— BTF's Preseason Previews
Monday, March 27, 2006
2006 Chicago Cubs
Why do I have this nagging feeling that decades from now I'll be as eager to talk about the 2003 NLCS as Ron Santo is to talk about the autumn of '69? When I walked out of Joe Robbie after Game Four, the Cubs were up 3-1 with Zambrano, Prior, and Wood set to go in the next three games. In the unlikely event the Marlins came back to steal the series, the Cubs still looked stacked with young talent and set to contend for years to come.
Since then, things have slid steadily downhill. Injuries struck Wood and Prior in 2004, and despite an improved offense propelling the team to one more win than in '03, better competition meant no playoff appearance. Management dismissed the broadcast team at the end of the year, and yet somehow 2005 turned out to be worse. Neither Prior nor Wood were able to get healthy and stay healthy and the offense regressed as well. The team finished below .500 and entered the off-season in disarray.
Despite their record, Jim Hendry surveyed the team and concluded that Lee, Ramirez, and the starting pitchers constituted enough front-line talent to build around as the core of a playoff team. He acquired Juan Pierre and Jacque Jones to play outfield, and Scott Eyre and Bob Howry to patch the bullpen. Hendry and Dusty Baker seem to have slotted rookies Matt Murton and Ronny Cedeno for left field and shortstop respectively, and with those peripheral changes the team headed to Mesa to give it a go.
Catcher (2005 OPS .791, #4 in MLB)
Michael Barrett (Age 29, 2006 ZiPS OPS .810)
Henry Blanco (Age 34, 2006 ZiPS OPS .609)
Since being acquired two winters ago for Damian Miller, Barrett has made catcher an offensive strength for the Cubs by posting two very solid (and nearly indistinguishable) offensive seasons. Barrett is a converted shortstop, and although has received generally good reviews for his willingness to work on defense opposing runners continue to have success running against him (25% caught in '04, 23% in '05). By contrast, Blanco consistently catches nearly half of would-be opposition base stealers while hitting like a back-up catcher.
First Base (2005 OPS 1.071, #1 in MLB)
Derrek Lee (Age 30, 2006 ZiPS OPS .980)
From 2000-2004, Derrek Lee often started slow. His average April OPS in that time period was .783, for May it was .732. Each year he'd pick up the pace though, and by season's end his OPS fell between .820 and .887. Wistful Marlins fans (later echoed by their Cub counterparts) would oft be heard saying "If only one year he would start hot...". 2005 they got their wish.
Lee 2005 OPS by Month April 1.257 May 1.070 June 1.171 July 1.048 August 1.000 September 1.003It was a year to win over the most die-hard Hee Seop Choi enthusiast. Lee set career highs in nearly every hitting category, led the league in batting average, SLG, OPS, hits, total bases, doubles, and extra-base hits. He won his second Gold Glove, and even tied Corey Patterson for the team lead in stolen bases with fifteen.
Now the question is whether Lee's 2006 will look like 2005 or like the previous five years. ZiPS naturally answers "somewhere in between," and that certainly makes sense, especially after a look at what changed for Lee last year. His batting average on balls in play jumped from .305 and .306 the previous two years up to a career-high .349. While he did manage BABIPs between .325 and .335 in 2000, 2001, and 2002, it is nonetheless likely that this year's number will regress toward the mean. On the other hand, part of the boost in Lee's effectiveness was attributable to a big jump in his power numbers (.327 Isolated Power, .090 higher than his previous career high). Furthermore, it wasn't a case of a handful of doubles sneaking over the fence. Lee bested his career mark in doubles by eleven and in homers by 14.
Second Base (2005 OPS .788, #8 in MLB)
Todd Walker (Age 33, 2006 ZiPS OPS .771)
Jerry Hairston, Jr. (Age 30, 2006 ZiPS OPS .728)
Neifi Perez (Age 33, 2006 ZiPS OPS .641)
The question has been raging all winter and into the spring - why isn't Todd Walker the Cubs' presumptive starter at second base? Cubs management cites his sub-par range, but Walker's bat would seem more than enough to make up for his defense which (as he has pointed out in the press) matters less on a team with a s trikeout-prone staff like the Cubs. Perez, despite a hot April that led to a brief All-Star write-in campaign, was dreadful over the rest of the year and ended with numbers no better than his mediocre career averages. Hairston is better, but his career high SLG of .397 is identical to Walker's career low way back in 1999. The Cubs need substantial improvement at multiple positions to contend this year. A decline at second base would make the task that much tougher, and Walker is the only man likely to keep the Cubs in the top half of the majors at second base.
Third Base (2005 OPS .881, #5 in MLB)
Aramis Ramirez (Age 28, 2006 ZiPS OPS .900)
Despite repeated dalliances with the disabled list, Ramirez has managed to appear in 86% of the Cubs' games during his tenure with the team, and when he has played he has hit. His walk rate and batting average slipped a bit from the highs of 2004, but his power remained excellent. His range remains fair and his fielding percentage worse, but his bat more than makes up for it. The Cubs desperately need him healthy and hitting.
Shortstop (2005 OPS .677, #21 in MLB)
Ronny Cedeno (Age 23, 2006 ZiPS OPS .744)
Neifi Perez (Age 33, 2006 ZiPS OPS .641)
If he plays shortstop instead of second, Neifi's glove is slightly more valuable and his bat slightly more forgivable. Even so, his ZiPS OPS of .641 would be one of the worst in the majors and leave the Cubs in desperate straits. Enter Ronny Cedeno- the youngster has a solid defensive rep and is coming off a breakthrough year (.921 OPS at Iowa, .731 with a .356 OBP in the bigs.) There are two caveats. First, Dusty Baker will be hesitant to turn over the reins to a rookie, particularly with a trusty veteran to choose instead. Perhaps more importantly, Cedeno's offensive numbers were downright terrible in rookie and A ball. He stepped up to a .729 OPS in AA in 2004 and the aforementioned numbers last year, but I'm not overly confident that he's going to jump in the lineup and hit. If he doesn't, You Know Who will be waiting in the wings...
Left Field (2005 OPS .738, #20 in MLB)
Matt Murton (Age 24, 2006 ZiPS OPS .780)
Like Cedeno, Murton is a youngster who has hit increasingly well as he moved through the minors. Unlike with Cedeno, there is no obvious veteran replacement waiting in the wings, so Murton may see playing time even in the event of back-to-back 0-4 games. He was adequate defensively in college and by most accounts in the minors.
