Only 2017 season ;)
Pitchers and catchers have reported!
The unseasonably warm weather has put the thoughts of the MLB season into my head a little sooner than usual. Coupled with being a Cubs fan and still riding a high from the fall, I'm aching to get going.
Cubs, Dodgers and Nationals look like easy picks for division winners at this point, but the Giants can never be counted out and the Mets still look really good if they can get a full season out of those arms. I'll look at the Rockies to be a surprise contender for the wild card.
In the AL it looks like all Indians and Red Sox. Boston getting Sale is going to make them really tough to beat in a series. I expect Houston to bounce back from their disappointing season. I'd like to see the Mariners finally pull through and live up to expectations.
I've heard a lot of bitching about getting rid of the four pitch intentional walk, but I'm a big fan.
Only 2017 season ;)
I've heard a lot of bitching about getting rid of the four pitch intentional walk, but I'm a big fan.
I know IBB have trended downward in recent years but it doesn't change the basic structure of the game and nothing's more annoying than spending a minute and a half watching an intentional walk.
Only 2017 season ;)
I've heard a lot of bitching about getting rid of the four pitch intentional walk, but I'm a big fan.
I know IBB have trended downward in recent years but it doesn't change the basic structure of the game and nothing's more annoying than spending a minute and a half watching an intentional walk.
So we save 60-90 seconds every three games or so. I suppose its a good thing, but I would prefer they make real changes, like a 20 second pitch clock with no one on base, limit visits to the mound by ANYBODY (catcher or manager) to one per pitcher per inning, with the second meeting meaning the pitcher has to leave the game, instituting a rule that any pitcher entering a game mid-inning has to face at least two batters, batter has to stay in the batters box, no time outs by the batter, etc. I love baseball, but MLB should insure we spend more time playing baseball and less time just dawdling.
I'd also like to do something to reduce strikeouts. Baseball is at its best when the ball is put in play and fielders and base runners are on the move. Not sure how to accomplish that, but I think the specialization and proliferation of relief pitchers is the primary cause, and expanding the roster to 26 is just going to make it worse.
I'd like to see pitching changes just signaled from the dugout. There's no need for the manager to slowly walk out there to take the ball from the pitcher. Get the umps attention, motion to the pen and have the reliever come in. Again, it's not going to save a huge amount of time but it could average out to 4-5 minutes a game.
There was a White Sox game I went to once when Buehrle was pithing, and the game didnt even take two hours, and if it did, it was barely over 2.
I don't see much in the way of roster decisions for the defending champs. It could be a Szczur or LaStella call.
Maddon recently brought up having two fifth starters, meaning they would take turns in the fifth spot, sighting that neither of these two potential #5's has thrown many innings over a season. I don't think it's a terrible idea, but you'd have to be really creative with how that other 5th guy was used and still available, so you weren't just going 10 straight days with one less arm.
I don't see much in the way of roster decisions for the defending champs. It could be a Szczur or LaStella call.
Maddon recently brought up having two fifth starters, meaning they would take turns in the fifth spot, sighting that neither of these two potential #5's has thrown many innings over a season. I don't think it's a terrible idea, but you'd have to be really creative with how that other 5th guy was used and still available, so you weren't just going 10 straight days with one less arm.
Are they going with the automatic ( no pitches) walk this season?
Yes, it's official.
Seems like a silly change. How much time per game is spent on intentional walks? One minute?
Sounds like David Price may need Tommy John...
There was a White Sox game I went to once when Buehrle was pithing, and the game didnt even take two hours, and if it did, it was barely over 2.
I'm personally glad it's gone, but I'm not sure how they are selling it. It also has some implications with pitch counts, as these pitches were listed as part of the pitch count. I'm sure coaches were smart enough to ignore this, but it appears on the stat count..... I don't know, just grasping as straws here. I'm glad it's gone but I can't give a good reason as to why it really matters.
I'd also like to do something to reduce strikeouts. Baseball is at its best when the ball is put in play and fielders and base runners are on the move. Not sure how to accomplish that, but I think the specialization and proliferation of relief pitchers is the primary cause, and expanding the roster to 26 is just going to make it worse.
Some things that are both measurably longer and perceived to take longer:
- multiple pitching changes within an inning
- multiple mound visits to buy time for relievers to warm up in the bullpen
http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=18988797&sf65527676=1
PEDs are awesome.
http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=18988797&sf65527676=1
PEDs are awesome.
So do the Brewers have any shot at a .500 record this year? Or is 90+ losses still the likely outcome?
Offense is good enough, but pitching will continue to be a problem.
OK, so no real need to invest anytime trying to figure out who these guys are then...
17 of the 27 Brewers on the opening day roster make the minimum salary.
Yet they are still basically double the payroll of the Padres who are in last place in salary. Unreal.
Why? They are in full rebuild mode. They are also paying quite a bit of salary to guys on other teams (Kemp, Shields, etc.). They also spent like crazy on the international market this year. The Pads went for it hardcore a couple years ago, it didn't work. Now they are building again with a clear plan.
Why? They are in full rebuild mode. They are also paying quite a bit of salary to guys on other teams (Kemp, Shields, etc.). They also spent like crazy on the international market this year. The Pads went for it hardcore a couple years ago, it didn't work. Now they are building again with a clear plan.
Bryant and Rizzo failed with the bases loaded.
The magic is gone.
I'm predicting 1-161 for the Cubbies because, come on, 0-162 is so unrealistic.
#firemaddon
Cubs are a dumpster fire. Maddon needs to learn to coach
Joe Maddon...best clubhouse manager and worst game manager in baseball?
Discuss...
Probably and no. Discussion over.
Probably and no. Discussion over.
Idk. Now that Ventura is gone that mantle of worst in game manager is available... You could easily make the point that the cubs beat the tribe in spite of Maddon's decision making.
Gets way too cute with his moves trying to look the genius. Montgomery is bouncing baseballs up to the plate against a bevy of right handers and his one move is to load the infield with extra players? Should have put one of those guys behind home plate as the second catcher.
His post-season on-field moves have been well discussed and critiqued. His club management is brilliant. His top step moves are mostly mediocre and way over-managed.
What was with attendance last night?
Maddon certainly isn't in the top half of in-game managers, but as long as Dusty Baker is employed, the title for worst is pretty locked in.
Gets way too cute with his moves trying to look the genius. Montgomery is bouncing baseballs up to the plate against a bevy of right handers and his one move is to load the infield with extra players? Should have put one of those guys behind home plate as the second catcher.
His post-season on-field moves have been well discussed and critiqued. His club management is brilliant. His top step moves are mostly mediocre and way over-managed.
Only on scoop would we be talking about Maddons decision making. Won the world series with one of the youngest teams. On a team that hasn't won one for 108 and we give him crap for starting out 4-2?
The cubs are on pace to win 108 games. We're talking crap about his managing.
Nah, that's just outcome bias. Pretty much everyone was talking about Maddon's decision making in the immediate aftermath of games 6 and 7, and he didn't have great answers. This isn't giving him crap for the first six games of this season, its a body of work criticism. LaRussa, for example, was pretty much universally panned as an in-game overmanager, and he managed for 33 years and won 3 titles.
I know you're joking but this would be illegal. Catcher is the only player allowed to position himself in foul territory.
Only on scoop would we be talking about Maddons decision making. Won the world series with one of the youngest teams. On a team that hasn't won one for 108 and we give him crap for starting out 4-2?
Well, not much of that is true. For starters, his own players were questioning his management in the WS, so it isn't just on scoop.
You mean Chapman? He was trying to throw heat away from himself. Maddon made great moves in both games. Some people got upset he pitched Chapman so much in game 6 but it was an elimination game. You don't pull your best relief for pitching that has been absolutely shaky throughout the playoffs.
And game 7? Hendricks was never going to go past 5. He was routinely pulled even when he was doing a solid job during the regular season. Lester and Ross were always going to come into the game. Some bad luck where a 55 foot pitch bounced off a catchers mask made it look like a bad move. And Alamora's pinch run? Best play in world series history.
As a Sox fan, I spend more time and effort for updates on Burdi, Moncada, Collins, Robert, Ohtani, and Beer than anything else. I'd be quite happy to land two of the three between Robert, Ohtani, Beer.
And Alamora's pinch run? Best play in world series history.
This is perfect cub fan nonsense.
And Alamora's pinch run? Best play in world series history.
All of you are a bunch of morons if you think Alamoras tag to 2nd wasn't the play that won them the game.
So, some cub fans apparently think the World Series started last year. Here are some historically significant plays.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaughter%27s_Mad_Dash
https://youtu.be/lrI7dVj90zs
https://youtu.be/-F5HwiGm7lg
https://youtu.be/roZUjcYj95k
https://youtu.be/BQksDqxG36s
https://youtu.be/gNt3UuDTBz8
https://youtu.be/86jDXpGtUoo
Oh yeah, and these
https://youtu.be/ACHJvLM8848
https://youtu.be/AFsmDKUswas
But you are probably right, a tag up is definitely the, what did you say, oh yeah "best play in World Series history" ::)
But here, just for fun, is what may have been the best play of all time, at least before Joe Maddon pinch ran for a slow guy with a fast guy.
https://youtu.be/7dK6zPbkFnE
Well you have done messed up "meat" (You are now blocked btw)
#1: We don't even know what actually happened. Done.
#2: Wasn't even a world series play. Done.
#3: Game 6, non elim for the Blue Jays. Was hardly the pressure play felt by Alamora. Plus it was a home run on a pitch he got squared up on. This was hardly a heads up play
#4: Wasn't a play. Was an entire game. Did I say "Best game played by a player" No.
#5: 3rd inning.... Oh my. Let's face it. IT was a great play, but didn't come close to determining the entire game.
#6: This is the 3rd time you've attempted a walk off play. Those aren't great plays. In fact the percentage to win the game was incredibly favorable for the Diamond backs in that moment. Do you know the percentage that a tag on first happens?
#7: 4th time? Were you just googling crap? wasn't even an elim game. For Christ sakes my man.
#8: 5th time? 2nd game of the series. Again you have on average a 30% chance of hitting the ball. This is like a team in basektball winning off a fast break with a layup and you saying the shot was amazing. And not the play that set it up. FYI The latter was the hardest part.
#9 6th time. This was just a grand slam. Lol
As I said before, you are a moron. You clearly don't understand baseball, and understand the managing of baseball even less.
All of you are a bunch of morons if you think Alamoras tag to 2nd wasn't the play that won them the game.
Dude no one is denying it wasn't great heads up baseball that was a catalyst to them scoring those runs that won them the game. We are just pointing out that a tag up from first is not that greatest play in World Series history. Take a few deep breaths and enjoy the banner raising tonight.
I think it is unlikely that the Sox get 2 of those. Signing Robert this session would make it nearly impossible to sigh Ohtani, unless he signs for 300k. Signing them both next session would be equally unlikely, as they would both have to fit under the cap (8.5 or so), keep in mind the international pool isn't a suggestion like it has been, it is a hard cap. I'd be pretty happy if they get either Robert or Ohtani.
Beer may very well be the number one overall pick, I personally don't think the Sox will be bad enough to get number 1 (prove me wrong boys, prove me wrong), top 5 certainly, but teams like the Padres, Reds, Twins (hot start not withstanding) have a better shot at that number 1 pick.
Like you though, the minor leagues are where most of the interest lays. I upgraded my MLB.tv subscription to include MiLB TV as well.
All of you are a bunch of morons if you think Alamoras tag to 2nd wasn't the play that won them the game.
And Almora's pinch run? Best play in world series history.
Heads up baseball play that required a basic understanding of score and situation. Some major leaguers would have screwed it up. Lots of Pony Leaguers (13 - !4 year olds) would have gotten it right. Nothing special.
Heads up baseball play that required a basic understanding of score and situation. Some major leaguers would have screwed it up. Lots of Pony Leaguers (13 - !4 year olds) would have gotten it right. Nothing special.
I know it'll be virtually impossible to sign both Robert & Ohtani. I know one exec said Robert is better than Ohtani, and the Sox international signing strategy puts them in a great position to sign Robert.
Most people don't think Beer will go #1, a true corner outfielder has never gone 1-1, and (luckily) the 2018 draft is loaded with talent.
I've heard from Sox people that they are going all in on Machado. They have the second lowest salary commit right now in MLB for 2019, and can front load a $35 -$40 mil deal for him without hard cap ramifications.
I'd love a Machado, Robert, Beer, Moncada, Collins middle of the order come 2020. That doesn't take into account their arms in the minors, this year's draft, or trading Quintana. I'm willing to stay patient if this is what's coming.
Everything you hear about Robert is a lot like Moncada 2.0. Would love to get him and the Sox seem well positioned. Ben Badler, Mr. Cuba, seems to think the Sox are the favorite. Little Havana on the South Side, sign me up.
I didn't realize that about a corner OF. That is a little surprising. It would be great to get that 80 power bat for sure. At least the speculation will keep things interesting.
I'm not even going to get my hopes up on Machado, but that would be something...
Has there been any alluding as to what might happen regarding Quintana? Apologies if I missed but curious as to what people think the strategy will be around that. You run the risk of holding him and pitching out of some additional value but at the same time you can hold out for the contenders price. Unrelated but Sale getting the old Quintana treatment in Boston with 0-1 and 1.23 era in two decisions.
This is perfect cub fan nonsense.
I know it'll be virtually impossible to sign both Robert & Ohtani. I know one exec said Robert is better than Ohtani, and the Sox international signing strategy puts them in a great position to sign Robert.
Most people don't think Beer will go #1, a true corner outfielder has never gone 1-1, and (luckily) the 2018 draft is loaded with talent.
I've heard from Sox people that they are going all in on Machado. They have the second lowest salary commit right now in MLB for 2019, and can front load a $35 -$40 mil deal for him without hard cap ramifications.
I'd love a Machado, Robert, Beer, Moncada, Collins middle of the order come 2020. That doesn't take into account their arms in the minors, this year's draft, or trading Quintana. I'm willing to stay patient if this is what's coming.
::)
This response is just as embarrassing, if not moreso.
Typical Sox fan. ;)
I do think Game 7 of the '16 World Series has a chance to be the best baseball game of all time. FWIW, MLB Network did a countdown of the 20 best games a few years ago. These are amazing games and bring back a lot of fun memories, but Cubs/Indians last November certainly makes the list.
http://mlb.mlb.com/network/games_airdates/
(http://mlb.mlb.com/network/games_airdates/)
I didn't bother to look thru all the links, but I really like baseball and think the best play in WS during my lifetime, (I'll be 40 on the fall) was Puckett's walkoff in 1991 or Gibson's home run in '88.
My favorite was the Yanks/Dbacks in 2001. Just a great series. Every game down to the wire. In my opinion that was as much fun as baseball can be (of course excepting 2005 for personal reasons, but that wasn't near the series.)
You sure about that? ;)
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ARI/ARI200110270.shtml (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ARI/ARI200110270.shtml)
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ARI/ARI200111030.shtml (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ARI/ARI200111030.shtml)
What do you think VBMG? Best play in the history of the WS?
Best play in the history of any sport at any time.
That's a stretch. I mean, I made a pretty spectacular game-winning catch in an intramural football game while at MU, circa 2000.
I wouldn't hold your breath on Machado.
Best play in the history of any sport at any time.
I'm not even going to get my hopes up on Machado, but that would be something...
Why is that? The Sox and Phillies are the two teams that can front load more money against the tax than anyone else. The Yankees are working to get there, they can't sign both Harper and Machado. Under the new CBA, the Sox will have an incredible number against the tax to work with. Dodgers would be in play if Kershaw opts out, but then another team will absorb his salary.
They clearly have as good a chance as anyone.
Do the White Sox want one player to take up such a large portion of their payroll? They've shown no indication in the past that they're willing to put together the type of exorbitant offer it will take.
And while their rebuild is off to a solid start, at least in terms of some of the prospects they've acquired, it may take a leap of faith from Machado to believe they will be fielding a winning team in the near future. So how much more would they then have to pay than some other teams that may have more attractive situations?
Anything is possible and I obviously might be wrong but I just don't see it as likely.
I've always liked the Yankees; Don Mattingly was my favorite player as a kid, and I wore a Yankees hat literally every day in high school. Also, the Yanks failed to make the playoffs between the time I was 4 years-old and my frosh year at Marquette, so it's not like I followed them because they were "always winning."
Game 7 of the '01 WS reminded me of the cruelty of baseball. I can't stand Luis Gonzalez, (there's no way he wasn't on juice), and he gets a bloop hit to win it all after two of the most remarkable comebacks at Yankee Stadium (Brosius and 'Mr. Novemeber.') Fantastic World Series; I just didn't like the way it ended.
Having befriended some people in the Sox front office, I can say that I'm led strongly to believe they are all in on Machado. Whether he signs elsewhere is of course up to him, but with $2.65 million committed to 2019 (without arb guys/rookies), they believe they can heavily front load a deal and stay out of tax hell.
Is front-loading really even an incentive for the player though? I know this is discussed in theory a lot but doesn't seem to be very common.
Shouldn't be real important since contracts are fully guaranteed.
It's a very big deal in the NFL, though.
People have to understand the new CBA to realize teams are going to work against the tax like it's a cap. If you're the Cubs as an example, you'd be way better front loading a Machado (or whoever) contract in 2019 if you had Bryant/Schwarber/Russell non arbitration years coming up in '20, '21. No one is going to pay the tax, penalty is stiff. So while it doesn't matter from a guarantee standpoint, it'll you give Machado 5 years, $200 mil, and give him $50 upfront, no player will turndown a front loaded deal.
By the way, anyone see Utley score from first on a dropped third strike? Gotta be one of the best plays in history.
The cubs are on pace to win 108 games. We're talking crap about his managing.
Cubs now on pace to finish 81-81 and miss the playoffs.
I dunno...that may still win the division, especially with St. Louis on pace to win 41 games.
Do the White Sox want one player to take up such a large portion of their payroll? They've shown no indication in the past that they're willing to put together the type of exorbitant offer it will take.
And while their rebuild is off to a solid start, at least in terms of some of the prospects they've acquired, it may take a leap of faith from Machado to believe they will be fielding a winning team in the near future. So how much more would they then have to pay than some other teams that may have more attractive situations?
Anything is possible and I obviously might be wrong but I just don't see it as likely.
Do the White Sox want one player to take up such a large portion of their payroll? They've shown no indication in the past that they're willing to put together the type of exorbitant offer it will take.
Reinsdorf claimed he was willing to spend big to get A-Rod but they came up a little short. I have my doubts about how close they actually got. I mean, Reinsdorf only reluctantly paid Jordan market value!
Reinsdorf claimed he was willing to spend big to get A-Rod but they came up a little short. I have my doubts about how close they actually got. I mean, Reinsdorf only reluctantly paid Jordan market value!
In all fairness, Reinsdorf paid Jordan $33 million in 1997-98 ... a year in which the salary cap was $26.9 million.
The next highest-paid player in the league that year was Patrick Ewing, at $20 million.
In 2016 dollars,Jordan's salary would have been worth a shade under $50 million. That's $19 million more than LeBron is getting paid this year as the highest-paid player in the league.
Heck, in actual dollars, Jordan's 1998 salary would make him the league's highest-paid player in 2017.
In 96-97, Jordan was paid $30 million (when the cap was $24 million), which is $46 million in today's dollars.
The White Sox made Albert Belle the highest-paid player in baseball when they signed him to a free-agent deal. So, yeah, there's a history of them being willing to put together exorbitant offers when they want to.
That said, I don't think the Sox would deviate so greatly from their rebuilding plan after just one year to sign Machado. I think they'll continue to go young and build from within for at least a couple more years and then, if/when they have a contender, they'll spend on free agents.
Looking way ahead, the potential 2020 free agent pool includes Nolan Arenado, Paul Goldschmidt, Jose Altuve, Madison Bumgarner, Michael Wacha, Gerrit Cole, Xander Boegarts, Rick Porcello, and Chris Sale (OK, maybe he's not a likely option).
I would say the chance of the majority of those guys actually making it to free agency is minimal.
In all fairness, Reinsdorf paid Jordan $33 million in 1997-98 ... a year in which the salary cap was $26.9 million.
The next highest-paid player in the league that year was Patrick Ewing, at $20 million.
In 2016 dollars,Jordan's salary would have been worth a shade under $50 million. That's $19 million more than LeBron is getting paid this year as the highest-paid player in the league.
Heck, in actual dollars, Jordan's 1998 salary would make him the league's highest-paid player in 2017.
In 96-97, Jordan was paid $30 million (when the cap was $24 million), which is $46 million in today's dollars.
Thames, juicer.
Thames, juicer.
Not sure if sarcastic, but this is stupid. His improvement is mostly because of vastly improved plate discipline
http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/78768/real-or-not-eric-thames-and-aaron-judge-will-keep-on-slugging
And Jake Arrieta just went from someone who could stay in the MLB to the best pitcher of baseball in 1 year as a 28 year old because of a new pitching coach...
And Jake Arrieta just went from someone who could stay in the MLB to the best pitcher of baseball in 1 year as a 28 year old because of a new pitching coach...
I think it's dumb to assume every improved professional baseball player got there because of PED's. Thames problem never was strength, or bat speed. It was because he couldn't lay off anything. Now he has incredible plate discipline.
MLB has the strictest drug testing procedures of any major sport. It has suspended guys like Braun and Marte, star players, for breaking the rules. I'm not going to assume that every good player is doing it illegally. In that case, we might as well assume every professional athlete in every sport is taking something.
Arrieta was a top 100 prospect for the Orioles so it wasn't like he completely came out of nowhere. He changed where he stood on the mound and threw significantly more strikes.
He pitched his last game for Baltimore on June 17 and he had a 7.23 ERA with 17 BB in 23.2 IP (6.5 BB/9) thru 5 starts.
His first Cubs start came on July 30. For the remainder of that season (9 GS), he had a 3.66 ERA with 24 BB in 51.2 IP (4.2 BB/9). In other words, his improvement was almost immediate upon joining the Cubs. Are you arguing that his pitching coach had nothing to do with this? Did he juice up for 6 weeks while in AAA?
Man, Chris Sale is good. Free agents always seem to stink the first year with the Red Sox, but he is tearing it up through four starts. He's only 1-1, but his ERA is 0.91 and the Sox are 3-1 in his first four starts despite scoring only 3, 1, 2, and 1 thru 9 innings in them.
Not to nitpick, but he wasn't a free agent, traded for. He's used to that kind of run support from his White Sox days.
Probably to the bolded, yes.
As far as being a highly ranked prospect, so what? There comes a point when someone just isn't as good as they were expected. That point typically comes before someone turns 28 years old. Sorry, but that's just not when athletes suddenly develop.
If this pitching coach can really take some former high potential guy who has never done anything in his life and, without the benefit of a single offseason to work with the guy, turn him into one of the best pitchers in baseball, the Brewers need to pay him 10x whatever he's getting from the Cubs and bring him aboard immediately. Give this guy Matt Garza for a couple days and we have a steal of a contract all of a sudden with him!
Reinsdorf complained publicly about "having" to pay Jordan $30M plus.
Jordan made everybody around him rich - Pippen, Luc, Kerr, everyone - especially Reinsdorf.Well, I mean, Reinsdorf was worth well over nine figures before he even bought to Bulls, but it is true that Jordan's presence on the Bulls made him even richer.
Jordan would have gotten his money no matter where he was playing; Reinsdorf wouldn't have won a single ring if the Trail Blazers had taken Jordan and left Sam Bowie to the Bulls.
But he has chosen to take some dubious stands, including blowing up a six-time championship team so he didn't have to pay the luxury tax.
Kornel David, we miss you!
Of course, I should have said big names rather than free agents. Anyway, he has been great.
No, no, no.
The NBA didn't even have a luxury tax until 2001, two years after Jordan's second retirement.
Also, Phil Jackson broke up the Bulls when he decided to leave the team, knowing that Jordan had repeatedly said publicly that he'd quit if Phil quit. Reinsdorf had offered both substantial raises to stay on for another year. They elected not to.
Arrieta didn't "develop" at age 28. He finally put it all together at age 28. The talent and stuff had always been there. With Bosio's help, he tweaked his mechanics, altered the grip on his slider and became a smarter pitcher who pitched to contact as opposed to just trying to strike everybody out.
Funny you mention Garza because he worked with Bosio in parts of 2012-13. His ERA with Bosio was 3.61 and he allowed 7.8 H/9. His ERA since then 4.54 with 9.5 H/9. Jason Hammel has a career 3.59 ERA with Bosio and a career 4.77 ERA with everyone else. Are those numbers merely coincidental or does Bosio perhaps know what he's doing?
Sound like numbers of some guys who would have changed some mechanics and improved a bit. But to go from a guy who went from being unable to find a spot in a major league rotation to the best pitcher in baseball? Hmm...
Speaking of hmm... anybody else see Lackey's comments on Thames's homer off of him? What a douche. "I thought I threw a pretty good pitch. You just don't see guys hit a ball that far to the opposite field on that pitch. Just one of those things that just, uhh, makes you scratch your head. *wink*" So when Schwarber's and Rizzo's and Bryant's bats heat up and they're hitting solid pitches out of the park is Lackey sitting in the dugout scratching his head?
Aren't you pretty much doing the same thing that Lackey is doing?
Wasn't there an issue with Pippen's contract coming due too? He had signed a long-term contract that made him one of the highest paid players in basketball, but by the end of that contract he was severely underpaid. (Bulls couldn't renegotiate due to CBA.) It didn't seem like it was any single factor, but a combination of factors that came together at once.
Yeah. The difference is I couldn't care less that MLB players take PEDs. Sorry, but show me a baseball team that doesn't have PED users at some point in their life on it and I'll show you a little league baseball team.
Not to mention, I'm not sitting in the same clubhouse as multiple guys who hit the exact same kind of home runs that he's throwing shade at other players for.
Yeah, Pippen was a free agent. In spite of all his bashing of Krause and Reinsdorf, they rewarded him with a sign-and-trade that paid him far better than he would have received on the open market.
Wasn't there an issue with Pippen's contract coming due too? He had signed a long-term contract that made him one of the highest paid players in basketball, but by the end of that contract he was severely underpaid. (Bulls couldn't renegotiate due to CBA.) It didn't seem like it was any single factor, but a combination of factors that came together at once.
No doubt. Brewers should send all of their minor leaguers over to Japan for a couple years, PED it up, and come back ready to kick ass.
Ummm, Korea is not Japan.
This thread has gotten great. The most recent themes seem to be: "The Jewish owner is cheap and all Asians are the same." Nice work scoop.
Yeah. The difference is I couldn't care less that MLB players take PEDs. Sorry, but show me a baseball team that doesn't have PED users at some point in their life on it and I'll show you a little league baseball team.
Not to mention, I'm not sitting in the same clubhouse as multiple guys who hit the exact same kind of home runs that he's throwing shade at other players for.
Really? For someone who doesn't care, you sure throw accusations around pretty regularly and try to diminish the accomplishments of those you are accusing.
I'm not trying to diminish any accomplishments at all. I've said it everywhere that I wish the Brewers, Bucks, Packers, etc. would get all of their players on PEDs. There's no coincidence that the best players in the history of sports are the ones who have used PEDs.
Name a Wisconsin athlete who you think is on PEDs.
Gretzky, Messi, Pele, Orr, Ruth, Cobb, Williams, Mays, Jordan, Jim Brown, Sanders ... big-time juicers.When Mays was on the Mets, he was spotted with a bottle of liquid amphetamine in his locker. Many players during his era were taking "Greenies."
Definitely Mason Crosby.
When Mays was on the Mets, he was spotted with a bottle of liquid amphetamine in his locker. Many players during his era were taking "Greenies."
Cite?
After Reinsdorf signed him, Jordan said Reinsdorf told him: "Somewhere down the road, I know I'm going to regret this."
Reinsdorf tried to save face by saying, "I said I might live to regret it."
https://books.google.com/books?id=leziAAAAQBAJ&pg=PT501&lpg=PT501&dq=reinsdorf+jordan+i%27m+going+to+live+to+regret+this&source=bl&ots=TqA1KB7god&sig=lXDEhjEJhJvMeOEdSCqAXqkXIds&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi50c6b57TTAhUMw4MKHZJjBKQQ6AEIOzAD#v=onepage&q=reinsdorf%20jordan%20i'm%20going%20to%20live%20to%20regret%20this&f=false
Well, I mean, Reinsdorf was worth well over nine figures before he even bought to Bulls, but it is true that Jordan's presence on the Bulls made him even richer.
Good point. Jordan made everybody richer.
True story ... Portland would have taken Barkley ahead of Jordan.
Fair enough. They were stupid x2. My point simply was that Jordan fell into the Bulls' laps. Which he did.
No, no, no.
The NBA didn't even have a luxury tax until 2001, two years after Jordan's second retirement.
Also, Phil Jackson broke up the Bulls when he decided to leave the team, knowing that Jordan had repeatedly said publicly that he'd quit if Phil quit. Reinsdorf had offered both substantial raises to stay on for another year. They elected not to.
Great catch re the luxury tax. I wasn't trying to "get away with one." I simply misremembered.
As for Phil "breaking up the Bulls," this is revisionist history. Reinsdorf DID want to keep Phil (and of course Michael), but Krause wanted Jackson gone and tried to talk Reinsdorf out of resigning him for 1997-98. Jackson agreed to come back, and Krause spent most of media day (before the first practice of the season) talking almost gleefully about this being Jackson's final season.
Jordan infamously said he wouldn't play for any coach other than Jackson, but Jordan said a lot of things - including that he was retiring after the first threepeat, that he was retiring after the second threepeat, that he would never play in any home arena other than Chicago Stadium, that he would never play for a pro team other than the Bulls, that he would never wear #23 again after his dad was murdered, etc, etc.
Anyway, Jordan privately had told people that he would have continued playing had Paxson been hired as Phil's replacement. Paxson, who had been one of Michael's favorite teammates, had been an assistant coach and broadcaster and back then was seen as future head-coaching material. Jordan even floated out there that he would have continued had Cartwright been hired as Jackson's replacement. One thing he definitely would not do was play for Krause's fishing buddy.
Reinsdorf surely would have kept Jordan, regardless of cost, and probably Jackson, too. But he had commented several times about not wanting the Bulls to end up like the aging Bird-McHale Celtics, and he definitely wasn't keen on paying Pippen and the rest.
In my view, the dynasty could have continued another year or two. Maybe even three. It's tough to win one championship; a team should never look down on the chance to win one.
The Hungarian Jordan!
Nobody will ever forget him! Wait ... who were we talking about?
And Jake Arrieta just went from someone who could stay in the MLB to the best pitcher of baseball in 1 year as a 28 year old because of a new pitching coach...
Arrieta was a top 100 prospect for the Orioles so it wasn't like he completely came out of nowhere. He changed where he stood on the mound and threw significantly more strikes.
He pitched his last game for Baltimore on June 17 and he had a 7.23 ERA with 17 BB in 23.2 IP (6.5 BB/9) thru 5 starts.
His first Cubs start came on July 30. For the remainder of that season (9 GS), he had a 3.66 ERA with 24 BB in 51.2 IP (4.2 BB/9). In other words, his improvement was almost immediate upon joining the Cubs. Are you arguing that his pitching coach had nothing to do with this? Did he juice up for 6 weeks while in AAA?
He's had this ridiculous point of view for a long time. He won't change his mind regardless of how much information is presented to the contrary.
Regardless to the point of view, he said he doesn't care about players using PEDs so I think we can agree it is no longer a relevant point of conversation! Glad the matter is put the rest!
He's had this ridiculous point of view for a long time. He won't change his mind regardless of how much information is presented to the contrary.
Why wouldn't it be a "relevant point of conversation?"
I just think it's funny that Chicago sports fans can't fathom that one of their own could possibly be using PEDs but they're more than happy to point to Clay Matthews or Thames or any other athlete out there and claim they use them.
To me? Yup, there's very little doubt in my mind that Thames and Clay have used some sort of PED in their lives. So has Jake Arrieta. So did Sammy Sosa. It's really not that big of a deal. But some people get all upset. "WHAT?! Hot takes! No way in heck did this jacked up monster of a human being who was pretty terrible at pitching a baseball until he hit the young, developing age of 28 years old, when he suddenly became the best pitcher on the face of the Earth take PEDs!"
Why wouldn't it be a "relevant point of conversation?"
I just think it's funny that Chicago sports fans can't fathom that one of their own could possibly be using PEDs but they're more than happy to point to Clay Matthews or Thames or any other athlete out there and claim they use them.
To me? Yup, there's very little doubt in my mind that Thames and Clay have used some sort of PED in their lives. So has Jake Arrieta. So did Sammy Sosa. It's really not that big of a deal. But some people get all upset. "WHAT?! Hot takes! No way in heck did this jacked up monster of a human being who was pretty terrible at pitching a baseball until he hit the young, developing age of 28 years old, when he suddenly became the best pitcher on the face of the Earth take PEDs!"
Crazy thought, but stick with me for a moment here ... maybe there's more than one factor involved in Arrieta's unusual ascent to the pitching elite.
Here's another thought ... barring a failed drug test or a tell-all autobiography, none of us will ever know whether Arrieta juiced or not, so you're wasting a lot of time and energy debating this for the past 2+ years.
So you care about fandom hypocrisy, not PEDs. Restating the Arrieta example over and over won't change anything about a holier than thou attitude unfortunately (not accusing anyone on this board having it). It happens with every fan base who is experiencing success.
Similarly, as a White Sox fan, I find myself trying to cherry pick reasons to hate on an organization that I deeply respect as a baseball fan but simultaneously despise which at the end of the day is not worth the time or the effort. (Digging up pictures of friends in sox gear in high school vs cubs gear when they won this year was entertaining enough though).
As far as PEDs go, (and whose company is rumored to have manufactured the goods Lance used), players only get caught when they are careless as doping technology will always outstrip testing technology.
So you care about fandom hypocrisy, not PEDs. Restating the Arrieta example over and over won't change anything about a holier than thou attitude unfortunately (not accusing anyone on this board having it). It happens with every fan base who is experiencing success.
Similarly, as a White Sox fan, I find myself trying to cherry pick reasons to hate on an organization that I deeply respect as a baseball fan but simultaneously despise which at the end of the day is not worth the time or the effort. (Digging up pictures of friends in sox gear in high school vs cubs gear when they won this year was entertaining enough though).
As far as PEDs go, (and whose company is rumored to have manufactured the goods Lance used), players only get caught when they are careless as doping technology will always outstrip testing technology.
So if I disagree about Arrieta based on all of the information available that's fandom hypocrisy? That's quite different than a fan blindly supporting a player simply because he wears that particular team's uniform.
It is what he perceives it as, just as he has been guilty of that regarding crapping on Jay Cutler time and time again. If you watch sports, it is inevitable. I believe that you have a well developed statistically sound opinion on the matter, just as he has relevant points. I guess I was trying to point out that there's no point in throwing stones at a mountain and expecting it to do anything. It is a debate in which no one will convince another otherwise.
TLDR - (https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)
Well, I mean, the fact that Jay Cutler continues to be unemployed kind of proves what I have been saying about Jay Cutler all along.
Reds pitching might just be a natural PED. Thames has more homers against the Reds than any player has in MLB right now.
http://deadspin.com/cubs-pitching-coach-comes-very-close-to-accusing-eric-t-1794508875
Depends who you ask. Oh the irony of Bosio talking about PED users and body transformations...
Wades when PEDs are mentioned in this thread ;)
(http://ima.ulximg.com/public/userfiles/2017/03/Lavar.gif)
Let's just universally agree that Lackey is an asswipe.
I have no room to talk about Lackey. I still defend AJ Pierzynski.
Wades when PEDs are mentioned in this thread ;)
(http://ima.ulximg.com/public/userfiles/2017/03/Lavar.gif)
Did AJ divorce his cancer-stricken wife too?
Lol this is awesome.
I'm not trying to diminish any accomplishments at all. I've said it everywhere that I wish the Brewers, Bucks, Packers, etc. would get all of their players on PEDs. There's no coincidence that the best players in the history of sports are the ones who have used PEDs.
Name a Wisconsin athlete who you think is on PEDs. Chances are I'll probably agree with you, and with the exception of Braun (because he's an idiot and tried to claim he didn't use them and the only reason his test failed was because it was tampered with rather than just accept the consequences) I probably cheer for them. Couldn't care less. MLB players have such a gigantic uphill battle if they haven't used PEDs to get to where they are because everyone else does.
I don't understand this logic.
So because you don't care if they use PEDs, you don't think it is wrong to accuse players of using PEDs without evidence? Yet because Lackey thinks it's wrong, he is a douch-bag for doing so?
It's either wrong or it isn't. If I accuse someone of having an affair on their spouse without evidence, that is wrong whether or not I believe having an affair is OK.
But if people want to believe that nobody has ever used PEDs unless they failed a drug test then be my guest. Beyond naïve if you ask me,
I never said that. I just think it is hypocritical for you to accuse whomever you wish, but then get on Lackey when he does the same thing. (Your five paragraph response notwithstanding.)
Please let me know what the word count limit is on my response.
Tommy Kahnle has been ridiculous, maybe I haven't paid close enough attention, but man is he bringing heat. He made Adam Jones and Machado look lost on back to back strikeouts. He should close once they trade Robertson & Jones. 21K's in 11 IP, -.17 FIP.
Will the cub game end?
Kudos to Anthony Rizzo for the $3.5 mil endowment he and his foundation are making to Lurie's. No one should ever become part of the pediatric cancer fraternity as a child or parent, but I can tell you from first hand experience that Rizzo is at the hospital as much as any athlete or celebrity I've ever seen. In my time going to Lurie's, it's funny (to me) that he & I never crossed paths. A month after Bradley was in treatment, his Foundation (specifically his agent) got a hold of me asking for our contact info (unprovoked mind you) and Anthony sent a nice letter, autographed picture and (in my mind) a substantial check...totally out of the blue. That $3.5 mil is huge for where it's going to, even something that seems trivial like parking fees, we were paying at least $500 a month to park our car at the hospital.
We're Sox fans in our family, but the only jersey my son owns and wears is Rizzo's #44. Great ball player, HOF human being.
Kudos to Anthony Rizzo for the $3.5 mil endowment he and his foundation are making to Lurie's. No one should ever become part of the pediatric cancer fraternity as a child or parent, but I can tell you from first hand experience that Rizzo is at the hospital as much as any athlete or celebrity I've ever seen. In my time going to Lurie's, it's funny (to me) that he & I never crossed paths. A month after Bradley was in treatment, his Foundation (specifically his agent) got a hold of me asking for our contact info (unprovoked mind you) and Anthony sent a nice letter, autographed picture and (in my mind) a substantial check...totally out of the blue. That $3.5 mil is huge for where it's going to, even something that seems trivial like parking fees, we were paying at least $500 a month to park our car at the hospital.
We're Sox fans in our family, but the only jersey my son owns and wears is Rizzo's #44. Great ball player, HOF human being.
Kudos to Anthony Rizzo for the $3.5 mil endowment he and his foundation are making to Lurie's. No one should ever become part of the pediatric cancer fraternity as a child or parent, but I can tell you from first hand experience that Rizzo is at the hospital as much as any athlete or celebrity I've ever seen. In my time going to Lurie's, it's funny (to me) that he & I never crossed paths. A month after Bradley was in treatment, his Foundation (specifically his agent) got a hold of me asking for our contact info (unprovoked mind you) and Anthony sent a nice letter, autographed picture and (in my mind) a substantial check...totally out of the blue. That $3.5 mil is huge for where it's going to, even something that seems trivial like parking fees, we were paying at least $500 a month to park our car at the hospital.
We're Sox fans in our family, but the only jersey my son owns and wears is Rizzo's #44. Great ball player, HOF human being.
To me? Yup, there's very little doubt in my mind that Thames and Clay have used some sort of PED in their lives. So has Jake Arrieta.
Another possibility? Among all qualified hitters this season, Thames has the lowest out-of-zone swing rate at 17.6% entering play Thursday. Thames had an out-of-zone swing rate of 35.6% in 2012 and 36.8% in 2011. If a major league hitter is only swinging at strikes, he will be successful. Any major league hitter.
As far as Arrieta is concerned - has he stopped taking the PEDs that you say he is taking or did they just stop working.
And even after making this argument Wades, I have no idea if these two or any other players are doing this. I assume some are, but unless they test positive, who knows.
One final question. What is the cutoff line as to saying who is or isn't taking them? Every player who hangs around for a while will have a career year. Do they take PEDs for that year and then quit? If Jake is on the sauce, why is it not working? Did he quit in a contract year who juicing makes the most sense for any player?
Sorry that was 4 final questions :-X
Hey Wades, I know you love bitching about this trade...
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2017/5/10/15597352/lewis-brinson-luis-ortiz-jonathan-lucroy-trade-texas-rangers
Robert to sign with the Sox. Seems well worth the risk of $ and to forfeit the next two international signing periods, as he'd be a top 10 pick in this year's draft.
Robert to sign with the Sox. Seems well worth the risk of $ and to forfeit the next two international signing periods, as he'd be a top 10 pick in this year's draft.
How's the pitching prospects looking for the Sox? I Don't follow the minor leagues as much as others. Always thought it was better to sign a FA pitcher when you're ready to compete instead of hoping one develops.
Could be wrong but it feels like there was a reason Giolito was readily available.
And then Giolito goes out and throws a no hitter.
I'm happy to be patient with him and all their prospects. Let him continue to get back to his old mechanics like the Sox are trying, and the stuff will be there.
Cubs should go out and get Salazar. If Bosio can take a 28 year old career struggling minor leaguer and turn him into the best pitcher in baseball, imagine what he'd do with a guy who is 27 and has already been an All Star starting pitcher that is simply struggling after his injury. Can you say best pitcher in the history of baseball here we come?
Cubs should go out and get Salazar. If Bosio can take a 28 year old career struggling minor leaguer and turn him into the best pitcher in baseball, imagine what he'd do with a guy who is 27 and has already been an All Star starting pitcher that is simply struggling after his injury. Can you say best pitcher in the history of baseball here we come?
(https://media.giphy.com/media/4R71Engp5NgHK/giphy.gif)
Cubs should go out and get Salazar. If Bosio can take a 28 year old career struggling minor leaguer and turn him into the best pitcher in baseball, imagine what he'd do with a guy who is 27 and has already been an All Star starting pitcher that is simply struggling after his injury. Can you say best pitcher in the history of baseball here we come?
Cubs got swept by the Padres...that's not good.
They are lucky the NL Central is pretty bad. If they were in another division they could already be out of it.
"The Babe" is looking more like 2011 Adam Dunn.
There's no possible way a staff coached by Bosio can be this bad.
They are lucky the NL Central is pretty bad. If they were in another division they could already be out of it.
"The Babe" is looking more like 2011 Adam Dunn.
I fully expect the Cubs to right the ship somewhat and win the division. But you guys have to admit that Stearns has put a nice little ball club on the field in Milwaukee with his $60MM payroll. I love the flexibility he has with position players. He has the makings of a nice starting rotation. And while the bullpen could continue to use some help, he has some pieces to build with.
Look, I'm a long way from predicting it but if this team is in the hunt at the All Star break, I sure hope he doesn't go into 'sell mode'. Stearns might not have all the elements in place just yet, but one must admit that the deals he's done to date mostly look tremendous. Perhaps the young core is already there (or nearly ready in Colorado Springs) to make a playoff run in a year or so. I think we'd all admit that would be way ahead of schedule.
Huh?
Yeah, Anderson, Davies, and Nelson all suck. ::)
I'll admit that Garza and Guerra probably aren't long term answers although they might get 3 good years from the latter. But that's what the top rated AAA class is all about.
88 games will win the Central. The Cubs need to go 63-47 from here out. Very doable for a team this talented.
Schwarber was outstanding for his first 30ish games when he initially got called up, but from August 14, 2015 to the present, his regular season batting average is .168 (52-309) with 108 K's. The Cubs have options in LF with Happ, Jay and Zobrist. It's time to send Schwarber to Iowa for a stretch or drop him way down in the order.
It may be doable - but it will not be easy for a team that may have the worst #2 through #5 starters in the league and one of the 2 or 3 worst outfields. Not to even mention that robust .235 BA. One regular hitting over .260.
Bryant and Rizzo can take this team a long way, but there are huge, huge holes here.
It may be doable - but it will not be easy for a team that may have the worst #2 through #5 starters in the league and one of the 2 or 3 worst outfields. Not to even mention that robust .235 BA. One regular hitting over .260.
Bryant and Rizzo can take this team a long way, but there are huge, huge holes here.
The Cubs' starters' ERA is 21st in MLB. Certainly not good, but far from being the worst, even without Lester. According to FanGraphs, the Cubs' outfield D ranks are about average to slightly below average. Again, not good but not the doom and gloom that you're wanting to see.
Also, the Cubs are 2nd in the NL in men left on base and the team OPB is middle of the pack, despite the poor batting average. The team is hitting .209 with RISP. That's not going to last all season.
Today is the start of a 10-game, warm weather homestand. If the Cubs can't get it going during this stretch, it could be time to start worrying.
This. I'm really not sure what the alarmism is about. The most talented team in baseball is 3 games back in one of the worst divisions on June 2. The team in first place is almost certain to fade and not make the playoffs, and their biggest competition has a run differential of exactly 0. Rizzo's OPS is down more than 100 pts from last year. Russell's is down 90. If Schwarber keeps playing this poorly, swapping him out from the top of the lineup for a lower-upside, more traditional leadoff man would tick the offensive stats up by itself. Even if the pitching overachieved some last year, its not this bad, and the Cubs can and almost certainly will add pitching, either an additional starter or strong bullpen help, at the deadline. The need to fill air time will still have sportstalk screaming "ZOMG the Cubs are worse than last year" in August, simply because Cubs talk sells - but they won 107 games last year. The NL Central will be boring by September.
