In the second page of today's "column" on Felix Pie by Phil Rogers, Phil apparently invents a time machine:
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-070222rogers,1,1416741.column?page=2&coll=cs-home-headlines
Quote[Pie] almost played alongside Sammy Sosa in 2004 but suffered a bone bruise sliding into third base on a triple just before circumstances forced Hendry to make a call to Double-A for two outfielders, Murton and the unfortunate Adam Greenberg (hit in the head with the first pitch he saw in the big leagues and still trying to get back) got the call while Pie slowly healed.
Uh...um...since the Cubs didn't trade for Matt Murton until July 31, 2004, and the Florida call-ups of Murton and Greenberg happened just before the All-Star Break in 2005, how could any of this be true?
Phil just confused Sammy Sosa with Jeromy Burnitz. This...fellas...is why Phil makes the big bucks.
Give the guy a break. He doesn't really watch baseball that much. Yet he has to churn out thousand-word articles about it every other day. It gets hard sometimes. Let's see you try it.
Phil says to watch out for the Rockies this year-they are a sleeper.
Ever time Phil Rogers writes a column, a kitten dies.
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
Quote from: Indolent Reader on February 23, 2007, 10:32:10 AM
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
Phil Rogers' time machine is a broken flux capacitor bolted onto an old Corvair.
Quote from: Indolent Reader on February 23, 2007, 10:32:10 AM
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
Not me. I learned my lesson from climbing aboard the Great Space Coaster when I was a wii lad. I ended up with Shamrock shake all over my shoes.
Quote from: James Westfall on February 23, 2007, 10:47:57 AM
Quote from: Indolent Reader on February 23, 2007, 10:32:10 AM
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
Not me. I learned my lesson from climbing aboard the Great Space Coaster when I was a wii lad. I ended up with Shamrock shake all over my shoes.
Better than in your mouth... those things are disgusting.
Quote from: cubfaninPA on February 23, 2007, 11:43:36 AM
Quote from: James Westfall on February 23, 2007, 10:47:57 AM
Quote from: Indolent Reader on February 23, 2007, 10:32:10 AM
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
Not me. I learned my lesson from climbing aboard the Great Space Coaster when I was a wii lad. I ended up with Shamrock shake all over my shoes.
Better than in your mouth... those things are disgusting.
I thought I was the only one that hated those things. Praise you Pie.
Quote from: Indolent Reader on February 23, 2007, 10:32:10 AM
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
Doesn't some fairly hot chick do a lot of the highlights on the Sports machine now?
Quote from: Dave B on February 23, 2007, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: Indolent Reader on February 23, 2007, 10:32:10 AM
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
Doesn't some fairly hot chick do a lot of the highlights on the Sports machine now?
I'm not sure she even qualifies as 'fairly hot', but I'd still hit it.
(http://www.nbcolympics.com/2006/0201/5091004_240X180.jpg)
Another Gem, from fellow homo Paul Sullivan:
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-070223cubs,1,1760433.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
QuoteCorey Patterson spent a few years in the minor leagues being promoted as the next great Cubs outfielder, only for impatient fans to run him out of town because they wondered when he was going to live up to the buildup.
Hmm. It's our fault Corey sucked balls?
So do we get credit for his solid 04 season?
#*($* Sullivan.
Quote from: RockTheIvy on February 24, 2007, 03:17:29 AM
Another Gem, from fellow homo Paul Sullivan:
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-070223cubs,1,1760433.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
QuoteCorey Patterson spent a few years in the minor leagues being promoted as the next great Cubs outfielder, only for impatient fans to run him out of town because they wondered when he was going to live up to the buildup.
Hmm. It's our fault Corey sucked balls?
So do we get credit for his solid 04 season?
#*($* Sullivan.
I had the exact same reaction to that line from Sullivan's piece of shit column today. How the hell does he still have a job? The fans ran KPat out of town? Yeah, and it was our fault that he only had .300 OBP with the Orioles this last year, too. If the Jockey wants to blame anyone for Patterson forcing Hendry to trade him for a bag of balls he should blame Dusty F. Baker, Sarge, Pat Clines and Corey himself before blaming the fans.
Let's take a ride on the Phil Rogers time machine all the way back to the halcyon days of 1996...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-26-rogers-al-westfeb26,0,993502.story?track=rss (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-26-rogers-al-westfeb26,0,993502.story?track=rss)
QuoteNow, like wide receiver Rod Tidwell in "Jerry Maguire," Lackey is telling the Angels, "Show me the money!"
Jerry Mcguire? Seriously? Welcome to 1996, Phil. Hopefully he steps up his game and we can get some Sling Blade quotes, or maybe Fargo if we're really lucky.
On a side note, searching for "Phil Rogers" brings up some hilarious results. The Phil Rogers Curse; Phil Rogers, you ignorant slut; Phil Rogers: Moran. So many choices to choose from...
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Facts are best when it's 1-on-1.
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Bleep bloop bleep blop Brian Eno
Quote from: Slakee on February 27, 2009, 10:45:27 AM
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Bleep bloop bleep blop Brian Eno
Adrian Belew solo.
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Slakee on February 27, 2009, 10:45:27 AM
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Bleep bloop bleep blop Brian Eno
Adrian Belew solo.
James Brown is dead.
Quote from: Oleg on February 27, 2009, 10:53:32 AM
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Slakee on February 27, 2009, 10:45:27 AM
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Bleep bloop bleep blop Brian Eno
Adrian Belew solo.
James Brown is dead.
Chinese food makes me sick.
Quote from: Fork on February 27, 2009, 12:21:22 PM
Quote from: Oleg on February 27, 2009, 10:53:32 AM
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Slakee on February 27, 2009, 10:45:27 AM
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Bleep bloop bleep blop Brian Eno
Adrian Belew solo.
James Brown is dead.
Chinese food makes me sick.
Guilty feet have got no rhythm.
Quote from: BH on February 27, 2009, 12:24:28 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 27, 2009, 12:21:22 PM
Quote from: Oleg on February 27, 2009, 10:53:32 AM
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Slakee on February 27, 2009, 10:45:27 AM
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Bleep bloop bleep blop Brian Eno
Adrian Belew solo.
James Brown is dead.
Chinese food makes me sick.
Guilty feet have got no rhythm.
So that's two George Michael references in this thread.
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 12:45:32 PM
Quote from: BH on February 27, 2009, 12:24:28 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 27, 2009, 12:21:22 PM
Quote from: Oleg on February 27, 2009, 10:53:32 AM
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Slakee on February 27, 2009, 10:45:27 AM
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Bleep bloop bleep blop Brian Eno
Adrian Belew solo.
James Brown is dead.
Chinese food makes me sick.
Guilty feet have got no rhythm.
So that's two George Michael references in this thread.
For the record, mine was a lyric from some techno-ish group -- who's name escapes me, right now -- from the early 90s. Also, I believe it was a lyric in a Tom Tom Club song they did in the middle of the
Stop Making Sense film. It was a Brian Eno inspired post, sort of.
That techno-ish group is LA Style (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Brown_Is_Dead).
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 12:45:32 PM
Quote from: BH on February 27, 2009, 12:24:28 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 27, 2009, 12:21:22 PM
Quote from: Oleg on February 27, 2009, 10:53:32 AM
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: Slakee on February 27, 2009, 10:45:27 AM
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 10:20:10 AM
In fairness to Phil, he thought Jerry McGuire was from 2005. Facts are his enemey; have been for a long time.
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts dont stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
Bleep bloop bleep blop Brian Eno
Adrian Belew solo.
James Brown is dead.
Chinese food makes me sick.
Guilty feet have got no rhythm.
So that's two George Michael references in this thread.
(http://blogs.nypost.com/popwrap/photos/michael-cera-arrested.jpg)
Quote from: Oleg on February 27, 2009, 01:00:25 PM
Quote from: flannj on February 27, 2009, 12:45:32 PM
Quote from: BH on February 27, 2009, 12:24:28 PM
Guilty feet have got no rhythm.
So that's two George Michael references in this thread.
