MSG T

Naw, Lee with the 5-3-2 GIDP.

Is it sad that I remember vividly, each of the guys playing for the Cubs that he's used the last two days? I'm going to cry if he starts breaking out some of the late 70's - early 80's guys.

I'm really not sure what to say, other than this really sucks. T's and P's. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4188199

That's pretty bad when Ryan Theriot is the power bat in your lineup. Oh and flip flop Fonts and Scales, you can't have two lefties hitting back to back. [-X

Well this call up is paying dividends already.

Wasn't there someone last year that played for one team prior to the game being suspended, then played (or was at least on the roster) for the other team when the game resumed like two months later?

It is hard for him to get hurt when he doesn't play. Why is he on the roster if he doesn't play? :banghead:

Again, I love the pics OMC. I posted a link on another board I frequent to this thread. We were having a baseball history related discussion and I though some of them would enjoy all the pics and stats that are in here. I even have my son checking this thread some now. Got him hooked on the history of the game from all of the pics.

You have to realize that Wrigley is not the norm with it's location. We're very lucky. Most modern ballparks are built to reflect that we are a car centered nation and are surrounded by parking lots. Kaufmann is in the middle of a huge parking lot and there's nothing to do pre/post game when it comes to bars. That being said people in Kansas City really know how to tailgate. While not as big as football: Royals games on Friday to Sunday will have some pretty good tailgating going on. And if you ever can, get to Arrowhead for a Chiefs game. Their pre-game tailgating is epic. But I will warn you that Chiefs fans will be downright nasty to people wearing visiting colors: even if it's different than the visiting team. I wore a Bears ballcap to a Chiefs/Buffalo Bills game and was challenged to two fights along with being bumped into and yelled at. I'm a Raiders fan, and take my boys to the Chiefs/Raiders game in KC every year, since we live in Iowa and it's the only realistic place to see the Raiders. To make matters worse, my kids HS team is the Raiders, so even that stuff gets challenged. They get very nasty down there, and it's doesn't help at all when your 8 year old son is a smart ass. Being Raiders fans just multiplies the crap we get. Oh, and Royals...er Kaufman, Stadium is the first place I ever saw a ML game. Notice the LF for the Royals...http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/KCA/KCA197308200.shtml

I know I don't post in the MiL forum much, but with my new slot, I'm going to be able to get to more I-Cub games this year. I'll try to get on here more often this season and give you guys some details. I always appreciate reading about what some of you watch regularly for the teams I never get a chance to see. BTW, does anyone know if they have expanded the online streaming for MiL games? Would like to catch some of the lower levels online.

That was just one example of many. The greatest legitimate home run hitter of all time, Hank Aaron, never hit 50 home runs in a season but Brady Anderson did. I guess you're right, the steroid era didn't skew the stats at all. I realize it's tough to admit that the baseball you have watched most of your life has been tainted by steroids but it is what it is. And Hank Aaron took greenies, so was he really legit? Jaywalking and armed robbery are both violations of the law. Are they both equally bad? Evidently greenies don't help you hit home runs or maybe Hank Aaron would have had as many 50 home runs seasons as the great Brady Anderson. Or maybe greenies turned a guy that might have hit 500-510 HRs in his career into a 750HR guy. People try to make guesstimates about how many HR Bonds gained because of steroids, how do we know that the guys in the 50's through 80's didn't gain 5-10 per season because of greenies. Does anyone have any way to refute that possibility? Greenies in the 60's were just as bad( cheating-wise) as steroids in the 90's-2000's. They just did a better job of keeping them under wraps.

He's going to be on who in the what-what? The new show on Comcast SportsNet from 6:00 AM-9:00 AM with Mike North and Dan Jiggetts. I caught some of it this morning and I was impressed and I'm not even a big fan of Mike North. I remember their show from the early 90's on the Score( when it was on 820). It was actually a pretty good show.

