CubColtPacer

Oh no, now the Pirates are purposely ordering their rotation in order to try to beat the Cubs:

I found this interesting. When Houston decided to pitch the two rookies instead of Williams and Oswalt: If you read later in the article, there's a great little rant from Floyd about it. http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070918&content_id=2216087&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc

Is it? Do you see the scrub the Astros are throwing out tomorrow. Guys we aren't really tied for first. We are as good as in second the way the Brewers are playing. With the way the Brewers are playing? They've won 4 in a row against horrible pitchers. Before that they had lost 3 out of their previous 4. This weekend they will be going into Atlanta, and the Braves have to win that series for them to have any chance at the playoffs, so they'll be pulling out all the stops. The Brewers would be lucky to get 3 out of 4 down there, and they easily could only take 1. If you add in that Sheets might miss a start and suddenly Vargas is back in their rotation, that hurts them even more. Add in the Padres series at the end of the season, who are almost certainly going to be fighting for their playoff lives for somebody, and I certainly don't think we can assume that the Cubs are automatically 1 game down. For us...4 games left with Cincy...We're 6-8 against them 3 games with Pitt...we're 5-7 against them 3 games with Fla... we're 0-3 against them. If we go 5-5 in our last ten, I'd be surprised. I'm guessing 4-6 or 3-7 Well, the 0-3 against Florida you can pretty much throw out the window. That was the Cubs low point, and Florida was actually a decent ballclub at that point and they've fallen apart in the second half. That series in May means absolutely nothing on how the Cubs match up with the Marlins. As for Cincy and Pitt, it's hard to tell for sure. I'd be surprised if the Cubs go 4-6 or 3-7. My guess would be 6-4 (2-2 against the Reds, 2-1 against the Pirates, 2-1 against the Marlins) and then we'll just have to hope that's enough.

Is it? Do you see the scrub the Astros are throwing out tomorrow. Guys we aren't really tied for first. We are as good as in second the way the Brewers are playing. The Astros suck and they're 12-4, soonto be 13-4 vs. theBrewers this season. The Brewers have 4 against Atlanta, 3 against St. Louis, and 4 against San Diego. This division is the Cubs for the taking. It all depends on how bad they want it. Look at the pitching matchups though. They do not favor us. Other than Hudson, Smoltz and Young, they face all really bad pitchers with over 5 ERAs. Hudson hasn't been good since May, Smoltz is negated by Gallardo (who has 21 straight scoreless innings) and Young has an over 4.00 ERA on the road. Meanwhile Lilly goes on 3 days rest tomorrow and Z's last 2 starts are negated by Gorzelanny and Harrang again They also face Maddux. Also, if the Brewers are playing that well and win 2 out of 3 say from the Padres in the last weekend before the Sunday game, there's almost no way the Padres would have clinched by then if the Brewers do that. So the Padres would be forced to throw Peavy in the final game. The only probable way the Padres will clinch before that last Sunday with the Phillies right on their heels is if they beat the Brewers at least 2 out of the first 3, which will be 2 losses that could allow the Cubs to catch and/or pass the Padres in the final weekend.

Is it? Do you see the scrub the Astros are throwing out tomorrow. Guys we aren't really tied for first. We are as good as in second the way the Brewers are playing. With the way the Brewers are playing? They've won 4 in a row against horrible pitchers. Before that they had lost 3 out of their previous 4. This weekend they will be going into Atlanta, and the Braves have to win that series for them to have any chance at the playoffs, so they'll be pulling out all the stops. The Brewers would be lucky to get 3 out of 4 down there, and they easily could only take 1. If you add in that Sheets might miss a start and suddenly Vargas is back in their rotation, that hurts them even more. Add in the Padres series at the end of the season, who are almost certainly going to be fighting for their playoff lives for somebody, and I certainly don't think we can assume that the Cubs are automatically 1 game down.

Just watched the 1st 3 innings. I'm not sure we can definitely say that Zambrano is bad because he's on short rest. That's going to be the easy explanation, sure. At the same time, this is the 5th time he's faced the Reds. He's given up 5, 6, 0, and 6 runs in the previous 4 games. So he's been terrible against the Reds 3 out of 4 games this season on regular rest. So if we put the blame on this outing as short rest, then what explains the other outings? The better argument is that the Reds have simply owned Zambrano. They have lots of left handed hitters that have hit Z hard. That's true no matter what kind of rest Z gets. You add in an infield hit, a couple bloops, and a runner on the move at the right time to avoid a double play to the hard hit balls, and suddenly you have a bad outing.

