Wack away boys.
This 27-year-old prospect has some serious shit.
Quote from: Fork on August 18, 2013, 12:53:13 PM
Wack away boys.
This 27-year-old prospect has some serious shit.
Can a guy with 65 major-league starts still be considered a prospect?
Quote from: Eli on August 18, 2013, 01:50:24 PM
Quote from: Fork on August 18, 2013, 12:53:13 PM
Wack away boys.
This 27-year-old prospect has some serious shit.
Can a guy with 65 major-league starts still be considered a prospect?
I assume that, despite making no reference whatsoever to hammer pants or Ron Jeremy or "McStiff", Fork intended "27-year-old prospect" as something of a joke.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 18, 2013, 05:14:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 18, 2013, 01:50:24 PM
Quote from: Fork on August 18, 2013, 12:53:13 PM
Wack away boys.
This 27-year-old prospect has some serious shit.
Can a guy with 65 major-league starts still be considered a prospect?
I assume that, despite making no reference whatsoever to hammer pants or Ron Jeremy or "McStiff", Fork intended "27-year-old prospect" as something of a joke.
Well, dang.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 18, 2013, 05:14:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 18, 2013, 01:50:24 PM
Quote from: Fork on August 18, 2013, 12:53:13 PM
Wack away boys.
This 27-year-old prospect has some serious shit.
Can a guy with 65 major-league starts still be considered a prospect?
I assume that, despite making no reference whatsoever to hammer pants or Ron Jeremy or "McStiff", Fork intended "27-year-old prospect" as something of a joke.
Did it have the cadence of a joke, though?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 18, 2013, 10:39:24 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 18, 2013, 05:14:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 18, 2013, 01:50:24 PM
Quote from: Fork on August 18, 2013, 12:53:13 PM
Wack away boys.
This 27-year-old prospect has some serious shit.
Can a guy with 65 major-league starts still be considered a prospect?
I assume that, despite making no reference whatsoever to hammer pants or Ron Jeremy or "McStiff", Fork intended "27-year-old prospect" as something of a joke.
Did it have the cadence of a joke, though?
Everyone seems to be laughing now.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 18, 2013, 05:14:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 18, 2013, 01:50:24 PM
Quote from: Fork on August 18, 2013, 12:53:13 PM
Wack away boys.
This 27-year-old prospect has some serious shit.
Can a guy with 65 major-league starts still be considered a prospect?
I assume that, despite making no reference whatsoever to hammer pants or Ron Jeremy or "McStiff", Fork intended "27-year-old prospect" as something of a joke.
You have a problem with hammer pants?
BUMP
This thread is shit. I'm going back to the other one.
Good stuff from Beyond the Box Score about how Jake is for real. (http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/7/25/5932013/Jake-Arrieta-success-chicago-cubs)
More talk about the cutter, but a lot more too.
Freakin' Coors Field.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 06, 2014, 10:36:07 PM
Freakin' Coors Field.
Eh, Jake was due for a shitter. Dude had been pitching out of his mind. By the time he reached the inning in which he gave up 7 hits and was pulled--the 6th, I think--his season ERA had worked its way down to 2.05.
Now that he's got that out of the way, expect him to drink the blood of Milwaukee's non-believers next week, or something.
Quote from: PANK! on August 07, 2014, 07:25:20 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 06, 2014, 10:36:07 PM
Freakin' Coors Field.
Eh, Jake was due for a shitter. Dude had been pitching out of his mind. By the time he reached the inning in which he gave up 7 hits and was pulled--the 6th, I think--his season ERA had worked its way down to 2.05.
Now that he's got that out of the way, expect him to drink the blood of Milwaukee's non-believers next week, or something.
Cubs fans like this guy are why I think I hate Cubs fans most of all...
https://twitter.com/paul1994loan/status/497212840860590080
Quote from: @paul1994loanQuote from: @BleacherNationArrieta's ERA for the game was 16.20. His xFIP was 3.54.
@BleacherNation why did renteria let him get drilled so badly is my q
https://twitter.com/paul1994loan/status/497208726319689728
Quote from: @paul1994loan@Cubs_Chick mgr is an idiot tonight
lets hope doesnt crush jakes psychi
I feel like meatball sports fans who sputter stupid shit about DESE BUMS WHO'S CELERIES I PAY can be found in every fan base.
But these middle-aged suburban dad milquetoasts, who treat the major leagues like it's tee-ball and spend their days fretting about players' fee-fees and rooting for the undersized kid on the field to just have a fun time out there, seem like Cubs fandom's own very special breed of irritating.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 07, 2014, 10:33:32 AM
Quote from: PANK! on August 07, 2014, 07:25:20 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 06, 2014, 10:36:07 PM
Freakin' Coors Field.
Eh, Jake was due for a shitter. Dude had been pitching out of his mind. By the time he reached the inning in which he gave up 7 hits and was pulled--the 6th, I think--his season ERA had worked its way down to 2.05.
Now that he's got that out of the way, expect him to drink the blood of Milwaukee's non-believers next week, or something.
Cubs fans like this guy are why I think I hate Cubs fans most of all...
https://twitter.com/paul1994loan/status/497212840860590080
Quote from: @paul1994loanQuote from: @BleacherNationArrieta's ERA for the game was 16.20. His xFIP was 3.54.
@BleacherNation why did renteria let him get drilled so badly is my q
https://twitter.com/paul1994loan/status/497208726319689728
Quote from: @paul1994loan@Cubs_Chick mgr is an idiot tonight
lets hope doesnt crush jakes psychi
I feel like meatball sports fans who sputter stupid shit about DESE BUMS WHO'S CELERIES I PAY can be found in every fan base.
But these middle-aged suburban dad milquetoasts, who treat the major leagues like it's tee-ball and spend their days fretting about players' fee-fees and rooting for the undersized kid on the field to just have a fun time out there, seem like Cubs fandom's own very special breed of irritating.
HEY!
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 07, 2014, 10:33:32 AM
Quote from: PANK! on August 07, 2014, 07:25:20 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 06, 2014, 10:36:07 PM
Freakin' Coors Field.
Eh, Jake was due for a shitter. Dude had been pitching out of his mind. By the time he reached the inning in which he gave up 7 hits and was pulled--the 6th, I think--his season ERA had worked its way down to 2.05.
Now that he's got that out of the way, expect him to drink the blood of Milwaukee's non-believers next week, or something.
Cubs fans like this guy are why I think I hate Cubs fans most of all...
https://twitter.com/paul1994loan/status/497212840860590080
Quote from: @paul1994loanQuote from: @BleacherNationArrieta's ERA for the game was 16.20. His xFIP was 3.54.
@BleacherNation why did renteria let him get drilled so badly is my q
https://twitter.com/paul1994loan/status/497208726319689728
Quote from: @paul1994loan@Cubs_Chick mgr is an idiot tonight
lets hope doesnt crush jakes psychi
I feel like meatball sports fans who sputter stupid shit about DESE BUMS WHO'S CELERIES I PAY can be found in every fan base.
But these middle-aged suburban dad milquetoasts, who treat the major leagues like it's tee-ball and spend their days fretting about players' fee-fees and rooting for the undersized kid on the field to just have a fun time out there, seem like Cubs fandom's own very special breed of irritating.
Because this was the first time in Jake Arietta's life that he ever got rocked.
Bump
Quote from: SKO on September 16, 2014, 10:13:31 PM
Bump
Not sure which I'm more disappointed in not seeing - Arietta get the no-hitter or Szczur splattering himself on the outfield wall.
Quote from: Fork on September 17, 2014, 08:55:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 16, 2014, 10:13:31 PM
Bump
Not sure which I'm more disappointed in not seeing - Arietta get the no-hitter or Szczur splattering himself on the outfield wall.
Why do you hate Szczur? Seems an odd person to have an opinion about.
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 09:01:56 AM
Quote from: Fork on September 17, 2014, 08:55:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 16, 2014, 10:13:31 PM
Bump
Not sure which I'm more disappointed in not seeing - Arietta get the no-hitter or Szczur splattering himself on the outfield wall.
Why do you hate Szczur? Seems an odd person to have an opinion about.
Why do you assume he hates a player just because he wants to see him splattered? Could be a perfectly lovely individual but I'm with Fork here.
Quote from: PANK! on September 17, 2014, 09:15:12 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 09:01:56 AM
Quote from: Fork on September 17, 2014, 08:55:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 16, 2014, 10:13:31 PM
Bump
Not sure which I'm more disappointed in not seeing - Arietta get the no-hitter or Szczur splattering himself on the outfield wall.
Why do you hate Szczur? Seems an odd person to have an opinion about.
Why do you assume he hates a player just because he wants to see him splattered? Could be a perfectly lovely individual but I'm with Fork here.
I'm pretty ambivalent about Szczur. Not as ambivalent about people splattering.
Quote from: Fork on September 17, 2014, 09:19:49 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 17, 2014, 09:15:12 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 09:01:56 AM
Quote from: Fork on September 17, 2014, 08:55:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 16, 2014, 10:13:31 PM
Bump
Not sure which I'm more disappointed in not seeing - Arietta get the no-hitter or Szczur splattering himself on the outfield wall.
Why do you hate Szczur? Seems an odd person to have an opinion about.
Why do you assume he hates a player just because he wants to see him splattered? Could be a perfectly lovely individual but I'm with Fork here.
I'm pretty ambivalent about Szczur. Not as ambivalent about people splattering.
Hendry drafted him. He's not one of our guys.
Quote from: PANK! on September 17, 2014, 09:15:12 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 09:01:56 AM
Quote from: Fork on September 17, 2014, 08:55:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 16, 2014, 10:13:31 PM
Bump
Not sure which I'm more disappointed in not seeing - Arietta get the no-hitter or Szczur splattering himself on the outfield wall.
Why do you hate Szczur? Seems an odd person to have an opinion about.
He's a tryhard no-bat fast guy. Seems like a perfect guy to splatter on the wall.
Why do you assume he hates a player just because he wants to see him splattered? Could be a perfectly lovely individual but I'm with Fork here.
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
When one finally does, I better not see you enjoying yourseelf.
Quote from: Fork on September 17, 2014, 11:44:30 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
When one finally does, I better not see you enjoying yourseelf.
Deal.
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
If splattering outfielders is what you're after, the White Sox are pleased to offer the amazing Adam Eaton for your amusement. Running into walls in a single, tardy bound!
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 17, 2014, 03:17:51 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
If splattering outfielders is what you're after, the White Sox are pleased to offer the amazing Adam Eaton for your amusement. Running into walls in a single, tardy bound!
I'm totally on board with that.
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 03:45:10 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 17, 2014, 03:17:51 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
If splattering outfielders is what you're after, the White Sox are pleased to offer the amazing Adam Eaton for your amusement. Running into walls in a single, tardy bound!
I'm totally on board with that.
I hate Adam Eaton and wish ill upon him
Quote from: Slaky on September 17, 2014, 03:51:34 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 03:45:10 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 17, 2014, 03:17:51 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
If splattering outfielders is what you're after, the White Sox are pleased to offer the amazing Adam Eaton for your amusement. Running into walls in a single, tardy bound!
I'm totally on board with that.
I hate Adam Eaton and wish ill upon him
He's a modern day Aaron Rowand.
Quote from: Slaky on September 17, 2014, 03:51:34 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 03:45:10 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 17, 2014, 03:17:51 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
If splattering outfielders is what you're after, the White Sox are pleased to offer the amazing Adam Eaton for your amusement. Running into walls in a single, tardy bound!
I'm totally on board with that.
I hate Adam Eaton and wish ill upon him
Whatever happened to Adam Eaton Pussy?
Quote from: SKO on September 17, 2014, 03:55:21 PM
Quote from: Slaky on September 17, 2014, 03:51:34 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 03:45:10 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 17, 2014, 03:17:51 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
If splattering outfielders is what you're after, the White Sox are pleased to offer the amazing Adam Eaton for your amusement. Running into walls in a single, tardy bound!
I'm totally on board with that.
I hate Adam Eaton and wish ill upon him
Whatever happened to Adam Eaton Pussy?
Last known post (http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?topic=4912.msg136791#msg136791)
Real murderer's row of commenters on that page.
Quote from: PenFoe on September 17, 2014, 04:13:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 17, 2014, 03:55:21 PM
Quote from: Slaky on September 17, 2014, 03:51:34 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 03:45:10 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 17, 2014, 03:17:51 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 17, 2014, 10:48:05 AM
No. Unless it's Matt Murton, who couldn't run fast enough to splatter on impact, I don't want to see Cubs outfielders splatter on the wall.
If splattering outfielders is what you're after, the White Sox are pleased to offer the amazing Adam Eaton for your amusement. Running into walls in a single, tardy bound!
I'm totally on board with that.
I hate Adam Eaton and wish ill upon him
Whatever happened to Adam Eaton Pussy?
Last known post (http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?topic=4912.msg136791#msg136791)
Real murderer's row of commenters on that page.
Indeed
Assuming he's done after 7 scoreless, Bump.
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:06:11 PM
Assuming he's done after 7 scoreless, Bump.
He's nails.
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 08, 2015, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:06:11 PM
Assuming he's done after 7 scoreless, Bump.
He's nails.
Strop also looks pretty awesome. What a great trade. 3 months of Scott Feldman.
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:13:29 PM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 08, 2015, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:06:11 PM
Assuming he's done after 7 scoreless, Bump.
He's nails.
Strop also looks pretty awesome. What a great trade. 3 months of Scott Feldman.
I think he's the actual ace of the staff. His stuff is just so good.
Quote from: Eli on April 08, 2015, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:13:29 PM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 08, 2015, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:06:11 PM
Assuming he's done after 7 scoreless, Bump.
He's nails.
Strop also looks pretty awesome. What a great trade. 3 months of Scott Feldman.
I think he's the actual ace of the staff. His stuff is just so good.
I'd like to see him repeat last year before I give him the title, but he's easily the most talented starter. I doubt Lester would argue. But if they both want to just, like, pitch really well and make it hard for me to choose I'm okay with that. #Analysis
Quote from: Eli on April 08, 2015, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:13:29 PM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 08, 2015, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:06:11 PM
Assuming he's done after 7 scoreless, Bump.
He's nails.
Strop also looks pretty awesome. What a great trade. 3 months of Scott Feldman.
I think he's the actual ace of the staff. His stuff is just so good.
Strop or Feldman?
Quote from: PenFoe on April 08, 2015, 03:26:08 PM
Quote from: Eli on April 08, 2015, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:13:29 PM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 08, 2015, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:06:11 PM
Assuming he's done after 7 scoreless, Bump.
He's nails.
Strop also looks pretty awesome. What a great trade. 3 months of Scott Feldman.
I think he's the actual ace of the staff. His stuff is just so good.
Strop or Feldman?
SKO.
Quote from: Eli on April 08, 2015, 03:28:10 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 08, 2015, 03:26:08 PM
Quote from: Eli on April 08, 2015, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:13:29 PM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 08, 2015, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 08, 2015, 03:06:11 PM
Assuming he's done after 7 scoreless, Bump.
He's nails.
Strop also looks pretty awesome. What a great trade. 3 months of Scott Feldman.
I think he's the actual ace of the staff. His stuff is just so good.
Strop or Feldman?
SKO.
All I do is take the ball every fifth day, and make sure you all agree Pen is the worst. I'm not in this for glory.
The Jake Arrieta splooge is mature like a fine cheddar.
I love watching Arrieta work. He's going to throw a no-hitter this year, you heard it here first. As long as he stays healthy. Eep.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on April 08, 2015, 05:03:23 PM
I love watching Arrieta work. He's going to throw a no-hitter this year, you heard it here first. As long as he stays healthy. Eep.
I did hear it here first, just not from you. (http://www.desipio.com/?p=5357)
Quote from: Brownie on April 08, 2015, 05:29:51 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on April 08, 2015, 05:03:23 PM
I love watching Arrieta work. He's going to throw a no-hitter this year, you heard it here first. As long as he stays healthy. Eep.
I did hear it here first, just not from you. (http://www.desipio.com/?p=5357)
I could do a lot worse than agreeing with Len. Like agreeing with Chuck, for example.
Quote from: Brownie on April 08, 2015, 05:29:51 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on April 08, 2015, 05:03:23 PM
I love watching Arrieta work. He's going to throw a no-hitter this year, you heard it here first. As long as he stays healthy. Eep.
I did hear it here first, just not from you. (http://www.desipio.com/?p=5357)
I feel like Andy had to be just messing with people with those rankings.
Since I bumped everyone else that did something awesome yesterday, guess I should bump this dude too, even though it's pretty routine at this point.
Nice to have a 1-B Ace that's been able to pick up Lester until the latter straightens his shit out.
Quote from: PANK! on April 21, 2015, 09:21:00 AM
Nice to have a #1-B Ace that's able to slot in front of Lester in a playoff series been able to pick up Lester until the latter straightens his shit out.
Best starter by far'd.
Quote from: PenFoe on April 21, 2015, 10:02:33 AM
Quote from: PANK! on April 21, 2015, 09:21:00 AM
Nice to have a #1-B Ace that's able to slot in front of Lester in a playoff series been able to pick up Lester until the latter straightens his shit out.
Best starter by far'd.
Let the record show that Pen is literally structuring the playoff rotation in April.
Quote from: PANK! on April 21, 2015, 10:04:22 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 21, 2015, 10:02:33 AM
Quote from: PANK! on April 21, 2015, 09:21:00 AM
Nice to have a #1-B Ace that's able to slot in front of Lester in a playoff series been able to pick up Lester until the latter straightens his shit out.
Best starter by far'd.
Let the record show that Pen is literally structuring the playoff rotation in April.
I haven't been able to sit down since Opening Day.
Quote from: PenFoe on April 21, 2015, 10:04:52 AM
Quote from: PANK! on April 21, 2015, 10:04:22 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 21, 2015, 10:02:33 AM
Quote from: PANK! on April 21, 2015, 09:21:00 AM
Nice to have a #1-B Ace that's able to slot in front of Lester in a playoff series been able to pick up Lester until the latter straightens his shit out.
Best starter by far'd.
Let the record show that Pen is literally structuring the playoff rotation in April.
I haven't been able to sit down since Opening Day.
And it's driving Huey insane.
Did anyone else see the exchange between Jesse of ESPNChicago and the fan who said that they should "demote Lester from ace and make Arrieta the ace and Lester have to earn it back"?
Because I laughed heartily at someone thinking "ace" is like an official team designation.
Quote from: SKO on April 21, 2015, 12:00:08 PM
Did anyone else see the exchange between Jesse of ESPNChicago and the fan who said that they should "demote Lester from ace and make Arrieta the ace and Lester have to earn it back"?
Because I laughed heartily at someone thinking "ace" is like an official team designation.
Lester's got elite QB makeup.
Quote from: SKO on April 21, 2015, 12:00:08 PM
Did anyone else see the exchange between Jesse of ESPNChicago and the fan who said that they should "demote Lester from ace and make Arrieta the ace and Lester have to earn it back"?
Because I laughed heartily at someone thinking "ace" is like an official team designation.
So there aren't any arm sleeve patches for "ace"?
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 21, 2015, 12:05:26 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 21, 2015, 12:00:08 PM
Did anyone else see the exchange between Jesse of ESPNChicago and the fan who said that they should "demote Lester from ace and make Arrieta the ace and Lester have to earn it back"?
Because I laughed heartily at someone thinking "ace" is like an official team designation.
So there aren't any arm sleeve patches for "ace"?
Intrepid reader: Rick AguileraKind of.
Quote from: Tonker on April 21, 2015, 12:22:05 PM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 21, 2015, 12:05:26 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 21, 2015, 12:00:08 PM
Did anyone else see the exchange between Jesse of ESPNChicago and the fan who said that they should "demote Lester from ace and make Arrieta the ace and Lester have to earn it back"?
Because I laughed heartily at someone thinking "ace" is like an official team designation.
So there aren't any arm sleeve patches for "ace"?
Intrepid reader: Rick Aguilera
Kind of.
The could switch contracts.
Bump for 8 IP, 10 K, 1 ER last night and a 3.00 ERA, 1.07 WHIP and 48/11 K/BB in 45.0 IP for the year.
Brett tweeted "He's the Anthony Rizzo of pitching". I like that.
That was a nails performance. Much needed while this bullpen gets put back in to place (hopefully).
Quote from: PANK! on May 13, 2015, 08:19:00 AM
That was a nails performance. Much needed while this bullpen gets put back in to place (hopefully).
I had concerns going in and he erased most of them. His FIP is now lower than his ERA. All good signs. His velocity and movement were excellent. Seems like when he gets hit, they're bleeders.
Bump
Quote from: Slaky on June 22, 2015, 08:34:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 21, 2015, 08:24:12 PM
Bump
I love when Jake does that shit.
Not to invoke the P word but Jake is the only one of the guys on this staff who I can usually tell from the first inning whether the other team even has a shot or not. The way Jake was dealing I said ballgame when Rizzo hit his homer to make it 2-0. I only ever really felt that way before about Prior.
Not a knock on Z or Lester or any of the other legitimately great pitchers they've had between now and then, but Arrieta is just in that category where if he's got everything working fuck you it's over.
Bump. Celebrated the two year anniversary of the day Theo pantsed the Orioles front office with 8 innnings, 7 Ks, one run.
Quote from: SKO on July 02, 2015, 03:49:08 PM
Bump. Celebrated the two year anniversary of the day Theo pantsed the Orioles front office with 8 innnings, 7 Ks, one run.
And no walks. This dude is so dope.
Quote from: SKO on July 02, 2015, 03:49:08 PM
Bump. Celebrated the two year anniversary of the day Theo pantsed the Orioles front office with 8 innnings, 7 Ks, one run.
It took me a really long time to cotton on to what Arrieta was doing because I was fucking convinced that, for what the Cubs gave up for him and Strop, he couldn't possibly be worth anything at all.
Quote from: InternetApex on July 02, 2015, 04:34:20 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 02, 2015, 03:49:08 PM
Bump. Celebrated the two year anniversary of the day Theo pantsed the Orioles front office with 8 innnings, 7 Ks, one run.
And no walks. This dude is so dope.
Some days he's almost too filthy for his own good. He'll K 13 guys but throw 115 pitches through 6. Days like today when he's just toying with fuckers and getting weak grounders are the most fun
He threw a slider in the 8th that looked like a cutter and was headed straight toward the center of Montero's glove. Right as it crossed the plate it appeared to dive about a foot left and Montero barely got a fingertip on it. Absolutely filthy late break.
Quote from: SKO on July 02, 2015, 05:28:21 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on July 02, 2015, 04:34:20 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 02, 2015, 03:49:08 PM
Bump. Celebrated the two year anniversary of the day Theo pantsed the Orioles front office with 8 innnings, 7 Ks, one run.
And no walks. This dude is so dope.
Some days he's almost too filthy for his own good. He'll K 13 guys but throw 115 pitches through 6. Days like today when he's just toying with fuckers and getting weak grounders are the most fun
I'd compare him to peak Prior in this regard but that would make me sad and I want to be happy.
Way ahead of things here, but if the Cubs get in the Coin Flip Game -- Arrieta has to start, right? I feel like this organization would be smart enough to put aside contract status and let the best pitcher on the team start that game.
Quote from: Eli on July 02, 2015, 07:54:59 PM
Way ahead of things here, but if the Cubs get in the Coin Flip Game -- Arrieta has to start, right? I feel like this organization would be smart enough to put aside contract status and let the best pitcher on the team start that game.
I don't think there's any doubt Arrieta gets the nod if both progress at the rate they currently are*.
It's kind of like 1989. Sutcliffe was the Opening Day Starter (though Maddux emerged the previous season....but then so did Arrieta last year). By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
*There's always the matter of Maddon not having control over it. If the regular season comes down to the wire, they may need to just concern themselves with winning the game that's in front of them and the coin flip starter might just be whose spot is next. Kind of like 1998, where Mark Clark--at best their 4th best starter for the playoffs--started Game 1 of the LDS simply because Tapani and Trachsel had needed to pitch their turn in order for the Cubs to stay alive, and good ole' Terry Mulholland was pitching every damn day in relief.
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on July 02, 2015, 07:54:59 PM
Way ahead of things here, but if the Cubs get in the Coin Flip Game -- Arrieta has to start, right? I feel like this organization would be smart enough to put aside contract status and let the best pitcher on the team start that game.
I don't think there's any doubt Arrieta gets the nod if both progress at the rate they currently are*.
It's kind of like 1989. Sutcliffe was the Opening Day Starter (though Maddux emerged the previous season....but then so did Arrieta last year). By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
*There's always the matter of Maddon not having control over it. If the regular season comes down to the wire, they may need to just concern themselves with winning the game that's in front of them and the coin flip starter might just be whose spot is next. Kind of like 1998, where Mark Clark--at best their 4th best starter for the playoffs--started Game 1 of the LDS simply because Tapani and Trachsel had needed to pitch their turn in order for the Cubs to stay alive, and good ole' Terry Mulholland was pitching every damn day in relief.
(http://i.imgur.com/Wzlm9xX.gif)
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on July 02, 2015, 07:54:59 PM
Way ahead of things here, but if the Cubs get in the Coin Flip Game -- Arrieta has to start, right? I feel like this organization would be smart enough to put aside contract status and let the best pitcher on the team start that game.
I don't think there's any doubt Arrieta gets the nod if both progress at the rate they currently are*.
It's kind of like 1989. Sutcliffe was the Opening Day Starter (though Maddux emerged the previous season....but then so did Arrieta last year). By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
*There's always the matter of Maddon not having control over it. If the regular season comes down to the wire, they may need to just concern themselves with winning the game that's in front of them and the coin flip starter might just be whose spot is next. Kind of like 1998, where Mark Clark--at best their 4th best starter for the playoffs--started Game 1 of the LDS simply because Tapani and Trachsel had needed to pitch their turn in order for the Cubs to stay alive, and good ole' Terry Mulholland was pitching every damn day in relief.
There was also the time that Edison VoLOLquez had to start the play-in/coin-flip/"playoff" game for the Pirates and gave up a grand slam to Brandon Crawford.
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on July 02, 2015, 11:11:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on July 02, 2015, 07:54:59 PM
Way ahead of things here, but if the Cubs get in the Coin Flip Game -- Arrieta has to start, right? I feel like this organization would be smart enough to put aside contract status and let the best pitcher on the team start that game.
I don't think there's any doubt Arrieta gets the nod if both progress at the rate they currently are*.
It's kind of like 1989. Sutcliffe was the Opening Day Starter (though Maddux emerged the previous season....but then so did Arrieta last year). By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
*There's always the matter of Maddon not having control over it. If the regular season comes down to the wire, they may need to just concern themselves with winning the game that's in front of them and the coin flip starter might just be whose spot is next. Kind of like 1998, where Mark Clark--at best their 4th best starter for the playoffs--started Game 1 of the LDS simply because Tapani and Trachsel had needed to pitch their turn in order for the Cubs to stay alive, and good ole' Terry Mulholland was pitching every damn day in relief.
There was also the time that Edison VoLOLquez had to start the play-in/coin-flip/"playoff" game for the Pirates and gave up a grand slam to Brandon Crawford.
Yes, there was that one time Pittsburgh played a baseball game.
(http://i61.tinypic.com/w7csi8.jpg)
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
That's our Chuck! *fart noise*
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
*There's always the matter of Maddon not having control over it. If the regular season comes down to the wire, they may need to just concern themselves with winning the game that's in front of them and the coin flip starter might just be whose spot is next. Kind of like 1998, where Mark Clark--at best their 4th best starter for the playoffs--started Game 1 of the LDS simply because Tapani and Trachsel had needed to pitch their turn in order for the Cubs to stay alive, and good ole' Terry Mulholland was pitching every damn day in relief.
All true. And depending on how the rotation would line up in the final days of the season, I could see Maddon doing something like letting Lester and Arrieta each go 3-4 innings. They'd be able to ramp it up for, say, 50 pitches and go all-out. Plus it'd give the other team two different looks to deal with.
Quote from: Eli on July 03, 2015, 11:41:28 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
*There's always the matter of Maddon not having control over it. If the regular season comes down to the wire, they may need to just concern themselves with winning the game that's in front of them and the coin flip starter might just be whose spot is next. Kind of like 1998, where Mark Clark--at best their 4th best starter for the playoffs--started Game 1 of the LDS simply because Tapani and Trachsel had needed to pitch their turn in order for the Cubs to stay alive, and good ole' Terry Mulholland was pitching every damn day in relief.
All true. And depending on how the rotation would line up in the final days of the season, I could see Maddon doing something like letting Lester and Arrieta each go 3-4 innings. They'd be able to ramp it up for, say, 50 pitches and go all-out. Plus it'd give the other team two different looks to deal with.
I certainly wouldn't put it past that trippy bastard.
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
I agreed with it.
Sutcliffe looked tired and old compared to Maddux. The Bielecki decision was an absolute mistake.
That season and especially the late summer was an incredible roller coaster.
As a side note, Mrs. flannj had pre-term labor and was on bed rest for the last three months of her first pregnancy which coincided with the same last three months of the Cubs season.
Required to relax in a no stress environment monitored by a nurse 4 times a day but she was still watching Mitch Williams pitch.
I love that woman.
I was 13 months old during that NLCS.
I just wanted to point out that you are all really fucking old.
Quote from: SKO on July 03, 2015, 02:21:13 PM
I was 13 months old during that NLCS.
I just wanted to point out that you are all really fucking old.
I was drafted during WWI, but too old to fight in WWII. What's your point?
Quote from: CBStew on July 03, 2015, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 03, 2015, 02:21:13 PM
I was 13 months old during that NLCS.
I just wanted to point out that you are all really fucking old.
I was drafted during WWI, but too old to fight in WWII. What's your point?
Stew still remembers the Maine.
Quote from: CBStew on July 03, 2015, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 03, 2015, 02:21:13 PM
I was 13 months old during that NLCS.
I just wanted to point out that you are all really fucking old.
I was drafted during WWI, but too old to fight in WWII. What's your point?
Are you doing a bit, Stew? I ask because you would've been too young for WWII and not even alive during WWI. You don't don't need to exaggerate your age; you're a good twenty years older than the next-oldest moran here--flannj.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
Rather than call bullshit--which is my first inclination-- I'll take this at face value and simply point out that you were every bit the counter-intuitive & contradictory walking Ball of Wrong in 1989 that you are today.
Quote from: SKO on July 03, 2015, 02:21:13 PM
I was 13 months old during that NLCS.
I just wanted to point out that you are all really fucking old Internet Chuck was an insufferable douche long before the Internet became widely available.
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 05:51:32 PM
Quote from: CBStew on July 03, 2015, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 03, 2015, 02:21:13 PM
I was 13 months old during that NLCS.
I just wanted to point out that you are all really fucking old.
I was drafted during WWI, but too old to fight in WWII. What's your point?
Are you doing a bit, Stew? I ask because you would've been too young for WWII and not even alive during WWI. You don't don't need to exaggerate your age; you're a good twenty years older than the next-oldest moran here--flannj.
I know that I have the youngest left hip of anyone on this board.
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 05:55:25 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
Rather than call bullshit--which is my first inclination-- I'll take this at face value and simply point out that you were every bit the counter-intuitive & contradictory walking Ball of Wrong in 1989 that you are today.
Maddux wasn't an All-Star in 1989; Sutcliffe was. Lasorda had Sutcliffe (whom he hated) pitch two innings in relief of Rick Reuschel in th All-Star Game in Anaheim. Sutcliffe pitched in relief on Sunday (win over L.A.) and went 6 Friday in a win over L.A.
I think Sutcliffe traced his subsequent arm troubles to the week. And we all saw that.
Maddux was the Ace. He should have shut down The Thrill in Game One. Bielecki won Game 2. If Lancaster didn't forget the count....
Quote from: Brownie on July 03, 2015, 08:28:15 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 05:55:25 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
Rather than call bullshit--which is my first inclination-- I'll take this at face value and simply point out that you were every bit the counter-intuitive & contradictory walking Ball of Wrong in 1989 that you are today.
Maddux wasn't an All-Star in 1989; Sutcliffe was. Lasorda had Sutcliffe (whom he hated) pitch two innings in relief of Rick Reuschel in th All-Star Game in Anaheim. Sutcliffe pitched in relief on Sunday (win over L.A.) and went 6 Friday in a win over L.A.
I think Sutcliffe traced his subsequent arm troubles to the week. And we all saw that.
Maddux was the Ace. He should have shut down The Thrill in Game One. Bielecki won Game 2. If Lancaster didn't forget the count....
I stand corrected. I had just assumed Maddux was a 2-time All-Star since he busted out in '88 and made the team. I just assumed he made it again in '89. I had no recollection of Sutcliffe making the All-Star team in '89. In spite of the fact that Sutcliffe ended up as the #3 starter, I sorta feel like I owe Chuck an apology.
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:19:54 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 03, 2015, 08:28:15 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 05:55:25 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
Rather than call bullshit--which is my first inclination-- I'll take this at face value and simply point out that you were every bit the counter-intuitive & contradictory walking Ball of Wrong in 1989 that you are today.
Maddux wasn't an All-Star in 1989; Sutcliffe was. Lasorda had Sutcliffe (whom he hated) pitch two innings in relief of Rick Reuschel in th All-Star Game in Anaheim. Sutcliffe pitched in relief on Sunday (win over L.A.) and went 6 Friday in a win over L.A.
I think Sutcliffe traced his subsequent arm troubles to the week. And we all saw that.
Maddux was the Ace. He should have shut down The Thrill in Game One. Bielecki won Game 2. If Lancaster didn't forget the count....
I stand corrected. I had just assumed Maddux was a 2-time All-Star since he busted out in '88 and made the team. I just assumed he made it again in '89. I had no recollection of Sutcliffe making the All-Star team in '89. In spite of the fact that Sutcliffe ended up as the #3 starter, I sorta feel like I owe Chuck an apology.
NEVER apologize to Chuck.
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:19:54 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 03, 2015, 08:28:15 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 05:55:25 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
Rather than call bullshit--which is my first inclination-- I'll take this at face value and simply point out that you were every bit the counter-intuitive & contradictory walking Ball of Wrong in 1989 that you are today.
Maddux wasn't an All-Star in 1989; Sutcliffe was. Lasorda had Sutcliffe (whom he hated) pitch two innings in relief of Rick Reuschel in th All-Star Game in Anaheim. Sutcliffe pitched in relief on Sunday (win over L.A.) and went 6 Friday in a win over L.A.
I think Sutcliffe traced his subsequent arm troubles to the week. And we all saw that.
Maddux was the Ace. He should have shut down The Thrill in Game One. Bielecki won Game 2. If Lancaster didn't forget the count....
I stand corrected. I had just assumed Maddux was a 2-time All-Star since he busted out in '88 and made the team. I just assumed he made it again in '89. I had no recollection of Sutcliffe making the All-Star team in '89. In spite of the fact that Sutcliffe ended up as the #3 starter, I sorta feel like I owe Chuck an apology.
You owe Chuck nothing. Sutcliffe was the truth before the ASG, and then was a cripple the rest of the way. It was a marvel to see him get through September without amputating his arm.
Maddux, meanwhile, was Madduxian in the second half.
I take the blame for losing the NLCS in 1989. The NLCS fell on Yom Kippur in 1989. Mrs. CBStew and I took an afternoon break to go to Candlestick. God punished us.
Quote from: CBStew on July 04, 2015, 11:23:22 AM
I take the blame for losing the NLCS in 1989. The NLCS fell on Yom Kippur in 1989. Mrs. CBStew and I took an afternoon break to go to Candlestick. God punished us.
And with an earthquake a few days later.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 04, 2015, 04:11:12 PM
Quote from: CBStew on July 04, 2015, 11:23:22 AM
I take the blame for losing the NLCS in 1989. The NLCS fell on Yom Kippur in 1989. Mrs. CBStew and I took an afternoon break to go to Candlestick. God punished us.
And with an earthquake a few days later.
Not my fault! (I'll leave now)
Quote from: Brownie on July 04, 2015, 08:20:07 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:19:54 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 03, 2015, 08:28:15 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 05:55:25 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
Rather than call bullshit--which is my first inclination-- I'll take this at face value and simply point out that you were every bit the counter-intuitive & contradictory walking Ball of Wrong in 1989 that you are today.
Maddux wasn't an All-Star in 1989; Sutcliffe was. Lasorda had Sutcliffe (whom he hated) pitch two innings in relief of Rick Reuschel in th All-Star Game in Anaheim. Sutcliffe pitched in relief on Sunday (win over L.A.) and went 6 Friday in a win over L.A.
I think Sutcliffe traced his subsequent arm troubles to the week. And we all saw that.
Maddux was the Ace. He should have shut down The Thrill in Game One. Bielecki won Game 2. If Lancaster didn't forget the count....
I stand corrected. I had just assumed Maddux was a 2-time All-Star since he busted out in '88 and made the team. I just assumed he made it again in '89. I had no recollection of Sutcliffe making the All-Star team in '89. In spite of the fact that Sutcliffe ended up as the #3 starter, I sorta feel like I owe Chuck an apology.
You owe Chuck nothing. Sutcliffe was the truth before the ASG, and then was a cripple the rest of the way. It was a marvel to see him get through September without amputating his arm.
Maddux, meanwhile, was Madduxian in the second half.
Sutcliffe from July 16 to October 1: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=sutclri01&t=p&year=1989&share=0.32#336-352-sum:pitching_gamelogs
103 IP, 3.84 ERA, .255/.320/.386/.706 against.
Maddux from July 16 to October 1: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=maddugr01&t=p&year=1989&share=3.66#90-105-sum:pitching_gamelogs
103 IP, 3.04 ERA, .265/.320/.382/.702 against.
Pretty fucking close.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 04, 2015, 04:22:38 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 04, 2015, 08:20:07 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:19:54 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 03, 2015, 08:28:15 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 05:55:25 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 03, 2015, 11:34:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 03, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on July 02, 2015, 08:04:54 PM
By the time the playoffs rolled around, though, Maddux was clearly the ace and he got the Game 1 nod.
And he shit the bed. He was young. He was scared. Zimmer screwed up those playoffs a great deal. But not starting Sut Game 1 was a bad move.
Hindsight.
Sutcliffe was their third best pitcher that year and pitched Game 3 (and lost). Maddux was a two-time All-Star by the time the '89 playoffs rolled around. If Zimmer was to be criticized for anything it'd be for leaving Bielecki in too long in Game 5, but you're only knocking the decision to start Maddux in Game 1 with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight. I PROMISE you not a single person questioned that decision at the time.
I did. The day they announced it I said I wanted Sut in game 1 then. Sadly, no internet exists to prove it. And I was two weeks short of starting my banking career so no co-workers to prove how pissed I was about it.
Rather than call bullshit--which is my first inclination-- I'll take this at face value and simply point out that you were every bit the counter-intuitive & contradictory walking Ball of Wrong in 1989 that you are today.
Maddux wasn't an All-Star in 1989; Sutcliffe was. Lasorda had Sutcliffe (whom he hated) pitch two innings in relief of Rick Reuschel in th All-Star Game in Anaheim. Sutcliffe pitched in relief on Sunday (win over L.A.) and went 6 Friday in a win over L.A.
I think Sutcliffe traced his subsequent arm troubles to the week. And we all saw that.
Maddux was the Ace. He should have shut down The Thrill in Game One. Bielecki won Game 2. If Lancaster didn't forget the count....
I stand corrected. I had just assumed Maddux was a 2-time All-Star since he busted out in '88 and made the team. I just assumed he made it again in '89. I had no recollection of Sutcliffe making the All-Star team in '89. In spite of the fact that Sutcliffe ended up as the #3 starter, I sorta feel like I owe Chuck an apology.
You owe Chuck nothing. Sutcliffe was the truth before the ASG, and then was a cripple the rest of the way. It was a marvel to see him get through September without amputating his arm.
Maddux, meanwhile, was Madduxian in the second half.
Sutcliffe from July 16 to October 1: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=sutclri01&t=p&year=1989&share=0.32#336-352-sum:pitching_gamelogs
103 IP, 3.84 ERA, .255/.320/.386/.706 against.
Maddux from July 16 to October 1: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=maddugr01&t=p&year=1989&share=3.66#90-105-sum:pitching_gamelogs
103 IP, 3.04 ERA, .265/.320/.382/.702 against.
Pretty fucking close.
Except for almost a full run more in ERA, you mean?
Quote from: Shooter on July 03, 2015, 07:06:27 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 03, 2015, 02:21:13 PM
I was 13 months old during that NLCS.
I just wanted to point out that you are all really fucking old Internet Chuck was an insufferable douche long before the Internet became widely available.
Last 5 starts of 1989:
Rick Sutcliffe:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
28.0 31 11 11 7 22 2 1 3.54 120 .284 .331 .431 .762
Greg Maddux:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
33.1 40 18 15 5 23 2 1 4.05 141 .310 .333 .450 .783
Quote from: InternetApex on July 06, 2015, 08:57:44 AM
Quote from: Shooter on July 03, 2015, 07:06:27 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 03, 2015, 02:21:13 PM
I was 13 months old during that NLCS.
I just wanted to point out that you are all really fucking old Internet Chuck was an insufferable douche long before the Internet became widely available.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 06, 2015, 09:50:59 AM
Last 5 starts of 1989:
Rick Sutcliffe:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
28.0 31 11 11 7 22 2 1 3.54 120 .284 .331 .431 .762
Greg Maddux:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
33.1 40 18 15 5 23 2 1 4.05 141 .310 .333 .450 .783
That really doesn't prove anything.
Quote from: Eli on July 06, 2015, 11:18:32 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 06, 2015, 09:50:59 AM
Last 5 starts of 1989:
Rick Sutcliffe:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
28.0 31 11 11 7 22 2 1 3.54 120 .284 .331 .431 .762
Greg Maddux:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
33.1 40 18 15 5 23 2 1 4.05 141 .310 .333 .450 .783
That really doesn't prove anything.
So basically Zimmer had two guys who had pitched roughly the same over their last month and he opted to go with the younger guy who had the better overall season and Chuck has held a grudge over it for 26 years even though the guy he wanted to start lost his game, too.
This is bad even for Chuck.
