Lowblow

That really makes a lot of sense. At least as a first step to getting a more predictable strike zone.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Robel Garcia has 24 homeruns in 81 games this year.

Too ethnic Nah, Italians are fine as long as they get back to [expletive] Hill by dark. edit: profanity filter took out a derogatory term for Italians that is the name of a section of St. Louis that was historically an Italian ghetto and is known for its many Italian Restaurants today. Although now it is advertised and celebrated as "The Hill" it had always been Dxxx Hill. "Dxxx" is where Yogi Berra and Joe Garagiola grew up.

There is a logic to the Brewers offseason if you're in Brewer's management rather than a Brewer fan. Despite 2017, the Brewers are not quite ready to compete for the big prize. Spending big money on a free agent frontline pitcher would certainly further raise already unreasonable expectations from their fan base. With their best pitcher already on the DL to start the season they are unlikely to duplicate what happened in the first half of 2017 no matter who they added. Consequently, I think Stearns decided to play this one close to the vest and take few big chances. We all know how easily pitchers can break (or get suddenly ineffective). We need to remember that he doesn't have the same margin for error that the Cubs have. Were they to have a Heyward type situation, it would cripple them for years. So they have to be cautious. I think their acquistion of Yelich kind of fell into their hands. It wouldn't surprise me to find out that they initially got into it to try to prevent Yelich from coming to us. But when he was available at a reasonable price they would have been foolish not to take him. Remember, they traded for Yelich the day before they announced Cain. My guess is that they had an agreement with Cain (who would have been their offseason Big Get) before Yelich became a target of opportunity. On the fly, I bet they convinced themselves that Santana would be a very attractive centerpiece for a trade for a cheaper TOR type of starter (Archer, et al) or they could dump Braun for something of real value. They may even have had some informal talks with other teams about it, but I think reality hit them in the mouth when they actually tried to do something about it. If you look at how they dealt with the Free Agent starters, they were perfectly prepared to take one of them if they fell into their lap at a "bargain" price, but they weren't going to stick their necks out with the potentially high cost of being wrong. Their situation is somewhat analagous to where the Cubs were when they signed Lester. The difference is that had the Cubs been wrong, it would have been a major disappointment, while a similar mistake by the Brewers would have been an End of Days scenario.

Without looking too closely, I would bet the net WAR for the Sandberg trade was mid-50's and the Sosa trade was probably around 50.

Unless, you foresee a future three to five years from now when you will have to pay Bryant, Rizzo, Russell, Baez, Schwarber, Quintana, et al a lot more money than you will be paying them in the nearer term.

The most important advice has already been given. Decide what forums you want to attend and be early for them. If you are in one of the forums that addresses questions from the floor and want a question answered, get in line early.

Of course,if he wants to fly JAL, Seattle would be out.

David, You may well be right. Probably, it's likely that you're right. I doubt that such feedback from a potential free agent would be the "sole" reason that the Cubs would let Bosio go. Certainly if they were committed to keeping Bosio that wouldn't cut much ice. Perhaps, as you suggest, the Cubs aren't committed to trying to sign Davis, but suppose that Alex Cobb is a friend of his (They did spend two years in Tampa together)... I have no way to judge whether there is any substance to such a speculation, but I raise these thoughts to emphasize that nothing is as one dimensional as some of the people have suggested in this thread. There is a lot more that we don't know than what we do know! While you are certain that the Cubs aren't going to pursue Arrieta or Davis, I am certain that Theo will keep his options open (see Fowler, Dexter). I find it likely that the Cubs will not commit the kind of money to Jake that he is seeking. However, if that becomes the best way to compete in the near term it wouldn't surprise me a bit to see him (or Davis) in Cub pinstripes next year.

Based on exactly zero evidence, let me suggest a contrarian view. Is it possible that Arrieta or more likely Davis has let the Cubs know that he would under no circumstances return if Bosio were still the pitching coach. I think Jake certainly said all the right things about Bosio's contribution to his success in the Cy Young offseason, but I seem to recall a couple of interviews later that offseason where Jake sort of deflated the "Bosio as miracle man" meme. Not much to build a case on, but adults who work in close quarters under pressure for extended periods have been known to act petulantly. I'm not certain that I've ever heard anything about Davis vis a vis Bosio but who knows. The only other pitcher on the staff that has the clout to anything with regards to Bosio is Lester. Regardless of the cause, I am optimistic that Theo and Jed will make a good personnel decision.

When Andy MacPhail first got to the Cubs he (or his intern) would respond to email questions pretty promptly. He'd ask pretty sensible questions back. I'm actually pretty certain it was MacPhail himself.

Holy crap! How the hell are you? Tim, I'm good. I think maybe I'll stop lurking and participate a little bit. I've got too much time on my hands. This retirement stuff sucks.

My first visit to Wrigley Field was in August of 1953 (a week or two before Ernie Banks first joined the Cubs). You're all fair weather fans.

You are reallly all new guys. My first game at Wrigley Field was sometime just before labor day in 1953. The Cubs were playing the Pirates and my hero was Dee Fondy the Cub's first baseman. Ernie Banks (and Gene Baker) didn't join the team for a couple weeks after that.

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this previously, but I was pondering on the Cubs dramatically improved home record and I was looking at what's changed. One thing for certain that's changed is the playing surface itself. I wonder if the project to eliminate the highly crowned surface in favor of a lower flat surface has had any impact on their improvement. I'm uncertain if their is a causal relationship, but it is a dramatic change......

I didn't see the play in question, but the comparison with the actions of a runner running into a catcher blocking home plate are only apt it the fielder was attempting to deny the runner access to the base. The runner has the advantage of being able to see whether there is going to be a potential collision at first base, so therefore the burden is on him. If a collision can be avoided while still offering him an opportunity to get to the base, then he (the runner) is obligated to avoid the collision. There is a good reason that the baseline to first base is in foul territory: the playing field generally belongs to the player attempting to make defensive plays (who often has no opportunity to protect himself from runners with full view of potential collisions).

The key difference between Pujols this year and Sosa in 1998 is that in '98, Sosa had 69 more RBI's than anyone else on his team. Is Albert likely to have more 70% more RBI's than the next guy on the Cardinals?