XZero771679666304

Had to be expected. Colorado is pretty attached to Tulo, so the Cards would have to pay through the nose. There will be some more noise, but I don't expect anything to come of it.

Right, the chasm between Santana wanting 100M and Santana getting 100M is the whole reason to laugh at that attempt in the first place. Why would you laugh at an athlete reaching for the most he can get in an incredibly inflated market? I'd laugh at the idiot who strives low and the teams that can't hang in the market. You can't blame him for trying, but it is a laughable goal. There is no harm in starting high and working down, though.

My most recent celebrity encounter was almost running over Dean Stockwell as he was being helped across the street by his twentysomething girlfriend.

I don't think that line is unrealistic at all. I might react that way if he posted a .300/.400/.500 line.

I doubt that, too.

Also that it was delayed b/c Theo wanted to talk to Lovullo first. Well that much was obvious. If Lovullo wasn't a prime target, this would have been done a long while ago. And it makes sense that Jed and Jason would have been the guys pushing it, if anyone was.

I think Incognito is clearly in the wrong, and he has a track record of disruptive and inappropriate behavior. I know hazing-type behavior is ubiquitous in pro sports (and football in particular, since football players are generally dumb even by pro athlete standards), but I think it's useless, stupid and sophomoric (especially at the pro level, it's supposed to be a professional sport) it wouldn't bother me at all if this all results in some kind of comprehensive hazing ban. There have to be less junior high-esque methods of building camaraderie and/or discipline. But most of all I think it's being sensationalized and I'm just sick of hearing about it. Cut him, don't cut him, mandate counseling, make an example out of him, whatever. Just get it over with.

I like when he blew up Piazza at the plate in 1994.

Ten or fifteen years ago this would have meant something, but there are so few games on WGN anymore anyway. WGN was awesome when it carried all (or nearly all) the games, but when it got to the point that I had to buy MLBEI, it became a total non-issue (as far as how I got to see the games goes).

I get what you're saying. But my allegiance to the Illini was cemented long before I ever set foot on a campus as a student. There was no way I could just switch (of course that is pretty much due to the fact that my father and many relatives were/are UI alums, and conditioned me to be that way). The Cubs and Illini are in my blood, there's no undoing that for me. And what about people who get an undergraduate degree from one school and a graduate degree from another? Does that confuse allegiances at all?

I'm always fascinated by how people's fan affiliations are formed. I am a rabid Illinois hoops fan, and have been since I was a kid. I didn't attend UI, but my father did and that's how I was indoctrinated. The schools that I have attended and received degrees from barely register anything more than a passive interest sports wise. I am always curious about how a person can be raised a huge fan of a school/team, but then replace that allegiance with another, even if it ends up being their alma mater. And I certainly don't think that being an alum automatically makes someone's fanhood more legitimate. Now if a person is a bandwagoner, that's a whole other thing altogether. I had an acquaintance who was all about the University of Michigan, despite the fact that he didn't go there, didn't know anyone who went there, never lived in or around the state of Michigan or had any connection to the university or the town. He just decided he was a Michigan fan while the Fab Five were there. I can't stand that guy.

After cruising around doing the schadenfreude thing, I am amused by how many Cards fans seem to despise Pedroia. It's funny to me because of all the players in MLB who aren't on the Cardinals, he is the one I think their fanbase would fawn and swoon over the most if he were one of theirs. Hell, they'd probably have called for a statue of the guy to be built already.

After cruising around doing the schadenfreude thing, I am amused by how many Cards fans seem to despise Pedroia. It's funny to me because of all the players in MLB who aren't on the Cardinals, he is the one I think their fanbase would fawn and swoon over the most if he were one of theirs. Hell, they'd probably have called for a statue of the guy to be built already.

My hate for the Cards and their fans is orders of magnitude more intense than any distaste I have for Boston. Absolutely no conflict in my mind about this.

The run expectancy with a runner on 1st and none out is about 45%. With none on and none out, it's about 30%. I'm pretty sure the run expectancy when you hit a home run is 100%. So you already have a run in, and only lose 15% of run expectancy going forward. Plus it's just common [expletive] sense.

