Jump to content
North Side Baseball

David

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    32,468

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by David

  1. David
    Isn't that a pretty big loss for them, considering he put up a near .900 OPS in CF for them last year? The points about their injuries are valid, though.
  2. David
    Lieber's number is lame. Fuld's sucks too, but hopefully we won't see that much of him anyway.
  3. David
    I don't mind 18. Would've preferred single digits. Maybe 5 or 8. Much better than whatever astronomically high number he had last year.
  4. David
    Well, the idea is for it to find the optimal lineup. Not the optimal lineup within the constraints of pointless conventional baseball wisdom... The only reason it's not "realistic" is because it's hard to see any manager going outside of that box of old school thinking. 99% of managers are just going to automatically put the pitcher in the 9th spot because that's what (just about) everyone else has always done.
  5. David
    Eh, I should refresh pages before I post a reply.
  6. David
    Offensive numbers say that Rameriz isn't even the best 3rd baseman in the NL Central. But then again, many of us watch the games and see his shortcomings daily. I'll take David Wright over him any day. Who among Troy Glaus, Bill Hall, Ty Wigginton, Edwin Encarnacion, and Jose Bautista is better (and yes, I realize you meant Braun, who was so horrifically awful at fielding his position that has already been moved to LF and has only done it offensively one year)? You'll take Wright over him? Really? Wow, that's saying a lot. I mean who would ever take one of the top two 3B in baseball on their team? I don't get how pointing out that there are better third basemen in the game somehow takes anything away from Ramirez. After ARod and Wright, there's not many I would take ahead of Aramis. Maybe Chipper, but he's getting long in the tooth. Depends where Cabrera plays, too, I guess. Aramis is definitely in the top five.
  7. David
    Are you actually reporting something you heard/read or are you just being pessimistic or something? Hard to tell...
  8. David
    While I still cringe when Roberts is referred to as a marginal upgrade over DeRosa (maybe if DeRosa plays at the best we can expect while Roberts plays at about his average it's a wash), I doubt Pie will be part of the deal.
  9. David
    MLB.com reporting that the deal is being finalized (whatever that means) http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080130&content_id=2359970&vkey=hotstove2007&fext=.jsp
  10. David
    Fine, but what the hell does "looks healthy" even mean? Are they gonna judge his posture and the way he's walking around? Are they just gonna make sure he doesn't writhe in pain after every play he makes? I don't know. Whatever.
  11. David
    Maybe Theo? Shapiro is pretty damn good, though.
  12. David
    Beane? really? It might be arguable, but yes, really.
  13. David
    My rankings...wow, right now, I'm trying to do this, and I feel like a supreme homer because I can't definitively put any teams ahead of the Cubs aside from the Mets. MAYBE the Dodgers, I guess. Anyway, it's a jumbled mess of teams, but I'll give it a shot. I can understand why media guys can't win with the fans when they try to put this stuff together. 1. Mets 2. Cubs 3. Dodgers 4. Brewers 5. Diamondbacks 6. Phillies 7. Rockies 8. Padres 9. Braves ----------------------------------Realistic Contender Line---------------------------------- 10. Reds 11. Nationals 12. Astros 13. Cardinals 14. Marlins 15. Giants 16. Pirates
  14. David
    Guess I'll follow suit and repost what I posted in the other thread for the sake of discussion. The D'Backs sweeping us in the playoffs isn't changing my mind that their record last year was a fluke. They gave up more runs than they scored. It's going to catch up to them. And yes, I understand that they got great production out of their bullpen last year, which would help explain their situation with the pythag, somewhat. That's still something else that's hard to repeat or predict. Bullpen performance seems to be inherently pretty flukish. Haren is a really nice addition, though. As for Johnson, I don't really think he has much in the tank at age 44. He made what, 9 or 10 starts last year? I'm not saying they aren't a decent team, but I can't put them as top 2 in the NL. I'm not even sure that I'd put them ahead of the Cubs.
  15. David
    I am neither an insider or the "OG" as you call it. Mr. Miles is both of those and much, much more. I just happen to be someone, like many of you I'm sure, who knows different people in many different walks of life. You hear things. You called the Lee trade way before the Bruce signal ever went up here. In fact, this forum wasn't even a year old at the time. You get the OG status.
