Quantcast

wrigley field from right bleachersThe Cubs and White Sox “rivalry” has lost a little luster in recent years, as neither team has been particularly competitive, and the series has been a bit marginalized by changes in interleague play.

But, I’m still a sucker for it. Cardinals and White Sox back-to-back. That’s pretty cool. The Cubs took down the Cardinals, and now it’s on to the White Sox.

Jeff Samardzija starts tonight against lefty Jose Quintana, and the Cubs respond accordingly with a lot of righties in the lineup. Samardzija has yet to make a start that was a real egg, although his last time out against the Reds (5.2 IP, 3 ER, 8 H, 4 BB, 4 K) was his worst effort of the year. He’ll get a DH-less White Sox lineup tonight to get back to his dominant ways.

Speaking of that lineup … how do you get Adam Dunn and Jose Abreu in the lineup without a DH? Well, you’ve gotta throw one of them into the outfield. Dunn is the sacrificial lamb tonight, where he’ll battle the idiosyncrasies of Wrigley’s corner outfield in left. His UZR/150 hasn’t been better than -30 in the outfield since 2008 (and it was -28.9 that year). That’s insanely consistently bad, in case you needed context. Hit it to left tonight, boys.

Think Samardzija is going to be jacked up to face Abreu? My money is on Samardzija, by the way.

Game Info

Chicago White Sox (15-17) at Chicago Cubs (11-18), 7:05 CT on CSN, WCIU (Sox).

Game Thread and Series Preview

The Game Thread lives here. And, of course, for those who aren’t into message board-style game threads, please feel free to use the comments on this post for your in-game commentary/outbursts.

The Series Preview lives here.

Starting Pitchers

Jose Quintana (4.00 ERA, 3.55 FIP, 3.33 xFIP; 3.56 K/BB)

versus

Jeff Samardzija (1.98 ERA, 3.28 FIP, 3.72 xFIP; 2.38 K/BB)

Chicago White Sox Lineup

1. Alejandro De Aza, CF

2. Gordon Beckham, 2B

3. Jose Abreu, 1B

4. Adam Dunn, LF

5. Dayan Viciedo, RF

6. Alexei Ramirez, SS

7. Tyler Flowers, C

8. Marcus Semien, 3B

9. Jose Quintana, P

Chicago Cubs Lineup

1. Emilio Bonifacio, CF

2. Junior Lake, LF

3. Anthony Rizzo, 1B

4. Starlin Castro, SS

5. Welington Castillo, C

6. Nate Schierholtz, RF

7. Mike Olt, 3B

8. Darwin Barney, 2B

9. Jeff Samardzija, P

  • itzscott

    Kind of Cub-like when you think about it….

    The Cubs want to trade an ace for someone who they think will become an ace later on.

    • Jon

      It’s ashamed so many emotions and agendas are involved. Had he been an asset acquired by current regime and extension probably is done by now

      • willis

        Trading him is ridiculous and the wrong move. But it will happen and the rebuild will take another step back as they move the goal posts even more. Just have to swallow the reality on that. It’s very unfortunate.

        • Jason P

          The Cubs have 3 options:

          (A) Overpay Shark

          (B) Trade Shark

          (C) Change the rebuild strategy/speed

          All of the options have their drawbacks, but to me, B is the least desirable

        • mjhurdle

          “Trading him is ridiculous and the wrong move.”

          i think the ridiculous thing is how you can even say that without knowing what they would trade him for.
          Unless you feel that Shark is just so good he should be untouchable no matter what the return is, at which point THAT would be the ridiculous thing.

          • willis

            I do not think they will get enough value for him. They may get some prospects, but no one that can give the cubs what he can. Again, he’s no ace. But he’s a damn good pitcher who gives you innings and keeps you in the game more times than not. You can give me four pitching prospects and I’ll take the bet none of them will be what Shark is, or what he will be. I could be wrong, but that’s the way I feel about it.

