Tell Me Where I'm Wrong

[DanTown]

You expect him to cut his K rate down 8.5% in an off season at 22? Russell doesn't have a track record of being a strong walker either above single A. This is the majors. The minors numbers can almost be thrown out the window. Russell also didn't get better as the year wore on with K's. He stayed pretty constant. Also, .350 OBP if he cuts down the K's? No, he had a 8% walk rate this year. Those K's would have to turn into hits which wasn't his strong suit either. Russell may be a leadoff hitter one day, but he is not there. Castro K rate is almost half of Russells. He doesn't walk as much, but yet again, neither of them walk much. Castro 3.6 walk rate last year will rise. He has stayed at 5% for most of his career. I am not advocating for Castro to lead off because I hope we add someone to do that. But, if we are staying in house, then Russell is in no way near ready for the spot.

Anthony Rizzo age 21 in SD: 30.1% k rate
Anthony Rizzo age 22 in Chicago: 16.8% k rate

It's not surprising at all for guys to fast track through the minors then struggle with SO at an early age in the MLB. Russell bat and swing never projected to be a guy with high SO and to judge a rookie 21 year old as a high SO guy has proven to be wrong before time and time again with guys who don't have those types of swings. I don't know if he's ready to be a lead-off hitter but the Cubs FA will tell us the answer to that question. I think I'd rather have Grienke/Price and Russell leading off (who had a higher OBP than Castro with more walks) then signing a lesser pitcher and paying for a lead-off hitter.

 

[DJMoore_is_fat]

Every single source I've heard except for Gordon Wittenmyer thinks $150 mil is about right give or take. I don't think they'll exceed that though and that number has to include some bench guys and pen arms.

Oh really? Thought I read $130M. So with projected arbitration numbers, would that leave us with about $40M in flexibility?

 

[85Bears]

...Why don't the Cubs just declare right now that the next 5-7 years they are the most dominate team on the planet?

here's how I would say that

...

And that would complete my worst nightmare as a White Sox fan. So why not make the nightmare a reality?

Your proposal gives me a serious pitching boner. On paper I'm not sure a better top 4 had ever been assembled. Cubs appeal or no Cubs appeal, I doubt Price and Greinke would sacrifice that much cash just to be here. MAYBE Price. Plus you've tied up a HUGE amount of money in 4 guys. If injury strikes, the Cubs are now the laughing stock of MLB.

You say this would be your worst nightmare as a Sox fan. Yes I know there's been a huge cross-town rivalry since forever, but in my opinion it's kind of stupid. I'm a Cubs fan, but I don't hate the Sox. Only time it would matter to me is if both teams made the same WS. And if that ever happened...well, Chicago would never be the same. The city would probably be hung over until Bears season...

 

[CSF77]

I would agree for the most part, but Joe likes to run. I don't see a guy he can out in the spot that can run. Castro and Russell are terrible at swiping bags. Bryant would be an ideal guy, but you wouldn't want to kill his RBI potential. Its interesting. Joe isn't very conventional so who knows what he is thinking. Also, I know for a fact the Cubs use computerized programs for lineups. I believe Maddon said he has his own theorem when making the lineup that is put in place. So, who knows. It was also reported that when Renteria was here that the FO did the lineup by computer and he didn't have much say.

That's why when they target guys you look at baserunning ability not speed

 

[brett05]

On paper I'm not sure a better top 4 had ever been assembled. Cubs appeal or no Cubs appeal, I doubt Price and Greinke would sacrifice that much cash just to be here. MAYBE Price. Plus you've tied up a HUGE amount of money in 4 guys. If injury strikes, the Cubs are now the laughing stock of MLB.

With four horses you can afford an injury and back fill if needed. It would have to be an epic string of tragic injuries to really cause harm.

 

[Bear Pride]

...Why don't the Cubs just declare right now that the next 5-7 years they are the most dominate team on the planet?

here's how I would say that.

