Jump to content
North Side Baseball

bukie

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,417

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

 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

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by bukie

  1. bukie
    Boston over Atlanta in 4 Detroit over Philadelphia in 5 Orlando over Toronto in 5 Cleveland over Washington in 5 LA over Denver in 5 New Orleans over Dallas in 7 Phoenix over San Antonio in 6 Utah over Houston in 6 Boston over Cleveland in 5 Detroit over Orlando in 5 Utah over LA in 6 New Orleans over Phoenix in 7 Boston over Detroit in 7 Utah over New Orleans in 6 Boston over Utah in 5
  2. bukie
    Thanks Tim. I am not so much overrating the importance of "Ozzie Ball" but trying to express how much Podsednik meant to that team in '05 and that the trade for Lee was the right move for the Sox to make. I guess when you speak into a canyon the words just end up echoing back. ;) But do you completely discount the possibility that the fact that the Sox won the world series was completely unrelated to that trade? The facts remain that the only areas where the Sox were above average in '05 was overall pitching and offensive home runs. Of the 12 pitchers that regularly contributed to that 2005 team, 11 of them pitched completely out of their minds for that entire year (Garcia possibly being an exception since he had similar statistical years), and the 12th (Hernandez) magically became completely unhittable in the playoffs. No other team that year or since has had that kind of dominance in pitching. I consider it a disservice to that team to claim "smartball" had anything to do with that season going well. If anything, it prevented easy wins because of a propensity to give away outs with overzealous SB attempts and sacrifices. EDIT: Corrected with Garcia the one not having a career year. He did have better years, but his 2005 was still above average. Buehrle did have his best year in '05.
  3. bukie
    Have to admit, I don't understand the bizarre schadenfreude towards Corey Patterson. The Cubs' management screwed with his development, he had an awful injury in 2003 when he was just starting to get it, he contributed well in 2004, and then somehow became the poster boy for everything that was wrong with the team from 2005 on.
  4. bukie
    I believe he was traded for 4 good innings of Steve Trachsel.
  5. bukie
    Because they traded Carlos Lee for Scott Podsednik.
  6. bukie
    The Sox already had plenty of power. Lee is the better offensive player when it comes to HR and RBI and AVG but what Podsednik gave the Sox was a player who could manufacture runs, a player who could beat out an infield hit (40 in 2005, 16 of those bunts), a player who could get on base (.419 OBP leading off the game in 2005) in the first inning and be at 2B by the time the meat of the order came up. He was the spark for the Sox in '05 and the offense suffered when he was out with an injury later in the year, which almost cost the Sox. Pods reminded my alot of what Bobby Dernier did for the Cubs in '84. So say what you will about old baseball traditional positions but there is a reason why they are traditions.....it's because they work more often than not and in 2005, it worked like a charm. In 2005, the White Sox won the World Series, hands-down, because of their pitching performance. They were awful offensively, particularly because of the "smartball" myth. Podsednik's usefulness was strictly a .350 OBP, which ranked 2nd on the team. Konerko was really the only offensive threat that team had. If they'd had even a little of the offense that they had the subsequent 2 years, they would have made things much easier on themselves.
  7. bukie
    Here's my argument: Every time you send a pitcher out there for an inning, it's a calculated risk. Every inning. Z was rolling exceedingly efficiently through 6 innings, and the Cubs had a comfortable cushion. Why blow an additional reliever inning in this situation when you have (A) Lilly going tomorrow, when he's struggled mightily, (B) Hill going Friday, who has also struggled mightily, © Marquis going Saturday, who has once again struggled mightily, and a total of 8 games in 8 days in early April when 3/5 of the rotation hasn't been able to throw 5 innings, let alone 7. At 80-some pitches through 6, I would think it's less of a risk to let a cruising Z go one more inning when he's been averaging 14 pitches an inning than it would be to burn a reliever specifically for the sake of extra rest for the only durable starter the Cubs have.
