NewUserName

I agree. Really in retrospect he should have been traded after we signed Soriano when his trade value was the highest. Sadly he will probably be traded when his trade value is its lowest. He also may just be Dave Magadan as a RHed hitting OFer. Still think if the team was committed to being good for years to come they would have never sacrificed his playing time for the likes of Cliff Floyd. Sadly there in some sort of Cardinal induced trance that they may win a WS this year.

They finished the regular season with four undefeated teams from the six BCS conferences which is ridiculous. EDIT: That actually might have been up to the conference title games though I'm not sure. Didnt they do a similar thing last year and have Iowa in the National Title game?

This is a key point here. Look, what folks really need to realize is that things have reached the point where free agent signings are not measured on a typical good-to-bad scale. They're basically all bad, and it's simply a matter of degree. Seriously, go have a look at all of the FA signings throughout baseball for the last couple of years, and see how many significant ones (say $20M+) you can look at and go, "wow, that was a really great signing -- that guy's really underpaid." You won't find many, and a guy like Ted Lilly for 4/$40 is going to be one of the best ones out there. The truth is that GMs hate to be in the FA market looking to fill holes. But what they hate even worse is handing a regular job to an overmatched rookie that belongs in AA or AAA. Getting league average production from a Marquis or a Jones for $5-7M beats the heck out of getting an 8.50 ERA or a .600 OPS for $400K. So given proper context, Hendry's signings don't look nearly so bad. a voice of reason in the wilderness! If this is the voice of reason then the Cubs either need to stay out of the FA market or start spending like the Yankees and Red Sox. Personally I would rather the Cubs way overpay for a really good young FA like Vlad a couple of years ago. What the Cubs are currently doing is just treading water with mostly mediocre free agent signings. Or worse, overpaying for a overrated player coming off a career year. If Lily stays a ok #2 signing then good for him. Truth is the Cubs cant keep building the team with guys like Marquis, Jones, Lily, DeRossa, Howry, Eyre, Floyd, Dempster, Ward and Blanco and think that they are going to win a World Series. It is striving for middle of the road. Its not that some of these guys dont have value. Its just that we are starting to get a roster full of them. Considering also that most of the players that have been coming up are also mediocre. So truth is if the Cubs dont start spending money like the Red Sox or Yankees, they had better start getting serious about player development. Which means that young players are going to have to be allowed to struggle at the major league level, while impatient fans say they should be in AAA. Or really hope that we can pull off a Cardinal like fluke. But the last thing I would say is too keep signing the likes of Jacque Jones to be a major contributer on this team to the contract that he signed is not a voice of reason. It is crying out for help.

No, he is replacing Murton. Soriano and Pagan will be back and Murton won't be on the final 25, for the playoff roster. Taking bets now. I am already taking that bet.

If......... then? Maybe I'm just not watching much, but I don't see the hype. They are hyping up the upcoming season, of course, but I don't see them hyping up preseason games specifically. I would say the fact that they have lead sportscenter with highlights of preseason games. The have Monday night countdown for several hours leading up to preseason games. Most of there afternoon programing has already went almost 50% NFL. Really starting in July ESPN becomes the 2nd NFL network. I understand that NFL is for some reason the most popular sport. Comeon though we are still 2 1/2 weeks until the season starts. I like Baseball a lot but really dont care after the hotstove league until the last week of Spring Training. I certainly dont want to see Yankees spring training highlights over a real sporting event going on at the time.

As politely as he could, Hendry basically made it clear that Monroe is here to face LHP. I'm thinking/hoping he's going to be Jacque's platoon partner in CF, the top bat off the bench to face lefties out of the pen and get an occasional start on the corner based on matchups. I would be willing to bet $10 that most of his starts will be in for Murton. If the Cubs make the playoffs Murton will not be on the playoff roster and will be traded when his value is its lowest this off-season.

