With no games that are important in the standings till Friday, I thought it might be interesting to take this pause and compare the Cubs' current standing position to where they were at the All-Star break in each of their four playoff seasons since 1945 (listing the primary contending teams only).
Today:
NL Central W L GB Milwaukee 49 39 -- Cubs 44 43 4.5 NL Wild Card W L GB Los Angeles 49 40 -- Atlanta 47 42 2.0 Arizona 47 43 2.5 Cubs 44 43 4.0
2003 (All-Star break after games of 7/13):
NL Central W L GB Houston 50 44 -- St. Louis 49 45 1.0 Cubs 47 47 3.0 NL Wild Card W L GB Philadelphia 52 40 -- Arizona 52 42 1.0 Los Angeles 49 44 3.5 St. Louis 49 45 4.0 Montreal 49 45 4.0 Florida 49 46 4.5 Colorado 50 47 4.5 Cubs 47 47 6.0
1998 (All-Star break after games of 7/5):
NL Central W L GB Houston 53 34 -- Cubs 48 39 5.0 NL Wild Card W L GB San Francisco 52 37 -- Cubs 48 39 3.0 New York 44 39 5.0
1989 (All-Star break after games of 7/9):
NL East W L GB Cubs 46 30 -- New York 42 36 5.0 St. Louis 42 37 5.5
1984 (All-Star break after games of 7/8):
NL East W L GB New York 47 34 -- Cubs 48 36 0.5 Philadelphia 45 39 3.5
Discuss.
I see some similarities
with the 2003 season. Back then the Cubs were a .500 team until the big trade for some hitting. I see them right now as a .500 team unless they make a trade for some hitting. They absolutely need a catcher. Two nearly automatic outs in a lineup that isn't that strong to begin with is a killer.rlpete - July 9, 2007
Was there ever as much uncertainty in the lineup..
...during those other pennant chases? Angel Pagan is really our starting CF? The power-hitting cather we've been waiting for is still playing in AAA? Right field is a platoon between 2nd base, the bench, and the DL?Furthermore I'm still a little miffed that Pie was going to get his "chance to start" in the first half and then got demoted after less than two weeks. His BA is still higher than Andruw Jones'.
Jerry Mumphrey - July 9, 2007
BTW, thanks for the name change
It's not "Jerry Mumphrey" but I suppose the penance is due.Jerry Mumphrey - July 9, 2007
LOL
If you'd like your user name to be "Jerry Mumphrey", that can be arranged.Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
Sweet.
I would, but my work computer is crippled. (Or else I'm too dumb)Jerry Mumphrey - July 9, 2007
Ask and you shall receive!
As you can see, I changed it.Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
Please don't compare
Pie to Andruw Jones. One is an unonown variable (on the MLB lavel) and the other is a proven commodity that's merely slumping.lovejones72 - July 9, 2007
The Cubs are in position to compete.
They are finding that their bullpen help from in-house could be adequate if not very strong. I think the biggest Qs will be the offensive performance of Theriot/Fontenot/Derosa. The team's bench is much stronger and they have been able to get production through injuries. It'd be a huge shot if Pi can adjust offensively. Pagan has been fantastic but if Pie could perform consistently offensively then the team's OF depth will be a huge strength.I have been optimistic about this team all season, but with periods of venting, and I think we will be able to compete with the Brewers for the division. The Cubs are capable of making the playoffs so let's hope for the best.
DudeVf11 - July 9, 2007
seeing where we were in 2003
has to make you feel good about this year's team. but that 2003 team was much more talented than this oneNDcubsfan - July 9, 2007
I wouldn't say they were more talented
but they certainly had all the pieces; good defensive catcher, excellent at the 1-2 holes and Wood and Prior.As good as Wood and Prior were that year, the team still did not take off until they got Lofton, Ramirez and Simon.
MPH73 - July 9, 2007
Starting Pitching
was way better in 2003 than now. Hill and Marquis are coming back to Earth and Marshall was lucky no get away with a no-decision last time out. He's really just throwing garbage up there and better teams are going to crush him.
Also, when you add in Z's sub-par year and the fact that we might see Wade Miller again. Well, um, yuck.
I see .500 team here if there are no improvements to the SP.
salparadise23 - July 9, 2007
I agree on the starters
I was referring to the big names of Soriano, Lee, Ramirez etc. The 07 team has bigger names, but the 03 team had the right pieces, and was a better lineup because it was balanced.MPH73 - July 9, 2007
That's true
Hey, maybe the can get Lofton again! Another reason the CPat debacle hurt this team. If there's no CF logjam, we probably keep Lofton and most likely win several more games over the years.
salparadise23 - July 9, 2007
agree 100%
NDcubsfan - July 9, 2007
true, but the division was also a lot stronger in
2003, the division this year is terrible, theres no excuse for us not being able to win this thing, although i do think we need to deal for another power hitter before the break because this lineup cant hit homerunsCubsBall2202 - July 9, 2007
News of the day...
...Blanco is expected to be back this month, after a week or so of rehab starts. Floyd's gonna get a cortisone shot, and Petrick will return to the ballclub.cwyers - July 9, 2007
I like Petrick a lot.
