UMFan83

Jason Heyward is under evaluation for an injury to his right torso/abdominal region.

So completely unfounded guessing: Oblique - 3-6 weeks Hip - 1-2 weeks Shoulder - anywhere from 6 weeks to season ending

The AP has a report that Heyward has an apparent hip injury. I don't think this is based on anything but speculation but I would think a hip injury wouldn't be too bad right? Like either it's sore/bruised and he's out a wake or two or he's the next Bo Jackson.

Tribune didn't give two [expletive] If you think that is bad, read about what condition Wrigley was in during the last years of the Wrigley ownership in the early 80s

I really hope Heyward doesn't have 2 injuries and the Cubs only report the less severe one again. "Word from the Cubs is Heyward has been diagnosed with a scratch on his left pinky finger"

Kris Bryant is kind of an OK player

You can kill our OFs but you can't keep us down

KILLED!

Off the bat it looked like it would clear the bases. Stupid horsefeathering NL West park

kicked in the nuts, wind knocked out of you, sometimes a sprained knee looks really bad

I thought we were supposed to be good at the running of bases? Some dumb errors lately

That would be what like 3-6 weeks

PLEXIGLASS PRINCIPLE

Between struggling against their teams and our OFs dying in their parks,

My dad said he had a torn rotator cuff several years ago and heywards reaction was very similar. I don't need to tell you how devastating a torn rotator cuff would be. Season ending. Take with a huge grain of salt though obviously.

Random discussion topic. If the selections happened today, how many Cubs do you think make the All-Star team? I'm not asking in a 'pick the top WAR guys' type of way. Based on your feel for how selections are typically made, who makes it? Contenders: Rizzo Bryant Russell Zobrist Fowler Lester Arrieta Rondon Of those, I think Rizzo and Arrieta are locks. Bryant is actually 4th among qualified NL 3B in terms of WAR (and about the same if you called him a LF), but I think based on name value, team play and sexiness, he gets in. Zobrist doesn't have as much name value, but he has enough and his numbers are overwhelmingly good enough to get him in the game. Fowler is getting a lot of press for his start to the season, and TBH, OFs in the NL are a bit of a weak class overall. He gets in too. Russell seems like an emerging All-Star but I there are quite a few quality SS out there this year, enough to not warrant a 5th Cubs position player AS. He is a snub. The Cubs have one of if not the best staff in baseball, so I certainly hope Lester makes it, I think its more likely than not. Rondon is iffy. Clearly he has the numbers and skill but not enough of a household name and his save number is low. Unfair to disqualify him on that I know but I think he's a 50/50 when Collins is picking guys...he will probably pick his guy over Rondon. I'll say he is snubbed, but 6 All Stars is still nice.

5 more games that start after 7:40 PM including tonight 5/20 @ Giants 9:15 8/5 @ A's 9:05 8/22 @ Padres 9:10 8/23 @ Padres 9:10 8/26 @ Dodgers 9:10 Only 2 of those are weeknights though, which was his point. Yeah I didn't say he was wrong, was just curious myself how many late games they had left.

5 more games that start after 7:40 PM including tonight 5/20 @ Giants 9:15 8/5 @ A's 9:05 8/22 @ Padres 9:10 8/23 @ Padres 9:10 8/26 @ Dodgers 9:10

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy So when the Cubs were like 21-6 or whatever, it was a fallacy to bet that the rate they were winning at would not continue? Honest question. What you are describing is more of 'regression to the mean' (i think), in that the Cubs probably aren't an .800 winning % baseball team (because no team has ever been one in MLB history). So eventually they will play to their true talent level, which is maybe something like .625-.650. Gambler's fallacy would be saying "the Cubs are a .650 team that has been playing .800 ball, thus they are more likely go on a losing streak right now'

Please explain in detail. Well, I feel like most teams don't play 1.000 ball. So if a team is playing 1.000 percent over the course of seven games, the odds would suggest that they would then lose some to balance that. Now, even though the odds are against them continuing to win every game, it can happen for a lot longer. But I feel like the odds are not in their favor for that to continue. I might be wrong, though. I'm not good at math. I mean that's pretty much exactly gambler's fallacy described. If you flip a coin 7 times and it lands heads, what is the chances the next one is tails? If a .500 team wins 7 games in a row, what are the odds they win the next game? And the game after that? Basically whatever you do, don't go to a roulette wheel with that logic.

Winning Cubs baseball is like heroin. At first its the greatest thing ever and over time its still awesome but you need more (like run differential wins) to get the same high. Then suddenly its ripped away from you (losing a few games) and you start getting irritated and irrational. You get pissed when you don't have access to the stuff (like an offday after a loss, or a 9pm start tomorrow after a day game). If you just quit watching the Cubs, maybe after 6 months or so you could just enjoy them in moderation, but horsefeathers that Bryant is up with 2 men on, I will quit tomorrow.

SEE? This is the [expletive] that I'm talking about. Calling a game over when the best team in baseball who has scored the 2nd most runs in baseball and who tied up the game against the closer about 13 hours ago, still has 3 outs to work with? Stupid. Oh yeah, real stupid. Hahahahaha, I hope you are kidding around.

I'm glad we have a level headed and rational manager because if it were up to me, Jorge would to toiling away in AAA, Contreras would be tearing the cover off the ball for the Cubs and Heyward would be hitting 8th. I understand the logic at keeping Heyward 2nd and not overreacting, but man do I get so frustrated every time he comes up in a relatively big situation and knowing that someone like Russell or Zobrist could be there instead

and apparently Heyward watched some meatballs Watched or fouled off?

K-ward strikes again 0-4, 2 K, 2 weak ground outs