CubColtPacer

I was a little irked when I saw they were throwing him against us and Gorz against Milwaukee. The first thought that came to mind was in '03 or '04 when some of the Cards players were saying they were rooting for the Stros to make the playoffs over us. CCP, thanks for the info, that's some good info there. I wonder how it's going to affect their use of their pen playing it that way. I guess I don't quite understand your meaning there. Usually a team would have a problem going to 7 starters because it would leave them with too few bullpen guys. In this case though, it will be September and Pittsburgh is allowed to have their full 40 man roster up. So even though they have 7-8 starters, they'll still have their full complement of relievers, and will use them much the same as they usually do.

I bolded the ones and changed the ones that I felt were wrong. On the surface it may seem that way, but he has hit for a lot less power. I like the walks, though. Additionally, he has been far more inconsistent. His home/road splits have been more unbalanced than ever, and he posted sub-.800 OPS' in June and July, two of his best months historically. His OPS is his lowest in years, but his OPS+ is right on par with recent years. I think the relative inconsistency is what is bothering me. You expect that from Soriano, but not so much from Aramis. He's become a different type of player, yes. But not one that is any less productive. Just not quite as much of a typical #4 hitter. But that has been just fine, because he has set the table for the people behind him. And besides, we're talking about a 31 point drop in SLG from last year, and that has only been caused by a lower batting average and a couple of triples. It's hardly a steep enough drop to say that he's been underperfomring, especially when his OBP is up 19 points from last year. As for consistency, this is hardly the first year that he's had trouble in certain months. In 2006, he had 3 straight months of problems. In 2005, he had 2 bad months out of 5. I don't see how this is not expected from Aramis to have some really hot months and some colder months, just because he was relatively consistent for 1 year.

I never said those guys haven't overperformed, because they certainly have. But none of them have been impact guys, a la Ryan Ludwick. And while Theriot has been far better than expectation, his poor defense, poor base running (getting caught 40% of the time, multiple times at 3rd) and lack of power (he rarely puts himself in scoring position, and has only scored 68 runs in spite of being on base 210 times) takes away from that somewhat. And though some might not realize it, Soto wasn't all that great in May, June or July. Can you honestly say there have been more overperformers than underperformers? Let's see: Over: Theriot Soto DeRosa Dempster Edmonds Wood (questionable because he missed a stretch, and has always dominated) Fontenot Under: Lee (nearly .100 below last year's OPS) Ramirez (his OPS is all right, but his SLG is well down, his lowest in 5 years) Soriano (b/c of injuries) Ward Howry Hill Fukudome Lilly (slightly) And the names on the under list are a lot bigger than on the over list. Let's look at this list. Theriot. 90 points above the OPS of last year, and 68 of that has been in OBP. Soto-probably about 50 points ahead of projections, mostly in SLG DeRosa-62 points above OPS of last year, mostly in SLG Dempster-about 2 points of ERA better than projection Edmonds-Close to 200 points of OPS better than Cubs projected center field production Wood-hard to say. Probably not much of an upgrade except for about a month extra of time. Fontenot-around 100 points better than projection Total of starting lineup=400 points of OPS better than expected Total of bench players=100 points better than expected Total starters=2 points of ERA better than expected That doesn't even reference Zambrano, whose ERA is the best it's been in 3 years and his bat is over 200 points of OPS better than his next best year. He's definitely overperformed. Also Blanco is having the best year of his entire career off the bench at age 38. That's got to factor in somewhere. Now let's look at the other list Lee-85 points worse in OPS than last year, split between OBP and SLG Ramirez-10-12 points worse in OPS, but that's offset by the fact that his OBP is 19 points better than it's ever been. This is not a downgrade. Soriano-ok, loss of 150 at-bats or so Ward-196 points worse of OPS than last year Howry-2.15 points of ERA worse Hill-.5 point worse in ERA, loss of time (filled with trade of Harden) Fukudome-around 75 points worse than standard projection Lilly-Expected slight regression. Not really behind projection. Total of starting lineup= 170 points worse than projection (counting Ramirez, which is questionable). Loss of 150 at-bats Total of starting pitching=.5 ERA, loss of starter Total bench=196 points worse total bullpen=2.15 points worse (made up for by minor league callups and trades filling important bullpen positions) Now you can see why this looks worse than it is. The players who are overperforming are doing so by a great deal larger than the players who are underperforming. Their starting lineup is overperforming more than it's underperforming. There was almost no chance that the Cubs top 2 starters would have a 2.85 and 3.29 ERA, but they do. Dempster has been much better than Hill was projected to be, and Hill didn't flame out before he got removed like Dempster was projected to do. Add in the trade, and you see why they have done so well.

I bolded the ones and changed the ones that I felt were wrong.

