User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.5972 seconds
56 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. retro-shiite Posted: October 07, 2007 at 02:15 PM (#2565193)I think Piniella's decision was defensible. But Cubs lost that game and were behind the 8-ball thereafter and didn't respond well to the pressure either on the mound or at the plate. Their hitters approached the plate like a club of Alex Rodgriguezes (playoff version) -- no plate discipline, trying to save the game/series by swinging at unhittable pitches.
Rick: We'll always have 1908. And Wrigley Field.
Scoring runs is really really really important.
So sad. So true.
They're not booing, they're saying "Loooooooooouuuuuuu".
No, check that, they actually are booing.
Current ownership tried hard this year. Piniella was a good catch, I think. New ownership may use this outcome, however, as a basis for changing a lot of things.
It's roughly equivalent to ragging on low wage earners. Of course, there are people who do that, too. I call them Republicans.
Which is better than standing pat, given that the Cubs aren't an outstanding team.
If you're talking about managerial changes, I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell the new ownership fires Piniella unless and until the team tanks. For more than 3 games in October, I mean.
And you know what? Nobody would give a shite.
I doubt it. There isn't much to change really. The core players are locked up long term. Lou is only through his first year of managing. So what is left? The coaches? Larry? Don't really know if jettisoning Larry is good or bad at this point. Hitting coach? Don't think I would notice that.
About the only thing a new owner could change is to remove the flotsam and replace with more core players. ARod instead of Theriot, IRod instead of Soto (which I wouldn't be for). so on and so on.
So?
He's trolling, just like in the Simers thread.
Biggest change I'd make is to give Hendry enough money to trade for another bat. All 3 big bats went cold in the playoffs, but I think the odds of 4 doing that is too small to think about.
Which means it'll happen again.
Have you seen the Yankees play baseball this fall?
Spoken like a true Cubs fan.
So?
Your baseball fandom is irrelevant to anything. The implication of your proclaiming that you'd give up watching baseball is that someone might care.
Yes, baudib is the master of the content-free one-sentence post. And yet, I can't resist the flashing red buttons; I'm weak that way.
I think it would've been fine if some of those associated with the Cubs would've said as much -- that the Cubs were, in fact, a very mediocre team. But the level of over-confidence, cockiness, arrogance heading into this series really amazed me.
With that said, I'd be concerned by the lack of talent comming up through the pipeline. Hopefully Soto will be able to retain his improvements he made this year.
I don't think much of that was coming from the Cubs. I think it was coming from people like Nate Silver, and he wasn't alone among pundits. I think the Cubs were expressing confidence, but not assuming anything.
Of course, Sox fans tend to treat anything other than complete doom-and-gloom from the north side as "Cub overconfidence and arrogance," so I suppose it's in the eye of the beholder.
If they're still letting Hendry handle it, I doubt any changes will be all that big.
What do you mean "go crappy"? The NL Central was even worse last year.
Seriously--has ANY team ever headed into a postseason series saying "you know, we're mediocre, and we're just happy to be here?" If so, point it out. Teams frequently praise their opposition before a series starts, but I can't recall ANY team talking as if they weren't worthy opponents, and accordingly, your getting bent out of shape by whatever "arrogance" on the part of the Cubs you're perceiving (or they're failure to concede that they're "mediocre"--which, quite frankly, describes the entire feckin' national league, to varying degrees) is completely unreasonable.
19, actually, but thank you for acknowledging that the Cub season wasn't a "$300 million failure."
Yankee fans, like Dallas Cowboy fans or Laker fans, are obnoxious but it's generally with good reason: their teams have generally been great over a period of many years. Cubs fans are obnoxious even though their team has generally been terrible for 100 years.
Yes, I've rehashed over and over. The bottom feeders in this year's central were nowhere near as bad as the Pirates and Cubs were last year, and the Cubs and Brewers were better than last year's Cardinals and Astros.
Somehow, I don't think the Cardinals would've gotten the slagging the Cubs are now getting if they'd lost a postseason series last year (which would have been a thoroughly unsurprising outcome).
Regardless.
