C.C.

No, Park will give up 10 hits, 4 walks, and still shut us down.

im willing to bet its bad management, seriously larry rothschild dosent seem like the best choice for this group couldve tried to get Mazzone, the best in the game but hendry was loyal to a subpar pitching coach Bad management? How about he's a 1 pitch pitcher? If you say he screwed up Hill then you have to say he's worked wonders with Sean Marshall right?

Cubs win this one with a offensive explosion 3-2... ARAM WILL GO YARD TONIGHT!

Once again on paper, and I do mean paper, we should win this game. Can we at least score 2 runs today?

I'm not going to disagree with you there! The Offense has been terrible! Maybe I will watch the Bulls game tonight afterall...

Seconded. I'll be watching the Lakers-Suns Game 6. I'd rather watch a Devil Rays Vs. Royals game before I watch a Pro-Basketball game. I know a lot of people on this board will be watching the Bulls-Heat Game 6, as long as it's close, before the Cubs game. I'm sure they will... This Cubs isn't nearly as exciting as the Bulls are. The Bulls are young, fresh, and play hard. The Cubs are old, bad, and sometimes unfun to watch. It's not about the Bulls playing hard, it's about Pro-Basketball being so boring the past 6-7 years, at least in my book. Give me College ball any day of the week! And aside from this recent slide I think the Cubs have been very fun to watch this year.

Seconded. I'll be watching the Lakers-Suns Game 6. I'd rather watch a Devil Rays Vs. Royals game before I watch a Pro-Basketball game. I know a lot of people on this board will be watching the Bulls-Heat Game 6, as long as it's close, before the Cubs game. I'm sure they will...

Seconded. I'll be watching the Lakers-Suns Game 6. I'd rather watch a Devil Rays Vs. Royals game before I watch a Pro-Basketball game.

Tell us how you really feel... Seeing as how the opposite of what I say always happens... "I'll get a raise" "Oil prices won't go over $3 a gallon" "Honey, we're having sex tonight" "Cubs will win" ... It couldn't hurt to try reverse psychology. LOL! Hey, whatever works!

I PREDICT! The Cubs win tonight and go on to sweep the Padres!!!!

Tell us how you really feel...

That's if Hill can get a good break on the ball playing in AZ.

And yet we are still 14-12. Hang in there! If we can just ride this out and get healthy we'll be alright.

Call me crazy but I'm feeling a real good outing from Hill tonight... 4-2 cubs win tonight.

Yes. Starters and relievers are two different animals. Relieving is easier on a pitcher's arm than starting. That's why Smoltz became a closer for a while. That's why Wood was in the bullpen last year. There is NO EVIDENCE that throwing a small number of pitches every other day can injure a pitcher. There is, however, quite a bit of evidence that throwing too many pitches per outing can hurt a pitcher. "There is NO EVIDENCE that throwing a small number of pitches every other day can injure a pitcher." LOL! Tell that to Eric Gagne, Chad Fox, Lightenberg, Williamson, Tom Gordon, Izzy, and the list goes on....What are you talking about? Only Starters have arm trouble? Gimme a break! Relievers come into games with maxium output on every pitch. Starters don't. You can't compare the two. Didn't Steve Stone say that if Wood was a Reliever he wouldn't last two months because if he can't pitch every 5th day how can he be expected to pitch every other day...

