| December 2003 archive |
 |
|
12.30.2003 |
HALL OF FAME
I've decided that the annual weirdness of the voting results for the Hall of Fame is due in large part to the timing of the vote-casting. The holiday season does strange things to people. Consumers spend hours waiting in long lines to buy gifts, only to have the recipient wait in equally long lines to return them. Extended families, including in-laws, voluntarily gather en-masse to often miserable effect. And sportswriters apparently forget all ability to objectively study their profession while drowning themselves in pools of Egg Nog, or Manischewitz, or champagne, or whatever their preferred holiday alcohol may be.
Around this time of year, the typical writer's argument for his or her ballot goes something like: "You gotta look beyond the stats when voting. You have to listen to your gut. That's why I think Player X is a Hall of Famer. He always seemed like a Hall of Fame player to me. Plus he once hit .350 in a 5-game postseason. That just says it all."
I'm not kidding. I see writers time and again write how they don't think so-and-so is a Hall of Famer because they just never got that "feeling" about the player. I have no idea how to counter this argument, other than to say it is utterly stupid. The "feeling" writers get during a player's playing days is more often than not a product of hype, whether or not that hype is deserved. A player who isn't particularly showy (think Trammell or Sandberg) doesn't generate much hype, hurting his chances for induction. Players with a lot of flash (think Puckett or Ozzie), but who are no more deserving of Cooperstown, have an easier chance of admission.
A further level of strangeness is found in the love/hate relationship voters have with statistics. Voters cry that the stats don't tell the entire story, which is true enough, but then point to completely misleading statistics when qualifying their vote. Or even worse, some writers will point to one game in a player's career as evidence that they belong in the Hall.
Here are some recent explanations voters have given for their votes:
"Jack Morris - See Game 7, 1991."
- Phil Rogers, Chicago Tribune
"Crunch the numbers any way you like. In the end, all you have is your instincts."
- Mike Downey, Chicago Tribune, in justifying his vote for Steve Garvey
"You study the statistics. You consider the competition. You weigh the worth of prospective Hall of Fame players against those baseball has already designated immortal. You ponder the intangibles and the imponderables - the impact of injuries, the biases of ballparks. But in the end, you vote your gut."
- Tim Sullivan, San Diego Union-Tribune
"And here's why (Jim Rice) gets my vote: in those 11 years he placed in the top five of the MVP voting six times, with finishes of first, third, third, fourth, fourth and fifth.
- The normally sensible Tom Verducci, SI.com
Well, boys, if you want random stats and gut feelings, I can give them to you. Mickey Mantle only drove in more than 100 runs in a season four times in his career, or one season fewer than Andres Galarraga. Joe DiMaggio finished his career with 2214 hits, or 40 hits fewer than Willie McGee. Nolan Ryan never won a Cy Young award, but Mark Davis and Pete Vuckovich did. Does anyone think Andres, Willie, Mark, and Pete were the better players? Of course not. But these are the kinds of arguments made time and time again for and against players.
In the end, I don't think most of the Hall of Fame choices are really all that difficult. Standards have been set over the past decades for each position, and the only debates are when a player sits at the edge of those standards, or when a player is completely unique (such as Eckersley this year). I do some research each year, and then confidently and without apprehension tick off the names on my imaginary ballot.
Maybe I'll write something up about Sandberg one of these days, since he's the most relevant player to this blog. But for now, I'm going to keep it simple.
So here, without explanation, is my ballot, presented in order of what I deem to be the player's worthiness:
Bert Blyleven
Paul Molitor
Ryne Sandberg
Dennis Eckersley
Alan Trammell
Goose Gossage
|
|
posted by alex at 02:52 PM | comments (6) |
|
12.29.2003 |
OFF-TOPIC TOLKIEN
Not exactly "ball talk", I know, but a masterfully funny review of the third movie in a trilogy I've enjoyed quite a lot. Found here.
|
|
posted by alex at 11:47 AM | comments (0) |
|
12.28.2003 |
BACK FROM INDIANA
Happy Holidays. A week off from the blog, but now I'm back at it.
I spent Christmas with my family in our hometown of Evansville, Indiana. Evansville, in the south of the state, is Cardinals territory, and has even produced some fine baseball talent. Yankee fans will know it as Don Mattingly's stomping ground (my mother, an elementary school teacher, once had a parent-teacher conference with Don). Die-hard Cardinals fans might even know that the Benes brothers grew up there (Andy and Alan's mom was my first piano teacher). Residents of Evansville might not live and breath baseball, but Hoosiers be damned, southern Indiana has more than just a passing interest in the sport.
So it came as little surprise that on the plane ride home I felt a tap on my leg while reading a baseball publication. "Are you a baseball fan?" Indeed, I replied, I am. Conversation followed, in which the tapper proffered disgust at my being a Cubs fan (he, of course, for the Cardinals) but nonetheless enthusiastically predicted next year's RBI totals for about twenty players. A young man, he was struggling to get into sports broadcasting after spending his college years covering baseball and football in southern Illinois. And while constantly reaching across the aisle to slap my leg is most certainly not a recommended way to get in my good graces, our chat made the flight pass quickly.
While I was home, the biggest news was that nothing happened. Or, at least, almost nothing. In a move that had the entirety of Cubs Nation scratching its collective head, Todd Walker signed on to be the Cubs' "backup" second baseman. The signing is a coup. Walker is saying he's happy to play second fiddle, and he signed for less than Grudz, but his protestations are premature when two things are considered: Walker is left-handed, and Walker is better than the starting second baseman. In the end, I think Walker gets the majority of the playing time. A true platoon would actually make for a very nice composite second baseman, as Christian Ruzich points out here. Walker's addition may have surprised, but he upgrades both second base and the bench. It is yet another solid move in what is, so far, becoming a very good off-season for Jim Hendry.
|
|
posted by alex at 08:15 PM | comments (1) |
|
12.19.2003 |
AND HOLLANDSWORTH TOO
Last season the Cubs enacted Project Swashbuckler, bringing in a bounty of Pittsburgh Pirates at the trading deadline to help with the playoff run. This offseason has witnessed the launch of the Fishin' Mission, as Todd Hollandsworth has joined Derrek Lee from the Marlins. And though its doubtful, perhaps another certain Phormer Phish will land in Wrigleyville next year.