Major League Baseball, from an organazational standpoints success shouldn't be judged on the quality of any one season. But how it fits into that organaztions business plan. Comming into the year, if the expectations by Cubs fans and management was to win the world series, then they were dulluded. You do not see 66 win teams challange for the world series. The goals for the cubs should have been something in the order of:
1. Signifigant improvement on the field, (check)
2. Avoidance of long term injuries (check)
3. Improvement and development young regulars (Hill,Marshell, Marmol, Soto) check
4. Resign Zambrano (check)
5. Better position itself for future world series opportunities (unclear)
Based on those, I believe the season was certainly a success.
edit: removed a couple things that probably weren't true.
BTW, the latest joke over at White Sox Interactive is that the "C" on the Cubs' caps now stands for "century."
Buy yourself a feckin' thesaurus. "Bitter" /= "obnoxious."
And I don't know who you root for, if anyone (seems to me you root against a lot of teams), but you're pretty feckin' obnoxious yourself.
Sure it was coming from the Cubs. You had Len Kasper on CSN last night saying he expected the Cubs to, at the very least, take it the distance. You had fans on Friday, the day after the game two loss, saying things like, "All the Cubs have to do now is protect Wrigley and then it'll be game five" (almost completely ignoring the fact that a game five matchup would be Webb vs Lilly).
Of course, Sox fans tend to treat anything other than complete doom-and-gloom from the north side as "Cub overconfidence and arrogance," so I suppose it's in the eye of the beholder.
Of course, you're the one who turns it into a Sox/Cubs thing. Funny...
Big talk from a team that's won all of *one* world series in 90 years, and that just capped a glorious final push to stay ahead of the Royals.
Hi there!
Denial ain't just a river in Africa, son. You know damn well what I'm talking about, and you know I'm right. You don't want to make your fandom an issue (especially when it's relevant), don't wear it on your handle.
Other 5 teams in the 2006 NL Central: 387-423 .478
Other 5 teams in the 2007 NL Central: 374-436 .462
So yeah, their schedule did get a little easier, BUT if you play it out, that means over the course of 79 games (what the Cubs had against the NLC this year), they should win 1-2 more games (1.264 more games by my math).
The question then becomes were the Cubs responsible for any of that decreased record? If they did improve, then the other teams should've had worse records.
But then there's teh 71 games against the rest of the NL, who got a bit better this year (814-806 last year, 827-795 this year). That's about 0.525 more losses the Cubs should've had.
I should note that the NL as a whole was actually a little better this year, going by interleague play.
In all, their NL games gave the Cubs maybe 1 extra win. Tops.
They did have a much easier interleague schedule, losing the Tigers, Indians, and Twins for the Rangers and Mariners (only 12 I-L games this year) while the White Sox sucked. Strangely, the Cubs actually did well against the Mariners, the only good AL team they faced.
Looking at the record, stregnth of schedule gave the Cubs about 2 extra wins over last year.
No, not bitter, but obnoxious and stupid. Anyone visiting Wrigley Field can see that.
I root for the Mets. Feel free to be obnoxious in kind.
Yeah, it's arrogant to think that your team will either beat the other team or at least make it close!
It's not as if that wasn't reasonable. The DBacks 3 and 4 pitcher aren't that good, and Wrigley has been friendly to the Cubs. And most of us here talked about the Marquis-Zambrano or Short Rest Zambrano-Lilly before the series. Sure, Game 5 favors the DBacks, but when you're down 2-0 you have to think that you can win the game needed to clinch. If you don't think you can, why play?
Given the lack of any real reasons to dance on the Cubs' grave, this is the only explanation for your trolling.
Read what I had to say about it here...The Hall of Very Good
Hi there!
OK, Captain Literal--I think it's clear MHS meant "as a rule." (And a pretty hard and fast one, at that.)
The '91 Braves (along with the Twins the same year) were the first teams IN HISTORY to go from last place to first in one season. The Cubs' replicating that feat (dog the division all you want) is not a common occurrence.
I root for the Mets. Feel free to be obnoxious in kind.
Yeah, god knows Met fans have no reputation for obnoxiousness.
And you're painting Wrigley attendees with an awfully broad brush, but I suspect you know that. (And if you don't think Cub fans are bitter, you've neither been to Wrigley in the past 5 years or hung out on many BTF Cub threads. Either that, or you're simply an idiot.)
