Baker and the Kids in Cincinnati
I happened to come across this article today on Yahoo about Dusty Baker and the Cincinnati Reds.
I think it's kind of funny how some things change (Dusty from the Cubs to the Reds) and some things stay the same (Dusty preferring a known, Norris Hopper, over a rookie, Jay Bruce). Now, someone else with more time can probably list the reasons why this is crazy.
Then we have these two gems from the article.
"Who says they need to be eased in?" Baker said. "I wasn't eased in. Junior wasn't eased in. A whole bunch of guys weren't eased in. A lot of it has to do with need." "But what if you say, `Go play, kid,' and he's not ready to play winning baseball? Is it OK to overlook that? I don't know."So with all that what do you think the over/under is for Bruce, Votto, Cueto, and Bailey?
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 |
82 comments
Comments
Does he have to start
by Hammer on Feb 22, 2008 8:44 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
You know....
by madmf on Feb 22, 2008 9:04 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I still think that Baker was a terrible hire...
by mportsch on Feb 22, 2008 10:02 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think the key here
Jockety has been around the block and I am sure he understands Dusty's strengths and weaknesses. Jockety could be a positive influence here if he can get Dusty to listen.
by MPH73 on Feb 22, 2008 10:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
The key is...
Now, as a Cubs fan, I'd love to see the Reds sign Neifi Perez, Rey Ordonez, Enrique Wilson, Tony Womack, and other useless players. Depends on how much influence Baker has.
by Al on Feb 22, 2008 10:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I forget...
Regardless, I don't see him as someone sitting idly by and giving Baker his typical wish list.
by MPH73 on Feb 22, 2008 10:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wayne Krivsky is GM ....
by MDBNIU on Feb 22, 2008 10:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
For now.
by Al on Feb 22, 2008 10:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you're wrong...
Walt Jocketty was brought in as a placeholder and to serve as little more than a glorified scout. Jocketty was dumped by St. Louis too late in the offseason game to land a GM spot elsewhere. Krivsky is definitely the man in charge in Cincy.
by MDBNIU on Feb 22, 2008 1:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Classic...
Um...it sure seemed OK for you to overlook in 2006 Dusty.
by santoswoodenlegs on Feb 22, 2008 10:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Im just glad
by cubsmania on Feb 22, 2008 10:52 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Ya know...
by RynoHoF on Feb 22, 2008 11:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
But I'll say one thing. History has, for the most part, validated Dusty's assessment of "can't miss" Cub positional prospects.
by MDBNIU on Feb 22, 2008 10:54 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
This may be true
It's one thing for an outside person to not see a prospect as "can't miss". It's an entirely different thing for the manager to label a "can't miss" prospect as not ready and then stunt their growth by not playing them and letting them waste away on the bench.
by RynoHoF on Feb 22, 2008 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Puhlease
Using Norris Hopper as an example of how Baker doesn't like to play kids is a very poor example. Hooper has a grand total of 142 games of major league experience with a lifetime ave of .332. Can you blame Baker for not wanting to give him first shot?
by wicubfan on Feb 22, 2008 1:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Amen brother
Last time I checked, Jason Dubois and Corey Patterson weren't even employed.
by MDBNIU on Feb 22, 2008 2:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Another amen
Most Cubs prospects were questionable well before they even got the majors. Does anyone seriously think Jason Dubois was going to be star? Matt Murton? Well it appears that Piniella doesn't think much of him either. Corey Patterson? I think he got playing time. Ryan Theriot? Come on, how much better does anyone think he could be than what he is now?
Name one position player that Baker didn't play and potentially damaged. If someone wants to argue that he might damage Cueto or Bailey with overuse, I agree. I just don't see the argument that he will stunt Bruce's growth by playing Norris Hopper.
by rlpete on Feb 22, 2008 3:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+1 (from the Reds MLB page)
"I think the only thing I haven't had as a manager, so far as players are concerned, is a Rookie of the Year, because I haven't had any," Baker said. "They got traded and I got the credit for not playing them, which was bull. There were a lot of rookies we traded because of the need to win now. It seemed like the philosophy."
