jersey cubs fan

He's a fragile dude that has had lots of playing time in the 2nd half, and the field is probably in bad condition.

weather.com's future radar feature shows it passing by shortly after gametime.

How did you misread that?

97 can get you a K if the batter's not looking for it. If he is looking for it - so will the outfielder be as he watches it fly over his head. The opposition doesn't get a lot of scratch hits off Gregg. He's a one trick pony that can fool some of the batters some of the time. Heilman has comparable k/ip numbers, perhaps you'd prefer he gets the ball to close? Glad you're comfortable with his contributions. 1) Cubs are 46-3 when leading after nine innings, so Gregg's obviously not cost the cubs too many losses in those situations above what you could name for any other closer 2) Gregg vs Heilman? Really? Let's see...the k/9ip is 9.24 vs 7.69 - a pretty significant difference in "stuff". Second, the k/bb rate is 2.43 for gregg vs 1.43 for Heilman. Do you want to try again? You should be really good when leading after 9 innings.

Why would we start seeing that now, at least in comparison to before? For as long as there has been free agency there have been guys who have decided they didn't want to play in NY. But by and large guys will follow the best offer. I think we're going to start seeing Chicago and LA as more desirable FA destinations. Still a good chunk of money, good fanbase, contending teams, less drama. I think it's gotten to the point that NY and Boston are overpaying because they have to. Their offers that are better by a few million aren't getting the job done anymore. As long as media keeps getting bigger and bigger and more obtrusive, I can't see most normal players wanting to go there, unless they are absolutely overwhelmed. Who is turning down Boston? I've heard a handful of guys don't like the Yankees, like Griffey, but all-in-all players aren't avoiding them in droves.

Aaron Miles was on a rehab assignment. Numbers are not his primary focus for what he was trying to do down there. You gotta get your strength back. You have to get your timing back. What was his primary focus when he was on the big league roster earlier this year?

Why would we start seeing that now, at least in comparison to before? For as long as there has been free agency there have been guys who have decided they didn't want to play in NY. But by and large guys will follow the best offer.

Clark has been one of the Bears best receivers for a few years now, but I don't think he's a top 4 receiver on this team now, or at least not for long. I think one of the younger WR is going to be a better option this year, partly because I expect one of them to emerge, and partly because I think Clark is starting to slip. I really like Clark and have been a big supporter of his even when everybody was clammoring for a new TE in the years before Olsen was drafted. But with Cutler at the helm I think too much 2 TE might not be a great idea. They need Jay to test teams deep and help one of those WR to develop into a top 3 receiving threat. I think a lot of the 2 TE sets you will see, will be Dez at TE and Olsen in the slot. From the sound of things, Olsen isn't going to be doing much blocking, especially with Gaines on the roster. I would expect that to be the vast majority of 2 TE sets. However, that is more helpful for a lesser QB that needs the fallback option and safety valves than for a potentially elite QB who can and should stretch the field. It's going to happen, a lot, but it should happen a lot less than it would for Orton. Cutler better get 3 WR + Olsen and Forte in several passing packages, not just a whole lot of 2-2-1.

I love that wins is his justification. That and he's been an excellent guy. Yea using wins and the fact that he never answered the question really. Actually, wins is probably going to end up being the biggest factor in whether or not he wins the award.

If you don't see how recklessly Baker handled Prior, then you just don't want to see it.

Isn't he guaranteed 2 more years?

you could ask the same of Ian Snell I think both of them pissed off management. Gorzo's a douchebag so that makes sense, I think Snell was just pissed that the team is awful. I thought Snell was diagnosed with the scaredies or something. But he actually did make 15 starts, so you can't ask the same thing. Gorzo made none this year. Why?

I dont' see how trying Fox at 2B would be a disaster. People have been crying out all season about how horrible it would be to have Fox in the major league OF, and then 3B, and then behind the plate. They were wrong every time. He's been fine. And two weeks in the fall flirting with 2b isn't going to destroy his progress at any of those other positions.

