Something to Smile About
Last night’s marathon contest against the Houston Astros was a welcome and unexpected gift of a game even if Dusty’s use of the bullpen at times left me scratching my head.
But I wasn’t sure I’d see a 2006 game that brought this much pleasure even if I wasn’t awake to see the final triumphant moment. Like I did countless times as a child, I turned off the lights last night and turned on the radio only to fall asleep as the battle raged toward double-header length.
Some of the main reasons we still watch Cubs games to the extent that we do certainly paid off during last night’s 18 innings, the longest regular-season game played in Houston’s miniature golf course of a ball park and the longest game ever managed by Dusty Baker. Here’s a partial list of the pleasures I tallied during this one long night of ball.
*) Jacque Jones’ mammoth shot to straight away center field after he had been purposefully plunked by Roger Clemens only a couple of at-bats ago. Clemens is maybe the greatest player I dislike the most. It was a glorious payback.
*) Young Juan Mateo’s payback purpose pitch to Clemens, hitting him on the shoulder. Clemens never got the chance to retaliate as he obviously had planned for Baker put in a pinch hitter for his next at bat.
*) Clemens’ dugout tirade. It was a lovely sight to see that the Rocket’s intimidation tactics did not work last night and that he got a good dose of his own medicine. He’s still the same nasty b****** he’s always been, but he’s no longer quite as good and he now comes to bat in the NL. Let’s hope for more nights like last night in the brief remainder of his career.
*) Jaun Mateo pitched a second consecutive solid game and threw many first-pitch strikes to set up his success. In five innings, he walked only one, and his one hit batter was...well...a brief bout of wildness I can live with.
*) Other young Cub arms we’re watching carefully fared pretty well last night; Good outings were turned in by David Aardsma, Angel Guzman and Rich Hill. And Roberto Novoa gave himself a birthday present by getting out of a potential game-ending jam. (Michael Wuertz and Will Ohman have had better nights, however).
*) Matt Murton clubbed a key home run to tie the game and then had a key hit to win the game. It may not have been Ryne Sandberg on June 23, 1984, but it was sure fun to see him continue to hit well and at such a crucial time.
*) Ronny Cedeno hit for power with an unexpected early home run although it was his only hit of the night.
*) And you know I have to throw in Cesar Izturis’s four hits including driving in the first run of the game.
Last night doesn’t make up for a season of futility, but it was sure nice to see such a game long after wins and losses have ceased to mean much in the standings. Many of the young players we’re all carefully looking at right now came through swell last night. And any game that leaves Roger Clemens having a tantrum in the opposing dugout is smile-inducing at any time of the year if you ask me.
Mike Isaacs
Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:55 AM |
31 comment(s)
Related News:
Chi Cubs
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
And Murton is heating up just in time to salvage the rest of this season...
Guzman looked as good as we've seen him this season. I think he is ready for major league hitters, as his WHIPs in the minors have always been solid (his ERAs seem to always run a little high compared to his WHIPs). He might be more of an "Earl Weaver" project, in that a half season in the bullpen might give him the confidence he needs to start effectively. Just tell him to go out and use his best stuff (but with the caveat to throw strikes) for 2-3 innings at a time. As we all know, an average starter is usually a good reliever and, if a player is young, being a good reliever might be the right stepping stone to being a good starter (ok, now I'm starting to sound like Donald Rumsfeld).
Anyways, I wonder who will start today? I give Rich Hill credit for saying he's ready to go, but somehow I doubt his wishes will come true ;D
I don't like Clute casually referring to Baker as a racist so let's back up any statements with evidence or refrain from ad hominem attacks.
I've been waiting for a game like last night's for a while -- mainly because Dusty (like most other managers) manages a game under the assumption that it'll only be 9 innings, so he has no problem with burning 5-6 guys over that stretch. The problem is when you have a game like last night's, it comes back to bite you in the butt when you reach the 14th inning and you are starting to look toward your starters.
The only reason I'm not surprised that it doesn't happen more often is the fact that there aren't that many games that go more than, say, 11 innings.
Guzman looked as good as we've seen him this season. I think he is ready for major league hitters, as his WHIPs in the minors have always been solid (his ERAs seem to always run a little high compared to his WHIPs).
Apparently not -- he's being held out his next start because his mechanics are "way out of whack." Numbers can be deceiving, of course.
I thought the same thing, Luke. I thought it was a reasonable time to let him throw one more inning even though he had seldom thrown that many pitches before. His pitch count was not that high relatively speaking, and he still seemed to have solid command.
