CubColtPacer

I don't understand the comparison at all. Estes had a 74 ERA+ with the Cubs (lower before his final game) and hadn't had a quality start since August 8th before his great start to end his year. Meanwhile Marquis has a 105 ERA+ and has had 3 quality starts out of 5 in September. There is simply no basis for comparison between the two.

If Sunday is gonna be the deciding game for the WC, they'll throw Peavy. Agree, but they are currently tied for the WC lead. They could easily be out of it by Sunday. They are currently 1 game up in the WC, not tied.

As Rob said, they are going to throw Peavy on Sunday if it's close, and it seems like the only way it wouldn't be close now is if the Padres had already beat the Brewers a couple times and were 2 games up. 2 games down by Sunday is possible for them, but not likely at all. Also, the Cubs don't need a lot from the Padres. They need 1, maybe 2 wins from them. If it were any other time besides the final week, no one would be predicting a Brewers sweep.

John Rodriguez was one of the first players off of the Cardinals bench the last couple years. I believe he is in AAA this year.

That is a very interesting list. I know Bay & Lee are Cub killers, but I didn't know how bad they own Big Z. I am surprised how bad Miggy does against him. How many HR's does Dunn have against Z? Dunn has 6 career home runs against Z.

No kidding! I don't think any other hitter has pwn3d Zambrano as much as Dunn has... but I'm too lazy to actually look at stats, so I hereby make it official! Players who have done the best with at least 15 career at-bats against Z: Jason Bay (34 AB's) .353/.463/.912 John Rodriguez (15 AB's) .400/.471/867 Carlos Lee (41 AB's) .366/.422/.780 Paul Konerko (22 AB's) .318/400/.864 Prince Fielder (21 AB's) .381/.500/.714 Ken Griffey Jr. (30 AB's) .367/.457/.733 Brandon Phillips (21 AB's) .333/.462/.619 Xavier Nady (20 AB's) .400/.409/.650 Vinny Castilla (18 AB's) .444/.500/.500 Edgar Renteria (31 AB's) .387/.500/.484 A.J. Pierzynski (15 AB's) .333/.444/.533 Adam Dunn (49 AB's) .224/.381/.592 Miguel Cabrera (18 AB's) .222/.333/.611 Felipe Lopez (28 AB's) .250/.364/.571 J.D. Drew (15 AB's) .200/.400/.533 Jose Valentin (17 AB's) .274/.400/.529 Craig Biggio (47 AB's) .255/.397/.532 Edwin Encarnacion (25 AB's) .280/.400/.520 Endy Chavez (17 AB's) .294/.333/.588 Chipper Jones (19 AB's) .263/.440/.474 Honorable mention Bobby Abreu (13 AB's, 17 PA's): .538/.647/.923 That's a very interesting list. A few surprises on there, but nothing major. What is interesting is that Dunn is probably not one of the 5 hitters in the division that you would not want Z to face. In fact, he is only the 3rd best hitter on the Reds against Z.

The Brewers wouldn't win the division outright in your scenario. If the Cubs won 3 games and the Brewers won every game for the rest of the year, there would be a 1 game playoff. As far as the Padres faltering, I don't exactly see it. Sure, they got swept by Colorado, but Colorado is the hottest team in the league (won 9 straight games). Before that sweep against Colorado, San Diego had won 7 straight. I know they are without Bradley and Cameron, but their offense has still been fine the last 2 nights. The Padres really aren't playing that badly.

I think the Cubs need to take 3 out of their last 5. Then you only count on the Padres to take 1, and even if they don't you're still in a 1 game playoff.

Truthfully, Peavy on 3 days rest (he gave up 8ER in 4IP when he did it earlier this month), Young (0-3 7.00 ERA in September, 0-2 5.68 ERA in August), and Maddux (fly ball pitcher) don't really excite me in this series. Don't pin your hopes on those guys. If he pitches Wednesday and then doesn't return until Sunday it's 4 days. Wed - Thurs 1 day Thurs - Fri 2 days Fri - Sat 3 days Sat - Sun 4 days I think he could be just fine doing that. I think Mad dog will pitch well with the playoffs on the line. Not sure about Young. Rest isn't counted like that. He is on 3 days rest if he pitches Sunday. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are the only days he doesn't pitch in between starts. Normal rest would mean that his next start would be on Monday.

