Game 92 Thread / Reds @ Cubs (3 of 3)

Game Chat | Press Pass | BR Preview

SP Bronson Arroyo SP *Ted Lilly
  6-7, 5.82, 91 K, 38 BB, 99 IP
9-5, 4.47 ERA, 105 K, 39 BB, 112.2 IP
       
CF Jerry Hairston, Jr. SS Ryan Theriot
SS Jeff Keppinger RF *Kosuke Fukudome
RF *Ken Griffey Jr. 1B Derrek Lee
2B Brandon Phillips 3B Aramis Ramirez
LF *Adam Dunn C Geovany Soto
3B Edwin Encarnacion CF *Jim Edmonds
1B *Joey Votto LF Mark DeRosa
C David Ross 2B *Mike Fontenot
P Bronson Arroyo P *Ted Lilly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cubs go for the sweep as Bronson Arroyo matches up against the Cubs' new #4 starter.

Lilly was hit hard in his only start against the Reds this year (6 H, 5 ER in 6 IP), a loss back in mid-April; Arroyo, who seemed to be starting against the Cubs every time you turned around last season, going 0-3, 3.58 in five outings, is making his first appearance against the Wrigleys in 2008.

If Lilly emerges the winner this afternoon, the Cubs will have a trio of 10-game winners at the All-Star break for the first time since 1969, when four guys—Jenkins (13-7), Hands (11-8), Holtzman (11-5), and reliever Phil Regan (10-5)—hit the mark.

Of course, we all know how well that worked out.

Tags: 
Gameday Open Thread
Submitted by Cubnut on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:29pm
Return to Homepage

Comments

Submitted by CA-Phil
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:35pm

Dueling Game Threads to account for the increased interest in the Cubs following the magnificent first half, 7 all-stars, and the Harden trade. Customer responsiveness, another reason TCR is the best Cubs blog out there!

Submitted by CA-Phil
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:39pm

Ryan Howard puts the Cards behind early. I've been thinking that the Cubs immediate goal should be to bury this division early and set up the rotation for the playoffs and rest Z, Harden, Dempster, Soto, etc. General consensus is the Harden trade was about 08. True, but I think it's more specific than that..it's possible they'll choke (it's still Cubs laundry), but seems very likely this is a post-season team and that the trade is built solely around October 2008. Front-line pitching is so much more important it seems in short series than in a prolonged season.

Submitted by Chad
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:56pm

No way Phil that they Cubs want to put this division away early. They want to scratch and claw and make us all have a collective heart attack on the last weekend of the season before clinching.

Submitted by CA-Phil
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:01pm

Yep, Chad, sure seems like the trend. Well, the latest trend, which beats the old trend of sucking and being out of it by early June....

Submitted by Andy
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:39pm

bah, Rob, you ate the TLFC prediction from your game thread!

Submitted by Wes
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:39pm

Am I the only one getting this weird blank space in the middle of the game threads in Firefox?

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:47pm

I still have the old version of Firefox and it's displaying fine for me.

Is it Firefox 3?

Submitted by Wes
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:01pm

Firefox 5. I reckon it started right around the time it updated a few days ago. I do know that I don't notice it when I run IE from work.

It looks like you guys tabbed down about a dozen times after the lineups. I don't see it in the other various threads.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:07pm

pretty sure they just went to Firefox 3, so Firefox 2 would be the old one.

yeah, when we put the table in, we have to do a much of line returns to get the text at the bottom, but it seems to display okay on all my browsers.

 

Submitted by Mister Whipple
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:25pm

I think he meant he had both Firefox 2 & Firefox 3 open at the same time. That totals Firefox 5.

Submitted by Wes
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 2:56pm

That's exactly what I meant.

I didn't read the About section of my browser correctly. 5.0 version of Mozilla. 3.0 version of Firefox.

I'm Sofa King We Todd Did.

