Jump to content
North Side Baseball

OleMissCub

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    38,741
  • 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 OleMissCub

  1. Argh, if you could have had the Saints offense with the Bears defense in 2006, they would have torched Indy.
  2. And Minnesota at hime (20). Pretending the only thing that matters is the Saints are good through the air and the Bears are bad defending it doesn't make much sense. The Denver game was 34-32 and was lost thanks in large part to that hack Gramatica missing TWO field goals. Brees had 421 yards in the loss. The Minn game was 30-27 and in that game Gramatica missed TWO field goals again including one that was blocked and returned for a touchdown. The Saints have gone through two kickers and thankfully their third one is pretty damn good. They got some kid named Garret Hartley from Oklahoma who has gone 11 for 11 since firing the other kickers. The Atlanta game (34-20) was just a pathetic showing on the part of the Saints D. Brees did have 422 yards passing though. Brees will most likely do well against your pass D like he did against those other crappy pass D's (though the cold weather may effect him), so the question is whether the Bears can keep up and outscore them?
  3. The existence of a running game this year as opposed to last year's game might help the Saints a touch. Takes more pressure off Brees. Bush and Deuce didn't play in the game last year. I've been so pleased with what Pierre Thomas has done this year. He's averaging 4.9 ypc in 94 attempts this season. Bears will still win.
  4. I'd poop my pants here at work if that happened.
  5. I believe you just have to have played in 10 seasons, be retired for 5 years, and be nominated by a screening committee. I don't even think there's a committee. Everybody who qualifies (10-year career, retired for 5 years) is added to the ballot the year they become eligible. To stay on the ballot beyond the first year the player needs to get some specified percentage of votes (5% sticks in my mind). Yes, definitely no screening committee. You think anyone would actually put Jeff Reboulet on a Hall of Fame ballot?
  6. I guess this is the place for all College Football talk now....so this is pretty bizarre. Top RB in state of Mississippi shot himself to death with a shotgun after being pulled over by a cop. http://www.gulflive.com/news/mississippipress/news.ssf?/base/news/12288213118390.xml&coll=5&thispage=1
  7. In actual practice, of course they are, but in the context of the Hall of Fame, nobody has ever been elected because of their rate stats. For batters, voters have always looked at hits, home runs, rbi, runs, stolen bases and those type things. I'm not endorsing that method totally, but that's just the way it always has been. Given the entire history of the Hall of Fame and their criteria, Dawson is clearly AT LEAST a borderline candidate.
  8. so you're completely tossing his counting stats in favor of a rate stat? This is what I was saying earlier. Some people have longevity and stay around long enough to be high up on the counting stats. Some think that makes the person a HoFer some don't. Exactly, and if someone looks at Dawson in a favorable or negative light regarding the Hall, that's OK with me. But saying he's NOT EVEN borderline is just false. When you are practically the only person in the history of baseball with certain uber-stats like HR and Hits that isn't in the HOF, you are damn sure a borderline candidate.
  9. I'll add a Saints fans stamp of approval onto this post. Saints are pretty much fried toast in games in those elements. Only consolation is that Reggie looks to be back from the DL playing very well and Pierre Thomas has never played as good as he has recently. Bears win.
  10. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Hall-of-Fame-elects-to-keep-choosing-the-dead-ov;_ylt=Al9TIYl.VhjSxxEVS1Vo3To5nYcB?urn=mlb,127567 grrr
  11. Albert Belle is the Dick Allen of our generation. A complete beast of a player but disliked by virtually everyone.
  12. Oh please, I'd have been much more understanding of your sentiment if you hadn't said something like that. 440 HR and 2800 hits on their own has traditionally gotten people into the HOF, much less combined. Every single eligible person with more hits than him is in the HOF (other than Harold Baines, who rightfully doesn't get many votes on account of him basically being a career DH). Only two players, McGwire and Kingman, have more HR's than Dawson and aren't in the HOF. So, every player in baseball history having just one of those numbers has virtually always got in the HOF. Dawson has BOTH. I have zero problem with people not thinking Dawson is a HOFer. I completely understand why someone wouldn't want him in, but to say he's not even borderline is completely laughable given the history of the HOF and their normal criteria.
  13. Exactly. Aside from his career stats, you'd think the fact that he was playing with a handicap would mean something, at least in a PR sense to the HOF. Obviously, I wouldn't want him in based on the fact that he was disabled because his stats clearly justify his entrance on their own. However, at this point, I'd take him getting in no matter what the circumstances. Hmmm, maybe that is how pressure could be placed on the appropriate sources. If someone got a special interest group for disabled persons involved.
  14. Concerning the slap in the face, I think it depends on what group of voters is around at the time. If it is this same group, then yes. If it is David Wright and Geovany Soto, then no.
  15. 5th or 6th greatest all-time at their position shouldn't be teetering on the border.
  16. He'll be dead. Ron will get in 40 years from now when they have a 12 person pre-1972 committee
  17. Well to be fair, Ty Cobb was a much much better ballplayer in his era than Ron Santo. Santo gets screwed because he is deemed as a borderline HOF player with a bad attitude during his playing days, although I personally think Ron is a clear HOF, not a borderline one. Also to be fair to Cobb, he was voted in during an era in which racism was practically endorsed by MLB. and going into the stands to beat up hecklers wasn't too damaging to a players reputation, seeing as how Babe Ruth did the same thing...twice.
  18. Morgan said that everyone feels like someone should be in the HOF, but they can't agree on who. I think they said something like each veteran voted for an average of 3.3 people, but no one came out with the requisite 75%. I think what they should do is instead of voting separately, they should all meet, and discuss the merits 1 by 1 of each player, and then vote for someone. I mean its a committee, and theres only 10 players on the ballot to discuss, it shouldn't be that hard. I believe that's what they used to do, and it led to some horrible choices. The system has shifted from cronyism to elitism.
  19. Dick Allen was the Albert Belle of his day. 40 years later it is clear that his fellows still hold animosity toward him. 156 OPS+ over 15 years and you get 7 votes...
  20. I wonder if Joe was lying when he said this: Some other HOFers:
  21. "which hat will Joe Gordon wear, a Yankees or an Indians one?" Why even ask that question? It's obvious what the freaking answer will be.
  22. Gordon was an OK choice. No way he would have gotten in if he had played for the Pirates.
  23. screw them: http://s255.photobucket.com/albums/hh153/OleMissCub17/santohof1.gif
×
×
  • Create New...