vance_the_cubs_fan

Someone needs to dare IMB to pick again.

Is there any day of the week that we have a winning record? CUBS are 10-11 on Sundays CUBS are 9-7 on Mondays CUBS are 8-11 on Tuesdays CUBS are 8-11 on Wednesdays CUBS are 3-10 on Thursdays CUBS are 8-14 on Fridays CUBS are 8-13 on Saturdays "Monday, Monday. So good to me..................... " edit: last year was better....... Team record by day of week W L pct Sunday 17 9 0.654 Monday 7 12 0.368 Tuesday 15 9 0.625 Wednesday 11 14 0.440 Thursday 6 11 0.353 Friday 13 12 0.520 Saturday 10 16 0.385 I'm looking forward to a new quote by Dusty saying, "Dude, if we had just had Derrek back and could've played all our games on Monday...we'd be right there.The ball, it just don't snake so bad on Monday."

As to not derail this thread any longer, here is a thread on my reasons for liking Dierker.

Dierker's beliefs are well-thought out. I'd reccomend reading This Ain't Brain Surgery if you'd really like to get a grasp on his philosophies. I think he'd be an ideal person as he can combine his experience as a player with a proper use of stats. Furthermore, based on what I've read from Dierker, I can almost guarantee he'd have had someone getting up in the pen at the start of the 7th inning in game six against the Fish.

In before the lock, merge!

are they? How do you figure Papelbon will be traded with the Red Sox payroll? ARod is much more expensive, older, and does not play LF. Peavy would be a nice addition but pitchers are too risky to make a huge investment. Cabrera would be a great addition and is far more likely to be traded than Bay. What exactly is your point anyway? You wouldn't want Bay or a Baylike player? I'm not entirely certain why people feel inclined to make sarcastic comments in these threads - the fact that Bay is under contract through 2009 is now well documented. That doesn't change the fact that he would be a perfect fit for the Cubs and Hendry should be on the lookout for how to obtain such players. I apologize for my sarcasm. I agree if there were a Bay-like player available in a trade that Hendry should be all of it. My opinion is that Bay, himself is not tradeable. Pittsburgh has him signed to a contract which should not become overly burdensome and so I'd seriously have doubs to his availability.

Couldn't resist the Dierker plug eh? I'm going to keep banging that drum until the game of musical chairs is finished. I've already made my plug on the Trib site. I'm just trying to get someone else to take the ball and run a little with it. his treatment of pitchers is enough to make me look elsewhere. Can you elaborate on that? I'll elaborate. Dierker feels that during ST starters should get stretched out so that they are capable of throwing 115-120 pitches if they are throwing effectively. He doesn't like having an early hook. His philosophy is that even a pitcher with a good track record may not always have his best stuff and you can't know this until you see him on the mound. If he has a starter who is effectively getting people out, he doesn't like going to the pitcher in the bullpen when he doesn't know what kind of stuff he will have.

Couldn't resist the Dierker plug eh? I'm going to keep banging that drum until the game of musical chairs is finished. I've already made my plug on the Trib site. I'm just trying to get someone else to take the ball and run a little with it.

Great article, Bruce. But couldn't you have also included a plug for Mr. Dierker?

While we getting Bay instead of Lee, why not get Miquel Cabrera, Brian McCann, ARod, Peavy, and Papelbon since those are all just as likely to be traded as Bay.

Yes. He's been getting playing time at SS and 1B (just like Jake Fox has gotten PT at LF, RF and 1B) and will continue to do so for the remainder of the season. Moore and Fox will play their regular positions a bit too. If Moore could keep up his batting numbers at SS and be adequate there defensively, he would experience a boon to his prospect status, no?

Is there any day of the week that we have a winning record?

I definitely agree with that. Because of the two infield situations we used most often (Walker at second/Mabry at first, or Neifi at second/Walker at first) Lee's at bats would essentially come at the expense of Neifi/Mabry. If replacing one of the worst hitters in the game with one of the best hitters in the game only results in 2-3 extra wins, then how is a bad team ever going to become good? That's Lee's point. It's not just that he was out, it's that the rest of the guys sucked living butt while he was out. Even with him in the game, if the team around him continued to suck living butt, we still lose. A lot. Is sucking living butt worse than sucking dead butt or is it the other way around? I can never keep it straight.

I'm not sure if he invented the double switich, but he sure has mass marketed it.

Never speculated it would happen...just that it should happen.

Vance, you are now the 2nd best WR in Louisiana. Drew Brees has to be hating this move. I actually like this move for both clubs. The Saints are deep at one position and that is WR, and they desparately need help stopping the run...well and the pass for that matter. The D is lacking. Stallworth had slipped to #3 on the depth chart per my understanding behind Horn and Devry Henderson. I follow the Saints (proximity) and the Colts (father's family lives in Indianapolis); I believe this to be a positive for the Saints. I don't think this is a good move for the Saints at all. Devry, while I like him being from LSU, is just not a legitimate #2 receiver. The Saints needed help at linebacker, but trading Stallworth wasn't a good idea. This is more a result of Donte falling out of favor with Payton than anything else.

Man...I tune in to see this!

The Saints traded Donte Stallworth to the Eagles for Mark Simoneau and a conditional fourth round pick which will be a third if the Eagles can sign Stallworth to an extension. Link.

