jjgman21

I agree to hoping that they lay off Corey. however, I saw a post game interview with him last night where he was asked about that, and he's handling it very professionally. he understands why its happening and is shrugging it off well. he said it hurt last year because it was the first time it ever happened to him, but is doing well taking it in stride this year. fact is, if not for Corey, the Cubs probably don't win these past two games.

the Nats should be without Nick Johnson for at least part of that series. anyone know the status of Hudson and Hampton for the Braves series?

I here ya. Kotsay may be doing a little better then again he may be hitting alot of weak groundballs and pop ups and his stats right around what he deserves (I just put together what BABIP is...incidentally, what is Barrett's?). For future reference, you can find BABIP here. A rough way for calculating expected BABIP is LD% +.110. Barrett LD%: .253 Expected BABIP: .363 Actual BABIP: .289 Barrett's line if he was hitting his expected BABIP: .347/.385/.542/.927 Barrett has been criminally unlucky. That LD% has to be wrong. That's pretty much impossible. I know Barrett has been hitting the ball hard all year, but that's just stupid. The problem probably lies with definitions of line drives. What is a line drive? There must be plenty of different people that score balls in play, and I'm sure not all of them have the exact same definition of a line drive. I'm also sure individuals aren't always consistent, and they'll call the same thing a line drive once and a flyball another time etc. I wish Baseball Info Solutions or whatever they're called published much more raw data. that's why I asked. Barrett has been in a bit of a slump as of late, but if we would have looked at these stats two weeks ago, his expected numbers would have been of the fricken charts. the slump he was in in April was the biggest streak of bad luck I have ever seen. he was hitting liners all over the field right at em, and not striking out at all, yet he was 6 for 60 or something ridiculous like that. it was the kind of streak that could have ruined a players year by making him press, so it sure was good to see him continue with the same approach and get so hot in May and early June.

I here ya. Kotsay may be doing a little better then again he may be hitting alot of weak groundballs and pop ups and his stats right around what he deserves (I just put together what BABIP is...incidentally, what is Barrett's?). but the proposed Corey trade only exacerbates the problem. you trade away three fine prospects to get Kotsay, forcing you to trade Patterson. but Patterson isn't tradable for an impact bat without a couple of other prospects thrown in, and all of a sudden the system is diluted and you are once again strapped for cash this offseason since all the money will go to Kotsay and the impact left fielder. then next year, you need a shortstop, secondbaseman (if Walker declines the mutual option), and still have a need for some pen help, only it will be worse than going into this year since Dempster will be a FA, and have no money and no prospects left to obtain said players. the more I discuss it, the more I convince myself that the biggest mistake the Cubs could make right now is being Beane's sucker and over paying in prospects for Mark Kotsay.

ok. but do you see validity to my claim that you're too willing to way overpay for Kotsay in terms of prospects? we're talking about a fill in leadoff hitter that can play the outfield. as far as Kotsay goes, there are four options: a. doing something with Corey which means trying to trade Corey at a point were he has no value, or releasing him at the end of this year or trying to put together some sort other big trade to get rid of Corey b. screwing our outfield production for 2006 and putting Corey and Kotsay out there c. finding a comparable player for a heckuva lot less (no, I'm not suggesting Erstad as a possability. he's name was raised to make a point) d. finding a much better player for a similar package. c or d are the obvious choices and overpaying for Kotsay would be a serious mistake. and as for the "beane really likes Kotsay" nonsense...don't you see he's just trying to raise his value with every intention of trading him? his rhetoric about Kotsay reminds me of Boras in November and December. there's simply no reason to let the guy fleece you when he can do it to another team.

all well and good, but not necessarily accurate or completely relevant ie. Kotsay couldn't hold Erstad's jock in terms of range in center, we're talking about a leadoff hitter so OPS is nice but not really what we are after, but Erstad can get on base and steal bases more efficiently. and did you consider that maybe Kotsay is or will suffer a blip in his career just like Erstad did? I'm not entire clear on BABIP, but it probably factors in Erstads worst years, so who cares about expectations, let's talk about getting a leadoff hitter for the rest of the year. Erstad has been ever bit as good in the role in 2004-2005. instead you want to lock the Cubs into another year of below average offense from center and left? that is exactly what you would have next year with Kotsay and Corey. but still, it doesn't change the fact that too many are vastly overrating Kotsay. Duchshistershyster is one thing, but Kotsay and Rincon for three of our best prospects is ridiculous. how about this, those three, or a comparable pitching heavy package, could probably get Dunn. what would you rather have, Kotsay and Rincon or Dunn?

