CubColtPacer

Great post. Thanks. I had no idea about some of those rules concerning schemes and stuff since I follow the NBA about as much as the MLS. I would argue as well that the level of defense varies wildly in the NBA. Some teams play run and gun (and Phoenix is the biggest example of this, so watching one of their games I can understand why you don't think there's any defense). Some teams play a very aggressive halfcourt defense though. That's why when the NBA Finals have come up with matchups like Detroit-San Antonio, people have called it boring because it traditionally has been a defense first, grind it out matchup. The biggest example of modern defense I can show you is the Indiana-Detroit Eastern Conference Finals 3-4 years ago. They played 6 games, and the motto was whoever made it to 75 first won. They were both talented offensive teams as well, but the defense was just so stifling it didn't matter. I would agree that the Pheonix model is getting more support from teams, even though it hasn't proven very successful in winning a championship for any of the teams who run it.

Michigan State is one extremly overrated team. The selection committee better not make the same mistake that the pollsters are making. USC leads Arizona by 7 with under 3 to play :) Also, go UCLA and Wazzu tonight. Yeah, I'm really hoping IU can beat them at their place for the first time in 15 years on Sunday, because MSU has really gotten worse as the season has gone along. I didn't watch the game-why did Neitzel only play 25 minutes? And only 3 points he scored-that's almost shocking.

That's surprising considering how successful he was in college. Don't listen to Mike Mayock about this one. That guy has a vandetta against McFadden for some reason. I love Mendenhall but if you gave me the choice of either, I'd take McFadden without much thought. yeah i have a hard time believing that the guy was running about 6 yards a pop without breaking some tackles. His high rushing average is due in large part (at least in my opinion) to his breakout runs he'd get alot. I get to see a good bit of SEC football down here and it seemed to me like McFadden's rushes would go something like 2 yards, no gain, 7 yards, 2 yards, 18 yards, 1 yard, -3 loss, 28 yards, 70 yards, 2 yards, etc. He depended totally on his speed and would rarely bowl over people, like Peterson (uber-stud), or juke people out of their shoes, like Bush (a bust). He seemed to just take off and people wouldn't be able to get a hand on him. With the speed the NFL seems to have at LB these days, I don't think he's going to get those big runs like he got in college. Looking over the game logs, I don't think that's true. He had only 5 runs over 30 yards all season long. That certainly doesn't scream breakaway back. He also didn't appear to have too many runs for losses or short gains. It was his runs between 5-15 yards that he did a really good job of and made his average so high.

They played him there 2 games last year, and he was so bad that in the 2nd game Lou switched DeRosa and Fontenot in the IF between the 1st and 2nd inning. So the answer is pretty much no.

No, but every time it's mentioned on TV it will be grating. And having lived in a town that changed a name of a stadium that is about 70 years newer than Wrigley and a lot less revered, it won't be forgotten quickly. People will be grumbling about it 15-20 years from now. Everybody that's not an official media source will still call it Wrigley though, similar to what happened in Denver with Mile High.

You can thank Adam Dunn for that. Dumbasses had him batting 6th. 6th was only Dunn's 4th most common spot in the batting order last year (56 AB's). He was primarily a #5 hitter last year.

That's an interesting question. 2007 average OBP's 7 spot: AL .326, NL .326 8 spot: AL .301, NL .325 9 spot AL .302, NL .241 Then again, the NL is kind of weird. The 3 highest OBP spots? 3rd, 4th, and 6th. 3rd and 4th makes sense, but 6th higher than all the others is very strange IMO.

Is Mungro still on the roster? No. Mungro hurt his knee in 2006, and the Colts didn't feel he was healthy enough to put on their roster for 2007. Since he hasn't signed with anybody since then, my guess is that the injury was career ending.

Your post count shows up for me. It's 7722. It's not post count. Let me show you an example of what I'm talking about. Look at the difference between these two links: This is Tim's member profile: memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=3 This is SanClementeFan's: memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=4 If you open both of those up and look on the right side under user statistics, you'll see what I mean. On SanClementeFan's, it says his total number of posts, and then directly under that it says what his most active forum and his most active topic are. On Tim's, it just says his total number of posts. His most active forum and most active topic are missing. I know what you'll say. Tim is premium and SanClementeFan is not, so that must be the difference. That doesn't seem to matter though. Anybody over 5000 posts premium or not their most active forum/topic doesn't show up. Anybody with less than 5000 posts, it shows up. My question is why that is, and if it is possible to get those statistics back for people who have over 5000 posts.

