PDA

View Full Version : Today's Tribune drivel


veeter
02-12-2006, 09:56 AM
The baseball writing has now begun and Rogers continues to boggle my mind. He rates baseball's best pitching staffs; wisely and correctly he has the Sox on top. They've earned it. He then rates the cubs fourth best IN BASEBALL. What? His reasoning is they have Williams, Rusch, Rich Hill and Angel Guzman to compliment Zambrano, Prior and Wood. (Who, by the way, has no shoulder left.) IMO the Cubs MIGHT have the second best staff in their DIVISION. The cub pitching staff lie continues. He then writes of the good signings of Paul Byrd and Jason Johnson by the Tribe. He attributes their 6th overall ranking to the signing of these two journeymen. I give up.

MUsoxfan
02-12-2006, 11:18 AM
Then the Brewers must have the #2 staff in baseball, huh?:rolleyes:

TDog
02-12-2006, 12:27 PM
Cubs fans believe Williams is one of the top pitchers in the league. Likewise they project Rich Hill for stardom.

Ranking the Cubs staff so high is giving its "potential" every benefit of the doubt while ignoring the potential of other teams pitchers.

veeter
02-12-2006, 01:05 PM
Cubs fans believe Williams is one of the top pitchers in the league. Likewise they project Rich Hill for stardom.

Ranking the Cubs staff so high is giving its "potential" every benefit of the doubt while ignoring the potential of other teams pitchers.Exactly. It's always, 'If everyone just duplicates their best year ever or fulfills their potential, we'll be great.' Unfortunately that never happens. Also, when Felix Pie fails, how many can't miss guys will that make, who were over-hyped. Ty Griffin, Gary Scott, Kevin Orie, Corey Patterson, Hee Sop Choi, Kerry Wood.... the list goes on and on.

Goodman6
02-12-2006, 01:08 PM
The baseball writing has now begun and Rogers continues to boggle my mind. He rates baseball's best pitching staffs; wisely and correctly he has the Sox on top. They've earned it. He then rates the cubs fourth best IN BASEBALL. What? His reasoning is they have Williams, Rusch, Rich Hill and Angel Guzman to compliment Zambrano, Prior and Wood. (Who, by the way, has no shoulder left.) IMO the Cubs MIGHT have the second best staff in their DIVISION. The cub pitching staff lie continues. He then writes of the good signings of Paul Byrd and Jason Johnson by the Tribe. He attributes their 6th overall ranking to the signing of these two journeymen. I give up.

Good Post. I read that same article by Rogers this morning and almost puked. It is becoming more and more obvious that Kerry Wood won't be in the rotation when the season starts (there is already concern about him having another set back), so the Cubs enter the season with the following rotation:

Zambrano - a hot-head that loses his cool when he starts getting hit. Also, the only teams he beats are the NL worst teams (i.e. Pirates, Diamondbacks, Mets, Reds).
Prior - Struggled in the second half of last year after returning from yet another injury.
Maddux - Once a great pitcher, but is now a 40-yr old has-been.
J. Williams - Cubs fans thinks he is special, but don't all Cubs fans think everyone of their players are special? Williams would be the 7th starter on the White Sox, at best.
G. Rusch - If this guy was in the Sox starting rotation, I don't think the Sox would have sold 20,000 season tickets. I don't remember Rusch getting past the 4th or 5th Inning in most of his starts in the second half of last season.

Bottom line: After reading Rogers' article about the Sox and other team's rotations, the Cubs don't belong in the top 10. Ranking them 4th is a joke. But then again, isn't the Cubune's entire sports section a daily joke?

