UMFan83

Strangely prophetic: [bbvideo=560,315] [/bbvideo]

So basically Maddons cryptic comments were basically him challenging LaStella to report and if he doesn't he won't be back with the team.

Reading @BleacherNation Twitter feed from the last 20 mins regarding LaStella and Maddons quotes. This thing keeps getting weirder. I'm not sure we will ever see Seal Boy in a Cubs uni again.

Yeah if he gets red hot again like the stretch in late June and gets his OPS up to the .950-.980 range he might become the favorite. Many were picking him as the favorite around the AS Break

How fickle are those numbers on a season to season basis? I'm assuming very. I see Bryant was the 2nd most clutch player in the NL last year, now he's the least clutch player this year.

I think that while voters are more educated on WAR and defensive value etc etc and it plays a factor into the voting, I still think eye popping slash lines will get lots of votes. I'm guessing that if the season ended today Daniel Murphy would win it. This is how a voter would defend it (not how I would, I'd pick Bryant or Rizzo): -.350/.390/.615/1.005 slash line, 21 HR, 81 RBI and only 44K, numbers that are all higher than Bryant except HRs. -Plays for the 2nd best team in the NL, and with Bryce Harper having a down year has stepped up as the most valuable offensive player on the team -We the voters hate strikeouts so 44 Ks vs. 113 Ks means something -Sure he doesn't walk nearly as much but when you are hitting .350 does it matter? -Doing all these things as a MI makes him even more valuable -We fell for him in the playoffs last year and love him even more for carrying his hot streak for almost a calendar year -Bryant is great, but so is Rizzo, how can Bryant be most valuable when Rizzo is putting up a similarly great season -We don't understand and/or trust defensive and baserunning metrics used in WAR -Bryant is young and will win an MVP some day, Daniel Murphy is a much better story *again this is not me arguing it, just how I'd expect a majority of voters would approach it*

Honestly, I would care a lot less if the Cubs won a recent World Series. Those mouthbreathers gloating about 1908 etc after beating us would be unbearable.

But is it an outside chance? Isn't the prevailing theory that even a team that's significantly better only about a 55-45 favorite in a short series? Maybe I bought in too hard to the playoffs are a crapshoot thing.

Why? I'd much rather the Marlins take that spot. I can't handle another Cardinals Cubs series. The Cubs are the clear better team but as discussed ad nauseum the advantage is like 55-45 Out of the 4 teams seriously vying for an NL wild card, I'd prefer the Cards and Marlins to any other permutation. I'd most like Marlins/Pirates, but I feel like I've nearly written Pittsburgh off. I agree Cards and Marlins are the 2 worst of the realistic candidates but the difference between the Cardinals and another team is not worth the emotional risk of another Cards-Cubs series. I prefer smooth sailing and saving my emotions for winning the World Series

Why? I'd much rather the Marlins take that spot. I can't handle another Cardinals Cubs series. The Cubs are the clear better team but as discussed ad nauseum the advantage is like 55-45

2 hours ago it looked likely the Marlins would have a 2 game lead over the Cardinals in the WC when the Marlins were up 5-1 and the Cards down 4-0. Now it seems likely that the end the night tied with the Cards winning and Giants having bases loaded 1 out in the 11th

Seriously. Up 4 runs with 2 outs in the 9th and a runner on 1st Walk HBP Single single Walk Walk HBP Reds lose 5-4. How do you allow 5 runs on 3 hits, none for extra bases. That's insane ineptitude

Game blown

Lead blown Thank God we have such a huge lead

Cigranis last 11 pitches: 8 balls HBP 2 singles 0 strikes

Wow runner on 1st with 2 outs up 4-0 and suddenly the tying run is on base. Not that the outcome matters much but it's always nice to extend the lead and always nice for Cardinals to lose

I can't believe we were in a division last year where the top 3 teams finished with 97-100 wins.