            • Eternal Pessimist

              But Shark will no longer be cost controlled and by trading him you pick up prospects and save the money to buy an additional starter. The Cubs will need more than one starting pitcher. Not saying they shouldn’t pay Shark…depends on price, prospects available in trade, and Sharks bottom line willingness to stay.

          • hawkinright

            I think it’s ridiculous when you have almost no legit MLB talent and one of the few guys that show at least the stuff of a front line starter and you want to trade him. Yes on that’s ridiculous.

            • hawkinright

              He’s been a starter a whopping two years prior to this season so his lack of ever being an ace prior to this year doesn’t really tell the whole story.

              • mjhurdle

                well, there were the 86 starts he made in the minors to factor in as well. It isn’t like they just made him a starter 2 years ago.

            • mjhurdle

              I think it is ridiculous that you think you know that the Cubs “want” to trade him.
              You have no clue what the Cubs are offering or what Shark is asking for.
              Shark may want to be paid like the Ace you think he is. The Cubs may want to pay him like the 1-2 WAR pitcher his stats say he is (priot to this year).

              I think the most likely scenario is that the Cubs want to have Shark on their team, but not necessarily at the $$$ Shark wants (not saying which side is wrong in that, just saying they are apart). At that point it isn’t that the Cubs want to trade Shark, but if they feel that Shark is leaving regardless, they would be….ridiculous…..to just let him walk with nothing in return.

    • JasonP

      Shark hasn’t pitched like an ace for a whole season yet. He’s been impressive and ace-like so far, but he has been able to almost completely avoid homers and has left a lot of guys on base.

      It’s amazing to me how many people so easily forget that this is the 5.00+ ERA pitcher from the back half of last season.

      • Jon

        Or people discard arbitrary end points

        • JasonP

          3 consecutive bad months, and a 100 IP sample size are worth taking notice of.

          • willis

            Well, so is another move that pushes back competing even more. I don’t think he’s an “ace” by any means, but he’s a horse on the mound that is still relatively young and could be a part of this thing. He’s a strong arm that competes like crazy. The cubs need that.

            • JasonP

              Go compare his stats for the seasons leading up to his free agency year with Edwin Jackson’s stats at the same age leading up to his contract with the Cubs.

              They certainly aren’t the same pitchers, but Shark’s performance has not put him in a different class than what EJax was prior to signing with the Cubs.

              If it was only going to take the same dollars to extend Shark as it took to get Ejax, then I would be very bothered by the FO on this front. I’m guessing that Shark is asking for quite a bit more. He’s a very good, but not great pitcher, and frankly the FO has got impressive production from cheaper signings to fill out the rotation from guys like Maholm, Feldman and Hammel (so far).

              If we’re working from an assumption that there are few if any payroll restrictions then, yes, not extending Samardzija is bad planning; but it’s not like he’s an invaluable asset.

              • hawkinright

                Ok and then go compare what the two were doing when they were 20.

          • hawkinright

            Yeah, you take note of that but in my mind he’s better then any pitcher that likely to hit the market, the cubs rank 23rd in payroll and just finished “2nd” again going after a free agent pitcher. It absolutely makes zero sense not trying our hardest to lock him up.

      • itzscott

        No argument there….

        He’s pitched like an ace the 1st month of the season, but nothing close at any time previously.

        It’ll be interesting to see what Hoystein settles for when a trade comes down.

        • Drew7

          I believe he had a sub-3 ERA through May of last season, while also striking more guys out.

          • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

            2.85 ERA and a little better than a K per inning.

        • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

          Because this front office has done a lot of settling in trades.

          • itzscott

            They’d have to settle for something or there won’t be a trade, no?

          • another JP

            Please give some examples of how this front office has “settled” in trades. You say “a lot” so it shouldn’t be too difficult for you.

            • itzscott

              Maybe poor choice of words on my part even though ultimately all deals are settled.

