The Cubs will be playing two games today. One against the White Sox that will be televised on WGN and one against the Japanese national team that will not be televised.
Here is the Cubs lineup for the televised game:
Valbuena 3B
Barney 2B
Castro SS
Schierholtz RF
Hairston DH
Navarro C
Bogusevic LF
McDonald CF
Nelson 1B
Hooray. I'm interested in Castro. That's all. I guess you can make a case for Barney since he might do something fancy in the field. There is not a single other name in that lineup that stirs any emotion in me whatsoever. Scott Feldman is starting for the Cubs. Of course he is. Why wouldn't it be the least interesting pitcher in the rotation?
The Cubs lineup for the game against Team Japan that will NOT be televised (I assume this is the lineup as the original lineup had Brett Jackson instead of Soler, but he's been scratched with a sore shoulder):
DeJesus CF
Baez SS
Castillo C
Soriano DH
Sappelt LF
Vitters 3B
Soler RF
Vogelbach 1B
Gonzalez 2B
Travis Wood will pitch. I can't even begin to express how much more I would rather watch the game against Team Japan. The Japanese media will have 140 members of their press at Ho Ho Kam for the game, so maybe I can find an illegal Japanese stream of the game. Otherwise, I guess the game against the White Sox is better than an Andy Griffith re-run or whatever WGN shows in the afternoons these days, but not by much.
I just don't understand why the Cubs wouldn't take this opportunity to show off the talent they have in the system to their fans. A game against a Japanese National Team will probably be just as competitive as a Spring Training game against a White Sox team that doesn't give a shit.
Go Cubs. I guess.
Not even on MLB Network or MLB.tv?
@ mikeakaleroy:
I don’t think there would be more injuries because they played in the WBC. If anything, they’d probably get a little less playing time. Perhaps they’re playing at a higher intensity, but when you factor in less playing it’s hard to see how it’s going to cause more injuries.
Albert Almora broke his wrist while swinging a bat. Injuries happen. Sure, if Clayton Kershaw leaves a game holding his shoulder the WBC would catch the blame, but unfairly.
I guess I’ve come around on this. A couple years ago I’d have agreed, but the WBC isn’t going anywhere. I’d like to see the best teams possible. Once players decide which teams they want play for, I’d like the fans to vote on them for the US roster. Other countries could do the same if they wanted. Imagine last night’s game was started by Clayton Kershaw who pitched 3 innings. He was relieved by someone like Justin Verlander and then another star pitcher. That would be fucking awesome.
@ Rice Cube:
There is nothing listed on MLB.TV as a broadcast option.
I don’t know. If I never see Josh Vitters play again I won’t be upset. (dying laughing)
Will the WGN game be a Cubs broadcast or a White Sox broadcast? That might have something to do with it, I guess.
That’s like a nightmare.
@ Brandon:
IIRC, the last couple years they’ve played on WGN in spring, it’s been the White Sox announcers.
@ Brandon:
Cubs. It’s Len Kasper on the call.
dmick89 wrote:
Yeah, but that’s about it. And Gonzalez at 2nd, big deal.
Otherwise, it’s the forecasted starter or a highly-touted prospect (or someone who once was). That’s pretty damn good for a split squad game. Especially considering 2 of your more interesting players (Jackson and Rizzo) are unavailable.
It’s because Josh Vitters needs to save face.
@ Aisle424:
Really? The Sox are the home team, I was bracing myself for some muted baseball.
@ Aisle424:
For sure. Other than Castro there’s nobody worth watching in the lineup on the one on WGN. I would much prefer to be able to watch Baez, Soler and Vogelbach than the other one. I don’t care much about the rest of the roster that’s not being televised, but there’s usually only a player or two worth watching during any spring game.
It’s probably intention on the Cubs part. This seems to happen every year and the lineup that has the prospects is almost never televised. I think the Cubs, and probably every other team, try not to put too much pressure on their prospects.
@ dmick89:
I don’t know how that’s too much pressure. The game is still an exhibition. At some point, these guys will have to play in front of cameras. If a guy is so fragile that one game on TV on a Friday afternoon that doesn’t count ruins them, then I’m not sure that guy is ever going to be successful.
It just seems silly that they are trying to build excitement, or at least good will towards the team, and they purposefully present almost the worst possible product. Shit, just throw Soler into the televised lineup instead of Hairston and it makes me want to bother tuning in. I probably won’t bother. I’ve got too much shit to do.
@ Aisle424:
But what could be more exciting than watching Cubs/Sox!!??
/Chicago Media, probably
This kind of thing drives me crazy.
