Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Electron Blue

Verified Member
  • Posts

    2,226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Electron Blue

  1. I agree with every single bit of your comments.
  2. dang. used to be my favorite husker -- for that reason alone, he's one of fav. major leaguers :(
  3. is that video out on the internet at all? Man he was a good Kruk.
  4. Agreed. I actually think this is one of those instances where 'experts' will often pick out bullpen as a team's projected weakness by default simply to get by without having to do any substantive research. Seems like every manager and GM would love 'help' with their bullpen anyway, so in the absence of actually digging up legit and quantifiable holes on a team, writers can just throw out bullpen and be done with it. Sort of reminiscent of how during the midst of the NFL season you hear from the 'experts' that literally every contending team 'needs help in the secondary.' Just sounds convenient, and frankly no team is fully satisfied with its secondary (or bullpen) ever to begin with, so they just mention that and move on. Just my uninformed guess since, as you said, our bullpen was quite productive last year and should theoretically only improve this season. Good point, and welcome to the forum!
  5. he probably is one of the biggest weaknesses on the team. i'd say he, izturis and marquis are probably the top three. I'd actually agree with that, except the order and reasoning is key. Izturis (plays everyday; pretty good glove, yet no hit) Marquis (plays only every 5-or-so days, but costs 21M and 3 years) Dempster (he's not great, but I'll wait to see if Lou sticks with him if he struggles a bit; if he's not the All Important Closer, he doesn't look nearly as bad, IMO)
  6. I think you're reaching there. He and the others were talking about how great the Mets farm system has been, particularly those who've made it to the majors with them. Dusty mentioned off-hand that these minor-leaguers can also be used to acquire proven talent. Sounds about right to me.
  7. the quote is the thread title, in reference to a player reading a fishing book in every spare moment he gets.
  8. -- Rick Sutcliffe haha, he says this during Reds/Boston game after some player was said to be reading "Hemingway on Fishing" in the dugout. Sounds like the Dusty-talks-about-nothing-but-fishing jokes go beyond NSBB :D
  9. I think I'm pulling more for Dempster to succeed than anyone on this team - simply because I want him to be worth being on this team! He's just too great to have around, just keep that WHIP down, demp'.
  10. Tony Larussa is much more high-profile than . . . literally forgot his name. Point made :) For better or worse fame is a factor in public reaction.
  11. Its weird it wasnt in park. Dudes lucky somebody came along otherwise hed have crashed into something eventually. Going at 2 MPH he coudln't cause that much damage. You think his car tops out at 2 mph? In that case, I don't know what we're all worried about. Considering he was sleeping, I think he's assuming (rightly or wrongly), that at that point, all he'd be doing is idling forward. That was my guess too. But it just doesn't matter, IMO. That's like saying Tony considered driving drunk and decided it was okay because, by the time he was found asleep, the car would be stopped and no one would be in danger. What about all the driving he did (or potentially could have done) before he sloooowly rolled to a safe stop? EDIT: on second thought, I really don't even disagree with cubbiechris, I was just looking at the issue as a whole (drunk driving) not the specific part he was refering to. no hard feelings, I'm not arguing :)
  12. That was in the NCAA tournament a year ago if I recall. I loved that. http://static.flickr.com/56/114728523_749e658d8c.jpg
  13. Its weird it wasnt in park. Dudes lucky somebody came along otherwise hed have crashed into something eventually. Going at 2 MPH he coudln't cause that much damage. You think his car tops out at 2 mph? In that case, I don't know what we're all worried about.
  14. i thought he was a stadium
  15. "not sure?" I didn't realize he even had a chance . . . ?
  16. I hope we can get that damn gum company's name off our ballpark!! ;)
  17. Meh. The trade was pretty much a wash. Aardsma is looking almost as bad this spring. At least Aardsma was a league leader. Alphabetically. He sits ahead of every other major leaguer in history. Link.
  18. Have you not been watching the games? If Prior makes rapid progress, I think he's still got a chance. But it will have to be very rapid. Lou said he's going to take his best pitchers north with him. I guess he meant it. I was actually unable to watch the game he was in and have only sporadically caught the others. I think there may be some subconscious thing going on where I'm avoiding news about Prior. No news is good news!! :D
  19. am I the only one who didn't realize Prior was so far behind?
  20. I have no idea what MOT stands for. But, then again, I have no idea what Mott or Hoople stand for, either. I think MOT stands for Member of the Tribe, or Jew. That's the only meaning of "MOT" from Urban Dictionary that seems to fit. Would make sense, too, his name being Greenberg. There really aren't that many jews in the entire league, are there? Shawn Green, and . . . that's all I can remember all of a sudden.
  21. His Cubs career was iffy, but I'll always love him in Cheers reruns . . . http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/805000/images/_807769_woody_300.jpg
  22. Your damn right brother. "Irregardless" is like saying "de-caffeine-free" fixed :wink: fixed again, 'cuz it's my damn right! :D
  23. :evil: at least it's in the dictionary: http://www.bartleby.com/61/84/I0238400.html Irregardless, it's still improper usage. :D It's called the modern English language. Get on board or get left behind. so you're saying the proper usage is irregardless? No. I'm saying it's like "ain't" or any one of the many other words that wouldn't make it into a college essay but is used all the time in informal speech. The last time I checked this was a message board, not a term paper. Acronyms and slang are thrown around here all the time. Is "irregardless" proper English? Of course not. But it's part of the modern English language, like it or not. Slang and acronyms are used because they are easy and informal, thus nice for a message board. WHat bugs me about "irregardless" is that it's simply a dumb word. :) Saying "regardless" means the EXACT same thing as "irregardless," even though the ir- prefix EVERY OTHER time means opposite. :)
  24. Excellent news. I gotta ask, though, 'cause I just don't understand . . . what rationale would there even be for Izturis to bat 2nd? Even in an old'schooler's mind? It's not like he's Juan Pierre, who could be deceptively valuable.
×
×
  • Create New...