17 Seconds

Except last year when they were about 80 games behind us. i don't remember that. i remember us winning an obscene amount of games and them still being within shouting distance most of the year. they were still a threat last year. luckily we had a ridiculous season and didn't have to sweat it out until the end. if they won 86 games with the roster they had last year and a ridiculous amount of blown games by the bullpen, then you'd be dumb to ever write them off before a season.

Wuertz was used alot the first two months of the season, especially in April. In May he pitched in less games, but was used in the same amount of innings. Still 27 IP the first two months of the season was only a half inning less then Howry, and two innings less then Wood. June is when Lou started to lose faith in Wuertz, because Wuertz was sucking. His era says 2.08 and looks pretty impressive, but Wuertz was very lucky. In 6 of 12 games he pitched in he allowed more hits or walks then outs he got. So he often let other pitchers base runners score, or was bailed out by other pitchers when he left runners on base. So maybe Lou did give up on him too soon, but lets not forget the same manager that let Wuertz pitch in 73 games a year ago. So maybe all the blame shouldn't go on Lou, and alot of it was due to Wuertz sucking. It didn't help that when he got sent to Triple A he pitched kinda subpar, and thats why it took him until September to come back. i was just talking about the IP argument. wuertz would have as much work as gregg if he was actually used and lou didn't hate him. And his era would have probably been much higher if Lou used him in more innings. . Why? His career ERA is 3.57 in 262.1 IP. I don't know why we're talking so much about ERA for relievers though.

Wuertz was used alot the first two months of the season, especially in April. In May he pitched in less games, but was used in the same amount of innings. Still 27 IP the first two months of the season was only a half inning less then Howry, and two innings less then Wood. June is when Lou started to lose faith in Wuertz, because Wuertz was sucking. His era says 2.08 and looks pretty impressive, but Wuertz was very lucky. In 6 of 12 games he pitched in he allowed more hits or walks then outs he got. So he often let other pitchers base runners score, or was bailed out by other pitchers when he left runners on base. So maybe Lou did give up on him too soon, but lets not forget the same manager that let Wuertz pitch in 73 games a year ago. So maybe all the blame shouldn't go on Lou, and alot of it was due to Wuertz sucking. It didn't help that when he got sent to Triple A he pitched kinda subpar, and thats why it took him until September to come back. i was just talking about the IP argument. wuertz would have as much work as gregg if he was actually used and lou didn't hate him.

It's not really Wuertz's fault that Lou decided he was never ever going to use him

but tht's not what you said. you said- so because of his good-but-not-great season last season at an extremely youn age you're not giving him a chance of being great? that makes no sense. i'm not pumping up vitters and of course i'd trade him for vitters. i just don't understand why you're not giving him a chance, especially considering he was pretty good last year. and he didnt turn 19 until the end of the season

you've gotta expect growing pains from players this young. not everybody can be like malkin and crosby. plus kane clearly isn't fully healthy. really i think the asb will do great things for this team. they've looked pretty bad/lifeless for a couple weeks now...even though they've been getting point. they need to get refreshes and healthy.

the vast majority of prospects ultimately are busts though. The vast majority aren't extremely well thought of. Vitters is much more highly regarded than most prospects. That doesn't mean he'll necessarily turn into anything, but he still has a greater shot than most. The vast majority of good to great teams out there get a strong aid from their minor league system. Unless you're the Yankees and can throw $250 million around, there are going to be spots that you must fill with cheap talent. That's where the farm system is most important. i don't disagree with any of that. you dont have to try and convince me of the importance of producing talent from the farm. i'm already convinced. but again, you dont let a kid who's never been above A ball (and frankly wasnt overly impressive in A ball) be a deal breaker in a potential jake peavy acquisition. I guess the biggest problem I had was that you seemed to not give Vitters any chance of being great - hence the Kevin Orie reference. The likelihood of busts is the reason you stack your farm as much as possible - in the event that a number of them bust. when we're talking about a guy who was fairly average in A ball, why should i give him any chance of being great? i don't get this post. first of all, .328/.365/.498 for an 18 year old in A ball is not "fairly average". it's pretty good. second, even if his performance was bad (which again, it wasn't), why would you be writing off an 18 year old that quickly based on like the first 300 at-bats of his minor league career? he was 18

