Is Bob Brenly going to be our next manager?

[Sammy Sofa]

And you know this how? Do you know Bob Brenly personally? Please provide a link.

 

http://bobbrenlyreallywisheshewasmanaginginsteadofannouncing.org

 

Weird that you demand that I back up my reading between the lines when all you've done is decided out of thin air that Bob Brenly decided to not manage the Cubs because he decided he's too good for them.

 

I'll take that as a 'No'.

 

Brenly has been reported as in the mix for multiple managing spots since 2004 and has come away with nothing each time. If you're really convinced that he was being pursued each time and turned them all down because they weren't the "right fit" then this is pointless, because that's ridiculous. How about the Brewers? Brenly was reported to be after their management spot after both the 2009 and 2010 season. Do you think he turned down offers then, too?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Bunting is a fundamental of the game and EVERYONE needs to know how to do it.

Bunting is for people who can't hit.

[Banedon]

my gut tells me getting there is a joke account

My gut tells me he hasn't been responding because he's been banned.

 

Whoops, looks like you forgot Benchwarmer.

 

It was an old banned account reborn. He wasn't banned because of his baseball opinions.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Here is the part where you tell us the old banned account...

[NewUserName]

great post season pitching has made Brenly, Ozzie Guillen and now Bruce Botchy look a lot better as managers then they really are. The rest of this thread is just mind numbing

[Sammy Sofa]

So was it CubsGM?

[dew1679666265]

dew, Luis had 57 HR (!) and let's not forget that even with those pitching stats in the regular season that Randy & Curt were starting even more playoff games.

 

I knew it was 50-something, 52 just came to mind. And you're right, Schilling and Johnson carried that pitching staff to the awesome numbers it posted. The DBacks won that year because their stars were stars, period. They had great players who played great.

 

This discussion reminds me of the 2005 White Sox "Ozzieball" farce.

 

Yeah, I was thinking about them too while I was writing my first post in this thread.

[dew1679666265]

Bunting is a fundamental of the game and EVERYONE needs to know how to do it.

Bunting is for people who can't hit.

 

Sac bunting is. There's definite merit in bunting for a hit, for certain players.

[dew1679666265]

FWIW, I care less now about managers who love bunting, stealing, hit and runs, etc... than I did a few years ago. They're not as bad tactically in this lower offensive environment.

 

That said, Bob makes me roll my eyes plenty when he acts when Soriano and Aramis are the problem spots on this team.

 

I think bunting is becoming much more acceptable - which is why I pointed out that there are beneficial times to use it. I'm also much more open to players like Pierre, Campana, etc., laying down drag bunts and the like since they have very realistic chances to reach base that way. It shouldn't be done all the time, but as a strategic weapon it can be useful.

[jersey cubs fan]

FWIW, I care less now about managers who love bunting, stealing, hit and runs, etc... than I did a few years ago. They're not as bad tactically in this lower offensive environment.

 

That said, Bob makes me roll my eyes plenty when he acts when Soriano and Aramis are the problem spots on this team.

 

I think bunting is becoming much more acceptable - which is why I pointed out that there are beneficial times to use it. I'm also much more open to players like Pierre, Campana, etc., laying down drag bunts and the like since they have very realistic chances to reach base that way. It shouldn't be done all the time, but as a strategic weapon it can be useful.

 

Sure, if you suck like Campana you have to bunt. But we're talking about actual major league caliber hitters.

[Brett]

FWIW, I care less now about managers who love bunting, stealing, hit and runs, etc... than I did a few years ago. They're not as bad tactically in this lower offensive environment.

 

That said, Bob makes me roll my eyes plenty when he acts when Soriano and Aramis are the problem spots on this team.

 

I think bunting is becoming much more acceptable - which is why I pointed out that there are beneficial times to use it. I'm also much more open to players like Pierre, Campana, etc., laying down drag bunts and the like since they have very realistic chances to reach base that way. It shouldn't be done all the time, but as a strategic weapon it can be useful.

 

Sure, if you suck like Campana you have to bunt. But we're talking about actual major league caliber hitters.

 

"Gritty" players bunt, "real" players swing.

[Sammy Sofa]

Lazy players swing, because they hate to run and try.

[Benchwarmer]

Bunting is a fundamental of the game and EVERYONE needs to know how to do it.

Bunting is for people who can't hit.

 

Sac bunting is. There's definite merit in bunting for a hit, for certain players.

 

How true. All the great players know how to bunt. According to STATS, Babe Ruth had 113 sacrifice hits and Lou Gehrig had 106 sacrifice hits. They knew the fundamentals and when asked by their manager to lay one down, they did it.

[CubColtPacer]

Bunting is a fundamental of the game and EVERYONE needs to know how to do it.

Bunting is for people who can't hit.

 

Sac bunting is. There's definite merit in bunting for a hit, for certain players.

 

How true. All the great players know how to bunt. According to STATS, Babe Ruth had 113 sacrifice hits and Lou Gehrig had 106 sacrifice hits. They knew the fundamentals and when asked by their manager to lay one down, they did it.

 

They also played in the deadball era when 1 run meant a whole lot more than it does now.

[Sammy Sofa]

Sacrifice flies and sacrifice bunts were a combined stat until 1954, so if you think most of those "sacrifice hits" for guys like Ruth and Gehrig were bunts then I've got a LOT of things I want to sell to you.

[soapy]

Bunting is a fundamental of the game and EVERYONE needs to know how to do it.

Bunting is for people who can't hit.

 

Sac bunting is. There's definite merit in bunting for a hit, for certain players.