Aisle424 wrote:
I don’t necessarily disagree, but I can understand why a team would rather not show the game we’d rather see. If Baez goes 3-4 with 2 home runs and a triple, fans are going to be going nuts and wondering why the Cubs aren’t starting the season with him. If or when Valbuena struggles, they’ll say he should be called up. After all, he went 3-4 with 2 home runs and a triple in that one split squad game.
If Baez or Soler instead goes 0-4 with 4 K’s, Cubs fans will already be writing them off.
If I was running the team, I’d show the same game on tv that they are. I don’t trust the fans to understand the insignificance of their performance in such a game. It’s not that I don’t think they could handle it. Aside from maybe being more embarrassed than they’d prefer (0-4, 4K) or egotistical (3-4, 2HR, 3B) they may get, I don’t think it would have any affect on them. But that alone is probably enough of a reason to not show that game. Add in the fact that the fans can’t comprehend what a single game means and I get why teams do this.
@ GW:
9 out of 10 Cubs fans who might watch on TV don’t give a shit about minor leaguers who aren’t going to be on the MLB team this year..
They would rather watch guys they’ve heard of, like Hairston and Shierholtz.
While I am certain of this, I don’t think the Cubs really care one way or the other to the point where they would tell the manager which players to start in each game. I think it is random.
@ Suburban kid:
I agree that most don’t care and we’re in the minority. It may be a coincidence that every team there seems to be a prospect heavy lineup as part of a split squad that the other lineup is on tv. That’s possible and maybe even likely.
Ewwww Hawk Harrelson.
Berselius wrote:
Feldman is good at baseball.
This is a game I recently didn’t enjoy.
Also I read all the ATP posts and I still don’t know who the fuck Nelson is
GBTS —–> London, Spurs match Sunday
@ gbts22:
Mind the gap.
@ dmick89:
This
akabari wrote:
Or McDonald.
I wholeheartedly agree that they broadcast the wrong game.
Baez is awesome.
Baez 2-R walk off. 7-5 Cubs over Japan
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
That could not be more awesome.
Aisle424 wrote:
/full circled
US getting beat.
http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/comments/change-two-rules-in-baseball
My 2 rule changes:
1. Intentional walks. Batter given 2nd base. 4-pitch walks would also have to result in the batter getting 2nd base. What to do with no-strike HBP?
2. Mid-inning relief changes. 1st one in an inning gives batter 2-0 count, second one gets a 3-0 count and subsequent mid-inning pitching changes put the next batter on 1st base.
@ Aisle424:
good thing that game wasn’t on tv. kid might have shit himself.
@ dmick89:
1) On a 4 ball walk, batter can elect to continue hitting, with and gets a two-base walk if he gets to 6 balls.
2) Pitcher cannot exit a game unless he records an out or an earned run.
@ GBTS:
I like both of those.
@ Berselius:
They showed it on mlb network tonight during the game.
Here was a suggestion I like too
If a penalty remains for players, there should be one for teams since we know they have actually encouraged players to take them. I would go with -5 wins.
@ dmick89:
dmick89 wrote:
Agreed wholeheartedly, but I think the team should not be able to fill the roster spot of the suspended player. So the team plays one man short for 50 games (and no other rules like changing the 10-day in the minors rule to compensate). If the player was on the ML DL when suspended, the team still loses the spot. Player gets no pay during suspension and team gets to void contract at end of suspension.
GBTS wrote:
WOW, you must really hate Marmol.
Rule changes:
You cannot get a three-inning save if you have entered the game with more than a 4-run lead.
All players that are called up to the big leagues must appear in a game, unless they are injured sneezing before they can do so.
You cannot have more than three people perform the 7th inning stretch over the course of a single season (OK, maybe that rule is only aimed at one particular team, but it’s like the no all-blues for Boise State).
Instant replay is allowed for anything except balls and strikes.
@ SVB:
I’m ok with that as long as the team is paying a stiff penalty (costs them 5 games at least).
@ SVB:
What on field changes would you propose?
In the vein of rule changes, here is what KLaw said he would change in the next CBA:
Universal DH
Dropping the compensation picks for FA signings
Removing international signing bonus limits
Making draft picks tradeable.
Removing testing and suspensions for marijuana.
Adding penalties for DUIs.
Adding one regular season series outside the US/Canada in every season
What a play by Rollins.
@ MJK:
I’m ok with those.
@ dmick89:
Me too since they’re all either common sense or beneficial to the Cubs
@ dmick89:
Well, I’m actually quite happy with the on-field rules. But since Tango’s rule was you have to propose one before you can comment on others (ignore comment 47 for the moment, (dying laughing)) I guess this:
Hit by pitch is not awarded to a batter when the pitch grazes body armor (except helmets).
