flyseye

Darwin will save the day! Or not.

I said he wouldn't be a bad choice because he does well with young teams. He was a terrible choice for Boston with a veteran team and following a beloved guy like Francona. He's not a bad baseball manager under the right circumstances, he just wasn't a good fit for Boston and especially so following Francona. ???? He had a young team for half a year in Boston. Valentine is a horrible choice for ANY team, and I would wager he has managed his last MLB game. Edit: I would also wager that nobody will hire him as a broadcaster again either, he was equally inept at that.

Nobody is misunderstanding anything but you. You tried to use a pathetic analogy stating that incidents, many of them isolated, by white guys, were ignored by the fans and press, while Zambrano was a victim of racism. I went on to cite that if a kid like you remembers the "white guy" stuff when he wasnt even alive to see much of it, it must have gotten, and continues to get plenty of press. I then went on to cite how said white guys were treated as badly as Zambrano. Zambrano would have been gone from most organizations long before the Cubs finally cut him loose. .

Grace run out of town? They offered him another contract and he took less to go to Arizona. Sandberg can't get a contract because he isn't fit for the job, but the idiots still think he should have it. Completely wrong about Grace. They did not offer him salary arbitration,basically told him to hit the road, and he took what he could get from the Diamondbacks. Why do you think Grace is still resentful towards the Cubs ? Edit: CUBZ99 beat me to it.

Oh, and to be clear you are talking about the Mark Grace who got run out of town after the 2000 season, and the Ron Santo who never got into the HOF until he was dead, and the Ryne Sandberg who cant get a major league coaching contract, correct ? I applaud those who make an effort to stand up to racism, but some of the posturing on this board is WAY over the top.

Remember that time Zambrano retired because he was having a bad season, abandoning the team, without coming back? Remember when he wouldn't stop showing up opponents with a dance move on the field? What about when he kept taking out younger players on binge drinking session before day games? Or the time he choked his manager? Punched a concession vendor? Oh wait, those were beloved, untouchable white players. If you can't see it, it's only because you don't want to see it. It would appear that all of the incidents you cite got enough press that you continue to remember them,even though you were but a tyke,or not yet born when many of them happened. Bad example.

You're aware that the Cubs have not lost 100 games this year right? Oh [expletive] that noise.

I would like to apologize to the board for dragging them all into the "Nuts and Gum" catagory, but when you have a board with only a few posters, and one of the most inane has 32,000+ posts,you tend to attribute that posters lack of knowledge to the entire board. My apologies to the rest of you. Meatball indeed.

Well, yes, it "matters." It's an even more uphill battle to improve a team that loses at least 100 games as opposed to 90, but my point was more dismissing how unlikely it is that they even lose 100 games in the first place. Nuts and Gum 4/17/2012 erik316wttn wrote: This team is going to lose 100 games this year, easy. Oh, [expletive] that noise. (nuts and gum) Talk about a meatball LOL.

Sorry,the "tough guy" quote was supposed to be directed at Sveum, not Baker, I worded that poorly. One too many double IPA's, and another lousy game makes for a bad post.

This is a 100 loss team. I should go back and dig up the old posts from all the "my opinion is a fact" posters who ridiculed those who suggested this before the season started, but you know who you are. Considering the fact that the Cubs are likely to trade many of their few valuable assets before the trade deadline,I could easily see this team breaking the all time Cubs loss record. At the sake of being captain obvious, this team, minus 2 or 3 players, stinks from top to bottom. I am extremely disappointed with Sveum,although you certainly cant lay all of the blame on him. However Jeff Baker has no business starting nearly as much as he has. All of his tough guy reputation has been totally missing. Ian Stewart hasnt been unlucky,he sucks. Nobody walks. The relief pitchers make me miss Grabow. Since I started watching the Cubs in the 60's, this is by far the worst team I heve seen. Pathetic. There, I feel better.Move this to rants,delete this if you like,I really dont care.

Tracking flyballs/linedrives isn't all that athletic of an activity. It's largely instinctual after years of following balls coming off bats from that distance/angle. Lots of players have moved to LF after not having played it much before, Pete Rose and Alphonso Soriano leap to mind. I have watched the likes of Dave Kingman,Mike Lum,Keith Moreland,and Glenallen Hill play LF for the Cubs, LaHair should be adequate. Its not like he would be replacing anyone who is particularly good out there as it is.

Did you miss the part where I mentioned he was worth 5.2 WAR in 2004? Let me know if LaHair ever sniffs that. To be fair, that 5.2 WAR is largely because of his incredible fielding numbers that year, which is either extremely flukish or more likely just plain wrong. His UZR/150 in 2003 was 2.8. In 2005 it was 6.5. In 2004 it was 30.7. He's only had 1 other year where it was even double digits! (excluding 2009, when he only had 50 fielding innings all season). That's why there's such a huge discrepancy between fangraphs and baseball reference for that year. BR has him as a good defensive player that year, and only has him at 2.7 WAR for 2004. That's probably closer to what Patterson was that year, with a possibility of up to a 3.5 or 4 win player. But he almost certainly wasn't anywhere near a 5 win player. It's very fishy to have a player coming off a major knee injury have by far his best defensive season of his career, which is what the fangraphs numbers would indicate. Yep,Pattersons fangraphs 5.2 WAR is most certainly an error. He was certainly more valuable than LaHair defensivly, but anyone using the 5.2 WAR as an arguing factor needs to work a little harder. It is simply a flawed/inacurrate stat.

