USSoccer

Dear Knicks, Try not getting blown off the floor next time. Invest your enegry in that. Sincerely, USS. PS: Eddy Curry=FAT.

Personally, I'd be furious that the Cubs left a starter in all year long that couldn't provide better numbers than that. I don't care if they have to promote Veal or Gallagher to make it happen. 5.40 ERA/1.60 WHIP is for AAA, not the major leagues. I'd be livid that the pitcher with the 5.40 ERA/1.60 WHIP wasn't DFA'd. Those are pathetic numbers regardless of the run support and "keeping his team in games" nonsense that would be spewed.

I still don't like him though. I do, oddly enough. I like the fact that he has an attitude problem, and that he then goes out and shows that he's playing at a completely different level.

Should they have simply handed this pitcher the fifth starter spot after a spotty spring and didn't show then that he had improved considerably from the above stats? --Edited We can assume that Johnson impressed the next spring to make the squad. To only give those stats is to make only half of the compairason. Miller gave up more hits, walks, home runs, had a higher WHIP, gave up an equal number of runs, and only one fewer earned run in 1.2 more innings.

Cristiano Ronaldo is the best player in the world. He's set up 3 of those goals. Man U just look ridiculous, and the Roma backline look drunk.

Jebus, Marquis.

ownership has turned over quite a bit from the old guard. you've got a lot of owners who probably hope to sell to the highest bidder sometime within the next 10-15 years. I don't see them being anywhere near as exclusionary as they may have been 20 years ago. John Henry, Zell/Trib, Steinbrenner, Moreno, the Dodgers guy who's name escapes me, and Texas' owner would all likely vote yes. Reinsdorf and Angelos would likely vote no. Maybe Drayton McLane, too. I don't know who half the owners are, though, so it's tough to guage their reception to Cuban.

I see Colangelo's record as a mixed bag. For example, he had success in AZ, but basically had to be bailed out of the situation because of financial mismanagement. I wasn't entirely aware of that. I remember hearing that the Dbacks were operating in the red when Colangelo sold them, but what was the major cause of this? Just curious to know all the fact about the situation. He deferred a ton of salary. More so than the current Cubs regime has deffered contracts? much, iirc

I see Colangelo's record as a mixed bag. For example, he had success in AZ, but basically had to be bailed out of the situation because of financial mismanagement. I wasn't entirely aware of that. I remember hearing that the Dbacks were operating in the red when Colangelo sold them, but what was the major cause of this? Just curious to know all the fact about the situation. He deferred a ton of salary.

The problem with giving him a couple more starts is that people will be focused on the outcome and not the process. If he gets lucky with BABIP and wins a game despite having lousy stuff again, he'll get more rope with which to hang himself, and that will cost the team more in the long run.

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later? They shouldn't let one start change the conclusion they drew after having 8 weeks of performance to consider. If Miller was their guy out of ST, he's still got to be their guy one week/one start into the season. Why? Give me a good reason. Is there some sort of honor or toughness associated with sticking to a stupid and poorly reasoned decision?

how is he going to earn it if there's no open spot in the rotation? small sample size for guzman aside, miller is a pitcher on the downside of his career without any effective pitches. lou, despite professing his love for the 5-man roattion recently, is skipping miller at every opportunity. what does that say about his faith in the man's ability to get people out? miller's just not good unless his fastball suddenly makes a reappearance. why not try a guy who has had past success at the minor league level, still has effective pitches, and will probably only improve as oppsed to a crafty veteran that isn't crafty? What does it say abou this faith in Guzman that he won't start him over Miller. This is the manager who won 115 games with Seattle let's not forget (I lived there in that season.... wow) It says that maybe the decision was taken out of his hands by a GM who doesn't manage his rosters very well. If Angel Guzman is going to develop, it's going to be starting. He shouldn't be in the bullpen rotting away, being used sparingly. He should either be in Iowa or starting in place of Miller. The fact that he's sitting on a bullpen bench means that Lou wanted him on the team, but the GM didn't do the right thing for the organization and the player. Likewise, Miller should not be starting; he should be in the pen, by your logic, learning how to pitch again, but the player wouldn't go to the pen, and the GM and manager acquiesced. And in case you try and say that Miller "won" the job, I'll post this again: Miller gave up more hits, walks, home runs, had a higher WHIP, gave up an equal number of runs, and only one fewer earned run in 1.2 more innings. That's not winning a job. That's being given one because a GM wouldn't stand up to a player.

