webjim25

I agree with you. I just dont think you can call it (and not that YOU personally did) the 2nd biggest rilvary in baseball if only the fans of the teams involved in it know that it exists. If thats the case then four different rivalrys are the second biggest in baseball. And I knew someone would say something along the lines of the fans I know are stupid. Of course you'd say that. Edit - I belong to several message boards outside of the midwest. Im going to post threads asking what/who they think is the second biggest rivalry in baseball is. Im going to leave out Dodgers/Giants/Mets/Phillies boards and all NL Central boards. I'll post results in 2 days.

I've been in the Navy for 13 years. Ive been stationed in various places in the US and out. I've met and befriended literally hundreds of baseball fans. Most fans only interact with people in their local area, or on boards such as these, but I work with and hang out with fans from almost every state on a daily basis. In my experience the Cubs-Cardinals rivalry is only relevant to Cub and Cardinal fans. The San Fran-LA and Mets-Phillies rilvary is much more acknowledged by the casual fan than Cards-Cubs. At least in my circles, but they are broader than the average. As far as very recent history is concerned, I can agreee with the Mets/Phillies thing. Between the Mets back to back collapses in a heated race with Philly, and the general disdain between Philly and NY in all sports, not to mention the proximity, it's a big deal. But rivalry means a few different things, what's hot at the moment and what is always a big rivalry. Cubs/Cards is not nearly as big nationwide as many Cubs/Cards fans assume, but it's up there. That said, Mets/Phils is only relavent to Mets/Phils fans, Yanks/Red Sox is only relavent to their fans, and thee people who make money off it. Giants/Dodgers is only relavent to their fans, but that includes both east and west coast fans, since they moved and retain a fan base. OK, I shouldnt have used the word 'relevant.' What I meant was, the baseball fans I know, in very large part, arent even aware that their is a Cards-Cubs rilvalry. Everyone, including you and me agree that Yanks/RedSox is the biggest rilvary in baseball. We may not 'care' about it, but we know its there. Cards/Cubs cant be the second biggest if no fans (or very little fans) outisde of the NL Central know its there. You say its not as big nationwide as we think but its "up there." So far, my reserarch shows that its barely 'there.'

I've been in the Navy for 13 years. Ive been stationed in various places in the US and out. I've met and befriended literally hundreds of baseball fans. Most fans only interact with people in their local area, or on boards such as these, but I work with and hang out with fans from almost every state on a daily basis. In my experience the Cubs-Cardinals rivalry is only relevant to Cub and Cardinal fans. The San Fran-LA and Mets-Phillies rilvary is much more acknowledged by the casual fan than Cards-Cubs. At least in my circles, but they are broader than the average.

Seems kinda trollish.

I agree with what you say. The only thing that makes your "what if" unlikely is that the Cards need to extend Pujols within the next 12 months. If it was a few years down the line, that could be enough time for those things you mention to unfold. Holliday, Carps and the Cards in general would need to stink it up this season. A solid season this year is all that needs to happen for those thoughts NOT to enter his mind. By the time all the wheels fall off, he'll be locked up. However, Im still not talking in absolutes. I'm not delusional enough to believe its impossible for him to end up somewhere else. I just figure that since, 1) they are planning to break the bank, and, 2)The have first crack at signing him, and, 3)the Cards should be playing in October this year - they'll likely get him extended. So yes, a lot possibly rides on the Cardinals living up to "expert" projections this year.

Pujols will stay because the Cardinals will break the bank to sign him before he reaches free agency. They'll have to pay him more than they paid Holliday. The only question is how bad will they suffer in a few years when Holliday and Pujols start playing well below those massive contracts.

Cardinals have done exceptionally well beating bad teams, especially in the second half. At home agaist 3 winning teams the last 3 series, they went 3-6. After Colorado they'll be (at most) 4-8 in that department. [expletive], I hope they can win this Houston series because they aint winning nothin with Loshe on the mound. I just dont see the Cardinals winning back to back series agaist the league's best teams. Since its only about a 2% chance they end up facing LA at Busch in the first round, the Cardinals are likely to have a quick exit, IMO. Also, they've gone from being very likely to hold on to a 1 or 2 run lead in the 9th to unlikely. They havent hit the Phillies level of very unlikely yet, but there is still time.

Thats not what he said. He said he didnt understand why he couldnt post Smoltzs' game stats when the originator created the thread "to observe Smoltz hurl a gem because we are out of it." Cause clearly, that's all he was trying to do. Enjoy this year. Stay classy. Stay classy? My post history on NSBB speaks for itself.