For the record, mine was a lyric from some techno-ish group -- who's name escapes me, right now -- from the early 90s. Also, I believe it was a lyric in a Tom Tom Club song they did in the middle of the Stop Making Sense film. It was a Brian Eno inspired post, sort of.
That techno-ish group is LA Style (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Brown_Is_Dead).
Quote from: Indolent Reader on February 23, 2007, 10:32:10 AM
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
(http://www.carlcoxphoto.com/images/George%20Michael%20NBC.jpg)
Quote from: Indolent Reader on February 23, 2007, 10:32:10 AM
Is the Phil Rogers' time machine anything like the George Michael (the unghey one) Sports Machine? Because, if so, I want to climb aboard right now!
Other things to climb aboard:
(http://www.cfhf.net/lyrics/images/great1.jpg)
(http://www.whereiscat.com/uploaded_images/golden-princess-776729.jpg)
Quote from: RockTheIvy on February 24, 2007, 03:17:29 AM
Another Gem, from fellow homo Paul Sullivan:
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-070223cubs,1,1760433.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
QuoteCorey Patterson spent a few years in the minor leagues being promoted as the next great Cubs outfielder, only for impatient fans to run him out of town because they wondered when he was going to live up to the buildup.
Hmm. It's our fault Corey sucked balls?
So do we get credit for his solid 04 season?
#*($* Sullivan.
In the two seasons since, K-Patt has had OBPs of .304 and .238. Yeah, those two really know what the fuck they're talking about.
I guess that's Cubs fans' faults, too.
Also, in order to be historically accurate, Don Baylor would deserve more of the blame than Baker in the handling of Patterson. Baylor and Ed Lynch could not wait to get Patterson up to the bigs--Lynch to prove that his farm system didn't suck balls, and Baylor for gord-only-knows-what-reason--during the 2000 Spring Training, and their exuberance only engendered Korey's sense of entitlement, which led to him turning into a stubborn motherfucker who was unable to deal with failure when it arose later in the 2000 season and every season thereafter. And even though Patterson struggled for the first time in his life during the 2000 season at West Tenn (he got off to a hot start at Rookie Ball, Low-A and the Arizona Fall League which is what had Baseball America drooling over him for a couple years), the Cubs went against any good judgement they may have had and still called him up in September. And, instead of sending him back to West Tenn for the 2001 season, they let him start at Iowa, where he struggled again and AGAIN they called him up to the bigs.
By the time Baker got his retarded hands on him, Patterson was an underdone prospect that had repeatedly gotten undeserved promotions. Baker merely put the finishing touches on him.
I'm not saying Patteson would have been a good player had he been in an organization that knew what the hell it was doing but, in retrospect, he really had no chance whatsoever considering the clown college that was in charge when he came up.
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 03:08:26 PM
Also, in order to be historically accurate, Don Baylor would deserve more of the blame than Baker in the handling of Patterson. Baylor and Ed Lynch could not wait to get Patterson up to the bigs--Lynch to prove that his farm system didn't suck balls, and Baylor for gord-only-knows-what-reason--during the 2000 Spring Training, and their exuberance only engendered Korey's sense of entitlement, which led to him turning into a stubborn motherfucker who was unable to deal with failure when it arose later in the 2000 season and every season thereafter. And even though Patterson struggled for the first time in his life during the 2000 season at West Tenn (he got off to a hot start at Rookie Ball, Low-A and the Arizona Fall League which is what had Baseball America drooling over him for a couple years), the Cubs went against any good judgement they may have had and still called him up in September. And, instead of sending him back to West Tenn for the 2001 season, they let him start at Iowa, where he struggled again and AGAIN they called him up to the bigs.
By the time Baker got his retarded hands on him, Patterson was an underdone prospect that had repeatedly gotten undeserved promotions. Baker merely put the finishing touches on him.
I'm not saying Patteson would have been a good player had he been in an organization that knew what the hell it was doing but, in retrospect, he really had no chance whatsoever considering the clown college that was in charge when he came up.
Intrepid Readers Tank, CT, and/or Gil Gunderson: I'd thank you not to refer to Princeton that way.
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 03:22:36 PM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 03:08:26 PM
Also, in order to be historically accurate, Don Baylor would deserve more of the blame than Baker in the handling of Patterson. Baylor and Ed Lynch could not wait to get Patterson up to the bigs--Lynch to prove that his farm system didn't suck balls, and Baylor for gord-only-knows-what-reason--during the 2000 Spring Training, and their exuberance only engendered Korey's sense of entitlement, which led to him turning into a stubborn motherfucker who was unable to deal with failure when it arose later in the 2000 season and every season thereafter. And even though Patterson struggled for the first time in his life during the 2000 season at West Tenn (he got off to a hot start at Rookie Ball, Low-A and the Arizona Fall League which is what had Baseball America drooling over him for a couple years), the Cubs went against any good judgement they may have had and still called him up in September. And, instead of sending him back to West Tenn for the 2001 season, they let him start at Iowa, where he struggled again and AGAIN they called him up to the bigs.
By the time Baker got his retarded hands on him, Patterson was an underdone prospect that had repeatedly gotten undeserved promotions. Baker merely put the finishing touches on him.
I'm not saying Patteson would have been a good player had he been in an organization that knew what the hell it was doing but, in retrospect, he really had no chance whatsoever considering the clown college that was in charge when he came up.
Intrepid Readers Tank, CT, and/or Gil Gunderson: I'd thank you not to refer to Princeton that way.
My bit! YOU STOLE MY BIT! [smashes the original Jon's head into the pavement, killing him]
Quote from: CT III on February 27, 2009, 04:13:57 PM
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 03:22:36 PM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 03:08:26 PM
Also, in order to be historically accurate, Don Baylor would deserve more of the blame than Baker in the handling of Patterson. Baylor and Ed Lynch could not wait to get Patterson up to the bigs--Lynch to prove that his farm system didn't suck balls, and Baylor for gord-only-knows-what-reason--during the 2000 Spring Training, and their exuberance only engendered Korey's sense of entitlement, which led to him turning into a stubborn motherfucker who was unable to deal with failure when it arose later in the 2000 season and every season thereafter. And even though Patterson struggled for the first time in his life during the 2000 season at West Tenn (he got off to a hot start at Rookie Ball, Low-A and the Arizona Fall League which is what had Baseball America drooling over him for a couple years), the Cubs went against any good judgement they may have had and still called him up in September. And, instead of sending him back to West Tenn for the 2001 season, they let him start at Iowa, where he struggled again and AGAIN they called him up to the bigs.
By the time Baker got his retarded hands on him, Patterson was an underdone prospect that had repeatedly gotten undeserved promotions. Baker merely put the finishing touches on him.
I'm not saying Patteson would have been a good player had he been in an organization that knew what the hell it was doing but, in retrospect, he really had no chance whatsoever considering the clown college that was in charge when he came up.
Intrepid Readers Tank, CT, and/or Gil Gunderson: I'd thank you not to refer to Princeton that way.
My bit! YOU STOLE MY BIT! [smashes the original Jon's head into the pavement, killing him]
Cecil, no civilization in history has ever considered chief hydrological engineer a calling.
Quote from: CT III on February 27, 2009, 04:13:57 PM
Quote from: Jon on February 27, 2009, 03:22:36 PM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 03:08:26 PM
Also, in order to be historically accurate, Don Baylor would deserve more of the blame than Baker in the handling of Patterson. Baylor and Ed Lynch could not wait to get Patterson up to the bigs--Lynch to prove that his farm system didn't suck balls, and Baylor for gord-only-knows-what-reason--during the 2000 Spring Training, and their exuberance only engendered Korey's sense of entitlement, which led to him turning into a stubborn motherfucker who was unable to deal with failure when it arose later in the 2000 season and every season thereafter. And even though Patterson struggled for the first time in his life during the 2000 season at West Tenn (he got off to a hot start at Rookie Ball, Low-A and the Arizona Fall League which is what had Baseball America drooling over him for a couple years), the Cubs went against any good judgement they may have had and still called him up in September. And, instead of sending him back to West Tenn for the 2001 season, they let him start at Iowa, where he struggled again and AGAIN they called him up to the bigs.
