Electron Blue

That's not the point. Lawton having a bad 75 at bats doesn't make him less "fundamentally sound" than when he was with the Pirates. That's what the articles about, not predicting future performance. The fact that Matt Lawton has walked twice since joining the Cubs (as well as the example in the article) are examples of him not playing fundametal baseball. I don't mean to say that he's not a fundamental/good player. But I am saying that he has been neither since August 1.

Nomar won a batting title, and is a career .320 hitter - should we bring him back for $10 million? I'm not going to ignore the awful time Matt Lawton has spent in Chicago just because he's had a pretty decent career.

Hilarious :D

Foulke, Wickman, Hermanson, Guardado, Todd Jones, Mesa(pirates), Looper(Mets). Lol, yeah, but for us? :wink:

I don't know why, but this line kinda made me laugh

I'm sure his stay here will be short. Congrats on teh great question!! There, now you're not a liar anymore. Just a tool :wink:

Nice! Congrats to Tim and all of NSBB! \:D/

I think you must have misheard it. What's your source? EDIT: They've actually done it three times this year. Most recently - yesterday . . .

Young position players are so shafted. You perform poorly at first, you never see the light of day. You perform well in a limited role, it's because Dusty put you in the right situation and will never expand your role. Anybody who believes the BS about it all being about performance should take note. It has nothing to do with performance. It's all about tenure. Ans as recently noted by Dusty, salary as well.

Does every team allow the SP to decide what uniform to wear? I think that's kinda cool, but a little weird too.

I'm pretty bummed too. But on the brightside, Murton will be back in just a few weeks.

Well, I'll agree with Dusty that players should have the fundamentals down by the time they reach the majors. But the way he phrases this is either accidental or frustrating. It sounds like he thinks it's not his job to continue to refine his players' fundamentals. It sounds like he puts very little focus on practicing them . . . which would explain alot.

this thread may have kinda shifted gears, but here's today's move anyway: Cubs reinstate Hairston, option Murton

But none of the other bolded ones were Cubs. And Willis and Garland would have to bolded, too.

When does Dunn's plane land in Chicago?

Well, that's fine - I get what you're saying. The difference between Wood and Dempster, though, is a track record. Wood as a starter has shown that he can take a little abuse (hits, walks, etc. . .) and still win the ballgame. He's shown this to be his style over the last six or so years. But Dempster as a closer hasn't proven to me that he can take the abuse yet. Sure he's converted 17/19 or something, but I don't think that's entirely out of the realm of luck. Right now, I am looking at his struggles of control and wonder if he can continuing saving games at that ratio. All-in-all, I'm very satisfied with his performance (esp. since he's new at it), all I'm saying is that his struggles indicate he may not be cut out for a single inning of do-or-die pitching.

First of all, I think Dempster is clearly the best option we have at closer right now, and that he should be stuck with unless he absolutely loses it, but . . . I think the attitude in the quote above is similar to how Dusty felt when JoBo and Hawkins were stuggling so bad at times. They were getting hit hard and were giving up runs, but weren't necessarily blowing saves. I won't call Dempster a Very Good closer just because of an impressive save %. He's struggling in the role, whether his save stats indicate it or not. I haven't seen Dempster really get smacked around like those guys were. It seems to me Dempster's struggles have come (for the most part) because of walks and/or poor team defence. I would agree with that. Except, I want a closer who has great control. In many save situations, giving up a walk automatically puts either the tying or winning run on base. Last night, I think he did about as well as he could have, given the team's defensive struggles in the 9th.

First of all, I think Dempster is clearly the best option we have at closer right now, and that he should be stuck with unless he absolutely loses it, but . . . I think the attitude in the quote above is similar to how Dusty felt when JoBo and Hawkins were stuggling so bad at times. They were getting hit hard and were giving up runs, but weren't necessarily blowing saves. I won't call Dempster a Very Good closer just because of an impressive save %. He's struggling in the role, whether his save stats indicate it or not.

