TCR Friday Notes

A chance to comment on some happenings from the past week....

- The Cubs signed Cuban defector Juan Yasser Serrano and while he may not be able to hit a curveball, he probably can throw one. At a $250K bonus (about 4th/5th round money), I don't think the expectations are going to be to high. An "insider" of Caribbean Baseball didn't give a flattering report back in April of last year:

The stark truth (known by all close followers of Cuban baseball) is that Juan Yasser Serrano was a rather mediocre Cuban Leaguer whose 2007-2008 record was a below average 2-7 won-lost mark, further diminished by an elevated 6.46 ERA and a hefty .312 opponents' batting average against his deliveries. And this, while hurling for one of the league's very best teams, Villa Clara. Serrano's three-year lifetime mark entering the current campaign was 14-16, with a 4.40 ERA for a club that captured division titles in all three seasons he labored there. It is hard to imagine a young prospect as being one of the most notable talents on the island when last season he posted the third worst ERA on his own team's 15-man pitching staff.

The article is more a criticism of his agent trying to elevate his status, but at $250K, it appears that didn't really work too well. The right-hander is 21 years old, throws a fastball between 89-92 mph at the moment and will likely start the year in Hi-A Daytona.

- Everyone's favorite topic...Milton Bradley! He had some interesting things to say yesterday. Let's start off with the somewhat insightful part.

"Just no communication," Bradley told the paper, referring to his Cubs
tenure. "I never hit more than 22 homers in my career, and all of a sudden I get to Chicago and they expect me to hit 30. It doesn't make sense. History tells you I'm not going to hit that many. Just a lot of things that try to make me a player I'm not."

I'm not sure if anyone was expecting 30 home runs, but the Cubs certainly expected him to be the #5 hitter and drive in runs and I've mentioned in the past how dumb this is. Bradley's a high OBP guy that takes lots of pitches and doesn't seem at all interested in expanding the strike zone just to put the ball in play. This is the player he is and if the Cubs wanted something else, they should have signed someone else. His skillset does not translate into an RBI guy, it translates into a pretty decent #2 hitter actually. For all the talk of the Cubs being more of a scouting team that favors seeing a guy play and getting to know a player, they sure acted like they had no idea what type of player or personality they were getting themselves.

I'm going to borrow from Transmission here to finish off my point.

Let me quote to you from the delightful children’s story and excellent allegory, The Little Prince:


“You,” said the little prince firmly.


But I'm not here to exonerate Bradley, because his statements from yesterday were filled with all kinds of bullshit as well. Let's get back to the first quote.


History also says you're a nutcase and can't stay healthy, yet Cubs management took a chance on you at 3/30M. How about coming out of your little cocoon of unaccountability and taking some responsibility for yourself and a bit of appreciation for the folks that took a chance on your baseball skills?

"Two years ago, I played, and I was good," Bradley told The Times. "I go to Chicago, not good. I've been good my whole career. So, obviously,
it was something with Chicago, not me."

Obviously Milton Bradley failed his logic class.

As reader Charlie pointed out, I'm not sure the city of Chicago was such a problem considering his home/road OPS splits of  .892 at home and .646 on the road. Bradley is more likely talking about the culture of the team and the city and how everyone should have just chilled and let Milton be Milton.

It's a bunch of nonsense of course from Bradley, just more rhetoric to pass the responsibility buck about his own failures and mistakes to all the other people trying to keep him down. It's frustrating as a fan, especially someone like myself that supported the signing and the abilities he could have brought the club. I wanted Bradley to succeed, I thought he could succeed with the Cubs, but every piece of bullshit and whininess that comes from his mouth just makes Carlos Silva in a Cubs jersey look that much better. And it takes a lot of bullshit and whininess to make Carlos Silva look good in any jersey.

- ESPN has a new insider blog named TMI, featuring a sabermetric slant and writers like Tom Tango and Dave Cameron.

- Paul Sullivan is to Cubs reporting what Fox News is to politics. His recap of yesterday's game was more worried about spinning the narrative of a loose anti-Bradley team, than realizing that five home runs in a game and a 9-3 blowout will put everyone in a good mood.

- The Sun-Times puts together an utterly ridiculous Top 50 list of all-time Cubs. I may revisit this debauchery at another time. The old-time pictures are cool though.

