jersey cubs fan

I like the idea of a postseason CYA award, I'm guessing it should go to a manager or executive. Who did a great job of covering their backside this year? I would vote for Cashman, who I believe has done a great job avoiding all the attention regarding the Yankees postseason losses by taking every opportunity to comment on Torre's future.

Google tells me McCarver was saying Deion was selfish for trying to play baseball and football at the same time, Sanders heard about it after the game and decided to dump the gatorade bucket on him.

polls

Strength of schedule. Adjusting for the fact that teams like the Cubs got to play STL, HOU and PIT a whole bunch whereas Boston had to play the Yankees and Toronto in their division.

Weird question.

Because you don't have Premium - it seems so much better when it's only 14 pages. :) "why is this thread 14 pages?" is an equally good question Because the team is probably months away from being sold, we're weeks away from any significant roster movement, and it's been over a week since the Cubs' season ended. In other words, there's nothing else to talk about.

I don't think the difference between .19 and .16 really lets the fan realize just how wide the disparity is between the grittiness of those two players. There needs to be a multiplier in there somewhere to really expand on the difference. Also perhaps their should be some added factors, like whether or not the player participated in the college world series, the numbers of chances this player was NOT given to make it in baseball, the number of teams players that were chosen before this player in the draft, and the number of articles written about the player in which the writer derided those who made jokes about the players' height, only to put those same jokes in the article.

Those were the real Chicago Cubs. No, those weren't. No kidding. The Cubs sure aren't the '27 Yanks, but what they showed in the LDS was pitiful, and certainly not what they had been for most of the season. Arizona was exposed by Colorado the same way they should have been exposed by the Cubs. It would make me feel much better if I could believe that Arizona was the better team and the Cubs were simply beaten, but I would be lying to myself. I can't believe people are still so willing to lie to themselves about what the 2007 Cubs were. The 2007 Cubs were prone to looking exactly like the team that got swept in the LDS this year, they did that very same thing on numerous occasions. That was the real Cubs.

What is that thing about ifs and buts? September was hardly his only bad month, it was pretty similar to June. But the point is the more he was exposed, the more his numbers looked like they were supposed to looked. He sucked this year, there's no way around that fact. He had a couple nice stretches, and a fabulous July, but when all was said and done, he sucked. And nobody can pretend they were surprised at where his numbers wound up, considering the type of player he's always been. He is, at his best, a fallback option if nothing else works out at SS. Ronny might be more of a boom or bust player, but I will always take my chances with the guy who at least has a chance to be good, rather than settle for the guy who is a near lock to be bad. I don't want the Cubs to start 2008 with either guy starting. But if it's down to those guys, I think a team that is trying to be very good has to take it's chances on the player who at least stands a chance to help them be very good. Theriot can't, Cedeno might not, but he's got a chance. But if they have to include DeRosa in a trade to get an impact bat somewhere, I wouldn't hesitate to platoon Theriot and Fontenot at 2nd base, where they could conceivably combine to an OPS somewhere between 760 and 800.

Even the Red Sox?? i'd rather the rockies or indians win. but if the red sox win, then whatever. better them than the diamondbacks. I'm tired of Boston sports. +100 Look no further than the Sports Guy for the giant transformation from sarcastic down on their luck fans to overly prideful goons. Every week he writes a new article about how terrific it is to be a fan in Boston. It's sickening. It's pretty amazing the town hasn't seen a champion in any sport since the 2004 season, yet they all seem to act as if the Patriots haven't lose a playoff game in a decade and that the Red Sox are indesctructible.

I really don't understand how this has gone on so long, but I'd just like to say I don't necessarily want to see Theriot run out of town. I just want to see him replaced as a starter with somebody who can do better. Theriot can still help the team by doing what he's qualified to do, being a utility player. That is, at least until he becomes arbitration eligible and starts to make more than he's worth. If some team wants him in a trade for a good bat, I wouldn't hesitate to include him, but I doubt he holds all that much value to be shopping him around.

Those were the real Chicago Cubs.

You don't think we could use another quality starter? I didn't say anything about getting rid of anyone, and I don't base that on the NLDS exclusively. We lost because we didn't hit. If you get the opportunity to add another quality starter, sure, go for it. But the first, second and third thing they do is improve the offense. It is, by far, the most glaring need. If they have money to spend, and spend it on pitching, they would not be doing a good job. I'm all for getting the best players they can relative to the current makeup of the team, whether it is pitching or hitting. That's likely to be on offense for the simple fact that it has bigger holes. But if it came in the form of a pitcher, I wouldn't complain. I won't complain if they improve the team by getting Johan Santana. But at this point, there's no way the team will get better if all they do is find slight improvement in the starting rotation and ignore the offense. If they get pitching and hitting, great. But first and foremost, they need more hitting.

You don't think we could use another quality starter? I didn't say anything about getting rid of anyone, and I don't base that on the NLDS exclusively. We lost because we didn't hit. If you get the opportunity to add another quality starter, sure, go for it. But the first, second and third thing they do is improve the offense. It is, by far, the most glaring need. If they have money to spend, and spend it on pitching, they would not be doing a good job.

