Jump to content
North Side Baseball

PackLandVA

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    4,367
  • 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 PackLandVA

  1. I'll give it a go, but it doesn't really seem like the board is interested. Two sucky performances to start the season doesn't help.
  2. Would be shocked if (at least) one of the games on Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday against the Rockies is rained out. Thursday would be a make-up day if necessary which means there's a day off (from rain) earlier than anticipated. That would impact the rotation as well.
  3. They have the "make-up day" immediately following the Rockies series. Both teams are off on Thursday, so that would be the day to make up a game, if necessary, for the two non-divisional teams. To have an off day earlier wouldn't make sense as it's possible Monday and Tuesday have "playable" weather.
  4. @Brian707 "Good luck with your first crap."
  5. Wasn't last year the same/similar to how it was done in the past (at least the last couple of years}? There was a rotation of thread starters, and that poster kept going until the thread starter lost the game. Then on to the next poster in the "rotation". We started out like that last year, but with the terrible start to the season for the Cubs, posters got less and less interested in making the game thread to a point where Brock just created one every morning (or the night before) to keep conversation/traffic/consistency up. I'm a proponent of having a list/rotation of thread starters like in the past, but not because I like creating them or think I'm clever or witty. To the contrary, I like the diversity of the posters' way of starting game threads. Some are stat-driven. Some are funny. Some are long-winded,,,,in a good way. And some just get straight to the point. For me, opening each game thread started by a different poster is a little like waking up on Christmas. I get quite the enjoyment from it. But, if it's not really "a thing" anymore, so be it.
  6. "Game Day" threads/thread starters rotation used to be a thing at NSBB, and they were often quite fun. Then wthey went away mostly and became less fun. Will this be a "thing" for 2024? If so, will it last the seas, and will it be mostly fun? Current lineup of game threaders: 1. @Brian707 2. @Southpaw19 3. @PackLandVA 4. @Bertz
  7. I know it's only Spring Training and all, but Hector Neris....yikes!
  8. Part of an upcoming trade???
  9. I think some may be taking the snippet/quote a bit out of context. Or maybe adding their own definition of it. It's not the GMs that use team record as a measurable for "winner"; it's the writer. The writer then goes on to question "whether or not Wolf -- or any others from the Ron Wolf tree -- would consider him (Maye) a winner." I took Gutekunst's comment "They've got to be winners. They've got to be able to win........" to be a little more nuanced than the team record/team outcome. I doubt he was referring to a QBs record as a starter.
  10. I will be rooting for Arizona (and Kentucky). What worries me about Arizona is they struggle away from McKale Center. They are 10-7 on road/Neutral site games. They have non-home losses to Stanford, USC, Oregon, and Oregon State (among others).
  11. Trading 1st Rounders for QB of Future I thought this was a pretty interesting article regarding teams that have traded 1st and/or 2nd Round picks to move up and select their future QB. The title "....fits the Packer Way mold..." is what caught my attention to read it. And, generally speaking, the article looks at what the Patriots might do with the 3rd overall pick. But I think it was an interesting read regarding the "prototypcal QB" for former Packers GM Ron Wolf and his many GM/Personnel Guy proteges. Of the 8 QBs listed, 4 were taken by the Packers and 7 of the 8 were good to HoF-worthy QBs. The only bust was Brohm (1 of the 4 Packers selections). Anyway, I think it gives a nice breakdown of the five QBs that fit the criteria: Maye, McCarthy, Daniels, Williams, and Nix.
  12. Indubitably!
  13. I'm probably in the minority, but I think Pat Hughes is just so-so. I really don't hear a lot of him anymore as I don't live in the Chicago area. But I don't really find him all that interesting. He's good, but not great.
  14. I'm disappointed it's not re-scheduled as well. They're refunding the tickets are bought directly from MLB/Cubs (I did), but I'd really rather see the game/players. Assuming this will be a yearly "thing", I'll plan to go next year.
  15. And the tarp is back on!
  16. They’re s squeegee-img the water off.
  17. Anyone at the game? I’m hanging near the Cubs dugout by third base.
  18. He had a nice Spring last year, too, if I recall. I suggested right here on this site that the good Spring might give him some trade value. The suggestion was quickly shot down as poppycock. The shooter was correct as he basically languished in the Minors all year.
  19. I remember when Barry Foote was a Cub and I didn't recall him being short or stout. Looked it up in BR and he was 6'3", 205. Hardly fire pluggish. Side note: I remember he hit a HR onto Waveland and it bounced and broke a window on one of the upper-floor apartments across the street.
  20. I've always felt a team should wait until a newly signed FA has at least 1 AB in Spring Training before they consider trading him. There's really no point until then.
  21. You can never have too many “Thompsons” in your organization.
×
×
  • Create New...