Wade Miller

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

I'm not so sure Wade is completely done-even with his fastball only hitting 89 or so on the gun when he came back, his K rate was still high. If he keeps that up and his control gets better, then he could still be very effective.

 

89 mph is being kind. Reporters are saying he didn't reach the mid 80's

 

Maybe so-I'm just taking the results from the gun when he was up at Wrigley that I saw, but it's possible that the gun was a fast one. He definitely was getting it up to 89 and sometimes 90 on that particular gun in his starts for the Cubs at the end of last year though.

 

For his sake, I hope you're right but I don't think that, in his current state, he makes the active roster (barring other injuries). My guess is that he starts the season on the DL which will allow him to make some rehab starts. The decision will be easier for Lou if everyone else in camp is healthy and pitching better.

 

I look at this as a good problem to have. Having too many options at pitcher can only help a team out. It's better than years past where we were wondering where our 5th starter was going to come from, and what guys were going to fill out the bullpen. If Miller can reinvent himself and become a serviceable 5 man, then it's just icing on the cake. No one is expecting too much out of him right now. Whatever he gives you that is over expectations is just a bonus.

[A New Era]

I'm not so sure Wade is completely done-even with his fastball only hitting 89 or so on the gun when he came back, his K rate was still high. If he keeps that up and his control gets better, then he could still be very effective.

 

89 mph is being kind. Reporters are saying he didn't reach the mid 80's

 

If you read carefully it said when he was pitching last year. It didn't really say what his velocity is right now. .

[Mizzou]

Struggling to hit the mid eighties? Yeah, Miller is basically done then as it stands right now.

[98navigator]

I'm not so sure Wade is completely done-even with his fastball only hitting 89 or so on the gun when he came back, his K rate was still high. If he keeps that up and his control gets better, then he could still be very effective.

 

89 mph is being kind. Reporters are saying he didn't reach the mid 80's

 

If you read carefully it said when he was pitching last year. It didn't really say what his velocity is right now. .

 

Sure it does. The writer is comparing the radar gun readings from last season to what he saw of his arm yesterday:

 

The former power pitcher, whose fastball routinely reached the mid-90s early in his career with Houston, had trouble reaching the mid-80s when he returned to the mound late last season, and it doesn't look like that has improved early in camp.

[Guest]

certainly a possibility. But I'm not sure right away. They might want to have him as back-up plan. He might be a "long swing man" for awhile. Then, depenbumpedding on how things shape up. Maybe traded. .

 

Then who gets bumps to make room for Miller?

 

Wuertz or Cotts - I think they both have options remainig so they can stick one of them in AAA until a trade or the inevitable injury.

 

If Miller is "stuggling to reach the mid 80s", I can't see keeping over over either Cotts or Wuertz who both as of right now, has more value then Miller.

 

Any chance that Miller might be interested in starting the season in the minors?

[Amazing_Grace]

i doubt marquis is going anywhere until at least next off season.

He'll be going somewhere, namely the Cubs' bullpen. :D

 

I agree. The Cubs won't be able to trade him, but I think that when the time comes they'll have to bench him. I'm sure they won't like it particularly, but the rhetoric this offseason has been WS or bust, and I expect them to do whatever it takes to win.

[Amazing_Grace]

Certainly this makes it seem like Miller's career may be over. There aren't many players that can get by with a mid-80's fastball. I can't think of any that are even average that don't at least get up to the upper 80's (excluding knuckleballers).

[hardcorecubfan]

If the Cubs could be as patient with him as they have been with 2 yr wonder Wood, then I think he will come around to the guy that was in contention for the Cy young

[98navigator]

If the Cubs could be as patient with him as they have been with 2 yr wonder Wood, then I think he will come around to the guy that was in contention for the Cy young

 

 

Are you kidding? "2 yr wonder Wood" has had more than two good years and he was under a longterm contract which is why the team has been patient with him. Kerry Wood wouldn't have survived this long without a tremendous upside. Wade Miller's age, risk level, and small contract make him easily expendable. Add to that diminishing stuff and its a recipe for getting released.

