TB_11

Bill Felber also did some analysis on the subject for his book The Book on the Book. Some decent analysis that uses expectations for runs scored in scenarios with differing outs and runners on.

Hateful and angry. The World Series is about to be forever tainted, and our fellow Cub fans are facing relentless persecution in their own city. What other reaction could one feel in the face of this travesty? Yup, we've been facing persecution for, ooooh, 90 years now? AND WE ARE THE LOVEABLE LOSERS remember..... How does this change that? Do the sox winning change how you feel about the cubs? Increases your self loathing perhaps? Doesn't change it for me. I will never change my allegiances from the cubs no matter what, not even by a %. What anyone else says, whomever else wins, whatever knuckleheaded people or moves the organizations undertakes, I'm a cubs fan. This "you aren't a cubs fan if you do not hate the sox" is lame. Is your love of the team that tenuous? What about all the other teams that have been kicking our tushes for all of my life? No Cubs fan's devotion for the team should change because the Sox win the Series (assuming they win 2 of the nex 5 games). The problem is all the insults and abuse Cubs fans receive from fans of the Cardinals, Marlins, Yankees, Mets, etc. will now also come from White Sox fans. And I'll guess that Cubs fans interact with Sox fans more than any other team. I can't stand the Cardinals. I despise the Astros. I wish the Marlins franchise would just die. I don't hate the Sox. But I'm not looking forward to the taunting and insults that are about to be thrown my way by the end of this week from Sox fans.

Two more worth throwing out there: Frankie Muniz: LA Clippers Billy Crystal: LA Clippers Anyone who doesn't find it embarrasing to call themselves a fan of the Clippers is a true fan.

He should probably call Byung-Hyun Kim at this point for therapy advice.

"Exile in Guyville" is a great album. But what in god's name was "Why can't I?" I think I read that she used the same song writers who do Avril Levigne stuff...so not only did she sell out, she also decided to suck. She has the same songwriters as Avril. She said she did it because she can't afford not to have a steady income now that she has a daughter. Which Fox star that has ties to Chicago you think will be at game 2?

Have you ever watched Pujols run the bases? His instincts are incredible. He's led all of baseball in runs scored, 3 years in a row. That's not happening by accident. It's not happening by accident, but it's probably more due to the fact that he gets on base, that he gets a lot of extra base hits, and that he has had good hitters behind him over those two years. As opposed to A-rod?? Not as opposed to A-Rod. I was making the point that Pujols's ability to get on base, get extra bases with his power, and the lineup around him were more important factors in him leading the league in runs scored than was his baserunning.

Batman has no powers, but is the bigger badass. Going off the movies, Batman has gotten Kim Basinger, Michelle Pfiffer, Katie Holmes, Nicole Kidman, and whatever girl he was with in the other movie I haven't seen. Spiderman got Kirsten Dunst. Kim Basinger + Michelle Pfiffer + Katie Holmes + Nicole Kidman + one other > Kirsten Dunst.

This is the 1st year pujols has stolen more than 5 bases in a year (16). Pujols career is 2-1 SB/CS while Arod career is 4.5-1 SB/CS. Arod has more speed no doubt. If i need a guy to steal a base im going with Arod. If i need a guy to score from second on a hit im not thinking twice about sending Arod but i'll think twice on pujols. There isnt a question on who you would rather have on base in the game, especially in the late innings. Have you ever watched Pujols run the bases? His instincts are incredible. He's led all of baseball in runs scored, 3 years in a row. That's not happening by accident. It's not happening by accident, but it's probably more due to the fact that he gets on base, that he gets a lot of extra base hits, and that he has had good hitters behind him over those two years. For Pujols vs A-Rod, if you ask GMs which one they'd rather have for only next year, I'd guess most would say A-Rod. If you ask which would they rather build an entire team around for the long-term, I'd guess they'd say Pujols.

And that's why it's awesome to have Bruce Miles on this board - speculative thread killer. Thanks Bruce :D

You obviously didn't comment on his numerous Sportscenter diving catches.

