jersey cubs fan

Good heavens no he hasn't. .270/.336/.369 is nowhere close to very good.

Yeah, it would be shocking to me if Blanco didn't start this game: day game after night game Barrett caught 15 innings 2 nights ago left-hander on the mound for the opposition Blanco is 2-5 against this pitcher Z is on the mound All the factors say a Blanco start is coming. My guess is that the rest of the lineup will be the same, but there could be 1 or 2 other small changes. My first instinct would be to think he'd sit Jones, since he's really cooled down after that brief hot streak, and already ranks third on the team in most playing time. And of course since he can't hit lefties at all, and never has. But when you think about how much stock Lou puts into coddling his veterans' egos and the thought of showing faith in Jones by putting him right back out there, I begin to doubt that idea. But it would be smart to give Felix "I've got 6 at bats in the past 7 days" Pie a start before he rots any further, at least taking advantage of his clear defensive edge over Jones.

right. there's no need for them to announce this publicly and make a big deal out of it. I think you're both wrong. Staying silent on the matter was not an option. This is a public show against DUIs more than anything. It's largely meaningless in and of itself. But the fact that MLB has been so accepting of drinking and driving in the past was a big problem. Banning drinking during team activities that occur just prior to players getting in their cars is a smart move. There's still far too much acceptance of drinking and driving in this country. People think of it like speeding, where the only thing that matters is whether you get caught, rather than whether you do it in the first place.

i dont know. maybe because the cubs only have 1 left handed starter in jones or pie when murton plays (which he should be doing every day imo). So? They need more hitters, not necessarily LH. There is no great need for LH hitters. If anything they need a RH bat that can platoon with Jones. i disagree. have you ever heard stone's explanation on why it is important to have several left handed hitters in a lineup? he contends that if a righty only faces right handed hitters, the pitcher is able to easily establish a release point to the outside corner which makes him that much harder to hit. it also goes along with the left right left (or right left right) batting order sequence that some managers prefer. the staggered lineup makes it harder for a starter to get into a good rhythm on his pitches. I've heard the theory, I just don't think it holds any water. The Cubs are much better against RHP than they are against LHP. And it's been that way for a few years, even though the rest of the league generally does better against LHP. They aren't in need of LH bats. They need bats. And if they need anything in particular, it is guys who hit well against LHP, which would mean a right handed bat.

i dont know. maybe because the cubs only have 1 left handed starter in jones or pie when murton plays (which he should be doing every day imo). So? They need more hitters, not necessarily LH. There is no great need for LH hitters. If anything they need a RH bat that can platoon with Jones.

But his 3 year splits are about 300 AB's fewer than Floyds so it's like comparing apples to oranges. That is completely nonsensical. A 300 AB difference over a 3 year period does not mean you can't compare two players' SLG. It's a rate stat, not a counting stat like HR or RBI. Cliff Floyd is playing too much, plain and simple. I like Cliff. I've wanted him to be a Cub for a long time. And I was pro-Floyd this offseason. But it had to be as only a part time player. He's simply not anywhere close to the guy he was in his prime, let alone who he was a couple years ago. He was bad last year, and so far he's been the same. Hopefully he can recover to put up some halfway decent numbers, but that won't happen as an everyday man. Time has not been kind to him. Murton needs to play more than 50% of the time. He's got a far greater chance of putting up a significantly better than average line than Floyd does. His numbers look like crap right now, but that is largely meaningless, as I would never expect an everyday playing young player just entering his prime to be able to handle such limited and sporadic use. Neither Floyd nor Jones are doing anything remotely irreplacable right now. There's no reason why they have to be the default everyday guys. And that's especially true when you consider the type of financial hit the Cubs will take if Floyd does continue to play this frequently.

Maybe. Or maybe they think Leo Mazzone can make a positive impact on one or both of these guys. Really? Why not just bring up a guy from their minor leagues instead of trading for has-beens? I mean, have you seen any Jeff Weaver games? He doing historically bad. I guess I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but it seems even too stupid for the Orioles (and that's saying a lot). Well, teams routinely very stupidly acquire crappy veteran pitchers instead of going with prospects. Maybe they don't want to expose a young guy this early.

I would. Alfonso seems to have a great arm. Bruce Miles has been saying since the day he signed that Soriano should be the everyday RF for this club especially with Pie being groomed to become the everyday CF. Some of that was predicated on the belief that Jones could be dealt, which I still think can happen. He definitely should be in RF.

