Yesterday, the Chicago Sun-Times (Mike Kiley, “Hendry choosing words carefully,” 1/18/2004) quoted Jim Hendry as saying, “We are going to give Ryan Dempster an opportunity to do [be the closer] in spring training, if nothing else changes. LaTroy Hawkins did a terrific job in the eighth last year and didn’t have quite as much luck in the ninth. In fairness to him, with Joe Borowski and Kyle Farnsworth being hurt, Hawk was put in a tough situation where he had to be overworked to a degree.”
In tomorrow’s Chicago Tribune (Dave Van Dyck, “Baker: Priority No. 1 is Sosa talk,” 1/20/2004), however, Dusty Baker is quoted as saying, “Everybody talks about Dempster, but we don’t know if he can do it; he never has done it. Joe Borowski might be healthy, we don’t know yet. And LaTroy Hawkins might be more experienced than last year. He certainly has the stuff. . . LaTroy will be better if he knows the league himself.”
“Everybody” is talking about Dempster as the closer because that’s what Baker’s boss is talking about. Baker and Hendry aren’t always on the same page, though, and this may be another example. On this issue, I think Baker will win out.
We spent all those weeks thinking about what Beltran would look like in a Cubs uniform, when being comatose would have been a much better use of our time. Beltran apparently is off to the Mets. Just like that. Without much of a fight from the Cubs.
If the Cubs didn’t believe Beltran was the franchise player other teams thought he was, that would be one thing. Then we’d be having a broader discussion on scouting. The Cubs’ decision would have been based solely on talent evaluation. You could respect that, even if you might not agree with it.
But the Cubs obviously think Beltran is a star. Otherwise they wouldn’t have made him a five-year, $75 million offer. The Mets and Beltran agreed in principle Sunday on a seven-year, $119 million deal.
The Cubs had to know their offer wasn’t going to be nearly enough, but they made it anyway. So this was all about money and wishful thinking, as it almost always is, and the Cubs came up short, as they historically have been known to do.
So, apparently, the Cubs were to just hand Beltran a contract and say, “Here, there’s a blank for ‘years’ and a blank for ‘dollars’. Kindly fill them in.”
Baseball Prospectusexamines the Cubs in its “Triple Play” column today. The first line reads: “The Cubs might be used to failing, but Jim Hendry isn’t. Hendry has met every possible expectation during his tenure as Cubs GM, yet this off-season looms as a major failure.” Cubs Pundit recently expressed similar sentiments: “Lots of talk but no action in the Cubs front office.”
I think it much too soon to make such pronouncements. BP bases its conclusion on the Cubs not meeting three goals: 1) trading Sammy Sosa; 2) strengthening the bullpen; and 3) signing an “impact bat.”
Of course, the offseason is not over (to be fair, BP’s pronouncement actually just states that failure is “looming"). While the Cubs don’t appear to have any plans to address the second goal, the first and third goals are still attainable. Unlikely, but attainable.
In any event, even if the Cubs held on to Sosa and failed to sign either Carlos Beltran or Magglio Ordonez, there is much to look forward to in 2005. BP only mentions the Nomar Garciaparra signing in passing, but that was an excellent re-signing. The ‘04 Cubs finished 5 wins short of their expected win-loss record based on their run differential. (St. Louis finished 5 games ahead, cutting the difference between the two teams by more than half.) A full season of Garciaparra at short (or even a 140 game season) will be a significant improvement over putting Alex Gonzalez, Ramon Martinez, and Rey Ordonez out there.
Moreover, one of the major reasons for the failure to meet expectations in 2004 was injuries. Kerry Wood and Mark Prior only started 43 games between them. 9 of those missed starts were made by a not-ready-for-prime-time Sergio Mitre. Prior’s and Wood’s combined starts total should increase by a third in 2005. And Prior didn’t become Mark Prior again until the last part of August. Mike Remlinger also spent part of the year on the DL. On the offensive side, both Sosa and Aramis Ramirez missed time. True, Sosa’s production is down drastically from his 1998-2002 levels, but he’s still an above average hitter.
The Cubs will have a hard time replacing Moises Alou’s surprising ‘04 level of production, but they would have had a hard time replacing that with Alou himself. Alou, I suspect, just had his last year of his career posting an OPS at least 10% greater than the league (he was at 14% in ‘04).
As for the bullpen—well, it is what it is. It’s not a great pen. LaTroy Hawkins has the capability of having a dominant season, but at the least will be quite good. If Ryan Dempster is able to pull off a 2003 version of Joe Borowski and all-of-a-sudden become an automatic saves guy, Hawkins can do what he excels at—putting out fires in the crucial 7th and 8th innings. Meaning we can relax about Kyle Farnsworth having to fill that role. It could work. What would be nice, though, is a 1989 version of Les Lancaster. How about another player who’s last name starts with an “L"—Jon Leicester. (Though for the similarities to get to the eerie stage, Lancaster would have had to pronounce his name “Laster").