I'd trade no one. Keep every single guy on the current roster and every single minor leaguer. Bring Grienke and Price in a room and say, look. The time is now. We want a two for one deal. We want you both at $25 million for the next six seasons. You'll be added to Lester and Jake. Jake we are going to sign up after the 2016 season to the same deal of $25 million for the next six. You've seen the offense. We got enough there and they are only going to get better. It's time to make history. And We aren't talking about just winning a World Series. That's the main piece of history, but Zach/David, let's make people stop talking about the Braves of the 90's, the Mets of the 80's and the Orioles of the 70s forever. You can be the four horseman. And with all that'll happen, the endorsement train will go farther than the eye can see. The Team and the Players get it all. They get the wins, they get the money, and they get the history. Fear will strike everyone even before the series starts. It'll start when they see the Cubs on their schedule.

It still keeps the payroll under $170 million and if you back load the deals it could be a little less. Then in five years you'll know if any of the pitchers panned out from the minors. You'll have more minor league hitters to offer as trade pieces to get younger pitchers at that point too.

And that would complete my worst nightmare as a White Sox fan. So why not make the nightmare a reality?

Nice post Brett. I was having this thought the other day. Why do we need to trade away our talent. The Cubs showed off an embarrassment of riches this year for position players. Why not just add two dominant pitchers to that mix?

I have to admit, I was struggling who would start at which slot with those 4 guys. They all have pretty good pitching mechanics, so I wouldn't be too concerned with injuries. The Cubs would also still have a pretty deep bullpen.

I bet they would get some veteran players that would want to join the ride and fill in some depth spots as well. The Cubs have a lot of guys under team control now, so why not spend now. Why mess with the great chemistry the Cubs displayed as well by trading/adding too many players?

And lastly, the Cubs still have some young studs coming up from the Minors, starting with the best C prospect in MLB in Contreras. Giving Maddon a R-L-R-L combo of pitchers that all are CY Young type quality is a recipe for 110 wins, imo.

I like the idea, myself!

 

[SilenceS]

Anthony Rizzo age 21 in SD: 30.1% k rate
Anthony Rizzo age 22 in Chicago: 16.8% k rate

It's not surprising at all for guys to fast track through the minors then struggle with SO at an early age in the MLB. Russell bat and swing never projected to be a guy with high SO and to judge a rookie 21 year old as a high SO guy has proven to be wrong before time and time again with guys who don't have those types of swings. I don't know if he's ready to be a lead-off hitter but the Cubs FA will tell us the answer to that question. I think I'd rather have Grienke/Price and Russell leading off (who had a higher OBP than Castro with more walks) then signing a lesser pitcher and paying for a lead-off hitter.

A couple of things, I did not say he could not improve but your comparison to Rizzo is laughable. Why? Rizzo completely changed his stance and some mechanics. Rizzo could not hit a fastball over 95 with the Padres. He came to the Cubs and moved over the plate. Opened his stance more and dropped his hands which was a huge reason he was striking out. This is Anthony Rizzo as a Padre.

[video=youtube;Fdr_K9Hs1_4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fdr_K9Hs1_4[/video]

It is a significant difference. Also, Rizzo at 21 played part of a season and didn't have the sample to start to even out.

Russell struck out 14, 34,26,17,25,27,6 and 3 times out of 12 at bats in the playoffs. That is his month to month strikeout total. It was consistent and no growth towards the end of the season. That tells me that its going to be a little while before he drops it down. Its either he has a lot of work to do or he was trying to be a power hitter and that didn't work out well either. Either way, Rizzo and him are not a good comparison because I believe comparing players to other players does absolutely nothing. they are each individuals that have faults that need to be adjusted to succeed. Some do it and some don't. This is the majors. Everyone is super talented and everyone has a big time skill set.

Also, you keep talking about the walking? OBP does not care if it is a walk or a hit. Its getting on base. Castro had an extremely low BABIP for him and Russells was 30 plus points higher with the higher walk rate and his OBP was .307. Castro's was .296 but has proven to be able to stay in the .330 range. Yet again, I am not advocating for Castro to lead off but no way should Russell get the reigns either. Neither of them can steal bases either and Russell has some learning to do on the base paths just like Castro.

