17 Seconds

The notion that a team could have fatal flaws that go virtually undetected over 162 games, but then suddenly are exposed in three games, is flat out comical. If the Cubs' offense was such a problem, then it would have become abundantly clear over the course of the regular season. To think otherwise is silly. They are playing the same game in October as they were for the first 6 months of the year, after all. stop it with this reasonable logic

First of all, stp using the "____ said this is the case and he knows way more about baseball than some internet message board poster" argument becuase it's a huge coupout. Don't you always complain about the Soriano contract and hendry? Well "Hendry has forgotten more about baseball than you have ever known! He makes millions of dollars while you post on an internet message board" See how that works? When you say stuff like that it just hurts your arguments. Anyways, show me where Lopu said that the reason the Cubs lost in the playoffs is because they didn't have enough speed and athletisism in the playoffs. Oh wait, he didn't. Listen dude, you NEED to stop with this stuff about them having some offensive flaw that only shows up in the playoffs. If you want to complain about the group of offensive players and say they'll continue to choke in the playoffs, then go ahead. That's a valid concern. But don't act like the reason they didn't score runs in those 6 games has to do with the type of offense of the way it's built. It's just makes you look really dumb. Sorry, but that's the truth. They couldn't handle the monet. It's as simple as that.... it really is. It had nothing to do with anything else. They couldn't handle the pressure and did not perform well. Just stop.

Uh, no. All that was proven was that they hcoked and didn't play well in 3 straight games. To say that team wasn't good enough to win it all is really dumb. They were clearly the best team in the league. They just choked, plain and simple. oh god. THE CUBS SCORED THE MOST RUNS IN THE NATIONAL LEAGUE LAST SEASON. seriously, you need to stop with this garbage. they didn't fail to score runs in the playoffs because of any any made up flaw that you want to talk about. they simply did not hit. to say that it was because of lack of speed and athletism is pretty embarrassing.

88 wins here we come

everyone else can stop making jokes now, this one is pretty good This signing just makes no sense at all The NL West is looking reealllllyyyyy weak this season, especially if Manny doesn't re-sign with the Dodgers. The Giants could compete in that division. The DBacks should rebound. Rebound from what? They lucked out in 2007 and had a good record even though they were outscored. Last year they were right where they should be and that was with a great year from Johnson. They have Webb and Haren and that's basically it. I don't see them being good at all.

everyone else can stop making jokes now, this one is pretty good This signing just makes no sense at all The NL West is looking reealllllyyyyy weak this season, especially if Manny doesn't re-sign with the Dodgers. The Giants could compete in that division.

You seriously trying to tie Swish down with Aram somehow? Convenient to forget that Aramis has had a 5 year run of producing 125+ OPS+? WHere hav you seen Aramis drop to the levels that Swisher did last year? Yeah, more or less, he does suck when you have to use OPS+ of 92 and 101 to figure out what he'll likely produce. That's just if you want to water everything down to just OPS+ (which is absurd). I'm just curious, but can you list a few things you value higher than OPS+? Tell me, just off the top of my head, is someone like Furcal a bad hitter just because his OPS+ has been under 100 historically? Please understand that I'm not just here to rile up people, I have somewhat an understanding of numbers as well as anyone else who can open a link. The difference is that I'm not smug enough to believe I know everything because of it. It's often very convenient to find a single stat and use it as an argument on this site. If you think that's acceptable (with any single stat) then we'll just disagree. Furcal's main draws are his defense and speed. He's not a bad hitter but he's nothing special. And again, you obviously don't know how to look at any kinds of stats or else you'd see that OPS+ doesn't even have to be used to find out Swisher was a really productive hitter in 2006 and 2007. OPS+ is just the one that is easiest to look at and easy fopr you to understand (or we thought so, anyways). Stop acting like OPS+ is the only thing we have on Swisher.

You seriously trying to tie Swish down with Aram somehow? Convenient to forget that Aramis has had a 5 year run of producing 125+ OPS+? WHere hav you seen Aramis drop to the levels that Swisher did last year? Yeah, more or less, he does suck when you have to use OPS+ of 92 and 101 to figure out what he'll likely produce. That's just if you want to water everything down to just OPS+ (which is absurd). You're trying to make too much out of what I posted. Nowhere did I say he's as good as Ramirez and I definitely didn't say he's as consistent Ramirez. My point was that you basically said the guy was garbage, yet for 2 out of the last 3 seasons, he was almost as good as Ramirez offensively. All OPS+ is is OPS adjusted for park, so it's not like this is some obscure stat I'm picking out that makes him look better than he is. It's pretty telling. And the only reason I'm "watering it down" (which makes you sound pretty dumb by the way) is because judging by your posts it sounds like you have no idea how to crrectly look at stats to determine how good a player might be. Otherwise you wouldn't completely writing off Swisher just because he doesn't hit for average and played ina pitcher's park before being traded tothe White Sox. Did he suck last year? Yes, but a ton of that has already been proven to be luck (despite you putting your fingers in your ears and pretending not to hear it). So yeah, I'm not saying he's as good as Ramirez. I just don't see why you're writing him off when he's cheap, under control, just entering his prime, and was really good in 2 straight years before last season. It's like you see his low batting average and you just can't get past it. It's like that Seinfeld episode where Jerry has to end relationships because he finds some very minor flaw that he can't get past.