You're right because you can generalize? Neat -- can I play that game too?
Putting it simply -- the Cubs were going up against a team that proved themselves better in the regular season, winning more games in a much, MUCH tougher division. Yet you still had many who thought the NLCS was a given. I remember comments after game one... "We really didn't need to win game one." That, along with the other things I've mentioned, exudes arrogance and over-confidence.
You've proven yourself to be bitter and overdefensive so it's rather useless trying to discuss a whole lot with you.
In the case of Hernandez, that's overly kind. He sucks.
What--they were supposed to throw in the towel after game 1? If they'd done that, I'm sure you would've refrained from painting them as losers who were "giving up."
You've proven yourself to be bitter and overdefensive so it's rather useless trying to discuss a whole lot with you.
And you're a trolling idiot, who hasn't had anything worthwhile to root for on a baseball diamond since about May 10. Shouldn't you be more concerned with how much the Royals improve themselves in the coming offseason, given that they'll be your primary competition for the next several years?
How am I trolling? Where did I dance on the Cubs' grave?
Ah, yes -- I'm the one trolling. Right.
Shoot is acceptable but sh1t is not. Yet the only reason you say shoot is because for some reason sh1t is not acceptable but yet everybody knows you really mean sh1t.
Crap? I expressed an opinion, that being I felt the Cubs and certain people surrounding them were a little too cocky heading into the series. You're the one who's turned it into the petty Sox vs Cubs ######## with your first response and every one since then. You haven't done anything to change that opinion, rather re-enforced it.
I don't see why not -- you've been playing it the whole thread. To wit:
* "You had fans on Friday, the day after the game two loss, saying things like, "All the Cubs have to do now is protect Wrigley and then it'll be game five" (almost completely ignoring the fact that a game five matchup would be Webb vs Lilly)."
* "Yet you still had many who thought the NLCS was a given. I remember comments after game one... "We really didn't need to win game one." That, along with the other things I've mentioned, exudes arrogance and over-confidence."
Trolling: Posting comments that do not analyze or add to a discussion but are meant to arouse anger and annoyance in others.
That fits.
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/how_sweep_it_feels/
As far as baseball goes, I would kind of like to know what the fan-on-the-street thinks about this Cubs team losing. They didn't really have the oomph or dominance of the previous 2003 team that seemed to be meant for greatness, and unless I'm wrong they are only going to get better next year. The September strength after a season of meh, did it actually carry over to a "this is our year!" feeling in the city?
Of course, you stated it not as opinion, but as fact (and in a rather matter-of-fact, "everyone who was paying attention could see this" sort of way). And your impressions of the Cubs and their fans were fixed coming into this thread, so I'm not terribly bothered by the (unlikely) possibility that I've "re-enforced [sic]" them. The notion that your Sox fandom filter didn't affect your perception of so-called Cub "arrogance" is a joke, which makes your particular rooting interest completely relevant.
At the risk of dignifying this by responding... Kasper, to a certain extent, is paid to be a cheerleader. With the Cubs down to their last chance, it would have sounded pretty bad for him to express the extent to which the Diamondbacks had the upper hand. There aren't too many broadcasters who are going to give you an even-keeled assessment of that situation on the local sports network. The fans that you quote, whoever they are, are merely appealing to the most reasonable scenario that gives them a chance at winning. Hell, I went through the same exercise myself. I'm sure you interpret these rather plaintive expressions of hope as arrogance, over-confidence and cockiness...whatever works for you.
No. The feeling among virtually every Cub fan I know was a belief (reasonable, in my view, the results of the LDS notwithstanding) that the Cubs had as good a chance in the playoffs as anyone else, given the parity of the league, but were hardly assuming anything. (Speaking for myself, I specifically stated in one thread that I wasn't making any predictions, as I thought every postseason matchup was as evenly balanced a slate as I could remember. Naturally, they've all ended up being sweeps or 2-0 deficits to this point, but that doesn't change what my perception was at the time.)
