Jump to content
North Side Baseball

anemic offense

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,002

  • 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 anemic offense

  1. anemic offense
    Thanks for the spell check :lol: .
  2. anemic offense
    That's a shock.
  3. anemic offense
    Very true, but this isnt the first time we've heard that rumor. It seems like there may be something to it. I dont know if I understand it fully, as I havent taken the time to do more then skim a couple articles about it. But as I understand it, it has something to do with If they cannot get a new stadium deal to bring in new revenue, they may need to trade Willis/Cabrera to clear up some cash. From today's Newsday Article Pie, Marshall, Murton, and Gallagher can all go for Cabrera. From a baseball only perspective it may be a good move. But I don't want him on this team, not with that attitude. He may only be 22-23 years old but I already see the makings of a clubhouse cancer. Many of you may be astounded by this, but I'd rather have a team with players I can root for (ala the Bulls) than to have a hugely successful team largely due to the play of a selfish, egomaniacal star (Bonds or Sosa). I want this team to win BADLY, just not at any cost.
  4. anemic offense
    UK, you must not think mcuh of the DBacks huh? :lol:
  5. anemic offense
    - AL EAST Skanks Bo Sox Toronto Tampa Bay Baltimore - AL CENTRAL Indians White Sox Twins Tigers Royals - AL WEST A's Angles Rangers M's - NL EAST Phillies Mets Braves Nats Marlins - NL CENTRAL Cards Cubs Brewers Stros Pirates Reds - NL WEST Dodgers Padres Giants D Backs Rockies - WCs - NL take pick between Cubs and Mets, AL - Angels - ALCS - Indians over Skanks - NLCS - Phillies over Cards - WS - Indians over Phillies
  6. anemic offense
    No, they're not. Not even close. We didn't have Wood and Prior for most of last year, and we didn't lose 90, and we're better this year. you gotta be kidding me. they lost 83 last year when the two of them combined for 37 starts. you really think that if they started ZERO that the cubs wouldn't lose seven more games? with this offense (and the fact that their replacements would be rusch/williams/hill/marshall) the cubs could lose 95-100 w/o those guys. Even without Prior and Wood all year, the Cubs are nowhere near a 100 loss team. For a frame of reference, no one in the entire NL lost more than 95 games last year. well, not many teams had a back end of a rotation as bad as maddux, rusch, williams, and marshall could be. they probably wouldn't lose 100 w/o prior and wood, but it'd be a miracle if they lost less than 92-95. It'd be a culmination of alot of things going wrong for them to lose 90 without them. Miller will be back in the rotation probably around late April or early May. Their win-loss record was worse last year than it should be if you judge by runs scored vs runs allowed. The offense, while still severely lacking, is better. The bullpen, is much improved. You point to the possibility that Murton and Cedeno might fail, hence your pessimism. Murton's worst case scenario would still be better than the garbage we got from Holla/Dubose/Gerut/Lawton last year. If Cedeno fails, then we're stuck with Neifi, which is a wash with last year. Our staff is better without Prior and Wood than it was without them last year. There's no reason to expect this team could lose 90 games. Everything went wrong last year and they still were in the running for .500 until the last week, and we're better this year, whether Wood or Prior make that many starts or not. What we need Wood and Prior for are to win the division, we won't do that without them. Good post. That's what I was trying to convey earlier.
  7. anemic offense
    BTW, I wasn't trying to insult you, I was simply targeting your post (sorry if it came across as otherwise. Oh, and the insults WERE spelled correctly. :D
  8. anemic offense
    thanks for the insults (regardless of they were spelled correctly or not). the article said that the cubs were a 90 loss team w/o prior and wood. i agreed. in fact, i think they could be a 95 loss team if they don't have either of those guys. they lost 83 last year (w/ those guys making 37 combined starts). i don't know how it's 'ridiculous' to say that if they made ZERO the cubs would lose a mere seven (or twelve) more games. in fact, to say that the idea that a prior and wood-less team could lose 90 games is ridiculous is, in itself, ridiculous. Again you're missing the point! Sure the team lost 83 games last year, but its ridiculous to say all the team's futility was generated solely by our pitcher's absences. Now I don't discredit the amount of games a healthy Prior and Wood are worth. What I do find mind-boggling, is how the improvements in other areas of the team aren't factored into the win total. The improvements this team has made should be worth AT LEAST 7 games (and I'm being ultra conservative here). So if the Cubs don't have Prior and Wood for the whole season (assuming other huge disasters don't occur), this team shouldn't lose 95, or even 90 games. At worst I'd say 83-87. Then again, I didn't think we would have encountered all the misfortunes and poor performances (outside of Wood and Prior) we saw last year either.
  9. anemic offense
    I have no doubt. If any team can take a mediocre to horrid player and turn him into a star its the 'Cards. Tony must have some magic pixie dust or something.
  10. anemic offense
    Ryan Hollins cracking the second round!! :cheers: I can't tell you how much I hate that mock. Bulls taking Morrison 2nd wouldn't be terrible, but O'Bryant (should stay another year) going 10th to the rockets and McRoberts being a lottery pick? No Joachim Noah? Yes it would be terrible. The last thing this team needs is a SF. They need big men and a bigger, well defending, SG.
  11. anemic offense
    Why did the Rangers want Konk? Why would anyone want Konk?
  12. anemic offense
    Hadn't been here all day and here I see this thread. At first I thought it was in regards to Neifi hitting the foul ball off his foot in today's game. Then I start reading it and realize immediately it was an April Fool's gag. I usually don't like any player going down, but I must admit when I initially saw the thread I felt a brief period of joy. Just as swiftly it was taken away.
  13. anemic offense
    The whole team? And I didn't know Pavano's nickname was 8-ball. :-k
  14. anemic offense
    No, they're not. Not even close. We didn't have Wood and Prior for most of last year, and we didn't lose 90, and we're better this year. you gotta be kidding me. they lost 83 last year when the two of them combined for 37 starts. you really think that if they started ZERO that the cubs wouldn't lose seven more games? with this offense (and the fact that their replacements would be rusch/williams/hill/marshall) the cubs could lose 95-100 w/o those guys. Wow, that's JUST as ridiculous. This team had a TON of things go wrong last year in addition to their injuries. LF was a disaster for half a season, the bullpen was abysmal, LT faded, Nomah went down, Patterson was terrible, we had the worst 1-2 hitters in the entire major leagues, our bench didnt produce, and Aram missed some time. With the exceptions of Z, Lee, Barrett, and Dempster (and maybe Rusch) most everyting that could go wrong did, to the tune of winning obly 79 games. Now if you can honestly sit here and profess this team didn't AT LEAST address most of the areas of concern your delusional. So some of the moves aren't great, but most are upgrades. A full season of Murton is an upgrade, Eyre and Howry should be upgrades, Pierre is a HUGE upgrade over Patterson (at least what we got last year), Cedeno (IMO) will be better than Neifi last year, our bench should be a little better (not by much). With all of these upgrades, nobody in their RIGHT mind can predict a 95 loss season. It's ridiculous. I guess it could happen, if Prior misses the entire season, Lee goes down, Aram goes down, Murton can't hit, our bullpen is worse than last year, Barrett goes down. Then again, I suppose the Cardinals could lose Pujols, Mulder, Carpernter, Izzy, Edmonds, and all their offseason moves prove fruitless, hell maybe they'll lose 95 games too. But trying to predict such an onslaught of injuries and ineffectiveness is nothing less than absurd. One just can't assume that degree of misfortune.
  15. anemic offense
    I said Perry was an idiot once and many here were asking why. I hope those same people wonder no more.
  16. anemic offense
    Rosenthal's right there with him. He picked the BJ's to win it all. Rosenthal's article was in jest. I wish I could say the same for Perry's.
  17. anemic offense
    So this is on the SuperStation?? God I hate it when it's on WGN, but not on the national feed. Especially when some lame(*&(* show is on instead. :twisted:
  18. anemic offense
    Exactly. The heavy RBI, HR, OPS guys consistently get all the love. That doesn't necessarily mean they are any more important to their team than Juan Pierre is to this team. We have enough RBI men, we just need guys who can reak some havoc on the bases and give our mashers the opportunites. Hopefully Juan will do that for us.
  19. anemic offense
    I don't think PECOTA does the Juan Pierre's of the world justice. So much of his skill set and impact can't be statistically measured, such as his clubhouse presense, scoring ability (with Lee and Arams doubles he will score a TON of runs from 1st), situational hitting (being able to lay down a bunt when the team REALLY needs a run), things like that. Don't get the idea I'm lobbying Juan Pierre to be on the All-World team. I'm not. Howver this is why I'm not so high on these projection when it comes to players with a unique skillset. They just don't do them justice (Eckstein consistently comes to mind).
  20. anemic offense
    He wouldn't have gone from sub 40 to 73 that's for sure. I am talking about over the course of his career. He may not have hit 73 but he probably could have averaged 40/yr. Look how many at-bats he has missed since the 73 and how many HR he missed because he was hurt. We do not know how much steroids contributed to his injuries but there is a good chance that it was substantial. And he might still be going strong had he not taken steriods. So what would the asterick mean by his name - that he hit more HR than he should have or that he hit less HR than he should have? I think that argument is absurd. Who's to say he would even still be in baseball today if it weren't for roids. It's not like he missed that much, the only significant time he missed was part of '99 and last season. Who is also to say that him missing last season was a result of complications from quitting steroids after the scandal broke and testing began? It's well known that if you do Steroids and then quit later, it's hard on your body. It's also well known that for the most part, the negative aspects to steroid abuse are mostly long term. If he started using when he was 34-35, it could have prevented him from breaking down when he was 36 or 37 and just delayed it until he was 39. There's no reason whatsoever to be apologizing for Bonds actions. To speculate he's hit less because of roids is pretty outrageous. You're absolutely right Jehrico. One of the most amazing things about the Bonds allegations, was Barry's belief in the roids having a healing effect on his nagging injuries. Whether that was real, or psychological, Bonds sure thought (according to the reports) they were having a positive effect. Too bad no one will EVER know the extent to which the steroids affected his performance. But if I had to guess, I'd say they had IMMENSE physical and physchological (positive) effects on his baseball.
