Minor League Roundup

[Butcher]

Who is that Zambrano kid pitching for Peoria? I think he might have some potential.

[VanSlawAndCottoCheese]

<!--quoteo(post=59206:date=Aug 21 2009, 08:14 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Aug 21 2009, 08:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->BT could argue the tits off tits off a stripper.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img]

[BT]

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->I've never been in one of these spats with BT, and from the outside, I always wondered why they blew up.

I'm not going to do this, BT. You care WAY too much, and it's not worth my opinion of you changing over something stupid like this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


OK. As long as we are all in agreement that it's totally my fault that its' got to this point, I'm wrong, and it's beneath you to respond, I guess we can all move along. Glad we got that settled.

By the way, I always find it fascinating that two people can make the exact same number of posts on a specific subject, argue pretty much with the same level of intensity, but suddenly one guy cares WAY too much.

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=59280:date=Aug 21 2009, 11:53 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Aug 21 2009, 11:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->I've never been in one of these spats with BT, and from the outside, I always wondered why they blew up.

I'm not going to do this, BT. You care WAY too much, and it's not worth my opinion of you changing over something stupid like this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


OK. As long as we are all in agreement that it's totally my fault that its' got to this point, I'm wrong, and it's beneath you to respond, I guess we can all move along. Glad we got that settled.

By the way, I always find it fascinating that two people can make the exact same number of posts on a specific subject, argue pretty much with the same level of intensity, but suddenly one guy cares WAY too much.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]

Fucking BT...

[Andy]

Not to side track this from the incredible BT/Ace argument over semantics....

Wouldn't it makes sense to combine the 2 DSL teams we have into 1 that may actually be somewhat good and have a few players that have a chance of playing in the Cubs minor league system?

[Coldneck]

<!--quoteo(post=59282:date=Aug 21 2009, 01:09 PM:name=Andy)-->QUOTE (Andy @ Aug 21 2009, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Not to side track this from the incredible BT/Ace argument over semantics....

Wouldn't it makes sense to combine the 2 DSL teams we have into 1 that may actually be somewhat good and have a few players that have a chance of playing in the Cubs minor league system?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Maybe they are going with the law of large numbers. The more kids you look at the better chance you find the diamond in the rough. Besides, these kids are very young, like 16 years old. Many may make huge improvements as their bodies mature.

[Andy]

<!--quoteo(post=59288:date=Aug 21 2009, 12:23 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Aug 21 2009, 12:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=59282:date=Aug 21 2009, 01:09 PM:name=Andy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Andy @ Aug 21 2009, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Not to side track this from the incredible BT/Ace argument over semantics....

Wouldn't it makes sense to combine the 2 DSL teams we have into 1 that may actually be somewhat good and have a few players that have a chance of playing in the Cubs minor league system?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Maybe they are going with the law of large numbers. The more kids you look at the better chance you find the diamond in the rough. Besides, these kids are very young, like 16 years old. Many may make huge improvements as their bodies mature.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I was just running off the fact that DSL Cubs 2 is 15-51 and hasn't won in like 3 weeks. My guess is the talent on that team is pretty low. Cubs 1 is 2 games over 500, so they're average. Combine the 2, get rid of a bunch of junk players and you get yourself the better players to look at and a much better team.

I realize the minors don't really care about team results and are much more interested in individual talent, but I don't know anyone who likes to lose and it appears the entire 2nd team is horrible.

[Ace]

<!--quoteo(post=59228:date=Aug 21 2009, 10:13 AM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Aug 21 2009, 10:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=59204:date=Aug 21 2009, 06:59 AM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 21 2009, 06:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I've never been in one of these spats with BT, and from the outside, I always wondered why they blew up.

I'm not going to do this, BT. You care WAY too much, and it's not worth my opinion of you changing over something stupid like this.

"I'm not saying he isn't still a prospect" - the reason I'm "not saying it" is because clearly he IS still a prospect. I'm sorry if you chose to read it some other way - your reading is a legitimate reading, I suppose, but worth this kind of blow up? Hardly. You can't just give up the "but," because the but is what emphasizes my point: "I'm not saying he's not still a prospect, but <i>instead</i>, the point I'm trying to make is that he isn't an <i>awesome </i>prospect." This really isn't that complex.

I know what I said; I know what I meant; I said what I meant; and I meant what I said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why didn't you just say "He's a prospect, but a mediocre prospect."?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Because I hadn't had a two-day long conversation on the point before I posted. I posted the thoughts running through my head at that moment. Isn't that kind of what you do on a message board?

[Ace]

<!--quoteo(post=59280:date=Aug 21 2009, 12:53 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Aug 21 2009, 12:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->I've never been in one of these spats with BT, and from the outside, I always wondered why they blew up.

I'm not going to do this, BT. You care WAY too much, and it's not worth my opinion of you changing over something stupid like this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


OK. As long as we are all in agreement that it's totally my fault that its' got to this point, I'm wrong, and it's beneath you to respond, I guess we can all move along. Glad we got that settled.

By the way, I always find it fascinating that two people can make the exact same number of posts on a specific subject, argue pretty much with the same level of intensity, but suddenly one guy cares WAY too much.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Read your posts. Read mine.

In the words of Walter: I'm calmer than you, Dude.

And I didn't say it was beneath me to respond (so fucking lame of you to say, by the way). I said it wasn't worth my opinion of you changing. Which it is. And not for the better.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=59386:date=Aug 21 2009, 04:33 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 21 2009, 04:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=59280:date=Aug 21 2009, 12:53 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Aug 21 2009, 12:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->I've never been in one of these spats with BT, and from the outside, I always wondered why they blew up.

I'm not going to do this, BT. You care WAY too much, and it's not worth my opinion of you changing over something stupid like this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


OK. As long as we are all in agreement that it's totally my fault that its' got to this point, I'm wrong, and it's beneath you to respond, I guess we can all move along. Glad we got that settled.

By the way, I always find it fascinating that two people can make the exact same number of posts on a specific subject, argue pretty much with the same level of intensity, but suddenly one guy cares WAY too much.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Read your posts. Read mine.

In the words of Walter: I'm calmer than you, Dude.

And I didn't say it was beneath me to respond (so fucking lame of you to say, by the way). I said it wasn't worth my opinion of you changing. Which it is. And not for the better.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Wow. What complete and utter bullshit. I read the posts. I lived my life. I know how much I fucking cared about this stupid fucking thread, and frankly it was not much at all. You seemed to get worked up about it, but I was simply arguing my point. I never cared WAY too much. Until I read this horseshit. Now I'm pissed.

But because I've spent 6 fucking years fucking talking to you and meeting you in real fucking life, I'm not going to let smug fucking comments like this fucking bullshit change my fucking opinion of you. Because that would be completely fucking stupid. So yes Ace, you've really fucking pissed me off, and yes Ace, now I care WAY too much.

But the good news for you is that I won't sadly shake my head and smugly explain to you how you are losing my respect, and wearily explain how my opinion of you is changing, "and not for the better". I'll simply be pissed for about 15 minutes, then go live my real life, have a nice weekend, and will continue treating you the same way I always have.

In the meantime, buy some pants, because you are so fucking high on your horse that I can see right up your skirt.

(hey good news, I haven't even hit "add reply", and I already feel much better)

[Ace]

<!--quoteo(post=59421:date=Aug 21 2009, 10:39 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Aug 21 2009, 10:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=59386:date=Aug 21 2009, 04:33 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 21 2009, 04:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=59280:date=Aug 21 2009, 12:53 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Aug 21 2009, 12:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->I've never been in one of these spats with BT, and from the outside, I always wondered why they blew up.

I'm not going to do this, BT. You care WAY too much, and it's not worth my opinion of you changing over something stupid like this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


OK. As long as we are all in agreement that it's totally my fault that its' got to this point, I'm wrong, and it's beneath you to respond, I guess we can all move along. Glad we got that settled.

By the way, I always find it fascinating that two people can make the exact same number of posts on a specific subject, argue pretty much with the same level of intensity, but suddenly one guy cares WAY too much.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Read your posts. Read mine.

In the words of Walter: I'm calmer than you, Dude.

And I didn't say it was beneath me to respond (so fucking lame of you to say, by the way). I said it wasn't worth my opinion of you changing. Which it is. And not for the better.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Wow. What complete and utter bullshit. I read the posts. I lived my life. I know how much I fucking cared about this stupid fucking thread, and frankly it was not much at all. You seemed to get worked up about it, but I was simply arguing my point. I never cared WAY too much. Until I read this horseshit. Now I'm pissed.

But because I've spent 6 fucking years fucking talking to you and meeting you in real fucking life, I'm not going to let smug fucking comments like this fucking bullshit change my fucking opinion of you. Because that would be completely fucking stupid. So yes Ace, you've really fucking pissed me off, and yes Ace, now I care WAY too much.

But the good news for you is that I won't sadly shake my head and smugly explain to you how you are losing my respect, and wearily explain how my opinion of you is changing, "and not for the better". I'll simply be pissed for about 15 minutes, then go live my real life, have a nice weekend, and will continue treating you the same way I always have.

In the meantime, buy some pants, because you are so fucking high on your horse that I can see right up your skirt.