Quote from: SKO on July 06, 2015, 11:24:06 AM
Quote from: Eli on July 06, 2015, 11:18:32 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 06, 2015, 09:50:59 AM
Last 5 starts of 1989:
Rick Sutcliffe:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
28.0 31 11 11 7 22 2 1 3.54 120 .284 .331 .431 .762
Greg Maddux:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
33.1 40 18 15 5 23 2 1 4.05 141 .310 .333 .450 .783
That really doesn't prove anything.
So basically Zimmer had two guys who had pitched roughly the same over their last month and he opted to go with the younger guy who had the better overall season and Chuck has held a grudge over it for 26 years even though the guy he wanted to start lost his game, too.
This is bad even for Chuck.
Fucking Les Lancaster.
Quote from: Eli on July 06, 2015, 11:18:32 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 06, 2015, 09:50:59 AM
Last 5 starts of 1989:
Rick Sutcliffe:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
28.0 31 11 11 7 22 2 1 3.54 120 .284 .331 .431 .762
Greg Maddux:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
33.1 40 18 15 5 23 2 1 4.05 141 .310 .333 .450 .783
That really doesn't prove anything.
Kinda contras, "Sutcliffe was the truth before the ASG, and then was a cripple the rest of the way. It was a marvel to see him get through September without amputating his arm."
Pretty sure Sutcliffe blamed his arm injury on coming back too soon from his hamstring injury he suffered in 1985.
Quote from: Eli on July 06, 2015, 11:18:32 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 06, 2015, 09:50:59 AM
Last 5 starts of 1989:
Rick Sutcliffe:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
28.0 31 11 11 7 22 2 1 3.54 120 .284 .331 .431 .762
Greg Maddux:
IP H R ER BB SO HR HBP ERA BF BA OBP SLG OPS
33.1 40 18 15 5 23 2 1 4.05 141 .310 .333 .450 .783
That really doesn't prove anything.
It does prove that Maddux went an inning longer per start than Sutcliffe.
Also, this (http://articles.latimes.com/1989-09-22/sports/sp-895_1_rick-sutcliffe):
QuoteCHICAGO — Cubs ace pitcher Rick Sutcliffe has an ailing right shoulder and probably will miss his next start, Manager Don Zimmer says.
Sutcliffe, who pitched just 12/3 Wednesday for his shortest outing in four years, could be questionable for the playoffs if the Cubs qualify and his condition doesn't improve.
"He's got a sore shoulder," Zimmer said. "I don't want to pitch a guy when he's hurt."
Sutcliffe, who has just two wins in his last six starts, is reluctant to discuss his condition. "It's not any different than it's been," he said. Sore or stiff? "A combination of both."
Sutcliffe has historically been reluctant to say he's hurting and this time, news of a possible injury apparently came through trainer John Fierro. Zimmer said, "Every time I sent him out, I asked him if he was 100% and he said he was all right. I wouldn't have sent him out if he wasn't."
Sutcliffe is scheduled to pitch again Monday but Zimmer said he isn't counting on it. Said Sutcliffe, "The only reason I won't pitch Monday is if Zim doesn't want me to pitch."
I might as well throw this (http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/10/07/Three-weeks-ago-Rick-Sutcliffe-had-doubts-that-he/8033623736000/) out there as well.
QuoteSAN FRANCISCO -- Three weeks ago, Rick Sutcliffe had doubts that he would be ready to pitch in these National League playoffs.
The Chicago right-hander, who started Game 3 of the championship series Saturday night with the Cubs and San Frcnisco Giants tied at a game apiece, had just walked off the mound Sept. 20 at Wrigley Field with a sore shoulder.
Sutcliffe had pitched 1 2-3 innings against Philadelphia -- his shortest stint in more than four years -- and was hurting.
'But the trainers got the swelling and the stiffness out,' Sutcliffe said on the eve of his third career playoff start. 'Then I had a good outing in Montreal (five days later).
'I needed to pitch that last day (of the regular season) in St. Louis, mentally more than anything else. I needed to find home plate and see if I could use all my pitches.'
Sutcliffe beat the Cardinals that day for his 16th victory of the season. The last time he won 16, it was in 17 decisions for the Cubs in their division-winning season of 1985.
Now, after six days off, Sutcliffe said he felt healthy enough to take on Kevin Mitchell, Will Clark and the rest of the Giants. He said he's not going to spend his time analyzing the San Francisco batters.
'I'm going to pitch my game,' said Sutcliffe, who had two losses, a no-decision and 4.03 ERA against the Giants in the regular season. 'I have a pretty good idea, since I've pitched against them in the past, where they hurt me. I'm not the type of guy that takes their weaknesses and exploit them. I'm going to use my expertise.'
Sutcliffe, though, realizes what Mitchell and Clark have done this season. And he's incredulous.
'I think of Candlestick as a pitcher's ballpark,' he said. 'It's amazing what Clark and Mitchell have done. Not only did they each drive in 100 runs, both of them scored 100 runs. They are two incredible offensive machines.'[/url]
Quote from: Brownie on July 06, 2015, 12:49:50 PM
I might as well throw this (http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/10/07/Three-weeks-ago-Rick-Sutcliffe-had-doubts-that-he/8033623736000/) out there as well.
QuoteSAN FRANCISCO -- Three weeks ago, Rick Sutcliffe had doubts that he would be ready to pitch in these National League playoffs.
The Chicago right-hander, who started Game 3 of the championship series Saturday night with the Cubs and San Frcnisco Giants tied at a game apiece, had just walked off the mound Sept. 20 at Wrigley Field with a sore shoulder.
Sutcliffe had pitched 1 2-3 innings against Philadelphia -- his shortest stint in more than four years -- and was hurting.
'But the trainers got the swelling and the stiffness out,' Sutcliffe said on the eve of his third career playoff start. 'Then I had a good outing in Montreal (five days later).
'I needed to pitch that last day (of the regular season) in St. Louis, mentally more than anything else. I needed to find home plate and see if I could use all my pitches.'
Sutcliffe beat the Cardinals that day for his 16th victory of the season. The last time he won 16, it was in 17 decisions for the Cubs in their division-winning season of 1985.
Now, after six days off, Sutcliffe said he felt healthy enough to take on Kevin Mitchell, Will Clark and the rest of the Giants. He said he's not going to spend his time analyzing the San Francisco batters.
'I'm going to pitch my game,' said Sutcliffe, who had two losses, a no-decision and 4.03 ERA against the Giants in the regular season. 'I have a pretty good idea, since I've pitched against them in the past, where they hurt me. I'm not the type of guy that takes their weaknesses and exploit them. I'm going to use my expertise.'
Sutcliffe, though, realizes what Mitchell and Clark have done this season. And he's incredulous.
'I think of Candlestick as a pitcher's ballpark,' he said. 'It's amazing what Clark and Mitchell have done. Not only did they each drive in 100 runs, both of them scored 100 runs. They are two incredible offensive machines.'[/url]
Jesus Christ: the meatball is strong in this one.
Quote from: Brownie on July 06, 2015, 12:49:50 PM
I might as well throw this (http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/10/07/Three-weeks-ago-Rick-Sutcliffe-had-doubts-that-he/8033623736000/) out there as well.
SAN FRANCISCO -- Three weeks ago, Rick Sutcliffe had doubts that he would be ready to pitch in these National League playoffs.
The Chicago right-hander, who started Game 3 of the championship series Saturday night with the Cubs and San Frcnisco Giants tied at a game apiece, had just walked off the mound Sept. 20 at Wrigley Field with a sore shoulder.
Sutcliffe had pitched 1 2-3 innings against Philadelphia -- his shortest stint in more than four years -- and was hurting.
'But the trainers got the swelling and the stiffness out,' Sutcliffe said on the eve of his third career playoff start. 'Then I had a good outing in Montreal (five days later).
'I needed to pitch that last day (of the regular season) in St. Louis, mentally more than anything else. I needed to find home plate and see if I could use all my pitches.'
Sutcliffe beat the Cardinals that day for his 16th victory of the season. The last time he won 16, it was in 17 decisions for the Cubs in their division-winning season of 1985.
Now, after six days off, Sutcliffe said he felt healthy enough to take on Kevin Mitchell, Will Clark and the rest of the Giants. He said he's not going to spend his time analyzing the San Francisco batters.
'I'm going to pitch my game,' said Sutcliffe, who had two losses, a no-decision and 4.03 ERA against the Giants in the regular season. 'I have a pretty good idea, since I've pitched against them in the past, where they hurt me. I'm not the type of guy that takes their weaknesses and exploit them. I'm going to use my expertise.'
Sutcliffe, though, realizes what Mitchell and Clark have done this season. And he's incredulous.
'I think of Candlestick as a pitcher's ballpark,' he said. 'It's amazing what Clark and Mitchell have done. Not only did they each drive in 100 runs, both of them scored 100 runs. They are two incredible offensive machines.'[/url]
So Chuck insists he remembers,
at the time, clamoring for Sutcliffe to start Game 1...in spite of the fact that Sutcliffe's shoulder being kept in place with twine and bubblegum was a matter of readily-available public information.
So even taking at face value that Chuck was the sole voice in the wilderness taking this stance in 1989 (a fact of which I remain skeptical), this would simply make Chuck as wrong during the 80's as he is in the twenty-teens.
Chuck: Wrong for any decade, wrong for America.
Quote from: PANK! on July 06, 2015, 01:04:38 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 06, 2015, 12:49:50 PM
I might as well throw this (http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/10/07/Three-weeks-ago-Rick-Sutcliffe-had-doubts-that-he/8033623736000/) out there as well.
SAN FRANCISCO -- Three weeks ago, Rick Sutcliffe had doubts that he would be ready to pitch in these National League playoffs.
The Chicago right-hander, who started Game 3 of the championship series Saturday night with the Cubs and San Frcnisco Giants tied at a game apiece, had just walked off the mound Sept. 20 at Wrigley Field with a sore shoulder.
Sutcliffe had pitched 1 2-3 innings against Philadelphia -- his shortest stint in more than four years -- and was hurting.
'But the trainers got the swelling and the stiffness out,' Sutcliffe said on the eve of his third career playoff start. 'Then I had a good outing in Montreal (five days later).
'I needed to pitch that last day (of the regular season) in St. Louis, mentally more than anything else. I needed to find home plate and see if I could use all my pitches.'
Sutcliffe beat the Cardinals that day for his 16th victory of the season. The last time he won 16, it was in 17 decisions for the Cubs in their division-winning season of 1985.
Now, after six days off, Sutcliffe said he felt healthy enough to take on Kevin Mitchell, Will Clark and the rest of the Giants. He said he's not going to spend his time analyzing the San Francisco batters.
'I'm going to pitch my game,' said Sutcliffe, who had two losses, a no-decision and 4.03 ERA against the Giants in the regular season. 'I have a pretty good idea, since I've pitched against them in the past, where they hurt me. I'm not the type of guy that takes their weaknesses and exploit them. I'm going to use my expertise.'
Sutcliffe, though, realizes what Mitchell and Clark have done this season. And he's incredulous.
'I think of Candlestick as a pitcher's ballpark,' he said. 'It's amazing what Clark and Mitchell have done. Not only did they each drive in 100 runs, both of them scored 100 runs. They are two incredible offensive machines.'[/url]
So Chuck insists he remembers, at the time, clamoring for Sutcliffe to start Game 1...in spite of the fact that Sutcliffe's shoulder being kept in place with twine and bubblegum was a matter of readily-available public information.
So even taking at face value that Chuck was the sole voice in the wilderness taking this stance in 1989 (a fact of which I remain skeptical), this would simply make Chuck as wrong during the 80's as he is in the twenty-teens.
Chuck: Wrong for any decade, wrong for America.
Plus as you pointed out, Sutcliffe lost! Gave up 3 ER in 6 innings in what was, as Sutcliffe himself pointed out, a pitcher's park at Candlestick. Sure he might not have gotten shelled as badly in game one as Maddux did, but there's basically no evidence that Sutcliffe would have won game one, or that Maddux wouldn't have gone and lost game 3, and the Cubs pen wouldn't have blown multiple late leads as they did anyway, so why hold on this for a quarter of a century?
This isn't like wondering what would have happened if Dusty had just asked Joe Borowski to get a 5 out save or something. *grumbles*
Quote from: SKO on July 06, 2015, 01:16:46 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 06, 2015, 01:04:38 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 06, 2015, 12:49:50 PM
I might as well throw this (http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/10/07/Three-weeks-ago-Rick-Sutcliffe-had-doubts-that-he/8033623736000/) out there as well.
SAN FRANCISCO -- Three weeks ago, Rick Sutcliffe had doubts that he would be ready to pitch in these National League playoffs.
The Chicago right-hander, who started Game 3 of the championship series Saturday night with the Cubs and San Frcnisco Giants tied at a game apiece, had just walked off the mound Sept. 20 at Wrigley Field with a sore shoulder.
Sutcliffe had pitched 1 2-3 innings against Philadelphia -- his shortest stint in more than four years -- and was hurting.
'But the trainers got the swelling and the stiffness out,' Sutcliffe said on the eve of his third career playoff start. 'Then I had a good outing in Montreal (five days later).
'I needed to pitch that last day (of the regular season) in St. Louis, mentally more than anything else. I needed to find home plate and see if I could use all my pitches.'
Sutcliffe beat the Cardinals that day for his 16th victory of the season. The last time he won 16, it was in 17 decisions for the Cubs in their division-winning season of 1985.
Now, after six days off, Sutcliffe said he felt healthy enough to take on Kevin Mitchell, Will Clark and the rest of the Giants. He said he's not going to spend his time analyzing the San Francisco batters.
'I'm going to pitch my game,' said Sutcliffe, who had two losses, a no-decision and 4.03 ERA against the Giants in the regular season. 'I have a pretty good idea, since I've pitched against them in the past, where they hurt me. I'm not the type of guy that takes their weaknesses and exploit them. I'm going to use my expertise.'
Sutcliffe, though, realizes what Mitchell and Clark have done this season. And he's incredulous.
'I think of Candlestick as a pitcher's ballpark,' he said. 'It's amazing what Clark and Mitchell have done. Not only did they each drive in 100 runs, both of them scored 100 runs. They are two incredible offensive machines.'[/url]
So Chuck insists he remembers, at the time, clamoring for Sutcliffe to start Game 1...in spite of the fact that Sutcliffe's shoulder being kept in place with twine and bubblegum was a matter of readily-available public information.
So even taking at face value that Chuck was the sole voice in the wilderness taking this stance in 1989 (a fact of which I remain skeptical), this would simply make Chuck as wrong during the 80's as he is in the twenty-teens.
Chuck: Wrong for any decade, wrong for America.
Plus as you pointed out, Sutcliffe lost! Gave up 3 ER in 6 innings in what was, as Sutcliffe himself pointed out, a pitcher's park at Candlestick. Sure he might not have gotten shelled as badly in game one as Maddux did, but there's basically no evidence that Sutcliffe would have won game one, or that Maddux wouldn't have gone and lost game 3, and the Cubs pen wouldn't have blown multiple late leads as they did anyway, so why hold on this for a quarter of a century?
This isn't like wondering what would have happened if Dusty had just asked Joe Borowski to get a 5 out save or something. *grumbles*
Well, Maddux gave up 8 in 4 and losses mean nothing, but your point stands.
Quote from: PANK! on July 06, 2015, 01:04:38 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 06, 2015, 12:49:50 PM
I might as well throw this (http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/10/07/Three-weeks-ago-Rick-Sutcliffe-had-doubts-that-he/8033623736000/) out there as well.
SAN FRANCISCO -- Three weeks ago, Rick Sutcliffe had doubts that he would be ready to pitch in these National League playoffs.
The Chicago right-hander, who started Game 3 of the championship series Saturday night with the Cubs and San Frcnisco Giants tied at a game apiece, had just walked off the mound Sept. 20 at Wrigley Field with a sore shoulder.
Sutcliffe had pitched 1 2-3 innings against Philadelphia -- his shortest stint in more than four years -- and was hurting.
'But the trainers got the swelling and the stiffness out,' Sutcliffe said on the eve of his third career playoff start. 'Then I had a good outing in Montreal (five days later).
'I needed to pitch that last day (of the regular season) in St. Louis, mentally more than anything else. I needed to find home plate and see if I could use all my pitches.'
Sutcliffe beat the Cardinals that day for his 16th victory of the season. The last time he won 16, it was in 17 decisions for the Cubs in their division-winning season of 1985.
Now, after six days off, Sutcliffe said he felt healthy enough to take on Kevin Mitchell, Will Clark and the rest of the Giants. He said he's not going to spend his time analyzing the San Francisco batters.
'I'm going to pitch my game,' said Sutcliffe, who had two losses, a no-decision and 4.03 ERA against the Giants in the regular season. 'I have a pretty good idea, since I've pitched against them in the past, where they hurt me. I'm not the type of guy that takes their weaknesses and exploit them. I'm going to use my expertise.'
Sutcliffe, though, realizes what Mitchell and Clark have done this season. And he's incredulous.
'I think of Candlestick as a pitcher's ballpark,' he said. 'It's amazing what Clark and Mitchell have done. Not only did they each drive in 100 runs, both of them scored 100 runs. They are two incredible offensive machines.'[/url]
So Chuck insists he remembers, at the time, clamoring for Sutcliffe to start Game 1...in spite of the fact that Sutcliffe's shoulder being kept in place with twine and bubblegum was a matter of readily-available public information.
So even taking at face value that Chuck was the sole voice in the wilderness taking this stance in 1989 (a fact of which I remain skeptical), this would simply make Chuck as wrong during the 80's as he is in the twenty-teens.
Chuck: Wrong for any decade, wrong for America.
I only have to be right for District 30.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on July 06, 2015, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 06, 2015, 01:04:38 PM
Quote from: Brownie on July 06, 2015, 12:49:50 PM
I might as well throw this (http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/10/07/Three-weeks-ago-Rick-Sutcliffe-had-doubts-that-he/8033623736000/) out there as well.
SAN FRANCISCO -- Three weeks ago, Rick Sutcliffe had doubts that he would be ready to pitch in these National League playoffs.
The Chicago right-hander, who started Game 3 of the championship series Saturday night with the Cubs and San Frcnisco Giants tied at a game apiece, had just walked off the mound Sept. 20 at Wrigley Field with a sore shoulder.
Sutcliffe had pitched 1 2-3 innings against Philadelphia -- his shortest stint in more than four years -- and was hurting.
'But the trainers got the swelling and the stiffness out,' Sutcliffe said on the eve of his third career playoff start. 'Then I had a good outing in Montreal (five days later).
'I needed to pitch that last day (of the regular season) in St. Louis, mentally more than anything else. I needed to find home plate and see if I could use all my pitches.'
Sutcliffe beat the Cardinals that day for his 16th victory of the season. The last time he won 16, it was in 17 decisions for the Cubs in their division-winning season of 1985.
Now, after six days off, Sutcliffe said he felt healthy enough to take on Kevin Mitchell, Will Clark and the rest of the Giants. He said he's not going to spend his time analyzing the San Francisco batters.
'I'm going to pitch my game,' said Sutcliffe, who had two losses, a no-decision and 4.03 ERA against the Giants in the regular season. 'I have a pretty good idea, since I've pitched against them in the past, where they hurt me. I'm not the type of guy that takes their weaknesses and exploit them. I'm going to use my expertise.'
Sutcliffe, though, realizes what Mitchell and Clark have done this season. And he's incredulous.
'I think of Candlestick as a pitcher's ballpark,' he said. 'It's amazing what Clark and Mitchell have done. Not only did they each drive in 100 runs, both of them scored 100 runs. They are two incredible offensive machines.'[/url]
So Chuck insists he remembers, at the time, clamoring for Sutcliffe to start Game 1...in spite of the fact that Sutcliffe's shoulder being kept in place with twine and bubblegum was a matter of readily-available public information.
So even taking at face value that Chuck was the sole voice in the wilderness taking this stance in 1989 (a fact of which I remain skeptical), this would simply make Chuck as wrong during the 80's as he is in the twenty-teens.
Chuck: Wrong for any decade, wrong for America.
I only have to be right for District 30.
I have to assume every poor kid in that school district hates their morning ritual of having to give the bellamy salute to a picture of Alfonso Soriano flubbing a ball in the outfield.
This guy.
Should be an All-Star.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 12, 2015, 03:42:47 PM
Should be an All-Star.
I'm kinda glad he's not if only so he can stay on pace to make his next regularly scheduled start.
Arrieta pitching = must watch TV. The guy's a goddamn delight.
Quote from: PANK! on July 12, 2015, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 12, 2015, 03:42:47 PM
Should be an All-Star.
I'm kinda glad he's not if only so he can stay on pace to make his next regularly scheduled start.
Arrieta pitching = must watch TV. The guy's a goddamn delight.
He started and threw 9 innings today so he probably wouldn't pitch in the game. He should be on the list, though.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 12, 2015, 04:56:42 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 12, 2015, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 12, 2015, 03:42:47 PM
Should be an All-Star.
I'm kinda glad he's not if only so he can stay on pace to make his next regularly scheduled start.
Arrieta pitching = must watch TV. The guy's a goddamn delight.
He started and threw 9 innings today so he probably wouldn't pitch in the game. He should be on the list, though.
Agree with both of the above statements. If this snub hurts him contractually, I have no idea if it does, it's absolutely awful. But he's handled it all very well in the interviews I've seen. He's my favorite bearded Cubs righty since the Red Baron. May he pitch 1,000 years and never again share a shower stall with Snork.
Quote from: InternetApex on July 13, 2015, 10:29:02 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 12, 2015, 04:56:42 PM
Quote from: PANK! on July 12, 2015, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 12, 2015, 03:42:47 PM
Should be an All-Star.
I'm kinda glad he's not if only so he can stay on pace to make his next regularly scheduled start.
Arrieta pitching = must watch TV. The guy's a goddamn delight.
He started and threw 9 innings today so he probably wouldn't pitch in the game. He should be on the list, though.
Agree with both of the above statements. If this snub hurts him contractually, I have no idea if it does, it's absolutely awful. But he's handled it all very well in the interviews I've seen. He's my favorite bearded Cubs righty since the Red Baron. May he pitch 1,000 years and never again share a shower stall with Snork.
Yeah I thought about that after Sterling's reply. He wouldn't pitch anyway since he threw his gem yesterday, and his omission from the roster may well have cost him some money which would suck and be entirely undeserved.
Arrieta was ok but he gave up a run that fucking overpaid assshole piece of shit they could have had Liriano instead.
Quote from: Slaky on July 13, 2015, 04:43:21 PM
Arrieta was ok but he gave up a run that fucking overpaid assshole piece of shit they could have had Liriano instead.
Yeah the Liriano suggestion is even dumber than the fucking Lester hate. This the same Liriano who has never pitched 200 innings? That the guy you wanna give 3 years to?
Quote from: SKO on July 13, 2015, 05:10:32 PM
Quote from: Slaky on July 13, 2015, 04:43:21 PM
Arrieta was ok but he gave up a run that fucking overpaid assshole piece of shit they could have had Liriano instead.
Yeah the Liriano suggestion is even dumber than the fucking Lester hate. This the same Liriano who has never pitched 200 innings? That the guy you wanna give 3 years to?
The same guy who is missing more bats than anyone but Sale and putting up a WAR that is basically identical to Lester's (fangraphs) or 1.6 better than Lester's (baseball reference)...at basically half the cost?
Yeah, that'd be terrible.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on July 13, 2015, 05:14:49 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 13, 2015, 05:10:32 PM
Quote from: Slaky on July 13, 2015, 04:43:21 PM
Arrieta was ok but he gave up a run that fucking overpaid assshole piece of shit they could have had Liriano instead.
Yeah the Liriano suggestion is even dumber than the fucking Lester hate. This the same Liriano who has never pitched 200 innings? That the guy you wanna give 3 years to?
The same guy who is missing more bats than anyone but Sale and putting up a WAR that is basically identical to Lester's (fangraphs) or 1.6 better than Lester's (baseball reference)...at basically half the cost?
Yeah, that'd be terrible.
Yeah because one should never consider a guy's complete fucking inability to stay healthy for a full season in his entire fucking career before handing out multi year deals.
Quote from: SKO on July 13, 2015, 05:31:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on July 13, 2015, 05:14:49 PM
Quote from: SKO on July 13, 2015, 05:10:32 PM
Quote from: Slaky on July 13, 2015, 04:43:21 PM
Arrieta was ok but he gave up a run that fucking overpaid assshole piece of shit they could have had Liriano instead.
Yeah the Liriano suggestion is even dumber than the fucking Lester hate. This the same Liriano who has never pitched 200 innings? That the guy you wanna give 3 years to?
The same guy who is missing more bats than anyone but Sale and putting up a WAR that is basically identical to Lester's (fangraphs) or 1.6 better than Lester's (baseball reference)...at basically half the cost?
Yeah, that'd be terrible.
Yeah because one should never consider a guy's complete fucking inability to stay healthy for a full season in his entire fucking career before handing out multi year deals.
Forget about it SKO, it's CUBSFANINHYDEPARKTOWN.
More boring dominance. Yawn.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 19, 2015, 07:31:26 PM
More boring dominance. Yawn.
The trade that brought Arietta here is quickly moving into Larry Jackson/Fergie Jenkins territory.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on July 20, 2015, 08:47:24 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 19, 2015, 07:31:26 PM
More boring dominance. Yawn.
The trade that brought Arietta here is quickly moving into Larry Jackson/Fergie Jenkins territory.
I would say easily Jepstink's best Cubs trade to date, but the Snork/Hammel for Russell and McKinney provides strong competition. Just as an aside, what were the best trades (and the worst) the last few Cubs GMs executed?
Hoyer/EpsteinBest: Arrieta and Strop (and money for International signings) for Feldman and Clevenger
Hon. Mention: Russell, McKinney and Straily (and money) for Samardzija and Hammel; Cashner and a minor leaguer for Rizzo and a minor leaguer
Worst: Dexter Fowler for Straily and Valbuena
HendryBest: Kenny Lofton and Aramis Ramirez and money for Bobby Hill and Jose Hernandez and Matt Bruback.
Hon. Mention: Lee for Choi; Grudzielanek and Karros for Todd Hundley
Worst: Antonio Alfonseca and Matt Clement for Dontrelle Willis and Julian Tavarez.
Dis. Mention: Rich Harden and Chad Gaudin for Matt Murton, Sean Gallagher, Eric Patterson, and Josh Donaldson.
Ed LynchBest: Lieber for Brant Brown
Hon. Mention: Luis Gonzalez and Scott Servais for Rick Wilkins
Worst: Matt Karchner for Jon Garland
Larry HimesBest: Sosa and Ken Patterson for George Bell
Hon. Mention: Steve Buechele for Danny Jackson? Kevin Foster for Shawn Boskie? Greg Hibbard for Alex Arias and Gary Scott? Jose Hernandez for Heathcliff Slocumb? Glenallen Hill for Candy Maldonado
Worst: Larry Luebbers, Darron Cox and Mike Anderson for Chuck McElroy
Jim FreyBest: Lloyd McLendon for Rolando Roomes
Hon. Mention: Jose Vizcaino for Greg Smith; Yorkis Perez and Turk Wendell for Berryhill and Bielecki; Paul Assenmacher for Kelly Mann and Pat Gomez
Worst: Schiraldi and Nipper for Lee Smith
Dishonorable Mention: Mitch Williams, Paul Kilgus, Curtis Wilkerson, Steve Wilson, Pablo Delgado and Luis Benitez for Drew Hall, Jamie Moyer and Rafael Palmeiro; Mitch Webster for David Martinez
Dallas GreenBest: Larry Bowa and Ryne Sandberg for Ivan DeJesus
Hon. Mention: Rick Sutcliffe, George Frazier and Ron Hassey for Joe Carter, Don Schulze and Mel Hall
Worst: Brian Guinn, David Wilder and Mark Leonette for Dan Rohn and Dennis Eckersley.
Dishonorable Mention: Jerry Mumphrey for Billy Hatcher and Steve Engel. Fritzie Connally, Craig Lefferts and Carmelo Martinez for Scott Sanderson
Larry Himes didn't do a lot in the way of trades (besides the Sosa trade), but he did his damage in the free agent market. Ed Lynch and Jim Frey were awful. Hendry wasn't great, but in hindsight he held his own. Green and Jepstink are capable of making bad trades, but even their worst are defensible.
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on July 20, 2015, 08:47:24 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 19, 2015, 07:31:26 PM
More boring dominance. Yawn.
The trade that brought Arietta here is quickly moving into Larry Jackson/Fergie Jenkins territory.
I would say easily Jepstink's best Cubs trade to date, but the Snork/Hammel for Russell and McKinney provides strong competition. Just as an aside, what were the best trades (and the worst) the last few Cubs GMs executed?
Hoyer/Epstein
Best: Arrieta and Strop (and money for International signings) for Feldman and Clevenger
Hon. Mention: Russell, McKinney and Straily (and money) for Samardzija and Hammel; Cashner and a minor leaguer for Rizzo and a minor leaguer
Worst: Dexter Fowler for Straily and Valbuena
Hendry
Best: Kenny Lofton and Aramis Ramirez and money for Bobby Hill and Jose Hernandez and Matt Bruback.
Hon. Mention: Lee for Choi; Grudzielanek and Karros for Todd Hundley
Worst: Antonio Alfonseca and Matt Clement for Dontrelle Willis and Julian Tavarez.
Dis. Mention: Rich Harden and Chad Gaudin for Matt Murton, Sean Gallagher, Eric Patterson, and Josh Donaldson.
Ed Lynch
Best: Lieber for Brant Brown
Hon. Mention: Luis Gonzalez and Scott Servais for Rick Wilkins
Worst: Matt Karchner for Jon Garland
Larry Himes
Best: Sosa and Ken Patterson for George Bell
Hon. Mention: Steve Buechele for Danny Jackson? Kevin Foster for Shawn Boskie? Greg Hibbard for Alex Arias and Gary Scott? Jose Hernandez for Heathcliff Slocumb? Glenallen Hill for Candy Maldonado
Worst: Larry Luebbers, Darron Cox and Mike Anderson for Chuck McElroy
Jim Frey
Best: Lloyd McLendon for Rolando Roomes
Hon. Mention: Jose Vizcaino for Greg Smith; Yorkis Perez and Turk Wendell for Berryhill and Bielecki; Paul Assenmacher for Kelly Mann and Pat Gomez
Worst: Schiraldi and Nipper for Lee Smith
Dishonorable Mention: Mitch Williams, Paul Kilgus, Curtis Wilkerson, Steve Wilson, Pablo Delgado and Luis Benitez for Drew Hall, Jamie Moyer and Rafael Palmeiro; Mitch Webster for David Martinez
Dallas Green
Best: Larry Bowa and Ryne Sandberg for Ivan DeJesus
Hon. Mention: Rick Sutcliffe, George Frazier and Ron Hassey for Joe Carter, Don Schulze and Mel Hall
Worst: Brian Guinn, David Wilder and Mark Leonette for Dan Rohn and Dennis Eckersley.
Dishonorable Mention: Jerry Mumphrey for Billy Hatcher and Steve Engel. Fritzie Connally, Craig Lefferts and Carmelo Martinez for Scott Sanderson
Larry Himes didn't do a lot in the way of trades (besides the Sosa trade), but he did his damage in the free agent market. Ed Lynch and Jim Frey were awful. Hendry wasn't great, but in hindsight he held his own. Green and Jepstink are capable of making bad trades, but even their worst are defensible.
Dexter Fowler has been a disappointment, but I have no idea who the Cubs would even have ended up with in CF this year without that trade. I think "someone worse than Dexter Fowler" is a pretty good answer, and Valbuena was expendable. I'd say that trade is just meh.
The Ian Stewart trade was a crap one. Not to overrate LeMahieu but Theo still undoubtedly lost that trade. Regardless the man hasn't really given away much they'll regret losing.
Also refuse to blame Hendry for trading away Josh Donaldson for Rich Harden. Harden was great down the stretch and that team should have won the fucking world series. That was a great win now move and Donaldson at the time was a college catcher failing to hit at low A ball.
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:31:50 AM
Dallas Green
Best: Larry Bowa and Ryne Sandberg for Ivan DeJesus
Hon. Mention: Rick Sutcliffe, George Frazier and Ron Hassey for Joe Carter, Don Schulze and Mel Hall
Worst: Brian Guinn, David Wilder and Mark Leonette for Dan Rohn and Dennis Eckersley.
Dishonorable Mention: Jerry Mumphrey for Billy Hatcher and Steve Engel. Fritzie Connally, Craig Lefferts and Carmelo Martinez for Scott Sanderson
Dennis Eckersley and Mike Brumley to the Chicago Cubs for Bill Buckner is Honorable Mention worthy.
Quote from: SKO on July 20, 2015, 10:42:45 AM
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on July 20, 2015, 08:47:24 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 19, 2015, 07:31:26 PM
More boring dominance. Yawn.
The trade that brought Arietta here is quickly moving into Larry Jackson/Fergie Jenkins territory.
I would say easily Jepstink's best Cubs trade to date, but the Snork/Hammel for Russell and McKinney provides strong competition. Just as an aside, what were the best trades (and the worst) the last few Cubs GMs executed?
Hoyer/Epstein
Best: Arrieta and Strop (and money for International signings) for Feldman and Clevenger
Hon. Mention: Russell, McKinney and Straily (and money) for Samardzija and Hammel; Cashner and a minor leaguer for Rizzo and a minor leaguer
Worst: Dexter Fowler for Straily and Valbuena
Hendry
Best: Kenny Lofton and Aramis Ramirez and money for Bobby Hill and Jose Hernandez and Matt Bruback.
Hon. Mention: Lee for Choi; Grudzielanek and Karros for Todd Hundley
Worst: Antonio Alfonseca and Matt Clement for Dontrelle Willis and Julian Tavarez.
Dis. Mention: Rich Harden and Chad Gaudin for Matt Murton, Sean Gallagher, Eric Patterson, and Josh Donaldson.
Ed Lynch
Best: Lieber for Brant Brown
Hon. Mention: Luis Gonzalez and Scott Servais for Rick Wilkins
Worst: Matt Karchner for Jon Garland
Larry Himes
Best: Sosa and Ken Patterson for George Bell
Hon. Mention: Steve Buechele for Danny Jackson? Kevin Foster for Shawn Boskie? Greg Hibbard for Alex Arias and Gary Scott? Jose Hernandez for Heathcliff Slocumb? Glenallen Hill for Candy Maldonado
Worst: Larry Luebbers, Darron Cox and Mike Anderson for Chuck McElroy
Jim Frey
Best: Lloyd McLendon for Rolando Roomes
Hon. Mention: Jose Vizcaino for Greg Smith; Yorkis Perez and Turk Wendell for Berryhill and Bielecki; Paul Assenmacher for Kelly Mann and Pat Gomez
Worst: Schiraldi and Nipper for Lee Smith
Dishonorable Mention: Mitch Williams, Paul Kilgus, Curtis Wilkerson, Steve Wilson, Pablo Delgado and Luis Benitez for Drew Hall, Jamie Moyer and Rafael Palmeiro; Mitch Webster for David Martinez
Dallas Green
Best: Larry Bowa and Ryne Sandberg for Ivan DeJesus
Hon. Mention: Rick Sutcliffe, George Frazier and Ron Hassey for Joe Carter, Don Schulze and Mel Hall
Worst: Brian Guinn, David Wilder and Mark Leonette for Dan Rohn and Dennis Eckersley.
Dishonorable Mention: Jerry Mumphrey for Billy Hatcher and Steve Engel. Fritzie Connally, Craig Lefferts and Carmelo Martinez for Scott Sanderson
Larry Himes didn't do a lot in the way of trades (besides the Sosa trade), but he did his damage in the free agent market. Ed Lynch and Jim Frey were awful. Hendry wasn't great, but in hindsight he held his own. Green and Jepstink are capable of making bad trades, but even their worst are defensible.
Dexter Fowler has been a disappointment, but I have no idea who the Cubs would even have ended up with in CF this year without that trade. I think "someone worse than Dexter Fowler" is a pretty good answer, and Valbuena was expendable. I'd say that trade is just meh.
The Ian Stewart trade was a crap one. Not to overrate LeMahieu but Theo still undoubtedly lost that trade. Regardless the man hasn't really given away much they'll regret losing.
Also refuse to blame Hendry for trading away Josh Donaldson for Rich Harden. Harden was great down the stretch and that team should have won the fucking world series. That was a great win now move and Donaldson at the time was a college catcher failing to hit at low A ball.
Not to mention, that trade removed the stink of Matt Murton from the franchise forever. That's an epic win. I think TJ typed the Valbuena trade under worst with his tongue planted firmly in his cheek.
Quote from: InternetApex on July 20, 2015, 10:51:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on July 20, 2015, 10:42:45 AM
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on July 20, 2015, 08:47:24 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 19, 2015, 07:31:26 PM
More boring dominance. Yawn.
The trade that brought Arietta here is quickly moving into Larry Jackson/Fergie Jenkins territory.
I would say easily Jepstink's best Cubs trade to date, but the Snork/Hammel for Russell and McKinney provides strong competition. Just as an aside, what were the best trades (and the worst) the last few Cubs GMs executed?
Hoyer/Epstein
Best: Arrieta and Strop (and money for International signings) for Feldman and Clevenger
Hon. Mention: Russell, McKinney and Straily (and money) for Samardzija and Hammel; Cashner and a minor leaguer for Rizzo and a minor leaguer
Worst: Dexter Fowler for Straily and Valbuena
Hendry
Best: Kenny Lofton and Aramis Ramirez and money for Bobby Hill and Jose Hernandez and Matt Bruback.
Hon. Mention: Lee for Choi; Grudzielanek and Karros for Todd Hundley
Worst: Antonio Alfonseca and Matt Clement for Dontrelle Willis and Julian Tavarez.
Dis. Mention: Rich Harden and Chad Gaudin for Matt Murton, Sean Gallagher, Eric Patterson, and Josh Donaldson.
Ed Lynch
Best: Lieber for Brant Brown
Hon. Mention: Luis Gonzalez and Scott Servais for Rick Wilkins
Worst: Matt Karchner for Jon Garland
Larry Himes
Best: Sosa and Ken Patterson for George Bell
Hon. Mention: Steve Buechele for Danny Jackson? Kevin Foster for Shawn Boskie? Greg Hibbard for Alex Arias and Gary Scott? Jose Hernandez for Heathcliff Slocumb? Glenallen Hill for Candy Maldonado
Worst: Larry Luebbers, Darron Cox and Mike Anderson for Chuck McElroy
Jim Frey
Best: Lloyd McLendon for Rolando Roomes
Hon. Mention: Jose Vizcaino for Greg Smith; Yorkis Perez and Turk Wendell for Berryhill and Bielecki; Paul Assenmacher for Kelly Mann and Pat Gomez
Worst: Schiraldi and Nipper for Lee Smith
Dishonorable Mention: Mitch Williams, Paul Kilgus, Curtis Wilkerson, Steve Wilson, Pablo Delgado and Luis Benitez for Drew Hall, Jamie Moyer and Rafael Palmeiro; Mitch Webster for David Martinez
Dallas Green
Best: Larry Bowa and Ryne Sandberg for Ivan DeJesus
Hon. Mention: Rick Sutcliffe, George Frazier and Ron Hassey for Joe Carter, Don Schulze and Mel Hall
Worst: Brian Guinn, David Wilder and Mark Leonette for Dan Rohn and Dennis Eckersley.
Dishonorable Mention: Jerry Mumphrey for Billy Hatcher and Steve Engel. Fritzie Connally, Craig Lefferts and Carmelo Martinez for Scott Sanderson
Larry Himes didn't do a lot in the way of trades (besides the Sosa trade), but he did his damage in the free agent market. Ed Lynch and Jim Frey were awful. Hendry wasn't great, but in hindsight he held his own. Green and Jepstink are capable of making bad trades, but even their worst are defensible.
Dexter Fowler has been a disappointment, but I have no idea who the Cubs would even have ended up with in CF this year without that trade. I think "someone worse than Dexter Fowler" is a pretty good answer, and Valbuena was expendable. I'd say that trade is just meh.
The Ian Stewart trade was a crap one. Not to overrate LeMahieu but Theo still undoubtedly lost that trade. Regardless the man hasn't really given away much they'll regret losing.
Also refuse to blame Hendry for trading away Josh Donaldson for Rich Harden. Harden was great down the stretch and that team should have won the fucking world series. That was a great win now move and Donaldson at the time was a college catcher failing to hit at low A ball.
Not to mention, that trade removed the stink of Matt Murton from the franchise forever. That's an epic win. I think TJ typed the Valbuena trade under worst with his tongue planted firmly in his cheek.
He also noted that even Theo's "bad" trades are at least defensible. I just defensed it.
Shit, forgot about Ian Stewart.
I am sure Andy would suggest that Valbuena could play third and Bryant could play center, but aside from that, it's a perfectly defensible trade, and Fowler could start being good at baseball again. (and I wouldn't have listed it as the worst if I remembered Ian Stewart).
These were all off the top of my mind, and then I went to Baseball Reference to verify they were what I thought they were. The Harden trade was defensible, but it was a lot of young talent for an injury risk, and Harden rarely pitched past the sixth all season.
Hendry had plenty of strengths, and he was an upgrade over Ed Lynch. His shortcoming was in contract negotiations and minor league scouting. And in the latter department, we're seeing that he wasn't that bad. That all said, Theo/Jed are better in nearly every criteria by which you'd judge a front office.
Ed Lynch was an arrogant prick who had no idea what he was doing. Plus, he threw at Keith Moreland in August 1984, and Zonk should have killed him with his bare hands so he wouldn't get traded to the Cubs and give up a million runs in 1986 and 1987, and then become soul-crushing GM. He had one fucking job in July 1998: land Randy Fucking Johnson.
Larry Himes and Jim Frey had no idea how the free agent thing worked. Frey really had no idea how to generally manage, beyond his hiring of Jim Essian, who is a suspect in the tragic disappearance of a Naperville attorney who went by the name of Kermit.
