RynoRules

No. That sounds like a reasonable assumption based on known information. What I bolded is a self-fulfilling prohecy. It is Dusty logic. Its not really. Its the role he's been for years with the Phils. Could n't they be right and/or know something we don't? My point isn't that Michaels is not an attractive optiion; he is. Its that it just does not make sense that he hasn't been used more often or traded to a team that recognizes his potential. If we "know" it, why hasn;t someone else picked up on it? Lot's of things in life don't make sense. Why did the Cubs sign a back-up SS to a 2.5 million dollar contract? Is your point that Michaels' situation doesn't make sense? If so, I agree. Which leads me back to my original point; the sensible thing would be one of the following: 1) Play the guy every day; or 2) trade for him and play him every day. It sure does not make sense that neither of these things has happened. Therefore, its reasonable to think there is something about him we do not have knowledge of. Its possible that there isn't, but there's enough evidence, IMO, to suggest that there is.

No. That sounds like a reasonable assumption based on known information. What I bolded is a self-fulfilling prohecy. It is Dusty logic. Its not really. Its the role he's been for years with the Phils. Could n't they be right and/or know something we don't? My point isn't that Michaels is not an attractive optiion; he is. Its that it just does not make sense that he hasn't been used more often or traded to a team that recognizes his potential. If we "know" it, why hasn;t someone else picked up on it? It can't be all about the Phils. If he's so good, someone would have made an offer that they could not refuse.

No one ever said the Phillies were a smart organization. Again, you're defending the decision making of an organization that just replaced it's GM as the basis of the argument. I mentioned this in the other thread and received no reply: What about the fact that over the last three or so years, no other org. has been beating down the doors to get Michaels? If he's so underutilized yet so valuable, why haven't other fwd-thinking teams put togethr a deal for him? The argument that Bowa, Manuel and Wade misused him does not explain this. EDIT: BTW, CubsDad is not my twin and I don't have a second user name. O:) There's a multitude of reasons why a player isn't traded. Teams asking too much, offering too little, etc. The lack of Michaels being an everyday player isn't proof he is incapable of handling it, or that there is something wrong with him. That's just faulty logic. So your argument is that no one has traded for him b/c either the Phils asked too much or the other teams offered too little, which is essentially to say that the Phils are dopes and are the reason he was not traded during his 20's? Isn't it possible that he is just more suited for and productive in the 4th OF role?

I'm here all week; try the veal!

I don't think Walker's presence in this lineup will make that much a difference. I'd rather have him at 2B than say, Neifi, but he won't make this ugly thing pretty all by himself. He's not that sort of player. Few are.

No one ever said the Phillies were a smart organization. Again, you're defending the decision making of an organization that just replaced it's GM as the basis of the argument. I mentioned this in the other thread and received no reply: What about the fact that over the last three or so years, no other org. has been beating down the doors to get Michaels? If he's so underutilized yet so valuable, why haven't other fwd-thinking teams put togethr a deal for him? The argument that Bowa, Manuel and Wade misused him does not explain this. EDIT: BTW, CubsDad is not my twin and I don't have a second user name. O:)

If the Cubs acquired Lugo (and his $4.95M contract) without shedding any salary of their own, it would probably prevent them from being able to sign Weaver, especially if the payroll is $100M. FWIW, reports say that Hendry expects the payroll to exceed 100M. I also think it's fair to say that they would shed some payroll in acquiring Lugo (if it comes to that). Plus, Walker's days seem limited. God, this has to be the worst collection of 100 million+ talent ever. No team with a 100 million+ payroll should have an outfield of Murton/Pierre/Jones. Pierre will maybe be better than average, but Murton and Jones have to be top 5 in the "worst group of corner outfielders". How can a team have Prior and Zambrano making relatively little, a group of 3 middle infielders making somewhere around 6 million, a rookie corner outfielder, an MVP candidate at first base making what, 8 million, and still come up with 100+ million? I agree with most of the above, though I will say that the jury is out on Murton. I think its conceivable that he could hit 25 HRs and go .300/.350 over an entire season. That's admitedly optimistic, but I think its based in reality.

