The day we learned Jim Hendry was fired, I talked about how listing general manager candidates would be lazy. The reality at that time was that there wasn’t a general manager in baseball that wasn’t a candidate. The media now seems content to say that had the Red Sox not collapsed Theo would have stuck around, but that’s naive. The very same reasons for joining the Cubs would still have existed had the Red Sox went to the playoffs and won the World Series. In the end, the Cubs got the best guy for the job.
The manager search, which we can only be relatively sure will come soon, is not like the GM search. While almost any manager would love to take over the team, the Cubs would have no interest in negotiating with another team to interview a manager. So the candidates for manager, if Quade is fired of course, would be the ones who are not under contract. Theo hired only one manager in his time as GM with the Red Sox.
Terry Francona had managed in the White Sox organization after retiring as a player and then as a third base coach for the Tigers in 1996. After the season he was hired as the manager of the Phillies and after four losing seasons was fired. He spent one year as an assistant to John Hart, Indians General Manager. The Assistant GM for the Indians then was Mark Shapiro who would become the GM of the Indians in 2002.
Hart was initially to retire, but then took the GM job for the Rangers the very next year and Francona was signed to be the first base coach. In 2003 he was hired to be the first base coach for the A’s. That season Grady Little would be fired after the Red Sox came so close to getting to the World Series and then Theo Epstein hired him to manage his team where he stayed on for 8 seasons before being thrown under the bus by the organization following this season.
I recall reading somewhere, but I cannot remember where I read this. I’m pretty sure it was in a book so I didn’t bother looking for it online, but anyway, I remember the author talking about how Terry Francona had been an old-school type manager with the Phillies, but after getting the first base job wit the A’s become more open to advanced stats. This would seem to be common in the A’s organization, but when Francona was hired by the Red Sox he wasn’t the same coach he was in Philadelphia. Not only did he spent the year in the A’s organization, but in 2001 he was an assistant to then GM John Hart whose Assistant GM was a sabermetric fan (Shapiro). He then got a job with the Rangers (Hart was the GM). Hart would not have the same success in Texas that he had in Cleveland and would retire after the 2005 season. Despite that, new GM John Daniels thought so highly of him they gave him a lot of money to stay on in an advisory role. They did not want him to interview elsewhere.
Hart is openminded, but not what you’d call a sabermetric GM. He’s more old school than that, but he’s surrounded himself with some of the brightest. The list includes Mark Shapiro, Josh Byrnes, Paul DePodesta, Neil Huntington, Chris Antonneti and the current Rangers GM John Daniels. All 6 of them, and probably a few others, have been GMs. Huntington, Antonneti and Daniels are all current GMs. Shapiro took over Hart and then Antonneti took over for him. These are all GMs that you’d consider to have a strong sabermetric background.
Maybe there’s something to Theo working around some of the better GMs and in a sabermetric organization that made him change. Maybe there were no changes other than the talent on the roster. We don’t know and likely never will. It couldn’t have hurt. I know I’ve read some who say that he was a very different manager. It may be true. It may not be. It’s 50/50.
Francona was Theo’s first and only managerial hiring. He stuck with him for 8 years and I’m pretty sure had Theo been likely to remain the Sox GM that Francona would have returned next season. I think the Red Sox learned early on that Theo was so interested in the Cubs job and there was little they could do to stop him. As a result, they knew the new GM might want to hire his own manager so they let Tito walk.
Theo is now a Cub and Francona is obviously available so people are putting two and two together and that means that Francona is a favorite to land the job. I’m not so sure that’s true. While the two have a lot of respect for one another, I didn’t get the impression from Tito that he was looking to 1) manager in 2012 or necessarily work again with Theo. I imagine working for him is demanding. You not only have the Red Sox fans, the media and ownership, but you also have the GM. It probably wasn’t easy, but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen.
The other name thrown around almost as often is Ryne Sandberg. This is for obvious reasons and while I don’t subscribe the Ryne Sandberg Is Awesome At Everything Church, I think he’s shown over the last 3 years in the high minors that he can and does deserve a chance to manage at the highest level. He’s well respected by the players from everything I’ve read. He’d be a fan favorite and he’d be happy to take any managerial job at this point. You may not be able to push him around like Joe Blow off the street, but he’s coachable. Theo can work with someone like Sandberg. I don’t see any reason they couldn’t. Sandberg would be cheaper than Tito.
Based on what we know of Theo and the Cubs orgnazation, those are the two obvious candidates. I’ll throw out one other name that I haven’t yet heard: DeMarlo Hale.
Hale has been with the Red Sox (bench coach in 2011) for a long time. He was a player there, coached in the minor leagues and after coaching a bit for the Rangers (working with Francona for a year), he returned the Sox. He’s been considered a candidate to replace Francona. He interviewed twice last year for the Blue Jays managerial opening. It was the same opening that Ryne Sandberg was intiially a candidate of.
I don’t know much about Hale. I do know that the Red Sox and Cubs will essentially be beginning their searches at the same time. The Cubs may be a bit behind as they have to figure out what to do with Mike Quade. Hale has much stronger ties to the Red Sox of course, but he was born in Chicago. He was also hired by Theo.
[quote name=GW]i don’t really think it would make much of a difference. (full disclosure, i think that the “undervalued obp theory” was overblown). every year it seems like there are big obp/low power saber-darlings that don’t get respect in prospect rankings, and have at best slightly more success than the their prospect status would have indicated. youk transformed himself from a 10hr guy to a 25hr guy. without that, he’d likely as not be a bench player.[/quote]Most of those players are .275/.375/.430 hitters, GW. Youkilis was .300/.440/.440.
i remember this too. i think it was that baseball prospectus book that went in depth about bosox strategies after their first championship?
I guarantee you that if you find a hitter in the minor leagues today that has hit .300/.440/.440 they are going to be ranked fairly high. They’d definitely be in the top 100.
That Youkilis is older is a good point.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=barton001dar
just one example. much better prospect than youk in terms of age/level. guys that can maintain high obp’s w/out power are pretty rare.
http://www.amazon.com/Mind-Game-Created-Blueprint-Winning/dp/0761140182
i think it was this one.
[quote name=GW]i remember this too. i think it was that baseball prospectus book that went in depth about bosox strategies after their first championship?[/quote]I think you’re right. I can’t remember the title, but I’m pretty sure the cover was green.
[quote name=GW]http://www.amazon.com/Mind-Game-Created-Blueprint-Winning/dp/0761140182
i think it was this one.[/quote]I think so.
it’s not that i disagree with any of this, and it’s hard not to be impressed by what sandberg has done, but i’m still skeptical. as a player, i remember him being very introverted. i could see that blowing up pretty quickly.
Though after looking through Francona’s history I’m not it’s just his time with the A’s. He’d been around open minded people in the game for a few years before he got the Sox job.
[quote name=GW]it’s not that i disagree with any of this, and it’s hard not to be impressed by what sandberg has done, but i’m still skeptical. as a player, i remember him being very introverted. i could see that blowing up pretty quickly.[/quote]Apparently he’s a lot different now. I remember him talking once about how when it’s you that’s on the field playing it’s easier to be quiet and just kind of hide. But he said now that he’s watching all these other guys who he’s invested so much time in it’s become impossible for him to be like that. He basically went from the quiet guy to the parent strongly advocating for his child. It’s almost exactly like that from what I’ve read.
Maybe that’s easier in the minor leagues. That’s possible, but I really think managing has just changed the overall investment he has in the game.
Dave Martinez?
[quote name=GW]http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=barton001dar
just one example. much better prospect than youk in terms of age/level. guys that can maintain high obp’s w/out power are pretty rare.[/quote]I wouldn’t say .440 slugging is without power. I’d say, as in Starlin Castro’s case, it’s not much power.
I remember Youkilis coming up and being a big name. I know he was highly thought of by the Sox by the time he reached the big leagues. It’s difficult for me to believe that there’s a guy who could hit as well as him today, and play an important defensive position, and not be ranked in the top 100. Every year there are guys who are 25 who are in the top 100 it seems. I agree Youk was older than Jackson so we probably have to give the edge to Jackson.
Think about this in terms of what the teams value. The A’s valued OBP at that time more than any other team. The Red Sox now value that stat as much as anyone. I think it makes sense, but the $7 million the Sox would owe Theo if the deal doesn’t go through makes it less likely Jackson goes the other way.
I’ll be a Rays homer and say I wouldn’t mind if they went after Dave Martinez, Maddon’s bench coach. He’ll probably be sought after (was heavily rumored for the White Sox job) and has that whole ex-Cub thing, if that matters to you.
it’s a pipe dream, but i would love to see a dedicated, in-game strategist as a bench coach. mgl minus the douchiness, basically.
If the Cubs hire Dave Martinez instead of Sandberg, they might as well hire Palmeiro as his bench coach and have them finger bang Cindy in front of the cameras during the press conference while she flips Sandberg off.
[quote name=GW]http://www.amazon.com/Mind-Game-Created-Blueprint-Winning/dp/0761140182
i think it was this one.[/quote]
Didn’t read that one. I liked Baseball Between the Numbers, but their pennant race book was utter shit and turned me off from the rest of their work.
[quote name=GW]it’s not that i disagree with any of this, and it’s hard not to be impressed by what sandberg has done, but i’m still skeptical. as a player, i remember him being very introverted. i could see that blowing up pretty quickly.[/quote]
When Sandberg was coaching in the minors I always got the vibe from the writers that he was pretty vocal with his teams. Maybe even too much so.
FWIW, it’s tougher to put a price on it but I think the amount of flak the Cubs would get, from the fans/media as well as with other GM candidates/teams, if these negotiations fell apart makes that a moot point.
(dying laughing), that sentence was Yellonesque
[quote name=GW]it’s a pipe dream, but i would love to see a dedicated, in-game strategist as a bench coach. mgl minus the douchiness, basically.[/quote]I’d love it if it were MGL. Just give him a laptop and we can read about how every decision is the worst that has ever been made.
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2011/10/14/red_sox_cubs_negotiate_compensation_for_theo_epstein/
[quote name=Berselius]FWIW, it’s tougher to put a price on it but I think the amount of flak the Cubs would get, from the fans/media as well as with other GM candidates/teams, if these negotiations fell apart makes that a moot point.[/quote]They’d catch all kinds of hell for sure, but it at least provides some leverage to the Cubs. The Red Sox have already moved on. Cherington has all but officially been named their GM and has been doing all the work the last couple of weeks. The Red Sox have a lot of money to spend, but I’m sure they don’t want to spend $7 million on a GM who isn’t even working for them.
The deal will get done. There’s a .0001% chance that it doesn’t.
[quote name=mb21]I’d love it if it were MGL. Just give him a laptop and we can read about how every decision is the worst that has ever been made.[/quote]
literal (dying laughing)
This is the first time I’ve read that, but it obviously makes sense. If Epstein is going to bring 45 guys with him, it’s going to cost the Cubs more.
[quote name=mb21]
The deal will get done. There’s a .0001% chance that it doesn’t.[/quote]
Agreed with this. I just don’t think the Cubs can use that for leverage. They’ll get Theo and whoever he wants to bring along, even if they have to grumble about the cost.
