Advertisement:

Everybody tuck their pants into their socks! Reds 8 Cubs 2

Everybody tuck their pants into their socks! Reds 8 Cubs 2

(Note: Sorry about no Brunch today. I actually wrote it. but was unhappy with it's incredibly negative tone. Wasn't making the point I wanted to make. Gonna edit and re-work it till it's something I like and something I think you'll enjoy. Look for a "Tuesdays with Felzzy" this week…)

The Cubs followed up their brief moment of happy baseball by quickly down shifting into overmatched, slow bad baseball in getting throttled by the Cincinnati Reds 8-2. Carlos Villanueva started off well but soon found his stuff flatter than Herman Munster's head. And the Reds were more than happy to pound CV's weak stuff all over the field, getting three runs off of the Moose-stache in the 4th and two more in the 5th. Meanwhile, the Cubs played a giant game of whac-a-mole, trying to get that elusive hit with runners in scoring position. It was a futile chase, with the Cubs only getting 2 runs despite having 11 hits. Game over, get out of here before the Seagulls start loosening their belts.

SINCE I DONT SMOKE, I DECIDED TO GROW A MUSTACHE- BETTER FOR THE HEALTH

Kinda running out of "Well Carlos didn't get enough time to stretch out in Spring training…" excuses for Carlos Villavueva. He's had five starts. He shouldn't be that hittable second trip through the order. But there it was…The killer was that it was the bottom of the Reds order that did all the damage. Ryan Ludwick, Devan Morosco, and Zack Cosart were 8 for 13. Heck even Homer Bailey got an RBI hit. Wesley Wright came in and bailed out Villanueva and had a solid inning himself. Jose Veras, who Manager Rick Renteria said he would like to see regain the closer role, was just awful in the 7th allowing three runs on two home runs, including one by Zack Cosart, who hadn't homered this year. Everyday Grimmy and Everyday Jimmy closed out the game with scoreless innings.

CAREER OPPORTUNITIES, THE KIND THAT NEVER KNOCK.

The Cubs came into the game hitting .197 with runners in scoring position. They wound up going 3 for 14 today. ARRRRGHHHHHGGH. Different manager, different different hitting coach…..yet same results. What's constant theme? Oh, right, same hitters.

BEEF. YES. ROAST BEEF. IT IS THE SWEDISH TERM FOR BEEF THAT IS ROASTED.

Wellington Castillo seems to cruise under the spotlight that is constantly on Starlin Castro and Anthony Rizzo. But he did not have his best game. Perhaps he was distracted by Billy hamilton being on base. But Castillo came up twice with runners in scoring position, once with the bases loaded and came up goose eggs. The bar isn't set as high for Castillo as Rizzo and Castro, as Castillo has been doing more than his share behind the plate. But he can hit. He has the highlight hit of the year so far with that home run against the Cardinals. He needs to deliver. .231 isn't acceptable.

So the Cub-coaster jerked us down just as quickly as it brought us up.  No rest for the wicked though, as the Diamondbacks come calling tomorrow, with long haired freaky person Bronson Arroyo taking the mound against Travis Wood. Last year, the Cubs had great success against the NL west. Hopefully that carries over. Onwards.

Boxscore

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Was hoping to win a series. I am glad this game was on WICU, so I didn't have to see it but I found it on the Reds channel just in time to see Veras get lit up.
    You gotta believe if Jake has good outing and feels good he will replace mustache???
    If we lose this next series 1-3 to the Diamondbacks it will get ugly. Especially if we score little runs.

  • Yeah, Jake has his final rehab game tomorrow I think and then you'll see him back in the rotation. Not that he's the answer to all our prayers. But Villanueva is showing he's more of a reliever these days….

  • In reply to felzz:

    Not the answer but can help. You can't have a era of 12 and b helping. I could see Veras go or wright. But I would like to see new blood in line up but don't know who it could be.

  • In reply to felzz:

    Yep,.... Carlos can be effective for a few innings - but that does not an effective regular guy for the starting rotation make.

    Arietta also may not be the 'answer' to our bottom of the rotation problems - but it's about time to find out IMO.

  • "Kinda surprising Veras had another awful performance," said nobody.

  • They're either going to have to waive Veras or fake an injury. It's not a tenable situation.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to h vaughn:

    there will need to be a roster move when Arrieta comes back, but my gut feeling is it won't be Veras, but someone with options (Parker, Grimm?) will get sent down. This FO doesn't seem to make quick moves on people they feel they have an investment in - see also how long they stuck with Marmol and Camp last year, long after most rational people could see they needed to be launched.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    Grimm needs to stay up, a real positive thus far.

  • In reply to h vaughn:

    They just have to decise whether Veras has a brain or arm injury.
    Maybe he has both.

  • fb_avatar

    My 13 year old is open in his baseball allegiance; he's a Cub fan because I'm a Cub fan, but the hold is tenuous. I worry that after 5 years of not just losing but truly, sincerely stinking, there's a good chance the Cubs will lose a whole cohort of fans who will never come back. This article talks a bout making fans by winning, but the converse is equally true - losing fans by not winning.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/opinion/sunday/they-hook-you-when-youre-young.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to SKMD:

    I've already lost my oldest granddaughter to the dark side. My grandson is indifferent. There may be hope yet for the 2 year-old.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    You guys speak as if people will soon stop being born. Ie When they start winning there will be different kids. Hawks managed.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Dan Bradley:

    yes, but the affects of the generation that's being repelled by this team now will form a dip in their support (attendance, licensed item purchases, influence on their own kids) that will carry on for decades. Look at the article, which shows longitudinal support for Mets vs Yankees.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Dan Bradley:

    I'm not worried about the Cubs regaining fans. It is difficult to raise kids to be a fan of a team who loses perpetually, especially when that is all they know of that team. Add in the fact that I live in the heart of Cardinal country, and the AA franchise calls my current city home. You can about guess who they will cheer for.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    Cubs didn't win when I was growing up, still a fan. Cubs haven't won while my after my daughter's have grown up, they are still fans. Fans follow a team win or lose. Frontrunners only follow winning teams then disappear when they lose.

  • As crap as the team has been, Bonifacio and Rizzo have been having really good years. It's nearing the end of April which is typically the end of the "small sample size" type arguments. I feel like Rizzo in particular hasn't gotten enough attention because the teams been awful but he's been having a Goldschmidt type year thus far. He could end up hitting .300/.400/.500 or something close to that.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to beckdawg:

    I've been really happy with both Rizzo and Castro. I'm tentatively waiting for Boni to fall off the cliff.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Julie Willson:

    I really wish we could find a way to trade him and Barney right now.

    Let Olt play everyday at third and Valbuena can hold down 2nd for now.

  • fb_avatar

    Was watching at a bar and I started laughing when we grounded into a double play with the bases jacked.
    Dude across the bar was not as amused by our struggles and was glaring at me like we was going to throw his bottle at me. Still funny.

    Time to get the D-backs back on track, I guess.

    On the upside: Rizzo. I was never really a proponent of the idea that he needed to "bounce back." I don't think last year was as bad as his BA suggested, so he didn't need a comeback year. per se, but was hoping to see a very strong season from him. And man, is he coming through.
    His BA against lefties is actually better than his BA against righties, and he's just about the onlu guy on the team that's aware you can get on base without hitting the ball.
    I hope he can keep it up.

    Back to the downside: Someone needs to figure out how to calm down Baez. 3 Strikeouts, no hits, no walks is an awful way to return.

    I'm sure he wants to prove he is a big-league player, but he's just proving he's not.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Baez is back? That is good news.:)

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John57:

    Not like that is isn't.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    what are you trying to say?

