jersey cubs fan
-
Posts
68,029 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
64
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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by jersey cubs fan
-
Canada strikes first
-
USA vs Canada in women's soccer on nbc sports net right now
-
what were the circumstances of him leaving last year? Did he get a big deal they just weren't interested in matching? He's kind of old now, isn't he? Why was he still available this summer?
-
Paul Maholm and Reed Johnson say "hi." apples and oranges. Paul Maholm is a left handed starting pitcher who has been quite effective this season while David Dejesus has been a completely unimpressive RF. LH starting pitching is going to get overvalued, pitchers pitching well are going to get a nice return midseason. Completely replacable bats like DeJesus probably aren't. -
Football coaches like to part ways with guys they don't see as part of the program. While many people see value in keeping a guy around or maybe maximize his trade value. But when a guy was a starter and gets leapfrogged, or the coaches feel the guy just isn't "part of the team", they will cut them. I understand that, but that doesn't seem to be logical in this case. They kept Omiyale around, who was in the same situation, but worse, and made much more money. And you're talking about an undrafted rookie getting major time if Carimi, who missed basically the whole season last year, gets hurt again. I'm not sure it's the same situation. Chris Williams was a first round draft pick that hasn't lived up to billing and has missed a lot of time to injury. Coaches hate guy who disappoint them and spend too much time in the trainers room. It may not be completely logical, but in the world of football it is certainly a possibility and should not be that surprising. Although I'm against it, personally.
-
I have to think it's the latter. I would think the former, no doubt. That's a dick move, to allow a player to listen in on a conversation between 2 GMs without letting the other GM know he was on the phone. That goes beyond shady.
-
Football coaches like to part ways with guys they don't see as part of the program. While many people see value in keeping a guy around or maybe maximize his trade value. But when a guy was a starter and gets leapfrogged, or the coaches feel the guy just isn't "part of the team", they will cut them.
-
If he was that is ridiculous because he spent a lot more money than his competition over 9 years and did a terrible job of it. Making a team bad and then spending a ton of money to make it better for 2 years (before falling apart again) is both incredibly easy and a stupid thing to applaud a GM for doing.
-
Generally I agree. But when it's tape delayed for american audiences, I can understand trying to remain unspoiled. I've seen news of the results in dozens of locations in the last 30 minutes. if you are making the effort to avoid being "spoilered" from a sporting event that anybody can follow live don't read about the olympics. Agreed, which was my original point to Derwood. He probably should've just avoided the thread. and espn.com, cnn.com, twitter, every other television network, etc, etc.
-
In a league where you can't spend big on amateur talent anymore, using your excess cash for "free access" to quality veterans may be the best option.
-
are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season? In a word, yes. Because it's not that important. It's not a running league. It's a sack the quarterback league. The Bears defensive front has done a poor job of this and as a result they haven't been good enough against the pass.
-
Generally I agree. But when it's tape delayed for american audiences, I can understand trying to remain unspoiled. I've seen news of the results in dozens of locations in the last 30 minutes. if you are making the effort to avoid being "spoilered" from a sporting event that anybody can follow live don't read about the olympics.
-
sports aren't spoiled.
-
And he failed miserably at that job. I hate Hendry, but I wouldn't say the transformation from the 06 team to the 07-09 teams was a miserable failure. Hendry didn't generally manage for 2 years. And they sucked in 2006 largely because of how poorly he did his jobs the 3 years prior.
-
And he failed miserably at that job.
-
how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.
-
Minor League Discussion & Boxes 8-1-12
jersey cubs fan replied to CaliforniaRaisin's topic in Cubs Minor League Talk
He has no role as a starter on a team because he can't hit lefties and he's not particularly good against righties, plus the defensive limitations. Just because he has no role as a starter on the team does not mean he should be released. There is such a thing as a useful bench player. See: Campana, Tony There is, and I'm all for the concept of a guy who does one thing particularly well getting a role on the bench, see Campana. I'm not sure LaHair is as much of a slugger as he needs to be to garner that role for much longer, especially when you consider the defensive limitations. For now, there's hardly anybody who needs to be up in the majors taking his space, so it doesn't really matter. But he probably shouldn't be on next year's team. -
lochte fading
-
You're nuts. Harris was a beast and Tank Johnson was actually quite good for a year. You are honestly the only person I've heard suggest anything other than Urlacher isn't as good as he was at his peak. The team doesn't even pretend that is the case. prove it then, and how is the team "not pretending" that that is the case? saying that they're not pretending that's the case doesn't mean anything, it's literally empty conjecture. his stats haven't suffered and he's done what he's done all of his career in coverage, so there's no real proof that he's lost a step. i'd wager that most of it is perception because he's 34 years old. harris was a 3-technique interior lineman. he didn't play the same position as paea. tank johnson was ok. what the hell stats are you looking for? His OPS?
-
by definition? Not exactly.
-
You're nuts. Harris was a beast and Tank Johnson was actually quite good for a year. You are honestly the only person I've heard suggest anything other than Urlacher isn't as good as he was at his peak. The team doesn't even pretend that is the case.
-
The fact that they may still be good does not say anything about whether they are as good as ever. That is just simply not the case. They aren't as good as they were at their best, both the individuals discussed and the group as a whole. i know you have a striking distaste for anything older and believe that age in-and-of-itself is a mark of decline, but you can't make the case that there has been an appreciable, significant, or noticeable decline in urlacher, briggs, or peppers, although i can see you trying. Yeah you can for Urlacher. He used to be a better pass rusher, better pass defender, and a better run defender. He's still a very good player, but he's not the best player every time he takes the field anymore like he was in and around the Superbowl season. Will agree that Peppers and Briggs haven't had any significant decline. And I will say again that I don't think Melton is filler. He has a big role in the defense. On the 2006 defense, Tommie Harris was the 3rd of the Big 3 (with Urlacher and Briggs), but Ogunleye played a huge role along with Alex Brown. Melton is at least the Ogunleye of this defense, but plays a more pivotal position. Mr. Anderson
-
The fact that they may still be good does not say anything about whether they are as good as ever. That is just simply not the case. They aren't as good as they were at their best, both the individuals discussed and the group as a whole. i know you have a striking distaste for anything older and believe that age in-and-of-itself is a mark of decline, but you can't make the case that there has been an appreciable, significant, or noticeable decline in urlacher, briggs, or peppers, although i can see you trying. I can't make the case that Urlacher is not as good as he was at his peak? Seriously? He's clearly lost a step, literally and figuratively. Still good, but not near the elite force he was at his best. Peppers and Briggs are probably not as good as they were at their peak, but the decline is less noticeable than with Urlacher. Besides all this though, that front seven was an unstoppable force in 2006. Thy are not currently as good as ever. It's just not true and it is completely disingenuous to claim that it is.
-
The fact that they may still be good does not say anything about whether they are as good as ever. That is just simply not the case. They aren't as good as they were at their best, both the individuals discussed and the group as a whole.
-
what an odd out of nowhere post
