CubColtPacer

I sorta remember seeing somewhere that this is due to Silva not being on the team. Like it isn't reported in the final totals but the Cubs technically are higher I think. Those opening day payroll lists are so dumb. They don't take into account contracts that have been eaten, nor mid-season trades that add or subtract payroll to teams, in order to actually compare what the team spends on players. I wasn't aware of any of those omissions. $125MM sounded low, but I just figured I thought so because I don't follow payroll numbers very closely. Where is a better spot to find payroll info? Cots tends to give better and more detailed information although it also has its quirks (pro-rating signing bonuses for example). It has the Cubs at 134 million. The USA Today list gives you a very rough look at how teams stack up to each other while Cots will give you a much better player/team breakdown.

Unfortunately, the Cubs don't have affiliates in either one of those leagues. Someone better in tune with the minors than I am might be able to tell you some good prospects in those leagues though.

Is the draft over much earlier for other team's scouting director? For some yes. Teams drop out early. Or at least I thought they did?

And Ricketts could simply say: "I am evaluating everyone and lets leave it that". After that, say: "Thanks, guys", and walk away. He really sounds like an idiot (whether he meant what he said or not) to use the injury card as an excuse for this horrid team. And speculation only increases that Hendry's days are numbered and then the first question (and an endless amount after that) in Hendry's next press conference is whether he thinks he'll be fired, whether he's talked to Ricketts about his job, etc. Thus making his job more tedious because he has to field even more questions about his job security. I think the earlier comment about expectations was right on. If Ricketts knew this would be a difficult year and that we'd be fighting to stay around .500 most of the year, then he made a 100% accurate statement that the biggest thing wrong with this team is injuries, because without all the injuries all at the same time this team is probably a lot closer to .500 than it is now. By answering the way he did, Ricketts showed faith in the original team that was constructed and didn't open any new cans of worms. I totally agree. Everybody knew this was going to be a difficult year and the Cubs would be a borderline .500 team. Any optimism was based on everything going right for the Cubs and going wrong for the Reds and Cards. The team has totally sucked, but all of the injuries has to be considered as the main reason this team hasn't played somewhere near expected (borderline .500, not contenders). With minor leaguers and bench players filling up 40% - 50% of the starting lineup and rotation on a daily basis, it's not surprising that they're getting their rear ends kicked daily. Isn't that kind of a pointless distinction? Either way the Cub's weren't going to contend, which is unacceptable. It makes a big difference in the philosophy for 2012. If the Cubs are an 80-85 win team that has been hurt by injuries, then they can sign an elite talent or two and get into contention. If they are a 70 win team, then they should probably pack it in and start preparing for 2013 or 2014.

You are a such a liar it is ridiculous. Pitchers do not do what Cashner did all the time. Last year he was a reliever. It doesn't matter that he went a little deeper in starts in April and May. He was a reliever for four months pitching nearly every other day for 1 inning at a time. You don't just maintain your starting capacity for workload when you actually perform as a reliever, especially when you had such a limited capacity for workload as a starter in the first place. Wells needed to gradually build up to 200 innings if they wanted to be cautious about future healthy. He went from 120 to 190 and then just had one more 190. Your statement suggests he has a slew of 190 seasons coming in. He did not. He made a huge jump. And now he's paying the price. Pitchers don't win a starting job in spring training after being a reliever the previous year? It happens every year around baseball. Cashner was told he was a starting option and had all winter to build up. He was used as a starter all of spring training. He's been starting the majority of his life (he had only been a reliever for 1 1/2 years of his entire career). This was not an unusual situation whatsoever. In Wells case, once the second 200 inning season goes under his belt the injury risk becomes a lot less. And a guy with Wells type of stuff should be much less of an injury risk anyway because he shouldn't put as much stress on his arm as a Marmol/Zambrano/Wood does.

Cashner was hurt after being a college reliever pushed into a starting role where he was basically a 4 inning pitcher, then pushed back into a relief role and suddenly back into a starting role. It's lunacy to pretend this wasn't dangerous. Going 190 no issues doesn't mean you have established yourself as a guy who can't get hurt. He went from 100-120 to 190, then got hurt. His lack of wear and tear on his arm is a double edge sword. He wasn't already broken down, but neither was he built up. An unathletic catcher with multiple DL trips is a really strong bet to have more DL stints. Pitchers do what Cashner did all the time. Probably the only slightly different thing in Cashner's case is that he was a college reliever for 1 year almost 4 years ago. And that should have no bearing on his arm state now. And by the way, he was hardly a 4 inning pitcher last year. And if Wells isn't built up by now, how many 200 inning seasons did he have to have before he wasn't considered an injury risk anymore?