Hmm, well let's see if I can organize my thoughts on this one. I definitely agree that momentum is an emotion. Sometimes it gives you more confidence that you can do anything you try to do, and sometimes it just increases your energy level. I think momentum is much harder to track in baseball than football or basketball because I believe there are many more negative aspects to momentum in baseball than the other two sports. In basketball, momentum brings some extra energy that lets the team play hard constantly and have the confidence to make jump shots, which is key. In football especially on defense, momentum keeps defenders from being tired and keeps them flying to the football which improves performance. In baseball, the confidence at the plate does help. However, energy level can be amped up to the point that focus is lost at the plate. A guy is more likely to swing at a 3-2 pitch trying to hit a ball hard when the crowd is standing up cheering, even if it's a few inches off of the plate. Momentum can help a team do more than normal, but it can also cause a team to try to do too much in every at-bat. For a pitcher, the effects on Zambrano when he feels all that extra energy is obvious. So there are both positive and negative effects of momentum in a baseball game, and the results of each at-bat are based so much on luck that momentum can be hard to quantify. I think the positive effects of momentum can be seen more from game to game than inside a game itself. That's why teams can be hot for 2 weeks or cold for 2 weeks. That doesn't mean they won't come out for a game and just be horrible even during the middle of a hot streak, but it can mean that overall the team is feeling the effects of momentum, be it positive or negative momentum. So momentum is definitely present, but it often can be so obscured by other factors that it is very difficult to predict and easily mistaken for other things.

DeRosa is a tough one to get a grip on how much value he actually has to the club. One thing that he has provided that has been huge for the club is that his versatility allows the club so much flexibility on lineups and roster moves. If Aramis goes on the DL, you can call up a 3B or a 2B. If an oufielder goes down, you can call up an OF or a 2B. If DeRosa isn't here, Theriot probably doesn't get the chance to become the everyday SS (because they wouldn't be able to lock Theriot down to one position). The Cubs have so many players who have huge platoon splits that moving DeRosa around allows Lou to take advantage of matchups. Factor in an above average bat at second base, very good defense at second (great defense at third, average defense in right and at first), and someone who handles the bat well at the plate (good fundamental guy who is very good at laying down bunts or being a situational hitter, which adds a little bit of value) and DeRosa has been quite the pickup. Does that make him more valuable than Soriano, Lee, or Ramirez? I honestly don't know. DeRosa has helped inflate other people's numbers by his flexibility which helps Lou put the best lineup on the field everyday, but it's really hard to know if that makes up for 100 points of OPS or not.

Yes. If the Cubs clinch, both Z and Lilly will sit. If they somehow clinch before Friday (which I see as possible but not likely) then my guess is that they will likely still give Rich Hill his start so he isn't waiting too long before his start in the playoffs. Personally, I'd probably pitch Z on Friday even if the Cubs clinch and give Hill and Lilly time off. I want Z on as close to regular rest as possible so he doesn't come out too strong, and Hill has thrown a lot of innings for what he's used to this year so he could use the break.

I don't know-the Cubs are on a roll since they started looking at the scoreboard more extensively. I say let them keep doing it! I mean, DeRosa in the Reds comeback game specifically mentioned the scoreboard as a big reason why the comeback happened just to cite one example. I don't quite believe him on that, but it appears from this Cubs team that it doesn't hurt them to do it.

