17 Seconds
-
Posts
23,748 -
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
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by 17 Seconds
-
There was an article a week or (can't remember where) about Murton and he didn't actually say he wanted to be traded, but it was pretty obvious. He kept talking about how he likes Chicago, but feels that he'll never get an opportunity to take it to the next level here and basically that he wouldn't mind a trade. Definitely sounded like he'd like to be moved.
-
I think going after Roberts was a waste of time to begin with.
-
The playoffs are a crapshoot, for the most part. Having a "leadoff" hitter wont change that. Having another very good SP might, but that's about the only thing. As presently constructed though, the Cubs are a slight favorite to make the playoffs, and then we have about a 12.5% chance once we get in, just like everybody else. I never said anything about getting a leadoff hitter. I wasn't really talking about Roberts, as I don't really want him. I'm talking more about shortstop and the rotation. I agree that the playoffs are a crapshoot, but relying on that when building a team seems like a bad philosophy to me. "Yeha, we definitely have holes, but we aren't worried about them. The playoffs are a crapshoot!" To me it makes sense to do the best you can to buold a team better than the opposition, not rely on luck.
-
That's what we have the trade deadline for. I can almost guarantee that if the Cubs make the playoffs, you'll see new faces on the playoff roster. Why is it acceptable to wait until the trade deadline to make improvements that you know are neccessary? So we can pay more? Because it takes two teams to make a deal. If the other team says no, you can't make a trade. No team finishes the season with the same 25 it starts with. I know, but there are always guys available. Renteria, for example, would have been an enormous upgrade and he was had for realtively cheap. There are always players available.
-
That's what we have the trade deadline for. I can almost guarantee that if the Cubs make the playoffs, you'll see new faces on the playoff roster. Why is it acceptable to wait until the trade deadline to make improvements that you know are neccessary? So we can pay more?
-
Does anybody actually think this team as is can do anything serious in the playoffs? Because I certainly don't. I think this is about an 87 win team and not close to a realistic World Series contender.
-
Apparently Pie or Colvin won't be neccessary to make a Roberts trade happen. http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-osqa222,0,1982196.story
-
Stop lying. Lou never said that. I listened to the interview and all he said was that he's consider possibly moving Soriano down if they made a trade, which is what he's been saying all offseason.
-
Nevermind, I didn't know they were good friends. Here is the video of that http://www.baltimoresun.com/video/?slug=bal-millar0221-video
-
Millar rips Dempster apart. “If Dempster threw it at my ribs, that means he’s trying to go down and away. He has no command, no control, of any fastball he throws, so he can’t tell anybody where he’s going to throw the baseball. The young man made the (2000) All-Star team with the Fighting Fish (Florida Marlins) because they had to take somebody. The guy’s lived off the 2000 All-Star stuff for many, many, many years and I’m tired of hearing about it. “He watched the ‘04 World Series. He knows who the Cowboy Up guy is because he was on the couch that year. He hadn’t been to the playoffs, he hadn’t been to the big dance. He was barbequing with his friends and family that year.” Ouch. That seemed a bit unneccessary.
-
Unless Boston eats most of his contract, then no, he can not be had for extra cheap. Why would we want a bad player who whines if he doesn't get playing time? That seems like a terrible mix.
-
Aramis had longest HR of 2007 (neat HR chart)
17 Seconds replied to OleMissCub's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
Ahh yes, the Mandatory Marquis Meltdown, or as I like to call it, the "mmm". -
Hits are more likely to occur by chance while walks are not? I completely disagree. Walks are WAYYYY more about luck than hits are. You get a hit if your a good hitter end of story. You take a walk if the pitcher happens to throw you balls. that's the dumbest thing i've ever heard. I find it hilarious that this guy is a baseball coach. HOW IN THE HELL DO HITS OCCUR BECAUSE OF LUCK??!!!! ARE YOU GUYS SERIOUS RIGHT NOW?!!!! I'M DONE WITH THIS ****. YOU GUYS HAVE TO BE THE STUPIDEST PEOPLE IVE EVER COME ACROSS. BATTING AVERAGE IS A VERY IMPORTANT STAT WHEN DETERMINING HOW GOOD A HITTER IS. NO ONE HAS A HIGH BATTING AVERAGE BECAUSE OF LUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was referring the the "you take a walk if the pitcher happens to throw you balls" stuff. I don't like to harp too much on Moneyball, but there's a chapter in that book discussing that exactly mentality about walks and how early statisticians ridiculously denied that taking a walk could be due to the skill of the player. The chapter pretty much talks about how stupid they were.