I don't know. There is a lot fundamentally wrong with the organization, but in terms of on the field results, over the past 11 seasons we've made 3 playoff appearances with a Super bowl and another conference championship appearance, had 3 other seasons where we either tied for a playoff spot at 10-6 or needed to win in week 17 to get in and didn't, and another year where we started 7-3 and surging toward the playoffs when Cutler went down for the year. that leaves only 2007, 2009, 2014 and 2015 as completely lost years. And overall, I am a believer in Pace and think that we are on the right path (although this is a big year to know for sure). All I'm saying is that yes there are a lot of stupid backwards things about this organization and yes its stupid to have to use "but they almost made the playoffs 4 other times" as an argument, but there have been several teams that would be a lot worse to follow over the last decade plus than the Bears. this is all garbage they've been a mess a handful of other teams have done worse but we were all relieved when their incompetence had a touch of professionalism last year. it's a huge bummer I agree its not a great organization but my point was that its not one that's tempting me to bail on them. If I was a Browns fan or a Bills fan or a Dolphins fan or even a 49ers fan (yes they can make the same 'on field success' argument that I made about the Bears but I would argue that their FO and ownership make the Bears general incompetent ownership look like the Patriots in comparison), I could understand it.

I don't know. There is a lot fundamentally wrong with the organization, but in terms of on the field results, over the past 11 seasons we've made 3 playoff appearances with a Super bowl and another conference championship appearance, had 3 other seasons where we either tied for a playoff spot at 10-6 or needed to win in week 17 to get in and didn't, and another year where we started 7-3 and surging toward the playoffs when Cutler went down for the year. that leaves only 2007, 2009, 2014 and 2015 as completely lost years. And overall, I am a believer in Pace and think that we are on the right path (although this is a big year to know for sure). All I'm saying is that yes there are a lot of stupid backwards things about this organization and yes its stupid to have to use "but they almost made the playoffs 4 other times" as an argument, but there have been several teams that would be a lot worse to follow over the last decade plus than the Bears.

Willson's numbers from call up to the end of the losing streak: .312/.398/.982 in 22 games Willson's numbers since the winning streak started: .211/.300/.254/.554 in 20 games He has an inverse effect on the Cubs success as a team.

I'd guess its Cahill, hasn't he been stretching out in Iowa?

Read something on Twitter from Carrie Muskat that La Stella basically made a deal with the Cubs that he would not report but would continue to work out at his home in NJ. WTF? http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/4065/6681/original.jpg

My point still kind of stands but I feel less strongly about it after looking at their AAA roster. Of pitchers who have made 3 starts for the Salt Lake Bees, only 2 of them have an ERA under 4.74. Those pitchers are Lincecum, who failed spectacularly in the bigs and was DFA'd and Tyler Skaggs who is currently in their depleated rotation. The ERAs of the rest of the guys who have made at least 3 starts for them (from most starts to least): 4.74, 7.19, 6.26, 5.24, 6.42, 6.91, 5.92, 15.00 What a dumpster fire of an organization.

They have a AAA team right? I mean the 2006 Cubs gave starts to guys like Marmol, Juan Mateo, Les Walrond, Ryan O'Malley, Jae Kuk Ryu, Wade Miller and Jerome Williams. None of them worked out, but at least they got a good look at Marmol and turned him into a quality reliever. Maybe that would have happened without auditioning him, but it certainly didn't hurt him. Point is that there is absolutely no future with Jered Weaver and the Angels season has long since been lost. I'm sure there's a AAA pitcher that's worth looking at, or a Brian Matusz out there. At least those options have a non-zero chance of impacting the organization in the future.

it makes no sense. He's old (33), he's not under team control beyond this year, he hasn't been good for several years. He totally seems like the kind of guy you DFA and give his starts to pitchers in AAA, even if they aren't highly regarded prospects (see: 2006 Cubs rotation), because whats the point in giving them to Weaver?