jjgman21

this posts ip is 07.OOPS.JEW. jewish ballplayers can come here to atone for sins against Cubs fan. I got that Brant Brown kinda feeling today.

bottom level, up against the fence behind the back row of seats, behind the yellow line.

if that were the case, I would think it would show up in P/PA and IsoD. P/PA v. lefties - 3.73 v. righties - 3.73 IsoD v. lefties 61 v. righties 62 they are not appreciably more patient against righties than they are against lefties. And that's the problem. the Cubs do just fine with the exact same amount of patience v. righties. the question at hand is why don't they fair well against lefties. so an overall more patient approach has some inherent ability to close the gap between what a team does against lefties v. what they do against righties? or is success v. lefties somehow dependent on having more patience against them as opposed to righties?

if that were the case, I would think it would show up in P/PA and IsoD. P/PA v. lefties - 3.73 v. righties - 3.73 IsoD v. lefties 61 v. righties 62 they are not appreciably more patient against righties than they are against lefties.

I think there are a variety of reasons that fall under two broad headings. the first being the Cubs approach is to stack the lineup with righties. as others have touched on, the lefties we have problems with are generally finesse pitchers, aka, the change up is one of their predominant pitches. change up pitchers often have reverse splits. it also creates the situation that Brenly has touched on several times. with all righties, the pitcher can zone in on one approach to getting the entire lineup out and really zero his location in with those pitches. the second was also touched on but the thought under developed. I think laying it on being overly aggressive is too simplistic. the Cubs right handed hitters for the most part are all pretty similar in that they are straight up and down hitters that are pull conscious. few of them are the type that dives over the plate to get at outside pitches. they all see that slow roller on the outside corner and try to muscle up on it instead of lining it to rightfield. the result is they fall right into the soft tossing lefties hands and hit groundball to short after lazy fly to left after groundball to short.

this is completely observational and not meant as a serious critique, but I think it raises an interesting point. one normalizing stat we have all become comfortable with, wrongly or rightly, is OPS+. it seems to make alot of sense to many to adjust stats to account for the competition and the effect a home park has on creation and prevention of runs. one thing that Cub fans are generally aware of is that the park effect of Wrigley is usually dependent on the wind. sure, a little bit of foul territory is now seats as compared with the past and there might be a slightly different height to the grass, but conventional wisdom is that the real effect of Wrigley is whether the wind turns HRs into cans o' corn, or Russell Branyan pop ups into basket shots. these seem to me to be the three primary factors that would go into the effect most parks would have, with some parks having different #1 factors than wind (ie. humidity in AZ and Col, marine layer in Cali). we have just seen one of the flukiest years in Wrigley history. as usual, the wind almost always blew in in April and May, but on those hot and humid days where we are all accustomed to gails blowing out to left or center, the wind has blown in, for whatever reason. not sure if there are any 'wind in/wind out' sources to back this up, just seems that way. perhaps Truff has a comment on whether my observations match up with actual weather patterns. so if the wind has been blowing in at a higher rate this year than in years past, how on earth is Wrigley's park factor favoring offense? shouldn't the park effect stat jibe up with the phenomena that is the primary factor going into determining park effect? and if doesn't, shouldn't we question any stat that normalizes based on park factors determined purely by statistical analysis as there may be sample size issues or some variable missing from the equation? or is it just a case of observation and conventional wisdom being incorrect?

And if the Cubs' big bats played to career norms the Cubs might have 90 wins right now. Apples and oranges, could've, should've, would've. No one has gotten more or less breaks, both teams have been pretty mediocre for a myriad of reasons. Let's not fool ourselves. But having Yost giving away games is good for us. The Brewers have had as many underachievers or more than the Cubs this season. Say what you will but Yost has cost this team its shot at the playoffs most likely. who? seriously, who do you really think is doing all that poorly from what you expected going into the season that isn't evident in their career path or otherwise makes said prediction justifiable? I'll give you one, Capuano, and we all know that's just because of the bad defense. other than that, you can say ALL your 1-3 year players are entitled to carry over minor league success, and most of them are performing beyond your wildest dreams, but that's getting a little greedy, isn't it? I guess more homeruns out of Tony Graffanino then we get out of either of our two 'lefty power bats' isn't enough, nor is JJ Hardy having more than Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez.

the Cubs got two terrible 'breaks' on that play. the second was Hopper catching the ball. the first was that he had an opportunity. with the way Aram crushed that ball, and the wind howling out, it was a freak of nature that the ball wasn't long gone.