Enough with the silly puns. Hollandworth fits in as the Cubs' fourth outfielder. Like Kent Mercker, Hollandsworth's value is closely tied to how he is used. Todd may look like an O'Leary clone, but Todd's platoon split suggest he will be a nice left-handed addition to the bench, and will be very useful in spelling Moises Alou occasionally against right-handed pitchers:
3-year averages against RHP
AVG OBP SLG
Alou .277 .347 .456
Holland .298 .356 .505
Note: I'm not implying that Alou struggles against righties, just that if you're going to rest him it makes sense to do so against righties, since Hollandsworth hits them very well. Alou murders lefties, so he should play against them every chance he can.
The fourth outfielder is likely to be called on often this year, with a brittle Alou and a rehabbing Patterson set to start. Hollandsworth isn't really good enough to start regularly, since he can't hit lefties at all, but he's a pretty solid fourth guy, and $1 million isn't much at all to pay for his services. It's a good signing.
The outfielders are now set, though I could see either Dubois or Kelton making the team as a backup first baseman/outfielder. The only really unfortunate thing about having Hollandsworth as the fourth outfielder is that he isn't a true centerfielder, though he has played there off and on through his entire career. Patterson will most likely need some breathers in the early going, and with Hollandsworth capable but unlikely to play centerfield under Dusty, it could mean seeing a lot of Tommy Boy Goodwin in April and May.
Oh dear.
|
|
posted by alex at 07:07 PM | comments (1) |
MISSIN' AUGIE ALREADY
AU-GIE AU-GIE AU-GIE
Too bad Augie Ojeda was claimed off waivers last month.
Yesterday the Cubs signed Bill Selby to a minor-league contract, and today they traded for Jose Macias. Presumably the two will battle for a backup infielding spot.
If Hendry wanted a crappy-hitting utility infielder on the team, why not just hang on to Ojeda? At least Augie provided some cheer in the stands at Wrigley...
|
|
posted by alex at 02:15 PM | comments (0) |
CUBS ADD MERCKER
A couple days ago I was pretty dismissive of Kent Mercker as a potential bullpen option, using the word "ewww" to enunciate my thoughts on him. On closer examination, I might have been a bit hasty with my condemnation. I think Mercker actually has some value out of the bullpen if used correctly.
And since the Cubs signed him yesterday to a one-year, $1,200,000 contract, I'm trying to look on the bright side.
As opposed to Remlinger and Guthrie, Mercker is a lefty that actual shows a normal lefty-righty platoon split:
3-YEAR AVERAGES
OPS vs left OPS vs right
Remlinger .790 .570
Guthrie .712 .679
Mercker .722 .892
This should make Dusty's job a little easier at least, since Baker didn't seem to understand last year that Veres was his best option against tough lefties, just as Remlinger was best against righties. Hopefully, Mercker will only be used against lefties, since right-handed hitters clobber him.
On the surface Mercker had a really nice year last year, posting a 1.95 ERA in 55 innings. Warning signs are there, though: he walks a ton of batters, gives up more fly balls than grounders, and was very hit-lucky last year (given average luck, or an average defense, he'd have given up quite a few more hits than he actually did).
I'd expect an ERA in the upper threes next year. A little higher if Dusty uses him against righties as well, and little lower if used in an extreme platoon role.
|
|
posted by alex at 10:48 AM | comments (0) |
|
12.17.2003 |
BARRETT
So call me less than impressed that the Cubs have acquired Michael Barrett as a potential catcher option. If this had happened last offseason, I would have been very pleased, as it looked like Barrett was coming into his own: he was a 25 year-old, inexpensive, athletic catcher who was developing some home-run pop and improving his plate discipline:
YEAR AB HR BB AVG OBP SLG
2000 271 1 23 .214 .277 .288
2001 472 6 25 .250 .289 .367
2002 376 12 40 .263 .332 .418
Unfortunately, injuries and ineffectiveness hounded his 2003 season, and he had a miserable year which now clouds his future:
YEAR AB HR BB AVG OBP SLG
2003 226 10 21 .208 .280 .398
The good news is that the collapse is due completely to losing 60 points of batting average. Barrett's walk rate didn't change significantly, his power actually increased a touch, and his strikeout rate even improved a bit.
The bad news is, of course, that a .280 OBP is still super-sucky, no matter what the other indicators say.
The Cubs aren't necessarily keeping Barrett. If they can't reach an agreement before Saturday's contract-tendering deadline, Barrett will likely be dropped from the roster. If they do agree to a contract (hopefully below Damian Miller's $3,000,000 due), reports say they'll ship Miller to Oakland as the PTBNL.
Of course, all this ignores the fact that Barrett and Miller are basically the same player. Granted, Barrett is younger and offers a bit more upside, but if the Cubs are looking for an upgrade, he really isn't it. Even Barrett is aware of the irony of being traded for his older clone:
I obviously don't have the Pudge Rodriguez talent but I can contribute the same as a Mike Lieberthal (of the Phillies) and Damian Miller. I think the guy I compare to the most is the guy I'm competing for a job in Spring Training, and that's Damian Miller.
Except you won't be competing against Miller, buddy. It's either you or him. And, really, who can tell the difference?
|
|
posted by alex at 02:30 PM | comments (2) |
CRUZ CONTROL
Just looking at a Baseball America email update containing boxscores from the Dominican Winter League. It appears a certain someone in our 'pen seems to be trying to get some notice:
IP H R ER BB K
Juan Cruz 7.0 1 0 0 2 10
Not too shabby.
|
|
posted by alex at 01:08 PM | comments (0) |
|
12.15.2003 |
SZUMINSKI TO PADRES
Jason Szuminski just turned 25 four days ago. He also changed teams twice today.
The Cubs lost righty reliever Szuminksi in today's Rule 5 draft to the Royals, who subsequently traded him to the Padres.