I think most Cub fans this year were excited to be on the giving end of a nice in-season comeback (down 8.5 games in late June), but recognized the limitations of this team. This team was fun to watch, because they generally didn't exude the whininess and stupidity that marked Dusty Baker's Cub teams, but at the same time, they weren't a hugely talented team--they were a reasonably talented team that found ways to win (not unlike the media-fellated Diamondbacks). (They reverted to the stupidity to a disturbing degree in the LDS, obviously.)
I mean, you had the "It's Gonna Happen" T-shirts being worn in Wrigleyville, but that was more wishful thinking from a handful of fans than anything else. It's not like every other team doesn't do the same sort of crap. (Well, no other team has a hundred-year world series drought they're trying to break, but you know what I mean.)
You sure about that? You might want to check the numbers BEFORE you reply. Morris was 21-6 in 1992, finished FIFTH in the Cy Young voting and led the team in starts, innings and complete games. Sure, his performance in the Series wasn't spectacular...but he was certainly their ace.
From the thread you posted, Dan:
Len Kasper said that, at the very least, he expected the series to go five. That's funny... Here I was thinking that the D'Backs were the team that won 90 games and the Cubs were the ones that struggled to take baseball's worst division. Guess I was wrong.
I don't know... If you want to call that trolling then I'm pretty sure you could pick out lots of 'trolls' from going through any Cano - Pedroia or steroid thread.
DJF... touche. I did paint a bit of a picture with a broad brush there.
In my defense, DJF, ex-PFC said (IIRC) most of this was coming from people not associated with the Cubs. Some of the quotes were in response to that in a "from where I'm sitting" fashion, although I do understand that I did generalize.
I guess that makes Pinella's move all the more idiotic now doesn't it? Taking Z out should be more offensive to Cubs fans than when Grady Little left Pedro IN.
And how did that work out for Grady?!?
I'm sure you could. Cano and Pedroia threads are bad, but try being constructive in a steroids thread. That's nearly impossible.
Carlos Marmol is a better bet in that inning than Zambrano. Marmol has been an elite reliever all year, and either had bad luck or suffered from the same thing as Lilly, Hill, and the offense.
To be honest, I think the team was not psychologically ready for the playoffs, other than Z and Soto. They just seemed to be worse than at almost any point in the year. Even then, Z seemed to struggle at times in game 1.
In my defense, DJF, ex-PFC said (IIRC) most of this was coming from people not associated with the Cubs. Some of the quotes were in response to that in a "from where I'm sitting" fashion, although I do understand that I did generalize.
Both of you have. I do excuse Retro a bit, however -- at least today -- in that our feelings are still rather (and understandably) raw at the moment.
I was actually more shook up about Thursday than last night.
Thanks! We pride ourselves on being condascending, cocky, antagonistic, and over-confident at all times. It's plain to see the we aren't affected by the pessimism, doubt, and anxiety that fans of some teams experience.
Thanks again for your kind words and careful observations.
Sincerely,
All the Cub fans on Primer
The day after a team loses in the play-offs you generally will find their fans bitter and defensive. ex-PFC is being really that way, but
I really don't think the problem with Cubs fans are that they're more obnoxious, just that there's more of them. Skipping around the post-mortem threads today, people note incidents where they heard Cubs fans say they thought their team was going to win. . . . . Well, yeah. That usually happens with fans. No one cares when Rockies fans or Marlins fans or others like that get all up about it because there's not some Superstation contingency of them.
Yes, I'm pretty sure about that. (And, I'm correct). Morris was the fourth-best starting pitcher on the Jays and starting pitching wasn't the strength of the team to begin with.
Hill, Lilly, Rameriz, and Soriano didn't just perform poorly. They looked self-consious and unable to perform while doing it. Maybe that's the case for Marmol as well, I dunno. Lee didn't hit, but he never had an at bat from hell like the others did. I think Piniella did a great job this year, but when 3-4 of the 6 most important players on the squad all played so stricken (at least Z was great) it's fair to look askance at the managerand what he did to prepare his team for that series.
I think leaving well enough alone was all he could do -- the team did put up a 115 sOPS+ for September, after all. Soriano, Ramirez and Lee all hit very well in September. Hill didn't have a good September but pitched well in his final outing. Lilly had a good September.
