Do you want LOU fired?

cubsjunkie

mistress
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
343
Liked Posts:
31
Meh, not really. Let him ride out the season. Whatever... our season may not technically be 'over' but does anyone really see us making it all the way? Which is the only acceptable outcome when making it to the playoffs...

I don't know... this was kind of a pointless post for me bc I'm in between.
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
NO, I don't want to see an interim manager, and Tom Ricketts would "shit a chicken" (Talladega Nights) if the Cubs showed that sign of forfeiting the season.
 

yoshiki89

New member
Joined:
May 7, 2010
Posts:
62
Liked Posts:
2
Heck no. Will he be back next year? Probably not.

Ken Rosenthal, I find him humorous. He's not as twisted as most ESPN analysts, but close.
 

EnjoyYourTiger

That weird bear thing.
Donator
Joined:
May 6, 2010
Posts:
3,945
Liked Posts:
935
Location:
peoria/ chicago, il
Yeah, I agree, I wouldn't want to see Piniella go, mostly because it sounds like if he goes Sandberg takes his place, although there's talk about Trammell stepping in. Either way, I'm not much in favor Lou getting the boot. I just think it's unfortunate that as soon as the team goes through a slump, the talk goes directly to firing the manager instead of changing the roster, etc. But if someone really has to go, I'll sign Hendry away. Lol.
 

bulldog1205

New member
Joined:
May 12, 2010
Posts:
77
Liked Posts:
10
Now? No. After the season? Very likely. I liked him the first year mainly because he just wasn't Baker, but ever since I've realized that he isn't really very good. It would take a very strong turn around for me to change my opinion.
 

ZAN

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
1,286
Liked Posts:
356
I, for one, want Lou gone.

He's been merely collecting a paycheck this season. He's not making smart baseball moves at all, and it's really been detrimental to the Chicago Cubs.

For instance:

1. Last week. Ryan Dempster has a 4-2 lead. Runners on 1st and 2nd and 2 outs. He's up around 115 pitches in the 7th inning. Joey Votto is up. Votto has killed righties this season, and not hit lefties so well. In fact Sean Marshall (who made Votto look stupid the day prior) was ready and warm in the bullpen. Lou comes to the mound, fiddles around...and let's Dempster stay in the game. Dempster promptly GROOVES a fastball that was hit and still hasn't landed. Reds went on to win the game. This is just one example of many times where Lou has refused to play the statistics of the game.

2. Lou constistantly let DLee, Ramirez, and Soriano bat 3-4-5 for the first month of the season (before Soriano got hot) when they were all 3 in a huge slump. Soriano has since gotten hot...but Lou STILL has DLee and Ramirez (the easiest outs on the team, right now) in the two biggest run producing spots in the lineup. Stupid....and unexplicable. Lou finally slid ARam down into the 5 spot....but that was only for 2 games. Now he's back to cleanup.

3. The mishandling of the bullpen. I don't necesarilly disagree with Zambrano being the 8th inning guy. But let's look at the setup role. Lou let Grabow and Caridad blow 5 of the first 8 games to start the year! We started the season 3-5 because of those two pitchers alone.

4. The current mishandling of Starlin Castro. Does anyone else not see that Starlin is clearly a number 2 hitter? Did it REALLY take Theriot being out of the lineup and Fukudome sliding into the leadoff role for Lou to let the kid hit 2nd? Now, let's look at this through the common sightline of the Chicago Cubs organization. This kid is the SS of the future, right? This kid is supposedly a 4 tool player, and the 5th tool is supposedly going to be coming with reps as an everyday SS. Then why are we letting him hit in front of the pitcher? This kid has shown great patience, the ability to hit the ball to the right side of the infield (hence, moving runners). He has excellent speed and bat control (indicative of a good number 1 or 2 hitter). He also has moderate to average power. Shouldn't he be batting in front of the 3-4-5 hitters, where he should see more strikes (hence being able to put the ball in play, move runners over, get on base, etc...)? Nope. Lou wants to hit him in front of the pitcher, where there is no security in the lineup for a 20 year old rookier in his first major league stint. Instead, let's bat Marlon Byrd (our best run producer through the first month and a half) in the 2 spot where, statistically proven, he has a lesser chance to drive in runs....Meanwhile, our ELITE prospect rots in the 8 hole batting in front of the pitcher slot. You can't evens steal bases in the 8 hole because most pitchers can't hit a decent fastball (so why waste the off speed stuff on a pitcher).

I could go on. But it's been apparent that Lou is going through the motions and refusing to shuffle things up. What can it hurt? We are already behind the PITTSBURGH PIRATES in the division.

Things Lou has said that make me feel like he's quit on the team:

(When asked why Fontenot he didn't bunt with the tying run on second and no outs with Fontenot hitting in the bottom of the 8th three weeks ago) "I don't know. I don't know."

Well Lou, If you don't know. Who does? You're the manager of the Chicago Cubs. Shouldn't you have a reason for your strategies. "Not knowing" why you didn't bunt Fontenot (especially after he didn't move the runner in the EXACT SAME situation 2 innings prior) is not something a man making a few million bucks a year to be the manager of probably the most beloved team in professional baseball, isn't an excuse.