I'm thinking this as well, but I don't remember if it was the same guy. I do remember Lou slobbering all over some obscure guy though. I am pretty sure it was Monroe. He couldnt criticize Granderson enough. I think Grandersons game does have some holes in it but he was better than Monroe last year and much younger.

overreaction much? No kidding. He gave up 2 runs. It happens. But an ace doesnt walk the opposing teams pitcher, and consistently have games of 4+ walks. Consistently is an understatement. It feels like Z walks something like 6 or 7 batters every.single.game. Umm thats why I said 4+ And the ones he dont walk all seem to go 3-2 against him.

I was just thinking that it was during the playoffs last year when Lou was announcing. He had some sort of Man crush on Monroe. This is the reason that stuck in my head that I didnt want Lou to be our manager. After an hour of cooling down, I just hope he hits well for us and we win the WS. I still think its just another case of Cubs hoping someone else's trash will for some reason be better with the Cubs. I think its funny that the Tigers who are a legitimate WS contender would rather play a AA player.

Just like he did with Randall Simon, right? Like he did with Neifi. The Cubs also picked up Derrek Lee that offseason so there was not need for Simon. All I have to say is I have been a Cub fan for a long time and this is just another example of a 30 something never was who was in some pennant race with another team being overrated by the Cubs.

What I think should really concern people is if he puts up a few "clutch" homers. The Cubs back into the playoffs and then Hendry signs his sorry can to a 3yr 15mill contract. Not only is Murton a better option against Lefties now he will probably be gone next year as we get Monroe for 300 ABs. This is typical LOSER MENTALITY from the biggest losers in pro sports.

I think great is probably out. He might be effective. If they tender him what will it cost the Cubs? I am guessing the payroll is getting pretty tight already and the need for another OFer is more important than a questionable starter/reliever.

Rich has Kerry Wood disease. The Cubs don't score any runs when he pitches. He's inconsistent :wink:

The fact that Jeter was even on the ballot shows how stupid the whole thing is. Of course its all-time gold glove winners, which is annually the stupidest award in baseball.

True. I am guessing there isnt even a debate with other fans who is a better 2nd baseman between Sandberg and Morgan.

No argument there. However, if, as you say, Ryno took every opportunity to toot his own horn, I am sure he would factor in much more to these votes. Must disagree here. Morgan, while great, not the greatest ever. Was immensely helped by one of the best lineups in history and while winning this vote, was not half the fielder Sandberg was. How did the great lineup help him? His numbers did improve going from Houston to Cincinati but the Astrodome was probably the worst hitters park in baseball at the time and Riverfront probably leaned towards being a hitters park. I am not saying the lineup didnt help him but its not like he was chopped liver in a pretty bad hitters park. He was also just entering his prime when he joined the Reds. I dont know about all-time but he certainly was the best 2nd basemen of my lifetime. Also to say that he wasnt half the fielder Sandberg was is a little extreme. Joe Morgan was a great defensive 2nd baseman. Probably not as good as Sandberg but not a lot worse.

Slugging Percentage: Floyd .380 Murton .371 I'm just saying. Murton has 4 hrs and 9 doubles in 178 ab's while Floyd has 4 hr's and 8 doubles in 220 ab's. Floyd hasnt hit a hr since June 26, my God thats pathetic. OPS: Cliff Floyd .744 Matt Murton .699 The bottom line is that they're both terrible and should not be starting corner outfielders for a pennant-contending team. And yet, one of them will be, and only Murton has shown signs of being productive within the past year. Murton should clearly start v. LHP. Can you explain what you mean by "shown signs"? OPS v. RHP Floyd 2006 - .765 2007 - .732 Murton 2006 - .782 2007 - .725 That's virtually indistinguishable It is reasonable to assume that Murton will improve into a .800 plus ops guy. I dont think its reasonable to assume that for Floyd anymore. Truth is Murton is hitting 40 points below his career average. Just like it was reasonable to expect JJones to improve to his career norms, it is also reasonable to expect the same from Murton. Its not like he is past his prime and injury prone like Uncle Cliffy

You should have put NFL preseason. At least Yankees, Red Sox and Bonds are real competition going on right now. If there anything more meaningless and more boring to watch that is more hyped than NFL preseason football.

