I didn't wnat to launch a Cantu bash. He has had issues with his wrist (which may be kinda important for a hitter) and has been sound at 1B. My point is that the love of some players and the hate for others othen has little to do with what they've produced. Cantu is 6th in RC/27, 7th in OPS, and has no kind of "clutch" numbers in 2009 (not that I put much stock in individual season numbers of that nature). I happen to like how much contact he achieves, so he has some more value in the 4 hole than OPS would indicate.

 

This team ended 2008 with 7 of 8 of our starting position players running .800+ OPS and we started this speed/defense jackassery and thus sat on Bonifacio at 3B (a offensive production position) for months.

 

As of right now. Coghlan, Hermida, Ramirez, Ross, Uggla, and Baker are more dangerous with a bat.

I think the fact that Cantu hasn't been bad enough to be moved from the cleanup role means that he is far from terrible. Some would say he should have been moved out of that role, but he still hasn't been glaringly bad there.

 

 

 

He hasn't?

 

His batting average his stayed around .280 all year and he has driven in a fair share of runs (71). There's nothing special about a .427 slugging percentage nor any of his numbers, but I didn't say Cantu was special or even good in the cleanup role, I said that he had been far from terrible.

 

And a .280 avg with 71 RBI is far from terrible even if it is below average for a cleanup hitter.

 

 

He's got a .760 .OPS. (.715 against RHP)

That's not good from a 4th hitter/corner infielder.

 

He's also been horrendus this month.

 

And contrary to popular belief, he hasn't been the "clutch" guy, either. He's been a lot better with nobody on base than he has been with men on base. So, basically, the RBI's are just due to him having more chances than most of the other guys on the team.

 

When Cantu comes up with a man on, that man scores 16% of the time. That's up from 15% last year, and only Hanley is higher on the team.

When Cantu comes up with a man on, that man scores 16% of the time. That's up from 15% last year, and only Hanley is higher on the team.

 

 

Interesting, though I did say I liked his contact in the cleanup spot. I think one of his problems has been that he hasn't been his own RBI quite as often. This time last year I think he had like 8-9 more HRs.

I think the fact that Cantu hasn't been bad enough to be moved from the cleanup role means that he is far from terrible. Some would say he should have been moved out of that role, but he still hasn't been glaringly bad there.

 

 

 

He hasn't?

 

His batting average his stayed around .280 all year and he has driven in a fair share of runs (71). There's nothing special about a .427 slugging percentage nor any of his numbers, but I didn't say Cantu was special or even good in the cleanup role, I said that he had been far from terrible.

 

And a .280 avg with 71 RBI is far from terrible even if it is below average for a cleanup hitter.

 

 

He's got a .760 .OPS. (.715 against RHP)

That's not good from a 4th hitter/corner infielder.

 

He's also been horrendus this month.

 

And contrary to popular belief, he hasn't been the "clutch" guy, either. He's been a lot better with nobody on base than he has been with men on base. So, basically, the RBI's are just due to him having more chances than most of the other guys on the team.

 

When Cantu comes up with a man on, that man scores 16% of the time. That's up from 15% last year, and only Hanley is higher on the team.

 

When Cantu comes up with men on, he has a .676 .OPS.

I think the fact that Cantu hasn't been bad enough to be moved from the cleanup role means that he is far from terrible. Some would say he should have been moved out of that role, but he still hasn't been glaringly bad there.

 

 

 

He hasn't?

 

His batting average his stayed around .280 all year and he has driven in a fair share of runs (71). There's nothing special about a .427 slugging percentage nor any of his numbers, but I didn't say Cantu was special or even good in the cleanup role, I said that he had been far from terrible.

 

And a .280 avg with 71 RBI is far from terrible even if it is below average for a cleanup hitter.

 

 

He's got a .760 .OPS. (.715 against RHP)

That's not good from a 4th hitter/corner infielder.

 

He's also been horrendus this month.

 

And contrary to popular belief, he hasn't been the "clutch" guy, either. He's been a lot better with nobody on base than he has been with men on base. So, basically, the RBI's are just due to him having more chances than most of the other guys on the team.

