Warren Brusstar

I agree with you. I've beaten up on Dusty all season and was utterly shocked that the two words "plate discipline" came out of his mouth. I'll give him credit for this move. However, I want him to mention "plate discipline" to the whole team and not just Cedeno. Saying plate discipline doesn't mean a thing. Making mentions of things isn't what matters. People have been talking about this problem for 4 years and he just now mentions the words and we're supposed to get all giddy? Dusty's track record is set as far as patience at the plate is concerned. He would have to undergo a drastic change to make a difference for the better. Saying you are going to talk to somebody about plate discipline isn't the same as actually making a hitter better. That's fine, but that standard needs to be applied both ways. This board jumps all over any and every thing that Dusty says that runs contrary to this board's collective wisdom regarding how to manage a baseball team. That's a double standard. Either his comments matter or they don't.

Yeah, Wuertz had an ERA+ over 100 each of the last two years, and then has to languish in the minors most of this season. This is from Bruce Miles most recent article. So if Wuertz was throwing 87-88 mph, the first time around, it could be a case of "tired arm" or some kind of injury that the Cubs felt was better for Wuertz to stay at AAA, instead of the MLB. If that is the case, then keeping Wuertz down at AAA until his velocity returns, is ONE smart move the Cubs have done, this year. I figure, Wuertz is up to stay, this time around, unless he hangs out with Glendon too much. Except that Wuertz's utter dominance at Triple A belies any notion that he's just now getting his velocity back.

If by "nobody," you mean late-90s Pedro, then yes.

With the Murton-Pierre-Jones outfield, outfield assists will be an extremely rare event.

Fontenot has had a much better walk rate each of the last two years.

Why isn't Fotenot getting this chance? Fotentot and Theriot are the same age and Fotentot has been a better hitter at virtually every level.

Burrell's home/road splits since the Phils moved into Citizen's Bank have been pretty drastic. At that price, I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole. (Unless, of course, the Phils are willing to take Rusch and Neifi in the deal and give us a significant chunk of cash)

Dear Scott: Shut up. TIA, Warren

DLee not in the lineup tonight

So he can't throw? He'll fit in great with our current outfielders, none of whom can throw either.

You forgot Zambrano. If he's not the definition of "untradeable," I don't know what is.

By by "those" you mean you (and only you), then yes.

Ryan Dempster is a freaking joke.

Michael Wuertz's 3.80-ish ERA over 75 innings last season is good enough proof for me that he's more than qualified to pitch at this level. Talk about getting screwed over by sample size. Other than Dempster, the guy was the best pitcher out of the Cubs bullpen last season. His thanks for that? 3 2/3 innings of bad performance before being banished to Triple A.

Now put the damn ball in play Walker

Well to be fair Uribe is hitting what .230? In June, Uribe's OPS is .847. He's been a different hitter in June.

And, for the first time in, well, forever, the Cubs best lineup is in the field.

Really? That's not what I recall. Thankfully, the internets allow us to see my original post: Please let me know where I suggested you were ignorant for thinking that Murton should play more. It's absolutely no where in this thread. I've taken issue with only one thing -- the notion that Murton gives team a better chance to win games right now against RHP. OK. So what do you think? Who does give the Cubs a better chance to win v. RHP? Nevin or Murton?

Also, I'd appreciate if you could direct me to any place in this thread in which I've posted anything even resembling this idea. I've consistently demonstrated that Nevin gives the team a better chance than Murton to win v. RHP. And since the Cubs face RHP over 2/3rds of the time, that's a pretty important part of the discussion.

I was attacking the ignorance of the idea. At no point in this thread have I said anything about you. I'd appreciate the same treatment from you. Agreed. As to the latter, and at least against RHP, yes it is. Murton v. RHP - .603 OPS Nevin v. RHP - .732 OPS Unless human phsyiology has somehow changed without my knowing, there are still only two types of pitchers. So, any discussion regarding whether Nevin or Murton gives the Cubs a better chance has two necessary components -- Nevin and Murton v. RHP and Nevin and Murton v. LHP. So, it seems to me that discussing whether Nevin or Murton gives the Cubs a better chance v. RHP is a fairly important component of this discussion. You must have missed the part where I said that "if Murton plays every game for the rest of the season, you won't hear a peep from me." I don't have any problem with the notion that playing Murton right now is in the best long term interest of the organization. I don't think it's right, however, to pretend that Murton -- right now -- is better against RHP than Nevin. He's not. Why do you insist on only talking about RHP? It's absurd. I'm not arguing who is better against RHP. I am arguing against the uninformed idea that Nevin gives the Cubs a better chance to win by playing right now, against everybody. They both suck vs RHP. Murton rakes against LHP, while Nevin is okay against LHP (but has been terrible in a Cubs uniform against LHP). If you want to say that a platoon of Murton and Nevin gives the Cubs the best chance to win, well go right ahead. But you can't say starting Nevin everyday gives them the best chance to win. And you can't concentrate exclusively on the against RHP split, which is what you are doing. This is quite the two-step you're doing. That's exactly what I'm saying. Do you agree? If so, thanks!

I was attacking the ignorance of the idea. At no point in this thread have I said anything about you. I'd appreciate the same treatment from you. Agreed. As to the latter, and at least against RHP, yes it is. Murton v. RHP - .603 OPS Nevin v. RHP - .732 OPS Unless human phsyiology has somehow changed without my knowing, there are still only two types of pitchers. So, any discussion regarding whether Nevin or Murton gives the Cubs a better chance has two necessary components -- Nevin and Murton v. RHP and Nevin and Murton v. LHP. So, it seems to me that discussing whether Nevin or Murton gives the Cubs a better chance v. RHP is a fairly important component of this discussion. You must have missed the part where I said that "if Murton plays every game for the rest of the season, you won't hear a peep from me." I don't have any problem with the notion that playing Murton right now is in the best long term interest of the organization. I don't think it's right, however, to pretend that Murton -- right now -- is better against RHP than Nevin. He's not.

How about following your own advice? And where exactly did I attack the poster in this thread? All I've done is criticize his ideas. He's the one that's chosen to characterize me. (See, e.g. "non-stop bashing of Murton.") You don't see the difference?

LO freaking L. Post of the day.

And yet, your tiny one week sample size utterly dwarfs Murton's numbers v. RHP for the entire season. Those are Nevin's overall numbers, not just against RHP. Nevin has faced a lot of LHP recently, even though Murton's numbers dwarf his against LHP. Don't talk to me about wilful ignorance, your non-stop bashing of Matt Murton and inability to see the need for young players to fight through tough stretches is epitome of fan ignorance. 1. Attack the post, not the poster. 2. LOL. You don't see the irony of lecturing me regarding letting players "fight through tough stretches" in the same thread in which you use Phil Nevin's numbers for the last week to support your argument? Phil Nevin v. RHP this year - OPS .732 Matt Murton v. RHP this year - OPS .603 Again, reasonable people can differ whether playing Murton now is in the best interest of the Cubs organization. You won't hear a peep from me if Murton plays every game the rest of the season. But there is absolutely nothing in his performance record to demonstrate that he gives the Cubs a better chance to win games against RHP than Nevin. And Nevin is terrible.

And yet, your tiny one week sample size utterly dwarfs Murton's numbers v. RHP for the entire season. Reasonable persons can differ whether playing Nevin or Murton against RHP is in the long term best interest of the Cub organization. But to pretend that Murton gives this team a better chance to win games right now against RHP is wilful ignorance.