Fundamentals of major league baseball

[wpr]

I was listening to Mike Shannon on the radio on my way home today. In the first inning DeJesus walked to lead off the game. He then stole 2nd base. No one out. Castro in 3 swings pulled the ball on the left side of the field. Two fouls and a ground out to Short. The runner did not advance to third.

During the whole at bat both Shannon and his partner commented that it looked like Castro was not being a team player and trying to hit to the right side of the infield in order to move the runner to 3rd with less than 2 outs.

Next batter, Rizzo, hit a fly ball to center. It may have led to a run if Castro had given himself up in order to get the runner to 3rd with only 1 out.

It is not my desire to make this a bash the Cubs or their players thread. I am wondering if people think Castro is selfish as the announcers were saying (my wording not theirs.) by trying to get a base hit to make his numbers look good instead of doing what was best for the team by trying to get the runner to third and having his batting average drop. I am not saying that he should have done a sacrifice bunt. In the past 30+ years I have seen a lot of singles hit to right field when the batter just slapped it that way.

Or is it Cubs management's fault for not insisting that he do what is best for the team by benching him when he does things like that.

Or is it simply the way things are done today. Forget the old time fundamentals. They don't matter today.

A few more comments.

Over the past 2 years I have heard a few announcers mention the shortcomings or lack of Castro's fundamentals. Even Cub announcers have mentioned it. But they have also said he is young (22) and they hope that he will learn. (maybe) After plying for a year and a half you would think he would know what to do by now.

At least 2 more times the Cubs had a runner on 2nd and the other players did not try to hit the ball to the right. If Sveum was really concerned he would have had Listach call Castro over after the first or 2nd foul balls.

I know players do a lot of things different today than they did in the past. Off the top of my head pitchers don't brush back the batter like they use to. Batters don't take a pitch or two when it is late in the game. They also don't always take a pitch or two when it is a 3-0 count.

An argument can also be made that it was the first inning they should try for the bigger inning instead of playing for only 1 run.

[uiba99]

I'm a big fan of small ball. Castro is a good enough player that he should be able to advance the runner on all but very few occasions. I know the Cubs are out of it this year but it should still be a source of pride to do what's best for the team instead of what's best for yourself. Even (and perhaps especially) most of the biggest superstars understand this.

If you're dealing with the Brewers lineup, though...all bets are off this year. Watching them play small ball has at times been quite frustrating.

[AHSIllini32]

My take is that Castro is 22 as you said and has improved immensely at the fundamentals. It's ridiculous how much people want to nit-pick at Castro because of his expectations. He didn't get the job done today but no player, NOT A SINGLE ONE, ever did his job 100% of the time.

Castro is a great, young, still inexperienced player who is still learning and improving.

Was this a Cards radio broadcast you were listening to?

[wpr]

Originally Posted by uiba99

I'm a big fan of small ball. Castro is a good enough player that he should be able to advance the runner on all but very few occasions. I know the Cubs are out of it this year but it should still be a source of pride to do what's best for the team instead of what's best for yourself. Even (and perhaps especially) most of the biggest superstars understand this.

If you're dealing with the Brewers lineup, though...all bets are off this year. Watching them play small ball has at times been quite frustrating.

Castro IS good enough to advance the runner. But you didn't answer my question(s). Did he fail to even try? Is it the organization's fault? Do teams as a whole not bother anymore?

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

My take is that Castro is 22 as you said and has improved immensely at the fundamentals. It's ridiculous how much people want to nit-pick at Castro because of his expectations. He didn't get the job done today but no player, NOT A SINGLE ONE, ever did his job 100% of the time.

Castro is a great, young, still inexperienced player who is still learning and improving.

Was this a Cards radio broadcast you were listening to?

I don't think it is nit picking when a talented player continually fails to try to do the very basic things we were taught in little league. He is talented. VERY TALENTED. I would think if he was told 2-3 times that he would have learned the lesson. (He doesn't eat sunflower seeds or turn his back to the batter between pitches any more does he? Lessons learned.)

Repeated failure to do the simple things is noticeable no matter who the player and it is appropriate for reporters to mention it. Just because he is young doesn't mean he gets a free pass. Perhaps the first half of a rookie year you can expect the reporters to say nothing. Remember I have no ax to grind with him. He can succeed or fail and it doesn't matter to me at all.

