Josh Vitters had a big game going 3-4 with a BB. Vitters was just a HR shy of the cycle and his OPS now sits at .869. Brett Jackson had another 3 strikeout performance. He needs less that 60 more to make the 200 k mark for the year.
Junior Lake continues his hot streak and racked up 3 hits in 5 AB's yesterday. He also stole a pair of bases so a hearty Kudos to Mr. Lake. Both Justin Bour and The Greg of Rohan hit HR's with Rohan seeing some time in the OF.
Matt Szczur was 2-4 with a BB and his OBP is just shy of .400. With Jae Hoon Ha's scary injury last night we might see Szczur move up and he has certainly earned it. John Andreoli was 2-3 with a BB. Andreoli has zero power but he takes his walks and has good speed and might make it one day as a reserve OF. Austin Kirk is repeating his 2011 season in which he dominates in the first half and getting shelled in the 2nd. Kirk walked 5 and gave up 4 ER in 6 IP last night and his ERA for July is 5.67.
Javier Baez was 2-2 with a pair of RBI's and his now slugging .599 with an OPS just south of 1.000. Michael Jensen had a good start working 6 IP and giving up a pair of runs while striking out 6.
I picked the wrong night to wach a Boise Hawks game as they were shut out and lost 1-0. Dan Vogelbach had a good eye at the plate and very very fast hands. He just missed a HR right center and had a gem of an AB vs the Yakima closer. He worked the count, fouled off a bunch of pitches and then ripped single into RF.
Jorge Soler drew his first walk and stole a base & Garrett Schlect hit his first HR. The Rangers Joey Gallo came in as a PH and hit a HR in the bottom of the 9th his 13th already in AZL.
Suburban kid wrote:
WORK.
@ Mish:
Work sucks. I’d rather have more graduate degrees.
I know you’ve always wondered so here’s the resolution people are viewing this site in
In your survey, would Mac OS X include iOS? Outside of work I’m mostly viewing OV on my iPad.
Mish wrote:
cool story bro
@ Mish:
We use Sitemeter (that’s where I got that info). I think it probably includes it with Mac OS X, but I’m really not sure why.
Looking at other stats, it appears 2% of our traffic is using an iPad with 6% using an iPhone. Another 17% using Mac OS X.
These numbers will be slightly different and probably a little less accurate, but close enough. There are 3 different Mac OS X being used to access this site (10.7 mostly, which is Lion, 10.5 is next which is Leopard and then 10.6, which is Snow Leopard). My first thought was that it was surprising there were more Leopard users than Snow Leopard, but if you have SL you probably went ahead and updated to Lion so it makes sense).
There aren’t enough 10.8 users showing up, but it’s only been out for 2 days.
If 6% are iPhone users that would probably mean 6% of other mobile users are using Google or Windows because it appears about 12% of the users are viewing the site on their phone from what I can tell. That’s kind of surprising that it seems split evenly. I’d have expected more iPhone users, but like I said, it’s possible these numbers aren’t accurately showing the OS people use.
Does anyone know if the olympics will be streamed online?
@ mb21:
There’s also got to be some overlap in these numbers, i.e. Mac users that also own and iPhone and access the ste via both means
Whatever happened to BM’s Olympics rant from old ACB?
WaLi wrote:
Yes, if you subscribe to cable/satellite:
http://www.nbcolympics.com/liveextra/
@ mb21:
Your fancy user stats don’t tell you anything about the intangibles and grittiness I use in reading the blog
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
My first ACB comments involved baseball’s departure from the Olympics.
I also wrote a post there about the Trib’s Olympics beat writer who is also one of the holier than thou BBWAA cunts who made racist comments about Dominican players when announcing he’d never support a Sammy HoF nomination. Good times.
@ WenningtonsGorillaCock:
Don’t worry. I’m sure they have scouts watching your every computer-related move. All evidence has been turned over to the proper authorities. Do not be blindsided by the repercussions.
