Jump to content
North Side Baseball

mg420

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,260

  • 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 mg420

  1. mg420
    what about guys like williams, hill, pinto, & perhaps guzman & marshall (if they can stay healthy) to go along with prior, z & rusch?
  2. mg420
    The difference being that McGee had more power than Furcal and Coleman knew how to steal bases without getting thrown out 45% of the time. huh? furcal has far more power than mcgee. willie had 79 hr's in 7649 ab's while furcal has 45 in 2642 ab's. as far as sb's, furcal has been caught stealing 28% in his career while pierre is at 36% (30% in 05).
  3. mg420
    Murton is already penciled in as the starter in left field. Not sure about Walker's arm either. I truly believe he was signed to be traded. I think Hairston will be the supersub, and if the Cubs don't sign a centerfielder this offseason and Patterson doesn't show them something in spring training Hairston could very well be the starting CF in 2006. and people are complaining about pierre being in center for the cubs??? Just my analysis of what might happen. Of course, alot of this would depend on the Cubs signing Furcal. If they don't sign Furcal then I would bet they will surely sign a centerfielder to fill the leadoff spot. I don't think Hairston is that bad of an option to fill in, considering he makes far less than Pierre. If that is the case and Hairston doesn't produce you would have Pie in the wings, although I would hope they give him another full year in the minors. this like most things is pure speculation, but why cant the cubs sign furcal & trade cp/mitre for pierre? pierre can lead off & furcal can bat #2 moving murton down in the lineup. I dont like having two leadoff hitters in the lineup. The way I would work it is go for one of them and that's it. Trade for Pierre bring in Nomar. Sign Furcal bring in a better CF. Remember Vince Coleman and Willie Mcgee during the Mid 80's.....I hated them but that was a team that made you nervous...pure speed i would say 100+ steals in the top of the lineup would do wonders for lee & aram rbi wise.
  4. mg420
    Murton is already penciled in as the starter in left field. Not sure about Walker's arm either. I truly believe he was signed to be traded. I think Hairston will be the supersub, and if the Cubs don't sign a centerfielder this offseason and Patterson doesn't show them something in spring training Hairston could very well be the starting CF in 2006. and people are complaining about pierre being in center for the cubs??? Just my analysis of what might happen. Of course, alot of this would depend on the Cubs signing Furcal. If they don't sign Furcal then I would bet they will surely sign a centerfielder to fill the leadoff spot. I don't think Hairston is that bad of an option to fill in, considering he makes far less than Pierre. If that is the case and Hairston doesn't produce you would have Pie in the wings, although I would hope they give him another full year in the minors. this like most things is pure speculation, but why cant the cubs sign furcal & trade cp/mitre for pierre? pierre can lead off & furcal can bat #2 moving murton down in the lineup. I dont like having two leadoff hitters in the lineup. The way I would work it is go for one of them and that's it. Trade for Pierre bring in Nomar. Sign Furcal bring in a better CF. either way i dont want any part of nomar (and hopefully neither do the cubs).
  5. mg420
