fromthestretch

I pitched against Todd Dunwoody in high school. Not quite the same as playing against two guys that have actually had sustained success at the major league level.

If it wasn't for Wood's 2003 regular season and post-season performance prior to that game, they probably never would have been that close to reaching the World Series in the first place. So let me get this straight...you're complaining that he hasn't pitched enough because of injury yet, at the same time, claiming he's taken starts away from young pitchers? If he's not pitching, how is he taking starts away from young pitchers? If any pitcher on this staff is blocking the young guys, it's Rusch.

I'm going to have to call you out on this, considering one of your arguments earlier in this thread was that he played with guts. I know that's not the foundation of your argument, but it certainly has nothing to do with stats.

Someone actually makes some very reasonable comments in opposition to your argument and instead of discussing it, you decide to make some totally asinine comment about statistics. That was mature.

All these posts about Murton's numbers not being all that impressive or Williamson not pitching well kind of go hand-in-hand with what Williamson was saying. If you're a relief pitcher and not given a chance to get regular innings, it's tough to be on top of your game. If you're a young player and not given a chance to play through your struggles, how are you supposed to bounce back? I also think the coaching staff needs to take some responsibility for Murton's struggles. Telling a kid with a very good approach at the plate that he needs to be more aggressive probably wasn't the smartest thing to do.

Very few burst onto the scene. The Cubs got scene bursters with Wood and Prior. But they abused the heck out of them and couldn't keep them healthy. That's one of the big problems with devoting the vast majority of your minor league system to pitching. Pitching is unreliable. And who are all these other teams with first year guys tearing it up from the outset? It just doesn't happen all that frequently. The difference is most other teams don't send a guy down for struggling and blame their struggles on the kid. The Yankees for instance have an impotent Melky out there everyday and he's as much of an OF butcher as any Cubs fielder. Just about every team has at least one. Let's look at our division for example: Elizardo Ramirez, SP, Reds Prince Fielder, 1B, Brewers Ronny Paulino, C, Pirates Anthony Reyes, SP, Cardinals Adam Wainwright, RP, Cardinals Ok, so the Astros also don't have one. I could go through the other divisions and find similar players, but I think you get my point. Murton and Cedeno came up as rookies last year and played very well. Like many before them, they have struggled at times in their second season. Most of the guys you listed will have their struggles, as well. Some of them could end this season with mediocre numbers. Anthony Reyes has thrown a total of 33.3 innings in his career. I'm not ready to name him Rookie of the Year just yet.

Pratt, Hawkins, Patterson, Hill, Choi...shall I continue? Hawkins you could make an argument, but Hill and Pratt aren't good enough to have a ruined career, Patterson's career is taking a turn for the MUCH better in Baltimore, and if Dusty helped ruin Choi, so did LA and Florida who refused to play him also. Florida did play him regularly during the time he was there, and he produced. Cubs let him rot on the bench after the concussion, and LA never really gave him a fair shot, especially right after they acquired him.

I dunno, Boston traded for Wakefield's personal catcher based on basically one game with Bard. He had 10 passed balls in six starts while catching Wakefield. Something needed to be done.

That's absurd. It may be an important part, but it's not close to being the most important part. Besides, so what if he does have success bunting? Bunts are hits, too. And a main reason he's successful at bunting is largely due to A) his speed and B) his power, not necessarily in that order. People don't expect him to bunt once (or more) per game like Pierre, so they don't always play in on him. They need to respect the fact that he can hit the ball with some authority. If he bunted more often, people would probably expect it more often and defend him differently.

I know that, this isn't my first day on the internet. I just thought the critical comments are a little unnecessary, moreso in the draft threads. The constant sarcasm too gets a little old in parts. Just my .02 cents, toally fine to disagree. I don't know what kind of player he is going to be, but I'll give him some time before I write it off as a wasted draft choice. Reading over a lot of the comments, it appears that most of them were more of a shot at the Cubs than they were at him. I highly doubt you're going to find anyone on here who is seriously bashing the kid based on one game. I guarantee most people will give him a fair shot at proving him self in the professional ranks.

Many of the pros who make their living scouting and publishing their reports didn't think he was the 13th best player available. It's great that you choose to have full faith and confidence in the Cubs front office and the Cubs player development system. Not everyone chooses to share that confidence ... which is their perogative. Surprisingly, not everyone on the internet agrees with each other on everything. Don't confuse my remarks to mean I have full faith in the Cubs organization, I don't. My only point is I think it is a little too early to start the comments like, "He'll fit right in, etc." The kid hasn't even signed and he's getting criticized. Welcome to the organization Tyler! GIve the kid a break. Not his fault the Cubs picked him so high. I'm sure no one was being the least bit sarcastic when making those remarks either. As we all know, everything everyone posts on a message board is meant to be 100% serious and taken literally.

