CubColtPacer

They said it was blowing in, but it wasn't blowing very hard today at all.

He does do it at a pretty high rate. He's put 4 balls into play on the first pitch now out of 21 total AB's.

A home run away from the cycle in the first inning already.

Well, we finally got our answer. That Pie bunt a week ago was his own, not called from the bench.

Lineups Cubs Soriano-LF Pie-CF Lee-1B Floyd-RF DeRosa-3B Fontenot-2B Hill-C Izturis-SS Marquis-P Seattle Suzuki-CF Lopez-2B Guillen-RF Ibanez-LF Sexon-1B Betancourt-SS Bloomquist-3B Burke-C Weaver-P

I'd have no problem with that-if they are going to have DeRosa play short at all. Before Fontenot came up and Murton went down, it seemed like that a good ratio would be DeRosa 6 (all at 2nd), Theriot 5 (1 at 2nd, 4 at SS) and Izturis 3 (all at SS) would be good. That would give everybody at least one day off, and Izturis only steals one start out of 7, hopefully against a pitcher he's been good against in the past. Now with Fontenot up and playing well, and a lack of options in RF to play against LHP, DeRosa should probably play 6 out of 7 (2B against right-handers and RF against left-handers), Fontenot play a variable amount (giving DeRosa days off against right-handers at times, and playing 2B against left-handers), Theriot play 6 out of 7 (all at SS), and Izturis playing 1 out of 7 giving Theriot a day off. Of course, none of this can even start to happen until Ramirez comes back.

Will Carroll doesn't seem to think so. He goes on in the same article to say:

got any numbers to support that ridiculous claim? didn't think so. honestly though, i would love to see you list all the instances where barrett's d cost the cubs a run. Well, using one formula for Runs Created, Barrett has generated 26.1 runs for us. I don't know what the "average catcher" would have generated, but taking Blanco's numbers and extrapolating them upward to equal Barrett's playing time, you come up with 11.5 RC. Doing the same with Koyie Hill you get 2.4 RC. On the other side of the coin, I can think of 3 or 4 instances where Barrett's defense or bone headed base running contributed to a CUBS loss. Some will undoubtedly argue that there are more. I can't imagine that there are enough runs given up by Barrett to negate the extra offense he brings, in spite of his current slump. Thank-you, Fred. That sums it up. Barrett may have cost the Cubs a run here or there, but I doubt he's cost anywhere near the 15 run difference between him and Blanco. I agree that Barrett probably still outdoes Blanco, but I think Blanco's extrapolated numbers skew the numbers a little bit against him. He has only had 36 AB's, and I don't think it's reasonable that he'd stay at a .481 OPS if he got more AB's and a better sample size. He's had 8 full time seasons, and his worst one was a .524, with his second worst at .602. So he'd still be horrible at the plate, but he would have to make up a few less runs on Barrett if he was at .602 rather than .481, and I don't think .602 is optimistic at all (his last 3 years have been .628, .678, and .723).

If Murton plays at all well at Triple A, they will find room for him on the major league roster. At the minimum Lou will get fed up with his options against left-handers and want Murton back up, and he'll be back up then.

His other two pinch-hitters are Cesar Izturis and Jacque Jones. So who's our catcher if Hill gets hurt? I'm not exactly sure. Fontenot maybe?

His other two pinch-hitters are Cesar Izturis and Jacque Jones.

Grounders and soft fly balls-there haven't been that many hard hit outs tonight.

The problem here is that it brings a much larger chance of Floyd's option vesting. Do you really want an overpriced, declining Cliff Floyd on this team in '08? I sure as hell don't. Floyd would have to average 3.17 AB's a game the rest of the year for even his first option to vest. I'm sure they won't play him against all the left-handers (when Aramis comes back, DeRosa will probably play some RF against LHP) and then when Murton comes back later in the year, there isn't that big of a chance that Floyd could have that many AB's to have the option kick in. I'm too tired to remember-is his vesting option PA's or AB's? You're right-I thought it was AB's for some reason, but it's PA's (425 of them or 100 starts). That still puts the average he would need at over 3 PA's a game, and remember also that Lou is going to double switch him out of a lot of games like he did earlier in the season for defensive purposes if the Cubs are winning.

The problem here is that it brings a much larger chance of Floyd's option vesting. Do you really want an overpriced, declining Cliff Floyd on this team in '08? I sure as hell don't. Floyd would have to average 3.17 AB's a game the rest of the year for even his first option to vest. I'm sure they won't play him against all the left-handers (when Aramis comes back, DeRosa will probably play some RF against LHP) and then when Murton comes back later in the year, there isn't that big of a chance that Floyd could have that many AB's to have the option kick in.

I don't see how anybody could possibly think it's not about the lack of consistent time. No kidding. Good track record in the minors. Good player in basically a full year in MLB. Suddenly can't find it when he's put in a platoon of sorts (a very random one, at that). Seems to me, if you're looking for a culprit, you have to at least start w/ the lack of consistent playing time, don't you? He was playing well in a platoon in July/August of last year. He played well in a platoon in July of 05. That's 3 of the best 5 months of his career in the major leagues. Murton showed consistently before this year that he could play well when he wasn't getting every at-bat. I don't see why that would suddenly change this year. it certainly wasn't a strict platoon last year... Murton had over 500 PAs and played in 144 games. He had a .351 OBP and a .787 OPS against RHP coming into this year. His OPS was over .900 the second half of last year. There's absolutely no reason that a young, cheap outfielder with numbers like that should be essentially demoted into a platoon position. I'm not saying that he should have been in a platoon situation to begin with. All I'm saying that he has shown that he can be a good player in a platoon situation because he had success in that role for parts of the last two years. He should have been given the chance to start more than he has. I think his slump is just that-a slump, and his lack of playing time means that it just took longer chronologically to get out of, because he hasn't had enough AB's to break out of the slump naturally. I hope he can get his AB's down there, break out of the slump, and then I think he'll have success when he comes back up to the majors if it be in a starter role or in a platoon.

