Can we merge this with the MLB 2017 thread? There's a lot of good, active discussion there already.
I'm delighted at this turn of Cub events.
For I am a St. Louis Cardinal fan.
We know the Cubs because our team has been playing the small and inadequate bears for more than 100 years. We know that for every flash of brilliance in Wrigley Field, there will be decades of futility.
We respect the Ricketts family because they're trying to bring the Cardinal Way to Wrigley Field. But we inevitably know that despite the family's best efforts, the Cubs will continue to be the Cubs.
In St. Louis, we know that at 36-40, the Cardinals are having a crappy year. That's true even though we're well within hailing distance of the NL Central Lead. Four games out and we're talking about firing our Manager and General Manager (and probably the head of player personnel).
Some think we're spoiled and that we're not true fans because we don't support our team through futility, like Cub Fans do. But folks, understand that we're demanding fans. We expect to win. We tolerate losing, but we do so with the expectation that our team and our players (yes, even though we don't own the team, we see them as "our" players) will do their best to win and that losing is not a permanent part of Cardinal lore.
I don't even know where to begin with this stuff.
https://twitter.com/BestFansStLouis
I'm delighted at this turn of Cub events.
For I am a St. Louis Cardinal fan.
We know the Cubs because our team has been playing the small and inadequate bears for more than 100 years. We know that for every flash of brilliance in Wrigley Field, there will be decades of futility.
We respect the Ricketts family because they're trying to bring the Cardinal Way to Wrigley Field. But we inevitably know that despite the family's best efforts, the Cubs will continue to be the Cubs.
In St. Louis, we know that at 36-40, the Cardinals are having a crappy year. That's true even though we're well within hailing distance of the NL Central Lead. Four games out and we're talking about firing our Manager and General Manager (and probably the head of player personnel).
Some think we're spoiled and that we're not true fans because we don't support our team through futility, like Cub Fans do. But folks, understand that we're demanding fans. We expect to win. We tolerate losing, but we do so with the expectation that our team and our players (yes, even though we don't own the team, we see them as "our" players) will do their best to win and that losing is not a permanent part of Cardinal lore.
StL Cardinals fans are to MLB what GB Packers fans are to the NFL.
StL Cardinals fans are to MLB what GB Packers fans are to the NFL.
And cub fans are like Bears fans. Win one title and talk about it for the rest of your life like the team is still meaningful.
I'm guessing dumping a catcher will fix things, though. If Joe could just get a few more guys to play a few more positions, that would help, too. ;D ;D
And cub fans are like Bears fans. Win one title and talk about it for the rest of your life like the team is still meaningful.
I'm guessing dumping a catcher will fix things, though. If Joe could just get a few more guys to play a few more positions, that would help, too. ;D ;D
StL Cardinals fans are to MLB what GB Packers fans are to the NFL.
Apparently, the Cubs visited the White House/Trump Today. This after they did the same in January with Obama.
Has any team ever had two WH visits before?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-cubs-joe-maddon-white-house-20170627-story.html
The only titles that have me "worried" (and not really worried, but just still want to see before I die) are a Marquette National Title..... My hope is that we will be in the running for the first by 2019.
Today's visit is an informal visit because they're in DC and the opportunity was presented to them. Maddon wasn't even sure if they'd be meeting with the President. The Ricketts' family also has some close ties to the Commander in Chief so there's that too. It's not a second "championship celebration" visit.
Hope they got lots of Orange Creep juice on them.
Does this visit mean that Maddon has to lie to Cub fans every day?
What's going on with Almora's left hand?
What's going on with Almora's left hand?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDbo4oNUwAANiik.jpg)
What's going on with Almora's left hand?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDbo4oNUwAANiik.jpg)
I'm delighted at this turn of Cub events.
For I am a St. Louis Cardinal fan.
We know the Cubs because our team has been playing the small and inadequate bears for more than 100 years. We know that for every flash of brilliance in Wrigley Field, there will be decades of futility.
We respect the Ricketts family because they're trying to bring the Cardinal Way to Wrigley Field. But we inevitably know that despite the family's best efforts, the Cubs will continue to be the Cubs.
In St. Louis, we know that at 36-40, the Cardinals are having a crappy year. That's true even though we're well within hailing distance of the NL Central Lead. Four games out and we're talking about firing our Manager and General Manager (and probably the head of player personnel).
Some think we're spoiled and that we're not true fans because we don't support our team through futility, like Cub Fans do. But folks, understand that we're demanding fans. We expect to win. We tolerate losing, but we do so with the expectation that our team and our players (yes, even though we don't own the team, we see them as "our" players) will do their best to win and that losing is not a permanent part of Cardinal lore.