No, you're missing the point. Right now is the worst case scenario. If what has happened over the last 5 days were to continue to happen for the rest of the season, there's no reason anyone in a 7-man bullpen should be overworked. For some reason, you think Angel Guzman should be fine throwing 105 pitches every five days, but you worry that if Dempster had to throw 29 pitches every five days. Not a single reliever has thrown more than 90 pitches in the past five days, but you say that the bullpen will get burned out at this rate. Yet you say pitchers shouldn't start unless they can throw 100 pitches. Your position makes no sense in light of the fact that research shows it's easier on a pitcher to throw fewer pitches with more frequent appearances than it is to throw more pitches with longer periods of rest. You again are missing the point! You said that Dusty is overworking the starting pitching so far this year, and I said he isn't at all. You said that 105 pitches is excessive for a starter and I said it's not. I said if a starter can't pitch 100 pitches then he shouldn't be starting. Simple as that. As for Guzman? Again if he can't pitch 100 pitches he shouldn't be starting. If the starting staff continues to on average not make it past the 5th inning then yes indeed the pen will burn out. If the staff gets in the habit of getting further into game, then this is a moot point! But your point being that 100 pitches is too much for a starter is crazy! Are we straight on this? So... A starter throwing 100 pitches every 5 days = A-OK A reliever throwing < 90 pitches every 5 days = pen burnout That's the point of contention. Are you seriously comparing Relievers and Starters? It's too different animals here. You can't compare a starter throwing every 5 days to reliever throwing every other day. All I'm saying (once again) that if our starters continue the trend of not going deep in games, then our relievers will burn out.

No, you're missing the point. Right now is the worst case scenario. If what has happened over the last 5 days were to continue to happen for the rest of the season, there's no reason anyone in a 7-man bullpen should be overworked. For some reason, you think Angel Guzman should be fine throwing 105 pitches every five days, but you worry that if Dempster had to throw 29 pitches every five days. Not a single reliever has thrown more than 90 pitches in the past five days, but you say that the bullpen will get burned out at this rate. Yet you say pitchers shouldn't start unless they can throw 100 pitches. Your position makes no sense in light of the fact that research shows it's easier on a pitcher to throw fewer pitches with more frequent appearances than it is to throw more pitches with longer periods of rest. You again are missing the point! You said that Dusty is overworking the starting pitching so far this year, and I said he isn't at all. You said that 105 pitches is excessive for a starter and I said it's not. I said if a starter can't pitch 100 pitches then he shouldn't be starting. Simple as that. As for Guzman? Again if he can't pitch 100 pitches he shouldn't be starting. If the starting staff continues to on average not make it past the 5th inning then yes indeed the pen will burn out. If the staff gets in the habit of getting further into game, then this is a moot point! But your point being that 100 pitches is too much for a starter is crazy! Are we straight on this? One last point our starters are 15th out of 16 teams with innings pitched so far this year. If things don't improve then again our pen will burn out.

Although Dusty has overworked his starters in the past, 2003 being the most famous example, the point was more about the bullpen than the starters. Our bullpen is far from overworked. In fact, some guys are going so long between appearances that they're not sharp. It's nearly impossible to overwork a 7 man bullpen. You could overwork 1 or 2 guys by continually going to them in every situation, but the pen itself isn't going to get overworked with so many bodies. That's not true! If your starters are averaging only 5 innings a start you will overwork a bullpen. Out of a 7 man bullpen only 2-3 of those get consistent work. Over the last 5 games, our starters averaged LESS than 5 innings a game. Which of our relievers were overworked during that time? Your missing the point! It's April! No starter or relievers are overworked at this point, but common sense is if our starters can't average more then 5 innings a start the pen will be overworked! Why can't you see that?

Although Dusty has overworked his starters in the past, 2003 being the most famous example, the point was more about the bullpen than the starters. Our bullpen is far from overworked. In fact, some guys are going so long between appearances that they're not sharp. It's nearly impossible to overwork a 7 man bullpen. You could overwork 1 or 2 guys by continually going to them in every situation, but the pen itself isn't going to get overworked with so many bodies. That's not true! If your starters are averaging only 5 innings a start you will overwork a bullpen. Out of a 7 man bullpen only 2-3 of those get consistent work.

"what do you mean by a "power pitcher?" If you mean hard throwers, those are exactly the ones who should be monitored. " I meant that power pitchers or high stikeout pitches tend to pitch more pitches per innings...

