Jump to content
North Side Baseball

CubsBullsBears

Verified Member
  • Posts

    891
  • 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 CubsBullsBears

  1. You beat me to it.
  2. Looked like good hard-nosed baseball to me. It's definitlely no worse than plowing into a catcher who doesn't have the ball. To me, a catcher impeding the path of the baserunner when he does not have the ball is different than a runner going out of the baseline to break up a double play. Agree to disagree. It's just unfortunate that MLB is so vague with the rules in these types of situations. Thames was able to put both hands on the bag in the play I saw, so he wasn't really too far from the bag. His objective was to break-up the DP and he did. It's legal and considered clean. ITS 2005 GRINDERBALL. Had the White Sox done, that, it would be another part of their marketing slogan for Ozzieball, Grinderball, whatever idiotic name you wanna call it. GRINDER RULE NUMBER 130: DEFEAT YOUR OPPONENT... ANYWAY POSSIBLE! That would be more appropriate for defeating another team, w/ a pic of Buerhle hitting Hafner in the face And once again you provide no proof for why Buehrle would throw an 80 mph pitch at someone's face. It put him on the DL for a month
  3. Looked like good hard-nosed baseball to me. It's definitlely no worse than plowing into a catcher who doesn't have the ball. To me, a catcher impeding the path of the baserunner when he does not have the ball is different than a runner going out of the baseline to break up a double play. Agree to disagree. It's just unfortunate that MLB is so vague with the rules in these types of situations. Thames was able to put both hands on the bag in the play I saw, so he wasn't really too far from the bag. His objective was to break-up the DP and he did. It's legal and considered clean. ITS 2005 GRINDERBALL. Had the White Sox done, that, it would be another part of their marketing slogan for Ozzieball, Grinderball, whatever idiotic name you wanna call it. GRINDER RULE NUMBER 130: DEFEAT YOUR OPPONENT... ANYWAY POSSIBLE! That would be more appropriate for defeating another team, w/ a pic of Buerhle hitting Hafner in the face
  4. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2525212 It's in the press, MLB. No more Ozzie being Ozzie crap. He hits a Texas batter, he needs a long suspension. His act is tired. He's said it this time, something needs to be done.
  5. Well, Coletti is an idiot, so we'll see. Maybe he'll also allow us to break Furcal's wrist :lol: :lol: :lol:
  6. Me too. That's a great qoute for my book.
  7. Will his relation to Dusty have any bearing??
  8. You could score all the way from 1st on a ball thrown in the dugout. Mark Bellhorn did in a game vs. St. Louis in 2002. He was on 1st, someone hit a ground ball to the 2B. He threw to 2B, Horn was safe, ball was thrown into the dugout. Bruce Kimm said b/c they threw to 2B, and he was safe, he already had the base and therefore should be allowed to score. He was right.
  9. Keep track of his Walks and Home runs too... He's basically playing defense-independent baseball. I think you guys are on to something - a new stat, we can call it DMAWBS (defense may as well be sleeping): DMAWBS = (BB + SO + HR) / PA Dunn eclipsed the 50% level in 2004: 51.2% So far this year he's on pace to do it again: 50.9% Compare with McGwire, who in '98 had a 56.8% DMAWBS, then a whopping 57.9% in 2000 and 55.5% in '01. Don't forget to include ground rule doubles. Ground-rule hits can't be included, b/c the defense still goes after the ball. They also go after home runs. Well if you're going to include ground-rule doubles, you should then exclude inside-the-park home runs. How do you measure for this?? Do they track ground-rule hits, and inside-the-park home runs?? I don't know if this is a real stat or not, but if it is they should exclude inside-the-park HR's where the defense makes a play on the ball. I have no idea if they keep track of that stuff. Well it's not hard to. I mean HR's are kept track of, walks, strikeouts, PA's. The problem is ground-rule hits, and inside-the-park home runs. That would be a good stat to track though how often the defense could sleep on a certian batter.
  10. Keep track of his Walks and Home runs too... He's basically playing defense-independent baseball. I think you guys are on to something - a new stat, we can call it DMAWBS (defense may as well be sleeping): DMAWBS = (BB + SO + HR) / PA Dunn eclipsed the 50% level in 2004: 51.2% So far this year he's on pace to do it again: 50.9% Compare with McGwire, who in '98 had a 56.8% DMAWBS, then a whopping 57.9% in 2000 and 55.5% in '01. Don't forget to include ground rule doubles. Ground-rule hits can't be included, b/c the defense still goes after the ball. They also go after home runs. Well if you're going to include ground-rule doubles, you should then exclude inside-the-park home runs. How do you measure for this?? Do they track ground-rule hits, and inside-the-park home runs??
  11. Can Dusty explain how walks clog the bases but singles don't?? That was a sign I made for my game last week.
  12. TIGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 5.5 up now!!!
  13. Keep track of his Walks and Home runs too... He's basically playing defense-independent baseball. I think you guys are on to something - a new stat, we can call it DMAWBS (defense may as well be sleeping): DMAWBS = (BB + SO + HR) / PA Dunn eclipsed the 50% level in 2004: 51.2% So far this year he's on pace to do it again: 50.9% Compare with McGwire, who in '98 had a 56.8% DMAWBS, then a whopping 57.9% in 2000 and 55.5% in '01. Don't forget to include ground rule doubles. Ground-rule hits can't be included, b/c the defense still goes after the ball.
  14. He did not carry us in 2003. Alou, Lofton, Ramirez, Simon (when they got here), and the pitching carried us.
  15. Williamson said he doesn't want to play for Ozzie. Trade Pierre to the White Sox for all I care. His arm is a noodle, and he won't help the offense much. What they need is bullpen help, and I don't want to give them any of our guys.
  16. Besides general business ethics, yes, the commissioner's office would most definitely get involved. Just to play devil's advocate, how would the commissioner's office know? If nothing came out to the press and this scenario happened, how would anybody know that it wasn't just Aramis wanting to return to Wrigley in 2007? They'll suspect something fishy. That Ramirez viods his contract, the Cubs make the excat same offer, and he pounces on it. That is very fishy. And any trade w/ the Dodgers needs to involve breaking Furcal's wrist.
  17. I think it's a great idea. Shut Lee down for a while, and give Nevin and Walker a chance to improve their stock. Shut down Dusty's toys while you're at it.
  18. I think he might, simply b/c he's put up better #'s than Adrain Beltre and Beltre has a 5/64 deal
  19. http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-soxnt20.html Ozzie's comments about the Tigers making a trade
  20. Well then why doesn't he take a bat and smash the camera's?? Other teams are stealing signs and using scoreboards. It's plain and simple.
  21. TIGERS WIN!!!!! How about the Whiney Sox???
  22. He's related to Dusty, remember!!!
  23. What ever happened to Cliff Bartosh?? He was doing pretty good for the MLB team last year
×
×
  • Create New...