jersey cubs fan

I cannot be the only one who thought about For Love of the Game. http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=231787&src=152

I don't think cubs fans should be saying that much can be extrapolated from a four game span of a 162 game season. At least not after these last four games ;) So wait, the Cubs can't talk trash after a 4 game sweep, but the Brewers can talk trash for being 4.5 games back? The Cubs may be in a bad stretch, and it may have been only a 4 game sweep, but it's still a lot more than the Brewers got as far as "rights to trash talk". I don't think he was saying the Brewers have more room to talk, but rather that any 4-game stretch doesn't mean much.

It's because of that stuff you posted. Plus, the bad seats at Wrigley are really bad.

7 runs a game is great, but 7 runs in 11 innings is less impressive. It's only slightly above the rate of run scoring/game the Cubs have had all year, which is still pretty damn good - or excellent. The Cubs had an OPS around 1200 last night, so I don't think they did a bad job. But it would be nice if Lee would hit the ball in the air a little more often.

Or not. What Valverde does is no different than what Zambrano does. Zero percent different. but when zambrano does it, it's cute Zambrano's never murdered a family of 5 in their sleep though. yet if it turns out that he's pretty injured, i would think dusty would probably start locking his doors and windows at night He's only got 1 kid though. Dusty? He's got the little boy and at least one other daughter sleeping with CPatt. As a former pro ballplayer, there's no telling how many other pitcher killers he's got out there.

Or not.

I think that's only in the AL. Really? That would be a strange rule to put in place if so. I thought they put it in place last year and that the choice would alternate between NL and AL.

It's not that arbitrary or subjective. He's an extreme case. There's a few like him and it's annoying.

I honestly think he'd be as a reliever. The guy is typically good for 2-4 innings per game, and then blows up in one inning. As a reliever, he might be less likely to reach the point where he blows up, and if/when he does struggle, the manager should be more willing, and more prepared to have a replacement ready. Then again, since nearly all relievers are failed starters, that's not much of a stretch. And like most of them, he'd probably be inconsistent, if not from appearance to appearance, then from year to year.

If it's decently close, I don't think it will be a good game. As you noted, it will be because of mistakes. The only way the Bears win is if Manning is either out of synch, or injured. In fact, that's the only way it stays close. Go ugly or go home.

Gutsy call. Definitely the most pessimistic I've seen, but many have said 4-12. I think they are probably mediocre enough to win a couple more and stay out of the top 5 in the draft, but maybe not.

The suicide pool I've seen is worth about 18k to the winner. It's all fine and dandy to make stupid bets on your team, but I wouldn't do that in a suicide pool, with the Bears, in Indy, in week 1. Throw $20 on them with the local bookie if you must.

I just got to Peter King's MMQB today, and I found this entry odd: Has this really been a story? I may not have followed all the NFL preseason talk as much as I have in the past, but I have not heard a single mention of this story. How has it gotten to the point where King is saying, "enough already". Also, he complains that a veteran who was turned down for the hall 5 years ago is back on a ballot "so soon". How the heck is 5 years not enough time to bring a name back up? He started the article getting all pissy about Warren Sapp saying the Inside the NFL was stale, boring and just "sat there expecting people to watch it." King defended the show he worked on by saying it won emmies. Joe Freaking Morgon has won an emmy or two. That is by no means a good indicator of whether or not a show has gotten boring. I know that a decade ago I'd watch it somewhat regularly. But I hadn't seen more than a minute or two of Inside the NFL in several years. I don't need hip or flashy or more Fox/ESPN hype, but the HBO show never really did it for me.

I have to get excited about the Bears. I dropped a $20 on them beating the Colts in a suicide pool. A lot of Bears players have a lot to prove. Hope Clark and Olson are ready to catch a lot of quick, short passes. I know. It's a crazy pick. But, I won an NCAA pool and am still way ahead in winnings. Not to mention the fact that I'm about to win two more bets. Mike Cameron only needs to hit one more home run and Tampa needs to stay ahead of Toronto in the NL East for the other bet. These are bets I made in the preseason. Realistically, I see the Bears at 8-8. The offense will be quite frustrating, but between defense and special teams, there are enough possession guys on offense to score enough points to be a .500 team this year. Wait you picked the Bears to beat the Colts in your suicide pool?? The Bears going into Indy, in their first game in their new stadium, and beating the Colts? I know Peyton might not be 100% and I know everyone has been dogging the Bears, but you must be crazy! Maybe he thinks a suicide pool means killing your chances of winning a bet.

