nilodnayr

Is that significant? No, not at all

Heilman, Marshall, Olson, Gaudin, and Samardzija (and who knows about Guzman) are all fine 5th starters on an average team. If you have to have more than one of them in the rotation that could be a problem, but as far as 5th startes go, we would have quite a glut. FWIW, Heilman is a guy that Hendy has been after for quite a while so he definitely could be staying even if we get Peavy.

0.0

(Tear)

Glaus is pretty studly himself...

Roughly 14.4% annual return...nice. Even if the Cubs operated at a loss every year they still would have been a great investment.

atta boy sharpy Also, IMO Keith has been the best player on the team so far this year...by a lot.

Sorry for the delay... Ha, no, we tried not to be too hard on the guys (unlike we were to Quenneville). Similar format though, Troy Murray started it off, asked the guys a few questions and then opened it up to the audience. Both guys were pretty shy to start off (especially Campbell), but they opened up as the night went on. All in all, they were up there for about an hour. I'll point out what I remember. Patrick Sharp is quite a looker in person. I'm a straight dude, but man is he handsome. Troy pointed out that the stewardesses call him McDreamy. One big reason Campbell chose the hawks is the proximity to his parents who live 6 hours away. He wanted to reward his dad for helping him throughout his career. Since Toews is such a young captain (ie under legal drinking age), a lot of the other guys help out in terms of socializing and such, typically Campbell. Campbell and Burish love to prank Toews and Kane. They'll fill up a garbage can with water and lean it on their hotel room door and knock, so when they open the door it'll tip over on them. They'll take a rope and tie Toews/Kanes door handle to a door opposite so they can't open the door. They'll order everything on Toews/Kanes room service breakfast menu for them and ask for a 5 AM delivery. They'll go down and have a nice meal at the hotel and charge Toews/Kanes room. They said Toews and Kane couldn't be more different. Toews is really quiet and respectful and Kane is loud and sorta cocky/confident. Troy just said "Wiz" and Campbell said "ohh my God I had to drive that guy home for 6 hours once". Evidently Wiz is sorta annoying and tells everyone that hes the best at everything. They kind of said it in an endearing way, but you get the idea that hes hard to handle. When asked if they think the team needs anything else they really focused on the chemistry of the team and that anyone brought in would have to work well with the guys. Sharp said that his career started rough, leaving home at 15 to go play juniors, but he had his older brother with him and then fortunately got to move home and play in his home down for a few years and went to college, but you learn a lot of life lessons along the road (ie learning how to write a check). Both guys were relatively low draft picks but they continued to work hard and now that they've got pretty good contracts, they feel like they have to work even harder and continue to get better to prove that they are worth it. Sharp said he gets recognized more on the street this year...and he likes to go to Wiener Circle. Campbell said hes had to balance being an offensive defenseman and had to deal with coaches that have tried to alter him, but hes learned. The assistant coach in Buffalo sat him down and talked to him and told him, you give me some and I'll give you some and that had a big affect on him and he won't let his offense hurt the team defensively. Campbell is REALLY excited for the game tonight (btw, its the midpoint of the season).

Surprised I haven't asked this before... but what is your connection with the Hawks nilo? The alumni gave me a college scholarship. In addition to the $, you become a member of the alumni association and get to participate in a lot of events, have monthly meetings, etc. Its pretty damn cool.

Campbell and Sharp will be speaking at our Alumni meeting tonight. I'll report back with a summary of what they said.

Trading for Heilman would just make it easier to give up Marshall in a Peavy deal.

Thats what I was asking about.

I agree it was a good goal.... BUT it should NOT have been a goal. it was called NO GOAL on the ice. Smyth DID make a kicking motion putting the puck in the net... there was NO conclusive evidence that he didn't. it's a subjective matter on what a "kicking motion" is and it needs to be ratified by the NHL. He did make a "kicking motion" but he didn't raise his skate above the ice. If the initial call on ice was GOOD GOAL I wouldn't have argued it... but the fact is was called no goal, it should have stayed that way. I really didn't see a kicking motion from Smyth. Well his foot came forward as if he were "kicking it", like I said I agree the goal was a good goal... but the NHL needs to define what a "kicking motion" is. I don't understand why you wouldn't argue if they called good goal on the ice. I guess we just saw it differently. IMO there was 0% kick. Not even 5%, it was in my mind absolutely not a kick. His foot came forward because it was attached to his leg, which was attached to his body, which was going towards the net. He was on his inside edge actually snowplowing stopping to slow down when the puck hit his leg and his foot and bounced it. Its impossible to kick from that position. And frankly, its hard to define a kick, but you know one when you see one. I have no problem leaving it up to the refs/Toronto to make the call, its usually quite obvious upon slow motion replay.

BTW, I just re-watched the disputed goal (since I only watched the third period lastnight) and that SOOOOOOOOOOOO was a goal. Good overturn. I actually am shocked that they called that no goal on the ice.