Szuminski improved his command this year and zoomed all the way up to the Iowa ballclub. He drew some notice in the Arizona Fall League this year, especially when Peter Gammons wrote up this tidbit in his notes column:
We have a new favorite prospect out of the Arizona Fall League -- Jason Szuminski, a 24-year-old reliever who was 7-4, 2.26 ERA with a 45/19 K/BB ratio at West Tennessee. He's a favorite not because one scout says Szuminski "has one of the best sinkers I've seen all year," but because Szuminski went to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Indeed, he got his BS in aerospace engineering from MIT in 2000. Bet he can start a lot of aerospace engineering conversations in those minor-league bullpens.
Rule 5 picks have to stick on a team's 25-man roster or be returned to the original club for a small amount of cash. As was the case with last year's selection of Jason Dubois by the Blue Jays, Szuminski could easily end up back in Cubbie blue come the spring.
|
|
posted by alex at 02:18 PM | comments (0) |
SPIEZIO OFF MARKET
The Mariners have done the Cubs a small favor and taken Scott Spiezio off the market, signing him to a 3-year deal worth 9 million.
Spiezio will either be an incredibly expensive bench-player or a pretty weak-hitting starting third baseman for the Mariners. I'm figuring the latter. He's a fine short-term solution, but why sign him for three years?
The guys at U.S.S Mariner have more stuff to say from their perspective.
At any rate, no loss.
|
|
posted by alex at 01:51 PM | comments (1) |
NOTES AND STUFF
Some notes on some names that have been associated with the Cubs the past few days:
Ivan Rodriguez
According to I-Rod's new agent and spokesperson, the Cubs' postseason nemesis would like to roost in Chicago next year.
Rodriguez would obviously be a huge offensive upgrade on Miller or Bako, but I just don't understand where the money to sign him would come from. And then what do you do with Miller? He would be traded, but I doubt any team would want to take on his salary without throwing a small albatross the Cubs' way.
Todd Hollandsworth
It seems Hollandsworth might be the heir apparent to Troy O'Leary as the left-handed fourth outfielder. As I mentioned a couple weeks ago, the fourth outfielder is going to be very important to the Cubs next year, and I think Lew Ford would be a perfect choice. Todd woudn't be a disaster, but he's also would not be much of an upgrade over O'Leary.
Hollandsworth and O'Leary have been remarkably similar offensive players through their careers:
CAREER NUMBERS
AVG OBP SLG OPS
Hollandsworth .276 .333 .442 .774
O'Leary .274 .332 .448 .780
Now Todd had a better season last year than Troy, and is a few years younger, so he has a few things going for him. He also can play some center field (last year was the first year in his career he failed to do so), so that's another point in his favor. All in all, he wouldn't be a bad signing -- I just think the Cubs could find someone cheaper and better in a player like Ford.
Scott Spiezio
Spiezio would presumably be targeted to back up first base, and maybe even a bit of third and the outfield. Spiezio has been a full-time player the past three years, so backing up durable types like Aramis Ramirez and Derrek Lee would be a huge cut in playing time for him. Spiezio is an excellent-fielding first baseman, has some doubles power, but I'm not sure why the Cubs would go after him. Kelton and/or Dubois would offer the same position insurance as Spiezio at a cheaper price, and with significantly more upside.
Scott Sauerbeck and Ricardo Rincon
These two lefty relievers are cut from similar cloths. They're both thirty-somethings coming from smart teams (and in Sauerbeck's case, still currently with his team). I'm sure Oakland (Rincon) and Boston (Sauerbeck) liked the relievers' strikeout-rates (both high), liked their aversion to allowing home runs (both very low), thought they walked a few too many last year, and think they're going to be a bit too expensive this year. And they would be a expensive for the Cubs to acquire -- not only would they get their millions in salary, but the Cubs would have to give up a draft pick for Rincon or some talent for Sauerbeck.
These are two pretty good lefties, though, and an acquisition of either would complete the bullpen and ensure the Cubs that they, and not Houston, would have the premiere 'pen in the Central next year.
Ron Villone and Kent Mercker
The Cubs are supposedly considering these two as cheaper alternatives to Sauerbeck or Rincon (or Gabe White, another lefty possibility).
Ewww.
Villone's been dodgy since, well, forever, but he really hasn't had a decent year since 1996. Mercker had a shocking 1.95 ERA last year, but he's not that good: he walks loads of people, gives up a fair number of bombs, and he's coming off four years with ERAs of 5.07, 4.80, 6.52 and 6.14.
I'll pass on both, thank you. Why exactly did we drop Guthrie, again?
Glendon Rusch
Rusch was a walking disaster last year, finishing the year at 1-12 with a 6.42 ERA. He still strikes out a lot of batters, but that's the only good sign I see. His control, once a real asset, has gotten progressively worse:
BB/9
2000 2.08
2001 2.16
2002 3.25
2003 3.28
Despite this, I actually think he offers more hope than either Villone or Mercker. I'm just not sure what role he would play on the team. He's not good enough to be the Cubs' fifth starter, and he gives up way too many home runs to be an effective situational reliever. It's strange, I've always kind of liked Rusch, but it just doesn't look like things are going to work out for him in the big leagues.
|
|
posted by alex at 12:13 AM | comments (2) |
|
12.13.2003 |
BRING ON THE LEFTIES
The NL Central has spent the last few years as a division without impact lefty starters, but this past week has seen that change rapidly. First, with the signing of Pettitte. And now, with the Cardinals' acquisition of Jason Marquis.
Actually, though, Marquis is much more likely to "impact" the division in the way Sean Estes did last year:
YEAR IP SO/9 BB/9 ERA
2000 23 6.56 4.63 5.01
2001 129 6.82 4.11 3.48
2002 114 6.61 3.86 5.04
2003 40 4.20 3.98 5.53
Other than a nice ERA in 2001, Marquis has been pretty awful in the majors. Marquis' strikeout rate was solid from 2000-2002, but completely fell off this past year. And he's always had horrid control. Being only 25, Jason has some time to work out his problems, but I don't really see any reason to believe he'll do so. You might've had a hard time convincing me to trade Marrero for Marquis in a one-for-one swap, let alone adding in Drew.
With all the usual caveats about his health (and those are, granted, HUGE caveats), J.D. Drew is clearly the best player to change hands in this trade. He's still youngish, and when he plays, he plays very well. His career .282/.377/.498 line will go a long way to easing the loss of Gary Sheffield, and at age 28, he'll be beginning his prime next year.
