Bleed Cubbie Blue: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Spencer Hall's Sports Meme Power Rankings

Off

The Cubs have today off, their only off day of the month.

And not a moment too soon, after yesterday's 4-2 loss to the Mariners, and the other bad news yesterday, yet another medical examination for Mark Prior, this time on his shoulder.

Now. Is this good news? Hell no, it's not good news. It sucks. But is that cause to get all hysterical, accuse the Cubs of lying again, and claim that the sky is falling, neither Prior nor the Cubs will ever win another game again, and there won't be a chicken in every pot?

Sorry. But seriously. Yes, I know that the Cubs have had trouble keeping their pitchers healthy, and in the past, have had trouble being forthcoming about what's really going on. Here is what Jim Hendry said about the latest Prior news:

"It's unfortunate. But the first time he has ever complained of discomfort since the day we got here was today. Obviously, it'll be perceived any way people want to perceive it, but there's no advantage to holding back until March 14 and then discussing a problem that we knew about earlier.

"It was very disheartening, [but I hope] it's just a little snag and he's back on his program at the end of the week. I can't tell you any more than the truth, and today was the first day he told Mark [O'Neal and pitching coach Larry Rothschild] he had a little discomfort. He wasn't in agony or anything like that, but we'd be foolish not to have Lew look at it."

I don't see any reason not to believe this. Seriously, if you want to go all sports-talk-radio, rant and rave, accuse the Cubs of lying again, go right ahead. But frankly, I don't see how that would make you a happier baseball or Cub fan, or happier person. It doesn't for me. Am I happy about this? No. Am I going to sugarcoat it? No. But I'm going to wait till Prior gets back from the medical exam and there is more news before I criticize.

There is one thing that has been said about Mark Prior that I will repeat, because if true it is worrisome. For all his natural abilities and physical talent, Prior has developed a reputation for not being mentally or physically tough enough. Most pitchers have pain almost constantly and they work out ways to pitch through it. Frankly, Prior sometimes seems like a bit of a baby.

Maybe this is something. Maybe it's nothing. As Hendry said, perceive it any way you want. But the truth is that right now, we simply do not know anything for certain.

One thing I do know -- there are way too many diaries on this topic. Just a reminder -- let's not let this turn into the Cubs website message board, deluged with dozens of threads on identical topics. If you see a diary on a topic you want to post about -- well, don't. Just post your thoughts under that diary. Thanks.

I'm more concerned about Derrek Lee, who bruised his shoulder in the WBC and is also headed to see Dr. Yocum. Of this, Hendry compared the problem to the minor injury that held Lee out of a few games last July and said:

"Then he came back and played great like he did all year. I don't think it's anything more serious than last year. Hopefully, it won't even be a case where he has to miss that much. Hopefully, he can still help the USA win."
That might not be up to Lee. After the USA loss on Monday, Japan can wrap up a spot in the semifinals (Korea is already in) by beating the Koreans today and allowing six runs or less. If they do so, it doesn't matter what the USA does against Mexico tomorrow. If Korea beats Japan, the USA gets in with a win over Mexico -- and the way the US team has been playing, that's no sure thing.

Finally, I am off -- to Arizona. I'll be arriving tonight, and will be at tomorrow's game at Tempe, and Friday's at Scottsdale. Perhaps I'll run into some of you there. I'll be in Arizona for the rest of the spring season, hope to see many BCB'ers at various games.

0 recs  |  Comment 169 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Sunday
I'll try to look you up Sunday at  a game and by then, hopefully, we'll get get news on Prior. Have a great vacation Al!

by mrcubsfan on Mar 15, 2006 8:47 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

On what do you base this?
That Stone was prescient and knew Prior would hurt himself yesterday?

Wait till all the facts are out.

by Al on Mar 15, 2006 9:00 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Al...
...you're going off the deep end defending Cubs management.  It's obvious Prior has been hurt.  Healthy pitchers aren't throwing simulated games 2 weeks into ST.  Don't you think it's a heck of a coincidence that Will Carroll reports that Prior's shoulder is injured, the Cubs deny it saying he'll be pitching the next week.  Then lo and behold, he doesn't pitch the next week.  Finally he's off to see the surgeon about his shoulder.  At this point there is no way the Cubs management deserves the benefit of the doubt.

by jolietconvict on Mar 15, 2006 10:27 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think....
....Al is defending Cubs management--I have no idea how you can say that.

Al is merely saying, "Let's wait and see what happens" -- I think he gets a little bored with all the doomsday "talk-radio" hyperbole that swirls around this site and the team.

by southerncubbie on Mar 15, 2006 12:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Stone...
... didn't say that he knew that Prior was hurt. He simply presented the facts, that Prior had not yet started a spring game, that he had not (at that point) threw to batters, that he was on a different routine, and, of course, that his once pin point control was no longer so pin point. All he said was that this was cause for concern and raised the possibility that perhaps Prior was hurt.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 10:37 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Pitching through it
I see one of the big problems with guys like Wood and Prior is baseball clubs today pay big bucks for a players potential at the lifetime record of Wood and than his salary. The player has always tried to look out for himself in the game, however in the past the only way to make money in the game was to produce, today you just need the  potential to produce. It seems like it is more profitable for them to only pitch when 100 percent, thereby leaving the thought in the ball clubs mind of what a great pitcher they will be when healthy and we must pay them based on them staying healthy. Prior and Wood's fault or the system?

by jimhickman on Mar 15, 2006 12:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm right behind you
I was out there 2 weeks ago and will be back this Friday-Sunday.  I'm going to see the MIL/KC Friday and CHW/MIL Sunday.  Saturday is still up in the air.

Expect rains on Sunday though.  My parents tell me So Cal is getting a big storm on Saturday.  AZ lags 1 day behind usually.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 8:55 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Yeah...
... the forecast doesn't look too good for Sunday.

And -- I like doing this because I get to see other players than regulars -- I won't be at the Mesa game on Sunday. I'm going to the Cubs/A's split-squad game in Phoenix.

by Al on Mar 15, 2006 8:59 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know...
...if the forecast has changed since last night, but on the 10PM news they were saying this storm was tracking well to the north of the Phoenix area. While they were predicting more snow (Yes!!) for the northern part of the state, Phoenix is not supposed to see much, if any, rain.

The key for winter storms in Phoenix is to watch San Diego.  If SD gets rain, so do we.  If LA gets rain, but not SD, most of the time it misses Phoenix.

by jazzman56 on Mar 15, 2006 3:01 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

al, stop
I don't see any reason not to believe this.

you're behaving like an abused spouse.

they are serial liars, they've been lying all along, they are lying right now and they're going to go on lying.

you don't know anything for certain. but, at some point, that becomes nothing more than a rationalization that allows you to ignore painful things which you clearly should know approximately.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 9:10 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Provide proof, please...
... that Jim Hendry lied in his statement quoted in the paper today.

Proof. You accuse -- provide proof, please. I don't believe you have any, but if you do, I'll read it with interest.

Until then, I wait for further information.

by Al on Mar 15, 2006 9:21 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i'm so tired of this.......
it's the same now since 2003, our hope's are high, and the cubs continue fall.
Al, i know you always look for the best, but this time i think it's the same ol, same ol from hendry and the cubs.
they have already got my money again this year, and i'm sure they will get it again next year.
i'm doomed to be a sufering cub fan.
next year will never be here, but i will.
i'm 40 yrs old and for as long as i can remember i've followed the flubs. and i always will.
so as usual, the cubs need a fix for 2006.
wheatfield mike down here in god's country

by wheatfield mike on Mar 15, 2006 10:40 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I have an idea....
.....why don't those in the minority who think that the Cubs players, management and coaches suck find a new team to root for--obviously the team is never going to please any of the doomsdayers who are constantly poor-mouthing the organization and the players.  Go root for someone else.

Personally, I hope Mark Prior is not going to be damaged goods, and further, how can Hendry and Baker be responsible this?

In my time observing the postings and diaries on this site, I would say that the emotional/negative commentary far outweighs the positive or objective criticism of the team--I guess it's natural for Cubs fans to fall prone to the "Chicken Little" syndrome.