Yes, the NL can compete. The difference between the two leagues right now is a factor of cyclicality, as well the as obscene path on which the Yankees and Red Sox payrolls have gone. They are so far ahead of anything the NL throws out there, that it always gives that league a huge advantage in terms of having great teams. In order to contend in the AL, you have to contend with the Yankees and Red Sox, so you have to do more than a team in the NL. Look no further than the Cubs for evidence that some, or many, teams will only do as much as necessary to contend, not necessarily be the best they can be. I believe the DH rule gives a small advantage to the AL, in that it gives them space to hide a big bat the NL teams can't hide. But they also wear on their pitchers all that much more. Overall, I'm guessing the effect is minimal.

Did you like Cesar Izturis also? Seriously all these people talking about how Theriot had a fine year at SS need to realize he had the same year as Izturis. Theriot is grittier.

I don't. If people don't realize that Theriot was bad this year and needs to be replaced, there's no disagreement, there's just a lack of understanding on their part. It's not opinion, it's cold hard fact.

It means it's on cable. And all this indignation about expansion teams and teams not from huge markets playing playoff baseball is Yankee-esque. It's disgusting. Teams not from a top 5 market are only their to be fodder for big city teams? Wait, that's not what I'm trying to say. If I said that I didn't mean it that way. I had no problem whatsoever with the DBacks in '01 when they were a real good ballclub and beat the Yanks. The Rockies just threw Josh Fogg. And he dominated. DOMINATED. It's crap baseball. Craptober indeed. How good are the Rockies? Well, they're good enough to beat ballclubs so fundamentally flawed they wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs in a year where the NL was decent. Doesn't have much to do with the fact that they are an expansion team. As for the Yanks and Angels -- shame on you. Shame on you for laying a huge egg to what should have at least been halfway decent baseball in the DS round in the AL. I'm hoping the ALCS will rescue this mess. Maybe the WS will be exciting, I don't know. I'll give it a chance. Colorado is pretty good. They outscored their opponents by 100 runs, and had the 2nd best regular season record in the NL. Their pitching is similar to the Cubs, in that they've got a good amount of solid pitchers, without any real superstuds, and a very good bullpen. Factoring in ballparks, I would say they are similar to what the 2007 Cubs would be, if the Cubs could score runs. They had a team OPS+ of 104 (to the Cubs 97), and a team ERA+ of 110, to the Cubs 113. They are a young team that has been built up on the strength of a farm. I think they are very enjoyable to watch. If the Cubs actually had a decent lineup, they would probably be battling in the NLCS this year, and nobody would be complaining. Why? Because of the backstory. That's the only thing. This isn't a case of bad teams going deep, it's a case of people complaining about the name on the front of the jersey. It's all about the expansion stigma, and not the baseball itself. I find them pretty intriguing. A bunch of sweeps is disappointing, from a drama point of view, but I think Colorado is good enough to give the AL a run for their money.

Man, I can't believe I'm going to have to rely on the Blackhawks fighting for a playoff spot to quench my sports thirst for the next 6-7 months. Not the most reliable group to put your hopes on.

He doesn't hit well enough for the outfield, and he doesn't field the position well enough to get away with diminished batting production. Murton doesn't hit well enough to be a cornerstone in the OF, but he hits well enough to hold his own out there. If Murton played full time and translated his partial production to a full season, the Cubs would be just fine at the position. Unlike Theriot, who did start every day and proved he can't hold his own out there. I would prefer a new, better starter at SS as well as a better corner OF option. But it is clear that if you are a going to start one of the guys, Murton or Theriot, then Murton is the only possible option any reasonable person could select.

Obviously they didnt' get good enough production elsewhere, because they were a mediocre offense. You may not care where he ranks, but you can't get improvement unless you find a way to get better in comparison to the rest of the league.

A 32-year old starting pitcher who might be a #3 or #4 doesn't do a thing to improve this team, unless it means they package other pitchers for a big bat and replace Marquis.

Turned on Theriot? Theriot sucks, and it's about time people face the facts. Murton actually produces. OPS+ comparison 72 to 100 this year. There's nobody with a brain calling for his head because he didn't perform anywhere close to as poorly as Theriot. And nobody is calling for Theriot's head either, they are asking for somebody who doesn't suck to fill the position.

Chicago Cubs numbers from their SS: .254/.309/.331 That was the worst OPS in the league from the SS position. Ryan Theriot's numbers from the SS position: .253/.312/.325 Ryan Theriot's overall numbers: .266/.326/.346 He started out as a mediocre platoon guy, one he was installed as the everyday man at SS, he settled into something less than that. Even if you take Theriot's overall numbers, and place them among all NL team's SS production, the Cubs would still rank just 13th, out of 16 teams. That's awful. Catcher and CF were the only two other positions where the Cubs were clearly outplayed by the competition in the NL. SS was a huge hole, and Theriot is most responsible for what the Cubs got from the SS position this year. It's not like he did well and the position was weighed down by a couple stinkers. Theriot did almost the same exact thing as Izturis once he was installed as the starting SS. He barely outperformed Cesar.

How can somebody call worst in the league "well enough". Cedeno may or may not be an upgrade. He's younger, with considerably higher upside. Ronny may do the job well enough, he may not. I'd prefer to get something closer to a guaranteed upgrade. But we know Theriot did not, and will not, do the job well enough.