He's got a great arm and mound presence. A little experience and we might have a really good setup man or even closer in a year or two.Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
Talking about Petrick
I hung out with him on Friday here in Des Moines at a local bar called Drinks . . . . Told me how he grew up loving the cubs . . . We talked about the bullpen and I told him how much we dislike Eyre, I told him Eyre should challenge Kobayashi in some kind of eating contest, he laughed but didn't say anything. . . We hung out for about an hour or so, I told him about BCB and how much BCB readers liked him, he said he is going to check it out, my girlfriend stopped by and took pictures of us . . ., Petrick is one really cool dude, really cool , loves to drink vodka and talk about baseball . . .CZ38 - July 10, 2007
Personally I can't get excited
by the possible return of Blanco. I really doubt he can be their regular catcher with his injury. Even if he can, his last full-time gig was 2004 when he hit .206. Last year's average was a career high. The Cubs need a catcher. I wish AJ was a RH hitter but I really think the Cubs need to make a run at him. I'm not sure if there are any better options that will be available.rlpete - July 9, 2007
I would
rather get castrated than have AJ on this team.jshipp - July 9, 2007
I agree...
Bowen and Hill might not be good hitters but they call an adequate to good game, and most importantly, they wouldn't take a giant dump on the team chemistry that we have right now.WartburgCub - July 9, 2007
I agree
sue369 - July 9, 2007
I'd rather win
The Cubs cannot have two outs in their lineup. They need an upgrade.rlpete - July 9, 2007
A lot of good
NL teams have and still do have two outs in the lineup. If you get the right production from the guys you should, this should not limit the teams success.Let's take a look at this; the Cubs have already tried the power lineup, with a bad catcher, mediocre defense and that got them no where. There are a lot of ways to win baseball games, and having two outs in the lineup, is an issue for a lot of good teams.
MPH73 - July 9, 2007
Yep
Many good teams sacrifice offense for defense at catcher and somewhere in the middle infield. Off the top of my head the 2001 D-Backs come to mind (Miller, Womack) and the Cardinals last year (Molina, Miles). It's not impossible to win that way at all.cubsbak - July 9, 2007
The Cards
First off, Molina still hit .216 which is significantly better than Hill. He is also better defensively. Miles hit .263 so he wasn't completely useless. Don't forget that the Cards also had a 1st baseman that slugged .671.Another thing forgotten with that team is the bench. Here are some of their bench/part-timer numbers.
- Duncan .293/.363/.589!
- Spiezio .272/.366/.496
- Luna .291/.355/.417
- Rodriguez .301/.374/.432
LaRussa was able to bring in a good bat when he needed it for Molina and others. Other than Ward, the Cubs don't have that.
Right now, the Cubs are averaging 4.55 runs per game, last year's Cards team scored 4.85.
rlpete - July 9, 2007
Let's hope Lee
starts driving in runs. Or they get something more out of CF. Or Jones steps it up in the second half. Lots of places to look for offense besides catcher. Like I said, it's not impossible to win with an automatic out at catcher.cubsbak - July 9, 2007
I'd be fine with a CF upgrade
That was my main point, the Cubs need more hitting. I still think AJ is a good and available option. People can hope for Andruw Jones and Salty. I'm looking at realistic options that might be available that the Cubs can afford.I'm still not sure how many teams win with a .150 average position player.
rlpete - July 9, 2007
AJ would poison the water
coral - July 9, 2007
He's got
a championship ring.rlpete - July 9, 2007
I don't think there is any playoff hopeful team
that has a position player hitting .150. I'd settle for .220/.230 but that's not likely with either of these catchers. Considering that the Cubs have other offensive issues in CF and SS, they need an upgrade somewhere.rlpete - July 9, 2007
I agree
but how long have Hill and Bowen been catching (25-30 games)? I'll guarantee, there have been good teams that had one of their defensive position players hit .150 over a 25-30 game stretch.MPH73 - July 9, 2007
But that's all these guys will hit
Both have been waived by multiple organizations. Hill's lifetime batting average is .202 in a part-time role. It will only go down if he is a starter and the season starts wearing him down. The Yankees released Hill last year after he hit .143 in 70 AB's in AAA.Bowen has now struck out 79 times in 240 AB's and has a .213 lifetime average. His minor league career average is .238. These guys are career backups. Chad Moeller was just released by the Reds. The Cubs might as well sign him as their starting catcher.
I don't understand people thinking these guys will get better. They won't.
rlpete - July 9, 2007
Amen
I said it before, Bowen is challenging Todd Pratt as the worst offensive Cubs catcher in history (numbers or not). He's just plain brutal.And last I checked, neither one of them can throw anyone out. Improvements defensively over Barrett...but that's purely relative. These guys just are not very good. Period.
krummy12 - July 9, 2007
Look at the Yankees
on the surface, they look loaded and look how they are doing.BigJohnAZ - July 9, 2007
Thanks for the chuckle
That's a good one. You made me LOL. I'm not sure I would go that far, but I'd just about rather have anybody besides AJ.billybuck - July 9, 2007
It makes me laugh.....
that so many people here have this hate for AJ.Barrett was the instigator. It is that simple. If the Cubs could get AJ, it would be a GREAT get. He is locked up for at least two more years, he has proven he can handle a pitching staff, and most importantly, he is the proud owner of a ring.
I have scissors to help you with the castration......
timeforachange - July 9, 2007
It takes 25 to earn a ring...
D Lee, Cliff Floyd, even Marquis, all have rings. Having a ring means very little when it comes to winning another one, with another team.Getting AJ, and his ring would not guarantee anything.
Up the middle we need to be strong defensively, even it means sacraficing offense. As someone noted earlier if we were getting production from the proper places this wouldn't be an issue. Furthermore if our bullpen could hold a few more leads we would be in much better shape.
