Banghart

I think this sums up nicely what I was trying to get at though. This team doesn't have to be a top OBP team, but I am not sure it isn't going to be a bottom tier one again. We saw what teams that led the league in HRs and SLG look like if they have a low OBP. The Cubs did that in 2004 when the team was tops in HRs and near the top in SLG, but still managed to be only middle of the pack in runs scored. The point I was trying to make is no that the Cubs offense was going to be as bad as last year, but rather that it was going to be the same kind of offense we had in 2004. That team required top tier pitching and it still didn't manage to win 90 games. The way this team was built supposedly was to be an offensive juggernaut, one of if not the best in the league. From what I have seen so far, this team is going to be a lot like the team in 2004, and if we don't get the same caliber of pitching this year will be yet another year since winning 90 games.

Some point well taken so far. I issued the disclaimer about it being way too early to tell right off the bat, but that being said I think the point I've been trying to make is some what missed. The offense is better than the pathetic level it has been at in 2005 and 2006, but the point I was trying to make is that this team still needs to pitch well above average to be a contender. The talk I constantly hear on TV, radio, and some fans is that the Cubs are a top tier offensive ball club in the NL. I still don't see it from this bunch. The team does have more depth. The addition of Cliff Floyd was a big boost for the overall depth. If he can remain healthy he can provide serious pop from the left handed side. That said we still have a ton of question marks or just bad players. Shortstop has been an offensive blackhole for the Cubs for the past four, five seasons. I can't believe I honestly miss the days of Ricky Gutierrez. Our second baseman is coming off a career year in one of the most, if not the most, hitter friendly ballpark in baseball. These can be made up for the power through out the lineup, but the team is still not built to get on base consistently. I think the Cubs will do fine this year because I think the pitching is better than we've been told, but that elusive 90 win mark still seems a bit out of reach at this point without a lot of breaks.

File this under the catergory of too early to know for sure, but doesn't the cub offense as a whole feel a lot like the Cubs offense of the past several seasons. The team still does not draw a lot of walks, and is dependent on stringing together lots of hits together to make things happen. The result of this being big innings like we saw against the Brewers yesterday, and scores of 1 and 2 like in the series against the Reds. I really don't have expectations one way or the other for the Cubs this year, it is only disappointing when you do 1999, 2004, etc. However, the talk around baseball, excluding some on this board, was that the Cubs were going to be an offensive juggernaut. I questioned this at the time because I felt like I had seen Cubs' offenses like this one in the past. Lots of power throughout the lineup combined with low OBP. The result is a streaky offense that generally winds up being below average. This is a one case where I hope I am wrong, and with my track record of predicting baseball I probably will. (Thinks back to last October-There is no way the Cards will make it out of the first round of the playoffs with their pitching.)

They did for Ichiro. -Banghart

This isn't that far fetch. If you recall Dusty allowed Mark Guthrie to face Mike Lowell in Game 1 because he was worried about the dangerous Lenny Harris coming off the bench. Lowell hit the game winning homerun of course, and the Cubs lost game one of the series. As far as the importance of defense is concerned, we can all look back and find one defense gaffe that cost their teams games. However, over the course of a season what matters the most is pitching and hitting. The Cubs aren't very good at either right now. There appears like there is some talent for pitching to fix itself next year, while the offense continues to be getting worse and worse. -Banghart

The Cubs have a 110 BBs total this season. That places them at 26th overall in the majors at drawing walks. The White Sox pitched well, but I think there is a bigger trend at work here. -Banghart

Well the Cubs failed to score early runs, and Marshall failed to make it through five innings. The Cubs failed to score any runs through the same time frame. This is the same team that we have watched the past few years. This a team incapable of putting together a solid run. This season is getting longer with each passing day. -Banghart

Maybe not. It seems that the breaking ball underneath the hands is the way to get Jones swinging every time. Tough pitch to hit, but it would be nice to see him layoff things he cannot drive. -Banghart That would be describing a selective hitter, who is patient. You're in the wrong fanbase (caveat murton) Granted, but just something I noticed that it seems like that is where most pitchers go for strikeouts against Jones. I know if he could layoff that pitch he would be a much better hitter than he is, but one can hope. Can't we? -Banghart