The key to the deal, of course, isn't Drew, Marquis, Marrero, or Ray King (who is a nice reliever), but 22 year-old righty Adam Wainwright. Baseball America just ranked Wainwright the Braves' number three prospect, a year after ranking him the Braves' number one prospect -- but that has more to do with the ascension of Andy Marte and Jeff Francoeur than any knock against Wainwright. He's looked very good the past two years:
YEAR ERA IP BB SO
2002 3.31 163 66 167
2003 3.37 150 37 128
Wainwright immediately becomes the Cards' best prospect, not that they really had any to begin with. I'm guessing he'll see some action in St Louis next year, though he won't start the year with the team.
So while Wainwright looks like a great prospect pickup for the Cards, it still begs the question: why did Atlanta trade him? Atlanta simply never trades away young pitchers that turn into stars. At least I can't think of any -- can anyone out there? (and no Ruben Quevedo jokes, please.)
|
|
posted by alex at 05:00 PM | comments (3) |
|
12.10.2003 |
DEFINING AN ACE
ESPN is reporting that Andy Pettitte is close to signing with the Astros. Towards the end of the article, they include this tidbit:
Barring a snag, Pettitte would give the Astros a bona fide No. 1 starting pitcher they haven't had in several years.
This is a rather bizarre statement. Last time I looked, Roy Oswalt looked pretty ace-ish to me. Oswalt is an injury risk, but when healthy he is without a doubt one of the premiere pitchers in the game, something I wouldn't say of Pettitte.
Pettitte is obviously a very good pitcher, and his lifetime ERA of 3.94 is due in part to playing behind a crappy defense for a groundball pitcher, but he's never seemed more than a number 2 starter to me. And with Wade Miller on the staff, I think Andy is even fighting for that designation.
But if this trade goes through, I think it would not only shock the hell out of the Eastern Seaboard, but would also help make the 'Stros a mighty force in the NL Central next year. We'll have to wait and see if the reports are true.
|
|
posted by alex at 09:27 PM | comments (4) |
HEAR THEM TIGERS GROWL
Apparently upset that they missed out on joining the 120-loss society last year, the Tigers just signed Fernando Vina to a two-year contract worth 6 million dollars.
Not only is this a humiliating signing for the Tigers, but it is another feather in Jim Hendry's cap, who got a better player (Grudz) for cheaper (2.5 mil) for a shorter period (only one year guaranteed).
|
|
posted by alex at 12:43 PM | comments (2) |
|
12.9.2003 |
PIZZA FEED
Both Chicago and New York lay claim to having famously good pizza. I call New York home, and just spent a fun-filled weekend in Chicago scarfing down pizza on no fewer than four, count 'em, four occasions. So I feel eminently qualified to pronounce my judgment. Which is:
Both cities, in general, produce so-so pizza.
The best (american-style) pizza I've had to date actually came from a small craphole in the Southern Indiana town I grew up in. It included sauerkraut and artichokes among its pile of toppings, which may sound gross to you, but is in fact yummy.
At any rate, I attended the Baseball Prospectus pizza feed last Saturday, where the pizza was solid but the company was extraordinary. This particular feed featured a mock "Winter Meetings". Everyone was assigned a current Major League roster with an imperative to trade with other teams, sign free agents, and stay under budget -- all while building a better team. BP will likely be posting some commentary on the event in the near future.
Since I was a late-comer, I was assigned the role of Player SuperAgent©, representing all players "I" through "M". My group was very strong, and included Millwood, Maddux, Kim, Lofton, Lopez and Matsui.
This was a BP crowd, though, so the rush was for the "bargain" million-dollar players. Other than for Kim, I received surprisingly few bids on my big names. Maddux got only two offers, and one of those was a 2-year, 4 mil per package from the Expos. Egads. Javy Lopez only had one offer all afternoon, and that was to re-sign with Atlanta for 2 years, 12 million total.
So I spent the majority of my time peddling the likes of Lidle, Kapler, Lincoln, Ligtenberg, and Travis Lee (!). Which is all fun and good, but I was wondering at times throughout the event if the obsession with getting bargain platoon-type players was a bit overblown.
Of course it isn't good to overpay for a guy like Greg Maddux, but he's still Greg Maddux! I'd rather have Maddux on my team next year than 90% of the pitchers who were signed before him. And before San Diego swooped in at the last minute and dropped a serious chunk of change into his lap, most other teams could have had him for a price significantly lower much earlier in the day.
Regardless, I was really impressed with the teams that the "GMs for a day" ended up with. The GMs were under a lot of time pressure (3 hours), but every team had a least a couple very solid moves. My first impression was that the Dodgers were ridiculously talented, but I'd have to take a look at the final rosters again before coming to any hard conclusions.
Here's how I fared as an agent. (Some names below were free agents due to being non-tendered):
PLAYER TEAM CONTRACT
Jimenez Rockies 2 yr, 3 mil
Kapler Brewers 1 yr, 1 mil
Karros Yankees 1 yr, 500k
Kim Mariners 3 yr, 16 mil guaranteed
Lee, Travis Pirates 2 yr, 3.5 mil
Lidle Red Sox 3 yr, 9.6 mil
Ligtenberg Brewers 1 yr, 1.5 mil
Lima Indians 1 yr, 1.25 mil
Lincoln Mets 1 yr, 500k
Lofton Marlins 1 yr, 1.5 mil
Lopez Braves 2 yr, 12 mil
Maddux Padres 3 yr, 27 mil
Matsui Dodgers 3 yr, 24 mil (beats the Mets' offer)
Mesa Rockies 1 yr, 1 mil (Mesa in Coors. Tasty.)
Mientkiewicz Dodgers 3 yr, 5.5 mil
Millwood Cardinals 4 yr, 42 mil
Mondesi Mets 1 yr, 500k (a bargain, but ewww)
Myers Rockies 1 yr, 600k
I also got Mark Johnson (the Catcher) signed for 400k, but can't remember who he went to.
|
|
posted by alex at 05:57 PM | comments (3) |
|
12.8.2003 |
NEW CONTRACTS
I'm back home in Brooklyn, having spent the weekend in Chicago. I even got to attend all of the Chicago pizza feed, which I'll have more on later.