Against 3 lefties? Maybe knocking back a few too many after long days in the athletic office? I am reminded of Indiana Jones in the first movie, when they move the slab to reveal the crypt with the arc, and Indy drops a torch in, takes a look inside, rolls over, and says "lefties.........why's it gotta be lefties?"

in the post game interview, Lou was being asked about Soto and Lou said how he's done a nice job and how he could use some power at the bottom of the lineup. I got a warm fuzzy thinking maybe we would be seeing him more. then someone asked directly 'is there any reason to think that Soto will get more playing time down the stretch.' Lou responded something like 'there's no reason to say that' or something to that effect. either I didn't hear the question, Lou didn't hear the question, Lou mixed up his words in response to the question, or Lou's an idiot and everything was heard and said perfectly clear. hope that clears up Soto's potential playing time for everyone. just kidding. did anyone hear this exchange more clearly than I did?

"Brewers just lost the game" sez Stuart Scott.

gotta love the Cardinals tanking, but I really wish it wasn't this soon. they'll have nothing to play for by the time the Brewers play them, and it would be just like LaRussa to "rest" the better players as one last 'screw you' to the Cubs and their fans before going back to the AL.

they better have some flea run for him.

why you messin' with mojo. snark away.

the fourth Hanson brother choking it up. wtg Astros.

Bob was awesome. stepped it up a notch there.

Henne's not starting this week either? not that Morelli is any good, but Henne is second only to Carr for UM's consistent underachievement the past few years.

the thing about Sheets is he's not injury prone. it's just a clever illusion. a myth perpetuated on the masses.

Good memory. Thank ya. Was that also the Andy Pratt game? I believe Farns came in to attempt to clean up Andy Pratt's mess, and nearly did. edit - nope, Farns did come in to attempt to clean up Andy Pratt's mess, but walked a batter, then threw the same pitch 13 times to Franco. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playbyplay?gameId=240410115

They wouldn't go on sale until after the final game next Sunday. like in 1998, when downtown Crystal Lake, Illinois became a Nascar practice track for fifteen minutes following the best thing Neifi Perez ever did for the Cubs. superior pit work (parking far away from the doors and running into the store) turned a top twenty finish into sixth place, netting me and my crew 8 trophies.

who knows if it came from Roth or Baker, but someone on the bench called for the same pitch over and over and over, completely ignoring that the pitch that was continuously called was the pitch that Franco has made a living on for several decades. he never should have gotten a single fastball on the outside corner, much less 10 in a row.

Great! When do they do the flip? nitpicky, but.... so homefield advantage for the WS is determined by the outcome of an exhibition game in which half the players probably don't care and the game is not managed to have the best available players on the field for the vast majority of the game, or in the case of this year the best hitter in baseball did not even play, but homefield for a one game playoff is determined by a coin flip, even though one team beat the other 9 out of 15 games this year? at the same time, if two teams in a division are tied at the end of the year and one of them is the wildcard, they crown the team with the best vs. record as the division champ and the vs. loser as the wildcard. I can understand flipping for a one game playoff to determine homefield for a playoff to determine wildcard, or if there is a three way tie, but shouldn't you get some credit for beating down the opponent you end the season tied with?

Thats it, I'm moving to Chicago. I made that decision when a certain 19 year old Texas right hander struck out 20 Astros one early May day. many great memories from that summer/fall. I attended the Sosa 3 HR game against the Brewers and Game 163, and several other very good games. in retrospect, I gave too much weight to a rather trivial pursuit and it tipped the scales into making a bad decision. should have stayed where I was.

that never makes any sense to me. apparently they are under the impression that the Yankees are what people tune in to see. given that, shouldn't they bury it somewhere in the middle or toward the end of the show to keep all those people watching for more of the show?