Submitted by 10man
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:40pm

Wow. the browser from the future. you're either a time traveler or you're getting that bug because you have an ultra early alpha edition. :)

Submitted by Ryno
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 3:00pm

It's the new "whitespace feature" in Firefox.

Submitted by CA-Phil
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:40pm

(making up for limitted postings by CA-Phil, whose only redeeming TCR quality is having more electoral votes than AZ Phil)...

this lineup sucks..

Submitted by jacos
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:46pm

Is Henry Blanco dead?

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:46pm

sorry about the double threads, my contribution was that if Lilly doesn't get the win today, then Z and Dempster would be the first pair since 1977 (Rick Reuschel and Burris)with 10 or more wins at the Break.

and will Geovany Soto ever get a day off?

sorry about eating the TLFC super computer prediction...hopefully he'll put it back up.

Submitted by jacos
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:25pm

I know Soto is young and everything, but the kid is gonna burn out with the Wrigley home schedule as it is.

Submitted by Mister Whipple
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:26pm

Don't you mean she?

Submitted by Ted Lilly Fan Club
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:54pm

Dare we re post the prediction, isn't that some sort of sacrilege?

Submitted by Ted Lilly Fan Club
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 12:59pm

ahh screw it...

TLFCSC sees: 7 IP, 7Ks, 2 BB, 2ER, 1-3 RBI (2b, hbp, sac fly)

Submitted by 10man
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:44pm

Wow the computer is very generous today considering the wind is howling out and TL is our current home run leader :) but i'll take it!

Submitted by Ted Lilly Fan Club
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:44pm

Uh yeah, that TLFCSC prediction should have stayed with the deleted post. Sorry about that, you can blame us for that loss.

Submitted by navigator
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 1:56pm

Ted's throwing a lot of 83 MPH fastballs today. Is this normal?

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:18pm

so TCR...i missed most of the game...was ted really throwing a lot of low 80s fastballs?

sorry nav...i need some backup on the statement. dont take it personally.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 2:22pm

and dodgers and phils interested in AJ Burnett....

Submitted by navigator
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 2:26pm

anyone interested in Ted Lilly?

Submitted by Doug Dascenzo
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 2:30pm

Seeing Michael Wuertz in the third inning is never a good sign.

Should start raining in the next 5-10 minutes anyway. Maybe after the inevitable delay we'll see Gaudin for a long relief spot.

Submitted by jacos
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 2:50pm

Start the rain dance!!!

Submitted by Tito
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 2:52pm

Seeing Michael Wuertz at any time is becoming iffy.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 3:29pm

is usually scheduled for before the game, right?

Submitted by Ryno
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 3:46pm

TLFCSC sees: 7 IP, 7Ks, 2 BB, 2ER, 1-3 RBI (2b, hbp, sac fly)

...ummm.

Submitted by Ryno
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 3:47pm

63 pitches in 2 2/3 IP. Yipes.

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 3:53pm

wow...wuertz and loober work for only the 2nd time in about 2 weeks.

and it looks like they've had 2 weeks off, too.

Submitted by jacos
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:02pm

Sexson released, Bedard goes on DL

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Ao9hEEqhMZla...

Submitted by billybucks
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:24pm

Reds lead in the HR derby 7-1.

Submitted by billybucks
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:27pm

C-Pat goes in to play CF in the top of the 8th, then Dusty pinch-hits for him in the bottom of the 8th with the Reds up by 5 runs.

Cold. Very cold.

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:58pm

Actually... no he didn't. Patterson came in in Dunn's slot, not the pitcher's slot.

Submitted by 10man
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:35pm

of course, dusty never hesitates to do a double switch whenever he can.

Submitted by Dmac
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:32pm

If you're watching, the Reds were just sitting on that BP fastball of Lilly's - a quick hook by Lou, but a necessary one. Decent outing by our new middle - relief man, albeit with one HR. Looked better than Weurtz, at least.

Dunn's HR cleared the park, btw. Looked like it was still rising as it flew over the bleachers.

Submitted by Dmac
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:32pm

Maybe Dusty needed some more base - clogging.

