sunnydoo

If by they you mean the Cleveland Indians, then yes you are correct. 1948 to 2007, no reason they should suffer anymore.

Ya thats an apt comparison...someone leading the league in hittting vs. someone who should be pitching in AA ball. Ohman is a joke. The bullpen is a joke. The loogy system is a joke. And yes, Howry should have more of blame than Ohgiirl. But this is about a pattern and Ohman fails.

.265/.328, and he is the problem?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/LAN/LAN196509090.shtml our almost 42 year streak comes to a screeching halt to another Dodger lefthander. its the only way we can top ourselves. 9-9-65 to 5-26-07

Ya the NTC is still in effect. From what i understand, it works like the waiver system. The club makes a deal and brings it to him and he can say yea or nay on the trade, but it remains in effect after the trade. Most GMs will go to the player first (especially experienced veterans) and let them know that they are exploring options and get a list of teams they would go to. This helps mitigate the shock that they may be sent somewhere and helps the GM lock in on certain targets. Also gives the GM some confidence that the player will actually go to the team the deal is arranged with and not back out of it or void it out of hand. Some teams and players will actually lay out a list in the contract of teams that they can be traded too at any point and a list that they wont be sent to. But that is still kind of rare.

WILL OHMAN

Wooohooooo! The Cubs bullpen made real progress tonight sending its mediocre 4.00 ERA which was only good for 10th in the league to a soaring 4.16. We would have made 14th had the Reds not tacked on 2 meaningless runs in the bottom of the 10th and the Giants not had an absolute meltdown at the Bay themselves. C'est la vie. Oh well, not to worry there is always tomorrow when you guys can blow another lead for us. We will catch Philly and Colorado sooner or later. Save % at 50% and falling. Bullpen now 4-12. I think the record for losses for a NL bullpen is 39, set by Colorado in 2004, but i will have to look that up. We are on a pace for 43. Keep up the good work guys. Edit: Guess i was wrong. Pinto stunk up Mitres Game in Fla and Cincy was below us and melted down for 7 in the 10th. So we are still in 10th. Good try boys. You can go back at it tomorrow.

Another outstanding freaking job by Ohman and Howry again tonight. Another reason to hate the LOOGY. The opposing manager with plenty of righty help off the bench just pinch hits for the lefty and walla...big inning explosion time. Ohman couldnt get Mario freaking Mendoza out at this point. I seriously dont think he could get Mario Lopez out if he were to bat right handed. Ohman is an absolute joke. Time to get him and Howry the old #76 uni b/c when you see them coming its time for Unocal.

15 of his walks were in his first 15 innings pitched this season when he had other things on his mind and baseball was the furthest thing from being important. since back from his bereavement leave he has issued 3 passes in 6 IP, which is still not great but definitely better. dont think he is worth guzman and dempster. could get a lot more for them, and i think guzman will make a fine closer himself one of these days if he keeps on keeping on and stays healthy.

Honest to God, I have no clue what you're trying to say here. And where did the 1990 cut off come from? Difference between the league and the record?? And looking back over things, it seems like you're (partially) blaming Wrigley for both the Cubs having a high disparity between home/loss record(cause they're too focused on winning at Wrigley) and a low disparity between home/loss record(cause they're not taking advantage of their homefield like a team should. There is not a single amount of statistical evidence that can prove to you that Wrigley isn't bad for the Cubs. Ok, looking at some of the studies been on Coors Field and at my college stats books, i have discovered something. Park Factor takes into account more than i thought it did. It takes both runs scored and given up and win/loss % based on the scenario of events using an OPC. Using that data, take a look at what i was talking about. I provided the totals earlier based on decades which i had from another research project. I initially described a shift that i saw occurring around 1990. Taking that into account and now looking at park factors, i can say that the shift occurred in 1993. For the last 14 years, there has been a huge dropoff in park factor for the cubs over that haul, which might explain why they are losing more at home and winning more on the road. I am going to do a correlation study (misspelled Pearson earlier i realize rofl) based on park factor now using Cubs data and perhaps as someone suggested WhiteSux and RedSux data to see how far into the distribution set they are.

