Jump to content
North Side Baseball

USSoccer

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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. USSoccer
    I wouldn't even think about that trade. But Giles is better than Walker. He's faster. Better defensively. Walker has better power and patience. I'd say it's a push. Walker has better power and patience? IsoP: Walker: .169 (2005) .151 (career) Giles: .170 (2005) .173 (career) IsoD: Walker: 0.050 (2005) 0.058 (career) Giles: 0.074 (2005) 0.074 (career) I don't think so. Okay, I'll admit-I'm at work, and didn't loko up the numbers, so I got owned :D . But still. I wouldn't trade Ramirez for the sake of Giles.
  2. USSoccer
    I think the durability concerns are a little overblown. It would take 1 offseason of a decent conditioning/stretching program to prevent these pulls. It's not like he's Griffey, with demolished legs.
  3. USSoccer
    I wouldn't even think about that trade. But Giles is better than Walker. He's faster. Better defensively. Walker has better power and patience. I'd say it's a push.
  4. USSoccer
    Why on earth are people using Aramis as a trading chip? And for Chipper Jones and Marcus Giles?? Aramis will outproduce Jones in every phase of the game in 2006, plus he is much cheaper. It's laughable how much better Aramis is than Jones. And if you think Aramis gets banged up, wait til you pay Jones $17m to be on the DL with back spasms, or elbow issues. Marcus Giles isn't any betetr than Todd Walker. That's a bad idea right there. Aramis should not be a trading chip. He should be a building block, and someone you only trade for a top 10 player. Trading him for those 2 is, as best, a lateral move, and doesn't make your team any better.
  5. USSoccer
    Plus the related concern of durability, as well. I think you'll see that improve this offseason. Does he have a personal trainer? He's training with Bonds this off season. :wink: I'd love to hear that Ramirez is going to improve his conditioning which imo would help his durability. I believe Mark O'Neal has been quoted as saying that someone will be working with both Z and ARam this winter, on diet, stretching and conditioning.
  6. USSoccer
    Exactly. If I invest $10m over multiple years in a player I want Top 3 production from his position in the league, for the length of the contract. Damon won't deliver that. Give me a list of ten players who have in the last 10 years produced in the top 3 for his position every single year of the contract and had a top 5 salary for the position. Good luck. Alex Rodriguez, Barry Bonds, Albert Pujols and Manny Ramirez come immediatly to mind. Of course, those deals are still in progress, but you'd be hard pressed to see a signifigant decline from any of those guys. That's just 4 off the top of my head. Also, your response basically confirmed what I am trying to say: big money players rarely are worth their salaries for the length of the contract, so you have to be careful who you shell out 8 figures to. Damon is a nice player, but not worth his asking price, and certainly not at the cost of blocking Pie.
  7. USSoccer
    Plus the related concern of durability, as well. I think you'll see that improve this offseason.
  8. USSoccer
    He would have been up in July because he was the best batter to call up. We still wouldn't have seen Greenberg in the bigs if it weren't for Pie's injury. After all how is Pie ever going to become a decent major leaguer if he never plays in the bigs?? He's only 19 or 20 ( i forget), and still has plate discipline issues. He is a raw talent, who relies on physical ability more than baseball skill. He needs, IMO, 1 more full, uninterrupted season in either AA or AAA before being called up in September, and being a 25 man roster guy in 2007.
  9. USSoccer
    Pretty much. I haven't seen anyone go higher that $52m or lower than $32m, but most posts have been in the 44-42 range. Structure woould be more important than overall value, though, since a creatively constructed contract can make or break a signing.
  10. USSoccer
    Tim, If you give me until Saturday I'd be happy to give $50. It's a small, small price to pay for this site.
  11. USSoccer
    Exactly. If I invest $10m over multiple years in a player I want Top 3 production from his position in the league, for the length of the contract. Damon won't deliver that.
  12. USSoccer
    You know what? Paging Bruce Miles. Bruce! Are you or any of the other beat guys sick of Aramis Ramirez? Are the Cubs sick of him?