Center Field (2005 OPS .643, #29 in MLB)
Juan Pierre (Age 28, 2006 ZiPS OPS .741)
For all the off-season talk, Pierre turned out to be the single biggest acquisition the Cubs would make. The good news is, he need only turn in an average big league center field season to be a big improvement over what the Cubs had in 2005. The bad news is that might be all he is capable of. There are bright spots in his record- he posted OBPs of .361 and .374 his first two years in Florida, and an uncharacteristically low BABIP last year makes 2005 look like a fluke. Still, he has little power and only an average glove. Even his career OBP of .355 would have placed him in just sixtieth place among big league hitters last year, and half of that career was compiled for the Colorado Rockies. Again, this should be an improvement, but Pierre is unlikely to be any better than an average center fielder for the Cubs this year.
Right Field (2005 OPS .746, #25 in MLB)
Jacque Jones (Age 31, 2006 ZiPS OPS .753)
The other significant hitter acquired by Hendry, Jones should hit about as well as Pierre but plays corner outfield, doesn't steal bases nearly as effectively, and shouldn't be on the field against lefties. Also, he's locked into a three-year, $16M deal.
Outfield Reserves
John Mabry (Age 35, 2006 ZiPS OPS .734)
Marquis Grissom (Age 39, 2006 ZiPS OPS .670)
Angel Pagan (Age 24, 2006 ZiPS OPS .641)
Mabry should be a lock, with the final roster spot a toss-up between Grissom and Pagan. Mabry took a step backward with the Cardinals last year, mostly due to his batting average dipping to .240. He still walks and hits for a bit of power, so if he can arrest his decline he could be a passable fourth outfielder. There's talk that Pagan may nab the last spot, but his minor league numbers show no particular promise and Grissom may actually be the better choice. Of course if Grissom's on the roster, the threat of him replacing Murton in left may become all too real.
Starting Pitching
Mark Prior (Age 25, 2006 ZiPS ERA 3.43) and Kerry Wood (Age 29, 2006 ZiPS ERA 3.76)
The playoff hopes of the 2006 Cubs very likely rest on the right arms of two men who haven't looked like themselves since the first half of the 2003 NLCS. When healthy, both have consistently been among the best pitchers in baseball, but the on-going saga of their health has left all but the most optimistic fans cynical and embittered.
And yet, there were still signs of hope. Both men maintained sterling strikeout rates (perhaps the single best indicator of future pitching success). Both were above average in most indicators with the exception of homers allowed. Last year, the Cubs got 66 innings of league average pitching out of Wood, but 168 innings of above average pitching out of Prior. They'll need that much at an absolute minimum, but Dusty has to be counting on getting more. It's anyone's guess if that's going to happen.
Carlos Zambrano (Age 25, 2006 ZiPS ERA 3.40)
On the bright side, there's Z. Zambrano has borne an increasingly heavy workload the last three years, but so far has shown no ill effects. Last year he managed a career-high 223 innings while his K/9 edged up to a career-best 8.14. Furthermore, his splits actually show a slight improvement in his effectiveness as games wore on. He allowed a few more homers than in previous seasons, but his G/F ratio stayed very high at 1.62 (14th highest in the majors) minimizing any cause for alarm. Although there are no sure things when it comes to pitching, Zambrano may be as close as it gets right now.
Greg Maddux (Age 40, 2006 ZiPS ERA 4.14)
Greg Maddux is one of the very best in baseball history, and at 39 last year he remained an effective pitcher. Yet it must be said that over the last four years he's been steadily losing his uncanny ability to mesmerize hitters. His durability and walk rate have stayed as amazing as ever, but his K/9 (never high) has slipped, as has his G/F ratio and with it his homer rate. The five highest homer allowed totals of his career have come in the last six years, with the two highest in 2004 and 2005. He may yet have enough guile to squeeze out another effective year, but the end is going to come sooner rather than later, and maybe as soon as this year.
Glendon Rusch (Age 31, 2006 ZiPS ERA 4.53)
The Cubs stayed in the hunt in 2004 as long as they did largely because Glendon Rusch managed a career year when Wood and Prior were suffering from injuries. He did it with improvements to both his homer rate and his control. In 2005 Wood and Prior were hurt again, but this time Rusch not surprisingly regressed towards his career averages across the board. As welcome as his performance in 2004 was, numbers like last year's are far more likely in 2006.
Jerome Williams (Age 24, 2006 ZiPS ERA 4.36)
Williams had a very good rookie season and although his K/9 has slipped since (and his ERA with it), he still managed league-average performances each of the last two years. He still has age on his side, and if he can get the K-rate back up he's got the potential to improve on his last two seasons.
Ryan Dempster (Age 29, 2006 ZiPS ERA 4.06)
Dempster found a home in the Chicago bullpen last year, with a high K-rate and much improved control, as well as a new-found ability to keep the ball in the park. Normally he might be expected to regress toward the mean, but since the dramatic improvements came with a move to relief it may be that role simply suits him better.
Scott Eyre (Age 34, 2006 ZiPS ERA 3.48)
In Eyre's first seven big league seasons, he managed an ERA under 4.46 just twice (once in 15.2 innings pitched.) Then in 2004 his K/9 jumped from the 5-6 range to 8.37 and his ERA dropped to 4.10. In 2005 the K/9 inched higher still to 8.56, and he cut his walk rate and halved his homer rate. The result was a career year, highlighted by a gaudy 2.63 ERA. The chances of him being that good over the next three years are not great, but it was a gamble Jim Hendry was willing to take as he signed Eyre for $11M over the next three years.
Bob Howry (Age 32, 2006 ZiPS ERA 3.32)
Howry signed for roughly the same money as Eyre, and is a gamble in his own way. Howry has had superb control throughout his career, and he's usually been fair at keeping the ball in the park. The parabola of his career (pretty good, to marginal, to excellent) has mostly tracked his strikeout rate, with the glaring exception of last year. 2005 saw his K/9 plummet from 8.23 to 5.92, even as his batting average allowed fell from .228 to .191. This is extremely unlikely to occur again in 2006, so he'll have to get his K-rate back up to earn his paycheck.
Scott Williamson (Age 30, 2006 ZiPS ERA 3.86)
Another pitcher, another gamble. In previous incarnations, Williamson has been one of the most effective relievers in the game. After Tommy John surgery, he struggled in some late season appearances last year with the Cubs. He has probably the most upside of anyone in the Cubs pen, if only he can return to his pre-surgery form.
