anthony rizzo showIt was easy to miss, what with the Blogathon and Trade Deadline, but here’s your reminder that there’s a free fantasy contest running today. It’s got a $300 prize pool, and signing up helps support Bleacher Nation. So, sign up. It takes two minutes, and you can have some fun watching your team rack up points with today’s games.

  • Anthony Rizzo, who hit two solo homers last night, offered a spot-on summation of the Cubs’ offensive struggles this year, even if he didn’t quite mean it that way: “They scored more runs than we did, and we didn’t give ourselves the opportunity to score runs tonight,” Rizzo said, per “This is unusual for us; usually we give ourselves that opportunity every game …. ” Indeed, the Cubs have frequently given themselves the opportunity to score this year. Not cashing in on those opportunities consistently has been the issue.
  • Speaking of Rizzo, he complimented his fellow two-homer-night teammate, Junior Lake, for his approach so far in his big league stint. Rizzo, 23, sounds like a leader already. He’s also putting together a great year when you dig in. I especially like to see that he’s got just 86 strikeouts, compared to 53 walks and 50 extra base hits. That tells you a guy is hitting really well, regardless of what his BABIP-depressed batting average says.
  • Jed Hoyer spoke about Rizzo, and Starlin Castro, yesterday on the radio.
  • As projected: SportsCenter’s highlight package of last night’s game was 75% Yasiel Puig (the other 25% was a Jerry Hairston single), including him getting thrown out at the plate (the other players involved were barely mentioned) and his 9th inning superfluous homer. Rizzo and Lake – both just 23 – homering twice apiece? Didn’t happen. Lake’s catch crashing into the wall? Didn’t happen. Darwin Barney’s ridiculous play? Didn’t happen. Cody Ransom’s diving play? Didn’t happen.
  • Kyuji Fujikawa, recovering from Tommy John surgery, visited with his teammates at Wrigley Field yesterday, saying that he’s fully planning on being back – and hopes to be closing – for the Cubs in 2014. Fujikawa had surgery on June 11, so the earliest you can reasonably expect him to be back with the Cubs is around July next year.
  • Dale Sveum, whose decisions the last two years strongly suggest that he’s a believer in sabermetrics, says he believes that “clutch” exists as an independent player ability, per While “clutch” is something of a divisive issue among modern statistical thinkers – the numbers tend not to back it up, year to year – Sveum essentially says that being clutch is the ability to put together a better at bat with runners in scoring position and the ability to keep yourself a normal level of calm in those situations. I can’t really argue with that.
  • Internet awesomeness: Dramatic Jon Morosi tweets.
  • The Wrigley Beer Man could use your help.
  • The BN apparel shop has a special offer going on right now where you get $10 off any order of $50 or more. Just use the coupon code “TENOFF.”
  • King Jeff

    I’m surprised that the Cubs made sportscenter at all. I’m actually surprised that they had time for baseball, but it was Puig, so.

    • DReese

      it’s hard to talk about the Cubs when so much is happening with the heat and the Yankees.

      • Jp3

        Don’t forget about the Jets and Patriots and Tebow.

        • Bric

          And Riley Cooper.

  • Patrick G

    I hate not being able to watch Cubs games since I don’t live in the area. And then I can’t even get any good highlights to see what happened. Gotta live off the box score

    • CubsFaninMS


      I upgrade my Dish Network package just so I can watch WGN every season, which adds about $15-20 a month on to my bill. BUT, last month I bought an Apple TV box and purchased MLB.TV on it. The price for it is pretty steep ($25 per month) but I can actually watch the games on my iPhone, iPad, and Apple TV (home theater system). I rarely miss a game, which has absolutely killed my personal productivity over the past few weeks! Point being, there are other options out there. Must. feed. Cub. addiction.

      • Patrick G

        Yea I was thinking of getting MLB.TV but I can sometimes stream the game live for free. I think next year I might get it and didn’t want to this year because I knew they weren’t going to be really competitive, is that bad? lol. I want to wait til some of the young guns get to the bigs

        • Feeney

          I have and I watch about 3 or 4 Cubs games a week. I also watch 2 or 3 other games a week depending on my schedule. I tend to watch a late game from the west coast as I am falling asleep. It’s totally worth the money for me personally.

          • Lance

            I live in indiana and blacks out cubs games for me. Its weird. I can watch the reds but no tigers or cubs.

      • jim haley

        go directv instead of dish network….no comparison unless you want to live in the dark world of sports

        • http://Jplgxk AlwaysNextYear

          Direct tv is horrible.

