Chocolate Milk

D. Lee

Not sure about this one. Are they trying to stick it to Briggs? I can't imagine this deal was very lucrative. Well, I hope it isn't.

those back spasms must have been an ongoing problem since the beginning of rusch's career, because he's never been any good. I agree with Dusty that sometimes you have to man out what doesn't hurt.

Awesome.

Those teams stink because they're in small markets and have no money... and because they've been terribly managed. The Cubs have the resources to be very successful, but they're incompetent in how they allocate these resources. Then, they keep around a moron like Dusty even though it's painfully obvious he should have been canned long ago. Not to mention that it's bad enough to try to follow this team through the computer. I really wouldn't want to waste the time commuting to and from Wrigley and spending money at the game to watch the Cubs lose 7-1. Oh, I agree in that I'm not wasting my money going to games to see them get stomped. However, I still don't see how the much ballyhooed boycott of the Cubs is going to help things. Getting competent management will help things not lowering team revenue. That would only give the Tribune company an excuse to lower payroll.

I guess you just didn't look at the numbers. His "clutch" stats aren't routinely better than his regular stats. Sometimes they are a little better, sometimes a little worse, and in the case of this year, his close and late are much worse. He's the same hitter virtually all the time. And that's a very good hitter. So, when you give a very good hitter lots of opportunities to have a bit clutch hits, which is what a great team with great team OBP will give a guy, you will have numerous instances where he'll come through. You'll also have a lot of times when he'll fail, just like every ballplayer has lots of times when they fail. ESPN showed a stat consisting of the most "walk-off" hits since 2003 this morning. Guess who the other leaders are? Pujols and Miggy. Wierd. Good hitters knock in runs when there is no where to put them. This is shocking. But, as Abuck pointed out, Alex Gonzalez was on that list, no? You're point is valid though, as he was the only poor hitter in the group. No, he wasn't. Also, abuck didn't point anything like that out. He said that he would imagine A Gonz was high but he hadn't yet looked at the stats. What ESPN showed this morning said Papi had 10 "walk off hits" Pujols 9, and Miggy 8. BTW ESPN radio hacks are having a field day with this today. Joe Morgan just said that Ortiz is the best "big game hitter" in baseball today.

Nothing will turn this team around like lowering revenue. Look what it has done for the Pirates and the Royals. Those fans are making a stand and the Management is taking notice.

I guess you just didn't look at the numbers. His "clutch" stats aren't routinely better than his regular stats. Sometimes they are a little better, sometimes a little worse, and in the case of this year, his close and late are much worse. He's the same hitter virtually all the time. And that's a very good hitter. So, when you give a very good hitter lots of opportunities to have a bit clutch hits, which is what a great team with great team OBP will give a guy, you will have numerous instances where he'll come through. You'll also have a lot of times when he'll fail, just like every ballplayer has lots of times when they fail. ESPN showed a stat consisting of the most "walk-off" hits since 2003 this morning. Guess who the other leaders are? Pujols and Miggy. Wierd. Good hitters knock in runs when there is no where to put them. This is shocking.

Yep. It has gone way too far. I am not. With the Cubs miserably sucking the only thing preventing me from going insane is when the teams I hate don't win. If the Cubs were winning, I could care less what was going on on the South Side. Can you make your avatar any bigger? Thanks in advance.

Barrett and Zambrano should be on it.

Hot pink, with a shade of lime green. In that case, I'm on board.

This is the goods here. Don't forget to transfer at Fullerton or Belmont to the Redline. Get off at Addison. If you miss it, take the Brown line to Southport take a right coming out of the station and then another right on Waveland. When transferring to the Red Line at Fullerton or Belmont, remember to get on a northbound train to Howard. Do not get on the 95th/Dan Ryan train, or else you will be going south and in the wrong direction! Addison is two stops from Fullerton and one stop from Belmont, just so you know. Your train ride will take a really short amount of time. Indeed. Either follow other Cubs fans (There should be some) or make sure the train is heading in the same direction as the one you get off of.

This is the goods here. Don't forget to transfer at Fullerton or Belmont to the Redline. Get off at Addison. If you miss it, take the Brown line to Southport take a right coming out of the station and then another right on Waveland.

What color shoes should they wear?

Puts the defense under tremendous pressure.