How does he pass the drug tests? Cocaine is on the banned substance list. Youd think with a heavy user he would eventually get caught. They do not test for all banned substances. They can't according to the agreement unless there is reasonable cause. http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20050316141550-27350.pdf See page 6 where it states that players are not subject for testing for any drugs of abuse except as set forth in section 3C...3C defines resonable cause Cocaine clears through your system rather rapidly. Dont hear about guys flunking drug tests for Coke very often.

He didnt have a good Cardinal series after having a pretty good series against the Reds. I have a feeling his playing time is about ready to take a big dip. So you should be happy.

Everything in life is relative. Rich Hill is incosistent compared to who? Speaking of HRs Lilly has been giving them up a pretty good clip. His own demonstrated capabilities? I think if Hill would get average league run support there would be no talk of his consistency.

I dont think that the A's or the Twins have a lot higher payrolls than KC. These 2 teams have proven you can be competitive on the field without being competitive in payroll. The Royals also had a great following in the 70s and 80s. It is not inconceivable for them to build themselves to a midmarket team. these two teams have proven you can be competitive for a couple of years if you have a slew of talented young players all come up at the same time. after that, you have to start spending some money to sustain it. http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/totalpayroll.aspx?year=2001 vs. http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/totalpayroll.aspx?year=2007 I was trying to point out that if KC was to become competitive then their fans in the past have proven to support them. Which could help them make there way to being a mid-market club.

Abraham Nunez

Do you have any links that prove your first statement. It is a common myth in baseball that a good hitter behind you will make you a better hitter. I dont have any links but Bill James in his abstract back in the 80s concluded that it helps some hitters to have a better hitter behind them but hurts others. So you could not come to the conclusion that a better hitter behind someone automatically makes them a better hitter. It is more of case by case thing. No I don't have any "research" to prove my statement... but as I have used in the past... assume Cedeno is hitting behind Ramirez. If we had a non power hitter who really isn't that great hitting behind the best slugger on the team it is COMMON SENSE (not common knowledge I guess) that the pitcher would attempt to pitch around Ramirez in order to get to the easy out. Now... if we had Soriano hitting behind Ramirez, it would make more sense to go after Ramirez and try to get him out by any means possible (aka not walking him) In order to make sure Soriano comes up with less people on base. So if they are trying as hard as they can not to walk Ramirez because Soriano is up, that means there will be more strikes thrown and that also means more hittable pitches. Let me introduce you to a guy named Bill James. Starting in the late 70s he started writing a book called the Baseball Abstract. It was a yearly publication. A lot of what the books were about was there was a lot of "Baseball Knowledge" or common sense that littered what managers did and announcers announced. Things like you have to have a "speedster leading off" or "a good contact hitter hitting second" or that "power pitchers pitched better in cold weather". Some of these old myths were true(like dont make the last out at 3rd) Some were myths (power pitchers pitch better in cold weather). Almost all of them were driven by "Common Sense". Like you will hit better with a better hitter behind you. Truth is he proved it was different for each hitter. Some hit better, some hit worse. Like Dale Murphy hit better with Bob Horner out. Most certainly cannot draw a definate conclusion that someone will hit better with just becuase there is a better hitter behind them, common sense or not.

Do you have any links that prove your first statement. It is a common myth in baseball that a good hitter behind you will make you a better hitter. I dont have any links but Bill James in his abstract back in the 80s concluded that it helps some hitters to have a better hitter behind them but hurts others. So you could not come to the conclusion that a better hitter behind someone automatically makes them a better hitter. It is more of case by case thing.