jersey cubs fan

It certainly made Ryan Harvey something special.

I'd love to have him in CF, but man, the last few years of his contract are not pretty. Also, can anyone explain the money deferred thing? I remember it was what killed the Diamondbacks for a number of years, but I can't quite remember the mechanics of it. After June he'll have essentially a 3.5 year 64.5m contract, but the team won't have to pay him that money all at once, they can defer it. This would be no problem for a team like Chicago. Arizona was struggling to grow revenue and that's what hurt them.

Send Marquis back to NY, and let them have DeRosa to help with their 2B situation, and Murton to help in the corner OF. Then let them takeover the Pie experiment. Throw Hoffpauier in to make Delgado sweat.

Right before they called him up somebody, Dusty or Hendry, said they were not going to give Corey the yo-yo treatment, but that is exactly what they did. They did all sorts of things like make him sit for days at a time for no good reason, then get sent to AAA to work on slapping the ball and being a bunter. Patterson started 72 out of the first 79 games in 2005. I'd hardly call that jerking him around. His line after July 2nd of that year when he lost his job: .236/.274/.387 in 305 AB's. I don't agree with what they had him work on in the minor leagues, and believe that was a mistake. But I don't think they gave him the yo-yo treatment. They also didn't start him as much as I'd like after he came back, but he did start 37 out of the 50 games. Baylor and the injury were the worst things to happen to Patterson. He got a fair shot in 05. And, btw, fixing Pie's swing this early is a mistake, no matter how bad he looked. They're taking a huge gamble before even seeing how well he can adjust on his own. That's nice, but Corey was first called up to the majors in 2000. He went back to AAA in 2001, then got called up where he platooned for a while and then more or less turned into a pinch hitter for 2 months. The names you mentioned were Dusty and Hendry. I would agree that Patterson was yo-yo'd back in 2000-2001, but you said that Dusty and Hendry did it, and neither of them were in the key decision maker spots back then. Did you mean Baylor and MacPhail? I don't recall who said it actually. I meant Baylor or Hendry. Andy was the key decision maker, but Hendry was heavily involved and quoted. I just know somebody specifically referred to "yoyo treatment" when Corey was first called up. When he was drafted I believe it was Andy who essentially said, "he's a fast centerfielder but he's not a leadoff hitter. We think of him as a middle of the order run producer."

Most of those things will get you noticed, but hardly any of them guarantee you any sort of success. Running that fast will make it a pretty good bet that you can succeed in track, but I've never been interested in competing in what is essentially practice for other sports. 300+ in golf is fairly meaningless, I've done it and I suck. We had a big fat backup center who could throw the ball almost 80 in high school, it's kind of a meaningless without accuracy and the ability to read defenses. Kicking the ball for distance sounds like you are referring to football place kickers, and again, you have to wonder about accuracy. Lifting a bunch of weight could ensure a nice career as a bouncer or security guard, but I don't know about how it would help in sports. Throwing 98 still requires accuracy, movement and some sort of durability/stamina to make anything of it, but considering I always had good location and the ability to change speeds, adding that kind of heat to my reportoire would have made it realistic that I could have done something with my pitching career (which ended early and unceremoniously). At the bare minimum you'd get a chance to play professionally, even if you flame out in single A. Then again, if everything else was the same, being that fast really would have helped in football.

Right before they called him up somebody, Dusty or Hendry, said they were not going to give Corey the yo-yo treatment, but that is exactly what they did. They did all sorts of things like make him sit for days at a time for no good reason, then get sent to AAA to work on slapping the ball and being a bunter. Patterson started 72 out of the first 79 games in 2005. I'd hardly call that jerking him around. His line after July 2nd of that year when he lost his job: .236/.274/.387 in 305 AB's. I don't agree with what they had him work on in the minor leagues, and believe that was a mistake. But I don't think they gave him the yo-yo treatment. They also didn't start him as much as I'd like after he came back, but he did start 37 out of the 50 games. Baylor and the injury were the worst things to happen to Patterson. He got a fair shot in 05. And, btw, fixing Pie's swing this early is a mistake, no matter how bad he looked. They're taking a huge gamble before even seeing how well he can adjust on his own. That's nice, but Corey was first called up to the majors in 2000. He went back to AAA in 2001, then got called up where he platooned for a while and then more or less turned into a pinch hitter for 2 months.