    • Jim

      I don’t live in the area either but as long as the game isn’t on WCIU I can see every game. I have Directv and my package includes WGN and Comcast Sportsnet Chicago.

      • Scott

        The CSN games are blackedout in AZ.

      • Austin

        Yea how can you watch CSN games? I live in Michigan and I can’t even watch CSN.

  • KidCubbie

    I actually posted this on the Minor League Daily post by Luke but does anyone else think that Rizzo has a shot at a Gold Glove this year?

    • Nate

      He should. He has just 3 errors and I’m pretty sure he has the best range ranking this year (not positive because sabermetrics are hard sometimes). But does he really have a shot? It will need to be talked about so people notice

      • Edwin

        Yeah, it seems like Gold Gloves are more given out based on “politics” and reputation.

        • KidCubbie

          Yeah but there is hope since Barney got his over Phillips last year. Seems someone actually looked at the numbers.

          • DocPeterWimsey

            Actually, it was probably the errorless streak. Those get publicity, and publicity is key here.

            • KidCubbie

              It does seem like Rizzo has been quietly awesome. Unfortunately.

            • Nate

              Exactly what I was trying to get at. I don’t think with a the Cubs record they get talked about. If Rizzo had been a all star this year (and I don’t think he it was warranted) he would be talked about a lot and have a much better shot. Its not impossible though.

    • Jim

      Right now I would say the competition is between Rizzo .997 FPCT and Paul Goldschmidt .996 FPCT (has 42 more chances and 1 more error). Anybody else in the conversation would be pure politics. Gonzalez has 9 errors and Votto 12.

  • Frank

    last night’s game was 75% Yasiel Puig. Are you really surprised? The clowns at ESPN will attach their lips firmly on the ass of someone they pick and they won’t let go. I’m just surprised it wasn’t someone from New York or Boston.

    • Hookers or Cake

      I rarely go to anymore. When I do, it automatically opens videos of Skip Bayless being shocked and appalled by everything. God forbid you look at the comments on any article. Wow! If you think racism, sexism, and homophobia aren’t still a problem in America… glance at an ESPN comment board. Yikes.

      • CubsFaninMS

        The emergence of the internet leaves the sports fan with so many additional options other than ESPN and Sportscenter. Heck with them. It’s a competetive world these days. If they want to turn sports news into a male soap opera, they’ll just see themselves become obsolete like a paper-based news publication.

        • college_of_coaches

          Well put.

        • Scott

          It does feel like it is getting harder to tell if you are watching ESPN or TMZ.

          • FFP

            Is there any chance the Cubs will start there own network with next TV deal? Like the Yankee’s YES Network or the Red Sox NESN? If so, what would we want the thing to look like?

            • FFP


              • gocatsgo2003

                AHHH TOO MANY THEIR/THERES!!!

            • Rudy

              I would love it if aside from Cubs games they also palyed all the MiLB games but I doubt that would happen.

              • Dustin S

                The Yankees network does show at least some AAA games from time to time, but not all of them and I don’t think games from lower than AAA generally. So I would imagine a Cubs channel would be similar, using an Iowa game as filler once in a while but not broadcasting every minor league game.

      • cking6178

        basing a general opinion of “America” on the comment board at ESPN is asinine…you have a FEW informed opinions, but mainly it’s just spoon fed sheeple on those boards (and the official Cubs page, which is why I barely go there anymore)….the quality of comments here and John’s site is much better and people, while still wearing cubbie blue colored glasses, tend to have informed opinions and comments.

  • ssckelley

    Yes Puig is the story everyone is talking about and want to see more of so ESPN is playing to that. Had Tebow been at the game they would have had highlights of him watching the game.

  • ISU Birds

    I still enjoy baseball tonight because they try to not be so star centered, I think. But sportscenter and baseball are not friends. It is getting less and less for me anymore probably because my two favorite sports are hockey and baseball.

  • Edwin

    It’s nice to see that Rizzo is doing better against LHP this season.

  • Jono

    Why isn’t “Rizzo” pronounced like “pizza”? It’s much more fun say like “Reetsoh” like “Peetsah”

    • gocatsgo2003

      Because there’s an “o” at the end of his name instead of an “a”?

      • Jono

        yea, that changes how you pronounce the “izz” …..

        • gocatsgo2003

          I really had no idea — I’m the fool who took French instead of Spanish in high school, to Italian is even more foreign to me.

          • Jim L.

            So did I, only because the French teacher was hot.

