Nolasco homers in 9-1 Marlins’ pummeling of three-ring circus known as the Cubs
After yesterday’s astonishing come from behind victory (and believe me, overcoming a two-run deficit is a miraculous feat for the Cubs) the noxious nine traveled to Miami and promptly got toasted by those 11-31 Marlins. Sean Marshall struggled, and Michael Wuertz did his best to keep up the tradition of success at Iowa meaning nothing with the big league team by tossing a 2-run inning of relief. Aramis Ramirez hit his third homer in two games, although tonight’s blast was truly meaningless.
Obviously, Dandy Andy MacPhail has been on our minds lately, and like the generous soul he is, he has made a public appearance to address the Cubs’ woes. According to Mr. MacPhail the Cubs’ problems boil down to the young rotation and lack of production with runners in scoring position. In his own words:
“You just have to do better with runners in scoring position,” MacPhail said Monday before the Cubs’ game against the Florida Marlins. “It’s something they’re certainly aware of and certainly working on, we just have to continue it through into the game.”
Right on! That ol’ nemesis clutch hitting is the problem! Not the fact that the Cubs are last in just about every offensive statistic in the NL, including a team OBP of .300 and slugging percentage of .364 (although they are firmly entrenched in first place in GIDPs!). How could anyone have predicted that the team assembled for opening day would struggle to drive in runners who are sitting on the bench? Juan Pierre is on pace to drive in eight runs in over 600 at bats - Rany Jazayerli discussed this issue a few years back (free article). Our starting left fielder is in a truly monumental slump. It hasn’t been discussed much, but Murton has been awful all May. His approach at the plate has deteriorated, and he hasn’t had an extra base hit in almost a month. Ronny Cedeno has average 3.35 pitches per plate appearance, one of the lowest rates in the league. Our backup catcher can’t hit his way out of a thimble (you know you’re bad when an out only drops your batting average by a point and you’ve only got 39 ABs). Meanwhile, President MacPhail believes he has fingered the real problem with the offense.
Conservative Bill “I’d Bet My Shorts” Bennett wrote a screed a few years ago entitled “The Death of Outrage”. With the horrible quality of play on the field, let alone the renewed rumbling about Baker getting the extension he so richly doesn’t deserve and the clueless words that come out of MacPhail’s and Hendry’s mouths whenever they speak, it becomes difficult to make any kind of denunciation of this racket that hasn’t been uttered before. The outrage I have for this organization is withering into cynicism.
Luke Jasenosky
Posted: May 22, 2006 at 10:22 PM |
46 comment(s)
Related News:
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
overall: 245/301/364
runners on: 251/318/385
RISP: 232/311/373
RISP, 2 out: 136/240/247
close & late: 250/337/406 (opponents: 194/306/266)
God forbid ESPN would have leading off or nobody out splits!
Anyway, the RISP, 2-out numbers are bleak, but all those other ones are better than the overall numbers (though still bleak). If we'd "come through" in those RISP 2-out situations like we have overall, we might have 12-15 more runs!!
On the rotation, three of them have been doing just fine. The rest have stunk -- whether old (Rusch, Wood) or "young" (Hill is 26, Guzman and Williams 24). The bullpen has been fine and the important guys have been excellent.
And of course more of that frustrating rhetoric -- everyone is stinking it up therefore no one person is to blame therefore no one is accountable.
You can add another 5 games with just 1 run.
That's nearly half their games with 1 or fewer runs -- that's amazing.
13 of their 18 losses have been by more than 3 runs. At least other teams aren't racking up saves against us! :-)
For comparison, the Royals have only been shutout 4 times and scored 1 in 8. They have lost 15 by more than 3 runs. That's all season.
The Cubs' run differential is -62 runs. That's 28 runs worse than Washington, 25 runs worse than the Os, 23 runs worse than Pittsburgh, 21 runs worse than Florida, 11 runs worse than the Angels, 6 runs worse than the D-Rays. Thank god for the Royals.
We are now scoring fewer runs per game than the Royals. But that's not a fair comparison because they have the DH in that league. :-)
We've heard nothing but excuses and explanations for the past 3 years (if not for the past century). In early December, Jim Hendry said on public airwaves that 79 wins wasn't acceptable and wouldn't be acceptable as long as he's GM . . . and that was in a season where both Prior and Wood spent substantial time on the DL and they lost one of the team's best hitting stars in April.
