8/26 Cubs (Marquis) @ D'Backs (Petit?) 3:40 CST on Comcast

davearm · August 26, 2007

Because you're more worried about a ground ball DP if you don't send the runners than a strike-em-out/throw-em-out DP if you do send them.

hawkeyecub · August 26, 2007

To stay out of the double play. With most players I would not like that decision at all. With Kendall, I was in favor of it. In a full count he's more likely to take ball four OR ground into a double play than he is to strike out in my opinion.

samhainn77 · August 26, 2007

Absolutely. He was just trying to make something happen.

If the cubs hadn't put their bats away after the 3rd, this isn't even an issue. The BP has been nails lately, what a waste.

rawaction · August 26, 2007

I couldn't see the game, but the bunt call was a bad idea. Sending the runners was not. Kendall is one of the best contact hitters on the team, with a pretty good eye. He's not the easiest in the world to double up. I would have took my chances with him swinging away and at worst beating a relay throw to 1B.

illiniguy · August 26, 2007

Why I would rather have the guy at 3rd with two outs as opposed to 2nd. At least a wild pitch ties it then.

VanceJergins · August 26, 2007

I don't see how anyone can defend that call. 0 outs, runner already in scoring position, top of the order coming up. I was fine with bunting, but why take that big of a risk?

gflore34 · August 26, 2007

Flat out luck, twice Jones hits a rocket and Arizona pulls a play out of their collective asses. I dearly hope the Cubs make the playoffs and play these guys in the first round - that lucky crap has a way of turning around in the playoffs.

illiniguy · August 26, 2007

It will when the cards sweep them.

Rob · August 26, 2007

Lou most likely lost us this game.

Soul · August 26, 2007

Well, I disagree wholeheartedly but I'm not going to get into an argument tonight, I'm feeling like shooting a bunch of small animals or something.

CubsBears29 · August 26, 2007

Complete knee-jerk, but I could the NL Central looking like this after Thursday's games are over;

StL 66-64 --

CHC 67-65 --

MIL 67-66 0.5

CIN 63-70 4.5

And real good chance Cubs finish 3rd or 4th in the division. Thinking Cards-Cincy-Cubs-Brewers.

davearm · August 26, 2007

It's very simple, and has already been explained.

There's more than one risk at play here.

Lou's thinking was that the risk of Kendall hitting a GB was larger than the risk of him striking out.

Pretty basic stuff here. Not sure why there's such a struggle to grasp the logic.

3Dog · August 26, 2007

It seemed like the DBax knew what was coming, what with the runners going on the previous pitches. Valverde used Kendall's anxiousness against him by throwing a pitch outside, knowing that Kendall would chase. If Kendall wasn't caught up in the moment then he takes that pitch for ball four and the Cubs have bases loaded and no outs.

hawkeyecub · August 26, 2007

Oh please.

Yeah our offense going to sleep had nothing to do with it. Neither did the five runs given up by Marquis.

Look it was a risky play. But I trust Kendall to take ball four or put the ball in play in that situation. I think those are more likely results than him swinging and missing. He probably swung at ball four which he doesn't do much. It happens. When you aren't scoring or driving in runs like you should, you have to take some risks sometimes.

gflore34 · August 26, 2007

Do you blame Lou for the inability to do anything with crappy pitching they faced during innings 1-6?

CubColtPacer · August 26, 2007

It's not that big of a risk:

Kendall grounds into a double play with runners on base a greater percentage of the time than he strikes out with runners on base (if you look at the numbers this is true for him about every year of his career). You add in the fact that there's a small possibility that Fontenot can beat the throw to 3rd base even if Kendall does strike out (and the small benefit of the runners moving if Kendall gets a hit), and the odds easily favor the runners moving in that situation.

It's not something you do with many hitters-but Kendall strikes out so infrequently and grounds into enough double plays for it to be a good move.

illiniguy · August 26, 2007

No it isnt if he swings and misses its a more sure double play than if he hits the ball. Plus, If there is a double play the way we did it keeps the lone runner on 2nd. The other way odds are we have a runner at 3rd.

rawaction · August 26, 2007

It's about personnel. You gamble that Kendall, who doesn't strike out much....either puts the ball in play or takes a walk. You gamble that a guy with mediocre speed gets a good enough jump off of 2B in case of a swing and miss. If I were a betting man, I would put my money on Kendall putting a 3-2 ball in play more than I would Theriot or Jones hitting a sac fly. Theriot doesn't normally hit the ball in the air with much authority. Jones doesn't normally hit the ball in the air at all.

Soul · August 26, 2007

Again, the risk of a Kendall strikeout is much smaller than a Kendall ground ball DP. If Lou managed by counting on a DP ball to have a runner @ 3rd with 2 outs instead of trying to get runners @ 2nd & 3rd with 1 out, I'd be calling for his head right now. That would be asinine.

Look, Jason blew the bunt attempt, then he swung at ball 4 when he knew he had runners moving. Jason let the team down today.

UMFan83 · August 27, 2007

If he strikes out and the runners are sent, there is probably a 90% chance that they get a DP out of it. If he hits a ground ball and the runners aren't moving, its certainly not guarenteed that its going to be a DP. The ball can find a hole, the runner can break up a DP, Kendall can somehow beat the throw to first.

CubColtPacer · August 27, 2007

Here are the numbers for the past 3 years:

Kendall with a runner on 1st base (1st only, 1st and 2nd, 1st and 3rd, bases loaded)

103 at-bats

6 K's

7 double plays

When you consider that I didn't take out his at-bats with 2 outs (eliminating the double play but not the strikeout), striking out has happened less for him in double play situations than double plays have.

Try 2006:

167 at-bats

13 K's

19 double plays

And 2005:

194 AB's

10 K's

27 double plays

If the runners had held on their bags, there would have been a much higher chance of having 2 outs than if they started the runners. As you can see, even when including the 2 out situations Kendall grounds into more double plays than K's in those situations each of the last 3 years.

UMFan83 · August 27, 2007

Also, what about considering the options of what happens if Kendall does make contact with the ball. What if he lines out to an IF positon...thats a DP. What if he hits a fly ball, the runner has to tag and won't advance. Its more than just DP or strikeout. You're basically hoping that Kendall either gets a hit or a ground ball. With a 3-2 count, the odds are a bit better, but not good enough for me to seriously consider sending the tying run that is already in scoring position up a base.

3Dog · August 27, 2007

Let's hope Kendall is the type of guy that feels shame when he lets down the team and comes out the next day ready to take smart at-bats.

illiniguy · August 27, 2007

Does anyone actually think we are going to win this division anymore? We have given away way too many of these games.

Soul · August 27, 2007

Actually, I was hoping Jason wouldn't fail to bunt the runners over which would have kept us out of the situation entirely. I was also expecting that he wouldn't swing at an obvious ball 4. The pitch wasn't close, which is why he missed it.

8/26 Cubs (Marquis) @ D'Backs (Petit?) 3:40 CST on Comcast

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs