ptatc

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 14, 2015 -> 03:28 PM) Still, you think they could do better than a guy who couldn't hit 5 years ago. The last time he faced pro pitching. I think he may be going to Soxfest. Maybe his "fee" is doing him this solid. I expect him to be cut in AZ. Alot of his problems were self-inflicted immaturity. Maybe he grew up and some of the talent will finally come through. It's worth a shot.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 12, 2015 -> 06:23 PM) Was going to say, Peyton is as good as gone if the entire staff has been dismissed. The only way the Broncos could keep Manning was to keep Gase. So Fox had to go because Gase would have been offered a HC job somewhere.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jan 12, 2015 -> 11:31 AM) "I'm not here to hit singles and doubles"...mercy. Absolute mercy. He was telling the truth. He didn't hit very many.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jan 12, 2015 -> 02:28 PM) .....It was an awful call to end a great game, even if Rodgers comes back and the Packers win. I don't think there is a guarantee the Cowboys win that game if they get the call, but it doesn't change the fact that it would have been a much better ending than the game ending right after an awful call. What goes around comes around. Even in this game the Cowboys got many breaks. The pass interference to score the first touchdown. The referees given them an extra 3 yards before the replay correctly ruled he was nowhere near the first down.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 12, 2015 -> 03:10 PM) But the arbitrary numbers set by the quality start definition mean very little and say very little about how a guy pitched. Would you rather have your starter go 5.2 and give up no runs or go 6 and give up 3? One is a quality start, the other is not. you are really nitpicking improbable scenarios. The stat is like any other. It is meant to be taken as a whole season and career, not every individual game. For every 5.2 not quality start he probably had a 6 ininng 3 ER game and they offset each other. At the end od the season it will tell if he had a good season or not. It's a way to look at it without going into mindless detail.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jan 12, 2015 -> 01:17 PM) I really would loooove to see the Bears sign a HC some time soon here, jeez. I get the feeling that every passing day that goes by they are decreasing their chances to get the guy they want and also continue to go the path of not knowing exactly what they want and will wind up with just a guy that happened to still be there that they liked. I swear if turns out in the future that Bowles was the best of the bunch and the Bears missed out by dorking around I wouldnt be the least surprised. Its Arians all over again. It appears one of the guys they want (Kubiak) would rather stay as an OC rather than become the head coach for the Bears.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jan 12, 2015 -> 08:41 AM) He had 5 touchdowns in the playoff lost to the Cardinals. This game is a perfect example of why W-L isn't a QB stat. He did have some tough games against the Giants and the 49ers twice, but their defense also played awful in two of those games. It still is mostly. Of course there is a defense as well. But for every game like this for a QB where they lost when they should have won, there is one on the other side. There was one where he beat the Bears but threw 2 or 3 interceptions without a touchdown and they won 21-10 or something like that. It mostly evens out. It isn't an exact stat but over the course of a career it usually tells the story.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Jan 9, 2015 -> 12:15 PM) Can someone explain to me what's with all the Cubs hype recently? Does adding Lester, Montero and bringing back Hammel, while getting Maddon to coach their team make them THAT much better? They have too many unproven talents for anyone to start hopping on their bandwagon. Adding Lester immediately gives them a decent rotation. Not top of the line yet but good. It takes them from the basement to the middle of the pack. The hype has everything to do with Theo and his group. They are leading the way for the SABR group and many of the national writers believe this is the way to go. The Cubs have compiled a number of really good hitting prospects. The only thing really missing was to buy the pitching since they didn't draft it. Their philosophy appears to be to acquire proven or MLB experienced pitching because drafting and developing them is tough to do. So far their plan is on track. however, for them to be that good this year, everyone one of the young players will need to have an impact and no one can have a bad year. Possible but not likely.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jan 9, 2015 -> 01:31 PM) Which is fine but it doesnt make it right. Gould isnt a drunk and happens to be one of the best kickers in Bears history. Not that everyone should shut up and listen when Gould talks but I think when guys like Briggs walk out when you try giving the team a pep talk/rant that shows how much you are respected. I realize that. I'm just saying that the fact that Marshall was yelling that Gould was only a kicker is a very common comment in NFL locker rooms. I'm sure Briggs walked out because of another one of Marshall's rants as when players do this too often, others tune them out.