AJ and his ring are not the answer. We have players with rings, and have had players with rings, look what that has got the Cubs...
DenverCub - July 9, 2007
Missing the point.....
The point is simple. AJ has been on a team that has won. He has proven that he can handle a championship caliber staff. I would take AJ over any of the garbage we have on this roster.Either way, I think we win this division. IMHO, we need to look big picture and position the team to go deep into October/ November.
timeforachange - July 10, 2007
The point is
that AJ handled a pitching staff that pitched as well in the post-season as any team in recent years. He did have some issues when he was younger in San Francisco but he seems to be fine with the Sox. Catching a World Series team means a lot more than just being on a championship team. For people to say he is poison is wrong. If he is available for a decent price including one of the Cubs' overhyped prospects, the Cubs should try to acquire him.I'm tired of arguing. People say Hill and Bowen will get better. I say they won't. They are average defensively at best. Offensively and defensively, they are worse than Brad Ausmus and Yadier Molina. They are career backups who would not be starting for probably any other team in baseball.
If people think this lineup will win, feel free. I don't see Pie contributing much this year, Floyd is more than likely heading to the DL. Theriot is what he is, a poor man's David Eckstein. Fontenot has been great but he won't continue to hit .350. I think the team needs an upgrade or two in order to win in a very winable division and where no one in the whole NL looks that tough. A surprise like the Cardinals could very well happen again this year once a team makes the playoffs.
rlpete - July 10, 2007
Jeff Blauser
is also the proud owner of a ring.
salparadise23 - July 10, 2007
My god
I may have completely forgotten all about that signing if you hadn't brought it up. Thanks a lot.Years of therapy down the tubes. </joke>
SackMan - July 10, 2007
Agree 2003 team stronger
Surprised record so mediocre at .500 they really caught fire last few mos. esp. after the Pitt trade...and they had some real stud pitchers at top of their game then, and slugging OF.That's what this team really needs not convinced Jacque Jones can do it, but he can chip in..If a chance arrives to acquire an Andruw Jones or Griffey for not-much, they've got to go for it..Are there any other hard-hitting outfielders likely to be available?? Because with Floyd's continued frailty and Jones' non-productivity, RF seems the most likely place for a major infusion...
Lee could provide a nice pick-up with his power in 2nd half...if he doesn't start hitting HR they're gonna be in trouble with this lineup.
writerinwrigley - July 9, 2007
Ugh ... Jones or Griffey?
Andruw Jones has been slumping all season and Griffey has been an injury risk for years now. Trading for either of these guys is a huge risk.El Borto - July 9, 2007
And
if Hendry deals with the Braves, you know he's going to get robbed blind.
salparadise23 - July 9, 2007
Besides the fact...
that both are 10 and 5 guys. Griffey could be talked into moving to a contender (perhaps), but Jones has no incentive whatsoever to uproot at this point. Better to ride out the last couple of months in Atlanta, and hit free agency.Damen Jackson - July 9, 2007
Andruw Jones
I watched the guy for years in Atlanta. He was really good (after learning some hard lessons), but I think he is passing his prime. I'd rather see him stay in Atlanta and not repeat history by trading for players past their prime. Let him age wtih Chipper et al. JMONo Southern Belle - July 9, 2007
the '03 Cubs were hot for one month only
They were only at 3 games over .500 entering the month of September and then the Cardinal series got them going.TR - July 9, 2007
3 is the magic number
More than three games back in the loss column has been the limit. If they were more than 3 back, they didn't qualify.They are 4 back now.
SsEll - July 9, 2007
I had little hope back in May that we'd
be in this good of shape by the All Star break.I still think were put together to be a .530ish team but if Hendry truly can shore up some things perhaps we can win this mess of a division.
Milwaukee is a good team and they'll keep getting better with the young talent they have in their farm system. Hopefully this year they're too young and will crack down the stretch.
stelmodad - July 9, 2007
Agreed
I never thought they would be at this point a month ago and am pretty happy being one game over .500 right now. The team seems to have figured things out and is playing the kind of ball I expected before the season started. I do have concerns regarding the decline of Hill and Marquis however. I don't think our offense can compensate for two starting pitchers going down the toilet for the remainder of the season.qccub - July 9, 2007
I hear you.
A good friend and co-worker of mine is a St. Louis native and a die hard redbird fan. He likes Marquis but has always said beware the All Star break... Hopefull Jason's trend as of the last few years will make a turn for the better this year.stelmodad - July 9, 2007
Looking at the Brewers year so far
They have been extremly streaky as a team and individually. JJ Hardy was money in the first several weeks of the season but has cooled considerably. I think the same can be expected of Braun and Hart. As the year wears on I think the Brewers will fall off but our Cubbies will get more consistent and we'll end up fighting off the Cards for the division.El Borto - July 9, 2007
The way I see the Brewers...
... is like the 1978 Brewers, who suddenly burst on the scene with a great 1st half and the addition of young players like Paul Molitor and Gorman Thomas and the maturing of Cecil Cooper and Robin Yount.That Brewer team took till 1981 to make the playoffs. This team is VERY similar to that one in its makeup. I see them fading in the second half.
Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
Well
If the Cubs can't win the division, I'll definitely be pulling for the Brew Crew to win it. It would be nice to have a Central champ that's neither St. Louis nor Houston.
salparadise23 - July 9, 2007
Amen
coral - July 9, 2007
Amen to that Amen
n/tBigJohnAZ - July 9, 2007
interesting comparison
The teams are similar. The major differences however are that fielder and braun at the corners are already better than bando and cooper, but on the whole i think the offenses are similar, with the 1978 team featuring slightly better pitching.That Brewer team took till 1981 to make the playoffs. This team is VERY similar to that one in its makeup. I see them fading in the second half.