I'm not sure Baker removed him because of his pitch count although I agree you can make a case for doing so. I wonder though if Mateo would have been pulled had he not hit Clemens.Is it possible that Baker removed him mostly because he didn't want to see Clemens retaliate when Mateo came to bat?
I dunno the answer, but I still would have kept him in and let him hit. If he showed the guts to plunk Clemens, he also had the guts to face him in the batter box. I thought it was a pretty good time for Mateo to extend himself by an inning or so not to mention avoiding more wear and tear on the bullpen.
Ryan O'Malley gets the nod.
I don't think that's evidence he's not ready for ML hitters. During yesterday's broadcast, Len and Bob said that the Cubs were going to skip Guzman's start and that he would be available in relief today. So whatever his mechanical issues are, they weren't enough to stop Guzman from pitching. I bet he would have taken his normal start if the schedule hadn't lined up to allow the Cubs to skip him.
If so, when was the last time that happened?
Not only that but Eyre one day later is on the DL.
Yes.
It looks like 25 names on the boxscore, but I can hardly identify who the Cubs starters are anymore.
The five Cubs' starters are:
Mateo - he started
Guzman - pitched 3 shutout innings in relief
Hill - pitched 2 shutout innings in relief and got the win
Zambrano - he pinch-hit
Marmol - he pinch-hit
If so, when was the last time that happened?
I think Len said it happened in April, 1986.
I don't believe anyone ever said he wasn't "ready for ML hitters." Still, being capable of facing MLB hitters doesn't necessarily mean one *should* be in MLB, especially when the team is already stretched thin by giving starts to so many other rookies.
This was the point I was trying to make yesterday. Larry Rothschild only has so much time in the day for instruction and I don't seem to recall any of us leading the "Free Angel Guzman!" parade last month. Did I miss something?
As for his mechanical issues, it's quite possible that Dusty/Rothschild noticed them in last night's game, or perhaps they noticed them earlier but were forced to take their chances and put Guzman in the game out of necessity.
Ryan O'Malley is proving this point quite well today.
There's a big difference between pulling a pitcher who's cruising at 70 pitches and not pulling a pitcher who's struggling at 100+ pitches. In order to be a longterm option as a starter, Mateo is going to have to pitch past the 5th or 6th inning. Also, as hard as the bullpen has been ridden recently, getting a sixth innning out of Mateo could have eased the pressure a little bit. To allow Mateo to pitch the 6th inning against the Astros would not have been like Dusty's past decisions to leave Prior in to pitch when he'd thrown over 100 pitches and the Cubs had a comfortable lead.
Personally, I'm not particularly upset by the decision to pull Mateo. He's basically been a five inning starter in AA and I'm happy that the Cubs are bringing him along slow. It also allowed him to leave on a high note.
I don't think playing too many rookies is a criticism of Dusty. It's a criticism of Cubs' management for getting rid of MAddux and for failing to have an innings sponge starter. Not having a starter to soak up innings has lead to a lot of short starts, possibly putting more pressure on Zambrano to pitch deeper into games.
Those things don't bother me because 1) I think the only way to redeem the season is to sort out the young'uns, wins and losses be damned; 2) I don't think the Cubs should worry about riding generic relievers on one year contracts like Aardsma, Ohman, Novoa and Wuertz for a couple weeks until rosters expand; and 3) Hill, Ryu, Guzman and Mateo have all earned tryouts due to their minor league performance.
I'm not complaining that Dusty is playing too many rookies. I'm not even complaining about Dusty -- to the extent I'm commenting about anyone, it's Hendry (as TRHN observes).
All I was trying to do was (a) wonder if the Maddux deal might be creating some unnecessary problems; and (b) express caution about the use of these kids down the stretch.
I agree with you in principle, but Maddux is hardly an innings eater anymore. Unless you meant your two points to be unrelated, then please ignore everything after "with you."
Except for Zambrano, Maddux was reliably eating more innings than any of the other Cubs starters. I realize he wouldn't be an innings sponge on almost any other team, but when four of the five starters have trouble getting out of the 4th inning, having a so-called "six inning pitcher" can be a blessing.
When are we going to see Donald Veal?
The "six inning pitcher" label isn't much of a condemnation. He's on pace for 205 IP. He may rarely go more than 7, but he rarely goes fewer than 6 as well, and he never misses starts. It takes a fairly extreme definition of "inning eater" for it not to include Maddux.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main