CubinNY

Just because he doesn't pitch more than 30 pitches right now doesn't mean he can't. I realize he's had problems with that in the past, but he really seems healthy now. And Hendry has shown a lot of loyalty to a lot worse players...I think he'll be back, at the very least as a reliever. I'm pretty sure he can't. Hopefully Hendry won't be around to make those decisions. What worries me about Wood is that he doesn't throw enough strikes on a consistent basis to be an effective reliever. He also hasn't shown that he can pitch at all 3 out of 5 days if need be. And he's likely to cost a lot for a reliever.

No one said it did. But I say they are not putt together well. And they aren't. What I'm refuting is the idea that the 2007 Cubs are "significantly" better than the 2006 Cardinals. They aren't.

Do you think that Dempster, Howry, Marmol and Eyre are better relief pitchers than Wood right now, or do they keep the spots that they have just because Lou doesn't want to get guys out of the "comfort zones" that relievers get into? I admit that I may not be able to be unbiased when it comes to Kerry, but I think he's pitched better lately than all of those pitchers with the possible exception of Marmol...although Marmol has had his moments lately too. If Kerry is feeling good enough to be stretched out into a starter again, what's the problem with putting him as a 4th or 5th starter behind Z, Lilly and Hill? (And probably Marquis since we're likely stuck with him.) I don't think he could be worse than the 5th pitcher options we tried this year. Where would Prior slot in? :wink: bullpen in the role Wood vacates to become a starter. Vance, I love the sentiment but don't think there is any chance that Wood will ever start a baseball game again. Hell, he was almost retired until the "miricle". He hasn't changed his mechanics and can pitch more than 30 pitches. He is physically unable to start. I think it is time to part company.

WGN?

I don't know how you could possibly justify saying that except for blind homerism. The 2007 Cubs are as mediocre as the 2006 Cardinals. I also believe they are a worse put together team. Why? Because they are? Last year the Cardinals won 83 games. The best the Cubs can do is win 87. There is not a whole lot of difference there. In 2006 the Cardinals fifth in RS/game in the NL and 8th in pitching. In 2007 the Cubs are 8th in RS/game and 2nd in pitching. There's not a whole lot of difference there. Now, on being put together worse. The Cubs spent a lot of money this offseason and at best they will have 4 more wins to show for it. You still haven't explained why the 2006 Cardinals were a better put together team then this year Cubs? Well they had a CFer for one. They had a SS who got on base. They had the best player in baseball at first. They had a catcher who shut down the running game and hit. Aramis and Rolen are about even. But most importantly, THEY SPENT $88 M DOLLARS TO DO SO. ABOUT $40 M LESS THAN THE CUBS THIS YEAR. Or to put it another way the Cards spent 1 M/win. The Cubs have spend 1.45 M/win

Mindless rants from the game thread? Where do you come up with this stuff. I excuse Len somewhat b/c he is the pbp man, but Bob gives almost no analysis of the game. They are talking about making chords ont the guitar, or his son, or the latest concert, or anything else besides giving insight to the game. Bob use to be a catcher, you'd think he'd have more to say about the pitching than "the batter can see the catcher's shadow so he better not set up too early".

I don't remember the Cubs winning 83 games last year. At best they'll have a 21 game improvement. Big fricken deal. That is entirely beside the point of this conversation. We are comparing the 2006 Cards to the 2007 Cubs. Anyway, I have no idea why people have this mentality. The Cubs stunk last year. This year they're mediocre at best and have a top payroll. That is not something to crow about. Seriously, where does this stuff come from?

I don't know how you could possibly justify saying that except for blind homerism. The 2007 Cubs are as mediocre as the 2006 Cardinals. I also believe they are a worse put together team. Why? Because they are? Last year the Cardinals won 83 games. The best the Cubs can do is win 87. There is not a whole lot of difference there. In 2006 the Cardinals fifth in RS/game in the NL and 8th in pitching. In 2007 the Cubs are 8th in RS/game and 2nd in pitching. There's not a whole lot of difference there. Now, on being put together worse. The Cubs spent a lot of money this offseason and at best they will have 4 more wins to show for it.

I don't know how you could possibly justify saying that except for blind homerism. The 2007 Cubs are as mediocre as the 2006 Cardinals. I also believe they are a worse put together team.

It's the roids.

Brought back the horny wagon for good luck?

I totally agree although I'm not a big fan of Bob. I am also getting tired of the constant rock n' roll stuff. They have really slipped this year, especially Len. It's almost like they are afraid to criticize anything. A lot of games I've turned the sound down and listened to XM even though it has about a 30 delay.

Yeah I dont get the move either. I don't know much about socer but to me this move seemed to be a symbol of the idiotic notion that experience is ALL that matters. It's right out of the old school manager's handbook. But like I said, I don't know a whole lot about socer.

It was bad, very bad.

I hate My Self Nirvana

I am so freaking sick and tired of this vertran fetish. Sean Marshall could easily pitch this bad. Lou is going to cost the Cubs the playoffs.

But it is blind faith...you're ignoring the numbers and other factors other than Lou's opinion. It's the definition of blind faith. And Lou has been riding the hot hand based on small sample sizes all season long. Even if Soto's just on a hot streak, and next season will just revert to being a crappy minor league catcher, why not ride out the hot streak? There's just no argument for this move that makes any sense. There isn't anything that Kendall does better than Soto. Other than be old. If a doctor gives me a diagnosis, even if he knows more than me about the field, that doesn't mean I can't go and educate myself about what he's told me, and determine if I agree with what he said. Not BLIND faith, but faith in an expert. If I relied on yyour analysis, that would be blind faith. No disrespect intended. None taken, but I still disagree with your definition. Main Entry: blind faith Part of Speech: n Definition: belief without true understanding, perception, or discrimination It says nothing about expert opinion. The fact is that you're taking what Lou believes at face value without any kind of discrimination. That's blind faith. Lawyer, Musician, Doctor, Insurance guy...whoever you consider an expert in their field...they make mistakes too. If I didn't do a critical analysis of advice that one of them gave me, I feel like I'd be making a mistake then. I want to know how lou is an expert? Is it because he gets paid? Or is it becuase he played baseball?

Baseball is the worst sort of fraternity immaginable. It is almost disfunctional, but the simplicity and beauty of the game always win out over petty human buffonary.

JR will be there I believe. He hasn't posted in a while but I can remember him posting that he had tickets. Look for the biggest truck or largest Cadilac.

It's true. Any team can win.. But the better teams always have a better shot going in, and I tend to think the Cubs are the best NL playoff team all around... I think the Mets are but they are playing like stink lately. It's a crapshoot, they just have to get in.

Random%20picture I don't get it? look at all the pictures in the thread and find the one that doesn't belong. I think O_O was quite funny.

Random%20picture

Leaving in Marquis after the first inning. Oh and not starting Soto too.

I'm done.

It's not Marquis fault that Lou kept in him when he sucks. It is his fault for sucking though! soap drop the soap dropping soap drop