CubinNY

yeah. i caught that too. :? Me too. Cedeno and Walker are in Mesa, Len.

Marshall looks like he is 9 feet tall. This is the first I've seen him pitch. He has throw more strikes.

I think the Cubs offense will be medicore once again. Not terrible but not great either. I think they will score about @ 20 to 40 less runs than last year. That is how I judge offesense by runs scored not team AVE/OBP/SLG/OPS.

Chocolate Milk, See that is the thing. If you read my posts througout this thread you will note that I ddi not try to defend Sammy. I never said he didn't. In fact, I said I don't know. What I did is present his homerun totals from 93-03 and they showed a natural career arc for a slugger. I questioned other peoples justification for saying Sammy was on the juice. To me it appears as if they have nothing more than bias. McGuire is tottaly irrelavent to the discussion of Sammy. However, as far as I am concerned they all have the taint of steriods, but that doesn't mean they used them. It is one thing to say "I suspect" and quite another to say "he did". Especially when one gives hat size and shirt size a a justification.

[sarcasim]Now is the time to do the Walker for Matos deal.[/sarcasim]

You mean the ones who can tell what drugs people have taken by looking at pictures of them in baseball uniforms? The thing I don't understand about the majority of people on this board is why they defend Sammy Sosa when they criticize Barry Bonds and say that he took steroids. The fact is that Sosa's body changed just as much as Bonds's did. Both of their heads looked like they got filled up with helium. When did you measure their heads? Sammy's body changed at a much younger age then Bonds. Sammy came from a third world country and was rail thin in Texas and barely out of his teens. Sammy never gave testimony that said he used steriods. Sammy has never been caught with Steriods. Sammy has never tested positive for steriods. Now, all this doesn't mean he didn't do it. But what you have done in this thread is absolutely nothing to demonstrate in any tangible way that Sammy was a user. You've passed your opinion off as fact. So it is probably best that you are done with this thread. These are pretty strong words from someone who said the following about Mark McGwire who similarly is only speculated to be steroid user. I would have no problem if the plaque read the same thing for sammy or any other player whose career ran from the mid 90s to 2005. McGuire went in front of Congress and didn't answer questions about his use of steriods. McGuire played the majority of his career in the bay area with Canseco and with Giambi. Again, I don't know if he took steriods either. But there is far more circumstantial evidence for McGuire than Sammy. You are dismissing other's circumstantial evidence regarding Sammy but using other circumstantial evidence to say that McGwire shouldn't be in the HOF? That is where you are wrong. They haven't presented any evidence whatsoever. None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Nothing.

You mean the ones who can tell what drugs people have taken by looking at pictures of them in baseball uniforms? The thing I don't understand about the majority of people on this board is why they defend Sammy Sosa when they criticize Barry Bonds and say that he took steroids. The fact is that Sosa's body changed just as much as Bonds's did. Both of their heads looked like they got filled up with helium. When did you measure their heads? Sammy's body changed at a much younger age then Bonds. Sammy came from a third world country and was rail thin in Texas and barely out of his teens. Sammy never gave testimony that said he used steriods. Sammy has never been caught with Steriods. Sammy has never tested positive for steriods. Now, all this doesn't mean he didn't do it. But what you have done in this thread is absolutely nothing to demonstrate in any tangible way that Sammy was a user. You've passed your opinion off as fact. So it is probably best that you are done with this thread. These are pretty strong words from someone who said the following about Mark McGwire who similarly is only speculated to be steroid user. I would have no problem if the plaque read the same thing for sammy or any other player whose career ran from the mid 90s to 2005. McGuire went in front of Congress and didn't answer questions about his use of steriods. McGuire played the majority of his career in the bay area with Canseco and with Giambi. Again, I don't know if he took steriods either. But there is far more circumstantial evidence for McGuire than Sammy.

That's because he could go to the Dominican Republic for his supply. They don't have smoking guns in the DR (except for Manny Alexander). Sammy has proven that he is not above cheating, e.g. corking his bat. Given that, I am fairly confident that he would have no problem taking steroids. Be careful. If you've ever gotten a speeding ticket you could be charged with murder.

You mean the ones who can tell what drugs people have taken by looking at pictures of them in baseball uniforms? The thing I don't understand about the majority of people on this board is why they defend Sammy Sosa when they criticize Barry Bonds and say that he took steroids. The fact is that Sosa's body changed just as much as Bonds's did. Both of their heads looked like they got filled up with helium. When did you measure their heads? Sammy's body changed at a much younger age then Bonds. Sammy came from a third world country and was rail thin in Texas and barely out of his teens. Sammy never gave testimony that said he used steriods. Sammy has never been caught with Steriods. Sammy has never tested positive for steriods. Now, all this doesn't mean he didn't do it. But what you have done in this thread is absolutely nothing to demonstrate in any tangible way that Sammy was a user. You've passed your opinion off as fact. So it is probably best that you are done with this thread.

who did that? Sammy Sosa and before anyone corrects me, he was 29. Either way, it's still not natural. When did you put him on the scale?

