BigbadB

Santa Ana winds are an eastern wind that typically hits the west coast in the fall season. It's a warm desert breeze that not only dry out the already dry brush, but that's where a lot of the big west coast fires come from. It's currently fire season. Luckily, we are getting some much needed rain these past few days. The Santa Ana winds have very little effect on Padres games.

Even with Hollandsworth, Dubois, Neifi, Macias, Enrique Wilson, Burnitz and Blanco, the Cubs still ranked 5th out of 30 teams in XBH's. This was not a team lacking power or the ability to hit. The Cubs ranked 28th in BB's. Here is the problem. You would think a tema that could rank 5th in XBH's would be at or near the top in runs scored. The Cubs ranked 21st in runs scored. If they could have ranked in the top 5 in walks along with their top 5 finish in XBH's, this team would be ranked closer to first than last in runs scored. Just reiterating that Preston Wilson does nothing to solve this problem.

I'll also point out that LA and San Diego play more like hitter's parks in day games. We have very low humidity on the west coast, therefore it's a very light air and balls travel well in lighter air. This is also why Arizona is a hitter's paradise. They don't get a marine layer cover in their night games and they have no humidity to speak of. It's just a dry desert air, therefore balls travel very nicely. Check the Cactus League Spring Training scores. Usually some pretty high scoring games. San Diego is just like Phoenix as far as the air is concerned during daylight hours. When the marine layer filters in, it completely changes the thickness of the air.

We don't have high winds in San Diego. The thick air from the marine layer is what knocks down fly balls, not only to left field, but also to center field and right field also. Petco does have a "short porch" in right field, which helps the lefties hit more home runs to right field, but they have to really pull the ball to hit the porch.

It's all about the marine layer, Craig. The same can be said for San Fran, Oakland, Seattle, San Diego and Anaheim. There is a heavy air that comes in off the ocean late every afternoon. It would always be there, actually, if the sun didn't burn it off early in the day. This marine layer just absolutely kills a balls flight. Day games on the west coast are typically higher scoring, because the marine layer hasn't settled in yet. It doesn't always hold true, but it's pretty typical. There is no set time that the marine layer settles in either. On a typical summer day, it may not roll in until after sunset. A night game starting at 7pm might be high scoring until the sun sets and the marine layer starts covering the stadium at 8:30pm, or about the midpoint of a game. In this instance, you may see high scoring early in the game, and next to nothing once the heavy air settles in. It's weird, but it's also a legit problem.

All Milwaukee needs to do is play their cards right, and they can have a 30m payroll finishing in the hunt for the playoffs for the next 5 years. Why trade Bill Hall? If I was Milwaukee, I'd be penciling him in as the starting 3rd baseman over Helms. Helms can't stay healthy and Hall impressed in that role. Isn't Helms closer to free agency than Hall? If the Brewers can trade for a 3b, then Hall becomes a great role guy off the bench. This team could get scary good in the next few years. Heck, starting this year. The Brewers should definitely be shopping Clark this offseason. With Krynzel the heir apparent at that position, they can try to get top dollar for Clark, something that is unfamiliar territory for the Cubs these days. I like the Shoppach idea. He's basically useless behind Varitek. Now is probably a good time to move Overbay as well if Fielder is ready. This young team will start getting the fans attention soon enough, and Milwaukee will not only be able to pocket tons of cash, but they will have the ability to spend it when the moment is right. I'd be really scared of that team in the coming years. This offseason, Milwaukee needs to have Carlos Lee, Geoff Jenkins, Wes Helms, Brady Clark and Lyle Overbay on the market and see what they can reel in.

