Game notes Cubs vs. Braves

[Nick Douglas]

-Jaret Wright was given a bullpen spot ahead of Shane Reynolds and Trey Hodges. Wright had a 2.00 ERA in 9 innings with 9Ks and good velocity since coming over to Atlanta. Could be a good righthanded arm for Atlanta is Ortiz can't go more than 5 or 6.

-Estrada will be the backup catcher for Lopez, not Blanco. I believe Blanco was Maddux' catcher, but I am not sure. Estrada is certainly the better hitter of the two.

-Jessie Garcia, a backup infielder, is another guy who spent most of the year in the minors but was kept on the postseason roster. DeRosa has a sore hand and that is why he is there.

-Chicago media outlets were trying to get Cubs players to respond to Javy Lopez' comments that the Cubs had no chance against Atlanta, but nobody responded.

-Dusty Baker took a little shot at Atlanta fans, urging Cubs fans to make the trip to Atlanta because there are always plenty of good seats for Braves' games come playoff time.

-Bako and Karros will start tonight ahead of Miller and Simon, respectively. Interesting decision on Karros, as he is a righty and Simon is a lefty. Both decisions are based on each guy's career numbers vs. Ortiz. It also gives Baker a lefty bat on the bench. In my opinion it is risky to use past results to try to predict future performance because to me those stats are largely based on whether the pitcher was fresh and had their good stuff when they happened to be facing those players. We'll see if it works for the Cubs tonight.

 

[ontyme]

its not risky---to play players due to past performances---Baseball is a percentage game, and Dusty is playing the percentages--Karros could go 0-4 but percentage---is what this game is about.

 

[Nick Douglas]

That is precisely what I disagree with, ontyme. I think playing the percentages would tell someone to play the lefty vs. the righty because I believe lefties hit about 30 to 50 points higher as a whole than righties do when facing a righthander. I just disagree with the idea that past success vs. a certain pitcher means all that much. You saw it with the Twins beating Mussina today that by far the most important thing to consider when gauging a pitcher's performance isn't batter/pitcher matchups, but rather what type of stuff that pitcher is going to have on a certain day.

There is a good chance that Karros just happened to hit Ortiz on several days when he had below average stuff. Plus, most of those appearances were surely prior to this season, when both Karros and Ortiz were different players production-wise than they are today.

 

[ontyme]

did u watch the Yankees game---Twins were not excatly lighting up Mussina--They got their runs off aggresive baserunning--Boone failed to get a tag down on 3rd. Bernie misplayed a ball in center---that lead to a run. So if your saying the Twins hit Mussina any differently than they did in the past i disagree and believe that you are wrong. Mussina pitched well enough to win. Yankees had their chances with guys on =, they just didn't deliever big hit.

as i'm typing this Karros gets a hit--so if your saying u know more than Dusty Baker than somebody sign u up for Manager--Orioles are looking

 

[Nick Douglas]

3 ER, 1.45 WHIP and a 2:1 K/BB ratio in 7 IP are not exactly Moose-like numbers, especially against a team that he supposedly has the number of like the Twins.

It sounds stupid to make one post where you basically say, "I don't care if Karros goes 0-4, Dusty made the right move," and then come back shortly thereafter and say, "See, Dusty made the right move because Karros has 2 hits." Rather contradictory, wouldn't you say?

 

[ontyme]

no i'm saying baseball is a failure sport---Its the only sport u can succeed 3 out of 10 times and make it to the Hall of Fame---So going 0-4 1 game doesn't mean the Manager made the wrong move. Every manager does this,they play the percentages. So if your saying Dusty is wrong, your going against the grain of Managers. It is irrelevant if Karros goes 0-4 or 2-3---History tells us that he has success. Simon struck-out---only 1 bat but it happend. I'm not contracdicting myself, I'm simply stating your dead wrong for saying that managers should not play the percentages. Hello---I don't know if u know baseball, but i'm sorry to tell u, baseball is a percentage sport. Ask anyone that knows the game.

Again, the twins got their runs from aggressive baserunning in the 4th that Boone failed to get tag down, and Bernie misplayed a ball bad that led to 2 more runs. I do agree that if a pitcher has success against a team, that he could get lit up because of many variables--such as how he is feeling(is he healthy?)

 

[Nick Douglas]

Whatever way you try to explain away your contradicting statements, the bottom line is that your tune changed from, "tonight's performance doesn't matter," to, "tonight's performance mattered because it proved me right."

Look, you can play it any way you want to play it. I read your bio and saw you are a professional handicapper, so good for you. As long as you are not using this site to try to make a name for yourself before starting up a service, it's all right by me.

I saw that you were on the Cubs runline tonight and that was an excellent play. I do maintain that handicapping based on prior batter/pitcher matchups is perilous. Like with any method you can find success for a time but over the long term I really find that the better way to look at pitching is by looking at their previous start or two and the amount of sharpness and/or wear that the stats indicate.

 

[Bombs]

I side with Nick on this one. Past performance numbers have so many variables which are often hard to tease out. Unless someone has absolutely owned another player over 50+ atbats in a recent timeframe, can't really look too much at them. They have some relevance, but I am not sure how much.