bring stone back

In regards to his defense, see the other thread on Edmonds. I thought it was fine, too but a few disagree - one saying he's the worst center fielder in baseball.

You can't look at every baseball statistic in a vacuum. Do they factor in a great rightfielder he's playing next to and a horrible left fielder he's playing next to who admittedly still isn't playing 100%? Do you or the defensive metrics know the scouting report against an opposing hitter, the wind, the situation, how the pitcher is going to approach a hitter in a particular at bat? Yes, statistics are nice and give you a good barometer but there are many other factors to consider. Again, considering the guy is a platoon player I really don't think it's much to complain about. yea truffle computers can't watch the games Yeah, because that is exactly what I said, too. All I said was you can not take every baseball statistic and look at in a vacuum. Watching games is a bad thing then? One can't gain any sort of insight or knowledge from actually watching games? It's like having a discussion with a 4 year old...

You can't look at every baseball statistic in a vacuum. Do they factor in a great rightfielder he's playing next to and a horrible left fielder he's playing next to who admittedly still isn't playing 100%? Do you or the defensive metrics know the scouting report against an opposing hitter, the wind, the situation, how the pitcher is going to approach a hitter in a particular at bat? Yes, statistics are nice and give you a good barometer but there are many other factors to consider. Again, considering the guy is a platoon player I really don't think it's much to complain about.

Watch the games! awesome. i watched today's game and saw a ball hit over his head for a double. pie probably makes that play without much difficulty. Yeah, he probably would have. If only he could hit a baseball in major league competition...we might be on to something then.

Edmonds' defense is fine. He/Johnson can't cover the ground of Pie but they're fine. Only glaring weakness in the defense? Is Soriano so bad defensively we just don't even count him as a defender then? Is he just neutral out there - sometimes helping the Cubs and sometimes helping the other team's offense? edmonds' defense seems fine because he mostly catches the balls that he gets to. the problem is that he is so slow that he can't get to much. he's one of the worst-fielding centerfielders in the game at this point in his career. The defensive play of a platoon center fielder is/should be the least of the Cubs' concerns right now. No, he doesn't cover a lot of ground but he has a pretty live arm yet, is smart and positions himself well. He is certainly not a defensive problem by any means. Edmonds has never been a burner but he allegedly worked on his speed all offseason and is faster than he's been in the last 3-4 years.

You wouldn't prefer to be in the easier division? I know I would...

Edmonds' defense is fine. He/Johnson can't cover the ground of Pie but they're fine. Only glaring weakness in the defense? Is Soriano so bad defensively we just don't even count him as a defender then? Is he just neutral out there - sometimes helping the Cubs and sometimes helping the other team's offense?

You are just now seeing this? What took so long? I like Rich Hill but clearly he's had issues for a long while now. Marmol is great, no question - but you give him that much pressure each time out? There are times when relievers have no room for error but to do it each time? A little much to ask. I say if the Cubs ever lead by 3 or more - then Marmol never should be considered unless a dire situation presents itself.

The Dodgers scored ugly as well so now it's even! Watch a wild pitch put the Cubs up...

1 week of posting privileges says Fontenot gets the run in to tie the game.

I'd say no they can't and no they don't want to, either. Many felt it was a ridiculous contract the day it was announced and he is Cubs property for the foreseeable future - good or bad. The only thing as fans we can do is cheer in awe during his amazing hot streaks and grit your teeth during his inevitable cold streaks/defensive errors.

I'll take that bet.