I still can't figure out why Lou called that. Jones racks up plenty of strikeouts as it is and that was a pitch he couldn't do anything with. The best result he could have gotten with that pitch was a foul ball out of play; that's pretty much it. I'm concerned with Lou's style of managing. While I don't think he's as prone to stupid and head-scratching decisions as previous managers, I think he tries too hard to micromanage the game. Part of this might have to do with a lack of familiarity with his players' strengths and weaknesses, which is understandable, but if this trend continues, I won't be too happy with it. At least he's seemingly figured out Ohman is a LOOGY. Or maybe that's just a coincidence of his overmanaging. Everybody in Lou's bullpen is an OOGY of some sort.

One loss and all the good feelings generated over the past week and a half are gone, huh? LOL I don't know if was the loss itself last night, or the way we lost. The bottom of the 8th was some of the worst baseball I have ever seen in my life. Even the very best teams in the league will lose games looking awful...and the worst teams will look great in some games. It's inevitable with a 162 game schedule and the nature of the game. Last night's game doesn't tell me anything I didn't know about the team before the night began. I agree. And I disagree that the 8th inning was some of the worst baseball people have ever seen. Come on. The worst inning you could see is 3 straight weak ground balls to the pitcher on 1 pitch each. The Cubs threatened but didn't score. Big deal. I've seen much worse. At least they threatened, for one. And two, you have a guy like Murton who is not accustomed to pinch hitting come up and hit a pop up that doesn't get the job done. That's part of the problem of the "just hit it in the air" mentality of playing for sac flies, especially when you have a guy that doesn't hit a lot of deep flies. The pitcher got ahead in the count, but Murton battled, and in trying to hit it in the air he got a fraction of an inch under the ball. It wasn't an awful at bat. It was a bad result, but come on already with the melodrama. Then Barrett is walked and Jones grounds out against a lefty. Well, Jones never hits lefties. Was anybody really surprised. He got tied up. Pittsburgh left many more people on base yesterday. The 8th inning was just an inning that nobody would remember if they made the save. It was an annoying loss since it was the first game in a home series against a bad team and brought them back to .500. But there's no reason for all the angst about the so-called worst baseball people have ever seen.

I'd think they are fairly happy. A couple big market teams, including SoCal. A traditional power in Detroit. Even though Buffalo is upstate NY, it gets considerable play in the metro area. There's a Canadian team as well, to boot. I'm sure they'd prefer Toronto/Montreal against the Rangers and Chicago against the Kings, or maybe Vancouver or even Edmonton. But this works.

By the same token, teams have days where they don't get many chances-it happens all the time. Both are at fault yesterday-the Cubs would have had a .330-.340 OBP yesterday if a run had been knocked in when it was supposed to, but their lack of chances in extra innings was also a big factor in the loss This is their first game out of the last 6 in which they had less than a .355 OBP for the game-if individual hitters can play the percentage card, then so can the team. How does one determine when a run is supposed to be driven in? The point is you can't. Runs can be scored in any situation, likewise, they can be prevented. People blast a hitter for not bringing in a run from third with less than 2 outs, but they'll celebrate a pitcher for getting out of such a situation unscathed. The Cubs have been better getting on base this year. Although they are still just a slightly above average offense. They currently rank 7th in Runs scored, OBP, SLG and OPS among NL teams. They are 2nd in AVG but 13th in walks. That last point is nothing new. It's still a little upsetting to me to see every beat writer talking about what an OBP turnaround they've had, and having everybody chalk up the loss to a lack of clutch hits in a game in which OBP was such a glaring problem. Walk more, get on base more, and you will have more opportunities. With more opportunities, you will score more runs. It's simple, but still something that is plaguing the team. And to top it off, the pitching staff walked 8. Cubs OBP yesterday was .280, Pitt's was .360. In retrospect, it was Pitt that didn't take advantage of as many opportunities, they left 17 on base while the Cubs left just 10. But it's no surprise which team won.

Baseball is about percentages. Just like it doesn't make any sense to get pissed at a player for not getting a hit, because most of the time they don't get a hit, it doesn't make sense to get pissed every time a team fails to drive in a run on a sac fly or something. It's not like it's just a given you can drive such a player in. Teams fail to drive in runners from 3rd with less than 2 outs every day. It happens all the time. When you take 2 walks in a game, whether it's extra innings or 9, you are stacking the odds against you. When you give up 8 walks in a game, you're making it tougher. The Cubs biggest offensive problem is a lack of chances, because you can't take advantage of all, or even most of you chances. The key is more chances. More opportunities. And the way you do that is by getting on base. The Cubs didn't get on base. Pittsburgh did.