I seem to remember a period in June or July last year where the Cubs were struggling. Way to early to worry. But it is true that if they fail to right the ship, this will have to be acknowledged as a pretty big collapse for a team built to win consistently.
Yeah, they had a 5-15 stretch right before the All Star break.
The Cubs' starters' ERA is 21st in MLB. Certainly not good, but far from being the worst, even without Lester. According to FanGraphs, the Cubs' outfield D ranks are about average to slightly below average. Again, not good but not the doom and gloom that you're wanting to see.
Also, the Cubs are 2nd in the NL in men left on base and the team OPB is middle of the pack, despite the poor batting average. The team is hitting .209 with RISP. That's not going to last all season.
Today is the start of a 10-game, warm weather homestand. If the Cubs can't get it going during this stretch, it could be time to start worrying.
I wonder if winning the World Series caused many Cubs to lose their edge and focus. Bryant is the only bat that seems to be performing as expected and the pitching has slipped significantly.
After breaking the 108 year drought, the mental sharpness may have been lost with a relaxed complacency replacing it. Would this theory make sense Cub fans?
Honestly, I think that deep postseason runs in back-to-back seasons can take a toll on baseball players, especially with the current extended postseason. No MLB team has won consecutive WS since the Yankees won 3 straight from 1998-2000. 5 of the last 6 WS winners have missed the playoffs the following season, including the last 4. Half of those teams finished .500 or worse. Baseball is a long, taxing season and adding an extra 2-4 weeks to the season makes it even more so.
I agree with some of what you say, and if betting, I would bet on the Cubs to win the division. I think St. Louis has almost as good a chance to win the division, though. But....
1. You made my argument about the OF. If the best thing about it is that they rank slightly below average defensively, they truly are the worst OF in all of baseball, When John Jay is the best hitting OF on the team.... well, that says it all.
2. The starters. Lester is very good, Hendricks is good (for some reason, Joe does not trust him though), Arrieta & Lackey are below average and the 5th spot may be the worst in all of baseball.
Arrieta got lit up by Colorado in mid-May but he's had a 3.38 ERA in his 4 starts since then. He'll be OK. Lackey has been bad. No arguing that. Although, you might want to look at the rotations for teams like the Phillies, Reds and Tigers before making proclamations about Cubs' starting pitchers being "the worst."
Those 3 teams have been racked by injuries though.
If I'm a Cubs fan, I'm not worried, but I'm probably at least paying attention. All you have to do is get into the tournament, and then hope you're hot at that time of year. They have a much easier path than most teams, and they are obviously talented to say the least.
Schwarber though is a different story, that's something that needs to be addressed. Unfair or not, he'll always be scrutinized more, because his trade value was highest when he was on the DL all of last year. The Cubs won a world title with him, and he was an important part of that WS run. Long term, some fans will link him with the career Torres has, right or wrong. I'd send him down to Iowa, let him DH for a week or two and figure things out.
Schwarber worked his tail off to get back and then hit .412 in a World Series that ended the team's 108-year drought. He's going to get a loooooong leash from fans. No matter what he does from here on out, I can't imagine there being many comparisons between him and Torres. The Cubs don't win the WS without Schwarber (or Chapman). They won it without Torres.
Was at the game today. Lackey rebounded nicely.
Schwarber and Russell look like they have no chance up there right now. Schwarber worked 3-0 and 3-1 counts in his first two ABs and whiffed both times. Something is definitely off and there's little doubt he's lost confidence. At least Russell brings value on defense.
Maybe they give Schwarbs this homestand but if he doesn't turn it around you have to send him down for a bit.
Maybe he just isn't that much more than a 3 outcome player. Right now, for his career, he is K-ing in about 29% of his PA, BB-ing in 13% and HR-ing in 5%.
Jack Cust was at 32%, 17%, 4%
Adam Dunn was 29%, 16%, 6%
Mark Reynolds is 31%, 11% 5%
The real Babe, for reference was at 13%, 19%,7%
Schwarber still has small sample size on his side clearly, and he isn't a .170 hitter, but maybe he is a 3 outcome guy that will be a .230-.240 hitter.
Zach Davies is pretty much horrendous. Nelson has taken a step forward through the first 10 starts this year, but for a guy who was untouchable when the Brewers were buyers a few years ago he's certainly not what the Brewers hoped for. Chase has been good this year. But Jimmie and Chase are 28 and 29 years old, respectively. I know we've started out well, but I'd be shocked if the Brewers won more than 78 games this year and were in the Playoffs within the next 3 years. I highly doubt they are in the rotation when the Brewers make the Playoffs next.
'Brewers starter Zach Davies was trending in the right direction coming in, having gone 7-1 with a 3.67 earned-run average over his previous 10 starts. His seven victories since April 20 were tied for the most in the major leagues with Arizona's Zack Greinke, Boston's Chris Sale and St. Louis' Adam Wainwright.'
'Milwaukee starting pitchers entered the day with a collective 9-4 record and 2.63 ERA over the previous 20 games. Opponents were batting just .230 with 101 strikeouts, and the rotation had also turned in 10 quality starts.'
You want to revise and extend your remarks wades? ::)
Now the bullpen, that's another story. :(
All that work over the last 10 games just to get his ERA down to 4.91. That's pretty awful. Thankfully he has had some incredible run support.
I would put the over/under on current starters still being starters the next time the Brewers make the Playoffs at 1.5 and I would take the under.
All that work over the last 10 games just to get his ERA down to 4.91. That's pretty awful. Thankfully he has had some incredible run support.
I would put the over/under on current starters still being starters the next time the Brewers make the Playoffs at 1.5 and I would take the under.
In 60 days you just might regret that prediction. Look, I'm not suggesting they 'will' but they are not all that far off from the conversation being they 'might'. The longer the Flubs play like the Flubs......
Personally, I think this is a big 2 weeks for the Crew. Some opponents they need to play .600 ball against.
By the all star break the cards and cubs will be on top. The Brewers will be out of the picture. Just like every year
By the all star break the cards and cubs will be on top. The Brewers will be out of the picture. Just like every year
The Brewers will be out of the picture. Just like every year
People said the same about the Cubs in 2009 and 2010 and 2011 and 2012 and 2013 and 2014 and 2015 and 2016.
It was right for awhile - hell, in their case, they were right for 100+ years - but it finally wasn't right last season.
Nothing stays the same in sports. Not even the Cubs losing. (Or the Cavs, for that matter.)
The Brewers will have their day eventually. And if getting to the WS is "having their day," they did that in 1982. And if getting to the postseason is "having their day," they've done that before, too.
The most far fetched thing may be the belief that the Cards will be in contention. They really seem like a bad team. They are five under .500 (same record as the tanking White Sox)and only have winning get records against teams under .500.
By the all star break the cards and cubs will be on top. The Brewers will be out of the picture. Just like every year
And there really aren't that many Brewer fans who have grand allusion of winning the division. Most of us are just happy to see progress. You know...like the Cubs fans saw just a couple years ago.
The Cubs are on top every year? Now that is classic.
I mean, I'm a Brewers fan who thinks they'll end up double digit games back in both the wildcard and the division by the end of the year, but to say that the Brewers out of contention with the Cubs/Cards the only contenders at the break happens every year just betrays an ignorance of the NL Central over the past 10 years.
Since 2000 only 3 years have not had the cubs or cardinals in 1st. But k.
Doesn't seem correct...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_division_winners
Cubs have won it 4 times since 1990. Clearly they are in it every year.
Since 2000 only 3 years have not had the cubs or cardinals in 1stt. But k.
Doesn't seem correct...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_division_winners
Cubs have won it 4 times since 1990. Clearly they are in it every year.
It may not "seem" correct but it absolutely is. There have been 3 instances since 200 when a team other than the Cubs or Cardinals won the NL Central. The Astros won in '01, The Brewers in '11 and the Reds in '12.
It may not "seem" correct but it absolutely is. There have been 3 instances since 200 when a team other than the Cubs or Cardinals won the NL Central. The Astros won in '01, The Brewers in '11 and the Reds in '12.
It may not "seem" correct but it absolutely is. There have been 3 instances since 200 when a team other than the Cubs or Cardinals won the NL Central. The Astros won in '01, The Brewers in '11 and the Reds in '12.
By the all star break the cards and cubs will be on top. The Brewers will be out of the picture. Just like every year
Since 2000 only 3 years have not had the cubs or cardinals in 1st. But k.
Manny Machado may be my favorite current player to watch.
http://deadspin.com/the-only-possible-explanation-for-this-manny-machado-th-1796205098 (http://deadspin.com/the-only-possible-explanation-for-this-manny-machado-th-1796205098)
It's the Cardinals and everyone else, quite simply. And I hate the Cardinals.
Rizzo gonna get drilles today. The Pads weren't happy with him.
Dunno why, didn't look like he gave Rizzo the plate, 50/50 call either way. I'm sure the Padres woulda done something similar and Maddon would have had a similar reaction.
It looks like it started as a slide and when he realized he was going to be out, he made the split-second decision to barrel into Hedges. It's a good, hard baseball play but it's also a play that MLB is trying to get rid of.
The Padres will hit Rizzo today and hopefully he takes his bruise, puts his head down and goes to first. Keep the pitch low and this incident goes away quickly. If they go up by his shoulders/head, Rizzo has every right to charge the mound and pummel the pitcher. Hopefully it's the former.
Nah. Rooting for the latter. A pitcher deserves to be pummled for that nonsense.
How about he throws at him but misses and then gets pummeled?
Because baseball players go apesh*t over any perceived slight and feel it is their duty to dole out justice.
Unwritten rules are so stupid.
Except this isn't an unwritten rule. It's an actual written rule.
Official Baseball Rule 7.13 – Collisions at Home Plate
A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate). If, in the judgment of the Umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) in such a manner, the Umpire shall declare the runner out (even if the player covering home plate loses possession of the ball). In such circumstances, the Umpire shall call the ball dead, and all other base runners shall return to the last base touched at the time of the collision.
As the replay photo shows, Rizzo clearly is not taking a direct pathway to the plate. He makes contact with Hedges at the top of the batters box, at least two feet above home plate. Had Hedges not been there, Rizzo would have slid and missed home plate. There's no way Rizzo makes contact with the catcher there without deviating from a direct pathway.
(https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/STyUi.8pRHhlJpkXiJu4iw--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9NzcwO2g9NDMz/http://l.yimg.com/yp/offnetwork/4a71f86051e5e30fe28fe011d0dc981f)
Was the runner declared out by the umpire? No? Then he apparently didn't break the rule.
Might he be suspended by MLB? If so then he did upon review and will be given a penalty.
So either he didn't break the rule, or he did and MLB will punish him accordingly. The Padres have no cause to plunk him.
I'm not suggesting the Padres plunk him, and if that's what you meant by "unwritten rule," then I misunderstood you.
And, yes, Rizzo was called out, because Hedges held on to the ball, so there was no need for an immediate call one way or the other on Rule 7.13.
Was the runner declared out by the umpire? No? Then he apparently didn't break the rule.
Might he be suspended by MLB? If so then he did upon review and will be given a penalty.
So either he didn't break the rule, or he did and MLB will punish him accordingly. The Padres have no cause to plunk him.
Ridiculous linkage Sultan. The ump called Rizzo out simply because the catcher hung on to the ball. He never felt the need to reflect on the 'outside the base path' rule.
I dislike the over regulation of baseball and dislike the runner/catcher collision situation more than most recent rules. Handle it the way it has been handled for 120 years. He's earned a helluva thigh bruise on the hardest fastball the Padres can muster. Of course you throw at him. Of course you throw at him below the waist. And then we move on.
Ridiculous linkage Sultan. The ump called Rizzo out simply because the catcher hung on to the ball. He never felt the need to reflect on the 'outside the base path' rule.
I dislike the over regulation of baseball and dislike the runner/catcher collision situation more than most recent rules. Handle it the way it has been handled for 120 years. He's earned a helluva thigh bruise on the hardest fastball the Padres can muster. Of course you throw at him. Of course you throw at him below the waist. And then we move on.
Why though? He was going hard to the plate I doubt Rizzo was trying to hurt him. Anyways, Rizzo get plunked more often than anyone else in the majors, hitting him will do absolutely nothing.
While on the subject of hitting players, can we please do away with the unwritten rule that you shouldnt bat flip or stare down your homerun? Celebrate as you wish.
My goodness you guys are soft.
My goodness you guys are soft. Guys have been plunked for the entirety of baseball history. I never remember anyone charging the mound with his bat. First off, he'd never get there. If the benches clear and there's a punch or two, so be it.
But here's what Rizzo will do. He'll stiffen to take the pain for a second. Then he'll trot to first base working very hard not to limp. Over. Baseball the way it was always played.
Now here's what nobody could condone. You never throw at someone high. Headhunting is never acceptable in the same way as taking your bat to the mound is never acceptable. There are lines. Too bad we seem to be forgetting that in today's culture at large. (Not to go down that rabbit hole.)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/vMPqEsML6cWRy/giphy.gif)
It has nothing to do with being "soft." Gimme a break.
It has to do with simple logic. The Padres should not be part of the enforcing of the rules. It's not their job. Just because it has "always been done that way," doesn't mean it should be done that way.
Whether Rizzo intended to hurt him is irrelevant. The rule eliminates the need to judge intent. It's simply a matter of whether Rizzo went outside a direct path to the plate in order to initiate contact. Judging by the replays and still photos, it's clear that he was outside the direct path when he collided with Hedges. Hence, he violated the rule.
And, fwiw, the rule's intent - beyond protecting defenseless catchers - is to eliminate the need to plunk Rizzo here. Let the league mete out whatever punishment is appropriate and the Padres have no need to seek their own brand of justice.
Official Baseball Rule 7.13 – Collisions at Home Plate
A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate). If, in the judgment of the Umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) in such a manner, the Umpire shall declare the runner out (even if the player covering home plate loses possession of the ball). In such circumstances, the Umpire shall call the ball dead, and all other base runners shall return to the last base touched at the time of the collision.
As the replay photo shows, Rizzo clearly is not taking a direct pathway to the plate. He makes contact with Hedges at the top of the batters box, at least two feet above home plate. Had Hedges not been there, Rizzo would have slid and missed home plate. There's no way Rizzo makes contact with the catcher there without deviating from a direct pathway.
(https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/STyUi.8pRHhlJpkXiJu4iw--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9NzcwO2g9NDMz/http://l.yimg.com/yp/offnetwork/4a71f86051e5e30fe28fe011d0dc981f)
The photo is obviously a still shot. Watch the actual replay video. Rizzo does NOT deviate from his path towards home plate. The rule doesn't say that he needs to run directly down the baseline. For whatever reason, Rizzo was running well inside the baseline.
Also, look at the attached screenshot and tell me where Rizzo's path to the plate is.
Personally, I'm not a fan of home plate collisions but I'm also not a fan of player's giving themselves up in an attempt to score a run.
I'm not suggesting the Padres plunk him, and if that's what you meant by "unwritten rule," then I misunderstood you.
And, yes, Rizzo was called out, because Hedges held on to the ball, so there was no need for an immediate call one way or the other on Rule 7.13.
The photo is obviously a still shot. Watch the actual replay video. Rizzo does NOT deviate from his path towards home plate. The rule doesn't say that he needs to run directly down the baseline. For whatever reason, Rizzo was running well inside the baseline.
Also, look at the attached screenshot and tell me where Rizzo's path to the plate is.
Personally, I'm not a fan of home plate collisions but I'm also not a fan of player's giving themselves up in an attempt to score a run.
Actually should have been called safe. Ball was never inside of the glove. Only touched the outside.
The photo is obviously a still shot. Watch the actual replay video. Rizzo does NOT deviate from his path towards home plate. The rule doesn't say that he needs to run directly down the baseline. For whatever reason, Rizzo was running well inside the baseline.
Also, look at the attached screenshot and tell me where Rizzo's path to the plate is.
Personally, I'm not a fan of home plate collisions but I'm also not a fan of player's giving themselves up in an attempt to score a run.
MLB rules the slide illegal:
http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-cubs/report-mlb-rules-anthony-rizzos-controversial-slide-illegal
By the way, anyone with any doubts about whether Rizzo deviated to make contact, check out the first GIF included in the link above.
Your screenshot makes the case against Rizzo. At that point, his right foot is right up against the baseline. At the point of contact (my screenshot), his right foot is about 18-24 inches inside the baseline. How did it get there? He clearly swerved further inside, where the catcher just so happened to be.
It got there because he was coming in at an angle directly at the catcher. That was his direct pathway towards home plate.
Actually should have been called safe. Ball was never inside of the glove. Only touched the outside.
Actually should have been called safe. Ball was never inside of the glove. Only touched the outside.
MLB rules the slide illegal:
http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-cubs/report-mlb-rules-anthony-rizzos-controversial-slide-illegal
By the way, anyone with any doubts about whether Rizzo deviated to make contact, check out the first GIF included in the link above.
The first GIF doesn't show anything. Have you seen a clip of him running from third to home at full speed?
The first GIF doesn't show anything. Have you seen a clip of him running from third to home at full speed?
Doesn't show anything? So, it's blank GIF?
I have not seen a clip of him running from third to home at full speed. Do you have one? Have you forwarded it to MLB?
I'm guessing not, but I'm sure it proves Rizzo innocent.
Here's a longer replay. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find the one which focuses on Rizzo the entire way
http://www.totalprosports.com/2017/06/20/anthony-rizzo-home-plate-collision-padres-reaction-video/
Regardless, the rule is stupid.
Yes, it's a blank gif.
What's up your ass?
I think the more relevant question is why are certain Cubs fanboys so vociferously defending a slide that everyone else - including the Cubs general manager - agree was against the rules, and is obvious by watching the replay?
Nobody here is calling Rizzo a dirty player or bad human being. They're saying he broke a rule. Trust me, you can admit that and still be a fan.
It's comical how much thisirritatesamuses you.
Fixed
Don't forget the one in last night's Seattle-Detroit game. Breaking up a perfect game with a bunt?!? Blasphemy! But it turned the game around.
More stupid unwritten rules bullsh*t.
http://deadspin.com/the-mets-are-pissed-at-yasiel-puig-for-admiring-his-hom-1796325948
So, just for the record, the Rizzo thing wasn't an unwritten rule. It was a written rule violation.
The "unwritten" part of the Rizzo incident was the notion that SD was going to plunk him in his first AB the next day as payback, which they didn't...and instead he hit a HR.
Rumor Mill: Schwarber headed to AAA.
I'm having trouble getting the embed link to pop up but take 30 seconds and watch Arcia seal the win last night.
http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/51231442/v1524815783/pitmil-arcia-makes-great-play-to-secure-the-win/?team_id=158
I don't care if you hate the Brewers, that's some damn fine glove work right there.
Hmm, that seems to make a strong case for hitting the guy...
Or just pitching better.
Rumor Mill: Schwarber headed to AAA.
I'm having trouble getting the embed link to pop up but take 30 seconds and watch Arcia seal the win last night.
http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/51231442/v1524815783/pitmil-arcia-makes-great-play-to-secure-the-win/?team_id=158
I don't care if you hate the Brewers, that's some damn fine glove work right there.
Arcia has quickly become one of my favorite players. Kid has golden glove potential
They gotta give it to him this year. Dude is absolutely special with the leather. And I think he's hitting about .265. Very solid with the stick for a SS.
Well below the Mendoza line, and not a good enough to defender to compensate.
Knebel sets record for consecutive appearances with a strikeout to start a season. Not bad
At some point do they actually 'buy' a reliever and try to dance this year? Look, I give up no prospects but if they're still in first in 3-4 weeks.......
Not a rumor.
And overdue.
At some point do they actually 'buy' a reliever and try to dance this year? Look, I give up no prospects but if they're still in first in 3-4 weeks.......
Brewers should be (and I trust Sterns is smart enough that he will be) in sell mode.
Haven't been watching the Crew a lot lately, but who's @ the top of list to try to sell off, and who are the current ones to build around?
Haven't been watching the Crew a lot lately, but who's @ the top of list to try to sell off, and who are the current ones to build around?
The MLB trade deadline isn't until July 31. If the Brewers are still in contention for the division, or even a WC place, they shouldn't sell.
No WCs are going to be in play for teams west of the Rockies this year. The NL West has them more or less locked down. The Cubs are 8.5 back as LAD, ARI, and CO are all at least 19 games over .500.
There's a lot of baseball to be played between now and July 31, and the Brewers have none of the things that lend themselves to staying power, i.e. a thin rotation that doesn't go deep often and a bullpen full of hacks (Knebel excluded).
I hope I'm wrong. I don't think I will be.
I agree with you on all counts. I have no illusions that the Brewers will make the playoffs.
I just am saying that if they are still in contention in a month, then they can't be sellers unless they get a real good offer. (For Braun for instance.)
I'm a huge Brewers fan. I'm overjoyed that they're in 1st place in late June. That being said, their position is all about Milwaukee overperforming, and the Cubs WAY underperforming. The phrase of the 2nd half is going to be "regression to the mean" kids.
In a twisted way, the best case scenario is for the Cubs to get a little hair of the dog and shake this post WS hangover and start playing like the absolutely loaded team they are, overtake the Brewers by the deadline so the Brewers can feel free to sell off some pieces.
As a short effort at 8:20 a.m. here's a start:
Sell:
Braun -> LAD. The NL West is insane, and LA is one of about two places Braun will waive no-trade to go to. If the Brewers can get ANYTHING up to and including a sandwich for him, they should take it.
Garza -> There's a sucker born every minute. Hey, he hasn't pitched THAT badly. If there's a buyer out there, sell him for anything at all.
Thames -> Someone needing pop at 1B. Hey, sell high right? (although he's a ton of fun to watch, so I actually want him to stick around).
Shaw -> He's raking at 3B. Same as Thames, he's WAY outperforming his contract. The brewers have prospects to spare on the IF and Shaw is worth more as a piece than on the field. (On a human note, his newborn daughter is under the care of the saints at Children's, one of whom apparently specializes in her condition, so again, I don't want him to leave).
Untouchables:
Arcia
Chase Anderson (team friendly deal, club control through 2020ish?)
Josh Hader (practically still a prospect, but on the big club)
Knebel
Brinson
I don't know about dealing Shaw. I don't think the Brewers have any decent third basemen in the system. Same with first base. Granted, they could be acquired in trades, but it is a little more risky. Especially since Shaw and Thames are under control for a few years.
Agreed with pretty much all of this. Obviously if someone offers you something you can't pass up anybody can be traded, but reasonably the only guys I wouldn't touch that are on the MLB roster are Arcia, Hader, and Brinson. I enjoy Shaw and Thames so I'd like to see them stay, but their value certainly isn't going to get any higher in the future. The Brewers have had giant success trading away bullpen pitching at the deadline recently, and Knebel could be next. Nobody will trade for Braun with his injuries, but I'd love to see it. And Chase I'm not sure you get much more value at any point in the future than you do right now. I'm still skeptical that he's a true top end starter, but he appears to be that right now...
I get the value argument for trading away assets but then you are assuming you are getting equal or greater value on the assets you get in return....and at some point all these new assets need to be returning that value all at the same time so you can be a contender at a minimum, and go win the whole f'in thing at maximum.
At what point is a bird in the hand worth more than two in the bush?
The problem with Milwaukee is that everyone knows their path. They did it a few years ago and it takes hitting on a handful of stud prospects and getting them to the show and All-Star caliber performances *all at the same time* and then adding one or two cheap/veteran/roll pieces via free agency, and lastly, when all that's going right, sell out with a trade to "go for it."
The more shots at stud prospects coming together the better. A good/outproducing his contract Shaw and Thames is not the same as having 6 shots at another Braun/Fielder/Gallardo combo.
As much as it sucks, I just don't see any other path to post-season contention for a team like the Brewers.
If expansion actually happens, do they expand the playoffs?
I'm trying to remember when exactly it became common for fans of a baseball team to sell off decent players and intentionally tank a season. Seriously. It's been a couple decades at least, it seems, but I don't remember when.
I remember when the White Sox did it in the '90s and most fans were outraged. So it's at least since then.
It's a weird thing. In basketball, a team that tanks is rewarded with a high draft pick who could start right away; plus, there is a salary cap. Same with football, although the cap is more strict - kind of like hockey. So it makes sense that a team in those sports can fix cap problems and position themselves for high draft picks who might have an impact the following season.
In baseball, there is no salary cap. No owner "needs" to dump salary. And draft picks, even the highest-rated ones, have a high rate of failure. Even the best ones usually take several years to reach the majors.
And yet Brewers fans seem to be rooting that their first-place team - a team ahead of the "Flubs" the fans purport to hate - go into the tank in June.
And yet Brewers fans seem to be rooting that their first-place team - a team ahead of the "Flubs" the fans purport to hate - go into the tank in June.
Do you want a single playoff run for one year where your going to get erased by the NL west in the divisional series? Or would you like long success over a few years? Cause we can have a repeat of the Brewers last playoff run.
It doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.
I can understand why (as GB Warrior said in the comment just above yours), many Brewers fans hope management doesn't trade prospects for a long-shot run at a title. But I don't really understand why many Brewers fans are hoping a team in the middle of a pennant race act as if it's in last place -- and dump good, productive major-leaguers in an effort to chase some hoped-for title next decade that might never materialize.
Because as Brewers fans we need to realize the Cubs are not nearly as bad as they are playing and the Brewers are not nearly as good as they are playing. Guys like Eric Sogard are not going to keep looking like they're Dustin Pedroia out there. When the chances of you making the Playoffs are below 10% (and I said that before I even looked on Fangraphs, which has the Brewers Playoff chances at 9.5%), and the chances of making a run in those Playoffs is even lower (in fact, under 1% at 0.7% to make it to the NLCS), you look to better a future that appears to be heading in the right direction.
I would never suggest a true tank in the sense of benching the best available players on your roster to try to lose as many games as possible because moving up in the MLB draft is a lot less meaningful than in basketball or football, and the only reason not to play your best players available would be if you're out of the Playoff race and you want to see what you have in some of the younger guys on your roster, but if you are reasonable and realize that you are at least 2 years out from truly contending, if you can get a good return for some of these guys who really can't possibly play any better than they are (Garra last year, Shaw, Thames, Sogard this year) you have to take a serious look at it. Could those guys be part of a Playoff run 2 or 3 years down the road? Sure, it's possible. But it's far more likely that it's centered around Brinson, Phillips, and others still in the minors than it is guys who are currently playing at their absolute peak. You don't just pull a Bulls/Jimmy Butler and shed those guys for the first deal you are offered, but if you shop them around and find some good young talent, you make the deal even if you are still in first.
Shaw isn't likely to be dealt because no other team will pay the premium it will take to pry away all of the years of control he has left, based on just a short amount of sustained success. When the Brewers traded for him in the offseason, he was a 27 year old who had hit 30 HR and about .250 in 200 games. So he had the power but an inconsistent bat. I think if someone wanted to pay for Shaw's 2017 pace and those years of control, Stearns should sell high and pull the trigger - but no GM will be willing to pay that price, and Shaw will play a serviceable 3B for the Brewers for at least another couple of years.
To echo Wades, I don't think there are Brewers fans that are jumping up and down to sell guys for nothing, but if you had teams willing to pay for the 2017 seasons AND the years of control left on guys like Shaw or Thames, I think the 2017 Brewers have to pull the trigger for the good of the 2019 Brewers.
I'm trying to remember when exactly it became common for fans of a baseball team to sell off decent players and intentionally tank a season. Seriously. It's been a couple decades at least, it seems, but I don't remember when.
I remember when the White Sox did it in the '90s and most fans were outraged. So it's at least since then.
It's a weird thing. In basketball, a team that tanks is rewarded with a high draft pick who could start right away; plus, there is a salary cap. Same with football, although the cap is more strict - kind of like hockey. So it makes sense that a team in those sports can fix cap problems and position themselves for high draft picks who might have an impact the following season.
In baseball, there is no salary cap. No owner "needs" to dump salary. And draft picks, even the highest-rated ones, have a high rate of failure. Even the best ones usually take several years to reach the majors.
And yet Brewers fans seem to be rooting that their first-place team - a team ahead of the "Flubs" the fans purport to hate - go into the tank in June.
You can look at the Brewers' season in two ways:
1) They're in contention in late June!
2) They're a .500 team who's in contention because the most talented team in the division is massively underachieving.
Speaking as a non-Brewers fan, I'd be expecting them to make a few tweaks at the deadline but nothing major. The Brewers have a long-term plan and just being involved in the pennant race will be good for their young players even if it doesn't result in a division title. The 2015 Cubs are a good example to follow. They were viewed as being "ahead of schedule" and were leading the division at the deadline, albeit by a significant margin. The only moves they made were acquiring Dan Haren and Tommy Hunter for scraps and Fernando Rodney and Austin Jackson for PTBNL. Compare that with the 2016 Cubs who were "ready" and thus went all in on a deal for Aroldis Chapman.
Not saying I don't agree but I'm always curious when I hear things like this. At what point are the Cubs no longer "underachieving" and the Brewers no longer "overachieving"? How deep into the season do you need to get before people stop thinking there will be "regression to the mean" and start thinking "this is just what these two teams are. We over or under estimated them at the beginning of the season."
To be clear, I agree that the Brewers have overachieved to this point and the Cubs have underachieved. I'm just curious how long needs to go by before that perception changes?
That is a great question, and a hard one to ask. We're probably inching closer to that line. Everyone's individual responses probably reveals whether they are optimists or pessimists. Who needs inkblot tests right?
The Cubs miss Dexter Fowler WAY more than anyone anticipated. He brought strong intangibles to the clubhouse and he was also a catalyst at the top of the order. His absence has been magnified by The Schwarber Lead-off Experiment being a total bust. The "You go, we go" saying had a lot of merit.
Fowler in wins (85 games): .310/.433/.494
Fowler in losses (40 games): .205/.299/.349
The Cubs were 80-38 in games he started and 23-20 in games he missed. Maybe they really are a .500 team this season.
2017 Cubs' lead-off hitters (75 games): .231/.322/.471
Zobrist has had a tough year with nagging injuries (he's currently on the DL), but I still think he's the team's best option to lead-off when he's healthy. Maddon obviously likes to play around with his line-up, but there was something to be said for having the same guy start off every game the last couple of seasons.
Maddon obviously likes to play around with his line-up, but there was something to be said for having the same guy start off every game the last couple of seasons.
The more and more Theo talks about continuing the roster build towards the deadline, the more and more I believe he did not think winning the WS was possible this season.
Doubt the Cubs would do it for a variety of reasons, but Lackey is done, and should be outright released. Never seen a team go this long into a game against a pitcher with zero swing and misses. That's really hard to have happen to you as a pitcher.
Him and Bosio should give Thames a ring and ask him for some advice...
Doubt the Cubs would do it for a variety of reasons, but Lackey is done, and should be outright released. Never seen a team go this long into a game against a pitcher with zero swing and misses. That's really hard to have happen to you as a pitcher.
I think Hendricks will still be fine. He's only what, 26? He won't pitch like he did the second half of last season but he can be a solid rotation guy.
I see no way right now that they can get past Washington or LA - if they make the playoffs, that is.
I'm a Nationals fan but their bullpen problems are going to be an issue for them all season. Even if they trade for a closer, they're going to have trouble closing out games. And Turner broke his wrist yesterday, so it remains to be seen how long he'll be on the DL.
Arcia has a knack for late inning defensive gems:
http://m.mlb.com/mil/video/v1559827283/miamil-arcia-vogt-connect-to-nab-realmuto-at-home/?affiliateId=clubMEGAMENU (http://m.mlb.com/mil/video/v1559827283/miamil-arcia-vogt-connect-to-nab-realmuto-at-home/?affiliateId=clubMEGAMENU)
His defense is every bit as magical as billed, and his offense is slowly coming around. He's been spectacular.
The more I think about it, a Quintana trade to the Brewers makes a ton of sense. Not even for the rest of this year, the Brewers would get 3 more years of inexpensive cost control for top of the rotation production.
He's definitely a buy-low candidate. He's much better than his recent production.
I don't think the Sox will be selling low at all on Q.
With the Yankees, Astro, and Braves heavily interested, I can't imagine the price would be low enough for the brewers. Can't jeapirdize the rebuild just for a chance at a first round playoff exit.
Just to pile on the Arcia love, that rundown play to day was fun as heck.
It took some defensive mental lapses to make that happen, but some really heady running to pull that off
Believe today is when the cubs make a run. Most of the guys are back from the dl. Day off after an 11 game road series. Hopefully they come out firing.
Believe today is when the cubs make a run. Most of the guys are back from the dl. Day off after an 11 game road series. Hopefully they come out firing.
Umm, nope.
https://www.mlb.com/gameday/rays-vs-cubs/2017/07/04/491361#game_state=final,game_tab=videos,game=491361
OK, Cubs fans. Verlander and Avila are available from the Tigers. What kind of package do you think it will take to get them?
I've watched enough Cubs games to agree somewhat. Another 30-something starter may not be the answer. Avila as a back up catcher/left handed bat off of the bench with playoff experience couldn't hurt. To my eyes, the Cubs are suffering a post world series hangover, failing to reproduce the lightning-in-a-bottle and are going through growing pains. So the question is whether Theo wants to spend big to go for a repeat, or is willing to sacrifice the end results this season for longer term stability.
If the Cubs DO pull the trigger on the deal, I expect they will end up Verlander's entire contract.
OK, Cubs fans. Verlander and Avila are available from the Tigers. What kind of package do you think it will take to get them?
I'd be all in on the Cubs acquiring Avila for the right price.
The Cubs have been rumored to be interested in starters who are controllable for a few years (they'll lose Lackey and likely Arrieta after this season). Chris Archer would be the ideal candidate as he has an incredibly reasonable contract thru 2021. Unfortunately for the Cubs, the Rays are in the race in the AL (with a better record than the Cubs) and the TB front office doesn't seem to be all that enthused about working out a deal with the team that stole their manager. They asked for a boatload from the Cubs when discussing Matt Moore at last year's deadline and ended up getting an average package from SF instead.
If they go for a veteran, it wouldn't surprise me to see names like J.A. Happ or Edinson Volquez pop up (both signed thru 2018). Considering their interest in Moore last season and the Giants' collapse, he's another guy who could be an option.
How would Moore or Volquez help this team? They need serious pitching help, and a couple of bottom feeders won't fit the bill either for the remainder of this year or next.
I don't think either guy is the answer to the Cubs' prayers but I'd take them over John Lackey and Eddie Butler. Both guys have pitched better than their numbers indicate. Lester, Arrieta, Hendricks (when healthy) and who else? Montgomery has been solid in the rotation but he was better out of the pen. Sonny Gray or Chris Archer would cost a ton. Guys like Happ, Volquez and Moore could be had for a much lower asking price, which is why I brought up their names.
I agree that the Cubs need serious pitching help but it's not really out there right now and the FA market isn't great next season. Darvish, Tillman, Estrada - any of those guys do anything for ya? Someone needs to fill the gap until guys like Cease and De La Cruz are MLB-ready.
I'm not arguing with what you say but the Cubs need serious pitching help if they want to be a factor in post season conversations, both this year and beyond. Stop gap won't do it.
Marcus Stroman is potentially on the block and definitely on the Cubs' radar. He's only 26 and not eligible for free agency until 2020. The Cubs wanted him from Toronto when the Blue Jays were looking to acquire Jeff Samardzija.
Would he be worth Eloy Jimenez?
A 26 year old, proven pitcher with team control until 2020 for a unproven outfielder when you have Happ and Heyward locked down for a while? Absolutely.
I guess when you put it that way...
Marcus Stroman is potentially on the block and definitely on the Cubs' radar. He's only 26 and not eligible for free agency until 2020. The Cubs wanted him from Toronto when the Blue Jays were looking to acquire Jeff Samardzija.
Would he be worth Eloy Jimenez?
Why not just ask the Dodgers for a Keyshawn for Jimenez deal?
Why not just ask the Dodgers for a Keyshawn for Jimenez deal?
This sun-out makeup game is awesome.
At least we'll get to see who the Cubs' position player pitcher is now that they've traded Montero.
I'm sure this game is fun for Brewers fans, but I'm OK with that ;)
(http://www.jostens.com/apps/shop/images/champ/2682513/ring-views-01.jpg)
Yup. Definitely caught fire. Yep. Just call me nostradumous. Or nostradumbass?
Lol. It wouldn't be a good time to catch fire anyway. 1 series and then a break.
we learned one thing. Jon Jay has a better ERA then Montgomery.
Pretty funny when the Brewers have 4 outfielders better than any on the Cubs.
You think Perez is better than Happ? You'd take Broxton and his negative dWAR over Heyward and his Gold Gloves?
If you want to make the argument that the Brewers' outfielders are having better seasons, that's one thing (though their WARs might surprise you). To say they're better players is highly questionable.
Interesting article on 538 about the Cubs having one of the worst championship hangovers ever, especially in the modern era. I'm throwing out the '97 Marlins everyone must go team.
It is really amazing to watch. Hard to argue that they're anything better than mediocre right now. But the chill of September is still a long way off.
I think the Crew is really hurt by Anderson's injury. But if Suter pitches another gem in NYC they just might be a team with destiny smiling on them. 2 out of 3 this weekend would be very nice.
I think by Aug 15th, we'll see if the Brewers have staying power, and if the Cubs have enough to get out of mediocrity.
Both teams coincide with brutal schedule stretches from July 25th-Aug 13th. Cubs go @MIL, AZ, WAS, @SF, @AZ. Brewers go @WAS, Cubs, STL, @TB, @MIN, MIN. Back third of August is really tough for the Brewers as well.
One of the main reasons they should probably be sellers at the deadline.
One of the main reasons they should probably be sellers at the deadline.
Who do they have to sell? No one's taking Braun. Garza has the only expiring contract and he could be moved in late August if they somehow fall out of the race by then. The package they'd get back for him isn't going to be all that overwhelming anyway. Stay the course and see how it plays out. Honestly, despite their talent, the Cubs have given no indication that they're about to get hot and go on a run.
Even with Braun's salary, the Brewers have the lowest payroll. They had a low payroll the year before too. It's not imperative they trade him.
The tail end of that contract may be worse, but with all the money they are saving now, they could raise the payroll above what it had been before the rebuild. Mark A. said they'd be using the money saved for when they are a contender.
Any trade will likely be for someone with control going forward. Prospects are still unreliable to contribute. Mat Gamel was untouchable at one point and LaPorta was the centerpiece of the Sabathia trade. If they get Gray or Quintana, and aren't in it in two years, they can trade them for prospects at the deadline.
I agree with TAMU. Winning the division is a huge accomplishment for a team that has rarely reached the postseason and cannot be taken lightly. But I wouldn't materially deviate from the long term plan to achieve it. That said, Stearns looks like the real deal as most of his moves have been outstanding.
Stay the course. If I could get a starting pitcher with multiple years of control for a top OF prospect (Brinson or Ray) and another prospect in the Brewers top 30s, I do it. Our farm system could absorb that. But the Sox are asking for the moon for the luxury of 3.5 cheap years of Quintana. I don't want Gray for a top prospect. Oakland's ballpark is much friendlier than Miller Park.
I'd much rather them sit it out entirely unless someone wants to sell the farm for Thames or get us out from under Braun. I'd love a lefty reliever, but our own trades from last year should tell us they will be pricey.
Late night edit:
we are buyers. This team has to have one of the deepest benches in baseball right now. Feels like someone will step up each night, whether it's a backup or not. I know the Yankees are struggling, but this was a hell of a game.
On another note, I think we found our lefty pitcher, whether it's out of the pen or starting. Holy crap
Let's hope starting after this season.
By the all star break the cards and cubs will be on top. The Brewers will be out of the picture. Just like every year
Looking ahead, they have the third-easiest schedule in the second half.
If the Brewers play ~.500 baseball the rest of the way, the Cubs (and Cards) will need to go at least 42-32 to catch them for the division lead at season's end.
If the Brewers continue at their current pace (.549 win%), the Cubs (and Cards) would need to go 46-28 to catch them at season's end.
It's the Brewers' division to lose at this point.
Did he set the record for most opposite field homers? I was shocked how many he took the other way with no effort.
Yeah, that was impressive. There were an awful lot of times I thought, "Oh, he missed that one," only to see the ball carry to the second deck in right.
Here's a really cool graphic (https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/hr_derby) that shows the distribution of HRs during the derby. You can click on each player and see where his went. Judge really stands out as the only one that hit to the opposite field.
Cubs not interested in Verlander but are supposedly willing to offer Schwarber to Detroit for Michael Fulmer. I can't imagine Detroit having any interest in that deal unless the Cubs throw in a whole lot more.
If I'm seeing this correctly, out of the other seven contestants, only six HR's went to the opposite field: Sanchez 5, Stanton 1.
Judge hit nearly as many to right as he did to left.
That Judge kid can hit the ball a little. :o
Cubs not interested in Verlander but are supposedly willing to offer Schwarber to Detroit for Michael Fulmer. I can't imagine Detroit having any interest in that deal unless the Cubs throw in a whole lot more.
Not a chance straight up. Fullmer is an ace in the making. Tigers would want a king's ransom in return. So Schwarber PLUS 1-2 top (read major-league-ready) prospects.
It actually wouldn't be surprising to see them offer up Almora or even Russell along with Schwarber. With Happ and Baez able to man CF and SS, it would be worth it for a 24-year-old top of the rotation guy. That said, my guess is that Detroit would want young pitching in return and the Cubs simply don't have that outside of Dylan Cease.
Wow, Sox got a haul, love it, absolutely love it.
If that's what it took to get it done, I'm glad the Brewers refrained. Top 2 prospects is steep. The difference is that the Cubs will be able to resign him at the end of it all.
If that's what it took to get it done, I'm glad the Brewers refrained. Top 2 prospects is steep. The difference is that the Cubs will be able to resign him at the end of it all.
If that's what it took to get it done, I'm glad the Brewers refrained. Top 2 prospects is steep. The difference is that the Cubs will be able to resign him at the end of it all.
When was the last time the Cubs and Sox were trade partners? I'm sure there's a more recent example, but the last one I can think of is Sosa.
When was the last time the Cubs and Sox were trade partners? I'm sure there's a more recent example, but the last one I can think of is Sosa.
Hell, I never knew Garland was even in the Cubs organization at one point.
Wow, Sox got a haul, love it, absolutely love it.
"Potential" haul.
Remember, not one of these 4 guys has ever even seen AA action yet. Lots of A ball stars never reach the Bigs.
When was the last time the Cubs and Sox were trade partners? I'm sure there's a more recent example, but the last one I can think of is Sosa.
It's always potential haul, but if you're rebuilding like they are, and you look at MLB's top prospect lists, it's a haul in that regard. All four prospects they got could all fail miserably for sure, but in the moment, they got a gigantic return today.
I wasn't disagreeing with you, Dish. I think this is the best the Sox could do.
I was just giving a precautionary note. There is a huge difference between a top 10 prospect who is in A ball compared to a top 10 guy in AAA.
White Sox now have 5 of the top 28 prospects in baseball, and 8 of the top 70, per MLB's rankings.
And that doesn't include Jake Burger, who's killing it in his limited time in A ball.
Obviously prospects are only prospects, but Hahn has done a remarkable job with the rebuild so far. Gone from one of the worst systems in baseball to the best in seven months.
Now if he can only convince Washington to give up Robles or Fedde for Robertson ....
Now if he can only convince Washington to give up Robles or Fedde for Robertson ....
Brewers swing their own "big" deal. Get lefty Tyler Webb from Yanks.
It actually might be significant. Means they could move top pitching prospect Josh Hader into the rotation soon. He was only lefty in bullpen.
Hell of a golfer too. Looks like we gave up Cooper who was having a nice year, but blocked for the foreseeable future with Thames and Aguilar.
Woo Hoo!!!!
Now the cubs have TWO aces with ERAs over 4.25 and WHIPs over 1.30
Brewers swing their own "big" deal. Get lefty Tyler Webb from Yanks.
It actually might be significant. Means they could move top pitching prospect Josh Hader into the rotation soon. He was only lefty in bullpen.
That would be a coup. I'd gladly take Soto or Kieboom...
Brewers swing their own "big" deal. Get lefty Tyler Webb from Yanks.
It actually might be significant. Means they could move top pitching prospect Josh Hader into the rotation soon. He was only lefty in bullpen.
I actually had just read a second-half-of-season prediction in SI saying Theo would do whatever it took to get Bumgarner. Whether there was any possibility of that or just SI throwing noodles against the ceiling, it's pretty unlikely now.
As a detached observer who doesn't care whether the Cubs or Sox win or lose, I love this trade for the Cubs. You have a chance for a championship, you go for it - period. And if it doesn't work out this season, you've still got a stud-ish pitcher for the future
Nobody knows if any of the prospects the Sox got in return will be any good (as has already been discussed), but I don't blame them for making the deal one iota.
I actually had just read a second-half-of-season prediction in SI saying Theo would do whatever it took to get Bumgarner. Whether there was any possibility of that or just SI throwing noodles against the ceiling, it's pretty unlikely now.
Schrubs is still up in the air. His true value was as a catcher. But after the acl injury he's really destined for a dh spot in the AL. The cubs still have a solid core of outfielders and trading their worst glove for a pitcher still seems quite likely.
Schrubs is still up in the air. His true value was as a catcher. But after the acl injury he's really destined for a dh spot in the AL. The cubs still have a solid core of outfielders and trading their worst glove for a pitcher still seems quite likely.
