forbez18

I am a huge Cubs fan, but you have to like seeing good baseball being played in Chicago all around. It is very rare that both are leading their divisions, and just imagine the city if both teams were just in the playoffs at the same time. I think it is good friendly competition that might make each team want it just a bit more.

I think it would be a good idea as well. I am always looking for tickets around face value, and I wouldn't mind putting some that I can't make up on the board if I could get a fair trade for other tickets to games that I could make.

I would let him play out his first full season, and see what condition he comes back next year in. The concern with Soto will be his weight and if he will be able to keep it under control. If he gets lazy after having success his first full year there could be a significant drop off.

I know, I know, Wood is to fragile to throw him into the rotation and expect him to be able to sustain any consistency to depend on. However, as the Cubs current rotation stands, they do not have any consistency out of their 4th or 5th pitchers. The experiment of trying Wood as the closer does not seem to be working, but he proved yesterday that he is still an effective pitcher. So could the Cubs, if they decide to carry 13 pitchers for a bit, use Wood as the long man and stretch him out for the next month. Then slide him into the rotation and use him down the stretch if the Cubs are still in contention. If you could line up Zambrano, Lilly, Dempster, and Wood in the playoffs, I would certainly like our chances much more then with Z, Lilly, Demp, and Marquis. Just wanted to know if it would be possible or not.

Freel is hitting 292/327/354 and is sitting so Corey Patterson 213/281/475 can start. Gotta love some Dusty. So Patterson has a better OPS, and is a far better baserunner and defender. Keep. Reaching. I don't have to reach to know Dusty is a bad manager and the Reds will be under 500 at the end of the season. Then just post that and stop looking for crap to blame on Dusty that isn't really there. I'll post whatever I want. Dusty is bad manager and I'll crticize him when I feel like it. Go back to the Redszone if you don't like it. Yea I would have to agree. Patterson should not be a leadoff hitter, and Dust out of all people should understand that. Freel is not a great player either but if you were to bat one leadoff it would have to be Freel. I also didn't know we wern't alowed to criticize Dusty in here.

He needs to locate his pitches better. It looks like he is just throwing the ball and he either falls behind or offers it right down the middle. The movement is still there, but when you can't locate it allows hitters to sit for the middle part of the plate.

It seems like you may have something for Cedeno or really hate Theriot, but it does not make sense to say hey Theriot you won the starting position and you have done nothing to lose it, but we are going to replace you because your back up has had a few good at bats. It is obvious that you want Cedeno in there no matter what the reason is, but let things be for a bit. Keep Theriot as the starter and get Cedeno in there as much as possible. If one comes back to reality then there is a reason to make a switch. My statement was made based on many many posts by Truffle over the dozens of threads that this discussion has arisen in. And yes, I want Cedeno to start over Theriot. He should have been starting from the beginning of the year. He's the one who has a history of good production in AAA. He's the one that's significantly younger and just entering his prime. He's the one that could fit into the Cubs plans as a long term answer to what has been a gaping hole for years. He gives us the better chance to win this year than Theriot. So he should be starting. Theriot's history and age make it much less likely that he'll put up good or even average numbers for long, where Cedeno's history and age make it much more likely he'll that put up solid to good numbers this year (though not likely a .950 OPS). ETA - re the bolded part: yes, something about a young SS that put up a .900+ OPS twice in AAA makes me like him. Not sure why. i end up debating this over lots of threads and posts because people like you continually suggest that i have a weird affinity for theriot or a prejudice against cedeno. i've laid out my points before; cedeno was one of the five worst players in baseball over a full season at age 23, and also has a tendency to make stupid/careless plays on the basepaths and in the field. my opinion is that he won't improve enough over his horrid 2006 numbers to be a better player than theriot. hopefully i'm wrong. but please, stop suggesting that there aren't any logical reasons to support theriot over cedeno, and you won't have to worry about me posting so much in the "START CEDENO BENCH THERIOT" threads any more. Cedeno hit what .245 in over 500 at bats I believe in 2006 and then started 2007 hitting just about .200 with an OBP of .230. They gave him a chance to prove himself and he did not, now he has to work to prove that he can hit major league pitching. When he gets spot starts and come in as a sub he has to continue to prove he is capable. If after 150 at bats he is hitting .320 and Theriot is hitting .280 then yea you make a switch and give him a chance. However, not after 40 at bats when they are both doing well. You can't qualify your statement by saying Cedeno give the Cubs the best chance to win because in the past he has not, and until he proves that he will for a sustained period the statement in wrong.