They're trying to limit the innings of Karstens because he pitched so few last year. So they are giving him extra days of rest when they can. This is the start of something the Pirates are going to be doing with a few of their starters the rest of the year. When September 1st comes around, they'll be giving 7-8 different pitchers starts from time to time.

This is Gorzos first start since being recalled from the minors That's true. And he was pretty dominant in the minors. After his final start (7 innings, 1 hit, 0 walks, 6 K's) they recalled him. It doesn't look like he's doing too badly tonight.

We have a blogger who claims to have mostly figured out how the Elias rankings work. Here is the explanation: http://tigers-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html Scroll down a little bit to Thursday, July 24th to the post entitled: (Almost) How the Elias Sports Bureau Rankings Work Since then, he's done a little more digging and found out what is likely to be the disabled list adjustment, and with that info in hand he's started the job of projecting how Elias will rank the players this year using their up to date statistics. Here are the results of that (still in progress): http://tigers-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008/08/projected-elias-rankings.html He's done a lot of work on it. From reading a few of the the posts, I'm inclined to believe it. Either way, it will be interesting to see if it's true, as it could be a great resource in future years.

It's probably a combination of the long string of consecutive games that the Cubs are in, and the fact that Gaudin threw 52 pitches yesterday. It's not like they're stretching Dempster out in this game..they're just not taking him out early.

Lets hope not I think it's a great scenario IF Lee is not hurt seriously, and could come back soon after those 15 days without any ill effects. It helps the Cubs roster situation because Hoffpauir will be on the roster on August 31st, just in case the Cubs on the DL find their way back in September. It also gives some rest to Lee, and allows him to come back fresh for the last couple weeks and playoffs. I don't think those assumptions in the first line can ever be definite though, which makes it incredibly risky. So I'll rather hope that he is absolutely fine, but a minor injury wouldn't be bad either. The Cubs will need Lee in the playoffs.

15 at home, 3 on the road. Taking a quick glance at the wind, it looks like 3 home runs against the wind, 5 or 6 with a cross wind, and 6 or 7 with the wind blowing out at home.

He walked the bases loaded. Yep, that would be falling behind! Was he missing by a lot or did he suddenly get squeezed after getting calls he had earlier? All 4 balls to Guzman were just a little bit off the outside corner. He didn't miss by much, but he wasn't getting squeezed either. 2 of the ones to Zimmerman were close, and the other 2 were way out of the zone. From watching Marquis, it seems like he doesn't want to give in to the middle (close too) of the plate until he struggles and then it's too late. Maybe I'm wrong but it seems to me he works his own way and then when he starts to struggle, puts it down the middle or continues to walk batters. Does he usually give up big innings and not 1 or 2 at a time? I haven't looked up the stats myself, but Len and Bob talk every start about his propensity to give up the big inning after cruising for a while. I do agree with you Cuse on that. It appears that he is comfortable and just making pitches..but when he gets thrown out of that, he gets cute and tries to be perfect with every pitch, which causes him to fall behind and put more runners on. Then he gets afraid of walking the next hitter, so he lays one in there that gets pounded. Typically, as soon as he gets out of his big inning, he returns to cruising along.

He walked the bases loaded. Yep, that would be falling behind! Was he missing by a lot or did he suddenly get squeezed after getting calls he had earlier? All 4 balls to Guzman were just a little bit off the outside corner. He didn't miss by much, but he wasn't getting squeezed either. 2 of the ones to Zimmerman were close, and the other 2 were way out of the zone.

He walked the bases loaded. Technically true, but it doesn't paint the exact picture. He gave up a hit in the 6th, then walked 2 guys to load the bases. Walking the bases loaded implies that he walked all 3 runners, which he didn't do. He then got a sac fly, then another hit. Then he was pulled (having given up 2 runs and 2 runners on) and Cotts let both inherited runners score.

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown? Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE. I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better. Like who? Colts Pats Arizona Cinci After that there are a couple of teams that can be argued either way (Detriot, New Orleans, maybe one other that I can't think of right now). Indy? Probably Pats? No Arizona? haha no Cinci? No Arizona? Seriously? Yes they have Boldin and Fitz but after that? Come on now New England has Moss and Welker but Gaffney and co. would be battling it out with Ruvell Martin for the 5th WR spot on the Packers rosters. Cinci? Johnson and TJ are both elite but Chris Henry is.. well blah. He has talent but he cant stay on the field to prove that. And Chatman wouldnt make the Packers roster. The Packers 1-5 have the arguably most talent and depth in the NFL at the WR position. The Colts are probably the closest however. Gonzalez would probably start over Jones but after that... And Wayne and Harrison are obviously elite but after that it would be Nelson and Martin over Hall and whoever else they have. So I would probably give you the Colts. I think a WR core has to be weighted according to projected playing time. You're right IMO on one thing: the Packers fifth wide receiver has proved more than pretty much any other team's 5th wide receiver. However, that isn't much benefit. Your 5th wide receiver only gets a small amount of playing time. So when looking at receiving cores, having a better 1st and 2nd wideouts are the most important thing. Then, having a good 3rd becomes important as they are on the field a lot. 4th and 5th are really not all that necessary most of the time (many teams don't even use a lot of 4 WR sets). So I would agree with the Colts, Pats, Arizona, and Cincy. They all have 2 receivers who are gamechangers. Those are a lot more dangerous than 5 good receivers who are interchangable like the Packers have (2 of the receivers probably being classified as very good). If you look deeper into those teams, most of them have 3rd and 4th string guys who have enough talent to beat 1 on 1 coverage, which is all you need when having those top 2 guys. I know the Colts and Pats do. I would then put the Packers on the next tier. Good WR cores that can burn you, but aren't the entire focus of a defense. Other teams on this tier include the Steelers (Ward/Homes/Washington/Sweed), Browns (Edwards/Stallworth/Jurevicius), Cowboys (Owens/Crayton), Saints (Colston/Henderson/Patten), and Lions (Williams/Johnson/Furrey). I considered teams like the Giants, Rams, and Seahawks for the 2nd tier, but ultimately decided they were all 3rd tier.