[quote name=Berselius]literal (dying laughing)[/quote]That thread over there was hilarious. Still haven’t read the BTF thread though.
As long as Bobby Valentine stays the hell away from this team, I’ll be happy.
[quote name=jtsunami]As long as Bobby Valentine stays the hell away from this team, I’ll be happy.[/quote]That goes double for that mustachioed moron in the WGN TV booth, who has been lobbying HARD for the job.
What about Carlos Marmol as compensation? Papelbon is a free agent and Marmol would give them a decent 9th inning guy. Cubs would have to throw something else in. Maybe Jay Jackson.
[quote name=mb21]What about Carlos Marmol as compensation? Papelbon is a free agent and Marmol would give them a decent 9th inning guy. Cubs would have to throw something else in. Maybe Jay Jackson.[/quote]
Yes, please. Though I think the reports that no MLB talent is changing hands will hold up.
I think that Sandburg will be less of a factor than local fans think, if only because Theo basically can choose anyone he wants. I would be surprised if he went with Sandburg or Francona over some other candidate he’s had his eye on. He owes nothing to any implicit promises the org made to Sandburg, or any promises he made to Tito in the past job. He can pick from his secret wishlist right now and suffer no flak at this point. Then again, he seems to be the type of guy who doesn’t pay much attention to the media anyway, so he may be immune to flak.
[quote name=mb21]What about Carlos Marmol as compensation? Papelbon is a free agent and Marmol would give them a decent 9th inning guy. Cubs would have to throw something else in. Maybe Jay Jackson.[/quote]I’d do that. But like b says, all reports are that no MLB players will be in the deal.
I have to admit that one of the big reasons that I like Epstein is that his charitable foundation is named Foundation to be Named Later (dying laughing)
[quote name=josh]I think that Sandburg will be less of a factor than local fans think, if only because Theo basically can choose anyone he wants. I would be surprised if he went with Sandburg or Francona over some other candidate he’s had his eye on. He owes nothing to any implicit promises the org made to Sandburg, or any promises he made to Tito in the past job. He can pick from his secret wishlist right now and suffer no flak at this point. Then again, he seems to be the type of guy who doesn’t pay much attention to the media anyway, so he may be immune to flak.[/quote]
Agreed, or at least I hope so. I get that he’s managed at the MiLB level and that is important experience, but I still don’t think that matches the profile Theo is looking for. Note that Francona had several MLB jobs, including talent evaluation, before becoming a big league manager. Sandberg has not done this.
I also don’t like the idea that the Cubs should limit themselves to former Cubs for any reason. There are a lot of good candidates who have plenty of big league experience as bench coaches, base coaches, or managers – why pick someone unproven and inexperienced? The Cubs didn’t hire someone unproven for the GM job, how is the manager’s job any different?
I think Theo would be happy to bring Francona in as manager. I don’t think Francona is all that interested right now though.
[quote name=josh]I think that Sandburg will be less of a factor than local fans think, if only because Theo basically can choose anyone he wants. I would be surprised if he went with Sandburg or Francona over some other candidate he’s had his eye on. He owes nothing to any implicit promises the org made to Sandburg, or any promises he made to Tito in the past job. He can pick from his secret wishlist right now and suffer no flak at this point. Then again, he seems to be the type of guy who doesn’t pay much attention to the media anyway, so he may be immune to flak.[/quote]
The rumors out of Chicago are that Ricketts strongly prefers Sandberg, but will leave it to Theo to make the hire. If you’re going young, you hire Sandberg. He knows a lot of the guys already here, and he’s a manager that can grow with the team. If you’re going to load up on FA and make a serious run at getting better now, you probably want to hire a guy who is A.) experienced in flossing numerous big egos in the locker room, and B.) isn’t going to try and play Billy Badass with his veterans, which means no Ryno and probably a guy like Francona or Valentine.
[quote name=Phil Rogers]Regarding snag in Theo compensation talks: MLB may be telling teams to take their time. The ideal window for formal unveiling is Mon/Tues.[/quote].
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/complacent-reynolds#.TphPJrJ7SDk
I really resent to degree to which Selig meddles in team affairs. GTFO, Shortsleeves.
Hmmm. Chicago sports radio saying the the Cubs began negotiating the compensation package with Randy Bush and for some reason, Ricketts took over at some point yesterday.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Hmmm. Chicago sports radio saying the the Cubs began negotiating the compensation package with Randy Bush and for some reason, Ricketts took over at some point yesterday.[/quote]
Probably over the FO staff, not surprising that he would be involved where that’s concerned.
Heyman says Epstein could take someone from the medical staff. Wut?
[quote name=Berselius]Heyman says Epstein could take someone from the medical staff. Wut?[/quote]Heyman is a fucking idiot.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Heyman is a fucking idiot.[/quote]
First rule of tautology club is first rule of tautology club
Damn. Jay Cutler is getting after Martz.
[quote name=Berselius]Heyman says Epstein could take someone from the medical staff. Wut?[/quote]
I heard or read Epstein say recently that one of the bigger inefficiencies he currently sees is in health/injury, so I’m not surprised to see this.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Damn. Jay Cutler is getting after Martz.[/quote]Where is this happening? postgame interview?
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
The daily herald are morons. They charge for content now, which completely rid them of their readership, while simultaneously having Bruce Miles write less. When I went to the blog he keeps, all of the comments are advertisements for black market clothing. Apparently those advertisers also don’t realize no one is reading.
I’m dubious about Sandberg getting the nod. If Ricketts wanted him for the job, wouldn’t he have hired him for it last year? Unless, of course, Ricketts knew eight months out that he was going to fire Hendry, the team would underperform, and Sandberg and Epstein would both be available now. Plus, how is Ryno not still pissed off at a braintrust of trust fund dipshits who spurned him for Quade?
I don’t buy it. Tom Ricketts is a lot of things, but he’s no Kaiser Soze.
Bring back Aramis as player-manager.
[quote name=josh]Where is this happening? postgame interview?[/quote]It was during yesterday’s media day. Jay was diplomatic, but the implicit message the line can’t block the scheme and Jay’s not gonna play the scheme any more. He totally went outside the gameplan against DET, moved the pocket, took short drops, etc, and when he was asked about it, he said the offense needs to use shorter drops and move the pocket and basically insinuated that Martz has refused to do so thus far. Then Martz was asked about and stumbled all over himself saying “we can do that, yeah.” and other such shit. I think this thing is going to come to a head soon.
[quote name=shotty]I’m dubious about Sandberg getting the nod. If Ricketts wanted him for the job, wouldn’t he have hired him for it last year? Unless, of course, Ricketts knew eight months out that he was going to fire Hendry, the team would underperform, and Sandberg and Epstein would both be available now. Plus, how is Ryno not still pissed off at a braintrust of trust fund dipshits who spurned him for Quade?
I don’t buy it. Tom Ricketts is a lot of things, but he’s no Kaiser Soze.[/quote]From what I heard, Ricketts wanted Ryno, but left the decision up to Hendry. Hendry hired Quade. And as far as Sandberg not wanting to work for the FO, it’s worth noting that that FO will be gone in a week or less.
[quote name=ACT]Bring back Aramis as player-manager.[/quote]He would only stack up wins when it no longer counted.
[quote name=shotty]I’m dubious about Sandberg getting the nod. If Ricketts wanted him for the job, wouldn’t he have hired him for it last year? Unless, of course, Ricketts knew eight months out that he was going to fire Hendry, the team would underperform, and Sandberg and Epstein would both be available now. Plus, how is Ryno not still pissed off at a braintrust of trust fund dipshits who spurned him for Quade?
I don’t buy it. Tom Ricketts is a lot of things, but he’s no Kaiser Soze.[/quote]I think Tom let Hendry build his own coffin with his manager choice. I’m beginning to wonder if this wasn’t sort of a plan all along. You give the existing guy a chance to fix it under the constraints he set by signing all those big money deals because almost nobody could have without a shit-ton of luck.
That way, Hendry either fixes it and Tom is a genius, or he fails miserably and Tom goes and hires the best person available to come into a situation that has far fewer restrictions because the salaries are almost all off the books. The fact that it is Epstein, who then also has ties to Sandberg is complete happenstance, but if Theo wasn’t available and he had set his sights on Friedman, wouldn’t we be almost as ecstatic (some of us more so)?
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]It was during yesterday’s media day. Jay was diplomatic, but the implicit message the line can’t block the scheme and Jay’s not gonna play the scheme any more. He totally went outside the gameplan against DET, moved the pocket, took short drops, etc, and when he was asked about it, he said the offense needs to use shorter drops and move the pocket and basically insinuated that Martz has refused to do so thus far. Then Martz was asked about and stumbled all over himself saying “we can do that, yeah.” and other such shit. I think this thing is going to come to a head soon.[/quote]I fucking hope so. I’m getting physically sick watching the horrible play calling. Call for the team you have, not the team you wish you had.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]From what I heard, Ricketts wanted Ryno, but left the decision up to Hendry. Hendry hired Quade. And as far as Sandberg not wanting to work for the FO, it’s worth noting that that FO will be gone in a week or less.[/quote]
I don’t know, MO. I feel like when you’ve sucked it up coaching/managing in the minors and have HOF credentials (literally) with an organization, there’s bound to be a grudge when you ship the family to BFE to start over with a new club.
[quote name=Aisle424]I think Tom let Hendry build his own coffin with his manager choice. I’m beginning to wonder if this wasn’t sort of a plan all along. You give the existing guy a chance to fix it under the constraints he set by signing all those big money deals because almost nobody could have without a shit-ton of luck.
That way, Hendry either fixes it and Tom is a genius, or he fails miserably and Tom goes and hires the best person available to come into a situation that has far fewer restrictions because the salaries are almost all off the books. The fact that it is Epstein, who then also has ties to Sandberg is complete happenstance, but if Theo wasn’t available and he had set his sights on Friedman, wouldn’t we be almost as ecstatic (some of us more so)?[/quote]
Ricketts = Machiavelli? Well, then, that’s all you had to say.
[quote name=shotty]I don’t know, MO. I feel like when you’ve sucked it up coaching/managing in the minors and have HOF credentials (literally) with an organization, there’s bound to be a grudge when you ship the family to BFE to start over with a new club.[/quote]True…but a few million dollars tends to assuage frayed feelings. (dying laughing)
I know what you mean, though. This is just what I’ve heard, and it’s more likely than not to be totally false. (dying laughing)
[quote name=josh]I fucking hope so. I’m getting physically sick watching the horrible play calling. Call for the team you have, not the team you wish you had.[/quote]Exactly.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]True…but a few million dollars tends to assuage frayed feelings. (dying laughing)
I know what you mean, though. This is just what I’ve heard, and it’s more likely than not to be totally false. (dying laughing)[/quote]
Well put.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]True…but a few million dollars tends to assuage frayed feelings. (dying laughing)
I know what you mean, though. This is just what I’ve heard, and it’s more likely than not to be totally false. (dying laughing)[/quote]
Comments along those lines always make me think of this
http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2003/05/28
[quote name=shotty]Ricketts = Machiavelli? Well, then, that’s all you had to say.[/quote]I don’t know, but I’m starting to wonder if maybe we hadn’t underestimated Tom’s craftiness.