Schrubs is still up in the air. His true value was as a catcher. But after the acl injury he's really destined for a dh spot in the AL. The cubs still have a solid core of outfielders and trading their worst glove for a pitcher still seems quite likely.
I would not say Schwarber is untouchable but the chances of him being moved are pretty minimal, especially after that trade, IMO.
If he's "untouchable" it because his trade value has plummeted and the Cubs don't want to ell this low.
Schrubs is still up in the air. His true fantasy value was as a catcher.
FIFY.
Also, Jon Morosi is reporting that the Cubs are still interested in Gray. That might be a home for Schwarber.
FIFY.
Also, Jon Morosi is reporting that the Cubs are still interested in Gray. That might be a home for Schwarber.
Would the A's accept a deal built around Schwarber and Candelario? Does someone like Almora go too? Should be an interesting couple of weeks!
Turning Schwarber into Gray would be tremendous. You can run with Jay, Haap and Almora in the outfield. You can't run with Lackey in the rotation.
You guys are highly overrating Gray, IMO. I don't think I would trade Schwarber straight up for him, let alone adding Almora and Candelario.
You're vastly underrating a 27-year-old front-end guy who's controllable for 2 more seasons. If the A's offered Gray for Schwarber the Cubs would take the deal in a split-second.
Gray is never going to be Kershaw or Scherzer but for a team in desperate need of starters going forward, he has tremendous value.
I am not a believer in Gray, though Wrigley is a much better home for him than Miller Park. A bad ERA in the Coliseum is bad.
Gray has a 3.49 ERA at home this season and the A's defense is not good. Aside from 1 bad start at Cleveland, Gray's ERA has been 3.41 and his overall FIP is 3.58. I don't think he's the answer to the Cubs' prayers but he's a solid starter and far better than anything they have going forward.
You guys are highly overrating Gray, IMO. I don't think I would trade Schwarber straight up for him, let alone adding Almora and Candelario.
I don't consider Gray a front-end guy. He was horrendous last year and has been average this year. While his K rate is up this year he's never missed enough bats in his career.
"but he's a solid starter and far better than anything they have going forward."
How so?
The cubs still have a solid core of outfielders and trading their worst glove for a pitcher still seems quite likely.
Say what?????
If by solid, you mean one of the worst in MLB, then I guess you have a pointy.
Their corner outfielders are clearly the worst offensive pair of corners in the league - probably by far - and CF is nothing to write home about.
The Cubs never intended to use Schwarber as a catcher.? He caught 21 games in 2015. Was supposed to platoon in 2016 but tore his acl in game 2. He has even caught 5 innings this year as he tries to ease into it.
Would you rather have Lackey/Butler/Montgomery in the rotation or Sonny Gray?
2018 Starting Rotation
Lester
Hendricks
Quintana
???
???
Again, Butler? Montgomery? You want Brett Anderson back? Rob Zastryzny? I'd much rather have Sonny Gray even if it means giving up Schwarber.
To say this about Gray, and ignore Schwarber's season shows an amazing ability to compartmentalize reality.
It's not ignoring or compartmentalizing anything. If anyone is doing that it's you.
Gray was horrendous last year and has been ok this year. Is that the norm going forward or will he revert back to the pitcher he was his first few years? Maybe he's the type that can be very successful without K'ing a bunch of guys but the luster has certainly come off him. He's under team control through 2019.
Schwarber has obviously been awful this year but he only has 555 career plate appearances and is under team control through 2021. That type of power from the left side is hard to find and the front office believes he is a much better hitter than what he has shown thus far this season.
So no, it's not as obvious of a decision as you think it is.
Joe Borchard had some of the most immense power I have ever seen. Dude just hit bombs. Problem is, when you can't make contact, power doesn't matter at all. As for your support of Schwarber, you could say the exact same things about Gray. Slightly less team control, but is one season removed from a truly dominant campaign.
But as I hope the cubs lose, I hope they don't acquire Gray. I hope they keep SchwAAArber, keep scuffling at a .500-ish pace, I hope they keep looking up at the Brewers, and I hope they don't have anyone else to add to their rotation next season.
Cheers!
Oh yeah-- What did I compartmentalize?
That's right - younger players with less than 600 career plate appearances never struggle or come back to be successful after being demoted to the minors.
And how on earth will the Cubs ever find a quality pitcher to fill out the rotation if they don't acquire Gray?!?!
That's right - younger players with less than 600 c.areer plate appearances never struggle or come back to be successful after being demoted to the minors.
And how on earth will the Cubs ever find a quality pitcher to fill out the rotation if they don't acquire Gray?!?!
Have any data to back that up or are you just spouting off again? Remember to take Schwarber's numbers out since Unleash was talking about OF other than him.
Another well reasoned,rational response. ::)
How is it not?
You don't know nearly as much as you apparently think you do.
Seriously?
Tell me about the offensive exploits of Heyward, Almora, and Jay. At least Happ is somewhat decent.
There are more than a half dozen players with more HR than all 4 of those guys combined. Not one single guy is in the top 60 (just outfielders) in RC.
I would be interested in your list of worse offensive OFs than the Cubs.
Cubs LF: 0.5 oWAR (21st)
Cubs CF: 1.2 oWAR (18th)
Cubs RF: 0.8 oWAR (18th)
Cubs LF: .751 OPS (14th)
Cubs CF: .754 OPS (14th)
Cubs RF: .727 OPS (25th)
Cubs OF WAA: 0.1 (17th)
Overall OF WAR: 3.4 (17th)
Far from being world-beaters but, even including Schwarber and all his struggles, the Cubs' OF are not among the league's worst.
You didn't really answer the question.
What team has a worse offensive OF than the Cubs?`And they would be ranked even lower if you exclude the games that their 3B played in LF.
I know it seems like I disagree with you a lot, but I really don't. I would guess I agree with 90% of your posts. I notice we tend to disagree on baseball and football issues cuz I'm a Packers/Brewers fan and you're a Bears/Cubs fan.
I know enough to know what I apparently need to know about knowing you. I know.
You didn't really answer the question.
What team has a worse offensive OF than the Cubs?`And they would be ranked even lower if you exclude the games that their 3B played in LF.
I know it seems like I disagree with you a lot, but I really don't. I would guess I agree with 90% of your posts. I notice we tend to disagree on baseball and football issues cuz I'm a Packers/Brewers fan and you're a Bears/Cubs fan.
I honestly don't follow baseball nearly as closely as a lot of you guys, especially any teams beyond my Crew. Obviously living in Chicago gives me some perspective on the Cubs but only casually. So help me out here. Schwarber spent all of last year hurt but of course was a big story with his comeback for the WS. And this year he has truly sucked so bad that the Cubs finally HAD to send him back to the minors to 'iron things out'. Serious question. Has he ever actually done things at the Major League level or is/was he one of those supposed 'can't miss' prospects that will simply be given a super long leash (deservedly so)?
To flip it around, I remember being pretty disappointed with Arcia's first 60 games last year. I was thinking that if he was MKE's best prospect than maybe the future didn't look as bright as it was being painted. Even early this year his stick was sorely lacking. But since May we've seen what a great player he can be with more games under his belt. Sure he'll struggle. Sure he'll have defensive lapses. But the top end of his ability is absolutely apparent at this point. Not so with anything I've seen from Schwarber.
Edit: So I looked up Schwarber's 2015 stats. Pretty damn pedestrian although admittedly his call-up year as he played 69 games. And we know the guy can't play a lick of D so he's got that going for him too.
He was ok in a limited sample size in that 2015 season, but then got VERY hot in the playoffs. Hit .333, slugged almost .900, 5 HRs in 9 games. Gave a lot of people excitement and hope for the 2016 season. Then hurt his knee, but then he game back for the WS and was like out of a movie. Hit over .400, .500 OBP, all after missing an entire year.
So I think the optimism and excitement was justified. This wasn't just blind hope for a guy cause he was a high draft pick. He'd produced multiple times on the brightest stage. But yes, he's been atrocious this year, and yes he deserved to get sent down. But at the same time, he's played less than 150 MLB games and has shown plenty of natural ability. But I agree that he'll never been better than a below average fielder. He's a prototypical DH.
He's a prototypical DH.
Bryant has played 9 games in the OF and hit .269 with 1 HR so he's hardly skewing the numbers. Also, the argument was without Schwarber so the numbers I presented would actually be improved.
To answer your question...
At least,
SF
Atl
Bal
SD
KC
I'm so sad VBMG doesn't like me. Sad face. Very sad face.
By the way, VBMG, your childhood hero says hello.
(http://images.complex.com/complex/images/c_fill,g_faces,h_164,w_270/fl_lossy,pg_1,q_auto/gywotz5emj3j0kuuhitv/sammy-sosa)
Milwaukee has a tougher schedule the remainder of the season
Saw this on ESPN about the brewers.QuoteLooking ahead, they have the third-easiest schedule in the second half.
Not sure what that's based on and its for the whole mlb or just the nl....but barring disaster in the next few weeks the Brewers shouldn't be sellers at the trade deadline.
Are you sure about that? I posted this a few weeks back:
Not sure what that's based on and its for the whole mlb or just the nl....but barring disaster in the next few weeks the Brewers shouldn't be sellers at the trade deadline.
Like I said before, I don't know if its true or not, but I don't think the Crew have that tough of a schedule. Do the Cubs have an even easier schedule?
Winners
Chicago Cubs: How big a deal is the 19-point schedule difference between the Cubs and the Brewers? That's 1.3 wins over the number of games remaining, almost as valuable to the reigning champs as the new addition to their rotation over the same portion of the schedule. You could argue that the schedule is like getting two Jose Quintanas for the rest of the season. While it reflects poorly on the team's performance that they're even in the position that it matters, with no games against the Dodgers and just three against the Nationals, the schedule is certainly in the Cubs' favor.
Losers
Milwaukee Brewers: Nothing like the schedule to sit there in the future and try to ruin a perfectly good underdog tale. But there's no escaping it -- the Brewers have the third-toughest schedule in the National League, second among realistic playoff contenders (I'd say sorry to the Padres' fans, but I think they're all cognizant of where the team is). The Brew Crew has 10 games left against the Dodgers and Nationals, compared to the Cubs' three, and they will have to compete without their competition's four-game set against the White Sox.
fwiw, espn seems to think the Brewers have a much tougher sched than the Cubs in an Insider article from today -
Sammy, whatever color he may be today, was not my childhood hero, sorry.
I'm open to having an actual baseball conversation, if you're capable of that. You seem to have a pretty good case of White Sox fan syndrome though.
Yeah. It is so interesting can't find a cub fan now that ever liked Sammy. Yet, I seem to remember a great deal of worship for him. Must be my memory.
And yeah. Must be all me. Sorry about that. I have White Sox syndrome.
everyone worshipped sammy in the early 2000's. Those who say they didn't lied.
I knew many, many, many Cubbie fans who didn't like Sammy even while he was hitting 60 HRs for them. Believe it or not there were plenty of Cubbie fans who actually thought Grace was a better and more valuable player. I hate to make it a racial thing ... but pretty much every Cubbie fan who thought that way was white.
Yeah. It is so interesting can't find a cub fan now that ever liked Sammy. Yet, I seem to remember a great deal of worship for him. Must be my memory.
And yeah. Must be all me. Sorry about that. I have White Sox syndrome.
Are there non-white Cubbie fans?
(https://cdn.meme.am/cache/images/folder393/600x600/14801393/ronnie-woo-woo.jpg)
Of course I rooted for Sosa when he was on the team but he was never my favorite player or an idol of mine. Wasn't really my style.
As for baseball discussion, I logically laid out why the Cubs front office may not consider trading Schwarber for Gray to be an obvious decision.
You responded with "Kyle SchwAAArber" and that you hoped the Cubs continued to lose. Yep, great response on your part. That was all me.
Your logical argument started by telling everyone they were over valuing Gray. Couldn't have been you making the valuing error, not that it matters, but nice job matter of factly telling everyone else they were wrong.
Yeah, the Schwarber of each was good. Chuckled to myself. True too, that's the best part. As for rooting against the cubs, yeah. Duh. You should have known that already.
I, for one, hope that the Cubs do not trade Schwarber for Sonny Gray. Gray had a horrible 2016. Other than that, he has been pretty dang good, including this year, and especially in his last 4 starts when he has been lights out. I've seen some people (both on Scoop and elsewhere) talking like 2016 is the norm for Gray and this year's bounce back is him playing above his level. The guy was 3rd in the AL Cy Young award voting in 2015 and in 2014 and 2015 (first 2 years as a full time MLB starter) he threw 219 and 208 innings, respectively, and had a 3.08 and 2.73 ERA, respectively. I think Gray is a really solid starter, and I think Schwarber is a horrendous defensive player that can do one of two things offensively: swing and miss or swing and hit the ball really far on occasion.
In fact, despite saying I hope the Brewers "sell," with 2 more years of cheap control I'd actually love to have the Brewers go after him with some of their prospects that have young talent in front of them at the MLB level.
And I understand this point of view and I could certainly be underselling Gray.
But I find it amusing that people "know for sure" that Schwarber is only going to be a guy who Ks and lucks into HRs when he makes contact, considering he is only 24 years old and with 568 career plate appearances. And he had a 130+ OPS as a rookie, had success in the playoffs in 2015 and the World Series in 2016, and has a career OPS of 1.051 through 665 minor league plate appearances.
Maybe he is a 4A player or maybe he's just going through an adjustment period as a lot of young hitters do. It's also possible he becomes a 30 HR/900 OPS guy.
And as for his defense, if you look at OFs on Baseball Reference using total zone fielding runs above average and defensive runs saved above average, he is not as horrendous as most assume (although he's not good either).
In June, his OPS was .849 and so far in July it is .887. Small sample size for sure but those are nice numbers.
Schwarber's career has been the perfect storm of creating unrealistic expectations.
In his first 27 games, he hit .352/.436/.625 with 6 HR. He had arrived!
Over his final 42 games of 2015, he hit .181/.308/.403 but this tends to get lost in the shuffle because his average slowly dropped but still looked pretty good for most of the season. His overall 2015 numbers look very solid, especially for a rookie -- .246/.355/.487 with 16 HR in 69 games.
He then hit .538 in the 2015 Wild Card Game and NLDS, with a HR and 3 RBI in the WCG and the moonshot that landed on top of the RF scoreboard against StL. Suddenly he was a star despite struggling for a majority of his time in the majors. He went 2-14 in the NLCS but had 2 HR and just about everyone else struggled as well so it didn't really stand out.
Next up, he missed basically the whole 2016 season which kept his reputation as a star in tact and this reputation was furthered by him coming back from serious injury to hit .412 (including 3 hits in Game 7) in the franchise's first World Series win in 108 years. All of a sudden he's a baseball god!
He enters this season with expectations that he'll become an All-Star/40 homer guy in his first full season in the bigs. Not to mention, he's the new lead-off man for the World Series favorites. His hot start and clutch performances turned him into a player that he's not. He's more Adam Dunn than table-setter.
Has he been a disappointment this season? Absolutely. It's surprising that he's struggled to this extent, but if you think about it, it shouldn't be all that surprising that he hasn't been the player many believed he would be at this point.
But I find it amusing that people "know for sure" that Schwarber is only going to be a guy who Ks and lucks into HRs when he makes contact, considering he is only 24 years old and with 568 career plate appearances. And he had a 130+ OPS as a rookie, had success in the playoffs in 2015 and the World Series in 2016, and has a career OPS of 1.051 through 665 minor league plate appearances.
But I find it amusing that people "know for sure" that Schwarber is only going to be a guy who Ks and lucks into HRs when he makes contact, considering he is only 24 years old and with 568 career plate appearances. And he had a 130+ OPS as a rookie, had success in the playoffs in 2015 and the World Series in 2016, and has a career OPS of 1.051 through 665 minor league plate appearances.
And as for his defense, if you look at OFs on Baseball Reference using total zone fielding runs above average and defensive runs saved above average, he is not as horrendous as most assume (although he's not good either).
That's right - younger players with less than 600 career plate appearances never struggle or come back to be successful after being demoted to the minors.
And how on earth will the Cubs ever find a quality pitcher to fill out the rotation if they don't acquire Gray?!?!
I, for one, hope that the Cubs do not trade Schwarber for Sonny Gray. Gray had a horrible 2016. Other than that, he has been pretty dang good, including this year, and especially in his last 4 starts when he has been lights out. I've seen some people (both on Scoop and elsewhere) talking like 2016 is the norm for Gray and this year's bounce back is him playing above his level. The guy was 3rd in the AL Cy Young award voting in 2015 and in 2014 and 2015 (first 2 years as a full time MLB starter) he threw 219 and 208 innings, respectively, and had a 3.08 and 2.73 ERA, respectively. I think Gray is a really solid starter, and I think Schwarber is a horrendous defensive player that can do one of two things offensively: swing and miss or swing and hit the ball really far on occasion.
In fact, despite saying I hope the Brewers "sell," with 2 more years of cheap control I'd actually love to have the Brewers go after him with some of their prospects that have young talent in front of them at the MLB level.
So, I clearly offended you with my response to this statement. You know why I gave you a snarky response? Because I never said, or even implied any of those things. I pointed out that power is meaningless if you can't make enough contact. That is all. Never said Schwarber was done. Certainly didn't say that I "know for sure" he was done. That was you making assumptions about things I never said.
Also never said they couldn't find another pitcher of Gray's quality. Not sure where you got that at all.
When I brushed off your response, you told me I was too stupid to insult. Nice. Why should I respect you again?
I went with Sammy, you told me I couldn't have a baseball conversation, after blatantly insulting me with 2 consecutive posts (at least the ones from our conversation), oh yeah, then you insulted me again.
I don't have an inferiority complex at all. More than comfortable in my Sox fan skin. What I have a problem with is the cub fan superiority complex, which you have demonstrated to perfection.
I have no problem with the Cubs, they actually seem like a decent bunch of guys, especially Rizzo, but others as well. It is the cub fans, many like you, that make me really despise the team and hope they lose.
So, I clearly offended you with my response to this statement. You know why I gave you a snarky response? Because I never said, or even implied any of those things. I pointed out that power is meaningless if you can't make enough contact. That is all. Never said Schwarber was done. Certainly didn't say that I "know for sure" he was done. That was you making assumptions about things I never said.
Also never said they couldn't find another pitcher of Gray's quality. Not sure where you got that at all.
When I brushed off your response, you told me I was too stupid to insult. Nice. Why should I respect you again?
I went with Sammy, you told me I couldn't have a baseball conversation, after blatantly insulting me with 2 consecutive posts (at least the ones from our conversation), oh yeah, then you insulted me again.
I don't have an inferiority complex at all. More than comfortable in my Sox fan skin. What I have a problem with is the cub fan superiority complex, which you have demonstrated to perfection.
I have no problem with the Cubs, they actually seem like a decent bunch of guys, especially Rizzo, but others as well. It is the cub fans, many like you, that make me really despise the team and hope they lose.
Yeah. Cubs fans claiming other fan bases have an inferiority complex is pretty comical.
Nothing offended me - annoyed is a better description. I'd suggest you go back and look at the order of the posts as your memory isn't serving you well. You went the snarky route before I ever insulted you - I was still having a conversation. Specifically this:
But as I hope the cubs lose, I hope they don't acquire Gray. I hope they keep SchwAAArber, keep scuffling at a .500-ish pace, I hope they keep looking up at the Brewers, and I hope they don't have anyone else to add to their rotation next season.
You're perception of a "Cubs superiority complex" is also way off base.
Yankees '16 first round pick Blake Rutherford going to Sox, top 30-50 prospect.
Yankees '16 first round pick Blake Rutherford going to Sox, top 30-50 prospect.
Baseball America has him #36. MLB has him #30. Keith Law has him #16.
That's a great return for a pair of guys the Sox were eager to be rid of, unlike Quintana who they could have kept until winter and still received great value.
Between Rutherford, Jiminez and Robert, they now have some monster OF prospects. 2020 can't come soon enough on the South Side.
Baseball America has him #36. MLB has him #30. Keith Law has him #16.
That's a great return for a pair of guys the Sox were eager to be rid of, unlike Quintana who they could have kept until winter and still received great value.
Between Rutherford, Jiminez and Robert, they now have some monster OF prospects. 2020 can't come soon enough on the South Side.
Selling high on Kahnle is smart, he's having a spectacular year, but he's had trouble before, and won't be around by the time the Sox are good again.
That Bryant slide did not look promising. Looked like he broke two fingers.
Hahah, ok. Sox inferiority complex is real, but superiority complex is in my mind. Ok. Sorry, I am so inferior to you I must have been blinded by your halo like glow. And, I hope you know. I am so sorry SchwAAArber has gotten under your skin so much. I was just poking a little fun, thought you could handle it. Sorry I misread you. I remember you giving me a lot of crap last year when the Sox fell apart, not sure I instantly fell into petty insults, but who knows. Maybe I did.
Sprained pinky, day to day.
Does the benefit of calling Moncada up now and getting experience outweigh losing some service time considering the Sox probably won't be competitive for a few more years? He's doing well in AAA but not completely dominating.
I know he was up for a few weeks or so last year so they'd have to keep him down the rest of this year and maybe into May of next year to gain that extra year of control.
Have the Cubs awakened?
At this point, the Sox have him under control through 2023 and they've likely cleared the dreaded "Super Two" deadline. If my calculations are correct (always a risky proposition, I know), they'd have to keep him down for most of 2018 - assuming a September call up - to gain another year of service time on the back end AND avoid Super Two I don't see how that does the player or the team much good.
No, he's not completely dominating AAA now, but he's shown enough there to indicate he isn't going to progress much more playing against that level of competition. Better off letting come up now and go through the likely rough patches than keep him at AAA for most of another season.
Have the Cubs awakened?
Got it. Super Two shouldn't even be a consideration and I don't recall exactly how long he was up for last season but I would be surprised if they had to hold him down any longer than through May of next year to get the extra year of control. Obviously I could be completely wrong.
1 game back. That race got close quick.
I doubt a single Brewer fan is really all that surprised.
I think the hard part is not having the ball Charlie brown them on the way up the middle
Is it really that hard to find guys who can throw strikes?
Today showed the immediate need for relief pitching for the cubs.
The Cubs bullpen has actually been really good overall this season, excluding the 8th inning today.
Rondon and Grimm are pretty bad, but the rest of the guys have thrown well.
Harrelson has been an embarrassment for years. No idea why the Sox keep him around.
I get why people dislike Hawk, but I'll never understand why he's despised for being a unrepentant homer and Harry Caray is beloved for being an unrepentant homer.
I get why people dislike Hawk, but I'll never understand why he's despised for being a unrepentant homer and Harry Caray is beloved for being an unrepentant homer.
Really?
Hawk is the mean drunk uncle.
Harry was the fun-loving drunk uncle.
Steve Stone has done broadcasts with both of them...and he really can't stand being with Hawk
Lackey just sucks and has lost most of his control.
I particularly liked when he was calling for the Sox to settle it with Lackey in the parking lot. Pure class. Cause hitting someone to load the bases in a 2 run game is totally a spiteful move. Lackey just sucks and has lost most of his control.
Hawk and Brian McCann can go sit on a porch somewhere together and scream at kids for playing baseball in the street the wrong way.
Harry was the fun-loving drunk uncle.
C'mon. Lackey is as big a jerk as there is in baseball and hs been forever. He hit Abreu twice and 3 guys in one inning. That's not by accident. If it is, the Cubs should DFA him.
Hawk envy is an ugly trait. Why exactly is anyone surprised Hawk, among others, wanted some payback for 4 hit batters in 4 innings? Why is that a shocking development? You think Kasper would have been like "well that is no big deal" if Rodon had plunked Bryant twice, Rizzo and Happ? Somehow I think he would have been a little irritated. And I think a Sox hitter would have gotten hit back.
C'mon. Lackey is as big a jerk as there is in baseball and hs been forever. He hit Abreu twice and 3 guys in one inning. That's not by accident. If it is, the Cubs should DFA him.
Hawk envy is an ugly trait. Why exactly is anyone surprised Hawk, among others, wanted some payback for 4 hit batters in 4 innings? Why is that a shocking development? You think Kasper would have been like "well that is no big deal" if Rodon had plunked Bryant twice, Rizzo and Happ? Somehow I think he would have been a little irritated. And I think a Sox hitter would have gotten hit back.
By the way, another trade by Hahn, another surprisingly good return.
So his ego is so big he's going to load the bases intentionally in a close game with his team in a pennant race?
That's ridiculous.
Well aware Happ got hit. Mathematically, that is 25% retribution. :D
I'd bet he didn't want to hit all of them. Hitting Moncada seemed unintentional. Hitting Abreu twice smells fishy, and drilling Davidson after being down 2-0 with a base open, that smells a like tuna left out in the sun for 3 days.
Hawk envy? You serious, Clark?
Happ got hit. No one complained about that.
To say 3 more guys should be hit to make it even is f'n stupid.
Hawk is awful. When Stone is paired with the other dude they are actually listenable.
Again, what's the possible motivation for hitting these guys? You think a guy with an ERA around 5.00 who could potentially lose his rotation spot is intentionally putting runners on base?
Didn't both Maddon and Kasper complain about it?
Smiley face meant joke. You've got anger issues.
Where's this "anger" you're referring to?
Apologies for missing the smiley face.
No idea. You think Lackey accidentally hit 4 dudes in 4 innings? He averages 10 per 162 (217 IP). So 4 in 4 seems statistically improbable.
Cubs hit 4 guys, Hawk got pissed (so did Stone btw...) Sox hit 1 back. It ended. Not sure why this is even a discussion.
Honestly, do you think the Cubs would have handled it differently? Do you think any of their announcers would have said anything?
At that point Rodon was already done pitching. It was a close game and the Sox had already traded pretty much all of their major league bullpen pieces. If you can't be confident enough to think you will win that game...
Well, you called me "f'in stupid" after what was clearly a joke. Seems like an angry response.
No, I didn't call *you* f'n stupid.
Again, what's the possible motivation for hitting these guys? You think a guy with an ERA around 5.00 who could potentially lose his rotation spot is intentionally putting runners on base?
Ah, right just what you think I thought. Sorry about that. After 2 weeks of you just hurling insults at me, I guess it was an easy leap in logic for me that you just instantly resort to insulting people during a discussion.
And either way, it still seems angry. Maybe a little early, but have a cocktail or something to take the edge off.
Just like Budweiser wanted you to believe.
Harry was a fantastic entertainer, but like every other entertainer, he played a character.
Hawk envy is an ugly trait. Why exactly is anyone surprised Hawk, among others, wanted some payback for 4 hit batters in 4 innings? Why is that a shocking development? You think Kasper would have been like "well that is no big deal" if Rodon had plunked Bryant twice, Rizzo and Happ? Somehow I think he would have been a little irritated. And I think a Sox hitter would have gotten hit back.
You're right, but that's the difference between Harry & Hawk. Hawk isn't playing some character.
Hawk "envy?"
Why the f*ck would I be envious of him?
Um, because he is awesome. Duh.
C'mon. Lackey is as big a jerk as there is in baseball and hs been forever. He hit Abreu twice and 3 guys in one inning. That's not by accident. If it is, the Cubs should DFA him.
Yeah. I guess he really is representative of most Sox fans I know.
(https://cdn.milo.yiannopoulos.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/giphy-downsized.gif)
Admittedly I don't know many.
Well, at least you didn't bring up attendance or the Ligue family, so thanks for that.
Knebel can flat out hum it. How's the dude from da Diamondbacks who got clocked in da coconut, hey?
Which they will do once they complete another deal for a starter.
Going 1-2 against the Cubs isn't the result the Brewers wanted, obviously, but the Brewers played well throughout. It's not reasonable to count on their bats to do what they were doing before the all-star break, but it's not reasonable them to stay this cold, either.
Based on this, the Brewers should hang around, but are not ready for the big time. As most fans have said, the best course of action this year is to stay the course.
Wow, hot perspectives change around here quick.
Twitter heating up with news that Avila and Wilson from Detroit to Cubs for prospects
Not really. I think Brewers fans have been pretty reasonable in their expectations even with the Cubs playing bad and he Brewers playing better than expected this year. Not sure many, if any, Brewers fans wanted to trade future pieces away to go for it this year. I'm still in the camp that if you can get big hauls for guys like Thames (you can't) or anything for Braun (you can't) you do it. Really anybody should be available for the right price. This Brewers team is and always has been 2+ years from really being ready to compete.
Seems done. Caldelario and Paredes.
Not really. I think Brewers fans have been pretty reasonable in their expectations even with the Cubs playing bad and he Brewers playing better than expected this year. Not sure many, if any, Brewers fans wanted to trade future pieces away to go for it this year. I'm still in the camp that if you can get big hauls for guys like Thames (you can't) or anything for Braun (you can't) you do it. Really anybody should be available for the right price. This Brewers team is and always has been 2+ years from really being ready to compete.
Candelario had no place to play so I expected him to be moved but I'm disappointed Paredes is going. Wilson is a stud but seems like a steep price. Obviously this front office gets the benefit of the doubt.
But they are in WS now mode and getting past both the Dodgers and the Nats will be a very big uphill challenge this year.
The Dodgers have been unreal this season, especially at home. As much talent as the Nats have, they also have Dusty managing the pitching staff which tends to work in the opposing team's favor.
But they are in WS now mode and getting past both the Dodgers and the Nats will be a very big uphill challenge this year.
NL playoffs are going to be great.
Dodgers get Watson, Cingrani and now Darvish. Rich get much richer..
Interesting. Crew just got Jeffress back from Texas in return for Scott, a AA pitcher they signed as a FA about a year ago.
I agree. I hope the Cubs can find their way back but it feels like the Dodgers' year. Cubs/Nats will be too close to call. The over/under on Harper IBBs could be high.
Wow, pretty much a bust trade for the Rangers last year. I guess pending their PTBNL from the Rockies, doubt it approached what they gave up though.
I completely forgot that Cordell (traded to the Sox) was the PTBNL last year. What a mess.
Stearns seems to have mastered the art of selling high. Three complete robberies with the Gomez/Fiers, Lucroy/Jeffress, and Thornburg trades.
You have to remember the short-term motivations of those on the other sides of those trades. No different when the Brewers traded Lorenzo Cain and Alcides Escobar for a half-season of Greinke.
Wow, pretty much a bust trade for the Rangers last year. I guess pending their PTBNL from the Rockies, doubt it approached what they gave up though.
Actually it was 1 1/2 years of Greinke, then flipped for Segura, who was dealt for Chase Anderson and a prospect.
Sabbathia was a straight rental.
Anyone see Austin Jackson last night? Wow. What a catch.
Anyone see Austin Jackson last night? Wow. What a catch.
While they certainly haven't reached the promised land yet, most of Stearns trades have been outstanding.
Thrilled with him so far. I got a little nervous at the deadline with the rumors that ownership was interested in trading prospects to go for it, but glad they didn't force the front office's hand and are going to let Stearns cook.
Wilson Contreras is going to be a star.
I said it during the playoffs, especially when he hit the game tying single in SF. He just has a clutch sense of the moment. Love his development behind the plate and the ability to move him to the outfield like today to rest his knees and keep his bat in the lineup. Love watching him.
Also, in a "depends on your perspective" moment, Harper tossed a ball to the fans in right, they threw it back, and he launched it out of the park. Older fans would prolly call him a punk, I think its hilarious and playful. Just getting used to the fans out there for when he's patrolling in 2019.
Sox season is going perfect, they're now a game behind Philly for the worst record, and their next 8 games are Astros, Royals, Dodgers. Baseball draft certainly a crapshoot, but if you're going to be bad, might as well finish with the worst record.
Maddon, who likes to think "outside the box," had a perfect opportunity today.
The game clearly was going to be won or lost in the 8th inning. Why not bring in Davis then? If you want to start the 8th with Montgomery, cool, but then if you're gonna yank him after he gives up an infield single with one out in a 1-run game, why not go to Davis? If Davis was good enough to escape with the Cubs still ahead, or even tied, then you can go to somebody else in the 9th.
But no, just like pretty much every manager, Maddon will only bring in his relief stud to start the 9th inning.
He never got the chance to do that this time because the Cubs were down 1,000 runs after Edwards got blown up in the 8th.
In other Cubbie news ...
Schwarber continued to show that, as a LF, he's a DH. Wow ... that was a play that at least 8 out of 10 Little League kids I umpire make. And, incredibly, he wasn't even charged an error on the play. Lester was pissed when Schwarber butchered the play - and he had to be even more pissed when he realized he got charged with an effen earned run!
TBS posted a graphic showing that Schwarber is the worst LF in the majors. And I wonder how many other errors he hasn't been charged with.
If I'm the Cubs, this offseason I seriously consider moving Schwarber to an AL team if they can get decent value back for him. That's a pretty big "if," though, given that he can't get over the Mendoza Line.
It doesn't sound like it, but I actually like Schwarber as a hitter. He's well-suited for today's "bomb or bust" game because he homers, whiffs or walks such a huge percentage of the time. Unfortunately for the Cubbies, this season the whiffs far outpace anything else.
Maddon, who likes to think "outside the box," had a perfect opportunity today.
The game clearly was going to be won or lost in the 8th inning. Why not bring in Davis then? If you want to start the 8th with Montgomery, cool, but then if you're gonna yank him after he gives up an infield single with one out in a 1-run game, why not go to Davis? If Davis was good enough to escape with the Cubs still ahead, or even tied, then you can go to somebody else in the 9th.
But no, just like pretty much every manager, Maddon will only bring in his relief stud to start the 9th inning.
He never got the chance to do that this time because the Cubs were down 1,000 runs after Edwards got blown up in the 8th.
In other Cubbie news ...
Schwarber continued to show that, as a LF, he's a DH. Wow ... that was a play that at least 8 out of 10 Little League kids I umpire make. And, incredibly, he wasn't even charged an error on the play. Lester was pissed when Schwarber butchered the play - and he had to be even more pissed when he realized he got charged with an effen earned run!
TBS posted a graphic showing that Schwarber is the worst LF in the majors. And I wonder how many other errors he hasn't been charged with.
If I'm the Cubs, this offseason I seriously consider moving Schwarber to an AL team if they can get decent value back for him. That's a pretty big "if," though, given that he can't get over the Mendoza Line.
It doesn't sound like it, but I actually like Schwarber as a hitter. He's well-suited for today's "bomb or bust" game because he homers, whiffs or walks such a huge percentage of the time. Unfortunately for the Cubbies, this season the whiffs far outpace anything else.
Also, in a "depends on your perspective" moment, Harper tossed a ball to the fans in right, they threw it back, and he launched it out of the park. Older fans would prolly call him a punk, I think its hilarious and playful. Just getting used to the fans out there for when he's patrolling in 2019.
A few points.
Maddon said Davis was not available today because he threw 30 pitches yesterday. That being said, he still probably doesn't go to him there.
Schwarber was charged with an error on that play, and rightfully so.
I also don't think they'll get the value they'd require to move him.
How capable is Contreras in OF? With Schwarber still meandering along and a net negative defensively, maybe it's worth Contreras to LF and seeing if Avila can recapture some of his early season magic.
How capable is Contreras in OF? With Schwarber still meandering along and a net negative defensively, maybe it's worth Contreras to LF and seeing if Avila can recapture some of his early season magic.
Baylor out.
Contreras been on fire since the break, that's an unfortunate injury, didn't look promising.
Huge loss.
Well the good news is its not a tear. They expect him back within a month.
One, the Crew is just trying to win one right now. Two, does it matter? Seriously, while the playoffs are short series and anything can happen don't the Dodgers look the part of unbeatable?
One, the Crew is just trying to win one right now. Two, does it matter? Seriously, while the playoffs are short series and anything can happen don't the Dodgers look the part of unbeatable?
They also have an ace coming off an injury who while being historically good in the regular season has been significantly less so in the post season. A 2/3 in Darvish who has little post season experience and has been awful this year, and then Maeda.
They are unreal, their streak has been beyond impressive, but I don't think they're the 27 Yankees just yet.
Assuming you are a Cub fan, you are awful optimistic about that junk heap of a team. They are tied for 1st with the worst Cardinal team in some time - a team with no closer that doesn't have a single position guy who would start for the Cubs. They are 2 games ahead of a Brewer team that was picked to win 75 games.
And they have a manager who has been way out-managed by Counsel and Hurdle and even out-managed by a guy like Matheny.
Don't make any WS plans yet.
Assuming you are a Cub fan, you are awful optimistic about that junk heap of a team. They are tied for 1st with the worst Cardinal team in some time - a team with no closer that doesn't have a single position guy who would start for the Cubs. They are 2 games ahead of a Brewer team that was picked to win 75 games.
And they have a manager who has been way out-managed by Counsel and Hurdle and even out-managed by a guy like Matheny.
Don't make any WS plans yet.
Wow. Preliminary tests were incorrect. No torn ACL or PCL for Harper. Significant bone bruise. Hopeful to return this season. That was nasty. Very surprised there is no ligament damage.
They also have an ace coming off an injury who while being historically good in the regular season has been significantly less so in the post season. A 2/3 in Darvish who has little post season experience and has been awful this year, and then Maeda.
They are unreal, their streak has been beyond impressive, but I don't think they're the 27 Yankees just yet.
I mean, some of this is true, some is overly negative, but in reality, they have lost 6 games since the end of June. They could play .500 ball the rest of the way, and set the all time record for wins. So while they may not be a perfect team, they are as close as we have seen in a long time. At least in the regular season. Which is obviously not to say anything is guaranteed in the playoffs.
If they play at the pace they've played all season, they would go 32-13 from here on out. That would be 115 wins, which still wouldn't be an all-time record for wins (116 by the 1906 Cubs and 2001 Mariners). As good as they've been, if they want the all-time record for wins, they have to play better than they have throughout the season.
The Dodgers are 83-34 with 45 games remaining. If they go .500 (let's give them one game over since it's an odd number) they would win 106 games. That wouldn't be an all-time record for wins and wouldn't even be in the top-10.
If they play at the pace they've played all season, they would go 32-13 from here on out. That would be 115 wins, which still wouldn't be an all-time record for wins (116 by the 1906 Cubs and 2001 Mariners). As good as they've been, if they want the all-time record for wins, they have to play better than they have throughout the season.
And as you say, nothing is guaranteed in the playoffs. The 1906 Cubs and 2001 Mariners both failed to win the World Series.
I don't think they have to play "better" because many of their upcoming games will be against teams who have thrown in the towel. But I would be concerned that playing essentially meaningless games down the stretch might hurt their playoff preparation.
By the same token, they'll likely have thrown in the towel as well. No idea if they will get there, but I don't expect them to win the World Series. The closer they get to 116+, the less I expect they'll end up hoisting the trophy.
By the same token, they'll likely have thrown in the towel as well. No idea if they will get there, but I don't expect them to win the World Series. The closer they get to 116+, the less I expect they'll end up hoisting the trophy.
Assuming Roberts & Co. are smart enough to not go balls to the wall in an effort to get the record, why would one thing have anything to do with the other?
If he sets up the rotation properly, rests the bullpen and position players in the right spots, doesn't push anybody with even mild injuries, etc, but STILL wins 117 games, why would it impact the postseason one way or another?
In theory, it shouldn't. But having watched teams like Golden State, New England, Kentucky basketball, the Mariners, and countless NHL President's Trophy winners go chasing regular season history only to come up short in the postseason, I really think the burden of history is a lot heavier than it logically should be.
In theory, it shouldn't. But having watched teams like Golden State, New England, Kentucky basketball, the Mariners, and countless NHL President's Trophy winners go chasing regular season history only to come up short in the postseason, I really think the burden of history is a lot heavier than it logically should be.
I agree totally re Golden State. The Cavs coming back from down 3-1 against the "greatest" regular season team in NBA history was an upset for the ages.
The other examples don't work for me. In hockey upsets are extremely common in the playoffs. New England and Kentucky lost 1 game, not a series. Finally, Seattle's run differential wasn't even the best in the American League the year they won 116 - their record using other metrics was a bit of a fluke.
All that said, a healthy Washington team will be very tough and the Cubs are the defending champs. The AL champs won't be pushovers either.
And GS had a 75% healthy Steph Curry, had the NBA find a convenient way to extend the series beyond 5 games, and then had their starting C and only rim defender go out for the rest of the series.
Finally, Seattle's run differential wasn't even the best in the American League the year they won 116 - their record using other metrics was a bit of a fluke.
I think it's one of the highest of all-time, and certainly led MLB.
http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/standings?season=2001 (http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/standings?season=2001)
Stanton cleared waivers. The Marlins might be wise to sell high and try to move while he is healthy and having an outstanding season. Still 10 years and almost $300 million left on his deal, though.
That would be amazing, and I agree they'd be smart to see if a big-market team is willing to take on that contract AND part with some major young talent. But with the impending sale, does anyone within the organization actually have the necessary authority to pull the trigger on that kind of move?
Stanton cleared waivers. The Marlins might be wise to sell high and try to move while he is healthy and having an outstanding season. Still 10 years and almost $300 million left on his deal, though.
Such an interesting case. I think he would be difficult to trade for if you are the opposing GM. Is he a game changing bat? Check. Unmatched power? Check. Huge contract? Check. Significant injury concerns? Check. Opt out risk? Check.
His current contract runs another 10 years and 285 million if he doesn't opt out. Not exactly a bargain. Factor in that he has only played 150 games 1 time in 7 seasons (not counting this year), and that this is his first time hitting 40 HRs, there is a huge amount of risk. That money could devastate many teams if Stanton isn't everything he has been this year. The payoff? Well a bat that can instantly change any game. A huge gamble just to take the contract, much less to trade away good prospects. A very interesting case indeed...
Stanton cleared waivers. The Marlins might be wise to sell high and try to move while he is healthy and having an outstanding season. Still 10 years and almost $300 million left on his deal, though.
I think this is a fairly regular process used by teams. There is no risk to Miami - if someone claims him, they just revoke the waiver.
I recall this happening with both big money guys and marginal guys. I guess the main benefit is that if they did want to trade him after the trade deadline, they can now do it.
I think this is a fairly regular process used by teams. There is no risk to Miami - if someone claims him, they just revoke the waiver.
I recall this happening with both big money guys and marginal guys. I guess the main benefit is that if they did want to trade him after the trade deadline, they can now do it.
I think this is a fairly regular process used by teams. There is no risk to Miami - if someone claims him, they just revoke the waiver.
I recall this happening with both big money guys and marginal guys. I guess the main benefit is that if they did want to trade him after the trade deadline, they can now do it.
I'd be stunned if a team took on the entire contract and parted with good prospects but I guess you never know.
Didn't mean to imply that. Obviously no team would do that. No team was willing to risk just having the contract.
Didn't mean to imply that. Obviously no team would do that. No team was willing to risk just having the contract.
Because of the opt out. Without it, I think odds are he'd turn out to be fair value, maybe even a bargain. In 2 years (when the White Sox are ready to contend) he'd look pretty good in right field for us.
I don't see how the opt out plays a role in this case. If the Sox had claimed him, the Marlins may have just let him go (the aforementioned Alex Rios case). They wouldn't have necessarily had to trade anything to get him (not saying the Marlins would have let him go for nothing, but the possibility exists). They didn't claim him, to me that says they didn't want to shoulder the risk of being on the hook for the entirety of his remaining contract, regardless of the players required in return.
And if he opts out he will be walking out on 8 years and 233 million (29.125 / year). I would have to think the odds of him opting out are pretty low. Especially because he would be 31 following his opt out. There could be a lot of bad money on that deal.
First, I think there is almost zero chance the Marlins would let him go for nothing. Second, the Sox are probably 2+ years away from competing (either 2019 or 2020) so the timing is bad - no way the Sox will spend 60 million when they're not competing only to have him opt out when they are.
It's just my opinion, but I believe that when 2020 rolls around 29M a year for Stanton will be a relative bargain. Harper may be making 40M a year by then.
That may be true, but the fact is, there are zero teams that were willing to take that chance. And while his contract may look reasonable in a couple years, Stanton is no where near the caliber of player of Harper. Stanton is a power bat. That is all. Harper is in a different category. Even with his injury this season, he has a chance to win his 2nd MVP at age 24. Stanton's contract should look like a bargain by comparison.
Stanton will make about 110 million in his age 35-38 seasons. That is a lot of bad money in all liklihood.
It could look like a bargain after Harper, Machado and Arenado sign. For a couple years (20-22). Then when Stanton gets old and his skills diminish, and he gets older, becomes even more of an injury risk, it is bad money. It is such a long contract it could very well go in stages.
**though upon looking at his contract, he will be making at least 29 mil from 2021-2026. Even compared to Harper that likely won't be seen as a bargain.
Stanton's current production should age fairly well, too, in comparison to those guys. At the rate he's going, Harper will have trouble walking in ten years, and Machado's slump seems to be at least partially him trying to figure out how he wants his game to look. Arenado is wonderful, and while his bat may have a bit of the Coors effect, is probably the player I'd want most on a long-term deal of those four. But Stanton's first and second best skills is mashin taters, and that doesn't typically go away until a guy gets closer to 35.
David Ortiz hit 38 HR at age 40.
Dave Winfield hit 28 HR at age 39 and 26 at age 40.
Frank Thomas hit 39 HR at age 38.
Jim Thome hit 25 HR at age 39 in just 108 games.
Big guys who hit dingers can typically do it for a long time.
David Ortiz hit 38 HR at age 40.
Dave Winfield hit 28 HR at age 39 and 26 at age 40.
Frank Thomas hit 39 HR at age 38.
Jim Thome hit 25 HR at age 39 in just 108 games.
Big guys who hit dingers can typically do it for a long time.
Adam Dunn hit 354 HRs with a .250/.381/.521 through age 30. Beyond that he hit 108 with .202/.321/.407
Mark Teixeira hit 275 HRs with .286/.377/.536 through age 30.
