XZero771679666304
-
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
-
More Kyle racism. At least he tried. I'm surprised he didn't just call him "the other chinaman". -
That sucks. But the flagstick giveth, and the flagstick taketh away.
-
Why are you so bothered by the fact that I don't like Pat Hughes? Opinions on stuff like this are subjective as hell. I can't help the fact that the way he calls a game frustrates me sometimes. I'm bothered by any fan claiming their announcers aren't big enough homers. It's nothing personal. Yeah, at least a semblance of objectivity is definitely a good thing, imo. It doesn't hurt my feelings when our announcers give credit where credit is due.
-
Yes. I have hated it for as long as I have been watching baseball.
-
Youre probably right here. The new incarnation of the rooftops doesnt add charm, whereas the prior I think probably did. So when they were infringing on the cubs property they were adding a bit of charm and since the agreement they are providing the consideration to do what they are doing. So basically im not gonna fault them for advocating for their businesses and trying to enforce their contract. Advocating their business is one thing, but their notion that relationship is somehow strongly symbiotic is preposterous. It's a parasite/host relationship.
-
If someone waved a magic wand and the rooftops were gone, the effect on the Cubs would be negligible at best.
-
How many have been looking? (just curious)
-
Gameday made that pitch look like it was two feet off the plate.
-
Creamed, IMO. If he's being creamed at IU, I can't say as I'd blame him. Anyway, why would he do that? Maybe as an insufferable douche, he feels compelled to migrate to his natural habitat.
-
Because this issue has mainly been fabricated in the minds of Purdue/Illinois fans. Illinois, you know, the program that just had how many players transfer? how many of those kids were groce's? It's always easy to rationalize when it's the program you root for, isn't it? You really don't see the difference between over committing players you recruit, knowing that you'll almost certainly have to force them out later, and a new coach telling players the previous coach recruited that they won't get much playing time in his system and them transferring? Really? Even if Groce didn't play these kids just because he didn't want them, it's much less disingenuous than recruiting kids and then doing it to them. Neither scenario is what you would call ideal, but one is decidedly worse then the other. I don't think Illini fans are the ones rationalizing here.
-
No what did he do? made fun of bleacher report To be fair, accusing Brett of plagiarism is a shade worse than just making fun of his site.
-
Yeah, that's about it.
-
Bah. Shark missed his spot, and we are all missing Darwin Barney. Really not the way I thought his day would end.
-
What? Leaving him at closer isn't exactly throwing in the towel when we don't have anybody better for the job right now. Camp and Russell posted similar FIPs and xFIPs last year and aren't exactly big upside guys themselves. Maaaaaybe Fujikawa, but I think it's pretty early to suggest that. As to the "sucks" thing, 2010 was his best year. 2011 was definitely respectable. And he was just fine after coming off the DL in late May last year. Is anybody expecting him to revert to his 2010 form? No. But there's a very reasonable chance he could look useful to a contender. Your argument isn't logical. It's purely emotional. Which is fine, I suppose, as long as you'd rather be making silly arguments than being frustrated. If there's anything that I've gleaned from the Soriano/potential trade saga, it's that even among executives, perception often trumps reality. Unless Marmol does revert to his 2010 form starting pretty much immediately, the Cubs aren't getting much for him. He was terrible for a huge part of last year, he was terrible in ST and he's been terrible so far int he regular season. DFAing him would be stupid, but I can definitely see the argument for pulling him from the cloer's role, at least for a while. I think his trade value is about as diminished as it can get.
-
I'm guessing they don't need to. IIRC, the wording was such that after a certain number of years (which has passed) the contract didn't offer much protection of the rooftop views.
-
Well, that's simply not true. "Personal dislike?" Yeah, I don't think there's much if anything personal about this. Marmol has long been a favorite here and I think most of us would like nothing more than to see him succeed. And yes, he's probably not as effective as he once was due to him being ridden like a horse, which is unfortunate, but that's not exactly a revelation and frankly not relevant when deciding if he should remain the closer. His wildness was acceptable when no one was making contact, but that's not the case anymore, and I don't think it will be again.