Whitesox029
02-12-2006, 01:25 PM
The baseball writing has now begun and Rogers continues to boggle my mind. He rates baseball's best pitching staffs; wisely and correctly he has the Sox on top. They've earned it. He then rates the cubs fourth best IN BASEBALL. What? His reasoning is they have Williams, Rusch, Rich Hill and Angel Guzman to compliment Zambrano, Prior and Wood. (Who, by the way, has no shoulder left.) IMO the Cubs MIGHT have the second best staff in their DIVISION. The cub pitching staff lie continues. He then writes of the good signings of Paul Byrd and Jason Johnson by the Tribe. He attributes their 6th overall ranking to the signing of these two journeymen. I give up.
At least the Sox got what we deserve. That's an improvement over previous years.

tick53
02-12-2006, 01:26 PM
The Cubs and Cubune just can't get over the fact that the Sox are World
Champs. :bandance: They're reaching as usual.

Goodman6
02-12-2006, 02:24 PM
At least the Sox got what we deserve. That's an improvement over previous years.

You are correct. However, just think what Cardinals fans would think of Rogers' article. He has the Cardinals rotation ranked 9th and slams them for replacing Morris with Ponson. He totally ignores the fact the Cardinals still have Carpenter, Mulder, Marquis and Suppan in their rotation. Carpenter, Mulder and Marquis all had better seasons that the Cubs supposed Ace, Zambrano. Regarding Ponson, I am willing to bet that almost every GM in baseball would rather have him as their 5th starter as opposed to Glendon Rusch. Despite what some people on this board may think, Rogers is just another idiot Cubs fan. He used the opportunity to slam the Cards (the other team all Cubs fans hate) because he knows he can't deny the White Sox any longer.

C-Dawg
02-12-2006, 03:36 PM
Well, you know they're not going to say anything BAD about the Cubs' staff.... They have a lot of new $60 bleacher seats to sell tickets for!

thomas35forever
02-12-2006, 10:19 PM
If the Cubs are fourth in baseball, then a lot of good pitchers like Santana and Carpenter must have declined in their offseason training.

ChiSoxGirl
02-12-2006, 11:11 PM
The baseball writing has now begun and Rogers continues to boggle my mind. He rates baseball's best pitching staffs; wisely and correctly he has the Sox on top. They've earned it. He then rates the cubs fourth best IN BASEBALL. What? His reasoning is they have Williams, Rusch, Rich Hill and Angel Guzman to compliment Zambrano, Prior and Wood. (Who, by the way, has no shoulder left.) IMO the Cubs MIGHT have the second best staff in their DIVISION. The cub pitching staff lie continues. He then writes of the good signings of Paul Byrd and Jason Johnson by the Tribe. He attributes their 6th overall ranking to the signing of these two journeymen. I give up.

I read the same thing this morning (on the back page no less!) and couldn't believe what I was seeing! I didn't know which was more surprising- the Sox pitching staff ranked #1 and FINALLY getting some media love, or the Cubs pitching staff ranked fourth overall! :?:

I read some of those names- Rusch, Hill, Williams, etc.- and wondered if that organization and its fans really believe these unproven arms can carry them to a division title, let alone anything beyond! I think they went on to say that they actually have six starters when they threw The Messiah and Wood into the mix. Wood doesn't have an arm left and The Messiah seems to be taken off the mound during his starts or skipping starts entirely because of his stellar health more often than not.

I've been saying this since the NLCS in 2003- Baker pitched The Messiah and Wood too deep into those games. Their pitch counts were consistently hovering around the 130-140 mark; all because Baker didn't have faith in his 'pen. The lack of confidence in his bullpen in the post-season is what I believe gave The Messiah and Wood chronic pitching problems. Granted, Wood hasn't done anything but win 14 games in each year since his rookie season, but didn't a lot of his arm trouble surface after October of 2003? The pitching sensation that was supposed to be Wood is in the past- that ship has sailed!

chisoxfanatic
02-12-2006, 11:15 PM
But Kerry Woods and Mark Prior are the best in MLB in simulated starts. That alone has to count for SOMETHING!!!