After that he hit 134 HRs .234/.327/.455
Harmon Killebrew hit 336 HRs with .263/.371/.535 through age 30
After that he hit 237 with .247/.381/.478
Dave Kingman hit 252 HRs with .241/.305/.504 through 30.
After that he hit 190 HRs with .231/.298/.448
Prince Fielder hit 288 HRs with .285/.388/.522 through 30
After that he hit 31 HRs with .273/.348/.419
Juan Gonzalez hit 362 HRs with .294/.343/.566 through age 30
After that he hit 72 HRs with .302/.345/.540
Duke Snider hit 316 HRs with .303/.383/.560 before 30 and 91 with .275/.370/.482
Yeah, Thomas, Thome, Winfield, Papi and others mashed beyond age 35. Most guys don't. Most, even some guys that were elite power hitters, don't play up to, or much past 35, and their skills rapidly decline after 30. Maybe power does age more gracefully than other skills. But it is still a rare player that stays relevant, impact-ful and feared into his late 30's.
Your post-30 numbers aren't all that meaningful without more detail.
Dunn's 108 HR came in only 4 seasons.
Teixeira hit 31 HR at age 35.
Killebrew averaged 34 HR/year from age 31-36. His dropoff came at age 37.
Kingman hit 35 HR in his final season at age 37.
Fielder only played 2 seasons after age 30 because of injuries.
Juan Gonzalez had back issues and only played 1 full season after age 30...and he hit 35 HR that year. He also hit 24 HR in just 82 games at age 33.
Snider's power numbers went down when the Dodgers moved to LA and right center field was nearly 450 feet from home plate, compared to ~300 down the RF line at Ebbets Field.
Adam Dunn hit 354 HRs with a .250/.381/.521 through age 30. Beyond that he hit 108 with .202/.321/.407
Mark Teixeira hit 275 HRs with .286/.377/.536 through age 30.
After that he hit 134 HRs .234/.327/.455
Harmon Killebrew hit 336 HRs with .263/.371/.535 through age 30
After that he hit 237 with .247/.381/.478
Dave Kingman hit 252 HRs with .241/.305/.504 through 30.
After that he hit 190 HRs with .231/.298/.448
Prince Fielder hit 288 HRs with .285/.388/.522 through 30
After that he hit 31 HRs with .273/.348/.419
Juan Gonzalez hit 362 HRs with .294/.343/.566 through age 30
After that he hit 72 HRs with .302/.345/.540
Duke Snider hit 316 HRs with .303/.383/.560 before 30 and 91 with .275/.370/.482
Yeah, Thomas, Thome, Winfield, Papi and others mashed beyond age 35. Most guys don't. Most, even some guys that were elite power hitters, don't play up to, or much past 35, and their skills rapidly decline after 30. Maybe power does age more gracefully than other skills. But it is still a rare player that stays relevant, impact-ful and feared into his late 30's.
Chuckler, while I usually agree with you on the baseball thread (you are one of the more knowledgeable guys here), I think you are just trying to be argumentative here. You list a bunch of guys, most of whom had lots of injuries, as examples. Then, you minimize the guys that were able to play into their late 30s and beyond.
I could cite Ken Griffey as an example of a multi-faceted player to prove that those type of players decline after age 30 - his WAR over his last 10 years was 3.8 - not 3.8 per year, but 3.8 total.
Will Stanton - even injury free - be worth the money in the last couple years of his contract? History says no, but that doesn't matter to teams because if he lives up to it for the next 6-7 years, any team will be overjoyed at the results.
Your last sentence is spot on - but it applies to players with any type of special skills.
First of all, thank you, I truly appreciate that.
I am not trying to be argumentative, though, maybe I am coming off that way. I certainly didn't mean to minimize the guys that continued to dominate, I just meant to show that for every one of those guys, there are many more, that for whatever reason, fail to be the player they were.
I guess I am just trying to make my point, that because of the immense amount of risk involved in his contract, I would not take on Stanton's contract even considering his immense talent. He could very well be Papi, and rake until he is 40, but he could be Dunn and fall apart at 30. More than likely he falls somewhere in between. It is just that to me, Stanton's contract could be crippling to all but the wealthiest (Yanks, Dodgers, Boston?) teams. There is a lot of money there at ages where players usually fail to be impactful.
My problem isn't with Stanton the player, it is with the contract entirely. Long term contracts don't usually work out. His contract is very long term, with an immense amount of money on it.
But, I guess everyone is quite done with my opinion here, and I am clearly an outlier. I guess watching the White Sox bullpen will make one cranky. Sorry.
First of all, thank you, I truly appreciate that.
I am not trying to be argumentative, though, maybe I am coming off that way. I certainly didn't mean to minimize the guys that continued to dominate, I just meant to show that for every one of those guys, there are many more, that for whatever reason, fail to be the player they were.
I guess I am just trying to make my point, that because of the immense amount of risk involved in his contract, I would not take on Stanton's contract even considering his immense talent. He could very well be Papi, and rake until he is 40, but he could be Dunn and fall apart at 30. More than likely he falls somewhere in between. It is just that to me, Stanton's contract could be crippling to all but the wealthiest (Yanks, Dodgers, Boston?) teams. There is a lot of money there at ages where players usually fail to be impactful.
My problem isn't with Stanton the player, it is with the contract entirely. Long term contracts don't usually work out. His contract is very long term, with an immense amount of money on it.
But, I guess everyone is quite done with my opinion here, and I am clearly an outlier. I guess watching the White Sox bullpen will make one cranky. Sorry.
Machado's slump is long over. Been on a tear, hitting well over .300 since July 1. 3 homers last night, including a walk off grand slam. 8 hr 21 rbi in August. By far his best month of the season and there are still 12 days left.
This Sunday night game in Williamsport is really cool. All the little leaguers and their families in a fancied up 2500 seat A-ball field.
Here'a a catch most big leaguers couldn't make.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYDizBLz-is
Funny thing is - it is still a home run and the umps screwed up the call.
Boy, some rough luck for Rich Hill tonight.
Brutal. Could've been the greatest start in the history of baseball. So close to a perfect game with 10 Ks in about 95 pitches but an error starts the 9th, he still goes 9 no hit innings but his team also gets shut out through 9 innings, and he goes back out there and gives up a walk off homer.
Wades, you obviously didn't see Kerry Wood's masterpiece in '98. I've never seen anything even remotely close to that game.
Wades, you obviously didn't see Kerry Wood's masterpiece in '98. I've never seen anything even remotely close to that game.
Wood was a Cub so that outing doesn't register for Wades. :)
Wades believes Wood juiced up for just that one game.
Yeah there is absolutely zero chance that a guy who came onto the scene in the heart of the steroid era of baseball that threw 100 MPH and had a history of nagging injuries used PEDs. Because, of course, he's a Chicago guy. Chicago athletes are not only the absolute best to ever walk the Earth, but they are also the cleanest and the greatest human beings in history.
Thanks for bringing it up though.
Yep. That's exactly the point I was making ::)
I'm not sure what point you were making then. You think there's no way Wood took PEDs in his life? Or...you think he did take steroids but...I'm really not sure here?
Yeah there is absolutely zero chance that a guy who came onto the scene in the heart of the steroid era of baseball that threw 100 MPH and had a history of nagging injuries used PEDs. Because, of course, he's a Chicago guy. Chicago athletes are not only the absolute best to ever walk the Earth, but they are also the cleanest and the greatest human beings in history.
Thanks for bringing it up though.
Come on man. Arrieta roided.... Now wood? Who's next? Ross?
Dumb and lazy, per usual. Your anti-Chicago bias makes it hard to take anything you say seriously.
Of course it is possible for Chicago athletes to take steroids (hello Sammy).
Wood was a pudgy 20 year old with a baby face and an amazing breaking pitch that put immense torque on his elbow.
This may be hard for you to believe, but pitchers get hurt quite a bit, and some pitchers are more injury prone than others.
I'd be very surprised if Wood used PEDs during his career.
Come on man. Arrieta roided.... Now wood? Who's next? Ross?
Lol. Chicago sports fans are the absolute best.
Didn't expect this good of a laugh by 10 AM today. Thank you, Chicago sports fans.
Yep, looking at each individual player and making logical inferences sure is hilarious.
Yeah you're right, looking at what a player's face looks like is definitely a solid way to determine whether a player used PEDs or not. Because steroids apparently now age a person's face? That's a new side effect that I had never heard of. My fault, you nailed it. The conclusion is Kerry Wood never used PEDs, his face looks too young!
Chicago fans are the best. Bring up Arietta and you can't look at the muscles coming out of muscles because some people actually lift weights, so no way you can just look at someone physically and conclude PED use. But then hey, let's look at Kerry Wood's baby faced pudginess, no way he used steroids! Classic.
Forget the results, TONS of pitchers throw 100 MPH, especially starters! Forget the injury history, pitchers simply get hurt! Kerry Wood is the only pitcher to throw a curveball. Or better yet, Kerry Wood is the only one who torqued his arm to throw the curveball. All other pitchers throw it straight down and somehow get some crazy spin that results in a curveball.
Forget that he was one of the 103 names that popped up on the list of steroid users that got leaked. He played for the Cubbies. No chance he used PEDs!
Of course none of this absolutely proves that anybody used PEDs, steroids, etc. But the double standards are absolutely hysterical. Let's not look at Jake Arietta's build because that can't prove anything, but let's look at Kerry Wood's build and face because that proves he didn't use steroids! Let's look at all the players who are always injured to show they probably used steroids, but hey Kerry Wood threw a curveball of course he was going to be injured!
Is this how sports talk radio is in Chicago? If so, any suggestions on what radio show to listen to? This is some of the best entertainment I've seen since college basketball ended.
Pudgy build, baby face = no steroids use. I'm definitely buying it for "logical inferences."
I'm pretty sure he was saying that Wood wasn't physically built up enough. Then was throwing to hard and caused himself injury.
IE, exactly why Little League and professional teams have placed strict limits on # of pitches a young player is allowed to throw.
Wood could throw in the low 90s as a junior in HS. Was he juicing then?
Wood occasionally threw both ends of double headers in high school (including once when he threw 175 pitches) and with the Cubs he had a manager who was notoriously bad with pitchers and pitch counts. Add those things together and it shouldn't be surprising that his body began to break down at a young age and during his time with Dusty.
Steve Stone won the 1980 Cy Young Award by throwing primarily curveballs. He pitched only 1 more season after that as a result of elbow problems attributed to throwing all those curves. Point being: Curveballs are bad for your arm to begin with and even worse when you have a violent pitching motion like Kerry Wood. You rarely see "curveball specialists" anymore. There's a greater focus on sliders and cutters.
It's very possible that Kerry Wood used PEDs, especially when rehabbing. That wouldn't surprise me at all. However, your notion that seems to claim that any successful MLB player (especially those playing in Chicago) reached that point as a result of the use of PEDs is laughable.
Wades believes Wood juiced up for just that one game.
Yeah you're right, looking at what a player's face looks like is definitely a solid way to determine whether a player used PEDs or not. Because steroids apparently now age a person's face? That's a new side effect that I had never heard of. My fault, you nailed it. The conclusion is Kerry Wood never used PEDs, his face looks too young!
Chicago fans are the best. Bring up Arietta and you can't look at the muscles coming out of muscles because some people actually lift weights, so no way you can just look at someone physically and conclude PED use. But then hey, let's look at Kerry Wood's baby faced pudginess, no way he used steroids! Classic.
Forget the results, TONS of pitchers throw 100 MPH, especially starters! Forget the injury history, pitchers simply get hurt! Kerry Wood is the only pitcher to throw a curveball. Or better yet, Kerry Wood is the only one who torqued his arm to throw the curveball. All other pitchers throw it straight down and somehow get some crazy spin that results in a curveball.
Forget that he was one of the 103 names that popped up on the list of steroid users that got leaked. He played for the Cubbies. No chance he used PEDs!
Of course none of this absolutely proves that anybody used PEDs, steroids, etc. But the double standards are absolutely hysterical. Let's not look at Jake Arietta's build because that can't prove anything, but let's look at Kerry Wood's build and face because that proves he didn't use steroids! Let's look at all the players who are always injured to show they probably used steroids, but hey Kerry Wood threw a curveball of course he was going to be injured!
Is this how sports talk radio is in Chicago? If so, any suggestions on what radio show to listen to? This is some of the best entertainment I've seen since college basketball ended.
Pudgy build, baby face = no steroids use. I'm definitely buying it for "logical inferences."
Seek help, Wades.
Shoot, you got me again.
We're on the same page then.
Also, your counter-argument to my views on both Arrieta and Wood doesn't hold up in terms of body-type.
Body type means absolutely nothing in terms of PED use. All 5'11", 170 lbs of Dee Gordon was suspended for PED use. If your argument that Wood and/or Arrieta don't have the "body type" of a PED user so they obviously can't be using PEDs your argument is pretty awful.
But yeah, I'll go get some help now. Lol.
I was referring to Wood specifically as a 20 year old. There was no change in his body type, he hadn't been seriously injured up to the point. He was a big kid with a huge arm and violent mechanics. He didn't regularly throw 99-100 mph. So, if you think Wood used something before Tommy John surgery in 1999 you're nuts.
Could he have used something as he recovered or later on? I suppose so and if he did I would be disappointed.
As for Arrieta, the guy is a workout and health fiend. He's never tested positive for anything. He changed his mechanic multiple times and they are still complicated. Assuming his success over the past 5 years is due to PEDs is idiotic, especially considering he's having another pretty good year when his velocity is down.
Okay. You are right. There is no way in hell Chicago athletes would ever use PEDs. And I'm sure, even now after seeing what the Cavs got for a player who was demanding a trade from them, that, to you, the Bulls didn't get absolutely smoked by the Wolves in their trade for Jimmy Butler. And Jay Cutler was an awesome quarterback for the Bears. Etc. If you think a Chicago sports team made a bad personnel decision you're a blind Chicago hater. If you think a Chicago athlete took PEDs you're a blind hater because all PED users show body type changes and you're idiotic if you think otherwise. If you think a Chicago athlete was a bad player you're a blind Chicago hater.
Well, we "know" Thames juiced up just for April, then dumped the rest of the juice.
Da dumb chit shoulda kept it up. Hasn't dun dooka since, hey?
You're pretty much going off the deep end here. He literally admitted that Wood could have used PED's post-surgery.
Okay. You are right. There is no way in hell Chicago athletes would ever use PEDs. And I'm sure, even now after seeing what the Cavs got for a player who was demanding a trade from them, that, to you, the Bulls didn't get absolutely smoked by the Wolves in their trade for Jimmy Butler. And Jay Cutler was an awesome quarterback for the Bears. Etc. If you think a Chicago sports team made a bad personnel decision you're a blind Chicago hater. If you think a Chicago athlete took PEDs you're a blind hater because all PED users show body type changes and you're idiotic if you think otherwise. If you think a Chicago athlete was a bad player you're a blind Chicago hater.
I don't know why you spend so much time worrying about what an "idiotic" person who should "get help" has to say lol. Seems like that'd be a waste of time, but to each their own.
You sound like a maniac with a real Chicago fan complex.
Right, we already established this a number of times.
I thought the Bulls trade of Butler was horrendous and I have no confidence in the front office.
My fault - you extending the logic to the Bulls and Bears made perfect sense. As I think Arrieta is clean all of my opinions on Chicago sports must be ludicrous.
I thought the Bulls trade of Butler was horrendous and I have no confidence in the front office.
Jay Cutler is an average QB you can win with but not because of.
Pretty sure nobody here defended that trade and nobody is out there praising the front office.
Twins win again! Sano on the 10-day DL... hope it doesn't go longer. Next 5 games are at ChiSux - winning ways will hopefully continue. Would love to go 4-1 against them.
I may walk over to the ballpark a lot in September if we're still looking good then. I fear I'm getting my hopes up too much, but starting to get emotionally invested.
Well this is fun...
How about that Yankee-Tiger game?
There was definitely one poster here who was willing to die on the hill of the Butler trade not being that bad. I thought it was Blue Man. Must be mistaken.
Sad but true. Maybe the suspension will give him time to rest his back. Miggy had just posted on Instagram earlier about having to pay 'protection' for his family in Venezuela, how tired and frustrated he was. I think that, along with injuring his back in the World Baseball tournament in March, has been weighing on him and it all came out today. He has not been his usual smiley self all season.
He's one of my favorites of all time, but he's had demons for years.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/miguel-cabreras-death-threats-taunts-revealed/
(https://www.cbsnews.com/news/miguel-cabreras-death-threats-taunts-revealed/)
"I will kill you," he allegedly told a restaurant manager. "Kill me," he defiantly told the police.
Those are the words of Miguel Cabrera, according to the 911 call and disturbing new reports stemming from the Detroit Tigers star's DUI arrest last month.
Wades - How has Arrieta been so good now that he's off roids? Or is he cycling back on?
Looking forward to your expert opinion.
Because once you stop using PEDs you lose everything you gained while you were using them...
You are a really smart dude.
As usual you're completely missing the point.
Make a better point then.
Well, the Cubs took care of Pittsburgh. The Buccos are officially toast in the Central.
The Cardinals seemed to raise the white flag, or at least an off-white or egg-shell flag, when they traded Mike Leake.
So that leaves the Brew Crew. I think the teams have 7 games remaining. If Brewers win 5 or 6, they can make things interesting. Big if.
Over 162 games, the best team usually wins.
The point is that Arrieta has found success since he came to the Cubs because he became a better pitcher, not because of PEDs.
It's a stupid, lazy narrative.
I know. We get it. No Cub could ever have possibly taken PEDs, corked a bat, etc. Heck, Sammy Sosa, after speaking English just fine, legitimately just forgot how to speak English!
Well, the Cubs took care of Pittsburgh. The Buccos are officially toast in the Central.
The Cardinals seemed to raise the white flag, or at least an off-white or egg-shell flag, when they traded Mike Leake.
So that leaves the Brew Crew. I think the teams have 7 games remaining. If Brewers win 5 or 6, they can make things interesting. Big if.
Over 162 games, the best team usually wins.
Absolutely. Crew and Cubs play 7 times so there's a chance. But even the experience of playing meaningful ball in September is healthy for the Crew. Good for them this year.
Think the Brewers have a better chance at catching Colorado than the Cubs, to be honest.
Think the Brewers have a better chance at catching Colorado than the Cubs, to be honest.
I think the Cubs are certainly better than the Rockies, but those seven games give the Brewers a little more control in terms of catching the Cubs. If the Brewers can win 5 of 7, I think they snag the division crown. Will be a very interesting month of baseball. Brewers have surpassed any expectations I had for them at the beginning of the season. A playoff berth is not expected...but I won't be satisfied without one!
EDIT: Just peeked at the Cubs schedule. Besides the Brewers, the only team that the Cubs play who is in playoff contention is two games against the Rays (3.5 games back in the AL wild card). Probably not going to be a lot of losses for them left on the schedule so I may have to rethink my statement.
The Cubs changed a game vs. Milwaukee on Sept 8 to a 7:05 start from 1:20 because the Cubs play at night in Pittsburgh the day before. It'll be the first ever regular season Friday night game at Wrigley.
The Brewers are PO'd about the change even though they have Thursday off, it's not a get away day and MLB signed off on the deal despite the Brewers "vigorously objecting."
I could see the Brewers being upset if they played the night before and the start was moved up, but this? Come on. Get over the "rain out," fellas! You won that game. This type of petty stuff is a bad look for the organization.
So why'd they have a 1:20 first pitch if they had a night game in Pittsburg the night before in the first place? Seems like they could've, or, better, should have simply had it scheduled that way from the start?
It goes against local laws so literally required city government approval. That's why.
So I'll ask again, what is the point of having a schedule if you can just change the dates and/or the times of games as the home team sees best for their competitive advantage, as multiple people involved in the changing of the start time sited?Is it a competitive advantage or just getting them back to par with the rest of MLB?
There certainly is some pettiness going on here, but it's certainly not from the Brewers side. Why wouldn't they be pissed? The people who were involved in this decision literally said we're changing the start time because we want the Cubs to have the best opportunity to win the game in a pennant race. Must be nice to just decide, hey, we're a week out from the game, I don't think the time it's scheduled at is best for our team and it really helps our opponent, so let's go ahead and get that changed. Forget that we play with this type of schedule multiple times a year, the Brewers need to quit being so petty and complaining that we're just going to decide to change the scheduled start time a week before the game because it is in our advantage to do so.
I know. We get it. No Cub could ever have possibly taken PEDs, corked a bat, etc. Heck, Sammy Sosa, after speaking English just fine, legitimately just forgot how to speak English!
So I'll ask again, what is the point of having a schedule if you can just change the dates and/or the times of games as the home team sees best for their competitive advantage, as multiple people involved in the changing of the start time sited?
There certainly is some pettiness going on here, but it's certainly not from the Brewers side. Why wouldn't they be pissed? The people who were involved in this decision literally said we're changing the start time because we want the Cubs to have the best opportunity to win the game in a pennant race. Must be nice to just decide, hey, we're a week out from the game, I don't think the time it's scheduled at is best for our team and it really helps our opponent, so let's go ahead and get that changed. Forget that we play with this type of schedule multiple times a year, the Brewers need to quit being so petty and complaining that we're just going to decide to change the scheduled start time a week before the game because it is in our advantage to do so.
Is it a competitive advantage or just getting them back to par with the rest of MLB?
The people involved in the decision making process certainly seem to be implying that it is to the Cubs advantage to move the start time back to a night game. The Cubs manager, president of business operations, Chicago mayor, and an alderman all essentially (or directly) says it will help them in their chase for October. So yeah, the Cubs clearly believe this helps them, so is it really shocking or petty that the Brewers think this hurts their chances?But it just gets them back to square with the Brewers. I don't think there's anything unfair about it and doesn't put the Brewers at any disadvantage, so yes I think the Brewers are definitely being petty. If anything the Brewers were at an advantage because the Cubs are forced to play day games?
Again, why have a schedule when you can just change the dates and/or times as those game times approach to give yourself the best chance of winning?
::)
It has no impact on the Brewers whatsoever. And as explained to you by multiple people, there are city ordinances regarding Friday and Saturday regular season night games.
It's certainly not providing them a competitive advantage. It makes the Brewers sound like whiny babies.
Again, why have a schedule when you can just change the dates and/or times as those game times approach to give yourself the best chance of winning?
But it just gets them back to square with the Brewers. I don't think there's anything unfair about it and doesn't put the Brewers at any disadvantage, so yes I think the Brewers are definitely being petty. If anything the Brewers were at an advantage because the Cubs are forced to play day games?
1) The date of the game didn't change.
2) As people keep pointing out to you, the Cubs have limitations on night games, which is something no other MLB team has to deal with. Every other MLB team would have had this game scheduled for Friday night. The Cubs weren't allowed to do that and needed special permission from the mayor's office in order to move the start time. They weren't going to be granted that permission months ago.
3) The Brewers contend that they aren't upset about a potential "competitive advantage" for the Cubs. They just don't like the schedule being changed.
4) The Brewers are upset about the rain out from earlier which is why they're whining about this start time, which really doesn't affect them. That's why they seem petty.
5) I'd expect nothing less from you when it comes to your response to this situation.
Back to square? Did the Brewers make the Cubs schedule for them? Come on now. This is honestly the argument? "The Brewers are whining because the Cubs want to make up their own schedule."
This is a 162 game baseball season. Guess what? Sometimes teams have to play games against other teams that just had an off day while they had to play a game that prior day. It happens. This isn't unique to the Cubs. And this isn't a one time situation. This happens multiple times a year. Why didn't the Cubbies change their Friday day game on August 4th when they finished up a series with the Diamondbacks the night of August 3rd while the Nationals had an off day August 3rd?
1) The game where the Brewers had to sit in Chicago in the sunlight and wait for the game to be cancelled because the Cubs were struggling did have the date changed. The Cubs changed the date of the game as they saw best fit their interests.
2) So what is the point of a schedule when they can just change the star time a week before the game?
3) How do you know what the Brewers contend? All that is said is that the Brewers are upset about the change of the scheduling and are talking to the MLB about it.
4) Of course the Brewers were upset about the rainout. It was sunny and it made the Brewers stay in Chicago that day then head back to Chicago in between two series with different teams when they should've simply had an off day. That was beyond ridiculous. I'm genuinely curious how you got the Brewers front office phone systems tapped, because you seem to know a lot about the Brewers motivations and feelings that haven't been reported at all.
5) I'd expect nothing less from you when it comes to your response of this situation.
It's not at all unusual for game times to be changed when moved to national TV.
The rain out was 4 months ago. Move on!
I didn't tap the Brewers' phone lines. It's called the Internet.
https://www.brewcrewball.com/2017/8/31/16236916/milwaukee-brewers-cubs-game-on-september-8-moved-to-7-05-pm-start-milwaukee-brewers-are-not-happy (https://www.brewcrewball.com/2017/8/31/16236916/milwaukee-brewers-cubs-game-on-september-8-moved-to-7-05-pm-start-milwaukee-brewers-are-not-happy)
I guess I must've missed that this game was moved to national television, my fault.
Lol again, where are you getting that the Brewers are upset because of a rainout game "4 months ago" (not quite but we'll go with it). You must be lying that you don't have anything tapped to get that information.
So you say, "The Brewers contend that they aren't upset about a potential "competitive advantage" for the Cubs. They just don't like the schedule being changed." (your #3), then you tell me there's something called the internet when I ask you where you get your information from, and then you send a link that literally says, "#Brewers objected to Cubs changing Friday game to night because it gives them advantage after night game in Pittsburgh day before." Like, what?! That is literally almost word for word a direct contradiction to what you said. You say they are just mad that the schedule is changed but not worried about a potential "competitive advantage" for the Cubs, but the article that you got this information from literally says they object because of the "advantage it gives them." Hmm... "It's about adhering to the schedule and not changing it for competitive reasons"...
Read the whole article, sport. Particularly Haurdicourt's tweets near the bottom.
Where do you think the last quote is from, sport? Particularly Haurdricourt's tweets near the bottom. "It's about adhering to the schedule and not changing it for competitive reasons." The last 6 words are, once again, a direct contradiction to what you say. Sport.
Here's the next question that Cubbies fans will ignore. If this wasn't changed for competitive reasons then why was it changed at all?
Agreed. That's what I'm saying. Thank you.
Well, the Cubs certainly think it has a big impact on their game with the Brewers or they wouldn't be changing the scheduled start time. Here are a few quotes for you, ones that you have all read but are just trying to ignore so you can play up the, "Oh gosh look at those whiny baby Brewers again! Why wouldn't they want to skip playing a game in Chicago when they're already in Chicago and come for a one game trip between road series and now move a start time a week before a game to help the Cubs get their proper rest (according to their own people)?!:
“We are glad to have been able to work together to address this issue and help our team and organization as we compete to play October baseball.”
“With the Cubs in the thick of the pennant race, we’re going to make sure the Cubs can focus on doing what they need to do: winning ballgames and bringing another World Series back to Chicago.”
"But it’s something that we’re all trying to work toward to make sure the team gets the proper rest.”
The people involved in this decision certainly seem to think this helps your beloved Cubbies compete. If not, they're certainly going out of their way to make it sound like they do. And there would be no reason to change the start time if that wasn't the case.
But sure, the Brewers should damn well just close their mouths and accommodate the Cubs and their requests no matter what they are. Forget what the schedule says, the Cubs want to play on a different day. You want to complain about it? Man, what a bunch of whiny babies. The Cubs want to move the start time back. You want to complain? The audacity to want to follow the scheduled start time and not let the Cubs simply start when they deem the best time for them to start. Yeesh, what babies.
This is the first time all season that the Cubs have had a home day game immediately following a road night game. The August 3 game was at home and at 1:20, not on the road at 7:00.
Where do you think the last quote is from, sport? Particularly Haurdricourt's tweets near the bottom. "It's about adhering to the schedule and not changing it for competitive reasons." The last 6 words are, once again, a direct contradiction to what you say. Sport.
Here's the next question that Cubbies fans will ignore. If this wasn't changed for competitive reasons then why was it changed at all?
You left out an important part of the tweet. You know, where he says "Brewers did not say Cubs get advantage by switching to night."
I'm sure everyone's sick of seeing this board overrun with me making valid, logical points and you being a complete and total buffoon.
I apologize to anyone who actually wanted to discuss baseball.
Good night!
It has no impact on the Brewers whatsoever, genius.
It potentially gives the Cubs 6 hours more rest. It doesn't hurt the Brewers.
I don't think you know what "competitive advantage" actually means.
Wades is immune to facts and common sense when it comes to the Cubs.
Wades is immune to facts and common sense when it comes to the Cubs.
Yet he ended the Tweet with "It's about adhering to the schedule and not changing it for competitive reasons." Seems like he's saying the Brewers simply objected to changing the schedule...because the change is being made for competitive reasons. That's important. But we can ignore that part of you would like to I guess. Not surprising.
And that is the absolute best. "I'm a genius, I'm way above this guy, he's wasting everyone's time, sorry you had to read all this, it's all wade's fault!" Classic. Love it.
Thank you for your service. You are so much smarter and more mature than me that it's such a waste of your time to bother with such a small man like myself. Keep up the intelligent, well reasoned work you do here. Lol. Talk about taking oneself to seriously. Glad you're feeling good though. I know when I need a boost in confidence I come MUScoop and talk about the Brewers being whiny babies because they won't ask the Cubs which days and what times they would prefer to play their games against them in the series rather than follow the schedule that has been out for 8 months.
Oh the irony of these 3 in a row. Absolutely hilarious. Please, Mr. Blueman Group. Do enlighten me. Your superior intelligence is greatly needed. What, my friend, is a competitive advantage?
By your definition when Jake Arrieta takes PEDs and, let's say, Eric Sogard does not, that is NOT giving Jake Arrieta a competitive advantage in a matchup of Sogard at the plate facing Arrieta on the mound, which is hilarious because that's EXACTLY what a competitive advantage is. But Arrieta taking PEDs simply helps Arrieta perform, it does NOT affect Sogard, his muscles and athletic ability aren't taken away. So according to you that is NOT a competitive advantage. Hilarious.
If this is how Chicago sports fans consider someone making "valid and logical points" like the almighty MM above then shoot, I'm totally overmatched. I need to study up and start using cute terms like "sport" and "genius" (I remember 2nd grade) and then maybe I can try to insult peoples' intelligence by telling them they don't know what a competitive advantage is while clearly having no idea how to define it.
Detroit Tigers give the best gift they can to the suffering citizens in Houston. Justin Verlander.
This is one of the most accurate posts I've read on this site. Everyone on the Cubs ever is on PEDs, every move they make is nefarious, every fan is delusional...I truly thought this level of vitriol on this site was strictly reserved for Wisconsin and Notre Dame.
Jake Arrieta does not and has not used PEDs. I think this not because he is a Chicago Cub but because of logically looking at all of the information regarding his career as a whole and since he became a Cub. If I had a similar viewpoint of a player and was presented with a ton of information that pointed in the opposite direction, I wouldn't be so stubborn and illogical to cling to my original opinion. Any advantage Arrieta would and does have over Sogard is because he is a better pitcher than Sogard is a hitter.
Moving the start time to help the Cubs competitively does not equate to a competitive advantage. Those are two different things. A competitive advantage provides an edge OVER your rivals. Moving the start time does not do this. If anything, it puts the teams more on equal footing for the game in terms of rest. Now hypothetically, if the Cubs had an off day on Thursday, the Brewers were playing a night game, and then the Cubs moved a night game to a day game you'd have a point. In this scenario, you do not. You're wrong, full stop. So no, I don't think you know what "competitive advantage" means, either.
Detroit Tigers give the best gift they can to the suffering citizens in Houston. Justin Verlander.
Interesting debate .. didn't know about the controversy.
The request is being made to give the Cubs 6 hours more rest before a game .. there's no debate as to whether that assists the team compete. Whether that's classified as a "competitive advantage" or not is silly. It helps, if it didn't they wouldn't do it, full stop.
How much it helps is debatable, though. It's not like the starting pitcher isn't fresh after 4.75 days of rest instead of 5.0. Most of the team is in their 20s and are pretty solid athletes. Yeah, it helps. A bit.
In the end, it should be up to the Brewers to decline, though, as helping the Cubs = hurting the Brewers chance to win the division, and they are rightfully irked the MLB has allowed the change.
Interesting debate .. didn't know about the controversy.
The request is being made to give the Cubs 6 hours more rest before a game .. there's no debate as to whether that assists the team compete. Whether that's classified as a "competitive advantage" or not is silly. It helps, if it didn't they wouldn't do it, full stop.
How much it helps is debatable, though. It's not like the starting pitcher isn't fresh after 4.75 days of rest instead of 5.0. Most of the team is in their 20s and are pretty solid athletes. Yeah, it helps. A bit.
In the end, it should be up to the Brewers to decline, though, as helping the Cubs = hurting the Brewers chance to win the division, and they are rightfully irked the MLB has allowed the change.
Moving the start time 6 hours simply does not give the Cubs an edge OVER the Brewers for that specific game. That's ultimately what it comes down to.
It gives the Cubs a percentage more rest than they would have received otherwise. Therefore it benefits the Cubs more than the Brewers. That is clearly the case.
It gives the Cubs a percentage more rest than they would have received otherwise. Therefore it benefits the Cubs more than the Brewers. That is clearly the case.
I don't think it's that big of a deal. These guys can deal with it. I feel more sorry for fans who were planning on making a nice day trip to Chicago and are now holding tickets to a night game.
Not to fan the flames here, but doesn't it also give the brewers a percentage more rest?
Anyhow, the fauxtrage over it is amusing...
Not to fan the flames here, but doesn't it also give the brewers a percentage more rest?
Anyhow, the fauxtrage over it is amusing...
Very true on all accounts. I'm convinced that the Brewers' "outrage" stems from the rain out earlier in the season.
Also, does moving the start time back give the Cubs a competitive advantage or does it lessen the Brewers' competitive advantage? Or is that basically saying the same thing? ;)
I think the "outrage" just comes from the fact that the Brewers got a nice break in the schedule where the Cubs were going to have a quick turnaround and then the Cubs just decided they were going to change that themselves. When you're 3.5 games back in the division with 30ish games to play and you were expected to be well out of the race by now, any bit of an advantage that you can get helps and when someone simply decides they're going to ignore the schedule that has been out for 8 months so that they can be well rested it kind of stinks that that advantage you had would be lessened not because there was a need to change the game time, but simply because the Cubs know it can help them so they're going to just go ahead and do that. There's a schedule for a reason. Sometimes you get some tough draws and play 18 games in 18 days, and other times you get 2 off days in a week. The Cubs conveniently deciding to change the start time from a day game on a quick turn around to a night game is bush league. I don't think it has anything to do with an 11-2 Brewers win.
Changing a start time a week before a game is not remotely comparable to changing the day of a game.
As someone said, this is sour grapes from the rainout.
It's already been explained to you ad nauseum why it wasn't originally a night game and why the Cubs were able to change it.
I don't get the "sour grapes from the rainout" point either.
As far as I know, the Brewers haven't made a public statement about it. I haven't seen a quote from an official about it. There was one line in a story saying they "strenuously objected" to it.
We have no real idea why they objected.
Lol. This is too good. Moving the start time back does not help the Brewers but it does help the Cubs to have the best chance to win that night. So it helps one team compete on the field while not helping the other, but it's not a competitive advantage. Got it. And I'm the one that doesn't know what a competitive advantage is. Genius (did I use that right?).
Correct - you don't know what a competitive advantage is. Glad we are on the same page now!
Regardless, I'll be at that game in the bleachers and it should be a great time. Rivalries are fun.
I don't get the "sour grapes from the rainout" point either.
As far as I know, the Brewers haven't made a public statement about it. I haven't seen a quote from an official about it. There was one line in a story saying they "strenuously objected" to it.
We have no real idea why they objected.
The Cubs postponed a game against the Brewers early and the rain never actually came. The Brewers were upset about this and rightfully so. However, I don't think they handled that situation very professionally which leads me to believe that the reported outrage and "vigorous" opposition to this slight schedule change is related to their previous outrage from the "rain" out. IOW, they think the big, bad Cubs are yanking them around again in terms of scheduling.
There has been no specific report of the scheduling issues being related and perhaps it's not at all. To me and many others though, it seems highly likely that there's a connection. We'll never actually know for sure since I doubt anyone from the Brewers will admit it but the perception is still there.
Or they're chasing the Cubs and had a scheduling advantage that the Cubs took away from them and they're pissed that that's gone. But sure, they're just worried about those big bad Cubs and a game they won 11-2.
...says the only person on the board who thinks there isn't a competitive advantage in the Cubs favor by moving the start time back to a night game. The people involved in this decision themselves said so multiple times. But you're the smartest man in the room, as always, so of course everyone else is wrong. Heck, the Cubs just wanted to move the start time back for the fun of it, maybe see those sour grapes coming out! They don't see any real advantage in moving the start time back. It's all for a good laugh. Genius (again, I home I'm using this right! Been a while since I was young enough to think it was cool to call other people a genius when I thought they were wrong).
First, I'm not the only person that thinks that in this thread unless you're willfully ignoring other posts.
I never said I was the smartest man in the room and am more than willing to admit when I'm wrong. You, on the other hand, show no capability of being able to do so, especially when it comes to the Cubs or Chicago sports.
I've also said that moving the start time is to the Cubs benefit, however small that benefit may be.
However, to me, there is a distinct difference between the time change helping the Cubs and giving them a competitive advantage over the Brewers. All it does is help to level the playing field between the two teams in terms of rest. To me, that is not a competitive advantage. You think it is. I think you're wrong.
Are you this much of a turd in real life?
Yes. Are you?
I'm not a turd here so your question is not relevant. :D
Nailed it. That was almost not the most predictable response ever. The irony following a post where you say you have no problem admitting when you're wrong. Guess your only problem is admitting you're a "turd."
This is a 162 game baseball season. Guess what? Sometimes teams have to play games against other teams that just had an off day while they had to play a game that prior day. It happens. This isn't unique to the Cubs.
Oh relax. I'm joking around.
Anyway, you have yourself a great holiday weekend.
*have to play 14 hours after night game
*won't be leaving the stadium until around midnight
*have to travel to another city
*this is unique to the cubs
Let's see if you do better with this façade of being the bigger man and moving on from a guy who isn't intelligent enough to belong in a conversation with you than MerritsMustache did. He lasted about long enough to get a night's sleep in after being "correct and logical on everything" before he jumped right back into the conversation with his cute GIFs. Maybe you really will be the bigger man, and if so, congrats to you. But if you're going to play it off like you are then don't jump right back in.
*are the only team that can choose when it's most convenient for them to play and change the start time of a scheduled game one week before it is scheduled with no reason other than we want to get our players some rest.
It's a 162 game season. There are points in the season for every team that the schedule gets long with no days off and quick turnarounds. The Cubs can't handle it I guess.
Moving the game back is not a competitive advantage for the individual game. As others have pointed out, it is evening out the advantage the Brewers have over the Cubs in this individual game.
Moving the game back is a competitive advantage for the season as a whole. As far as I know (I could be wrong), no other team has been allowed to move the start time of a game midseason because they have a difficult turnaround time.As others have said, scheduling sometimes leaves teams in tough spots. As far as I know, the Cubs are the only ones have been allowed to mitigate one of their more difficult start times. That's an advantage the Cubs have now been given that I don't think any other team has been given.
Has anyone considered that the Brewers "vigorously protesting" the time change is just a show for the players? Managers going out to scream at the umpire after a close call never actually changes the call. But the managers do it to try and motivate their players and show that they have their back. My guess is that the Brewers' protest is more likely motivated by pumping up the players for an important rivalry game than it is about 6 hours of rest.
Actually. Could you show me another team that has a night game in one City followed by a 1pm game in the same time zone in another city?
The Cubs are the only team in MLB that's not allowed to schedule night games on Fridays. Any other team would have had this game scheduled for a Friday night from the get-go. The Cubs needed special permission to do so. If anything, people should be upset with the Pirates for scheduling a night game on get away day.
I actually considered this. They whined about the rainout and the team dominated the make-up game. Perhaps it's an attempt to motivate players by making them feel disrespected.
Arguing if it's a competitive advantage is not silly because the person who doesn't like the move is making that exact argument.
I'm not arguing it's not beneficial to the Cubs - that would be silly. But it doesn't give them an edge OVER the Brewers. That's the point.
Let's see if you do better with this façade of being the bigger man and moving on from a guy who isn't intelligent enough to belong in a conversation with you than MerritsMustache did. He lasted about long enough to get a night's sleep in after being "correct and logical on everything" before he jumped right back into the conversation with his cute GIFs. Maybe you really will be the bigger man, and if so, congrats to you. But if you're going to play it off like you are then don't jump right back in.
*are the only team that can choose when it's most convenient for them to play and change the start time of a scheduled game one week before it is scheduled with no reason other than we want to get our players some rest.
It's a 162 game season. There are points in the season for every team that the schedule gets long with no days off and quick turnarounds. The Cubs can't handle it I guess.
Moving the game back is not a competitive advantage for the individual game. As others have pointed out, it is evening out the advantage the Brewers have over the Cubs in this individual game.
Moving the game back is a competitive advantage for the season as a whole. As far as I know (I could be wrong), no other team has been allowed to move the start time of a game midseason because they have a difficult turnaround time. As others have said, scheduling sometimes leaves teams in tough spots. As far as I know, the Cubs are the only ones have been allowed to mitigate one of their more difficult start times. That's an advantage the Cubs have now been given that I don't think any other team has been given.
Now is the extra six hours of rest going to make much of a difference? Probably not. Is it that big of a deal? To some? Maybe. To me personally as a Brewers fan? Nah.
Has anyone considered that the Brewers "vigorously protesting" the time change is just a show for the players? Managers going out to scream at the umpire after a close call never actually changes the call. But the managers do it to try and motivate their players and show that they have their back. My guess is that the Brewers' protest is more likely motivated by pumping up the players for an important rivalry game than it is about 6 hours of rest.
Teams don't make their own schedule, which is why the Brewers have every right to be upset here. They can put in requests for which holidays they would like to play at home, they can let the MLB know when there are conflicts going on in their stadiums, etc. but they aren't picking out, "Hey, we'd like to host the Cubs 9/4-9/7 with these start times." The MLB comes up with the schedule. Teams follow the schedule. Unless you're the Cubs and want some rest.
I probably shouldn't have used "silly" .. the better word I'd swap is "irrelevant." Whether it's a competitive advantage is irrelevant.
It's bending the schedule to assist a team compete moreso than they would have been able prior.
Everyone else plays by the schedule (and any TV rules that may move them.)
Imagine a MLB rule that said "teams can request time changes to give them more rest when they are in a pennant race, playing the 2nd place team."
Maybe an analogy is to request the 100m dash be 90m because one runner is tired. They'll all have to cover the same distance, so no one gets a "competitive advantage," right?
Maybe an analogy is to request the 100m dash be 90m because one runner is tired. They'll all have to cover the same distance, so no one gets a "competitive advantage," right?
That's a pretty weak analogy.
If Marquette won an NCAA Tournament game in Pittsburgh at 7pm then flew back to Milwaukee and had to play at noon the next day against a team coming off an off-day, would you have a problem with the tip-off to be moved back?
Jake Arrieta does not and has not used PEDs. I think this ...
*have to play 14 hours after night game
*won't be leaving the stadium until around midnight
*have to travel to another city
*this is unique to the cubs
Are the brewers going to point to this game, if the cubs win, and the brewers lose the division by 1 game, as the game that caused it? If not, then lets just all move on...
If so, then wow...
It's not unique the Cubs. The Yankees have a 1:05 game this upcoming Monday in Baltimore after playing a night game this Sunday in New York.
That's an interesting one to bring up. The Sunday game was originally scheduled for the afternoon, though one could argue that common sense would suggest ANY Red Sox-Yankees Sunday game will inevitably end up in the evening slot.
So it's a little unique from the Cubs situation in that it was originally scheduled to provide 24 hours between games on a travel day. But if one accepts the league's ability to put one team at a disadvantage by flexing a start time like that, why would they be willing to grant clemency to a team already in that spot?
Your first sentence is stated as a fact. You cannot possibly know if this is true or not.
You then go into opinion mode, which is what the first sentence really was.
As for wades ...
Shyte, man, your head must have exploded when the Cubs won the WS last year. How long did it take to clean all the brain guts from your ceiling!!!
Although I am not a Cubbie fan (have accused of being a Cubbie hater many times, but I'm not that either), I think I would have loved to have been a fly on your wall when you watched Game 7. The celebrating when Chapman blew the lead ... followed by the total despondency when the Cubbies actually won. Wow! Musta been something to behold.
I think I'm as passionate about my family as you are about your hatred for all things Cubbie, but I'm not really sure!
Your first sentence is stated as a fact. You cannot possibly know if this is true or not.
You then go into opinion mode, which is what the first sentence really was.
As for wades ...
Shyte, man, your head must have exploded when the Cubs won the WS last year. How long did it take to clean all the brain guts from your ceiling!!!
Although I am not a Cubbie fan (have accused of being a Cubbie hater many times, but I'm not that either), I think I would have loved to have been a fly on your wall when you watched Game 7. The celebrating when Chapman blew the lead ... followed by the total despondency when the Cubbies actually won. Wow! Musta been something to behold.
I think I'm as passionate about my family as you are about your hatred for all things Cubbie, but I'm not really sure!
It's not unique the Cubs. The Yankees have a 1:05 game this upcoming Monday in Baltimore after playing a night game this Sunday in New York.
Is the Sunday game an ESPN game?
