Sammy Sofa

Yes, he would. Hill's AB's stinks, but he plays too large a role behind the plate that Fox simply cannot do.

So sexy.

No kidding. Plus it's a double whammy since Lou inexplicably bumps Fukudome out of the leadoff spot when Johnson is in there. It makes no sense. Give the guy who is terrible against RH pitchers more AB's than anyone else against them. Both Bradley and Johnson have been pretty brutal against RHP this year. I can't get too upset about MB not being in there with they way he's been hitting. Not saying Johnson is the best option, but MB looks lost out there. How often has he faced RH pitchers actually hitting RHed? He's looked his worst when batting from the LH side of the plate, which the Cubs are determined to keep him doing. I think most of us here want to see if his success from the RH side of the plate against LH pitchers would perhaps carry over if he just bats RHed all the time as opposed to tossing Johnson out there against righties when he's almost a lock to be useless against them. I don't think its far to say the Cubs are determined to keep hitting LH against right-handers. How do we know that? Bradley probably hasn't batted full time as a RH in years. I don't it is the Cubs insisting on this, its just what he has done his entire career. True, but this year his LH numbers are ghastly and his RH numbers are very good. At this point it's argubaly better to try and ride out what's been working than what obviously has not been. That's in no way saying that he's a lock to hit from the right side against righties, but the splits are dramatic enough that they shouldn't be dismissed with team seemingly approaching this like he HAS to hit LHed against righties.

No. This cannot be said enough. I'd much rather plug him into RF if they feel they have to sit Bradley than suffer through Fox at catcher. It's too critical a position and he's too [expletive] horrible at it.

No kidding. Plus it's a double whammy since Lou inexplicably bumps Fukudome out of the leadoff spot when Johnson is in there. It makes no sense. Give the guy who is terrible against RH pitchers more AB's than anyone else against them. Both Bradley and Johnson have been pretty brutal against RHP this year. I can't get too upset about MB not being in there with they way he's been hitting. Not saying Johnson is the best option, but MB looks lost out there. How often has he faced RH pitchers actually hitting RHed? He's looked his worst when batting from the LH side of the plate, which the Cubs are determined to keep him doing. I think most of us here want to see if his success from the RH side of the plate against LH pitchers would perhaps carry over if he just bats RHed all the time as opposed to tossing Johnson out there against righties when he's almost a lock to be useless against them.

No kidding. Plus it's a double whammy since Lou inexplicably bumps Fukudome out of the leadoff spot when Johnson is in there. It makes no sense. Give the guy who is terrible against RH pitchers more AB's than anyone else against them.

This is just getting absurd. It is? The Cubs have a number of players over 30.

THOSE DAMN STATHEADS, WHAT WITH THEIR SHENANGIANS AND WHATNOT

OH GOD I'VE BEEN LIVING A LIE.

Do any of you people pay any attention to anything? What seems to be the problem? The Cardinals have had a below average offense on the season, and you believe Matt Holliday makes them stacked. They also acquired DeRosa recently so it's not just Holliday. But Mark DeRosa is Mark DeRosa.

eh it's possible, but baltimore is a middle-market team while the cubs can keep their payroll high. i can see them having a short down period but i don't see any reason that they should be in the toilet for 10 years. Balt. had one of the highest payrolls at the time. Unless they cont. to build up the farm, I can see them being medicore (78-85 wins) for the next 5 years or so. Why 5 years? The only contract by then still hanging around from today would be Soriano's.

If he misses more than 2 starts, sure. A standard DL stint isn't really anything to panic over.

eh it's possible, but baltimore is a middle-market team while the cubs can keep their payroll high. i can see them having a short down period but i don't see any reason that they should be in the toilet for 10 years. Plus the Orioles were the result of a truly apathetic and meddling owner willing to settle for the relative minimum investment to stay in the black. I suppose Ricketts could be along the lines of Angelos, but it would require him being a similar owner for the Cubs to truly become the O's.

Zemeckis is a [expletive] hack.

That worked out so well for Hendry. Note that it wasn't just Hendry who did that, which should once again give you an idea that the parade of GM medocrity at best for the Cubs is all but guarenteed to continue once he is gone. Most GM's are not terribly good at their job and the ones that are better than just being tolerable are few and far between.

God only knows.

Santo's on the radio, isn't the play by play guy and is paired with one of the best broadcasters out there. Hawk is on TV as the play by play announcer and is paired with Steve Stone.

So you're honestly bothered by the idea of a president calling to speak to the pitcher of his favorite team after he throws a perfect game and not doing the same across the board?

Favortism? What? Of course he wouldn't call the Cubs, or any other team...he's a White Sox fan. So then I guess the President should only have his favorite team to the White House if they win the World Series. Why should he have another team? He's not a fan. If a president didn't, who gives a crap?

Favortism? What? Of course he wouldn't call the Cubs, or any other team...he's a White Sox fan.

I'm so glad AJ was not behind the plate for this.

You can argue what constitutes a prolonged hot streak, but consider this...... 04/06 - 05/17 AB R H 2b 3b HR TB RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS CUBS 1221 182 312 61 5 46 521 171 144 268 0.256 0.339 0.427 0.766 Through 36 games, the CUBS were 21-15, scoring 5.06 runs per game. If we can put up another offensive streak like that one, we'll be in pretty good shape ! The crazy thing about that is they did it while Bradley and Soto were hurt/in a horrific slump, and Lee was hitting terribly. How the heck did they score those runs? Aramis got of to a good start, Fukudome was hitting great and Soriano looked like he was going to have one of the best years of his career.

A lot of teams bunched up there, but for the Cubs to make the playoffs, they would have to play very good baseball anyways so the number of teams shouldn't be a problem. The thing that scares me right now is that the projected playoff teams are very scary. Can anyone see the Cubs winning a playoff game against Philly or LA let alone a series? We may be able to beat someone like SF or COL, but its highly likely we'd be matched up with them. I'd guess this is going to be similar to 2007, where if the Cubs play well enough to be in the lead of the Wild Card, it probably won't matter since they'll probably be in first place in the NL Central anyway. Also, yes, I could see the Cubs winning a playoff series. Would they be favored? Maybe not. But the favorite doesn't always win and with a rotation of Lilly-Z-Harden-Dempster and the bullpen pitching as well as it has now, it's certainly possible. Right, the pitching would be the key to winning the playoff series. Given how much they come down to being a crapshoot even this team offensively could get hot at the right time in the playoffs. Hell, look at the 2003 Cubs: awesome pitching but on paper who is picking them to beat the Braves? This obviously isn't the ideal team right now to go into the playoffs but so long as they cna get there anything can happen in those short series.

If the team was performing closer to the projected levels (sans Fontenot) I'd think getting Sanchez was a great idea. As it stands, his age and his skillset do little to address the problems that are currently facing the team offensively.

Ah, gotcha, so you're another one of these "playoff sample sizes trump all" proponents.