the vols lost in the most agonizing way ever. the white sox won the first two games of the world series. i am in third place in the college football pool i'm in with geoff and chad. the browns sucked ass. i went on tilt sometime around 4pm on saturday and really haven't come off tilt fully yet, and its cost me a lot more money than i would like. also, all my ground beef went bad (2 days after i bought it!) and two of my nice bowls from the crate and barrel showed they were not that nice and got chipped. not to mention the cloudy, rainy, and at times downright stormy weather that's been sitting over boston for the last ... fuck, i dunno, two weeks at least.
what a brutal fucking weekend.
brutal weekend
1107-october24-2005
comments
re: comment
from: phil (2005-10-25 12:15:16)
the only thing i can think of better than the cardinals winning the world series...and really it wouldn't get much better than that, is the white sox beating the astros.
first, you get the astros misery and then it's added to by the cubs fans being miserable that the white sox have won before they have.
has there ever been a more miserable organization or a more miserable set of fans than the cubs'? the red sox win a title, the white sox are going to win a title, and the cubbies field one of the priciest teams in baseball and can't even finish .500.
re: living in chicago
from: chad (2005-10-25 14:16:11)
living in chicago but spending a large amount of my free time with a Cards fan, I have come to realize this:
Cardinals fans are delusionally angry with the Cubs for everything from not being good to having fans who support them even when they aren't good.
Cubs fans, on the other hand, couldn't care less about the Cardinals, their fans, their stadium, or anything else dealing with St. Louis.
Sounds like an inferiority complex to me...
re: comment
from: phil (2005-10-26 11:44:24)
we dont understand the cubs fan, that's what it is.
you guys are THE big market team in the 3rd largest market in the city. in all seriousness the cubs should be spending money like the yanks and sox are and like the dodgers and the braves used to. you have a national following (albeit i can't understand why. the red sox got their following because they got so close so many times and failed. the cubs never really get close, they're out of it by the end of may usually. i don't see the interest in that for someone who isn't from the north side) and yet your ballclub is run like you're the devil rays....albeit the devil rays with 10 times the history, so in effect, 10 times the failure.
all the while cubs fans don't even seem to care. when the cardinals were crappy in the mcgwire years of the late 90's i was screaming to trade mcgwire for pitching and prospects. of course it would've never happened, but that sentiment was out there, and eventually the cards started acquiring pitching and some help for mcgwire in the lineup (matt morris and darryl kile, and jim edmonds). the cubs fans never seemed to realize that they weren't going to win with sosa (until his skills completely eroded) and sat happily drinking their old styles without a care in the world.
we dont hate the cubs fans, we look at you as if you're inhuman because you dont seem to care that your organization puts a crappy product on the field even though they can afford to do better. we dont understand you because when you continue to flock to wrigley to see sub .500 ballclubs you simply encourage them to keep doing the same. at least devil ray fans have the good sense not to go to the games. we dislike the cubs because we're cardinals fans and we're supposed to...much like yankee fans dislike the redsox and vise versa and the dodgers and giants dislike each other. if you live in chicago you may not see it, but if you're from the battleground midwest between the two cities...in the towns of downstate illinois, indiana, and parts of kentucky, then you see the dislike the fans of the two ballclubs have for each other.
you're the big market team in a relatively small market division. why dont the cubs just act like it?
re: comment
from: phil (2005-10-26 11:44:58)
rather, you're the big market team in the 3rd largest market in the country.
re: comment
from: niv (2005-10-26 12:06:24)
who is the "you" to whom you're talking, phil? i don't think any cubs fans frequent this site. you really sound like a blowhard that belongs on cold pizza.
re: comment
from: niv (2005-10-26 12:06:53)
also its "vice-versa"
and yankees fans don't give a shit about red sox fans.
re: comment
from: niv (2005-10-26 12:08:35)
also, did you say you look at other people as subhuman because they root for the cubs? that has to be far and away the most retarded thing i've ever seen written.
re: i assume he means me
from: chad (2005-10-26 12:40:47)
I am guessing that "you"=me, which is misguided, at best, since, despite Niv's best efforts, I am not a Cubs fan. I am, however, one of the people who regularly attends games at Wrigley.
