Four and Twenty

I remember an AB late last year when he swung at 3 straight pitches in the dirt 2 feet outside and casually walked back to the dugout. Like he didn't give a s@!t. Injuries, frustration, whatever. I was pretty damn pissed off at that. Yeah, I prefer it when the athletes representing the team I follow throw fits, cry, and mope about like children when they fail. I already miss Milton.

At least he wasn't sneezing while catching up on family email from a hot tub when his chair broke. Such is the life of a Chicago Cub.

In which case we don't have to worry at all. I dont know about that, I could see us going into next season Fonty 3B, Castro SS, Theriot 2B, 1B Baker if the other 2 walk. That way Hendry can have middle infielders at every position, that would be his wet dream. I was referring more to the notion that Aramis and DLee both putting up .300/35HRs/120RBI as impossible.

Adrian Joss pitched a perfect game on October 2, 1908 with just 74 pitches and only 3 strikeouts. Talk about a team effort.

Exactly. I was specifically referring to 20K games that were completed in 9 innings. I suppose Johnson could be included for the 11 inning game against Cincinnati because he did strikeout 20 in 9 innings of work. He did not, however, get the win. Of course that is through no fault of his own. It should be noted that the 21K outing by Tom Cheney was in 16 innings of work. He only had 13 strikeouts through 9 innings.

Clemens had 2 by himself I just caught that and fixed it. Thanks.

No. There have been sixteen perfect games in the Modern Era. There have been three 20 strikeout games during that same time period. Nine players are involved in a perfect game. Two are involved in a 20 strikeout game, with the catcher making a minor contribution. This wouldn't even be worth discussing if DeWayne Wise hadn't robbed Kapler. Truly a spectacular catch considering the scenario, one with which Mark Buehrle had nothing to do with other than delivering the tater across the plate that made it possible. Woody's performance most definitely edges out Buehrle's. Edit: I forgot Clemens struck out 20 twice.

I'm guessing they split the report in to three parts to clearly attribute credit to each author. You are right in regards to the comment section. It is one of the few venues of the internet where the comments are of actual worth. Thoughtful articles reap thoughtful comments.

In which case we don't have to worry at all.

FanGraphs has chimed in with three articles involving Cubs talent and organization outlook. There isn't anything particularly groundbreaking to note but they are certainly worth the read. Organizational Rankings: #18 - Chicago Cubs by Dave Cameron Organizational Rankings: Current Talent - Cubs by David Golebiewski Organizational Rankings: Future Talent - Cubs by Bryan Smith Bruce Miles, being a reader of FanGraphs, offers his brief thoughts on the articles here. As per usual, their collective insight is on par with reality.

The eras of 1900-1910 and 1930-1940 make 2000-2010 pale in comparison. This article is terrible and fraught with contradictions. I'll let Dolan fill you in on the rest.

Most definitely. Dislocated shoulder last season. Won't take live batting practice off his teammates this Spring Training. Triceps soreness. It won't end until next year when he is with some other team. And even then my fondness for him will cause me to worry a bit. He will always be one of my favorite players to watch take an at-bat and it's hard not to care about the well-being of a quality guy like that.

You say it like "strippers on the pitcher's mound for the 7th" is a bad thing? Well presumably it would require a pole to be installed, and then we'd be even worse than the Astros. Someone should email Drayton McLane, Jr. and plant this little kernel... I can totally picture Michael Bourn colliding with Kiki Bubbles while chasing an errant fly.

Yes.

Even the professor needs a chalkboard diagram at times...

Not necessarily. The Cubs have a number of players on the 40 man roster that can't be easily sent down (i.e. without clearing waivers or the right to refuse), so discussing possible trades to solve any problem of trimming down to 25 may not be as hypothetical as you would like to think. Definitely. I should have been more specific. I was referring to trade talk involving the 25-man roster, and more specifically any of the Cubs core that might available throughout the season depending on the their level of success.

A this in return. I don't particularly understand the sentiment that the season is over on March 19th, either. Obviously, you consider each scenario in the context with which you come across it. Trade talk involving anyone on the Cubs roster is just hypothetical babble at this point.

I agree. Nuts&Gum is a competent writer. And while he assuredly understands the important concepts you so eloquently stated, he did not adhere to them this time around. Incorrect. Sentences (1) and (2) are related. Sentence (3) is offered as an alternative Nuts&Gum would happily take (meaning, he would advocate for it) if they received a good return on a Theriot trade. It is not a continuation of the basic idea of (1) and (2). While it is a logical course of successive thought regarding (1) and (2), (3) does fine standing alone. Sentences (4) and (5) are related to the success of 2010 and beyond without Theriot if the trade in (3) were to happen. I agree. Applying these rules to Nuts&Gum's quote and it should read... His first paragraph challenges the idea that playing Theriot and playing Castro are the only viable options. His second paragraph offers an alternative that he supports. This is why I commented in the first place. I interjected to quell an argument over semantics. It's clear that Nuts&Gum should have used a second paragraph. One of you stopped to read the post, consider it for awhile, and understand it before responding and one of you didn't. I couldn't have said it better myself. Lastly, apologies to Nuts&Gum. I enjoy your posts thoroughly and only critique your writing to illustrate an argument. Please, sir, continue unabashed.

This is where he advocates trading Theriot, with the qualifier being "getting a good return." I'll spare you the reading comprehension insult since you seem to be well versed in such frivolities.

You mean windmill? I enjoy that show. Different Thursday night NBC show. Oops. Glad you at least knew to what I was referring.

You mean windmill? I enjoy that show.

1 year/$1MM, plus a possible $1.2MM in performance bonuses. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/02/cardinals-close-to-deal-with-felipe-lopez.html

And here I thought this was a thread about a Theriot sighting at the Castro Street Fair. And no, I'm not. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I'd rather you go to the Orioles camp in Sarasota and Theriot Pie in the face.

Ricketts should hire Yogi as a guidance counselor for Hendry.