I think he's done a lot better lately, but gave a lot of vets a lot of playing time when they were playing really bad, and let the young guys rot on the bench. Murton, Pie, and Soto didn't get any significant playing time until just recently, and Pie still hasn't. Jacque, Floyd, Izturis, Koyie, Trachsel, Miller, and Monroe have all gotten far too much PT. Lou has corrected many of his mistakes though...that's where he beats out someone like Dusty, who just rides his mistakes into the ground. I know that some of that has to do with Hendry handing him these players, and that he's had to make do. I recognize that, and I do give Lou credit for what he's done with this team. But he's had his fair share of mistakes this year. Waiting till now to unleash Soto is one of them. I don't care what other managers would do. They'd be wrong too. Well the last sentence just means that you choose to look at it with no perspective at all. Some of your playing time gripes are just ridiculous. Monroe has gotten 46 plate appearances in the 30 games since being acquired. Murton didn't get any significant time until recently? Really? Jacque disappeared in the first half when he stunk. Lou went back to him after Felix struggled in June and Jacque got hot. He cooled down but he still has an .800 OPS in the second half and no one else could contribute that this year in CF. Wade Miller had a total of 3 starts. Izturis only got 50 PA's in the 24 April games. In May his production wasn't much off of what Theriot has done (.350 OBP). Following that in his last 44 games on the roster he got 69 AB's. On the contrary Pie got 44 PA's in his first 12 games here. He had 100 PA's in June. That's not significant playing time? That's much more than the guys who you claim got too much time and it was 4th most on the team in June. You're always going to have non-productive players getting time, especially when your roster consists of what we had at C, SS and the outfield. Guys have to fail before they get their time taken away. Then in most cases, when someone produced he kept them in the lineup. The point of my last sentence is simply this. If someone does something badly, I'm not going to be giddy with someone that does it less badly. Maybe you are. That's fine. I'm not. Look I'm not trying to bash Lou. I think he's done a reasonably good job with this team this year. But I do have gripes with some of his personnel decisions this year. You were obviously fine with Floyd and Jones getting playing time when they were struggling, and Murton sitting on the bench getting periodic playing time. I wasn't. And yes, Murton hasn't gotten regular playing time until this past month. Before that it was highly erratic. I agree, Miller was probably a bad choice for me to point out, and Izturis did go away, so I'm willing to concede those points. Pie had 87 PA's in June. Jones and Pagan combined for 91 PA's in June. So Pie got less than half the total PT as Jones and Pagan. So Lou didn't exactly let him get steady playing time. Instead he broke it up into a couple games on then a couple games off. He had no rhythm. Jacque was flat out terrible in June. And Pagan is not someone in the Cubs future. It just didn't make a lot of long term sense. I agree, that Lou is a lot better at letting players earn their spots, but he was slow to pull the trigger in some instances in this season, and I happen to think they were mistakes and cost the Cubs. (FYI, I'm not complaining about what Jacque has done in the second half. But the Cubs were about to trade him away, so they thought he was toast too. So it's not like it was amazing foresight on Lou's part to let him stick it out.) I agree with some of your point, but this isn't exactly correct. Pie didn't have a couple games on and then a couple games off. When he played, he tended to play in bunches. He came up on June 3rd and started 9 games in a row, then sat one game, then started 10 more games in a row. After that, he only had 2 starts before he was sent down again. So Pie's time might have been limited overall, but he didn't get inconsistent time. Instead, he played a lot, got benched, then got sent down. This also follows the pattern of the first time he was up where he started 9 out of 12 games, then got benched and didn't start again before he got sent down. As far as your first sentence, how else are we supposed to grade managers instead of on how other managers would do? I mean, we could say you shouldn't get giddy about a team that wins 95 games just because every other team in the league wins less. That is the same thing with managers-Lou has done more right than wrong, and is a better manager than most. You have to evaluate him by what everyone else does, because if you evaluate him on a criterion standard everybody falls short.

For most GM's, even if they wanted to sign Bonds, their club presidents would forbid the signing. There's too much to lose from a marketing standpoint for any team outside the Bay Area for a guy like Bonds for the club president to let it go through, no matter how much he may help on the field.

Choi went home to Korea after not making the team for Tampa in ST. He plays for the Kia Tigers there.

I wouldn't call it hurting the Cubs. I would call the help to the Brewers in the season and the hurting of the Padres in the playoffs about equal as far as the Cubs are concerned.

Oh, I'm sure there's almost nothing to it (there might be a minimal effect of Soriano being more comfortable, but it's not large at all). I'm not saying that having Pie on the roster for all of 2008 will make Soriano have a monster year. At the same time, Soriano is fascinating because of how many times he can be the exception to things. Consider the facts talked about on this board: hitting with nobody on and hitting with RISP should equal about to about the same production over time. Soriano is 99 points better over his career with nobody on than with RISP, which is a huge difference for how long he has been playing. batting in a certain spot in the lineup doesn't affect production. Soriano is 66 points better in the 1 spot than any other spot with at least 100 at-bats (he's had at least 100 in the 1, the 3, the 5, the 8, and the 9). hitting production is not affected by what position you are playing. Soriano has a career .908 OPS as a LF while having only an .820 OPS as a second baseman. prime is between 27 and 29. soriano has now his 2 best overall OPS seasons at 30 and 31. production is not affected by outside influences (such as who else is on the roster). Soriano's production with Pie on the roster has to be at least 300 points better than when Pie is not on the roster. Soriano's career just doesn't quite make sense. He is one of those different kind of players that cannot quite be explained. Not only are certain things about him anomalies, I believe his entire career is an anomaly.

Also another interesting note with Soriano is that the Pie being on the roster helping Soriano continues to hold true. Soriano struggled the first two months except for the couple weeks that Pie was up. When Pie came back up on the 3rd of June, Soriano went on a tear. Pie was sent back down in early July, and Soriano had a horrid July and August. Since he came back in late August though, Soriano has once again been hot with Pie on the roster. I'm not saying it means anything per se, but it is interesting to note.

