CubColtPacer

I'm one who thinks Z can go this long on pitches once in a while without worrying too much. But why here in this game? You should save those for the biggest of situations. His other game where he did this at least had really good reasons why he stayed in. This one really didn't. It was pretty pointless, and that bothers me more than the pitch count itself.

It's more of a logic exercise than an argument. And we still have an hour until game time. I think it boils down to risk. I don't like risk. If the Cubs win the division they are in. If they're fighting for a wildcard there is risk. However, in CCP's scenario they're in either way so it doesn't matter. I think things are going to get very tight down the stretch. The Mets and Phillies are playing much better baseball as of late. The Mets are playing good baseball. The Phillies are not. The Phillies have been treading water as long as the Cubs have. They hit their high water mark on June 8th, 13 games over .500. At the end of June, they were 5 games over. Today, they're 6 games over. There's plenty of risk either way. I also am looking to minimize the Cubs risk, and am even willing to throw away homefield to do it. If the Cubs play well (say, get to 94 wins or so) the only way they don't make the playoffs is if Milwaukee and St Louis both play really well and pass them. There's a statistically insignificant chance that 2 of the 3 of Philly, New York, and Florida can win 40 of their next 60 games. That's too good of a pace for too long for two teams in a division to do. If the Cubs play ok and win about 89 games (1 game under .500 the rest of the way), then the East could catch them. But Milwaukee and St Louis both have great chances to pass them as well. I think the Cubs would squeak out the WC in this scenario and probably lose the division by 3-4 games. If the Cubs collapse to 85 wins (9 games under .500 the rest of the way) they aren't winning either the division or WC. They have a better chance of winning the WC in this scenario, but they're likely staying home for the playoffs. Part of this logic is also what you think of Milwaukee and St. Louis. If you think Milwaukee is really good, you'd rather them sweep St. Louis. If you think the Brewers and/or the Cardinals are going to collapse in September no matter what, then a split would be good. The later it gets the more I believe that the former is closer to the truth then the latter, although the latter still has a pretty good chance of happening. I don't want the Brewers or the Cardinals in the playoffs. I want the Cubs in the playoffs. The only sure way that happens is to win the division. The surest way for that to happen is for the two teams behind them to beat each other up as much as possible so even when the Cubs lose one of the two isn't gaining ground on them. The closer the Brewers and/or the Cardinals are to the Cubs the less likely it is that the Cubs make the playoffs. When you win your division it doesn't matter what your record is compared to the rest of the league. That's not the case with the WC. I really wish we had access to BP's playoff odds simulator so we could run both scenarios out and see the actual percentages. It would be fascinating. The only sure way for the Cubs to be in the playoffs is to win a playoff spot. That can happen one of two ways. Sometimes the WC takes more wins then your particular division. In the Cubs case, that is statistically incredibly unlikely. In fact, mathematically, the Central has an 85 percent chance to win the WC this year. In the other 15 percent, the chances that the division winner has also collapsed behind the WC winner from another division is not good. When the division will take more wins then the WC, which will happen this year, the only difference between the races is the number of teams involved. For every extra team comes extra risk with more teams that could get hot and possibly catch you. In the case this year, there is at most 2 extra teams involved in the WC race than are also involved in the division race, and they're not all that likely to get in the race at this point of the season. The chances of adding extra teams to the race is low, so each game of lead is statistically more important. The easiest way still for the Cubs to miss the playoffs is to be behind Milwaukee and St. Louis, so it's better to push one of them back as far as possible. Focusing on winning the division at the possible expense of the WC brings increased reward (homefield throughout) but it also brings increased risk of the Brewers and Cardinals being the 2 central representatives.