As a person with no horse in the race - not a fan of any MLB team, nor a hater of any MLB team - I don't think Cardinals fans are in a position to gloat here.
The Cubs kicked their butts in the 2015 playoffs, and then the Cubs won the 2016 World Series. Plus, just about any objective baseball observer still thinks the Cubs have more going for them as an organization than the Cardinals do (better young talent, better farm system, more money available to spend, etc). Sports is the ultimate "what have you done for me lately?" deal.
So you certainly are free to think the Cardinals have some kind of edge over the Cubs because of history, but what happened in 2011 or 1982 or 1967 doesn't have much relevance now. Not a single Cub or a single Cardinal were alive in 1967, and only a handful were even alive in 1982.
As a person with no horse in the race - not a fan of any MLB team, nor a hater of any MLB team - I don't think Cardinals fans are in a position to gloat here.
The Cubs kicked their butts in the 2015 playoffs, and then the Cubs won the 2016 World Series. Plus, just about any objective baseball observer still thinks the Cubs have more going for them as an organization than the Cardinals do (better young talent, better farm system, more money available to spend, etc). Sports is the ultimate "what have you done for me lately?" deal.
So you certainly are free to think the Cardinals have some kind of edge over the Cubs because of history, but what happened in 2011 or 1982 or 1967 doesn't have much relevance now. Not a single Cub or a single Cardinal were alive in 1967, and only a handful were even alive in 1982.
Other than to give me a nostalga buzz, I agree with you on 1967, 1982, 2011 or any number of other Cardinals World Championships.
But I have listened to enough Cub fans blow crap because we won't put up with losing. We're not loyal, they tell me. Not true baseball fans. But the measure of the organization is the will to win consistently and to make every effort to put the best product you can on the field. That, my friends, is the Cardinal Way.
Why does it matter. Because you could put the West Allis Little League intramural squad on the field at Wrigley and draw 35,000. But when the Cardinals suck and the team gives up, there aren't 1,000 people there. Expecting an organization that respects the fan, puts a quality product on the field and then retools and repairs when things don't happen is the Cardinal way.
Until the Ricketts adopted the Cardinal Way for their own hapless franchise, the small bears were willing to clip coupons, throw open the gates and invite 35,000 to a show the local Little League could beat. So while I do have a warm spot for true, long-suffering Cub fans, I take this notion of a dynasty in the same vein as I do the Hillbilly's promise to stay at Marquette as long as we would have him.
The Cardinal way is living in fantasy world where they are the Yankees of the National League when in fact they are nowhere close. Pathetic excuse for a dynasty.
As a Brewers fan I totally disagree. Sure, the Cubs have had better seasons the last 2 years. But the Cardinals are head and shoulders the better organization. It'd be like saying Providence is a better basketball program than Marquette because the last 2 years they've been the better team. Sure, but the complete and total domination not just head to head but overall by Marquette as a program vs. Providence as a program both in the more recent (last decade?) past and the overall history of the programs is so far in Marquette's favor it's not even close.
Other than to give me a nostalga buzz, I agree with you on 1967, 1982, 2011 or any number of other Cardinals World Championships.
But I have listened to enough Cub fans blow crap because we won't put up with losing. We're not loyal, they tell me. Not true baseball fans. But the measure of the organization is the will to win consistently and to make every effort to put the best product you can on the field. That, my friends, is the Cardinal Way.
Why does it matter. Because you could put the West Allis Little League intramural squad on the field at Wrigley and draw 35,000. But when the Cardinals suck and the team gives up, there aren't 1,000 people there. Expecting an organization that respects the fan, puts a quality product on the field and then retools and repairs when things don't happen is the Cardinal way.
Until the Ricketts adopted the Cardinal Way for their own hapless franchise, the small bears were willing to clip coupons, throw open the gates and invite 35,000 to a show the local Little League could beat. So while I do have a warm spot for true, long-suffering Cub fans, I take this notion of a dynasty in the same vein as I do the Hillbilly's promise to stay at Marquette as long as we would have him.
Recent years - and the future - are all that matters. The Cubs have had the better of it recently and most baseball observers seem to believe the Cubs are very well positioned for the future. Many believe that Theo is doing in Chicago exactly what he did in Boston - setting up the franchise for many years of being solid contenders.
Hey, I was as skeptical as anybody, having lived in Chicago for 16 years and having witnessed "this time it's different" many times in Cubbieland - only to see it was never different. But now it really IS different. For the first time in more than a century, they have something every other team in baseball wants!