Again, just utter garbage spewed towards Dusty. He played vets because that's what he was given to work with. And he had ZERO talented young players during his previous stops. I'm very nervous with the Reds because when Bruce, Votto, Cueto, and Bailey begin to dominate, and they will, Dusty is gonna shove it right in our face and there is nothing we can do about it because he will play the "hot" players. And all 4 of those guys are top-flight players.
Don Baylor and Jim Hendry ruined Patterson. Patterson should have never been promoted from AA. Kerry Wood blew his arm out before Dusty. Steve Stone even admitted he felt Kerry would go down with injury because of his mechanics--all before Dusty ever came to Chicago.
People just need to realize that everything is not Dusty's fault.
by socalbob on Feb 22, 2008 4:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have to agree
by McRipper on Feb 22, 2008 4:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you'll hear
The only thing remotely worth discussing is how hard he rode Prior in Aug/Sept of 2005 when we were out of it, not 2003.
by socalbob on Feb 22, 2008 4:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So basically
by McRipper on Feb 22, 2008 4:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In a word....
by MPH73 on Feb 22, 2008 5:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No??
Baker greatly over worked and over used Wood and Prior's arms. You can argue that Baylor and the high school coach contributed to Wood's problems, but Prior is right at Baker's door. The relationship between high pitch counts/pitcher abuse points and arm trouble is well established - particularly with young players. While not abusing an arm does not necessarily mean no arm trouble and while abusing an arm does not necessarily mean arm trouble, the probabilities are certainly there.
The usual "defense" of the Baker sycophants is to cite to Nolan Ryan or some other "exception" to the rule. And that's about as valid as citing to the little old woman who is 103 and smokes 2 packs a day as proof that Cigarette Smoking is not dangerous.
Baker is a very dangerous man to have on your team. He will destroy your players. (And he's not "good" at a clubhouse either unless you believe that a team with a "paranoid us against the world" attitude subdivided into camps is more likely to win
by frustratedfan on Feb 22, 2008 10:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll just say this...
In saying this, I fully understand he has one of the best win/loss records of any manager over the last 12 years or so (you have to give him some credit for that). I don't like his managing because he is a poor in-game strategist and IMO, a poor evaluator of players capabilities.
What you can't ignore with him, is the fact that players love to play for him. With his record, that has clearly played a role in his team's successes. What a GM needs to do, is keep Dusty away from hand picking players and making these decisions for him.
To me, the whole abuse thing with Prior and Wood is completely over-blown, and I still say the bulk of the blame for the Cubs downfall after 03 should go to Hendry.
by MPH73 on Feb 22, 2008 5:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting
by McRipper on Feb 22, 2008 5:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
For what's it worth
As for Baker, number 1 I think he is a terrible in-game manager. Game 7 in 2003 was a prime example. He was outmanaged by McKeon. No way should he have given up the lead that easily with Wood. Where was Clement? McKeon went to Beckett, his best pitcher available. Baker should have used Clement to hold the lead. It was obvious Wood didn't have it.
That said, people here do like to pile on Baker with every possible flaw. I don't see the not playing rookies at least in Chicago.
by rlpete on Feb 22, 2008 5:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for your input
by McRipper on Feb 22, 2008 5:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree on the game seven
Stupid, stupid, stupid!!!!
by MPH73 on Feb 22, 2008 8:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Players love to play for him?
And the whole abuse issue, particularly with regard to Prior wasn't "overblown", it was understated. Baker took a pitcher that was on track for an inner circle Hall of Fame career and destroyed him. He took the Mona Lisa and put it out in the open sun and rain.
by frustratedfan on Feb 22, 2008 10:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
Regarding players liking to play for him; I have heard this directly from a former player that played for Dusty and several other managers. He said "Dusty creates a relaxed atmosphere where many players excel". Now, there is a downside to that if you have no "player leadership" on the club, but with his long run of winning seasons, it seemed to workout fairly well for him.
