Sun Times article spot on......

by Peoria Matt on Sep 12, 2007 6:07 AM CDT Comment 61 comments

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/552786,CST-SPT-cub12.article

"In fact, for the same reasons, this Cubs season should never have gotten to this point -- trailing Milwaukee by a game in the National League Central with 18 to play and defying logic with a once-heralded, veteran lineup that falls so short so often it's doubtful it can rise in time to be a force in this division race."

Pretty good summary. This team is not going to hit some magic switch and start dominating good teams.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 61 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

True

What can you say? This team has struggled for the most part of the year with hitting in critical spots
Soriano doesn't take pitches, Theriot is in a rut, Floyd hasn't produced, and Jones (who has hit for average the second half,) just had a horrible AB last night in the 11th, 2-0 count, Lidge on fumes and trys to rip the ball on I thought was a ball up in the strike zone.
Can not get a read on this team, and with 18 games to go, you can see this team go 9-9.

by Johnny Callison was a Cub on Sep 12, 2007 7:20 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Way off

You're way off here. Jones had a fine AB. He hit the ball hard on a fastball that was up in the zone but a strike. He just hit it right at the CF. Nothing more. You can't rip Jones for that AB. In fact, you shouldn't even be thinking that.

Eighty-five percent of the f*ckin' world is working. The other fifteen percent come out here. -- Lee Constantine Elia, 1983.

by krummy12 on Sep 12, 2007 7:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another "hacker".

That was a horrible at bat. The pitcher had given up three walks already. Sound baseball sense says you take a strike before you swing in that situation. A hitter shouldn't be hacking when the pitcher is wild and on fumes.

by Fraggin Judge on Sep 12, 2007 8:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"baseball sense"

In a 2-0 count, you almost always look for a specific pitch in a specific location. Most of the time you are looking for a fastball in your "zone."

And that is what Jock got.

And Jock swung, hit the ball pretty well, but essentially right at a guy who caught it.

That is baseball. You cannot fault Jock for swinging at that pitch. It was a great pitch to swing at, and he got unlucky by hitting it right at someone.

visit the mindful mission.

by big_lowitzki on Sep 12, 2007 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree.

I follow your reasoning. I know that that was Jones' approach but you have to factor in how the pitcher is doing that inning. He was wild and tired. You had to make Lidge pitch himself out of that ballgame. I'm sure Jones knows how to hit with 1 strike. That's a situation where it's OK not to swing at a great pitch.

Anyway, that is not the play that beat us, and I've discussed it enough already. Al mentioned several crucial mistakes during the game that contributed more to the loss.

by Fraggin Judge on Sep 12, 2007 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Same here

if it were the fifth inning or earlier or even a little later in fact, fine but extras, 2-0 with a laboring pitcher and bases full...I would have been okay with him taking it. Especially with how the Cubs had been hitting. I for one was holding out for a walk, not a bases clearing double. JJ did not lose this game but i would have expected him to be taking all the way.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was amazed

to see Jones swing at that pitch. Lidge was clearly running on fumes and he had lost a lot of MPH off his fastball. Clearly, the prudent thing was to make him throw a strike.

Yet, as I was watching the game, I knew Jones would be swinging. It's what the Cubs do. We just aren't very prudent.

Right now every pitch and every play must be the most important of your career. Act like it or sit down.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2007 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I do think

he needed to take that pitch though. He was one of the best hitters last night but Lidge was struggling. The loss falls on all others though IMO.

We are watching little league people...plain and simple.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 8:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

It's worse.

In Little League they teach them to wait a strike in that ssituation. You only do the opposite in Dusty's Hacking League.

by Fraggin Judge on Sep 12, 2007 8:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually

You only do that in Little League. If Jones is incapable of putting the ball in play on a 2-0 cockshot with the bases loaded, then the problem is larger than what happened last night. Yes, Jones is a hacker. But what he did last night was not wrong. He hit the ball hard on a 2-0 count knowing a fastball was coming. Since the pitch was a strike, albeit a high one, had he taken it, it probably would have been the best pitch he had seen all AB. A slider was coming next and then Jones would have to deal with guessing on 2-2. Then you would have complained that Jones didn't get a good pitch to hit. Leave Jones alone here, he did what major league hitters are supposed to do. Just as Scott did in the exact situation in the bottom of the inning. Let it rest.