Dallas Green's biggest talent was his encyclopedic knowledge of the Phillies system and a pretty good idea how to build an organizational structure. Without Dallas Green (and Jim Finks, who is also responsible for the Bears' 1980s renaissance), this franchise would have a very different look today.
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:58:19 AM
Shit, forgot about Ian Stewart.
I am sure Andy would suggest that Valbuena could play third and Bryant could play center, but aside from that, it's a perfectly defensible trade, and Fowler could start being good at baseball again.
These were all off the top of my mind, and then I went to Baseball Reference to verify they were what I thought they were. The Harden trade was defensible, but it was a lot of young talent for an injury risk, and Harden rarely pitched past the sixth all season.
Hendry had plenty of strengths, and he was an upgrade over Ed Lynch. His shortcoming was in contract negotiations and minor league scouting. And in the latter department, we're seeing that he wasn't that bad. That all said, Theo/Jed are better in nearly every criteria by which you'd judge a front office.
Ed Lynch was an arrogant prick who had no idea what he was doing. Plus, he threw at Keith Moreland in August 1984, and Zonk should have killed him with his bare hands so he wouldn't get traded to the Cubs and give up a million runs in 1986 and 1987, and then become soul-crushing GM. He had one fucking job in July 1998: land Randy Fucking Johnson.
Larry Himes and Jim Frey had no idea how the free agent thing worked. Frey really had no idea how to generally manage, beyond his hiring of Jim Essian, who is a suspect in the tragic disappearance of a Naperville attorney who went by the name of Kermit.
Dallas Green's biggest talent was his encyclopedic knowledge of the Phillies system and a pretty good idea how to build an organizational structure. Without Dallas Green (and Jim Finks, who is also responsible for the Bears' 1980s renaissance), this franchise would have a very different look today.
Can I ask who you are referring to by that? Javy? Mendy? Am I missing any Hendry draftees who are contributing in a meaningful way?
Quote from: SKO on July 20, 2015, 11:01:36 AM
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:58:19 AM
Shit, forgot about Ian Stewart.
I am sure Andy would suggest that Valbuena could play third and Bryant could play center, but aside from that, it's a perfectly defensible trade, and Fowler could start being good at baseball again.
These were all off the top of my mind, and then I went to Baseball Reference to verify they were what I thought they were. The Harden trade was defensible, but it was a lot of young talent for an injury risk, and Harden rarely pitched past the sixth all season.
Hendry had plenty of strengths, and he was an upgrade over Ed Lynch. His shortcoming was in contract negotiations and minor league scouting. And in the latter department, we're seeing that he wasn't that bad. That all said, Theo/Jed are better in nearly every criteria by which you'd judge a front office.
Ed Lynch was an arrogant prick who had no idea what he was doing. Plus, he threw at Keith Moreland in August 1984, and Zonk should have killed him with his bare hands so he wouldn't get traded to the Cubs and give up a million runs in 1986 and 1987, and then become soul-crushing GM. He had one fucking job in July 1998: land Randy Fucking Johnson.
Larry Himes and Jim Frey had no idea how the free agent thing worked. Frey really had no idea how to generally manage, beyond his hiring of Jim Essian, who is a suspect in the tragic disappearance of a Naperville attorney who went by the name of Kermit.
Dallas Green's biggest talent was his encyclopedic knowledge of the Phillies system and a pretty good idea how to build an organizational structure. Without Dallas Green (and Jim Finks, who is also responsible for the Bears' 1980s renaissance), this franchise would have a very different look today.
Can I ask who you are referring to by that? Javy? Mendy? Am I missing any Hendry draftees who are contributing in a meaningful way?
Here are a few:
LeMahieu, Javy, Jeff Samardzija, Sean Marshall, Andrew Cashner, Darwin Barney, Casey McGehee, Sam Fuld, Brandon Guyer, James Russell, Matt Szcuzr.
He also drafted Tim Lincecum and Sonny Gray but failed to sign them.
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 11:15:29 AM
Quote from: SKO on July 20, 2015, 11:01:36 AM
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:58:19 AM
Shit, forgot about Ian Stewart.
I am sure Andy would suggest that Valbuena could play third and Bryant could play center, but aside from that, it's a perfectly defensible trade, and Fowler could start being good at baseball again.
These were all off the top of my mind, and then I went to Baseball Reference to verify they were what I thought they were. The Harden trade was defensible, but it was a lot of young talent for an injury risk, and Harden rarely pitched past the sixth all season.
Hendry had plenty of strengths, and he was an upgrade over Ed Lynch. His shortcoming was in contract negotiations and minor league scouting. And in the latter department, we're seeing that he wasn't that bad. That all said, Theo/Jed are better in nearly every criteria by which you'd judge a front office.
Ed Lynch was an arrogant prick who had no idea what he was doing. Plus, he threw at Keith Moreland in August 1984, and Zonk should have killed him with his bare hands so he wouldn't get traded to the Cubs and give up a million runs in 1986 and 1987, and then become soul-crushing GM. He had one fucking job in July 1998: land Randy Fucking Johnson.
Larry Himes and Jim Frey had no idea how the free agent thing worked. Frey really had no idea how to generally manage, beyond his hiring of Jim Essian, who is a suspect in the tragic disappearance of a Naperville attorney who went by the name of Kermit.
Dallas Green's biggest talent was his encyclopedic knowledge of the Phillies system and a pretty good idea how to build an organizational structure. Without Dallas Green (and Jim Finks, who is also responsible for the Bears' 1980s renaissance), this franchise would have a very different look today.
Can I ask who you are referring to by that? Javy? Mendy? Am I missing any Hendry draftees who are contributing in a meaningful way?
Here are a few:
LeMahieu, Javy, Jeff Samardzija, Sean Marshall, Andrew Cashner, Darwin Barney, Casey McGehee, Sam Fuld, Brandon Guyer, James Russell, Matt Szcuzr.
He also drafted Tim Lincecum and Sonny Gray but failed to sign them.
Am I being trolled here
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:31:50 AM
Dishonorable Mention: Mitch Williams, Paul Kilgus, Curtis Wilkerson, Steve Wilson, Pablo Delgado and Luis Benitez for Drew Hall, Jamie Moyer and Rafael Palmeiro; Mitch Webster for David Martinez
Losing Moyer and Palmiero sucked, but the Cubs don't win the division in '89 without Mitch.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on July 20, 2015, 11:39:35 AM
Quote from: Brownie on July 20, 2015, 10:31:50 AM
Dishonorable Mention: Mitch Williams, Paul Kilgus, Curtis Wilkerson, Steve Wilson, Pablo Delgado and Luis Benitez for Drew Hall, Jamie Moyer and Rafael Palmeiro; Mitch Webster for David Martinez
Losing Moyer and Palmiero sucked, but the Cubs don't win the division in '89 without Mitch.
I had high hopes for Steve Wilson, too. The trade was bad because they would have won the division in 1989 with Lee Arthur Smith as well.
Bump for a dude who is the most reliable, electric pitcher I can remember here since Prior.
Quote from: Slaky on August 05, 2015, 09:15:50 AM
Bump for a dude who is the most reliable, electric pitcher I can remember here since Prior.
Last night was especially great in my eyes, since the Cubs had some long innings at the plate, and he never lost his rhythm.
Bump
Jake is the truth.
He lost his command halfway through and still threw 7 2/3 shutout innings against one of the best offenses in baseball. Nails.
Quote from: Eli on August 09, 2015, 07:24:59 PM
He lost his command halfway through and still threw 7 2/3 shutout innings against one of the best offenses in baseball. Nails.
That was the best part. He was badly missing his spots, left some over the plate, but his stuff is so good you just can't make good contact against it most of the time.
His ERA over his last 10 starts is 1.24.
Something something Bob Gibson something.
Jake Arrieta: still the balls. I wish they had 12 of him.
Olney tweeted that, according to ELIAS, Jake was the first pitcher in a decade to go at least 6 innings and not allow a single flyball. Jake is the fucking truth, man.
Quote from: SKO on August 21, 2015, 07:19:18 AM
Olney tweeted that, according to ELIAS, Jake was the first pitcher in a decade to go at least 6 innings and not allow a single flyball. Jake is the fucking truth, man.
It only makes your hatred for him more perplexing.
Quote from: CT III on August 21, 2015, 08:38:03 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 21, 2015, 07:19:18 AM
Olney tweeted that, according to ELIAS, Jake was the first pitcher in a decade to go at least 6 innings and not allow a single flyball. Jake is the fucking truth, man.
It only makes your hatred for him more perplexing.
I'm a complicated man. In a way, the only one I don't hate is David Ross. If only because he justifies my hate every time he swings his pool noodle at the plate. Really makes you thing.
Quote from: SKO on August 21, 2015, 08:49:13 AM
Quote from: CT III on August 21, 2015, 08:38:03 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 21, 2015, 07:19:18 AM
Olney tweeted that, according to ELIAS, Jake was the first pitcher in a decade to go at least 6 innings and not allow a single flyball. Jake is the fucking truth, man.
It only makes your hatred for him more perplexing.
I'm a complicated man. In a way, the only one I don't hate is David Ross. If only because he justifies my hate every time he swings his pool noodle at the plate. Really makes you thing.
You've certainly got me thinging, I can tell you.
Jaaaaaake
Pretty amazing that "Jake Arrieta didn't have his best out there tonight" results in 6 IP, 4 H, 0 ER, 1 BB, 8 SO.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 26, 2015, 12:43:53 AM
Pretty amazing that "Jake Arrieta didn't have his best out there tonight" results in 6 IP, 4 H, 0 ER, 1 BB, 8 SO.
I actually thought he had some of his best stuff all year till he threw that ball wide of second on that error. That seemed to get him off of his game a little bit and made him throw like 20 more pitches in the inning when he could have been out of there and probably pitched the seventh and saved us all from Tommy Hunter. Oh well. Jake is the balls.
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH
This freaking guy.
Time for a sideswipe:
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman." -- Jeff Samardzija
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 30, 2015, 10:12:35 PM
Time for a sideswipe:
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman." -- Jeff Samardzija
I must find this article.
This is absurd: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-07-02/sports/ct-spt-0703-cubs-moves-chicago-20130703_1_carlos-marmol-international-signing-bonus-slots-steve-clevenger
Quote from: Slaky on August 30, 2015, 11:04:36 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 30, 2015, 10:12:35 PM
Time for a sideswipe:
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman." -- Jeff Samardzija
I must find this article.
This is absurd: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-07-02/sports/ct-spt-0703-cubs-moves-chicago-20130703_1_carlos-marmol-international-signing-bonus-slots-steve-clevenger
There's a Cubs columnist gig waiting for Jeff at the Sun-Times as soon as he retires.
Quote from: thehawk on August 30, 2015, 10:56:54 PM
Quote from: flannj on August 30, 2015, 10:16:34 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on August 30, 2015, 10:06:55 PM
Quote from: CT III on August 30, 2015, 09:56:58 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 30, 2015, 09:56:44 PM
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH
Quote from: Tony on August 31, 2015, 12:18:11 AM
Quote from: thehawk on August 30, 2015, 10:56:54 PM
Quote from: flannj on August 30, 2015, 10:16:34 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on August 30, 2015, 10:06:55 PM
Quote from: CT III on August 30, 2015, 09:56:58 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 30, 2015, 09:56:44 PM
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH
Meh. He didn't throw to bases or pick off runners AT ALL. What the fuck? It's like he doesn't even want to win. Gutless fucking arsehole.
I also enjoyed Mattingly throwing Joc Pederson out there against Jake Arrieta for his first start since getting benched. That's a way to build a kid back up. I almost felt bad about Jake predictably pantsing him over and over.
Quote from: Slaky on August 30, 2015, 11:04:36 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 30, 2015, 10:12:35 PM
Time for a sideswipe:
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman." -- Jeff Samardzija
I must find this article.
This is absurd: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-07-02/sports/ct-spt-0703-cubs-moves-chicago-20130703_1_carlos-marmol-international-signing-bonus-slots-steve-clevenger
As much as I truly despise Snork, he seems to be saying some nice things about a teammate and friend in response to a question from a reporter post-trade. If anybody, even Theo, had said something like, "Jake Arrieta is going to be the best pitcher in the NL in two years, bitches, watch," we'd have us a something.
But still, fuck Snork. I'm glad he's dead.
When you look at his splits for the month, they're pretty hard to believe. 4-1, a 1.93 ERA, and he allowed only 28 hits and 11 walks in 42.2 innings of work.
Except those were his insanely good July splits, upon which he improved in August. He's allowed only 19 hits this month, and only 2 earned runs. This has to be the best baseball we will ever see from a pitcher. Phenomenal.
Two years ago, Arrieta was mostly pitching in AAA and was basically the poster child for mediocrity, putting up a 4.08 ERA and 1.35 WHIP in 15 starts. Now he wears mustache pajamas to his no-hitter press conferences. What a world we live in.
Quote from: Eli on August 31, 2015, 10:18:16 AM
Two years ago, Arrieta was mostly pitching in AAA and was basically the poster child for mediocrity, putting up a 4.08 ERA and 1.35 WHIP in 15 starts. Now he wears mustache pajamas to his no-hitter press conferences. What a world we live in.
I did enjoy Kershaw's quote before the game saying when the Dodgers faced him in Baltimore they said he had some of the nastiest stuff they'd seen and now that he's got it under control it's terrifying. Then, boom, no hitter.
Quote from: Canadouche on August 31, 2015, 09:53:56 AM
When you look at his splits for the month, they're pretty hard to believe. 4-1, a 1.93 ERA, and he allowed only 28 hits and 11 walks in 42.2 innings of work.
Except those were his insanely good July splits, upon which he improved in August. He's allowed only 19 hits this month, and only 2 earned runs. This has to be the best baseball we will ever see from a pitcher. Phenomenal.
Hi.
(http://www.realclearsports.com/blognetwork/rcs_sidelines/Orel%20Hershiser%20SI%20Cover.jpg)
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 31, 2015, 10:22:29 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on August 31, 2015, 09:53:56 AM
When you look at his splits for the month, they're pretty hard to believe. 4-1, a 1.93 ERA, and he allowed only 28 hits and 11 walks in 42.2 innings of work.
Except those were his insanely good July splits, upon which he improved in August. He's allowed only 19 hits this month, and only 2 earned runs. This has to be the best baseball we will ever see from a pitcher. Phenomenal.
Hi.
(http://www.realclearsports.com/blognetwork/rcs_sidelines/Orel%20Hershiser%20SI%20Cover.jpg)
Orel Hershiser is a fucking cummunist.
Quote from: Eli on August 31, 2015, 10:18:16 AM
Two years ago, Arrieta was mostly pitching in AAA and was basically the poster child for mediocrity, putting up a 4.08 ERA and 1.35 WHIP in 15 starts. Now he wears mustache pajamas to his no-hitter press conferences. What a world we live in.
That whole conversation they described between Jake and Theo when he first got to Chicago must have really twisted the knife for Orioles fans. He basically said the Orioles had tinkered with his delivery so much he couldn't tell up from down and all he wanted was for the Cubs to just let him go back to throwing the way that felt most natural to him, and good things have followed.
I'm sure the Cubs have done more than just get the hell out of his way, and there was a long hug and words exchanged between him and Chris Bosio that looked fairly emotional so I'm sure Jake gives a lot of credit to Chris for his success as well, but if Baltimore wasted all of that talent by trying to fix what wasn't broken, that's gotta hurt.
Quote from: SKO on August 31, 2015, 11:25:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 31, 2015, 10:18:16 AM
Two years ago, Arrieta was mostly pitching in AAA and was basically the poster child for mediocrity, putting up a 4.08 ERA and 1.35 WHIP in 15 starts. Now he wears mustache pajamas to his no-hitter press conferences. What a world we live in.
That whole conversation they described between Jake and Theo when he first got to Chicago must have really twisted the knife for Orioles fans. He basically said the Orioles had tinkered with his delivery so much he couldn't tell up from down and all he wanted was for the Cubs to just let him go back to throwing the way that felt most natural to him, and good things have followed.
I'm sure the Cubs have done more than just get the hell out of his way, and there was a long hug and words exchanged between him and Chris Bosio that looked fairly emotional so I'm sure Jake gives a lot of credit to Chris for his success as well, but if Baltimore wasted all of that talent by trying to fix what wasn't broken, that's gotta hurt.
He was not exactly terrible in 2010 and up into June of 2011, pitching for a lousy team trying to rebuild. In 2011, they hired a pitching coach named Rick Adair, and he quit his post in August 2013 (one month into Scott Feldman's tenure with Baltimore). Arrieta has politely alluded to not caring for Adair's ptiching philosophy, whatever it is.
Quote from: Brownie on August 31, 2015, 11:35:17 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 31, 2015, 11:25:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 31, 2015, 10:18:16 AM
Two years ago, Arrieta was mostly pitching in AAA and was basically the poster child for mediocrity, putting up a 4.08 ERA and 1.35 WHIP in 15 starts. Now he wears mustache pajamas to his no-hitter press conferences. What a world we live in.
That whole conversation they described between Jake and Theo when he first got to Chicago must have really twisted the knife for Orioles fans. He basically said the Orioles had tinkered with his delivery so much he couldn't tell up from down and all he wanted was for the Cubs to just let him go back to throwing the way that felt most natural to him, and good things have followed.
I'm sure the Cubs have done more than just get the hell out of his way, and there was a long hug and words exchanged between him and Chris Bosio that looked fairly emotional so I'm sure Jake gives a lot of credit to Chris for his success as well, but if Baltimore wasted all of that talent by trying to fix what wasn't broken, that's gotta hurt.
He was not exactly terrible in 2010 and up into June of 2011, pitching for a lousy team trying to rebuild. In 2011, they hired a pitching coach named Rick Adair, and he quit his post in August 2013 (one month into Scott Feldman's tenure with Baltimore). Arrieta has politely alluded to not caring for Adair's ptiching philosophy, whatever it is.
I believe the Orioles at the time had also tried to discourage what they saw as overreliance on the cutter by many of their pitching prospects, and that nasty slider/cutter hybrid that Jake throws is what makes him truly elite.
Quote from: SKO on August 31, 2015, 11:58:24 AM
Quote from: Brownie on August 31, 2015, 11:35:17 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 31, 2015, 11:25:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 31, 2015, 10:18:16 AM
Two years ago, Arrieta was mostly pitching in AAA and was basically the poster child for mediocrity, putting up a 4.08 ERA and 1.35 WHIP in 15 starts. Now he wears mustache pajamas to his no-hitter press conferences. What a world we live in.
That whole conversation they described between Jake and Theo when he first got to Chicago must have really twisted the knife for Orioles fans. He basically said the Orioles had tinkered with his delivery so much he couldn't tell up from down and all he wanted was for the Cubs to just let him go back to throwing the way that felt most natural to him, and good things have followed.
I'm sure the Cubs have done more than just get the hell out of his way, and there was a long hug and words exchanged between him and Chris Bosio that looked fairly emotional so I'm sure Jake gives a lot of credit to Chris for his success as well, but if Baltimore wasted all of that talent by trying to fix what wasn't broken, that's gotta hurt.
He was not exactly terrible in 2010 and up into June of 2011, pitching for a lousy team trying to rebuild. In 2011, they hired a pitching coach named Rick Adair, and he quit his post in August 2013 (one month into Scott Feldman's tenure with Baltimore). Arrieta has politely alluded to not caring for Adair's ptiching philosophy, whatever it is.
I believe the Orioles at the time had also tried to discourage what they saw as overreliance on the cutter by many of their pitching prospects, and that nasty slider/cutter hybrid that Jake throws is what makes him truly elite.
Slutter
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 31, 2015, 10:22:29 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on August 31, 2015, 09:53:56 AM
When you look at his splits for the month, they're pretty hard to believe. 4-1, a 1.93 ERA, and he allowed only 28 hits and 11 walks in 42.2 innings of work.
Except those were his insanely good July splits, upon which he improved in August. He's allowed only 19 hits this month, and only 2 earned runs. This has to be the best baseball we will ever see from a pitcher. Phenomenal.
Hi.
(http://www.realclearsports.com/blognetwork/rcs_sidelines/Orel%20Hershiser%20SI%20Cover.jpg)
Sorry -- to be clear, I meant to imply it's the best we'll see from a Cubs pitcher, specifically.
8IP, 4H, 0R. He's slipping.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on September 05, 2015, 04:27:32 PM
8IP, 4H, 0R. He's slipping.
This is your drop the mic moment. Grab that brass ring.
Quote from: Oleg on September 05, 2015, 08:55:54 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on September 05, 2015, 04:27:32 PM
8IP, 4H, 0R. He's slipping.
This is your drop the mic moment. Grab that brass ring.
8IP, 6H, 1ER. He's done lost it. That line won't be enough to beat Cole or Liriano at PNC.
That's probably the worst game Jake's pitched in over 2 months (lots of 2-0 counts in the first 4 IP, uncharacteristic of him) and yet he still ended up throwing 8 innings and allowed 1 run and managed to lower his ERA.
He has been positively Sutcliffian v.1984 since June. His viability for the Cy Young is so less laughable than it was a month ago. The. Balls.
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 01:42:27 AM
That's probably the worst game Jake's pitched in over 2 months (lots of 2-0 counts in the first 4 IP, uncharacteristic of him) and yet he still ended up throwing 8 innings and allowed 1 run and managed to lower his ERA.
He has been positively Sutcliffian v.1984 since June. His viability for the Cy Young is so less laughable than it was a month ago. The. Balls.
What?
Quote from: CT III on September 12, 2015, 07:33:55 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 01:42:27 AM
That's probably the worst game Jake's pitched in over 2 months (lots of 2-0 counts in the first 4 IP, uncharacteristic of him) and yet he still ended up throwing 8 innings and allowed 1 run and managed to lower his ERA.
He has been positively Sutcliffian v.1984 since June. His viability for the Cy Young is so less laughable than it was a month ago. The. Balls.
What?
1) I was drunk
2) see #1
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 09:23:07 AM
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
I had a long, hard look at this earlier today. It still clearly needs to be Greinke, although I agree: Arrieta has definitely strengthened his grip on second place and if Greinke gets shelled a couple of times in the next few weeks, who knows?
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 09:23:07 AM
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
I had a long, hard look at this earlier today. It still clearly needs to be Greinke Kershaw, although I agree: Arrieta has definitely strengthened his grip on second place and if Greinke gets shelled a couple of times in the next few weeks, who knows?
I fixed it for you.
Quote from: Oleg on September 12, 2015, 10:51:12 AM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 09:23:07 AM
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
I had a long, hard look at this earlier today. It still clearly needs to be Greinke Kershaw, although I agree: Arrieta has definitely strengthened his grip on second place and if Greinke gets shelled a couple of times in the next few weeks, who knows?
I fixed it for you.
Whuh?
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:57:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on September 12, 2015, 10:51:12 AM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 09:23:07 AM
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
I had a long, hard look at this earlier today. It still clearly needs to be Greinke Kershaw, although I agree: Arrieta has definitely strengthened his grip on second place and if Greinke gets shelled a couple of times in the next few weeks, who knows?
I fixed it for you.
Whuh?
I wouldn't say "clearly" but Kershaw, despite owning 3 of the last 4 CYA and having a historically good year, is completely under the radar. He'll probably finish 3rd due to the ERA and W numbers that Arrieta and Greinke have, but he's on pace for about an 8.5 WAR season. WAR is obviously a new invention, but there have been 55 such 8.5+ WAR pitching seasons since 1920 -- of those, 28 earned the CYA. Two occurred before the award was around, and 9 of the other 25 lost to one of those guys with an 8.5+ WAR season.
Here's the top 15 FIPs among qualified pitchers since 1969:
# Season Name Team W L SV G GS IP K/9 BB/9 HR/9 BABIP LOB% GB% HR/FB ERA FIP xFIP WAR
1 1999 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 23 4 0 31 29 213.1 13.20 1.56 0.38 .323 77.6 % 2.07 1.39 11.6
2 1984 Dwight Gooden Mets 17 9 0 31 31 218.0 11.39 3.01 0.29 .296 72.5 % 2.60 1.69 8.3
3 2014 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 21 3 0 27 27 198.1 10.85 1.41 0.41 .278 81.6 % 51.8 % 6.6 % 1.77 1.81 2.08 7.7
4 1971 Tom Seaver Mets 20 10 0 36 35 286.1 9.08 1.92 0.57 .263 85.7 % 1.76 1.94 9.1
5 2013 Matt Harvey Mets 9 5 0 26 26 178.1 9.64 1.56 0.35 .280 77.4 % 47.7 % 4.7 % 2.27 2.00 2.63 6.5
6 1972 Steve Carlton Phillies 27 10 0 41 41 346.1 8.06 2.26 0.44 .258 81.7 % 1.97 2.07 11.1
7 1995 Randy Johnson Mariners 18 2 0 30 30 214.1 12.35 2.73 0.50 .301 77.4 % 2.48 2.08 9.5
8 2015 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 13 6 0 28 28 201.0 11.60 1.61 0.63 .283 78.6 % 51.5 % 11.0 % 2.15 2.08 2.10 7.3
9 1981 Bill Gullickson Expos 7 9 0 22 22 157.1 6.58 1.94 0.17 .287 71.7 % 2.80 2.11 4.8
10 1985 Dwight Gooden Mets 24 4 0 35 35 276.2 8.72 2.24 0.42 .259 86.9 % 1.53 2.13 8.9
11 2001 Randy Johnson Diamondbacks 21 6 0 35 34 249.2 13.41 2.56 0.68 .315 80.5 % 2.49 2.13 10.4
12 1986 Mike Scott Astros 18 10 0 37 37 275.1 10.00 2.35 0.56 .247 78.8 % 2.22 2.16 8.6
13 1971 Don Sutton Dodgers 17 12 1 38 37 265.1 6.58 1.87 0.34 .278 74.4 % 2.54 2.16 7.1
14 2000 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 18 6 0 29 29 217.0 11.78 1.33 0.71 .236 86.6 % 1.74 2.17 9.4
15 1988 Roger Clemens Red Sox 18 12 0 35 35 264.0 9.92 2.11 0.58 .291 73.5 % 2.93 2.17 9.2But if you go back another ~50 years to 1920, he only drops down 6 slots to 14th (Gibson, Tiant, and Moose from '68; Koufax in '63 and '65; Newhouser in '46).
Quote from: ChuckD on September 12, 2015, 12:31:54 PM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:57:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on September 12, 2015, 10:51:12 AM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 09:23:07 AM
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
I had a long, hard look at this earlier today. It still clearly needs to be Greinke Kershaw, although I agree: Arrieta has definitely strengthened his grip on second place and if Greinke gets shelled a couple of times in the next few weeks, who knows?
I fixed it for you.
Whuh?
I wouldn't say "clearly" but Kershaw, despite owning 3 of the last 4 CYA and having a historically good year, is completely under the radar. He'll probably finish 3rd due to the ERA and W numbers that Arrieta and Greinke have, but he's on pace for about an 8.5 WAR season. WAR is obviously a new invention, but there have been 55 such 8.5+ WAR pitching seasons since 1920 -- of those, 28 earned the CYA. Two occurred before the award was around, and 9 of the other 25 lost to one of those guys with an 8.5+ WAR season.
Here's the top 15 FIPs among qualified pitchers since 1969:
# Season Name Team W L SV G GS IP K/9 BB/9 HR/9 BABIP LOB% GB% HR/FB ERA FIP xFIP WAR
1 1999 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 23 4 0 31 29 213.1 13.20 1.56 0.38 .323 77.6 % 2.07 1.39 11.6
2 1984 Dwight Gooden Mets 17 9 0 31 31 218.0 11.39 3.01 0.29 .296 72.5 % 2.60 1.69 8.3
3 2014 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 21 3 0 27 27 198.1 10.85 1.41 0.41 .278 81.6 % 51.8 % 6.6 % 1.77 1.81 2.08 7.7
4 1971 Tom Seaver Mets 20 10 0 36 35 286.1 9.08 1.92 0.57 .263 85.7 % 1.76 1.94 9.1
5 2013 Matt Harvey Mets 9 5 0 26 26 178.1 9.64 1.56 0.35 .280 77.4 % 47.7 % 4.7 % 2.27 2.00 2.63 6.5
6 1972 Steve Carlton Phillies 27 10 0 41 41 346.1 8.06 2.26 0.44 .258 81.7 % 1.97 2.07 11.1
7 1995 Randy Johnson Mariners 18 2 0 30 30 214.1 12.35 2.73 0.50 .301 77.4 % 2.48 2.08 9.5
8 2015 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 13 6 0 28 28 201.0 11.60 1.61 0.63 .283 78.6 % 51.5 % 11.0 % 2.15 2.08 2.10 7.3
9 1981 Bill Gullickson Expos 7 9 0 22 22 157.1 6.58 1.94 0.17 .287 71.7 % 2.80 2.11 4.8
10 1985 Dwight Gooden Mets 24 4 0 35 35 276.2 8.72 2.24 0.42 .259 86.9 % 1.53 2.13 8.9
11 2001 Randy Johnson Diamondbacks 21 6 0 35 34 249.2 13.41 2.56 0.68 .315 80.5 % 2.49 2.13 10.4
12 1986 Mike Scott Astros 18 10 0 37 37 275.1 10.00 2.35 0.56 .247 78.8 % 2.22 2.16 8.6
13 1971 Don Sutton Dodgers 17 12 1 38 37 265.1 6.58 1.87 0.34 .278 74.4 % 2.54 2.16 7.1
14 2000 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 18 6 0 29 29 217.0 11.78 1.33 0.71 .236 86.6 % 1.74 2.17 9.4
15 1988 Roger Clemens Red Sox 18 12 0 35 35 264.0 9.92 2.11 0.58 .291 73.5 % 2.93 2.17 9.2
But if you go back another ~50 years to 1920, he only drops down 6 slots to 14th (Gibson, Tiant, and Moose from '68; Koufax in '63 and '65; Newhouser in '46).
I was going on WAR:
Greinke: 8.0
Arrieta: 7.1
Kershaw: 6.5
Scherzer: 4.9
I don't care what Oleg's been smoking, Kershaw is having the third best season in the NL this year.
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 02:02:12 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 12, 2015, 12:31:54 PM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:57:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on September 12, 2015, 10:51:12 AM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 09:23:07 AM
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
I had a long, hard look at this earlier today. It still clearly needs to be Greinke Kershaw, although I agree: Arrieta has definitely strengthened his grip on second place and if Greinke gets shelled a couple of times in the next few weeks, who knows?
I fixed it for you.
Whuh?
I wouldn't say "clearly" but Kershaw, despite owning 3 of the last 4 CYA and having a historically good year, is completely under the radar. He'll probably finish 3rd due to the ERA and W numbers that Arrieta and Greinke have, but he's on pace for about an 8.5 WAR season. WAR is obviously a new invention, but there have been 55 such 8.5+ WAR pitching seasons since 1920 -- of those, 28 earned the CYA. Two occurred before the award was around, and 9 of the other 25 lost to one of those guys with an 8.5+ WAR season.
Here's the top 15 FIPs among qualified pitchers since 1969:
# Season Name Team W L SV G GS IP K/9 BB/9 HR/9 BABIP LOB% GB% HR/FB ERA FIP xFIP WAR
1 1999 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 23 4 0 31 29 213.1 13.20 1.56 0.38 .323 77.6 % 2.07 1.39 11.6
2 1984 Dwight Gooden Mets 17 9 0 31 31 218.0 11.39 3.01 0.29 .296 72.5 % 2.60 1.69 8.3
3 2014 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 21 3 0 27 27 198.1 10.85 1.41 0.41 .278 81.6 % 51.8 % 6.6 % 1.77 1.81 2.08 7.7
4 1971 Tom Seaver Mets 20 10 0 36 35 286.1 9.08 1.92 0.57 .263 85.7 % 1.76 1.94 9.1
5 2013 Matt Harvey Mets 9 5 0 26 26 178.1 9.64 1.56 0.35 .280 77.4 % 47.7 % 4.7 % 2.27 2.00 2.63 6.5
6 1972 Steve Carlton Phillies 27 10 0 41 41 346.1 8.06 2.26 0.44 .258 81.7 % 1.97 2.07 11.1
7 1995 Randy Johnson Mariners 18 2 0 30 30 214.1 12.35 2.73 0.50 .301 77.4 % 2.48 2.08 9.5
8 2015 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 13 6 0 28 28 201.0 11.60 1.61 0.63 .283 78.6 % 51.5 % 11.0 % 2.15 2.08 2.10 7.3
9 1981 Bill Gullickson Expos 7 9 0 22 22 157.1 6.58 1.94 0.17 .287 71.7 % 2.80 2.11 4.8
10 1985 Dwight Gooden Mets 24 4 0 35 35 276.2 8.72 2.24 0.42 .259 86.9 % 1.53 2.13 8.9
11 2001 Randy Johnson Diamondbacks 21 6 0 35 34 249.2 13.41 2.56 0.68 .315 80.5 % 2.49 2.13 10.4
12 1986 Mike Scott Astros 18 10 0 37 37 275.1 10.00 2.35 0.56 .247 78.8 % 2.22 2.16 8.6
13 1971 Don Sutton Dodgers 17 12 1 38 37 265.1 6.58 1.87 0.34 .278 74.4 % 2.54 2.16 7.1
14 2000 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 18 6 0 29 29 217.0 11.78 1.33 0.71 .236 86.6 % 1.74 2.17 9.4
15 1988 Roger Clemens Red Sox 18 12 0 35 35 264.0 9.92 2.11 0.58 .291 73.5 % 2.93 2.17 9.2
But if you go back another ~50 years to 1920, he only drops down 6 slots to 14th (Gibson, Tiant, and Moose from '68; Koufax in '63 and '65; Newhouser in '46).
I was going on WAR:
Greinke: 8.0
Arrieta: 7.1
Kershaw: 6.5
Scherzer: 4.9
I don't care what Oleg's been smoking, Kershaw is having the third best season in the NL this year.
You're using bWAR. fWAR (which is also what CD was using):
Kershaw: 7.3
Arrieta: 5.9
Greinke: 5.3
Scherzer: 5.0
The difference between Kershaw and Greinke is the same difference as Greinke to Shelby Miller.
Kershaw has also pitched more innings than Greinke with a FIP that's a more than a half a run better. He's also striking out a whole lot more hitters than Greinke is with a very similar BB rate (If you want give Greinke credit for allowing .1 fewer BB per 9, fine. If it wasn't for some April hiccups, this wouldn't be nearly as close as it is.
So, despite what I've been smoking, Kershaw is the best pitcher in the world. And, he only further proves that this year.
Quote from: Oleg on September 12, 2015, 02:21:04 PM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 02:02:12 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 12, 2015, 12:31:54 PM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:57:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on September 12, 2015, 10:51:12 AM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 09:23:07 AM
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
I had a long, hard look at this earlier today. It still clearly needs to be Greinke Kershaw, although I agree: Arrieta has definitely strengthened his grip on second place and if Greinke gets shelled a couple of times in the next few weeks, who knows?
I fixed it for you.
Whuh?
I wouldn't say "clearly" but Kershaw, despite owning 3 of the last 4 CYA and having a historically good year, is completely under the radar. He'll probably finish 3rd due to the ERA and W numbers that Arrieta and Greinke have, but he's on pace for about an 8.5 WAR season. WAR is obviously a new invention, but there have been 55 such 8.5+ WAR pitching seasons since 1920 -- of those, 28 earned the CYA. Two occurred before the award was around, and 9 of the other 25 lost to one of those guys with an 8.5+ WAR season.
Here's the top 15 FIPs among qualified pitchers since 1969:
# Season Name Team W L SV G GS IP K/9 BB/9 HR/9 BABIP LOB% GB% HR/FB ERA FIP xFIP WAR
1 1999 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 23 4 0 31 29 213.1 13.20 1.56 0.38 .323 77.6 % 2.07 1.39 11.6
2 1984 Dwight Gooden Mets 17 9 0 31 31 218.0 11.39 3.01 0.29 .296 72.5 % 2.60 1.69 8.3
3 2014 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 21 3 0 27 27 198.1 10.85 1.41 0.41 .278 81.6 % 51.8 % 6.6 % 1.77 1.81 2.08 7.7
4 1971 Tom Seaver Mets 20 10 0 36 35 286.1 9.08 1.92 0.57 .263 85.7 % 1.76 1.94 9.1
5 2013 Matt Harvey Mets 9 5 0 26 26 178.1 9.64 1.56 0.35 .280 77.4 % 47.7 % 4.7 % 2.27 2.00 2.63 6.5
6 1972 Steve Carlton Phillies 27 10 0 41 41 346.1 8.06 2.26 0.44 .258 81.7 % 1.97 2.07 11.1
7 1995 Randy Johnson Mariners 18 2 0 30 30 214.1 12.35 2.73 0.50 .301 77.4 % 2.48 2.08 9.5
8 2015 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 13 6 0 28 28 201.0 11.60 1.61 0.63 .283 78.6 % 51.5 % 11.0 % 2.15 2.08 2.10 7.3
9 1981 Bill Gullickson Expos 7 9 0 22 22 157.1 6.58 1.94 0.17 .287 71.7 % 2.80 2.11 4.8
10 1985 Dwight Gooden Mets 24 4 0 35 35 276.2 8.72 2.24 0.42 .259 86.9 % 1.53 2.13 8.9
11 2001 Randy Johnson Diamondbacks 21 6 0 35 34 249.2 13.41 2.56 0.68 .315 80.5 % 2.49 2.13 10.4
12 1986 Mike Scott Astros 18 10 0 37 37 275.1 10.00 2.35 0.56 .247 78.8 % 2.22 2.16 8.6
13 1971 Don Sutton Dodgers 17 12 1 38 37 265.1 6.58 1.87 0.34 .278 74.4 % 2.54 2.16 7.1
14 2000 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 18 6 0 29 29 217.0 11.78 1.33 0.71 .236 86.6 % 1.74 2.17 9.4
15 1988 Roger Clemens Red Sox 18 12 0 35 35 264.0 9.92 2.11 0.58 .291 73.5 % 2.93 2.17 9.2
But if you go back another ~50 years to 1920, he only drops down 6 slots to 14th (Gibson, Tiant, and Moose from '68; Koufax in '63 and '65; Newhouser in '46).
I was going on WAR:
Greinke: 8.0
Arrieta: 7.1
Kershaw: 6.5
Scherzer: 4.9
I don't care what Oleg's been smoking, Kershaw is having the third best season in the NL this year.
You're using bWAR. fWAR (which is also what CD was using):
Kershaw: 7.3
Arrieta: 5.9
Greinke: 5.3
Scherzer: 5.0
The difference between Kershaw and Greinke is the same difference as Greinke to Shelby Miller.
Kershaw has also pitched more innings than Greinke with a FIP that's a more than a half a run better. He's also striking out a whole lot more hitters than Greinke is with a very similar BB rate (If you want give Greinke credit for allowing .1 fewer BB per 9, fine. If it wasn't for some April hiccups, this wouldn't be nearly as close as it is.
So, despite what I've been smoking, Kershaw is the best pitcher in the world. And, he only further proves that this year.
fWAR is for the birds.
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 02:48:42 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 12, 2015, 02:21:04 PM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 02:02:12 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 12, 2015, 12:31:54 PM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:57:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on September 12, 2015, 10:51:12 AM
Quote from: Tonker on September 12, 2015, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 12, 2015, 09:23:07 AM
But I think what I was trying to say was that it's so much less laughable in relation to Greinke's chances of winning it, which seemed like a shoo-in. Greinke hasn't fallen off; Jake's just managed to close the gap.
I had a long, hard look at this earlier today. It still clearly needs to be Greinke Kershaw, although I agree: Arrieta has definitely strengthened his grip on second place and if Greinke gets shelled a couple of times in the next few weeks, who knows?
I fixed it for you.
Whuh?
I wouldn't say "clearly" but Kershaw, despite owning 3 of the last 4 CYA and having a historically good year, is completely under the radar. He'll probably finish 3rd due to the ERA and W numbers that Arrieta and Greinke have, but he's on pace for about an 8.5 WAR season. WAR is obviously a new invention, but there have been 55 such 8.5+ WAR pitching seasons since 1920 -- of those, 28 earned the CYA. Two occurred before the award was around, and 9 of the other 25 lost to one of those guys with an 8.5+ WAR season.
Here's the top 15 FIPs among qualified pitchers since 1969:
# Season Name Team W L SV G GS IP K/9 BB/9 HR/9 BABIP LOB% GB% HR/FB ERA FIP xFIP WAR
1 1999 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 23 4 0 31 29 213.1 13.20 1.56 0.38 .323 77.6 % 2.07 1.39 11.6
2 1984 Dwight Gooden Mets 17 9 0 31 31 218.0 11.39 3.01 0.29 .296 72.5 % 2.60 1.69 8.3
3 2014 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 21 3 0 27 27 198.1 10.85 1.41 0.41 .278 81.6 % 51.8 % 6.6 % 1.77 1.81 2.08 7.7
4 1971 Tom Seaver Mets 20 10 0 36 35 286.1 9.08 1.92 0.57 .263 85.7 % 1.76 1.94 9.1
5 2013 Matt Harvey Mets 9 5 0 26 26 178.1 9.64 1.56 0.35 .280 77.4 % 47.7 % 4.7 % 2.27 2.00 2.63 6.5
6 1972 Steve Carlton Phillies 27 10 0 41 41 346.1 8.06 2.26 0.44 .258 81.7 % 1.97 2.07 11.1
7 1995 Randy Johnson Mariners 18 2 0 30 30 214.1 12.35 2.73 0.50 .301 77.4 % 2.48 2.08 9.5
8 2015 Clayton Kershaw Dodgers 13 6 0 28 28 201.0 11.60 1.61 0.63 .283 78.6 % 51.5 % 11.0 % 2.15 2.08 2.10 7.3
9 1981 Bill Gullickson Expos 7 9 0 22 22 157.1 6.58 1.94 0.17 .287 71.7 % 2.80 2.11 4.8
10 1985 Dwight Gooden Mets 24 4 0 35 35 276.2 8.72 2.24 0.42 .259 86.9 % 1.53 2.13 8.9
11 2001 Randy Johnson Diamondbacks 21 6 0 35 34 249.2 13.41 2.56 0.68 .315 80.5 % 2.49 2.13 10.4
12 1986 Mike Scott Astros 18 10 0 37 37 275.1 10.00 2.35 0.56 .247 78.8 % 2.22 2.16 8.6
13 1971 Don Sutton Dodgers 17 12 1 38 37 265.1 6.58 1.87 0.34 .278 74.4 % 2.54 2.16 7.1
14 2000 Pedro Martinez Red Sox 18 6 0 29 29 217.0 11.78 1.33 0.71 .236 86.6 % 1.74 2.17 9.4
15 1988 Roger Clemens Red Sox 18 12 0 35 35 264.0 9.92 2.11 0.58 .291 73.5 % 2.93 2.17 9.2
But if you go back another ~50 years to 1920, he only drops down 6 slots to 14th (Gibson, Tiant, and Moose from '68; Koufax in '63 and '65; Newhouser in '46).