Lastly, it is the GM's responsibility to choose the players and also to determine if the manager they hired knows how to pick the right ones. If Hendry couldn't figure out this was not Dusty's strength, that's on him as GM.
by MPH73 on Feb 23, 2008 8:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Players Love to Play for Him?
Baker is one of the worst managers in the history of baseball (if not the worst manager to have ever been given more than a few seasons) and anyone who thinks that Baker is even competent should have their credentials to go to baseball games revoked.
Thank goodness he's with the Reds. They won't contend for at least two years after he's gone. (And let's see how long Griffey, Jr, who understands about winning baseball, puts up with Baker in the Clubhouse. My guess is that by the middle of the season he has given them a him or me ultimatum.)
by frustratedfan on Feb 23, 2008 10:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Can you explain
Don't tell me, he had a 12 year run of pure luck before he had two bad seasons, right? It had nothing to do with pitching injuries and a GM that failed at obtaining the right players.
Torre had a losing managerial record before he got to a team (Yankees) that spent whatever it took to get him the best. Did he all of a sudden become the best manager in baseball? I don't think so, and it is the same regarding Dusty not all of a sudden becoming one of the worst managers in baseball.
Again, would I hire Dusty? No I would not, but to say he is one of the worst with his LONG tenure of winning, is absolute ignorance in understanding the game.
by MPH73 on Feb 23, 2008 10:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
This is really the difference between people who superficially evaluate pitchers based, for example, solely on win loss records or managers on their winning record. In the case of Baker, I opened up my eyes, saw what he did with the players on the team and how they played.
Baker is bad in game day decisions.
Baker is bad at selecting talent, playing a veteran at every case over a rookie.
Baker is bad at pitching staff management, destroying great young pitcher arms with abuse.
Baker is bad with the media, creating an attitude of hostility.
Baker is bad in the clubhouse creating extreme clique-ness and allowing the "superstars" to run roughshod over the team.
The only thing that Baker appears to be "good at" is creating a pressure free atmosphere for the select players that he has chosen to favor.
He's a lousy manager. The worst manager in the history of baseball with more than 4 seasons of managing (Ted Williams only managed for three seasons.... thus the caveat)
by frustratedfan on Feb 23, 2008 1:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Strongly disagree
Sure, he had Bonds, but we have seen time and time again, you need a hell of a lot more than one great player to win anything in baseball.
I agree he is not a good in game manager and is not an objective evaluator of talent, but there ain't no way he won for as long as he did simply because he had the best players, because he didn't.
by MPH73 on Feb 23, 2008 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you are absolutely wrong
The thing you are completley unaware of is Dusty played the game at a high level just like these guys are doing. He knows their plight and can relate better than most. It has nothing to do with free agents flocking to a team. It's about the team you have liking to play for a guy.
Your statement is just wrong.
by socalbob on Feb 23, 2008 11:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Baker
by frustratedfan on Feb 23, 2008 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Beyond this...
by Al on Feb 23, 2008 1:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Baker the Player
by frustratedfan on Feb 23, 2008 1:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have to say this....
For example; if you look at the last five years Dusty was in Frisco, his teams finished in this order in regards to OBP compared to other NL teams:
2nd
3rd
1st
3rd
1st
Doesn't sound like his swing away mentality had much of a negative impact with those guys, did it?
Bottom line, the Cubs have been terrible in OBP more because of Hendry's philosophy as opposed to Baker. Remember, Hendry ran the farm from 95 to 02 and has been GM since that time. Baker made some bad strategic decisions as manager of the Cubs, but this blame for poor OBP and ruining Prior and Wood is really off the charts. Look at the guy who has been with the organization since 95, and you will have your answer for poor OBP an also lack of position player development.
by MPH73 on Feb 23, 2008 4:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Do this.