This team is clearly not even going to meet that level, yet whenever the issue of change comes up, everyone in the Cubs organization consistently says "you can't blame (insert name) because of all the injuries." Here's MacPhail's latest version of this:
"We need to get at full strength and have everybody play to their accustomed level and see how we go from there and find out how good we can be."
Of course, if everyone was playing at what the organization figured to be "their accustomed level," there would be no need for change -- the team would be comfortably in first place. Meanwhile, hostilities would be over in Iraq and Osama bin Laden would be found and brought to justice. It ain't happening soon.
I thought the whole point of getting rid of a management team was because they aren't enabling their subordinates to perform at their optimal level. That isn't happening, hasn't happened in weeks, and doesn't appear to be happening anytime soon, yet we continue to hear this "wait and see" crap.
When will there actually be repercussions? I mean, beyond the punitive demotion of guys like Rich Hill, Jerome Williams, and Angel Guzman? When will the team do something that might actually address a real problem?
Dusty was brought here because he got the best out of his players, yet since he has been here the Cubs have been among the worstst fundamental teams in baseball, and from what I have seen, none of the boneheaded plays seem to be discussed with either the team as a whole or the player in question, as these problems continue to happen.
It is too late this year to do much to plug this stinkhole of a team, but to even consider an extension for should be a capital offense. This team needs to be blown up, starting with McFail, and ending with whoever coaches down in the Dominican Summer League.
The "let's make excuses for everyone" philosophy of this team needs to go, but that won't happen with this trio. It is a shame there is no accountability in this organization, and until there is, this team will continue ro flounder. Time for me to find a new team to watch, because I can't put up with this organization any more.
Although he is literally correct, as Walt points out, the second part of the quote is BS. You can't "work" on hitting better (than your expected norm) with RISP. The Cubs appear to simply be having bad luck in the timing of their hits. But McFail doesn't want to be appearing to blame bad luck, so he makes up the idea that they're working on it.
Well, that's what you and Walt think. Working on hitting with RISP might not be your way of getting out of a slump, but it IS the Solid, Slow and Unspectacular™ way. MacPhail estimates that with the proper drills and preparation, the Cubs should be coming out of this hitting slump some time around 2009.
Our starting left fielder is in a truly monumental slump. It hasn’t been discussed much, but Murton has been awful all May. His approach at the plate has deteriorated, and he hasn’t had an extra base hit in almost a month. Ronny Cedeno has average 3.35 pitches per plate appearance, one of the lowest rates in the league.
Should this be surprising in an organization that hasn't developed a star position prospect since the Reagan Administration? We all had (and still do, I suppose) hope that Murton was fundamentally strong enough to overcome the malaise which permeates every cubic inch of the Cubs clubhouse, but we have to look at the track record and be skeptical of that.
I'm not a Cubs fan by any stretch (White Sox fan), but the criticisms of this organization are becoming ridiculous. During the off-season, everyone around here ####### and moaned about how Dusty's love of Veteran Presence meant that Murton probably wouldn't get a chance to play. Apparently, everyone was wrong -- the Cubs play Murton everyday (he's been in 43 of the team's 44 games), he's just not that good. And THAT'S the team's fault as well?
Yes, Dusty's handling of Murton and of young players in general is causing the problem. With Murton specifically, through April, he was doing fine. Not much power yet, but a solid on-base percentage and he was going deep in counts. Meanwhile, every time he would go a game or two without a hit, Dusty would say he needs to get more aggressive. As the May slump developed, Murton started swinging earlier in the count and the slump got worse. Based on Dusty's history and that of his coaches, I think they have encouraged Murton to be more aggressive at the plate which is exactly the wrong way for a young player to get out of a slump or to better learn the pitchers in the league. It also takes away a major strength of Murton's offensive game which was his ability to work the pitcher.
Secondly, Dusty's history of benching young players at the drop of a hat for his "guys" seems to have scared Hendry away from going after a decent fourth outfielder in the off-season. You're Jim Hendry. You know you need a solid righthand hitting veteran OF (a Jay Payton type) to spell Jones against lefties and provide the occasional day off for Pierre and Murton. You also know that if that player has any history at all in the big leagues, Baker will throw him into left field five times a week the minute Murton has an 0-10 slump. Weighing your options, you decide that getting playing time for Murton is more important than having that good fourth outfielder. Pretty soon, you have a roster with 5 middle infielders (6 if you count Bynum), 12 pitchers and no one with any pop on the bench.
Dusty: "Baseball's a game of breaks, and I know we've got to have a bunch coming our way." There you go, give that man another contract!
Question: did the three ex-Cub Marlin pitchers who shut the Cubs down yesterday all leave in the same trade, or different trades last offseason?
Arguably, yes.
When Murton came up last summer, he was a breath of fresh air - a patient hitter, willing to go deep in the count, look for his pitch and, if it didn't come, then he'd walk. He also showed some opposite field pop and a willingness to hit to all fields. His short demotion to Iowa, when injury to Hairston brought the recall of Corey Patterson, was accompanied by an expressed desire on the part of Dusty Baker that he (Murton) would work on pulling the ball more.
This year, Baker has spoken of wishing Murton showed more 'aggression' at the plate. Now we're seeing the results of this strategy. It angers me that this young guy came up looking good and from the get-go the pressure has been put on him to be something he's not. It's the same thinking that all but finished Corey Patterson and it's plain stupid.
Nolasco and Pinto represent two thirds of the bounty the Cubs coughed up for Juan Pierre (the third, Sergio Mitre, is also in the Marlins' rotation). Wellemeyer was a separate deal.
I don't get it, was that sarcasm? In case it wasn't here's the line again in full context:
Ok, but this is the Cubs. I was keeping in mind the fact that our #1, and #7/8 is hitting much like the garbage you would expect from a #9. At least our pitchers can stay out of the DP. In general, I agree with a traditional batting order with the exception of the speed factor for the #1 and #2 spots, unless of course your roster is built like the '87 Cardinals, which we will not likely ever see again.
I got it from a well-thumbed journal of statistical baseball trends shared by Gene Clines and Dusty Baker.
Charles S: Yes, Dusty's handling of Murton and of young players in general is causing the problem.
I disagree. I'm not saying that Dusty handles his young players well, but I'm certainly not blaming him for Murton not hitting.
Murton has less than a year of MLB experience. It seems to me that it is quite possible that the league has figured Murton out and that Murton needs to make adjustments as a result. While Dusty and his staff can help, it's ultimately up to Murton to make the changes necessary.
In any event, it's too soon to tell what he'll end up being in the long run. Personally, I doubt he'll be a real impact player, but whether he turns out to be a legitimate regular or a fringe guy like Brant Brown remains to be seen.
Furthermore, if he does turn out to be a fringe guy, I don't necessarily blame Dusty for that either. Murton is what he is, and IMO the only people that were touting him with legitimate star potential were/are looking at him through tinted, rose-color Cubbie glasses.
If Murton doesn't pan out, perhaps it's fair to (once again) observe how the Cubs can't seem to scout/acquire/develop any meaningful position players, but I don't really see how this is all Dusty's fault.
I also disagree with this and think it gives Hendry far more credit than he deserves. Yes, Dusty has been known to bench young players at a moment's notice, but I've never seen anything to indicate that this deterred Hendry from getting another OF -- in fact, I've never seen any indication that Hendry doesn't feel the same way as Dusty.
Likewise, while we all can see that Hendry needed to get a platoon partner for Jones, I've never heard Hendry recognize this at all . . . including when he signed Jones in the first place. Put another way, when you say "[y]ou know you need a solid righthand hitting veteran OF," I'm not convinced Hendry knew this at all.
First off, playing Murton every day and Murton developing as a major leaguer are two separate issues.
Second, I again point to the Cubs track record developing position players.
Certainly it's up to Murton to make adjustments. That's true of any young player. But he has gotten worse at the one thing he was definitely good at. That happens to be the one thing Dusty's Cubs have been consistently weak at, patience at the plate and the ability to work the pitcher. I don't think its a huge stretch to lay much of the blame for this regression in Murton's game on Dusty and his staff.
The only other possibility is that Hendry has very little idea of how to put together a big league bench. Oh wait, okay, you win that one.
