The 2010 Cubs Free Agent and Roster Moves Thread: SAVEENG OUR KUBBEEZ!!11

[Eli]

Get on Fukudome and Bradley.

We already know you irrationally dislike Bradley, but why would we "get on" Fukudome?  Have you been paying attention at all?  He's been great this year.

[Canadouche]

Get on Fukudome and Bradley.

We already know you irrationally dislike Bradley, but why would we "get on" Fukudome?  Have you been paying attention at all?  He's been great this year.

You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

.271 AVG, .387 OBP, .846 OPS, 10 homers, 44 RBI, 6 steals in 14 attempts, .171 AVG v. LHP = better than bad but way, way less than "great"

[Kermit, B.]

Get on Fukudome and Bradley.

We already know you irrationally dislike Bradley, but why would we "get on" Fukudome?  Have you been paying attention at all?  He's been great this year.

Fukudome stole Theriot's rightful leadoff spot for 22 games!

[Pre]

.271 AVG, .387 OBP, .846 OPS, 10 homers, 44 RBI, 6 steals in 14 attempts, .171 AVG v. LHP = better than bad but way, way less than "great"

Way to cherry pick some stats at the end to try and make your numbers
sound better.  117 OPS+, reasonable defense in CF (where he doesn't
belong).  That's somewhere between significantly above the average and
great.  I wouldn't argue against anything in that range.  Given the choice I'd
say he's well enough to justify his contract (this year).  A couple caught
stealings (and ignoring that Lou likes to hit-and-run Fukudome) isn't a fucking
counterbalance to a .387 OBP.

I don't think you can rationally blame Theriot for anything other than a) being
a total moron on the bases and b) playing for a team with a GM who makes
him play SS instead of 2B.

He's got minimal range, but he makes the plays he gets to.  UZR and such
puts him at about average.  That's probably about right if you think of all
the SSs around the majors.  And, he's hitting .300/.351/.409 at SS.  That's
great for a SS (a clarification for those of you who think 8 CS is a deal breaker
for players with a .387 OBP).  Hell, if you want to argue intangibles or whatever
instead of about rational actual player performance, he also seems to have a lot
of "smart" at bats spraying the ball which I enjoy watching.  He's not the
cornerstone of a championship at SS, but he's also a hell of a lot of value for
$400k (if you believe in fangraphs performance valuation, they put his
contribution as worth almost $13 million).

[R-V]

Since I think I started this whole mess with my JJ Hardy suggestion, let me point out that I wasn't trying to REPLACE Theriot, just move him to 2B. I think he's a fine hitter to have in the lineup. So getting all asshurt and firing up your Therinferiority/I hate objective measurements of players because I've played and watched a bunch of baseball complex probably wasn't necessary, Dave.

And Fukudome HAS been great this year if you consider the position he plays. I'm sure referencing the shut-ins at Fangraphs again will give some people the vapors, but going by their measures he's been the 4th best hitter and 9th best fielder among regular centerfielders. Unless Matt Kemp or Curtis Granderson is available, it's pretty dumb to criticize him.

[Canadouche]

.271 AVG, .387 OBP, .846 OPS, 10 homers, 44 RBI, 6 steals in 14 attempts, .171 AVG v. LHP = better than bad but way, way less than "great"

Way to cherry pick some stats at the end to try and make your numbers
sound better.  117 OPS+, reasonable defense in CF (where he doesn't
belong).  That's somewhere between significantly above the average and
great.  I wouldn't argue against anything in that range.  Given the choice I'd
say he's well enough to justify his contract (this year).  A couple caught
stealings (and ignoring that Lou likes to hit-and-run Fukudome) isn't a fucking
counterbalance to a .387 OBP.

It's not cherry picking ... I listed good with bad there.  Like I said, he's better than bad but calling Fukudome "great" for having an above average OBP and good defensive skills is a bit of a stretch.  I'd go as far as to say "good" if not bordering on "very good," perhaps even "mostly awesome," but great?  He can't hit lefties and I'm not really sure his numbers justify an eight-figure a year contract.  

