baseballfan50

As an outsider, I'm not all that familiar with Zambrano, but it's not a surprise. Emotion is good, but you can't lose it like that. I do wonder if Lou is gonna be gone as well. The Cubs may just have to take a bath on Z's contract, as it will be hard to unload.

Trading for a pitcher is not as ideal, as it would require more prospects. Our bullpen has been good overall. We need a good starter, hopefully temporarily.

To be honest, from an outsider's point of view, it seems that the Cubs are always having some kind of drama, so a story like this, true or not, seems plausible. But a team's standings and record make a difference, too.

Maybe if the owner didn't pocket the revenue sharing money, and actually spent it on the team, the team would be better! I can't speak for Fredi Gonzalez's managing skills, but good grief! The owner is more of the problem than the manager.

I thought the Cubs were getting a guy who kept a tight clubhouse in Lou Piniella. He really has softened in the last couple years. I don't think he has the energy or will to keep a tight ship anymore. I just can't believe he let Ramirez bring a gun to the clubhouse. That has to be illegal. Ryan Franklin was upset about it earlier this year (he's an avid hunter, though I'm not sure why he would need one in the clubhouse). Anyway, I'm not sure it's illegal, but MLB has a rule against it. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/dailypitch/post/2010/02/cardinals-ryan-franklin-bemoans-baseballs-edict-against-guns-in-clubhouses/1 There are also the city of Chicago's laws about gun ownership.

Eh. We'll just have to wait and see how he does. If anybody can work a miracle, Dave Duncan can. Sometimes a change of scenery also helps.

We had Walters start, as well as another rookie I think. Any rookie we started was not much better than Suppan has been so far. From my understanding, there aren't really any pitching prospects that the team wants to call up to pitch. Either the prospect is not ready or is just not very good. You don't want to bring up a minor league player too early anyway. Suppan is a decent fill-in for the time being. He was also low-risk. And the young pitchers that were near the Major League Level just weren't getting the job done. Obviously stats aren't everything, but PJ Walters did start two games this season. He's 0-1 with a 7.94 ERA. Granted, he has pitched 17 innings, about twice what Suppan has done. In those two days he gave up 15 runs. He is only 25, but he may need some more time in the minors. Hawksworth has pitched in 22 games. His overall ERA is 5.63. He may fill in some as the fifth starter too. He's been used quite a bit in the bullpen this year. We all have Motte and Boggs, both in the bullpen. Motte is good. Boggs has been okay, too. Another reason to have Suppan in the rotation is that, for the time being anyway, you need two fill-in starters. You don't necessarily have the ready prospects to fill both of those spots. You also don't want to take pitchers out of the bullpen if starting is only temporary.

I'm saying so far he's better than our alternatives. We could have traded for somebody, but that would further deplete our depleted farm system. Penny may be back in the next few weeks, so that will give us some relief from our fifth spot starter. If/when Lohse is back, Suppan will likely need to be moved. That said, with injured pitchers, there are always a lot of uncertainties. Suppan's next start is against Kansas City, then likely Arizona, Colorado, Houston, Dodgers, Chicago (July 23), Mets, Houston, Cincinnati, 8/15 against the Cubs, Giants, Nationals, Astros, Brewers, Braves, Padres, Pirates, Pirates, and Colorado. It'll be interesting to see how he does, but it's hard to say when for sure he will be starting. In July, Penny may be back, so Suppan may be moved around in the order.

I hate those things. What moron came up with this idea?

So far with the Cardinals W L ERA G IP H R ER HR HB BB SO AVG WHIP 0 0 3.12 2 8.2 11 3 3 2 0 3 6 .324 1.62 It's not bad. It's still much better than was expected, and he's been better than the rookies we had starting. He still hasn't gone more than 4 2/3. May just be for precautionary reasons, since, until he came here, he hadn't started since April. Once (and it'll be a while) Penny and Lohse are both back, Suppan may find himself in the bullpen anyway (if he pitches well enough). The early signs are encouraging, but it is early. There wasn't much better alternative, unless you wanted to give up a bunch of prospects in a trade. I still like the move. He's low-risk anyway. The more he pitches the better idea we will have as to if he is any good. But it's a decent way to start.

I'm not saying that he's going to be successful, but it could have been much worse. Our rookie pitchers we've used to fill the spaces weren't any better. Lohse will be out a while, and Penny likely won't be back this month. We'll see on Sunday when Suppan starts against the A's.

I'm satisfied with Suppan's performance. Four innings isn't a lot, but he did throw eighty pitches. He had a rough start, but he was still better than the rookies we've tried. One run on four hits isn't bad. I realize the Mariners lineup isn't the best out there, but it was a decent start nonetheless. He did a lot better than I expected.

Suppan is expected to start tomorrow against the Mariners. I don't expect us to win, but I'm curious to see how Suppan does.

Dave Duncan knows more about pitching that we likely do. This signing is just a cheap reclamation project. If it works, we got a bargain. If it doesn't, you just release him. So far Walters and Ottavino haven't done much. It's worth a shot.

I'm surprised Ozzie could get into an argument. He's hard enough to understand while he's talking, I imagine it's even more difficult when he's yelling. Seems like Ozzie should be glad his kid got drafted. So many more college and high school ball players want to get drafted and never are. Those that get drafted are talented, but also very lucky.

