RynoRules

Way out of it? That trade was in 2002, and as of the trade deadline in 2002 they were leading the division by 5 games. That was a classic buy from a buying team and has no relevence to the Cubs current situation. Whoops, i feel like an idiot go with San Diego trading for Brian Giles the year before they opened their park. They were out of it the year of the trade, but they wanted to give the fan base reason to believe they were serious about fielding a winner the following year. For them, it really helped build the season-ticket sales during the offseason. The Cubs may not need that as badly, but the positive publicity would certainly be beneficial for them. This brings up an interesting point: Would you rather see them tear this thing down, hire a guy with patience for young players and play kids around a few vets (for example, Lee, Z, and Barrett), or do you really believe they are only three or four good moves away? I am torn. I'm not sure how realistic this would be, but given the reports that Philly wants to dump Abreu to anyone that will take the full contract, let's say these trades + offseason signings were made: 1. Abreu for Hill + Harvey 2. Ethier + Broxton for Maddux + Howry 3. sign Jason Schmidt 4. sign Zito 2B Walker (re-sign him) LF Ethier 1B Lee RF Abreu 3B Ramirez CF Jones C Barrett SS Cedeno SP Zambrano SP Schmidt SP Zito SP Prior (when or if healthy) / Marshall SP Marshall / Marmol / Guzman / etc. RP Dempster RP Broxton RP Eyre RP Ohman RP Wuertz RP additional arm from plethora available I think that team wins the central and is WS - worthy. Schmidt and Zito are paid from the Wood and Maddux money, so the payroll just needs to go up for Abreu's salary. Those suggestions nearly mirror the ones I posted in the "sulley's steps thread" (excepting the Zito move, which I did not consider, and noting that I would use Prior to get Abreu). That said, so many proactive moves in one cycle (trading deadline through spring training) are pretty difficult to pull off. Even so, its a nice mesh of trading for prospects to fill needs (thus saving money in process) and being active in the FA mkt to repair the rotation. I think the toughest part ofthe above would be inking both Schmidt and Zito. Also a risky long term move to tie up so much money in pitchers.

ESPN Radio 1000 is reporting that Adrian Peterson has taken all second team reps in practice today, and that Jones has not practiced. No explanation yet. I will post again if I hear one. EDIT: Jones strained a hamstring during a team physical and has been placed on the "physically unable to perform list". If he does not come off the list by opening day, he must miss a minimum six weeks. All of the above per ESPN Radio 1000 here in Chicago.

Way out of it? That trade was in 2002, and as of the trade deadline in 2002 they were leading the division by 5 games. That was a classic buy from a buying team and has no relevence to the Cubs current situation. Whoops, i feel like an idiot go with San Diego trading for Brian Giles the year before they opened their park. They were out of it the year of the trade, but they wanted to give the fan base reason to believe they were serious about fielding a winner the following year. For them, it really helped build the season-ticket sales during the offseason. The Cubs may not need that as badly, but the positive publicity would certainly be beneficial for them. This brings up an interesting point: Would you rather see them tear this thing down, hire a guy with patience for young players and play kids around a few vets (for example, Lee, Z, and Barrett), or do you really believe they are only three or four good moves away? I am torn.

I'd be surprised if JH traded him. He's immensly popular.

My major issue with Dusty is that he is supposed to be a great motivator and manager of the clubhouse, yet his Cubsteams have folded every time they face adversity. That says a lot about him, IMO.

Thats true, but part of why I have a job is to advise employers on scenarios like the one that apparently took place here. if lawyers like me were involved (and I'd bet they were based on ESPN's refusal to talk about it), then the investigatory manadates were very likely followed.

That doesn't sound like it follows logically. A company under a ton of pressure---as you claim ESPN might be---would be ripe to skip steps in the process, not the other way around. At any rate this is all very speculative. Your are completely incorrect. The legal standard that all employers subject to Title VII are required to follow demands a thorough and prompt investigation and documentation thereof. If they know what they are doing - and I have no reason to believethey do not - they took each of these steps and determined that they had evidence of inappropriate behavior justifying a termination. It is also very likely that Reynolds had an employment contract that defined conditions under which he could be terminated (known as "cause"). If so, ESPN had to be even more careful, b/c Reynolds was not simply "at-will" (meaning he could be terminated for any reason or no reason at all, so long as the discharge is not based on his membership in a protected class; i.e., illegal discrimination). EDIT: But feel free to do your own research. Start with the Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, a 1986 Supreme Court case that establishes that sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination, and go on from there.