I was thinking about the reasons that Theriot might be overrated by many fans, and I was thinking about some of the misconceptions that have come up in this thread. I think Theriot is overrated less because he hustles, plays the right way, etc. and more because 1) he's young and 2)his spot in the batting order. Theriot bats behind Soriano and in front of Lee and Ramirez. Let's say the bottom of the order gets on and the top of the order doesn't drive them in. Who gets blamed, Theriot, or one of Soriano, Lee, or Ramirez? People are going to say Soriano, Lee, and Ramirez failed because those are the hitters who are supposed to come through in those situations. They are making the big money, they are the power hitters, and they are the veterans. By the same token, when Theriot does well, it's much more memorable because he came through. If Theriot has a hot streak, everybody knows about it, but cold streaks by a player like Theriot are usually ignored because people are concentrating on the faults of the bigger hitters. Over the course of the season, one can get a very distorted picture of what actually happened, and it's perfectly understandable why that's the case. I think Theriot is liked because of his hustle and willingness to do whatever it takes. I think Theriot is overrated because 1)many people love speed just as much as power, and 2) his spot in the batting order around so many big hitters obscures his failures and props up his successes.

Traschel again...he was good last time he pitched in a one game playoff. :D I'm just wondering with these 3 day rest decisions, if Lou is trying to manipulate the schedule in the event of a tie. No, Lou is really just trying to skip the 5th starter as much as possible because he's not comfortable with Marshall or Trachsel on the mound right now. Lou is trying to pitch his 4 best pitchers as much as possible these last two weeks. I'm not sure Lou has any idea what will happen with a 1 game playoff, and I think he's pulling out all the stops in order to try to win before that. BTW, from the other thread on pitching probables for the rest of the year, it looks like it will probably be Jason Marquis if it goes to a 1 game playoff.

They would play in Chicago because the Cubs won the coin flip. As far as pitching matchups, I think it's too early to tell. The Cubs pitching rotation is not set for the final week yet.

It's only 2 days of doing this though. Like someone else said, Marmol, Howry, and Dempster got the day off last night, and those were the only 3 who pitched Sunday. So there is absolutely nobody in the pen who has thrown two days in a row. Even if the Cubs have to go to the bullpen early the next two nights, they should easily have enough rested arms down there, and then the off day Thursday will get the pen back rested again.

Mine wasn't in order. I don't think Eric makes the BA top 100, but that doesn't mean he can't be a good ML player. I don't know what was so wrong with Patterson's season at AAA. He walked 54 times in 516 ABs, which is an excellent rate. He hit for about as much power as you could expect. He struck out less than he ever has as a professional. I think he could be a ML 2B or a CF, where he could be at least a league average to above average hitter for his position. I don't think anything was necessarily wrong with Eric Patterson's numbers-until you consider the offensive environment at Iowa and the PCL overall. The PCL overall had an average OPS of 783, so Patterson only was 34 points above average. At Iowa, there were plenty of people who had better seasons than Patterson. In fact, his closest batting comparisons this year are to Sam Fuld, Koyie Hill, and Josh Kroeger. That's not the greatest company there, and there were several other non-prospects that had similar or better numbers than Patterson. Most of the other actual prospects in Iowa last year had over 900 OPS's.

LOL...yeah all you guys that weren't mentioning Soto's name a few months ago...sheesh... Well, it depends on how many months ago. There weren't that many people talking about Soto in March or April. I mean, people wanted him as the backup catcher, but nobody thought he was any good. Well we were certainly talking about him before the Kendall deal...and the Bowen deal... Agreed. So it just depends on if Hendry meant 3 (which he's wrong) or 5 (which he's right) when he said a few months. People use few to reference so many numbers that I can't tell which interpretation to take, and if I don't know I tend to give the benefit of the doubt.

I have no idea? Might as well have a force at every base. Perhaps the manager didn't trust that Weathers can throw strikes? That's the thing. If you catch the grounder at second, you still have to check third and that would make it very difficult to turn 2. So you go 1. Now you have 2nd and 3rd, now they have to walk the next guy, who was on deck when they pitched to DeRosa? Jones was on deck behind DeRosa. The Reds manager said he didn't want to walk the bases loaded and put that much pressure on Weathers to throw strikes.

LOL...yeah all you guys that weren't mentioning Soto's name a few months ago...sheesh... Well, it depends on how many months ago. There weren't that many people talking about Soto in March or April. I mean, people wanted him as the backup catcher, but nobody thought he was any good.

Easy. If you're Clemson, do you stick a player who has never played outfield before in CF? Colvin's been a guy who has reportedly made great strides every year he has played in the OF. Honestly, I have no idea who to believe anymore. I've heard all kinds of reports (there have been no reports that he was terrible in CF, but I've heard everything from will eventually move to a corner to so-so to excellent). I don't think the fact that he played LF at Clemson means that he cannot play CF though because he was still very new to the outfield while he was at Clemson. As for top 100 prospects, my guess is that Colvin will be in most of them. He'll be down pretty far (80's or 90's) but he'll be there. Colvin will also be in the top 3 of about every Cubs prospect list. I can't back that up though, so that's just my opinion and I guess we'll have to wait and see on that.