Agreed. I just don't blame Neifi for any of it. Neifi is limited; its the manager's job to know how best to use his players; Dusty misuses Neifi; thus, it is Dusty's fault. I think most would agree with thhis logic. Thus, to the extent Neifi is personally based here, its probably misguided.

Have the Cubs really screwed Walker? I know picking up his option was a security blanket, for the team, but in doing so he has been guaranteed a job next season at 2.5M. Had he been forced into FA, he might have been relegated to NRI status or to take a million or more dollar paycut as a backup. Teams don't seem to be very interested in his services. I agree with you. Financially speaking, I think Hendry did Walker a favor by picking up his option. I didn't see any team giving Walker $2.5M. I think Hendry assessed that while Walker is a fine hitter, his fielding and mouth would not get him more than $2.0M from most teams. Hendry did himself a favor with picking up that option too - the last thing Hendry wants to see is Walker go to St. Louis or the Mets, two post-season threats. By locking his rights for 2006, Hendry can now trade him safely to an AL team or a non-NL contender. It's a good financial and baseball move to pick up his option. I just don't buy that there was any handshake deal. What I buy is that by Walker agreeing to the option clause in the agreement he signed before the 2005 season, he was basically giving the Cubs the right to choose his fate for 2006. They did (or better put, they will soon). Sound reasoning. My problem with this whole deal isn't the notion that Walker is a good hitter (he is) or that he is our best option at 2B (likely he is, but I think Hairson deserves a shot now that he is healthy again), its that if Walker is so undervalued by the Cubs relative to his salary, how come people aren't lining up with a nice deal to take him off of our hands? It just does not make sense. EDIT: And I don't see how Hendry "screwed" him over. He signed the deal; he knew this was a possibility; he's clearly an intelligent guy; now live with it.

I agree with the above. Michaels stats do not disprove that he would be an effective everday player. My problem is - and its been said alread - if he is such a sure thing, how come he never has been everyday player? How come some other fwd-thinking team hasn't already traded for him (he's thirty!)?

You sure don't have any tolerance for those that don't like Sammy do you? Why do you act like your opinion is more valid than theirs by mocking anyone who might not like the way he acted or might have suspicions of illegal roid use? I know several fans who didn't like him not for "roid use" but more for how they perceived his attitude to be. I know alot of Grace fans that believe he ran Grace out of town. Now I'm not saying any of those opinions are correct, but I'm certainly not going to mock everyone anytime the name Sammy is brought up like you undoubtedly do. I don't get why you feel the need to do it everytime, but carry on if you must. I'm not trying to speak for Goat, but I think he was getting at the fact that during Sosa's glory years, the many fair weather fans were praising his name were the first to bash him when things went wrong as opposed to others who stuck by him. Additionally, anyone who would boo Sosa during his first start back would probably be a jerk anyway, imo. Having participated in previous convos on this topic, I don't think that is what Roast meant. And I agree with Badger that its ridiculous to mock people who are still peeved with Sammy. If people want to be, they have the right to be. I have stated ad nauseum on this bd that I am mad at him for how he handled the "Game 162 incident" two seasons ago. I had supported him through every other issue - corking; alleged steroid use; etc. Skipping out on his team was the straw that broke my back.

Hard to disagree, except I am not yet convinved that JH should be fired.

She's not pyscho, just an opportunistic wh........, flesh peddler. And I love her for it, damn it.

Exactly how is "clubhouse" measured? Last year Neifi was 9th out of 11 qualified SS in OPS. He has a .681 OPS for his career. In short, his OPS sucks. He should not be an every day player and he should not be making 2.5 mill/year. And furthermore, when you do suck that badly, you should sign autographs, dammit. If Derrek Lee or Mark Prior don't want to sign...fine by me. They've earned that right. But scrub replacement level shortstops should sign the G**D*** autograph! :) What's important is that you are not bitter.

no kidding. did you see that usher? he had his hands all over her and she seemed not to mind. i swear he was copping a feel. lucky old fart. From what I can tell, she's quite the looker. But she also seems to be just a few steps shy of Mrs. Warner and Mrs. Christie in the full of herself pyscho sports wife category. what about the fromer Mrs. Finley (aka Mrs. Winger, aka Mrs. Hercules)? And don't ever leave Mrs. Anna "If my husband ever cheats I am doing the entire 40-man roster" Benson out of this convo.

agreed.