BP fails to get at what the real failure this offseason has been—the construction of the bench. Jose Macias, Neifi Perez, and Henry Blanco could set out-making records if just given the opportunity.
Still, there’s no reason to worry yet. This team is good. Let’s play some games and find out how good.
Sandy Krum’s lawsuit claims that former Cubs athletic trainer Dave Groeschner was not licensed to be an athletic trainer in Illinois until after his firing by the Cubs. Jim Hendry’s statement yesterday, reports the Daily Herald, said that Groeschner “was certified to do his job in the state of Illinois.” However, the web site for the Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation allows you to look up licensed professionals. Here is the listing for Groeschner, which shows an “original date” of November 5, 2004, after his firing in October.
The Daily Southtown’s Nathaniel Whalen reports today that Matt Clement’s agent Barry Axelrod has not heard from the Cubs at all. The Cubs’ exclusive negotiation window with Clement expires tomorrow. No surprise there.
Axelrod also says the Cubs have shown a “glimmer of interest” in a different client—Rich Aurilia. But, says, Axelrod, “From what they said, though, they want to explore the situation with Nomar first.” Aurilia had an OPS 10% below league average last year.
Apparently Dusty Baker is on some sort of attempt to have each member of the 2002 Giants play for him in Chicago. Ramon Martinez, Kenny Lofton, Tom Goodwin, and Calvin Murray have already been checked off the list. Shawon Dunston better have his phone line free.
Via The Cub Reporter is this post by Wait ‘Til Next Year’s Bryan Smith on the Cubs’ minor leaguers and who should be protected on the 40-man roster this winter.
After an injury-riddled seasons, the Cubs fired head athletic trainer Dave Groeschner and assistant trainer Sandy Krum. Daily Herald columnist Barry Rozner had this to say about the firings:
The blame game
Never mind the curse of the goat. If you’re a Cubs trainer, it’s the curse of the scapegoat.
It has become something of a tradition at Wrigley Field to blame the trainers when things go bad, so Wednesday’s news that the Cubs had done it again was hardly surprising.
Besides, when you’ve already blamed the announcers, the media in general, the umpires, the coaches and worldwide conspiracies, why not blame the trainers?
Worth noting
GM Jim Hendry looked less than managerial during the Sammy Sosa and Steve Stone fiascos, but in the last week he has regained some control and whacked two Dusty Baker pigeons (a trainer and a third-base coach). Is this the start of something between Hendry and Baker?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the tenor of the second item inconsistent with the first? Bad job Cubs in placing blame where it doesn’t belong; good job Hendry for starting to act like a GM and taking control of the team.
In any event, if there are problems between Hendry and Baker in terms of control of the team, this isn’t the first evidence of those problems (see here, here, and here, all from the 2003 season).
It was surprising, given that Dave Groeschner was in his first season as the Cubs trainer. The Cubs injuries can hardly be laid at Groeschner’s feet on the whole, though there are certainly reasons beyond them that the Cubs may have. The Cubs were only slightly above average in days lost to the DL. Still, one year is too short a time frame to make any judgment about Groeschner’s programs.
UPDATE (10/16/2004 1:05am):The Big Red C thinks it a goodthing that Hendry appears to be taking control.
The Chicago Cubs did the right thing and fined Sammy Sosa one day’s pay—$87,000—for his abandonment of the team on the last day of the season, reports the AP.
As Northside Lounge has already noted, the Chicago Tribune reports today that Greg Maddux’s agent, Scott Boras, is trying to get Jim Hendry to meet his demands by noting Maddux’s ability to coach the Cubs pitchers. According to the Trib, Boras is “pointing to improvements by former teammates Mike Hampton, Kevin Millwood and Damian Moss, among others.”
Interesting people to point to. Hampton went from Colorado to Atlanta, and so was bound to improve. As for Millwood and Moss:
Millwood went 18-8 with a 3.24 ERA for Atlanta in 2002 before regressing last year to 14-12 and 4.01 in Philadelphia.
Moss had a career year in Atlanta in 2002, going 12-6 and 3.42, before slumping a year ago to 10-12 and 5.16 with Baltimore and San Francisco.
In other words, Maddux is such a great teacher his students forget everything he’s ever taught them as soon as they’re not around him anymore.
Also, as Dennis writes, “[P]itching coaches don’t make all that money and neither do too many 38 year old six inning pitchers.”
