CubinNY

Michigan is marching down the field like State is a high school team. Michigan has been very, very, impressive this year.

In 2001, when the Mariners won a league record 116 games, Piniella was without Griffey (traded to Cincy in the winter of '99), ARod (signed with Texas the winter of 2000), and Johnson (signed in Arizona in '99). He did have Edgar and a washed up Jay Buhner (played in 19 games that season). I'm not a Piniella fan, but lets make sure the facts are straight. He managed one of the best regular season teams of all time and didn't have the big weapons any more. I was clearly talking about the late 90's team. You want to talk 2001, lets do that. We have nowhere near the talent of that team either. His original point was that Piniella has proven he can win with a mix of vets and youth. The obvious point of my sarcastic comment was only when he has great players. In reality anyone is going to win with those teams. If we assemble a team that has the same level of talent as the Griffey, Unit, A-Rod, Buhner, Martinez Mariners or the Ichiro, Edgar, (Juiced up) Boone, Garcia/Moyer/Sele 2001 Mariners we will win if anyone manages, Piniella and Dusty Baker included. In 2001 Ichiro hit .350/.381/.457 Boone hit .331/.372/.578 Edgar hit .306/.423/..543 Olerud had an OBP over .400 Cameron added 25 HR's 3 starters went over 200 IP with sub 4 ERA's in the AL in the "juiced ball era." The Bullpen was one of the best in baseball. How's that for facts? Does anyone think Sweet Lou was the reason why they won 116 games? I don't. I love how when teams win managers are genuises and when they lose they are worthless. MLB managers for the most part are interchangable. Their job is to manage a bullpen and to know how to fill out a lineup card. Amazingly some of them can't do that. If you give any manager great talent, he will win. If you give any manager poor talent, he will lose. Jim Leyland is a sub .500 career manager (another fact), yet this season he is the second coming. Why? Because he has a really talented team. So the bottom line is this: Can Piniella win if we give him a really talented team? Sure. Is he going to be the reason why they win? No way. Do we have a really talented team? Absolutly not. So do I want to spend big money on Piniella who has a reputation of working pitchers like Dusty, has freely admitted on Fox Broadcasts to not being a fan of OBP and not knowing what WHIP is? Heck no! Well written reply. specifically the bolded part. I don't want a manager double switching in the 6th, 7th, or 8th inning for defensive purposes. I don't want a manager going with the "hot hand" in the bullpen. I don't want a manager putting a guy at the top of the order simply becuse he is fast. I don't want a manger allowing a pitcher to pitch after his mechanics start breaking down. But more than anything else, I'll take one of those types if the team has enough talent to overcome the mistakes a manger makes, simply to justify his position and salary.

I bet they'll be hearing from you at the convention anyway. What makes you think Giaradi likes the Cubs over any other organization? It takes two to make a deal.

No on Sheffield and no on Mussina. Both will probably want multi-year deals and for big bucks. However, Shef may retire.

kc tigers, We haven't seen that kind of analysis since Bob's Keeper's last article. But a lot of people don't know what pythagreon win totals mean, let alone runs created, Win Shares, WARP and VORP. That's probably why you didn't get a ton of replys. I think your post was great, but I still take Jeter. He actually diserves the credit this year.

Believe it or not the Yankees are about at their spending limit. They really can't afford to take on much more debt while they are financing the new stadium. With that in mind is this a realistic trade proposal To Cubs A-Rod (minus a few million) Carl Pavano (minus another few million) To Yankees Felix Pie Mark Prior B level pitching prospect ------------- If the Cub invision Colvin becoming a CF Pie becomes expendable (so to speak). The Cubs need another starting Pitcher if they deal Prior and we already know Hendry loves da' 2003 Marlins. To me this is not a bad trade, but I don't know about the financials for the Cubs. They would be taking on a lot of salary.

It's hard to tell. I'd say he doesn't mind giving up outs so I'd put him somewhere like this: Earl Weaver Terry Francona Joe Girardi Lou Piniella Dusty Baker

That reminds me of some lines from Naked Gun 2

Yea, it's kind of like choosing amoung your least favorite vegetables. I don't like cooked carrots or cooked broccoli, but I like broccoli more than carrots. But I agree with those that say the manager doesn't really matter unless and until Hendry Brings in more talent.

Take a look at that roster. A lot of those guys were at AA last season and didn't figure to be ML ready by anyone's imagination outside the Marlins org. Geez, even prospects like Hanley Ramirez had their stock drop substantially the previous season. Someone ironed out the normal rookie ups and downs. That's the coaching staff. Girardi specifically? I have no idea, but he ran the dugout. People who don't like Girardi don't want to give credit where credit is due. How many managers won 50% of their games with a team full of scrubs (refering to hypothetical scenario, not the '06 Marlins)? This isn't Major League with Pedro Cerano and Wild Thing Vaughn. Some of those "scrubs" would have started on the Cubs. They started out terrible becuase Giardi had people in the bullpen who should have been starting and people starting who should have been in the pen. He was then told to start the rookies and they started to win. Many of the best players go directly from AA to the majors. Especially with the talent of the players in the Marlins organization. It doesn't take imagnination to win and it doesn't take "leadership" to win, whatever that is. It takes talent to win and the team had a lot of young talent. In two or three years they will probably win another WS, without their fearless leader.