Al, I don't know how you constantly keep the wolves at bay, but I suggest that if the Cubs are such a negative and fearful force for the fans who have already written the team off before the season begins--why waste your time?  Go find another team / organization to believe in--

by southerncubbie on Mar 15, 2006 12:33 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Amen
God love ya.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 12:36 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

good point
and when i don't agree with somehting the US goverment does, I'll move to Mexico.  Or if my wife does/says something I don't like, I'll divorce her...

by mike bornemann on Mar 15, 2006 12:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

it's not the "something"...
...... that bothers me, it's the "everything".......

I would definitely suggest that if:

1.) Everything about your country and government upsets you, you disagree with everything your country and government does, and you have nothing good to say about your  country and government; yeah go ahead and move to Mexico--however, Canada probably offers more; including a professional baseball team that's pretty damn good.

AND if

2.) Everything about your wife and your marriage upsets you, and it's difficult for you to find positive attributes surrounding your marriage and your relationship, then yeah......definitely get a divorce....it's not worth it.

If you're a fan of the Cubs, why stick with the Cubs if the negative so clearly outweighs the positive, and if there's nothing to root for?

by southerncubbie on Mar 15, 2006 12:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Mediation
Don't be silly.  You only divorce your wife if she isn't pretty anymore.  
Seriously, if the government is doing something people don't like, most people do piss and moan on blogs and do nothing resembling anything near proactive - so I see your point.
But you bring up another good point.  After 9/11 Bush was slammed for not doing enough to prevent it, using any means necessary.  But now he's in trouble again for taking it to the opposite extreme with wire tapping.  He can't win.  Neither can the Cubs management.  They push their pitchers too hard, we complain.  They treat them with great caution, we're irate!  Let's not treat our favorite team like the red-headed stepchild we've made in the White House.  Let's save our hot air for the political arena and keep it out of the friendly confines.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 12:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I haven't...
...seen anyone who claims the Cubs have been too cautious with any of their pitchers.  People, rightly, questioned the throwing program Prior was on because it was indicative of him being injured not because they thought the Cubs were being too cautious.

by jolietconvict on Mar 15, 2006 1:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Semantics
If the throwing program was indicative of his being injured, that would be insinuating that they were being.... cautious?? Perhaps you'd prefer a different word? Careful?
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 2:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Depends...
...on whether the throwing program was truly precautionary or preventative in nature (as the Cubs claimed) or whether it was reactionary due to a pre-existing condition.

Since the whole concept of spring training for starting pitchers is to build up arm strength for the regualr season, logic would dictate that it was likely more reactionary than preventative.

(Just curious, are your initials really SHE?  If so, that is very cool).

by jazzman56 on Mar 15, 2006 3:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes
Indeed they are she.  Unfortunately, it means I can never get married, or at least I can only seriously date those with last names beginning with E.  Can you imagine if I ended up with somebody the last name Thomas or Talbert?  Disastrous...

Thanks for noticing! People usually just think that I started a sentence about a female and just never finished it.

she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 4:09 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think...
...if a guy were serious about a woman whose initials are SHE, he should at least be open to changing his last name to one beginning with E.

It's only fair.

by jazzman56 on Mar 15, 2006 5:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm with you
I'll start demanding that on first dates.  And also bring up how many kids I want and how it's ok for a man to cry at movies.  Haha.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 16, 2006 6:59 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It's not semantics.
The people who were upset/suspicious about Prior's throwing program did not feel that way because they thought the Cubs were being overly cautious.  They felt that way, rightly, because it reeked of an undisclosed injury.

by jolietconvict on Mar 15, 2006 5:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

With all due respect,
I think you're missing the point.  Management can't win.  If they push them too hard, fans get upset.  If they are overly cautious, they must be up to something and know something we don't.  Regardless of the cynics, it is feasible that maybe they were just being cautious?  Maybe Prior did just start feeling discomfort?  Who am I to say who's lying? Regardless, what's done is done.  I'm going to do my best to keep the faith that I will watch him pitch on April 5th. I'm thinking... 9 K's, Cubs 4, Reds 1.  Prior has a no-hitter into the 5th, gives up a hit to Dunn, and exits with a bad case of gas after eating too much Skyline chili. Cubloggers everywhere will cry foul and accuse Dusty of force-feeding his pitchers and pushing toothpick-smoking on minors.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 16, 2006 7:20 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think you're missing the point
This wasn't the Cubs merely being cautious with Prior.  There was a report from Will Carroll that Prior's shoulder was hurt.  Yes it was anonymous, but Carroll also reported on Prior's elbow trouble in '04 before anyone else.  The Cubs denied it yet Prior continued to make minimal progress.  His timetable was continually pushed back.  Finally there's pretty much zero chance that Prior will pitch 4/5.  Even if he doesn't require surgery, this is probably going to keep him from pitching off a mound for a while, which means he'll be pushed even farther behind.  I'll be shocked if he makes any spring training starts at all.

by jolietconvict on Mar 16, 2006 8:51 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No, I get it.
I think it's just that I don't have the same viewpoint as you.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 16, 2006 8:54 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

you're talking about two different things
sarah, you're talking about their policy in using their pitchers.

jc is talking about, after the use has injured them, how the cubs lie about it.

fwiw, it is not really feasible that they were being cautious ex nihilo. that kind of caution is known as "spring training", and is what they're doing with all their uninjured pitchers.

they treated prior differently because they believed he was hurt.

by gaius marius on Mar 16, 2006 10:04 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Such optimism!
I too, SHE, had hoped to see Prior pitch on April 5, and bought tickets in anticipation; but I do think it's out of the question now. Perhaps Greg Maddux will carry that no-hitter into the fifth, having thrice struck Wily Mo out and twice induced double plays from Mr. Kearns?

by dr johnson on Mar 16, 2006 9:41 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Kearns
Grrr... I really don't like him.
Maybe Mad Dog will barely snip Kearns' jersey and he'll throw down his bat and start sobbing on his way to 1st.  
He's such a girl.

Are you in Cincy or just coming in for the game?  Are you going to Opening Day?  I'll be two rows back from Pierre on the 3rd, and on the 1st baseline for the 5th.

she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 16, 2006 9:50 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Just...
...coming in for the game, Wednesday only. I'm not sure where I'm seated...my brother has the tickets.

The Reds should have traded Kearns and Pena long ago for pitchers. They better hope those two have decent seasons so they can cash in.

by dr johnson on Mar 16, 2006 10:04 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Fat chance
But it's safe to assume Rose would put money on that happening.

I'm just worried about that Lopez kid.  He can be lethal.

If it wasn't for Dunn's K count, I'd be worried about him, too.

she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 16, 2006 10:34 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

oooh,
I'm so jealous.  I prefer 3rd to 1st.  I caught a foul ball off Neifi's bat at Great American last year on the 3rd base side.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 16, 2006 12:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Kingly Treasure
A foul ball of Neifi's bat! Now that is a rare prize indeed...

I yearn for a foul ball from the Marquis de Grissom.

by dr johnson on Mar 16, 2006 12:27 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I can sell you
the spectacular foul ball I caught last year from Enrique Wilson?

by socalbob on Mar 16, 2006 12:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

foul ball
Cobwebs and all?

Hey now, catching a foul ball is always cool.  Especially when you're a girl, and you don't have a glove.

she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 16, 2006 12:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm jealous, really...
...since I've never ever caught a foul ball, with or without a glove.

But you must admit, when you tell your grandchildren whose bat delivered you your foul ball, they may not be as impressed as you will hope them to be. :)

by dr johnson on Mar 16, 2006 12:48 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Nah,
kids will believe anything.  I'll tell 'em it was Lee.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 16, 2006 12:55 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

neifi's not done playing
he's got time to impress.  and if some on this board turn out to be correct, he may well get 500 chances to impress this season alone.

impressing the grandchildren is still possible.

or, she could just lie about who hit the ball.

All will be fixed in 2006

by DSZ on Mar 16, 2006 12:55 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm going to inject...
...something in response that won't be very popular.

First of all, Hendry, Baker, Rothschild, et al are professional career baseball people.  One has to ASSUME that they know what they are doing.

Oh, BTW, that applies to Steve Stone, too, who I happen to think is one of the most knowledgable guys around.  These guys are in the business and their methods/opinions have validity, because that is what they do.

That doesn't mean that they can't agree to disagree or have varying opinions on correct courses of action.