 

How true. All the great players know how to bunt. According to STATS, Babe Ruth had 113 sacrifice hits and Lou Gehrig had 106 sacrifice hits. They knew the fundamentals and when asked by their manager to lay one down, they did it.

 

They also played in the deadball era when 1 run meant a whole lot more than it does now.

 

Right. In a situation where you are playing for one run, it can make a lot of sense to sac bunt. If I remember the statistics right, having a runner at second with one out (vs. having a runner at first with no outs) increases the chances that you will score a run, but it decreases the average amount of runs a team will score.

[Sammy Sofa]

No, stop this discussion right now. I just said sac bunts and sac flies were the same stat until 1954. They were recorded together as a single stat called "sacrifice hits." There's no need to try and breakdown Benchwarmer's inane post...anyone with a functioning brain is going to realize that most of Ruth and Gehrig's "sacrifice hits" were sac flies and not bunts.

[Fred Hornkohl]

No, stop this discussion right now. I just said sac bunts and sac flies were the same stat until 1954. They were recorded together as a single stat called "sacrifice hits." There's no need to try and breakdown Benchwarmer's inane post...anyone with a functioning brain is going to realize that most of Ruth and Gehrig's "sacrifice hits" were sac flies and not bunts.

 

In addition to that, up until fairly recently (I just don't remember exactly when) moving a runner from 1st to 2nd and/or 2nd to 3rd with a long fly ball out was scored as a sacrifice fly, too.

[MSG T]

Bunting is a fundamental of the game and EVERYONE needs to know how to do it.

Bunting is for people who can't hit.

 

Sac bunting is. There's definite merit in bunting for a hit, for certain players.

 

How true. All the great players know how to bunt. According to STATS, Babe Ruth had 113 sacrifice hits and Lou Gehrig had 106 sacrifice hits. They knew the fundamentals and when asked by their manager to lay one down, they did it.

 

They also played in the deadball era when 1 run meant a whole lot more than it does now.

 

 

Babe Ruth yes, but Gehrig never played in the deadball era, IIRC he was a rookie in 1925.

 

And, not directed at the above quote, N&G is right, most of Ruth and Gehrigs sacs were flies. I'd be shocked if either laid down more than 5 sac bunts in their career.

[Sammy Sofa]

No, stop this discussion right now. I just said sac bunts and sac flies were the same stat until 1954. They were recorded together as a single stat called "sacrifice hits." There's no need to try and breakdown Benchwarmer's inane post...anyone with a functioning brain is going to realize that most of Ruth and Gehrig's "sacrifice hits" were sac flies and not bunts.

 

In addition to that, up until fairly recently (I just don't remember exactly when) moving a runner from 1st to 2nd and/or 2nd to 3rd with a long fly ball out was scored as a sacrifice fly, too.

 

Yes, I should have clarified this, too. Thanks for that, Fred. Benchwarmer's vision of an often-bunting Ruth or Gehrig is pure fantasy.

[CubColtPacer]

I forgot about the combining of sacrifice bunts/flies. But even so...

 

Would I like everyone to know how to bunt? Sure. Even Albert Pujols is probably going to have a couple times in his career where it would be slightly beneficial for him to lay down a bunt. But it's not like you can teach a player to bunt and have him pick it up and be great at it. Bunting requires repetition and a certain amount of skill. Some pitchers have been trying to bunt for 10-15 years and are still not good at it. Carlos Pena has been working hard on bunting for at least a couple years now, has much more of the field available to him then a typical sac bunt would, and still can't get the ball down all the time.

 

So it's almost certainly a waste of time to spend a lot of time working on bunting with a good hitter who is not naturally skilled at it in order to trust him enough to call a bunt for the 10-20 times in his career where it would make sense for him to bunt. It's more likely that he'll never be good enough at bunting to make it worth it to take the bat out of his hands.

[Sammy Sofa]

I can't believe I'm trotting out this cliche, but....even the best hitters fail 7 times out of 10. Yes, bunting is different than swinging away, but people talk about players "knowing how to bunt" like they expect, no, DEMAND that they lay down a successful bunt every single time they attempt to. They talk like since it's something they don't have to do very often they should be able to do it without fail every time they're called on to do it. If that's the case, then don't you expect a starting player to get on base every single time they called on to pinch hit? You get people talking like bunting is some kind of muscle memory activity, where if you practice it enough you can just do it in your sleep and always succeed at laying one down.

[bcl412]

Bunting is a fundamental of the game and EVERYONE needs to know how to do it.

Bunting is for people who can't hit.

 

Sac bunting is. There's definite merit in bunting for a hit, for certain players.

 

How true. All the great players know how to bunt. According to STATS, Babe Ruth had 113 sacrifice hits and Lou Gehrig had 106 sacrifice hits. They knew the fundamentals and when asked by their manager to lay one down, they did it.

 

They also played in the deadball era when 1 run meant a whole lot more than it does now.

 

Also, just because they did it doesn't mean they should have. I mean, we are talking about two of the greatest hitters ever.

[jersey cubs fan]

I can't believe I'm trotting out this cliche, but....even the best hitters fail 7 times out of 10.

 

Only 6 out of 10 if you properly utilize PA. :D

[MSG T]

I guess I should have added, in regards to Ruth and Gehrig, their heyday as teammates with the Yankees, 1927-1933, came during a much higher scoring environment then there is this season. 1927 & 1928 both had AL scoring averages of 4.92 and 4.77 rpg, from 1929 through 1933 the AL was over 5 rpg. This year the AL is currently at 4.29, meaning is was even more stupid for Ruth and Gehrig to lay down a bunt than it currently would be, and it would be pretty stupid now to have AGonz, Pujols, Bautista, Votto or any of the other top hitters to lay down a sac bunt.