inari
-
Posts
9,366 -
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 inari
-
Don't get me wrong, I like watching Z hit quite a bit. I like the strategy that not having the DH brings. However, I think that the NL getting the DH is more or less an inevitability and I used to have a problem with that. Now, I kind of like what the DH offers in terms of resting players but still keeping their bats in the lineup. I'm expecting that everyone here still hates it, though.
-
If Don Baylor was the manager in 2003, I doubt the results would've been any different. That was an absurdly good pitching staff. If he was the manager in 2004, I bet it would've been better.
-
Brewers have signed Jeff Weaver?
inari replied to C.C.'s topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
I was really expecting the Cardinals to pick him up at some point. -
would have...not would of. Link. And no, we would not have had a championship if he were still here. (subjunctive mood, please.) just stfu this isn't a classroom. This is getting old.
-
Sabremetrics vs. Intangibles: Which do you value more?
inari replied to chuckywang's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
You're trying really hard to get anyone who posts here to admit that they'd take intangibles over statistics in any circumstances. I don't think it'll work. I'm just trying to find some sort of gauge as to how much more intangibles a player must have in order to cancel out a deficiency in stats. Posts above were deciding based on age, which is not the discussion I had in mind (yes, kinda shortsighted of me in my original post). I, myself, would also choose the guy with the better stats. However, a friend of mine last night convinced me that, given a deficiency in stats small enough that can be explained away by "randomness", then you should go with the player with the intangibles. I just wanted to find out what everybody else thought. If it can be explained by randomness, like a .850 OPS instead of an .848 OPS, then I'd probably take the player with "intangibles," even if he had the .848 OPS (all other things being equal). -
Sabremetrics vs. Intangibles: Which do you value more?
inari replied to chuckywang's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
You're trying really hard to get anyone who posts here to admit that they'd take intangibles over statistics in any circumstances. I don't think it'll work. -
There's yet another "Joe Crede is the best, Error Miss Ramirez is an unclutch future DH" thread over at WSI.
-
Who are the "lesser teams" we're supposed to discuss? *rimshot*
-
That was close.
-
No walks, Howry. Otherwise, a Howard walkoff is just too predictable.
-
Howry if you blow this I'll never forgive you.
-
LUCKY BREAK!
-
How in the world could our bench be depleted by the 10th inning?
-
Nice of Lou to burn our entire bench.
-
At least it's only one out.
-
Hey Theriot, pretend it's July of 2007.
-
What a play by Derrek Lee!
-
What the hell, Woody?
-
Haha. As if there was any doubt we're going to lose.
-
I'm pretty sure that's the plan.
-
I'm pretty sure we're still going to lose.
-
How do you not get on base when you're up 3-0?
-
Geovany Soto with the oops-RBI.
-
Stupid decision to run, but hey, it worked.
-
Why is Felix Pie batting, exactly?