10,000 things happened while I was away, though the biggest news for the Cubs was the re-signing of Grudz and Goodwin.
I've gone on at length about my desire for the Cubs to go after Vidro, but after the Yanks nabbed Vazquez and it became apparent the Expos weren't going to keep Vlad, it looks like the 'Spos will be able to keep Vidro for the near future, at least.
With that knowledge, I think Grudz was a satisfactory option, especially considering that it looked for a while like Hendry was going to pick Vina up. Mark had a nice year last year (his VORP last year was, believe it or not, at Ray Durham's level and just a few notches below Jeff Kent), but I wouldn't be surprised to see him slip closer to his 2002 levels of .271/.301 /.364, which would be, well, Vina-like.
There were a couple of other options out there, including Todd Walker, Ronnie Belliard, Jerry Hairston (via trade), and (possibly non-tendered) Adam Kennedy, but none of the four are all that likely to offer much more next year, and only Hairston has a notable upside. Grudz's contract was relatively cheap at 2.5 mil, and the Cubs own the option, so I think Hendry made a completely rational, if uninspired, decision.
The Goodwin signing I'm less thrilled about, but I really am not gonna get bent out of shape about it. Goodwin had a nice average as a pinch-hitter last year (.345) and is a very good basestealer. Unfortunately, Goodwin has stopped drawing walks, and never has hit with any power. But he's the 5th outfielder, and there are worse 5th guys out there.
The lineup is basically set for Hendry now, with the 5th starter being a priority, followed by a 4th outfielder. Catcher is the obvious lineup hole that is feasible to be replaced, though I don't see the Cubs pursuing Pudge. If the Pirates picked up half the contract, I'd actually rather have Kendall for the next few years at 5-6 mil a year. Kendall would be a big offensive upgrade on Miller, and would solve the leadoff problem as well. Hendry has already shown, by trading Choi for Lee, that he can surprise people with a move when faced with an opportunity he suddenly finds available, so maybe he has a trick or two up his sleeve.
|
|
posted by alex at 06:14 PM | comments (2) |
|
12.4.2003 |
MY KIND OF TOWN
I'm flying off this afternoon to visit a friend who's is undergoing chemo in Chicago, so wish both me and her luck. I'll try to poke in and post if some significant Cubbie news happens, and will be back Monday.
While I'm in Chi-town, I'm hoping to stop by Saturday's Pizza Feed for a couple hours. So if any of my few (but extraordinary!) readers happen to be attending, be sure to say hi.
I'll be the fey one who's fabulously dressed and humming Barbra and Cher.
OK, not really.
|
|
posted by alex at 02:24 PM | comments (1) |
THE 2004 CUBS, PART V: THE BENCH AND FINAL ROSTER
Alrighty. My version of the 2004 Cubs is almost complete. We're close, but we still need two outfielders and two infielders to complete our roster.
The fourth outfielder is going to be very important to the Cubs next year. Corey Patterson is coming off a tricky injury, so the 4th guy needs to be able to man centerfield. And Alou and Sosa aren't exactly iron men, so the fourth guy will also need to be good enough to start regularly.
Re-signing Kenny Lofton would make a lot of sense, but there are a few issues that would arise from his signing:
a) Even if Patterson comes back full strength, Lofton will eat into Corey's playing (and development) time under Baker.
b) Lofton signed at a bargain price of a million the past two years, but this year the Yanks are apparently interested, so his price will likely rise.
c) We have basically no money left in our budget.
Thankfully, though, there's a team out there with a glut of outfielders, the supporting cast of whom could probably be had for fairly cheap: the Minnesota Twins. And they have the perfect cheap, fourth outfielder for the Cubs in Mr. Lew Ford.
Ford is a 27yo speedy outfielder who gets on base, hits for a little power, and can handle all three outfield positions. He hit ..329/.402/.575 with the Twins in 80 PA last year, and while that line is way over what should be expected, his minor league numbers have been very strong in the recent past:
AVG OBP SLG
2002 AA .311 .401 .515
2002 AAA .332 .390 .487
2003 AAA .303 .357 .450
His speed disappeared last year (only 6/11 in SB attempts), but he'd been a premiere basestealer up to that point, stealing 28/34 in 2002, and a whopping 52/56 back in 2000. And I think he could be had for B-level talent. He'd cost the minimum, so for now we'll tally him up for 300k.
The other outfield guy should be a lefty-hitting corner guy with some patience and pop. Matt Stairs would be perfect, and I'd grab him in a second if I could get him under a million, but I'm guessing some smart team (or maybe the Royals!) is going to pounce and pay a lot more than that. John Vander Wal is old, but he is kind of Stairs-lite, and I'll take him for 500k.
We need a backup firstbaseman/leftfielder, and have two internal options. Jason Dubois and David Kelton can battle it out in spring training, and the winner stays on the roster, the loser sent to AAA. I'm guessing Dubois wins. Another 300k.
Someone besides Ramon to man the infield positions would be nice. I'll wait for Geoff Blum to be non-tendered, then sign him for 700k. Blum, while useless when taking time from Morgan Ensberg, is just fine in a utility role. If Blum doesn't work out, I'll sign Tony Graffanino for 800k. If neither of those options are viable, I'll give NRIs to Brent Butler and Jermaine Clarke, and maybe one of those two will be okay.
Alright, so my final tally is now set at $87,950,000, which is more than I wanted to spend, but certainly not too much to ask for from my Cubbies.
