Jump to content
Join us for a livestream as we discuss the red-hot Cubs, starting at 4pm Central time! ×
North Side Baseball

fromthestretch

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,563

  • 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 fromthestretch

  1. fromthestretch
    The '07 Cubs? Seriously? You want to compare a 101-win team that pretty much dominated all aspects of the game to an 85-win team? About the only similarity between those two teams is that they were both two wins under their Pythagorean W-L. Regardless, I was simply pointing to the 1971 team as an example that just about anything can happen in the playoffs. You really think Weaver somehow did something to his position players to make them play like crap in the World Series?
  2. fromthestretch
    I would really hope they'd give Cashner a chance to start.
  3. fromthestretch
    But they still each have won 1 World Series title. Quite honestly, that's all that really matters. Anything can happen in the playoffs. Weaver's 1971 team was a good all-around team that hit well (1st in OPS), pitched well (1st in ERA), and played good defense. In the World Series, they pitched well, hit horribly, and committed nine errors in seven games. It happens. Similarly, the 2001 Mariners won 116 games and were bounced out of the ALCS 4-1 while being managed by a Senor Lou Piniella. Correct. Piniella has had a good career as a manager. I just don't agree that he was as good as Weaver.
  4. fromthestretch
    But they still each have won 1 World Series title. Quite honestly, that's all that really matters. Anything can happen in the playoffs. Weaver's 1971 team was a good all-around team that hit well (1st in OPS), pitched well (1st in ERA), and played good defense. In the World Series, they pitched well, hit horribly, and committed nine errors in seven games. It happens. They should have given his team ribbons for that. :good: So it's his fault that some of his players that hit very well in the regular season and in the ALCS had a poor seven games in the World Series? It's his fault that his defense that was good all season kicked the ball around like a soccer team in the World Series? He managed a very good team to 101 wins that year, but you're right, it's crap because his offense and defense slumped in a seven-game series.
  5. fromthestretch
    But they still each have won 1 World Series title. Quite honestly, that's all that really matters. Anything can happen in the playoffs. Weaver's 1971 team was a good all-around team that hit well (1st in OPS), pitched well (1st in ERA), and played good defense. In the World Series, they pitched well, hit horribly, and committed nine errors in seven games. It happens.
  6. fromthestretch
    Championships 1,480 - 1,060 for a .583 winning percentage. #20 all time in wins and #9 all time in winning percentage. One World Series title and three World Series losses. Lou Piniella 1,826-1,691 for a .519 winning percentage with 1 World Series Title and 3 Manager of the Year awards. Sure his winning % is not as good as Weaver's, but he managed the frigging Rays for 3 years. He has more wins than Weaver and as many titles. Look around here to see how he is thought of as a manager. More wins is meaningless. Winning percentage matters, and Lou's pales in comparison. So take out his 3 years with the Rays (where NO ONE would have won at that time) and then give me his winning % if that's what makes such a huge difference. It's .536. Still a far cry from Weaver.
  7. fromthestretch
    But then you run the risk of having to pay him again when nobody offers a contract better than he could get in arbitration. They base it on three year numbers, don't they? It can be beneficial to old guys nearing the end to accept arbitration and probably get a raise even if they sucked in the previous year. I thought it was based on two-years, not three.
  8. fromthestretch
    That post is dated 12/4/2009. Is there news of the Braves currently having interest?
  9. fromthestretch
    He's got some weird ties to Indiana. I think he went to Culver Military Academy. He also has some ties to Columbus OH, that's why the Clippers were the AAA team for so long. He was an assistant football coach at Purdue for a bit.
  10. fromthestretch
    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=5015&position=OF#fieldingadvanced Looks like his infield defense was pretty horrible.
  11. fromthestretch
    Then they would be charging them with murder when they line it right back to their pitching coach, but it would be entertaining He said let them use aluminum bats, not "get rid of the L screen."
  12. fromthestretch
    To you he may have disappeared. Those of us in the metro DC area wish he would disappear.
  13. fromthestretch
    A very good prospect at first base or second base would be what would tempt me with Dempster. I would add third base to that list, as well. Josh Vitters :( I'm not exactly writing him off. He's still young, but he obviously has a long way to go. Would be nice to have another option at that position.
  14. fromthestretch
    A very good prospect at first base or second base would be what would tempt me with Dempster. I would add third base to that list, as well.
  15. fromthestretch
    You're acting as if no one here criticizes some of his decisions at the time he makes them.
  16. fromthestretch
    The Phillies can live with Howard's defense because of his offensive production. I understand, which is why I mentioned that Colvin is no Howard. However, what do the Cubs have to lose. If anything else they can figure out if he is ABLE to play first (which shouldn't be too difficult), and if he isn't, what have you lost? The Cubs stand to lose nothing by trying, and stand to gain alot if Colvin can continue to contribute while playing 1B. It's highly unlikely that the Cubs would try something like that, but it would seem logical to try to find a alternative solution for 1B next year when there are very few candidates within our organization or through free agency. Especially if the intent is to find a stud 1B through free agency after 2011 (Fielder, Gonzalez). The Cubs have absolutely no idea if Colvin can even be a 4th OF; how about they allow his role as an OF become more clear before deciding to hand him the reigns at 1B? Hell, to tie it in to what was also brought up, it would make much more sense to move Soriano to 1st and let Colvin play LF. Especially when you consider that Soriano has at least fielded an infield ground ball in game situations before. Colvin has not...at least not since the Cubs drafted him.
