Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Fred Hornkohl

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    59,334

  • 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 Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Fred Hornkohl

  1. Fred Hornkohl
    Thanx for the kind words. I'm sure you'll appreciate the great contrast between the Dodgers and the Giants, with the Dodgers winning their first WS in 1955 the year after the Giants won their last one. Consider these 2 time frames...... 1876 thru 1954 World Series team W L pct PA W L Los Angeles Dodgers 4939 4740 0.510 7 0 7 San Francisco Giants 5851 4652 0.557 14 5 9 1955 thru 2005 World Series team W L pct PA W L Los Angeles Dodgers 4364 3717 0.540 16 6 5 San Francisco Giants 4190 3895 0.518 8 0 3 That's quite a reversal of fortunes, even though neither team was ever bad for any prolonged period of time.
  2. Fred Hornkohl
    Excellent guess. Replace the A's with the NY/SF Giants, and you're dead on.
  3. Fred Hornkohl
    Laugh if you must.... but in the whole history of the game, only 4 teams have been able to sustain a winning pct of 56% for 50 years. Can you name them ? edit: Hint. St. Louis isn't one them.
  4. Fred Hornkohl
    I agree with you, right up until you added that needless hyperbole at the end. I realize this is ancient history, but for the time being, it's all we've got. 1876 thru 1925 World Series team W L pct PA W L Chicago Cubs 3712 2890 0.562 5 2 3 St. Louis Cardinals 2100 2878 0.422 0 0 0
  5. Fred Hornkohl
    AB R H 2B 3B HR TB RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS Marquis 87 10 27 8 1 1 40 10 2 11 0.310 0.326 0.460 0.786 Zambrano 80 8 24 6 2 1 37 6 1 23 0.300 0.309 0.463 0.771 Wow, marquis must have had a horrid sept. His ops was at nearly 900 earlier. With such a small number of ABs, a single 0 for 4 would drop his OPS by .035. So it wouldn't take long, eh?
  6. Fred Hornkohl
    I think you meant Zambrano, not Barrett, eh? AB R H 2B 3B HR TB RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS Marquis 87 10 27 8 1 1 40 10 2 11 0.310 0.326 0.460 0.786 Barrett 424 49 117 29 3 15 197 61 39 61 0.276 0.343 0.465 0.808
  7. Fred Hornkohl
    AB R H 2B 3B HR TB RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS Marquis 87 10 27 8 1 1 40 10 2 11 0.310 0.326 0.460 0.786 Zambrano 80 8 24 6 2 1 37 6 1 23 0.300 0.309 0.463 0.771
  8. Fred Hornkohl
    That's beyond ludacris. That's just dumb (and admittedly creepy if true). At this point we need to take whatever help we can get. Hey.... every time the white sox have won the World Series, the CUBS have gone to the WS the following year, no? :wink:
  9. Fred Hornkohl
    OK, that's fair enough.
  10. Fred Hornkohl
    Gammons is almost never right about such things, but those two signings would be huge. I'm not so sure about that. If he is commenting that, at this early stage of the game, the Cubs appear to be the most aggressive, there is nothing wrong with that. Gammons is not wrong often about which teams are talking to which players. He only has a bad track record when making final predictions. If Gammons is proven to be correct - that the Cubs are being aggressive with regad to acquiring Brian Giles - can we please stop the "Hendry doesn't even try" stuff? I know that not everyone on the bd. believes this, yours truly included. I'm trying to figure out how the CUBS could be charachterized as aggressive or the early leader when we are in the middle of a period where only the previous team (in this case San Diego) can negiotiate with a player. Am I missing something ??
  11. Fred Hornkohl
    Sorry, double post :oops:
  12. Fred Hornkohl
    Wow! Not a chance. Trading TWO guys who's values are at their lowest along with another guy who is very productive given his salary. With all of these suggestions for Cedeno to be penciled in as a starter, does anyone have any projections for him for a full season? What if he has an offensive season that looks like Patterson's past season? Can the Cubs win with that kind of everyday production? Who is his back up if that's the best he can do? Because we don't know whether he can be a plus production guy or a minus production guy, I don't think it's a good idea to pencil him in as a starter on a team that is in desperate need to improve offensively. The 2006 ZiP projections for the CUBS were just released the other day...... Name P AVG OBP SLG G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS Cedeno ss .287 .332 .412 113 345 46 99 15 2 8 40 20 63 13 4
  13. Fred Hornkohl
    Let the flaming begin !
  14. Fred Hornkohl
    My wife asked me to wait long enough for her to take out a larger life insurance policy on me. Mercenary, Vance, just mercenary !! :wink:
  15. Fred Hornkohl
    No, it'll be for 13.5 million. They will either pay him 13.5, or 3 million to buy out the contract. 3 million is sunk. it's 10.5 or 0. That depends on what year you think the buyout is put towards. It doesn't matter to what year the $3 million buyout is allocated. The decision that will have to be made is whether it's worth spending an additional 10.5 million for an additional year of Kerry Wood's services. If you think the buyout is allocated towards '06, then Wood either counts 13.5 million, or nothing towards the '07 payroll. I'm pretty sure that's the decision Warpticon was referring to. The decision is worth 10.5 million dollars because the 3 million is a sunk cost; i.e it cannot be avoided. Re-allocating things to different accounting periods doesn't change anything. The decision is worth $10.5 million.
  16. Fred Hornkohl
    No, it'll be for 13.5 million. They will either pay him 13.5, or 3 million to buy out the contract. 3 million is sunk. it's 10.5 or 0. That depends on what year you think the buyout is put towards. It doesn't matter to what year the $3 million buyout is allocated. The decision that will have to be made is whether it's worth spending an additional 10.5 million for an additional year of Kerry Wood's services.
  17. Fred Hornkohl
    A twenty second check via Baseball Reference says it's not. Indians made the WS in 1954, losing to the NY Giants, and the Brooklyn Dodgers won the 1955 WS. And the Indians made the WS in 1920, losing to the Brooklyn Robins, and the New York Giants won the 1921 WS. The Indians have made the WS three other times (54, 95, 97) and the Yankees won in the following seasons. So New York teams always win the year after the Indians make the WS, but not necessarily the Yankees. Cleveland won the '20 WS, 5-2 They also went to the WS in 1948, beating the Boston Braves. In every year following a Cleveland appearance in the WS, the New York Yankees appeared in the World Series. 1921 lost to New York Giants 1949 defeated Brooklyn 1955 lost to Brooklyn 1996 defeated Atlanta 1998 defeated San Diego.
  18. Fred Hornkohl
    I could see the Bears going 7-9, and still making the playoffs. This NFC north is really bad !!!
  19. Fred Hornkohl
    Bring on them Saints !!
  20. Fred Hornkohl
    I don't f***ing believe it.
  21. Fred Hornkohl
    And now we overthrow a wide open receiver by 20 yards ??? :shock:
  22. Fred Hornkohl
    This game is getting stranger by the minute.
  23. Fred Hornkohl
    But what happens if the Bears fumble the snap and the Lions recover and score? Which has the greater possibility of the fumble/score ?? The short snap or the long snap ??
  24. Fred Hornkohl
    Punting the ball away with 0:03 is just insane !! It gives the Lions a chance to score. Running one more running play definitely takes the 3 seconds off the clock !!
  25. Fred Hornkohl
    Time for another 99 yard drive, eh?
×
×
  • Create New...