Submitted by Jeff_Pico
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:54pm

This was like that game Leiber started only we actually had a few shots to get back in the game. Ah well won the series..mission accomplished...now lets do the same with the Giants.

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:54pm

damn...votto has 6 of his 13 homers vs. the cubs.

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 4:55pm

lou postgame..."we cant stay with 13 pitchers" and he mentions needing an OF'r...

Submitted by Wes
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:15pm

I really don't know if there's a better option than Dubois. 336/439/818 in 110 AB's. Either him or Torres, I reckon.

Not sure either one is a terrific choice.

Submitted by Mister Whipple
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:31pm

Is David Kelton available?

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:40pm

dubois would have to be added to the 40-man and granted i know nothing of his approach this season, but traditionally the 29 year old has had no f'n clue what he's swinging at...but boy does he swing hard.

i know its harsh to say "no f'n clue" (and a bit ignorant sounding) but he comes about as close to that being truth as any hitter ive ever seen.

Submitted by Mister Whipple
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:45pm

Maybe if he used an oversized bat he'd have a better shot at hitting the ball with his eyes closed. When he connects he mashes it but it's a few years past time to move on. The fella will never be able to hit major league pitching. He's a AAA lifer.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 6:36pm

cubs have an extra 40-man spot after the trade and Jake Fox and Adam Harben wasting space as well.

 

 

Submitted by 10man
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:36pm

Hoff-POWER!

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:21pm

Hoffpauir or Torres I would guess, no way it would be Dubouis. Surprised they didn't make the move Wednesday.

 

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:05pm

Umm...

Corey Hart? An All-Star? Seriously? Over Burrell and Wright?

Sad.

Submitted by Wes
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:10pm

Would have picked Burrell, personally. Hard to turn away a 1.001 OPS.

Submitted by carlosrubi
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:14pm

That's a shame. Pat the Bat gets no respect.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:20pm

hopefully Burrell will at least get Soriano's roster spot. Holliday was named the starter by default.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080710&c... 

Submitted by carlosrubi
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 5:16pm

3:09 PST on July 10th, 2008: the moment in which Willie Bloomquist hits his first extra base hit of the season.

I wonder how he's kept his job the past five seasons.

Submitted by Timmer
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 6:36pm

Cubs go for the sweep as Bronson Arroyo matches up against the Cubs' new #4 starter.

Too bad the new #4 pitched like a #5.

Submitted by Cubster
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 6:38pm

Can't we trade for Glenallen Hill for the righty off the bench? He's the one wearing a Rockies first base coach helmet.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-301795791...

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 6:45pm

PITT going with the "pitcher hitting 8th" thing...

2 on, 2 out...pitcher strikes out. that's a shock.

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 7:03pm

I am trying to figure out how the two are related.

Does the pitcher never come up with 2 on, 2 out when the pitcher hits ninth?

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 7:11pm

its not a point of relation.

its the fact they took a worse hitter and moved him up to get a better shot at a/b's...

but hey, they get a "free leadoff hitter" to try again next inning! ...one that got a hit that may/maynot have cashed in a run.

with 2 on you want your .147 hitter up or your .299 hitter up?

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 7:21pm

giving your best hitters more AB's...interesting concept. Must not apply to the leadoff spot...

(cheap shot...I'll show myself out) 

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 7:35pm

well any time you can become manager you can move dlee/aram to the leadoff spot and let fuku/theriot hit them in.

let's at least stay in the same ballpark here...we're talking about end-rotation hitters without much power in most cases.

we're also talking about what may be (and probably is) a statistical blip given some of these studies show the positive of hitting your pitcher 8th is around .05 runs.

i don't see anything positive about moving a worse hitter up (usually 1/2 the batter of the guy he's replacing) just to gain that .05 run advantage which may or may not be a sound finding, even if true.

