RynoRules

Where were the Trib higher ups when a lot of money was being handed out to a crappy ballplayer? 15m is what they gave a crappy ballplayer just last week. Jones is a classic Cub signing. Essentially, sign a guy hoping he can return to past glory. See Kal Daniels, Maldonaldo, Hundley, Nomar for more. I'm sure one of the elder statesmen Cub fans could come up w/ one heck of a list of such signings. You rang?: Danny Jackson, Dave Smith, Rick Agulera, Goose Gossage... Kevin Tapani, Willie Wilson, Luis Salazar, Steve Buchele, Mike Morgan... Vance Law, Larry Bowa, Jay Johnstone, Henry Rodriguez, Joe Girardi (second coming)... Anyone else feel exhausted or like they want to: :pukel: EDIT: I'd hate to forget Gaietti, Veres, Guthrie and Remilinger...

:shock:

Point of my original post was that many of us were fine with the early moves - the two relivers, Rusch, and (gulp) Neifi - assuming that we acquired some big help for the lineup (Furcal / Pierre / Big RFer). We have wound up with Jacque Jones and Juan Pierre. That ain't exactly what I had in mind, and its hard to believe that JH isgoing to find away to further strengthen the team without severely weakining it in another catagory.

Exactly. Metrics canot tell you about his professionalism and hustle, and the fact that he played on two gimpy knees for most of his career, yet put up HOF-like nos. In addition, he had an absolute rocket arm that was highly accurate (think Vlad Guerrero). Not to mention his performance in 87' was unmatched during that decade; I mean no one came close to putting up nos. like that during the 80's. It was astounding, particularly since he did it for this team: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/1987.shtml Yeah, its my heart strings that are being tugged (I was eleven that summer and worshipped the very ground he walked on), but I vote "yes".

Borderline. In light of the way I feel about Belle (I know, different eras, but still), I have to give him the thumbs down.

Who cares how surly he was. He had seven Koufax-like years. "Yes".

I was actually thinking: - Draft Shelden Williams - Trade the other no. 1 with Gordon as part of a package for a vet. two guard

I feel like I am in one of the "Bad News Bears" sequels: "Let Murton play, let Murton play!!!!"

Jason Bay is an uber-Giles. He's the cornerstone of that team and if they can make themselves competitive, he should be a Pirate for life. (a fate worse than death?)

Do you have kids? Last night I was looking for a summary of Levine's late-afternoon appearance on ESPN 1000, missed it, and then posted a frustrated request for it. In reality, I missed it b/c I was distratced by my toddler. It happens. Darn kids!!! Glad I am not expecting my second!!! (due in late-May)

Already done. Thanks!!!

Someone should edit the title of this topic to "rumor". The DRays and O's get hosed in that deal, big time. The rumored Cubs offer is twice as good.

The day ARam got hurt he led the team in HR's and RBI. After having a awful April. That's probably what he's referring to. Bingo. Thanks for the helper.

$7M in 2006 $10M in 2007 $12M in 2008 With Contreras, Buerhle, Vazquez, Garland, Garcia and McCarthy, it gives KW the flexibility to shop one for a bat. My guess: Garcia. The Sox are way over budget and must trade one of their pitchers without assuming a large contract (e.g, Tejada). If Hendry was smart (the jury is still out), he would trade enough prospects (ex-Hill) to the Sox to get Garcia or Vazquez or Garland and then flip him with Hill and Patterson to the Orioles for Tejada. Assuming the O's bite, that way the Cubs could get their man without giving up Prior. If it made the Sox better, KW would cooperate with the Cubs and would love to rub it in their faces if one of the propects paid dividends later. That is an interesting idea.

Me either. And I've been perhaps his strongest supporter as far as Garland turning the corner. Then you're nuts. Look at what the AJ Burnetts and Kevin Millwoods of the world are getting. It's a below market value contract, especially given that it is only a three year deal. Not to pick on Prior, but can we please cut this sort of nonsense out? It only leads to prolonged name-calling and in-fighting, and its becoming more prevelant around here.

Just broke on ESPN Radio.

Levine is subbing for Silvy and Carmen on ESPN Radio 1000 here: just said that the Tejada - Prior scenario is now looking "more convoluted". I guess he's half-way to a retraction? EDIT: Levine: "The deal might be a little stalled." "They are not dying to trade Prior." "Its unclear whether they are going to be close to getting anything done..."

When Pierre and Jones hit 1/2 in the order, I'm sure we'll be seeing the "French Connection" signs. Ha. If Pierre and Jones exchange some sort of ceremonial greeting before each game, will it be dubbed the "French Kiss"?