[ChuckD]

"Unabashed ignorance"? Because I think that Milton Bradley's failure to come close to his offensive performance of 2008 (or many of his other years where he actually played 100 games) is a contributing factor in the Cubs' dismal 2009 season?

Yes. Baseball, at it's most fundamental, is about getting on base (or, preventing the other team from doing so). As you well know, Bradley has been better at getting on base than any other Cub this year. That's not a good thing. That's a great thing. Yet, due to the persistent but antiquated notion that a corner outfielder needs to hit home runs, he's getting flak because his slugging percentage is down or he's not driving in runs or something. Admittedly, the decrease in power is slightly disappointing, but it's not completely unexpected. True, his ISO (SLG% - AVG) on the year falls below his career average. That's unfortunate, no doubt.

However, most people (including yourself, apparently) had unrealistic expectations for him based upon the aberrant production he put up last year. As IrishYeti (shockingly) noted earlier, Bradley was one of the luckiest hitters in baseball last year. This year, using the same model described in Yeti's article, Bradley's predicted BABIP is about .322. As of now, it's at .315, suggesting that his extremely lucky 2008 has gave way to a slightly unlucky 2009. But, he's adjusted by being patient, not forcing anything, and taking what opposing pitchers are giving to him. That's a very smart move on his part. I don't want to go sort through the game logs, but I seem to recall (based upon watching games with my eyes) that Bradley was pressing a bit early on in the year and trying to put the ball in play when he could've been taking walks.

Because I think that someone who got paid what he did should put some better offensive numbers other than OBP or draw walks?

Yes. Why do you care what the Cubs are paying him or any other baseball player for that matter? The market pays whatever the highest bidding team will bear. Hendry paid a premium price for the 2008 Milton Bradley when Bradley's career numbers suggested that something between the 2006/2007 version of Milton Bradley was the more probably commodity.

I wasn't a Bradley-basher to start with, but it's pretty obvious that he hasn't had close to the year they were expecting when they signed him.

And how. But is it Bradley's fault that Hendry expected him to have another career season?

For example: If I were to wager $100 that IrishYeti will make posts as enlightened as he has in this thread today for the next week. Whose fault is it when Yeti reverts to shitposting in Mom's Basement per usual?

Similarly, is it Bradley's fault that Piniella is a stalwart who made a similar mistake by looking at the inflated counting stats (hint hint) and penciled him in to a lineup spot that wasn't a good fit for Bradley's skill set? And is it Bradley's fault that Piniella refused to move him when it was exceedingly apparent that the middle of the order wasn't a good fit?

His injuries and offensive slump at mid-season forced the Cubs to play some lesser player in the OF in his absence/benching.

Slumps happen. Injuries happen. In fact, injuries were to be expected considering the clause included in Bradley's contract.

But, hell, this game's fun. Let's play it anyway with two players with whom we are intimately familiar (not that intimately!).

Between April 15 and June 17 (about one third of the season), Theriot had a slash line of .262/.316/.410/.725. During that time, he was hitting almost exclusively in the two spot. He had a lot of plate appearances. The Cubs went 24-29. What does that prove? Nothing, really. Theriot had a shitty two months and it coincided with a crappy stretch for the Cubs. Bradley went .258/.340/.406/.747 over the same stretch for what it's worth. Obviously, Bradley was the weak link in the chain. Let's rip him.

Bottom line, Bradley's Offensive Win% for this year (OWn%, a nerdy statistic that estimates the winning percentage for a hypothetical lineup comprised of the player in question) is .574. A winning percentage of .574 would result in a record of 93-69. So, even with the slump and the uncharacteristically awful year, Milton has the 11th best OWn% among starting right fielders. For comparison's sake, Theriot's OWn% is .526 for an estimated record of 85-77 (that's pretty good for a shortstop, by the way). Considering Theriot's above average defense (also shocking, I know), he's pretty good as far as shortstops go. Just don't tell the rest of these guys.

cntd...