Submitted by Arizona Phil
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 7:36pm

With Lou Piniella saying in the post-game presser that the Cubs can't stay at 13 pitchers post-ASB (and it sounds like he would prefer to have the 13th pitcher replaced with a position player immediately), one thing to keep in mind is that if Michael Wuertz is optioned out for at least 20 days, the Cubs buy another year of control over him.

If Wuertz continues to accrue MLB ST without losing anything to time spent on optional assignment to the minors, he will hit 6+007 MLB ST at the end of the 2010 season, and he can then be a FA. But by going out on optional assignment for at least 20 days, he cannot get credit for a full season of MLB ST in 2008, and in fact would enter the 2009 season with no more than 3+159 MLB ST, meaning the earliest he could hit six years would be early in the 2011 season, rather than late in the 2010 season. And that would delay his becoming a FA by one year.

Wuertz has one minor league option left, and although he would have to clear Optional Assignment Waivers in order to be optioned out, these particular type of waivers are almost always just a formality because they are revocable. Most teams place all of the players on their 40-man roster who would require Optional Assignment Waivers in order to be sent to the minors on waivers at the beginning of each waiver period just to get it out of the way. And then once the player clears Optional Assignment Waivers, the waivers are good for the entire waiver perioid (the current one runs through July 31st).

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 7:38pm

given that lou has used wuertz and loober twice in the last 2 weeks they might as well send wuertz down...if not now, then when eyre gets back.

might as well send the backup catcher on pace for 100 or so ab's down, too, and let someone else take over that emergency role. hehe =p

FREE DUBOIS!!!! haha...

Submitted by Mister Whipple
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 8:13pm

Wow. All this Dubois talk has me really wondering whether this is the year Boston breaks their curse.

C'mon Dusty! Two winning seasons in a row! We can do it!! I'm so glad we have a such a high caliber manager as Dusty Baker. Some of his moves are a little odd, but hey, he did get us 1 game away from the World Series!

Submitted by 10man
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:43pm

You can't mention Dubois w/o mentioning Holly. They are linked at the hip.

Submitted by Arizona Phil
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 7:53pm

As for which positon player the Cubs might bring up until Soriano is ready, I would think Felix Pie (326/370/488 in nine games at AAA Iowa since returning from his "rehab" at Fitch Park) and Jake Fox (288/370/522 with 6 HR and 28 RBI in his last 35 games at AA Tennessee) would be easy moves that could be undone without difficuluty.

The problem with bringing Jason Dubois up from Iowa is that he is out of minor league options, so sending him back to the minors would require getting him through Outright Assignment Waivers, which are irrevocable. It may be that the Cubs would be willing to take on Dubois while he's hot (he hit three more HR last night), and then just risk losing him on waivers to another club once Soriano returns. But recalling Pie or Fox and then optioning them back to the minors once Soriano returns would be easy.

Submitted by billybucks
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 8:53pm

I assume Dubois is there for a potential Sept. call-up to bring a power (although quite iffy) RH bat off the bench in Sept.

I also assume they would want to see more out of Felix than a good 9-game stretch -- probably depends on Sori's time frame.

Looks like we get Cain Friday and Lincecum Sunday. Nuts.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 9:06pm

I think Dubois is in Iowa so they have fill out all 9 spots in the lineup.

 

Submitted by billybucks
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 9:02pm

Speaking of pitching matchups -- the Reds wills send Fogg to the mound tomorrow vs. the Brewers. A quick look at Fogg's career stats begs the question "How the hell is this guy still in MLB?" Truly amazing.

Submitted by Chad
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:46am

don't mock. he beat the cubs last august when we really needed a game. That bastard hit a grandslam off rich hill too.

Submitted by Chifan
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 10:56pm

I think we saw Wuertz pitch his last game in a Cubs uniform today. From the postgame comments Lou wants another OF and Wuertz just doesnt have a role. Lou doesnt trust him in close games and you have Lieber, Marshall and now Gaudin to work long relief. I think he will be DFA'd before tomorrow's game and Torres will take his spot on both the 25 and 40 man roster. Wuertz then will likely be traded to the Marlins for one of the prospects that was involved in that aborted JJ trade last year.

