Anybody see Gammons on ESPN News last night?

[beowulf28]

I sent Gammons an email thanking him for pointing out the obvious.

 

Perhaps it will be a comfort if he's on the receiving end of a profanity-laced tirade from the Cubs front office.

 

You mean that he should be more "positive" regarding his coverage of the Cubs? :roll: The same BS that the Cubs management tried to persuade Paul Sullivan with? :roll:

[TruffleShuffle]

I sent Gammons an email thanking him for pointing out the obvious.

 

Perhaps it will be a comfort if he's on the receiving end of a profanity-laced tirade from the Cubs front office.

 

You mean that he should be more "positive" regarding his coverage of the Cubs? :roll: The same BS that the Cubs management tried to persuade Paul Sullivan with? :roll:

 

The Cubs should replace Paul Sullivan with this guy:

 

http://dunamai.com/Humor/BagdadBob/images/bagdad_bob_large.gif

"Have no fear, my friends! The Cubs are just lulling the opposition into a false sense of security! Things will all get better! Dusty Baker and Jim Hendry are the right people to lead this team!"

[Derwood]

with Hendry we can only speculate that he is somehow trying to defy metric-based scouting. It's a well known fact that Morgan is anti-Moneyball. There would be no speculation with him

[beowulf28]

I sent Gammons an email thanking him for pointing out the obvious.

 

Perhaps it will be a comfort if he's on the receiving end of a profanity-laced tirade from the Cubs front office.

 

You mean that he should be more "positive" regarding his coverage of the Cubs? :roll: The same BS that the Cubs management tried to persuade Paul Sullivan with? :roll:

 

The Cubs should replace Paul Sullivan with this guy:

 

http://dunamai.com/Humor/BagdadBob/images/bagdad_bob_large.gif

"Have no fear, my friends! The Cubs are just lulling the opposition into a false sense of security! Things will all get better! Dusty Baker and Jim Hendry are the right people to lead this team!"

 

:lol:

[CaliforniaRaisin]

He sounded good till the second-to-last sentence. Brandon Wood is having a real rough season down at AA and is showing major flaws in plate discipline. As in, the Angels' offense's biggest problem.

 

I wouldn't say plate discipline is his major problem right now. The K's are a bit high, but his OBP is 100 points higher than his AVG (244/344).

 

54 strikeouts in 42 games is more than a bit high. His numbers are actually similar to the ones that Dallas McPherson had in the minors. He walked at a pretty good rate, but also struck out way too much. So far, McPherson has been a dud in the bigs, despite showing a good walk rate in the minors. Big league pitchers can take advantage of the inability to make contact in a way that minor league pitchers cannot.

 

Yeah, I agree. McPherson's K problems have been his biggest undoing in the big leagues.

 

Kotchman's struggles have surprised me - even before he came down with the virus, he was struggling. But that was a limited sample and could easily just have been a season-starting slump.

[UMFan83]

I sent Gammons an email thanking him for pointing out the obvious.

 

Perhaps it will be a comfort if he's on the receiving end of a profanity-laced tirade from the Cubs front office.

 

You mean that he should be more "positive" regarding his coverage of the Cubs? :roll: The same BS that the Cubs management tried to persuade Paul Sullivan with? :roll:

 

The Cubs should replace Paul Sullivan with this guy:

 

http://dunamai.com/Humor/BagdadBob/images/bagdad_bob_large.gif

"Have no fear, my friends! The Cubs are just lulling the opposition into a false sense of security! Things will all get better! Dusty Baker and Jim Hendry are the right people to lead this team!"

 

So thats what Carrie Muskat looks like

[hrowengartner]

I sent Gammons an email thanking him for pointing out the obvious.

 

Perhaps it will be a comfort if he's on the receiving end of a profanity-laced tirade from the Cubs front office.

 

You mean that he should be more "positive" regarding his coverage of the Cubs? :roll: The same BS that the Cubs management tried to persuade Paul Sullivan with? :roll:

 

The Cubs should replace Paul Sullivan with this guy:

 

http://dunamai.com/Humor/BagdadBob/images/bagdad_bob_large.gif

"Have no fear, my friends! The Cubs are just lulling the opposition into a false sense of security! Things will all get better! Dusty Baker and Jim Hendry are the right people to lead this team!"

