CubinNY

Yes.

That was a good 1-2 slider. Nice work out of a jam.

Williamson up in the pen.

Dusty better get someone up in hte pen.

Dick Cheney = Monty Burns?

Not really in the works, but an eventual move, as I wrote a number of times.

Hopefully, this will end the mock cross examination garbage. Thank you.

So would I. Is your memory infalable or something? No, but your memory of obscure articles re David Wright apparently is. What is this? Pick on CubinNY day? Now what are you talking about? The article was not obscure it was a spring training article on the Mets. IIRC, you have criticized posters in the past when they fail to support their positions with "hard evidence". I thought it was interesting that you were arguing that you shouldn't have to do so to please other posters. Did you read the entire thread? Paste the "hard evidence" that say that Wright will be (or even MIGHT BE) moving to first base. Also paste the "hard evidence" that any scouts think that Wright can't hack it defensively at third base. That's all. I already did. And moving to 1st base eventually dosen't mean he will be working out at frist base anytime soon. The spring training article said there was talk but the talk had quieted. Well, that is a nice way of saying people aren't convinced he is going to be good. And people are still talking. I live right outside of NYC I hear stuff all the time. I get the local paper. I am sorry I won't go and search the archives for a NY Times article that you won't read anyway. Just like the Newsday article that you wouldn't read. The numbers say he wasn't good last year. He will improve but time will tell if he will become a better than average defensive third baseman.

So would I. Is your memory infalable or something? No, but your memory of obscure articles re David Wright apparently is. What is this? Pick on CubinNY day? Now what are you talking about? The article was not obscure it was a spring training article on the Mets. IIRC, you have criticized posters in the past when they fail to support their positions with "hard evidence". I thought it was interesting that you were arguing that you shouldn't have to do so to please other posters. Did you read the entire thread?

So would I. Is your memory infalable or something? No, but your memory of obscure articles re David Wright apparently is. What is this? Pick on CubinNY day? Now what are you talking about? The article was not obscure it was a spring training article on the Mets.

So would I. Is your memory infalable or something? All I can tell you I know of what I speak. I have to have the Yankees and Mets crammed down my throat on a daily basis. This is not something that is made up. But anyway, I've already shown two articles talking about his defensive woes. I think I've proved my point. And one more time. I said I've read and heard baseball people talk about Wright as a future 1st baseman (long term). That doesn't mean he won't be an adequate defensive thrid baseman in the near future. All and all, I'd take him right now over Aramis or Rolen.

What are you talking about? Find it. If you can I will never post here again. If not try not do this type of thing again.

Huh? There was a thread last season about Rusch, and someone started talking about how he had become a "pitcher" and that when he came into the league he was throwing heat and striking people out all the time. I'm positive it was you. Nope. Not me. But what does this have to do with this thread?

Huh?

How did he manage in those postseason appearances? Since 1993, Dusty Baker has MORE Manager of the Year Awards than Bobby Cox. That kinda puts that award in perspective, doesn't it. I think he's pretty damn good, the players love to play for him and has an impressive track record. I hope he stays. What impressive track record are you talking about? Is he good at betting on horses?

No he doesn't have a point. He has nothing. EDIT 1: I just did a google search and it took me less than a minute to pull up this article. Now you have to buy it if you want to read it David Wright gets defensive -- Newsday.com The job of improving his defense is so arduous, and David Wright takes it so seriously, that sometimes the work brings the Mets' young third baseman to his ... http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ ... ,0,3018274. story?coll=ny-sports-headlines&track=rss - 66k - http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spmets0324,0,3018274.story?coll=ny-sports-headlines&track=rss Edit 2 (two minutes from the last edit) Here is another one from the Mets webpage http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060312&content_id=1346509&vkey=spt2006news&fext=.jsp&c_id=nym Sure doesn't look like you looked too hard there. I am done with this nonsense. It really isn't worth my time. I'm not going to register to read the Newsday article, but here's what your referenced Mets page says: Early last summer, while Wright's error total was steadily increasing, there was a thought, one that had a brief shelf life, that the third baseman of the present and future might be transformed into the first baseman of the future. The thought died quickly, even before Wright made adjustments during the All-Star break and became a more reliable thrower and an improved overall defender. He slowed himself and less rushing meant fewer errors. Wright committed 15 errors in 233 chances (a .936 fielding percentage) before the All-Star break. After the break, he made nine in 228 chances (.961). It goes on to compare him to a young Scott Rolen. Pretty much a ringing endorsement for his defensive abilities, if you ask me........ and no sign of him moving to first base. No it is not a ringing endorsement and it is from the Mets own webpage. If a propaganda piece is printing it, what do you think the scouts are saying. Furtermore now you've read something you said you couldn't find. It took me all of two minutes to find it. Moreover, you said someone wouldn't find it. And I didn't even look that hard You have been shown to be wrong throughout this thread. Yet every time you try to spin something. It is like this with every thred in which you post. You are the very definition of a troll.