I think signing Suppan, Winn, and Miles are kind of experiments. The younger guys weren't hitting either. It makes sense for the younger guys to back to the minors and play every day, rather than having them sit on the bench at least half the games. Miles is used to playing off the bench, anyway. The Cardinals wanted help, but they didn't want to trade for a player like Oswalt. I think they're going to try signing guys and then go to a trade if they don't work out. Tony and Duncan usually know what they're doing. They're not above questioning (no one is), but their success does gain them some trust and respect in my mind. If Suppan doesn't work out, he's cut. The Cardinals lose around $400,000. If the Cardinals trade for a player, then whether he works or not, they have lost prospects because of it. Suppan's not the first player the Cardinals have tried out at the Major League level. Granted, a lot of these experiments have not worked, but some do. It's worth trying, especially since we seem to be in a rut (mostly with our offense, though). Tony likes to change things around, whether it be the roster or the lineup. I don't think Tony hates rookies. What would be worse is having Mather (and others like him) sit on the bench all season, especially when they are struggling. Send them to Triple-A and let them hit and field every day. Tony likes change and he likes players competing with each other (in a healthy manner). I read that a few years ago the players were polled about the best and worst managers. Tony was on both lists. So not all players and fans like him, but I think he's a pretty smart guy when it comes to baseball. He obviously doesn't take managing lightly.

If anybody can work miracles it's Dave Duncan. He's worth a shot anyway.

That's a lot of money to throw away.

So? He was a big part of the team a couple of years ago. No, he wasn't. I didn't say he was a great player. In 2006 he was a fan favorite and an important part of the team. Fans appreciate that. He might have been a fan favorite, but he definitely was not an important part of the team, at least not in regards to his on-field performance. I'm not talking about on-field performance. I'm talking about in the clubhouse and with the fans. The fans liked his work ethic and his attitude. He seemed to get along with everybody. That doesn't make him a great player, but the fans did like his personality.

So? He was a big part of the team a couple of years ago. No, he wasn't. I didn't say he was a great player. In 2006 he was a fan favorite and an important part of the team. Fans appreciate that.

So? He was a big part of the team a couple of years ago. People have good memories of him. It's not just about what kind of player he was. Fans have a lot of good memories that relate to him. I was at the game June 4 and a Brewers player made a diving snow cone catch in the outfield. The fans applauded the effort. I had to wonder how many other stadiums would have applause for a member of the other team, even when he did make a great catch. I'm not embarrassed in the slightest that Miles (or any returning player) gets a standing ovation. Miles was a fan favorite for a few years. A lot of the fan favorites aren't necessarily the best players. I have no problem with Miles being back. It was a low-risk signing anyway. He had a hit tonight, anyway.

? I count at least 17 cops in that shot I just meant in general. If you watch old videos after World Series games fans just pour out on to the field. You also see shots of fans watching games in the early 20th century and there isn't much in the way of fencing or space between the fans and the field. Here's 1903 for example http://ideagirlconsulting.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/worldseries1903-640.jpg I realize that was the first World Series, but what the heck is going on here? Do fans in the outfield catch homeruns? That's in Boston by the way. The American League Boston club (Red Sox) against the Pirates of the National League. Boston won 5 games to three. This one (1907) is interesting as well. It's hard to tell if there is a fence around the field or not. There are also rooftop seats. http://www.ticketcity.com/images/world%20series/1907-world-championship-series.jpg Some more World Series photos here http://www.ticketcity.com/world-series-tickets/world-series-pictures.html It just seems much more regulated and secure today compared to even 20 or 30 years ago. The early 20th century looks like people just sat where ever. There seemed to be less security as far as who gets in the ballpark and what they bring in.

That's an amazing photo of that old stadium. I love the old photos like that. It almost takes you back to a simpler time. And it's incredible how little security there was. Some more of the West Side Grounds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Park And the South Side Park (White Sox) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Side_Park

Wasn't there some big uproar last year about Zambrano complaining about how Miller is so much nicer for players than Wrigley? Wrigley has the history and the nostalgia, but it probably doesn't have the room and the amenities that the newer ballparks have, especially for the players. I realize Pujols was in the Cubs visitors clubhouse, but here's the Cubs home clubhouse http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wL2z6tLl3mw Which is nice, but compare it to the Cardinals home clubhouse http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d0lVgNFRFQ Nationals (not done yet in the video) There's a bunch more on YouTube. Overall, I think players are allowed to complain about stadiums. Wrigley probably just doesn't have the comforts that players at newer ballparks are used to. Wrigley is often noted for its great history and its atmosphere, but that doesn't mean that it (or any stadium) is above being criticized occasionally.

I think baseball stadiums tend to sell fewer tickets if the team is not doing as well. That, and schools are just now getting out. As far as forums, it's been my experience that baseball forums tend to be less busy around April and May. As kids get out of school and spring semester ends, and the weather is warmer but not blistering hot, people like to take trips and be outside. If the team is in a slump, or if they are the Pirates or the Royals, people are less likely to be on the forums as well. That is just forums in general. If a forum does have tension between members (I'm not here enough to know), then the forum is generally not as busy, because people don't like to talk to people that they don't like.