I’m glad that players wear pads so they don’t get hurt. A pitch that hits a players wrist and breaks it is bad for the batter and the fan. But the hit by pitch rule is there to protect the batter, the additional padding protects the batter, and the batter ought not to be allowed to take advantage of incidental contact with the padding. Yeah, it’s a minor thing. Probably will generate some arguments about umpire subjectivity, but so what. That’s already part of the game. That’s why I like the umpire-called strike zone.
I could possibly be convinced that GBTS’s suggestion is a good idea:
It would extend game time, I’d think. But the corollary should be true too: Once a batter is in the line-up, he must bat or play the field. No more putting in a pinch hitter to get a pitching change to then pinch hit for a guy that never swung the bat.
I don’t like the 6 ball walk or the start on a 2-0 count.
fwiw, I also hate hate hate shoot outs in hockey and soccer. Accept a tie or play til you win. Take players off the field if necessary, but shoot outs are stupid.
@ MJK:
How does making draft picks tradable help small market teams? Wouldn’t they just trade their high picks so they don’t have to pay the bonus? Would the bonus allotment trade with the pick, or not?
I wouldn’t want to add any changes that would be up to the unpire’s discretion. I’d like to take as much of that away. All of it actually.
@ dmick89:
Yeah, I knew that was coming. (dying laughing)
One thing that made Maddux so effective was that he also pitched to the tendencies of the umpires. I hate the robot strike zone idea. But the HBP thing wouldn’t be any harder than calling a foul tip.
Of course, I don’t really care if that rule gets accepted or not. I like the on-field rules as they are. And anyway, I thought replay was an on-field rule…
@ SVB:
I was just reposting something Keith Law said in a chat last week, didn’t mean to imply any of those changes would be good for small-market teams. I reckon the 2nd & 3rd ones would probably hurt small-market teams.
I don’t think making draft picks tradeable inherently favors small-market teams either. I think it favors teams with good GMs. I would assume that the draft allotment traded with it. I believe that’s how compensation picks work now. And I would hope no team would trade away high draft picks to save money but I wouldn’t put it past some owners.
http://youtu.be/m1Vdl-EMY1E?t=2m2s
I wonder what the kid said to the ump?
@ Suburban kid:
I made the mistake of reading the comments.
I like that they used Wrigley as the backdrop and that both teams had similar uniform colors. I like being confused by youth sports.
@ Rice on bus:
The kid must have said something like “You Suck” to the ump because he was tossed so fast after turning to him. I don’t get how he was tossed for “celebrating”, because he didn’t even have three seconds to celebrate before getting yoinked. I also didn’t realize you can get ejected from a game that was finished.
@ Suburban kid:
If that was the case I wonder why the coaches weren’t given a proper explanation. But I’m just going off the video description. Maybe Deadspin will figure this out.
1. After the first pickoff attempt of an at-bat, each additional pickoff attempt counts as a thrown ball.
2. Any player on base during a ground-rule double is assumed to have scored. This shit with men on first base only advancing to third is really stupid, in my opinion.
The first rule speeds the game up, the second makes more sense (and rewards the ground-rule double commensurate with it’s difficulty).
Myles wrote:
OK, I like this one.
I was reading through the comments in order, and I couldn’t figure out where you’d seen a pickoff attempt that got a little league catcher thrown out of a game!
@ Myles:
But GRDs aren’t really a skill, it seems to me be mostly park dependent.
@ Suburban kid:
Yeah, he must of said something insulting to the ump. And I guess if that was the case he should be tossed. The first time through the video, I didn’t even see the kid turn to the ump, so I figured he probably said something like “Gotcha, F*g” to the kid who struck out. But after watching again, I think it’s a comment to the ump.
If the video description is accurate, the coaches did a good job instructing their players not to go ballistic on a close play. They should have closed the deal with, “And let it go after that.” Seems very possible the kid knew enough not to say anything in the game, but waited til the end.
@ josh:
Even so, unless Hector Villanueva is on first, there is still a good chance the runner scores if the ball stays in play.
SVB wrote:
I think we all like it, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t ways to make it better. Not saying mine will (I’d enjoy it more, but I don’t know about others). Just saying that anything can be made better.
Baseball needs to become more exciting, which means more runs scored. I’d favor just about anything that increased runs, but would prefer it be done in the least intrusive way possible. I cannot stand it when batters are intentionally walked. When I”m at a game and a good hitter comes to the plate, nothing pisses me off more. As a fan, I want to see them hit. So do most fans because we all like watching good players.
So I’m much prefer there be a harsh penalty for doing such things. I also wouldn’t mind it if all baserunners advanced a base on a 4-pitch walk or no-strike HBP. That would significantly cut down on them.
The mid-inning relief changes are just boring and it cannot do anything other than drive fans away from the game. 4 different pitchers in the same inning late in a game make the half inning last about 30 minutes.
I’d be OK with GBTS’s rule (pitcher can’t be relieved until he’s recorded an out or a run). That would also speed up the game.
