ConstableRabbit

That's a false choice. Care to explain why you think so?

If we're older and expensive, then we're trading good young talent to improve the team. That basically gives this team a one-year window to win a championship, and oh by the way there are a lot of other really good teams (a.k.a. American League) who we'd have to beat to win. If you don't do it, you've got an old team with no major-league ready prospects and you've just thrown a few more years into the crapper. Right. The playoffs are such a crapshoot too. Why not just make a team good enough to get into the playoffs for the next 3 years? We'd have a much better chance of winning that way then putting all of our eggs in one basket, imo. I think the playoffs crapshoot angle is overplayed. It's true that any team can get in. But it's still true that the better teams have a better chance of making it. I'd rather not just settle for trying to get in. I still think it's best to create the best team possible, regardless of division. Sure, the Cubs are lucky to have a relatively easy road to the playoffs, that doesn't mean they will definitely make it. Plus, the whole "contend within the division" theory didn't really work out well under MacPhail. I don't believe in setting goals that low. Set them for the highest, build the best team you can, and then see how it plays out. I was responding to a post that essentially put the upcoming seasons on the backburner in order to "win now" If you had a choice between winning 95 games and being the #1 seed in the NL and then missing the playoffs the next 2 years or Winning the division this year (we will) and the division or the wildcard the next 2 years I would take the latter because I think that more playoff appearances will do us more good than trading away the likes of Marmol, Pie, and others for big name rentals that would allow us to "win now"

Please, don't attack the poster(s) :lol:

If we're older and expensive, then we're trading good young talent to improve the team. That basically gives this team a one-year window to win a championship, and oh by the way there are a lot of other really good teams (a.k.a. American League) who we'd have to beat to win. If you don't do it, you've got an old team with no major-league ready prospects and you've just thrown a few more years into the crapper. Right. The playoffs are such a crapshoot too. Why not just make a team good enough to get into the playoffs for the next 3 years? We'd have a much better chance of winning that way then putting all of our eggs in one basket, imo.

Thank you!

Great. So no matter the asking price, he should just pull the trigger...

Please be a good deal Jim! Please!

I'm starting to get nervous too, but there's 2 hours left. Something could still happen. Right? RIGHT?

Man, if they get him for a package around Gywnn, that will suck...hes a freakin 4th OF. Who said anything about Gwynn? BBTN? If so, we could easily match that...

Steve "I hope Mark Prior takes a fastball off the forehead and we never have to see him again" Kline?

I was thinking about it, but I'm not feeling very well. In short, I'm hour-to-hour and it'll be a game-time decision.

I always thought those "Game Over" Gagne shirts were cool. I'd be down for this trade if something made them with a Cubs logo/Cubs colors.

You should probably read the thread then. The one thing posters on this board should understand is that regardless of differing opinions, fact- and stat-based logic will always triumph over Joe Morgan style logic. But Joe Morgan style logic is so much more fun. Joe Carter logic is day-long entertainment. Joe Carter logic with regard to Sammy would just be him saying: "Semmy Sosa -- comin' up big for the cUHbs"

You should probably read the thread then. The one thing posters on this board should understand is that regardless of differing opinions, fact- and stat-based logic will always triumph over Joe Morgan style logic.

I'm still laughing at my desk over that penguin with the 63 on it. LOSER

LMAO :lol:

I see what you're saying, and I do somewhat agree with you, but Murton and Kendall are really different stories. I don't think you can compare the outlier seasons of a 10+ year veteran who has hit for a .298 career avg with a young player who played well in the minors, for a year in the majors, and has struggled this year. But said 10 year veteran is a catcher on the wrong side of 30 who has been in decline for the past 3 years. Said young players are players in the prime of their careers who had trended upward in the years previous. Oh I definitely agree with the catcher over 30 thing. But this is a pretty steep dropoff... BA is 70 pts lower than last year and OPS+ halved. You see what I'm saying, I see what you're saying. I don't want to detract from the Church discussion.

Yep because Ohman and Eyre are great. Because Gagne is left handed? I don't get it. For what it's worth, Gagne has been pretty effective vs. lefties this season: .143/.208/.163 in 49 AB vs righties: .170 .279 .264 in 53 ABs But yes, I understand your point. He could help for the right price.

Why/how do you think is Church better? Better hitter IMO, almost equal power (slight edge to Gomez), better BB:K, and can play CF. Think Church will benefit more from a change of scenery. FOr some reason, I wasn't even thinking about CF...

How do you know that there aren't selfish players on the current Cubs roster? Does someone on the team have to come out to the media to complain about it? Is it because no one waves to the camera after homering?

I see what you're saying, and I do somewhat agree with you, but Murton and Kendall are really different stories. I don't think you can compare the outlier seasons of a 10+ year veteran who has hit for a .298 career avg with a young player who played well in the minors, for a year in the majors, and has struggled this year. I don't see your point. Are you saying Kendall is being undervalued and Murton overvalued (by the people making the comments you bolded in SSR's post)? No. I'm saying when someone says that it's more likely that Kendall will return to MLB-career norms than Murton, I don't consider it an abomination. That being said, I do think that Murton -- given playing time -- can get back to form. I just don't think someone's a hypocrite if they think Kendall will get return to career norms and Murton won't.

Especially when it involves replacing Dempster, who has been fine. Get a RH bat!

I see what you're saying, and I do somewhat agree with you, but Murton and Kendall are really different stories. I don't think you can compare the outlier seasons of a 10+ year veteran who has hit for a .298 career avg with a young player who played well in the minors, for a year in the majors, and has struggled this year.

Why/how do you think is Church better?

Damn! I thought this post was the something! I'm really desperate for a move...