That is an incorrect use of statistics. If the deviation is 7.7% then you have to look at the case made individually not by the whole. You need to take the win loss records from 1956 to 1990 and compare it to the actual Cub win loss record and then do the same from 1990 to present. pre1990 the Cubs were 1382-1317 .512 at home and 1141-1548 .425 on the road. post 1990 they are 690-682 .503 at home and 611-747 a.450 away. Second problem is that you also have to look at the difference between the league and the record not just the differences of the total. i will have to find the time to get piersons coefficient and the standard deviations.

Decided to put up or shut up and get some numbers...so for the last 50 years of Wrigley Field, here is the sad sad truth. Interestingly enough our next game in Wrigley will be our 2000 loss since 1956 there. Year Home Away 1956-1959 143-165 .464 125-183 .406 1960-1969 405-399 .504 330-470 .413 1970-1979 428-377 .532 357-450 .442 1980-1989 406-376 .519 329-445 .425 1990-1999 395-387 .505 344-426 .447 2000-2007 295-295 .500 267-321 .454 Total 2072-1999 .509 1752-2295 .432 Now some may suppose that the numbers between the 2 just show the difference in playing away vs. home and indeed that is the case for most of the discrepancy. However, I would like to highlight the shift from 1990 on to pre 1990. As the Cubs got worse at home, they seemingly got better on the road showing what i would say is the more balanced approach of not gearing the roster for Wrigley. Pre 1990 i would say just the opposite that the Cubs were gearing for Home as opposed to the Road. The Years since 1956 that we have had a winning road record are: 1969, 1984, 1989, 1993-1995, and 2003-2005. Some of those are because they were superior teams and rightly made the playoffs. But there are some interesting connotations for those mid 90 teams and the 2004/2005 squads including a few with losing home records. Again, I am not saying its all the effect of Wrigley, i am just attributing some of the problem to playing in Wrigley and the effect on the roster. And oh god, i thought i had it bad seeing some of the mid 70 Cub teams growing up....my dad is a Saint for what he had to put up with in the mid to late 50s early 60s...just awful awful baseball teams.

Ya but take a look at this: Larry's Best Team in 2000: C John Flaherty 1B *Fred McGriff 2B Miguel Cairo 3B Vinny Castilla SS #Felix Martinez LF Greg Vaughn CF Gerald Williams RF Jose Guillen DH Jose Canseco SP Bryan Rekar SP Albie Lopez SP Steve Trachsel SP Ryan Rupe SP Dave Eiland CL Roberto Hernandez RP *Doug Creek RP Rick White RP Jim Mecir RP *Mark Guthrie vs. Lou's Best in 2004: C Toby Hall 1B *Tino Martinez 2B Rey Sanchez 3B *Aubrey Huff SS Julio Lugo LF *Carl Crawford CF Rocco Baldelli RF #Jose Cruz DH *Robert Fick SP *Mark Hendrickson SP Victor Zambrano SP Dewon Brazelton SP Rob Bell SP Doug Waechter CL Danys Baez RP *Trever Miller RP Lance Carter RP Travis Harper RP Jorge Sosa

They have been guilty of both in my opinion over the years. Sometimes its just maddening to see them do so well for so long, then just bust everything up and try again with a different approach. And one of the key problems i have always felt has been the lack of a solid left hitting power hitter. 1914 to 2007 just seems like forever. dumb luck should have kicked in by now, but no, not the case. And i am by no means arguing that it is soley the effect of Wrigley Field (which i think is better terminology). We have had some really awful management, poor decisions, and egos get in the way as well.

Marquis led the NL last year with 35 gopher balls in 194 innings. Ortiz and Arroyo tied for 2nd with 31. Jorge Sosa was 4th with 30.

Ya, take a look at the teams though. Larry's team had talent, albeit somewhat aged. Lou's had kids. Which did a better job? The one who had more to work with or the one who didnt? Thats what i thought.