But now that I think about it, updating every single strike out is a bit over the top. That is uncalled for.

Thats not what he said. He said he didnt understand why he couldnt post Smoltzs' game stats when the originator created the thread "to observe Smoltz hurl a gem because we are out of it."

That, to me, = bleh. regardless of whether that is "bleh" to you or not, that's still a lot more valuable than 2 of 3 of the cubs' outfielders this year and around half of their starting infielders for the majority of this year, and he's our worst starting OF'er now. So, you have a below average hitter for a corner OF, but the point you're trying to make is that "he's better than two of your OF's"?

LMAO. That was funny.

That, to me, = bleh.

It might get them to their homes watching baseball on Direct TV in October. Cardinals aint won nothin yet.

OPS+'s of the guys you mention shouldnt be as "good" as they are. 107 99 79 Even though they didnt beat them in a "row," I suppose you can say its "odd." But "odder" things have happened when a team is in the middle of a hot streak.

Broxton and Rodriguez both have 5 blown saves a piece, including failures against the Padres, Pirates, Orioles, Giants and Dbacks.

Before last night's games... 26 of the STL's 545 runs are unearned. Thats 4.7%. 22 of the Cubs 520 runs are unearned. Thats 4.2%. 30 of LA's 589 runs are unearned - 5.09% 31 of Colorado's 602 runs are unearned - 5.14% 30 of San Fran's 480 runs are unearned - 6.25% 26 of ATL's 531 runs are unearned - 5.09% 37 of Florida's 571 runs are unearned - 6.4%

5 guys is the only burger really discussed here.(a little talk about in&out as well) How about those Steak&Shake Steak burgers? They're currently number 1 in the poll. (due to no 5 guys I understand.) Anyone had one of them lately? I used to eat loads of them when I was younger but I just dont get around to Steak and Shake that often anymore.

So your theory is: Play in high school and know scouts are in the stands? No problem. Play in minor leagues knowing your future as a ballplayer is on the line each and every season? No problem. Break into the big leagues, knowing that rookies need to perform immediately or get labeled "AAAA," No problem. Play for a team whose fans really want to win? Oh no, too much pressure! There's a difference between pressure coming from yourself and pressure coming from millions of rabid fans who are ready to label you satan if you don't perform in the biggest situations. I mean, are you really going to pretend like the Cubs getting swept the last 2 seasons had absolutely nothing to do with pressure and choking? Seeing as how Arizona and LA had just as much "pressure," the answer is pressure had the least to do with it.

I dont think I said this like I meant it. What I mean is, every team has an Aaron Miles. AKA a below average to crappy middle infielder who rides the bench. In fact, most NL teams have two of these, but always at least one.

Fellas, Aaron Miles has very little to do with the Cubs performance, good or bad. He's a bench player, he shouldnt even get enough playing time to effect the team either way. He's the third or fourth infielder, right? If he was hitting along the lines of his career norms, he still wouldnt effect your wins and losses. Earlier in the season I made a post that you all wouldnt care about the loss of DeRosa if the current players were performing as expected. Everyone here agreed with that, as its an obvious fact. As far as bullpen's go, they are fickle. Marmol goes from perhaps the best BP arm in baseball to pitching below average. Franklin goes from horrible to studly. BP's are fickle like that. You've been ravaged by injuries and Soriano's is sucking, thats all. Players like Miles and Thurston shouldnt be counted on to help a team succeed. I mean, what do you expect to get out of players like that? So you overpaid for Miles, thats like Gates overpaying for a pair of socks, you can afford it.

Hopefully Lou is the one getting canned This really isn't Lou's fault. Blame the architect of the team. Not even that. A lot of injuries + an bad off season from Soriano. Their is nothing wrong with the architect of the team.

There is no reason in the world for Kemp not to put his team up right here.

Thats fine. The Cardinals arent going to no-hit teams that often. Wasnt my point, but this is a true statement I guess. Says who? Sounds like a perception rather than a fact, but I'd listen to evidence. He gave up a hit an inning. His last 73 innings he's given up 73 hits. I guess he's going to "get away with it" all season.

You are overrating having men on base, as if it automatically means runs will/should score. How many innings did they have a runner on base due to a 2 out single? How often did they have runners in scoring positions? How many times did the lead off man get on? (supposedly this leads to a run more so than getting on with outs already recorded.) Havings runners on base doesnt mean they'll the plate, especially when going against two pitchers who havent been giving up runs. Besides even if they would have capitalized on having men on base its more than likely they would have lost these two games anyway by getting out scored.