CubinNY

Since you're in the eye of the storm, what about him is controversial or confrontational, etc. What makes him the proverbial cancer in the clubhouse. Asking because I have no clue about the guy. I don't have any inside knowledge of the Nationals clubhouse and hope never to pretend to, nevertheless beat-writers and bloggers in the DC area have tended to be fairly polarized in their thoughts on Church. His apologists chalked up his surly behavior and poor attitude to being managed by Frank Robinson. I'm not sure what this year's excuse will be. Last year Church reacted poorly to not making the major league roster. That happens. The previous year he was rumored to have been the source of quite a bit of acrimony in the clubhouse. This year he proclaimed that he would turn it all around. Here are his exact words: "I can't wait," Church said yesterday by phone. "This is the year I prove everybody wrong." And he has done just that, or at least he's proved Manny Acta wrong: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072402197.html When Ryan first came up, the fans here, such as they are, really took to him. That enthusiasm has waned and is now, for most, tepid at best. Last year, the question was Ryan Church or Marlon Byrd (or some other similar fill-in) and everyone answered Church. This year, I'm not sure that would be true. This has been a disappointing year for Nats fans, even though expectations were already low. Zimmerman, Kearns, and Lopez have also disappointed, but each one of them, at least, has validated people's optimism about them at the major league level. I have come to really dislike Church -- the game he cost Cordero against the Phillies is what I've come to expect from him, so I am certainly not objective about this. The Cubs would be better off without him. In a way, Church has been the Nats version of Corey Patterson light. Sometimes he looks like an all-star. But, most of the time, he looks lost out there. I wouldn't mind picking him up because if he can get his head strait, he may be an excellent outfielder. But, that's a huge IF and the Cubs certainly shouldn't over pay for him. A lot has been brought up about him being able to play center. However, from the Nats games I've been to and observed, he's a notch below average as a center fielder. He is also extremely militant in his religion from what I remember. Being devout is fine and all, but one cannot expect every one to think like oneself. I think that is where some of the clubhouse problems stem from.

I think it says guys don't like playing behind Rich. He is slow, throws lots of pitches and really doesn't get the defense involved (Lots of K's and flyballs). Whoa whoa whoa I'm not saying anything like that, I'm just saying it might affect Rich a little pyschologically. He plays his heart out and the bats never seem to pay him any favors. I know what you're saying. And I'm saying that maybe if he pitched a little faster (lower pitch counts, quicker innings) that the bats might pick him up more often. I'm saying that's crazy talk.

Well, I won't go into too much detail b/c if you read Raisin's updates you know the story. Wood was missing the zone quite a bit but was overall effective. He was consistently in the 94-92 range with his fastball and his breaking ball was breaking pretty good. Overall, he looked ok. He left right after he pitched. I guess up to Chicago. Some other notes, Colvin cannnot weigh more than 160 pounds, but he hit a HR. He was then taken out in the 6th inning and I don't know why. O'Malley was sharp but there wasn't a lot of talent on the field tonight for the D-Jacks.

So you're basing your throwing decision on the worst case scenario, that being a terrible throw that the 2nd cut can't even knock down. Makes sense to do that for little league and even some high schoolers(though by the time I learned double cut we were using it in the way I presented), but for a major leaguer that's wasteful to throw to the short guy just because you might make a bad throw and now you can save a runner from moving up one base max. Just the opposite--if you miss the first guy, there is a back-up. If you miss the second guy, problems. I don't know how old you are or if you've ever played ball at an advanced level. However, reading your posts makes me think you haven't. Once you get past little league there is no 2nd cut off. If you need two cuts to get a guy out at home you aren't getting him out unless he's tryng for an inside the park HR or very, very slow. It is asinine. I could be wrong but it looked to me like Murton picked Theriot up at the edge of the infield like an outfielder is taught to do when throwing to home, and fired. Theriot might have been backing up Derosa who was way out of positon, I don't know. Had Murton thrown to him instead of Theriot a run would have scored. Good play by Murton and Theriot. I don't think you're understanding what a double cut is. Tell me, what is a double cut?

So you're basing your throwing decision on the worst case scenario, that being a terrible throw that the 2nd cut can't even knock down. Makes sense to do that for little league and even some high schoolers(though by the time I learned double cut we were using it in the way I presented), but for a major leaguer that's wasteful to throw to the short guy just because you might make a bad throw and now you can save a runner from moving up one base max. Just the opposite--if you miss the first guy, there is a back-up. If you miss the second guy, problems. I don't know how old you are or if you've ever played ball at an advanced level. However, reading your posts makes me think you haven't. Once you get past little league there is no 2nd cut off. If you need two cuts to get a guy out at home you aren't getting him out unless he's tryng for an inside the park HR or very, very slow. It is asinine. I could be wrong but it looked to me like Murton picked Theriot up at the edge of the infield like an outfielder is taught to do when throwing to home, and fired. Theriot might have been backing up Derosa who was way out of positon, I don't know. Had Murton thrown to him instead of Theriot a run would have scored. Good play by Murton and Theriot. major league teams use the double cut all the time. When? Forget it, don't answer. I don't want to know. I'm off to Jackson to see wood.

