Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

Cubs - Signed Jones

Chicago Cubs - Signed OF Jacque Jones to a 3-year contract worth $16 million.

Cub fans are rightly worried about the future of their team.  With the new ads, BTF finally had the revenue to buy what we needed - a time machine.  So, here’s a sneak peek as to what Cubs fans face, come April.


 


 


 


 


 


 

 

Dan Szymborski Posted: December 21, 2005 at 04:37 AM | 86 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

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. SouthSideRyan Posted: December 21, 2005 at 04:44 AM (#1787568)
Nitpicking, but Pierre doesn't K much. Probably wouldn't look as cool showing a lazy pop up. Nice work, regardless.
   2. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 21, 2005 at 04:54 AM (#1787581)
Fixed
   3. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:00 AM (#1787597)
Not fixed on my screen
   4. SouthSideRyan Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:00 AM (#1787599)
Haha, excellent, thanks Dan.
   5. Moses Taylor World Re-Tour 2.0: Warszawa Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:02 AM (#1787603)
I'm crying tears of laughter and pain at the same time.
   6. Dr. Vaux Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:05 AM (#1787621)
Totally awesome.
   7. EvilBoWeevil Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:09 AM (#1787633)
Actually it looks like Pierre lined out to the pitcher to me.

By the way who are the cubs playing? Got to love thier Pink uni's whoever they are.
   8. slackerjack Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:12 AM (#1787644)
Baseball Stars!

Best. Game. Ever.
   9. slackerjack Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:13 AM (#1787646)
BTW, the team in pink is the "Lovely Ladies".
   10. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:15 AM (#1787647)
This Amy is a pretty crafty hurler.
   11. Graeme Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:28 AM (#1787668)
Why did Derek Lee only get a single for hitting something all the way to the wall? Maybe he tripped rounding first
   12. Dr. Vaux Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:30 AM (#1787673)
I was going to ask what game it was.
   13. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:31 AM (#1787674)
Why did they take out Lian?
   14. Morph Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:33 AM (#1787682)
Who is a good player to you people? Can you define it? It's either great or horrible...
   15. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:33 AM (#1787681)
I couldn't screen capture and make him run to second at the same time!
   16. Eric Opperman Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:42 AM (#1787699)
Ahh, the Lovely Ladies! The highest prestige team, getting you the most money. :)

I don't even want to begin to think about how much time I spent on that game. Thanks for the laughs, Dan.
   17. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:48 AM (#1787710)
Holy crap, I was just playing a team of superwoman on that game this morning.
   18. My guest will be Jermaine Allensworth Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:51 AM (#1787715)
Maybe Lian was dangerously overweight, tweaked a back muscle and decided she couldn't go any further. Nice job, Dan.
   19. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:06 AM (#1787738)
Jacque Jones doesn't really have enough power or a high enough OBP to be a force in a corner outfield spot, hence I dont' think he is agreat player. He may be a good one, he is good defensively, but I doubt it. He also sucks against lefties. Al told he is a decent player who isn't very young. The problem here is that the Cubs probably think they solved their OF problem for the next three yeras, when they only upgraded slightly for one.

Is murton still likely to get playing time?

And could the Cubs be trying to ape the White Sox in getting two "CFers"?
   20. Who Swished In Your Cornflakes? Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:07 AM (#1787739)
Am I wrong for thinking that the Cubs get a player who is essentially Matt Lawton, minus steroids?
   21. PreservedFish Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:23 AM (#1787754)
Baseball Stars. Best damn baseball game ever.

The code to get the team of all superstars is seated at the right hand of Up-Up-Down-Down-Left-Right-Left-Right-B-A-Start in my personal Mount Olympia of video game cheats.
   22. Paul M Hates Krispy Kreme Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:24 AM (#1787758)
Best. Oracle. Ever.

This beats "Toast" and "Letter to Chuck Lamar" easily.
   23. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:34 AM (#1787768)
Greatest TO ever, just barely nudging out Letter to Chuck Lamar.
   24. Jorge Luis Bourjos (Walewander) Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:51 AM (#1787786)
I've got it tied with Jim Bowden's to-do list. That was awesome, Dan, thanks.
   25. My guest will be Jermaine Allensworth Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:55 AM (#1787792)
Not that this undermines anything, but there should be a hit on the scoreboard.
   26. Jorge Luis Bourjos (Walewander) Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:56 AM (#1787793)
Who is a good player to you people?