Not sure if this should be here, rivalries, or social (maybe even Rants). http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2006/06/phillies_pitche.html?p1=MEWell_Pos1 This is a really sad situation.

So Pierzynski made no attempt to defend himself because he LIKES being punched in the face?? That doesn't make much sense. You have allready lost this argument. You need to know when your beaten. You have no idea what a sucker punch is. You tell me what a sucker-punch is. To me, it's when a guy punches someone else who isn't expecting it. That's pretty simple. Considering nobody has ever been punched at home plate by a catcher (that I'm aware of), you surely don't think that AJ expected it, do you? And if he did expect it, then explain to me why he made absolutely no attempt to defend himself. Your definition makes no sense. So when a boxer gets knocked out from a punch he didn't expect, that's a sucker punch? It is by your definition! How should I know why AJ didn't try to defend him self? Maybe he was too slow, maybe he was trying to have a macho stare down with Barrett, maybe he likes to get punched in the face. I don't know? All I know is that he had every opportunity to defend himself. He was looking right at Barrett from a distance of about 6 inches, they had just had a physical interaction, Barrett just said something very combative to him. Barrett then, face to face, punched him. How in god's name is that a sucker punch? I know your just a troll but geeze. I've seen sucker punches. I was at a Met's game where a guy ran up from behind a guy who was walking down the concourse, and punched him in the side of the face from behind. That's a sucker punch. I've been at a house party when I guy walked up to a guy who was talking to his girlfriend (out of his range of vision) and cold cocked him without saying anything. That's a sucker punch. What Barrett did was not a sucker punch. I work with all Sox fans, none of them thought it was a sucker punch. I don't know what else to tell you.

So Pierzynski made no attempt to defend himself because he LIKES being punched in the face?? That doesn't make much sense. You have allready lost this argument. You need to know when your beaten. You have no idea what a sucker punch is.

Selig is obviously just an obsessed Cubs fan who doesn't respect Ozzie's title.

Seriously. What kind of time does it take to pull this stuff up. 30 seconds? How can paid professionals, whose job it is to evaluate baseball players, not investigate every way to evaluate them? It's your job. If someone said, "Hey, something interesting to look at when evaluating a ball player is X." Isn't it your duty to at least investigate the matter? What do these guys do all day? Do MacPhail and Hendry just serf the internet all day or watch old movies? When someone interrupts them to ask, "Why does your team suck?" They just spout off some garbage that could be disproved in about 30 seconds by going to ESPN.com? How is this acceptable on any possible level? It's infuriating. Actually, I probably spent about 20 minutes putting that post together. But, your point is well taken. :wink: That's just due to formating the post. The information can be pulled up in seconds. AMIRITE?

That, to me, is the most important question. Whenever I see/hear/read about Hendry or Baker being interviewed, I never see anyone back up an assertation with a statistical fact. I always hear too much deference and use of baseball cliches like "Clutch". I want to see someone point out the disparity in runs scored and hits for the Cubs since 2004. I want to see someone trot out Remlinger's R/L splits, or Neifi's statistical crapiness, or Rusch's anything. I want to see somebody use numbers to put Hendry in a position to justify his crap moves since 2004. I agree. This is one of those, "What the hell is going on???" moments for me. When someone get's the answer, "We lack in the clutch hitting department." Why doesn't someone say, "That's not true at all. The fact is you have far fewer baserunners than anyone else in the entire league. Here are the facts..." Why don't people say these things?

Seriously. What kind of time does it take to pull this stuff up. 30 seconds? How can paid professionals, whose job it is to evaluate baseball players, not investigate every way to evaluate them? It's your job. If someone said, "Hey, something interesting to look at when evaluating a ball player is X." Isn't it your duty to at least investigate the matter? What do these guys do all day? Do MacPhail and Hendry just serf the internet all day or watch old movies? When someone interrupts them to ask, "Why does your team suck?" They just spout off some garbage that could be disproved in about 30 seconds by going to ESPN.com? How is this acceptable on any possible level? It's infuriating.

What? Every pitcher that was in the Top 5 in PAP 2003 hasn't been the same since.

Do you have alot of experience at being plowed over by a baserunner and then throwing a punch? I thought you were done here? I have seen sucker punches and I have seen fights start. It's my opinion that you haven't or are here just to start arguments. Personally, I believe it's the latter.

I let common sense and life experience convince me.