rawaction

I voted no for everyone. I liked Trammell alot though. I agree with Tim in every way, except for the vote. Although, I could be swayed.

I think I would go with Cabrera slightly over Wright. Really the only reason is that Cabrera offers more versatility. You can take him and then still go after the best available player at any position. Cabrera could play LF, RF, 3B, or SS if he has to. With Wright, you can't really pick the best player left if he's a 3B unless you play someone out of position.

The worst thing about this is Prior isn't gonna be a Cub after 2008 with all this trade talk happening. He has more value right now than he will ever have to the Cubs again as far as trades are concerned. My opinion is that the Cubs pretty much have to trade him now. Obviously, they can make amends or get rid of the entire front office and put a great team around him, but I think Prior has been loyal and I don't think he will think too highly of hearing his name in trade rumors. I agree with most that they should just put him out there and see what they can get for him.

Why midseason? He got thru the AFL healthy. I think he should be ready to go to start the season barring another set back. I assumed he would go to the minors first, but if he's gonna be pitching somewhere, it might as well be in Chicago. Even still, I would hope the Cubs would put him in Tennessee until the weather heats up. The fact he pitched in the AFL is one reason all by itself. How many innings do you think he can withstand after pitching so few these past few years? He hasn't pitched over 100 innings since 2002. He's one of my favorite prospects, but counting on him to give you 160+ innings as a 5th starter is just not a good idea in my mind. At least not in 2006. Well, if he's gonna come up at midseason, he's gonna have to pitch somewhere before then, right? If he makes it from the AS break to the finish in the Cubs rotation, that's a good 80-100 IP, in addition to what he throws in the minors, he'd be pretty close to 160. I agree that counting on him to give you 160+ is not a good idea, but he's at the age now that if he's healthy, you go with him in the majors as soon and as long as possible to maximize his value.

Why midseason? He got thru the AFL healthy. I think he should be ready to go to start the season barring another set back. I assumed he would go to the minors first, but if he's gonna be pitching somewhere, it might as well be in Chicago. Even still, I would hope the Cubs would put him in Tennessee until the weather heats up.

I think JH is counting on the rotation looking like this: Z Wood Maddux Williams Guzman I'd certainly rather it be that way than having Rusch in the rotation, so may be its wishful thinking on my part. Aside from Z the pitching rotation would be pathetic. Do you guys really expect Wood to be back and injury free? Maddux is likely going to regress again this year. Williams is a good #5 right now and Guzman is in the same category as Wood. TERRIBLE. Wouldn't the rotation be, Z Wood Maddux Bedard Williams It's hard for me to believe that Hendry could survive another offseason after trading away Sosa and Prior for less than full value in the previous 2.

Had players in the top 6 at every position, except for Kicker. The #1 QB in the league was a 5th round pick. I had a great draft, despite having a couple players with down years.

CHAMPIONS! QB- Carson Palmer QB- Mark Brunell RB- Willis McGahee RB- Willie Parker RB- Clinton Portis RB- Ronnie Brown WR- Chad Johnson WR- Keenan McCardell WR- Muhsin Muhammad WR- Amani Toomer WR- Eddie Kennison TE- Alge Crumpler K- Mike Vanderjagt D- Pittsburgh D- Miami

