scarey

The bolded is simply wrong in several different ways. The whole theory about pitchers not being able to control balls in play does not suggest that all pitchers will have exactly the same BaBIP, it suggests that they will all fall within a fairly tight range (which is a little bigger for relievers than starters, theoretically because relievers pitch fewer innings, more often have the platoon advantage, and since they pitch fewer innings they can generally "air it out" more than starters who have to be able to maintain their stuff for 100+ pitches). That range for starting pitchers is around 280-300 generally, and Z's career BaBIP is right at 282, so no, he doesn't have some special power to cause less balls in play to drop in for hits. Also, as far as the whole "BaBIP isn't consistent" thing, I dare you to try and find me 5 non-knuckleball throwing (because it is also acknowledged that knuckleballers have a wider range of potential BaBIP than regular pitchers) starters from the modern era that pitched >1000 innings in their career with a BaBIP of <270. You won't, because they don't exist. Randy Johnson's career BaBIP is 302, Pedro Martinez' is 291, Greg Maddux's is 289, Johan Santana's is 287, Roger Clemens' is 294... and the list goes on and on. You're not going to find a whole lot more filthy pitchers in the last 20 years than the ones on that list, and they are all right smack in the middle of the widely accepted range of what a starting pitcher has control over. Really? So you think a .282 BABiP isn't significant enough to be an outlier? And you don't think a pitcher that has a better LD% and GB/FB ratio than league average isn't capable of inducing a lesser BABiP? It's not a special power, it's common knowledge that if a pitcher can induce less line drives and more ground balls than average, than there's a good chance that his BABiP will be lower than average.

That seems like an irrational fear. Why? Its completely rational. Hendry is on the hot seat, and the major league club has sucked. Hes going to try saving his ass somehow, and about the only way he can is to trade the "kids" for some experienced veteran ballplayers to help the major league club. I'd say there is a very good chance at Hendry trading at least one of out better prospects for a completely overrated valued veteran bullpen arm. Hendry has shown in the past that he does not overpay in trades and is extremely stingy with top prospects (some seem to feel he's stingy to a flaw). Names like Pie, Castro, Vitters, Marmol, Soto, and others have been thrown around in trade talks and he has refused to bite. I don't think he's going to change his philosophy for two reasons. 1. While he is on the hot seat, a poor choice could tip him in the wrong direction with Ricketts who has commented on how much he values a farm system. Everyone wants to assume that Hendry is already on the chopping block and he has to save himself from it. He may have to make a mistake to lose his job for all we know. 2. If Hendry does lose his job, I'm sure he's going to be looking for a new one. I don't think he's going to start pulling desperate moves to save his job and give potential employers another reason to not consider him. As for why Vitters should be valued by the Cubs: If there's one thing the Cubs system lacks it's power. Vitters is one of the few prospects that project for power if he hits his ceiling.

That seems like an irrational fear.

Does anyone have any idea of what's going on with Wilson Contreras? How does the the 50 game suspension work if he's just going to stay in South America this year? What qualifies as a game played at all in terms of the suspension? I would think the Cubs could just assign him to a team and let him attend an acedemy while he gets "suspended" for 50 games.

So, you're claiming to never have passed a judgment on a pitcher based on a negative performance in spring training? I find that hard to believe. You completely ignored his spring training performance by making assumptions about his ability to hit breaking balls and quality fastballs with this line.: "He'll see a lot less fastballs once the season starts, and it's likely the fastballs he sees will be better located." Or... do you have advanced scouting reports on him? Again, I find it hard to believe you do. If you do or have had extensive time watching him, I sincerely apologize for the ignorant remark. I agree that you can make assumptions based on statistics, but it's not exactly a foregone conclusion that he can't hit a breaking ball or a good fastball based on poor plate discipline. I just went back and checked my work, I forgot to include HBP, reached on error, SF, and SH to my plate appearances. My apologies for the faulty math. I don't disagree with that. I don't think it's just me that does it, but I admittedly key in on one or two main points I get from a post and respond to it and may forget a point that may be contradictory to something in my response. For that, I also apologize. Just because you didn't specifically type out an issue I pointed out doesn't mean your post didn't carry that interpretation. For example, if you type out "Samardzija is not happy about missing out on the rotation", it's not ridiculous for me to make the assumption that he's unhappy about pitching relief even though you didn't say anything specific to his being a reliever. I don't see any reason to take it so personally?

It's entertaining to me that people will go through such lengths to provide explanations on why a guy like Colvin is impressive in spring training (pitchers working on pitches, fastball ineffectiveness, etc.) but are not hesitant at all to throw a pitcher under the bus when he gets knocked around and don't recognize the fact that not even everyone is hitting .475/.475/.729. Don't get me wrong. I'm in no way saying Colvin is the real deal. But isn't it just as ignorant to completely write off what he's done the last 10 months as it is to proclaim him ready for the big show? Also, while he hasn't shown it in spring training, Colvin has shown significant improvement in plate discipline. In his first two years he had an IsoD of .041 and improved to .071 in his second two years. His plate discipline fate is not exactly set in stone.