 

I'm not trying to get into a philosophical debate on the value of RBI, but I will say that if Cantu were really doing incredibly terrible, he would not have 71 RBI. Those runs are tangible evidence that he has actually done ok in the cleanup spot. If you're offense is generating runs (which it has done reasonably well most of the year) and your cleanup hitter has 71 RBI, why change it?

 

Clearly, you've never sat through years where teams had cleanup hitters who were on pace for 60-70 RBI. I have (it's calle following the Cubs over the Years) and trust me, runs don't just happen. Even though some of those Cubs teams weren't that good, their top of the lineup was getting on base at just as much as most top of the lineup guys would.

 

And by runners on, do you mean having Bonifacio and his stellar OBP hitting second most of the year (or leadoff). Sure, that changed when Johnson was brought it, but he played for 2 1/2 weeks before getting hurt and Gload/Helms haven't been good OBP guys in his stead. He does hit behind Hanley, which has its benefits, but Hanley has done a pretty good job of driving in runs that Cantu may have gotten the opportunity to drive in.

 

By the same token, Hanley's 85 RBI didn't just happen because runners were on base for him either.

I think the fact that Cantu hasn't been bad enough to be moved from the cleanup role means that he is far from terrible. Some would say he should have been moved out of that role, but he still hasn't been glaringly bad there.

 

 

 

He hasn't?

 

His batting average his stayed around .280 all year and he has driven in a fair share of runs (71). There's nothing special about a .427 slugging percentage nor any of his numbers, but I didn't say Cantu was special or even good in the cleanup role, I said that he had been far from terrible.

 

And a .280 avg with 71 RBI is far from terrible even if it is below average for a cleanup hitter.

 

 

He's got a .760 .OPS. (.715 against RHP)

That's not good from a 4th hitter/corner infielder.

 

He's also been horrendus this month.

 

And contrary to popular belief, he hasn't been the "clutch" guy, either. He's been a lot better with nobody on base than he has been with men on base. So, basically, the RBI's are just due to him having more chances than most of the other guys on the team.

 

I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate on the value of RBI, but I will say that if Cantu were really doing incredibly terrible, he would not have 71 RBI.

 

He is doing incredibly terrible.

.227/.303/.320 in August.

 

RBI's are team dependent. As a 4th hitter, he's obviously going to get more chances.

 

Against RHP, Cantu has been a below average hitter this year. Yet, he hits 4th against them...everyday.

hardly the problem on this team.

Cantu is ranked 11th of 13 in OPS for NL first basemen. Nick Johnson is 10th but there is a huge gap between the two.

I think the fact that Cantu hasn't been bad enough to be moved from the cleanup role means that he is far from terrible. Some would say he should have been moved out of that role, but he still hasn't been glaringly bad there.

 

 

 

He hasn't?

 

His batting average his stayed around .280 all year and he has driven in a fair share of runs (71). There's nothing special about a .427 slugging percentage nor any of his numbers, but I didn't say Cantu was special or even good in the cleanup role, I said that he had been far from terrible.

 

And a .280 avg with 71 RBI is far from terrible even if it is below average for a cleanup hitter.

 

 

He's got a .760 .OPS. (.715 against RHP)

That's not good from a 4th hitter/corner infielder.

 

He's also been horrendus this month.

 

And contrary to popular belief, he hasn't been the "clutch" guy, either. He's been a lot better with nobody on base than he has been with men on base. So, basically, the RBI's are just due to him having more chances than most of the other guys on the team.

 

I'm not trying to get into a philosophical debate on the value of RBI, but I will say that if Cantu were really doing incredibly terrible, he would not have 71 RBI. Those runs are tangible evidence that he has actually done ok in the cleanup spot. If you're offense is generating runs (which it has done reasonably well most of the year) and your cleanup hitter has 71 RBI, why change it?

 

Clearly, you've never sat through years where teams had cleanup hitters who were on pace for 60-70 RBI. I have (it's calle following the Cubs over the Years) and trust me, runs don't just happen. Even though some of those Cubs teams weren't that good, their top of the lineup was getting on base at just as much as most top of the lineup guys would.

