MSG T

Sorry, many of the games unwritten "rules" ARE idiotic. Therefore if someone is following one of those, like throwing at people intentionally (which does happen), then they are being idiotic. Throwing inside, great go for it, do it all day. Throwing at someone because they hit a HR or you think someone is cheating or showing you up in some way, is moronic. There are much better ways to get back at them for doing that. What did you have in mind that is a better deterrent than a fastball in the ribs? Striking the guy out? Outs are better than HBP any day of the week. Show the guy you can beat him even if he is cheating. All intentionally hitting a guy does is start an even dumber beanball war. Like I said, just because that's how it's always been done, doesn't mean it isn't stupid. The White Sox' intent is to stop the Blue Jays from cheating by stealing signs. And your solution to get them to stop cheating by stealing signs is to strike them out. Seems to me that would have the opposite effect of what was intended. More irony. The White Sox stretegy is definitely ironic, mine...not so much. If I'm a pitcher, I don't care if the cheat against any other teams, I only care if I beat them. The best way to beat them is to get them out, not hit one in the head. It looks like they think the Blue Jays are cheating all the time, what are they going to do, hit every player on the team? All hitting Bautista will do is cause one of their own to get hit in retaliation, which is just as stupid BTW. It won't get them to stop if they are, in fact, cheating. The only thing that will get them to stop is someone getting evidence and turning over to the commisioner's office. Hitting someone with a ball, on purpose, is stupid. I don't care how long it's been going on. It's no different than fighting in hockey, it's an unnecessary, moronic thing to do that accomplishes nothing other than giving some guy a puffed out chest for "taking care of his teammates". Dumb.

Sorry, many of the games unwritten "rules" ARE idiotic. Therefore if someone is following one of those, like throwing at people intentionally (which does happen), then they are being idiotic. Throwing inside, great go for it, do it all day. Throwing at someone because they hit a HR or you think someone is cheating or showing you up in some way, is moronic. There are much better ways to get back at them for doing that. What did you have in mind that is a better deterrent than a fastball in the ribs? Striking the guy out? Outs are better than HBP any day of the week. Show the guy you can beat him even if he is cheating. All intentionally hitting a guy does is start an even dumber beanball war. Like I said, just because that's how it's always been done, doesn't mean it isn't stupid. The White Sox' intent is to stop the Blue Jays from cheating by stealing signs. And your solution to get them to stop cheating by stealing signs is to strike them out. Seems to me that would have the opposite effect of what was intended. More irony. The White Sox stretegy is definitely ironic, mine...not so much. If I'm a pitcher, I don't care if the cheat against any other teams, I only care if I beat them. The best way to beat them is to get them out, not hit one in the head. It looks like they think the Blue Jays are cheating all the time, what are they going to do, hit every player on the team? All hitting Bautista will do is cause one of their own to get hit in retaliation, which is just as stupid BTW. It won't get them to stop if they are, in fact, cheating. The only thing that will get them to stop is someone getting evidence and turning over to the commisioner's office. Hitting someone with a ball, on purpose, is stupid. I don't care how long it's been going on. It's no different than fighting in hockey, it's an unnecessary, moronic thing to do that accomplishes nothing other than giving some guy a puffed out chest for "taking care of his teammates". Dumb.

Hate to break it to you, but yeah they (pitchers) do. So let's not go calling guys lunatics or idiotic simply for playing by the game's (unwritten) rules. Sorry, many of the games unwritten "rules" ARE idiotic. Therefore if someone is following one of those, like throwing at people intentionally (which does happen), then they are being idiotic. Throwing inside, great go for it, do it all day. Throwing at someone because they hit a HR or you think someone is cheating or showing you up in some way, is moronic. There are much better ways to get back at them for doing that. What did you have in mind that is a better deterrent than a fastball in the ribs? Striking the guy out? Outs are better than HBP any day of the week. Show the guy you can beat him even if he is cheating. All intentionally hitting a guy does is start an even dumber beanball war. Like I said, just because that's how it's always been done, doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Some football player scores a TD and shows the defense up, does he get a forearm to the head the next series? No, if he did, the player doing it would be suspended, and rightly so. Did anyone jack Tom Brady in the head when the Patriots were caught filming practices? No. They'd be done for the year. This tough man, police our own crap in baseball is stupid. Especially when you're talking about hitting someone intentionally with a 90+ mph fastball.

