TruffleShuffle

might as well go cheap. Just sign guys who were good five years ago, or who never were good (Abraham Nunez, Tony Womack) and watch the results roll in!

It's funny you wrote that because it includes our worst teams too, unlike the Big 10 or the SEC and I still like our chances to win 4 or more of those games because if you look at what ACTUALLY has happened on the field Syracuse has beaten Illinois and UConn has beaten Indiana. I'd love to have a Big East/Big 10 or SEC thing like that like they did in hoops. 4 or more? Come on. If we did it in hoops, then the Big East would win, as you know, but your bias keeps you from acknowledging what is plainly obvious about football. I mean, in the matchups above you'd have LSU vs Pitt and Tennessee vs South Florida, for God's sakes. These games wouldn't be close. Also, the problem with your logic here is that you're complaining about how it's "ridiculous" that Ohio State doesn't play Wisconsin, but ignoring when good teams miss bad teams. Like Michigan doesn't get to play mediocre Purdue and Illinois this year. Is that ridiculous? LSU has to play road games with Florida, Auburn, Tennessee and Arkansas this season, but the teams they don't play Georgia, South Carolina and Vanderbilt - three of the worst four teams in the SEC East. I don't hear you talking much about how ridiculous it is that LSU can play a loaded schedule like that, playing every hard team in the conference, and missing three of the easier ones.

The Cubs have stood firm on their principles, and as a result have not gotten a premium free agent in Lord knows how long? 15 years? 20?

yeah all Ohio State had to do was play at the defending national champion, host another team that beat them last year (Penn State), go to Iowa for a night game (when Iowa was ranked around #10) and then next week beat the #2 team in the country. Here's a good way to think of it, one that I heard or read somewhere, I forget which. Ohio State vs West Virginia Michigan vs Louisville Wisconsin vs Rutgers Penn State vs Pitt Iowa vs South Florida Purdue vs Cincinnati Indiana vs Syracuse Minnesota vs UConn say each teams play five times on a neutral field (to remove the element of a one-game fluke). How many of these does the Big Ten win? Or, to think of it in terms of the SEC: Florida vs West Virginia Arkansas vs Louisville Auburn vs Rutgers LSU vs Pitt Tennessee vs South Florida Georgia vs Cincinnati South Carolina vs Syracuse Alabama vs UConn

exactly. everyone always says that contracts like rusch's aren't the problem with the cubs. if that's the case, tossing another 3 million a year towards aramis shouldn't be a tough decision at all. ah, very well put.... I had never thought of it this way. Next time someone says a contract like Rusch or Izturis isn't why the Cubs are losing, remind them that ARam got away because the Cubs wouldn't pay him the extra $3M per year that another team offered.

It does? Doesn't hurt me. I meant hurts us with regard as players leaving our favorite teams and thus making them even worse. well yeah, except the cubs are going to be bad regardless of whether they resign aramis

It does? Doesn't hurt me.

Also, don't forget that the career of a major league ballplayer usually is less than 10 years, or even in the case of good players, usually less than 15. Yes, they can earn money from autograph signings and stuff after they retire, and some go on to become TV commentators or coaches, but that doesn't pay nearly as well. If they want to live like a very rich person for their entire life, they probably should take the highest offer, especially if there's a difference of more than $2-3M per year. Lets say they keep 20 million in a standard savings acount. Assuming someone like ARamis is going ot make about 90 million over six is highly probably. If it is at about what 4% interest could be wrong but if it is 4% they woudl be making about 800,000 a year for the rest of their lives. I'm pretty sure than can live a great life off of that. Again, they'd be making a life off $800,000 when they'd been used to living like someone making $15 million.. Plus, they're losing half the $15M to the government and another 10 percent to their agent. Most people that rich give fairly generously to charity, and many support their extended families. Of course people who make less than $100K will look at $800K and say "hey you can make a great living off that." But when you've been taking home $7M per year during your playing career, your perspective on $800K has to be very different.

Just because they go for the highest offer doesn't make them stupid. Yes, what Sprewell said was very dumb, but most guys aren't going to pretend that they need the money for bare necessities. Someday I may be out on the job market and take the highest offer... I think it would be hypocritical for me to look down on someone else for doing the same thing, regardless of what that price may be.

Also, don't forget that the career of a major league ballplayer usually is less than 10 years, or even in the case of good players, usually less than 15. Yes, they can earn money from autograph signings and stuff after they retire, and some go on to become TV commentators or coaches, but that doesn't pay nearly as well. If they want to live like a very rich person for their entire life, they probably should take the highest offer, especially if there's a difference of more than $2-3M per year.

He was better last year than he was this year. But chicks dig the long ball.