By the time Baker got his retarded hands on him, Patterson was an underdone prospect that had repeatedly gotten undeserved promotions. Baker merely put the finishing touches on him.
I'm not saying Patteson would have been a good player had he been in an organization that knew what the hell it was doing but, in retrospect, he really had no chance whatsoever considering the clown college that was in charge when he came up.
Intrepid Readers Tank, CT, and/or Gil Gunderson: I'd thank you not to refer to Princeton that way.
My bit! YOU STOLE MY BIT! [smashes the original Jon's head into the pavement, killing him]
Thank god I'm an orphan owned by the Shoutbox.
JOn's the Original Alfalfa?
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 05:26:01 PM
JOn's the Original Alfalfa?
You're awful at this. Just bloody awful.
Quote from: CT III on February 28, 2009, 01:24:58 AM
Quote from: MAD on February 27, 2009, 05:26:01 PM
JOn's the Original Alfalfa?
You're awful at this. Just bloody awful.
And THAT is why I only listed Tank, Gil, and CT.
What is this not-so-subtle shit from Phil in the 3/28 Tribune?:
FT. LAUDERDALE — There's no blinking neon sign above the Baltimore Orioles' clubhouse door, certainly not one saying what newcomers must think when they walk inside.
But the atmosphere is different from that in most other places around baseball, especially ones where contributing to a playoff team is part of the bargain. To go from a Cubs team run by Lou Piniella to an Orioles team run by Dave Trembley guarantees culture shock.
...The onus remains on Hill, just like it remains on Pie. But with the Orioles looking at a 12th consecutive losing season, a baseball game can just be a baseball game. It's been a while since it didn't feel like something else at Wrigley Field.
Quote from: Dave B on March 30, 2009, 10:14:29 AM
What is this not-so-subtle shit from Phil in the 3/28 Tribune?:
FT. LAUDERDALE — There's no blinking neon sign above the Baltimore Orioles' clubhouse door, certainly not one saying what newcomers must think when they walk inside.
But the atmosphere is different from that in most other places around baseball, especially ones where contributing to a playoff team is part of the bargain. To go from a Cubs team run by Lou Piniella to an Orioles team run by Dave Trembley guarantees culture shock.
...The onus remains on Hill, just like it remains on Pie. But with the Orioles looking at a 12th consecutive losing season, a baseball game can just be a baseball game. It's been a while since it didn't feel like something else at Wrigley Field.
Am I dumb if I don't understand the "main idea" of this passage? Was I left behind as a child?
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on March 30, 2009, 10:53:16 AM
Quote from: Dave B on March 30, 2009, 10:14:29 AM
What is this not-so-subtle shit from Phil in the 3/28 Tribune?:
FT. LAUDERDALE — There's no blinking neon sign above the Baltimore Orioles' clubhouse door, certainly not one saying what newcomers must think when they walk inside.
But the atmosphere is different from that in most other places around baseball, especially ones where contributing to a playoff team is part of the bargain. To go from a Cubs team run by Lou Piniella to an Orioles team run by Dave Trembley guarantees culture shock.
...The onus remains on Hill, just like it remains on Pie. But with the Orioles looking at a 12th consecutive losing season, a baseball game can just be a baseball game. It's been a while since it didn't feel like something else at Wrigley Field.
Am I dumb if I don't understand the "main idea" of this passage? Was I left behind as a child?
I don't get what he's trying to say either; I actually feel more intelligent for it.
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 10:55:31 AM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on March 30, 2009, 10:53:16 AM
Quote from: Dave B on March 30, 2009, 10:14:29 AM
What is this not-so-subtle shit from Phil in the 3/28 Tribune?:
FT. LAUDERDALE — There's no blinking neon sign above the Baltimore Orioles' clubhouse door, certainly not one saying what newcomers must think when they walk inside.
But the atmosphere is different from that in most other places around baseball, especially ones where contributing to a playoff team is part of the bargain. To go from a Cubs team run by Lou Piniella to an Orioles team run by Dave Trembley guarantees culture shock.
...The onus remains on Hill, just like it remains on Pie. But with the Orioles looking at a 12th consecutive losing season, a baseball game can just be a baseball game. It's been a while since it didn't feel like something else at Wrigley Field.
Am I dumb if I don't understand the "main idea" of this passage? Was I left behind as a child?
I don't get what he's trying to say either; I actually feel more intelligent for it.
I took it to mean that Lou was a big meanie to Rich and Felix.
Quote from: Shooter on March 30, 2009, 11:21:25 AM
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 10:55:31 AM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on March 30, 2009, 10:53:16 AM
Quote from: Dave B on March 30, 2009, 10:14:29 AM
What is this not-so-subtle shit from Phil in the 3/28 Tribune?:
FT. LAUDERDALE — There's no blinking neon sign above the Baltimore Orioles' clubhouse door, certainly not one saying what newcomers must think when they walk inside.
But the atmosphere is different from that in most other places around baseball, especially ones where contributing to a playoff team is part of the bargain. To go from a Cubs team run by Lou Piniella to an Orioles team run by Dave Trembley guarantees culture shock.
...The onus remains on Hill, just like it remains on Pie. But with the Orioles looking at a 12th consecutive losing season, a baseball game can just be a baseball game. It's been a while since it didn't feel like something else at Wrigley Field.
Am I dumb if I don't understand the "main idea" of this passage? Was I left behind as a child?
I don't get what he's trying to say either; I actually feel more intelligent for it.
I took it to mean that Lou was a big meanie to Rich and Felix.
I take it to mean that Phil is a horrible writer.
I interpreted to mean that the Orioles are a more laid-back organization that Phil thinks is more conducive for players like Hill and Pie to develop in. Less pressure and less attention.
I don't agree with that, but I think it's Phil's way of jabbing the Cubs and it doesn't work.
Quote from: Dave B on March 30, 2009, 11:35:53 AM
I interpreted to mean that the Orioles are a more laid-back organization that Phil thinks is more conducive for players like Hill and Pie to develop in. Less pressure and less attention.
I don't agree with that, but I think it's Phil's way of jabbing the Cubs and it doesn't work.
Does anyone have Gally's stats since he was traded to the Orioles?
Quote from: Dave B on March 30, 2009, 11:35:53 AM
I interpreted to mean that the Orioles are a more laid-back organization that Phil thinks is more conducive for players like Hill and Pie to develop in. Less pressure and less attention.
I don't agree with that, but I think it's Phil's way of jabbing the Cubs and it doesn't work.
Then Spring Training with the Orioles must be even LESS pressure-packed, so I bet these guys are kicking ass!
Pie: .216./.281/.314, 1 HR, 4 RBI, 10 K, 5 BB
Hill: 0.00 ERA (http://nationalpost.pa-sportsticker.com/default.aspx?s=mlb-news-display&nid=A33281351238349243A)!
If there's one thing an Andy McPhail run organization is an expert on....it's player development!
How does Phil Rogers remain employed?
QuoteBut with the Orioles looking at a 12th consecutive losing season, a baseball game can just be a baseball game.
Ladies and Gentlemen your 2009 Baltimore Orioles!
Quote from: Dave B on March 30, 2009, 11:35:53 AM
I interpreted to mean that the Orioles are a more laid-back organization that Phil thinks is more conducive for players like Hill and Pie to develop in. Less pressure and less attention.
I don't agree with that, but I think it's Phil's way of jabbing the Cubs and it doesn't work.
That's what I thought, too. This is really stupid regardless.
Let me see if I have this right. The Orioles have a horrible team. They have been horrible for well over a decade. The players, the manager, the press, and the fans don't give a shit about winning. Therefore, the Orioles have a superior organization to the Cubs.
Yeah! Way to kick the Cubs ass with that one, Phil.
So... You can suck and it doesn't matter that much because your team sucks too and has no one better down in Rochester with whom to replace you. And if you get lit up, everyone in town will be too busy wondering about the Ravens or the Redskins to care.
Yeah, what a career move!
Quote from: Brownie on March 30, 2009, 12:24:27 PM
So... You can suck and it doesn't matter that much because your team sucks too and has no one better down in Rochester with whom to replace you. And if you get lit up, everyone in town will be too busy wondering about the Ravens or the Redskins to care.
