What's with all the Sandberg hate around here?

[Banedon]

How this didn't turn into a Sandberg photoshop thread, a la the Soriano thread, I'll never know.

[Derwood]

How this didn't turn into a Sandberg photoshop thread, a la the Soriano thread, I'll never know.

 

you can't force that kind of thread....it needs to just happen

[SouthSideRyan]

 

This is basically the way I feel about it. When Soriano slumps he turns into Paul Bako. If he is going to get out anyway why not make sure that you get something out of it.

 

Because you're talking about things after the fact.(Same thing with the slumping offense you mentioned earlier. It's easy to look back and say, oh these guys weren't hitting, why didn't they do something to scratch out some runs? Guys can turn on a dime and break out of a slump no matter how pathetic his previous 20 ABs looked. It's extremely difficult to pinpoint when a player is going to suck.

[javy knows my name]

I don't pay enough attention to the way Sandberg has managed in the minors, so I can't comment on that. However, if his philosophy was similar to Tony LaRussa, where every player on the team was capable of bunting and could use it in certain situations, I would have no problem with that. For instance, I remember a time when Edmonds was leading off and the Cubs had a big pull shift on him. It was late innings of a tied or one-run game. He just bunted a ball down the third base line and they had absolutely no chance of getting him out. He ended up scoring.

 

Now assume this. Soriano is in one of those slumps where he's very likely to strikeout. Runners on first and second, 0 outs, tie game, late innings. Baker or Soto is on deck and have been hot lately. If Soriano can get the bunt down, at least he'll make a productive out. I do think that every player should be capable of bunting.

With the exception of everything you said here, I agree. Even mired in his worse slumps, Soriano should never be bunting. For one, the resources needed to teach him to bunt can be much better used elsewhere in his game or with other players. Secondly, and most importantly, if Soriano is up with a runner on, the minute chance he gets a hold of one and puts multiple runs up with that appearance outweighs any benefit of a productive out in any situation, really. The only time a bunt is acceptable, IMO, is to avoid a dp with the pitcher up or the 8 hitter to be followed by a PH. The "manufacturing runs" philosophy is truly an awful one, even for a struggling offense.

[Rob]

Earl Weaver really said it best...

 

If you play for one run, that's all you're gonna get. So you had better be sure that run will win you the game.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Let's not forget that the bunt is statistically better under average conditions with 1st and 2nd and no outs, iirc.

[dew1679666265]

I don't have an answer for that. I rarely ever pay any attention to how another club scores its runs. From watching this team, day in and day out, I see a team that could benefit from playing smaller ball on occasions. This team seems to have slumps together and go on tears together. When everyone on the team is having a power outage, why not try a different approach until they start pulling it together.

 

Here's a few numbers that may help clear this up a bit.

 

We've scored 1-3 runs in a game 41 times and 4-6 runs in a game 40 times. We've scored 7+ 25 times and scored none 9 times.

 

By contrast, the best offense in baseball this year (the Phillies) have scored 1-3 runs 38 times, 4-6 runs 37 times, 7+ runs 35 times and have been shutout 4 times.

 

So, the Cubs and Phillies' differential between 1-3 run games and 4-6 run games is the same. The only difference between the offenses is that the Phillies score 7+ more often and get shutout less.

 

In our shutouts, we've lost by 2 runs twice, 3 runs three times, 4 runs twice, 6 runs once and 10 runs once.

 

It appears that the offense has been worse this year because they've scored a bunch of runs in a game less instead of going from 4-6 runs in a game to 1-3 runs. For instance, last year's Cubs team scored 7+ runs 57 times, 1-3 runs 58 times, 4-6 runs 38 times and were shutout 8 times. So, for the most part, a number of last year's 7+ run games have turned into 4-6 run games.

 

Thanks for taking the time to put that together. Puts some perspective on where this team is different and it's not where I thought.

 

Not a problem. My guess would be that most of the best offenses mirror more similarly the 2008 Cubs (lots of large output games) and not the perfect balance the Phillies have put together this year. My thinking is that every offense goes through hot and cold stretches, but the really good offenses score in bunches more often.

[Old Style]

I loved his HOF speech.

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder what the average age is of posters that hated it.

[Rob]

Let's not forget that the bunt is statistically better under average conditions with 1st and 2nd and no outs, iirc.

 

The numbers fluctuate, but they're usually pretty close to equal.

 

Situations like those are the ones where a manager makes the difference, trying to predict how the opposing manager will respond to having first base open with whatever hitter is coming up.

[Cubbie Swagger]

A real LOSER off-the-field too. No wonder he's headed for a second DIVORCE. LOUSY family man.

I wouldn't put too much stock in that. Most marriages don't last these days anyway. And the ones that do, more often than not, shouldn't.

[imb]

lol

[SouthSideRyan]

I loved his HOF speech.

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder what the average age is of posters that hated it.

 

The under 80 crowd hated it.

[Old Style]

I loved his HOF speech.

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder what the average age is of posters that hated it.

 

The under 80 crowd hated it.

I guess I need to check my birth certificate again. It says I'm only 36.