I’d also penalize coaching visits to the mound. I’d be in favor of eliminating them, but there’s not an effective way to do so. If you eliminate them, pitcher will fake injuries so the trainer or coach can come check on them. You could require that the pitcher be replaced, but that’s the same thing as mid-inning pitching changes. I guess one way to avoid that would be a mandatory period of games in which the player is ineligible to play and the roster spot can’t be filled. That would probably work, speed up the game, keep the shittiest relievers off the field and create a better overall experience.
@ josh:
Yeah, they are. I like the idea. It would increase run scoring, which I favor. It would create more runs in specific parks, but each team playing would be playing by the same rules.
Myles wrote:
That’s another rule that forces the pitcher to stop fucking around. I like it. Plus, I’d love to see a pitcher throw over to try and get Tony Campana or some other speedster and then not be able to throw over there again. Campana would never be thrown out. Even slower guys might take a leadoff of more than a step at which point they could also steal a base. More runs.
Create a delay of game penalty in baseball. I’m thinking about managers, coaches and players arguing, but it can apply to other situations too.
@ dmick89:
I like that baseball doesn’t have a clock. I wouldn’t want other sports to get rid of their clock, but football might be pretty interesting if it was played until both teams ran at least 60 plays. The series where the last team got to 60 plays would end the game.
I guess I’m a patient guy on most things, and I like pitching. One of the best games I ever saw was Schilling vs Millwood (in his good Braves days) in Ariz. 13 innings. Would have been better if Grace had driven in the winning run, and if the DBacks didn’t play is such a horrible park… I think the game ended about 12:30 a.m. If I’d had my kids with me, we probably would have had to leave early, but I wouldn’t begrudge the fans who couldn’t stay the exciting ending. Anyway, football can go forever too, with all the clock stoppages. For me, a pitcher’s duel is far better than any soccer game. Talk about something boring due to lack of scoring.
Anyway, to your comment, why not just get rid of the Intentional Walk? Personally, I’m OK with the strategic value of the IBB because a team should be more than one player. The Cubs certainly gained by not pitching to Albert Pujols, and lost by having people IBB Sosa. But when Alou was hitting well, teams paid for walking Sosa. If the IBB was eliminated, I wouldn’t cry about it. Maybe starting the next batter on a 1-0 count after a 4-0 walk would be OK, but not giving batters extra bases. You have to earn your base. A 1-0 count still gives the next batter an advantage.
I don’t think eliminating in-inning pitching changes is workable either. How many times have we screamed that Baker/Quade should have taken (scrub) out? 1000s. Forcing them to record an out or run is workable, but not eliminating the pitching change. How many runs do we have to watch Lendy Castillo give up? I’m sure if the no changes in the middle of inning rule were in place, we’d have seen him give up at least 15 runs as some point. I have to admit that I hate the LOOGY that comes in and then walks the guy anyway, whether on purpose or not. So the more I think of it, I like GBTS’ rule a lot. It would decrease pitching changes, and increase scoring, but not substantially change the nature of the game.
Interesting discussion…
SVB wrote:
Wow. SK is going to skewer me with the stream of consciousness on that paragraph…
(dying laughing)
Wandy is looking pretty good today, except against the lead off hitter.
SVB wrote:
tldr
Looks like they finally heard you, aisley.
per Brett:
also jim deshaies’ debut
#OnWisconsin
GW wrote:
I’d like a million dollars.
Batting practice.
Suburban kid wrote:
Saved from a skewering by a short attention span.
@ dmick89:
Vitters still can’t.
It’s practice.
Vitters has infield cutout power.
I’m most excited to watch Takahashi. Kid had potential.
@ Aisle424:
@ dmick89:
So did Esmalin Caridad. I hope this turns out better.
Jim Deshaies is awesome.
Javier Baez is also awesome.
I love Cubs baseball.
Also, Jorge Soler hit a foul ball probably 500 feet. It was incredible
Soler looks slower than I thought he’d be, but I’m not sure if it’s 2005-Soriano Syndrome (where he looks slow because of his gait/size, but actually isn’t slow).
Soler is huge.
I liked Jim DeShaies.
I also liked all the home runs.
I want a Javier Baez tattoo on my penis so I can hit home runs in the bedroom. Yes I’m drunk.
@ JonKneeV:
That’s a first.
I don’t know what happened here or if I missed the context, but it sounds like Gomez is displeased that the USA didn’t homer enough. It’s disappointing, sure, but it was six games, how can you conclude anything from just six games?
Have you heard of this ESPN thing? It’s almost like they are more entertainment-focused and not very good at analysis!
new shit:
http://www.obstructedview.net/news-and-rumors/the-cubs-have-tried-to-extend-jeff-samardzija-twice.html