Alex Rodriguez is alright, I guess.

Can anyone hook me up with where to find the Chuck LaMar letter? It's Christmas...
   27. My guest will be Jermaine Allensworth Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:03 AM (#1787800)
   28. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:08 AM (#1787806)
This sums up the Cubs better than any column I've read in the last 2+ years. Nicely done.
   29. Jorge Luis Bourjos (Walewander) Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:15 AM (#1787810)
Thanks, ph.
   30. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:18 AM (#1787814)
Why did they take out Lian?

Because they hates the Yellow man.

J/k. I know I nkow, cease and desist... c'mon it's a video game
   31. Walt Davis Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:37 AM (#1787828)
Jones at this money is OK. 3 years I'm not thrilled about, but I'm not sure how many other options they had at this point. I guess I'd rather have Sanders out there. Hopefully they'll be smart enough not to start him against lefties. And I could be wrong, but I don't think they'll bat him 4th.
   32. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:44 AM (#1787834)
Reading the Letter to Chuck Lamar topic is interesting. It includes people complaining that the D-Rays aren't calling up Jonny Gomes and this one from SG:

"Josh Phelps > Rubson Giamierra"
   33. Old Matt Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:53 AM (#1787837)
What is Amy's FIP?
   34. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: December 21, 2005 at 09:32 AM (#1787868)
What is Amy's FIP?

36-24-36
   35. Horatio Funderburke Posted: December 21, 2005 at 09:32 AM (#1787869)
Would someone be good enough to post Bowden's to do list as well? I remember enjoying it a ton, and I can't find it now.
   36. The Keith Law Blog Blah Blah (battlekow) Posted: December 21, 2005 at 12:53 PM (#1787896)
   37. Russ Posted: December 21, 2005 at 02:02 PM (#1787915)
Average Time of Cubs-Pirates game for 2006: 1:27

The TV networks are gonna love this, the games won't even run over into CSI.
   38. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: December 21, 2005 at 02:37 PM (#1787944)
Jones at this money is OK. 3 years I'm not thrilled about, but I'm not sure how many other options they had at this point.

I have a strong feeling that Hendry --

(a) decided he didn't want to give up any farm talent in a trade for an OF (either because he didn't want to deal any farm talent or because there wasn't anyone worth giving them up for);

(b) looked at the FAs and saw Jones as the *only* choice (despite Sanders and White being on the board);

(c) knew that the Royals were offering Jones 3 years; and therefore

(d) gave Jones a 3 year deal of his own.

IOW, I strongly suspect that Hendry didn't *want* to sign Jones for 3 years, but rather felt forced to because he didn't think he had any other alternatives.

That's a hell of a way to run a ballclub and the vision I want to see in a leader.
   39. dcsmyth1 Posted: December 21, 2005 at 02:50 PM (#1787953)
Second verse--same as the first. What does Jones offer that Burnitz doesn't? Their projections are almost exactly the same. And Burnitz could have been retained on a 1 yr deal, I believe.

So Hendry is just changing names to fool the public into thinking that he has noticeably upgraded the team. His real plan to win is just to hope that Prior, Wood, and Zambrano stay healthy and play up to their potential.
   40. H. Vaughn Posted: December 21, 2005 at 02:59 PM (#1787962)
RDF Dan. A+ creativity.

dJf - I think you're spot on a through d, and there may have been other teams bidding (Cards? Dodgers?). I think we all would have liked to see a more creative solution to RF, such as Church, Wilkerson or Michaels, but that isn't how this organization thinks. Given that Giles really wasn't for sale this winter and that they weren't going to experiment with a lesser known or unconventionally productive player, this is about all Hendry could do. It's better than paying Burnitz 7 mil for the same production, I guess.

For me, if they let Cedeno and Murton play, it will be enough to mitigate some of the disappointment of their upcoming fourth place season. That, and the prospect of Hendry and Baker losing their jobs over it.
   41. Damon Rutherford Posted: December 21, 2005 at 03:06 PM (#1787979)
Awesome, Szym. The scoreboard at the bottom is incorrect, though, as the Cubs had one hit.
   42. Andere Richtingen Posted: December 21, 2005 at 03:13 PM (#1788000)
IOW, I strongly suspect that Hendry didn't *want* to sign Jones for 3 years, but rather felt forced to because he didn't think he had any other alternatives.

