Z's Explanation

[Guest]

Don't know if anyone has posted this yet but ESPN 1000 just reported that Z has called a pregame press conference to apologize for his statements yesterday.

 

Hooray for artificial and forced apologies!!

 

Save the words and just pitch well, Z.

 

Judge much?

[soccer10k]

Don't know if anyone has posted this yet but ESPN 1000 just reported that Z has called a pregame press conference to apologize for his statements yesterday.

 

Hooray for artificial and forced apologies!!

 

Save the words and just pitch well, Z.

 

Judge much?

 

Sure there's a chance he's sincere with it but I highly doubt that. Z's true feelings came out yesterday and I would be willing to bet anything that somebody (Lou/management/his agent) are basically forcing him to do this. I just can't see Z making a complete 180. I mean, did anyone really believe Barrett and Z when they said there was nothing wrong after Z decked Barrett? I sure didn't.

 

That being said, regardless of whether it's a sincere apology or not, I would still rather see him not say anything and just go out and pitch well on Saturday in Pittsburgh.

[Guest]

Don't know if anyone has posted this yet but ESPN 1000 just reported that Z has called a pregame press conference to apologize for his statements yesterday.

 

Hooray for artificial and forced apologies!!

 

Save the words and just pitch well, Z.

 

Judge much?

 

Sure there's a chance he's sincere with it but I highly doubt that. Z's true feelings came out yesterday and I would be willing to bet anything that somebody (Lou/management/his agent) are basically forcing him to do this. I just can't see Z making a complete 180. I mean, did anyone really believe Barrett and Z when they said there was nothing wrong after Z decked Barrett? I sure didn't.

 

That being said, regardless of whether it's a sincere apology or not, I would still rather see him not say anything and just go out and pitch well on Saturday in Pittsburgh.

 

 

Oh cmon - you've played sports haven't you? You've never done or said anything out of character during or right after a game? He wasn't drunk and uninhibited - he was frustrated and upset with himself.

[soccer10k]

Don't know if anyone has posted this yet but ESPN 1000 just reported that Z has called a pregame press conference to apologize for his statements yesterday.

 

Hooray for artificial and forced apologies!!

 

Save the words and just pitch well, Z.

 

Judge much?

 

Sure there's a chance he's sincere with it but I highly doubt that. Z's true feelings came out yesterday and I would be willing to bet anything that somebody (Lou/management/his agent) are basically forcing him to do this. I just can't see Z making a complete 180. I mean, did anyone really believe Barrett and Z when they said there was nothing wrong after Z decked Barrett? I sure didn't.

 

That being said, regardless of whether it's a sincere apology or not, I would still rather see him not say anything and just go out and pitch well on Saturday in Pittsburgh.

 

 

Oh cmon - you've played sports haven't you? You've never done or said anything out of character during or right after a game? He wasn't drunk and uninhibited - he was frustrated and upset with himself.

 

His motion to his head on the field makes me think otherwise. He had a few innings to think about this in the clubhouse before he had to speak with the media. This wasn't a closer giving up a walkoff home run and then talking with reporters 10 minutes later.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Don't know if anyone has posted this yet but ESPN 1000 just reported that Z has called a pregame press conference to apologize for his statements yesterday.

 

Hooray for artificial and forced apologies!!

 

Save the words and just pitch well, Z.

 

Judge much?

 

Sure there's a chance he's sincere with it but I highly doubt that. Z's true feelings came out yesterday and I would be willing to bet anything that somebody (Lou/management/his agent) are basically forcing him to do this. I just can't see Z making a complete 180. I mean, did anyone really believe Barrett and Z when they said there was nothing wrong after Z decked Barrett? I sure didn't.

 

That being said, regardless of whether it's a sincere apology or not, I would still rather see him not say anything and just go out and pitch well on Saturday in Pittsburgh.

 

 

Oh cmon - you've played sports haven't you? You've never done or said anything out of character during or right after a game? He wasn't drunk and uninhibited - he was frustrated and upset with himself.

 

His motion to his head on the field makes me think otherwise. He had a few innings to think about this in the clubhouse before he had to speak with the media. This wasn't a closer giving up a walkoff home run and then talking with reporters 10 minutes later.

 

Am I the only one who really wasnt offended by Z's comments? I guess I just thought he is getting as frustrated as the fans are and simply was reacting. Immature, sure, but its Z, and if you dont expect it from him by now, your being naive.

 

What he said really wasnt that big of a deal-get over it kids.

[C.C.]

Don't know if anyone has posted this yet but ESPN 1000 just reported that Z has called a pregame press conference to apologize for his statements yesterday.

 

Hooray for artificial and forced apologies!!

 

Save the words and just pitch well, Z.

 

Judge much?

 

Sure there's a chance he's sincere with it but I highly doubt that. Z's true feelings came out yesterday and I would be willing to bet anything that somebody (Lou/management/his agent) are basically forcing him to do this. I just can't see Z making a complete 180. I mean, did anyone really believe Barrett and Z when they said there was nothing wrong after Z decked Barrett? I sure didn't.

 

That being said, regardless of whether it's a sincere apology or not, I would still rather see him not say anything and just go out and pitch well on Saturday in Pittsburgh.

 

 

Oh cmon - you've played sports haven't you? You've never done or said anything out of character during or right after a game? He wasn't drunk and uninhibited - he was frustrated and upset with himself.

 

His motion to his head on the field makes me think otherwise. He had a few innings to think about this in the clubhouse before he had to speak with the media. This wasn't a closer giving up a walkoff home run and then talking with reporters 10 minutes later.

