Nine hours, 81,245 fans and countless beers after Wrigley Field opened for business on Sunday, the Cubs wound up exactly where they started -- at .500 and 3.5 games out of first place -- following a day-night doubleheader split. The Cubs won the first game convincingly 7-3 and dropped game two 4-2, in part because of a strange strike zone from plate umpire Marvin Hudson.
For once, weather wasn't an issue; despite early predictions of scattered showers in the evening, the sun was shining brightly all afternoon and the sky was clear at night.
Carlos Zambrano threw six solid innings -- having only one frame (the third) where he lost his command, and that resulted in the Cardinals tying the game after Micah Hoffpauir parked a three-run homer deep into the right-field bleachers in the first inning. Z got the Cubs the lead back to stay an inning later when he hit his third homer of the season (and 19th of his career). The 19 home runs ties Z with former White Sox pitcher Gary Peters for 14th place on the all-time pitcher home run list. The career record is 37, held by Wes Ferrell, who pitched mostly for Cleveland, Boston and Washington in the 1930's. (Ferrell hit 38 career HR; one was as a pinch-hitter, and it was memorable: a three-run walkoff on June 21, 1935.)
Digression over; after Z's homer he settled down on the mound, too, retiring the last ten batters he faced (yes, one of them, Albert Pujols, reached base when Ryan Theriot dropped his popup, but then Theriot threw him out trying to take second). Sean Marshall, Carlos Marmol (who looked pretty good even with one walk) and Kevin Gregg finished up -- the Cardinals got only one hit over the last six innings, and the Cub first-game starting lineup, which resembled something you might see in spring training, tacked on three more runs in the eighth, mainly thanks to a pair of St. Louis errors.
So after a few of us went down the street for an early between-games dinner, optimism was high that the Cubs could pull off the sweep and thus move to within 1.5 games of first place. It's impossible to tell how many people attended both games, but by 5:30, 90 minutes before the scheduled night game time, lines for the bleachers extended from the corner of Waveland & Sheffield all the way to Clark Street on the LF side, and around the corner onto Addison Street on the RF side, forcing the Cubs to open the park thirty minutes before they had originally planned -- there was some rowdiness in line and the Cubs, apparently fearing trouble on the street, figured it was easier to get everyone inside.
Games like the second are maddening -- with the regulars (save Kosuke Fukudome) back in the lineup and Randy Wells pitching as well as he has so far, you figure there's a good chance at a sweep. Unfortunately, Ryan Ludwick had other ideas -- he hit a pair of two-run homers. That, really, was the story of the game. Wells didn't have his good command in the first inning, but after he got Pujols to hit into a double play, it looked as if he could have gotten out of the inning unscathed. Ludwick had other ideas, and repeated the blast in the sixth for his seventh career two-homer game. (Other than the homers, Wells threw a pretty good game after he settled down.)
The Cubs had their chances; they left RISP in the third, fourth and sixth and took far too many called third strikes, although the latter may have been more due to a badly-called strike zone by plate umpire Marvin Hudson than any fault of Cub hitters. I once facetiously criticized Milton Bradley for drawing too many walks. Yesterday, he had four of them -- three in the first game -- and probably should have had ball four in the ninth inning. My friend Phil -- who I don't often agree with -- says that maybe the Cubs should try Bradley in the leadoff spot after the break. It's an intriguing idea, especially with his 41 walks now second on the team to Fukudome and his .379 OBA tops on the roster. Bradley's not driving in runs right now -- why not use him in a spot where he can contribute to the team and get on base to start a game?
The most entertaining part of game two was Lou's decision -- done by managers every now and again -- to shift Sean Marshall to left field after he had walked pinch-hitter Nick Stavinoha to load the bases in the top of the ninth, so that Aaron Heilman could come in and face Brendan Ryan. The Marshall Plan then had him return to the mound to throw the rest of the inning, with Reed Johnson going to LF. The look on Alfonso Soriano's face and his bearing were priceless when Lou pointed at him -- "Who, ME? You want ME to come out of the game?" Marshall stood there as if he were just getting ready to shag flies during batting practice; Heilman did his job by striking out Ryan and then Marshall returned to the mound, bases still loaded, and calmly retired the side, thanks in part to a catch Johnson made after tripping and falling (replays appeared to indicate the ball might have been trapped).
Unfortunately, it seemed as if umpire Hudson had a late dinner date, because he called three questionable third strikes in the last of the ninth, giving Ryan Franklin his 21st save and putting the Cubs back to .500.
It's not the worst spot to be in -- almost identical, in fact, to the 2003 Cubs' spot at the All-Star break (47-47, third, 3 games out) and the 2007 Cubs' spot at the break (44-43, second, 4.5 games out). This flawed and injured team still has a real shot at postseason competition, if, as Lou said in his postgame remarks, "they rest up, get healthy, and start swinging the bats. It's as simple as that."
It really is as simple as that, although the Cubs could also use relief help. As I tweeted yesterday, rumor has it that the Cubs are working on a deal for a major league catcher. I also heard late yesterday that they may be after some relief help by trade, and they may still go after B.J. Ryan after he clears waivers today, to which I say, "Good!" Send him to Iowa for a while, and if he's got anything left, put him in the pen and Marshall back in the rotation.
Enjoy the break. I will post an All-Star game thread sometime tomorrow, late afternoon or early evening, and then I am off to follow the Cubs on the next road trip. I'll be at the upcoming games in Washington and Philadelphia, so any of you who live there or are also traveling there and would like to meet up at Nationals Park or Citizens Bank Park, email me and we'll make arrangements. (Also, I have an extra pair of tickets for the Thursday night game in Washington, if you are interested.)
Here's to a great second half!
0 recs | 273 comments
First!!
I loved the double swithing at the end of game 2, too bad it didn’t work out offensively in the bottom of the ninth. Hopefully the break will be good for the team.
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
swithing = switching
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
Great recap as always Al
I know it’s been said many times before, but you are truly the best blogger around. Thanks for a great first half, and may the second half be even better! Go Cubs!
cubswgnrocks - July 13, 2009 via mobile
Thanks!
