CubColtPacer

I doubt they think Ausmus is anywhere the same player that Barrett is. As somebody who values defense a great deal, it still doesn't make even close to the difference between a .930 OPS and a .586 OPS. Could it have been that they think Barrett could be average at another position defensively and still have that big bat? I'm still not sure it's worth it-to have offense at a position where offense is so scarce is still so valuable. Offense at a non-offensive position is only an advantage if you have offensive players in offensive positions. It's still an advantage-it allows you flexibility at some of the other positions-for example, Barrett's bat behind the plate might mean that we need a big bat for only one of left field and second (preference being second because left is the much better bat right now anyway), and not both.

Yup-3 days before. I remember because the 16 inning game was my sister's wedding day and the corked bat incident was my birthday :(

I doubt they think Ausmus is anywhere the same player that Barrett is. As somebody who values defense a great deal, it still doesn't make even close to the difference between a .930 OPS and a .586 OPS. Could it have been that they think Barrett could be average at another position defensively and still have that big bat? I'm still not sure it's worth it-to have offense at a position where offense is so scarce is still so valuable.

The interesting question in this game is-whose lineup tonight is actually better? It's actually a pretty tough call with these two lineups.

Hmm..are we going to end up scoring more runs this year than last? I didn't think that was possible a month and a half ago. If we can keep up those home run and walk stats, that would really help the ballclub. I know why they are hitting more home runs-a large part of that goes to Ramirez. What has happened to make them walk a great deal more though? The quality start stat-ouch. That's the growing pains-it's worth it to get all these young pitchers experience, but it still hurts.

Neifi could still contribute on a team for 2007 with a different manager. He's never going to contribute to a team for 2.5 million dollars-that's for sure, but if you release him you have to pay his salary anyway. So, that's a mistake that's in the past-so we might as well keep him and use him in the role that he was intended. Neifi is playing hte role that he was intended, maybe not intended by God, but by Hendry and Baker. He was supposed to play a lot from the very beginning. That was the plan. You don't pay a guy that much money for a guarantee of 2 years if you don't plan on using him a lot. Oh, I agree. He was intended for the wrong role for this team. I meant the role that he is supposed to be playing for a player with his skills-a player who should be paid less than a million, not 2.5 million dollars.

Neifi could still contribute on a team for 2007 with a different manager. He's never going to contribute to a team for 2.5 million dollars-that's for sure, but if you release him you have to pay his salary anyway. So, that's a mistake that's in the past-so we might as well keep him and use him in the role that he was intended. Nevin is just playing out the year-we don't have anybody they want to replace him with, so just like Mabry he is playing out the season and then they will say goodbye to him. Rusch-same situation with the money situation-I just hope that if he continues to pitch as horribly as he did this year that they option him to the minors at the start of next year-if he can regain even last year's form he'll be ok as a reliever-not worth his money, again, but that's a sunk cost. We might as well see if he can regain some of his form over the offseason (don't let him pitch again this season), and if he is still pitching horrendously in spring training, then would be the time to either option him out or release him.

Baker sets the lineups. We're 19 games below .500 and we're not still not playing rookies as much as a team in this situation should. Big deal or not, there definitely seems to be a difference. What rookies are we not playing? I see 4 rookies basically on the squad today. 2 of them play in left field everyday, and Cedeno plays 4 out of every 5 games at second. So, the only problem is that Neifi gets some of the starts at second that Cedeno doesn't get, which is a problem, but not a huge one. I think that there have been reasons for getting a new manager in now-but right now I think they are doing a pretty good job of playing young players. I mean, for example, we haven't seen Nevin in left field lately-that's a Dusty move that has been stopped.

True..but if you only have 3-4 relievers available (I believe Wuertz and Aardsma were unavailable if not more), and you have to use a reliever starting the 6th inning-you need that reliever to give you 2 innings-and you then need to double switch in order to not have the reliever bat. Not all of his double switches make sense, but this made sense.

