sethuel1

It's getting painful to listen to Ron for an entire game. Aww c'mon. its tough to listen to him if you're really into hearing pertinent info about the game, but to hear the mad ramblings of a loony old Cubs fan, it's great.

Lineup card 1, Dusty 0.

Ron just claimed that he didn't know Macias could play center.

Why does it not suprise me that the SF announces can see this, but dusty can't. They must be ecstatic to watch him screw up some other team. then again, they had to watch the Felipe Alou bullpen-go-round a couple of nights ago

Aram is a lazy $%% ...../sigh He's lazy and his errors have been numerous lately....earn that money man! we should trade him now, if only some other team would take him. Never said anything close to Trade him....told him to earn his money.. I'd say his stat line shows he's earning his money. Ok, I will rephrase for the Stat Line....run your lazy rear end off. Cool? I would prefer he not try and run to hard all the time, remember he has had growing problems in the past and the last thing we need is for him to get hurt trying to beat out an infield hit in the first inning of a game. growing problems? oh, groin problems! groin growing problems?

Aram is a lazy $%% ...../sigh He's lazy and his errors have been numerous lately....earn that money man! we should trade him now, if only some other team would take him. Never said anything close to Trade him....told him to earn his money.. He's been the best hitter in the NL for the last 2 months, IIRC. He's earning his money. thats also why he gets the significant benefit of having Todd Hollandsworth protect him in the lineup.

Ronnie just told a story that proudly concluded with the line, "i spread my legs and it went right past and ended up on the floor."

As if this lineup would be any different had Greenberg not gotten hit in the head. Exactly. Also, why did we trade Jason Dubois for a guy who can't beat Macias into the starting lineup? Why have Gerut on this team and talk about how he has the ability to play CF if he's going to just sit on the bench and watch crappy Macias play in front of him? This organization (mostly Dusty) really infuriates me sometimes. The thing is, I bet when Hendry made that trade, Dusty acted all excited. Then when Gerut showed up and Dusty realized how young he was, he started ignoring him and hasn't stopped since. Edit: I'm not saying Gerut is actually young (he's 27), but that he appears young, and that's enough for Dusty.

As if this lineup would be any different had Greenberg not gotten hit in the head.

You have got to be kidding me. I have only one hope. I know it won't happen because of the Cubs-colored glasses and the constant comments about the "great manager Dusty Baker", but what do you think would happen if Ron Santo absolutely flipped out over how incompetent Dusty has been in regards to filling out the lineup card? Do you think tribune Co. would throw him under a bus?

Good thing players like Pujols didn't come up under Dusty. He might still be a platoon player right now. LOL, Cedeno is no Pujols. You're missing the point. It blatantly doesn't matter how promising a young player is, he gets little shot under Dusty. I think it was Bob's Keeper that did the excellent study which is floating around somewhere in the archives, which showed that not once in Baker's managing career has he had a rookie under 26 win a starting job under him. Seriously. that's glaring.

Sorry, but he's made several great plays for the Cubs this year. The most recent one being the screaming liner from Pujols. It was right at him.

We under appreciate Neifi. He's a career sub who has filled in admirably. Let's not have short memories, Neifi and DLee were carrying the offense when Aramis and Corey were automatic outs early in the season. Without going into the same debate again, I'll have to strongly disagree. Neifi did well in April, but he's regressed to his career numbers, which I don't want on the roster at all. Nonsense. Since May 1: .241/.261/.337/.598 Who's been worse? Cory Patterson for one. Nope, actually 50 points better in OPS, but he's been deemed not good enough to be on a major league roster at that level of production. Yet Neifi has praise heaped upon him for being worse since his hot start. I should have clarified though, I was referring to infielders when I asked who was worse, since you claimed he was the best reserve. This is a prime example of why I'm glad the Cubs look at more than just selective stats. I guess you just ignore defense, but hey that's ok. Your're entitled to your opinion, I just disagree. CPat is where he belongs BTW. Show me the replay of the grounder he didn't get to in the late innings against St. Louis this weekend and then make that argument. Neifi is no better than the average shortstop anymore defensively.

We under appreciate Neifi. He's a career sub who has filled in admirably. Let's not have short memories, Neifi and DLee were carrying the offense when Aramis and Corey were automatic outs early in the season. Without going into the same debate again, I'll have to strongly disagree. Neifi did well in April, but he's regressed to his career numbers, which I don't want on the roster at all. Nonsense. Since May 1: .241/.261/.337/.598 Who's been worse? Cory Patterson for one. Nope, actually 50 points better in OPS, but he's been deemed not good enough to be on a major league roster at that level of production. Yet Neifi has praise heaped upon him for being worse since his hot start. I should have clarified though, I was referring to infielders when I asked who was worse, since you claimed he was the best reserve. ha. I was just doing the math for this one as well. Corey, despite his terrible June, actually has been better.

I'll admit that i've never seen that night games ruling in print, but I've heard it around the neighborhood from several people. there's some crackpots that live here, though, so maybe it's not true. here's to hoping. And how is the city going to make money off of Buffett? From the city taxes on the concert tickets?