Rather than your Providence/Marquette analogy, I'll counter with a baseball analogy: Were the Yankees a "better organization" than the Cardinals in 1966 because the Yankees had been a dynasty for decades ending in 1964? For that matter, are the Giants a "better organization" now than the Cubs are? If so, where's the proof?
Your defense of the Cardinals is funny given that just a couple of posts later you attack "the Cardinal way." (And I agree with most of your points.) I guess you simply hate the Cubs that much.
The advantage I have over others in these kinds of debates is that I literally don't give a crap who wins and who loses. If the Cubs finish first or last, the Brewers finish first or last or the Cardinals finish first or last ... none of it is skin off my teeth. I am the ultimate "objective observer" in baseball discussions because I have absolutely no horse in the race. I just like baseball and have followed it closely for 40+ years.
I hate the Cardinals quite a bit more than I hate the Cubs. For most my life the Cubs are one of the few organizations that have been nearly as irrelevant as the Brewers. The Cardinals, however, have always been the team everyone was trying to catch. Their fans, players, managers, and front office alike are by and large pompous d-bags. But I'm not naïve enough to pretend that because one organization that has been more or less completely awful for over a century had 2 seasons where they were better than an organization that for decades has been the cream of the crop in the division they are suddenly a better organization. They had 2 great years. We are now half way through the season and they are a .500 team. If they spend the next decade consistently competing for the division title and making WS runs while the Cardinals fall back to consistently missing the Playoffs then we can talk about the Cubs being a better organization that the Cardinals. Until then it's not even close.
I was nearly 25 years away from being born in 1966 and I'm sure the game was very different, so I'm not certain I can really say who a better organization was back in the mid 60s. But yes, the Giants are 100x the organization the Cubs are. One bad year compared to one good year means very little in the grand scheme of things. Maybe that's why those fan bases do become such pompous d bags. Because when the Cubs finally win 1 WS title in 108 years they act like suddenly they're God's gift to baseball. The Cubs over the last 3 years have been great. They also were great in 2008 and 2 years later were last in the division. They have a long, long way to go to compare to the Cardinals, or to the Giants.
Just because I call things for what they are doesn't mean it's blind Chicago hatred. "Oh my gosh wadesworld, quit talking about Jay Cutler being bad, his arm is incredible, if he could just get an offensive coordinator to stay in place he'd be right up there with the best QBs in the league! You're just such a blind Chicago hater if you can't see his only problem is the lack of a consistent system!" (Oh wait, he's now calling football games from the booth). "Oh my gosh wadesworld, you think that the Cubs winning the WS one time in the last 108 years doesn't make them the greatest organization in baseball! Just blind hatred for all things Chicago obviously!"
No. There's more to organizational success than 1 title.
If you had to bet your life on the Cubs, Giants or Cardinals being the best franchise (i.e. most wins, playoff appearances, pennants, championships, etc) over the next 5 years, which team would you pick?
Nah. The Cardinal way is b!tching about opponents admiring their home runs when you have this dude on your team:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcAnpC-U6gU
Speaking of that dude, the Cardinal way is roiding up like no other, along with Mac and many more.
The Cardinal way is driving drunk.
And stealing other organization's files.
And then pretending everything you do is perfect and nobody can live up to your moral standards.
THAT is the Cardinal way.
I hate the Cardinals quite a bit more than I hate the Cubs. For most my life the Cubs are one of the few organizations that have been nearly as irrelevant as the Brewers. The Cardinals, however, have always been the team everyone was trying to catch. Their fans, players, managers, and front office alike are by and large pompous d-bags. But I'm not naïve enough to pretend that because one organization that has been more or less completely awful for over a century had 2 seasons where they were better than an organization that for decades has been the cream of the crop in the division they are suddenly a better organization. They had 2 great years. We are now half way through the season and they are a .500 team. If they spend the next decade consistently competing for the division title and making WS runs while the Cardinals fall back to consistently missing the Playoffs then we can talk about the Cubs being a better organization that the Cardinals. Until then it's not even close.
I was nearly 25 years away from being born in 1966 and I'm sure the game was very different, so I'm not certain I can really say who a better organization was back in the mid 60s. But yes, the Giants are 100x the organization the Cubs are. One bad year compared to one good year means very little in the grand scheme of things. Maybe that's why those fan bases do become such pompous d bags. Because when the Cubs finally win 1 WS title in 108 years they act like suddenly they're God's gift to baseball. The Cubs over the last 3 years have been great. They also were great in 2008 and 2 years later were last in the division. They have a long, long way to go to compare to the Cardinals, or to the Giants.