That said, being upset that your team isn't winning is one thing. I think that Geoff, Niv and I were all unhappy with the Indians performance in the 2002-2004 seasons. And calling for changes at that time makes sense too (which is why we were unhappy with performance but happy with Shapiro's 2005 plan, which worked to perfection).
But saying things like, "we dont understand you because when you continue to flock to wrigley to see sub .500 ballclubs you simply encourage them to keep doing the same. at least devil ray fans have the good sense not to go to the games" is idiotic. This is, basically, the difference between a fairweather fan and a true fan. You want true fans? Look at Browns fans or Packers fans. You support the team, you buy tickets, you go to games, you cheer the team on...but you question the bad moves and call for accountability. Not going to see a team because they are sub .500 is the definition of being a fairweather fan, and its crap.
The majority of Cubs fans hate the fact that their team won't spend money on a big name bat or two, and most of them hate the fact that their pitchers get overworked 3 weeks into every season. But they still go to the games and drink their Old Style because the LIKE THE CUBS and want to go to games and cheer on their teams. It isn't Derek Lee or Corey Patterson or any other player who is at fault for the crappy management. So you go and you cheer on the team and you question management and hope that maybe this group of players can stay healthy and put together a season like they did a couple years ago.
This team has been to the playoffs a couple times in the last 10 years, which certainly doesn't make it a dynasty, but does make it as good as most teams in baseball.
I never argue with people that Indians fans are, in general, good fans. Cleveland is and always will be a football town, and until an Indians team really proves it's good, fans do not show up. Even this year, people stayed away. I expect that to change next year, but as soon as the team starts rebuilding again, the attendence will plummet again.
I will, however, defend Cubs fans. There are lots of North Siders who enjoy the games, cheer for the Cubs, but couldn't care less about whether they win or lose, but the majority of Cubs fans are loyal, they care about their team and want to see a winner as bad as anyone. Calling them inhuman because they go to games when the team is bad is without a doubt the stupidest, most defeneless point of view I have ever heard. The next time the Cardinals are struggling, I hope that the stadium is empty every day. At least that way, you won't have to feel bad about all the inhuman inhabitants of St. Louis.
re: comment
from: phil (2005-10-26 13:19:38)
firstly, you can't compare nfl fans to mlb fans. comparing attendance for 8 home games per season compared to 81 home games per season isn't fair at all. lots of awful nfl teams (the redskins the last 10 years as an example, since i'm here in the DC area) sell out everygame, so lets not go off the deep end and say that the nfl teams that sell out games have great fans. i mean in green bay what the hell else are you going to do on a sunday?
subhuman or inhuman may have been a little harsh, admittedly, but it did provoke discussion, which is the point of niv's postings and our comments, right? maybe, "lower species of fan" would have been a better choice of words...but i'm sure that would have provoked response as well.
yes, it's "vice-versa".
niv, you say that yankees fans dont care about the red sox. i think they say they dont because they like to be smug and imperious like yankees fans are, but deep down they do care about the red sox. steinbrenner cares enough about the red sox to try to block and/or match any type of move the red sox make. the yankees and their fans of course never would say they care about the red sox or the mets, but their actions say that they are obsessed with being better than those teams. remember the 1918 chants that yanks fans shouted at sox fans? if they didn't care they wouldn't have bothered with the 1918 chants. now that the sox have won a title they care even more.
i'm not advocating that fans not go to games if their team is losing. i am advocating that for cubs fans though. the cubs are an extreme circumstance in baseball. it says something about the loyalty of cubs fans, about their love of baseball, and about the good time that people apparently have at wrigley. the ability of the cubs to consistently field uncompetitive teams and continue to sell tix at an astounding clip is amazing. however, most organizations when they field bad teams see dips in attendance and in turn that motivates the team (or i'd imagine it would) to put a better product on the field because the team needs to sell tix to make money. the cubs, with their big tv deal and constantly high attendance at wrigley win or lose have no such incentive and therefore continue to be poorly managed and poorly run and put a bad product on the field with no reprocussions. i mean last year steve stone got fired because he questioned the players, team and organization.
