Cubs and the Interleagues: the Gimmick Is Working

The Cubs just beat the White Sox. It wasn’t the most exciting athletic event of my lifetime. It won’t give me sufficient ammunition to make my White Sox fan friends cry in their Monster energy drinks. I was nervous at exactly zero points during the game.

But the game was entertaining.

Okay, so I had to break out the meaningless one-sentence paragraph just to manufacture a sense of drama, but this is the boring hand the Cubs have dealt us this year. Still, these interleague games are fun to watch. I find myself actually wanting to sit down and watch the game. For me, the gimmick is working.

Even without the sideshow factor, this game was enjoyable. It had Starlin Castro hitting his 2nd of 25 homers. It had Carlos Pena being good at baseball again (hard to believe he’s got 12 home runs now). It featured Carlos Marmol scaring the crap out of Carlos Zambrano again. (These multiple-Carlos games aren’t nearly as comfortable as they used to be.) And let’s not forget Ozzie Guillen getting ejected for arguing that a ball may have been foul (still haven’t seen a conclusive replay, and it looked fair to me . . . who cares). It was entertaining on its own.

The gimmick itself, though, makes me more interested. I still watch Cubs games even though I never post here. I’m not even sure this will make it on the Internets or if I’m just dreaming that I’m making a contribution. But I got crap going on, and the Cubs haven’t been a reason for me to drop everything or carve out time in my somewhat nonboring schedule. But for the Yankees? Yeah, I’m making the time to see those games. I’m excited to see them play the Royals. And even the White Sox are making me interested in games again. Because this year? Interest is no guarantee.

So give me the Yankees. Give me the Royals. Give me Ozzie Guillen’s crazy mask-kicking exits. Put it all in a big dopey Crosstown Cup, and I’ll be happy to watch that metaphor go nowhere. My point is, the Cubs aren’t easy on the eyes. They’re a bad baseball team. I’m happy to see games against AL teams to create even the flimsiest illusion that it’s October and these games mean everything.

Actually, when the gimmick is over and the only drama we have left is how large the double-digit NL Central deficit will grow, the illusion of significance will be gone. In a way, these games do mean everything. Even if in another way, a more realistic and accurate one, they’re completely meaningless, I’ll continue to cling to my contrivances just for kicks.


104 thoughts on “Cubs and the Interleagues: the Gimmick Is Working”

  2. Cubs might be 9.5 games out of first by the end of tonight depending on how the Brewers do tonight. That might be worth a couple units of attention.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  3. [quote name=mb21]I don’t have much respect for Walt, but I loved that he broke back into the house. That created some interesting scenes. Also, if he hadn’t broken into the house the wife and kid would have been murdered by the cousins.[/quote]
    Yeah, but IIRC Walt didn’t know that.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  4. [quote name=Rice Cube]Cubs might be 9.5 games out of first by the end of tonight depending on how the Brewers do tonight. That might be worth a couple units of attention.[/quote]The standings are so helpless, the Cubs need every other first baseman, third baseman, and starting pitcher in the division to sustain wrist injuries just to start a conversation about contention.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  5. [quote name=AndCounting]The standings are so helpless, the Cubs need every other first baseman, third baseman, and starting pitcher in the division to sustain wrist injuries just to start a conversation about contention.[/quote]
    That might require a very well placed asteroid to fall right in the middle of the poker table as all parties are playing a round of Slap Jack. No easy feat.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  7. [quote name=ACT]http://twitter.com/#!/PWSullivan/status/83001776713904129
    Ugh.[/quote]In a city full of Royal Crown assholes, Sullivan is far and away, the most reddened, gaping, fuckdrenched asshole of the bunch.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  8. [quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]In a city full of Royal Crown assholes, Sullivan is far and away, the most reddened, gaping, fuckdrenched asshole of the bunch.[/quote]
    Although one could argue that this would’ve been justifiable homicide if Marmol had blown another Z-win (dying laughing)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  13. [quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]In a city full of Royal Crown assholes, Sullivan is far and away, the most reddened, gaping, fuckdrenched asshole of the bunch.[/quote]Sullivan has to be self-aware at this point.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  15. It actually looked like a good play by Soto. He either snatched it an instant before it rolled off the plate or an instant after. Either way he got to it so quick the umpire gave him the benefit of the doubt.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  17. I don’t get that table. With a no out double and a runner on first, you basically have the exact same run expectancy if you hold him or if he scores, but you send him 92% of the time? That doesn’t make sense to me.