- Some "fan" denies Sam Fuld's wife and baby his home run ball from yesterday. I hate drawing conclusions from just one side of the story, but this one fan really sounds like an asshole...must have been a lost White Sox fan.

UPDATE: In the comments on the link, an eyewitness says a Cubs player threw the ball to a little girl and then there may have been some negotiations (I assume with the Mom), but not as greedy or assholish as it originally sounded. Tragedy averted. Still might have been a White Sox fan though.

- NFL free agency kicked off today and the Bears look to be big players in the market. The Bear Truth has the latest and be sure to grab the RSS feed. And register. And tell your friends.

- 3 questions to John Sickels from his old friend Rob Neyer on his prospect book. I enjoyed this passage:

I'm also a lot less arrogant in my middle age than I was when I was in my late 20s. Back then I would make a lot more snarky or sarcastic comments about particular players or front-office mistakes, but as I've grown older I don't do that as much. I've come to realize that there is still an awful lot we don't know about prospect development. I've become more comfortable saying "I'm not sure." Sometimes that irritates people (especially people in their 20s!) but truth is an absolute defense, and if I'm not sure about something I'm not going to pretend that I am sure.

- The guys that use to run Thunder Matt's Saloon and then College of Idiots have a new blog, Exile on Clark Street. I believe their the 49th Cubs blog I've added to the TCR blogroll (lower left sidebar). Check it out.

Phil Rogers says Cubs
were close on Calero until they saw his medical records:

# Cubs Close to signing Kiko Calero but medical work scared them away. Rather have healthy kids in bullpen than another injury risk.

And now the ironic compliment twitter from Muskat:

#cubs Angel Guzman had MRI Thursday on right shoulder. Official results expected Friday, but not expecting good news

She did update it to say the team is still optimistic about the results.

Return to Homepage


Matt Camp makes an error at 2b and Stevens gets rocked for 5 runs/4 earned in the 6th.

5-4 DBacks...

Colvin is 2/3 with 2 RBI's btw...

5/6 in the first 2 games...

Stevens actually could have easily retired the first three batters. Someone got awarded a double for a ball that almost hit a camped out Jackson in the head in center, then Camp showed us why he's never going to be in the majors, followed by Colvin getting blocked from catching one in the first row down the third base line by a D-Bag fan.

Gaub gives up a home run, Mateo with a scoreless inning

6-4 Dbacks in the bottom of the 8th

Barney walked with bases loaded and 2 outs, ties the game at 6-6 in bottom of 8th

Yay Spring Training!

Colvin 2/3, Vitters 2/4 with 2 R, Castro 2/4 with 1 run, B. Jackson 1/1 with 2 BB's, 1 3B, 1 RBI, 1 R

Jackson's triple and the game winning double were both high off the hitter's backdrop/wall in center. The triple probably was a 460 foot shot, and could have been an ISTBPHR if there were two outs.

Rob -- IIRC, I think we have disagreed about Bradley in the past, but you said it perfectly in this post. I couldn't agree more.

It seems to me that Seattle is about to repeat the Cubs mistake and use Bradley incorrectly. If Bradley is a guy that's not going to provide much power and won't expand the strike zone to drive in a run, is that the guy you want batting third?

how are they going to use bradley incorrectly?

stick him in LF and he can DH some, too. guy hits doubles and takes walks with some HR power...hell, they should probally bat him 2nd if it wasn't for chone.

ichiro/figgins/bradley...lopez or kotchman-garko...etc.

batting bradley third in the lineup is a bit odd, particularly for traditional lineups. But the mariners don't have anything resembling a power hitter after Branyan left.

I assume they'll be batting Suzuki, Figgins, Bradley, Griffey, Kothchman, Johnson, Guiterrez, Lopez, Wilson. Might as well put your top OBP guys up first and hope for the best, there's just no slugging in that lineup besides what you may get from Griffey. They'll need to get on-base, use their speed and prevent a lot of runs.

Also, if Bradley is closer to a .900 OPS, RBI guy or not, his slot in the order won't be that big a deal.

BP had a good take on Bradley, I think it was in last year's book and they repeated it in this years. Something to the effect of Bradley has never been able to do all these 3 things successfully over one season...stay healthy, play the field and be productive with the bat. He can do 2 out of the 3, but never all 3 and that's what the Cubs were asking for last year.