Of course no one does things 100% correct all of the time. I certainly didn't suggest that at all. If you are implying that I said that you are grossly mistaken. I said he had 3 chances to hit the ball to the right side and didn't even try to do it once. It would have been completely different if Castro fouled the ball off while trying to go to the right side the first 2 times then, with 2 strikes, swung away with his normal swing.

Who knows, maybe he is such a pull hitter that he is not skilled enough to take the ball to the right side at this stage of his playing life.

As for Mike Shannon, he is a Cardinals announcer but what has that do with anything? Mike is not an announcer who is always condemning others. He is one of the friendliest, most helpful men you will ever meet. He has been around the game for more than 50 years so he knows how the game is meant to be played. Since it is radio, the listener can't see what is happening. I expect him to tell me what happened and also to add his insight.

So I ask you as well, was it Castro, management or what?

[uiba99]

I don't think we can answer that question unless (1) Castro answers it or (2) Sveum addresses it. It may very well be that he was told to advance the runner and he was simply unable to do it. Or he may also be disregarding signs. I would hope that management would address that issue regardless of his status as one of the club's future stars.

As for whether teams try anymore, that's on a manager-by-manager basis. We all know that Guillen's 2005 White Sox were famous for playing small ball, with clear success. It's an important, often overlooked aspect of the game.

You can have a team full of home run hitters but they aren't going to hit 450 foot bombs every night. You have to know and appreciate how to score runs by using your at-bats as efficiently as possible. If your team has a leadoff double or triple, there is almost no excuse for a major league team to fail to score a run during that inning. The same with bases loaded and nobody out. (This happened at the San Antonio Missions game we attended on Friday and it made me want to pull my hair out. One strikeout, then a double play and inning over. Maddening.)

Then again, the Cards beat up on the Cubs so badly this weekend that maybe they just quit.

[wpr]

obviously no one but the parties involved know the real story. But if board members only posted when they knew what was going on there would be nothing to post. As I mentioned in another thread I value your opinion and was interested in this issue in general not necessarily this specific AB.
I don't think the Cubs quit in the first inning.

[IlliniSteve]

Castro's 22 years old. He should be in AA or AAA right now. Instead, he's a two time Major League All Star.

[uiba99]

Originally Posted by wpr

obviously no one but the parties involved know the real story. But if board members only posted when they knew what was going on there would be nothing to post. As I mentioned in another thread I value your opinion and was interested in this issue in general not necessarily this specific AB.
I don't think the Cubs quit in the first inning.

LOL, I find the bolded funny for many reasons. Sometimes posters on here think they know a lot more than they actually know. And I'm not referring to you, except as it pertains to you saying I'm a wise woman. That might be the overstatement of the century, but let's just assume it's true anyway.

I think discussing the fundamentals of baseball, how the game has changed, etc., can be quite fruitful. I often wonder what it would be like if a kid like Strasburg got a chance to pitch against Ruth, or if someone like Pujols or Braun batted against Nolan Ryan or Christy Mathewson. You can't compare guys from different time periods with any sort of accuracy, but it's neat to think about.

It's interesting to see how the game has evolved in so many ways and stayed the same in so many others. That's probably why I love baseball more than any other professional sport, because while it's still changing, it still resembles what I watched as a kid twenty-five years ago, or what others on this board watched fifty years ago.

And I was just kidding about the Cubs quitting. I don't think they did. But man, the Cardinals managed to score a ton of runs off of them. It probably didn't help that Garza got injured, either.

I should disclaim that I think Castro is a very, very good player with the makings of a superstar. I picked him up for my fantasy team last year and the only reason I didn't draft him this year is because I have a personal policy against drafting guys who have off the field issues, and during spring training there was still a debate as to whether charges were going to be filed against him for that sexual assault accusation.

So I hope the kid does well. I've defended him to a few people who think he's very immature, and he probably is. Bryce Harper has had his detractors for the same reason. They might be multimillionaires but they're still basically college-aged kids playing a game. They'll grow into it or they'll face a rough time from the media and fans as their careers go on. But I like them both.

But I'm a bigger fan of Mike Trout, LOL.