I try to resist interpreting three bad games too deeply, but to me it looked like the Cubs haven't completely locked up the demons that terrorized them in May. Throughout the remainder of the season, they would re-emerge here and there to remind them of how bad they were capable of being, but considering how low this team was when it bottomed out, I think Piniella did a good job of putting these things in the past. And hey, I'd rather watch the Cubs ground into double plays than make brain-dead mistakes on the basepaths.
Which media? The Tucson Star? The Prescott Fresca? The Yuma Duma?
If you've been following the national media (which ironically includes papers outside of Chicago), you'd know that 99% of articles on the Dbacks this year have been about how they're a total fluke, a bunch of over-achievers, a gang of luck s.o.b. rascals, a kindergarten class running wild along the Gila river. Basically every article has been saying how the Dbacks shouldn't be winning any games, they shouldn't be winning the NL west, and they shouldn't even be showing up for their first game against the Cubbies. And when someone wants to do any sort of more positive article on them, it's been about Eric Byrnes's leadership. Just look at the panel of ESPN analysts who predicted the Cubs-Dbacks series... who chose the Dbacks? Bryant and Keri... and with Keri you can never be sure if he means it or is just pulling a leg. Yeah, the media really felated the Diamondbacks. One word for you, dude: WHATEVER.
Okay...so Zambrano and Soto were the only two prepared. Fair enough. HOWEVER...Pinella removed Z in Game One and replaced Soto with Kendall yesterday.
Let's face it...the Cubs (no matter how much money was thrown out there) are a disaster and Lou Pinella owes all the Cubs fans an apology.
The Hall of Very Good
Who was the ace...Juan Guzman?!? He had a good season (and a fraction of Morris' innings), but he certainly wasn't their "go to" guy. Wait...are you confusing 1992 with 1993?
And to say "pitching wasn't the strength of the team" is a cop out...you need to have a good mix of both to be successful. The Jays did...and were.
The Hall of Very Good
My suggestions are...comment on what I wrote, continue to comment on what is posted here or do nothing. There's no need to play forum cop...much less single me out for what dozens do in these forums daily.
??? media fellated diamondbacks????
FELLATED????
dude
you got a seriously WEIRD definition of "fellate"
i never met a man who thought "fellate" means to get shtt on
first time for everything i guess
What? I can't think of a single other poster who provides a link to his blog as a signature in every post of his on the site.
3/4. About the same fraction of your posts which pimp your blog.
While 3/4 is technically a fraction, that is not the generally accepted use of the idiom. David Cone had a fraction of Morris's innings. Juan Guzman pitched 180 innings and was second among qualifiers for the ERA title.
I guess there was interest from Repoz. No need to apologize.
Hey...does ANYONE want to clue me in as to who the three starting pitchers were on the Jays staff in 1992? I was told Morris was the fourth...but the MENSA member who mistakenly counted has disappeared.
Also, Stieb was on that team and was much worse that year, but clearly was a better HoF candidate than Morris for his career.
Just a point on personal bias: I usually assume anyone who uses "MENSA" in a sentence is an idiot. I've been right 97% of the time! But hey, I guess that makes an ass out of you and me.
Yeah, even The Fantasy Baseball Generals limited themselves to submitting every one of their blog entries as a news item.
Their ace was David Cone...they mortgaged the future (Jeff Kent, Ryan Thompson) to get him and he was worth it.
Guzman was solidly No. 2. Jimmy Key was better than Morris as well.
This isn't really debatable, btw.
That's not how the Jay's saw him. With all the time necessary to set up their rotation, they started him in games 1 and 4 of the LCS, and Games 1 and 5 in the WS. He sucked in all of them, and was never again more than a replacement level pitcher, but in 1992 he was thought of as the guy.
What the Jays thought of him does not change the fact that he was their fourth-best pitcher.
Ummm, I'm PRETTY sure that since the Jays considered him their ace (which was the contention that I made in the first place)...makes him their ace REGARLESS of what you say 15 years later. And frankly, Jimmy Key's 13-13 doesn't hold much weight when you compare it to Morris' 21 wins.
Reconstructive elbow surgery, out for most/all of next season.
Juan Guzman or Angel Guzman? I'm confused.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main