seanimal
-
Posts
9,377 -
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 seanimal
-
lol right, what i said was that i'm interested in how scouts react to this year's defensive performance. and also that some question his long-term position. i'm still waiting for you to actually prove why either of these are unreasonable statements to make Well, that's one of the things you said. no, there are two things that i said there: 1) some question his long term position 2) i'm interested in how scouts react to this year's defensive performance interesting. it's almost as if I was saying "hey, i wonder what those will say." if i had to do it all over again, i would say that. lesson learned yes, you can extrapolate from my dismissive attitude towards your 28-game sample size that i don't get why error rates would matter for SS prospects. totally reasonable no negative reports heard + positive comments seen + not fat since junior year = overwhelming consensus good talk
-
lmao come the [expletive] on. i wasn't divorcing context from anything. i was pointing out that people still think this thing. what the author does after doing so has NOTHING to do with what I was illuminating by quoting it. the conclusions of the article don't change the fact that some still think he won't stick at SS for reasons related to his physique. how is this a thing i have to continue to point out?
-
lol right, what i said was that i'm interested in how scouts react to this year's defensive performance. and also that some question his long-term position. i'm still waiting for you to actually prove why either of these are unreasonable statements to make
-
errors. in 28 AA games. ok anyway, lets just pretend like the context of the team he will be playing for will have no impact upon what position he ends up playing at the major league level
-
no tim, it's not interesting that i cut out the rest of the paragraph. the point was to show that the idea of him moving off of 3B based on his body doesn't have anything to do with how fat he was in 2010. which was the point of including that quote, as he speaks of those opinions in the present tense
-
he's put on muscle weight, and will put on more. i think it's entirely reasonable to see what the scouts think about the positional performance this year. yes, everyone knows he was fat in high school and took some metabolife and lost some weight. what a laughable thing to point out anyway, like his muffin top was some kind of determining factor as to whether he stuck at SS or moved to 3B
-
Alcantara didn't take SS from Castro, Baez didn't take it from Castro, and Russell is in AA. So until Russell moves up two levels and takes it from him, I wouldn't assume anything. the older scouting pieces on russell suggest a "frame" or "build" that isn't suited to SS long-term. i'm interested to see the revised outlook on his positional future after this season. my guess is that if castro is still around when russell's time is here, he'll stay at SS This has been covered before, but those reports date back to his Junior yr in high school before he started really training hard. He dropped a bunch of weight his senior year and there haven't been any real questions since then. no? http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/at-shortstop-addison-russell/ this is something the author asserted others currently felt in november 2013. i assume he wasn't referencing something a scout said during russell's fat elvis period he's 6'0 195 and arguably has some filling in to do. wide-set shoulders on that one. whether valid or not, it's just not the body type typically associated with middle infielders
-
the gif: Holy [expletive], I want him to be my grandpa. well he probably f'd all of our grandmas, does that count?
-
at least they got some mileage out of the leftover carpet from the airport sheraton remodel in 1994
-
Alcantara didn't take SS from Castro, Baez didn't take it from Castro, and Russell is in AA. So until Russell moves up two levels and takes it from him, I wouldn't assume anything. the older scouting pieces on russell suggest a "frame" or "build" that isn't suited to SS long-term. i'm interested to see the revised outlook on his positional future after this season. my guess is that if castro is still around when russell's time is here, he'll stay at SS
-
anecdotally, pitching coaches tend to stick at that job forever, or at least for really long stretches. rothschild, mazzone, cooper, other names, etc.
-
umm [expletive] pitching
-
Too many words. Excellent article though. the pagination or whatever that puts it in that tiny column is pretty annoying. was like reading a grocery store receipt
-
yep. i want him so badly. give them soler/baez/pierce Soler is literally the only one that gives me pause. I wouldn't blink if anyone else went. Bryant will be better than Stanton. doubtful
-
yep. i want him so badly. give them soler/baez/pierce Soler is literally the only one that gives me pause. I wouldn't blink if anyone else went. i'm not going to say that i wouldn't trade soler for stanton, but i'd much rather give up anyone else before him
-
that's just the medication talking
-
almost always, yes. but unlike people who tune civics, their cars are actually awesome so it's like eh i can just ignore these assbags
-
rickie has had a really, really awesome year and will win many majors if he sticks to what he's been doing. it's a little too easy to say he fell apart there at the end, miffing those two drives and missing what seemed to be a couple of opportunities on the greens. but that save from the fringe on the other fairway was a magnificent shot, if you can call a tight hook that. mcilroy just had everything on his side after the turn, not the least of which was his eagle on 10 that he didn't hit to plan (judging by his initial reaction) and somehow ended up like 7 ft from the hole. hard to beat a guy who is mistaking his way to an eagle. everything after that was a clinic i think i'm going to save up my pennies to try to get a lesson with butch harmon before he dies. it's a total waste on an awful player like me, but wow, he has to be one of the greatest teachers in golf history. up there with harvey pennick
-
I've never heard anyone complain about it before. I don't complain about it but it looks stupid (to me) to wear what looks like dress socks with athletic shoes and shorts. But to each his own. I'm sure people think my Boston Birkenstocks look goofy with shorts. I guess I don't think all black socks look like dress socks. yeah, especially if they're not dress socks...
-
If you own a flat bill you might be secret douchebag hard to keep that secret in this way
-
it was a stomache haha
-
lol, yes very sad that the difference in viewership between these two things was less than one percent of the population of the us nevermind that ratings numbers are flawed at best and arguably entirely useless Come on...that's not how advertisers look at ratings. And yes, they're probably flawed, but do you really find it that hard to believe that people in the US are that much more into the NFL than hockey? in no way was i debating the relative popularity of the two sports. that said, even if we're pretending that ratings numbers are ample support for that claim, there are two problems here: 1) the hall of fame game comes after a scarcity of live nfl action and football fans are likely to tune in just to see something after seeing nothing for months. compare that with game 5 of the scf, which comes after 93% or so of nhl fans have their rooting interests eliminated 2) the hof game was on a sunday night; game 5 of the scf on a friday night. sunday is the day of the week with the most viewership, friday is the day of the week with the lowest so not only does that comparison rely on statistically suspect rating numbers, it ignores context entirely
-
The NBA is currently the least talented it's ever been. There are 0(!!) players from the 50 greatest players ever list playing today. Glad ur back to trolling me. I missed you! i don't think you understand trolling
-
is anyone this side of mj or lebron an established star before they play a single game at the professional level? No. What's the point you're getting at? It's not like Bosh and Wade joined Lebron as rookies. It's not like Irving and Love are either. you got me there wait what? are we having the same conversation? you said pippen wasn't an established star when he "joined jordan", aka, when he started playing professional basketball. my response to that was essentially that no one is, so that's not really a meaningful point to make. to that you respond with... i don't know what that is exactly
-
is anyone this side of mj or lebron an established star before they play a single game at the professional level?