Lefty

Has Bruce Levine ever got anything right?

Carroll happens to have a very good source in the Cubs front office this year. Therefore I was glad to see that we have no interest in Soriano.

This is some anemic lineup we're trotting out there.

But they would lose Hudson after this year anyway. And Hudson hasn't been so great this year, and the Braves committed another 4 years and $50 million to him. Whose spot would you rather occupy? I think the A's accomplished what they wanted except that Cruz and Meyer have been of no help yet.

The schedule heavily favors the A's over the Angels the rest of the way. The A's have played 24 more games vs. the East (8-16) and the Angels have played 28 more against the Central (17-11). The A's have a better divisional record as well (22-12 vs. 17-14). Basically the Angels are in 1st only because they have played the Central part of their schedule. Another little tidbit, the White Sox are 21-20 outside of their division. I know, I know, it doesn't matter. I'll bet the Sox win the World Series, at least the pennant, and finish below .500 next year. But flags fly forever.

Karchner, Alfonseca, Remlinger, Hawkins, Rojas, etc. This team shoud never trade for or pay a premium to sign a reliever again. You'd be amazed at what a good offense would do for the bullpen.

nice insite! Do you have a link? I think it would be hard to find a link saying Leiter sucks. You just have to take it on faith.

It works just as well, but is much less likely.

Here's how I'm rooting. The Nats must collapse, utterly, and then the Braves must romp in that division. Then we are competing with Houston, Miami, Philly and the Mets where a game and a half separates all of us. And the Braves romping ought to help keep those Eastern teams down. We need to beat up on Houston. What'd I miss?

I'll take the counter argument. In the past Hendry has unloaded prospects he received from other orgs. to get an MLB player. If he thinks this season can be saved, Murton may be traded for an impact bat. I can't believe that anybody thinks this season can be saved with Baker at the helm.

That goes along with several different theories I have thought of. I asked the question because I had two really phenomenal coaches in highschool that had both played minor league ball (both made it to AAA). They were great coaches and both went on to coach college first as assistants and now one of them is the head coach at UIC. Just thought they were phenomenal coaches who know the game extremely well. The things you are both saying here also fall along the lines of scouting and player development - it's all pretty much a "fraternity" of ex players that handle those things (as well as being batting and pitching coaches). Off topic a little, but it always interested me how the "moneyball" theories of baseball worked their way into the sport. Those theories were certainly revolutionary and there are still lots of ex players/scouts etc... who slam them any chance they can get. OT in a way here but Earl Weaver, (now there was a skipper), was "Moneyball" before most of the current young bright lights were out of diapers. Beane isn't yet IMO. The quote that comes to mind here is one by Sir Winston Churchill, "The problem most people have is that they will trip over the root of truth, fall down, get back up and dust themselves off and continue on thier journey." Earl Weaver went to war for his players and kicked them in the behind when they didn't do what they were supposed to. He was supported by a great team in Baltimore, then, that also gave him the tools to get the job done. The question we should really be asking is Has Baker been handed the tools to get the job done. If you say yes then he needs to go. If you say no then Baker needs to stay and the front office needs to go. My views anyway. Hendry and Baker both have to go. But their replacements have to be on the same modern page. Tough task.

Like it matters anymore.

Where's the chemistry?

Dusty knows he's getting fired soon. He is just letting it all hang out. I swear the day I wake up, turn on the computer and see a "Baker Fired" thread on NSBB, I am going to run around my apartment complex hooting and hollaring with joy. Very soon, my friend.

Not yet, but we're getting there.

Without paying a ridiculous amount of his salary of course.

You're a little disingenuous here. You deride Clement for his excellent run support, but mention Maddux' record as proof of something. Maddux has good run support too, and Clement has pitched much better than Maddux. It's not even close who is a better pitcher for the money.

Are they in contention now? I don't think so. I think the point was that as long as we have the starting pitching we do, the Cubs wil be a very dangerous team. Well I guess my point is that we don't have that pitching anymore. If Wood is not going to be effective, something that won't be settled here, is Prior, Wood, Zambrano, Maddux and Williams so terrific? Is it any better than Carpenter, Morris, Mulder, Marquis and Suppan? And then there is the small matter of 100 runs on offense.

Are they in contention now? I don't think so.

After losing the 2003 NLCS, there was no clearly dominant team in the NL. The Cubs attempted to step into that void by specifically filling their perceived needs. They traded for an established hitter (Lee), signed a reliever to a long and expensive contract (Hawkins), and signed a reliable veteran starting pitcher for a lot of back loaded money (Maddux), to be paid mostly when the pitcher would likely be less effective. I would add that the Nomar trade was part of the same 'movement,' if you will, as an attempt to save last season. The Cubs' great strength to which they were building around was their starting pitching. Prior, Wood, Zambrano, and free agent to be Clement were all young and potentially dominant. A decent supporting cast would make years of contention a near certainty. In the process the Cubs became the highest payroll team in the NL. I know someone has to have the highest payroll, but does anyone think that this is a permanent situation? Well now it is apparent that the moves of last season were an attempt to win last year, and not necessarily in the future. The signing of Maddux pretty much pushed Clement out the door. Bad trade. Spending the money on an established reliever, historically a bad way to spend money, probably hurt our flexibility somewhere else. That somewhere else was LF where Hendry spent all winter telling us we didn't have to have a star in every position and that someone had to win Rookie of the Year. Meanwhile, we have shortstop production coming out of leftfield. Maddux is at best average. He has one and a half years left on his contract. Wood's new mechanics are worse than before he got hurt and will probably make him less effective to boot (see Will Carroll's article on BP). I think he is no longer part of any kind of big three, and I would support trading him (never did before). Prior and Zambrano could be great, but two great starting pitchers isn't as unique as 3 or 4 of them. And the Cubs offense is terrrible. So basically the Cubs who have lost 25 games in the standings to the Cardinals over the last year, and are several behind the Astros in that time as well, no longer have anything on anybody. They're starting over.

Do you really want to come back with Prior on three days rest for his third outing coming back from an injury? 82 pitches over 5 innings; yes. It doesn't mean I expect him to go 9 next time, either. Remember he'd be taking Maddux' spot; he only has to go 5 or 6 to equal Maddux. I'd rather have Prior pitch those innings. If I were in charge I would handle my staff totally differently than anybody else. I don't expect Dusty "I need 12 pitchers even though I won't use some of them" Baker to do anything progressive, though.

They should start Prior on three days rest next Tuesday, then they can pitch him on the Sunday before the ASB. The best part is we skip Maddux.

The truth is, if Maddux finishes just short of the 187 1/3 he needs, the Cubs will accept the option obligation anyway. Only an injury prevents it from happening. Averaging 5 and two-thirds a game (for the year) gets him there.

I'm actually surprised that Baker is burning his top Pinch Hitter in a starting role.

See, like this, put this in rants. There's no baseball info here. Tho I may have been annoying in my describing of Dusty Busters, at least I had things like facts and reasons. Whatever tho, I know I post dumb stuff just for fun too so I'm not pretending to be above stuff like the above post. I think Tim will have fun savoring his decision and being the final arbiter of this fate of this thread: it has merits, but does it really, what about posts like the above, can we create a thread that criticizes Dusty intelligently without the flamers??? Heavy is the head that wears the crown.... Chill out, man! I'm just riffin' on your post. Post in Rants and I'll be glad to say that Baker su**s there too.