Jump to content
North Side Baseball

jersey cubs fan

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    68,021
  • 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

  1. Is anybody taking money into account when talking about who won a trade? Nomar was making a nice chunk of change that year in the final year of his deal. Boston was not going to offer him arbitration to get picks, because he wasn't worth his contract anymore. Then he signed as a free agent.
  2. Wasn't he initially acquired via trade? I thought the Cubs dealt Miguel Batista for him. Nope, he signed as a free agent. He was traded by the Cubs to the Marlins in the big Ross Gload deal. No, the Cubs traded for him, he played a year then tested free agency and resigned with the Cubs. And then he was traded the next year I think.
  3. A couple guys I was targetting are now gone, and I think I'm down to two other options for the Jets, so give me a little bit.
  4. Everything I've read has said it's pretty much a done deal.
  5. I've thought about that HF advantage, and like the idea, but the reasons I'm not pushing for it are that a big part of making the playoffs is extra playoff revenue for the home team, and fans getting to see a playoff game in their ballpark. Under that plan, if you are the 2nd WC, you will play a road game in the 1 game playoff, then two more road games before your first and only home date in the first round. It would be tough, and involve a ton of travel. Plus, forcing the WC teams to play 1 game before starting against the big boys is a pretty huge advantage for the #1 seed, who should get favorable pitching matchups and a more rested bullpen because of it. I think the WC teams have enough of an added challenge under the system without going all the way to the HFA thing. But I wouldn't necessarily object.
  6. My plan would not add an extra round, it would add an extra game, well 2, 1 in each league. 3 division winners, 2 WC teams play each other the Tuesday after the season ends, winner goes on to face the #1 seed. The punishes WC teams for not winning their division, and greatly benefits the #1 seed by getting to a player a team that had to probably throw their best pitching in that 1 game playoff the day before. 1 game play-ins are great TV. But we only get them in the event of a tie. This opens up the chance at the playoffs to more teams, including those forced to face economically superior teams in their division. It actually makes it more "prestigious" to win your division, as only 20% of the teams earn the right to a playoff series, while the other 4 playoff teams have to play a 1game play-in to get there. I think this serves several purposes, it adds emphasis on winning your division, it makes being the #1 seed meaningful, it opens up the playoffs to more teams, but also makes it tougher on you if you get in via WC. MLB has to maintain interest in as many markets as possible. As it stands, you typically only have the interest in 8 playoffs markets, and then maybe 2-3 cities that came up just short. You add two WC and suddenly maybe 14-15 cities maintain their hopes into September.
  7. admiring how dreamy patrick sharp is? if they wanted to admire how handsome he is, they would've had a better view from their defensive zone. Maybe they wanted to check out his end.
  8. Badasses don't get hurt by having an old man hold them.
  9. I assume you like 8 teams because it keeps it an accomplishment to make the playoffs. I think adding 2 more, for 10 total, maintains that allure. 37.5% of NFL teams make the playoffs, while 53.3% make the NBA and NHL. MLB's 26.7% is still the most exclusive, but 33.3% would still be the most exclusive if they added 2 more wild cards. It also makes winning your division so much more important, since the 2 WC in each league would play each other for the right to face the #1 seed. This also keeps the playoff season at the same amount of time, so it's not it's own beast.
  10. I know it was always a nice rumor that was 90 percent sure of but this is nice to know How do we know anything more after reading that blurb than all the other millions of blurbs that basically said the same thing?
  11. The 3rd back will be a guy that plays well on special teams. It's not about their running back ability.
  12. You should get an award for saying something so profound. No one disagrees with what you said. The person who sent hate mail probably disagrees.
  13. Well then it's Wolfe. Unless that Bell guy is a real tackler, he'd serve no purpose.
  14. I think Bell. Peterson is likely gone, and I wasn't impressed with Wolfe. It's going to be the best ST player, which I think is Peterson. Peterson is unrestricted. He also is NOT a better special teams player than Wolfe anymore. He didn't get CBA-ified back to restricted status? What does Wolfe do on ST nowadays? I can't picture him making plays. Either way, with 2 higher profile runners, the 3rd back isn't going to be playing RB barring massive injuries.
  15. There has to be a question about whether or not a handful of games against the Yankees will offset the cost of telling your fans you aren't trying. At least in the AL Central, even a weak team has a chance of winning in any given year. They would be much better off making more opportunities for teams to contend than forcing teams to admit if they are trying. Add a wild card team and more teams will have hope.
  16. That could be true, if Lilly comes back 100% the rotation should be fine, except for the 2 other questionable spots.
  17. I think Bell. Peterson is likely gone, and I wasn't impressed with Wolfe. It's going to be the best ST player, which I think is Peterson.
  18. The problem with lists like this is if you make them sensibly, nobody will talk about them.
  19. Yes, it's quite fitting that a white guy from the 19th century had some F-ed up views on race relations.
  20. I don't get what you are saying. Either he's possibly more marketable than Lebron, which isn't true, or that he's more interesting than Lebron, which is meaningless since there's nothing interesting about Lebron's personality. lebron hosted the [expletive] espy's, i think he's got a pretty marketable personality. Really? First off, the espy's are a joke, and I don't know anybody that has ever watched them. But I also cannot think of anything interesting about Lebron, other than the fact that he's really good at basketball and rich as a mofo.
  21. Lou on Silva: Oh, well since that's the easy part no problem.
  22. I don't get what you are saying. Either he's possibly more marketable than Lebron, which isn't true, or that he's more interesting than Lebron, which is meaningless since there's nothing interesting about Lebron's personality.
  23. Since the Cubs were okay but disappointing, does this mean their year on the farm was just suprisingly not as bad as it could have been?
×
×
  • Create New...