CubColtPacer

The Cubs can probably not be concerned with the Cardinals any longer if they sweep them. But the Cardinals season won't be over regardless of what happens this weekend. I doubt they'll sweep them anyway, but it sure would be nice.

Thanks Bruce. Something I hadn't heard yet was that groundball/flyball ratio. Anybody who can get that many ground balls and that many strikeouts definitely has potential. Just a manner of refining the mechanics and hopefully getting those walks a little bit down.

when you're on a WS contending team, the goal is to have everyone on the 25 man roster above average. Is that really ridiculous to you? The thing is come October Jason either A. wont' be on the WS contending team's roster, or B. will fill the role of 11th pitcher, in which case he'd be above average. C) won't be on the playoff roster at all Which is A on his list.

Hmm..I put a post in, realized that it somehow double posted it, so I deleted one copy and it deleted both. Basically, I was agreeing with jersey on the idea that the article is absolutely wrong if is says that the win totals for Marquis do not reflect how well he's pitched. He should be right around a .500 record with how he's pitched, and while the team hasn't given him a lot of run support lately, they have given him plenty of run support when looking at the full season.

Are people opposed to calling up Castillo because it will start his clock or something? I guess I can understand that, he could probably use another year in the minors anyway. How old is Welington? Castillo is 21. And yes, that's why I would be opposed to him coming up. The 3rd catcher really isn't going to be used unless for an emergency, and I'm pretty sure Castillo is not on the list that needs to be put on the 40 man this year. He would then have to use a major league option to send him down next year after Spring Training. I would rather save that option and put him on the 40 next year if he's still doing well.

that's not true. Yeah, he also mashes bad breaking balls. I was writing with assumption that any hitter playing everyday in the big leagues can mash a hanging breaking ball for an extra base hit. That's a given. The only pitcher's pitch (meaning non-mistake pitch) Soriano can really do damage on is a fastball. When Soriano's on though, breaking balls that normal hitters can't do anything with he can hit out of the ballpark. If he's hitting well, you better get the breaking ball in the dirt. If you leave it ankle high (which is normally a pretty decent pitch still to a normal hitter, especially to a right handed hitter) Soriano has a decent shot to golf it right out of the park.

Marmol wasn't a good starter at all because he doesn't have a good third pitch. That's why he was converted into a reliever. You can be a dominant reliever with two good pitches, as Marmol proves. marmol was a good starter in the minors that time has likely passed, obviously, but the reason marmol wasn't a success as a starter in the majors go way beyond the lack of a third pitch No, not really. He struggled as a starter as a rookie, that doesn't mean he would never have become a good starter. His change is passable, his control/pitch count would have needed work. You may be right (I'd call his change up as mediocre at best, and that's maybe a little generous), but the perception of not having three major league pitches in the front office most certainly was the deciding factor in him converting into a reliever when he went down after those initial struggles. Had he had a better change than what he does, I think his chances of sticking as a starter three years ago would have been considerably higher. His conversion into a reliever was because the Cubs needed an extra bullpen arm in the middle of the year last year, and Marmol was the best choice (at the time he was doing well as a starter at Iowa). So that's why he was the one called up, and he ended up being so dominant as a reliever that the Cubs decided to keep him there rather than risk switching him back. The perception of 2 pitches might have factored into them keeping him as a reliever (although I think his dominance was a much bigger factor), but his conversion into a reliever was strictly need based.

The 9 spot the Cubs put up against Contreras and company in the 4th a month or two back was a lot of fun also. It's hard to say which one was better.

Probably 2004 sometime. Didn't an ESPN announcer say that the other day was the first time they had been 21 games over (or whatever it was at the time) since 1969? That stat was the last time the Cubs have been 22? games over on this date of the season since 1969. Other teams since then have been that many games over at other parts of the season.

Hopefully it's nothing serious for Gallagher. It's always sad when a young pitcher like him goes down with an injury, especially such a nice one like him. I'm sure it must have been scary to hear that pop with all the stories he's probably heard of a pop being the beginning of the end, and I certainly hope that nothing could be further from the truth here and he can still have a long career.

Does that include CSN+? There are 2 games on CSN+, 2 games on WICU, and 1 game that is currently scheduled to not be on TV at all in September. That game is likely a TBD. It's definitely going to be on TV. Yeah, it was. It just got a firm start time, so I'm guessing they'll decide on the TV soon. They will televise a Cubs-Cardinals game in September. The White Sox are on CSN that day (it's a Sunday) so I'm hoping it's one of those September games that WGN picks up (they usually have picked up 1-2 extra when the Cubs are in contention).