Couple of things wrong with this.
jacob - July 9, 2007
Hey!
Jacob's back!Kegler - July 9, 2007
Also note...
under the current playoff format, the '79 Brewers would have been at worst a Wild Card, at best an AL Central winner.bison - July 9, 2007
another interesting comparison
the teams aren't as similar (so perhaps the comparison isn't appropriate as the team makeup was different) but the 1978 Cubs were 43-39 at the break on decent pitching and below average offense. the second half saw the over-performing pitching regress to average and the unbalanced offense maintain it's near mediocrity. the team ended up fading to a 36-43 second half record to complete the season 79-83.jacob - July 9, 2007
True.
That Cub team didn't have near the talent that the 2007 Brewers have.I would expect that the Brewers could be a dominant team for several years if they can afford to keep the core together. Maybe they can do what the Indians did in the 90's, sign their young players to longterm deals before they get to free agency or arbitration.
Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
the comparison
the comparison was '78 Cubs and '07 Cubs. At the break both were slightly over .500, both had gotten there on over-performing pitching and mediocre to below average offense.I would expect that the Brewers could be a dominant team for several years if they can afford to keep the core together.
How many is several? 5?
jacob - July 9, 2007
Oh, come on.
I said "several" to be general about it. I have no idea exactly how many.Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
ok
But with the way arbitration works small market teams cannot afford NOT to keep players through arbitration. Hardy is the first one to hit FA in 2011, weeks, hart, fielder, and hall are next at 2012, Braun and Gallardo are not until 2013.The core of this team WILL be together for several years, and then, after several years, will be expensive enough that some decisions will have to be made.
So, don't expect the brewers to be busted up anytime in the next several years.
jacob - July 9, 2007
Nope.
Well, maybe I should say it depends. The payroll budget vs. market value of the player are the obvious variables. The Brewers $70+ million payroll, which includes $5+ million to Anderson and Koskie, won't be able to sustain keeping much of this core group when they hit arbitration. Even taking into account the assumed payroll increases management should budget and assuming this group plays like it does now. Hall and Weeks have both been signed to contracts that avoided arbitration, so you'll want to fact check a little better. Fielder's agent is Scott Boras, so give him all your love now while you can. So don't expect that they won't be busted up during the next several years.The Lip - July 9, 2007
nope.
you didn't write anything that contradicted anything i wrote.so yes, don't expect the core of the brewers to be busted up anytime soon.
jacob - July 9, 2007
Contradiction is obvious.
I really hope that you aren't playing the same game that you did when you were last here. You aren't a stupid man and claiming that you don't see the rebuttal in various responses is beneath the relative intelligence you've displayed and certainly wastes the few minutes it takes to respond. Maybe that's your goal.If you do have a genuine interest, are still around and would like to discuss it, I'm happy to oblige. Do realize that players become eligible for arbitration when they reach 3 year's MLB service time- 2+ if they have 86 days of service the preceding season and are in the top 17% of all players between 2 and 3 years in terms of playing time? At 6 years players become eligible for FA.
It's obvious that you haven't been accurate in a lot of what you have written on this topic, particularly about the likelihood of the team's staying together. Check it out for yourself the MLB Basic Player Agreement is here: http://roadsidephotos.com/baseball/BasicAgreement.pdf
The contracts and service times are here: http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/milwaukee-brewers.html
Unless I'm reading incorrectly or don't completely understand- the majority of the Brewers 25 man roster will be arbitration eligible or free agents at season's end '07 and '08. If you look at Sheets you'll see that in '05 they signed him through'08 to avoid arbitration and cover his first two years of FA, just the scenario that Al suggested.
The Lip - July 10, 2007
vacuous
claiming that you don't see the rebuttal in various responses is beneath the relative intelligenceI'm trying to get you to speak in specifics instead of wild generalizations so that we can have a fact-based conversation. Twice now you've suggested that i'm misrepresenting facts. Here it is for you, specifically:
- so you'll want to fact check a little better
- It's obvious that you haven't been accurate in a lot of what you have written on this topic,
Which facts am I wrong about?Here, i'll lay it out simply for you, you can even refer to the argument by letter if it helps you.
A. The young core of the brewers is under brewer control until about 2012 (hardy is the exception at 2011).
B. For a small market team, a team cannot afford to NOT sign pre-FA players
C. the Brewers are a small market team
----
THEREFORE: the young core of the brewers will be brewers for several years.
Now, what do you have a problem with?
ps. Here's one more (unrelated) fact for you, too. The players on the 25 man roster who will be free agents after this season, or next season are: cordero (32), dessens (36), graffanino (35), miller (37), estrada (31), shouse (38), spurling (30), jenkins (32)
jacob - July 10, 2007
Jacob, Sweetheart calm down.
I don't have any problem at all- it's just a baseball blog. Nothing to lose it over. Hey, a BrewCrewBall member being angry, trolling and feeling superior to Cubs fans is not upsetting to me. I don't think you are representative of Brewers fans at all. So, lets finish it."But with the way arbitration works small market teams cannot afford NOT to keep players through arbitration."