Pretty impressive numbers by the pitchers!

No he doesn't have a point. He has nothing. EDIT 1: I just did a google search and it took me less than a minute to pull up this article. Now you have to buy it if you want to read it David Wright gets defensive -- Newsday.com The job of improving his defense is so arduous, and David Wright takes it so seriously, that sometimes the work brings the Mets' young third baseman to his ... http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ ... ,0,3018274. story?coll=ny-sports-headlines&track=rss - 66k - http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spmets0324,0,3018274.story?coll=ny-sports-headlines&track=rss Edit 2 (two minutes from the last edit) Here is another one from the Mets webpage http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060312&content_id=1346509&vkey=spt2006news&fext=.jsp&c_id=nym Sure doesn't look like you looked too hard there. I am done with this nonsense. It really isn't worth my time.

You have got to be kidding me. What am I taking at face value? The fact that you are being argumentative over something that is rather insignificant? The fact that I was trying to get the thread back on topic? I'm not getting worked up, I'm just wishing you would shut up. The topic was "Scott Rolen or Aramis Ramirez". Someone pointed out that they'd rather have David Wright (not off-topic, in my opinion..... just a slight diversion). I don't get to see EVERY player perform on a regular basis (Wright is one of them), so I depend heavily on what I read, and what the numbers tell me. That's why I was interested in where the information came from. I really like what I've seen of the kid, and hadn't heard this particular information. So now not only are you trolling you are calling me a liar too? That's ok. As I wrote, I am not going to spend an hour or two seaching for NY Times articles that will cost me money download to satisfy a Cardinal troll. I've read it and I've heard it. I live in NY and I subscribe to the NY times. I get the YES network and MSG, and the new network of the Mets. You didn't even know that Wright wasn't a rookie last year. I have a real hard time beleiving you follow him closely. You are a troll. BA data say his has a FRAA of 0 He had the most errors at his position last year Over his short career he is averaging an error a week. He will likely get better, but right now he is not good. Those are the data. Keep your opinon if that makes you happy.

I agree with almost everything except for the part about Pagan having more pop that hairston. Pagan is a singles hitter, when ha manages to get a hit, which isn't all that often. Don't let the ST numbers fool you. The Cubs are very thin. This injury is the reason some of why some wanted Sing or Restovich.

Does anyone with a medical background know if this type of injury is a chronic thing that can be bothersome for the year?

I wouldn't be so hard on Marshall. He was kind of squeezed in the first inning then settled down until the 5th. Ruch on the other hand. Well, let us just say, "Cinderlla the clock is striking 12". I hope Wood and Prior come back soon and are healthy. Same with Aramis.

I'll take David Wright :D

As has already been pointed out: And that's for a 23-year old kid who is still getting better. He's gone 46 innings this year without a single error. His fielding percentage has been slightly below average over his 235 games, but his range has been above average. You also initially implied that he'd only be at third base for 5 years......... and now you're saying "about age 30". You've also said that you've heard scouts and read reports that say his future is at first base. I simply want to know which reports you've read, and which scouts said that, so that I can determine how much credence to give it. That doesn't seem like a huge request. 1. Average is not good. It is average 2. He will be 24 shortly unless I forgot how to add in five years he will be around 30 3. I've already said where I read the reports and where I've heard them from. I am not going to spend an hour looking stuff up to make you happy. 4. No amount of going round and round on this topic will sway your opinon. And it seems neither will the data so keep your opinion and wait five years to have this conversation again.

I think you mean OldCubsfan. I think he was referring to this: I see. Thanks. Mick Kelleher is also on that list too. Another Cub of the byegone era of futility. No wonder why they weren't so good.