Yeah, what a career move!
Yeah, but you'll
FEEL better about everything because no meanie is breathing down your neck to throw f*cking strikes/hit the f*cking ball. That's a real team right there, yes sir.
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 12:30:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on March 30, 2009, 12:24:27 PM
So... You can suck and it doesn't matter that much because your team sucks too and has no one better down in Rochester with whom to replace you. And if you get lit up, everyone in town will be too busy wondering about the Ravens or the Redskins to care.
Yeah, what a career move!
Yeah, but you'll FEEL better about everything because no meanie is breathing down your neck to throw f*cking strikes/hit the f*cking ball. That's a real team right there, yes sir.
Feelings are for homos and liberals
Quote from: IrishYeti on March 30, 2009, 12:31:35 PM
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 12:30:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on March 30, 2009, 12:24:27 PM
So... You can suck and it doesn't matter that much because your team sucks too and has no one better down in Rochester with whom to replace you. And if you get lit up, everyone in town will be too busy wondering about the Ravens or the Redskins to care.
Yeah, what a career move!
Yeah, but you'll FEEL better about everything because no meanie is breathing down your neck to throw f*cking strikes/hit the f*cking ball. That's a real team right there, yes sir.
Feelings are for homos and liberals
Nice avatar, Yeti. Does Agador Spartacus clean windows too?
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 11:57:25 PM
Quote from: IrishYeti on March 30, 2009, 12:31:35 PM
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 12:30:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on March 30, 2009, 12:24:27 PM
So... You can suck and it doesn't matter that much because your team sucks too and has no one better down in Rochester with whom to replace you. And if you get lit up, everyone in town will be too busy wondering about the Ravens or the Redskins to care.
Yeah, what a career move!
Yeah, but you'll FEEL better about everything because no meanie is breathing down your neck to throw f*cking strikes/hit the f*cking ball. That's a real team right there, yes sir.
Feelings are for homos and liberals
Nice avatar, Yeti. Does Agador Spartacus clean windows too?
The shoes, they make Yeti fall down.
Quote from: Jon on March 31, 2009, 08:51:34 AM
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 11:57:25 PM
Quote from: IrishYeti on March 30, 2009, 12:31:35 PM
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 12:30:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on March 30, 2009, 12:24:27 PM
So... You can suck and it doesn't matter that much because your team sucks too and has no one better down in Rochester with whom to replace you. And if you get lit up, everyone in town will be too busy wondering about the Ravens or the Redskins to care.
Yeah, what a career move!
Yeah, but you'll FEEL better about everything because no meanie is breathing down your neck to throw f*cking strikes/hit the f*cking ball. That's a real team right there, yes sir.
Feelings are for homos and liberals
Nice avatar, Yeti. Does Agador Spartacus clean windows too?
The shoes, they make Yeti fall down.
No! I'm gonna look like a fag!
Quote from: IrishYeti on April 01, 2009, 10:08:53 AM
Quote from: Jon on March 31, 2009, 08:51:34 AM
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 11:57:25 PM
Quote from: IrishYeti on March 30, 2009, 12:31:35 PM
Quote from: powen01 on March 30, 2009, 12:30:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on March 30, 2009, 12:24:27 PM
So... You can suck and it doesn't matter that much because your team sucks too and has no one better down in Rochester with whom to replace you. And if you get lit up, everyone in town will be too busy wondering about the Ravens or the Redskins to care.
Yeah, what a career move!
Yeah, but you'll FEEL better about everything because no meanie is breathing down your neck to throw f*cking strikes/hit the f*cking ball. That's a real team right there, yes sir.
Feelings are for homos and liberals
Nice avatar, Yeti. Does Agador Spartacus clean windows too?
The shoes, they make Yeti fall down.
No! I'm gonna look like a fag!
There are pills for that. And they did studies on those pills.
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Quote from: RV on April 01, 2009, 12:00:11 PM
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Maybe he's just displaying his rapist's wit. Nah.
Quote from: Slakee on April 01, 2009, 12:12:30 PM
Quote from: RV on April 01, 2009, 12:00:11 PM
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Maybe he's just displaying his rapist's wit. Nah.
I'd actually Agree with Phil that a strong leadoff hitter Isn't essential to winning. What I'd disagree with is the idea that the you don't need good hitters at all, a philosophy the White Sox seem to be embracing. And my God am I tired of the shlop job the media is doing over Alexei Ramirez of the .290 BA with the .317 OBP.
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:31:15 PM
Quote from: Slakee on April 01, 2009, 12:12:30 PM
Quote from: RV on April 01, 2009, 12:00:11 PM
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Maybe he's just displaying his rapist's wit. Nah.
I'd actually Agree with Phil that a strong leadoff hitter Isn't essential to winning. What I'd disagree with is the idea that the you don't need good hitters at all, a philosophy the White Sox seem to be embracing. And my God am I tired of the shlop job the media is doing over Alexei Ramirez of the .290 BA with the .317 OBP.
What I disagree with is the notion that Juan Pierre should have more at-bats than anyone else on a team.
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:31:15 PM
Quote from: Slakee on April 01, 2009, 12:12:30 PM
Quote from: RV on April 01, 2009, 12:00:11 PM
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Maybe he's just displaying his rapist's wit. Nah.
I'd actually Agree with Phil that a strong leadoff hitter Isn't essential to winning. What I'd disagree with is the idea that the you don't need good hitters at all, a philosophy the White Sox seem to be embracing. And my God am I tired of the shlop job the media is doing over Alexei Ramirez of the .290 BA with the .317 OBP.
He hit a GRAND SLAM once! A grand slam!
Quote from: Andy on April 01, 2009, 02:42:11 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:31:15 PM
Quote from: Slakee on April 01, 2009, 12:12:30 PM
Quote from: RV on April 01, 2009, 12:00:11 PM
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Maybe he's just displaying his rapist's wit. Nah.
I'd actually Agree with Phil that a strong leadoff hitter Isn't essential to winning. What I'd disagree with is the idea that the you don't need good hitters at all, a philosophy the White Sox seem to be embracing. And my God am I tired of the shlop job the media is doing over Alexei Ramirez of the .290 BA with the .317 OBP.
He hit a GRAND SLAM once! A grand slam!
I forgot about that. Never mind, he truly is CHICAGO'S GREATEST BASEBALL PLAYER
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:46:18 PM
Quote from: Andy on April 01, 2009, 02:42:11 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:31:15 PM
Quote from: Slakee on April 01, 2009, 12:12:30 PM
Quote from: RV on April 01, 2009, 12:00:11 PM
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Maybe he's just displaying his rapist's wit. Nah.
I'd actually Agree with Phil that a strong leadoff hitter Isn't essential to winning. What I'd disagree with is the idea that the you don't need good hitters at all, a philosophy the White Sox seem to be embracing. And my God am I tired of the shlop job the media is doing over Alexei Ramirez of the .290 BA with the .317 OBP.
He hit a GRAND SLAM once! A grand slam!
I forgot about that. Never mind, he truly is CHICAGO'S GREATEST BASEBALL PLAYER
FINALLY. I've waiting for someone who doesn't work at a bankrupt newspaper to say it.
Quote from: CT III on April 01, 2009, 03:25:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:46:18 PM
Quote from: Andy on April 01, 2009, 02:42:11 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:31:15 PM
Quote from: Slakee on April 01, 2009, 12:12:30 PM
Quote from: RV on April 01, 2009, 12:00:11 PM
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Maybe he's just displaying his rapist's wit. Nah.
I'd actually Agree with Phil that a strong leadoff hitter Isn't essential to winning. What I'd disagree with is the idea that the you don't need good hitters at all, a philosophy the White Sox seem to be embracing. And my God am I tired of the shlop job the media is doing over Alexei Ramirez of the .290 BA with the .317 OBP.
He hit a GRAND SLAM once! A grand slam!
I forgot about that. Never mind, he truly is CHICAGO'S GREATEST BASEBALL PLAYER
FINALLY. I've waiting for someone who doesn't work at a bankrupt newspaper to say it.
Greatest. Ramirez. Ever.