Again, that's perception. Theriot has seen less pitches per plate appearance than Jacque Jones, Aramis Ramirez, or Alfonso Soriano. In fact, the only non-pitcher on the roster who sees less pitches per PA is Cliff Floyd. Everyone else sees more pitches than Theriot does. Theriot has put the first pitch into play more than any other Cub, and while the Cubs as a whole have an .896 OPS on the first pitch, Theriot has a .655 on the first pitch. He gives up the most easy outs to the opposition of anybody on the team. He also leads the team in putting it into play on 0-1 count, is 4th on putting it into play with a 1-0 count, and leads the team in putting it in play on a 1-1 count. That is amazing for any one person to lead the team in that many early counts, and it shows that Theriot goes up there trying to put one of the first couple pitches in play. He rarely gets deep in the count. When he does get deep in the count, usually good things happen, but it gets there less with Theriot than with any other hitter on the Cubs roster.

I disagree with some others that think the non-quantifiable things are very small. I actually think they are somewhat large (although not nearly as much as football or basketball). However, I question if Theriot has those "intangibles" that everyone describes of him. "He provides a spark, and he's a winner"-the Cubs are 60-58 with him starting, and 19-14 when he doesn't. Additionally, the Cubs score 5.24 runs per game when Theriot is not in the lineup, while they only score 4.37 runs per game when Theriot starts. (those might be a little off, I was trying to do a manual count-there's at least a .6 or .7 difference though, maybe Fred can run it through his program and check). There's absolutely no evidence that Theriot makes the Cubs better. They don't win more when he's in the lineup, and they don't score as much when he's in the lineup (countering the intangible that even though Theriot might not be getting on, his spark has made others better around him). There are other intangibles, but I think most people would agree those are the two biggest, and Theriot hasn't made a difference on either one.

You guys I will defend Lou putting Kendall and Floyd in the lineup most of the time, but with those batter/pitcher matchups above, Murton and Soto please tomorrow. If I can only have 1, I'd rather have Soto (because Floyd is hitting the ball so well lately).

No idea on where to find it yet, but - I don't remember it too clearly, as I was having an aneurism at the time as well, but I think Santo's call on the Ramirez double is a little more vintage Santo than on the final play. Definitely remember to check out the tying hit. Yeah, I listened to both. I don't even remember Santo on the final call. It was all Pat...Derosa..ground ball....Cubs win! Off of the glove of Weathers! That is about all I remember. It wasn't all that memorable of a call. The funny thing about the rant that the Cubs were lucky is that Ron had a big rant in the 8th inning about how everything had gone the Reds way tonight, from check swings to diving catches to ....(can't remember all of it). Ron usually roots like a fan, but he doesn't usually rant like that so that made me believe him a little more (I missed the 4th-part of the 7th).

I think Soriano's range is probably above average normally, but he has battled leg injuries for over 1/2 the year.

The Cubs also have pitchers who historically have below average BABIP's. Lilly in the last 6 years has 3 well below average and 3 average BABIPs. Hill in his 3 significant data sizes (Triple A 06, Major league 06, and Major league 07) all below average. Marquis has had more of a history of low numbers than high ones. Zambrano's highest BABIP in the last 4 years was .284, which is well below average. Even Marshall has a slightly below average BABIP rate. The defense isn't that great for the Cubs. It's pretty good, but it's nothing special. The Cubs have assembled starting pitchers who have shown that they can keep their BABIP's down and have hitters get bad contact on the ball. That has artificially made the defense look a lot better than it actually is.

Yeah, if Kendall gets a deal like that he's gone because the Cubs won't offer him that. As far as the Blanco retiring thing, I could see the Cubs keeping him on the 60 day DL and having him not officially retire. I don't think the Cubs will go into the offseason making moves with the thought that Blanco will be on the roster. I think they'll plan to be without him, one way or the other.

I mostly agree with this. The only thing that makes me wonder is that it seems pretty obvious to me that Blanco is going to retire after the year. If Blanco retires, Kendall will likely be signed back, and then it will probably be an open competition in ST next year.

3rd in the NL. There are only 4 NL teams in the top 10 of that statistic.

If the Cubs stick with 4 starters, does it matter that much on who is the 3rd starter? Besides, it's not like Marquis and Hill have been a ton different this year. Hill has been better, but not by so much to say that Marquis starting the game before Hill would be terrible, and it could be argued that Marquis is pitching more consistently well than Hill is down the stretch.