And the bottom line is that pitchers get hurt.  Especially starters that are power pitchers.  You can do everything exactly right and still it happens.  Always has and probably always will.

But, here's the controversial part...has anybody stopped to think that the preponderance of Blogs, Usenet, talk shows, and web sites, etc makes team officials even MORE cautious about what they say publicly?  The way every word is scrutinized, analyzed and interpreted, it is no wonder everybody errs on the side of extreme caution in what they say to the media.  And things that start out as "rumors" have a way of turning into fact very quickly these days.

I think it is obvious that the Cubs (and most everyone else in today's environment) parse their words so carefully, because they know that if they don't, people will jump all over what they say (and will do so anyway).

And if that means being something less than 100% forthcoming...well, I think it is somewhat understandable.  That doesn't make them dishonest or liars...it just makes them careful, for good reason.

It will be interesting to see how they manage the news of what is the result of Yokum's examination of Prior's shoulder.

by jazzman56 on Mar 15, 2006 4:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

though i think
they are liars as a matter of system, and always will be. it's a trait of most every corporate endeavor of mankind.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 4:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I suppose...
...it's a matter of interpretation.

Suppose Rothschild had come out yesterday and said, "Gee, I don't know, Mark kept saying he was okay, but based on what I saw this is not good.  It may be something serious."  That would be honest, but not smart.  The headlines in the Chicago papers today would be something like PRIOR'S CAREER IN JEOPARDY.

If you read between the lines of what he did say, it is something pretty close to that, but formulated in such a way that he doesn't speculate or overly emphasize what his professional sense is of the extent of the injury.  That's not lying really...it is more a case of being responsible where a baseball career is involved.

You may disagree, but my feeling is that it is not a job requirement that team officials reveal everything they know or even suspect until it is to the point where they simply have no other choice. That is just the way of the world today.

by jazzman56 on Mar 15, 2006 4:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

A lie is a lie is a lie
If the Cubs are concerned about how their comments may play in the blogosphere outside of their control, then they should adopt a policy of saying nothing.  After all, they aren't obligated to reveal the state of health of any player.

Purposely being less than completely forthcoming about any situation almost always comes back to haunt an organization in the long run.  It's a bad habit to get into.  And, as the Cubs have discovered, it's the single biggest reason why no one believes them now even though, this time, it could well be the truth.

Remember - oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.

by Jed Taylor on Mar 15, 2006 4:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

But,
...it isn't a lie if you choose not speculate on things in the media when you really don't know for sure.  It may be less than forthcoming about what you suspect, but there is no obligation to speculate in the media.

The theory that they can just not say anything really doesn't hold water.  If they said nothing about Prior leaving ST camp and word got out that he had gone to see Yokum, the media would go ballistic and heads would roll.

There is a compromise here that is the proper approach that lies between saying everything and saying nothing.

by jazzman56 on Mar 15, 2006 4:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Re
I'm not suggesting that the Cubs withhold facts.  When the media asks, "Where's Prior?", they answer that he's having a medical evaluation as the result of unexpected pain experienced when throwing yesterday.  When the media asks what the Cubs expect from the evaluation, they answer that they're not going to speculate about Prior's physical status but instead wait for the results.

The problem the Cubs run into is the desire to control what they can't; that is, the reaction to news.  That's why you have Hendry saying things like he knows some people are going to twist the situation in the media and him pleading that this is situation is completely out of the blue.  What he should be doing is simply stating the facts and refusing to be drawn into either the defense or speculation trap.  Even if his intentions are good, and they probably usually are, when he sets expectations he has no control over achieving, he's bound to take it on the chin when they are not met.

Furthermore, the Cubs have developed a reputation for using one condition to mask another.  For instance, by insisting that Prior's workout schedule was solely the result of his respiratory problems in the offseason, they become perceived as being less than honest because the evidence, admittedly circumstantial, but convincing nonetheless, doesn't back them up.

Instead, they would be much better served by being forthright about Prior's overall physical condition - that he's not in shape to throw on a regular schedule generally, but at this time there's no specific reason as to why.

It's all the attempts at shifting focus to innocuous explanations that come back and bite the Cubs in the ass.  They think they're being smooth and media savvy, when in fact, they're just killing what little credibility they have left.  And once people stop believing what you say, you might as well not bother saying anything at all.

My overall point is the long-term affect of disembling and spinning.  The Cubs have no one but themselves to blame for the reputation they've developed.  Just think how different the reaction to this one situation would have been if they had a reputation for honesty instead.

by Jed Taylor on Mar 16, 2006 12:32 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

exactly
The problem the Cubs run into is the desire to control what they can't; that is, the reaction to news.

this is the same effect one sees from most any corporate body -- government being particularly notorious, but business enterprises and churches no differently.

the managing of expectation all amounts to deception in the end, however well intentioned.

by gaius marius on Mar 16, 2006 10:18 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes
I agree with you here.  Spin control is a way of life in the 21st Century.  No matter what business you are in.

The problem with the Cubs management is that they want to do spin control, but they aren't trained in that.  These are baseball men.

So, it winds up being clumsy and ineffective.  But, I don't think that the Cubs have a copyright on this problem.  It exists in most baseball organizations.(Think about the way the Yankees, from media savvy NYC, handled that sign they wanted to put up apologizing to their Spring Training fans about the fact that they had some players in the WBC.  Nice going, George).

In the NFL, where they have strict policies about how and when injuries are to be reported, most teams have developed ways to skirt the rules and not show their hand in terms of what players will be available for the upcoming game.  It's a shame it has to be that way, but...

by jazzman56 on Mar 16, 2006 10:58 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

well said
cubsfan4life

by cubfan4life on Mar 15, 2006 5:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Why...
...is it that the Cubs are the only team that is continually back pedalling on injury stories?

by jolietconvict on Mar 15, 2006 5:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think...
...that's a question that we may never know the answer to. Let's hope when Rothschild is no longer with the Cubs that he writes a juicy tell all book about his former employer.
cubsfan4life

by cubfan4life on Mar 15, 2006 6:02 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

your country -- love it or leave it?
that isn't much of a prescription for helping to make things better.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 12:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not one of those...
...who buy into all the conspiracy nonsense, but there is NO QUESTION that the comments put forth by the Cubs yesterday are not exactly fothcoming.  They are, at the very least, disingenuous.

When Hendry says that yesterday was the first time Prior had any discomfort all spring, that is being intellectually dishonest.  If he had said that yesterday was the first time Prior had pain severe enough to warrant a trip to the west coast to see Dr. Yokum and probably have an MRI, then that would be easier to swallow.

Rotator cuff injuries, I don't care whether it is a strain, tendinitis, a tear or impingement, do not suddenly crop up overnight.  You can bet the farm that Prior was experiencing some form of discomfort from the start and that is why they were babying him.

I really don't believe Cubs management is purposely putting out false information, but I do think they believe it is in their best interest to put the best possible face on any injury developments.

Make no mistake, a trip to see Dr. Yokum is not trivial.

While I'm at it, the theory that I have read on here that somehow Prior isn't tough enough or is a baby is just a lot of nonsense.

First of all, from a practial standpoint, pitching with any sort of rotator cuff injury is a sure way to make it worse.  That would be being stupid, not tough.

Secondly, any elite athlete like Prior plays with pain and irratation all the time.  To question the toughness or commitment of somebody, particularly a starting pitcher in the major leagues, is just ignorant.  You don't even make it to the majors unless you are committed enough to play with pain.

I can only assume that anybody who would make such a comment has never had a rotator cuff injury, because believe me, it is not like a headache where you take an aspirin and it goes away.

by jazzman56 on Mar 15, 2006 2:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So we should listen to you as the voice of reason-
Someone who has rarely if ever agreed with anything the Cubs management has done? Doesn't sound objective to me. I am expecting bad news regarding this injury, but I am not convinced that we have a conspiricy going on. Maybe Oliver Stone should read this blog to get some ideas for a new movie.

by LT on Mar 15, 2006 12:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Lying
Who's really been lying.
If Hendry knew Prior was hurt, why wouldn't he (for his...Hendry's...own job security) have taken more action in the off season to improve the starting pitching? If I knew about it...like we all know about Woods injury...it would be a no-brainer to find solutions there instead of relief pitchers...I can't believe he would be that negligent.
Could it be that the Cubs are at fault for believing their players? Of course, they all sugarcoat things, but not letting your employer know that you might not be capable of performing your job is tempting to many people. Who wants to lose their job?
Who's really been lying?
"1958-NL MVP; 1959- NL MVP; 1960-GOLD GLOVE SS"

by letsplaytwo on Mar 15, 2006 8:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Gaius, if you had to guess...
what do you think the result of Prior's MRI will be?  Do you think he has a torn rotator cuff and is out for the season?  Or do you think it's an injury that Prior can recover from and then be able pitch at some point during this season?

