bukie

Well, the Cubs don't bat a lot of ninth innings at home.

I'd call up both Murton and Hoffpauir, and platoon them for 6 weeks. Hoff was coming up anyway, and the Cubs have no reason to carry 13 pitchers anymore.

It's what I expect people to SAY in the heat of the moment during a game, but in a format like this, you have to actually type it out and then hit submit, which should allow even just a little restraint.

And now Wainwright and Pujols go down with injuries within a week. Weird.

This thread is basically an example showing that Sox fans and Cub fans really aren't that much different from each other.

Chicago White Sox is definitely the second favorite. I just can't bear to watch any of their games. Outside of their announcers, coach and general manager, they really are a likeable team. Plus, my wife is most likely the most dedicated Sox fan I have ever known.

Who are the first-round caliber high injury risk picks, so I can know to respond with anger and vitriol if/when the Cubs draft one of them?

Maybe they'll bounce their ideas off him in the vein of "Hey, Dave, you think this is a good idea? Yeah? OK, let's go in another direction, then."

Does "safer" player generally mean "college" player? I know the Cubs have been burned recently on some early HS picks that didn't pan out (Harvey is the one that immediately comes to mind).

Yeah, especially after the TJS and all... :)

I'm really hoping Rich does something that really gets Hendry's and Piniella's attention today. Just dominate completely, so no concerns will remain. It's sad that Hill's ERA+ for this year is higher than Lilly's and Marquis' and Hill is the one that needed fixing.

The Cubs are still one game under their Pythagorean projection, and right at their adjusted EQA projection. They are a couple games ahead of their 3rd level projection (Adjusted EQA). Roster-wise, who is overperforming? Theriot, DeRosa and Cedeno, maybe, but not by a whole lot, and any overperforming is explained by a difference in OBP. Derrek Lee is underperforming at this point. Dempster will likely come down, but it's just as likely as Lilly coming back and performing at his normal rate. Marquis is not likely to keep performing as he is and continue pitching. Hill, Marshall, and Gallagher should be able to provide extra rotation support if any of the other pitchers falter. As for the Cardinals, they are overplaying all their projections, by 2-3 games each. Plus, guys like Ludwick, Schumaker, and Molina aren't likely to maintain their pace, and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone else available in the lineup or on the bench that should improve significantly. Wellemeyer is as off the charts as Dempster at this time, Looper's peripherals are going to catch up with him eventually, and Lohse is also having his best year in a while. Isringhausen fell apart, but Franklin stepped up nicely, so it's not as if they're worse in the pen than expected. I do find it scary that the Cubs really aren't playing above their heads to this point. They're just playing to their potential, which they haven't done in 10 years.

Last year on this date, the Cards were 24-30. This year, they're 35-25. What personnel changes have prompted the 8-game turnaround? They replaced Kip Wells and Anthony Reyes in the rotation with a rejuvenated Todd Wellemeyer and Kyle Lohse. Braden Looper is 7-4 despite an 83 ERA+ and a 5.03 ERA. Offensively, they switched out Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus, David Eckstein for Cesar Izturis, Jim Edmonds for Rick Ankiel, and Juan Encarnacion for Ryan Ludwick. Really, their only clear upgrade thus far has been Edmonds for Ankiel, although Ludwick is outperforming even the most optimistic projections by about double. The longer they hang around, though, the less likely that it is all a fluke. Maybe Wellemeyer is that much better than Wells. Maybe Ludwick does have more power than Pujols....nah....

So, is it too early for me to make the "What's gotten into the Cardinals?" thread? They D-backs were 20-8 at the start of this thread, and have gone 12-19 since.

The magic number to shoot for is to win 6 of every 10 games for the year. Any team that can do that consistently will finish the year 97-65. Right now, the Cubs are actually ahead of that pace. If they win 6 of every 10 for the rest of the year, they will finish 100-62. If the Cubs can do that, I don't think it'll matter what any other team does. The Cubs should at least make the playoffs.

agreed Corollary: The phrase "Ballgame" should not be uttered until the final out is recorded. Sheesh. You guys take all the fun out of game threads. What's next, no "XXX just hit a homer," no "nameresult," no posting of observations that are then completely debunked by a quick baseball-reference link? What's left? BTW, Braves lead Marlins 3-2 in the fifth. If Atlanta wins, Cubs are 6.5 games clear of the wild card. I don't know the numbers, but I'm pretty sure Mark DeRosa is bad in clutch situations. Oh, and Tony Gwynn just hit an inside-the-park homer because his flyball to left field was just Sorianowned.

agreed Corollary: The phrase "Ballgame" should not be uttered until the final out is recorded.

Even more concerning are his numbers in games where he's blown a save: 5 IP 7 H 6 ER 5 BB/HB/IBB 2.40 WHIP 10.80 ERA .300 AVG/.440 OBP/.700 SLG/1.140 OPS 0 Saves 4 Blown Saves Save % -∞

Next year every NHL team will play every other NHL team. This year wasn't the case (and many, many people complained about it). Even in the NBA, though, the schedules are hardly balanced. Even funnier than the schedule argument is Selig's argument of "Well, it's nice to know ahead of time where to reserve hotels and such for the World Series, and that's why we can't just let whichever team that has the best record get HFA" that he tried to pull a couple years ago.

Lilly's pitching style (super flyball pitcher, lots of pitches up) would seem to be custom-fit for this park, so it would be really nice to get another win. Would it be too much to ask to win a game by, say, 5 runs this time, though?

ugh, i hate this line of reasoning. it's innings that matter, not days. This is true. A starter will always affect more innings than a reliever if they are starting every 5 days and giving an average of 5 innings a start. Not even Marmol is on a 162 inning pace.

According to Will Carroll, the Braves are holding a press conference today to announce that John Smoltz is done for the season due to soreness and swelling after his last relief outing.

It was somewhat explainable for the world series cause the teams played a different set of opponents all year. That's the same scenario in every sport, though. Record-based HFA makes a lot more sense than "winner of the All-Star game" HFA. Only the NFL does things differently, because it's a single game at a neutral site. Now, if baseball decided on a seven-game series all at a neutral site, then maybe it'd be acceptable.

As I mentioned earlier the West had HFA in '85 as well. '85 was an oddball year for some reason. That was the first year the CS was 7 games, so perhaps it had something to do with that.

and your point is....? his point is that Wood is terrible in the narrow range of made up situations he has invented to prove his point You know, on days where Wood blows saves, his stats look terrible. He's even 0 for 4 on save opportunities in those situations.