aramis' OPS+ in the past 3 seasons- 126, 129, 128 swisher's OPS+ in 06 and 07- 125, 127 yeah this guys sucks

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: at this entire post

Nothing if you like a station to station offense. Sounds like clogging the bases all over again. We should get some speedy guys like Juan Pierre. i think it's more that those 3 guys are huge question marks. thome is 38 and showed a ton of decline last year. konerko has showed a huge decline over the last 3 seasons and was awful last year. dye was good last year but it was pretty only much the second or 3rd time he's had a good year in the last 8 seasons. those guys could all easily be .800 OPS (or worse) guys next season

The Pedro deal wasn't really bad at all when he was signed. He was still 33 and really good. He was ridiculously good in his first year with the Mets and then the injuries started. You couldn't really have predicted that his body would have broken down that much that quickly. The Red Sox predicted it. That's why they didn't want to give him more than 3 years. I think the Red Sox decision was based more on declining skills, not health.

The Pedro deal wasn't really bad at all when he was signed. He was still 33 and really good. He was ridiculously good in his first year with the Mets and then the injuries started. You couldn't really have predicted that his body would have broken down that much that quickly.

How is he bad for the team? Swisher's career OPS+ is only slightly worse than Bradley's and he's younger, cheaper, and not a lock to get injured like Bradley is.

yeah because that's exactly what he said

They led the league in runs, were extremely OBP heavy, and the production was spread evenly throughout the lineup. How was it flawed? They just choked, plain and simple. Stop looking for excuses to why they didn't score runs in the playoffs.

Watching what? MLB Network isn't on yet... unless it's doing some sort of preview channel... is it? If so I need to know, asap I have the channel already... it's just kind of a preview. They're just cycling between a special on the 2004 Red Sox playoff run, the 2005 White Sox playoff run, and then some highlight show called "Baseball's Epic Moments" or something like that.

Now that I look at it, he wasn't bad at all in 2007. For some reason I remembered him being worse that year... maybe because the home runs were down.

I've been a fan of Swisher for a while (and not just because of Moneyball), but I don't know. He's gotten progressively worse over the last 3 seasons. I wouldn't give up that much for him I don't think. I'd rather have him than Abreu though.

I could be wrong, but don't the Brewers now lose the Yankees first round pick? What do they get now?

And the Cowboys and the Panthers and the Vikings. Cowboys? They don't impress me. The Bears outplayed the Panthers in Carolina (albeit with no Smith) and they are very much equal with the Vikings. The Panthers are a better team now. The Bears are a worse team. The Vikings have more talent in every facet of the game except kick returning. I'll give you Carolina, not Minnesota. Their "superb talent" is vastly overrated. They've got a couple fat guys on the DLine and Peterson. Their QBs are nothing, their receivers are unimpressive, the rest of their D hasn't exactly shut down the league. They allowed 48 points to the freaking Bears. They've played the same teams as the Bears and have the same record. They do not outclass the Bears. Those couple of fat guys are Pro Bowlers who lead maybe the best run defense in the league. Adrian Peterson is the best back in the league. That outclasses the Bears. Plus they have one of the best pass rushers in the league with Allen. Right now Jackson is a better QB than Orton. Their receivers are unimpressive, but still head and shoulders above the Bears. The Vikes are a different team now. Yeah they lost last week, but that's because Peterson couldn't hold onto the ball. That won't happen again. Then how did they lose the other 5 games?

Yep, they are all shocked that their insiders were incorrect. Hilarious. I'm not sure what is more pathetic: people who hang on every word an "insider" has to write on a message board, or people on a completely unrelated message board getting off every single time those "insiders" are wrong. It's not that I enjoy the "insiders" being wrong. I simply got annoyed by people over there so drastically overvaluing their prospects while bashing ours. The last 2 offseasons have left me more than a little jaded when it comes to the Orioles. You mean like when they thought they could get Chase Headley for Olson?

Yep, they are all shocked that their insiders were incorrect. Hilarious.

They wil open it back up later. They close it sometimes but always open it back up

http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/191*260/22-1vike030607.standalone.prod_affiliate.2.jpg