But defense is not the reason this team didn't win enough games this year. Not saying you are wrong, but I can think of 3 games off the top of my head that the defense cost us. An improved defense should be one of our concerns, especially up the middle. Ok, you can name 3 that D cost us. I don't doubt that you can, and I'm sure they were all legit. However, about 10 come to mind right off the top of my head that lack of timely hitting cost us. Okay. Hawkins threw away the comeback line drive. That cost us one. Macias in CF against the Mets probably cost us the Zambrano Sunday night game, since the Mets ran on his "arm" at every opportunity. And that's aside from his routes to the ball. There's 2. Perez had a 2 error game in May, I think, that cost us a win. Barrett's botched rundown in Philly. There's 3. :P Not to get nitpicky, but doesn't the fact that Macias, Perez and Hawkins were playing in these games sort of give one the impression it wasn't just defense that cost us those victories? :wink:

I wonder who else Boras has as clients that are in their free agent year this year? Patterson is such small potatoes to Boras these days that Patterson might be better served hooking up with someone else. Of course, the Cubs do have a good working relationship with Boras..... Forget it. Boras will have Patterson signed to a 4/16 deal with some crap GM by Spring Training.

I would imagine that the White Sox will gain some fan base from the Cubs with this World Series trip. Definitely a smart move on their part attempting to increase season ticket sales with this World Series appearance.

I'm sure the money is good in NY, but I don't know why he would be the slightest bit interested in working in that cut throat environment.

To put the importance of OBP into perspective here, the Cub team of 1998 that went to the playoffs got more RBI's from the platoon combo of Henry Rodriguez and Glenallen Hill than Derrek Lee got this year. Sammy Sosa had 158 RBI's that year with 10 less XBH's. The reason these guys got that many RBI's was because they had good OBP all the way through the top half of the order. Lance Johnson had a .335 OBP, Brant Brown had a .348, Mickey Morandini had a .380, Sosa had a .377, Grace had a .401, Gaetti was at .397, Hill was at .414, Blauser at .340, Rodriguez was at .334, Sandy Martinez at .363, Matt Mieske was at .373. There were a few bad OBP's, notably Jose Hernandez, Manny Alexander, Tyler Houston, Scott Servais and Kevin Orie. But, these are not the guys who gobbled up most of the at bats. That Cub team drew 601 walks to go along with a .264 AVG. They scored 831 runs. The 2005 Cubs hit .270, but only drew 419 walks. 703 runs crossed the plate in 2005, nearly 130 less runs scored. The 1998 team struck out 300 more times than the 2005 club. Strike out all you want, but strike out swinging at good pitches, not bad ones. The walks are the difference. Preston Wilson doesn't walk enough and doesn't hit enough to warrant wasting any roster space on the 2006 Cub team. Fine, sign him to a luke warm deal as roster filler if you get all the other guys that really make this team better. But, I wouldn't trust that Hendry would consider him "roster filler".

Every Cub team of the 2000's has been plagued by the same disease. Poor OBP. Poor contact. Preston Wilson is just more of the same. This Cubs team has the available money this offseason to go out and get good contact/good OBP guys. If I'm the Cubs front office, I don't settle for Preston Wilson when Brian Giles is available. I don't settle for Jeromy Burnitz if Adam Dunn is available. This Cub team has the potential to fill every single spot in the order (and on the bench for that matter) with guys who can put up .350+ OBP's. The other problem I have with Preston Wilson is that he's right handed. If the Cubs resign Nomar (which they should), they have plenty of right handed power in the line up. They need lefty hitters to add balance and stability to the line up. I'm in agreement with Goony that if the Cubs sign Preston Wilson, they will make every effort to play up this signing as the huge signing that the Cubs needed. There has been little to no discussion of bringing Brian Giles on board. That should be all they are talking about at this point. Along with resigning Nomar, anyway. This should be a major concern.

I don't think the Cubs are in a position to play games with Nomar. I think they need to work out a 1 year arrangement and resign him for 2006 and be done with it. If they want to go after Furcal too, fine. But, if they show no interest in Nomar and he signs elsewhere and Furcal doesn't come to Chicago, this will have the making of a horrible offseason. If they get both, they can move one of them to 2nd or one to the outfield. Or they could trade Aramis and move Nomar there.

Now that's blech. Low trade or value not, Patterson's got to go in order for the organization to start its renewal process. Why? I don't understand this thought process. Why does Corey have to leave for this team to be good? That sounds an awful lot like last year's "get rid of the bad apples" strategy that failed oh so miserably. If you want Corey replaced with somebody who is guaranteed to be much better, fine. If you're looking for more CF production, I can't argue. But the "he has to go before this team can win" theory doesn't add up. I think if you can get the necessary improvements elsewhere, they'd be justified in giving Corey another year to make something of his skills. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. To me, getting rid of him is an addition by subtraction move - it's a gut thing - obviously, someone else will be playing CF if Patterson is gone. As long as that somebody isn't Marquis Grissom, Endy Chavez, Laynce Nix, Steve Finley, or Tike Redman (and I wouldn't expect Hendry to get any of those guys), the Cubs will be better off. I'm going to disagree with you also, Hoops. They did the whole addition by subtraction thing last year with Alou, Sosa and Mercker. They had a worse year than the previous year. Pat "The Bat" Burrell had a horrible year recently in arguably one of the worst places to play, as far as fans getting on the players is concerned, and a whole bunch of Cub fans were clamoring about wanting to trade for Burrell this year. He came out of his year long slump in fine fashion. For those that don't recall, Burrell had a .209 AVG and a .713 OPS as a corner outfielder in 2003. Take away some of Burrell's 72 walks that year, and you have Corey Patterson Jr. Even worse though, is the fact that Burrell plays a much more offense oriented position than Patterson. I tend to believe Patterson will be gone this offseason, but this would be another really bad trade on the Cubs part, because all they will be asking in return is a bucket of balls. Cubs management shoot themselves in the foot once again if that's the trade that happens. They paid someone for Sosa to play somewhere else. If they hadn't glorified the whole "Sosa is a plague" routine, they might have been able to get a team to pay more of his salary and get something a little more significant than Hairston in return. They've done nothing to give any team the impression that Patterson would be worth trading for, so what exactly do they get in return for trading him? Nothing. If nothing is all he is worth on the market, then why not give him a bench job? His offense may not provide any value this year, but his speed and defensive skills make him a decent #8 hitter in a line up that has lots of quality offensive production. He can bunt his way on in the 8 hole and let pitchers bunt him over. He can steal 2nd and let pitchers bunt him to 3rd. He can work on his plate discipline in the 8 hole as pitchers tend to pitch around the 8 hitter. I understand the frustration with Patterson, but I'm not ready to give up on him if it means just giving him away.

That's what I think as well. I'd also be fine with Patterson as the starting centerfielder if they made the necessary improvements elsewhere. Hairston is Patterson's protection. Lofton wouldn't be a bad stop gap, as he'd come cheap, wouldn't need a long term contract and provides a decent top of the order OBP. Patterson makes for a decent late inning defensive replacement. If he solves his offensive woes, he could be a decent lefty bat off the bench, a decent pinch runner, etc....