I'm hoping it's a case of Prior feeling some inflammation and it will go away, of course.  I'm sure you're hoping that too.  But what do you think will happen here?

One day, the dream will come true.

by brianp88 on Mar 16, 2006 8:24 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

my guess is just that
but if he can't play long toss once a week for 30 throws without pain, it's reasonable to expect significant damage. he simply hasn't thrown enough, imo, for this pain to be what socalbob quite plausibly forwarded as a possible cause -- that is, too sudden a throwing program. prior's had just the opposite, imo, so the chances of a minor injury seem slight to me.

if reports about the pain being anterior are correct, then i would think rotator cuff, scope and wait for 2007.

if they aren't, then there's also a reasonable possibility of labrum damage -- meaning all bets are off.

by gaius marius on Mar 16, 2006 10:22 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, all you can do is hope...
that Prior is going to to be okay.  I'm holding my breath.  In the event that Prior is going to miss time, I'll root for Rich Hill or whoever replaces him in the rotation.  I'm still optimistic.  I have to be.  I'm a Cubs fan.
One day, the dream will come true.

by brianp88 on Mar 15, 2006 9:21 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

I completely agree.
If Prior doesn't pitch, I will be sad and disappointed.  But somebody is going to be on that mound, and whoever it is I will be right there cheering for them.  
Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Mar 15, 2006 4:38 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

same prom
different gym.  balsa Wood and Prior are missing time, absolutely shocking.

by mike bornemann on Mar 15, 2006 9:25 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Andrew
Thanks, Al, for providing a voice of reason here. Yes, it could be as bad as we all fear, but we have no way of knowing yet.

The fatalism and vitriol displayed by so many here is just alarming and ridiculous. Why follow the Cubs? Folks, if it causes you so much inner angst, just give it up!

by The Boar on Mar 15, 2006 9:39 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Whoops, sorry,
"Andrew" is a name I use on another board, where you have to type it in before you can post your comments. Getting my blogs mixed up again!

by The Boar on Mar 15, 2006 9:40 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

LOL!
I wondered where that came from!

by Al on Mar 15, 2006 9:47 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

AMEN!
.......I was hoping there was another person on here who agreed with Al's rational stance on this.

by southerncubbie on Mar 15, 2006 12:35 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

To brianp88 and, of course, Al.
To quote Bob Verdi about our Cubbies, "In lieu of offering a present, they offer you a future."  You guys restore my faith in Cubs fans everywhere!  The ivy may die every year, but it always comes back full force every spring.  Just like we do.  Here's to believing.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 10:18 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

And to those...
... who challange the Cubs and look below the surface, I thank you for having your own mind and attempting to think critically. Prior may be hurt, he may be fine. The Cubs may have known, they may not have known. I just find it simply ironic how people can just ignore the clear trends over the past few years.

"Those Who Forget History Are Doomed to Repeat It"

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 10:25 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

there
seems to be a lot of people that whole-heartedly believe he's always been hurt, or whole-heartedly believe he's healthy, and there is nothing more than circumstance to prove either.

we're on the outside looking in, and all we can do is try our best to interpret the situation with the little information we are given.

to act as though any of us knows anything with certainty is a little presumptuous, if you ask me. doesn't mean either side isn't right, but i think presenting an interpretation as fact is irresponsible.

by tomas21 on Mar 15, 2006 10:46 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

agreed, but
there is this problem of conditional probability.

i would agree wholly that if prior were going to the doctor ex nihilo, we would know just about nothing.

but it isn't ex nihilo. this comes in the context of a non-throwing throwing program that was pretty clearly an attempt to coddle an injury.

going to the doctor in the context of that throwing schedule raises the probability that this is something the cubs have known about for some time.

then take that raised probability in context of rumors -- will carroll or 1060west's newman or others -- that the cubs knew about a shoulder injury and were concerned. and the probability rises yet again.

then take that probability in the context of his laborious, uncharacteristic and inefficient outings in august and september of last year -- and the probability rises yet again.

clearly, i'm not issuing prophecy here. there's no "proof" in any of this.

but most of life is assessing situations without proof because certainty in most cases is simply impossible to attain. if you wait for certainty, you've almost always missed the boat.

what can be said, in lieu of certainty, is that the conditional probability that the cubs knew about prior's shoulder and lied about it to the public is very significant.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 12:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't disagree
No one should be acting as if we know what is fact, however there is merit to being concerned and more importantly, planning for alternatives. This is more than just reading the tea leaves. There is lots of circumstantial evidence that can lead to people making some hypothesis. Yes, they are assumptions, but there is validity to them.

As I mentioned, several months ago, David Kaplan of WGN had talked to a scout who said that he felt that Mark Prior had an elbow injury. He said that the lack of control, which Prior once had, was a cause for concern. Control problems are often a sign of elbow damage and Prior saw his once tremendous command deteriorate. This has been echoed by some over the last year or two.

So what I'm getting at is that its not unacceptable for people to draw some conclusions, however preaching them like they are solid fact is not necessary. More importantly, though, is that the Cubs should be looking at these things and making alternative plans. It was wrong of them to sit back and have no other plans than going with Wood and Prior when one as coming off a surgery and there were signs of an injury in the other.

My bigger issue is the lack of action in terms of improving things. Again, the Cubs are on the brink of seeing two "once in a generation" arms go down the toilet. With each bump in the road that Prior and Wood encounter, there is no proactiveness in diagnosing and correcting the bigger problems.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 1:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i agree
there is certainly enough reason to be suspicious and worry. the cubs have not been forthcoming with information, prior has had prior problems (pun sort of intended), and he was on a strnge program this spring.

there is not enough information available to us for us to state anything as fact.

and fwiw, the will carroll source could still be full of baloney. anyone could start a rumor that one of the cubs pitchers, especially wood or prior or guzman, was having elbow or shoulder problems, and have it eventually come true with some regularity. forgive me if i take someone who has such serious secondary gain for publishing inflammatory rumors with a grain of salt.

by tomas21 on Mar 15, 2006 2:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

History
There is far more to the Cubbies' history than the trends that you speak of.  For instance, losing seems to one of our favorites.  But I'd rather watch the Cubs lose than watch any other team win.  That's why I'm a fan.  My job is to adore them, not challenge them.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 12:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So well said.......
.....exactly what being a real fan is all about.

Cheers--

by southerncubbie on Mar 15, 2006 12:36 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

thats your choice
my preference is to watch them, win or lose, but to not let them treat me like I'm an idiot. I don't get the umberage that some people are taking with others who simply decide not to walk around waving the Cubbie flag. I am a Cub fan and always have been. This does not mean that I cannot challenge them and get pissed when I think they do the wrong thing.

I challange them because I want them to get better. They likely do not hear me, but that does not mean that I should cease from doing what I think is necessary to make things better.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 1:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Street Cred
Posting your umbrage and challenging your team on a blog is necessary to make things better?  All this time I thought it was a place to cozy up to a Cubs community.  Who knew?

With that kind of optimism and blind idealism, you'd think you would make the perfect Cubs fan!

Please understand that with all of the negativity swirling about the place, I'm just concerned about losing our reputation as the best fans in the world!  We are idiots, but we're proud idiots. :)

Although, I don't have a flag to wave.  Perhaps with your connections in making things better, you could call Dusty himself and have him pick one up for me.  Thanks!

she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 1:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

My point...
... is that there is no one way to define proper fan attitude. My problem is with others who seem to think that there is one way.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 1:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Very true.
You don't have to have a positive fan attitude.  Quite similarly, you don't have to bathe everyday.  But far fewer people will want to sit next to you if you don't.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 2:03 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

As I've said,
as a Cubs fan, I'm an idiot... what does n/t mean?? :)
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 2:20 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It means...
... "no text".

by Al on Mar 15, 2006 2:25 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting
" you don't have to bathe everyday.  But far fewer people will want to sit next to you if you don't."