The TEAM, not Dee himself. I addressed THE TEAM in the first half of my post. You say Illinois is untested, but other than Gonzaga, all the other teams that MSU has played have proven to be overrated. Arizona isn't even in the top 25 anymore. BC isn't in the top 10. Even the Zags are just squeaking by teams. One of your losses was a really bad one. Don't even say it was because of the cramps, because the Hawaii starter played as few minutes as the MSU starters. IU was beaten by the oly really goodteam they played (UK is mediocre until Morris comes back), and lost to Indiana State. UNC has proven to be better than Arizona and in my estimation, UK. The Illini brike their home wining streak while playing a piss poor game. MSU hasn't played a team with the caliber of defense that Illinois is going to bring, nor have they defended nearly well enough to win a defensive dogfight. IMO, MSU is vulnerable to any team with a really good defense. IU is inconsistent. Iowa just isn't that good. Illinois has traded an outside game for an inside game, and while weaker in some ways, in a lot of ways they are even stronger than last year. They won't live and die by the three, and can handle the post much better than they have been able to in years. Their offense hasn't gelled yet, but the shooting is still there with Dee, Jamar and McBride, Randle is as athletic as they come and will only get better as the season goes on. Augie is a bit better, and now he will be helped out by the rotation of Pruitt, Arnold and Carter, so he won't be as alone defensively in the post. Last year, the Illini really only had one big guy, and few fouls to give in the post. Now the Illini are very big, and have a ton of fouls to give. Guys like Davis and Killingsworth will have a much harder time with this year's Illini than pevious years. Now the Illini have been vulnerable to a good zone, but their defense is good enough to hold teams down and keep them in every game. As an Illini fan, I have heard every year how the Illini have been less talented than MSU, or how we are untested every time we get off to a hot start. It's getting kind of cliche. Every year it's "We'll se how good the Illini are when the play the good teams", and at the end of the year, we are always at or near the top of the conference. I guess we'll just have to wait and see if history repeats itself. How is IU inconsistent? They've played 1 bad game this year, and that was on the road with an instate rival. And I'll take the kind of inconsistency that leads to 85 PPG and the nation's leading FG and 3PT%s. Throw in the fact that they lead the conference in Ast/TO ratio, and just held their last 2 opponents to under 55 points, and I'm cool with that. And how come every team gets put down while Illinois and their opponents get put up? Arizona, UK, Gonzaga, BC are not very good, but UNC is? I know you didn't say that, but Sully basically did. Aren't those teams considered "not very good" partly because of the way MSU and IU beat them? And why does U of I get a pass for not playing it's best basketball yet, but IU is called inconsistent despite missing their BEST player for all but 1 game, Indiana's 2004 Mr. Basketball playing 100% in 2 games, and having role players like Kline and Calloway miss time or play less than 100%? That being said, Butler will probably beat IU tonight.

That's good news. I'd play a lot of Green, McGowan and Joe too. All looked good last week, but the Bears need the 3 starters healthy for the playoffs.

illinois is great at defending the perimeter. IU's percentages will come down, it's just common logic. davis's huck-it-and-chuck-it offense will shine through. Agreed. Illinois does have a better perimeter D than anyone IU has played, and maybe will play this year. But who said anything about Illinois? I was just responding to your post that IU would be tough with their 2 big men. And I went on because every publication says IU has a great interior tandem that can lead them far in the tourney, but that's not what's making them a good team. The Charlotte game was a blueprint of what to expect if teams want to double down on Killer or DJ. IU has Strickland, Vaden, Ratliff, Wilmont, Suhr, and Allen who can knock down shots. I just think it's more of a pick your poison against IU, than "they are gonna be tough inside". And to reiterate CP's point....why would either of us like Illinois? They are rivals, and is the team that dominated the world last year. For the record, I hate Iowa more.

I like how everyone talks about IU's inside game, but nobody talks about the outside. Granted, they've only had Killer so far in the middle, but IU is the best shooting team in the country. 54% from the field, and if you think it's due to Marco getting easy baskets on the interior......the team is also leading America in 3pt percentage. And if that wasn't enough, they are 1 assist behind Washington for the best passing team in the country. And now they have started to rebound, play defense, and not turn the ball over.

The problem with touting his upside is that he is the oldest pitcher in this entire discussion. If Bedard has upside from where he is right now, what about Prior. Rich Hill's older than Prior and people on this board still think he'll be the next Barry Zito even though he'll be 26 by the time the season starts. :roll: Bedard's older than Rich Hill and people in this organization think he'll be the next Barry Zito. Even though he'll be 27 by the time the season starts. :roll: And btw, what does what people think about Hill have anything to do with this? Nobody is mad about Hill being included in a deal for Tejada.

