Ballgame64

I think Cowley tweet suggests that the Sox are trying to do something different knowing Jackson trade is still available. With KWs track record, it will be a deal no one has a clue about until it is completed. I don't know if I would classify this as "big" but could Lilly be going to the White Sox?

The Cubs have had the unique opportunity to play 3 of the worst offensive teams in the last 17 years of Major League Baseball this season. The Seattle Mariners (.642 OPS), Houston Astros (.649 OPS) and Pittsburgh Pirates (.672 OPS) have the 1st, 2nd and 5th worst team OPS since 1992. The Cubs are 8-19 (assuming today results in a loss) against those teams. :shock: So if the Cubs did to them what the rest of baseball does to these three teams, the Cubs would be fighting for the division lead. So what are we to conclude from this information? It is just baseball. The Cubs are better than we think. They don't take these teams seriously so they don't play as good. Lou and his staff have not done a good job of preparing the team to play also rans. Bad luck. A combination of all of these...

The Cubs are on the way to losing their 4th series of the year to the Houston Astros. I wouldn't make any changes either Tom. Let Crane Kenney and Hendry pick the next manager, they have done a great job up to this point.

When your idiot manager plays a guy who can't field or throw in left field, bad things are bound to happen. Don't worry though, Nady will make up for it with his awesome hitting. Why didn't Ricketts just tell Lou to go home after Lou announced he is retiring. Just pay the man and let Trammel run things from here on out.

The Cubs have the 10th most AB with the bases loaded. They have the 7th highest OPS with the bases loaded and the 7th most runs scored with the bases loaded. Not sure specifically about no out situations. I would have never guessed they have been that good. Then again, D Lee with the bases loaded this year has been tremendous even though it seems like he sucks with runners in scoring position. I can think back to Cincinnati for Leake's major league debut and today where they have had bases loaded and no outs in the top of the first. At least today they got one run. When the team is bad, it seems like they have never done anything right.

Has there ever been a team that gets less out of bases loaded and no outs than the Cubs?

I wish Lou would start giving the take sign with the bases loaded. That was a ridiculous at bat by Byrd. Take a fastball right down the middle after swinging at two horrible pitches to start the at bat.

With Joe Torre's contact also up at the end of the year and Paul Sullivan saying LA sources say Torre would like the challenge of managing the Cubs, what would people here think of Joe Torre as the next manager? He had a heck of a run with the Yankees and the Dodgers have lost the last two NLCS. But way back when, he did not have a lot of success as a manager.

That's playing smart baseball at the little league level, not the majors. If the object of the exercise as a hitter is to not make an out, isn't it better to put the ball in play than to swing and miss assuming the pitch is a strike? However, a batter who shortens his swing still strikes out, as well. And he's much less likely to get a hit - major league defenses are really, really good. Simply putting the ball into play weakly is extremely unlikely to get you on base. On the other hand, taking a good solid swing at the ball optimizes your chances of having a positive result. Thanks for the explanation. So in today's world, when you look back in baseball history, how do we judge guys like Wade Boggs or Tony Gwynn? Neither guy hit for a lot of power but did not strike out much. How does their OPS compare to what is considered a good hitter now. I would say Gwynn's approach is more what I am talking about when I think of shortening your swing or having a controlled swing. Maybe they were just so good at hitting that they are not the best examples.

That's playing smart baseball at the little league level, not the majors. If the object of the exercise as a hitter is to not make an out, isn't it better to put the ball in play than to swing and miss assuming the pitch is a strike? I'll take a strikeout and a home run over a groundout and a single. That's a simplistic analogy, but the point is the same. Cutting down on your swing hurts you on the macro level more than it helps. I understand that, but I guess I look at each individual game and the approach hitters take. Plus, you can't say you'll take a strikout and home run since the chances of certain players hitting a home run is so low. While I do understand some of the advanced stats used today and actually argue for them to some of my friends, I still have trouble with the macro level. I'm stuck in the here and now aspect of each game. However, I enjoy the explanations from those who take the time to do so.

This from a person using the term Cubbie. Who would you like to see as GM and Manager of the Cubs?

That's playing smart baseball at the little league level, not the majors. If the object of the exercise as a hitter is to not make an out, isn't it better to put the ball in play than to swing and miss assuming the pitch is a strike?

Ok let's judge Sandberg on his win-loss records 71-68 60-78 (QUICK!! PROMOTE HIM!!) 71-69 (OVER 500?? PROMOTE HIM AGAIN!!) 51-44 That is a stellar 6 games under 500 for his managerial career. Surely, no other minor league managers are out there with that kind of track record. So why did they promote him? You may not agree with how the front office judges such things, but obviously someone felt he has done a good job. My comment about wins/losses is at the major league level since we all know kids are moved off minor league teams as they prove worthy of promotion, which can impact the final record.

When I hear it, I think about all those poor morons who walk up to the plate with scuba gear on, hit the ball with their kayak paddles and then run into center field before collapsing to the ground. I wish they'd stop playing the game wrong. Is that supposed to be funny? Don't quit your day job friend.

