Sarcastic
-
Posts
2,096 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Sarcastic
-
It's easy to criticize, but much harder to offer solutions. So, what would you have done "at a fraction of the cost" to put the Cubs in the same position they are currently in? (If Marquis sucks with 6 wins and a .367 ERA, then there are one heck of a lot of terrible pitchers in the game today.) Asmodai Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:12 am Post subject: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ooooh wins! ooooh his era is a rising disaster. Perfect example of criticizing and not answering the question. To be fair, that argument barely deserves a response, and it has already been given repeatedly.
-
3-5 may be good, but I'm not crazy about Theriot leading off. I don't quite know why people think that Soriano batting 5th would make a difference. Studies show that the most productive lineups have players bat in order of OPS, from highest to lowest, so what is wrong with batting one of your best hitters first?
-
It's easy to criticize, but much harder to offer solutions. So, what would you have done "at a fraction of the cost" to put the Cubs in the same position they are currently in? (If Marquis sucks with 6 wins and a .367 ERA, then there are one heck of a lot of terrible pitchers in the game today.) This has probably been pointed out already, but although Marquis' ERA is solid, it isn't a great indicator of his likely performance for the rest of the contract. Just look at his K/BB ratio. He walks far too many batters. His solid ERA is due mostly to his luck with balls in play. A pitcher with as few Ks as Marquis should not have such a low BAA. If balls start finding the holes in the fielding against him, he'll be in trouble. There was no perfect solution to the 5th starter problem, and the Marquis signing may not turn out to be a disaster, but it was definitely not advisable. Hendry may have been better off going with a AAA stopgap and seeing what he could do with it at the deadline or during the next offseason. Of course, the problem was that he didn't know if he would be around for next year, so he didn't have much of a inclination to act with caution.
-
I didn't think Lou would move Soriano out of the leadoff spot. I wonder if this will be a long term experiment or just for LHP. I'm actually fine with Soriano in the leadoff spot, even though I don't think he'd have a problem hitting elsewhere in the order. But, moving him to fifth probably won't hurt much.
-
How Do You Feel About Larry Rothschild Now?
Sarcastic replied to Outshined_One's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
The pitching was fine while Barrett was here. See Fred's stats on ERA w/ different catchers this year. -
Catchers can influence the game in many ways. But you miss the point, which is that despite the fact that they have influence, other factors are much more significant. I don't care how much confidence a pitcher has in his catcher, if his breaking pitch sucks, it will be hit. If his opponents are good, he will be hit. If the fielders behind him suck, balls will get through. The value of the catcher's role as pitching coach is so much less imporant than those things that it doesn't make a visible difference in the actual statistics. See Fred's stats on the staff on the last page.
-
Since you're new, and I assume that you were referring to Fred's post, I'll let you know that he has sort of adopted the job of resident useless stat guy. He posts those in most threads. You may know proceed with your admiration.
-
That actually makes it worse. As bad as Barrett has been since the Cubs traded him, he STILL would have been a significant improvement over the garbage on the team now.
-
Good god, people, when can we put to rest the idea that catchers determine how good the pitching is? Factors more important to a pitcher's success than his catcher: 1. His pitching skill 2. His opponents' batting skill 3. His fielders' skill 4. Park factors Whatever intangibles a catcher contributes are nothing compared to the factors outside his control. Comparing the performances of pitchers throwing to different catchers is totally worthless due to the variance of the above factors and luck. To cement this point: Barrett's CERA w/ the Cubs: 4.26 Backup C's CERA while Barrett was here: 4.32 *courtesy of Warren Brusstar
-
and zero hits. seriously, the catching is a problem. i can't believe people are like "oh well, we're winning, so it's ok." it's gonna catch up to them. They don't have zero hits but ok. No, but they're closer than any players ever should be in that amount of playing time. Again, the Cubs are winning in spite of them, not because of them.
-
I'm fine with what we have now..............if we're winning. The Cubs are winning in spite of their catchers, not because of them. With this offense, they may not be winning for long.
-
Um, there isn't a cap in baseball. Some people have been using the word cap to refer to a payroll limit set by ownership for some time now. It isn't technically correct, but I think we all know what is meant by now, no?
-
I'm so glad we got rid of Barrett, he was really costing us games.
-
I'm pretty sure he's still arby eligible, so they'll renegotiate his contract to something not much different than his current one. He won't be getting a raise, seeing as he won't have pitched for a year. They'd be insane not to keep him around one more year to see if, now that the problem has finally been identified, he can regain any of his old form. I don't think he is going to be any good next year coming off major surgery, but if he can stay healthy in 2008, maybe he'll be able to regain a bit of his former glory, and they should be able to extend him for a reasonable amount of money.
-
Please shrink your avatar a bit. Or just get a new one.
-
That seems unlikely since the Cubs have control of him through next year. Unless he is done for 2+ years or Kaplan thought he was going to be traded, there's no reason to say he has thrown his last pitch as a Cub.
-
FINALS - (1) CaliforniaRaisin vs. (1) vance_the_cubs_fan
Sarcastic replied to Derwood's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
This is what happens when you bring money into politics. :lol: -
Looks like Oswalt is going to no-hit the Cubs today.
-
Until he bats 2nd.
-
This isn't surprising. Roy Oswalt's strikeout rate has been in a perpetual decline since he broke into the majors. You think there is a reason for it? Is he just trying to pitch to contact more? He could just be losing his stuff as he gets older. I know he isn't really at the age where people think of players as declining, but K/9 tends to peak early in pitchers' careers, if I remember correctly. I haven't looked at his stats, so I don't know if how much more significant his decline is than the average.
-
For anyone who heard the radio report, did Levine mention when he thought Soto would be called up? Is it possible that he was merely making a bigger deal than necessary out of a move that is only being considered for some future time?
-
Do we have any independent confirmation that Soto has been/will be called up, or is it just Levine's word on this?
-
Ichiro set to re-sign
Sarcastic replied to SouthSideRyan's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Technically, telling someone what they can't post doesn't count as a personal attack. Although calling him a BP whore probably does. -
That'd be one ridiculous argument. a) Studies consistently show OBP to be more important than SLG. Depending on who you ask, the multiplier is anywhere from 1.5x more important to 3x more important. b) The importance of SLG in proportion to OBP is going to be the same no matter where you stand when you've got your fielder's glove on. The notion that your LF and RF have to slug and your CF and SS need to get onbase is complete and utter nonsense. What's needed is lineup balance, regardless of defensive position. I agree with B. I find A slightly misleading, since the implication is that OBP is up to 3 times as important as SLG, when the multiplier is usually used in the context of what multiplier creates an adjusted version of OPS that best correlates with run production. I think everyone would agree that both OBP and SLG are important.
-
I realize this is a small thing, but it matters to me: I would have been seriously depressed if Pujols hit the game winning hit in the All-Star game. ESPN, FOX, and every sports network on TV or radio in existence would have been talking about it for weeks. Every time a baseball game was on, the announcers would have made a reference to somebody needing to ask Pujols for advice on how to hit in the clutch, whether he had anything to do with the game or not. I couldn't stand sports commentators going down on Pujols any more than they already do, and this would have increased their love of him by several orders of magnitude. So no, I am not sad that he didn't come in. Homefield advantage isn't worth that much to me.