Clearly he wouldn't be on the majors on any other team and/or be a platoon starter for some - otherwise other GM's would have jumped all over him the multiple times Hendry has made it abundantly clear Murton is available. Earlier this year, he all but sent a memo to every GM in baseball saying he was available. I'm not a Murton apologist, but I have to take issue with this position. Simply because Murton hasn't been traded does not mean other teams would not gladly have him on their 25-man roster, and possible give him starts in a platoon. It just means that they aren't willing to pay whatever Hendry has asked for him. To me, the proof is this: If Murton were released today, how quickly would some AL team or lowly NL team scoop him up and put him on their 25-man? I think there would be at least 10 teams looking to do just that. Point taken and I agree with you. However, nearly any team would take him for free but they must not think THAT much of him considering (on the surface) nobody is willing to give up anything of any value to acquire him. The real funny part of this ongoing Murton debate is this - if the Cubs traded him today Hendry would be universally bashed on this board for not getting "true value" for Murton. Yet, by keeping him, they maintain that bargaining chip (no matter the value real or perceived) in case a corner outfielder on another team gets hurt, thus increasing Murton's value, and Hendry still gets bashed. The Cubs are doing the right thing by holding on to Murton for the time being so he can replace Soriano the next time he pulls a muscle in his leg and just in case another team is desperate for his services. As far as Murton being in AAA...is he better than Fukudome or Soriano? No. Can he be considered a late inning defensive replacement? No. Can he be considered a pinch runner or even play center in a pinch? No. Does he offer power off the bench? No. I'm not saying he's a bad baseball player but not nearly as good as some wish/think. The Cubs, as they are assembled, just don't have the room or need for his talents right now.

Just to clarify, by "sabotaging" Murton's Cubs career, do you mean signing MUCH better players in Soriano and Fukudome? If you're pissed about stunting Pie's growth - I get that but Murton is/will always be viewed as a 4th or 5th OF - at best. Clearly he wouldn't be on the majors on any other team and/or be a platoon starter for some - otherwise other GM's would have jumped all over him the multiple times Hendry has made it abundantly clear Murton is available. Earlier this year, he all but sent a memo to every GM in baseball saying he was available. I really wish Murton was actually as good as many in the pro-Murton crowd think.

I don't agree with Lou on everything. Not even close. I just think the hyperbole about him being a "terrible" manager is way over the top. Yep. With as many "Lou's an idiot" posts and responses I see here you'd think he starts 5 players in the field every game. I almost laugh when people criticize him after EVERY lineup because of no Pie and Cedeno. The "over the topness", constant complaining and arrogance on this board is amazing.

theriot the last 28 days: .370/.452/.480/.932 yeah, that's a guy you want bunting. why not bunt with lee and ramirez in similar situations, whille you're at it? As I said before, different situations for different management. No, I wouldn't bunt with Lee or Ramirez. Would I for Theriot in the right sitation (to get Lee, Ramirez and Fukudome possibly runners in scoring position when playing for 1 run to extend a possible weather delay) - yes? Theriot sucks, he still can't hit, sample size....."yeah, tha'ts a guy you want bunting." So, now he's good then? Which one is it? Wrong guy for this argument. What, is he going to climb out of my computer and beat me up or call me a name?

theriot the last 28 days: .370/.452/.480/.932 yeah, that's a guy you want bunting. why not bunt with lee and ramirez in similar situations, whille you're at it? As I said before, different situations for different management. No, I wouldn't bunt with Lee or Ramirez. Would I for Theriot in the right sitation (to get Lee, Ramirez and Fukudome possibly runners in scoring position when playing for 1 run to extend a possible weather delay) - yes? Theriot sucks, he still can't hit, sample size....."yeah, tha'ts a guy you want bunting." So, now he's good then? Which one is it? So please, explain why lowering your chances of scoring one run makes sac bunting a good idea To get my 2 (or 3 if they walk Lee) best hitters a chance to get a single against Shawn Estes to "win" a game. I'm clearly assuming Lou was factoring the weather in his decision. As I said, do those percentages factor in Derrek Lee, Aramis Ramirez and Kosuke Fukudome against Shawn Estes looking for a bloop single or a sac fly? I'll take my chances with 1 of those 3 coming through.

theriot the last 28 days: .370/.452/.480/.932 yeah, that's a guy you want bunting. why not bunt with lee and ramirez in similar situations, whille you're at it? As I said before, different situations for different management. No, I wouldn't bunt with Lee or Ramirez. Would I for Theriot in the right sitation (to get Lee, Ramirez and Fukudome possibly runners in scoring position when playing for 1 run to extend a possible weather delay) - yes? Theriot sucks, he still can't hit, sample size....."yeah, tha'ts a guy you want bunting." So, now he's good then? Which one is it?