Additionally, the reason why the face off was being delayed was because the Avs were changing lines (as you know, home team gets to be last to change lines), so because the Avs were delaying the game to get the matchup they wanted on the ice, the ref blew his whistle. It was the Avs fault the delay occurred, the ref CAN drop the puck 5 seconds after he blows the whistle but its up to his discretion. Since it was the Avs and not the Hawks that were causing the delay, he should have waited for the Hawks to get to the dot. It was pure crap. And then to call the penalty...we really got jobbed there.

We're the Park Ridge Cubs now, didn't you get the memo? Actually they are going to go by Cubs at Ridge, Park...or for short C.R.A.P. wouldn't that be C.A.R.P. letters are hard

We're the Park Ridge Cubs now, didn't you get the memo? Actually they are going to go by Cubs at Ridge, Park...or for short C.R.A.P.

I don't like their starting rotation either. Parra melted down as the #3 last year, is he really going to be expected to be the #2? Its not great, but its not terrible. They probably have a slightly below average rotation. They OK, but missing a frontline starter. They are looking like a .500 team, which is good considering what our team is shaping up to be.

I think this really comes down to Peavy. The Padres dangled him and I think he officially wants out. Peavy's contract extension was based on the Padres staying competitive. I wouldn't be surprised if Peavy forces the trade to the Cubs. I've held firm all offseason that this deal will happen. I'm also expecting it to happen sooner now than later. Both teams still have work to do if Peavy isn't going anywhere, and less and less players will be available to either team the longer this deal takes. How would he do that? By taking his gripes to the front office. He can express his disappointment with the organization for having a fire sale when his contract extension was based on the team staying competitive. Peavy acted in good faith to the organization and they crapped all over him. Granted, he can't actually force a trade. But, I would imagine the proper thing to do when you have burned that bridge is to trade the player. Kinda hard for Peavy to take a "you owe it to me to trade me" stance when he's got a NTC that he's using to tie the Padres' hands. I'm sure if Peavy was willing to waive the NTC then Towers would be more than happy to accomodate him. I would agree with you, except for the fact the Padres gave him that NTC. By trying to trade him when they know full well that he has an NTC, they've basically burned that bridge, not Peavy. Would Peavy have given the Padres that very fair extension if he knew that less than 12 months later, they were going to have a fire sale? If I was a betting man, somewhere in the extension negotiations, Peavy and his agent made it clear that the contract extension signed was based on the team staying competitive. Peavy has honored his end of the deal and the Padres have not. From reading comments on DePo's blog and general sentiment, it seems as though fans are really on Peavy's side. I've read exactly what BBB said over and over and over. They are more angry with the Padres for blowing it all up and simpathize with Peavy who took a hometown discount and wanted to win a championship with the Padres. And considering the way the whole situation has been handled this offseason, its just exacerbated the fans annoyance/anger with the Padres org.

Here are the details... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/SPM81557IM.DTL&feed=rss.athletics Sounds like they are going to use Giambi as a DH mostly, move Cust to the OF and keep Barton at 1B. That leaves CF for Buck, Sweeney, Cunningham and Davis. I'd imagine Cunningham goes back to the minors, Buck and Sweeney battle out for CF starter with the other rotating in frequently/being a defensive replacement/4th OF and Davis holding down the 5th OF spot. As much as I wanted to trade for Sweeney, itsounds prudent for them to hold on to their young OFs for the eventual injury, Barton suckage, etc. Especially considering Holliday will be gone after next year and Giambi will only be around after next year if hes productive.

Reed is worthwhile. The other two leave enough to be desired that they shouldn't be considered viable options for a supposed championship contender to fill in 40 games missed by one of its 3-4-5 hitters. Hoffs 2009 Projections: Marcel: 287/351/449 ZIPS: 286/323/505 Hoffs 2008 MLE vs righties: 317/350/610 I'm not saying hes going to be great or anything (and he needs to work on his defense in the OF), but hes a guy that shouldn't hurt you filling in on the meaty end of a platoon for a bit. Although, that would leave you with a big dropoff for PH in high leverage situations.

I'd give him 2 years 10mil with a mutual option for the third....the guy is extremely reliable, is a proven winner, and would work nicely with his sinker in Wrigley. My second option would be Sheets for 7mil for one year. Kind of like the Penny deal And you'd get neither because they both will have bigger offers out there from competitive teams that they want to play on.

Only a .450 IsoP...meh that's not everything. he had a .609 OBP that season and had the highest OPS of his career. 232 walks is insane to me. i was obviously kidding...we retired green font i still should have caught that yeah considering the last guy who did it was some guy named mcgwire in 98 who broke some silly little record

Only a .450 IsoP...meh that's not everything. he had a .609 OBP that season and had the highest OPS of his career. 232 walks is insane to me. i was obviously kidding...we retired green font

This. Normally, I'd agree with this line of thinking, but if you add Sheets, that's 3 potential injuries waiting to happen in the rotation (Harden and sadly Zambrano are the others). Also you have to consider the amount of innings Dempster threw last year vs. the previous 3. While it seems great to say we have Marshall if one goes down if 2-3 of them go down, we are all the sudden looking much less formidable. Also, you'd have to think that if hes coming on a somewhat cheap deal, he'd just stay with the Brewers. They are still in on him and would probably match anything we'd offer.