the season they had a couple of years ago was total crap. they won a division with 89 wins. the cards were without izzy until mid june and blew more saves and lost more 1 run games without izzy than any other team in baseball. with a healthy izzy that season (or if edmonds hadn't torn his shoulder to shit in the homerun derby and had an awful second half) the cards win the division (and i'd say they prob. win 95 games).
i do like the way the indians have built their ballclub and they way they've gone about it. the cubs and mets are the knicks or the rangers of baseball.
re: comment
from: niv (2005-10-26 13:32:09)
phil,
if a team sells out every game but is bashed by the media and the fans for not spending money, i think that is impetus enough for them to attempt to improve.
it's unbelievable that you can even claim that the cubs do not try to improve their team. they went out and got nomar. they went out and got aramis ramirez. they went out and got derrek lee. they are definitely trying to improve their team. everything you've argued in this thread has been patently false and very mean for no reason.
re: comment
from: phil (2005-10-26 14:08:53)
the team is bashed by the national media but in chicago, where the tribune company owns the biggest newspaper and also owns wgn...they also own the cubs. it's like fox news.
nomar was washed up; aramis ramirez, when they acquired him (along with kenny lofton and corey simon) was a free swinging, bad fielding (still is) 3B on an already bad defensive team. Aramis is now the top (or among the top, along with Rolen and Ensberg and Wright) offensive 3B in the NL, so that was a fine move. they have not addressed their inability to manufacture runs though. they have, for the last couple of years gotten some ridiculously high % of their runs on home runs and it hasn't resulted in winning. they need a leadoff hitter (johnny damon would be a good fit) and some production from the middle infield. they also need a manager who can manage the rotation and bullpen, need to trade kerry wood while he has any value whatsoever, and need to acquire a closer (they've needed to do this for years). the trade for derek lee was seen as a defensive upgrade at 1B and he's blossomed into an offensive star (for one season at least), i guess this is one thing that's worked out for the cubs.
i hope they dont do this, but if i were the cubs i'd sign furcal, sign billy wagner or bj ryan, sign aj burnett or jeff weaver, and get johnny damon. the cubs have more money than anyone but the yanks or sox, so they should put brian giles on the shopping list too. if they made a couple of those things happen i'd be impressed. if they fired dusty baker and hired a good manager that would be an upgrade as well. i personally really like jim tracy, but he's with the pirates now. too bad he never really had a good ballclub in LA.
i'm good at being mean. wait til we get a thread started on college basketball.
re: false is the key word...
from: chad (2005-10-26 14:14:53)
Phil--the next time you say something like, "If Izzy was healthy and Edmonds was healthy and Bob Gibson were still pitching we would go 153-9 and win the World Series in 3 games cause we would be that damn good" I am going to recommend that Niv ban you from discussing baseball on his site.
If Wood and Prior and the entire Cubs bullpen were healthy this year...If Nomar was healthy this year...If Corey Patterson wasn't a complete bust...etc. The Cubs could have won this division. With a healthy Wood and Prior, they have 3 solid 20 game winners, all of whom are capable of putting up Cy Young seasons, and that DOESN'T include Greg Maddux, who would be the best right-hander of his generation if Roger Clemens weren't the greatest right-hander (maybe) of all time. And Mitre clearly has a bright future. Injuries happen. Deal with it. Two years ago, the Cubs self-destructed but should have made the World Series, and would have been able to go toe-to-toe with anyone in baseball because their pitching staff is just that good.