Why was Gorzo unable to crack the Pirates rotation? They've had 7 guys make starts this year and only one has an ERA under 4. If he was looking that good in AAA, was he really not worthy of a callup to the Pirates? Were they hiding him down there to inflate his trade value? Was their rotation just too good? Did he just now start pitching well?

Seriously, how are people pretending this is only a 2 game stretch of wildness?

I'll throw in my prediction of Hoffpauir going down for Geo just because Fuld is the backup CF and that will probably tip the scales in his favor. It might be the best thing for Hoffpauir right now. He's in a absolutely massive slump and from his quotes sounds like he might be pressing because of it. Go get him 2-3 weeks of at-bats at Iowa and see if he can relax and work through it with regular at-bats. Does Hoff have options? I thought there was talk in the spring that if he didn't make the team they'd risk losing him.

Why do so many people think "why not try him at 2B" for guys who struggle at the corners? If you are a little to bulky, slow and fluid to be the regular 3B or LF, why would 2B be the place to go?

Sure, but so did the fact that he was the starting ASG catcher, and had terrific numbers for a his position. Who was his closest competition?

Why not just send Fuld back down? They can do so without risking losing him, and they can find others to fill-in the OF for a while.

Clark has been one of the Bears best receivers for a few years now, but I don't think he's a top 4 receiver on this team now, or at least not for long. I think one of the younger WR is going to be a better option this year, partly because I expect one of them to emerge, and partly because I think Clark is starting to slip. I really like Clark and have been a big supporter of his even when everybody was clammoring for a new TE in the years before Olsen was drafted. But with Cutler at the helm I think too much 2 TE might not be a great idea. They need Jay to test teams deep and help one of those WR to develop into a top 3 receiving threat.

Sure they give him an advantage, but it's not like it's an unfair advantage, it's a strength of his game.

then why is he worse when it's not a save situation? It's common sense that better offense will make the team better, but it's not going to make Kevin Gregg better.

Hoffpauir sucks. The Cubs lived through a good deal of non-production out of Theriot before he justified the time. The Cubs absolutely can play wait and see with struggling kids. If they didn't make so many horrible mistakes with overpriced veterans they could do it more. They just choose not to.

Yes, the pitch count is arbitrary. You're out of your mind if you think that pitch counts is the primary reason why a pitcher gets hurt compared to the other factors I had mentioned. It's stupid to try and pick out one phrase (which is correct) and ignore everything else I had mentioned. I didn't even read your post, I was just responding to IMB's post. Sorry, just because 100 is an arbitrary number doesn't mean high pitch counts aren't dangerous. And just because we don't have all the evidence about what causes injuries doesn't mean you throw caution to the wind and treat pitchers, especially young ones, the way Dusty does. Pitching injures arms. It's only reasonable to be cautious. That does not mean to never let a young guy throw 110 pitches. It does mean not just throwing him out there repeatedly. If he goes higher one start, ease up later. Not like a guy to throw 110+ in several consecutive starts isn't even close to saying he better never throw more than 90.

I'm not sure how that could possibly be true. I mean, a 1 run lead is a 1 run lead no matter how many runs it took to get there. Gregg's offense already bailed him out Saturday night. Improvement by the offense would be nice overall, but I don't really see how it has anything to do with Gregg's performance. If he blows a lead he blows a lead. The Cubs have played a bunch of close low scoring games this year, even if it's one run more here or there, it might turn that one run game into a 2 run game and given Gregg's HR ratio and decent WHIP, it becomes more important with him than most closers. Maybe that run turns it into a 4 run lead instead of a 3 run lead and with Lou, he won't feel compelled to use Gregg in the lower leverage situation. I'd be curious to see the save situation between Gregg and Woody last year to see the diff. between 1 run leads and 2-3 run leads between each year. Or maybe he blows a 3 run lead. A save situation is a save situation. He's pitched in plenty of games with more than a 1 run lead. He's blown some, he's given up some runs without relinquishying the lead in some, and he's been successful in most. The offense being better will help the team, it's not going to help Kevin Gregg pitch better. If anything he's pitched worse in non-save situation this year, which suggests he needs it close to be sharp.