USSoccer

When was the last time the Bears won a playoff game? 1996, right?

You don't know what you've got unless you play them at the major league level. There is no better time to do this than during a lost season. Except that you have a manager trying to save his job, or at least his baseball repuatation, which makes it unlikely for him to play anyone outside his comfort zone too much. That's why it's a lost season. Being 25 games under and 15 out sucks, but at least if the Cubs were smart they'd make the most of their loyal fanbase and their tourist attraction ballpark and play the entire 2nd half with young players replacing the useless. Instead, we'll muddle along like we always do, never giving the kids quite enough AB's or IP to develop; just giving them enough to struggle. And in 2 years, when our system is back to 1996 type levels, we'll all wonder what happened. Until Baker and his coaches are fired, there is no point in trading for prospects.

Why actually watch a game when it just confuses people. He was too busy calling John Paxson to complain about the trades of 'no heart-no hustle' Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler. Last night he was crunching numbers about Kerry Wood's WHIP 7 years ago. The chant remains the same. Are you attacking my argument, or me? I'm not talking about blindly evaluating players based on numbers, without observable input. I'm talking about how foolish it is to jump to conclusions about a player based on a stupid baserunning mistake, and a habit on not running all-out on every grouder or popup. You don't build a team around "hustle and heart". You build it around talent. Aramis has talent. You don't just toss talented, younger players out the window because of a perception that he doesn't care, or "have heart". If this team were playing better, this wouldn't be magnified to the level it is. Losing has a tendency to do that, but to jump to the kind of conclusions you are making is a really bad idea.

It's no worse a strawman that "playing the game the right way", or having "heart". People in Chicago would worship mediocrity if it played like David Eckstein. I personally can tolerate not sprinting out of the batter's box at all times if the tradeoff is getting the kind of talent that Ramirez has.

Are you referring to Ramirez getting thrown out at 3b? Because that kind of stuff happens. It was a stupid mistake, but not worthy of this level of disdain being tossed at a player that has produced at a high level since his aquisition in 2003. I have seen Lee stare at fly balls and have to stop at 2B instead of 3B. I have seen many other players do so. Does it irritate me he doesn't run flat out out of the box? A little, but in the scheme of things it's such a minor thing that's getting magnified x1000 because of the team's performance. It doesn't mean he doesn't have "baseball sense", or "heart", or "doesn't know how to play the game the 'right way'", it means he has a tendency to lose focus on crappy teams. He's an asset to this team, and I'd hate to see him run out of town by fans too myopic to see what the team's actual problems are.

I need only go to last night's game with the Brewers to show how Lazy heis. Look at what Paul Sullivan of the TRIB wrote: Kool-aid drinkers can't find stats for 'playing the game right' or 'giving it your all'. Better just to look at numbers and close your eyes to the rest. One wonders how they are evaluated on their jobs. No doubt expect a cookie for just showing up. You're citing a Paul Sullivan article as evidence that Ramirez is lazy? That he has no baseball sense? From the quotes in that article, that's not what Baker is saying, that what Sullivan is framing, since ripping Ramirez is starting to gain steam on radio talk shows where the average caller has an IQ roughly equivalent to their pant size. You've got to be kidding me. It's such a Chicago thing that every time a team struggles, fans have to find a scapegoat and then use reasons like "playing the game right" and "heart" to back up irrational conclusions about good players struggling for half a season. Unless he's going out there with an oar instead of a bat, and a stapler instead of a glove, he's playing the game "the right way". Everything else is a matter of perception. You do realize that during 2004 and 2005 he put up fantastic numbers despite dealing with nagging injuries? His talent didn't just evaporate. He's having a rough year at the same time the Cubs are having an abysmal year. There's no reason to toss him under the bus and act like he's the reason we're bad.

You're going on the assumption that the Cubs can properly develop young, unproven talent and actually allow them time to develop properly. Also, how are we magically going to get Josh Fields?

Fixed No, somehow he'd go there and things would work out perfectly.

Atlanta could get much more from a contending team for Jones than from a team retooling for 2007 like we are. The Yankees, White Sox, and Angels are 3 teams that are in races that Atlanta could hold hostage for Jones. I think Anaheim and the White Sox match up the best. And FWIW, I agree with Vance that the Braves would ask for Pie, plus a couple of our pitchers.

Eevry time Stone opens his mouth it provides more evidence that he should never be a GM. Aramis is worth much, much more than Izturis is. It seems like he's jumping on the growing line of thinking that Ramirez's performance this season is one of the biggest reasons we suck, and that he should be dumped because he doesn't "play the game the right way" or play "with heart" or some other such nonesense that people in Chicago use whenever they want to scapegoat a player and run him out of town. Given Ramirez's track record, though, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. He's a good player having a rough season. It happens. He's still entering his prime, and put up excellent numbers in 2004-5. Ramirez is one of the last guys on this team you should actively pursue a trade with.