You wrote that right? Not seeing any comment anywhere like
"B. For a small market team, a team cannot afford to NOT sign pre-FA players"
in fact your post was disputing Al's comment
"I would expect that the Brewers could be a dominant team for several years if they can afford to keep the core together. Maybe they can do what the Indians did in the 90's, sign their young players to longterm deals before they get to free agency or arbitration"
My responses to you have addressed arbitration and free agency. As I said, if they continue to play as well as they are currently they will garner big dollars during arbitration which will make it difficult for the small market Brewers to afford all of the young talent through their FA eligibility. Which makes it likely that some of them them will be traded. Most of the Brewers roster will reach arbitration or free agency after '07 and '08 is an indisputable fact.
Look, you win. I got sucked into the troll. Hey, I'm one of the neanderthal Cub fans that can't understand WPA charts or any of the sophisticated sabrmetric tools at the other BCB so of course you're right about everything. And vacuous? Well compared to "Five Fun Facts about Cecil Fielder" and "Five Fun Facts about Gabe Gross" what isn't? You are welcome here and the next time you troll, I'm sure at least some of the other knuckle dragging Cub fans will bite. I'm finished with this and you. Feel free to respond- I won't read it and you can pretend you're superior.
The Lip - July 10, 2007
arbitration
Arbitration and free agency are not the same thing. So the first two quotes you pulled of mine are the same.Arbitration win shares are about half as expensive as free agency win shares. It's wrong of you to believe that a small market team cannot afford arbitration eligible players, those arbitration eligible players are under team control and have no leverage.
Arbitration is what keeps small market teams competitive.
jacob - July 11, 2007
who are
the 78 versions of dlee, aramis, and soriano on that cubs mediocre offense?kylejo - July 9, 2007
buckner, murcer and kingman
they all had an above average OPS+, and were the only regulars to do so. Like the '78 team there are only 4 players on the '07 team with and above average OPS+. Now dlee, aram, and soriano are each better than buckner, murcer and kingman which is why the former trio carries the team to only a slightly below average OPS+ of 97, while the latter trio could only lift their unbalanced offense to an OPS+ of 89.There is no question that the '07 offense is stronger than the '78 offense, but they share an unbalanced offense and were both carried in the first half by pitching.
jacob - July 9, 2007
78 vs.07
Despite the 2007 team's lack of power, it already has hit more homers this year (74) than the 1978 team did the entire year (72). I imagine there were some long homer-less streaks that year.danimal15 - July 9, 2007
different Era
it's not really fair to compare the game in '78 to '07. Interestingly though the '78 team finished 11th in HRs, and the '07 team is currently in 11th in HRs.jacob - July 9, 2007
True to a point
Yes - it was a different era - back at a time when a team hitting 150 homers would probably lead its league. That said, 72 was low even for then (except for the Astros and Cardinals). The 1979 Astros were almost certainly the last team to post more complete games (55) than homers (49) in a season.danimal15 - July 9, 2007
Nope.
The NL in 1978 had an ERA of 3.58 vs the Cubs 4.06. In the 1st half they had an ERA of 3.91 and in the second- 4.20. The NL's split was 3.57/3.59. Your account is incorrect and the allusion to the '07 Cubs is similarly flawed.The Lip - July 9, 2007
nope.
so which part is wrong? that the cubs pitching carries them to .500 in the first half and regressed?jacob - July 9, 2007
Yes
The pitching was virtually the same (fair at best) in both halves and didn't carry them at any point. I know that you have been spinning off of Al's reference to the '78 vs '07 Brewers, but as noted earlier the comparisons in both cases aren't particularly useful in predicting the rest of this season.I'm sure everyone gets the point that you think that this year's Cubs have been carried by over-performing pitching and as it regresses the Cubs will fall far out of contention and under .500. You are certainly not alone in that supposition.
Since I'm responding the day after your last writing, I'll leave it at that. If this topic still interests you, I'd be curious about your thoughts about both team's first half and what lies ahead for them in the second.
The Lip - July 10, 2007
A very nice article about Barry Bonds
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1640390,00.htmlcubsnlinux - July 9, 2007
Good food for thought.
Thanks for posting this. I fall into the "he cheated" category, but there is absolutely no doubt that soon, we will be witnesses to history, whether we like it or not.Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
Yeah I too lean that way,
but as a wise man (Buster Olney? - Ha ha ha) once said - that's the difference between being 99% sure and 100% sure. That last 1% is huge.lovejones72 - July 9, 2007
n/t
I couldn't find a category for my position:I'm pretty sure he took steroids, but he didn't cheat.
So take that for what it is, but I've put enough time into my fandom over the years that I'm not about to question all of professional sports and try to recolor my memories of the 1990s over it. I still try to watch all the Bonds ABs and I'm pulling for a HR. Baseball let the steroid issue happen and Barry went nuts and it honestly doesn't bother me.
Jerry Mumphrey - July 9, 2007
Hey, there's a new one on me...
...how can a ball player take steriods and NOT cheat?BlueSox - July 9, 2007
Probably he believes
that bonds took those steroids without knowing that they are performance enhancers or that they are not a no-no. I think bond's leaked testimony is something similar to the above.I don't agree with the above.
cubsnlinux - July 9, 2007
I also affiliate myself with the -
"He Cheated Category"But as pointed out in the article there had been so many controversies in the game, doubts about so many players that it is irrational to simply ignore the record.
cubsnlinux - July 9, 2007
To further clarify my position..
