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. They go hand in hand. A guy who was a masher is relying even more on god (or Dr.) given ability than your typical major league hitter. But your question was about a guy who hit homers vs a guy who couldn't even make AAA, so ability is clearly part of the discussion that you raised.
  2. The argument for having your better hitters batting earlier is that you'd normally like your better hitters getting more plate appearances than a guy who can "move the runners over". I don't think there's any argument that when Soriano is hitting well, he's a better hitter than Theriot. But he's not the Cubs best hitter so why should he bat 1st and not Ramirez or Lee? That's a different argument, though. I'd be all in favor of moving Lee and Ramirez up. I'd much rather see Fukudome-Lee-Ramirez than Fukudome-Theriot-Lee-Ramirez. It's not different. If the argument for Soriano batting 1st is getting your best hitters more PA, then it's a flawed argument because he is not the team's best hitter and could conceivably be out of the top 5. And if you are putting a guy who makes lots of outs 1 then you are making it more difficult to get more PA for your actual best hitters, let alone more PA with runners on base.
  3. And the Angels, Phillies Dodgers. It's not a case of needing an all star at every position. It's a matter of having a huge advantage over the competition but not having a clearly better team, and having several questionable positions. They have 2 stable rotation spots going into 2010 and 3 questionable spots. That should not be.
  4. Mike Fontenot as the only viable backup shortstop? Is there someone he's forgetting? It will probably be Hoffpauir instead of Branyan, but I have a hard time seeing another backup infielder making the team right out of camp. Hasn't Lou basically said Andres Blanco will be the backup SS?
  5. Not happening today guys...Adams' funeral is today. I didn't even consider that, when I was trying to think if it made sense for them not to make that decision soon if they were going to make it. I could see it by tomorrow, but if it goes into early next week, that would be weird, unless they aren't hiring him.
  6. I think there's a difference between knowing how it should be done, and physically being able to get it done. I always question the ability of star players to coach, with the possible exception of guys who were known as terrific tacticians. I can't imagine Sammy Sosa being able to teach hitting well. I would be similarly skeptical about McGwire.
  7. I don't mind the guy having some of these opinions (with the most notable exception of his ridiculous pity for pitchers who apparently never did steroids - even if a guy was clean, what pitching coach or manager lost faith in a guy because he couldn't get Mac out when nobody could get him out?), but it's absurd to put it in the form of an open letter, especially given the hypocritical nature of his scorn for a guy who used illegal drugs.
  8. The fact is they are starting the season without Lilly and he's coming off surgery. You prepare for the season that way and go from there. I don't give a crap about going into the season thinking, "hey if all these things workout we'll be alright". Of course if everything works out this team will be fine. But that's not how reality works. They are going into the season in a position of weakness, only 2 dependable starting pitchers, and that is before accounting for the inevitable speed bump. As of now they are last year's team, minus Harden and Bradley, plus Byrd and Silva. I don't see how that is even remotely an improvement. And last year's team was not an improvement from the 2008 team. (minus Wood, DeRosa and Edmonds, plus Gregg, Bradley and Miles). They need to replace Harden just to stay even with last year's rotation. I don't see why a $140m payroll team has to go into a season hoping a bunch of stuff will work out so they can have a chance. This team should be in a position where a bunch of things would have to go wrong to think they don't have a chance, and that's not the case.
  9. In theory, but they rarely end up doing that. And leaning heavy on the "big boys" early isn't ideal either, as those guys usually don't go long in games anyway, and need to be conserved a bit. And wouldn't they want to give Wells rest when they can, considering his lack of 200 inningness? Plus, Lilly is out at least a month, and it's really hard to rely on a pitcher to come back on time and at full strenght from surgery. And you already have a situation where the 4th starter to start the season is in doubt, let alone the 5th. Zambrano, Dempster, Wells, who and who?
  10. I'm pretty sure it's been used for every topic ever. I saw one about the pending doom of the Third Reich that was pretty hilarious.
  11. Three things: Marshall has always seemed to be a good candidate to slide into that role, but the Cubs have been reluctant, and are reportedly still thinking of him as a reliever. It's not a bad thing to give a young pitcher an opportunity, but hopefully that's a high quality young pitcher who has established himself as a really good prospect. Wells kind of came out of nowhere, and it's irresponsible to build your team counting on guys to pull that sort of thing off every year. And it's not one spot that's open. They have 2 dependable starters to start the year, 3 spots with a varying degree of questionable status.
  12. The argument for having your better hitters batting earlier is that you'd normally like your better hitters getting more plate appearances than a guy who can "move the runners over". I don't think there's any argument that when Soriano is hitting well, he's a better hitter than Theriot. But he's not the Cubs best hitter so why should he bat 1st and not Ramirez or Lee?
  13. That may have been the words he used to describe it, but Cleveland ranked 16th in both pass attempts and rush attempts in 2007, not exactly an overly run happy team. And he was working with a completely unestablished Derek Anderson and a recently signed 28 year old Jamal Lewis. He's also been in San Diego with a pass oriented team. It seems to me that he would be a guy who runs a balanced attack, but when he throws, he throws down the field, and not a bunch of dink and dunk WR screens. I would be leary because I don't know much about him, and I worry about Lovie's "off the bus running" nonsense getting in the way. But it would seem to me this guy could get the most out of Cutler.
  14. I hope so as well, unfortunately hope is all we got. It's tough enough to a get a good performing prospect to translate into good performance in the majors, but it's really tough to turn an underperformer into a good one, and I don't like the idea of hoping for that to be a key for your season. Why would hoping for Samardzija to be a good 5th starter be "a key" for the Cubs season? It's tough to win with an imcompetent 5th starter, especially when you don't have any top notch aces to carry the rotation. The goal is 90+ wins and securing the division, not scraping by and hoping to be in the race if others struggle the same. It would be a key spot because the Cubs only have 2 relatively dependable rotation spots filled going into the season, so they are going to need guys to step up and perform in the rotation.
  15. There's a difference between Soriano hitting and Soriano hitting well.
  16. I'm fairly certain this was mostly a Crane Kenney move.
  17. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-spt-0122-haugh-bears-chicago--20100121,0,1121909.column Haugh has been pushing for Martz all offseason, but now he's promoting a Chudzinski hire. He's not quite the QB developer Sean Payton was, but he could be a similar hire to Payton, and the most capable of taking over for Lovie if he's canned, or at least sticking around if they make a move next year.
  18. It's always been a joke.
  19. What does this even mean? Oh come on, everybody knows ECU suffers from an abundance of overly disciplined non-cliquey players and could use a coach like Shula to turn things around.
  20. Neither of those things are contagious, and losing that frequently, for that long amount of time, puts a serious dent in any "they have more talent" claim.
  21. I'm guessing because the Cubs have had about a half dozen chances to give him a starting job and never do it, and despite performing well in the role during limited duty, they keep saying they value him coming out of the bullpen.
  22. The Nets don't have more talent than anybody. They're 3-37. What kind of logic is that? They most certaintly do have talent and moreso then New York. The records was based on their best talent being injured and non-effective at the beginning of the year. Beginning of the year? They've lost 9 in a row, and before that it was 10.
  23. I hope so as well, unfortunately hope is all we got. It's tough enough to a get a good performing prospect to translate into good performance in the majors, but it's really tough to turn an underperformer into a good one, and I don't like the idea of hoping for that to be a key for your season.
  24. He had a deceptively small ERA for about 25 innings in 2008, despite not pitching all that well in reality.
×
×
  • Create New...