pine. If you project out his numbers over a full season his numbers look really solid.
While it won't happen, this would be the ideal time to ask Derrick Lee to waive his no-trade, and attempt to trade him while his value is high...and then insert Fox at 1B. But that would be asking too much of Hendry to get a bit creative. Instead, we'll see Derrick get an extension at age 34. Chances are he won't repeat his 2009 performance.
I personally don't want to see an aging Byrd, nor do I want us giving up any key players (beyond Bradley and perhaps a Fontenot) for a platoon player in Granderson.
Hendry blew it last year when the Braves stole McLouth from the Pirates for really nothing. A great deal, came out of nowhere, and was a total steal. Hendry never pulls those types of deals with the exception of the Ramirez catch years ago.
If Hendry can't swing a deal for a true impact player like a Sizemore or Crawford, then just play a platoon of Johnson/Fuld next year, and save some $$$'s. To me, we've seen these Byrd and Granderson moves before in the likes of Jacques Jones, Bradley, and others. No thank you.
Bryan, while my sentiments are with you re Fox...the reality is Lou will be the
manager this season...and Fox will not get the opportunity to play.
Moving DLee now, on the surface, makes a lot of sense...no-trade clause notwithstanding.
But some points to ponder if that were to happen.
1)ARAM is more likely to opt out. (If he is not moved to 1rst)
2)It WOULD start te total makeover of the team as constituted.
3)That means Jim Hendry would be at the helm for the transition from this core to the next...Do you really want him to
be making that deal?...or would you rather the transition be left to another GM after 2010?
Suzy ... just a reminder, Lee was asked about waiving his no-trade clause last winter and declined. He said he wanted to stay in Chicago.
I remember Neil...But if he does not get the extension...he might change his mind.
Lee took less money to stay here last time...I love the guy...but with his neck
and the preview of the double play hitter we might expect in the near future...I would be reluctant to give him an extension...or the type of money
he could potentially command on the open market if he has another big year.
Aram has had health problems each season for the last 3 now....and now he has a shoulder to consider. It might be an idea to wait on any extension to DLee...
consider letting him go and moving ARAM to first to preserve his health...(2011).
From what I'm currently hearing on Vitters...IF he makes it...he is probably 2 years out...so it might present a problem at 3rd...but we'll have to wait and see what unfolds.
Bryan,
Why do you say that McLouth was acquired for nothing? Gorkys Hernandez is a highly touted CF prospect who is only 22 years old and entered 2009 ranked pretty close to Vitters on Baseball America's top 100 prospects list. Locke and Morton are decent mid level pitching prospects. Would you have traded Vitters plus 2 mid level pitching prospects for McLouth? If so, then it is fair to blast JH for not making a deal happen. If you wouldn't make a deal similar to the one the Braves made, then I don't think it's fair to blame JH.
My problem with Granderson is that he strikes out a lot and that is like having another Soriano on our team other than that he is a good player.
Re a DLee extension...I love DLee, his professionalism/great defense/steady play....BUT I absolutely do not want to see an extension at this time...
If you think about it...The Cubs HAVE to float some talk of an extension just to calm the troops...and fans...
My guess is that it does not happen...
Until the Cubs begin to get production in line with salary (replacing Fukodome/Bradley with players that really produce to salary) They have to
begin to create flexibility elsewhere.
DLee's expiring contract represents opportunity for a younger cheaper first baseman....and if necessary...an infusion of talent mid season.
I think we should wait until the end of next season to decide on Derek Lee.
Marmol for Granderson ?
LMAO
oh, and yea he wants to throw in Castro
WTF
Phil Rogers is such an idiot.
NO WAY do I trade Marmol
NO FREAKIN WAY
so....listened to an interesting video of Hendry posted on Len and Bob's blog....not really sure I have much to say about that other than (GAG ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!). This guy clearly has no idea how to operate as a GM. He doesn't even carry himself like a cool, calm, collected, and confident dude. It's almost like, "well, we'll throw sh$#t on the wall, and if it sticks, it sticks, but we'll pretty much leave everything to chance."
