Illini Iceman

Can it really be described as the "Ohman experiment" when he appeared in 69 games in '05 with a 2.91 ERA and in 78 games in '06 with a 4.13 ERA? Those really aren't bad numbers for middle reliever / loogy. It probably justifies giving him more than 4 innings before throwing him under the bus. Cedeno on the other hand, is a wasted roster spot right now. Put him at SS at AAA for a full season and see if he can develop some better plate discipline.

The son of TV game-show host Peter Marshall

Don't get me wrong, I think DLee is awesome, but this quote is a great example of why he and Dusty got along so well: http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-070415cubsgamer,1,2833219.story?coll=cs-home-headlines Geez, I can almost hear it coming out of Dusty's mouth. Hopefully the shakeup is Theriot getting to play SS when ARam comes back. Good old Dave van Dyck didn't even think of that one. He is trying to figure out where they can stick him in the outfield.

Just what you want to do, give a guy that is already a borderline head case something else to have to think/worry about on the mound every time he goes to a 3 ball count.

=D> =D> =D> co-sign My gut tells me that something fishy was going on with Sosa, but the fact that this much time has passed without even one person coming forward with any kind of dirt on him is pretty compelling. Either he was clean and a victim of really unfortunate circumstances (so many other players at the same time cheating) or if he was guilty he had some exceptionally loyal people surrounding him.

Cause we had no outs and 3,4,5 coming up. it was dumb. Soriano is fast enough to score He would have been out by 20 feet. The ball was hit too hard. No he would't have. The Reds were conceeding the run, Freel didn't even throw to the plate. The Reds announcers said the same thing; they were surprised he didn't score. dude, you're wrong. just move on. No I'm not. Even the Reds guys were surprised he didn't score. In a game where runs are at a premium he should have been sent. Even the Reds guys? If an announcer says it then it must be true. If runs were at a premium wouldn't the strategy be to not run into a potential out at home plate with no outs?

Cause we had no outs and 3,4,5 coming up. it was dumb. Soriano is fast enough to score He would have been out by 20 feet. The ball was hit too hard. No he would't have. The Reds were conceeding the run, Freel didn't even throw to the plate. The Reds announcers said the same thing; they were surprised he didn't score. Soriano would've been meat at the plate. Freel didn't throw it home because Theriot would've probably tried to take 2nd on the throw. I thought he did throw home but the throw was cut off at the pitchers mound.

Looked like a strike to me. Lee has to swing the bat if it's that close. Close enough to at least foul off and stay alive. Two strike hitting is a lost art.

I remember either last season or the one before when there was the RUMOR that Hendry had a chance to trade Dunn for Hill straight up and would not do it. Almost everyone here was in agreement that was insane of Hendry if true. Dunn is off to a hot start this year and Hill is starting to show signs he could be the real deal. I wonder what the consensus would be about making that deal right now.

A win is a win. Today's game means just as much in the standings as a game on Sept 25th. games in september count double now well let's take it easy on carlos and rich so they can go every three games in september. speaking of which, does anyone remember when the Cubs went to a three-man rotation (maddux, sutcliffe, bielecki) toward the end of 1989? they made the playoffs, but bielecki and sutcliffe were never the same. In all fairness, Sutcliffe was nearing the end of the line anyway so his decline may have been inevitible and Bielecki was never nearly that good before '89 so his year may have just been a fluke.

So if a player comes through one time in the clutch while failing every other time, he's still considered clutch? Every other time, huh? Do you work for ESPN?

I say I. OK, but what about "aye"?

I hope Lou is at least considering Ohman to at least start against Dunn. No way I see that happening. It would be a huge vote of no confidence in his closer to start the season.

who would you have hit there? that's the izturis we know and love. murton i don't see the point in that at all. murton over izturis? really? theriot already pinch hit, so he would go to short while murton would have moved to left for floyd, who theriot pinch hit for... give me murton everytime No. He would've pinch-hit Murton for DeRosa, and put Murton in LF and Theriot at 2B. Too much tinkering. Overmanaging like that is what makes you run out of players when games go to extra innings.

Lou is probably in the dugout telling his story about finding a wallet on the street but not being able to count on going back again and finding another wallet.

Because they had to make room for the great Brendan Harris, that's why!

I'm not sure I agree with you that the closer concept should never have been invented. There is still a mental toughness about closing out the 9th inning that some relievers simply can't handle. Now, this doesn't have to be your best reliever, and it's probably preferable if it isn't-but a closer by committee usually only works IMO if you have multiple people who could be closers by themselves instead of going to a committee because you have no one who could be a closer by themselves. For the Cubs, if Dempster can bounce back he's pretty good for the role. He's not the team's best reliever, but he does have the ability to be a closer, which allows us to bring in our ace relivers like Howry and Eyre in key situations. A lot of the pressure of pitching the 9th has been artificially created by the closer/save construct. Ridiculous as it is the save is a highly regarded stat and careers and tons of money can be made by compiling a large number of saves. That's where the pressure comes from. If you take away the save as a stat and discard the closer concept then the 9th is not such a big deal anymore. So if I understand this correctly, your theory is that the pressure on 9th inning situations comes not from the team being so close to winning and only needing a few outs to finish the game, but instead from guys knowing they need to get the save in order to earn a big contract? In other words, if it weren't for personal stats, guys would stroll out to the mound in the 9th and not care whether they secure the win or blow the game?

