CubColtPacer

Where was the rest of his team :D Even Jordan needed Pippen, Reggie never had a player of that caliber playing with him.

88 over 600 AB's

especially since he was the "payoff" for an asset with some value Yeah, that was definitely part of the equation. Its funny that literally getting nothing for Maddux would have been so much better. Well, I know this only makes it slightly better-but at least if Izturis hadn't been traded for, Neifi probably wouldn't have been traded (because he would have been the starting second baseman at the time) and then Theriot would not have been on this team at all, because he wouldn't have gotten the time he did when Neifi was traded and then Izturis got hurt.

Mench can't hit right-handers-at all. not completely true, but he's definitely a lot better against LHP Yeah, I looked it up and realized I was over-stating it. A .737 OPS the last 3 years against right-handers.

Mench can't hit right-handers-at all.

The Bills select Allen Barbre out of Missouri Southern State. They need a quality OT, and Barbre is quite an athlete at the position and should compete for a starting job almost immediately.

Maybe that should tell you something about how useless pythagorean records are this early in the season. Pyth record means nothing. Actual wins and losses mean something. The Cubs have actually won just 36.8% of their games, and they actually have to play a lot better if they want to be in the race this year. And what is the biggest reason for that? The Cubs inability to hit in close and late situations. Here are the Cubs regular splits and their splits in those situations: Regular: .264/.322/.402 Close and Late: .198/.286/.237 Now someone that has a lesser understanding of statistics would look at this and simply call the Cubs "un-clutch" and forecast no change. However you know as well as I do that the longer the season goes along, the more likely it is that the second batch of numbers becomes closer to the first. In fact, from the way Lou uses his bench, it is likely that the second batch of numbers should be slightly higher than the first (as he uses his bench liberally to get the best matchups). As that happens, the Cubs will win a lot more close games. Now, there's a second big issue-bullpen usage. The team either has to get better performances out of people like Eyre or change how they use their bullpen. Until then, they won't have as good of a record in close games as they will in blowouts. However, it still won't be anywhere near what the team is doing now if the hitting picks up in those "clutch" situations like it is supposed to.

That could work both ways. Right now, they only have 2 guys with more than an inning of work with an ERA over 4.00 out there. They've got 3 guys, Wuertz, Dempster and Cotts, who are actually outperforming a bit. Yup-which is why the statistics still have the bullpen in the top half of the league.

The only people talking about their 1-run record are the people who keep blaming their struggle on luck and blindly expecting things to just even out. Pythagorean record doesn't mean things will even out. You have proof that it won't? Teams underpreform their pythagorean record all the time. The measure is used to determine if teams underperform or overperform based on their RS and RA. It has no basis in reality, it's simply a nominal measure. Two teams have had a 10 game or more difference between their Pythagorean record and their real record in a season in the past 6 years. One of those had a 12 game difference, the other had an 11 game difference. Currently, the Cubs are projected to have a 34.1 game difference. That kind of difference simply cannot be sustained-in fact nothing even close can be reasonably sustained.

That's asinine. Aramis hit a freaking HR. That HR was the difference in the ball game if Lee doesn't try to steal. For the life of me, I cannot understand Cub fans. ITS NOT BAD LUCK THAT IS KEEPING THE CUBS FROM WINNING Tell me, what exactly is asinine about what I said? Asinine:" You cannot really Aramis would've hit that HR if Lee had been called safe or hadn't tried to steal at all." Aramis did hit a HR and Lee did get called out. This isn't chaos theory nor is it the butterfly effect. All we have to go on is exactly what happened. And what happend was a dumb play followed by a HR that should have been the difference in the ball game. So you are trying to argue that the catcher would've called the exact same pitch, the pitcher would've made the exact same pitch in the exact same location, and Aramis would've made the exact same swing had the attempted steal never happened? The play may have been dumb, but you can't just say that it cost us a run because Aramis hit a HR on the next pitch. It just doesn't work that way. You're the one making asinine statements. No. You are trying to argue that there would have been a different outcome in some hypothetical universe where Lee's stupid play went the other way. I'm going on what actually happened. The problem is, it very likely wouldn't have actually happened had Lee still been on base. Exactly-Aramis is up with a 1-2 count. The pitch that a pitcher throws with 1 out and Lee on 2nd is completely different from the pitch that he throws with 2 outs and nobody on. For one, he is much more willing to waste a couple of pitches and risk walking Ramirez in the first scenario then in the second one, and so the pitcher is going to throw more strikes that could possibly be driven with nobody on.

