Illini Iceman

I don't even see much risk for 76-79 wins. I think 80-86 is the highly probable range, with 87-92 quite possible, with an outside shot at 93+. I think Philly is at a big risk for decline if they don't find some starting pitching. The Mets are going to be better than last year's 83 win team. I think all those other teams, plus Milwaukee will compete with the Cubs. And SF might be there as well if Bonds plays a full healthy season. I'm a little more optimistic than that but not much. I would say 83-88 highly probable. I do think St. Louis is closer to 90 than 100 this year though and Houston finally drops back to .500. Still some time yet and I want to see who rolls into Spring Training with injuries (i.e. not ready to play baseball physically). I'm not seeing much of a plan with this ballclub. Are we building through free agency? The draft/minors? Both? Neither? The ship seems a bit adrift from my point of view. Certain players are not impressive in their offseason dedication, too. That's troubling. Right now I'm looking at .500.........3rd or 4th place depending on whether the Brewers continue their build and what happens with the Stros. Who are you referring to? Barrett, Jones and Pierre seem to be working very hard and word was that the starting pitchers looked to be in excellent shape for that time of year at the convention. Not saying you are wrong, just wondering what you are basing this on since I have not seen any such reports.

Are you moving to the Bronx? Naah, I'll get to see the finally go down here in Oakland. FWIW, you have a WAY better chance than I do here in Tampa! :lol:

Are you moving to the Bronx?

I don't think not going to Winter Ball is any indication of a poor work ethic, if a player has a off-season workout program at home. Was Patterson not going an indication? Michaels is known as a gym rat who arrives early at the park, like Patterson, that speaks more to me than declining going to Winter Ball. yes

About as well as Huff would. While Huff should be an everyday third baseman, he wouldn't kill the team if he had to play there for a week or two if Ramirez got hurt. I'd prefer him there than Mabry. Huff gives you a lot more options than Jones. Technically, Huff can play multiple positions but he's a defensive liability in all of them. I just realized a rather important typo in my previous post. It should read, "While Huff shouldn't be an everyday third baseman..." I agree he's not good defensively, but there are plenty of "utility" guys that are rather bad at the positions they play. He also might become a little better (key word "little") if a team actually let him consistently play the same position for a couple years instead of moving him all over the place (and that position should probably be 1B or LF). If Ramirez misses time this year or simply needs a day off here and there, the Cubs options for third base are Mabry and probably Neifi. I'd prefer Huff to either. I doubt Baker would consider Walker or even Hairston as backup options for 3B, unless it was an absolute emergency. I am a little unclear why it makes a difference if Ramirez is out whether Huff plays third and then Mabry covers RF versus just having Mabry play third and leave the everyday RF in his normal spot. The argument about Jones vs. Huff seems like valid debate, but unless you plan on Huff playing in RF and 3B at the same time I don't see how his playing 3B adds any value.

The reason I think that the steroid question is so vital to McGwire's candidancy is that in essence all he ever did to earn HOF consideration was hit home runs. Sosa and Bonds were by far more complete players and had better success stealing bases, hitting for average, playing defense, etc. Even if Bonds never put up the huge HR numbers he would still be borderline HOF. Sosa not so much, but his non-HR skills are much better than McGwire's. IMO McGwire basically did ONE thing exceptionally well and that ONE thing can be greatly impacted by steroid use. He has been called out by another player (Canseco) as a user and his body/health would be indicative of someone using steroids. I don't think it is unreasonable for a HOF voter to take into account that cloud of suspicion when deciding if they want to elect a one dimensional player like McGwire.

I don't think Rosenthal said they were going to trade those two pitchers straight up for Huff. He said they were two they wanted in a potential deal for Huff, meaning more players were probably including. Knowing the Rays I am sure that it was at least one more top prospect. After all this time trying to deal Huff I am pretty sure they would not be jumping at the offer of Nolasco and Pinto.

they have a bias against teams that do dumb stuff. some of their writers are even cub fans. Like sign Esteban Loaiza? i dont know if you read bp, but most of the writers there did indeed criticize the a's for the move. IMO the reaction would have been much more critical if Hendry had made the same deal. Do you even read BP? Yes, and I even buy gas there on occasion. :lol: (sorry about that)

He did the same thing with the D-Rays and when Piniella asked him why he didn't even react when the border line pitch was called strike three to end the game he supposedly responded "What difference does it make?". That pretty much sums up Grieve, talent but no drive or passion. What a waste. Or maybe he has respect for authority. And he knows that arguing balls and strikes with an umpire won't "make a difference" unless you want rung up. So he has respect for authority, but he answered his manager's legit question with "what difference does it make". That's a nonsense argument. It makes no positive difference to argue with umpires. One of the things I have against Moises Alou. The point isn't just that he didn't argue. He didn't even grimace, smack his bat on the ground or show any emotion about the fact he just took strike three to end the game. So when Grieve says "What difference does it make" one has to wonder (as I am sure Piniella did) does he mean what difference does it make whether he argues with the umpire or does he mean what difference does it make whether the D-Rays lose another game when they are hopelessly out of the race.

they have a bias against teams that do dumb stuff. some of their writers are even cub fans. Like sign Esteban Loaiza? i dont know if you read bp, but most of the writers there did indeed criticize the a's for the move. IMO the reaction would have been much more critical if Hendry had made the same deal.

they have a bias against teams that do dumb stuff. some of their writers are even cub fans. Like sign Esteban Loaiza?

& you will still think this if he reverts back to his 02'/03' numbers? that's not going to happen, those were his prime years. yes it could happen then i guess every signing is a good one since theres a chance they could be good or i suppose we could analyze player acquisitions based on whether or not it's at all likely that they're going to be good Or perhaps other people don't need to have your permission to have their own opinions.