 

So thats what Carrie Muskat looks like

Fixed

[soccer10k]

you know what scares the hell out of me? (i read some of the topic, but don't have any real comments on it. this sort of applies, but not really):

 

That we fire Hendry and Baker, but end up with Steve Phillips and Joe Morgan.

 

Oh please no. I think Joe Morgan would be worse than Baker. Although then we wouldn't have to hear him announcing games anymore and Jon Miller could get a competant partner.

[soccer10k]

Thank you Peter Gammons. Hopefully Hendry will listen to you, although I highly doubt it.

[BigSlick]

the OBP thing isn't new, but the team could always hide behind the fact that the team hit a lot of homers and could play Weaver-ball. Now with very few homers the inability to manufacture runs is even more magnified

 

What do you mean by "manufacture runs?"

 

I can't tell if that was a sarcastic question or not

 

It's not a sarcastic question.

 

I'm with you about the lack of OBP.

 

But it sounds like you're in favor of "manufacturing runs" instead of "Weaver-ball."

 

Players with high OBP are usually also players who hit a lot of homeruns. It sounds to me like you want to have high OBP without relying on homeruns. That would be hard to do.

 

Players in the top 40 in OBP last year with fewer than 15 homers: Luis Castillo, Placido Polanco, Sean Casey, Joe Mauer, and Bill Mueller.

 

I really don't know how we could field a high-OBP team that "manufactured runs" without relying on power.

 

Power = Pitches out of the Strike Zone = More Walks = Less Outs/More Baserunners = More runs

 

Basically a proven formula.

[soccer10k]

the OBP thing isn't new, but the team could always hide behind the fact that the team hit a lot of homers and could play Weaver-ball. Now with very few homers the inability to manufacture runs is even more magnified

 

What do you mean by "manufacture runs?"

 

I can't tell if that was a sarcastic question or not

 

It's not a sarcastic question.

 

I'm with you about the lack of OBP.

 

But it sounds like you're in favor of "manufacturing runs" instead of "Weaver-ball."

 

Players with high OBP are usually also players who hit a lot of homeruns. It sounds to me like you want to have high OBP without relying on homeruns. That would be hard to do.

 

Players in the top 40 in OBP last year with fewer than 15 homers: Luis Castillo, Placido Polanco, Sean Casey, Joe Mauer, and Bill Mueller.

 

I really don't know how we could field a high-OBP team that "manufactured runs" without relying on power.

 

Power = Pitches out of the Strike Zone = More Walks = Less Outs/More Baserunners = More runs

 

Basically a proven formula.

 

[sarcasm] But I thought walks were bad? [/sarcasm]

[BigSlick]

with Hendry we can only speculate that he is somehow trying to defy metric-based scouting. It's a well known fact that Morgan is anti-Moneyball. There would be no speculation with him

 

See the problem with the Oakland A's is that they wait on the 3 run homer, and they can't manufacture runs. They are still waiting.

 

What? He says this stupid tirade every single broadcast. (Insert team for Oakland A's)

[BigSlick]

the OBP thing isn't new, but the team could always hide behind the fact that the team hit a lot of homers and could play Weaver-ball. Now with very few homers the inability to manufacture runs is even more magnified

 

What do you mean by "manufacture runs?"

 

I can't tell if that was a sarcastic question or not

 

It's not a sarcastic question.

 

I'm with you about the lack of OBP.

 

But it sounds like you're in favor of "manufacturing runs" instead of "Weaver-ball."

 

Players with high OBP are usually also players who hit a lot of homeruns. It sounds to me like you want to have high OBP without relying on homeruns. That would be hard to do.

 

Players in the top 40 in OBP last year with fewer than 15 homers: Luis Castillo, Placido Polanco, Sean Casey, Joe Mauer, and Bill Mueller.

 

I really don't know how we could field a high-OBP team that "manufactured runs" without relying on power.

 

Power = Pitches out of the Strike Zone = More Walks = Less Outs/More Baserunners = More runs

 

Basically a proven formula.

 

[sarcasm] But I thought walks were bad? [/sarcasm]

 

I almost can't believe that some of you say Dusty thinks walks are bad, I'd like to see some evidence to this. In no way is adding a baserunner and avoiding an out a bad thing, ever. (ok we might get into some stuff with a pitcher comingup, but c'mon now)

[wade]

the OBP thing isn't new, but the team could always hide behind the fact that the team hit a lot of homers and could play Weaver-ball. Now with very few homers the inability to manufacture runs is even more magnified

 

What do you mean by "manufacture runs?"