[CuseCubFan69]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

[RichHillIsABeast]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

[CuseCubFan69]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

[RichHillIsABeast]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Well, harping on millions spent on crappy vet bench options is one thing. Harping on a similar amount of money spent on potentially dominant bullpen or rotation arm is another.

 

Has this type of activity ever worked? Chris Carpenter.

 

A couple million may sound like a lot, but it's only a few percentage points of the Cubs payroll.

[98navigator]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

[CuseCubFan69]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

Didn't they pay him last year and are paying him this year? Miller has been on the 40 man roster or am I wrong?

[Drew Doughty]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

Didn't they pay him last year and are paying him this year? Miller has been on the 40 man roster or am I wrong?

 

they paid him 1m dollars. if a big market team like the cubs is seriously hindered by giving wade miller 1m, then there are bigger problems than giving wade miller 1m.

[C.C.]

Wade Miller was worth the 1M risk. I have no problem with that. Marquis on the other hand....

[Abe Frohman]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think' date=' even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.[/quote']

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

I think it's kinda funny talking about preventing prospects from dipping their beaks, considering the 2006 Cubs. I wouldn't give up on Wade Miller yet, I am interested in seeing how he adjusts. If he can mix up speeds he can be effective, even with a mid to upper 80's arm. We'll see.

[CuseCubFan69]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think' date=' even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.[/quote']

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

I think it's kinda funny talking about preventing prospects from dipping their beaks, considering the 2006 Cubs. I wouldn't give up on Wade Miller yet, I am interested in seeing how he adjusts. If he can mix up speeds he can be effective, even with a mid to upper 80's arm. We'll see.

 

If Miller isn't on the 40 man the Cubs still have that pitcher the Tigers took in the draft.

[98navigator]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

Didn't they pay him last year and are paying him this year? Miller has been on the 40 man roster or am I wrong?

 

Yes, last year he made $1M. This year's deal is $1.5M plus incentives. So if he amounts to nothing the Cubs have only gambled $2.5M because the incentives wouldn't be earned. Again, that's not going to keep them from extending Zambrano.

 

It's totally low risk with a potential high reward for a guy with a decent ML track record. If a team can catch lighting in a bottle and help a guy resurrect his career, it's worth it. If not they part ways amicably.

[CuseCubFan69]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

Didn't they pay him last year and are paying him this year? Miller has been on the 40 man roster or am I wrong?

 

Yes, last year he made $1M. This year's deal is $1.5M plus incentives. So if he amounts to nothing the Cubs have only gambled $2.5M because the incentives wouldn't be earned. Again, that's not going to keep them from extending Zambrano.

 

It's totally low risk with a potential high reward for a guy with a decent ML track record. If a team can catch lighting in a bottle and help a guy resurrect his career, it's worth it. If not they part ways amicably.

 

So you're ok with losing 2.5 plus (yes, it costs money to rehab) off the payroll? Z asks for 17 and the Cubs top off at 14.5, what's the difference? I see it as a waste of money especially since Miller was a power pitcher to begin with.

[Drew Doughty]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

Didn't they pay him last year and are paying him this year? Miller has been on the 40 man roster or am I wrong?

 

Yes, last year he made $1M. This year's deal is $1.5M plus incentives. So if he amounts to nothing the Cubs have only gambled $2.5M because the incentives wouldn't be earned. Again, that's not going to keep them from extending Zambrano.

 

It's totally low risk with a potential high reward for a guy with a decent ML track record. If a team can catch lighting in a bottle and help a guy resurrect his career, it's worth it. If not they part ways amicably.

 

So you're ok with losing 2.5 plus (yes, it costs money to rehab) off the payroll? Z asks for 17 and the Cubs top off at 14.5, what's the difference? I see it as a waste of money especially since Miller was a power pitcher to begin with.

