Jump to content


Photo

Random Stat of the Day


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#31 VanSlawAndCottoCheese

VanSlawAndCottoCheese

    Whimbilly Hendicks

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Columbus, Ohio

Posted 31 August 2016 - 13:00

Inspired by Butch's pro-Edwards talk, a look at the 2013 Garza trade:

 

Matt Garza's 2016 thus far:  73.2 IP, 89 H, 40 ER, 29 BB, 48 K

 

Combined Edwards/Grimm in 2016: 70.1 IP, 47 H, 28 ER, 26 BB, 89 K

 

Ramirez in 2016: The three-team do-si-do

 

Olt in 2016: No fucks given


  • 0

#32 VanSlawAndCottoCheese

VanSlawAndCottoCheese

    Whimbilly Hendicks

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Columbus, Ohio

Posted 31 August 2016 - 13:17

As a bonus, here's one SOI take on the Garza trade after it happened. For fun, I've hidden the name of the poster under a spoiler tag. Reveal when when you're ready for a cool surprise!

 

Spoiler

 

I'm not sure if we have completely different views, but you are right, I was on the extend Garza train hard, vs trading him. Obviously if the FO wasn't going to pay Garza anything near what he wanted, then completing a trade for him is the way to go. My thing with that is let's say for grins that the goal is to raise hell and be competitive starting in 2015. And Garza wanted 5 years in the talks, he'd be...31? And a solid 2/3 type for the team. Why is that so bad?

 

I've heard rumors and granted, none of us were in the room for any of the talks, that 5/$75 was Garza's asking price. As big of a Garza fan as I am, I don't think that's too much, not to mention the majority of that contract would be when the team is ready to compete for wild card/division titles. At the end of the day, I'm just a huge Garza fan, and I don't believe that the Cubs in this case got anything that will come close to the value Garza would have brought if they could have extended him. And My argument is based on things he said about wanting to stay and work out an extension. IF that was really the case, then yes I'm bothered by the FO not seriously entertaining that option. I think I view Garza as a very good long term asset for this team, maybe more than I should, and that skews my view of the trade some.

 

Saying that the haul was ok, and with a PTBNL that could end up being Ramirez...well yes it was a solid deal. I'm very sour on Grimm, Olt and Edwards are the kickers. If they can turn Olt into something close to what he was, then it's a huge deal and he becomes a great asset. But that's a big if. Let's hope the last 10 games are a preview of what's to come.

 

Edwards is the other big key here. Do you (me/us/whoever) view him as a starter or reliever? Scouts love his stuff but not his build. If he can stick in the rotation and keep pitching as well as he has while he moves up, then you look back on this deal and say wow, great haul.


  • 0

#33 Butcher

Butcher

    Poundie the Clown

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,047 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 August 2016 - 13:20

That was a cool surprise!


  • 0

#34 VanSlawAndCottoCheese

VanSlawAndCottoCheese

    Whimbilly Hendicks

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Columbus, Ohio

Posted 31 August 2016 - 14:06

Changed your life, right?


  • 0

#35 rok

rok

    Chairman of the Board

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 31 August 2016 - 17:31

Did he really write that all by himself?
  • 0

#36 VanSlawAndCottoCheese

VanSlawAndCottoCheese

    Whimbilly Hendicks

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Columbus, Ohio

Posted 31 August 2016 - 18:27

I'm sure he got some help from Craig.


  • 0

#37 nakedman1664

nakedman1664

    Bro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,379 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Merritt Island, Fl

Posted 31 August 2016 - 18:45

Did he really write that all by himself?

I don't think I ever knew a *don't want to ruin the spoiler* that was that articulate.


  • 0

#38 1984

1984

    Triple-A Ball

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,526 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 August 2016 - 19:27

Apparently, Heyward had a streak of 63 PA's without a walk.  Just broke it.

 

Maybe he should have his eyes checked or something?


  • 0

#39 phan

phan

    Triple-A Ball

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 31 August 2016 - 22:00

Best month for a cubs team since 45. Beat August since the 30s.
  • 0

#40 Kid

Kid

    Mr. Congeniality

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bleeding out in a dumpster

Posted 31 August 2016 - 22:06

Of the 6 losses in August, they all came in splitting a 4-game series vs. the Cardinals & losing 2-out-of-3 at the Rockies & Dodgers.

 

All other series were sweeps (vs. MIA, at OAK, vs LAA, vs MIL, at SD, vs PIT).


  • 0

#41 BT

BT

    Cubs Bench Player

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,307 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 31 August 2016 - 22:11

Apparently, Heyward had a streak of 63 PA's without a walk.  Just broke it.

 

Maybe he should have his eyes checked or something?

 

Actually I think because he had been going so bad, they were simply throwing him strikes, and see what he could do. 


  • 0

#42 phan

phan

    Triple-A Ball

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 05 September 2016 - 08:38

Cubs one game over 500 in one run games. Last week was a good week for that stat
  • 0

#43 1984

1984

    Triple-A Ball

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,526 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 September 2016 - 22:28

The Cubs have given up the fewest total bases in all of MLB, by a mile.  1533 total bases.  Next are Washington with 1701 and the Dodgers with 1729.  


  • 0

#44 Andy

Andy

    Cubs Bench Player

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,385 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greenville, WI

Posted 06 September 2016 - 09:18

Over the last 50 years, there have only been 12 teams who have held the best record in baseball by more than 5 games.  Of those 12, 9 have gone on to win the WS.  Lots of games left to be won, but that's pretty cool.
 
Team
  Difference Outcome
2001 Mariners +14 Lost ALCS
1986 Mets +12 Won World Series
1975 Reds +10 Won World Series
2016 Cubs +9 (projected) ?
1969 Orioles +9 Lost World Series
1967 Cardinals +9 Won World Series
1998 Yankees +8 Won World Series
1990 Athletics +8 Lost World Series
1984 Tigers +8 Won World Series
2009 Yankees +6 Won World Series
1989 Athletics +6 Won World Series
1970 Orioles +6 Won World Series
1968 Tigers +6 Won World Series
  • 0

#45 VanSlawAndCottoCheese

VanSlawAndCottoCheese

    Whimbilly Hendicks

  • Private Access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Columbus, Ohio

Posted 06 September 2016 - 10:15

Neat list, Andy. Every team but the "best," the 2001 Mariners, made it to the series. The other two losers are were victims of two of the biggest WS in history--the '69 Mets over the Orioles and the '90 Reds over the A's.


  • 0




4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users