They probably would think of the Cards as a bigger rival since they were the 2 best NL East teams during the 80s. Actually, the rivalry could become better now as both teams (hopefully) look to be good for the next 3-4 years. Yet its hard to be a rival when you play 6 times a year and don't reside in the same time zone or division. The Mets only came to Wrigley 2 games this year. How can you be a rival of them? The rivarly has faded significantly. But there's definitely some leftover animosity when the teams do meet, and I think a playoff series or two could spark some more interest. NY/Chicago is a natural rival in any sport, or other venture. As a NJ resident I'd much rather see them come out here at least twice a year, instead of having to road trip to Philly, Pittsburgh and DC to catch games.

They probably would think of the Cards as a bigger rival since they were the 2 best NL East teams during the 80s. Actually, the rivalry could become better now as both teams (hopefully) look to be good for the next 3-4 years. I don't know about the Mets staying good for 3-4 years. Their core group is relatively young, but a lot of key components are very old. Santana and Maine are good, and Perez is inconsistent but decent. The rest of the staff is a huge question. Their RS/RA is nearly 1/1, with both stats sitting roughly in the middle of the league. They are a pretty mediocre-to-average team that doesn't really do anything all that well. I've got a couple friends who are just going bonkers about this team. I still don't hate the Mets nearly as much as I've hated the Yankees though. They are kind of inconsequential.

And you sort of predicted this, right? It's a nice little stretch, but it's still very little. His season long and May OPS are still just 702 and 707, respectively. He's going to have to sustain this for a while to impress me.

He would have had a bad week then they would have sent him down to the minors and signed a 38 year old outfielder who just got cut by the worst offense in baseball to take his place. ba-zing. (standard Pie is a much better prospect than Corey ever was) corey was regarded as one of the top 3 prospects in baseball; pie was never really close to that. In a subjective sort of way, that's true. But in terms of actually playing baseball well enough to justify the acclaim, I think Felix is probably a better prospect than Corey ever really was.

What? He won't be an NBA power forward if he is 6'7" or 6'8". What? Going to have to elaborate. Why?

Right before they called him up somebody, Dusty or Hendry, said they were not going to give Corey the yo-yo treatment, but that is exactly what they did. They did all sorts of things like make him sit for days at a time for no good reason, then get sent to AAA to work on slapping the ball and being a bunter.

Only an idiot would think otherwise.

If he's a giveaway, sure, but the Cubs don't have enough good prospects to justify giving the few they have for a player like Ibanez.

Wait a minute. When Buerhle is on? It's easy to say that at his best a guy is better than somebody else is at their non-best. But come on here, Buerhle/Vazquez are not more solid than Zambrano/Lilly. Zambrano has been the most consistently good pitcher of that group, while the rest of the three have had their ups and downs. I think they are. I say when Buehrle is on because he tends to be inconsistent, but not on a start to start basis, but a half season to half season sort of basis (don't have the stats handy, but this is what I've noticed). I think bar none Vazquez is better than Lilly. So together, if Buehrle is throwing well, I would take them over Z and Lilly. You are right though, Zambrano is easily the most talented off the 4 pitches. Try and justify it all you want, but when you compare guys by using one pitcher's "on" stats vs another pitcher's average stats, it's completely bogus.

And what an important fact that is!

Wait a minute. When Buerhle is on? It's easy to say that at his best a guy is better than somebody else is at their non-best. But come on here, Buerhle/Vazquez are not more solid than Zambrano/Lilly. Zambrano has been the most consistently good pitcher of that group, while the rest of the three have had their ups and downs.

What does that mean?

Depends on where the bad fundamentals are coming from. The manager's primary job should be to develop the prospects. If the system guys suck there isn't much he can do about that. He has to work with the guys to get better, but I'm not sure what blame you can give him for having the team "not look like a team" and "not have it".