I don't see how anybody could possibly think it's not about the lack of consistent time. No kidding. Good track record in the minors. Good player in basically a full year in MLB. Suddenly can't find it when he's put in a platoon of sorts (a very random one, at that). Seems to me, if you're looking for a culprit, you have to at least start w/ the lack of consistent playing time, don't you? He was playing well in a platoon in July/August of last year. He played well in a platoon in July of 05. That's 3 of the best 5 months of his career in the major leagues. Murton showed consistently before this year that he could play well when he wasn't getting every at-bat. I don't see why that would suddenly change this year.

I thought of Gallagher as well, but he did pitch last night, 1/3rd of an inning according to the box score. Good catch-I forgot he had to come in for Ohman and pitch to 1 batter in the 13th.

Hopefully Murton can get it back on track in AAA. He just hasn't come around so far this year. I don't think it's all the splitting time thing, because he didn't have a good grasp of his job in either 2005 or parts of 2006. Playing everyday though might let him figure out what's causing his slump and correct it. The Cubs could use his 2005/2006 numbers in the second half, and I still think he could be a valuable component to this year's team. Hopefully this means that Floyd gets most of the at-bats in right field for now.

There seem to be 4 decent options here: 1) Ohman. He gave up the run yesterday and he's the most likely person who Rapada specifically would be called up to replace. I'm not saying it's necessarily right that he would be send down/DL'd, but it might happen. 2)Wuertz to the DL-In all the other extra inning games, Wuertz pitched much earlier than he did last night. Did they want to save him because he pitched 3 days in a row Friday/Saturday/Sunday, or because his arm isn't feeling right? 3)Eyre release. The question is-why now? If they were going to do it, wouldn't it have been done a couple of weeks ago? 4)Gallagher demotion. Since he didn't pitch last night, and he's the long man, I don't know why they'd send him down tonight. It wouldn't make sense if the bullpen is tired to send down a fresh long reliever for a short reliever. All the other options are very unlikely.

I can't sort it by the number of outs, but here is a quick summary of how the team has performed with the bases loaded. Theriot has had the most opportunities-14. He is 1 for 14 with 1 BB and 4 RBI's. DeRosa has had 12 chances. He is 4 for 12 with 1 HR, 3 BB's, and 13 RBI's. Jones has had 12 chances. He is 3 for 12 with 1 3B, and 6 RBI's Lee is 2 for 9 with 1 HR, 1 2B, and 7 RBI's. Ramirez is 1 for 9 with 1 HR and 5 RBI's. Izturis is 1 for 7 with 1 RBI Nobody else has any more than 3 AB's with the bases loaded, and nobody else has a hit or a walk in that situation. The Cubs team has a .203/.284/.407 line with the bases loaded (59 AB's).

It was either double-switching Hill for Barrett, double-switching Jones for Pagan, or letting Howry hit for himself as the 2nd hitter in the 10th inning. Pick your poison.

They should trade Heinrich, who probably has a better reputation and perceived value than actual value. I saw one report a few days ago that said that the Bulls are active in the trading mark, but Hinrich is their only untouchable (the link that I provided only says that Hinrich is untouchable, not their only untouchable, but I'm pretty sure I read the "only" in the link that I read a few days ago that I cannot find right now). I'll try to track that one down for you. Ok, I found a similar link to the one I read. http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/46427/20070609/bulls_active_in_trade_scenario_discussions/

10 team 5x5 league, 120 start limit Original team (autopick draft) C-Brian McCann 1B-Nick Johnson 2B-Luis Castillo SS-Bill Hall 3B-Mark Teahan OF-Vladimir Guerrero OF-Carlos Lee OF-Carlos Beltran Util-Johnny Damon Bench-Michael Barrett Bench-Michael Cuddyer Bench-Rocco Baldelli Bench-Edgar Renteria Bench-Nick Markakis P-Roy Halladay P-Rich Hill P-Daisuke Matsuzaka RP-Fransisco Rodriguez RP-Bobby Jenks RP-Todd Jones Now C-Brian McCann 1B-Adrian Gonzalez 2B-Brian Roberts SS-Miguel Tejada 3B-David Wright OF-Vladimir Guerrero OF-Carl Crawford OF-Bill Hall Util-Todd Helton Bench-Michael Cuddyer Bench-Dan Uggla Bench-Mark Teahan P-Roy Halladay P-Rich Hill P-Daisuke Matsuzaka P-Cole Hamels P-Ben Sheets RP-Todd Jones RP-Bob Wickman Open Roster spot (about to pick up a reliever to be in this slot)

Hell, even Ryan Church: .270 .367 .465 OPS+: 125. Hendry tried to get Church though. Was that really Hendry trying, or was it just the media and us wishing? Bruce told us that Hendry was really interested in Church and had tried to get him, but the Nationals were "asking the moon" for him.

Hell, even Ryan Church: .270 .367 .465 OPS+: 125. Hendry tried to get Church though.