    • Diggs

      I think that would technically be how you would say it (“Reetsoh”) if speaking Italian, but I could be wrong.

      • Jono

        I think you’re right, as long as you use some crazy hand motions

        • On The Farm

          Reminds me of the scene on ‘Family Guy’ when Peter goes to the butcher and tries to speak Italian.

          • Jono

            Haha, good call!

  • ShootTheGoat

    This is why my TV channel of preference is MLB Network. Of course it could also be the fact that I get tired of the stupid drama from all other sports during the Baseball season…

  • On The Farm

    But you have to give it to ESPN, their top 50 “This is Sports Center” was pretty good last night.

  • Eric

    Rizzo was just a great pickup for us. God I’m glad he’s a Cub.

  • DougS

    Speaking of “internet awesomeness”… and without too much to get excited about in regards to the Cubs, other than the prospect watch…

    One thing that became a highlight of the BN trade deadline blogathon was the occasional spotlight on Kim DeJesus… maybe this should become a more frequent happening with the daily bullets…

    Just sayin’….

    • JB88

      Chris De Luca (I think) of the Sun Times retweeted some items that Kim tweeted yesterday, including a portion of the text conversation between her and David about her appearing in the Sun Times with Champagne bottle to lips. It was pretty funny stuff, actaully.

  • NyN

    Do people still watch sportscenter?

  • jt

    Remember that Rizzo changed his swing this year and has been “growing” into it.

  • Rebuilding

    I don’t believe in “clutch”, but I do think Sveum is partially right in that guys with a better idea of the strike zone will have better at-bats (forcing more pitches, fouling more balls off). Unfortunately we haven’t had many of those kind of guys in the last few years. I don’t think it’s clutch, it’s just guys playing to their ability amplified by the situation

    • DocPeterWimsey

      That actually should be important. Many pitchers lose a little bit of stuff (including control) when they pitch from the stretch, and most “clutch” situations have a guy pitching from the stretch. Batters probably are no more or less prone to swinging at bad pitches in those situations: but if pitchers are more prone to throwing bad pitches in those situations, then guys with good batting eyes should have a slight edge, if only in drawing a(nother) walk. (A lot of people hate it when batters take walks in those situations, but it keeps the line moving: and increases the chance of the pitcher resorting to a batting practice fastball just to get it over the plate for the next batter.)

      • Eternal Pessimist

        I absolutely believe in clutch. Anyone who has played sports has been in game situations where they get a little nervous. Some can control it. Some can actually increase their focus, beyond what they normally put into the game. Sabermetrics really hasn’t gotten to that level of sophistication yet, but I’d bet soon enough a new line for “clutch” will be added. I would also bet Theo has been implementing that measurement into his drafts/FA signings.

        • bbmoney

          I doubt you’ll see a SABR stat on it. I also really doubt Theo has been implementing clutch into his drafting and IFA strategy. They may go for high character guys, but I don’t think that correlates with ‘clutch’.

          I believe clutch exists in the general population, or to put it better there are variations in how well people perform under pressure. I’m not much of a believer that there are serious variations in clutch at the MLB level. Guys who can’t perform in the clutch have already been weeded out by that point.

          • Eternal Pessimist

            You may be right, but I won’t be the least bit surprised when a clutch statistic is out there. I remember a time when just about all we had to compare one player to another was ERA and BA and people would argue the player performance based on this limited data, but I think every knew there was too much that these numbers were missing. I’m absolutely certain there are significant enough differences between the “clutch” for many of these players that can be measured.

        • DocPeterWimsey

          “Nervous” is only going to affect cognitive processes. Most of athletics is reaction, not cognition: humans do not think as fast as a baseball gets to homeplate, or even from a batter to the outfield. Moreover, nervous is important to doing well in reaction: that is why amphetamines (which make you edgy and jittery) enhance performance, whereas drugs that relax you are a detriment to athletic performance. (Note that pitching might be completely different, as that is cognitive: but pitching and batting are two fundamentally different athletic efforts with absolutely nothing in common.)

          Also, sabermetrics has always been sophisticated enough to assess this: it’s probability 101, after all. It’s a simple 1-parameter vs. 2-parameter system. The null hypothesis is that P[outcome in clutch | overall rate] x P[outcome in non-clutch | overall rate] is within error of P[outcome in clutch | clutch rate] x P[outcome in non-clutch | non-clutch rate]. When you do this for big league batters, you find that individual players show the distribution of deviations expected simply by chance alone. This is true for different batters in the same seasons and for the same batter within careers.