Catching up? I know I'm biased to a point, because I'm of a younger generation that never saw Santo play, but I'd say that the Ramirez we have right now at least matches up (I hate to say better/worse because it's tough to compare eras) with Santo in his prime. Whether Ram puts up an entire career to match up/exceed Santo's remains to be seen, but I'd say he's pretty well on his way with the way he has performed since 2004. OPS+ would disagree with you. Santo's best 5 seasons were 164, 161, 153, 146, and 138. Ramirez's best 5 so far are 137, 136, 132, 126, and 125. So Santo's peak was a lot better than Ramirez's at least according to that metric.

How do the playoff look? Will the Cubs face the winner in the west or possibly the wild card team? It seems unavoidable at this point that the Cubs will face a West team. Arizona is the team we'd play right now since the Padres lead the wildcard. If the Phillies were to get the wild card, the Cubs would play the Mets, but it's highly unlikely. Either matchup doesn't inspire confidence. How is it highly unlikely that a Phillies team that is currently 0.5 games out of the WC will win it?

How do the playoff look? Will the Cubs face the winner in the west or possibly the wild card team? It will either be the west winner or the east winner, depending on which team wins the WC.

Yea, i would put in Hart over Ohman, Cedeno over Fontenot (backup SS and has been hot in limited appearances). I do NOT want Monroe on the roster, although I think I would put him on. I would put on Fuld. He and Pie can be the pinch-runners and defensive replacements. By adding Soto we get one more pinch-hitter, so I think we could add Fuld and still have enough people on the bench. Huh? Noway you have 2 guys on the roster for defensive purposes only. Fuld wont, and shouldnt be on the roster. Woops :oops: I fixed it in my original post. I figure that Fuld will not be on, and Monroe will. Although, we would have enough pinch hitters to survive. Ward, Soto, Murton, Cedeno/Fontenot. How many times do you need more than 4 pinch hitters in one game? If Soto isnt starting he wont be used as a pinch hitter it would leave us with no catchers if Kendall gets hurt. Cubs catchers have pinch-hit 17 times this year (Koyie Hill 5, Blanco 4, Barrett 4, Kendall 2, Bowen 1, Soto 1) and have been double-switched a few other times. Lou isn't nearly as concerned as some other managers about using his second catcher. He still doesn't usually use it as the first option, but he won't hesitate to use the catcher, especially if the catcher is a good hitter (look at Barret's 4 pinch-hit appearances in just over 2 months even though he didn't sit out all that many games). How many of those have came when we were carrying 3 catchers? It's hard to say without looking at each game log. Considering the Cubs have only carried 3 catchers for 24 days this year (2 days in July and 22 days in September) I'd say not many of them.

Yea, i would put in Hart over Ohman, Cedeno over Fontenot (backup SS and has been hot in limited appearances). I do NOT want Monroe on the roster, although I think I would put him on. I would put on Fuld. He and Pie can be the pinch-runners and defensive replacements. By adding Soto we get one more pinch-hitter, so I think we could add Fuld and still have enough people on the bench. Huh? Noway you have 2 guys on the roster for defensive purposes only. Fuld wont, and shouldnt be on the roster. Woops :oops: I fixed it in my original post. I figure that Fuld will not be on, and Monroe will. Although, we would have enough pinch hitters to survive. Ward, Soto, Murton, Cedeno/Fontenot. How many times do you need more than 4 pinch hitters in one game? If Soto isnt starting he wont be used as a pinch hitter it would leave us with no catchers if Kendall gets hurt. Cubs catchers have pinch-hit 17 times this year (Koyie Hill 5, Blanco 4, Barrett 4, Kendall 2, Bowen 1, Soto 1) and have been double-switched a few other times. Lou isn't nearly as concerned as some other managers about using his second catcher. He still doesn't usually use it as the first option, but he won't hesitate to use the catcher, especially if the catcher is a good hitter (look at Barret's 4 pinch-hit appearances in just over 2 months even though he didn't sit out all that many games).

Aramis doesn't have quite as good of numbers as some of the MVP candidates. He still would be considered except he doesn't have the plate appearances because he has missed so many games. For example, for the 3 guys you mentioned, Fielder and Wright have around 100 plate appearances more than Aramis. To win MVP and play in only around 130 games like Aramis is going to do, you have to have easily better numbers than anybody else. Aramis simply doesn't have that.