If we chose to ignore the allegations then we would be setting a bad precedence and we would be sending wrong signals to everyone from present to the upcoming youngsters and we would doing grave injustice to all those people who played the game the right way.But we know that there had been so many controversies in the game before bonds and as rightly pointed out in the article bonds merely belongs to the 'steroids era' and there had many such tainted eras before the advent of barry bonds. Also it is possible that some of the pitchers who gave up all those home runs to bonds might have very well been on steroids themselves. So interestingly bonds might have been on a level playing field because he was playing in the 'steroids era'.
I think bonds is just a symptom of a bigger disease and that is the failure of MLB system. What we can only do is to have stricter steroid policies and their proper enforcement. But it wouldn't be fair if we ignore Barry's feat or if we show excessive disgust at his accomplishments.
cubsnlinux - July 9, 2007
I too am torn.
Bonds was a great player before the alleged steroid use.Take a look at his stats from 1990-1993. In that four season span he had 100 or more RBI's, 39 or more SB's, including 52 in '90, and 30 or more HR's every year, with the exception of '91 when he hit 25. He won 3 MVP's and finished 2nd the other.
This OBVIOUSLY doesn't paint the whole picture, but I have to believe he would have had the credentials to be in the HOF without the steroid use. Now there is obvious debate, but his stats don't lie.
Whether or not you agree with Bonds as a player or person, 755 HR's is an historic feat. I just don't know if I can "celebrate" it.
Tangled Up In Blue - July 9, 2007
Yeah, this is...
...wholly unprecidented. It would be like if the career totals for hits, games played and at bats all belonged to a guy that bet on baseball.Oh, wait.
cwyers - July 9, 2007
LOL
Tangled Up In Blue - July 9, 2007
Yeah, well...
...unless it happens in the upcoming series the Cubs have against the Giants, I'm not sure exactly how much witnessing I'll be doing.cwyers - July 9, 2007
Well...
... I was using "witnessing" in the figurative sense, meaning you are alive and noting that it happens, whether you are there in person or not.Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
2003 Pitching
I don't think there is ever a team that wins the World Series that is fully stacked from top to bottom w/out any holes. I think great teams find a way to win, and there is a new hero every day. That's how we've played at times this year. Ofcourse it would be nice to have every position solidified but Lou is doing two things at once. Weed out the crap, sort things out and put the team in the best position to win, all while trying to take us to the promised land in the same year (his first year)!I think pitching is going to be the key down the stretch. In 2003 Sosa was the only real power threat, Alou the next closest with 22 HR and 91 RBI. But lets see how the SP did from July on.
From 7/9 on, Kerry Wood went 6-5 w/3 Complete Games and 2 Shut-outs.
From 7/11 on, Mark Prior went 10-2 w/2 Complete Games.
From 7/3 on, Carlos Zambrano went 7-5 w/3 Complete Games and 1 Shut-out.
From 7/2 on, Matt Clement went 9-5 w/2 Complete Games and 1 Shut-out.
That's a combined 32 wins, 10 Complete Games and 4 Shut Outs. If we can get something similar from the current rotation I dont see any reason why we can't win the division. It would be nice to score like the Twins did on the Sox during that double header the other day, but the Cubs are going to score runs, we just need to do a better job of pitching with dominance.
2003 stats http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/2003.shtml
tony412 - July 9, 2007
That would be nice
But I don't see this rotation giving us 10 complete games all season, let alone in the second half.phat
phatass - July 9, 2007
the big trade
ok i been hearing about this big trade for awhile now and i been thinking of possible people that we can acquire and so far there is a problem with them all and who can we trade for bc if we do trade jaque jones how much do u really think we can get for a struggling player with a high pay salary if we can even get a trade for him the possible people i wouldnt mind getting aj i know i know he plays for the white sux and we all hate that team but hes a good hitter and can play a good enough catcher i mean i hate the pirates with a passion but i love a-ram and im sure every one else does too sometimes we have to forget about who they played for and look what they can do for us but anyways anyone have any ideas who the cubs can possible get and who we can trade besides jaque bc they wont get anything for himryan797 - July 9, 2007
does this
qualify as a fragment?tony412 - July 9, 2007
I think
his period key must be broken.rlpete - July 9, 2007
it certainly
qualifies as s ruin-on sentencelovejones72 - July 9, 2007
I type like I have
boxing gloves on...lovejones72 - July 9, 2007
LOL
"ruin-on sentence"As in a run-on sentence ruining the reader's comprehension?
BlueSox - July 9, 2007
After getting thru...
...the tortured/non-existent syntax, I think you want a big trade.AJ is NOT that trade - while decent at the bat, he's had problems with focusing with pitchers in the past in San Fran, and right now I like the fact that our pitchers seem comfortable with the way our catchers call the game (so does Lou, evidently). I'd love to see us get more offense out of that position, but not if we sacrifice defense/pitch calling.
Here's an oldie but goodie for all of you - ARod. The Yankees are going nowhere this year, he's probably opting out after this year (see the NY Post stuff), and with the age in their rotation (Mussina, Clemens, Petite) and elsewhere (Posada, Jeter, the shrinking man Jason Giambi) they need to free up cash for some good free agents (don't laugh - they could use some payroll flexibility). The Cubs with Pinella are arguably one of the few places he'd waive his no-trade clause for, he stays in a major market (but not one as insane as NYC), plays for a coach he loves, and can go back to his old position of shortstop.
The price could be really high (Pie, Marshall or Guzman, Fontenot or Theriot or Cedeno, perhaps JJones, maybe another pitcher/reliever), but if the Yankees are out of it near the end of July, why KEEP ARod?