It's not unique the Cubs. The Yankees have a 1:05 game this upcoming Monday in Baltimore after playing a night game this Sunday in New York.
For the Cubs, this is their every week.
For the Cubs, this is their every week. They are the only ones dealing with these ordinances. The Yankees situation is different because Monday is a holiday. It's not like the Yankees are going somewhere that prohibits night games on Mondays.
Again, the limitations the Cubs are under in regards to number of night games played and not being able to play regular season Friday and Saturday night games play a role in this.
The city of Chicago has been very strict with the Cubs in terms of any deviations from the current rules. If it were up to the Cubs, they would have night games the day after any getaway night game.
The Cubs have already been asking about easing this very restriction for a while. This is not something new. The city agreeing to it certainly is.
I don't think your 100m dash comparison holds water.
That's a pretty weak analogy.
If Marquette won an NCAA Tournament game in Pittsburgh at 7pm then flew back to Milwaukee and had to play at noon the next day against a team coming off an off-day, would you have a problem with the tip-off to be moved back?
I was playing basketball for about 85% of game 7 of the WS, so I'll take it as a compliment to my game that you would've liked to have been watching me play pickup basketball over watching game 7 of the WS. I do think I have some game. Fans are always welcome, so stop by any Monday or Wednesday night.
I did get home just in time to see the game tying homer. I think I laughed and that was about it. A few minutes into the rain delay I went upstairs and showered and the Cubs had scored by the time I got back to the TV. Don't think being a fly on that wall would've been the greatest thing in the world, but I'm not here to judge.
I don't really get all that worked up watching sports. Even when my favorite teams are doing well (or horribly). Would I prefer that the Cubs (or Bears, or Bulls, or Blackhawks) not win a title? Of course. Am I going to make sure I'm watching and screaming for their opponent? Unless they're playing my favorite team, not in the least bit. I can't remember the last time I did more than a pretty tame clap in the Bradley Center while watching sports, and I hardly ever even do that. I think I dropped an F bomb after the Packers loss in Seattle in the Playoffs a few years ago. I think I may have yelled a "Yeeeahhh!" when MU beat Nova this past season. Otherwise? Sit there and enjoy the game.
Now when a Cubs fan jumps in on the Brewers being a whiny, petty group because they actually want to play the game when the game was scheduled to be played? Sure I'll jump right on in on that fun.
Interesting, wades.
If this were the only time you got very passionate about what our old friend willie woulda called your "hate woody" for the Cubbies, I'd say, "OK, yeah, he just didn't like his Brewers being called whiny." But let's be honest ... you go off on the Cubbies and their fans repeatedly here. Often get very worked up about 'em.
All that's OK. I mean, what else are the interwebs for? But to dismiss this as a one-off ... evidence would suggest otherwise.
I also didn't watch all of G7. Watched probably from the 7th inning on, and then did so via the DVR. (As I've gotten older, I have less and less patience for commercials, the time between pitches, pitching changes, batters scratchin' and spittin' between pitches, rain delays, halftime in basketball and football games, etc.)
I enjoyed the theater of it all, including a blown save by the guy who probably should have been in jail, and then moved on to my life.
Maybe one day I'll check you out on the court, wades. I'd enjoy seeing you dunk on Ners!
Later!
Chicago sports fans accuse the Brewers of being petty and whiny because they won't conform to their every request and simply play the game when the Cubs want it to be played, schedule be damned.
If the Brewers really were refusing to conform, they would refuse to play.
They would take the forfeit loss and act as a change agent to make sure MLB didn't let this happen again.
Saying, "I don't like this" but then acquiescing isn't the same as refusing to conform.
Wades, let's just dream that the season ends for the Cubbies about like this:
(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--kFB6W_zb--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/gr727neixnqxfgfddtlf.jpg)
I'm just talking about my demeanor watching sports. I love watching them, I love seeing my favorite teams win, I hope my least favorite teams lose, but I don't lose sleep on many games, especially games between teams I either don't like or don't care about.
I do love a good back and forth with any and all Chicago sports fans. It definitely helps pass a work day. Instances like these are exactly why it's so fun. Chicago sports fans accuse the Brewers of being petty and whiny because they won't conform to their every request and simply play the game when the Cubs want it to be played, schedule be damned. It's that kind of attitude that makes the city and its people unbearable sometimes. "Despite how this event was scheduled, we see it more beneficial if we change it, and if you complain about it you're just a whiny, petty baby!"
Some people follow schedules. Others think the world revolves around them and if you won't accommodate them as they please then you're the problem. Different strokes for different folks.
If the Cubs were playing another team on the 8th I think they would have made the same request.
If the Cubs were playing another team on the 8th I think they would have made the same request.
I guess we'll see if they change the Friday, September 29 game against the Reds from a 1:20 start to a night start following their game in St. Louis at 6:15 PM on the 28th.
That is simply NOT true. When the Cubs' schedule was put together, there were only TWO instances of a night game, travel and day game.
The first is the weekend we are talking about. The second is the last weekend of the year.
http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/chc/downloads/y2017/2017-Cubs-Schedule.pdf
I guess we'll see if they change the Friday, September 29 game against the Reds from a 1:20 start to a night start following their game in St. Louis at 6:15 PM on the 28th.
What Cleveland and Arizona are both doing right now is pretty incredible.
JD has been quite the steal for Arizona.
Well, it seems like Jimmy Nelson and the bullpen got fired up for the rescheduled game.
The Cubs just didn't have enough rest. Are we sure they're going to be ready for the afternoon start tomorrow? Might want to push that thing back a few hours.
Nelson out for the season.... Ugh
Tough blow for the Brewers.
I'd still like to see the DH come to the NL. A situation like this isn't the main reason but it's part of the picture.
It is a tough blow but I never want the DH in the NL.
It is a tough blow but I never want the DH in the NL.
Its absurd that the DH hasn't been adapted by the National League. There is nothing "pure" about pitchers hitting.
Should've cancelled this one. Heard the weather was crazy in Chicago today.
Youre not funny, just sound petty.
Youre not funny, just sound petty.He had to come out of the woodwork after that embarrassment against the reds.
He had to come out of the woodwork after that embarrassment against the reds.
Oooooooo we got the tough guy Cubbies fan putting the Brewers fan in his place.
15-2
Oooooooo we got the tough guy Cubbies fan putting the Brewers fan in his place.
15-2
Congrats on cutting the lead to 3, idiot.
Oooooo dang all these Cubbies tough guys getting worked up.
3 games separating a "dynasty in the making" coming off of a WS championship and one of the worst teams in baseball last year a week into September in a season in which the Brewers were expected to be...15? games back at this point. And the big bad Cubbies being scared into making schedule changes multiple times...and then getting smoked up both times they have.
I'm not worked up in the least. The Cubs have had a disappointing season and the Brewers have had a very nice season.
I just think you're an idiot.
Especially with Nelson going down I still think the Brewers have an uphill battle. But watching silent and early departing Cubs fans who paid $100+ for their seats at Wrigley......priceless.
Especially with Nelson going down I still think the Brewers have an uphill battle. But watching silent and early departing Cubs fans who paid $100+ for their seats at Wrigley......priceless.
No doubt. I have never felt the Brewers were going to make the postseason this year, and still do not at all. Which is why it's even more enjoyable to watch Maddon get all squirmy about the Brewers. The Brewers are a year ahead of where I thought they would be. I thought next year the Brewers would end the season right around .500. I didn't think there was any chance of that this year, and I certainly didn't expect to be within striking distance of the division in September. This has been one of the more enjoyable seasons as a Brewers fan. No expectations but have, for the most part, played some good ball and hung around.
Congrats on cutting the lead to 3, idiot.
https://twitter.com/brewers/status/906687455608414214
WE AGREE!!!!
https://twitter.com/brewers/status/906687455608414214
This for PTM, and PTM only. Go Brewers
(http://files.shroomery.org/files/08-18/984957867-cubs_sweep.gif)
This for PTM, and PTM only. Go Brewers
(http://files.shroomery.org/files/08-18/984957867-cubs_sweep.gif)
Things just got mighty interesting in the NL Central. Had the Cubs swept, the race would have been over. Instead, for a non-partisan baseball fan like me, it should be fun!
Now it's up to the Brewers and Cardinals to take care of business by beating crappy teams so the race is close when they play each other and the Cubbies. Can't afford getting swept by the likes of Cincinnati anymore.
With the Rockies not letting up against the Dodgers, it's shaping up that the three-way race between the Brewers, Cardinals and Cubs will be one where there are no points for second place.
If the Cardinals and Brewers can catch the Cubs they can catch the Rockies as well. There's only 1 extra game separating the Cardinals and Brewers from the Rockies than there is separating them from the Cubs.
Exactly right. The Crew especially needs to beat the teams who are simply waiting to hit the golf course. Focus guys. There's a chance.
The Crew needs to be able to beat crappy teams.
I believe they were 10-3 vs. the Nats, Dodgers, Cubs, and Cards. It is the lousy teams that are the problem.
With the Rockies not letting up against the Dodgers, it's shaping up that the three-way race between the Brewers, Cardinals and Cubs will be one where there are no points for second place.
Brewers gonna put out a little prick tease. Den, leave ya high and dry?
Honestly, nobody feels that way at all. Crew is a highly competitive team with a $60M payroll. Thrilled to be playing September ball.
Honestly, nobody feels that way at all. Crew is a highly competitive team with a $60M payroll. Thrilled to be playing September ball.
You're obsessed with the payroll being a factor....why? If it was $95 million would you still be happy? $125 million? Does it matter?
First, know your facts.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/mlb/brewers/2017/09/09/haudricourt-lowest-payroll-among-contenders-brewers-got-bang-their-bucks/639961001/
If you would like the Cubs to trade payroll capacity with the Brewers, I'm sure that the Brewers would be open to that.
Some of you forget that baseball is a business. Wins and losses aren't the only metrics for success.
The Brewers have payroll capacity and have spent big bucks when necessary before. I don't think that's an issue.
The Brewers could not give 15% of their payroll to Matt Garza. That may help.
The ONLY way the Crew wins if is they have home grown talent.
AND they could pay up. The Brewers had a Top 10 payroll as recently as 2012.
You all battle over the dumbest things...
The Brewers are a young team with a decent farm system. They have way outperformed what they were supposed to do and made the nl central a competitive division.
However it's baseball. Some teams that are really really good can go cold for an entire season (the cubs). And it's the same the other way. Some teams get really hot for a year and then go back to non competitive. It's the multi year strings that really make a team (cards). If you can get success 3/4 years your team is insane.
I believe the most fatal flaw for Milwaukee was Sterns not trading away thames while he had value.
You all battle over the dumbest things...
The Brewers are a young team with a decent farm system. They have way outperformed what they were supposed to do and made the nl central a competitive division.
However it's baseball. Some teams that are really really good can go cold for an entire season (the cubs). And it's the same the other way. Some teams get really hot for a year and then go back to non competitive. It's the multi year strings that really make a team (cards). If you can get success 3/4 years your team is insane.
I believe the most fatal flaw for Milwaukee was Sterns not trading away thames while he had value.
I do know the facts, the payroll is currently almost $83 million. Opening Day is different.
http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/milwaukee-brewers/payroll/
"Really, really good" teams do not go cold for an entire season. Not with a 162 game schedule.
What? They do all the time. See -> Giants
Look at their roster. If you think that is a very good team, you need to bone up on baseball.
$14.5 million is signing bonuses spent on rookies. So $68.5 million is more accurate of what the major league payroll is. That also accounts for "buried" minor league salaries and deferred money. Active payroll is $57.5 million.
Regardless of how the remainder of this season goes, the Brewers will be interesting to watch next season. I don't necessarily think of the Brewers as being "ahead of schedule" on the rebuild. They look more like a "lightning in a bottle" team this season.
Aside from Arcia, Santana and possibly Villar, most of the regular position players aren't exactly centerpieces of the rebuild. Braun is 33 and in decline. Time will tell is Travis Shaw is for real. Thames and Pina are having career years at age 30. Same with Sogard (age 31) who has cooled off considerably. Broxton is 27 and hitting under .200 since late May. Aguilar's also 27 and had basically been a career minor leaguer. Brinson and Phillips have a lot of potential but neither appeared to be all that close to MLB-ready. The average age of the Brewers' regulars this season is 27.4. By comparison, Ben Zobrist (36) is the only Cubs regular over 27 and that doesn't even include Happ (22) or Baez (24).
As far a pitching, Davies has looked solid, especially at age 24, Woodruff obviously has potential and Knebel and Hader have been great on the back-end of the pen but Nelson and Anderson are in their late 20s and having far and away their best seasons. Are they going to keep that up? Both had FIPs near 4.50 coming into this year. Suter could be a late-bloomer or he could be a guy who got it together for an extended stretch. The Brewers are 5th in the NL with a 4.05 ERA but the team FIP is a league-average 4.33. In fact, no NL team has a higher differential between ERA and FIP than the Brewers.
I'm not attempting to downplay the Brewers' success this year. They're a fun team who's had an excellent, unexpected season and they have a legit chance to win the division. I just don't view this season as Step One in their run of perennial contention.
AND they could pay up. The Brewers had a Top 10 payroll as recently as 2012.
2016 League Divisional Series L
2014 World Series W
2012 World Series W
2010 World Series W
????????????????????????
I do know the facts, the payroll is currently almost $83 million. Opening Day is different.
http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/milwaukee-brewers/payroll/
Brewers announce Sept. 22 game vs #Cubs at Miller Park will start at 6:35 pm CT, not 7:10 pm CT
This is outrageous! I am outraged!!
Brewers announce Sept. 22 game vs #Cubs at Miller Park will start at 6:35 pm CT, not 7:10 pm CT
This is outrageous! I am outraged!!
Fairly different reasons for the time change. This is TV driven.
That was cute. The Brewers had absolutely no say in it.
But hey, you tried.
Regardless of how the remainder of this season goes, the Brewers will be interesting to watch next season. I don't necessarily think of the Brewers as being "ahead of schedule" on the rebuild. They look more like a "lightning in a bottle" team this season.
Aside from Arcia, Santana and possibly Villar, most of the regular position players aren't exactly centerpieces of the rebuild. Braun is 33 and in decline. Time will tell is Travis Shaw is for real. Thames and Pina are having career years at age 30. Same with Sogard (age 31) who has cooled off considerably. Broxton is 27 and hitting under .200 since late May. Aguilar's also 27 and had basically been a career minor leaguer. Brinson and Phillips have a lot of potential but neither appeared to be all that close to MLB-ready. The average age of the Brewers' regulars this season is 27.4. By comparison, Ben Zobrist (36) is the only Cubs regular over 27 and that doesn't even include Happ (22) or Baez (24).
As far a pitching, Davies has looked solid, especially at age 24, Woodruff obviously has potential and Knebel and Hader have been great on the back-end of the pen but Nelson and Anderson are in their late 20s and having far and away their best seasons. Are they going to keep that up? Both had FIPs near 4.50 coming into this year. Suter could be a late-bloomer or he could be a guy who got it together for an extended stretch. The Brewers are 5th in the NL with a 4.05 ERA but the team FIP is a league-average 4.33. In fact, no NL team has a higher differential between ERA and FIP than the Brewers.
I'm not attempting to downplay the Brewers' success this year. They're a fun team who's had an excellent, unexpected season and they have a legit chance to win the division. I just don't view this season as Step One in their run of perennial contention.
I know. Just being sarcastic - doesn't bother me at all. Nor would it have bothered me if it was an identical situation to last week.
::)
Yeah, like I said, it was cute. Good job.
Did anyone really think the Cubs were going to repeat?
Did anyone really think the Cubs were going to repeat?
Brewers announce Sept. 22 game vs #Cubs at Miller Park will start at 6:35 pm CT, not 7:10 pm CT
This is outrageous! I am outraged!!
Did anyone really think the Cubs were going to repeat?
Marlins v Brewers series moved to Milwaukee this weekend!
Now this I absolutely have an issue with.
Marlins v Brewers series moved to Milwaukee this weekend!
If I were the Cubs, Cardinals, or Rockies, I'd be irate. As a Brewers fan, I expected a neutral site somewhere if it wasn't going to be Miami.
I feel like Wades would have typed about 7 pages worth of crap had this happened to the Cubs. Oh well, it's not that huge of a deal. Miller doesn't get attendance anyways.
I love it. Cubs fans getting all squirmy because they can't decide the Brewers schedule for them.
The 2008 series between the Astros and Cubs at Miller Park was totally 24,000 neutral Milwaukeeans just trying to see some baseball.
The Yankees and Rays playing a series at Citi Field this year was definitely all Mets fans filling the stands just enjoying some ball between 2 teams they don't cheer for.
And comparing a manager just deciding he wanted to change the schedule to benefit his team is definitely comparable to a team whose city was hit by a hurricane...
What's funny is I wasn't even the one who brought up the schedule change. All the Cubbie fans got upset that the Brewers actually expected to follow their schedule.
I may be wrong on this but didn't the Astros ( a few years back) play a "home series" against the Cubs in Miller Park, where it was crawling with cub fans? This is a little different, but not much.
Also recently I heard an interview with the owner of the Rays, and ge talked about how truly difficult it is to put on a game on short notice at a ln alternate location.
Really? Remove your head from your ass and look at it from an unbiased perspective.
You are correct, because of Hurricane Ike. Zambrano threw a no-hitter. While it wasn't necessarily neutral it was certainly different than playing the games at Wrigley. If I recall correctly, Houston was very upset about it and that was understandable.
The White Sox are out of town this weekend. Schedule it there and let's see how many Brewers fans make the trip.
I feel like Wades would have typed about 7 pages worth of crap had this happened to the Cubs. Oh well, it's not that huge of a deal. Miller doesn't get attendance anyways.
I'd love to hear an explanation of why a neutral location was not feasible.
This is some Grade-A bullsh*t.
Really? Remove your head from your ass and look at it from an unbiased perspective.
You are correct, because of Hurricane Ike. Zambrano threw a no-hitter. While it wasn't necessarily neutral it was certainly different than playing the games at Wrigley. If I recall correctly, Houston was very upset about it and that was understandable.
The White Sox are out of town this weekend. Schedule it there and let's see how many Brewers fans make the trip.
Says the guy who said the Brewers would be out of the playoff race by the ASG, and then refused to bet on it.
Lastly, Crew in top 10 of MLB attendance this year genius.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/7lMxCYjSZOwdq/giphy.gif)
For the record, it was a helluva break for the Crew. I did see a quote that Maddon said 'Something had to be done and he had no issue with it.'
Seems as if logistics played a huge issue, just getting stadium workers, etc. Read that the Crew is only being allowed to open the lower deck on Friday.
Brewers .548 winning percentage at home, .500 on the road
Marlins .438 winning percentage on the road, .507 at home
Well, Giancarlo should get pass 62 with the extra games at Miller Park.
I'd assume MLB wasn't willing to risk a rain out at this point in the season which ruled out many potential host sites. Could have moved to to Arizona, although that is far for both teams.
Well, Giancarlo should get pass 62 with the extra games at Miller Park.
Have you watched the dude's yackers? Those things aren't wall scrapers.
Hmm. That would probably deserve an asterisk.
Brewers .548 winning percentage at home, .500 on the road
Marlins .438 winning percentage on the road, .507 at home
Don't forget that some of this might have to do with the home team hitting last ... which I assume the Marlins will get to do in these games, yes?
I believe that's all the employees they can find
The issue is less with the Brewers playing in Miller Park and more with the fact that they don't have to travel. The time in the airport, on the plane, getting to the hotel, being away from home, etc. That's the stuff that wears on players more than simply playing in front of a different crowd at a different stadium. Since the Brewers feel so passionately about competitive balance, they should board a plane, fly for 3-4 hours and then land back in Milwaukee before being bussed to the Pfister for the weekend ;)
The issue is less with the Brewers playing in Miller Park and more with the fact that they don't have to travel. The time in the airport, on the plane, getting to the hotel, being away from home, etc. That's the stuff that wears on players more than simply playing in front of a different crowd at a different stadium. Since the Brewers feel so passionately about competitive balance, they should board a plane, fly for 3-4 hours and then land back in Milwaukee before being bussed to the Pfister for the weekend ;)
Let's break this down... open MLB stadiums for this weekend:
Group 1 (Barred by Collective Bargaining Agreement)
Chavez
Oakland
Seattle
San Diego
Arizona
The CBA doesn't allow teams to play in the Eastern time zone the day after a game in the Pacific time zone (Arizona doesn't have DST, i.e. they are on Pacific time right now). While the CBA does allow up to seven exceptions per season (for each league), Miami is scheduled to play the Mets on Monday and the Brewers are in Pittsburgh ... whether that game happens in Miami or NYC, this would add two more West-to-East games to the NL schedule which currently stands at six (AZ, LAD, SD, WAS, STL and SF have all gone W-to-E once this year). 6+2 = 8 which is > 7, so this wasn't going to happen.
Group 2 (Scheduling Conflicts)
St Louis - Staging this weekend for Billy Joel concert next week.
Baltimore - Hosting charity 5K run and related events on Saturday.
Citi - Hosting arts festival this weekend
Group 3 (Significant risks/no assurances)
Toronto - International logistics (customs, tax/financial, regulatory implications); also would need a variance from City of Toronto to add a game to the schedule.
Boston - Rain in forecast (MLB does not want to risk having to postpone or cancel a game for team in division chase); also need a variance from City of Boston
Comiskey - Rain in forecast
Kansas City - Rain in forecast
Group 4 (Possibile, but could be PR nightmares)
Pittsburgh - Cannot independently confirm this, but word on the street is there are multiple weddings scheduled at PNC Park this weekend.
Arlington - Maybe... but Texas' resources are already being taxed enough as it is, and I think humanitarian concerns are played more of a role here than the fairness concerns of Cardinals and Cubs fans.
Solid breakdown. There's also a concert being held at Comiskey/US Cellular/G-Rate Field this weekend. The Cubs and Cardinals fans played zero part in this decision.
I just find it amusing that there were so many Brewers fans up in arms and citing "competitive advantage" with the Cubs moving back a game time by a few hours yet they seem to be perfectly fine with getting 3 important late season games moved to their home stadium.
It is what it is. If the Cubs and Rockies take care of their business, it'll all be moot.
No, what was amusing was Cubs fans freaking out that the Brewers complained about not following the schedule...again. Brewers fans didn't even bring up the time change until Cubs fans (you specifically) got all butthurt about the Brewers "pettiness."
Again, comparing the manager of a team deciding, "Hey, we have a quick turnaround against a team we're competing with in the division race so let's move the first pitch back one week ahead of the game" to, "We've been hit by a hurricane and we can't play the games in our home stadium" is laughable at best. The Cubs decided they wanted to change the start time for their benefit. The MLB decided they needed to move the game because a hurricane hit the city that the games were supposed to be played in less than a week ago. The Cubs are the ones who decided they wanted to make a change. The Brewers had absolutely no say whatsoever in moving the games to Milwaukee. The two situations aren't remotely similar.
If you want the Brewers fanbase to celebrate the fact that a hurricane hit their opponent's city to the point they can't play baseball in it so they caught a scheduling break, then sure, here you go: WOO HOO! CAN YOU BELIEVE IT! WHAT GREAT FORTUNE THAT IRMA CRUSHED THE CITY OF MIAMI AND WE GET 3 EXTRA HOME GAMES IN A PENNANT RACE!
The Yankees got to play Tampa Bay at Citi Field in NY while the Red Sox are going to have to play them in Tampa this weekend. On the Red Sox TV broadcast last night, they said that currently none of the traffic signals in and around the area surrounding the Trop are working, and if that remains the case tomorrow, they will play in an empty (by design) stadium. I couldn't find any corroboration of that anywhere, though.
I just find it amusing that there were so many Brewers fans up in arms and citing "competitive advantage" with the Cubs moving back a game time by a few hours yet they seem to be perfectly fine with getting 3 important late season games moved to their home stadium.
Solid breakdown. There's also a concert being held at Comiskey/US Cellular/G-Rate Field this weekend. The Cubs and Cardinals fans played zero part in this decision.
I just find it amusing that there were so many Brewers fans up in arms and citing "competitive advantage" with the Cubs moving back a game time by a few hours yet they seem to be perfectly fine with getting 3 important late season games moved to their home stadium.
It is what it is. If the Cubs and Rockies take care of their business, it'll all be moot.
I don't think you'll find a single Brewers' fan who doesn't recognize that they just gained a massive competitive advantage. The difference, whether fair or not, is that this changed was done by MLB, completely beyond the Brewers' control. The Cubs moving back their game was initiated by the Cubs (and approved by the MLB).
The Cubs initiating the change should have nothing to do with it. In both cases, MLB acted logically in their decision. However, in one case you have a team's front office "vigorously objecting" to moving back one game's start time which partially negates their advantage. In the other case, you have a manager whose response is "I have no issues with it. None."
#characterrevealed
Of course the motivations matter. In one case the Cubs wanted a schedule change for convenience. In the other, an act of God caused the Marlins to want to move the series.
"Due to the brief lead time, staffing levels for concessions, guest services and other logistics will restrict seating capacities at Miller Park for the three games. For Friday's game, only Field Level tickets will be available for purchase -- a capacity of approximately 10,000 tickets. For the Saturday and Sunday games, the capacity will increase to approximately 23,000 with staffing for those two games extended into the Loge Level. "
In both cases, MLB had the final say. Obviously, they were going to grant the Marlins permission to move the games. I don't understand why there was such outrage over the Cubs seeking permission to change one start time.
I don't understand why you care so much.
The irony ::)
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/614/729/e62.gif)
You're killing it with the GIFs today. More cute posts from the Cubs fans.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l2JhwoIj5Wti14Vlm/giphy.gif)
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/614/729/e62.gif)
I remember when I first discovered GIFs.
You strike me as the kind of mid 30s guy who not only created a bitmoji but also updates his bitmoji's clothes to match what he's wearing.
You have issues with reading comprehension so I've decided to respond to you only in picture form.
(https://media.tenor.com/images/0958bb49d003f1f6087c021e2b1c0c93/tenor.gif)
Also, I have no idea with a bitmoji is.
Hmm. So you haven't been comparing a team deciding they want to move their first pitch back because it benefits them to a team that has to relocate their games because a hurricane hit their city? And talking about baseball teams sitting in airports waiting for their 3-4 hour Wisconsin to Florida flights? Well, you got me there, I guess I have issues with reading comprehension.
It's the bad guy from Last Action Hero!
My first thought too!
(http://www.alpenwasser.net/repository/emoticons/missing-the-point.gif)
Okay. Well sure. Hurricane, convenience of getting extra rest...one in the same. Sounds like something a Cubs fan would argue...
I don't really care either way for this debate, but getting the city of Chicago to grant a Friday night game is quite the feat. Honestly, I never thought it would happen unless there was a natural disaster. The Cubs have put it monthly requests for this, and it was finally granted. This happening was an enormous feat for the organization that will likely have scheduling impacts in the future, which is better for not only the Cubs, but their opponents as well.
This was not done merely because the Brewers were coming to town, this has been long time goal since Ricketts' took over. I'm not sure if you have ever followed the Cubs v. Alderman Tom Tunney saga, but I actually think you would enjoy it.
Wrong. Wades is only capable of getting enjoyment out of complaining about the Cubs and Cutler.
Wrong. Wades is only capable of getting enjoyment out of complaining about the Cubs and Cutler.
Facts. I bet wades is a HUGE Ann Sather fan when in town.
The issue is less with the Brewers playing in Miller Park and more with the fact that they don't have to travel. The time in the airport, on the plane, getting to the hotel, being away from home, etc. That's the stuff that wears on players more than simply playing in front of a different crowd at a different stadium. Since the Brewers feel so passionately about competitive balance, they should board a plane, fly for 3-4 hours and then land back in Milwaukee before being bussed to the Pfister for the weekend ;)
You're only thinking about one side of it. It's important to think about the "home" team turned into visitors. I think the Marlins should also be allowed to live in the Brewers' homes, sleep in their beds, and everything else that may entail. Seems only fair.
Wife swap mlb edition?
But wait. Which is it, is it a fact that I only am capable of getting enjoyment by complaining about the Cubs and Cutler, or can I get enjoyment from food (of which I've never had...I try to avoid that dump of a city as much as I can, so I've probably missed some hot spots to hit up)?
Already been done. Medich and Peterson if I remember correctly.
And it was a permanent swap - for one of them, anyway.
Does Billy the Marlin get to use the slide?
Dang dude, these jabs continue to hurt!
Why would the MLB want to move the game to the Cell when the weather report calls for mostly sunny on Saturday? Those are the exact types of conditions that result in rain outs in Chicago.
Already been done. Medich and Peterson if I remember correctly.
And it was a permanent swap - for one of them, anyway.
No, what was amusing was Cubs fans freaking out that the Brewers complained about not following the schedule...again. Brewers fans didn't even bring up the time change until Cubs fans (you specifically) got all butthurt about the Brewers "pettiness."
Again, comparing the manager of a team deciding, "Hey, we have a quick turnaround against a team we're competing with in the division race so let's move the first pitch back one week ahead of the game" to, "We've been hit by a hurricane and we can't play the games in our home stadium" is laughable at best. The Cubs decided they wanted to change the start time for their benefit. The MLB decided they needed to move the game because a hurricane hit the city that the games were supposed to be played in less than a week ago. The Cubs are the ones who decided they wanted to make a change. The Brewers had absolutely no say whatsoever in moving the games to Milwaukee. The two situations aren't remotely similar.
If you want the Brewers fanbase to celebrate the fact that a hurricane hit their opponent's city to the point they can't play baseball in it so they caught a scheduling break, then sure, here you go: WOO HOO! CAN YOU BELIEVE IT! WHAT GREAT FORTUNE THAT IRMA CRUSHED THE CITY OF MIAMI AND WE GET 3 EXTRA HOME GAMES IN A PENNANT RACE!
The Brewers caught a break. I'm not sure what more there is to be said that Cubs fans are hoping to hear. It's a similar break to the Cubs getting to play visitors to the Astros in Milwaukee in 2008 (when there were 23,000 fans, compared to the 10,000 open seats available for tomorrow night's game at Miller Park) and similar to the Yankees playing visitors to Tampa Bay at Citi Field just a few weeks ago.
But if you want to dramatize the situation and talk about players spending time in the airport as if they're like you or I traveling with the rest of the population and laying around on the airport floor waiting to board an airplane or having a 3-4 hour flight to Florida have at it.
Hmm. So you haven't been comparing a team deciding they want to move their first pitch back because it benefits them to a team that has to relocate their games because a hurricane hit their city? And talking about baseball teams sitting in airports waiting for their 3-4 hour Wisconsin to Florida flights? Well, you got me there, I guess I have issues with reading comprehension.
Are you really this stupid?
Nevermind, don't answer that.
Y'all. We are going to have some really interesting baseball in the final month of the season. We've got 4 teams slugging it out for two spots in the playoffs. Reasons to cheer for all of them (except the Cardinals ;D). Can y'all call a truce or something so we can talk some baseball?
How 'bout dat throw from Phillips last nite, hey?
Y'all. We are going to have some really interesting baseball in the final month of the season. We've got 4 teams slugging it out for two spots in the playoffs. Reasons to cheer for all of them (except the Cardinals ;D). Can y'all call a truce or something so we can talk some baseball?
You know, for me the beauty of baseball is the subtlety. In today's modern fast paced society only the booming HR highlight gets any attention. Lost forever are the days where that critical corner slider with the tying run on third or that incredible assist from Center gets enough attention. I know the game wasn't close and wouldn't have changed. But that's one of the best throws I have ever seen.
Or how about leading of the bottom of the 10th with an extraordinary (and maybe a little crazy) hustle play (https://twitter.com/Indians/status/908654135213383682) to stretch a single into a double. Every highlight package I saw about last night's Tribe win showed Lindor's double off the wall, and Bruce's game-winning hit -- both of which were awesome. But Ramirez's double to lead off the tenth was amazing!
Wow. Amazing but risky as heck. That's one of those plays that if you make out you catch it from the manager. But when everything is going that well for the Tribe........
Facts. I bet wades is a HUGE Ann Sather fan when in town.
Or how about leading of the bottom of the 10th with an extraordinary (and maybe a little crazy) hustle play (https://twitter.com/Indians/status/908654135213383682) to stretch a single into a double. Every highlight package I saw about last night's Tribe win showed Lindor's double off the wall, and Bruce's game-winning hit -- both of which were awesome. But Ramirez's double to lead off the tenth was amazing!
FS1 Wraparound show - everybody went wild about Ramirez's hustle double.
For the sake of this thread can we just drop the Brewers/Cubs moving times debate? Between the NL Central race, NL Wild Card race, AL East race, and AL Wild Card race, and the Indians' streak, there are a lot of good MLB story lines right now. A lot of discussion to be had and it's devolved into a pointless pissing match.
Off my soapbox now. Big weekend for the Brewers. Huge series between STL and Chicago. Should be fun.
But it's not muscoop if we don't whine and bitch about some trivial matter instead of talking about the real issues.
For the sake of this thread can we just drop the Brewers/Cubs moving times debate? Between the NL Central race, NL Wild Card race, AL East race, and AL Wild Card race, and the Indians' streak, there are a lot of good MLB story lines right now. A lot of discussion to be had and it's devolved into a pointless pissing match.
Off my soapbox now. Big weekend for the Brewers. Huge series between STL and Chicago. Should be fun.
The Cubs drafted Kaepernick in 2009. Why haven't they called him up yet? Is he being blackballed by MLB?
Brewers fans, what do we want in this series? Obviously, the Brewers have to win at least the series this weekend. The Cards to win the series 2-1?
Brewers fans, what do we want in this series? Obviously, the Brewers have to win at least the series this weekend. The Cards to win the series 2-1?
Those ejections were awesome.
Was Chicago's 7-run inning awesome, too?
(I have no horse in the race. Just enjoy having fun!)
I haven't expected the Brewers in the Playoffs for a single day this season and still don't. Wouldn't have if the Cubs had lost 2-1 today. So the 7 run inning does nothing for me.
What does get me chuckling is seeing the Cubbies get all squirmy in the midst of what everyone thought would be year 2 of a a growing dynasty. And that was as epic of a 3 year old temper tantrum as I've seen in a professional sporting event in my life.
But lets' not forget, Madden said he had absolutely no issue with the Marlins playing at Miller Park in a series that doesn't even involve his team. What a guy!
I haven't expected the Brewers in the Playoffs for a single day this season and still don't. Wouldn't have if the Cubs had lost 2-1 today. So the 7 run inning does nothing for me.
What does get me chuckling is seeing the Cubbies get all squirmy in the midst of what everyone thought would be year 2 of a a growing dynasty. And that was as epic of a 3 year old temper tantrum as I've seen in a professional sporting event in my life.
But lets' not forget, Madden said he had absolutely no issue with the Marlins playing at Miller Park in a series that doesn't even involve his team. What a guy!
I haven't expected the Brewers in the Playoffs for a single day this season and still don't. Wouldn't have if the Cubs had lost 2-1 today. So the 7 run inning does nothing for me.
What does get me chuckling is seeing the Cubbies get all squirmy in the midst of what everyone thought would be year 2 of a a growing dynasty. And that was as epic of a 3 year old temper tantrum as I've seen in a professional sporting event in my life.
But lets' not forget, Madden said he had absolutely no issue with the Marlins playing at Miller Park in a series that doesn't even involve his team. What a guy!
"I love making fun of the Cubs failures but am completely unaffected by any of their success" ::)
And squirmy? Yea, caring about your team in the midst of a division race is definitely a sign of insecurity. Cause winning back to back WS titles is simple, especially when you're projected to be a top team, cakewalk.
Also, let's not pretend Cubs fans really care for Lackey to begin with. Least fav Cub since Soriano
Sounds like someone's squirming around a little bit.
All this talk of squirming, you'd think Chicos never left.
He never did.
Well...he did, he just came back.
Contreras suspended 2 games because an umpire can't see what a curveball down the middle looks like.
Cubs Magic Number down to 11.
I don't know which of the 3 straight posts to respond to (you mad bro?) so I'll just respond to the last, but what you're saying is that you, like MM, really think that Joe Maddon wanting more rest heading into a big weekend series and deciding to move the scheduled start time of a game back for no reason other than that one week prior to the game is comparable to the the MLB telling Craig Counsel that the Marlins would be coming to Miller Park to play their series because a hurricane barreled through Miami less than a week prior to their series started?
Well, if thinking those two situations couldn't be any different makes me stupid and hypocritical, count me as happily and proudly stupid and hypocritical.
Nope. As usual you completely missed the point.
You were a whiny baby about the Cubs pushing back a start time, even though it had no adverse impact on the Brewers.
But when the Brewers get a free home series in a close race Cubs fans should be completely ok with that.
I supposed you would have been perfectly fine with it if the Cubs series against Tampa this upcoming week had been moved to Wrigley instead of a neutral site.
Edit: Cubs fans were whiny babies that the Brewers wanted to follow the schedule because the Cubs had absolutely no reason for a time change besides they wanted some extra rest so they are better prepared to compete with the team chasing them in the division, and when Brewers fans pointed out that nobody else in the MLB just gets to choose their start times and dates they play except for the Cubs it turned into the Brewers are petty. AKA The Cubs should get to do as they please and if you don't agree you're a whiny baby.
Yet again, we're going to say that if you're not okay with a team changing the time of a game a week before it simply to give them more rest because...well, because they want it and so it should be that way, then you can't possibly be okay with a team moving their game because they can't play at their home stadium due to a hurricane rolling through and making it unplayable at their stadium.
So a hurricane creating the need to move a series should have the same reaction as a team wanting some rest.
Only Chicago sports fans can actually say this and believe it. "The world revolves around me."
Your utter lack of comprehension is quite astounding.
Coming from a guy who is continuing to compare how someone reacts to a series being relocated due to a hurricane vs. a team wanting some extra rest so they move the start time at their leisure, I'm cool with you thinking so.
Coming from a guy who is continuing to compare how someone reacts to a series being relocated due to a hurricane vs. a team wanting some extra rest so they move the start time at their leisure, I'm cool with you thinking so.
Again, that's not what I'm comparing. Nor did I ever say the Marlins series shouldn't have been moved.
You were a whiny baby about the Cubs pushing back a start time, even though it had no adverse impact on the Brewers.
But when the Brewers get a free home series in a close race Cubs fans should be completely ok with that.
Your utter lack of comprehension is quite astounding.
You aren't?
That makes the following quote look pretty dang funny. I'm all for cute little jabs at people's intelligence, but, in my obviously less intelligent opinion than yours, you should at least get it right. You're doing exactly what I said you're doing (comparing the reactions of moving a game for the leisure of a team to get more rest to a team that needs to move due to a hurricane hitting its city), but I'm the one with an "utter lack of comprehension." Pretty dang funny.
No, I'm not. I'm comparing your absurd responses to each situation.
Oh. I guess in my "utter lack of comprehension" I must've missed that. When you compared the response of "being a whiny baby" about the Cubs moving the start for their convenience and then followed it with fans should be okay with games being moved out of Miami because of a hurricane I took that for what it was, comparing reactions of a time change due to wanting extra rest to a hurricane forcing a series to be relocated.
Why anybody would ever bring up the reaction to a manager changing a start time of a game to get extra rest when discussing a series being moved after a hurricane is absurd.
But I'll go work on that comprehension thing so that someday I can be as smart as you.
Cubs Magic Number down to 11.
Clean sweep....
(http://www.chuckblogerstrom.com/uploads/7/2/6/8/72683421/8668978_orig.jpg)
Wades is like the drunk guy at a bar. Constantly butting into a conversation and saying the same thing over and over.
Yeah. Because that's how absurd it is to compare anyone's reactions to a manager wanting extra rest vs. a relocation of a series due to a hurricane. I say it over and over and over again because the two situations are not even remotely similar and it's absurd to discuss them as such. "Hey, people are reacting differently to Maddon wanting extra rest and Hurricanr Irma hitting Miami." Uhh...ya think? You have to be pretty stupid to not comprehend why that might be...
For the last time...
And you still don't get it....
At last you're consistent.
YAY!!!!
Damn...
YAY!!!!
Damn...
But the Dodgers aren't probably going to run full strength lineups out there, and I would venture to guess there's almost zero chance that the Dodgers actually pitch their rotation as currently scheduled (Hill, Ryu, Kershaw).
But the Dodgers aren't probably going to run full strength lineups out there, and I would venture to guess there's almost zero chance that the Dodgers actually pitch their rotation as currently scheduled (Hill, Ryu, Kershaw).
First game of NLDS is Friday following, so bank on Kershaw pitching the last day of the season.
Additionally... having spent a nice chunk on the DL recently (not to mention less-than-stellar performances his last three starts) and with normal rest in front of him, I have a hard time believing DR would yank him early in game 162.
Pet peeve for baseball announcers. When they say phrases like this: "That's not a strike...well, its going to be a strike on the K zone....but I don't think it should be a strike."
If Kershaw puts in a solid 5 innings against the Rockies, he's coming out of the game. No brainer. Especially with another potential match-up against Colorado looming in the NLDS. In the game 162, have him get his work in and get him out of there.
I don't think I've ever heard that. Who've you been listening to?
I don't think I've ever heard that. Who've you been listening to?
Pet peeve for baseball announcers. When they say phrases like this: "That's not a strike...well, its going to be a strike on the K zone....but I don't think it should be a strike."
Need robots/video/technology for balls/strikes. Need it now.
I agree. If for nothing else, just to end the "pitch framing" madness.
Such grit!
Sounds like something a Cubs fan would say.
9
I agree. If for nothing else, just to end the "pitch framing" madness.
Just the fact that we have pitch framing and some catchers are much better than others is proof enough we need robot umps calling balls/strikes. The location of the pitch should determine whether a pitch is a ball or strike. How the catcher catches it should be no factor.
It will come when the technology is there. It's close, but not quite there yet.
This.
I think the pitch tracking technology is there, but the delivery system needs further development.
One game back of the Rockies. Les go!
Win tonight and take 3/4 this weekend and the last week of the season is going to be incredible regardless of the final outcome.
(http://www.cubsbythenumbers.com/my-uni9.jpg)
Brew Crew holding strong, though, with Cubs coming to town.
(http://www.bleachernation.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/javy-baez-swing.jpg)
(https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1990/Topps---Box-Set-Base---Collectors-Edition-(Tiffany)/362/Damon-Berryhill.jpg?id=e69b332d-be7c-44cd-824c-50407696aa20&size=biggerthumb)
(http://delivery.gettyimages.com/xr/57341305.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=3&d=77BFBA49EF878921F7C3FC3F69D929FDC55687A829BD40393E4D125295BF66A9F08DF20337D1274BE30A760B0D811297)
Where are Biaz's dope braids?
Where are Biaz's dope braids?
Although I don't have a horse in the NL Central race, I always get some pleasure out of seeing Braun take an oh-fer in a big game.
My least-favorite player in baseball. Of all the cheaters - Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, A-Rod, etc, etc - only Braun brazenly tried to ruin another human's life so he could protect his secret. Scum of the earth.
While I agree he's a POS, you just started a new thread about a group of people who I would consider "scummier" than Ryan Braun. And there are, sadly, a lot of people out there who are "scummier" than them. "Ruin another human's life" is taking it a bit far. He questioned the integrity of another human's ability to do his side job correctly. That's a pretty far cry from "ruining a human's life."
If you limit it to just sports figures and take out the likes of people who murder people in drunk driving incidents and shootings, have dozens of illegitimate children, beat their children or wives or girlfriends, and dozens of other things, Ryan Braun is up there.
Sure. Yes. There are scumbags who are higher on the scum-of-the-earth scale than Braun. He didn't murder or rape anybody. He nonetheless is still scum of the earth to me - worse than all the other steroid cheats IMHO, and very easy to root against.
I don't expect Brewers fans to root against him. Fans will root for anybody, including all of those even scummier scum-of-the-earthers who do the stuff you mentioned.
Braun ain’t watt he wuz. Basically, shot his load and now just middle of da road. I contend he signed da big contract years ago, knot ‘cuz he luved MKE, butt because it wuz an “annuity” for wen he new he’d eventually get busted. Da dude’s a huge dick, not in a good wey, and I’d trade his nappy ass for a bag of soiled rosin, ai na?
"Ruin another human's life" is taking it a bit far. He questioned the integrity of another human's ability to do his side job correctly. That's a pretty far cry from "ruining a human's life."
I'd say trying to get a man fired from his job would count as ruining someone's life.
Then after getting off on that technicality, he got caught again. Why should I assume he has learned his lesson and still isn't using?
Far and away my most hated player in the history of baseball. It turns out Ty Cobb was actually not a bad guy (http://www.freep.com/story/entertainment/arts/2015/06/09/ty-cobb-myth-legend-popular-culture/28765125/).
If that makes Braun the scum of the earth and someone who "tried to get a man fired from his job" and "ruining his life" then I guess Braun is.
Edit: And fourth of all, he wasn't "caught again." It was his involvement with Tony Bosh and the files he handed over to the MLB from prior to his failed drug test that he was suspended for, not a second failed drug test.
First of all I'm fairly confident that Ryan Braun wasn't the one coming up with the legal strategy on his appeal or the one writing up the statement he made. But hey, maybe I'm wrong there.
Second of all, there's an appeal process for a reason. Guilty or not, every defense team in the world will try to find the loophole in the case. Braun's legal team found one. If that makes Braun the scum of the earth and someone who "tried to get a man fired from his job" and "ruining his life" then I guess Braun is.
Third of all, again, this was Laurenzi's side job. I know plenty of people who have very good full time jobs and pick up side jobs for some extra money or just because they want to occupy their weekends. I'm fairly confident their lives wouldn't be ruined if they got fired from their side job. Maybe Laurenzi is different and his life would be over if he was fired.
