genghiskhan

The wild card means that the White Sox are probably going to make the playoffs no matter what. They would have to do a major big-time fold for the Indians AND the runner-up team from the AL East to pass them. Then again, that's not as unlikely as pooping away 13 1/2 games of a 15-game lead is.

Describes the whole Cub rotation, except for Zambrano, really. Carlos has had another excellent year, but Wood was a non-factor, Prior wasn't exactly dominant, and Rusch and Maddux have thrown up a 4.59 and 4.31, respectively.

Man, even now they still can't sell out that stadium. 36,543 attended yesterday's game, which translates out to 4000 empty seats.

This is a pointless stat. The only reason he's third on the team is because of injuries. If the 3B, LF and RF had all been healthy this year, Eckstein would rank 6th on the team at best. How about "his 58 RBI are only five off his career high"? Anyhoo, he's been a most excellent surprise. Putting the Renteria money into Mark Mulder worked out quite nicely.

I don't trust Marquis. Not at all.

Eckstein hit his eighth home run today. His 58 RBI are third on the team. And he's outperformed both Renteria and Cabrera in just about every offensive category. An absolute steal. And I was most upset when we signed him.

Yeah, it's hard to see the W.S. making the series now. I would like a chance at revenge against the Red Sox, actually. But they might miss the playoffs completely.

I don't think Dusty Baker is that much of a manager. But I tend to agree with the poster upthread that the Cubs simply weren't that talented. Remember, in their moment of glory in 2003, the Cubs won only 88 games, and last year they won 89. And most people would probably agree that this Cubs team was not as good as the 2003-04 Cubs. The pitchers were brittle. The shortstop was brittle. Sosa and Alou weren't adequately replaced--and even with Sammy's rapid decline, his PRODUCTION from 2003-04 wasn't replaced. The Cubs were a badly flawed team who were pumped up in the preseason expectations game, partly by the natural optimism of a rabidly loyal fanbase and partly by a sports media that was still in love with the potential of Prior and Wood. The Cubs aren't a playoff contender, and barring some major changes, they won't be next year either.

St. Louis over Chicago in six!

I'll take a Cardinals-White Sox World Series.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a47/madhops_42/carnivale_tree_small.jpg Great sig picture. I really miss "Carnivale". Anyway, if the criteria applied in 2004 were applied for 2005, Carpenter would win the Cy Young. Clemens won it last year despite trailing Jake Peavy in ERA and Randy Johnson in just about every category, because Clemens went 18-4 and all the writers said "Wow, 18-4, that's cool!". Now in 2005 it appears that whoever wins the ERA title must automatically get the Cy, even though that has never been the determining factor before. One suspects the real rule is "The pitcher who wins the ERA title must win the Cy Young if that pitcher's name is Roger Clemens".

You have to really try to strike out against Mark Mulder.

National anthem...still haven't changed it to "America the Beautiful". :x

I'd take Grudzielanek over Kent, because Kent has the range of a tree stump.

Good morning, all. The Cardinals should do all right this series--coming off a sweep of Milwaukee without their two best pitchers, and I think the matchups in this series are favorable. And the Cubs, it has to be said, appear to be quitting on Baker. We'll see if they can get up for St. Louis.