Of course, there are teams out there that can offer more in return (Angels, Dodgers, maybe Padres), but I'd love to see us kick the tires...
Chadnudj - July 9, 2007
where would A-Rod play?
I would love to see ARod in Cubbie Blue, but we already have a highly-paid high-caliber third baseman in Aramis Ramirez. Could he make the move back to shortstop?WartburgCub - July 9, 2007
yes....
...I'm SURE he could make it, and probably, frankly, wants to make it. He's certainly as good defensively at shortstop (even after playing out of the position the past few seasons) as ANYONE the Cubs have, and is miles ahead in terms of offense.Chadnudj - July 9, 2007
You know what's sad about this post?
That's 4 playoff appearances in SIXTY ONE FREAKING YEARS !!!!!Unbelievable. Mind-boggling. Maddening. Add your own.
Peoria Matt - July 9, 2007
Sigh.
I should have known someone would chime in with negativity.Actually, it's four in the 26 years of Tribco ownership, still not great, I acknowledge.
For the last three decades or so of Wrigley ownership, it was pretty clear the Wrigleys didn't know what they were doing and weren't really trying. They lucked into some good teams in the late 60's and early 70's that SHOULD have had several playoff appearances, but didn't.
Look, we all know the history of failure. Constantly reminding us -- what's the point?
Let's look forward. There's still a chance THIS year. That's what's important to me NOW.
Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
Sigh too......
as Ditka once said, the past is for "Cowards and losers".....I will say Al; your piece on mgmt the other day was interesting. Although you are correct that no one outside of the inner circle knows 100% what is going on, you can not tell me that Zell and his group nixed the deal.
Think about it: Jones is a starter. Jones is benched. Jones is told he is not wanted. Jones is now Lou's buddy again. Me thinks that Uncle Lou knows he can't get rid of him and he now has to make the best of it.
Also, the Zambrano mess is 100% due to the change in ownership. There is no master plan.
I do agree with you regarding the hatred spewed towards Hendry. Personally, I do not like the man as the GM of the team I root for. That is where I stop. The personal attacks are weak.
As for McDonough, I stand by my comments that he is over his head. IMHO, he is a great marketing guy. That is where he should stay.
timeforachange - July 9, 2007
And once again to Al and timeforachange....
Someone pointing out a glaring fact of failure about their favorite team is NOT BEING NEGATIVE. It is a fact. Is there something in that comment that was not factual? Let me know if there is.It is not someone saying Jacque Jones will always suck, Wrigley Field is a dump, etc., etc.
I guess it is easier and convenient to forget about the near 100 years of failure of this team.
And nothing like quoting Ditka . He was always known for his philosophical
greatness. Either that or flipping off a fan.
Peoria Matt - July 9, 2007
What was the point of your post?
We all know the Cubs haven't won. Your post didn't add anything to the discussion. The point of mine was to show that this year's Cubs are just about where the other four playoff teams were at this point in the season.But as you wrote, I guess it's easier for you to write and be negative and slam anything you can, rather than to think positively. Suit yourself.
Al Yellon - July 10, 2007
Let me apply your thinking to your original post..
"Let's look forward. There's still a chance THIS year. That's what's important to me NOW."Then why bring up the records of 4 teams that failed to win the World Series? Isn't that in the past also? Those 4 teams past records have no bearing on this years team. Again, I said absolutely nothing about this years team, I just made a statement about the Cubs failure to reach the postseason.
"I guess it's easier for you to write and be negative and slam anything you can, rather than to think positively."
Me pointing out the fact that the Cubs have failed to be a consistent participant in the postseason using the facts you gave is being negative or stating a fact?
Peoria Matt - July 10, 2007
"Failure to reach the postseason".
Hmmm. Seems to me the Cubs reached the postseason in each of the four years for which I posted All-Star break standings. That was the point of the post.Your negative post, in which you stated a fact which we all know, was pointless.
I know you love being negative. Hope you enjoy that. It wears on me.
Al Yellon - July 10, 2007
Al, you can't be serious.....
"Me pointing out the fact that the Cubs have failed to be a consistent participant in the postseason using the facts you gave is being negative or stating a fact?" You correctly answered stating a fact, but contradict yourself by saying "I love being negative".Exactly the opposite Al. I hate the fact that this team has only crappy results, which reinforces my lack of faith in them. I would love nothing more than for the Cubs to provide me with no reasons to doubt them, but that day hasn't arrived. Prove me wrong is my yearly motto. Hell, even the Red Sox have a title.
I grasp the fact that you showed the records of the last four Cub teams that reached the postseason.
Since my post "has no point", answer me this:
Why are you bringing up past records since you only "look forward"? Using your stance, we should not even be using the past as a basis to judge this team.
How could one not understand a Cub fans less-than-rosy disposition toward their favorite team? That's even more mind-boggling.
But guess what Al: I'm going to keep hoping they win the title, not just in the manner you would like.
Peoria Matt - July 10, 2007
Okay.....
first, the Ditka quote was a joke....Second, you are correct about this team's futility. No one can argue differently. However, IMHO, there has been a change this year due to the manager. I equate it to what happened when Dallas Green was brought in. This team is not the "lovable losers" (puke) of years gone bye. Uncle Lou has held people accountable and has not stuck with status quo.
This season should not be compared to years past, IMHO. I am excited to see this play out. I do not care about 69, 84, 89, 98, 03, 04, 05 or 06.
