Jump to content
North Side Baseball

jersey cubs fan

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    67,901
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    63

 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 jersey cubs fan

  1. Where do you find his current error totals? http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?sid=milb&t=t_ibp&cid=553 It may just be my perception, but I don't think he's made as many errors lately. My perception is he hasn't played 3B as frequently recently.
  2. Where do you find his current error totals?
  3. I'm hoping there's no after effects to last week's ridiculous over usage that was well past the point of Zambrano being effective. In other news, I saw myself in the highlights of that grand slam, landed about 6 rows behind me.
  4. Those guys were probably top 5 in the Cubs system, which is largely devoid of top end talent. They have lots of guys who could be halfway decent utility players and maybe even positional placeholders while they are cheap.
  5. yeah - HJL is the piece we're really going to end up missing. Archer may not ever really get control of his stuff. Guyer and Chirinos are mainly just guys (old guys at that). It took a lot of the depth from the system and I would have loved to have Guyer on hand with the OF injuries we've had this year. But cripple seems too strong of a word. It didn't just take depth, it took away some of the best prospects. The system as a whole is just a pile of depth.
  6. Yep, you're right. I always confuse the two for some reason - maybe because both seem to have similar football uniforms or something. You confuse Villanova and Connecticut? Hmm. I sometimes confuse it with Vanderbilt.
  7. I think of the vote of confidence as the inevitable situation where a GM has to address a manager's job status because a team is playing so poorly that the media is bringing it up every day. When things are going okay, it's not a topic.
  8. Between Milwaukee/Miller Park and a Wrigley rooftop, where would you rather chill? I was wondering whether it was a new advertising phase - turning around the Wrigley North concept. I was assuming the Brewers marketing department was looking at the Cubs struggles on the field and ticket office as a great opportunity.
  9. Sure, but that's still having a GM's first year clouded by a lame duck manager and giving the impression of starting from scratch one year later. If you are a new GM coming in this year, you are either going to look at Quade as a longterm option, or hire your guy. Letting him be a lame duck is pointless.
  10. If he can figure out 3B, there's hope. If he has to play 1B, he's going to be really disappointing.
  11. Right. He's made some questionable decisions with SPs, but he's far from Dusty territory. He's not doing a bunch of micro-managing, from what I've seen. So if he's not causing undo harm to pitchers and not bunting in the first inning, for example, who cares. I wouldn't be surprised if a new GM kept him on, at least in the short term, unless there's a specific manager available that the new guy wants. Yeah, pretty much. Given that he'd only be here the first year and doesn't have a reputation as being a "problem" it wouldn't surprise me at all if a new FO just let him rid out the first year of transition and then lets him walk after his deal is up after 2012. I think he's done a horrible job managing his starters, pushing them too far from the start and foolishly risking injury after an hour rain delay. On top of that, I think he's completely in over his head. I also don't see any possible way that a new GM would hold onto Quade for his lame duck season. That's a bad way to start off your regime, and once you fire the guy a year later you've already used up one of your GM lives.
  12. I'm fairly certain there were two different contracts. He got $1m to sign for one year while still playing football. Then after that season, they ripped up the original deal and signed a 5/10 with a $2m bonus and everything else spread over the 5 years, plus two team option years.
  13. ::wrigley23:Soriano ::jeffh:Hendry (more than your average person.) what do all those posters have in common? Guys who have never been in my kitchen.
  14. Well that's one way to get the guy a rest. He's been pretty terrible for almost two months after the hot start, but he's probably been the least likely guy to sit for a game as well.
  15. I wouldn't say he's given them anything. They've paid him a hell of a lot of money to run this team poorly.
  16. I don't think there is a clause like that. I'm assuming that if they pick up his options, and he finishes up this contract without the necessary service time for free agency, then they will have the option of offering him arbitration or not. If they don't offer, he will be a free agent. That's not the arbitration he was talking about, he was asking if he'd still be under team control. I'm pretty sure he would be. That is the arbitration I am talking about. He will be under team control, as long as they offer him arbitration. He will have ~4 years of major league service time, but no contract.
  17. I don't think there is a clause like that. I'm assuming that if they pick up his options, and he finishes up this contract without the necessary service time for free agency, then they will have the option of offering him arbitration or not. If they don't offer, he will be a free agent.
  18. Yeah, he's had a few nice outings. Still safe to assume a bumpy road ahead for the guy though.
  19. Actually this makes a lot of sense, assuming they are prepping Coleman to make one of the starts on the DH. It's 15 days away, so they will be able to recall Coleman by then and have enough time to get him on schedule for that date.
  20. You think so? Back end of the bullpen guys can sit around for 5-7 days at a time, at least when the Cubs aren't starting loogies in the rotation. I'd think what he needs is regular work, which I'm not sure he'd get in Chicago.
  21. Every major league team deals with unexpected setbacks throughout the season. You have to plan for setbacks, and one of the most basic ones you expect is you will need more than 5 starting pitchers. The Cubs did everything in their power to dwindle what had been decent depth. It doesn't make any sense to give them a pass because of unexpected injuries to pitchers when they purposefully went into the season without pitching depth. For god's sake, they started a damn loogy for a month.
  22. So you are ignoring trading Gorz? At the time the Cubs traded Gorz they had plenty of pitching depth and no place to put him. I don't consider that one a mistake. By the time Silva was released the equation had changed significantly. The day after they traded him they didn't have any depth. He was their best 6th option at the time.
  23. They got 2 injuries in the opening week. And a few more in late May. They didn't have an abnormal amount all at once. The whole point is they didn't supply themselves with the necessary depth at starting pitcher. They went into it blind with a whole series of questionable pitchers in the rotation (and on top of that the manager foolishly risked the health of their most stable guy). You can't give them a pass for not having any depth just because if nobody got hurt they wouldn't have needed it.
×
×
  • Create New...