If this is true, it merely demonstrates what a failure the last couple of years have been. And who's to blame for that?

Actually, Jones isn't a bad player with a platoon partner. But what are the chances of that happening?
   43. zonk Posted: December 21, 2005 at 03:35 PM (#1788047)
Actually, Jones isn't a bad player with a platoon partner. But what are the chances of that happening?

Poor - but as much because of Dusty's inadequacies as the fact that I don't see anyone in-house or readily available to take the other half (Mabry? But then, who will screw Murton out of at-bats?)

If DLee returns to pre-2005 levels, this offense has a chance to be.... not good. For nearly a decade, the Cubs offense was Sosa, Grace, a randomly sometimes valuable LF (H-Rod, White, Alou) -- and five guys named Willie Greene - and they routinely lost more than they won.

I'm not so sure this offense is much better than that -- with bunches more in the risk department. A-Ram - as much as I've been a staunch defender - has injury concerns. As wonderful as Lee's 05 campaign was, I'm not ready to accept a new level of performance from him.

Beyond that - Barrett may be the best offensive catcher in the NL, but that's more a factor of league suckitude behind the dish than Barrett being the best thing since sliced bread. I know everyone's booking on a Pierre 'comeback' - but like I and others have mentioned, Wrigley Field isn't the most condusive park for Pierre's style of offensive play. I like Murton - but if Lee's 2005 doesn't earn him the benefit of the doubt, then Murton's 150 major league at-bats and a monster year in AA certainly don't earn him any MORE slack than Lee. Neifi will be terrible. Whatever plays second will be lucky to be league average.

The Cubs will need at least 90 starts from Z-Prior-Wood -- and 90 Z-Prior-vintage Wood quality starts, at that -- to have a shot.

In retrospect - the bullpen money looks well-spent, considering the bucks thrown at Joe Table, BJ Ryan, and others.... though I still think the bullpen is a poor place to invest.
   44. Quinton McCracken's BFF Posted: December 21, 2005 at 03:37 PM (#1788051)
Best. Oracle. Ever.

This beats "Toast" and "Letter to Chuck Lamar" easily.


Even that Tigers Baseball letter by Mike Ilitch, although I think that was some other website.

And they said it couldn't be done!
   45. SouthSideRyan Posted: December 21, 2005 at 03:41 PM (#1788064)
FOR ####'S SAKE MABRY IS NOT GOING TO TAKE ABS FROM MURTON.
   46. Dr Love Posted: December 21, 2005 at 03:42 PM (#1788066)
They pulled their starter after a third of an inning?

Neifi K'ed on 77 mph gas (from a pitcher who throws like a girl. Literally.). Fitting.
   47. zonk Posted: December 21, 2005 at 03:53 PM (#1788090)
FOR ####'S SAKE MABRY IS NOT GOING TO TAKE ABS FROM MURTON.

We'll see.... but in the interest of TO harmony, I will refrain from further claims of such...... until it inevitably starts happening sometime in late May, then, my friends, the trumpets shall signal the return of the Snark
   48. SouthSideRyan Posted: December 21, 2005 at 04:17 PM (#1788130)
then, my friends, the trumpets shall signal the return of the Snark

And I'll be cowering in the corner from crow and the multiple seizures I'm having.
   49. fracas' hope springs eternal Posted: December 21, 2005 at 04:39 PM (#1788168)
They pulled their starter after a third of an inning?

The answer is in post #7:

Actually it looks like Pierre lined out to the pitcher to me.

He did, and Lian jammed a finger making the out, so they brought in Amy. And Lee's hit was a line shot at the left fielder, who tipped it off her glove and had to chase it to the wall. The scoreboard operator was still waiting for the Hit versus Error ruling from the press box when the inning ended.