We’ve known he is a snake-oil salesman when it comes to selling the ivy and history and bullshit Way of Life, but maybe he’s also a bit oily in his baseball decisions too.
Maybe he had every intention of firing Hendry unless a miracle occurred, but he knew he had to sell it, so he got out there and backed his man like he really thought Jim could turn this shit around with his “See what happens” strategy. He brought in Ari Kaplan, and say what you want about him, but he was still a step forward from where the Cubs were and Hendry initially mocked him and stats on his first day. Tom didn’t say a word about it.
It is definitely interesting how suddenly things have all of a sudden all started pointing up. That usually isn’t luck. It usually means there was a plan in place.
[quote name=Aisle424]I don’t know, but I’m starting to wonder if maybe we hadn’t underestimated Tom’s craftiness.
We’ve known he is a snake-oil salesman when it comes to selling the ivy and history and bullshit Way of Life, but maybe he’s also a bit oily in his baseball decisions too.
Maybe he had every intention of firing Hendry unless a miracle occurred, but he knew he had to sell it, so he got out there and backed his man like he really thought Jim could turn this shit around with his “See what happens” strategy. He brought in Ari Kaplan, and say what you want about him, but he was still a step forward from where the Cubs were and Hendry initially mocked him and stats on his first day. Tom didn’t say a word about it.
It is definitely interesting how suddenly things have all of a sudden all started pointing up. That usually isn’t luck. It usually means there was a plan in place.[/quote]
Agreed. And I think that plan was Hire Theo Epstein all along. I don’t buy any sort of Machiavellian plan with Sandberg though. Just luck that he and Epstein turned out to have this tangential connection after the Cubs didn’t hire him. If they wanted him that badly they would have just forced Hendry to hire him over Cuey as the chance that Sandberg would get a mlb position was too high to risk it.
[quote name=Aisle424]I don’t know, but I’m starting to wonder if maybe we hadn’t underestimated Tom’s craftiness.
We’ve known he is a snake-oil salesman when it comes to selling the ivy and history and bullshit Way of Life, but maybe he’s also a bit oily in his baseball decisions too.
Maybe he had every intention of firing Hendry unless a miracle occurred, but he knew he had to sell it, so he got out there and backed his man like he really thought Jim could turn this shit around with his “See what happens” strategy. He brought in Ari Kaplan, and say what you want about him, but he was still a step forward from where the Cubs were and Hendry initially mocked him and stats on his first day. Tom didn’t say a word about it.
It is definitely interesting how suddenly things have all of a sudden all started pointing up. That usually isn’t luck. It usually means there was a plan in place.[/quote]
I’ll concede it’s possible, but will only feel confident of his craftiness when he begins preying on heiresses on the French Riviera with Todd playing Ruprecht with his genital cuff.
[quote name=Berselius]Agreed. And I think that plan was Hire Theo Epstein all along. I don’t buy any sort of Machiavellian plan with Sandberg though. Just luck that he and Epstein turned out to have this tangential connection after the Cubs didn’t hire him. If they wanted him that badly they would have just forced Hendry to hire him over Cuey as the chance that Sandberg would get a mlb position was too high to risk it.[/quote]Agreed. There are definitely some elements of luck in all of this. Which is weird to say when the Cubs are involved.
[quote name=Berselius]I have to admit that one of the big reasons that I like Epstein is that his charitable foundation is named Foundation to be Named Later (dying laughing)[/quote]What does it benefit?
[quote name=Rice Cube]What does it benefit?[/quote]Patterson’s
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]The rumors out of Chicago are that Ricketts strongly prefers Sandberg, but will leave it to Theo to make the hire[/quote]
Is that rumor from purple shirt guy? I don’t think anyone in Chicago has a fucking clue what Tom Ricketts is planning on if he hasn’t previously publicly announced it. Anything else is a Phil Rogers style rumor invention.
Paul Sullivan went out of his way this AM to note he finally had someone (an MLB source, not Cubs) other than a guy from one of those ‘man on the street’ interviews give him some original information.
Actually really cool…I wonder if he opens a Chicago chapter and keeps the one in Boston going.
http://www.foundationtobenamedlater.org/beneficiaries.html
Hey wait, though, wasn’t purple shirt guy right? Or was that just coincidence?
[quote name=josh]Hey wait, though, wasn’t purple shirt guy right? Or was that just coincidence?[/quote]Julie has been saying she has a source that says Theo was never in Chicago and that all negotiations happened in NYC.
Interesting hypothetical situation:
[quote name=Theo Epstein]No, Larry. We are not trading Brett Jackson for me.[/quote]
[quote name=Long Duck Dong]Is that rumor from purple shirt guy? I don’t think anyone in Chicago has a fucking clue what Tom Ricketts is planning on if he hasn’t previously publicly announced it. Anything else is a Phil Rogers style rumor invention.
Paul Sullivan went out of his way this AM to note he finally had someone (an MLB source, not Cubs) other than a guy from one of those ‘man on the street’ interviews give him some original information.[/quote]It’s from someone I trust. But as with all rumor it should be regarded with suspicion, and I’ve never alleged it to be anything more than a rumor.
[quote name=Aisle424]Ari Kaplan[/quote](dying laughing)
Ari Kaplan, what does the future hold for you now?
[quote name=josh]Hey wait, though, wasn’t purple shirt guy right? Or was that just coincidence?[/quote]He was right at the time he was quoted, but that doesn’t mean he’s not wrong now.
[quote name=jtsunami]Interesting hypothetical situation:[/quote]
[quote name=Aisle424]Julie has been saying she has a source that says Theo was never in Chicago and that all negotiations happened in NYC.[/quote]If we can’t trust purple shirt guy? Who can we trust?
[quote name=Berselius]Agreed. And I think that plan was Hire Theo Epstein all along. I don’t buy any sort of Machiavellian plan with Sandberg though. Just luck that he and Epstein turned out to have this tangential connection after the Cubs didn’t hire him. If they wanted him that badly they would have just forced Hendry to hire him over Cuey as the chance that Sandberg would get a mlb position was too high to risk it.[/quote]Okay to all that, but it would be pretty plausible for Ricketts not to want to A) tarnish a team legend like Sandberg by putting him into a shit situation, and B) overrule your GM to do so. Rickett’s “accountability” line tells me he was unlikely to overrule Hendry unless he thought it’d make a huge difference, and he may have figured that if Q didn’t work out then they’d sack Hendry and have a chance at getting Ryno back anyway. That doesn’t require Machiavellian genius on Ricketts’s part, but it is a sensible move.
I just read [url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1190632/index.htm]this Verducci piece from the Brad Pitt issue[/quote], which includes this Theo quote:
…which makes me think that he might want Sandburg, actually. He’s shown he’s good at working with kids, and knows a lot of them; he’s desperate to manage and may be teachable on the new-school stuff; and as for managing MLB egos, I would think that a plaque at Cooperstown would go some little way towards that.
Ahem.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1190632/index.htm
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2011/10/14/red_sox_cubs_negotiate_compensation_for_theo_epstein/ :
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
Theo may have just made a huge mistake.
[quote name=fang2415]Ahem.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1190632/index.htm/quoteBeane said something very similar lately. It’s a good theory. Also, proper stretching. Baseball is behind the times on the advantages of flexibility, although it’s gotten better over the last few years.
[quote name=fang2415]http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2011/10/14/red_sox_cubs_negotiate_compensation_for_theo_epstein/ :
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
Theo may have just made a huge mistake.[/quote]He’s going to be surrounded by purple-shirted citizens every time he goes out for a Starbucks or a PF Chang’s…
[quote name=fang2415]http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2011/10/14/red_sox_cubs_negotiate_compensation_for_theo_epstein/ :
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
Theo may have just made a huge mistake.[/quote]
He can use those millions to go to Trotters. It doesn’t seem like the kind of place where you’d get a lot of yelling across the dinning room.
[quote name=josh]He can use those millions to go to Trotters. It doesn’t seem like the kind of place where you’d get a lot of yelling across the dinning room.[/quote]Why do that when you can fly to NYC and eat at TGI Fridays?
[quote name=fang2415]Ahem.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1190632/index.htm/quote
Great read. Unfortunately I think there is already an established Cubs Way. I just hope he rewrites the book.
.
[quote name=josh]Beane said something very similar lately. It’s a good theory. Also, proper stretching. Baseball is behind the times on the advantages of flexibility, although it’s gotten better over the last few years.[/quote]Actually, I think the state of the art in sports health is more anti-stretching these days. But yes, I think all the good GMs are very concerned about finding ways to keep players healthier.
[quote name=WaLi]Great read. Unfortunately I think there is already an established Cubs Way. I just hope he rewrites the book.[/quote]Yeah, I was struck by that too. Although I guess there’s sort of a Cubs way, I’m a little less convinced that it’s the sort of thing that anybody’s ever bothered to (or knew how to) write down.
[quote name=josh]He can use those millions to go to Trotters. It doesn’t seem like the kind of place where you’d get a lot of yelling across the dinning room.[/quote]All I know is that if he’s coming to Chicago, he’d better be prepared to go without dinner for a long time. (dying laughing)
Although you may be right that he may be safe at Trotter’s since none of the local press can afford to see him there.
[quote name=fang2415]Actually, I think the state of the art in sports health is more anti-stretching these days. But yes, I think all the good GMs are very concerned about finding ways to keep players healthier.[/quote]Really? From what I can tell, it’s just more about increasing flexibility in the right way. Like, static stretching isn’t really that good, but dynamic flexibility is, stuff like that. I admit I don’t have my finger on the physical fitness pulse.
[quote name=fang2415]All I know is that if he’s coming to Chicago, he’d better be prepared to go without dinner for a long time. (dying laughing)
Although you may be right that he may be safe at Trotter’s since none of the local press can afford to see him there.[/quote]Nor most of the bleacher goombas.
[quote name=josh]Really? From what I can tell, it’s just more about increasing flexibility in the right way. Like, static stretching isn’t really that good, but dynamic flexibility is, stuff like that. I admit I don’t have my finger on the physical fitness pulse.[/quote]Maybe I should have said “flexibility” rather than stretching?
[quote name=fang2415]Yeah, I was struck by that too. Although I guess there’s sort of a Cubs way, I’m a little less convinced that it’s the sort of thing that anybody’s ever bothered to (or knew how to) write down.[/quote]Cubs Way for Hitters:
1. Swing at first pitch. If you don’t get on base or you aren’t out, proceed to step 2.
2. Swing at second pitch. If you don’t get on base or you aren’t out, proceed to step 3.
3. Swing at third pitch. By now you should either be on base or you should be out. If you aren’t proceed to step 4.
4. Go home without dinner for failing to live the Cubs Way.
[quote name=fang2415]Yeah, I was struck by that too. Although I guess there’s sort of a Cubs way, I’m a little less convinced that it’s the sort of thing that anybody’s ever bothered to (or knew how to) write down.[/quote]Of course there is a Cubs Way. It’s a Way of Life!
Duh.