Hate to break it to you, but yeah they (pitchers) do. So let's not go calling guys lunatics or idiotic simply for playing by the game's (unwritten) rules. Sorry, many of the games unwritten "rules" ARE idiotic. Therefore if someone is following one of those, like throwing at people intentionally (which does happen), then they are being idiotic. Throwing inside, great go for it, do it all day. Throwing at someone because they hit a HR or you think someone is cheating or showing you up in some way, is moronic. There are much better ways to get back at them for doing that.

This is getting awfully melodramatic with the life threatening injury hysterics. All that happened here is that Bautista was warned to quit cheating, or there would be retaliation, in the form of him getting thrown at. That's how baseball polices itself, and has for decades and decades. Being done for decade after decade doesn't mean it's not idiotic.

Just taking the optimistic outlook here, but maybe they didn't spend quite as much as they thought they would to get some of the bigger names and were able to go a little higher in other places (like the Shoulders signing)? Just a guess, since I'm hoping they got a bunch of those bigger names.

I think Woodbury still ends up at Iowa, even with the UNC offer. KU would worry me more, but I also think it's a longshot they offer.

If they can play the uptempo ball Fran wants to play, they could all be green, I don't care. I just want them to win again. Although, isn't there same law, as in physics or some other science, that says you can't have two gingers on the same team? They'll have Gesell and White together for three years. That won't make the universe explode or anything will it? Their first game together would be in Nov of 2012, the world is supposed to end in Dec 2012...coincidence? BTW, I'm a ginger too, so don't take this as racially motivated.

Yeah this is big. I think Woodbury is going to Iowa unless Kansas or UNC come through with offers. After he had those big camps this spring and was MVP at the NBPA it seemed like that might happen but he cooled off/wore down later in the summer and they both appear to have a few targets in front of him. With Gesell in the bag I think he might come to Iowa even if he got those offers. Elijah Macon said he's planning on visiting and Kenny Gaines has us in his final 4-5. This could be the best class Iowa has had in a really long time. To be honest, I think the next commit is probably Ingram, which is fine. Woodbury most likely won't announce for a couple of months. I could see something like this (trying to be realistic) Myer Gesell Woodbury Ingram Thurman/Abrahamson That would be a pretty good haul and pretty realistic, they have a great chance with all of them. I don't know if they'll add a sixth or carry that scholarship over, but I'd look for Fran to try to bring in five. That would be a very good five. I think ESPN has all of them, other than Ingram who's unrated so far, at a 90 or higher. I'd love to see them get at least a serious look from Macon, Gaines and Hornbeak, but I'm not sure how realistic any of them are. Although, supposedly Macon is visiting, which is good, especially with the basketball facility done now. Just re-read, I meant ESPN rates them at 90 or higher, not where they are ranked. Gesell and Woodbury are both top 100 (with Woody at 51 IIRC). It woldn't quite match Horner/Haluska/Brunner, in terms of overall talent level, but it would be close. Evidently Myer has been making all kinds of noise this summer too, so he may climb in the rankings.

Evidently Mike Gesell is going to Iowa. Good get, top 100 player going to a team with a lack of top 100 players. Hopefully this will help draw Woodbury with him. http://thegazette.com/2011/08/08/high-school-coach-mike-gesell-commits-to-iowa/

Yeah, but does he get the all important Ryne Sandberg vote of confidence now that he's a gritty white guy?

When all you're capable of doing is hitting the ball on the ground softly, and you have no speed anymore, you're not going to get many hits. That said, 0-40 on balls in play is seriously unlucky.

Glad you caught the intent and not thinking I actually meant it.

There's definitely merits to the old-school scouting style of evaluation. There's a lot that can be gleaned that way that can't through numbers only. However, there needs to be a balance between the two. Old school scouting can be wrong just as numbers only evaluation can be wrong. The biggest mistake people make oftentimes is ignoring one of the two. The eyes can lie just like the numbers can be manipulated. It's important not to disregard one form of evaluation in favor of another. Derek Jeter is a great defensive SS.

