JudasIscariotTheBird

Can we ban TomTheLazyTolkienReference? Low cost, maximum utility.

I don't even remember... is the Marlin Bystro here the PSD one or a joke parody? iirc he was the good insider from psd and abty was full of horsefeathers I have no idea who 70% of even the regular posters here are, but I do know that was a heaping unmistakable pile of sarcasm.

From any other poster, I'd assume sarcasm. Are you implying some sort of announcement?

I was going to dispute this, but I suppose you are the expert on periods of time with 7 in the ones column.

Yeah he’s largely been the same player every year since then. I get being worried about the injuries but he isn’t really a different player now vs 2016. Maybe he’s lost a little speed. 2015-2016: .285/.378/.524 .385 wOBA, 143 wRC+, .240 ISO, 11% BB, 26% K 2017-2019: .284/.390/.511 .382 wOBA, 147 wRC+, .227 ISO, 12% BB, 21% K Its the smile. It just doesn't sparkle as much.

Unless I missed one no 13-3 team has played on WC weekend under the current 8 division format. Last one was Tennessee in 1999 but they were a WC team. Nope. The last time it happened was in 2011...where the Saints went 13-3, but got the 3 seed behind...the Packers and 49ers...

FWIW Jim Bowden predicted that a Bryant to the Nats deal would look like Carter Kieboom, Jackson Ruttledge (2019 First Round Pick), and Tim Cate (2018 2nd Round Pick). Now Bowden is very much a clown (he thinks the trade will happen in March?!?), but he can be good at correctly gauging what things actually cost. Like his FA predictions are usually the best in terms of dollars. But again, he's a moron, so grain of salt and all that. I'm salty enough over all of this trade BS that a grain ain't gunna cut it.

Probably posted less often than you'd think based on this offseason :dontknow: TBF, I'd have like 1500 fewer posts without getting sidetracked!

Exactly. The odds aren't necessarily set at the closest they can place them to reality. They are set at the point that will make them the most money. The money is going to roll in on the Patriots. ...and I'll take the points.

That's huge for a playoff game I would think, especially since the Pats' D >>> their offense. Do they usually get higher? Anyway, Tannehill put on a prettier dress this year thanks to AJ Brown, Derrick Henry, and avoiding his annual concussion or whatever injury, but the best defense by DVOA in his division was Tenn's 18th ranked entering yesterday and I just don't believe he's got big playoff wins in him until he does it Playing at home is normally a 3-4 point advantage. The odds makers are basically saying the Titans and the Pats are equally good football teams, at this point...which is crazy to think about.

The Tannehill playing for the Titans isn't the same as the Tannehill playing for Gase. The Pats are only 4.5 point favs at home for a reason.

So let me get this straight. You've made up nearly half of the posts in this thread over the last week, you know you annoy the living hell out of a lot of the posters/readers here, and when I point out how ridiculous its been getting, I'M the 'weirdo' 'invested' in YOU?! I would just like it if you posted less because you post a lot. Try and discriminate. It's much more enjoyable for the reader. We'll all atttain message board happiness.

...Hoooow does phrasing your request as a question asked directly to me solve your latest manufactured problem? The most insulting part of your many, many attempts to snipe me is how half witted they are It isn't just my problem, and it was meant to be insulting. Seriously. You're just spamming at this point.

Can you try and limit your comments to maybe make up only 1/6th (or hopefully even less) of the posts in this thread, please?

Oh. You are realistic and no one else is. But to get serious, why do you take it as a given that trading Bryant is the best/only way to keep the pitching from being bad? And also, why not just let the pitching suck and keep Bryant? Why is keeping that pitching at an arbitrary level of current performance needed, and at the expense of trading away our (probably) best position player? This can all be avoided by not doing any of it. No, if you read what I wrote, I'm saying that some others in this thread are lacking in imagination, not that they haven't been realistic. The straw man trade ideas they've put forth have been unrealistic (like Bryant for Trout or whatever), but the complete inability to conceive of a possible trade that hurts their chances in 2020 but sets them up much better in 2021 and beyond is simply a lack of imagination. It's very realistic to say that you can't improve this team for 2020 by trading Bryant. I agree strongly with that statement. And if that's what a lot of posters have been saying (but just leaving out specifying 2020 only) then this was all a misunderstanding. I also don't say trading Bryant is the only way to keep the pitching from being bad or that the Cubs pitching will suck going forward, but to address your hypothetical, how many teams get to/go deep into the playoffs with a great line-up but sucky pitching? That doesn't sound like a plan that will get the Cubs to the desired result to me. Does it to you? I doubt you'll want to read my ridiculously long post that's coming (I'm moving at the end of the month so I've had small bits of time to write lately. But it's coming if you're really interested. (As an aside, yo, peeps, stop with the knee-jerk reactions to anyone who says something different than you and read dudes, sheesh...) In general, if you don't like knee-jerk reactions, then this place prob isn't your jam. I think most of us read, however...or am I giving a knee-jerk reaction to the implication that we aren't reading your posts? The teams that get into/go deep in the playoffs are the ones that are good at winning baseball games. You can be good at winning baseball games with so-so pitching if you mash the ball, and vice versa. We all know this. I don't see why the Cubs of 2020, or even the Cubs of 2024, should be interested in trading position players for pitchers for the sake of it.

I'll diagree on one point. He was so horrible last year that it would be difficult to actually be worse next year. He'll probably "bounce back." The true definition of a dead cat bounce. That isn't a reason to keep him, to be clear.

[bbvideo=560,315] [/bbvideo]

Can I add that I predict he generates around half of his WAR while visiting Busch?

If he gets the ABs, he gets to 5 WAR.

Oh. You are realistic and no one else is. But to get serious, why do you take it as a given that trading Bryant is the best/only way to keep the pitching from being bad? And also, why not just let the pitching suck and keep Bryant? Why is keeping that pitching at an arbitrary level of current performance needed, and at the expense of trading away our (probably) best position player? This can all be avoided by not doing any of it.

[bbvideo=560,315] [/bbvideo]

I'm definitely rooting for the home team in this one. I don't like Tiger. I don't like Kuchar. I don't like Reed. I don't like JT. I don't like Bryson. If Fowler and Finau weren't on the team, it would be really easy to root for them to fail.