Quote from: Andre Dawson's Creek on April 01, 2009, 04:20:28 PM
Quote from: CT III on April 01, 2009, 03:25:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:46:18 PM
Quote from: Andy on April 01, 2009, 02:42:11 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 01, 2009, 02:31:15 PM
Quote from: Slakee on April 01, 2009, 12:12:30 PM
Quote from: RV on April 01, 2009, 12:00:11 PM
I think Phil might have brain cancer.
QuoteAt this time last season, Wise was quietly going to work every morning in the Sox's minor league camp. Few knew he was even there. He's with his fourth big league team and holds a .214 batting average and .254 on-base percentage after 240 big league games.
And this is the guy Williams and Guillen have picked to lead off for a team they privately believe should cruise to an American League Central title?
That's confidence.
One good thing about leading off with Wise is that it protects two guys who would make more sense there: rookie Chris Getz, penciled in at No. 2, and 2008 stud Alexei Ramirez, who could hit as low as eighth against right-handers.
Having a strong leadoff hitter is hardly essential to winning, however. There are only about 10 of those guys in the major leagues, and not all are on playoff teams. No need to trade for Juan Pierre to get one.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-rogers-baseball-apr01,0,2361957,print.column)
Maybe he's just displaying his rapist's wit. Nah.
I'd actually Agree with Phil that a strong leadoff hitter Isn't essential to winning. What I'd disagree with is the idea that the you don't need good hitters at all, a philosophy the White Sox seem to be embracing. And my God am I tired of the shlop job the media is doing over Alexei Ramirez of the .290 BA with the .317 OBP.
He hit a GRAND SLAM once! A grand slam!
I forgot about that. Never mind, he truly is CHICAGO'S GREATEST BASEBALL PLAYER
FINALLY. I've waiting for someone who doesn't work at a bankrupt newspaper to say it.
Greatest. Ramirez. Ever.
I thought that was this guy:
(https://www.beckett.com/images/pgitems/399680101.jpg)
Thanks to a 5-2 start (at HOME, against the mighty Pirates and Astros), Phil has made the Satanic Fowl #2 in his Power Rankings this week.
Quote from: Dave B on April 13, 2009, 10:26:49 AM
Thanks to a 5-2 start (at HOME, against the mighty Pirates and Astros), Phil has made the Satanic Fowl #2 in his Power Rankings this week.
And the Cubs are 7th, behind the Marlins and Wrigley Field/Fenway Park.
I couldn't read that far.
Quote from: Dave B on April 13, 2009, 10:26:49 AM
Thanks to a 5-2 start (at HOME, against the mighty Pirates and Astros), Phil has made the Satanic Fowl #2 in his Power Rankings this week.
Chris Carpenter is 100% back - he had one good start. So you know 35 more of those are comin' right up. Dave Duncan's will be done.
Quote from: Slakee on April 13, 2009, 10:54:26 AM
Quote from: Dave B on April 13, 2009, 10:26:49 AM
Thanks to a 5-2 start (at HOME, against the mighty Pirates and Astros), Phil has made the Satanic Fowl #2 in his Power Rankings this week.
Chris Carpenter is 100% back - he had one good start. So you know 35 more of those are comin' right up. Dave Duncan's will bag o'steroids be done .
This is still my favorite from Phildo today:
Quote31. Astros (20). The worst thing about this team is that it looks like a non-factor despite having the oldest lineup (average age: 32.6) and oldest rotation (33.6) in the majors.
Who would have thought that a team made up primarily of guys who have reached the age where most of baseball players begin to decline would be a non-factor?
Not Phil Rogers.
That must mean ole Phil has given up on the Astros sneak attack.
Phil goes back in time again. Only to see what could have been with Curty and the Cubbies (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-0226-rogers-curtis-granderson-yank20100225,0,5492412.column)
QuoteGranderson pondered that question for a long time this offseason. It could have been a beautiful marriage — in my opinion, one of the best things that might have happened to the Cubs both because of his skill set as a power-speed hitter and plus fielding and his off-the-charts intangibles.
This might be my favorite part. Intangibles are bullshit things that can't be measured numerically, but somehow his quality intangibles are off the charts of imaginary numerics. Nice.
Quote from: Waco Kid on April 13, 2009, 11:52:15 AM
That must mean ole Phil has given up on the Astros sneak attack.
That will just make it all the sneakier.
Quote from: Shooter on February 26, 2010, 01:57:48 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on April 13, 2009, 11:52:15 AM
That must mean ole Phil has given up on the Astros sneak attack.
That will just make it all the sneakier.
Shooter! You're alive!
Phil slams Kenny Williams (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/05/your-morning-phil-15.html) for trading for Peavy. I'm too lazy to find Phil Rogers' reaction to the trade last summer, but I know those are out there:
QuoteWas Jake Peavy just another grab for attention by Ken Williams?
Williams' need to put his stamp on the White Sox roster has been evident throughout his decade as the general manager, and the addition of Peavy is just another example.
Reader Phil Trager offered some good thoughts on Williams' heavy-handed style in the GM job in a recent e-mail, charting the tendency all the way back to the trade of Aaron Rowand after the 2005 World Series. The thought then was that Rowand was expendable because the Sox had a surplus of center field prospects, led by Brian Anderson (now trying to make it as a pitcher in the Royals' organization).
"Usually while fishing, an angler does not leave fish to find fish,'' Trager writes. "The first rule of baseball then may be not to get rid of a good player to take a chance on an unproven player.''
Williams certainly has done that more than a few times. He's also habitually raided his farm system to make splashy acquisitions, perhaps the biggest of those being the deal for Peavy at the trading deadline last July.
One of the reasons that was such a shocking move was that the White Sox were already in fairly decent shape in regards to starting pitching. They had just gone to the 2008 playoffs behind a cast including Mark Buehrle, John Danks, Gavin Floyd and Clayton Richard, and had starting pitchers coming, most notably Daniel Hudson.
But Williams decided that Peavy was a must-have commodity, ignoring a few facts in picking him up. The first was that Peavy was on the disabled list at the time, not taking regular turns in the Padres' rotation. The second was that he had built his statistics based in Petco Park and the NL West, the best place in the majors for a pitcher. The third was that U.S. Cellular Field is a hitter's park, an especially tough place for any pitcher to dominate.
Williams also concluded that with a corps of Peavy, Buehrle, Danks and Floyd the White Sox would be able to win 90-plus games and compete against the best teams in the American League. This looks like a poorly played hand, in part because the salaries of Peavy and newly acquired center fielder Alex Rios took away his off-season flexibility to complete the roster. He wound up trading for the relatively affordable guys he could get (Juan Pierre and Mark Teahen) rather than pursuing the impact hitter or two that was needed.
Peavy may eventually get himself in a groove, although the six runs in six innings against the Angels on Thursday night was a step backward. But will it matter that the Sox have Peavy? It doesn't appear they have a 25-man roster to compete against the Twins and Tigers. But Williams created a ton of buzz with the Peavy trade, allowing himself to masquerade as a master deal maker. The Padres are glad he did, but it's tough to find any benefits for the White Sox.
Phil wants everyone to watch the proof of his genius unfold (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/06/could-guillen-go-to-florida.html). The pieces are falling into place ... JUST LIKE HE PREDICTED AND PREDICTED AND PREDICTED AND PREDICTED.
I'm sure Indolent Reader and Sox fans would agree with Phil - definitely a good thing (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/08/your-morning-phil-sox-bullpen-beckham-quade.html) that Beckham didn't hit for half the year.
QuoteThis has been a huge developmental year for Gordon Beckham. It's far better for him to struggle and figure it out than if had just continued to hit, and his consistent success in the second half is proof that Beckham has turned a corner and should never again be in a funk like the one he was in at the start of the season.
Quote from: R-V on August 26, 2010, 12:44:57 PM
I'm sure Indolent Reader and Sox fans would agree with Phil - definitely a good thing (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/08/your-morning-phil-sox-bullpen-beckham-quade.html) that Beckham didn't hit for half the year.
QuoteThis has been a huge developmental year for Gordon Beckham. It's far better for him to struggle and figure it out than if had just continued to hit, and his consistent success in the second half is proof that Beckham has turned a corner and should never again be in a funk like the one he was in at the start of the season.