Remember how the Cards got significantly outplayed by an Astros team that was minus its best or second best hitter? Yeah, that's cause pitching beats hitting 10 times out of 10. If all teams are healthy, the Cards are possibly the best regular season team in their division, but third best in the post-season because in a head-to-head matchup, shut down pitching will trump a good lineup always. Want proof? From 1995-1999 the Indians had the best offense in baseball almost every year. And almost every year they ran into pitching studs and that was that. The Braves staff in 95 needs no introduction. Mussina and Wells were on the 1996 Orioles. The 1997 Marlins had Kevin Brown, Alex Fernandez, Al Leiter and a young Livan Hernandez who thought he was Sandy Koufax for two months. 1998 Yankees had Pettitte, Cone, Wells, Irabu and El Duque all on top of their game. 1999 Red Sox had Pedro. Maybe others too, but Pedro is what matters.
The fact is, the Cubs have run into shitty luck with injuries the past couple seasons (although I would argue that Dusty Baker is to blame, but thats another story) but they are rebuilding in the RIGHT WAY. The team is definitely trying to improve. They got rid of Sammy because he only cared about stats and being loved...winning wasn't an issue with him. They brought in Nomar because Nomar desperately wants to win. They brought in the pitching necessary to compete, and have had injury after injury side-track what could have been a solid two years.
Pay more attention to what REALLY goes on. Instead of just assuming the Cubs "don't need to try to win," look at what they have done the past few years. Maddux, Lee, Ramirez, Nomar...Hell, they even signed a big time free agent MANAGER.
re: comment
from: chad (2005-10-26 15:10:27)
your last comment, Phil, was posted while I was typing my last one...and it actually isn't half bad. Except you refuse to give them credit for getting Ramirez and Lee for cheap when I am sure you would praise the Cards for getting Rolen. Ramirez and Lee were good pick ups, no doubt. Also, the Chicago media bashes the Cubs daily for not making the right moves. Even the Tribune. I imagine that living in DC you don't get much in the way of Chicago news, but I am glad you have such strong opinions.
also, you should read more rob neyer or baseball prospectus or bill james or something to start to understand the lack of value in manufacturing runs. the yankees, red sox, and indians were three of the 5 or 6 best teams in baseball, and none spent any time "manufacturing runs." and the white sox, while seen as a small ball team, were actually among the league leaders in home runs, which is the REAL reason they have been as good as they are.
signing all those guys is just another move in the same direction that left the yankees and red sox sitting out the ALCS this year and moving closer and closer to sitting out the playoffs all together. the Cubs just need to get their pitching healthy and continue developing the farm system. To be honest, as guys like Edmonds and Walker get older (not to mention Morris), the Cardinals are going to have to start thinking about rebuilding and getting good young talent into their farm system so that they can keep reloading (a la the Braves) and not turn into an old, overrated, no chance at a title team (a la the yankees).
re: comment
from: phil (2005-10-26 16:10:20)
god, i'm not getting into the whole sabremetrics argument again. the short version though is that i'm of the mindset that you have to be able to both manufacture runs and hit home runs. the best teams are able to do both. i'm not looking at stats to back this up, so correct me if i'm wrong, but the '96 yankees, 2002 angels, 2003 marlins, and 2005 white sox all won titles with teams that could do both. i'm not saying you have to steal bases (the 2005 cardinals were last in the NL in steals), but you do need to have the ability to bunt guys over and hit and run as well as be able to draw walks and hit 3 run bombs. in the 3 one run games in the cardinals/astros series, it got lost in the dramatic home runs, but the teams who moved guys over and ran the bases better and scratched out runs won those games.
the cards are trying to build their farm system. surprisingly they do have young, cheap pitching. you'll probably see anthony reyes in the rotation next year and adam wainwright in the bullpen for long relief and spot starts. walker is retiring. i wouldn't be surprised if we spent the leftover from what we save on morris/marquis (one of the 2, or both won't be back) and walker on a big name free agent outfielder.
