scs_paradise

I might be wrong but I think its against the nsbb rules to reprint the entire article...something about copyright infringment...I think you have to link it....but I could be wrong.

Thank you! If Bonds was on the Cubs, people on this site would have such a diffrent attitude on Barry. If you support Sosa especially, then how could you hate Bonds? Ludacris. Best hitter of our generation, people. Big difference between Sosa and Bonds. First off, Sosa's not breaking any records. Second, and most importantly, Sosa is a suspected cheater, while Bonds is a known cheater. Bonds is heralded as the greatest hitter of our generation because of what he has done from 2001 and forward. That's going back to when he was 36. The 4 greatest offensive seasons of his career occured after he turned 36. He was outstanding before that, but nothing he did in his prime was ever considered Ruthian. It's been everything he did after he started juicing in 99 or 2000. you need more than cork sprayed all over the infield to be convinced sammy was a cheater? you have your head in the sand as deep as the ones who defend barry as having never used if you really feel that way.

While it's obvious that you're being sarcastic, there are some on this board who lack the ability to detect sarcasm. Initially, those people will respond harshly to your post. Then, embarassed that they didn't immediately recognize that you weren't serious, they will criticize you for not using a smiley to indicate your lack of sincerity. In coming days, you will be told that your "sarcasm act" is getting old. Eventually your loyalty to the Cubs will be questioned, probably by a poster who lacks grammatical skills and whose screenname is a combination of a rather generic word and a number. Finally, there will be a call for you to take an "absolute psychological test" to prove you can handle the pressures of posting despite your track record that shows you excel at such an activity. Be careful. I doubt JC needs such advice as he's been an active and respected member of this board for years. People from all walks of life post here. You'll encounter those with differing opinions and/or writing styles frequently. In my opinion, it's best to not get upset or bitter about it. Back to the topic....If I remember correctly, that one winning streak came on the heals of a long losing streak. Thus, both of those were essentially negated. I agree with those that state that Baker isn't the one primarily repsonsible for the losing streaks this season although he has proven himself unworthy of an extension in '04 and '05. I blame Hendry more for this season's performance. The offseason was a disaster and put the Cubs in a position for failure with or without Lee. How inept does Macphail look for giving Hendry an extension immediately preceding this gargantuan slide? its ok cheap, I got your sarcasm, and I think JC would too. Perhaps you should have added a smiley. :D

I don't know anyone who hasn't acknowledged barry's talent. It seems to me that the other side are the ones who refuse to acknowledge the "help" he got for atleast 8 years.

You wonder if it was just a bad decision or a desperate move because the offense hasn't been scoring runs. With this slump continuing, you see a lot of mistakes (swinging at bad pitches, trying for a HR, etc.) because of the desperation. maybe he was hoping the second baseman would cut it off, drop it and then airmail it home....

Par for the course, my friend. Par for the course. Actually, lately it's been a combination of bad pitching and bad hitting that's done the Cubs in. The pitching was pretty good today, all things considered. Marshall got himself into and out of a few jams, Howry did really well, and Eyre shut down the Braves. The offense, on the other hand? Blah. You just watch, tomorrow we'll put up 8 and lose by 7 runs. Good call.

wasn't there a managerial change too that started the 'stros turnaround...I thought that was how garner got the job...

Obvious sarcasm, so you admit that acquiring and playing Bynum is a horrible decision. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, fool me repeatedly in agony, shame on Hendry and Dusty. Actually, no. I don't read that as sarcasm. I read that as a subtle little slam on anyone who likes how Billy Beane does business. It's not sarcasm, it's trolling. We've tried to tell CubfaninCA over and over again that the walk was invented long before Billy Beane was ever born and that Billy Beane did not invent OBP. But, it doesn't seem to sink in. That's okay. I only wish it would sink in with Hendry and Dusty. Today was a perfect example of what a walk can do. Atlanta got 9 of them. The Cubs got one. The Cubs only walk was an intentional walk to get to the pitcher. Atlanta scored 3 runs off of walks. The walks didn't drive in the runs, but they were on base when someone else drove them in. The more runners you get on base, the chances increase of driving in a runner. The Cubs are dead last in OBP, and their dead last in runs scored. It's actually pretty elementary. The Royals have scored more runs than the Cubs, and they've played 2 less games than the Cubs. Hudson threw 70 pitches in 6 innings. Zambrano threw 120 in 6.2 innings. This particular line in the box score pretty much looks the same everyday. weren't there atleast two runs scored today that were walked in....that is sad when the walks ARE driving in runs.

kurkijan (sp) didn't know who he was either. even said so on 4 quarters today. he said he's never heard of this kid.