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 9, 2015 -> 01:11 PM) Well there's rumors about him being a "menace" or whatever in the locker room, but maybe a competent coach could correct that. I've heard alot of people criticize the way Trestman ran a locker room. He expected them to be men and allowed them to do their own thing. It obviously failed. I'll be interested to see how Maddon does with the Cubs as he has said he runs a team in a similar way. His only rule is that that run hard to first. He expects them to be professional and know how to take care of the rest. This was in response to the staying out late crowd and having a day game the next day. When asked what he would do if they don't act like an adult he said we don't want those types of players here.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jan 9, 2015 -> 01:10 PM) I think that comes from people who are close to the situation. There are sources from within that are saying things like this. Lance Briggs walked out on him last year when he started ranting in the locker room and telling Gould to sit down and shut up because he was just a kicker. You think that is acceptable and not a cancer in anyway? I really havent decided myself on what I hope to happen with Marshall but if Pace has heard enough from the people on the team (believe he is going to do his research) that Marshall is a detriment and trade/release him I would be fine with that. They arent a playoff team for the next year anyway. Just for the record Peyton manning did the same thing when Mike Vanderjagt criticized him. He said, he's just a drunk kicker. MostNFL players really don't think the kicker is a football player. You hear the "only a kicker" comment alot.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 9, 2015 -> 11:47 AM) Jerry Angelo had all of the power and built a roster that went to the super bowl then somehow Lovie Smith was allowed to have a say in personnel decisions and there went the slow train to non-super bowl team. I am thinking this was not Jerry Angelo's idea. If the GM is reporting to Ted, Ted has a role. He is not scouting and hands on but he has a role. If not, the GM would not report to him. There is something there and I do not like it. A direct line between George and the GM is what needs to happen. This is always a problem when a team has success in any sport. Everyone wants more control because they feel they are right. It just depends on who the owner/president thinks is better. This happened with the Bulls. After winning the championships. Phil Jackson wanted more GM power which would have pushed Krause out. JR wouldn't give it to him so Jackson left. He went to LA did the same thing and divorced his wife to marry the owners daughter and got more power. He his now the power in NY and is seeing how difficult it can be.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 9, 2015 -> 08:15 AM) He should be here to get this team to a Superbowl. Beating GB can be a part of that, but it isn't absolutely necessary and it isn't goal #1. We'd all rather have a 14-2 SB champ than a 2-14 "Beat GB!" champ. It's not that laying out a plan to supplant GB as NFC North champions is bad, it's just that the first words being "I'm here to beat GB!" rubs me as the same-old, same-old from the Bears. but like jake said, maybe the McCaskeys are part of the meathead group... Have the Bears ever made it to the playoffs without beating Green Bay? I see what you are saying that beating Green Bay isn't the number one goal. It's winning the super bowl. However in this division, that road starts by beating Green Bay.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 8, 2015 -> 04:42 PM) I think, given his minor league track record and the most reason season we have on record, Wilkins is better bet to do something in the majors offensively than is Jordan Danks. It's very likely that Wilkins never sniffs the majors as a hitter or, if he does, it's in the form of September call ups or as a pinch hitter, but right now, I think he'd be projected to perform better offensively than Jordan Danks. For the record, here are the ZiPS projections for their batting lines. These mean little other than plugging numbers into a computer to generate likely splits: Wilkins: .242/.294/.437, .318 wOBA Danks: .232/.308/.375, .303 wOBA --- Also worth considering is that the Sox have indicated to Danks that they'd welcome him back with open arms and they know what he is, but perhaps they're doing this as a favor to him. Allow him the opportunity to see if another team in the majors wants him or let him pursue more playing time overseas or something along those lines. From what I saw, I don't think Wilkins has a prayer in the MLB. The projections may be right but the swing and miss capacity of wilkins was astounding. Not that Danks is going to be any good at hitting but the comment that Wilkins is obviously alot better is not correct.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 8, 2015 -> 04:50 PM) well that makes me like him less. His job is to get the team to the playoffs and the Superbowl, not to appease meatheads. They are currently the best in the division. What he said is true. It would be different if GB was a losing team. Right now they need to beat GB.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 8, 2015 -> 03:32 PM) Because Andy Wilkins is a better hitter than Jordan Danks. He hasn't shown it yet. But maybe they think he can.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Jan 8, 2015 -> 03:33 PM) Yeah, I'm surprised as well. I wouldn't think you can have Bonifacio as the only bench guy who can play CF as he presumably is covering a bunch of other positions, and Eaton's a good candidate to get banged up and miss 3 games in a row here and there. And with potential butchers Garcia and Cabrera out there, 'excellent defensive outfielder' is even more valuable. JB Shuck has only played a few CF games in his career and it'd be surprising to assume he could do it without watching him in spring training. My first guesstimate is that there's another move(s) coming that involve bench/OF. Either that or they figure the can re-sign him after they trade DV. This way they don't lose anyone.

QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 7, 2015 -> 01:19 PM) I never realized how mediocre Ted Lyons was. There's another number they can unretire as far as I'm concerned. If you play 21 years for a single team, your number should be retired just on principle. Other than the fact that he is in the HOF.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 02:53 PM) Ventura stated when he retired it was because of the pain in his ankle and the weakness of that leg. It got to the point, as we have stated, that he had to walk with a cane until his additional surgery in 2005. He put up some decent power numbers later in his career but that was about it. He didn't hit higher than .250 after age 31. During his prime he was absolutely one of the best in the game and that's not really debatable. For his entire career he averaged 4.5 fWAR per season and before 2000 he averaged 5.3 fWAR. Do you know how many position players had a 5.3 fWAR season last year, just 21. If you are a top 20 player in baseball for a single year you are one hell of a player. If you are a top 20 player in baseball for a decade you deserve to be in the HOF discussion. I realize the part about the retirement. However, he also could have had the surgery earlier and then returned to baseball. He chose just to ride it out. You don't really see him limping or using a cane now. The surgery cleaned everything out. It is never going to be perfect but it would have extended his career but he would have had to miss a significant part of a season to do it. Maybe it was because of him playing with Frank Thomas but I just didn't see him as one of the best hitters in baseball. A very good hitter but not one of the best. Maybe the abundance of PED performances jaded it as well. You mentioned that only 21 players had a 5.3 fWAR season last year that would have made him a top 21 hitter, I don't consider a top 21 hitter in a given year a HOF caliber player. HOF should be in the top 10 at least over a long period of time. How many of the players in his era had that type of fWAR? I'm sure it is more than now. That would put him in the top 30 range. I just don't see that as one of the best players of all time and HOF worthy. Just my opinion but I don't see it.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 7, 2015 -> 05:15 PM) I think what really hurts him is that he was rarely the best player on his team (those Expos teams were loaded) and he never really lead the league in any major category. For whatever reason, he was often overshadowed. He is statistically the 6th best left fielder to play the game. That alone says...sure fire HOF'er. I'm not a fan of people using this as a reason for the HOF. It's the hall of fame for the best players not the best left fielders or best leadoff men or best third baseman. I happen to agree that he belongs in based on being a great player not necessarily ranked by position.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 7, 2015 -> 04:20 PM) I would just about bet that there is a certain percentage of voters that won't vote for him because of the whole cocaine thing. Whether that's a significant percentage or not is anybody's guess. I don't think it's just the cocaine, it's the fact that he admitted he changed his game and the way he played due to it. The were stories of him not sliding properly and getting caught stealing because he wanted to protect the vial in his pocket. He took the stuff in the middle of games. I think alot of voters hold this against him.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 10:14 PM) If you choose not to be insulted by hearing or reading stories of Jerry Reinsdorf's asserted benevolence because he approved that last additional "expenditure" for Cabrera's contract, which pushed the team payroll just over the $100 million mark, you go right ahead. That's just barely getting the team to the MLB team average for payroll, and therefore I refuse to fall prey to the team's propaganda and talking points that they're somehow going out on a limb on all of this recent spending. Meanwhile, the reigning division champs continue to spend almost 50% more than the Sox. I find that disparity unacceptable, that's all I'm saying. The sox attendance has been awful in the 2000's. They have been in the bottom 1/3 or 1/4 almost every year. They were in the top half once in 2006 after they won the world series and that was just barely at 15. All teams share in the TV and internet revenue. The teams all negotiate their own local broadcast rights. The sox are always substantially lower than the cubs. Thus the teams know all of their revenue prior to the season except one variable: attendance and the associated income ie. parking drink sales etc. JR has always said that he will not lose money for the Board. What business would? Thus they can guess about how much they can budget to player salary pretty closely except for attendance. Now given the Sox fans history on not coming to the games, would you go out a limb and really raise the player salary budget? history shows the Sox need to win with a moderate payroll, so they just need to have Hahn know what he is doing. Sox fans will not support a high budget. The other option is to hope that when JR's kids sell the team a guy like Mark Cuban who doesn't need to care about money buys the team. I know baseball owners won't approve him but that type of person. Maybe George Lucas as in retirement he seems to be getting more involved in Chicago, although his primary sports fandom revolves around racing.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 10:34 PM) Just out of curiosity, how do you know that? Advertising money, tv ratings, fan attendance, team logo sales. All of which can be found in Forbes and is usually about 2/3 Cubs.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 03:43 PM) Sounds, then, like the Sox are operating at quite a competitive disadvantage, which really shouldn't be the case for a team playing in a large market. There is no competitive disadvantage other than they have a lower share of a large market. Many other teams employ the same type of board structure. There are some exceptions, such as the Cubs and Detriot. But that is how a business works. The most important thing they could do is gain a larger share of the market from the cubs. I'm sure they are working on it. This was the big failing of the JR regime. The tried to do the sportsvision network similar to the Yankees but they were too new to the town and didn't realize how bad it would turn out. They didn't have the same dominance that the Yankees did and many fans turned to watch the cubs free.

QUOTE (MAX @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 02:22 PM) He did a lot of good. But he was a mediocre player and manager overall. I respect your opinion but I disagree. It's just a matter of opinion on what you think is important to the franchise. I don't think being one of the winningist mangers with the only modern era world series title is mediocre for the team. He is one of the best they've ever had. That coupled with being an outstanding shortstop for over a decade is an important figure for the team. I won't complain if it doesn't happen but I think he is worthy of consideration.