And the final roster looks like this:
STARTING PITCHERS
Prior - R 2.100
Wood - R 10.000
Zambrano - R 1.0
Clement - R 6.0
Batista - R 3.5
BULLPEN
Borowski - R .800
Farnsworth - R 1.200
Remlinger - L 3.550
Stewart - L .500
Ligtenberg - R .800
Wellemeyer - R .300
LINEUP
Vidro - S 7.000
Alou - R 9.500
Sosa - R 16.000
Lee - R 6.500
Patterson - L .600
Ramirez - R 6.000
A-Gonz - R 5.500
Miller - R 3.000
BENCH
Bako - L .900
Ford - R .300
Martinez - R 1.500
Dubois - R .300
Vander Wal - L .600
Blum - S .700
This is still a team with weaknesses, but it is a very strong team. The starting pitching is awesome, and the simple switch of Batista-for-Estes could mean a swing of as many as 4 wins on balance. The 'pen is fine, and is much more cost effective than last year's while being at least as performance effective. The lineup arrangement is not ideal, and I've played around with switching Alou and Patterson, especially considering Alou's propensity for the groundball. I think Patterson's high SLG, low OBP approach is better suited to the 5th or 6th spot, and I like how he breaks up the righties. Even with its faults, this lineup features significantly more power and OBP than last year's opening day lineup, and should be fairly strong offensively. Finally, the bench is affordable and flexible. It could stand to have one more lefty on it, but Ford hit righties better than lefties in the brief time he has been in the majors, so that's a good sign at least.
So all in all, those are my moves this offseason. This isn't a powerhouse team, but is a very good team that is crippled in part by the bad contracts given Alou, Gonzalez, and Miller (18 million combined). Nevertheless, this is a 2004 Cubs team that is a threat to go very far into the postseason, and maybe even bring back a championship.
|
|
posted by alex at 01:53 PM | comments (2) |
DAMN YANKEES
Javier Vazquez is simply awesome, and now it looks like he's joining my least favorite team.
Myself a New Yorker, I don't feel too bad about getting irritated at the local team and the legions of rabid fans around the city. Plus, I live in Brooklyn, not the Bronx.
But my somewhat irrational biases aside, this deal does have some significance to the Cubs: unless the Expos are putting together a miracle campaign to keep Vlad, it seems reasonable that Vidro will be off the trade market. Or at least that the Expos will no longer feel any urgency to unload him.
|
|
posted by alex at 01:29 PM | comments (0) |
WHAT'S THAT OBP STAT MEAN, ANYWAY?
The Cubs just announced that they've created a new position to focus on "player statistics and salaries".
The Trib reports, however, that the Cubs have been quick to make sure no one thinks they're getting all SABR on us:
Hendry stressed the new position was not akin to Boston's hiring of statistician Bill James in its front office last year.
The eyes of the Cubs' scouts will override any computer printout of numbers.
"I'm more of an old-school scouts' guy," Hendry said. "But Chuck brings a lot of information to me to help augment our baseball guys' information."
It'll be interesting to see what effect, if any, this hiring has on the team's scouting and signing of players. Hopefully the guy chosen to fill the position, Chuck Wasserstrom, can write up a quick report on why signing Vina would be a really, really bad idea.
Wasserstrom has been the media relations director the past couple years. A quick googling of him didn't reveal much of interest, except this humorous anecdote from a Jayson Stark column a few seasons ago:
They say you can't beat that computer age, but the Cubs and Brewers did Monday. Milwaukee's Kevin Barker was able to go from first to third when Cubs pitcher Jon Lieber threw ball four to Henry Blanco, and the ball got by catcher Joe Girardi. But when Cubs media-information whiz Chuck Wasserstrom tried to input a walk-passed ball into the official computer log of the proceedings, he got a message saying that combination of events did not exist. Yeah? Tell it to the Cubs, Hal.
|
|
posted by alex at 01:15 PM | comments (0) |
|
12.3.2003 |
THE 2004 CUBS, PART IV: THE BULLPEN
I wrote all of my columns exploring possibilities for the 2004 Cubs last Sunday, knowing full well that Hendry could shake some things up and throw my plans for a loop. With yesterday's signing of LaTroy Hawkins, that's exactly what happened. And to add to the quandary, today's column is specifically on the bullpen, something LaTroy's presence affects mightily.
However, since I'm working within the guidelines of a specific budget, and am already almost finished with my posts anyway, I'm going to pretend that the Cubs didn't sign Hawkins last night, and continue to tell you my plan for the Cubs future, circa November 30th, 2003.
------------
I don't understand what the fuss is about regarding the Cubs' bullpen. It wasn't a strength last year, but it also wasn't terrible either. Borowski was awesome, and Farnsworth -- despite everyone's whining about him -- was really very excellent. Remlinger was just a notch above okay, but those three form a very solid core for any bullpen. Given an improved offense and continued domination from the starting pitching, I think the bullpen will be just fine with a few minor acquisitions.
Throwing 8 million at Keith Foulke or 4-5 mil at LaTroy Hawkins isn't going to make the Cubs 100-game winners, just as throwing millions at now-departed Alfonseca, Veres, and Guthrie did little good. This is where the bargain shopping begins.
Since I've traded Cruz and picked up Scott Stewart, I'm looking for only two guys -- a righty setup type and a long reliever. Here are some options for the setup guy:
1) LaTroy Hawkins. I was super-high on him until I heard he was looking for 4-5 million a year. He's the best guy out there, but no thanks at that price. (EDITOR'S NOTE: Can I really be my own editor? At any rate, LaTroy signed for less than was rumored. This no longer makes him overpriced, simply too expensive for my budget)
2) Scott Sullivan, Paul Quantrill, Mike DeJean. These are "proven" relievers who actually are pretty good. I would sign any of the three for 2 years, 1.5 million per. However, I'm guessing none of them would stoop to that price.
3) Antonio Osuna, Kerry Ligtenberg. They carry their risks, but could likely be had for under a million, and could be effective pitchers to slot in behind Farnsworth in the 'pen.
4) 6-year free agent bonanza. Joey Dawley, Brad Clontz, Travis Driskill. I'd invite them all to camp no matter who I signed, as they'd have a chance to perform well if Dusty would venture to give them a try. Thanks to Aaron Gleeman's informative article for turning me on to these guys, among others.
5) Joe Borowski. This would, of course, mean getting a new closer and moving Joe into the setup role, which wouldn't be bad at all. However, closers on the free agent market generally command more than setup men, so it doesn't really make sense to pursue this option.
I'm going to figure that LaTroy is too expensive, and the threesome in number 2 above aren't happy about my "meager" contract offers. So I'll take my chances with a Kerry Ligtenberg type at, say, 800k, and have a few NRIs sitting in AAA to come up if need be.