[quote name=fang2415]…which makes me think that he might want Sandburg, actually. He’s shown he’s good at working with kids, and knows a lot of them; [/quote]
Says who? Just because he’s worked with some of the kids doesn’t mean he’s good at it. Maybe I’ve missed it, but I haven’t seen any non-puff pieces about how the 20somethings Sandberg worked with loved him and thought he was the best thing that happened to them.
I don’t hate Sandberg, I just view hiring him too much as a homer choice, rather than the best choice. Let him cut his teeth at the MLB level somewhere else, the Cubs don’t have to go cheap and try to catch a guy at the beginning of his managerial career anymore than they have to do that with GM, Prez, or anything else. This is a big-market team, they’re starting to act like it, I’d be a little disheartened by moves that don’t follow the trend.
[quote name=josh]Really? From what I can tell, it’s just more about increasing flexibility in the right way. Like, static stretching isn’t really that good, but dynamic flexibility is, stuff like that. I admit I don’t have my finger on the physical fitness pulse.[/quote]
I coach HS track athletes. You’re right, the current vogue is for dynamic stretching and a gradual buildup of physical activity. Baseball is a tough sport for warmups though, because there is so much down-time. Starting pitchers are really the only ones that are working at a rate that keeps their muscles in a condition to stay warm and in optimal exertion state.
Then again, I find the warmup players do on gameday hilarious. It’s like they watch a 1950s PE class video in spring training, and then follow that all season. The only thing missing is jumping jacks and tiny shorts with knee socks….
[quote name=josh]Really? From what I can tell, it’s just more about increasing flexibility in the right way. Like, static stretching isn’t really that good, but dynamic flexibility is, stuff like that. I admit I don’t have my finger on the physical fitness pulse.[/quote]Yeah, me neither really. You might be right that it’s just that the notion of “flexibility” is now being emphasized, and unpacked, more than it used to be.
[quote name=fang2415]Yeah, me neither really. You might be right that it’s just that the notion of “flexibility” is now being emphasized, and unpacked, more than it used to be.[/quote]http://www.macknewton.com/
[quote name=26.2cubsfan]I coach HS track athletes. You’re right, the current vogue is for dynamic stretching and a gradual buildup of physical activity. Baseball is a tough sport for warmups though, because there is so much down-time. Starting pitchers are really the only ones that are working at a rate that keeps their muscles in a condition to stay warm and in optimal exertion state.
Then again, I find the warmup players do on gameday hilarious. It’s like they watch a 1950s PE class video in spring training, and then follow that all season. The only thing missing is jumping jacks and tiny shorts with knee socks….[/quote]Addressing how a player can keep limber during the downtime, if that indeed was a key to helping prevent injuries, could be one of the big breakthroughs for the sport.
[quote name=26.2cubsfan]I coach HS track athletes. You’re right, the current vogue is for dynamic stretching and a gradual buildup of physical activity. Baseball is a tough sport for warmups though, because there is so much down-time. Starting pitchers are really the only ones that are working at a rate that keeps their muscles in a condition to stay warm and in optimal exertion state.
Then again, I find the warmup players do on gameday hilarious. It’s like they watch a 1950s PE class video in spring training, and then follow that all season. The only thing missing is jumping jacks and tiny shorts with knee socks….[/quote]MANDELBAUM! MANDELBAUM! MANDELBAUM!
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]MANDELBAUM! MANDELBAUM! MANDELBAUM![/quote]Time to take this up a notch.
[quote name=Aisle424]Time to take this up a notch.[/quote]
You lie, you dry. Fire it up, son
….
There’s something wrong with your car. It’s dripping something on my feet. Some kind of red liquid.
[quote name=Aisle424]Time to take this up a notch.[/quote]It’s go time.
[quote name=26.2cubsfan]Says who? Just because he’s worked with some of the kids doesn’t mean he’s good at it. Maybe I’ve missed it, but I haven’t seen any non-puff pieces about how the 20somethings Sandberg worked with loved him and thought he was the best thing that happened to them.[/quote]
I’m not sure I’ve read anything about Sandberg that wouldn’t qualify as either a puff piece or a hit job. (dying laughing) I certainly agree that if Theo or whoever doesn’t like what he does with players, they shouldn’t even consider him, but I’m not sure we’d really be able to assess that independently as fans. I certainly haven’t heard anything to suggest Sandberg is bad at the teaching side though.
I guess I’m just starting to think that the really important things to have in a manager are 1) reputation/credibility, and 2) openmindedness and/or obedience to the FO-led strategy. Managers just aren’t nearly as important as GMs, so as long as your guy doesn’t lose the respect of his players (Q?), the biggest risk is of over-managing (hello, TLR). So in some respects it may be *worse* to have an experienced manager, since they know that the way to win is to bunt, bunt, bunt.
The problem is that most guys who haven’t managed before won’t command the respect of the players. Sandberg’s HOF plaque should take care of that.
I think it’s actually an unusual opportunity to have a guy who’s as respected as George Washington, but who you can push around strategy-wise (and cheap to boot!). That does also assume that you like his teaching abilities and such, but to outweigh those advantages I think that’d have to be a lot worse than we’ve heard.
^ Oh that can’t be real… (dying laughing)
Or is it? I guess I wouldn’t be surprised either way, but that’s a really short abstract (dying laughing)
http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-sandlot-little-big-league-and-rookie-of-the-ye,63395/
NEGATIVE FAGET POINT FALCON PUNCH
Oh wow…it is real:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1110/1110.2832.pdf
ROFL
[quote name=Rice Cube]Oh wow…it is real:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1110/1110.2832.pdf
ROFL[/quote]I’m surprised the peer reviewer allowed that. Is it actually published or inpress?
I guess if its in Arxiv, that sort of implies that it isn’t published yet.
[quote name=josh]I guess if its in Arxiv, that sort of implies that it isn’t published yet.[/quote]My guess is that it’s been accepted and is in press. Nowadays they allow a lot of papers to be available online prior to being in print.
[quote name=Rice Cube]My guess is that it’s been accepted and is in press. Nowadays they allow a lot of papers to be available online prior to being in print.[/quote]Yeah, it’s not that uncommon anymore…except for journals run by the hive of scum and villiany known as Springer.
I know when I worked at UC Press, almost every paper was on arxiv (or another site run by NASA. It’s been a few years an I can’t remember) before it was published, but the arxiv version was almost always an earlier draft than the final. I’m just saying it probably won’t be officially a two word abstract at the end.
[quote name=josh]I know when I worked at UC Press, almost every paper was on arxiv (or another site run by NASA. It’s been a few years an I can’t remember) before it was published, but the arxiv version was almost always an earlier draft than the final. I’m just saying it probably won’t be officially a two word abstract at the end.[/quote]That’s probably true. A lot of early versions of accepted papers in the social sciences, philosophy, and anthropology end up on SSRN now, but rarely would an unaccepted paper end up there.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Yeah, it’s not that uncommon anymore…except for journals run by the hive of scum and villiany known as Springer.[/quote]Am I wrong to think that academic publishers essentially serve no purpose but to make publicly-funded work inaccessible? The academics do all the writing, reviewing, and editing for nothing or almost nothing except prestige, for which their universities pay them. The internet can now do all the distribution.
Am I missing something, or do the publishers just print 400 copies for the few people who still read on paper and then charge every university library in the world a zillion dollars to access their website?
[quote name=josh]I know when I worked at UC Press[/quote](dying laughing), my snark now seems even snarkier. But I’m kind of serious — why do academic publishers still exist?
[quote name=fang2415]Am I wrong to think that academic publishers essentially serve no purpose but to make publicly-funded work inaccessible? The academics do all the writing, reviewing, and editing for nothing or almost nothing except prestige, for which their universities pay them. The internet can now do all the distribution.
Am I missing something, or do the publishers just print 400 copies for the few people who still read on paper and then charge every university library in the world a zillion dollars to access their website?[/quote]It certainly feels that way. Springer is now even trying to bring suit against instructors and professors who make work available via Blackboard, even in some cases where the work is the professor’s own.
[quote name=fang2415]Am I wrong to think that academic publishers essentially serve no purpose but to make publicly-funded work inaccessible? The academics do all the writing, reviewing, and editing for nothing or almost nothing except prestige, for which their universities pay them. The internet can now do all the distribution.
Am I missing something, or do the publishers just print 400 copies for the few people who still read on paper and then charge every university library in the world a zillion dollars to access their website?[/quote]You have to publish to get tenure. Also, at least in the hard sciences, it’s all about grant and external funding. Your paper is what you publish to display those results and prove that you were working. They actually pay (usually with the grant money) to have their work published. In some ways it’s little more than self-publication, but it’s a way to prove to your peers that you are working, and there is a review process that cuts down on complete BS that sometimes tries to slip through. It’s more about the community effort of doing the work and receiving validation from your peers.
Having it in libraries used to be the only way to make it accessible to people. The system is sort of changing now, I would say, but there is still an editorial filter that you get from a published journal that you don’t get from the internet. Sometimes, also, the data that they pre publish contains errors, which peer reviewers catch.
In a lot of ways, yes, it is a self-perpetuating system. You could think of it as a community of scientists working together, too.
[quote name=josh]You have to publish to get tenure. Also, at least in the hard sciences, it’s all about grant and external funding. Your paper is what you publish to display those results and prove that you were working. They actually pay (usually with the grant money) to have their work published. In some ways it’s little more than self-publication, but it’s a way to prove to your peers that you are working, and there is a review process that cuts down on complete BS that sometimes tries to slip through. It’s more about the community effort of doing the work and receiving validation from your peers.
Having it in libraries used to be the only way to make it accessible to people. The system is sort of changing now, I would say, but there is still an editorial filter that you get from a published journal that you don’t get from the internet. Sometimes, also, the data that they pre publish contains errors, which peer reviewers catch.
In a lot of ways, yes, it is a self-perpetuating system. You could think of it as a community of scientists working together, too.[/quote]But that doesn’t justify the existence of the publisher, if the one appreciable service they provide, i.e. peer review, is done by the professors themselves. It certainly doesn’t justify the exorbitant pricing, or the nastiness with which they pursue academics who try and find other means of disseminating published work.
But in a publish-or-perish environment like ours, the publisher can do whatever they wish because our employment depends on an entity that could not exist without our labor.
[quote name=fang2415](dying laughing), my snark now seems even snarkier. But I’m kind of serious — why do academic publishers still exist?[/quote]At least at UCP when I worked there (it’s different now that the ApJ left) there was added value of copy editing. A lot of academic presses no longer do that. But UCP also brought things to the table like an electronic system for peer review, the ability to publish in color, an overall editorial filter that you don’t get when you just put your work out there on the internet yourself. That’s not true at all presses, and you could argue that the publishing industry overall, not just academic presses, is undergoing a shift to account for the internet. Most of the practices they had in place were certainly based on the premise that professors needed libraries in order to have access to the documents in a searchable form. It’s changing now, but still, how do you know if a scientific paper you find on Arxiv is citeable unless you also know it’s being published? It’s a good question, and one that a lot of presses don’t have a good answer for yet.
