Jump to content
North Side Baseball

USSoccer

Old-Timey Member
  • 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

  1. I heard that from a source, too. It was called ESPN. You haven't been here very long, so here's some history: Hoops is a poster with connections to some people in baseball throughout the land, and actually broke one trade here at NSBB (Choi for Lee). His sources are usually very accurate. I'm sure you didn't mean any disrespect, but I thought I could let you know some background so that in the future you understand what Hoops means by "sources".
  2. Just wait until the Sox win. Then we'll see some odd articles....
  3. From what a source told me, the Marlins braintrust is very split on what they should do with Delgado. The Marlins have somewhat serious financial issues, and as much they love him, they can't afford to keep him for 3 years and $48M, and not do anything else to reduce the cash outlay. Thus they are forced into an either/or situation: deal Delgado or deal some combination of players that reduces the cash burden. Their priority is to dealing Lowell (2 years/$18M), and knowing that his poor performance in 2004 will cause some heartburn, they are dangling Castillo as incentive. Castillo has a very easy vesting option that automatically pays him $6M in 2007 - the Marlins are worried about that figure too. I am told option 3 is to take a recent Yankees pitch, which was Robinson Cano and Shawn Chacon for Juan Pierre, Castillo and Paul LoDuca. Yankees would then deal Jorge Posada to Baltimore or Anaheim or the Mets. Hoops If I'm the Marlins, I take the deal that involves the Cubs. Cano and Chacon? That's not an impressive haul. Plus, do you really see NY trading Posada? I thought he was one of their home grown guys, and a big clubhouse leader.
  4. first: What Podsednik effect? Second: that's one run generated that way. I'd wager that they scored a whole lot more runs off extra base hits against us. They just weren't as flashy. If by "Podsednik Effect" you mean our enitre pitching staff having career years at once, then yeah, i'd love some of that on our side of town. :P Well, we can have some influence on that by putting out a team with Furcal & Castillo on the IF and improved OF defense. yeah, but if it happens people will assume it was because we had speedy leadoff types manning the middle IF, and not because our staff era drops by a run per game. I don't care what others think. If the Cubs staff ERA drops by a run per game the Cubs will be in the playoffs and I'll be content with that. Oh, me too. I was just trying to make a wry observation. It doesn't across as well via text. :-)
  5. first: What Podsednik effect? Second: that's one run generated that way. I'd wager that they scored a whole lot more runs off extra base hits against us. They just weren't as flashy. If by "Podsednik Effect" you mean our enitre pitching staff having career years at once, then yeah, i'd love some of that on our side of town. :P Well, we can have some influence on that by putting out a team with Furcal & Castillo on the IF and improved OF defense. yeah, but if it happens people will assume it was because we had speedy leadoff types manning the middle IF, and not because our staff era drops by a run per game.
  6. first: What Podsednik effect? Second: that's one run generated that way. I'd wager that they scored a whole lot more runs off extra base hits against us. They just weren't as flashy. If by "Podsednik Effect" you mean our enitre pitching staff having career years at once, then yeah, i'd love some of that on our side of town. :P
  7. You want Rich Aurilia on the team so soon? oh man. don't ruin my morning.
  8. The Sox outscored the Cubs this year. But, more importantly, it's their type of small ball offense that scores runs against good pitchers. They may not post up 15 runs in a game, but they consistently score and make the game competative. Even though the Cubs have more power in their lineup, the Cubs post far too many goose eggs for a good team. The Sox offense was more consistent in giving the team an opportunity to win and did, in fact, outscore the Cubs this year. Those 38 extra runs are a lot of one run ballgames with their stellar pitching staff. The Sox did not play "small ball". They were 4th in the AL in Home Runs. The reason they won games is because eevry single pitcher on that staff had a career year. EVERY one. The small ball/ozzie ball/parole ball thing is a media creation. Nothing more. That team is as dependent on the HR as any other WS team of the past 4 years, they just happen to have traded a slugger for a leadoff guy. That really didn't change a thing.