I realize that a lot of GM's wear their hearts on their sleeve, and if they're upset, you'll know it, and if they're happy, you'll know it, and if they want to get rid of a player, you'll know it, because they publicly call them out. But, Hendry, on the other hand operates on this sort of old school, "awwwwwww, shucks" sort of mentality, where he could care less about sabermetrics or any other stats, because he goes with his gut. Well, guess what...his gut has been wrong 99% of the time.
During this interview, Hendry was asked about the down years of guys like Hoffpauir, Fontenot, etc., and responded something to the effect of, "well, yeah, it's bizarre, and I'm sure they'd tell you that too. In Fontenot's case, here's a guy that has swung the bat well his entire life..." and we've heard him say that on many other occasions, basically saying that "Player A has an excellent track record of success, and we just don't know what went wrong"....
um........
Actually, Jim, Fontenot has NOT swung the bat well his entire life. In the minors, here were his stats:
high-A: .264 avg, .333 OBP, 8 hr, 53 RBI, 42 walks to 117 K's
AA: .325 avg, .399 OBP, 12 hr, 66 RBI, 5o walks, 89 K's
AAA: .279 avg, .346 OBP, 8 hr, 49 RBI, 48 walks, 111 K's
AAA: .272 avg, .377 OBP, 6 hr, 39 RBI, 59 walks, 77 K's
AAA: .296 avg, .375 OBP, 8 hr, 36 RBI, 47 walks, 64 K's
AAA: (55 games) .336 avg, .384 OBP, 6 hr, 34 RBI, 16 walks, 32 K's
***so, just to summarize for you, essentially this guy repeated AAA in 4 consecutive years, and basically averaged a .289 avg, .367 OBP. To me, that's horrible. Even guys like Pie, Cedeno, Fox, Hoffpauir, etc. were able to dominate AAA pitching after 1, maybe 2 stints there. What exactly was Hendry talking about, "history of success swinging the bat" Really?!? I guess he thinks that since Sean Marshall had a .231 avg and .286 OBP last year, that he has a "history of success swinging the bat" with his type of logic.
I don't know how many times I have to say this....but success in the minor leagues has a DIRECT correlation to success at the major league level POST and PRE STEROIDS era. If you look at a pitcher's body of work in the minors, or a batter's body of work, chances are, you'll see significant trends that let you know what they might produce in future seasons.
Guys like Fielder, Braun, Votto, Bruce, Dunn, AROD, Pujols, ARAM (interesting case that proves my theory that if you produce when you're young at lower levels, chances are you'll produce at higher levels---he made his MLB debut at 20 yrs old), etc., all dominated the minors, and now they're dominating the majors. Guys like Hoffpauir, Fox, Cedeno, Soto, Fontenot, etc. never dominated the minors at multiple levels. Sure, they all shined at AAA after 1 or more years there, but not so much before that. I just don't get Hendry's thought process. You can see the product of his faulty thought process through his ill-advised trades and free agent signings. Almost none of the guys he goes after have a history of excellence in their resumes. They might have one or two good seasons, or a "career year" (how often have we heard that with Hendry signings?), but they sign here, then fail, and Hendry's left answering questions like a dumbass saying, "well, he's produced his whole career, so we expect him to turn it around next season, BLAH BLAH BLAH" Really?!? Based on what evidence?
"Soriano will turn it around" Really? Even before he was signed, he had an up-and-down career. Sure, his power numbers were in the 30+hr range, 80-90+RBI range, but his peripheral numbers like walks, K's, avg, and OBP were absolutely all over the place.
"Miles will turn it around" Really? Prior to this season, Miles had season averages in the .260's, .280's, .290's, and .300's, and OBP's primarily in the .320's and below with a high of .355. Does that sound like anything you can revert back to, and say, "see...we expect him to be in this range...."? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!!!!!
"Fukudome/Hoffpauir/Fontenot/Soto/Bradley (if he's still here....gag)/etc. will turn it around". I've already answered this, but based on what, exactly?
To think that Hendry could've solved all of our issues by going after Carlos Lee in the first place instead of Soriano, actually drafting Hamilton (instead of for the Reds) when we clearly needed a replacement for Jones---instead Hendry went after the cripple known as Cliff Floyd, and Adam Dunn or Abreu instead of Bradley.