- Bonds led Giants with 198 BB. Next on the team is J. T. Snow, 59.
- Bonds led Giants with 177 BB. Next on the team is Jeff Kent, 65.
- Bonds led Giants with 109 BB. Kent had 90.
- Snow led with 86. Bonds had 73. Bonds also missed significant time on the DL that year.
- Bonds led Giants with 130 BB. Next on the team was Bill Mueller with 79.
By contrast, in 2006, when the hackalicious Cubs were at their worst, the leader in walks was Aramis Ramirez, who had 50. That was 12.7% of the team's horrid total of 395.
by Al on Feb 23, 2008 5:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Al....
Hitters are pretty much set in their ways in regards to their level of patience when they get to the show, and Lou made a point of this as well late last year when asked about the Cubs needing a more patient approach at the plate.
Whether your club is doing well in regards to OBP, is going to be a reflexion of the types of players you sign, draft and develop, not the manager.
by MPH73 on Feb 23, 2008 5:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Furthermore
by MPH73 on Feb 23, 2008 5:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
About Lee and Ramirez...
Ramirez' OBA's are good, but they've hardly "jumped" since he became a Cub. His Cub OBA's are pretty similar to the .350 he put up in his one good year in Pittsburgh (2001).
by Al on Feb 23, 2008 5:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The stats show me
Anyway, my point is this; Managers have little impact in regards to affecting their overall team OBP. This is driven by the types of players the GM signs, drafting philosophies, scouting and minor league player development.
by MPH73 on Feb 24, 2008 12:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps you should hear it from the man himself
"I'm big on driving in runs and scoring runs," Baker said. "Guys in the middle should score about close to equal to what they drive in. On-base percentage, that's fine and dandy. But a lot of times guys get so much into on-base percentage that they cease to swing. It's becoming a little bit out of control.
"What you do is run the pitcher's count up, that helps," Baker said. "You put him in the stretch, that helps. But your job in the middle is to either score them or drive them in. The name of the game is scoring runs. Sometimes, you get so caught up in on-base percentage that you're clogging up the bases." _
Source article is here.
by gary varsho on Feb 24, 2008 1:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's great
What Baker or anyone else says does not change my basic premise:
Mangers have little impact on the overall OBP of their club. Lou mentioned this repeatedly last year when the topic was brought up by the media. His reaction (and I paraphrase) was something like this; "if you want high obp guys, you sign them in the offseason, because you hitters are who they are for the most part".
In general, I just think the average fan is completely missing the boat by blaming the last few years on Baker. Hendry was the guy running the farm (since 95) and the GM since 02, and folks need to take a hard look at the clubs record of drafting, organizational development, philosophy of skill assessment etc., before they point the finger at a guy who won't be in a position to have much impact on changing a player's tendancies.
by MPH73 on Feb 24, 2008 2:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So, on your account,
by gary varsho on Feb 24, 2008 3:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That depends on the circumstances
On the other hand, you can't hold a manager responsible for a teams offensive performance if the GM has not given him a balanced offense.
Did people like Baker in 03? For the most part probabably yes. Did they like him in 04, 05 or 06? Probabably not. With that said, I ask a simple question, what was the biggest difference between the 03 club and the next three years?
Healthy starting pitching
Table setters at 1 and 2
Now, I realize there wasn't much anyone could do about the pitching injuries (for the most part), but what about the lack of table setters at the 1 and 2 holes? The 3,4 and 5 hitters for the Cubs were pretty strong during that stretch, but they didn't get enouph RBI opportunities because of what was happening at the top of the order, and it is the GM's responsibility to recognize such an obvious hole.
I don't buy the excuse that Hendry simply listened to Baker. If Hendry could not recognize such an obvious problem, and see Patterson, Niefi and the like were not the answer, he should have taken matters into his own hands as the person responsible for the roster.
by MPH73 on Feb 24, 2008 3:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Baseball players don't grow on trees
by gary varsho on Feb 24, 2008 4:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand
There is a reason the Cubs have produced next to nothing in regards to position players during Hendry's entire tenure of involvement (either running the minor leagues or as GM) and it amazes me that this 15+ year drought flys under the radar.