We went over this before. Soriano and Johnson are the only ones that should be "expected" (I guess Garza as well due to the rain delay) That's simply not true. Cashner is a reliever who was yoyoed last year and then shoved into a starting role he was clearly not ready for. He was a 4+ inning pitcher for the most part in the minors and the last time he pitched when it counted he was a reliever. You can't treat a young arm with such limited use that way and expect it to go swimmingly. Wells was converted to pitcher and got stretched out in a hurry from a 100-120 inning pitcher to a nearly 200 inning pitcher. That's rough on an arm. Soto has been hurt every year. He's an unathletic catcher, that's going to be lead to DL stints. And then there was the reckless use of Garza. Byrd was the only weird one. Cashner might be expected to miss some time. But not 97% of the season so far. Wells I don't buy that he's much more of an injury risk than any other pitcher. If he was going to have a problem with throwing 200 innings it should have shown up last year not suddenly at the beginning of the season. But even if he's an injury risk, he should miss less than 80% of the season. Soto's had slightly more injury days then he should so far, but nothing too far out of the ordinary. Baker and Johnson should probably both have DL stints in the course of a season, but they probably shouldn't both have had them already. The problem isn't that these guys weren't expected to miss any time. The problem is that they have all missed so much time already. If everybody gets healthy and the team is mostly healthy all the rest of the way, the injuries won't have been much of a problem. If the injuries occur with the frequency in the last 2/3 of the season then they have the 1/3, then players will have missed a ton more games than expected.

That was the 3rd National. The first two were Harper and Strasburg.

ESPN is doing a franchise players draft. Basically in the majors or minors if you could pick anybody to build your franchise around who would you pick. Starlin Castro went 19th right in between Buster Posey and Hanley Ramirez. http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?page=110601franchisedraft So far through 24 out of the 30 picks Florida already has 3 drafted players, Tampa has 2, San Francisco has two, Colorado has two, and Washington has two. 13 other teams have 1 player each.

It apparently was picked to make the start times of games a reference to a 6-4-3 double play.

Why wasn't Campana sent back down after getting picked off first? It seems a major league game is a much worse time to have a lapse than a random AA game whose outcome is completely meaningless. First, I wouldn't consider Campana's error to be as bad. Ha came in as a pinch runner. In that situation, you can't immediately get picked off first base. And Campana will be heading down to the minors as soon as Byrd comes back just as Ha got sent down as soon as Jackson came back. An outfielder was going to leave Tennessee. Ha gave them a reason for it to be him rather than one of the other 3-4 OF's that are at Tennessee. I would not have supported it if they had just demoted Ha and brought up another OF from Daytona.

I'm fine with it myself. If it was a guy who was clearly a AA player already then a demotion would have been harsh. But this is a crowded Tennessee team and a young player trying to break in due to an injury. Someone had to get moved out when Jackson came back and it was a bad time to have a major lapse like that. And it's not like Ha is going to be wasting time at Daytona-he still can definitely learn at that level as well. The fact that it provides a teaching moment is just the cherry on top.

By the time he's good enough to worry about that it's too late because the damage is already done. It was a good question because the team should be proactive about such things instead of reactive. In LeMahieu's case though his clock shouldn't be badly affected. And while LeMahieu is never going to be a star, he's a pretty safe bet to be a major leaguer. The only reason he wouldn't is if both his defense at 2nd is just horrid and the Cubs don't value his skill set at 3rd or another position. His batting average for a guy without blazing speed suggests he's an elite line drive hitter. That skill translates very well to the majors. He's almost certainly a .290+ type of hitter. Those guys have a place on a major league roster even if his power doesn't develop at all (and it still could considering how tall he is-he was hitting for more power this year after bulking up this winter).

Ugh...looks like both Johnson and Baker are still not ready to start...which leaves: Campana Barney Castro Ramirez Soriano Montanez Pena Hill Wells

The Cubs are 19-14 in games started by their original starting 5. It's the sacks of crap we've ran out there otherwise that have sabotaged us. They showed a stat on WGN at the beginning of the game that said the Cubs are 3-12 when Russell, Coleman and Davis start and those three have an ERA over 8 when they start. So even if the Cubs could have gone 8-7 in those starts, they'd be 27-21 right now and in second place, 1.5 out of first. 5-10 in those starts would put them at .500. Going 8-7 with 3 horrendous pitchers is asking alot. Even if we had Wells and Cashner, its far from a guarantee that we would have. Lets face it, its not like this is Cain and Lincecum were missing. There aren't many teams that play over .500 ball with the #4 and #5 starters pitching. I think it might be safe to say that we might have 2-3 more wins with Wells and Cashner. That was supposed to be the Cubs main strength though that their #4 and #5 starters weren't that different from their first 3. Wells especially is pretty close to the other three starters. But the pitching staff is always going to have some injuries so we can't just plug them in for a full year and project the Cubs record even though the Cubs have gone overboard a little bit so far this year.

