CuseCubFan69

Well that's just silly. Why should his ST results determine whether or not he wins a job, when he's shown repeatedly to be among the better Cubs relievers. He had a nice debut in 2004. A very solid 2005 campaign and regardless of his 2006 spring, he was fantastic with the Cubs. Sure, but who do you get rid of then? I don't care about their talent, I care about the results. He's shown enough in the past, when it matters, to comfortably ignore spring results. I would agree that Novoa should not get it over Wuertz-I disagree a little bit about Wade Miller, although I think you did mention it if everyone is healthy and pitching good. If Wade is pitching well (and better than Wuertz) and everyone is healthy in the rotation in front of him, which means he can't crack the rotation, then I can certainly understand why they would rather option Wuertz than release Miller. That's the only case I see where the bullpen might change over ST though. This is my main argument. It's silly to claim Wuertz has to have a better spring than he did last year to "win" a job. Wuertz has a job. He's the Cubs 3rd best reliever, possibly 2nd. The only way he should lose his job is if you are in the unlikely situation where everybody else is great. Wuertz doesn't need to do anything this spring to "win" a job. I agree but the numbers game may come into play that determines what happens and also the deals Hendry made to sign Miller and any others. I'm not saying that's right but it may be wh something that doesn't seem right may happen.

There's a way to edit a post? I don't spell that well and my grammar is below average and I try to edit as much as possible. There are certain words that I screw up consistantly that drive me to maddness and no matter waht I spell them wrong the first time even though I do know how to spell them.

okay, i was using hyperbole there. but you get the idea. and i disagree that numbers cannot catch nuance. in fact, the title of the book i quoted pretty much captures the point i'm trying to make. baseball must be looked at in perspective--the perspective of a 162 game season. numbers catch the invisibility of what actually is going on. So a number can tell me that an ump just called a ball when it was a strike? It can tell me the pitchers arm is sore? A hitter has a bad back? The SS slept with 4 hookers the night before and is exhausted and couldn't get to a slow roller up the middle? It's raining and the ball and field are wet?

okay, i was using hyperbole there. but you get the idea. I do now!

I think the idea is that, with increased emphasis on 100 mph heat comes decreased emphasis on control, and a guy might be drafted or called up to the majors primarily on the basis of his fastball, without concern for his inability to avoid hitting batters. Also, it's just plain harder to get out of the way. That's what I thought the poster meant. Add to that you have a lot of batters too comfortable and leaning in and you'll have guys unprepared to get out of the way.

I wonder if Cuban would send video to the Commissioners office about how horrible the umps are?

Is Lou really Ditka?

But the Tribune can sell the Cubs whenever they want. The deadline is for TRB reorganization in general. The Cubs are just a very small part of that plan. Amazing that 700 million dollars is a small part of anything. I'm in the wrong business.

Thanks. Some guys just take a little longer to get ready than others. Wuertz has proved he can be a decent reliever in the past and I'm not too worried about him unless he has an injury. If these two guys get sent down, is there room at Iowa for them? And, if they are there that team is going to have a pretty good 1-2 reliever tandum.

My favorite Dusty moment is the day he left.

Thanks! That's probably why Barrett is ahead of Jones. Silly Lou wants to win instead of pandering to the vets.

The smell of spring is in the air!

I keep waiting for Bruce to say April Fools. Who is pitching against the Cubs in that game?

I'd love to see a real strike zone called. But, umps through out bb history have all had their different zones and I don't think that the ones years ago were that different from the ones today.

Murray just e-mailed me and said this thread is just like the book my 2 mommies.

I almost teared up, reading that. It's exactly how I would make out the lineup with these players. I can't say I could EVER say the same thing when Dusty was making out the cards. Could we actually have a manager with some common baseball sense??? I don't know about you but I think it moved when I saw it.

Nice lineup Lou and thanks Bruce.

Nah....it will be either NY Giants (unfortunately, I could see the Giants offering him what he wants) or the Redskins. Maybe he can work out a Clemens like deal and show up around 1/4th of the way into the season and only on gameday on Sunday. Isn't that what his team did this past season? Ha...maybe! Let's see. Go to practice on Tuesday then on Wednesday get the magic pills from the trainer. Honestly, maybe this steroid thing is the real reason Cowher left.

Bruce....you're evil.

Nomar did just as much as Jeter in 1999 in 100 less at bats. An argument could be made for any one of the top 7 or 8 guys to have won the MVP that year. Personally, I would have given it to Pedro. Come on BbB...vote for Pedro is so 2005.

Go to heck stat boy!!!! I like using all of them and looking or breaking down specific stats for a specific area that I'm trying to figure out. When someone throws out ERA as the barameter of how good a pitcher is it bothers me because I think there is a heck of a lot more than that to determine what makes him a good pitcher. I think ERA is ok but I like using WHIP, % of line drives hit of him, innings pitched, and yes...the horrible how does he do when he is struggling when he doesn't have his best stuff. I love to see it when a pitcher doesn't have his best stuff but fights it out long enough to help his team. How is that measured out stat wise, it isn't.

I love looking at this pictures and seeing the different techniques/fundamentals the pitchers use to throw a ball. Thanks to all of you for putting these up.

It depends on the pitcher and the situations. I think saying stuff like this is obvious because I'd love a 3 pitch inning everytime.

The people who are in charge of bringing us the game are generally the people who have always been in charge, and those people don't have any use for progress. They like being in charge, and they know what they know, so they keep feeding us the same stuff. The key is getting more and more people like Bruce and Len into the situation. There are also old guard types like Peter Gammons who have given these stats much deserved recognition. The biggest problems are the people like Chass, and those who automatically respect the opinion of "baseball people" who continually bash the "stat mongers". There are people who don't talk about the stats much, but they don't bash them either. That's fine. But when idiots like these keep coming out with rant after rant against knowledge, it's quite disconcerting. I agree. I also think that it goes both ways when the fans that love stats rant against the "baseball people" they sound as ignorant. Both are useful and the mocking of either method is what makes them dig their heels in and keeps them ignorant of the other belief.

Actually, Jeter was an MVP caliber player last year. I'd love him if he were a Cub.