Eighty-five percent of the f*ckin' world is working. The other fifteen percent come out here. -- Lee Constantine Elia, 1983.

by krummy12 on Sep 12, 2007 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No one is bashing the guy

in fact, most of us have said he is in no way the reason the game was lost. What I was saying is that that was one rare time that I am all for him taking a strike. Sure, a slider may have been next but with a tired pitcher, that slider may have ended up at the backstop, job done, run scores. Maybe the slider is off the plate and Jones lays off and we are 3-1. Either way, IMO, he ought to have let that pitch go, even though it was a strike.

Yes hindsight is 20-20 but I for one, said to myself out loud, please take whatever comes your way now. He hit it well and normally there is nothing wrong with swinging away but I would have preferred him run it to even 3-2 and then all that pressure on Lidge, combined with a tired arm/psyche may do us a big favor.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wrong approach

Waiting for a free pass is a softball or little league approach. That is what most of us here have actually played, so we may have learned that lesson. But that is where the picthers have a much lower chance at throwing a strike, and the batters are much weaker hitters.

This is the major leagues. Waiting for a pitcher to make a mistake is not just waiting for 4 balls. It is also creaming the mistake pitch that catches too much of the plate. That is what Jones did, and it just didn't fall in for a hit.

We took an amazing 250 pitches last night, and had a ridiculous 10 walks, and only scored 4 runs in extras. The problem with the O last night was not a lack of taking pitches.

Meanwhile, you do not tire out a relief pitcher in one inning no matter how many pitches you let him throw. Its one inning. He can throw 30 pitches, and be fine.

There are certainly times to take borderline pitches, but there is very few times to be taking meaty ones.

by californiachicagoan on Sep 12, 2007 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

on several things.

First, normally you may be correct on taking pitches however, on a night when the O wasn't able to knock in anything, changing the pace of things could help. The same way that Len and Bob were talking about rather than bunting with Lee at bat in the 9th or 10th to hit and run in order to change things up, I would advocate that taking a pitch may have been a good idea.

Secondly, you very much CAN tire out a relief pitcher with a combination of pitches thrown, and psycholgical pressure. Lidge was on the ledge so to speak, and we pulled him back in. He had SO much pressure on him and to make him work a couple more pitches (and still possibly get the same result) would not have been the worst thing.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's called situational hitting

First, it was Lidge's 2nd inning of relief and he had thrown 45 pitches, which was the most for him all year. He was wild. It was extra innings and 1 run was huge.

Even taking a strike puts the count at 2-1 which is still big advantage hitter. And finally, even hitting the ball hard doesn't guarantee success. The hitter is still going to make an out 70% of the time.

If there was ever a time for patience, that was the time.

Right now every pitch and every play must be the most important of your career. Act like it or sit down.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2007 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually 62%

His career average on a 2-0 count is .380. My guess is it's even higher on a 2-0 count with the bases loaded, although I don't know how to find that statistic. The only count that Jones has a higher average is on the first pitch, believe it or not. According to the stats, a 2-0 count seems to be his best chance to get a hit. I guess he could've just kept taking pitches hoping to get walked. I don't believe that strategy "guarantees success" either, which seems to be the standard you've set.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

But

I can't imagine Jones goes up there thinking "Okay, I better seing now cause my career avg with 2-0 count is .380". The thought process ought to have been, "wow, Lidge looks like he is struggling, I think I'll make him throw a strike. If he does, then I will be looking for a pitch to hit".

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That was

swing, not seing.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

My guess

is he's very aware that a 2-0 count is a pretty good count for him to get a hit. He might even be aware that it's his best count. My guess is he's also very aware that he's not very good hitting deep into the count. My guess is on the 2-0 count he was looking for a fastball out over the plate because he probably (rightly) thought that he wouldn't see a pitch like that again.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Overthinking

IMO if that is everything he is thinking about. Like i said, normally, a 2-0 count is a swinging count but last night I think we needed another take.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

One more thing

Jones was probably also very aware that he had 6 hits in his previous 9 AB's and he was seeing the ball pretty good.

Just because someone's aware of the situation doesn't mean they're overthinking.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're right.

Of course Jones has more success swinging at the first pitch. That's all he does. He hardly runs the count.

As you say it was a situation where good hitting tells you to hold until you get a strike. Statistics about past performances in that count are irrelevant. After all, a tired Lidge wasn't pitiching to Jones in all of those prior at bats.