As far as long relievers go, I think it should be Wellemeyer's job to lose. He's cheap, and Dusty doesn't use his eleventh man very often anyway, so I don't think there is much to lose. Mitre, Webb, and Smyth are also internal options, though I think Mitre could use some more seasoning, Webb was traded to Montreal in my deal for Vidro, and Smyth just isn't very good.
So I completed the bullpen by adding only $1.1 million in salary, and it should be comparable to last year's, if not better by Alfonseca-attrition alone. We're now at $86,150,000 (geez this is hard). I'll fill in the remaining bench slots, including the relatively important fourth outfielder, in my fifth and final column...
|
|
posted by alex at 05:08 PM | comments (0) |
OLD HAUNTS
There is one player out there that few Cubs fans can have a rational reaction to. One player whose name can immediately evoke feelings of disappointment, disillusionment, and grief. One player, who above all others, makes me want to cry when I think about what could have been.
Greg Maddux.
For over a decade now, Cubs fans have plotted a Maddux reunion at Wrigley. And all these years, Maddux has seemed about as interested in us as he is in Roger Clemens' workout regime.
And now, as his days are fading, he has the audacity to say:
"It'd be kind of cool to finish up where you started and all of that. I could see that. It kind of cleans everything up."
And with that one, short quote, I can feel the tears welling up in my eyes.
|
|
posted by alex at 01:57 PM | comments (3) |
|
12.2.2003 |
CUBS SIGN HAWKINS
The Cubs just signed LaTroy Hawkins to a 3-year, $11 million contract.
I have very mixed feelings about this:
1) LaTroy was one of the two best free agent relievers on the market (Foulke being the other). Signing him greatly improves the bullpen.
2) The Cubs got him for significantly less that the rumored price of 15 million. This is good.
3) 3.5 million / yr is still a lot to pay a reliever, no matter how many millions other lesser relievers are getting paid.
4) Despite the grumblings, the bullpen wasn't all that bad, and certainly wasn't the biggest problem the Cubs had last year. That problem would be the hackaway, OBP-phobic offense. Money should be going towards this problem instead.
And my number one reason for having mixed feelings?
5) I wrote my damn comments on how to rebuild the Cubs' bullpen 3 days ago, and now I have to edit them before posting tomorrow morning.
If the Cubs' budget is higher than I'm thinking it is, and they can still spend money on upgrading the offense, then this really does improve the team.
However.
If improving the pitching in the 8th inning of every other game means that in EVERY inning of EVERY game we send to the plate a lesser offense, this deal is not good news.
So, as with many things, the verdict is TBD.
|
|
posted by alex at 10:36 PM | comments (2) |
PLAYSTATION PRIOR
So a couple weeks ago I finally wilted under the pressure of working in an office filled with techie types and their toys, and I bought a PS2.
I wasn't a video game kid in the 80s, and I didn't have access to a computer until college, so the entire console gaming thing kinda blows me away.
At any rate, I picked up World Series Baseball 2K3, which was the highest-rated baseball game on IGN. I got it primarily because of the roster management tools -- you sign and develop draft picks, hire coaches and managers to work on your player's skills, and work out contract extensions for your current 25-man team.
I've been playing the Cubs. Duh. Prior is the ace of my staff (He is one of the few pitchers with an A+ potential rating, so he keeps getting better), but he's currently in his walk year. In trying to resign him in-season (something his agent informed me he had no interest in doing), I apparently pissed him off, and now he won't even talk to me.
Needless to say,
I'm crushed.
|
|
posted by alex at 08:18 PM | comments (1) |
THE 2004 CUBS, PART III: ANOTHER STARTER
The Cubs need a fifth starter. In fact, no team in baseball would have benefitted more from a decent fifth starter last year than the Cubs. Sean Estes' SNWAR (Support-Neutral Wins Above Replacement-Level, a measure of how a pitcher compares to a AAA-level callup) of -1.8 was the third worst in all of baseball, and Estes was the only pitcher from a contender to finish in the bottom ten.
So the good news is that this is the easiest position to upgrade, and even better news is that it shouldn't cost the Cubs an arm and a leg to do so.
While dreams of Pettitte, Millwood, or Vazquez are nice, they aren't practical given the Cubs' budget. This is fine, though, as there are four options out there that I'd pursue.
In order:
1) Miguel Batista. Batista had a fantastic year last year, and has now had a very nice three-year run in Arizona. His K-rate was a solid 6.49/9, his control has improved the past few years, and he doesn't give up many homeruns, despite pitching in a slight homerun ballpark. His component ERA (his expected ERA -- as opposed to actual ERA -- based on stats like hits, homers, etc) the past three years has been 3.43, 3.45, and 3.77. I'd try to sign him for a 3-million a year, and would probably end up with a package around 3 years, 10 million.
2) John Thomson. Thomson's been very solid for three years now, but has gone largely unnoticed. He doesn't K a lot of hitters, but has excellent control. His component ERAs the past 3 years have been 3.52 4.24, and 4.10, and the majority of that time was spent in the hitter's havens of Colorado and Texas. I'd see if he could be had for 2 years, 4 million.
3) Kenny Rogers/Rick Reed. Not inspiring choices, maybe, but solid fifth starters who can eat innings and have good control. Rogers got 2 million last year, but might be thinking about a raise after a solid season in Minnesota. He should think otherwise. I think either could offer a 4.5 ERA or so, which to me is worth a renewal of a Rogers-like contract, or $2 million for a year.
4) Wait and see. A pitcher like Hitchock may be had cheaply, and there will likely be some nice options who are non-tendered. Some potential candidates: Scott Schoeneweis, Freddy Garcia, and Tony Armas, Jr.
Note that I'm not paying any attention to whether or not a pitcher is right- or left-handed. Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn. Just give me a fifth starter who can pitch, and pitch well.
We'll say the Cubs luck out and land Batista for 3.5 a year. Where does this leave the budget? $85,050,000. Arghh. Already between the 85-90 million threshold, with 6 players left to sign. We'll start the bargain shopping next, when I take a look at the relief corps.
|
|
posted by alex at 12:12 PM | comments (4) |
CASTILLO SIGNS
Luis Castillo won't be in Cubbie blue next year, and at the price he signed for, I'm okay with that.
Is 3 years, 16 million really a hometown discount? Geez, I really don't want to know what the Cubs and Mets were offering.
