Jump to content
North Side Baseball

SouthSideRyan

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    48,492
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 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

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by SouthSideRyan

  1. And what about all of the other prospects over the years that we held onto for far too long and got nothing or very little for? How about Sosa, the Farns, Patterson, Sisco, Kelton, DuBois, etc. And what exactly did we get for Jimmy Anderson, Andy Shipman? I'd say we've had a pretty fair balance of selling high and waiting too long. Your claim implies that we never sell high. And yes, a relief prospect for someone as worthless as Jimmy Anderson is pretty impressive.
  2. Huh, never read that debate. Interesting to say the least. But, tangentially related to DIPS you have this quote from Hughes: "You show up at a game and the first thing you get is a stat sheet and you look at it. This has only been for the last 30 or 35 years that I’ve been doing this. But guess what? The guy with the best strikeout-to-walk ratio is usually the best player. Wow! This didn’t just happen in the past five years."
  3. Gary Hughes said this "What in the hell is a dips? sounds like something i put my chips in, am i right scouts, i mean, give me some fives on that one!" ?
  4. I surely hope Hill is dealt. With the hype that Hendry has put around him as well as some comments from other execs (was that in a Stark column?), his value is probably about as high as it will ever get. I simply do not envision him having a long, successful major league career, and I would like to see us sell high for a change. Bobby Hill, Matt Bruback, Justin Jones, Brendan Harris, Ray Sadler, Francis Beltran, Jimmy Anderson, Felix Sanchez, Dave Noyce, Ryan Gripp, to a lesser extent Latroy Hawkins. (Hard to say he was at the top of his value, but they certainly got a great return on their investment, not to mention to sell high on Latroy would have been to trade him ~June 15th, '04 which is a ridiculous notion.
  5. How great that you've all decided to ignore comments posted on this very board From Bruce Miles that Hughes isn't the old stat hating codger you all claimed he was. Nothing gets in the way of bad jokes!
  6. He'd probably be convicted of murder pretty shortly after we acquired him.
  7. Beat me to it. Regardless, the point needs to be beaten in the ground some more.
  8. I heard Wade Miller used to drink and has now stopped. Therefore something around his '01 career highs seems about right.
  9. 2001 Miller > 2005 Ponson 2006 Miller = Allen Benes Alan Benes > 2005 Ponson
  10. I'd imagine there isn't much demand for him. I'd imagine they'd have to eat at least 10M to get anything back at all.
  11. Will Farell's imitations of him were gold. I thought they were crap. Will Ferrell was doing an imitation of a guy doing an imitation of a guy doing Harry Caray. I have seen far, far better impersonations. Concurrence. And he's spawned every average person to do awful imitations of Haray as well.
  12. Yeah, that's like Leinart saying that USC was still the better team after they just lost to Texas. While it may be true, he just picked a really bad time to say it. At least Texas didn't beat SC by 3 TDs.
  13. Don't the Mets have like 42 relievers now?
  14. Unless it's a hobo. Then you're fine.
  15. That's different, those are revocable waivers.
  16. With regards to Michigan, I don't think it'll take 20 wins to make the tourney for them. Assuming the Big 10 finishes the season as the top or 2nd rated conference, 18 should do it, which leaves it as just winning all those games against the unranked teams, and then knock off one of the ranked teams. Puts them at 17 wins which should set them up with an easy 1st round matchup in the big 10 tourney for the 18th win. 18-11 in the best conference in the country with losses to only ranked teams seems good enough for me.
  17. Is that line Pinch Hitting? Whoops, yeah.
  18. Sample Size issues and all but Branyan for his career is 4 for 41 with a 098/315/195 line as a PH. I've heard from multiple Brewers fans on BTF that said he needs consistent playing time to be worth anything as he is very streaky.
  19. Surprising. Grieve must like the city or something, cause it really seems like he could've caught on with a team that better appreciates his talents the past couple offseasons.
  20. You dumb bas###. It's not a schooner, it's a sailboat.
  21. None of Louisville, Marquette, or Cincy are even close to Texas's level. I'm not even sure Cincy or Louisville (Dean or not, ST. JOHN'S??) are worhty of being tourney teams.
  22. Maybe it's the inner Sully in me, but I feel like the Illini are being treated as far less than a #5 ranked team. As I said it's not necessarily on this forum, but this: Doesn't exactly seem to be a glowing endorsement. If Duke loses to the #11 ranked team on the road who happens to be in the ACC it's seen as proof that the ACC is just a brutal place on the road, and it was amazing of MVP JJ to lead his team back to within a desperation 3 at the buzzer for a chance at the win. No wait, that's exactly what happened against Va. Tech.
  23. I don't understand the hate on U of I I've seen (not necessarily all here) They lost by 2 points on the road to the #11 team in the country in the Big 10 while their best player went 1-9. A win under those conditions would be quite incredible, yet I'm seeing them slammed in a lot of places. This is a top 10 team, and hopefully by the end of the year Warren Carter will be given the Nick Smith March '05 treatment and this will be a top 5 team.
×
×
  • Create New...