Fresh off the Odenigbo signing, word is now out that former Proviso East star Kyle Prater is choosing between NU and Wisconsin as schools to transfer to from USC. The fact that he's leaving USC was widely reported yesterday. The source for his interst in NU and UW? None other than his mom, in comments reported by the Trib, in which she emphasizes the importance of academics to their decision:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-praters-plan-northwestern-or-wisconsin-20120110,0,4833453.story

Still not convinced? Ok, here's what Prater himself supposedly said as reported by Scout.com:

“I’m hoping to be somewhere pretty soon,” Prater said in an interview with Scout.com. “I’m looking to play in state, at maybe Illinois, Wisconsin or Northwestern.”

http://northwestern.scout.com/2/1147174.html

(Cut him some slack on "in state" and Wisconsin; obviously he means close to home as opposed to someplace like Southern Cal).

Continue reading this post »

I know it’s fashionable to dump on Angelo, and he certainly deserves to shoulder the blame for the chronic failure to build up a competent offensive line despite having tons of cap room this offseason. But I think he gets a bad rap over the draft history.

I’ll get to the first rounders in a second, but lets start by acknowledging that the man drafted two absolute studs, and potential hall of famers OUTSIDE the first round (Briggs in round 3, and Hester in round 2). And, he got a whole bunch of other quality picks in rounds 2 – 7 over the years:

Continue reading this post »

I keep reading that the Cubs-Rays trade had two top prospects (Archer and Lee) plus some middling guys.  Well, if you step back to just the very recent past, then it had three top prospects.  Who's the third?  Garza, who was Baseball America's number 21 prospect heading into 2007, ahead of guys like Clayton Kershaw, Billy Butler, Ryan Braun, Jacoby Ellsbury, Joey Votto, Ubaldo Jiminez and Clay Buchholz.   

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/top-100-prospects/2007/263445.html

Those players I named, along with some of the guys ahead of him (Phil Hughes, Evan Longoria, Tim Lincecum, and Carlos Gonzalez) have fulfilled their potential and are legit stars.  Others (Dice-K, Homer Bailey, Andrew Miller, Delmon Young) have not, and either aren't as good as projected, or even as good as Garza.  So what lesson do I draw from this?

Continue reading this post »

Is anyone else using the online broadcast being sold as "Postseason.tv"?  I paid the $10 knowing it would really only be useful during the weekday LDS games, but was immediately disappointed to see that instead of giving you the TV broadcast, it just gives you the live, unedited feed from each of the cameras.  This is pitched as a benefit (choose your angle!) but in reality you're left watching the hitter with no idea where the batted ball went, or watching the pitcher with no idea where the hitter/ball are, or watching weird angles out of the dugouts.  Best angle I've found so far is the home plate one, but even that's like watching from the upper, upper deck behind home plate. 

Is there some way to fix this and just get the equivalent of the TV broadcast?  I want to watch the game, not play Arne Harris for the afternoon.

I'm as frustrated as anyone with how this team has played, and at the circus its become off the field.  But more so, I'm sick and tired of reading the daily post mortems while the body is still warm on the table.  Whether its April's pessimists coming back to say "I told you so" (speaking of which:  way to go out on a limb and predict the outcome that will happen for 29 of the 30 teams this season; what foresight and courage you showed; you want a medal or something?), or Rosenbloom calling the team a bunch of quitters in his blog ... its just gotten to be too much.  

Think about it this way:  if you had 2 minutes to address the team before its next game, what would you say?  Would you shout and point fingers and say "its your fault ... and yours... and yours..."?  Or would you say something like:    CUT OUT THE NONSENSE AND JUST PLAY BALL!!  Its not too late.  Focus on the game, cut out the circus, and go out there and execute.  Do that every game, and you can make a run.  Make a run, and you can make the playoffs.  Make the playoffs and we'll figure it out from there.  Just go out there today and get it done". 

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'd say the second in heartbeat.  This is baseball -- stranger things have happened, and will happen again.  Yeah, they put themselves in a bad spot, but tell that to  2001 A's, the 04 & 05 Astros, and the 07 Rockies if you think the season is over. 

If you disagree, fine, I respect your right to disagree but I politely ask you to stay out of this thread.  If you want to talk about how the season ended two weeks ago, you have plenty of places to do that.  I believe there's still something redeemable in this team, and if you agree, I want to hear about it below.  To quote the master:

"What the [cough] happened to the Delta I used to know?  Where's the spirit?  Where's the guts, huh?  This could be the greatest night of our lives, but you're gonna let it be the worst.  "Ooh, we're afraid to go with you Bluto, we might get in trouble."  Well just kiss my [cough] from now on!  Not me!  I'm not gonna take this.

Wormer, he's a dead man!

Marmalard, dead!

Niedermeyer... "

Care to finish the sentence?

Yes, this is another Micah Hoffpauir fanpost. 

I have no idea what the future holds for the Hoff, but I do know this:  people who say he can't or won't be an effective major league hitter based on the available evidence are just making things up.  

Such statements reminded me about the similar assessment of Geo Soto that appeared on this site in the weeks and months before his torrid September call-up in 2007 made him our catcher of the present and future.  The argument then was the same as it is for Hoff today:  through a significant part of his career arc, Soto had not shown the ability to hit; therefore, it was judged, he never would gain the ability to do so at the major league level.  Even as the evidence started to mount in the other direction with a solid campaign at AAA, these assessments proved to be stubborn.  As some fans started agitating in favor of giving the kid a chance, the responses were just as certain and dismissive as they are of Hoff today:  

*  "Soto might become a decent backup, that's all.  The Cubs' best catching prospect is Chris Robinson, the guy they got for Neifi. But he is at least two years away, maybe three."