Will Ohman (Age 26, 2006 ZiPS ERA 4.50)
Ohman was a distant memory after two Tommy John surgeries, but when he got another chance with the Cubs in 2005 he grasped it with both hands and didn't let go. Despite control problems at times, he managed 43.1 innings of quality work with a sterling 9.35 K/9. With the signing of Eyre, Dusty may free one or both from the constraints of a lefty specialist role.
Michael Wuertz (Age 27, 2006 ZiPS ERA 3.82)
There was no sophomore slump for Wuertz. His K/9 jumped from an excellent 9.31 to a gaudy 10.59, and a higher G/F ratio helped him keep the ball in the park a bit better. He was again far better against right-handed hitters, as his control sometimes deserts him against lefties.
Spare Parts
With Prior and Wood unavailable, one additional pitcher is likely to make the Opening Day roster. Press reports indicate a four-way race between Angel Guzman, Rich Hill, Sean Marshall, and Jae Kuk Ryu. There will likely be an additional bullpen slot as well, with John Koronka and Todd Wellemeyer the leading contenders. Felix Pie, a speedy outfielder who torched AA at age 20 last year, is the only prospect close to blue-chip status. If one of the current starting outfielders falters Pie may be called up sooner rather than later. Ryan Harvey, Brian Dopirak, and Luis Montanez have all faltered in the minors the last few years, and none seems likely to make an impact with the big club.
Conclusion
The Cubs finished 79-83 last year. Assuming it will take at least a 90-72 record to contend for the wildcard, it is hard to see where this club might find the extra eleven wins. Last year's club was inefficient at scoring runs considering their raw offensive output, so perhaps a few wins could be gained with an average performance there. If a miracle occurs and either Wood or Prior manage a relatively full, healthy season, perhaps another win or two. The improvement in center is substantial, and the bullpen and corner outfield slots should see some marginal improvement as well.
On the other hand, Greg Maddux is likely to continue to slide as he hits 40 this year. Derrek Lee is unlikely to repeat his career year, and its hard to imagine getting top-ten production at second if management succeeds in trading or marginalizing Todd Walker. Injuries could hit any team at any time, but this Cubs team is particularly vulnerable. Prior, Zambrano, Wood, Ramirez, and Lee are as talented a top-five as any team in baseball, but the second tier starters and reserves for the Cubs are weaker than many other would-be contenders. If Zambrano hurts his arm, or Ramirez re-pulls a quad, or Pierre comes up lame, there are few good options behind them.
I think this team is too talented to finish with less than eighty wins again. With no unexpected setbacks and no notable injuries they have a shot at contending, but a win total in the mid-80s seems more likely. I'll say 85-77, and a contract-extension for Dusty if they are in it at the All-Star break.
2006 ZiPS Projections - Chicago Cubs Name P G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS AVG OBP SLG Lee 1b 159 593 104 183 44 2 38 114 84 121 14 5 .309 .398 .582 Ramirez 3b 142 549 83 166 33 1 32 104 45 75 1 2 .302 .359 .541 Barrett c 125 410 47 113 29 4 14 58 37 60 0 3 .276 .342 .468 Murton lf 137 470 64 136 16 4 14 56 42 77 10 5 .289 .350 .430 Sing 1b 121 385 64 92 21 0 20 60 61 109 1 4 .239 .345 .449 Walker* 2b 125 451 60 125 26 3 13 57 40 49 1 2 .277 .336 .435 Pierre* cf 162 676 101 208 24 10 2 71 50 43 52 22 .308 .359 .382 Restovich rf 125 408 70 104 23 2 18 62 36 108 4 3 .255 .319 .453 Cedeno ss 113 345 46 99 15 2 8 40 20 63 13 4 .287 .332 .412 Craig# 3b 108 348 53 88 19 1 14 50 35 84 4 3 .253 .326 .434 Jones* rf 145 541 69 140 26 2 22 78 42 126 11 7 .259 .317 .436 Hairston 2b 98 333 44 91 22 2 3 31 31 39 9 9 .273 .350 .378 Fontenot* 2b 130 454 63 119 23 5 7 43 46 103 10 8 .262 .340 .381 Greenberg* cf 88 321 43 85 11 8 3 41 32 82 12 5 .265 .336 .377 Mabry* 1b 99 224 23 55 12 1 9 31 20 58 0 0 .246 .305 .429 Deardorff 3b 109 385 53 94 15 2 15 52 40 107 5 4 .244 .316 .410 Pie* cf 87 330 59 90 11 5 8 33 20 93 17 10 .273 .319 .409 Grissom cf 110 404 42 103 17 1 11 51 18 71 3 1 .255 .286 .384 Soto c 98 305 35 72 12 0 6 33 33 84 1 1 .236 .312 .334 Lewis 2b 129 439 56 106 21 4 7 38 35 113 8 6 .241 .301 .355 Spears* 2b 109 400 52 99 15 4 4 36 27 80 5 3 .248 .300 .335 Perez# ss 140 482 46 125 25 1 6 47 19 43 5 3 .259 .288 .353 Dopirak 1b 137 503 62 114 21 0 19 65 28 118 2 2 .227 .271 .382 Padgett* lf 127 425 48 96 20 2 11 52 31 134 2 1 .226 .281 .360 Pagan# cf 130 508 69 127 16 6 5 44 40 111 22 16 .250 .306 .335 Hoffpauir* 1b 121 416 48 97 18 2 6 41 28 81 2 1 .233 .286 .329 Ojeda# ss 114 334 45 73 16 0 3 26 34 37 5 5 .219 .309 .293 Blanco c 81 225 22 46 12 0 7 27 15 39 0 2 .204 .258 .351 Kopitzke c 81 251 18 55 7 1 0 16 17 40 1 2 .219 .280 .255 Name W L ERA G GS INN H ER HR BB K Howry 7 3 3.32 67 0 65.0 55 24 6 17 53 Zambrano 13 9 3.40 32 32 209.0 170 79 15 83 198 Prior 10 7 3.43 26 26 168.0 139 64 18 52 202 Eyre* 3 1 3.48 83 0 62.0 51 24 5 27 57 Wood 9 7 3.76 25 22 146.0 115 61 18 64 177 Wuertz 3 3 3.82 72 0 73.0 57 31 7 38 88 Williamson 2 2 3.86 42 0 42.0 32 18 4 23 50 Miller 11 10 4.01 27 27 155.0 137 69 14 67 139 Dempster 4 3 4.06 58 5 82.0 71 37 4 45 80 Maddux 14 14 4.14 35 35 215.0 228 99 30 36 129 Williams 10 11 4.36 29 28 165.0 164 80 17 62 104 Guzman 3 3 4.39 9 9 41.0 42 20 6 10 28 Ohman* 2 3 4.50 65 0 50.0 39 25 7 30 63 Aardsma 8 10 4.53 41 21 141.0 147 71 18 43 103 Rusch* 7 7 4.53 39 18 139.0 152 70 12 46 102 Novoa 6 6 4.55 63 0 83.0 84 42 10 32 70 Ryu 8 9 4.59 26 26 155.0 167 79 19 46 110 Pignatiello* 7 9 4.73 35 24 156.0 160 82 22 55 130 Hill* 6 8 4.78 30 22 130.0 117 69 21 65 156 Brownlie 6 8 4.91 25 19 110.0 114 60 17 40 83 Reith 3 5 4.94 44 1 62.0 61 34 7 31 47 Bartosh* 2 3 4.98 53 0 56.0 55 31 9 25 52 Koronka* 8 12 5.01 27 24 151.0 155 84 20 67 110 Fox 1 2 5.14 26 0 28.0 24 16 2 22 31 Corey 3 5 5.16 47 0 68.0 77 39 10 24 44 Rohlicek* 3 4 5.23 56 0 62.0 55 36 4 49 57 Wellemeyer 3 6 5.23 33 12 86.0 80 50 11 55 86 Lee 2 5 5.70 51 0 60.0 60 38 9 37 46 Disclaimer: ZiPS projections are computer-based projections of performance. Performances have not been allocated to predicted playing time in the majors - many of the players listed above are unlikely to play in the majors at all in 2006. ZiPS is projecting equivalent production - a .240 ZiPS projection may end up being .280 in AAA or .300 in AA, for example. Whether or not a player will play is one of many non-statistical factors one has to take into account when predicting the future.
