The Voice of Reason

but managers shouldn't "rock the boat". they're there to do a simple job--do whatever upper management wants them to do. unfortunately, in our case, that would be a terrible thing, as upper management is even more incompetent than field management. and while i think that girardi rocking the boat would help us in the short-term, the only thing that will help us truly is the deconstruction and reconstruction of the front-office with a team president like sandy alderson, a GM like paul depodesta, and any old ex-player they can find to do an easy job in the field. Too many managers let their ego affect their moves. They can't just put the guys on the field and let them play, they have to feel important so they call things like pitch outs, sac bunts, hit and runs, etc to put their stamp on the team. It's partially because they know the media laps that stuff up as a manager who is making things happen and doing the little things to be a winner. Jim Leyland's a very pro-active manager. I don't think he cares what the media or the front office thinks. How is he doing this year with essentially the same Tiger team that stunk last year? What changed from last year? Did the players all of sudden become talented? Leyland proved in Florida and is proving again this year in Detroit that good managers can have a very positive effect on a ball club. Since the Cubs let Leyland get away, why not hire someone (like Girardi) with a similar style and philosophy? Shaking up the mopey Cub players and incompetent front office couldn't make things any worse.

Paraphrasing Peter Gammons on ESPN this morning, "While a lot of fans and media in Chicago think Girardi would be a good fit for the Cubs, the front office of the Cubs is very leery of him and I don't think it will happen." Keep in mind the track record of recent former Cub managers at their next club - there isn't one. Reason = because the Cubs would rather hire "safe" managers that don't rock the boat over talented ones. If a manager starts to question the front office, he's gone faster than you can say Don Zimmer. The Cubs won't hire Girardi.

Starting to look like they might do it. Only have to go 4 - 20 to tie for worst record ever. Seem like a lock to finish under under .400 - have to finish 9 - 15 or worse. What free agent would want to come to this pathetic franchise?

I say no but that they will finish below .400 (98 losses) and among the top seven all-time worst Cub teams. From Barry Rozner in today's Daily Herald

In addition to "budget constraints," it's too bad the Cards also don't have "brain trust constraints" like MacPhail, Hendry and Baker. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/story/446272p-375711c.html

Ask him if it's true what they say about Northwestern girls.

Let the record show that Big Mac also won the prestigious MSNBC Whiner of the Week award. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3298669/

Although Big Mac does have one thing going for him - He's received the full support of Floyd Landis. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5848686?FSO1&ATT=HMA

Chicago baseball well represented with Sammy and the Black Sox. I was surprised the Giants didn't make it for having guys stationed in the scoreboard and stealing the signs to Ralph Branca before the Bobby Thompson home run. Any others they missed? http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0607/gallery.caughtcheating/content.1.html

Could it be that he just didn't want to discuss Bonds and steroids, in response to the question about Bonds? Nope, it must be cause he's hiding something. That's why he didn't comment on Barry Bonds. Yep. Agreed. Or maybe he didn't want to talk about Bonds because the point of the interview was to discuss Sosa being left off the Hometown Heroes list and not Bonds. Interesting theory although he had no problem offering an opinion on McGwire's HOF chances even though that wasn't the "point of the interview."

Could it be that he just didn't want to discuss Bonds and steroids, in response to the question about Bonds? Nope, it must be cause he's hiding something. That's why he didn't comment on Barry Bonds. Yep. Possibly, but given all the speculation about his own steroid use, it was the perfect time to dispute those allegations and condemn the use of steroids and all other forms of cheating (except corking a bat of course). :lol:

Sammy not wanting to discuss steroids? Wonder why? Did he think he was under oath at a congressional hearing and conveniently realized he didn't have the services of a translator? Not surprising that he's a big supporter of Big Mac. Wonder what Sammy thinks about Big Mac's hearing performance and his failure to talk about the past. Sammy's delusions are actually kind of sad. It's obvious he misses the limelight . However, why he thinks anyone would want the new slimmed down version of Sammy after no one did last year is beyond me. It's better to go out too early (like Jim Brown ) than too late (like Michael Jordan, Willie Mays, etc.).

That trade would make a lot of sense for the Cubs but do you really think the Yankees would make that trade just because Yankee fans currently aren't enamored with ARod? Arod is still one of the best players in baseball. Why would they want garbage like Rusch and Williams? Walker is a defensive liability and the Yankees already have Giambi at DH. Why would they want an underachieving no-hustle guy like Aram? He would get booed must worse than Arod does in New York, at least ARod hustles. Any deal with the Yankees for ARod will likely involve Jacque Jones because the Yankees need an outfielder. You might be right. They'd want Howry, Zambrano, Pie and Jones. No thanks.

That trade would make a lot of sense for the Cubs but do you really think the Yankees would make that trade just because Yankee fans currently aren't enamored with ARod? Arod is still one of the best players in baseball. Why would they want garbage like Rusch and Williams? Walker is a defensive liability and the Yankees already have Giambi at DH. Why would they want an underachieving no-hustle guy like Aram? He would get booed must worse than Arod does in New York, at least ARod hustles.

The place is falling apart. They should tear it down.

You might be right. How about $120M plus replacing MacPhail and Hendry with guys that knew what they were doing? Now that combination would get you results.

