dalgreen

So Murton doesn't hit the ball to the right side to advance the runner to third and he gets a free pass? Oh, yeah, he's a kid, so fundamentals don't matter for kids.

He should have heartburn since he has part responsibility in creating this mess.

Dusty Baker has done a bad job of managing this year, but I, for the life of me, will never understand how Hendry's name doesn't get brought up much for the failures of this team. Baker's failures have been mentioned ad nauseum, as they should, but it's like some people think we don't have a GM to fault. We knew way back in November of last year that in 2005 we needed: a leadoff man, closer, OBP guys, and an everyday leftfielder. Well, our great GM did nothing in these areas yet he seems to not get any blame. Personally, within this organization from Hendry on down to coaches and players, I wouldn't be sad to see anyone gone with the exceptions of Lee, Ramirez (his defense has hurt us significantly at times this year), Prior and Zambrano. This team needs to find guys who know how to play the game, instead of getting guys who only rely on their talent. I think this team is just not very good.

Bingo. Nice to see some people can see what this team really is. If you go back to March there were plenty of people saying we're going to have problems scoring runs. All I have to say is how many good teams would have Jeromy Burnitz hitting fourth or fifth? And that's because on this poor makeup of a team he almost has to. Think about it, if any other team had Hairston, Burnitz, Hollandsworth/Dubois, Patterson and Perez in the lineup everyday, we would say that team could lose 95-100 games. But because it's our team that is forced to play these type of players then we become blinded into thinking that this team is underachieving. This was not a well assembled team, and when you add a below average strategic manager that spells trouble.

Anyone else notice this team's offensive collapse coincides with Lee's slump? Funny, isn't it, how many people (including me) always look at career stats, but we seem to forget that Lee is not a career .320 hitter? His .261 average over the past two weeks seems to be closer to his career average than his .380-.390 avg for the first half. Add to that Walker's bad stretch and no wonder our offense is pathetic. Thanks ARam for still hanging in there offensively, anyway.

Our local school MC was named Choctaws in 1836. It was originally an all girls college which had no sports. I'm not sure that flies, at least not in this situation. It is a possible theory though which I will accept as valid. However, I think that in the case of Choctaws, Utes, Seminoles, Illini and other "tribe" schools which are in the area of the actual tribes, I think that most likely is tribute. On the other hand, schools that are Braves, Indians, etc, basic generic Indian names, then I think you may have a case. Having a white guy (as is the case with Chief Illiniwek) in war paint doing a dance that isn't even a real Native dance is not a tribute. Maybe the nickname was meant as a tribute, but Chief Illiniwek is no more different than you being upset at Blue Collar TV's image of Southerners. Plus, I believe the ruling has to do with mascots, so the issue of the nicknames doesn't come into play. It's the mascots that do, and they are stereotypical and bogus.

And YOU refuse to listen. I've said that Indian Joe is wrong. I've said Redskins and Redmen is wrong. But can you tell me what in gods name is wrong with the Mississippi College Choctaws. A school which has Choctaw indian mounds ON CAMPUS for crying out loud. Why should they be punished by the NCAA when they are roundly supported by the reservation nearby?? I could care less about the Utes or the Illini or Seminoles. What I care about is our local college which is full of freaking Choctaws being punished. And being part Choctaw, I like the fact that they are the Choctaws because for one thing, people and kids are stupid these days; How many people these days would know what a Seminole or a Ute was if it wasn't for the mascot. People have forgotten history and this is one way to remember it. If the Choctaw Nation is not offended by it, so be it. I still say all state funded schools should put their team mascots up for vote to be voted only by those who are 100% Native. Would you be against that? I am not Choctaw and really would only like to hear from those that are 100% Choctaw on the subject. And please spare me the forgotten history line. That's what museums are for. And if museums were built, the ones crying that Native names are meant to honor them wouldn't be the ones showing up in the museums. By the way, why is Blue Collar TV offensive to you? I think it's honoring the some of the southern culture. Okay, not really, but I don't see why you're offended by this but can't understand why some Choctaws may be upset at Mississippi College's mascot.

You just refuse to get it. It's not the name so to speak as much as the ridiculous mascot. Since you say you're 1/16th Native, how many Native Americans do you know that look like that stupid logo on the Redskins helmet? Or look like Chief Illiniwek? Or the Cleveland Indians logo? Yet, you get ticked off at Blue Collar TV because it makes all southerners look like hics as you've stated. Hypocrisy at its best.

Exactly, and that's where my previous point comes up in regards to Treebeard's post. If you change names because someone somewhere is offended, there will be no nicknames left. If a tribe or group of people is being degraded or the majority of that group finds it's usage offensive, that's one thing. There are ways of solving those problems without upsetting everyone and still keeping some tradition. But if some random white guy in Iowa finds Seminoles offensive, while the tribe, university, locals, etc. don't, then you don't change it. Common sense has to come into play at some point. I still have never, ever heard anyone offended by the use of the name Tigers, Bears, Wildcats, etc. Nor have I heard anyone say they're offended by Saints, Friars, etc. That's just another weak argument used by those who refuse to try to understand the feelings of others. By the way, we're generally talking about state funded schools, where no Native Americans were even at the table when the nicknames were thought up. At Notre Dame and Providence (Friars) I bet there were Irish and Catholics at the respective schools' tables.

Yeah, animals are really crying out. I have never even heard PETA say the LSU Tigers is an offensive name. I hate this argument because it doesn't make sense. I would bet if schools and professional teams simply used the names without having the mascots/logos you wouldn't have as many people offended.