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2007/5/1/95457/33444

 * "Question regarding Barrett... if the Cubs DON'T re-sign him, who's the catcher next year? And don't say Geovany Soto."  (When a commenter predictably responded with Soto and Koyie Hill, the response: "Oh, lord.").

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/comments/2007/5/28/19846/2434/136

* (In response to a suggestion from Dartmouth Cub Fan that the team use Soto instead of trading for Kendall) "Because he's a Triple-A catcher!!! I don't care what a guy hits at Iowa. Is Soto ready to be the starting catcher for a playoff contender, with as little ML experience as he has? I say no. There is more to being a winning ML catcher than a few stats on a Triple-A spreadsheet."

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2007/7/24/94316/1416

My point is not that people who pushed for Soto were right, so therefore the people pushing for Hoff must be right too.  Thats not my point at all.  Something about the excitement for Hoffpauir reminds me of the similar excitement once upon a time for Julio Zuleta and Hee Sop Choi.  My point is that these snap judgments some people have made about Hoffpauir not being capable of hitting at the major league level are just as much guesswork as the assessments that say he will be the next Ryan Howard (who, lets not forget, likewise debuted late at 26 and promptly won ROY, then an MVP, then a World Series ring).  The point is that we don't know what Hoffpauir will be; he can be great or a bust.  It is at the very least possible he will be a late bloomer like Howard who goes on to do great things.  Or like David Ortiz who was 28 and had played several mediocre seasons without ever topping 20 homeruns and 75 RBI when he moved to Boston and went absolutely gonzo.

So is Hoff the next Howard/Ortiz or the next Zuleta/Choi?  Who knows?  But I say the only way we'll know is if the team gives the kid a shot to see what he does with it.  In the meantime, statements like "Micah Hoffpaur is a Quadruple-A player, nothing more" sound awfully like "Soto might become a decent back-up, that is all."

A common theme for the TBS announcers last night was that the crowd was shockingly quiet and passive, and it certainly looked that way on TV.

Al said the same thing in his wrap-up.

And I saw the same thing first-hand at last year's Game 3 loss, where the stadium really only got rocking just one time, when DeRo came up with the bases loaded.  Otherwise, people were quiet for most of that game.

All of that is completely different from the Wrigley Field we have all seen dozens of times for relatively meaningless games, and especially for the meaningful ones like Opening Day or any series involving the Sox or Cardinals.  So what gives?

I think the most commonly floated reason is that the fans are too nervous -- afraid of failure, they sit through a playoff game like its a horror moving just waiting to see how terrible its going to get. 

I have a different theory.  It seems to me that in the stubhub era its just too easy for wealthy, mildly-passionate, bandwagon type fans to offer a price for tickets that the average, everyday, die-hard (and yes bleed-cubbie-blue) fan just can't match.  So instead of the full-throated season ticket holder who is living and dying on each pitch, you have a bunch of fans who aren't as passionate and are going because its the thing to do and they have the means to do it.  When a $50 face value ticket is going for $800 or even $1,200, it reaches a point where people who would be in the seats screaming their heads off decide they'd be crazy not to sell to someone who will sit there passively with a cardigan tied around his neck.

Your thoughts?

"Sources" tell some other blog that Mark Cuban is out of the running for the Cubs, and that the clubhouse leader is Tom Ricketts.

http://chi-ball.com/blog/2008/09/12/cuban-out/

This in turn was reported on another blog, deadspin.com, so now I believe it.  Is this all unsubstantiated rumor?  Anyone have any more info?

[And as always, apologies if this is old ground; I ran a search, turned up nothing new on Cuban since August]

I'm surprised that for all the attention paid to Zell's comments about selling naming rights, there is very little discussion of the political leverage Cubs fans throughout Chicago and Illinois currently have.  

Its true, as Zell says, that Wrigley is "his asset" and without our own ownership interest we can't really stop him from selling the naming rights to it.  But our elected leaders in State and City government absolutely can do something about it.  Zell is practically begging them to purchase the stadium because the state can obtain tax-free financing, and can therefore afford to pay Zell a higher price.  His analysts tell him that if he sells the stadium to a private buyer he'll get a lower return.  Zell is also going to need City and State cooperation for any plan to remake or remodel Wrigley Field because of its historical landmark designation, a designation intended for just this sort of use.  The cooperation of City and State officials is necessary to either of those ends; if they withhold it, the value of Zell's "asset" falls.

With that in mind, its remarkable that at the same time Zell is courting the Governor, the Mayor and hundreds of legislators, he manages to upset an untold number of their constituents.  How many people would be sufficiently offended by the renaming of Wrigley Field to vote against the politicians who let it happen?  Thousands?  Certainly.  Tens of thousands?  Probably.  Zell  might not care what we think, but he should, because the politicians he needs to persuade will absolutely care if there are thousands of Cubs fans calling for their heads.  

So, instead of focusing energy on polls that ask whether Cubs fans would go to games at a re-named Wrigley Field (they will), like the Sun Times is asking, someone should be posing the question:  Would you vote to re-elect a politician who struck a deal with Sam Zell while turning a blind eye to his intention to re-name Wrigley Field?  The answer to THAT poll, I think, would be a resounding "no."  That's leverage, and its where we should focus our energies.  If you start a "Save Wrigley" petition, make sure it lands on the desk of every politician whose consent is necessary for Zell to maximize the price for his "asset."