Cubs 9, Dbacks 1

In Postgame by berselius59 Comments

OSS: David Bote puts on a show.

Three up

  1. David Bote came up big in this one, the first multihomer game of his career. The first one was an absolute bomb that hit the second deck in left field that broke the game open for the Cubs. Bote was also hit by a pitch later in the game that led to some words exchanged/reluctant jogging by bullpen pitchers. He also had a solid defensive day despite tallying the Cubs lone error. He made up for it by smoothly turning a DP on the very next play. Bote now has a .296/.397/.556 line on the year, good for a .402 wOBA.
  2. There were plenty of extra base knocks to go around, as Baez, Bryant, Schwarber (twice), and Rizzo (twice, plus a late HR) all had doubles in this one. Bryant in particular seemed to be making good contact today, though the results didn’t really show it.
  3. Darvish struggled early, but then looked like a different pitcher from the third inning on. He ended the day with eight strikeouts and four walks (and one HBP) in six innings, allowing just two hits. One was a home run to dead center in his last inning of work, the only run he allowed. IIRC Darvish struggled early in games last year too, and hopefully the Cubs can figure that shit out because innings 3-6 Darvish certainly looked like the guy they paid for.

Three down

  1. A tough day for Taylor Davis, who went 0-4, but his main value is spelling Willson anyway. I’m surprised that Joe hasn’t given Contreras more rest, but with the relatively absurd number of off days built into the schedule in April I guess it’s relatively moot.
  2. A couple of TOOTBLANs in this one, as Javy was caught dead to rights in the second inning on a SB and Schwarber was picked off of second base in the fourth.
  3. My confidence in this bullpen is so low that when the DBacks brought in a position player to pitch the ninth inning, down 9-1, my gut reaction was that they were wrong to be punting on this game (dying laughing).

Next up: The Cubs go for the series win at 3:10 PM CT. Q takes on Cards transplant Luke Weaver.

Share this Post

Comments

  11. andcounting

    SK,

    His entire research consists of reading a tweet and one of the replies to that tweet. He published that story maybe five minutes after the tweet was twitted.

    Yeah, it makes me miss newspapers too. Imagine someone actually giving two shits about the actual story.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  12. andcounting

    andcounting,

    I mean, I get this is a controversial, important issue, but imagine a journalist being threatened. What recourse do they have? Thank goodness there are other journalists on twitter to get the word out once the fourth-generation rumor shows up in their feeds.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  14. andcounting

    Myles,

    The most bizarre quote that makes me doubt the veracity of this tweet is the assertion that the Cubs are approving positive stories. Are they saying the news media is running story ideas past the Cubs for approval? That would be brand new information.

    The only possibility I can see for that version of events to have any credibility is within the group who publishes material for the Cubs/MLB.com. But even those stories are said to be not approved by the teams.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  15. andcounting

    andcounting,

    And I can see a team telling “reporters” who work for the team not to publish anything critical. But that would not be a significant story.

    I can see them telling actual reporters not to write anything critical, but I can’t imagine a journalist taking offense at it and not just posting about it.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  17. SK

    andcounting,

    I didn’t realize it was just tweets that were his sources, but those weren’t from random tweeps, they were people posting in their own names who do likely speak to reporters a lot because of the orgs they work for.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  19. andcounting

    SK,

    I don’t think they’re people out to manufacture hit-job stories. I’m highly critical of the guy who published that as a news story instead of actually working to uncover and develop the story. It just isn’t news at this point and we can’t pretend to have reliable information.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  22. SK

    andcounting,

    That would be preferable but I doubt beat writers dependent on access are gonna go on the record.

    Surely loads of stories about teams’ shitty actions go undeveloped and unpublished for that reason.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  23. dmick89

    I think reporters are far more willing to trade good stories for access than they once were. It’s happened with politics so it wouldn’t be surprising that it’s also happened in sports. I do agree that some of this story seems fishy, but it’s also not something would seem all that surprising to me. Stupid? Yes. Absolutely.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  24. dmick89

    Any journalist worth a shit would have found a way to record the Cubs pressuring them to back off and they’d release the audio. I do find it a little hard to believe the Cubs would waste their time with this. They can’t rebuild Russell’s name with good coverage and it’s not going stop people from calling him out on social media. If anything, this just brings more coverage to it.

      Quote  Reply

    2

    0
  38. EnricoPallazzo

    Anyone else listening to pat and ron right now? I’m getting the distinct impression that pat may like saying “jon duplontier” almost as much as “eugenio suarez”.

      Quote  Reply

    3

    0
  58. andcounting

    Was that outing from Chatwood possibly more impressive than his start? He came in with the bases loaded and didn’t lose the game.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

Leave a Comment