Official Offseason Thread - CUBS edition

[Jntg4]

Excellent reading skills. I never said Ramirez was great.



Nothing about Ramirez being great.

You said it was exactly the comparison you wanted, and mentioned how Brady was great... thus that was part of your comparison... :facepalm:. Excellent writing skills bro.

 

[Capt. Serious]

Tom Brady & A-Ram in the same breath.

Jesus christ CO.

 

[Captain Obvious]

To play Devil's Advocate... Brady has had several Hall of Fame caliber games in the playoffs... Aramis Ramirez has had 1.

It is interesting how everyone arguing ARam's playoff performances in 2007-08 are forgetting his performance in 2003: 11/44 7 BB... .250 BA/.353 OBP 4 HR 10 RBI 6 Runs in 13 games.... not to mention the series winning solo shot against the Braves in the NLDS, Game 2 winning shot in the NLCS, and 2 blasts in Game 4 of the NLCS (of course one was another game-winning blast).

In no way am I trying to compare them. My point is that the best player in the world can have a bad game. That doesn't mean he isn't clutch. A player like Ramirez can have a bad set of games, that doesn't mean he isn't clutch. Sure they were at an unfortunate time when his team needed him. Do I want to rely on him in the future in the playoffs? Hell no. But to say he isn't clutch because of those 6 games is ludicrous.

 

[Jntg4]

In no way am I trying to compare them. My point is that the best player in the world can have a bad game. That doesn't mean he isn't clutch. A player like Ramirez can have a bad set of games, that doesn't mean he isn't clutch. Sure they were at an unfortunate time when his team needed him. Do I want to rely on him in the future in the playoffs? Hell no. But to say he isn't clutch because of those 6 games is ludicrous.

:umad:

 

[Uman85]

This thread is ludicrous.

My brain aches from the tomfoolery in here.

 

[Jntg4]

This thread is ludicrous.

My brain aches from the tomfoolery in here.

The point I tried to make about 10 pages ago, lol.

 

[dabynsky]

Can we just rename this the Cubs Way Off Topic Thread and just get it over with?

 

[icehogfan08]

Sorry, but this thread is pretty stupid

 

[Uman85]

Upon entering this thread, don't forget to put on your lollerskates.

 

[Jntg4]

See, my idea of waiting until the off-season 10 pages ago was relevant.

 

[Jntg4]

CO:

to

to

Personally, I prefer Tinker to Evers to Chance. :shrug:

 

[Uman85]

I'd take Tinkers, Evers and Chance to these guys today. I'm sure their corpses are more lively.

 

[Jntg4]

I'd take Tinkers, Evers and Chance to these guys today. I'm sure their corpses are more lively.

Ya, except I would like to point out one thing, but only because I always hear people make this mistake... there was no Tinkers, his name was Joe Tinker without the "s".

 

[Uman85]

Ya, except I would like to point out one thing, but only because I always hear people make this mistake... there was no Tinkers, his name was Joe Tinker without the "s".

You know your Cubs history.

:clap:

 

[Jntg4]

You know your Cubs history.

:clap:

I would accept that beer, but there's that whole age restriction thing, lol.

I don't know that much Cubs history, it wanes away after 1918... but I've researched the Cubs between 1870 and 1918 quite a bit.

I also know the score of the first game the Cubs ever played, 47-1 victory of an amateur St. Louis team in 1870 (the Cubs played in a mixed amateur/professional league then, guess you could call it pro-am).

 

[dabynsky]

1870 was when the only organization was the National Association of Baseball Players. It began as a strictly amateur organization, but as the 1860s wore on it became clear that most of the top teams were at least partly professional. The Association tried to create a professional categoy in 1869 as a test. 1871 the professional clubs bolted to form the National Association of Professional Baseball Players. So yes when the Cubs first played as the White Stockings back in 1870 the association was a mixture of professional and amateur clubs with the Cubs as a declared professional club.

*See we recovered this thread to do a little baseball history.

 

[Jntg4]

1870 was when the only organization was the National Association of Baseball Players. It began as a strictly amateur organization, but as the 1860s wore on it became clear that most of the top teams were at least partly professional. The Association tried to create a professional categoy in 1869 as a test. 1871 the professional clubs bolted to form the National Association of Professional Baseball Players. So yes when the Cubs first played as the White Stockings back in 1870 the association was a mixture of professional and amateur clubs with the Cubs as a declared professional club.

*See we recovered this thread to do a little baseball history.

:yep:

And the Cubs ownership founded the National League in 1876, or started the process and had the concept of forming the league anyway.

 

[DewsSox79]

1870 was when the only organization was the National Association of Baseball Players. It began as a strictly amateur organization, but as the 1860s wore on it became clear that most of the top teams were at least partly professional. The Association tried to create a professional categoy in 1869 as a test. 1871 the professional clubs bolted to form the National Association of Professional Baseball Players. So yes when the Cubs first played as the White Stockings back in 1870 the association was a mixture of professional and amateur clubs with the Cubs as a declared professional club.

*See we recovered this thread to do a little baseball history.

recovering the thread from the asshat talk is very true, but should I rename it "cubs history thread"

 

[dabynsky]

:yep:

And the Cubs ownership founded the National League in 1876, or started the process and had the concept of forming the league anyway.

That whole era of baseball is just fascinating to me. I found a real cool paper on the 1890 Players League. Really interesting read to hear about a time with 3 competing leagues, and the concept behind the Players League like players being able to own stakes in the team and essentially all Players had NTC. Just very interesting thing to think about what if that league had managed to survive how the history of the game and really professional sports in America since the NL was basically the model all leagues tried to follow after that point.

 

[Jntg4]

That whole era of baseball is just fascinating to me. I found a real cool paper on the 1890 Players League. Really interesting read to hear about a time with 3 competing leagues, and the concept behind the Players League like players being able to own stakes in the team and essentially all Players had NTC. Just very interesting thing to think about what if that league had managed to survive how the history of the game and really professional sports in America since the NL was basically the model all leagues tried to follow after that point.

The 1890 Pittsburgh Pirates make the 2011 Chicago Cubs look like a powerhouse, lol.

I've always wanted to acquire the full annual club listings of the NABBP, but never could and probably will never be able to, lol.