I've done a 180 on the DH issue, and at this point I'd be happy to see the NL adopt it. I really don't care for the "strategy" having the pitcher bat adds to the game, and I despise the pretentiousness of it. It would decrease the number of breaks in the action as well as sac bunts and other such annoyances, and would lead to increased offense, which is fine by me. And frankly, I think it's just a matter of time before it actually happens. I'd be very surprised if it doesn't in the near future.

I think there's going to be some serious growing pains/adjustments/frustration early in the year, but there's a chance to be pretty good later on.

Oh, I agree, but I could make sense of it. Now if the end result of this process turns out to be a total and utter failure, then I think a lot of people will jump ship. As for me, I've been a fan since the 80's, so I feel like it can't get a whole lot worse than what I've already experienced. But we'll see, I guess.

I know a lot of us feel like we could quit on the team sometimes, but I think most know that they never actually could. Short of it being revealed that the Cubs were facilitating some kind of heinous human trafficking/exploitation operation or affiliating themselves with a hate group or some such thing, I don't see any way I could just stop being a Cubs fan. I wouldn't be so sure of that. People's life situations change all the time. And especially as people age they tend to care less about a pro sports team. On the whole you aren't going to see a mass exodus of fans. But I could easily see people just stop caring/paying attention. It happens every season on a smaller scale, why couldn't it happen over a longer term? And I wouldn't just assume somebody "wasn't much of a fan" if they ever did stop caring. Is that really the case, though? Based on people I know and have known (anecdotal, I know), I'd say the opposite is true. Most of the really invested fans I know are older, while casual fans tend to be younger. Younger fans seem more outwardly fanatical, but older fans seem to be more attached. Being emotionally invested in a triviality (sports or a sports team) over which you have no control doesn't make any rational sense, and if you don't grow out of it early, I don't think you grow out of it at all. Maybe someone can show me a study that proves this theory wrong, but I think that if you make it into mid-life and you're still invested, you're a lifer. Like with anything else, the longer you identify with something, the harder it becomes to let it go. Just my opinion. And as for the "not much of a fan" comment, that was more in response to notion that who they hired as a 3B coach would be enough. You stand by though all the losing and shenanigans, but the 3B coach is the final straw? Unless a person had some blood feud with Guillen, I'm not buying that. Now if someone were to say this rebuild/financial fiasco was what pushed them to their limit, that I could at least understand.

I know a lot of us feel like we could quit on the team sometimes, but I think most know that they never actually could. Short of it being revealed that the Cubs were facilitating some kind of heinous human trafficking/exploitation operation or affiliating themselves with a hate group or some such thing, I don't see any way I could just stop being a Cubs fan. And certainly not because they hired a spaz to be their third base coach. But we all should know Ozzie is not the kind of person the FO would hire anyway.

That's just ridiculous. I think Ozzie would be a nice asset as a 3rd base coach. Please explain. I don't think Ozzie would be a "nice asset" in any capacity, but saying you'd be done with the Cubs if they hired him is ridiculous. Unless you're just not much of a fan.

You don't think that the pharmaceutical lobby wants to keep it illegal because of it's easy availability without their involvement/profits? Any hippie can grow marijuana plants. yeah, but that's not exactly a conspiracy, it's just rich and powerful people trying to stay rich and powerful. smoking weed isn't going to cure your cancer and there's not some shadowy organization determined to let people die of cancer so they can keep selling advil Yeah, there are numerous perfectly obvious reasons certain parties want to keep it illegal, but they're almost all strictly monetary. Trying to monopolize the pharms market or keep the private prison system brimming with "customers" isn't exactly the darkest depths of conspiracy.

Those people drive me nuts. I think it should be completely legalized (and taxed and regulated, along with most illegal drugs), but some people are really out in left field with their conspiracy theories as to why it is illegal as well as their astounding beliefs that marijuana is an absolute good, with no harmful effects. There are a bunch of wannabe hippie types where I live who are almost militant with that [expletive]. And as with anything, being [expletive] crazy extreme about a cause only hurts it.

Oh, shut up with that [expletive]. At least you can bring yourself to like hockey, so you have that.