Lawton fades down the stretch like no one's business. Murton is a perfect trading chip. Great numbers and performance, but doesn't project for power in a power spot. Dopirak has had 1 great year, and is still far away. 1B aren't tough to find, really, and this makes Dope a great trading chip. Mitre is our most tradable P, since he's had ML success, is a sinkerballer, and blocked by Williams and Rusch. I think Rincon and Kotsay are worth that trade. It's a fair deal for both teams. I didn't know that about Lawton, but I see you are right. but how about this, assume Erstad were still playing center. would you trade Mitre, Murton, and Dope for a deal for him and Scott Sauerbeck? of course you wouldn't, but current and career performance tells you that the the players are amazingly comparable. something about being a Beane boy makes people want to over pay.

virtually all of Beane's pen is young and cheap, except Rincon who is old and relatively cheap. Beane's not trading any of the young ones, and with Rusch moving to the pen, Rincon's not a fit. again...or you could have Lawton and the same production for minor league spare change instead of two of our top hitting prospects and our only ML ready starter.

if you're talking about a short term solution for this year only, why not Lawton instead of Kotsay? he plays the position you're looking to fill (albeit not well) so no centerfield controversy, costs about the same but requires no commitment beyond October, matches Kotsay every bit in OBP, and plays for a team that will probably be looking to dump a salary instead of fleece the highest bidder of prospects.

and even though Baker doesn't let his 1-2 guys steal in front of his 3-4 guys anyway. so it begs the question, why insist on speed at the top if you never use it anyway? Walker's no Patterson, but he's fast enough and a good enough baserunner to score from second on singles and first on doubles.

although his credability is a little shot after the trade rumors this week, Bruce Levine tried to wade through some of the misinformation on Prior last night on Trib Sportsnite Live (or whatever) on CSN. he's had discussions with O'Neil. as soon as the swelling goes down, Prior can begin throwing. he can even throw before the break heals. however, the time table is still expected to be 4-6 weeks.

Manuel? that's the Phils manager, isn't it?

Nomar was sick. didn't hear that. then again, Aram had a sore groin last week don't you know. I still don't know what to believe with that one.

can't believe there is not more flaming about Dusty tonight. the double switch is fine, but the timing is inexplicable. why not wait to do it until after Rusch faces Dunn? I know, a much better idea is to bring in the guy who's pitched one inning in the past week and a half. he's bound to be locked in and throwing strikes. and that shortstop, you know, the three hole hitter who we are counting on who finally put some decent swings on the ball the past couple games, let's let him ride some pine. wouldn't want him to get in a groove or anything.

further evidence that this forum needs a puke emoticon. Perhaps a review of existing emoticons would satisfy you. :pukel: :puker: :puke: the code shows up for me, but an actual emoticon does not. not sure why.

further evidence that this forum needs a puke emoticon.

Atlanta let him go despite the fact he pitched very well for them last year. In fact, he was better than any reliever on the 2004 Cubs, save Hawkins. And I really hope you aren't writing him off because of his first four innings of 2005. I loved Cruz and was pretty disappointed that the Cubs traded him. but looking at his stats from last year is pretty deceptive IMO. he had 50 appearances and a grand total of 2 holds and 13 inherited runners. he was used strictly in mop up duty. Cruz was always known as a guy who loses his composure. perhaps the reason he excelled last year was because how rarely he was put into pressure situations.

if its for the elbow to Prinz, absolutely absurd. as about incidental of contact as it comes. barely even grazed him. and Larry Brown was really treading water in terms of respectability after the game in Detroit earlier this year where the Pistons got call after call after call in their favor, yet Brown proceeded to berate the ref for 5 minutes after the game. now he calls Nocioni a dirty player because of this? don't like the taste of your own medicine there do you Lar. if Noch was being dirty, Prinz would have a busted cheek bone right now.

on a different 'sign' note, I noticed yesterday that a Wrigley tradition has died. no Torco sign, replace by rooftop bleachers.