I'm not claiming they don't spend. I just think that the situation today often clouds fans' perceptions about how it's been in the past. They dwarf the competition today much more so than in the past. I'm not so sure the Cubs should spend as much as Boston. A) Boston is the only team in all of New England. It's a huge fish in a gigantic pond, the only fish in fact. The Cubs share a city with another team, and are surrounded by rivals in neighboring states. B) Northeast money blows Chicago money out of the water. There is just a much greater pool of cash to play with there. When you look at the money available to the Cubs market, I believe their rightful place is about 4th-7th on the list of teams that "should" spend big money. NYY, NYM and BOS all have greater resources to play with. LAA, LAD and SFG can and should all compete with the Cubs for the next spot. Valid points but I still don't why the Red Sox payroll should be close to 50% more than the Cubs. Note: I am assuming the Red Sox are around $135M and the Cubs are around $90M. I can't believe the Red Sox squeeze more direct ballpark-related related revenues out of Fenway than the Cubs get for attendance, parking, signage, roof top access, etc. Also, with a national fan base, the Cubs memorabila sales revenue has to be close to the Red Sox. Now, maybe one of you kids in Fantasy Land (i.e., college) with a lot of time on your hands can figure out now much more televison revenue the Red Sox get than the Cubs and how much higher the Red Sox Franchise is valued - I bet it's not 50% higher than the Cubs.

Disagree. How many less of their 26 championships would the Yankees have if they didn't have the highest payroll year after year. I would guess it would be quite a few. It's not a coincidence that the next highest # of WS championships is like 9. Increasing the payroll doesn't guarantee a WS but it does increase your margin for error and with the right GM can help teams remain competitive year after year like the Yankeees and Red Sox. How many of the 26 World Series have the Yankees won with the highest payroll? Obviously you're right that the higher payroll increases flexibility and margin for error, but I think as it pertains to the Cubs we're in more need of better decisions with the money than more money itself, though both are plenty useful. All 26. I doubt it. In the mid-to-late 90's, Baltimore had the highest payroll. I'm pretty sure that for at least one, and maybe two or three of those titles, the Yanks were not the highest payroll. And I'd bet they didn't have the highest in some earlier seasons either. OK maybe they didn't have the highest payroll EVERY SINGLE year but they've always been at or close to the top. Starting with the purchase of Babe Ruth they've been willing to spend money to get good players. In the early years, before the draft, the Yankees simply outbid everyone for the best players. Read Bill Veeck's excellent book Veeck as in Wreck sometime. He documents this fact in detail. The Yankees were the reason MLB started the draft. Bruce and I are not saying the Cubs should spend like the Yankees just like the Red Sox.

Another example of why the Daily Herald has the most insightful and thought provoking sports writers in town. I personally would love to see MacPhail go. http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/imrem.asp?id=207023

Disagree. How many less of their 26 championships would the Yankees have if they didn't have the highest payroll year after year. I would guess it would be quite a few. It's not a coincidence that the next highest # of WS championships is like 9. Increasing the payroll doesn't guarantee a WS but it does increase your margin for error and with the right GM can help teams remain competitive year after year like the Yankeees and Red Sox. How many of the 26 World Series have the Yankees won with the highest payroll? Obviously you're right that the higher payroll increases flexibility and margin for error, but I think as it pertains to the Cubs we're in more need of better decisions with the money than more money itself, though both are plenty useful. All 26.

Disagree. How many less of their 26 championships would the Yankees have if they didn't have the highest payroll year after year. I would guess it would be quite a few. It's not a coincidence that the next highest # of WS championships is like 9. Increasing the payroll doesn't guarantee a WS but it does increase your margin for error and with the right GM can help teams remain competitive year after year like the Yankeees and Red Sox.

Bruce - As long as you are asking for the Red Sox's budget, how about obtaining their GM (Theo) as well?

How long until qualifying for the 2010 World Cup starts?

Homeruns are up all across baseball. Why? You could argue that the hitters are cheating, but there is an equally viable argument that states it's due to lack of pitchers cheating. Afterall, the majority of positive tests for banned substances thus far has occurred in pitchers, not hitters. I've always felt steroids could help a reliever better than anyone else in baseball. HGH and steroids increase recovery time and no one needs that more than relief pitchers. While those substances can surely help hitters in bulking up and there's definitely some value there, imagine a pitcher who could dial it up to the 90's, but was unable to hit 85 the next day discovers that by juicing he can hit in the 90's on consecutive days. His value skyrockets under those circumstances. Can you say Joe Borowski?

Mods - I'm sorry this was posted in Polls before I noticed this thread. Anyone think Sosa or Clemens was one of the players Grimsley named? Excerpt from Smokinggun. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/nolte1.html Pitcher Spills Steroid, Speed Secrets Diamondback Jason Grimsley's home raided in federal drug probe JUNE 7--Federal agents yesterday raided the Arizona home of a journeyman baseball pitcher who reportedly admitted using performance enhancing drugs and gave investigators the names of current and former major leaguers who have also juiced. Jason Grimsley, an Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher, began cooperating with probers after he accepted a $3200 shipment of human growth hormone at his Scottsdale residence on April 19 (the HGH was delivered to Grimsley, 38, by an undercover postal inspector). After a week's cooperation, Grimsley's lawyer stopped his chats with the government team, which included Internal Revenue Service agent Jeff Novitzky, who has headed the steroid investigation of Barry Bonds and other clients of San Francisco's BALCO laboratory. Below you'll find a copy of Novitzky's search warrant affidavit for Grimsley's home, which was unsealed yesterday in U.S. District Court in Phoenix. During his brief cooperation, Grimsley fingered several fellow athletes (whose names were redacted from the affidavit), spoke about the prevalence of amphetamines in baseball clubhouses, and claimed that "Latin players" were a major source of speed in the big leagues. He also said players on California-based teams would go to Mexico and score amphetamines. Grimsley's remarkable admissions span about seven pages in the Novitzky affidavit. Grimsley, a 15-year veteran, has played for seven teams, including the New York Yankees and Cleveland Indians. His teammates have included Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, Jose Canseco, and Roger Clemens. (20 pages) _________________