Hay JC! :wave: I agree by the way

So you're basing your throwing decision on the worst case scenario, that being a terrible throw that the 2nd cut can't even knock down. Makes sense to do that for little league and even some high schoolers(though by the time I learned double cut we were using it in the way I presented), but for a major leaguer that's wasteful to throw to the short guy just because you might make a bad throw and now you can save a runner from moving up one base max. Just the opposite--if you miss the first guy, there is a back-up. If you miss the second guy, problems. I don't know how old you are or if you've ever played ball at an advanced level. However, reading your posts makes me think you haven't. Once you get past little league there is no 2nd cut off. If you need two cuts to get a guy out at home you aren't getting him out unless he's tryng for an inside the park HR or very, very slow. It is asinine. I could be wrong but it looked to me like Murton picked Theriot up at the edge of the infield like an outfielder is taught to do when throwing to home, and fired. Theriot might have been backing up Derosa who was way out of positon, I don't know. Had Murton thrown to him instead of Theriot a run would have scored. Good play by Murton and Theriot.

LOL, wasn't that drunk color guy Sutcliffe? Yes. And for the record, it was DeRosa, not Fontenot. Not that it matters who it was, but I'm busting chops today. Whoever it was, was out of position. Sutcliffe probably saw the field better, but it looked to me like Murton turned caught sight of whoever was at the end of the infield, whirled and threw. Luckily Theriot was there already. Like I wrote, if he would have hit the cut off, that's a run. I turned on the XM and listened to Corey Provis and Ron on a 15 second delay after about the fourth inning of listening to Suttcliffe name drop and basically provide every cliche known to baseball. He sucks. Since we're bagging on outfielders, how about Pagan with the brain fart? At least he didn't toss it into the bleacerhes. Derosa wasn't out of position. Middle infielders are taught to go out that far to receive a cut off throw. One of the reasons is because the 3rd base coach will probably hold a runner if it's already in the hand of the cut off man. No they're not. If Derosa catches that it's a dribble to the plate. Even a pony league's team outfielder can hit the edge of the infield on the fly. It's why you never see the firstbaseman out in the outfield on a cut to home plate. Anyway, not to go off on a tanget, but after Theriot hit the combacker off of Hamels' leg, Sutt siad this gem, "That's why they have Theriot, right there. This kid can make things happen." It's not that important, so I don't want to get in a petty argument. On a ball to the wall in right field like that the second baseman is suppose to run out to right field probably about 25' out from the dirt, the short stop should be backing him up, and the first baseman should be about 5' in front of the mound. Shorter throws mean more accurate and stronger throws. This is how I've always been taught, and I have never seen it done any differently. I do agree Sut was awful last night, and was giving Theriot the Eckstein treatment. Then you were taught poorly. Why would you expect an outfielder to only be able to throw @ 125 feet and expect an infielder to throw @ 200 feet? Remember, the throw wasn't to second or to get a man at third, it was to gun a guy down at home. Anyway, Theriot did the right thing and so did Lee following the runner to second.

LOL, wasn't that drunk color guy Sutcliffe? Yes. And for the record, it was DeRosa, not Fontenot. Not that it matters who it was, but I'm busting chops today. Whoever it was, was out of position. Sutcliffe probably saw the field better, but it looked to me like Murton turned caught sight of whoever was at the end of the infield, whirled and threw. Luckily Theriot was there already. Like I wrote, if he would have hit the cut off, that's a run. I turned on the XM and listened to Corey Provis and Ron on a 15 second delay after about the fourth inning of listening to Suttcliffe name drop and basically provide every cliche known to baseball. He sucks. Since we're bagging on outfielders, how about Pagan with the brain fart? At least he didn't toss it into the bleacerhes. Derosa wasn't out of position. Middle infielders are taught to go out that far to receive a cut off throw. One of the reasons is because the 3rd base coach will probably hold a runner if it's already in the hand of the cut off man. No they're not. If Derosa catches that it's a dribble to the plate. Even a pony league's team outfielder can hit the edge of the infield on the fly. It's why you never see the firstbaseman out in the outfield on a cut to home plate. Anyway, not to go off on a tanget, but after Theriot hit the combacker off of Hamels' leg, Sutt siad this gem, "That's why they have Theriot, right there. This kid can make things happen."

