Jump to content
North Side Baseball

goonys evil twin

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    13,551
  • 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 goonys evil twin

  1. As a Bears fan I don't care about the margin of victory. As a gambling fan, I do.
  2. It's all based on Strength of Schedule. USC has Arkansas and Nebraska helping them out a great deal, plus their worst games are their bottom Pac 10 opponents, which are still usually rated higher than most teams non-conference schedules (their entire non conference schedule is Arkansas, Nebraska, and Notre Dame-of course Notre Dame doesn't factor in to their schedule so far). Ohio State though has one great opponent so far-Texas. Other than that, Penn State, Iowa, and Michigan State all have at least 3 losses, and they have Northern Illinois, Cincinnati, Bowling Green, and Indiana. Ohio State's schedule has not really been all that hard. Michigan is ahead of OSU for one basic reason-they both have played one great opponent (OSU-Texas, Michigan-Notre Dame), they both have several common games (Iowa, PSU, Michigan State), similar other non-conference games (OSU-Cincy, Bowling Green, Northern Illinois, Michigan-Vanderbilt, Central Michigan). So it basically comes down to their other conference games-and Michigan leads by having played Wisconsin. ND shouldn't be considered a great opponent.
  3. You'd probably also have to get another starter after losing Hill or Z in a trade for ARod. I included the part about improving the rest of the team. The Cubs greatest asset is a ton of money they have to spend, more than most teams.
  4. Growing up, the only people I knew who were Illinois fans were the people who went to Illinois, or had relatives that went there. And there wasn't a single athlete who dreamed of going there. It was a fallback if they weren't recruited elsewhere. There was no built in support the locals kind of thing like you see in Iowa or Michigan, or many other places.
  5. why Howery, he didn't do a bad job a bit over-used in the last month along with the rest of the pen. I'd rather trade Eyre. But you have to give up quality to get quality. A middle reliever should never stand in the way of a deal to get a star like ARod. You can't just include guys you want to get rid of.
  6. Nobody is giving up on Sean Marshall. I'm saying he had a horrible year this year, and should not be a lock for the 2007 rotation.
  7. Let me be clear that I think he is a very good pitching prospect as well. My objection is for the claim that he might be considered a lock for the rotation. If he has another spring like last, and there's an open spot, then maybe I think about giving him a shot. But this guy had less than 300 professional innings this year. Now he's got about 400. He's not a guy that needs to be in the big leagues right now or you're wasting him. He's got plenty of room for improvement. I think that with a few months of work next year in AAA, he might be a solid option to step in if the team needs a late addition to the rotation. And by 2008 he should be a good candidate to start full-time. But he was pressed into duty this year out of default more than anything else. He's got a major health issue and needs to rack up innings. Get through 2007 without injury, strikeout 9/9, give up less than 3 walks per 9 and hold down the homers, and then we'll talk. But right now the Cubs need to plan the 2007 rotation without Marshall in mind.
  8. I hadn't heard anything like that.
  9. Marshall was bad, and the team should do whatever it can so that he doesn't have to be in the rotation next year. The numbers you listed don't get anywhere close to making a guy a lock. Marshall is like the anti-Hill. He started out 2-0 (despite poor outings his first two starts) and didn't go below .500 until June. But he had several absolutely horrible outings (as well as a few good ones). He had a 4.98 ERA before going down with injury. He finished the season with a ERA+ of 83. He gave up more than a hit per inning, and then added a bunch of walks to make his WHIP horrible. You cannot go into next season with him a "lock" for a rotation spot. Maybe if you go Zambrano, Schmidt, Zito, Hill as your first 4, you can think about giving him the job. But he's got to be a fallback option at best.
  10. That's not true. If ARam was going to make $13m if resigned, then ARod would only make $3m more. He would probably produce enough to make up that difference, and then you'd have whatever money, minus $3m, to improve the rest of the team. I think it would be a mistake to let Aramis walk, and I think it would be incredibly difficult to contend without him next year. But it's not at all true that there would be no chance of contending.
  11. Cheating and defense wins championships.
  12. Interesting. From a perception standpoint, being the Rockies hitting coach is sort of a no win situation. If your guys hit, it's because of Coors. If you take the Cubs bench job, and they succeed, your name will be hot, but odds are they won't win, and you will be considered part of the losing.
  13. Lilly was pretty good in 2002 and 2004, and decent in 2006. It's not like he's Rusch here. Nate Robertson has some similarities, results wise. I think Doug Davis is another comparison. These guys aren't great, but if you are going to be getting multiple pitchers, they could be the robin to the offseason equivalent of batman. Throw Moyer money at them, and you could benefit. I'd like to go in another direction myself, but if you have multiple holes, this type of pitcher might be a reasonable target.
  14. Isn't a pitcher's prime a little later than a hitter's?
  15. The Flyers, Eagles and Cubs are legit reasons to feel doomed. I don't think those PSU losses were all that surprising, and you simply can't count Holy Cross tourney losses when discussing disappointing sports results that ruin your faith.
  16. I don't think this sets much of a precedent. Moyer is a halfway decent innings eater, but old, and his contract is very small. It's a case of a great offensive team trying to lock in some pitching stability with a shaky, but durable pitcher. I guess other teams in that situation might have to bid similarly. But, such a deal would also represent a slight decline in average salary for Moyer, who got 5.5m last year.
  17. that's a lot of points for looking pretty bad on Monday night. Classic bounce back game expectations. I'd like to think the bye week will help the Bears but they are 0-2 in Smith's career after a bye, including an embarassing loss at Cleveland last year. Not the biggest sample size ever. I think it'll be more the bounce back game than that the game is after a bye. Yeah, the first year the team was terrible, so a loss after the bye didn't really mean much. And last year's team was quite shaky, and 1-2 going into the bye, so I'm not sure the bye was going to help anything.
  18. Not aware of any specific rule, but I'd be surprised if the Commissioner didn't get involved in an instance as blatant as that. A team that did that runs the risk of ruining any chance of ever getting quality Japanese talent in the future.
  19. See Derek Lowe's 2004 season and the contract that he got. He was downright bad that year, but redeemed himself in the playoffs and parlayed that into $9M/year. How was he the year before? Slightly above average.
  20. Good, I was getting scared of all the experts clamoring for Moyer teaming up with Piniella. Jamie's a tight rope walker, I wouldn't want to rely on him in the Cubs rotation next year. At least not without an enormous upgrade to the lineup. Unless the Cubs vault into Philly caliber offense, they can't win with pitchers like Moyer.
  21. They'll bounce back Truffle. It's early in the season and they still have games left with the Cowboys and Giants. Donny made some bad reads and TB made him pay. Yeah, I've been telling myself that my teams would bounce back for the past 20 years. Games against the Cowboys and Giants don't cheer me up, because those teams are better than the Eagles and are playing at home. After the Eagles lose this week they'll be 4-4 going into the bye, and looking at their second half schedule, that will pretty much sink them. I guess the good side of this is that I'm not going to bother watching the games, since I just get pissed off and don't even enjoy it. And if you're not enjoying what you're doing in your free time, why bother even doing it? I guess it would be hypocritical of me to called you a pessimist. It must have been frustrating to watch them get through that 5 year stretch of greatness without a SB win. Worse than Bears fans who still regret only getting 1 SB out of that great 80's team. The Eagles should be able to win their next 3 games, but the playoffs are still in doubt this season. I remember listening to a lot of preseason talk, and the consensus was they'd suck, right up until around the Stallworth trade, and people really thought they were unfairly overlooked by the experts.
  22. that's a lot of points for looking pretty bad on Monday night. Classic bounce back game expectations.
×
×
  • Create New...