  • It's getting tougher and tougher to be patient with this club (and Theo). I have defended "the plan" over and over, but at some point the team needs to have a little success --- both to keep the fan base engaged and to motivate the "core" to continue working hard... Zero series' wins thus far... Ugh. Unfortunately, I think we're carrying too many non-contributors on the roster (Veras, Barney, CV, Ruggiano, Kalish, Sweeney, etc.). And Ricky is proving to be a little less conventional than most. And by "less conventional", I mean indefensible by using either sabremetrics or common sense. 4 leftys then 4 rightys in the lineup today? There are many reasons no one else does that... And the bunting can stop any time now. Is there any reason we couldn't have signed some stop-gap guys for 2-3 year deals (vets with some actual talent) to help the young core this year and next while the farmhands develop? Other than EJack (huge mistake), we really haven't signed any FA's to help in the clubhouse or on the field, have we? Other than guys that were on the street, tendered, waived, etc. Or other than guys we fully expected to try to flip, like Veras or Hammel. I understand the argument that playing .500 ball does nothing except move you down in the draft, but I would argue that there is some collateral damage to a lot of losing. Both to the fan base and to the young guys in the clubhouse. I abhor those in the NBA who "tank" in an effort to get the top draft picks. It's starting to feel like we're tanking this year to secure another top pick. I've also heard the argument that the progress may not be linear, which I have tried to believe, but it's getting more and more difficult to believe that without some major infusion of FA talent, we aren't going to see a lot of progress any time soon. After all, Baez may or may not be a star and if so, he alone won't make a lot of difference. And Bryant likely won't be in Chicago until 2015 at the earliest and again, might not be a high WAR guy until his 2nd or 3rd year. And with some of the other guys (Soler, Almora, CJ, etal.) it could be 2-3 years from now before we see any impact. Are we really supposed to sit and wait until 2017? Can we not improve and spend a little? At the expense of a decent pick or two, I think the fan base would actually appreciate the appearance of trying to compete. And I think the young guys might grow and develop and learn to win if they actually have a puncher's chance day in and day out....

  • In reply to ErnieB:

    it will be 2-3 yrs. and no, they wont spend a little to be a little better. I for one hope they dont. I can wait 2 or 3 more years for this to be done right. because thats when they will start to spend more than a "little money" to be more than a "little better".

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    If the Cubs go five straight seasons losing 90+ games, and Year3 looks like a certainty, I don't know how you can re-sign Theo. I don't care how good the minors look.

  • In reply to O’Brien:

    Can't be worrying about what we are going to do after year 5 when year 3 just started. I think we need results from year 3 4 and 5 before we come to that bridge.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to O’Brien:

    Because he wasn't hired to win now.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    I never said he was.

  • In reply to ErnieB:

    Theo said it would take 4 or 5 years. 2016 will be 5 years. That is when I am guessing we will start making the playoffs. We will just have to be patient Ernie.

  • In reply to John57:

    Where is this quote where Theo gave an exact number of years it would take? I see it referenced all the time. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I just cannot find it.

  • In reply to O’Brien:

    I don't have the article anymore. He said it right when he was hired after the 2011 and before the 2012 season. When he said it would take 4 to 5 years, he also mentioned years 1 and 2 would be bad(And he sure wasn't kidding). After that he said improvement would come but would not be linear. Basically we are going to improve in the next 3 years but he is not sure exactly when. Hope that helps.

  • In reply to John57:

    Do you think the hiring of Sveum moved that timeline back? I do.

    What if Renteria is also a bad hire?

    Looks like he miscalculated.

  • In reply to O’Brien:

    Sveum was atrocious, but I don't think it really amended the timeline. Because there is no way, with the talent he had, that they were going to compete any time soon. However, Dale didn't do Starlin any favors. Jury obviously still out on Ricky, but not overly impressed thus far with lineups, bunting or bullpen usage.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to ErnieB:

    I agree that Sveum had no effect whatsoever on the timeline.

    He sucked and was miserable at helping the young players but so what? He didn't do any permanent damage to the few guys he coached that look like they'll be with the team long term.

    I think managers are overrated in baseball. Talent matters more, and we don't have it. Yet.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    File that under, things said about Renteria in 2016.

  • In reply to O’Brien:

    We will just have to wait and see if he miscalculated. My guess is he expected some failures too. I think some of the player acquisitions have been better than he hoped for. All things considered, I still think 2016 is when the Cubs start making the playoffs.

  • In reply to John57:

    Fair enough, everything can't be a slam dunk.

    He has had some good to go along with the bad. I agree.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to ErnieB:

    I don't understand how people can want to give up a better draft slot knowing we will STILL be bad.

    Hell, just sweeping the white Sox last year cost us a draft slot that may really bite us in the ass. There appears to be three elite guys and we pick fourth.

    What about last year? moving back just a couple spots would've put us out of the running for a draft that also had 3 elite prospects before "everyone else".

    Honestly, if this team ever had a chance to be competitive, then screw the draft slot, but we never were.

    Also, I continue to love the suggestion that we a sign Mr Random Stopgap for 2 years. Who is this mystery player that is good enough to make the team better but bad enough to sign for two years?

    Seriously. Stop suggesting it. GOOD baseball players don't usually sign 2-3 year contracts with awful teams.