That's all well and good, but in baseball, sports, hell, most anywhere in the world, people are going to go for the highest offer 90% of the time. If the Cubs had the attitude of "well what's the difference between $15 and $17 million a year, he's rich either way," they'd end up with no good players at all. Yeah money does matter for most people, but most people make under 100,000 a year. And frankly, it is tough to live a comfortable life and be able to send your kids to college if you don't make that much. So for people who make under 100,000 a year if they make 75,000 at one job but are offered 85,000 at another most people to jump to the other company because the money does make a huge difference in their lifestyles. But when it comes to people making 10 million or 15 million it doesn't change their lifestyles at all. Those are the ones who trully have a choice where they work and go wherever they would be happiest. Hey, I don't know what to tell you. None of us are that rich or ever will be. But the vast majority of guys go for the highest offer. Maybe all MLB players are just greedy pricks.

That's all well and good, but in baseball, sports, hell, most anywhere in the world, people are going to go for the highest offer 90% of the time. If the Cubs had the attitude of "well what's the difference between $15 and $17 million a year, he's rich either way," they'd end up with no good players at all.

but he's great with RISP! He's so good at sports writing, it's like he wins games with his words. Speaking of RISP, I saw on SportsCenter that the guy with the 5th best BA with RISP is Frank Catalanotto... I believe he's a free agent, and I'd love to see the Cubs sign him as a super-utility guy. Dude can flat-out hit, and he's as underrated as anybody in baseball.

What were the points? I think the best one is that the Big East beat had one OOC win over a team in the top half of its conference - that being Maryland. Gosh, now I'm watching Lou Holtz on SportsCenter. I swear, his ability to speak is diminishing every passing day. How many does the Big 10/11 have? 2? Wow...that's so much more impressive. How many do the 12 teams in the SEC have? The Big 12? who knows, I don't have a research staff

They need it, they're way down this year. I thought they were crazy playing all those teams. I could see a few but they played way too many tough teams IMO the past couple of years. agreed... if the Big Ten were a joke I could understand it, but it's not. Too many hard games in and out of conference for them. It's admirable to play a schedule like that, but not the best idea.

Not if he does an adequate job of replacing him. But if he gets away and the Cubs don't bring in any of the big names out there, I'm done having interest in this team, and I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one.

but he's great with RISP!

just saw on SportsCenter - 2 years, $18-19M. I think this is a bad deal from the Cards' perspective. Of course I'm sure he'll turn back into a 160-170 OPS+ guy and it'll all work out fine for them as they win each of the next two World Series.

He should just get Matsuzaka to be his agent

What were the points? I think the best one is that the Big East beat had one OOC win over a team in the top half of its conference - that being Maryland. Gosh, now I'm watching Lou Holtz on SportsCenter. I swear, his ability to speak is diminishing every passing day.

Would he even know? I'd have to say he'd probably know more than Buster Olney, considering Matsuzaka is his agent. uh, i think you got that backwards wait, Matsuzaka is Buster Olney's agent? Dunno how they got that set up.

Then you would be creating another hole on the team. Not if they're determined to pick up at least 2 other starting pitchers. It all hinges on what else Hendry can get done. And Sanchez seems pretty good. That deal doesnt make sense. You dont trade a staff ace. Their determined to pick up at least 2 other starting pitchers? Who are these guys that are better than Zambrano? Who said better than Zambrano? STL won after letting their past ace, Morris, leave. The Yankees went on an ace acquiring binge in the 2000s and didn't win the WS. Florida got rid of their best pitchers and are poised to be better than the Cubs for a while. Oakland has won despite ace type pitchers leaving. It's never good to get rid of a great pitcher. But it's all about the net gain. If you can turn that 1 great pitcher into 1 great position player and 2 good pitchers, you are probably better off. Who are the good pitchers? If you're talking about someone like Sanchez, he hasn't thrown a pitch in the majors yet. If you're talking about two free agents, then that's a whole lot of money being spent along with bringing in a $25 million player. Your argument for not needing an ace is terribly flawed. The Marlins got rid of their best pitchers and are poised to be better than the Cubs for a while? The Marlins had their best pitchers and won a World Series. Oakland has won despite those pitchers leaving? Oakland has won with them, too. The Yankees won with guys like Clemens, Pettitte, Cone and El Duque. Their pursuit of an ace hasn't been their problem - it's that they keep signing one-year wonders like Jaret Wright or Carl Pavano, or over-the-hill vets like Randy Johnson and Kevin Brown. Those guys aren't aces, they're wannabe aces and former aces. The Red Sox signed Curt Schilling to go along with Pedro Martinez and Derek Lowe in 2004. Result? Won the World Series. Lowe and Pedro left after that year, and Schilling has probably not recovered from the injury he pitched through during the playoffs in '04. The Red Sox haven't come close to achieving the same success that they had in '04. And Matt Morris? Come on. His ERA+ his last two years in St Louis was 89 and 104. The year before he left St. Louis, he was the second worst starter on their staff, not exactly an ace. And, this year without this "ace" the Cards won 15 fewer games during the regular season. Meanwhile, Zambrano's ERA+ has been over 130 for the past four years. Putting him and Zambrano together is just a horrendous comparison.

Depends on the price. OPS+ the past 3 years: 2004: 173 2005: 136 2006: 111 Not a guy who should get an expensive contract.

boy, lee corso really hammered the big east on PTI... made some good points too