 

I can't tell if that was a sarcastic question or not

 

It's not a sarcastic question.

 

I'm with you about the lack of OBP.

 

But it sounds like you're in favor of "manufacturing runs" instead of "Weaver-ball."

 

Players with high OBP are usually also players who hit a lot of homeruns. It sounds to me like you want to have high OBP without relying on homeruns. That would be hard to do.

 

Players in the top 40 in OBP last year with fewer than 15 homers: Luis Castillo, Placido Polanco, Sean Casey, Joe Mauer, and Bill Mueller.

 

I really don't know how we could field a high-OBP team that "manufactured runs" without relying on power.

 

Power = Pitches out of the Strike Zone = More Walks = Less Outs/More Baserunners = More runs

 

Basically a proven formula.

 

[sarcasm] But I thought walks were bad? [/sarcasm]

 

I almost can't believe that some of you say Dusty thinks walks are bad, I'd like to see some evidence to this. In no way is adding a baserunner and avoiding an out a bad thing, ever. (ok we might get into some stuff with a pitcher comingup, but c'mon now)

 

 

Dusty has been quoted about walks and this article has the most famous ones-

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2669

 

from the article-

 

AFTERNOON CONSTITUTIONAL (A.K.A., THE DUSTY BAKER QUOTE EXTRAVAGANZA BEGINS)

 

"I think walks are overrated unless you can run... If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, that helps. But the guy who walks and can't run, most of the time they're clogging up the bases for somebody who can run."

--Dusty Baker, Cubs manager (Chicago Daily Herald)

 

"Who's been the champions the last seven, eight years? ...Have you ever heard the Yankees talk about on-base percentage and walks? Walks help. But you ain't going to walk across the plate. You're going to hit across the plate. That's the school I come from."

--Baker

 

"It's called hitting, and it ain't called walking. Do you ever see the top 10 walking? You see top 10 batting average. A lot of those top 10 do walk. But the name of the game is to hit."

--Baker

 

This is why people think Baker doesn't think walking is a great thing.

[BigbadB]

It's funny that Baker brings up the Yankees and all their recent championships. Since 1995 when they started their yearly playoff run, they haven't posted a team OBP below .353 more than once.

 

The Yankees have averaged 644 walks a season since 1995.

 

Baker's Cubs walked 419 times last year. They haven't walked 500 times in a season under Dusty. The Yankees walked 718 times in '99 and posted a team OBP of .364.

 

Check this out. The Cubs team batting average last year was .270. That's actually pretty good when you take into consideration that the pitcher bats a few times a game and they had Neifi, Patterson, Macias, Hollandsworth, Burnitz and a few other poor hitting players. But, they only walked 419 times. The team OBP was a measily .324, which probably helps explain why they only scored 703 runs all year.

 

The '04 Yankees finished with a lower overall batting average than the '05 Cubs. They had a .268 team AVG. But, they walked 670 times and ended up with 897 runs scored for the season.

 

Yeah, Dusty. It's all about swinging the bat, isn't it? That's nearly 200 more runs scored than the Cubs WITH A LOWER TEAM AVG. How do you suppose that happened?

 

The Yankees had 543 XBH's that year. The Cubs had 540. Do you suppose the those 3 XBH's created nearly 200 more runs? Nah. That's not it. Could it be that the Yankees had more hits than the Cubs? Nah, that's not it. The Cubs had 23 more hits than the Yankees. Could it be that the difference of 419 walks and 670 (251 walks) created all those extra runs? I'd say they played a big part in it.

[CuseCubFan69]

Andy MacPhail still refuses to acknowlege the problem with OBP, claiming they just aren't getting the timely hits to drive runners in. This management group is clueless. And I'm pretty sure they are ignoring OBP and walks now out of spite. They used to ignore all non macho unaggressive stuff. But they have to have heard about it now, and they're just putting their fingers in their ears and pretending not to hear. They can't be this dumb.

 

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/story.asp?id=192097

 

I think they are just way too stubburn to admit they were and are wrong. They don't learn from their mistakes and continue to try to prove that they were right all along.