I no longer worked UCP, by the way. The Astrophysical Journal decided to switch publishers because they didn’t want to pay extra for editing and for the name UCP to be attached to it, so they left. so there you go.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]But that doesn’t justify the existence of the publisher, if the one appreciable service they provide, i.e. peer review, is done by the professors themselves. It certainly doesn’t justify the exorbitant pricing, or the nastiness with which they pursue academics who try and find other means of disseminating published work.[/quote]Probably not anymore. The professors do the peer review, but the press sets up the electronic system so that the process is blind and all that, at least they did for the ApJ. We also translated the author’s LaTeX into something that would actually work on the internet and in print. I think the trend is definitely away from print versions, because of the cost. The ApJ went out 3 times a month at about 150 pages per issue.
If the journal wants to be a printed journal, I think presses still have a role. Even if it’s to be purely electronic, the advantage of a press web site is indexing and so forth. I don’t even know if Springer qualifies as an academic press, since they are, I believe, for profit.
The one area where academic presses still are considered important in my discipline is books. Books still matter, although discipline is moving towards article-length work more and more, and who publishes that book matters. So even the service there is pretty much limited to pedigree concerns, which, IMHO, are fucking asinine.
[quote name=josh]You have to publish to get tenure. Also, at least in the hard sciences, it’s all about grant and external funding. Your paper is what you publish to display those results and prove that you were working. They actually pay (usually with the grant money) to have their work published. In some ways it’s little more than self-publication, but it’s a way to prove to your peers that you are working, and there is a review process that cuts down on complete BS that sometimes tries to slip through. It’s more about the community effort of doing the work and receiving validation from your peers.
Having it in libraries used to be the only way to make it accessible to people. The system is sort of changing now, I would say, but there is still an editorial filter that you get from a published journal that you don’t get from the internet. Sometimes, also, the data that they pre publish contains errors, which peer reviewers catch.
In a lot of ways, yes, it is a self-perpetuating system. You could think of it as a community of scientists working together, too.[/quote]I get that you need peer review. What I don’t get it why you need to have libraries pay up to $25K/yr in order to get peer review.
AFAIU, arXiv and the like are pre-peer-review, but is there a reason why they couldn’t implement it? I guess you’d need you’d need to manage permissions for a list of editors who manage the review process. But if I was a librarian, I’d rather pay $50K/yr to one guy to keep that up for 100 online journals than to shell out the same amount for 2 traditional journals.
Hmmm, did Al do somethin not completely terrible?
http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/10/14/2490219/theo-epstein-compensation-cubs-red-sox-do-it-yourself
[quote name=josh]If the journal wants to be a printed journal, I think presses still have a role. Even if it’s to be purely electronic, the advantage of a press web site is indexing and so forth. I don’t even know if Springer qualifies as an academic press, since they are, I believe, for profit.[/quote]Yeah, My gripe is not with places like OUP, UCP, etc, but with for-profit conglomerates like Springer.
I think it’s like a lot of things, it’s as valuable as it’s perceived to be. I doubt a university will hire a professor, no matter how prolific, if he published his findings only online, no matter how many peers he had review it. A press organizes that process to help maintain objectivity. You could have a society of professionals establish a very similar review system, but are the going to keep up with current trends? Are they going to redo their publishing program when Web 3.0 or Web 4.0 come along? I would say they could, but they would need a few dedicated professionals to help them. Most academic presses, incidentally, fit the bill of “a few dedicated professionals.” UCP is the exception, being as big as it is.
[quote name=josh]You have to publish to get tenure. Also, at least in the hard sciences, it’s all about grant and external funding. Your paper is what you publish to display those results and prove that you were working. They actually pay (usually with the grant money) to have their work published. In some ways it’s little more than self-publication, but it’s a way to prove to your peers that you are working, and there is a review process that cuts down on complete BS that sometimes tries to slip through. It’s more about the community effort of doing the work and receiving validation from your peers.
Having it in libraries used to be the only way to make it accessible to people. The system is sort of changing now, I would say, but there is still an editorial filter that you get from a published journal that you don’t get from the internet. Sometimes, also, the data that they pre publish contains errors, which peer reviewers catch.
In a lot of ways, yes, it is a self-perpetuating system. You could think of it as a community of scientists working together, too.[/quote]
[quote name=josh]I guess if its in Arxiv, that sort of implies that it isn’t published yet.[/quote]
IIRC anyone can post anything they want to arxiv, there’s no peer review involved. Most people in mathematics at least tend to make preprints available on their website even for published work (even though it’s probably technically illegal). If you can’t access a journal article through your institution your best bet is to just email the author for a copy.
Print journals are the dinosaur of the academic world, but as MO pointed out they’re ingrained in the system, despite the fact that everyone reads stuff electronically now. The only real advantage of old-style publishers is prestige. You’d still want to have your articles printed in Science, or Nature, or more familiar to me, Journal of Computational Physics, etc. rather than some other random peer-reviewed journal. So long as they have that name they can charge a premium.
Most journal malfiesance that I’ve heard about has been with Elsevier.
[quote name=fang2415]I get that you need peer review. What I don’t get it why you need to have libraries pay up to $25K/yr in order to get peer review.
AFAIU, arXiv and the like are pre-peer-review, but is there a reason why they couldn’t implement it? I guess you’d need you’d need to manage permissions for a list of editors who manage the review process. But if I was a librarian, I’d rather pay $50K/yr to one guy to keep that up for 100 online journals than to shell out the same amount for 2 traditional journals.[/quote]They could, for sure. It’s just easier to hire it out to people who already have a system in place rather than building it from the ground up. I think libraries are trying to cut out traditional print journals more and more, for sure. I wouldn’t be surprised if the trend is toward the presses being wittled down to 2-3 people who run the peer review and maintain the arXiv or similar website. I think traditional print presses are becoming more and more of a dinosaur.
Springer does what it does because it can. They are seductive, because I think they are very easy to publish with and have their fingers in a LOT of different disciplines, which gives them a lot of name recognition. It would take the scientific communities simply organizing it themselves.
But there is also a question of external legitimacy, accountability to the funding agencies, etc. The government needs a paper trail.
[quote name=fang2415]I get that you need peer review. What I don’t get it why you need to have libraries pay up to $25K/yr in order to get peer review.
AFAIU, arXiv and the like are pre-peer-review, but is there a reason why they couldn’t implement it? I guess you’d need you’d need to manage permissions for a list of editors who manage the review process. But if I was a librarian, I’d rather pay $50K/yr to one guy to keep that up for 100 online journals than to shell out the same amount for 2 traditional journals.[/quote]
The other problem is that those guys have the rights to all their back issues. Even if researchers tell Springer to STFU and start publishing somewhere else, plenty of people still want access to all those old articles and Springer et al will make you pay.
[quote name=Mish]Hmmm, did Al do somethin not completely terrible?
http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/10/14/2490219/theo-epstein-compensation-cubs-red-sox-do-it-yourself/quote
[quote name=Berselius]IIRC anyone can post anything they want to arxiv, there’s no peer review involved. Most people in mathematics at least tend to make preprints available on their website even for published work (even though it’s probably technically illegal). If you can’t access a journal article through your institution your best bet is to just email the author for a copy.
Print journals are the dinosaur of the academic world, but as MO pointed out they’re ingrained in the system, despite the fact that everyone reads stuff electronically now. The only real advantage of old-style publishers is prestige. You’d still want to have your articles printed in Science, or Nature, or more familiar to me, Journal of Computational Physics, etc. rather than some other random peer-reviewed journal. So long as they have that name they can charge a premium.
Most journal malfiesance that I’ve heard about has been with Elsevier.[/quote]I agree, prestige is a big part of it.External validation. Say I’m on the hiring board and not a mathematician. Throwing out a name of a journal you were published that I actually recognize is going to be more impressive than the theorem you proved.
Libraries should just get rid of all of their new print journals, and old ones too. Who the fuck wants to lug one of those around when you can just get a pdf?
[quote name=Berselius]Libraries should just get rid of all of their new print journals, and old ones too. Who the fuck wants to lug one of those around when you can just get a pdf?[/quote]Getting the cover art on Cell, Science or Nature is still pretty awesome.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]
But in a publish-or-perish environment like ours, the publisher can do whatever they wish because our employment depends on an entity that could not exist without our labor.[/quote]I think that’s the key. If the universities started rewarding an article published in the peer-reviewed U of C Library Web Journal of Neurophysics the same as they reward Elsevier’s Quarterly Neurophysics Review (or whatever), then there’d be no reason to publish in a non-free journal. The publishers don’t seem to offer anything but brand, which the libraries are paying dearly for ATM.
Even for books, if the thing is peer-edited and reviewed, I don’t get why you can’t just put it online and get tenure for that (although there may be editing services that I don’t know about for those books).
Popular publishing I understand since the authors need to sell books to make money. But in academia, you get paid for publishing, and your publisher gets paid for selling your work.
[quote name=Berselius]Libraries should just get rid of all of their new print journals, and old ones too. Who the fuck wants to lug one of those around when you can just get a pdf?[/quote]Some are required by law or by their governing institution to keep hard copies for a certain length of time. There are questions like the longetivity of electronic media. How do you assure that a digital copy will still be viable or readable in, say 20 years. What if a new technological revolution makes digital obsolete? How can you ensure future generations of scholars can still read a pdf?
[quote name=josh] How do you assure that a digital copy will still be viable or readable in, say 20 years. What if a new technological revolution makes digital obsolete? How can you ensure future generations of scholars can still read a pdf?[/quote]
That’s a ridiculous argument. You could say the same thing about books printed on whatever paper, etc.
[quote name=fang2415]I think that’s the key. If the universities started rewarding an article published in the peer-reviewed U of C Library Web Journal of Neurophysics the same as they reward Elsevier’s Quarterly Neurophysics Review (or whatever), then there’d be no reason to publish in a non-free journal. The publishers don’t seem to offer anything but brand, which the libraries are paying dearly for ATM.
Even for books, if the thing is peer-edited and reviewed, I don’t get why you can’t just put it online and get tenure for that (although there may be editing services that I don’t know about for those books).
Popular publishing I understand since the authors need to sell books to make money. But in academia, you get paid for publishing, and your publisher gets paid for selling your work.[/quote]A big portion of the income for UCPress is literally the money the authors paid to have their articles published, which usually comes from the grant money itself. The Press has to ship the actual journals, and print them, which is very expensive.
Books are much more thoroughly edited than journals, in my experience, but that’s only with one publisher, so YMMV.
Disclosure: I’ve also worked on a journal, as a copy editor (dying laughing). We need to get oog up in here. IIRC he worked for some meterological journal for quite some time.
[quote name=Berselius]That’s a ridiculous argument. You could say the same thing about books printed on whatever paper, etc.[/quote]Can and do. That’s why there are archive editions and special papers and fire/waterproof vaults. This is one of the primary issues in academic libraries.
[quote name=Berselius]Disclosure: I’ve also worked on a journal, as a copy editor (dying laughing). We need to get oog up in here. IIRC he worked for some meterological journal for quite some time.[/quote]I was just a manuscript editor. I actually applied for a job as a book editor but they basically told me journal editors are useless and sent me packing. I’m just giving my perspective as a bottom feeder.
(dying laughing), sorry for the threadjack. But I’ve been thinking for a while now that the academic publishing system is totally fucked, so it’s good to see people who actually understand it kind-of agree.
Back to Theo-news-hunting with no dinner.