    Same with a first and second no out single. Holding or scoring each gives you 2.5 runs-ish, out at the plate gives you less than one. That seems like a no send to me.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  18. [quote name=GBTS]I don’t get that table. With a no out double and a runner on first, you basically have the exact same run expectancy if you hold him or if he scores, but you send him 92% of the time? That doesn’t make sense to me.

    Same with a bases loaded no out single. Holding or scoring each gives you 2.5 runs-ish, out at the plate gives you less than one. That seems like a no send to me.[/quote]I’m guessing that’s the percentage of time the runner does get sent rather than the frequency that he should get sent. But I’m wrong a lot.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  20. [quote name=AndCounting]I’m guessing that’s the percentage of time the runner does get sent rather than the frequency that he should get sent. But I’m wrong a lot.[/quote]Could be that too.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  21. Actually, no, I have no idea what that’s saying. (dying laughing)
    I have a hard time believing those are the recommendations or the actual numbers. In basically all the 2-out situations, it appears that sending the runner is worth the risk. I don’t get it..

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  22. Mish needs to come straighten this out. Its way too early for me to be getting riled up over run expectancies.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  23. Oh, maybe that’s how sure you have to be that the runner will be safe in order to send him. That would make sense. (dying laughing)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  24. [quote name=GBTS]I don’t get that table. With a no out double and a runner on first, you basically have the exact same run expectancy if you hold him or if he scores, but you send him 92% of the time? That doesn’t make sense to me.

    Same with a first and second no out single. Holding or scoring each gives you 2.5 runs-ish, out at the plate gives you less than one. That seems like a no send to me.[/quote]
    http://baseballandnotbaseball.com/2011/06/20/youve-got-to-know-when-to-hold-them/

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  25. [quote name=AndCounting]Oh, maybe that’s how sure you have to be that the runner will be safe in order to send him. That would make sense. (dying laughing)[/quote]Whammy.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  27. [quote name=AndCounting]Oh, maybe that’s how sure you have to be that the runner will be safe in order to send him. That would make sense. (dying laughing)[/quote]Yes. Another way to put it would be that in those certain situations the runner would have to score 92% of the time to make sending him worth it. It’s like a stolen base. On average, you have to be safe about 7 of 10 times to break even. If you can’t do that, don’t steal. On a double with a runner on first and nobody out, you need to be able to score 92% of the time or you’re costing the team runs in the long run.

    I would just add that not all doubles are the same, which is obvious of course. Obviously you don’t send a runner on just every double. That would be stupid and it would lower your percentage of successful attempts. The higher percentage required the more runs lost if you make an out.

    Stealing home is actually about a 50% breakeven point. It’s probably something some players should be doing more often.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  33. Billy Beane might know statistics, but he can’t judge talent.

    Remember, this is the guy who gave up Carlos Gonzalez, Huston Street, and another pitcher for half a season of Matt Holliday. He also gave up Tim Hudson for Charles Thomas, Dan Meyer, and another prospect.

    Oh, and he needed a Gameboard so much that he gave up some guy named Eithier.

    Pass.

    I’m not a Jim Hendry fan, but Billy Beane would not be an improvement.