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 7:16am

Huh?

Why would you DFA a guy you can option down to the minors? Especially one that can still contribute? They don't even need the room on the 40-man roster.

Submitted by Chifan
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:06pm

Doesnt Wuertz have enough service time to reject a minor league assignment?

Submitted by Cubster
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:05pm

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?arti...

for those of you who get baseball prospectus, here is the link to C Kahrl's Transaction of the Day column. It's a detailed take on both the Oakland and Cub sides of the trade. Pretty scathing in spots, mostly ranting about why Oakland/Beane would make this deal:

excerpts...

Why make a deal with the Cubs, who just don't have all that much to offer?
------
On some level, I segregate this deal into two segments, because I'm merely human and I create patterns where none might exist. First, I put Gaudin for Gallagher to one side as something of a push, where the benefits are pretty straightforward: Gaudin's getting expensive through arbitration, where Gallagher's five years removed from free agency and three years younger. Consider it an exchange of an established fourth starter for a potential fourth starter, with the attendant cost savings. The problem is that this leaves you with Patterson, Murton, and Donaldson for Harden. Somebody would bite on that? Billy Beane would bite on that? Where's Felix Pie? Where's Rich Hill? Where's... well, something or somebody with real upside? This is it?

Submitted by Rob G.
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:14pm

to each their own...think she/he is a little confused on Gallagher's upside. To say I think Gallagher is no better than a 4th starter is one thing, but he certainly has the potential to be better than that. 

seems like he/she is working off some old scouting reports too 

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:33pm

interesting you should say he/she there...lotta people forget she is transgender.

she's got cred, though...but yeah, she's selling gallagher short even if a lot of people are kinda shocked that's all beane wanted in a tight market for starters and more than a few teams to play off each other.

wonder what beane sees in epat and murton anyway...well, murton is his type of player, but that's only on paper. he's so f'n mixed up and constantly changing EVERYTHING about his plate approach. early in his career this was a positive...showing he's open for adaptation and coachable, but he's yet to find a comfort zone of consistency in the batter's box for how he wants to set himself up to receive the pitcher's offerings.

Submitted by Chad
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:50am

if you call me she Jim Everett and I will kick your ass.

I have never seen she as a transgendered pronoun. I was always told to use he as a default.

Unless of course, you are actually talking about the writer and he/she is in fact transgendered. Then whatever.

Submitted by nohit
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 2:00am

Chrissy!!!

Submitted by Chad
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 2:08am

*flips table*

Submitted by crunch
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 10:21am

"I have never seen she as a transgendered pronoun. I was always told to use he as a default."

well yeah...you're told lots of weird things =p

general rule...if they're transgender (aka, not a cross dresser) most prefer the gender they've changed to. and to add confusion to it...cross dressers throw a lotta that out the window and not counting the drag-queens more than you'd suspect are straight...its a "weird perversion" to some straight men kinda like those people that lick feet and other stuff.

yeah...go cubs.

and damn all those years in the club/rave scene as a promoter...you meet some "interesting" people you have to work with. yeesh.

Submitted by Mister Whipple
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 10:56am

You meet some awfully interesting people here as well.

There's a person of undefined gender named "HollywoodChad" who shows up in Parachat regularly. I'm fairly certain s/he's into baseball only to gaze at the players...and maybe the grounds crew as well. There were rumors that s/he's into witchcraft, ponies!1!! and BEES??!! as well, but I'm not sure that any of that's to be taken seriously.

Also the son of the world's most famous sex addict comes by regularly. I'm not sure how that's relevant, but everybody, especially Carlos seems to have her regularly. It's really quite awkward.

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 10:58am

S/he is also into mullets.

And that is NOT just a rumor.

Submitted by crunch
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 1:53pm

im beginning to suspect that uber-gay hollywood chad might secretly be into boobs.

its time to come out of the closet and admit you're straight, dude. we're a supportive community here even if some of us believe you might be going to heaven for your beliefs.

