2020 Chicago Cubs Offseason Thread

[CP_414]

Not at all. You seem to have a problem. Have a good night.

You called me a tool and a dick and cried to the mod that I called you a moron, but yeah I have the problem. Haha. Typical Dawk.

Have a wonderful, amazing, fantastic evening.

[Stratos]

Lol. What an embarrassing post.

Go read yours brah LOL.

[CP_414]

Go read yours brah LOL.

K brah.

[BDawk4Prez]

You called me a tool and a dick and cried to the mod that I called you a moron, but yeah I have the problem. Haha. Typical Dawk.

Have a wonderful, amazing, fantastic evening.

I said you were acting toolish.

You called me a moron.

Mods laughed.

I then called you a dick.

[CP_414]

I said you were acting toolish.

You called me a moron.

Mods laughed.

I then called you a dick.

Incorrect. You said I am toolish and implied I have been for a long time. That’s a perfectly valid opinion to have if you want to stand by it. There’s plenty of supporting evidence that shows I can be toolish, but you can’t get all huffy and upset when I call you a moron after you’ve insulted me, Dawk. The first cheap shot here was yours. If you want to complain to the mods, go for it.

Anyway, I give you credit for admitting that your Darvish take was dumb. I still think you are often a moron, but at least you can own a bad take. That’s better than some.

Go Cubs.

[Stratos]

It's not a bad take, a normally very good Darv got absolutely shelled in 2 appearance in the WS. Small sample, but the data supported the take at the time. Then we learned new info, the Astros stole signs. C'est la vie.

[chibears55]

[emoji846]

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[La_bibbers]

It's not a bad take, a normally very good Darv got absolutely shelled in 2 appearance in the WS. Small sample, but the data supported the take at the time. Then we learned new info, the Astros stole signs. C'est la vie.

No man, it was always a stupid/bad take. By your own admission, it was a small sample. There was never enough information to determine that Darvish's issues were a result of "mental weakness" but people ran with it anyway. Your own example is a clear case for why the arguments you're making are bad.

As for the overall subject, I don't care how much sample you have. You don't know the person personally. It's hard enough to get a true gauge on people that you do know, even the ones you know best. So yeah, overall, I think takes grounded in body language and demeanor are generally always stupid, bad takes, as well as disrespectful to the human being you're observing without even thinking it necessary to have said two words to the guy before passing assessments on their character.

Substantiated claims = good

Unsubstantiated claims = bad

[CubsRule08]

Name calling is allowed now?

Depends on the severity. Don’t wanna be too over dramatic, since I’ve been told a few times that I was.

[Stratos]

Anyone with an extended take on the Sogard signing?

He'll probably suck because he sucks, but gives us options. Shows us how much money we weren't willing to spend on 2B this season, which is essentially nothing but a minor league deal.

I think we spent more money towards starting pitcher depth which is a good investment, and seemed to go with a few less total retreads in the pen this spring than last if i remember, which I think is better spending because innings will be thinner this year among starters.

I think it will be good to have a starter or 2 in the pen as longmen that can be ready to eat innings especially if we're losing and save the rest of pen.

Unrelated note: Zach Davies looked decent today, he's similar to Hendricks, and not a very big guy at all. If Alzolay makes the rotation I'd put him between Hendricks and Davies in the rotation to mix things up.

[CP_414]

No man, it was always a stupid/bad take. By your own admission, it was a small sample. There was never enough information to determine that Darvish's issues were a result of "mental weakness" but people ran with it anyway. Your own example is a clear case for why the arguments you're making are bad.

As for the overall subject, I don't care how much sample you have. You don't know the person personally. It's hard enough to get a true gauge on people that you do know, even the ones you know best. So yeah, overall, I think takes grounded in body language and demeanor are generally always stupid, bad takes, as well as disrespectful to the human being you're observing.

Substantiated claims = good

Unsubstantiated claims = bad

It’s not worth it, bibs. Trust me.

[Stratos]

No man, it was always a stupid/bad take. By your own admission, it was a small sample. There was never enough information to determine that Darvish's issues were a result of "mental weakness" but people ran with it anyway. Your own example is a clear case for why the arguments you're making are bad.

As for the overall subject, I don't care how much sample you have. You don't know the person personally. It's hard enough to get a true gauge on people that you do know, even the ones you know best. So yeah, overall, I think takes grounded in body language and demeanor are generally always stupid, bad takes, as well as disrespectful to the human being you're observing.

I'm not judging anyone personally, i'm making observations on subjective intangible abilities (pitcher makeup) while in uniform that scouts judge literally all the time, so it isn't disrespectful in any way whatsoever, no more than saying player X's swing is terrible. I don't know why everyone is taking this as a personal affront to the character of these people as human beings.

You're essentially arguing that all scouts have bad takes because their observations can't be substantiated with data (not that i'm a scout). You can't substantiate subjective intangible qualitative claims that are impossible to operationalize via statistics, which is why scouts exist to do the things that data can't.

[Stratos]

Do you guys ask for statistical evidence when your wife gets mad at you? Stupid take dear. Lol.

[Stratos]

Scouts and GMs do qualitative research when variables can't be operationalized via stats to measure intangibles: https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/...tive-research/

[ILMindState]

Stratos, just curious but do you think Heyward, Betts, and McCutchen have bad makeup?