I was going on WAR:
Greinke: 8.0
Arrieta: 7.1
Kershaw: 6.5
Scherzer: 4.9
I don't care what Oleg's been smoking, Kershaw is having the third best season in the NL this year.
You're using bWAR. fWAR (which is also what CD was using):
Kershaw: 7.3
Arrieta: 5.9
Greinke: 5.3
Scherzer: 5.0
The difference between Kershaw and Greinke is the same difference as Greinke to Shelby Miller.
Kershaw has also pitched more innings than Greinke with a FIP that's a more than a half a run better. He's also striking out a whole lot more hitters than Greinke is with a very similar BB rate (If you want give Greinke credit for allowing .1 fewer BB per 9, fine. If it wasn't for some April hiccups, this wouldn't be nearly as close as it is.
So, despite what I've been smoking, Kershaw is the best pitcher in the world. And, he only further proves that this year.
fWAR is for the birds.
I generally think bWAR vs fWAR is a wash for position players, but bWAR for pitchers is heavily flawed and I believe it relies heavily on ERA, which is itself a problematic stat. So in general I just use fWAR.
I know it works differently than politics but I wonder if there's any chance Greinke and Kershaw somehow "split" the vote, paving the way for Jake.
How many BBWAA writers with Cy Young votes know anything about advanced statistics?
My guess is the best combination of wins, strikeouts ane ERA wins.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 13, 2015, 11:53:01 AM
How many BBWAA writers with Cy Young votes know anything about advanced statistics?
My guess is the best combination of wins, strikeouts ane ERA wins.
Meh. It might end up that way, because leading the league in those things has a close correlation with being the best pitcher; but these days, more and more BBWAA writers are aware of the more common advanced stats. I have increasing confidence in their not just picking the guy who has 22 wins, anyway (which in this case, is actually a shame).
Quote from: PANK! on September 13, 2015, 09:17:22 AM
I know it works differently than politics but I wonder if there's any chance Greinke and Kershaw somehow "split" the vote, paving the way for Jake.
If half the writers vote Kershaw first and the other half vote Greinke first and everyone votes Arrieta second, would that do it?
Quote from: Oleg on September 13, 2015, 07:08:28 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 13, 2015, 09:17:22 AM
I know it works differently than politics but I wonder if there's any chance Greinke and Kershaw somehow "split" the vote, paving the way for Jake.
If half the writers vote Kershaw first and the other half vote Greinke first and everyone votes Arrieta second, would that do it?
No. It's basically impossible to win the award without receiving 1st place votes.
1st - 7 pts per vote
2nd - 4
3rd - 3
4th - 2
5th - 1
If (by some statistical improbability) Kershaw/Greinke each received 15 1st place votes and 15 3rd place votes while Arrieta swept all 30 2nd place votes:
Kershaw: 15 * 7 + 15 * 3 = 150 points
Greinke: 15 * 7 + 15 * 3 = 150 points
Arrieta: 30 * 4 = 120 points
Now, if Kershaw and Greinke received 15 1st place votes and 15 fifth place votes, and Arrieta swept all 30 of the 2nd place votes, you'd have a 3-way tie at 120 points.
Quote from: ChuckD on September 13, 2015, 07:34:40 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 13, 2015, 07:08:28 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 13, 2015, 09:17:22 AM
I know it works differently than politics but I wonder if there's any chance Greinke and Kershaw somehow "split" the vote, paving the way for Jake.
If half the writers vote Kershaw first and the other half vote Greinke first and everyone votes Arrieta second, would that do it?
No. It's basically impossible to win the award without receiving 1st place votes.
1st - 7 pts per vote
2nd - 4
3rd - 3
4th - 2
5th - 1
If (by some statistical improbability) Kershaw/Greinke each received 15 1st place votes and 15 3rd place votes while Arrieta swept all 30 2nd place votes:
Kershaw: 15 * 7 + 15 * 3 = 150 points
Greinke: 15 * 7 + 15 * 3 = 150 points
Arrieta: 30 * 4 = 120 points
Now, if Kershaw and Greinke received 15 1st place votes and 15 fifth place votes, and Arrieta swept all 30 of the 2nd place votes, you'd have a 3-way tie at 120 points.
And we could all enjoy the witch hunt for the guys who decided Kershaw or Greinke were the 5th best pitcher in the National League.
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Never assume. Jake has no need of bullpens
CG 3H SO with 11K's, what a bum, Feldman would've had at least a no-no.
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
Quick glance of Sut's splits (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=sutclri01&year=1984&t=p#month_extra::none) for 1984 tell me that if he and Jake were on the 84 Cubs, the Red Baron would have started game 2.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Quick glance of Sut's splits for 1984 tell me that if he and Jake were on the 84 Cubs, the Red Baron would have started game 2.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
Quick glance at this post tells me that Fork still hasn't figured out how quotes work.
Quote from: Tonker on September 23, 2015, 08:20:59 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Quick glance of Sut's splits for 1984 tell me that if he and Jake were on the 84 Cubs, the Red Baron would have started game 2.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
Quick glance at this post tells me that Fork still hasn't figured out how quotes work.
DPD.
ESPN puts Jake's run into context (http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/63176/tuesdays-top-5-jake-arrieta-is-good).
QuoteJake Arrieta has an ERA of 0.86 in 13 starts since the ASB. No pitcher has ever recorded a sub-1.00 ERA after ASB with at least 13 starts.
QuoteJake Arrieta's shutout gives him a 0.48 ERA since Aug. 4, 4th-best mark in 10-game stretch since ER became official in both leagues in 1913.
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
When adjusted for league environment, Prior's August/September in '03 was pretty fucking special. And, yet, I'm still guessing Arrieta's run blows it away.
Just for reference, Prior's last 11 starts in '03:
82.2 IP, 67 H, 95:16 K:BB, 1.52 ERA. Despite a .309 BABIP, he still only gave up a slash line of 221/265/327. That ERA must have been an ERA+ in the 250 range, I'm guessing.
For league reference, it seems Prior led the league in FIP that year with a 2.47.
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
When adjusted for league environment, Prior's August/September in '03 was pretty fucking special. And, yet, I'm still guessing Arrieta's run blows it away.
Just for reference, Prior's last 11 starts in '03:
82.2 IP, 67 H, 95:16 K:BB, 1.52 ERA. Despite a .309 BABIP, he still only gave up a slash line of 221/265/327. That ERA must have been an ERA+ in the 250 range, I'm guessing.
For league reference, it seems Prior led the league in FIP that year with a 2.47.
I've always felt Prior could've been the Cy Young winner that year. As I said earlier, I never thought I'd see better pitching from a Cub than what Prior did those months in '03. I've gotten used to being wrong.
Quote from: Canadouche on September 23, 2015, 12:14:04 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
When adjusted for league environment, Prior's August/September in '03 was pretty fucking special. And, yet, I'm still guessing Arrieta's run blows it away.
Just for reference, Prior's last 11 starts in '03:
82.2 IP, 67 H, 95:16 K:BB, 1.52 ERA. Despite a .309 BABIP, he still only gave up a slash line of 221/265/327. That ERA must have been an ERA+ in the 250 range, I'm guessing.
For league reference, it seems Prior led the league in FIP that year with a 2.47.
I've always felt Prior could've been the Cy Young winner that year. As I said earlier, I never thought I'd see better pitching from a Cub than what Prior did those months in '03. I've gotten used to being wrong.
I think his year in '03 gets lost in Cubs history. It truly was an amazing performance. He was a 7.8 fWAR pitcher that year.
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on September 23, 2015, 12:14:04 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
When adjusted for league environment, Prior's August/September in '03 was pretty fucking special. And, yet, I'm still guessing Arrieta's run blows it away.
Just for reference, Prior's last 11 starts in '03:
82.2 IP, 67 H, 95:16 K:BB, 1.52 ERA. Despite a .309 BABIP, he still only gave up a slash line of 221/265/327. That ERA must have been an ERA+ in the 250 range, I'm guessing.
For league reference, it seems Prior led the league in FIP that year with a 2.47.
I've always felt Prior could've been the Cy Young winner that year. As I said earlier, I never thought I'd see better pitching from a Cub than what Prior did those months in '03. I've gotten used to being wrong.
I think his year in '03 gets lost in Cubs history. It truly was an amazing performance. He was a 7.8 fWAR pitcher that year.
It's just too hard to really appreciate when it's followed by overwhelming bitterness and sadness at the very thought of what happened afterwards. I try not to remind myself of Mark Prior, period.
Quote from: SKO on September 23, 2015, 12:22:56 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on September 23, 2015, 12:14:04 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
When adjusted for league environment, Prior's August/September in '03 was pretty fucking special. And, yet, I'm still guessing Arrieta's run blows it away.
Just for reference, Prior's last 11 starts in '03:
82.2 IP, 67 H, 95:16 K:BB, 1.52 ERA. Despite a .309 BABIP, he still only gave up a slash line of 221/265/327. That ERA must have been an ERA+ in the 250 range, I'm guessing.
For league reference, it seems Prior led the league in FIP that year with a 2.47.
I've always felt Prior could've been the Cy Young winner that year. As I said earlier, I never thought I'd see better pitching from a Cub than what Prior did those months in '03. I've gotten used to being wrong.
I think his year in '03 gets lost in Cubs history. It truly was an amazing performance. He was a 7.8 fWAR pitcher that year.
It's just too hard to really appreciate when it's followed by overwhelming bitterness and sadness at the very thought of what happened afterwards. I try not to remind myself of Mark Prior, period.
It was a long time ago. I'm with you on the bitterness and sadness although over time it has turned into just massive disappointment. Maybe I'm just getting old and soft but I've been better about separating the good from the bad without letting either affect the other too much. The Cubs were amazing and fun to watch that year. The Cubs were also a nut-punch that will take WS to heal. I think I can look at each of those things as its own thing.
But, Dusty Baker can still get bent.
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:28:42 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 23, 2015, 12:22:56 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on September 23, 2015, 12:14:04 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
When adjusted for league environment, Prior's August/September in '03 was pretty fucking special. And, yet, I'm still guessing Arrieta's run blows it away.
Just for reference, Prior's last 11 starts in '03:
82.2 IP, 67 H, 95:16 K:BB, 1.52 ERA. Despite a .309 BABIP, he still only gave up a slash line of 221/265/327. That ERA must have been an ERA+ in the 250 range, I'm guessing.
For league reference, it seems Prior led the league in FIP that year with a 2.47.
I've always felt Prior could've been the Cy Young winner that year. As I said earlier, I never thought I'd see better pitching from a Cub than what Prior did those months in '03. I've gotten used to being wrong.
I think his year in '03 gets lost in Cubs history. It truly was an amazing performance. He was a 7.8 fWAR pitcher that year.
It's just too hard to really appreciate when it's followed by overwhelming bitterness and sadness at the very thought of what happened afterwards. I try not to remind myself of Mark Prior, period.
It was a long time ago. I'm with you on the bitterness and sadness although over time it has turned into just massive disappointment. Maybe I'm just getting old and soft but I've been better about separating the good from the bad without letting either affect the other too much. The Cubs were amazing and fun to watch that year. The Cubs were also a nut-punch that will take WS to heal. I think I can look at each of those things as its own thing.
But, Dusty Baker can still get bent.
I have a lot of stupid emotions tied up in the 2003 Cubs and I have a hard time focusing on the positives. My grandpa is the reason I am a diehard Cubs fan. He had brain hemorrhages in May of that year, and was supposed to be dead in a few weeks. Somewhat miraculously (to the point that doctors wrote a paper about him because it was so unprecedented) his brain matter regenerated and he lived another six months. He and I spent a lot of time that summer watching those Cubs. I was young and stupid and naïve enough to tell myself that they were going to pull it off and maybe, just maybe, that's part of why Grandpa got all that extra time.
I remember waiting during game six with the phone by my side, ready to call him as soon as they clinched. After it was over I was too upset to even talk about it. We lost him a couple of months later. I wanted that world series so badly, and I don't know that I'll ever not be mad beyond all reason about it, even when they do finally win one. I wanted
that one specifically.
This was a bit heavy for desipio. My bad. Dusty Baker
can get bent. Forever.
Quote from: SKO on September 23, 2015, 12:37:38 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:28:42 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 23, 2015, 12:22:56 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on September 23, 2015, 12:14:04 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
When adjusted for league environment, Prior's August/September in '03 was pretty fucking special. And, yet, I'm still guessing Arrieta's run blows it away.
Just for reference, Prior's last 11 starts in '03:
82.2 IP, 67 H, 95:16 K:BB, 1.52 ERA. Despite a .309 BABIP, he still only gave up a slash line of 221/265/327. That ERA must have been an ERA+ in the 250 range, I'm guessing.
For league reference, it seems Prior led the league in FIP that year with a 2.47.
I've always felt Prior could've been the Cy Young winner that year. As I said earlier, I never thought I'd see better pitching from a Cub than what Prior did those months in '03. I've gotten used to being wrong.
I think his year in '03 gets lost in Cubs history. It truly was an amazing performance. He was a 7.8 fWAR pitcher that year.
It's just too hard to really appreciate when it's followed by overwhelming bitterness and sadness at the very thought of what happened afterwards. I try not to remind myself of Mark Prior, period.
It was a long time ago. I'm with you on the bitterness and sadness although over time it has turned into just massive disappointment. Maybe I'm just getting old and soft but I've been better about separating the good from the bad without letting either affect the other too much. The Cubs were amazing and fun to watch that year. The Cubs were also a nut-punch that will take WS to heal. I think I can look at each of those things as its own thing.
But, Dusty Baker can still get bent.
I have a lot of stupid emotions tied up in the 2003 Cubs and I have a hard time focusing on the positives. My grandpa is the reason I am a diehard Cubs fan. He had brain hemorrhages in May of that year, and was supposed to be dead in a few weeks. Somewhat miraculously (to the point that doctors wrote a paper about him because it was so unprecedented) his brain matter regenerated and he lived another six months. He and I spent a lot of time that summer watching those Cubs. I was young and stupid and naïve enough to tell myself that they were going to pull it off and maybe, just maybe, that's part of why Grandpa got all that extra time.
I remember waiting during game six with the phone by my side, ready to call him as soon as they clinched. After it was over I was too upset to even talk about it. We lost him a couple of months later. I wanted that world series so badly, and I don't know that I'll ever not be mad beyond all reason about it, even when they do finally win one. I wanted that one specifically.
This was a bit heavy for desipio. My bad. Dusty Baker can get bent. Forever.
Jesus, man. Sorry to hear. I think it's a solid reminder that, although there are many, many things more important than sports fandom, sports fandom can still have an emotional impact on our lives. In some ways, I'm glad and sad that I don't share that with my dad or anyone else in my family. Makes it easier to separate those things. But, it also means I live somewhat vicariously and will enjoy the everlasting shit out of the Cubs WS for those of you who do have that sports bond with yours.
All that happened to me was making out with some random chick in the upper deck of Joe Robbie stadium in a drunken haze during game 5.
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:45:15 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 23, 2015, 12:37:38 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:28:42 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 23, 2015, 12:22:56 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on September 23, 2015, 12:14:04 PM
Quote from: Oleg on September 23, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 07:28:03 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 23, 2015, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on September 22, 2015, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 22, 2015, 09:08:18 PM
Assuming he's done....8 shutout innings and an ERA down to 1.88. Jesus Christ
Since the beginning of August: 10 GS, 74.1 IP, 7 R, 4 ER, 38 H, 1 HR, 71 SO, 14 BB, 0.70 WHIP, 0.48 ERA, 5.1 SO:BB
I can safely say I've never seen anything like this.
Closest thing I could compare it to would be '84 Sutcliffe and I'd be willing to bet Sut's numbers don't hold a candle to this.
When adjusted for league environment, Prior's August/September in '03 was pretty fucking special. And, yet, I'm still guessing Arrieta's run blows it away.
Just for reference, Prior's last 11 starts in '03:
82.2 IP, 67 H, 95:16 K:BB, 1.52 ERA. Despite a .309 BABIP, he still only gave up a slash line of 221/265/327. That ERA must have been an ERA+ in the 250 range, I'm guessing.
For league reference, it seems Prior led the league in FIP that year with a 2.47.
I've always felt Prior could've been the Cy Young winner that year. As I said earlier, I never thought I'd see better pitching from a Cub than what Prior did those months in '03. I've gotten used to being wrong.
I think his year in '03 gets lost in Cubs history. It truly was an amazing performance. He was a 7.8 fWAR pitcher that year.
It's just too hard to really appreciate when it's followed by overwhelming bitterness and sadness at the very thought of what happened afterwards. I try not to remind myself of Mark Prior, period.
It was a long time ago. I'm with you on the bitterness and sadness although over time it has turned into just massive disappointment. Maybe I'm just getting old and soft but I've been better about separating the good from the bad without letting either affect the other too much. The Cubs were amazing and fun to watch that year. The Cubs were also a nut-punch that will take WS to heal. I think I can look at each of those things as its own thing.
But, Dusty Baker can still get bent.
I have a lot of stupid emotions tied up in the 2003 Cubs and I have a hard time focusing on the positives. My grandpa is the reason I am a diehard Cubs fan. He had brain hemorrhages in May of that year, and was supposed to be dead in a few weeks. Somewhat miraculously (to the point that doctors wrote a paper about him because it was so unprecedented) his brain matter regenerated and he lived another six months. He and I spent a lot of time that summer watching those Cubs. I was young and stupid and naïve enough to tell myself that they were going to pull it off and maybe, just maybe, that's part of why Grandpa got all that extra time.
I remember waiting during game six with the phone by my side, ready to call him as soon as they clinched. After it was over I was too upset to even talk about it. We lost him a couple of months later. I wanted that world series so badly, and I don't know that I'll ever not be mad beyond all reason about it, even when they do finally win one. I wanted that one specifically.
This was a bit heavy for desipio. My bad. Dusty Baker can get bent. Forever.
Jesus, man. Sorry to hear. I think it's a solid reminder that, although there are many, many things more important than sports fandom, sports fandom can still have an emotional impact on our lives. In some ways, I'm glad and sad that I don't share that with my dad or anyone else in my family. Makes it easier to separate those things. But, it also means I live somewhat vicariously and will enjoy the everlasting shit out of the Cubs WS for those of you who do have that sports bond with yours.
All that happened to me was making out with some random chick in the upper deck of Joe Robbie stadium in a drunken haze during game 5.
and Thrill was behind you pointing at you guys whilst a picture was taken
So.... Jake Arrieta, you guys.
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:12:58 PM
So.... Jake Arrieta, you guys.
If he pitches the coin-flip game on Wednesday, he should be good for Game 3 the following Monday, right?
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 02:14:59 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:12:58 PM
So.... Jake Arrieta, you guys.
If he pitches the coin-flip game on Wednesday, he should be good for Game 3 the following Monday, right?
Good Lord willin' and the creek don't rise, I'd say yesir.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 02:14:59 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:12:58 PM
So.... Jake Arrieta, you guys.
If he pitches the coin-flip game on Wednesday, he should be good for Game 3 the following Monday, right?
Yep.
Better question is considering that he'd be pitching the Coin Flip game on a normal 4 days rest, provided he continues to pitch on 4 days rest the remainder of the season...should Jake *only* pitch his next start, on 4 days rest, next Sunday vs. Pittsburgh and then rest for 9 days until the Coin Flip game, or continue to throw 5 days after Pittsburgh, on the final Friday of the season of the season, even if their fate is sealed and they're locked into whatever position they're in?
My Solomonesque solution is pitch him on Friday, October 2nd, but pull him after 5 IP (or fewer). He's so hot I definitely don't want to see him go 9 days without pitching because I can easily imagine that backfiring but I also wouldn't mind seeing him get a
little rest.
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 02:22:15 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 02:14:59 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:12:58 PM
So.... Jake Arrieta, you guys.
If he pitches the coin-flip game on Wednesday, he should be good for Game 3 the following Monday, right?
Yep.
Better question is considering that he'd be pitching the Coin Flip game on a normal 4 days rest, provided he continues to pitch on 4 days rest the remainder of the season...should Jake *only* pitch his next start, on 4 days rest, next Sunday vs. Pittsburgh and then rest for 9 days until the Coin Flip game, or continue to throw 5 days after Pittsburgh, on the final Friday of the season of the season, even if their fate is sealed and they're locked into whatever position they're in?
My Solomonesque solution is pitch him on Friday, October 2nd, but pull him after 5 IP (or fewer). He's so hot I definitely don't want to see him go 9 days without pitching because I can easily imagine that backfiring but I also wouldn't mind seeing him get a little rest.
I approve of this plan. The extra rest can dick around with pitchers' control. And you can't have that in a one and done situation.
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:26:59 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 02:22:15 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 02:14:59 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:12:58 PM
So.... Jake Arrieta, you guys.
If he pitches the coin-flip game on Wednesday, he should be good for Game 3 the following Monday, right?
Yep.
Better question is considering that he'd be pitching the Coin Flip game on a normal 4 days rest, provided he continues to pitch on 4 days rest the remainder of the season...should Jake *only* pitch his next start, on 4 days rest, next Sunday vs. Pittsburgh and then rest for 9 days until the Coin Flip game, or continue to throw 5 days after Pittsburgh, on the final Friday of the season of the season, even if their fate is sealed and they're locked into whatever position they're in?
My Solomonesque solution is pitch him on Friday, October 2nd, but pull him after 5 IP (or fewer). He's so hot I definitely don't want to see him go 9 days without pitching because I can easily imagine that backfiring but I also wouldn't mind seeing him get a little rest.
I approve of this plan. The extra rest can dick around with pitchers' control. And you can't have that in a one and done situation.
I agree with this. Let him go 5 just to keep his groove, but he comes out even if there's a no-hitter going.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 02:34:36 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:26:59 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 02:22:15 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 02:14:59 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:12:58 PM
So.... Jake Arrieta, you guys.
If he pitches the coin-flip game on Wednesday, he should be good for Game 3 the following Monday, right?
Yep.
Better question is considering that he'd be pitching the Coin Flip game on a normal 4 days rest, provided he continues to pitch on 4 days rest the remainder of the season...should Jake *only* pitch his next start, on 4 days rest, next Sunday vs. Pittsburgh and then rest for 9 days until the Coin Flip game, or continue to throw 5 days after Pittsburgh, on the final Friday of the season of the season, even if their fate is sealed and they're locked into whatever position they're in?
My Solomonesque solution is pitch him on Friday, October 2nd, but pull him after 5 IP (or fewer). He's so hot I definitely don't want to see him go 9 days without pitching because I can easily imagine that backfiring but I also wouldn't mind seeing him get a little rest.
I approve of this plan. The extra rest can dick around with pitchers' control. And you can't have that in a one and done situation.
I agree with this. Let him go 5 just to keep his groove, but he comes out even if there's a no-hitter going.
Someone fax this thread to Joe's office.
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 23, 2015, 05:41:27 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 02:34:36 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:26:59 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 23, 2015, 02:22:15 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 23, 2015, 02:14:59 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on September 23, 2015, 02:12:58 PM
So.... Jake Arrieta, you guys.
If he pitches the coin-flip game on Wednesday, he should be good for Game 3 the following Monday, right?
Yep.
Better question is considering that he'd be pitching the Coin Flip game on a normal 4 days rest, provided he continues to pitch on 4 days rest the remainder of the season...should Jake *only* pitch his next start, on 4 days rest, next Sunday vs. Pittsburgh and then rest for 9 days until the Coin Flip game, or continue to throw 5 days after Pittsburgh, on the final Friday of the season of the season, even if their fate is sealed and they're locked into whatever position they're in?
My Solomonesque solution is pitch him on Friday, October 2nd, but pull him after 5 IP (or fewer). He's so hot I definitely don't want to see him go 9 days without pitching because I can easily imagine that backfiring but I also wouldn't mind seeing him get a little rest.
I approve of this plan. The extra rest can dick around with pitchers' control. And you can't have that in a one and done situation.
I agree with this. Let him go 5 just to keep his groove, but he comes out even if there's a no-hitter going.
Someone fax this thread to Joe's office.
I'm on hold with his secretary.
Quote from: PenFoe on September 23, 2015, 05:54:58 PM
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
For some convoluted reason, his not winning the Cy Young and winning the MVP would only make him more awesome.
But yeah, I expect him to get some votes. Although I think Rizzo will probably get more.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 24, 2015, 08:08:28 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on September 23, 2015, 05:54:58 PM
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
For some convoluted reason, his not winning the Cy Young and winning the MVP would only make him more awesome.
But yeah, I expect him to get some votes. Although I think Rizzo will probably get more.
My pointless prediction is Jake finishes 2nd to Greinke and Rizzo finishes third behind Harper and Goldschmidt.
And I think those are fair results.
Quote from: Slaky on September 24, 2015, 08:17:25 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 24, 2015, 08:08:28 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on September 23, 2015, 05:54:58 PM
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
For some convoluted reason, his not winning the Cy Young and winning the MVP would only make him more awesome.
But yeah, I expect him to get some votes. Although I think Rizzo will probably get more.
My pointless prediction is Jake finishes 2nd to Greinke and Rizzo finishes third behind Harper and Goldschmidt.
And I think those are fair results.
They are. I wonder if Rizzo might have passed Goldschmidt for second place, whatever that's worth (nothing), with the Diamondbacks falling completely out of contention. He was more of a story when they were inexplicably .500 largely due to him playing out of his mind.
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 24, 2015, 08:17:25 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 24, 2015, 08:08:28 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on September 23, 2015, 05:54:58 PM
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
For some convoluted reason, his not winning the Cy Young and winning the MVP would only make him more awesome.
But yeah, I expect him to get some votes. Although I think Rizzo will probably get more.
My pointless prediction is Jake finishes 2nd to Greinke and Rizzo finishes third behind Harper and Goldschmidt.
And I think those are fair results.
They are. I wonder if Rizzo might have passed Goldschmidt for second place, whatever that's worth (nothing), with the Diamondbacks falling completely out of contention. He was more of a story when they were inexplicably .500 largely due to him playing out of his mind.
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
He'll get more than one. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Schwarber gets at least one 10th place vote.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 24, 2015, 09:01:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 24, 2015, 08:17:25 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 24, 2015, 08:08:28 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on September 23, 2015, 05:54:58 PM
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
For some convoluted reason, his not winning the Cy Young and winning the MVP would only make him more awesome.
But yeah, I expect him to get some votes. Although I think Rizzo will probably get more.
My pointless prediction is Jake finishes 2nd to Greinke and Rizzo finishes third behind Harper and Goldschmidt.
And I think those are fair results.
They are. I wonder if Rizzo might have passed Goldschmidt for second place, whatever that's worth (nothing), with the Diamondbacks falling completely out of contention. He was more of a story when they were inexplicably .500 largely due to him playing out of his mind.
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
He'll get more than one. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Schwarber gets at least one 10th place vote.
That catch he made last night salvaged almost the entire shitty loss for me, entertainment-wise. He gets one, 79th place vote on my ballot for that alone. For being Babe fucking Ruth, he also gets slotted in 78-3 behind Rizzo and Bryant.
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
And I think it's because Rizzo is not a rookie and Bryant is. Not that it's really logical, but I think people think "Well, Bryant is getting ROY and he can't be getting TWO awards"
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2015, 11:01:33 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
And I think it's because Rizzo is not a rookie and Bryant is. Not that it's really logical, but I think people think "Well, Bryant is getting ROY and he can't be getting TWO awards"
Does it matter that Rizzo plays his position with Gold Glove caliber while Bryant appears adequate at a few others? I'm not ragging Bryant's defense. It is better than they told us it would be but Rizzo probably does things at first that don't show up in defensive metrics, like going backside over tea kettle into a throng of Chads and Trixies for a foul pop. That's worth a vote IMO.
Quote from: InternetApex on September 24, 2015, 11:13:07 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2015, 11:01:33 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
And I think it's because Rizzo is not a rookie and Bryant is. Not that it's really logical, but I think people think "Well, Bryant is getting ROY and he can't be getting TWO awards"
Does it matter that Rizzo plays his position with Gold Glove caliber while Bryant appears adequate at a few others? I'm not ragging Bryant's defense. It is better than they told us it would be but Rizzo probably does things at first that don't show up in defensive metrics, like going backside over tea kettle into a throng of Chads and Trixies for a foul pop. That's worth a vote IMO.
Could be? My guess it's a combination of all these things. Certainly no one is saying Rizzo isn't deserving of some votes, and while I love advanced stats I don't rigidly adhere to "X's WAR is better than Y's WAR so there's no argument to be made so however about Y possibly being better". My original point was to note that Kris has been so great he probably deserves a few token votes, too. Not that Tony deserves any less. Tony rules.
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Because the Cubs' PR department is creating more buzz for Rizzo? Plus, Rizzo got a decent number of votes last season.
Quote from: PenFoe on September 23, 2015, 05:54:58 PM
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
Are we not doing 'phrasing' anymore?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 24, 2015, 02:36:44 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on September 23, 2015, 05:54:58 PM
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
Are we not doing 'phrasing' anymore?
(||)
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 24, 2015, 02:36:44 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on September 23, 2015, 05:54:58 PM
I know that MVP doesn't really mean that much (I'm sure it does to the winner) but I could easily be convinced that Arrieta should finish second in the MVP vote behind Harper this year (excepting all the votes for David Ross for bringing the team together and teaching them all how to be winners.)
Obviously I pay much more attention to the Cubs than other teams, but the effect he has on this team overall is amazing. And it's not even just about affecting the bullpen and pitching staffs the days before and after, it's just knowing that every Jake Day, they're going to win or at least should win. Stop a losing streak, keep winning, whatever it is, just that the Cubs are going to basically be awesome that day.
I'm sure there are tons of valid arguments why a guy who only plays in 20% of the games can't justifiably be an MVP, but this dude just feels much, much bigger than that.
Are we not doing 'phrasing' anymore?
It's the way Pen phrased it in his dreams.
Some fun reading on Our Man Jake (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/24/sports/baseball/cubs-jake-arrieta-keeps-his-view-of-the-playoffs-unobstructed.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-3&action=click&contentCollection=Baseball®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article)...
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
I feel like Rizzo started out hot and that started the MVP talk early on, while Bryant was held out for a few weeks and then had the long homer drought at the beginning. Basically, Rizzo had a head start on any MVP consideration.
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
Well, despite all the showreel stuff and what is obviously an outstanding baseball brain, he's noticeably whiffed on a couple of picks in recent weeks. I'm very, very happy to have Tony Ballgame at 1B for the Cubs, but a genuine gold glover makes those plays.
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
Wow.
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
I'm surprised you went with that example of his douchebaggery and not his campaign of JAKE ARRIETA CLEARLY HAS A FOREIGN SUBSTANCE ON HIS ARM.
I mean he can see it from his TV, so he's obviously right, and I guess every team that plays Jake Arrieta and presumably has scouts and execs watching on TV and seeing him up close doesn't see and never asks for someone to go take a fucking look.
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
Thanks Huey. I couldn't hold back so tune in.
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
I did once tweet that I noticed that none of the other BP Wrigleyville people EVER say a thing to defend Trueblood when people call him a fucking turd, and Sahadev favorited that briefly before apparently thinking better of it.
I'm delighted by his apparent lack of self-awareness. How can you tweet that and not realize (or care) that's it going to come off as appallingly wrong and conceited, and deserving of the cruelest mocking? Holy fuckballs.
Quote from: PANK! on September 25, 2015, 08:38:14 AM
I'm delighted by his apparent lack of self-awareness. How can you tweet that and not realize (or care) that's it going to come off as appallingly wrong and conceited, and deserving of the cruelest mocking? Holy fuckballs.
Also, when your avatar proves you've never seen a real boob.
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 08:29:51 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
I'm surprised you went with that example of his douchebaggery and not his campaign of JAKE ARRIETA CLEARLY HAS A FOREIGN SUBSTANCE ON HIS ARM.
I mean he can see it from his TV, so he's obviously right, and I guess every team that plays Jake Arrieta and presumably has scouts and execs watching on TV and seeing him up close doesn't see and never asks for someone to go take a fucking look.
Given that I don't follow him, I don't catch *all* the controversies.
And, you must answer for your sins, son: https://twitter.com/StartKyleOrton/status/605103920357056513
*grabs pitchfork*
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:39:54 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 25, 2015, 08:38:14 AM
I'm delighted by his apparent lack of self-awareness. How can you tweet that and not realize (or care) that's it going to come off as appallingly wrong and conceited, and deserving of the cruelest mocking? Holy fuckballs.
Also, when your avatar proves you've never seen a real boob.
Ha....yeah, more lacking self-awareness. Not trying to be a playground bully here or taking layup cheapshots, but I can't help myself--I mean seriously, if you look like that I'd suggest using an avatar of a Cub player or something.
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:42:24 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 08:29:51 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
I'm surprised you went with that example of his douchebaggery and not his campaign of JAKE ARRIETA CLEARLY HAS A FOREIGN SUBSTANCE ON HIS ARM.
I mean he can see it from his TV, so he's obviously right, and I guess every team that plays Jake Arrieta and presumably has scouts and execs watching on TV and seeing him up close doesn't see and never asks for someone to go take a fucking look.
Given that I don't follow him, I don't catch *all* the controversies.
And, you must answer for your sins, son: https://twitter.com/StartKyleOrton/status/605103920357056513
*grabs pitchfork*
Meh. May was a rough month for SKO. The Cubs suddenly being good had a lot of people overreacting. That early May series in St. Louis still makes me embarrassed for a majority of this fanbase, but all is mostly forgiven. The important thing is that SKO didn't keep doubling down on his hot taek like this other assface.
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:42:24 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 08:29:51 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
I'm surprised you went with that example of his douchebaggery and not his campaign of JAKE ARRIETA CLEARLY HAS A FOREIGN SUBSTANCE ON HIS ARM.
I mean he can see it from his TV, so he's obviously right, and I guess every team that plays Jake Arrieta and presumably has scouts and execs watching on TV and seeing him up close doesn't see and never asks for someone to go take a fucking look.
Given that I don't follow him, I don't catch *all* the controversies.
And, you must answer for your sins, son: https://twitter.com/StartKyleOrton/status/605103920357056513
*grabs pitchfork*
I will accept the ribbing, but I think there's a difference between questioning a manager, which we all do at some point, and outright asserting you're better at his job than he is.
Also, unlike Trueblood, I'm more than willing to admit I'm a fucking dope.
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:42:24 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 08:29:51 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
I'm surprised you went with that example of his douchebaggery and not his campaign of JAKE ARRIETA CLEARLY HAS A FOREIGN SUBSTANCE ON HIS ARM.
I mean he can see it from his TV, so he's obviously right, and I guess every team that plays Jake Arrieta and presumably has scouts and execs watching on TV and seeing him up close doesn't see and never asks for someone to go take a fucking look.
Given that I don't follow him, I don't catch *all* the controversies.
And, you must answer for your sins, son: https://twitter.com/StartKyleOrton/status/605103920357056513
*grabs pitchfork*
It's one thing to say that Maddon's not the best tactician. It's another to think you're better than he is.
Quote from: Canadouche on September 25, 2015, 08:51:20 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:42:24 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 08:29:51 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
I'm surprised you went with that example of his douchebaggery and not his campaign of JAKE ARRIETA CLEARLY HAS A FOREIGN SUBSTANCE ON HIS ARM.
I mean he can see it from his TV, so he's obviously right, and I guess every team that plays Jake Arrieta and presumably has scouts and execs watching on TV and seeing him up close doesn't see and never asks for someone to go take a fucking look.
Given that I don't follow him, I don't catch *all* the controversies.
And, you must answer for your sins, son: https://twitter.com/StartKyleOrton/status/605103920357056513
*grabs pitchfork*
It's one thing to say that Maddon's not the best tactician. It's another to think you're better than he is.
I'll also admit that my bitching was mostly just an overreaction to the fact that in a lot of those early season situations Joe didn't actually have ANY good options. It's easier to look smart when you're not using Brian Schlitter or Phil Coke or Johnny Buckets in meaningful situations by necessity.
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 08:53:03 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on September 25, 2015, 08:51:20 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:42:24 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 08:29:51 AM
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 07:42:18 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
There was a lot of debate about Rizzo's defense when he made that play in the stands and that Matt Trueblood fellow (has anyone managed to follow him for more than a few weeks? His info is sometimes useful but my word is that kid a fucking dick) said something about Rizzo being "borderline unplayable" on defense, whereas I heard someone else cite that he was above average in defensive runs saved?
I think there's just something kinda wonky in general about the first base defensive metrics. I certainly don't think Tony is a liability there by any stretch.
That Trueblood guy is a shitbag. Anything he says is trash just because he tries so hard to be the emotionless commenter. There's a lot of hockey dudes like that and I hate em.
The one thing I admire about guys like Sahadev is that they can play nice with these types and never go on rants or scorn them with dickish manual RTs. I could never be in the media.
Trueblood is a penis: https://twitter.com/MATrueblood/status/640628792940064768
Quote from: some dude on the twitsstop it you're not smarter than Joe. Stop arguing this and admit you messed up
Quote from: TruedickI'm not smarter than Joe Maddon. I never said that. I will say that I'm a better tactician, because I am. Many are.
He actually said that... Sounds like a great follow
I'm surprised you went with that example of his douchebaggery and not his campaign of JAKE ARRIETA CLEARLY HAS A FOREIGN SUBSTANCE ON HIS ARM.
I mean he can see it from his TV, so he's obviously right, and I guess every team that plays Jake Arrieta and presumably has scouts and execs watching on TV and seeing him up close doesn't see and never asks for someone to go take a fucking look.
Given that I don't follow him, I don't catch *all* the controversies.
And, you must answer for your sins, son: https://twitter.com/StartKyleOrton/status/605103920357056513
*grabs pitchfork*
It's one thing to say that Maddon's not the best tactician. It's another to think you're better than he is.
I'll also admit that my bitching was mostly just an overreaction to the fact that in a lot of those early season situations Joe didn't actually have ANY good options. It's easier to look smart when you're not using Brian Schlitter or Phil Coke or Johnny Buckets in meaningful situations by necessity.
Black and White world. Pick a side. And you did. You and Trueblood, forever
Quote from: Yeti on September 25, 2015, 09:01:07 AM
Black and White world. Pick a side.
Twitter: summarized.
Quote from: Tonker on September 25, 2015, 03:03:29 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
Well, despite all the showreel stuff and what is obviously an outstanding baseball brain, he's noticeably whiffed on a couple of picks in recent weeks. I'm very, very happy to have Tony Ballgame at 1B for the Cubs, but a genuine gold glover makes those plays.
I'm not saying he should be a Gold Glover. I'm saying he's at least average if not above average defensively and I'm mystified why the Fangraphs measure says otherwise.
Quote from: R-V on September 25, 2015, 09:44:36 AM
Quote from: Tonker on September 25, 2015, 03:03:29 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
Well, despite all the showreel stuff and what is obviously an outstanding baseball brain, he's noticeably whiffed on a couple of picks in recent weeks. I'm very, very happy to have Tony Ballgame at 1B for the Cubs, but a genuine gold glover makes those plays.
I'm not saying he should be a Gold Glover. I'm saying he's at least average if not above average defensively and I'm mystified why the Fangraphs measure says otherwise.
I'll say it, based purely on the empirical analysis of my own eyes, coupled with the undeniable evidence that I only watch Cubs games and I can't fairly actually compare him to any other first basemen. His defense has saved the Cubs at times, and in some big games.
So in the annals of Cubs first basemen's defense it's safe to say that Anthony Rizzo falls somewhere between Fred McGriff and Derrick Lee?
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 25, 2015, 10:47:28 AM
So in the annals of Cubs first basemen's defense it's safe to say that Anthony Rizzo falls somewhere between Fred McGriff and Derrick Lee?
What's funny is I think many defensive metrics actually say Lee was kind of overrated defensively. I prefer to just admit the truth that defensive metrics are still far from perfect and Tony seems to be a good defensive first baseman, numbers be damned.
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:39:54 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 25, 2015, 08:38:14 AM
I'm delighted by his apparent lack of self-awareness. How can you tweet that and not realize (or care) that's it going to come off as appallingly wrong and conceited, and deserving of the cruelest mocking? Holy fuckballs.
Also, when your avatar proves you've never seen a real boob.
My Muttleying has yet to subside. Having trouble breathing. Send help.
what should not be lost is that I believe Trueblood first made the "I am better than Joe Maddon" comment when he said that Joe should pinch hit for Montero with the bases loaded vs. a left handed pitcher for the Diamondbacks (and no outs) and Miggy promptly hit a grand slam.
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 11:54:12 AM
what should not be lost is that I believe Trueblood first made the "I am better than Joe Maddon" comment when he said that Joe should pinch hit for Montero with the bases loaded vs. a left handed pitcher for the Diamondbacks (and no outs) and Miggy promptly hit a grand slam.
Yabut
OUTCOMES DON'T VALIDATE PROCESSES!It says so in his Twitter bio.
Quote from: PANK! on September 25, 2015, 12:03:32 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 11:54:12 AM
what should not be lost is that I believe Trueblood first made the "I am better than Joe Maddon" comment when he said that Joe should pinch hit for Montero with the bases loaded vs. a left handed pitcher for the Diamondbacks (and no outs) and Miggy promptly hit a grand slam.