Cubs and Sox winning with Mets and Yankees losing is fine by me.

Would they keep Gordon and Deng? I would assume Deng, but wouldn't Gordon be a prime candidate to get rid of with his contract situation if they draft the guard? Would Gordon be a legit starter alongside a real point guard? I think Gordon could be great alongside a real PG. I'd imagine at least one of them would be kept, maybe both if they traded Hinrich. My simpleton view of what should happen is they draft Rose, trade Hinrich for some sort of usable big guy. But then I think if it's so obvious they should trade Hinrich, how do they get anything of value for him?

Would they keep Gordon and Deng? I would assume Deng, but wouldn't Gordon be a prime candidate to get rid of with his contract situation if they draft the guard? Would Gordon be a legit starter alongside a real point guard?

As for the "you can't blame the Cubs, he was consensus top 5" excuse: Baseball consensus is, by and large, incredibly stupid. It's been shown over and over that conventional wisdom and all that nonsense is rooted in fallacies and tradition. The Cubs took a very big gamble that to date has shown no signs of paying off. It is far too early to determine whether or not it will ever pay off. The story is far from over. As a Cubs fan there's little to do but hope and wait on the guy. But the story so far resembles so many stories that have been all to familar to Cubs fans.

I think its been said like 15 times in this thread alone that he was very sick that season (he had mono). That is why no one was concerned about his "weak" season. It is not like the Cubs reached on some huge project. The guy was a top prospect who was going top 5 anyway. That's the problem. He was a high school kid with very little track record yet his entire senior season was excused because he was sick. It's one thing to give 1st round money to a kid with such a red flag, but to take him in the top 5? High school hitters are hard enough to justify taking when they are healthy and productive. But when they come in off a bad season? From a business standpoint that's just a tremendous risk to take. You're drafting him and paying him based on what he did a year ago at 16. Stuff happens to young athletes and if a guy is so sick he basically misses his senior season, there's no telling what other physical changes that sickness may have been masking. If I'm picking, and paying that high, you better be coming in with very little in the way of red flags.

I'm surprised that Lou doesn't give him more end of the game at-bats (pinch-hitting and coming into the game defensively). I'm not surprised that he isn't starting him. Cedeno has a few walks and a few bloop singles this month. Granted, his at-bats have been sporadic, but he hasn't been hitting the ball very hard this month, and it shows in his results: .217/.333/.217 Then when you compare Cedeno and the people fighting with him for playing time as far as what types of balls they've hit, Cedeno: 16.4 LD, 41.8 GB, 41.8 FB, .382 BABIP Theriot: 24.5 LD, 49.7 GB, 27.8 FB, .355 BABIP DeRosa: 21.7 LD, 37.5 GB, 40.8 FB, .372 BABIP Fontenot: 26.0 LD, 46.0 GB, 28.0 FB, .286 BABIP Cedeno's had the most balls fall in despite having the fewest linedrives, and the highest fly ball percentage. That isn't normal. I think Cedeno's great new approach at the plate has masked that he has hit a lot of bloops this year, and his sporadic playing time the last couple weeks has masked that he really hasn't played well recently. With that being said, I feel that Lou's riding all the starters a little hard right now. You have two capable middle infielders on the bench, and I'd be using them to make sure two players who have gotten tired in past seasons (DeRosa and Theriot) get regular rest. I know Lou has already said that as the weather heats up, Soto will be sitting more, so I hope that is true for those two as well. I think you are underplaying how sporadic they have been. He had 45 tremendously productive at-bats in April, what I think was too low of a number already. Then he started May by getting 3 PA over 5 games - going 1-2 with a walk. He then had back to back starts where he went just 1-8 combined, then got 2 more at bats in 6 games. He's got just 23 at bats in 12 appearances spread out over 20 games. He's barely gotten more playing time than Felix Pie (4 more AB) who was sent to AAA over a week ago and was getting barely any playing time himself.