I still can't figure out why Lou called that. Jones racks up plenty of strikeouts as it is and that was a pitch he couldn't do anything with. The best result he could have gotten with that pitch was a foul ball out of play; that's pretty much it. I'm concerned with Lou's style of managing. While I don't think he's as prone to stupid and head-scratching decisions as previous managers, I think he tries too hard to micromanage the game. Part of this might have to do with a lack of familiarity with his players' strengths and weaknesses, which is understandable, but if this trend continues, I won't be too happy with it. Cubs had so many chances to win way before that call. That call didn't lose the game, not even close. We could've played another 9 innings and not score. We just couldn't get a big hit when needed. I hear the consensus sounds like the Cubs just couldn't get the big hit despite numerous chances. It should be pointed out the Cubs drew 2 walks to the Pirates 8. That's the key, as it always is with the Cubs. Their OBP yesterday was about .280, absolutely pathetic. Pitt's OBP was .361. They are the ones that had all the chances to score. Add Lou's insistence on running his few baserunners into outs on a regular basis and you have a perfectly good explanation for why the Cubs couldn't score yesterday.

I don't like them either. But I'd bet you'd stay with the service that long even without the commitment. No reason to punish yourself just to pretend you've got freedome to move from service to service.

I never expect a sweep, unless they've already won the first two. I always think in terms of winning the series. It shouldn't scare you that you think a sweep is in question. But the Cubs do have to win series like this whenever possible, especially with the upcoming schedule getting tougher.

If you think that the teams Hendry has put together over the last two or three seasons were terrible and doomed to failure because of the crappy decisions he made and that the injuries to superstars Prior, Lee and Ramirez, plus some important role players, and the larger than normal amount of games missed by injury concerns Wood and Nomar, and the unforeseeable and freakish collapses of Patterson, Dempster and others had little to no effect on the won-loss record of those teams, then yes, he doesn't deserve any credit. But if you think he put together teams that could have contended if it weren't for a lot of freakish stuff happening, then he deserves more credit than you and some others are giving him. If you choose to only look at the total won-loss record over 4 years and not take into account that it looked a whole lot better after his 3rd year before a disasterous season felled by an unusual amount of injuries to key superstar players, then yes, he doesn't deserve any credit. But if you allow yourself to remember the records of the teams before he took over and see how much better his teams were in his first two or even three years combined, even withstanding a rapidly declining superstar and injuries to key players over those seasons, then he deserves more credit than some are willing to give him. From where I'm looking at it, that seems clear to me. Am I missing something that you're seeing? In other words. Things were worse before, so I'm just happy they are marginally better now. Believe me, it's perfectly clear.

What? Hendry hired those guys. It's his job to hire the right guys. But more importantly, Hendry has been the guy who has pushed this backward strategy the hardest.

Hendry hired Baker and kept him on board. And now that's his only fault? Laughable, utterly laughable. I try to fight the argument that Cubs fans get what they deserve because they accept the losing, but it's hard to with so many people making claims like this.

In fact it is that simple. If you throw in all the BS excuses people like to give Hendry, you complicate the story. The fact is Hendry has done a poor job. I don't mean to be flip, but you just restated your opinion without providing any reasons why it should hold up under logical scrutiny. I can make an argument why it is fair and accurate to take into account the state of the team at the time the GM takes over and why it is hard to fault a GM for catastrophic injuries. Can you make an argument for why it is more fair and accurate to judge a GM on one statistic? If you need something to backup the claim that results are what matters in sports then you just don't understand sports. There's nothing else to say. Hendry has been in charge for many years. And before he was in charge of the whole thing he was in charge of the minors. He had as much money and resources to work with as any GM could possibly expect, and he failed. Those people who are willing to accept mediocrity as a goal are satisfied with somebody like Hendry in charge. Those people who want to see a championship are not. It's quite simple. No need to muck it up with the nonsense. There is no logical scrutiny that can tear down the argument that Hendry has done a poor job. There is only BS and lies.

Actually, the problem is he thought leadoff hitter was the problem. Leadoff hitter wasn't the problem. And why Cubs fans are still fooled by this non-existent position is beyond me. But the problem has been that the Cubs don't walk enough and they give up too many walks. Hendry ignores this, instead going after a crap leadoff hitter that anybody with half a brain could see was not going to help the team. Hendry ignored the holes, and concentrated on filling mythological needs.

It worked so well he got fired! That was my first thought as well. Opinions didn't get Stone fired. Opinions kept him gainfully employed for 2 decades. In fact, he wasn't even fired. If anything, you could say arrogance led to him leaving on his own accord.

In fact it is that simple. If you throw in all the BS excuses people like to give Hendry, you complicate the story. The fact is Hendry has done a poor job.

I still don't understand why so many people think of the Cubs lineup as too RH heavy, when this lineup has been fine vs RHP, but has struggled mightily against LHP for such a long time.

You could be right, but I have a hard team imagining a new owner allowing the GM to play out the string on his contract. Most of these guys are either cut loose before that last year is up, or extended beyond that year. It's dangerous to allow a GM without a contract beyond tomorrow to make decisions that can affect an organization for years.