Yabut OUTCOMES DON'T VALIDATE PROCESSES!
It says so in his Twitter bio.
Does his Twitter bio also say, "I am stupid y'all. Seriously"? Because if not...
Edit: sorry. This was a really, really lame joke.
Quote from: PANK! on September 25, 2015, 12:03:32 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 11:54:12 AM
what should not be lost is that I believe Trueblood first made the "I am better than Joe Maddon" comment when he said that Joe should pinch hit for Montero with the bases loaded vs. a left handed pitcher for the Diamondbacks (and no outs) and Miggy promptly hit a grand slam.
Yabut OUTCOMES DON'T VALIDATE PROCESSES!
It says so in his Twitter bio.
The funny thing is Montero has a better OPS vs lefties than righties this year. I know that's SSS and not his career norm but it was certainly not such a glaring issue that it's worth pinch hitting for him with the bases loaded and zero outs (and then leaving you with David Ross potentially taking key at bats in the later innings). Certainly not enough for him to declare himself smarter than Joe Maddon.
Then today he declared that literally NO managers are good tacticians, and Joe Maddon is the best of them, so he is literally saying he is better than all managers, period.
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 12:09:11 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 25, 2015, 12:03:32 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 25, 2015, 11:54:12 AM
what should not be lost is that I believe Trueblood first made the "I am better than Joe Maddon" comment when he said that Joe should pinch hit for Montero with the bases loaded vs. a left handed pitcher for the Diamondbacks (and no outs) and Miggy promptly hit a grand slam.
Yabut OUTCOMES DON'T VALIDATE PROCESSES!
It says so in his Twitter bio.
The funny thing is Montero has a better OPS vs lefties than righties this year. I know that's SSS and not his career norm but it was certainly not such a glaring issue that it's worth pinch hitting for him with the bases loaded and zero outs (and then leaving you with David Ross potentially taking key at bats in the later innings). Certainly not enough for him to declare himself smarter than Joe Maddon.
Then today he declared that literally NO managers are good tacticians, and Joe Maddon is the best of them, so he is literally saying he is better than all managers, period.
Are we sure this isn't actually Fro?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 25, 2015, 11:37:39 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 25, 2015, 08:39:54 AM
Quote from: PANK! on September 25, 2015, 08:38:14 AM
I'm delighted by his apparent lack of self-awareness. How can you tweet that and not realize (or care) that's it going to come off as appallingly wrong and conceited, and deserving of the cruelest mocking? Holy fuckballs.
Also, when your avatar proves you've never seen a real boob.
My Muttleying has yet to subside. Having trouble breathing. Send help.
Yeah, this was good stuff right here.
Quote from: R-V on September 25, 2015, 09:44:36 AM
Quote from: Tonker on September 25, 2015, 03:03:29 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 24, 2015, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on September 24, 2015, 10:45:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2015, 08:21:23 AM
I also expect Bryant to get at least one vote, honestly, since he's arguably been more valuable to this team than Rizzo, at least according to Fangraphs.
I've wondered about this for weeks. Why is Rizzo getting MVP buzz when he hasn't even been the most valuable position player on his own team? I mean, he's obviously been fantastic, but why is there no similar talk for Bryant?
Probably because Rizzo has the better slashline (although the gap has narrowed) and also because Rizzo has carried the team most of the year, at times when others have slumped. Bryant's late season surge has been amazing and he'll end the year with the more valuable season, but I get anyone who has watched this team all year long touting Tony as the steady hand that's rarely faltered.
(advance apology for wading knee deep into stuff I'm not too knowledgeable on)
Here's what I don't get: Fangraphs has Rizzo with -10.6 defensive WAR. Now I get that even the absolute best defensive 1B are going to have a negative defensive WAR due to the relative lack of value for 1B defense compared to other positions. But Rizzo's number for this year is significantly worse than it was in 2013 & 2014 (both years around -4) and he ranks 15th out of 20 qualifying 1B. Just based on the eye test I feel like Rizzo has been better defensively this year than last and I don't understand how he could be ranked below league average. So my questions are: why does he rank so low this year, and would he be smoking Bryant in overall WAR if you insert last year's defensive numbers?
Well, despite all the showreel stuff and what is obviously an outstanding baseball brain, he's noticeably whiffed on a couple of picks in recent weeks. I'm very, very happy to have Tony Ballgame at 1B for the Cubs, but a genuine gold glover makes those plays.
I'm not saying he should be a Gold Glover. I'm saying he's at least average if not above average defensively and I'm mystified why the Fangraphs measure says otherwise.
I know you're not, sorry if I made it sound like I thought you were. I'd take it a little further, though, and say that if the stats show that Rizzo is defensively average, and maybe even a touch below, I'm not that shocked. He makes some great plays, but he also misses the odd one. And, bearing in mind what else he brings to the team, I'm completely fine with that.
If only Matthew Trueblood was the manager instead of that stupid dumb idiot Joe Maddon they would've won. Matty's got some hot Anthony Rizzo takes on his Twitter now that I refuse to link to.
QuoteRizzo has fallen in love with his swing and left the monster production of the first six weeks of the season far behind.
QuoteNot for nothing: Anthony Rizzo is now up to 500 PA and change of being a very ordinary (.860 OPS) first baseman. Good... But ordinary.
QuoteFolks, Anthony Rizzo is really, really good. It's a compliment that he's hit .265/.365/.495 for 120 games and could be better.
Is he "very ordinary" or "really, really good"? I'm having a hard time keeping up with his brilliant mind.
Intrepid Reader: Matthew Trueblood
I dated this girl for a while. She was really a... nasty freak. She just loved to get down with sex all the time. It was like... anytime of day, she was like, "Yeah, let's go! I'm so nasty!" And I'd be nailing her and she'd be like, "Oh, you're nailing me! Cool!"
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 25, 2015, 06:15:51 PM
Intrepid Reader: Matthew Trueblood
I dated this girl for a while. She was really a... nasty freak. She just loved to get down with sex all the time. It was like... anytime of day, she was like, "Yeah, let's go! I'm so nasty!" And I'd be nailing her and she'd be like, "Oh, you're nailing me! Cool!"
He's not 40 yet, is he?
Jaaaaake
He's a good baseball player.
He's starting to slip. He had a 0.42 ERA in August, in 42.1 innings. In 40 September innings, his ERA is 0.45. Teams batted .130 against him in August. They're batting 18 points better against him in September. With a trend like this, Arrieta is going to look extremely beatable in just 5 to 10 years.
Jesus Christ, this guy.
Quote from: Bort on September 28, 2015, 11:19:16 AM
Jesus Christ, this guy.
(http://i.imgur.com/1cN95cU.png)
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 28, 2015, 12:36:37 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 11:39:35 AM
Quote from: Bort on September 28, 2015, 11:19:16 AM
Jesus Christ, this guy.
(http://i.imgur.com/1cN95cU.png)
He looks nothing like Paul.
Which reminds me, what's that guy up to these days?
QuoteJust watched a bird take a poop into the birdbath, then turn around and take a drink from the birdbath. Coulda stopped him. Didn't. Watched.
https://twitter.com/PWT3/status/644530846641352704
Quote from: Eli on September 28, 2015, 02:08:45 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 28, 2015, 12:36:37 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 11:39:35 AM
Quote from: Bort on September 28, 2015, 11:19:16 AM
Jesus Christ, this guy.
(http://i.imgur.com/1cN95cU.png)
He looks nothing like Paul.
Which reminds me, what's that guy up to these days?
QuoteJust watched a bird take a poop into the birdbath, then turn around and take a drink from the birdbath. Coulda stopped him. Didn't. Watched.
https://twitter.com/PWT3/status/644530846641352704
Bruce Wolf is one of his 47 followers. WTF?
Semi-serious question: Why is Jesus frequently depicted with a shining heart?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 02:35:49 PM
Semi-serious question: Why is Jesus frequently depicted with a shining heart?
Some catholic nonsense. Every good Southern Babdist knows Jesus was a regular looking white dude.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 02:35:49 PM
Semi-serious question: Why is Jesus frequently depicted with a shining heart?
The Sacred Heart is a Catholic Devotion.
I should get struck by lightning for just typing that given how far I have fallen.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 02:35:49 PM
Semi-serious question: Why is Jesus frequently depicted with a shining heart?
That's the sacred heart, one of your more fire 'n' brimstoney symbols of the church. It's intended to represent Jesus' divine love for humanity but actually scares the hell out of young Catholic children.
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
Dammit I laughed at a Chork joke.
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
I teach at a Catholic school, and I didn't immediately recall the answer.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
It's not even homemade.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I've been ex-communicated?
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 06:13:12 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
It's not even homemade.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51voIkFMmPL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 08:33:01 AM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 06:13:12 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
It's not even homemade.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51voIkFMmPL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Carp?
(http://i19.tinypic.com/4m8t6ok.jpg)
Quote from: CBStew on September 28, 2015, 08:57:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I've been ex-communicated?
Seriously, WTF, Chuck? Stew is probably the most Jewish of us all. And, store-bought gefilte fish? And a picture without the red horseradish?
Here's the nightmare of my youth:
(https://schnitzelim.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/gefilte1.jpg)
I really like the gefilte fish you get in the freezer section and boil with onions and carrots.
And the horseradish with beets is awesome.
We had surprisingly good gefilte fish this year at Rosh Hashanah. Like good enough that everyone was baffled.
Quote from: Oleg on September 29, 2015, 10:33:25 AM
Quote from: CBStew on September 28, 2015, 08:57:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I've been ex-communicated?
Seriously, WTF, Chuck? Stew is probably the most Jewish of us all. And, store-bought gefilte fish? And a picture without the red horseradish?
Here's the nightmare of my youth:
(https://schnitzelim.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/gefilte1.jpg)
Everything about that picture makes me want to hurl. I will never, ever complain about fish on Fridays during Lent again.
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
Quote from: SKO on September 29, 2015, 10:49:08 AM
Quote from: Oleg on September 29, 2015, 10:33:25 AM
Quote from: CBStew on September 28, 2015, 08:57:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I've been ex-communicated?
Seriously, WTF, Chuck? Stew is probably the most Jewish of us all. And, store-bought gefilte fish? And a picture without the red horseradish?
Here's the nightmare of my youth:
(https://schnitzelim.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/gefilte1.jpg)
Everything about that picture makes me want to hurl. I will never, ever complain about fish on Fridays during Lent again.
Fish needs to be fried when served on Fridays. It's basically the 11th commandment.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
We're getting into that time of the year for Flanken in a Pot.
Jake Arrietta is the pitching equivalent of Flanken in a Pot.
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Quote from: CBStew on September 29, 2015, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Not enough gentile blood, obviously.
Quote from: SKO on September 29, 2015, 03:04:51 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 29, 2015, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Not enough gentile blood, obviously.
Muzlin children! Get it RIGHT!
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 29, 2015, 03:04:51 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 29, 2015, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Not enough gentile blood, obviously.
Muzlin children! Get it RIGHT!
Chuck, if there's one thing we gentiles know how to do, it's tell the blood libel.
Quote from: Bort on September 29, 2015, 08:54:17 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 29, 2015, 03:04:51 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 29, 2015, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Not enough gentile blood, obviously.
Muzlin children! Get it RIGHT!
Chuck, if there's one thing we gentiles know how to do, it's tell the blood libel.
I thought I was doing a Morph thing. And a modern Palestinian thing.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:48:21 PM
Quote from: Bort on September 29, 2015, 08:54:17 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 29, 2015, 03:04:51 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 29, 2015, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Not enough gentile blood, obviously.
Muzlin children! Get it RIGHT!
Chuck, if there's one thing we gentiles know how to do, it's tell the blood libel.
I thought I was doing a Morph thing. And a modern Palestinian thing.
If it's me or SKO, you're going to need to expect mainly accusations of well-poisonings and matzah made from gentile baby blood. We're old fashioned.
Quote from: Bort on September 30, 2015, 12:05:18 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:48:21 PM
Quote from: Bort on September 29, 2015, 08:54:17 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 29, 2015, 03:04:51 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 29, 2015, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Not enough gentile blood, obviously.
Muzlin children! Get it RIGHT!
Chuck, if there's one thing we gentiles know how to do, it's tell the blood libel.
I thought I was doing a Morph thing. And a modern Palestinian thing.
If it's me or SKO, you're going to need to expect mainly accusations of well-poisonings and matzah made from gentile baby blood. We're old fashioned.
I actually had no idea there had ever been a documented case of blood libel in the US, and it wasn't even THAT long ago, relatively speaking: http://forward.com/news/164493/decades-old-blood-libel-case-roils-town/. How disappointing.
Quote from: SKO on September 30, 2015, 07:33:26 AM
Quote from: Bort on September 30, 2015, 12:05:18 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:48:21 PM
Quote from: Bort on September 29, 2015, 08:54:17 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 29, 2015, 03:04:51 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 29, 2015, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Not enough gentile blood, obviously.
Muzlin children! Get it RIGHT!
Chuck, if there's one thing we gentiles know how to do, it's tell the blood libel.
I thought I was doing a Morph thing. And a modern Palestinian thing.
If it's me or SKO, you're going to need to expect mainly accusations of well-poisonings and matzah made from gentile baby blood. We're old fashioned.
I actually had no idea there had ever been a documented case of blood libel in the US, and it wasn't even THAT long ago, relatively speaking: http://forward.com/news/164493/decades-old-blood-libel-case-roils-town/. How disappointing.
There is something wrong with the math in that story. It was published in 2015. It is about the disappearance of a four year old girl in 1928. She reappeared the following day and was said to be 88 years old today. But if she was born in 1924 she would be 91 years old today. I wonder if anything else is wrong with that story?
Quote from: CBStew on September 30, 2015, 09:43:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 30, 2015, 07:33:26 AM
Quote from: Bort on September 30, 2015, 12:05:18 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:48:21 PM
Quote from: Bort on September 29, 2015, 08:54:17 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 29, 2015, 03:04:51 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 29, 2015, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: thehawk on September 29, 2015, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 29, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Quote from: thehawk on September 28, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 28, 2015, 03:07:54 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 28, 2015, 02:57:19 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 28, 2015, 02:53:38 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 28, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
Chuck, you just got two of the mickiest of Catholics on this board to revisit the intense fear that was the backbone of our religious upbringing.
Yeah thanks a lot, Chuck.
Don't forget us Eastern European types.
You are all welcome to come over the the Chuck / Hawk / Oleg side. No hell, plenty of sports media jorbs, the intense fear only comes from seeing your mother's name on the caller ID, good food.
(https://whydyoueatthat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/gefilte.jpg)
I am assuming showing a Manischewitz jar of Gifilte Fish as an example of good Jewish food is an Internet Chuckism
That (or jarred/canned Streits) was the only kind of gifilte fish I ever had. Think this thread needs a palate cleanser:
(http://veryculinary.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chicken_Noodle_Soup_with_Matzo_Balls_blog.jpg)
And, oh year, Jake Arrieta is really really good.
My mother, in some ways, was an excellent cook. Her strudel was legendary. But her matzo balls tended to be the size, density and hardness of a golf ball. I bet that you could send one of those things about 90 to 100 yards if you hit it just right with a number 1 wood. They were also green in the middle, but you would need a knife to cut into it to find out.
Not enough gentile blood, obviously.
Muzlin children! Get it RIGHT!
Chuck, if there's one thing we gentiles know how to do, it's tell the blood libel.
I thought I was doing a Morph thing. And a modern Palestinian thing.
If it's me or SKO, you're going to need to expect mainly accusations of well-poisonings and matzah made from gentile baby blood. We're old fashioned.
I actually had no idea there had ever been a documented case of blood libel in the US, and it wasn't even THAT long ago, relatively speaking: http://forward.com/news/164493/decades-old-blood-libel-case-roils-town/. How disappointing.
There is something wrong with the math in that story. It was published in 2015. It is about the disappearance of a four year old girl in 1928. She reappeared the following day and was said to be 88 years old today. But if she was born in 1924 she would be 91 years old today. I wonder if anything else is wrong with that story?
Originally posted in October, 2012.
Back on topic:
Jake Arrieta has gigantic steel balls.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 10:16:12 AM
Back on topic:
Jake Arrieta has gigantic steel balls.
It's a good thing they aren't matzo balls.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 10:16:12 AM
Back on topic:
Jake Arrieta has gigantic steel balls.
Jake Arrieta was born in a log cabin and is a strong proponent of the Gold Standard.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDiqkfzUsAE_7Ys.jpg)
Quote from: flannj on September 30, 2015, 12:44:30 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 10:16:12 AM
Back on topic:
Jake Arrieta has gigantic steel balls.
Jake Arrieta was born in a log cabin and is a strong proponent of the Gold Standard.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDiqkfzUsAE_7Ys.jpg)
Jake Arrieta has at least 4 different fragrances of English Leather.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 12:51:26 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 30, 2015, 12:44:30 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 10:16:12 AM
Back on topic:
Jake Arrieta has gigantic steel balls.
Jake Arrieta was born in a log cabin and is a strong proponent of the Gold Standard.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDiqkfzUsAE_7Ys.jpg)
Jake Arrieta has at least 4 different fragrances of English Leather.
Jake Arrieta once shot a man for snoring too loud.
Quote from: Bort on September 30, 2015, 01:18:50 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 12:51:26 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 30, 2015, 12:44:30 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 10:16:12 AM
Back on topic:
Jake Arrieta has gigantic steel balls.
Jake Arrieta was born in a log cabin and is a strong proponent of the Gold Standard.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDiqkfzUsAE_7Ys.jpg)
Jake Arrieta has at least 4 different fragrances of English Leather.
Jake Arrieta once shot a man for snoring too loud.
Did I ever tell you about the time Jake Arrieta took me out to go get a drink with him? We go off looking for a bar and we can't find one. Finally, Jake takes me into a vacant lot and says, 'Here we are.' Well, we sat there for a year and a half. Sure enough, someone constructed a bar around us. Well, the day they opened it, we ordered a shot, drank it, and then burnt the place to the ground. Jake yelled over the roar of the flames, 'Always leave things the way you found them!'
Quote from: flannj on September 30, 2015, 12:44:30 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 10:16:12 AM
Back on topic:
Jake Arrieta has gigantic steel balls.
Jake Arrieta was born in a log cabin and is a strong proponent of the Gold Standard.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDiqkfzUsAE_7Ys.jpg)
Beautiful.
Quote from: SKO on September 30, 2015, 01:22:36 PM
Quote from: Bort on September 30, 2015, 01:18:50 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 12:51:26 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 30, 2015, 12:44:30 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on September 30, 2015, 10:16:12 AM
Back on topic:
Jake Arrieta has gigantic steel balls.
Jake Arrieta was born in a log cabin and is a strong proponent of the Gold Standard.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDiqkfzUsAE_7Ys.jpg)
Jake Arrieta has at least 4 different fragrances of English Leather.
Jake Arrieta once shot a man for snoring too loud.
Did I ever tell you about the time Jake Arrieta took me out to go get a drink with him? We go off looking for a bar and we can't find one. Finally, Jake takes me into a vacant lot and says, 'Here we are.' Well, we sat there for a year and a half. Sure enough, someone constructed a bar around us. Well, the day they opened it, we ordered a shot, drank it, and then burnt the place to the ground. Jake yelled over the roar of the flames, 'Always leave things the way you found them!'
Jake Arrieta once threw a no-hitter. Against The Los Angeles Dodgers.
59 pitches through 5 innings. Looks like he's determined to throw a complete game even on a limited pitch count.
I know we all know about fWAR and bWAR and FIP and xFIP and BABIP and all that bollocks, and it's true that a great many BBWAA members these days also know about some, or even all (Bruce) of those things. Nonetheless, there's a significant amount of old-fashioned meatballery still going on in the press and I think that actually works in Jake's favour. On balance, I think he deserves the Cy Young now however you want to measure it, but 22 wins and four complete games are what will actually get him over the line.
Put it this way: as meaningless as wins are, if Greinke had 22 and Arrieta 18, I'd feel a lot less confident about Jake taking home the prize.
33 GS, 229 IP, 22-6, 1.77 ERA, 236 K, 48 BB, 2.35 FIP, 2.62 xFIP, 7.3 fWAR, 4 CG, 3 SO, 1 no hitter.
Hot damn.
Quote from: SKO on October 03, 2015, 08:34:34 AM
33 GS, 229 IP, 22-6, 1.77 ERA, 236 K, 48 BB, 2.35 FIP, 2.62 xFIP, 7.3 fWAR, 4 CG, 3 SO, 1 no hitter.
Hot damn.
Jake is the balls. Compared to Greinke he has a better hit rate, better home run rate, better strikeout rate (Greinke didn't even average a strikeout per inning), more starts, more innings, more complete games, more shutouts. It won't be a robbery if Jake wins, which I really hope he does.
Also, Jake Arrieta: Not an All-Star. #neverforget
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 03, 2015, 02:31:03 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 03, 2015, 08:34:34 AM
33 GS, 229 IP, 22-6, 1.77 ERA, 236 K, 48 BB, 2.35 FIP, 2.62 xFIP, 7.3 fWAR, 4 CG, 3 SO, 1 no hitter.
Hot damn.
Jake is the balls. Compared to Greinke he has a better hit rate, better home run rate, better strikeout rate (Greinke didn't even average a strikeout per inning), more starts, more innings, more complete games, more shutouts. It won't be a robbery if Jake wins, which I really hope he does.
Also, Jake Arrieta: Not an All-Star. #neverforget
I remember thinking about it at the time and deciding I was glad he was left off the roster because I didn't want him pitching in an exhibition anyway. And when I looked at the starting pitchers they took, I couldn't really argue with any of their merit. But Jake has ascended so far above everybody else in the NL SINCE the All-Star break, that he's considered the frontrunner for the Cy Young by many. The fact that he went on his psychotic rampage of bloody murder AFTER the mid-summer break makes it even more impressive.
And I'm still glad he didn't throw a pitch in that game.
Quote from: InternetApex on October 04, 2015, 12:17:20 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 03, 2015, 02:31:03 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 03, 2015, 08:34:34 AM
33 GS, 229 IP, 22-6, 1.77 ERA, 236 K, 48 BB, 2.35 FIP, 2.62 xFIP, 7.3 fWAR, 4 CG, 3 SO, 1 no hitter.
Hot damn.
Jake is the balls. Compared to Greinke he has a better hit rate, better home run rate, better strikeout rate (Greinke didn't even average a strikeout per inning), more starts, more innings, more complete games, more shutouts. It won't be a robbery if Jake wins, which I really hope he does.
Also, Jake Arrieta: Not an All-Star. #neverforget
I remember thinking about it at the time and deciding I was glad he was left off the roster because I didn't want him pitching in an exhibition anyway. And when I looked at the starting pitchers they took, I couldn't really argue with any of their merit. But Jake has ascended so far above everybody else in the NL SINCE the All-Star break, that he's considered the frontrunner for the Cy Young by many. The fact that he went on his psychotic rampage of bloody murder AFTER the mid-summer break makes it even more impressive.
And I'm still glad he didn't throw a pitch in that game.
Pretty sure he can book his room for next year's now.
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
DPD, but I also like the guy who responded to the first dude saying how awesome it was that he clearly got under Jake's skin and how it was kinda unprofessional for Jake to reply.
Because you should just be able to say whatever you want to celebrities on twitter and get mad when they respond.
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
They are aware that there was a 20 year long stretch where Pittsburgh couldn't even break .500 that ended two years ago, right?
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:08:12 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
DPD, but I also like the guy who responded to the first dude saying how awesome it was that he clearly got under Jake's skin and how it was kinda unprofessional for Jake to reply.
Because you should just be able to say whatever you want to celebrities on twitter and get mad when they respond.
DPD, also, he didn't seem mad at all. I read that as being ice-cold.
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 10:09:26 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:08:12 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
DPD, but I also like the guy who responded to the first dude saying how awesome it was that he clearly got under Jake's skin and how it was kinda unprofessional for Jake to reply.
Because you should just be able to say whatever you want to celebrities on twitter and get mad when they respond.
DPD, also, he didn't seem mad at all. I read that as being ice-cold.
Yeah, I don't think he was emotional at all. Honestly I don't even think he was guaranteeing a win or anything (although it's more fun to assume so), I think he was just saying that it makes no difference to him if they're all wearing black shirts and cheering really loudly.
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 10:09:26 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:08:12 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
DPD, but I also like the guy who responded to the first dude saying how awesome it was that he clearly got under Jake's skin and how it was kinda unprofessional for Jake to reply.
Because you should just be able to say whatever you want to celebrities on twitter and get mad when they respond.
DPD, also, he didn't seem mad at all. I read that as being ice-cold.
Indeed. Terrifyingly so.
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:13:30 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 10:09:26 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:08:12 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
DPD, but I also like the guy who responded to the first dude saying how awesome it was that he clearly got under Jake's skin and how it was kinda unprofessional for Jake to reply.
Because you should just be able to say whatever you want to celebrities on twitter and get mad when they respond.
DPD, also, he didn't seem mad at all. I read that as being ice-cold.
Yeah, I don't think he was emotional at all. Honestly I don't even think he was guaranteeing a win or anything (although it's more fun to assume so), I think he was just saying that it makes no difference to him if they're all wearing black shirts and cheering really loudly.
He's also so loose about Wednesday that he can break balls on Twitter.
By far, the most effective insult Pirates fans have against the Cubs is that we're overly excited about a third-place team. Devastating.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 11:57:10 AM
By far, the most effective insult Pirates fans have against the Cubs is that we're overly excited about a third-place team. Devastating.
I'm sure you couldn't get good cocaine from Clark the Cub.
I guarantee you Jake is going to the mound with the theme from Rocky IV in his head knowing that the Pirates won't score a single run. He's obviously very gifted but his demeanor is no joke. He's a bad ass.
Looking at this, he should sneer at the Gods and shave his beard. Holy shit, that look is Lily-esque:
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 12:05:38 PM
(http://i57.tinypic.com/2d1r40m.jpg)
Quote from: Slaky on October 05, 2015, 12:34:35 PM
I guarantee you Jake is going to the mound with the theme from Rocky IV in his head knowing that the Pirates won't score a single run. He's obviously very gifted but his demeanor is no joke. He's a bad ass.
Burning Heart (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_h4d4Pl0dA) or Hearts on Fire (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SUzcDUERLo)?
Quote from: PenFoe on October 05, 2015, 12:44:39 PM
Quote from: Slaky on October 05, 2015, 12:34:35 PM
I guarantee you Jake is going to the mound with the theme from Rocky IV in his head knowing that the Pirates won't score a single run. He's obviously very gifted but his demeanor is no joke. He's a bad ass.
Burning Heart (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_h4d4Pl0dA) or Hearts on Fire (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SUzcDUERLo)?
He's totally a Heart's on Fire guy. He's going to run out to the mound and yell "DRAGO!"
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 11:57:10 AM
By far, the most effective insult Pirates fans have against the Cubs is that we're overly excited about a third-place team. Devastating.
Yeah, they're really nailing us to the wall.
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
MLB let them play some more games after the won the wild card game in 2013.
Quote from: Shooter on October 05, 2015, 06:35:17 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 05, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
Quote from: Bort on October 05, 2015, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 05, 2015, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: morpheus on October 05, 2015, 09:50:39 AM
Jake Arrieta has pendulous balls. https://twitter.com/JArrieta34/status/650799923017945088
I have just spontaneously ejaculated sperm into my undergarments.
And the Pirates Twittersphere has exploded with glorious asshurt. Everyone wins.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love how boastful Pirates fans are of their playoff experience giving them the edge, when 50% of their playoff experience is losing the wildcard game at home.
MLB let them play some more games after the won the wild card game in 2013.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjKRQ_OqCCw
Some Pissburgh nobody named David Whatever is trying to start a #WeMatter hashtag (https://t.co/vxhbjNVqBm) to intimidate Jake and soothe their butthurt. (Even though Jake was saying their hope doesn't matter, not them personally, but it's Pissburgh we're talking about.) Our hero's response:
Quote from: @JArrieta34
David. Bring out all the reinforcements. I need it LOUD.
I need new pants, please.
DPD. Jake's confidence is already inspiring some choice takes.
Quote from: @Dejan_Kovacevic
Doesn't the statute of limitations on playoff trash-talking expire a century after a franchise's last championship, @JArrieta34? #1908
Amazing it took this long for someone to realize 1908 could be used as an insult, really. Dejan is a pioneer. (It also makes no sense, so there's that.)
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 07:35:02 PM
DPD. Jake's confidence is already inspiring some choice takes.
Quote from: @Dejan_Kovacevic
Doesn't the statute of limitations on playoff trash-talking expire a century after a franchise's last championship, @JArrieta34? #1908
Amazing it took this long for someone to realize 1908 could be used as an insult, really. Dejan is a pioneer. (It also makes no sense, so there's that.)
Isn't it sort of weird for a beat writer to get involved in something like this?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 07:05:21 PM
Some Pissburgh nobody named David Whatever is trying to start a #WeMatter hashtag (https://t.co/vxhbjNVqBm) to intimidate Jake and soothe their butthurt. (Even though Jake was saying their hope doesn't matter, not them personally, but it's Pissburgh we're talking about.) Our hero's response:
Quote from: @JArrieta34
David. Bring out all the reinforcements. I need it LOUD.
I need new pants, please.
This is one of those times when I really wish I could fastforward my life. Wednesday night can't get here fast enough.
he's fucking striking out 23 Pirates.
Quote from: Shooter on October 05, 2015, 07:37:09 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 07:35:02 PM
DPD. Jake's confidence is already inspiring some choice takes.
Quote from: @Dejan_Kovacevic
Doesn't the statute of limitations on playoff trash-talking expire a century after a franchise's last championship, @JArrieta34? #1908
Amazing it took this long for someone to realize 1908 could be used as an insult, really. Dejan is a pioneer. (It also makes no sense, so there's that.)
Isn't it sort of weird for a beat writer to get involved in something like this?
I thought the same thing. I'm sure it's happened but I can't think of any right now. I remember this, but that's it at the moment.
(http://i62.tinypic.com/2yo4ysn.png)
Leaves out the fact that only one team did it on purpose.
Quote from: Shooter on October 05, 2015, 07:37:09 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 07:35:02 PM
DPD. Jake's confidence is already inspiring some choice takes.
Quote from: @Dejan_Kovacevic
Doesn't the statute of limitations on playoff trash-talking expire a century after a franchise's last championship, @JArrieta34? #1908
Amazing it took this long for someone to realize 1908 could be used as an insult, really. Dejan is a pioneer. (It also makes no sense, so there's that.)
Isn't it sort of weird for a beat writer to get involved in something like this?
I hope this has been pointed out on teh Twits, jesus what a clown.
Jonah Keri's final ballot. (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-awards-2015-al-nl-mvp-cy-young-rookie-of-the-year/)
He's got Jake 3rd for Cy Young and 4th for MVP.
Quote from: PenFoe on October 06, 2015, 11:02:20 AM
Jonah Keri's final ballot. (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-awards-2015-al-nl-mvp-cy-young-rookie-of-the-year/)
He's got Jake 3rd for Cy Young and 4th for MVP.
Jonah Keri is a fucking moron. Except, you know... when he's predicting three Cubs in the MVP top ten.
Quote from: Tonker on October 06, 2015, 11:11:48 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on October 06, 2015, 11:02:20 AM
Jonah Keri's final ballot. (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-awards-2015-al-nl-mvp-cy-young-rookie-of-the-year/)
He's got Jake 3rd for Cy Young and 4th for MVP.
Jonah Keri is a fucking moron. Except, you know... when he's predicting three Cubs in the MVP top ten.
I wouldn't put Greinke over Jake but I can't quibble with Kershaw.
Quote from: SKO on October 06, 2015, 11:43:52 AM
Quote from: Tonker on October 06, 2015, 11:11:48 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on October 06, 2015, 11:02:20 AM
Jonah Keri's final ballot. (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-awards-2015-al-nl-mvp-cy-young-rookie-of-the-year/)
He's got Jake 3rd for Cy Young and 4th for MVP.
Jonah Keri is a fucking moron. Except, you know... when he's predicting three Cubs in the MVP top ten.
I wouldn't put Greinke over Jake but I can't quibble with Kershaw.
Shutupshutupshut
UP!
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 06, 2015, 12:49:18 AM
Quote from: Shooter on October 05, 2015, 07:37:09 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 07:35:02 PM
DPD. Jake's confidence is already inspiring some choice takes.
Quote from: @Dejan_Kovacevic
Doesn't the statute of limitations on playoff trash-talking expire a century after a franchise's last championship, @JArrieta34? #1908
Amazing it took this long for someone to realize 1908 could be used as an insult, really. Dejan is a pioneer. (It also makes no sense, so there's that.)
Isn't it sort of weird for a beat writer to get involved in something like this?
I thought the same thing. I'm sure it's happened but I can't think of any right now. I remember this, but that's it at the moment.
(http://i62.tinypic.com/2yo4ysn.png)
Leaves out the fact that only one team did it on purpose.
Just getting to it now, but Maddon DID NOT LEAVE OUT THE FACT THAT MATT HOLLIDAY was hit in the head. She sucks and has no credibility.
Quote from: Brownie on October 07, 2015, 10:29:23 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 06, 2015, 12:49:18 AM
Quote from: Shooter on October 05, 2015, 07:37:09 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 05, 2015, 07:35:02 PM
DPD. Jake's confidence is already inspiring some choice takes.
Quote from: @Dejan_Kovacevic
Doesn't the statute of limitations on playoff trash-talking expire a century after a franchise's last championship, @JArrieta34? #1908
Amazing it took this long for someone to realize 1908 could be used as an insult, really. Dejan is a pioneer. (It also makes no sense, so there's that.)
Isn't it sort of weird for a beat writer to get involved in something like this?
I thought the same thing. I'm sure it's happened but I can't think of any right now. I remember this, but that's it at the moment.
(http://i62.tinypic.com/2yo4ysn.png)
Leaves out the fact that only one team did it on purpose.
Just getting to it now, but Maddon DID NOT LEAVE OUT THE FACT THAT MATT HOLLIDAY was hit in the head. She sucks and has no credibility.
I think she's calling out Carrie for the "misleading" report.
I know it's been mentioned in other threads and I'm sure it was all over Twitter when it happened, but of all the badass shit Jake has done this year, and there's been a ton, that steal of second base is right at the top.
Just an incredible "Fuck You" to the whole deal.
Quote from: PenFoe on October 08, 2015, 10:29:51 AM
I know it's been mentioned in other threads and I'm sure it was all over Twitter when it happened, but of all the badass shit Jake has done this year, and there's been a ton, that steal of second base is right at the top.
Just an incredible "Fuck You" to the whole deal.
I was so mad Polanco managed to catch that sinking liner by Fowler to end the inning, if that had dropped in for a hit and Jake had scored after they intentionally put him on base in an elimination game I'd have laughed for all eternity.
Really though, what a dumbass decision. All that said to me was they knew, down 4-0, they had no fucking chance anyway. It was a white flag.
Quote from: SKO on October 08, 2015, 10:31:57 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on October 08, 2015, 10:29:51 AM
I know it's been mentioned in other threads and I'm sure it was all over Twitter when it happened, but of all the badass shit Jake has done this year, and there's been a ton, that steal of second base is right at the top.
Just an incredible "Fuck You" to the whole deal.
I was so mad Polanco managed to catch that sinking liner by Fowler to end the inning, if that had dropped in for a hit and Jake had scored after they intentionally put him on base in an elimination game I'd have laughed for all eternity.
Really though, what a dumbass decision. All that said to me was they knew, down 4-0, they had no fucking chance anyway. It was a white flag.
I too was desperate for that ball to get down: instant karma is always fun. The only possible explanation I can come up with for the whole thing, though, was that they hoped that they might somehow get Arrieta ejected. Fortunately, the Cubs (and David Ross in particular) were wise to it and weren't having it, as Sean Rodriguez found to his cost.
Quote from: PenFoe on October 08, 2015, 10:29:51 AM
I know it's been mentioned in other threads and I'm sure it was all over Twitter when it happened, but of all the badass shit Jake has done this year, and there's been a ton, that steal of second base is right at the top.
Just an incredible "Fuck You" to the whole deal.
That really caught me off guard...I didn't expect it at all and it was immaculate.
Quote from: PenFoe on October 08, 2015, 10:29:51 AM
I know it's been mentioned in other threads and I'm sure it was all over Twitter when it happened, but of all the badass shit Jake has done this year, and there's been a ton, that steal of second base is right at the top.
Just an incredible "Fuck You" to the whole deal.
I couldn't have been any happier if he'd been giving them the finger all the way to second base.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on October 08, 2015, 01:57:09 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on October 08, 2015, 10:29:51 AM
I know it's been mentioned in other threads and I'm sure it was all over Twitter when it happened, but of all the badass shit Jake has done this year, and there's been a ton, that steal of second base is right at the top.
Just an incredible "Fuck You" to the whole deal.
I couldn't have been any happier if he'd been giving them the finger all the way to second base.
I'm surprised he didn't flip a double bird while moonwalking into second.
I've never seen a Cub with less fucks to give than Jake.
Jake is actually fucking historic (http://m.mlb.com/news/article/153956848/jake-arrietas-run-among-best-in-mlb-history). As is my underpant shortage.
(http://i.imgur.com/lJjlpSR.jpg)
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
Wordswordswords. Does somebody who knows shit from shinola have an opinion?
Quote from: CT III on October 18, 2015, 08:31:56 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
Wordswordswords. Does somebody who knows shit from shinola have an opinion?
CFiHP is a rank supernaturalist.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
1. You start your best pitcher in Game 1, which gives you the best chance to take the 1-0 lead.
2. You start your best pitcher in the most favorable matchup, which gives you a chance to then play Montero in a position where he's able to do the most damage.
3. It gives you the chance to start Jake 3 times in the series if you have to (1/4/7), which is better than starting Lester 3 times.
4. It gives you the chance to use Jake to close down late innings in Game 6 if necessary.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
Lester was going to pitch just well enough to lose no matter what.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
Reread CFiHP's first sentence. It's isomorphic to a "Traditional Chinese Medicine" "diagnosis."
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 09:07:37 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
Reread CFiHP's first sentence. It's isomorphic to a "Traditional Chinese Medicine" "diagnosis."
So the whole issue is Jake's chi? Let's break out the needles.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 09:30:16 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 09:07:37 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
Reread CFiHP's first sentence. It's isomorphic to a "Traditional Chinese Medicine" "diagnosis."
So the whole issue is Jake's chi? Let's break out the needles.
Is that gonna fix the offense? Because I hear this team is built on offense...
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 09:30:16 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 09:07:37 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
Reread CFiHP's first sentence. It's isomorphic to a "Traditional Chinese Medicine" "diagnosis."
So the whole issue is Jake's chi? Let's break out the needles.
Qi is secondary (or, but one of the "Three Treasures"). It's necessary to examine his tongue and classify his pulse first.
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 09:53:12 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 09:30:16 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 09:07:37 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
Reread CFiHP's first sentence. It's isomorphic to a "Traditional Chinese Medicine" "diagnosis."
So the whole issue is Jake's chi? Let's break out the needles.
Qi is secondary (or, but one of the "Three Treasures"). It's necessary to examine his tongue and classify his pulse first.
Aw. I was going to say that.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:53:18 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on October 18, 2015, 08:28:16 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 18, 2015, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on October 18, 2015, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 18, 2015, 08:15:17 PM
Jake picked a poor night to become mortal again.
Coom Dawg just reassured everyone that it has nothing to do with innings pitched.
I think I'd prefer that he's gassed than any of the other myriad reasons why he might be getting lit.
It's not that he's gassed, he had Gerrit Cole, over-rested syndrome. Too many balls left up in the first inning, which is a key indicator of too live/over-rested of an arm.
For all the good decisions that Joe has made, not starting Jake on normal rest last night was a mistake.
If he had started on normal rest though, that would have meant another day of overrest for Lester. So how would that have made things better?
1. You start your best pitcher in Game 1, which gives you the best chance to take the 1-0 lead.
2. You start your best pitcher in the most favorable matchup, which gives you a chance to then play Montero in a position where he's able to do the most damage.
3. It gives you the chance to start Jake 3 times in the series if you have to (1/4/7), which is better than starting Lester 3 times.
4. It gives you the chance to use Jake to close down late innings in Game 6 if necessary.
got it
So Jake basically admitted in the post-game that he's tired. I went back and looked at his game log and the only game that really stands out as needlessly dumb was the 4-0 shutout vs. Milwaukee (on 9/22) where he threw 123 pitches. I recall most people saying that was unnecessary at the time. But other than that, there are only a handful of other instances where you can nitpick an inning here or there. If he's tired now, I don't think a scattered 100-200 pitches over the last few months would make a big difference now.
Long story short, throwing a ton of pitches/innings is just what happens when you're good. Even in hindsight, it's tough to say what they could have done differently.
Quote from: Eli on October 19, 2015, 07:07:20 AM
So Jake basically admitted in the post-game that he's tired. I went back and looked at his game log and the only game that really stands out as needlessly dumb was the 4-0 shutout vs. Milwaukee (on 9/22) where he threw 123 pitches. I recall most people saying that was unnecessary at the time. But other than that, there are only a handful of other instances where you can nitpick an inning here or there. If he's tired now, I don't think a scattered 100-200 pitches over the last few months would make a big difference now.
Long story short, throwing a ton of pitches/innings is just what happens when you're good. Even in hindsight, it's tough to say what they could have done differently.
I'm with you. It just sucks that it's happening right now. I guess it's sort of inevitable.
He can still get by in his remaining start(s)* with guile. I think he's a good enough pitcher to do that. I'm not sure Murphy's homer wasn't just him being red hot and hitting a decent pitch into the perfect combination of wind and seating arrangement. If that ball hung up or went foul, what are we saying about Jake's outing then?
*if necessary
Quote from: Slaky on October 19, 2015, 08:24:14 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 19, 2015, 07:07:20 AM
So Jake basically admitted in the post-game that he's tired. I went back and looked at his game log and the only game that really stands out as needlessly dumb was the 4-0 shutout vs. Milwaukee (on 9/22) where he threw 123 pitches. I recall most people saying that was unnecessary at the time. But other than that, there are only a handful of other instances where you can nitpick an inning here or there. If he's tired now, I don't think a scattered 100-200 pitches over the last few months would make a big difference now.