Another, more appropriate, analogy might be: Two people are out walking in a driving rain storm.  One has an umbrella while the other does not, is smiling, getting soaked and is shouting, "I'm waiting to see how much rain we're going to get before I buy an umbrella!"

Which one with the guys in white coats drag away?

To suggest that a fan with a negative attitude towards a team with 98 consecutive years of failure and a history of mistatements on the health status of key players is a member of the "great unwashed" is not only insulting, but it is also self serving.

by Ivychat on Mar 15, 2006 2:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Thank you
I couldn't have said it better myself.

I find it insulting that we are deviding this into being positive and being negative camps, as if to insinuate that being critical is not a good thing. Perhaps it isn't a good thing for some people. I could easily say that one camp is being proactive in their thought, while others are simply being passive and, IMO, being passive is conterproductive.

Frankly, I wasn't sure if Sarah's claiming to be "an idiot" Cub fan was sarcastic or not. Clearly it wasn't. I'm not sure how anyone could take pride in being an idiot.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 2:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Being critical...
... also means being critical when appropriate, not throwing out wild unprovable accusations, and measuring your words.

I happen to like being positive. Does that mean I can't see what's going on? Of course it doesn't. To continue the rain analogy -- do I want to sit around every day raining on someone else? No one wants to hear negative stuff all day long, every day.

There has to be a balance. I like to think I'm a bit closer to that than others.

by Al on Mar 15, 2006 2:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

there is a problem
if you cannot find things in your life which you can be positive about, yes.

that is a FAR cry from forcing a positivity into one part of your life that may not be warranted -- especially when you deny probable truths as a matter of course to do so.

to find the first is healthy. to force the second is not.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 2:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

sigh
which is clearly not to say you're sick, al. :) just that you are articulating what seems clearly to me a misguided notion of balance and how to achieve it.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 2:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I do not agree...
... that people have been throwing out wild, unprovable accusations. This is humorous to me  because I was shouted down a year ago on the Cubs NG for taking the Cubs to task for not being forthcoming with Wood and Prior's health and it turned out that both had injuries that were worse than the Cubs originally led us to believe.

Al, with all due respect, you and others seem to think that some of the criticism that people aim at the Cubs is without basis. Whether you felt a week ago that Prior was or wasn't healthy, there was significant evidence to believe that SOMETHING was wrong. Whether or not you believe that the Cubs have been and are being honest in regards to injury, there is a significant body of evidence from the past three years that shows that this has not been the case.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 3:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

AL
 You make Ernie Banks sound like like a pessimist. However its March and for 40 years there has never been a March were I did not think the Cubs were going to the World Series and I am not about to start this year. Should Prior's problem turn out to be serious however I am thinking the Cub's in 5 instead of a sweep.

by jimhickman on Mar 15, 2006 3:23 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

May I suggest...
Regardless of tricks, the Cubs in '06?
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 3:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Idiocy
Oh no, I meant it.
As despair.com says, "Quitters never win, winners never quit, but those who never win and never quit are idiots."  
Then again, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, so I guess regardless of positive or negative attitudes, we are all fantastically insane idiots.  
Wrigley keeps selling out, so there must be a lot of us!
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 2:48 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

you know what DML
I agree with this.  I think the sides should be broekn into a "critical" point of view and a "non-critical" point of view.

Oftentimes critical people who challenge the norm are thought of as negative.  The truly gifted communicators can cahllenge others to think critically without coming across as negative.  It's hard to do in this type of forum.

I'd like to say I take some from each side.  Some things I am very critical (Jim Hendry's way of building a 25 man roster for the season) and other's not so much (Cedeno's capabilities).

Well said.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 2:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Who'll Stop The Rain?
And what might you call suggesting that my kind should be locked away in an asylum?

Darling, it was an analogy.  And quite a good one at that, I must say.  To be clear, in no way do I personally believe that someone with a negative attitude does not bathe nor do i think you will pass the asian bird flu, mad cow, or any other communicable disease on to me.

Allow me to offer this thought -- carrying an umbrella won't make it stop raining, it will just protect you from it.  But if it's going to rain anyway, you might as well dance around in it.  Swim around in the sweet misery.  We Cubs fans wear it proudly.  

If they lied, they lied.  After all, everyone does do it.  It sucks, but what can we do about it now?  Really, what could we ever do about it?  We can't stop it from raining.  Let's deal with the issue at hand and hope for the best for our young ace.

I believe.

she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 2:42 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You have an excellent way with words
and an intriguing way of presenting your arguments. Keep it up. My thoughts are that most everyone has been saying that we can't count on Prior and Wood anyway. So why all the angst? I seriously doubt anyone from Cubs management even cares (or knows) this site exists. Whether the Cubs win or lose we watch them beacause we're fans. It's more fun when they win, but many fans probably only have a vague idea why they're Cub fans to begin with, but I can gaurantee it's not because they're winners.

by teacher tom on Mar 15, 2006 3:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

We can demand...
... that they stop treating us like idiots. The Cubs shouldn't do it. The government shouldn't do it. Sorry but I don't know why anyone feels that being so casual with the truth is an okay thing.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 3:09 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

lol
I certainly do not feel that being casual with the truth is acceptable.  Fight the man to your little heart's content - I'm all about it.

What I'm casual with is my control over people telling the truth.  My goodness, if I could stop the world from lying?  Oh the difference I could make.

We have no control over these matters, as Al has delicately pointed out.  If you'd really like to make a difference in the Cubs ethical practices OR your government's, get involved! Apply for a job at the Cubs.  Write Jim Hendry a letter, camp out on the White House lawn - or Bud Selig's for that matter!

Additionally, isn't it the relinquishing of control that makes baseball so intriguing?  How fun would it be if we knew what was going to happen?  I mean, Pete Rose would be happy as a clam, sure.  But it's the magic of baseball that keeps us coming back.  It's supernatural luster that defies time and space - and pessimism - it's just lovely.  Ahh, April 3rd can't come fast enough!

she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 3:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

how about
We have no control over these matters

simply refusing to give them several thousand dollars a year for the privilege of being lied to?

i disagree, sarah. frequent ticket buyers not only have some control -- they have all the control.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 3:33 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

not true
until there is no other ticket buyer to take your place.  That's not the case today, nor will it ever be given the social nature and phenomenon of Cubs games being in a huge town with a huge following.  Look no further than the UC and how the Bulls managed to sell-out every night for this pathetic teams they rolled out.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 3:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

not anymore!
reduced demand even at the fringes will affect cub revenues, thanks to wrigley field premium. :)

but i think you underestimate what can befall the cubs. no sports team is ever too far from where the cubs were in 1979. they're more than capable of going right back there with the "proper" management.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 3:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't buy that
the world is no longer the place of '79.  And Cubs fans have quadrupled in that time.  And Wrigley has become a social gathering place.

I see you have passed on my request to expose your real name.  :-(

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 3:51 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

all of those things
can change, socal -- and will, in time. it was once inconceivable that the royals and twins would play to half-filled houses. but they do.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 4:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

it can
but won't.  KC and Minn is not a comp for Chicago.  And given the social nature of the Cubs games one cannot compare cities like that to Chicago, let alone the mass national following.  Do you have any idea what the waiting list is for Cubs tickets?  It's absurd to think it would diminish.  

Nice try.  I'm still not buying.  Have anything more for me?

What the heck is your first name?

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 4:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm curious too!
Who is gaius marius?
Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Mar 15, 2006 4:41 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Here you go
Gaius Marius
"The key to winning baseball games is pitching, fundamentals, and three run homers." - Earl Weaver

by VS on Mar 15, 2006 7:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No! :)
I meant who is gaius marius, as in BCB gaius marius.  

Maybe we should play the name game one day.  Where you say your first name and the last name of a baseball player that has the same first letter as your first name.

I would say Miriam Murton. LOL.

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Mar 15, 2006 10:23 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

and .
I would say dream until your dreams come true
2006 -- AC036097 -- Eamus Catuli!

by priorpwnz on Mar 16, 2006 12:53 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I just wanted to see...
What it would look like if I posted here.  I'm wondering how narrow the margins will be.  