It's more of a logic exercise than an argument. And we still have an hour until game time. I think it boils down to risk. I don't like risk. If the Cubs win the division they are in. If they're fighting for a wildcard there is risk. However, in CCP's scenario they're in either way so it doesn't matter. I think things are going to get very tight down the stretch. The Mets and Phillies are playing much better baseball as of late. The Mets are playing good baseball. The Phillies are not. The Phillies have been treading water as long as the Cubs have. They hit their high water mark on June 8th, 13 games over .500. At the end of June, they were 5 games over. Today, they're 6 games over. There's plenty of risk either way. I also am looking to minimize the Cubs risk, and am even willing to throw away homefield to do it. If the Cubs play well (say, get to 94 wins or so) the only way they don't make the playoffs is if Milwaukee and St Louis both play really well and pass them. There's a statistically insignificant chance that 2 of the 3 of Philly, New York, and Florida can win 40 of their next 60 games. That's too good of a pace for too long for two teams in a division to do. If the Cubs play ok and win about 89 games (1 game under .500 the rest of the way), then the East could catch them. But Milwaukee and St Louis both have great chances to pass them as well. I think the Cubs would squeak out the WC in this scenario and probably lose the division by 3-4 games. If the Cubs collapse to 85 wins (9 games under .500 the rest of the way) they aren't winning either the division or WC. They have a better chance of winning the WC in this scenario, but they're likely staying home for the playoffs. Part of this logic is also what you think of Milwaukee and St. Louis. If you think Milwaukee is really good, you'd rather them sweep St. Louis. If you think the Brewers and/or the Cardinals are going to collapse in September no matter what, then a split would be good. The later it gets the more I believe that the former is closer to the truth then the latter, although the latter still has a pretty good chance of happening.

Well, he does have better numbers against left-handers than the 3 hitters behind him this season. He should be batting either 5th or 6th tonight.

Lets see the Cubbies are going to try this again and bring a starting pitcher up and throw him in the relief role. Look folks he will become a "two pitch" pitcher as in the bullpen he will throw a FB/SL combination. Does success in AAA automatically mean you will do well in the Majors? Hell no, as while Shark throws hard he throws a flat FB. I've said this before that pitchers have better success with a mid 90's FB with late movement than someone that throws High 90's with a straight FB. Then you throw him in the middle of a playoff race with the Brew crew coming and I can't wait to watch this. I think Samardizja is primarily a 2 pitch pitcher anyway. He mixes in a couple other pitches, but it's mostly the fastball/splitter combo that he's used the last couple months. Those 2 pitches are a great combination for a relief pitcher. I would actually rather have Ceda. Samardzija could use the extra development. Ascanio and Wuertz haven't been lighting the world on fire. If Samardzija does come up though, it will be good experience for possible help in September from him. Samardzija still uses his change quite a bit, from all the quotes he's made. Thanks for the clarification. I forgot about the change. He better have kept it after all the rumors of the Cubs making him throw it constantly last year.

To be honest, I still don't understand why a split would be the best thing. I've been rooting for a sweep the whole time, and while I preferred a Cardinals sweep, a Brewers sweep isn't too bad either. The Cubs could lose sole possession of 1st place tonight with a Brewers win and Cubs loss. If the Brewers and Cards split the 4 games the worse the Cubs could do with a loss tonight is be 2 games up. a tie for first is worse than being 2 games up. Yes, but if they had split the Cubs would be 2 games from missing the playoffs entirely with a loss tonight. A sweep and the worst the Cubs can be back is 3. And the Cardinals would have only been 1 back in your scenario of a split and the Cubs losing tonight, not 2. I'd rather the Cubs be closer to not winning the division then closer to the Cubs not making the playoffs. Again, you have to think about the NL East. You're not. The Cubs win the division is what is important. The closer they are to not winning the division and the less likely it is that they make the playoffs. The division is what matters. If they win the division they could have a .500 record for all I care, they still get into the playoffs. I'd rather see the other two teams fighting for the Wild Card. I am looking at the East. But if the Cubs let 2 teams from the East pass them at this point, they aren't winning the Central anyway. 1 of the 2 teams of the Brewers or Cardinals may also play that badly. Certainly not both. So the NL East point really becomes irrelevant for the purposes of this question or at most an incredibly tiny factor. If the Cubs have enough wins to win the division this year, 99.9 percent of the time they'll have more wins than the WC winner. Your way increases the chance of the Cubs to win the division, but I still believe that it decreases the Cubs overall chance of making it into the playoffs. If the standings were tighter between the Central and other divisions, it might be different. But with a situation of the 3 teams in the Central having the 3 best records in the NL, I'd rather increase my chances of making the playoffs in anyway possible, and the best way to do that is to push the 3rd best record as far back as possible.