Looking forward to MUCH better baseball in the 2nd half.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
From your mouth
to their ears!
slcathena - July 13, 2009
For those of you who watched...
The game on TV, did you know that the Hoffpauir’s are NOT related? Remember Jarrett and Micah are NOT related.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
Jon Miller did say that,
but on Sports Center afterwords they called them brothers… I think they were making a joke but it was hard to tell if they were misreporting it or not.
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
Speaking of ESPN,
did you guys know that Joe Morgan was in the World Series and hit 2 home runs? That guy drives me nuts.
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
Game 1 and Game 3
off two lefty’s even, Flanagan and McGregor. I can only hope Joe tells me more about this next Sunday. Was it a changeup? fastball? the suspense is killing me
bheidge - July 13, 2009
Can you believe...
They are not related?
\sarcasm.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
I caught that after my first post...
It’s early yet. After the sixth or seventh time they said that, it began to sink in…
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
But
they spell their names the same way! Craziness
bheidge - July 13, 2009
Wow, I think I am REALLY glad I didn't have to listen to the game on TV last night.
Say, did Joe Morgan figure out what was happening when Marshall moved to LF?
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
it was a mess in the booth as well
I almost feel bad for Phillips, he seems to get iced out of most of the conversation by those two.
bheidge - July 13, 2009
I dont have a problem with it...
He is a moron too.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
pick your poison......
All three of them blow
bheidge - July 13, 2009
It kills me that...
Phillips WAS a GM. Obviously it clicked to someone that he is not but come on.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
Yes, Phillips was a GM.
Not a very good one, either. It’s telling that he was never offered another GM job after the Mets fired him.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
I couldn't envision
a world where he gets that old title back
bheidge - July 13, 2009
I really didn't think they were that bad
They seemed to get a kick out of it, watching the wheels in La Russa’s & Pinellia’s heads.
I thought both booths were really good yesterday.
Allie - July 13, 2009
Well, ESPN was good by their usual standards, I agree
Morgan didn’t seem nearly as “blathery” as usual.
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
Morgan even had some interesting tidbits
when he and Phillips were talking Ludwick’s adjustments.
I thought they were really interesting and fun to listen to.
Allie - July 13, 2009
My shampoo was really blathery this morning.
daver - July 13, 2009
Blintz, repeat
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
got applesauce?
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
What the Cubs did was wrong...
In Joe Morgan’s eyes. It was not right, the umpire was wrong.
And yes, you should be really glad. I am not exaggerating how the Hoffpauir thing went down either, it was a good 5-10 minutes of how they could not believe they were not related.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
I'll bet someday we find out the Hoffpauirs ARE distantly related.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
Obama and Cheney are related, so...
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
he said
he didn’t know the rule.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
Joe Morgan implied that Sean Marshall couldn't pitch again because he was the LF'er.
He shut up afterwards when he realized he didn’t know the rule. He was speculating what LaRussa was telling the umpire. He probably was announcing the change of hitters but Morgan thought LaRussa was protesting Lou’s move. Bizarre!
Fraggin Judge - July 13, 2009
Hmmm... I must have heard differently.
I’m pretty sure La Russa was confirming that if Marshall came in from LF, he had to pitch to a batter. Morgan thought that that was either a bad rule or not the rule (not terribly sure which) and that Marshall could be taken out right away even if Tony put in a pinch hitter. I don’t think Joe thought that Marshall couldn’t pitch; rather, that he shouldn’t have to pitch.
Pat19 - July 13, 2009
Thats how I heard it too
Allie - July 13, 2009
i wonder if arod and krod are related…
jesus christos - July 13, 2009
Did you know they are the only two Hoffpauirs ever play in the ML's?
Got a chance to watch the game last night, but this is the first time all season I had the “pleasure” of Sunday night baseball.
Why they 3 in the booth is a mystery, when Joe obviously realizes he is the star.
Madison Cub Fan - July 13, 2009
hitting Bradley at leadoff
Not a fan. BUT … what about hitting him second? Here’s the lineup against righties.
Fukudome
Bradley
Lee
Ramirez
Soriano
Soto (when healthy)
Fontenot
Theriot
elgato - July 13, 2009
I was thinking the exact same thing this morning
Fukudome isn’t doing too bad at leadoff and Baggage seems to be hitting for contact. He’s best suited at the #2 spot.
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
That's the winner!
Go with it for two full weeks and see what happens.
MPH73 - July 13, 2009
I like that lineup and you can add my name to the list.
It’s looking more and more like Bradley is a top of the order (leadoff or No. 2) as a lefty and maybe a middle of the order hitter as a righty (he has a .918 OPS as a RHH vs. LHP in a small sample of 67 PAs). I think it’s time to call off the righty-lefty alternating madness and install Dome and Bradley at the top of the lineup vs. RHP.
daver - July 13, 2009
interesting theory on Bradley
How about this versus lefties:
Johnson
Theriot
Lee
Ramirez
Bradley
Soriano
Soto
Baker
elgato - July 13, 2009
Yep, that looks good to me.
I have no problem with platooning Dome and RJ in the leadoff spot. In fact, it’s what I’ve wanted to see in the event Soriano was ever dropped in the lineup. I’d stick with it.
daver - July 13, 2009
I'd be OK with Johnson and Theriot switching places
n/t
elgato - July 13, 2009
I'm with that lineup
But Hill has to be in there for now.
Worf - July 13, 2009
right
Two potential issues:
1) The lineup has odd lefty-righty balance. Two left, four right, etc. (assuming Hill’s not out there).
2) Theriot gets buried. I think his best spot is the two hole, but oh, well.
elgato - July 13, 2009
Theriot is good in the 8 spot though
He takes his walks (if they’re trying to pitch around him to get to the pitcher)…
Allie - July 13, 2009
I like it.
Fraggin Judge - July 13, 2009
Double switch
I truly thought that Lou had lost his mind. Definitely one of those situations where if the move works he looks like a genius. If it doesn’t everyones calling for his job.
cubswynn - July 13, 2009 via mobile
the fans in the bleachers
loved it. They were cheering like madmen for Marshall!! LOL
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
Marshall in LF/Heckler
Thought this was funny.
http://www.theheckler.com/news/templates/?a=3007&z=18
wccubfan - July 13, 2009
Piniella: 'He didn't look half as lost out there as Soriano'
Great link!