Cubs 2005 numbers, total and with RISP Total NL Rank RISP NL Rank OBP .324 11 .336 15 SLG .440 2 .414 7 OPS .764 4 .749 10 PA 6161 10 1605 15 Aside from the drop in slugging, it seems to be the problem isn't so much as a lack of performing with RISP, as simply getting RISP in the first place. Players and coaches who don't understand the value of getting on base lead to not having runners on base to drive in. I think performance with RISP is very much a problem. 15th out of 16 in the NL in OBP with RISP is a big reason for being 4 games under .500 But I do agree that the organizational hitting philosphy needs to change. I don't think the problem is having a low OBP with runners in scoring position as much as having a low OBP overall. That leads to the most important statistic listed (to me): PAs with RISP. It's not that we're not executing when RISP, it's that we're not putting runners on base in the first place. That leads our good power numbers not resulting in many runs scored.

Cubs 2005 numbers, total and with RISP Total NL Rank RISP NL Rank OBP .324 11 .336 15 SLG .440 2 .414 7 OPS .764 4 .749 10 PA 6161 10 1605 15 Aside from the drop in slugging, it seems to be the problem isn't so much as a lack of performing with RISP, as simply getting RISP in the first place. Players and coaches who don't understand the value of getting on base lead to not having runners on base to drive in.

If this is the way the Astros are thinking, the team is done.

I was just talking to one of my friends who coaches Jr Bronco (9-10 year olds) back in the suburbs, and he was saying that he would rather see a long "Griffey" swing out of kids at that age rather than a Pujols/Bagwell swing. Reason being at that young age most of them don't have the power in the upper body to drive the ball out of the infield, and will get frustrated quickly with a Pujols/Bagwell swing. He said that in high school they should switch to the shorter swing as they develop more muscle in their upper body. His two cents - thought it was interesting. Not me. I want the kids to swing correctly from the get go and trying to change a kids bad mechanics when he is 12-14 years old is a very hard thing to do. If he has had moderate success with a long swing he will be reluctant to change and once he starts facing pitchers with some serious heat or that can change speeds he will get eaten up. Interesting take. I know from playing through high school that was true for pitchers (and throwing in general), but many of us tinkered and changed with our stances as we started to face better pitching junior and senior year of high school. Also I just watched Albert's feet as he hit a 450 ft home run off Brad Lidge to fight off elimination. That was unbelievable. A stance is one thing but changing hitting mechanics is quite another. Kids have to know and be told that a good swing will work at any age. Let me also add when you have a kid that has made Little League All Stars and think they have the swing down...they are an interesting breed to fix. If I have kids that are doing the proper mechanics from Day 1 it makes tweeking so much easier. It's the coaches job in the younger ages to try to do his or her best and teach the kids the best proper mechanics they can. The many wrong things taught are the overstride "Step into the ball", elbow up and Swing hard and long and the ball will go farther while simple things like the Knocking knuckles being lined up and back foot pivit (Squish the bug) are being over looked. The hip torque is so important when it comes to power and I don't know why that's not pushed instead of the long swing. Pujols is a wonderful hitter to watch, his swing just looks so effortless. Actually that's a very good point. The guys on my high school team who were labeled 'naturals' from t-ball through pony league (13-14 year olds) actually didn't seem to do as well in high school, since their reliance on their natural talent wasn't enough to compensate for a lack of fundamentals. In high school as those of us who were labeled good to very good in Little League started putting on "muscle" (if that's what you want to call what was on my 5'8", 130lb frame then) we started to focus more on hip torque, along with hand-eye coordination and pitch recognition, and moved away from the grip-it-and-rip-it mentality we all had in Little League. Aside from the pre-labeled "naturals" mentioned above, most of us made the adjustment fairly well - we saw more line drives and well-hit ground balls. Btw Cuse it's good to hear someone in Little League who's preaching development and fundamentals....... I definitely didn't see that in all my coaches growing up. We had our fair share of coaches who would rather see a 6-2-5-1-5-2-5-2-3 double play that wins the game than a kid developing and enjoying baseball.

It wasn't just the fact that he hit a home run with two outs in the top of the ninth against one of the best relievers in the game to give his team the lead and hold off elimination. It's that a) the look on Pujols' face when he hit it looked like he expected nothing less than to hit a home run and b) that ball went about 9000 feet. Why does he have to be on the Cardinals????? And yes that was Ralph's heart that was broken by Lisa.

