stitchface

we may be witnessing an historic season from albert. I'm not witnessing anything. I don't watch the Cardinals. :P you should be.

lollygaggers!

we may be witnessing an historic season from albert.

a bartman interference from taking what? that series? Maybe. The world series, big maybe? the Cubs were an up and coming team at that point, they nearly made the world series, they had a solid young core and a great farm system. now where are they?

is 70 wins better than 50 when you haven't won a world series since 1908?

out of context? What I'm saying is that organization that is complete shambles financially, has won two world series by going with youth and likely will rebuild and win again with youth before the Cubs can figure out how to score runs. the cubs have deluded themselves into pretending to be contenders - as a result their prospects never get a chance. While the Marlins are awful in 2006, they will figure out who is a major league player and who isn't and they will develop the keepers. See also Tigers and A's. The Cubs give a pitcher 4 starts and then rip him and send him back to a level where he has nothing to prove. If the Cubs were a contender or had a suitable alternative, this might make sense.

You dismiss is out of hand saying it would have been unpopular here ... hindsight works both ways. It's pretty easy to say they should have found someone better to pitch for them ... quote] I was pretty concerned about the pitching coming into the season and supported the Rusch signing cause the Cubs needed something. He's been awful tho. :( I wish they would have pulled off a deal for someone like Derek Lowe, who was supposedly on the block. As for unpopular here, the majority tends to lean towards more hitting. If Murton & Hill were dealt for some pitching, I think the majority would have been ticked. jmo depends who would be playing LF and who the pitcher they got in return was.

that's what it says on their world series trophies probably - you kids are a disgrace. this is a discussion about 2006. the organization you call a disgrace has won 2 of the last 8 world series. I'm sure you would have called the 1998 team a disgrace as well. unlike the cubs, the marlins have a plan and they stick to it. this year's team is not good, but they have a future. the cubs future is more mediocrity

Who should have been starting instead of Hill and Guzman? I've seen the stat that the Cubs have gone 1-15 in the "#5 starter position" ... but I honestly don't know how that #5 position was computed. I think the 1 win was Rusch vs. the Pirates. ETA: to change the verb tense re who should have been starting They should have traded some of the kids for a starter or signed someone. This would have been real unpopular tho, and the Cubs would have been criticized for wasting money or never giving the kids a chance. I'm basically taking the often heard "give the kids a chance" theory to task. The Cubs can't do the things Oakland and Atlanta can cause they don't draft well. Your last point is one that will get little to no argument. This was debated often last year when Baker kept going to the vets instead of the kids, and was one of the things I was hoping to elicit some discussion on. The Cubs farm system just can't be depended on. I think Guzman will turn out to be good, but I'm losing faith in Murton & Cedeno. Hill might be good on a small market team... the A's and Braves don't send players down after a couple weeks of struggles. they don't badmouth them in the media. they coach and teach them. signing and playing washed up veterans instead of giving young players a chance serves no purpose. nor does giving up on them after a few weeks in which they struggle.

that's what it says on their world series trophies probably - you kids are a disgrace.

its been a blast the last couple years. unfortunately we will be gone by then or I would meet up with you.

hahaha Serena - the crowd composition at an average cubs rockies game at coors is about 60 percent cub fans, 20 percent rockies fans, 10 percent cardinals fans, and 10 percent astros fans. may be different this year though.

sarcasm. any improvement in corey is likely solely the result of better pitch selection.

pierre is much better than corey - how come you didn't post how many ks each has?

I need some grass.

the run differential is 57-137. That means they are being outscored 2.375-5.7 on average. almost 3.5 runs per game - that is some bad luck!

four games? Have they even scored four games in a row recently?

too bad the contract extension likely isn't contingent on the announcement.

Hendry's strategy was apparently to remove the XBHs from the equation.

How? Why? His in game moves smack of managering - that is making moves just to make moves instead of for sound baseball reasons. I personally think Yost is not a great manager at all.

his arm would be an improvement over Pierre and no worse than corey probably. if the cubs got a couple rakers in LF and RF, that might not be a terrible move.

I didn't see it - it was lost in the hugeness of the Jones homerun. You can't top that kind of clutchiness. Justified his whole three year contract right there. Never seen a bigger play in cub history.

why would a man with a broken wrist come on the field in a fight? If he did, that's not too smart. Barrett should not get any more games than Kendall did last week. How is what he did any worse? In fact, its not as bad IMO. Barrett was ignited by physical contact whereas Kendall provoked a fight because of something the pitcher said. For Barrett's suspension to be 2.5 times as long is absurd.

LOL! Much bigger than both of ARam's homeruns!

didn't ramirez hit two homers today?