Agreed. I COULD live with Scott Moore at 3rd base, if it meant getting ARod. But I don't see how the Cubs can get ARod without parting with ARam. It's not feesible otherwise, IMO. If the Cubs re-sign Aramis I don't think they can trade him right away. But I don't know how the rules work.

My personal opinion is that neither of those deals would get the players that you wanted. That's just IMO, but for example what the Braves were looking for before the trade deadline (when they were actually a little more desperate because they wanted to trade him before his 10/5 rights activated) is more than Marshall and Veal. I have no idea either. I'm terrible witht this stuff, but a guy can dream. Can't he?

I don't know how I'd feel about it, but would Prior and Fox net A-Rod? Move him back to short, amd trade Marshall and Gallagher or Veal for Andruw Jones. Sign Zito and/or Shmidt and call it an offseason. I have no idea what to do with Neifi Jr. though Jones Murton Arod Lee Rameriz Barrett Jones Cedeno/Theriot Z/Shmidt or Zito/Hill/?/?wood? That would be a team built for the post season.

Baseball on the radio kicks ass. I most strongly agree.

Tim, I haven't been able to access premium for about a week. I'm not sure if my membership is due or what. In the meantime I've sent you a check for $50 just in case. I would also ask anyone else who is reading this to help Tim out. The $50 is equal to about 13 cents per day. We all love this place and I don't think Tim is asking too much for the community to share in the costs of keeping it up. just my 2 cents (pun intended)

Get Giles and Andruw Jones.

Have you seen him manage? I'm here all week folks.

The playoff teams averaged 68.25 sac bunts compared to the Marlins 76, and the league average of 74.4. I stand by what I said, I think you overstated your case. Point conceded.

Pick the playoff teams from 2006 and see where they fall in the sac bunt situation: 1 Colorado 119 2 Houston 100 3 Chicago Cubs 84 4 San Francisco 80 5 Atlanta 78 6 NY Mets 77 7 Washington 76 8 Florida 76 9 St. Louis 71 10 Cincinnati 66 11 LA Dodgers 66 12 Pittsburgh 62 13 Arizona 61 14 San Diego 59 15 Milwaukee 58 16 Philadelphia 57 Edit: Thanks Fred, you are the man Here are the stats for the AL and show a similar trend http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggregate?statType=batting&group=7&seasonType=2&type=type2&sort=sacHits&split=0&season=2006 I'd be willing to be we could go back a number of years and see the same trend. Lot's of teams sac bunt, but more than not the ones that use it the least win the most.

2005 Whitesox. Worked out pretty well for them . The '05 White Sox were a below average offense. Okay, now I'm done, I mean it. Hopefully you're done. Because everything you just said is not even close to being true. Oh cripes, look it up for yourself. Link 9th in the AL, and middle of the pack in MLB with the benefit of the DH. I thought you were done? Btw, the Whitesox had the best offense in MLB this year, and where did that get them? Jim Thome banging homeruns and Dye having a career year.

What does that mean? Again, are you kidding me? Not too hard to understand what that means. What does leadership have to do with winning baseball. You really don't think that a good leader vs. someone who is lousy at leading makes a difference? Not in baseball. The manager's job is to put his team in the best position to win. If you want to call that leadership, I'll go with it. Aside from making a lineup card and changing pitchers I don't see how a "leader" has any effect in a baseball game?

I didn't realize forearm tightness was a season ending injury? And here this whole time I though they were overly cautions since there was only 2 1/2 weeks left in the season and playoff hopes had faded. :roll: Strained legiment in his arm, not a cramp. and there is/was no excuse for it. And at the time they we're well in the hunt. I see your roll and raise you two :roll: :roll: :roll:

What does that mean? Again, are you kidding me? Not too hard to understand what that means. What does leadership have to do with winning baseball. I might add that if it does have anything to do with it, Girardi hasn't demonstrated it because his team didn't win and had more talent than the Cubs. Did he will those rookie pitchers to pitch well? Or Cabrerea to put up another monster season? Did he will the Red Sox to trade him one of the best young SS in the game? Did his leadership ability lead to getting Slappy for a certian talented lefthander and two other pretty decent young pitchers?

What does that mean?

Why? Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year. The team didn't have a winning season, had some of the best young talent in baseball and he was responsible for sending one of their best young pitchers out after a long rain delay. The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game. He is infatuated with the sac bunt, made poor personnel decisions at the begining of the year and was told to make changes. I don't see any reason why the cubs better pick him.