That's colossally stupid, even for Maude. Wow.
Quote from: R-V on August 26, 2010, 12:44:57 PM
I'm sure Indolent Reader and Sox fans would agree with Phil - definitely a good thing (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/08/your-morning-phil-sox-bullpen-beckham-quade.html) that Beckham didn't hit for half the year.
QuoteThis has been a huge developmental year for Gordon Beckham. It's far better for him to struggle and figure it out than if had just continued to hit, and his consistent success in the second half is proof that Beckham has turned a corner and should never again be in a funk like the one he was in at the start of the season.
That's why I'm ok with Z struggling early this year. Maude knows what's up
Quote from: PANK! on August 26, 2010, 12:45:51 PM
Quote from: R-V on August 26, 2010, 12:44:57 PM
I'm sure Indolent Reader and Sox fans would agree with Phil - definitely a good thing (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/08/your-morning-phil-sox-bullpen-beckham-quade.html) that Beckham didn't hit for half the year.
QuoteThis has been a huge developmental year for Gordon Beckham. It's far better for him to struggle and figure it out than if had just continued to hit, and his consistent success in the second half is proof that Beckham has turned a corner and should never again be in a funk like the one he was in at the start of the season.
That's colossally stupid, even for Maude. Wow.
You don't get it. Now Beckham will never suck to start out a season ever again.
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 26, 2010, 12:58:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on August 26, 2010, 12:45:51 PM
Quote from: R-V on August 26, 2010, 12:44:57 PM
I'm sure Indolent Reader and Sox fans would agree with Phil - definitely a good thing (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/08/your-morning-phil-sox-bullpen-beckham-quade.html) that Beckham didn't hit for half the year.
QuoteThis has been a huge developmental year for Gordon Beckham. It's far better for him to struggle and figure it out than if had just continued to hit, and his consistent success in the second half is proof that Beckham has turned a corner and should never again be in a funk like the one he was in at the start of the season.
That's colossally stupid, even for Maude. Wow.
You don't get it. Now Beckham will never suck to start out a season ever again.
Dumb. Just dumb.
Quote from: Yeti on August 26, 2010, 12:57:24 PM
Quote from: R-V on August 26, 2010, 12:44:57 PM
I'm sure Indolent Reader and Sox fans would agree with Phil - definitely a good thing (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/08/your-morning-phil-sox-bullpen-beckham-quade.html) that Beckham didn't hit for half the year.
QuoteThis has been a huge developmental year for Gordon Beckham. It's far better for him to struggle and figure it out than if had just continued to hit, and his consistent success in the second half is proof that Beckham has turned a corner and should never again be in a funk like the one he was in at the start of the season.
That's why I'm ok with Z struggling early this year. Maude knows what's up
Fuck. The Cubs traded Fontenot as he was on the cusp of his inevitable run of 80 HR seasons.
Phil is a talentless hack - but he's a
productive talentless hack. (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/10/your-morning-phil-sandberg-hamiltoncano-granderson.html)
QuoteSpeaking of Granderson, I still wish the Cubs had found a way to trade for him last winter -- but I can see why Hendry considered Starlin Castro far too high of a price to pay. Granderson's all-around play remains a pleasure to watch. He hit only .247 in his first season with the Yankees, which he considered a disappointment, but it was a productive .247 (OPS: 792) and his work with hitting coach Kevin Long helped him become more of a factor against left-handed pitchers (.234/.646 OPS, compared to .253/.866 against right-handed pitchers).
Granderson is a player who can't really be measured by the raw numbers. He contributes with his range in center fielder and his ability to run bases, along with amazing leadership in the clubhouse. I once wrote that he should be the next commissioner of baseball, and he hasn't done anything since to make me regret it.
Quote from: R-V on October 21, 2010, 08:28:33 AM
Phil is a talentless hack - but he's a productive talentless hack. (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/10/your-morning-phil-sandberg-hamiltoncano-granderson.html)
QuoteSpeaking of Granderson, I still wish the Cubs had found a way to trade for him last winter -- but I can see why Hendry considered Starlin Castro far too high of a price to pay. Granderson's all-around play remains a pleasure to watch. He hit only .247 in his first season with the Yankees, which he considered a disappointment, but it was a productive .247 (OPS: 792) and his work with hitting coach Kevin Long helped him become more of a factor against left-handed pitchers (.234/.646 OPS, compared to .253/.866 against right-handed pitchers).
Granderson is a player who can't really be measured by the raw numbers. He contributes with his range in center fielder and his ability to run bases, along with amazing leadership in the clubhouse. I once wrote that he should be the next commissioner of baseball, and he hasn't done anything since to make me regret it.
I know I'm stupid for even asking since it's Phil Rogers, but what could Granderson do to make Rogers regret making that idiotic statement?
Quote from: R-V on October 21, 2010, 08:28:33 AM
Phil is a talentless hack - but he's a productive talentless hack. (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/10/your-morning-phil-sandberg-hamiltoncano-granderson.html)
QuoteSpeaking of Granderson, I still wish the Cubs had found a way to trade for him last winter -- but I can see why Hendry considered Starlin Castro far too high of a price to pay. Granderson's all-around play remains a pleasure to watch. He hit only .247 in his first season with the Yankees, which he considered a disappointment, but it was a productive .247 (OPS: 792) and his work with hitting coach Kevin Long helped him become more of a factor against left-handed pitchers (.234/.646 OPS, compared to .253/.866 against right-handed pitchers).
Granderson is a player who can't really be measured by the raw numbers. He contributes with his range in center fielder and his ability to run bases, along with amazing leadership in the clubhouse. I once wrote that he should be the next commissioner of baseball, and he hasn't done anything since to make me regret it.
Son of a bitch. He just can't help himself and say, "Granderson had a mediocre season offensively but remains an excellent defensive centerfielder and a threat to steal bases. He's also a great guy, beloved by teammates and I think he'd be a great baseball executive some day."
Quote from: R-V on October 21, 2010, 08:28:33 AM
Phil is a talentless hack - but he's a productive talentless hack. (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/10/your-morning-phil-sandberg-hamiltoncano-granderson.html)
QuoteSpeaking of Granderson, I still wish the Cubs had found a way to trade for him last winter -- but I can see why Hendry considered Starlin Castro far too high of a price to pay. Granderson's all-around play remains a pleasure to watch. He hit only .247 in his first season with the Yankees, which he considered a disappointment, but it was a productive .247 (OPS: 792) and his work with hitting coach Kevin Long helped him become more of a factor against left-handed pitchers (.234/.646 OPS, compared to .253/.866 against right-handed pitchers).
Sounds like a variation on Yellon's theory of Not the Best Player, but the Right Player®
Also, a .646 OPS is only "more of a factor" in the same sense that getting punched in the taint five times is better than getting punched in the taint six times.
Quote from: Eli on October 21, 2010, 09:15:47 AM
Quote from: R-V on October 21, 2010, 08:28:33 AM
Phil is a talentless hack - but he's a productive talentless hack. (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/10/your-morning-phil-sandberg-hamiltoncano-granderson.html)
QuoteSpeaking of Granderson, I still wish the Cubs had found a way to trade for him last winter -- but I can see why Hendry considered Starlin Castro far too high of a price to pay. Granderson's all-around play remains a pleasure to watch. He hit only .247 in his first season with the Yankees, which he considered a disappointment, but it was a productive .247 (OPS: 792) and his work with hitting coach Kevin Long helped him become more of a factor against left-handed pitchers (.234/.646 OPS, compared to .253/.866 against right-handed pitchers).
Sounds like a variation on Yellon's theory of Not the Best Player, but the Right Player®Also, a .646 OPS is only "more of a factor" in the same sense that getting punched in the taint five times is better than getting punched in the taint six times.
I see that on a t-shirt* worn by Visor Guy in front of the foul pole within a couple years.