              Should have played down to my audience and written “what they get” using 3 words instead of one.

              • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                Either way you are implying that this front office has consistently traded guys for less than what they should have.

                You could, possibly, make that case for Rizzo/Cashner but that’s about it.

                This front office is hell bent on garnering a reputation similar to what Friedman has in TB. Pay their prices or you aren’t getting their players. That’ll mean they hang on to some players too long but they’ll get far more than they should a lot of the time.

                • itzscott

                  Wow… That’s not what I implied at all.

  • SenorGato

    Maybe I never noticed before but MLB Gameday offers this little scouting note once in a while. They just said that Barney is hitting .000 on fastballs in the zone a recent pitch was in…wasn’t paying too much attention and it went away as fast as it came.

    I really thought they’d luck out and Barney would hit a little better this year. The patience is nice, but I worry that he might just have gotten lucky there. He’s swinging and missing more while swinging less, can’t be a good sign. OTOH he’s being more patient and hitting more fly balls – two things that could lead to a half decent summer for Darwin Barney.

  • 70′s Cub

    Olt is getting himself on the bubble double R lets him rip on a 3-0 pitch “good coaching”. Fastball middle of the zone those got to be squared up son! At this pace he’s back at AAA after the super 2 deadline.

    • nakedman1664

      Can’t come soon enough.

    • itzscott

      I’m a big Mike Olt fan, but at this point I don’t think that would be a bad thing for him so long as he gets some consistent playing time.

      • itzscott

        The only thing I fear with Olt is that the Cubs could have two Josh Vitters on their hands.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          What’s the comparison between Vitters and Olt?

          Vitters – good contact hitter, no defensive home.

          Olt – bad contact hitter, pretty good glove at third.

          • itzscott

            Last time I saw Vitters in the majors he looked like Olt does now.

            • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

              It’s pretty rare that a guy who has a low K rate in the minors and whom scouts describe as a good contact hitter has his K rate jump above 30% in the majors.

            • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

              That would be a couple years ago when he, a notorious slow starter, was getting only occasional work.

              If you want to define Vitters based just on that, I suppose you can. If you look at the total body of evidence, though, Olt and Vitters really aren’t all that similar.

              • itzscott

                Since that’s what I’ve got to go on, I’d say the similarities are apparent.

                • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                  So we should ignore what they have done in the minors?

                  Otherwise, today’s Olt and pre-June 2012 Rizzo were the same as well.

                  • itzscott

                    Has Vitters been killing it in the minors?

                    Doesn’t appear to be that he has been.

                    I know, I know. He’s been injured, he’s young, etc, etc.

                    • SenorGato

                      Not sure, but I can not wait for this revampimagimake to move the team and fans past these guys. I’m hoping for a corner utility from either one of them at this point, and even then would rather just be done with the whole thing.

                    • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                      Olt may never hit the ball enough to be successful in the majors.

                      Vitters should hit the ball enough just not get on base often enough to make it in the majors.

  • Jason P

    If Shark can get us one more inning, I like our chances in the bottom in the ninth with Valbuena (hopefully), Rizzo, and Castro. That said, he’s at 105 pitches and the middle of the order coming up. Hopefully RR has him on a short leash.

  • Blackhawks1963

    Mike Olt can’t make contact in this league. He’s Brett Jackson all over again and we are rapidly learning why Texas no longer wanted him. He sucks.

    • cubsfan08

      Dramatic much?

      • ssckelley

        Next he will tell us how much Lake sucks.

    • ssckelley

      Post this a couple more times today.

      • Funn Dave

        hahaha

  • BlameHendry

    I realize Shark has been very good tonight, but sending him back out there for the 9th against their 2-3-4 is another very questionable decision by RR…

    • Jason P

      I’m with you. Very questionable.

      • willis

        Pretty bad, but I can see Shark lobbying for it. RR has to step up there and say no.

    • ssckelley

      Never a doubt!

      Whew!