    “I’ve never complained about it. I’m thankful to have a jersey.” Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

    by DeRoMyHero on Jun 20, 2011 5:32 PM CDT reply 1 recs

    Alvin likes this. Should I start listing the other trades Beane has made or do you guys already know about them?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  35. [quote name=Jame Gumb]Alvin likes this. Should I start listing the other trades Beane has made or do you guys already know about them?[/quote]
    What did they turn Matt Holliday too? How about how they acquired Haren for Mulder?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  36. [quote name=Jame Gumb]http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/6/20/2232916/yankees-cubs-news-recap-series#70042351

    I like SWL’s response.[/quote]
    Couldn’t you oblige SWL with a jpeg flowchart of when Al allows homosexual referencing?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  37. [quote name=Mish]Jesus Christ with the nicknames.[/quote]I think he also called Juan Pierre “Juany.” Maybe I misheard…

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  41. After “STOP THE NAME CALLING”, you can add another step “GO ON THE MOST HOMOPHOBIC RANT EVER SEEN”.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  42. Don’t know if you guys heard about this from last night’s Rays/Brewers game, but Maddon wanted to pitch Ramos in the 8th inning but somehow word got to the pen that Peralta should warm up. So to buy some time for Ramos, Maddon put Fuld on the pitcher’s mound and had him warmup for a little bit, and then Maddon pulled him off the mound before facing a batter and called in Ramos.

    The official rule says a player replacing a pitcher must face one batter, but Fuld had already come in as a pinch hitter so he technically wasn’t a substitute. Don’t think it’s quite legal but it’s somewhat of a gray area.

    More here: http://www.raysindex.com/2011/06/was-sam-fulds-mound-warm-up-illegal.html

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  43. [quote name=Mish]Don’t know if you guys heard about this from last night’s Rays/Brewers game, but Maddon wanted to pitch Ramos in the 8th inning but somehow word got to the pen that Peralta should warm up. So to buy some time for Ramos, Maddon put Fuld on the pitcher’s mound and had him warmup for a little bit, and then Maddon pulled him off the mound before facing a batter and called in Ramos.

    The official rule says a player replacing a pitcher must face one batter, but Fuld had already come in as a pinch hitter so he technically wasn’t a substitute. Don’t think it’s quite legal but it’s somewhat of a gray area.

    More here: http://www.raysindex.com/2011/06/was-sam-fulds-mound-warm-up-illegal.html%5B/quote%5D(dying laughing), that’s pretty creative.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  44. [quote name=Mish]http://www.raysindex.com/2011/06/was-sam-fulds-mound-warm-up-illegal.html[/quote]This was very close to a common meme around here.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  45. [quote name=Muckey]I can’t get twitter at work but what did Sullivan say?[/quote]Marmol warming up in pen. If he blows this one for Z, he may have to get a restraining order.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  46. [quote name=Mish]Don’t know if you guys heard about this from last night’s Rays/Brewers game, but Maddon wanted to pitch Ramos in the 8th inning but somehow word got to the pen that Peralta should warm up. So to buy some time for Ramos, Maddon put Fuld on the pitcher’s mound and had him warmup for a little bit, and then Maddon pulled him off the mound before facing a batter and called in Ramos.

    The official rule says a player replacing a pitcher must face one batter, but Fuld had already come in as a pinch hitter so he technically wasn’t a substitute. Don’t think it’s quite legal but it’s somewhat of a gray area.

    More here: http://www.raysindex.com/2011/06/was-sam-fulds-mound-warm-up-illegal.html%5B/quote%5D

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  51. [quote name=Mish]Where is everyone today? Aren’t you aware this series is our motherfucking playoffs?![/quote]I forgot, sorry. I’ll skip dinner.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  54. Soto and Pena are interviewing on WGN radio RIGHT NOW! Soto said catching hurts, and Carlos said education is important. More highlights to come?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  58. I have no idea what you’re talking about, but I have little recourse other than saying Kaplan’s a tard.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  59. [quote name=Mish]I have no idea what you’re talking about, but I have little recourse other than saying Kaplan’s a tard.[/quote]Mission accomplished.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  60. He was basically asking Soto (on the radio) if Soto was star struck by the Yankees, but he just kept going on about it. The question lasted an uncomfortably long time. In the end, Soto said no. Pena said he hated the Yankees.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  62. [quote name=josh]Soto and Pena are interviewing on WGN radio RIGHT NOW! Soto said catching hurts, and Carlos said education is important. More highlights to come?[/quote]
    Soto wrapped up with “Women be shoppin’!”