But again, statistics are like lamp posts. Most people use them to enlighten their lives; others just use the lamp post to hold on to it in order to break a fall.

by Fraggin Judge on Sep 12, 2007 4:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some

might argue that Jones facing a tired Lidge in a 2-0 count makes it even more likely that he'll get a hit. I don't see why statistics suddenly become irrelevant because Lidge is tired. Lamp posts? Whaha?? Your logic escapes me.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Obviously

most all logic escapes you. The statistics prove that it was a terrible idea to swing at that pitch. Your refusal to acknowledge the facts doesn't negate their validity.

Right now every pitch and every play must be the most important of your career. Act like it or sit down.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2007 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think

you understand what you're talking about. See below, moron.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're right for once

I looked below the word moron and saw your name.

Right now every pitch and every play must be the most important of your career. Act like it or sit down.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2007 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Clever

Seriously, and I'm not trying to provoke you here, but why are you such a jackass all the time? I'm hesitant to even respond to your posts most of the time because I'd rather not deal with your meanness. Why is it necessary for you to throw out insults all the time?

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Set the record straight

My initial post was not even in response to you. You're the one that threw down the gauntlet.

Since then you've called me a number of names. I haven't lowered myself to your level. I've stated facts and you're calling me a jackass? Grow up. I didn't seek you out. Man up and move on. Personally, I could care less what you believe Jones should have done.

I believe it was a mistake and presented facts to document my belief. I was at the game and Lidge was toast. We let him off the hook. Personal observation and statistical data and the situation lead me to believe it was a terrible decision. That's all I have to say about it.

Right now every pitch and every play must be the most important of your career. Act like it or sit down.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2007 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Are you for real?

Man up? Throw down the gauntlet? Seriously, what is wrong with you?

Look at the tone, attitude, and the many not-so-subtle insults laced throughout your posts in response to mine and it's not hard to understand why I resorted to namecalling. My original post in response to yours wasn't insulting at all. I simply raised objections to your viewpoint. You obviously can't handle that without resorting to saying things like: "It doesn't take a genius..." or "Of course, since you want to believe what you think, the facts don't interfere with your ideas."

What a bunch of bullshit.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 6:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Um, that was a strike

He did wait for a strike. And he nailed it. and it was caught. Happens.

by californiachicagoan on Sep 12, 2007 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wrong again

This year Jones is hitting .286 when he puts the ball in play on a 2-0 count. Of course that eliminates the possibility of drawing a walk. So, what is his OBP after the 2-0? That's .485. Now that figures in the BB that he has been drawing when he's patient.

You want to look at career numbers even though I think the 2007 stats are more indicative of what to expect. After the 2-0 count he's had a .340 BA and a .497 OBP.

It doesn't take a genius to see that swinging at that pitch was almost criminal. Of course, since you want to believe what you think, the facts don't interfere with your ideas.

Finally, I never said that taking the pitch guarantees success. I said it was a bad idea and lowered the probability of success for Jones to swing at the 2-0 in the situation that existed last night.

Right now every pitch and every play must be the most important of your career. Act like it or sit down.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2007 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wrong again?

Why so dramatic? Settle down and lose the bravado. What's wrong with you anyway? Why do you have to be such an ass?

I look at career numbers because in 2007 he's only had 21 plate appearances in which he's had a 2-0 count. That's too small of a sample size to be very useful.

Also, it's not fair to look at his OBP after the 2-0 count since that pitch was most definitely a strike if he took it. So you need to look at it after a 2-1 count. His career number after a 2-1 count is .352, which is LOWER than his career number hitting on a 2-0 count (.280). Thus, his probability of success was HIGHER by swinging at that 2-0 pitch, rather than taking it and letting the count go to 2-1.

So it doesn't take a genius to figure out that it's far from clear that "swinging at that pitch was almost criminal." And here, let me throw your bravado back at ya: "Of course, since you want to believe what you think, the facts don't interfere with your ideas."

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Change .280 to .380

n/t

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let's see

if you can follow. And I'll even use the career numbers you want to use rather than Jones current year stats,
Count 2-0. If a ball is put in play, it's an out 62%.
Count 2-1. If a ball is put in play, it's an out 65%.
So by taking the pitch no matter what, he has effectively lowered his chance of success by a whopping 3%

In the meantime you have eliminated any possibility of taking a base on ball which will drive in a run in extra innings. After a 2-0 count JJ OBP is .497 which means he has walked many times when being patient. And that doesn't even factor in a tiring pitcher who has already thrown more pitches than he has all season and walked 3 other hitters.

Do the math. Take a pitch and lower your success rate by 3% if it's a strike. However adding in the walks improves the success rate to 50% if he takes the pitch. That's an 12% improvement over going after the pitch.