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.
I think I see things pretty much the same way. I like your bullseye call of 85 wins, but don't think, say, 80 or 90 is much less likely. I think the chances of 95+ wins is also significantly non-zero. It wouldn't require a terrible run of injury luck to drive it down to 70 or fewer.
I would add that peripheral issues have taken a toll on this team in the last couple of years, and my concern that this will continue. It seems like this is a team that gets its panties in a wad over the slightest provocation, and that it looks for excuses to lose. When the Cubs get a runner on second with no one out, or on third with one out, I tend to think they're not going to get that runner home, and I have the impression that the players think that too.
Also, I actually think a true platoon of Neifi with Walker at 2B would be a good thing, but I don't see the Cubs doing it. We are left with the perpetual problem of a player on the roster with some useful but limited skills being misused. In a situation where you're not rock solid at every position, these sorts of managerial issues add up and take a toll. If it's just Neifi taking playing time against RHP from Cedeno, it's not the end of the world, but if it's Mabry and Grissom and Pagan and God-knows-who-else, it's a serious problem.
I refuse to believe anyone who would post at this site, much less this very legendary poster, would even stoop so low and participate in something of this magnitude.
First, Dusty Baker will be hesitant to turn over the reins to a rookie
Without addressing the Neifi issue, I'd say I agreed with this all winter. However, during the game Sunday on WGN, Len and Bob were talking to Dusty. And Dusty supported Cedeno and said it was his job, and he's not worried about him hitting. He complimented his defense and smarts and baserunning. And the best part-no "buts" (you know, the things he adds when he talks about any young player-Murton's arm, etc). Whether this lasts more than a week, I dunno. But for now, I'm actually believing him. Only person I've ever heard Dusty defend more is Neifi. Uh.
The playoff hopes of the 2006 Cubs very likely rest on the right arms of two men who haven't looked like themselves since the first half of the 2003 NLCS
One criticism-way too much emphasis on Kerry Wood. This team will be lucky if he pitches 60 league average innings. Whether or not this team makes the playoffs, it'll likely won't depend on Wood. I think Hendry knows that, and that's why there's a lot more contingency plans in place (for example, I think Miller's health is much more important; I expect Miller to pitch 2x as many innings as Wood).
Also, I actually think a true platoon of Neifi with Walker at 2B would be a good thing
I see no reason to believe that would be better than a Walker/Hairston platoon.
Re: Todd Walker. Agree that he's the best bet, but I do have some concern that this guy will be 33 this year and had one season with an OPS+ higher than 100 prior to coming to Chicago. (Yes, he did have OPS+s of 100, 99, 95, & 91 in other years so it was always a good hitter for the position). He could fall off a cliff, though. The good news is that Neifi's the same age, and could also fall off a cliff. And if he gets drastically worse at the plate, then Baker would be forced to start benching him. OK, it might take 70 games, and need to be accompanied by considerable hand-wringing and intense sports media criticism.
Perez, despite a hot April that led to a brief All-Star write-in campaign, was dreadful over the rest of the year and ended with numbers no better than his mediocre career averages.
Hey! He went three-for-seven in October! . . . Actually he was about as good in August as he was in April. That helped keep people in the dark about how bad he was the rest of the year. I once read that's its much better to have a hot April followed by a cool May than the other way around. I believe it. Root for Neifi to have a frigid April. Good news - according to retrosheet, April is historically Perez's worst month.
If he plays shortstop instead of second, Neifi's glove is slightly more valuable
How good defensively was Neifi at second? His range factor and fielding percentage were both subpar, making his glove at short considerably more valuable than its apparent negative value at second.
Even his career OBP of .355 would have placed him in just sixtieth place among big league hitters last year, and half of that career was compiled for the Colorado Rockies.
Yea, but few players are less likely to take advantage from playing in Colorado than Pierre. He's one of the most extreme groundball hitters in baseball, so the thin air wouldn't play as large a role for him. And I can't see any real boost in his OBP when he went from Colorado to Florida. Jacque Jones is also an extreme groundballer. Anyone have any idea how good opposing infield defenses are in the NLC? I know the Cards are always up there in DER.
but the on-going saga of their health has left all but the most optimistic fans cynical and embittered.
Not to mention the assinine attempts by the Cubs to spin their health woes at every available opportunity.
