Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Sammy Sofa

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    98,022
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    206

 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 Sammy Sofa

  1. Plus it's a loaded question in that a lot of people who are "for" it are only for it in the sense that it's a platform for further reform, and not that this plan is the solution.
  2. Yeah, the polls out there over this are wildly back and forth. You'll see a lot of polls where the majority states they are against this specific plan or against "Obama's plan" or "the Democrats' plan," etc., but then there are also polls where people are asked their opinions about the main goals of the plan and how it's proposed they will be accomplished (minus the context that these are the specifics of the Democrats' proposed plans or the one that passed) and the majority is in favor of them.
  3. Not if we are to have a government of the people. That's unrealistically idealistic. At this point, I somewhat agree. That said, I think it's necessary stepping stone to better legislation and to force the issue to stay on the table.
  4. The government often has to enact legislation that at the time is technically "against the will of the majoroty" for the good of the country. It's unrealistic to think it should only take such steps when most of the population is for it.
  5. Since this this is just a tangent from the political thread I'll share this here, too: http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/obamas-moderate-health-care-plan http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5ieXw28ZUpg/SxyVY8X94lI/AAAAAAAABb4/qblR4eEhryA/s400/hc.png That said, opinion polls aren't some kind of end-all-be-all. The majority of Americans still think a conspiracy killed JFK, but that doesn't make it so. It more often than not just reflects uninformed, partisan opinions.
  6. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT THESE ACTIVIST LAWMAKERS STICKING THEIR NOSE IN OUR BUSINESS IS MAKING ME MAD!
  7. Or it represents the will of the typically conservative state AG's.
  8. Hey, it's all relative. To the suck.
  9. But that's not what he said, he called it the golden age of Cubs baseball. Golden age is specifically defined as "a time period when some activity or skill was at its peak". Maybe I'm being too technical but like TT said, my biggest gripe is about the fact that he's assuming that even with the Cubs resources we are headed for a down decade and will wish we were back in the "golden age" of Cardinals and White Sox winning championships while the Cubs suffer epic collapses or whatever. I don't know, Leitch rarely has anything nice to say about the Cubs, and I read this as a passive agressive way to rip on the Cubs. I suppose, but I'd still agree with him that there were far more "good moments" in the last decade than the Cubs had in a long time.
  10. Rose makes life happy. VDN getting tossed was hilarious.
  11. Hah, really? What a bunch of morons.
  12. So at least 25 state AG's are preparing to try and take legal action?
  13. I don't think he's all that off. In terms of having their best (and most) chances to win a WS this has been the Cubs' best decade for the better part of a century.
  14. I would actually be curious as to why you're so sure he'd be fine out of the bullpen, given how hittable he was last year.
  15. When did anyone stop worrying about Aramis?
  16. We had, a week ago, until you tore open the wounds, you bastard.
  17. Is there a single major league player on the current Cubs team to whom this doesn't apply? There shouldn't be. (Except for maybe Soto)
  18. If you had actually read the discussion you would have noticed I specifically stated in seperate posts that they should trade him only if the offers/demand are there and not simply to trade him just to trade him. Nowhere have I advocated moving Theriot just because it could be done. I think his value would likely be maxmized if he was part of a package, like, say, if it's near the deadline and the Cubs out of it and Lilly's had a nice bounceback. I think it would be a smart move to start offering a package of Lilly and Theriot to maximize the return, especially if they can't talk Aramis and Lee into waving their NTC's.
  19. The reality of the discussion does not revolve only around those two points. You're trying to frame it like the Cubs are actually a "win now" team when in reality they're just selling the "win now" message with a very underwhelming team. The Cubs very easily could eat the SS production of Blanco/Castro if it's part of a process to make the team better in the long run while shaking off as many overrated and overpaid (or soon to be overpaid) players as possible. I actually agree that them trading Theriot is unlikely since, like trading DeRosa, it would be perceived as a negative move by most of the media and too many of the fans regardless of the return because while this team is only a "contender" because the division is so bad, the perception still exists that they should be winning it and if they don't then you're just going to see the same scramble to blame and make excuses as last year. The wild card in all of this is how smart Ricketts is and how much he's willing to accept in terms of negative publicity this early in the ownership game if it means making decisions that are good for the club in the long run. There's absolutely nothing "delusional" with the idea of trading Theriot to make the team stronger in the future given how piss-poor and old the team is made up right now.
  20. Yeah, it was pretty great to watch.
×
×
  • Create New...