Pujols or Fielder?

[dabynsky]

Unforunately I think that they feel Barney is really a building block type guy. I think you can live with his production and defense if the money you save on him goes towards two impact players. Fielder and Wilson with Ramirez at 3rd base creates a pretty solid lineup with an above average rotation and good bullpen.

 

[nwfisch]

I agree with Dabs for once on signing a good SP in the next year or 2. I ray: the Cubs will contend next year, but they probably won't, so it'd be wise to wait for the apparently loaded FA SP class of 2013.

 

[dabynsky]

Well as D3A pointed out a number of those guys will likely get extensions and so the class won't be as loaded as it looks right now. But the idea that the Cubs by the start of 2013 could have a rotation with CJ Wilson, Matt Cain and Matt Garza as the front 3 is pretty damn appealing.

 

[daddies3angels]

* The Cubs now are 33-23 when they score at least four runs, good for a .589 winning percentage. When they score three runs or less, they’re 9-42. Saturday’s game was the fifth time since the start of June that they’ve scored more than four runs and lost the game.

Another reason they need a true number 3 hitter like Fielder

 

[Anno Catuli]

* The Cubs now are 33-23 when they score at least four runs, good for a .589 winning percentage. When they score three runs or less, they’re 9-42. Saturday’s game was the fifth time since the start of June that they’ve scored more than four runs and lost the game.

Another reason they need a true number 3 hitter like Fielder

I just posted the same stat on my facebook page.

 

[dabynsky]

I don't get it really. They've scored 4 runs or more in over half their games. You don't think the fact that they can't win low scoring games is more an indictment of the pitching than the offense. I'm going to ride this one into the ground, getting a top of the rotation starter is a bigger need than improving the middle of the order. The ideal world I could get both next offseason, but if the choice is between one or the other I will take the TOR starter every time.

 

[Anno Catuli]

I don't get it really. They've scored 4 runs or more in over half their games. You don't think the fact that they can't win low scoring games is more an indictment of the pitching than the offense. I'm going to ride this one into the ground, getting a top of the rotation starter is a bigger need than improving the middle of the order. The ideal world I could get both next offseason, but if the choice is between one or the other I will take the TOR starter every time.

If they can not win low scoring games, that is more on the offense IMO. Not many teams will win many games when they only score three runs or less. That is 42 losses with only scoring three runs. It is 29 losses scoring only two runs a game.

When you score four runs a record of 33-23 isn't horrible, but its far from great. They need a pitching staff which won't give up four plus runs a game, and that can do a lot better than pitching a "quality start" which is a stat I find completely BS.

The pitching is not great by anymeans, but the offense is at just as much fault I think.

 

[dabynsky]

If they can not win low scoring games, that is more on the offense IMO. Not many teams will win many games when they only score three runs or less. That is 42 losses with only scoring three runs. It is 29 losses scoring only two runs a game.

When you score four runs a record of 33-23 isn't horrible, but its far from great. They need a pitching staff which won't give up four plus runs a game, and that can do a lot better than pitching a "quality start" which is a stat I find completely BS.

The pitching is not great by anymeans, but the offense is at just as much fault I think.

It is time for some fun facts. The Cubs score runs at a slightly below average rate, with an above average batting average and slugging percentage. Their OBP is well below average, but even still they score more than 4 runs in over half their games. On the other hand, Cubs starters have the worst ERA, fewest quality starts, and the fewest innings pitched but it is as much as the Cubs offense fault they suck as the pitchers?

 

[Anno Catuli]

When you lose 42 games when you score 3 runs or less (that is more than half of their losses) it is. Look at Garza's recent starts. He has pitched his ass off and has gotten no run support at all.

Both the offense and pitching suck, but if a pitcher gives up three runs the team has to score more than two.

 

[dabynsky]

When you lose 42 games when you score 3 runs or less (that is more than half of their losses) it is. Look at Garza's recent starts. He has pitched his ass off and has gotten no run support at all.

Both the offense and pitching suck, but if a pitcher gives up three runs the team has to score more than two.

But scoring more runs isn't going to improve their winning percentage in those situations. The fact that Garza has pitched his ass off in a few starts in a row doesn't change the fact that in less than 40% of Cubs starts will Cubs starters go 6 innings or more with 3 earned runs or less. Find me stats the Cubs offense is dead last in because I can find plenty of categories that Cubs starting pitching is dead last in.

 

[Rice Cube]

Today's verdict: the Cubs suck :lol:

 

[Anno Catuli]

But scoring more runs isn't going to improve their winning percentage in those situations. The fact that Garza has pitched his ass off in a few starts in a row doesn't change the fact that in less than 40% of Cubs starts will Cubs starters go 6 innings or more with 3 earned runs or less. Find me stats the Cubs offense is dead last in because I can find plenty of categories that Cubs starting pitching is dead last in.

Not exactly earth shattering, but the Cubs have 18 losses when opponents score 4 runs or less.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Not exactly earth shattering, but the Cubs have 18 losses when opponents score 4 runs or less.

We suck pretty much no matter the situation right now..

Just what it is.

 

[dabynsky]

Well here I just added up. The Phillies who lead the league in wins have played in 64 games when their offense has scored 4 runs or less. The Cubs have played in 51. It isn't the fact that the Cubs offense isn't consistenetly putting up that number. There is no statistically measure which shows the Cubs offense is as bad as the Cubs starting pitching. Until someone can find it there is no way to look at what is going on and say that the offense has more to blame than the starting pitching.

Please note I am not saying that the Cubs offense couldn't use improvement. Any improvement to any facet of the game will result in an increase in wins. However, starting pitching is the weakest part of the team right now and improving that will result in the greatest increase in performance.