Chicago Cubs 2014 Season Thread (super-official)
- Thread starter bws258
- Start date
GoHawks24
Well-Known Member
Who needs runs when you have a great family atmosphere for the games?
That's what matters, right? Having fun. All ya gotta do is pay an arm and a leg. No big deal.
hawkfarmer
Well-Known Member
3 sacrifice bunts! 3! And Samardzija's goes for a double play. Rough one for Renteria's first game. I didn't hate the attempt by Lake cause he can beat those out, but did not like to see it on the second pitch when he whiffed the bunt attempt on the first one. Gotta let them swing. Statistics show that it creates more offense, and man the cubs need all the help they can get in that department.
Also, before anyone argues, there is a time and place for sac bunts, but not 3 in a 0-0 game, and not before the 9th inning.
Also, before anyone argues, there is a time and place for sac bunts, but not 3 in a 0-0 game, and not before the 9th inning.
judzeehawk
Well-Known Member
Getting picked off first base Doesn't help things either but hey it's the first game. I'll say 72 games sounds about right. Those replays are really gonna slow a slow game down.
JG10Hawk
Well-Known Member
Idk about you but I've personally been a part of several wins due to executing multiple sac bunts during close games. That is when it is smartest to do so. You only need one run so you strategically set your runners up to be in a scoring position. When you have an inept lineup for hitting with power you have to play smart ball. The execution just stunk. All 3 were with 0 outs which is ideal. The 1st one backfired because Samardzija bunted right back to Liriano for an easy double play, the second bunt was a success but then Castro hit a hard grounder to second and Bonifacio got too far off of 3rd so got caught in a pickle, and the last one was a sucess but the last two batters flew out and popped out in foul territory. So the first bunt was a failure, the last two a success but the execution of the next batters stunk. Sac bunts move runners over and apply pressure on the pitcher. Maybe I'm of the minority but I strategically thought the game was managed well.
NEIChawk
Well-Known Member
You have to manage with what you have....I think the Cubbies are getting those types of players, and of course it depends on the situation, helluva gamble, and you need the right players doing the right things...it will happen...I don't give a crap I just like watching the Cubs....been my team for the last 40+ years...it's good to be a Cub fan....
JG10Hawk
Well-Known Member
Agreed. Some might consider the first bunt as too early in the game, being the 5th inning, but you had your pitcher up to bat. The other two bunts were in the 8th and 9th when 1 run would have won the game.
MisterLucky
Well-Known Member
Tuned in to watch the season opener and freakin' ESPN showed a rerun from last year.
hawkfarmer
Well-Known Member
This is exactly why sac bunts are not great in major league baseball. You only have 27 outs and you need to utilize them the best you can. If it is the 9th inning and a guy on 2nd, no outs, tied game, down 1, then yes go for it. But 6th inning, man on 1st or 2nd and you bunt with the #2 batter? Waste of an out. Why not see if that guy can be more productive. Even in 1 run games say pre-7th inning, odds are decent that the other team will score at least 1 more run, so then you actually needed to score 2 runs and you gave away an out trying to do so. That is silly. Statistics are not on the side of the sac bunt anymore. It's just not an efficient play. It may work in a game or two, but it may cost you the potential win in others.
I'm going out on a limb and saying you did not play ML baseball. So you may have had a few more wins due to those, but I'm going to say pretty much 0 comparison at all.
JG10Hawk
Well-Known Member
Actually it was top of the 5th and the guy that bunted was the pitcher. Why not advance the runners and give the top of your lineup 2 cracks at bringing a run in without more than 1 force out available? If it was the 2 hitter I would agree with you on sac bunting that early but it was Samardzija. The other two bunts came in the 8th and 9th inning when 1 run would have won the game.
Last edited:
OakRaiders
Well-Known Member
Middle of the line up had 7 Ks in 8 ABs at one point yesterday. It is a good thing rizzo plays first because that was as close as he came to being on base all day.
It is also good we let Navarro go. I really hated having a strong switch hitting catcher in line up.
Hoping Rizzo and Olt can touch the ball today.
It is also good we let Navarro go. I really hated having a strong switch hitting catcher in line up.
Hoping Rizzo and Olt can touch the ball today.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
I would bet anything that Rizzo and Olt don't touch a ball TODAY in a game anyway.
Maybe tomorrow though
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
That is where the real team is playing. SIAP but the ICubs are rich in prospects for the first time in years. Usually they get assigned a bunch of fringy, AAAA, type players the big league team stashes in Iowa in case of injuries.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
If anyone did not notice yesterday the Cubs released 2012 minor league Pitcher of The Year Nick Struck. The goes to show you how much the farm system has come along and how bad it was just 18 months ago. Basically they had no place to put him as there was no room in AA or AAA starting rotation.
OakRaiders
Well-Known Member
Sounds more like the kid didn't pan out. You can say they now have better prospects but if this guy was voted the best and then didn't progress what is to say others wont do the same. I love the Cubs but until I see wins this is like when we were all pumped about he Hawks deep bench. Ultimately means nothing.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
Chances are pretty good a few of them are going to pan out. You missed my point, the Cubs had no place to put this guy. They are stacked with prospects at almost every position. You can grumble about the MLB team all you want but this plan is coming along nicely and we will finally start seeing the benefits of that this season.
The Cubs are going to be good, and for a long time.
GoHawks24
Well-Known Member
So in how long are we talking? 10, 15 years? I like your optimism, but I just don't see it. Not anytime soon at least. Guess we'll see how the prospects pan out this season.