I think that the vesting 4th-year option is going to bite the Marlins in the butt. It's based on plate appearances, and even if Castillo in the future isn't playing particulary well or not playing at 100%, he will continue to rack up huge PA totals in the next few years. I see the Marlins in 2007 paying over five million for a vintage Vina 2003 performance.
Still, this isn't such a bad signing overall, just a little costly, and I wouldn't have included an option that automatically vests. So now maybe the Cubs can pursue other avenues. Let's hope.
|
|
posted by alex at 11:51 AM | comments (0) |
|
12.1.2003 |
THE 2004 CUBS, PART II: SECOND BASE
This is the second part in my series about what the Cubs should do this offseason. Part One here.
Second base is the biggest hole the Cubs currently have, and one which the Cubs are apparently trying to fill right away. So this column may be moot by the time I finish writing it. So it goes.
Here are the options at second, as I see them:
1) Sign a "top tier" second baseman such as Luis Castillo or Todd Walker to an expensive 3-4 year contract.
2) Re-sign Grudz for about 2 million.
3) Sign some second baseman who's horrid with the bat, such as Vina or Sanchez, for about a million.
4) Wait for Aaron Boone and/or Adam Kennedy to be non-tendered.
5) Trade for an elite second bagger who is languishing with a franchise that can't afford him and doesn't even have a proper hometown.
As you might guess, I choose option five, with said second baseman being Jose Vidro. The other options at second simply aren't very tantalizing. Castillo would be okay at 3 million, but 5.5 million is too much for a guy with a career .722 OPS. Would his .381 OBP look good at the top of the order? Sure, but Vidro's .395 mark would look even better, plus Vidro hits for power. Castillo's speed is also worrisome: it is his modus operandi, and yet it is a skill that seems to be failing him, along with his baserunning instincts. Last year's horrid 21/40 stolen base rate is pretty disturbing.
Vidro would be expensive, both in terms of talent and cost, but I think he'd be worth it. Vidro has hit over .300 five years running, his walk rates have improved each of the last four, he doesn't K much, he's a switch-hitter, he hits for solid power, and I think he would make a wonderful father to any future children I might have. Okay, not really, but you get the point -- Vidro is one of my favorites.
And if you're a fan of Win Shares, then check this out:
WIN SHARES
'00 '01 '02 '03
Player A 25 18 29 19
Player B 29 23 29 18
Not too much separating the two, eh? Player A is Vidro, Player B is a teammate of his who gets a wee bit more press. Vladimir Guerrero.
As far as what to offer, I'd start with Juan Cruz, include a close-to-ready pitcher such as Francis Beltran or John Webb, and one of the elite arms in the system (though not an untouchable like Sisco or Guzman), maybe Ryu. If the 'Spos demanded a position player, I'd even consider sending them Brendan Harris (who I absolutely love, but that's how good I think Vidro is).
In return, I'd ask for Vidro and Scott Stewart. If I'm remembering correctly, Scott has some potential injury issues, but he's a) cheap, b) pretty good, and c) left-handed. He'd certainly be an acceptable risk for a left-hander to have in the pen behind Remlinger, and will come cheaper than the vast majority of free agent "proven" lefties Hendry might otherwise pursue. I'd also do the deal contingent on signing Vidro to a 3-year contract worth 24 million, with salaries of, say, 7, 8, and 9 million.
If Vidro didn't work out, my second option would actually be another trade, this time with Baltimore. I'd try to get Jerry Hairston, Jr., who is possibly expendable thanks to the presence of Brian Roberts. The Orioles will especially find themselves in a position to deal if they land one of the big-name shortstops, crowding their infield. Only if Hairston isn't available would I look at the free agents, and then I'd rather have Grudz (or a non-tendered Kennedy) for one year than invest in Castillo, unless Luis could be had at 3 million or so. But for now we'll pretend the Cubs have landed Vidro.
Budget? This is my biggest expenditure, and would total an addition of 7 million in salary (7 million for Vidro, .500 for Stewart, minus .500 for Cruz). We now sit at 81.550, leaving 4-8 million to sign 7 more players.
The next column will address priority number 2, the number five starter. The Cubs have quite a few options, some of whom are even left-handed...
|
|
posted by alex at 12:47 PM | comments (3) |
TRIVIA, ANSWERS
The answers to the trivia from the other day:
1) Who played the most games in the AL, and how many games did he play?
Hideki Matsui played in 163 games last season, thanks
to the official tie game between the Yanks and Orioles played on September
18th.
2) What AL hitter had the highest OBP out of the leadoff spot (min. 150 PA)?
Jerry Hairston Jr. had a .389 OBP out of the leadoff
spot. The AL leaders are a laundry list of relative unknowns: Aaron Guiel,
Reed Johnson, Tony Graffanino, and Chone Figgins are all in the top
seven.
3) Which AL catcher threw out the highest percentage of potential base
stealers (min 50 attempts)?
Toby Hall. Now we're just waiting for that offensive
breakout...
4) What NL hitter had the highest leadoff OBP (min. 150 PA)?
Marquis Grissom, .412 OBP. Not only is Grissom a
shocker, but he was the only leadoff hitter in MLB to post an OBP above .400.
5) What two pitchers share the same last name AND walked a combined 200
batters last year?
Carlos and Victor Zambrano. News wires also
annoyingly tend to get the two confused, though Carlos is a much better
pitcher.
6) What AL pitcher threw the most pitches per start?
Joel Piniero. Mark Prior, unsurprisingly, led the
NL. Why are such young pitchers being allowed to throw so many
pitches?
7) What AL relief pitcher was the best at keeping men off base (min 50 AB)?
Rafael Soriano, with a .224 Opponent's OBP. Largely
unsung this year, in part to just missing the cutoff for being a "rookie",
Soriano had an awesome year out of the Seattle 'pen.
8) What NL pitcher threw the most pitches under 80 MPH?
Hideo Nomo in a landslide, throwing 150 more under 80
MPH pitches than number two on the list, Mark Redman. We think of Nomo as a
premiere strikeout pitcher, but this is just a reminder that it isn't how
hard you throw the ball...
|
|
posted by alex at 09:50 AM | comments (0) |
|
|
|