Huh? If it was rescheduled as the "night" part of a day night doubleheader, the Cubs would be replacing a night game (tonight) with a night game (the make-up). How would that affect the number of night games? Show me where the Cubs have another night game against the Giants. I don't think you're following what I'm saying. Hypothetically, let's say the Cubs have a limit of 24 night games. (I say "hypothetically" only because I don't know the precise limit) Further, let's assume that the Cubs have exactly 24 night games on their schedule. If tonight's game was rained out, it would be removed from the schedule. So, there would be 23 night games on the schedule. Accordingly, the Cubs could make the game up tomorrow night (as past of a day-night doubleheader) without exceeding the limit on night games. If a DAY game is rained out, the Cubs are unable to make it up at night. I do get what you're saying. What I'm saying is that i know the city of Chicago approves the night game list months before the season starts, and I don't think they allow making up of night games on nights where there's no scheduled night game. The limit, by the way, is 30. The Cubs also scheduled a pair of Jimmy Buffett concerts, one of which is at night, which the city is tremendously unhappy about. The city of Chicago has already punished the Cubs for scheduling Buffett by taking away one of their night games for next year, so they will only be able to have 29. Also the Cubs have already agreed that they will not have any more concerts next year. As I am sure that the Cubs would have to go through the city in order to reschedule this game at night, I think making a night game, especially tomorrow night, is out of the question. I may be wrong, but I doubt it. Where do you get your info? It probably will be a straight DH tomorrow, but the info you are saying is just plain wrong. The city is happy to have Buffet, they need the money. You must be hearing this stuff from Charlotte Newfeld, not your alderman. The city agreed to night games and they agreement of when they are scheduled or re-scheduled have to fall under the master agreement, not day to day. http://suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-wrig09.html

Well, only if you hold a grudge against his brother. Who's his brother? How could anyone ever dislike Tom Skilling? :wink: Jeff Skilling. The enron CEO.

Huh? If it was rescheduled as the "night" part of a day night doubleheader, the Cubs would be replacing a night game (tonight) with a night game (the make-up). How would that affect the number of night games? Show me where the Cubs have another night game against the Giants. I don't think you're following what I'm saying. Hypothetically, let's say the Cubs have a limit of 24 night games. (I say "hypothetically" only because I don't know the precise limit) Further, let's assume that the Cubs have exactly 24 night games on their schedule. If tonight's game was rained out, it would be removed from the schedule. So, there would be 23 night games on the schedule. Accordingly, the Cubs could make the game up tomorrow night (as past of a day-night doubleheader) without exceeding the limit on night games. If a DAY game is rained out, the Cubs are unable to make it up at night. I do get what you're saying. What I'm saying is that i know the city of Chicago approves the night game list months before the season starts, and I don't think they allow making up of night games on nights where there's no scheduled night game. The limit, by the way, is 30. The Cubs also scheduled a pair of Jimmy Buffett concerts, one of which is at night, which the city is tremendously unhappy about. The city of Chicago has already punished the Cubs for scheduling Buffett by taking away one of their night games for next year, so they will only be able to have 29. Also the Cubs have already agreed that they will not have any more concerts next year. As I am sure that the Cubs would have to go through the city in order to reschedule this game at night, I think making a night game, especially tomorrow night, is out of the question. I may be wrong, but I doubt it. I have no knowledge regarding whether the city has to approve the precise dates of Cub night games. If so, that would preclude the Cubs from making it up tomorrow night. But, that has no relation to the limited "number" of night games that the Cubs have, which is the purported justification in your first post. So, while you may be right (I don't know one way or the other), it's not for the reason you stated. Yeah, the first one was phrased wrong, now that i look at it. it should have read "the Cubs have a preset home night game schedule every year." Anyway, the bottom line here is that Daley is an idiot Sox fan.

Well, only if you hold a grudge against his brother.

Huh? If it was rescheduled as the "night" part of a day night doubleheader, the Cubs would be replacing a night game (tonight) with a night game (the make-up). How would that affect the number of night games? Show me where the Cubs have another night game against the Giants. I don't think you're following what I'm saying. Hypothetically, let's say the Cubs have a limit of 24 night games. (I say "hypothetically" only because I don't know the precise limit) Further, let's assume that the Cubs have exactly 24 night games on their schedule. If tonight's game was rained out, it would be removed from the schedule. So, there would be 23 night games on the schedule. Accordingly, the Cubs could make the game up tomorrow night (as past of a day-night doubleheader) without exceeding the limit on night games. If a DAY game is rained out, the Cubs are unable to make it up at night. I do get what you're saying. What I'm saying is that i know the city of Chicago approves the night game list months before the season starts, and I don't think they allow making up of night games on nights where there's no scheduled night game. The limit, by the way, is 30. The Cubs also scheduled a pair of Jimmy Buffett concerts, one of which is at night, which the city is tremendously unhappy about. The city of Chicago has already punished the Cubs for scheduling Buffett by taking away one of their night games for next year, so they will only be able to have 29. Also the Cubs have already agreed that they will not have any more concerts next year. As I am sure that the Cubs would have to go through the city in order to reschedule this game at night, I think making a night game, especially tomorrow night, is out of the question. I may be wrong, but I doubt it.

If it happens later, WGN will show it.

But tonight is a night game that wouldn't be played. it doesn't matter. the Cubs have to clear the night game schedule with the city months before the season starts. That is just plain wrong. I agree, but thats the way it works. This is the Giants' only trip to Chicago. They have no more scheduled night games on this trip. Therefore, the game must be made up as part of a doubleheader tomorrow or on a mutual off-day later where it cannot be scheduled as a night game due to the fact that the city won't allow it. Especially since the city isn't tremendously happy about this Jimmy Buffett thing.

Night games are allowed any day except Thursday and Friday nights. The Cubs tend to schedule them Sun thru Tues more often, but that's just organizational preference. I think they feel they can sell out a Wednesday or Thurday afternoon game better.

But tonight is a night game that wouldn't be played. it doesn't matter. the Cubs have to clear the night game schedule with the city months before the season starts.

Huh? If it was rescheduled as the "night" part of a day night doubleheader, the Cubs would be replacing a night game (tonight) with a night game (the make-up). How would that affect the number of night games? Show me where the Cubs have another night game against the Giants.