goonys evil twin

What would you have him do? Since he's a LH hitter, he's not much of a platoon candidate with Jones. Do you want him on the bench? Personally I'd rather the Cubs give more bench spots to minimum wage kids who at least have a chance of producing than guys making 2, 3 or 4 times that much that are almost a lock not to produce. At this time though, I don't see much need for Nic. Although if they need somebody on the 60-day DL when Miller comes off, he might do the trick. And yes, he is off to a nice year with his FSL and SL stats combined.

If you want to get technical, the entire team doesn't suck. There are 4 active position players who have been reasonably productive, and 7 pitchers. But I don't see why it's wrong to point out the bench sucks too. At least with some of the position players, you could reasonably expect an increase from where they are (Ramirez, Pierre). And some of the young pitchers are coming along just fine, not to mention the rehabbers. But there is no hope for the bench, unless a move is made. These are crappy baseball players that are playing crappy baseball. Hendy did a terrible job with the bench this year and some people called him out on it as it happened, only to see their biggest concerns come true (no obp, no power, no RH threat, no potential platoon for the inept Jacque Jones).

Please get rid of "K" Mabry while you are at it please. What do you expect out of bench players? I'm not crazy about his stat line either, but if he were good, he'd be able to start for someone like Pitt or KC. I'll tell you what I expect out of bench players, to be better than the Cubs bench players. EVERY SINGLE CUBS BENCH PLAYER HAS AN OPS UNDER 600. EVERY SINGLE CUBS BENCH PLAYER HAS AN OBP UNDER .300. The highest SLG of any Cubs bench player is Mabry's abysmal .345. Cubs pinch hitters have the 7th highest OPS in the NL, but only the 11th highest OBP. And pinch hitting is really only a small portion of those bench players time on the field. Most of their at bats actually come as starters, which just hurts the team even more.

I'm not tired of it. It's exactly what they should be doing. They have an obligation to their customers to be as forthright as possible, and to be open and honest about injuries. You hear every other team talking about timelines. Sometimes they are met, sometimes they are not. The Cubs, in their pathetic pansy way take offense when they are called out on it, so they hide in their little shell and pretend nothing is behind the green curtain. It's a sad yet perfect depiction of the all-around ineptness of this organization. Somebody refered earlier to the concept that the Cubs can do no right in this situation. I think that's exactly the point. They are a bunch of bumbling buffoons who can't figure out anything injury related. They can't figure out the one problem that has killed this team for years offensively. They can't figure out how to get pitchers to throw strikes. They can't figure out how to win ballgames. This front office has had a dozen years to get things right and they've failed miserably. They foolishly tried to become the next Braves, when they should have tried to be the next Marlins. If you put all your hopes on a couple arms, the odds are you will fail because arms are extremely unreliable. If they put an ounce of energy into the offense, and more than a minute of thought beyond the tools, it would be a lot easier to win games without absolutely perfect pitching.

Draft Tex

Guzman is starting because the team is desperate. Sure, most guys should be able to go 100. But Guzman is a special circumstance. Likewise, Marshall, with no history of big inning in a season is somebody to look out for overworking (in general, every young pitcher should be protected from overwork, no 23 year old should be throwing 120 pitch games). Because of Guzman's special circumstance you have to take special care of his arm. Ideally he could go 100+ with ease, but these aren't ideal times. The bullpen is not at risk of being overworked right now, and there are reinforcements in AAA if any one guy does get overextended early (not to mention, now we have a starter in the long relief role). Worrying about overworking your relievers, who are by definition your least valuable arms, instead of worrying about your starters, who are much more valuable, is just plain foolish.

I heard them talk about how great Roy was and had many of the same thoughts Mercker must have had. But Kent is still a pathetic loser for calling up and complaining about it like he did.

Wood and Prior are better hitters than some of the guys grabbing bats now, it could help......

They need a lot of things. A platoon for Pierre is unrealistic. He's the fulltime guy. Maybe they'll sit Jones against the occasional lefty, and I'd love to see them get somebody for that job.

Although Dusty has overworked his starters in the past, 2003 being the most famous example, the point was more about the bullpen than the starters. Our bullpen is far from overworked. In fact, some guys are going so long between appearances that they're not sharp. It's nearly impossible to overwork a 7 man bullpen. You could overwork 1 or 2 guys by continually going to them in every situation, but the pen itself isn't going to get overworked with so many bodies.

If the guys stands over the plate like that you should be forced to hit him twice before he gets the base.