Has a seizure in the face of opportunities...

points for originality Thank you, I do. (Yoda is my fave)

Hurt his hand or finger, I understand.

I am in the industry - I am a labor and employment attny on the management side. A company like ESPN - with a ton of resources and rumors of a sexually hostile atmosphere (see ESPN: The Uncensored History) - very likely had a long list of complaints against HR and warned him at least once to cease this sort of behavior. Moreover, ifthey knew he was engaging in these acts and did not take prompt remedial action, they would be liable for his conduct. Accordingly, it is likely that HR got a fair shake but was unale to correct his own behavior. If ESPN outed him with an official statement, however, they would be asking for greater troubles. If I were their attny, I would have told them only to say he doesn't work here anymore, and that's it.

If the Halos are really interested in him, Hendry shouldbe all over it. They have a ton of guys Iid like to see here.

I think the "good friend" comment was just a way to make the joke work. I misinterpreted the joke.

:?: Clarence Thomas, Anita Hill, confirmation hearings, pubic hair, can of coke, long dong silver...... any of this ring a bell? I think he was barely a teenage when this happened. At least Reynolds won't call this a "high-tech lynching." I was just in high school when it all went down. Yeah, but you were pushing twenty-one. Not the same thing. Thanks for the lesson. I know who Clarence Thomas is and was, and recall following the Anita Hill hearings with great interest at age 14 (I believe it was 1990, no?). My "?" had nothing to do with who he is.

:?:

that must have been some hug. Looks like he forgot to mention that he wasn't wearing pants. :D Good one. "It was just a hug. I mean, it happened when I walked in on her in the ladies bathroom, but sill..."

I love when fans complain that a player "hits too many solo shots". It reminds me of Buddy Ryan's statement about Chris Carter when both were with the Eagles: "All he does is catch touchdowns."

Me too. The structure of the title is odd.

Dusty has made two intelligent moves in the last 12 hours - pulling Dempster in the 9th when it was clear he could not get anyone out, and giving Ronny a day or two off to get himself together a bit. Too bad he doesn't act this way consistently.

A combination of a bad defensive reputation and a suspect attitude (not my feelings, just a hunch based on baseball cliche-driven GM's) is probably partly to blame. Also, he just hasn't been that productive for us this season. Are you saying Beane and Riccardi subscribe to these so-called "baseball cliches"? Walker makes a heck of a lot of sense for both teams, particularly the A's, who are struggling with their bats this year. Moreover, I would think any GM doing his homework would note that Walker's sporadic playing time has had a lot to do with his relative lack of production.

It's a different type of love. Pedro Gomez does the daily reports on how Bonds is feeling, whether he is going to play or not (and if he isn't, the reason for it), and how he is dealing with all the steroid allegations as well as the potential indictments. Tim Kurkjian only does his Bonds spiel when Bonds hits a historic homerun. When it took Bonds almost two weeks to hit #714, I swear I saw the same Kurkjian piece every other day because they were anticipating him hitting it. The phrase I remember was "when he does finally pass the Babe..." which was changed to "now that he has caught the Babe..." after he hit 714 and changed to "now that he has passed the Babe..." after he hit 715. Pedro Gomez doesn't love Bonds. His employer has assigned him to the Bonds beat, which, for better or worse, is a decision many news outlets have made. He's a reporter, not a commentator or analyst, a la Kurkijan. You can't criticize Gomez for doing his job. If you don't like the way he does it, that's another matter.

It is interesting that no one has offered enough to JH to get him to pull the trigger on Walk. He makes a lot of sense for a small mkt team that puts a value on metrics, as his production at the plate is good relative to his salary. An AL team like Oakland or Toronto could let him play some 2B and DH and make good use of him. I still don't get why no has wanted him for two years. Something is up there.

I don't think its possible to manage solely on stats. Its a game played by humans after all, so you have to do some other thinking beyond what the metrics tell you. That said, it sounds like Dierker employs a nice mix of both.

Update from Deadspin:

Me too.