"...because that is how the game was played when Ryno was in his prime. The "daily double" of Dernier and Ryno made a killing doing this in '84. That is how the game was played back then and that is how Ryno knows the game. What scares me about him is that he doesn't seem flexible enough to change with the game. Some of what he says I completely agree with (respect the game, appreciate the fans, it is a privilege to play) but a lot of what he has done in the minors I disagree with as the game has simply evolved without him (or so it would seem). Giving up outs is no longer a consistently good game strategy IMO. I fear that Ryno will try to implement the '84 style of play in 2011 and fail miserably. He is easily my favorite player and seeing him fail isn't something that I want to watch." I like your take on this subject. When I hear "playing the game right" I think about playing smart. Throwing to the correct base, not running into outs, being patient at the plate and looking for a pitch to drive not just hit with less than two strikes, cutting down on your swing with two strikes because making the defense make a play is better than striking out (unless of course you hit into a double play). I don't equate those things to constantly calling for a sacrifice bunt or always trying to hit and run. My memories of Ryno as a player will not be tarnished by a managing career with the Cubs or any other team.

1,480 - 1,060 for a .583 winning percentage. #20 all time in wins and #9 all time in winning percentage. One World Series title and three World Series losses. I hope the Cubs next manager can be that bad with the Cubs. Although, I'd rather see 3 WS wins and 1 loss. So what makes a good manager?

Clearly Ryno was groomed for the role by Hendry and if he goes then there is no guaranty that Ryno is the next manager. I think Sandberg was offered the Class A manager job because Hendry didn't think there was anyway Ryne would take it but at least Hendry could look fans in the eyes and say the Cubs offered him a chance. When Soto was on rehab in AA last year, Hendry visited the Smokies and commented on the job Ryno and the other coaches were doing. I think Sandberg has surprised Cubs management by his willingness to do whatever it takes to get experience and be a viable candidate, not to mention the results. He has had success at each level. There are a lot of people here who will not give him much credit for what he has done and think he will be a horrible manager because he doesn't spew stats constantly, talks about playing the game the right way or they simply say the teams have been successful inspite of Sandberg. But at the end of the day, the team is judged on Wins/Losses and ultimately on championships, not how many times a manager calls fo sacrifice bunt during the seaon. I am not saying he should be the next manager. My only hope is the next manager gets more out of the talent that is on the roster than Lou has the last couple of years. This team seems to lack focus or does not seem prepared on a daily basis. Is that the manager/coaching staff, the players or a combination of both? The baseball season is a long season but managers like Tony LaRussa find a reason to make every game more important than yesterday. Maybe that is why his teams are better year in and year out even when they don't have the same talent level on paper, that other teams appear to have.

According to the New York Daily news, Lou is going to retire at the end of this year. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2010/07/20/2010-07-20_lou_piniella_former_yankees_manager_and_player_will_retire_as_manager_of_cubs_at.html

Come on. They didn't lose tonight because of ridiculous intangibles; they lost because of poor pitching. Most of the other games lost to bad teams has been due to a lack of offense. That is true, but why does this keep happening, especially against bad teams? Take a look at the Cardinals record in the first game of a series compared to the Cubs. Carpenter and Wainwright are not the only ones who pitch for the Cardinals. Tonight, the immortal Blake Hawksworth gives up 3 in the first and another in the 4th. He keeps his team in the game for 6 innings and the offense comes back to give him a win. The bullpen comes in and doesn't give up runs. Meanwhile, in Chicago, the Cubs bullpen gives up home runs to unproven players on a horrible team. EVERY pitcher used by Lou gave up runs. Are these top bullpen guys, no but no one can step up and shut down a bad line-up for a few innings? Is it bad talent? Maybe. But it is not always talent level.

If anyone in the bullpen could do their job, maybe the Cubs could have come back and made a game of it. But when you are allowing unknowns to have career nights, there isn't much the offense can do. This team is so frustrating. They have as much overall talent as anyone in the division but are lacking something. Heart, courage, passion, focus, leadership...something that does not allow them to take advantage of bad teams other than Arizona. Not that I think they are going to get back into the division race, but this game was ridiculous. Let me guess, the fact that Zambrano threw a simulated game is the reason the team struggled tonight. They are all focused on what Carlos will say when he apologizes to the team.

Is anyone actually watching who could describe the errors by Castro.

37-55 and shut out yesterday yet the Astros send 11 men to the plate in the first inning and score 5 runs. Thankfully I don't get WCIU and the weather is playing havoc with the AM feed. I guess it is time to pray for rain!

So if they somehow tie the game, Koyie Hill's great bat will get a chance. WTF?

Same tired offense once they face a real pitcher again. It is really getting old watching Nady hit into double plays and I really hope the new stats guy hired by the Cubs convinces Ricketts that Theriot has to be a utility guy if he is going to continue to be on the roster.

Nice base running by Theriot and Byrd. Not going to get many chances against Kershaw so you can't run into outs.