Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Gonfalon Cubs > Discussion
Gonfalon Cubs
— Cubs Baseball for Thinking Fans

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.

   1. CrazyAboutLou Posted: August 16, 2006 at 01:02 PM (#2142744)
Well said. I concur in full.
   2. Clute Posted: August 16, 2006 at 02:54 PM (#2142835)
Dusty, Dusty, Dusty. Is there possibly a worse strategic manager in baseball? Pulling Mateo after 5 inn. when he was on cruise control and a pitch count in the 70's. I'm sure glad Murton doesn't have any power and is a wiff machine unlike J. Jones, because what other reason would Dusty have for platooning Murton instead of Jones? LOL Oh I forgot. Jones has a big contract and Murton doesn't make dick. What a bube! Dusty the EL has a line direct to O'Hare, so pack up the toothpicks and don't forget to offer a personal chauffer position to Jim Hendry, as he is as clueless as you and it would be a nice touch and deflect the criticism of you being a racist by having a white limo driver on your job interviews.
   3. Biscuit_pants Posted: August 16, 2006 at 03:28 PM (#2142904)
What a bube! Dusty the EL has a line direct to O'Hare, so pack up the toothpicks and don't forget to offer a personal chauffer position to Jim Hendry, as he is as clueless as you and it would be a nice touch and deflect the criticism of you being a racist by having a white limo driver on your job interviews.
Is this a throw away line or are you claiming that Dusty is a racist? I have not seen anything that would make me think he was a racist so I am curious.
   4. 1k5v3L Posted: August 16, 2006 at 03:35 PM (#2142923)
Of course, this wasn't the ONLY 18 inning game in the NL yesterday. COL-ARI lasted 18 innings as well. First time ever that two games went 18 innings in the same day.

And Murton is heating up just in time to salvage the rest of this season...
   5. Luke Jasenosky Posted: August 16, 2006 at 03:36 PM (#2142926)
Nicely said, Mike. I actually remained conscious for the entire game (although, to be fair, I only started watching it in the fifth inning). Pretty amazing that the six pitchers combined for 12 innings of scoreless relief. I was a bit perturbed by Baker's decision to pull Mateo, but he obviously hasn't thrown over 80 pitches very often so it is at least understandable. I was more annoyed when Dusty decided to play Larussa-lite and removed Aardsma after two batters. Aardsma was throwing hard and had good command - in a tight game, going to your fifth reliever (Eyre) in the seventh just to set up a lefty-lefty situation (especially with two out and no one on base) is overmanaging in the extreme. It is obvious that Dusty manages the bullpen by rote - he knows what the modern rulebook says about platoon match-ups, and he just robotically goes out to make the moves unthinkingly.

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
   6. Cabbage Posted: August 16, 2006 at 03:38 PM (#2142928)
I caught the last three innings after I checked the mlb scoreboard late last night and realized the game was still on. I'm really excited about Rich Hill. The fastball and curve were around the zone, which we all know was his problem in previous non-AAA appearences. Additionally, I saw him throwing high inside fastballs to righthanders. I didn't see this in his bad outings and going high and inside (in addition to fastballs at the bottom of the zone and that pretty curveball) makes for three hard distinct offerings and a second out pitch towards righties. He needs nothing more than fastball/curveball against the lefties, but moving the fastball around the zone should make things much more difficult for the RHB.
   7. Luke Jasenosky Posted: August 16, 2006 at 03:45 PM (#2142944)
I assume Clute was referring to Baker's line a while back. Although I'm not a big fan of "Reason" magazine, there is a relatively interesting take on Dusty's comments here:



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.
   8. Luke Jasenosky Posted: August 16, 2006 at 03:46 PM (#2142949)
Sorry - the link to the "Reason" article is here.
   9. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: August 16, 2006 at 03:58 PM (#2142975)
I was a bit perturbed by Baker's decision to pull Mateo, but he obviously hasn't thrown over 80 pitches very often so it is at least understandable. I was more annoyed when Dusty decided to play Larussa-lite and removed Aardsma after two batters. Aardsma was throwing hard and had good command - in a tight game, going to your fifth reliever (Eyre) in the seventh just to set up a lefty-lefty situation (especially with two out and no one on base) is overmanaging in the extreme. It is obvious that Dusty manages the bullpen by rote - he knows what the modern rulebook says about platoon match-ups, and he just robotically goes out to make the moves unthinkingly.