It's that simple.

And you might try dropping the name calling.

Right now every pitch and every play must be the most important of your career. Act like it or sit down.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2007 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

2-1

"After a 2-0 count JJ OBP is .497 "

But the pitch was a strike, which is why he swang at it. The useful number is his OBP after a 2-1 count. "After a 2-0 count" includes all the hits he got swinging at 2-0 strikes like he tried last night.

by californiachicagoan on Sep 12, 2007 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

n/t

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 6:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ha, ha, ha...

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Your 3% number assumes he puts a ball in play on BOTH the 2-0 count and the 2-1 count. Thus, in BOTH scenarios he's eliminated his chances for a walk. Thus, it makes no sense to say he's lowered his probability of success by only 3% and then turn around and talk about the possibility of walking. And then it looks like you pulled those 50% and 12% numbers out of your ass. And even if it is only 12% (which it's not), does that warrant all your bravado?

Here are the facts so let's see if YOU can follow: Based on his career numbers by putting the ball in play on the 2-0 count he had a 38% chance of success. By taking the strike (and there's no doubt that pitch was a strike) and letting the count go to 2-1 he had a 37.5% chance of success. Also, a tiring pitcher is probably a non-issue since it probably increases both the probability that he's gonna get a hit on the 2-0 count and the probability that he's gonna get on base after 2-1. Maybe it increases the latter more than the former, but probably not by much. And certainly not by enough for someone to say swinging at the 2-0 pitch was "almost criminal."

Have a pleasant evening.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Because it doesn't make sense to you

is irrelevant to making sense.

Now you're supplanting you "logic" with such wonderful and factual data such as "a tiring pitcher is probably a non-issue" since it "probably increases the probability etc".

Still more "maybe it increases etc". Hell, who can argue with those irrefutable facts.

You might also note that JJ has been to bat 114 times with the bases loaded. One lousy walk. How Dustyesque.

Right now every pitch and every play must be the most important of your career. Act like it or sit down.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2007 6:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nobody's claiming

anything's irrefutable except you.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh and

"Because it doesn't make sense to you is irrelevant to making sense" is non-responsive to anything and a pointless insult. Kind of makes your claims of "not lowering yourself to my level" pretty laughable.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm sorry man

but why is it that you NEVER have a discussion with anybody without you resorting to the whining and complaining that people "follow you around and call you names, and insult you"?

Seriously.

There has to be something about you and your ways that antagonize people don't you think?

I try hard to stay out of this and you and I had a relatively decent discussion about JJ swinging away last night. I still believe you take that pitch regardless of whatever stats you present. I have to say, the only blatent name calling has come from you with such comments as "moron", "jackass", "ass", etc.

If you want people to understand your plights, don't be such a hypocite. I know this will make you mad but I truly appreciated the conversation we had earlier, then I read your comments above and I felt annoyed again. I know you don;t care and that is fine but I seriously urge you to think about how you engage people here. I have done so myself (with the urging of Al at times) when I found that I argued with a lot of people. Of course I still do but I understand my role a little better...you may want to as well.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 10:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

hypocite=hypocrite

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 10:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

I've noticed your improvement. You haven't called been calling people names in a while. Good job!

As for me, you just stick to worrying about yourself and your behavior.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 10:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well thanks for the props

It is simply a suggestion that might help your stress levels and improve your peaceful existence here. But I will leave your behavior to you.

Still think you are wrong about JJ man...you just gotta make the pitcher work harder under those circumstances...you just gotta. I don't disagree that it was a fat pitch but JJ actually hit some pretty tough ones all night (like the one he absolutely golfed into RF off the ground practically!)

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I take your point

about stress levels, but there are really only 2 or 3 posters around here that I really have problems with. I generally try to just avoid them, but sometimes I end up in a disagreement that inevitably gets ugly.

And I still disagree about JJ. Keep in mind that he was something like 6 for his previous 9 going into that AB. And I think he got a hit in his first AB tonight. He's seeing the ball pretty well right now. DLee's AB earlier in that game was much worse because he swung at a bad pitch on 2-0 with the bases loaded and Backe struggling with his command. He popped out weakly to right. At least JJ picked out a good pitch and hit the ball hard. Can't ask for much more than that out of an AB.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well I was sking for more...

take one more JJ, take one more! It's over though, no sense rehashing. Plus, I think he is one of the truly guilt free guys from last night.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know...

sking=asking

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I can't believe I spent so much time analyzing one stupid AB today....almost funny.

by cubsbak on Sep 12, 2007 10:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree and this is why

Jones is an aggressive hitter and not one to be real patient in his AB's. His career success rate at 2-0 is .380 (not bad), but he is also a guy who starts to fish for bad pitches later in the count. To me, his best chance of success (after a 2-0 count) is to swing at the next best pitch to hit, and that is exactly what he did and he hit the ball hard.