I was just talking to one of my friends who coaches Jr Bronco (9-10 year olds) back in the suburbs, and he was saying that he would rather see a long "Griffey" swing out of kids at that age rather than a Pujols/Bagwell swing. Reason being at that young age most of them don't have the power in the upper body to drive the ball out of the infield, and will get frustrated quickly with a Pujols/Bagwell swing. He said that in high school they should switch to the shorter swing as they develop more muscle in their upper body. His two cents - thought it was interesting. Not me. I want the kids to swing correctly from the get go and trying to change a kids bad mechanics when he is 12-14 years old is a very hard thing to do. If he has had moderate success with a long swing he will be reluctant to change and once he starts facing pitchers with some serious heat or that can change speeds he will get eaten up. Interesting take. I know from playing through high school that was true for pitchers (and throwing in general), but many of us tinkered and changed with our stances as we started to face better pitching junior and senior year of high school. Also I just watched Albert's feet as he hit a 450 ft home run off Brad Lidge to fight off elimination. That was unbelievable.

To your point, Bradley figures to make $4-5M as an arbitration eligible guy; Lowe will be making $9M; Lowell will be making $9M. Essentially, the Dodgers will be giving away guys making $13-14M for a guy making $7M (Cubs picking up $2M). That's a $6-7M upside for LA, which could be used on a lot of things. By the way, I have heard the Dodgers are trying to lure Paul Byrd up 30 miles - they like his mental make-up. Hoops Nice breakdown of the money situation for the Dodgers. I could see PD considering the deal then to get two clubhouse problems off the team, and to get out of Lowe's contract (although they did just sign him last year).

So to summarize: Cubs lose: Walker, Nolasco, 1 outfield prospect, 1 pitching prospect, $2M Cubs get: Castillo, Bradley, Lowe Marlins lose: Lowell, Castillo Marlins get: Walker, Nolasco, 1 outfield prospect Dodgers lose: Bradley, Lowe Dodgers get: Lowell, 1 pitching prospect, $2M The Cubs make out like bandits and the Dodgers get shellacked on that deal. I can't see the Dodgers pulling the gun on that trade.

This was somewhat discussed in another thread - Link The Tribune cares about the Cubs turning a profit. If the Sox win the World Series, people will still pile into Wrigley, still watch the games, still buy the jerseys. If anything it might actually be beneficial from the point of view of the Tribune Company, since the Cubs will now be the only cursed team, the only team that hasn't won in over 80 years. Also I've never heard anyone in the organization point to the White Sox's futility when asked about our own.

Most Sox fans I know like Guillen a lot.

I was just talking to one of my friends who coaches Jr Bronco (9-10 year olds) back in the suburbs, and he was saying that he would rather see a long "Griffey" swing out of kids at that age rather than a Pujols/Bagwell swing. Reason being at that young age most of them don't have the power in the upper body to drive the ball out of the infield, and will get frustrated quickly with a Pujols/Bagwell swing. He said that in high school they should switch to the shorter swing as they develop more muscle in their upper body. His two cents - thought it was interesting.

He has a bit of Jeff Bagwell's swing in him, letting the torque of his upper body drive the ball. I love the fact that he wanted to decrease his strikeouts from an already low number this year. Why does this guy have to play for the Cards.....

This was a terrible call, no doubt. The Sox got lucky, and Eddings knows he messed up but won't admit it regardless of how much evidence there is to prove that he did. That being said, this wasn't the worst call or performance made by an umpire during the post-season as some have said. It was one mistake, it just happened to be timed at the worst possible time, during the bottom of the 9th with two outs in a 1-1 game. The Denkinger call might have been worse. Eric Gregg literally expanding the strike zone 12 inches off the plate to give Livan Hernandez 15 strikeouts was far worse than the Eddings call, since it lasted over the course of the game and got worse as the game progressed.

Good to hear he wants to work on his plate discipline. Hopefully he'll play for a manager who feels the same and a team willing to be patient with his development.

Colon is out for the ALCS with shoulder problems. No word on whether it will affect his eating.