Maybe not. It seems that the breaking ball underneath the hands is the way to get Jones swinging every time. Tough pitch to hit, but it would be nice to see him layoff things he cannot drive. -Banghart

Worked the first time, so....The Cubs will score some runs. The Cubs will score some runs. The Cubs will score some runs. -Banghart

Marshall will settle down. Marshall will settle down. Marshall will settle down. If you say it enough times, it has to be true. -Banghart

Need to get one back here. Don't need the big inning, but got get one back right now. Rally cap time already. -Banghart

Last night was the cathartic release we have all been waiting for the past two weeks. The offense truly broke out in a big way. Matt Cain was struggling, and the Cubs took it to him like they are supposed to with a pitcher who has pitched poorly all year. The eight run outburst was highlighted by the fine pitching of Carlos Zambrano who seems to be returning to form. The importance of this has increased with Greg Maddux returning to late thirties form after pitching better than the Cy Young version of himself in April. Today is the real test of this ball club. This is not a must win ball game because that it is real had to call any game that in May. The Cubs will not be knocked out of the playoff picture if they lose today, and they will not be right back in the thick of things if they win. However, this is one of many moments in a season that defines a team. Cubs teams of the past seasons have struggled to maintain long winning streaks. Over the past three years the Cubs have had only one month with more than sixteen wins. A win today could make yesterday’s victory a turning point in the season. A win today could mark the beginning of a prolonged period of success. A win today could be the catalyst to the Cubs first 90 win season in eight years. The Cubs need this game to make yesterday’s game a turning point in the season. This is not going to be easy for the Cubs. So many times last year the team would have a great game, and then play another lackluster game the next day. Today needs to be the day where the Cubs start to turn the season around. May has not been kind so far with the Cubs record at 2-8 this month. The Cubs need to go 8-1 the rest of the way to have a winning record. It is not necessary for the Cubs to have a winning record this month, but a winning May would mean that the Cubs do not have to an amazing month to reach 90 wins this season. Jamey Wright is the starting pitcher for the Giants today. Wright is another struggling right hander that the Cubs need to beat. The Cubs play San Diego at home next, and the Padres are red hot after winning 10 of their last 11 games. Taking two out of the three at San Francisco is essential to salvaging May. Dusty Baker finally shuffled the lineup significantly yesterday. Juan Pierre batted second for the first time this season. This is where Juan Pierre should stay until Derrek Lee returns. Pierre’s speed can be utilized in the two spot as much as at leadoff until Lee gets back. Pierre bats left handed which will set up the leadoff hitter for stealing second, and Pierre is a great bunter. Jacque Jones needs to be moved up to fifth as long as a lefthander is not on the mound. I strongly dislike Jones presences on this team, but he is hitting the cover off the ball right now. Marshall needs to pitch like he has been the past three starts. The Cubs need to score runs early, and get to Wright early in the game. The Cubs need to leave San Francisco with some momentum to even the score against the Padres at home. Today’s game could be that forgotten moment of the season where the tide was turned if the Cubs can win. -Banghart

Okay, I must admit ignorance here. Where did we get JR Mathes from, and what is his story? -Banghart

At the time there was serious concern about when Brian Roberts would be available to play. Baltimore's interest in Walker would have been as a temporary fill-in for Roberst, and then as a player who could fill in at 2B, 1B, DH, and the OF in a pinch. -Banghart

Bynum is out of options. That is why we were able to get him for just Koronka. There is no way that the Cubs are going to send him down in April, and expose him to waiver after trading for him. -Banghart

The timely hitting was there, Jim. The guys who draw the walks in front of timely hitting were not. That is a really important point that we have to look at. The reason that came up was Levine asked Hendry a question about why did the Cubs lead the league in hits and last in walks. Levine said it was really strange how the Cubs did so well hitting, and were ninth in runs. Hendry answered by saying that really strange to lead the league in hits, but just didn't get the job done with runners on third. It was a poor year in doing what you have to do. We are going to score more runs this year. We are going to be able to do more things this year like hit and run and run a bit more. That was paraphrased, but Hendry did not say one word about the fact that the Cubs were last in walks or low OBP of the team. The focus was again on timely hitting, and the Cubs improved their offense because they should be able to run more. There was one other thing that was interesting was the fact that Hendry made a specific point in saying that Murton and Cedeno could be no. 2 hitters down the line. -Banghart