The Mariners seem to be asking the same thing, although they do have a DH spot they can use if he does get hurt.

It sounds a lot like Mark Grace, who was a very good #3 hitter.

My first reaction was to disagree with you, but after looking into it, I think what you say is correct. The two have very similar stats. Of course, Grace was much more durable, averaging quite a few more games played per year than Bradley, but that doesn't have anything to do with where he bats in the order.

Would Grace be a #3 hitter today if he was still around (and young)? I'm not sure. My gut says "no," but I could be wrong. I think Rob's comment that the Mariners don't have anyone that would be better in the three hole is accurate. I'm not sure that Seattle is using Bradey correctly, but he's the best guy they have for the job.

Cubs didn't have anyone better for the 3-hole either most of the time when Grace was around. Him or Sosa and one of them has to bat 4th.

Grace though would have probably been a better #2 hitter. Even for a slow guy, he had great instincts on the basepaths.

An eyewitness to the Fuld home-run/souvenir scandal steps forward in the comments section of your link, Rob.

Still no word about whether this was a White Sox fan or not. :)

thanks Romero

Cubs come back to win 8-7, looks like Snyder was the hero.

Normally I enjoy your work, but...

"Paul Sullivan is to Cubs reporting what [sic] Fox News is [sic] politics"

I can't tell if you meant
1. "Paul Sullivan is to the Cubs as Fox News is to politics" ... now we're comparing nouns, instead of an action compared to the umbrella term "politics"
2. "Paul Sullivan is to Cubs reporting as Fox News is to political reporting" ... now we're comparing the act and quality of reporting on a certain subject
3. "Paul Sullivan is to Cubs reporting as Fox News is to news" ... now we're comparing the act and quality of reporting in general
4. Paul Sullivan is bad at Cubs reporting like Fox News is bad at ... politics? Please send my well wishes to Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and the whole gang; I had no idea they were candidates for office! Oh wait, never mind. If they're as bad at politics as Paul is at reporting, they'll lose.
5. That just as Paul is spinning the narrative of a loose anti-Bradley team, Fox News is spinning the narrative of a loose anti-Bush administrative team. Wait a minute, I thought Fox hated Obama? Why would they parrot the central theme (i.e., Bush sucks, move beyond the failed policies of the past, etc) of his campaign? Isn't that what Democrats do?
5. I thought Fixed Noise (oh Keith, you rogue) was a bunch of liars. Is Paul lying about the team being loose? You were so eager to throw together a Fox putdown, you left us hanging. Fox is a lot of things, but they're definitely not reporting on the loose atmosphere of the administration and ignoring everything else.

Report Card:
Relevancy to baseball fail.
Analogy fail.
Grammar fail.
Humor fail...unless TCR is now part of MSNBC, in which case this would be a perfectly acceptable substitute for humor.

All in all, a grand slam fail. Kudos.

sense of humor fail.

yeah, that's new territory no one but rob has ever dared to touch.

he must be making it up. no one's ever done a critical review of their news reporting that i know of. it seems like someone might want to. waaaait... hehe

btw...your rant is a one-sided political slam. just saying... *cough*

enjoy your custom-fit news. you're the target audience.

#2 of course...

Fox News (news + opinion shows) is interested only in spinning a very certain narrative, as does Paul Sullivan at times.

"Humor fail" - not the first, not the last time for me...

It wasn't difficult to understand.

I didn't fall out of my chair laughing, but that's okay--you didn't write LOL after your own joke or anything.

I understand northsider's point of view, though. If I were a FOX News viewer, I'd be touchy about it too.

the fox news viewer/reader...

go to ANY day...

click on "most read"...

you can usually find 1 or 2 stories in between christian moral outrage, opinion-bashing, TV/models/hollywood women, and especially the sex-related stories. the sex related stories are instant "news" win for their readers/viewers.

shouldn't be having this discussion here, but if you get your actual "news" from Fox, you have issues.

If you're watching Beck, Rove and Hannity because you agree with their politics, fine, but Fox's actual news reporting service is anything but "fair and balanced" or objective for that matter.