 

[Boobaby1]

Nice post Brett. I was having this thought the other day. Why do we need to trade away our talent. The Cubs showed off an embarrassment of riches this year for position players. Why not just add two dominant pitchers to that mix?

I have to admit, I was struggling who would start at which slot with those 4 guys. They all have pretty good pitching mechanics, so I wouldn't be too concerned with injuries. The Cubs would also still have a pretty deep bullpen.

I bet they would get some veteran players that would want to join the ride and fill in some depth spots as well. The Cubs have a lot of guys under team control now, so why not spend now. Why mess with the great chemistry the Cubs displayed as well by trading/adding too many players?

And lastly, the Cubs still have some young studs coming up from the Minors, starting with the best C prospect in MLB in Contreras. Giving Maddon a R-L-R-L combo of pitchers that all are CY Young type quality is a recipe for 110 wins, imo.

I like the idea, myself!

Don't the Cubs need to address the strikeout issues too? They aren't going to drastically cut them down by the maturation process.

It's great to have that "one swing of the bat could change things" team, but I'd prefer to address all of the weakness.

Granted, pitching may be at the top of the list, but it is still not the only thing.

They need to go back to the three R's in elementary.

Rotation, Runners getting on, and relief.

 

[SilenceS]

Nice post Brett. I was having this thought the other day. Why do we need to trade away our talent. The Cubs showed off an embarrassment of riches this year for position players. Why not just add two dominant pitchers to that mix?

I have to admit, I was struggling who would start at which slot with those 4 guys. They all have pretty good pitching mechanics, so I wouldn't be too concerned with injuries. The Cubs would also still have a pretty deep bullpen.

I bet they would get some veteran players that would want to join the ride and fill in some depth spots as well. The Cubs have a lot of guys under team control now, so why not spend now. Why mess with the great chemistry the Cubs displayed as well by trading/adding too many players?

And lastly, the Cubs still have some young studs coming up from the Minors, starting with the best C prospect in MLB in Contreras. Giving Maddon a R-L-R-L combo of pitchers that all are CY Young type quality is a recipe for 110 wins, imo.

I like the idea, myself!

Contreras is not the best catching prospect in baseball and people need to pump the brakes on him and let him show more than one year. People have him penciled in as the starter for the next 10 years. Ive seen him crash before and want to see if his adjustments are real. He also isn't complete behind the plate. He can throw runners out, but still has issues receiving the ball and would like to see him in the dirt with the nasty MLB pitches because they are different animals from AA.

 

[SilenceS]

Don't the Cubs need to address the strikeout issues too? They aren't going to drastically cut them down by the maturation process.

It's great to have that "one swing of the bat could change things" team, but I'd prefer to address all of the weakness.

Granted, pitching may be at the top of the list, but it is still not the only thing.

They need to go back to the three R's in elementary.

Rotation, Runners getting on, and relief.

The Cubs were 12th in OBP. That wasn't an issue. They will get better at that as well. The problem was RISP they ranked 3rd to last in the majors and were 24th with RISP with less than two outs. A lot of that has to do with young kids trying to go deep instead of putting the ball in play. The Cubs need to tinker with the team. People seem to want to gut it.

 

[knoxville7]

Contreras is not the best catching prospect in baseball and people need to pump the brakes on him and let him show more than one year. People have him penciled in as the starter for the next 10 years. Ive seen him crash before and want to see if his adjustments are real. He also isn't complete behind the plate. He can throw runners out, but still has issues receiving the ball and would like to see him in the dirt with the nasty MLB pitches because they are different animals from AA.

this. cubs fans seem to forget a guy named geo soto that everyone thought was going to be our catcher for 10+ years due to one good year. let the kid keep playing and work his way through the system before anointing him just yet

 

[CSF77]

Soto had a few good years and his D improved every year. His flaw was hitting vs RH pitching. Splits were plain bad

 

[CSF77]

On C. Non issue. Montero is under control for a while. Ross retires this year. Conteres will be in AAA ready to back up Montero in 2017. Really a non issue here. Gives him time to learn from a pro.