Yeah I recall being particularly frustrated when the Cubs failed to land Bradley. Thanks for the additional info about how little the A's gave to get Bradley. So I think it is pretty clear that the Jim Hendry had a few options that would have improved the offense versus Jacque Jones. Hendry could have improved the offense. However, he decided that not only was Jones a short term solution this year at a position the Cubs had no real prospects for, but was a long term solution at the position (the 3 year contract Jones received from Hendry as proof). I don't know if it can be shown any more clearly that the Cubs could have done better at RF, and that would have gone a long way to improve this offseason instead of at best remaining even with last year. -Banghart

I think it is completely fair to say that the Cubs could have gone out and improved at the position more than Jacque Jones. You might be right that we might not have matched up with the Nationals in making a trade, but let's also point out the fact that the Rangers got more than Wilkerson back. That means thatthe Nats valued Soriano more than Wilkerson. There were numerous reports that Nationals had interest in Patterson. It is entirely possible that a package of Patterson, Walker, and pitching prospect(s) (if the Cubs had said Rich Hill's name in a possible deal, I think the Nats would have listened very hard to the offer). It might have required the Cubs to overpay in a deal, but I don't think you can sit here and say that there was no way the Cubs could have acquired Wilkerson. However, Wilkerson was available, and that fails to address Milton Bradley at all. The A's gave up prospects of some value to get him, but it wasn't a package the Cubs couldn't have beat if they wanted to. Instead they were willing to settle for the OBP void that will be Jacque Jones' spot in the batting order.

He's gone now, so I figured we wouldn't have to go through this again, but where is this notion that CPatt wasn't willing to work come from. All reports were last year that he showed up earlier, with a few other Cubs position players, to Mesa to work on his swing. I have never seen anything, besides posters on this message board, which question CPatt's work ethic. His ability to adapt to whatever the Cubs coaches wanted from him is a completely different problem, and unrelated to any lack of effort. -Banghart

Well how about Milton Bradley or Brad Wilkerson. Both were traded this offseason, and therefore were available. Either would look a lot better in RF than Jones right now. -Banghart

Wasn't Izturis really a product of Toronto's system. I seem to recall the Dodgers trading for Izturis. I could be wrong. -Banghart

The club performed well down the stretch in 2003, and despite the choke job in game 6 played well in the playoffs. But one has to understand that that team won only 88 games that year. The reason the Cubs were in position to be one game from the World Series was because the Astros and Cards both had down years, if you remember the Marlins as the wildcard team had a better record than the Cubs that year. We saw the correction of that in the following year, when the team won more games, albeit only by one, but was eliminated from making the playoffs the last week of the season. The point here is that this team was slightly above average in 2003 because it had amazing pitching and a subpar offense. The team performed better the following year using the same formula, largely. Then the pitching took a huge step back with the same offense in place. This is a team that has moved backwards since become a slightly above average ballclub in 2003. -Banghart

Not quite. The Cubs were going to pick Tex if they didn't get Prior when they drafted second. The Twins picked Joe Mauer first overall. The Cubs took Prior second, and I believe Texas got Texiera at fifth. -Banghart

Goony already stated it, but I think it bears repeating that the 2003 team wasn't that great. It barely sneaked into the playoffs with 88 wins. It did well when it made it into the playoffs, but that was due more to a crappy Central Division than the Cubs. The team performed better in 04, but the competition improved. And that is why 04 was a failure compared to 03. That is what is so frustrating though about this team. The team has been moving backwards from a point where they were just starting to become a contender. This team used to be able to count on dominant pitching, and we can't do that anymore due to injuries and poor management decisions. Add on top of that an offense that has remained weak during the entire stretch that has yet to be improved, and the outlook is bleak for next season. That doesn't mean that the Cubs have no chance. A returning of the type of pitching in 03 might be enough to carry this team to 90 wins (and even then it took the Cubs an extra game to reach that number), but as the roster stands now we are no where near that number of wins that this team has only accomplished once since 1990. -Banghart PS-As a side note the last time the Cubs scored 800 runs in a season was in 1998. That was good for third in the league. -Banghart