Mephistopheles
-
Posts
8,724 -
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
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Mephistopheles
-
WHAT ABOUT PIE AND GALLAGHER FOR GREENE! -
So yeah the only question for me is who wins the Wild Card: Philly or Atlanta. I think the rest is etched in stone.
-
Wins: 1. New York Mets (95-100) 2. Atlanta Braves (90-95) 3. Philadelphia Phillies (90-95) 4. Los Angeles Dodgers (90-95) 5. Chicago Cubs (87-82) ---------------------REAL CONTENDER LINE------------ 6. Arizona Diamondbacks (85-90) 7. San Diego Padres (85-90) ---------------------REAL PRETENDER LINE------------ 8. Colorado Rockies (80-85) 9. Milwaukee Brewers (80-85) 10. Cincinnati Reds (75-80) 11. St. Louis Cardinals (75-80) 12. Pittsburgh Pirates (70-75) 13. Washington Nationals (65-70) 14. Florida Marlins (65-70) 15. Houston Astros (65-70) 16. San Francisco Giants (70-75)
-
No one's stopping you from doing that. Yeah but WGN's Chick Cam
-
I wouldn't mind looking at Lisa Dergan more often though. I am pulling out hair on this one. http://www.terababes.com/almostfamous/lisadergan/lisadergan12.jpg
-
their success was primarily because of one move. Yes, and the Cardinals have somewhat lucked into success as well. My point is that they aren't a sabermetric team, but they (at least they think they are) are good at recognizing and developing amateur talent. Who exactly have they developed outside of Joe Mauer who was someone they couldnt mess up. Justin Morneau and Matt Garza and that's about it. 1998 - Ryan Mills (6th overall) 1999 - BJ Garbe (5th overall) 2000 - Adam Johnson (2nd overall) 2001 - Joe Mauer (1st overall) 2002 - Denard Span 2003 - Matt Moses 2004 - Trevor Plouffe 2004 - Glen Perkins 2004 - Kyle Waldrop 2004 - Matt Fox 2004 - Jay Rainville With the exception of the no brainer choice, that's about the worst run of drafting during that time frame in the first round in the non-Royals division.
-
coco crisp is a fine defensive centerfielder. the one outlier was 06. his 05 and 04 translated to CF put him above average (not elite) but above average.
-
their success was primarily because of one move.
-
The problem was they were willing to give up Hughes a month and a half ago so that's not entirely true. I don't think they were. And if they were then, they aren't now, or Bill Smith is [expletive]. Well Bill Smith clearly screwed this situation up. I mean have you looked at his offseason?
-
The problem was they were willing to give up Hughes a month and a half ago so that's not entirely true.
-
Not really on that one. Anyways I don't buy the argument that the Yankees are (should) just happy that Santana isn't in Boston. That school of thought has left them empty handed the last 7 years. They're still playing second fiddle to the Sox. They need to figure out what's best for the Yankees. And quite frankly, Santana for $300m is probably better for the Yankees than Rodriguez for $300m.
-
Their young player are a cost to ensure he takes their offer. It's like a posting fee....except we know Johan Santana's the #2 pitcher in baseball.
-
who said they were random? we haven't a clue what they're factoring, how much weight they're giving it, what they're omitting, and still it's used as gospel of a player's true value. it's laughable. i guess i'm more critical. Sure we* do....I know how to calculate everything. Not to the T but close enough where we're going to be different by like one percent. I may come up with a .298 EqA, they might come up with a .301 EqA. No stat is accurate enough for that .003 to be worth arguing over. * At least I.
-
who said they were random? we haven't a clue what they're factoring, how much weight they're giving it, what they're omitting, and still it's used as gospel of a player's true value. it's laughable. i guess i'm more critical. what statistic do you prefer that gives an estimation how much a player is worth? not just hitting, but value for their fielding, and baserunning too. none exist yet. not even close. Actually, one does. It's called WARP-(1,2,3) What it does is considers all the aspects of a player's game and makes an educated evaluation with the most complete information we're presented with. I have an idea. Take a knife and cut out the portion of your brain that uses WARP.
-
do you think the yankees care? the one night stand comment with clemens goes away if that were the case oh yeah and randy johnson
-
well clemens was a one night stand. santana is a relationship
-
#-o :shock: Wow... The strangest part of all these rumors is that the package got worse and worse as time wore on. Typically, and especially once other players are no longer available due to free agent signings or trades that have already happened, teams get a little more spendy to ensure they get what they want. Why on Earth would the Yankees turn down that deal? I don't think their heart was ever in to committing that much money to a pitcher. As long as he's not headed to Boston they're happy. They gave 90 mil to Mussina in 2000
-
yep thats the point half of the time And the other half? because its fun
-
Schilling will be done soon. Wakefield too. And how in the world is Coco Crisp a big name? Even by your standards: He hit .264 and .268 the last two seasons.
-
i saw something on the espn bottom line about clemens
Mephistopheles replied to Mephistopheles's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
eh is that even possible in a dorm -
this is completely fabricated, but w/e its something i like well enough to overlook that part of it http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f189/kctigers23/StampofApprovalSmall.png
-
You are correct. http://texas.rangers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?c_id=tex&content_id=1443421&fext=.jsp&vkey=news_tex&ymd=20060508 you are correct. the cubs traded for kyler burke a year and four days after he signed
-
I was only kidding... Latos has a mid 90s fastball, good curve, good change. Big and projectable. Injury risk though (bc of age). Top of the rotation potential with 2 plus pitches, maybe a third in a perfect scenario. He was an 11th round pick in 06 (first round talent) and signed for over a mil as a DFA. Would have easily gone in the first this year had he gone back in. He signed quick enough to get 11 starts in SS this year. He had 74 Ks in 56 innings with 22 walks. Hes got loads of potential, but his ETA is probably 2011. And I've ever been serious? Wow... real interesting guy. Only problem is, looks like he didn't sign til May 31st, 2007. That means he'd have to be a PTBNL... which isn't going to happen. No, he was drafted in 2006. I believe the rule is one year from the day he was drafted, not signed. The rule is there to ensure that teams don't circumvent the trading draft picks rule.
-
actually i made that reply without knowing you replied to me.
-
I was only kidding... Latos has a mid 90s fastball, good curve, good change. Big and projectable. Injury risk though (bc of age). Top of the rotation potential with 2 plus pitches, maybe a third in a perfect scenario. He was an 11th round pick in 06 (first round talent) and signed for over a mil as a DFA. Would have easily gone in the first this year had he gone back in. He signed quick enough to get 11 starts in SS this year. He had 74 Ks in 56 innings with 22 walks. Hes got loads of potential, but his ETA is probably 2011.
