Jump to content
North Side Baseball

XZero771679666304

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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. XZero771679666304
    I definitely lean heavily towards the saber side, but at the same time I'm perplexed by how some people treat analysis as if the game is played in a vacuum by automatons. It's kind of a backlash against antiquated criteria like chemistry, grit and the W/L/AVG/RBI/etc. stat base. I definitely think those things have been proven to be largely superfluous (I think people who still treat them as gospel are the baseball equivalent of the flat earth society), but the extremes some folks take the application of advanced statistical analysis to is a bit too far. Some of the stats (especially defensive metrics) are still really hazy.
  2. XZero771679666304
    I find it very useful myself. I don't even bother. I just tune some people out (or try to). I tried it out, but while I might have missed the initial post that would have pissed me off, it invariably pissed off someone else who then quoted it, displaying it for me to see and then be pissed off by it. A veritable piss spiral. Indeed.
  3. XZero771679666304
    I find it very useful myself. I don't even bother. I just tune some people out (or try to). I tried it out, but while I might have missed the initial post that would have pissed me off, it invariably pissed off someone else who then quoted it, displaying it for me to see and then be pissed off by it.
  4. XZero771679666304
    Yeah, sometimes the bullying people into going away works, but I am often perplexed by how many people argue ad nauseum with people who only want to argue. If you know getting into it with a particular person will only precipitate an endless and circuitous argument, why bother? Sometimes ignoring the problem is the solution. Agreed, how do you foe someone anyway. I have a few people I could do without. It's largely worthless. You can't see the original post, but you can see it's contents every time someone quotes it. You just have to condition yourself to ignore certain posters.
  5. XZero771679666304
    They might have been misplaced efforts, but I don't think they exacerbated the problem. I think they were largely ignored. The bad baseball is the real culprit.
  6. XZero771679666304
    Since about 2004 or so, I've had the message board bookmarked, not the front page. I just come straight here every time. I guess I just assumed most people did as well.
  7. XZero771679666304
    Yeah, sometimes the bullying people into going away works, but I am often perplexed by how many people argue ad nauseum with people who only want to argue. If you know getting into it with a particular person will only precipitate an endless and circuitous argument, why bother? Sometimes ignoring the problem is the solution.
  8. XZero771679666304
    I don't get the correlation between attempting to monetize the site and the site's supposed decline. I don't either. It never impacted my experience here in the least.
  9. XZero771679666304
    Show me a list of the top, oh, 10 or 20 highest post counts on NSBB, and then try finding names on that list that ARE NOT persistently aggressive with their opinions. Throw out the persistently aggressive crowd and then there'd REALLY be nobody left. Here you go dave. memberlist.php?mode=&sk=d&sd=d Name names. LOL, on that list it'd be harder to find aggressive types in the top 10. Although I am sick and tired of Fred pushing his [expletive] dogma on me.
  10. XZero771679666304
    If a post doesn't warrant a respectful reply, it doesn't warrant a reply at all. Don't validate the dumb repetitive arguments by taking the time to reply to them. It's hard not to respond sometimes, but this is generally my attitude. If somebody says something stupid with real conviction, they're probably set in their stupidity and it's not worth trying to debate them, unless you just get off on the conflict. But you don't have to be totally opposed to someone's viewpoint to have a debate. Many of the best discussions here were debates on aspects of an issue rather than the nature of it. But at the same time if you come in here and say something patently stupid I don't think you should be surprised to be lambasted, or expect to be coddled. And Rob, I don't think many of the bullies want to see new blood. It's easier to feel like king of the hill when there are fewer to challenge you and easier to feel superior when you have the same whipping boys hanging around.
  11. XZero771679666304
    That's a big part of it. A lot of people are snarky because they're sick of having the same arguments over and over. I personally don't care for debating with the baseball equivalent of the flat earth society, but some people take opportunity to brow beat them. This place always had a bit of an elitist vibe, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Some people might disagree, but I've always thought of NSBB as a place for more progressive analysis and discussion. Now there's just a lot of bad juju and bitter people. But I really feel like lack of interest is driving the lack of discussion. There's always something to be smartly debated, who wants to think about the Cubs any more than they have to right now? it's just depressing. And I have a hard time believing that other places are hopping with lively discussion. I'd wager that if stuff starts moving and shaking in the upcoming offseason, things here will pick back up in a hurry.
  12. XZero771679666304
    Dude, not trying to combine this with the other thread, but what do you want from Rickett's to this point? Based on resumes, Quade was more qualified than Ryno-and I'm no Quade apologist by any means. Do you want an owner who in his first year riles the Chicago press and fires his manager midway into his first season? Are you a Redskins fan too? We're all frustrated with the state of the franchise right now, but piling on Ricketts for this mess is misguided at best. People just want to see some blood after all the recent disappointments. I would have fired Hendry, but coming in hacking and slashing before a season that wasn't going anywhere regardless wouldn't have made much of a difference. At this point I'm not at all convinced Ryno would have been any worse than Quade, but that's not an endorsement by any means. I wanted Bobby V., but that was never going to happen.
  13. XZero771679666304
    There's a lot of good stuff being posted in this site, just not in this forum. The minor league and amateur baseball forums are still good reading. And the dearth of good stuff in the Cubs Discussion and Transactions forums has more to do with a lot of us becoming bitter and disillusioned than anything else. If things start looking up for the team, the quality of postings will as well. But yeah, the amount of actual analysis and discussion is probably at an all time low.
