USSoccer
-
Posts
17,655 -
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 USSoccer
-
Seriously, I'd love for one of these 2 to come here and try and debate this. There's just a mountain of contradictory evidence.
-
Is that true? I've seen recent columns from Mr. Miles and from the Sun Times guys stating their opinions that Hendry should let Pierre walk because he's not worth a 3 year - $27M deal. Bruce is the exception. Also, lets talk about Greg Maddux. He had a terrible May, June AND July. Where's Rozner's column about how Maddux quit on the team, or should hang it up, or wasn't worth $9m/yr? He's a hypocrite with an axe to grind. He defends "his" guys and rips the ones who are not.
-
Ancillary thought: I think he's questioning whether or not it makes sense to pay a guy $16M a year for 5 years if he can't put up numbers in April and May? Just my $0.02: I really like the thought of Aramis being a Cub. I really don't like the idea of paying him $80M over 5 years. By that logic, it was stupid to give Lee the money they gave him. He only produced in April and May for one season. Aramis produced in April and May of 2004, so both are equally subject to that critique.
-
Figgins is also Pierre with about twice as many walks, and a few more runs scored. And a bit more power. I'd take Figgins over Pierre any day. He's a better player, with more versatility. Only problem is we need more run production from our outfield. He's not worth the player cost. We don't have much in the way of tradeable assets to work with; I'd rather save what we have for a better player.
-
Harping on Aramis or harping on the nonsense? Sorry, that was worded poorly. They were harping on Aramis. Saying he's not worth the money he's asking for the amount of effort he puts forth...etc. Though they acknowledged that Steve Stone had been on and said that if you let A-Ram go and you sign Soriano, then you're really not any better off than you were. Jeez. Scratch those 2 radio hosts as defenders, then. I could have sworn I heard them defending Aramis the other day. That's a bummer. I would have hoped those guys would see past the nonsense. Also, how on earth are people forgetting that Soriano is the same guy that threatened to sit out if he was made to play LF?
-
Yeah, but it's totally unfounded. Has he ever been a clubhouse problem? Called out a teammate? Thrown one under the bus? As far as I can see, he just goes about his business. If Rozner wants to hold a grudge because Aramis isn't a good interview or doesn't "play ball" with Barry, whatever, but that shouldn't cloud his impression of Aramis the baseball player.
-
Harping on Aramis or harping on the nonsense?
-
I suppose the notion of Hendry asking beat guys or contacts in the media to plant stories in order to gauge public opinion is a little tinfoil hat-ish, but it seems very odd that nearly every beat writer and columnist in the city, and all but 2 radio hosts keep beating the "ARam sucks and we hate him" drum at the same time, generally using the same talking points. Much of it, I'm sure, is lazy journalism, but it seems amiss to me. There hasn't been this much concentrated vitriol in the media towards a player since Sosa was run out of town.
-
The following is totally warranted: :roll: This whole thing wreaks of smear job. It's like they unleashed a horde of critical articles to gauge public opinion.
-
Both. If you let one walk, and don't get the other, you're hosed.
-
I e-mailed Couch the link and here's his reply. I guess he's oblivious to the fact that his article was utter crap. Maybe someone should email him the game logs that show most of ARam's homeruns were far from meaningless. What's his email, BTW? We've actually been exchanging e-mails back and forth about Ramirez and the Cubs in generally. I have to say his e-mails are much better than the original article. His e-mail is gcouch@suntimes.com Does he have any better basis for his stance that he wrote?
-
I e-mailed Couch the link and here's his reply. I guess he's oblivious to the fact that his article was utter crap. Maybe someone should email him the game logs that show most of ARam's homeruns were far from meaningless. What's his email, BTW?
-
Protection isn't usually ever a factor. As far as having a metric to measure it's effect? My memory is that metrics tend to show that it doesn't matter how you construct a lineup in terms of the batting order and its productivity. Could be wrong, though. I've heard that, but that might be one metric I'd take issue with. Surely it's better to have high OBP guys 1-2 than it is to have them 6-7. I think it's more of a case of protection not making a difference for a player's individual production (AVG/OBP/SLG). Who bats in front of you will most defintiely affect your RBI, while who bats behind will affect your R. That makes much more sense.
-
Protection isn't usually ever a factor. As far as having a metric to measure it's effect? My memory is that metrics tend to show that it doesn't matter how you construct a lineup in terms of the batting order and its productivity. Could be wrong, though. I've heard that, but that might be one metric I'd take issue with. Surely it's better to have high OBP guys 1-2 than it is to have them 6-7.
-
Protection isn't usually ever a factor. As far as having a metric to measure it's effect?
-
Remember how Aramis got hurt in 2005? It was hustling down the line to break up a double play. In the first inning. He got ripped for being injury prone.
-
Which then makes 1/3 of his home runs meaningless. To then calculate his salary for next year, deduct 1/3 of the 15m he's commanding. :cheers: Wouldn't Aramis have had more of an impact on the overall offensive production if he didn't have 4-3 and Neifi Perez hitting in front of him most of the year? I don't think there's any doubt. Also factor in the fact that he had no protection in the lineup either, and the fact he was able to get anything good to hit is amazing.
-
Someone needs to cut and paste that article and email it to Greg Couch. Also, somebody gamelogged all of Aramis' HR"s this season in a game thread, and like 2/3 of them gave the Cubs the lead, tied the game, or brought the Cubs within one. But yeah, totally all meaningless.
-
Maybe Hendry convinvced him to take less in order to build a better offense around Aramis and Lee.
-
That's what Hendry is offering, or that's what Ramirez is asking for? Either way, that's more than fair for both sides. They said that he is close to resigning, and that the deal would likely be 5 at an average of $14m. Which, if true, is really good news, financially and from a roster standpoint.
-
Because they can't afford to employ good baseball players? Why use logic and reason to form your opinions when you can latch on to idiotic conventional wisdom? Seriously, a good majority of sports fans in Chicago have shockingly little critical thinking ability.
-
Okay, per the SCORE update, their sources say 5 years, average of $14m per year. If true, that's a pretty fair contract. And of course, there are people talking about how ARam isn't clutch, how he's a loafer, and how Pittsburgh "got rid of him for a reason". :pukel:
-
I try never to listen to the Score between 12 and 2. It's like open mic night at the idiots club. I also get a kick out of people that clamor for Soriano but think Aramis is lazy. Really it's anytime before 2:00. Most of the stuff after that is listenable. Although I'm not a big fan of Buffone or O'Bradovich when they're on. But yeah, Mike Murphy really does have a lot of terrible callers. It's because Murphy is a terrible host, with terrible producers and has flawed knowledge of sports and consistently uses faulty logic to make his nasally points.
-
It is an overblown myth. QFT. It's a product of radio beat reporters with a grudge, repeating a mantra over and over until it becomes publically accepted.