New Quade thread.. only intelligent posts please

[cubsneedmiracle]

Yeah, actually, the biggest downfall to bunting is wasting outs. This is what all the tinfoil hats will tell you and its the truth. Bunting has inherent risks that are true whether you bunt a little or a lot. Whether or not the baserunner could have stole the base anyway, is an issue when considering bunting. So is whether or not youre more likely to get 1 hit with fewer outs than 2 hits with more outs. That all hinges on personnel. Which is what I said.

Stop being this poser.

Oh and youre really amusing. When you say something stupid like "too hot means something is too hot...bunting too much means youre bunting too much" no one cares and this is how you try to play it off. And this is after youve called cubs fans stupid. Thats rich.

The top paragraph is basically just elongating what I've stated before in multiple posts.

The middle sentence is just unnecessary.

The last paragraph is hilarious. You just pick fights with everyone you can acting like your internet penis is bigger than everyone else's.

 

[Lex L.]

The top paragraph is basically just elongating what I've stated before in multiple posts.

The middle sentence is just unnecessary.

The last paragraph is hilarious. You just pick fights with everyone you can acting like your internet penis is bigger than everyone else's.

Stop claiming credit for what others have said. Even if you had said the pitfalls of bunting correctly, previously, youve contradicted yourself with this easy outs comment. Sorry but this is like the "over-bunting" comment in quality. It has nothing to do with being easy. Its about sacrificing outs, not making easy outs.

 

[Derkach77]

The top paragraph is basically just elongating what I've stated before in multiple posts.

The middle sentence is just unnecessary.

The last paragraph is hilarious. You just pick fights with everyone you can acting like your internet penis is bigger than everyone else's.

Lol I gotta agree with our pitching coach (cubsneedmiracle) on that.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Stop claiming credit for what others have said. Even if you had said the pitfalls of bunting correctly, previously, youve contradicted yourself with this easy outs comment. Sorry but this is like the "over-bunting" comment in quality. It has nothing to do with being easy. Its about sacrificing outs, not making easy outs.

I'm taking credit for what I've said.

Sacrificing outs is an easy out for the defense.

It doesn't guarantee you score more runs.

 

[Lex L.]

Lol I gotta agree with our pitching coach (cubsneedmiracle) on that.

The risk of bunting isnt about giving up too many easy outs, its about making a sacrifice to advance a runner. The bunter could actually be safe or he could be out. It could be tough to throw him out or it could be easy to throw him out. Whether he's easy to throw out or hard, is not terribly important.

Wrong. The issue with bunting is whether or not its necessary (can your runner steal the base) and whether or not youre more likely going to get 2 hits with more outs or 1 hit with less outs. If youre more likely to get 2 hits with more outs, then youve wasted an out. Thats the trade off thats wieghed. Whether or not the bunter is easy to get out is not the issue. As far as baseball goes, bunting is one of the more higher percentage plays...or at least should be in terms of advancing the runner.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Is this guy serious?

I can't tell.

What did I say that was untrue?

 

[Jntg4]

Does it matter who's manager? I mean come on, is their anyone who could manage the Cubs to a World Championship even with a miracle offseason? We'll probable never win anyway. And Sandberg may be a HOF, but the only real Cubs greats played in 1907 and 1908, Tinkers, Evers, Chance, etc. The ones who actually won us a World Series.

 

[poodski]

Who is wearing tin foil hats?

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Who is wearing tin foil hats?

I have absolutely no idea whatsoever.

 

[Jntg4]

lol, only a few people read the title:
New Quade thread.. only intelligent posts please

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Quade isn't ruling out Ryno on the MLB staff

Cubs manager Mike Quade met on Wednesday with general manager Jim Hendry to discuss his coaching staff, which could include Ryne Sandberg.

Hendry picked Quade over Sandberg for the manager's job but left the door open to the Hall of Fame second baseman as to whether he would return to the Cubs organization.

"[Having Sandberg join the staff is] not impossible, that's for sure," Quade said on WMVP-AM 1000 on Wednesday. "That would be a unique circumstance, but I'm telling you, everybody is on the table.

Quade doesn't rule out Ryno for Cubs staff | cubs.com: News

 

[DewsSox79]

Oh, the irony. You talk about not picking fights but this is exactly what youre doing. Maybe you should go where you belong.

STFU, tool. Thats what was being discussed.

Now run along.

im not picking fights with anyone.

tool?

i disagree with poodski, but atleast he argues his point like an adult, and admits the reasons he wanted sandberg. i do give him credit for that.

your posts however are very stale, not amusing, and just plain dumb. you are looking for a corner inside of a circle and you will not find it, but go ahead and keep trying, it makes me laugh.

