Tracer Bullet

Did we really need the whole CV?

21 going on 32. Kid has LeBron disease (not that it's a bad thing to have).

That sounds about right to me. Being the 87th, 90th, 80th or 62nd best starting pitcher is right exactly where I was placing him: A solid No. 3 starter. Using "qualified" usually undersells a player (and yes, I did it too with LFers earlier) because the bad players don't play enough to be qualified. I think a lot of the talk about whether a guy is a 3, 4 or 5 is a bunch of nonsense, but I'll comment anyway because I'm drawn to nonsense. Maybe that qualifies a guy to being labeled an average pitcher on an average team, but better pitching staffs are going to have better guys as their 3rd best. I wouldn't call such a player a player a "solid #3", he's a #3 if you are comfortable with a pitching staff that probably isn't good enough to be playoff caliber. If you are thinking about being a good team, you don't want such a guy as your 3rd best starter unless you have the best offense around, and even then you're probably spending half the season looking at finding a better pitcher to slot ahead of him. Also, it's not just bad performers that aren't qualifying, it's good guys who deal with injury, or good call-ups. Exactly my point about Wood and Sappelt. On a poor team they are a #3 starter and a starting OF. On a decent team, Sappelt is a 4th OF and Wood might be a #3 starter. On a good team, Sappelt is a 4th OF and Wood is a #4 starter. I realize we're punting 2012, but some of you need to be reminded that we're a large market team. No one needs you to remind us of that several times.

What is this based on?

Please don't put your website link in the content of your posts. Thanks.

I was watching Clubhouse Confidential the other day, and the guy they had on from BP was saying they were backing off their support of Trammel. Said something about their new defensive evaluations/metrics suggesting that they had been overrating his defensive ability/contributions. I don't care. Trammell was my favorite non-cub growing up. I am skeptical of current defensive metrics. Defensive metrics for players 15-30 years ago are almost meaningless to me.

No SS should be in until Trammel is in.

He's had 1 crappy season in the past 4, so he should be one of those guys that gives you decent performance when he does pitch. Not sure what prevented him from racking up the IP, but he has made 30+ starts in 4 of 6 seasons. He does seem like a guy who can be useful on a team that actually scores some runs. exactly. if the cubs were going for it this year i'd be behind the deal. but for a rebuilding team, i don't think an above average veteran starter is a hole we need to worry about. Such a player can be a useful trade chip in July for those teams that actually do score runs and are going for it. Yeah, if we're just going to have piles of money sitting around, I'd rather sign a couple guys like this that might have value at the deadline.

Theo understood Red Sox sentiment because he was a fan of the Red Sox. But you just said he was all business no sentiment and since his only gig was with the Sox, that must have been what you were alluding to. This act of yours has grown tired.

What are you expecting? Theo didn't walk into the 2004 clubhouse.

I guess; but if there's nothing to it then why would the story going public effectively force them to say they want to question him? Why couldn't they say something like "we've investigated the matter and it's closed" or something along those lines? It could be (and I'm stressing could be here) a matter of trying to make it look like they take all accusations of sexual assault seriously and after it finally did leak they felt they could just say "it's closed" even if they don't see it going anywhere. Yeah I think it's more important to the CPD not to say case closed (from a public perception standpoint) unless this story gets legs. If this is all that ever comes from it bc there was no crime, than that's the best result for everyone. Saying 'case closed' may sound like the CPD is just protecting a high profile athlete and create a story where one didn't exist.

That's not good. He just wants 4am coffee and donuts with Bobby Blue Eyes. Don't we all.

Sorry, I just post the first thing that pops into my head, but I'll try to be more careful about it in the future, and I really mean that, I mean, I really don't want to defy the mods and get in trouble, but I also want to be able to participate actively, so I'll do my best and, hey, you please keep me in line, I don't want to be a hassle, and if I have to change things, I am willing to do that, but I am always going to stay myself, so don't expect me to change too much, but I am sure we can work something out, if we all want to. I will punch you in the face before I read this.