Submitted by T-Dubs
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:55pm

Does anyone know what the basis is for the two references in the article that there is some controversy/conspiracy theory that the Cubs have been cheating at home? I haven't heard anything like this and wasn't able to find anything in an extremely brief google search.

Submitted by Pell Mell
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 6:30am

This guy does a pretty good job of breaking down this alleged controversy in his July 9 entry:

http://diaryofamadcubsfan.blogspot.com/

I hadn't heard of it before I saw his post. I'm not a BP subscriber, so I don't know the full extent of what was said, but it sounds fairly ridiculous. Also, as the Goat Riders article that Flax links to points out, it's almost flattering: when was the last time a Cubs team was so good that it could be accused of cheating?

Submitted by Cubster
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:14pm

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?arti...

also in baseball perspective is the Joe Sheehan take on the trade (some of this is pretty funny...love the Sirotka'd line!):

exceprts...

Yet with all that, well, this is basically a free Rich Harden. If you’re the Cubs, the risk involved in making this trade is so low as to make it a no-brainer. The package of players they gave up will not be missed.
---------
This is not to say that Harden is damaged goods, that he’s going to get hurt, that the Cubs got Sirotka’d. This is to say that no one in this deal, and no one breaking it down on the internet, has a firm grip on what Rich Harden is. He could be one of the 10 best pitchers in the National League. He could also be to the 2008 Cubs what Mark Prior was to the last two editions—a potentially great pitcher who never takes the mound.
---------
Eric Patterson is Ray Durham Lite
---------
We can say with some certainty that Murton is the biggest winner in the trade, given that the Cubs have done everything but sign Andre Dawson and exhume Hack Wilson to play in front of him.
--------
There’s an argument that the Cubs didn’t just get the best player in the deal—they got the two best players.

Submitted by Cubster
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:28pm

I think Wuertz should have trade value. He's experienced and has hot streaks were he does excellent work. Just not this year. He's been erratic but so infrequently used that he's not gotten into Lou's regular bullpen rotation.

Submitted by crunch
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:35pm

i think if the cubs give up on wuertz any time before he's last-year arb. eligable or a FA they're just insane...this is discounting any injuries or etc.

when weurtz is on he can pound the zone low extremely effectively.

Submitted by rokfish
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:34pm

once again i say that m. wuertz needs to go
the sooner the better, was it not stated
on a earlier post that he does have a option
left?

Submitted by rokfish
on Thu, 07/10/2008 - 11:47pm

now that was a platoon!

Submitted by Chad
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 2:12am

No way. Now this a platoon:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091763/

Submitted by Ryno
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 8:32am

billybucks:
Speaking of pitching matchups -- the Reds wills send Fogg to the mound tomorrow vs. the Brewers. A quick look at Fogg's career stats begs the question "How the hell is this guy still in MLB?" Truly amazing.

Wasn't Fogg & Kip Wells in the same rotation at one point? Scary stuff.

Submitted by Ryno
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 8:36am

Yep... in '05 the Bucs had Kip Wells, Josh Fogg, Mark Redman, and Dave Williams. That's epic.

Submitted by jacos
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 8:46am

Rumor Alert~
I have a contact in MLB circles who talked to a Cardinal scout that Matt Holliday will be traded to Cardinals in next couple of weeks.

Take it for what its worth.

Submitted by Wes
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 9:23am

I have also heard the Rox have a boner for Anthony Reyes. Don't know why. If the witch doctor of pitching can't make him right, he may not ever get it. He is still young, though., at 26.

Still don't know how they have enough to get Holliday if they make Rasmus untouchable. Put that Perez kid in there, maybe. I don't know.

Submitted by Rob G.
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:43pm

the only thing the witch doctor did with Reyes is keep telling him to pitch completely differently than he did before he got to the majors. No wonder he struggled.

