Well, my wristband was in the 10,800s and the actual number drawn was in the 600's. I didn't spend all day in the virtual waiting room. So I'll have to make do with my weekend and night game tickets. That's fine. I've got plenty of the Astros and Cardinals games as well as the Sat and Sun Sox and A's games. Opening day as well. I'm pretty psyched about the games I got. I drove up to Wrigley to get my car washed at the self serve. Again, today, the line for tickets was long. The Tribune is raking in the money on these preseason sales. I think it's a testament to the idea that when you field a team that you gotta believe will win 90-100 games, the tickets will sell themselves.
For the fifth year, I have bought weekend, holidays, and nightgame tickets with a group of friends. We had our draft tonight. I have many more tickets than I will likely be able to use. If you are interested in buying games (at face value), please e-mail me. My plan is that if you e-mail me now, I will keep you on a list and send an e-mail to those who are interested a week prior to a game that I will not be able to attend. So let me know if you want to be included. (Please no "hey, ya got any spare sox tickets?")
I had some good news professionally today. I won a summary judgment motion on a case that nearly drove me insane. I've been checking the court's docket sheet every morning via PACER and when I saw the order I felt great. After e-mailing the client, I went off to Wrigley to get my wristband for individual game tickets. They opened at 11:00. I got there about 10 minutes early and I walked to the ticket windows under the Marquee. There was no one there, so I was psyched thinking this would take 5 minute. There, I saw a sign that said the writstbands were being given out up the street on Clark (the little building that sells merchandise during the season). Well, the line stretched from that building to the sidewalk (along the fence that separates the car wash from the player's lot), wrapped around at Waveland and extended along the left field fence past Kenmore. I waited over an hour for the damn wristband. Still, this turnout was extraordinary for a Wednesday morning and a testament to the excitement in the city about this years Cubs.
The wristband is only any good if the number drawn on WGN on Friday is anywhere close to the number I got. I'm 10,832, so if I'm within a thousand of the number, I should have plenty of tickets for this season.
I said that this blog would have occassional digressions. Today, the President announced his support for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. As noted below, I am generally conservative on most issues, but I believe homosexuals deserve equal dignity and denial of marriage rights is a denial of that dignity. However, this is not the opinion of the majority of Americans. What troubles me is that gay marriage is being imposed by the courts, without input of the people. On the other hand, by defining marriage as between a man and a woman, the Constitution is being frozen in such a way that the electorate, when they decide to include homosexuals in the institution of marriage, will not be able to do so. I therefore drafted my own version of a constitutional amendment that would address the concerns of both the judicial imposition of gay marriage and the ability of the electorate to evolve their thinking on the matter. So without any further pretension, here is my draft:
1. The people of the several states, acting through their elected representatives or through referenda, shall have the power to define marriage as each state so decides. Each state shall have the power to decide which marriages entered in the other states it will recognize.
2. Neither the judiciary of the several states nor the federal judiciary shall have the power to negate the definition of marriage as enacted by the people of the several states.
3. Nothing in this amendment shall be construed to allow the people of the several states the power to deny to any person the right to marry a person of the opposite sex on the basis of either person's race or ethnicity.
4. The Congress shall have the power to define marriage for purposes of federal law, provided that such power shall not be construed to overrule the several states' right to define marriage for purpose of each state's law.
So that's my proposal. I think it is fair. I believe that gay marriage will be enacted democratically in most states in the next five years, and I welcome that. So that's my take.
I listened to ESPN 1000 today. The Mack Jurko and Harry show, and they were talking about the importance of a manager. They said Dusty was almost entirely responsible for the Cubs success. As I said, I believe the manager matters and that Dusty is a good manager. Nonetheless, they were blathering nonsense. One of them was saying that the manager has a decisive effect on the outcome of 1/3 of the games because of the number of one run games (which is around 30% of games played). The Cubs did well in one run games; and indeed, but for that fact, the Cubs probably would have finished third last year.
Well, why was that? The folks that have studied this say it's mainly luck. But what about Dusty? Could Dusty have an effect on a team such that it would win more than its share of such games? Dusty ends up to have won only .524 of one run games which is worse than his record in games decided by more than one run.
So Dusty's not a one run specialist or anything.
I think what Dusty is good for is getting everybody on the same page and making the players the focus of the team. He gets guys believing in him as well. Look at what's being said. Maybe they're just pulling our cranks, but they seem not to care who starts opening day, or who is the closer, or who starts at second (well, at least Walker doesn't). Prior says he'd go to war for Dusty.
