Cubs in the rearview

[Fatter than Joey]

In related News --

 

Zambrano hinted that his next catcher may be Molina (the slow one).

 

Next catcher?

 

Now, Barrett is almost certain to be moved -- so perhaps Molina coming to the Cards for Barrett may make some sense.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Now, Barrett is almost certain to be moved -- so perhaps Molina coming to the Cards for Barrett may make some sense.

 

Did you mean that Molina would get traded to the Cubs for Barrett? I really doubt that - I think Zambrano is more or less alluding to his pending free agency than the Cubs trading for a catcher that the Cards probably won't ever trade - especially now that he's on the DL for at least another month.

 

Actually, I think the Cubs are more likely to trade Zambrano than Barrett - they have nothing special at C in their organization to replace Barrett, and it would be tough to get a different catcher that makes any positive impact on their season via trade. If the Cubs are happy with Marmol's progress, they may opt to move him into the rotation, and trade Zambrano (who's gonna be gone after this year anyway) for a very good package of prospects or mlb ready players. Whether the Cubs are buyers or sellers at the deadline, IMO, depends on how they play this next month - even if they become sellers, they very well may improve their team by unloading some of the many "spare part" players that they have on their roster.

 

The rest of the Cubs players that they will be looking to use as trading chips are all sell low players - aside from D Lee, Ramirez, and Soriano, the veterans on their team generally are underperforming, and have difficult to trade contracts.

[Fatter than Joey]

Did you mean that Molina would get traded to the Cubs for Barrett?

 

No not necessarily -- I think that the most probable explanation is that Z was being a dink, and probably Molina would be a catcher that he would like to see the Cubs acquire. Maybe he forgot which Molina plays where -- I know I can't keep track of them. -- More than anything, I think it is something worth talking about in this discussion.

 

Actually, I think the Cubs are more likely to trade Zambrano than Barrett - they have nothing special at C in their organization to replace Barrett, and it would be tough to get a different catcher that makes any positive impact on their season via trade.

 

I disagree -- I think if one gets traded it's Barrett. Besides brusing Zambrano's knuckles with his lip, he is not one of "Pinella's guys". If the Cubs are in fact committed to Pinella, I have to believe that Barrett's days are numbered in Chicago.

[endaround]

Murton is a very good bat. The fact that Cubs spent money on three aging outfielders while having Murton and Pie go back and forth to Iowa explains al ot.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I know I'm splitting hairs here, but if Zambrano was picking out shinguards for Molina to pitch to him in Chicago, wouldn't he want blue ones? I'm gonna agree that Zambrano was simply being the piece of work that he is.

 

I also agree that Barrett could easily be dealt, especially once Hank White (Henry Blanco) comes off the DL.

 

I guess my main point is that the Cubs have a much better chance of improving if players they already have start producing more consistently, rather than being really active in the trade market - their whole team seems to play great or horribly at the same time. If they find a way to pick each other up rather than piling on to good and bad situations from game to game, their talent will keep them winning consistently.

[Fatter than Joey]

I guess my main point is that the Cubs have a much better chance of improving if players they already have start producing more consistently, rather than being really active in the trade market

 

Agreed. I think this is true... however I think unless Pinella/Z go Barrett has to go, and it really is more of a clubhouse thing -- not the best trade reason.

[Thurston Fluff]

I guess my main point is that the Cubs have a much better chance of improving if players they already have start producing more consistently, rather than being really active in the trade market - their whole team seems to play great or horribly at the same time. If they find a way to pick each other up rather than piling on to good and bad situations from game to game, their talent will keep them winning consistently.

 

 

Good point. One of the problems they have been talking about with the Cubs was a lack of continuity with a whole group of guys who haven't really played together very long. Taking some away and adding another could set that back some. I don't know if their talent will do all that much. Really I see a couple great players surrounded by some pretty average to below average ones. Personal opinion here but the reason they are so sttreaky is they go the way a couple players go. If Soriano and Lee struggle the whole team does. The advantage the Brewers have is if one or two guys struggle the rest of the lineup is good enough to compensate. You need look no furhter than the Detroit series where Prince struggled and the team won anyway.

[naivin]

Making Pie, Theriot and Fontenot regulars in the line-up has absolutely helped the Cubs. Whether or not those guys can sustain a high level of play throughout the season is obviously a big question mark. If they can (especially Pie), the Cubs become much better and much deeper. Pie's ability (or inability) to hit LH's is going to be a huge factor the remainder of this year.