[wpr]

Originally Posted by uiba99

LOL, I find the bolded funny for many reasons. Sometimes posters on here think they know a lot more than they actually know. And I'm not referring to you, except as it pertains to you saying I'm a wise woman. That might be the overstatement of the century, but let's just assume it's true anyway.

I am glad you don’t think I am one of those who feel they know so much. I have proclaimed my ignorance on many occasions. You are wise as you don’t take cr-p from others and yet you don’t get too bent out of shape by what others say. Usually.

Originally Posted by uiba99

I think discussing the fundamentals of baseball, how the game has changed, etc., can be quite fruitful. I often wonder what it would be like if a kid like Strasburg got a chance to pitch against Ruth, or if someone like Pujols or Braun batted against Nolan Ryan or Christy Mathewson. You can't compare guys from different time periods with any sort of accuracy, but it's neat to think about.

It's interesting to see how the game has evolved in so many ways and stayed the same in so many others. That's probably why I love baseball more than any other professional sport, because while it's still changing, it still resembles what I watched as a kid twenty-five years ago, or what others on this board watched fifty years ago.

I was trying to discuss fundamentals. Glad you noticed. That was why I put it in the title to the thread and then stated I am not trying to criticize Castro. Cub fans are so paranoid these days (have been for years) you can’t carry on a decent conversation with most of them without them getting all worked up. (See above posts. Castro doesn’t need to be defended. Or for fans to make apologies for him.) They just don’t get it.

As to multi generational players facing each other. I have always found it an interesting concept. Years ago Jack Buck did a simulation broadcast of a game with players from some all time greatest team. (Maybe greatest players of the 20th Century or something like that.) The computer gave the results for each batter but no details. Jack had to fill in all the rest himself. The neat part was the little things he said like describing the AL OF alignment. He said “Look how shallow Babe Ruth plays compared to the other OFers. That is because most players didn’t hit the ball as far in his day than they do today. Except for himself of course.” My point is, like you mentioned, some things do change. Things like that are interesting. I know MLB has juiced up the ball sometimes and let the air out of it so to speak at other times.

Fundamentals- They don’t really change. OFers should throw the ball to the correct base. Instead they muscle up and try to gun the guy at the plate and the other runners move up an extra base. Pitchers should take command of the plate. being able, willing to throw inside is a part of that. (I am not saying hit the batter but being able to move the batter off the plate.) Runners should know what they are doing. StL has seemingly been running with reckless abandon this year. They look like a bunch of 6 year olds who keep running until they finally get tagged out. Some times it makes sense to take a few chances other times it does not. They seem to treat every chance on base exactly the same. I have blamed that on rookie manager Matheny. At least in part. He can tell the team and coaches when he wants them to be aggressive and push and when to take what the other team has given them. I actually think they are doing better at this in the past week but I want to see more games before I admit they have changed their tactics.

Originally Posted by uiba99

And I was just kidding about the Cubs quitting. I don't think they did. But man, the Cardinals managed to score a ton of runs off of them. It probably didn't help that Garza got injured, either.

I know. I just wanted to poke at you a bit. The Garza injury was the key to the game yesterday. I think all the players let down a bit. The Cardinals are not playing good enough to take advantage of it immediately but they did so in the 7th.

Originally Posted by uiba99

I should disclaim that I think Castro is a very, very good player with the makings of a superstar. I picked him up for my fantasy team last year and the only reason I didn't draft him this year is because I have a personal policy against drafting guys who have off the field issues, and during spring training there was still a debate as to whether charges were going to be filed against him for that sexual assault accusation.

So I hope the kid does well. I've defended him to a few people who think he's very immature, and he probably is.

I think there have been a few superstars that could really play the game but lacked the ability to do the little things that all players should do. I have seen players miss on the bunt and then hit the HR on the next pitch. All is forgiven but they didn’t do what they should have done.

I would consider having Castro on my fantasy team. If I still played. I had a couple of rules myself. The first is not to bid on Cub players. It is not that I don’t want them. It is because the Cub fans in my league tended to bid too much for them and they bought the Cubs for more than they were worth. The second is like you mentioned. I tend to not look for players with off field issues. It is just too distracting to me to have players who are in the news for negative things. I played the game as a way to escape, at least for a while, some of the issues that we face on a day to day basis. I don’t want to hear about them every time one of my players comes to bat.

