CubinNY

I still like EPat for 2nd base. DeRosa ain't cutting the mustard. Last 7 days .111 .238 .111 .349 Last 14 days .195 .283 .195 .478 Last 28 days .221 .299 .390 .688

I still like him for 2nd base.

Lou is hard headed but not dumb. This move should have been made after Spring Training.

I wonder how much the running off at the mouth by the Sox has affect the Cubs. They sure do seem intent on making a statement

Yep. The Cardinals are outperforming their predicted adjusted record by 5.7 wins and 'should be' a .500 team. Though, the Cubs are also a bit 'lucky' and should be 3.3 games worse than they currently are. The whole NL Central is outplaying its numbers. NL Central Current Predicted Standings w/ (AE)RS/(AE)RA (above/below actual record difference) Cubs 46-29 (+3.3) Cardinals 38-38 (+5.7) Brewers 37-37 (+2.7) Reds 35-41 (0.0) Astros 34-41 (+0.5) Pirates 30-45 (+5.8) I've written it before but it bears repeating. The correlations you are reporting have extremely low predictive value with such small sample sizes. What the Cubs or any other team "should" do is what they have done to this point. Pyth. record as statistic has @.03 correlation to actual wins until around 120 games. Edit: That's not to say that having a + sized run differential isn't a good thing, because it is. The bigger the better.

Because they might be WS contenders if they get him. They are like 19-6 over their last 25 games. Also, I don't think they will have to trade away all their talent. Their system is loaded and they have good young ballplayers at the ML level. They could trade Weeks or Hall too.

That was the funniest thing I've read on here in a long time. Well done.

Interesting to see how that impacts the roster moves. You have Marshall and Ward ready to come up in the next 3-4 days. If Reed goes to the DL, what's the other roster move? It will be interesting to see if they feel that Patterson needs to be up, or do they keep Hoffpauir and feel comfortable with Fukudome and Cedeno as the two backups in CF to a slightly injured Jim Edmonds. Would they consider Pie? Should they? With Edmonds he's kind of superfluous, but Lou likes him some defense in the late innings.

It is. Thus making this one of my new favorite pictures. It's my desk top.

They are busting him inside but he's not swinging unless he's down in the count. He's a smart baseball player (always has been), I'm sure he knows his limitations.

And who sets his own pitch counts?And has a bad back.

I wasn't against the signing because he was Jim Edmonds. I was against the signing because he is a washed up baseball payer. I will say that Hendry rolled a seven though. Even if he does nothing to help the Cubs for the rest of the season he's earned the league minimum that the Cubs are paying him. Put 1 in the Hendry column.

Low ball him/her. Give him/her $500 over blue book. Tell them it is your best and walk away. If they want to sell it they will. Go Cubs.

Pretty damn good. I think the maintaining variables might be different than what caused the initial problems. Perhaps changing Hills mechanics was the major cause of his problems at the onset. However, I have a hard time believe that those changes are maintaining the problem. I think it is partially "mental" but mostly physical. I have no idea how to correct those problems.

Is Marquis hitting his spots?

Homer Simpson: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm. Lisa Simpson: That’s specious reasoning, Dad. Homer: Thank you, dear. Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away. Homer: Oh, how does it work? Lisa: It doesn’t work. Homer: Uh-huh. Lisa: It’s just a stupid rock. Homer: Uh-huh. Lisa: But I don’t see any tigers around, do you? Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

when is the next major? i wonder if there are any long term ramifications from what he just did to his knee. I believe it is the British Open which is a bitch of a walk. This is good news for other pro golfers bad news for the networks that cover golf.

First, let me start out by saying that I agree with you completely. That said, I find it pretty ironic/puzzling that you're taking this stance considering you argued adamantly with me over the offseason that process didn't matter more than outcome (results). I forget what thread it was but there's a pretty decent chance that, given the fact that it was in the offseason, it was in the Roberts thread. :lol: Not to go on a tangent. Process doesn't matter more than outcome and this is a perfect point to illustrate it, Reed got lucky once and then did two stupid things afterwards, IMO, because his "hustle" (i.e., process) was reinforced by stretching a single into a double (outcome) the first time. Outcome always matters, it is what defines good process. With poor "process" one can get away with it every once in a while but more times that not the outcome won't be what is desirable (i.e., getting thrown out at 3rd and attempting to bunt when a) the pitcher has had a hard time finding the plate, and b) the playing surface is fast). IMO, it also hurt when DeRosa didn't back up 1st base. Good process = RJ not attempting to take second base... not attempting to drive backwards on the highway Bad process = RJ attempting to take second... you attempting to drive backwards on the highway Process trumps outcome. Do you see what I'm getting at here? The fact that you made a bad decision by driving backwards on the highway isn't somehow justified or excused by a good outcome (i.e. you not killing yourself, making it through unscathed). At some point in time the rubber has to meet the road so to speak, luck will only take you so far. Here's the deal I believe that process trumps outcome. I believe in the process of teaching kids to read by having them sleep on books at night. I know this because some kids have learned to read by doing it. I teach my teachers to teach kids to read by telling them to sleep on their books. I never have to be confronted by the outcomes of my teaching because I teach teachers how to teach, so I will always value process more than outcome. My officemate believes that outcome defines good process. He believes in the process of teaching kids how to read by breaking down words into their phonemes and teaching kids sound/letter relationships. He knows this because some kids have learned to read by doing this. He teaches his students to teach kids to read by sounding out letters and breaking words down. However, unlike me he spends time in schools and does research, he therefore knows that it is the outcomes that matter and outcomes are a function of process. Basically you are trying to define process a part from outcome. When the two are inseparable. When I say that a risky performance is not ok just because it worked I'm saying that anyone can get lucky. Consequences always matter. The more luck we have the more likely we think we are on the right path.

