jersey cubs fan

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.

Well, minor league records don't matter, so it shouldn't be how anybody rates a minor league manager. But aren't the Tenn Smokies the Cubs AA team? How do they have "a lot of talent"? Fox Craig Colvin Samardzija Holliman Veal Clevenger There are a lot of high round draft picks there. I think one has to measure talent by the level of competition. They were only high draft picks because the Cubs drafted them. The Cubs are clearly in the bottom half of minor league talent, so I'm not sure how somebody could think they have a lot of talent in AA. Physical ability maybe, but baseball talent? Not so much. I can't blame a manager for Tyler Colvin's weak numbers or Samardzija's incompetency. The other guys are fairly marginal as far as I can tell.

I'm not much of a college basketball fan so I cannot comment on the Coleman Beasley thing, however low graduation rates are somewhat of a red herring. When I was at OSU the graduation rate (within 4 years) for ALL undergrads averaged around 35%-45%. At most of these big schools graduation rates for all undergraduates is pretty poor. Graduation rates are always going to be worse because many times the athletes come to college unprepared to succeed at college. I know some of the people who work with the athletes at the University of Memphis, and they are working hard with the athletes even before the athletes formally take classes. I think it is a bit unfair to make blanket statements about programs. But it's not unfair to pick on the outliers, which, I believe Huggins' programs have always been. I don't disagree, but I'd like to know what the overall graduation rate at Cin. was when Huggins was there. Rose is a good kid and has worked hard in school even though everyone knew he was only staying for one year. If I'm the Bulls, I draft him. On the last point I have no idea one way or the other who is a better fit. From the sounds of things I would think they'd be better off with getting Rose and trading some of their guards, but I know very little about basketball. I remember the past couple years all the talk of needing big scorers. The biggest thing keeping them from success was the foolish attempt to try and win as a team without a star, because it was clear they had no stars.

At this point, turning 24 in a couple years, it would be very difficult for them to transition him to pitcher and still get any value out of it, right? It's going to take a couple years before he's even going to have a chance at the majors, at which point some other team, likely a non-contender, would probably have more incentive to take a flyer on him.

Well, minor league records don't matter, so it shouldn't be how anybody rates a minor league manager. But aren't the Tenn Smokies the Cubs AA team? How do they have "a lot of talent"?

Hall will always be a favorite. I got my first, and only, foul ball off his bat.

I'm not much of a college basketball fan so I cannot comment on the Coleman Beasley thing, however low graduation rates are somewhat of a red herring. When I was at OSU the graduation rate (within 4 years) for ALL undergrads averaged around 35%-45%. At most of these big schools graduation rates for all undergraduates is pretty poor. Graduation rates are always going to be worse because many times the athletes come to college unprepared to succeed at college. I know some of the people who work with the athletes at the University of Memphis, and they are working hard with the athletes even before the athletes formally take classes. I think it is a bit unfair to make blanket statements about programs. But it's not unfair to pick on the outliers, which, I believe Huggins' programs have always been.

maddux, glavine, and johnson are 100% 1st ballot no question. the other 3 probably get in a year or 2 later. though it's a crime if any of them (with the possible exception of schilling) don't make it right away. I don't see how Glavine ranks ahead of the others. He's not in Maddux's or the Unit's class. i agree. but 300 wins = first ballot in the minds of sportswriters. If that's the case, then sportswriters are very narrow-minded. Don't they realize that a pitcher's W/L record is mostly out of their control? Generally speaking it's going to even out over the course of a guy's career. I completely agree on not judging how good a player is over a single season by how many wins he got but if a player gets or approaches 300 wins, in this day and age, he's at least a good pitcher. You don't luck into getting 15-20 wins per year for 15+ years. One or two years, sure, but not for a career. Obviously there are better measures for evaluating how good a pitcher was but with 250-300 wins, I don't think you can just dismiss that like you can for a single season. What if he loses 290? It's just a pet peeve of mine that not only do people overemphasize W/L record, but they always refer to pitchers by how many wins they are capable of in a season, while ignoring the losses. A 15 game winner is a 15 game winner whether he went 15-16 or 15-6. A record of 16-14 is given more respect than somebody who only wins 11 but goes 11-3. It makes no sense.

I read something that said he was kicked out of a bunch of schools, yet only committed "minor" indiscretions like slashing car tires, graffiti and putting a dead rat on a teachers desk. Okay, so he didn't rape anybody, good for him, but that's some serious signs of one screwed up prick. That was in high school. He had NO incidents at KSU. Starting to think he's grown up quite a bit. Who doesn't screw around like that in high school? It's better than the alternative of gangs, drugs, booze etc..... He's never gotten in trouble with the law. He was a practical joker. As Frank Martin said, if those are the only issues you have to deal with with a kid, then I'll take those kind of issues ANY time. How long was he in KSU? Who doesn't screw around like that in high school? Most people. Graffiti isn't much of anything, but slashing tires, dead rats in teacher's desks, and getting kicked out of multiple schools? Those are not practical jokes. That's a prick with no regard for other humans. Give that person millions of dollars and you are most likely going to see more problems.