  8. bukie
    103(?) pitches for Z through 7. Should be it. Get Wuertz/Howry some confidence time.
  9. bukie
    Pie makes a tough catch look easy.
  10. bukie
    Yes, let's simply ignore the fact that Murton actually plays left field defensively, then your analogy is perfect.
  11. bukie
    True, but no one has been arguing for stretching a double into a triple as the result of hustling. then remind me what's the point in hammering on Aramis for his double? Thinking you hit a homerun when it really is a double increases the chances you get thrown out at second. It is one of my pet peeves. Actually hitting a double instead of a home run increases the chances you get thrown out at second by quite a bit more.
  12. bukie
    I don't know who you're talking to but I didn't once consider this as "helping" Pie by benching him. I'm suggesting benching him because he isn't hitting the baseball and Reed Johnson is. The manager's job is to put players in a position to succeed and give the Cubs the best chance to win every day - that would be Reed Johnson. The manager's job is to put the players on the field that would give the Cubs the best chance to win more games overall. Short term fixes to sacrifice long-term development is not the way to do that. Pie has no more he can learn in AAA. He adjusted to and mastered that league. He needs time to adjust to the major leagues, and the Cubs need time to evaluate him in their long-term plans. Neither is accomplished by benching Pie or sending him down. Pie has initially struggled for a few months at every stage of development. Once he adjusts, he's been a phenominal player, on all levels. The important thing right now is to not have a knee-jerk panic reaction and stunt his development even more just to get a below average offensive performance from CF for a month instead of a poor one. It could even be argued that his defensive value over Johnson makes up most of the offensive difference.
  13. bukie
    But....isn't that just another difference in how the game is played? Rose's hits record is one of those that is both really impressive and potentially breakable one day. Same with DiMaggio's hitting streak record and Ryan's 7 no-hitters.
  14. bukie
    Nah. The group just makes a consensus choice and then it's on to the next pick. They should do this in the actual NFL draft. It would make things hilarious for situations like the Vikings not picking on time.
  15. bukie
    Sandberg had a very good AA year at age 20, but he never exhibited any sort of the power that he did in the majors.
  16. bukie
    What I can't understand is why it's taking people 30 posts to see this.
  17. bukie
    So, apparently when Myers overheard hecklers tell him he couldn't "hit the broad side of a barn", he failed to hear the "side of a barn" part?
  18. bukie
    Of course...the pro-Mendenhall crowd will hate me, that's for sure. :) So...all we have to do is make sure when the Bears pick that Raisin's not around...for 12 hours... ...yeah, that'll never happen. OL it is.
  19. bukie
    Warner Wolf, a longtime NY area sports guy on the news, and ESPN 1050 personality, recently told the story, I believe, about the first time a team (probably Yankees) used numbers. They stuck to the number of their position or batting order, can't remember. I think it was in the 20's. Batting order, which is why Ruth was 3 and Gerhig 4. and, unfortunately, Theriot is 2 and Fukudome is 1
  20. bukie
    Well...he did walk last night...
  21. bukie
    Don't worry, after that happens, his AARP Insurances kicks, and he would be ready to play again by 40. So he'd only be out a couple weeks?
  22. bukie
    Yeah, with 8 LOB.
  23. bukie
    If anybody deserves a public apology after the Cubs win a World Series, it's Steve Bartman.
  24. bukie
    (I thought this was a Soriano thread...) Rotoworld mentioned Sunday that the Cubs were resting Pie because of his hand on Saturday and Sunday. Yesterday and tomorrow there are lefties pitching, so Johnson gets more time. I could be wrong, but I think the 4 game layoff is largely coincidental due to the HBP last week and the 2 lefties in a row this week. We'll know for sure by next week, but I'm not about to get too concerned yet. Although Pie's AB yesterday was hugely frustrating, swinging at 3 pitches outside the strike zone to a pitcher who walked 5 in the inning.
  25. bukie
    I'd be very, very careful with Freddy Sanchez here, since Meek is on deck and the Pirates have nobody left to hit.
×
×
  • Create New...