 

And by runners on, do you mean having Bonifacio and his stellar OBP hitting second most of the year (or leadoff). Sure, that changed when Johnson was brought it, but he played for 2 1/2 weeks before getting hurt and Gload/Helms haven't been good OBP guys in his stead. He does hit behind Hanley, which has its benefits, but Hanley has done a pretty good job of driving in runs that Cantu may have gotten the opportunity to drive in.

 

By the same token, Hanley's 85 RBI didn't just happen because runners were on base for him either.

 

 

RBIs are relatively worthless. Whenever people bring up RBIs, I like to mention Ruben Sierra's 1993 season. He finished the season with just an .678 OPS, but since he either batted 3rd or 4th in the lineup for most of the season, he had 101 RBIs. Granted, he was a little better with RISP, but still not nearly enough to merit 101 RBIs.

 

It's based mainly off of opportunities, and is dependent on many other factors, which is why it shouldn't be used when evaluating a player. If we would have put Coghlan, Ross, Hermida, etc. in the 4th spot, all of them would probably have just as many, if not more RBIs.

RBIs are team dependent. When guys get on base, they depend on a guy like Cantu to hit them in which doesn't magically happen.

It's based mainly off of opportunities, and is dependent on many other factors, which is why it shouldn't be used when evaluating a player. If we would have put Coghlan, Ross, Hermida, etc. in the 4th spot, all of them would probably have just as many, if not more RBIs.

 

You may wanna go back and read message No. 52.

It's based mainly off of opportunities, and is dependent on many other factors, which is why it shouldn't be used when evaluating a player. If we would have put Coghlan, Ross, Hermida, etc. in the 4th spot, all of them would probably have just as many, if not more RBIs.

 

You may wanna go back and read message No. 52.

 

 

I don't see your point. Ross, Coghlan, and Hermida all have an OPS at least .100 points higher than Cantu with men on base.

Cantu is ranked 11th of 13 in OPS for NL first basemen. Nick Johnson is 10th but there is a huge gap between the two.

 

 

Also, Johnson's OBP is a billion. And that's more valuable than SLG, point for point.

This team is better than what they have shown most of the year. A real manager would have been on his players to not have them let up. And when there was a stretch of games when it seemed umpires where were siding with the opposing team (ex. 2nd game of Colorado double header), Fredi never even got out of the dugout let alone get into umpires faces and let them have it. He doesn't use his gut but his stubborn statistics (I know that gut does not mean a win but it beats this crap). So when do you think Beinfest and Samson realize that Fredi will do no better than have a winning a season? When will they realize that so long as Fredi is the manager, this team will choke each and every year just like they are doing now?

 

 

I guess you're in the same sh*tty state of frustration and somehow anger I'm in today. (And problably many of us) On the other hand I'm not pretty much a fan of Fredi's either, maybe for different reasons.

 

That said, I believe that if by passion you mean making bolder moves, or some kind of out-of-the-book decisions I might be on your side, but honestly I also think that the only thing getting into the umps faces in those cases would do is getting Fredi's ass in the showers.

 

Arguing with the umps over outs, strikes, and balls called is plain dumb, since that's irreversible.

 

How could any of that save the day?

 

 

 

Problem with that. When he does think outside the lines, or makes decisions that some fans either can't or refuse to understand, he gets nailed for it around here. Called idiotic and stupid, among other things. Fans always know better.

 

 

I agree with you, when I said bolder moves, or some kind of out-of-the-book decisions is because having seen the best of two very different worlds as far as baseball is concerned I've seen some of those "crazy things" many of which really worked, the difference is that there was nothing to lose in terms of salary, position, etc.

 

Can you imagine what would happen if any manager here gave an order like "From now on and untill I say otherwise everybody bunts, no matter what, no matter who"?

 

I think that even if it worked that manager would be crucified. So I don't recommend that to Fredi or no one else.

Lou Pinella is as "passionate" as they come yet he hasn't led a team to the WS in nearly 20 years. Comparing this team to the 2003 is outrageous, that team was loaded, a virtual All-Star team with one of the greatest defensive infields ever assembled. The OP is just a troll because no one can be that dumb.