Ah, thanks. I didn't look very hard :)

Pittsburgh Pirates 5, Chicago Cubs 4 Day Game Played on Friday, April 19, 1991 (N) at Three Rivers Stadium CHI N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 - 4 3 1 PIT N 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 - 5 8 0 BATTING Chicago Cubs AB R H RBI BB SO PO A Dascenzo cf 3 0 0 0 1 1 5 0 Sandberg 2b 3 1 0 0 1 0 2 4 Grace 1b 3 1 1 0 1 0 8 0 Bell lf 4 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 Dwight Smith rf 3 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 Berryhill c 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 McElroy p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dawson ph 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 Dave Smith p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Dunston ss 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scott 3b 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 Jackson p 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Bielecki p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Walton ph 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lancaster p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pappas c 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 Totals 30 4 3 4 3 9 26 7 FIELDING - E: Dunston (3). PB: Berryhill (3). BATTING - 2B: Grace (3,off Belinda). HR: Dawson (2,9th inning off Belinda 3 on, 2 out). HBP: Dwight Smith (1,by Belinda). Team LOB: 3. Pittsburgh Pirates AB R H RBI BB SO PO A Redus 1b 3 1 1 0 2 0 5 0 Bell ss 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 3 Van Slyke cf 3 1 1 3 1 0 3 0 Bonilla rf 4 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 Bonds lf 4 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 King 3b 5 0 2 1 0 1 1 0 Slaught c 4 0 2 0 0 0 9 0 Lind 2b 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Palacios p 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Patterson p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Belinda p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wilkerson ph 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 30 5 8 4 7 3 27 4 BATTING - 3B: Bell (1,off Bielecki). HR: Van Slyke (2,3rd inning off Bielecki 1 on, 0 out). SH: Palacios 2 (2,off Jackson,off Bielecki); Bell 2 (6,off Lancaster,off Dave Smith). SF: Van Slyke (3,off Bielecki). IBB: Bonilla (1,by Dave Smith); Bonds (1,by Dave Smith). Team LOB: 11. BASERUNNING - SB: Redus (2,3rd base off McElroy/Pappas); Van Slyke (2,2nd base off McElroy/Pappas). PITCHING Chicago Cubs IP H R ER BB SO HR Jackson 2 1 1 1 3 0 0 Bielecki 3 3 2 2 0 1 1 Lancaster 1.1 1 0 0 1 0 0 McElroy 1.2 0 0 0 1 2 0 Dave Smith L(0-1) 0.2 3 2 2 2 0 0 Totals 8.2 8 5 5 7 3 1 Pittsburgh Pirates IP H R ER BB SO HR Palacios 6.2 1 0 0 2 5 0 Patterson 0.1 0 0 0 0 1 0 Belinda W(1-1) 2 2 4 4 1 3 1 Totals 9 3 4 4 3 9 1 WP: Dave Smith (1), Palacios (1). HBP: Belinda (1,Dwight Smith). IBB: Dave Smith 2 (2,Bonilla,Bonds). Umpires: Charlie Reliford, Jerry Layne, Mike Winters, Paul Runge Time of Game: 2:40 Attendance: 13157 ^--- From Retrosheet.com Is that the game you were thinking of. It happened in the ninth, not extras, bu sounds heartbreaking nonetheless.

Wouldn't that just about be the most impactful offseason the Cubs have *ever* had? In other words, it seems too good to be true.

I'll say forever that Stone was one of the smartest baseball men I've ever heard. I miss him in the booth. At least when he left for 2 years, there was a chance of him coming back. Now, I very highly doubt I'll hear him in the booth for the Cubs ever again. i think he'll come back...once Baker and Hendry are both gone from the organization. My understannding was that the feud was mostly Baker and Stone, with Hendry just trying to play Peacemaker (albeit poorly). Perhaps Baker and the Cubs part after this year, Brenly gets sent to the dugout, and Stone returns . . .

I don't believe Nomar has used steroids either, but the speculation is out there. Gammons Article EDIT: ^-- Granted, one of the points of the article is that Peter believes Nomar is clean - I'm just pointing out that some have thrown his name out there.

I don't know why, but I just have a feeling that Stone really would make a great manager.

SI.com A pretty good read, I thought. I'm surprised no one posted this yet - I'm sorry if someone did and I missed it. I thought Stone's version of the Dusty/Broadcaster feud of last year was interesting: