03-26-2010, 09:19 AM
<!--quoteo(post=84487:date=Mar 25 2010, 04:37 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Mar 25 2010, 04:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->FWIW, I agree that Brock is overrated. But he's overrated in a "he's barely HOF-worthy," kind of way, not in a "he sucked ass" kind of way. Who knows what would have happened if he'd stayed in Chicago, but if everything else had stayed the same, it's possible, if not likely, that the Cubs would have won the pennant in one or two of the following years: 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972.
That era of the team was a great team. They lacked speed, a leadoff hitter, and a solid 3rd outfielder; thus, Lou would have fit in extremely well.
Still, you can play coulda shoulda woulda with any team. Bad trades, bad signings...all part of the game.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But like I said, Brock sucked his entire time with the Cubs. He didn't become good until he was traded. It's entirely possible that had he stayed a Cub, he would never have been any good. I don't know why that would be, but that's the Cubs for you.
That era of the team was a great team. They lacked speed, a leadoff hitter, and a solid 3rd outfielder; thus, Lou would have fit in extremely well.
Still, you can play coulda shoulda woulda with any team. Bad trades, bad signings...all part of the game.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But like I said, Brock sucked his entire time with the Cubs. He didn't become good until he was traded. It's entirely possible that had he stayed a Cub, he would never have been any good. I don't know why that would be, but that's the Cubs for you.
Wang.