          (With pitchers, it does become more complicated because of the stretch vs. the windup issue: very real differences exist there for many pitchers, and that overlaps with clutch vs. non-clutch situations.)

          • Eternal Pessimist

            I don’t know how the distraction of nervousness isn’t going to affect a player. To suggest that concentration, or cognition as you say, doesn’t have an affect since it mostly “reaction” seems to miss the boat. Certainly most MLB players have managed to excel, so they must have managed to control their nerves to some extent, but I’m quite confident they are not equal. Some are likely to be better at controlling their nerves and are likely to be better clutch players because of it.

            “that is why amphetamines (which make you edgy and jittery) enhance performance, whereas drugs that relax you are a detriment to athletic performance”

            Actually, amphetamines enhance concentration (cognition) which is the main reason they are used in the treatment of Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). Treatment for ADD must be given in a narrow therapeutic range and too high of a dose would likely be too activating leading to an eventual decline in performance.

            The drugs that would relax you (anxiolytics such as xanax, valium) are also very sedating. Being relaxed at the plate is fine, but being sedated is not very helpful. If you look into the full effects of the drugs there is much more to the story.

            • DocPeterWimsey

              Amphetamines also make you edgy and nervous. (I’ve take quite a lot fo them in my day: they are a PED for academics!) However, being nervous also makes you focus better: it’s an adaptive. Adrenaline is actually better than amphetamines for this sort of stuff!

              • Eternal Pessimist

                You are taking one effect of the drug and ignoring the other (stronger) effect it has in relation to cognition/concentration. i.e., the net gain in concentration/cognition due to certain CNS effects > net loss of concentration/cognition due to nervousness/edginess from drug.

                • Eternal Pessimist

                  There are many levels of nervousness as well. Nervous can have beneficial/adaptive effect or be so severe/poorly controlled that it leads to paralysis.

                • DocPeterWimsey

                  No, I’m not: my point is that type of “nervous” improves your reflexes and actually lets you concentrate better, at least for short spans of time.

                  • Eternal Pessimist

                    There is a limit to nervousness being useful, beyond which it lowers your performance. As an extreme example, have you ever seen someone having a panic attack?

                    In any event, until someone does the work to calculate performance in some defined “clutch” situation category, and prove it otherwise, I will continue to believe that “clutch” players exist, though the difference may not be much from their general performance.

                    • Chris

                      Well written.

                    • Rebuilding

                      I linked this a little higher, but not sure you saw it. Here you go:

                    • Kyle

                      The work you describe has been done literally dozens, if not hundreds, of times in the last 30 years.

                    • TWC

                      “[U]ntil someone does the work to calculate performance in some defined “clutch” situation category, and prove it otherwise, I will continue to believe that “clutch” players exist…”

                      Okay. It’s been done. Read Chapter 4 of The Book.

                      Or, if you don’t want to spend any money to be wrong, look at this BP article:

          • cking6178

            I think the “flaw” in the argument is that SABR stats are quantitative in nature and “clutch” is a qualitative measure…I agree with bbmoney, most of the “non clutch” guys have been weeded out by the time they get to the show….also, your argument about cognitive processes is a little off….to say that “humans do not think as fast as a baseball gets to homeplate” is false…our brains process information at ridiculous rates…that is why you hear about the ability to “slow the game down”…your brain actually calculates very complex physics equations in split seconds, otherwise you’d never be able to actually hit a baseball…I think you mean that we don’t consciously comprehend what our brain is processing faster than a baseball travels to homeplate.

            • DocPeterWimsey

              No, all probability has a qualitative component. Almost all test hypotheses predict that Group A and Group B are different: and that is qualitative, whether it be groups of rats, groups of genes, or groups of plate appearances. For example, my computer is running analyses very analogous to this issue right now, but asking whether two different periods in time showed different levels of ecological similarity. It’s the same math: I could basically use the distributions of K’s, BB’s, doubles, triples and HR in this same program!

              As for what the brain does, yes, we can do impressive trigonometric calculations on the fly: because we are advanced monkeys with ancestors that required this to stay in trees! However, it is purely non-cognitive: a lemur could do it as well as you or I could (actually, better!), and lemurs are not all that much brighter than dogs. Impressive? Hell, yeah. Cognitive? Not remotely!

            • Eternal Pessimist

              bmoney said

              “I’m not much of a believer that there are serious variations in clutch at the MLB level.”