Then why would he want to come here? This is a really good point that should be expanded on. Why would Tejada want to come here? We don't have a winning tradition. We haven't made the playoffs since 2003. Teams don't become better when they trade 1 player for another of equal value when it just creates another hole somewhere else. If Tejada wants to win, I'm afraid he'd be going to the wrong organization if he became a Cub. He should want to be traded to the team that has Mark Prior. A combination of Tejada and Prior with a decent supporting cast will probably create a winner. How long will it take for Tejada to wear out his welcome? How long before he asks for another trade? The Cubs treat their Dominican superstars so well throughout their time with the team. Or maybe he just likes that the Cubs never dangle the names of their superstars out for trade proposals. I'll probably get flamed at forn oting this, but when Sammy started to heat up in the mid-90s (particularly in 96' and 97'), I asked my Old Man (a long time Cubs fan) why he thought that the team didn't market him the way they did Grace. He answered that race and skin color was a major reason. Of course, this changed the next year (98'), but did the Cubs have a choice at that point? Is this still true? Lee certainly gets more pub that ARam, whose stats might have been similar had he not been hurt. May be this needs its own thread. :offtopic:

If Chachin and Towers are good and the middle relief holds up, I think they could leapfrog the Red Sox and challenge for the WC. But the Yanks are likely to outscore everyone.

Wholly (*expletive*) thats one ugly list.

I heard someone on ESPN Radio (national, not local) killing Grossman for being inaccurate and not throwing for enough yardage. I guess that guy missed Moose dropping three passes, including one sure TD. What would Grossman's line have been if Moose catches two of those three, including the TD, which Grossman put right in his hands? These "journalists" should try knowing what they are talking about before they start flapping their gums.

That's most sports writers though. It's that whole "standing by your story" journalism. If you think about it, has there been any sports writer (Internet, radio, newspapers, etc.) that we would say was right on the money at least 80 percent of the time? Probably not, and your point is well taken. But see my post above.

When the search tool is back up and running, I'm really starting to think that we need to document the number of imminent deals that Levine has discussed that didn't come through. He's not a particularly reliable source, though he does give us some fuel for the hot stove (albeit the dried cow dung variety). He's generated at least two enoormous threads on this bd. since May (Dunn and Tejada). I guess what irritates me the most is he never seems to get called out by the station (or anyone else) for these inaccurate reports, and/or never seems to explain himself when they turn out to be inaccurate. I wonder if something is getting lost in the translation from what he actually says to what people here write about what he says. I've seen the guy on Comcast a lot and have heard him on the radio from time to time, and while his style does not lend a lot of credibility to his words for me, I've never heard him talk the way some people report that he talks. Did he really say such and such deal was imminent, or did he say the Cubs are looking for a big bat, these are some examples of a big bat, they'd like to get something done sooner or later but nothing is imminent? Maybe the people on this board who start posts relaying what Levine reports need to pay a little closer attention to the whole story and not just look for key words like Prior, Tejada, trade. The way people tell the story he's going out there saying a trade is very likely, and then he comes right back the next day and denies ever saying a trade was likely. And this story has been played out at least a half dozen times. I find it really hard to believe this is actually how it's happening every time. You get a guy like Rogers in print and on the record constantly begging for the trades of Zambrano or Wood, and it's easy to have a discussion about him. He's not saying the Cubs are going to do something, he's just playing Sam Smith and saying he thinks they should do something, that's the difference between a reporter and columnist. My problem with Levine stems mainly from his handling of the May trade rumor, where (and I heard him say it) he stated that a "major trade" was imminent in Cub-land, and would definitely happen within a day or two. He mentioned Dunn, though I do not think he said that the trade would absolutely be for him (if I implied that, then I apologize). As we know, he was dead wrong, and to the best of my knowledge, he never took responsibility for this inaccuracy. Now the accuracy of his Tejada report is in doubt. In my mind, Levine stands in direct contrast to Sam Smith, who clearly qualifies the trade scenarios in his columns with disclaimers that indicate that "I would do this if I were John Paxson". Therefore, its clear that the scenarios he writes about are ones that he has envisioned or created, and that there do not come from his "sources". I appreciate that sort of caveat when I am listening and/or reading about th possibility of a transaction taking place.

When the search tool is back up and running, I'm really starting to think that we need to document the number of imminent deals that Levine has discussed that didn't come through. He's not a particularly reliable source, though he does give us some fuel for the hot stove (albeit the dried cow dung variety). He's generated at least two enoormous threads on this bd. since May (Dunn and Tejada). I guess what irritates me the most is he never seems to get called out by the station (or anyone else) for these inaccurate reports, and/or never seems to explain himself when they turn out to be inaccurate.