*
Proceeds go to to Darwin Barney's battle for anal fistula
Quote from: PANK! on October 21, 2010, 11:32:25 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 21, 2010, 09:15:47 AM
Quote from: R-V on October 21, 2010, 08:28:33 AM
Phil is a talentless hack - but he's a productive talentless hack. (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/10/your-morning-phil-sandberg-hamiltoncano-granderson.html)
QuoteSpeaking of Granderson, I still wish the Cubs had found a way to trade for him last winter -- but I can see why Hendry considered Starlin Castro far too high of a price to pay. Granderson's all-around play remains a pleasure to watch. He hit only .247 in his first season with the Yankees, which he considered a disappointment, but it was a productive .247 (OPS: 792) and his work with hitting coach Kevin Long helped him become more of a factor against left-handed pitchers (.234/.646 OPS, compared to .253/.866 against right-handed pitchers).
Sounds like a variation on Yellon's theory of Not the Best Player, but the Right Player®Also, a .646 OPS is only "more of a factor" in the same sense that getting punched in the taint five times is better than getting punched in the taint six times.
I see that on a t-shirt* worn by Visor Guy in front of the foul pole within a couple years.
*Proceeds go to to Darwin Barney's battle for anal fistula
Why is Darwin Barney battling FOR anal fistulas? Has he been bought out by Big Fistula?
Quote from: R-V on October 21, 2010, 11:49:22 AM
Quote from: PANK! on October 21, 2010, 11:32:25 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 21, 2010, 09:15:47 AM
Quote from: R-V on October 21, 2010, 08:28:33 AM
Phil is a talentless hack - but he's a productive talentless hack. (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/10/your-morning-phil-sandberg-hamiltoncano-granderson.html)
QuoteSpeaking of Granderson, I still wish the Cubs had found a way to trade for him last winter -- but I can see why Hendry considered Starlin Castro far too high of a price to pay. Granderson's all-around play remains a pleasure to watch. He hit only .247 in his first season with the Yankees, which he considered a disappointment, but it was a productive .247 (OPS: 792) and his work with hitting coach Kevin Long helped him become more of a factor against left-handed pitchers (.234/.646 OPS, compared to .253/.866 against right-handed pitchers).
Sounds like a variation on Yellon's theory of Not the Best Player, but the Right Player®Also, a .646 OPS is only "more of a factor" in the same sense that getting punched in the taint five times is better than getting punched in the taint six times.
I see that on a t-shirt* worn by Visor Guy in front of the foul pole within a couple years.
*Proceeds go to to Darwin Barney's battle for anal fistula
Why is Darwin Barney battling FOR anal fistulas? Has he been bought out by Big Fistula?
Anal fistulas might be painful enough to make you forget Darwin Barney.
How do you know something won't happen? When Phil Rogers cites Barry Rozner: (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/your-morning-phil-crawford-damon-mitchell.html)
Quote1. I'm not sure why, but it's amazing to me that so many people talk about the White Sox without considering their payroll budget. Or maybe the problem lies with me because I look at the numbers as hard and fast, and then find myself surprised when Jerry Reinsdorf and Ken Williams throw money at guys like Albert Belle, Alex Rios, Jake Peavy, Edwin Jackson and Manny Ramirez.
Anyway, I bring this up because I'm hearing a lot of Paul Konerko talk, and on talk radio this morning heard my friend Barry Rozner say that if the Sox don't sign Konerko they might shift their focus to landing another prominent free agent, specifically Carl Crawford.
If only Phil Rogers can start citing Rozner citing an Alex Kaseberg joke.
Phil is worried that mean internet bullies like Yeti gave the Cy Young to Felix (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/22/did-bullies-give-the-cy-young-award-to-felix-hernandez/):
QuoteI wonder how much of it was bullying on the Internet. There were a lot of columns written in September saying no one should be stupid enough not to vote for Felix. Maybe that's what happened, but I hope not.
Quote from: R-V on November 22, 2010, 11:37:44 AM
Phil is worried that mean internet bullies like Yeti gave the Cy Young to Felix (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/22/did-bullies-give-the-cy-young-award-to-felix-hernandez/):
QuoteI wonder how much of it was bullying on the Internet. There were a lot of columns written in September saying no one should be stupid enough not to vote for Felix. Maybe that's what happened, but I hope not.
I was really ready to be butthurt but that Cy Young voting. Luckily, the sportswriters did the right thing.
Quote
Surely somebody else out there would like to have Jeter, even at an admittedly elevated price. I thought the Tigers might get involved, as they have a ton of free-agent flexibility and would be applauded for adding the Michigan native, but they just re-signed Jhonny Peralta. The White Sox and Cubs don't appear to have a need, given the 2010 performances of Alexei Ramirez and Starlin Castro.
What about the St. Louis Cardinals? What about using Jeter to bring the Pujols negotiations to a head? Here's a two-prong approach: Make a sincere offer to Pujols (essentially the best the Cardinals can/will make) and see if he is going to stay beyond 2011. If the answer is no, then bid to pry Jeter away from the Yankees. If you are successful, you chase an NL pennant with Pujols and Jeter next year and then build contenders around Adam Wainwright, Chris Carpenter, Yadier Molina, Matt Holliday and Jeter. The 2011 payroll would be bloated unless the Jeter deal was backloaded but that money could be repaid by not reinvesting all of the Pujols money the next few years. Would there be a better way to defuse the backlash from losing Pujols?
Build a team beyond 2011 with Derek Jeter?
Quote from: Brownie on November 22, 2010, 11:58:29 AM
Quote
Surely somebody else out there would like to have Jeter, even at an admittedly elevated price. I thought the Tigers might get involved, as they have a ton of free-agent flexibility and would be applauded for adding the Michigan native, but they just re-signed Jhonny Peralta. The White Sox and Cubs don't appear to have a need, given the 2010 performances of Alexei Ramirez and Starlin Castro.
What about the St. Louis Cardinals? What about using Jeter to bring the Pujols negotiations to a head? Here's a two-prong approach: Make a sincere offer to Pujols (essentially the best the Cardinals can/will make) and see if he is going to stay beyond 2011. If the answer is no, then bid to pry Jeter away from the Yankees. If you are successful, you chase an NL pennant with Pujols and Jeter next year and then build contenders around Adam Wainwright, Chris Carpenter, Yadier Molina, Matt Holliday and Jeter. The 2011 payroll would be bloated unless the Jeter deal was backloaded but that money could be repaid by not reinvesting all of the Pujols money the next few years. Would there be a better way to defuse the backlash from losing Pujols?
Build a team beyond 2011 with Derek Jeter?
I, for one, support this level of duncitude.
How about this for Major League Dumb:
(http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2011/03/your-morning-phil-marmol-milledge-marcum.html)
QuoteThe Rangers have spent the spring dealing with the question of whether to start Neftali Feliz or leave him as their closer. The Cubs' Opening Day starter is going to be Ryan Dempster, who once was their closer. So it got me thinking: What about Carlos Marmol?
Could the Cubs' closer ever be transformed into a starter?
I doubt that Mike Quade or Marmol would ever try to fix something that's not broken, but down the road it's something that a team in transition should be open to at least considering. Marmol is without question the Cubs' best pitcher -- just ask the hitters who have batted .150 off him the last three seasons -- and the Cubs have at least two other possible closers on their 25-man roster in Kerry Wood and Andrew Cashner. Chris Carpenter, who will open the season at Triple-A, also has closer potential.
Cashner is likely to open the season in the starting rotation but he spent much of his college career as a closer at TCU. He has front-of-the-rotation stuff but figures to take some lumps as he works to get established. There are scouts who believe his fastball/slider combination -- like Marmol's -- could play well in the bullpen.
And who knows with Wood? He's been great this spring and figures to be solid as a set-up man. If his health holds up, it wouldn't be a reach to move him back into the closer's role he filled in 2008, when the Cubs won 97 games.
How about Marmol as a starter? He doesn't fit the mind's eye in that role, as he goes a million-miles-an-hour in the ninth inning. But he put together a long track record as a starter in the Cubs' farm system before making his big-league debut in 2006, when he started 13 games for a Dusty Baker team that used 15 starters.
Marmol wasn't effective in that role, turning in a 6.08 ERA while walking 59 in 77 innings. A converted catcher, he had been a full-time starter since 2004 and never had a problem handling the workload. His work in the big-league bullpen suggests that he could be a 200-inning starter, if he was ever called upon.