[naivin]

My what a good weekend in Minnesota could mean for the Brewers...

 

Looking at the upcoiming schedules, after this weekend with the Twins, the Brewers have a 9 game homestand consisting of SF, KC, and HOU, prior to a weekend series at Wrigley Field. The Cubs play 12 games between now and then as well (SD, @TEX, @CWS, COL). Both teams then finish the first half with 7 games at PIT, and WAS.

 

I fully expect the Cubs to do pretty well against SD, but if we can avoid total disaster against the Twins and at worst lose a game in the standings, we should be in a position to not only get that game back, but create a little additional distance prior to the series with the Cubs at the end of the month - and potentially go into that thing with a 6-8 game lead, really needing only to avoid getting swept to prevent any real damage in the standings, where even losing 2 of 3 wouldn't really hurt.

 

If on the other hand we are only 3.5 or (gulp) 2.5 up come Monday, things could get mighty interesting.

[Ennder]

Cubs won today 4-1 so only 5 games back.

[SeriesFinale]

They looked good doing it, too, with their youngsters (well, Fontenot) contributing

 

They look like a team turning it around, I think it's gonna be a crazy second half but like someone said, the hot start and the schedule really helps the Brewers here

[Thurston Fluff]

Cubs are 9-6 this month to climb all the way to 5 games below .500.

Brewers are 6-6 this month to fall all the way down to 6 games above .500.

 

So they have to play as well as they have this month well into July just to get to .500. If we don't play any better this month than we have we are still six games up in the wins cloumn.

 

Doesn't that sound better than they are within 5 games of us?http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Fear The Chorizo]

Nobody said it was gonna be easy for this team to win the division - if it was it would have happened at some point over the past 25 years

 

While it would be great to blow the rest of the division out of the water by 15 games, it'd also be great to be involved in a tight race to see who comes out on top. Right now it feels good to be the hunted for a change, rather that speculating how many games the brewers would need to win over the course of two weeks to get back to wild card contention, as has been the case over the past few seasons.

 

And as much as scrub fans would hate to admit it since they always claim to care less about the Brewers, seeing Milwaukee in front of them in the standings doesn't sit well with them. I think they'd actually rather be trailing the Cards by 5 games right now. They might actually have to accept that the Brewers are one of their rivals, instead of claiming that playing the Cubs is like the playoffs to the Brewers.

 

As a Brewer fan, I've watched some brutal Milwaukee teams who oftentimes had trouble fielding even a semi-competitive roster - I for one like the view from the top of the division (even though the division may not seem too impressive right now), instead of what the outlook is right now for a fan of the astros, reds, cards, pirates, or cubs. Being in front of a division lets you focus on rooting for your own team rather than praying for other teams to lose in order to feel good about your team's chances.

 

-------------------------

[olliegjw]

I was looking at the Cubs lineup today, and there is only one player on their team that I would take over our current starters. I would take Soriano over Menchkins in left. The only other spots that could be close are Barrett over Estrada, or Ramirez (on DL) over Braun. I would call it a push at 1B between Lee and Fielder, although a good argument could be made that Lee is the better all around player than Fielder.

 

As far as pitching staffs, I think the Brewers have a slight edge in SP, and a fairly large edge in the bullpen. I also think the Brewers are a deeper team than the Cubs.

 

So, overall, it looks like the Brewers control their own destiny. The Brewers have the better team, now they must prove it on the diamond.

[rluzinski]

I never expected the Brewers to have the NL Central all sewn up by June, so why panic? The Brewers might cough up the lead altogether at some point. All that matters is where both teams are after game 162. The Cubs have a solid club, so it's probably going to be a dog fight.

[SeriesFinale]

Being in front of a division lets you focus on rooting for your own team rather than praying for other teams to lose in order to feel good about your team's chances.

 

I agree but there's just something about a 10-20 stretch that leads to scoreboard watching.

[SeriesFinale]

Another perspective, from northsidebaseball.com:

 

Quote:

---

just noticing who the Brewers will be facing. against the Twins, they miss Santana. heck, they don't even get Silva. Bonser and two rookies.

 

then they go onto San Fran. they miss Cain and Morris.

