jjgman21

have to plead ignorance, but I have to ask... can Murton play center and if he can't, why not?

don't want to toot my own horn....ok, I do want to toot my own horn a little bit. wish you could have made it happen back on June 27 when I suggested it, Jim.

As much as I would be interested in that happening, Boras says: "That's a good one Jim. I think you'll reconsider if you ever want to sign any of my clients, or any clients in general, after I tell the media about your shenanigans." "I'm sorry to hear that Scott. we've always had a good working relationship. you know the Cubs are willing to pay if they think your client is the best player for the team. I've done alot to help you up the contracts of your players. just this past year, neither Beltran, Drew, or Ordonez would have gotten their contracts if their respective teams didn't think they were bidding against us. but nonetheless, I'm calling your bluff Scott. because you know as well as I that all you are interested in is money, and if the Cubs offer the sweetest deal, you're going to advise your client to sign the contract, regardless of some grudge you may have over the Maddux situation. you see the fact is Scott, you need the Cubs more than the Cubs need you. as for the media, say what you want Scott. all we have to do is say we are putting Mitre or Rusch on the mound because he gives us the best chance to win. with Maddux's performance, it's a pretty valid point. and if its not taken with validity by the media, I think I've proven that I truly can't give a damn what the media says. I'm building a baseball team here, not running for office."

eatting some crow. I've been one that didn't think Maddux's contract was something that would hurt the club. I've changed my mind. There are three NL teams on the west coast, all of whom play in gigantic ballparks, all of whom are desperate for pitching. nobody would claim Maddux if a post-deadline trade was arranged. Hendry needs to sit down with Boras and say "it's quite simple Scott. waive the no trade clause and pack off to Cali. either that, or Maddux and his 4.65ish ERA rides the pine as soon as he reaches 390 innings, the option doesn't vest, and Gregs looking for a contract at 40 following two crap years."

hey, yet another pitcher that doesn't hit a lick getting an RBI against us. good times.

game over.

if you read the thread as you claimed to have done, clearly my question to Reggie was a follow up to my post immediately preceeding in which I made a point about the boderline pitch never going the Cubs way. reply to any post you want, but expect similar reactions when you jump in to answer questions specifically directed to someone else. try to deflect all you want, but you clearly had attitude. I understand that you may not have known that Reggie was a Cardinal fan because he doesn't post often and is generally a respectful poster. but maybe, just maybe, if you don't understand the context of a post, you shouldn't reply. again, maybe you should know the entire context. the ball strike calls were terrible the entire game. the Glaus homerun is directly attributable to missed strike three calls. and again, my primary point is not about Hollandworth. yes, that pitch is close enough to be a strike. it was also far enough off the plate to be a ball, and had been called a ball throughout the course of the game. you completely misconstrued what I said. I said you were standing in the shoes of a Cardinal fan when you jumped into answer the question directed at Reggie. I'll grow up and stop making stupid insinuations when you learn how to read. and please use the eyeroll a little more often. it makes for such pleasurable discourse and drives home your point so well. of course they are, and you and I are as well. but my point is that Len and Bob call a spade a spade. they generally are not homers and call it straight up. its not like the broadcasters on the otherside of town who call it one way, and they're not like the broadcasters last year who refused to acknowledge how badly Alou was getting hosed all year. they call em as they see em and my reference to their comment was meant to reinforce that the pitch was outside according to two objective observers. And most baseball people will tell you that with two strikes, you've gotta protect the plate. And that means sometimes swinging at borderline pitches. And if the ump was as inconsistent as you and others say, Holly should've recognized this and altered his plate approach. By the way, Holly has struck out in 7 of his last 8 ABs. That should tell people how well he's seeing the ball. you just don't get that I am not discussing one single at bat. there is plenty of discussion on this board about how bad the Cubs are at taking walks. plenty of baseball people will tell you that its nearly impossible to take a walk when the borderline strike never goes your way. not only do you not get the ball called, you then have to swing at that pitch the next time it comes. I am in no way sticking up for Hollandworth. however, I do empathise with him for that particular AB. that AB is reminiscient of the Corey Patterson syndrome I witnessed earlier this year. a batter who is swinging wildly at balls who finally takes a couple balls in an AB, and they are called strikes anyway. I have been watching Cubs baseball for about 30 years now, and see this same treatment from the umps year after year. I watched the replay of the Sandberg game last night, and without the emotion that comes from not knowing the outcome of the game, I saw several ridiculous strike calls that benefitted rookie John Cintranella. I saw should be Hall of Famer Bruce Sutter get two charity strikes that nearly ended the game and would have left Ryno in the on deck circle to end the game. the only year I did not see it was 2001 when those calls actually seemed to even out. this is to me is not an argument about one single AB or one single game, it is an editorial about officiating in baseball. the debate happens in all sports. basketball with one sided foul calls on behalf of Duke and the Lakers, hockey with one sided penalty calls on behalf of the RedWings and Avalanche, and football with selective holding and pass interference calls (one which I am sure you vehemently deny since your team is so often the beneficiary). its not an absurd notion, nor a claim of conspiracy. perhaps its an area for psychology, but the fact is the uniform is often the determining factor in sports officiating, and I am sick of my favorite team coming out on the short end of the stick, game after game, year after year.