The Brewers have scored 4 or fewer in 9 of their 19 games and they're on top of the division. They're also 7-3 in games decided by 2 runs or less. And to continue on that, the Astros have scored 4 or less in 10 of their 18 Cincy in 11 of 19 St. Louis in 15 of 18 Pittsburgh in 10 of 17 And a few from the NL West: LA-9 of 19 games San Diego-12 of 19 San Francisco-11 of 17 Arizona-12 out of 20 The Cubs percentage of scoring 4 runs or less is neither unique or particularly indicative of their terrible record.

And that black hole that is Cedeno/Izturis isn't? At least one can reasonably expect that the offensive production from the OF is going to pick up. The same can't be said for Izturis or Cedeno. Well, you have to expect Izturis/Cedeno to pick it up-how much so is questionable, but given more time they'd probably add 100 OPS points each-an improvement, but they'd still be a black hole at that level.

You'd rather have Floyd than Jones in RF? A Soriano, Pie, and Jones OF would be fine with me for now. Eventually I'd envision Soriano, Pie, and Murton in the OF. I think he meant the fact that Floyd started the game in RF last night. If they are willing to have the defensive problems of Floyd in RF at least occasionally, then they should also be willing to try to have the possible defensive problems of Theriot at SS. I would agree completely with that logic-if they are willing to try all these strange combinations, then they should be willing to try Theriot at SS, at least for a while. Right now the only thing the two SS's are giving you is the occasional power hit by Cedeno, and the walks by Izturis.

People keep talking about the 1 and 2 run losses, but the Cubs have lost by 3, 4 and 5 runs as well. When you are a bad team with a bad record, your record is going to be bad in just about every split. Actually, not really in this case 1 run/2 run/extra innings (i.e.-close games) Cubs 0-9 All other games Cubs 7-3 The Cubs haven't been getting blown out very much at all. In fact, the last time the Cubs lost a game by 3 or more that didn't go into extra innings (a blowout)-was the first Sunday of the season, game #6.

Obviously St. Louis found it an acceptable situation-they sent him up to the plate 9 times in 2005, and 10 in 2006 as a PH.

That #4 pick could be very, very interesting. Trouble is, Angelo has already alluded to the idea that getting a high 1st rounder might cost more in salary than the team is planning on, given they still will need to sign a few high-profile guys soon. Yeah, but you can then trade down from 4. :D Teams have had a ton of trouble trading out of the top 10. That's why I doubt this goes down. I don't see Angelo going for it. May really be tough in a draft like this too, with only 1 "can't miss" player in the draft. If the Raiders pick Johnson #1, it could get interesting. Does a team trade up when there are 2 QBs on the board? I can't see a team trading up too far to take either Russell or Quinn-they are too risky of picks to be worth trading up. BTW raw, it's actually your pick in the mock draft in case you haven't seen.

Why can't it be? If a pitcher hits well enough, they should be considered part of the bench. If you count this year, then 3 out of the last 4 years Marquis has hit .292, .310, and .273. Also between 2004-2006, he was 6-19 as a pinch hitter with 1 2B and 1 3B. With the Cubs roster right now, putting Marquis up there is just as effective as Izturis, Cedeno, Blanco, or Pie. ...which should tell you exactly how much trouble we're in. Marquis is a .225 lifetime hitter, according to the stats I saw last night on screen. That is true, but that's because he went 7 for 73 in his years with Atlanta. Somebody with St. Louis taught him how to hit. In the past 3 1/2 years, he has been a .262 hitter overall. Still not awesome, but pretty good for a back of the bench guy. For pretty much any team, when you get to your 3rd or 4th best bench option, that's about as much as you can hope for.