  • Soda Popinski

    Ok, I didn’t see that at bat against Abreu, but on mlb.com game center there looked to be two strikes that were called balls. Is Wellington out there framing poorly?

    • Drew7

      The 2-1 pitch was most certainly a strike.

    • Funn Dave

      Probably

  • Eternal Pessimist

    The ump is sticking it to Shark…the 2nd and 4th pitch were each in the strike zone. Watched on TV and MLB.com and it clearly shows each pitch in the strike zone. So that’s were Abreu gets his “magic”.

  • Rebuilding

    Great, great game by Shark. No way he should be out there over 120+ pitches. Go get him Rick

  • Soda Popinski

    )@#(*%#

  • BlameHendry

    i cannot believe he is STILL out there… RR is out of his mind

  • Jason P

    Alright, what the hell is Renteria doing? Take Shark the eff out.

    • cubsfan08

      Genius!

  • JasonP

    Oy vey, if Shark has some bad starts after this, the narrative of RR ruined his season by running up his ptich count against the Sox is going to be unbearable.

  • Rebuilding

    Nice!! I stick by the fact that there is no way he should be in the game at that point. His right arm is too valuable

    • willis

      No way. Not with that pitch count. I can imagine that conversation was tough to have, but you have to have it and make the right decision. We’ll see the aftermath…he got out of it but damn near 130 pitches. Yo.

  • JasonP

    Atta baby Shark!! Needed that twin killing.

  • ssckelley

    Now get him a win!

  • BlameHendry

    sheesh that DP was clutch… but despite not giving up any runs, letting him almost 130 pitches is still just bad bad bad. Can we please not destroy his arm before the trade deadline?

  • Jason P

    Despite the double play, 126 pitches is not acceptable, especially leaving him out there after 2 consecutive walks. Lets hope this doesn’t become a habit.

  • sunshine and rainbows

    Phew, dodged a bullet there in several ways. I don’t like that he kept him out there for 125+ pitches but at least it worked out this time. But I don’t think the risk of losing everything we will get from trading him to just show he can go 9.

  • JasonP

    Love the extra replay of that horrible slide into second.

    • nakedman1664

      We shall call it….the penguin.

  • nakedman1664

    Calm down folks. Shark will be fine.

    • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

      Eh, keeping pitch counts low doesn’t just limit injuries it also increases the likelihood that he has a good outing next time out and impacts his next several starts.

      http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/sabr_present.pdf

      • nakedman1664

        Since this isn’t something that regularly happens with him, I don’t see that throwing 126 pitches will suddenly render him ineffective his next few starts.

        • blublud

          Exactly. I hope 126 pitches does not become a regular event, but one time is not going to hurt him.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            Actually, the data points exactly to the evidence that one game with an elevated pitch count can have a continuing and negative effect for several games. One game with an elevated pitch count can, according to the research, in fact hurt his performance for multiple games.

            It’s just a bad risk to take.

          • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

            The extended period of sac bunting for everyone ticked me off but nothing gets my blood boiling more (at least when it involves managerial decisions) than pitch counts.

            No damn reason to go over 100. Especially so when you have a decent bullpen that includes a swing-man.

            • blublud

              Once again, I’m sure Ricketts knows what he is doing.

              • Drew7

                Guess I missed him sitting in the dugout tonight.

                • blublud

                  Renteria, sorry.

              • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                If you mean Renteria, he could probably handle an MLB clubhouse a million times better than I could. I’d get pissy about all of the egos and let it fester until I blew up and called them all a bunch of namby-pamby wannabes who don’t know their head from their elbow.

                Except it appears he doesn’t know what he is doing when it comes to limiting pitch counts. That’s ok, most of MLB is lagging.

                • blublud

                  Man, once again, please build me a flow chart and write me a process spec on how to properly build or repair an airplane. I’m sure you are more knowledgeable than I am.

                  • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                    If I spent a better part of 6 years reading research papers about how to build an airplane…I might be able to do it.