He allowed a few more homers than in previous seasons, but his G/F ratio stayed very high at 1.62 (14th highest in the majors) minimizing any cause for alarm.
Between him & Maddux the Cubs have to extreme groundballers in their rotation, which would emphasize infield defense more. Z's Ks wipe out much of this for him (14th in G/F ratio, but 34th in GBs allowed), but it's definately an issue with Maddux. Betwen all the K's and GBs, OF defense might mean less for the Cubs than any team in baseball.
Glendon Rusch managed a career year when Wood and Prior were suffering from injuries. He did it with improvements to both his homer rate and his control.
His traditional nemisis are H% and Hit Deltas. The man is the anti-Voros, he's allowed 1 more hit per nine innings than his DIPS says he should. In '04 his Delta was -1. . . Remember way back when he was a sabermetric darling?
Re: Scott Eyre - He got diagnosed with ADD a few/couple years ago, and he's said that's why he suddenly became a better pitcher. Previously, he couldn't focus on the mound and would lose his composure, and now he's in control. If true, it's a reason to be a little more optitmistic with him.
The parabola of his career (pretty good, to marginal, to excellent) has mostly tracked his strikeout rate, with the glaring exception of last year. 2005 saw his K/9 plummet from 8.23 to 5.92, even as his batting average allowed fell from .228 to .191. This is extremely unlikely to occur again in 2006, so he'll have to get his K-rate back up to earn his paycheck.
THT said the Indians had the best defense in baseball last year, IIRC.
Will Ohman: Has any pitcher ever been good after 2 Tommy Johns? That's a serious question.
The Cubs finished 79-83 last year. Assuming it will take at least a 90-72 record to contend for the wildcard, it is hard to see where this club might find the extra eleven wins. Last year's club was inefficient at scoring runs considering their raw offensive output, so perhaps a few wins could be gained with an average performance there. If a miracle occurs and either Wood or Prior manage a relatively full, healthy season, perhaps another win or two. The improvement in center is substantial, and the bullpen and corner outfield slots should see some marginal improvement as well.
Generally, the team that (in theory) has the best chance for rapid improvement is a team with considerable holes. The '05 Cubs definately fall into that category. If Pierre and/or Jones exceed expectations they could turn an horrid outfield into a positive. Being more efficient offensively give them a few wins. Is a healhier Wood or Prior really only worth "a win or two"?
One other factor, which I don't have time to explain. Due to random variation, a team with .500 talent doesn't always finish at .500. IIRC, a .500 team has a 9.1% chance to finish with 90+ wins.
Good preview, I liked it.
my first thought was "who is looking forward to this?"
Several people participated because it would be hilarious to see Neifi in the all star game. None of us believed he'd keep up his hot start.
As for season outlook, I'm inclined to project 82 wins, with a better chance of 77 than 87. (I don't see the probablities as on a true bell curve.) Part of me realizes that much of the reason for only 79 wins last year was luck (especially, Dusty's use of Neifi/Corey at the top of the order). I want to think that just getting Corey out of town will lead to improvement.
OTOH, why? Dusty hasn't gotten smarter, IMO, and if Cedeno doesn't cut it at the plate, I could easily see Neifi back near the top of the order, and if Pierre falters or is hurt, it won't be dramatically better than last year.
I will never get to the point of actively rooting for the Cubs to lose any game, but there is a huge part of me that thinks the best thing for the team would be to have a lousy April/May, hopefully leading to Dusty and possibly Hendry getting canned.
So you're pegging them somewhere between 30 and 130 wins, Andere?
I was being tounge-in-cheek. For a couple of weeks, my handle was Neifi's #1 Fan.
That's my position as well. If they're going to have 2-3 bad months this year, they need to come in the first half of the season and not the second. The worst thing that could happen would be the Cubs jumping out to a 50-30 start, Dusty getting a 3-year extension, and then watching them collapse to finish at 80-82.
FWIW, a column at one of the major news sources (I don't remember where it was now) pegged Dusty as the most likely first manager fired this year. Given that he's in his last season, I think there's a chance the Cubs will cut him loose during the year if the team stinks. I think that would have happened last year if he hadn't been signed through 2006, back in June/July when they looked so very awful.
Yeah, give or take.
it was amusing to watch and to torment them so, also it makes them easier to be killed....best of all the nl all star team would only have gotten better if it had happened that way
i hate dusty
we will win less then 75 games
dusty will still get an 11 billionty year extention
i will commit sucide
that is the cubs season for 2006
Neifi Perez hit a homer off Mark Buehrle today.
I think Dusty's thinking he found the guy to protect D. Lee in the lineup.
I think Dusty's thinking he found the guy to protect D. Lee in the lineup.
Well, Neifi IS better from the right side. Now, if Dusty would notice that he's ONLY adequate from the right side, we'll be getting somewhere.
I don't entirely disagree, but would cite defense as a significant difference here. Part of that is perception on the part of the pitching staff, but I would guess there's some truth to it. Basically, the pitchers don't want Walker playing 2B because of his defense, and Hairston as a platoon partner isn't going to make them feel better about that. Second, Neifi's career OPS against LHP is about the same as Hairston's. He's benefitted from Colorado, and OBA is a bigger component of Hairston's OPS than Neifi's, but as hitters against LHP I don't think there's a major difference between the two.
So you're pegging them somewhere between 30 and 130 wins, Andere?
Well, the MacPhail-era Cubs teams have been horrible to handicap. Win totals since 1997 have been 68, 90, 67, 65, 88, 67, 88, 89. 79. Last year was the first season since 1996 where the Cubs won between 69 and 87 wins, with four years above and four below that mark. I guess the teams of the last couple of years have come close to many projections, but I really think this is a team that has an abnormally high chance of being really good or terrible.
To put my intuition into made-up statistical terms, if I were to make a probability chart for each possible Cubs win total, I'd guess something like a 16% chance of 75 wins or fewer, and a 16% chance of 90 wins or more.
Oh, no, we're cynical and embittered, too!
I think he's talking about the guys who sat behind me at ST in Mesa last year and were loudly proclaiming to their fellow Cub fans that Hollandsworth was the best hitter on the team.
I was being tounge-in-cheek. For a couple of weeks, my handle was Neifi's #1 Fan.
Come on! That is like Scooters and Fatties, they are fun to ride, but you don't want your friends to find out!
itl all be clones of neifi, dusty has secretly been raising them for years
HUH? 'Mony and Goody are coming back? Anyone want tickets?
from this day forward matt murton shall be known as fire crotch
As long as he'd not known as exploding bloody groin like NoMore...