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
Umpriring was horrible in the last game.
When we were pitching, strikes were called balls. While we were batting, balls were called strikes. How bout the 9th inning. I do think the terrible umpiring did hurt us in that game.
adam316 - July 13, 2009
it was pretty bad
they got a few of the check-swing calls incorrect, the roaming strike zone was frustrating, but they also missed the trap call in the outfield that would have plated 2 for the Cardinals. So I cant really say that the Umps blew this one for us
bheidge - July 13, 2009
that was an outstanding effort by Reed though!
I’ll take that kind of missed call. It was hard to tell but he may have gotten the glove under it…
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
It was a nice effort
It would have been an easier catch if he wasn’t doing a bear crawl before catching it. That could have been bad
bheidge - July 13, 2009
It was hard to tell if the ball hit the inside of his glove and bounced around
or if it did hit the ground and bounce in to his glove. I still don’t know what the right call should have been. I will go find the video now and watch it in super slow-motion.
adam316 - July 13, 2009
I think it hit...
his webbing abd bounded up. I dont think he trapped it.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
Outstanding effort?
He tripped and got a lucky call.
cubswynn - July 13, 2009 via mobile
not many outfielders
would make that catch after tripping
bheidge - July 13, 2009
Neither did reed Johnson. He trapped it.
cubswynn - July 13, 2009 via mobile
not many outfielders
would be able to get a glove on it and make it appear like he caught it after tripping
bheidge - July 13, 2009
sure
but its moot if he doesn’t trip over the turf monster.
i loved the play and all.. but it never should’ve gotten that interesting.
Allie - July 13, 2009
You cannot said that...
100% – you dont know he trapped it, the camera angle was not conclusive.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
have you ever caught a fly ball with your glove facing down?
the ninth inning was a travesty all around.
themanthemyth - July 13, 2009
Yes, it was
Worf - July 13, 2009
Watching the replay
he was losing his balance and never took his eye off the ball. Yes, outstanding effort.
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
An outstanding effort recovering from his own clumsiness?
daver - July 13, 2009
An outstanding effort
hanging in there after tripping and still making one heck of a stop (caught or trapped, whichever) I’m just trying to give the guy some credit for playing hard. Give me a break. If the ball gets by it’s another 2 maybe 3 runs. Reed’s a solid OF and I like the way he plays ball.
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
I posed that question to cubswynn jokingly...
…but I actually agree with you. Baseball players wear cleats and sometimes those cleats get caught in the grass. RJ gutted out a potentially humiliating error and, well, “caught” the ball well enough to at least get the call from the umps. The guy’s a human highlight reel.
daver - July 13, 2009
Oh, sorry.
I got jumped on for saying that earlier, no hard feelings I hope! Thought I was getting it again… I coudn’t agree with you more about the human highlight reel!
Fonzie2178 - July 13, 2009
He clearly did not catch it.
It wasn’t even a trap. It bounced in front of his glove.
Notsnud - July 13, 2009
please
you were saved at least 2 runs with the obvious trap being called an out.
dcfcblues - July 13, 2009
Just like the obvious out
that occurred in the Top of 9th on Saturday that would have ended the game. Instead, the ump missed it and thus allowed the tying run to come to the plate….crap happens to every team…deal with it.
TheRiot Police - July 13, 2009
No "might" at all about Reed's trap
He trapped it. Cardinals should have scored at least two and probably three runs.
That makes all the whining about the strike zone later — PROTECT THE DANG PLATE! — a bit hard for me to take.
Worf - July 13, 2009
3 runs?
How? Maybe if it got past him, but if they call it a no catch, Reed still has the ball and fires it back in.
CubsBullsBears - July 13, 2009
I think he trapped it, too...
…but I disagree about the three two or three runs. And one bad call doesn’t justify the THREE bad strike-three calls in the ninth. I do agree, however, that Bradley needs to start protecting the plate more with two strikes. He’s just not going to get those close calls very often – if ever.
daver - July 13, 2009
Two runs at least
Cards were running on contact. Two runs score EASILY.
Worf - July 13, 2009
OK, probably two. Maybe RJ would've gotten lucky on the throw, though.
daver - July 13, 2009
You've got to protect the plate
OK, one guy gets rung up. It happens.
But all three??? I can’t remember the last time I saw a pitcher strike out the side ALL on backwards K’s.
That’s not all the ump.
Worf - July 13, 2009
Just saw the replay of the Johnson play.
It was a trap.
Result of game: the same.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
Yes...
but I don’t feel it’s appropriate to whine about the umps after getting a gift two runs saved.
Worf - July 13, 2009
Eh...
… yes, we got a gift. OTOH, we might have lost a rally to bad umpiring in the last of the 9th.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
I still dont think it is...
How the balls does not bounce leads me to think it was a catch. I think it hit the webbing and stayed in. if it was a trap the ball would have bounced more.
Umps called it out – so i guess that is all that matters.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
Would you have the same opinion if Duncan or Ankiel made the same play?
It may have hit the webbing of the the glove and bounced before RJ squeezed it. But, if I’m umpiring, I call no catch.
flachimesa - July 13, 2009
Absolutely...
looking at it from a physics stand point i find it hard to believe that the ball doesnt bounce more if it hit the ground. From the position his glove is in i dont see how he could trap it.
If the Cardinals made the same attempt i would have still thought it was a catch and that the umpires made the right call.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
I commend you and can see your physics point of view
There are some who see everything through Cub-colored glasses. If it goes the Cubs’ way, it’s right. If it goes the other teams’ way, it’s wrong.
flachimesa - July 13, 2009
Understand...
I love the cubs but – if an opposing team makes a nice play he makes a nice place.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
wossnames
from the Braves sure made a lot at SS. Mutter.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
Yuñel Escobar
Clutch16 - July 13, 2009 via mobile
yes, that guy!