We'd have an OF of this folks:
LF-Lee
CF-Hamilton
RF-Dunn (though b/c we'd have had Lee, I would've gone after Abreu for more speed/better defense)
Lee rarely K's, and has averaged about 30 hr, 100 RBI, .300 avg, .350--.360 OBP
Hamilton was injured last year, but in his 2 full seasons prior, you could expect around a .300 avg, .365+OBP, .530+SLG, and 19+hr, 47+RBI, and stellar defense, which, even in his low first year (which is what I was basing if off of, and not his breakout season), he'd still be above average offensively for a CF
Abreu averages about a .300 avg, .400 OBP, 15-20 hr, 100+RBI and 25 SB per season
Right now, we have Soriano in the wild range I discussed, though he hasn't even come close to those numbers while with us. Then, we have Fukudome, who never proved anything at the MLB level, and about all we can count on is 10-12 hr, 50-55 RBI, a .250-.255 avg, and a .365-.375 OBP. That's decent for a CF, but NOT for a RF, which is what he truly is. Then, don't even get me started on Bradley.
See what I'm talking about? If Hendry went by stats, we'd NEVER be in this predicament, but since he goes by his gut, we're left wondering what went wrong, and how can we possibly fix it, with so many immovable, high-priced parts.
The unfortunate thing about all of this, is for the next two years (longer for Soriano), we're stuck with the OF (and contract in case of Bradley trade) of Soriano, Fukudome, and Bradley at $18 million, $12 million, and essentially an average of $10 million per season. ALL are immovable, and ALL are performing at the bottom of league average for their positions. Lee has just 3 yrs left on his 6 yr $100 million deal with the Astros at $18.5 per for total of $55.5 while Soriano has 5 yrs left at $18 per for total of $90 million. Which do you think is more movable? Meanwhile, Hamilton hasn't reached FA yet, and he made $555,000 last season. Then, you have Dunn with only one year and $10 million left of his 2 yr deal, and Abreu, who only signed a one year deal last season.
Hendry left himself no way out, and absolutely no possible way to improve the ballclub. Basically, he knew that if he clogged up the roster with no maneuverability in years, $$'s, or no-trade clauses, his job would be safe, simply because no GM in their right mind would step into that situation, unless they knew the owner would be fine with eating salary. He basically created his own job security through bad decisions.
I know I’m again wasting my breath, but analyzing stats actually requires analytical calculations. I’m not saying Hendry uses it or not, but I am saying you aren’t and you probably know little other than key words you’ve heard analysts use. Your Lee vs. Soriano debate is beating a dead horse because you have yet to show the analytical significance behind your conclusion. Simply looking at stats and forming opinions is not analysis, it’s going with your gut…
Actually you and Hendry actually have similar reasoning skills but you have different opinions. How can you criticize Hendry for going after Fukudome with his unproven MLB skills, and then suggest they should have drafted and kept Hamilton? He was also unproven at the MLB level, coming off substance abuse and didn’t even play for a while. The fact was that Cincinnati was able to take the gamble because they had a roster spot on a team that wasn’t going to contend that season. The fact he paid Fukudome more would be an unreasonable remark, since he paid the rate the market set for him at that time (this is one of the few times he didn’t pay more than the market).
20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing isn't it ?
I agree with you.
Not too mention, I'm not saying I wouldn't like to have Josh Hamilton, but please, before we induct him into the HOF, the guy has had 1 good year in his career and he's going to be 29.
oh yay!!!...I get to respond to another Paul k bashing.....
First of all, who are you to say that I have no analytical calculation skills?!? Have you not seen the research I've done in the past? Furthermore, it's ORIGINAL research, not something Bill James comes up with, etc. It's actually forming a hypothesis, doing analytical testing of stats. Allow me to break it down to a kindergarten level for you, since that apparently is what you need:
A hypothesis, Paul, is a tentative statement that proposes a possible explanation to some phenomenon or event. For instance, having a high batting average and OBP throughout multiple levels of the minors might lead to success at the MLB level. A hypothesis, by nature is TESTABLE. How do we test things....Well, the first thing I did (this was a post I did during the season, and perhaps someone can find it)...is I took all of the top hitters in MLB, and I looked at their minor league stats, and compared them to each other, along with their MLB performance. THEN, I took a group of average MLB players, and looked at their minor league stats, and compared to each other, along with their MLB performance. From there, I was able to draw the conclusion that successful hitters at the MLB level have a direct correlation with their minor league stats and MLB stats in terms of consistency and success, and average players are all across the board, meaning that they might have a good year, then they'll have a terrible year, then they'll have an average year, then they'll have a good year (but not their best), then they'll plateau, and then they'll fall off. If you look at their minor league stats, there a appears to be a direct correlation, especially in terms of avg and OBP.