BTW, Jones will always suck and Wrigley is a dump.
timeforachange - July 10, 2007
lol....
nicely played time. And I have to agree with those points also.Peoria Matt - July 10, 2007
1978 Cubs team--no comparison
This team started out red-hot and was fading by the All-Star break..Sutter who was lights-out was the key to the hot start and he may have been injured already by the break; straight downhill after that. Al has posted before how far above .500 they were at one point, and then not to even finish with 81 wins was quite a tumble.They were fun though how they overachieved in the first few mos...May was wonderful, as I recall...Ontiveras, Mick Kelleher, Jerry Morales, Barry Foote all contributing big-time.
writerinwrigley - July 9, 2007
You're thinking of the 1977 team...
... that started 47-22 and finished exactly at .500, and had to lose their last five games to do that.The '78 team's high point was 35-26, nine over .500, 3 games ahead on June 19, at which point they promptly lost six in a row to fall out of first place; they got back to within 2 games of first on August 18, but never closer.
Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
And Manny Trillo!!
Lest we forget he had a few real hot starts to season...after the dark years following the aging/dismantling of Durocher's Cubs, it was exciting to see some fresh blood producing, even if it was short lived...Vince & Lou and Brick made it all so memorable, I can still hear their voices nearly 30 yrs. later....
writerinwrigley - July 9, 2007
those times
were lots of fun. I miss them (and the $1.50 bleacher tickets)danimal15 - July 9, 2007
Thanks Al,
for the research!This brought back happy and sad memories.
However, I hope we get a great resurgence from Hill and Marshall as they will be key during the rest of the season if we're to have a shot at the Wild Card or Division.
As you recall, Wade Miller was pitching BP in Milwaukee!
I'd hat it to have to come to this!!
TheEman - July 9, 2007
That's "hate it"..
Not a good typist...TheEman - July 9, 2007
good players not playing... good
I've said it all along I think the Cubs have good players that just weren't playing well at the beginning of the year but I really do think they're coming around. I'd prefer for the Cubs to be 2 or 3 games above .500 right now instead of just one game and I think they were sleep walking through the Pittsburgh series.BUT...
I think the Cubs should have Derosa at second, and Ramirez at 1st and third, Fontenot at short, Floyd in Right, Soriano in left, and Pie in Center. Theriot, Pagan, Jones and Ward make me feel comfortable enough to rest someone once in a while and they're great to have off the bench...
Izturis should go and I'd be surprised if he's still here at the end of July. I'd take Cedeno back up from AAA over the Izturis. I still think the Cubs will be able to unload Jones but I also predict Murton or Pagan will be gone too.
As for Wade Miller? well I think we should chalk that up as "not Hendry's finest hour."
Willgly - July 9, 2007
Wow!
Ramirez is a great player, but I don't think he cam play both 1st and 3rd.OK, I'm kidding. I know you meant to put D-Lee's name in there.
Right?
Al Yellon - July 9, 2007
The Hot Corners?
Ramirez covering both 1st and 3rd would be a real stretch of the hamstring! Could D. Lee play the outfield? Has he played anywhere else besides 1st? Yeah, he's a Gold Glove at first, but could he play a competent RF? Just something to chew over the ASB.Mr. Willgly didn't mention catcher, and as it has been stressed by others, the 2 headed Hill/Bowen is an out in the lineup. Hank White is at best doubtful to hit more than .220, but a good-hitting defensively competent catcher is hard to come by.
SpudV - July 9, 2007
I would take Riot over Fonty
NIUcubbie - July 9, 2007
Fonty's Defense
is starting to get a little scary, as in scary bad. The errors he makes are due more to a lack of ability rather than a bonehead move or trying to do too much at once. I wouldn't trust him with anything other than second base. Unfortunately the organization has 4 vying for that spot (DeRosa, Terry-O, Fonty-O, Cedeno) and E-Pat in the wings.I wouldn't mind seeing Riot and Cedeno splitting time at SS then seeing who can keep a hot bat going.
SpudV - July 9, 2007
I have a feeling......
I really think they will unload Eyre, and make Hill or Marshall their lefty out of the pen. I think that Marmol's mound presence has shown he can handle the ninth inning, and I believe Dempster, and his ficticious oblique injury, has been stretching himself out to be the 5th starter. I think Petrick, Marmol, Ohman, Hill, Howry, Gallagher, and Wuertz will make up the pen for the final stretch, so that Z, Lilly, Dempster, Marshall, Marquis can make up the starting five. Having Hill, Marshall, and Lilly in anyway going back to back, was becoming more and more the achilles heal of this pitching staff. They are the same pitcher.As far as a bat, and I do not think they have the bank to pull it off, but Gomes from Tampa has been a rumor I continue to hear about. It may take a Jones, Izturis, Eyre, AA player, but he has a righty bat and can play right field. We will see.
louslovechild - July 9, 2007
Watching ....
Berman is bad enough, but honoring Joe Morgan and Dusty Baket before the game beceam too much for me. Let me know who wins.louslovechild - July 9, 2007
Just a random thought
on the All-Star game. In my opinion, this game is and always has been an exhibition game. I have never cared for the idea of this exhibition game winner, getting home field advantage in the Fall Classic.I feel that MLB and Selig overreacted to that tie game a few years back........but I also admit that I'm an old guy that doesn't easily accept change of any kind.
deadcatbounce - July 9, 2007
lol
well, i'm a relatively young guy (31) and i don't like the all-star game counting either!... and the DH. don't get me started on the dang DH!anormal - July 9, 2007
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bleed Cubbie Blue to post a comment.