It all makes perfect sense.
   50. Spahn Insane Posted: December 21, 2005 at 04:48 PM (#1788180)
Puke. I've got an email in my inbox that I haven't opened, with the subject line "Cubs complete outfield makeover with key signing." I didn't even need to open it to know who they'd signed. 3 years is stupid, since you shouldn't have to outbid the Royals to get a player of Jones's ilk (assuming you even want him), and Jones's abject futility against lefties is more of a problem in the NL Central than it is anyplace else. The Cubs desperately need a lefty-mashing 4th outfielder.
   51. Spahn Insane Posted: December 21, 2005 at 04:49 PM (#1788182)
Am I wrong for thinking that the Cubs get a player who is essentially Matt Lawton, minus steroids?

Jones is a much better outfielder than Lawton, but other than that, yeah.
   52. Charles S. will not yield to this monkey court Posted: December 21, 2005 at 04:59 PM (#1788198)
Duffy nailed, but he should have said 50th verse same as the first. This is how they've been filling the corner outfield slot for the 21 years I've lived in Chicago.
a) Overpay for a name veteran to start or take over when they give up on a young player after 4 minutes.
b) Talk in the media about how he comes from a "winning organization".
c) Ignore the fact that that "winning organization" got that way by letting players like this go to teams like the Cubs.
d) Set up a new player as scapegoat when things go bad by having "clubhouse leader" badmouth him anonymously to Paul Sullivan. This works particularly well when "clubhouse leader" is white (or Brian McRae) and new scapegoat is minority.
e) Be unable to trade scapegoat for anything worth a damn, forcing return to a).
   53. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:06 PM (#1788219)
Actually, Jones isn't a bad player with a platoon partner. But what are the chances of that happening?

***Poor - but as much because of Dusty's inadequacies as the fact that I don't see anyone in-house or readily available to take the other half


I think the greater reason is the fact that the Cubs don't shell out $5.5mm/yr for a guy they intend to platoon.
   54. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:09 PM (#1788228)
or $5.33mm either
   55. Andere Richtingen Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:14 PM (#1788240)
I think the greater reason is the fact that the Cubs don't shell out $5.5mm/yr for a guy they intend to platoon.

Eventually it might happen, but clearly it's not the plan right now.

Puke. I've got an email in my inbox that I haven't opened, with the subject line "Cubs complete outfield makeover with key signing."

I replied to mine with something that was insulting and fairly profane. I have no idea who if anyone would ever see the reply, but I encourage everyone to do the same.
   56. Spahn Insane Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:17 PM (#1788249)
In an attempt to find a silver lining: perhaps, the Cubs having "completed the outfield makeover" without a second trade, Walker sticks around? Of course, I'm probably dreaming if I think Cedeno's starting at short, but whatever.
   57. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:22 PM (#1788260)
In an attempt to find a silver lining: perhaps, the Cubs having "completed the outfield makeover" without a second trade, Walker sticks around? Of course, I'm probably dreaming if I think Cedeno's starting at short, but whatever.

So the bench becomes:

Cedeno
Hairston
Patterson
Mabry
Blanco

With:

CF Pierre
SS Neifi
1B Lee
3B Ramirez
RF Jones
2B Walker
LF Murton
C Barrett

Am I forgetting someone?
   58. Spahn Insane Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:22 PM (#1788262)
In an attempt to find a silver lining: perhaps, the Cubs having "completed the outfield makeover" without a second trade, Walker sticks around?

Or not. From the Sun-Times:

"The Cubs would seem to need a right-handed-hitting reserve outfielder and perhaps a more versatile infielder than Todd Walker, who is third on the depth chart at second base behind Neifi Perez and Jerry Hairston. "

No idea what the source is for that "third on the depth chart" comment, but Jesus.
   59. Spahn Insane Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:23 PM (#1788265)
That's actually not a bad-looking bench.
   60. Andere Richtingen Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:24 PM (#1788268)
In an attempt to find a silver lining: perhaps, the Cubs having "completed the outfield makeover" without a second trade, Walker sticks around?

That's what I'm wondering. However, the bench will definitely get some tinkering.