Here is my take. Catchers should always get into the habit of tagging the runner on balls in the dirt or very near the dirt as was the case in this instance. Paul made a mistake in not doing so. The batter should run in this situation also. To wait to see if a ball in the dirt or nearly in the dirt is the instant they stand no chance of being safe at 1st. Pierzinski did the right thing. The umpire should stand by his call. He called him out. He did not see the ball come free. Why did he allow Pierzinski to take 1st base? Because Pierzinski made it to 1st before the throw he should be awarded 1st base? That's absurd. What were the other umpires doing? Eddings called him out. There was no one on base at the time. Every umpire should have been watching the play at the plate. I suppose they also needed to be watching for a balk by the pitcher, but the 1st and 3rd base umpires seem to be able to watch for a balk and for a check swing strike, therefore they should be able to confirm that the umpires original call should stand. The umpires look like idiots on this play and it's their own doing. I'm going to assume the home plate umpire is an idiot because he's wishy/washy on his calls. The 1st base umpire was busy watching the girl in the short skirt take her seat in section 4, row 4, seat 3. The 2nd base umpire was checking out Adam Kennedy's butt. The 3rd base umpire had an itchy scratch he was tending to. I most certainly would have shown up the umpire crew after that obviously horrible call/non-call. I would have circled the bases on every ground out, ran to first on every strike 3, etc... As the catcher, I might have dove for a ball in the dirt that wasn't really in the dirt and let that 100 MPH fastball hit the umpire in a very sensitive area. Blame it on a mix up between the catcher and pitcher. I'd have the centerfielder catch a ball for out number 1 and run it all the way in and tag the hitter as he took his second step down the dugout steps and take the time to slowly walk all the way back to centerfield just to slow things down. Could you really blame the Angels for doing all those things? The umpires made a horrible call in a very crucial game. Actually, they made the right call, but changed their minds for reasons that are totally beyond comprehension. I realize umpires make mistakes. However, how can 4 people totally miss that Paul caught the ball? Even if it hit the ground before it went in the mitt, it was quite obvious that he never "dropped" it. Someone should have simply said that the umpires original call of out should stand. The umpire wasn't in a position to say the ball wasn't caught. He'd have to be able to see through the catcher to make that judgment. He could also assume that he made the right call since the catcher didn't make any attempt to tag the runner, so he must have caught it. If the catcher didn't catch it, he'd know he needs to tag the runner, who just happened to still be standing right there. The umpires are clueless and deserve all the wrath they receive.

I still have an argument in regards to placement in the order. I don't necessarily believe that by moving people around in the order, that the runs created just shifts a little bit. Neifi Perez is not an OBP guy. He does, however, hit for a fairly decent AVG. Not only does his 2005 season reflect a .305 AVG hitting 7th, but he also provided an OBP in the 7 hole of .341. In the 8 spot he had a .318/.375. His 3 year splits show he has more success towards the bottom of the order. That being said, if you had Walker/Hairston and Murton batting 1/2 in the order, and they provided a .350 OBP, the runs scored would dramatically increase from the top spots in the order. If you took the good AVG but not so good OBP guys and put them at the bottom of the order (Macias/Perez), you could get run production this way as well. I still think this team could have scored 60+ runs more than they did. I also think that if everyone stayed healthy and there was no need for Macias and Perez, they could have scored many more than that. I think the Cubs had a better offense than Cincinnati if you had everyone healthy and the right person filling out the line up card.

Okay, Clement didn't do anything numbers wise prior to his time in Chicago that would warrant trading for him. I'll agree with this. Therefore, we are both looking at it in hindsight. Had Willis been traded in this deal and he blew out his arm in the minors and was never heard or seen again, we wouldn't be looking at this trade and saying it was a bad trade. Willis was an unknown commodity at the time of that trade. Honestly, at this point I can't recall whether Florida demanded Willis or if Hendry offered him? I don't know. I think we agree on a lot of issues, I just took exception to Willis and his success with Florida as something the Cubs should have assumed. I wanted Cruz in the rotation in 2003. But, he would have been preventing the Cubs need to sign Estes, not the trade for Clement. If the Cubs went with Wood, Zambrano, Prior and Cruz and one other farmhand or two filling the back end of the rotation, they would have been risking a very young rotation not having the strength to make it a whole season. That's why I didn't have a problem with the Clement trade. He was durable and having watched him for a few seasons in San Diego, I knew that if he worked with the right pitching coach, he had the potential to be even better than he was in his time with the Cubs.

As a Cub fan, you sure seem to know a whole lot about the Cardinals fans message boards. If you know so much about them, would it be because you visited their boards? If it was acceptable for you to visit their boards, wouldn't it be just as fair for them to visit ours? The Cardinal fans that post here have been nothing but respectful. The ones who don't get a fairly quiet dismissal. The reason this particular forum (Rivalries) is here is for them to lounge and not clutter up the rest of the board with Cardinal discussion. While I enjoy the comraderie of hanging out with other Cub fans here, I also enjoy discussing baseball with fans of other teams. It's nice to get that perspective from the "other side". As long as the discussions stay civil, we can coexist peacefully. We have banned many Cardinal fans for trolling this site, but I'd venture to guess we've banned just as many Cub fans.