I know it's just minor league spring training, but I find it extremely fascinating that these guys are getting opportunities like this at such a young age. I would think they would only be running drills. I guess it makes sense for Na since he they may be squeezing in as much baseball as possible before he goes back to school. I guess Alcantara has been making his name known.

It would help to have a 1B who can actually hit though, especially if they bring nothing to the table defensively. I don't know what you expect here. Do you want him on the bench? It's not gonna happen. There's not exactly a glut of good hitting first baseman immediately available, so why not move Soriano and grab one of the free agent outfielders. Or, save some money by having someone like Colvin or Jackson or Burke (if ready by then) move into the outfield. If a worth while 1st baseman becomes available in 2012, Soriano can move back to left field as there will be a vacancy in the outfield from Fukudome.

Also, keep in mind that he Cubs have acquired a bunch of near-MLB ready first base recently. Brian Lahair, Matt Spencer, and Ryne White. None of those guys look like they will be up to the task of being a full time first baseman, but I could see Lahair or Spencer being capable in a platoon roll.

I was thinking about Soriano to first at some point in his contract the other day. Why not next year? I understand we've grown to be spoiled by Lee's defense at first, but first base is not exactly known to have premiere defenders league wide. Hell, we've already brought up the idea of Dunn playing there. We know he at least has fielded ground balls at one point in his career. My thought is if guys like Konerko, Delgado, and Dunn can play first, surely a guy who at one time played 2nd base can play there. The other idea would be Nady to first base. We'll have to see how he plays this year though.

'08 alum. First became a full fledged Boiler basketball fanatic when I got there in '02 with Willy Deane flying all over the court and Kenneth Lowe dropping shots from Slater Hill.

Watch the game again. They did quite a notable job of defending Johnson and pushing him out of the low post. Kudos to them.

Listed weights of each player. Davis: 220lbs Tisdale: 235lbs Johnson: 215lbs

Looking at the play by play here: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/playbyplay?gameId=300512509 I looked at it individually. I noticed that they do not specify if a blocked shot was a jumper or a layup, but I don't remember any jump shots being blocked, so let's assume those were in the paint. Also, they do not specify when a foul was on a layup attempt or what not if the attempt was missed, so this is pretty flawed information really. However, based on that game log, the Illini were 4/15 in the paint while the Boilermakers were 8/22. Again, these do not account for the fouls in the paint, so this really tells us very little. I can tell you that the Boilermakers made it to the line 3 times before the bonus in the 1st half and 2 times before the bonus in the 2nd half. Illini went once all game before the bonus. So, unless there was a foul on a jumpshot at some point that I don't remember, it was at least 16 attempts in the paint for the Illini and 27 for the Boilermakers. That's a pretty large discrepency.

Lot's of individual things to address in this post, so I'm going to break it down. I respectfully disagree. Lewis Jackson was getting pushed around all game long. He always does in every game because he's just a smaller player. The Illini were playing him just as physically as Purdue was playing. Also, Johnson was getting pushed around all game too. You think there's a reason he was only settling for 15 footers? Every time he brought it inside he would have major body contact and not get the call. I can only commend your guys for the way they played Johnson (although I admittedly would be peeved if we had lost). I can't account for every single foul against Hummel, and I'm sure there were some very questionable ticky-tack fouls called. But again, it works both ways. I just listed three specific plays that went in favor of the Illini. Shouldn't that be game planned for though? If you know Kramer is going to flop, why allow Davis to slide into a screen on him after an inbound pass? Again, what Kramer was doing to your guards is what your guards were doing to Jackson when bringing the ball up the court. EVERYONE who has ever played a game of basketball does that. EVERYONE. I never asked for sympathy. I just find it a little hypocritical to call him out for it when you would be happy to have a guy that does the same thing for your team.

Because it's not basketball it's Wojo slap the ground bull [expletive]. It's not emphasizing a foul, it's acting like a clown They were fouls with our without the flop. It's true, they may not be called if not for the flop, but the bottom line is they were fouls. Don't foul you don't get called. I'm sorry, there's no other way to put it.

