TCR Friday Notes
- David DeJesus ends up going to the Rays, essentially confirming hat the Nationals weren't all that interested in DeJesus afterall and claimed him only in a hope to block him from another team. Instead they ended up with $2.5M committment that they were able to shift to the Rays. The Rays will throw a player to be named later or cash (more likely cash) towards the Nats, which will then most likely get forwarded to the Cubs. You think they Western Union for that?
Looks like the Rays have use for DeJesus as they said he'll play against most righties, mostly instead of Kelly Johnson.
- The Cubs and Rangers completed their deal for Matt Garza today once the Cubs were awarded a waiver claim on RHP Neil Ramirez. The 24-year old right-hander is striking out over 11 per 9 this year in AA, but with a healthy walk rate of 3.8. Before the 2012 season, John Sickels had him as the Rangers #7 prospect, ahead of both Christian Villanueva and Justin Grimm and had this to say:
Held his own in Triple-A until sore shoulder issue sent him back to previously-skipped Double-A level for rehab. A breakout candidate who broke out.
2012 didn't go too well though, putting up a 6.28 ERA between AA and AAA and seeing a significant drop in his K rate. That dropped him to #18 on Sickels pre-2013 prospect list.
Tough to get a handle on after wildly erratic season, failed in Triple-A and was spotty after going down to Double-A though sometimes effective. I have been very high on him in the past but he might do better with a change of scenery. Trade bait?
And so they Rangers sent him back to AA for 2013 to try and master it, and he's put up good numbers going: 9-3, 3.84 ERA, 11.1 K/9 3.7 BB/9 and 0.7 HR/9/. But as Sickels mentions in mid-season review, he'll have to get through AAA before folks get to excited about him.
- Cubs have moved to a game and a half behind the White Sox for the third pick in the draft, thanks to an unlikely 6-game winning streak for the South Siders. The Cubs have 35 left to play and are on pace for 93-94 losses. The remaining breakdown of the schedule for the Cubs look like this (All are 3 game series unless otherwise noted):
@ Padres, @ Dodgers, @ Cincinnati, @ Pittsburgh (4), @ Milwaukee (4)
Philadelphia, Miami, Milwaukee, Atlanta, Pittsburgh, St. Louis
Have a good weekend everyone.
Mama Schwarber wants to have a word with you.
Mrs Fowler would like a word with you.
It seems to be blowing a bit out to right but far less than yesterday and much cooler so shouldn't be too much of an effect.
Only one of our hrs last night was out because of the wind though I think.
Which direction is wind blowing today? With Lackey a groundball pitcher, it might help Cubs if it is blowing in today and a 2-1 game instead of a 10-6 game.
I have convinced myself that Hammel's second half struggles were due to minor injuries and fatigue so with the extra rest he is going to be lights out.
Benji Molina is out of lineup
Yes. Unfortunately, as many of us, I have seen this movie before. Do not care for Hammel, and unlike other managers Joe will pull the plug quickly at least. I hope before things were to get out of hand.
Many of us are like "abused spouses" or whatever - with this Cubs stuff. You get hurt so many times, the trust rapidly erodes.
If the Cubs can get to Lackey early, its gonna be a big key to a W or L.
No idea what will happen. The Cards are the Cards and they have come back from 2-1 holes twice in the last 4 years, so I don't see them in panic mode at all. If anything, I expect the Cubs to be pressing more than the Cards today.
I want the Cubs to win because it would be great for the city, and great for the fans. But more than anything, I want the Cubs to win so I can see this team play for at least one more week this year. Never enjoyed watching a team more than this year.
Just to remember how far we have come: last year's opening day lineup was Bonifacio, Lake, Castro, Rizzo, Olt, Castillo, Schierholz, Barney, and Samardzija. It's been a fun ride this year!
BRADSBEARD: I haven't noticed any new rule or a change in the interpretation of an existing rule happening in Advanced Instructs, I don't know what rules will be tested in the AFL, although almost all recent rule changes and new interpretations of existing rules (the home plate collision rule, replay, time clock between innings, et al) do get their start in the AFL.
AZ Phil: I've heard that the AFL will be testing out a new force out rule that would affect break-up plays (like the Utley play). Have you heard anything about this new rule and any details about it? Are they testing it out at the advanced instructs as well?
Pretty sure I already know the answer to this, but since I will be in NYC next week I want to confirm... If the Cubs were to advance to the NLCS, the winner of LAD/NYM would have home field based on being a division winner (as opposed to Cubs by virtue of better record), correct?
CUBSTER: This "hammy" is on the other leg I heard last night. See you at the ballyard today young man!
Oh what do you know, Cubster? Go back to your day job.
--- Ducks, puts on Cardinals cap, runs.