If you're going to be a starter in the Major Leagues with 2 pitches, those two pitches better be Sandy Koufax's fastball and curve*.
*also applicable for Nolan Ryan
Quote from: Brownie on March 18, 2011, 10:35:57 AM
How about this for Major League Dumb:
(http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2011/03/your-morning-phil-marmol-milledge-marcum.html)
QuoteThe Rangers have spent the spring dealing with the question of whether to start Neftali Feliz or leave him as their closer. The Cubs' Opening Day starter is going to be Ryan Dempster, who once was their closer. So it got me thinking: What about Carlos Marmol?
Could the Cubs' closer ever be transformed into a starter?
I doubt that Mike Quade or Marmol would ever try to fix something that's not broken, but down the road it's something that a team in transition should be open to at least considering. Marmol is without question the Cubs' best pitcher -- just ask the hitters who have batted .150 off him the last three seasons -- and the Cubs have at least two other possible closers on their 25-man roster in Kerry Wood and Andrew Cashner. Chris Carpenter, who will open the season at Triple-A, also has closer potential.
Cashner is likely to open the season in the starting rotation but he spent much of his college career as a closer at TCU. He has front-of-the-rotation stuff but figures to take some lumps as he works to get established. There are scouts who believe his fastball/slider combination -- like Marmol's -- could play well in the bullpen.
And who knows with Wood? He's been great this spring and figures to be solid as a set-up man. If his health holds up, it wouldn't be a reach to move him back into the closer's role he filled in 2008, when the Cubs won 97 games.
How about Marmol as a starter? He doesn't fit the mind's eye in that role, as he goes a million-miles-an-hour in the ninth inning. But he put together a long track record as a starter in the Cubs' farm system before making his big-league debut in 2006, when he started 13 games for a Dusty Baker team that used 15 starters.
Marmol wasn't effective in that role, turning in a 6.08 ERA while walking 59 in 77 innings. A converted catcher, he had been a full-time starter since 2004 and never had a problem handling the workload. His work in the big-league bullpen suggests that he could be a 200-inning starter, if he was ever called upon.
I want to fully understand why he is allowed, nay paid American dollars, to spew his uninformed opinions in a major (arguably) publication on a sport he clearly has never watched. It blows my fucking mind.
Quote from: Slaky on March 18, 2011, 12:40:59 PM
Quote from: Brownie on March 18, 2011, 10:35:57 AM
How about this for Major League Dumb:
(http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2011/03/your-morning-phil-marmol-milledge-marcum.html)
QuoteThe Rangers have spent the spring dealing with the question of whether to start Neftali Feliz or leave him as their closer. The Cubs' Opening Day starter is going to be Ryan Dempster, who once was their closer. So it got me thinking: What about Carlos Marmol?
Could the Cubs' closer ever be transformed into a starter?
I doubt that Mike Quade or Marmol would ever try to fix something that's not broken, but down the road it's something that a team in transition should be open to at least considering. Marmol is without question the Cubs' best pitcher -- just ask the hitters who have batted .150 off him the last three seasons -- and the Cubs have at least two other possible closers on their 25-man roster in Kerry Wood and Andrew Cashner. Chris Carpenter, who will open the season at Triple-A, also has closer potential.
Cashner is likely to open the season in the starting rotation but he spent much of his college career as a closer at TCU. He has front-of-the-rotation stuff but figures to take some lumps as he works to get established. There are scouts who believe his fastball/slider combination -- like Marmol's -- could play well in the bullpen.
And who knows with Wood? He's been great this spring and figures to be solid as a set-up man. If his health holds up, it wouldn't be a reach to move him back into the closer's role he filled in 2008, when the Cubs won 97 games.
How about Marmol as a starter? He doesn't fit the mind's eye in that role, as he goes a million-miles-an-hour in the ninth inning. But he put together a long track record as a starter in the Cubs' farm system before making his big-league debut in 2006, when he started 13 games for a Dusty Baker team that used 15 starters.
Marmol wasn't effective in that role, turning in a 6.08 ERA while walking 59 in 77 innings. A converted catcher, he had been a full-time starter since 2004 and never had a problem handling the workload. His work in the big-league bullpen suggests that he could be a 200-inning starter, if he was ever called upon.
I want to fully understand why he is allowed, nay paid American dollars, to spew his uninformed opinions in a major (arguably) publication on a sport he clearly has never watched. It blows my fucking mind.
This article makes sense to me. He asks "Why not use Marmol as a starter?" And then tells us that when Marmol was tried in that role the minors he was a complete disaster. Apparently that is why not.
Where the hell is SKO?
http://www.desipio.com/?p=3485
QuoteBut like Cyndi Lauper says, if you want to rock and roll, you have to let your freak flag fly. And sometimes — like peace — you have to give Quade a chance.
Phil just broke my mind.
BTW... What mouthbreather site linked to Andy's post?
The comments on it are quite thoughtful.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on March 18, 2011, 06:14:23 PM
BTW... What mouthbreather site linked to Andy's post?
The comments on it are quite thoughtful.
I'm assuming it's all of Huey's meatball friends.
(http://i.imgur.com/R0t3w.jpg)
Oh my god.
QuoteBut like Cyndi Lauper says, if you want to rock and roll, you have to let your freak flag fly. And sometimes — like peace — you have to give Quade a chance.
What.
The.
Fuck?
Quote from: PenPho on March 18, 2011, 06:27:08 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on March 18, 2011, 06:14:23 PM
BTW... What mouthbreather site linked to Andy's post?
The comments on it are quite thoughtful.
I'm assuming it's all of Huey's meatball friends.
Not sure I agree with you a hundred percent on your police work there, Lou.
That is to say there were already 7 comments when I linked to it.
Quote from: PANK! on March 19, 2011, 07:33:41 AM
Quote from: PenPho on March 18, 2011, 06:27:08 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on March 18, 2011, 06:14:23 PM
BTW... What mouthbreather site linked to Andy's post?
The comments on it are quite thoughtful.
I'm assuming it's all of Huey's meatball friends.
Not sure I agree with you a hundred percent on your police work there, Lou.
That is to say there were already 7 comments when I linked to it.
What really matters is that you took this literally.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on March 19, 2011, 09:44:58 AM
Quote from: PANK! on March 19, 2011, 07:33:41 AM
Quote from: PenPho on March 18, 2011, 06:27:08 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on March 18, 2011, 06:14:23 PM
BTW... What mouthbreather site linked to Andy's post?
The comments on it are quite thoughtful.
I'm assuming it's all of Huey's meatball friends.
Not sure I agree with you a hundred percent on your police work there, Lou.
That is to say there were already 7 comments when I linked to it.
What really matters is that you took this literally.
"That's Our Huey."
Quote from: Bort on March 19, 2011, 01:13:24 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on March 19, 2011, 09:44:58 AM
Quote from: PANK! on March 19, 2011, 07:33:41 AM
Quote from: PenPho on March 18, 2011, 06:27:08 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on March 18, 2011, 06:14:23 PM
BTW... What mouthbreather site linked to Andy's post?
The comments on it are quite thoughtful.
I'm assuming it's all of Huey's meatball friends.
Not sure I agree with you a hundred percent on your police work there, Lou.
That is to say there were already 7 comments when I linked to it.
What really matters is that you took this literally.
"That's Our Huey."
I know. It was just an excuse for Pen to throw down one of Morph's finest works to date.
My 5 year old daughter, by the way, happened to catch it and, once she sort of comprehended what it was, had a genuine belly-laugh.
THIS IS WHAT YOU GET FOR IGNORING MY SAGE ADVICE, IDIOTS (http://mobile.chicagotribune.com/p.p?m=b&a=rp&id=696401&postId=696401&postUserId=54&sessionToken=&catId=6957&curAbsIndex=0&resultsUrl=DID%3D1%26DFCL%3D1000%26DSB%3Drank%2523desc%26DBFQ%3DuserId%253A54%26DFC%3Dcat1%252Ccat2%252Ccat3%26DL.w%3D%26DL.d%3D10%26DQ%3DsectionId%253A6957%26DPS%3D0%26DPL%3D3)