Hitmen77
02-13-2006, 08:42 AM
Today, they rank Dusty Baker as the 6th best manager in the majors. Dude, they're kidding us, right?


http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/chi-0602130147feb13,1,2673158.story

veeter
02-13-2006, 08:54 AM
Today, they rank Dusty Baker as the 6th best manager in the majors. Dude, they're kidding us, right?


http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/chi-0602130147feb13,1,2673158.story I saw it. The b.s. continues. Dusty Baker is one the worst field managers I've ever seen. His players love him because there's no accountability. Let me get this straight: the cubs have the fourth best pitching staff in all of baseball. The cubs have the sixth best manager in all of baseball. Yet they finished in fourth place behind the low budget Brewers last season. How is that possible?

chuckn98229
02-13-2006, 09:19 AM
I saw it. The b.s. continues. Dusty Baker is one the worst field managers I've ever seen. His players love him because there's no accountability. Let me get this straight: the cubs have the fourth best pitching staff in all of baseball. The cubs have the sixth best manager in all of baseball. Yet they finished in fourth place behind the low budget Brewers last season. How is that possible?

How is this possible, you ask? A new season means a new batch of cubbie kool-aid to quiet the restless inmates at Club Urinal. The Trib sells it and the idiots buy it up!

Dan Mega
02-13-2006, 09:36 AM
I can't seem to find the link to the article the OP is referencing (I see the coaches rankings one). Does anyone have it?

Hangar18
02-13-2006, 09:38 AM
Cubs fans believe Williams is one of the top pitchers in the league. Likewise they project Rich Hill for stardom.

Ranking the Cubs staff so high is giving its "potential" every benefit of the doubt while ignoring the potential of other teams pitchers.


I still cant believe the Giants were hoodwinked into giving up Williams
for LaTroy Hawkins.

Hangar18
02-13-2006, 09:50 AM
How is this possible, you ask? A new season means a new batch of cubbie kool-aid to quiet the restless inmates at Club Urinal. The Trib sells it and the idiots buy it up!

Thats all this is. I cant remember the last time ive seen a NEGATIVE cubs article. The Tribune exists to to Fluffy and Positive articles about the Cubs, they write 5 times as many articles about them as they do about us, and the articles they do write about the SOX, 1/2 are negative in scope. Do this for about 20 years and guess what? You have "fans" everywhere clamoring for anything cubby related. Im not surprised at all.

What I am interested in, and the MediaWatch will measure this, is how much press the SOX get this season. For most of 2005, the .500 3rd/4th place Cubs were getting 3 times the amount of coverage as the 1st Place, Best team in baseball White Sox. A FREAKING JOKE. Why? We were told it was because the Cubs got so close in 2003 .........

SOXPHILE
02-13-2006, 10:25 AM
So, let me get this straight. The Cubs have the 4th best pitching staff out of all 30 teams in baseball ??? Ahead of the Cardinals ? Now, they tell us Johnny Baker is the 6th best of of 30 managers ? Ahead of, say, a Mike Hargrove, or a Ron Gardenhire ( sp ?) ? :rolling:

I love it. Keep laying it on, TribCo. Keep lapping it up Cub fans. Johnny Baker is one of the worst managers in baseball. I've said before, and I'll say it again, I hope he remains at the helm of the lil' blue ones for a long time. However, I fear that this will probably be his last year with them, if he is not fired by August ( :(: ) as the Cubs struggle at 3-5 games under .500, and TribCo. starts printing the N.L. Wildcard standings, informing us that the Cubs are currently in 6th place in the race, and "only" 7 games back.

White Sox Randy
02-13-2006, 10:26 AM
You guys should know that everything about the cubs is "the best", including their losing.

veeter
02-13-2006, 11:11 AM
Mid- June the Lou Pinella rumors will start swirling.

Hangar18
02-13-2006, 11:46 AM
Mid- June the Lou Pinella rumors will start swirling.

Not Fair ............ I called that last year ............
Lou Piniella will have about 20 Piniella-to-Cubs stories written about him by the All-Star Break.
Book it.

veeter
02-13-2006, 12:18 PM
And if one guy does not fit the cub mananger m.o., it's Piniella. To me it would be a disaster, because Lou wouldn't stand for their company garbage. He'd get the shaft like Jim LeFebvre.