i know i'm gonna take some a lot of crap for this, but after the first few weeks of the season i stopped watching and started hoping the bulls lose. might as well get another decent draft pick (although pax will blow it anyways) and hopefully get a real coach. outside of rose, this is the most unlikable bulls team i can remember. i cant stand watching them play.

jesus patrick. you have to put that in the net

i wonder if kane is planning on scoring another goal one day

the cardinals are always a threat. always

man the power play is a mess lately

dude You are watching, right? it's not the point. you need to just stop talking aobut the refs EVERY game. just let it go

dude

Pie had no options left. He had to be traded. Olson was probably the best offer on the table regardless of the Peavy situation. I think the talks will be revisited, but people are rreading too much into the Marquis/DeRosa stuff. That had to be done to afford Bradley. If it ends up helping with Peavy later on, great, but I'm pretty sure those moves would have been made even if Peavy wasn't an option.

Why? Do you think the new owner won't approve it, or are you calling Bruce a liar?

Bruce after being asked in the comments section of his blog about the chances of landing Peavy- http://blogs.dailyherald.com/node/1261 It's good to know there's at least a reasonable chance.

Man, the dudes on OH really want to fellate Felix man this sucks we just traded corey hart for jason marquis

right as for the post itself, i see what you were saying now. you should have just said that instead of offering cryptic "you're wrong and can't accept facts" posts.

I'm not sure what's more stunning, the fact that I am having to debate the point that Kerry Wood has had a very sketchy injury history or the fact that nobody else finds it the least bit strange that the debate is occurring - I mean if that doesn't sum up northsidebaseball.com, I don't know what does. a) very few people here like meph (no offense, meph). i think nobody is replying because most people have him on ignore. that or they are like me and they have no idea what the hell meph is saying and they don't feel like looking back through this thread to understand what the hell he is talking about b) if this place sucks so bad, why are you here? i'm not trying to be a dick, i just dont understand why people post here and then complain about how bad the site sucks

Did we get more for Pie than we got for DeRosa?

90 games of a guy with an .827 career OPS is better than DeRosa and Wood by a "wide margin"? I don't know aobut that. Even if he OPSs like .900 next year in 90 games I still wouldn't say that. Well I think the best case scenario we can realistically hope for is that they match DeRosa's production, but that's not the only issue. Bradley is a lock to get hurt. With DeRosa, all that would have meant is more Fontenot in the lineup in place of Bradley (with DeRosa going to right). Now since we're using Fontenot, when Bradley goes down it's suddenly more at-bats for much crappier hitters. That's the main loss of trading away DeRosa and that's why I think the combo of trading DeRosa/signing Bradley was pretty dumb. I guess that's just a matter of how you look at it. I could just as easily argue that Wood doesn't have a great track record either when it comes to injuries or that DeRosa probably isn't going to repeat his numbers from last year or that Fontenot was actually better than DeRosa last season (granted in fewer at bats). I don't want to come off sounding like I blindly support every move, but I'm just failing to see how we are so much worse right now than we would be if we kept Wood, DeRosa, Marquis, and Pie. Even if DeRosa goes back to his .800ish OPS that he put up the previous 2 seasons, that could still end up being more valuable than Bradley. I just don't see how you can look at who left and who came in and say we aren't worse off. At best it's a wash, but I don't really see that. The only significant player we brought in was Bradley.

wait when did we sign taye diggs

mcgahee just wanted to kill the mood so the postgame celebration wasn't as much fun

huh? ther'es no such thing as helmet to helmet if the guy has the ball? wtf is he talking about?