 

Am I the only one who really wasnt offended by Z's comments? I guess I just thought he is getting as frustrated as the fans are and simply was reacting. Immature, sure, but its Z, and if you dont expect it from him by now, your being naive.

 

What he said really wasnt that big of a deal-get over it kids.

 

I was offended by his performence.

[Guest]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

[Mephistopheles]

Zambrano's stuff isn't that good. He's got a plus fastball and two pitches that don't grade out that well. His fastball a few years ago was plus-plus now not so much. His offspeed stuff has never been overly impressive. I would call them average but it would be an insult to some of the posters here.

[C.C.]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

 

Not as good as Pedro in his prime.

[badger1679666666]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

 

Not as good as Pedro in his prime.

 

Pedro in his prime is the SOLE comparison for Cy Young talent?

[C.C.]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

 

Not as good as Pedro in his prime.

 

Pedro in his prime is the SOLE comparison for Cy Young talent?

 

Who said that?

[Guest]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

 

Not as good as Pedro in his prime.

 

So what? That does deter Zambrano's stuff. Just because he's not harnessing his stuff to the fullest and doesn't have great results and doesn't have Pedro in 2000 stuff doesn't mean he doesn't have "Cy Young stuff."

[soccer10k]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

 

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

[C.C.]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

 

Not as good as Pedro in his prime.

 

So what? That does deter Zambrano's stuff. Just because he's not harnessing his stuff to the fullest and doesn't have great results and doesn't have Pedro in 2000 stuff doesn't mean he doesn't have "Cy Young stuff."

 

Z has Cy Young "stuff". I never said he didn't. He's no where near at the level of Pedro. Not even close.

Edited September 4, 2007 by C.C.

[Guest]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

 

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

[Guest]

Actually, let me add an idiot as well. Anyone who predicts he will be the Cy Young winner is arrogant and an idiot.

 

This is untrue. If I am Pedro Martinez and it's the offseason between 1999 and 2000, and I say I predict I will win the CYA, does that make me an idiot or arrogant? That makes me betting on the odds. But this is a tangent but there are a few cases where predicting a CYA for yourself isn't idiotic. I don't have a problem with that comment. It came off wrong, but it seemed to me like that was his goal. Frankly, I'd rather his goal be to win the CYA than make the playoffs, because of he does the first the second would come.

 

No, because Pedro usually backs it up.

 

And so does Z. Until 3 months out of this year.

 

Z's never had Cy Young stuff. Pedro did.

 

Sure he has. He has some of the best stuff in all of baseball.

 

Not as good as Pedro in his prime.

 

So what? That does deter Zambrano's stuff. Just because he's not harnessing his stuff to the fullest and doesn't have great results and doesn't have Pedro in 2000 stuff doesn't mean he doesn't have "Cy Young stuff."

 

Z has Cy Young "stuff". I never said he didn't.

 

Which is what I said - I never said anything about how good he is in comparison to Pedro, so what's the point in bringing up Pedro with me? I was disagreeing with soccer's assessment of Zambrano's stuff.

[soccer10k]

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

 

His control isn't that great. That factors in to determining how great a pitchers 'stuff' is.

[C.C.]

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

 

His control isn't that great. That factors in to determining how great a pitchers 'stuff' is.

 

Is there a stat on "stuff"?

[hawkeyecub]

Apparently Z will give some fake, prepared apology at a press conference at 3:45.

[hawkeyecub]

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

 

His control isn't that great. That factors in to determining how great a pitchers 'stuff' is.

 

Is there a stat on "stuff"?

 

No. You use your eyes.

[soccer10k]

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

 

His control isn't that great. That factors in to determining how great a pitchers 'stuff' is.

 

Is there a stat on "stuff"?

 

Uhhh...no.

 

Why are you asking that question anyway?

[C.C.]

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

 

His control isn't that great. That factors in to determining how great a pitchers 'stuff' is.

 

Is there a stat on "stuff"?

 

No. You use your eyes.

 

Sorry I believe in Stats only. :wink:

[C.C.]

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

 

His control isn't that great. That factors in to determining how great a pitchers 'stuff' is.

 

Is there a stat on "stuff"?

 

Uhhh...no.

 

Why are you asking that question anyway?

 

It's a joke! I'm just joking around.

[XZero771679666304]

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

 

Absolutely. Part of Carlos' problem is that he gets behind in the count so often that he is forced to come in with a predictable pitch or walk the guy, neither of which produces a desirable result.

 

This was also a problem Kerry Wood struggled with, though his stuff was better than Z's, so it has less of an impact (save the high PC's that contributed to his injuries).

 

The effectiveness of a pitcher's stuff is almost totally contingent on their command of it. And IMO, part of command is pitch selection relative to situation.

 

Mark Prior is a good example. His stuff was good, but not so much as Z's or Wood's. But he was more effective when he was healthy because he had such fine command.

 

A pitcher with average stuff and fine command will have far better results than a pitcher with stellar stuff and zero command.

 

 

This is what really frustrates me about recent seasons. As good as Z has been, he really could have been better. All of our pitchers could have been better if they simply had better command, or were coached properly on their command.

[soccer10k]

He's been good enough to be an ace of the Cubs but he's never been top 5 in either league at any point. He walks too many batters and his subsequent WHIP not at the elite level (only one year under 1.2 and that was a 1.15 in 2005).

 

There's a difference in having great stuff and harnessing or maximizing that great stuff.

 

His control isn't that great. That factors in to determining how great a pitchers 'stuff' is.

 

Is there a stat on "stuff"?

 

Uhhh...no.

 

Why are you asking that question anyway?

 

It's a joke! I'm just joking around.

 

Ah, my bad. :D

 

It appears my sarcasm detector isn't working properly today.