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  72. Pierre – LF
    Vizquel – 2B
    Quentin – RF
    Konerko – 1B
    Dunn – DH
    Ramirez – SS
    Pierzynski – C
    Rios – CF
    Morel – 3B
    Buehrle – P

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  73. [quote name=ACT]CF Johnson
    SS Castro
    DH Baker
    3B Ramirez
    C Soto
    LF Soriano
    1B Pena
    RF Montanez
    2B LeMahieu[/quote]
    Sort of understand keeping Pena in as he’s probably seen a lot of Buehrle as a member of the Rays.

    Baker at DH annoys me for some reason. DH is supposed to hide the bad defender right? You probably can’t put Baker in LF without people laughing, but DHing him seems like a waste of the spot.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  74. DHing Ramirez would seem like the way to go; UZR has Baker below average at 3rd but just barely; sample size warnings as always.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  75. Via Fangraphs, Baker’s career UZR/150 is -8.0 (495.1 innings), while Aramis’s is -2.8 (13369 innings). Of course, defensive value changes over time, and Aramis is older than Baker.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  78. [quote name=ACT]Carrie Muskat said he “changed his mind.” http://muskat.mlblogs.com/%5B/quote%5D
    Remember when you were taking the SAT and thought that an answer was right, but changed it anyway and then after the test realized that you’d made a mistake by not trusting your first instinct?

    I think it’ll be kind of like that.

    Oh well.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  79. [quote name=ACT]Via Fangraphs, Baker’s career UZR/150 is -8.0 (495.1 innings), while Aramis’s is -2.8 (13369 innings). Of course, defensive value changes over time, and Aramis is older than Baker.[/quote]
    True, but Baker still doesn’t really meet three years with of data at third, so there’s a lot more uncertainty. While his UZR/150 in 29 innings so far in 2011 are awful, he was wortha +9 last year, FWIW. Ramirez has posted negative UZRs since 2008.

    Also, DRS has Baker as a +1 at 3rd; Ramirez at -30.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  82. [quote name=Rice Cube]Remember when you were taking the SAT and thought that an answer was right, but changed it anyway and then after the test realized that you’d made a mistake by not trusting your first instinct? [/quote]
    No. I knew every answer was right, got a 1600 (which was a good score then) and took the short bus back to junior high. You guessed wrong because you were too busy thinking about horses, smurfs and Strawberry Shortcake. (dying laughing)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  83. [quote name=Jame Gumb]No. I knew every answer was right, got a 1600 (which was a good score then) and took the short bus back to junior high. You guessed wrong because you were too busy thinking about horses, smurfs and Strawberry Shortcake. (dying laughing)[/quote]And cats. Don’t forget about cats.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  85. [quote name=Jame Gumb]Dear reader: No. I knew every answer was right, got a 1600 (which was a good score then) and took the short bus back to junior high. You guessed wrong because you were too busy thinking about horses, smurfs and Strawberry Shortcake. Don’t make me get my Bible out.(dying laughing)[/quote]/1060 West’d

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  88. [quote name=WaLi]Why does this article have no tags? I want tags, damnit![/quote]
    All taken care of.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  89. [quote name=WaLi]Why does this article have no tags? I want tags, damnit![/quote]

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  91. [quote name=WaLi]Thanks! I love the customer service here.[/quote]
    We are about pleasing people. Even when they have really dumb requests. That’s the kind of people we are.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  92. [quote name=Aisle424]We are about pleasing people. Even when they have really dumb requests. That’s the kind of people we are.[/quote]
    I don’t think you should please those people. That seems like a waste of time

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  93. [quote name=Aisle424]We are about pleasing people. Even when they have really dumb requests. That’s the kind of people we are.[/quote]
    It’s the tried and true Sullivan-Kaplan Path to Success

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

  94. [quote name=Aisle424]We are about pleasing people. Even when they have really dumb requests. That’s the kind of people we are.[/quote]See: the new Juan Pierre macro

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *