Warren Brusstar

Yes, they do routinely avoid interfering with their team's efforts to catch balls. I've seen it happen on numerous occasions. In any event, resolving that point is unnecessary. You're the one who took the position that "any" fan would have done exactly what Bartman did. Now, you are conceding (as you must, of course), that lots of fans duck for cover and try to avoid it. Indeed, that's clearly what's happening with the female fan directly to Bartman's left in the pictures on page 1. At bottom, regardless whether it's characterized as "avoiding the ball" or "letting the home team try to make the catch," your position that "any" fan would have done the same thing Bartman did is asinine.

Look if Steve Bartman had never been born, then the Cubs' history would be exactly what it is now. Some other fan would have been sitting in that seat, and would have reached for that ball, and hey, maybe some other fan would have actually caught it... not that it matters. So yeah, the story of how some poor schmuck was at the wrong place at the wrong time, and had his life ruined as a result, isn't what I'd call interesting. Nor is the story about how the delusional fanbase of a sad sack franchise has a new, pathetic, irrelevant scapegoat to blame for its failures what I'd call interesting. But hey if those storylines are interesting to you, go ahead and tune in. I don't know how you could possibly know this. Do you not watch baseball games? Both before and after Bartman, fans of the home team have routinely avoided interfering with their team's efforts to catch balls in the stands. You can make the case that it is *likely* that another fan would have reacted similarly. But you certainly can't assert it as unquestioned fact. Maybe you should watch the replay. Every fan in the area is reaching for that ball. Bartman simply happened to be closest to it. Heck if Bartman had been in the bathroom pissing in a trough at that moment, that ball still isn't getting to Alou's glove. No, maybe you should look at the pictures on page 1 of this thread. Neither the fan directly to Bartman's left, nor the fan directly to his right ever reach for the ball. The only fans who actually reached for the ball are (1) the fan two seats to Bartman's right, (2) the fan directly behind the person two seats to Bartman's right, and (3) (maybe, it's hard to tell) the fan directly behind the fan directly to Bartman's right. No one else reaches for the ball. So, out of 7 or 8 fans within reaching distance of the ball, 3 or 4 tried to catch it.

Look if Steve Bartman had never been born, then the Cubs' history would be exactly what it is now. Some other fan would have been sitting in that seat, and would have reached for that ball, and hey, maybe some other fan would have actually caught it... not that it matters. So yeah, the story of how some poor schmuck was at the wrong place at the wrong time, and had his life ruined as a result, isn't what I'd call interesting. Nor is the story about how the delusional fanbase of a sad sack franchise has a new, pathetic, irrelevant scapegoat to blame for its failures what I'd call interesting. But hey if those storylines are interesting to you, go ahead and tune in. I don't know how you could possibly know this. Do you not watch baseball games? Both before and after Bartman, fans of the home team have routinely avoided interfering with their team's efforts to catch balls in the stands. You can make the case that it is *likely* that another fan would have reacted similarly. But you certainly can't assert it as unquestioned fact.

is it as remarkable as blaming livestock? Exactly. The whole premise that the Cubs lost because of a Curse or a Goat or Steve Bartman is nauseating and should be an insult to every reasonable person's intelligence. Neither of which anyone is arguing here. And yes, the goat story is a story. I don't see how you're not grasping the difference between "OMG, THOSE ARE THE REASONS THE CUBS LOST!!!" and "wow, those are weird stories." The Bartman saga is interesting. A guy trying to bring his damn goat to a ballgame and being turned away and then supposedly cursing the team is interesting. It's like you're arguing that everyone should just shrug these stories off or ignore them, as if acknowledging how unusual they are is somehow condoning meatballism. Well I'll say it again. To me these are not interesting stories. More like nauseating. And there is no Bartman saga if everyone agrees the guy's not to blame, so your premise is immediately faulty. He is partially to blame. Just like AGonz, Dusty, Prior, Alou, and a whole host of others. No single play is ever singularly responsible for winning or losing a game. But it's equally ridiculous to assert that Bartman's actions didn't effect the outcome of the game. They did.

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed. He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game. Calling it a critically important moment in an historic game is overplaying it. IMO. And it ignores that Bartman did what any other fan would have done in the same circumstances -- and every other fan in his vicinity was trying to do. What happened was, the Cubs choked in the 8th, and again in game 7. The Bartman nonsense is just needless dramatization. Saying this 1,000 times doesn't make it true. Fans in similar situations -- before and after Bartman -- have routinely refrained from interfering with the home team's attempt to catch the ball. While perhaps most fans would have done likewise, it is not at all accurate to say that "any" fan would have done the same.

I'm a terrible fan and Bartman is overplayed. He might be overplayed, but that's quite different from insisting that it wasn't a critically important moment in an historic game.

Condescending Cubs fans who insist that anyone who thinks Bartman is even part of the story are meathead mouthbreathers. He was part of the story, and if Alou catches the ball, the Cubs almost surely win the pennant. To be sure, the Cubs had ample other opportunities to win the game, and there are certainly other events (AGonz's error) that caused the loss far more than Bartman's play. But there can be no dispute that it was a critical negative play in an historic game. In my experience, those who contend otherwise generally suffer from "I-am-a-better-fan-than-you" disease.

good god, how many times do I have to post this in various places? August 2009: .287/.398/.506/.904 The whole Fukudome sucks past April thing needs to die. I'm sorry that you don't like the truth. Fukudome's collective post-April numbers in '08 and '09: .243/.345/.374 To be sure, two years isn't a sufficient sample to suggest that there is some sort of pattern. He certainly could be a productive player this year after April. But it is disingenuous to suggest that he hasn't been pretty bad after April in his first two years.

What he said. Quit being a prima donna, earn your paycheck, and [expletive] HUSTLE. A 3-step process to becoming loved by Cub fans. Bradley hustles more than probably every other guy on the team. If you can't see that, you're not paying attention.

2008 Gregg: 3.41 ERA; 1.282 WHIP; 58:37 K:BB 2008 Wuertz: 3.63 ERA; 1.433 WHIP; 30:20 K:BB Gregg wasn't great last year, but he was better than Wuertz. Also, Gregg got hurt around this time last year (the same knee injury he struggled with early this year) and that's why he was taken out of the closer's role. Please add 2005-07 to your comparison

Why do people think Kevin Gregg was "great" for the Marlins? He wasn't as good as Michael Wuertz all while pitching in one of the best pitcher's parks in baseball. Also, he lead the majors in blown saves and lost his job at this time last year.

Can't wait to see the Charlie Weis death march!!!!

One, he's not good at football. Have you ever heard of a good white wideout. THEY DON'T EXIST. Especially ones from ND now if he went to big ten school he would've had a shot. But he would never play there anyways. Also yup it was the kevin hart trade that doomed this team. WEMUSTPROTECTCHARLIEWEISANDNOTREDAME!!!!!!!! Come 'on, Halman

Clutch - Scott Fletcher. Non-clutch - Richard Hidalgo

Unless and until there is conclusive evidence to the contrary, I remain convinced that Miles is an undercover operative paid by Larussa to sabotage the Cubs. NO ONE DENIES THIS

Do you still contend the reason he failed is Larry Rothschild?

abuck told me that this is all Larry Rothschild's fault and that Hill would be straightened out as soon as he escaped Larry's evil spell.

Jose Oquendo says hello http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_7C0gSvTcf58/Rg0iqf-GgBI/AAAAAAAAAL8/zydNCcnn46o/s320/jose_oquendo Neither one of them can compete with the all-time leader -- Don Mossi http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/jjgreen33/DonMossi.jpg

What did he say?

The Cubs haven't won the season series from them since 2001. 16-29 v. the Phillies since '02.

i think it's clear that it's in their heads right now and it's affecting them, so yeah So there's such thing as a clutch hitter?

Oops.

Overrated for what purpose? As a way of predicting how well he's going to hit in the future in with RISP, it's utterly useless. As a way of determining how much value a player has provided in such situations, it's a reasonable proxy.

Why?

You know how I can tell Pie is no longer in the Cubs organization? A post referred to him as a "failed" prospect and there weren't immediately 17 responses saying that it's way premature to say he's failed and that it's Piniella's/Hendry's fault in any event.