[quote name=josh]Can and do. That’s why there are archive editions and special papers and fire/waterproof vaults. This is one of the primary issues in academic libraries.[/quote]Negative point all you want, I have friend in libraries, and their entire job is figuring out how to ensure this stuff is accessible in the years to come.
The negative faget point bandit is back?
[quote name=fang2415](dying laughing), sorry for the threadjack. But I’ve been thinking for a while now that the academic publishing system is totally fucked, so it’s good to see people who actually understand it kind-of agree.
Back to Theo-news-hunting with no dinner.[/quote]It is. My experience at the ApJ was that science world has, to some degree, it’s head up its own asshole. It’s an inbred world, sometimes.
[quote name=josh]I was just a manuscript editor. I actually applied for a job as a book editor but they basically told me journal editors are useless and sent me packing. I’m just giving my perspective as a bottom feeder.[/quote]
Yeah I edited manuscripts too. My advisor was editor/founder of an applied math journal and a vast majority of the authors were not native english speakers. My job was to edit them so they were structurally consistent and so native speakers wouldn’t bang their head against their desks trying to read them (dying laughing).
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
[quote name=Berselius]Yeah I edited manuscripts too. My advisor was editor/founder of an applied math journal and a vast majority of the authors were not native english speakers. My job was to edit them so they were structurally consistent and so native speakers wouldn’t bang their head against their desks trying to read them (dying laughing).[/quote]Yep, same in astrophysics. I got to be the one banging my head against my desk so the scientists didn’t have to. You’re welcome, astronomers.
[quote name=fang2415]
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1[/quote]This is Skynet’s fault.
http://espn.go.com/boston/mlb/story/_/id/7101409/source-boston-red-sox-theo-epstein-taking-aides-chicago-cubs
Updated.
[quote name=josh]Can and do. That’s why there are archive editions and special papers and fire/waterproof vaults. This is one of the primary issues in academic libraries.[/quote]So… have a printer print pdfs straight into a little slot on top of the vaults? Are you going to spend more on printer paper than you will on journals?
If you even need a hard copy, that is. My guess is a lot of smaller libraries won’t give a shit about it as long as somebody’s got it fireproofed somewhere
I think longetivity of a document is a valid question. There have been countless examples in science of some earlier article or book having relevance in a context long after the author died. Books have a track record of staying viable (or, books transferred to micofilm, for example), whereas digital media so far seems very ephemeral. Formats change constantly. Interoperability isn’t 100% between MS Word 2003 and 2007. Libraries want to ensure they don’t block an academic from making an important connection simply because they can’t read the only copy of the document.
[quote name=fang2415]So… have a printer print pdfs straight into a little slot on top of the vaults? Are you going to spend more on printer paper than you will on journals?
If you even need a hard copy, that is. My guess is a lot of smaller libraries won’t give a shit about it as long as somebody’s got it fireproofed somewhere[/quote]Bound, protected books with treated paper last longer. Not forever, but longer. Yeah, I think you’re right on though. There could be repositories and most people could use the electronic form. That’s fair. Now how do you determine where the repositories are and who pays for them? Is it fair that UC has to be the library that keeps all the hard copies and has to build new vaults to hold them and the other libraries just ask for it whenever they need? I think the issue is more complex, that’s all.
If there were universal digital formats that preserved the articles perfectly in a format that you could reasonably assume people 20-30 years from now could still access and reasonably sound backup systems, I don’t think any library would have a problem using all electronic copies. But those issues haven’t all been put to rest, especially since something like PDF is a proprietary format. Do you want future academics to be dependent on the whims of the Adobe company?
Open source formats. The library would have to keep the reader programs on archive too, just like they have to keep microfiche readers, but they would be fine with that.
This coversation is the worst thing that ever happened to this blog (dying laughing)
[quote name=MLBTR]There’s a “good chance” that Epstein hires Padres executive Josh Byrnes to work with him in Chicago, according to Tom Krasovic of Inside the Padres (on Twitter). Byrnes, the D’Backs’ former GM, worked with Epstein in Boston.[/quote].
[quote name=WaLi]This coversation is the worst thing that
everevery happened to this blog (dying laughing)[/quote].[quote name=WaLi]This coversation is the worst thing that ever happened to this blog (dying laughing)[/quote]You apparently weren’t around for Cone’s Fat Ugly Naked Guy Thread.
[quote name=WaLi]This coversation is the worst thing that ever happened to this blog (dying laughing)[/quote]Mish started it.
Bleacher Nation said John Henry was on WEEI and basically insinuated Theo was gone.
I apologize. I don’t have a lot of friends. I’ll got to bed without dinner tonight, I promise.
[quote name=Rice Cube]Bleacher Nation said John Henry was on WEEI and basically insinuated Theo was gone.[/quote]He said a lot of stuff. The interview was fascinating and I only heard the last third of it. I’ll see if there is a link to the full thing. I caught it streaming live. Unreal.
Henry was getting slammed by the interviewers, who were complete dickbags, but he got caught up in his doub;e-talk so much that he ended up saying a lot more than he intended.
He pretty much admitted Luchino is the one who trashed Francona, he said he never wanted Carl Crawford, he denied that Theo was gone, but then said it was a hard dao to say goodbye to two such great baseball guys (Francona and Theo). It was unreal.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]You apparently weren’t around for Cone’s Fat Ugly Naked Guy Thread.[/quote]No… which sounds like that’s a good thing. (dying laughing)
http://www.nesn.com/2011/10/john-henry-appears-on-985-the-sports-hubs-felger-and-massarotti-to-discuss-terry-francona-rumors-hea.html
http://www.nesn.com/2011/10/john-henry-appears-on-985-the-sports-hubs-felger-and-massarotti-to-discuss-terry-francona-rumors-hea.html
Tidbits.
Mish wins.
They actually asked him what happens to the Red Sox if he dies and he admitted his wife doesn’t get them.
So I’m guessing no dinner for him. Or sex.
Negative faget point bandit = Rice Cube. I win.
You knew Schilling would pop up eventually:
http://deadspin.com/5849956/
Don’t you like anything?
[quote name=josh]I think the issue is more complex, that’s all.[/quote]
Not saying it’s not complex. But the complexities aren’t show-stoppers, and the academics/librarians/whoever should fucking well sort it out. There’s a shit-ton of knowledge of incalculable value to humanity sitting locked away because a few academics have their heads up their asses.
Apparently PDF has been free and open since 2008: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pdf But you’re right, someone somewhere needs to worry about shit like that. Especially us right here on this blog.
[quote name=WaLi]This coversation is the worst thing that every happened to this blog (dying laughing)[/quote]HA HA TAKE THAT SEC & TEXAS A&M&WHATEVER FUCKFACES. However, correct.
[quote name=WaLi]Negative faget point bandit = Rice Cube. I win.[/quote]Profiling.
Full replay of the interview at 5pm eastern.
http://player.radio.com/player/RadioPlayer.php?version=1.2.12495&station=20629
[quote name=fang2415]Not saying it’s not complex. But the complexities aren’t show-stoppers, and the academics/librarians/whoever should fucking well sort it out. There’s a shit-ton of knowledge of incalculable value to humanity sitting locked away because a few academics have their heads up their asses.[/quote]The average Joe has no interest, and the ones that do have little trouble getting what they need at no personal cost. If libraries charged professors $150 per article, this problem would resolve itself quickly. Places like Springer shouldn’t even exist. I don’t know why they do. Academics should boycott them permanently, but since academics can be an arms race toward most publications, Springer gets fed constantly.
[quote name=josh]The average Joe has no interest, and the ones that do have little trouble getting what they need at no personal cost. If libraries charged professors $150 per article, this problem would resolve itself quickly. Places like Springer shouldn’t even exist. I don’t know why they do. Academics should boycott them permanently, but since academics can be an arms race toward most publications, Springer gets fed constantly.[/quote]THIS. x1000
Places like Springer exist because it was a pain in the ass to communicate 50 years ago. They’ll continue to exist as long as people want access to those articles that they have the rights to, whether or not people boycott sending stuff their way.
[quote name=fang2415]Apparently PDF has been free and open since 2008: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pdf But you’re right, someone somewhere needs to worry about shit like that. Especially us right here on this blog.[/quote]
From what I understand, libraries are doing this, it just takes a fuck-all long time. And scientists don’t just take the reins from publishers for the same reason novelists don’t, because they’d rather be plying their trade then worrying about some bullshit they don’t care about. Also it feels good when you see “Your paper/book has been accepted for publication.” That’s just a god damn good feeling.
Man, I just wanted to post a funny abstract and now all yous are talking about libraries and journals…
[quote name=Berselius]Places like Springer exist because it was a pain in the ass to communicate 50 years ago. They’ll continue to exist as long as people want access to those articles that they have the rights to, whether or not people boycott sending stuff their way.[/quote]Funsucker.
[quote name=josh]From what I understand, libraries are doing this, it just takes a fuck-all long time. And scientists don’t just take the reins from publishers for the same reason novelists don’t, because they’d rather be plying their trade then worrying about some bullshit they don’t care about. Also it feels good when you see “Your paper/book has been accepted for publication.” That’s just a god damn good feeling.[/quote]Waiting to see that letter, however, sucks tremendous balls.
[quote name=Rice Cube]Profiling.[/quote]Fact: Almost everyone has negative faget points
Fact: Rice Cube Doesn’t
Fact: You can’t negative faget point yourself
Fact: Bears eat beets
Rice Cube = negative faget point bandit
Q.E.D.
[quote name=Berselius]Places like Springer exist because it was a pain in the ass to communicate 50 years ago. They’ll continue to exist as long as people want access to those articles that they have the rights to, whether or not people boycott sending stuff their way.[/quote]Good point. People could band together and declare scientific knowledge is legally open source and pass worldwide reforms on copyright laws, but, again, most people wouldn’t care enough to do that, since it doesn’t affect them.
Full interview available here:
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/10/14/felger-mazz-john-henry-invades-felger-and-massarotti/
[quote name=WaLi]Fact: Almost everyone has negative faget points
Fact: Rice Cube Doesn’t
Fact: You can’t negative faget point yourself
Fact: Bears eat beets
Rice Cube = negative faget point bandit
Q.E.D.[/quote]
Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica.
If everyone doesn’t stop talking about academic publishing, I am going to go on the most academic rant you have ever seen!
Also, for any NHL fans out there, NHL center ice is available for free until Oct. 23rd
And on that note, WaLi out fuck faces.
[quote name=Aisle424]If everyone doesn’t stop talking about academic publishing, I am going to go on the most academic rant you have ever seen![/quote]I CAN’T HELP IT I’M SO GOD DAMN BORED!
[quote name=Aisle424]If everyone doesn’t stop talking about academic publishing, I am going to go on the most academic rant you have ever seen![/quote]
That better be peer-reviewed first. I’ll look for it in 10 months or so.
This is about motherfucking academic publishing.
[quote name=Mish]Hmmm, did Al do somethin not completely terrible?
http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/10/14/2490219/theo-epstein-compensation-cubs-red-sox-do-it-yourself/quoteWTF? Maybe Theo is also now in charge of Al.