I'd be all over that. Put Pie in RF.

LOL, wasn't that drunk color guy Sutcliffe? Yes. And for the record, it was DeRosa, not Fontenot. Not that it matters who it was, but I'm busting chops today. Whoever it was, was out of position. Sutcliffe probably saw the field better, but it looked to me like Murton turned caught sight of whoever was at the end of the infield, whirled and threw. Luckily Theriot was there already. Like I wrote, if he would have hit the cut off, that's a run. I turned on the XM and listened to Corey Provis and Ron on a 15 second delay after about the fourth inning of listening to Suttcliffe name drop and basically provide every cliche known to baseball. He sucks. Since we're bagging on outfielders, how about Pagan with the brain fart? At least he didn't toss it into the bleacerhes.

Murton's throw was not bad at all regardless of what the drunk "color" man said last night. Fontenot was way, way too far out in the outfield. If Murton would have hit him it would have been an esay run. Murton threw to the edge of the infield just like an outfielder is taught. The throw probably saved a run there. But go ahead with the nonsense.

As per usual, the NY paper has is it wrong. He can veto a trade to the Yankees or Mets. They are on his "no trade" list, the Red Sox are not.

Who hasn't? Liars BTW> I define slumpbuster a little differently than Grace. Slumpbuster = any girl I could get to be with me after a long "drought". Most of the the time they were a)drunk and b)not very attractive. A few were 2nd or 3rd time arounders :-# :oops: :oops: :oops: [-X

The reincarnation of Rick Ankiel is probalby complete. He has 30 HR in AAA this year. I wouldn't be surprized if the Cardinals call him up for an extended look once they go back to sucking. He is 28 and his numbers aren't that spectacular though: .263/313/.558 (you do the ops)

I'm not sure I'd consider 28 to be "lots," especially when some of the other players who have hit home runs at that rate are thought of as having a little help from performance-enhancing drugs. It's not like there have been a few hundred people in the history of the game that have averaged a home run per 16 at-bats. Costas is not correct. He actually averaged 1 HR every 17.6 AB. However that does not take into account the fact that he started playing MLB at age 21. From age 27 (1992) to 33 (1998) (his prime years) he average 1 HR every 13.2 AB. That is not very common and puts him in the elite category of hitters. It's what has happend after age 33 that is so suspicious. However, look at Aarons later years, and no one is acusing him of steriods. BTW, his lifetime batting average is still only 298. Bonds is probably a steriod user, but how many of the pitchers he faced were on the stuff. It's not an excuse and I don't condone steriod use. I think the entire era should have a seprate set of records, kind of like the "Dead Ball era" before Ruth changed the game.

[expletive] Suttcliff sucks.

My wife and I will be there.

It saddens me to know there are baseball fans out there like this. Ugggggggggggh. That has to be some sort of inside joke or something. Even a Cubs fan who pays almost no attention should know that Izturis was terrible.

A good ole' fashioned ass whipping. Maybe it will put them in a surley mood for Cincinnatti. I sure hope so.

Theriot might be a better trade value than Cedeno. He's got the Ecstein factor in triplicate. And I think Cedeno will be a better player long term.

a) The dude sitting next to you at the bar bragging about his new Ford Mustang 5.0 and iPhone b) Inventions used to make life easier for mankind c) Real and hypothetical behaviors demonstrated by an athlete

So esentially they will have two "color" guys doing the game? Well I guess they already have that with DJ and Harelson. The worst broadcast team in baseball, and that is saying something.

One of the things I've noticed is that he seems to be laying off pitches he use to swing at. I think he actually walked twice the other day (1st game in Stl.). The other thing is his BABIP is currently at .286 for the season but I don't know what it is for July. It is probably much higher, whether it is sustainable is anybody's guess.

His name just showed up on the I-Cubs roster, so I think we have a winner. I assume he'll be replacing Nelson at 3rd? Simokaitis is listed on Iowa's roster as well. Replacing Rojas at SS? Nice. It's not like the I-Cubs need anymore help offensively lol. I'm assuming Craig will take over at 1B and let Kroeger go back to the OF. Moore is back to play 3B. How would you like to pitch to 1B Craig .931 2B Patterson .855 3B Moore .890 OF Pie 1.017 OF Murton .979 OF Kroeger .938 C Soto 1.017 And Craig's numbers are from the SL where OPS averages about .050 less than PCL And Cedeno's .900+ OPS at SS just got promoted. Staggering. Is the pitching way down in PCL or is this normal?