Just because I call things for what they are doesn't mean it's blind Chicago hatred. "Oh my gosh wadesworld, quit talking about Jay Cutler being bad, his arm is incredible, if he could just get an offensive coordinator to stay in place he'd be right up there with the best QBs in the league! You're just such a blind Chicago hater if you can't see his only problem is the lack of a consistent system!" (Oh wait, he's now calling football games from the booth). "Oh my gosh wadesworld, you think that the Cubs winning the WS one time in the last 108 years doesn't make them the greatest organization in baseball! Just blind hatred for all things Chicago obviously!"
No. There's more to organizational success than 1 title.
Agreed to there being more to organizational success than 1 title.
The rest is merely your opinion, which you obviously are allowed to state.
The Steelers were a dynasty in the 1970s and the 49ers were a laughingstock. In 1978 and 1979, the Steelers went on to win two MORE Super Bowls while the 49ers went 2-14 each season. The 49ers had NEVER won a championship, and they won only two playoff games in their first 31 years as an NFL franchise.
Only an insane person would argue that there was any chance in hell that the 49ers would become the team of the '80s and the Steelers would fade to mediocrity.
That's sports. Things change. Even the Cubs win the World Series. Even the Cavs win the NBA title.
To argue that the Cardinals aren't just the better franchise but are "head and shoulders above" the team that has schooled them the last two seasons and seems to be better positioned for future success ... that doesn't make sense to me.
Even one year ago at this team, I might have nodded my head in agreement at "the Cubs are the Cubs are the Cubs." But, as the Red Sox showed in the aughts, winning one World Series can help transform a franchise. Will the Cubs do what the Red Sox did? We don't know. I am not claiming there are any guarantees. I just think your judgment is a little clouded here.
Their fans, players, managers, and front office alike are by and large pompous d-bags.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. If the Cubs and the Cards had very similar histories in both the past decade and in the more distant past then sure, I think you could argue the Cubs are the better organization. But the fact of the matter is the Cardinals won the division as recently as 2 years ago (something that I would put more stock in than a team winning the Wild Card, beating their division champion on the Divisional Round, and then losing in the Championship Round), won a World Series in the last decade, and are 4 years removed from their last World Series appearance. Since 2000 they've made 12 Playoff appearances, won 2 World Series, and been in 2 other World Series. Compare that to the Cubs who have 4 Playoff appearances, 1 World Series win, and no other WS appearances since 2000 and it's laughable to even consider the Cubs even remotely close to the Cardinals. Again, if the Cubs go on to win 6 of the next 10 division titles and get another WS or 2 in there while the Cards are at best mediocre, sure, let's have the discussion. Until the Cubs have 1 big season? Come on.
You put a lot of weight into the Cards' NL Central titles and postseason appearances, but a couple hours earlier when discussing team success, you stated that 2-5 years after the fact, you won't know or care about playoff appearances.
You also defined success as "legitimate chances to win a title" but claim that winning the division but losing in the Divisional Round is a better accomplishment than getting to the NLCS. So winning the division gives you a better chance to win a title than going to the WS as a Wild Card?
Your thoughts are all over the board here, wades.
Wait, I must've missed it. The Cubs actually beat the Mets in the 2015 NLCS? ::) No, they didn't. They lost. In my opinion, in a baseball series sometimes the better team doesn't win the series. Unlike in basketball when the better team nearly always wins the series. Over the course of a 162 game season if a team wins 100 games they're usually better than the rest of the teams in their division, but it doesn't mean that one of the other teams in their division can't get hot and win 3 out of 5 games.
But sure. The Cubs are a better organization than the Cardinals. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
If we're talking since 2016? We'll agree there. ANY time prior to that? It's beyond laughable.
Wait, I must've missed it. The Cubs actually beat the Mets in the 2015 NLCS? ::)
I didn't say that the Cubs beat the Mets. My inference was that you thought winning the division was more of an accomplishment than making a run as a Wild Card.
Nothing else you wrote addressed my points. Also, despite your 5 smiley faces, I never said that the Cubs were a better organization than the Cardinals. My question was whether or not division titles and playoff appearances actually matter in terms of "success" or if only championships matter. You went both ways on that so I'm just trying to figure out if you have a stance or if you just go with whatever fits your narrative at the time.
Over the course of a 162 game season if a team wins 100 games they're usually better than the rest of the teams in their division, but it doesn't mean that one of the other teams in their division can't get hot and win 3 out of 5 games.
