TheDude

DeRosa has been very impressive this year. Great job.

Careful with that argument. Remember, Hill had a great winning percentage as a Cub. It means nothing in reality. I like the Kendall/Soto tandem for the playoffs. They bring completely different games with them, and both represent respectable PH options, which isn't true for most catching tandems. Kendall would be a great guy to PH with in any situation where you need the ball put in play. Obviously with Soto, you're looking for RH power.

5-4 will do it. I can't see Milwaukee going 7-4 with Atlanta and San Diego comprising 8 of those games. They probably go 4-4 in those, which means they would have to sweep the Cardinals.

Cubs are 11-7 in September.

I wanted and advocated Tejada each of the last three years around here. Next year is really no different. I don't know if Baltimore is really in position to ask for the moon anymore. He's another year older and another year off the contract, although 2 years remain. With Tejada, Lee, Ramirez, and DeRosa, the Cubs would be looking at 90-100 HR and 220+ XBH infield. That is some kind of power on the infield.

LOL...yeah all you guys that weren't mentioning Soto's name a few months ago...sheesh... You can't seriously expect that Hendry would include a message board community in his list of 'real people'. When he says 'nobody', I'm quite sure he is talking about the organization and other organizations, not fans. And I'm sure he is exaggerating as he often does to the media. Somebody in the organization likely talked up Soto at some point.

My heart can't handle this crap man. WOW!

Perhaps it's the .400 OBP he has as a pinch-hitter?

I find it hysterical that the Reds have gotten the benefit of every single close and blown call tonight, and have the gall to protest.

I hate the shift as much as I hate bringing the infield in.

I can't recall the game I watched where one team was this lucky. The Reds should be thanking whatever gods they believe in for this game. Every umpire call, every bounce, every broken play...it's incredible.

It shouldent even be a damn question Jesus. The only thing Soto has over Kendall is experience, which shouldnt mean a damn thing considering 3 of our 4 starters are extremely experienced. Hill is the only non experienced guy in our rotation, so there you go Lou, let Kendall catch Hill, let Soto catch everybody else, question solved. Right or wrong, it is a question. Baseball managers at any level have a natural inclination to avoid sticking rookies in a critical role down the stretch, especially rookies just brought up to the big leagues. Hell, managers at any level of any industry have that bias. Experience buys you a longer leash and a first nod in most managers' minds. Few baseball managers will take a gamble on September call-ups in a critical role. The ones that do, usually do it with pitchers, not positional guys. Soto has done exactly what he needed to do in September - make himself memorable to the big league team. I'm not saying Lou is right by sticking with Kendall as the 1st option. I'm saying his actions are pretty standard and traditional for an older baseball mind. But his recent quote is also in line with Lou's habits - he likes to ride the hot hand while it's hot. Even if he doesn't get a lot of time in the last 12 games, he'll get a long look next year in ST.

Kendall and Soto. Start Soto against a lefty, Kendall a righty. When Kendall is in the lineup, I'd probably drop him in the 2-hole, but Lou has fond of JJ in that spot against right-handers. And JJ has produced out of that spot, so maybe it's moot.

Big difference between SS and RF. Theriot's SS or 2B production is acceptable in a lineup that has big production elsewhere, and has some compensation production at another non-traditional offensive spot. Burnitz's hustle in RF didn't mask his production shortage. You stick both Theriot and Pie in a lineup together if you have 5 .800-1.000+ OPS guys and you can probably drop a .750 in there as well. Going into 2007, Theriot looked just fine at 2B or SS. If Lee, Ramirez, and Soriano had put up the 110 HR we expected in 2007, and Jones/Floyd/Murton/Barrett/Derosa had combined for 60 HR as expected, Theriot's ~.690 OPS doesn't matter much. Going into next year, Theriot is still good as an MIF super-sub with 400 ABs. He needs to increase his doubles and triples a bit, but he's young enough to raise those next year.

I just wonder how much LR has helped these guys? I dunno. LR said he was going to help Marquis though, and it looks like it worked. I keep feeling like we are "getting away" with something with these two performing so well. But hey -- who cares what I feel? I hope it continues. Anybody who didn't think Lilly would succeed with the Cubs at this rate wasn't looking deeper into his numbers. When the Cubs signed Lilly, I said it many times, but from 2004-2006 he had 26 starts against Boston and New York in the AL East. 26/89 = 29% of his starts. To put up a 3-year split ERA of 4.52 with 29% of your starts against Boston and New York was impressive. To then move to NL Central, widely regarded as the weakest division in baseball, you'd have to expect an improvement from Lilly. There isn't much to 'get away' with...you took a guy battered by the AL East and dropped him in the NL Central.