He was listed as a"B" prospect in John Sickel's 2004 handbook. That info is nearly 2 years old now, however. Bedard was less than impressive in the majors. 2005: 141.7 IP, 4.00 ERA, 1.38 WHIP and a .260 BAA. His minor league numbers do look outstanding, but if I'm trading Prior along with Hill, I want more than Tejada and Bedard. In the very least, I want a prospect like Markaris thrown back into the deal. Bedard is no more accomplished or impressive than Hill or Williams. He's no less of a "health risk" than Prior. He is not nearly enough to justify such a trade. That's what I don't get. Hill is supposedly can't touch, but Hendry is gonna throw him in a deal just to get a very similar pitcher, but with more of an injury history. I'd probably do Bedard for Hill straight up, but it's not a no brainer. So, this deal is basically Prior for Tejada straight up. Say all you want about the Cubs having good young pitching and a lackluster offense, the bottom line is you don't trade a 24 year old already near the top of the league in production for a 29 year old. I wouldn't trade Prior straight up for anyone over 26. Even Barry Bonds, if I was assured 2001-2004 type seasons from him.

I wouldn't be shocked to see Rivers dealt to Arizona for a first and third rounder. I've heard rumors of Rivers to the Jets for Jonathan Vilma, and maybe picks going each way.

BTW, I was joking about OSU winning the conference. I think MSU is the best team, as I've said all year. MSU, Illinois, then IU. IU has more talent and a better team than U of I (YEAH, I SAID IT), but U of I is much more better coached. I think OSU will finish a close 4th though, and ahead of Iowa.

I think he'll make 20 errors easily as an ML SS, but he'll still be above average defensively. If he's at 2B, I think you see a lot fewer E's and one of the best in the game defensively there. I think he has the upside defensively of Julio Lugo (offensively too FWIW), which means he won't win any gold gloves, but will be as dependable as any SS around. I'll take that.

Is Rondell gonna DH? Can't imagine him getting too much time on that turf.

I always find it funny that a name-brand is actually widely used as the name of a product. See, Pampers and Diapers.

Possible, but doubtful if he moves to the NL. That's usually good for knocking a half a run off the ol' ERA. That's a good point. But still, I'd rather have more of a guarantee. I think plenty of guys on Zito's level (#2 starter or above) have shown if they are on the mound, they are gonna be great. Prior is one of them. Granted, you'd be almost guaranteed a healthy season from Zito vs. Prior, but when Prior is out there you are guaranteed 9.5 times out of 10 he won't have a disasterous start. I don't see that guarantee with Zito.

Not any more! Wow that's true. Toronto has a #2 making 11 for 5 years. Yeah, but just because they did it doesn't mean the Cubs should. Zito isn't worth that much. Like I said, Zito could easily have an ERA in the high 3's low-to-mid 4's for the next 4 years. I don't want to be locked into that for that long for that much. I'd rather keep Bedard, who has the upside to be at least that good. You are right and I agree with you but I wouldn't even trade Prior for Tejada and Bedard to begin with. Well, me either.

Not any more! Wow that's true. Toronto has a #2 making 11 for 5 years. Yeah, but just because they did it doesn't mean the Cubs should. Zito isn't worth that much. Like I said, Zito could easily have an ERA in the high 3's low-to-mid 4's for the next 4 years. I don't want to be locked into that for that long for that much. I'd rather keep Bedard, who has the upside to be at least that good.

THEY HAD ALEX GONZALEZ!

Just because Nomar broke down doesn't mean every 30 year old shortstop will break down. Tejada has never shown he is going to be breaking down soon. How has Derek Jeter done the past few years? As for Zito, he has a career 3.50 ERA in the AL. I'd call that #2-esque. Just because he had one mediocre year doesn't mean he's horrible. I'd have no problem giving Zito 12 million a year. He's one the few that will actually deserve that type of money in the coming years. Really? Zito's good. I believe he's a legit #2 type guy, but $12M is ace money. He had a rough start and a rough end to the season, but was great in the middle. It would be one thing if this was his first evidence of mediocrity, but he was bad in 2004. He'll be 28 in 06, and will not get better. I think he'll put up close to his career numbers for 3-4 years, but I don't know that those numbers are worth that much, especially with the increasing potential that he could be worse. For $12M, he better be a lock to put up numbers like his 02-03 numbers.

I just decided that Ohio State is gonna win the Big Ten. They are good. Gonna get the best recruiting class next year. They scare me. They are a bad matchup for many teams in the conference.