Long story short, throwing a ton of pitches/innings is just what happens when you're good. Even in hindsight, it's tough to say what they could have done differently.
I'm with you. It just sucks that it's happening right now. I guess it's sort of inevitable.
He can still get by in his remaining start(s)* with guile. I think he's a good enough pitcher to do that. I'm not sure Murphy's homer wasn't just him being red hot and hitting a decent pitch into the perfect combination of wind and seating arrangement. If that ball hung up or went foul, what are we saying about Jake's outing then?
*if necessary
That's it. It's not like Jake left a center-cut gopher ball out over the plate. Murphy hit Jake's pitch.
Quote from: Slaky on October 19, 2015, 08:24:14 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 19, 2015, 07:07:20 AM
So Jake basically admitted in the post-game that he's tired. I went back and looked at his game log and the only game that really stands out as needlessly dumb was the 4-0 shutout vs. Milwaukee (on 9/22) where he threw 123 pitches. I recall most people saying that was unnecessary at the time. But other than that, there are only a handful of other instances where you can nitpick an inning here or there. If he's tired now, I don't think a scattered 100-200 pitches over the last few months would make a big difference now.
Long story short, throwing a ton of pitches/innings is just what happens when you're good. Even in hindsight, it's tough to say what they could have done differently.
I'm with you. It just sucks that it's happening right now. I guess it's sort of inevitable.
He can still get by in his remaining start(s)* with guile. I think he's a good enough pitcher to do that. I'm not sure Murphy's homer wasn't just him being red hot and hitting a decent pitch into the perfect combination of wind and seating arrangement. If that ball hung up or went foul, what are we saying about Jake's outing then?
*if necessary
Someone tweeted that the exit velocity on that Murphy home run was 91 MPH, and less than 1% of all homers this year had an exit velocity that low or lower. He just hit in the one location where the wind was actually going to help a ball go out.
Quote from: SKO on October 19, 2015, 08:27:06 AM
Quote from: Slaky on October 19, 2015, 08:24:14 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 19, 2015, 07:07:20 AM
So Jake basically admitted in the post-game that he's tired. I went back and looked at his game log and the only game that really stands out as needlessly dumb was the 4-0 shutout vs. Milwaukee (on 9/22) where he threw 123 pitches. I recall most people saying that was unnecessary at the time. But other than that, there are only a handful of other instances where you can nitpick an inning here or there. If he's tired now, I don't think a scattered 100-200 pitches over the last few months would make a big difference now.
Long story short, throwing a ton of pitches/innings is just what happens when you're good. Even in hindsight, it's tough to say what they could have done differently.
I'm with you. It just sucks that it's happening right now. I guess it's sort of inevitable.
He can still get by in his remaining start(s)* with guile. I think he's a good enough pitcher to do that. I'm not sure Murphy's homer wasn't just him being red hot and hitting a decent pitch into the perfect combination of wind and seating arrangement. If that ball hung up or went foul, what are we saying about Jake's outing then?
*if necessary
Someone tweeted that the exit velocity on that Murphy home run was 91 MPH, and less than 1% of all homers this year had an exit velocity that low or lower. He just hit in the one location where the wind was actually going to help a ball go out.
Daren Willman.
https://twitter.com/darenw
He's got a great site
Quote from: Yeti on October 19, 2015, 08:50:51 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 19, 2015, 08:27:06 AM
Quote from: Slaky on October 19, 2015, 08:24:14 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 19, 2015, 07:07:20 AM
So Jake basically admitted in the post-game that he's tired. I went back and looked at his game log and the only game that really stands out as needlessly dumb was the 4-0 shutout vs. Milwaukee (on 9/22) where he threw 123 pitches. I recall most people saying that was unnecessary at the time. But other than that, there are only a handful of other instances where you can nitpick an inning here or there. If he's tired now, I don't think a scattered 100-200 pitches over the last few months would make a big difference now.
Long story short, throwing a ton of pitches/innings is just what happens when you're good. Even in hindsight, it's tough to say what they could have done differently.
I'm with you. It just sucks that it's happening right now. I guess it's sort of inevitable.
He can still get by in his remaining start(s)* with guile. I think he's a good enough pitcher to do that. I'm not sure Murphy's homer wasn't just him being red hot and hitting a decent pitch into the perfect combination of wind and seating arrangement. If that ball hung up or went foul, what are we saying about Jake's outing then?
*if necessary
Someone tweeted that the exit velocity on that Murphy home run was 91 MPH, and less than 1% of all homers this year had an exit velocity that low or lower. He just hit in the one location where the wind was actually going to help a ball go out.
Daren Willman.
https://twitter.com/darenw
He's got a great site
Marry it
Quote from: Slaky on October 19, 2015, 09:30:28 AM
Quote from: Yeti on October 19, 2015, 08:50:51 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 19, 2015, 08:27:06 AM
Quote from: Slaky on October 19, 2015, 08:24:14 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 19, 2015, 07:07:20 AM
So Jake basically admitted in the post-game that he's tired. I went back and looked at his game log and the only game that really stands out as needlessly dumb was the 4-0 shutout vs. Milwaukee (on 9/22) where he threw 123 pitches. I recall most people saying that was unnecessary at the time. But other than that, there are only a handful of other instances where you can nitpick an inning here or there. If he's tired now, I don't think a scattered 100-200 pitches over the last few months would make a big difference now.
Long story short, throwing a ton of pitches/innings is just what happens when you're good. Even in hindsight, it's tough to say what they could have done differently.
I'm with you. It just sucks that it's happening right now. I guess it's sort of inevitable.
He can still get by in his remaining start(s)* with guile. I think he's a good enough pitcher to do that. I'm not sure Murphy's homer wasn't just him being red hot and hitting a decent pitch into the perfect combination of wind and seating arrangement. If that ball hung up or went foul, what are we saying about Jake's outing then?
*if necessary
Someone tweeted that the exit velocity on that Murphy home run was 91 MPH, and less than 1% of all homers this year had an exit velocity that low or lower. He just hit in the one location where the wind was actually going to help a ball go out.
Daren Willman.
https://twitter.com/darenw
He's got a great site
Marry it
Over-Rest tends to affect control it doesn't account for the drop in velocity.
HGH is a helluva drug. Somebody get Madison Bumgarner's "personal trainer" in for a consult with ... hell everybody.
JAY CARIETTA SHAVED HIS DAMN BEARD OFF MY FRENTS. (http://espn.go.com/blog/mlb/post/_/id/9966/cubs-arrieta-shaves-his-beard)
Quote from: Tonker on October 31, 2015, 02:02:31 PM
JAY CARIETTA SHAVED HIS DAMN BEARD OFF MY FRENTS. (http://espn.go.com/blog/mlb/post/_/id/9966/cubs-arrieta-shaves-his-beard)
The fact that this is newsworthy is all the proof we need that Grantland was indeed obsolete.
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." -- Jeff Samardzija
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
As long as there's gasoline, a barn, a padlock, and some matches, I'll be there to stop this.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
With the added benefit that he would be the rotations' Chris Coghlan, a guy I'd feel comfortable hating beyond all reason even when he's doing good things.
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
That's what the Germans said about Hitler in '33.
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
When Chuck is right.
(http://image.cdn.ispot.tv/ad/7A0Z/geico-mobile-app-when-pigs-fly-large-6.jpg)
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
NO BECUZZ EDWARD JACKSON
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
Look, who would know more about what kind of investment Snork is worth, the front office that turned him into a starter, has in depth knowledge of his medicals, and oversaw the most successful period of his career, or those of us that hate him for being bad like 5 years ago and having a stupid face and stupid hair on top of his stupid face and also all of the stupid things that have come out of his stupid mouth on his stupid face?
(for what it's worth I both understand the Snork hate and would also be 100% fine with bringing him back on whatever terms Jepstink deem worthy)
All you bullshit-tolerating Snorkfuckers are gonna be sorry if you get what you want.
Quote from: SKO on November 19, 2015, 09:07:40 AM
Look, who would know more about what kind of investment Snork is worth, the front office that turned him into a starter, has in depth knowledge of his medicals, and oversaw the most successful period of his career, or those of us that hate him for being bad like 5 years ago and having a stupid face and stupid hair on top of his stupid face and also all of the stupid things that have come out of his stupid mouth on his stupid face?
I'll have to think about this and get back to you.
Quote from: SKO on November 19, 2015, 09:07:40 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
Look, who would know more about what kind of investment Snork is worth, the front office that turned him into a starter, has in depth knowledge of his medicals, and oversaw the most successful period of his career, or those of us that hate him for being bad like 5 years ago and being bad in 2015 and having a stupid face and stupid hair on top of his stupid face and also all of the stupid things that have come out of his stupid mouth on his stupid face?
(for what it's worth I both understand the Snork hate and would also be 100% fine with bringing him back on whatever terms Jepstink deem worthy)
There you go.
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
I get it. Trust the front office. No need to share opinions anymore.
So... Battlefront anyone?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 09:17:36 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 19, 2015, 09:07:40 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
Look, who would know more about what kind of investment Snork is worth, the front office that turned him into a starter, has in depth knowledge of his medicals, and oversaw the most successful period of his career, or those of us that hate him for being bad like 5 years ago and being bad in 2015 and having a stupid face and stupid hair on top of his stupid face and also all of the stupid things that have come out of his stupid mouth on his stupid face?
(for what it's worth I both understand the Snork hate and would also be 100% fine with bringing him back on whatever terms Jepstink deem worthy)
There you go.
That's the thing though. Why was he so good in 2014 and bad in 2015? Is there something he did for the Cubs that he didn't do for the White Sox? Eli mentioned Cooper wanting him to cut down on using his splitter, which was his most effective pitch the year before. Something very similar happened to Arrieta in Baltimore. Given this org's success rehabiliting most pitchers not named Edwin Jackson, I think it's fair to assume that if they're interested in Snork at all they see something concrete that went wrong and can be fixed, rather than just hope that it was an aberration.
Quote from: SKO on November 19, 2015, 09:23:57 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 09:17:36 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 19, 2015, 09:07:40 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
Look, who would know more about what kind of investment Snork is worth, the front office that turned him into a starter, has in depth knowledge of his medicals, and oversaw the most successful period of his career, or those of us that hate him for being bad like 5 years ago and being bad in 2015 and having a stupid face and stupid hair on top of his stupid face and also all of the stupid things that have come out of his stupid mouth on his stupid face?
(for what it's worth I both understand the Snork hate and would also be 100% fine with bringing him back on whatever terms Jepstink deem worthy)
There you go.
That's the thing though. Why was he so good in 2014 and bad in 2015? Is there something he did for the Cubs that he didn't do for the White Sox? Eli mentioned Cooper wanting him to cut down on using his splitter, which was his most effective pitch the year before. Something very similar happened to Arrieta in Baltimore. Given this org's success rehabiliting most pitchers not named Edwin Jackson, I think it's fair to assume that if they're interested in Snork at all they see something concrete that went wrong and can be fixed, rather than just hope that it was an aberration.
How can you even type with Snork's dong hanging out of your mouth?
I wouldn't care if they signed Snork but can we get the fucking chode out of the Arrieta-is-god thread?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 09:19:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
I get it. Trust the front office. No need to share opinions anymore.
This has basically been the prevailing opinion since Epstein took over, so why is it different now?
Quote from: Oleg on November 19, 2015, 09:32:07 AM
I wouldn't care if they signed Snork but can we get the fucking chode out of the Arrieta-is-god thread?
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:35:02 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 09:19:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
I get it. Trust the front office. No need to share opinions anymore.
This has basically been the prevailing opinion since Epstein took over, so why is it different now?
For the record, my position is "let's wait until the thing we're dreading actually happens and then we can bitch about it".
Quote from: CT III on November 19, 2015, 09:46:23 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:35:02 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 09:19:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 09:00:13 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 19, 2015, 08:53:08 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 19, 2015, 08:36:18 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on November 19, 2015, 07:14:15 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 18, 2015, 06:01:52 PM
The Cy Damn Young Award.
"I don't think this team improves by trading Scott Feldman. He was one of our better pitchers." --Jeff Samardzija
Please don't let this asshole come back.
I like making fun of him for that line, too, but I don't really blame him for saying it at the time. These guys are competitive as hell; why would they enjoy their prime years being spent on a team that's intentionally losing games?
Anyway. There's been a lot of talk about Cooper not letting him throw splitters and messing with his mechanics, which is why he struggled so much. As long as he's not the best pitcher they acquire this offseason, I'd be happy to see him come back as a 4/5 starter.
...on a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't want a long term contract to him clogging up the rotation for years. There are going to be far better options than him within the next 3+ years. Further, they are going to sign someone not named Snork to a 5 year deal this winter. That ties up two of the five spots long term. Arrieta is in line for a third long term spot. I have no interest in having Snork as the #4 until 2019 and only having flexibility to add someone in one rotation slot.
If he's signed, I'd trust that the front office has a plan on how to handle all of this. Or are we not trusting them anymore if they sign Samardzija?
I get it. Trust the front office. No need to share opinions anymore.
This has basically been the prevailing opinion since Epstein took over, so why is it different now?
For the record, my position is "let's wait until the thing we're dreading actually happens and then we can bitch about it".
But I'm angry now!
Didn't even look like he was trying. My pants exploded after the back to back Trout/Pujols Ks
I like to look at his numbers and just dream of a better world. A world where Jake pitches every day.
Quote from: Slaky on April 05, 2016, 09:38:10 AM
I like to look at his numbers and just dream of a better world. A world where Jake pitches every day.
The Cubs' outfielders were bored to tears.
I totally get and agree with the argument that the Cubs have Jake under contract at reasonable dollars through his likely prime so we need to prepare ourselves for him leaving because it's probably the right long-term move. But what if he just keeps pitching like this for the next two years?
Quote from: R-V on April 05, 2016, 11:46:01 AM
I totally get and agree with the argument that the Cubs have Jake under contract at reasonable dollars through his likely prime so we need to prepare ourselves for him leaving because it's probably the right long-term move. But what if he just keeps pitching like this for the next two years?
Then the Cubs are gonna win a lot of games. Which will be awesome.
Quote from: R-V on April 05, 2016, 11:46:01 AM
I totally get and agree with the argument that the Cubs have Jake under contract at reasonable dollars through his likely prime so we need to prepare ourselves for him leaving because it's probably the right long-term move. But what if he just keeps pitching like this for the next two years?
I feel like the Cubs should just shut up and give him their money.
Although I also feel that in a few years, the Cubs are going to have trouble paying for their superstars.
Quote from: Canadouche on April 05, 2016, 12:49:25 PM
Quote from: R-V on April 05, 2016, 11:46:01 AM
I totally get and agree with the argument that the Cubs have Jake under contract at reasonable dollars through his likely prime so we need to prepare ourselves for him leaving because it's probably the right long-term move. But what if he just keeps pitching like this for the next two years?
I feel like the Cubs should just shut up and give him their money.
Although I also feel that in a few years, the Cubs are going to have trouble paying for their superstars.
Given the way they're building up all these revenue sources I'm not sure. What's the value of the team, doubled, since Ricketts bought?
Quote from: Canadouche on April 05, 2016, 12:49:25 PM
Quote from: R-V on April 05, 2016, 11:46:01 AM
I totally get and agree with the argument that the Cubs have Jake under contract at reasonable dollars through his likely prime so we need to prepare ourselves for him leaving because it's probably the right long-term move. But what if he just keeps pitching like this for the next two years?
I feel like the Cubs should just shut up and give him their money.
Although I also feel that in a few years, the Cubs are going to have trouble paying for their superstars.
They can always pay for somebody else's superstars then.
Last 22 starts:
HR given up-2
HR Hit-3
EDIT -- my bad
Are we sure he's not actually God? He's got the beard and everything
So, this is real.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-jake-arrieta-saxx-underwear-20160414-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-jake-arrieta-saxx-underwear-20160414-story.html)
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on April 14, 2016, 11:56:41 AM
So, this is real.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-jake-arrieta-saxx-underwear-20160414-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-jake-arrieta-saxx-underwear-20160414-story.html)
(||)
Quote"They have designed products specifically to fit my needs on the mound..."
Indeed. I see what he did there.
I'm just grateful that soon my balls will never have to endure another day without being snuggled tightly by some Jake Arrieta endorsed textile product. BOUT GODDAMN TIME!
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on April 14, 2016, 03:32:36 PM
Quote"They have designed products specifically to fit my needs on the mound..."
Indeed. I see what he did there.
I'm just grateful that soon my balls will never have to endure another day without being snuggled tightly by some Jake Arrieta endorsed textile product. BOUT GODDAMN TIME!
Shut up Paul, you're a douche.
Saxx Underwear: Let Jake's Big Saxx Keep You Warm
With the exception of the last 2 playoff games, he just keeps on churning out great starts.
Quote from: PenFoe on April 05, 2016, 12:00:53 PM
Quote from: R-V on April 05, 2016, 11:46:01 AM
I totally get and agree with the argument that the Cubs have Jake under contract at reasonable dollars through his likely prime so we need to prepare ourselves for him leaving because it's probably the right long-term move. But what if he just keeps pitching like this for the next two years?
Then the Cubs are gonna win a lot of games. Which will be awesome.
Yeah. That's a "problem" I don't mind having.
Franchester's butthurt must be off the charts.
Yawn.
I am enjoying this season, so far.
He's good.
Quote from: CBStew on April 21, 2016, 09:13:41 PM
I am enjoying this season, so far.
Meh. It's been ok.
<Insert irrational "Give him all the money" post>
Quote from: PenFoe on April 21, 2016, 09:24:09 PM
<Insert irrational "Give him all the money" post>
I'll get a CDL if it means I can have the honor of backing up the dump truck full of money into his driveway.
Lowest number of regular season starts to include two no-hitters:
Roy Halladay 24 (2012, second start was post-season, though)
Max Scherzer 20 (2015)
Homer Bailey 19 (2012-13)
Nolan Ryan 15 (1973)
Nolan Ryan 12 (1974-75)
JAY CARRIETA 10 (2015-16)
Warren Spahn 7 (1960-61)
Did I miss anybody? What Arrieta has done since last summer hasn't quite been historic, but bloody nearly.
EDIT: per Chuck Dickens (for it is he), Johnny Vander Meer threw back-to-back no-nos once, when Stew was a kid.
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
Quote from: Tonker on April 22, 2016, 04:35:18 AM
Lowest number of regular season starts to include two no-hitters:
Roy Halladay 24 (2012, second start was post-season, though)
Max Scherzer 20 (2015)
Homer Bailey 19 (2012-13)
Nolan Ryan 15 (1973)
Nolan Ryan 12 (1974-75)
JAY CARRIETA 10 (2015-16)
Warren Spahn 7 (1960-61)
Did I miss anybody? What Arrieta has done since last summer hasn't quite been historic, but bloody nearly.
EDIT: per Chuck Dickens (for it is he), Johnny Vander Meer threw back-to-back no-nos once, when Stew was a kid.
The second of which happened to be the first-ever night game at Ebbetts Field if I'm not mistaken.
Here's something I've been thinking about recently... at what point does what Jake's been doing go from super fucking rare, to unprecedented, to singular? As in, never done before and likely never to be repeated. Previously thought to be impossible. That kind of thing. I mean, I guess we started to get a little taste of unprecedented during the second half of last year. Now we seem to be staring at some potentially unprecedented-over-a-calendar-year type shit. But I'm wondering at what point does it move into that never-before-and-never-again type territory.
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on April 22, 2016, 09:05:39 AM
Here's something I've been thinking about recently... at what point does what Jake's been doing go from super fucking rare, to unprecedented, to singular? As in, never done before and likely never to be repeated. Previously thought to be impossible. That kind of thing. I mean, I guess we started to get a little taste of unprecedented during the second half of last year. Now we seem to be staring at some potentially unprecedented-over-a-calendar-year type shit. But I'm wondering at what point does it move into that never-before-and-never-again type territory.
You've articulated what my potato brain has been scratching at, thank you.
Jake is THE MOTHERFUCKING BALLS (https://twitter.com/theaceofspaeder/status/723508599788560385).
Jake Arrieta is Superman.
Jake Arrieta pitches as if he's playing a MLB video game on Easy Mode.
It's been almost 99 years since this shitshow (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN191705020.shtml) and 50 since this one (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN196508191.shtml), so I hope Hippo Vaughn and Larry Jackson are cackling somewhere.
Four teams have thrown no-hitters against the Cubs. Jake has avenged two of those teams (Dodgers -- twice, and Reds -- twice). The Cubs are in San Francisco (ghosts of Christy Mathewson) May 20-22 and host Philadelphia (ghosts of Cole Hamels and Chick Fraser) May 27-29. If Maddon sticks with the five-man rotation with the off-days, Arrieta misses both of them.
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
I love this Pexstory.
Quote from: flannj on April 22, 2016, 03:25:17 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
I love this Pexstory.
And that's why Ken Burns left Spahn out of "Baseball".
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
Call me at dinner (or any time) with a survey and you will get the same reaction from me. AND STAY OFF MY LAWN!
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
I once
received a call from Amaury Telemaco. I don't know if it was
the Amaury Telemaco, but ... how many could there possibly be? I can't remember particulars, but I think he wanted to know when his car parts were going to be delivered.
I also called Eric Crouch's (I assume) mom and tried to get her to switch to MCI long distance. This was right around when the Worldcom scandal was happening. I don't think she switched. It was a woman with a last name of Crouch who lived on "7 Eric Crouch" Lane/Place/Way somewhere around Omaha.
[/penstory]
Quote from: ChuckD on April 22, 2016, 05:26:26 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
I once received a call from Amaury Telemaco. I don't know if it was the Amaury Telemaco, but ... how many could there possibly be? I can't remember particulars, but I think he wanted to know when his car parts were going to be delivered.
I also called Eric Crouch's (I assume) mom and tried to get her to switch to MCI long distance. This was right around when the Worldcom scandal was happening. I don't think she switched. It was a woman with a last name of Crouch who lived on "7 Eric Crouch" Lane/Place/Way somewhere around Omaha.
[/penstory]
I briefly worked at an eBay storefront fly-by-night company about 10 years ago, where I sold Mike Ditka's wife's golf clubs.
Damn it, this PenStory sucks worse than a real one.
This is from Friday (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-king-of-weak-contact/)...I just read it now. But if it doesn't give you the warm fuzzies in your underpants, fuck off.
Quote from: Bort on April 22, 2016, 05:50:12 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on April 22, 2016, 05:26:26 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
I once received a call from Amaury Telemaco. I don't know if it was the Amaury Telemaco, but ... how many could there possibly be? I can't remember particulars, but I think he wanted to know when his car parts were going to be delivered.
I also called Eric Crouch's (I assume) mom and tried to get her to switch to MCI long distance. This was right around when the Worldcom scandal was happening. I don't think she switched. It was a woman with a last name of Crouch who lived on "7 Eric Crouch" Lane/Place/Way somewhere around Omaha.
[/penstory]
I briefly worked at an eBay storefront fly-by-night company about 10 years ago, where I sold Mike Ditka's wife's golf clubs.
Damn it, this PenStory sucks worse than a real one.
I once spoke to Lawrie McMenemy on the phone. I was calling Southampton FC about tickets, and I think he picked up to make an outgoing call just as I rang in. Safe to say that whoever it was he was expecting to talk to, it wasn't me. He did ask me who I was, but even when I told him, it didn't really seem to clear anything up for him. I think he was a bit confused, to be honest. Not by my phone call, particularly: just in general.
Quote from: Tonker on April 25, 2016, 12:34:23 PM
Quote from: Bort on April 22, 2016, 05:50:12 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on April 22, 2016, 05:26:26 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
I once received a call from Amaury Telemaco. I don't know if it was the Amaury Telemaco, but ... how many could there possibly be? I can't remember particulars, but I think he wanted to know when his car parts were going to be delivered.
I also called Eric Crouch's (I assume) mom and tried to get her to switch to MCI long distance. This was right around when the Worldcom scandal was happening. I don't think she switched. It was a woman with a last name of Crouch who lived on "7 Eric Crouch" Lane/Place/Way somewhere around Omaha.
[/penstory]
I briefly worked at an eBay storefront fly-by-night company about 10 years ago, where I sold Mike Ditka's wife's golf clubs.
Damn it, this PenStory sucks worse than a real one.
I once spoke to Lawrie McMenemy on the phone. I was calling Southampton FC about tickets, and I think he picked up to make an outgoing call just as I rang in. Safe to say that whoever it was he was expecting to talk to, it wasn't me. He did ask me who I was, but even when I told him, it didn't really seem to clear anything up for him. I think he was a bit confused, to be honest. Not by my phone call, particularly: just in general.
I assume a 'McMenemy" is a Irish male enemy.
Quote from: Oleg on April 25, 2016, 12:11:24 PM
This is from Friday (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-king-of-weak-contact/)...I just read it now. But if it doesn't give you the warm fuzzies in your underpants, fuck off.
This article by Trueblood cites that article: http://wrigleyville.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2016/04/21/can-jake-arrieta-keep-this-up-data-instead-of-history-might-hold-the-answer/ and is actually really good.
Quote from: Oleg on April 25, 2016, 12:48:27 PM
Quote from: Tonker on April 25, 2016, 12:34:23 PM
Quote from: Bort on April 22, 2016, 05:50:12 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on April 22, 2016, 05:26:26 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
I once received a call from Amaury Telemaco. I don't know if it was the Amaury Telemaco, but ... how many could there possibly be? I can't remember particulars, but I think he wanted to know when his car parts were going to be delivered.
I also called Eric Crouch's (I assume) mom and tried to get her to switch to MCI long distance. This was right around when the Worldcom scandal was happening. I don't think she switched. It was a woman with a last name of Crouch who lived on "7 Eric Crouch" Lane/Place/Way somewhere around Omaha.
[/penstory]
I briefly worked at an eBay storefront fly-by-night company about 10 years ago, where I sold Mike Ditka's wife's golf clubs.
Damn it, this PenStory sucks worse than a real one.
I once spoke to Lawrie McMenemy on the phone. I was calling Southampton FC about tickets, and I think he picked up to make an outgoing call just as I rang in. Safe to say that whoever it was he was expecting to talk to, it wasn't me. He did ask me who I was, but even when I told him, it didn't really seem to clear anything up for him. I think he was a bit confused, to be honest. Not by my phone call, particularly: just in general.
I assume a 'McMenemy" is a Irish male enemy.
I used to work in Deerfield at Service Merchandise, right next to the Multiplex where the Bulls worked out. I once sold Mike Smrek an answering machine. Also waited on Scottie Pippen and Dallas Green (when I asked, "Can I help you"? He said "Not right now." Another customer said to him, "You did enough. You signed Sutcliffe." Pretty sure he was talking to Green). Also, while subbing in the Merchandise Pick Up area, I helped an 8 months pregnant Kim Singletary load two chaise lounge chairs into the back seat of her two door Cadillac Riviera. That was hard because there were two huge watermelons in the rear foot wells.
Heady times!
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 25, 2016, 03:48:53 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 25, 2016, 12:48:27 PM
Quote from: Tonker on April 25, 2016, 12:34:23 PM
Quote from: Bort on April 22, 2016, 05:50:12 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on April 22, 2016, 05:26:26 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 02:53:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on April 22, 2016, 02:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 22, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 22, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on April 22, 2016, 07:23:22 AM
I take back what I said, and reiterate: Jake Arrieta is the greatest Cubs pitcher I've ever seen. Greg Maddux can suck it.
THIS.
Greg Maddux is the best Braves pitcher I've ever seen. Take his fucking retired number down and quit pretending like it belongs there you fucking dipshits.
Warren Spahn wants a word with you.
I expected to get all indignant about this post. On a per year basis, Maddux was amazing. But Spahn pitched for many more years with The Braves than Maddux had.
I never saw Warren Spahn tho, so...
I did call his wife up on the phone and talk to her once. Swear to God. I used to conduct surveys for Cummins Engine Co. and the Spahns had a motor home with a Signature 600 diesel under the hood. Those were so cutting edge they blew the rest of the heavy duty diesel competition out of the market. Anyway, Spahn had one of the first ones. He was on my list to call. I'm sure it was him because of his home address and whatever. Anyway. I called. His wife answered and that old lady was fucking pissed that anybody had their number and called them. She/he/they did not participate in that very important customer satisfaction assessment. No they did not.
I once received a call from Amaury Telemaco. I don't know if it was the Amaury Telemaco, but ... how many could there possibly be? I can't remember particulars, but I think he wanted to know when his car parts were going to be delivered.
I also called Eric Crouch's (I assume) mom and tried to get her to switch to MCI long distance. This was right around when the Worldcom scandal was happening. I don't think she switched. It was a woman with a last name of Crouch who lived on "7 Eric Crouch" Lane/Place/Way somewhere around Omaha.
[/penstory]
I briefly worked at an eBay storefront fly-by-night company about 10 years ago, where I sold Mike Ditka's wife's golf clubs.
Damn it, this PenStory sucks worse than a real one.
I once spoke to Lawrie McMenemy on the phone. I was calling Southampton FC about tickets, and I think he picked up to make an outgoing call just as I rang in. Safe to say that whoever it was he was expecting to talk to, it wasn't me. He did ask me who I was, but even when I told him, it didn't really seem to clear anything up for him. I think he was a bit confused, to be honest. Not by my phone call, particularly: just in general.
I assume a 'McMenemy" is a Irish male enemy.
I used to work in Deerfield at Service Merchandise, right next to the Multiplex where the Bulls worked out. I once sold Mike Smrek an answering machine. Also waited on Scottie Pippen and Dallas Green (when I asked, "Can I help you"? He said "Not right now." Another customer said to him, "You did enough. You signed Sutcliffe." Pretty sure he was talking to Green). Also, while subbing in the Merchandise Pick Up area, I helped an 8 months pregnant Kim Singletary load two chaise lounge chairs into the back seat of her two door Cadillac Riviera. That was hard because there were two huge watermelons in the rear foot wells.
Heady times!
Dallas Green would have loved you, Chuck.
Confirmed: Jake Arrieta is still 7% human.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on April 28, 2016, 06:45:41 PM
Confirmed: Jake Arrieta is still 7% human.
Dee Gordon and Chris Colabello are gone for 80 games each after getting caught using PEDs. I don't think one single person ever looked at either of those guys and said, man, I bet he's on some shit. There's no way he could do that without drugs. The takeaway is that 99% of athletes at the highest level have probably dipped into something on the banned substance list at one time or another. The stuff they're doing these days is completely different from the STEROIDS they were using during the longball era. The effects are not for functionality and speed, they're for keeping the body younger and healthier so they can do sports like they're being paid to do.
Jake is one of those guys who takes such amazing physical care of himself that you can believe that he'd see the challenge of doing it natrually as something to take on with fervor and piety. People thought the same thing about Roger Fucking Clemens.
I don't have one single solitary problem with a person who is paid to abuse the shit out of his body on the field and in the gym, taking a drug, knowing the risk, that helps him do his job better. Rules are rules, and MLB in particular took such a massive P.R. hit by allowing the word STEROIDS to dominate the discussion through they're litany of communications and policy fuck ups. So some guys have to get busted now and again to make it look like they give a gram of shit whether guys are on PEDs or not.
I do have a problem with guys like Clemens and Lance Armstrong who wag their fingers at the world and uphold their lifestyle as something it isn't and make a name for themselves as dominant physical specimens above reproach. Jake is my favorite baseball player since Sosa, a known drug cheat who was caught up in an environment that was encouraged and richly rewarded until it wasn't. But Jake has now entered the category of guys who are so fervently anti-dope that he'd really better not get caught doing it or the public cry against him will actually be somewhat deserved.
Even that might not be fair. He was defending himself against iditos like Stephen A. Smiff who can't look at this issue objectively enough to see that if Dee Gordon and Chris Colabello are getting popped, maybe it's not PEDs that make Jake the ace of the entire profession right now. You think? What Madison Bumgarner did during the 2014 postseason should raise as many eyebrows as Barroid's gigantic fucking jawbone but fuck if I ever hear a peep out of any of the handwringing shitbirds on the anti-drug firing squad.
Fuck them all, and feed them greenies so they may wake the fuck up some day and stop trying to ruin my favorite sport with their mealy-mouthed indignation.
I really don't think that many players are on PEDs anymore, given how few players are defying the aging curve nowadays, the frequent injuries to pitchers, etc. The fact that two guys got caught by comprehensive testing is not evidence to me of widespread use so much as it could be interpreted as "hey the system is working and guys are getting caught."
I'm going to assume guys aren't on anything until they get caught doing it, and if they get caught, whatever, there's a system of punishment set up now that I think is fine. In the meantime, stop accusing people of shit, because it's annoying and I'm tired of it after all these years. I don't care about the purity of the game, but I respect that guys like Jake Arrieta work their asses off and don't want their name sullied by these allegations even if you say you don't care if he did it or not, so let's just drop it and agree anyone who keeps bringing up can get fucked.
Quote from: SKO on April 29, 2016, 09:46:28 AM
I really don't think that many players are on PEDs anymore, given how few players are defying the aging curve nowadays, the frequent injuries to pitchers, etc. The fact that two guys got caught by comprehensive testing is not evidence to me of widespread use so much as it could be interpreted as "hey the system is working and guys are getting caught."
I'm going to assume guys aren't on anything until they get caught doing it, and if they get caught, whatever, there's a system of punishment set up now that I think is fine. In the meantime, stop accusing people of shit, because it's annoying and I'm tired of it after all these years. I don't care about the purity of the game, but I respect that guys like Jake Arrieta work their asses off and don't want their name sullied by these allegations even if you say you don't care if he did it or not, so let's just drop it and agree anyone who keeps bringing up can get fucked.
That's exactly what MLB wants you to think, so yeah, the system is working. And how in the world do widespread injuries make you think that guys aren't getting extra help? PED helps their muscles recover faster so they feel well enough to plow forward until something tears, and then their recovery time from the injury is shortened and so on and so forth.
Quote from: InternetApex on April 29, 2016, 09:48:02 AM
Quote from: SKO on April 29, 2016, 09:46:28 AM
I really don't think that many players are on PEDs anymore, given how few players are defying the aging curve nowadays, the frequent injuries to pitchers, etc. The fact that two guys got caught by comprehensive testing is not evidence to me of widespread use so much as it could be interpreted as "hey the system is working and guys are getting caught."
I'm going to assume guys aren't on anything until they get caught doing it, and if they get caught, whatever, there's a system of punishment set up now that I think is fine. In the meantime, stop accusing people of shit, because it's annoying and I'm tired of it after all these years. I don't care about the purity of the game, but I respect that guys like Jake Arrieta work their asses off and don't want their name sullied by these allegations even if you say you don't care if he did it or not, so let's just drop it and agree anyone who keeps bringing up can get fucked.
That's exactly what MLB wants you to think, so yeah, the system is working. And how in the world do widespread injuries make you think that guys aren't getting extra help? PED helps their muscles recover faster so they feel well enough to plow forward until something tears, and then their recovery time from the injury is shortened and so on and so forth.
I'm saying with the decline in offensive numbers and the comprehensive testing I think it's safe to say there's more evidence now that most guys aren't on it than evidence there is. You can say "hey they have cool new shit now that can't be picked up by tests" but if I'm donning your tinfoil hat I'm going to ask why the fuck are guys getting caught then? Did they not get the memo everyone else got about which ones evade detection?
You don't actually have any evidence, you just have skepticism, which is fine, I get why you'd have it given the game's history, but I'm fine with believing Jake Arrieta and whoever else is telling the truth until they are proven not to be. It's kind of a dick move to just assume everyone is lying all of the time. You can say "hey I get why he has to lie, but I believe he's doing it even though I don't care that he's doing it", but that still kind of makes you a dick for accusing him of lying without any real evidence to back that up.
For what it's worth the consensus among writers and ex-players who lived through both eras is that the game is mostly clean now, and I tend to believe them because during the steroid era it was never really even a remotely well kept secret.
Quote from: InternetApex on April 29, 2016, 09:48:02 AM
Quote from: SKO on April 29, 2016, 09:46:28 AM
I really don't think that many players are on PEDs anymore, given how few players are defying the aging curve nowadays, the frequent injuries to pitchers, etc. The fact that two guys got caught by comprehensive testing is not evidence to me of widespread use so much as it could be interpreted as "hey the system is working and guys are getting caught."
I'm going to assume guys aren't on anything until they get caught doing it, and if they get caught, whatever, there's a system of punishment set up now that I think is fine. In the meantime, stop accusing people of shit, because it's annoying and I'm tired of it after all these years. I don't care about the purity of the game, but I respect that guys like Jake Arrieta work their asses off and don't want their name sullied by these allegations even if you say you don't care if he did it or not, so let's just drop it and agree anyone who keeps bringing up can get fucked.
That's exactly what MLB wants you to think, so yeah, the system is working. And how in the world do widespread injuries make you think that guys aren't getting extra help? PED helps their muscles recover faster so they feel well enough to plow forward until something tears, and then their recovery time from the injury is shortened and so on and so forth.
Anabolic steroids help with muscle recovery, but HGH helps everything - ligaments, cartilage and bones - heal faster. And it's much harder to detect.
Anybody getting caught is just being dumb.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on April 29, 2016, 10:00:43 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on April 29, 2016, 09:48:02 AM
Quote from: SKO on April 29, 2016, 09:46:28 AM
I really don't think that many players are on PEDs anymore, given how few players are defying the aging curve nowadays, the frequent injuries to pitchers, etc. The fact that two guys got caught by comprehensive testing is not evidence to me of widespread use so much as it could be interpreted as "hey the system is working and guys are getting caught."
I'm going to assume guys aren't on anything until they get caught doing it, and if they get caught, whatever, there's a system of punishment set up now that I think is fine. In the meantime, stop accusing people of shit, because it's annoying and I'm tired of it after all these years. I don't care about the purity of the game, but I respect that guys like Jake Arrieta work their asses off and don't want their name sullied by these allegations even if you say you don't care if he did it or not, so let's just drop it and agree anyone who keeps bringing up can get fucked.
That's exactly what MLB wants you to think, so yeah, the system is working. And how in the world do widespread injuries make you think that guys aren't getting extra help? PED helps their muscles recover faster so they feel well enough to plow forward until something tears, and then their recovery time from the injury is shortened and so on and so forth.
Anabolic steroids help with muscle recovery, but HGH helps everything - ligaments, cartilage and bones - heal faster. And it's much harder to detect.
Anybody getting caught is just being dumb.
Most guys get caught doing stuff that helps them cycle off of the real PEDs. Then they're like "I DUNNO WHAT HA HAPPEN!!! THIS WAS NOT FOR SPORTS!"
Quote from: SKO on April 29, 2016, 09:46:28 AM
I really don't think that many players are on PEDs anymore, given how few players are defying the aging curve nowadays, the frequent injuries to pitchers, etc. The fact that two guys got caught by comprehensive testing is not evidence to me of widespread use so much as it could be interpreted as "hey the system is working and guys are getting caught."
I'm going to assume guys aren't on anything until they get caught doing it, and if they get caught, whatever, there's a system of punishment set up now that I think is fine. In the meantime, stop accusing people of shit, because it's annoying and I'm tired of it after all these years. I don't care about the purity of the game, but I respect that guys like Jake Arrieta work their asses off and don't want their name sullied by these allegations even if you say you don't care if he did it or not, so let's just drop it and agree anyone who keeps bringing up can get fucked.
It's seven guys since the start of spring training. Still not a ton, but as many as all of last season.
I think a pretty fair number of guys are still using PEDs in some form, in part because in the past, the chances of getting caught were very slim. If the testing has changed and they are catching more people, that will probably get some guys to stop.
Quote from: Shooter on April 29, 2016, 08:09:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 29, 2016, 09:46:28 AM
I really don't think that many players are on PEDs anymore, given how few players are defying the aging curve nowadays, the frequent injuries to pitchers, etc. The fact that two guys got caught by comprehensive testing is not evidence to me of widespread use so much as it could be interpreted as "hey the system is working and guys are getting caught."
I'm going to assume guys aren't on anything until they get caught doing it, and if they get caught, whatever, there's a system of punishment set up now that I think is fine. In the meantime, stop accusing people of shit, because it's annoying and I'm tired of it after all these years. I don't care about the purity of the game, but I respect that guys like Jake Arrieta work their asses off and don't want their name sullied by these allegations even if you say you don't care if he did it or not, so let's just drop it and agree anyone who keeps bringing up can get fucked.
It's seven guys since the start of spring training. Still not a ton, but as many as all of last season.
I think a pretty fair number of guys are still using PEDs in some form, in part because in the past, the chances of getting caught were very slim. If the testing has changed and they are catching more people, that will probably get some guys to stop.
Seven since the beginning of Spring Training feels like a pretty significant number.
Is he god?
Quote from: Yeti on May 03, 2016, 10:48:32 PM
Is he god?
I don't know if he's god, but at this point I'd trust him to dispatch Gozer.
Quote from: Canadouche on May 04, 2016, 05:22:44 AM
Quote from: Yeti on May 03, 2016, 10:48:32 PM
Is he god?
I don't know if he's god, but at this point I'd trust him to dispatch Gozer.
Nimble little minx, insn't she?
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won’t offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago’s Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn’t of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. “Aces get seven years,” Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: “I’ll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers.” Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game’s other elite arms is also a factor. “Financially I’m fine, regardless,” he said. “You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don’t think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year.”
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Jake's conditioning will make him an atypical 32 year old starting pitcher, no?
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 12, 2016, 09:19:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Jake's conditioning will make him an atypical 32 year old starting pitcher, no?
It will make him an extremely well-conditioned 32-year old starting pitcher, yes.
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Counterpoint: minor league + MLB innings load at time of free agency (I'm assuming 200 innings this year and next for Jake).
Lester 2,080
Greinke 1,777 (prior to signing with Dodgers)
Arrieta 1,687
Price 1,592
Scherzer 1,402
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:17:32 AM
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
Yeah it seems like they could hopefully work their way around the length by front-loading the ever loving crap out of it. Give him most of the money the next couple of years before Bryant and Co. even hit arbitration.