    This FO is more than willing to sign players who fir the plan. It just hasn't quite worked out. They made a good run at Tanaka but the Yankees gave him a ridiculous offer that a team like the Cubs couldn't match. (and I'm not talking about money). They made a good run at Anibal Sanchez but it was a smokescreen.

    And really, the desire for mediocrity is exactly why we have 105 years of losing. why pay for a winner when fans will show up for a team that wins give or take 80 games a year?

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Carlos Beltran signed for 3 years and is very productive.

  • In reply to O’Brien:

    Beltran on the cubs makes them what? MAYBE a 75 win team? and thats being generous. do you think 75 wins puts more butts in the seats? if no or not really. he isnt worth his contract.. hence why this FO doesnt spend money.. its throwing money away. plus they lose lose draft position for a better prospect that could be a game changer for the cubs for his entire career, instead of 3 yrs so fans can feel good about the team for a single year.

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    I'm not advocating a Beltran signing but you can say that about anyone. You have to add pieces slowly though.

    Using that flawed logic you might as well not sign anyone this upcoming off-season. They aren't going to make a huge difference. Wasted money.

    Plus...a full season of Baez next season is going to add, what 2-3 extra wins?

    Might as well write off 2015 too.

    In Theo You Trust.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to O’Brien:

    He turns 37 this week and you want to give him three years? BRILLIANT!

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    How about Curtis granderson, Johnny peralta, or another SP? We all understand the plan. But this team simply isn't fair to the fans. And what FA is gonna wanna sign with us if we loose 95+ every year. We are gonna have to over pay to get a tanaka. Beltran would be our best outfielder RIGHT NOW!! Lake isn't there yet. And Sweeney, Ruggiano just suck. Just losing at the rate we are and hoping that all these kids are just gonna come up and all be great your just fooling yourselves. I'm a huge cub fan. I try to stay positive but I'm at the end of my rope myself.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Seancicero:

    Granderson is hitting .127/.222/.236, Peralta not only plays a position we already have filled with Castro and Baez behind him (and Hernandez and Penalver behind HIM) but is hitting .172/.243/.406 and has actually been benched a few times. Neither one of those guys is going to be a significant positive factor for this team. Beltran is playing well, but you've already proven earlier in your post the difficulty of finding the older FA who is going to live up to that contract.

    We are going to have to fill in holes with free agency. But right now the holes are the entire team (except, arguably, SS and 1B) and removing our financial flexibility before we know for sure where to use it only hurts us long term.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    Well said.

    Granderson would also have been awful due to his injury history. If he gets hurt, we would be right back where we started only with even less money.

    There is no quick fix. Let the idea that there is just die.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    I agree there is no quick fix but this FO has had 3 off seasons to make strides. Yes the Minor leagues look better, but how much is to be determined. In 3 off seasons you could have picked up a player and by the third year you could put a pretty competitive team together. We just went one direction with it.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Injury history? Before last season 7 straight seasons with at least 500 PA, 600 in 6 of those years.

    Being hurt one season when the time missed was because of a broken foreman and later pinkie due to being hit by pitches doesn't mean he has an injury history.

    Sorry buddy.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    He's also 33! Again, part of the plan is not throwing money at old players.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Stick with that then because you made up the whole injury history concern.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    You don't understand that they aren't mutually exclusive?

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    I understand. Abandon the injury talk it's false.

    If you don't want old players that is ok, but you're misinformed saying he has injury concerns. You should search a little deeper into him with your google searches instead of just seeing he missed time last season and assuming he's an injury risk.

    Completely false.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Peralta was a bad example, I had just woken up. Nelson Cruz would have been fantastic on a 2-3 year deal! His D is below average but at least he would help us score some runs. I understand wanting to draft near the top, but this team is almost unwatchable. As a fan I'd rather watch us lose 6-4 or 8-5, this weak ass offense makes me not want to even come to the games. I still believe or hope we're on the right track. I still believe in the FO, but this is just really hard to watch right now.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Seancicero:

    And he would have cost us a draft pick, which most other teams in baseball are zealously guarding. (That he wasn't signed for so long is an indication of the fear of his performance vs. cost -- it's not like the Cubs were alone there.)

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Yeah because players who are 37 automatically suck. Check his stat line.