Yeah, Jimmer sounds like a justifiable lotto pick. And even if he wasn't, Indiana or Utah would still take him. I think imb is right with the strategy the Bulls should use. Interesting reputation Indiana's got when they've drafted one white US player and maybe 1 or 2 foreign white players in the last 10 years (I'm assuming that's what you were referencing). Actually, the first mock draft I looked at has the Pacers drafting two UCLA players with their two picks-with them and Collison we'd turn you into a Pacers fan yet :-) And btw, the first 5 mock drafts I looked at all had Fredette in between 12 and 19 with Utah the most likely spot for him to land. And while I said the Pacers are probably not completely enamored with him, he very well could be one of the 4 players who Bird is apparently hoping that one of them falls to his spot.

Wells is pitching tomorrow for the Cubs. Coleman was also likely going to have to bat in the bottom of this inning because the Cubs are very thin on the bench right now.

My opinion is that the Cubs can't sustain this average but they probably shouldn't be 13th in HR's all season long either. But their average should be high at the end of the season because they've got a lot of high average guys in their lineup. I don't think the offense is inconsistent. The Cubs, Diamondbacks, and Rockies are all very close in the runs scored department so I looked at their run distribution to see if they were different: Cubs 0 runs: 4 1: 3 2: 5 3: 6 4: 10 5: 9 6: 1 7: 2 8: 1 9: 3 10: 1 11: 3 Diamondbacks: 0 runs: 1 1: 5 2: 6 3: 9 4: 11 5: 5 6: 5 7: 2 8: 1 9: 1 10: 1 11: 1 12: 0 13: 2 Rockies 0 runs: 2 1: 5 2: 6 3: 11 4: 3 5: 5 6: 6 7: 6 8: 0 9: 2 10: 1 11: 0 12: 2 So the Cubs have been shut out a couple more times than normal but they have scored 0-2 runs 12 times, the Diamondbacks have also done it 12 times, and the Rockies have done it 13 times. And the Cubs have been right around average (4 or 5) runs 19 times, while the Diamondbacks have done it 16 times and the Rockies have done it only 8 times. The Cubs offense is no more inconsistent than any other offense out there.

Cubs Ranks now through almost 2 months (all NL ranks) Offense Runs: 5th (3rd in R/G) BA: 2nd OBP: 2nd SLG: 4th OPS: 2nd doubles: 5th HR: 13th Strikeouts: 3rd (fewest) Walks: 16th (dead last) Starting Pitching ERA: 16th (dead last) Walks: 5th worst Strikeouts: 10th BAA: 16th (dead last) OBP allowed: 16th (dead last) SLG allowed: 15th OPS allowed: 16th (dead last) Relief Pitching ERA: 6th Walks: 2nd worst Strikeouts: 4th BAA: 10th OBP: 14th SLG: 9th OPS: 11th So the offense has been really good (although strange considering the low home run and walk totals). The starting pitching has been atrocious and the bullpen has been lucky. Considering the top 3 in the bullpen have all been very good to elite so far this year though, the bullpen numbers will get a lot better if the starters go deeper and the back end of the bullpen doesn't have to get used so much. Is this team a starter or two away from being good? And will that matter with how big of a hole they've dug?

I definitely think philosophy has something to do with it which translates to pitch selection. He threw over 70% fastballs all 3 years as a Ray. He's throwing 54.7% fastballs as a Cub. His swinging strike percentage is easily the highest it's ever been. That hasn't done terrible things to his walks so it looks to be a good change.

This Cubs team is quickly sliding up the NL ranks in offense. That's really surprising considering who they've had to throw out there at times this season.

George, one or both of Hibbert/Hansbrough (hopefully only one), Rush, Stephenson/Price if the Magic wanted either, and Posey to make the salaries work, and picks as needed. Don't know if that would be enough. Although if the Magic would take Granger/Hibbert/Rush and picks, I would really like that trade. But I'm not sure the Magic would want Granger other than for PR reasons because of his age.

I don't think most IU fans said the second statement you said. They argued that phone calls even though it was a second violation didn't deserve postseason bans or huge scholarship reductions. It wasn't deserving of the major punishments and the NCAA agreed with that. What devastated IU had nothing to do with the phone calls or NCAA violations.

I so wish Howard didn't want to play in a major market. The Pacers could give the Magic pieces they would like (at least I think so, others can correct me if I'm being crazy) and could probably build a great team around Howard. It would be too risky to trade for him though with the chance he would walk in two years.

I don't have the numbers to support this, but wasn't baseball far more popular during the steroid era, when home run records were falling left and right? I understand that some people, like yourself and maybe some others on the board, would like that type of game, but that doesn't mean it's good for the game if it doesn't appeal to the casual fans. By what measure? Attendance or relevance? I think attendance numbers were high during the 90's and 2000's for baseball (as with a lot of sports) but I would definitely say that baseball is less relevant than 20 years ago. And a large part of the complaint is that games simply take too long without enough action to support it. And the most dynamic action in the game is due to power hitters. That only happens about once every hour and a half though in a normal game. Not nearly enough for the attention span of most people.