I don't watch Beck, OReily or Hannity. I get my news from the actual news programs on Fox, such as Brett Baird and Shepard Smith because they are much more balanced and fair than the other cable or network news programs.

Everyone's opinion programs are worthless.


True. Of course, so is MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC and others.

The difference is, of course, that Fox reports BOTH sides of the story.

"The difference is, of course, that Fox reports BOTH sides of the story."

and that's where the credibility of your comments before are lost. =p

what's with Fox News viewers who think only Fox News are giving them a fair shake and the rest are conspiracy factories or just straight up lieing to you while Fox isn't?

that's a unique phenomenon not seen in other news products aside from those that are fans of the olberman/maddow block on MSNBC.



the BOTH sides of the story is pretty funny. I assume that was sarcasm.

And to be clear one more time, I'm talking about what they actually consider news reporting, not the obvious opinion shows like Maddow, Olbermann, Reilly, etc.

I certainly don't watch Charles Gibson(i think he retired actually) and think he's spinning the news.

CNN/MSNBC NYTIMES etc, its about what they don't report. For months if that was your only news source the Tea Party Movement didn't exist. Once they did pick up the story its nothing but Tea Bag References and right wing racist lunatics. That goes along with anyone who opposes Obama is a racist, and that comes from the mouth of non-opinion news reporters and Democrats themselves.

Now a Coffee Party group is starting up and suddenly they have CNN, and NYT coverage right of the bat. They even talk about its founder, some girl named Park. But what they didn't do is do any kind of research on who she is. She is a hard core liberal who is practically in love with Obama and campaigned for a Democrat. She was also employed by the NYT in the past but according to her interview, she is leading is a "real grass roots movement, with no political affiliation." My ass she is.

Its all about what the media decides isn't important, like a John Edwards sex scandal the major news networks sat on so they wouldn't damage a Democrat running for office. But at the same time send an army of reporters to Alaska to dig up dirt on Palin.

Or how about ACORN teaching people how to avoid taxes, and run a prostitution ring with underage girls from El Salvador? Again a non-news story from MSNBC but it was News on Fox News. I think its important to know that a corrupt organization with access to billions of tax payer dollars thinks its pretty cool to pimp out children as long as you join ACORN and support Democrats.

Look for the news that isn't reported by MSNBC, NYT etc to find out what really is going on. Cuz they sure as hell wont tell you.

Also when a politician is caught in scandal, play the "Name that Politician Game" If its Republican they make sure they put it right at the beginning of the article and repeat it over and over. If its a Democrat, they might bury it in paragraph 12. And you might have noticed that all the news that isn't in the Democrats favor they release on Friday when hardly anyone is paying attention. Like renewing the Patriot Act for another year. Mmmm all that crap about how evil it was, and it gets signed up for another year in a whimper on a Friday.

So much for the fierce moral urgency of change. And so much was written and cried about how Bush was evil for having the Patriot Act that not even the main stream media could muster much reporting on its renewal under Obama.


real shame, more of this wasn't on the news

Not only both sides of the story, but also stories that the other networks totally ignore or downplay, such as the Emails that show the Global Warming scientists to be frauds

First, I never understand why the hell people who watch Fox News continue to complain about the NYT or MSNBC not covering those stories. How many Fox News viewers read the NYT? How many would even notice if there was a front page story on the Tea Party Movement? In contrast, 95% of the readers of the NYT would not be interested in reading about it. So should they cater to their customers or Fox News viewers?

This is just like when Fox News covered a Tea Party protest of 200 people, and then ignored tens of thousands of gay rights activists protesting in DC that same day. Fair and balanced? No. Of course not. But most Fox News viewers have no interest in gay rights, and think the Tea Party movement is the second coming. So what do you think they are going to cover? And yet both sides complain. The reality is, news is personalized. If TV tried to be fair and balanced, people would just go online to the types of websites they want to get their information from that matches up with their worldviews. So TV simply does the same thing. The idea that we need 5 networks covering the same exact news stories in the same way is just a way for 3-4 of them to go out of business very quickly. They cater to their viewers, plain and simple.