-
2013 Other Games Thread
XZero771679666304 replied to TruffleShuffle's topic in Fred Hornkohl Game Thread Forum
That sucks. -
NFL Offseason/Coaching Carousel/non-playoff talk
XZero771679666304 replied to Banedon's topic in Other Sports
that was a generation ago. now, unless you are incredibly lucky, you won't come close without a quarterback that can carry you. you want proof, the last quarterback to play in the super bowl who wouldn't be considered elite or near-elite or an absolutely dynamic talent, is rex grossman. You really think Flacco is? I sure as hell don't. Played his very best at the right time, but that doesn't make him elite. -
He jumped, landed and his leg looked was bent like he was down on his knees, except it wasn't bent at the knee but halfway down his leg. It was Joe Theismann's injury basically. I still think Marcus Lattimore or Napoleon McCallum were the worst I've seen. Lattimore almost kicked himself in the face without his thigh even moving. Knox's injury is worse than everyone's because it was the back. I think the leg injuries are "uglier" to look at though given that you can see stuff sticking out of places it's not supposed to and complete limpness of the leg. Shaun Livingston will forever be the most horrific injury I have ever seen. The Baron Davis knee injury last year, or the year before, when he was on the Knicks is up there for me along with the Bogut Elbow/Forearm injury. Bogut might be #1 for me. The Marcus Lattimore injury was pretty bad. Napoleon McCallum might have been the worst, at least in my memory (I haven't watched it since). EDIT: I didn't even see raw referenced the same two injuries until after I posted that.
-
NFL Offseason/Coaching Carousel/non-playoff talk
XZero771679666304 replied to Banedon's topic in Other Sports
They don't win them on their own is the point. You have to have a good team around that QB and by severely overpaying an average QB, you hurt your chances of building a good team around him. The 2000 Ravens and 2002 Bucs are proof of this. That said, you have to pay your (good) QBs if you want to sustain winning. You're not going to build perennial powers around guys like Trent Dilfer. Generally QBs get too much credit and too much blame for the fortunes of their teams, but without a good one, you're not going to go too far (unless you have a ridiculous defense and/or running game). And Jersey makes a good point, since "overpaying" for QBs is pretty much the status quo, you're not really putting your team at a competitive disadvantage by doing so as well. But I don't think Flacco was a wise investment for those kind of dollars. The Ravens are going to rue that contract. -
Re: Projecting the 2013 Cubs
XZero771679666304 replied to CaliforniaRaisin's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
How do we know it's not like that? I can think of lots of trainable skills where you if miss certain windows, you'll always be inferior. Foreign languages and chess, off the top of my head. I'm willing to draft/sign raw players on the chance that they develop skills, but I'm not going to give them extra projection credit over a player the same age who has been trained properly. The ability to learn certain things (such as your examples) can be reduced outside of their "optimum learning" windows, but aren't lost altogether. If you don't plate discipline when you're young, you might never be Barry Bonds, but if you cultivate what you can during your normal professional growth period, that can add to development. If someone who has an extreme gift for linguistics isn't taught foreign languages when they're young, with advanced training they'd probably stand a better chance of being a prolific polyglot than one of average cognitive means who was trained at the "right" time. I think the same can apply to gifted athletes. I wouldn't bet on it, but I think it can be a consideration. -
Re: Projecting the 2013 Cubs
XZero771679666304 replied to CaliforniaRaisin's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
It's not a difficult concept to grasp. I mean it's not like being malnourished during adolescence where you can never make the lost opportunity for growth up. Trainable skills can always be acquired or enhanced, provided the subject has the capacity. If don't subscribe to that line of thinking, I don't suppose you'd ever be in favor of drafting/acquiring "raw" players. It ceases to be an excuse if a player stagnates for a prolonged period even when receiving good training, but it is a legitimate reason to be optimistic that there could be room for growth beyond the normal curve, especially with guys who are young and obviously gifted. I think we've been seeing it to some extent with Samardzija. That said, it's by no means a guarantee that additional development will ever happen (Szczur). -
Kind of? He's a huge d. That said, he's a solid coach. If he can figure out his tournament bugaboos (which may be fluke-ish anyway) he could do quite well there. While obviously no home run, it's better than Mark Gottfried. When he cuts & runs from the Bruins they'll hate him too. He leaves sorrow and angst in his wake wherever he goes. Yeah, people down here are not happy. I would tell people how much many Iowa fans despised him and why they felt the way they did, and while most felt he was a bit of a prick, they overlooked it because the program was doing well. Not so much today (or going forward, I think). There's no such thing a loyalty among college coaches, but Alford is beginning to make a science of the broken commitment.
-
Man Raisin, I am sorry. This has to be a massive disappointment.
-
I understand that concept. Definitely. Though it's not Indiana. I can and do root for all Big Ten teams that make the tourney (provided they're not playing Illinois) with one exception.