  13. USSoccer
    Be specific about which idiot on the score is talking. Most are useless, self serving fools that have no knowledge at all. So, which idiot are you referring to? The only guys on the score that have been critical of ARam have been Boers and Bernstein, who rip on his "lack of hustle", or his "Dominican Bat Flip". Personally, I'm sick of the Chicago media trying to find a scapegoat out of nothing. Ramirez was far and away our second best player, and had he not been hurt would very possibly hit more HR's and RBI's than Lee. The Cubs won't be trading ARam because of "antics". He doesn't mouth off to the press, he doesn't argue on the field. There's no reason to deal him. If they do, they are absolute fools.
  14. USSoccer
    I remember when the playoff blackout was imposed as if it were yesterday. I always thought the turning point of game 5 was when ARam turned just a hair too early on a Beckett fastball with the score still 0-0. I thought if we could get a lead in that game before the blackout we'd have won.
  15. USSoccer
    I think that was game 4, which we lost anyway. We actually won Game 4, and I think that was the Lofton catch game because didn't Ramirez hit the grand slam a short time later? Ramirez hit his Grand Slam in like the second inning of an earlier game I thought. I'm positive the Grand Slam was in Florida, and I think that Lofton's catch was back in Chicago. You guys are thinking of game 4 of the NLCS, not the NLDS. Lofton's trap catch was in Chicago against Atlanta, and it was in game 4. ARam's grand slam was in the 1st inning of Game 4 of the NLCS off of Willis.
  16. USSoccer
    I think that was game 4, which we lost anyway.
  17. USSoccer
    Goony, thanks for the article. That is a massive drop in profits. How much do you think that the Cubs are worth on the open market?
  18. USSoccer
    About the only thing I'll say to that is that Paul should have tagged him to be sure. Other than that, the whole play was bull.
  19. USSoccer
    Livid, but under control. I really like Scioscia. will there be an official protest to the league? Protests of the play in question are not allowed: This wasn't a judgement call, though. He called him out, then inexplicably allowed him to stay at 1B.
  20. USSoccer
    Livid, but under control. I really like Scioscia. will there be an official protest to the league?
  21. USSoccer
    I'd just go 12/12/12/12. i dunno..spreading it out helps ease the blow of a rapid decline.
  22. USSoccer
    4 years, $48 million. Bonuses for winning MVP, batting title and ASG appearance. Structured 14/16/10/8. $6m buyout at the end of the 3rd season and $6m buyout at the end of the 4th.
  23. USSoccer
    According to AJ he didn't hear a verbal call from the ump that he was out, this is why he quit walking towards the dugout and ran to first. As a catcher if the ump doesn't call the runner out verbally do you really just throw the ball back to the mound and walk to the dugout? I think this is a non-issue, there was no verbal out call, AJ ran to first and the Josh Paul should have tagged the batter. That's a good point, however, the umpire ruled him out twice. Once at the swing and once after the play. Well maybe, I've seen many umpires make a fist for strike 1 and 2... is the batter out then? It's technically no-contact and a strike but the batter is not out. A fist just means a strike, and that's exactly what it was. It goes down as a K. But he did not indicate that the ball had not been caught, which he has to do.
  24. USSoccer
    According to AJ he didn't hear a verbal call from the ump that he was out, this is why he quit walking towards the dugout and ran to first. As a catcher if the ump doesn't call the runner out verbally do you really just throw the ball back to the mound and walk to the dugout? I think this is a non-issue, there was no verbal out call, AJ ran to first and the Josh Paul should have tagged the batter. That's a good point, however, the umpire ruled him out twice. Once at the swing and once after the play.
  25. USSoccer
    Although I highly doubt MLB would do it, I was thinking the same thing. No, there is precedent, and the Angels GM and President should be on the phone with the leage raising holy hell right now. I cannot even immagine the words I'd be using if i was the GM/President of that team. Wow. I'd be citing the Pine Tar game that was replayed after the fact, the fact that the umpire called him out cleanly at the swing, without signalling the ball hit the dirt, and the fact that no replay shows the ball hitting the dirt. I'd file an official protest, as well.
×
×
  • Create New...