It would be nice to see an account of the incident from a bystander. Attitude problem?

He shouldn't have, but I'm not surprised. Even though NFL coaches are far more likely to hand jobs to deserving youngsters than MLB people are, they still do tend to rely on "veteran presence" a bit too much. Booker was brought in to be the steady short yardage 3rd down receiver you can count on. They probably think that if there is any hope for a playoff team in 2008, they need a guy like Booker to perform as well as they think he can. If this was a new staff not worried about keeping their jobs beyond 2008, they probably would have gone with the youngster (like Miami getting rid of Booker). But Lovie, and especially Turner, probably need to win as many games as possible to avoid the firing line. In those situations, coaches nearly always go with experience over the unknown youth.

My response didn't go through. Anyway, Comcast had a brief story about Tommie's knee bothering him all preseason and rumors that he'd be on the injury report today and potentially out of Sunday. Yeah I just read up on it. That sucks. What is everyone's best case scenario, everything goes right optimistic prediction about this season? I think it everything goes right within reason the Bears finish 8-8 or 9-7. Realistically, I'm thinking 5-11. I think Vegas has the over/under around 6.5. It was 8 wins early in the summer and I'm sure people bet heavily on the under. I could easily see this team lose 12 games. They could have a historically bad offense with a mediocre defense (a group that relies on speed and athleticism doesn't hold up with age and no youthful reinforcements). That being said, with everything going right, maybe, possibly, it could happen, that they win 10. It's possible the defense returns to dominate, possible but doubtful. The offense could show enough to be competent. I'd still bet the under on 6.5 wins, thinking 6 is more likely. But I don't have a decent grasp on this team at all. They should be a desperate bunch, and it's not like they are suffering from some sort of hangover season. But every good defensive player has been paid and is not fighting for money, while there isn't an offensive player capable of performing like a star. The only motivation they have is pride, and that just isn't good enough. I see this team underperforming and the Lovie/Angelo era wimpering toward a few 7-9 seasons in the coming years before a change is made.

My response didn't go through. Anyway, Comcast had a brief story about Tommie's knee bothering him all preseason and rumors that he'd be on the injury report today and potentially out of Sunday.

Time to lock this bad boy and pretend this horrible preseason never happened.

Are people that disinterested in the Bears that nobody has a game thread up yet? The Bears stand at 9.5 point underdogs, only one other week 1 game has a wider spread, with New England favored by 16. Indy is likely without Jeff Saturday, but the Bears might be missing Tommie Harris, or at least a healthy Tommie Harris, so it is questionable how much push they can get toward a somewhat hobbled Peyton Manning. That is really the team's only hope this weekend. They need to pressure Manning, make him move and hope he is just rusty enough to not rip the defense to shreds. And the Bears really need to run. As soon as they get into a clear passing situation, Indy is going to pin their ears back and manhandle the line. Early pick is Indy covering, with ease.

When is the rain scheduled?

Buddy? http://www.billandted.org/pics/ea/bteanapoleon.jpg

You are wrong.

that's what I'm trying to figure out here. if 20 hypothetical players are worse, I would expect around 20 hypothetical players to be better and the other 160 hypothetical players to be pretty damn close to where they always are If 20 are worse, why even assume 20 are better? That makes absolutely no sense. If a certain subset of players is performing worse, it is a mathematical certainty that someone is performing better. And yes, collectively, the 180 players would be performing better. If 20 players performance worse in clutch situations than they normally do in regular situations, how in the hell is there any certainty that 20 others perform better in the clutch than they do in normal situations?

that's what I'm trying to figure out here. if 20 hypothetical players are worse, I would expect around 20 hypothetical players to be better and the other 160 hypothetical players to be pretty damn close to where they always are If 20 are worse, why even assume 20 are better? That makes absolutely no sense. I'm going with his hypothetical player scenario from before, trying to get back to that hypothetical average number. I could hypothetically stick my head up a cow's ass but I'd rather take the butcher's word.