Do we really want to make personel decisions based on the players truthiness?

If only he was an effective pinch hitter. .123/.247/.200 makes Jose Macias look like Bonds. 123/247/200 as a ph in 63 at bats 253/361/463 as not a ph in 802 at bats does it really make sense to go ahead and decide he's not a good pinch hitter based on these limited numbers? Maybe not, but what is there to show he can be an asset off the bench other then assuming he can? He may improve at it with experience, but do we want to provide him with it? Well, they need a starter now. Worry about his ability to come off the bench later. And since we already know our bench sucks, I don't see why they wouldn't give a shot to somebody who might actually be good later.

http://www.northsidebaseball.com/PremiumForum/viewtopic.php?t=31118

I believe you. and I care. But I won't see you there. I wonder if there will be a way to get pitch by pitch results. http://www.peoriachiefs.com/ You could probably listen to the game over the internet.

And several years after they started talking about this.

It's a rise to mediocity from six years of absolute failure. If they're still hovering around .500 two years from now, I'll be disappointed. But to expect an instant return to the glory days would be foolish. No doubt, but there's a wide margin between .500 and first round exit and the glory years. And 8 years is hardly instant.

I think the problem is more with soft tossing junkballers than hitting lefties. It just so happens that a lot of these lefties are junk pitchers. June pitchers rely on fooling hitters into hitting their pitch, and swinging at pitches out of the zone. They have success when they frustrate overly aggressive hitters. This has been a problem for years now.

I can see how a casual observer could be disappointed with this team, but I'm more than satisfied with their progress. It's the youngest team in the postseason. Key members of the young core have improved this year, especially during the playoffs. Heading into the off season, the team has a guaranteed top 5 pick in this year's draft and significant cap space. The Bulls are in as strong a position as nearly any team in the league moving forward. There's room whenever you'd like to root for the most successful sports franchise in Chicago. I guess all that success in the past does make it easier to accept the rise to mediocrity as some sort of achievement. If the Cubs won 6 WS in the 90s maybe I wouldn't be so hung up on their stagnation now. But then again, if MLB had an NBA like playoff philosophy, the Cubs would have seen a heck of a lot more playoff appearances than they have in real life. Unfortunately, I didn't take any joy in the Bulls success, it was great for the city to see a champion, but I still partially blame that success with blinding the fans to the disgrace that was taking place across the rest of the Chicagoland sports scene. My original point was just that the NBA and NHL's playoff formula allows for much great acceptence of mediocrity as some sort of achievement. Here we are 8 years post Jordan and the Bulls have 1 season of greater than .500 ball. The Cubs have been a much better team over that time frame, with 4 winning records, but I wouldn't say they're moving in the right direction. It seems to me that after tasting such success, Bulls fans would be waiting for at least a division crown or trip to the conference championship before liking what they see.

You're fooling yourself if you think it's a temporary problem. With or without Lee, they have a crap bench. They need all the help they can get in that department. They've spent all their energy trying to find versatile bench players, meanwhile, they haven't bothered finding a bench player that can hit worth a lick. I don't care if a guy can only play 1B defensively, they still need bats, desperately. I agree, but would Clark waive his no-trade clause to come to Chicago to sit on the bench? The question should be, would he waive the clause to come to Chicago to start for 2 months, then become a spot starter for Lee as he comes back from a very serious injury and be the primary threat off the bench.

It's interesting what a "let them all in" playoff philosophy will change how fans look at their teams. I don't see how any Bulls fan could be happy with this team finishing .500 and losing in the first round, and failing to take any sort of step forward after last season. In reality, making the playoffs isn't an accomplishment in either the NHL or NBA.

You're fooling yourself if you think it's a temporary problem. With or without Lee, they have a crap bench. They need all the help they can get in that department. They've spent all their energy trying to find versatile bench players, meanwhile, they haven't bothered finding a bench player that can hit worth a lick. I don't care if a guy can only play 1B defensively, they still need bats, desperately.

I'm not comparing them to the Cubs. With that pitching staff (especially the pen), Cincinnati has perhaps the biggest "bottom falling out" potential of any team who's bottom hasn't already fallen out. I know we keep saying their pitching stinks, but it hasn't happened yet. Does anyone have pitching stats for current Cubs and Reds? You mean, like this? http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/pitching?team=chc http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/pitching?team=cin

What judgements about players have been made on less than 63 at bats?

He still uses a bat? I thought he went up there swinging a wet noodle by the looks of his production.