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity. Then you'd have had your way and he wouldn't have been on the team. Do you remember that he stated clearly that if he didn't win the fifth starters spot that he didn't want to be here? Hendry also said that it would be "unfair" to Miller if he didn't start and would seek to trade or release him. The long relief spot is not an option for Miller. I could care less what Wade Miller wants, or what he feels is unfair. What's unfair is losing winnable games because your starting pitcher can't crack 90mph and throws the ball straight down the middle. . Players would be lining up to play in your organization. :? You're assuming the other 24 guys on the roster are fine with a reclamation project who got paid to rehab dictating his role on the team. I'm guessing that's not the case.

And what makes you so sure that Prior or Guzman won't cost us games? There's a difference between someone with no ceiling beyond replacement player costing you games, and someone taking a lump here and there with a ceiling as high as Angel's. Wade Miller isn't good, and likely won't be better in the future. Angel Guzman is at worst level with Miller now, and with a few starts might be a very good starter. Speculation and opinion. I have no problem with either, but they should be identified as such. Here is the definition of earning it: http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/stats/sortable_player_stats.jsp?c_id=chc&section1=1&section2=1&section3=1&statSet1=null&statSet2=null&statSet3=null&statType=2&timeFrame=1&timeSubFrame=23&baseballScope=CH2&prevPage2=1&readBoxes=true&sitSplit=&venueID=&teamPosCode=all&box4=XXXX150063chnX&box5=XXXX425768chnX&compare.x=25&compare.y=10 spring training stats are nonsensical tools to judge players on Guzman's stats in the regular season are not that good either. ](*,) Nor were Miller's last season, which would be more relevant than his career stats, given that he's lost 10mph on his fastball.

And what makes you so sure that Prior or Guzman won't cost us games? There's a difference between someone with no ceiling beyond replacement player costing you games, and someone taking a lump here and there with a ceiling as high as Angel's. Wade Miller isn't good, and likely won't be better in the future. Angel Guzman is at worst level with Miller now, and with a few starts might be a very good starter. Speculation and opinion. I have no problem with either, but they should be identified as such. Here is the definition of earning it: http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/stats/sortable_player_stats.jsp?c_id=chc&section1=1&section2=1&section3=1&statSet1=null&statSet2=null&statSet3=null&statType=2&timeFrame=1&timeSubFrame=23&baseballScope=CH2&prevPage2=1&readBoxes=true&sitSplit=&venueID=&teamPosCode=all&box4=XXXX150063chnX&box5=XXXX425768chnX&compare.x=25&compare.y=10 So in 1.2 more innings, Miller gave up more hits, home runs, and walks, an equal number of runs, a worse WHIP and one less earned run? Yeah, he totally outpitched Angel.

Guzman is lacking - consistancy - translation of talent - ability to get major league hitters out Both can improve, but Miller won the spot and should be given his chance. There is no gaurantee that Guzman will do better or win games. Can you prove Miller "won" the spot? It seems as if it was given and not earned. Meanwhile, Guzman has: Velocity Movement Control The thing he lacks is experience. There's seriously no risk in having him start over Miller. Why do you think it's a given? Don't you think Lou and Hendry want to win more then anybody. Espically Hendry! If Miller had a terrible ST, I find it hard to believe that Lou would make him the 5th starter because his name is Wade Miller. That's silly... I think there's plenty of evidence to support the theory that Hendry was just as culpable as Dusty Baker in cultivating the veteran fetish that this team has had for practically forever. It wasn't Dusty signing veteran retreads and leaving young players to rot on a bench instead of sending them back down to AAA or whatever.

And what makes you so sure that Prior or Guzman won't cost us games? There's a difference between someone with no ceiling beyond replacement player costing you games, and someone taking a lump here and there with a ceiling as high as Angel's. Wade Miller isn't good, and likely won't be better in the future. Angel Guzman is at worst level with Miller now, and with a few starts might be a very good starter.

Guzman is lacking - consistancy - translation of talent - ability to get major league hitters out Both can improve, but Miller won the spot and should be given his chance. There is no gaurantee that Guzman will do better or win games. Can you prove Miller "won" the spot? It seems as if it was given and not earned. Meanwhile, Guzman has: Velocity Movement Control The thing he lacks is experience. There's seriously no risk in having him start over Miller.

Apologies to Seth, but I don't see Man U losing at Old Trafford. Likewise, I'd favor Valencia against a Chelsea side that didn't look all that great at home last week.

