K-Town

Reyes will be in the rotation. One of two things will happen. Ponson will bomb in spring training (very likely), or Ponson will be good in spring training, and Marquis will be traded for outfield help.

With what resources? Right now at OF, there is little supply, greater demand, and a higher price since the supply can't meet the demand. 2B- There's no supply, somewhat of a demand unless you're comfortable with Luna, and once again no money. Last year, when he got Grudzielanek, Eckstein, and Molina, they was decent quailty avail. as well as the money to get them or in the case of Molina slide him in there. Don't forget Bo Hart! The fans love him! What fans? Cardinal fans think he's horrible.

How do you know that there's money there (for the Cubs or Cards)?

We can only hope. If the Jacque Jones rumors are true, the Cubs will have improved this off-season just by the Cards' taking steps backward. I think the Cubs are closer to landing Jones than the Cards are, at this point.

Why should fans be upset? The owners have given Jocketty one of the highest payrolls in the NL, and top 6 in all of baseball, and said "here's the money....... now put a good product on the field". Jocketty should be able to do it with those resources........ that's what they pay him for. I don't see why that's a problem. I think the rumors are false, by the way. Jocketty was quoted in the PD as saying that Grudz wasn't signed because he was asking for more than he though Grudz was worth, not because the owners wouldn't cough up the money. Here's the quote, from a Q&A session: Q: You have indicated sensitivity to criticism levied at ownership, specifically (general partner) Bill DeWitt, regarding payroll policy. Can you explain? A: "I think it's very unfair. Bill wanted to pursue (Mark) Grudzielanek and (Reggie) Sanders. It was a baseball decision not to pursue those guys with a multi-year deal. Not for the kind of money they're looking for. That was not influenced by ownership. If anything, ownership pushed harder to sign those guys. . . . They have never really shot us down on a player we felt would really help the club. If there's somebody that we feel can make a difference, they'll come up with it. "Just to throw money around like some of these other clubs is stupid. It's dumb business. We're not going to do that, because I don't want people criticizing me. (Laughs.)"

I don't live there. I spend a fair amount of time there, but I wouldn't say a lot. My understanding is that St. Louis was a ghost town before Busch Stadium was built. It's not exactly Sunset Strip now, but the baseball team certainly brings plenty to downtown, and hopefully the new stadium complex will liven it up a bit. The St. Louis owners are only one of only 2 groups (the other being San Francisco, I believe) who are financing the bulks of a new stadium. All other new stadiums are being financed by tax dollars. Is that a good way to go? I suppose a case could be made either way. My point is that it's pretty rare for an ownership group to take the initiative to finance a stadium, after voters have chosen not to. My message to Cardinal fans ......... be happy about that, and stop whining about the payroll, which isn't bad to begin with.

That's because Dusty Baker has no clue how to read splits on guys like Looper, and so there wouldn't be much chance of him succeeding with the Cubs. Larussa is a master at using pitchers situationally.

They key is that Looper and Rincon (as already detailed by PieOnMyHands) are EXCELLENT when used wisely. Looper absolutely dominates righties (righties have hit .231 against him over the last 3 years, with only 4 homers in 464 at-bats), and Rincon is very good against lefties (lefties hit .217 against him over the last 3 years). Looper's problem was that, as a closer, he had to face alot of lefties. As a situational late-inning pitcher, and knowing Larussa, Looper will be put in situations where he'll be VERY successful. Same for Rincon. If Looper and Rincon are used situationally, as Tavarez and King were used, then this not only COULD be an upgrade, but it SHOULD be. Assume Thompson taking Eldred's place, and possibly more bullpen help on the way, and I think the pen is definitely shaping up to be a strength in '06.