Olerud was 32 when Piniella left and played 4 more years before hanging it up last season. That is not really that old in baseball terms. Lots of guys play well into there late 30s at high levels. Franco is still kicking it at 48. But he never had another season like any when he played for Lou. Boone was 33 when Piniella left. He had one good year in 2003 and then declined into nonexistence. Cameron was 29 when Lou left. He had 110 RBIs in 2001, the most of his career. The highest since that time was 83. But you are right he did have a year last season like 2001 in terms of OPS. 1 season in 5 after playing for Lou.

Nope- you are wrong. Its one of the reasons the cubs were pushing the sinkerballers and hard throwers in the late 70s and early 80s. Its also the reason the Cardinals were so successful in the 80s. They built their team on speed and defense which killed people in Busch. That also happened to translate to the road where a lot of the games were on turf. But for the Cubs just like the RedSux, they have to deal with a place that isnt like most other places. They have purposely not signed some pitchers based on their fly ball ratios. God only knows whats going to happen to Marquis this year in August. Its going to be ugly if Rothschild does convince him that he isnt a sinkerballer. And make no mistake about it, the Cubs have always tried to take advantage of the situation with hitters like Kingman or Sosa. Guys who hit the ball a long way, but strike out with frequency trying to capitalize on the old wind currents with fly ball hitters. Could you imagine a team like the 80s Cardinals in Wrigley...they would get fried.

No. You construct your team around 81 games at home. You should build it so that you have a better advantage in those games. But this may effect the way you play on the road. In colorado they tried sinkerball pitchers and people who didnt rely on the curve...and it hasnt worked. I am not saying that the field gives one team an advantage over the other you rubes, saying that it makes a difference in the way you set your roster. Do you really want a fly ball pitcher pitching in Wrigley in August with the damn wind blowing out at 40 MPH? Gimme a break.

I will say this yet again. With the wind the way it is in the summer time it may cause an effect like the altitude in Colorado. By building the team one way, we may be causing ourselves problems another. I am saying it could be the ballpark which has been around since 1914. We have never won in it. So can you say looking into your crystal ball that is absolutely 100% not the ballpark, and the wind, and the elements in April or October? I cant say with even 75% certaintity that it is. And i dont really have to tell you about the lines around the foul area..say LCS game 6?

On this we are just going to have to disagree. I know you believe in the Loogy, i just dont. Its just different managerial styles. There have been occasions when i have disagreed with choices made (namely Eyre pitching to Delgado who has pounded lefties this year but not done so well against rightys) but its more i think from not having the right pieces rather than the wrong ones. Piniella simply wants to build the Nasty Boys again in the bullpen..flamethrowers with attitude...and our bullpen is a bunch of choir boys and boy scouts who walk people like pansies. Barry Bonds wasnt there for the 103 win season, the team was more than just him (Kent for example), and Bonds is more bottle than blonde if you know what i mean. As for the BBWAA, we will have to disagree with that too. They do some good things and then they do some moronic things. Not going to condemn the whole process over a few events, but measure them equally and individually for what they are worth. I disagree with this. We have no idea what goes on behind close doors. I think he has done tremendous thingss for several guys on the team including Guzman, Ramirez, Cedeno, and Theriot by setting the bar and letting them no what is expected of them. He also has been involved with Rothschild in helping him do his job trying to get the deliveries of Guzman, Hill and Z sorted out. He wants to kill his bullpen no doubt, but with as many walks as they are giving up, i think anger is the proper response. And again we will disagree. Lou won the WS. He has managed many post season teams. Some of it is natural talent, some of it is GM building (Quinn for instance was a real good baseball man although i am sure many do not appreciate his grandson on this board), and some of it is just luck, but the bottom line is you need to get results and Lou has done that over his career. In my honest opinion, i feel he is a step down from Dusty, but he manages the game the way it supposed to be managed. He talks the talk and walks the walk. You may not be happy with the way he manages, but its simply a different philosophy. Some of it is attention getting and some of it is for reasons unknown, but look at the careers of his players once they left his side. For every Griffey and ARod you can name (guys who had immense talent to start with) i can give you a Boone, an Olerud and a Cameron who had career years playing for Piniella but have now hit the skids. And you think Fitzsimons signs off on an unproven major league talent for a 90 million payroll team wanting to win a WS? He would have been tarred and feathered and run out of town.