Even when the Cubs had bad overall pitching numbers in recent years, the team BAA has been exceptional. The Cubs management loves swing and miss pitchers. High K teams have low BAA, it's just one of those natural compliments. But low BAA is not indicative of low base runners allowed. Because high K pitchers tend toward high walks also. And those walks have a tendency to score. I would say the Cubs have a top 5 staff in MLB, especially when they have a lead. But it does have a few holes.

Probably zero. The Cubs were winning games between Kendall and Barrett. Hill had a winning record as a catcher, by a nice margin. I'm not saying Hill gets the credit, I'm saying the team was winning regardless, so I don't see any real opportunity cost. I suppose the team wins-more in the same game, which doesn't matter at all. The entire Soto craze is way overblown. It's like a bride anticipating a dream wedding that will never happen the way its projected. So, the Cubs never lost a game the entire time that Hill, Bowen, Kendall have been catching? ok That argument doesn't work on so many levels. You're essentially saying that Soto himself could have somehow "won" any games that the other catachers started...you're also discounting that he could have also somehow "lost" any of the games the others won or helped win. No, I'm saying we don't know. The Dude dude is saying none. The only way that is possible is if Soto would have done exactly the same as Kendall, Bowen, and Hill or preformed worse. We have no way of knowing, but I'd wager that it is near imossible to perform worse than the combination of Kendall, Bowen, and Hill. On so many levels? What the hell does that mean? You were saying that you know Soto would have netted more wins. That is exactly what you were saying. Or do you not understand your own reference to opportunity cost? By mentioning the opportunity cost of not playing Soto, there is a clear inference that Soto yields more wins. I agree that Soto is a better player than Hill and Bowen, and potentially better than Kendall. He is an excellent candidate to catch. I'd like to see him get the shot as number one catcher next year. My only point is that you can't successfully argue Soto would have yielded more wins, and it's best to take you're latest, altered stance, which is to suggest we'll never know.

Probably zero. The Cubs were winning games between Kendall and Barrett. Hill had a winning record as a catcher, by a nice margin. I'm not saying Hill gets the credit, I'm saying the team was winning regardless, so I don't see any real opportunity cost. I suppose the team wins-more in the same game, which doesn't matter at all. The entire Soto craze is way overblown. It's like a bride anticipating a dream wedding that will never happen the way its projected.

You're kidding right? There are no elite names in that list.Are YOU kidding? The fact that there are no elite teams on that list are exactly why they don't sound like people the Cubs can beat. I'll take my chances every day of the week. Cubs history of ineptitude against average pitching (besides being overblown) doesn't have any bearing on the future games. We have to assume all these pitchers will perform as expected - according to a balance between 2007 overall and 2nd half pace. With an average pitcher you could get ace stuff, you could get 8 runs in 2 innings. However, with the aces the Brewers face, you know what to expect every outing. There is no question this a huge advantage for the Cubs. We're realistically looking for 10-7 the rest of the way, not 17-0. 10-7 should not be a problem against the pitchers projected. For the Brewers to pull off 10-7 against some of the names in their projected - that would be a feat.

You're kidding right? There are no elite names in that list. Harang and Willis are maybe the toughest match-ups. Besides, you should see the Brewers projected opposing pitcher schedule. It's brutal, containing several elite pitchers (Oswalt, Young, Smoltz, possibly Peavy) and several solid guys (Maddux, Hudson).

My heart can't take another game like last night. Please score early, and often. Blow out please.

Wuertz is so frustrating. He has the stuff to be damn good, but just can't seem to maintain any consistent control.

I love that Lee, Soriano, and Ramirez are now actively fighting for the team lead in HR, rather than one of them backing into it. It seems the past week one of them has HR in just about every game.

On the first pitch...again. This kid seriously is trying to shoot himself in the foot.

Both teams probably tread around .500 the next 10-12 games. But the schedule for the last 10/11 games is all that matters to Cubs fans. The Brewers last 11 games go against Atlanta, St. Louis, and San Diego. Cubs fans have to hope they go 4-7 or worse on that stretch. Meanwhile the Cubs close the season against Pitt, Florida, and Cin. And the Cubs need to go at least 6-4 to have a shot. 83 wins takes this division.