cheapseats

Sample size :) What's especially frustrating is that it comes off as an attempt to emulate the southside, while conveniently ignoring the fact that the White Sox were 5th in MLB in homeruns last year - they hit more than the Cubs, in fact. In the offseason, the Sox went out and got another big bat. Hendry went out and got a bunch of track stars.

Who isn't putting forth effort? They're trying to win. They're just not a very good baseball team.

corey: .277/.299/.446/.745 ouch. I didn't want to see Corey back, but I'd much have preferred a year of Corey to three years of Jones. And I said that when we signed Jones. :x I remember reading that on this site from several of us. I actually said that by year 2 of the Jones era, we'd want Hollandsworth back. Hollandsworth: .265 .265 .471 .735 But he doesn't have Pierre's flair or Jones' baserunning smarts.

corey: .277/.299/.446/.745 ouch. I didn't want to see Corey back, but I'd much have preferred a year of Corey to three years of Jones. And I said that when we signed Jones. :x

What I don't understand: Why did Baker send Bynum out to pinch hit in the 9th if he was just going to have him sacrifice? Why use a position player to do that? A lot of managers send a pitcher (Greg Maddux, for example) to pinch hit if they're going to bunt. Pitchers are often better at laying down sac bunts b/c it's what they're called on to do most often. I still wouldn't like the strategy, but at least it would have been saving Bynum to use as a pinch runner or (shudder) substitution.

Not that it would have mattered because we wouldn't score anyways, but seriously, why not let Dempster pitch to stay sharp and increase your chances of prolonging the game? baker was waiting until the 12th inning I thought he had the 14th in mind, personally. :D

Not that it would have mattered because we wouldn't score anyways, but seriously, why not let Dempster pitch to stay sharp and increase your chances of prolonging the game? Bochy pitched Hoffman in the last two games, neither in a save situation. That's smart managing. I hate the "save" stat. When it's important not to give up a run, the best pitcher in the bullpen should be the guy who gets the call, regardless of the inning. But guys like Baker and Torre won't use their "closers" unless there's a chance to get a save. Is that what being a players' manager means?

That's Hendry and the Trib. They're willing to overpay for mid-level players, but they're unwilling to get in bidding wars for top-tier free agents.

i didn't say bring him up now. pierre's track record shows he can do much better, but if he's still struggling by july, they gotta start thinking about bringing up pie. A lot of baseball analysts say the Cubs do plan to bring him up around the all-star break. Either: 1) Those analysts are wrong. 2) One of our present outfielders gets benched, at least part of the time. Being as Pie has the most value as a centerfielder, it would make sense for Pierre to get benched. Personally, I don't see Pie getting much time with the major league club unless one of our OF's gets traded.

Do you have numbers for that? BP did a study that showed pretty conclusively that the only good times to sac bunt when playing for one run are 1) when there are no outs and a runner on second and 2) when the pitcher (or someone who hits just as poorly as a pitcher - Neifi Perez for example) is batting. Same study shows that bunting a runner to second with not outs increases your chances to score one run slightly. You generally don't want to do it because it significantly decreses your chances to score more than one. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2851 Numbers in this study show pretty conclusively that it's a very good idea to bunt when playing for one run with a runner on second an no outs. It's usually a bad idea to sac bunt with a runner on first with no outs, even when playing for one run. If you've got a different study that shows bunting a runner from 1st to 2nd raises probability of scoring one run, I'd genuinely like to see it. It's something that interests me. I am going off the strict odds of scoring situationally. Maybe your odds are based on different numbers than the one in that article. Even when playing for just one run, unless the hitter has an average below .236, the article shows there's a greater chance of scoring one run if the hitter doesn't bunt. For those that don't have access to BP premium stuff, the article isn't an anti-bunt article. It does try to find situations in which a bunt might be helpful: "There appear to be a few select game situations in which [a sacrifice bunt] remains a better option than swinging away. However, those situations are almost entirely limited to when there is a runner on second and no outs."

Do you have numbers for that? BP did a study that showed pretty conclusively that the only good times to sac bunt when playing for one run are 1) when there are no outs and a runner on second and 2) when the pitcher (or someone who hits just as poorly as a pitcher - Neifi Perez for example) is batting. Same study shows that bunting a runner to second with not outs increases your chances to score one run slightly. You generally don't want to do it because it significantly decreses your chances to score more than one. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2851 Numbers in this study show pretty conclusively that it's a very good idea to bunt when playing for one run with a runner on second an no outs. It's usually a bad idea to sac bunt with a runner on first with no outs, even when playing for one run. If you've got a different study that shows bunting a runner from 1st to 2nd raises probability of scoring one run, I'd genuinely like to see it. It's something that interests me.

Do you have numbers for that? BP did a study that showed pretty conclusively that the only good times to sac bunt when playing for one run are 1) when there are no outs and a runner on second and 2) when the pitcher (or someone who hits just as poorly as a pitcher - Neifi Perez for example) is batting.

With Dempster 1 is enough. But bunting in that situation probably doesn't increase the chances of scoring 1 run, much less multiple runs. If Cedeno had been on 2nd, calling for a sac bunt would be appropriate if playing for one run. I still hope the Cubs score here, though.

Koronka, too!

FWIW, Koronka is 3-1 with a 3.55 ERA in 6 starts.

He was worth Koronka.

I can't decide whether to laugh or cry about that last line... Hey it's kinda off-topic but is there any new news on a potential trade for a bat (the last rumor was millar or conine)?? Do you consider Millar and Conine as bats? :twisted:

The difference, of course, is that Aram will probably turn things around and have a good season, while Neifi and Rusch will continue to suck. Have you read this article? Most of us think it's pretty good: http://www.northsidebaseball.com/Articles/ArticleText.php?ArticleID=117 I now retire. Good night all.

That's because almost every time he's up, Pujols is already on. (unless Pujols hit a home run) With someone on base almost every time you're up, you're eventually going to start racking up RBIs. That is true but he is still hitting over .300 with RISP which is pretty good when your average is at the Mendoza line. Edmonds is as clutch as they come.

Guzman is a special, special player.

Is Hendry your dad? :twisted: We could do worse than Hendry. I hear Dan O'Brien is available. Maybe we could pick up Jim Bowden when he gets fired.

Homeruns made us too one-dimensional. I know because Joe Morgan said so. :evil: Now we have more ways to not score.

Glass half full, huh? currently, who's worse? howry and eyre have been really good. sorry for "celebrating" that. If you are looking for a fight from me, you won't get one. I'm fine with Howry and Eyre. This team is bad with them. They'd be bad without them. It's your claim that we should all look at this optimistically. Then you proceed to be a hypocrite by screaming how horrible Aramis is. At least I'm consistent. :D for $11 mil he has been awful. considering half the budget's out this team isn't "bad." that's where the "glass half empty" statement comes from. Why do you care how much he gets paid. Hater. :twisted:

He sounds like a broken man. Somedays, I think he's going to die on the air. I'd prefer it to happen to Joe Buck.

Something about a Chevy Blazer.