Statistical analysis, just FYI is defined as a study of how differences are explained.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....
So, perhaps if you even knew what you were talking about in the first place, you'd understand that is PRECISELY what I've already done.
A difference between an average MLB player or player that won't succeed at all, and one that DOES succeed, and becomes a star can be linked to their body of work in the minor leagues.
Are there variations? Sure....if you took statistics in high school or college, you learned about mean, median, mode, standard deviation, etc. So, the question becomes, why are statistics so important in baseball, and why are they so revered?
Baseball is a game of failure. If you succeed 30% of the time in getting a hit, you're a star. But if you're just 5% off that, you're considered average, or even below average hitter. So why does that 5% matter so much? Well, it matters, because over the course of the last 133 years (since 1876), they have an entire book of stats, showing the most successful players and teams, and we have all of those statistics to show why certain players are worth more than others.
I don't know why I have to keep battling you about this, defending my integrity with my statistical analyses, but apparently I have to bring it down to a kindergarten level with you consistently.
You're even so unbelievably WRONG about the Josh Hamilton situation. The Cubs had room on their roster. They were searching for an alternative in the OF that could play both a corner spot, and possibly CF, because they were openly unsatisfied with Jacque Jones--both his offense AND poor arm in the OF. The Rule 5 Draft happened December 7, 2006, and Floyd was signed January 24, 2007. Hamilton was widely panned as a risk/reward situation, and the best player in the Rule 5 Draft that year. But was he really a risk? Let's just say his demons came back to haunt him, and he got suspended, etc., how much money would you be out? The answer is, the $50,000 Rule 5 fee paid to the Rays, and you wouldn't even be on the hook for a guaranteed MLB deal or anything because of the clause written in the contract. Also, keep in mind that it was simply drug issues he was dealing with, and not being a bad teammate, etc. At the time, we had Soriano, Pie, Jones, Murton, and Angel Pagan in our OF. At the time, Soriano was expected to be our CF, but he had difficulty in ST handling it and was moved to LF. Murton was nothing more than a LF, Pie was a CF, Pagan was all over, and Jones was a CF with a wimpy arm playing in RF. Floyd was nothing more than a LF, and had limited experience in RF. Thus, there was a log-jam created. Hendry at the time bemoaned lack of versatility, which is why he went out and got DeRosa in the first place, and his OF soon became crowded and not very versatile. Hamilton had a cannon in the OF, and was known to have a HUGE bat, when he wasn't high on drugs. He'd been clean, the league cleared him, and he had a good support group already in place.
Riddle me this Paul k....if the waiver claim was $50,000, and he didn't pan out in ST either b/c of a relapse, or due to lack of production/proof that he could handle MLB pitching, then what's the worst thing that could happen? You'd actually either be out 50k, or 25k, depending if the other team took him back, which is actually less than the Cubs were out this ST when they signed Bako, and had to pay 200k buyout.
You might say, "well, the Cubs had a logjam, and he never would've seen the field." My response to you is that we had the logjam, and still signed Cliff Floyd for $3 million plus incentives and a 2nd year option...Did he see the field? You bet he did.
In fact, the Reds had a logjam of their own. The had Dunn in LF, Norris Hopper and Ryan Freel in CF, plus Griffey Jr. in RF. They still found a way to ease him into playing time, didn't they?
If you want to disagree with me, that's fine, but don't question my integrity, or the work I put into the research. If you have anything brilliant to add, do it then. If you want to prove something, back it up....but all you're doing is exactly what you accused me of----you're just stating an opinion without backing anything up
Hey Aaron, I just want you to know...that while I don't always agree with you (Dunn, Dunn, and Dunn)...I do know you put a lot of work into your research...and I really, really do appreach it...I couldn't do it to the degree you do.
I have a cousin that has season tix
to the Red Sox (and Patriots).