Tomorrow's editorial: Cubs were actually good last year. You are all mistaken. Keep buying tickets After a bit of reflection, I don't think the Cubs were really as bad as their 79-83 record would have many believe. Going by straight run differential the Cubs should have finished 80-82. OK, no big difference there. However, going by their component offensive stats this team should have scored many more runs than it did... to the tune of about 767 as opposed to the 703 runs they actually plated. Using that as the differential, it could be argued that this team played like it should have won 87 games, not 79. No improvement over the past couple of years, but not a huge dropoff, either. The question is who can we blame for the team falling 60+ runs short of its expected offensive output? I'm not sure the coaching staff and/or management can take a lot of that blame. Most of that difference is probably due to (a lack of) situational hitting, something that doesn't seem to follow much a of predictable pattern. I'm not saying that Dusty/Hendry shouldn't be criticized for some of their decisions, just that the 2005 Cubs team they assembled probably wasn't as bad as its record indicated. The Cubs OBP from the lead off spot this year was .299. From the #2 hole, it was .317. Can you correlate what Lee and the clean up hitters might have done if they had an average OBP from the top two spots of somewhere in the neighborhood of .330? And how about again at .350? Assuming Lee has 70 extra runners on base over the course of the season, and that he drives in a runner every 3 at bats that he has runners on base, Lee alone could have had 23 more RBI's alone. Add in Ramirez, Nomar and Burnitz all possibly having more runners on base to advance and I could easily see this team reaching the 60+ extra runs you suggest.

I think it's disgusting to reward incompetence.

Well, I may have the time frame wrong, but I don't believe I'm just making this up. He had some arm problems either right before or right after his Achilles problems. There was discussion about him possibly missing significant time because of it. And it wasn't the forearm drive off his elbow that I'm referring to.

Yep. Jimenez would be playing everyday and Cedeno would be sitting on the bench. I love what Cedeno has the potential to become, but he's about as unknown of a commodity as anyone on the Cubs roster. The first sign of struggle, Jose Macias (or whoever the veteran flavor of the day happens to be) to the rescue. It's one thing when guys like Cedeno get sat in favor of the likes of Perez or Macias. It would be another if he sat in favor of Jimenez, who actually has value and would be an asset to the team. It's unfair to compare D'Angelo to Neifi. I'm not comparing Jimenez to Neifi. I didn't even mention Neifi. My point is that Baker wouldn't give Cedeno the time he needs to prove he is WAY better than Neifi, Macias, Jimenez or whoever else might be considered for a back up job behind him. The first sign of struggle, he'll be on the bench. I'm in the bring back Nomar camp, and I believe Nomar is way better than all the above names. Quite possibly better than all of them combined.

Hasn't that been the problem? I guess we could have the age old argument about how Prior's injuries were flukes... :? You disagree with this? You think most of them weren't flukes? He's had 3 real injuries, 2 have caused a great deal of missed time IIRC. 1) Running into Giles. How is this NOT fluke? 2) Getting struck on the elbow with a ball travelling over 100 mph. How is this NOT fluke? 3) Achilles. The only one that could be considered not fluke. Nothing irritates me more than people suggesting Prior is "injury prone". I don't disagree with you, but I believe you are missing an injury. What was it that had him shut down at the end of 2004? It was some sort of arm trouble.

Yep. Jimenez would be playing everyday and Cedeno would be sitting on the bench. I love what Cedeno has the potential to become, but he's about as unknown of a commodity as anyone on the Cubs roster. The first sign of struggle, Jose Macias (or whoever the veteran flavor of the day happens to be) to the rescue.