I don't think former premium has anything to do with it. It seems like anybody under 5000 posts you can see their statistics, while anybody over 5000 posts cannot be seen. Can anybody help with this problem? I'd like to see what mine is, but cannot seemingly because of too many posts.

Hmm...if that's true (and that's hardly confirmation, considering it's 1) an insider who has been proven to be somewhat spotty with info and 2) says "may" and 3) doesn't say if he's speculating or from his source) then I would be ok I guess if the 4th player is not among the Cubs top 12 prospects or so. I just don't think Veal is going to be good, so sending him in a deal isn't all that bad for me. That would also allow us to keep Murton and either use him as the 4th OF or then trade him to get a prospect back for the system. I hate to give up Gallagher because I love his potential, but I think it's worth it for this deal. Especially now that DeRosa is going in for surgery, which although supposed to be a quick recovery, could become a very tricky situation very easily. I'm not letting them have another top 10 prospect though along with Veal. That's personally where my line is drawn.

The Colts cut Booger McFarland and Rob Morris today. Neither one passed a physical. McFarland had a 7 million dollar salary in 2008 with 0 dead money on the cap if he was cut, so it was pretty obvious he was leaving. Morris adds another million or so to the room. He would have been a backup after his injury anyway.

To be fair, they're year in and year out the two most consistent good teams in the major leagues, and they are also from major markets. It makes complete sense to put them quite a bit on the schedule. At the same time, I'm glad to see that they're not playing each other on there. Of all the teams they are playing, their only opponents that typically get on T.V. quite a bit are Detroit and maybe Cleveland. And with possible exception of the Blue Jays game, those should all be good matchups.

I think I'd have less of a problem with selling the naming rights if he was planning to keep the team . Instead, I almost feel like MLB should step in a little bit here. I don't quite think it's ethical for Zell to be making these huge decisions for this franchise while he's in charge when he already is an owner of the White Sox. He has a financial incentive to get all the money out of the Cubs he possibly can in the short-term, and he has a financial incentive to bury the Cubs in the long-term (if the Cubs bomb out, the White Sox get more revenue). Look at his track record: 1) Naming rights. It will probably be structured so most of the money comes up front so that Zell can pocket it. The new owners will see little of the money, but will lose the iconic Wrigley name. 2)Splitting off Wrigley in the deal. This is the one that is the most legal for Zell to do. He can split it off any way he wants. At the same time, this is another thing that will hurt the new owners in the future, and the more dispute there is over Wrigley's lease in the future the more the White Sox and Zell benefit. 3) Renovations to Wrigley. Quite convenient that Zell can arrange a deal to have the Cubs play at the Cell, which puts more money in the White Sox pockets (including his own), and then have the new owners be the ones who will have to go through the headaches of the renovation? There is a huge conflict of interest going on here. While each of the moves are somewhat defensible, putting them together along with Zell's short-term ownership of the team and also his minority ownership in a team who is competing directly for the same market share makes this a situation that needs to be looked into and fast.

I want Laws badly for the Colts in either the second or third round. He fits the Colts defense perfectly. He's got a great motor and is a great tackler even while being a little undersized. Unfortunately, I know the Colts will pick some nobody out of Northwestern Montana State that I'll like just as well in 2 years :D.

so? i bet you hate Len and Bob for being so biased for the Cubs too Len and Bob broadcast on a network that calls themselves the home of the Cubs. It's expected they're going to be biased because they are paid to follow one team. I have no idea if Musberger is biased towards Ohio State. If he is though, that is serious because he is on a national network that is the home of NCAA football, so he shouldn't be biased to any particular team while calling a game. I would agree with your point though that the only announcer I find to be incredibly biased is Vitale. Everyone else just bandwagon jumps for the most part.

There's many scouts who believe that Colvin will eventually have to move to a corner as his frame fills out (he's still incredibly thin right now). However, many scouts also believe that process will increase his power. So he's either a CF with decent power right now, or he fills out and becomes a corner outfielder with a little more power.