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
except
it wouldn’t bounce more because it hit his glove
Villeslgr - July 13, 2009
Fuld will again go back to Iowa
Despite being on base 3 times last night including the double to start the game. He will be the odd man out when the Cubs pick up a back up catcher. Hey why keep a guy who plays better than Soriano for less than 1/40th the price. I know because he can’t hit for power and he isn’t a star. Work those frequent flyer miles Sam.
Doggie Stalker - July 13, 2009
Because baseball is not a meritocracy
It’s about whose agent swindled which idiot GM for the best contract.
In a meritocracy, Soriano would be riding the bench.
Worf - July 13, 2009
I agree that, once again, Fuld looked very good this weekend.
daver - July 13, 2009
Put Soriano on the DL for 15 days,
and let Fuld leadoff and play left. Sori just doesn’t look healthy to me when he is running.
slocs55 - July 13, 2009
I've no problem with Sori to the DL
if it’s warranted, but I really like Dome as leadoff. I don’t think he should be moved around a lot.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
Yeah, for consistency's sake, I think I'd rather see Dome stay in the leadoff spot, too.
And I don’t want to get too carried away with the Fuld love – but he’s looking like he could be a great 5th outfielder and maybe even a surprising bat off the bench.
daver - July 13, 2009
heh-heh
Surprising bat.
I have this image of Lou pulling a double switch, and the opposing manager going “FULD????”
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
"That little twerp can't hit major league pitching! Throw him the heat!"
BOOM!
daver - July 13, 2009
he is not
who we thought he was.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
I'm not fooling myself on Fuld.
I just think he could give a temporary spark while getting Soriano healthy physically and mentally.
I think it is foolish how everyone think’s Soriano is done, I mean he isn’t going to hit like this for the next 5 and half years.
Side note, saw Gran Turino last night, decent, not great. I thought the acting was below average.
slocs55 - July 14, 2009
He really doesn't look healthy at all
Not just running, but his leg kick is SOOO much less than its been in the past.
Allie - July 13, 2009
Hudson didn't lose the game for the Cubs
but his strike zone was maddening. And he completely changed what he had been calling in the bottom of the 9th. The first two called strike 3s weren’t even close. Hoff’s last strike was borderline, but after the previous two punch outs, I can see where he felt screwed.
Hudson squeezed the strike zone on Wells from the start of the game, NOT giving him the outside portions of the plate he later WOULD give the Cards closer.
Very frustrating.
That said, the Cubs did little offensively to win the nightcap, so they got what they deserved. 2 runs won’t do it (usually).
Zeke - July 13, 2009
You've got to protect the plate
I can see maybe the first guy, Bradley, being surprised, but after that, the next two guys should have been swinging at whatever they could reach, just in case.
Worf - July 13, 2009
I understand your point...
But IF Baker swings at his pitch, he would not have hit it. So either way it didnt matter.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
I can see that
Baker probably wouldnt have been able to make contact on the pitch that he got rung up on. Micah should have been swinging though
bheidge - July 13, 2009
Maybe
but he swings at that… he’s doing nothing other than probably fouling out to Pujols.
Allie - July 13, 2009
He gave one call to Wells
I think it was a pitch to Ankiel that should have been ball 4. But that may have been because Ankiel took off to 1st before the call was made
bheidge - July 13, 2009
Yeah, that one was probably the only call in favor of the Cubs.
And I wouldn’t be surprised if he called a strike because the batter started heading to 1st. If so, that just proves that he is a piece of $4!# umpire. The way the game ended was ridiculous. If anything, borderline pitches are normally not called for 3rd strikes especially to end the game.
adam316 - July 13, 2009
The Marshall to LF thing...
was cool to watch, but why not just let him face the right-handed hitter there?! Lou wound up getting outmanaged anyways, as LaRussa PH for the guy Marshall was brought BACK in to face.
I just don’t understand why Lou constantly uses Marshall (who was significantly better against RHP in a full year last year) as a LOOGY.
Oh, and not one of those called third strikes in the 9th was actually a strike. Just terrible umpiring. It sure would be nice if umps were, you know, held accountable for failing at their job like most every other American is.
kanderber - July 13, 2009
The Cubs hit the ball hard in game 2 yesterday
it was some bad luck most were right at someone. I actually thought we hit better in game II than game I, when, other than the 3-run HR, we were bailed out by shoddy Cards fielding.
BeltwayCubsFan - July 13, 2009
There was a solo shot crushed in Game 1, as well
We were facing better pitching in Game 2, however.
Clutch16 - July 13, 2009
Lou uses him as a LOOGY...
because that’s the only lefty he’s got. So, he saves Marshall for a tough lefty that he needs to get out. Problem is, he’s — at least in theory — got better right-handed options available once you get that late in games, so it’s usually one (or two) and done for Marshall.
Honestly, they really need to trade the guy, especially if they sign Ryan, and can get a good showing from him prior to the deadline. This is simply not Marshall’s highest and best use, and I think it would be most helpful to trade him while teams still see him as a potential starter.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
No, they don't need to trade him...
… if they sign Ryan or acquire another LHP, he needs to go into the rotation — at least while Dempster is still out.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
I can understand saving him...
for the tough lefty. But to have him get that lefty out and them remove him from the game so Heilman, for example, can pitch to the right handed hitter? So dumb.
I completely disagree with trading him. Guys that can pitch effectively no matter what his use is (starter, long man, LOOGY, late relief) are hard to come by. And Marshall is just that. Very valuable player.
kanderber - July 13, 2009
And is that value...
Put to best use getting a couple of guys out a week right now, or spinning him to someplace that might send your fading offense a cheap bat back? I like Marshall, but if I can use him as a trade chip for someone more useful, and who I control at least through 2010, I do it.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
Any suggestions?
I like Marshall where he is (or back in the rotation.)
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
I don't know man...
Check back in a week or so. This year is so damn odd; everyone is technically in it, and the economics are making things extra foggy. Offhand, Teahen makes some sense. Maybe Cantu. Honestly, I’d love to see the Cubs make some serious inquiries about Aaron Hill.
