MeatampPotatoesMan

At least Neifi plays decent defense. :roll:

Levine scooped the Rusch contract before anybody He's actually fairly accurate apart from the "blockbuster trade" rumor this year, which may not have been his fault. JH could have opted to go another way at the last instant.

I'd say if we seriously pursue all 3, we stand an excellent chance of getting 1, a fair chance of getting both, and a slim chance of getting all 3. true. it's the right way to go...pursuing all three. we're just going to pay out the backside. burnett wants 5 years. 5/50? wow. furcal 4/40? we're going to tie up 20% of the payroll in players that aren't core guys (Z, Prior, ARam, Lee).

we're not getting Furcal, Burnett, and Giles. It's a longshot to get two of the three.

Burnett's agent says he's looking for a 5 year deal.

Why would we want Bobby Kielty? :? I don't see us dealing Walker before getting Furcal (or deciding we aren't in the running anymore). It doesn't do much good to go out and get two leadoff hitters (Roberts).

Does that mean we're going to trade Walker? Getting an impact bat sounds good. A. Jones talked to Furcal and said that he doesn't think Furcal will be back, as Atlanta won't pony up the doe.

Epstein is continuing to work for a few more days.

the padres even forked over money in the deal. :shock:

lmfao :lol:

HE11 NO!!

he's only a plus at an appropriate price (ie not 4/40).

He's going to play 1/2 season of winter ball.

I hope that is more than just a rumor.

No, the rotation is not set. Rusch isn't assured of a rotation spot. The only real shoe-ins are Z, Prior, Wood (if healthy), and most likely Maddux. One spot, maybe more, is open.

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20051102&content_id=1263795&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb except the substance he did use was "leaked" as frequently happens during this process. it was steroids.

But you know as well as me that Jocketty will figure out some way to make it work. He always seems to approach things with the "glass is half full" vigor; sadly, our guys tend to think the "glass is half empty." winning seems to have that effect. :(

Pierre was quite unlucky BABIP wise, especially for a guy with his speed. However, even at his best he's not that great, and he'll be overpriced in cash and players. Lofton, on the other hand, is the poster child for BABIP good fortune. I don't want either. i wonder what the effect of being a slap hitter is on BABIP. Pierre reminds me too much of Neifi.

Pie is definitely not ready for CF in Wrigley. I hope JH realizes this and is willing to let him develop for another 1-2 years.

Abreu? buhahahaha, what a joke. congrats DLee and Maddux. :D

The Cubs should bring back LOOGY extraordinaire Mike Remlinger. you're evil.

i wonder when he tested positive for steroids. it would be interesting if it was with the pirates or cubs, who would have knowingly traded away tainted goods.

yes there are probabilities, but that just tells you what you would expect to happen if that exact scenario happened 100 times, it does not tell you what would happen this time. stat heads would NEVER have brought up Gibson v. Eck in game 1 or Perez to hit a grand slam or Lee to have the year he did or Patterson to have the year he did etc. Stats are a tool but some of you use it like an end all be all, this isn't a computer program, there are too many human variables to use it that way. no, it doesn't tell you what will happen "this time." it tells you the likelihood that something will happen. a gut feeling doesn't tell you what will happen either (dusty's style of managing). no method is clairvoyant. no, stat hounds wouldn't have predicted the things you say (the odds were against them, not that they were impossible)...and no one else did either, so your point is...

Not purposely caused clubhouse problems, purposely made errors. which is what he said he'd do (2005 mid-season) if he were traded.

No need to be snide. They replaced Carlos Lee with Scott Podsenik. That did not in any way, shape, or form, improve their offense. Lineup position is irrelevant. No matter where either one of them hits, if you replace Podsenik with Lee, it's a downgrade on offense. so i guess 60 sb's had little effect on the sox's offense. ...just about as much effect as getting caught 23 times. you are right. everyone should have 100 sb's and never get caught. 60 sb's is just pathetic (even though it's probably more than the whole cubs team had last year). i should know better than to argue with such sound reasoning. isn't it true that while stat analysis can indicate trends it does nothing for an indiviual game. so while you can predict that a coin flipped 100 times will come up 50/50 with a standard deviation, it does not indicate what the next flip will be? If so, stats are great for looking at the totals and making it say what you want it to say but it does nothing for that one game where you need Pods to steal second, be bunted over to third and score on a sac fly? there are probabilities for every state in a ballgame. but you can't tell me from stats when those stolen bases were important and when they just thought they could get an extra base can you? so you don't really know what affect Pods speed has on wins and loses, you have numbers that you think say something, but the first thing you learn in statistics is that statistics say whatever you want them to say. no, stats only say what you want them to say when the people you're talking to are too dumb to understand the nuances (not referring to you). :wink: yes, you can tell how important pods' speed is, b/c his sb changes the state of the game (as does getting caught stealing). speed isn't an intangible, although it is difficult to quantify in some situations. you just need to acquire the right data to overcome that, which has been going on for years now.