I hate the Cardinals quite a bit more than I hate the Cubs. For most my life the Cubs are one of the few organizations that have been nearly as irrelevant as the Brewers. The Cardinals, however, have always been the team everyone was trying to catch. Their fans, players, managers, and front office alike are by and large pompous d-bags. But I'm not naïve enough to pretend that because one organization that has been more or less completely awful for over a century had 2 seasons where they were better than an organization that for decades has been the cream of the crop in the division they are suddenly a better organization. They had 2 great years. We are now half way through the season and they are a .500 team. If they spend the next decade consistently competing for the division title and making WS runs while the Cardinals fall back to consistently missing the Playoffs then we can talk about the Cubs being a better organization that the Cardinals. Until then it's not even close.
I was nearly 25 years away from being born in 1966 and I'm sure the game was very different, so I'm not certain I can really say who a better organization was back in the mid 60s. But yes, the Giants are 100x the organization the Cubs are. One bad year compared to one good year means very little in the grand scheme of things. Maybe that's why those fan bases do become such pompous d bags. Because when the Cubs finally win 1 WS title in 108 years they act like suddenly they're God's gift to baseball. The Cubs over the last 3 years have been great. They also were great in 2008 and 2 years later were last in the division. They have a long, long way to go to compare to the Cardinals, or to the Giants.
Just because I call things for what they are doesn't mean it's blind Chicago hatred. "Oh my gosh wadesworld, quit talking about Jay Cutler being bad, his arm is incredible, if he could just get an offensive coordinator to stay in place he'd be right up there with the best QBs in the league! You're just such a blind Chicago hater if you can't see his only problem is the lack of a consistent system!" (Oh wait, he's now calling football games from the booth). "Oh my gosh wadesworld, you think that the Cubs winning the WS one time in the last 108 years doesn't make them the greatest organization in baseball! Just blind hatred for all things Chicago obviously!"
No. There's more to organizational success than 1 title.
I would put my money on none of those 3 organizations winning a World Series in the next 5 years. And 5 (or 2) years after that, I won't remember, nor care, who had more Playoff appearances or overall wins.
But if I had to pick 1 team to have what I would say is the "most success" (legitimate chances to win a title) I'd say the Giants.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. If the Cubs and the Cards had very similar histories in both the past decade and in the more distant past then sure, I think you could argue the Cubs are the better organization. But the fact of the matter is the Cardinals won the division as recently as 2 years ago (something that I would put more stock in than a team winning the Wild Card, beating their division champion on the Divisional Round, and then losing in the Championship Round), won a World Series in the last decade, and are 4 years removed from their last World Series appearance. Since 2000 they've made 12 Playoff appearances, won 2 World Series, and been in 2 other World Series. Compare that to the Cubs who have 4 Playoff appearances, 1 World Series win, and no other WS appearances since 2000 and it's laughable to even consider the Cubs even remotely close to the Cardinals. Again, if the Cubs go on to win 6 of the next 10 division titles and get another WS or 2 in there while the Cards are at best mediocre, sure, let's have the discussion. Until the Cubs have 1 big season? Come on.
What logical baseball reason do you have for picking the Giants in this scenario?
I'm delighted at this turn of Cub events.
For I am a St. Louis Cardinal fan.
We know the Cubs because our team has been playing the small and inadequate bears for more than 100 years. We know that for every flash of brilliance in Wrigley Field, there will be decades of futility.
We respect the Ricketts family because they're trying to bring the Cardinal Way to Wrigley Field. But we inevitably know that despite the family's best efforts, the Cubs will continue to be the Cubs.
In St. Louis, we know that at 36-40, the Cardinals are having a crappy year. That's true even though we're well within hailing distance of the NL Central Lead. Four games out and we're talking about firing our Manager and General Manager (and probably the head of player personnel).
Some think we're spoiled and that we're not true fans because we don't support our team through futility, like Cub Fans do. But folks, understand that we're demanding fans. We expect to win. We tolerate losing, but we do so with the expectation that our team and our players (yes, even though we don't own the team, we see them as "our" players) will do their best to win and that losing is not a permanent part of Cardinal lore.
Because in 2008 they won 72 games and 2 years later they were World Series champions. In 2013 they won 76 games and in 2014 they were World Series champions. They've been there, they've done that. If I had to put money on one of the Cardinals, Giants, or Cubs winning a WS in the next 5 years it'd be on the team that has been the most consistently successful over the past 10 years.
Okay. Cubs fans really want 2015. Congrats, you were better in 2015 if you want it that bad. So you were better each of the last 2 years. Which makes up nearly all of your time being better than the Cardinals in the last 100 years.
03 08?
Well that's not a very bright approach.
After I buy you a shot of Crown at Soft Pines this summer, I am going to do my duty as a Cubs fan and kick you in the nuts. :o. ;)
Thanks for the advice. I think the Giants know what they're doing. Just like the Packers, Patriots, Spurs, etc.