It seems like you may have something for Cedeno or really hate Theriot, but it does not make sense to say hey Theriot you won the starting position and you have done nothing to lose it, but we are going to replace you because your back up has had a few good at bats. It is obvious that you want Cedeno in there no matter what the reason is, but let things be for a bit. Keep Theriot as the starter and get Cedeno in there as much as possible. If one comes back to reality then there is a reason to make a switch.

Guess this answers the question of who will get the loudest boos tonight. Why would Bako the the loudest boo's? He was never a fan favorite that sucked and went to another team, or the manager of the team that fell apart when all the fans had such high hopes. Bako actually did an okay job for the Cubs considering he wasn't coming in to be anthing more then a back up catcher.

Sign me up if it is average to get 8 years of job security at a just under 20 million a year. I would even take one year at that much and say I am good.

Yea, I do not understand this one. They have Lilly vs. Vazquez it would have been a real good game to watch. Now I will probrally be forced to go run around instead of sitting and relaxing in front of the TV.

Get to see Dempster today in person, and it would be my guess that there will be a lot of subs starting in the field today. Ofcourse for the first spring training game I get to see.but I will be there tomorrow as well.

It'd be a lot more solid if they took Theriot out of the two spot and moved everyone up a notch. Maybe latter on in the year, or if Theriot starts to show that he can not perform. There is a lot of hate for Theriot, but he is earning his spot this spring (unlike Cedeno), and if he can make contact I have no problem having him in the 2nd spot, and Pie in the 8th spot.

Yea, that is a pretty solid, and if that could be the starters for 120 games or so the Cubs are going to have a real good chance at taking the Central no matter what the other teams do. I also hope that this lineup is close to what it will be on Friday when I am at their game!

While I agree that he needs to be throwing his breaking pitches effectivly, Marquis is one of the pitchers that people talk about when they say, "a well placed fastball is the best pitch in baseball." Marquis finds himself getting into trouble when his fastball gets up in the zone. His arms seems to get tired, and his arm falls behind and his ball doesn't sink as much, and thus is up in the zone.

Do you know who is throwing for the Giants? I could care less who they have in their lineup, however they do have a decent rotations still.

Tributes that anyone does to help the grieving should be welcomed. My girlfriend attends NIU and was walking across the street when everything happened, and she was very much shook up over the incident. However, I know that time will help her over come the terror that she had when she heard that there was a gunman on the lose and everyone was running, but I also know that events like these shake kids foundations. It is very difficult to understand why people do the things that they do, and it is equally as easy to group indiviudal together and become scared of everyone. When teams/indiviudals/groups/politicians/and the media put out a tribute for the fallen it helps them realize that not everyone in the world is bad, and that there are still that are there to protect them. Should there be more done by teams and groups alike? That is their choice, and if they chose not to, that is just fine as well. However, to be offended when a team does make a tribute is quite confusing to me. Yesterday I was watching the Bulls game when they came out in the NIU shirts, and my girlfriend was passing the TV, at that moment she stoped and smiled. As I am sure it did for others who were involved. So yes it may not fix things, or make the path to the afterworld any easier for the ones who passed, but it might make a girl smile for a second durring a griving stage. If the world did more of this, maybe there would not be as much shootings as there are.

I will be down there the 14th as well....

Pie would really have to suck for Payton to be a viable fall back plan. PECOTA projects an OPS for .697 for Payton. I just have a really bad feeling Pie's not going to hit. I think it is important to have realistic expectations of how he'll preform. I think it is realistic to expect a league average CF production from Pie with well above league average fielding. To me the problem is not putting Pie in CF it is that the Cubs don't have a strong enough team to let a talented young CF learn to be a major league player. They need Pie to produce. IF we had a legit SS, we'd be able to handle it pretty well, since we're pretty strong in the other 6 spots in the lineup. If we do get Roberts, probably the best case scenario would be for Theriot to get hurt or suck REALLY bad so that they're stuck having no choice but to give DeRosa a good amount of time at SS. I'm not saying I'd hope for Theriot to start out poorly or get hurt. I'm just saying, realistically, it's probably the best thing that could happen. Why wouldn't the best thing for the Cubs to have Theriot play like he did for that one month, for 3/4 of the season (no one will play like that all season). Then slot him in at the #2 spot and he would be fine. I also find it hard to believe it that the Cubs are not good enough to allow a young CF'er to develop. If the Cubs aren't good enough then who is, maybe the Tigers and Boston. Lee, Ramierez, Soriano are all above average. Fukudome should be above average. Second is average, or will be above average. Soto should be at least an avg. hitting catcher. So that leaves short most likely below avg. at a position that history shows as not impact bat position. So if they can't help bring up a young player, then who can?