[wpr]

Originally Posted by IlliniSteve

Castro's 22 years old. He should be in AA or AAA right now. Instead, he's a two time Major League All Star.

I don't accept this as being valid. We teach 10-12 year olds to advance the runner. He has been playing for at least 10 years. He should know that long before he reached the majors.

AVERAGE players are in the minor leagues at age 22. Elite players almost always are in the majors by they are 20-22 years old unless there is some kind of a bottleneck above them. The quickest comparison I can think of is Pujols. He was in the majors at 21, like Castro. And yet I don't remember him having the same "youthful issues" that seem to plague Castro. And while he was n 161 games Pujols played 2 OF positions, 3B and 1B. So he was always being moved around. The most he played at one position was 52 at 3B. Certainly he made mistakes. Everyone does. Yet he wouldn't make the same one twice.

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by wpr

I don't accept this as being valid. We teach 10-12 year olds to advance the runner. He has been playing for at least 10 years. He should know that long before he reached the majors.

AVERAGE players are in the minor leagues at age 22. Elite players almost always are in the majors by they are 20-22 years old unless there is some kind of a bottleneck above them. The quickest comparison I can think of is Pujols. He was in the majors at 21, like Castro. And yet I don't remember him having the same "youthful issues" that seem to plague Castro. And while he was n 161 games Pujols played 2 OF positions, 3B and 1B. So he was always being moved around. The most he played at one position was 52 at 3B. Certainly he made mistakes. Everyone does. Yet he wouldn't make the same one twice.

To the discussion, let me just add that there are different philosophies on the particular question of advancing a runner. Most advanced statistics show that bunting to move a runner is a bad statistical play except for in specific situations. Similarly, hitting a weak grounder to the right side of the field can also be a bad statistical play.

Check out a metric called "run expectancy". It gives you an idea of how many runs you are likely to score in different situations. That is baseline statistics. The batter in question, the next batter and the pitcher all add complexity to these issues that are difficult to determine.

Finally, Epstein is from the Sabermetrics community. I think therefore that it's likely that the Cubs will shift toward giving away fewer outs and letting their hitters (especially their good ones) hit. Thus I think it is likely that the analysts you were listening to don't understand.

[wpr]

Originally Posted by IntenselyOrange

To the discussion, let me just add that there are different philosophies on the particular question of advancing a runner. Most advanced statistics show that bunting to move a runner is a bad statistical play except for in specific situations. Similarly, hitting a weak grounder to the right side of the field can also be a bad statistical play.

Check out a metric called "run expectancy". It gives you an idea of how many runs you are likely to score in different situations. That is baseline statistics. The batter in question, the next batter and the pitcher all add complexity to these issues that are difficult to determine.

Finally, Epstein is from the Sabermetrics community. I think therefore that it's likely that the Cubs will shift toward giving away fewer outs and letting their hitters (especially their good ones) hit. Thus I think it is likely that the analysts you were listening to don't understand.

this is a valid argument. Players and coaches 50 years ago didn't have this data. Announcers that played that long ago are still thinking/ talking about the way things were back in their day. I know they have heard about Sabermetrics but it is only so much mumbo jumbo to them. It doesn't make sense to them. Fact was IF Castro had moved the runner over in some manner they would have scored the run on Rizzo's fly ball. That is what Shannon will remember about the situation. And for the record I would never in any situation in any game say Castro should bunt the runner over. That is totally giving away his AB. Hitting to the right side is not. Plenty of base hits come that way. Most so with power and .300 hitters than with .200 hitters.

I would also accept the premises that it was the first inning. Play for the multi run inning early in the game and switch over to going for a single run late in a game that is tied or separated by a single run. Some times it takes pitchers an inning or two to find their release point and can give up runs early then be tough to reach base against the rest of the game.

I was simply wondering if the old school thinking was alive in the average fan or if it died. thus the post.

[AHSIllini32]

Originally Posted by wpr

I don't accept this as being valid. We teach 10-12 year olds to advance the runner. He has been playing for at least 10 years. He should know that long before he reached the majors.

AVERAGE players are in the minor leagues at age 22. Elite players almost always are in the majors by they are 20-22 years old unless there is some kind of a bottleneck above them. The quickest comparison I can think of is Pujols. He was in the majors at 21, like Castro. And yet I don't remember him having the same "youthful issues" that seem to plague Castro. And while he was n 161 games Pujols played 2 OF positions, 3B and 1B. So he was always being moved around. The most he played at one position was 52 at 3B. Certainly he made mistakes. Everyone does. Yet he wouldn't make the same one twice.

You're also comparing one of the best ever to a kid who's still 22 and who's future is unknown. You don't have to accept anything as valid but the fact remains that players who are "young" for the league they're in make mental mistakes. There's a reason experience is valued. Anyone who's watched Castro play and not just listened to Cardinals radio broadcasters would know the guy's made huge strides this year.

[wpr]

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

You're also comparing one of the best ever to a kid who's still 22 and who's future is unknown. You don't have to accept anything as valid but the fact remains that players who are "young" for the league they're in make mental mistakes. There's a reason experience is valued. Anyone who's watched Castro play and not just listened to Cardinals radio broadcasters would know the guy's made huge strides this year.

no I was not. I was comparing a 21 year old kid in his first year of the majors who happened to become one of the best players in the game to a 21 and now 22 year old who has had issues. My comment was that age isn't an excuse.

There are many other examples. I was tired and didn't want to cite a long list of other players. Nor do I want to waste my time doing it today. Age is an excuse. If you want to accept it fine. I don't as it has no bearing on this thread's discussion.

[AHSIllini32]

Age is an excuse you're right...experience with regards to age is not which is what I was discussing.

[wpr]

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

Age is an excuse you're right...experience with regards to age is not which is what I was discussing.

Then start a new thread if you want to change topics.

[AHSIllini32]

Are you friggin serious? You were asking about why Castro "lacks the proper fundamentals". His experience with regards to his level is a reason why he may seem to lack whatever fundamentals you seem to think he does.

Either way, the whole thing is blown outta proportion by the radio broadcasters you were listening to. Not surprisingly it's Cards announcers talking trash about a player without actually doing their homework.

[KBLEE]

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

Either way, the whole thing is blown outta proportion by the radio broadcasters you were listening to. Not surprisingly it's Cards announcers talking trash about a player without actually doing their homework.

+1

[ilphotog]

To me its more of a generation gap, I watch baseball nearly every night with different announcers.
Every game the announcer (former player etc) will rip into a player (usually younger) for not doing something the "old school way", or "thats not how we did it when I played". In way they are probably right, but for us older fans, things where always better back during our time!
Up until about 10-15 years ago, if you were batting and got 2 strikes, what did you do or were supposed to do?..... Choke up, protect the plate and just try to make contact. Ever see a hitter do that today? Hell they swing just as hard as any other time.
Should have Castro tried to move the runner over? probably. Early in a game I doubt if the manager would ask a player to move the runner over, a veteran player like Jeter would probably do it. It doesn't mean that Castro is selfish, maybe in his mind he could get a hit? Who knows. This is something a vetern ballplayer would take care of with a younger player, if that didn't work then a coach or manager would probably say something.

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by ilphotog

To me its more of a generation gap, I watch baseball nearly every night with different announcers.
Every game the announcer (former player etc) will rip into a player (usually younger) for not doing something the "old school way", or "thats not how we did it when I played". In way they are probably right, but for us older fans, things where always better back during our time!
Up until about 10-15 years ago, if you were batting and got 2 strikes, what did you do or were supposed to do?..... Choke up, protect the plate and just try to make contact. Ever see a hitter do that today? Hell they swing just as hard as any other time.
Should have Castro tried to move the runner over? probably. Early in a game I doubt if the manager would ask a player to move the runner over, a veteran player like Jeter would probably do it. It doesn't mean that Castro is selfish, maybe in his mind he could get a hit? Who knows. This is something a vetern ballplayer would take care of with a younger player, if that didn't work then a coach or manager would probably say something.

I think you are right, but I also think that the "new" way is more statistically sound. Given that you only have 27 outs in a given game you need to give away as few as possible. "Sacrificing" usually lowers your run expectancy. Late in a tie game or when you have Verlander facing Kershaw you have to change your strategy, but in general you should not give up outs. And that is based purely on mathematics.