If there was a different type of hitter up (DeRosa, Kendall, type hitter) I would have given them the take sign, because they usually don't get over anxious deeper in the count (like Jones).

Piniella said the other day the Cubs have aggressive hitters and you can't change how they approach AB's (much). He is correct. Hitting has to be instinct, because you have very little time to think about what you are going to do. If you are aggressive you go with it, if you have the ability to be patient, you use that to the best of your ability. When you try to change a guys approach (that comes natural for them) you really mess with their head and productivity falls of the ledge.

As Piniella also stated; if you want patient hitters, you sign patient hitters in the offseason. Hendry has always leaned towards the "grip it and rip it" approach and the bulk of the lineup is that way. This is another reason I don't care for Soriano in the leadoff spot. Besides wasting 30+ homer power, you have a guy hacking away and not making the pitcher work, which I think is helpful in that role.

Anyway, Jones did what he does when he is successful, he saw a good pitch and he hacked at it.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Sep 13, 2007 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess

I was feeling generous this morning.

MMMMM...Mannys corned beef and a latke

by Kinky Reggae on Sep 12, 2007 8:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Did you just start following the Cubs?

"This team is not going to hit some magic switch and start dominating."

Yeah, not like they could be the best team in baseball for weeks at a time. How likely is that? ...

... Oh wait.

by californiachicagoan on Sep 12, 2007 12:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

No I've been watching them for about 30 years....

And you might want to check the records of the teams they beat during "the best team in baseball for weeks at a time" claim.

And while you're learning something there, check the last time they won a series from a team with a winning record.

Because the sign of a truly great team is the ability to dominate weaker opponents and play badly against good ones.

Oh wait.....

by Peoria Matt on Sep 12, 2007 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Style points don't count

They still have the best record in the National League since June 1 (I think), according to Al's game thread.

How can that be?

by Not Bruce Froemming on Sep 12, 2007 4:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Check the record yourself

51-30 since June 2nd, including all of this .500 ball they have been playing lately. Best team in the NL over that stretch.

We are talking 81 games, or half a season. They only played bad teams for half a season? No wonder they had such a tough time in the first half then!

But you are right, how can they possibly get that hot again? All is lost.

by californiachicagoan on Sep 12, 2007 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't confuse people

with the facts. Thoughts and feelings are much more accurate and important.

by Not Bruce Froemming on Sep 12, 2007 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow, what a great record that is.....

sadly the games played before that magical date also count, which is why the Cubs are clawing to get into the playoffs in the worst division in baseball.

After that World Series trophy is paraded through the streets is when I guess I'll realize how stupid it was to think this team wasn't going to win it all.

by Peoria Matt on Sep 12, 2007 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The last time...

... the Cubs won a series from a team with a winning record was all of two weeks ago, when they took 2 of 3 from the Brewers.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Sep 12, 2007 8:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The fact is that the Cubs have been the...

better team in the NL since June 2nd. However, that doesn't mean they will remain being so by September 30th. This latter statement isn't fact but a possibility. It's up to the team to perform as they did before, the past week and a half notwithstanding. I don't see a reason why they cannot do it if they want to. It's up to the Cubs players. NBF and Al are positive about the team's chances. Let's all hope they're right.

by Fraggin Judge on Sep 12, 2007 10:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Maybe this will help my original post......

Here are the teams with winning records the Cubs have played this year and the Cubs record against these teams:

Brewers 9-6
Braves 4-5
DBacks 2-4
Dodgers 2-5
Mets 2-5
Padres 3-5
Phils 3-4
Seattle 2-1
-----
27-35

But as we know, this is meaningless because the Cubs have the best record in baseball since June 2nd. Too bad those pesky good teams have to be on the schedule.

I don't want "to confuse people with facts" though.

I will edit my original posting to what I should have typed.

by Peoria Matt on Sep 12, 2007 11:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Good point.

If the Cubs can step up their play against this kind of teams they will go to the postseason. If they can't they will probably watch it on TV along with everyone else. Nothing says they can't improve.

by Fraggin Judge on Sep 12, 2007 11:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs