SouthSideRyan

It begs the question how the hell did the Red Sox(who you said suffer the same problems as the Cubs) and the White Sox(higher HR factor than Wrigley) manage to win World Serieses recently?

I have a hard time blaming Jocketty, but I'd certainly be pissed at ownership if I had no soul.

Ya, take a look at the teams though. Larry's team had talent, albeit somewhat aged. Lou's had kids. Which did a better job? The one who had more to work with or the one who didnt? Thats what i thought. I think Lou's team had more talent. Older doesn't = more talented.

Re: Better on the road because of the all the astroturf. You'll have to excuse my memory on which fields had astroturf, but off the top of my head I've got Cincy, Philly, Montreal, Pittsburgh, and Houston. The Cards record in those cities was 119-115, worse than their record on grass road games of 132-115. EDIT: This was for the '82-'87 seasons, the Cardinals world series runs.

Yep, let's build the rotation based on the 1 game every 5 years where the wind blows out at 40 MPH. The wind blows in more than it blows out. It's stupid to build your team around your park no matter how extreme the park is. Teams have better records at home because they don't have to deal with travel and they're familiar with the park, not because they're designed to the park's specifications.

Didn't we have this same argument about dominant PGs like 3 months ago? Championship teams have some dominant players???

Except in the case where the buyer was knowingly underage (inapplicable) or involuntarily drunk(roofied by an employee of the bar?) It's why Hancock is forced to include the ridiculous involuntarily drunk part, and why his case holds no water.

I will say this yet again. With the wind the way it is in the summer time it may cause an effect like the altitude in Colorado. By building the team one way, we may be causing ourselves problems another. I am saying it could be the ballpark which has been around since 1914. We have never won in it. So can you say looking into your crystal ball that is absolutely 100% not the ballpark, and the wind, and the elements in April or October? I cant say with even 75% certaintity that it is. And i dont really have to tell you about the lines around the foul area..say LCS game 6? Please don't remind of game 6. It brings back horrible memories. Of those long delays of changing the field dimensions and weather every half inning. Cause they were playing in 2 different dimensioned ballparks. Get it?

Which brings it all back to saying Hancock was involuntarily intoxicated. Which is insane.

I wonder if John Olerud and Bret Boone getting old had anything to do with them doing poorly. And I wonder if Mike Cameron had as good a year as ever as recently as last year when Piniella was notably not managing the Padres. And I really don't even dislike Piniella much, but thi reasoning is nutty.

Are you really going by the career averages of a 26 year old starting pitcher who came into the league at the age of 22? His last two seasons have been the stuff of a No. 2 starter, and he's not even near his pitching prime. His numbers are skewed by a rough 75 starts when he was getting his feet wet. I guess when your "point" is completely wrong, it's just easiest to make a fool of yourself. The difference is, I have a point. You have NOTHING but pure speculation. Pitchers in their prime have regressed before, you know. Myers wasn't moved to the pen because the Phillies had to have him there. He was moved because he flat out stunk in the rotation this season. 5 IP per start, with a 9+ ERA, and a WHIP of 1.6. Yep, those look like #2 starter numbers to me. Good point. In three starts. If you can't grasp how stupid it is to move a 26 year old, coming off two good-to-great seasons, to the bullpen because of two bad starts (his first start was good), then it's not even worth having this discussion with you. His numbers as a reliever are still better than his "good to great" seasons as a starter. Look, we disagree. No big deal. I just find the "Message Board Mentality" funny. You know.. the one where posters on a message board all think that they are so much smarter than actual executives in MLB. Yeah, we're all so smart. That's why none of us have a job in professional baseball. Every politician/pundit is smarter than you at running the government. Mike North knows way more about sports than you do. There are dopes EVERYWHERE in this world, many of them in high paying/high power positions. These dopes then use this power/money to hire more dopes because they don't know any better. Cause they're dopes.

I'm not even gonna dignify the "Wrigley is the problem" nonsense with a response. But why is it exactly that Lou and Dusty's 18 years of being respected in the business is enough for you but Rothschild's isn't? And my favorite part, commending Lou for averaging 67 wins a season in Tampa. Something Rothschild did.

I'll blame him for not pinch hitting for Izturis for sure, but I'm fine with Marshall staying in the game(he was dealing and was under 100 pitches), and Jones pinch hitting. Jacque took a good approach in the AB and hit the ball hard.

The best player is always the most valuable. If Derrek Lee was on the Cardinals that year why would he be more valuable? What about teams that run away with their division? If you win the division by 10+ games can you not be an MVP from that team either? People always insist on using analogies from other sports to prove their point regarding baseball. They don't work because they're different sports. You have a lot more of an affect on the style your team plays and how well your teammates play in basketball compared to baseball.

Ya know who would be nice to have? LaMarcus Aldridge.

So my bid of 3.58 didn't work then.

Jesus, this is getting annoying. He didn't suck? No he didn't. Losing a fly ball and making a bad throw doesn't mean you suck in the field. Murton is averageish in RF.

Cause that would be stupid?

I was starting to think that I was the only rational person left on NSBB. I am amazed how some posters overreact to anything that happens to be whispered by someone. I have supported Hendry in the past, but I can't believe he would give up Murton for a relief pitcher especially since we seem to lead the league in quantity (not quality) of relief pitchers. As some posters have pointed out, Murton is the kind of player that you package with pitching prospects to get a big name player. I don't believe this rumor unless it is really an outstanding relief pitcher. I was thinking the same thing. First, the over-reaction to a rumor. Second, that trading Murton would not be even close to the worst thing Hendry has done. If the Cubs were playing fantasy baseball, then Murton has has good value, but when you actually have to put a 9 man team on the field, mixing defense with offense, Murton has avg. value. Yeah cause Murton gets tons of HRs, SBs, and RBI. I love that "fantasy baseball" has become code for when actually looking at stats.

Jesus, this is getting annoying.

Josh Towers said to be embarrassed for Johan Santana.

I think including theoretical defense in LF along with baserunning, Gimabi is less valuable than even an imporperly managed Pagan/Murton/Floyd platoon.

To listen to some people on this board we've won about 10 blow outs against the Kansas City Royals and then the rest of our games we spend leaving the bases loaded every inning, and still manage to have our sucky bullpen blow our nonexistent lead. There's plenty of stats out there that show why we're just a 500 team, there's no need to just make stuff up.

If I see one tomorrow, I'll grab one, but I wouldn't be shocked if it's already been stolen.

Easy to stay in shape when you have nothing better to do because nobody loves you. Including your wife and kids.