But if we want to put a friendly Scoop wager on it I'm all for it. I'll take the Giants and you can pick one of the Cubs or Cards. Whatever team wins the most WS over the next 5 years wins the bet. Loser can donate money to a charity of the winner's choice. If neither team wins one neither person wins.
Right. So 2 of the 4ish years they've been better.
The fact Cubs fans actually think they have an argument for being better than the Cardinals organization says everything anyone needs to know about Chicago sports fans. It's not remotely close.
I'm kind of a big dude LOL
I'm kind of a big dude LOL
PS I saw an article at work from early this year that Arrieta's average fastball was down 2.6 MPH from last year to this year, the biggest drop in the majors of any starter by 0.9 MPH. Now that could've changed recently, but that is definitely one of those things that just makes you scratch your head...
What logical baseball reason do you have for picking the Giants in this scenario?
In his defense, nut shots are the great equilizer
Right. So 2 of the 4ish years they've been better.
The fact Cubs fans actually think they have an argument for being better than the Cardinals organization says everything anyone needs to know about Chicago sports fans. It's not remotely close.
As a Cubs fan, it's ridiculous to say the organization has been historically better than St. Louis. But to say that since Ricketts took over and Epstein has come on board that it is as good of or a better organization is completely legitimate. That's not to denigrate St. Louis, either.
Where are the Cubs fans who are making this argument?
As a Cubs fan, it's ridiculous to say the organization has been historically better than St. Louis.
The Cubs have been the better organization for one whole year. Definitely not "since Ricketts took over and Epstein has come on board."
So all the arguments from Cubs fans are...because they agree? Interesting.
It's really not all that hard to comprehend. The Cubs need to go roughly the next decade of consistently competing for WS titles with the Cardinals being mediocre for much of that decade to even be in the picture as on the same organizational level as the Cardinals. Could they get there? Sure. Are they set up to be successful over the next decade? Looks like they should be. But am I just going to say, "Well, they won a WS and it looks like they're set up to succeed for a while, so forget the 108 years prior to that, the Cubs are right there with the Cards now?" Nope. It really has nothing to do with "being a blind Chicago sports hater" and everything to do with...well, the fact that the Cubs have largely been a joke of an organization for a century while the Cardinals have been one of the two best NL organizations. How there can be any debate about that is completely baffling. But I guess Chicago fans agree but just want to argue...
This statement, WHICH YOU QUOTED, goes against your argument. No matter how matter times you write it, there are no Cubs fans making the argument that the Cubs have been a better franchise than the Cardinals. The point is that the Cubs have been one of the best teams in baseball for the last 2 seasons and they're trending in the right direction. The Cardinals have fallen back the last 2 seasons, missing the postseason last year and likely doing the same this year.
Since Theo took over, the Cubs have 1 NL Central title, a Wild Card berth, an NL Pennant and a World Series title (despite tanking for 3 of his 5 seasons) while the Cardinals have 3 NL Central titles, a Wild Card berth and a pennant. StL has the advantage in postseason appearances but the Cubs have the advantage in that they've won the World Series. The argument is "which franchise is in the better position right now and looks to be in a better position going forward" as opposed to your false claim that Cubs fans think their franchise has been better historically.
The Cubs are a whopping 2.5 games better than the Cardinals this year. Less games than what the Cardinals beat the Cubs by in 2015 yet the Cubs were the better team...
You've created so many strawmen in this topic that it's turning all of Scoop into a fire hazard.
Good thing we have multiple resident firemen.
The Cubs have been the better organization for one whole year. Definitely not "since Ricketts took over and Epstein has come on board."
So all the arguments from Cubs fans are...because they agree? Interesting.
It's really not all that hard to comprehend. The Cubs need to go roughly the next decade of consistently competing for WS titles with the Cardinals being mediocre for much of that decade to even be in the picture as on the same organizational level as the Cardinals. Could they get there? Sure. Are they set up to be successful over the next decade? Looks like they should be. But am I just going to say, "Well, they won a WS and it looks like they're set up to succeed for a while, so forget the 108 years prior to that, the Cubs are right there with the Cards now?" Nope. It really has nothing to do with "being a blind Chicago sports hater" and everything to do with...well, the fact that the Cubs have largely been a joke of an organization for a century while the Cardinals have been one of the two best NL organizations. How there can be any debate about that is completely baffling. But I guess Chicago fans agree but just want to argue...
You're the type that just goes down with your ship regardless of the quality of your argument, huh?
When the argument is Cubs organization vs. Cardinals organization when all the Cubs have is one season on them? Yup. I'll go down with that ship!