[soccer10k]

Excellent post

 

I agree completely. The problem with past Cubs teams wasn't that they hit too many home runs. It was that they hit too many solo home runs when other teams were hitting more two and three run home runs.

[Warren Brusstar]

It's funny that Baker brings up the Yankees and all their recent championships. Since 1995 when they started their yearly playoff run, they haven't posted a team OBP below .353 more than once.

 

The Yankees have averaged 644 walks a season since 1995.

 

Baker's Cubs walked 419 times last year. They haven't walked 500 times in a season under Dusty. The Yankees walked 718 times in '99 and posted a team OBP of .364.

 

Check this out. The Cubs team batting average last year was .270. That's actually pretty good when you take into consideration that the pitcher bats a few times a game and they had Neifi, Patterson, Macias, Hollandsworth, Burnitz and a few other poor hitting players. But, they only walked 419 times. The team OBP was a measily .324, which probably helps explain why they only scored 703 runs all year.

 

The '04 Yankees finished with a lower overall batting average than the '05 Cubs. They had a .268 team AVG. But, they walked 670 times and ended up with 897 runs scored for the season.

 

Yeah, Dusty. It's all about swinging the bat, isn't it? That's nearly 200 more runs scored than the Cubs WITH A LOWER TEAM AVG. How do you suppose that happened?

 

The Yankees had 543 XBH's that year. The Cubs had 540. Do you suppose the those 3 XBH's created nearly 200 more runs? Nah. That's not it. Could it be that the Yankees had more hits than the Cubs? Nah, that's not it. The Cubs had 23 more hits than the Yankees. Could it be that the difference of 419 walks and 670 (251 walks) created all those extra runs? I'd say they played a big part in it.

 

Dude, the Yankees have gamers like Derek Jeter and Jorge Posada, who clearly know how to hit in the clutch. That's pretty obvious, dude.

[sethuel1]

The team OBP was a measily .324, which probably helps explain why they only scored 703 runs all year.

 

I would also like to note that it you take Derrek Lee out of last year's lineup, that team OBP drops to .308

[Sammy Sofa]

In a way, Derrek's spectacular year in 2005 might have been the worst possible thing to happen with this team since it masked all of deepening flaws enough so THIS seaon is unleashed on us. Yeah, a lot of people were pointing things out from 2004 and on, but gee, that Lee and his bat, it made it so much easier for most to ignore the real problems.

[stitchface]

Hendry's strategy was apparently to remove the XBHs from the equation.

[TruffleShuffle]

In a way, Derrek's spectacular year in 2005 might have been the worst possible thing to happen with this team since it masked all of deepening flaws enough so THIS seaon is unleashed on us.

 

Masked how? Even with the monster year from Lee, they were 79-83 and missed the playoffs by 10 games. It's not like 2004, when they were really close to the playoffs and could blame injuries and Latroy Hawkins. This team was lousy last year and is even worse now.

[Sammy Sofa]

Masked in that you didn't have anywhere near the amount of frustration and sheer rage expressed over this team that you're seeing now. Lee's achievements were a huge distraction...it's not like the 2006 team's crappiness came out of nowhere. The seeds of failure were planted in 2004, and 2005 I think would have met the response we're seeing now had it not been for Lee coming out of nowhere. The management and owners gambled that they could bring Lee back, and he and Ramriez together would be enough to again put a bandage on a gaping head wound, and it blew up in their faces. This would have no doubt happened last year had Lee stuck at his career levels, when the management were gambling Nomar would be the big bat they needed besides Ramirez. This team and its owners are going to drag their heels to do any major changes until the last possible moment, and it's only now they're finally being backed into a corner.

[BigbadB]

The team OBP was a measily .324, which probably helps explain why they only scored 703 runs all year.

 

I would also like to note that it you take Derrek Lee out of last year's lineup, that team OBP drops to .308

 

A very welcome addition. I didn't realize it was that bad without Lee's numbers. Yowza.

[Laura]

Since a couple of people have asked ...

 

I submitted my comments to Gammons through the ESPN web interface. Here's the LINK. He may have a regular espn.com email addy, but I don't know what it is.

 

I just thanked him for pointing out some of the obvious problems with the Cubs team. And refrained from adding in any extraneous ESPN rants.