Santana has a better WHIP, and much better K/9 and H/9. Oswalt has slightly better BB/9 and HR/9 numbers. Consider that Santana pitches in the AL, is left-handed and over a year younger, I'll take Santana over Oswalt every time. Considering the age difference, I definitely take Pujols over Manny.

That's the weird thing. There were a handful of pitches that looked liked strikes early in the inning but were called balls. Then that pitch to Langerhans was well off the plate and called a strike. Makes me wonder if the umpire even knows what his strike zone is.

For the most part, it's been a very tight zone. Although there was one strike called that was probably 4-5 inches off the plate.

We're in the area, too, but we just got Directv. Took me awhile, but I found the game. I was a bit worried that I wouldn't be able to watch it, but if it's anything like the past couple weeks, I'll be shutting it off by the fifth or sixth inning out of sheer disgust.

Yes, and I'm obviously not arguing that point. However, I fail to see where anyone said he should face lefties all the time. Considering he bats left-handed and a majority of pitchers are right-handed, I'd consider a straight platoon regular playing time for him. That being said, I don't think there's substantial proof that he's as bad against lefties as you make him out to be.

Don't suppose you care to post the number of plate appearances he was given against lefties? I'm sure that has nothing to do with the difference in home runs. Hard to hit lefties when you rarely, if ever, are given an opportunity to face them. Even if he does have trouble with them, platoon him. Start him against right-handers and use him off the bench to pinch hit against righties. You can do that and get him 400+ at-bats easily. I'm not saying that the Cubs should do this. When Lee is back, they have a star player at that position. But there are teams that don't have someone locked into that position.

Poor management? Bad decision making? It's not like the Cubs have the market cornered on those two things. I am not saying that's not a possibility, but I think its less likely than my theory. I don't want to hijack this thread, but your argument implies that the majority of the trained pros making personnel decisions are "poor managers" and "bad decision makers". While I agree they exist, I have a hard time believing that this is true of 50% or more of them. My argument doesn't imply that at all. I said there are some teams that he could be starting for. A lot of teams already had players in place that were as good, if not better. Other teams have rookies that deserved a shot. There are plenty of reasons. But there are teams that he could be starting for. He also would have been a good insurance policy for some teams that were opening the season with rookies starting at 1B or DH. Florida, Tampa Bay, and Kansas City could use him. He certainly couldn't do any worse than Johnson has so far at first base for Oakland, although I think Johnson should be able to turn it around. LaRoche in Atlanta isn't exactly an All-Star. I honestly think he'd be good in a platoon at first base with Niekro in San Francisco.

Poor management? Bad decision making? It's not like the Cubs have the market cornered on those two things.

have seen this before. choi, jerome walton.... it's a legit question. not trying to knock the kid. The Marlins are really the only team that has allowed Choi to play regularly, and when given that opportunity, he produced. Then they traded him to the Dodgers who let him rot on the bench. perhaps i'm wrong, but didn't a bunch of teams have a chance to claim choi off waivers recently?? I believe the Red Sox have him stashed at AAA now. Doesn't change the fact that when give a chance to actually play regularly, he played well. if the guy could produce, he wouldn't be stashed in AAA. :roll: Whatever you say. I guess the fact that he actually has produced when given the chance to play regularly doesn't mean anything. No one is saying he's a star player. However, there are some AL teams that could use him as a DH, and probably a handful of teams around the majors that could use him at first base. He just happens to be in an organization that has productive players at 1B and DH already.

have seen this before. choi, jerome walton.... it's a legit question. not trying to knock the kid. The Marlins are really the only team that has allowed Choi to play regularly, and when given that opportunity, he produced. Then they traded him to the Dodgers who let him rot on the bench. perhaps i'm wrong, but didn't a bunch of teams have a chance to claim choi off waivers recently?? I believe the Red Sox have him stashed at AAA now. Doesn't change the fact that when give a chance to actually play regularly, he played well.

have seen this before. choi, jerome walton.... it's a legit question. not trying to knock the kid. The Marlins are really the only team that has allowed Choi to play regularly, and when given that opportunity, he produced. Then they traded him to the Dodgers who let him rot on the bench.

Shoot, by Opening Day, they'll be ridiculing the hell out of home players. Yep. Fixed.

You mean Uecker or the TV guys? Uecker does a pretty good job. TV Guys, I'd love to listen to Uecker. One of the TV guys sounds like Norm from Cheers. Haha...how great would it be to listen to just one Red Sox game, as called by George Wendt and John Ratzenberger as Norm and Cliff? Anymore than that would be pure torture, but one game would be entertaining.

You mean Uecker or the TV guys? Uecker does a pretty good job.