UMFan83

.309 for DLee now. OPS at .889ish

He'll say "BREWERS" too like he did last year.

Get off the team Neifi!!! Oh wait..

Nah, Lou will send Jacque

Why the hell not, it can't be any worse than them winning it all last year with that team. Don't tempt them. They could make the playoffs, then lose the first 2 games of the NLDS by scores of 430-0 and 232919-0 and then win 3 consecutive 1-0 games on a HBP and 3 wild pitches in the bottom of the 23rd inning every game and then rinse and repeat through the NLCS and World Series.

Ugh could you imagine the Cardinals being 1 game out of first after tonight?

DLee's 2007 OPS - .891

Typical DLee....avg down to .310

It's not good for their awful pitcher either. But playing the Cubs is.

Rich Hill has looked great lately. The Brewers hit him and lefties well. Something has to give. While the Brewers have been slumping, their bats against lefties have not. Since August 1st, the Brewers have faced 6 lefties, and this is their line in those games: .282/.339/.462/.801 I am too lazy to calculate the stats against just righties, but this is their overall numbers in August: .261/.310/.480

And here is the woman who is supposedly better than you Vance: http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-08/32153850.jpg That should be you!

I would guess our interleague schedule would look like this: @ White Sox @ Red Sox (never been) @ Tampa Bay (never been) vs. Baltimore (never been to Wrigley) vs. White Sox

Astros are only 9 games out. Think they are trying to spark the team for a late season run? Otherwise, why the hell wouldn't he just ride out the season? Why the hell didn't the Cubs do this with Dusty?

I haven't been impressed with Wood's performance this season. Not to say that he has been awful, but when people say "boy what an upside" I tend to disagree. I just don't see the dominating Wood of 2003 reemerging, or even the dominant setup man of 2005 coming back. Plus I still can't buy that he's healthy after his 'miraculous' recovery of a month ago. I say no on Kerry next year.

I think you're downplaying Galloway a bit. In 2005 he had 85 catches for almost 1300 yards and 10 TDs. His numbers slipped a bit last year, but he still had solid numbers despite the turmoil that the Bucs had a QB. Now they have Garcia, but while Galloway is getting older, he should still be the #1 receiver on a passing team.

Who cares, the Cubs are 3 freaking games over .500

Stark continued in his recent chat:

I'm enraged that Monroe started against a righty. He has had more ABs against righties than lefties since he has become a Cub. This trend can really not continue.

We might still but I'm worried about the fact that we are 3 games over freaking .500 and have gone 9-14 in our last 23 games. I don't want to make the playoffs and get swept, I want to win some stuff. I have little to no hope for that.

Also, what about considering the options of what happens if Kendall does make contact with the ball. What if he lines out to an IF positon...thats a DP. What if he hits a fly ball, the runner has to tag and won't advance. Its more than just DP or strikeout. You're basically hoping that Kendall either gets a hit or a ground ball. With a 3-2 count, the odds are a bit better, but not good enough for me to seriously consider sending the tying run that is already in scoring position up a base.

Why? Even if it works, I'm complaining. Yeah right. Yeah so, I'm the first to call out decisions that are bad even if they work We hadn't scored since what? The 3rd inning? Sorry, but that was not a bad decision, it was bad execution. Kendall couldn't execute the bunt, and then he couldn't execute with the runners moving. It's that simple. Why would you send the tying run with 0 outs in the 9th when he's already in scoring position. It makes no sense. so you don't need a hit to tie it up? But I hated the call. Valverde is a strikeout pitcher. Fontenot isn't fast. Too much risk. Sucks it didn't work out. I don't see how anyone can defend that call. 0 outs, runner already in scoring position, top of the order coming up. I was fine with bunting, but why take that big of a risk? It's not that big of a risk: Kendall grounds into a double play with runners on base a greater percentage of the time than he strikes out with runners on base. You add in the fact that there's a small possibility that Fontenot can beat the throw to 3rd base even if Kendall does strike out (and the small benefit of the runners moving if Kendall gets a hit), and the odds easily favor the runners moving in that situation. It's not something you do with many hitters-but Kendall strikes out so infrequently and grounds into enough double plays for it to be a good move. No it isnt if he swings and misses its a more sure double play than if he hits the ball. Plus, If there is a double play the way we did it keeps the lone runner on 2nd. The other way odds are we have a runner at 3rd. If he strikes out and the runners are sent, there is probably a 90% chance that they get a DP out of it. If he hits a ground ball and the runners aren't moving, its certainly not guarenteed that its going to be a DP. The ball can find a hole, the runner can break up a DP, Kendall can somehow beat the throw to first.

Why? Even if it works, I'm complaining. Yeah right. Yeah so, I'm the first to call out decisions that are bad even if they work We hadn't scored since what? The 3rd inning? Sorry, but that was not a bad decision, it was bad execution. Kendall couldn't execute the bunt, and then he couldn't execute with the runners moving. It's that simple. Why would you send the tying run with 0 outs in the 9th when he's already in scoring position. It makes no sense.

I'm not watching the next series, screw this

Why? Even if it works, I'm complaining. Yeah right. Yeah so, I'm the first to call out decisions that are bad even if they work

Don't agree, not that I'm in love with Lou like some are. However, what a terrible decision