That's very true, but it's more of a tremor than a big shakeup. This team needs about a 9 pointer on the Richter Scale. Hmmm, I think it's like pulling a major trade. Guzman has great stuff, but just isn't ready. Without Lee, the Cubs almost have no shot of winning when Guzman takes the mound cause the opposition probably gets 5-6 runs off him and the middle relief. Wood gives them the chance of winning 4-3 or 3-2. At least he can go 6, giving up only 2 runs, and hand it over to Eyre, Howry and Dempster. maybe not the best plan anymore.

I heard a more lengthy interview with Roberts's rationale was that with a wild pitch or one too far out he'd be able to score from third. You can't do that from second, usually. I agree, perhaps it was the straw that broke the camel's back....it wasn't the hay stack but it was the breaking point.

They were up 3 RUNS at that point, with no certaintly they'd be able to keep that lead. here's how the inning wend down. basically what you just pointed out was that roberts risked 3 SD runs for a meaningless stolen base, I know that is with 20/20 hindsight. does anyone have any stats on the difference in scoring percentage with a runner on second with two outs vs. a runner on third with two outs? I would be willing to wager that the difference is not worth the risk of stealing third. maybe I'm wrong, but like someone said, if he gets a great jump I suppose, yet he still would have been out with a good throw IMO.

I think the SD broadcasters were right. Roberts has run at will on the Cubs, 6 SB in the past week. I tend to agree with the thought that emotion without execution is pretty hollow. I don't think Roberts stealing 3rd with a 3-run lead yesterday was out of line at all. I've got a lotta man-love for Michael, don't get me wrong, but he simply looked like a sore loser by jawing at Roberts. like I said, the steal made no sense other than to pad your stats. there were two outs IIRC, so on any basehit he scores from either second or third. why risk getting thrown out unless you are trying to make the other team look bad. Its not even a smart baseball play in my opinion. I didn't see the play so I am not sure if Roberts was close to being thrown out, but I definitely think that stealing 3rd makes sense in that situation if you get a great jump and have good speed. You can score on a passed ball or an infield single, and you might score on the play if the catcher makes a bad throw to third. A lot of good basestealers say that stealing third is easier than stealing second, especially if the defense is sloppy. Vince Coleman used to say that all the time. There were 2 outs, true, but if that was the basis of Barrett's beef -- that Roberts is a bonehead for risking a 3rd out at 3rd after Roberts stole 6 bases in 4 games vs the Cubs -- then that's pretty sad. I don't think that was it; I think the SD broadcasters were right. You almost would rather see Barrett get pissed at Neifi for letting Roberts reach 2nd base. there are alot of other things I would love to see barrett pissed at neifi for! :P

I think the SD broadcasters were right. Roberts has run at will on the Cubs, 6 SB in the past week. I tend to agree with the thought that emotion without execution is pretty hollow. I don't think Roberts stealing 3rd with a 3-run lead yesterday was out of line at all. I've got a lotta man-love for Michael, don't get me wrong, but he simply looked like a sore loser by jawing at Roberts. like I said, the steal made no sense other than to pad your stats. there were two outs IIRC, so on any basehit he scores from either second or third. why risk getting thrown out unless you are trying to make the other team look bad. Its not even a smart baseball play in my opinion. Pad your stats? Do you know anything about Dave Roberts as a player? He's not a "pad your stats" kind of guy. As far as "risking" geting thrown out, apparently there was little risk. It WAS a very smart baseball play with what transpired with the Padres pitching, Williams out and having to use relievers. Anything that can increase the chance for one run that might make the difference in a game is the right move. The Padres had a shaky (so far this season) call up, Jon Adkins in the bullpen, and were later using Sweeney after having used Linebrink and Embree (LOOGY pretty much) the previous game. stealing second in that situation I agree with, stealing third I think is more gray area than you are giving it credit for. With the heart of your lineup coming up, you are in scoring position, if you want to be sure to extend the inning by scoring, you let your big guys hit. And yes I'm am very familiar with Roberts, as is Barrett, which is why it surprises me when he bunted and stole second in a blow out last week, and then stole third in a play that I still don't think is smart baseball in that situation.