Eh. Do you really think that will help? I'd like to see Baker fired because I can't stand him, and perhaps a managerial shakeup would light a fire under the team. But I see little use in firing Hendry. The problems in this organization go a lot deeper.
The negative vibes coming from CubbyTown are out of control.
And I'm diggin' what I'm reading.
It would be a lot easier to be hatin' on the Cubs if their fan base didn't set the bar so high. But I'm ok with it.
Keep on keeping on. Don't let me interrupt. Cubs s*ck, Dusty blows, and Hendry's a dumb*ss. Pause. Repeat.
Later,
H3
Im worried about this years team, we didnt really plug any hols from last year we have adaquate fillers --jones and piearre, they over all will be better but with a team that couldnt score a runner from 2nd and no outs if their life depended on it (lee excluded, cause you know he would be the runner on second and aram would be on the DL) they needed something better instead they spent at least 22 mil on bullpen help. they have the young arms to fill those slots. the rotation is more of a mess then could be imagined. I dont think williams is that great nor will rusch be, we need one more year of maddux greatness, and for z to do what he does. i would love to see some great years out of the youngters-- guzman and marshall. but is that likely? im not sure nether can stay healthy though the both came back in almost top form guzman more so then others. his fastball is still mid 90's and his other pitches are still there, if he can stay healthy he will be in the rotation all year long, i dont think there will be any other choice. marshall has also looked good but i think he could benifit from another year in the minors untill prior or wood returns to the dl come july/august.
the other big problem is their lack to use walker properly could cost them. the cubs, as already been said, mainly groundball/ strike out pitchrs and walker isnt that bad defensivly if hairston or neifi start hot, deal them asap for max value prospects or anything including a bag of used baseballs/ and or sun flower seeds both are usefull.
the most frustrating thing of all is the overall lack of a plan for the team its self, they cant choose which way to go, they say therein win now mode and yet the dont bring any big name free agents, they waste their money. they also keep employing a manager whos style would benifit the old yankees, not the youth laden cubs. this is probly the biggest hinderence to the team. i think rothschild is just following company lin when it comes to the pitchers, of course he isnt going to contridict his manager. i really think that with a decent manager the cubs could excell to 90 wins, maybe more. however i see another losing season this year, maybe they can out perform our expectations i somehow doubt it though.
And for non coubs fans, the reason we are so pessimstic is after watching 2003 kill us, recovered and had it happen again they blew it down the strech i 04, for 05 they got rid of the malcontents and yet the same #### kept happening, when will this end? hopefully when baker gets his sorry ass out of town taking neifi #### perez with him
/rant
I certainly agree that getting rid of MacPhail (and possibly selling the team) would be a good thing, but the way I figure it, the bigger the shakeup, the better.
Ridding ourselves of Dusty would be a great first step, but the last few years have taught me that Hendry isn't the foil that we all figured him to be.
2004 wasn't that long ago.
Just pray that the White Sox are kind to the 2006 AL Central divison winners......the Cleveland Indians.
I was expecting more snark though.
Ridding ourselves of Dusty would be a great first step, but the last few years have taught me that Hendry isn't the foil that we all figured him to be.
The Cubs have been through three GM cycles in the MacPhail era, Lynch, then MacPhail, now Hendry. Hendry came with a considerable track record of accomplishment, but he was also very much a MacPhail protege. Hendry has his flaws, but I think a lot of that has to do with the organization within he is operating. I think that if you were to take Hendry and put him in a different context, he may be a good or even great GM, because he does have some strong positive attributes.
I really think firing Hendry would be the equivalent of pulling a dandelion and hoping a tulip will come up in its place. The shakeup has to come from the top. In fact, I wonder if the only way things can improve is if the Tribune Company sells the team.
Got a story to share, Meat?
You know, I would be at least somewhat fine with that.
I've seen the White Sox win the pythag championship, and now I've seen them win the World Series. I know which one I prefer.
I was assuming that he somehow determined that the carpet matches the drapes.
Probably. I do know that even though they weren't as successful, I was able to enjoy the team much more pre-Hendry -- at least in the sense that my frustration was just that they were bad.
Now, it not only seems that they are almost *striving* to be bad, but they are also striving to alienate their fans -- not just with Hendry's moves, but with everything about the franchise, from Wrigley Field Premium tickets to showing Steve Stone the door to the knothole fiasco to the falling concrete and probably several other things that have little to do with Hendry.
Still, like I said, I think the bigger shake-up the better, but I'll take anything at this point. If Dusty and Hendry leave, I'm back -- and even if Hendry stays, I'll most likely be back.
And just like the actual roster construction, they're failing at that, too. We may feel alienated, but they sure as #### aren't feeling the hurt from my boycott.
Most of the best teams are projected to low 90s due to regression. It was a team in '04 that experienced tons of injuries and had a pythagorean record of 94-68.
Wow, one surprise and one not so much. I was sure Grissom would go north with the team.
This is probably a good thing, especially for Matt Murton.
Wellemeyer, who was out of options, was dealt for minor league pitchers Lincoln Holdzkom and Zach McCormack. Holdzkom, 24, had a 2.86 ERA in 110 career games in the Marlins organization and will be assigned to Double-A West Tenn. McCormack will be sent to one of the team's Class A affiliates.
I'm just glad that Grissom retired, one less bullet in the chamber for Baker.
I consider this bad news. I'd rather have the bullet Grissom than Pagan, the equivalent of rock salt.
Angel Pagan's been outplaying him. I was also sure that Grissom would make the team, but stories like those that came out today made me think otherwise. (Stories like this and this.)
The Wellemeyer deal was only a surprise in that it didn't happen months ago. Here is the Cubs press release on the deal. Holdzkom is 24, coming off TJ surgery, and has a grand total of 23+ innings of experience in the FSL (which he didn't exactly master). He'll have to sink/swim pretty quickly at West Tenn. McCormack is also 24 and was in A for most of last year (for ~40 IP) and didn't impress there either, but has the proverbial "live arm."
IOW, essentially what you would expect for someone like Wellemeyer who was out of options and couldn't make the squad. The chances of either of these guys playing for the Cubs major league squad are pretty slim.
I'm ok with it. They need a backup CF and if you don't want to bring up Pie just yet, then Pagan is your best choice (especially because he's had a good spring).