Both, with the qualifier that if you can only afford one impact position, you go with the hitter. I don't see it happening, though. I think Hendry would rather spend average money on both than high end money on either.

How can you knock a guys throwing error when he's committed a total of 4 errors all year? The argument about attempting to go to 3rd is reasonable, but it should also quiet the argument that he's lazy. He's Lazy!!! He's lazy at the plate. He's lazy running. He's lazy in the field. Plus, he just doesn't get it. He has very little baseball sense. No wonder when he lost that pop fly in the sun that was to his side and it hit him in the head-he didn't rub it. There was nothing there that could be hurt. His stupid baserunning last night was typical on not knowing what to do. I'm sure those that wallow in their 'stats du jour' will look at his fielding numbers or other such meaningless huey and try to tell us different. But those who have actually watched him play, know he is average-on his best days. And this guy is being paid $11 million? No thank you. Trade him to the Dodgers-get some prospects. Then acquire Josh Fields from the White Sox who already has better numbers and isn't LAZY!! Would you care to cite a tangible reason why Aramis is "Average on his best day"? Because, despite his struggles this season, every available number says otherwise. Would you also care to prove how he "Just doesn't get it", and has "very little baseball sense"? You cite the lost pop up, but I very much doubt he's the only ML who's ever lost a popup. It's funny how there always has to be a scapegoat who "doesn't play the game right", or is "lazy", or "gutless", or some other such nonesense. Everything is magnified when a team is this bad, and there are about 22 guys on this roster who are more of a problem than Ramirez.

You take away 1 of those hits, and he was only at 200 for the game. You take away 2 of them, and add 5 K's, and he's regressed right back to old Corey.

I think he's in Dusty's living room at the moment anyway.

You go, Scott from Chicago:

That was pretty much my follow up.

OMG, I posted that! What a dumb answer too. Baker had no other choice... I posted a follow up. We'll see if it gets answered.

OMG, I posted that!

When the mob needs a scapegoat...

I'm too lazy to go back and read, but was that seriously his argument? If you remove his bunt singles his SLG% isn't impressive? That's like Dave Wannsdedt saying "If 5 or 6 plays go our way, we win the game." I'd imagine anyone's SLG% would go down if you removed one type of hit from the equation.

Fire has nothing to do with anything. Baker's shortcoming isn't that he's too laid back. It's that he's incompetent. He relies on cliches and idiotic logic and as a result has done less with more than any Cubs manager in 35 years. Plenty of managers have success without being absolutely red-faced and yelling. Joe Torre comes immediately to mind. So does Tony LaRussa. The difference is that a manager needs to know how to put his players in the best possible position to succeed. Their method of motivation is secondary to how they actually manage lineups and matchups in a game. Being able to read a split sheet, or not relying on veteran has beens is a much more important factor in managerial success than yelling and screaming is. Knowing how to manage young arms and protect them from overuse when uneccesary is more important than throwing 2nd base into centerfield. It comes down to being good tactically (in game management) and strategically (lineups, coaching, etc. ). If Baker were good at either, the Cubs would be abetter team, and he would be free to be laid back. But he's not, and that's why he needs to go. Not because of his personality, but because he's no good at managing. And FWIW, again, the Tigers are pretty much the same team as last year, but the way they developed and treated their young pitchers is pretty much the opposite of what the Cubs did. Leyland is reaping the benefits of a really strong pitching staff, and not getting in the way of it too much. His early season comments ripping the team after a poor perfomance were well timed, but it's not like that's the sole reason they've maintained their high level of play.

The Tigers are winning with a pitching staff that is what the Cubs staff was supposed to be post 2003, and with guys who murder the ball and get on base. Having Leyland demand "guts" and "heart" means nothing. Going into this season, IIRC he had a sub .500 winning percentage. With teams that got rid of all their players. I don't think you can make a blanket statement like his record until you look at what he had to deal with. He won when he had players and when he lost the two teams Pitt and Florida had fire sales. He dealt with 1 season's worth of fire sale at FLA and had stacked teams in the late 1980's/early 90's with Pittsburgh. T The fact that he can only win with stacked teams and struggles with lesser talent means there's not much to his "hustle and heart" attributes. It means that he's subject to the team around him. And I don't think you can understate his career record when evaluating his effectiveness as manager.

The Tigers are winning with a pitching staff that is what the Cubs staff was supposed to be post 2003, and with guys who murder the ball and get on base. Having Leyland demand "guts" and "heart" means nothing. Going into this season, IIRC he had a sub .500 winning percentage.

That's unfortunate.

I think that if Abreu is in play, the Cubs should go for him, but not at the cost of Aramis.