  17. fromthestretch
    The players that need to be moved the most are immovable based on their contract, not the NTC. The only player that we could trade that any other team would want right now is Ted Lilly. All the other guys with ridiculous contracts are performing horribly. If you were to try to come up with a worst-case scenario for a major league team, the 2010 Cubs would be it. Not that I would expect them to make him available, but you don't think other teams would be interested in Dempster? Nope. The team that picks Dempster up are on the hook through 2012 for $14 mil each year. The only reason other teams would want Lilly is because he is a FA and they don't have to pay him beyond this year. The Cubs could pitch in some cash, but I doubt they'd need to throw in much. We're talking about a guy who's been good for 200 innings the past two seasons (and is on pace to easily reach that this season), has shown solid control without giving up a crapton of hits, and has kept the ERA in the mid 3's or lower since converting back to a starter. I don't think it's a reach to think that some teams might be interested...especially if they were in a position to hunt for a free agent starter in the offseason anyway.
  18. fromthestretch
    No one is saying he's incapable of learning the position. It's just probably not the wisest thing in the world for a player in his first major league season to REGULARLY play a position he's never played as a professional. He's already having to adjust to major league pitching. And while he's hitting well for now, he's bound to have a slump. When that happens, I'd prefer if his focus wasn't divided between his offensive struggles and learning a new position, regardless of how easy said position may be. If the club had any ideas of making him into a first baseman, they would most likely do so during the offseason. This I can live with...All I am saying is this team is going nowhere this year, jerking him in and out of the lineup divides his focus more than going to 1st would...IMO. How is he being "jerked in and out of the lineup?" How is he not? The players that regularly occupy the three positions Colvin plays (RF, LF, CF) are the only ones outside of Soto who have performed well offensively this season. While he's hit the ball very well so far, he still has some flaws in his game. I'd say Lou's handling of Colvin hasn't really been bad.
  19. fromthestretch
    Man, this is an amazing player development path you've got penciled in here. I know, because nobody in the history of baseball considered a defensive liability where they play has ever been moved to 1st base. Hilarious. I still want to know when he played it in the past as you claim.
  20. fromthestretch
    No one is saying he's incapable of learning the position. It's just probably not the wisest thing in the world for a player in his first major league season to REGULARLY play a position he's never played as a professional. He's already having to adjust to major league pitching. And while he's hitting well for now, he's bound to have a slump. When that happens, I'd prefer if his focus wasn't divided between his offensive struggles and learning a new position, regardless of how easy said position may be. If the club had any ideas of making him into a first baseman, they would most likely do so during the offseason.
  21. fromthestretch
    Wait, what? Colvin is a first baseman now? And you talk about him like he's some awesome offensive player, but he can't face lefties and shouldn't be hitting at the top of the order? He has played it in the past Mr. Know it all, not to mention last I checked my late grandmother could learn to play an adequate 1st base in a month or 2...gimme a [expletive] break joker. When? In college? Because he sure as hell hasn't played a single inning there as a professional ballplayer (majors or minors).
  22. fromthestretch
    The players that need to be moved the most are immovable based on their contract, not the NTC. The only player that we could trade that any other team would want right now is Ted Lilly. All the other guys with ridiculous contracts are performing horribly. If you were to try to come up with a worst-case scenario for a major league team, the 2010 Cubs would be it. Not that I would expect them to make him available, but you don't think other teams would be interested in Dempster?
  23. fromthestretch
    He's made $3 million as a pro pitcher That's it? He's only 25, and he's already missed quite a bit of time due to injury. I'd say $3 million is pretty good.
  24. fromthestretch
    If I'm not mistaken, most metrics indicate that Barmes is decent defensively at SS.
  25. fromthestretch
    How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that. All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player. You don't know either of those things. Sorry to break everyone's hearts, but most players couldn't care less about the history of the Cubs and what winning a title would mean to Cubs fans. To the extent that the players are reminded of it by the media, and having to answer questions about it, then yes it can and probably does add to their stress or pressure or whatever. If nothing else it's a distraction. A distraction, maybe. But increased pressure? I would think there would be more pressure playing for a team that's expected by its fan base and the media to win each year. Don't win in New York, and you're going to hear about it constantly. Don't win in Chicago? Hell, the fans are used to that.
×
×
  • Create New...