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.
   10. Mike Isaacs Posted: August 16, 2006 at 03:59 PM (#2142977)
I was a bit perturbed by Baker's decision to pull Mateo, but he obviously hasn't thrown over 80 pitches very often so it is at least understandable.
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.
   11. Biscuit_pants Posted: August 16, 2006 at 04:14 PM (#2142999)
I assume Clute was referring to Baker's line a while back. Although I'm not a big fan of "Reason" magazine, there is a relatively interesting take on Dusty's comments here:
That was the only thing that I could think of too. I never thought that was a racist comment though, so I wondered if something else was said.
   12. Andere Richtingen Posted: August 16, 2006 at 04:17 PM (#2143005)
Anyways, I wonder who will start today?

Ryan O'Malley gets the nod.
   13. KB JBAR (trhn) Posted: August 16, 2006 at 04:31 PM (#2143025)
O'Malley seems pretty solid to me. A 26 year old college lefty who has progressed slowly through the Cubs minor leagues, but has had success at every level. This year he's been pretty good, but he seems to be a BIP type of pitcher: 4.08 ERA, 123 IP, 71 Ks, 30 BBs, 9 HRs.

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 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.
   14. Luke Jasenosky Posted: August 16, 2006 at 05:20 PM (#2143106)
O'Malley looks to be Glendon Rusch minus some poundage. He's no prospect, but, as a lefty with excellent control, he could be a swingman in the majors. One positive is that he looks to have a pretty small platoon split - .727 OPS vs LHB and .770 vs. RHB at Iowa this year. He had a solid outing the last time he pitched on the 11th, going seven innings.
   15. Daryn Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:14 PM (#2143269)
Did they use everybody on the roster? It looks like 25 names on the boxscore, but I can hardly identify who the Cubs starters are anymore.

If so, when was the last time that happened?
   16. McCoy Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:26 PM (#2143285)
I was more annoyed when Dusty decided to play Larussa-lite and removed Aardsma after two batters. Aardsma was throwing hard and had good command - in a tight game, going to your fifth reliever (Eyre) in the seventh just to set up a lefty-lefty situation (especially with two out and no one on base) is overmanaging in the extreme

Not only that but Eyre one day later is on the DL.
   17. Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:42 PM (#2143307)
What happened with Clemens' tirade?
   18. Kiko Sakata Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:56 PM (#2143332)
Did they use everybody on the roster?

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.
   19. Kiko Sakata Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:59 PM (#2143340)
Specifically, it happened on April 20, 1986.
   20. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: August 16, 2006 at 08:00 PM (#2143346)
I don't think that's evidence he's not ready for ML hitters.

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.
   21. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: August 16, 2006 at 08:03 PM (#2143352)
Still, being capable of facing MLB hitters doesn't necessarily mean one *should* be in MLB,

Ryan O'Malley is proving this point quite well today.
   22. Meatwad Posted: August 16, 2006 at 10:14 PM (#2143578)
theriot is looking very good in the field. he got hit by clemens last night as a retaliation, it was pretty obvious, i wonder if anthing will come of it
   23. KB JBAR (trhn) Posted: August 17, 2006 at 04:29 AM (#2144182)
How the hell do the Red Sox have Hinske, Choi and Carlos Pena as 1B options while the Cubs have John Mabry and Phil Nevin? Dealing for Hinske would have given the Cubs a fill-in during Lee's absence, insurance against Ramirez opting out, a lefty bench bat and a DH for interleague games.
   24. Urban Faber Posted: August 17, 2006 at 05:16 AM (#2144222)
Although that 1986 game was a suspended deal (remember those?), and picked up in August so the roster was different. This time they used everyone they had. Good thing there wasn't an injury.
   25. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: August 17, 2006 at 01:23 PM (#2144319)
So now the complaints against Dusty are that he plays too many rookies (#20) and is too quick with the hook with young pitchers (#2, 10)? Just keeping track.
   26. KB JBAR (trhn) Posted: August 17, 2006 at 02:47 PM (#2144392)
So now the complaints against Dusty are that he plays too many rookies (#20) and is too quick with the hook with young pitchers (#2, 10)? Just keeping track.


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.
   27. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: August 17, 2006 at 02:55 PM (#2144399)
So now the complaints against Dusty are that he plays too many rookies (#20) and is too quick with the hook with young pitchers (#2, 10)? Just keeping track.

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.
   28. jwb Posted: August 19, 2006 at 01:20 AM (#2146935)
It's a criticism of Cubs' management for getting rid of MAddux and for failing to have an innings sponge starter.

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."
   29. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: August 19, 2006 at 04:00 AM (#2147230)
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.
   30. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: August 19, 2006 at 03:42 PM (#2147608)
Then stories like this make me further wonder if having a guy like Maddux around wouldn't have helped quite a lot. Now the Cubs have no idea who will make the start on Sunday, let alone next week.

When are we going to see Donald Veal?
   31. Andere Richtingen Posted: August 19, 2006 at 04:03 PM (#2147618)
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.

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

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Piehole of David Wells
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.5225 seconds
53 querie(s) executed