  21. anemic offense
    I did notice that most writers did not make a big deal of the quote. But I've feared for quite some time that Ronny will be on an incredibly short leash. And while it's true that most teams operate this way, that doesn't make it a sound practice. So it doesn't take much to start worrying. Ronny has to be given a chance to fail, and fail badly, then get the chance to play through it and rebound before being replaced by such dead weight as Neifi. Neifi guarantees ONLY a .300 OBP? That was ONE YEAR! Worst OBP in his career. He could have a .330-.340 year for all we know. And that guy is FAR from dead weight, man. Neifi's best non-Colorado OBP is 298. Neifi's career OBP even with more than half his career with the Rockies is 301. Aside from the ridiculousness of saying Neifi could have a .330-.340 OBP, or that he is anything but dead weight, what in the world were you responding to in the posts you quoted that had anything to do with .300 OBP? Suggesting Neifi could have a 330-340 OBP season may be the fastest and EASIEST way to discredit yourself on this board. Either that or say Dusty knows how to handle a pitching staff.
  22. anemic offense
    \ Bull. I'm sure my judgement is a little clouded because of my Cedeno bias, but Ronny has ABSOLUTELY deserved to be given the starting SS job. Although his overal MiLB performances weren't much to be desired, he came of age last year at a tough position, allthewhile being younger than his peers. Once he was called up, he continued to impress, even in spite of the fact Dusty wasted valuable ABs on Neifi when the season was already "over". He then continued his hot hitting into winer ball. What more do you want this kid to do? Come out of the box hitting 10 homers in spring? I think a lot of his poor performance can be chalked up to pressure and being tired from playing baseball conistently over the last year. IMO, what it all comes down to is that Neifi is a mid-30s veteran who will NEVER get better. He will play great defense while being a black hole at the plate. Ronny on the otherhand, is 22 years old, has tons of potential, and has his best days ahead of him. If the Cubs/Dusty don't **** with him, he'll do just fine, but it doesn't help matters when Dusty doesn't keep his idiotic mouth shut. The last thing this team needs is for him to derail another promising career.
  23. anemic offense
    How we "feel" the players performed is rarely an accurate assessment of how they actually did perform. This team lost games because they didn't score runs, they lost more when the starting pitching fell apart. I kinda though that was rather obvious. Alright, we all know teams lose games because the oposition scores more than you, or you don't score enough, whatever way you want to look at it. But yearly stats, fail to break down the performances in many critical situations. As with most here, I watched enough games to know this team ABSOLUTELY STUNK at pitching in close games. Sure, the offense should shoulder its share of the blame, but when someone other than Dempster came in we rarely had a chance. One just can't underscore the importance of the pen. It's not going to make this team great by itself, but if it's even a little above average (which I hope it will be) I think one could conservatively say it could give a five game boost (I think it'd be more than that, but I can't prove it with stats, and I know you'll automatically discredit it anyway). Then if the offense can improve some as well, this team has a chance. How good of a one may depend on our SP health, but it should have one nonetheless.
  24. anemic offense
    I don't know if I'd go THAT far. Although I am very optimistic given their performance, the bullpen might be the biggest crapshoot in all of sports. It seems there are maybe 10 guys who are consistently great every year, and another 20-30 that are consistently good. The rest either usually suck, or are extremely inconsistent from one year to the next. Case in point, I thought the Remy and LaTroy signings were great deals (especially LT). But when you take a reliever out of his comfort zone, or snatch him up after a career year, he's prone to decline, and sometimes tremendously. Unfortunatley, neither worked out all that well, yet the Cubs were saddled for several years of their contracts. Is that to say that's going to Eyre and Howry? I hope not. But it does lead me to be "cautiously optimistic" in gauging their coming year's performances. The bullpen is just that unpredictable (especially when building via FA).
  25. anemic offense
    IMO, the most encouraging performances of the spring (outside of Murton), has been the performances of both Howry and Eyre. If these two guys both perform at above average levels (assuming Dempster doesn't fall on his face) this team will surprise a lot of people. For the last couple years I thought our bullpun was our weakest link. Yeah, a lot of the other areas sucked too, but at least I felt confident in a few of our starters, as well as a handful of offensive players. In contrast, EVERY time Dusty made a move to the pen I felt like we were going to get hammered, and unfortunately, most of the time they did. They could pitch well when the game was out of reach, but when it was close they were at their worst (Dempster withstanding). If Eyre and Howry can help reverse those fortunes, it will be worth several games. In the end its hard to draw a whole lot from this spring training. Aram mashed, Lee did fairly well in the WBC before he twinged his shoulder, Murton impressed, Jones hasn't stunk, Howry and Eyre pitched great, as did Marshall. On the flipside, Pierre has struggled, Cedeno hasn't played as well as we had hoped, Neifi has played better than we had hoped, Baker's still considering Neifi for the 2nd base job, Williams has been lit up, and Prior and Wood are out again (which I come to expect anymore). So what does this all mean? I don't think anybody has the slightest idea.
×
×
  • Create New...