Meh

A caveat: I didn't see the game (as I don't have MLB TV). Plus, I followed the game by watching the box score online and by reading blog/board threads. Nevertheless, as a blogger, I offer the following thoughts.

Meh. Seriously, meh.

--Zambrano was either good or the Pirates' hitters were not so good. I'm guessing that Zambrano (in spite of walking batters) was likely helped by the complete ineffectiveness of the Pirates' hitters and, of course, by Jason Bay's sore knee preventing him from playing.

--3 earned runs over 5 innings, not so good. 3 earned runs over 7 innings, kind of/sort of a "quality start," right? While Serious, Lifelong Baseball Fan suggested after I criticized Snell's K to BB rate his last outing that perhaps I should want dear Ian to learn how to pitch around hitters rather than try to whiff everyone, I do think there is something to be said for Snell being at his most effective when he is able to strike out a lot of batters. That said, compared to previous outings against the Cubs, and going only by the box score, Snell was neither tremendous enough to get his team a win when they only got 2 hits but in no way horrific. If the Pirates had been able to hit Zambrano (sigh) or hit at all, if the defense had showed up, the Pirates could have won the game. So, who is Snell? Well, today he was a pitcher who lost a game to another team's multimillionaire if moody ace, but, seriously (and I realize this is a pathetic example of "encouragement," but remember, I'm a Bucco fan), for the most part, he's appearing to show himself to be a legitimate MLB pitcher. Not the great pitcher I saw in a few games the first half of this season, not yet, but I mean, the Pirates still had chances to win this game.

--Speaking of those chances, the difference between teams that win versus teams that lose is that winning teams take advantage of opportunities. I believe Mr. Tracy calls this "clutch" hitting, but I just call it as the essential truth that good hitters tend to hit and bad hitters not to hit (August hot streaks aside, the truth tends to come out over 162 games) when "key" or "clutch" situations occur in a game.

--That love/hate relationship with Soriano? Fans of the Cubs must have been loving Soriano tonight; I know I would have been.

--Oh, apparently the Bucco defense, in addition to their offense, wasn't so good this game. Adam Laroche made an error (he really doesn't tend to do that very often, a fact I appreciate). And while you don't want your pitcher letting Soriano hit long fly balls, perhaps that 2 run home run could have been an out, and perhaps without that Laroche error, you somehow manage a 1-1 ball game entering the eighth (and you put in a different pitcher in the eighth inning, and oh, I really should have learned by now to stop playing "what if" with this baseball team). I can't say that the game should have been 1-1 in a game I didn't even see because I know the Cubs tend to hit Snell pretty hard and for all I know it was luck that the score was what it was at the end of the seventh. I'm just saying that as hard as I can be on Snell (due to how good he was in the first half of this season), this is one loss where I have no business fingering the long ball given up by my starting pitcher as anywhere near one of the main issues in this particular loss. Two hits? Defensive plays that could be made? Oh, and of course, the difference between a team that wins more games than it loses and a team that loses more games than it wins.

--Jason Bay's knee is not in good shape. Not good news. How long has this injury lasted? All season? When, I presume, it can be repaired in the offseason, will Jason Bay return to being Jason Bay? As a friend of an opposing team recently asked me, "What's wrong with him?" Well, apparently, he's been playing hurt.

--"Meh" is a better reaction than what I felt after Thursday's debacle, but I still prefer last night's win over today's "meh" (not atrocious, but annoying) loss. Winning beats losing.