Re: Prior, I'm shocked.  I had no idea that he might hurt.  This came out of nowhere. There were no warning signs.  I'm sure the cubs were shocked also.

It's one thing to be optimistic.
It's another thing to be gullible.
I HOPE Prior recovers quickly and that this isn't major.
But I didn't believe it when Dusty said, "there's absolutely nothing wrong with him. Nothing."
Please.

The cubs may have legitimate reasons for being so secretive about the health of their pitchers, but personally, I doubt that these reasons are worth sacrificing so much credibility.  
In any event...
We are upset that Prior is going to start the season on the DL (again).  HOw long did they know?
Does it matter?
I wasn't suprised.
No matter how or when the news is revealed and/or spun, the most troubling problem is that Prior isn't healthy.

Yes, I'm annoyed with how misleading the Cubs have been.  But of they were more upfront, it wouldn't change the fact that this sucks.

 

by dan the fan on Mar 16, 2006 4:27 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh I will...
or maybe I should have Maddog adopt me.  Then, I could be Miriam Maddux.

If you played the name game, you could say Chris Carpenter or Chris Clemens! :)

Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Mar 16, 2006 7:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

far from absurd
It's absurd to think it would diminish.

i think you're projecting recent past into extended future. what's become of the cubs has much to do with the economic improvement of the country since the inflationary period of 1968-81. reverse that growth for some period -- which is less a probability than an eventual certainty -- and not only the cubs but a lot of spectator sport would regress significantly.

the 1981 cubs then were long known for bleacher bums and a national following -- and it counted for little. that waiting list can vanish remarkably quickly.

by gaius marius on Mar 16, 2006 10:28 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

today's sports world is far removed from 1979
the extent to which sports permeate our society is nothing like 1979.  a ticket is now far more than the chance to go to a game - it has become the chance to go to a game and the more valuable chance to tell people you went to the game and the even more valuable chance to offer people one needs something from the opportunity to go to a game.

the stature one gains today from season tickets along with the virtual guarantee that one can sell all of their tickets for face value, and if they are so inclined, substantially more than face value, makes it a no-risk, high reward proposition to hold onto season tickets.

All will be fixed in 2006

by DSZ on Mar 15, 2006 7:09 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

that is true
and i think there is an underlying trend toward sport-as-entertainment that has raised the floor.

but the cubs situation is far from invincible as a result of that.

by gaius marius on Mar 16, 2006 10:32 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Huh?
So what would that accomplish?  You don't get to watch Cubs baseball... and they still don't listen to you...  

So, by your rationale, if you're in the family friendly section that gives you rights over what, lead off hitter?  And sitting near the dugout lets you boss the batboy around?  Buying a ticket doesn't give you equal share in the ins and outs of the Cubs organization any more than buying a movie ticket lets you pick the ending of the film.

If you'd like to give up your tickets, I'd gladly take them off your hands.  

And also, if you have any extra to Brokeback... haven't seen it yet.  I'm so out of the loop...

she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 3:41 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

But...
...I already tried camping out on Bud Selig's lawn. He threatened me with instant replay and a national league DH.

He won this time. But I'll get him...oh I'll get him...

by dr johnson on Mar 15, 2006 3:36 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

HAHA
Well-played... well-played.
she

by Sarah Hope on Mar 15, 2006 3:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

in this group
there's one guy waiting to see how much it will rain before he buys an umbrella, and another guy who will never go outside because it will probably rain eventually.

personally, i don't mind getting wet sometimes.

by tomas21 on Mar 15, 2006 3:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You know someone here is now
going to say you're all wet. Sorry. We all know that a professional team is ALWAYS going to put a positive spin on EVERYTHING. Period. Maybe  they're confabulating. Definitely they're blowing sunshine up our behinds. But that's what pro sports is for, to keep the masses opiated and pallated. Bring on the boys of summer!

by teacher tom on Mar 15, 2006 3:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

agreed
nothing left now but to charge into the void.

this is ironically the one time in the year when i usually get optimistic -- what's done is done, what they failed to do they failed to do, and now they just have to go out and make the best of the sorry cards they dealt themselves.

but, in a few weeks, they'll remind me that their gross incompetence isn't limited to the offseasons -- and i'll be back to finding happiness in the parts of my life where it can actually be found.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 3:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Don't forget Dusty
When evaluating the credibility of Cubs management, let's not forget Dusty's recent "hear no evil" comments regarding Bonds and steroids. A "No Comment" would have been appropriate. But to say essentially that he had no idea that BB was juicing is ridiculous.

by perseman on Mar 15, 2006 8:48 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Credibility issues more than others
Reality is that past crimes, regardless of the circumstances come back to haunt when credibility has been lost, it never really is regained because people like to confirm their prejudices.

Prior being hurt does not surprise me, the extent is another. I can be very cynical on him and not the Cubs in that he chose to negate his contract for a few more bucks, supposedly taking a risk but in reality the Cubs would not pass on him because of his potential.

Reality is pitchers get hurt often. Those who don't are the rarest.

So here is the bottomline, no wonder Hendry kept acquiring more (Simontacchi was a sign, as was Miller while signing Rusch et cetera.)

The trouble with this is it will make the Cubs bullpen a 7 man crew unless the Cubs keep option type players on the bench and in the bullpen.

If he is hurt, then get him fixed.

Bill Veeck planted Ivy during 'The Depression', and over time the Ivy Walls has become the most distinct symbol of Wrigley Field.

by Ivy Walls on Mar 15, 2006 10:18 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Tejada
All winter, when the Orioles were willing to trade Tejada for Prior and minor prospects, I was saying that the Cubs were crazy not to do it.  Zambrano is the future of the Cubs pitching staff.  Prior was going to get hurt sooner or later.  Unfortunately for us, it is sooner.  Tejada could have given us the best offensive infield in baseball for the next several years.

by Rootbulls on Mar 15, 2006 11:15 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Perhaps
the Orioles knew something was up. It sounds like the deal was on the table and the O's said no, but thats simply conjecture. Had the trade happened, Prior gone to O's camp and this occurred, the trade could possibly have been voided (if there is a real injury).

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 11:34 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Tejada
From everything I read, the Cubs were the ones not willing to part with their pitching.

by Rootbulls on Mar 15, 2006 11:38 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I've heard both
I've heard that the O's were not willing. I've heard that the Cubs never even offered Prior.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 11:51 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

doubt it
after the Mets acquired Brian Lawrence he went down with a bum shoulder and the Cameron trade was not voided.  I'm sure Prior would have had to take a physical before the trade was complete.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 11:39 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It depends
Had Lawrence thrown any pitches between being traded and going down? It just seems that if a player shows up and, before getting any playing time shows signs of injury, the trade usually gets voided or the teams reconfigure the deal. This actually happened with one of the minor leaguers from the Cubs-O's Sosa deal.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 11:50 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

it happened
exactly as I wrote it.  Lawrence showed up and couldn't throw.  Extensive tests revealed he was damaged goods, but had passed a Mets physical so the trade stood.  Caught the Padres and Mets off guard.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 11:52 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

OK
I didn't know the specifics of the Lawrence injury. I just think that with a trade involving the calibre of players of Prior and Tejada, this could have become somewhat complicated.

DmL

by dmlichte on Mar 15, 2006 11:59 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

agreed
could you imgine the firestorm if this happened?  Holy Cow!

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 12:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Hey Al,
Will you be 'findable' at the park? I'll be in town all of next week.

by Smooth Jazz Man San Diego on Mar 15, 2006 11:56 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Email me privately ...
... use the link on the right sidebar, and we'll make arrangements!

by Al on Mar 15, 2006 12:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Offseason Training
Whether or not Prior has been hurt and the powers that be have been trying to hide it, we will never know for sure.  I certainly wouldn't put it past Jim, Dusty, Larry, and Co. but I have no proof because I was not there.  My question is, what the hell kind of offseason workout program are Wood and Prior on?  Why can Maddux, Zambrano, and so many other pitchers show up to spring training every year healthy, and these two can't?  Aramis Ramirez was hurt the last month of the season, but worked out all winter and seems to be fine now.  

Do these two even work out in the offseason?  Knowing that Cubs management tries to treat these two like the goose that laid the golden egg by flying them out to see a specialist in L.A. every time they have a headache or a paper cut, is it possible that at the end of every year they tell them to just go home and not touch a ball until February?  Whatever these two do in the offseason needs to change 180 degrees, because it simply is not working.  

CTC

by ctcoff99 on Mar 15, 2006 12:32 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I wrote this much 2 weeks ago when the first firestorm of Prior reared it's ugly head.

I really feel the hangover from the end of '03 affected each's preparation for the upcoming season.  They were out of shape for ST '04 and haven't recovered since.  They were out of shape and pushed it too hard too fast because we were "the team" so aptly jixed by SI.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 1:03 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

we disagree, socal, as you know
i think it's far more likely that the damage was done in 2003 by the repeated high pitch counts for wood and prior for a team in a playoff drive and operating with no confidence in its bullpen.

pitchers have been long coming into spring without having thrown a ball all offseason -- year-round training is new to baseball. it never resulted in these kinds of breakdowns systemically. spring training was designed to avoid it, in fact.

but 130- and 140-pitch counts are also new to baseball largely, in an era when the strikeout and the wasted pitch has become epidemic. it was hard for pitchers like drysdale and spahn to get anywhere near 130 pitches in nine innings. but in strikeout-ball, a guy can pile that up in seven innings.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 1:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

yes we do
I was playing year round basbeall in 1984, so NO, it's not new.  Prior has been playing year-round basbeall up until he signed.  He knows about staying in shape and playing year-round.

There isn't one study that can difinitvely point to "# of pitches = injured arms."  You can try to make that connection, but there's no fact to it.

For every guy you want to point to, I can submit another who did more and had no arm troubles.

Look at Maddux and Z as two entirely different pitchers in terms of economy, yet they are out there every 5th day.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 1:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

of course not
but then, what is that simple? is this more of the futile search for certainty? :)

what is known is that there is a statistical correlation between high-count outings and diminished performance and injury. is it a = b? no. but neither is it statistically insignificant.

and it does definitely fit the trend of the game -- with pitchers in the age of the strikeout throwing so many more pitches per inning than ever before, despite ever-improving medical understanding, disabled list time has increased dramatically.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 1:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

and with z
i'd issue solon's warning -- it ain't over until it's over.

maddux, for his part, has arguably avoided injury by becoming a pitcher that throws a complete game on 88 pitches -- as was once much more common.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 1:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

it's uncomfortable
agreeing with phil rogers.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 1:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i'd say
it calls for an instant reevaluation of your opinion.  there is far more proof that phil rogers consistently pulls columns directly out of his dog's ass than there is that the cubs would blatantly lie about the health of a pitcher a couple of days before telling the world he's going to a well-known surgeon.
All will be fixed in 2006

by DSZ on Mar 15, 2006 6:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

it's his opinion
I don't agree with it.  Pitch counts are also because a guy is throwing well and probably has the lead late in the game.  Something Prior and Wood did a lot of in the stretch of '03.

Should Phil have taken out MJ for Craig Hodges late in games because he was worried about the amount of minutes MJ had accumulated?  I'd say hell no.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 1:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

mj wasn't a repetitive-stress injury candidate
as just about every starting pitcher is, of course.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 1:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

really?
have you ever played basketball with all the running and cutting and the pounding on the knees.  He surely should have blown his ACL because of all the running and cutting and jumping and banging especially if he played a lot of minutes and was fatigued.  Phil Jackson sucks for leaving him in so many minutes.

Obviously sarcastic in tone.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 2:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

lol
ok -- mj wasn't at quite as high a risk of repetitive stress injuries as a starting pitcher.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 2:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

MJs
stress fracture was under the tuteledge of Stan Allbeck.

by Ivychat on Mar 15, 2006 2:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

you know I was kidding
I agree, but the point was about having the best player in control.  Fortunately or unfortunately, Prior and Wood were the best in '03 and especially down the stretch.  If you judge how a pitcher is feeling in relation to velocity, command, getting hit by batters, and asking the pitcher, then Dusty managed it correctly.  Pitch counts are the new thing in baseball and the 100-pitch number is arbitrary to say the least.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 2:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

there's no magic number, i agree
i think the logic of pitcher fatigue relates more directly to loss of mechanics. if one could sit on the bench and reliably discern mechanical failures at a distance, i'm sure that would be a better way. but that's impossible for the human eye in real time -- so pitch counts become a crude proxy.

but a far better proxy than a manager caught up in the moment and afraid of his bullpen. :)

fwiw, i think dusty was all too willing to push his two young starters past their command breakdown points. i watched game 6 from left field, and i could see in the 7th that prior was leaving everything up and losing it. still, dusty didn't even get anyone up in the pen. he had made up his mind that it was prior or nothing. it ended up being nothing -- but that wasn't the first time that year he did so. he gambled with wood and prior frequently that autumn and won.

all that gambling seems to have ended up indebting the cubs in a way baker clearly hadn't fully appreciated.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 3:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Re
Pitch counts are also because a guy is throwing well and probably has the lead late in the game.

And - and this is an important and - there's little to no confidence in the bullpen.

After all, if the issue is merely pitching with a lead, then there's no way of explaining Roger's observation about the Sox starters last year only combining for 5 outings above 120 pitches, the longest being 123.  And that was in AL.

Just because pitch counts and pitcher abuse points are relatively new to the game doesn't mean people shouldn't learn from what they're trying to communicate.  I would guess that OG has paid attention.  We'll see what happens to the WS rotation as the season unfolds.

BTW - if experience had led to a general understanding that playing Jordan beyond X minutes a game could lead to a serious injury, and the only alternative on the bench for Phil Jackson was Hodges, that would be the fault of Jerry Krause for putting Jackson between such a rock and a hard place.  NBA Strat-O-Matic has such playing time limitations, and it can be quite a challenge putting a competent lineup on the floor because of them.  Fortunately, Jordan's was, IIRC, usually 2.

Looking back at the 2003 pitching staff, it's easy to see why Baker, never one known to manage a staff well to begin with, would ride his lead horses until they dropped.  That's on Hendry.

by Jed Taylor on Mar 15, 2006 3:53 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

you make some good points
the bullpen has been rather weak and lacking any significant depth.

I will answer the correlation to the Sox staff from Roger's article, that not one pitcher on the Sox staff is a comparable pitcher to Wood or Prior.  The Sox pitchers are a sinker, splitter and change-up bunch whereas Wood and Prior and POWER pitchers.  Pitch counts with Sox type of  pitchers are generally lower.  A better comp for the Sox staff would be Maddux.  If Rogers wants to comp Prior and Wood, he ought to look at Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling.  Rogers drawing conclusions from different types of pitchers using 1 obscure and unsubstantiated metric is assinine.

As for the Jordan point, you are right.  I agree 100%.  The problem I was pointing out is the "X".  In baseball it's become convenient to say 100 pitches is the number.  It's so arbitrary and no basis in fact.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 4:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

pitch counts
You may be right that pitchers in the old days didn't throw 130-140 pitches per game very often (not that we see that too often today, either, for that matter). But over the course of a season, many pitchers in the old days (and by that I mean the 1960s and 1970s) tossed over 300 innings and started 40 or more games. Nowadays, 200 innings and 35 starts is considered a lot. So I'd imagine pitchers then threw more pitches cumulatively over the course of a season than pitchers do today.

Also in regard to your repeated claims that Prior and Wood came down hurt due to Baker's pushing them too hard in 2003 - why is it that Zambrano and Maddux can come back year after year without these type of injuries, when they've been "pushed" just as hard? Bill James wrote an interesting essay last year in which he concluded that based on all the data he's seen, there is no relationship between high pitch counts and pitcher injuries.

by danimal15 on Mar 16, 2006 12:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Exactly
thank you.  As i said, there is no correlation between the two.

by socalbob on Mar 16, 2006 12:19 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

the logic of pitch counts
isn't to restrict innings or pitches in a season -- indeed, studies have been done to show that the five-man rotation did nothing to improve pitcher health over the four-man. i don't think there's anything particularly threatening about making 39-40 starts.

it's to keep a pitcher from becoming fatigued in any one start -- because, the logic goes, fatigue leads to mechanical breakdowns, which lead to injuries.

why is it that Zambrano and Maddux can come back year after year without these type of injuries

maddux because he has never thrown many pitches. baseball's only been keeping "pitches thrown" since 1999, but maddux always throws under 14 an inning, sometimes fewer than 13, over a season. that's how to stay healthy. prior, on the other hand, averages 16.8 -- something like 25% more pitches per inning.

zambrano, for his part, has only been pitching the full slate in the majors for three years. he might be a livan hernandez -- a constructional freak with a rubber arm. but he probably isn't. if he keeps getting used the way he has been, i'd bet you it won't be long before "internet elbow" becomes surgery.