I'm really confused how someone could argue the Cardinals aren't the premier team in all of baseball for the last decade and a change. Everyone thought they'd fall off once La Russa left.
The Cubs have been exceptionally well run since Theo. They were, in many respects, a better small market team than the Brewers. Focused on the draft and cheap controllable talent, and they look primed. But to reach STL's level, they'll need to win or compete for a few more. Sustrightbility is the name of the game.
I expect the Cubs to trade for Alex Avila any day now. The question is who they will give up.
in other news, the sears tower refuses to allow cub fans on the elevator
anastasio must be pinching himself.
I know there's a lot of baseball left, but that happened quickly...(http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/photo/2017/0727/r236678_1280x720_16-9.png&cquality=80)
I expect the Cubs to trade for Alex Avila any day now. The question is who they will give up.Quick! PM me tomorrow's Powerball numbers. I'll give you a commission I promise.
Quick! PM me tomorrow's Powerball numbers. I'll give you a commission I promise.
(http://a.espncdn.com/media/motion/2017/0927/dm_170927_mlb_cubs_win_central/dm_170927_mlb_cubs_win_central.jpg)
(http://a.espncdn.com/media/motion/2017/0927/dm_170927_mlb_cubs_win_central/dm_170927_mlb_cubs_win_central.jpg)
(http://a.espncdn.com/media/motion/2017/0927/dm_170927_mlb_cubs_win_central/dm_170927_mlb_cubs_win_central.jpg)
(http://a.espncdn.com/media/motion/2017/0927/dm_170927_mlb_cubs_win_central/dm_170927_mlb_cubs_win_central.jpg)
3 (NLDS) + 4 (NLCS) + 4 (World Series) = 11
(http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/mark-grudzielanek-of-the-chicago-cubs-is-tagged-out-at-homeplate-by-picture-id3221654)
Extremely tough series ahead. Nats are a great team.
The Nats also have Dusty, which can occasionally negate a team's greatness.
Classic Wades. Sad.
I just can't wait until Murphy runs into one in his first at bat tonight. That'll bring back some memories...That would be soul crushing because then they might take back the Cubs World Series Championship from last ye...wait no they can’t ever take it back!
That would be soul crushing because then they might take back the Cubs World Series Championship from last ye...wait no they can’t ever take it back!
I can move on to other major world issues like will MU ever win a National Championship during my “college basketball lifetime”. (Sorry, the Magic/Bird Championship is as far back as my memories of college basketball go).
Now that they have one I can move on to other major world issues like will MU ever win a National Championship during my “college basketball lifetime”. (Sorry, the Magic/Bird Championship is as far back as my memories of college basketball go).
That's where I'm at, led to someone accusing me of being sexist two nights ago because I said that a USA Men's World Cup would mean more to me than a Women's World Cup win. She started ranting about what a terrible person it made me, but I've seen the Women win three World Cups, I've never seen the Men even make the semi-finals.
For me, the remaining titles that would really get me excited are Marquette Men's basketball, Marquette Women's basketball, USA Men's World Cup, and Reading FC winning any significant trophy (FA or Carling Cup, or whatever they call that now).
And the womans world cup is kind of a joke in itself. Since the US is the only one who puts an actual product on the field. I remember the girls from Japan that one year that won were basically semi pro and practiced after work.
You just can't handle the fact that from a relative standpoint, the women are a better team.
Kind of like Marquette basketball. ;D
And the womans world cup is kind of a joke in itself. Since the US is the only one who puts an actual product on the field. I remember the girls from Japan that one year that won were basically semi pro and practiced after work.
The Women actually have a decent field now. Not every team, but Sweden, Germany, Brazil all play tough and fairly attractive football. Even Canada is pretty solid. Many European clubs have started professional women's teams and the USA has the pro league that is somehow still surviving. We were definitely miles ahead to start because of Title IX, but the world is catching up.
3 (NLDS) + 4 (NLCS) + 4 (World Series) = 11
(http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/mark-grudzielanek-of-the-chicago-cubs-is-tagged-out-at-homeplate-by-picture-id3221654)
Fat broad gonna belt it out, ai na?
Not worried one damn bit.
Happ 22
Russell 23
Almora 23
Baez 24
Schwarber 24
Bryant 25
Contreras 25
Rizzo 27
The problem for the Cubs this offseason is who would they spend money on for pitching? The best starter on the market is someone they will most likely let walk (Arrieta), the other options aren't great (Cobb, Lynn, maybe Tanaka, maybe Cuteo). The best reliever is someone they will most likely let walk (Davis), and the rest of the relief market this winter is bad.
