CubColtPacer

Ward is now tied for the 5th on the team in walks despite only having 10 at-bats-he has 7 walks to go along with that.

Marquis can't get a SS who can field the ball behind him. Izturis with the error today and the 3 error game-both Marquis games. Cedeno started behind Marquis and really struggled defensively that day. Theriot started behind him on Friday, and had the error and a couple other misplays. Marquis is the one who needs defense at SS the most, so it's really bad that the 3 people who have played behind him have not gotten the job done in his starts.

Is Marshall healthy yet? He's getting there-he pitched a rehab start at Daytona, and he makes his first start for Iowa tonight.

Soriano's OPS has quickly shot back over 800 on the season now-I think it was only like a week ago that it went over 700. If he can get a little run going now, the slow start will be completely forgotten.

Yes, it does, because 90% of baseball is right handed. And where did this idea come from that he cant hit righties, anyway? He's batting in the upper .280's with an OBP of .350 lifetime against righties. Granted, it is better against lefties...but it's not like he cant hit righties Murton has gotten some time against right-handers-I would like to see more (which will probably happen when either Pie is sent down or Jones is traded) but he has seen some time. BTW, only about 70% of starting pitchers are right-handed IIRC.

I think I read 67. Yup-ML record 67, NL record 64. Both of those were done in the 1930's.

When Soriano moved to LF, Murton became a bench player. Jones is the starter in right, with Murton and Floyd getting a good amount of time there as well. Murton is not getting a good amount of time in right. If you believe the back injury kept him out of the games before the off day last week, then since Soriano moved to LF Murton has started twice in right over a 5 game period. If you believe that, well, have fun. I believe in facts and the fact is Murton is getting screwed. But how is it a fact that Murton is getting screwed? Isn't everyone kinda getting screwed with all the OF's we have expecting playing time right now (excluding Soriano)? In fairness to the other argument, Murton has seen less PT than the other OF's-but also the one area where Murton is sure to get at-bats against LHP, the Cubs have faced the fewest of in the entire major leagues.

When Soriano moved to LF, Murton became a bench player. Jones is the starter in right, with Murton and Floyd getting a good amount of time there as well. Murton is not getting a good amount of time in right. If you believe the back injury kept him out of the games before the off day last week, then since Soriano moved to LF Murton has started twice in right over a 5 game period.

When Soriano moved to LF, Murton became a bench player. Jones is the starter in right, with Murton and Floyd getting a good amount of time there as well.

Swich deRosa and Theriot and add some Izturis. Lou is giving Derosa the 2nd game off. Also Barrett is playing. DeRosa has played quite a bit lately with Theriot in at short most days-it's probably good that they are giving him the 2nd game off. It's good though that they didn't put Blanco out there then so the team can still have enough power in the lineup.

Yes-they were the last team in the majors in to do that.

My guess on lineup would be Soriano/Theriot/Lee/Ramirez/Jones/DeRosa/Blanco/Pie. I bet we'll have to wait until right about gametime to know.

Really? I don't know for a fact, but I thought Pie was much faster than pretty much anyone else except Soriano. I don't know that 1/100 of a second is going to make a difference in scoring, esp. with an unproven rookie. Like somebody else said though, it was mainly a defensive substitution-Pie in center and Jones in right is a much better defensive alignment than Jones in center and Murton in right. The extra speed was just icing.

You want to bench our 3rd best hitter so far?

Soriano Howry Lee Ramirez Barrett Jones DeRosa Izturis Murton Jones, DeRosa, Izturis due up in the 8th.

I'll go ahead and edit those into my post as well-just a minute on that.

Are there any studies that look at lead-lag relationships in Pythag WL % vs actual WL %? I havent seen any evidence that Pythag WL % has strong predictive value, but maybe I missed something. Just to be precise, the claim is that the Cubs won't necessarily start winning games at the rate indicated by their current pythag %; the pythag number could just as easily drop toward 42%, the current actual WL. No one said anything about "little chance". That's an interesting question. These are the teams last year that were 2 games or more off their Pythagorean projection after April. I am putting their actual winning percentage after April, their expected winning percentage, and then what their actual winning percentage at the end of the year was. Edit: I also am including the ending Pythagorean percentage per a request. Red Sox. Actual-.577, Pythag-.461, End-.530, endpyth-.500 Yankees. Actual-.541, Pythag-.667, End-.598, endpyth-.586 Atlanta. Actual-.440, Pythag-.520, End. .488, endpyth-.525 Washington. Actual-.308, Pythag-.423, End-.438, endpyth-.493 Florida. Actual-.261, Pythag-.435, End-.481, endpyth-.432 Cincy. Actual-.692, Pythag-.577, End-.493, endpyth-.469 Houston. Actual-.630, Pythag-.560, End-.506, endpyth-.512 Cubs. Actual.583, Pythag-.500, End-.407, endpyth-.432 Pirates. Actual-.257, Pythag-.333, End-.413, endpyth-.438 Rockies-Actual-.577, Pythag-.500, End-.469, endpyth-.500 San Fran-Actual-.520, Pythag-.440, End-.472, endpyth-.472 Los Angeles-Actual-.462, Pythag-.538, End-.543, endpyth-.537 The 2 AL teams finished closer to their actual percentage than their Pythagorean percentage. The NL teams? All 10 of them finished closer to their Pythagorean percentage at the end of April than their actual percentage, but for some of them neither one was very accurate. The Cubs mid-point would be .500-so from this one season data, it would seem to indicate that they are likely to be over .500 at the end of the year. From looking at the 2005 data quickly, it looks like a couple teams were closer to their actual, but most were again closer to their pythagorean numbers.

