Jump to content
North Side Baseball

XZero771679666304

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    14,655
  • 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 XZero771679666304

  1. My concern with Cashman is that because of the huge amounts of money he's been able to play with, we haven't really seen a "type" of player he likes. We don't know what his philosophy is on what makes a player good, basically. With the Yankees, he's simply able to (and more often than not, I'd guess, instructed to by the Steinbrenners) simply outbid everybody for the stars who are good at everything (Sabathia, ARod, Jeter, etc). Should he come to Chicago and he has a big payroll but not unlimited, what type of player does he target and look to develop? Is he an OBP/more progessive stats guy or is he more of a traditionalist? Yeah, it's hard to properly gauge Brian Cashman given the degree to which his strings were being pulled by the Steinbrenners.
  2. It's just like ripping off a band-aid. Best to just get it over with.
  3. Of course Wrigley needs heavy renovation. The grandstands are falling apart, the player's facilities are abysmal, etc. But the notion that the Ricketts' had no idea what they got themselves into is ludicrous. Particularly since they've been actively campaigning for these renovations and trying to raise huge sums of money to implement them.
  4. When you have a GM who just loves to re-sign non-productive former Cubs each year just to give them a paycheck, who could be surprised. Wood isn't productive? What are you babbling about? Reading is fundamental. 1-3 record for an overpaid non-productive thrower is what I'd expect. Try to keep up. Citing W/L (especially for a reliever) as the primary indicator of a pitcher's production and then admonishing others to "keep up" with you might just be one of the most (unintentionally) ironic statements I've ever read here.
  5. A decade ago many Cubs fans probably hoped Lou Montanez would become the Cubs #3 hitter. Not sure these are the circumstances they envisioned, though.
  6. No one is. What's happening is that people hate LeBron and love Jordan so much that they're so eager to make sure the comparison never gets made that they make incredibly specious statements about LeBron to make themselves feel better about the media making comparisons. So taking shots at LeBron because they fear he may be anointed GOAT at some point? Out of fear their guy might not hold that mantle forever? Well, there are a lot of Bulls fans here, I guess. Still, pretty stupid. Someone will probably unseat Jordan as consensus GOAT at some point, and that person may just be really unlikeable (like Jordan). At this point, my money would be on Kobe, if I had to pick one. And I do hate me me some Kobe Bryant.
  7. Yes, nobody can compare one player to another player until both player's careers are done. If you're building a case for GOAT, it's kind of difficult to make that call when one of the players hasn't had half the time of the other to establish a legacy, isn't it?
  8. Okay, I don't frequent NBA threads much, but what is going on here? Are people comparing LeBron to Jordan in a GOAT debate? Because that would be preposterous. Maybe in 8-10 years, but not now. Even more preposterous would be saying LeBron is has a better case for GOAT right now. I hope no one is suggesting that.
  9. To be fair, just about anyone could kick the ass of most of the drunken douchebags that do this sort of thing. Really, I don't care what happens to these jackasses. Tackle them, arrest them, taze them (my personal favorite), whatever. Beating them is probably a bridge too far, though.
  10. Please let this not happen. Yeah, that would actually be a big step down. :-&
  11. http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110608&content_id=20203006&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc I find it curious because it seems to loosely confirm what many have suspected for awhile, which was that Wilken and Co. had more restrictions on money, particularly with over-slots, than was publicly acknowledged. I don't recall any statement prior to this year that seemed to suggest things in as strong a term, although maybe I missed something. Anyhow, seems to bode well for our chances to land some of these kids. Looking at it now, it seems pretty obvious. The change in strategy this years seems to lend credence to the idea that constraints have been removed.
  12. Day game after night game replacing a catcher who has sucked this year. What's the big deal? I'd prefer it be Castillo, but it's not all that big a deal. Castillo should be playing everyday.
  13. More often than not Ryan has been really good, certainly worth his salary. The hate for him, especially given all the more deserving targets, has been bizarre. Granted, it's only been from a couple of people.
  14. A few weeks ago I had hope this team could contend for the division. Now I'm hoping for a top five draft pick and a cleaned front office. If we're gonna [expletive] it up, let's [expletive] it up good and proper. Eyes on the prize.
  15. or legally allowed to tackle them to restrain them, and arrest them. or taze them, at least in Philly. In Philly, lethal force should be authorized.
  16. I clearly remember Jim Essian, even though I was pretty young back then. You don't forget that brand of awful easily.
  17. not that many players hit like that any more because most players aren't on steroids. castro and soto are a good start and their rotation, when healthy, is reasonably solid. and obviously the main thing is the money coming off the books in the next couple of years. the bottom line is, it's not hard for a team with the cubs' resources to make a quick turnaround. Exactly. The 2006 Cubs had a couple of studs but not much else. This year's team has some young talent, but is missing 1-2 impact players. With all the money coming off the books and players becoming available, that can be remedied quickly.
  18. He's due. Let him play. This season is in the S-bend and we might as well find out if the Colvin we saw in 2010 was a mirage or not.
  19. I don't either. He's a potential impact bat and there's no need to wreck his base by putting him back there. We've got Soto and Castillo at the position, and not much at 3B outside of Vitters, who is still up in the air. I'd leave him where he is and maybe move him to third down the road.
  20. It counts in the loosest sense. And I like the upside of this pick. It sounds like he could well develop into good power and I doesn't seem like there any glaring weaknesses. His hands look busy but his swing looks smooth and quick, and he looks pretty well put together for a HS guy, so there won't be a huge need for him to bulk up.
  21. Mayo looks like Micheal Berryman, and it creeps me out.
  22. Yes, this would be great. Except I don't even think they'd do Zambrano/Soto for Montero straight up if it meant they had to pay all the money. They wouldn't trade Montero and Banuelos for for Z/Soto straight up with even money. Neither would I.
  23. Sure, calling out teammates isn't always in good taste, but there has been a serious lack of accountability from Hendry on down for a few years. Trading the one guy who, albeit in a less than perfect manner, says it how it is because he said it how it is would be disappointingly typical. But if Hendry has any delusions of salvaging this season, and I'm sure he does, trading Z would be surrendering them.
  24. Hahahaha...You are joking, right?
×
×
  • Create New...