But at this point, I’m not fixated on a target; just the need.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
I haven't seen any follow up, but am assuming
the umpire and LaRussa were right that Marshall had to face the batter when he came back from LF.
All the speculation and chatter on the espn telecast made me wonder if, in fact, the call had been blown.
Any confirmation either way?
N Oakley - July 13, 2009
as far as I know
what they did was legal. You can move a pitcher into another position and then move him back.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
Thats true
but once he’s in at pitcher he needs to face a batter.
Allie - July 13, 2009
yep
and he did that. I thought it was awesome. I hope that it’s a sign of renewed involvement on Lou’s behalf.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
The call wasn't blown, because it wasn't made
Marshall did face a batter, so there was no ruling to be made.
To your question, I don’t know if he has to face one batter after moving back to the mound. It’s an interesting question, though.
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
Joe Morgan's...
Expalination of the ruling was very clear and understandable. Sarcasm.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
That was the issue the unibrain of Morgan/Phillips was discussing.
Marshall came in to the game to be a pitcher, therefore has to face one batter.
Marshall was moved and became a left fielder.
Marshall was moved back and became a pitcher.
If Sean didn’t have to face the one batter as LaRussa argued and the umpire required, Lou could possibly have pulled Marshall to face the RH batter TLR had him face.
As Lou didn’t argue and it was only Morgan/Phillips discussing, I assumed the call was correct on the field.
N Oakley - July 13, 2009
Probably, but I don't know if Piniella would have made another change
Either way, it was interesting stuff.
That was a memorable inning for no runs scoring.
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
I think Marshall facing Hoffpauir wasn't really a big deal.
The big guy to get in that situation is Colby Rasmus. If TLR subs Shu out for Hoff at that point I think you take it.
aldimond - July 13, 2009
Agreed...
I am sure Lou would have much rather had Marshall face Hoff than Schu. We’re talking about a guy who has just recently been brought up and a big leaguer. Maybe Lou was even hoping that’s what TLR would do.
Fishbone2 - July 13, 2009
I'm surprised you thought Marmol looked good in Game 1 Al
Two balls were absolutely pounded off of him in his inning of work. Both caught fortunately but to me this ridiculous stat that our announcers keep pushing that Marmol is “unhittable” given his IP to HA ratio. He’s unhittable because he doesn’t throw strikes. And when he has thrown strikes lately they have been getting hit hard. If he had 10 less walks issues my guess is his HA would be upped a good portion of that.
Second, I think Bradley leadoff is a great idea. Because as announcers pointed out he is looking to take even when he has a 3-1 count, that is not what he was brought here for but it seems like that is what we are getting. Dome is once again falling apart (1 for last 21 or something) and he, like Soriano, is too streaky to bat leadoff. We need a guy that can find ways to get on base every game, and Bradley seems better able to do that.
BeltwayCubsFan - July 13, 2009
You know, the problem...
with Bradley is that he just can’t run — or the Cubs don’t want to risk him doing so — so it’s much too difficult to do things out of the lead off spot with him in that role. And since Lou’s head would explode at the thought if packing lefties back-to-back, I’m pretty certain he’ll stay where he’s at for now.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
how would lefties be back to back?
Bradley – Theriot…And Dome ain’t exactly stealing bases, sure he can motor around the bases a little faster but I think Bradley is fine for that.
BeltwayCubsFan - July 13, 2009
And remember....
… getting on base is the most important thing from the leadoff hitter, not necessarily running.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
This isn't Boston....
You really think Lou Piniella is going to stick a station to station runner at the top of the lineup? And an injury-prone one at that? I just don’t see what you see.
I think the Cubs are hoping to get Bradley’s power stroke back at some point this season anyway, but if the Cubs did make a change, I think hitting in that two-hole might be a little more interesting. Less movement, and you still get a couple of guys with .400 OBA capability at the top of the lineup.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
Except Fukudome is so inconsistent.
Why not try Bradley at leadoff for a week? See what happens?
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
I'd rather...
…see him in the 2-hole for a week or so, and see what happens.
MPH73 - July 13, 2009
Yeah,
Now I think that idea is cooking with gas.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
Wasn't he already batting there like a week, or week and a half ago?
Craig in South Bend - July 13, 2009
I don't believe...
…it lasted very long, maybe only a couple of games.
I like the 2 hole because the running piece becomes less important and if his pop returns (which it probably will) you get more return on that in the 2 hole.
MPH73 - July 13, 2009
Exactly right
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
Because a bad hangnail...
could send Bradley to the DL for month?
Why not bat Bradley batting lead-off? Why not give Jake Fox some starts? Why not let Guzman close? Why? Why? Why? Geez, you’re 80-something games into the season. At some point, you’ve got to set some roles, field a team, and let the chips fall where they may.
Bradley is here to slug. They’re spending a great deal of time trying to get him back to that point, and I don’t sense that the Cubs are ready to capitulate on that issue.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
Why is bradley hurt so often?
If these are soft tissue injuries, doesn’t he get physical therapy and off-season conditioning? I can see having chronic injuries to a point, but maybe he’s just an lucky guy who is pre-disposed to nagging injuries?
DudeVf11 - July 13, 2009
Couldn't begin to tell you...
Some guys just don’t have the natural flexibility and core conditioning, and he seems like one of them. I’m not sure how much work he’s doing, but I’d probably want to examine that a bit further to start. I mean, no one likes yoga and plyometrics, but….
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
I seem to recall
at the beginning of the season, there was discussion about how heavily muscled he is below the waist, and how you can make your muscles stronger, but you can’t make the ligaments and tendons stronger, especially where they’re connecting muscles to bone — and THAT is where you get your injuries.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
You could say the same thing...
…about a lot of guys. Chipper Jones is one that immediately comes to mind. He gets hurt when he steps out of the dugout.
MPH73 - July 13, 2009
some of these follow ups are a little comical
I fail to see how batting Bradley leadoff makes him more susceptible to injury than batting 6th or 2nd or 9th. He is not going to be stealing bases, we’ve discussed that a leadoff hitter is only guaranteed to bat leadoff once a game, so not sure what connection people are trying to draw between batting leadoff and him getting hurt. Kind of silly.