I've been a Braun hater for along time. But the "scum of the Earth" and the "ruining a man's life" is quite a bit of hyperbole.
Edit: And fourth of all, he wasn't "caught again." It was his involvement with Tony Bosh and the files he handed over to the MLB from prior to his failed drug test that he was suspended for, not a second failed drug test.
So he was lying the first time he said he was innocent and chose to place the blame on the carrier. Cool.
Do you think Braun knew or gave a sh*t if it was his side job? He was lying and throwing someone under the bus to protect himself. FYI, losing a job can be absolutely devastating to someone depending on the timing and circumstances, even it it is not a lucrative job.
How does that make it any better? His legal team works for him. He could have just said "I did it" instead of letting an innocent man take the blame.
How does that make it any better? His legal team works for him. He could have just said "I did it" instead of letting an innocent man take the blame.
Because he was trying to win a case. The guy failed to do his job correctly, and Braun won the appeal. Every single player/person in his situation would have done the exact same thing.
Because he was trying to win a case. The guy failed to do his job correctly, and Braun won the appeal. Every single player/person in his situation would have done the exact same thing.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but I thought there was more gray area than that. Something along the lines of the collector followed the protocol of his employer, but his employer's protocol was not in line with the CBA of MLB? Anyone remember something similar? (Not that it really makes a difference for this argument).
Hours away from a pivotal series and amidst one of the better division/ wild card races in recent years, can't we find something something else to discuss other than a years-old Braun controversy?
Hours away from a pivotal series and amidst one of the better division/ wild card races in recent years, can't we find something something else to discuss other than a years-old Braun controversy?
We could talk about arrieta and peds
We could talk about arrieta and peds
PEDs are awesome. I wish more Brewers would do them more often. Career minor leaguers can suddenly become the best pitcher in baseball at 28 years old. It's incredible.
Because he was trying to win a case. The guy failed to do his job correctly, and Braun won the appeal. Every single player/person in his situation would have done the exact same thing.
PEDs are awesome. I wish more Brewers would do them more often. Career minor leaguers can suddenly become the best pitcher in baseball at 28 years old. It's incredible.
PEDs are awesome. I wish more Brewers would do them more often. Career minor leaguers can suddenly become the best pitcher in baseball. It's incredible.
Wait, Zach Davies is doing PEDs now?
If that makes Braun the scum of the earth and someone who "tried to get a man fired from his job" and "ruining his life" then I guess Braun is.
How does that make it any better? His legal team works for him. He could have just said "I did it" instead of letting an innocent man take the blame.
Actually, by Wades' logic, Chase Anderson would be the more likely user. He's having a great year in his age 29 season after being mediocre in his career so he must be on something.
Scherzer must be using too since he's been amazing since his age 28 season.
Wait, Zach Davies is doing PEDs now?
Actually, by Wades' logic, Chase Anderson would be the more likely user. He's having a great year in his age 29 season after being mediocre in his career so he must be on something.
Scherzer must be using too since he's been amazing since his age 28 season.
He also could have told whatever "team" he has that he wasn't doing a press conference. He could have filed the appeal, never talked to the media, won the appeal and the guy's name never makes it to the public.
By the way, MLB allows I think 5 times the normal limit of testosterone. Braun's tested 20 times. Once a guy fails, the testing organization sends to another organization just to be sure. He tested positive again. The protocol was breached, the urine was still dirty.
Yeah because Scherzer didn't have a 3.05 ERA in 16 appearances as a rookie or 3.50 ERA in his third season. :o
Just went from bad to best pitcher in baseball. Oh wait. Lol
Neither did Arrieta, genius.
Neither did Arrieta, genius.
Hmm. He went 4.66, 5.05, 6.20, 4.78. And then he turned 28 and it was 2.53. Hmm.
PS I really love the "genius." Brings me back to those 3rd grade days. It's awesome. Almost as awesome as PEDs taking a guy from being unable to stick in the majors to the best pitcher in baseball at age 28. Hmm...
Baez with the worst at bat I've ever seen that resulted in a tie game in the 9th
That's a bit of hyperbole.
Jump right over that 3.66 ERA he put up after joining the Cubs and started to make adjustments.
I have some other adjectives I'd prefer to use but this isn't the appropriate forum.
Huh? I jumped over what, exactly? The decent month and a half he had with the Cubs, which was included in the 4.78 ERA that was listed? I didn't skip over anything, "genius."
And oooooh no. That last line is genuinely giving me a giant laugh. Outstanding.
Huh? I jumped over what, exactly? The decent month and a half he had with the Cubs, which was included in the 4.78 ERA that was listed? I didn't skip over anything, "genius."
And oooooh no. That last line is genuinely giving me a giant laugh. Outstanding.
Someones salty after Bryant's bomb.
Yes. After the trade he was sent down to the minors to begin adjusting his mechanics. He then came up and found success and continued to build on it the following season and into 2016. There was never a huge increase in velocity.
It's all perfectly logical. Unfortunately you're too dense and stubborn to let go of your ridiculous narrative despite all evidence to the contrary.
It's my fault I continue to engage on the topic as it's futile.
We interrupt discussion of the latest Brewers Choke-A-Thon to talk about the MVP Award ...Never understood why the BBWAA thinks an MVP should be on a contending team, doesnt make any sense to me. 'Most valuable' and 'best' are synonymous to me.
Trout is showing why an MVP should come from a team that at least contends for a playoff spot. It's easy to just swing away when there's nothing on the line for half a season or more. When it's nut-cuttin' time, not so easy.
I wouldn't have voted him MVP last season. I wouldn't vote for Stanton this season. I wouldn't have voted for A-Rod the year he won it for a Rangers team that finished 1,000 games out of first place. I wouldn't have voted for Dawson or Banks.
It's pretty simple: If they're gonna call it MVP, the V has to mean something. If they want it to just go to the best player, they should just call it BP; then I'd have no problem with Stanton getting it.
Cy Young is best pitcher, not most valuable pitcher, so sure, give it to a last-place guy if his numbers merit it. Same with Rookie of the Year; it's not Most Valuable Rookie.
But it's MVP, not BP.
I think we've had this discussion before, but I just got reminded of it watching Trout flail away lately. Given all kinds of chances to be valuable for a contending team, he isn't doing it. It would be so much easier for him to relax at the plate if the Angels were 40 games out again.
Never understood why the BBWAA thinks an MVP should be on a contending team, doesnt make any sense to me. 'Most valuable' and 'best' are synonymous to me.
Yeah, I know. You have Bossio. He turns all 28 year old pitchers who can't stay in the majors into the best pitchers in baseball.
I guess if you don't consider 85 up to 91 on the slider not a huge increase in velocity sure we can agree there.
It's alright. We get it. It's super common that a guy can't stay under 4.50 for his ERA and can't stay in the majors in his career and then suddenly it all just clicks and next thing you know you're a top 5 pitcher in all of baseball at 28 years old like that. Happens all the time.
The bloody Cardinals are gonna make the playoffs aren't they?
Yeah, I know. You have Bossio. He turns all 28 year old pitchers who can't stay in the majors into the best pitchers in baseball.
I guess if you don't consider 85 up to 91 on the slider not a huge increase in velocity sure we can agree there.
It's alright. We get it. It's super common that a guy can't stay under 4.50 for his ERA and can't stay in the majors in his career and then suddenly it all just clicks and next thing you know you're a top 5 pitcher in all of baseball at 28 years old like that. Happens all the time.
Who's Bossio?
A link to his velocities over the years, starting with his rookie year, would be great. I'll be waiting.
Lol wait, really? So you say, “there wasn’t a huge increase in velocity,” then when the actual numbers are brought up you admit that you’ve never seen year to year velocity numbers for him? AKA you were just taking a shot in the dark that the velocity has been the same without actually having looked into it? And then ask me to do the leg work for you?
My goodness, that is good. “Genius.”
Hint: Fangraphs. I hope that makes it easy enough that you don’t have to keep waiting.
Home plate ump has been horrendous on both sides.
I have seen them. I just wanted you to provide them since you're the one making the claim.
You make it easy to make you look stupid.
Baez with the worst at bat I've ever seen that resulted in a tie game in the 9th
It would have been a hyperbole if I said he should have used a golf club.
You did say a tag up was the greatestplay in World Series history a few months ago.
That tag up was huge. They don't walk Rizzo to get to Zobrist without it.
(Granted Rizzo could have hit a home run which obviously would be a better outcome.)
Honest question for all Cubs fans who think Arietta has never taken PEDs. Beyond any players who have failed a drug test and been suspended by the MLB already, over/under 0.5 players currently in the Cubs organization that have taken PEDs. What are you taking?
Honest question for all Cubs fans who think Arietta has never taken PEDs. Beyond any players who have failed a drug test and been suspended by the MLB already, over/under 0.5 players currently in the Cubs organization that have taken PEDs. What are you taking?
Also one comment on the Arrieta thing... it's pretty well known the Orioles screw up the pitchers in their system by trying to get them to all pitch to their system.
Honest question for all Cubs fans who think Arietta has never taken PEDs. Beyond any players who have failed a drug test and been suspended by the MLB already, over/under 0.5 players currently in the Cubs organization that have taken PEDs. What are you taking?
Easy, I believe Quintana was suspended 50 games as a member of theyankeesmets (or just released by the mets)...what were the odds on the over? I am here to collect!
Guess you missed the whole “beyond any players who have failed a drug test and been suspended by the MLB already” part.
I might have, I don't often like to read everything
With back to back last inning losses, the Brewers could really use some time to recharge. Maybe they should consider calling today's game due to rain.
Says the guy who literally just asked me to provide him with the numbers to show the velocity of his pitches throughout his career AFTER making the claim that his velocity hasn’t changed throughout his career. And then AFTER that pulls up some random website nobody’s ever used and says “hey look I found the numbers that I claim I had already seen but obviously hadn’t or I wouldn’t be asking you to find them and then saying hey look I found them!”
Here you go, “genius.”
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4153&position=P
Not too hard to comprehend. Slider in 2010 with Baltimore comes in at 85.3. In 2015 it’s at 90.8. Hmm. No velocity change there at all.
But yeah I’m full of sh!t, despite telling you the exact numbers while you literally claim you’ll be waiting because the numbers can’t be found. Lol. This is too good.
Here’s an idea. Next time you think to yourself, “I don’t think I can find this information,” go to this website called Google.com, type in what you’re trying to find, and chances are you’ll find it. It takes like 15 seconds max usually. Worth it.
I never claimed his velocity never changed THROUGHOUT his career. Not once. I also asked you to provide a link because you made a specific claim which gives you the burden of proof.
Let me try to explain this to you like you are a child.
-You claimed Arrieta used PEDs to become the "best pitcher in baseball" in his age 29 season. (2015)
-You later also indicate he would have used in his age 28 season (2014) based on his success.
-The lower velocity on the slider you reference is in 2010, his age 24 season. You then reference the 5 mph increase by 2015, a period of 5 years.
-Let me repeat - 5 years. Nevermind that the velocity on that pitch gradually increased over time during these 5 years as he moved into his physical prime. This was not a one year or even a two year jump.
-The biggest jump on his slider was actually between 2011 and 2012. Yet during this time period he was still terrible in Baltimore. If he was using PEDs during this point why didn't his performance follow suit? That's the narrative you keep pushing.
-From the time he joined the Cubs in July of 2013 until becoming "the best pitcher in baseball" in 2015, his velocity on the slider, and really all of his pitches, was extremely consistent. Most differences on a month-by-month basis were negligible.
-Logically, you claim that PEDs are responsible for his success. Yet any velocity increases occurred over a long period of time while his performance remained well below average. His velocity at the time of becoming a Cub, where he first found success after changing his mechanics as he was entering his prime, had basically leveled off.
-Logically, this disputes the entire basis for your argument. The numbers don't show what you think and say they do.
-If PEDs are responsible for his success, why did his velocity increase over a period of multiple years yet we did not see the same improvement in his outcomes? It just doesn't add up.
I'm looking forward to seeing how you move the goalposts.
Yep, like Zach Davies...
Honest question for all Cubs fans who think Arietta has never taken PEDs. Beyond any players who have failed a drug test and been suspended by the MLB already, over/under 0.5 players currently in the Cubs organization that have taken PEDs. What are you taking?
Haven't you guys figured out that wades never gives an inch and responds every time? So if you are tired of his responses, don't engage him.
I enjoy making him look foolish and I find his inexplicable responses that fly in the face of reason and logic fascinating.
I'm stealing this from someone. But I wanna do it.
(http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/slides/photos/004/042/049/hi-res-0d5658378f6aa124a83f31d17d5c11cd_crop_north.jpg?w=630&h=420&q=75)
Wait, what? I brought up the claim? Uhh, no, you're the one who said his velocity has never changed, which I showed is clearly false. You asked for his velocity from his rookie year to present day, but now you're going to dispute that because it changed over the course of his career rather than one night it's not valid? What will you look for next?
Wow, the guy's month by month velocities didn't vary much. I'm shocked, I'll tell ya. Because that's definitely the time you'd see the increase in production with PED use because the MLB has so much time off to train in season. You definitely wouldn't see it from one year to the next through an offseason when he goes from a guy who can't stay under a 4.50 ERA to suddenly a 2.53 ERA. Hmm...
But yeah, his month to month velocities within seasons are the same. No chance he took steroids! It's indisputable, what was I thinking?
Again, this stuff is great. Mind blowing, really.
(https://media.tenor.com/images/00c468e1376366da8459118704f859fe/tenor.gif)
Don't take the bait, Vander!
Not surprising that you ignored every point that discredits your point of view. To be expected.
You must have struggled mightily in logic at Marquette.
Look at the numbers on a month-by-month and year-over-year basis combined with his performance and how his career has progressed and you don't have a leg to stand on.
Baez is always excitable but even-keel Kris Bryant was showing some emotion after his blast in the 10th.
The irony of that coming from a guy who uses "baby face," "chubby," and "month to month velocity consistency" as proof that guys haven't used PEDs. LOL!
You really are a dimwit.
His month-to-month velo is part of a larger picture when looking a his career as a whole. Instead you look at two numbers over the course of 5 years, which tell no story whatsoever.
But you stick to surface level numbers instead of digging in and looking at the big picture.
Why did Arrieta still stink in Baltimore even though his velocity had already increased?
How did PED usage suddenly turn his career around with the Cubs even though his velocity had already leveled off prior to joining the organization?
I'd love some reasonable responses to those questions as well as the questions in my other post. Unfortunately you've shown that you're not capable of that.
Please, oh please, stop the insanity, VBMG! I've been caught up in before too and I recognize that it's hard not to respond because his points are so bizarre and irrational and illogical and his reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired but it's possible. Just let it go. Please! ;D
You really are a dimwit.
His month-to-month velo is part of a larger picture when looking a his career as a whole. Instead you look at two numbers over the course of 5 years, which tell no story whatsoever.
But you stick to surface level numbers instead of digging in and looking at the big picture.
Why did Arrieta still stink in Baltimore even though his velocity had already increased?
How did PED usage suddenly turn his career around with the Cubs even though his velocity had already leveled off prior to joining the organization?
I'd love some reasonable responses to those questions as well as the questions in my other post. Unfortunately you've shown that you're not capable of that.
This is an honest suggestion. Read up on HGH and its benefits. Use some logic as to how it would help a pitcher. For someone who likes to pretend to be so much smarter (and seriously, your awesome adjectives like "dimwit" and "genius" just show your insecurities, so keep going with them) you are genuinely clueless as to the benefits of PEDs for pitchers. You continue to obsess over velocity, and despite the fact that you can make false claims about his velocity remaining consistent throughout his career, the point is that even if we pretend for a minute you weren't entirely wrong about that, velocity changes mean absolutely nothing, just like baby faces and pudginess mean absolutely nothing. You're thinking of anabolic steroids, which I have never claimed Arietta used. That's the days of Mac and (I know this is going to hurt, so make sure you're sitting down when you read this) Sammy Sosa. Those days are gone.
Please, oh please, stop the insanity, VBMG! I've been caught up in before too and I recognize that it's hard not to respond because his points are so bizarre and irrational and illogical and his reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired but it's possible. Just let it go. Please! ;D
You're right. It's my fault. As you said, it's just so bizarre, irrational, and illogical that i have a hard time letting it go. Need to do better as far as that goes.
Anyway, looking forward to a much less stressful game tonight.
Please, oh please, stop the insanity, VBMG! I've been caught up in before too and I recognize that it's hard not to respond because his points are so bizarre and irrational and illogical and his reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired but it's possible. Just let it go. Please! ;D
So how specifically, from 2013 to 2015, did PEDs help Arrieta become "the best pitcher in baseball"? Enlighten me.
I enjoy seeing Cubs fans claiming they're so much smarter than everyone else by comparing hurricane relocations of a series to a manager wanting to get his team extra rest for the team's convenience
These posts are the best. "You're right. I'm so much better than him. I'm better than getting sucked in." (But I continue to carry on.)
Lol. If you want to be the bigger man have at it. Me? I enjoy seeing Cubs fans claiming they're so much smarter than everyone else by comparing hurricane relocations of a series to a manager wanting to get his team extra rest for the team's convenience and using the physical appearance of a person's face as proof of a lack of PED use. It's awesome. You two are definitely way smarter than me and very much the bigger men. The difference between us is I have no problem acknowledging that.
Having said that:
Here's one of millions of Google searches you could do. A guy who's so much smarter than me but can't figure out how to find why athletes might use HGH...
https://www.google.com/search?q=benefits+of+hgh+for+athletes&oq=benefits+of+hgh+for+athletes&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0j0i8i30k1.54798.55140.0.55528.4.4.0.0.0.0.115.417.1j3.4.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.4.411...0i7i30k1j0i8i7i30k1.0.K6ZdgPG-aX4
Sorry I have to ask. I'm sure it was discussed but I wasn't following the thread during the series relocation.
What is your argument against moving the series to a neutral site?
Also I have to ask, what is your complaint about the Cubs moving the game back 5 hours? The Brewers had an off day the day before so it didn't effect them at all. Literally nothing changed for the Brewers.
(https://i.imgur.com/LaJ9Kmo.gif?noredirect)
How valuable can a player be if his team finishes 30 games out of 1st place? He could be replaced by a Minor Leaguer and the team would have the same chance to win their division.He can be incredibly valuable...isn't the best player in the league valuable? It's an award given to an individual, I don't understand why his team makes any difference.
Is that fair? I would say probably not, but neither is life.
"I used to get drawn in by him myself, but I've learned my lesson! I'm a bigger, better man now!" (But I'll continue to go and find cute GIFs to share to show how much of a bigger man I am.)
Keep up the good work, MM!
LOL
https://twitter.com/1057fmthefan/status/911217264166359040
So put in play the same restrictions the Bulls had when they were playing the Bucks in the Playoffs a few years ago, is what they're asking?Yes, and it's still worth poking fun at both of them for it.
Yes, and it's still worth poking fun at both of them for it.
I genuinely don't know, but my guess is that this isn't overly uncommon in professional sports ticket sales. Certainly not something everyone does, but I doubt the Bulls were the only team to do it (heck, for all I know the Bucks might have done the same thing for the same series).It's not that uncommon, Predators have been open and adamant about it. Seahawks banned playoff sales in California for their 49ers game. I'm sure there's more.
Also, when The Fan is asking if someone should do something, that means there's no chance it's even being considered.
The collapse of the Dodgers has been quite astounding. Good thing they built up that 25 game division lead or whatever it was.
I have to admit I was rooting for the Angels to make the 2nd wild card for 2 reasons, first I wanted Trout back in the playoffs. Secondly, they went for it and tried to get better to make the playoffs, where the Twins took the opposite route. But alas, they really aren't that good (like most of the AL) and played to 4-6 over their last 10. Technically they are still alive, but they aren't playing like it.
I was surprised to see so many empty seats last night and so many graphics on the telecast about tickets still available for this weekend. The crowd was definitely pro-Cubs last night.
Is it possible that many Brewers fans don't want to go because there are so many "obnoxious Cubs fans" in the stadium?
These posts are the best. "You're right. I'm so much better than him. I'm better than getting sucked in." (But I continue to carry on.)
Lol. If you want to be the bigger man have at it. Me? I enjoy seeing Cubs fans claiming they're so much smarter than everyone else by comparing hurricane relocations of a series to a manager wanting to get his team extra rest for the team's convenience and using the physical appearance of a person's face as proof of a lack of PED use. It's awesome. You two are definitely way smarter than me and very much the bigger men. The difference between us is I have no problem acknowledging that.
Having said that:
Here's one of millions of Google searches you could do. A guy who's so much smarter than me but can't figure out how to find why athletes might use HGH...
https://www.google.com/search?q=benefits+of+hgh+for+athletes&oq=benefits+of+hgh+for+athletes&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0j0i8i30k1.54798.55140.0.55528.4.4.0.0.0.0.115.417.1j3.4.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.4.411...0i7i30k1j0i8i7i30k1.0.K6ZdgPG-aX4
There's a lot of mediocre in the AL this season. The Angels have dropped 4 straight, the M's have dropped 6 straight, the Twins had lost 5 of 6 before last night. In the NL, the Rockies have dropped 4 straight to the Giants and Padres. I don't think this is what MLB was envisioning when they added the second Wild Card.
I'm just embarrassed for him at this point.
I hope the Brewers don't start doing this. Its not my favorite look that the stadium is half full with Cubs fans, but its our reality. Given the geography, market size, and economics of the fanbases, its not something I feel overly embarrassed about as a Brewers fan. I wouldn't want the Brewers to jack up the prices for Cubs games and then not give MKE market fans first crack, but if its an open market and there are open seats, just gotta let the chips fall where they may.
The Brewers did their fans an early crack at a lot of Cubs tickets this season. They did a discounted weekend presale. The only issue was that the email was sent out to anyone that has purchased from brewers.com. Then the passcode was up for grabs.
I actually cut back on Wrigley tickets this year and loaded up on Miller Park games because of this presale.
"I used to get drawn in by him myself, but I've learned my lesson! I'm a bigger, better man now!" (But I'll continue to go and find cute GIFs to share to show how much of a bigger man I am.)
Keep up the good work, MM!
For someone who said "I don't care about sports that much, I barley clapped when Marquette beat Nova" You sure as crap have some huge complex against the Chicago Cubs. News flash, the cubs are rivals with the Cards and the White Sox. Not some team from Milwaukee that can't fill their stadium on a night game in a division race with 3/4 of the attendees for the away team.
LOL
https://twitter.com/1057fmthefan/status/911217264166359040
There's a lot of mediocre in the AL this season. The Angels have dropped 4 straight, the M's have dropped 6 straight, the Twins had lost 5 of 6 before last night. In the NL, the Rockies have dropped 4 straight to the Giants and Padres. I don't think this is what MLB was envisioning when they added the second Wild Card.
Hmmm... stealing an opposing team's ticket code. Where have I heard that before.
The replies on that are almost as bad as Wades. Are Brewer fans just that dumb?
Says the guy who said a tag up was the best play in the history of the World Series.
But yeah, I'm sure all Tweets about Chicago sports are well thought out, well reasoned, intelligent, calm thoughts.
Good stuff as always.
"Best heads up play by a player" But lets be real.
Also can someone find wades post rant about him not caring about sports? It's in this thread somewhere.
Interesting to note that the all time record between the Cubs and Brewers is 167-160. Was very surprised when I learned that is was near .500. Brewers actually held the lead as recently as September 2015.
"Best heads up play by a player"
"Best heads up play by a player" But lets be real.
Also can someone find wades post rant about him not caring about sports? It's in this thread somewhere.
You mean Chapman? He was trying to throw heat away from himself. Maddon made great moves in both games. Some people got upset he pitched Chapman so much in game 6 but it was an elimination game. You don't pull your best relief for pitching that has been absolutely shaky throughout the playoffs.
And game 7? Hendricks was never going to go past 5. He was routinely pulled even when he was doing a solid job during the regular season. Lester and Ross were always going to come into the game. Some bad luck where a 55 foot pitch bounced off a catchers mask made it look like a bad move. And Almora's pinch run? Best play in world series history.
With back to back last inning losses, the Brewers could really use some time to recharge. Maybe they should consider calling today's game due to rain.
Haven't you guys figured out that wades never gives an inch and responds every time? So if you are tired of his responses, don't engage him.
I'm sure the Cubs wouldn't object. No time to make it up, so that's one game closer to the division while also getting an extra day of rest.
Lol. Man this stuff is getting really good. I'm all for people attempting to insult my intelligence. I say stupid stuff all the time, most of the time to get a rise out of people (it evidently works) but sometimes I'm just plain dumb.
But wow, if Cubs fans are going to go all in on the "you can't be this stupid you dimwit!" or the "are you really this dumb? I can't even respond to you anymore (only to respond 15 minutes later)" at least don't post "WTF stupid" posts right after each other.
You really think if the Cubs Tuesday game at St. Louis got rained out the MLB would just say, "Well, you're each playing 161 games this year!" That is outstanding stuff. (Although, with the way Joe Maddon goes about his business he might just have the Cubs "forget" that they had to make up the game and it might work out for him.)
Gotta love it when the guy that makes a tongue in cheek post is way too self anxiousness to recognize the tongue in cheek response. ;D ;D ;D
(https://media.tenor.com/images/8c571ce6938b5894ec4bef585fab78ff/tenor.gif)
"Way too self anxiousness." That's a new one.
(http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/files/2017/04/Almora_1280a_e3jf41nn_70iiy1v9.jpg)
It's actually 4.
It's actually 4.
5 is right. Cardinals won.
Man, the last two days have been like when you get kicked in the nuts hard enough that your gut hurts.
wow. that had the feel of a potentially season saving win. let's hope that starts some momentum.
When the Cubs scored in the top of the 10th, I thought it was game, series, season for the Brewers. Be interesting to see what momentum they can pull from that, though I do think the division is already out of reach.
Yesterday, Jose Abreu became just the third player in MLB history to log 25 HRs and 100 RBI in each of his first 4 seasons. Joining Joe DiMaggio and Albert Pujols.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Published-Images/Published-Photos/i-MQJ4zX4/0/b0b30f08/S/Ryan%20Theriot-S.jpg)[img]
Theriot is dead to me.
Jon Lester must be a blast at parties.
http://deadspin.com/jon-lester-is-not-happy-about-the-nacho-man-1818807336
He's been spending too much time with Lackey.
Jon Lester must be a blast at parties.
http://deadspin.com/jon-lester-is-not-happy-about-the-nacho-man-1818807336
Jon Lester must be a blast at parties.
http://deadspin.com/jon-lester-is-not-happy-about-the-nacho-man-1818807336
I understand it when it is happening during a game and a guy doesn't want his focus interrupted. If he snapped at Addison in the dugout - no problem. But to be a douche in comments AFTER the game? Says a lot about Lester.
Which reminds me of the single thing that has bugged me more than any other is sports this year. Ron Coomer calling Lester "Johnny". Not once during a game but over and over and over..... ad nauseum. Sometimes a dozen times in an inning.
Does Justin Wilson even make the playoff roster at this point?
His last week or so was promising. Hopefully this is just a blip, but he needs to prove himself in the next 5 games to be on that roster. Problem is that after Montgomery and Duensing, it's him or Zastryzny if you want another lefty in the pen.
Every Cubs starter lost 1-3 MPH on his fastball this season. Hmm...
It's a relatively old staff. I would assume this is natural decline. I doubt they had a powwow saying "Hey, we won the World Series, let's get off the juice."
Or it could be a pitching philosophy change to not throw as hard to go deeper in games. Who knows. Anomalies happen all over the place. A career fringe MLB player in Scooter Gennett just picked this year to take steroids and hit almost 30 homers? I don't think steroids is the answer to every variance.
Maybe if it was 1 of their 5 starters. All 5? Hmm...
I swear to god I'm going to pistol whip the next person that engages wades on this.Shenanigans
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/11-03-2015/k6pwFt.gif)
Maybe if it was 1 of their 5 starters. All 5? Hmm...
Every Cubs starter lost 1-3 MPH on his fastball this season. Hmm...
(https://media.giphy.com/media/vWDrezW0rMjmM/giphy.gif)
Me too. If you could show me any other time in the history of baseball that every single starter saw their velocity decrease from one season to the next I will stop laughing.
I'll wait.
Me too. If you could show me any other time in the history of baseball that every single starter saw their velocity decrease from one season to the next I will stop laughing.
I'll wait.
Me too. If you could show me any other time in the history of baseball that every single starter saw their velocity decrease from one season to the next I will stop laughing.
I'll wait.
Maybe if it was 1 of their 5 starters. All 5? Hmm...
(https://media1.popsugar-assets.com/files/thumbor/j4bg0hdRCObvGuDzJHMjqSYJN5Y/fit-in/1024x1024/filters:format_auto-!!-:strip_icc-!!-/2016/02/23/006/n/1922398/caeb1c25573f3024_keanu1_.gif)
Me too. If you could show me any other time in the history of baseball that every single starter saw their velocity decrease from one season to the next I will stop laughing.
I'll wait.
Me too. If you could show me any other time in the history of baseball that every single starter saw their velocity decrease from one season to the next I will stop laughing.
I'll wait.
Me too. If you could show me any other time in the history of baseball that every single starter saw their velocity decrease from one season to the next I will stop laughing.Just shows how much adversity those guys overcame. To lose all that velocity and compete at that age and still win the division...impressive.
I'll wait.
Just shows how much adversity those guys overcame. To lose all that velocity and compete at that age and still win the division...impressive.
Yeah what great adversity they overcame to win a division in which their payroll is $34 million more than the 2nd highest payroll in the division. A measly $100 million more than the team that is in second place in the division. Unbelievable the type of adversity they had to overcome this year to win the NL Central.That drastic velocity drop is unprecedented though! Name me a team that saw that type of drop in velocity AND still went on to win the division.
Yeah what great adversity they overcame to win a division in which their payroll is $34 million more than the 2nd highest payroll in the division. A measly $100 million more than the team that is in second place in the division. Unbelievable the type of adversity they had to overcome this year to win the NL Central.
Yeah what great adversity they overcame to win a division in which their payroll is $34 million more than the 2nd highest payroll in the division. A measly $100 million more than the team that is in second place in the division. Unbelievable the type of adversity they had to overcome this year to win the NL Central.
Just shows how much adversity those guys overcame. To lose all that velocity and compete at that age and still win the division...impressive.
That drastic velocity drop is unprecedented though! Name me a team that saw that type of drop in velocity AND still went on to win the division.
Yeah it is unprecedented. Still waiting on someone to provide me with that ever happening before.
Quintana wasn't on the Cubs last year.
Yeah what great adversity they overcame to win a division in which their payroll is $34 million more than the 2nd highest payroll in the division. A measly $100 million more than the team that is in second place in the division. Unbelievable the type of adversity they had to overcome this year to win the NL Central.
http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/05/03/about-those-cubs-velocity-issues-well-some-of-it-may-be-a-wrigley-problem/
Most of the velocity issues are happening at Wrigley.
I regret even asking but...
You are saying that every Cubs starter was taking steroids and they all stopped this year. As a result, all of their velocities are down.
Why did they all stop if it worked so well last year? Why did all four guys decide to quit at the same time? I mean it would be pretty suspicious if all of their velocities dropped at the same time. Why not continue since they hadn't been caught?
I regret even asking but...
You are saying that every Cubs starter was taking steroids and they all stopped this year. As a result, all of their velocities are down.
Why did they all stop if it worked so well last year? Why did all four guys decide to quit at the same time? I mean it would be pretty suspicious if all of their velocities dropped at the same time. Why not continue since they hadn't been caught?
Lester is going to be 33 and had pitched 457 and 1/3 innings over the last two years going into this season.
Lackey of is 38 and had pitched 429 and 2/3 innings over the last two years going into this season.
Arrieta is 31 and has pitched 468 and 1/3 innings over the last two years going into this season.
It is stunning, absolutely stunning that the velocities of pitchers in their 30s decreased after two years of massive workloads and pitching into late October and November. Something underhanded must be afoot.
Absolutely. I don't think any team had its 5 starters throw more innings than the Cub starters last year. Cleveland was the other team that played as many games, but a quick look and it seems like their 5 starters threw hundreds of innings less.
The most hilarious aspect is to insinuate Kyle Hendricks used something. It's a great way to reinforce that you're a nutjob with no credibility though.
I regret even asking but...
You are saying that every Cubs starter was taking steroids and they all stopped this year. As a result, all of their velocities are down.
Why did they all stop if it worked so well last year? Why did all four guys decide to quit at the same time? I mean it would be pretty suspicious if all of their velocities dropped at the same time. Why not continue since they hadn't been caught?
I notice this has been ignored...
I mean the guy who brought it up has the feature article on ESPN's MLB page. So I guess if ESPN is giving out their jobs to nutjobs with no credibility you nailed it. But that's nothing new, you've never got anything wrong in your life.
The most hilarious aspect is to insinuate Kyle Hendricks used something. It's a great way to reinforce that you're a nutjob with no credibility though.
(http://media.giphy.com/media/X5GdXShZrWDEQ/giphy.gif)
Burrow did say the next person to engage would get pistol whipped
I didn't engage directly. :)
The link and the blurb from the article are below. This is the hard hitting journalism at its finest.
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/20838192/mlb-season-115-recap-counted-27-head-scratching-plot-holes
I just glanced at the article, because I'm too hung over to read something quite so in-depth. The first 'head-scratching plot hole is Why is the best player so short, (Altuve)? and plot hole #2 is-- wait for it-- Why is the other best player so tall, (Judge)? Nice.
They do employ Myron Medcalf.That article links to a 538 article, which contains this blurb:
Also, Sultan posted a good article showing a possible cause of the across the board drop.
That article links to a 538 article, which contains this blurb:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/baseballs-new-pitch-tracking-system-is-just-a-bit-outside/?ex_cid=538twitter
"Park-specific calibration errors such as these may explain other aberrant MLB trends. Despite the aforementioned league-wide hike in measured velocity, Chicago Cubs starters have registered lower fastball velocities than last year, sparking concern among Cubs fans. Writers have pointed to poor starts by Chicago pitchers as evidence that the velocity drop-offs are real, and even suggested that it could be part of a conscious effort by Cubs pitchers to decrease fatigue. But the far simpler explanation is bad data: If the club’s pitch tracker is poorly calibrated, it could make it look like pitchers are losing velocity when in fact the readings are just wrong. Supporting this idea is the fact that opposing teams’ pitchers in Wrigley have also registered a lower raw velocity than average. Unless the Cubs’ velocity woes are contagious, it seems likely that Statcast errors are driving some of their low numbers."
So the Cubs got new radar guns at Wrigley this season and they're reading slower velocities than they were last season? Are they shopping at Play It Again Sports for their equipment?
Glad to see the Cubs eliminate the Cardinals last night with their B lineup
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l0IykOsxLECVejOzm/source.gif)
Really not a hard concept. The comparison isn't the Cubs pitchers' velocity at home compared to on the road. It's the Cubs pitchers' velocity in 2017 compared to 2016. Unless the Cubs "updated" their radars at Wrigley with faulty new radars this season, they were being gunned by the same radars as they were last year so even if they are reading slower velocities, they were also reading slower velocities last season. Not hard to comprehend, but to some I guess it might be?They switched/updated the technologies in 2017.
Any Scoopers going to WC or DS games? Just got my tickets for Game 4 at Wrigley.
A belated congrats to all of my Cubbie fan friends on here.
They have as good a chance as anybody to win the World Series. They've been there, they know what the pressure chamber is like, and they have a lot of talent. Obviously, they need their best pitchers to perform well, and that's a big "if." But it's even been a big if for one of the best pitchers in baseball history - a guy named Kershaw.
I wouldn't want to face the Cubs if I were another team in the NL playoffs. Maybe if I was on the Indians, I'd want another crack at 'em, though.
Count me in the chorus of those who think the Indians are the team to beat.
It will be interesting to see how the Cubs set up their postseason rotation. Lester has struggled recently and Arrieta is not 100%. The top two have to be Hendricks and Quintana at this point.
Really not a hard concept. The comparison isn't the Cubs pitchers' velocity at home compared to on the road. It's the Cubs pitchers' velocity in 2017 compared to 2016. Unless the Cubs "updated" their radars at Wrigley with faulty new radars this season, they were being gunned by the same radars as they were last year so even if they are reading slower velocities, they were also reading slower velocities last season. Not hard to comprehend, but to some I guess it might be?
Really not a hard concept. The comparison isn't the Cubs pitchers' velocity at home compared to on the road. It's the Cubs pitchers' velocity in 2017 compared to 2016. Unless the Cubs "updated" their radars at Wrigley with faulty new radars this season, they were being gunned by the same radars as they were last year so even if they are reading slower velocities, they were also reading slower velocities last season. Not hard to comprehend, but to some I guess it might be?
I'll probably regretting asking/engaging but I'm genuinely curious about something.
I just need a Yes/No answer to this. Nothing more.
Is your contention that all 5 Cubs starting pitchers were taking PEDs during the 2016 season and then, either collectively or individually, decided to stop using them for the 2017 season?
I'll probably regretting asking/engaging but I'm genuinely curious about something.
I just need a Yes/No answer to this. Nothing more.
Is your contention that all 5 Cubs starting pitchers were taking PEDs during the 2016 season and then, either collectively or individually, decided to stop using them for the 2017 season?
I'll probably regretting asking/engaging but I'm genuinely curious about something.
I just need a Yes/No answer to this. Nothing more.
Is your contention that all 5 Cubs starting pitchers were taking PEDs during the 2016 season and then, either collectively or individually, decided to stop using them for the 2017 season?
No.
I'll probably regretting asking/engaging but I'm genuinely curious about something.
I just need a Yes/No answer to this. Nothing more.
Is your contention that all 5 Cubs starting pitchers were taking PEDs during the 2016 season and then, either collectively or individually, decided to stop using them for the 2017 season?
The most hilarious aspect is to insinuate Kyle Hendricks used something. It's a great way to reinforce that you're a nutjob with no credibility though.
Not agreeing with Wades...Not at all, but this line of thinking seems antiquated. I think the cases of Dee Gordon and Raul Mondesi Jr. show that it isn't just power guys that use PEDs.
So dem Brewers gotta chance, ey?
So dem Brewers gotta chance, ey?
Are brewers fans worried about any type of regression by the young players? Kind of like Schwarber. If one or two of them regress and the pitching doesn't comeback as strong (Anderson/Nelson), they are back below .500.
Arrieta is throwing a sim game Wednesday which means he's likely out for the games in Washington and sets up nicely for Game 3.
I can't decide who I'd like for games 1 and 2. Hendricks is the best pitcher right now, however, with the Nats struggles with left handed pitching I'd consider Quintana and Lester. Lester though, has been struggling though.
I think I would go Hendricks, Quintana, Arrieta, Lester.
How 'bout them Minnesota Twins? First team to lose 100+ games the season before and make the playoffs.
I imagine Scoop can unite against the Yankees on Tuesday.
That being said .. the first at-bat for the Twins in the WC game is house money.
Managers usually like to "dance with the girl that brung ya," not to mention favoring veterans who have significant postseason experience. Hard to imagine Lester being the No. 4 starter. But Maddon likes to do things differently, so who knows? Maybe he'll bat the pitcher clean-up!
Arrieta is throwing a bullpen instead of a simulated game, it was reported. The Cubs insist there is no setback and he is still on target to start ( I would assume game 4 at this point but who knows).
It's also being reported that Scherzer may be held back until game 3, which means he can't start two times in the series. Strasburg is a stud though so he would be able to do so.
Cubs set their NLDS rotation:
Game 1 - Hendricks
Game 2 - Lester
Game 3 - Quintana
Game 4 - Arrieta
Cubs set their NLDS rotation:
Game 1 - Hendricks
Game 2 - Lester
Game 3 - Quintana
Game 4 - Arrieta
That Altuve guy can kinda hit huh?
Kind of reminds me of Daniel Murphy in 2015.
That Altuve guy can kinda hit huh?
He had a really nice postseason, but Altuve is 10x the player Daniel Murphy will ever be.
He had a really nice postseason, but Altuve is 10x the player Daniel Murphy will ever be.
Altuve will have 10x better career than Murphy, more factual statement.
Also, juice.
What does that even mean? Like 10 times the homers, RBIs, hits, BA, etc.? I’m going to go ahead and say Altuve will not be “10x the player” or have “10x the career” that Murphy has. Better? No doubt. But Murphy is pretty dang good.
And yeah. He’s about the second most obvious PED user in baseball behind Arietta.
What does that even mean? Like 10 times the homers, RBIs, hits, BA, etc.? I’m going to go ahead and say Altuve will not be “10x the player” or have “10x the career” that Murphy has. Better? No doubt. But Murphy is pretty dang good.
And yeah. He’s about the second most obvious PED user in baseball behind Arietta.
Seek help.
What does that even mean? Like 10 times the homers, RBIs, hits, BA, etc.? I’m going to go ahead and say Altuve will not be “10x the player” or have “10x the career” that Murphy has. Better? No doubt. But Murphy is pretty dang good.
And yeah. He’s about the second most obvious PED user in baseball behind Arietta.
Well at least it's not limited to the cubs.
As a former catcher and Indians fan (and Yankee hater), I hope you can forgive a little hyperbole, but this is one of the greatest plays I can recall (https://youtu.be/j_6NVsvPhYY). Setting the stage, this is after the Yankees got their leadoff hitter to second in the top of the 11th (and after a five-run comeback by the Tribe earlier in the game).
Thank goodness for replay.
Wow, that series turned in a heartbeat. Cubs up 3-1 in the 8th and on the verge of going up 2-0 in the series before heading back to Wrigley, then the Nats explode for 5 runs to take the lead and win the game. Now the series is tied with Scherzer coming to the hill on Monday. All the pressure immediately shifted back to the Cubs.Eh Cubs still have homefield advantage, Nats have plenty of pressure to actually win a DS.
I feel like I'm repeating myself from last postseason, but Maddon made some odd bullpen decisions tonight.I’m ok with them. Players gotta execute.
I think Paul Goldschmidt is making a case for some national recognition of his awesomeness.
As a former catcher and Indians fan (and Yankee hater), I hope you can forgive a little hyperbole, but this is one of the greatest plays I can recall (https://youtu.be/j_6NVsvPhYY). Setting the stage, this is after the Yankees got their leadoff hitter to second in the top of the 11th (and after a five-run comeback by the Tribe earlier in the game).
Thank goodness for replay.
Lindor clearly taking lessons and advice from his countryman and teammate Javy. Now if only Baez could get some lessons in return about plate discipline.
Also, talking to my buddy who is also a huge Indians fan, thank god it was Gomes back there. Perez doesnt make that throw.
Yankees really shot themselves in the foot. I have no clue why you pitch to Lindor there. At worst, you walk him and you're still up 4 with 2 outs and you're facing Kipnis. But no, you pitch to one of the most timely hitters in the league right now.
Huh? You pitch to him because the bases are loaded and you don't want to walk in a run in a 5 run baseball game. They literally had no option but to pitch to Lindor.
I feel like I'm repeating myself from last postseason, but Maddon made some odd bullpen decisions tonight.
Huh? You pitch to him because the bases are loaded and you don't want to walk in a run in a 5 run baseball game. They literally had no option but to pitch to Lindor.
You sacrifice a run to face a player who bats .230 and has significantly less output in all major hitting categories than an All Star. Don't talk like I'm a moron, its not a preposterous thought with a 5 run lead. Used to happen with Bonds. I'd do it with Stanton in that situation. Same with Ramirez if it had been 2 batters later. 1/2/3 run game, completely different story.
It is 100% preposterous.
You sacrifice a run to face a player who bats .230 and has significantly less output in all major hitting categories than an All Star. Don't talk like I'm a moron, its not a preposterous thought with a 5 run lead. Used to happen with Bonds. I'd do it with Stanton in that situation. Same with Ramirez if it had been 2 batters later. 1/2/3 run game, completely different story.
Don't talk like I'm a moron, its not a preposterous thought with a 5 run lead. Used to happen with Bonds. I'd do it with Stanton in that situation. Same with Ramirez if it had been 2 batters later. 1/2/3 run game, completely different story.
An intentional walk with the bases loaded has happened 5 times in the history of baseball. Once was with Bonds, (by Buck Showlater and the D-Backs in '98). It also happened to Josh Hamilton in '08. The other 3 are before 1945.
Agreed. The lefty was ready but he let RHP Edwards face Harper then let LHP Montgomery face Zimmerman instead of bringing in Davis. It wasn't Joe's best night but unlike Game 7, his players didn't bail him out this time.
I was and am still ok with Edwards facing Harper. Lind got a lucky hit and Edwards made a horrible pitch. I'm less ok with the decision to keep Montgomery in (although he does generate a ton of ground ball and I believe he is split neutral).
The problem was that because Martin, Lackey, and Wilson all made the roster, the only right handed option was Davis. That would have been a nice spot for Rondon and I think leaving him off the roster was questionable.
If Martin is on the roster for speed and defense, why wasn't he playing LF in place of Zobrist in the 8th? He may have actually had a shot at Zimmerman's HR.
Very frustrating but just have to move on.
Can't lie. I don't really get the usage of Sale and Verlander here. If this was the plan why weren't they just the starters? The managers had to be hoping for magic from Porcello and Morton, I guess.
Cubs did everything possible to lose that game. 4 errors, terrible baserunning, no hits for 6 innings, and the Nats still can't win. They are just a terrible postseason team.
Great start by Q. Not surprised he got a ND. But a great start.
Can't lie. I don't really get the usage of Sale and Verlander here. If this was the plan why weren't they just the starters? The managers had to be hoping for magic from Porcello and Morton, I guess.