Someone else brought up, hitting the other way vs. bunting. It's a good point and if a RHB gets a ball out over the plate he should hit it to the right side. However, a pitcher is likely to bust you inside in this situation making that difficult. A guy like Jeter has developed the skill to hit the inside pitch to the right side and to hit it well that way. Most players have not learned this. If it was easy David Ortiz and Adam Dunn would be hitting 0.600 with the entire defense shifted in many situations. Certainly, young players who have always been the "run producer" in the lineup have not likely learned this skill.

But the question then becomes - if the math indicates that giving yourself up is a bad play, should players even be working on this skill? In the rare event that moving the guy over is the only goal, you could bunt.

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

Are you friggin serious? You were asking about why Castro "lacks the proper fundamentals". His experience with regards to his level is a reason why he may seem to lack whatever fundamentals you seem to think he does.

Either way, the whole thing is blown outta proportion by the radio broadcasters you were listening to. Not surprisingly it's Cards announcers talking trash about a player without actually doing their homework.

I agree that it's blown out of proportion. But do a google search on Starlin Castro and fundamentals. Maybe the problem is that they did do research.

There isn't bias in everything. Other people can hold different opinions.

[illiniobserver22]

So many logical leaps going on in the original post here.

1. Who are you to say Starlin wasn't trying to hit the ball to the right side? Maybe his timing was just slightly off in this at bat. Maybe every pitch was inside, or offspeed.

2. Why is it a good idea to give up an out to move a runner forward?

Here are the historical run expectancy values (league wide, 1969-1992):

Runner on 2nd, 0 outs: 1.102 runs
Runner on 3rd, 1 out: 0.943 runs

3. How do you know Rizzo still hits a fly ball if DeJesus is standing on 3rd? Don't you think he probably gets different pitches (lower in the zone) in that situation?

4. Why is Starlin Castro trying to hit a single that results in a run for his team selfish? Seems that would be a better outcome for his team than moving a runner forward one base. So actually you could say he was being unselfish, as a sacrifice bunt is much less likely to hurt his batting average than swinging away is. However, he chose the selfless act of putting his at bat at much greater risk for the possibility of giving his team a 1-0 lead. He's a hero.

[orangeroses07]

I love how this automatically turned into the Cardinals announcers hate the Cubs players and will do anything to put them down and make a bad example of them. It just happened to be a Cubs player that Shannon was interpreting. I've listened to Mike Shannon my whole life and he interprets every single player on what they did wrong and what they should do better, including Cardinal players.

[IlliniSteve]

No radio announcer should call out an opposing player.

You can say, "he didn't get the job done there". But you shouldn't say, "he's selfish".

Shannon's old school though, and you know he's not a big fan of the Cubs, so these things happen. He also likes to drink, but in the 1st inning I don't think you can chalk it up to that.

[wpr]

Originally Posted by orangeroses07

I love how this automatically turned into the Cardinals announcers hate the Cubs players and will do anything to put them down and make a bad example of them. It just happened to be a Cubs player that Shannon was interpreting. I've listened to Mike Shannon my whole life and he interprets every single player on what they did wrong and what they should do better, including Cardinal players.

Yep. Even though I said this had nothing to do with Cubs players per se. It just happened to be the game I was listening to at the time. Cub fan's are so self conscience.

Originally Posted by IlliniSteve

No radio announcer should call out an opposing player.

You can say, "he didn't get the job done there". But you shouldn't say, "he's selfish".

Shannon's old school though, and you know he's not a big fan of the Cubs, so these things happen. He also likes to drink, but in the 1st inning I don't think you can chalk it up to that.

That is just ridiculous. Are you saying they can't comment on what they see? Are you suggesting that they can not give their opinions on the game before them?

Selfish was my word if you bothered to read the original post instead of getting so indignant. Their term was probably closer to the comment "he didn't get the job done". I was trying to put the post together and I could not remember their exact words so I did a poor job of paraphrasing them and then said so.

Mike certainly is old school. That is the whole jest of this thread. The question was/is "Is old school thinking correct?" ilphotog and IntenselyOrange (uiba99's replies weren't bad either.) were able to answer the question without getting hysterical.

As for Mike being a fan of the Cubs or not, you don't know Mike at all if you don't think he has great respect for the Cub organization and their history.
As to his drinking, I have never heard Mike unable to broadcast a game because he had been drinking during the game. (Something Cubs fans can not say about their broadcasts.)