Oh, I do. The Cubs have NO power off the bench. Right now, John Mabry is their big power threat. They need a major league quality guy for that job, and if they need to go to another organization to get it, then so be it. Pagan is a subpar option.
I agree that the Cubs have little power off the bench, but Pagan is not supposed to address that and Grissom certainly wouldn't have been an improvement either.
Trade one of the 2B trifecta for a decent bat.
Todd Walker?
They need a backup CF
Jerry Hairston?
"Unless we see major leaps in either OBP or power (or both) in an encore year at Norfolk, he's not going to dent anybody's roster."
Guess they didn't factor in the Cubs on that one.
His PECOTA projection is .253/.312/.364
He is just 24 this year and worth keeping in the organization. Starving for PAs, however, is not likely to help him improve to the point of actual utility to a ML organization in my opinion.
Oh, I'm not saying Grissom was a good option by any means, just that I don't think his retirement leaves them in a better position.
It's only a strikeout-prone staff if Wood and Prior are there.
Right, but my point is that Pagan's role isn't to provide power off the bench. Blaming the punchless bench on him is like blaming it on Henry Blanco. The real culprit is the Hairston/Perez tandem.
BTW, if they go with an 11-man staff, who will be the last bench guy? Right now, they have Theriot on the roster, but I can't imagine he'll make the trip north, will he?
It eliminates Eminem's musical chair partner. So no one likes Pagan? He could outplay Jones pretty easily, he also doesn't cost $5+ Mil for Jody Gerut numbers.
Duh Gee I know, lets trade hariston or T-Walk and jones for one good player. Not a bunch more unknown arms...
But, Seriously! When are they going to trade Walker? I wonder how Dusty-san's big sit-down went with the threeheaded 2nd basemen, I think that was supposed to happen today per Carrie Muskat. The poor bastard is the hunchback of Wrigley Field.
Now, it not only seems that they are almost *striving* to be bad, but they are also striving to alienate their fans -- not just with Hendry's moves, but with everything about the franchise, from Wrigley Field Premium tickets to showing Steve Stone the door to the knothole fiasco to the falling concrete and probably several other things that have little to do with Hendry.
$40 bleacher tix? I have a degree in Economics and understand supply and demand, but $30 for the reds on a monday 1:20 day game or $40 for those June Brew Crew day games is rediculous.
I agree on the knothole fiasco too. Why cover it up? The games are almost all sold out. It'll let people WANT to be inside even more. -Oh wait that makes sense, sorry...
April 1.257
May 1.070
June 1.171
July 1.048
August 1.000
September 1.003
Lee's 2005 is pretty similar to what Frank Thomas did all during his 20's.
That's entirely a false statement. The Cubs continue to lead the majors in stirke outs for years now even with only getting a part-time performance from Wood and Prior. The Cubs have put together a team that should easily finish .500 That puts them a little luck in the health/production department away from 90 and contention for the playoffs. With everyone healthy the Cubs have a rotation that could go 7 deep and an improved bullpen. The Cubs OBP production out of the first two spots in the line-up last year were awful. Pierre and Walker/Hairiston both could put up OBP in the .350 range this team stands the chance of scoring a lot more runs(now I am assuming Dusty doesn't suddenly decide that Perez is the answer at 2B). Everyone is down on the team but they have 5 guys with 20+ HR power, two guys who could hit 40, a legit leadoff hitter, and stability in the bullpen for the first time in YEARS. If Wood and Prior give 25 starts a piece I say they win 90, If not they'll at least float at .500
Cedeno no sure thing
Ronny Cedeno's grip on the Cubs' shortstop job may be more tenuous than he knows with Opening Day around the corner.
Cedeno hit .216 in the Cactus League this spring after being handed the job over the winter when the Cubs couldn't sign Rafael Furcal or trade for Miguel Tejada.
Manager Dusty Baker hinted Thursday he could pull the plug early on the Cedeno experiment if his hitting doesn't improve in the regular season. Neifi Perez, whom Baker referred to as "my everything man," will be ready to move into the job if Cedeno struggles.
"Cedeno is going to get the first nod, but it's up to him to keep the job without us putting pressure on him," Baker said. "We're not in the giveaway business. We think he earned the situation that he's in, but …"
Baker digressed into a story about Dodgers veteran Ron Fairly telling him as a rookie that it's tougher to stay in the majors than it is to get there.
"With that in mind, you have to play," Baker said. "That's how it is."
If the Nanny weren't around, I'd comment on this story. As it is, I'll just say I've been saying this will happen since they resigned Neifi to that ridiculous contract. You don't pay a guy $2.5M a year to sit on the bench. Mother*******************
Yes, and?
Not that I disagree, but if Cedeno continues to hit .216, how long would you give him? Yes, Neifi is determined to suck and yes I'd probably give Cedeno more of a shot than Dusty will, but .216 is .216, whether it is by Cedeno, Neifi, or Corey.
At a certain point -- May? June? later? -- you have to think about sending the kid back down, even if means putting up with Neifi in the interim.
Is Neifi a much better glove than Cedeno? Otherwise, what's the justification for playing him over even a struggling Cedeno? A struggling Cedeno will probably provide as much offense as an average Neifi.
Just as importantly, though, how long do you want a rookie (or near-rookie) hitting below .220 before you start thinking about what it may be doing to him psychologically?
I'm not so sure about this. My impression (completely stat-free, mind you) is that Cedeno's got very good range, and a serious throwing arm. Neifi's pretty good defensively, but I can't believe he's much (if at all) better than Cedeno.
Still, it misses my main point, which was the fact that even the most prospect-friendly organization is only willing to stick it out for so long with a kid hitting < .220
I think the important thing is to show confidence in a young player, especially if he struggles.
I well remember Robin Ventura's rookie year, in 1990 (a year the White Sox were contending, by the way). He started the season 0-for-41 and looked shaky on defense (probably in large part because of his struggles at the plate), but they expressed confidence with him, left him as the starter, and he went on to finish the season strong and had a fine career. I remain convinced that if they had sent him back down to the minors, it may have had a deleterious effect.
If you don't think he'll ever snap out of it, and you're seeing his true talent level, that's one thing, but I think giving up on a young player because of temporary struggles is a lot more psychologically damaging than keeping him in there.