One summer, when we were kids...(before computers and after TV) He decided he would watch every Red Sox game and keep complete statistics himself...by hand.
I don't think he missed a thing...statistically speaking of course.
So I have the ultimate respect...just not the mind or desire to spend that type of time...Thankyou.
So you simply look at numbers and compare them to find a difference or to support your hypotheses. Sorry to tell you but you are wasting your time. Mean, mode, standard deviation are just the begining of analysis. There are formulas and calculations that can tell you how well the data you have can predict future results let alone their significance. Corelation is a statistical term that carries a heavy meaning and can only be derermined through certain calculations. I doubt you perform anything other than calculating an average.
I guess I went to an advanced elementary school that taught me these things and not to believe someone just because he types the most.
Yes, I see what you are talking about Aaron. We've seen it for a long time. And just think, we get Marlon Byrd next...for 3 years! I don't really have the time or energy right now to make a list of the all the Cubs OF (and $$) since 2003 would be interesting, or should I say frustrating...surely depressing.
It seems Mark Prior is throwing again ... maybe we sign him up. Kidding ...
Don't laugh, that's just the type of minor league deal Hendry might try to pull later in the off season.
You could do a lot worse than signing Mark Prior to a minor league deal...granted they keep him in the minors until he starts showing the old stuff, and don't bring him up earlier
I second this. Prior isn't going to demand a whole lot with his track record - money wise - and his upside is.. well.. we know what his upside is. If it was a $200k minor league deal, I'd do it. That is if he would do it. He seemed to have reservations about jetting out of Chicago the last time.
im genuinly scared shitless that Aramis Ramirez will opt out..
I say we trade bradley for kerry wood
it will help our bullpen, and our chemistry
For everyone that has issues with Granderson:
He is 29. Still in his prime. Talk of platooning him does not matter. Our struggles in the playoffs were because of what reason - lack of lefty presence in the lineup.
Think about this, how many lefty starters do we face in the NL Central? Cards don't have one, Brewers currently have one that our Single A team could hit. The Astros have what Wandy Rodriguez. If we get to the playoffs, we face the Dodgers again who don't have any lefties, since Wolf is probably leaving. The Phillies have Cliff Lee now that could potentially be the only problem with Granderson. We might face Johan Santana once during the season. Granderson gets a rest day, during the season.
The whole platoon thing for a left handed hitter is being blown way out of proportion.
Granderson brings us a five tool player which we were supposed to have in Patterson and Pie.
Here is an idea also, Sterlin Castro could be up at some point in 2010. So if we were to make a deal for say Phillips to play second, that means Theriot would be sent to the bench. Why not let him get some time in spring training in center? He has the wheels to patrol out there. That would give us an option to play him in center on Granderson's days off and not lose speed in the lineup - this being after Castro comes up of course.
Any thoughts???
Woody, all things being equal...Crawford would be our best addition...in the outfield...IMO/
I am neither for or against Granderson...how's that for a fence sitter?...as a player I like him...if he is part of the Milton trade...by all means.
I like him much better tan Byrd...it's all going to depend on the deal with any of these guys.
I don't think Theriot has the arm.
How often if it happened, would Theriot actually play center? Maybe once a month, twice a month? I would have to believe that if Theriot has the arm to play shortstop, he has the arm to play center field. We are not asking for Ichiro type cannon in center field.
Woody, I applaud your creativity...not many people would think of putting Theriot in CF. Do you think the Cubs would?...Given the current management?
If we opened with Phillips at 2nd/Theriot at ss with Castro coming up
midseason...What I imagine the actual scenario would be that Castro/Theriot platoon ss and Theriot would also see time backing up 2nd...until he was traded.
It's not out of the realm of possibility
that Theriot would be traded to acquire Phillips or Granderson either...as part of your scenario.
(In which case the Cubs would probably open with a platoon of Blanco and Barnes
at ss until Castro was ready.)
I guess we can't ignore Miles since it is also his listed position...But I'm hoping against hope he won't be with the team.
I'm sorry, the backup outfielders we had last year had a strange rotation....I don't see Theriot in that vein...no statistics to support it...just personal opinion.
Woody...you're trying to have your cake and eat it too.....and I don't blame you.
I like Riot too.