BeltwayCubsFan - July 13, 2009
Yep, I'd like to see Bradley as the No. 2 hitter vs. RHP.
He can bat lower in the order vs. LHP as a RHH.
daver - July 13, 2009
I'd question...
Whether Theriot would
- or should- be left there with Bradley batting leadoff. The Cubs have tried Fukudome in run-producing spots, and I don’t think the results were very good.Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
Statistically Fuku...
Should bat 1st or 5th. He has been statistically successful there.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
I've seen those stats...
But I just don’t like some of the adjustments that he strung himself into last season trying to fill that role. Evidently, neither did the Cubs, who did after all make a sizeable deal with Bradley to fill that spot.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
Exactly....
Honestly i dont even know, i liked the Fuku signing, i like him, but i just dont know.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
Brother...
I know exactly how you feel. I just keep crossing my fingers that he adjust to MLB baseball by the out years of this contract, or quietly finds his way back to Japan after the season. I’m a bit indifferent about which one right now.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
Jake Fox...
looked good enough behind the plate. Didn’t seem to have any issues at all that I can remember. Loved seeing his emotion too!
kanderber - July 13, 2009
How about it...
After the strikeouts, he was all over the pitchers with excitment. You gotta like that.
Also going along with that, Bradley won me over a little yesterday. The sliding into the wall play, and the solid double he hit. I enjoyed Bradley last night.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
He can kidnap orphans and I'd still like him
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
Hopefully Lou liked what he say
Even if Fox isn’t the greatest at defense back there his bat can really help.
nji232 - July 13, 2009
He did look pretty smooth...
…and his fire back there when Wells got that big K was awesome.
daver - July 13, 2009
He looked just fine blocking that pitch away,
he chased it down and runners stayed in place.
Not a bad option for the late inning double switch.
N Oakley - July 13, 2009
Jake looked great!
We should DEFINITELY be able to get some good prospects for him now!
Worf - July 13, 2009
Gotta agree.
Hope they can get more than a journeyman major league backup catcher, ie Bako.
N Oakley - July 13, 2009
To quote Yosemite Sam:
“Shut up shutting up”! I have a feeling Bako’s the catcher in question, and I don’t like it.
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
That was Yosemite Sam
I thought it was that little gangster Bugs faced one time?
Worf - July 13, 2009
You may be right
I have to check it out now.
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
It was Yosemite Sam indeed
MP3
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
Must have been both
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJhh5k6hhF0
Go to 2:09
Worf - July 13, 2009
Well, Mel Blanc did all those voices, so...
Also, Alex Lifeson, guitar player for Rush, did a song in his solo album called “Shut Up Shuttin’ Up.” Here.
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
I'm thinking a bat like that in the AL
brings a solid hitting prospect and maybe a decent pitching prospect.
But make no mistake. There is NO future for Jake Fox on the Cubs.
Worf - July 13, 2009
There should be a future for a guy like Fox with thump in his bat and
the ability to be servicable at multiple positions, including catcher on any NL team.
I don’t think he’s wanted by the Cubs, but a weak fielding guy who can be the double switch king should be the NL luxury.
He can’t be any worse a fielder than Hart was for the Brewers all those years.
I just expect he’ll be given away for something less than Koyie Hill.
N Oakley - July 13, 2009
Man,
I don’t want to put too fine a point on it, but Fox really needs to head to the AL. This multiple positions stuff if just wrong. He’s another third baseman in the mold of Casey McGehee, that the Cubs wouldn’t even be looking at were it not for the fact that they are desperate for offense. He’s abysmal in the outfield, has to work to become average at third, and has questionable ability to call a game behind the plate.
Fox might actually catch on as a third baseman in the NL, but to try and call him versatile is a bit much.
Damen Jackson - July 13, 2009
Oh, I'm not overselling it.
He has a bat and the willingness to try to play multiple positions. I guess my big selling point is that he’s a great 25th man.
N Oakley - July 13, 2009
I think there could be
its not overly likely… but its possible.
If he could just get league average at a position..
Allie - July 13, 2009
Funny article from The Heckler...
http://www.theheckler.com/news/templates/?a=3007
kanderber - July 13, 2009
Trivia note
The last Cubs pitcher to do what Marshall did last night was Les Lancaster, this one in the 1st game of a doubleheader, on June 13, 1990.
The Cubs lost that game too.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
Interesting coincidence
Ace Venom - July 13, 2009
Of course, there's one other famous pitcher that played LF for the Cubs...
carmen_fanzone - July 13, 2009
I'd seen position players pitch before
like DD, and also Larry Biittner (with the WGN graphic “BIITNER NOW PIITCHING”).That tends to happen in blowouts. But this is the first time I recall having a pitcher take a field position so that he can come back and pitch, and in a close game. When a team has only one LOOGY, it seems like a novel way to get some more use out of him.
ChipSet - July 13, 2009
Todd Worrell did it 4 seperate times for the Cards in the 80's...
Kent Tekulve, Roger McDowell, Jesse Orosco, Jeff Nelson, Steve Blass, Wayne Granger.
More occurences happened in the 80’s than recently, but it’s kind of funny that some fans are treating last night’s switch as something akin to the first moon landing.
carmen_fanzone - July 13, 2009
Oh, and my DD comment about him being a "pitcher who played LF"....
..was purely tongue in cheek.
carmen_fanzone - July 13, 2009
It may have been purely coincidental,
But Lancaster also went into left field in that game, too.
Vermont Cubs Fan - July 13, 2009
Marshall back in the rotation?
For who though? Unless you move Harden into the bullpen, I don’t see how that makes sense.
CubsBullsBears - July 13, 2009
I'm an advocate of moving Harden for whatever before the deadline
but Marshall does seem to deserve a shot at starting again.
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
True...
But he’s been pretty good in the role he has now.
CubsBullsBears - July 13, 2009
Well, right now you could slot him in Dempster's spot.
Otherwise, it has to be Kevin Hart again.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
The real value for Harden becomes, then, a trade for an above-average lefthander
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
Oh that's right...
I completely forgot about Demp on the DL.