Assuming a starting core of Barrett-Lee-Perez-Cedeno-Ramirez-Murton-Pierre-Jones and twelve pitchers, that would leave a current bench of:

R: Blanco, Hairston
L: Patterson, Mabry, Walker

I don't think this is going to stand, and the obvious shortcoming here is a lack of right-handed power. I still think Patterson is going to go, but I also think Walker is going to be seen as expendable. I definitely see Walker as a useful piece of the puzzle, but I'm not sure Hendry will.
   61. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:26 PM (#1788273)
Todd Walker, who is third on the depth chart at second base behind Neifi Perez and Jerry Hairston . . .

Oh. My. God.
   62. Spahn Insane Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:28 PM (#1788280)
To clarify--the bench doesn't look that bad, but it's not well suited to the Cubs weaknesses, in that it lacks a righthanded outfielder. Craig Wilson available?
   63. Spahn Insane Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:32 PM (#1788286)
My nightmare scenario for '06 has a double play combination of Perez and Hairston, with Patterson outperforming both Pierre and Jones for some other team.

Maybe the Indians are interested in Patterson--they could use an outfielder.
   64. Andere Richtingen Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:33 PM (#1788289)
To clarify--the bench doesn't look that bad, but it's not well suited to the Cubs weaknesses, in that it lacks a righthanded outfielder. Craig Wilson available?

What do you mean it lacks a righthanded OF? Why, Jerry Hairston's name is right there.
   65. jolietconvict Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:39 PM (#1788301)
Todd Walker, who is third on the depth chart at second base behind Neifi Perez and Jerry Hairston . . .


I can understand the Cubs' desire to improve the IF defense given that you have a below average defender at 3b and a bit of an unknown at SS. However when the Neifinator is the answer you're asking the wrong question. As dJf said:

Oh. My. God.
   66. Toolsy McClutch Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:50 PM (#1788317)
When Baseball Stars came out, I called the store downtown every hour to see if they had received it. By about 2pm, they were refusing to take my calls so I ended up going down there and showed up about 10 minutes after the shipment arrived.

I held the box so tight on the Subway ride home, the box was creased.

Burned into my memory.
   67. Sam M. Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:53 PM (#1788321)
In the pantheon of TO classics, there's always this one. Just a perfect sum up to the goings-on July 30, 2004.
   68. Toolsy McClutch Posted: December 21, 2005 at 05:55 PM (#1788327)
Oh, and Jones sucks. In my mind, a brutal signing.
   69. Charles S. will not yield to this monkey court Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:10 PM (#1788365)
Am I forgetting someone?

I don't imagine Patterson will still be around. If this is what we go to war with, I think the best line-up is:

Pierre CF
Walker 2B
Lee 1B
Ramirez 3B
Jones RF
Murton LF
Barrett C
Cedeno SS
   70. Moses Taylor World Re-Tour 2.0: Warszawa Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:24 PM (#1788394)
nope, i still don't feel any better about this today.
   71. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:27 PM (#1788403)
The Tigers letter was mine, too. It can be found here.
   72. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: December 21, 2005 at 06:49 PM (#1788465)
I hadn't seen the Tigers letter before. That is priceless, but still is #2 on my list below the simple elegance that is Toast.
   73. 1k5v3L Posted: December 21, 2005 at 07:11 PM (#1788528)
JJ chooses Oasis as his coming to bat band:

"We are hackastic, and I am hackastick too"
   74. FDR Jones Posted: December 21, 2005 at 10:51 PM (#1789042)
i think hendry knows he can't put the "final piece" in RF for the cubs this year, either by FA or trade. that said, three years is not a stop-gap contract. it's not a good signing, but it doesn't really hurt them all that much. the money is no big deal for the cubs.

considering Neyer thinks Damon is going to hit 280/330/440 next year for 13M, I'll take 250/320/440 from Jones for 5.3M (of course JJ isn't a CF). anything is better than Patterson in right.
   75. Giantandre Posted: December 22, 2005 at 01:09 AM (#1789266)
Dan, Thank you for putting so much effort in the Cubs off-season...Somebody had too
   76. Walt Davis Posted: December 22, 2005 at 07:26 AM (#1789771)
Actually, Jones isn't a bad player with a platoon partner. But what are the chances of that happening?

Platooning is one of the few lineup things that Baker does fairly well. Not always smartly (Murton/whatshisname vs. Hollandsworth), but he's done it in the OF, 2B, 1B (Karros/Choi and with the Giants) before.

I'll agree I don't think they decided to pay Jones $5M to platoon him.