Lets see the Cubbies are going to try this again and bring a starting pitcher up and throw him in the relief role. Look folks he will become a "two pitch" pitcher as in the bullpen he will throw a FB/SL combination. Does success in AAA automatically mean you will do well in the Majors? Hell no, as while Shark throws hard he throws a flat FB. I've said this before that pitchers have better success with a mid 90's FB with late movement than someone that throws High 90's with a straight FB. Then you throw him in the middle of a playoff race with the Brew crew coming and I can't wait to watch this. I think Samardizja is primarily a 2 pitch pitcher anyway. He mixes in a couple other pitches, but it's mostly the fastball/splitter combo that he's used the last couple months. Those 2 pitches are a great combination for a relief pitcher. I would actually rather have Ceda. Samardzija could use the extra development. Ascanio and Wuertz haven't been lighting the world on fire. If Samardzija does come up though, it will be good experience for possible help in September from him.

To be honest, I still don't understand why a split would be the best thing. I've been rooting for a sweep the whole time, and while I preferred a Cardinals sweep, a Brewers sweep isn't too bad either. The Cubs could lose sole possession of 1st place tonight with a Brewers win and Cubs loss. If the Brewers and Cards split the 4 games the worse the Cubs could do with a loss tonight is be 2 games up. a tie for first is worse than being 2 games up. Yes, but if they had split the Cubs would be 2 games from missing the playoffs entirely with a loss tonight. A sweep and the worst the Cubs can be back is 3. And the Cardinals would have only been 1 back in your scenario of a split and the Cubs losing tonight, not 2. I'd rather the Cubs be closer to not winning the division then closer to the Cubs not making the playoffs.

To be honest, I still don't understand why a split would be the best thing. I've been rooting for a sweep the whole time, and while I preferred a Cardinals sweep, a Brewers sweep isn't too bad either.

Let me preface this by saying that Wuertz should be brought back up ASAP. But he was sent down in large part because he hadn't pitched well since the middle of May. At some points in there, he had some strange usage patterns, and at other points he didn't. But he was pretty bad for about a 40 day stretch and his last 15 appearances in the majors or so. How has he done in comparison to Howry in that stretch though? Howry's allowed a lot less baserunners. Wuertz has the much better ERA. Howry has been very good at coming in with runners on. Haven't found how Wuertz has done in those spots. Wuertz's ERA is really good because other people have come in and done a great job of getting out of his innings where he has let the first couple runners on. The last 17 outings he had in the majors, he was allowing over 2 baserunners an inning. You can't survive long as a relief pitcher doing that.

Let me preface this by saying that Wuertz should be brought back up ASAP. But he was sent down in large part because he hadn't pitched well since the middle of May. At some points in there, he had some strange usage patterns, and at other points he didn't. But he was pretty bad for about a 40 day stretch and his last 15 appearances in the majors or so.

Edmonds did not have less than a .375 OPS when the Cubs picked him up.

You're absolutely right. You honestly believe that? Would you have anymore satisfaction as a fan if the Cubs had managed to pull one out in 69 or 75 or 84 or any other year? Who the hell cares? I was commenting more on the bolded part... that at the end of the year, it doesn't mean anything to win your division if you don't win the World Series. That's a little depressing. Surely there must be enjoyment in a good year over a bad year, right? I'd much rather get there and lose every year than be out of it in mid-August. I think it still means a lot to win your division. It means something, but the goal of every single team is obviously to win the World Series. If you don't win it, you failed your goal. The Cubs have failed since 1908. True, that's the ultimate goal of the team. But the ultimate goal of the fans is to be able to enjoy the team the most. Obviously, winning a world title is the best way to do that, but playing consistently good baseball from year to year has to be a close second, even if it comes with disappointment at the end of the year. 2003 for example was a great year to be a fan..so many good times and great games in that year. Last year was another great year. This year has been a whole lot of fun, and that's not going to change if the Cubs bomb out in the playoffs (although if they collapse the next two months, the opinion of the year probably does change).

You're absolutely right. You honestly believe that? Would you have anymore satisfaction as a fan if the Cubs had managed to pull one out in 69 or 75 or 84 or any other year? Who the hell cares? I was commenting more on the bolded part... that at the end of the year, it doesn't mean anything to win your division if you don't win the World Series. That's a little depressing. Surely there must be enjoyment in a good year over a bad year, right? I'd much rather get there and lose every year than be out of it in mid-August. I think it still means a lot to win your division.