I understand Shawan Dunston Jr. is ready to break out from his father’s shadow
[quote name=WaLi]Fact: Almost everyone has negative faget points
Fact: Rice Cube Doesn’t
Fact: You can’t negative faget point yourself
Fact: Bears eat beets
Rice Cube = negative faget point bandit
Q.E.D.[/quote]It might also be that they don’t pay attention to me for some reason…or I’m being framed!
*gasp*
[quote name=josh]I understand Shawan Dunston Jr. is ready to break out from his father’s shadow[/quote]You could say that he is walking away from his father’s shadow…
I assume this was an OBP thing right?
[quote name=josh]I CAN’T HELP IT I’M SO GOD DAMN BORED![/quote]You said it. This several-hour period of no Theo news is unacceptable in the new regime.
[quote name=Rice Cube]You could say that he is walking away from his father’s shadow…
I assume this was an OBP thing right?[/quote]Uh………….I didn’t actually read the article.
http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20111011&content_id=25607746&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc
[quote name=fang2415]You said it. This several-hour period of no Theo news is unacceptable in the new regime.[/quote]Theo should have fired at least three managers and traded Starlin Castro by now.
[quote name=josh]Uh………….I didn’t actually read the article.
http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20111011&content_id=25607746&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc/quoteHehe. I don’t think Junior has actually started playing pro baseball yet or at least his stats haven’t been uploaded on B-Ref.
Maybe it’s just me, but with the Red Sox digging in their heels on this compensation and John Henry beginning to throw Theo under the bus by airing his disapproval of the Crawford signing (good luck on that rebound Carl, clearly the organization is behind you 100%), this all reeks of spite. Being difficult just for the sake of it.
Take this comment from Henry for instance:
“There’s a prohibition against announcements being made during the postseason in baseball. It would be unfair of me to the Cubs, who I don’t care that much about, but certainly to the Red Sox, Theo and the people involved to comment on what’s going on until there’s something to announce,”
WTF? Is that necessary?
New Unobstructed View with links to highlights and full interview with Hendry: http://www.obstructedview.net/unobstructed-views/mlb/so-john-henry-walks-into-a-radio-station.html
[quote name=Aisle424]New Unobstructed View with links to highlights and full interview with Hendry: http://www.obstructedview.net/unobstructed-views/mlb/so-john-henry-walks-into-a-radio-station.html/quoteIt sounds like he’s throwing Theo under the bus without actually saying that outright.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]You apparently weren’t around for Cone’s Fat Ugly Naked Guy Thread.[/quote]
Hey now, some people liked those. Names withheld to protect the guilty.
I’m beginning to think John Henry is quite a raging red rectum.
I am not the negative faget point bandit. This is kind of amusing though.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]I’m beginning to think John Henry is quite a raging red rectum.[/quote]
I’ve always figured it was Lucchino. That’s who Epstein had a problem with back in 2005.
[quote name=Berselius]I’ve always figured it was Lucchino. That’s who Epstein had a problem with back in 2005.[/quote]He never expressly denies that it was Lucchino. And Lucchino has never denied it.
[quote name=Aisle424]He never expressly denies that it was Lucchino. And Lucchino has never denied it.[/quote]Maybe they’re just an asshole tag team.
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Maybe they’re just an asshole tag team.[/quote]
(dying laughing), apparently. According to Maury Brown Lucchino’s contract was just extended.
[quote name=Berselius](dying laughing), apparently. According to Maury Brown Lucchino’s contract was just extended.[/quote]He basically said it was going to be in the interview.
[quote name=Aisle424]He basically said it was going to be in the interview.[/quote]
That would require me listening to the interview (dying laughing)
[quote name=Berselius]That would require me listening to the interview (dying laughing)[/quote]It is worth it. It really is. They had like 45 seconds to prepare and they are pretty much hacks to begin with, and Henry is pissed, so it is entertaining. Totally worth the time.
I’m listening to the re-air and they just had a huge back and forth with these guys getting into the “lazy player” meme, of course referencing David Ortiz first, and Henry openly mocks them for it. This is radio gold. It really is.
Aisley out to see my sister get married, fuckfaces.
[quote name=Aisle424]Aisley out to see my sister get married, fuckfaces.[/quote]Congratulations to the Aisley family.
[quote name=Aisle424]It is worth it. It really is. They had like 45 seconds to prepare and they are pretty much hacks to begin with, and Henry is pissed, so it is entertaining. Totally worth the time.
I’m listening to the re-air and they just had a huge back and forth with these guys getting into the “lazy player” meme, of course referencing David Ortiz first, and Henry openly mocks them for it. This is radio gold. It really is.[/quote]
(dying laughing) I just caught some of it in the car. The vibe I got from te hiss is that they’re going to run it o a loop for the next 24 hours.
[quote name=Aisle424]Aisley out to see my sister get married, fuckfaces.[/quote]Tell her WGC says hi. Tell your mom, too.
(dying laughing), I need a special typing wand.
/phone
http://twitter.com/#!/thekapman/status/124978415538421760
[quote name=GW]http://twitter.com/#!/thekapman/status/124978415538421760[/quote]Why would he have to get pulled from a non-MLB event if he switched MLB teams?
the cubs are fucking stupid to give up Jackson. Which is why im sure he is on a plane to Boston
[quote name=WenningtonsGorillaCock]Tell her WGC says hi. Tell your mom, too.[/quote]Sounds like you’re quite familiar with the Aisley family. I’m surprised you weren’t invited.
CarrieMuskat Carrie Muskat
Calm down. Brett Jackson tweaked his foot. Pulled because of injury. #Cubs
[quote name=dylanj]the cubs are fucking stupid to give up Jackson. Which is why im sure he is on a plane to Boston[/quote]I’d be sad if he is actually gone, but (1) he’s not a sure-fire-can’t-miss prospect, and (B) we’re trading him for a guy who compiled two World Series winners and a perennial contender in less than a decade in the toughest division in baseball.
no prospect is a cant miss. i keep reading Law and Callis say he is average or good but not “elite” I guess my question is what do you have to do to be elite? There are very very few CF’s doing what Jackson does. Those guys went nuts for the kid TX threw a ton of cash at and he did awful in AA. Jackson is mashing at the highest level of the minors at a young age. And at a premium position.
[quote name=GW]http://twitter.com/#!/thekapman/status/124978415538421760[/quote]Really irresponsible rumor.
Kap is reporting Jackson was pulled mysteriously and not in the lineup tomorrow. Then we hear from Muskat he has an injury. What is going on (dying laughing)
http://twitter.com/#!/thekapman/status/124985774004379648
Move along. Nothing to see here…
[quote name=Rodrigo Ramirez]Kap is reporting Jackson was pulled mysteriously and not in the lineup tomorrow. Then we hear from Muskat he has an injury. What is going on (dying laughing)[/quote]I heard last night that Brett Jackson went to out to center field at the start of the game, but returned to the dugout just three outs later. Thought for sure he was done as a Cub.
[quote name=GBTS]I heard last night that Brett Jackson went to out to center field at the start of the game, but returned to the dugout just three outs later. Thought for sure he was done as a Cub.[/quote]
Seriously if Theo doesn’t come over soon, Chicago media might just get even more outrageous.
College football folks:
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news;_ylt=AhR5ZQ4u5toHmlUIQqTt6ag5nYcB?slug=ap-mountainwest-conferenceusa-merger
[quote name=Rice Cube]College football folks:
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news;_ylt=AhR5ZQ4u5toHmlUIQqTt6ag5nYcB?slug=ap-mountainwest-conferenceusa-merger/quoteI think I’ll wet my pants.
Maybe the Sox won’t want him now that he’s injured his foot.
A guy in a forest green cardigan at Eddie Bauer told me that Carlos Zambrano dropped an extra-large can of Goya beans on Brett Jackson’s foot.
/Sullivan’s dream scoop
[quote name=fang2415]Maybe the Sox won’t want him now that he’s injured his foot.[/quote]I don’t think BJax is going to the Red Sox anyway, but an injured foot wouldn’t deter them unless he got it caught in a thresher.
[quote name=GBTS]A guy in a forest green cardigan at Eddie Bauer told me that Carlos Zambrano dropped an extra-large can of Goya beans on Brett Jackson’s foot.
/Sullivan’s wet dream[/quote]A master of the narrative, that Sullivan is.
[quote name=Rice Cube]I don’t think BJax is going to the Red Sox anyway, but an injured foot wouldn’t deter them unless he got it caught in a thresher.[/quote]In this business, I’m sure it’s happened before.
[quote name=dylanj]no prospect is a cant miss. i keep reading Law and Callis say he is average or good but not “elite” I guess my question is what do you have to do to be elite? There are very very few CF’s doing what Jackson does. Those guys went nuts for the kid TX threw a ton of cash at and he did awful in AA. Jackson is mashing at the highest level of the minors at a young age. And at a premium position.[/quote]“Elite” status is open to interpretation, but as far as I’m concerned that’s an overall top 10 prospect. Maybe even top 5. I don’t think talking about elite status gives us much information. Starlin Castro wasn’t an elite prospect, but he’s going to be very valuable. The problem with Jackson is his ridiculously high strikeout rate. Research exists that shows those guys fail more often than low strikeout hitters.
This is for two fairly obvious reasons: defense is improved so the BABIP will decline and the pitching is better meaning an even higher strikeout rate. Along with those, you get a lower walk rate, the stolen base percentage is worse, your defense is worse and so on and so forth.
Don’t get me wrong. I think Brett Jackson is a very good prospect and I still think if he works out he’ll easily be better than Castro. He’s a good ballplayer.
People talking about “average” are just trying to downplay how good he he has been or how good he could become. However, there is plenty of reason to believe that he won’t reach that ceiling. He has a lesser chance of doing so than another guy with slightly lesser numbers and a much lower strikeout rate.
Among top 100 BA prospects going from 1990 to 2007, a strikeout rate similar to Jackson would result in a success rate of about 20%. The strikeouts are a huge issue with him and there have been questions with his defense.
If they traded Jackson for Theo the Cubs are just playing the odds. More than likely Brett Jackson does not have a successful MLB career.
[quote name=Rice Cube]I don’t think BJax is going to the Red Sox anyway, but an injured foot wouldn’t deter them unless he got it caught in a thresher.[/quote]I think he will be going to the Sox. Sounds like they’re standing pat and have no interest in settling with the Cubs. Based on what I’ve read over the last couple hours, I’m guessing the Cubs send Brett Jackson and cash.
[quote name=mb21]I think he will be going to the Sox. Sounds like they’re standing pat and have no interest in settling with the Cubs. Based on what I’ve read over the last couple hours, I’m guessing the Cubs send Brett Jackson and cash.[/quote]I’d be okay with that and would still follow his career…just a bit sad that he didn’t do it as a Cub. But if they’re sending a top prospect you would think Theo would be able to bring more of his folks to the Cubs, no?
(dying laughing) @ Greinke’s luck
[quote name=Rice Cube]I’d be okay with that and would still follow his career…just a bit sad that he didn’t do it as a Cub. But if they’re sending a top prospect you would think Theo would be able to bring more of his folks to the Cubs, no?[/quote]Yeah, I don’t care one bit if the Cubs trade Jackson. Maybe he turns out to be good. Don’t care. I’m pretty sure Theo is going to add more wins to this team in 5 years than Jackson ever could.