Young position players be given a chance? It could've been done if Hedry didn't sign Burnitz and Hollandsworth. And why is it that the Cardinals lose good players and the players they acquire step right up and fill in well? The answer is good decision making by the GM. Example: Last year Womack was good at leadoff for the Cardinals. They let him go and needing a good leadoff hitter they get Eckstein. We needed a good leadoff hitter and we get?

It's a tribute argument is hogwash. In this country when you want to honor or pay tribute to a people you build a museum in their honor. But, of course, the people defending this "tribute" would never visit the museum which makes their argument moot. At least FSU got the permission from the Seminole tribe for its logo and use of the Seminole. Most colleges and sports teams don't because they know they wouldn't get permission. I generally don't like the NCAA, but I agree with this decision.

Who in the world deemed you judge? How many Native Americans do you know that look like these logos? How about putting it up to a vote of full blood Native Americans? They won't. YOu know why? Because schools and professional teams know the nicknames would get shot down. It's amazing that one people can tell another people what is and what isn't offensive. I wonder what Irish people would say if at halftime of Notre Dame games the leprechaun did an Irish dance, got drunk and then got into a fight? I'm an Illinois alum, and I hate Chief Illiniwek. I know of no Native Americans who look like him or dance like him, and it's even more absurd that a white guy with paint on his face depicts him.

I have no problem with those wanting to fire Baker. But it is beyond my comprehension how you can want Baker fired but in the same breath be okay with Hendry. I truly understand if you want both gone or both to stay, but I can't understand how one can stay and one shouldn't other than pure bias. Please help me explain how the Cardinals, who have had a lower payroll than the Cubs the last two years can finish so far ahead of the Cubs, even when missing some key people from last year's team? And from 2000-2003, they had a nearly equal payroll. And I think LaRussa is as bad/good a manager as Baker. Now Milwaukee, without a total free fall, will likely finish the season near us. I don't see what Hendry has done that has been so impressive. Aramis Ramirez was a steal, but have you chosen to overlook many of his bad decisions? Yeah, our minor league system is better, but what is that really saying as bad as it was during much of the '90's? Where are our supposed saviors like Kelton, Dubois, Montanez, Hill, Choi, Jackson and the list goes on. I just don't know how you can hate Baker and still have all of this love for Hendry. If you love the job Hendry has done than you must really, really love a GM like Jocketty and Melvin. I think Baker and Hendry will stay, but I find it hard to separate the two.

I highly doubt if I would've told you back on March 31st, that Wood would make less than 10 starts, Prior would miss two months, Walker would miss two months, Nomar would miss almost four months, Corey Patterson would be demoted to AAA, Hawkins would be traded, ARam would play hurt for the first six weeks of the season and our closer would only have 15 saves at the beginning of August, I doubt you'd say you still expect us to be 15 games over .500. If you want Baker fired that's fine, but don't use the record as an excuse.

But this isn't "other teams". This is the Chicago Cubs, laughingstock of baseball for most of the past 97 years or so. If Hendry cannot see the damage that Dusty has done/is doing to this team, I sincerely think he should make an appointment to check for brain damage. Maybe he hurt more than just his knee with that tumble down the stairs he took a while back. Again, that's simplistic thinking to think that another manager with the same cast would be able to produce a 60-63 win team at this point. I don't understand, even with the hatred for Baker, that you choose to let Hendry and the players off the hook. If you want to fire Baker, fine. But then you have to at least get rid of some players or the coaches or the GM, too. You're giving Baker too much credit if you think he singlehandedly has ruined the team.

I guess I'll call it a lot stronger than you. This game was doomed after Walker let the ball drop behind him. I won't bring up the dumb play with him trying to make an off balance throw to home. But that's fundamentals again. You are taught to go after every ball hard until you hear the outfielder call you off. If you're going to give up on it, then don't go out after it.

Million dollar question: How do the Cardinals score 5 runs against John Smoltz with guys like Nunez, Rodriguez, Diaz and Taguchi in the lineup tonight?

Do you think Maddux can pitch into the eighth inning tomorrow?

Nomar will always swing at the first or second pitch. I think a team can live with one or maybe two guys like that in a lineup, but not six or seven. I wasn't singling him out. He and Burnitz both decided to ground out early. Macias saw more pitches than both of them combined. Oh I know you weren't singling him out. That's why I said you can't have six or seven guys who love to swing early in the count in the same lineup. A lot of people blame Dusty's philosophy on this, but if you check out the guys we get, they have a history of being hackers and not able to work deep into counts. Regarding the Brewers, my pride doesn't want them passing us up. But as a baseball fan I hope they do. I can't think of five of their players not living up to expectations...even their young guys. On the other hand, I can only think of maybe five on our team who have.

Nomar will always swing at the first or second pitch. I think a team can live with one or maybe two guys like that in a lineup, but not six or seven.

I sure hope Maddux can give us seven quality innings tomorrow. We still have more than a week to go before an off day.

Glendon is a veteran pitcher. Ultimately, he's to blame because he has the right to shake off any pitch he doesn't want to throw. I would usually agree with that, but with Glendon's WHIP I'm not sure he's capable of knowing what pitch to throw. Much respect meant, but that woman in your avatar is gorgeous.

I'm not sure if Rothschild calls the pitches or Barrett does, but I've questioned the pitch selection a lot this year. I'm not talking about location because you can blame that on the pitcher a lot of times, but why would anyone throw Mike Piazza a first pitch fastball anywhere? Then they start Wright off with a breaking pitch. I don't get it.

Can anyone explain to me why Lawton is so far off the plate against Glavine? Glavine is keeping everything middle out to all the hitters.