BigbadB

The bases were like 50 feet closer to each other way back then. :D

Babe Ruth used to run really fast around the bases in those old newsreels :D Yes he did. But, once again I was referring to his bat speed. I couldn't believe how quickly he got the bat through the zone on that bomb. I'd never consider Aramis quick around the bases.

Bobby Cox: 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, etc.. infinity... Baker: 1st, 3rd, 4th This isn't comparing apples with oranges, but rather grapes to watermelons.

Ugh!

:cheers: The 2002 team was bad. Very, very bad. But, Bellhorn was a stud in the lead off spot. Kimm>>>Baker for that reason alone.

Maybe my math is a bit fuzzy, but by my calculations, Fielder struck out zero times "BETWEEN" AAA and the majors. :D

Dusty stresses aggressiveness at the plate. I don't believe that changed this offseason. I think their idea of improving fundamentals is improving defense and increasing team speed.

I didn't see the game, and I'm sure it was pretty hilarious. However, many good defensive catchers who are not used to catching a knuckleballer would probably look pretty much the same given the circumstances.

Was their stress on improvement of fundamentals meant to include more patience at the plate? If so, they had no business signing guys like Neifi Perez and Jacque Jones to contracts.

In a 5 year period, a whole team's roster can turn over. How many players do the Red Sox have left from their World Series team, and that was just 2 years ago? The Cubs 2003 line up featured: Sosa, Patterson, Moises, Aramis, Gonzalez, Grudz, Karros, Miller Who is left from that Cub line up? Aramis! Who we acquired mid season that year. Not one bench player from 2003 is still on the team. Only Prior, Wood and Zambrano remain from the entire pitching staff of that year. That's 4 players out of more than 25 from just 2003 alone. What stability is necessary in the role of a manager when the roster itself is not stable?

In Varitek's defense, he hasn't had much opportunity to catch Wakefield. Mirabelli was and has been Wakefield's personal catcher. Catching a knuckleballer is no easy chore, even if you are an outstanding defensive catcher.

Hendry and MacPhail have been able to get the Tribune to open the purse strings, something no other GM's have been able to do. Because the money has been available to make improvements to the team, I can't really give Baker any credit for their back to back winning seasons. While injuries have had their impact on the last two seasons, injuries can't be used as the excuse for why you didn't win. Rewarding a manager coming off of a losing season is not my idea of good business practice. I watched Dusty manage this team all of last year, just like I've watched managers manage their teams since the early 70's. After watching last year, I'm under the impression that any clown can manage a baseball team. Maybe not well, but they could do it, and probably at least match Dusty's record of last year. I honestly felt that Dusty was attempting to get himself fired with the moves he made. I don't think he likes it here, and the feelings with me are mutual. I don't like him here. To top things off, he's one of the highest paid managers in the game today. I expect much more than what we got. A manager needs to be a leader, lead by example and make sound decisions 162+ games a year to make his team as successful as they can be. Dusty failed badly at this last year. An extension is the furthest thing from my mind at this point.

A lot of players do have pretty good AVG first pitch hitting, but it drives me nuts. I absolutely hate 1 pitch outs. Dusty encourages an aggressive approach at the plate, and that might partially be due to the fact that they know the pitcher doesn't like to fall into a hole and might groove one. I'm sure Dusty isn't the only manager with this approach to hitting, but I'm not a fan.

The Reds won by 2 runs today. The Freel run really didn't mean anything, other than the fact the Cubs were going to need at least 2 runs to tie.

Oh, have we started already? I better put some guys in my line up.

=D> You manage like Dusty.

It hurt nothing. The Cubs were losing when that play happened, and the Cubs lost even if he nails Freel for leaning too far. It's a play that has split second decisions. If Cedeno winces because Freel doesn't "obviously" head back to 3rd, the runner will be safe at 1st and then people will rail him for that. It's a situation where speed helped Cincinnati score that run. It's going to happen from time to time. I don't look at it as a rookie mistake in the slightest. A veteran could have allowed that to happen just as easily.

Aramis? What about Mabry? (note: I think he's finally rounding 2nd) Actually, I was referring to bat speed. :wink: No one was faster than Todd Coffey today, and the Reds did win, so........

Speaking of fast, I couldn't believe how quickly Aramis got around on that bomb he hit. Now that was fast.

What is the purpose of this? Does this strengthen your side of this debate? I don't think so.

Derrek Lee is not slow.

And if Dave Ross catches the foul pop up, Derrek Lee doesn't crush that home run. If Barrett was supposed to be flawless today, we must also assume that Ross would be flawless as well. So, no, the game would not have been tied if Barrett didn't make those two boneheaded plays. We still would have been down.

Huh?

Cedeno did look over there, he just assumed that the look would be enough to stop Freel in his tracks. He assumed incorrectly. But, Cedeno did rifle the throw to 1st. The only way the Cubs get Freel there is if Barrett blocks the plate.

Gotcha beat. I cut him after he didn't play Monday and I read he wasn't going to be a starter. Bow down, for I am soapy, lord of the idiots. Nah, lord of the idiots is the Reds manager, who is starting Womack over Freel. Thank you, may I have another.