Hasn't this been the knock on Cubs fandom over the past years, that their only support the team because they play in Wrigley. I love Wrigley as much as anyone, but I would definetly be at a bunch of games if they were playing in the cell. I would miss Wrigley for a summer for sure, but it would be a cool experience going to home games at the cell and frankly, would become a large part of Cubs history. There's a huge difference between supporting a team when you are local though and driving 10+ hours like Cuse would have to do. I don't blame him for wanting to wait a year to take that type of trip. If he can't see them in Wrigley, it would probably make more sense for Cuse to drive to an East Coast stadium to see them then to come all the way to Chicago just to watch them in an unfamiliar stadium.

Patriots are expected to release Roosevelt Colvin today to clear cap room: http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2008/02/pats_expected_t.html Are they making room for Moss? If they are, that will keep their offense very good but unless they can find some help their back 7 on defense right now is pretty awful.

I can only comment on the numbers and the limited at-bats he had in both 2006 and 2007, so I'm not completely qualified to judge. From my limited viewpoint though, it's a combination of figuring it out and having a lucky year. 2007 still was likely a career year for him. He will likely regress from a normal minor league translation from his numbers last year. At the same time, I remember thinking about how absolutely lost he was at the plate in 2006 when he came up. He only hit 1 or 2 balls hard the entire time he was up. 3 or 4 of his 5 hits that year were dribblers. It wasn't that he just wasn't getting breaks. It was obvious he was completely overmatched (the best comparison to Soto 2006 would be Koyie Hill 2007, and Soto was probably a little worse). When he came up in September of last year, it was a completely different hitter. He waited back on the ball and drove it well with a much quicker bat. That bat speed was probably due to all the weight he lost in the offseason last year. If he can keep the weight down, he should be a guy who will walk a pretty good amount and have pretty good power for a catcher, and that will make him pretty good offensively for his position. Thanks for your answer CCP. He had a wonderful year last year and imo he'll struggle a lot more this year. I hope you're right and he has figured it out plus I'm sure a little luck played a part as well. I don't think he's going to sneak up on the pitchers this year either and they will be looking for weaknesses more than they did last year. Add to that, the possible struggles of Theriot and Pie and you have 4 possible holes in the lineup. Didn't Soto always have a decent Isod? Yes, Soto has always had an excellent ISOD, usually between .80 and .100. That's going to be the biggest reason why he won't fall too far is that he knows how to take a walk, so even if he struggles with the power aspect he has his patience to fall back on. I wouldn't worry too much about Soto being a hole. An average catcher put up a .711 OPS last season. Soto should be able to put up that with his walks even if he only hits 5-10 HR's next year. I think the only two positions that the Cubs have to worry about having a below average offensive player in are SS and CF.

I can only comment on the numbers and the limited at-bats he had in both 2006 and 2007, so I'm not completely qualified to judge. From my limited viewpoint though, it's a combination of figuring it out and having a lucky year. 2007 still was likely a career year for him. He will likely regress from a normal minor league translation from his numbers last year. At the same time, I remember thinking about how absolutely lost he was at the plate in 2006 when he came up. He only hit 1 or 2 balls hard the entire time he was up. 3 or 4 of his 5 hits that year were dribblers. It wasn't that he just wasn't getting breaks. It was obvious he was completely overmatched (the best comparison to Soto 2006 would be Koyie Hill 2007, and Soto was probably a little worse). When he came up in September of last year, it was a completely different hitter. He waited back on the ball and drove it well with a much quicker bat. That bat speed was probably due to all the weight he lost in the offseason last year. If he can keep the weight down, he should be a guy who will walk a pretty good amount and have pretty good power for a catcher, and that will make him pretty good offensively for his position.

It's very interesting to see the difference between how people viewed prospects between the end of the season and now. The last 3 pages of this thread have a lot of arguments about the BA top 100: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=44019 One of the biggest arguments was if Colvin would make the top 100. It turns out he did, and Raisin nailed it right on the nose on him being right around 75th. The two people on the Cubs list who have probably raised their stock the most since September have to be Soto and Gallagher. Soto wasn't considered a top 50 prospect before his time in the majors, and Gallagher was an iffy bet to be in the BA top 100 before his AFL performance. Probably the most interesting in hindsight quote of the thread (the he refers to Colvin): It turns out that not only is Schafer on there, he's rated 25th overall.

I'd say Fontenot would be the opening day starter with Cintron and Cedeno backing him up. Patterson is not working at second base at all this spring training, so he isn't really an option.

It seems like Lou considers Marshall a veteran starter at this point though.

And yet 4 of the 5 people who were robbed are actually the ones who aren't nearly as rich.