It is much easier to have some luck with pitching, because guys with great arms are much more likely to have success at the big league level. With hitters, it requires a mindset and evaluation capability that goes beyond putting check marks next to the five-tool category. Baseball has been loaded with athletes who can't hit major league pitching, but look great in their uniforms. The organizations who have had long term success, are the ones that do a good job at recognizing who will have success (as a hitter) at the major league level.
Hendry has spent a lot of money during his GM tenure. Some of that money has been wasted and some of it has been well spent, but you can't have sustained success without knowing how to produce some good major league position players.
by MPH73 on Feb 24, 2008 4:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
BTW, please excuse me
by gary varsho on Feb 24, 2008 3:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you...
- .335 (7th)
- .327 (14th)
- .335 (11th)
- .336 (6th, tie)
- .321 (14th, tie)
- .323 (13th)
- .328 (11th)
- .324 (11th)
- .319 (16th)
- .333 (10th)
And, the team OBA jumped in Lou's first year. Coincidence? I say no.
by Al on Feb 23, 2008 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Baker.....
And, oh yeah, I also blame him for Steve Stone leaving.
by deadcatbounce on Feb 23, 2008 8:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Steve Stone leaving.....
I do think you can make an argument that Dusty is partly responsible for global warming.
by MPH73 on Feb 23, 2008 8:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL......
I don't suppose you could shed some light on the Stoney issue??
by deadcatbounce on Feb 23, 2008 7:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, BeerCub.
by deadcatbounce on Feb 24, 2008 7:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Dusty, Dusty Baker
by wild bill on Feb 22, 2008 11:06 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I refuse to read Dusty stuff anymore....
by DudeVf11 on Feb 22, 2008 1:03 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
baker
by NOMAR on Feb 23, 2008 4:52 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Dusty
Now, I don't care for him as a manager also, his clubhouse is loose, for what I have read and heard, his decisions on the field are horrible, and IMO he fried Prior in the summer of 03.
I remember when the Marlins got back in the game in game 7 and he brought Dave Veres in, I sat at the TV in disbelief, just numb. Sort of like ( I am a Cleveland Browns fan) when Earnest Byner fumbled on the 3yard line in Denver in the AFC championship, couldn't move, stunded.
I just wished the Cubs had the young offensive talent the Reds have.
by Johnny Callison was a Cub on Feb 23, 2008 8:54 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Dusty
Now, I don't care for him as a manager also, his clubhouse is loose, for what I have read and heard, his decisions on the field are horrible, and IMO he fried Prior in the summer of 03.
I remember when the Marlins got back in the game in game 7 and he brought Dave Veres in, I sat at the TV in disbelief, just numb. Sort of like ( I am a Cleveland Browns fan) when Earnest Byner fumbled on the 3yard line in Denver in the AFC championship, couldn't move, stunded.
I just wished the Cubs had the young offensive talent the Reds have.
by Johnny Callison was a Cub on Feb 23, 2008 8:55 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Baker did not overuse Prior
http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/priorma01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/d/drysddo01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/j/jenkife01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/maricju01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/gibsobo01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/s/seaveto01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/blylebe01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/s/suttodo01.shtml
Just to name a few. Prior wasn't overused. He just didn't have what it takes.
by BeerCub on Feb 23, 2008 9:26 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
100% agree
by McRipper on Feb 23, 2008 9:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Citing Exceptions
For every Bob Gibson, there are many other pitchers that had greatly forshortened careers. Some we have heard of, some we have not, because their careers got cut so short that they never had the chance to show their stuff.
by frustratedfan on Feb 23, 2008 10:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
These aren't exceptions....
by BeerCub on Feb 23, 2008 10:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well said
by MPH73 on Feb 23, 2008 10:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Moreover
by BeerCub on Feb 23, 2008 10:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
the only issue
The rest of people complaining about 2003 would have done the same damn thing with Prior and Wood as the Cubs were trying to get to the World Series.