    Murton is already penciled in as the starter in left field. Not sure about Walker's arm either. I truly believe he was signed to be traded. I think Hairston will be the supersub, and if the Cubs don't sign a centerfielder this offseason and Patterson doesn't show them something in spring training Hairston could very well be the starting CF in 2006. and people are complaining about pierre being in center for the cubs??? Just my analysis of what might happen. Of course, alot of this would depend on the Cubs signing Furcal. If they don't sign Furcal then I would bet they will surely sign a centerfielder to fill the leadoff spot. I don't think Hairston is that bad of an option to fill in, considering he makes far less than Pierre. If that is the case and Hairston doesn't produce you would have Pie in the wings, although I would hope they give him another full year in the minors. this like most things is pure speculation, but why cant the cubs sign furcal & trade cp/mitre for pierre? pierre can lead off & furcal can bat #2 moving murton down in the lineup.
  6. mg420
    Murton is already penciled in as the starter in left field. Not sure about Walker's arm either. I truly believe he was signed to be traded. I think Hairston will be the supersub, and if the Cubs don't sign a centerfielder this offseason and Patterson doesn't show them something in spring training Hairston could very well be the starting CF in 2006. and people are complaining about pierre being in center for the cubs???
  7. mg420
    you mean if he can only avoid getting into verbal and physical confrontations with his wife, fans, teammates and management.
  8. mg420
    walker would be pissed because he wants to start every day (not a bad thing of course!) but thats a very good idea. he can also give lee a break at 1b once in a while.
  9. mg420
    why is it unlikely?
  10. mg420
    You want to know what kind of rotation they were? OVERACHEIVING! If you want to bank on all of your pitchers having career years/coming up huge in the clutch, then why do we even need Rusch? Wood will be healthy and will strike out 250, Prior will win 25 games and Z will have an ERA under 2 and Maddux will win 10 games in the second half. it remains to be seen if they overachieved or if garland & contrares have finally figured out how to pitch. if zambrano, prior & wood are all healthy i'm not too concerned about the #4 & 5 guys.
  11. mg420
    Several fans on this site, not saying one of them was you, have criticized Hendry heavily for not having better back-up plans at SS and in the rotation where known injury-risks exist for the Cubs. Hill is still unproven and can't be counted on to perform when called upon like Rusch can. So Hill doesn't seem like a sound option as an insurance policy while Rusch's numbers over that last two seasons show he has the ability to get the job done when called upon. And the results of this season seems to have shown the need for reliable insurance policies. Plus, estimates show the Cubs have around 50 million dollars to spend this off season. So, spending 2.75 million on a player who can provide insurance to the starting rotation and effective relief is money well spent considering the amount of money the team has to shell out. Will this team make the playoffs with a rotation of Z, Prior, Maddux, Rusch, Williams? Thats an average rotation. Unless we get Giles, resign Nomar, keep Walker, and get Bradley, we need at least an above average rotation. If you are going to get an insurance option, why not get actually a decent starter and use Williams as insurance. If we get a #3 and Wood gets hurt and Williams has to step in, we still have a chance. Dusty needs defined roles because he has no clue what the right moves are. i know everyone is sick of the white sox examples but here's another one. what kind of rotation was burehle, garland, garcia, el duke & contrares (sp?)? i'm sure most people here would have given it a below average score before the season started.
  12. mg420
    is there any way the cubs could trade maddux if he does decide to come back in 2006 (does he have a no trade clause in his 06 option?)? they could pick up a good portion of maddux's salary & put williams in the rotation.
  13. mg420
    as was mentioned in another thread, with koronka tearing up the AFL, the cubs might already have their other lefty for the pen next year. they must have seen something in him to have kept him on the 40 man last year so hopefully they made the right move and he'll be good out of the pen.
  14. mg420