So, let me see if I have my math right. Daytona has rained out 3 times out of 99 total games. Mesa has only rained out once right? So 1 out of 25. So that's 4 times out of 124 games. And Rich Hill has been the scheduled starting pitcher for 3 of those 4 games. MILB.com only has Hill listed for 3 official appearances with Mesa. For some reason, I thought it was 4, but I'll run with the 3 number for now. So Hill has been rained out in 3 of his 4 starts that he has tried to take the mound for his 2 teams (I'm counting each game for one-if they have to reschedule it, the 2nd time doesn't count), while the other pitchers have been rained out 1 out of 120 times. So Rich Hill is 9000 percent more likely to get rained out than any other pitcher on those two squads. It's purely a random luck driven stat with a tiny sample size, but it's still pretty improbable.

Probably my favorite night in my sports watching life (conference championship night) edging out IU coming back against Duke and a couple memorable Pacers games along the way (with so many last second shots, it's hard to choose). The Cubs have had some awesome moments, but haven't quite had that one absolutely memorable one quite yet (and it doesn't necessarily have to come in the WS, as the others on my list show). Sorry, I'm off track reminiscing. I came in to say good luck to the Bears this year. I hope to be there for the Bears-Colts game in a month. Until then, let's not have the injury bug hit either one of our squads more than it already has. If your team is mediocre or climbs back into excellence, try to enjoy the ride. You have a lot of players that are very fun to watch.

No more drafting from Notre Dame imo. (ok this has a little to do with the fact that I hate the place) Well, our opinions are turning around to the positive on our biggest investment into a Notre Dame product lately. But this one I think the Cubs have developed more than their program did.

I think we're going to see the Ward-Fukudome-Hoffpauir outfield this inning by the way Ward acted right before the break. So hopefully we bring in a ground ball pitcher.

It unfortunately smells like an Edmonds injury. You certainly don't doubleswitch a pitcher to bat 2nd next inning for that purpose.

Get a pitch right over the middle of the plate and hit it hard? It's too bad it was another groundout, but Lee's approach was fine there.

Marquis actually has excellent numbers against the Diamondback hitters, even after you factor in that Chris Young has hit 3 HR in 6 at-bats off of him. He has a decent shot of having another good outing tonight. Petit doesn't have much of a history against this Cubs team. He pitched pretty well against the Cubs last year, but half of the lineup has changed since then.

I would argue no. There are more ground ball base hits that are hit into LF than RF. Coming to the plate, Soriano's arm is more valuable where there are more chances to throw out players who are trying to score from 2nd. The only other big difference is that your RF having a strong arm can prevent a runner or two from going to first to third. You don't see that many runners taking that chance anymore though, and you're not going to get many assists at third base. It will be more about prevention than actually getting outs from your arm. The big reason why I would say LF is that third base coaches are a lot more cautious in bringing runners to third base than sending them home. That enthusiasm in waving runners in needs to be countered by having the best arm in LF. At the same time, I think athletically you want your best athletic corner OF to be in RF (less damage in misplayed balls in LF than right), so that's why I would move Soriano to RF anyway if Dunn came aboard.

I'm hoping for a sweep in the Cards-Brewers series just because of the WC issue. If all 3 teams were fighting for 1 spot, I'd hope for a split. But all 3 teams could very well be fighting for 2 spots (unless 2 NL East teams keep playing better than the NL central teams and pass them). So if 1 of these teams sweeps, the Cubs will have a more significant lead on getting a playoff spot than if a split happens.

Is it really a good idea? Remember what happened last time he was rushed back. Didnt start off so well. Too bad were not playing the Giants or the Badres. If we were, that could have been considered his rehab assignment. It depends on how he felt today. And with the Cubs having 2 of their next 3 games against left-handers, as long as Soriano can field his position (and every indication says that there should be no problem with that) he likely won't be a downgrade to whoever else the Cubs would throw out in that spot. I don't think the Cubs should have real high expectations for him the next 3 days, but I don't mind if they throw him out there in the majors instead of the minors. As long as there isn't a high chance of having a setback (which isn't common with this type of injury, and it doesn't sound likely in this case) then Soriano working on his timing at the plate is more upside with little downside for the major league team.

That actually makes a lot of sense to me. He's a switch-hitting OF with power and Texas needs pitching. Marquis would look really good in a Texas uniform as the veteran pitcher in the deal. We'd probably have to send at least one prospect back to Texas if they take Marquis. Who would be a fair offer? Let's just say this. Texas asked for Gallagher and Murton for Marlon Byrd in the winter. Bradley should have a lot higher value to them, especially since he'll get at least one draft pick for Texas when he becomes a free agent. The price would likely be very high.