All I am getting on CSN is stinking hockey.....

Mick Kelleher

Bobby Valentine is one of the most annoying announcers I have ever heard.

Busch Light, Old Style, PBR and Keystone are all battling it out for dominance in the shallow gene pool market. You can go straight to hell for lumping PBR in there Hipster? You don't have to be hipster to like PBR. The head brewmaster at Bells calls PBR the best mass produced lager beer in America. Hipsters drink it ironically, beer lovers drink it because it's good. Where did you ever hear crap like that?? The "head brewmaster" at Bells has no opinion on PBR. Dont make [expletive] up.

Castro comments aside,I thought Valentine came across as a pompous ass last night. I couldnt stand to listen to him pontificate any longer, so I turned the sound down in the 5th. He made Steve Stone seem humble.

There is a vast divide between a bench player who is good at "everything" and one who is only good at one thing. Come on, even you can do better than that. Baker can hit lefthanders, period. End of story.Would you like me to make a list of bench options who can accomplish more than that? You know better if you think before you post.

You're being deliberately obtuse, right? You can't see the value in a platoon player? Baker's career numbers against LH pitchers: .317 .364 .536 .900 in 535 PA You really can't see the value in that? Oh,I see it. Its his 1/2 dimension. So your philosophy is that you would rather a bench player be ok in everything than great in one thing and poor in the rest? I can understand that (the former provides better depth while the latter is better to have in any individual game). In the Cubs case, I'm not sure it works though. If Ramirez or Barney go down for any length of time, the Cubs have minor leaguers they can bring up to start at those positions. So why not keep Baker and use him where he's great? If Jackson pushes Reed Johnson off the team next year (which is very possible) then the Cubs are going to be low on guys who can come off the bench and hit left-handed pitching. Baker can fill that void and be used primarily for that purpose. Plus having Baker on the bench means that you can be a little more picky with your other bench players since he can passably play so many positions. If Bakers pinch hitting numbers were more respectable , or if he were above average at any other aspect of his game I might see your point. As it is his skill set is so limited he provides little value.Keeping Baker is akin to keeping Campana as a pinch runner/defensive replacement. I will concede that Bakers ability,for lack of a better word,to play multiple positions gives him a shred more value than I was giving him credit for.

SLG: 2011: .495 Career: .536 OBP: 2011: .371 Career: .364 UZR has him as a very good fielder at second and inconsistent at third. I'll concede this one to you. He's got enough power and patience in a platoon role, however. All numbers are against lefties. he doesn't need a lot of patience if he hits .355 against lefties and he's used exclusively against them. he's a valuable bench player, i have no idea why someone would want to get rid of him. Lets see,his lifetime ba vs lefties is well below .355 (.317) .he is a lifetime .190 pinch hitter,cant hit righties for [expletive], is a rather poor fielder,has no power,never walks,has no speed,and makes over a million dollars per. He would have to improve to be considered one dimensional,right now he would have to be considered 1/2 dimensional at best.Glad you like him,though. You're being deliberately obtuse, right? You can't see the value in a platoon player? Baker's career numbers against LH pitchers: .317 .364 .536 .900 in 535 PA You really can't see the value in that? Oh,I see it. Its his 1/2 dimension.

SLG: 2011: .495 Career: .536 OBP: 2011: .371 Career: .364 UZR has him as a very good fielder at second and inconsistent at third. I'll concede this one to you. He's got enough power and patience in a platoon role, however. All numbers are against lefties. he doesn't need a lot of patience if he hits .355 against lefties and he's used exclusively against them. he's a valuable bench player, i have no idea why someone would want to get rid of him. Lets see,his lifetime ba vs lefties is well below .355 (.317) .he is a lifetime .190 pinch hitter,cant hit righties for [expletive], is a rather poor fielder,has no power,never walks,has no speed,and makes over a million dollars per. He would have to improve to be considered one dimensional,right now he would have to be considered 1/2 dimensional at best.Glad you like him,though.

So in reality what you are saying is that IF we can sign Fielder/Pujols and Wilson we might be able to afford keep a Baker/whoever platoon and absorb the decline in production at 3rd. Ok,I'll give you that. Wont happen,though.

SLG: 2011: .495 Career: .536 OBP: 2011: .371 Career: .364 UZR has him as a very good fielder at second and inconsistent at third. I'll concede this one to you. He's got enough power and patience in a platoon role, however. All numbers are against lefties. Aramis Ramirez against lefties AND righties: SLG: 2011-.512 career:-.500 OBP: 2011-.342 career=.340 Who do you suggest for a part time third baseman to platoon with Baker to equal these numbers? Ramirez will be back. Baker=Dump him.

Baker has a career OPS over .900 against lefties. He could be very valuable to the Cubs as the right handed side of a third base platoon next season. There's plenty of reason for him to be on the team. Little power,never walks,average fielder at best,dump him.