 

then to KC. they get Bannister, but miss Meche.

 

then to Houston. if Houston doesn't skip a starter on their off day, the Brewers will miss Oswalt and Samson, but will get Jennings. if Houston does skip a starter on their off day, the Brewers get Oswalt, but miss Samson and Jennings.

 

ETA - just carrying it through, looks like they will miss Snell in their four game set against the Bucs, like they have in both series they have had against the Bucs so far this year (only faced Gorzealanny once).

 

 

pull the darn horseshoe out of your tail Brewers.

---

 

(edited for our virgin ears)

[SeriesFinale]

The irony, of course, is this guy doesn't seem to realize that the Brewers often hold their own against aces (Verlander, of course, aside) but bow to fourth starters just up from AA.

[BCZF]

Ahh I see, it's LUCK that the Brewers lead the division.. Hmm gee, I guess drawing a downtrodden Mariners team, getting SD without facing Peavy and moving on to Texas (where by the way, those LUCKY Brewers landed with a thud) makes the Chubbs schedule more "difficult"..Puh-leeze..

 

Every team draws the tough matchups and the seemingly "easier" ones, it all evens out, but to imply that somehow it's an automatic cakewalk for the Brewers from here on, is just ignorant. However they did run into a buzzsaw (called the months of May and June) and the lovable losers (and the rest of the division) were gracious enough to keep us propped up..Gracias Chubbies!

[recte44]

If Alan Trammell was the Cubs manager instead of "Sweet Lou" I might take them more seriously.

 

3-1 under Trammell, 28-34 under Piniella.

 

Ok, I'm only HALF joking here. They seem to play tense under Piniella. They have talent, for sure. I think it's a typical Cubs team, though, overrated and mismanaged.

[BrewCrewRising]

OK...I just got back from seeing The Police at Wrigley. I would have enjoyed it a lot more if some meathead behind me wasn't talking the whole time. I think it's just the Wrigley effect.

 

Anyway, there were all sorts of happy Cubs fans out there because the Cubs picked up another game on the Crew. If I'm a Cub fan I'm feeling good because they have been playing very well, and the Crew looks very catchable right now. We're still 4.5 up, but the Cubs have gone 22-12 since June 1st.

 

A few weeks ago a Chicago Sun Times columnist (can't remember his name) said, "If the Cubs play at the same pace they have played in their last 21 games, they'll win 90 games, and probably win the division." I had to laugh that off a bit because this guy was cherry picking the nicest stretch of baseball the Cubs had played up to that point.

 

But, I do have to ask: How long do you think the Cubs will keep up this pace? Russ said above (a few weeks ago) that the division will be a dogfight between the Crew and the Cubs.

 

Every day I look at the adjusted standings and playoff odds at baseballprospectus.com and feel some comfort that the Cubs aren't really expected to win more than about 85-89 games (depending on which formulae are used), and the Crew is expected to win 89-93. But then a day like today happens and I ask myself, can we sustain 90+ pace, especially with potentially disasterous injuries? Could the Cubs play at about .610+ clip the rest of the year and win 90+ games?

 

I don't buy the 'They're chokers' because every team is until that one time they manage not to.

 

I'm wondering what people think (though I'm secretly hoping that Russ posts one of those cool multi-color 3D graphs saying that it's more likely for one of us to get hit in the head by a falling bean bag with an image of the Virgin Mary than it is for the Cubs to win the division.)

[pitchleague]

well, the Astros in 2005 pretty much played like garbage for 2 months of the year and then went on a tear to get back into the race. Looks eerily similar to the Cubs so far.

 

As for the "Cubs in the rearview", it's beginning to look like we need to put the ol' "objects are closer than they appear" disclaimer on said mirror.

[DougJones43]

As for the "Cubs in the rearview", it's beginning to look like we need to put the ol' "objects are closer than they appear" disclaimer on said mirror.

 

Yikes. No kidding. A 4.5 game lead isn't very comforting at this point. I'll admit I'm starting to get a bit worried, especially with the injury to Hall today.

 

I think the Brewers' rotation is under-acheiving, and the Cubs' rotation is over-acheiving. Hopefully, that will straighten out and help us hold off the Cubs.

[BowMeHunter]

This has to be the worst bumped thread I ever read...

[BowMeHunter]

I'm not supposed to be reading the board after a loss, my fault.

 

Carry on.