    He'd be the best hitter on the Cubs for those 3 years.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Samboka:

    37 year olds don't have a great track record of staying healthy. If he CAN stay healthy, good for NY but a rebuilding team wasting money on a geriatric.

  • In reply to O’Brien:

    When he's not injured.

  • I for one am not happy with the "progress" of Castro. He had a couple of terrible AB;s today and one with the bases loaded.

    He has taken 2 walks, one of them intentional so I guess we have to throw out the hope that he can change his approach.

    I am beginning to question if his power will ever really develop and think he might be a 25 -30 double guy with 10 HRs.

    His fielding looks improved but as we know, a bulk of his errors came in two stretches last year. We will see if that repeats.

    Last season, after 16 games his slash line was .304/.324/478.
    This season after 16 games his slash line is .292/.313/.415.

    And last season was his terrible year.

    I am pulling for him hard, but I have just about given up hope that he can be a star in this game. His approach is not going to allow him to reach such lofty heights.

  • In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    Totally agree - he swung at two pitches that bounced up there today. Including a key AB where the 3-2 pitch was nowhere close... JD even said on air --- "need to make this be a strike" or some such. Alas, not to be...

  • In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    I think you guys have to relax. Like you said its 16 games, Its plenty of player around the league who's numbers are not that good early on. If castro would have got an extra two hits this series his numbers would look different. What I'm looking for is hard contact which he has been getting. Last year he was getting beat by fastballs and this year he is hitting the fastball hard. Before this series people said he was back but now after a couple of games people are worried. I'm just saying give it some time.

  • In reply to seankl:

    Sean... Obviously you have the right to your opinion. That said, Irwin and Ernie are right, in my opinion.

    I watched every pitch of this godforsaken game. Those two at bats were atrocious. Castro looked, to me, like someone who felt pressure to "do something" in RISP situations. The outcomes were, I felt, the result of being 'anxious.'

    You're absolutely right. He's had a ton more good ABs than he had last year. Good for him. But he's too long in the league to have miserable ABs with RISP like he did today.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to MoneyBoy:

    it's very natural for a player to see the season slipping away, hear the boos and want to try to hit that 6-run homer to salvage a win. If Castro is feeling pressure to "do something" - which I agree with you - then this is right in Renteria's lap, it's his job to show these guys how to relax and remind them that sometimes a walk is as good as a hit, and a bloop single is better than a deep fly caught on the warning track.

  • In reply to MoneyBoy:

    I agree that he did not have good at bats today, but being in the league a certain amount of time doesn't mean your not going to have bad at bats. I agree that it looks like he is anxious and trying to do to much but I can't come to the conclusion that its going to be a bad year or he will never be this or that. Mike trout struck out four time yesterday, it happens.

  • fb_avatar

    Just to put this Castro stuff in context with his numbers. Wasn't this the point last year where Sveum said something about sending down Castro and Rizzo in a press conference? I can not remember if it was the middle of April or May that the comment was made.
    After it was said and Team Theo got in the middle of the conversation effectively telling the kids not to worry about what ever is coming out of the managers mouth the season was over.

  • I am so tired of certain fans taking the approach that stinking it up is ok cause we will get a better draft pick. That way if thinking is for fans who have accepted losing and are not a competitive person. If a FO has done its homework, knows what they are doing, and has some luck then 1 or 2 draft position isn't going to hurt. You can find great players or " game changers" into the 20th round or more. I just can't stand fans that use the excuse of drafting makes it okay to stink. Plenty of good teams use the balance if draft, foreign players and finding the right FA. You can't tell me the last 3 off season there hasn't been a guy we could sign that could have helped? We did nothing to help are very weak and questionable outfield and are seeing what happens when u don't improve it.

  • In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    The new OFs we picked up this year that made the team are Ruggiano and Kalish. So we did do something.

  • In reply to John57:

    That is a great point. Thanks for that knowledge.

  • In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    Vehemently disagree with "You can find great players or " game changers" into the 20th round or more". Every study of the draft ever done disproves this in every way. I'm not going to get into the rest of your argument, but that statement is definitely based on a couple cherry-picked guys. The balance of talent is obviously right at the front of the draft, always has and will be.

  • In reply to nmu’catsbball:

    Are you telling me you can't find great players 20th round? My point is if you have the 3rd pick or the 7th pick you are still gonna get a great player if you have done your homework and scouted well.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    That isn't what he's saying. What he's saying is that the odds of getting an impact player -- regardless of how good your scouting is -- go down with every pick. If you want a concrete example of this: this team would be very different, indeed, if they'd had the 25th pick instead of the 31st pick in the 2009 draft.