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown? Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE. I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better.

Lineups: Nationals E Bonifacio 2B C Guzman SS R Zimmerman 3B L Milledge CF R Belliard 1B R Langerhans RF W Harris LF W Nieves C J Lannan P Cubs A Soriano LF R Theriot SS D Lee 1B A Ramirez 3B R Johnson CF G Soto C M DeRosa RF R Cedeno 2B J Marquis P

The U.S. won 101-81.

That's pretty much what it is. He's played catcher a little bit, but mostly they're DH'ing him and working on his catching in workouts since it's been so long since he played there. The plan for him is definitely still as a catcher down the road.

There's no real way that Colvin can salvage this into a good season. But he is certainly interesting because of all the different flashes he's shown this year. Looking over the post-All Star Break numbers, I'm struck by one thing. Colvin's walk totals have gone back to just a little higher than what they were last year. At the same time though, his strikeout rate has stayed down lower than it was last year, and has stayed relatively consistent since the last 10 days of May. Even if he always is a highly aggressive hitter, if he can maintain that ISOP with that acceptable strikeout rate he'll be a decent player. The question is-was the work they did with him the reason for this strikeout rate change? It certainly seems so, since it appeared with the increased walks and didn't decrease when the walks went away. As is almost everything with Colvin right now though, it will take a year or two to sort out all the mixed signals that his splits suggest.

I personally think the Cubs will exercise Blanco's option if he decides to come back. He's a "veteran" who is having a good year heading into his option/buyout. I think the Cubs will see it as the safe option to bring him back for one more year.

Orton's not a good option for you guys for the full season. But he has a decent chance of being a good option against the Colts. The Colts are typically stubborn enough to play the same defense against all types of QB's. They take away the deep ball and allow you to make accurate, short passes that they then tackle you on. If the opposing QB can throw an accurate short ball though, the other team can move down the field and churn up clock. Grossman is the absolute worst type of QB to start against the Colts. He would try to force things, and his strength does not do well against what the Colts are willing to give you. Orton is a better option for the Bears for that game. If he can get 2 good drives in playing a ball control offense, and the Bears add some great special teams in, they could win the game. I would hope the Colts would change their strategy to stop that (play press coverage and force Orton to throw it over them), but after seeing them play against other QB's with weak arms, I doubt they will. BTW, everything I've heard about Manning still says he's on schedule, but he won't return to the practice field until at least next week.

There's no maybe about it. Howry's spot is Gooz's to steal with a good September. That's who exactly I had in mind in terms of Guzman making into the playoff roster with Howry being left out. For some reason, Lou still believes in Howry. You don't need 5 starters in the playoffs, and Lou has never liked Marquis. I could see Gooz making the team at Marquis expense instead of Howry. I hate to say it, but I'd rather have Marquis than Howry on the playoff roster at this point. It might not be the competition betweenthem. The Cubs will likely use only 11 pitchers in the playoffs. The pitchers who seem to be locks: Zambrano, Harden, Dempster, Lilly as starters Wood, Marmol, Cotts, Samardzija, Gaudin That leaves 2 spots for Marshall, Howry, Marquis, Guzman, etc. So it's certainly possible that both Marquis and Howry will get left off the roster. I don't see that happening, but if Howry continues to go the way he's been going it could.

An exception is made when Texas has home games in the heat of the summer. Since conditions can be so horrible in Arlington, they allow them to play night games even on Sunday.

I'm not sure if it's possible in MLB. The club already has so much control over the player (the club can control the player for his first 9-10 years with an organization, while in like the NBA they can only hold them for 3-4). It would be utterly unfair to the players to give them no power over salaries for most of their career.

Nunez threw 53 pitches yesterday for the Braves, and he's right back out there today.