[Garwilly]

I loved his HOF speech.

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder what the average age is of posters that hated it.

 

The under 80 crowd hated it.

I guess I need to check my birth certificate again. It says I'm only 36.

 

And I'm 26.

[Rob]

I'm 24, and I loved it. The things he mentioned in the speech are the reasons why he was my childhood hero. I guess I just thought about how the good things applied to him and ignored the fact he was taking potshots at other players.

[Roast]

I'm 24, and I loved it. The things he mentioned in the speech are the reasons why he was my childhood hero. I guess I just thought about how the good things applied to him and ignored the fact he was taking potshots at other players.

I think that's probably the case; and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that. It's the same way with how I look at Sosa. It's because of him I'm a baseball fan and so it's a lot easier to look past the negative. That said, never having been a fan of sandberg, that speech was just obnoxious, IMO. Using the most important day of your baseball life to take shots at other players, all while talking about 'respect,' just didn't come off the right way.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm 24, and I loved it. The things he mentioned in the speech are the reasons why he was my childhood hero. I guess I just thought about how the good things applied to him and ignored the fact he was taking potshots at other players.

 

It was utter fogeyism. It wasn't talking about how Ryno was a complete player, it was talking about how the damn kids who won't get off his lawn aren't complete players, and don't care and make too much money, and stole his wife.

 

Sandberg was my favorite player during his career(and probably top 5 of all time, below Edmonds, but up there for sure), but managing/loud mouth coot Sandberg is a different animal.

[Sammy Sofa]

When I was a kid Sandberg was easily my favorite pro athlete besides Jordan.

 

That said, it's become abundantly clear over the years that I was a fan of him as a player and that's it.

[jersey cubs fan]

When I was a kid Sandberg was easily my favorite pro athlete besides Jordan.

 

That said, it's become abundantly clear over the years that I was a fan of him as a player and that's it.

 

Sandberg and Sweetness for me. One died young and the other is pretty annoying, childhood ruined for me. :cry:

[Rob]

I'm 24, and I loved it. The things he mentioned in the speech are the reasons why he was my childhood hero. I guess I just thought about how the good things applied to him and ignored the fact he was taking potshots at other players.

I think that's probably the case; and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that. It's the same way with how I look at Sosa. It's because of him I'm a baseball fan and so it's a lot easier to look past the negative. That said, never having been a fan of sandberg, that speech was just obnoxious, IMO. Using the most important day of your baseball life to take shots at other players, all while talking about 'respect,' just didn't come off the right way.

 

He did also use it to talk about how Santo should be in the hall.

[Sammy Sofa]

When I was a kid Sandberg was easily my favorite pro athlete besides Jordan.

 

That said, it's become abundantly clear over the years that I was a fan of him as a player and that's it.

 

Sandberg and Sweetness for me. One died young and the other is pretty annoying, childhood ruined for me. :cry:

 

I loved the '86 Bears, but for some reason I was much more a fan of guys like The Fridge, Dent, Singletary and Dan Hampton over Payton. It's not like I disliked WP, but I guess to a 7-year-old he didn't seem as "large as life" as some of the other guys on that team.

 

I definitely lost it, however, when he announced that he was sick. That one hurt.

[rynefan]

I loved his HOF speech.

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder what the average age is of posters that hated it.

 

The under 80 crowd hated it.

I guess I need to check my birth certificate again. It says I'm only 36.

 

I'm a big Sandberg fan, always will be. I blow off the hatred around here. He was a great player in a time in my life when I was much younger and had a lot more time to focus on the team and the specifics. Now I'm lucky to tune into a game. I thought his HOF speech was GREAT and I'm far less than 80. The marriage angle is dumb. I don't know him personally, but I'm a big fan of what he did for the Cubs back in the day.

[rynefan]

When I was a kid Sandberg was easily my favorite pro athlete besides Jordan.

 

That said, it's become abundantly clear over the years that I was a fan of him as a player and that's it.

 

You summed it up well. I think that's what I was trying to say.

[jersey cubs fan]

When I was a kid Sandberg was easily my favorite pro athlete besides Jordan.

 

That said, it's become abundantly clear over the years that I was a fan of him as a player and that's it.

 

Sandberg and Sweetness for me. One died young and the other is pretty annoying, childhood ruined for me. :cry:

 

I loved the '86 Bears, but for some reason I was much more a fan of guys like The Fridge, Dent, Singletary and Dan Hampton over Payton. It's not like I disliked WP, but I guess to a 7-year-old he didn't seem as "large as life" as some of the other guys on that team.

 

I definitely lost it, however, when he announced that he was sick. That one hurt.

 

85 Bears?

 

I started to get into the Bears a couple years before then, when Payton was pretty much the only highlight. 1984 solidified it, and he was still amazing in 85, and really 86 as well. I liked the defense mostly, but not any one player, except for maybe Singletary.

[Sammy Sofa]

I always call them the '86 Bears because of when the Super Bowl is played even though I know it's not technically correct. It's what I was doing as a kid and it just stuck ever since.