I would like to believe today was a testament to IU's improvement and bodes well for the Hoosiers in the Big Ten. Instead, I think it portends doom for Iowa's chances in the league. I have a few observations about that game. First of all, we played a really poor game but most of it was a result of what IU was doing. They were overplaying defensively and not giving us nearly as many open looks from 3 as we typically get. That did allow us to drive and get more points inside than we've gotten practically all year, but they made Iowa go away from their strengths and get out of their comfort zone. Iowa reacted well to it for stretches but then made some really bad decisions and hit some droughts. This is the first time I've seen IU all year. That team has completely bought in to what Crean is telling them. They played frickin hard. I don't know that I've ever seen an opposing bench as into the game as those guys were. Seriously when they were down 13 they were still up on their feet and freaking out just over deflections. And I mean that in a good way. I say that team wins at least 4 Big Ten games. I know they're bad but they do have some talent and they're going to be overlooked by everyone they play. And when you play that hard and are well coached you'll sneak up on some teams and pull out close games. As far as Iowa, I think this team thinks they're better than they are for some reason. There's been a defensive regression. I think they can still be around that 7-8 win mark in the Big Ten but there needs to be improvement. You might also want to point out, as it had a big effect on both teams, Eddie Hightower was reffing. How does that guy still have a job as a ref?

If I had Dunn's career numbers at Wrigley, I'd want to be a Cub also. 217 ABs: .286/ .419/ .664/ 1.083. That's also all against Cubs pitching. I don't put too much stock into a guys career numbers at a road ballpark. While I tend to agree, on the last page I posted his overall numbers against the Cubs and his numbers at Wrigley, obviously also against the Cubs. His numbers are markedly better at Wrigley. It is, however only 267 PA's in Wrigley. I have always wondered about the sanity of someone that wants a player, from another team, because that guy hits well in your ballpark. That being said, if a guy hits your pitching way better in your park than he does in his, the park may have some effect. But I doubt it means too much in the grand scheme of things.

Hermida would be my top choice, but I really don't think they'd be able to get him. Of the FA's, if Bradley would be more likely to stay healthy, he'd be my first choice, with Dunn being second. I just don't think Bradley is going to stay healthy. I'd bet he misses more games than Soriano did last season. For me it comes down to 150 games of Dunn's D>Bradley on the DL for 60 games. It's still pretty close though.

Found it, kind of. In 109 games against the Cubs, covering 460 PA, .260/.398/.614/1.012 w/84 BB and 38 HR. In Wrigley- 60 games 267 PA .286/.419/.664/1.083 w/49 BB and 23 BB. So against comparable pitching, he did hit better at Wrigley. Although he absolutely kills Cubs pitching everywhere. However, how would he do against everyone else at Wrigley? For the record, I love to see Dunn, Fuku/Johnson, Soriano L to R manning the OF.

i know he's had a ton more at-bats at cincy, but dunn has a 100 point higher slugging percentage at wrigley than he does at gabp. I'm pretty sure we both agree that means nothing. I am warming to Dunn so long as he is in Chicago 4 years or less. He'd fit nicely between Lee and Ramirez. it worked out wonderfully when we signed blauser because of it. I'm betting that, overall, the Cubs pitching that Dunn faced in Wrigley was better than the Cubs pitching that Blauser faced. However, in principle, I agree. I guess you'd have to compared how he did against Cubs pitching in GABP vs how he did in Wrigley vs Cubs pitching. *small sample size alert

He signed with the Chicago White Sox. Thanks, I hadn't heard that.

Maybe I missed something, but what happened to Kroeger, you removed his line in your updates.

there will be blood Not trying to be Mr. Smart Guy, but why the comparison of Dunn to either A) guys we already have(the Soriano comparison, they aren't even remotely similar) or B) guys were never going to get( Morneau) I'm more interested in how he compares to Bradley, which has at least been addressed some, Abreu, Burrell or any other guy that there's at least a minute possibility of playing RF for the Cubs next year.

Right now the Cubs are a worse pitching team than they were in 2008 and a worse hitting team than they were in 2008. The point remains they must improve just to get back to last year's level. This is correct. But getting Peavy doesn't address the bullpen or the offense. It does make both weaker, with DeRo and Marshall both being involved. Unless everyone plans on all five of Z, Lilly, Peavy, Demp and Harden starting 32 games and pitching into the 7th or 8th every game, and Marmol, Shark and Gaudin being the only relievers used. do you not realize the upgrade of marquis to peavy is worth much more than the downgrade from kevin hart to atkins? yes, the bullpen gets worse if you trade marshall or whatever. but the rotation gets much, much better. and you can't just assume the rotation boost is equal to the bullpen loss because that's insane. And having a crappy bullpen is going to help how? Plus, what about the offense? They've already got at least one hole(with CF maybe 2), this would make two, maybe three. And how healthy is everyone going to stay? And how about any possible deals later in the year. Without Peavy the Cubs are still going to be favorites to win the Central. They can make moves other than this that will help improve upon that more than Peavy. If it was just Cedeno/Hart/Vitters types they are losing, I could easily go for it, but when you start throwing in pretty important pieces like DeRo and Marshall, not so much. Then you have limited resources to get 3-4 other holes filled. I'd be thrilled if the could get Peavy, I'd be more thrilled if they could get a couple of extra hitters to get the offense to where it was last year.