                    Then again that’s not really the issue.

                    Now, you have engineered an airplane and I am sure you are good at it but have you spent decades on the assembly line building that airplane? Have you spent decades flying those airplanes?

                    No? Oh, well then you don’t know anything compared to the factory workers and pilots! They have real world experience building and flying airplanes.

                    • blublud

                      Actually, I started on the floor building and repairing airplanes with my hands. I also have an A&P license and I am a certified Aircraft Maintenance Tech(sheet metal and structures). There is a reason I’m good at my job.

                    • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                      But if a guy has decades of experience building and repairing airplanes…he would be better than you at designing aircraft?

                      Or would he need some sort of education? Something beyond the factory floor work to allow him to design aircraft.

                      The sword cuts both ways.

                      Just because RR has been in baseball a long ass time, doesn’t mean everything he does is gold or is the best decision possible. If Samardzija was going for a no-hitter, sure leave him in for as long as possible. The goodwill might outweigh the negative impact.

                      But I guess they shouldn’t have listened to Abraham Wald because he was just a stat head and had no experience flying a bomber into enemy fire.

                    • blublud

                      No, not exactly. Conventional wisdom says more experience, more knowledge, but that’s as wrong as paying an employee on years of experience instead of proven ability. Some guys have a higher level of comprehension, or an ability to dissect information quicker once exposed to a subject. So a guy with 5 years experience could be better or know more than a 10 year guy, but I’m willing to bet a guy with zero years experience will never know more than either guy.

                    • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                      Let’s put it another way.

                      The engineers of the Apollo program had no clue and had never flown a rocket to the moon.

                      Neil Armstrong had landed a spaceship on the moon.

                      Who would you rather trust to come up with the orbital maneuvers to get Apollo 12 to the moon?

                      Did the Apollo 13 crew tell Houston what to do or did Houston tell Apollo 13 what to do?

                      Experience doing something doesn’t equal expertise in doing something.

                    • blublud

                      Right Hansman, but those guys studied and did their Jobs for years. They took time and learned hands on. They didn’t build a “rocket and ship it to the moon” by reading from some stat websites and wikipedia. Some guy fresh out of college wasn’t calling the shots. At the time, they were the best people available to understand what was going on. The didn’t read some paper and decide the could do the job.

                    • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                      “…those guys studied and did their Jobs for years. They took time and learned hands on.”

                      Not really. The flying was left up to pilots. I’m willing to bet a fair amount of money none of the engineers of the Apollo program had spent any time in a rocket.

                      “They didn’t build a “rocket and ship it to the moon” by reading from some stat websites and wikipedia.”

                      Neither did Bill James or any of the sabermetricians since him. Yet, the sport has been revolutionized by them.

                      “Some guy fresh out of college wasn’t calling the shots.”

                      Same with all of the non-player GMs.

                      “At the time, they were the best people available to understand what was going on.”

                      You mean except for the guys who logged hundreds of hours flying in space. Like Grissom, Collins, Armstrong, Aldrin. I am sure they were consulted but they weren’t leading and designing space flights.

                      Space flight and baseball have taken two opposite paths. Baseball had a century of hands-on experience where most of it has been proven wrong through empirical study. Space flight has had a little bit of empirical study followed by a lot of hands on experience.

                      I’ll let you figure out which one has had more things proven wrong/end up in reverse thinking.

                      “The[y] didn’t read some paper and decide the could do the job.”

                      I’m not saying that I could be an MLB manager or GM. I’m also not saying that their experience makes them geniuses in everything baseball. I give every manager a fair bit of slack and I give the FO plenty of benefit.

                      Sometimes, folks can be too close to the trees to see the forest.

                    • blublud

                      Wow Hansman, you totally missed it. This Convo has gone way off course. The point is, pilots, scientist, engineers, etc, they studied their crafts and learn through trial and error. Trial and error that we never experienced, so we could never have their knowledge.

                      First rule of being an IE. Never tell someone how to do their job, let them teach you how they do their job. Allow them to see their own faults and then they’ll come up with new solution based of research you give them.

                      So in other words, if Renteria turns into the exact manager you think he should be, if the manager he wants to be, I would still support him 100%.

                    • Jason P

                      Well Renteria’s been a manager for all of 1 month, so there’s a good chance he doesn’t completely know what he’s doing yet.

                      Again, as Hansman pointed out above, baseball is an evolving game. Guys like Bill James were laughed at for their research because he was challenging people who analyzed baseball for a living and beliefs that had been held for generations.

                      Quite frankly, the “he must be right because he does this for a living argument” is very weak.

                      If the

                    • Jason P

                      Ignore the random 2 words at the end of my comment..

                    • blublud

                      Sorry. I don’t agree. I feel if you have hands on experience on something that I don’t, then there are no amount of reports I can read to make me more knowledgeable on the subject. If I do, then that says more about your lack of knowledge on the subject than my apparent knowledge.

                      We’ll have to agree to disagree.

                  • Drew7

                    Ok, I’m sure it took a ton of hard work to become an airplane mechanic (engineer? I honestly don’t recall) and it sounds like you enjoy it, which is the most important thing.

                    But, have you noticed that nobody else talks about what they do or how smart they must be to have the job they have?That’s because it makes you sound like a *huge* douche.

                    • blublud

                      The point is, no matter what you do for a living, I’m not going to be better at it than you. The goes for flipping burgers or being a Lawyer. That goes from selling shoes, to selling cars. I would be a douche if I tried to tell a shoe sells man how to properly sell shoes.

                    • blublud

                      Also, I’m not an Aircraft Engineer, I’m an IE. So I don’t design aircraft, I just tell you the fastest way to complete the work that design engineers create.

                    • Drew7

                      “I would be a douche if I tried to tell a shoe sells man how to properly sell shoes.”

                      This I agree with. There is nothing more annoying than the Type-A personality that happens to know the right way to do *everything*.

                      Here’s the problem though – talking about how playing college baseball gives your statements more credibility, how smart you have to be to be an airplane mechanic, and your sarcastic, outright dismissal of anything remotely resembling advanced stats *make you just like those guys*.

                      This may read like I’m trying to be a dick, but that really couldn’t be further from the truth. I’m just letting you know why some people may not be hearing what you have to say.

                    • blublud

                      First of all, the college baseball point was originally stated when I was told I didn’t understand baseball. So I responded I played in college( I really really really sucked) so I think I understand baseball more than who ever I was talking to at the time. But like everything here, the narrative has exploded into something different.

                      I never said you have to be smart to be A/C tech, just that you can’t tell me about A/C work, just like you can’t tell Renteria how to do his job. I can’t tell you how to do your job.

                      Stats are my life. Measurements and metrics and numbers are my life. I don’t do shit unless numbers tell me to do it, unless human element suggest differently. I don’t trust my own stats or numbers because numbers are naturally manipulative, and even when true, easily manipulated. Human element is always first. Know why? Because we are humans. I understand eliminating human error. That a huge part of my job. But I have learn in almost every study I have ever done, that that is impossible when dealing with humans.

        • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

          I’m going to guess you didn’t check out the link.

          Which is fine, I don’t click on every link I am presented. But, the data points to limiting pitch counts is more effective than extending an extra day of rest.

      • JasonP

        What’s really interesting (to me at least) from that is the decreased walks, especially on the 10 prior game pitch counts.

        Guys trying to stay in the zone more to cut down on pitch counts?

        • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

          I’m guessing if I did some digging on YouTube I could find the video of this presentation.

          My guess is that it is guys losing “stuff” and missing fewer bats which leads to pitches that would have been out of the zone going for weak contact.

  • JasonP

    Coghlan is hitting .000, send him down!!!! Rabble, Rabble Rabble!!!!!!!!!

  • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

    126 fucking pitches?!

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      With an 8 man bullpen.

      Completely senseless.

      • BT

        I think RR was trying to get him a win.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          If RR was risking the health of his best pitcher in a misguided effort to net Samardzija a completely meaningless and utterly useless contrived “stat” like a pitching win…

          Let’s just say I hope RR is quickly and thoroughly shown the stupidity of that line of reasoning.

          • blublud

            Luke, I agree about the win thing, but 126 pitches is no big deal. I could see if he was doing this on a game by game basis, then that would troublesome, but 126 pitches is not going to kill a pitcher once.

            • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

              Well no, it won’t kill him…probably (unless you are Chris Sale) but it probably will limit his ability to have success the next time out and the time after that and the time after that.

      • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

        With 13 pitchers, a crappy season and several guys that could be future starters, I’d like to see the Cubs try a 4-man rotation with piggybacked starts.

        Instead we see guys going over 100 pitches on a regular basis.

        Just something to shake it up.

        • wkranz

          I get the desire to preserve arms and avoid injury, but seems like a pour way to develop.

          • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

            Develop what? You should be able to get 8 guys a decent number of pitches over the course of the year and it appears guys do better throwing fewer pitches.

            • wkranz

              I’m assuming you are talking about something similar to what Colorado did with abbreviated starts and turning to long relievers…don’t feel like that is what we will do long term, I don’t want our guys arms and habits to get built on that, just my opinion

              • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                Well, the Rockies started with crap pitchers when they initiated that experiment. Seriously, their 2012 staff was chock full of just terrible performances.

                You really need 8 guys who could perform well for once through the rotation on an ongoing basis and who wouldn’t take it up another notch knowing they are only out there for 4-5 innings. And a manager that will employ the hook at the designated pitch count.

                And it’s like Oakland in 2002, they will have to do something special in order for the baseball world to get turned on it’s head.

                • wkranz

                  Right, but our rotation isn’t that bad. They are probably average overall (so far this year above average). Why take away one of our few (if not only) “strengths” and risk messing up development.

                  Everyone points at Castro and says “the front office and new plate approach is ruining him” until they let him swing away. I could really see this backfiring.

                  • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                    You wouldn’t though.

                    If you went with 4 days rest and 5 innings pitched each starter would get 200 innings of work, it’s just more frequent but shorter duration.

                    You would need to set the pitch count limit at 80, which with 2 pitchers at that mark should get you through the 8th a vast majority of the time. This would keep the in-game pitches equal and only increase the pre-game, less stress pitches.

                    • wkranz

                      I’m not talking IP or pitch count, I’m talking flow of games. Our pitchers need to learn how to rely on their stuff, play with pitches, and change velocity when they pitch through a lineup 3 times. They will have to when we get good.

          • blublud

            That just crazy stat head trying to find a way to replace managers with computer. You know, they want restrict as many human decisions as possible.

            • Jason P

              This has become quite your line.

              • blublud

                It’s funny, but I’m always accused of being negative, but in the three season this FO has been here, I have questioned moves they have made exactly zero times. I was mad about Zambrano being traded for Volstead, more because I don’t believe in “clubhouse cancer” , and I kept up the Campana Love joke after he was traded for about 48 hours but I have literally seriously questioned their moves ZERO times. I hated Svuem and never did question his baseball decisions. You know why? Because they all know more than I do.

                As for the computer joke. Computerized strike zones. 8 man piggy back rotations. Saber metrics setting up lineups. Statheads don’t want humans making decision in baseball. Its a fact.

                • Jason P

                  Why wouldn’t you want the move with the highest probability of working out each time? If Samardzjia’s velocity is down next time he goes out there — and research has shown each pitch beyond 120 greatly increases that risk — is it somehow made better by the fact that it was a human making the error rather than a computer making the right call?

                  • blublud

                    You do know Shark probably threw 250+ pitches tonight, if not more. Now warm up pitches are usually as stressful as live pitching, but 10 or 15 more pitches in one game is not going to destroy him. If it becomes a regular event, then I agree, its a problem.

                    • Jason P

                      Again, you’re arguing with facts. If you read the link Hansman posted above, you’ll see that throwing that many pitches has a tangible effect on that pitcher’s next outing, and makes him more prone to injury.

                      Why do you think so many pitchers struggle in the games immediately following their no hitter. That’s just one game, but you can see the long-lasting impact it has on the rest of their season. Chris Sale just went on the DL one night after throwing upwards of 130 pitches.

                      Even though it’s just 1 game, 126 pitches are not good.

                • hawkinright

                  This kind of piggybacks my frustration on not extending Samardzija. I keep hearing look at his numbers they just like Edwin Jackson’s before free agency. Well looking past the numbers are every bit as important. 20 teams would stand in line if shark would take Edwin Jackson $. After 5 years Nolan Ryan’s similarity comparable is Floyd Youman,

            • Drew7

              Now you’re just being obtuse.

        • JasonP

          Shark/Hendricks, Wood/Arrieta, EJax/Ramirez, Hammel/Grimm?

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            That would be interesting.

            Toss in a 4 man bullpen, and that’s a typical 12 man pitching staff.

            • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

              I don’t know if you’d even need a full bullpen. Cut down on side sessions and replace some of those pitches with BP work.

              • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                I’d prefer a decent pen, just as an insurance policy when a starter has a bad day. I suspect the ability to work matchups in the ninth wouldn’t hurt anything either.

                • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                  I think you’d want 3 guys in the pen for sure and probably a guy in AAA who had his bags packed for Chicago at all times and was on strict low pitch counts.

                  If you loosened up on days rest and just managed pitches or innings (starter goes no more than 5 or 90 pitches, whichever is first and the 2nd starter goes 4 or 75 pitches but kept a running log of pitches (including warmups and side sessions) I think you could make it work with 3 in the pen.

                  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                    If a team doing that won a couple of division titles, it’d be interesting to see what the league reaction would be.

                    • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                      If a team won 1 division title it would cause some ripples.

                      The problem is you either go all-in or not at all. You can’t afford to piggyback 1 or 2 starters and still have an effective pen.

          • blublud

            And watch how many pitchers sign with you in the off season, or refuse to sign extension so they can go be a real pitcher on a real team.

            • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

              Just remind them that they get 40 chances at going 5 innings and qualifying for a Win or that they’ll throw the same number of innings and throw more often.

              Or just realize that the 3rd and 4th time through the order for those guys is about as good as the first time through the order for an average pitcher and live with the fact that the Verlanders of the world won’t sign with you.

              Until it works. But hey, we suck already so those guys aren’t signing with us anyway.

  • willis

    I’m really glad they took down Lake for Coughlan.

  • Soda Popinski

    C’mon Castro! Let’s end this!

  • ssckelley

    He is off the bag!

    • nakedman1664

      That’s pretty damn close though. Could go either way.

  • JasonP

    I don’t think they can overturn that one. He probably was a few millimeters off the bag, but I can see it on those replays.

    • JasonP

      **can’t see it**

  • JasonP

    This is also the point where I think they should say that if we can’t make a call in 90 seconds, the call stands.

    • Beast Mode

      I agree but it didn’t take me 90 seconds to see he was safe.

  • Beast Mode

    He is safe, again. Yes,it is close but unless your blind it should be overturned.

    • ClevelandCubsFan

      I honestly think they shouldn’t be like the NFL. The decision should be made on the preponderance of the evidence. That should ensure a higher percentage of calls are made correctly.

    • ClevelandCubsFan

      Need more frames per second. More frames please! 60 FPS, and we’d probably know for sure on this one. Also seems like there could be a sensor in the bag that is cued to the video cameras.

  • Beast Mode

    I knew it BS again.

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+