Look at his minor league numbers and then get back to me about how he isn't waiting to destroy opposing hitters. And why is it that the pitcher with the wrecked shoulder who needs to relearn how to pitch doesn't have to earn it, but the talented guy does? Ok, let me get this straight, spring training stats against major league hitters don't count, but minor league stats against hitters who aren't major league quality do? Dude, come on, you are far more logical then that I hope. As far as earning it, that's what happened in open four way competition in spring training between Neal Cotts, Mark Prior, Wade Miller, and Angel Guzman. He won the spot and deserves the chance to do his job. Why aren't we talking about Howry who has now blown two games or hitters who are not preforming well, because it's way early in the season and they haven't had enough games to judge. Neither has Miller. Be consistant across the board. Judge everyone early, or no one early. Don't just arbitrarily judge people at different points because you might think they may or may not have "the stuff". I don't see how you're comparing Miller to Howry. Howry has pitched great (or at least well) the last two years, oh, and he hasn't had any kind of major surgery and lost 8 mph off his fastball in the process. Doesn't mean he still can't be effective and it doesn't mean he won't regain some of the velocity. Again, let's all relax. If Miller continues to suck and looks done, then I'm sure Prior(?) or Guzman will have their shot at the 5th man. And how many games will Miller's performance cost us in the meantime? One more is too many.

Look at his minor league numbers and then get back to me about how he isn't waiting to destroy opposing hitters. And why is it that the pitcher with the wrecked shoulder who needs to relearn how to pitch doesn't have to earn it, but the talented guy does? Ok, let me get this straight, spring training stats against major league hitters don't count, but minor league stats against hitters who aren't major league quality do? Dude, come on, you are far more logical then that I hope. As far as earning it, that's what happened in open four way competition in spring training between Neal Cotts, Mark Prior, Wade Miller, and Angel Guzman. He won the spot and deserves the chance to do his job. Why aren't we talking about Howry who has now blown two games or hitters who are not preforming well, because it's way early in the season and they haven't had enough games to judge. Neither has Miller. Be consistant across the board. Judge everyone early, or no one early. Don't just arbitrarily judge people at different points because you might think they may or may not have "the stuff". You seriously don't get the concept of sample size, do you? 20 innings in Arizona in 2007 aren't going to tell you anything. You look at a player's body of work. But if you're going to play the small sample size game, look at Miller's 2006. He gave up 12 runs in 21 innings, walked 18 and struck out 20. Those numbers suck. Miller didn't win anything in Arizona. He was given a job by a manager, with possible influence by the GM, based on veteran preference, or the threat of a trade demand, maybe because the GM was afraid of injuries hitting the team again. You're talking up Miller's spring like he was worlds better than Angel. I don't see how that's the case.

That's the point. His injuries have made him a below average pitcher. How do we know that? Based on the 20 spring training IP that you've already told us would be a terrible basis for deciding anything? Based on the fact that he wasn't that good last season, showed no velocity in spring, and showed no velocity or movement or command on Sunday. It's not necessarily about the outcomes, which some people are pointing to as the end all be all, but about the process. Wade Miller isn't going to be successful throwing in the mid 80's. Why should the Cubs waste winnable games trying to see if the $1.5m they've spent is going to come to anything? If anything, Miller should be in long relief or in AAA trying to learn how to pitch without being able to throw hard. The idea that Guzman is going to develop sitting on the bullpen bench and getting a couple innings of mop up work is idiotic. You can turn this around and ask me how Miller is going to learn in long relief, but I could care less what happens with Wade Miller. The Cubs have more invested in Guzman, and Guzman has signifigantly more upside and ceiling than Miller. Guzman showed that he has excellent stuff and showed decent command in Arizona. Combined with his minor league numbers, he should have been starting on Sunday, not Wade Miller.

Look at his minor league numbers and then get back to me about how he isn't waiting to destroy opposing hitters. And why is it that the pitcher with the wrecked shoulder who needs to relearn how to pitch doesn't have to earn it, but the talented guy does?

I don't think anyone is saying that. I'll say it again, it's not just one start. Miller's past shouldn't be ignored. Is his past that bad that he couldn't be counted on for a number 5 starter? He's talking about the completely destroyed shoulder, inability to avoid injury and subsequent loss of 10pmh on his fastball. If he's going to throw in the mid 80's with no movement, he should be in long relief so he can work with whoever on a new way to pitch, because what was apparent on Sunday was he was attempting to pitch as if he still had the velocity to overcome lack of movement and control. It's one start. Wow. You're right. Wade Miller existed in a vacuum prior to Sunday. Has he not been hurt for the past two years? That's the point. His injuries have made him a below average pitcher.