This time though it actually made sense. We had 2 relievers who were ruled out of the game-the double switch allowed Novoa to go 2 innings, and Pagan gets the triple to get one of the runs.

come the end of the year, after losing their bowl game, I think you will find the pollsters had ND well ahead of all the computer rankings. they were by no means treated unfairly in 2002. quite the contrary. they jumped over teams when the should not have, and didn't drop as far as they should have when they lost. I don't think the Irish were treated unfairly in 2002-I think they were treated exactly as they should have been. The AP poll had ND at 17th at the end of the season after their bowl game with a 10-3 ND record There were only 2 teams behind them in the top 25 who had the same number of losses or less-Marshall and TCU, who had 2 losses each against a vastly inferior schedule. There were 6 3 loss teams in the poll-ND is dead last among those 6 teams. In fact, there are 2 teams with 4 losses who were ranked higher in the final poll than the Irish. As for the computer rankings, Sagarin had them at 9th after the bowl in his rating he uses for the BCS. Colley had them at 9th as well. Massey's BCS rating had ND at 10th after the bowl loss. Anderson and Hester had them at 10th. The other computer rankings of that year do not have the final results archived anymore that I can find. So the computers still thought ND was a top 10 team-ND was ranked behind every 3 loss team in the poll and even two 4 loss teams-how exactly is this favortism?

Taveras immed. came to mind, how many speedster leadoff guys are there in general? (Of course, he has struggled at getting on-base) Hmm, do you count Ichiro as a speedster leadoff guy? I see Ichiro, Dave Roberts, Brian Roberts, Damon?, Furcal?, Reyes, Hanley Ramirez, Rollins, Posednik, Figgins-those are the other leadoff hitters out of the 19 that qualify that have at least 20 stolen bases (Sizemore had 18)-I'm not sure you would count those players as speedster leadoff hitters (that's a really hard thing to define). Looking at some players who didn't qualify, Freel, Lugo, and Luis Castillo could both be put in that category also. Of course, half of those players are not outfielders. You have 4 potential OF'ers, although I don't consider Ichiro a leadoff hitter in that manner, I'll use him. 1 cannon, the rest are avg. to below avg. That ratio isn't too unusual combining 2 + plus arms like Ichiro ans Taveras with Pierre, Posednik, Damon, and Roberts. I also think hitters like Reyes & Ramirez will be middle of the order type hitters, but at the top of the order b/c of the speed. Rollins has more power and a lower batting avg. than most at the top. No, it's not that unusual about the arms. I was actually surprised when I was looking through about how many people batting leadoff have that many stolen bases. I was expecting a much smaller list than that.

How do you explain Glendon Rusch then?

it's difficult to have sympathy for them. they made their bed, they have to lay in it. they could've become part of a conference long ago, but remaining independant just brings in too much money with no need to share the revenue with other teams. they have a choice, not be so greedy or continue having difficulty getting the at large bid. I don't really think he was complaining about ND's process, just explaining that it's not the cake walk into the BCS that so many antis like to portray it as. Yup-I'm not complaining whatsoever other than to refute the assumption that ND gets special treatment just because they are ND, as many of the people around the country have said in the past (Oregon last year for example). ND has an advantage in getting selected when they are eligible, and it balances nicely with the disadvantage they have of not ever being able to get in due to winning a conference in a down year. Those balance out to the point that I think it is fair for everyone. with words like "unlike BCS teams" and "forced" and "never being able to sneak" it kind of sounds like complaining. die hards will never admit this but its true...there are certain teams that don't fall as far as others in the polls after a loss and certain teams that will get the nod over other teams in the rankings even if they have more losses plus less than impressive schedules and certain teams that generally are ranked higher at the beginning of the year than they probably should be. some teams just get pushed up when it isn't justified. two of these teams used to be Florida and Nebraska, but both programs hit bumps. another of these teams is Michigan, but they have pretty much been exposed. and another team, and I am a fan (they are my second favorite CFB team after my alma mater), is Notre Dame. just look at my favorite team, Wisconsin. they pounded Auburn in their bowl game, finished with identical records as Auburn, but some how finished right behind Auburn in both polls. why? why does a voter sit down, make out a list, and put team A ahead of team B the day after team B trounced team A? because one is a traditional powerhouse. the other is an annually competetive team, but not a traditional powerhouse. sorry guys. it's nothing to be embarassed or ashamed about or defensive of. it's just something that goes along with being a historical power house in a sport. the same goes in college hoops, see Duke, NC, and any other traditional powerhouse. Well, yes-at the start of my post, I was trying to prove there was a disadvantage to being in the position they wre in as well as the advantage that had already been pointed out that they were going to get picked if the y were eligible. That's why I said in my last sentence of my original post that the advantage was negated by the disadvantage-which would make it fair. I personally do not agree with you that ND gets that favoritism in the polls. 2002 is a perfect example of this. There were 6 teams that were undefeated after 8 weeks when the first BCS standings came out-Oklahoma, Miami, ND, Virginia Tech, Georgia, and Ohio State. At the time, ND was rated as having the top schedule in the country by those rankings (the other teams schedule strength was 13th, 27th, 25th, 9th, and 28th respectively). Because of their schedule strength, Notre Dame was #1 in 4 computers, #2 in 2 computers, and #4 in one computer. What were they ranked by the polls? 6th-by both polls, even after going undefeated so far with the hardest schedule. I just don't see very often how ND gets the favortism of the polls-there are just as many people that hate ND as those who will vote for them.