 

[poodski]

im not picking fights with anyone.

tool?

i disagree with poodski, but atleast he argues his point like an adult, and admits the reasons he wanted sandberg. i do give him credit for that.

your posts however are very stale, not amusing, and just plain dumb. you are looking for a corner inside of a circle and you will not find it, but go ahead and keep trying, it makes me laugh.

It's not so much I want Sandberg its more I want a big name manager.

I don't really feel like the Cubs should be hiring someone like Mike Quade, especially since I believe its for nothing more than because he went 24-13.

I ran the numbers of other interim managers and how they did:


Clint Hurdle (23-14 over his first 37 games) stayed with Rockies for 6 full seasons afterwards led them to 1 winning season, and gave way to...

Jim Tracy (26-11 over his first 37 games) has done decently in his first full season, but was helped by a strong early September to keep him above .500.)

David Trembly (20-17) did terrible with the Orioles after his strong start and was fired midseason for Buck Showalter who also did very well in his start, but we haven't seen the results of that

Ned Yost (17-20) its not above .500 but lets be honest thats pretty damn good for the Royals who outside of those 37 games went 50-75.

John McLaren (20-17) was fired during the next season.

Jerry Manuel (23-14) I think this one is pretty obvious, and in my opinion most resembles what we have here.

Jim Rigleman (17-20) thats pretty good considering they got the number one pick in the draft still. Regardless he lost 93 games this season.

Its not impressive and its pretty obvious teams play better under a new manager at least for the start.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

It's not so much I want Sandberg its more I want a big name manager.

I don't really feel like the Cubs should be hiring someone like Mike Quade, especially since I believe its for nothing more than because he went 24-13.

I ran the numbers of other interim managers and how they did:


Clint Hurdle (23-14 over his first 37 games) stayed with Rockies for 6 full seasons afterwards led them to 1 winning season, and gave way to...

Jim Tracy (26-11 over his first 37 games) has done decently in his first full season, but was helped by a strong early September to keep him above .500.)

David Trembly (20-17) did terrible with the Orioles after his strong start and was fired midseason for Buck Showalter who also did very well in his start, but we haven't seen the results of that

Ned Yost (17-20) its not above .500 but lets be honest thats pretty damn good for the Royals who outside of those 37 games went 50-75.

John McLaren (20-17) was fired during the next season.

Jerry Manuel (23-14) I think this one is pretty obvious, and in my opinion most resembles what we have here.

Jim Rigleman (17-20) thats pretty good considering they got the number one pick in the draft still. Regardless he lost 93 games this season.

Its not impressive and its pretty obvious teams play better under a new manager at least for the start.

Those are pretty damn solid numbers..

Quade is the guy though.. So we'll see what happens..

 

[poodski]

Those are pretty damn solid numbers..

Quade is the guy though.. So we'll see what happens..

Players always seem to play better once a new manager is brought in. Maybe we should get a new manager every 60 or so games.

 

[tbo41fan]

This thread will close too if the attacks keep goin...

cmon boys

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Players always seem to play better once a new manager is brought in. Maybe we should get a new manager every 60 or so games.

Ehh.. We've tried something similar to that..

 

[tbo41fan]

Ok guys,

I know that hiring a manager for a rebuilding team is a hot topic issue rolleyes
but the name calling and attacks need to stop...this is the second straight thread that this has happened....Lex, calm down dude....

NO MORE!

 

[DewsSox79]

It's not so much I want Sandberg its more I want a big name manager.

I don't really feel like the Cubs should be hiring someone like Mike Quade, especially since I believe its for nothing more than because he went 24-13.

I ran the numbers of other interim managers and how they did:


Clint Hurdle (23-14 over his first 37 games) stayed with Rockies for 6 full seasons afterwards led them to 1 winning season, and gave way to...

Jim Tracy (26-11 over his first 37 games) has done decently in his first full season, but was helped by a strong early September to keep him above .500.)

David Trembly (20-17) did terrible with the Orioles after his strong start and was fired midseason for Buck Showalter who also did very well in his start, but we haven't seen the results of that

Ned Yost (17-20) its not above .500 but lets be honest thats pretty damn good for the Royals who outside of those 37 games went 50-75.

John McLaren (20-17) was fired during the next season.

Jerry Manuel (23-14) I think this one is pretty obvious, and in my opinion most resembles what we have here.

Jim Rigleman (17-20) thats pretty good considering they got the number one pick in the draft still. Regardless he lost 93 games this season.

Its not impressive and its pretty obvious teams play better under a new manager at least for the start.

no no no, i doubt quade will fall asleep in the dugout.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

no no no, i doubt quade will fall asleep in the dugout.

:rolling:

holy crap I forgot about that..