I missed the great plant genetics experiment from earlier but I think whatever GW said is probably what I would have tried to do. But I don’t really do plants or genomics/genetics so I’d probably be terrible with details. I guess it also depends on whether you are trying to detect a steroid, a simpler chemical compound, a peptide as GW suggested, or a larger protein. But for the genetic part you can definitely use either a microarray-based approach or qPCR if you know which genes are responsible for producing and regulating your favorite hormone.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Yeah there is.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
http://www.dmick89.com/cubs/?p=1506
Someone should post that in the forum for the Olympics discussion thread.
@ WenningtonsGorillaCock:
Bah, I don’t wanna pay…
@ WenningtonsGorillaCock:
We are working on a proprietary formula to measure the heart of our readers.
@ Suburban kid:
A comment or a post?
This is ACB from 2005-2009 if anyone wants to search for something: http://www.dmick89.com/cubs/
Here’s 2009-2011: http://dmick89.com/cubs/joomla/
@ mb21:
The Olympics beat writer / Sosa HoF was one of the few actual posts I contributed.
The other thing was just comments, seeing as it was my first involvement of any kind there.
@ Suburban kid:
Any idea when it was when you would have written it? On the old ACB or Bloguin ACB?
This? http://www.dmick89.com/cubs/?p=541
Philip Hersh
Yep, that.
That was before Sammy was outed from that list and there was no evidence.
I’m still failing to understand why non-baseball people have votes for HoF induction.
Suburban kid wrote:
Would you rather have Joe Morgan voting?
@ Suburban kid:
Everyone knows that journalists are the authorities on everything.
@ Suburban kid:
Same here. That was a good article. Makes no sense that a guy who covered baseball 30 years ago would have a vote today. None.
jtsunami wrote:
Not a great choice (dying laughing).
I’m not even talking about beat reporters, I’m talking about guys who were once beat reporters but not for the last 25 years. This guy wasn’t covering baseball during Sosa and McGwire’s careers (and anyone else who played in the 90s.)
Just got a Team Stream update that Garza has fluid in triceps. Won’t be DLed but he won’t pitch until after deadline.
Mucker wrote:
Is that like a misting station?
@ Mucker:
“YES! FEED ME YOUR SWEET DISAPPOINTMENT!” -The Hope Monster
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/27/so-much-for-the-cubs-trading-matt-garza-hes-out-until-after-the-deadline/
should have traded Garza in the offseason. 2 years of club control is more valuable than a year and 2 months. A year and 2 months is more valuable than 1 year. Not much the Cubs can do because of the injury, but they should have better protected themselves from the possibility of an injury considering that’s what pitchers do: get injured.
@ Mish:
Hopefully Dempster isn’t butthurt by the fact that he may be the second choice.
@ mb21:
starting to blame the front office yet? (dying laughing)
This Garza thing has really blindsided Dempster.
@ mb21:
Would giving Garza an extension make sense?
He would be our #1 next year I imagine and for the few following years. He seems to like it here… or is at least enjoying himself (See: Pie in the face) and we do need someone to pitch. He is still youngish so he might be near the end of his prime, but still in good years, by the time we contend. I guess it depends on if our prospects get up to the majors in real time or in bubbles time.
@ GW:
No, not for nothing happening right now. Nothing they can do about that, but teams were interested in Garza all offseason and the Cubs overvalued him. They likely still did and he probably wouldn’t have been traded anyway. Based on what I’d read the Cubs hadn’t come down on their offseason demands at all. They wanted a Gio Gonzalez like return for Garza and that’s just ridiculous.
That said, it’s not like the possibility of an injury to a pitcher is far fetched and it never should have gotten to this point. The team wanted to trade Garza. The only smart thing to do was trade him for the best offer this past offseason. Once they didn’t, they settled on getting less in return for him later on or re-signing him. I’m not opposed to re-signing him, but would offer less at this point than I would have last year, which was less than what the Cubs were probably thinking anyway.
This roster is what it is. We knew entering the season they didn’t have much value to trade and the Cubs won’t end up getting anything in return. It’s not surprising. Too bad they didn’t get a prospect like Delgado though. That would have helped.
Conspiracy theory: they shut Garza down until after the deadline because they don’t like the deals they are getting offered for him now and figure maybe they’ll just extend him at this point, or trade him in the offseason when they have a better shot at replacing him on the roster with someone who is not Rodrigo Lopez or Casey Coleman, because let’s face it, that is going to suck and they do have tickets and hope to peddle.
So they take him off the market and make Dempster the only one available so that maybe the Dodgers give up on trying to extract Garza and just settle on getting the Dick Joke Brothers together again. It may not improve the deal they get from the Dodgers, but maybe the Dodgers stop holding out for Garza and just do it.
@ WaLi:
Assuming the MRI didn’t show anything more than what we’ve heard, I would consider it. I would probably wait a month and see how he performs, but I wouldn’t be offering he 5 years and $60 millionish I would have last offseason. I’d go something closer to 5 years and $50 million. He’ll probably decline it since he’s so close to free agency.
@ mb21:
you’ll get there…
mb21 wrote:
/non mb above average cub fan’d
@ Aisle424:
Shut down Garza, knowing they will extend him to up Dempster’s trade value?
I hate to be “that guy” but isn’t Garza getting hurt so Cub? It’s not like he’s even going to be out for a month or more. It figures he’ll miss two starts and they are right around the trade deadline.
Sorry if I sound like Rosenbloom.
@ Aisle424:
It’s a nice theory, but you’d first have to get the player to agree to be shut down and considering Garza has been relatively healthy, this is concerning for him and any future contract he may get. It’s the first sign of any arm troubles and that’s never a good thing. If he was being shut down because he had some toe fungus, I might agree that it’s more of a possibility, but with it being arm related, I’d say the odds this is some kind of agreed upon conspiracy are slim to none.
@ josh:
Of course, they could have just taken Garza off the block. But then they’d be accused of trying to drive up Demp’s trade value.
@ mb21:
Never assume a conspiracy when BEING THE CUBS suffices.
If they wanted to shut him down, they would have put him on the DL. His next start is scheduled 14 days out. There’s still an outside shot of a trade (yeah, you can be traded while on DL) but that way he can start sooner.
It’s not like Garza being shut down until after the deadline eliminates the possibility of a trade. Waiver deals are still possible, although certainly more complicated. If the Cubs want to deal him, they still can….
Anyone got any good dick jokes?
The Hope Monster is really enjoying all the dashed hopes this trading season has brought.
@ GW:
Get to blaming them for not trading overly talented players for overly talented prospects at the deadline? I might side with you if we’re talking this past offseason and I actually do, but right now there’s just not much they can do other than caving into demands and I don’t want that. I do want them to be realistic and fear they weren’t with Garza, but that’s a small complaint and it assumes all reports are accurate.
Am I disappointed with how year one of Team Theo has worked out? Yeah, more than a bit to be honest, but I actually don’t know how much of that is becasue of my general disinterest in the team or the expectations I had. At some point after the season I’ll collect my thoughts on it, but it’s just one year and he took over a team with little talent at the MLB level and in the minor leagues. It’s going to be ugly for awhile and it probably affects what I think too. It definitely affects my interest in the team.
@ 26.2cubfan:
They’d be in a similar situation that they’re in with trying to trade Dempster. They’d have no leverage as they could only deal him to one team.
@ josh:
Can we trade the Hope Monster for some prospects, or does he have fluid in one of his tentacles?
@ mb21:
we’ll see how the next five days play out. if poorly, maybe i’ll write up what i mean.
@ Suburban kid:
Have you ever heard the Voodoo Dick joke?
@ mb21:
5/50 seems a bit low. I haven’t ran the numbers, but he has had an ERA+ above 110 in all but 1 season (2010, where it was 100). That puts him in the “above average” category, right? Didn’t you show yesterday that the top 30 or 40% is where that 12.5 M salary arbitration number comes from? So he should make above that I would think because he is probably in the top 30-40% of players.