You are weird.

I read something that said he was kicked out of a bunch of schools, yet only committed "minor" indiscretions like slashing car tires, graffiti and putting a dead rat on a teachers desk. Okay, so he didn't rape anybody, good for him, but that's some serious signs of one screwed up prick.

Doubts? Everyone had doubts! Yet, when I check out other sites, I don't see anything close to resembling the same overreaction for other underperforming prospects from that draft. It's been less than a year. It's ludicrous to label this guy a bust. It's ludicrous to rip on the guy non-stop without giving him a chance. People here need to take a step back and stop going nuts over this guy. It's ridiculous to claim people are ripping on him non-stop. And yes, there were large doubts, including, I believe, a weak season before the draft. Top picks that high should not have such red flags as, "well, he wasn't any good this year but he was hurt/sick so it doesn't count". Or if that is the red flag, the rest of the portfolio better be outstanding.

The reasons people give for being against instant replay are mind boggling.

Supposedly power potential type guy with questionable contact skills and hasn't hit at any level at all. He looks like a poor man's Ryan Harvey Coming into his draft, Harvey's power potential was freakish. It was easy to imagine him hitting 40+ HRs at his peak. He had a long swing coming out and his ability to draw walks and overall plate discipline had lingering questions. He was also supposed to be a five tool guy. Coming into his draft, Vitters' power potential was lower (likely a 30 HR guy at his peak). Vitters also had very good plate discipline, a terrific right handed swing, and a good ability to make contact. Vitters' defense and speed were not at Harvey's level. Comparing the two like that is a bit of a head-scratcher, especially considering Vitters' age and lack of experience. Injuries have held the guy back. We don't have very much to go on statistically speaking. Frankly, I think there maybe are about 3 or 4 people total on this board who have seen Vitters in person and can give us a good picture of what he is capable of. With such a small sample size, that's the best we can ask at this point. It's one thing to dislike Vitters because you wanted Porcello or Wieters in the draft. That's understandable. It's another thing altogether to hate the guy because of what he's done since being drafted. That's just ludicrous. There were doubts before the draft and a year later there's been nothing resembling good news on him, what's so ludicrous?

That would be a ridiculous deal for the Bulls. That's about what Hinrich is worth, but getting him outta him would be much more valuable. How is it ridiculous if that's about what he's worth? If you're going to dump him for Rose anyway, I find an extra mid-first round pick to be entirely palatable. I'm pretty sure he meant ridiculous in a good way. He's worth the 13th pick in the draft? The 13th pick must be pretty useless.

With the Cubs offday today, the next time Gallagher's spot comes up will coincide with Marshall's regular rest. If he can go an effective 5+ today, I would think they'd strongly consider going to him next. I'd still like to see them experiment with the duel starter thing, let Gallagher and Marshall go 3-4 each in the same game, see how that works. The problem for each seems to be the 2nd/3rd time through, and endurance. That's actually not a bad idea. Marshall's OPS against went up about 300 points after 75 pitches last year. He averaged under 5 1/3 innings per start. I do admit though, I hate the idea of being locked into a set routine before the game even unfolds. On one hand, it could be an extra day off for your bullpen. On the other, you let the other team know what's coming and when. You don't know on a given day if Marshall or Gallagher can go 7 strong. You don't have to make it a set time, and if a guy is cruising, you can choose to stick with him. Depending on the lineup (lots of lefties early, or RH dominant) you can choose which one to actually start, and then let him go as long as he's shutting them down. Of course this isn't condusive to "letting a guy learn how to get out of jams", but I think it's a decent idea to try and get young pitchers adjusted to the game. Eventually one of them may prove to be better going longer, and you can adjust. It doesn't have to be a season long thing.

2-1 when Gallagher starts. Am I missing something here? I realize his performance doesn't necessarily dictate a 2-1 record, but he's far from causing the Cubs to concede games. Am I missing something here? Gallagher has started for a total of 10 innings and given up 10 runs in those innings. Granted, I'd still rather have him out there than Marquis, but Gallagher hasn't impressed me in the least thus far (and I was very excited to see him in the rotation). That's my point. "Conceding games" was a bad choice of words, but I would not assume it is best for Marshall to replace Marquis versus Gallagher. It wasn't a bad choice of words, it was a ridiculous statement. No, he hasn't been good, needs to be better, and should probably be replaced by Marshall next time out.

Give this post a standing ovation until your hands bleed. After his 10AB-small-sample-size-batting-rampage he went 5/25 with 11 K's until he was sent down. He struck out 4/6 AB's immediately following this 10AB-batting-rampage-miracle-turnaround. =D> spread out over how much time?