FWIW, Sisco is also most certainly not the next Randy Johnson like alot of people were making him out to be. I saw him pitching against the white sox in their recent series, and he didn't top 91 and was working consistently at 89. sure it would be nice to have him, but this most certainly is not the next Johann Santana.

When you're hitting .206 in a month and your team is down by a run in the 9th, you need to take what the pitcher gives you. It was a slow pitch that missed the zone by about two inches and both the batter and the umpire had a clear look at it. Dowdy was just terribly inconsistent (and terrible) behind the plate for both teams today. I agree, I do think the he was inconsistent today. But this looked like a really good pitch that Hollandsworth was not expecting to get on a 3-2 count. That said you cant watch a pitch anywhere near as close to that wiht 2 strikes. Especially if you know the ump has been inconsistent all day. answer honestly... is that called strike three on Jim Edmonds? for that matter, is that called strike three on John Mabry? for that matter, has that been called a strike on any Cardinal in your memory? What is that supposed to mean? :head scratch: By the way, for those who want to argue whether or not it was a strike......anyone noticed Hollandsworth didn't take the bat off his shoulder once during the AB. Maybe that gives a little insight on his approach to the AB, and whether or not he was fooled by the pitch. why are you responding to a post not directed to you with an attitude like I just slapped your mom? yes. I noticed that Hollandsworth didn't take the bat off his shoulder. he took a strike, just like he should have. took a high pitch that should have been called a ball for strike three, then took a pitch that 99.9% of the people who saw the game, except maybe you and the Cardinal fan you are standing in the shoes of, know was off the plate. if Len and Bob thought it crossed the plate, they wouldn't have said "maybe a stitch on the ball caught the outside corner." but even so, I am not commenting on the Hollandsworth AB in and of itself. I am talking about the Cubs never getting a call that could go either way, and no matter how much conviction you have that strike three caught the plate, it certainly was a borderline strike at best, and of course went against the Cubs. and FWIW, I just got done watching the Sandberg game. just as I remember, just as things are today, just as things have never changed...the Cubs had to overcome some terrible ball-strike calls to win that game.

When you're hitting .206 in a month and your team is down by a run in the 9th, you need to take what the pitcher gives you. It was a slow pitch that missed the zone by about two inches and both the batter and the umpire had a clear look at it. Dowdy was just terribly inconsistent (and terrible) behind the plate for both teams today. I agree, I do think the he was inconsistent today. But this looked like a really good pitch that Hollandsworth was not expecting to get on a 3-2 count. That said you cant watch a pitch anywhere near as close to that wiht 2 strikes. Especially if you know the ump has been inconsistent all day. answer honestly... is that called strike three on Jim Edmonds? for that matter, is that called strike three on John Mabry? for that matter, has that been called a strike on any Cardinal in your memory?

grrr... hate it when the site eats my posts. the cliff notes version of what I had to say. the Cubs made too many mistakes to win today, as they have done about 20 times this year. but the fact is, the umpires have cost the Cubs just as many. this game didn't come down to one pitch to Hollandworth. but maybe if you combine the other bad call in that AB, the pitch early in the count to Jackson that was a strike to Hairston the inning before but a ball in his critical AB, the other two pitches I detailed earlier that were called differently from one half inning to the next, the missed strike three to Glaus before his dinger, the other pitches mentioned in the thread before I was watching the game, and a couple of others, that certainly can make a difference. fact is, there are pitches that can go either way throughout a game, and they rarely go the Cubs way. "bad calls even out in the end" is a crock and I'm sick of rooting for a team (actually two teams because I'm a Bears fan too) that have to defeat two teams, game after game, year after year.

more shocking than the IBB to Neifi was the ump not calling that a strike on the outside corner.

LaRuss and Duncan use the same philosophy as the old Dodger philosophy Brenly was just talking about.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. whatever you do, don't put a runner on third with less than two outs. it virtually ensures they won't score. c'mon Furious.

damn. I got booted off my dial up and didn't get back on in time to edit before anyone noticed.

edit to delete. wrong thread.

edit to delete. wrong thread.

Gammons has said not to expect a trade there, so it looks pretty likely at this point. I wish I had a dollar for everytime that was said on here. its gotta be right up there with references to Dusty's 'you can't walk across homeplate' and 'white people can't handle the sun' on the tired scale.

I want Questec at Wrigley.

"tough for umpires to call that pitch a strike.... " when the guy that threw it wears a big red C. thanks blue.

the entire top half of the lineup has been aweful lately. the wins we have gotten can be attributed for the most part to the catchers, shortstops, Murton, and the pitchers spot.

deadest game thread ever.

ummmmm..... nice play Todd.

strike two to Aram and ball two to Clayton were the exact same pitch. same speed, same location, same movement. exact same pitch.

he need a couple more guys in the lineup to try to pull this guy. Cintron may doze off here.