[ChuckD]

Chuck D, I'll put up my baseball experience/knowledge against yours, any day, anywhere.

Slow down, big guy. I'll just admit that you have a larger penis. I haven't umpired high school baseball or listened to the SCORE on my drive to work or whatever it is that you claim as your ethos. Obviously I don't have any real world experience about playing baseball the right way. I'm just going off what the linear regressions say.

I don't come on this site to bash other commenters with some knee-jerk heckling just for the sake of riling somebody up. But if you call me ignorant, then I'm going to yap back.

Okay. But a spade's a spade. Feel free to yap back, I guess.

Milton Bradley's a good player who happens to be receiving more money than his production this down year warrants. You'd do well to remember that when the Cubs cut Theriot the $18mm/3 deal that his inflated production is worth. If next year Bradley reverts to career norms considering the progression due to age, he'll earn his check.

And his Bnmj8KHodf is down .231%. For fuck's sake, I'm sure you can pull up any number of these obscure stats to prove whatever point it is you want.

This is why you're ignorant. Also, didn't you just a few posts up say that "the stats don't lie"?

Bottom line: from the beginning, my point with Theriot is that he is a decent enough SS at 500K in this line-up that Cubs' management decided to put on the table. They've paid a shitload of money to the corner outfielders, corner infielders, and and starting rotation. You can't just go to the Shortstop Store and pull a Cal Ripken or Robin Yount off the shelf. And with all of the no-trade contracts and a shortage of bargaining chips at the minor league level, you just can't go out and trade for Hanley Ramirez.

Fair enough. I don't really mind Theriot, but by all means, continue to beat that Strawman.

Get on Geo Soto for coming back from his Rookie of the Year fat and stoned.

Or for turning back in to the pumpkin we always thought he was?

Get on Fukudome and Bradley.

lol no

Place the blame on injuries that have landed 3/5 of the rotation on the DL for at least 25 days apiece.

Consider them blamed! BLAME!@

Get on Soriano.

Okay, just don't tell Chuck or my real, non-Canadian girlfriend.

Bitch about the Four Horsemen they've had to play at second base. And get all over the shitfest known as the bullpen.

Truth.

But as John Hart said on WGN Radio last night, Theriot and D-Lee have been the only consistent good things about this offense the whole season. 

This, additionally, is why you're ignorant.

[Pre]

I'd go as far as to say "good" if not bordering on "very good," perhaps even "mostly awesome," but great?

I admit to being wrong.

In my original reply I had a really shitty comment about how I was sure you'd
backtrack from your ridiculous "way, way less than "great"" comment and try
and make this a semantic argument about adjectives and how I would rather
you go fuck yourself than try and regroup your idiocy.  Then I took it out because
I thought it was overly mean spirited.

I was wrong to remove that.  Fuck off and die.

[Canadouche]

I'd go as far as to say "good" if not bordering on "very good," perhaps even "mostly awesome," but great?

I admit to being wrong.

In my original reply I had a really shitty comment about how I was sure you'd
backtrack from your ridiculous "way, way less than "great"" comment and try
and make this a semantic argument about adjectives and how I would rather
you go fuck yourself than try and regroup your idiocy.  Then I took it out because
I thought it was overly mean spirited.

I was wrong to remove that.  Fuck off and die.

I won't fuck off and die but I will happily wait with baited breath while you try to justify your opinion that a guy who will never bat higher than .280 or hit more than 15 homeruns -- or for that matter drive in more than 80 RBI at the very most -- is "great" enough to justify a 14 million dollar a year contract.  Maybe only when compared with how terrible Bradley has been this year.  Think about it.  He's the center field equivalent of Mark Grace, hopefully without the compulsive Dubbs-like desire to bang fat chicks during the long months when he can't get his AVG over .200.  (Three times in his illustrious 11 months-so-far of playing baseball.)  

And I was being polite.  He's nowhere near mostly awesome.  But he is better than bad.

[PenFoe]

I'd go as far as to say "good" if not bordering on "very good," perhaps even "mostly awesome," but great?

