CubColtPacer

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.

How are the splits broken up? I don't know, but completely guessing I would assume that they were very good in April and May, ok in June, bad in July and August, and improving in September. In ERA for all of MLB (I'm using everybody because the initial poster did) the Cubs are: 7th in April 16th in May 4th in June 1st in July 18th in August 9th in September If you were talking about BAA for MLB: 4th in April 8th in May 1st in June 1st in July 8th in August 6th in September So April, August, and September were as you remembered it with May, June, and July being different.

The batter pitcher matchups look absolutely ugly tonight. If you want to give Pie a start, tonight is the night. Jones is 4/28 against Arroyo. Unfortunately, Soriano is 4/27 and Lee is 4/18. Floyd is 5/15 with a double and a home run, so he'll be the starter in right field. Ramirez, Theriot, and DeRosa have all been solid against Arroyo. Kendall is 1/9 against Arroyo lifetime. It's a good time to give Soto another start.

You could always pull out a SB tape and watch him coach his team to a win of Super Bowl XI. :D Did he just win the one Super Bowl? I can't remember how many his Raiders won. Yeah, I'm pretty sure it was just 1. They unfortunately ran into the Steelers several times in the AFCCG.

They'd need a better pass defense as well. Good QB's can really exploit their linebackers and secondary. The Patriots still run good enough schemes though that average or less QB's are absolutely befuddled by them, and that's what is happening tonight.

You could always pull out a SB tape and watch him coach his team to a win of Super Bowl XI. :D

I think people are still having a hard time adjusting to the fact that Piniella doesn't really care about who is a proven veteran and who isn't. If this was Dusty Baker's team, yes, it'd be Blanco and Blanco would be playing as often as Soto is right now. But, it's Soto who's getting the AB's and he will be on the playoff roster if the Cubs get the chance to fill one out. In fact, the case can be made that Soto should be starting right now given that Kendall is 8-50 in September and Soto is 11-19. Not saying this means Soto wont be on a playoff roster if we make it, but its clear today was just an offday for Kendall and nothing more. Yup, that was Piniella's quote before the game. The only thing I can find after the game is this little comment by Muskat: I think Piniella is coming around on Soto, I just wish he'd go a little faster on it. One thing that I am happy about is that Piniella seems to really like Soto, which spells good things for his PT in 2008. I doubt he'll ever get to do more than split time in 2007, but I do hope it gets to that point.

Here are the starting pitchers who signed for more money per year than Marquis last offseason: Miguel Batista, Adam Eaton, Tom Glavine, Kei Igawa (including posting fee), Ted Lilly, Greg Maddux, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Gil Meche, Mike Mussina, Vincente Padilla, Andy Pettitte, Jason Schmidt, Jeff Suppan, Jeff Weaver, Randy Wolf, Barry Zito Here are the players who were paid comparable to Marquis (6 to 7.5 million per year): Orlando Hernandez, Mark Mulder, Woody Williams So there were 19 pitchers just last offseason who were paid as much or more than Marquis. Of those 19, how many have been better than Marquis this season? 4, maybe 5. By the way, if you look at the pitchers who were in the next pay level down from Marquis, you get pitchers like Kip Wells (4 million), Joel Pineiro (4 million), Tony Armas (3.5 million), Steve Trachsel (3.1 million), and David Wells (3 million). Do you want any of those pitchers? In this pitching market, if you pay a pitcher 7 million a year, you're expecting a below average to average pitcher. Anybody who has shown to be a little above average like Lilly, Padilla, etc. got larger deals. Marquis signed that contract to be an average pitcher, and he's been above average this year. I don't see how anyone can say he was overpaid for this year. In fact, if teams thought they could get a 4 ERA out of him, they would have paid him 10-13 million like they paid other pitchers with histories of giving over a 4 ERA (Suppan is a great example of this). Now, I have no idea what will happen to him in year 2 or year 3. Almost 1 year in though, he's anything but overpaid relative to the market.

No timeouts = No challenges he used the timeout after that play, he should have challenged before taking a timeout Agreed. If you're going to take a timeout anyway, why not challenge the spot of the ball? The fumble may have not been reviewable, but the spot of the ball is, and there is absolutely nothing to lose.