Speaking of the Tea Party movement though. Do you know another big reason why the NYT/CNN etc. don't cover it much? It's not a story! I mean what are the goals of the movement? They believe in "free market" - OK, great, 99% of Americans do. They believe in "fiscal responsibility." Wow, that really sets them apart from all of those people who think we should practice fiscal irresponsibility. And they support "States Rights." Again, there is no story here. What have they accomplished with any of these protests? What specific policies do they even want changed? So why should we report on every meeting they have? It's stupid. If you are going to cover them, cover a thousand other groups that organize across the country regularly. The only reason they are on the news at all is because they are A) outside and holding up crazy signs, etc., and B) are the favorite pets of Fox News. That's it.

Also, democratic scandals are hidden? We ignored important issues and wasted months of our time obsessing over and impeaching a sitting president for getting a BJ from an intern. Yeah, that was totally buried on the back page. Seriously? Meanwhile Palin can make up ridiculous stories about pretty much anything and no one even asks her about it.

You also know the guy how supposedly "busted" ACORN has been arrested by the FBI for trying to wiretap a US senator's office right? Or did Fox News not cover that story? Did you also know the people in the ACORN prostitution video were cleared of all charges because it turns out he doctored the video? You probably didn't know that either.

Also, the reason why the networks downplayed the Global Warming emails is because they are again, not much of a story. A few scientists were having email discussions 15 years ago about how better to present data. And somehow Fox News has made you believe that ALL GLOBAL WARMING SCIENTISTS ARE FRAUDS!!! By that same logic, the one guy who shows up at a Tea Party movement with a Nazi sign means the ENTIRE MOVEMENT is comprised of Nazi Racist. Right? This is what Fox News does though, they take something trivial, out of context, and hype it on their news and talks shows all day, and in a few days its viewers think "it HAS to be a huge issue, or why would they cover it so much?"

There are 6.7 billion people in the world, and pretty much all of them understand the reality of climate change except the Fox News viewers of the United States. It's sad.

I apologize for the above rant. I normally don't do this. But I get very frustrated when I read stuff like this on here of all places. I mean you guys have chosen to go away from the normal sites and pursue your Cubs news from the great independent writers and commentators at this website. Imagine if all you got for Cubs news was Carrie Muskat? You go to one website for coverage on prospects, right? One for minor league statistics. One for fantasy baseball stuff, etc.

So I would just encourage you to take the same approach to world news. Think if Fox News and MSNBC to be Carrie Muskat. Don't waste your time with either of them. If you hear a story on Fox News or whatever, google it, visit a number of sites and a number of different types of sites that cover it. See where the pieces fit and don't fit. Do this for enough stories for a couple of weeks and you will start to have a very good idea of which websites you feel give you the complete story. Which ones cover things more in-depthly, less biased, etc. I guarantee you that you will mostly stop going to mainstream media and will just start visiting 3-4 websites each day. And in the end, just as you feel like you are more in tune with the Cubs by visiting this site, you will feel more knowledgeable about the world.

So much of what you wrote is a warped sense of reality.

Fox News covered 200 people while ignoring Gay Rights Activists? I assume your talking about the 9/12 March by the Tea Party Movement that drew upwards of 450,000 people.

This is where the left tries to minimize the effect of the Tea Party by saying only 40,000 showed up. But crowd estimates have ranged from 450,000 to 2 million people showing up.

The left claims 4-5 million people showed up for Obama's inauguration. Those estimates have gone down as they have compared it to other gatherings in Washington. And the 9/12 march at least equals or surpasses that.

A simple view from space shows more than 200 people or 40,000 gathering in Washington for the 9/12 march. Scroll to the bottom for a graphic.

Kinda hard to miss that many people but MSNBC and the lot somehow did. As for the Gay Rights Activists no network really gave them any coverage. The left sure as hell wasn't going to after Obama refused to tackle "Dont Ask Don't Tell" when he said he would.

The only thing you get right about ACORN (he was arrested for a matter unrelated to ACORN) is that he was arrested, the rest you get spoon fed by the left is wrong and Breitbart and O'Keefe have gotten retracts from news organizations for not telling the truth when reporting on the matter. He wasn't arrested for wiretapping.

As for ACORN people being cleared, i think the only person that was officially cleared was in Brooklyn. Which is where you get the "they edited part". What they don't tell you is that the Brooklyn DA is a member of the ACORN/Working Families party. Big shock they were cleared there.

