Jump to content
North Side Baseball

17 Seconds

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    23,966
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 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 17 Seconds

  1. btw, for the right price, i'd take sheets overall IP and performance from pretty much any of his season other than 2009 (obviously). he doesn't have to pitch close to 200 inning to help the team, and an incentive based deal owuld help protect against overpaying.
  2. texas was going to sign him until they found out he needed surgery
  3. Ravens 24-20 Chargers 27-13 Saints 34-24 Cowboys 23-20
  4. he's not assistant gm. he's an assistant to the gm.
  5. And that list doesn't include 2008 where he was unable to make his last 2-3 starts in the Brewers playoff push as well as unable to play in the postseason. Again, I'm for the move because it's a really high reward. He's one of the top 5-10 pitchers in baseball when he's healthy, but he's not healthy all that much. he doesn't have to make 30 starts to help the team a lot
  6. so he's saying that he used roids, but NOT to help his performance. i'm so [expletive] sick of these half apologies. i'd rather a guy just not say anything then half ass it and make excuses.
  7. wait, so romo has one good playoff game (in the wild card round) and suddenly he's proven himself and is a changed man?
  8. I could see this, and I think their baseball acumen would outweigh the obvious meatball fan pleasing factor Careful. You'll get run out of here with pitchforks and torches if you so much as even mention the possibility of Sandberg becoming manager. yeah its annoying how people dont want a terrible manager with outdated philosphies to run the cubs major league team. these are the same clowns who ran dusty out of town.
  9. i think people are more excited about it just because he's back with the cubs organization.
  10. He hit 49 HR's as a rookie and would have likely still made plenty had he never touched them. He did make more by taking them but he would have still made plenty without them. That said I agree when people like this admit they need to stress the kids more so they understand that it wasn't worth it in the end. Anyways my first reaction was regret that the crazy youtube Cards fan was retired. This video would have been epic. What makes you think his 49 HR's were clean? Pujols will be the next big name when he's caught. ugh
  11. Their record sucks and their goal differential sucks. So far this season, yeah, they've sucked.
  12. Pretty cool that he picked the Cubs
  13. Really? REALLY?
  14. so he's talking about the past
  15. and some other guys throw lefthanded and in the mid 90s and are really good. The only thing that the Reds got going for them is they didn't have to spend nearly as the Red Sox did for Dice-K. Otherwise, I'm just not impressed with another overhyped Cuban. can you tell us what you don't like about him? He doesn't appear to have a reliable secondary pitch and he hasn't faced much high-level competition. It's not a terrible signing for the money (he certainly has a ton of potential) and it's better that the Reds are spending their money on young players with promise as opposed to spending it on players like Francisco Cordero. But it's hard to overlook the fact that Cuban free agents have, by and large, failed to live up to expectations in the US and say this was a great signing when the Reds could have taken the money and spread it amongst other international free agents or draft picks. Outside of Alexei Ramirez and a half-season of Jose Contreras, they've all been busts so far. fair enough.
  16. Aren't all playoff losses amongst the most demoralizing losses you could imagine? Give me an example of a playoff game that wouldn't fall into this category. Would you have rather the Packers not made a comeback? Not picking on you, just wondering, because I always think like that, and if asked that I would say like a 27-17 loss would be better because we'd just be beaten by a better team but at least were in the game and not blown out. But in reality, I'd be picking those moments of close calls that didn't go our way, which happen in every game to make me demoralized beyond belief about what could have been. losing on a fumble in ot after you just missed a wide open reciever for a td that would have ended the game (and after you came back from 21 down in the second half) is a bit different than losing like the eagles or patriots did this weekend, yea. True. I missed the play where he missed the receiver, I had to run an errand the last 5 minutes of the 4th and only heard the rest on the radio. Maybe if I saw how close it was I could understand better. he was wide open and all alone. all he had to do was hit him and it's game over. he overthrew him by about 5 feet
  17. sometimes its hard to tell if youre being serious or not and defending the hawks and pointing out that this weekend wasnt as bad as it felt is me venting and talking myself into feeling better too
  18. and some other guys throw lefthanded and in the mid 90s and are really good. The only thing that the Reds got going for them is they didn't have to spend nearly as the Red Sox did for Dice-K. Otherwise, I'm just not impressed with another overhyped Cuban. can you tell us what you don't like about him?
  19. did we trade for the new orleans saints yet
  20. your face is stupid
  21. wrong again. over his last 11 starts (BEFORE tonight), he had a save percentage of over .930 and a GAA of right around 2. he's been lights out
  22. so at first your argument was "teams never get outshot by 30 and win." now it's "oh well, great teams never lose to really bad teams" the devils lost to the lightning tonight and they're worse than the ducks. EVERY team loses to teams that are significantly worse than them a number of times over the course of 82 games. it happens all the time. so neither of your crazy arguments are true. would you like to make a 3rd argument that's incorrect and irrational?
  23. you dont even make sense
  24. you don't even have to go back a week to find it happening to a similar team. last monday the sharks outshot the kings by 27 and lost http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/boxscore?gameId=300104018
  25. did you just start watching hockey?
×
×
  • Create New...