I just suggested stickying a thread about bad umpiring in the game thread forum. I think both are a great ideas.

more level headed Cub fans see this team for what it is, deeper, more balanced, likely to improve in OBP, more speed and overall likely to score more runs even with less power. we also see a closer situation for what it is, no answers, but not really a pressing concern considering the options currently available and those that could come available in mid-season via trade. Jocketty squeezed the weinie baloon. he saw a concern, but the only way he was able to address it was by weakening another part of his team. plus it remains to be seen just how much Mulder and Morris's repaired shoulder is going to solve the Cards weakness. yes, there didn't appear to be a ton of pitchers available, but Benson, V. Zambrano and Brad Penny all changed teams. further, appearances can be deceiving. afterall, it didn't look like Walker himself was obtainable, but just look what happened. if there was a will there was a way. nonetheless, Walker was a nice pickup. as was Rolen a couple years back. but the fact remains the Cards had plenty of offense both years and needed pitching, but pitching you did not get. if it happened in Chicago, the fans and radio hosts would've had his head on a stick.

you knew I was going there next because you've seen my adeptness at sniffing out bs and you knew you were spouting more bs. seems to me, all things being equal, a problem with starters doesn't effect the pen unless that problem is number of innings pitched. the answer to your querry is 9 starting pitchers for the Cards in 2003 (the Kile situation at that time was his losing the ability to feed worms. he died in 2002). the Card starters combined for 979 innings, whereas last years starters combined for 996 innings. in other words, starters in 2004 went on average one tenth of an inning per game less than 2003 starters. I don't think those extra 17 innings the starters saved the pen is what turned it around for them or put LaRussa at a loss for using his bullpen. what turned it around for them was talent and performance. the talent pool in 2005 has once again shrunk and the 2005 performance of those returning cannot rationally be expected to happen again. and without that depth, LaRussa's pen games becomes a weakness, not an advantage (and kills the fun of watching a ballgame irregardless) strange how you poo-poo Jocketty's acquisition of Borbon (4 IP didn't make that big of difference in the outcome of the season, did it?) and Yan in this post, whereas a few posts ago you boasted confidence in the Cards being able to go get something cheap to get the job done. but you don't have to worry about that situation this year because you have Flores, Cali and Reyes. (incidentally, that was not the first or last time Jocketty made the wrong midseason acquisition. he does it year after year after year, usually getting more hitting when the Cards need more pitching). I think the biggest problem for the Cards this year is overall depth. barring injury, that will be most evident, and hurt them the most, when it comes to the bullpen. and especially after today, you can add Chad Fox to my list of 5th and 6th guys out of the pen that gives me extreme confidence, and come the time Lincoln comes off the DL, you can add Scott Williamson to the list.

ah, on to the next shift in the argument. so the 2003 Cards pen had nothing to do with talent and poor performance, LaRussa just had an off year playing that fiddle. its alot harder to situationally use your bullpen when only a couple of those guys can get batters out with regularity. what's he going to do this year in situations when he needs a guy who strands runners with regularity in the middle innings or in situations when he needs a guy who throws up a .453 OPS against lefties? I'll admit that the Cards often get more mileage out of players who have no right being in the major leagues, but your cup runneth over with the crimson brew. and I call alot of people dude, male or female, young or old.

no, when shifting the argument like that, the difference is 115 innings of question marks instead of stellar relief work vs. probably no difference at all in OPS. to answer the question when you shifted the argument to criticism of the Cubs (and put words into my mouth about supreme confidence of 5th and 6th guys out of the pen) instead of comparison of team's fans, Leicester, Wuertz, Wellemeyer, Ohman, Mitre/Rusch and a bevy of other prospects as opposed to career minor leaguers. then again, Kline and Calero were hardly guys who filled the role of mop up duty like you imply by calling them 5th and 6th guys out of the pen. your lefty specialist is now Myers, who you admitted stinks. the mid inning stopper is replaced by a question mark, as opposed to the great jobs Calero and Haren did. face it dude, the Cards pen was one of the team's keys. all the returning pitchers are coming off career years they are not likely to repeat (Izzy, King, Taverez, Eldred) and all the depth is gone. you can go on not worrying about it if you want, but that only proves my other point about being blinded by optimism.

I think this is an excellent illustration of the difference between Cub fans and Card fans. Cub fans scream bloody murder that we are replacing an .850 OPS guy with a .915 OPS guy (albeit Coors aided) while Card fans are confident Kline's 1.79 ERA over 50 innings, Haren's 2.61 over 20 innings, and Calero's 2.78 over 45 innings will be easily replace by three journeyman minor leaguers who combined for 25 innings of mop up duty and a guy who, according to the post-dispatch, won't return until June or July. both of us are unrealistic. the difference is, we are unrealistic due to our pessimism, you Card fans are unrealistic due to your optimism