Nice post BeerCub.
by socalbob on Feb 23, 2008 11:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
post from "GuyinNY"
I thought this is solid research and should put to rest any of crap about Prior and 2003.
From Guyin NY:
Mark Prior, in his final starts of the season, WAS providing NECESSARY bullpen relief on September 1, 6, 11, 16, 21, 27. In other words, in EVERY September start which Mark Prior made, he was taking the mound with the knowledge that he had a depleted bullpen which had been heavily taxed the night before. Moreover, as an ace, Prior had to play the role of the stopper. He did this successfully, recording wins the day after a loss on the 1st, and more importantly, the 21st and the 27th. As you look deeper, it becomes very clear that Mark Prior was living up to his billing as an ace down the stretch of the 2003 season as the Cubs made their run.
Prior's 9/1 start sees him go deep in preparation of a double header the next day. His 9/6 start rested Borowski, Farnsworth and Alfonseca (used the day before) by allowing Baker to use "only" Veres and Remlinger. On 9/10, Matt Clement gave only 5 IP. The next day Mark Prior stepped in and took the ball for 5 2/3's gutty IP (yes, there's a diff. Prior had to have his PC run up so that he could give as much as possible to rest the pen, which was pretty battered.) On 9/16, after a solid Matt Clement start, Prior provides further rest for a tired pen (check the previous games until Z's SH on 9/14) by giving 8 2/3's strong innings. After Clement gets obliterated on the 20th, Prior steps in for a great start on the 21st and goes deep (7.2) to rest an obviously tired pen (Clement had only gone 3 the day before). On the 27th, after an off day and coming off another key loss (in which Z only went 5 and Baker had to use most of the pen), Mark Prior stepped in and LIKE AN ACE goes 6 2/3's dominating IP (10 K's) to right the ship (enough cliches for you? :) ).
The picture that's painted is a pretty simple one, and that is Mark Prior rising to the occasion and blossoming into an ace during the heat of a pennant race just as his club needed him most. Remember, Prior's contributions are two fold : the deeper he goes in every start, the better rested the pen is in case of a poor outing AND with every strong start, Baker has reason to leave the best pitcher in the NL in to solidify a win. Lesson? It's hard to pull the best pitcher in the league when he's on fire and the title starved team's in the thick of a pennant race.
I hope this is enough for you, as you can see that Prior was doing his job and his performances were necessary in context. Please remember one other thing that is sorely forgotten on a prospect site such as this. Young pitchers are groomed in the hope that maybe, someday, they will be able to do what Mark Prior did for the 2003 Chicago Cubs. He pushed them into the playoffs, and if it hadn't been for Steve Bartman, he likely would have pushed them into the World Series. He was billed as an ace, and he lived up to that billing.
by socalbob on Feb 23, 2008 11:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
please note
by socalbob on Feb 23, 2008 11:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
The point about Bartman....you make the point about how Prior was big down the stretch and getting really really strong. If Alou makes that catch Prior wins and probably goes on to win 1 or 2 in the WS because I dont think the Cubs would lose the WS if they got in (Tear) My point--if not for Bartman (or other nearby fans) we would all have blind love for Mark Prior and Dusty Baker---as it stands today most of us have them on our most hated list.
by Hammer on Feb 24, 2008 2:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Plus....
And please, like others, I'm no Baker fan. The echoes of my screaming can still be heard over Games 6 and 7 and his bad decisions. But no way is he responsible for Prior and Wood's declines. Only nature.
by BeerCub on Feb 23, 2008 10:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It may not prove it
by rlpete on Feb 23, 2008 11:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This just in
by rlpete on Feb 23, 2008 9:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

by 



















