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. By this definition, then I'm guessing that no quarterback ever slumps. How many guys have seven bad games in a row, or even four in a row? Can't think of any, really. Eli Manning. And it doesn't have to be 5 or 7 games. Had Clayton called it a 2 game slump, he'd be correct. Likewise Favre just ended a 3 game slump. A 7 game slump consists of 7 bad games, and there's no way it includes very good games in which the QB throws for multiple TDs, barely any INTs, the team wins by double digits and he has ratings over 100. If you have one game in which the QB has a rating over 100, it's impossible to claim that was part of a slump. Let alone if you have 3.
  2. I think any of those teams could beat the Bears. I also think the Bears could beat any of those teams. If they settle down the defense a bit, get guys healthy, and keep getting good Rex, the Bears would beat anybody. But none of those things is guaranteed.
  3. I don't see the point in worrying about that. Had the Bears not given up so many yards and points against STL, and if they did not play them so close in the first half, I think they may be considered a little higher. But this isn't college where polling matter. The record is what matters.
  4. What does that have to do with the issue at hand? I've acknowledged that Grossman has been awful in his awful games. How many more times do you have to hear it? The point is, people with no clue, the general media and fans of other teams who aren't paying attention, just don't seem to understand that Grossman's season did not start out great and turn to crap in the 2nd half. He's been up and down from game to game in the 2nd half. He's had multiple very good games during the so-called slump. How can John Clayton claim that this game somehow ended the slump, when it wasn't any better than 2 of the other games that took place during the so-called slump? How? It can't, that's how. It hasn't been a slump, a slump is prolonged poor play, not inconsistent sometimes great, sometimes terrible, sometimes good.
  5. Baseball isn't football, that's a terrible analogy. The media has acted as if the NY games were bad, and the San Francisco games didn't happen. For other QBs, Eli for one, they are more than willing to describe it as inconsistent. Eli had 5 straight games with a rating below 80, 7 with a sub 100. The longest Rex went with a sub 80 rating was 2 games, and only 3 with a sub 100. Only a clueless moron would call that a 7 game slump. It's called inconsistent results. If you want to try the baseball analogy it's more like a starter throwing a complete game shut, then getting rocked in 2 innings, following that up with a 8 inning 1 run outing, a 4 inning 5 run outing, a 7 inning 2 run outing, a 6 run 3 inning outing, then 2 more shellackings. Incompetent journalists would lump that into a long slump. People with a brain would call that inconsistent. There's a clear distinction.
  6. Boras has absolutely no leverage in this deal, and I hope the Red Sox hold out. As long as the Red Sox are offering a decent deal I don't have any problem with them telling Matz to go back to Japan and wait 'til next year. There's no way Matz should be getting $100 million when he was only making $4.5 million last year, and the Red Sox have already forked out $51 million just to talk to the guy. The posting system has a lot of flaws, but Boras is the biggest problem in this scenario. This is a side tangent that really is beginning to bug me. When did everyone in baseball start getting called by partial names? D-Lee A-Ram, A-Rod, I-Rod, K-Rod, D-Mat. . . is it so hard to say a person's full or even just last name? I'm not sure D-17.
  7. By my count, they are at 39 with those 3 guys not yet counting. They could take 2 guys off the roster, but I think Hendry is hoping to make a trade to get the space.
  8. I disagree. Dempster is going to be useful, it's a matter of how much. And I think Wood is a pretty strong bet to be useful out of the pen. I wouldn't count on him as my best bullpen guy, but his questionable status wouldn't keep me trading other relievers.
  9. As I pointed out on another thread, Giles will not be coming here if the Braves non-tender him. At three years and $13 million, I think the Cubs are pretty well committed to DeRosa. I think people are going to be happy with DeRosa. If you really want to get behind replacing someone replace Izturis! At this point, it's probably not realistic to think they will upgrade either spot.
  10. I dont get the whole thing about "handling" the second spot in the rotation. He'll pitch once every five days like every other starter, there is litereally no difference between pitching second or third in the rotation. What I'd like to know is how often over the entire season does the #1 pitcher face the opposing teams #1. I know the first week or so it works, but when days off start adding up I don't think it lines up all that often does it? A lot of times it doesn't even work in the first week. Teams aren't always able to start their ace in game 1, which throws the whole thing off. And teams that start on the road might hold a guy back from starting until the first home game. The only time you need to worry about it is when thinking about the quality of your staff, and setting your postseason roster (which again, won't always matchup 1/1 and 2/2, because some teams like certain guys to pitch at home, and they may end the season needing their ace to pitch). I think it's helpful to think of guys as 1-5 when putting together a roster. You want your best pitcher to be really good. You want your 2nd best pitcher to be a guy capable of at least being the 2nd best pitcher on most other teams, same with the 3rd, 4th and 5th. As for "handling the role" though, that's completely meaningless.
  11. Well you're wrong. Everything that has been written is that Hendry asked him not to play.
  12. That's going to lead to some awful nice field position. I would think teams that have something to lose (ie: in playoffs) would have almost no choice. You can't risk a Hester touchdown right after you've scored. They might just figure they have a better chance of stopping Rex than stopping Hester. Hester's fumbles/muffs from earlier are going to inspire some coaches to punt to him deep in the Bears territory.
  13. I thought Soriano wasn't playing in that league.
  14. Without a doubt. A middle reliever for a potential impact starting position player? That's a no-brainer.
  15. That's fine. I'm nervous. It's fine to be nervous and to question Rex. It's fine to point out his inconsistency. My problem is ESPN's continued insistence that Rex Grossman has had 2 awful months and is coming off a 7 week slump. It's an absurd notion. If this was Dallas, either NY team, New England, or even the Redskins, they would not be making these blatant errors.
  16. I probably shouldn't care, but it's getting disgusting how repetitively inaccurate these buffoons have been on this issue. It's painfully obvious how wrong they are. It's not like he was putting up 10/22, 150 yards and no TDs in the non-bad games. He actually lit up some teams and produced in the others. It's become a runaway train. It's typical "say it enough times and it's got to be true" stuff that is driving me nuts.
  17. Why? WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHY Why do people keep lumping in the 2 NY games and the San Francisco game into the discussion about Rex's bad games? Why? Why are they so utterly incompetent to make this mistake over and over again? Why can't they see that Rex's game log looks like this: Good Great Okay Very Good Very Good Terrible Great Terrible Very Good Good Terrible Terrible Good How hard is it to see this? He has not had a 7-game slump. He went into the Meadowlands where he outplayed both Eli Manning and Chad Pennington, both more respected QBs than himself, not to mention, he had better games than Tony Romo, the annointed one. This is getting regoddamndiculous.
  18. No, they make those changes a couple weeks in advance. The only week left undecided for the late games is week 17.
  19. Bradley wasn't in the game much after that, if I recall. Bingo - I turned to my wife and said that was totally Bradley's fault. Rex threw to the perfect spot and Mark just kept running. I think Lovie sent Bradley a message. I hope it doesn't involve a doghouse with no exit. I was liking Bradley's emergence, and really think that he, along with Muhsin and Berrian provided Rex with 3 legit receiver threats.
  20. That is a point that doesn't come up enough. The D was winded last night. And each Hester return came after a long STL drive of their own. It's great to get those returns, but it wears on the defense.
  21. No, not really. I like the Saints story, and I'm glad for the city that they are playing well. I also think they are clearly the 2nd best team in the NFC, and the Bears stiffest competition for the trip to Miami. I never bought into the Dallas hype, especially the Tony Romo love. What I was sick of was their Rex talk, which was similar to what Buck and company were doing to Boston a few years ago. All they do is harp on the one story over and over, waiting for a guy to make a mistake.
  22. Has the Bradley miscommunication been discussed at all? I believe that was a pretty clear misread on Bradley's part, he had a 10 yard cushion, and Rex threw right to the spot where he could have had an easy first down. A completion there would have likely led to another score, and an even better looking day for Grossman. Obviously it's a what if scenario and you can't just add that to Rex's totals, but I think that was a clear case of a receiver letting him down.
  23. I'd be fine if he sat out again. TB isn't going to be a passing threat. The Bears are going to get to Gradkowski and cause more turnovers this week.
  24. Hrm.... I was thinking the same thing after the first kick return. His lateral speed is insane - he looks like Reggie Bush. Line the guy up in the slot or put him in motion. No safety or backer could possibly stay with him. Even just as a decoy. He'll get plenty of attention just being on the field. In his first play on the field, I'd either run/throw to the opposite side of the field from where he's at, or run a fake reverse. Teams are going to be so keyed on Hester when he finally does get on the field for the play, that a decoy play would be your best option.
  25. I could not understand that matchup.
×
×
  • Create New...