What also isn't reported by the left is almost all of the people involved in the ACORN videos were fired by ACORN. If they were victims of doctored videos and were innocent why did they get fired? No matter what happens to James O'Keefe the rest of his life still doesn't dismiss the fact they walked into not one but 4-5 offices and ran into the same thing over and over. Screaming "they edited it" is the same thing as calling people "racist" and thats where the conversation is supposed to end. Its meant to end discussion, because you know it's awful and disgusting. The unedited video is on the net for anyone to look at. Full length, one camera shot, no pull away conversations with ACORN Employees. Or does MSNBC not let you watch those videos? NBC/MSNBC produce "To Catch a Predator" that works on the same level.

Thats why vindicated ACORN is dropping its ACORN name and reorganizing under a new name. Same people, same scams, same money flow. It also helps to distant themselves from the 14 states investigating them for voter fraud. You might want to check out the Nevada ACORN trial.

Global Warming isn't a big deal to who? The left thinks its a big deal, hellloo seen Al Gores Nobel Prize??!?! Now all of a sudden its not news. Its not news now because most of the research on it is a fraud it looks like. When a political party spends a decade rallying the need to climate change legislation and all the evils of Global Warming and then find out the research is being made to fit the narrative, i think its fucking news even if Democrats don't think it is.

You make the perfect illustration of what i talked about in the first paragraph. Its what people don't tell you is where the problems rest.

O'Keefe getting arrested doesn't dismiss child prostitution being encouraged. Just like a COP getting busted on a DUI doesn't mean everyone that he caught before gets off the hook. But if that cop lied and made up false reports then there is no way to ensure the people he put in jail are guilty. The same goes for those Scientists who made up data to fit their narrative, you can't trust anything they say and you need to re-examine the entire basis of their theory. And when they admit they have lost their historical records of global temperature...well isn't that convenient. No one can check their work now. Thats what you call rigging the game in your favor. If they had nothing to hide they wouldn't of destroyed data.

Here is something to think about. Next time a Senator/Politician/Hollywood person that says people need to sacrifice for the environment and then take off in their private plane, tell them to go fuck them selves, you hypocritical ass-holes.

Next time you hear the left screaming about cap's on executive pay, tell them thats fine as long as there is a cap on sports players and actors as well. And when you get that shocked expression of horror you know you hit a nerve.

What?!?!?! Mess with Hollywood and Athletes money! Ohh no no no, were talking about the rest of you people not us.

If its good for one group of people its good for another. Unless the group advocating it won't even accept it. Much like our Health Care bill, in which our Senators say its awesome but won't sign it and won't use it because they already got a sweet health care package.

Just be wary of people advocating for things they don't want for themselves.

I haven't taken a poll, but I, at least, read the NY Times.

As far as coverage of the tea party is concerned, it is largely a result of the tea party movement that there are Repbulican governors in Virginia and New Jersey, and a Repbulican sitting in Teddy Kennedy's seat in the senate. Yet the mainstream media chose to ignore the movement until recently, and their coverage now consists mostly about stories about how unimportant it is.

Saying that the Global Warming Emails are no big deal is the most foolish part of a foolish post.

That handful of scientists falsified the data upon which the entire United Nations report was based. Without that falsified data, the entire global warming theory disappears.

And it is BECAUSE that data was falsified that the democrats are trying to pass a law that would increase energy tax by trillions of dollars over the next decade. If that is "no big deal", you have been reading the NY Times too long.

gwah...this CLE/CIN replay on MLB Network looks like it was recorded/rebroadcast off analog tape.

is this 1985? did someone fix my flux capacitor when i getting a tire repaired this afternoon?

...very fuzzy.

At the end of Chicago Tribune Live tonight they said that there is concern that Guzman is done for the season. No confirmation yet.

Lou said Guzman is jinxed.

First a knee, now a shoulder for Cubs reliever Angel Guzman. "It doesn't look good,'' said Lou Piniella. "The kid is jinxed.''

sounds like mid-season form guzman to me.


Sounds like mid-season form for Lou, too.

Also, I get my news directly from Jesus. Granted, it's a little slanted.