1st- Buhner was hurt most of the year. 2nd- You forgot the other half of the equation, Pitching. Jeff Fassero for gods sakes was the #5 starter. He was 4-14 with a 7.38 ERA. SP Freddy Garcia 4.07 17 8 SP *Jamie Moyer 3.87 14 8 SP *Jeff Fassero 7.38 4 14 SP *John Halama 4.22 11 10 SP Gil Meche 4.73 8 4 CL Jose Mesa 4.98 3 6 33 RP Jose Paniagua 4.06 6 11 3 RP Ken Cloude 7.96 4 4 1 RP Frank Rodriguez 5.65 2 4 3 RP Paul Abbott 3.10 6 2 doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out why they only won 79. we are experiencing it first hand. bullpen meltdown due to lack of talent. I just love gross overgeneralizations. Because you disagree with one thing someone does, everything else they do is wrong as well. Dusty did his job well and he deserved it. He put up the first 100 win season in SF since 1962, in one of the most god forsaken ballparks of all time. He consistently won 90 games there as a manager for a franchise that hadnt done that well since the 60s. And again, one of only 4 NL managers to ever have winning seasons for 8 straight years. That takes some talent. This is silly. 3 decades in the game and they dont know the mechanics. :roll: Piniella is 18th all time, dusty 38th in wins. both have winning records. both have pennants. who exactly is a good manager in your opinion thats out there? Of the active managers ranked in wins are LaRussa, Cox, Torre, Piniella, Leyland, Hargrove, and Baker in that order. Leyland and Hargrove have losing records. All time Piniella and Baker are sorting out pretty well at .516 and .527 respectively. And talking about a ridiculous standard...Earl Weaver is 9th All Time in winning % and the only person in the last 50 years to be in the top 12 where you find Davey Johnson and Bobby Cox in 13th and 14th. Dusty is right with Torre (32) and Larussa (33) in this regard who are at .536 and .535. Piniella is 50th. And Mike Scioscia is the only other active manager in the top 50 at 30 with a 539. I have said all along we should have gone long term with Girardi, but everyone is concerned over the way he manages starters. Piniella was the alternative. He is dealing with what he has to work with. He just cant help a stupid GM. Again, Hendry, Rothschild, Tribune Mgt, and Wrigley Field.

I know tons of people in tons of different lines of work that are recognized as sacks of crap (police officers for example) and are actually outstanding performers. These 2 are good baseball examples. Sticking to my story: Hendry, Rothschild, Tribune Management, and Wrigley Field with the lead pipe in the Study.

Lets see here Piniella has won 1511 games (18th All Time) and has twice been named Manager of the Year. He also won a World Series. One season he won 116 games with one team and he won 200 games for an awful organization in Florida in 3 years. Dusty has won 1162 games as a manager (38th All Time) and been named Manager of the Year 3 times in 14 seasons. He is one of only 4 NL Managers to have 8 consecutive winning seasons EVER. He also won 1100 ballgames faster than such board icons as Jim Leyland and Mike Hargrove. Um, lets see 18+ years service in an industry and being recognized for excellence in that industry. Gee what employer wouldnt want that. Do you realize how stupid this remark is? Also plays to the fact that the players realize these arent a couple of guys they pulled off a turnip truck somewhere and that they should immediately respect them. They have been around the block a time or two and have been involved in the game for at least 3 decades. Only thing ridiculous here is your assessment that Piniella and Baker are bad managers. They simply arent.

Oh god, i just looked at our upcoming schedule @ LA 3 games vs. Fla 3 games vs. Atl 3 games @ Milky 3 games @ Atl 4 games We keep playing this badly and we may not win for another month.