I'm not factoring Schwarber into this. Unless he just turns into this soft handed strong game caller at best he is a emergency 3 string.

 

[CSF77]

The Cubs were 12th in OBP. That wasn't an issue. They will get better at that as well. The problem was RISP they ranked 3rd to last in the majors and were 24th with RISP with less than two outs. A lot of that has to do with young kids trying to go deep instead of putting the ball in play. The Cubs need to tinker with the team. People seem to want to gut it.

That is a reason why I would like to see contact guys hitting in RBI spots. Put the ball into play more.

 

[SilenceS]

That is a reason why I would like to see contact guys hitting in RBI spots. Put the ball into play more.

I agree to an extent. These kids are your money players. They need to learn what to do in situations and only experience will give them that. Frankly, I think people are making to big of a deal of the NLCS. the team all year struggled when Rizzo and Bryant didn't hit. They hit very little all playoffs. Hopefully, that is just an anomaly and not a trend.

 

[CSF77]

More so Rizzo than Bryant.

I'm still in the opinion of leading off with Rizzo. A bad year is .350 OBA with him. Solid base running etc. keep Castro lower in the line up. If they decide to trade Baez and get a CF look for a high contact type to split up the bats.

 

[Boobaby1]

The Cubs were 12th in OBP. That wasn't an issue. They will get better at that as well. The problem was RISP they ranked 3rd to last in the majors and were 24th with RISP with less than two outs. A lot of that has to do with young kids trying to go deep instead of putting the ball in play. The Cubs need to tinker with the team. People seem to want to gut it.

The term "runners getting on" is meant that they strike out too much. The chances that a player makes it to first base after a strikeout are about 150-1.

A strikeout does nothing anytime. Sure they may get better, but they would have to overcome major obstacles to improve in that area substantially.

And gut it? No!

There is absolutely nothing wrong with picking up someone like Markakis if that is who they want to play right field in trade if they also target a pitcher n a package deal. He solves many issues. Well actually, both players would solve issues.

First off, markakis has won two GG's. Second, he struck out a grand total of 83 times and had 70 BB's with a .370 OBP.

Soler is projected to have 188 strikeouts if he had played a full season, with a .325 OBP.

Sure some of those strikeouts might come down with age, but if he nets you a pitcher (which they need), and a right fielder (which they would need also), I don't see how you can say that is gutting a team.

The object is to get much better all the way around, and if it means giving up a piece or two to do so, then you do it.

 

[Parade_Rain]

If anyone thinks that these young kids aren't going to examine their 2 strike approach and runners on approach and makes some changes, I have a bridge for sale.

 

[Parade_Rain]

The term "runners getting on" is meant that they strike out too much. The chances that a player makes it to first base after a strikeout are about 150-1.

A strikeout does nothing anytime. Sure they may get better, but they would have to overcome major obstacles to improve in that area substantially.

And gut it? No!

There is absolutely nothing wrong with picking up someone like Markakis if that is who they want to play right field in trade if they also target a pitcher n a package deal. He solves many issues. Well actually, both players would solve issues.

First off, markakis has won two GG's. Second, he struck out a grand total of 83 times and had 70 BB's with a .370 OBP.

Soler is projected to have 188 strikeouts if he had played a full season, with a .325 OBP.

Sure some of those strikeouts might come down with age, but if he nets you a pitcher (which they need), and a right fielder (which they would need also), I don't see how you can say that is gutting a team.

The object is to get much better all the way around, and if it means giving up a piece or two to do so, then you do it.

It's disingenuous to use Soler's K stats as one and project for next year. The half splits are much different.

 

[brett05]

If anyone thinks that these young kids aren't going to examine their 2 strike approach and runners on approach and makes some changes, I have a bridge for sale.

How much are you asking?