Yes. Goony and Fred have hit the nail on the head. CW= conventional wisdom. The ideas that we want clutch hitters, the idea that a speedy guy is needed at the top of the order, sac bunting, walking a hitter to set-up a double play, etc are all examples. I prefer a manager that knows about those things, but has looked at them critically. So are you guys saying Girardi lacks Conventional Wisdom? Whatever the case what he's doing in Florida is pretty damn amazing. Espically for a first year manager. No, I'm saying Giradi relies too much on conventional wisdom. That's what I meant... I don't see enough of his games to see if he does or not. I haven't either...but some of the quotes I've heard seem to be imply he has a strong reliance on it. It's always been my fear ever since people have bandied his name around. Girardi gives me the impression of a manager who would rely on the old adages to a fault. I'm also concerned that if given his way, he could end up with some Dusty-lie veteran fetishes. While he didn't in Florida, he didn't really have the opportunity. Exactly-and every time Girardi's name is brought up, people come up with "He's better than Dusty". Sure, he is-just because he is an upgrade doesn't make him the right man for the job-we could be saying many of the same things about Girardi 3 years from now. Could he be the right hire? Of course-but his Florida experience is closer to managing a minor league team to great things than managing a normal major league team (because it is so full of young players trying to prove themselves instead of potential big ego veterans). There is just so little we know about Girardi and his managerial style with a team like the Cubs that it would be a risk. Well there is little we know about Fredi Gonzalez...larry dierker seems like a popular choice on this board, and I also would'nt mind if he threw his hat in, but does anyone actually know if he wants to manage? Dierker has made statements that for the right offer, he would like to try it again. I'm thinking if the Cubs offered him a 4-year contract at near the money they paid Dusty, it would be too much for him to turn away from. The main reason Dierker won't be hired is that he and Hendry likely wouldn't see eye to eye on most issues about what makes a valuable player.

Geaux Tigers! Go GT Yellowjackets!

Yes. Goony and Fred have hit the nail on the head. CW= conventional wisdom. The ideas that we want clutch hitters, the idea that a speedy guy is needed at the top of the order, sac bunting, walking a hitter to set-up a double play, etc are all examples. I prefer a manager that knows about those things, but has looked at them critically. So are you guys saying Girardi lacks Conventional Wisdom? Whatever the case what he's doing in Florida is pretty damn amazing. Espically for a first year manager. No, I'm saying Giradi relies too much on conventional wisdom. That's what I meant... I don't see enough of his games to see if he does or not. I haven't either...but some of the quotes I've heard seem to be imply he has a strong reliance on it. It's always been my fear ever since people have bandied his name around. Girardi gives me the impression of a manager who would rely on the old adages to a fault. I'm also concerned that if given his way, he could end up with some Dusty-lie veteran fetishes. While he didn't in Florida, he didn't really have the opportunity.

Yes. Goony and Fred have hit the nail on the head. CW= conventional wisdom. The ideas that we want clutch hitters, the idea that a speedy guy is needed at the top of the order, sac bunting, walking a hitter to set-up a double play, etc are all examples. I prefer a manager that knows about those things, but has looked at them critically. So are you guys saying Girardi lacks Conventional Wisdom? Whatever the case what he's doing in Florida is pretty damn amazing. Espically for a first year manager. No, I'm saying Giradi relies too much on conventional wisdom.

Yes. Goony and Fred have hit the nail on the head. CW= conventional wisdom. The ideas that we want clutch hitters, the idea that a speedy guy is needed at the top of the order, sac bunting, walking a hitter to set-up a double play, etc are all examples. I prefer a manager that knows about those things, but has looked at them critically.

The last thing I'm interested in is how big of a name the manager has. I don't want the enthusiasm to be built on the name of the manager, that should be determined by the level of player acquisition Hendry embarks on this winter. I, for one, don't really care about tenure. Whether the next manager is here for 3 years or 10, all I care about is they win. Some managers come in and win one, then leave, as they either wear out their welcome or lose the desire. Joe Torre and Bobby Cox are the only real staples of the managerial business. Scioscia is close with his 6 years and level of success. I really have no interest in getting a guy like Bochy to be there every year and pretty much maintain a level of mediocrity that does little to inspire. Stability is overrated in sports if it doesn't come with success. I'd much rather have a short and volatile era than a long steady, and ultimately unsuccessful period. Agreed. Get me Davey Johnson who will piss everyone off in route to winning 2-3 penants. I'm not opposed to Girardi; however, once again let me state my candidates on order of preference. 1. Dierker 2. Johnson 3. Gonzalez I'd be happy with any of the three. After that, there's a number of names I might be ok with, but I'm not overly excited about. Girardi is in that group. Why would you want Gonzalez over Girardi? Just curious? Gonzalez has had success managing in the minors as well as working with major league teams. I'd hope some of Cox's philosophies would rub off on him as well. I've heard some of the things Girardi has said, and he's filled with a little too much CW for my liking. I'm not saying he'd be a bad choice, and he certainly has done much with little in Florida, but I'd prefer someone less inclined to use CW in their decisions.

Are you saying Dusty is Jesus? Well, Jesus can't hit a curveball.