Hitmen77
02-13-2006, 01:32 PM
... Let me get this straight: the cubs have the fourth best pitching staff in all of baseball. The cubs have the sixth best manager in all of baseball. Yet they finished in fourth place behind the low budget Brewers last season. How is that possible?

Their excuse it that they are "cursed"

Smokey Burg
02-13-2006, 02:25 PM
When you've got nothing, (or not much, really) all thats left is hope. I keep waiting to hear Dusty say that "all the pieces are in place."

chisox2005
02-13-2006, 04:10 PM
Best rotations

Just wondering what everyone thought about their rankings of the top 10 rotations in baseball. I was really surprised to see the Yankees at 3, and the Cubs at 4. They have great names on paper but have shown over the last couple years to not exactly be reliable.

1. WHITE SOX: In Mark Buehrle, Jose Contreras, Freddy Garcia, Jon Garland, Javier Vazquez and Brandon McCarthy, the Sox have a collection of talented workhorses. Plus the bullpen is full of guys who could start, with Neal Cotts likely to get a chance in future seasons.

2. ATHLETICS: Billy Beane added to his team's strength by signing Esteban Loaiza. Oakland now goes seven starters deep with Barry Zito, Rich Harden, Dan Haren, Joe Blanton, Joe Kennedy, Kirk Saarloos and Loaiza, who all made at least 19 starts last season.

3. YANKEES: This is basically the same group that disappointed a year ago, but look for Carl Pavano and Jaret Wright to benefit from mulligans.

4. CUBS: Health is again the key question. But in Jerome Williams, Rich Hill, Glendon Rusch and Angel Guzman, they have guys with upside behind Carlos Zambrano, Mark Prior, Kerry Wood (recovering from shoulder surgery) and Greg Maddux.

5. TWINS: There are questions behind Johan Santana, but Brad Radke, Kyle Lohse and Carlos Silva have experience while Francisco Liriano and Scott Baker have potential.

6. INDIANS: Give GM Mark Shapiro credit for good signings in Paul Byrd and Jason Johnson, who replaced Kevin Millwood and Scott Elarton.

7. CARDINALS: This could have been a great group if management had ponied up for someone better than Sidney Ponson to replace Matt Morris.

8. RED SOX: There's a surplus on paper after the Josh Beckett trade, but Matt Clement shouldn't be your best starter, which he was in the first half a year ago. High-mileage arms are a big problem.

9. ASTROS: If Roger Clemens returns in May, this is a top-five rotation. Roy Oswalt's a beast and Andy Pettitte was very good last year.

10. BLUE JAYS: If A.J. Burnett clicks behind Roy Halladay, no one will want to play Toronto. Ted Lilly, Gustavo Chacin and Josh Towers are solid.

Ol' No. 2
02-13-2006, 04:14 PM
I don't think anyone here has an opinion on that.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=66402

PaleHoseGeorge
02-13-2006, 07:12 PM
1. WHITE SOX: In Mark Buehrle, Jose Contreras, Freddy Garcia, Jon Garland, Javier Vazquez and Brandon McCarthy, the Sox have a collection of talented workhorses. Plus the bullpen is full of guys who could start, with Neal Cotts likely to get a chance in future seasons.

2. ATHLETICS: Billy Beane added to his team's strength by signing Esteban Loaiza. Oakland now goes seven starters deep with Barry Zito, Rich Harden, Dan Haren, Joe Blanton, Joe Kennedy, Kirk Saarloos and Loaiza, who all made at least 19 starts last season.

3. YANKEES: This is basically the same group that disappointed a year ago, but look for Carl Pavano and Jaret Wright to benefit from mulligans.

4. CUBS: Health is again the key question. But in Jerome Williams, Rich Hill, Glendon Rusch and Angel Guzman, they have guys with upside behind Carlos Zambrano, Mark Prior, Kerry Wood (recovering from shoulder surgery) and Greg Maddux.