              I think that is a fair debate to have. If they defined specific situations (man at third and 2 outs for instance) and compared performance across the league I would bet you find significant trends exist and significant differences between players, but I would also bet the differences are small compared to the big differences SABR has found w/ stats like OPS and FIP, etc…

              • DocPeterWimsey

                No, there would not be any such trends. Indeed, one amusing thing about the different clutch statistics is not only that they fail to predict the future: they fail to predict each other! How a guy does with runners in scoring position does not predict how well he does in “late and close.”

                Sample size is the other big issue. Let’s just go with “high leverage” situations, as defined by Fangraphs. The current leader in PAs in “high leverage” situations is Andrew McCutcher: with 65. He’s doing pretty well: a failure (out) rate of only 0.554. Clutch?!? Well, his overall failure rate (1-OBP) is 0.63. So, that is all of 5 fewer outs than we expect. We expect one player in 15 do be doing that much better than expected (and another one player in 15 to be doing that much more poorly) just by chance alone. Half the guys with “true” OBPs of 0.370 should have OBPs between 0.340 and 0.415 in such situations.

                So, really, the logic and math behind this is quite easy!

                • Eternal Pessimist

                  Sample size is an issue for sure.

          • jt

            “Most of athletics is reaction, not cognition”
            not sure that the cognitive can’t interact a bit with the reaction.
            For example,Sosa gate swung at outside pitches and turned on those that were inside. Sandberg was able to learn to turn on the inside pitch. Batters pick up on the changes in delivery that may indicate the type of pitch.
            But this is a pretty important concept that perhaps a lot of fans do not consider.
            Downhill ski racers have a different talent than those who race the slalom, the former executes from a studied of the course, the latter reacts to perceived patterns.
            Ted Williams was a nervous nanny flow type of guy. Not sure the same could be said about Joe D.

        • Rebuilding

          Sorry I missed this whole discussion, but there is no such thing as a clutch hitter. It’s been shown over and over. Here is a great article from Baseball Prospectus that links to other studies:

          • Rebuilding

            I’ll amend that slightly: some people do perform better under pressure, but the ones that don’t have been weeded out long before the major leagues. So generally there are no “clutch” hitters in MLB

  • Rebuilding

    They were just talking about Rizzo on The Score and I agree with their observation that when he hits an opposite field homer he sure looks like Jim Thome

  • Dawn Strand

    I watch Baseball Tonight every night – mainly for the Web Gems. I learned long ago that there is no love or respect for the Cubs on that program. I get that the Dodgers are exciting right now, but come ON… Although my DVR cut off the web gems last night. Didn’t see if they gave one to Barney or Ransom. I’d be shocked…

  • CubsFaninMS

    ESPN’s website (yes, I’m using ESPN after my anti-ESPN rant) says that Anthony Rizzo is…

    a) second among NL first basemen in home runs, tied for 6th in MLB first basemen (along with Prince Fielder)
    b) first among major league first baseman in doubles
    c) third among NL first baseman in walks
    d) in the top 10 in NL first basemen in most offensive categories not mentioned (not BA of course)

    Rizzo is having a good first you, no doubt. Rizzo compares very admirably with Prince Fielder this year. Now. Compare contracts.

    • CubsFaninMS

      *btw, I do know the difference between “first basemen” and “first baseman”, although my post above indicates otherwise

      • Bric

        Damn those irregular plurals! We knew what you meant.

  • Chad

    Does anyone see us going after Giancarlo Stanton hard this offseason? I think I lineup with him and Rizzo would be so powerful!

    • Eric

      Depends on what the fish want to do. We definitely have the pieces to get something done, but I’d hate to see what it would take. I think the conversation starts with Baez, Soler, and Almora.

      • Michael

        I would really like to see Olt get the call in sept. And succeed then you could package him with Beaz and and maybe Johnson/Alcantara?!?

        • willis

          With him missing everything in AAA it’s going to be interesting to see if they do indeed bring him up for a month. I can’t see the reason to do so unless they just want to try “lightening in a bottle” hoping he can be hot for a month.

          • Kyle

            If he doesn’t begin to show some sort of turnaround, it would be cruel to call him up.

            • MoneyBoy

              Yup … see BJax and Vitters!

    • mjhurdle

      I don’t get the Stanton love.
      The kid has amazing power, but has not proven he can hit for any consistent average, he strikes out a ton, he is an average fielder at best, and he has already had injuries to his hamstring, knee and shoulder.
      Why is everyone in a rush to get this guy?
      I wouldn’t mind it is the price was right, but you know the Marlins are going to ask for the moon, and i am not sure that he is worth it.
      The injuries probably scare me the most when thinking about sending off 3-4 top prospects for him.