the cardinals get praised universally because of their ability to re-sign guys for less than market value because they want to stay in st. louis to play. i dont know what ramirez re-signed for or what lee is getting paid. lee of course is getting paid based on his production before this past season. if ramirez signed for below market value then that's a great job by the cubs. the cards get credit from everyone for their ability to do that, not just from me, although i'd be the first one to give them credit for just about anything good. the lineup and pitching staff that they put together for $90 mill. is pretty astounding.
just for some clarification. the cards had the best pitching staff in baseball this year. best team ERA and most wins by starters. the cubs do not have 3 potential 20 game winners. wood has never won 15 games in a season. i dont ever think we will see him win 15 games even if he's healthy. prior remains a question mark in my opinion because some nights i've seen him be lights out and others he's very hittable...i dont know if because he's still so young or if it's a concentration issue. i like zambrano. i hate him, but i like his stuff.
the cards were outplayed in games 2 & 6. astros were outplayed in game 1. games 3,4,5 were even and all 1run games and could've gone either way. anyone who contends that the cards were 'significantly outplayed' didn't watch the series.
re: comment
from: niv (2005-10-26 16:58:01)
phil its unbelievable that you have such an inferiority complex to the cubs. every one of your stupid half-assed arguments is just your way of getting into a pissing contest with the cubs. NOBODY CARES. except me, cuz now i'm going to figure out a way to prevent you from posting your longwinded bullshit filled tirades
re: comment
from: niv (2005-10-26 17:16:09)
Things that have ruined sports coverage in Boston for me:
1) Contrarians simply out to make a name for themselves.
Otherwise known as the “Let me say something so incredibly stupid that people can’t help but take notice and have me on their shows so I can defend my position, and get more attention and make money and then be a regular guest on those shows while I continue to say dumb things just for the sake of standing out and being different.” This is probably the biggest problem in the sports media right now. You get rewarded for being a contrarian, no matter how stupid what you say really is. It allows people with no talent to keep in the spotlight and get their names talked about.
13) I was right all along!
A proclamation is made. Usually there is very little evidence to prove this proclamation, the basis for the proclamation may even be disputed or proven to be out-and-out wrong. Weeks, months go by, and then by coincidence, the scenario described in the original proclamation actually comes about. That original statement is still dead wrong, but now the leap is made that the speaker was correct all along and now has been proven as such. He seeks vindication from any and all that will listen to him. One to look to for the future, and perhaps it is even happening now, is Borges proclaiming the Patriots championship run as a house of cards, ready to fall apart at any time. At some point, the Patriots are not going to win the Super Bowl, and Ron will be right there, telling us he was right all along. Even if that date turns out to be 2008.
source
re: comment
from: phil (2005-10-26 17:17:04)
i dont have an inferiority complex against the cubs. actually it may be a superiority complex. any rivalry is better when both teams are good. in my last post i didn't even say much about them. here's what i said:
1. zambrano has good stuff. he's a dick, but his stuff is super good (this is pretty air tight)
2. wood has never won 15 games (true). the other stuff is my opinion and i'm just going on his previous track record.
3. prior, for all of his talent has been kinda inconsistent. i dont know why this is. and i threw out a couple of possible ideas.
re: comment
from: niv (2005-10-26 18:18:28)
JonH1465 (12:05:37 AM): i read your elscorcho post from the weekend...i think that the solution to you weather problem is to move to california
JonH1465 (12:05:53 AM): and our ground beef is better
JonH1465 (12:06:14 AM): but we can't make you better at picking college football
i think asian's right....
re: superiority vs. inferiority
from: chad (2005-10-27 09:11:12)
People with superiority complexes say things like, "nice job" to teams that outperform them, cause they don't care. As a matter of fact, this is how I have been handling the entire post-season in Chicago. I congratulate Sox fans and wish them well, mostly because, somewhere, in the back of my mind, I am thinking, "You and I both know that the Indians were the much better team and that you lucked your way into the post-season, right?" People with an inferiority complex get angry and complain about meaningless things with half-assed arguments. I get this way about Northwestern when things aren't going well. Browns fans get this way about the Ravens (sorry, Geoff) because it is so painful to see the Ravens succeed when the Browns fail (thank god the Ravens suck this year). We say things like, "Ray Lewis is a murderer" or "Jamal Lewis is a drug dealer" or "all Ravens are dirty criminals" instead of focusing on things like, "The Browns are a horrible team, and the Ravens are much better," which is the truth, for now.