5. TWINS: There are questions behind Johan Santana, but Brad Radke, Kyle Lohse and Carlos Silva have experience while Francisco Liriano and Scott Baker have potential.

Why am I sure Ron Gardenhire and the assorted dopes writing in the Twin Cities press, are going to turn this into yet another "Chicago doesn't respect us" bit of bulletin board material?

The Cubune is priceless...

csufsoxfan
02-13-2006, 07:53 PM
whats wrong with santana

thomas35forever
02-13-2006, 10:41 PM
Are they trying to convince us that Dusty is a better manager than Francona, Garner, or Gardenhire?

fusillirob1983
02-13-2006, 10:56 PM
Are they trying to convince us that Dusty is a better manager than Francona, Garner, or Gardenhire?

I know Garner guided the Astros to the World Series, but I don't think he's that great as a manager. With that being said, I still think he's better than Dusty.

miker
02-14-2006, 01:42 PM
Are they trying to convince us that Dusty is a better manager than Francona, Garner, or Gardenhire?
Hey the players love him, and they've got his back if a lowly announcer takes a shot a him or the team (see "Stone, Steve").

Chicken Dinner
02-14-2006, 02:19 PM
Today, they rank Dusty Baker as the 6th best manager in the majors. Dude, they're kidding us, right?


http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/chi-0602130147feb13,1,2673158.story

Pretty funny!!

bigfoot
02-14-2006, 11:03 PM
Well, you know they're not going to say anything BAD about the Cubs' staff.... They have a lot of new $60 bleacher seats to sell tickets for!

Sorry CDawg, but did you mean to say ".......scalp tickets for!"?

Rooney4Prez56
02-16-2006, 10:34 AM
4. CUBS: Health is again the key question. But in Jerome Williams, Rich Hill, Glendon Rusch and Angel Guzman, they have guys with upside behind Carlos Zambrano, Mark Prior, Kerry Wood (recovering from shoulder surgery) and Greg Maddux.



Isn't Kerry Wood always recovering from shoulder problems at the start of every season? And if health is the real question, then why are they ahead of the Astros, Cards, and Twins, who all have perfectly healthy and strong rotations?

jdm2662
02-16-2006, 10:40 AM
whats wrong with santana

I don't think there is any. I think the article is saying, after Santana. There is nothing wrong with him. He's the best pitcher in the AL IMO...

ChiSoxLifer
02-16-2006, 11:54 AM
The funny thing is, today they posted an article lifted from the Houston Chronicle about how "fiscally irresponsible" the White Sox are because they have a $95 million dollar payroll. I know this article was cited in another thread but here's the link.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-0602160303feb16,1,5061213.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

GoSox2K3
02-16-2006, 01:13 PM
The funny thing is, today they posted an article lifted from the Houston Chronicle about how "fiscally irresponsible" the White Sox are because they have a $95 million dollar payroll. I know this article was cited in another thread but here's the link.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-0602160303feb16,1,5061213.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Good grief! That article is totally idiotic! Yeah, how dare the White Sox try to win another title by adding good players! They should follow the Astros lead of trying to win again by subtraction!.

And his "proof" that the Astros approach is better than the Sox? One is a claim that the White Sox aren't as good as the Yankees and Red Sox. Huh? So, the proof that spending more doesn't make you a better team is to make a claim that teams that spend even more money are even better? :nuts:

Uncle_Patrick
02-16-2006, 04:43 PM
The funny thing is, today they posted an article lifted from the Houston Chronicle about how "fiscally irresponsible" the White Sox are because they have a $95 million dollar payroll. I know this article was cited in another thread but here's the link.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-0602160303feb16,1,5061213.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

OK, I just happened to read this article and I just don't get it. The author doesn't really make any good points at all. It seems to me like this article is more to address the complaints of any Astros fan who says "Hey look at all the White Sox are doing, why aren't the Astros doing anything?" and his answer "Hey, spending money isn't everything, the Astros were good before, they'll be good again". And there's no reason to say why the Astros will be good. He assumes that they just will be.