erik316wttn

This guy makes Milton Bradley look sane.

I've batted against former major leaguers and high draft picts in non-professional leagues and it's neither terrifying nor awesome. When you are in the box it's see ball hit ball. Who is dealing is means nothing. That's not to say I was remotely successful either, b/c mostly I wasn't, but when i've been in the box it doesn't matter. Ok now you have to name drop. Who have you faced?

You're correct, but sometimes you gotta stand pat. Good young ML-ready SS and C talent is insanely hard to come by. Which is why we could stock up the farm, agreed, but I don't think anyone would be wililng to deplete the farm for those guys. And I don't think there's anyone who has enough talent to do it. Or, if they did, you'd essentially be selling them for lottery tickets. Oh I'd be extremely pissed off if either was dealt, it's just a fun thought. Between the two of them I'd bet you could land 4 or 5 top 75 prospects. Completely agreed. Or we could use them to build a team around. Also agreed. I'm not in favor of trading them at all, I just agreed with the statement that they'd bring a ridiculous haul in prospects.

You're correct, but sometimes you gotta stand pat. Good young ML-ready SS and C talent is insanely hard to come by. Which is why we could stock up the farm, agreed, but I don't think anyone would be wililng to deplete the farm for those guys. And I don't think there's anyone who has enough talent to do it. Or, if they did, you'd essentially be selling them for lottery tickets. Oh I'd be extremely pissed off if either was dealt, it's just a fun thought. Between the two of them I'd bet you could land 4 or 5 top 75 prospects. Completely agreed.

You're correct, but sometimes you gotta stand pat. Good young ML-ready SS and C talent is insanely hard to come by. Which is why we could stock up the farm, agreed, but I don't think anyone would be wililng to deplete the farm for those guys. And I don't think there's anyone who has enough talent to do it. Or, if they did, you'd essentially be selling them for lottery tickets.

Glad to see there's at least a little bit of a bright spot. This team does have some good young talent on it.

So what's the best way for him to avoid the dreaded Sophomore Slump next year?

Careful, just mentioning his name will send certain posters into a rage.

598 I think BCB emphasized the wrong word. He meant no one will know how many home runs HE really hit. I'm pretty sure a cyborg was responsible for at least 150 or so. I think Bud Selig should subtract 150 and really piss of Yankee fans If Selig won't even overturn a historically bad umpire's call that blew a Perfect Game, there is no freakin' way in Hell he'll do this. Although it would be funny.

Soto may be close, but Castro has the far higher ceiling.

Given the circumstances it's about the best we could have hoped for.

The Cubs are winning? Are they allowed to do that?

And people railed on Theriot for his arm.

Against the Pirates on 4/22/10, the Brewers batted around in the 7th and again in the 9th, en route to a 20-0 victory. It's no "11 consecutive hits", but batting around twice in one game is batting around twice in one game. Pirates lost seven straight from 4/20-4/26 Pirates allowed 25 hits in the aforementioned game against Milwaukee. Only one less. The Brewers batted around in the 3rd and 8th innings against Pittsburgh on 4/26/10. This in addition to the previously mentioned game where they batted around twice against Pittsburgh only four days earlier. Brewers had 21 ABs with RISP in the 20-0 game against the Pirates. However, it would have been more if not for a couple of homeruns with two guys on base, as opposed to only one homer against the Cubs. Furthermore, while Milwaukee had 29 ABs wtih RISP against the Cubs, they tallied 12 hits for a .414 avg in those situations. Against Pittsburgh, they went 10-for-21, for a .476 avg with RISP. The 2-3-4 hitters are at least typically some of the better hitters in the lineup. The Pirates allowed the Brewers 6-9 hitters to go 11-for-22, including two hits by the pitcher. Later in the game, they gave up a hit to a relief pitcher that was inserted higher in the order on a double switch. This is irrelevant as it's not like an injury to any player was going to hurt the Cubs chances at this point in the season. The same can be said for the Pirates during their streak, even though it was April (sorry, Jake). Pirates were outscored 72-12 from 4/20 - 4/26. The Pirates never even led late in any game during their streak to even allow for a walkoff. And while they didn't allow a cycle, Edmonds came close, hitting a single, two doubles, and a homer in one game. They also managed to give up four hits in a game to Greg Zaun of all people. This is only looking at 2010. I'm sure if anyone went back through the years, they could find SEVERAL examples of bad weeks that rival or surpass what the Cubs have done. Fair enough. Henceforth, upon which time you find yourself wishing to refer to the suckiness of the Cubs, thou musteth include the Pirates. ONLY THE CUBS AND PIRATES SUCK THIS BAD!! But then only the Cubs when they're playing the Pirates.

Ok. You see that? Grassbass gave me what I asked for, he has shown that the Pirates had a worse week in April than the Cubs have currently. He actually researched and posted stats to debunk my points one by one. And, as I said if someone could do that, I would admit I was wrong. See how simple that was? So here it is: I was wrong. I'm a man of my word. Grassbass, you're a credit to NSBB, and I don't mean that sarcastically.

I remember watching that game. That was hilarious.

What do you think we're all fatasses? No, just you. Way to go right for the personal insult (paraphrased due to erik's edit) Sometimes when logic and reason doesn't work you have to argue with people on their level. I'm sorry that's the only thing you seem to understand. I am now officially done with this thread as people refuse to read and just like to cherry pick one or two things instead of looking at the entire picture, and therefore have decided to devolve into the highly useful practice of engaging in personal insults (myself included). Yeah. Like this. If you disagree with me, fine, but apparently some people can't disagree without being disagreeable.

I'll get on board with that!

What do you think we're all fatasses? No, just you. And excellent job of avoiding the point, btw.

Fixed that for ya, champ.

Oh my god you have to be the dumbest person alive. Only southsideryan Agreed.

Oh my god you have to be the dumbest person alive. Follow the logic. Useless trivia has no relationship with how good/bad a team is. That's why pointing out random facts and saying "only the Cubs" as if it's some sort of proof of their futility is a dumb exercise. Read the post. All of it as a whole points to just how bad the Cubs have been lately. If you only cherry pick it one piece here or one piece there and take it out of context as people on NSBB love to do, then yes, it's going to have a different meaning. Eat the whole pizza, not just a slice. And the point I was trying to make was that the Cubs just haven't been bad, they've been so bad lately that teams have been doing things on the field against them that haven't been done in a very, very long time. Never once anywhere did I say the Cubs were the worst team ever. If others want to take issue with it, that's fine. And the Cubs really don't need a whole lot of "proof" as to their futility, do they? So as I've said earlier in this thread after Fred posted: Ok maybe not "only the Cubs", but they've been exceptionally horrible lately.

Oh my god you have to be the dumbest person alive.

LOL TOWELS!!

Yeah, they should get rid of all of them. Not a one of them is useful at all. Not a single one. None. There plenty useful, just not when to comes to winning baseball games. Too right. None of them have any future with this team. Holy missing the entire [expletive] point, Batman!