CuseCubFan69

I wouldn't say crap but he had the first day stiffness going for him. He didn't get good breaks on the balls hit and looked rough on the grounders. I'm not worried about it and he'll just keep getting better as the pre-season progresses.

co-sign Time to move on folks. It appears we will have some good things to look fwd to this season. What's so good about Perez starting and batting second? Oh God it feels good not to have to worry about that. A deep breath...a smile and it's time to move on to the 2007 season! Go Cubs!

A big step forward indeed.

Dusty did come out with some doozys but I'm sure the press took a few out of content too.

Duke will finish .500 in conference if/when UNC beats them on Sunday. Luckily for them they played a strong out-of-conference schedule. BTW, Duke's a 5 in Bracketology. Which is complete crap. Duke's #14 in the polls, which is also complete crap. Directly after being unranked. That was pretty odd. Mini rant-Texas gets a big win vs A&M and on ESPN they just show A&M shots the whole time. You'd think they'd show something Texas did since they only scored 98 points or so. Well, the highlights of that game were Acie Law single handedly keeping them in it. I'd be more upset if they didn't show the shots that Law hit. It just doesn't have to be all or nothing though. At least give the Texas kids a highlight or 2.

I don't mean to scare you, but didn't Finley sign a minor league deal? That may mean he's available at the end of ST. Nooooooooooooooo!!! You're evil! I think that Soriano is just trying to learn technique and that takes time and you are going to look foolish sometimes while in the learning stage.

Didn't Manning give the Colts a little salary relief too or was that another QB?

I would take that also. I figured they could get a second rounder from some team. I don't know how reputable KNBR is as far as reporting rumors but they are the major sports radio station out here. Why not go after Carr and use the 1st pick on Johnson? That's what I would do. David Carr might retire, that's why-he went from one of the worst lines in history to go to another of the worst lines in history-that would be some of the worst luck for him I've ever seen if that happened :D Ha...you're probably right! I'd go CJ and then line line line if I were the Raiders.

Thanks for helping a native English speaker feel worse! :oops:

And that just the guys have commented on it no less?

If he does poorly and is dropped from closer, the Cubs might look to make him a starter again next season. There is NO ROOM for Dempster. Not here, maybe. Given how much pitching went for in free agency, there should be a market for Dempster via trade. Yep, making a player as attractive as possible is always a good thing. I can't say it enough but it's so nice to have quality options like the Cubs have right now, especially in the pen.

Excuse me but it's your patella, not your knee cap. :D

I would take that also. I figured they could get a second rounder from some team. I don't know how reputable KNBR is as far as reporting rumors but they are the major sports radio station out here. Why not go after Carr and use the 1st pick on Johnson? That's what I would do.

I think this might a very eventful off season for the NFL. I wonder what Houston could get for Carr and if their are too many QB's out there to get what they could in a down year for him. He may be the steal of the whole off season.

Congrats Bear fans, it's good to see the Bears take care of both these guys.

How?

Duke will finish .500 in conference if/when UNC beats them on Sunday. Luckily for them they played a strong out-of-conference schedule. BTW, Duke's a 5 in Bracketology. Which is complete crap. Duke's #14 in the polls, which is also complete crap. Directly after being unranked. That was pretty odd. Mini rant-Texas gets a big win vs A&M and on ESPN they just show A&M shots the whole time. You'd think they'd show something Texas did since they only scored 98 points or so.

Didn't Soriano look horrible in the OF last spring too? I thought he had some very poor games in the beginning of the season and then improved quite a bit as the season progressed. I wonder if he stinks the place up out in CF if the Cubs would just trade Jones and slide Soriano over to RF and bring up Pie. Also, thank God Finley signed already.

I agree but sully said stats tell the whole story and I said they didn't. never did i say that. i said that they tell a more accurate story. numbers catch the invisibility of what actually is going on. That is what you wrote and that's what I've been discussing. and that means that i said that numbers tell the whole story? quite a leap, there. Maybe I did. Please tell me what you meant by it then.

No criticism that I know of at GT. The only worry I have (and this COULD fall on the QB at Tech) is that he disappeared at times during big games when he wasn't thrown to early. I have no idea if he was shut down, or if he was pulling a Randy Moss and taking plays off. as others have born witness, it was reggie ball who disappeared, not johnson. So you're ok with your Ball disappearing but not your Johnson?

This is why it isn't a flat line thing and what I've been getting at. Stats do not tell the whole story. They help with what you have mentioned and I think they serve a lot of purproses. What's funny is that it seems that I talk about this and then I'm accused of disliking them for some reason and of never wanting to use them because I argue about (for) the intangibles. It isn't an either or thing and for some reason that's what it seems to get to.

Yes, they show you who has the best chance, but not who will win. Ok...now is it always right? No. It gives you the best chance and that's it. Now, for what we were talking about earlier the variables that happen during a game that are not measured by numbers. A pitcher that is a starter his whole career and struggles late and is an alcoholic. He stops drinking gets traded and is one of the greatest closers of all time. What stat told me this was going to happen? i'm sorry CCF, but this is almost not worth responding to. this has nothing to do with what we're talking about. It does and it doesn't. It has something to do with unknown variables and trends and how you would react if you were a GM in that instance. Where did Sully advocate maknig decisions solely thru metrics? You're debating something entirely different from the point. What if the alcoholic pitcher got off the sauce and sucked? or didn't change his performance levels? Stats are going to provide you with a better big picture than solely looking at the human element of character, or whatever. No one is saying that random events aren't going to alter a trendline. People are saying that you need stats to accurately track the trendline. I agree but sully said stats tell the whole story and I said they didn't. never did i say that. i said that they tell a more accurate story. numbers catch the invisibility of what actually is going on. That is what you wrote and that's what I've been discussing.

He was quite fun to watch play defense when he first started with the Mets. I remember one of his first games with the Mets in '96 (maybe it was even his debut), they were playing the Cardinals with Ozzie Smith. Rey made an incredible relay from his knees to gun someone out at the plate. After the game Ozzie made some remark along the lines of "I think we've just seen the second-coming of me." Yeah, Ozzie if he had an arm!

Yes, they show you who has the best chance, but not who will win. Ok...now is it always right? No. It gives you the best chance and that's it. Now, for what we were talking about earlier the variables that happen during a game that are not measured by numbers. A pitcher that is a starter his whole career and struggles late and is an alcoholic. He stops drinking gets traded and is one of the greatest closers of all time. What stat told me this was going to happen? i'm sorry CCF, but this is almost not worth responding to. this has nothing to do with what we're talking about. It does and it doesn't. It has something to do with unknown variables and trends and how you would react if you were a GM in that instance. using your logic, if i see a relatively ineffective pitcher have an effective outing, he should be counted on to be effective throughout the season. you don't acquire and use a bad player if you think there's an off-chance that he could be good on a particular day. "well, novoa has an 8 run era in his last 10 outings, lou, what do you think?" "ah, he's due." that's bad management. that's micromanagement. a good GM or manager will put the best players on the field, not bad players that they feel have a chance to be good on a particular game. And you're talking as if everything is equal. Who knows who in the pen is tired. Who knows who is available that can possibly give the Cubs 4 innings to rest the pen.

Yes, they show you who has the best chance, but not who will win. Ok...now is it always right? No. It gives you the best chance and that's it. Now, for what we were talking about earlier the variables that happen during a game that are not measured by numbers. A pitcher that is a starter his whole career and struggles late and is an alcoholic. He stops drinking gets traded and is one of the greatest closers of all time. What stat told me this was going to happen? i'm sorry CCF, but this is almost not worth responding to. this has nothing to do with what we're talking about. It does and it doesn't. It has something to do with unknown variables and trends and how you would react if you were a GM in that instance. Where did Sully advocate maknig decisions solely thru metrics? You're debating something entirely different from the point. What if the alcoholic pitcher got off the sauce and sucked? or didn't change his performance levels? Stats are going to provide you with a better big picture than solely looking at the human element of character, or whatever. No one is saying that random events aren't going to alter a trendline. People are saying that you need stats to accurately track the trendline. I agree but sully said stats tell the whole story and I said they didn't.