      • On The Farm

        I would guess it would have to do something with that 5.7 WAR he put up last season. But I agree, I feel like the cost might not be equal to the return.

  • @cubsfantroy

    Another reason I refuse to watch anything on ESPN! I really hate them.

  • CubFan Paul

    “That tells you a guy is hitting really well, regardless of what his BABIP-depressed batting average says”

    Uh-oh. Don’t diss the BABIP man. He’s clearly been unlucky.

  • Funn Dave

    That picture is hilarious. Well done.

  • Scott

    Poor Wrigley Beer Man. Went Phishing for a drug filled Phish fan and broke his bike. At least he saved that person. Somebody donated that guys a bike.

  • Vulcan


    Story is

  • Blublud

    People bash ESPN, but yet you keep watching. You have to watch them to know what to bash them about. ESPN and Sportscenter is and always will be the best sports show on TV. I don’t see this bias you guys are talking. Its a sports “news” show and it’s a show(like any other show) built for ratings so they can make money. If people want to see Puig, they are going to show puig because that’s what gets them ratings. Same goes for ARoid, Riley Cooper, Tebow, Johnny Football and every other person who dominates their headlines. If it get ratings and makes them money they are going to show because that is what they are in business to do. Brett should understand this, because as much as he loves the Cubs, he doesn’t run this site for free and he post what he thinks will help his ratings.

    • mjhurdle

      You say you don’t see the bias, then proceed to explain that of course they are biased because they only show what gets them ratings (implying that their concern is not as much being an informational sports network as it is being the sporting world’s version of The Bachelor).
      And as far as the “show what gets ratings”, apparently that isn’t their driving factor, seeing as their ratings are all significantly down across the board from last year.
      Or maybe, as people are suggesting, there is a disconnect between what ESPN thinks drives ratings and what the average viewer wants to see.

  • CubsFaninMS

    The problem is, ESPN is more or less creating a “narrative” now, not being objective. They are selecting players and teams they like and throwing them into the spotlight and ignoring other, equally appealing stories (i.e. Junior Lake). “People are interested” in teams and players because they are publicized by people like ESPN. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. To a lesser extent than a news source, they have somewhat of a moral obligation to present a great deal of objectivity in who they select to cover. Case in point.. the Cubs are a major market team with a huge fan base across the country. What Junior Lake has done over the past two weeks is somewhat comparable to Puig’s emergence yet he is being totally ignored.

    A major news outlet came to my small hometown several years ago to report a major news story. When presented with simple interviews from family members who were not part of the story and courthouse-documented eye witness statements (23 of them), the news outlet simply chose to report the story presented by the family members. That’s create a narrative, not objective reporting.

  • pete

    Brett, 2 questions about Fujikawa/his surgery. Is 13 months basically the fastest that a player can come back from TJ? Also, when does he start rehabbing and do we know where he will do so (AZ, Chicago, etc.)?

  • Bilbo161

    It seems to me that the Cubs get plenty of love when they deserve it. Got to win games if you want to be noticed.

  • Eternal pessemist

    I dont think its a matter of “getting the love”. Its a matter of reporting the biggest momemts of the game in an unbiased way. ESPN ignored not one, but two cubs having two homer days. Overall, the Puigors had a better day, but how do they miss that?

  • CubsFaninMS

    When it comes down to it, this is America. We have the freedom of choice. If ESPN wants to selectively cover certain players and markets, they do it at their own risk. When they drop the ball on covering the Chicago Cubs and their players, there will people outlets like Bleacher Nation and other news sources to more than fill the vaccuum.

    • Jed Jam Band

      All we’re saying is that their coverage isn’t very comprehensive. If they want to call themselves “East Coast-West Coast Sports Network” I’d be fine with that. But they market themselves as THE place for sports coverage which could not be further from the truth.

      Alternative network names: Guys Yelling About Sports Network, Tim Tebow Network, LeBron Is Good At Basketball Channel

    • Cubes

      ESPN doesn’t have the attention span for baseball

    • ssckelley

      ESPN would not be covering players the way they do if nobody was watching it. But the big markets like New York and Los Angles care about people like Tebow and Puig so that is what they continue to show. When the Cubs get relevant again then players like Rizzo and Lake may get some love. ESPN will cater to the Chicago market when the teams are relevant, after all DRose gets plenty of coverage.