Just wait to see the explosion when Hairston gets a "playing time" start in LF against a leftie while Jones starts in RF.
   77. thegat Posted: December 22, 2005 at 09:30 AM (#1789865)
that's pretty much the greatest thing I've ever seen. I've made all-star teams for different decades on BStars. There's no way that I'm still cool.

Does it strike anyone else that Jacque Jones is just an older version of Corey Patterson? Same propensity for strikeouts, doesn't walk much, has some speed and some pop, bats lefty.
   78. Andere Richtingen Posted: December 22, 2005 at 02:25 PM (#1789927)
Platooning is one of the few lineup things that Baker does fairly well. Not always smartly (Murton/whatshisname vs. Hollandsworth), but he's done it in the OF, 2B, 1B (Karros/Choi and with the Giants) before.

I've yet to see evidence of it with the Cubs, and wouldn't consider Karros/Choi a success story. The only uses of the platoon I've seen have been the first steps in nudging a player out.

Just wait to see the explosion when Hairston gets a "playing time" start in LF against a leftie while Jones starts in RF.

If the roster is such that that is the best option, it will deserve an explosive response, in Hendry's direction. Hairston has a career .720 OPS against LHP. Using him in RF against LHP is better than using Jones, but it's not what I would call a great idea. The Cubs need to add another right-handed hitting OF.
   79. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: December 22, 2005 at 05:58 PM (#1790293)
Platooning is one of the few lineup things that Baker does fairly well.

I don't know if I agree with this. Baker platoons, but not because he sees a strategic value for doing so, but because he is too insecure to give a kid a fulltime job. This was true with Choi, and was also true with Dubois and Murton as well.

As for 2B, even when he had Walker/Grudzielanek, I don't believe Baker used them in a strict platoon -- he tended to mix and match, trying to find a hot hand. Of course, it also seemed that one of the two was frequently hurt as well.
   80. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: December 22, 2005 at 08:09 PM (#1790530)
I can't decide which is the greatest NES game in history--Baseball Stars or Tecmo Super Bowl.
   81. Quinton McCracken's BFF Posted: December 24, 2005 at 05:16 PM (#1792934)
Pierre's bunting in that thing, not lining out, right? Or maybe it was a pop-fly bunt?
   82. SuperGrover Posted: December 28, 2005 at 06:44 AM (#1796539)
F&*king A awesome. Baseball Stars was the best game ever created for Nintendo although as AD/DC points out Tecmo Super Bowl was pretty damn good too (btw, Baseball Stars II never happened. IT NEVER HAPPENED!). I can't even remotely recall how many hours I wasted on that game. Hell, I still humm the tune from time to time ("Da dum dum da dum dum...da dum dum da dum. Dum, dum, da dum. Da Dum da dum.)

Kudos.
   83. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: November 28, 2006 at 04:40 PM (#2247376)
The pop fly bunt is easy to do in Baseball Stars. The key is to hold down the "up" button while bunting to put the ball on the ground.

Thr drag bunt down the 1st base line is very difficult, because by pushing a side-to-side arrow, you almost always pop it up. Luckily, pitchers and 1b usually only have 3 or 4 "defense" attributes and don't run very fast, so sometimes you can get it down anyway.
   84. Dan Evensen Posted: January 21, 2008 at 03:39 AM (#2672631)
When I was a kid I always thought you could hit an automatic home run in RBI Baseball with the AL All-Stars. You just had to put McGwire in to pinch hit in the #1 spot at the beginning of the game, then hold down "up" and hit the ball cleanly.

Unfortunately, I didn't have Baseball Stars until I bought it around 1997. My buddies weren't into NES games by then.
   85. Greg Posted: January 21, 2008 at 04:41 AM (#2672662)
Has there ever been a bigger disappointment than Baseball Stars 2?

I mean...it's essentially the same game, except you can't edit people's names...how lame is that?
   86. Harvey Berkman Posted: January 22, 2008 at 12:26 AM (#2673274)
I never saw baseball stars two, it was so lame. I must have played like 700,000 hours of that game though.

Anybody else here liked Baseball Simulator 1.000?

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dingbat_Charlie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.7505 seconds
47 querie(s) executed