Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Hairyducked Idiot

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    39,504
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    46

 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 Hairyducked Idiot

  1. Did Barney have to hold up a bit to make sure it wasn't caught on the line? It could have been a terrible throw and he'd have still been out.
  2. Very sporting of us to give the Mets an out like that.
  3. Castro's been saved a decent amount of errors by calls like that this season, imo.
  4. Sveum's need to use Russell in two-out situations befuddles me.
  5. Sheesh. Harvey's splits actually get better after 75+ pitches.
  6. @$%@#%$@#$% This is the kind of game we need to win to get back to where we deserve to be.
  7. Jackson sure feels like he has trouble putting hitters away with two strikes for a guy who has an awesome K rate. It's just observer bias, but still annoying.
  8. Here's a good article explaining it: http://www.nwumpires.com/home/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=39:lg&catid=19:rulesarea&Itemid=7 There is a rule against intentionally dropping the ball, but it means literally dropping it out of your glove, not just letting it fall to the ground. " “A batter is out when an infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases. APPROVED RULING: in this situation, the batter is not out if the infielder permits the ball to drop untouched to the ground, except when the Infield Fly rule applies."
  9. There's no rule against it per se, but the umpire can negate it by calling infield fly while it's in the air. A ball hit like that has plenty of risk of funky spin, missed short-hop or even hitting the base, and I don't think you had much chance of getting the runner at first even if you field it cleanly and don't make a bad throw. Just take the out.
  10. I think Castro made the right call there. Way too risky to let that drop.
  11. not today, he isn't Oh yeah, it's based on FIP (8.02 so far today) and not xFIP (3.33). I miss just being able to count the runs, maybe do a park adjustment. This stuff hurts my head.
  12. That's the third time we've heard the "slider-speed fastball" story this year, at least.
  13. 30 is much more reasonable, and you'd still probably get 50 or so names listed.
  14. Rizzo is really in a groove on that opposite field swing.
  15. OK, I wondered where Cincinnati would have been.
  16. Does ZIPS do team win projections? Can I see them? Google's not helping.
  17. That's a playoff team for sure. The team currently assembled is a .500 team if given a decent bullpen. We currently stand at a -7 run differential. Of the 9 games our bullpen has blown, just converting just 33% of those puts us at .500 on the year. I don't know if it's a flat-out playoff team. It's in the mix. We're on pace for a -28 run differential right now. That's roughly a 78-win team (right where most people had them, incidentally). Using updated ZIPS projects, replacing Villanueva with Price would be +3 wins, Soriano with Choo +4, and upgrading the bullpen to average would be +1 (yes, they've cost us more than that, but that's accounted for by using run differential and not raw win totals). So by getting the best pitcher in baseball, the best available FA outfielder and magicking an average bullpen, you're still a couple wins short of a playoff projection.
  18. Honestly, a whole lot of that top-50 list looks super weird now. We should start another one midseason.
  19. There's no clear line between "prospect" and "roster fill," but he's definitely in the vicinity of that line. You could call him a really fringey prospect.
  20. I'd be pretty surprised if he didn't. Agreed. I still hold out some hope that, like Samardzija, his career path will make him a late bloomer. Like Samardzija, I'm going to remain curmudgeonly on him until I absolutely have no other choice. I think at best, Szczur is a Darwin Barney type in the OF. Low-offense era and good defense combine to mean you can live with him if you have to, but you'd rather have someone better.
×
×
  • Create New...