Sarcastic

Cutting him would be stupid. I would see if anybody would be willing to shop him, though. Who in their right mind would take his contract?

It looks like Peavy really wants to get the outside corner, but he isn't getting it today.

That strike two call was extremely questionable.

the one against ward? it was right down the middle, belt high. Yeah, maybe by the time it reached the catchers glove (it was a looping curve). On the replay it was an inch or two above the belt when it passed home plate.

That's not prophetic. It follows a well established pattern of suckiness.

There's a mistake in Masset's line. 2 BBs.

No, it will not. Howry is a legitamate set up guy, even if he has struggled this season. Replacing him with Marmol and expecting the pen to improve is absurd. And, despite his problems, I'd still rather see Eyre in the pen than Cherry. Eyre is inconsistent, but Cherry has no success to his name besides a few spring training innings. There is no way the Cubs can replace Howry and Eyre with minor leaguers and expect the pen to improve, and this overreaction to what is most likely a slow start and a down year for the two relievers, respectively, is unwarranted. I hope that the Cubs don't end up leaving Guzman in the pen for long, considering that he is currently the best option for the #5 spot in the rotation. None of us can assess the full extent of the problem this move represents until we know who will be taking that spot.

They just hit the ball to the same spot on the infield three times in a row with the wind blowing out.

The announcers or benching Guzman?

Jogging in to let Theriot catch it. I don't know if they were just waiting because they thought he had it or because they got a really bad jump on the pop up.

It isn't logical to pick and choose which games "count" towards team totals. The blowouts are as much a part of the team's performance as the one run losses. If the data showed that, over the long term, a team that tends to lose lots of one run games while outscoring opponents over will continue to lose, you'd have an argument. But while it is possible that the Cubs' poor play in one run games could continue, you haven't proven that those games are any more predictive of their future performance than their overall efforts. If you can show statistical evidence that those losses were more predictive, and not mostly up to chance, I'd like to see it. I know, but the Cubs have not been winning according to what the overall stats say they should. Do you really think with this BP we're going to start winning close games late? I'm certainly not seeing it, although I'd love for it to start happening. I can show you the lack of holds from the BP. We don't have anyone near the league leaders in that category. If the BP can't hold teams, why would they suddenly start winning one-run close games? I'm sure you acknowledge the BP has been weak this year, correct? According to ESPN.com, the Cubs bullpen ERA is 3.58, 6th in the NL. That isn't the best measure of a bullpen, but I prefer it to holds or saves. In the early going, the team has consistently put the bullpen in positions demanding perfection. The end result is that the bullpen gives up just enough and they get the blame, even though the offense failed to score the tack on run, or the starter let the opposing team back in the game. The bullpen hasn't been spectacular, but it gets more than a fair share of the blame. As the season goes on, it is probable that the luck of one run games will even out. It won't necessarily. We could have a bad season in one run games. But hopefully the rest of the team picks the bullpen up and puts them in fewer crucial situations, and maybe a few breaks will go the Cubs way in the close ones. Either way, what the batters and starters do will be much more important to the team's success than the bullpen.

It isn't logical to pick and choose which games "count" towards team totals. The blowouts are as much a part of the team's performance as the one run losses. If the data showed that, over the long term, a team that tends to lose lots of one run games while outscoring opponents over will continue to lose, you'd have an argument. But while it is possible that the Cubs' poor play in one run games could continue, you haven't proven that those games are any more predictive of their future performance than their overall efforts. If you can show statistical evidence that those losses were more predictive, and not mostly up to chance, I'd like to see it.

On the plus side, they worked Glavine's pitch count up pretty well that inning.

I agree that Murton should be getting the majority of the ABs over Floyd. Considering their ages and past histories, I don't think there is a question about that at this point. However, while I realize I'm not a mod, I think you should tone done your posts. Talking about people having an agenda to "ruin the cubs" or thanking them for playing has nothing to do with baseball.

That is an example of how his hits and walks were spread out, not of how often he actually reached base. I'd say he is getting on base at a decent rate right now. He isn't the prototypical leadoff hitter, but he is doing fine there, since his OBP is decent, regardless of his walk rate.

Was I the only person who interpreted the original post as meaning that the rap and other violent or "inappropriate" entertainment causes domestic abuse notion was tired and overused? I'm prety sure he wasn't trying to blame rap. That sentence had all the markings of sarcasm.

I don't think any of those fit this sentence: Bako is a journeyman catcher who wasn't paid much and has been on 3 other teams after the Cubs. Blanco was going to be signed by the Yankees if the Cubs hadn't signed him in the offseason, so even though he's overpaid there was a market for him. Remlinger and Erye were overpaid, but neither are replacement level players. I'm not convinced that Howry is overpaid. None of those players fit all the qualifications of that sentence. I think Hendry has overpaid a lot-but I challenged that post in particular because I think that sentence is overstating it, and I see variations of it all the time. well, I'm not going to get into a semantic argument - my point is that hendry doesn't learn from his mistakes and regardless of the cost of the players, continues to stock the roster with players of limited or replacement level value. What players on the 2007 roster, besides Izturis, some of the bench, and maybe, with a little exaggeration, Marquis, can be described as replacement level players? Hendry doesn't stock the roster with replacement level talent. What he does do is overpay just about everybody, resulting in a team that has less talent than the payroll would indicate.

I'm excused for the second half of the school day for AP exams, so I finally get to watch a day game during the week. They'd better not mess it up.

76 on Gameday.

Neifi.

Or how about having men on 2nd and 3rd with no outs in the bottom of the 8th and failing to score?

15 inning games are not given away. No, they really did. They have had multiple chances to score, even before extra innings, and failed to capitalize on a single one of them. I can't believe I watched 15 innings just so they could lose like this.

I can't believe I watched 15 innings of this crap just so they could lose pathetically.

I can't take this anymore. I'm starting to lose my sanity watching this. They have got to win it this inning.

That's true for pretty much every extra inning for the home team.