So what would the prospects that the M's gave equall out to be in the Cubs farm system?

He was out all of 2007 due to shoulder surgery. These are things that I should know, but I have been real bad at following up with him. I was his catcher for a few years before college, and he was hitting 90 then, however he was a short stop up until a year and a half before college. Never pitched before that in his life. Kit and Dan Frega both played on my team, and then went onto ISU where they were each drafted in the 4th round. I hope to hear that Kit recovers well, and is able to produce this year.

I like that this keeps going because it gives me something to read everyday. However, I am going to be even happier when Roberts is traded to the Cubs. I think he is going to be a great addition to the club. Derosa is a very fine ball player, and he will find his at bats durring the season probrally spelling time for when Roberts, Ramierez, possibly even Lee go down for short periods. The Cubs do not have a utility player of Derosa's proven ability and that alone will strengthen the team.

Considering the level of competition in MLB, I would wager that not a lot of pitchers concentrate on runners to the point where it negatively impacts their ability to deliver an effective pitch. We're not talking about a bunch of high school pitchers here. These are guys who have pitched a ton of innings with guys on base. As pitchers progress, most learn how to deal with it. I'm not saying that every single major league pitcher deals with it well. But those that don't are probably in an extreme minority. A pitcher can keep a runner honest without losing focus on the hitter. If you're throwing over to first, that's where your focus should be. If you're delivering to the plate, that's where your focus should be. You can still give the runner a look before you deliver the pitch, but you can do that without taking away focus on the pitch you're about to throw. You're making major league pitchers out to seem weak-minded. It's not like these guys have never pitched with a guy on base. I am not making these pitchers anything more then what they are. They are extremely talented athletes that have amazing ability. However, that does not make them super human. If you are focusing on one thing (locating your pitches) and then have to try and focus on a multiple of things (where your deffense is positioned, how far the the base runner off the base, make sure the ball is not in the dirt, make sure not to walk this batter and set up a huge inning, this runner could be the winning run on first, or a multiple of other things) the focus of a pitcher can be distracted sometimes.

I actually did read the article and I thought it was a very good piece. I also am able to think for myself, and realize that there were things missing. He goes to talk about the walk rate and how it is higher with out a base stealer on base. Well..that makes sense, because pitchers are forced to pitch differently, and ofcourse (he does not say) but would not walk a batter intentionally. He also does not mention the catcher and pass balls, or throwing errors made by the catcher or pitcher. He takes a statistic for basestealers and all baserunners and compares the two, when he should have taken basestealers to all baserunner minus basestealers if you wanted to find out the difference. He also doesn't talk about how the batter after does not hit HR's as much...well that would also make sense because as a battery typically the #2 hitter on the team, their job is to typically bunt or move the ball to the right side of the field. It is not their job to try and hit it out of the park. The only real statistic that if he could figure out (because I know I can't) would be is are more runs scored typically when teams get their best basestealler on compared to when they dont, and then some how justify the conclusion with the team still having the same amount of baserunners on just with out their best basestealler.

I never said to throw out stats completely and if you look at my original post, I actually said that they can tell a lot, specially in baseball. However, they do not tell the entire story. There is not a stat for how a pitcher changes his approach when a base stealler is on base compared to what he would have done. There probrally is a stat for what the next hitter does with a base stealer on base, but it can not be possible to show what would have happened if the base runner was not there. When Rich Hill is pitching and he gets someone on base you can see how it changes his approach. He has to change his delivery, and (I know I can't prove it) but Rich Hill in the past was a pitcher who would mentally break down over time. There may be pitchers who can ignore a base stealer, but there are a lot that concentrate on them way to much. To say that there is no possitive impact (or that the negatives outweigh the positive) because there is a stat that says one thnk does not prove your point.