Syracuse missed the tournament once with 10 Big East wins and I believe Penn State or someone else missed the tourney last year with 10 Big Ten wins. Syracuse doesn't ever count when they're on the bubble because they play 14 D2 teams in non-conference every year. I really think they'll get in at 11-7. Whether they beat Minny and Michigan or lose one of those and beat UW I don't think matters. Also, possibly one of the most homer reffed games I've ever seen today. Absolutely awful. The scout board had a breakdown on shot types, Purdue shot 6 more layup/dunks and went to the line something like 20 more times. Awful. I hadn't seen the comments made here, and maybe I shouldn't be bringing this back up, but really? Are you implying that Purdue went to the line on jump shot fouls? I think some of you Illini fans saw Kramer flopping on two calls, looked at the free throw desparity, and automatically assumed the refs gave it away. 6 of the free throws that Purdue shot were from intentional fouls at the end and 2 free throws were from Weber's T. That's a 5-20 free throw differential which is understandable seeing as Purdue had a huge differential in points in the paint (and is a reason I don't believe the breakdown on shot types you referenced). Also, Illinois got plenty of calls in that game. Kramer got nailed in the nose on that drive and didn't get a call. That foul on Jackson when he clearly tied up Tisdale for a jump ball. The tipped pass that McCamey deflected out of bounds that went to Illinois. Sometimes calls are gonna go your way, sometimes they don't. Not to mention that the flops by Kramer were in fact fouls! Davis slid into that screen. I agree, it's not going to get called all the time, but it's not Kramers fault for flopping, it's Davis' fault for not positioning himself well in the first place. Kramer's feet were set on the Cole charge and the blocking foul by Cole, he was still moving up to his spot. They were all fouls! If Kramer flops to emphasize a fould and try to give his team the advantage, how can you blame him for that? As a Purdue fan, I don't care if people think he's a [expletive] for it, he's giving my team an advantage. What sucks is I was thoroughly impressed by the Illini, but you guys are overshadowing it by the complaints about the refs. I didn't realize your guys spaced the floor and shot so well. The defense was excellent as well. Your bigs had their feet on Johnson't neck all game long. If you get to the tourney, you have a great chance to upset a few higher seeds. Best of luck going forward except if Purdue and Illinois meet in the conference tourney.

Position player I'm looking forward to is Ryan Flaherty. If he can keep his power numbers up at A+/AA, he could become a very valuable prospect. The pitcher I'm looking forward to is Cashner. I'm hoping he starts to regularly pitch 4-6 innings per outing and can rack up more strikeouts.

Well, don't forget that Santo could fall out of the booth and die on impact, President Obama could attend a game and eat a tainted hotdog causing fatal food poisoning, and the sky could fall. Other than those exemptions, I think you have a great outlook on the upcoming season... I'm not saying the Cubs will go 59-103. That list shows they're far from a lock for 95 wins and a playoff berth. Thoughts like considering Zambrano's elbow and/or shoulder may finally give out is just a little too much over the top pessemism for me. That's all I'm saying.

Well, don't forget that Santo could fall out of the booth and die on impact, President Obama could attend a game and eat a tainted hotdog causing fatal food poisoning, and the sky could fall. Other than those exemptions, I think you have a great outlook on the upcoming season...

Doesn't Cashner's fastball have a lot more movement than Gregg's ever did?

I was a little surprised by Truffle's comment on Gaub too. I've heard he has very good stuff and there has to be a reason for striking out almost 13 per nine innings in the minors.

I find the fact that you're very specific in your predictions a little weird (no offense). Also, I think Huseby could bust, but I don't think it will be due to the fact that he gets hit hard at any point except maybe the majors. This is how I see things just in terms of the big league roster. Keep in mind, this is strictly in terms of who is in the Cubs organization at this time. Similar to how BA does their projected lineups. C- Soto 1B- Vitters 2B- Flaherty SS- Castro 3B- Lee LF- Soriano CF- B. Jackson RF- Burke SP1- J. Jackson SP2- Zambrano SP3- Rhee SP4- Carpenter SP5- Antigua Bench- Watkins Bench- Barney Bench- Guyer Bench- R. White Bench- Clevenger LR- Coleman MR- Cales MR- Guzman MR- Gaub SU- Parker SU- Huseby CL- Cashner Nothing too surprising other than maybe Lee at 3rd. If they don't end up trading him, I think they might move him over because of his arm despite the fact that they would be losing a lot of power from the hot corner, but I think Jackson in center and Flaherty at 2nd makes up for it. It would just be a shame to waste his range over there. I could see him getting traded in the long run though.

There's always the chance that some guys could get their opportunity as a result of an injury. 1B we are not really very prepared for although Lahair or Ryne White could be possibilities. Barney or Thomas will get called up if we lose a middle infielder as long as Castro isn't the obvious choice . Marquez Smith may get an opportunity if Aramis has another major injury. Colvin is the obvious first outfielder up. And Clevenger, Chirinos, and Robinson will probably have to make themselves stand out to get picked out in the case of a Soto or Hill injury. If a starter goes down mid season, Samardzija, Gorzo, Marshall, or Caridad would obviously be first in line. But if all of them are working relief in some capacity or already starting with the Cubs, I would guess Atkins, Coleman, or possibly Jackson would get an opportunity. I think there are so many relief candidates lined up in waiting that it's not worth mentioning.

1. Josh Vitters 2. Starlin Castro 3. Andrew Cashner 4. Jay Jackson 5. Brett Jackson 6. Hak-Ju Lee 7. Chris Carpenter 8. Kyler Burke 9. Ryan Flaherty 10. Blake Parker I realize it's a little unorthadox.