/rant
 

bossdrb

The Boss
Donator
Joined:
Apr 28, 2010
Posts:
1,380
Liked Posts:
165
If everyone could get back to 2007-2008 form, I have no problem with Lou. But, that's not happening.
 

ZAN

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
1,286
Liked Posts:
356
Your argument makes no sense, Dustin Brown.

You're essentially saying that the manager has no bearing on how ballgames pan out. We all know that the 07-08 97 win team essentially managed itself. Everyone hit the cover off the ball, and there was no need to utilize the bullpen unless it was Marmol or Wood. The starters went 7 or 8 innings 3 out of 5 games. A chimp could have managed that team.

You also forget that the team stopped playing in the playoffs. Who's responsibility is it to get the team back on track after a situation like that? The managers....and Lou certainly choked on that one too...
 

bossdrb

The Boss
Donator
Joined:
Apr 28, 2010
Posts:
1,380
Liked Posts:
165
Your argument makes no sense, Dustin Brown.

You're essentially saying that the manager has no bearing on how ballgames pan out. We all know that the 07-08 97 win team essentially managed itself. Everyone hit the cover off the ball, and there was no need to utilize the bullpen unless it was Marmol or Wood. The starters went 7 or 8 innings 3 out of 5 games. A chimp could have managed that team.

You also forget that the team stopped playing in the playoffs. Who's responsibility is it to get the team back on track after a situation like that? The managers....and Lou certainly choked on that one too...

Wasn't an arguement. It was simply a joke.

I think Lou has an impact on us now (in a negative way,) but I also think we aren't living up to our potential.
 

ZAN

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
1,286
Liked Posts:
356
Thanks, bro. Nice catch on the Darwin Barney. I posted without research. I focus a lot on the minors. But I KNOW that the angle is that they are gonna start working Darwin at the corner. It only makes sense. Vitters can't field really well at 3rd, and actually looks decent in a small sample size at first. Castro is the future at SS. Maybe Barney could do well at 3rd.
 

ZAN

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
1,286
Liked Posts:
356
Wasn't an arguement. It was simply a joke.

I think Lou has an impact on us now (in a negative way,) but I also think we aren't living up to our potential.

I don't think there is ANY potential on the Cubs, Dustin.

"Potential" is a word reserved for young players. For instance: Colby Rasmus of the Saint Louis Cardinals.

The Cubs have 4 or 5 guys on the entire roster with "potential". I consider those guys: Castro, Colvin, Marmol, Soto, and Wells. Once you start getting to the point in a guy's career where you look at "3-year averages" to guage how he will perform...I think potential is out the window....because his 3 years of service time can better project his performance...Potential, in reference to: Lee, Ramirez, Soriano, Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly, etc...is a misused word. I think it's more of that "Chicago Cubs eternal fan hope" than "potential"
 
Last edited:

bossdrb

The Boss
Donator
Joined:
Apr 28, 2010
Posts:
1,380
Liked Posts:
165
I don't think there is ANY potential on the Cubs, Dustin.

"Potential" is a word reserved for young players. For instance: Colby Rasmus of the Saint Louis Cardinals.

The Cubs have 4 or 5 guys on the entire roster with "potential". I consider those guys: Castro, Colvin, Marmol, Soto, and Wells. Once you start getting to the point in a guy's career where you look at "3-year averages" to guage how he will perform...I think potential is out the window....because his 3 years of service time can better project his performance...Potential, in reference to: Lee, Ramirez, Soriano, Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly, etc...is a misused word. I think it's more of that "Chicago Cubs eternal fan hope" than "potential"

Potential as in... Lee and Rami. They're consistent usually. But, I don't expect us to do anything this year.
 

ZAN

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
1,286
Liked Posts:
356
Potential as in... Lee and Rami. They're consistent usually. But, I don't expect us to do anything this year.

That's what I'm saying. Lee and Ramirez are to the point in their career where you don't use "potential" with them. That's reserved for players who haven't gotten a big tenure with a team. Lee and Ramirez aren't performing. Period. Potential isn't an issue. We know what they have done based off of 3-year averages....There isn't any potential to them.
 

bossdrb

The Boss
Donator
Joined:
Apr 28, 2010
Posts:
1,380
Liked Posts:
165
That's what I'm saying. Lee and Ramirez are to the point in their career where you don't use "potential" with them. That's reserved for players who haven't gotten a big tenure with a team. Lee and Ramirez aren't performing. Period. Potential isn't an issue. We know what they have done based off of 3-year averages....There isn't any potential to them.

You're right.
 

ZAN

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
1,286
Liked Posts:
356
Girardi = Doc Rivers

(Players winning it for him...but it doesn't necesarilly make him a bad coach/manger at all)
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,163
Girardi = Doc Rivers

(Players winning it for him...but it doesn't necesarilly make him a bad coach/manger at all)

I don't know...Girardi was pretty damn well respected as a manager in Florida winning with very raw talent. The guy can flat out manage a team.
 

Dismagic1

Guest
Girardi = Doc Rivers

(Players winning it for him...but it doesn't necesarilly make him a bad coach/manger at all)

So coaches who happen to have great players can't get credit when their teams are playing really well?

So you think Phil Jackson, Joe Torre, and Joel Quenneville are overrated then?
 

Top