Yeah, you'll never get unbiased reports on Iraq or Afghanistan from that lily-hearted peacenik.

man, you are behind the times.

iran is the new thing that's going to kill us if socialism by that nigg...i mean, our president doesn't kill us first.

lol...socialism. quick, buy ammo and flags with snakes on them talking about treading.


psst...what's socialism?

and Sullivan tweets that, "Guzman is cooked for '10..."

can he please get a better headline writer?

maybe Rob was on to something. Who's Fox? Jake does news and DH'ing?

That says "may be cooked for '10"

My scoop. Lilly may be cooked for '10. Throw Zambrano on there too.

I heard Sullivan is lobbying for an anchor position with Fox News.

I heard he was out until June.

The BP article about Bradley was actually pretty bad. It didn't say what Rob said it did, at least it wasn't the main point. It was mostly about how once a guy goes to DH he doesn't come back. It was probably one of the dumbest things I've ever read there, since it totally ignored the fact that he went to DH because he was 5 months removed from ACL surgery. It didn't mention a guy like Ron Gant who couldn't play baseball for a year because of serious surgery, but then came back and played outfield again. It was embarrassingly poorly researched and thought through, and I say that as a fan of BP.

hmm, maybe we're talking about different articles then. I read a few lines in this year's BP book on the Cubs that referenced it and I believe it was this one.

or this one

There's no consolation in having made him go away, and the question as to what they were thinking when, as Joe Sheehan put it last spring, they tried to make Milton do the things he cannot do simultaneously (play outfield, hit, and stay healthy).

nothing I saw about going to DH and not coming back, although DH'ing is mentioned.

Wow, nice comments on Bradley Rob.

Gave me a warm fuzzy reading that.


"Utterly ridiculous" is about right. A couple of the most egregious -- #36. Grover Cleveland Alexander comes in right behind 35. Glenn Beckert and 34. Don Kessinger. I love Beck & Kess but wtf?

Even worse is 30. Cap Anson who comes in way behind 26. Bill Nicholson, 14. Mark Grace, 10. Hack Wilson and 9. Phil Cavarretta.

They describe Anson as "One of the greatest players of the 19th century". According to Bill James (Baseball Historical Abstract), Anson WAS the greatest player of the 19th century by a wide margin. In 22 years, he put up slash states of .331/.396/.448 (OPS.844) with a Cubs lifetime OPS+ 141. 3012 lifetime hits, 1880 RBI, 1722 Runs scored, all still franchise records. IMHO, if a player was the most dominant player in the Major Leagues for over a 20 year period of time, he should probably rank a lot higher then #30 on your teams' list of all-time greats. Sheesh.

I'm not sure what to think about the Guzman speculation yet... but when Paul Sullivan gets a headline up saying (pre-MRI results):" Guzman facing possible shoulder surgery" and then just blabbers about waiting on the MRI results but expecting the worst, I think they just might as well take it to the next level..."Cubs warming up spot on 60 day DL for Guzman" or "MRI expected to show Angels & Demons". Sometimes I really dislike the media because of how they deal with this stuff.

Also reporting that the results of the MRI will be available friday afternoon but not getting word on it until...[[crickets]]

Just remember Guzman had labrum repair surgery in 2003 (age 22), so his MRI just might be more difficult to read. Also remember that it took an MRI-Arthrogram to sort out Kerry Wood and Mark Prior's shoulder problems and since Guzman has a history of previous shoulder surgery that might be worth considering if they want additional information.

From Baseball America, Nov 2003:

Background: The Cubs thought Guzman was ready to make a Mark Prior-like ascent in 2003, beginning the season in Double-A West Tenn and getting to the majors by midseason. If Chicago didn’t have so much pitching, he could have pressed for a big league job. Guzman led the Cubs with a 1.13 ERA in the Cactus League, and his teammates voted him the most impressive rookie in big league camp. He caught fire in late May, going 3-1, 1.01 over his next five starts. After shutting out eventual Southern League champion Carolina for seven innings on June 20, Guzman was picked to pitch in the Futures Game and would have been the logical callup when Prior hurt his shoulder in mid-July. But Guzman never threw another pitch in 2003, as his shoulder was bothering him. Doctors diagnosed a slight tear in his labrum, and he had it corrected with arthroscopic surgery. The Cubs added him to the 40-man roster for the first time in October...

  • Sign in with Twitter