Taveras immed. came to mind, how many speedster leadoff guys are there in general? (Of course, he has struggled at getting on-base) Hmm, do you count Ichiro as a speedster leadoff guy? I see Ichiro, Dave Roberts, Brian Roberts, Damon?, Furcal?, Reyes, Hanley Ramirez, Rollins, Posednik, Figgins-those are the other leadoff hitters out of the 19 that qualify that have at least 20 stolen bases (Sizemore had 18)-I'm not sure you would count those players as speedster leadoff hitters (that's a really hard thing to define). Looking at some players who didn't qualify, Freel, Lugo, and Luis Castillo could both be put in that category also. Of course, half of those players are not outfielders.

I believe your slugging number post all star break should be .723, not .575.

it's difficult to have sympathy for them. they made their bed, they have to lay in it. they could've become part of a conference long ago, but remaining independant just brings in too much money with no need to share the revenue with other teams. they have a choice, not be so greedy or continue having difficulty getting the at large bid. I don't really think he was complaining about ND's process, just explaining that it's not the cake walk into the BCS that so many antis like to portray it as. Yup-I'm not complaining whatsoever other than to refute the assumption that ND gets special treatment just because they are ND, as many of the people around the country have said in the past (Oregon last year for example). ND has an advantage in getting selected when they are eligible, and it balances nicely with the disadvantage they have of not ever being able to get in due to winning a conference in a down year. Those balance out to the point that I think it is fair for everyone.

Wow. I knew Marmol walked a bunch of guys but I didn't realize he walked 8 and the Cubs have allowed 10 walks on the day. I guess it's not surprising that the Cubs have walked the most batters in the majors this year. Yup-what was shocking to me was how easy it all was. It was pretty easy for the Rockies to stand up there and walk all day when few pitches get even close to the plate. It seemed like that one batter he would throw 3-4 strikes in the at bat, and then walk the next guy on 4-5 pitches where very few if any were borderline pitches-and that seemed to happen all day long.

Theriot! What a time for that one!

Well, the triple prediction came through-nice hit Pagan.

There were 3 balls on Murton. If he couldn't hit it because it was a ball, he should have let it go. (Although, if you're worried about Barrett being tired with the day game, I don't know why you would start him 5 times in a row and make him even more tired).

Hey, it's only a 270 ERA for the game...could be worse :D

What is there to choose from ?? ............ 04/03 - 08/12 AB R H 2B 3B HR TB RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS Cedeno 386 35 96 10 5 4 128 29 12 76 0.249 0.274 0.332 0.605 Perez 217 25 55 12 1 2 75 24 5 21 0.253 0.267 0.346 0.612 Oh, definitely-it's not as there is a much better option on the roster. If they are all terrible though, I'd prefer Cedeno or Theriot to get the start at this point. It's not something that I'm worried about whatsoever-it's not like one start a week is going to be the difference between those two players developing or not though.

The only thing I can think of is Kim's splits. Against right: .271/.306/.398 Against left: .313/.408/.497 Of course that doesn't explain Neifi very well-even though he can bat left handed, he's been pretty terrible from the left side of the plate this year. It may explain the way the order is structured though-although it is still a head scratcher.

Also Bruce, I'd love to hear your opinion on if giving Murton and Pagan both playing time is justified or not.