Either way, screw the AL East. Screw both of their stupid short walls in right field. Hope the Astros get their groove back and the Indians have Bauer on point again.
I get Sale for the Red Sox, as they were low on options after blowing through the bullpen in the first three games and it was win or go home, but Verlander surprised me, at least that they didn't wait to put him in at the beginning of an inning. Pretty safe for them to use him up since they also had Keuchel ready to go in a game 5 on regular rest. I wasn't really watching the Cubs game but I flipped to it the inning they pulled Scherzer. That was the most baffling decision to me. The guy is pitching a no-hitter for 6 1/3 and finally gives up a hit and they pull him for a guy with a 5.88 ERA? And nobody seems to be talking about it.
I get Sale for the Red Sox, as they were low on options after blowing through the bullpen in the first three games and it was win or go home, but Verlander surprised me, at least that they didn't wait to put him in at the beginning of an inning. Pretty safe for them to use him up since they also had Keuchel ready to go in a game 5 on regular rest. I wasn't really watching the Cubs game but I flipped to it the inning they pulled Scherzer. That was the most baffling decision to me. The guy is pitching a no-hitter for 6 1/3 and finally gives up a hit and they pull him for a guy with a 5.88 ERA? And nobody seems to be talking about it.I actually think pulling Scherzer was the right call. Coming off an injury, he looked gas and was struggling to locate his pitches. Not sure Solis is the best option there, but I think you can justify pulling him. Pitching to Rizzo though...
I actually think pulling Scherzer was the right call. Coming off an injury, he looked gas and was struggling to locate his pitches. Not sure Solis is the best option there, but I think you can justify pulling him. Pitching to Rizzo though...
I get Sale for the Red Sox, as they were low on options after blowing through the bullpen in the first three games and it was win or go home, but Verlander surprised me, at least that they didn't wait to put him in at the beginning of an inning. Pretty safe for them to use him up since they also had Keuchel ready to go in a game 5 on regular rest. I wasn't really watching the Cubs game but I flipped to it the inning they pulled Scherzer. That was the most baffling decision to me. The guy is pitching a no-hitter for 6 1/3 and finally gives up a hit and they pull him for a guy with a 5.88 ERA? And nobody seems to be talking about it.
Sounds like it must be an 85 degree sunny day in Chicago.
Huge for the Nats, no? They could go Stras on full rest tomorrow, and then come back with Scherzer for game 5 on Friday?
Absolutely a huge boost to the Nats chances. Except, if there is a game 5, it is on Thursday and Scherzer would be on two days rest, so maybe he could go a couple of innings.
Rumor is TBS would not allow the game to be moved up to early afternoon today, in which case they probably would have gotten it in.
[/quote
Strasburg isn't starting due to being under the weather according to Dusty. Sticking with the same starter.
Absolutely a huge boost to the Nats chances. Except, if there is a game 5, it is on Thursday and Scherzer would be on two days rest, so maybe he could go a couple of innings.
Rumor is TBS would not allow the game to be moved up to early afternoon today, in which case they probably would have gotten it in.
Absolutely a huge boost to the Nats chances. Except, if there is a game 5, it is on Thursday and Scherzer would be on two days rest, so maybe he could go a couple of innings.
Rumor is TBS would not allow the game to be moved up to early afternoon today, in which case they probably would have gotten it in.
[/quote
Strasburg isn't starting due to being under the weather according to Dusty. Sticking with the same starter.
Stunned they are sticking with Roark.
Sounds like it must be an 85 degree sunny day in Chicago.
Stunned they are sticking with Roark.
Classic Dusty excuse train! Mold, Air conditioning, everyone sick, moving hotels.
Not even exaggerating.
Agreed.
Now, obviously, we are not privy to the information about how sick Strasburg is. Maybe he is so weakened he couldn't throw an 80 mph fastball, so he wouldn't be helping the club at all by insisting he could "gut it out."
But given what we have been told, it is stunning that a supposed "stud" pitcher can't work an elimination game because he is feeling a little under the weather.
It's odd that he threw a bullpen session on Monday and was said to be lethargic due to his illness and yesterday they ruled him out for a Wednesday start but believe that he's still going to start tomorrow. Why not wait to see how he's feeling this morning before making that announcement? Something doesn't add up logically.
I guess there's a chance that they're hoping to get 2-4 innings out of Roark and then they'll bring in Strasburg to see how long he can go. They'd then still have Gio and Scherzer available for a potential Game 5.
Latest report says that Strasburg is going to start today. Nats have yet to confirm.
A do-or-die game and a team is forced to go with a starter who has an ERA of 5.32 in his last 4 starts since their ace with an ERA under 1 since the break isn't feeling well. Strasburg definitely has some Mark Prior in him where he's not taking the mound unless everything is just right. Considering that and given how much the Nats have coddled him in his career, this comes as no surprise.
If Roark gets shelled and the Nats go home, things could get ugly.
Or Dusty knew yesterday he planned on starting Strasburg but was blowing smoke in an attempt to gain some sort of mental edge? The excuses he used made no sense.
Or Dusty knew yesterday he planned on starting Strasburg but was blowing smoke in an attempt to gain some sort of mental edge? The excuses he used made no sense.
I just don't think that's Dusty's style. Also, if this was actually a plan then the GM likely wouldn't have gotten into an on-air argument with a couple sports talk doofuses in DC nor would the team have made their star pitcher look gutless and soft.
I'm leaning towards...the Nats botched the communication of this whole thing.
Rip a guy (Strasbourg) as gutless without any facts.
Who is that player? ;)
Me I suppose. Well, guilty to a degree. But at first there were some facts at least. He wasn't going to take the ball because he was "under the weather". His manager then went on to talk about how many guys on the team were sick (though Strasburg was the only one sick enough to not play apparently). He also talked about things more related to allergies than flu-like.
Then after much scuttlebutt about it, all of a sudden he isn't too sick to pitch. This is also not his first run in with a reputation of being soft.
But, whatever the case, he took the ball when his team needed him. He has gone from possibly being a goat and a pariah to possibly being a hero.
And, as I was a jumping the gun ass-hat in this situation, I apologize to Stephen, his family, fans, baseball and mostly (because they are the only ones that will see it) the scoop community.
I wish the Cubs could find a reliever besides Davis who could throw strikes in the 8th and 9th innings.As a (now) KC fan i love Davis but, to your point, Herrara really made him dominant by owning the 8th
I just had to be a smart ass before owing up to making a mistake.
I know you weren't picking on me, I deserved to be called out. I called him soft without knowing what was up. But more importantly he took the ball and dominated.
Can everyone agree that after 16 years in the majors, at the age of 37, when you are throwing the hardest you have all season in October, and you are clearly carrying 40lbs of fat............ya need to be drug tested ASAP?
The too-good-to-be-true postseason storyline for the 2016 Cubs was that they were saved by the rain delay in G7 of the WS. It stopped Cleveland's momentum, refocused the cubs, gave Heyward the opportunity to give an inspiration speech, etc.
Wouldn't it be ironic (or maybe just coincidental) if the postseason storyline for the 2017 Cubs was that they were done in by the Oct. 10 rainout? Instead of getting to face a horsecrap pitcher, they had to face a dominant Strasburg.
Of course, the Cubs still have the chance to write their own 2017 postseason history. Then again, so did the Indians last year.
The too-good-to-be-true postseason storyline for the 2016 Cubs was that they were saved by the rain delay in G7 of the WS. It stopped Cleveland's momentum, refocused the cubs, gave Heyward the opportunity to give an inspiration speech, etc.
Wouldn't it be ironic (or maybe just coincidental) if the postseason storyline for the 2017 Cubs was that they were done in by the Oct. 10 rainout? Instead of getting to face a horsecrap pitcher, they had to face a dominant Strasburg.
Of course, the Cubs still have the chance to write their own 2017 postseason history. Then again, so did the Indians last year.
Picked Indians vs Diamondbacks in the World Series. Oops.
Tested for what? Cheeseburgers and fried Twinkies?
I didn't pick the Diamondbacks, but I certainly didn't see the Yankees in the ALCS.
Especially considering their choosing to call a game for rain on an 85 degree sunny day earlier this year because they were playing bad baseball, the team they were chasing in the division and playing against was smoking them in the series, and they had an off day while the Brewers could come to Chicago on a day off a few weeks later and then head to NYC after that game.
Karma is a b.
Seek help.
You guys have any regret over how it played out? Or are you happy with the state of the farm and the outlook for the future (which does look pretty good, but it still could have...)
I have to wonder to myself, does seeing the Yanks in the ALCS get to Brewer fans a little bit?...
The Brewers have 7 guys on MLB top 100 right now (including this years top pick Hiura-- so they couldn't have traded him). But they had plenty of capital to make a move and still have talent on the farm, but for the most part it appears they were content to contend next season.
You guys have any regret over how it played out? Or are you happy with the state of the farm and the outlook for the future (which does look pretty good, but it still could have...)
I didn't pick the Diamondbacks, but I certainly didn't see the Yankees in the ALCS.
As much as I'm trying to tell myself otherwise, I think the Cubs are in trouble tonight. They really don't have anyone who has hit Gio Gonzalez well historically. Jay is 4-11 and Contreras is 1-2 but no one else is hitting better than .216. Gio gave up 2 HRs in Game 2 but only 1 other hit. The Nats also have Scherzer available for an inning or two out of the pen. The Cubs tend to rely on the long ball but they may need to manufacture a couple runs tonight and Hendricks is going to need to be lights out. In addition, with Maddon vs Dusty, it's really anybody's guess as to what bizarre strategies could be implemented.
Are we sure the Cubs are facing Gio? It's noon and the Nats still haven't named a starter.
Beyond that, I'm concerned because the approach at the plate yesterday was AWFUL. Taking nothing away from Strasburg who was lights out, the Cubs had little patience and were fanning at everything. I dont think a single of Strasburg's Ks were looking.
I didn't pick the Diamondbacks, but I certainly didn't see the Yankees in the ALCS.
Oh, and the Indians have lost 6 straight gamessage in which they could have eliminated their competition. Ouch.
This is very true. Only 1 of Strasburg's 12 Ks was looking (against Arrieta) and I don't think he recorded a single K on a fastball. The pitches were all low and tailing down. The Cubs struck out at least 4 times on balls in the dirt. Only 19 of the 72 strikes that Strasburg threw were called strikes. Oddly, Arrieta also had 19 called strikes, but on just 53 strikes thrown. Strasburg didn't have great command but the Cubs were chasing.
Strasburg absolutely had great command, IMO. His change-up and curveball are elite pitches and he was putting them where he wanted to.
It gets worse. (Sorry, SaW.)
In 1999, they lost the ALDS to the Red Sox after being up 2-0.
In 2001, they lost the ALDS to the Mariners after being up 2-1.
In 2007, they lost the ALCS to the Red Sox after being up 3-1.
In 2013, they lost the AL WC game to the Rays.
And we know what’s happened the last two years.
If you’re keeping track at home, that’s six straight playoff appearances where they’ve been eliminated in a winner-take-all game. In three of those appearances, they gave up three straight wins to an opponent on the brink of elimination. Their record in opponent elimination games over this span is 3-17.
That’s rough.
You're right. I should have said that he wasn't pounding the strike zone but was still getting strikes because the Cubs were chasing.
In the Dodgers game on Monday night, there was a shot of Bellinger in the dugout watching past ABs against one of the DBacks relievers he would likely be facing coming up. That kept popping my head as the Cubs were chasing changeups out of the zone OVER AND OVER. Surely there should have been adjustments made by the players, if not the coaching staffs. This was the second time seeing him in a week. Very frustrating.
In the Dodgers game on Monday night, there was a shot of Bellinger in the dugout watching past ABs against one of the DBacks relievers he would likely be facing coming up. That kept popping my head as the Cubs were chasing changeups out of the zone OVER AND OVER. Surely there should have been adjustments made by the players, if not the coaching staffs. This was the second time seeing him in a week. Very frustrating.
Absolutely fair thought experiment, but this Brewers fan is okay with things as they stand. The payroll thing gets tossed around a lot, for better and worse. The worse is when small market fans use it as some sort of badge of honor to try to portray themselves as "better" fans than fans who happen to root for a high payroll ceiling team. It gets very Cardinal-esque in a hurry.
But when you back away from the emotional part of Milwaukee's financial situation, I think they need to hoard their stockpiled depth on the farm for now, and couldn't afford to trade even from depth this year. The real benefit of having a lot of money is knowing you'll be able to use it to shore up the 5-6-7 spots in the lineup, the 3-4 spots in the rotation, and the pen. When you look at the 2011 Crew, those batters/pitchers were guys like McGehee, Lucroy, Hart, Gomez, Morgan (all homegrown, 1 for 1 trades, or reclamation projects) and Randy Wolf, Narveson (amazing how healthy the rotation was until Marcum's arm fell off), and maybe the best cobbled together bullpen I've ever seen - Hawkins, Saito, Loe, Axford. They used their meager $ and their prospects for the type of pitchers small-market teams can't afford the injury risk to pay - Greinke, Marcum, K-Rod when closers still got big money, even CC going all the way back.
So even if they deal from depth this year and leave, say, their top 5 prospects alone, you have to assume (hope) they're probably trading away something along the lines of (in 2018-19 terms) one SP, one solid bullpen pitcher, one 5-6 hitter, and a couple pieces that could be used to get a a top line starter and a #3-ish starter. The problem is the Brewers can't afford to chuck market deals at a bunch of guys like Headley, Zobrist, Jason Heyward, Lester, Chapman, etc. So I think its vital they be patient waiting for their window, because in aggregate $$ and prospect capital, it can only realistically be about two years long, and they have to go all-in when the biggest mass of their current prospects are hitting their prime.
In the Dodgers game on Monday night, there was a shot of Bellinger in the dugout watching past ABs against one of the DBacks relievers he would likely be facing coming up. That kept popping my head as the Cubs were chasing changeups out of the zone OVER AND OVER. Surely there should have been adjustments made by the players, if not the coaching staffs. This was the second time seeing him in a week. Very frustrating.
Double ouch.
It just doesn't work that way. His stuff was unhittable. A very good pitcher with his best stuff. There were no adjustments to be made.
Strasburg averaged 95.4 mph with his four-seam fastball on the evening. His changeup was coming in at 88.6 mph on average.
Exact same motion on both pitches. Except, one rises in the zone, the other falls off the table.
It had nothing to do with what Cubs hitters were doing wrong. It was all about Strasburg.
Sorry. You beat me to it, VBMG.
I'm not saying they were going to magically start hitting him over all the park. I know how a changeup works, thanks for the baseball lesson. As I mentioned earlier, the only strike out looking was from Arrieta. The rest were swinging strikes. Then you go back and look at see that from the second inning on, the Cubs had only 2 ABs where they saw more than 5 pitches. They weren't working counts and its not like they were taking called strike 3s as corners were getting painted. As the game progressed, they got frustrated and chased. Thats what I was upset with. I'm taking nothing away from the pitching performance, but he definitely feasted on the fact that the Cubs got impatient and chased anything that looked like a fastball. A number of those "changeups that fall off the table" wouldn't have been strikes if they had been a straight fastball. They started low or out of the zone.
It was a frustrating and annoying game to watch all around. And I'm more concerned that their plate habits will continue into tonight.
Michael A. Tater.
Great comeback and some very sloppy Nats play.
The Cubs probably should lose Game 1 against the Dodgers, but I remember in '05, the Angels beat the Yankees in Anaheim, flew red eye to NYC, beat Yankees, then flew to Chicago and beat Sox in Game 1 of ALCS. Because baseball.
If you're the Dodgers, do you go Kershaw in Game 2 instead of Game 1?
Lackey should pitch game 1. So I'd bench Kershaw. But you also play to win that day right?You play for the series and having your ace go games 1-4-7(available) is a no brainer.
Going to guess Rondon is on the roster for the NLCS. Maddon has no faith in Wilson.
At-bat by Lind in 8th was as bad as i'e ever seen in 50 years of watching baseball.
Completely clueless to the situation.
Going to guess Rondon is on the roster for the NLCS. Maddon has no faith in Wilson.
Lackey should pitch game 1. So I'd bench Kershaw. But you also play to win that day right?
This is spot on and will be lost in the aftermath of the rest of the game. Zero reason to swing first pitch there.
Also, why not have Strasburg pinch hit and sacrifice there instead? First and second, no one out, late inning...didn't understand it
Quintana could start game 1.
Why is Lackey on the roster? He seems buried pretty deeply in the dog house.
Why is Lackey on the roster? He seems buried pretty deeply in the dog house.
I think part of it was they weren't sure about Arrieta's health and wanted someone to be able to give them a bunch of innings, if necessary.
Exactly. He was likely going to be the long man if any pitchers struggled in the first couple of innings.
I'd be tempted to go with Lackey in Game 1, Q in Game 2 and Lester in Game 3 on regular rest after his 55-pitch relief appearance. Lackey didn't have a great season but he had a 2.73 ERA over the last month. It'd give the rest of your starters a chance to get back on schedule a bit and the Cubs do not want to get into a bullpen battle with the Dodgers.
That said, my best guess in that we'll see Quintana in Game 1, Lester in Game 2 and Arrieta in Game 3.
As a person that wants to see the Cubs lose this series, I would love it if the Cubs sent out Lackey in game 1 followed by Quintana and Lester.
The old school baseball guy in me thought the same thing. But in the brave new world of baseball bunting is the scarlet letter.
Exactly. He was likely going to be the long man if any pitchers struggled in the first couple of innings.
I'd be tempted to go with Lackey in Game 1, Q in Game 2 and Lester in Game 3 on regular rest after his 55-pitch relief appearance. Lackey didn't have a great season but he had a 2.73 ERA over the last month. It'd give the rest of your starters a chance to get back on schedule a bit and the Cubs do not want to get into a bullpen battle with the Dodgers.
That said, my best guess in that we'll see Quintana in Game 1, Lester in Game 2 and Arrieta in Game 3.
The old school baseball guy in me thought the same thing. But in the brave new world of baseball bunting is the scarlet letter.If Nats were down a run I would've bunted. Down two, I wouldn't.
Quintana should go Game 1, use Lackey (or Montgomery) if you need to.
Unless you're Matt Wieters
I think you've gotta go Q in game 1 if he's ready. I think we see Hendricks in 3 as that would be normal rest and Arrieta in 4 - just a guess.
Rondon needs to make the roster.
Honestly, I'm not sure Lackey is necessary if you think Q can go in game 1 and feel good about Arrieta's hamstring.
Exactly. He was likely going to be the long man if any pitchers struggled in the first couple of innings.
Umm, I think that is exactly what happened yesterday and it wasn't Lackey.
I love that bunt against the shift.
Honestly, I'm not sure Lackey is necessary if you think Q can go in game 1 and feel good about Arrieta's hamstring.
Nope. Hendricks made it through 4. That's not the first couple innings.
(http://static.thefrisky.com/uploads/2013/06/18/karma.gif)
While true, he didn't exactly bridge to the reliable part of the pen either. I would have thought Lackey was preferrable to Montgomery, Strop, Duensing and co.
(http://p.fod4.com/p/media/5c597eb60b/uF9MjJo3QIaijySXC4iL_Confused%20Christian%20Bale.gif)
The old school baseball guy in me thought the same thing. But in the brave new world of baseball bunting is the scarlet letter.
I love me some Chris Sale, but this kind of start is pretty typical for him.
If I'm a BoSox fan, I'm worrying about this yearly late-season fade.
I didn't really care about whether he bunted or not. But he had to make Davis throw pitches. It was a terrible AB for two reasons.
1. He had just walked two batters in a row. Lind comes up and swings at the 1st pitch.
2. Maddon had his cards on the table. Davis, who never throws more than one inning was the horse he was riding for the last 2 1/3 innings. At the point when Lind stepped to the plate, Davis had already thrown 20 pitches and still had 6 outs to go (not to mention the 2 walks). Make him go deep into the count. They had a chance to get him into the 50 pitch area.
Maybe if Dusty managed as hard as he chews on his toothpick, things would have turned out different. It's not against the rules to tell Lind to look at some pitches.
Yeah definitely. It is a little league rule. If the pitcher is being wild, let him be wild. Don't help him out.
There were a lot of things that happened yesterday that violate many little league lessons.
The pitch count factor is a good point as well. Just a really terrible AB by Lind.
The other mindset is that when a pitcher has walked consecutive batters, he's more likely to throw a first ball fastball down the middle. I assume that's what Lind was looking for. IOW, it's not "wrong" to swing at the first pitch against a pitcher struggling with command but you need to be very particular about your pitch. You look for a certain pitch in a certain location and if you don't get that, you keep the bat on your shoulder. Lind's AB wasn't awful because he swung at the first pitch. It was awful because he got too anxious and rolled over a curveball on the first pitch.
Scoop at its best.
Rip a guy (Strasbourg) as gutless without any facts.
Puig is a tool, that was a bad call. The throw took him across the plate.
Maddon should probably be more mad that his bullpen kinda sucks than over that call.
That rule is a dumb as the NFL pass possession rule with its 50 caveats. Let the players play.
I don't disagree, flip side is if old rule is in place, Contreras likely gets bulldozed there.
The rule was intended to protect the catcher but what that play proves, is is unfair for the fielder and favors the runner. It was a bang bang play where the catcher had to swing to the left to catch and apply the tag.
They review it in slow motion and determine he was blocking the plate as he is receiving the ball.
I don’t think so. He clearly kicked his leg out. And I honestly don’t find it to be a bad rule. I guess it comes down to whether or not you think a fielder should be able to block a runner from being able to touch the bag. Personally I like that the fielder can’t. The only reason the runner couldn’t touch the base was because he was blocked from the base by the fielder. If a baserunner can’t block a fielder from making a clean throw (double play situation, etc) then I don’t have a problem with a fielder not being able to block a runner from being able to touch a base.
Unless the Cubs get 2 runs here it won’t end up mattering though.
And 5 minutes after I post that he makes the throw of his life.
It didn't matter but it's still an awful rule. The throw absolutely took him in that direction.
I didn't see the play, but the ESPN broadcasters seemed to immediately think the initial call would be overturned and couldn't believe Maddon was arguing.
One stupid rule helped the Cubs Thursday night. One stupid rule hurts the Cubs tonight.
Definitely a stupid rule. Lackey had it right, the softening of baseball has hurt the game.
What do the ratings say?
Definitely a stupid rule. Lackey had it right, the softening of baseball has hurt the game.
I sound like a broken record...
Joe Maddon made some odd bullpen decisions tonight.
Did Wade Davis leave the stadium or something in like the 5th inning?
I sound like a broken record...
Joe Maddon made some odd bullpen decisions tonight.
Did Wade Davis leave the stadium or something in like the 5th inning?
Maddon lucked into the Cubs offense last year masking his poor bullpen decision making. That's not happening this year.
Turner was 3-6 (now 4-7) lifetime against Lackey. Everything about bringing him in made ZERO sense, between the consecutive nights being used, bringing a starter into the middle of an inning with a runner on, his velocity hitting just low 90's.
Maddon's postgame comments were just absurd. So basically he wasn't bringing Davis in unless the Cubs got a lead. Utterly ridiculous.
back to back NLCS's
Every Cubs fan saw that happening. I had NO faith in Lackey there. I was praying he lucked into an out of some sort with Taylor cause I knew at worst Turner was going to poke a single somewhere on a bad pitch.
For any soccer fans, Maddon reminds me of the Mourinho effect. Provides magic in the locker room, gets teams to play together, but that wears off. He doesn't get toxic like Mourinho, but I think the spark he brings and provides is past.
I firmly believe that team doesn't gel quickly and get to back to back NLCS's without him. But he couldn't manage a bullpen last year and its even worse this year. He's holding the team back. Baseball is funny and the Cubs could easily win this series in 6 or 7, but margins are very thin and he's severely disadvantaged in late game pitching talent, without him bumbling through it.
KB has been as bad as Ive ever seen an elite talent be.
1) Arrieta 2) Murphy 3) Turner
Top 3 most obvious PED users in the MLB.
This is well said about Maddon. He brings a good mindset/attitude to the clubhouse, but in pressure situations, he's at best mediocre in his decision making. He'll always have a WS title to his name, but overrated for sure.
1) Arrieta 2) Murphy 3) Turner
Top 3 most obvious PED users in the MLB.
1) Arrieta 2) Murphy 3) Turner
Top 3 most obvious PED users in the MLB.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Don't forget you alsosaidstrongly implied the entire Cubs starting rotation.
In other news. The League of legends championship beat out the world series in ratings in 2015
Aren't you retired? I would think one of the biggest benefits of retirement was not running short on sleep.
Definitely a bit mad scientist, a guy who is incredibly entertaining, and for the foreseeable future untouchable because he was in charge when the Cubs finally won one, but as far as game time decisions, agreed completely. Not as bad with pitchers as Dusty was, but if it's anything more than getting 8 innings from a starter and 1 from a closer, you kind of know there'll be second guessing going on.
+1 on the general Maddon consensus in this thread. Kind of wonder if he'll outgrow his utility to that team somewhere around 2019. Bryant and Contreras will be 27, Rizzo will be 30, Russell and Baez will still be young at 25 & 26 but will have more service time, and they'll probably add some more veterans to plug holes over the years a la Zobrist, Heyward. I feel like Maddon's personality is more important to a young club over 162 games to help them grow into the game, than it is for a batch of vets used to winning. At that point, you might just want a guy that relies on analytics and makes the statistically correct decisions.
1) Arrieta 2) Murphy 3) Turner
Top 3 most obvious PED users in the MLB.
As already stated, the decision to bring in Lackey was inexplicable. I'd rather go down with Duensing or even Rondon at that point. There's no excuse for it.
I like Maddon but what is so frustrating is his unwillingness to take accountability for poor decisions, specifically games 6 and 7 last year.
Rich Hill left a ton of hittable fastballs right over the plate last night and the Cubs either took them or swung right through them. I've never seen Bryant look this bad - it's bizarre.
As a Brewer fan, I don't have much experience with playoff baseball. Is the using the starters in relief a new thing? I understand wanting your best arms in the game, but at some point, you have to do what got you there. Relief is so different than starting. I can see as a long reliever to eat innings, but not 1 or 2 inning stints.
As a Brewer fan, I don't have much experience with playoff baseball. Is the using the starters in relief a new thing? I understand wanting your best arms in the game, but at some point, you have to do what got you there. Relief is so different than starting. I can see as a long reliever to eat innings, but not 1 or 2 inning stints.
By the way, Contreras is super annoying as a catcher. He make more mound visits than Joe Mauer did. How many trips did he make yesterday? 50?
Mark Buehrle closed a game (albiet extra innings) in the 2005 World Series.Cy Young pitched in relief in the 1903 World Series. It's been going on forever. In the old days you had 4 man rotations and the 4th starter wasn't needed in the World Series with the travel days and was moved to the bullpen. Now there are 5 starters and the fifth starter (or sometimes someone better than the fifth starter if they have relief experience) moves to the pen, like Lackey. What's changed is rather than using that fifth starter to eat up innings with an early starter departure, they're starting to use them like regular relievers and hoping for the best.
Cy Young pitched in relief in the 1903 World Series. It's been going on forever. In the old days you had 4 man rotations and the 4th starter wasn't needed in the World Series with the travel days and was moved to the bullpen. Now there are 5 starters and the fifth starter (or sometimes someone better than the fifth starter if they have relief experience) moves to the pen, like Lackey. What's changed is rather than using that fifth starter to eat up innings with an early starter departure, they're starting to use them like regular relievers and hoping for the best.
Yes, 50. ::)after Puig got on second there were a LOT of mound visits and steps off the mound. 50? no, but there were way too many. You can fault your manager for having Lackey in but he was never allowed to get into any kind of rhythm. Ya gotta admit it was unusual at a minimum.
after Puig got on second there were a LOT of mound visits and steps off the mound. 50? no, but there were way too many. You can fault your manager for having Lackey in but he was never allowed to get into any kind of rhythm. Ya gotta admit it was unusual at a minimum.
Not really. You are comparing concurrent streaming to TV ratings, that's flawed from the start. You're also comparing global access to US only access.
Simple fix. Unless there is a mound visit, you throw a pitch in 20 seconds from the time a pitcher gets the ball back in his hand or a ball is called
Pitchers would adjust quickly and game times would be shorter. And, if the batter decides to not be in the batter's box? Too bad. The pitch stands.
after Puig got on second there were a LOT of mound visits and steps off the mound. 50? no, but there were way too many. You can fault your manager for having Lackey in but he was never allowed to get into any kind of rhythm. Ya gotta admit it was unusual at a minimum.
after Puig got on second there were a LOT of mound visits and steps off the mound. 50? no, but there were way too many. You can fault your manager for having Lackey in but he was never allowed to get into any kind of rhythm. Ya gotta admit it was unusual at a minimum.
Yes, 50. ::)
Wow, did you not get the hyperbole there?
Clearly it wasn't 50. But he was a rain delay.
Wow, did you not get the hyperbole there?
Clearly it wasn't 50. But he was a rain delay.
He freaks out over any perceived slight on anything the Chicago Cubs do, whether it's obvious hyperbole/sarcasm or not.
Absolutely got it. Thought it was silly based on the magnitude of the situation and a SP in an unfamiliar role.
(http://replygif.net/i/166.gif)
Exhibit 1,000.
I'll respond for you: What do you mean exhibit 1,000?! I only have 600 posts! It's not possible to have 1,000 exhibits when I haven't posted 1,000 times! Genius! Silly use of hyperbole! (Insert cute GIF here)
Absolutely got it. Thought it was silly based on the magnitude of the situation
No doubt the catcher was saying the same things over and over again. We all know how pointless that is.
Ok, but I think 2 separate mound trips without throwing a pitch is silly.
As a Brewer fan, I don't have much experience with playoff baseball. Is the using the starters in relief a new thing? I understand wanting your best arms in the game, but at some point, you have to do what got you there. Relief is so different than starting. I can see as a long reliever to eat innings, but not 1 or 2 inning stints.
0-27 against dodger relievers at the time of this post. Say what you want about pitching and Joe's mound choices. But you can't win if you can't hit and the cubs have been eating cold soup the entire playoffs.
Yep. Cubs have just been dominated.
Wrong time to go cold. Saw it against the Nats but they squeezed out some wins and then the nationals gifted them game 5.
This whole Cubs season has really been a bit of a struggle. Well, as much of a struggle as it can be for a 92-win team in the NLCS. It just hasn't had the same feel as 2016 or even 2008. This is a very good team with some obvious flaws - the lead-off spot has never been figured out, pitching has been inconsistent, defense is average, huge reliance on HRs, etc.
Assuming they lose 1 of these next 4, it'll be a disappointing end to the season but it's hard to be disappointed in this season as a whole. They won the division and made it to the NLCS. Only 4 of the last 10 WS champs have even made the playoffs. This team also projects to be good for a number of years going forward. They'll need to fill some rotation spots (bring back Arrieta? Alex Cobb? Yu Darvish? Make a trade?) and get the lead-off spot sorted out (Almora?). I trust that Jed and Theo will get that done.
This whole Cubs season has really been a bit of a struggle. Well, as much of a struggle as it can be for a 92-win team in the NLCS. It just hasn't had the same feel as 2016 or even 2008. This is a very good team with some obvious flaws - the lead-off spot has never been figured out, pitching has been inconsistent, defense is average, huge reliance on HRs, etc.
Assuming they lose 1 of these next 4, it'll be a disappointing end to the season but it's hard to be disappointed in this season as a whole. They won the division and made it to the NLCS. Only 4 of the last 10 WS champs have even made the playoffs. This team also projects to be good for a number of years going forward. They'll need to fill some rotation spots (bring back Arrieta? Alex Cobb? Yu Darvish? Make a trade?) and get the lead-off spot sorted out (Almora?). I trust that Jed and Theo will get that done.
"Give Montgomery a chance"
-Brewers fans
"Give Montgomery a chance"
-Brewers fans
Would love to see where I said/implied that.
Honest question for all Cubs fans who think Arietta has never taken PEDs. Beyond any players who have failed a drug test and been suspended by the MLB already, over/under 0.5 players currently in the Cubs organization that have taken PEDs. What are you taking?
Every Cubs starter lost 1-3 MPH on his fastball this season. Hmm...
Maybe if it was 1 of their 5 starters. All 5? Hmm...
Even with that ugly start against the Brewers, Montgomery went 5-5 with a 4.15 ERA and a 1.14 WHIP in 14 starts and that was typically with a pitch count of around 80-90. I'd take those numbers from a back-of-the-rotation guy.
Here you go.
I'll probably regretting asking/engaging but I'm genuinely curious about something.
I just need a Yes/No answer to this. Nothing more.
Is your contention that all 5 Cubs starting pitchers were taking PEDs during the 2016 season and then, either collectively or individually, decided to stop using them for the 2017 season?
No.
Home team undefeated in the ALCS.
Jacob Turner looks like a refugee from Thorin Oakenshield's merry band of dwarves.
Justin not to be confused with former terrible white sox, marlins etc pitcher, Jacob Turner.
Right call to keep Davis in. No other choice, you worry about tomorrow when it gets there. Got to win one, to win four.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a more egregious umpiring decision than that "foul tip" call in the top of the 8th.
So asking if over 0.5 Cubs players had taken PEDs and reciting an odd statistic that ESPN had out there is saying the entire Cubs rotation was on PEDS? Odd conclusion there but okay I guess.
I guess you also failed to read slightly further when I was directly asked that exact question:
My response was:
So if by, “No,” you took my answer to mean, “Yes,” then yeah, I said all 5 starters for the Cubs were on PEDs.
Glad you finally got back to me on that. The Cubs losing must’ve opened up some extra time for you to research and come up with answers that prove I never said that.
Now if unleashrowsey will find where I said I don’t care about sports we can bury that one too.
Justin not to be confused with former terrible white sox, marlins etc pitcher, Jacob Turner.
By the way, I think Alex Wood knew Contreras hit a HR before he swung.
If you aren’t implying that they took steroids then what are you hinting at? Keep in mind you included this with all of your Arrieta PED theories.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a more egregious umpiring decision than that "foul tip" call in the top of the 8th.
I did include this with all my Arietta PED stuff? Which part? The first post you quoted, which had nothing to do with all 5 starters on the Cubs, or any starter really, was posted on September 22. The next 2 are from September 28 and was reciting a statistic that ESPN had out in their article that day. Which is what I said then and said yesterday. That’s what I was hinting at. That ESPN pointed out a pretty odd stat about the Cubs starters.
Again, if you took my answer of “No” to the exact, direct question you are saying I said happened as meaning “Yes” then I can see where you read me saying all 5 Cubs starters had taken PEDs. How you get to that reading of it is beyond me but that’s on you. It’s not difficult. It’s laid out word for word in MM’s question asking for a simple yes/no, and my giving him a simple yes/no.
I usually defend umps, but this was truly awful, both in the way it was dealt with and in the final result. I'm glad Davis struck out Granderson on the very next pitch. So, in the end, no harm was done. But still.
As for the series ...
If the Cubs can somehow beat Kershaw - certainly not an outrageous notion given that his third-highest career WHIP is against the Cubs and that the Cubs beat him in the NLCS just a year ago - then things get really interesting. If I'm a Dodgers fan, I'm not sure how much faith I have in Hill or Darvish to close out the series.
Then again, if I'm a Cubs fan, I'm not sure how much faith I have in any of my hitters, not to mention my bullpen and a couple of my starters.
It's clearly what you were insinuating.
I'll probably regretting asking/engaging but I'm genuinely curious about something.
I just need a Yes/No answer to this. Nothing more.
Is your contention that all 5 Cubs starting pitchers were taking PEDs during the 2016 season and then, either collectively or individually, decided to stop using them for the 2017 season?
No.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a more egregious umpiring decision than that "foul tip" call in the top of the 8th.
Cmon really? Quit complaining. What is wrong with the LF umpire making a foul tip call.
Cmon really? Quit complaining. What is wrong with the LF umpire making a foul tip call.
If that were my team, I would have gone ballistic. Horribly egregious call. A fail-mary level (in terms of severity of the miss, not magnitude of impact) call that the Cubs should be thankful didn't cost them.
I know it's not reviewable, and that will almost certainly change this offseason. I cannot for the life of me figure out why the home plate umpire, who is in perfect position to see and makes the right call, allows himself to be overruled. I thought the announcers did a great job of explaining exactly what the ump is looking for and why the home plate should be the one to make the call.
I know it's not reviewable, and that will almost certainly change this offseason. I cannot for the life of me figure out why the home plate umpire, who is in perfect position to see and makes the right call, allows himself to be overruled.
You're right - I am being unreasonable.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a more egregious umpiring decision than that "foul tip" call in the top of the 8th.
Whats worse is that Rizzo actually did tip a ball in the 6th (?) and the ump called him out without any appeal.
I like Brian Anderson, but I worried I was losing my mind. He made it sound like it hit him when it clearly looked like it was off his bat.
Boy, hard to bet against the Yanks at this point. They will get Verlander, but they counter with Severino, along with that bullpen which is just unreal. Even with Betances unable to get anyone out, they have been dominant.
Great start by Tanaka tonight. He killed my fantasy team this year in the first half, but he has been himself ever since.
Whats worse is that Rizzo actually did tip a ball in the 6th (?) and the ump called him out without any appeal.
I thought if you swing thru, you sacrificed hit batter protection. Could be wrong.
Hmmm? It hit his bat.
I must be thinking of the wrong play, where he swung and the pitch hit him. Or I was not paying good enough attention.
So, Kershaw is 99-1 after receiving at least 4 runs of support.
My Cubbie-fan son texted from Chicago to say "the White Sox foisted Quintana on us." My son's a Curb fan, too!
When someone named Kiki ends up with almost as many RBI in one game (7) as the Cubs had in the entire series (8), Jose Quintana is not the problem.
Dusty's gone in Washington...supposedly against the GM's wishes. Could be an interesting off-season for the Nats.
They have the weirdest thing with managers.
Verlander does Verlander things on Friday.
I have been following this thread and noting the 20 to 1 (approx) rate of postings on NL/Cubs to anything going on in the AL or with my Astros...but...
I am not being critical or hurt feelings in the least. I totally get NL myopia. Long time Astros fans are still NLers at heart. Heck Cubbies, Cards Brewers were NL Centralers with my Stros. We suffered through our late season collapses with 81 Phillies, 86 Mets (great series) late 90s and early 2000s Killers Bees (Bagwell, Biggio Berkman) having bats go silent in playoffs...NL good times/bummers.
Houston (like Milw) was always an NL town (from 1920s to 1950s the triple AAA Houston Buffs were the St Louis Cards main farm team). The 1960 NL expansion Colt 45s (it was OK and still PC back then to use guns in a team name-lol) played at Buffs Stadium...then became the NL Astros on the Dome completion. All of our 50 plus years of memories were NL.
Milw had the Braves (57 world champ), and many fans moved to the cubs after they left...it seemed natural to me Selig moving the AL Brewers over to my NL. What still seems a betrayal to us was after Astros strongly supporting Milw joining NL ...years later Selig supports kicking our NL Astros over to the AL ...worse still we are AL West (BTW Rangers still arent much of a rivalry). All this ALCS Astros stuff still feels odd in an NL town
If we have to get past Red Sox and Yankees to go to WS...so be it .... but for the Astros to play the Dodgers in the world series defending the honor of the AL....well that just feels weird to me.
Yanks have better pitching tonite...Very nervous for our chances...but we are home...and Game 7 ...Altuve/Correa....who knows . Go Stros
Enjoy the game you NLers...yes we still have that stupid DH rule.
Absolutely want to see the Astros win. The thought of a Yankees-Dodgers World Series is gross.
Absolutely want to see the Astros win. The thought of a Yankees-Dodgers World Series is gross.
Cheering hard for my adopted Astros. Would be a great story for them to win the Series after Harvey. Plus, how can anyone cheer for the evil empires that are the Yankees and Dodgers against the upstart Astros?
Bosio gone
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/21101785/chicago-cubs-fire-pitching-coach-chris-bosio
I can. After all it's been awhile since my Yankees have won the World Series.
Regardless of who wins tonight it has been a fun season.
WOAH! Brewers better snatch him up ASAP. The narrative is he has worked miracles with every pitcher that’s come into Chicago and the minute those pitchers leave Chicago they suck again.
Idk how he could bear to be on the same team as obvious PED user Eric Thames ::)
Unfortunately someone from the nl central had to go. It was weird with one divison with 6 and one with 4. The Astros made the most sense geographically (and no way you could move the cubs pirates or cards) I still miss Yall and your 450 foot hill with a flag pole.
Why? Both teams with strong Chicago ties. Would like to also see the Dodgers get one for Tommy.
WOAH! Brewers better snatch him up ASAP. The narrative is he has worked miracles with every pitcher that’s come into Chicago and the minute those pitchers leave Chicago they suck again.
ABD.
Anybody But the Dodgers.
Why? Both teams with strong Chicago ties. Would like to also see the Dodgers get one for Tommy.
Bosio gone
Word is they're gonna hire a pitching coach who will make sure that the next time the Cubbies are in the NLCS, Zobrist (.000), Heyward (.000), Rizzo (.059), Jay (.083), Russell (.125), Schwarbs (.167), Baez (.167), Almora (.188), Bryant (.200) and Contreras (.222) will be able to hit their way out of a paper bag.
What's funny is that the Cubs' best hitters in the series were Bosio boys Lester, Arrieta and Quintana!
When this SI cover ran in June 2014 my Astros were in a 92 loss season, and coming off multiple years of 100 plus losses ....Today feels pretty darn good......
(http://)
WOAH! Brewers better snatch him up ASAP. The narrative is he has worked miracles with every pitcher that’s come into Chicago and the minute those pitchers leave Chicago they suck again.
Where is that narrative from? Is it your personal view? If so, why? Is it an opinionated narrative? If so, why and whose opinion? Is it a fact/stat-based narrative? If so, what are those stats?
You'd have to ask all the resident Cubs fans whose defense of Arietta's going from a guy who can't stay in the major leagues to being the best pitcher in baseball at the age of 28 years old as all about finally having a pitching coach who knew how to work miracles with all and any pitchers he's ever worked with and the long line of pitchers they'll point to who came in from different teams and saw their numbers skyrocket when they got to Chicago and then drop again when they left. If the guy is as good as Cubs fans will try to get you to believe, there's no way he should ever be fired from any job.
(http://gif-finder.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Will-Ferrell-Thats-dumb.gif)
Astros trying to make history. They would be the first team to represent both the AL & NL in the World Series.History made
Of course, they don't have much competition.
When this SI cover ran in June 2014 my Astros were in a 92 loss season, and coming off multiple years of 100 plus losses ....Today feels pretty darn good......
(http://)
+1. It always has been.
I'm just patiently waiting for you to say something intelligent.
You'd have to ask all the resident Cubs fans whose defense of Arietta's going from a guy who can't stay in the major leagues to being the best pitcher in baseball at the age of 28 years old as all about finally having a pitching coach who knew how to work miracles with all and any pitchers he's ever worked with and the long line of pitchers they'll point to who came in from different teams and saw their numbers skyrocket when they got to Chicago and then drop again when they left. If the guy is as good as Cubs fans will try to get you to believe, there's no way he should ever be fired from any job.
Oh.
Is that true though? Do pitchers come from other teams and put up better stats once in Chicago? And once they leave the Cubs, do their stats go down again?
Oh.
Is that true though? Do pitchers come from other teams and put up better stats once in Chicago? And once they leave the Cubs, do their stats go down again?
If that's the case, I'm not sure why you're firing the dude who's solely responsible for that success...
I'm asking you if that's the case. Have you looked into it at all?
Just reciting exactly what you and other Cubs fans say. So glad we’re finally on the same page here buddy.
No buzz on here about Dusty getting the old heave ho? Not a fan, but that is some crazy stuff right there.
Except you're not. You're reciting the same boring, incorrect narrative you've created.
How so? Wasn't surprising to me in the least after they didn't get past the NLDS.
No buzz on here about Dusty getting the old heave ho? Not a fan, but that is some crazy stuff right there.
The differing expectations for organizations is always fascinating to me. I have seen the Brewers make the postseason twice in my entire lifetime. I couldn't imagine firing a manager immediately after they led a team to the postseason. Hell, we didn't make the postseason this year and I was happy with how the Brewers did!
Right, it's a boring, incorrect narrative that was never true. But when it fit the Cubs fans agenda it was Gospel, and now that the Jesus of Pitchers has been fired it no longer fits the agenda so it's boring and incorrect.
No buzz on here about Dusty getting the old heave ho? Not a fan, but that is some crazy stuff right there.
Verlander had a really good comeback year last year. But he's old (34) for a power pitcher and his ERA, WHIP and BB/K ratio are bad - maybe the worst in his career. Figure in a crappy contract and I don't see him bring back a whole lot.Bump.
If I'm a club looking for a starter I'd go after Sonny Gray, Quintana, Cobb or Cole. (or someone else I'm sure I'm forgetting).
Verlander's tough. I think its hard to see him ever replicating last season ever again. He's conservatively probably a guy that will have an ERA between 3.5 and 4 for the next year or two, strike out 7.5 and walk 3 per nine. That's worth a fair amount over an entire season, but not much in trade value compared to the contract, and he's still not a guy you want to try to pitch three times in a 7 game playoff series - he's pretty much guaranteed to get shelled at least one of those times. Tough to see Verlander being the difference between getting bounced in the Divisonals and making another WS appearance.Bump
I think the Cubs have two big needs to be real WS contenders. One is that legit, reliable front line pitcher. Arrieta looks busted and I think the real Kyle Hendricks is the 2015 & 2017 version, not the 2016 version. Still valuable, but won't be more than maybe the third starter in the playoffs.
