FergieJ31

LOL I was just thinking the same thing. I don't drink but maybe I should start after this god-awful deal.

Im a math major. 12 ! = 479001600 Rob must know C++: != is the not-equal operator.

Like someone said, worst ... deal ... ever. I hate this deal so much. The ONE time the Cubs pull out all the stops for a big name, it had to be friggin Soriano. Why couldn't they do this for Beltran or Vlad? Or JD (with $ to spare) this winter? Seriosuly, how is Soriano not = Jock with a little more speed and a paltry 0.050 extra slugging? That's it, it's the only diff. Both are butchers in the field. True, Fonzie will hit about 35 dingers in Chicago ... hitting LEADOFF by all accounts. Once again the Cubs will lead MLB in 1-run homers. Jock gets a 3/16 deal that was generally panned by people here on NSBB. And now Fonzie gets 8/136 ... I'm astonished there isn't more bafflement and disgust here.

If he has a season like last year again, then I dont think there's a better FA option out there. Soriano's production last year is basically equivalent to Drew's career numbers. QFT - this speaks volumes. A five-year deal will be bad enough, but if it's eight years?? I just threw up in my mouth a little. Face it, if Soriano's signed Drew's *not coming*. Hendry will think he's done as far as the offense goes, with an OF of Murt, Sor and Jones. Next he will sign Lilly or Meche and call it an offseason.

Ditto. This is a horrible move - Cub fans will rue this day for years.

Player options, of course. Eh. I understand people are all "outraged" that we spent so much money for such a long time. But, the way I see it: Yeah, its a poor contract. But Hendry and the cubs organization are proving they want to win. They are proving they are actually, for the first time since i've been a fan, willing to go out and shell out cash for a good player. Except this wasn't the guy to shell out the cash for, and for 8 years??? Holy crap.

Name one player who had a better offensive career in chicago than sammy. 156 was Banks's best OPS+ total, in 1958. He OPS'd .980 that year and hit 47 dingers. Sammy's OPS+ from 1998-2002 read: 160 141 169 201 (!) 160 The numbers point in Roast's favor here. He did that while playing SS. He also did it at a time when 30 HRs was considered a very good season. That has to count for something. Exactly. Who had the best offensive career as a Cub? For the question to have any meaning context has to count for something -- at least era played if not position played. Sammy put up monstrous numbers in 2001 but the whole league was hitting that year. There were over a dozen guys with OPS over 1.000; compare that with Banks' big '58 and '59 years: Only 5 guys had OPS over 1.000 in '58 and just 2 in '59 (Aaron and McCovey). So I don't agree that the numbers necessarily go against Banks in context -- and certainly not for Gabby Hartnett. Hack Wilson's '26 - '31 is another career on par with Sammy's in Chicago.

Wow - very very interesting ... c'mon JD you know you like Chicago I vividly remember a Cubs Cards game in 2001 or 2002 when JD and Albert hit back-to-back jacks off Farnsworth on 98 and 99mph fastballs. Farns just looked shell-shocked, like wtf is going on. JD is a professional hitter the Cubs desperately need. Trivia q: when was the last time the Cubs had a guy w/a lifetime IsoD > 0.100 in their everyday lineup? Bellhorn? Bingo - good call.

Wow - very very interesting ... c'mon JD you know you like Chicago I vividly remember a Cubs Cards game in 2001 or 2002 when JD and Albert hit back-to-back jacks off Farnsworth on 98 and 99mph fastballs. Farns just looked shell-shocked, like wtf is going on. JD is a professional hitter the Cubs desperately need. Trivia q: when was the last time the Cubs had a guy w/a lifetime IsoD > 0.100 in their everyday lineup?

Not sure if this has been mentioned already but I think Cotts found himself in Ozzie's doghouse quite a bit. And I wouldn't even put a dog in Ozzie's doghouse. This trade might have been Ozzie saying to Kenny "I want this punk off my team this winter." Would be curious to hear from RationalSoxFan on this.

Name one player who had a better offensive career in chicago than sammy. Gabby wants a word with you: http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/hartnga01.shtml It's close but a strong case could be made for Gabby: Virtually the same career OPS+ numbers; Sammy had more power, Gabby had the higher OBP. But Gabby put up great numbers much longer than Sammy: at least 11-12 elite years with the Cubs as opposed to Sammy's big 6-7 (98-04). Plus consider the era ... Gabby didn't play in THE deadball era but relative to the thin pitching and short porches(*) of the late 90's / early 00's it was certainly a tougher era to hit. And Gabby was a C, a much tougher position to play. I'd give the edge to Gabby, curious to get other opinions. (*) not to mention the juiced ball/juiced players theories

3/30 for Slappy?? :shock: This is starting to feel like the insane 2000-2001 FA market ...

Gil Meche?! Please no .... but if it's any consolation, Chris Carpenter had a Meche-like 1.5 WHIP his last two years in the AL before joining the Cards. Who here thinks Meche can make the same AL-to-NL turnaround under the expert tutleage of Larry R? * crickets *

I loved our 2005 opening day infield: http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/B04040ARI2005.htm ... and even that wasn't enough for a .500 record ( although it would have been with Walker / Nomar out there everyday ) The Cubs have a long history of signing the Mark Derosas of baseball and passing on the Carlos Beltrans of baseball.

Well said -- I mostly agree except I don't think it's necessarily too much to pay if he's expected to be a starter. Prices are up this year. I'm not quite as bummed about this signing as I was the Izzy signing; we now have two back-of-the-lineup guys with DeRosa and Izzy (not to mention Cedeno) ... I was really hoping for Ray Durham at 2B and to bat leadoff :cry:

Amen. So when (not if) Kerry becomes the regular closer, what should his entrance music be? Gagne had "Welcome to the Jungle", Hoffman has "Hell's Bells" ... how bout that old UFO song "Lights Out" for Kerry.