The stadium isn't even DONE yet. Maybe the 15 National League pennants and 9 World Series banners will give it "character"? :wink: What would give it more "character"? A mound in center field? A train track above the outfield? Ivy on the wall? A roof? A roller coaster in the bleacher section? No thanks. It's a baseball stadium, in it's purest form........ and is expected to be as comfortable as any stadium in baseball. That's fine, by me. What will give it character is the bestest most knowledgable fans in sports. :pukel:

who did that?

Sammy's HR totals from 1993-2003 93 33 94 25 95 36 96 40 97 36 98 66 (McGuire chase, Maris and Mantle had a similar chase in 61 with each having career years in HRs) 99 63 00 50 01 64 02 49 03 40 To me that looks like a typical career arc for a power hitter. 2001 actually markes the down slope of that arc.

The last time I checked it wasn't too good. I think he was hitting in the low 200s. But ST numbers don't really mean the much.

As long as one or both of them can stay off the DL. I'm glad Aramis came to camp in better shape. He could have a monster year if he can stay healthy. I worry about Lee's shoulder. Glove arm or not it can affect his swing. I tore some of the muscles in my rotator cuff lifting weights in the summer of my Junior year and didn't get surgery. My senior year, I didn't hit for much power at all. I don't know if it was the injury or something else though.

That's a good question. In fact, I had my Jerry Hairston story written a week ago and planned to use it on the off-day in the schedule. But then Mr. Prior got hurt, and out went that idea. I picked yesterday as the day to run it. I haven't seen the other papers yet, so I don't know what they've written. Some days, the story line is obvious. Derrek Lee played in his first game since the WBC. So it was natural for all of the reporters (radio, Web site, newspapers) to want to to talk to him. In fact, he was waiting for us. If it's Derrek Lee, it's a big story, and everybody is going to "lead" with it. For the night games, we have limited access. We talked to Dusty before the other night's game, and the subject of Grissom came up. It was my "lead" note because of the 25-man roster issue and Dusty's history of preferring veterans. We have access to just about anybody who is there on most days. The Trib ran a Dempster story the other day. I ran a Dempster story last month. On some days, the story of the day jumps out at you. On other days, you pretty much decide on your own. Thank you for your time. I know you are busy and I really appreciate that you are willing to take the time to visit with us.

I dunno man, Sammy with the Rangers looked like around 170. He was pretty scrawny. He was also like 20 years old too. There will always be suspicion about Sammy. I don't want to believe he used. But the suspcion is there.

Sorry, too late. You took a stance by posting in this thread. Your stance appears to be that we shouldn't criticize Clines becuase we don't know the whole story. Thanks for the words of caution.

Nothing to add, except that I tottally agree, especially with point #2.

Hey Bruce, If you have a second or two. I noticed that all three papers (Daily Herald, Trib, Sun Times) print the exact same themed story on most days. For example, today it is Jerry Hairston and Derek Lee. Yesterday it was Grissom. Why is that the case? Do you guys only get access to a few players each day? Just curious, keep up the good work, and enjoy the warmth and sunshine, CubinNY

My prediction is that the Cubs are in the 675-687 range in runs scored this year. That means the pitching will have to be low 600s for any shot at the playoffs.

Not even in your wildest dreams Did you even bother to look up the numbers before posting this? The Cubs outproduced the Sox and Astros in 2005 in many offensive categories, including: BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, and TB The Sox hit 6 more HR, while the Astros hit 33 less. The Cubs have upgraded production in LF, SS, and CF, while maintaining status quo everywhere else. What's the problem? 2005 Runs scored CWS 741 HOU 693 (but they only gave up 609 runs) ChC 703 (but they gave up 714 runs) Even so we are talking about this year's team not last year's, no? The Cubs might have an upgrade in Cedeno, Pierre is an upgrade but that would be next to impossible not acheive and we will see what Murton is all about. Lee and Barrett cannot regress and Aramis has to say healthy. And they still will not score as many runs as last year.

Not even in your wildest dreams

Sub in Jones for Marby and Pierre for Pagen and put Piere at the top and Hairston at the bottom and I think you have a starting line up and batting order for about 50 to 60 games this year. More if Walker is traded.

The Cubs have been a very medicore team for four years. Don't let the 88 win division championship season fool you. If they are medicore again this year it is time to clean house