Submitted by Ryno
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 8:53am

Not even two full years ago the Chicago Cubs contained such gems as:

J. Pierre
M. Murton
J. Jones
J. Mabry
B. Coats
A. Pagan
F. Bynum
S. Moore
M. Barrett

Anybody miss Freddie Bynum? I didn't think so.

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 10:01am

Barrett is considered bad?

Amazing how short people's memories are.

Submitted by Wes
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 10:40am

Well, a lot of people who didn't like Barrett are the same sort of people who didn't like Murton. I'm sure that gets right to the heart of your perplexedness. Sure, he could hit a little. But, that was IT. BB was speaking about Dunn's fielding prowess (or lack thereof) yesterday, and said the following, which I think also applies to Barrett, "If he could take his bat out to the field, he probably would, because that glove ain't doing him any good."

Sure, he was probably was a net positive because of how good his bat was. And, he wasn't moved to C until he became a professional. And, by all accounts he was a nice enough fellow, but he was a god damned butcher. And I still hate him for that stupid play in Philly.

See? Now you've went and got me all angry thinking about Barrett again.

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 10:47am

Sure... I get that Barrett was a poor defensive catcher. But he was also one of the best offensive catchers in baseball for a few years. And his offense most definitely outweighed his defensive liabilities, imo.

I just find it funny to hear people attack Barrett as if he never added anything to the Cubs.

Of course, I think it is also funny that people hate Murton, so what the hell do I know?

Submitted by Wes
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:39am

I think we (you and i, specifically) could argue until we're blue in the face about the value of defense.

I think the conversation changes a little bit when you're talking about catcher, though.

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:45am

Wes - we could argue all day, but I would still be right! :)

Submitted by Wes
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:48am

sigh.

Submitted by Cubster
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 9:07am

Not even two full years ago the Chicago Cubs contained such gems as:

Neifi
J. Macias
M. Lawton

(don't remind me of this EVER again)

Submitted by Dmac
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 9:22am

I wonder what the conspiracy theory represents here - do they think the club's employing pitch spotters in the CF scoreboard? Shades of the Bobby Thompson Giants? A bit paranoid, perhaps? Patriots haters? Mulder, Scully?

Submitted by Wes
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 9:25am

Can't be Mulder. He's on the DL. Can't be Scully, either. He's in LA.

Submitted by Jace
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 10:17am

I just took a second to look at the AZL Cubs stats, and there are some players that are really kicking butt down there. 19-year-old Julio Pena has started off really well as a RHP, with a 0.52 ERA, and a 0.72 WHIP. There are also several position players lighting it up - Jericho Jones, Sean Hoorelbeke, John Contreras, and Nelson Perez. I am very aware that it is early, and at this time of year, there is quite a logjam in the low-level minors, due to all the draft picks just starting up. I wonder how long these guys will stay down in AZL if they keep up at this rate....

Submitted by Dmac
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:02am

"Barrett is considered bad?"

It wasn't just his defense behind the plate that annoyed some - his handling of the pitching staff was suspect as well. Notwithstanding the connection with Hill, he didn't appear to have a lot of confidence from the staff regarding calling a game (but perhaps the manager/pitching coach do that primarily these days) - and you don't get into fisticuffs with your ace on the bench. That pretty much said it all, didn't it?

If Barrett could've played the OF, perhaps he'd be a more valuable player. But the predominate view around the leagues are that you go for defensive ability first in a catcher, and any additional offense you get is gravy. Thank goodness the Cubs don't have to worry about either talent regarding Soto. Best player at that position (so far) since Jody Davis.

Submitted by 10man
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:11am

Personally I don't think Geo will ever live up to Jody's shoes simply because Harry is no longer around to make up a song about him.

Submitted by big_lowitzki
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:19am

And once again - I get the defensive liabilities. But I think the pitch calling thing is bs. Don't get me wrong - I don't think that Barrett was amazing. I just think that he is wrongly vilified around here.