I know that’s not how you are supposed to run the numbers, but If he was to get an extension for 5/60, I’d be happy. Unfortunately that would put him in the 10/5 boat and he would be hated by the time he left (dying laughing).
@ Suburban kid:
MB used “disinterest” wrong.
I’m a complete dick.
he was asking in the neighborhood of 5/100. if he’d take 5/60, it would already be done, methinks.
@ mikeakaleroy:
I always assumed that the Hope Monster was an invertebrate and therefore would need fluid in the tentacles to maintain some kind of shape.
@ GW:
You can write it up either way. I’d like to understand what you mean, but from my perspective you’ve got a front office trying to deal shit. Obviously Dempster and Garza aren’t shit, but considering their contract situation and value, they’re not much more than that to the Cubs in a trade. They’re salary dumps. Throw in some money and they can get something, but that’s about it.
@ Rice Cube:
So you’re saying that we could use his fluid for trade leverage! That just sounded wrong…
@ mikeakaleroy:
The Nationals were the one team that really needed him, but they decided to go the homegrown route.
Spellcheck reborn got promoted to AA.
@ josh:
I always do that.
@ jtsunami:
Can we not all agree to start calling him Caesar?
@ GW:
Garza was? I seem to remember his agent shooting for the Danks range, which was, what, 5/65 or something? Garza isn’t as good as Danks so I’d give him less. If he wants 100 million, stay the hell away. Hard to believe any team will sign him for 9 figures
@ mb21:
I was just trying to be a dick for the sake of the joke.
@ mb21:
i’m almost positive, though I don’t remember the source.
@ jtsunami:
Out of the ashes of Ha rises…. Sczuzrxzzaazr.
It’s like I’m writing for a Superman comic
@ josh:
I knew it was a joke.
@ GW:
If his agent told the Cubs he wanted that much the Cubs should have been on the phone 3 seconds later trading him to the highest bidder. There’s no excuse to not trade him right away if his agent is being that unreasonable.
@ josh:
I think you used wrong wrong.
@ mb21:
Assuming that was the real request, is there any chance the Cubs are trying to hedge their bets as a safeguard against the CBA? If a value of a win shoots through the roof, then maybe that deal seems more reasonable. I don’t know, I’m just throwing it out there that maybe some of this strangeness is part of a strategy they’re adopting because of the new rules.
Hell, I don’t know. Maybe other teams were making really shitty offers.
@ mb21:
Garza is much better than Danks, no? His WAR the past few seasons has been much better. And now Danks has shoulder issues.
@ mb21:
http://www.bleachernation.com/2012/05/24/lukewarm-stove-garza-dempster-lahair-castro-oswalt-soler/
@ Rice Cube:
No. Does it involve a voodoo idol who rolled his eyes, sang from his heart, and the jungle creatures from near and far came to lose their minds under his spell?
@ Suburban kid:
http://www.pagetutor.com/jokebreak/040.html
GW wrote:
I agree. How about Sizzler? As in the out-of-business buffet restaurant.
@ Suburban kid:
Yeah, what a dick.
@ Rice Cube:
(dying laughing)
Carrie Muskat tweets that Jae-Hoon Ha is out 7-14 days with a concussion after running his face into the brick wall going after a four in Jacksonville last night.
(Josh, can you fix this run on?)
@ Rice Cube:
When I heard that one when I was a kid it was “Little Green Fucky Monster.”
Kids are stupid.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/valuing-midseason-trade-targets/
@ SVB:
It’s not a run on, but I’m not clear about your use of “four” here. A runon would be two independent clauses joined with just a conjunction or no conjunction/punctuation at all. Everything after the first “after” is a subordinate clause. This is just a long sentence with a weird usage of ‘four.’
@ mb21:
I’m glad you got rid of that miscellaneous category from the previous thread. With 36 slices and 20-some at 1%, that was really bugging me. (dying laughing)
Also assuming unknown origin is the US, I’m glad I can contribute 1/3 of your geographic diversity. I guess the one RIM user is probably my lame-ass blackberry.
SVB wrote:
/jae-kuk ryu’d
@ josh:
Fixed
@ GW:
(dying laughing)
@ SVB:
I kept trying to cram “ball” in for “four.” It seemed like a weird mistake.
By the way, the disturbance response molecule is ethylene–the gas.
If you are dying to more about ethylene in one page, click here.
Can’t use it to season your cast iron, but you can use it to ripen your tomatoes.
@ SVB:
I should note that I’m the Jae-Hoon Ha of editing.
@ SVB:
We all know only the only way to truly season cast iron is with artisan beers while Breaking Bad plays on a nearby TV screen and someone sends you a Libertarian rant on your Mountain Lion equipped iPhone.
@ GW:
That Osprey thing was 9 years ago. Wow.
@ Rodrigo Ramirez:
I think fWAR has Garza as better, but rWAR has Danks as a lot better. They’re very similar pitchers and Danks was signed before the injury.
stupid question- couldn’t the Cubs just show the MRI to the team that wanted him? if their doctors saw it was just a minor cramp too then why would that be a deal breaker?
@ dylanj:
Yeah, it might still lower his value for the missed starts, but it seems like it would still be possible, if the other team’s doctor agreed with the Cubs’.
@ dylanj:
Yeah, that info would be shared or the trading team would do their own more likely. It’s still possible, but with him out for awhile I just don’t see teams being all that interested. Arm injuries are tricky so any team that might still be interested wouldn’t be willing to give up nearly as much as they would have if he was healthy.
@ dylanj:
i’m sure they will try that, but I doubt it will work.
@ GW:
Yeah, It would be surprising if any team was willing to give up much more than a midlevel prospect at this point and that’s clearly going to be unacceptable to them. I didn’t think he’d get traded even if he was healthy, but then I also didn’t know Garza was thinking he could sign an extension for $100 billion either.
josh wrote:
fixed
hell why not? You could even add language to void the trade if this cramp turns out to be a torn elbow. I mean if i were a rival GM and we are talking about a guy starting next fri instead of monday im not going to kill a good trade over that.
thats probably why i’ll never be a GM though
@ dylanj:
If you put that kind of terminology in the deal, what kind of protection will the other team want for their prospect until they know for sure the elbow is fine? Will the Cubs be able to play who they get back? Can the Cubs get a guarantee the Dodgers won’t use Garza for 165 pitches?
This type of deal just doesn’t happen because you’re asking one team to accept that another team will be taking control of that player with no guarantee they keep him. In other words, the Dodgers could have Garza start 7 games in a row and when he breaks down they get their prospect back, but the Cubs used that prospect for a 300 pitch outing and his career is over.
Obviously those are exaggerations, but I think it highlights why it won’t happen. The Cubs aren’t going to agree to a situation in which another team could use Garza as they want and the Dodgers won’t allow the Cubs to use who they acquire the way the Cubs might want. I’m not even sure that type of deal would be allowed by the commissioner anyway.
Also keep in mind, often times a pitcher’s estimated date of return is pushed back. Cashner and Wells were only going to miss 4 weeks last year. Then it was 6 and then it was 8. Looking into it from the start you could see it was going to be at least 8 weeks. I don’t trust the Cubs when they say he’ll pitch next Friday.
There are a lot of healthy pitchers available that a team could go after. They’ll move on.
Besides, I don’t think the Cubs would have traded him anyway.
I think we’re starting to really see how unenviable a task Hoyer and Theo took on here. Shit team with players no one wants under a new CBA that cripples rebuilding efforts of big money teams like the Cubs at the worst possible time.
Fuck it. Why don’t we just Yankees it up in here and start buying a team that can win?
I don’t care anymore. I don’t know if I can stomach a Pirates-like rebuilding timeframe.
New shit
http://www.obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/series-preview-chicago-cubs-40-57-vs-st-louis-cardinals-53-46.html
The current rumor regarding adding either Soriano or LaHair to a Dempster trade makes little sense to me.