Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Sammy Sofa

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    98,227
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    208

 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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Sammy Sofa

  1. Nobody wants them to suck, however, if July rolls around and were like 7 games out and in 4th place, Id just as soon they know when to hold em, and know when to fold em, and by this, I mean rather than trying some desperate attempt to claw their way into contention by trading for some middling lefty for the bench that they trade any expiring contracts, like Fukuome, Pena, Grabow, and Aramis if they dont intend on picking up his option and get what they can. Still wouldn't prevent them from drafting all-stars if they didn't have a fire sale.
  2. I'm actually on gooney's side not being wowed by the Cubs at all in the last decade, but I love the arbitrary "if they didn't win 90 games they [expletive] sucked" argument. Because 90 is the almighty line to cross. Not 89 wins, which they did once, and not 88 wins, which they did twice, but 90. Anything, ANYTHING less is out the window. Personally, I'd point to the fact they only made the playoffs/won the division three times in the decade as a more glaring accurate example of how poorly the team was run despite its resources than just randomly deciding that if the team didn't win 90 games then the season wasn't a good one.
  3. Yes, it's so sad that the Cubs haven't been perpetual cellar-dwellers a la the Royals or the Pirates to stockpile a bunch of high draft picks. That would have so much better, watching them struggle to not lose 100 games each season. FFS, this isn't basketball or football. I can't believe there are regular posters here who seem to honestly think that not having a lot of top 10 picks IN MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL is a serious detriment to not being able to develop all-star players.
  4. He's an interesting choice. Obviously, you've got the whole Beane connection, and his short career with the Dodgers is difficult to evaluate since he was fired by someone like McCourt and replaced by Ned [expletive] Colletti. And ironically a name I threw out in my post. Not that I can say DePodesta would be good. I just don't think he was given a fair shot. And I'm not sure the Cubs should be the team to give him that shot. Why not? N&G, not a rip on you, just asking for some clarification: You say you want a GM with experience, and you don't want the Cubs to hire a guy who has never held the job before. However DePodesta only had the job for like 6 months. Is that really a long enough time for you to feel confident in his abilities? No, I said this: And personally I think the Cubs are more likely to find a good GM through the latter than the former since the former are usually locked up with another team already. I don't have a problem with the Cubs hiring someone who hasn't been a GM before so long as they've got decent MLB experience in a good front office.
  5. All true. He might be awesome at it. Not sure if you saw an edit from an above post, but wikipedia states that DePo is now VP of player development and scouting with the Mets now. Yeah, I saw. I figured he was still working in baseball somewhere. If he wasn't that would be a pretty big warning flag.
  6. He doesn't have much of a GM history. I'd be willing to give him a shot just because of his past with Beane. I mean, how many good AND experienced GM's are out there to be hired? Odds are the Cubs are going to have to take a chance on someone relatively new or inexperienced in the GM role if they want to have a real shot at avoiding the usual retreads.
  7. He's an interesting choice. Obviously, you've got the whole Beane connection, and his short career with the Dodgers is difficult to evaluate since he was fired by someone like McCourt and replaced by Ned [expletive] Colletti. And ironically a name I threw out in my post. Not that I can say DePodesta would be good. I just don't think he was given a fair shot. And I'm not sure the Cubs should be the team to give him that shot. Why not? I don't know all the details as to why he was let go so quickly. Maybe someone with a much smarter baseball mind in the Dodgers organization could see immediately that he was not the man for the job. Why has no one else given him a job? These are questions I don't know the answers to. True, but again, look at who McCourt is and look at who they hired to replace DePodesta. That seems to argue pretty strongly in favor of them not knowing WTF they're doing. Plus meatball sports journalists/analysts haaaaaaaaated him, so that has to count for something.
  8. He's an interesting choice. Obviously, you've got the whole Beane connection, and his short career with the Dodgers is difficult to evaluate since he was fired by someone like McCourt and replaced by Ned [expletive] Colletti. And ironically a name I threw out in my post. Not that I can say DePodesta would be good. I just don't think he was given a fair shot. And I'm not sure the Cubs should be the team to give him that shot. Why not?