No, that is why sacrifice bunts that aren't executed well are stupid. no, bunting with your #2 hitter is stupid. or, having a #2 hitter who you'd rather bunt with in that situation is stupid. That makes no sense. Bunting with your #2 hitter - essentially trying to put 2 runners in scoring position for your 2 best hitters is stupid knowing full well this game may be called very soon? http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html Slightly more runs expected with runners on 1st and 2nd with no outs than runners at 2nd and 3rd with 1 out. plus that assumes that the bunt is executed properly. there's a much better chance of a failed bunt that results in a double play, pop out or fielder's choice than there is of a throw into the stands or theriot beating the ball to first. so actually the decision to bunt is going to cost you even more than that very small amount. It's not that hard people. The only positive from a sac bunt when everyone knows a sac bunt is coming and the defense doesn't botch it is moving runners over and getting an out. There are several positives if you actually try to get a hit, which is what hitters are used to doing in every single AB. And many positives come from a PROPERLY executed sacrifice bunt. A fly ball ties the game and a bloop single wins it. Considering the weather and circumstances, it was a good decision but poor execution.

No, that is why sacrifice bunts that aren't executed well are stupid. no, bunting with your #2 hitter is stupid. or, having a #2 hitter who you'd rather bunt with in that situation is stupid. That makes no sense. Bunting with your #2 hitter - essentially trying to put 2 runners in scoring position for your 2 best hitters is stupid knowing full well this game may be called very soon? http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html Slightly more runs expected with runners on 1st and 2nd with no outs than runners at 2nd and 3rd with 1 out. plus that assumes that the bunt is executed properly. there's a much better chance of a failed bunt that results in a double play, pop out or fielder's choice than there is of a throw into the stands or theriot beating the ball to first. so actually the decision to bunt is going to cost you even more than that very small amount. Do those numbers factor in when you're essentially playing for 2 runs in the bottom of the 9th type situation to win (5th here because of the rain), your 2 best hitters coming up, Shawn Estes being the opposing pitcher, etc?

No, that is why sacrifice bunts that aren't executed well are stupid. Giving away outs in the 5th is always stupid. I know - I hate it when I position my best 2 hitters to be hitting with 2 runners in scoring position with 1 out. IF they did walk Lee with the bases loaded, we'd get Ramirez and Fukudome with the bases loaded. How stupid.... can you read? they would have just walked lee, anyway. this way they pitch to him. i'd advise giving the bunting argument up. it doesn't really go over well, here. Clearly I can read, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. You're not very smart. If they walk Lee, I get the bases loaded with Ramirez and Fukudome needing a simple base hit against Shawn Estes. Sign me up for that!! Since you can so obviously predict the future and KNEW they were going to walk Lee, please tell me the powerball numbers - at least a hint.

No, that is why sacrifice bunts that aren't executed well are stupid. no, bunting with your #2 hitter is stupid. or, having a #2 hitter who you'd rather bunt with in that situation is stupid. That makes no sense. Bunting with your #2 hitter - essentially trying to put 2 runners in scoring position for your 2 best hitters is stupid knowing full well this game may be called very soon? it makes perfect sense. you don't put a guy in the #2 spot in the order if you feel fine sacrificing his out. plus, the game is in the 5th inning. Different situations call for different gameplay management. With the weather concerns, you're essentially playing the 5th as if it's the bottom of the 9th. I'll take my chances with Lee and Ramirez each getting a shot against Shawn Estes with 2 runners in scoring position needing a base hit to win.

I'd say Jason Marquis giving up 4 runs in 5 innings had a little more to do with it than a failed sacrifice bunt.

No, that is why sacrifice bunts that aren't executed well are stupid. Giving away outs in the 5th is always stupid. I know - I hate it when I position my best 2 hitters to be hitting with 2 runners in scoring position with 1 out. IF they did walk Lee with the bases loaded, we'd get Ramirez and Fukudome with the bases loaded. How stupid....

No, that is why sacrifice bunts that aren't executed well are stupid. no, bunting with your #2 hitter is stupid. or, having a #2 hitter who you'd rather bunt with in that situation is stupid. That makes no sense. Bunting with your #2 hitter - essentially trying to put 2 runners in scoring position for your 2 best hitters is stupid knowing full well this game may be called very soon?