    The odds of getting an impact player in the 20th round are infinitesimally small. You need just about everything to go right there and you simply can't scout luck.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I get the fact it increase your odds and the talent should be better in the 1st-3rd rounds but don't sit there and tell me you can't find great talent in later rounds. Give LAA credit for getting him at 25th or STL credit for getting Wacha when we let him go by.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    Literally no one is saying this: "you can't find great talent in later rounds."

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Right. There have been a bunch guys drafted in later rounds that ended up very good, no one is doubting that fact, but the number of those guys compared to guys at the very top is extremely far apart to the point that you would be a fool to count on finding talent down there regularly. The likelihood that Jacob Hanneman becomes a major league ballplayer is exponentially larger than the likelihood of our 20th round pick Zak Blair, and Kris Bryant's likelihood to be an impact player is exponentially larger than Nick Ciuffo, who was the 21st overall pick in the same draft. It's just how history says the draft ends up playing out. Even more so in the new CBA.

  • In reply to nmu’catsbball:

    I just don't like some fans saying it is ok to tank it this year because we can get a better draft pick. I don't like that thinking. Someone made a comment that a FA like Beltran may be good for 3-4 more wins and there is no promise that who you draft can add 3-4 more wins. I am saying if you have good scouting, DEVELOPMENT going on in the minors, and some luck you can draft well into the late teens and early twenties.

  • In reply to nmu’catsbball:

    I agree that if you scout and develop well you can sustain success with picks in the teens by being opportunistic like the Cards were with Wacha, the Angels were with Trout, etc. But there's no reason to push yourself back with someone like Beltran on a team like we have right now with only 2-4 long term pieces. I think next offseason when we have somewhere between 6-8 long term pieces together on one team is when a veteran or two should be added.

  • I agree with those who favor signing some vets to short term contracts. As a minimum, the young guys need some mentors (a role Sori was trying to fill before he was traded), but some proven hitters would help as well. Who's going to help teach the young guys how to win? And the fans are being asked to support a team where zero effort has been made to put a watchable (some would prefer competitive) team on the field.

  • As bad as the Cubs are it seems like Arizona is worse...there's no reason why the Cubs shouldn't win this series

  • In reply to Mikethoms:

    There's abosolutely no reason that the Cubs couldn't sweep the series against AZ,.....

    Except for the 'fact' that AZ, like every other team in the league (including the Cubs) has some pride and 'can' win just about any day if the pieces fall into place.

    That being said - I suspect the Cubs will win this series.

  • In reply to drkazmd65:

    They certainly have the ideal rotation (other than Jackson) to win the series. But again this f'ing team. Especially with Arroyo pitching, as much as he's scuffled I feel like he always owns the Cubs.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mikethoms:

    I think the argument that the Cubs are the ideal team for the D backs to be made makes more sense.

    They've struggled with pitching, while we have one of the worst offenses.

    Think about this: Rizzo and Babipio are 5th and 7th in OBP in the NL, respectively and the team is STILL 27TH in the league for OBP. Insane.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mikethoms:

    Arizona is obviously off to a poor start but there's plenty of reasons they should beat the Cubs. Like the significant talent gap between the two teams.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mikethoms:

    Exactly. The Cubs should win at least 3 of 4.

  • John, you've spoiled us. I'm still waiting for my Sunday column for the upcoming draft and I'm having withdrawals. ;-)

  • A reminder: Castro has a 96 career OPS+. He is no star and an unlikely future star.

    I agree with those who suggest the Cubs should NOT sign 32 year-old free agents for multi-year exorbitant deals. That's so counterproductive it's close to unthinkable. The Cubs will lose this year and next. - a lot. The more the better, in long-thinking terms. Like my father used to say, if that makes you mad, you better get glad.

    I agree with Roe Shidmore: when/if they start to win in a few years, the park will again be filled.

  • fb_avatar

    went to the games yesterday
    announced attendance was 28,000+
    but - there had to be -8,000 no shows
    looked really empty by the seventh inning
    stretch - I guess Veras didnt help that.
    My wife was amazed said she had never
    seen it like that. It was looking like 1983 in the bleachers .

Leave a comment