Quote from: SKO on May 12, 2016, 10:19:58 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:17:32 AM
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
Yeah it seems like they could hopefully work their way around the length by front-loading the ever loving crap out of it. Give him most of the money the next couple of years before Bryant and Co. even hit arbitration.
I honestly don't understand why more contracts aren't front-loaded. It seems common practice in baseball to back-load everything, but if you're going to sign an epic contract, wouldn't you rather pay the guy most of his money while he's actually still worth it?
Quote from: InternetApex on May 12, 2016, 09:22:57 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 12, 2016, 09:19:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Jake's conditioning will make him an atypical 32 year old starting pitcher, no?
It will make him an extremely well-conditioned 32-year old starting pitcher, yes.
with a little more tread on his tires than you'd generally see. So a 32 year old Arrieta might be as valuable as a 30 year old anybody else. At least that's my guess.
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:21:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on May 12, 2016, 10:19:58 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:17:32 AM
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
Yeah it seems like they could hopefully work their way around the length by front-loading the ever loving crap out of it. Give him most of the money the next couple of years before Bryant and Co. even hit arbitration.
I honestly don't understand why more contracts aren't front-loaded. It seems common practice in baseball to back-load everything, but if you're going to sign an epic contract, wouldn't you rather pay the guy most of his money while he's actually still worth it?
From a (pushes glasses up on nose, adjusts abacus) present value point of view, $20 M in year 1 and $10 M in year 6 is worth more to the player than $15 M in year 1 and $15 M in year 6. So if the Cubs are willing to sacrifice that value to maintain payroll flexibility in later years, I'm sure Jake and Boras would be all in favor of front loading.
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:17:32 AM
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
Basically, a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 12, 2016, 09:19:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Jake's conditioning will make him an atypical 32 year old starting pitcher, no?
Maybe a bit. But most elite athletes are in ridiculous physical condition. They're not as obviously muscular as Jake, but it's not like we're comparing him to any of us desk-job schlubs.
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 10:42:31 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 12, 2016, 09:19:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Jake's conditioning will make him an atypical 32 year old starting pitcher, no?
Maybe a bit. But most elite athletes are in ridiculous physical condition. They're not as obviously muscular as Jake, but it's not like we're comparing him to any of us desk-job schlubs.
I resent that. I don't even HAVE a job.
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 10:42:31 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 12, 2016, 09:19:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Jake's conditioning will make him an atypical 32 year old starting pitcher, no?
Maybe a bit. But most elite athletes are in ridiculous physical condition. They're not as obviously muscular as Jake, but it's not like we're comparing him to any of us desk-job schlubs.
Also I've never heard of an exercise that keeps UCLs from tearing
Aces might get seven years, but how do aces feel about opt-out clauses?
Or are the Cubs ready to bet $200 million on excellent conditioning and Pilates preventing a 32-year-old arm from exploding?
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 12, 2016, 11:08:08 AM
Aces might get seven years, but how do aces feel about opt-out clauses?
Or are the Cubs ready to bet $200 million on excellent conditioning and Pilates preventing a 32-year-old arm from exploding?
Pretty sure if they signed Jake, they'd have Lloyd's of London on speakerphone while they were doing it.
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:17:32 AM
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
This is only somewhat true and smart teams understand this. Fangraphs (I'm pretty sure it was Cameron) has written about this on multiple occasions and articulated it much better than I'm about to...
It's also a bit lazy as someone who is as awesome as Arrieta will probably have a whole lot of surplus value at the beginning of the contract and less so towards the end. For example (made up numbers!!!), at age 32, he may be worth 6 wins but get paid like a 3 win pitcher. By the end of the contract, he may very well be a 1.5-win pitcher who gets paid like a 3-win pitcher. The idea is to have a well-maintained aging/projection system that a team would trust to help make those decisions.
So, if you're lazy like most sports writers and talking heads, you see a Lester contract and scream about how he's not going to be worth $26MM when he's 37. If you're a FO like The Cubs', you understand that he's worth a good amount more than $26MM in the first year or three of the deal, which makes up for the shortfall in the later years.
Quote from: Oleg on May 12, 2016, 11:59:40 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:17:32 AM
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
This is only somewhat true and smart teams understand this. Fangraphs (I'm pretty sure it was Cameron) has written about this on multiple occasions and articulated it much better than I'm about to...
It's also a bit lazy as someone who is as awesome as Arrieta will probably have a whole lot of surplus value at the beginning of the contract and less so towards the end. For example (made up numbers!!!), at age 32, he may be worth 6 wins but get paid like a 3 win pitcher. By the end of the contract, he may very well be a 1.5-win pitcher who gets paid like a 3-win pitcher. The idea is to have a well-maintained aging/projection system that a team would trust to help make those decisions.
So, if you're lazy like most sports writers and talking heads, you see a Lester contract and scream about how he's not going to be worth $26MM when he's 37. If you're a FO like The Cubs', you understand that he's worth a good amount more than $26MM in the first year or three of the deal, which makes up for the shortfall in the later years.
Besides, the Cubs of today are in such a better position than the Cubs of a decade ago, when Jim Hendry was throwing piles of money at players who we all knew weren't really worth it, in a desperate attempt to keep his job for just a little longer. This organization can throw piles of money at Arrieta and still have cash to spare. I really don't want to see Jake go off to Los Angeles or New York and rack up another half decade of accomplishments. Pay the man.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 12, 2016, 10:25:08 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on May 12, 2016, 09:22:57 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 12, 2016, 09:19:15 AM
Quote from: Eli on May 12, 2016, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 11, 2016, 11:15:16 PM
Great, more reporters asking Jake about money.
Quote
Cubs ace Jake Arrieta won't offer the team a discount in extension talks, he told reporters, including ESPN Chicago's Jesse Rogers. According to previous reports, the Cubs have been hesitant to commit to anything greater than a four-year term, and that length clearly isn't of interest to the 30-year-old reigning Cy Young winner. "Aces get seven years," Arrieta candidly said in the interview. Asked what he felt his market to be, Arrieta declined to answer directly, instead telling reporters: "I'll let you judge that. Just look at the numbers." Arrieta again emphasized that his preference is to remain with the Cubs but that being compensated at the same level as the game's other elite arms is also a factor. "Financially I'm fine, regardless," he said. "You want to be paid in respect to how your peers are paid. I don't think that changes with any guy you ask. It happens around baseball every year."
In before the "Jake is ungrateful to the Cubs/Chris Bosio" takes start!
Aces get seven years because they typically hit free agency at 29 or 30. Jake will be 32 when his deal would start, which matters.
Jake's conditioning will make him an atypical 32 year old starting pitcher, no?
It will make him an extremely well-conditioned 32-year old starting pitcher, yes.
with a little more tread on his tires than you'd generally see. So a 32 year old Arrieta might be as valuable as a 30 year old anybody else. At least that's my guess.
My second oldest son is a Giants' fan, and definitely not a Cub fan. When Barry Bonds was an active player and an admitted steroid user, I gave my son a heavy ration of "he's a cheater" lectures. My son now suggests that Arrieta's recent history suggests that there may be some chemical assistance in his conditioning program.
Say it ain't so, Jake
Quote from: CBStew on May 12, 2016, 01:09:59 PM
My second oldest son is a Giants' fan, and definitely not a Cub fan. When Barry Bonds was an active player and an admitted steroid user, I gave my son a heavy ration of "he's a cheater" lectures. My son now suggests that Arrieta's recent history suggests that there may be some chemical assistance in his conditioning program. Say it ain't so, Jake
And you just let that happen? Say it ain't so, Stew.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 12, 2016, 01:38:55 PM
Quote from: CBStew on May 12, 2016, 01:09:59 PM
My second oldest son is a Giants' fan, and definitely not a Cub fan. When Barry Bonds was an active player and an admitted steroid user, I gave my son a heavy ration of "he's a cheater" lectures. My son now suggests that Arrieta's recent history suggests that there may be some chemical assistance in his conditioning program. Say it ain't so, Jake
And you just let that happen? Say it ain't so, Stew.
Stew is too smart to let his son become a Cubs fan.
Quote from: Slaky on May 12, 2016, 01:57:08 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 12, 2016, 01:38:55 PM
Quote from: CBStew on May 12, 2016, 01:09:59 PM
My second oldest son is a Giants' fan, and definitely not a Cub fan. When Barry Bonds was an active player and an admitted steroid user, I gave my son a heavy ration of "he's a cheater" lectures. My son now suggests that Arrieta's recent history suggests that there may be some chemical assistance in his conditioning program. Say it ain't so, Jake
And you just let that happen? Say it ain't so, Stew.
Stew is too smart to let his son become a Cubs fan.
Stew's son is 94 years old and can do whatever he wants.
Quote from: PenFoe on May 12, 2016, 02:12:05 PM
Quote from: Slaky on May 12, 2016, 01:57:08 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on May 12, 2016, 01:38:55 PM
Quote from: CBStew on May 12, 2016, 01:09:59 PM
My second oldest son is a Giants' fan, and definitely not a Cub fan. When Barry Bonds was an active player and an admitted steroid user, I gave my son a heavy ration of "he's a cheater" lectures. My son now suggests that Arrieta's recent history suggests that there may be some chemical assistance in his conditioning program. Say it ain't so, Jake
And you just let that happen? Say it ain't so, Stew.
Stew is too smart to let his son become a Cubs fan.
Stew's son is 94 years old and can do whatever he wants.
He'll be sorry when I rat him out to his probation officer.
Quote from: R-V on May 12, 2016, 10:30:52 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:21:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on May 12, 2016, 10:19:58 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:17:32 AM
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
Yeah it seems like they could hopefully work their way around the length by front-loading the ever loving crap out of it. Give him most of the money the next couple of years before Bryant and Co. even hit arbitration.
I honestly don't understand why more contracts aren't front-loaded. It seems common practice in baseball to back-load everything, but if you're going to sign an epic contract, wouldn't you rather pay the guy most of his money while he's actually still worth it?
From a (pushes glasses up on nose, adjusts abacus) present value point of view, $20 M in year 1 and $10 M in year 6 is worth more to the player than $15 M in year 1 and $15 M in year 6. So if the Cubs are willing to sacrifice that value to maintain payroll flexibility in later years, I'm sure Jake and Boras would be all in favor of front loading.
Also, paying him less now allows you to pay
other guys more now and build a better team around the highly paid guy.
Quote from: Shooter on May 12, 2016, 07:14:40 PM
Quote from: R-V on May 12, 2016, 10:30:52 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:21:46 AM
Quote from: SKO on May 12, 2016, 10:19:58 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on May 12, 2016, 10:17:32 AM
I suspect that very few big contracts ever prove to be "worth it," in the sense that most players get hurt and see diminished returns. However, I can't imagine the Cubs without Arrieta and I'd be devastated if he leaves. When they extend him, they will still have control of many of their key players for 3-4 years, which means that they could be a world-shaking team at below market value for a while. In other words, I think they will have money to spare, and they should be able to absorb the cost if Arrieta declines.
Yeah it seems like they could hopefully work their way around the length by front-loading the ever loving crap out of it. Give him most of the money the next couple of years before Bryant and Co. even hit arbitration.
I honestly don't understand why more contracts aren't front-loaded. It seems common practice in baseball to back-load everything, but if you're going to sign an epic contract, wouldn't you rather pay the guy most of his money while he's actually still worth it?
From a (pushes glasses up on nose, adjusts abacus) present value point of view, $20 M in year 1 and $10 M in year 6 is worth more to the player than $15 M in year 1 and $15 M in year 6. So if the Cubs are willing to sacrifice that value to maintain payroll flexibility in later years, I'm sure Jake and Boras would be all in favor of front loading.
Also, paying him less now allows you to pay other guys more now and build a better team around the highly paid guy.
For the Cubs, a front load makes more sense, since they're better off with cheap/old/more moveable Jake when it's time for some of the guys who are currently cheap start hitting the point in their careers when they're looking to cash in.
The Cardinal media is already talking about why Arrieta could end up in St. Louis. It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so sad (on their part).
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 13, 2016, 07:58:05 AMFor the Cubs, a front load makes more sense
Also, for Catholics.
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on May 13, 2016, 09:20:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 13, 2016, 07:58:05 AMFor the Cubs, a front load makes more sense
Also, for Catholics.
You used to be 27Bstrokesomethingsomething, right?
You should post more.
Quote from: PANK! on May 13, 2016, 09:39:45 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on May 13, 2016, 09:20:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 13, 2016, 07:58:05 AMFor the Cubs, a front load makes more sense
Also, for Catholics.
You used to be 27Bstrokesomethingsomething, right?
You should post more.
Thank you, sir. I've been trying. It is a wonderful time to be alive.
Quote from: PANK! on May 13, 2016, 09:39:45 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on May 13, 2016, 09:20:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 13, 2016, 07:58:05 AMFor the Cubs, a front load makes more sense
Also, for Catholics.
You used to be 27Bstrokesomethingsomething, right?
You should post more.
6 is what I believe you're looking for.
6.
Quote from: PenFoe on May 16, 2016, 11:13:04 AM
Quote from: PANK! on May 13, 2016, 09:39:45 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on May 13, 2016, 09:20:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 13, 2016, 07:58:05 AMFor the Cubs, a front load makes more sense
Also, for Catholics.
You used to be 27Bstrokesomethingsomething, right?
You should post more.
6 is what I believe you're looking for.
6.
I'm not sure which would be more surprising.
- Huey hasn't seen Brazil
- Huey has seen Brazil but forgot "27b/6."
Quote from: ChuckD on May 16, 2016, 11:49:51 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on May 16, 2016, 11:13:04 AM
Quote from: PANK! on May 13, 2016, 09:39:45 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on May 13, 2016, 09:20:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 13, 2016, 07:58:05 AMFor the Cubs, a front load makes more sense
Also, for Catholics.
You used to be 27Bstrokesomethingsomething, right?
You should post more.
6 is what I believe you're looking for.
6.
I'm not sure which would be more surprising.
- Huey hasn't seen Brazil
- Huey has seen Brazil but forgot "27b/6."
I have only seen Brazil in bits and pieces so it's not surprising I didn't put 2 and 2 together. It also explains where this URL (http://www.27bslash6.com/) comes from.
Thanks, CD!
Quote from: ChuckD on May 16, 2016, 11:49:51 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on May 16, 2016, 11:13:04 AM
Quote from: PANK! on May 13, 2016, 09:39:45 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on May 13, 2016, 09:20:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 13, 2016, 07:58:05 AMFor the Cubs, a front load makes more sense
Also, for Catholics.
You used to be 27Bstrokesomethingsomething, right?
You should post more.
6 is what I believe you're looking for.
6.
I'm not sure which would be more surprising.
- Huey hasn't seen Brazil
- Huey has seen Brazil but forgot "27b/6."
I have not seen Brazil.
Quote from: PANK! on May 16, 2016, 12:15:09 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on May 16, 2016, 11:49:51 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on May 16, 2016, 11:13:04 AM
Quote from: PANK! on May 13, 2016, 09:39:45 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on May 13, 2016, 09:20:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 13, 2016, 07:58:05 AMFor the Cubs, a front load makes more sense
Also, for Catholics.
You used to be 27Bstrokesomethingsomething, right?
You should post more.
6 is what I believe you're looking for.
6.
I'm not sure which would be more surprising.
- Huey hasn't seen Brazil
- Huey has seen Brazil but forgot "27b/6."
I have not seen Brazil.
You're right. The second thing would've been more surprising.
He's walked four guys in a game five times this year. Last year, he only walked more than three in a game once (six vs. the Indians). 2016 walk rate: 8.8% (ML average: 7.6%), 2015 walk rate: 5.3% (ML average: 7.1%).
Should I start worrying?
Quote from: Shooter on June 22, 2016, 07:17:01 PM
He's walked four guys in a game five times this year. Last year, he only walked more than three in a game once (six vs. the Indians). 2016 walk rate: 8.8% (ML average: 7.6%), 2015 walk rate: 5.3% (ML average: 7.1%).
Should I start worrying?
His stuff is so good that he's getting away with it. And most of his other peripherals are a tick better than last year (K rate, ground ball rate, soft contact rate). But the prospect of him racking up 85 pitches through 4 innings of a playoff start isn't something anyone wants to see, so sure; I think you can worry a tiny bit.
Quote from: Eli on June 22, 2016, 07:54:39 PM
Quote from: Shooter on June 22, 2016, 07:17:01 PM
He's walked four guys in a game five times this year. Last year, he only walked more than three in a game once (six vs. the Indians). 2016 walk rate: 8.8% (ML average: 7.6%), 2015 walk rate: 5.3% (ML average: 7.1%).
Should I start worrying?
His stuff is so good that he's getting away with it. And most of his other peripherals are a tick better than last year (K rate, ground ball rate, soft contact rate). But the prospect of him racking up 85 pitches through 4 innings of a playoff start isn't something anyone wants to see, so sure; I think you can worry a tiny bit.
Yeah, I was at an outing yesterday and when I first saw the score at 7-0 in the 7th I figured Arrieta must have pitched terribly. Turns out he was fine but couldn't stay in the game long enough to keep the Cubs in it. The pitch count stuff is a concern for sure.
For what it's worth, on June 16th last year Jake had a 3.40 ERA and a walk rate of 6.3%. Then from that point to the end of the year he had a 0.86 ERA and a 5% walk rate. Not saying he'll do that again, his second half last year would be almost impossible to repeat even for him, and 8.8% is quite a bit worse than 6.3%, but there is precedent for him cutting down the walks and going from merely "pretty good" to "untouchable God" mid-season, at least. I mean this year he's still mostly been "untouchable God", the walks have just made him a 5-6 inning god instead of a 7-9 inning god.
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2016, 08:37:08 AM
For what it's worth, on June 16th last year Jake had a 3.40 ERA and a walk rate of 6.3%. Then from that point to the end of the year he had a 0.86 ERA and a 5% walk rate. Not saying he'll do that again, his second half last year would be almost impossible to repeat even for him, and 8.8% is quite a bit worse than 6.3%, but there is precedent for him cutting down the walks and going from merely "pretty good" to "untouchable God" mid-season, at least. I mean this year he's still mostly been "untouchable God", the walks have just made him a 5-6 inning god instead of a 7-9 inning god.
It strikes me (with no research whatsoever to back it up) that batters are waiting Jake out a bit to run up his pitch count, figuring the best way to beat him is to get him out of the game. I saw something about him making an adjustment, I wonder if that may be pitching more to contact. May cause his ERA to rise a bit, but probably the necessary next step to get him back to going deeper into games.
Quote from: thehawk on June 23, 2016, 09:58:08 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2016, 08:37:08 AM
For what it's worth, on June 16th last year Jake had a 3.40 ERA and a walk rate of 6.3%. Then from that point to the end of the year he had a 0.86 ERA and a 5% walk rate. Not saying he'll do that again, his second half last year would be almost impossible to repeat even for him, and 8.8% is quite a bit worse than 6.3%, but there is precedent for him cutting down the walks and going from merely "pretty good" to "untouchable God" mid-season, at least. I mean this year he's still mostly been "untouchable God", the walks have just made him a 5-6 inning god instead of a 7-9 inning god.
It strikes me (with no research whatsoever to back it up) that batters are waiting Jake out a bit to run up his pitch count, figuring the best way to beat him is to get him out of the game. I saw something about him making an adjustment, I wonder if that may be pitching more to contact. May cause his ERA to rise a bit, but probably the necessary next step to get him back to going deeper into games.
Yep. I think that's kinda becoming "the book" on Jake. Just wait him out and let him rack up 40 pitches through 2, or something along those lines, and you're on the right track. And I still maintain that's largely because Jake continues to get squeezed early. And just for the record (again) I don't think it's deliberate, or that there's some kind of conspiracy. Honestly, I haven't the slightest clue how to explain it. My best guess at this point is that it's because of all that late movement. It's as confusing for home plate umpires as it is for batters. But hell if I know. All I know is that in my opinion, he just isn't getting those "benefit of the doubt" calls that historically (or at least so goes the legend) pitchers with a reputation for outstanding command tend to get when they paint the corners. Jake just doesn't get them, at least not early in games. And I think opposing batters are beginning to realize it, and so the strategy is to just wait it out. I wonder if it might also have something to do with Miggy's supposed pitch-framing prowess. Something along the lines of the home plate umpire sees Miggy easing the mitt back towards the middle of the plate, and the assumption is that he's selling a pitch that was off the plate, when it really did catch black, and if Miggy would just sit still rather than working it, they might get more of those calls.
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on June 23, 2016, 10:47:23 AM
Quote from: thehawk on June 23, 2016, 09:58:08 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2016, 08:37:08 AM
For what it's worth, on June 16th last year Jake had a 3.40 ERA and a walk rate of 6.3%. Then from that point to the end of the year he had a 0.86 ERA and a 5% walk rate. Not saying he'll do that again, his second half last year would be almost impossible to repeat even for him, and 8.8% is quite a bit worse than 6.3%, but there is precedent for him cutting down the walks and going from merely "pretty good" to "untouchable God" mid-season, at least. I mean this year he's still mostly been "untouchable God", the walks have just made him a 5-6 inning god instead of a 7-9 inning god.
It strikes me (with no research whatsoever to back it up) that batters are waiting Jake out a bit to run up his pitch count, figuring the best way to beat him is to get him out of the game. I saw something about him making an adjustment, I wonder if that may be pitching more to contact. May cause his ERA to rise a bit, but probably the necessary next step to get him back to going deeper into games.
Yep. I think that's kinda becoming "the book" on Jake. Just wait him out and let him rack up 40 pitches through 2, or something along those lines, and you're on the right track. And I still maintain that's largely because Jake continues to get squeezed early. And just for the record (again) I don't think it's deliberate, or that there's some kind of conspiracy. Honestly, I haven't the slightest clue how to explain it. My best guess at this point is that it's because of all that late movement. It's as confusing for home plate umpires as it is for batters. But hell if I know. All I know is that in my opinion, he just isn't getting those "benefit of the doubt" calls that historically (or at least so goes the legend) pitchers with a reputation for outstanding command tend to get when they paint the corners. Jake just doesn't get them, at least not early in games. And I think opposing batters are beginning to realize it, and so the strategy is to just wait it out. I wonder if it might also have something to do with Miggy's supposed pitch-framing prowess. Something along the lines of the home plate umpire sees Miggy easing the mitt back towards the middle of the plate, and the assumption is that he's selling a pitch that was off the plate, when it really did catch black, and if Miggy would just sit still rather than working it, they might get more of those calls.
I don't know if I've felt he's gotten squeezed as often as you have, but yesterday I definitely felt Wacha got some strikes that Jake didn't.
Brooks baseball would seem to agree Wacha got a slightly wider zone than Jake did:
(http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/fastmap.php-pitchSel=all&game=gid_2016_06_22_slnmlb_chnmlb_1&sp_type=2&s_type=7&cache=1.gif)
(http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/fastmap.php-pitchSel=all&game=gid_2016_06_22_slnmlb_chnmlb_1&sp_type=3&s_type=7&cache=1.gif)
Okay I'm worried
Still very goddamn worried
Quote from: SKO on June 27, 2016, 08:01:01 PM
Still very goddamn worried
He'll figure it out. I'm sure it's a mechanical issue. Or maybe he needs a pair of "wild thing" glasses when he pitches.
Quote from: Canadouche on June 27, 2016, 08:54:23 PM
Quote from: SKO on June 27, 2016, 08:01:01 PM
Still very goddamn worried
He'll figure it out. I'm sure it's a mechanical issue. Or maybe he needs a pair of "wild thing" glasses when he pitches.
Fantastic. Everybody's a scout.
Quote from: SKO on June 27, 2016, 08:01:01 PM
Still very goddamn worried
Panicking. Full blown fucking panic
Widespread Panic...
Here's hoping there was something in that run of 10 hitters or so where he looked like the Jake we know and love was something he and Bosio can analyze and find/fix his glitch.
Fangraphs takes a look at Jake's struggles (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrietas-been-off-for-several-weeks/) to regain his form: fewer strikes, fewer breaking balls, a lot more fastballs. Speculates he might be trying to limit his workload to avoid injury.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on July 05, 2016, 05:49:17 PM
Fangraphs takes a look at Jake's struggles (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrietas-been-off-for-several-weeks/) to regain his form: fewer strikes, fewer breaking balls, a lot more fastballs. Speculates he might be trying to limit his workload to avoid injury.
Haven't read the article yet but, trusting his conclusion, I'd suggest Jake's trying to limit his workload simply to pace himself for the extra 45 or so innings in the postseason. At least that's what I'm
hoping the deal is.
Not Sean Rodriguez. Never Sean Rodriguez. Get it together, man.
This is two starts in a row where he sharts himself early before settling into being the Jake we know and love before a second shart.
I'd be lying if I said it's not frustrating.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 09, 2016, 12:21:02 PM
This is two starts in a row where he sharts himself early before settling into being the Jake we know and love before a second shart.
I'd be lying if I said it's not frustrating.
It's like he threw a no-hitter and some carnival barkers started saying he was on HGH. And he said, no, I'm totally not. And he went off the juice for awhile and started to get tired and throw ordinary pitches.
I'm not saying that's what happened but it's plausible. What if the entire pitching staff held a kangaroo court and said anybody who does HGH will be ratted out like a bunch of common Verlanders and they're all afraid to juice?
That would be horrible.
Quote from: InternetApex on July 10, 2016, 12:02:46 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 09, 2016, 12:21:02 PM
This is two starts in a row where he sharts himself early before settling into being the Jake we know and love before a second shart.
I'd be lying if I said it's not frustrating.
It's like he threw a no-hitter and some carnival barkers started saying he was on HGH. And he said, no, I'm totally not. And he went off the juice for awhile and started to get tired and throw ordinary pitches.
I'm not saying that's what happened but it's plausible. What if the entire pitching staff held a kangaroo court and said anybody who does HGH will be ratted out like a bunch of common Verlanders and they're all afraid to juice?
That would be horrible.
He has had terrible fastball command. I don't think HGH gives you command. Does it?
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on July 13, 2016, 08:37:42 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on July 10, 2016, 12:02:46 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 09, 2016, 12:21:02 PM
This is two starts in a row where he sharts himself early before settling into being the Jake we know and love before a second shart.
I'd be lying if I said it's not frustrating.
It's like he threw a no-hitter and some carnival barkers started saying he was on HGH. And he said, no, I'm totally not. And he went off the juice for awhile and started to get tired and throw ordinary pitches.
I'm not saying that's what happened but it's plausible. What if the entire pitching staff held a kangaroo court and said anybody who does HGH will be ratted out like a bunch of common Verlanders and they're all afraid to juice?
That would be horrible.
He has had terrible fastball command. I don't think HGH gives you command. Does it?
I think it's best to just ignore Apex's "everyone is on steroids and we can trust no one" bit. You can't prove or disprove anything, the conversation is pointless.
Quote from: SKO on July 13, 2016, 09:08:14 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on July 13, 2016, 08:37:42 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on July 10, 2016, 12:02:46 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 09, 2016, 12:21:02 PM
This is two starts in a row where he sharts himself early before settling into being the Jake we know and love before a second shart.
I'd be lying if I said it's not frustrating.
It's like he threw a no-hitter and some carnival barkers started saying he was on HGH. And he said, no, I'm totally not. And he went off the juice for awhile and started to get tired and throw ordinary pitches.
I'm not saying that's what happened but it's plausible. What if the entire pitching staff held a kangaroo court and said anybody who does HGH will be ratted out like a bunch of common Verlanders and they're all afraid to juice?
That would be horrible.
He has had terrible fastball command. I don't think HGH gives you command. Does it?
I think it's best to just ignore Apex's "everyone is on steroids and we can trust no one" bit. You can't prove or disprove anything, the conversation is pointless.
He hasn't lost any velocity, so his "getting off the juice" doesn't hold water here.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 13, 2016, 09:21:15 AM
Quote from: SKO on July 13, 2016, 09:08:14 AM
Quote from: Powdered Toast Man on July 13, 2016, 08:37:42 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on July 10, 2016, 12:02:46 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on July 09, 2016, 12:21:02 PM
This is two starts in a row where he sharts himself early before settling into being the Jake we know and love before a second shart.
I'd be lying if I said it's not frustrating.
It's like he threw a no-hitter and some carnival barkers started saying he was on HGH. And he said, no, I'm totally not. And he went off the juice for awhile and started to get tired and throw ordinary pitches.
I'm not saying that's what happened but it's plausible. What if the entire pitching staff held a kangaroo court and said anybody who does HGH will be ratted out like a bunch of common Verlanders and they're all afraid to juice?
That would be horrible.
He has had terrible fastball command. I don't think HGH gives you command. Does it?
I think it's best to just ignore Apex's "everyone is on steroids and we can trust no one" bit. You can't prove or disprove anything, the conversation is pointless.
He hasn't lost any velocity, so his "getting off the juice" doesn't hold water here.
He's also incredibly fit Pilates Man and has been struggling in the first and second inning of games despite no noticeable issue in velocity. So either his recovery is so poor now that he's off the HGH that he's winded before he even throws a pitch or has dead arm, or steroids are not the issue at all here.
That was looking like back to back encouraging outings and then it wasn't
Touching tribute to Ryan Dempster with seven walks on the day.
Man I hope that's just a blip and not a return to the pre-ASB struggles.
And please don't be Willson's fault.
I was 100% joking about Jake going off HGH.
DOOM. (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-developed-a-problem/)
Quote from: morpheus on August 30, 2016, 02:19:02 PM
DOOM. (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-developed-a-problem/)
Doom aside, that's some high-quality analysis.
Quote from: Eli on August 30, 2016, 02:49:20 PM
Quote from: morpheus on August 30, 2016, 02:19:02 PM
DOOM. (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-developed-a-problem/)
Doom aside, that's some high-quality analysis.
Indeed. It gives me some hope they can fix this before October if they can successfully diagnose the problem.
Quote from: SKO on August 30, 2016, 03:02:01 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 30, 2016, 02:49:20 PM
Quote from: morpheus on August 30, 2016, 02:19:02 PM
DOOM. (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-developed-a-problem/)
Doom aside, that's some high-quality analysis.
Indeed. It gives me some hope they can fix this before October if they can successfully diagnose the problem.
Did anyone forward this to Theo?
Quote from: PenFoe on August 30, 2016, 03:24:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 30, 2016, 03:02:01 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 30, 2016, 02:49:20 PM
Quote from: morpheus on August 30, 2016, 02:19:02 PM
DOOM. (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-developed-a-problem/)
Doom aside, that's some high-quality analysis.
Indeed. It gives me some hope they can fix this before October if they can successfully diagnose the problem.
Did anyone forward this to Theo?
Not without violating the stalker restraining order
Quote from: PenFoe on August 30, 2016, 03:24:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 30, 2016, 03:02:01 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 30, 2016, 02:49:20 PM
Quote from: morpheus on August 30, 2016, 02:19:02 PM
DOOM. (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-developed-a-problem/)
Doom aside, that's some high-quality analysis.
Indeed. It gives me some hope they can fix this before October if they can successfully diagnose the problem.
Did anyone forward this to Theo?
I've been on hold with his receptionist all afternoon. I'm seriously thinking of playing the cancer card.
Quote from: morpheus on August 30, 2016, 02:19:02 PM
DOOM. (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-developed-a-problem/)
Quote from: Canadouche on June 27, 2016, 08:54:23 PM
He'll figure it out. I'm sure it's a mechanical issue. Or maybe he needs a pair of "wild thing" glasses when he pitches.
I mean, what else could it be? If he was nursing an injury, you'd think his velocity would have dropped.
Basically all I want from these last dozen or so meaningless games is everyone getting healthy and rested and Jake getting through 6 or 7 innings without have one where his command goes to complete shit andnhe serves up a meatball.
THAT'S what we needed to see today and something close to that for his last start. The way Lester/Hendricks have been pitching, if Jake's even close to today's performance then we should be looking pretty for October.
It's kind of crazy that a guy who's won 18 games and has a sub 3.00 ERA is the most unreliable, stress-inducing starting pitcher on the team. If Jake is the image of unreliability, then the Cubs have to feel pretty good about their chances.
Quote from: WTB...A RING FFS!! on September 23, 2016, 03:35:37 PM
THAT'S what we needed to see today and something close to that for his last start. The way Lester/Hendricks have been pitching, if Jake's even close to today's performance then we should be looking pretty for October.
We did? We do? We are?
Quote from: Oleg on September 26, 2016, 08:01:49 AM
Quote from: WTB...A RING FFS!! on September 23, 2016, 03:35:37 PM
THAT'S what we needed to see today and something close to that for his last start. The way Lester/Hendricks have been pitching, if Jake's even close to today's performance then we should be looking pretty for October.
We did? We do? We are?
I think he's talking about the voices.
*gulp*
Quote from: Saul Goodman on September 28, 2016, 07:51:45 PM
*gulp*
Getting it out of his system before the games count. *whistles past the graveyard*
Damn it, Jake.
There's never been a better time for a proper thread-bump, Jake. I know you're a lurker here.
BUMP for a strong effort from Jake tonight.
Attaboy Jake. Battled through the usual control issues to give them exactly what they needed.
Quote from: R-V on October 27, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
Attaboy Jake. Battled through the usual control issues to give them exactly what they needed.
I think that was why this was so encouraging. He didn't just have a game where everything clicked and he was old Jake again, we've seen him do that a couple of times and then go right back in the tank the next game. He actually lost it a few times, and each time actually managed to pull himself back from the ledge in a way he hadn't been.
Quote from: SKO on October 27, 2016, 09:04:48 AM
Quote from: R-V on October 27, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
Attaboy Jake. Battled through the usual control issues to give them exactly what they needed.
I think that was why this was so encouraging. He didn't just have a game where everything clicked and he was old Jake again, we've seen him do that a couple of times and then go right back in the tank the next game. He actually lost it a few times, and each time actually managed to pull himself back from the ledge in a way he hadn't been.
I would not be angry if the Cubs extended him. He stresses me out when he flounders, but his incredibleness makes up for it.
Quote from: Canadouche on October 27, 2016, 09:24:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 27, 2016, 09:04:48 AM
Quote from: R-V on October 27, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
Attaboy Jake. Battled through the usual control issues to give them exactly what they needed.
I think that was why this was so encouraging. He didn't just have a game where everything clicked and he was old Jake again, we've seen him do that a couple of times and then go right back in the tank the next game. He actually lost it a few times, and each time actually managed to pull himself back from the ledge in a way he hadn't been.
I would not be angry if the Cubs extended him. He stresses me out when he flounders, but his incredibleness makes up for it.
He neither floundered, nor was he incredible--taking a no-hitter past the half-way point notwithstanding.
He actually had some starts like this during his dominance last year, but they got washed away. I was in Philadelphia for a doubleheader last September about 7 rows back of the Cubs dugout, and we were fretting as Jake was seemingly constantly 1-0, 2-0 on batters...he gave up some shots that his defense made plays on and next the thing you knew, he had given up 1 run through 8 innings, and yet it didn't feel so dominant as we watched. He didn't have too many of those--indeed, he usually did dominate-- but even when he did those games were good enough to win easily as night (sort of) was.
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on October 27, 2016, 10:21:46 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 27, 2016, 09:24:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 27, 2016, 09:04:48 AM
Quote from: R-V on October 27, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
Attaboy Jake. Battled through the usual control issues to give them exactly what they needed.
I think that was why this was so encouraging. He didn't just have a game where everything clicked and he was old Jake again, we've seen him do that a couple of times and then go right back in the tank the next game. He actually lost it a few times, and each time actually managed to pull himself back from the ledge in a way he hadn't been.
I would not be angry if the Cubs extended him. He stresses me out when he flounders, but his incredibleness makes up for it.
He neither floundered, nor was he incredible--taking a no-hitter past the half-way point notwithstanding.
He actually had some starts like this during his dominance last year, but they got washed away. I was in Philadelphia for a doubleheader last September about 7 rows back of the Cubs dugout, and we were fretting as Jake was seemingly constantly 1-0, 2-0 on batters...he gave up some shots that his defense made plays on and next the thing you knew, he had given up 1 run through 8 innings, and yet it didn't feel so dominant as we watched. He didn't have too many of those--indeed, he usually did dominate-- but even when he did those games were good enough to win easily as night (sort of) was.
His stuff is so good that he really only has to get it close to the zone for it to usually work out okay, because it's so hard to square up and the Cubs defense is so good anyway. It's just a shame that when his control is off it is really off and he can't find the strike zone with a Sherpa.
Amusingly enough I have an opposite reaction to that start than Kurt. If the Cubs win this world series right now and have at least one championship in the Theo Era banked away it makes decisions like parting with Jake after next year easier. They're probably more likely to keep their window open if they don't over-burden themselves with multiple long term, nine figure contracts to aging pitchers. If they should lose this series, god forbid, and they have more of a sense of urgency then I think they're more likely to pay up for Jake.
Quote from: SKO on October 27, 2016, 10:35:26 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on October 27, 2016, 10:21:46 AM
Quote from: Canadouche on October 27, 2016, 09:24:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 27, 2016, 09:04:48 AM
Quote from: R-V on October 27, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
Attaboy Jake. Battled through the usual control issues to give them exactly what they needed.
I think that was why this was so encouraging. He didn't just have a game where everything clicked and he was old Jake again, we've seen him do that a couple of times and then go right back in the tank the next game. He actually lost it a few times, and each time actually managed to pull himself back from the ledge in a way he hadn't been.
I would not be angry if the Cubs extended him. He stresses me out when he flounders, but his incredibleness makes up for it.
He neither floundered, nor was he incredible--taking a no-hitter past the half-way point notwithstanding.
He actually had some starts like this during his dominance last year, but they got washed away. I was in Philadelphia for a doubleheader last September about 7 rows back of the Cubs dugout, and we were fretting as Jake was seemingly constantly 1-0, 2-0 on batters...he gave up some shots that his defense made plays on and next the thing you knew, he had given up 1 run through 8 innings, and yet it didn't feel so dominant as we watched. He didn't have too many of those--indeed, he usually did dominate-- but even when he did those games were good enough to win easily as night (sort of) was.
His stuff is so good that he really only has to get it close to the zone for it to usually work out okay, because it's so hard to square up and the Cubs defense is so good anyway. It's just a shame that when his control if off it is really off and he can't find the strike zone with a Sherpa.
Amusingly enough I have an opposite reaction to that start than Kurt. If the Cubs win this world series right now and have at least one championship in the Theo Era banked away it makes decisions like parting with Jake after next year easier. They're probably more likely to keep their window open if they don't over-burden themselves with multiple long term, nine figure contracts to aging pitchers. If they should lose this series, god forbid, and they have more of a sense of urgency then I think they're more likely to pay up for Jake.
I feel like, statistically, Arrieta is going to end up somewhere between his God Season and his second half of this past year. His numbers aren't a fluke, and if a team is going to pursue top-shelf pitching, he certainly has all the kinds of intangibles that you want, coupled with the bonus of already being a part of the team. He's stayed healthy, he pushes himself to improve, he's a fitness freak, and his arm has seen relatively little wear for someone his age.
I do believe that any great pitcher, when finally signed to that big contract, will likely have 1-2 years in which he doesn't earn the money. That's going to happen with Lester too, someday, I'm sure. I think we just have to accept it as part of the business and recognize that he's probably going to give the Cubs 3-5 years of reliability, and that good pitching is just something you have to pay for.
If someone steps up to be a mainstay in the rotation, then Arietta will be the chip the Cubs will use to restock their farm system July 31.
He'll be 32 on opening day of 2018. He's gonna want six or seven years and stacks and stacks of cash. I'll be fine if they pass on that.
Quote from: Shooter on October 27, 2016, 12:24:29 PM
He'll be 32 on opening day of 2018. He's gonna want six or seven years and stacks and stacks of cash. I'll be fine if they pass on that.
Same.
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on October 27, 2016, 12:26:03 PM
Quote from: Shooter on October 27, 2016, 12:24:29 PM
He'll be 32 on opening day of 2018. He's gonna want six or seven years and stacks and stacks of cash. I'll be fine if they pass on that.
Same.
Yeah. I'm okay with honoring what he's done and letting him go at that point.
Quote from: Brownie on October 27, 2016, 12:23:22 PM
If someone steps up to be a mainstay in the rotation, then Arietta will be the chip the Cubs will use to restock their farm system July 31.
They're not moving him. They'll ride him through the 2017 postseason, qualify him and take the draft pick.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 29, 2016, 06:34:42 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 27, 2016, 12:23:22 PM
If someone steps up to be a mainstay in the rotation, then Arietta will be the chip the Cubs will use to restock their farm system July 31.
They're not moving him. They'll ride him through the 2017 postseason, qualify him and take the draft pick.
Wouldn't he be likely to accept? It'll likely be around $18 M by then, and I'd surprised if he'd expect someone to give him a multi-year offer that would dissuade him from taking the qualifying offer.
Quote from: Shooter on October 30, 2016, 02:01:01 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 29, 2016, 06:34:42 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 27, 2016, 12:23:22 PM
If someone steps up to be a mainstay in the rotation, then Arietta will be the chip the Cubs will use to restock their farm system July 31.
They're not moving him. They'll ride him through the 2017 postseason, qualify him and take the draft pick.
Wouldn't he be likely to accept? It'll likely be around $18 M by then, and I'd surprised if he'd expect someone to give him a multi-year offer that would dissuade him from taking the qualifying offer.
I doubt it. We've talked recently about his self-confidence and I think Jake fully believes he's worth a huge contract, so that's what he'll go after.
Quote from: Eli on October 30, 2016, 09:15:40 AM
Quote from: Shooter on October 30, 2016, 02:01:01 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 29, 2016, 06:34:42 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 27, 2016, 12:23:22 PM
If someone steps up to be a mainstay in the rotation, then Arietta will be the chip the Cubs will use to restock their farm system July 31.
They're not moving him. They'll ride him through the 2017 postseason, qualify him and take the draft pick.
Wouldn't he be likely to accept? It'll likely be around $18 M by then, and I'd surprised if he'd expect someone to give him a multi-year offer that would dissuade him from taking the qualifying offer.