  9. Not terribly relevant. IIRC, James' theory on closer by committee was misapplied in Boston. The theory is dependent on having specific types of arms, which Boston did not have. Right, and it just so happens that the other teams that tried it also didn't have the specific arms, like oh say a Closer? Whcih other teams have tried closer by committee? The only recent team I can think of that really has tried is the White Sox this year, sort of. The Braves of this season would almost qualify by having three players with at least 10 saves. Then again, that was mostly because of the natural shuffle that occurs from ineffectiveness/injury and not really a pre-planned situation. Still, I'd say the Braves did just fine without a consistent presence in the ninth inning. So then the jury probably is still out on the closer by committee issue, and the Red Sox experiment didn't doom it.
  10. I just simply don't want to hear every dingbat sox fan run his mouth for the next 10 years, or at the least until we win a world series. If you don't live in the area, you just don't understand how obnoxious it really is. Sox fans are loud, coarse, classless jerks. They care first and foremost about the Cubs doing badly. Just look at the way the White Sox structured thier marketing campaigns in the last 5 years. The organization is a joke as well. There are, at best, 3 players on that team that you can respect. The rest are absolute tools, led by an appropriate classless figure. I don't buy the "championship for a great sports town" thing. The Chicago White Sox and their fanbase are not the reason this is a great sports town. Loyalty, tradition, hard work-those are the qualaties that make Chicago a great sports town. The Sox couldn't even sell out their much improved stadium more than half a dozen times this year with a 1st place team. Their fans are generally a joke. Fans left after Jenks ' blown save last night. Who leaves a WS game early? Yet, these will be the same jerks that will enjoy rubbing our noses in their season if they win 2 of the next 5 games.
  11. Not terribly relevant. IIRC, James' theory on closer by committee was misapplied in Boston. The theory is dependent on having specific types of arms, which Boston did not have. Right, and it just so happens that the other teams that tried it also didn't have the specific arms, like oh say a Closer? Whcih other teams have tried closer by committee? The only recent team I can think of that really has tried is the White Sox this year, sort of.
  12. If they move Huff I want no part of him. He sucked last year, and has motivation/attitude isues.
  13. Sox fans are going to be insufferable for decades.
  14. Yeah, it's starting to look that way. They have the Midas touch.
  15. That's what I get for ripping Podsednik. Way to tempt fate there, self.
  16. HAHAHAHAHAHA!! THAT's why Scotty Pods is a crappy LF! Nice rag arm there!
  17. What happened? Konerko hit a 2 out grand slam.
  18. Well that sucks. Get ready for the longest offseason in Chicago ever (for Cubs fans). If Houston doesn't comeback in this one, they're done.
  19. That's a great article Rich. :P :axe:
  20. You're totally missing the point of his post... because there is no point, you can't compare a part time player to a guy that has put up good numbers on a consistent basis. But CPatt isn't comparing a part-time player to a player that has put up good numbers consistently (because Juan Pierre hasn't put up good numbers consistently). .355 career OBP doesn't meet your criteria of good numbers? #-o .355 is good. However, last year it was .326. The Cubs will probably go after a guy after a down season. They seem to like making deals for guys when their value is at its lowest. Sort of like their philosiphy on trading prospects.
  21. Here's the article: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2002553059_ston11.html
  22. Yeah, I've talked to many SD fans here about the possibility of the Cubs making a big offer for Giles, and they all make the same claim....They wouldn't miss him. What they seem to think in San Diego is that it is just some fluke that Giles, Klesko and Nevin lost power moving to Petco. It's not a fluke. Whatever power hitter they get is going to show a decrease in power, and it's not because of steroids. Well, if Giles is dumb enough to take such a huge paycut to stay and play in a park that will hurt his HOF chances, meanwhile playing for an owner that cares more about what's going on around the park (shopping centers, condos, hotels, etc...) than what is going on inside the park (besides the sold out games), so be it. Cliff Floyd, here we come. Or Juan Encarnacion.
  23. *Just for CPatt20, and since I believe it* I think Hairston could be the leadoff hitter we've been waiting for, if he could just stay healthy
×
×
  • Create New...