Now, Phil, which sounds more like what YOU are doing in regards to the Cubs? You certainly aren't quietly reflecting on how much better the Cards are and congratulating the Cubs on things like getting to the NLCS two years ago. You aren't thinking, "poor Cubs fans, they simply don't have the joy of winning that us Cardinals fans get." You are yelling and bitching and moaning and screaming about how they don't try hard enough, like some sort of spoiled 4 year old who expects mommy and daddy to buy you every toy you want, because Jimmy down the street has those toys. The problem is that you are fucking Jimmy down the street and yet you STILL have an inferiority complex.
Don't feel bad though. It isn't just you. Every Cardinals fan I know has the same complex. I think it comes from a deep desire for you to hear Chicagoans say, "you're right, we're wrong, you're better, we love you, we're sorry," when instead they just say, "hey, we love our team, and maybe we'll be healthy and get you next year."
Also, most wins by starters might be the least meaningful statistic in the history of baseball. It means things like, "our games aren't decided late" and "our offense or pitching or defense or luck is good, but your guess as to which is as good as mine..." Your staff was a fine regular season staff, but who among the Cardinals starters strikes fear into opposing lineups the way that Oswalt-Clemens-Pettitte does? Or Buerhle-Contreras-Garcia, for that matter (I refuse to acknowledge the fluke that was Garland's first half). Carpenter, maybe. But that's it. Depth is GREAT for the regular season...5 number two starters will win 3 or 4 out of 5 times. But in the post-season, it comes down to at LEAST a big two. Without that, you are sunk. And you, my friend, are without that.
Oh, and "the lineup and pitching staff that they put together for $90 mill. is pretty astounding?" Did you mean astounding as in "my god we paid 90 million dollars for a team and didn't even MAKE the World Series, let alone win it" or astounding as in "My god, how did we waste 90 million dollars?!?" National League payrolls have the Cards as the second most expensive team in the league, behind the Phillies, who are wasting 15 million a year on Jim Thome's back. Third is the Giants, who were without Schmidt for a long time and Bonds for most of the year, who are their two best players. The "why aren't they TRYING" Cubs are 4th in the NL, so I guess they are trying afterall. Everyone makes a joke out of the fact that the Red Sox and Yanks both failed to make the World Series despite their payrolls, but the fact is the Cardinals could be just as much of a punchline.
For what it's worth, your fantastic pitchers gave up 9 fewer runs than the Indians this year and your stellar lineup scored 15 more. The Indians payroll (41 million) was 51 million less than the Cards (92 million). So unless my math is wrong, for each extra run over the Indians your scored or stopped, you are paying somewhere in the area of $2,125,000. You got 7 more wins than the Indians, and played in a garbage division in the weaker league (there are 4 horrible teams in the NL Central), so those 7 wins cost you more than $7 million a pop. Astounding.
re: i just had to squeeze this in
from: ken (2005-10-27 15:43:42)
obviously i know nothing about this whole argument and can't contribute, but I just had to point out that this was hilarious
"...The problem is that you are fucking Jimmy down the street... "
goddamn i hated jimmy (his name was actually andy) when i was a kid.
re: he's back!
It's the Niv I know and love! You have been so happy for so long, I almost forgot who you were! This is great!
Actually, sorry about your crappy weekend...if it makes you feel better, mine was only minimally better and when the white sox won those two games, you didn't have to be living in Chicago. And yes, I know you are living in Boston and dealt with this last year, but at least the Red Sox fans (I hope) didn't have some inexplicable urge to make every game seem like a slap in the face to the Indians.
Stupid South Siders.