Apparently WGN’s Rich King says the Sox are asking for Jeff Baker and a minor leaguer
[quote name=Berselius]Apparently WGN’s Rich King says the Sox are asking for Jeff Baker and cash. I’ll take it.[/quote][quote name=Berselius]Apparently WGN’s Rich King says the Sox are asking for Jeff Baker and a minor leaguer[/quote]It could go either way.
Yeah, go for it.
[quote name=Berselius]Apparently WGN’s Rich King says the Sox are asking for Jeff Baker and a minor leaguer[/quote]That’s hard to believe. If that’s all they wanted, wouldn’t it already be done? Everyone else seems to be saying they want a top prospect and the Cubs only have 2 of them.
3 if you count McNutt, but I haven’t heard his name brought up yet.
[quote name=mb21]That’s hard to believe. If that’s all they wanted, wouldn’t it already be done? Everyone else seems to be saying they want a top prospect and the Cubs only have 2 of them.[/quote]
Brett Jackson is a minor leaguer.
True, but usually when you read “and a minor leaguer” it’s someone like Matt Camp. (dying laughing)
[quote name=mb21]The problem with Jackson is his ridiculously high strikeout rate. Research exists that shows those guys fail more often than low strikeout hitters.
[/quote]
yes, of course. the problem with that research is that in accumulating a group of high strikeout guys to test, you will inevitably bring along a group of players with much less plate discipline than bjax.
(dying laughing)
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2011/10/after_his_impro.html
[quote name=GW]yes, of course. the problem with that research is that in accumulating a group of high strikeout guys to test, you will inevitably bring along a group of players with much less plate discipline than bjax.[/quote]Yeah, sure, but we’re not talking about a guy with a 20% K-rate. It’s 24-25% and will probably jump to 27-28% at the MLB level, if not higher. He’ll have to maintain a very high BABIP to be very good. He has the speed so it’s possible, but he’s more than likely a .250/.340/.430 hitter. As a CF that’s good, but I’m not holding up any trade for someone valuable because of that.
BJax’s K rate is far less of a concern to me than the chance he won’t stick in CF
EDIT: apparently comments don’t like less than signs now
(dying laughing) (dying laughing) (dying laughing) LaRussa. Genius indeed. He just bunted a runner to third with one out…with the pitcher on deck.
[quote name=Berselius]BJax’s K rate is far less of a concern to me than the chance he won’t stick in CF
EDIT: apparently comments don’t like less than signs now[/quote]I saw the less than sign. That’s odd it wasn’t working for you. Let me try it out.
lemonade < orange juice
Worked for me, b.
If you don’t put spaces between the letters and the less than sign it won’t show up.
…or I can’t read a box score, there was nobody out. Still, though (dying laughing)
It could also have something to do with my Molina-esque internet.
[quote name=Berselius]It could also have something to do with my glacial internet.[/quote]It has to do with spacing. Nothing has been changed on the site so I don’t know what happened. Fucking internet.
[quote name=mb21]lemonade < orange juice[/quote]
false
[quote name=GW]false[/quote]Correct < Nice snark
You guys haven’t had good orange juice.
[quote name=Buster Olney]Rival GM: “Cubs should just keep saying no (on compensation for Theo). What are the Red Sox going to do — bring Theo back? No way.”[/quote]
.
Or I haven’t had good lemonade.
Could go either way.
Yeah, b, Henry even said a bit ago that it was sad that both Tito and Theo are gone.
That was probably part of the radio interview you guys were talking about earlier.
.
So I guess it’s a matter of who caves first…the Red Sox saying “Fine, take him” or the Cubs saying “Fine, you can have our farm”…
Good OJ and heat-brewed lemonade are probably my two favorite beverages
I love OJ. The cheap shit is OK, but you can always find some higher quality OJ. I don’t drink much else other than OJ and water.
[quote name=Rice Cube](dying laughing) @ Greinke’s luck[/quote]Bad luck happens more when you have 0 strikeouts.
By Derosa’s beard, we’re at critical mass of TLR = genius tweets after pulling his starter after 4 1/3 innings to make sure Dotel can get his 8th K in the huge sample of 10 PAs vs Braun.
Baker sounds much more sensible to me than Jackson. Do we know whether the no-MLB-player thing comes from the teams or from MLB (or the PA)?
btw, per our earlier conversation, here are a handful of modern-day comps for what youk might look like were he a prospect now:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=darnel001jam
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=martin005jul
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=robins001tra
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=hassan001ale
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=eaton-002ada
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=belnom001vin
[quote name=mb21]I love OJ. The cheap shit is OK, but you can always find some higher quality OJ. I don’t drink much else other than OJ and water.[/quote]
I love OJ but more or less stopped buying it after I moved away from home. Too damn expensive.
[quote name=Berselius]I love OJ but more or less stopped buying it after I moved away from home. Too damn expensive.[/quote]
too much sugar.
[quote name=fang2415]Baker sounds much more sensible to me than Jackson. Do we know whether the no-MLB-player thing comes from the teams or from MLB (or the PA)?[/quote]Surely the Cubs would have given up Baker twice with a Patterson on top by now, if that was the asking price. Maybe they just don’t want to appear too eager. What if they come on too strong and Theo doesn’t like them that way? Did they even try sending him a note with checkboxes yet?
but I love southern sweet tea, which I believe is supersaturated with sugar (dying laughing)
[quote name=mb21]You guys haven’t had good orange juice.[/quote]I’m in the OJ camp. The natural sugar of the orange is a perfect compliment to its acidity, creating a rounded, smooth flavor. Whereas with lemonade, even if the sugar is perfectly balanced with the acidity it is more abrasive.
Both choices are great though.
Also, research shows that cuddle fish are fucking badass, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/nature/kings-of-camouflage.html
[quote name=cdw]I’m in the OJ camp. The natural sugar of the orange is a perfect compliment to its acidity, creating a rounded, smooth flavor. Whereas with lemonade, even if the sugar is perfectly balanced with the acidity it is more abrasive.
Both choices are great though.[/quote]I think orange juice is more refreshing but every now and then the tang of lemonade is quite welcome.
[quote name=cdw]I’m in the OJ camp. The natural sugar of the orange is a perfect compliment to its acidity, creating a rounded, smooth flavor. Whereas with lemonade, even if the sugar is perfectly balanced with the acidity it is more abrasive.
Both choices are great though.[/quote]I’d take orange juice. Although…
http://civileats.com/2009/05/06/freshly-squeezed-the-truth-about-orange-juice-in-boxes/
[quote name=Berselius]By Derosa’s beard, we’re at critical mass of TLR = genius tweets after pulling his starter after 4 1/3 innings to make sure Dotel can get his 8th K in the huge sample of 10 PAs vs Braun.[/quote]I’m fine with that move. Bunting in front of the pitcher, on the other hand…
[quote name=josh]I’d take orange juice. Although…
http://civileats.com/2009/05/06/freshly-squeezed-the-truth-about-orange-juice-in-boxes//quoteSo this conversation is a little absurd on a baseball blog but whatever, I go for either low-temp short-time (partially pasteurized) local OJ or from-concentration (non-pasteurized). I don’t care about reconstitution b/c the pasteurization definitely hurts the flavor profile. Obviously, fresh squeezed (space) > (space) either.
[quote name=cdw]So this conversation is a little absurd on a baseball blog but whatever, I go for either low-temp short-time (partially pasteurized) local OJ or from-concentration (non-pasteurized). I don’t care about reconstitution b/c the pasteurization definitely hurts the flavor profile. Obviously, fresh squeezed (space) > (space) either.[/quote]
are you also a coors light guy?
[quote name=cdw]So this conversation is a little absurd on a baseball blog but whatever, I go for either low-temp short-time (partially pasteurized) local OJ or from-concentration (non-pasteurized). I don’t care about reconstitution b/c the pasteurization definitely hurts the flavor profile. Obviously, fresh squeezed (space) > (space) either.[/quote]You obviously missed the library/publications chatter earlier.
I’m hoping the prospect is someone of the Vogelbach variety. Far away from the majors but with potential. I’d like some of the guys closer to the majors (McNutt, Jackson) to stick around to help improve the payroll efficiency of the major league team. That will be especially important if the Cubs try to shed the Soriano or Z contracts.
[quote name=GW]are you also a coors light guy?[/quote]I prefer miller light but coors light > Sierra Nevada Torpedo
[quote name=cdw]I’m hoping the prospect is someone of the Vogelbach variety. Far away from the majors but with potential. I’d like some of the guys closer to the majors (McNutt, Jackson) to stick around to help improve the payroll efficiency of the major league team. That will be especially important if the Cubs try to shed the Soriano or Z contracts.[/quote]Yeah, but Vogelbach can’t be traded yet. After being drafted all draft picks have a no-trade clause for 1 calendar year. It’s not common that they get traded. I don’t know if that’s because they decline or something else, but usually they’re off the table. I do agree with what you’re saying, but we’re thinking more about 2010 draft picks. What about Hayden Simpson and his 47 mph fastball?
(dying laughing)
Yuni occurrence.
[quote name=Rice Cube]You obviously missed the library/publications chatter earlier.[/quote]Ah damn. I always miss the good stuff.
The Brewers are playing like shit on defense.
[quote name=mb21]Yeah, but Vogelbach can’t be traded yet. After being drafted all draft picks have a no-trade clause for 1 calendar year. It’s not common that they get traded. I don’t know if that’s because they decline or something else, but usually they’re off the table. I do agree with what you’re saying, but we’re thinking more about 2010 draft picks. What about Hayden Simpson and his 47 mph fastball?[/quote]If Tim Wakefield decides to retire, they’ll need a new knuckleballer.
[quote name=mb21]Yeah, but Vogelbach can’t be traded yet. After being drafted all draft picks have a no-trade clause for 1 calendar year. It’s not common that they get traded. I don’t know if that’s because they decline or something else, but usually they’re off the table. I do agree with what you’re saying, but we’re thinking more about 2010 draft picks. What about Hayden Simpson and his 47 mph fastball?[/quote]done. will the sox take the weak excuse about how sickness is the problem and not the fact the cubs reached 12048 rounds too early for Simpson? Also, I try not to let technical policies get in the way of my grand visions for the cubs franchise. Fucking technocrats.
Jesus milwaukee defense is miserable
new shit: http://www.obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/more-on-compensation-for-theo.html
The Brewers also made some good plays on defense. Also, Greinke is putting a lot of pressure on the defense by “pitching to contact.” Additionally, Roenicke is a big fan of putting odd shifts on every single player.
dammit
Also of the 2010 class can we not trade Szczur? I liked that Jay Jackson idea. Honestly, as long as the guy is not Jackson or McNutt I’ll be happy. Even if’s one of those two I’m just glad we’ll get Theo and a few of his guys from the Sox. Hopefully, that young Dominacan isn’t on the Sox list. Jemier or something?
Watch Sports Live On Your PC And Never Miss Another Game Again. No Contacts,No Hassles Just A One Off Payment For 24/7 Access To Your Favorite Sports. http://bit.ly/watch-sports-live