    mg420 replied to YearofDaCubs's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk

    “Not everything that can be counted, counts. And not everything that counts can be counted.” Albert Einstein
  15. mg420
    There you go. this is amazing. if you cant see the difference in between "the sox's success was due to scott" and "that having scott lead off in 2005 didnt make a huge difference in the white sox's success" then i guess you win.
  16. mg420
    No need to be snide. They replaced Carlos Lee with Scott Podsenik. That did not in any way, shape, or form, improve their offense. Lineup position is irrelevant. No matter where either one of them hits, if you replace Podsenik with Lee, it's a downgrade on offense. so i guess 60 sb's had little effect on the sox's offense. They still didn't help them equal their run total from 2004. The Sox did not win because of their offense which was worse in 2005 than in 2004. They won because of their pitching and luck in one run games. again better offense does not mean a more balanced offense. they were a much more balanced team in 05 imo.
  17. mg420
    No need to be snide. They replaced Carlos Lee with Scott Podsenik. That did not in any way, shape, or form, improve their offense. Lineup position is irrelevant. No matter where either one of them hits, if you replace Podsenik with Lee, it's a downgrade on offense. so i guess 60 sb's had little effect on the sox's offense. ...just about as much effect as getting caught 23 times. you are right. everyone should have 100 sb's and never get caught. 60 sb's is just pathetic (even though it's probably more than the whole cubs team had last year). i should know better than to argue with such sound reasoning.
  18. mg420
    The White Sox scored less runs in '05 than '04, and at last check didn't score any more consistently than the Cubs's offense. so you are saying that having scott lead off in 2005 didnt make a huge difference in the white sox's success in 05? i think the sox players would beg to differ with you. omg. you can't seriously believe that. you're reasoning from the final result and saying that everything they did (including having scotty pod) contributed to success. that isn't even logical. show me where i said "everything"? huge difference does not equal everything. you said the white sox success was due to scott, with no justification other than he was part of the 2005 WS team. logically, that means everything that composed the '05 team was also the reason they won, which is ridiculous.
  19. mg420
    The White Sox scored less runs in '05 than '04, and at last check didn't score any more consistently than the Cubs's offense. so you are saying that having scott lead off in 2005 didnt make a huge difference in the white sox's success in 05? i think the sox players would beg to differ with you. omg. you can't seriously believe that. you're reasoning from the final result and saying that everything they did (including having scotty pod) contributed to success. that isn't even logical. show me where i said "everything"? huge difference does not equal everything. you said the white sox success was due to scott, with no justification other than he was part of the 2005 WS team. logically, that means everything that composed the '05 team was also the reason they won, which is ridiculous. again, show me where i said the sox's success was due to scott? i said he made a huge difference in the offense. you speak of logic yet you do not speak logically.
  20. mg420
    No need to be snide. They replaced Carlos Lee with Scott Podsenik. That did not in any way, shape, or form, improve their offense. Lineup position is irrelevant. No matter where either one of them hits, if you replace Podsenik with Lee, it's a downgrade on offense. so i guess 60 sb's had little effect on the sox's offense.
  21. mg420
    The White Sox scored less runs in '05 than '04, and at last check didn't score any more consistently than the Cubs's offense. so you are saying that having scott lead off in 2005 didnt make a huge difference in the white sox's success in 05? i think the sox players would beg to differ with you. omg. you can't seriously believe that. you're reasoning from the final result and saying that everything they did (including having scotty pod) contributed to success. that isn't even logical. show me where i said "everything"? huge difference does not equal everything.
  22. mg420
    The White Sox scored less runs in '05 than '04, and at last check didn't score any more consistently than the Cubs's offense. so you are saying that having scott lead off in 2005 didnt make a huge difference in the white sox's success in 05? i think the sox players would beg to differ with you. It did make a difference. They scored less runs. Of course, the pitching was good enough to win well over 90 games... maybe its not how many runs you score but when you score them. of course they had great pitching but having a leadoff guy who can get on base and steal was more important to their offense than having carlos lee who drove in a ton of runs. it is a question of a balanced lineup imo.
  23. mg420
    So wait....paying 6 million plus whatever prospects it takes to get him for 1 year isn't overpaying for Pierre? it probably is overpaying but its only 6 for 1 year not 8+ for 4 years.
  24. mg420
    The White Sox scored less runs in '05 than '04, and at last check didn't score any more consistently than the Cubs's offense. so you are saying that having scott lead off in 2005 didnt make a huge difference in the white sox's success in 05? i think the sox players would beg to differ with you.
  25. mg420
    i would rather see pierre. look what scott pod did for the sox in 2005 and i expect similar things from juan if the cubs trade for him. pierre had an off year in 05 (similar to s pod in 04) so i see no reason why he cant return to his .750 ops with 50 sb year form. whoever signs furcal will probably way overpay (in years & $) anyway and 1 year of pierre will allow cedeno to start at ss in 06 & perhaps pie in cf in 07.
×
×
  • Create New...