  9. http://www.microwaverecipescookbook.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Banana-Chips.jpg Why can't he appreciate the game with gritty stoicism like certain other players?
  10. He's an interesting choice. Obviously, you've got the whole Beane connection, and his short career with the Dodgers is difficult to evaluate since he was fired by someone like McCourt and replaced by Ned [expletive] Colletti.
  11. See, it's the bolded stuff that always makes me apprehensive to think whoever replaces Hendry isn't likely to be all THAT different (AGAIN, THIS IS NOT AN ARGUMENT TO KEEP HENDRY). Being obsessed with finding the perfect speedy leadoff guy or overpaying for crappy veterans is hardly unique to Hendry and is practically de rigueur around baseball. I definitely I think a lot of the expectations for the Cubs' next GM aren't nearly as tempered as they should be. Let's try something: I'm curious to see which current or recent GM's (let's say anyone who hasn't been out of the GM spot for more than 5 years) or assistant GM's people would want for the Cubs. How many of them can we truly come to a consensus on that they're a "good GM?"
  12. What qualifications does he have? Why dont we ask Ernie Banks, Billy Williams or Andre Dawson of he turns it down? Maddux is widely known as one of the smartest baseball minds out there. And Hendry's really popular with "baseball people." I'd much rather have someone who has some front office experience as a GM or under a GM who has shown that they know that they're doing in some capacity.
  13. RRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICKEEEEEEEEETT!!! *BOOM*
  14. It's apparently his groin, but he was able to finish the top of the first after tweeking it so hopefully it shouldn't keep him out for more than a handful of games. welington castillo was PH for in the third inning of a one-run game in iowa this evening, so either he's also hurt or the (chicago) cubs are expecting that he'll be needed. Sadly, Quade has killed any hope I have that he'd start Castillo over Hill. I hope I'm wrong.
  15. Just give me a GM who is able to envision how to make a team that ideally can compete year in and year out because the construction is well-rounded instead of playing catch-up with whatever pet peeve the manager and GM think made things go wrong the year before.
  16. It's apparently his groin, but he was able to finish the top of the first after tweeking it so hopefully it shouldn't keep him out for more than a handful of games.
  17. Realizing that most GM's are average at best isn't necessarily "fear of change."
  18. That's just a fancy way of saying "I'm broke and payroll will be coming down significantly." And with attendance taking a nose dive this year, he's probably going to have to stick to this plan, although it's likely to provide more fruit than what Hendry has been providing with an open wallet. Of course, Hendry already had an opportunity to build from within with a freed up payroll and a young core of prospects in 2004, and he could not turn that into a winner. It's just time to let someone else have a shot at it. The Ricketts are not "broke." That's just a silly thing to say. Of course he's not broke. Way to take my comment entirely out of context. He just spent hundreds of millions of dollars purchasing a baseball team. Payroll where it was when he bought the team will not help him earn back some of what he spent as quickly as it would if he lowers payroll. It is not silly to believe that part of the reason he lowered the payroll this year was because of money. And nobody said otherwise. You're the one that brought up "broke," and effectively hung the idea of pursuing better internal development as an excuse to mask that supposed reality. Look, if you don't want people to respond that way then don't say: That clearly makes it sound like you think they're making excuses for effectively being out of money and that they'll only "stick to the plan" out of necessity.
  19. Wood was an expensive injury risk and they sold high on DeRosa. Neither would have "saved" 2009. Most of the key offensive players from 2008 (Lee, Aramis, Soto, Soriano) were retained. And what does this even mean? How was he disrespected?
  20. I don't think anybody is arguing that he needs or deserves more time.
  21. That's just a fancy way of saying "I'm broke and payroll will be coming down significantly." And with attendance taking a nose dive this year, he's probably going to have to stick to this plan, although it's likely to provide more fruit than what Hendry has been providing with an open wallet. Of course, Hendry already had an opportunity to build from within with a freed up payroll and a young core of prospects in 2004, and he could not turn that into a winner. It's just time to let someone else have a shot at it. The Ricketts are not "broke." That's just a silly thing to say.
  22. Yup. And really, we're seeing the backloading mostly come to a head now. What gangbusters FA did these contracts keep the Cubs from signing in this offseason or the last? Sure, I'd like to see a GM that can better construct team and shell out the money more wisely, but let's not overstate things like Hendry crippled the team from taking part in some amazing FA classes between 2009 and 2011.
×
×
  • Create New...