Not offended at all, just wondering what sort of argument you were looking for, bringing back an old thread that wasn't going anywhere and obviously trying to antagonize somebody about something. Still not sure what you are saying, since I noted that I was being "sarcastic". I thought the non-response was funny.

My bad - I thought you were referencing something else within the post. Nevemind. Apologies.

He didn't say that at all. He said "Has anyone in this thread said that they hate Neifie? People have siad they hate the way Neifie has been employed by the managment of the Cubs. That is all most people ever say. Come down off the box. " There was no sweeping comment about anybody using the word hate. Regardless, quit being so sensitive. When people say they hate X, they are saying they think X is a big reason why the Cubs aren't winning, and I hate that the Cubs aren't winning. Do you really need everybody to be crystal clear in pointing out exactly what they are pissed off everytime they write? My lord, people use such throwaway lines all the time. All they are talking about is that they want the freaking Cubs to win, and there are a lot of things making it difficult to win. The only person getting upset or sensitive appears to be you. IMO, its inapprorpriate to say that you hate these guys, be it a "throw away" line, a misguided reference, or whatever other semantic you wish to use to describe it. That's my opinion. You attacked it, I defended it, you still disagree. That's fine. End of story.

I appreciate the follow up. I still think this whole thing was blown out of proportion. But did you really think those steadfast that it wasn't a direct quote would come out and say they were wrong? Why wouldn't they? I've been wrong and admitted on this site before. I don't think anyone on this site thinks that they are perfect, do they? Wow - silence on that one was deafening. What sort of argument are you guys trying to start now? I was being sarcastic. Sorry if that offends.

Has anyone in this thread said that they hate Neifie? People have siad they hate the way Neifie has been employed by the managment of the Cubs. That is all most people ever say. Come down off the box. People on this bd. have stated that they hate several Cubs; Neifi, Dusty, and Hendry included. I can't do a search, so you'll just have to take my word for it. In any case, it wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular, so take it easy. EDIT: FYI, here is one prominent member's signature line: What the heck does that have to do with what that person said? He clearly stated people hate management's use. You didn't prove anything here regarding whether people hate Neifi personally. Obviously when people are complaining about a player and the team's use of the player, they don't typically mean they hate the player personally, because they don't know him. The only players I've known people to talk about personal hatred for are guys like Sosa, Patterson, Hundley, Farnsworth and possibly Walker. People attack those guys on a personal basis. The attacks on Neifi are strictly professional related. He fails to do the job but the Cubs keep giving him the chance to fail, and people hate that. They aren't questioning his motives, effort, personal life or anything else, just how much he sucks and how much the Cubs let him suck. The point was that he/she made a sweeping comment that no one on this bd. says that they "hate" the player / manager / front-office guy. That's not the case. Saying you "hate" someone is dfifferent than saing "he stinks". And I have no problem with people saying that JH stinks as a GM or Neifi is junk ball player, etc.

Has anyone in this thread said that they hate Neifie? People have siad they hate the way Neifie has been employed by the managment of the Cubs. That is all most people ever say. Come down off the box. People on this bd. have stated that they hate several Cubs; Neifi, Dusty, and Hendry included. I can't do a search, so you'll just have to take my word for it. In any case, it wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular, so take it easy. EDIT: FYI, here is one prominent member's signature line:

I disagree - there have been plenty of posts here that have been farther "off the deep end"; this is not one of them. What he posted, with a disclaimer mind you, was his opinion on the topic. I don't agree with all of it, but who cares. Please explain why what he wrote is "utter nonsense" and is as much lacking in "merit" and "foundation" as anything you have seen here.

I agree that Neifi is overused and missused by Dusty. That said, I like him because he appears to try hard (even if the results are limited) and he plays solid defense. The fact that he is limited offensively and his manager uses him in a backwards manner is not a reason to hate him.

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.