In response to the previous post regarding the Cubs’ interest in Luis Castillo, one commenter expressed his desire that the Cubs instead attempt to trade for Jose Vidro. Today, Alex at ball talk (no permalink that I can decipher) has a good post on why the Cubs should do exactly that.
There’s been a surprising lack news coming out of the Chicago papers regarding what the Cubs are going to do about first base next season. It’s really hard to imagine them keeping both Hee Seop Choi and Randall Simon, unless Choi was given another year at Iowa, which would border on the absurd.
This is a huge decision. And I don’t mean huge in tough. I mean huge in that this decision is going to tell us how serious Jim Hendry is about position player development (and perhaps about how much influence Dusty Baker has over personnel). As David Geiser wrote at The Cub Reporter, “One thing is certain, and that is that Randall Simon needs to go away. . . . Re-signing him would be a huge mistake, and deciding on him over Choi for the long-term would be a blunder for the ages.”
Something to keep in mind: As bad as Choi slumped after his return from the disabled list following his concussion, he still ended up with a higher OPS than Simon on the year (771 to Simon’s 743).
Other things to keep in mind: Choi is younger, cheaper, a better defensive player, gets on base more (even with Simon’s batting average advantage), has a minor league history of being able to hit lefties, and has a good chance, if given everyday playing time, of becoming the first Cubs year-in and year-out power threat at first base since Ernie Banks.
What I think will happen: Simon is the everyday first baseman against righties next year after the Cubs trade Choi away. Ever since the College of Coaches debacle of ‘62 and ‘63, the Cubs organization has been risk averse. Jim Hendry and Dusty Baker, as much good as they may do, are not the people who are going to change that mindset. Choi is risky in the minds of the Cubs and the Chicago media. Simon is safe. Hence, Simon will play.
I’m sure most of you have seen this, but David Geiser has been guest blogging at The Cub Reporter. He’s got three posts up now – here, here, and here – on what the Cubs need to do in the offseason. Well worth reading.
The Daily Herald’s Bruce Miles on how wisely (and unwisely) the Cubs have spent their $80 million. Part of the “bad money,” of course, is Shawn Estes. The Cub Reporter puts Dusty Baker’s continued use of Estes in perspective – somebody pitching this poorly has just never continued to pitch for a contending team before. And Scott and Dennis at Northside Lounge examine Baker’s continued defense of Estes as someone who’s just been unlucky.
There’s one other thing I wanted to note from Miles’s article:
For now, we’re going to cut breaks to reliever Mike Remlinger ($2.63 million as part of a three-year, $10 million contract) and catcher Damian Miller ($2.7 million).
Remlinger hasn’t been himself, but he may yet turn it around. There’s no reason to believe Remlinger has been pitching in pain, but who knows what the Cubs will tell us after the season is over?
Did anyone else notice during Remlinger’s two inning stint in today’s game – in which he didn’t allow a run and continued to strike people out – that WGN was registering his fastball between 84-86, 5-6 MPH below what he normally throws? There’s no reason to think the gun was inaccurate; it appeared accurate for all the other pitchers. That’s a pretty big dropoff in velocity. As noted, though, it did not seem to affect Remlinger’s performance.
With Bobby Hill officially named the PTBNL and sent to Pittsburgh on Friday (see The Cubs Transaction Report for commentary from Christian and Brian), and with the Cubs having no other second baseman in their minor league system that appears ready for the big leagues next season – Brendan Harris has a 789 OPS for Double-A West Tennessee and has spent the majority of his time at third in any case – it appears more likely that Jim Hendry will try to re-sign Mark Grudzielanek to play second base next season. (See my earlier comments on why I think that is a bad idea.) The Tribune’s Paul Sullivan at least thinks that’s the case, writing in Saturday’s paper: “The Cubs, with no minor-league second baseman close to being ready for the majors, likely will try to re-sign Grudzielanek.”
But the quote from Hendry is actually to some extent equivocal:
“‘Grud’ is playing great,,” Hendry said. “When the season is over, the door is open for anything that would make us a better ballclub than we are now.”
That, to me, sounds like Hendry saying he’ll work hard in the offseason to find a better alternative than Grudzielanek (with Grudzielanek being offered a possible bench role, at a much reduced salary). At least that’s what I hope Hendry is saying, grateful as I am for Grudzielanek providing close to league average offense and good defense this season.
There’s been a surprising lack news coming out of the Chicago papers regarding what the Cubs are going to do about first base next season. It’s really hard to imagine them keeping both Hee Seop Choi and Randall Simon, unless Choi was given another year at Iowa, which would border on the absurd.
This is a huge decision. And I don’t mean huge in tough. I mean huge in that this decision is going to tell us how serious Jim Hendry is about position player development (and perhaps about how much influence Dusty Baker has over personnel). As