Would the Packers have enough cap room to be able to keep Moss if he hadn't restructured? That's what I heard was the biggest hangup on the deal-Moss was only willing to re-structure his deal to go to the Patriots, and nobody else had the ability to take on the contract otherwise. BTW, the Packers selected a very interesting prospect there-OT Allen Barbre.

I have my worries about Guzman being a starter. He came back last year and didn't dominate Triple A (but I didn't expect him to coming off the injury). When he came to the majors, he was great in his 5 bullpen appearances, but terrible in his 10 starts. Now we come to this year. In the games where he came in during the late innings in the spring, he did quite well. The one game he started, he had trouble finishing hitters off and that cost him. Then he gets put in the bullpen, and again he does quite well with lots of K's. Now he goes down to the minors and is struggling again. I'm not saying that he will flame out. If he is working on things in the minors, that could certainly be the cause of a couple poor outings. It's also possible that it will just take a little more time and experience coming back from the injury to really have it click for him in the starting rotation. He has earned a few starts in the majors, and he should get that chance. If he doesn't do well and the Cubs do replace him in the majors though (I don't know with who) then I hope they send him to the bullpen, because even if he's not effective starting I think he can still be a very effective reliever. Hopefully, he does well and the Cubs never have to make that decision.

My guess is the rain delay makes it even more likely that Pie, Blanco, and Theriot get the start tomorrow.

I checked my fantasy league tonight and simply laughed: they have this line listed for Cole Hamels: 7.0 IP, 16 H, 3 R, 6 BB, 11 K Apparently in their mind Hamels is the king of the inherited runners:) I finally looked up his real line: 7.0 IP, 8 H, 3 R, 3 BB, 6 K

There's a big difference between 2006 and 2007. In 2006 the team was one of the worst in both hitting categories and pitching categories. This team is 6th in the NL in runs/game, 10th in OBP, 6th in SLG, 6th in OPS, 5th in ERA-all those would indicate they should probably be one of the top 6 teams in the NL in wins at least. Instead, they are tied for 12th.

Maybe overall, but not in close games: Hitting in close and late: SF: .264/.308/.372 Cubs: .211/.298/.250 Now, pitching it is the opposite: Cubs: 2.58 ERA San Fran: 4.11 ERA The team has simply not hit well late in close ballgames. It's hard to figure out exactly why.

According to ESPN radio, the Panthers have released Keyshawn Johnson today. This move came out of left field for me. Do any of you want him for your team? One forum I saw said the Pats should pick him up-might as well have Keyshawn, Moss, and Stallworth on the same team all demanding the ball :D

Then what was with all the "Soriano will play one position all year" talk? I think the plan, once they moved him to CF, was to keep him in CF. They blamed his slow start on the move and used the injury as an excuse to bail on that plan. But I don't think they ever planned on playing Soriano in CF until Pie was ready. You don't give a franchise caliber contract to a guy who you expect to keep a spot warm for a rookie. The Soriano will play one position all year talk mysteriously vanished after Soriano agreed to play CF. The team tried half the winter to not have Soriano play CF, they weren't exactly going to reverse course and have him play CF all year just because he started the year there, and I'm sure that they explained that to him before they accepted his volunteering to play the position. I have to agree with Jersey's view. Nobody gives a player $136M and then asks him to play out of position for half a season for the sake of a prospect who may or may not come up and take the position. I think Hendry really believed that Soriano could be a good longterm CF. That's the thing-the Cubs didn't ask Soriano to do this. That view doesn't fit the available evidence-here goes: 1) Soriano is signed-Bruce Miles reports that Soriano has been signed to play one of the corners, not CF. 2) Reports come out that Henry is trying to trade for a stop-gap CF and trade Jones. The quotes were constant "We are not going to do anything to block Pie" "We feel he can be something special, and we are not going to tie up CF long-term" 3. Soriano suddenly volunteers to play CF a month and a half after he signs-the trade talks with Jones stop, and so do the statements that they are not going to move Soriano around between positions. 4. After just a few games, they move Soriano out of CF, even though he didn't look nearly as bad as some of the other converted CF's around the league (Bill Hall for example). None of this supports that they wanted Soriano to be the long-term CF all along.