Normally I can at least be somewhat optimistic for Marquis. But the Astros are just an absolutely horrible matchup for him. I'm just hoping he can avoid the disaster start, because those middle of the order hitters (especially Berkman) have just demolished him over the course of his career. On the other hand, the Cubs have not been stellar against Backe overall, although most of that is due to a low batting average caused by a low BABIP. So hopefully they can have a few more fall in today.

Does that include CSN+? There are 2 games on CSN+, 2 games on WICU, and 1 game that is currently scheduled to not be on TV at all in September.

Dr. Andrews has done stories and interviews before. I've read at least one of them. For example, this is a very long article all about Andrews, with plenty of quotes and a few stories spread in there: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=3024046

Shocking! That was expected, and there probably were at least 10 Cubs that cleared trade waivers. That doesn't mean they'd clear release waivers.

Theriot is actually a big DP candidate because of hit tendency to hit ground balls. He hits into a DP a greater percentage of his available opportunities than any other Cub. Higher than DLee? As careless said, yes. I still wouldn't have had Theriot bunt there though, especially not with Harden on 2nd. You have a decent shot of Harden being thrown out at 3rd or being doubled off on a bad bunt. And then when Theriot got ahead on the count, there's no way I bunt at that point.

Theriot is actually a big DP candidate because of hit tendency to hit ground balls. He hits into a DP a greater percentage of his available opportunities than any other Cub.

He probably has. Those are revocable waivers though and most players can get through those. It's a lot different to be able to get through waivers when the Cubs don't have the option of pulling him back, which will be the case the next time he goes through the waiver process.

I'm gonna quibble with you here. Hill hadn't pitched a full season yet when Marquis was signed. Marquis pitched the 3rd game of the season last year. Hill pitched 4th. The only reason Hill pitched the 4th game is because Lou wanted to split up the left-handers. When Marquis was signed, every article and quote had him as the 4th starter behind those 3, with 1 of Prior/Miller/Guzman filling the 5th spot.

I think you have to use the DFA method and expose him to waivers in order to get him to the minors. Eyre will be traded, probably for a PTBNL in the next 10 days. If not, somebody will claim him in the waiver process. Zero chance anyone claims Scott Eyre off waivers. Why? A left-handed pitcher with 2 months left on his deal, and has possibilities of helping a ballclub. There are several bullpen starved teams who would make a claim. There's very little risk in that move for them.

Marquis was signed to be the #4 behind Z, Lilly, and Hill. I agree with you that Marquis is not going to get any better. The concern with Marshall is you automatically need a pitcher who's ready to step in for when Marshall gets hurt, and Marshall's history has shown that it will happen during the season. That's the one thing that Marquis gives you is stability, something that Marshall hasn't been able to do in his career. As for the contract, comparing him to an arbitration pitcher like Harden is comparing apples and oranges. But I do agree that the Cubs are in a pretty good position for pitching in 09, and so dumping Marquis and his contract would probably be a good move. It was like the Eyre move that the Cubs did today. It's not necessarily the fact that Marquis hasn't done the job is the reason the Cubs should want to get rid of him. It's just that the Cubs have the luxury with how they've built their team of getting rid of mediocrity, and that is quite a luxury to have.

I think you have to use the DFA method and expose him to waivers in order to get him to the minors. Eyre will be traded, probably for a PTBNL in the next 10 days. If not, somebody will claim him in the waiver process.

In the particular game you mentioned, the Cubs took the lead in the top of the inning before the rain came. So it was unfair that the Cubs could take the lead in the top of a particular inning and the home team didn't get a chance to match that. That's why the rules call for that game to be resumed at a later time. In this situation, the Astros top of the 8th didn't matter. It didn't change the game in any way. So it was simply erased from existence, and the game was called after 7 innings. The only times that a game will be resumed later is if either 1) it is after the 5th inning and tied when the rain comes or 2) the visiting team either ties the game or takes the lead in the top of the inning, and the inning isn't finished before the rain comes.

The storm seems to be slowing down. Thank God the game started at 6 instead of 7 otherwise this one might be over already. yeah but this game wouldn't be official. Yeah it would have.... the bottom of the 5th just ended when the game was called. The Cubs stand to lose this game if its called. If the game had started at 7 central, they wouldn't have gotten through more than 2 or so before the rain came.

If the game is called, it will be an Astros win.