Jump to content
North Side Baseball

sethuel1

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,253

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 sethuel1

  1. sethuel1
    Get out there, Dusty!!! he'd better still be arguing when they get back
  2. sethuel1
    Boooooooooooooooooooooooo
  3. sethuel1
    Holy crap what a terrible call.
  4. sethuel1
    gotta make some cash. ESPN needs it.
  5. sethuel1
    What'd Dusty do? Wuertz had Encarnancion, and he almost had Pujols. At the very least, I would have liked to have seen Marshall clean up his own mess since he had a better chance at a groundball and also since Wuertz hasn't seen action in a long time. Wuertz is just a bad choice here. Dusty didn't throw Marshall to the wolves. He could have been rocked with the heart of the order due up, bases juiced. the heart of the order does not include Juan Encarnacion
  6. sethuel1
    Please don't use that kind of language here. Thanks. Seriously? From the guy that made the over-the-line gay joke?
  7. sethuel1
    It's a good thing our manager has such a quick hook.
  8. sethuel1
    you win the Internet.
  9. sethuel1
    Yeah ESPN Mobile...does anyone actually have that? I hope nobody was swayed to get it my those commercials at least.
  10. sethuel1
    Does anything suck more than the Mobile ESPN commercials? I think not.
  11. sethuel1
    Then they need to boo Hendry, not jones how do you suggest they do that?
  12. sethuel1
    No, it doesn't have to be done in multiples of 15.
  13. sethuel1
    I'd hit either Edmonds or Rolen in the 2 hole, personally. That 2 hole is a black hole. Edmonds still hits for good power (remember, if it weren't for the wind, he'd have hit that one off Maddux onto Waveland) and gets on base a lot due to his excellent strike zone judgement, but he's done being a great average hitter, I think.
  14. sethuel1
    Cabrera will be lucky to get half that. Why? He put up big stats last year, about a notch below DLee and you think he's only worth $6 mil a year? I probably estimated high on the 12-15 mil per year but if DLee is negoitiating a contract worth 12-13 mil a year, you don't think Cabrera, who is 22 not 30, isn't worth 10 mil a year? Furcal got 13 mil from the Dodgers. Service time. So if the guy can play but is only 22 (almost 23) that takes a few million off of what he's worth. Pujols has only been in the league for 5 years, this is his sixth. I don't know when Albert signed his contract and I'm not saying Cabrera is as good as Pujols is but Pujols is making 14 mil a year. Why isn't Cabrera worth 10. I still haven't heard a good reason. Just for kicks, lets say Cabrera puts up numbers this year comparable to what he did last year. Is he still not worth 10 mil? I think Pujols signed his multi-year deal before he was done with arbitration, maybe by one year. As long as a player is eligible for arbitration, other teams can't sign him so he won't have the opportunity to make big time money and poor teams like the Marlins can keep him longer. Thats' why it is the way it is. Before Curt Flood, a team owned the rights to a player forever. The whole arbitration thing is a compromise. Thanks. Just curious, what happened with Pujols then? 2006 is his sixth year in the league. Can the team a player is on just sign him to a gigantic deal if they want to? Yeah, that's what happened with him, two years early. Basically with Pujols, the Cards gave him more money in his last 2 arby-eligible years (5 and 6) in exchange for signing him to a discount (relatively, since I think his deal is about 7 years-$100 mil) in later years (7, 8, 9, 10, 11) in which he would have been free agency-eligible.
  15. sethuel1
    Are you trying to imply that you always go commando? because that's what i got out of this statement.
  16. sethuel1
    Cabrera will be lucky to get half that. Why? He put up big stats last year, about a notch below DLee and you think he's only worth $6 mil a year? I probably estimated high on the 12-15 mil per year but if DLee is negoitiating a contract worth 12-13 mil a year, you don't think Cabrera, who is 22 not 30, isn't worth 10 mil a year? Furcal got 13 mil from the Dodgers. Service time.
  17. sethuel1
    figured I'd bring this over from the game thread: * Fewest RCAA since 1900 1 Ski Melillo -355 2 Tommy Thevenow -351 3 Bill Bergen -312 4 Tim Foli -309 5 Larry Bowa -307 6 Alfredo Griffin -306 T7 Don Kessinger -305 T7 Ozzie Guillen -305 9 Neifi Perez -302 10 Ed Brinkman -300 source: Sabermetic Baseball Encyclopedia Definition of RCAA: 1. RCAA (n) a measure of a batter's ability to contribute runs per outs made as compared to the runs contributed by a theoretical average player.
  18. sethuel1
    raisin, can you expand on this from the context? I know he was clocked a number of times in the upper 90's his draft year and following. Is Ron saying he's been clocked regularly in the upper 90's more recently? If so, when? This spring? Last summer when he wasn't very good? The reason I'm askin is that it seemed he looked pretty good and was throwing pretty hard in spring. But my recall from last summer was that he wasn't throwing quite that well, or that effectively. Has something changed, or not? Was he throwing regularly in 95-97 last year too, even when he wasn't much good? If so, it's obvious that his 95-97 is no more useful, short of improved movement or control, than it was last summer, and he's fringe prospect. But if the story is that something is changed, that for whatever reason last summer he was more 88-92, and now he's back to 91-97 again, then it's reasonable to think his prospects now are better than they were then. But if there's been no boost in his velocity, that's a differet story. I'm pretty sure his velocity was down most of last year, and came back almost immediately in spring training this year. Don't remember where I heard that, though.
  19. sethuel1
    He is only among the worst hitters in all of major league baseball since 1900. THAT IS BAD. Today he got a bloop single on a ball that was a six inches of the ground and a lucky hop that golden boy Pujols should have stabbed. Neifi sucks, he should never start. Ever. Where did you come up with that stat? Since 1900? This hatred of Perez is just plain silly. * Fewest RCAA since 1900 1 Ski Melillo -355 2 Tommy Thevenow -351 3 Bill Bergen -312 4 Tim Foli -309 5 Larry Bowa -307 6 Alfredo Griffin -306 T7 Don Kessinger -305 T7 Ozzie Guillen -305 9 Neifi Perez -302 10 Ed Brinkman -300 source: Sabermetic Baseball Encyclopedia Definition of RCAA: 1. RCAA (n) a measure of a batter's ability to contribute runs per outs made as compared to the runs contributed by a theoretical average player. Just for kicks, here's the top 10 since 1900:' EDIT: NL-ONLY. For the top 10 list for both leagues, see my post below. RCAA 1 Barry Bonds 1502 2 Stan Musial 1204 3 Rogers Hornsby 1081 4 Hank Aaron 1039 5 Willie Mays 1008 6 Mel Ott 989 7 Honus Wagner 938 8 Jeff Bagwell 680 9 Joe Morgan 657 10 Eddie Mathews 652 P.S. Not that i expect you to believe this stat at all. In fact, you'll probably just ignore it and then wait for one of us young whippersnappers to make another statement you find outlandish, which you will reply to with a post like this one: "(Insert partial quoted comment here)! Ha! That's outlandish!" In fact, just cut and paste the above line from now on to save yourself time. Are you sure that top 10 is right for the NL? That's just a wierd distribution curve, namely the drop from Wagner to Bagwell. Found it here: http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=41141
  20. sethuel1