He did the same thing with the D-Rays and when Piniella asked him why he didn't even react when the border line pitch was called strike three to end the game he supposedly responded "What difference does it make?". That pretty much sums up Grieve, talent but no drive or passion. What a waste.

I can remember a least a few times last year he threw wildly to first on rather routine plays. It almost seems like when he is just going after a ball on instinct he is fine but when he has time to think about it his defense is more shaky.

Pierre Walker Lee ARam Jones Murton Barrett Cedeno

While I enjoy the NKorean stuff, I long for the days of the Waffle House and the creepy shocked geriatric. Please no more of Macias's head coming out of the toilet.

Reports here in Tampa are that the Rays are holding out on Boston for Marte. I can't think who in the Cubs system would give them equal value as Marte and make sense for the Cubs to give up in order to get Lugo for one year. Unless he comes cheap (which by all indications he won't) it seems to me that the better idea is to let Cedeno have a run at it. His production should be close enough to Lugo that it would not justify moving a top prospect. If Cedeno flames out and Boston doesn't give in on the Marte demands then maybe around mid-season Lugo will be available for less since the Rays will be seeing his FA on the near horizon.

It's okay to look at your own organization to see where it needs improvements and examine what mistakes it has made in the past. Give it a try sometime, Jim. I know that part really got me. I was going to post something about scapegoating but I didn't want to get into another Patterson is stupid debate. The only adjustments Hendry seems to make are pretty superficial. Going from whatever the heck his philosophy was last year to catching the ball this year doesn't do a whole lot. The only coach that has been let go in the past few years was Wendell Kim and there was a huge push by everyone to get him out. He took away Sarge's title as batting instructor, but in name only. It's about time they start looking at the basics of their organization, from international scouting and minor league promotions to major league instruction and offensive philosophy (and change it to one that doesn't focus on rewarding old guys for being able to cash paychecks). What do you mean by that?

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the World Series a "TEAM GOAL", and the HOF a "Individual Goal" much like the Cy Young? I know people remember Sutter hugging Porter after winning the World Series, and I can understand that, but...if winning a World Series was a requirement to reach the HOF, then there would be NO CUBS in the HOF, then. To use the World Series as justification for wearing the Cards hat is simply wrong. If Sutter wanted to use his stats, that's one thing, but using the World Series is a slap in the face of the Cubs organization (rather they deserve or not is another story), for what they did for his career. In fact, I would prefer him using his stats as justification. With that said, when Lee Smith makes the HOF, atleast we won't be having this conversation. I guess he wants to be remembered for that dominant (4.70 ERA) WS performance. :?

Then how does that explain Gary Carter in an Expos cap and Wade Boggs in a Red Sox cap? No matter what they say about it being the HOF's choice I think since it was almost a toss up they asked Sutter and went with his preference. My most indelible memory of Sutter in a Cards cap is giving up the two dingers to Ryno. His most dominant years were with the Cubs.

If you think Sutter was just "very good" you must not have watched him in the '70's when he was dominating with the Cubs. He overmatched hitters so much that it wasn't a question of whether they would get a hit as much as whether they would even be able to make contact. When Sutter took the mound people stopped what they were doing to watch.

You know if he signs with the White Sox he will get one of those cue shot doubles down the line to beat us in one of the inter-league games.

Gone. Someone already mentioned that Aramis is the one with the most tenure of all position players now. Wow. That sort of turnover doesn't exactly breed success... Thank you Ed Lynch. Well, do you think continuity helps? Obviously, if you have a team of scrubs, it doesn't, but don't you think it's a little odd that the longest tenured everyday player on a major market team with a top 10 farm system has been here for 2.5 years? Hmmm...which one of Miller, AGon, Karros, Grudz, Bellhorn, Alou, CPatt and Sosa would you like to have back for 2006? I think Hendry has changed the organizational philosophy and is now trying to get younger core, building block players like Lee, Barrett, Pierre and ARam to build around and create continuity. Furcal would have fit that mold if he had been able to get him signed.

You just don't get it. At all. But, you can spell. I think he gets it, but like many other of us does not believe in the magical transformation CPatt would have while sitting on the bench that would suddenly give Hendry "leverage" to trade him for more talent. If CPatt was brought back and Dusty decided to platoon him in LF with Murton to showcase him for other teams I can just imagine the outrage about playing a guy with such a low OBP and taking away playing time from Murton.

let me know when that happens. Cory Koskie is the difference maker, eh? :pukel: are you quoting the wrong post? where did i say that? the brewers were better than the cubs before they signed koskie...and they still are. Well, its the move that lead to this convo. For the record, your are saying that a team with a washed up 3B (Koskie), three rookies / rookie-like players in the rest of the IF, Lee (who has been savaged on this bd as overrated, and rightfully so), Clark (who played way over his station last season), and Jenkins (who is injured as much as he isn't) is definitively better than the Cubs? yes. they were better than the cubs last year weren't they? as i've said before they'll have a full season of a more experienced weeks and turnbow as the closer. like koskie or not, he's better than jeff cirillo, who they throw out there last year. plus, they'll have a healthy sheets. and what upgrades have the cubs made? pierre > patterson and some bullpen changes. whoop de doo. they'll also get worse production out of lf, 2b, 1b and possibly ss. maddux will likely be worse, and rusch will struggle if he's asked to start the entire year. the brewers, right now, w/o taking into account possible injuries, are better than the cubs. How do you figure the Cubs get worse production out of LF? And if you are assuming worse production out of 1B then why not assume better production out of 3B with a healthy Ramirez? If you assume a healthy Sheets then also assume a healthy Prior for the Cubs. No way would I trade the Cubs 25 man roster for the Brewers 25 man roster straight up, which IMO means that the Cubs go into the season as the better team.