Absolutely 100% agree. JD plz... the Cubs can and should outbid Boston here.

Yes, mostly agreed on all points.

Don't be fooled by the broken English; I think you might be underestimating the English Sammy can understand. We've all seen him conduct himself in interview rooms with background noise, cross-conversations, etc., especially during the '98 and '03 circuses. I've never seen him unable to comprehend even moderately complicated questions. I don't understand this point at all. Determine policies? He was clearly asked for his opinion under oath - nothing more. He wanted to make it sound as if he were being asked to determine policy, but that shouldn't fool anybody. Anyway I hate to sound like a Sammy basher - I'm not. I want believe he was mostly clean and I hope his records will continue to stand asterisk-free. The only reason I brought up the congressional testimony was because someone suggested that Sammy is pissed off at allegations. But he had a chance, under oath and on a national stage, to say he was 100% clean and chose not to do so. I don't know a single baseball fan who wasn't disappointed by his meek testimony.

Tough crowd? You make it sound like Sammy just got off the boat. He's a high-profile superstar with thousands of interviews under his belt. There were no difficult questions, no curve balls, right? If he were clean, every single question was a fastball in his wheelhouse. What "case", exactly, was he asked to make? What is your excuse for him saying "That's not for me to say" to the zero-tolerance question? And to the direct issue of whether he'd ever used ... if he was clean I'd expect him to JUMP at the chance to answer that. A simple "Absolutely not." would have been nice. Instead, we got a pretty clear indication that the question (from CUMMINGS about halfway thru) was off-limits.

Read it again - the post wasn't about Sammy's English; it was about a weak denial in front of Congress. Ammo for witchhunters - what are you talking about? Did I accuse of him of steroid use? Stop with the strawman. I thought I went out of the way to do the opposite. I agreed with your hypothetical that he should be "pissed off" at false accusations -- if they are false. Put yourself in his shoes ... you're clean and you're in front of Congress, and you have an interpreter just in case there's any doubt about what's being asked. Wouldn't you make stronger statements? Maybe show a little righteous indignation? He does speak English well enough to make simple, unambiguous statements doesn't he? Instead it was the "umm it's not for me to say" sort of stuff.

If your career was over, and every time your name was mentioned in the media there was a sidenote about steroid use, wouldn't you be kind of pissed off? Wouldn't you want to argue for yourself that you're clean? If Sosa sits back and rests on his laurels, there may not be a Cooperstown, because he was already hung at the gallows. Yes, in the clearest terms and the clearest diction I was capable of - not this crap: WAXMAN: OK. Mr. Sosa, do you think that we ought to have that gold standard of the Olympic program, zero tolerance? You got caught using steroids for whatever the sport is, that you're suspended for two years and after that second offense you're out. That certainly discourages people in the Olympics. Do you think it would be effective with baseball and other sports, as well? Would you push the mic? SOSA: I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, I don't have too much to tell you. [...later ...] MCGWIRE: I believe that's one of the reasons why I'm here, is to make this a positive thing instead of a negative thing. And I will do everything I can and in my power to turn this around from a negative to a positive. SWEENEY: Mr. Sosa. SOSA: I agree with Mr. McGwire. You know, one reason why we're here is to stop that. And you know, I think that we can do some more tests and one way or another we're here to help. [ ... later ...] CUMMINGS: Now, we've had -- you made some allegations. And, as I understand it, both Mr. Schilling, Mr. Thomas Mr. Palmeiro and I think Mr. Sosa have said they never used the substances. Is that right, Mr. Sosa? You said you that, right? You said you had never... (CROSSTALK) CUMMINGS: OK. Is that right? I -- all right. [ .. later ..] MCHENRY: ... using steroids, the use of steroids, is that cheating? Yes or no? MCGWIRE: That's not for me to determine. MCHENRY: Mr. Sosa. SOSA: I think so. MCHENRY: If you'll go down the line again, I'll ask another question that everyone can ask answer simply and directly, I would hope. If it's proven that a player has set records while using steroids, should those records stand? SOSA: It's not up to me. [ .. later...] TOWNS: The question is that you have a trainer who might be aware of the fact that somebody is using steroids. And, so, he knows it, but he just walks around every day and doesn't tell anybody about the fact that this is going on. PALMEIRO: I think that, if the trainer knows for sure, it's his responsibility to make the player aware and educate the player. TOWNS: Mr. Sosa? SOSA: I agree. I agree with Raffy. I think it is probably the trainer also on people (UNINTELLIGIBLE) --------------------- Maybe it's just me, but I'd expect strong statements in clear English that unambiguously deny he used, IF Sosa really was as pissed as SouthSideRyan suggests. That congressional testimony was weak.

Excellent news - that's a very reasonable contract. Another ray of hope for 2007.

Yes, what he said. Kudos for Jim for getting it done in the 11th hour.

I want to believe he's clean and always has been clean but I wish he would stay retired and keep quiet. "They don't have no evidence"? "They haven't been writing a book about me"? C'mon Sammy. To me, when he says things like that it just confirms the doubts about him. How? To repeatedly point out lack of evidence, and now saying things like "hey I'm not the one people are writing a book about" ... just sounds suspicious, too much denial via technicalities and red herrings. Obivously this is just a viewpoint; you don't have to agree. I'm not saying it proves he was juiced - there's a lot of circumstantial evidence that already points to that. But innocent until proven guilty: there is no clear damning evidence and I hope it stays that way. So I wish he would just shut up, stay retired and rest on his laurels on his way to Cooperstown.