And Soto appears to be a significantly better offensive player than Jody Davis. Davis had an OPS+ over 100 just once. Davis never had an OBP over .316 and only once had a SLUG over .428. And Soto has impressed me defensively, though I don't remember much about Davis' defense.

Submitted by Mister Whipple
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:22am

It's funny how the pitch calling genius only extends to starters. I don't know that I've ever heard someone talk about the way a catcher manages the pitchers in the bullpen.

Submitted by vacubsfan
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:21pm

Weurtz optioned to Iowa...Hart recalled.

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/press_releases/pr...

Brian

Submitted by Wes
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:28pm

So he doesn't want 13 pitchers. So he sends one down.... and calls up another pitcher.

Submitted by George Altman
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:38pm

Big L.,

If you ever pitched at the high school level or above, and/or coached a group of pitchers, and/or managed a team in a competitive travel level (14U or above) you would change your opinion of that 'pitch calling thing'. Ask Wes if you don't believe that. Sure, the pitcher ultimately decides what he wants to throw (box score says losing pitcher, not losing catcher), but it sure is delightful to have a catcher who knows your stuff, mechanics and the hitters. When you can just look down for the sign and concentrate on repeating your delivery, it doesn't get much better than that.

On top of all that, Barrett was (and probably still is) a baseball ass-hat. The juice was never worth the squeeze.

Submitted by Wes
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:54pm

Delightful, yes. Easier, yes. More painless, yes. Makes me less angry at you for being an idiot, yes. But, as I've said before, not necessary. Unless, as a pitcher, you're either A) an idiot, or B) stubborn. I have been accused of being both.

I like to think that they the catcher who "called a good game" was a benefit to me to some extent. You may inclined to believe that I had a lot of catchers smarter than me. 3 or 4 times a game those kids will drop down a sign that I hadn't thought of. It isn't what I wanted to throw, but it's sure a good diea.

At the same time, I also had a few dumber than me. I said earlier that I think that 'the catcher I have to shake off all the time' is a benefit if he's a horse at the plate. One kid in short-season ALWAYS called for my curve on a 3 ball count, which I couldn't throw for a strike if my life depended on it. I used to get so fucking angry. I'd step off. He'd come out. I'd put my glove over my face and yell at him until I got blue in the face. I always thought he was the real life version of Rube Baker from Major League 2. But, then the kid drove in 70 in short season. Ended up being a net positive. Kind of like Barrett. Give me some runs, you can call whatever the hell you want. Shaking you off once or twice isn't going to ruin this AB. At the same time, if you're going to help me pitch a better baseball game, I don't really care if you hit worse than I do. But, that's all just my opinion.

Submitted by Arizona Phil
on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 6:04pm

Submitted by Chifan on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:06am.

Doesnt Wuertz have enough service time to reject a minor league assignment?

======================================

CHIFAN: Michael Wuertz has enough MLB Service Time (MLB ST)  to reject an OUTRIGHT Assignment to the minors, but not enough MLB ST to reject an OPTIONAL Assignment to the minors.

While a player needs only three years of MLB ST in order to reject an Outright Assignment to the minors, a player needs at least five years of MLB ST in order to reject an Optional Assignment. At the time he was optioned to Iowa (today), Wuertz had accrued 3+109 MLB ST. So as long as he has a minor league option left (and he does have one), he would be able to reject an Outright Assignment, but not an Optional Assignment.

Once he spends at least 20 days on Optional Assignment to the minors in 2008, his final minor league option is used up (although he can be sent back-and-forth to the minors throughout the balance of the 2008 season), and he cannot accrue a full year of MLB ST, which would take him below four years of MLB ST entering the 2009 season and would delay his eligibility to be a FA by one year (post-2011 instead of post-2010).

But if he spends less than 20 days on Optional Assignment to the minors in 2008, his final minor league option is NOT used, he gets credit for a full season of MLB ST, and he stays on target to be a FA post-2010.

X
You may login with either your assigned username or your e-mail address.
The password field is case sensitive.
Loading