Jump to content
North Side Baseball

scarey

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,845

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by scarey

  1. scarey
    Actually, realistic analysis like this is what is best about NSBB. I was very intrigued by the statics offered in this thread. The delivery of the statistics though sounded overly critical. Statements like "we should not be particularly excited about him", "he's going to provide no value", and "there isn't much reason for enthusiasm here" seemed a little harsh. As an infrequent visitor here and a person that regularly posts at a different message board, I tend to agree with Aramis Fan. In fact, I rarely venture over to the Cubs Discussions forum actually and usually am all over the Minor Leagues forum instead (things tend to be a little bit more positive over there). The pessimism and holier than thou attitude that tends to shine through here as a result of specific, overly vocal individuals tends to push me and others I know away though. I'm not trying to pick on you Treeman, but just wanted to point out Aramis Fan's accusations are not unfounded.
  2. scarey
    It has to help that Prokhorov could probably feed LeBron into a virtually untapped market in Russia. If LeBron wants to be a global figure and a billionaire, it would help to add 142 million people as potential consumers. Then again, I have no idea what kind of effect Prokhorov would actually have on his home country.
  3. scarey
    The 40 man roster point makes sense. I just hope that wasn't the only factor put into why a player would make the roster over another.
  4. scarey
    I don't want to argue semantics, but most people that have listed a roster have him as the back up catcher.
  5. scarey
    Why is everyone so high on Welington Castillo? The guy seems to have a strong arm and can hit for power, but he rarely walks, doesn't hit for average, and from what I've heard is average at best behind the plate. Clevenger and Chirinos to me are better catching options. Chirinos sounds like he is the most well rounded of the three and best defender while Clevenger could be an offensive assett with his ability to get on base along with better than average receiving skills. Everyone seems to have jumped to the conclusion that Castillo is the back up next year, but a guy with a career .703 OPS in the minors isn't too high on my list personally. I know the other two aren't exactly lighting up the scoreboard, but at least they have respectable OBPs.
  6. scarey
    Three consecutive bad outings.
  7. scarey
    Peoria's hitters are starting to come around. If Fitzgerald, Rohan, and Bour could develop some home run power, we might have some decent prospects on our hands. Good to see Watkins, Cerda, and Lee's lines are starting to look decent.
  8. scarey
    What makes the least sense of all of this is... hasn't Zambrano been an active participant in the "hazing" in the past?
  9. scarey
    Not saying I'm totally blowing it off, but people that automatically believe this are doing so because they want to believe it's true IMO. Wow, that's quite a leap. Why would I want it to be true? I find it plausible simply because they have been very bad (including losing several close games), Z's issues have been well-documented, and Ramirez is having the worst season of his career by a long ways. Its not unusual for people to get frustrated and start acting out in this sort of situation. I'm not saying its the end of the world, I am just saying its plausible. People want it to be true because it's just another angle on why Lou should be fired. Also, I agree that it's plausible, but that's not what you said originally. Maybe you misspoke, but I have feeling when you originally typed "I buy it" you weren't meaning it was plausible.
  10. scarey
    Not saying I'm totally blowing it off, but people that automatically believe this are doing so because they want to believe it's true IMO.
  11. scarey
    I'm a bit confused. I thought "gritty" was how people try to explain why they like a player that is not very gifted but hustles. Are you saying you think Sandberg will want to stock the team with Theriot's? Or are you describing "gritty" and "playing the right way" as some thing different?
  12. scarey
    Trammell's numbers are a little skewed because of his first season when the team was desperately trying everything they could to score runs, but it is true that his teams were near the top of the league during his tenure in sac bunts. I don't know how he would handle more talented teams than the ones he had so I think the book might still be out on him. The one advantage I see with Trammell over somebody like Lou is that Trammell seems to be genuinely interested in developing younger players. Oh, and he actually watches the ball games. Whether or not he would be better than Sandberg, I have no idea. For me, it all starts with the quality of players put on the roster. If there were a GM in place who was doing a better and more consistent job, I really don't care who the manager is as long as he has some sort of sense on how to manage the entire pitching staff or at least defer to Larry. Hell, load the roster and let Larry run the show. I think keeping an open mind is probably the most level headed idea if Sandberg or Trammell get the job. I only pointed out Trammell's numbers because they are less speculative than what's being said about Sandberg in my opinion. And Nuts & Gum, I agree. Trammell's horrible team should be taken into account relative to his baseball philosophy.
  13. scarey
    This is where we are going to disagree. I don't think one party is going to convince the other party otherwise so... agree to disagree?
  14. scarey
    This is where I'm at really. Nail biting about Sandberg as manager is overblown in my opinion. really? because it seems like you're actually in "i'm going to defend Sandberg against all comers" territory. I think you're trying to set me up as a blind Sandberg supporter. That, I am not. I find it foolish to dig for reasons to not like him much in the same way that it is foolish to want him as manager simply because he's Ryne Sandberg. I think there's a handful of people that actually know what kind of manager he is (and I don't think anyone on this forum is included in that handful except for maybe a select few people that spent a season(s) going/listening to a majority of his teams games). Everyone else is speculating, but some seem to talk as if they do in fact know. So, I'll ask that you excuse me if you disagree with the idea that I find it fair to see what kind of manager he actually is before condemning him. That's all. It has nothing to do with defending Sandberg because he's Sandberg, but with defending a manager candidate.
  15. scarey
    When did this actually happen? I feel like it was hyperbole thrown out by someone at some point and has turned into the definitive proof that he would be a terrible manager. Hell, even if that's what the box score actually reads, we don't even know if in that particular situation the number three hitter was someone that had decent speed and thought he could reach by sneaking in a bunt that turned into a SH. It happened at least once last year and I was AT the game in Jackson TN. At another game he was kicked out while making a pitching change in the 3rd inning. You should read the minor league threads. You can feel whatever you want, Sandberg is a moronic manager. There's no way I could tell for sure, but I would make a healthy wager that I spend more time in the minor league forums than you do. Not that it even means anything in terms of this discussion.
  16. scarey
    This is where I'm at really. Nail biting about Sandberg as manager is overblown in my opinion.
  17. scarey
    I don't know why you're getting hung up on total sac bunt numbers. The point with the Sandberg incident isn't the general use of a sac bunt as opposed to who he was having sac bunt and what were the circumstances. You keep approaching this like people here are denouncing the sac bunt as some kind of baseball kryptonite. It's just one part of the game and it can be used well. The hit and run can also be used well, but it can also be used very poorly, as we've seen with Lou. I understand we don't know the context of the situations Trammell used sac bunts in during his tenure as the Tigers manager (unless anyone here is a closet Tigers fan?). However, you have to admit that an AL manager having a comparable amount of sac bunts to an NL manager, given an AL manager only has to have a pitcher bat in a handful of games, may indicate that said AL manager may sac bunt inappropriately. Right? I mean, I don't have dew for a first hand testimonial or anything, but you can see why I might jump to that conclusion?
  18. scarey
    I don't know about anybody else, but I don't think Lou sac bunts way too often. He tends to let the wrong guys steal sometimes (Theriot when he's not having success) and he hits and runs a bit too much, but I don't think he overly sac bunts all that much. Yeah, it seems the issue with small ball with Lou is the hit and run and too many attempts stealing with the wrong players and at the wrong times. He doesn't really call for many sac bunts. And who is "seeking salvation" in Trammell? My point was Lou has been managing an NL team and had comparable sac bunt numbers to Trammell who was managing an AL team. And there's plenty of people that have said "I hope they just give the job to Trammell instead". They've even done it in this thread. If you want to challenge the wording itself (specifically 'salvation'), I guess you have a case against me. But I'm pretty sure you understood what I meant: there are people who feel Trammell would be the better candidate.
  19. scarey
    I also want to point out that people seeking salvation in Trammell may be in for a disappointment. In his three years managing Detroit, Trammell averaged only sightly less sac bunts per year than Piniella did the last three years as a Cub for an NL team. If Trammell is bunting that much with a DH, I have to figure he'll be bunting at a Dusty Baker like rate.
  20. scarey
    Well, I guess not only is he a terrible manager, he is at a sub-human intelligence.
  21. scarey
    Ty Wright? I suspect he was trying to get on via sac bunt especially considering that was his one and only SH of the year. Edit: Minor league splits shows that as his only SH of the year while baseballcube shows he had 7 as Bob Sanders states.
  22. scarey
    As TT said, it could have been the 4 hitter instead of the 3 hitter, but otherwise that's exactly what happened. The runners beforehand reached base and then Sandberg had a sac bunt laid down to move the runners over. If there was another reason for doing it, I haven't heard Ryno give why. But seriously, take Sandberg's name out of the equation. Wouldn't you think something unusual happened here? A missed sign? An attempt at a bunt base hit? There's plenty of explanations that make more sense than "Sandberg was giving up an out to move his base runners over with his 4 hitter so his 5 hitter could drive them in".
  23. scarey
    When did this actually happen? I feel like it was hyperbole thrown out by someone at some point and has turned into the definitive proof that he would be a terrible manager. Hell, even if that's what the box score actually reads, we don't even know if in that particular situation the number three hitter was someone that had decent speed and thought he could reach by sneaking in a bunt that turned into a SH. Last year. Search function isn't working or I'd dig it up. In doing a google site search I found it might've been the 4 hitter after the first 3 guys got hits, but the principle is the same. My fuzzy memory was that it was not someone with wheels. Do you understand why I have a hard time believing that's what really happened? If that is absolutely what happened without any alterior motive and that is what Sandberg would do at the Major League level, then it would have to be the dumbest most stuborn managerial decision ever made. No exageration. I don't care who the manager was, I have to believe there's an explanation if this is without a shadow of a doubt what happened. It could have been a 6 year old making the decision and I would not believe it.
  24. scarey
    When did this actually happen? I feel like it was hyperbole thrown out by someone at some point and has turned into the definitive proof that he would be a terrible manager. Hell, even if that's what the box score actually reads, we don't even know if in that particular situation the number three hitter was someone that had decent speed and thought he could reach by sneaking in a bunt that turned into a SH.
  25. scarey
    Has Castellanos dropped that far? The guy can hit to all fields with power and should be able to stick at third base. What's not to like?
×
×
  • Create New...