Do we have enough in the kitty to sign 2 of the following 3...? Wainright - hits FA if the Cards don't excecise his $9M/$12M option CC Sabathia - opts out of contract CJ Wilson - FA OK, I'll put down the crack pipe now. Probably, but are you sticking with the current offense/defense? Cause the team will still suck, it will just be low scoring suck. Losing games 3-2 instead of 6-4 won't help them get to 90 wins. They need help on offense as much as defense.

Exactly. He can have a horrible season and still OPS nearly .900. He'd still be one of the top 3 1B in baseball.

I also forgot to add, he's been pretty unlucky all year. His career BABIP is .311, this year it's at .253. His last two months OPS has been 1.197 (June) and .955 (July), and he's done that with BABIPs of .231 (June) and .253 (July). So he's OPSing nearly 1.000 (or better) and been unlucky, what will he be like when he's back to neutral luck (for him)?

Pujols over the last week: .385 .407 .808 1.215 Last two weeks: .309 .333 .655 .988 Last month: .295 .330 .625 .955 Great last week for Pujols against two of the worst teams in MLB The numbers for the last two weeks and month is a decline from his previous big bad self. Most (Avg., OBP, OPS) all are much lower or lower than his career numbers and the slugging is right at his career numbers. I certainly don't want to act like I don't think Albert Pujols is a good baseball player anymore. But the dude is no longer the old Pujols and is not going to be worth near the contract the Cards (hopefully) give him. The last two months he's been pretty much what he's always been. April and May were pretty bad, but he's been back to great since then.

He somehow finds a way to be even more awful with each opportunity the Rockies give him. If he could be acquired cheaply, then I would be all for giving him a shot. But there's no way he can be your plan A at this point. A lot of people advocate having Flaherty as the primary third baseman if we don't re-sign Aramis. I'd rather take a chance on a guy like Stewart. A lot of people are advocating a platoon at 3B and Flaherty gets mentioned as one of the possibilities to fill half of the platoon. I've seen at least 6 different names mentioned as possibilities. And the most common one is Baker, not Flaherty. I'd have absolutely no problem with a Baker/whoever platoon for a year if it meant getting Prince/Pujols and Wilson. You want Baker as your primary third baseman when he's proven he can't hit righties? As the left handed portion of the platoon, Flaherty would get the most at bats and be the primary third baseman. Getting Stewart doesn't preclude hitting Baker against lefties. Can you read? I said a Baker/whoever platoon, not that I want Baker as the primary 3B. I know he can't hit righties, which is why I, and pretty much everyone else, said that if Aramis isn't back to have a platoon.

He somehow finds a way to be even more awful with each opportunity the Rockies give him. If he could be acquired cheaply, then I would be all for giving him a shot. But there's no way he can be your plan A at this point. A lot of people advocate having Flaherty as the primary third baseman if we don't re-sign Aramis. I'd rather take a chance on a guy like Stewart. A lot of people are advocating a platoon at 3B and Flaherty gets mentioned as one of the possibilities to fill half of the platoon. I've seen at least 6 different names mentioned as possibilities. And the most common one is Baker, not Flaherty. I'd have absolutely no problem with a Baker/whoever platoon for a year if it meant getting Prince/Pujols and Wilson.

Wasn't just his scouts. Maybe I'm not remembering right, but weren't there a lot of scouting reports, not just from the Cubs, out there comparing him to Matsui?

really? so he has very good pitch recognition but still strikes out a ton and doesn't walk. and he makes contact with pitches all over the zone, but struck out 130 times in 106 games last year. right. Well it's also got a couple of fairly significant factual errors. Like this- He's in his second full season at A+ Kinston. And that scouting report is from before last season. The year he was hurt and had season ending surgery was 2009. He's since spent two seasons at A+ ball and has a .244/.294/.429/.723 line in his second season. Who knows, maybe the guy is a late bloomer, but, people on here (not all, but a sizable number) complain about Vitters, but he's outperformed Abreu at each level and at younger ages. Maybe the injury has affected him the last two seasons, but I'm not sure about a guy that has a .294 OBP w/ 102K/22BB in his repeat season at A+ ball.

Huh, who'd have thought, the Cubs got Bryce Harper.

I'd hope that's what he's doing, just can't always tell without knowing the context of what was asked.

So if Jim is fired, then Gillick is brought in, he'd hire Hendry? Or could it be talking points because Jim is a friend and Gillick doesn't actually work for the Cubs yet? I'm confused, and honestly, losing hope that Gillick would change much as President.