Well, in Hendry's defense (and this is the only Hendry defense you'll get from me today - more than one a day and I feel dirty), he did give NRIs to Spring Training to Restovich and Marquis Grissom.
Ricky Nolasco drove in as many runs in last night's game as Juan Pierre has driven in all season.
Get your own damn Prozac.
vs. LHP -- AVG .170, OBP .200, SLG .189
at Wrigley -- AVG .183, OBP .221, SLG .220
RISP -- AB 26, AVG .115, OBP .179, SLG .115
By contrast Todd Walker has 30 AB with RISP for a .333/.410/.367 line. I hope that sheds some light on the lineup concept nonsense. Our leadoff hitter has had almost as many chances to drive in runs as our #3, albeit helped in part by his own uselessness.
Percentage of PAs with men on base by position in the batting order:
1st - 36%
2nd - 44%
3rd - 48%
4th - 51%
5th - 48%
6th - 46%
7th - 47%
8th - 46%
9th - 45%
This is not NL specific and I didn't see any NL specific data when flipping back through the chapter.
No, it doesn't. While the majority of Walkers AB have been in the 3 hole he has a significant amount in the two hole. He has 30 AB's with 5 walks and 1 HBP with RISP in 94 AB's in the 3 spot. While Pierre with 171 AB's in the #1 spot has 29 AB's and 2 walks with RISP. If you add DLee's 44 AB's in the 3 spot you can add 10 more AB's with 4 walks with RISP to the mix.
So in 171 AB's in the #1 spot Pierre has 31 plate appearances with RISP. With Lee and Walker in the 3 spot you have in 138 AB's with 50 plate appearances with RISP. In 44 games that's a lot.
First, let me observe that for all of Murton's struggles, his plate discipline is not as lousy as you think. In May, he's had 61 ABs and has drawn 6 walks, striking out 11 times. These are adequate numbers -- I'd love to see similar patience by Ronny Cedeno (1 BB/18 K in 80 ABs this month) or Jacque Jones (3 BB/9 K in 68 ABs this month). Indeed, only two Cubs have drawn more walks this month -- Barrett and Walker.
Still, Murton has slumped, there's no question about that, and has had virtually no power whatsoever. But to put this on Dusty? Please don't make me list all the people who initially have a run of success, then struggle after a few months. The list of players would run into the thousands, even under the best managers in the history of the game.
Dusty may not be helping Murton get out of it, but it's quite a stretch to say that Murton's problems are the result of Dusty.
It isn't necessarily something to pin on the manager, even if it's one I dislike.
But we're Cubs fans, piling on is what we do. I'm so fed up with Dusty, I'd blame him for a rainy day if I didn't already know it was Steve Garvey's fault.
Based on this, I definitely think Lee was screwed last year in the MVP voting. Look what happens when he's taken out of the line-up! The Cubs go from an 81-85 win team to the Bad News Bears.
On another note, it looks like Scott Williamson is finding his groove. In his last 11 innings he has only given up six base hits and four walks, while striking out 11. He is also the only guy on the staff with significant innings who has yet to give up a long ball.
This is almost useful for general lineup construction. To make it actually meaningful you would need to factor in the expected number of plate appearances for each position in the batting order, and maybe also some info about what base the runners are standing on. If you could find the number of plate appearances with men on and with RISP per nine innings, we could just about scientifically calculate the best batting order for each given set of starting nine players, based on past performances.
I don't mind it in theory, but I'll believe the Cubs successfully improving a young hitter's skills when I see it.
Cynical to be sure, but am I being unfair?
Someone did and they included a lot more into that as well. Find it here.
I was merely trying to answer the specific question under discussion.
1st - 36%
2nd - 44%
3rd - 48%
4th - 51%
5th - 48%
6th - 46%
7th - 47%
8th - 46%
9th - 45%
Note that, given the leadoff hitter has 20-25% of their PAs leading off the game that, after the first inning, they also have about 45-50% of their PAs with men on base. I'm a little surprised there's not a little more variation in those numbers given the #8 and #9 hitters (in both leagues) usually don't have high OBPs.
If the two people ahead of you both have OBPs of .300, and you're the third hitter, there's an average of a 45% chance of someone being on base when you bat.
Shouldn't you be including teams that were as bad or worse than 18-27, like the 2005 Astros?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main