    sethuel1 replied to DivineBovine's topic in Other Sports

    I have to admit I didn't read the actual article
  21. sethuel1
    Haha. you're so becoming a Cub-fan. I give it no more than 10 months till you're sporting a 1979 Dennis Lamp throwback jersey and special ordering Old Style by the 30-pack. fixed
  22. sethuel1

    sethuel1 replied to DivineBovine's topic in Other Sports

    Noah, Brewer and Horford aren't coming out. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2401235
  23. sethuel1
    I just found the actual list. First one was NL-only. this is the full list. Sorry for the mix-up. RCAA RCAA 1 Babe Ruth 1795 2 Barry Bonds 1502 3 Ted Williams 1475 4 Ty Cobb 1369 5 Lou Gehrig 1247 6 Stan Musial 1204 7 Mickey Mantle 1099 8 Rogers Hornsby 1084 9 Tris Speaker 1053 10 Hank Aaron 1032 The bottom ten is the full list of the bottom 10 (since 1900). No one-league-or-the-other there.
  24. sethuel1
    Larry Walker is one of the most genuine, enjoyable players I've ever seen as far as his interactions with the bleacher faithful.
  25. sethuel1
    He is only among the worst hitters in all of major league baseball since 1900. THAT IS BAD. Today he got a bloop single on a ball that was a six inches of the ground and a lucky hop that golden boy Pujols should have stabbed. Neifi sucks, he should never start. Ever. Where did you come up with that stat? Since 1900? This hatred of Perez is just plain silly. * Fewest RCAA since 1900 1 Ski Melillo -355 2 Tommy Thevenow -351 3 Bill Bergen -312 4 Tim Foli -309 5 Larry Bowa -307 6 Alfredo Griffin -306 T7 Don Kessinger -305 T7 Ozzie Guillen -305 9 Neifi Perez -302 10 Ed Brinkman -300 source: Sabermetic Baseball Encyclopedia Definition of RCAA: 1. RCAA (n) a measure of a batter's ability to contribute runs per outs made as compared to the runs contributed by a theoretical average player. Just for kicks, here's the top 10 since 1900:' EDIT: NL-ONLY. For the top 10 list for both leagues, see my post below. RCAA 1 Barry Bonds 1502 2 Stan Musial 1204 3 Rogers Hornsby 1081 4 Hank Aaron 1039 5 Willie Mays 1008 6 Mel Ott 989 7 Honus Wagner 938 8 Jeff Bagwell 680 9 Joe Morgan 657 10 Eddie Mathews 652 P.S. Not that i expect you to believe this stat at all. In fact, you'll probably just ignore it and then wait for one of us young whippersnappers to make another statement you find outlandish, which you will reply to with a post like this one: "(Insert partial quoted comment here)! Ha! That's outlandish!" In fact, just cut and paste the above line from now on to save yourself time.
×
×
  • Create New...