Why can't it be? If a pitcher hits well enough, they should be considered part of the bench. If you count this year, then 3 out of the last 4 years Marquis has hit .292, .310, and .273. Also between 2004-2006, he was 6-19 as a pinch hitter with 1 2B and 1 3B. With the Cubs roster right now, putting Marquis up there is just as effective as Izturis, Cedeno, Blanco, or Pie.

You don't get it to change-it just does. The majority of the time, it will even out for you-and if it doesn't, then you just become an exception to the rule (which would be terrible). There's no real way you can teach hitting in that situation-you just have to put your best people up there and hope for the best.

For the Cubs though, this hasn't been true a great deal. For example, here are some of the hitters who could have driven in the winning run last night from scoring position-some of them if they could have just hit a sac fly: Soriano Murton Lee Jones DeRosa Cedeno Barrett Marquis The only hitter the Cubs would want up there that didn't get a chance last night was Ramirez-everybody else simply didn't come through. Statistics claim that should even out over the season-so far that hasn't happened. Really? I would think most people feel when Marquis and Cedeno come up in a critical situation it's a letdown waiting to happen. I also feel Murton, DeRosa, and Jones are hitters I would rather not see in RBI situations. They aren't big RBI hitters. Good clubs seem to get guys like ARod, Ortiz, and Pujols up when they really need the dinger. We get Marquis. Does this not concern you? It concerns me only in that people like Cedeno and Marquis only got a chance because 1 of Soriano/Murton (these are two who had a runner on third with less than 2 outs), Lee, DeRosa, or Barrett had done their job. The Cubs only needed 1 of them to come through, and Cedeno and Marquis would never have come to the plate last night. Basically, the team had 6 of its 7 best hitters come up to the plate last night with a chance to win the game. I'm not sure how much more you can ask for then that when wanting the right person to come up in the right situation. Here are the situations 7th-2nd and 3rd, none out-Soriano/Murton/Lee all made outs 8th-1st and 2nd, 1 out-Derosa and Barrett made outs.

Why not! You might as well... Why not? Because they are likely to only have around 30-35 million to sign people next year. Z and Barrett have to be the two highest priorities, along with figuring out what to do about SS. Also, Floyd and Ward will need to be replaced (not big costs, but still). That extra 3 million that the team is paying Prior could make a difference in that. I'm not saying that they necessarily have to not sign Prior-but they simply can't pencil him in on the salary books for another season either without considering if it's worth it, and depending on the surgery Prior might not be worth it at that point.

the cubs are 4th in the nl in ba w/ risp. To be fair, that has mostly been in blowout games. They are dead last in BA in the close and late category with a .198 average, along with being third to last in OBP and dead last in SLG in that category (all of those are ranks in the whole major leagues- (131 AB's)). The team is simply hitting horribly at the end of close games-since we know that should even out, that gives quite a sense for optimism that some of those games will start going the Cubs way.

The question becomes-if he is out all of 2007, is he worth 3-4 million dollars? At some point, you have to treat it as if you were signing a reclamation project as a FA-would you give Prior that much to sign him as a free agent? Before 2007, it was pretty clear-cut-there were enough reasons for optimism for the high reward to clearly be worth the risk. Has the chance for a reward gotten too low for it to be worth it though? That's an interesting question for the Cubs, and I think they will seriously think about non-tendering him this offseason.

For the Cubs though, this hasn't been true a great deal. For example, here are some of the hitters who could have driven in the winning run last night from scoring position-some of them if they could have just hit a sac fly: Soriano Murton Lee Jones DeRosa Cedeno Barrett Marquis The only hitter the Cubs would want up there that didn't get a chance last night was Ramirez-everybody else simply didn't come through. Statistics claim that should even out over the season-so far that hasn't happened.

Hendry is responsible for each and every reason why they suck. He's the GM. He puts together the team. You don't diregard the poor record because a couple of the guys he got are doing well. So I guess whichever team wins the world title, no credit should be given to the players or manager, but just to the GM for "putting the team together." Hendry is not totally to blame. Yes, this is a flawed roster, and for that he incurs blame. Lou incurs blame for a few questionable decisions (none of them last night IMO) and the fact that he told Hendry repeatedly to not bring anyone else in. The players get blame for under performing what people like Hendry or everybody else would expect of them. There's too much blame here to put it on one person.