Woodster,
I'm not against Granderson either, but he's going to cost you players, GOOD players. Not too mention, you want to get Brandon Philips.
Who are you planning to dangle for these 2 guys ? Miles and Fontenot ? :-)
And please don't list 6 medicore AA guys... nobody wants quantity. To get studs like Philips and Granderson, you're going to have give up quality. That means guys like Vitters and Castro just to START the conversation.
As I much as I think Phil Rogers is an idiot, he's probably right on one thing....Marmol would probably be one of the guys that Tigers would want, and there's NO WAY you give up him.
He's a difference maker.....you don't give up 26 year old difference makers.
What a great Day@!!!!! ED LYNCH IS GONE!
That ding-fod traded for the losingest pitcher in MLB HISTORY, and then went out and hired the losingest manager (W-L %) in MLB HISTORY!! Was it any surprise that the Cubs continued to lose under his "management?"
Face it, people: the Cubs have had the dumbest GMs known to man. Unfortunately that tradition continues today. JHendry hired Dave Littlefield to head up the Cubs' minor league scouting!!
Theriot in CF is Juan Pierre, same crappy arm, less speed and OBP.
I just do not see the Crawford deal, didn't the Rays just re-up with him? I like Crawford, BUT, he would cost more than Granderson (in talent and $$) and i don't know if he's really worth it. Curtis is 28 and has 4 full seasons, Carl is 27 with 7 full seasons. Just looking at the their 162 game averages they are essentially the same in doubles, triples and RBI. Carl obviously far out ranks in SB with and avg of 54 to 16. But Curtis far out weighs in HR 25 to 13. RBI is dead heat at 75, not bad for leadoff hitters. Curtis Ks more but also walks more. Their avg/obp/slg/ops lines: Curtis- .272/.344/.484/.828 Carl- .295/.335/.437/.772
So even with the higher K totals, Curtis gets on at a little better clip, and has the power (still building) that Crawford has never developed, and won't. I'll take run production over SB any day.
cco - Aaron and I discussed the other night what it might take to get Granderson and Phillips. Detroit is looking for a cheaper better hitting catcher for Laird.
Our proposed deal was Soto, Bradley, and midlevel pitching prospect for Granderson and Laird.
We then flip Laird, Vitters, and mid level prospect for Phillips.
We run with Hill as starter at catcher, with Castillo or Clevenger getting a backup job for 2010. Instant upgrades at second and center, and will not cost us too much, but both of the other teams are getting plenty of talent to make fair deals.
Woody...I like that plan...But watch what the Cubs do re roster spots and protection for the rule 5 draft.
If the Cubs don't protect Clevenger,
we may lose him.
Suzy, the date clubs must file their reserve lists is November 20. In other words, any eligible players not added to the Cubs 40-man roster by the deadline can be taken in the Rule V Draft on December 10 (last day of the winter meetings).
I would look for Gaub, Parker and Castillo to be added. I think they like Clevenger and he needs more time. I do not think a club would risk taking him.
Remember like David Patton, the team that takes Clevenger will have to keep him on the active roster, or have him fake an injury, for the entire season.
That might be a little tough for a team to do with a catcher.
I also think Marcos Mateo will be placed on waivers, likely already has, and once he clears will be assigned to the minors.
That is another spot on the 40-man that will be cleared.
Jim Leyland made it pretty clear last year that he doesn't want Bradley anywhere near his clubhouse. But, I like the thinking guys. Do you think they could up the ante by adding Marshall + something better than midlevel pitching (don't know who) to get Edwin Jackson coming back this way too? I didn't realize he was only 26.
At any rate, the upgrade in young, talented, production in Granderson and Phillips would be completely worth Marshall, Soto, et al.
I like it.
Woody, I really like that proposal. I would do that deal in a heartbeat.
Marlon Byrd's career stats,
60 HR in 8 total seasons,
Career .270 average.
Career .340 OBP
Career 41 SB
Hit 10+ HR 3 times in 8 seasons.
This is so putrid, its not funny... This guy is a COMPLETE BUM!
correction -- career .279 avg.. sign him immediately
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/byrdma01.shtml
baron..Cotto or Pac?
Tough one to call Agustin... I think Cotto might have a little too much behind his punches, but its going to be a great fight
I agree!