Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Exile on Waveland

Verified Member
  • Posts

    6,468
  • 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

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Exile on Waveland

  1. http://yfrog.com/nnkq4z
  2. I have no idea what Eddie was looking at, the puck was past them when he did that. Higgins knew exactly where he was and was trying to knock Chara out of the game. Exactly. I have to say, I haven't agreed Eddie several times in this series. It almost seems like he's being contrarian just for the hell of it a lot of the time. Didn't think there were going to be any penalty calls. This is just about as close to a must-score PP as you'll ever see. I coudn't believe he said that was "innocent" when Higgins jumped up and elbowed Chara in the head. Also, he then claimed Bergeron "punched" the puck? I didn't see anything remotely close to that.
  3. Nah, don't think that was his fault. Though hopefully he thinks it was.
  4. Goal! Man . . . please be another meltdown in the offing . . .
  5. Oh, excellent.
  6. The sox screwed themselves by building a plain, boring park at a time right before the newer-styled parks were introduced Like Camden Yard and Turner Field. I actually like the Cell just for the stuff they have for kids. The restaurant in RF is nice too. Turner Field? Really? It's easily one of the worst "new" stadiums in MLB. Isn't it just some [expletive] they cobbled together out the Olympic leftovers? Yup. It's ostensibly a newer, nicer cookie-cutter. I haven't been to every single new stadium -- though nearly all of them -- but it's almost certainly my least favorite post-Camden stadium. In fact, outside of the absolute crap (Florida, Tampa Bay, Oakland)* I'm not sure it's better than any stadium currently in existence. *I can't include Toronto, because, the only time I was there, the retractable roof was amazingly state-of-the-art.
  7. The sox screwed themselves by building a plain, boring park at a time right before the newer-styled parks were introduced Like Camden Yard and Turner Field. I actually like the Cell just for the stuff they have for kids. The restaurant in RF is nice too. Turner Field? Really? It's easily one of the worst "new" stadiums in MLB.
  8. I love Wrigley and would hate to see the Cubs move, but you'd have to be a completely ignorant moron not to realize it doesn't need some renovation. Somehow I think the owner of the Cubs might have a decent understanding of this.
  9. Hahahah, Coletti . . . like hiring him away from the Dodgers would be some kind of coup. Yeesh.
  10. I'd like to have Fukudome back. He has some attributes (OBP, good fielder, left-handed) that the Cubs don't have in abundance. Obviously that depends on his contract, but I doubt he gets much of a deal elsewhere.
  11. Well, he does have one elite skill (OBP) that should/could be very desirable. Regardless, I didn't mean to imply -- and it's pretty clear now that my overly strong first sentence did so -- that his contract was of no concern at all. It's an issue, but I don't see it as completely prohibitive at all. It does seem that some believe Fukudome to be near untradable because of his contract (which, despite being bad, is mostly in the past). I think Fukudome will be imminently moveable -- the Cubs may have to absorb some salary, but that's rather common in such trades.
  12. I'm not sure that the cost of Fukudome's contract is terribly relevant for trades (other than, of course, the no trade clause). His contract expires at the end of the season. There's no player option for next year. Any trade would be at/near the deadline, meaning the Cubs will have already payed the bulk of his $13.5 million salary this year. Basically every team in a playoff push is willing to absorb some salary, and the majority are typically large market/high payroll teams. The contract may be a point of discussion in the trade, but I don't believe it's prohibitive to a trade at all.
  13. What does "attendance" mean? Is it tickets sold or actual fans in the seat? Because if it's the latter, then Winnipeg offers substantial revenue increases (where the 15,000 people "in attendance" will actually be there buying food, beer, parking, etc.).
  14. Even if they were, that doesn't inherently comprise "serious trouble" anyway. But he said they would only be in serious trouble if they keep making stupid mistakes. They have been making stupid mistakes and do continue to make them, there is no sign that the mistakes will end in the short term. There really is no assumption to make other than the same mistakes will continue until the front office is overhauled. I agree that there is no reason to assume the stupid mistakes will end. If management isn't overhauled, the stupid mistakes will likely continue. I'm just not sure I agree that the stupid mistakes spell "serious trouble" for the franchise. To echo SSR, at some point management will be overhauled if the team continues to struggle (maybe not as soon as you or I would prefer, but it will happen). The exact second that happens, and/or the exact second the team improves, fan interest will once again be through the roof. As a franchise the Cubs have so many inherent advantages that a few bad seasons will never comprise "serious trouble" without some deeper issue, something to the point of drastic Met-like problems.
  15. They've kept making stupid mistakes for a long time now. And yet the franchise isn't in serious trouble. They are in worse shape than they were a decade ago. No, they absolutely are not. I don't even know how one argues that. Even if they were, that doesn't inherently comprise "serious trouble" anyway.
  16. Yeah, because this is EXACTLY what everyone is saying. For someone who accuses people of not comprehending things on a routine basis, I think you better look in the mirror. The point here is that LeMahieu has more longterm potential than Barney. And it's not a knock on Barney either, who holds value to us as a cheap guy for a few years as a utility player. Not every youngster you have has to become A-Rod in order for him to have value to your club. Relax. All I'm saying is that in a thread a week ago discussing the Cubs' good young players, Barney was mentioned by several folks. Now this thread has several folks (albeit, not the same folks) pushing for him to be bypassed in favor of a guy that's literally 100% unproven at the ML level -- 1 AB. It's just amusing, is all. The truth is, both guys are probably in the replacement level / utility IF tier. Wait, so some people have differing opinions on a player? STOP THE PRESSES!! THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF NSBB!! I disagree.
  17. Exactly. Skinny jeans and Atlanta Flames retro t-shirts would have been a winning combo, but, alas, it was not to be.
  18. They shouldn't. And, I'm sure, they soon won't -- the Coyotes will be in Quebec City or Hamilton or wherever. Hopefully that doesn't end the south-to-north exodus, either.
  19. Me too. I'm anti hockey in the sun belt/south (with a few exceptions, perhaps), so it's good to see Winnipeg get a team back. I still cannot fathom why the NHL thought Atlanta (despite a large population), of all places, was a good idea: 1. It's a warm-weather city, and such cities have an iffy at best record supporting hockey. 2. It's an awful sports town that barely supports professional football, basketball, and baseball. 3. Apologies for stereotyping here, but it has a majority African-American population (not exactly reknown for hockey fandom). 4. The NHL had tried, and failed, in Atlanta before (see, Flames). (I do profess ignorance as to why the Flames left, but I'm guessing "lack of support.")
  20. Swansea City beats Reading 4-2, becoming first ever non-English side in the Premiership.
  21. I all of a sudden have Versus! Excellent.
  22. most 22 year olds with nba talent are definitely not trying to lead their team to the final four. That's not what he said. Well, if we're getting all technical, he said "most kids" and "most kids" are most certainly not trying to lead their team to the Final Four -- they're trying to ingest as much alcohol as possible and make as many notches on their bedpost as possible.
  23. really? This is how sulley copes. He got bold enough to make that "Golem of Akron" soliloquy a month or two ago and should've seen this coming. you have to admit that it was creative. i don't think i get enough credit for thinking up [expletive] like that. You certainly didn't that time. I was rolling with laughter at the Golem stuff. In fact, I kind of chuckle now just thinking about it.
  24. Additionally, here's a list of where Indiana Elite kids have gone to school: http://blogs.indystar.com/recruitingcentral/2011/05/26/indiana-elite-ties-to-college-programs/. Indiana obviously did very well in 2012, but, as mentioned, that's a bit misleading as both Patterson and Hollowell only joined IE after verballing to IU. It's also laughable that, say, the Zeller or Ferrell families were steered by anyone outside of their inner circle. (For further light, see http://blogs.indystar.com/recruitingcentral/2011/05/26/more-detailed-look-at-story-on-adams-a-hope-and-indiana/; one IU target/MSU recruit debunking ESPN's claim that Adams/IE "funnel" recruits to IU: http://blogs.indystar.com/recruitingcentral/2011/05/27/father-of-former-indiana-elite-player-said-adams-never-talked-about-iu/) Finally, the ESPN article has already been corrected, changing the false statement that IU has IE players lined up through 2014 to a vague statement that IU has IE players lined up for the future. If the writer can't even correctly identify common knowledge such as the AAU program of future commits, what makes anyone believe he can correctly identify anything?
×
×
  • Create New...