  16. David
    So odd that they would count on his spring training play. Why not just have team doctors evaluate his back rigorously? So say he goes out there for 2 weeks and hits .100. "Oh, his back must not be healthy, deal is off." Or he goes out and knocks the cover off the ball in a few games and the deal is on. Is half a season of Cactus League play going to tell the Giants what they need to know about his back? I don't see what stats OR scouts could possibly see in a few games of spring training action that would allow them to make that determination. Now, a medical exam? Sure. If this is really the case, it amazes me (OK, it really doesn't) what goes on in terms of decision making in professional sports, particularly baseball.
  17. David
    Hoops is the NSBB "insider." :lol: Well, he and Bruce. Hoops is the OG, though.
  18. David
    You mean Hoops (or his source, I guess) is completely making this up? Either way, I'm on board the Crisp bandwagon too, though I hadn't realized how much his numbers had suffered since going to the Red Sox. Yeah, maybe a change a scenery would help. He was going in a good direction after 04 and 05, but then crapped out in Boston. Thing is, his IsoD was his career best in 07, and 06 it was better than the year before (if I remember right from 5 min ago). His BA went down big time in Boston, though. Did he get unlucky in Boston BABIP wise? Was he getting lucky on Cleveland? Maybe some combination of the two?
  19. David
    You mean Hoops (or his source, I guess) is completely making this up? Either way, I'm on board the Crisp bandwagon too, though I hadn't realized how much his numbers had suffered since going to the Red Sox.
  20. David
    The D'Backs sweeping us in the playoffs isn't changing my mind that their record last year was a fluke. They gave up more runs than they scored. It's going to catch up to them. And yes, I understand that they got great production out of their bullpen last year, which would help explain their situation with the pythag, somewhat. That's still something else that's hard to repeat or predict. Bullpen performance seems to be inherently pretty flukish. Haren is a really nice addition, though. As for Johnson, I don't really think he has much in the tank at age 44. He made what, 9 or 10 starts last year? I'm not saying they aren't a decent team, but I can't put them as top 2 in the NL. I'm not even sure that I'd put them ahead of the Cubs.
  21. David
    Freaking sweet! \:D/
  22. David
    Same. It's not like we didn't enjoy the hell out of the 2006 Bears just because they didn't finish the deal. That was probably aided by the fact that all season I expected the Bears to reach the SB but lose, but I'd probably feel the same way about the Cubs going into a Series, unless a mediocre team managed to get through the AL.
  23. David
    You also have to factor in that he's probably going to get like 25 mil per year for 5 or 6 years. I'm not saying that makes it a bad deal, just that it's a huge element that needs to be accounted for.
  24. David
    Well... If he's in the AL, that's one more round he has to get through before we'd face him, and thus one more chance for his team to get knocked out. Plus, if we do face him and manage to get lucky enough to win when we face him, at least it'd be for the Series and not just the pennant, but I digress.
  25. David
    I know it's against the religion of this board to say anything positive about Andy MacPhail, but perhaps this Bedard thing with Seattle has been drawn out because the Orioles wanted to see what the Twins got for Santana. My thinking is that MacPhail was tipped off by somebody in the league office over the weekend that the Santana trade would be going down soon, so he decided to wait it out. I think we'll see Bedard dealt in the next 48 hours. My gut says Seattle too, but I wouldn't rule out a NL contender seeing as the Mets just improved themselves. What NL contender? Maybe Cincy? Perhaps Philly? The Dodgers are out after the Japanese guy they signed. Astros don't have enough to pry loose a Mike Hampton much less Bedard. Maybe St. Louis. The ONLY 3 NL contenders (or possible contenders) for Bedard would be Cubs/Cards/Reds. So, I agree with a couple of other guys, and say Bedard stays in the AL. The Cardinals and Reds are contenders? Can you name an "NL Contender" that would be interested in acquiring Bedard? I think Hoops was alluding mainly to the Cubs, considering the topic of the thread. I think he's implying that because the Mets just got Santana, the Cubs might feel inclined to go for Bedard. I could be wrong, though.
×
×
  • Create New...