Right now the Cubs are a worse pitching team than they were in 2008 and a worse hitting team than they were in 2008. The point remains they must improve just to get back to last year's level. This is correct. But getting Peavy doesn't address the bullpen or the offense. It does make both weaker, with DeRo and Marshall both being involved. Unless everyone plans on all five of Z, Lilly, Peavy, Demp and Harden starting 32 games and pitching into the 7th or 8th every game, and Marmol, Shark and Gaudin being the only relievers used.

OK. Say we do that. Then what do you do when Bradley or Soriano or Harden or Peavy get hurt and end up on the DL? Or Fuku sucks again? Or Theriot plays bad the whole year, instead of just half of it? Or Fontenot puts up a .520 OPS against LHP? Or Dempster pitches like 2001-02 Demp instead of 2007 Demp? My point being, if you trade every tradeable asset you have for one guy, what do you do when you need a call up or need to make a deal midseason? Then your stuck with what you have instead of being able to add a piece later. Again, I would love to have Peavy, but trading everything of value the Cubs have for him is not a good idea. Trading 5 or 6 guys for one, just to go from being a 97 win team to a 100 win team, and going from Lilly to Peavy in the playoffs? If Peavy was the difference between Wild Card contention and Division Champ, I could see it. But without Peavy they're still probably the favorites to win the Central again. Honestly, I'd probably be happier if they used some of those guys and got Hermida, traded Marquis(to clear salary) and signed Johnson for one year. Get a good young hitter and basically trade Marquis(who'll be gone after 09 anyway) for Johnson.

Wow this is a shallow way to look at things. Peavy has only had one GM and thats Towers. We dont know what kind of relationship he has with Towers. The way you are describing the situation its like saying if Wood wanted to go to the Yankees when he was a FA, do you honestly think Wood would've told Hendry screw this trade me to the yankees. Unlike some people, Peavy probably feels he owes it to the Padres to help them out a little. Just because Peavy doesn't speak up and say screw this trade me, doesn't me he wants to be a Cub. Its not a question about Loyalty, its a question about professionalism and respect. No, that is not how things work in the real world. Peavy signed his extension with the impression the Padres would build a team that had a chance to contend every year. The Padres failed miserably with that. Then, they decided that Peavy needed to be traded to meet a restricted payroll. Peavy owes nothing to the Padres organization and he should have zero reason to show professionalism or respect to the team that failed to meet their end of the bargain. No that is not how things work in the real world, not all of us are a-holes. Kerry Wood, Zambrano, Dempster, Ramirez showed some kind of loyalty. And how in the world do you know what was promised to Peavy? How do you know PEavy signed with the Padres because the Padres gave him the impression they would build around him? Maybe he just signed with SD because he was brought up in there system and because he lived in the area. "He should have Zero Reason" Wow talk about jumping to conclusions. This isn't the Kobe Bryant Situation where Kobe came out and said what was promised .People like you are missing the point that peavy never asked for a trade, he signed a contract when the padres were an average team, he never requested a trade this summer when the padres are coming off a horrible year. If it was such an issue for peavy he would've stood up and said something but he didnt, dont assume and act like you were part of the negotiations. Check again. The Padres were not an "average team" when he signed that extension. They finished 1st, 1st and then got beat out in a one game playoff for the wild card in their last 3 seasons prior to signing that extension. If Peavy knew he was going to be the main part of a fire sale, I'm sure he wouldn't have signed the extension. And what do you mean, "people like me"? I know an awful lot about Peavy, since I watch him pitch pretty regularly and listen to local sports radio. He's equal to Zambrano in fire and intensity. Peavy got duped by the Padres. He has zero reason to be loyal at this point. And I think he's already proven that he doesn't owe the Padres anything by limiting the amount of teams he's willing to be traded to, to basically just one. Sorry, just had to fix it.

I didn't want Ibanez at all. But if the Rays can convince Bradley to go there, the Phillies get Ibanez, the White Sox get Abreu, does that leave us Dunn? Id take that "consolation" prize. Seconded. Or is that "thirded"?