I think the SD broadcasters were right. Roberts has run at will on the Cubs, 6 SB in the past week. I tend to agree with the thought that emotion without execution is pretty hollow. I don't think Roberts stealing 3rd with a 3-run lead yesterday was out of line at all. I've got a lotta man-love for Michael, don't get me wrong, but he simply looked like a sore loser by jawing at Roberts. like I said, the steal made no sense other than to pad your stats. there were two outs IIRC, so on any basehit he scores from either second or third. why risk getting thrown out unless you are trying to make the other team look bad. Its not even a smart baseball play in my opinion. I didn't see the play so I am not sure if Roberts was close to being thrown out, but I definitely think that stealing 3rd makes sense in that situation if you get a great jump and have good speed. You can score on a passed ball or an infield single, and you might score on the play if the catcher makes a bad throw to third. all good points and I would agree if you are in a situation where you are down a run or tied or up a run, but I think they were up 3 or 4 runs at that point. plus you have the heart of your lineup coming up with cameron, giles and piazza. I just wouldn't steal third in that case. All in all, barrett should have had him, a good throw would have nailed roberts, so I'm sure that was another frustration barrett was releasing in the incident.

I think the SD broadcasters were right. Roberts has run at will on the Cubs, 6 SB in the past week. I tend to agree with the thought that emotion without execution is pretty hollow. I don't think Roberts stealing 3rd with a 3-run lead yesterday was out of line at all. I've got a lotta man-love for Michael, don't get me wrong, but he simply looked like a sore loser by jawing at Roberts. like I said, the steal made no sense other than to pad your stats. there were two outs IIRC, so on any basehit he scores from either second or third. why risk getting thrown out unless you are trying to make the other team look bad. Its not even a smart baseball play in my opinion.

So it sounds like Barrett wasn't so much angry at Roberts for the way he was playing the game (which seems like the right way, to me)..... but was probably angry because he couldn't stop him. I think he was pointing out that those three plays were against the "unwritten rules of baseball" 1. you don't bunt for a single late in a game up 4 or 5 runs. 2. you don't steal late in a game up 4 or more runs 3. you don't steal 3rd with two outs when you are up 4 or more runs. those are all moves that the other team will likely take offense to. and number 3 I don't even understand, on a base hit with two outs, he scores from second or third so why take the chance of getting thrown out at third unless you are trying to pad your stats.

this is the slowest moving game thread.....EVER.

are you kidding?? Cano for prior and jones plus cash....done deal. we need a 2B

I think he was genuinely peeved and frustrated. I don't think he "chose" to pick on roberts, I think it was a situation that presented itself and barrett used that situation to vent his frustration. It happens, I bet it dies after today.

If that's the case, then let's find someone to manage the team for $500,000/year and have an extra 4 million to spend on payroll. If the manager has little to no impact on wins and losses, then the Cubs sure are throwing their money away. =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> I think the manager makes a huge difference. I know I've been on teams in consecutive years with two different managers, one year we sucked, one year we kicked tail. Same players, same attitudes, same opponents, different manager.

on the first item: :oops: I'll get that fixed asap on the second: much bigger item, though there is a plug-in available. thank you! You're the best!

Ok, back on topic.

Tim, I think this is probably a little thing but I didn't notice it till today cuz I'm not sure who the Cubs are playing today. Could you add the team they are playing to the next game info on the front page? It lists the time, date, media, and pitchers but like I said, I'm not sure who it is they are playing....so now I'm off to Yahoo! sports to find out!!! Thank you! Rob Just "@ St. Louis" for road and "vs. St. Louis" for home games.... and how bout a spellchecker for members postings?!?!?? I'm sure that is a much bigger deal, and you've probably heard it before. Thank you anyway.

tease