Not long, probably, but that's a whole different matter than announcing before the season's even begun that the rookie is on a short leash and better not screw up because there's an "everything man" that Baker's dying to give the job to. I swear, Baker's like a confidence assassin for rookies.
"well i had to go with neifi because
he gave me an awesome blow jobhe is a veteran and understands what its all about to start the season off right, i just want ronny to see what its likehe needs to start giving me blow jobs or else he is done, someone has to replace maciascucking fubs
I agree completely. The last thing I want to see is Cedeno or Murton getting yanked after a 0-23 stretch. I also agree with Sweet that announcing that he's on a "short leash" certain isn't helpful either.
Still, suppose he's starting every game and, come the All-Star Break, he's hitting .187. Don't you think that it might be better -- not just for the team, but for Cedeno -- to try to regain confidence and work out the kinks in the minors?
I sure would. In fact, I doubt I'd wait until the All-Star break to make that move. I wouldn't consider it in April or early May, but at a certain point -- maybe June 1, I'd be thinking about it.
I should add to this scenario the likely assumption that he isn't hitting .187 due solely to bad luck, but that he's also chasing pitches outside the strike zone, missing hittable pitches, and just looking quite lousy and Corey-esque overall.
I'm also not saying he's looking that bad now, but I'm just trying to envision a possible scenario in which I'd think of sending him down.
If the alternative is Neifi, I'd give him until the All-Star Break at least. The Cubs shouldn't be counting on a bunch of offense from shortstop anyway.
Don't you think that it might be better -- not just for the team, but for Cedeno -- to try to regain confidence and work out the kinks in the minors?
The only reason that might be true is if Dusty is breathing down his neck, screwing him up even worse. A good manager can help a rookie through a bad stretch.
What's most important is that they kids are starting and developing, whether in Chicago or Iowa. If they are starting over an extended period, yet continue to get their brains bashed in on a daily basis, I don't see that as especially productive to their development, let alone the team's success.
If I make the decision to send Cedeno down to improve his confidence, work out the kinks, etc., Neifi will have nothing to do with it -- I'd be doing it for Cedeno's sake. Besides, the season would likely be a lost cause at that point anyway.
Don't you think that it might be better -- not just for the team, but for Cedeno -- to try to regain confidence and work out the kinks in the minors?
--The only reason that might be true is if Dusty is breathing down his neck, screwing him up even worse. A good manager can help a rookie through a bad stretch.
I think if Cedeno starts into June or later, and he's still hitting < .220, we can pretty much assume that Dusty and his staff aren't helping him.
Okay, but at some point you've got to fish or cut bait with the guy. What if you send him down and he has another slow start next year? It's not like the situation looks to be much different in 2007 - are you just going to give up on him entirely?
This probably goes a long way towards explaining why the Cubs haven't developed a good position player from their own system since Mark Grace.
Few things. First, Cedeno ain't Ventura. Cedeno's another good prospect, Ventura had that huge college hitting streak, the Sox #1 pick. If Ventura's star was the size of Cedeno's current one, there's no way he lasts 41 AB. I'd be lying if I said I knew exactly when you pull the plug on a player, but the more you expect out of him, the more leeway he gets. Second, it's true the Sox competed, but no one expecting them to. They'd stunk in '89. The ad campaign in '90 revolved around the park, not the team. It was supposed to be a rebuilding year, so they were more tolerant of his struggles.
Last and most interestingly, I looked up his 0-for-41 on retrosheet. Maybe he was just having a lot of tough luck outs, like some liners. . . . Uh, no. He was terrible. In his first 31 ABs in that stretch, he hit the ball out of the infield zero times. He struck out. He went down swinging 6 times. Went down looking 4 times. Grounded out 20 times (thrice to the pitcher, once to the catcher, four times to firs, six times to second, three times to short, and three times to third). Now, I know that a greater percentage of GBs go for hits than FBs, but the guy couldn't hit the ball out of the infield for over two weeks! I seriously question how hard hit those balls were. Especially given all the times he went down looking. Add in that he had 6 walks in this stretch, and his plate approach sounds rather passive, and I wouldn't be surprised if his swings were weak and contact poor. Sure looks like it. He also popped up once, to the catcher, in his 31st straight out.
Finally, on May 5, he flew out to right. Twice in a row. Ending his ball-not-out-of-infield stretch. He then walked four times in five plate appearances (grounding to the pitcher in his other try) -- still looking passive frankly. On May 9th, now 0-for-37, he lined out to short - his first liner. Then he flew out to left (only his third ball out of the infield). After striking out looking on May 11 (his 12 K of the slump, and 6th looking) he doubled to right.
The Sox were very patient with him. He only missed one game. To be fair, in three other games Grebeck started, but Ventura came in later in those affairs (in one he had no ABs though). They never lifted him for a pinch hitter until he was 0-for-30 (used Karkovice of all people as the PH). Only used three pinch hitters for him total.
Wow he stunk though. How often does a big leaguer go 17 days without hitting the ball out of the infield?
I'm just saying that if he's hitting < .220 come June, I'd be thinking of sending him to Iowa to tune him up. I'm not saying "cut bait," nor am I saying that the Cubs should write him off.
Under that dire scenario, when 2007 rolls around, we'd have to see. If Cedeno spends 2+ months starting in Chicago and hitting .189, then goes to Iowa and doesn't improve down there, I'd be planning to bring someone else in.
But there are a lot if "ifs" before it got to that point. If Cedeno returned to Iowa and hit .350, I'd certainly be thinking of him as the 2007 shortstop, but I'd also be calling him up in September to see if he can stick.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't agree that sending him back down to the minors is going to boost his confidence, and in fact, I think it more likely to have the opposite effect.
If he's ready for the majors, no amount of crushing AAA pitching is going to teach him anything he doesn't already know.
If he's not, he shouldn't be going north with the club.
I agree for the short and medium-term. Anything done in April or May would be punitive and counterproductive.
OTOH, I can't see how a season similar to what Corey Patterson did last year (i.e., a slow start, spiraling out of control with panic, desperation, and lousy habits) will do anything to help Cedeno or the team.
I really don't think I'm being outrageous here. It's too easy to think about things in the abstract, but if we see Cedeno going 4/27, then 5/10, then 7/40, then 5/12, then 8/45, then 4/9, then 3/37, then 2/4, then 2/32 . . .
. . . suddenly it's June 3 and Cedeno's hitting a robust .185, looking miserable while doing it, not showing any signs of being able to work things out, and get