Haha. "The poor play isn't his fault. But uh, I'm firing him anyway at 3am." This is the guy that was once called one of the 5 best GMs in baseball. I'm guessing that this wasn't Omar's call. Bad execution but for the right reasons though. What are the reasons though? The Mets biggest problem is that all their very old injury prone players are either injured or completely not performing. A team cannot fire the players. I don't think Willie is a particularly good manager. You can trade or release them. I don't think he's particularly good or bad. But I think the GM made some really bad decisions with some really old and injury prone players. I don't see Willie abusing talented young arms. The only argument I have heard is that the team looks flat or dysfunctional. I think they just look old and injured. The free Metro paper listed 3 mistakes by Willie and Omar. They are: Willie - slow start to season because they "lacked energy to start season". Race comments. And "his young team lacked leadership last September and Randolph did nothing to push them into performing better." That's gibberish, and that's the excuses I've been hearing as the reasons for his firing. He can't push them to perform better or add energy. He's a freaking manager. I don't disagree with you. I also read where Omar is taking all the blame on the firing. I don't really buy that.

First, let me start out by saying that I agree with you completely. That said, I find it pretty ironic/puzzling that you're taking this stance considering you argued adamantly with me over the offseason that process didn't matter more than outcome (results). I forget what thread it was but there's a pretty decent chance that, given the fact that it was in the offseason, it was in the Roberts thread. :lol: Not to go on a tangent. Process doesn't matter more than outcome and this is a perfect point to illustrate it, Reed got lucky once and then did two stupid things afterwards, IMO, because his "hustle" (i.e., process) was reinforced by stretching a single into a double (outcome) the first time. Outcome always matters, it is what defines good process. With poor "process" one can get away with it every once in a while but more times that not the outcome won't be what is desirable (i.e., getting thrown out at 3rd and attempting to bunt when a) the pitcher has had a hard time finding the plate, and b) the playing surface is fast). IMO, it also hurt when DeRosa didn't back up 1st base.

The Cubs played a little sloppy last night, they didn't deserve to win. However, if I had to blame one person it would be Reed. He had his head up his own ass three times 1) trying to stretch the single (worked) 3) stealing third (didn't work) 4) bunting on that turf (didn't work). There's a reason why Tampa has the fewest sac bunts in baseball and it ain't b/c they're managed by an Earl Weaver clone with a lot of big hitters. I don't understand why you're complaining about him stretching that single into a double considering that it worked, but whatever. As for the bunt in the 9th, it was a great idea. If Longoria doesn't make a perfect play on that ball, the game would've been tied. Unfortunately, he did make a perfect play. Nothing wrong with dropping down a bunt there. Yesterday I drove backwards down the highway, it worked so I'm going to try it today too. Whatever works man'. I love Len but he's dead wrong. It wasn't a perfect play it was a routine play and Johnson was thrown out by 15 feet. Johnson should know better than to bunt on a billiard green. Like I said, there's a reason why Tampa doesn't bunt. 15 feet? Boy that's not much of an exaggeration or anything. I'm watching the replay right now on ESPN and as the 1B is gathering the ball, Johnson's left foot is planted and he's making his final step to the bag with his right. So unless Reed has a 15 foot stride, you're off by about 10-12 feet. The firstbaseman was standing on the bag with the ball in his hand well before Reed reached 1st. Probably 3-5 paces. Not only was he out by a very wide margin, but they clearly didn't have to make a perfect play to get the out. it was a horrible throw and he was still out by several steps. Defending that bunt is absurd. It was a horrible decision whose execution was made all the more difficult by the playing surface. People blindly applaud being aggressive, "pressuring the defense" or trying to make things happen, but that was a straight up idiotic move by Reed Johnson. Then maybe we need a "Reed Johnson, what the hell are you doing?" thread. My original point was that this loss wasn't on Lou. I think he did the right things last night. However, I will say that playing DeRosa all over the field will sometimes create situations where errors (mental) are made as DeRosa is playing out of position. Last night Bob made some comment about DeRosa backing up 1st. Well Bob perhaps he should have, but perhaps having a guy out of position will cost you sometimes.

Haha. "The poor play isn't his fault. But uh, I'm firing him anyway at 3am." This is the guy that was once called one of the 5 best GMs in baseball. I'm guessing that this wasn't Omar's call. Bad execution but for the right reasons though. What are the reasons though? The Mets biggest problem is that all their very old injury prone players are either injured or completely not performing. A team cannot fire the players. I don't think Willie is a particularly good manager.

I have a heard time with this rumor simply because at present Hill has very little trade value. I imagine after all the shenanigans Crisp pulled last week his trade value has decreased.

Haha. "The poor play isn't his fault. But uh, I'm firing him anyway at 3am." This is the guy that was once called one of the 5 best GMs in baseball. I'm guessing that this wasn't Omar's call. Bad execution but for the right reasons though.

Was that really necessary? If you aren't going to respond to the points he made, then there's no need to say anything. I responded to each and every point he made. They are all wrong. Then say why instead of being snide. The condesenscion(boy do I miss my auto-spellcheck when I'm at work) is unnecessary. Noted