I admit to being wrong.

In my original reply I had a really shitty comment about how I was sure you'd
backtrack from your ridiculous "way, way less than "great"" comment and try
and make this a semantic argument about adjectives and how I would rather
you go fuck yourself than try and regroup your idiocy.  Then I took it out because
I thought it was overly mean spirited.

I was wrong to remove that.  Fuck off and die.

I won't fuck off and die but I will happily wait with baited breath while you try to justify your opinion that a guy who will never bat higher than .280 or hit more than 15 homeruns -- or for that matter drive in more than 80 RBI at the very most -- is "great" enough to justify a 14 million dollar a year contract.  Maybe only when compared with how terrible Bradley has been this year.  Think about it.  He's the center field equivalent of Mark Grace, hopefully without the compulsive Dubbs-like desire to bang fat chicks during the long months when he can't get his AVG over .200.  (Three times in his illustrious 11 months-so-far of playing baseball.)  

And I was being polite.  He's nowhere near mostly awesome.  But he is better than bad.

Did he lead a decade in hits?

I didn't think so.

[ChuckD]

I'd go as far as to say "good" if not bordering on "very good," perhaps even "mostly awesome," but great?

I admit to being wrong.

In my original reply I had a really shitty comment about how I was sure you'd
backtrack from your ridiculous "way, way less than "great"" comment and try
and make this a semantic argument about adjectives and how I would rather
you go fuck yourself than try and regroup your idiocy.  Then I took it out because
I thought it was overly mean spirited.

I was wrong to remove that.  Fuck off and die.

I won't fuck off and die but I will happily wait with baited breath while you try to justify your opinion that a guy who will never bat higher than .280 or hit more than 15 homeruns -- or for that matter drive in more than 80 RBI at the very most -- is "great" enough to justify a 14 million dollar a year contract.  Maybe only when compared with how terrible Bradley has been this year.  Think about it.  He's the center field equivalent of Mark Grace, hopefully without the compulsive Dubbs-like desire to bang fat chicks during the long months when he can't get his AVG over .200.  (Three times in his illustrious 11 months-so-far of playing baseball.)  

And I was being polite.  He's nowhere near mostly awesome.  But he is better than bad.

Did he lead a decade in hits?

I didn't think so.

He'll never fare well in the Triple Crown categories.

[Canadouche]

I'd go as far as to say "good" if not bordering on "very good," perhaps even "mostly awesome," but great?

I admit to being wrong.

In my original reply I had a really shitty comment about how I was sure you'd
backtrack from your ridiculous "way, way less than "great"" comment and try
and make this a semantic argument about adjectives and how I would rather
you go fuck yourself than try and regroup your idiocy.  Then I took it out because
I thought it was overly mean spirited.

I was wrong to remove that.  Fuck off and die.

I won't fuck off and die but I will happily wait with baited breath while you try to justify your opinion that a guy who will never bat higher than .280 or hit more than 15 homeruns -- or for that matter drive in more than 80 RBI at the very most -- is "great" enough to justify a 14 million dollar a year contract.  Maybe only when compared with how terrible Bradley has been this year.  Think about it.  He's the center field equivalent of Mark Grace, hopefully without the compulsive Dubbs-like desire to bang fat chicks during the long months when he can't get his AVG over .200.  (Three times in his illustrious 11 months-so-far of playing baseball.)  

And I was being polite.  He's nowhere near mostly awesome.  But he is better than bad.

Did he lead a decade in hits?

I didn't think so.

Good point, PenFoe.  Fukudome will never come near Grace's career batting average.  I guess upon reflection he's like a defensively superior Brant Brown, circa 1998.  Who the Cubs are paying a ridiculous sum to employ.  Yay?

[Eli]

I really should have better considered my adjective use during the eight seconds it took me to write that earlier post. 

[Canadouche]

I really should have better considered my adjective use during the eight seconds it took me to write that earlier post. 

Naw, I'm just a douchebag.  You were still right and Dave B couldn't be more wrong if he was a birther at a Town Hall.