(hey good news, I haven't even hit "add reply", and I already feel much better)
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The irony of trying to get over something and not continue to fight about it is that the other person can simply say that you're acting like you're on a high horse. I'm not on a high horse, BT. I just really didn't want to think you were being an asshole. But you were, and now you really are.

But since you want to play the game, a sample of your posts, which indicated to me, you were getting a bit worked up:

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->(In response to me asking how Goldstein and I differed) In lawyer speak? It doesn't specifically. In tone? Both Goldstien and Coach seem much higher on him than you. Goldstien says he is definitely a prospect. You said "shrug".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> - what the fuck does "lawyer speak" have to do with it? Sounds a little douchey, no? And that's before we even got into it.

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Dude, you are drunk.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> - Nope. But since it was mid-day, I guess that means I'm just an idiot.

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->I didn't actually mean something insulting, it's kind of tough shit if you are insulted (no offense).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> - Again, unnecessarily jerk-ish. I simply asked you to leave the lawyer thing out of it. That's it.

I'm sorry if that wasn't you getting worked up, and caring way too much. Your 500 word dissertations on the subject, aggravated tone, and hostile disposition led me to believe otherwise. And I didn't think it was worth it.

Sorry for trying to end it. I didn't realize that put me up on a horse in a skirt.

[Kid]

<b>August 21:</b>


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                   R  H  E
Iowa (64-62)       1  10 0
Portland (54-73)   8  11 0
WP: Josh Banks (7-6)
LP: David Patton (0-1)
HR: POR - Eliezer Alfonzo (12)

Patton: GS, 2.1 IP, 2 R, 2 ER (7.71 ERA), 2 H, 2 BB, 1 K
Andres Blanco: 3-4 (.319), 3 2B (14)
Darwin Barney: 2-4 (.276), 2B (9), RBI (14), SB (1), CS (1), PO<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                      R  H  E
Chattanooga (28-26)   5  11 3
Tennessee (27-27)     3  5  0
WP: Zach Schreiber (1-0)
LP: Casey Coleman (13-6)
SV: Kendy Batista (1)
HR: CHT - Chris Withrow (1)

Coleman: GS, 7.0 IP, 5 R, 5 ER (3.83 ERA), 7 H, 2 BB, 4 K
Jayson Ruhlman: 2.0 IP, 0 R, 0 ER (3.55 ERA), 1 H, 0 BB, 4 K
Tyler Colvin: 1-2 (.297), 2B (9), R, 2 BB, SB (4)<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                         R  H  E
Daytona (22-31)          1  5  3
Brevard County (31-17)   6  13 0
WP: Evan Anundsen (9-8)
LP: Jay Jackson (2-1)
SV: Omar Aguilar (7)
HR: BCO - Chris Errecart (6)

Jackson: GS, 5.0 IP, 4 R, 1 ER (0.59 ERA), 7 H, 0 BB, 7 K, 2 WP
Billy Muldowney: 2.0 IP, 0 R, 0 ER (11.57 ERA), 3 H, 0 BB, 2 K
Marwin Gonzalez: 2-3 (.242), 3B (3), R, BB, K<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                  R  H  E
Clinton (24-29)   3  5  1
Peoria (33-20)    7  11 0
WP: Alberto Cabrera (7-2)
LP: Bobby LaFromboise (7-8)
SV: Erik Hamren (7)

Cabrera: GS, 5.0 IP, 3 R, 3 ER (4.87 ERA), 3 H, 3 BB, 8 K, WP
Ryan Flaherty: 2-4 (.274), 3B (5), RBI (71), R, BB, 2 K
Rebel Ridling: 2-4 (.299), RBI (89), R, BB, 2 K<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                 R  H  E
Boise (28-32)    3  8  1
Yakima (23-37)   4  7  1 (F/10)
WP: Brian Budrow (3-2)
LP: Dionis Nunez (3-2)

Robert Whitenack: GS, 6.0 IP, 1 R, 1 ER (4.30 ERA), 3 H, 1 BB, 2 K
Yohan Gonzalez: 2.0 IP, 0 R, 0 ER (3.82 ERA), 2 H, 1 BB, 2 K
Logan Watkins: 2-3 (.341), RBI (26), R, BB<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                   R  H  E
Cubs (11-11)       9  16 3
Athletics (9-12)   10 15 4 (F/12)
WP: Ronald Ferreras (3-0)
LP: George Pineda (3-1)
HR: CHC - Charles Thomas (1)

Dae-Eun Rhee: GS, 0.2 IP, 3 R, 3 ER (10.13 ERA), 2 H, 3 BB, 0 K, WP
Thomas: 5-6 (.321), 2B (10), 3 RBI (23), R, BB
Glenn Cook: 2-4 (.179), 2B (4), RBI (7), 2 R, BB, K, HBP, SB (1)<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                  R  H  E
Cubs 1 (36-34)    5  8  1
Indians (32-39)   6  16 3
WP: Luis Castillo (1-0)
LP: Adner Ruiz (5-4)

Frank Batista: GS, 5.0 IP, 2 R, 2 ER (3.55 ERA), 5 H, 0 BB, 7 K
Yonan Fuenmayor: 2-4 (.255), RBI (34), R
Yamel Liria: 2-5 (.167), 2B (1), 2 RBI (2), K, PB (1)<!--c2--><!--ec2-->

<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                    R  H  E
Blue Jays (43-26)   5  6  0
Cubs 2 (15-52)      1  6  6
WP: Hector Velazquez (2-1)
LP: Amaury Paulino (0-4)

Willengton Cruz: GS, 1.2 IP, 0 R, 0 ER (6.10 ERA), 3 H, 2 BB, 0 K
Roeldwin Reyes: 2.1 IP, 1 R, 0 ER (5.00 ERA), 1 H, 0 BB, 3 K
Gregori Gonzalez: 2-3 (.190), BB, 2 CS (6), 2 E (9)<!--c2--><!--ec2-->

[Kid]

<b>August 22:</b>


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                      R  H  E
New Orleans (55-70)   3  4  1
Iowa (64-63)          0  3  1
WP: Rick VandenHurk (5-1)
LP: James Russell (3-2)
SV: Luis Ayala (3)

Russell: GS, 5.0 IP, 1 R, 1 ER (3.54 ERA), 3 H, 5 BB, 3 K
Justin Berg: 2.0 IP, 0 R, 0 ER (2.45 ERA), 0 H, 0 BB, 3 K, WP
Jeff Stevens: 1.1 IP, 2 R, 2 ER (2.31 ERA), 1 H, 3 BB, 1 K, WP<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                    R  H  E
Tennessee (29-27)   5  13 1
Carolina (20-36)    4  6  1
WP: Alex Maestri (4-2)
LP: Luis Montano (0-5)
SV: Brian Schlitter (19)

Christopher Carpenter: GS, 5.0 IP, 3 R, 3 ER (5.06 ERA), 4 H, 2 BB, 5 K; 1-2 (.333), 2B (1), RBI (1), K
Tony Thomas: 3-4 (.263), 2B (22), 2 RBI (39), R
Starlin Castro: 2-4 (.288), 2B (2), RBI (8), BB, E (7)<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                         R  H  E
Daytona (23-31)          5  7  1
Brevard County (31-18)   2  6  2
WP: Ryan Searle (7-10)
LP: Rafael Lluberes (3-3)
SV: Chris Siegfried (1)
HR: DAY - Josh Vitters (2)

Searle: GS, 6.0 IP, 2 R, 2 ER (3.91 ERA), 5 H, 0 BB, 3 K, E (1)
Brandon Guyer: 2-4 (.343), K, SB (21), CS (2)
Jericho Jones: 1-3 (.151), 2 RBI (8), BB, K<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                  R  H  E
Clinton (24-30)   0  4  1
Peoria (34-20)    8  13 0
WP: Aaron Shafer (9-8)
LP: Anthony Vasquez (1-3)

Shafer: GS, 6.0 IP, 0 R, 0 ER (4.96 ERA), 3 H, 2 BB, 5 K
D.J. LeMahieu: 3-4 (.323), 4 RBI (18), R
Rebel Ridling: 3-5 (.302), 2 R<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                 R  H  E
Boise (29-32)    10 14 2
Yakima (23-38)   3  10 1
WP: Josh Whitlock (3-3)
LP: Rafael Quezada (0-7)

Jonathan Nagel: GS, 3.0 IP, 2 R, 0 ER (3.77 ERA), 3 H, 1 BB, 3 K, E (2)
Jae-Hoon Ha: 3-4 (.259), 2 RBI (34), R, BB, SB (4), E (2)
George Matheus: 2-4 (.244), RBI (19), BB, K<!--c2--><!--ec2-->


<!--c1-->CODE<!--ec1-->                R  H  E
Cubs (11-12)    1  6  2
Giants (18-4)   2  8  2
WP: Brian Irving (3-1)
LP: Cody Hams (1-3)
SV: Shawn Sanford (7)

Luis Liria: GS, 3.0 IP, 1 R, 1 ER (5.40 ERA), 3 H, 1 BB, 2 K
Carlos Rojas: 4.0 IP, 0 R, 0 ER (5.20 ERA), 4 H, 0 BB, 1 K, HBP
Juan Medina: 3-4 (.280), CS (2)<!--c2--><!--ec2-->

[Kid]

Friday was the last day for the Dominican League.

[Ace]

I wonder when the Fall and Winter rosters come out. Probably still not for a while.