CubsBullsBears - July 13, 2009
I also would like to see Harden traded
I wanted to see him be traded prior to his last two starts, which have done nothing but lower his value…
Craig in South Bend - July 13, 2009
Nobody would take him
He’s basically useless to contending teams because he sucks. Other teams won’t take him ot build around because there might not be a worse pitcher to build around long term.
nji232 - July 13, 2009
But if you're a team who is in desperate need of a #2 or #3
and you’ve seen what Harden’s done, why not take a chance?
Craig in South Bend - July 13, 2009
I'm inclined to believe the Dodgers, Giants and Rangers could be interested
in Harden taking that role. I’m still a bit ambivalent about shipping him to a NL team though, in case the Cubs end up making it to the postseason.
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
While I believe someone would want Harden
I think you are way off on the Dodgers and Giants. The teams with the 2 best ERA’s in MLB wouldn’t likely have an interest. Giants need hitting and the Dodgers have Billingsley, Wolf, Kershaw plus even Jeff Weaver is pitching well for them.
rlpete - July 13, 2009
I agree. However,
Harden can help those two teams as their #4-5 starter.
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
Because its too much of a chance
The guy already has 74 IP. He has pitched like ass this season. Why would a team trying to win take a guy who isn’t able to keep his team in the game and also blows out a bullpen every other start?
Not to mention we saw Harden “pitch like an ace” in the playoffs last season. He got his ass kicked (to be fair so did all of them).
nji232 - July 13, 2009
Highlight of the second game. :D As I said last night, taking 3/4 from the Brewers and 2/4 from the Cardinals = not bad. Get rested, come out of the break with some big wins over the Phillies, and we could be on our way!
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
might be kinda difficult to come out of the break with win against the Phillies.........
as they aren’t the first series after the break. :)
I am happy to see them finally in Washington, hopefully that can help the bats
Madison Cub Fan - July 13, 2009
well, I know
the DC series SHOULD (I know, I know) be a foregone conclusion.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
Yep, the Cubs performed pretty admirably...
…against their two biggest division rivals this month. We’ll see Cincinnati (without Jay Bruce) and Houston in the last week or so.
daver - July 13, 2009
No Jay Bruce isn't the worst thing for them
Since I think he was close to being sent down anyway. His 86 OPS+ was getting close to Miles territory.
nji232 - July 13, 2009
Yeah, I was just looking at his numbers.
He’s got 18 bombs but, geez, the rest of his numbers are awful.
daver - July 13, 2009
He can still improve since he's only 22
but he hasn’t been close to what they said he would be.
nji232 - July 13, 2009
I don't see a split at home as admirable, dave
The offense is still pretty listless, unless you’re planning on counting on Pujols errors to win the division.
Worf - July 13, 2009
Offense did fine in game one, even without the errors.
And, give Wainwright some credit in game two, in addition to the horrendous umpiring.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
Without the umps
Cards win 6-2.
Worf - July 13, 2009
Maybe.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
And while we're on the subject
The error in Game 1 that pulled Molina off the plate was VERY close. It looked to me like the catcher got the edge of the plate.
Had the call gone that way, I wouldn’t have squawked. And had that been Theriot pulling Koyie off the plate, I would have screamed for the umps to give him the call.
A borderline call and a Pujols error do not an offense make.
Worf - July 13, 2009
Shoot...
You should be expecting a phone call from the umpires association, sounds like you see the game better than they do.
You can argue the Reed Johnson catch, but the play at the plate – come on. The ump is right on top of that, again what camera angle showed differently?
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
Those runs in game 1 didn't matter really anyway
Big Z had already given us the lead.
nji232 - July 13, 2009
You don't think the game would have played out differently?
That’s not to say the Cubs couldn’t have won, 4-3, but there’s no guarantee of that.
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
The Cardinals didn't really threaten though
I suppose Marmol’s inning would have been more interesting.
nji232 - July 13, 2009
Yea but...
I dont think Pujols makes that error – mainly becuase he could have just tagged first for the 3rd out. He was trying to get 2 outs with the grounder thus forcing the error.
HIGGY - July 13, 2009
I agree Pujols would have gotten the out
we were already winning thanks to Z. Perhaps Marmol’s inning would have been more tense, but I think we win even if none of those errors happen.
nji232 - July 13, 2009
Well, either way we didn't have to find out
And that’s ok with me.
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
me too
nji232 - July 13, 2009
me three
Madison Cub Fan - July 13, 2009
It was LaRue catching, not Molina
Itchy - July 13, 2009
You think that you could call that one
But you didn’t notice that was not Molina behind the plate for the Cards?
vonde6 - July 13, 2009
Without the errors, the offense blew two chances in 3 innings
With bases loaded and 1 out.
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
Bingo
Worf - July 13, 2009
Luck plays a role in any offense.
So they got lucky on a rare Pujols error – they still made it hurt. I saw the Cubs lose one awfully played game, win two well-played games and lose a pretty close, competitive game last night. I thought they played with some fire and make good use of role players like Fox and Fuld. I’m going to stick with “admirably” and keep my spirits up over the All Star Break.
daver - July 13, 2009
amen.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
They didn't really make the error hurt - the error itself hurt
They still had only 1 out after that and didn’t add on.
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
Oh, well, I guess I mean the Cubs had runners on base in the first place.
Once again, the value of OBP cannot be overestimated.
daver - July 13, 2009
♪Get down with OBP♫
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
Yeah, you know me
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
♪ ♫ Who's down with OBP? ♪ ♫
♪ ♫ MILTON BRADLEY! ♪ ♫
daver - July 13, 2009
♪Who's down with OBP?♫
♫Bradley’s friend, Kosuk-ee!♫
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
You two should start a band :)
Madison Cub Fan - July 13, 2009
we won game one
without any errors at all. The errors gave us insurance runs.
Splitting against the division rivals means we gain ground on the Brewers, and don’t lose any to the Cards.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
Insurance runs
with our bullpen is a very big deal
Worf - July 13, 2009
sure
I like to see them. But as it turned out, in that game, we didn’t need them.
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
Does anyone know whose pitching the Nats series?
