CubinNY

nice!

"The flu" is another word for didn't want to travel.

Who's drinking with me?

"Somebody is punching a wolf ticket"

Ya know..... last year, the CUBS were 32-22 when they scored in the first inning...... 34-74 when they didn't. :wink: Man, I'm really getting excited about baseball !! No game thread would be complete without a stat quote from Fred. Let the game begin! Less than 24 hours.

YEA, A GAME THREAD!

I agree. A statistic is simply a way to measure some portion of the game. A stat neither necssarily detracts nor enhances any part of baseball. If a stat is meanigful (i.e., useful) then why not use it? It's like arguing that learning something new about baseball is a bad thing, which Joe Morgan does every chance he gets.

My favorite is the great Grudz/Walker debate of 04. "You don't dump your new girlfriend just becuase your old girlfriend wants to get back together with you", or something like that

Usually when I'm posting I'm also doing other things as well. I'm very good at multi-tasking. However, multi-tasking creats errors and this is a message board for baseball and not an English class. Most of the time it's not hard to get the jist even if all the words aren't spelled correctly and the grammar is poor.

But Morgan's claim is he didn't change his vote because he has recently voted yes. I've never liked Morgan so I'm not going to claim he's telling the truth - but he is claiming he voted for Santo to get in. Morgan may well have voted for Santo, but not enough of the people who didn't vote for him in 2005 changed their vote. I'm pretty sure Santo got roughly the same % this year that he got the last time they voted. That means either the new guys voted for him but the one who didn't last time didn't this time. or The news guys didn't vote for him but some of the people changed their vote. or some combination of the two. My guss is the first one.

Morgan says he voted for Santo and Shmidt said he would vote for Santo. Hmm. what to believe Santo didn't receive any "new" votes from past members who voted on him or the new guys who entered didn't vote for him but the a few who didn't last time decided to change their vote. I'm going to believe that the old guard didn't change their vote. At one point in time Shmidt said he didn't think anyone should get elected by the vetrans committee because if they were good enough they would have gotten voted in by the writers.

If the CBA allows for such a maneuver, what would be the basis for their greivance? The article doesn't say. My guess is that arbitration must be entered into with good faith. The PA could argue he's only being released because he won his hearing. They might argue if the Padres didn't want to take the risk of losing arbitration they should never have offered. I'm not sure of the nuiances of the CBA, but my guess is it would revolve around a "good faith" clause. I don't buy the good faith argument. Clearly the CBA has an out clause for exactly this situation. It is not like Walker is going to walk away empty handed. He is going to get 1/6 of his salary without having to do a thing. How would you feel if your boss fired you for getting a raise and decided to give you two months salary when he fired you? Walker's agent should have informed him this was a possibility of happening before he accepted arbitration. His union gave away that right, and they can't be upset about it now just because it might possibly be used. I would feel bad about it (your analogy of getting fired, but I would have to accept it if it was in my contract, and I can't see how their challenge will result in anything but possibly eliminating that in the next CBA. The process of arbitration is agreed upon by both parties, on good faith that the result of the hearing will be abided to. Releasing Walker after he won an arbitration case is not bargining in good faith.

If the CBA allows for such a maneuver, what would be the basis for their greivance? The article doesn't say. My guess is that arbitration must be entered into with good faith. The PA could argue he's only being released because he won his hearing. They might argue if the Padres didn't want to take the risk of losing arbitration they should never have offered. I'm not sure of the nuiances of the CBA, but my guess is it would revolve around a "good faith" clause. I don't buy the good faith argument. Clearly the CBA has an out clause for exactly this situation. It is not like Walker is going to walk away empty handed. He is going to get 1/6 of his salary without having to do a thing. How would you feel if your boss fired you for getting a raise and decided to give you two months salary when he fired you?

Mac, Jurko and Harry played a soundbite from a brief interview Bruce Levine held with a member of the Hall of Fame board (Jane something) and Joe Morgan. Levine kept calling out Morgan and saying that perhaps the players on the veterans' committee aren't intelligent enough to vote in the right players. Hopefully they make it available on espn1000's website. If Levine actually said that he's earned a gold star in my book for asking a tough question. Making Joe Morgan the Vice Chairman of the committee is a perfect example of what is wrong with the vetrans committee. It's like making Ralphie Wiggum the Mayor.

Why even have a vetrans committee if their sole purpose is to keep people out. No one even came close.

It's bull crap.

Just thinking back to "This Old Cub" when Ronny was waiting for the call... lets hope its a lot different If he gets in I will have to close my office dooor so I can cry in private.

Are we talking about the Jim Hendry who GMs the Cubs? He has a history of signing or trading guys who have little market value for inflated prices.

Partially because he took significantly less than some other pretty crappy pitchers. Partially because there just wasn't any talk about him going elsewhere. It's pretty clear there wasn't a big bidding war for him. I don't see how it's a stretch to say that. It's pretty weird how the entire Rothschild/Marquis off-season dating and love fest occurred. They just happened to meet in Florida. Rothschild was able to spot some things that Duncan couldn't in a matter of minutes. And then viola' Marquis signs with the Cubs. When Marquis was bad he was really bad, but he also had some pretty good games too. I don't expect much good from Marquis, but I do expect Marquis will be a Cub for the entire 2007 season.

I don't think there is any way Patterson ever moves to the outfield. He'll either make it as an IFer or won't make it.

Beer is god's way of telling us he loves us. Get in line and get a good seat. Don't sit in the first row of the bleachers, you won't be able to see. If you want to get a shot at a HR ball sit in between rows 3- 20. I like to sit between CF and LF in the third row. Bring sunscreen, share your peanuts, and don't expect much indepth analysis of the game. I love the bleachers, but they are not for everyone.

It's her mouth and teeth. Sometimes she looks hot, sometimes she looks like she needs to see the dentists, like last week.

Yankee most likely. I agree with the Cardinals fan. I'm not happy about it, but I agree.

In regard to Prior, there is plenty of reason to doubt them. Fool me once shame on me, fool me tiwice,. . . fool, you won't get fooled again?

What if 1.5 is the difference between scouting an area like Asia? Is it worth it then? maybe the money is alocated differently but it has to be included in the overall budget. I'm hitting what you are pitching. I'd take the money Hendry has spent on all the washed up players over the years and put it into scouting and player development. Remember Chad Fox?