Bill James wrote an interesting essay last year in which he concluded that based on all the data he's seen, there is no relationship between high pitch counts and pitcher injuries.

i think he's wrong.

james' view is summed here as well as it can be.

but only one part of this counterargument seems at all relevant to me -- and that is the bit about pitches per game.

and, wadr to tangotiger, estimating pitch counts in games without actual counts is a hazardous affair. his theoretical model is forced to make assumptions that are not necessarily valid across all times, despite his claim.

moreover, i can look at retrosheet for time of game -- a stat with long records -- and see that the times of game have been rising steadily for a while now. that means more pitches are being thrown.

by gaius marius on Mar 16, 2006 12:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

quite the leap with absolutely no evidence
to presume that an increase in game length is the equivalent to increase in pitch counts.  game time, as i understand it, begins when the first pitch is thrown and ends with the final out.  the clock does not stop during breaks.  consider:
  1. inreased use of pitching changes
  2. increase in commercials
  3. increase in batters stepping out of the box between every pitch
  4. increase in pitchers walking around the mound in between pitches
  5. increase in cracked bats, necessitating a trip to the dugout and a stop at the circle for pine tar on the way back to the plate
  6. increase in offense, meaning more batters
and as for your dismissal of tangotiger's technique, surely you can try to come up with a more substantive critique than "his theoretical model is forced to make assumptions that are not necessarily valid across all times."  perhaps you can find a pattern of examples where his formula does not work.
All will be fixed in 2006

by DSZ on Mar 16, 2006 4:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

certainly
but it isn't as though no one took their time in baseball before.

and i'd note that #6 -- also a certifiable, measurable trend -- means more pitches thrown.

a more substantive critique

is something i can work on, but note that his approximator is purely empirical and drawn from modern-day data -- that is, he correlated.

there is no reason those correlatives must hold for all times, and he postulates none.

by gaius marius on Mar 16, 2006 6:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

so your assumption
is Maddux at 13/IP and Prior at 17/IP.  It's safe to assume they average 4 batters per inning, so we are talking about 1 more pitch per batter per inning.  And there is a 10 minute rest beween innings to recover from that strenuous 1 extra pitch per batter from the previous inning.  

And that's the reason for your belief in pitch counts?  That's borderline insignificant statisical analysis.  % doesn't mean squat from a small base.  You give me a penny and you get another penny in return is a nice 100% ROI, but it's still only 1 penny.

Again, that is why I say there is no correlation between # of pitches = arm injuries.  And there is no factual data that says I'm wrong either.

by socalbob on Mar 16, 2006 5:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

no it isn't
don't make the mistake, socal, of assuming small numbers are insignificant. i work in an industry where the difference between 3% and 6% is the difference between success and failure, so perhaps i'm a bit more attuned to it than most -- but saying that prior throws 25% more pitches per inning means that prior throws 250 of maddux's innings when he throws 200 in a year. it means his complete games are 11 of maddux's innings long. it's a major difference.

by gaius marius on Mar 16, 2006 6:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

uhhh what?
a pitch doesn't equal an inning and you can't extrapolate the numbers that way.  1 pitcher per batter or 4 in an inning is nothing when you get 10-15 minutes rest between the next set of 4 extra pitches.

If I agree with your facts (pitches per inning) it is statistically insignificant when you are talking about 1 pitcher per batter difference.  That is nothing.

by socalbob on Mar 16, 2006 7:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i really think
the cubs probably told prior not to do anything.

i just think calling prior lazy in so many words has almost no evidenciary merit. it takes a lot of effort to get to be a major-league pitcher.

it seems more likely to me that the cubs knew his shoulder was hurting last year, and hoped that six months of complete rest would heal it. it's a very common way to attack shoulder problems initially. clearly, if that's what happened, it didn't work.

by gaius marius on Mar 15, 2006 1:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Wow.
Just another day in paradise, huh, everybody?

by drone1047 on Mar 15, 2006 3:33 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Yup!
Life is just so wonderful.
Cubbie Blue always sPaRkLes in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Mar 15, 2006 4:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

An interesting side note...
...I heard today. The Cubs were only having prior throw off a mound in mesa while the rest of the team was on the road, making him unavailable to be evaluated by the media.

This has to raise the suspicion level. Did they not want the media to report on his lack of velocity? Control? Prior's discomfort?

cubsfan4life

by cubfan4life on Mar 15, 2006 7:20 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

this is common
practice in ST that if you are not pitching that day, you seldom accompany the team on roadies.  It's how a lot of pitchers get in rounds of golf during ST.

by socalbob on Mar 15, 2006 7:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

HEY AL,
Bonus points for the Herbert Hoover reference in the main post.

by FukudomeAtLarge on Mar 16, 2006 6:48 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Hey, thanks!
You guys sure were chatty yesterday! Didn't have a chance to get back to this thread after traveling all day.

by Al on Mar 16, 2006 10:26 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Stats analysis
Hey, random question. I know it's a lot of work but is there any time/chance you could do a stat analysis on the Cubs like the one on vivaelbirdos.com today?

by sdrone on Mar 16, 2006 9:10 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, that is a lot of work...
... and frankly, stat analysis isn't my cup of tea.

If there's anyone here who likes doing this sort of thing, I'd encourage you to do it and post a diary on it.

by Al on Mar 16, 2006 10:27 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Hey Al,
I see the Cubs won, but from the box scores it looks like Hill was pretty underwhelming. How was the game from your vantage?

by teacher tom on Mar 16, 2006 5:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bleed Cubbie Blue, the Chicago Cubs blog for the SB Nation, created on February 9, 2005 by Al Yellon
Start posting about the Cubs »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Sb_small
Ask BCB - Wacky Trade Proposals
Small
Reversal of opinion...Bradley will not be moved
Yelloncard_small
Baseball Picture Puzzles Overflow 1
Derrick_rose_poster_by_rokasm_small
You know you want him, Get it done Jim!
Yelloncard_small
Baseball Player Picture Puzzles

Recent FanPosts

Small
Time to get yelled at...
Cubs_small
Cubs HR Over/Under
Cubs_ying_yang_small
OT Aged Stadiums
Small
Here's a thought
Jake_fox_small
25th Annual Cubs Convention
Bucky_small
OT: Annual Thanksgiving  Thread
Dscn2381_small
Cubs 2010 2B and "the L word"
Cubswin712_small
Is there anyway we trade some of our high-priced players?
Yelloncard_small
Milton Bradley Named NL "LVP" By Joe Posnanski

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Would you blow up the farm system for Halladay?
FanGraphs calls Grabow a "waste of cash."
Fangraphs hasn't given up on Geo, should you?
Baseball America's Top 10 Cubs Prospects
An animated tribute to the no-hitter that Pirates pitcher Dock Ellis threw on June 12, 1970. Simply...

Recent FanShots

Mike Kiley insults Wrigley and Cubs fans
Muskat on Fuld : even DUMBER than usual
Free Agency Blunders
"I Want Mark DeRosa"
White Sox Sign Vizquel To One-Year Deal
Cubs' next major hire: marketing guru
Zambrano attends Bears game
Cubs install sign boards in bleachers to block Horseshoe Casino (Budweiser) building...
This one is for you sabermetricians
A Chicagoan, Part Of Cardinals Ownership Group, Dies

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

It Is Only...

Cubs By The Numbers

Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.

Click here to order your copy, available now!

SPONSORS

Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges

Yelloncard_small
Ticket Exchanges: Cubs Convention 2010
Yelloncard_small
Ticket Exchanges: General 2009 Ticket Exchange
Yelloncard_small
Ticket Exchanges: September 29-October 4 Homestand

Managing Editor

Yelloncard_small Al

Editorial Cartoonist

Toonmike_small toonmike

Contributors

Dsc_0139_small holy mackerel

100px-boisehawkscaplogo_small Josh77

Small shawndgoldman