Well, no, I specifically chose to say that he "skipped town and the country" to make it sound less like "the suspect has fled the country." Obviously that didn't work. To me "skipping town" sounds less serious. I didn't know he had come back; everything I had heard initially made it sound like he's been gone from the U.S. since shortly after this went down. I haven't really been following this since the news broke so that's my mistake. How long was he back for in November? Did the police know he was back? Did the Cubs advise him to speak to the police then? Seems odd that they wouldn't have tried to squash this then. Surely they didn't assume that they could keep this under wraps. (I don't respond in broken quotes) A - fair enough. B - he left the next day, so maybe before she reported it (which took 12 hours, per the link). And he was back long enough to meet Theo and do a card signing. He wasn't hiding out, that's for sure. If the police wanted to talk to him then, and the Cubs knew, I'd be shocked if Theo wouldn't have made it a point to deal with it in November. More probably, the CPD bungled this or there wasn't enough credible evidence in her story to pursue it, so they only told the media they wanted to question him after it became public. Maybe there are other likely scenarios, but those 2 seem most probable.

5 responses is probably more than enough. Ok?

He intimated that he was too drunk to drive not that he was actually driving drunk. She may very well be a gold digger. I certainly hope so i suppose you can read it that way, yes. soul is still a monster for saying this woman is a golddigger and that she shouldn't have gotten so drunk though. disgusting. I totally agree that it was a disgusting post. Question: is 'might be a gold digger' ok? I'd say no.

That seems obvious, I'm not sure what there is for him to prove. Fine, if you want to start yet another semantics argument, it's what he has to disprove. He has to tell his side of the story and so far he's chosen not to to the proper authorities and has skipped both town and the country. Skipped town and the country? Was he aware of the allegations when he left in September? Has he been charged with something? He came back and people knew he was back but the police didn't question him then. I agree with what I think is your point: Castro needs to respond to any police questioning and, if truthful, provide his side of the story to exonerate himself. But your post suggests he's a fugitive or something. I never said he was a fugitive; I specifically said that he's a person of interest in an ongoing investigation. That's obviously very different than being charged as a suspect and making him a fugitive. My point should be obvious; Soul decided to declare this woman a gold-digger (and then use the Mel Gibson cop-out) seemingly based on nothing except for the fact this situation even exists when you can call Castro plenty of things based on his actions/inaction as well. As I think I made clear, it was your choice of words (flee the country) that makes it sound like you think he's a fugitive or at least something more than just a guy. The police said to the media that they want to question him. I'd be interested to know when that was conveyed to Castro and how urgently he was expected. They know he'll be back in the states for spring training. It's been 4 months. Did the police let him come to the US and leave again in November bc this wasn't a news item yet?

Worse than gold digger? It goes (worst to 'least worst') drunk driving, gold digger, drunk girl comment.

That seems obvious, I'm not sure what there is for him to prove. Fine, if you want to start yet another semantics argument, it's what he has to disprove. He has to tell his side of the story and so far he's chosen not to to the proper authorities and has skipped both town and the country. Skipped town and the country? Was he aware of the allegations when he left in September? Has he been charged with something? He came back and people knew he was back but the police didn't question him then. I agree with what I think is your point: Castro needs to respond to any police questioning and, if truthful, provide his side of the story to exonerate himself. But your post suggests he's a fugitive or something.

Hahah, you're a funny guy! Wait, there's nothing for Castro to prove. Oh, joke fail. Please tell me your post was a horrible attempt at sarcasm. Gold-digger?

Amir Carlisle leaving USC for ND. Rumor that Armstead may be to follow.

Knock it off, but I can be told to get AIDS... sure! I quoted both of you b/c I asked both of you to knock it off. I'm not sure the "his comment was worse" defense is really an option to you in this one.

God, you're a [expletive] douche. Why call names? I wasn't even talking to you. Because a guy says he hates Manhattan because we always get destroyed there, and you go on a rant about how our OOC wasn't difficult, which we know. We weren't expecting to walk into Manhattan and destroy you guys at all. Get AIDS. Go f yourself buddy. He said he hates Manhattan, and I said you haven't played anyone yet so what do you expect when you play a real team? What's wrong with that? God I can't wait til all you meth heads are in the SEC. knock it off

this cannot possibly be true, unless you're considering their prime to be like 8 years long. I wish I could remember who posted it. But I thought hitters primes were shown to be closer to 23-27. No one else remembers this within the last month or 2?

The age difference between Cashner and Rizzo is less important to me in evaluating the trade. 25 isn't old for pitchers.** And it seems much more common for pitchers to turn into solid-to-better players in their late 20s and well into their 30s. So Rizzo being 3 years younger than Cashner isn't really apples to apples. Of course, Rizzo's age is important. The bigger factors are Cashner's health and he's not a SP yet. By the time he's pitching 200+ innings, he'll be 27-28. If he's a top of the rotation pitcher in 3 years, he'll already be in his arby years. **I don't remember who posted the evidence of hitters entering their prime around 22/23, but was there a corresponding post re pitchers?