Madison Cub Fan - July 13, 2009
Allegedly:
Lannan, Olsen, Stammen and Zimmerman. Also, look here as they may have a kid pitching Sunday.
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
For us, it is
Harden, Z, Lilly, TBA.
Vermont Cubs Fan - July 13, 2009
I was away all weekend, so forgive me if this has been suggested
… and I’m not really advocating here. But can anyone see the Cubs getting Halladay by ALSO taking on Vernon Wells’ contract? Maybe the Jays would take the cheaper Milton Bradley as part of the deal?
Is that possible at all/smart for the Cubs? Not to go all Eric Hanna, or anything.
elgato - July 13, 2009
SP really isn't the problem, though
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
Maybe not
But looking at the Cubs’ playoff chances — 16.2 percent as of this morning — I think shaking things up might be a good way to go.
elgato - July 13, 2009
but why shake up the one thing that is working?
The 16.2 % is almost all starting pitching
Madison Cub Fan - July 13, 2009
fair point
elgato - July 13, 2009
ty :)
Madison Cub Fan - July 13, 2009
FYI Nats
Acta out, Jim Riggleman in as mgr.
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - July 13, 2009
Former Cubs manager now coaching them?
Vermont Cubs Fan - July 13, 2009
Looks like Riggleman
is interim manager
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - July 13, 2009
So, the Cubs
immediately face their old mgr after the break. Hope the dreaded ‘new manager dead cat bounce’ doesn’t come into play.
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - July 13, 2009
Possible...
… but the Nationals are so bad that it’s unlikely.
Point of reference: Jim Riggleman similarly took over a nearly-as-bad Mariners team during the season in 2008. They won their first game under him, then lost the next two. They did manage to go 10-5 before going back to losing on a regular basis.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
ESPN News
with Nats press conference…Nats GM says “we are underachieving."
No, you stink.
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - July 13, 2009
But can you see a GM coming out and saying something like
We’d be underachieving even if we were a Triple A team. LOL
Madison Cub Fan - July 13, 2009
And speaking of the Nats' Triple A team...
… don’t forget, if they need help, Corey Patterson is there!
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
Understatement of the year.
daver - July 13, 2009
ESPN News screwing up Riggleman's record, too
saying his Cubs, after beating the Giants in a 1-game playoff lost the NLDS in 1998 to the Padres. (That would be the Braves…..not the Pads) The leader…..always fact-checking. Since those segments keep repeating…..there will be no-error free ball on ESPN News for a while.
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - July 13, 2009
What sucks most?
dtpollitt - July 13, 2009
We just see the results
no opportunity to take the poll
San Diego Smooth Jazz Man - July 13, 2009
I did vote for "my job"
chilango2 - July 13, 2009
first mobile post
….Pretty coolchecking in on BCB on vacation from north woods wisconsin…
JB 23 - July 13, 2009 via mobile
I don't think Theriot really threw Pujols out on the error
It was more like Baker picked it up off the ground and made a nice diving play to tag the big guy out. Sorry if someone already mentioned this.
northside9 - July 13, 2009
Harry Leroy Halladay
you are so beautiful to me.
lexmarklover - July 13, 2009
I had to look that up.
Yes, his name really is “Harry Leroy”.
But we don’t need him. We need a bat and a relief pitcher.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
you are damn right.
Hopefully Ryan is the Ryan of old if they do sign him. Remember when you wanted Luke Scott to play RF…. not looking too bad right now. If they do pick up a bat, i wonder where it’s going to be.
lexmarklover - July 13, 2009
I was thinking about Luke Scott over the weekend.
Even in a platoon role, he’d have been more productive than Bradley. (And he’s hitting better vs. LHP than RHP this year.)
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
if he played cf more regularly in his career
the Cubs should try to get him. To bad, he’s played 3 games i think. :(
lexmarklover - July 13, 2009
if he platooned with Bradley
wouldn’t he be in RF?
drewishdrewid - July 13, 2009
if bradley gets hot, platooning would be a waste.
But i guess if he’s struggling, you can always platoon in RF.
lexmarklover - July 13, 2009
I figured out in our hijacked game thread yesterday...
…that at this point in the season, Bradley’s WAR is as valuable as that of Neifi Perez in 2006. Yes, I cherry-picked that statistic, but who doesn’t love a lil’ Neifi stat?
dtpollitt - July 13, 2009
I saw that you had posted that.
Unbelievable.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
Looking forward to the Washington series...
Will be my first chance to see the Cubs in person since 2006 at AT&T Park (when Bonds was trying to pass Ruth).
I’m expecting big things to come in the 2nd half. Go Cubs! :)
CubsWin!Oregon - July 13, 2009
Good news
The Sale of Cubs has been completed to the Ricketts Family. Now hurry up cause I really want a new owner. Link
lexmarklover - July 13, 2009
Can't open the link here
But are you posting the story from last week?
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
Ah, found a new link. It is new. Cool.
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
IT'S HAPPENING?!
daver - July 13, 2009
damn you beat me to it.
lexmarklover - July 13, 2009
Keep in mind this paragraph from the link
Which will probably happen sometime in August.
Al Yellon - July 13, 2009
Ugh
‘course shouldn’t expect a modern resolution schedule for an agency like bud’s baseball.
age of telecommunications… and have to wait 6 weeks or more instead.
Allie - July 13, 2009
NOW WE CAN GET HALLADAY LIND AND ROBERTS
jesus christos - July 13, 2009
OT: the home run derby poll is awfully 1 sided
jesus christos - July 13, 2009
Errr, uhh, where did Sarah Spain go?
I kinda liked our video interviews…
dtpollitt - July 13, 2009
She's still pretty active on Twitter.
Seems like hockey and football are her true loves, sadly enough.
daver - July 13, 2009
Maybe she'd come back if we used her picture instead of Erin Andrews . . .
Shanghai Badger - July 13, 2009
Sori's contract caused this....
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/baseball/mlb/07/13/cubs.bankruptcy.ap/index.html
Just kidding. But a good article on the steps to aid in the sale
gaclaudy - July 13, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bleed Cubbie Blue to post a comment.