Irrelevant Dude

So uh... I'm starting to think this Castro kid can play.

What the hell???

Right down the middle, Ball 1.

I would much rather have seen Garza left in to finish the inning.

Ho hum.

Starlin! My hero.

Yeah, this is getting a little ridiculous.

Colvin was called out on strikes on a pitch that was off the inside corner. He yelled something out and then turned and walked toward the dugout while continuing to say something. He never appeared to direct anything at Bob Davidson, but Davidson decided to follow him back to the dugout anyway and then eject him. Quade then came out and argued/discussed things with Davidson for awhile, then turned and walked back toward the dugout and had seemingly finished his argument. After about 3 steps toward the dugout, Davidson ejected him too. Of course Brenly was all over Davidson "injecting himself" into the game and I have to agree. The ejections were both completely unnecessary.

That looked like 2 BS ejections.

Now that was a home run. Colvin must have been saving that one up.

This is exactly my point. I am already looking at the strike zone, so I don't need a graphic to direct me to that area. It doesn't prevent me from seeing anything, but it is simply unnecessary clutter on the screen. With that said, I haven't seen the graphic again so hopefully it was just a one-time occurrence.

Wasn't the idea that the Cubs needed to keep Hendry through the trade deadline so that he could do what he does best... make trades? Now that the deadline has come and gone with only one rather insubstantial move, is there any reason whatsoever to keep him any longer? Unless the guy Ricketts wants as his next GM is already under contract, there is no more benefit to allowing Hendry to finish the season.

I agree that we can't really make any conclusions based on that small amount of information. If the Rangers made a low-ball offer then I'm with Hendry on rejecting it. On the other hand, if the Rangers expressed interest and Hendry just told them "he isn't available", then I will grab a torch and lead the march.

It wouldn't even be there on an HD broadcast, would it? Yes. It may have just been a 1-game experiment though because I haven't seen it since.

This organization's "plan" seems to be to assemble a patchwork roster each season with false optimism that they will compete for a title. Now that this year is shot, they shift their plan to a futile attempt to win next year. They are never willing to sacrifice the present for a better chance of winning in the future. Now I am all for the win now philosophy if it is a realistic goal, but this Cubs team just doesn't have the core to do that. Even if they were to go out and sign Pujols or Fielder, there are still too many holes. This half-assed rebuilding (and hoping to win at the same time) mode isn't getting us anywhere. Really? So you don't think that adding a big time middle of the order bat and front of the rotation pitcher would make this team a winner? Then you totally wasting your time even following this team, because add those pieces, and they should own the division. I didn't say anything about a front of the rotation starter because I don't think it is realistic to expect the Cubs to sign one of Pujols or Fielder and give a huge contract to a pitcher in the same offseason. And I would have to assume that Aramis would definitely be gone in that case, so it isn't exactly like the Cubs would be adding Pujols/Fielder into their existing lineup. They would be losing their best hitter and replacing him with a better best hitter, so it would only be an incremental gain.

This organization's "plan" seems to be to assemble a patchwork roster each season with false optimism that they will compete for a title. Now that this year is shot, they shift their plan to a futile attempt to win next year. They are never willing to sacrifice the present for a better chance of winning in the future. Now I am all for the win now philosophy if it is a realistic goal, but this Cubs team just doesn't have the core to do that. Even if they were to go out and sign Pujols or Fielder, there are still too many holes. This half-assed rebuilding (and hoping to win at the same time) mode isn't getting us anywhere.

I agree that the team likely can't compete without him, but it is apparent that the team can't compete with him either. Yes the division is bad, but I still think it is unrealistic to believe that a couple tweaks are going to have the team competing for a World Series title next year. I'm not for trading Aramis at all costs, but if he brings appropriate value for his current production (read as high-end prospects) then I think the Cubs have to make the deal and deal with finding a replacement later.

I hope so too, but I heard the interview and it seemed like a genuine answer. As opposed to what? Was he flat-out asked about Hendry? Yes, he was asked specifically about whether he would see Hendry as his General Manager if he were in a President-type position with the Cubs and he said something to the effect of he would "see no reason not to keep Hendry" as the GM and went on to praise Hendry for his knowledge and past success. It wasn't the typical "we would have to assess the situation and determine what is best for the future of the team" type answer. It doesn't mean he would keep Hendry if he were hired as Team President No it doesn't, but he was rather convincing, so I have my doubts.

I hope so too, but I heard the interview and it seemed like a genuine answer. As opposed to what? Was he flat-out asked about Hendry? Yes, he was asked specifically about whether he would see Hendry as his General Manager if he were in a President-type position with the Cubs and he said something to the effect of he would "see no reason not to keep Hendry" as the GM and went on to praise Hendry for his knowledge and past success. It wasn't the typical "we would have to assess the situation and determine what is best for the future of the team" type answer.

I hope so too, but I heard the interview and it seemed like a genuine answer.

Yeah, that is completely different. It is still a little too close to the center of the screen for my taste, but it is much more tolerable than a strike zone graphic drawn around the actual strike zone. This isn't like football where a first down line changes from play to play. The strike zone never changes, so why does ESPN feel the need to show people where it is?

And people don't complain about this? It makes me feel like I'm watching a video game (and I don't even like the strike zone graphic in video games). Graphics in the corners/top/bottom of the screen are one thing, but having one right in the middle of the viewing area is crazy.

Whoa, who said the Cubs are planning to outright release Soriano? That might be a possibility 2 years from now, but releasing him is basically saying that he is not even worth the major league minimum salary. As bad as Soriano has been, his contract is a sunk cost so I would still rather have him on the team than not.

I was watching the Braves/Pirates game on ESPN tonight and they had a white outline around the strike zone on every pitch. Have they been showing that on every game? It is one of most ridiculous and annoying things I have seen on a baseball broadcast. I know where the strike zone is... I don't need ESPN to tell me. This sure as hell better not catch on.

Not really. If a hanging slider right down the middle of the plate is better.