They also need a table setter with some speed. Fowler had a career year in that respect last year. His .393 obp was his highest since 2012. In 2012, the OBP was a product of once-in a carer a .300 BA (25 pts higher than his second best season) buyoed by a .390 BABIP playing half his games at Coors. Moral of the story - I get why you don't pay Fowler, but that production in that place in the lineup is really missed, and there just aren't smart, veteran baserunners annoying pitchers when Bryant and Rizzo are trying to do their damage.
Bump.
Harsh, but fair. I'll nom my crow - he's been dominant this postseason. I remain really surprised though - in a blind analysis, I'd probably make the same mistake again. Looking at Verlander's fastball velocity chart - http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfxo.aspx?playerid=8700&position=&pitch=FA&data=pi (http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfxo.aspx?playerid=8700&position=&pitch=FA&data=pi) - it looks like a clear uptick through 2016 that continued through 2017. But halfway through the year, that trend was less clear, and without his fastball velocity, Verlander isn't a great pitcher - https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2017/8/12/16135278/justin-verlander-detroit-tigers-velocity-command-aging-trade-rumors-astros (https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2017/8/12/16135278/justin-verlander-detroit-tigers-velocity-command-aging-trade-rumors-astros).
I still have my doubts that he'll be able to keep this up for any extended period after the 2017 playoffs, and certainly wouldn't feel great being on the hook for $78M over the next three years (the 'Stros aren't, they got $ from Det to send better prospects). But there's no debating he's been lights out this postseason.
So.. was Verlander on PEDs?
No doubt he used PEDs in his career.
Did Nolan Ryan?
Kate was his PED. Seriously, he could end up being Doyle Alexander for the Astros. For those too young to remember, in 1987, the Tigers traded a prospect to Atlanta for Doyle Alexander. DA was lights out down the stretch, Detroit made the playoffs and lost to the Twins. DA had one more good year and then faded away. The prospect they traded away was John Smoltz.
So.. was Verlander on PEDs?
Verlanders early season numbers were skewed by two brutal starts against Cleveland. Watching him, I knew he was close to his best. Anybody who got him was going to get a horse. Yeah, he gave up two hits last night in 6 innings. He will give up homers.
It all depends on how the WS and next season play out.
If Detroit won the WS in 1987, that trade would have been 100% worth it. Just like if Gleyber Torres becomes the best SS in baseball, that deal was worth it for the Cubs because Chapman helped them win the WS.
If the Astros win the WS behind Verlander and Daz Cameron becomes Mike Trout, the trade is still worth it. If Houston loses, Verlander fades away and the prospects they traded become studs, the deal looks much, much worse.
Cubs got Brian Butterfield (third base coach) and Chili Davis (hitting coach) from the Red Sox. Davis has the reputation of being a great hitting coach, but basically every Red Sox hitter seemed to have a down year this year. I wonder how much influence Ortiz had on the young guys as hitters. Butterfield is a great 3rd base coach and was a popular guy in the clubhouse. Think Jerry Wainwright of baseball. First time in almost 50 years of Red Sox fandom that I cared that we're losing a 3rd base coach.
Thanks for the info. Sounds like the Boston guys and Hickey are highly regarded.
I have to think Hickey has a lot of influence on how hard the Cubs will pursue Cobb.
...and if they'll attempt to make a move for Chris Archer. The Rays could use an upgrade at 2B and DH. Happ and/or Schwarber?
Reading between the lines so far of the Cubs offseason, one thing is clear, the seat is getting warm for Joe Maddon. Right or wrong, but it's pretty evident.
https://sports.yahoo.com/joe-torre-confirms-umps-blew-call-nationals-game-5-nlds-215507389.html
But boy, that'd hurt if I were a Nats fan.
Strongly disagree. How so?
Epstein made it perfectly clear he's as safe as it gets.
Well, common sense for one. If I said "team loses in playoffs, head coach made questionable game decisions, third of coaching staff fired", you'd immediately say "wtf is going on there?".
No matter who ultimately decided to let the three guys go, there's an issue in that clubhouse. Maybe it's Maddon, maybe it's not. No matter who it was, it puts the onus on Maddon now. It seems really really strange, between the timing, and Maddon's comments.
The reaction of most Cubs fans is to believe nothing is wrong, but anyone who follows sports would suggest otherwise.
Not true at all and the condescension towards Cubs fans not understanding what is going on is impressive.
How many articles have you read on the changes, the impetus behind them, and why Maddon answered the question about his staff the way he did? I'm honestly curious.
None of the coaches that were let go were Maddon hires. The guys they've been replaced with are all very highly regarded.
Thinking Maddon isn't currently on the hot seat has nothing to do with being a Cubs fan. There's zero chance he doesn't finish out his contract. Considering his age what happens after that is anyone's guess.
Comprehension would be your friend here as well, as I was careful to say his seat is warming up, not that he's on the hot seat necessarily.
To answer your question, honestly as you asked, probably half a dozen. I'm not sure why that matters.
I guess I'm wrong and there's nothing to see here
Larrusa is probably rolling over in his grave.
Comprehension would be your friend here as well, as I was careful to say his seat is warming up, not that he's on the hot seat necessarily.
To answer your question, honestly as you asked, probably half a dozen. I'm not sure why that matters.
I guess I'm wrong and there's nothing to see here
As mentioned before, Maddon's seat isn't hot, but I do think the warming comments are fair. We Cubs fans celebrated the hell out of 2016, but how many would have been calling for Maddon's head on a spike if not for the extra-inning rally in Game 7? His timing of pulling Hendricks and subsequently Lester in that game, his management of Aroldis Chapman in the Series, there was plenty of reason to have doubts, but they all evaporated when the Cubs broke their 108-year-old duck.
I've always felt Maddon is a mad scientist type. When it works, it's a thing of genius, but just as often fans are left wondering exactly what he's thinking. I imagine there's some of that from management as well. Part of me is a bit disappointed the Cubs manager job isn't open now because I would love for them to make a run at Joe Girardi.
If the Cubs get back to the World Series next year, I'm sure all the pressure will go away, and even more so if they win another. That said, with this current crop of players in their prime, I'm sure management is hoping for more than one WS crown and if Maddon doesn't seem likely to deliver it or if 2016 proves to be a fluke, I could see him going away sooner rather than later. Most likely he survives to the end of his contract in 2019, but not renewing it at that point is certainly possible if that WS trophy remains alone at Wrigley.
Wasn't Maddon's primary positive attribute that he worked well with a young team? As opposed to Sveum who was considered a little too harsh? Maybe as this team ages, Maddon may not end up being the best type of manager for them to succeed.
This.
At the time Maddon was absolutely the best hire because he did the exact same thing with a very young Rays team.
There are absolutely better in game managers, which is what the Cubs need now. Let Maddon's contract run out, give him a cushy front office job, and call it a day.
No doubt he used PEDs in his career.
Maddon was terrible in games 6 and 7 of the World Series. His decision to use Lackey in game 2 of the NLCS this year was horrendous. He certainly has his faults, as do all managers. Epstein has already said the front office doesn't agree with all of his in-game decisions.
The Cubs have won more games than any team in the last three years to go along with a World Series and three straight NLCS appearances. I just don't see Maddon being on the hot seat following the 2018 season if the team doesn't make the World Series. I just think that's unrealistic. It's possible 2018 could be a bit of a transition year depending on the moves that are made this winter.
The biggest question will be does Maddon enter 2019 as a lame duck. If he does, the possibility of him not returning increases quite a bit. I can also see a two or three year extension prior to that season if Maddon wants to keep managing as he is getting a bit older. Or maybe he wants to finish out his contract and move into a different type of role.
One thing I know is the front office won't be influenced whatsoever by the fan base.
I see Mr. Maxwell arrested for a gun charge last night. Knee worthy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/10/29/as-catcher-bruce-maxwell-who-knelt-during-national-anthem-arrested-on-gun-charge/?utm_term=.8f63c23282b4
Again, no one is saying his seat is hot yet, but if they go out in the NLDS or NLCS in a similar non-competitive fashion to how the Dodgers handled them this year, I can see management considering their future, especially knowing he'd only have one year left on the contract.
Maddon was terrible in games 6 and 7 of the World Series. His decision to use Lackey in game 2 of the NLCS this year was horrendous. He certainly has his faults, as do all managers. Epstein has already said the front office doesn't agree with all of his in-game decisions.
The Cubs have won more games than any team in the last three years to go along with a World Series and three straight NLCS appearances. I just don't see Maddon being on the hot seat following the 2018 season if the team doesn't make the World Series. I just think that's unrealistic. It's possible 2018 could be a bit of a transition year depending on the moves that are made this winter.
The biggest question will be does Maddon enter 2019 as a lame duck. If he does, the possibility of him not returning increases quite a bit. I can also see a two or three year extension prior to that season if Maddon wants to keep managing as he is getting a bit older. Or maybe he wants to finish out his contract and move into a different type of role.
One thing I know is the front office won't be influenced whatsoever by the fan base.
I hope he is treated like every other athlete who does stupid stuff with a gun.
So, after pullin’ da celebrity card, nothin’ happens to ‘im, hey?
Yep. If the charges end up being true I hope he is held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. The waiter he accused of refusing to serve him also called in and said he was a liar, no idea who is telling the truth. Goes to show that every cause has some followers that are idiots.
It is interesting how many commenters are calling for him to be kicked out of the league. Id be curious to see how many of those same commenters were calling for the jobs of other violent athletes.
When you say waiter, wasn't this a food delivery woman? http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2741262-as-catcher-bruce-maxwell-reportedly-arrested-for-assault-with-deadly-weapon?ref=hvper.com
Which commenters? Most of the fans I know are consistent on this stuff. That doesn't mean all are or my sample size is representative, but violent athletes proven to be so (in a court of law), yes they should be dealt with harshly including potentially kicked out of their sport.
Managers don't have the benefit of hindsight. If Maddon doesn't go with Lackey and his replacement bombs, he still gets ripped. They are in a no win situation. No one can predict what would have happened if the alternate approach was taken, it is impossible to know.
And, apparently, neither is LA's tonight. What fun.
When you say waiter, wasn't this a food delivery woman? http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2741262-as-catcher-bruce-maxwell-reportedly-arrested-for-assault-with-deadly-weapon?ref=hvper.com
Tonight could be a battle of attrition for the bullpens. Sucks to be a manager tonight.
This is wild. Morrow clearly didn't have his stuff. Can't believe he was left in there so long.
So, what's juiced: players, bats or balls?
So, what's juiced: players, bats or balls?
This game is drunk
Glad you are talking about the A's backup catcher during a fantastically awesome World Series.
It is way more fun to read the same people rehash the same positions.
He was important enough as the backup catcher to talk about a few weeks ago, I don't recall you caring that he was the backup catcher then. :D
No he wasn't.
I didn't say anything about him, because it is a stupid forced story on all fronts.
Back to baseball...
Kershaw v Keuchel, 25 runs scored. Baseball is awesome. You never know what is gonna happen. Both of these offenses are completely superior to the bullpens.
Rough night for the home plate ump.
You're right about Morrow. In 5 pitches he gave up 3 runs on 3 hits (2 home runs, 1 double), and had a wild pitch the advanced a baserunner just for fun.
Players and balls both juiced.
I'm shocked you would say that ;D ;D
Interesting subject though. First part has been argued to death here.
Second part is more interesting. I do think balls may be wound slightly tighter, but the added velocity of pitchers may be an even bigger reason for the increase in HRs. Simply put, the faster a ball is thrown, the less chance it has to move as it crosses the plate. This is true for breaking balls as well as fastballs.
This is why we love baseball!!!!
And on a much lesser subject, why we can't stand chicas.
Below is an interesting article on the topic. Players say the balls feel different and are slicker. Thus certain pitches, like a slider aren't having the same movement and being hit much harder than usual.
https://www.si.com/mlb/2017/10/29/world-series-baseballs-leather-justin-verlander-yu-darvish-ken-giles-kenley-jansen
I love, love, love baseball. I thought Game 2 was fantastic, but last night started to be "too much." At one point I felt like I was watching two people play a video game. I'm too lazy to look it up, but I think there were 3-run HRs in the bottom of the 4th, top of 5th, and bottom of 5th. I know both offenses are fantastic, but that was a little silly.
I love, love, love baseball. I thought Game 2 was fantastic, but last night started to be "too much." At one point I felt like I was watching two people play a video game. I'm too lazy to look it up, but I think there were 3-run HRs in the bottom of the 4th, top of 5th, and bottom of 5th. I know both offenses are fantastic, but that was a little silly.
Verlander vs Hill on game 6. I am guessing that Hill won't be pulled after 4 if he is pitching well. Verlander will need to control his adrenaline and keep his pace slow. Can get wound up and go too fast sometimes. I think he does what he was brought to Houston to do and the Astros win. Of course, I thought Kershaw was primed to donate, so who knows?
Managers don't have the benefit of hindsight. If Maddon doesn't go with Lackey and his replacement bombs, he still gets ripped. They are in a no win situation. No one can predict what would have happened if the alternate approach was taken, it is impossible to know.
Well, Kershaw did kind of donate to the Astros.
I love, love, love baseball. I thought Game 2 was fantastic, but last night started to be "too much." At one point I felt like I was watching two people play a video game. I'm too lazy to look it up, but I think there were 3-run HRs in the bottom of the 4th, top of 5th, and bottom of 5th. I know both offenses are fantastic, but that was a little silly.
So now it is down to pitching. Verlander vs Hill. JV was made for this. Hill shouldn't have been pulled after 4 innings in his last start. Both will be relatively fresh. If both leave after, say, 6 innings, the last 3 innings should be nothing but high drama. Both bullpens are spent and both have been blown up. Hinch can't/won't use his closer. Roberts has overused his bullpen to the point that he has no idea who can get him an out. If Hinch tries to make it work with JV and then McCullers and FAILS, his game 7 starter will be Morton on 3 days rest. Roberts, if he wins, gets to run Darvish out again, who couldn't get out of the second inning in his last start. Talk about a battle of attrition.
I'm glad I'm not managing. God, I love baseball.
How many pitches is Verlansder available for tonight? 120?
At least. If this was an American league park he wouldn't come out. Hinch may choose to pinch hit for him.
What a reversal from game 5. Game 7's rock. The pitching parade is going to be epic. Could see Verlander and Hill.
Aaaaaand that's why I'm not a manager.
I HATE bunting. I would be one of those managers who almost never does it (except with a pitcher).
Taylor has not been an easy out all postseason. Plus, he can fly; in 274 career games, he has only grounded into 8 DP, none this postseason. I hate to give away that out.
Anyone who questions the baseball's slickness and tightness (i.e. "being juiced") just needs to watch the HRs hit last night. Those both looked like routine flyballs and both went several rows deep.
That said, tonight should be loads of fun...and, for this Cubs fan, WAY less exhausting than last year's Game 7!
There have been numerous studies about bunting. It greatly reduces your chances for multiple runs and slightly reduces you chances of scoring one run. (Your odds of scoring a run with a runner on first and no outs are greater than your odds of scoring a run with a runner on second with one out.) I agree use only for pitches and maybe some terrible hitters who are double play prone (like backup catchers or something).+1
+1
(http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/files/2015/04/run-expectancy-chart.png)
No. Watch Peterson's reaction. Looks like he knew he had a dinger.
Interesting, though that the ball is only juiced when they play in Houston. Players only hit the PEDs when they play there, as well.
Gotta laugh when I hear about all of the runs and HRs occurring. Lots of runs will score in a hitter's park. Not a lot of runs score in a pitcher's park.
No. Watch Peterson's reaction. Looks like he knew he had a dinger.
Interesting, though that the ball is only juiced when they play in Houston. Players only hit the PEDs when they play there, as well.
Gotta laugh when I hear about all of the runs and HRs occurring. Lots of runs will score in a hitter's park. Not a lot of runs score in a pitcher's park.
So you would know better than the professionals who have played the sport their whole lives and are the ones actually using the baseballs?
I'm guessing both the Astros and the Dodgers, both of whom have said something's up with the baseballs, would have a much better idea as to whether something was different with the baseballs than you, someone who (I assume) has not had any experience with the baseballs they're using in the WS.
So you would know better than the professionals who have played the sport their whole lives and are the ones actually using the baseballs?
I'm guessing both the Astros and the Dodgers, both of whom have said something's up with the baseballs, would have a much better idea as to whether something was different with the baseballs than you, someone who (I assume) has not had any experience with the baseballs they're using in the WS.
Nope. But they are different as PTM pointed out.
So, the balls and players are juiced. Yet, the two teams are averaging only 3.5 runs a game at Dodger Stadium in the WS - where the average is about 4.5 per game. Plus, the park gives up more homers than the average stadium in MLB.
This is at a park that gives up more homers than the average stadium in MLB.
So unless I am reading the chart wrong, it looks like better odds of scoring 2nd and 3rd one out than 1st and 2nd none out. That seems to make a case for bunting (at least in that case) and backup other similar data I have heard in the past.
Which is why I don't go to some kind of chart as an all-occasion solution.
You know your hitters. You know who is up with two on and nobody out and who is following them and who is getting a good bat on the ball and who isn't. Turner could do no wrong in the first 2 rounds but he hasn't been able to hit his way out of a paper bag in the WS.
I've been on Roberts for his handling of his pitchers, but I totally believe he did the right thing there ... and the results showed it. I wouldn't even have thought of bunting Taylor there.
I've been on the road all week, why didn't Kershaw start this game? Why would Darvish, who I believe didn't have a swing/miss in Game 3, start? I don't get it, Roberts should get some questions his way (unless I missed something obvious here).
I've been on the road all week, why didn't Kershaw start this game? Why would Darvish, who I believe didn't have a swing/miss in Game 3, start? I don't get it, Roberts should get some questions his way (unless I missed something obvious here).
He's on two days rest.
Hat tip to the Astros. Great World Series. Great call SI.In 2014....SI called it ....including putting the WS MVP on the cover.
Some issue that you can't use regular season park factors during the playoffs, the caliber of pitcher is much higher.
That would be a good research paper though, playoff ballpark factors, their regression and this year's ballpark factors
Hat tip to the Astros. Great World Series. Great call SI.
So unless I am reading the chart wrong, it looks like better odds of scoring 2nd and 3rd one out than 1st and 2nd none out. That seems to make a case for bunting (at least in that case) and backup other similar data I have heard in the past.
Agree 100%. Great games.
Now that the WS is over and it is likely that Beltran retires, is he a HOF'er?
I'd be interested in opinions here (this thread probably has the best posters on Scoop).
I think he is in the same class as Santo, Dawson, Williams (didn't mean to pick all cubbies). A very good player, but not a guy who would inspire the term "great".
My opinion is that he will get in - probably in one of the leaner years for choices. I'm not generally a guy for arbitrary stats, but he is one of only 5 guyus with 400+ HRs and 300+ SBs. Quite an impressive power/speed number. Bonds, Mays, ARod, and Thome are the others.
JK, it was Dawson.
Now that the WS is over and it is likely that Beltran retires, is he a HOF'er?
I'd be interested in opinions here (this thread probably has the best posters on Scoop).
I think he is in the same class as Santo, Dawson, Williams (didn't mean to pick all cubbies). A very good player, but not a guy who would inspire the term "great".
My opinion is that he will get in - probably in one of the leaner years for choices. I'm not generally a guy for arbitrary stats, but he is one of only 5 guyus with 400+ HRs and 300+ SBs. Quite an impressive power/speed number. Bonds, Mays, ARod, and Thome are the others.
JK, it was Dawson.
My gut reaction on Beltran was "no." But that is usually my default reaction unless a guy is obvious, as I'm a tough grader. I had the same knee-jerk reaction for Vlad Guerrero (a rookie in last year's class) until I really looked inside the numbers and decided he was deserving.
Beltran truly is a borderline case. Here's how he compares to Vlad (who received 71.7% of the vote last year and probably will get in this time), and Harold Baines (who never received even 6% of the vote and fell off the ballot after five tries):
BELTRAN: 20 Yrs ... .279 BA ... .837 OPS (223rd all-time) ... 435 HR (46th) ... 1587 RBI (41st) ... 1 top-5 MVP showing (4th in 06) .... 8 100 RBI seasons ... 4 30 HR seasons.
GUERRERO: 16 Yrs ... .318 BA (10 yrs .300-plus) ... .931 OPS (34th) ... 449 HR (40th) ... 1496 RBI (57th) ... 4 top-5 MVP showings (incl 1st in 2004) ... 10 100 RBI seasons ... 8 30 HR seasons ... 2 40 HR seasons.
BAINES : 22 Yrs ... .289 BA ... .820 OPS ... 384 HR (65th) ... 1628 RBI (33rd) ... no top-5 MVP showings ... 3 100 RBI seasons ... 0 30 HR seasons.
On raw stats, is Beltran closer to Guerrero (himself a borderline HoFer) or Baines (not a HofFer)?
A few notes: Unlike Guerrero, who was still posting big numbers in his next-to-last season, Beltran and Baines were guys who hung around compiling stats ... Beltran had a darn impressive 1.021 OPS in the postseason, much better than Vlad's .664 ... Beltran was a heck of fielder when he was younger, with 8 straight Gold Gloves.
I'd be surprised if Beltran makes it on his first try, mainly because his OPS isn't even top-200 material and he only had 1 top-5 MVP showing. The latter means that it would be hard to make a case for him being one of the true greats of his era. Voters also tend to deduct points for guys who just hang around as old men, contributing fairly little to their teams. But he was a very good player whose defensive ability, postseason showing and RBI total very well could get him into the Hall eventually. It also didn't hurt that he had some great years in NY with the Mets, as a lot of BBWAA voters come from that area.
Hard to argue against Beltran. I think his case is similar to Beltre's in a lot of ways.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_CF.shtml
Beltre is in.Agreed. I think Beltran is too.
A few notes: Unlike Guerrero, who was still posting big numbers in his next-to-last season, Beltran and Baines were guys who hung around compiling stats ..
Hard to argue against Beltran. I think his case is similar to Beltre's in a lot of ways.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_CF.shtml
I don't think Beltre is a good comparison for Beltran at all. Beltre is in, and there likely won't be much to think about. Beltre has the magic number, 3000. He is 4th (likely to reach 3rd next year) all time in HRs among 3B, 3rd in hits, 1st in RBI, 2nd in Doubles, 3rd in WAR. Those numbers are all time among 3B.
He is also a 5 time Gold Glove winner. He is quite simply one of the best all around 3B to ever play the game.
Beltran is a little bit of a different story. In full disclosure, I was never a huge Beltran fan early in his career. I really thought he was a bit overrated ( it may go back to him winning ROY over Chris Singleton -- He was robbed -- maybe not really...). I couldn't believe the contract he signed with the Mets. But then, well, while he was healthy, he kind of lived up to that contract.
His counting numbers are impressive, 435 HRs, almost 1600 RBI, 565 Doubles, .837 Career OPS. He also played CF, for some of which he was very good (he played about 70% of his career defensive innings in CF not counting over 300 games in which he DHed). He even won 3 Gold Gloves while with the Mets (even though he probably wasn't the best defensive CF on his own team the first year).
Though saying he was a 30/30 threat every year is a bit of a stretch. The last time he surpassed the high 20s for steals was 2004. And he had never hit 30 HRs before 2004 (his one and only 30/30 season). Certainly that does not take away that he was great blend of power and speed.
His numbers compare very well with many guys in the HOF. They also compare well with many not in the HOF (guys like the aforementioned Harold Baines, Luis Gonzalez, Bobby Abreu).
For the most part though, he is a little better than the "very good but not great" players of his era. He outpaces Torii Hunter, Garret Anderson, Bernie Williams as well as all those mentioned above, and many others that had a lot of great numbers and many great seasons.
I think the biggest concern for Beltran may be Jim Edmonds. Edmonds didn't play as long, but was better in all three slash categories. He also played CF for the entirety of his career (and I think most would say he played it better, and certainly flashier). I was surprised to learn that Edmonds has a career OPS that is about 70 points higher than Beltran (Edmonds had a .903 career OPS -- WOW!). Beltran hit more doubles (but they each averaged 35 per 162), more HR (Edmonds averaged more per 162) Beltran has more RBI (99 per 162 to Edmonds 97). The only category in which Beltran far exceeds Edmonds is SB.
Aside from the steals, I would say that Edmonds had the better numbers, but that is debatable, and unless I am remembering incorrectly, he didn't get 5% of the vote and fell off the ballot after his first attempt.
If I had to guess I say he gets in. If I had a vote, I'd say I would vote for him. To me though, he isn't the slam dunk case like Beltre. If one was to look for reasons not to include him, or want comparable players that aren't in, you could find them.
He was one of the best OFers of his generation. Had strong all around numbers, strong postseason success and seems to be universally liked and respected. I think that combination deserves the HOF.
I don't think Beltre is a good comparison for Beltran at all. Beltre is in, and there likely won't be much to think about. Beltre has the magic number, 3000. He is 4th (likely to reach 3rd next year) all time in HRs among 3B, 3rd in hits, 1st in RBI, 2nd in Doubles, 3rd in WAR. Those numbers are all time among 3B.
He is also a 5 time Gold Glove winner. He is quite simply one of the best all around 3B to ever play the game.
Beltran is a little bit of a different story. In full disclosure, I was never a huge Beltran fan early in his career. I really thought he was a bit overrated ( it may go back to him winning ROY over Chris Singleton -- He was robbed -- maybe not really...). I couldn't believe the contract he signed with the Mets. But then, well, while he was healthy, he kind of lived up to that contract.
His counting numbers are impressive, 435 HRs, almost 1600 RBI, 565 Doubles, .837 Career OPS. He also played CF, for some of which he was very good (he played about 70% of his career defensive innings in CF not counting over 300 games in which he DHed). He even won 3 Gold Gloves while with the Mets (even though he probably wasn't the best defensive CF on his own team the first year).
Though saying he was a 30/30 threat every year is a bit of a stretch. The last time he surpassed the high 20s for steals was 2004. And he had never hit 30 HRs before 2004 (his one and only 30/30 season). Certainly that does not take away that he was great blend of power and speed.
His numbers compare very well with many guys in the HOF. They also compare well with many not in the HOF (guys like the aforementioned Harold Baines, Luis Gonzalez, Bobby Abreu).
For the most part though, he is a little better than the "very good but not great" players of his era. He outpaces Torii Hunter, Garret Anderson, Bernie Williams as well as all those mentioned above, and many others that had a lot of great numbers and many great seasons.
I think the biggest concern for Beltran may be Jim Edmonds. Edmonds didn't play as long, but was better in all three slash categories. He also played CF for the entirety of his career (and I think most would say he played it better, and certainly flashier). I was surprised to learn that Edmonds has a career OPS that is about 70 points higher than Beltran (Edmonds had a .903 career OPS -- WOW!). Beltran hit more doubles (but they each averaged 35 per 162), more HR (Edmonds averaged more per 162) Beltran has more RBI (99 per 162 to Edmonds 97). The only category in which Beltran far exceeds Edmonds is SB.
Aside from the steals, I would say that Edmonds had the better numbers, but that is debatable, and unless I am remembering incorrectly, he didn't get 5% of the vote and fell off the ballot after his first attempt.
If I had to guess I say he gets in. If I had a vote, I'd say I would vote for him. To me though, he isn't the slam dunk case like Beltre. If one was to look for reasons not to include him, or want comparable players that aren't in, you could find them.
He was one of the best OFers of his generation. Had strong all around numbers, strong postseason success and seems to be universally liked and respected. I think that combination deserves the HOF.
Those numbers look great, but keep in mind, Beltran had about 63% of his ABs as a CF. Beltre has had about 99% of his ABs as a 3B. So where they fall on those lists may be a little deceiving.I guess what I meant is that they’re both guys that have never really been thought of as elite players while they played, which I think is reflected by their MVP voting, hell Beltre is only a four time AS (which is crazy to think about).
82, do/did you have a hall of fame vote?
yes/yes ... though I hope I don't regret saying that here.
yes/yes ... though I hope I don't regret saying that here.
I think it's very cool (and I'm a little envious) that you have a HOF vote. It's a great privilege/responsibility and from your posts in this thread you clearly approach it that way. Good for you, Mike!
What Lenny said. Very cool. Now, about Trammel and Whitaker...... ;)
Thanks guys. My tenure as a voter is probably nearing its end. The BBWAA enacted a new rule a couple of years ago to try to weed out those who haven't actively covered the sport for 10+ years, and this is my 9th year since I left the business (or since it left me).
I get the idea behind the rule: Those who are no longer actively covering (but still have Lifetime BBWAA privileges) are theoretically less likely to follow the sport closely, so culling the herd could make voting more "consistent" or "accurate."
What's interesting for me is that now that I don't predominantly cover one team (or in my case, the 2 Chicago teams), I am much less tunnel-visioned and I take a more overall-MLB approach to my observations. So I actually think I am MORE qualified. And I don't think anybody takes the responsibility any more seriously than I do, so I really appreciate that Lenny noticed.
But I am not going to beg for the opportunity. I've enjoyed having it for 20 years now, so if this year or next year is my last, then it's been a good run.
Maybe rocky or topper will hire you as Scoop's MLB reporter. The pay likely isn't high as they hoard all the profits from this place.
Maybe rocky or topper will hire you as Scoop's MLB reporter. The pay likely isn't high as they hoard all the profits from this place.
Roy Halladay dies in a plane crash... yet Curt Schilling lives on.
There is no God.
Without the injuries, he was a lock HOFer.
Roy Halladay dies in a plane crash... yet Curt Schilling lives on.
There is no God.
i hope that was supposed to be teal ?-(
Roy Halladay dies in a plane crash... yet Curt Schilling lives on.
There is no God.
Roy Halladay dies in a plane crash... yet Curt Schilling lives on.
There is no God.
+1.
Schilling is a bad man. Complete phony.
+1.
Schilling is a bad man. Complete phony.
Maybe.
But wishing somebody dead because you don't like their politics (even in what I'm sure is in jest) isn't funny and is intentionally polarizing. Do we really need more of that?
I wish no ill will and I'm not politically motivated.
Maybe.
But wishing somebody dead because you don't like their politics (even in what I'm sure is in jest) isn't funny and is intentionally polarizing. Do we really need more of that?
seriously? i understand MU can only do so much for some, but really? "bad man"?? some of you guys need to do some introspection. if that's how you define "bad" God help us all! cue in the serenity prayer or something :(
Fair enough - but you did +1 a post that most certainly did wish ill will and appeared to be political trolling.
It was joke. Good lord...
Roy Halladay dies in a plane crash... yet Curt Schilling lives on.
There is no God.
Noted, and agreed.
I just don't like Curt Schilling, for baseball reasons.
Agree he's a "Me first" guy.
Not funny, in so many ways.#allstartingpitchersmatter
Halladay is a sure fire Hall of Famer. One of the best I ever saw play. If he pitched most of his career in the USA we would be talking about him in much greater regard. Won 2/3 of his games. Dominant.
I hope this is a God, that's no joke.
It was joke. Good lord...
It was joke. Good lord...
Hmm, poorly timed and not funny. Maybe work on your material. Comedy is timing.
#allstartingpitchersmatter
He was flying a new plane,he got it in October. There are 23 of these planes in existence, and 3 have now crashed.
Very sad.
We already have multiple locked threads - I was hoping our MLB 2017 wouldn't drift in that direction.
I believe there is a God.
LXXXII’s already signed off on dat, hey?
RIP. Tremendous pitcher, 1st ballot.
While I agree he is a tremendous pitcher, he is a borderline HOF candidate and would have been one of those guys who had to hang around on the ballot for a few years. His closest career comps are a bunch of great pitchers who are borderline guys, only one of whom got in, though Greinke and Verlander are building their resumes and have good shots of getting in. Basic issue is counting stats (barely 200 wins). I think he would have hung around the ballot for a few years and then gotten in. I think the crowd that only vote for the Willie Mays and Greg Maddux type guys on the first ballot would have passed on Halladay in year 1. This may actually help his case for sooner enshrinement, although I wonder what the sentiment will be like when he is eligible. I'd vote for him.
1.Zack Greinke (922.4)
2.Dwight Gooden (920.2)
3.Justin Verlander (909.8)
4.Ron Guidry (898.0)
5.Jimmy Key (894.1)
6.Dazzy Vance (890.3) *
7.Roy Oswalt (887.5)
8.Bret Saberhagen (883.4)
9.Tim Hudson (882.5)
10.Lon Warneke (880.7)
Hmm, poorly timed and not funny. Maybe work on your material. Comedy is timing.
Just found out I'll still have a Hall vote this year. I'm glad about that because Jim Thome is one of the all-time great guys in sports and he is very deserving of enshrinement, so I wanted a chance to vote for him.
Love this Sox trade for Vieira.
I don't believe the teams that receive the competitive balance picks changes, just the order in which they pick.
My point is the Cardinals don't deserve one, and if anything, they should have also lost that pick as part of the hacking punishment.
Here are your HOF candidates for this year:
Barry Bonds
Chris Carpenter
Roger Clemens
Johnny Damon
Vladimir Guerrero
Livan Hernandez
Trevor Hoffman
Orlando Hudson
Aubrey Huff
Jason Isringhausen
Andruw Jones
Chipper Jones
Jeff Kent
Carlos Lee
Brad Lidge
Edgar Martinez
Hideki Matsui
Fred McGriff
Kevin Millwood
Jamie Moyer
Mike Mussina
Manny Ramirez
Scott Rolen
Johan Santana
Curt Schilling
Gary Sheffield
Sammy Sosa
Jim Thome
Omar Vizquel
Billy Wagner
Larry Walker
Kerry Wood
Carlos Zambrano
If I were voting (check it out 82, I'll help you out!)
Vlad, Hoffman, Chipper, Kent, Edgar, Mussina, Rolen, Thome, Vizquel.
I would have a 10th... but I have to think about it more. Andruw Jones, McGriff, Walker, Wagner and Johan would all get consideration.
... Probably Andruw Jones. He fell off quickly but boy was he great at his peak.
Agree on the first. Watch them use the pick in a trade for Stanton...
I believe they would have lost the pick last year, but they had already lost it to sign a free agent with draft pick compensation attached. The picks they lost were their first 2 I believe.
Can't trade draft picks.
I'm not against the competitive balance picks but I think you should have to meet both market size AND revenue criteria.
Unlike other Draft picks, Competitive Balance Draft picks can be traded. However, they can only be traded during the regular season and cannot be dealt simply in exchange for cash. Additionally, a Competitive Balance Draft pick can be traded only by the club to which it was awarded. In other words, the picks may be traded no more than once.
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Vladimir Guerrero
Trevor Hoffman
Andruw Jones
Chipper Jones
Edgar Martinez
Manny Ramirez
Gary Sheffield
Jim Thome
If possible I would put Wood and Moyer in. Wood for the most dominant outing by a pitcher and Moyer for pitching until he received his AARP card.
http://m.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/competitive-balance-draft-picks
There you go. A little baseball 101 from your friendly neighborhood Sox fan.
OK, so why no Sammy? Logically there seems to be a disconnect there. Not just you either...
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Vladimir Guerrero
Trevor Hoffman
Andruw Jones
Chipper Jones
Edgar Martinez
Manny Ramirez
Gary Sheffield
Jim Thome
If possible I would put Wood and Moyer in. Wood for the most dominant outing by a pitcher and Moyer for pitching until he received his AARP card.
You would want a pitcher who won 86 games AND a pitcher who lost over 200 games with a 4.25 ERA?
Might as well vote for me for watching hundreds of games.
Moyer was still getting paid for a 4.25 ERA though after 26 seasons.
Skin color has become way too creepy.
How much will St. Louis have to give up for Stanton?
My guess is one good OF prospect and one good P prospect. I don't think they give up Reyes or Weaver, though.
Miller Park will become the new halfway house of MLB if this happens...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-hot-stove-brewers-have-money-to-spend-reportedly-eye-jake-arrieta/amp/P
I’d do it under the condition Arrieta stays on HGH and gets Braun back on them so they can both be worth the paycheck they’d be receiving.
Don't forget the South Korean wunderkind...
Ehh. He wasn't very good even WITH the HGH. Unreal first month, pretty godawful after that.
Miller Park will become the new halfway house of MLB if this happens...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-hot-stove-brewers-have-money-to-spend-reportedly-eye-jake-arrieta/amp/P
Maybe the first month was the HGH?
If a well-run team that's in desperate need of starting pitching is letting one of their top starting pitchers walk, that'd be a huge red flag for me as a GM.
Players have always found a way to cheat. When one thing gets banned, another thing replaces it. Greenies, anabolic steroids, HGH, etc. It wasn't just some 10 year period of steroid users. There has always been cheaters in baseball, and there always will be. And a large majority of the best players in baseball will be those that have cheated. If you removed anybody who's ever cheated from HOF contention you'll end up with a bunch of Craig Counsells making up the HOF.
More likely he was on HGH the entire season there just was absolutely no book out on the guy for the first month of the season and once pitchers had some experience and some film on him back in the MLB there were some major weaknesses in his bat.
Bud Selig was elected to the HOF and he allowed the so-called "Steroid Era" to exist by looking the other way on PED use for a long, long time. Deserving players from that era like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa and McGwire, who were embraced by MLB at the time even though everyone knew what was going on, should be in the HOF and it should be noted on their plaques that they used PEDs. Additionally, Rob Manfred (and Bud Selig) should be forced to do their penance by smiling and posing for pictures with these players at their HOF inductions.
For the record, I believe Rose and all the accused steroid users should be in the fall. Roids or not, it's damn hard to hit a baseball.
Joe dude, hello. Da sacred Hall gots steroid users already in it, no doubt, ai na?
The Braves lose 13 international prospects and ex-GM John Coppolella banned for life from working in baseball. Ouch!
That's what you get for hiring a Domer.
Ditto. The problem is you can't ban someone from the Hall simply for suspect reasons.
Wouldn't mind the Cubs taking a look at Tyler Chatwood if he can be had on a reasonable deal. Only 28 and solid numbers outside of Coors.
Wouldn't mind the Cubs taking a look at Tyler Chatwood if he can be had on a reasonable deal. Only 28 and solid numbers outside of Coors.
Players have always found a way to cheat. When one thing gets banned, another thing replaces it. Greenies, anabolic steroids, HGH, etc. It wasn't just some 10 year period of steroid users. There has always been cheaters in baseball, and there always will be. And a large majority of the best players in baseball will be those that have cheated. If you removed anybody who's ever cheated from HOF contention you'll end up with a bunch of Craig Counsells making up the HOF.
How did Ruth, Ted Williams, Mays, Aaron, etc., "cheat"? Comparing greenies with anabolic steroids or HGH is the equivalent of comparing a student who looked at their neighbor's paper for an answer with someone who plagiarized a novel. It's an imperfect solution, but I would vote "yes" for those who I thought were Hall of Famers before they cheated (Bonds, Clemons) and no on those who only deserve consideration because they cheated (McGwire, Sosa, Palmiero). As for Rose, I'd vote yes.
Lenny, we are in agreement about almost all of this.
BBWAA voters are given great latitude in how they want to deal with the steroid issue. Neither the Hall nor MLB has issued any guidance whatsoever. My personal policy is pretty much exactly what you stated: If the preponderance of evidence suggests that a player was Hall-worthy before he took steroids, he will get my vote; if not, he won't. Yes, it's subjective. It's ALL subjective. For every slam-dunk obvious HoFer, there are a dozen or two borderline cases that involve opinion and nuance.
For example, some here have lobbied for Sosa. Maybe they have forgotten that he also was caught using a corked bat - making him a double-cheater. He has done nothing but lie about both the corked bat and the roids - making him a double-cheater and a pathological liar. It's very easy for me to not vote for him.
I am curious why you think Rose should be in. Gambling on games while one is an active player is the single worst baseball offense that a player can commit. (I say "baseball offense" so folks don't counter with murder or some other crime.) It has been strictly forbidden for decades, players know it, and consequences have always been severe. Despite this, Rose brazenly did it.
It's all moot anyway - Rose will never get in, and he's not on the BBWAA ballot. But it is an interesting conversation.
Lenny, we are in agreement about almost all of this.
BBWAA voters are given great latitude in how they want to deal with the steroid issue. Neither the Hall nor MLB has issued any guidance whatsoever. My personal policy is pretty much exactly what you stated: If the preponderance of evidence suggests that a player was Hall-worthy before he took steroids, he will get my vote; if not, he won't. Yes, it's subjective. It's ALL subjective. For every slam-dunk obvious HoFer, there are a dozen or two borderline cases that involve opinion and nuance.
For example, some here have lobbied for Sosa. Maybe they have forgotten that he also was caught using a corked bat - making him a double-cheater. He has done nothing but lie about both the corked bat and the roids - making him a double-cheater and a pathological liar. It's very easy for me to not vote for him.
I am curious why you think Rose should be in. Gambling on games while one is an active player is the single worst baseball offense that a player can commit. (I say "baseball offense" so folks don't counter with murder or some other crime.) It has been strictly forbidden for decades, players know it, and consequences have always been severe. Despite this, Rose brazenly did it.
It's all moot anyway - Rose will never get in, and he's not on the BBWAA ballot. But it is an interesting conversation.
I understand why gambling on games as an active player was once the worst offense imaginable. Any association with gamblers for guys who made more money in the offseason selling shoes or insurance than they did playing the game threatened baseball's integrity at its core. Times have changed, and given players salaries it's inconceivable to me that gamblers could "get to" enough players to affect the outcome of games. In addition, I don't think anyone in the history of baseball put forth more effort between the lines than Rose - so for me, his gambling problem was largely beside the point. What he did (and his subsequent denials) was wrong but I think the price he's already paid fits the crime. Just one guy's opinion, though.
Mike, what were your thoughts on Gaylord Perry if you were a voting member back then?
How does throwing an illegal pitch compare with corking a bat? How do we/you decide what is Ok and what isn't?
Ball players have always cheated or looked for advantages billy Martin used to steal the other team's signs. Mike Schmidt said he would have taken steroids if they were around during his time.
Other than Rose, where do we draw the line? What is acceptable cheating to the baseball writers? Just on a common sense level, cheating by purposefully breaking the basic rules of the game seems worse to me than cheating by taking stimulants or steroids.
It's a fine line. Nuanced, not black and white. I'm pretty sure that if corking his bat was Sosa's only offense, he would have sailed into the HoF. But it gives voters a nice out: "Not only was he a rampant juicer, but that wasn't enough for him. He even got caught corking his bat."
The ballot expressly states we should take integrity, character and sportsmanship into account, and I'm sure some voters use that to eliminate all cheaters. But that's a tough one because there are a LOT of effen SOBs in the Hall - lots and lots of racists, for one thing.
I can't speak for my fellow voters, but I consider all of these factors, take my responsibility very seriously and do the best I can. I know there have been those who have made a mockery of it by letting readers or radio listeners fill out their ballots, etc. (I think Le Batard was one who did this, and he had his vote taken away.)
It IS subjective, and it's one of the fun sports topics folks like to argue about. I think it's great that we have so many voters, upwards of 500, because if somebody makes it on 75% of the ballots it says something.
Would you feel the same way about a poor college basketball player who gambled on his team?
I find it interesting that you condemn and then are OK with cheating in the same post.
And I find it interesting that you make no distinction between murder and jaywalking.
I believe you said you're fine with Rose breaking the rules but have an issue with PED users breaking the rules.
If I misread your post, I apologize.
Jockey - I'm not fine with Rose breaking the rule. He (rightfully) has suffered for his sins, I just don't think betting on your own team TO WIN or on other games is cheating the game or your opponents. Anabolic steroids and HGH (IMO) is. Sorry if I was unclear.
https://sports.yahoo.com/giving-hall-fame-vote-joe-morgans-letter-144738128.html
I just don't think betting on your own team TO WIN or on other games is cheating the game or your opponents.
(http://49.media.tumblr.com/b783f8c5426bd8a959bf2b01519f96aa/tumblr_o12szlRLyf1rqe0rbo1_540.gif)
If the media had done a better job of reporting, much of the steroid nonsense could have been nipped in the bud.
That’s a dumb take. Blaming the media?
Hmm. Just dumb eh. I was trying to get to your level but I guess I still have to decay a bit.
Not blaming the media. But they were accessories. Do you think reporters covering Bonds etc. did their jobs well and asked the right questions? Think any of them maybe sat on information for better access? Did they spread nonsense stories about new bats? Did they get caught up in what they were covering so much so they missed obvious signs of steroid usage?
Clearly it was the players fault. Then a combo of the MLBPA and the MLB. But the media played a role. They media failed at reporting the truth (which used to be their job). Even after Ken Caminitti. During Sosa and McGwire. All throughout Bonds' chase and 100 more examples. They were complicit or oblivious. Neither is much better than the other.
Passan makes no sense. He had no problem voting previously as the Hall included all those people about which he wrote that are now so objectionable. He didn't seem to care until Joe Morgan stood up for what he thinks the Hall means. That makes no sense. So if that is how Passan regards the privilege of his HOF vote, the process is better off without him.
I think your take was dumb. I think this post is even dumber.
I don’t respect your opinions on the matter. They are poor.Sultan, I am usually on your side. Not this time. It is not enough to say "your opinion is poor." Explain your rationale.
Sultan, I am usually on your side. Not this time. It is not enough to say "your opinion is poor." Explain your rationale.
I don’t respect your opinions on the matter. They are poor.
I don’t respect your opinions on the matter. They are poor.
I don’t care if it is not enough in your eyes. Or anyone else’s.
No buck. You don’t understand. I think you are almost always wrong. Therefore my opinion is validated. Got it?