-
Hits are more likely to occur by chance while walks are not? I completely disagree. Walks are WAYYYY more about luck than hits are. You get a hit if your a good hitter end of story. You take a walk if the pitcher happens to throw you balls. that's the dumbest thing i've ever heard. I find it hilarious that this guy is a baseball coach.
-
I literally read nothing after this statement. I love it.
-
Alright guys, who's ready for the weekly interesting but ultimately worthless bigbird info? Here we go again.
-
I'm officially done with wrigley23 and deuce. It's like having a first grader tell the teacher that 6 divided by 3 equals 3, the teacher taking 20 minutes to explain why that's not true, and then the kid responding with "nah, it's 3".
-
How many of those at bats with runners on occurred when he was hitting in the middle of the order as a regular? Huh? That's irrelevant. He struggles with men on. He always has and always will. So, where will he get the most at-bats with runners on? The middle of the order, of course.
-
If any adjustments need to be made he can make them, just like the move to the OF. HE DOESN'T HIT WELL WITH RUNNERS ON BASE. That can change! It's not like it is much of a different skill to hit with runners on base. It shouldnt be any different than hitting with no one on. It can easily be coincidence to why he doesnt hit well with runners on. He also is a way more patient hitter with runners on. He has more walks with runners on base over the past 3 years than he does with no one on, and thats in half the at bats. This can lead to more stolen bases by him as well. Hitting in different spots in the order shouldnt affect the player. You see players get moved around all the time. Yes, you're right. Those 1679 at bats spread out over a 9 year career were all a coincidence. At 32 years old, I'm sure that's suddenly going to change. Well done.
-
They're Tyler Durden It wouldn't surprise me.
-
If any adjustments need to be made he can make them, just like the move to the OF. HE DOESN'T HIT WELL WITH RUNNERS ON BASE.
-
Anyways, here are a couple tidbits from Sullvian's most recent article. Mostly nothing new, but interesting anyways. The fact that he said "not necessarily" makes me think that maybe it actually is a precursor to another trade. You'd think he'd just say "no" if he didn't have plans to deal Cedeno. Again, it's not much, but at least it's not about Soriano leading off.
-
Anyways, here are a couple tidbits from Sullvian's most recent article. Mostly nothing new, but interesting anyways. The fact that he said "not necessarily" makes me think that maybe it actually is a precursor to another trade. You'd think he'd just say "no" if he didn't have plans to deal Cedeno. Again, it's not much, but at least it's not about Soriano leading off.
-
You don't know that. 500 at bats (ie. 1 year) doesnt tell everything. There is no reason to think that Soriano cant hit the same amount of HR's in the 5 hole as in the 1 hole. And if you say he needs protection, then bat him 4th with Aramis behind him. Aramis doesnt need protection. And Soto is good protection. Ugh. It's not about him batting 5th specifically, it's about him batting in the middle of the lineup as an RBI guy. He has way more than 500 at bats doing that, and his numbers (eespecially sluggin) have decreased dramatically. For the 57th time, look at his career numbers with runners on and risp. Simply by looking at those you could guess that he wouldn't be well suited as a middle of the order guy. I don't even know why I'm wasting my time explaining this AGAIN when it'a obvious you'll continue to REFUSE to acknowledge all the evidence that shows you're wrong. I'm done with this nonsense.
-
You don't know that. 500 at bats (ie. 1 year) doesnt tell everything. There is no reason to think that Soriano cant hit the same amount of HR's in the 5 hole as in the 1 hole. And if you say he needs protection, then bat him 4th with Aramis behind him. Aramis doesnt need protection. And Soto is good protection. Ugh. It's not about him batting 5th specifically, it's about him batting in the middle of the lineup as an RBI guy. He has way more than 500 at bats doing that, and his numbers (eespecially sluggin) have decreased dramatically. For the 57th time, look at his career numbers with runners on and risp. Simply by looking at those you could guess that he wouldn't be well suited as a middle of the order guy. I don't even know why I'm wasting my time explaining this AGAIN when it'a obvious you'll continue to REFUSE to acknowledge all the evidence that shows you're wrong. I'm done with this nonsense.