Oh, please don't go there. O'Malley makes John Koronka look like a dominating lefty.

It never did. Another of those stupid deals where Hendry just got rid of someone to get rid of them. What has Farnsworth done that has been so spectacular? It was a nothing trade...so what. He also would have left as a FA by now anyway so the fact that the Cubs still have one fairly servicable pitcher and one prospect with some potential trade value in the system to show for it actually seems like a plus for Hendry. We didn't get a serviceable pitcher in that deal. Yeah, ha, ha, Novoa is worthless and completely sucks, I get it. He appeared in 66 games last year and put up an ERA of 4.26 The year before he appeared in 49 games with an ERA of 4.43. I know, I know, ERA is not the greatest stat in the world but for a long / middle reliever I think he at least qualifies as "serviceable".

It never did. Another of those stupid deals where Hendry just got rid of someone to get rid of them. What has Farnsworth done that has been so spectacular? It was a nothing trade...so what. He also would have left as a FA by now anyway so the fact that the Cubs still have one fairly servicable pitcher and one prospect with some potential trade value in the system to show for it actually seems like a plus for Hendry.

BRUTAL! paul sullivan looks like a [expletive] monkey That is an insult to [expletive] monkeys.

I am glad they lost because it is better to go down by 2 points in the first round to VTech than to suffer the huge embarrasment of getting blown out by SIU in the second round.

Vance, I vehemently disagree. I don't think that Prior is irrelevant and expendable, but if Guzman flat out performs better then I think that he should get the spot. If Prior continues the way that he's going, I think he needs to be put on the 15-day DL and stay behind in extended ST to continue to work on his stuff. After he gets more comfortable and starts stretching it out down there, he should go on a rehab assignment for 2-3 starts split between AA and AAA to make sure he's sharp when he makes his debut. I'd aim for him to return around May 4th when the Cubs open up a 6-game homestand against the Nats and Pirates. I don't think the Cubs are going to play that game this year. I think this could be a pivotal time in Mark Prior's Cubs career. He can be replaced if someone can not only win the fifth spot but show flashes of dominance. Guzman has the ability to do so. It's all hypothetical at this point but if Guzman wins the spot and goes on to win his first few starts leading up to a potential Prior return, I could see it being a very difficult situation... Listening to the off-the-record comments by Lou, it's apparent that Angel Guzman fits his profile of his ideal 5th starter; a young guy who throws well with the ability to get better as the season progresses. Having said that, I'm sure Lou would love to have the old Mark Prior but it doesn't look like he'll be around for awhile (if ever). They may not, but IMO they would be foolish not to. He missed a good portion of last year with shoulder problems and hadn't thrown since August I don't believe. Right now I think as he gets his stamina and strength up, his velocity will improve. It is all a matter of fine tuning his mechanics and finding that consistent arm slot. If he can't do that by the end of ST, I don't want him to still be fooling around with it in Wrigley. Giving up on Prior at this point would be an incredibly stupid move by the organization.

Lunardi just likes to hear himself talk this time of the year. His last Bracketology posted on Espn.com has the last four in as Purdue, Illinois, Drexel, and Old Dominion. The last four out are Air Force, Florida State, Kansas State and West Virginia and next four out are Missouri State, Stanford, Appalacian State and Mississippi State. What in the world could Kansas State and Stanford have done for themselves since this morning that moved them up to the last four in? Either he was full of you know what this morning or is now. He just moves teams around so his reports seem interesting. Not that it really matters, Illinois has one and done written all over them this year. But they are more deserving than Kansas State and Stanford. Yep, well said on everything. Kansas State and Stanford have no right in being ahead of Illinois for a spot tomorrow. Lunardi is becoming an egotistical, arrogant meathead these last couple of years. And I'll agree that Illinois has one and done all over them. BUT, that does not mean they should be snubbed over a couple of other undeserving teams. I don't know about Kansas State but Stanford most definitely deserves to be in over Illinois without question. Yeah, Stanford's RPI of 65 and Strength of Schedule of 36 is WAY better than Illinois RPI of 31 and Strength of Schedule of 31. I am sure an argument could be made either way, but "most definitely" and "without question" is a bit overstated.

This doesn't apply to Campusano. It's really strange that the Blue Jays took Jason Smith when he was availble as a free agent about a month ago. Has anyone heard any news regarding the chances of Campusano and/or Holdzkom getting returned? It would be nice to have those two back in the system. Houston offered Holdzkom back today (link to thread). Campusano has been good so far for the Tigers (5 IP, 0 R, 1 H, 4 K/3 BB, 1 HBP). If they can't convince him to waive his free agency, the Cubs should try to move Miller asap in order to clear the 40 man spot to get Holdzkom back.