The problem for the Cubs this offseason is who would they spend money on for pitching? The best starter on the market is someone they will most likely let walk (Arrieta), the other options aren't great (Cobb, Lynn, maybe Tanaka, maybe Cuteo). The best reliever is someone they will most likely let walk (Davis), and the rest of the relief market this winter is bad.
They'll probably have to trade some combo of Happ/Baez/Almora to pick up pitching.
My other concern for the Cubs is Lester's going to be 34 going into next year. I don't think he'll be bad, but he does have a lot of innings on his arm.
I'll be interested to see how they approach this offseason. Obviously next year's free agent class is loaded and easier to address needs next year. They'll have some arb eligible guys coming up in the next couple of years. Curious if they conserve on spending this offseason, roll the dice on their core, pick up a pitcher, and focus more on 2019 than 2018 for the future of their team.
The Cubs have their 1-2-3 starters in Hendricks, Lester and Quintana so I don't think they'd be looking at a high-priced, long-term guy. Arrieta is gone unless there's no huge payday out there for him and the Cubs can bring him back on a reasonable 2-3-year deal. I'd put my money on Cobb joining the Cubs. I also tend to think that the ineptitude of the Cubs' bullpen this postseason may have made bringing back Davis a top priority. Davis was believed to be a stop-gap for this season with Edwards taking over next season, but Edwards' control issues and inconsistency likely cost him that opportunity. There's also Justin Wilson out there who was excellent for 3.5 years before being awful for a couple months with the Cubs (though his FIP was good). He was another potential closer who crashed and burned down the stretch.
Another guy who I wouldn't be surprised to see dealt for pitching is Addison Russell. Baez can handle SS and Happ can be an everyday 2B who occasionally plays in the OF, a la Zobrist. Happ also probably has the most potential to be a solid lead-off hitter.
There are obviously some upgrades needed but they should still be one of the favorites in the NL.
Darvish is out there as well.
There's also Justin Wilson out there who was excellent for 3.5 years before being awful for a couple months with the Cubs (though his FIP was good). He was another potential closer who crashed and burned down the stretch.
He hits a HR every 9-10 games,
He hits a HR every 4.3 games.
He hits a HR every 4.3 games.
But MU82s assessment of his fielding is spot on. It's like watching a newborn giraffe out there.He plays the outfield like a catcher in a slow pitch softball league.
But MU82s assessment of his fielding is spot on. It's like watching a newborn giraffe out there.
He plays the outfield like a catcher in a slow pitch softball league.
He is an average fielder. He has a decent arm.
Yes he dropped one badly against the dodgers but you’re wrong to use that as the incident to define his worth to humanity.
That’s what hack fans on message boards do. Glad no one around here is like that :)
Can you point out where someone tried to define Schwarbs' humanity?
You mean other than calling up a newborn giraffe?
You mean other than calling up a newborn giraffe?
Seriously? Comparing someone's movement to the way an animal moves is "defining their humanity"?
Now who's the snowflake?
In Russian basements, they are very sensitive to giraffes being insulted.
Can we get a list of metaphors to avoid? I don't want any south East African mammals being triggered on this board. They tend to charge.
*simile
simile
[sim-uh-lee]
noun
a figure of speech in which two unlike things are explicitly compared, as in “she is like a rose.”
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/014/033/knowing.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/zC0k1Qp.gif)
I doubt he'd go for it but I would try talking Shohei Otani into coming to the Cubs. He can play with similarly aged players for the next 4-5 years.
Unfortunately hes perfect for the AL. He can DH on days he's nott pitching.
He is an average fielder. He has a decent arm.
The Cubs are in international penalty and can only.offer him 300k. While the international marlet has changed and noone can offer unlimited money, this seems to be unrealistic. But who knows. Theo always finds the loopholes.
People have discussed the possibility of offering him a lucrative extension quickly as a way of circumventing the current $300K limit, although I imagine MLB will be watching that closely.
He is an average fielder.
People have discussed the possibility of offering him a lucrative extension quickly as a way of circumventing the current $300K limit, although I imagine MLB will be watching that closely.
If he truly wants to hit, I have to imagine that gives an AL team an advantage in terms of signing him because of the DH.
It's time the DH is league-wide. It's instances like this when teams aren't necessarily on a level playing field when signing players.
Thats a pretty rare case.
In the AL, do teams have to use a designated hitter? Or could Otani hit on days he is pitching.
No, AL teams don’t have to use a DH.
Correct me if I'm wrong, though - if they decline use of a DH, that's for the game. Can't plug in a DH for innings 6-9
Correct. If you give up the DH, you cannot assign one later on.