I doubt it. We've talked recently about his self-confidence and I think Jake fully believes he's worth a huge contract, so that's what he'll go after.
He can get more than 18/year on a long term deal, and if he took a one year qualifier he'd then be looking for a long term deal as he's another year older. No way he or Boras do that.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 30, 2016, 10:24:36 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 30, 2016, 09:15:40 AM
Quote from: Shooter on October 30, 2016, 02:01:01 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 29, 2016, 06:34:42 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 27, 2016, 12:23:22 PM
If someone steps up to be a mainstay in the rotation, then Arietta will be the chip the Cubs will use to restock their farm system July 31.
They're not moving him. They'll ride him through the 2017 postseason, qualify him and take the draft pick.
Wouldn't he be likely to accept? It'll likely be around $18 M by then, and I'd surprised if he'd expect someone to give him a multi-year offer that would dissuade him from taking the qualifying offer.
I doubt it. We've talked recently about his self-confidence and I think Jake fully believes he's worth a huge contract, so that's what he'll go after.
He can get more than 18/year on a long term deal, and if he took a one year qualifier he'd then be looking for a long term deal as he's another year older. No way he or Boras do that.
I'm an idiot. For some reason I was thinking of Lackey. Jesus. What a dope.
Quote from: Shooter on October 30, 2016, 10:46:27 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 30, 2016, 10:24:36 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 30, 2016, 09:15:40 AM
Quote from: Shooter on October 30, 2016, 02:01:01 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 29, 2016, 06:34:42 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 27, 2016, 12:23:22 PM
If someone steps up to be a mainstay in the rotation, then Arietta will be the chip the Cubs will use to restock their farm system July 31.
They're not moving him. They'll ride him through the 2017 postseason, qualify him and take the draft pick.
Wouldn't he be likely to accept? It'll likely be around $18 M by then, and I'd surprised if he'd expect someone to give him a multi-year offer that would dissuade him from taking the qualifying offer.
I doubt it. We've talked recently about his self-confidence and I think Jake fully believes he's worth a huge contract, so that's what he'll go after.
He can get more than 18/year on a long term deal, and if he took a one year qualifier he'd then be looking for a long term deal as he's another year older. No way he or Boras do that.
I'm an idiot. For some reason I was thinking of Lackey. Jesus. What a dope.
Lackey is God's way of punishing Cub fans.
Quote from: CBStew on October 30, 2016, 11:42:02 AM
Quote from: Shooter on October 30, 2016, 10:46:27 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 30, 2016, 10:24:36 AM
Quote from: Eli on October 30, 2016, 09:15:40 AM
Quote from: Shooter on October 30, 2016, 02:01:01 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 29, 2016, 06:34:42 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 27, 2016, 12:23:22 PM
If someone steps up to be a mainstay in the rotation, then Arietta will be the chip the Cubs will use to restock their farm system July 31.
They're not moving him. They'll ride him through the 2017 postseason, qualify him and take the draft pick.
Wouldn't he be likely to accept? It'll likely be around $18 M by then, and I'd surprised if he'd expect someone to give him a multi-year offer that would dissuade him from taking the qualifying offer.
I doubt it. We've talked recently about his self-confidence and I think Jake fully believes he's worth a huge contract, so that's what he'll go after.
He can get more than 18/year on a long term deal, and if he took a one year qualifier he'd then be looking for a long term deal as he's another year older. No way he or Boras do that.
I'm an idiot. For some reason I was thinking of Lackey. Jesus. What a dope.
Lackey is God's way of punishing Cub fans.
Well thank goodness He's finally getting around to it.
We're ready, Jake.
I'm engaging in some serious mental gymnastics here to convince myself that we're due for another dose of Superjake tonight.
235 calendar days between no-hitters #1 & 2. 194 calendar days since no-hitter #2. So he'd be a little ahead of schedule. On the other hand, 30 starts since #2 vs. only 12 between 1 & 2. So in that context, he's way overdue. And his last start, vs. this very same team, in this very same park, was (arguably) his best start of the postseason. 1 run, 6 Ks, no-hitter into the 6th. I want to believe he's been in the process of Hulking up, and tonight is Killing Time.
Furthermore, I mean, it's the Cubs and Indians in the fuckin' World Series. It just HAS to go 7. It can't NOT go 7, right? But beyond that, there just has to be something unbelievably spectacular, right? Other than one of these two teams winning, of course, because that's inevitable and therefore doesn't really qualify. So far, Schwarber has been that something spectacular, but I just feel like this series is destined to produce something "bigger", more "epic" or whatever.
So here's what I'm thinking. Superjake tonight, then a walkoff KYLE SMASH tomorrow night. That workin' for ya at all?
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:14:45 AM
I'm engaging in some serious mental gymnastics here to convince myself that we're due for another dose of Superjake tonight.
235 calendar days between no-hitters #1 & 2. 194 calendar days since no-hitter #2. So he'd be a little ahead of schedule. On the other hand, 30 starts since #2 vs. only 12 between 1 & 2. So in that context, he's way overdue. And his last start, vs. this very same team, in this very same park, was (arguably) his best start of the postseason. 1 run, 6 Ks, no-hitter into the 6th. I want to believe he's been in the process of Hulking up, and tonight is Killing Time.
Furthermore, I mean, it's the Cubs and Indians in the fuckin' World Series. It just HAS to go 7. It can't NOT go 7, right? But beyond that, there just has to be something unbelievably spectacular, right? Other than one of these two teams winning, of course, because that's inevitable and therefore doesn't really qualify. So far, Schwarber has been that something spectacular, but I just feel like this series is destined to produce something "bigger", more "epic" or whatever.
So here's what I'm thinking. Superjake tonight, then a walkoff KYLE SMASH tomorrow night. That workin' for ya at all?
Aside from Schwarber hitting a walk-off on the road, I can get behind this post.
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:14:45 AM
I'm engaging in some serious mental gymnastics here to convince myself that we're due for another dose of Superjake tonight.
235 calendar days between no-hitters #1 & 2. 194 calendar days since no-hitter #2. So he'd be a little ahead of schedule. On the other hand, 30 starts since #2 vs. only 12 between 1 & 2. So in that context, he's way overdue. And his last start, vs. this very same team, in this very same park, was (arguably) his best start of the postseason. 1 run, 6 Ks, no-hitter into the 6th. I want to believe he's been in the process of Hulking up, and tonight is Killing Time.
Furthermore, I mean, it's the Cubs and Indians in the fuckin' World Series. It just HAS to go 7. It can't NOT go 7, right? But beyond that, there just has to be something unbelievably spectacular, right? Other than one of these two teams winning, of course, because that's inevitable and therefore doesn't really qualify. So far, Schwarber has been that something spectacular, but I just feel like this series is destined to produce something "bigger", more "epic" or whatever.
So here's what I'm thinking. Superjake tonight, then a walkoff KYLE SMASH tomorrow night. That workin' for ya at all?
It's working in my pants, for sure.
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on November 01, 2016, 11:16:58 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:14:45 AM
I'm engaging in some serious mental gymnastics here to convince myself that we're due for another dose of Superjake tonight.
235 calendar days between no-hitters #1 & 2. 194 calendar days since no-hitter #2. So he'd be a little ahead of schedule. On the other hand, 30 starts since #2 vs. only 12 between 1 & 2. So in that context, he's way overdue. And his last start, vs. this very same team, in this very same park, was (arguably) his best start of the postseason. 1 run, 6 Ks, no-hitter into the 6th. I want to believe he's been in the process of Hulking up, and tonight is Killing Time.
Furthermore, I mean, it's the Cubs and Indians in the fuckin' World Series. It just HAS to go 7. It can't NOT go 7, right? But beyond that, there just has to be something unbelievably spectacular, right? Other than one of these two teams winning, of course, because that's inevitable and therefore doesn't really qualify. So far, Schwarber has been that something spectacular, but I just feel like this series is destined to produce something "bigger", more "epic" or whatever.
So here's what I'm thinking. Superjake tonight, then a walkoff KYLE SMASH tomorrow night. That workin' for ya at all?
Aside from Schwarber hitting a walk-off on the road, I can get behind this post.
Goddammit. I'm an idiot.
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:18:51 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on November 01, 2016, 11:16:58 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:14:45 AM
I'm engaging in some serious mental gymnastics here to convince myself that we're due for another dose of Superjake tonight.
235 calendar days between no-hitters #1 & 2. 194 calendar days since no-hitter #2. So he'd be a little ahead of schedule. On the other hand, 30 starts since #2 vs. only 12 between 1 & 2. So in that context, he's way overdue. And his last start, vs. this very same team, in this very same park, was (arguably) his best start of the postseason. 1 run, 6 Ks, no-hitter into the 6th. I want to believe he's been in the process of Hulking up, and tonight is Killing Time.
Furthermore, I mean, it's the Cubs and Indians in the fuckin' World Series. It just HAS to go 7. It can't NOT go 7, right? But beyond that, there just has to be something unbelievably spectacular, right? Other than one of these two teams winning, of course, because that's inevitable and therefore doesn't really qualify. So far, Schwarber has been that something spectacular, but I just feel like this series is destined to produce something "bigger", more "epic" or whatever.
So here's what I'm thinking. Superjake tonight, then a walkoff KYLE SMASH tomorrow night. That workin' for ya at all?
Aside from Schwarber hitting a walk-off on the road, I can get behind this post.
Goddammit. I'm an idiot.
Unless he hits a home run so majestic that Cleveland simply says, "fuck it, we quit."
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on November 01, 2016, 11:21:31 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:18:51 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on November 01, 2016, 11:16:58 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:14:45 AM
I'm engaging in some serious mental gymnastics here to convince myself that we're due for another dose of Superjake tonight.
235 calendar days between no-hitters #1 & 2. 194 calendar days since no-hitter #2. So he'd be a little ahead of schedule. On the other hand, 30 starts since #2 vs. only 12 between 1 & 2. So in that context, he's way overdue. And his last start, vs. this very same team, in this very same park, was (arguably) his best start of the postseason. 1 run, 6 Ks, no-hitter into the 6th. I want to believe he's been in the process of Hulking up, and tonight is Killing Time.
Furthermore, I mean, it's the Cubs and Indians in the fuckin' World Series. It just HAS to go 7. It can't NOT go 7, right? But beyond that, there just has to be something unbelievably spectacular, right? Other than one of these two teams winning, of course, because that's inevitable and therefore doesn't really qualify. So far, Schwarber has been that something spectacular, but I just feel like this series is destined to produce something "bigger", more "epic" or whatever.
So here's what I'm thinking. Superjake tonight, then a walkoff KYLE SMASH tomorrow night. That workin' for ya at all?
Aside from Schwarber hitting a walk-off on the road, I can get behind this post.
Goddammit. I'm an idiot.
Unless he hits a home run so majestic that Cleveland simply says, "fuck it, we quit."
If anyone can do it, Schwarber can.
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on November 01, 2016, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on November 01, 2016, 11:21:31 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:18:51 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on November 01, 2016, 11:16:58 AM
Quote from: Grandmaster Wang on November 01, 2016, 11:14:45 AM
I'm engaging in some serious mental gymnastics here to convince myself that we're due for another dose of Superjake tonight.
235 calendar days between no-hitters #1 & 2. 194 calendar days since no-hitter #2. So he'd be a little ahead of schedule. On the other hand, 30 starts since #2 vs. only 12 between 1 & 2. So in that context, he's way overdue. And his last start, vs. this very same team, in this very same park, was (arguably) his best start of the postseason. 1 run, 6 Ks, no-hitter into the 6th. I want to believe he's been in the process of Hulking up, and tonight is Killing Time.
Furthermore, I mean, it's the Cubs and Indians in the fuckin' World Series. It just HAS to go 7. It can't NOT go 7, right? But beyond that, there just has to be something unbelievably spectacular, right? Other than one of these two teams winning, of course, because that's inevitable and therefore doesn't really qualify. So far, Schwarber has been that something spectacular, but I just feel like this series is destined to produce something "bigger", more "epic" or whatever.
So here's what I'm thinking. Superjake tonight, then a walkoff KYLE SMASH tomorrow night. That workin' for ya at all?
Aside from Schwarber hitting a walk-off on the road, I can get behind this post.
Goddammit. I'm an idiot.
Unless he hits a home run so majestic that Cleveland simply says, "fuck it, we quit."
If anyone can do it, Schwarber can.
St. Louis quit after the SCHWARBOMB last year.
Wish Cowboy Joe hadn't cost him an extra 12-15 pitches with some missed strike 3s but Jake was the balls again.
Good season. Thanks man.
Jake Arrieta @JArrieta34 2h2 hours ago
Time for Hollywood to pony up and head for the border #illhelpyoupack #beatit
Quote from: Shooter on November 09, 2016, 11:32:54 AM
Jake Arrieta @JArrieta34 2h2 hours ago
Time for Hollywood to pony up and head for the border #illhelpyoupack #beatit
Not really sure what he's trying to say, exactly.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on November 09, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: Shooter on November 09, 2016, 11:32:54 AM
Jake Arrieta @JArrieta34 2h2 hours ago
Time for Hollywood to pony up and head for the border #illhelpyoupack #beatit
Not really sure what he's trying to say, exactly.
Be a tit, Sterling. Be a tit.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on November 09, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: Shooter on November 09, 2016, 11:32:54 AM
Jake Arrieta @JArrieta34 2h2 hours ago
Time for Hollywood to pony up and head for the border #illhelpyoupack #beatit
Not really sure what he's trying to say, exactly.
I don't know about the current crop of players, but it's generally common for players to be conservatives. It's depressing to realize that these guys support Trump, but I guess it's not surprising.
Quote from: Canadouche on November 09, 2016, 01:18:31 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on November 09, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: Shooter on November 09, 2016, 11:32:54 AM
Jake Arrieta @JArrieta34 2h2 hours ago
Time for Hollywood to pony up and head for the border #illhelpyoupack #beatit
Not really sure what he's trying to say, exactly.
I don't know about the current crop of players, but it's generally common for players to be conservatives. It's depressing to realize that these guys support Trump, but I guess it's not surprising.
I thought that he was just saying that he wanted the movie industry to make more Westerns.
Quote from: Canadouche on November 09, 2016, 01:18:31 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on November 09, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: Shooter on November 09, 2016, 11:32:54 AM
Jake Arrieta @JArrieta34 2h2 hours ago
Time for Hollywood to pony up and head for the border #illhelpyoupack #beatit
Not really sure what he's trying to say, exactly.
I don't know about the current crop of players, but it's generally common for players to be conservatives. It's depressing to realize that these guys support Trump, but I guess it's not surprising.
Not what I meant. He could be a Trump supporter but he could also just be complaining about (a) sanctimonious protest votes, (b) insincere declarations of moving to Canada from Hollywood types, (c) how much of Hollywood is responsible for making Trump a national star, etc. He's from Austin which went blue, so this isn't entirely out of the realm of possibility. It's just not a well-made point, which is not what I expect from my professional ball-slinging heroes.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on November 09, 2016, 01:51:45 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on November 09, 2016, 01:18:31 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on November 09, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
Quote from: Shooter on November 09, 2016, 11:32:54 AM
Jake Arrieta @JArrieta34 2h2 hours ago
Time for Hollywood to pony up and head for the border #illhelpyoupack #beatit
Not really sure what he's trying to say, exactly.
I don't know about the current crop of players, but it's generally common for players to be conservatives. It's depressing to realize that these guys support Trump, but I guess it's not surprising.
Not what I meant. He could be a Trump supporter but he could also just be complaining about (a) sanctimonious protest votes, (b) insincere declarations of moving to Canada from Hollywood types, (c) how much of Hollywood is responsible for making Trump a national star, etc. He's from Austin which went blue, so this isn't entirely out of the realm of possibility. It's just not a well-made point, which is not what I expect from my professional ball-slinging heroes.
It is (b). http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/305117-celebs-who-said-theyd-leave-country-if-trump-won
I'm shocked that a white millionaire from Texas would support Trump.
But I really hope one of the brothers calls him on this shit.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on November 09, 2016, 07:28:06 PM
I'm shocked that a white millionaire from Texas would support Trump.
But I really hope one of the brothers calls him on this shit.
Unless I missed something, there's still no evidence he actually supports Trump. Just that he likes calling out celebrities for claiming they will move.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on November 09, 2016, 09:32:43 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on November 09, 2016, 07:28:06 PM
I'm shocked that a white millionaire from Texas would support Trump.
But I really hope one of the brothers calls him on this shit.
Unless I missed something, there's still no evidence he actually supports Trump. Just that he likes calling out celebrities for claiming they will move.
Sure.
Half of the country voted for him. I don't care if Jake is one of them. A lot of people who mean a lot more to you than Jake Arrieta probably did, too. Not saying you can't be mad at him, or them, or this entire country, but angrily dismissing them as nothing more than idiots and bigots isn't the right response either. I thought maybe it was, but it turns out that years of just dismissing an entire swath of the country's complaints because even the valid complaints were surrounded by racism and sexism makes those people mad, and only creates more anger and it was enough to make this tragedy happen.
If Jake's a Trump supporter, fine. Throw the baseball well and I'll look past it. I'll write it off as ignorance and I hope he learns from it, like I hope they'll all learn from it. We're going to have to pick our battles for a while, folks. This isn't the one I want to have.
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AM
Half of the country voted for him. I don't care if Jake is one of them. A lot of people who mean a lot more to you than Jake Arrieta probably did, too. Not saying you can't be mad at him, or them, or this entire country, but angrily dismissing them as nothing more than idiots and bigots isn't the right response either. I thought maybe it was, but it turns out that years of just dismissing an entire swath of the country's complaints because even the valid complaints were surrounded by racism and sexism makes those people mad, and only creates more anger and it was enough to make this tragedy happen.
If Jake's a Trump supporter, fine. Throw the baseball well and I'll look past it. I'll write it off as ignorance and I hope he learns from it, like I hope they'll all learn from it. We're going to have to pick our battles for a while, folks. This isn't the one I want to have.
Yep.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 10, 2016, 09:29:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AM
Half of the country voted for him. I don't care if Jake is one of them. A lot of people who mean a lot more to you than Jake Arrieta probably did, too. Not saying you can't be mad at him, or them, or this entire country, but angrily dismissing them as nothing more than idiots and bigots isn't the right response either. I thought maybe it was, but it turns out that years of just dismissing an entire swath of the country's complaints because even the valid complaints were surrounded by racism and sexism makes those people mad, and only creates more anger and it was enough to make this tragedy happen.
If Jake's a Trump supporter, fine. Throw the baseball well and I'll look past it. I'll write it off as ignorance and I hope he learns from it, like I hope they'll all learn from it. We're going to have to pick our battles for a while, folks. This isn't the one I want to have.
Yep.
BUT JULIE TOLD HIM, AS A WOMAN, THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE HURTING AND JAKE'S NOT BEING VERY NICE.
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AMHalf One quarter of the country voted for him.
Corrected for the fact that HALF of our apathetic electorate didn't vote at all.
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on November 10, 2016, 09:31:14 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 10, 2016, 09:29:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AM
Half of the country voted for him. I don't care if Jake is one of them. A lot of people who mean a lot more to you than Jake Arrieta probably did, too. Not saying you can't be mad at him, or them, or this entire country, but angrily dismissing them as nothing more than idiots and bigots isn't the right response either. I thought maybe it was, but it turns out that years of just dismissing an entire swath of the country's complaints because even the valid complaints were surrounded by racism and sexism makes those people mad, and only creates more anger and it was enough to make this tragedy happen.
If Jake's a Trump supporter, fine. Throw the baseball well and I'll look past it. I'll write it off as ignorance and I hope he learns from it, like I hope they'll all learn from it. We're going to have to pick our battles for a while, folks. This isn't the one I want to have.
Yep.
BUT JULIE TOLD HIM, AS A WOMAN, THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE HURTING AND JAKE'S NOT BEING VERY NICE.
I don't follow her, so is she also calling out all the majority of white women who voted for Trump and put him in office?
Quote from: R-V on November 10, 2016, 10:20:07 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AMHalf One quarter of the country voted for him.
Corrected for the fact that HALF of our apathetic electorate didn't vote at all.
If ever there was a time to implement Instant Runoff Voting (or something similar), now would be the time. Based on turnout and exit polls 75% of voting aged people either stayed home or disapproved of both candidate.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on November 10, 2016, 10:25:34 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on November 10, 2016, 09:31:14 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 10, 2016, 09:29:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AM
Half of the country voted for him. I don't care if Jake is one of them. A lot of people who mean a lot more to you than Jake Arrieta probably did, too. Not saying you can't be mad at him, or them, or this entire country, but angrily dismissing them as nothing more than idiots and bigots isn't the right response either. I thought maybe it was, but it turns out that years of just dismissing an entire swath of the country's complaints because even the valid complaints were surrounded by racism and sexism makes those people mad, and only creates more anger and it was enough to make this tragedy happen.
If Jake's a Trump supporter, fine. Throw the baseball well and I'll look past it. I'll write it off as ignorance and I hope he learns from it, like I hope they'll all learn from it. We're going to have to pick our battles for a while, folks. This isn't the one I want to have.
Yep.
BUT JULIE TOLD HIM, AS A WOMAN, THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE HURTING AND JAKE'S NOT BEING VERY NICE.
I don't follow her, so is she also calling out all the majority of white women who voted for Trump and put him in office?
No idea...she blocked me ages ago.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 10, 2016, 09:29:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AM
Half of the country voted for him. I don't care if Jake is one of them. A lot of people who mean a lot more to you than Jake Arrieta probably did, too. Not saying you can't be mad at him, or them, or this entire country, but angrily dismissing them as nothing more than idiots and bigots isn't the right response either. I thought maybe it was, but it turns out that years of just dismissing an entire swath of the country's complaints because even the valid complaints were surrounded by racism and sexism makes those people mad, and only creates more anger and it was enough to make this tragedy happen.
If Jake's a Trump supporter, fine. Throw the baseball well and I'll look past it. I'll write it off as ignorance and I hope he learns from it, like I hope they'll all learn from it. We're going to have to pick our battles for a while, folks. This isn't the one I want to have.
Yep.
If I can get through Thanksgiving with my Trump loving brother and sister-in-law, I can get through a baseball season with Jake just fine.
I do not know if I can get through a Thanksgiving with my brother and sister-in-law.
Quote from: Tony on November 11, 2016, 08:15:01 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 10, 2016, 09:29:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AM
Half of the country voted for him. I don't care if Jake is one of them. A lot of people who mean a lot more to you than Jake Arrieta probably did, too. Not saying you can't be mad at him, or them, or this entire country, but angrily dismissing them as nothing more than idiots and bigots isn't the right response either. I thought maybe it was, but it turns out that years of just dismissing an entire swath of the country's complaints because even the valid complaints were surrounded by racism and sexism makes those people mad, and only creates more anger and it was enough to make this tragedy happen.
If Jake's a Trump supporter, fine. Throw the baseball well and I'll look past it. I'll write it off as ignorance and I hope he learns from it, like I hope they'll all learn from it. We're going to have to pick our battles for a while, folks. This isn't the one I want to have.
Yep.
If I can get through Thanksgiving with my Trump loving brother and sister-in-law, I can get through a baseball season with Jake just fine.
I do not know if I can get through a Thanksgiving with my brother and sister-in-law.
You're welcome to give it a go with my in-laws if you'd prefer.
Quote from: Tony on November 11, 2016, 08:15:01 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 10, 2016, 09:29:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 10, 2016, 08:16:26 AM
Half of the country voted for him. I don't care if Jake is one of them. A lot of people who mean a lot more to you than Jake Arrieta probably did, too. Not saying you can't be mad at him, or them, or this entire country, but angrily dismissing them as nothing more than idiots and bigots isn't the right response either. I thought maybe it was, but it turns out that years of just dismissing an entire swath of the country's complaints because even the valid complaints were surrounded by racism and sexism makes those people mad, and only creates more anger and it was enough to make this tragedy happen.
If Jake's a Trump supporter, fine. Throw the baseball well and I'll look past it. I'll write it off as ignorance and I hope he learns from it, like I hope they'll all learn from it. We're going to have to pick our battles for a while, folks. This isn't the one I want to have.
Yep.
If I can get through Thanksgiving with my Trump loving brother and sister-in-law, I can get through a baseball season with Jake just fine.
I do not know if I can get through a Thanksgiving with my brother and sister-in-law.
I'm fully prepared to get pretty drunk and yell a lot at my in-laws on Thanksgiving and my wife has given me permission to do so.
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
Quote from: SKO on April 05, 2017, 08:01:17 AM
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
Jake's in a year-long salary drive, and the Cubs reap the benefits.
Quote from: SKO on April 05, 2017, 08:01:17 AM
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
And if that Jake doesn't show up every week you'll be sure to let us know!
Quote from: CT III on April 05, 2017, 04:22:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 05, 2017, 08:01:17 AM
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
And if that Jake doesn't show up every week you'll be sure to let us know!
Woah, welcome to a brave new world where I no longer bitch about the Cubs. I'm zen. This year is playing with house money, my frent. All will be well.
Quote from: SKO on April 06, 2017, 07:46:43 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 05, 2017, 04:22:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 05, 2017, 08:01:17 AM
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
And if that Jake doesn't show up every week you'll be sure to let us know!
Woah, welcome to a brave new world where I no longer bitch about the Cubs. I'm zen. This year is playing with house money, my frent. All will be well.
Over/under on how long this state of zen will last?
Quote from: Canadouche on April 06, 2017, 09:21:10 AM
Quote from: SKO on April 06, 2017, 07:46:43 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 05, 2017, 04:22:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 05, 2017, 08:01:17 AM
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
And if that Jake doesn't show up every week you'll be sure to let us know!
Woah, welcome to a brave new world where I no longer bitch about the Cubs. I'm zen. This year is playing with house money, my frent. All will be well.
Over/under on how long this state of zen will last?
I'm really not sure, but Randal Grichuk, whom I despise like no other, basically singlehandedly beat the Cubs on opening day and it barely registered, so I'm in a good place, baseball wise.*
*- as opposed to my general view of humanity, which is still in a very, very, very dark place.
Jake seems to have traded a tick or two in velocity for improved command and it's hard to argue with the results so far
Maybe they should just have a meter on the screen when Jake pitches with how much he's going to get in his new contract.
Quote from: SKO on April 06, 2017, 07:46:43 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 05, 2017, 04:22:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 05, 2017, 08:01:17 AM
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
And if that Jake doesn't show up every week you'll be sure to let us know!
Woah, welcome to a brave new world where I no longer bitch about the Cubs. I'm zen. This year is playing with house money, my frent. All will be well.
It is impossible to make merited karma disappear.
Intrepid Reader: Homer Simpson
This is going great.
2015 pitch velocity: 94.4
2017 pitch velocity: 91.7
cha-ching.
I'd love to hear the voices in Scott Boras' head right about now.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 15, 2017, 08:35:15 AM
I'd love to hear the voices in Scott Boras' head right about now.
"Kris Bryant... Kris Bryant... Kris Bryant."
I don't give a shit about what's going on in Boras's head but I would like to have the 97 MPH fastball back from Jake.
I'm officially worried.
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
I don't give a shit about what's going on in Boras's head but I would like to have the 97 MPH fastball back from Jake.
I'm officially worried.
On the one hand he keeps under-performing his peripherals, because his K-BB numbers and stuff are still good, he's getting swinging strikes...it seems like EVERY mistake gets hammered though. His HR/FB rate seems unsustainably poor but, shit, if he's throwing 91 MPH down the middle because he hasn't learned how to pitch with diminished stuff is it really unsustainable?
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
I don't give a shit about what's going on in Boras's head but I would like to have the 97 MPH fastball back from Jake.
I'm officially worried.
Yesterday on Twitter, Nick Shepkowski said that if the Cubs sent Jake to TB for Archer, TB would have to throw in two prospects because Jake won a Cy Young.
I'm always amazed that people like this exist.
Quote from: SKO on May 15, 2017, 10:07:44 AM
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
I don't give a shit about what's going on in Boras's head but I would like to have the 97 MPH fastball back from Jake.
I'm officially worried.
On the one hand he keeps under-performing his peripherals, because his K-BB numbers and stuff are still good, he's getting swinging strikes...it seems like EVERY mistake gets hammered though. His HR/FB rate seems unsustainably poor but, shit, if he's throwing 91 MPH down the middle because he hasn't learned how to pitch with diminished stuff is it really unsustainable?
Conventional wisdom was always to take something off a fastball to make it move. Is it possible that with Jake it's the opposite?
Either way, 91MPH is getting hit but he's not walking anyone. 97MPH was not getting hit but he was walking the world. I haven't looked at his HR rate nor at his HR/FB% or any of his peripherals. But that fucking velo is it, man. He has no margin for error.
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 12:07:54 PM
Quote from: SKO on May 15, 2017, 10:07:44 AM
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
I don't give a shit about what's going on in Boras's head but I would like to have the 97 MPH fastball back from Jake.
I'm officially worried.
On the one hand he keeps under-performing his peripherals, because his K-BB numbers and stuff are still good, he's getting swinging strikes...it seems like EVERY mistake gets hammered though. His HR/FB rate seems unsustainably poor but, shit, if he's throwing 91 MPH down the middle because he hasn't learned how to pitch with diminished stuff is it really unsustainable?
Conventional wisdom was always to take something off a fastball to make it move. Is it possible that with Jake it's the opposite?
Either way, 91MPH is getting hit but he's not walking anyone. 97MPH was not getting hit but he was walking the world. I haven't looked at his HR rate nor at his HR/FB% or any of his peripherals. But that fucking velo is it, man. He has no margin for error.
The problem with his 91 mph fastball seems to be that the slider can't fool anyone anymore. When he was throwing a 95 mph fastball with an 89/90 mph slider/cutter that looked like a fastball there's no way to hit that. Now he's throwing 91 and the slider/cutter is at 84/85 and people can wait for it and crush it.
Quote from: SKO on May 15, 2017, 12:25:53 PM
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 12:07:54 PM
Quote from: SKO on May 15, 2017, 10:07:44 AM
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
I don't give a shit about what's going on in Boras's head but I would like to have the 97 MPH fastball back from Jake.
I'm officially worried.
On the one hand he keeps under-performing his peripherals, because his K-BB numbers and stuff are still good, he's getting swinging strikes...it seems like EVERY mistake gets hammered though. His HR/FB rate seems unsustainably poor but, shit, if he's throwing 91 MPH down the middle because he hasn't learned how to pitch with diminished stuff is it really unsustainable?
Conventional wisdom was always to take something off a fastball to make it move. Is it possible that with Jake it's the opposite?
Either way, 91MPH is getting hit but he's not walking anyone. 97MPH was not getting hit but he was walking the world. I haven't looked at his HR rate nor at his HR/FB% or any of his peripherals. But that fucking velo is it, man. He has no margin for error.
The problem with his 91 mph fastball seems to be that the slider can't fool anyone anymore. When he was throwing a 95 mph fastball with an 89/90 mph slider/cutter that looked like a fastball there's no way to hit that. Now he's throwing 91 and the slider/cutter is at 84/85 and people can wait for it and crush it.
Plus, whatever mechanical glitch that is costing him velocity could be costing his breaking balls some significant bite. Is his spin rate down as drasticlly as his velocity?
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 15, 2017, 01:44:53 PM
Quote from: SKO on May 15, 2017, 12:25:53 PM
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 12:07:54 PM
Quote from: SKO on May 15, 2017, 10:07:44 AM
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
I don't give a shit about what's going on in Boras's head but I would like to have the 97 MPH fastball back from Jake.
I'm officially worried.
On the one hand he keeps under-performing his peripherals, because his K-BB numbers and stuff are still good, he's getting swinging strikes...it seems like EVERY mistake gets hammered though. His HR/FB rate seems unsustainably poor but, shit, if he's throwing 91 MPH down the middle because he hasn't learned how to pitch with diminished stuff is it really unsustainable?
Conventional wisdom was always to take something off a fastball to make it move. Is it possible that with Jake it's the opposite?
Either way, 91MPH is getting hit but he's not walking anyone. 97MPH was not getting hit but he was walking the world. I haven't looked at his HR rate nor at his HR/FB% or any of his peripherals. But that fucking velo is it, man. He has no margin for error.
The problem with his 91 mph fastball seems to be that the slider can't fool anyone anymore. When he was throwing a 95 mph fastball with an 89/90 mph slider/cutter that looked like a fastball there's no way to hit that. Now he's throwing 91 and the slider/cutter is at 84/85 and people can wait for it and crush it.
Plus, whatever mechanical glitch that is costing him velocity could be costing his breaking balls some significant bite. Is his spin rate down as drasticlly as his velocity?
Is it a mechanical glitch, or is it dead arm?
Quote from: Canadouche on May 17, 2017, 08:15:07 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on May 15, 2017, 01:44:53 PM
Quote from: SKO on May 15, 2017, 12:25:53 PM
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 12:07:54 PM
Quote from: SKO on May 15, 2017, 10:07:44 AM
Quote from: Oleg on May 15, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
I don't give a shit about what's going on in Boras's head but I would like to have the 97 MPH fastball back from Jake.
I'm officially worried.
On the one hand he keeps under-performing his peripherals, because his K-BB numbers and stuff are still good, he's getting swinging strikes...it seems like EVERY mistake gets hammered though. His HR/FB rate seems unsustainably poor but, shit, if he's throwing 91 MPH down the middle because he hasn't learned how to pitch with diminished stuff is it really unsustainable?
Conventional wisdom was always to take something off a fastball to make it move. Is it possible that with Jake it's the opposite?
Either way, 91MPH is getting hit but he's not walking anyone. 97MPH was not getting hit but he was walking the world. I haven't looked at his HR rate nor at his HR/FB% or any of his peripherals. But that fucking velo is it, man. He has no margin for error.
The problem with his 91 mph fastball seems to be that the slider can't fool anyone anymore. When he was throwing a 95 mph fastball with an 89/90 mph slider/cutter that looked like a fastball there's no way to hit that. Now he's throwing 91 and the slider/cutter is at 84/85 and people can wait for it and crush it.
Plus, whatever mechanical glitch that is costing him velocity could be costing his breaking balls some significant bite. Is his spin rate down as drasticlly as his velocity?
Is it a mechanical glitch, or is it dead arm?
His arm isn't dead, it's pregnant with home runs.
Interesting analysis of Jake from Fangraphs (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-not-been-good/).
Quote from: Shooter on May 19, 2017, 10:11:06 AM
Interesting analysis of Jake from Fangraphs (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jake-arrieta-has-not-been-good/).
Donald Trump took credit for inventing the term "prime the pump". I take credit for inventing the term "whistling in the dark." That is how I describe the Fangraphs article that makes light of Arrieta's 2017 season performance so far.
This thread's looking less stupid.
Quote from: SKO on April 06, 2017, 07:46:43 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 05, 2017, 04:22:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 05, 2017, 08:01:17 AM
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
And if that Jake doesn't show up every week you'll be sure to let us know!
Woah, welcome to a brave new world where I no longer bitch about the Cubs. I'm zen. This year is playing with house money, my frent. All will be well.
So what happened here anyway?
Quote from: SKO on August 18, 2017, 03:16:10 PM
This thread's looking less stupid.
In a related story, Jake is looking less bad! Call it a win-win.
Quote from: A. Baldheaded Prick on August 18, 2017, 04:12:26 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 06, 2017, 07:46:43 AM
Quote from: CT III on April 05, 2017, 04:22:57 PM
Quote from: SKO on April 05, 2017, 08:01:17 AM
Bump. Jake looked pretty damn solid last night. His velocity wasn't as high as it has been in the past but he seemed to have much better control than last year and the sinker/change/curveball really had them off balance. If that Jake shows up every week he's going to be in Cy contention again.
And if that Jake doesn't show up every week you'll be sure to let us know!
Woah, welcome to a brave new world where I no longer bitch about the Cubs. I'm zen. This year is playing with house money, my frent. All will be well.
So what happened here anyway?
The online record will not bear this out but I am actually considerably more zen. I get worked up during games but once they're over, they're over. I'm not filled with existential dread about them blowing their shot, etc. It's more of an IRL improvement than an online one. I laughed because my wife complimented me after the Carl Edwards meltdown against the Nats for "handling that much better than you would have before" right after I concluded a twitter explosion.
But... all those pilates!
Wrigleyville Sports already had Jake jerseys marked down. It made me a little sad.
That was ace!
If that's the end for him in a Cubs uniform, fitting that he picked his team up off the mat and carried them to a win one last time. He was, at one point at least, the best we've ever seen. He's also the first Cubs pitcher to win two world series games since Hank Borowy. The greatest trade in franchise history?
Quote from: SKO on October 19, 2017, 06:13:22 AM
If that's the end for him in a Cubs uniform, fitting that he picked his team up off the mat and carried them to a win one last time. He was, at one point at least, the best we've ever seen. He's also the first Cubs pitcher to win two world series games since Hank Borowy. The greatest trade in franchise history?
I'm going to miss him quite a bit.
Quote from: SKO on October 19, 2017, 06:13:22 AM
If that's the end for him in a Cubs uniform, fitting that he picked his team up off the mat and carried them to a win one last time. He was, at one point at least, the best we've ever seen. He's also the first Cubs pitcher to win two world series games since Hank Borowy. The greatest trade in franchise history?
I hope at some point there's a "JAKE" flag up on the roof at Wrigley. 2 WS wins as of now, a Cy Young, 2 no-hitters. That rates a flag.
Hey assholes, there's still games for him to pitch in this year.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 19, 2017, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 19, 2017, 06:13:22 AM
If that's the end for him in a Cubs uniform, fitting that he picked his team up off the mat and carried them to a win one last time. He was, at one point at least, the best we've ever seen. He's also the first Cubs pitcher to win two world series games since Hank Borowy. The greatest trade in franchise history?
I hope at some point there's a "JAKE" flag up on the roof at Wrigley. 2 WS wins as of now, a Cy Young, 2 no-hitters. That rates a flag.
Shit if they can retire 31 for Maddux and Fergie they can retire 49 for Jake and, uhhh, Stan Hack*
*in my heart it'll be for Carlos Marmol
Quote from: Oleg on October 19, 2017, 08:27:49 AM
Hey assholes, there's still games for him to pitch in this year.
I know. He's currently lined up for Game 1 against the Astros.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 19, 2017, 08:34:21 AM
Quote from: Oleg on October 19, 2017, 08:27:49 AM
Hey assholes, there's still games for him to pitch in this year.
I know. He's currently lined up for Game 1 against the Astros. at home vs. the Yankees.
Welcome back Adam Warren
(and Girardi and Chapman and Castro)'d
Quote from: SKO on October 19, 2017, 08:27:59 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on October 19, 2017, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on October 19, 2017, 06:13:22 AM
If that's the end for him in a Cubs uniform, fitting that he picked his team up off the mat and carried them to a win one last time. He was, at one point at least, the best we've ever seen. He's also the first Cubs pitcher to win two world series games since Hank Borowy. The greatest trade in franchise history?
I hope at some point there's a "JAKE" flag up on the roof at Wrigley. 2 WS wins as of now, a Cy Young, 2 no-hitters. That rates a flag.
Shit if they can retire 31 for Maddux and Fergie they can retire 49 for Jake and, uhhh, Stan Hack*
*in my heart it'll be for Carlos Marmol
Bill Hands, Ogden.
Thanks, big guy.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 08:22:11 AM
Thanks, big guy.
That, and also please sign somewhere where you'll never hurt us, like Philadelphia.
Quote from: SKO on February 12, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 08:22:11 AM
Thanks, big guy.
That, and also please sign somewhere where you'll never hurt us, like Philadelphia.
I was thinking more like the "Nippon Ham Fighters" or the "Greater Austin, Texas Association of Pilates and Yoga Instructors," but sure, Philly would work.
Quote from: Brownie on February 12, 2018, 10:56:29 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 12, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 08:22:11 AM
Thanks, big guy.
That, and also please sign somewhere where you'll never hurt us, like Philadelphia.
I was thinking more like the "Nippon Ham Fighters" or the "Greater Austin, Texas Association of Pilates and Yoga Instructors," but sure, Philly would work.
He could pitch for a team in the Vega constellation and SKO would still find a way to shit his drawers.
Quote from: SKO on February 12, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 08:22:11 AM
Thanks, big guy.
That, and also please sign somewhere where you'll never hurt us, like Philadelphia.
A rotation with Nola and Arrieta at the top would give the Cubs fits.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 11:55:04 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 12, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 08:22:11 AM
Thanks, big guy.
That, and also please sign somewhere where you'll never hurt us, like Philadelphia.
A rotation with Nola and Arrieta at the top would give the Cubs fits.
They don't have much pitching not named Nola and their position player group is meh. If they added Jake they might project for 80 wins at best, maybe they get hot and compete for a second wildcard spot but I wouldn't fear them much, plus it wouldn't be the worst thing for the Nats to maybe have a slightly more difficult time cruising to their third consecutive NLDS loss.
Quote from: SKO on February 12, 2018, 12:41:30 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 11:55:04 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 12, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 08:22:11 AM
Thanks, big guy.
That, and also please sign somewhere where you'll never hurt us, like Philadelphia.
A rotation with Nola and Arrieta at the top would give the Cubs fits.
They don't have much pitching not named Nola and their position player group is meh. If they added Jake they might project for 80 wins at best, maybe they get hot and compete for a second wildcard spot but I wouldn't fear them much, plus it wouldn't be the worst thing for the Nats to maybe have a slightly more difficult time cruising to their third consecutive NLDS loss.
You're right. Jake wouldn't know anything about upsets out of the second wildcard spot.
Quote from: SKO on February 12, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 08:22:11 AM
Thanks, big guy.
That, and also please sign somewhere where you'll never hurt us, like Philadelphia.
He came through for me one last time. Thanks for the memories, champ
Quote from: SKO on February 12, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on February 12, 2018, 08:22:11 AM
Thanks, big guy.
That, and also please sign somewhere where you'll never hurt us, like Philadelphia.
He turned the clock back to 2015 tonight, blanking the Pirates and allowing 1 hit in 7 innings.
I miss him.