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. How is Harden a head case? Yeah, his head definitely isn't the problem.
  2. All we need is for Wood to continue pitching like he was in the second half of last season. That's far from a given, but it's reason to have faith that he can still contribute. If he does and Guzman gives us anything, the Cubs will have a very solid pen.
  3. All right, it's really hard to complain about this. It's a "get your cake and eat it, too" situation.
  4. He's younger, healthier and not crazy? but z is much better. this whole trade z movememnet upsets me greatly. he's never gone near 100 in terms of era+. I don't know how you can argue that Z is better. Garza just put up 3 consecutive WHIPS of roughly 1.25 in the AL East; Zambrano hasn't done that in 5 years in the NL Central. WHIP? Come on. WHIP isn't a bad stat. Not the best, but not bad. But we're missing the bigger issue here. Trading Z would subtract from Hendry's growing stockpile of Carlos-es.
  5. Yeah, I feel really conflicted about this. As a move, it's stupid. But at the same time it's awesome. It probably wouldn't have happened, but seeing him in a pale hosers uni would have killed me a little. Plus it would mean my wife would complain less about me watching the Cubs all the time (she has a thing for Kerry).
  6. Yeah, I read that earlier. It's a massive confluence of ignorance and idiocy.
  7. If Wood pitches like he did with the Yankees, and if his arm doesn't fall off. Then yes, it would set up nicely.
  8. 2003 was disgusting because we hadn't been so close for so long, and because of how underwhelming the Cubs were as a division winner, there was a sense (at least for me) that we might not be that close again for quite a while. 2007 and 2008 didn't sting as much because 2004 primed us for dashed expectations. Before that, there really weren't any expectations to speak of. Hendry loaded the team so well in the preceding offseason (that rotation alone: Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Maddux, Clement, ugh) that for the first time in my life I really expected a big winner, and we all know how that turned out. In 2003, we had the prize ripped from us suddenly, in 2004 we watched it crumble over the course of months. 2004 was more disappointing in it's totality, but for sudden, sheer heart rending agony, 2003 takes the cake. Honestly, the day I joined NSBB was the first time I allowed myself contact with anything sports related since the end of game 7. But it was game 6 that really did me in. Before that inning, I was feeling really, really good. After I was full of doubt.
  9. Regardless of how you characterize it, I don't think it's acceptable. Just because you get away with something doesn't mean it's all right. I agree the Illini finished off the Zags and Heels well, but only maintaining focus against better opponents isn't something I think will serve them well in the long term. It's probably just because we're young, but after league play starts, the odds of a team getting off the deck and biting us in the ass increases.
  10. We just can't won't finish teams. i don't know about that. i think we get up on bad teams and start coasting, we have no problem finishing good teams or teams in general. we just make thinsg look closer than they should be. I think losing focus and coasting when up is tantamount to just not finishing teams off. In this game, the Illini have been able to score nearly at will in the paint (which is nice), but after getting up, they just seemed to abandon that in favor of passing the ball around the perimeter. It'd be nice to see us step on the other team's throat when they stick it out.
  11. Richmond has such deceptive hops.
  12. We just can't won't finish teams.
  13. Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. The Illini should really be up by 25+, at least. The last 5 minutes or so have been pure slop.
  14. Well, I bet Trent Dilfer is feeling pretty smug right about now.
  15. Good lord, this is awful. And to think I was upset our CBS affiliate is carrying the Broncos/Cardinals game.
  16. I'm actually having a tough time understanding this sentence. But I've thought all along this team could compete in the NL Central, namely because it is the NL Central. I think they can compete, but yeah its because its the Central. Cubs could be a very good team if a lot of things go right: Zambrano has to be an ace and not a side show the remains of Brandon Webb have to be successfully reanimated Monster walk years from Aramis and Pena repeat of 2010 from Byrd Soriano to earn his money Soto, Castro, and Colvin to be the 1st successful trio of farm grown Cubs position players since Banks, Williams, and Santo Blake Dewitt reaches his ceiling of an OK ballplayer Koyie Hill doesnt make it past spring training A solid bullpen with Marmol, Marshall, Guzman and maybe O Day If all of this happens, we might just have ourselves a ballclub. If number 2 and 3 happen, the Cubs will compete for the Central crown. Add in you last one and Cubs have a fine team. Soriano will never be worth his contract, I just hope for his complete suckiness to be delayed as long as possible. The rest of what you listed only need to be decent, not great. Yeah, if all of that were to happen, the Cubs would win 110 games. But it won't.
  17. $5 million in 2012 is cheaper than $5 million now. Yeah, deferring the money is a good thing. It gives us more flexibility now and we should have more money available next year. Yeah, it's not a ton of money, and the Cubs are shedding contracts after 2011. I don't see how this is a bad thing, especially if it allows another move or two this offseason.
  18. I'd be fine with him as long as we don't overpay. Giving up one of our better prospects is pretty close to overpaying and probably is. I don't necessarily think so. I wouldn't be thrilled at giving up Lee in trade for Garza, but I could rationalize it. I think he could be a #2-3 guy in the NL.
  19. Obviously not Castro, and I don't think he really qualifies as a prospect anymore. I think Lee is the guy. I'm hoping it's Lake, but it seems obvious it'd be Lee.
  20. Let's not forget Garza was pitching in the Al East. The level of offense he'd be facing would be much, much lower.
  21. i don't understand how you can call them "very similar" and then predict an .830-.850 OPS when dunn is around .900 every single year. Low BA, high OBP guys who strike out a lot and hit a lot of homers. I said similar, not identical. I'm hedging a bit because of last season, but a near .900 OPS from Pena wouldn't be shocking.
  22. Dunn and Pena are very similar players. Dunn has more certainty, but their skill sets are nearly identical, save that Pena plays good D. I don't think we'll get 2007 Pena, but I don't think it'll be the 2010 version, either. I'm thinking an .830-.850 OPS, 35 homers, 150+ K's and 100+ walks to go with good defense. I'm not complaining.
  23. Overpaid, but you knew it would happen when Werth signed that ridiculous contract. The AL East has to belong to Boston now. I like this simply because I hate the Yankees so. I hope they miss out on Lee so I can see the heads of Yanks fans explode.
  24. I'd give Wells for Garza so fast it'd make your head spin. If the Cubs got Garza and Webb, we'd have a potentially great rotation.
×
×
  • Create New...