 

that's not 2.5m off the payroll, that's 1.5. Like I said, if they don't sign Zambrano over 1 -- or 1.5m i guess -- million dollars, then there are bigger problems than taking a risk on Wade Miller.

[C.C.]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

Didn't they pay him last year and are paying him this year? Miller has been on the 40 man roster or am I wrong?

 

Yes, last year he made $1M. This year's deal is $1.5M plus incentives. So if he amounts to nothing the Cubs have only gambled $2.5M because the incentives wouldn't be earned. Again, that's not going to keep them from extending Zambrano.

 

It's totally low risk with a potential high reward for a guy with a decent ML track record. If a team can catch lighting in a bottle and help a guy resurrect his career, it's worth it. If not they part ways amicably.

 

So you're ok with losing 2.5 plus (yes, it costs money to rehab) off the payroll? Z asks for 17 and the Cubs top off at 14.5, what's the difference? I see it as a waste of money especially since Miller was a power pitcher to begin with.

 

Spending 2.5 million dollars (the past two years) on a pitcher that has a low risk-high reward is not that big of a deal, when our payroll combined those two years was around 200 million.

[98navigator]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think' date=' even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.[/quote']

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

I think it's kinda funny talking about preventing prospects from dipping their beaks, considering the 2006 Cubs. I wouldn't give up on Wade Miller yet, I am interested in seeing how he adjusts. If he can mix up speeds he can be effective, even with a mid to upper 80's arm. We'll see.

 

If Miller isn't on the 40 man the Cubs still have that pitcher the Tigers took in the draft.

 

There's no guarantee Campusano will amount to anything substantial. Again, the Cubs have gambled that they will be just fine in their bullpen without him.

[CubinNY]

I was against the Miller signing last year and I wasn't thrilled with it this year. Just think, even though he is at minimum cost, take away his salary and the other projects Hendry has wasted money on (not including ex-Cubs) and added that cash to Z's deal instead, the Cubs would have been better off. Add to that the roster spots these guys take up and I still consider this one in a million shot to be lost cash when it could be allocated elsewhere.

 

When you're trying to build a team up through FA, you have to make those low cost / potentially high return moves. We could go the other route and just trade away our prospects...

 

Or use the prospects. Honestly, has this type of activity really worked? It takes away a roster spot and also takes away some young guy from getting innings too. I see a lot of complaints about Perez and his 2.5 and Macias and his contract but these guys that don't come close to panning out get a free ride from complaints. And I really don't consider all the money the Cubs have spent on Miller to really be low cost.

 

Yes, it does work; for the Cubs as well as other teams. It's a good gamble. The reality is, Miller has been on the DL, more often than not, during his brief time with the Cubs so it can hardly be argued that his presence has prevented the team from using its prospects.

 

If the Cubs can't extend Z because of the $1M+ they have given Miller, thus far, then they have big problems. I doubt that's the case.

 

Didn't they pay him last year and are paying him this year? Miller has been on the 40 man roster or am I wrong?

 

Yes, last year he made $1M. This year's deal is $1.5M plus incentives. So if he amounts to nothing the Cubs have only gambled $2.5M because the incentives wouldn't be earned. Again, that's not going to keep them from extending Zambrano.

 

It's totally low risk with a potential high reward for a guy with a decent ML track record. If a team can catch lighting in a bottle and help a guy resurrect his career, it's worth it. If not they part ways amicably.

 

So you're ok with losing 2.5 plus (yes, it costs money to rehab) off the payroll? Z asks for 17 and the Cubs top off at 14.5, what's the difference? I see it as a waste of money especially since Miller was a power pitcher to begin with.

 

It's not like Miller was an unknown quantity. He bombed out in Boston (with another arm injury) after he ruined his arm in Houston.

 

Miller was not a "good gamble". He is a two time arm reconstruction pitcher. This is so Cubs like. Hendry has wasted more in his Tenure as GM then I will make in three lifetimes.

 

I agree with Cuse, the opportunity costs have been high.