How can you compare Buehrle (241+ IP average over the past two seasons), Vasquez (207.1 IP average over the past two seasons), and Garland (219 IP average over the past two seasons) to Angel Guzman (33 IP average over the past two seasons or 26.2 IP average above rookie ball)? I'm not comparing Guzman to anybody. I'm just replying to the thread that said Dusty is over working our starting staff and I'm saying he's not. As for Guzman? If he can't pitch 100 pitches he doesn't belong in the majors. Can you agree with me on that? Ozzie isn't exactly known for his good starting pitcher management. I remember a couple of years ago when he wanted his guys to be throwing complete games right out of spring training. And Angel should not have been brought up when he did. He should have been brought up now for Rusch, but there's still no reason he should be throwing 104 pitches. He's not really ready yet and pushing him unnecessarily can have bad consequences. Thankfully, he shouldn't be up for long, but they shouldn't be that desperate for a few extra innings in the few starts he'll make in this stint with the Cubs. It's irresponsible. "Ozzie isn't exactly known for his good starting pitcher management. " Well he did win a World Series with his starting pitching last year, so he must be doing something right. Sorry I just don't see pitching 104 pitches irresponsible. Again (and for the last time) if you can't pitch 100 pitches you shouldn't be starting.

How can you compare Buehrle (241+ IP average over the past two seasons), Vasquez (207.1 IP average over the past two seasons), and Garland (219 IP average over the past two seasons) to Angel Guzman (33 IP average over the past two seasons or 26.2 IP average above rookie ball)? I'm not comparing Guzman to anybody. I'm just replying to the thread that said Dusty is over working our starting staff and I'm saying he's not. As for Guzman? If he can't pitch 100 pitches he doesn't belong in the majors. Can you agree with me on that?

I couldn't agree more!

If you want to believe what you want to believe without basing it on any evidence, I can't change your mind. Look at the numbers TT posted. Our starters have averaged slightly LESS than 5 innings per game during the last 5 starts. During that same period of time, we have guys in our bullpen who have thrown less than 30 pitches. Our bullpen is not overworked. If anything, some guys are not getting enough work. There's no need to worry about them being "toast" by June. Again, the evidence shows that throwing too many pitches in an outing leads to pitching injuries. The evidence does not show that extra rest between outings prevents injuries. There's no way that Angel Guzman should be throwing 100+ pitches after pitching 18 innings in all of 2005. "Our bullpen is not overworked." Well, not yet, it's been a month. Give it another month or two and they will be. It's funny how you think that the pen is not overworked but the starters are? I guess you see what you want to see. Again a power pitcher pitching 100 pitches is not over-worked in my book. Again if they can't pitch past the 5th inning with 100 pitches then they shouldn't be starters. Buehrle pitched 108 pitches yesterday, Vasquez pitched 100 pitches the day before, and Garland pitched 109 pitches before him! Is Ozzie overworking his starters? Gimme a break! I mean you aren't honestly saying that 100 pitches is too much for a starter to pitch are you?

Eh? Most our starters can't get beyond the 5th inning. The number of innings that a pitcher throws doesn't matter. It's the number of pitches that matter. Dusty has his starters throw too many pitches. You just stated why Dusty is worried about his bullpen being burnt out. Because his starters can't make it past 5 innings regardless of the pitch count. What is Dusty suppose to pull his starters after 4 innings because of pitch counts? Should Dusty pull his starters after 4 innings because of pitch counts? Absolutely. If Guzman hits 90 pitches, he should be pulled, whether it's the second inning or the seventh. Starter's pitch counts in the last 5 games: Guzman: 104 Marshall: 90 Maddux: 89 Zambrano: 103 Rusch: 81 Maddux and Marshall are about right. Z should be pulled at about 100 pitches. Guzman should have been pulled at 90. As for the bullpen during that time: Dempster: 29 Eyre: 57 Howry: 18 Ohman: 61 Novoa: 88 Williamson: 42 You could make the case that Novoa is overworked, but that's it. Do you think Howry has seen too much action? Dempster? Eyre? Decades of research have shown that it's much easier to throw 30 pitches three times over a five day period than it is to throw 90 pitches once in that period. Rest between appearances isn't nearly as important as limiting pitches during appearances. It's a catch 22. If you have your starters going 5 innings a start your pen will be toast by June. How can you even argue that? Having starters pitch 103 and 104 pitches is not a big deal. They are both power pitchers and they tend to have higher pitch counts. How could you fault Dusty for letting starters pitch 103 pitches? I mean if a starter can't pitch that many pitches they shouldn't be starting...