Saying the right things for the press? Maybe. But no player's going into operation shutdown for Dusty. That, over the course of a season, is worth a few games on the margin even if it can't be pinned down like a butterfly. And a few games on the margin is what winning a division is all about.
This just can't be right. Phil Rogers says that the final spot in the bullpen is going to Gary Glover.
I've yet to hear anyone even say that this was possible. Gary Glover?
He dismisses the idea that Cruz will get the last spot and states that Beltran won't get it because "[i]t makes more sense to give the last spot to a veteran such as Gary Glover, than to risk Beltran not getting regular work." This is news to me. It seems unsourced, but Phil Rogers seems to have decent reporting skills (as opposed to analytic skills). I hope this is wrong. Both Beltran and Cruz have much higher upsides as the 11th guy than Glover. I'm also wondering about Cruz's options. Evidently, he must have one left.
Tomorrow is my 30th birthday. It seems that a lot of major changes are coming up in the year ahead. I'm getting married, I'm starting a new career, and I'm officially not young anymore. In starting this blog, I've been thinking about how personal to be. What I put out there can be read (hopefully!), and I'm leaning towards keeping this almost entirely a Cubs oriented site. What are your thoughts on this? Have you found it better to be more open about yourself on your site or do you keep things more oriented on your subject? Again, I'm new at this and I'd love to hear your feedback. Thanks.
I thought this was an interesting item. The Cincinatti Reds' opening day game against the Cubs sold out in 16 minutes.
That compares to an hour last year. I'm guessing there were a fair number of Cubs fans who drove the demand. Right now, I'm itchin' to go, and all the Cubs fans I talk to are also. Single game tickets go on sale next Friday. I'm thinking I'll be at Wrigley, and it's going to be a mad house.
My thoughts on the Sloth/Clark & Addison tempest, I like the sloth's site a lot, but I can understand where the guy's coming from. Sloth swears, and he has a link to a porn site (inexplicably listed under the Cubs sites). I have no objection, but I file this under the too each his own category.
One thing that I've heard negative about Maddux is that he's a "six-inning pitcher." Jay Mariotti (loudmouth, know-nothing but at least fun to read) has said it repeatedly. Others have as well. He pitched 218 innings in 36 starts for an average of 6 innings (15 of them 7 or more innings). But isn't the fact that he started 36 games itself impressive? It's more than 20% of the games played and tied Halladay for most in the majors.
It's 4 more than the Clement, Z or Wood pitched and shows that the wily professor is still very durable. Consider also that Maddux must average 200 ip the next 2 years to get the bonus third year, and I'm thinking that it's likely the Cubs will have 5 pitchers pitching 200+ innings, which I don't remember a Cubs team doing ever.
Just a few things about me. I'm a lawyer in Chicago (though I'm hoping I won't be a lawyer forever) and a season ticket holder. I live about a mile from Wrigley with my fiance and two cats. We're getting married in July (my fiance and me, not the cats). I recently have made a career change (we won't get into that). I grew up in the suburbs of Chicago. Politically, I am conservative on issues like the war, taxes, and spending, but am culturally moderate (I have no problem with gay marriage, etc.).
I have read the Cubs blogs for about 7 months and am doing this because this is the most excited I've ever felt about the Cubs. The Maddux signing has really caused such a buzz in the city that I expect the ticket sales next Friday to be a madhouse.
If you're reading this, you probably have your views on the Cubs and baseball in general. I tend to believe sabermetrics, but think that it explains only part of what's going on. I think too many people have read Moneyball and think they're ready to be GM, and devalue the importance of team chemistry, individual player makeup, and the importance of a good manager.
And I do believe Baker's a good manager. Yes, the bunting annoys the hell out of me, and yes, he seems to be oblivious to statistical analysis. But next time you read someone ranting about the guy, ask yourself if you really think that Don Baylor would have gotten the Central last year.
My seats are in Section 204, in front of the poles so unobstructed. I was at every playoff game and was directly behind Bartman on that night (well, two sections back, but saw the beer raining down on the poor bastard). I left after the Cubs did nothing in the bottom of the eighth and a bird shat on my head as I walked home. Truly, truly, the worst night of my life (other than grandparents, no one close to me has died and well, grandparents die at some point). In any event, I'll be contacting the members of the army and hope that you'll link to me.
This is my Cubs blog. I will attempt to update daily. Why blog about the Cubs? There's already dozens of others doing the same thing. Also, isn't this a colossal waste of time? Well, people are interested in different things. Outside of friends and family, there isn't anything that I care about more than the Cubs. I think I have interesting things to say about the Cubs so why not me?