  14. XZero771679666304
    Yeah, any Kosuke contract would have to keep from interfering with Jackson's playing time in Chicago and a pursuit of Kemp. If we can do those two things, though, a .360-.400 OBP would look really nice staying at the top of the order. I actually made a thread about this a while back. I'd like to keep Kosuke around, as long as it wouldn't block anyone. He just bought a house in Chicago and said he'd like to stay here, so maybe he could be kept around for a reasonable amount, maybe 5-7MM per, maybe on a year to year basis. Now that it appears that Colvin might have been a mirage, it opens up some options. If Byrd could be dealt, it would increase the viability of the idea. I like Kosuke's OBP and defense a lot. Much depends on how the rest of this year plays out. If he maintains performance throughout the season, he might draw a fair amount of interest.
  15. XZero771679666304
    There are a few insufferable know-it-all dbags here, for sure. But on the flip side, there seems to be a steady influx of meathead, sports talk listening, RBI/AVG/W/GRIT/CLUTCH loving, you-can-keep-your analysis morons as well. Diplomacy would be nice, but I can't fault people entirely for losing their patience with those sorts of people. Having said that, I could make a list of NSBB stalwarts who could do with being banned/suspended from time to time.
  16. XZero771679666304
    I think an even bigger boon than canning Hendry would be hiring a sharp baseball mind as president ( who would likely recommend firing Hendry). Are there any names that come to mind?
  17. XZero771679666304
    I don't know how grand of a scheme it was but it's pretty clear this season is just a "wait it out" one and was from the start. That's a far cry from sabotage. And really, there wasn't much potential for this to be anything but a wait it out season. I would have sacked Hendry and Kenney, but even if there was new management they would have been totally hamstrung by largely immovable expiring contracts. There was little potential for change in the on field product. It's not the way I would have preferred to see it done, but letting this season play out isn't the end of the world. What happens starting the day after the season ends will be the real test. It could be that Ricketts saw this year likely wasn't going to go well and decided to let Hendry stick around to go down with the ship. That way he could say he gave him a full season to prove himself and appear diplomatic for doing so. Then he could cut Jim and Crane loose and start clean with a new GM and a bunch of freed up payroll. I really don't see that as shady. Or he may maintain the status quo and the whole thing could go to hell. We'll see.
  18. XZero771679666304
    No, Quade would sit him and start DeWitt at third. Because that's how he rolls.
  19. XZero771679666304
    Here's the thing: saying or directly implying the team was poorly constructed is not just an attack on Hendry, but the players. You can't just go about publicly casting aspersions without regard. I mean you could, but you're damaging your reputation and being unprofessional. Do you want players to want to play for you? You can get away with being an uncouth tyrant if you're a Steinbrenner, but the rest of the world has to at least try and be diplomatic. Some people just want to see people called out in public, but that's not how you do business. Ideally, Ricketts should have just dodged the question, but the answer he gave was better than calling out his management team in front of the media. We might feel a little vindicated if he did, but we're not entitled to it and it would ultimately be counterproductive if we were. Any "putting so-and-so on notice" should be done behind closed doors. Realistically, people aren't going to start coming out the ballpark because Tom Ricketts implied Jim Hendry's job is in jeopardy. They'll start coming out when change actually happens.
  20. XZero771679666304
    How do you know he hasn't? Do you think he should or would do it publicly?
  21. XZero771679666304
    Well, if Ricketts only goal this year was to be .500 and hope for the best, I would certainly hope he'd keep that part to himself. Talk about a good way to enrage an already testy (although increasingly apathetic) fanbase. But I don't know about that. Part of me feels he really thought this team could make noise, which is a scary thought. I'm sure his goal was for the team to make the playoffs and win the World Series, but it wouldn't surprise me if Ricketts knew there was little flexibility on the roster and recognized that expecting more than a .500 season or so was being unrealistic. Obviously he couldn't say that to media members, so he glossed over the question and gave as positive an answer as possible. I simply don't see a problem with it. We allw anted to see fur fly when the Ricketts' took over, but anyone with any real sense saw that new ownership really wasn't going to have an opportunity to make a big impact until this offseason. They could have fired Hendry right away, but a new GM would have been hamstrung, and the FA class was weak anyway. This offseason there will be significant money freed and there will be players that fit the team's needs. This offseason will be the real test, not the 15 months preceding it.
  22. XZero771679666304
    And Soto. And Marmol. And anyone else likely to be a Cub for more than the next year or two.
  23. XZero771679666304
    Can you imagine an owner sitting down the media and saying "Yeah, this thing is a real mess, the result of a litany of horrid decision making. There's not much to be done for it but to purge the front office and make wholesale roster changes." Sure we may want to hear that, but it would be appallingly, unthinkably bad business to actually say it. Hell, just saying change is needed would be fairly extreme. If this season plays out like it seems it will and Ricketts & Co. don't make some hay in the offseason, then we can start drawing conclusions about his ability and intent.
  24. XZero771679666304
    It looked like Marmol was throwing his fastball in the upper 80s and slider in the low 80s. That's not reassuring.
  25. XZero771679666304
    It depends on the player - which I think is what you're saying here. Should some team decide it wants Soriano, I'd take a couple of low-ceiling A ball guys if the other team will eat a large chunk of the money. If it's Pena or Kosuke, I'd eat much more of their salary if it would get us better prospects. Dumping salary shouldn't be that large a concern for this team, however, considering how many prospects we have coming up and how much salary we're already freeing up in the near future. In another year all we'll still have of significance is Soriano's contract, which is nigh unmovable. And maybe Pujols' or Fielder's contract. It'd be nice to get something for a few of these expiring contracts, but it wouldn't be much.
×
×
  • Create New...