Ha! Missourians said "screw you" when billionaires attempted to strong arm the taxpayers into financing a new stadium, the only purpose of which is to increase revenue for said billionaires. Don't get me wrong, I love the Cardinals with all my heart, but tax money, especially in a time of huge budget deficits, should not go to building cash cows for private billionaires and their millionaire employees. The city of St. Louis will benefit greatly from the new stadium. Don't kid yourself. The owners are to thank for that. You're one of those people who wants nothing but the very best, as long as somebody else is paying for it. You mean like it benefitted greatly from Busch II, the purported savior of downtown St. Louis? Oh, wait. Don't forget, the Cardinals did get over $100 million from the city, county, and state in various bond sales and tax apportionments. Does that count as a "screw you?" You should do some research on how publicly financing new stadiums has revitilized urban areas. I'll save you the time; it rarely does. You're one of those people who would probably let the local school district cancel after school programs because of budget shortfalls in favor of a tax cut for the rich. Illinois was willing to pay for a stadium for the Cardinals. You think there might be a reason for that? Busch Stadium actually DID revitalize downtown St. Louis. The point is that the owners are building a new stadium, have raised payroll to the point of being in the top 6 in all of baseball (despite being bottom 1/3 in market size), have consistently put a high-level product on the field, etc. Yet for some people, it will never be enough. Personally, I'd rather have them continue to spend the money wisely (which they have done), rather than simply spend more of it. It's THEIR money. THEY are the ones making the investment, and reports say that they lost money every year until last year. If they want to pocket a little bit, then so what? Wouldn't you? Hey........ there's any idea!! You figure out a way to making billions of dollars, then YOU can show us how to run a baseball team. It's always fun spending money......... when it's somebody else's money.

Ha! Missourians said "screw you" when billionaires attempted to strong arm the taxpayers into financing a new stadium, the only purpose of which is to increase revenue for said billionaires. Don't get me wrong, I love the Cardinals with all my heart, but tax money, especially in a time of huge budget deficits, should not go to building cash cows for private billionaires and their millionaire employees. The city of St. Louis will benefit greatly from the new stadium. Don't kid yourself. The owners are to thank for that. You're one of those people who wants nothing but the very best, as long as somebody else is paying for it.

I'm a Cardinals fan, but Missourians basically said "screw you" when it came to financing a new stadium. Now, all of a sudden, they want to reap the benefits of the new stadium. Anybody who criticizes Cardinal ownership is hypocritical.

Cardinal fans ARE up in arms (see the PD message board). I'm not. What do you sugget they spend their money on? Jacques Jones? Johnny Damon? Kevin Millwood? No thanks.

Right. But have you gotten a good look at the Cards bullpen lately? :lol:

You guys know anything about him? Any chance AT ALL that he'll be able to stick?

I wouldn't trade Edmonds either, but I'm wondering what makes people say that Cano is "overrated". He's 23 years old, put up solid minor league numbers, and had a .778 OPS in his rookie year......... not bad for a middle infielder. I realize he's not a gold-glover, but I don't think he's horrible, either. Anybody?

Hector Luna would be the likely starter, if the season opened today, and he's pretty good. This Hector Luna? The one with a career 265/322/384 line? while that isn't horrible, I'm not sure it qualifies as pretty good. 2004 was a "Rule V" year. He had to spend the season on the Major League roster, despite not being ready. Toward the end of last year, he looked like he had a plan at the plate, and put up a .753 OPS. He's no all-star, but the Cards don't need an all-star at 2nd base. I'd feel pretty comfortable with him as a cheap 2nd baseman, if the Cards use their resources to beef up the outfield.

Hector Luna would be the likely starter, if the season opened today, and he's pretty good.

So? That's not MLB's fault. The door is still open.

"World Series" is just a name for the tournament. Nobody is trying to imply that the whole world is represented. Just like "Super Bowl" games aren't always "super", and the "Big Ten Conference" has more than ten teams. Originally, it was a "world" series, because the game was only played in America. The name simply never changed, and there's no reason why it should. American arrogance is alive and well, and I don't really have a problem with that. Besides, every player in the world is welcome to participate. All they have to do is be good enough to be offered a MLB contract. It doesn't matter where they're from. I think people get too caught up in name games. It's just baseball. Let's tackle REAL problems.

? are deer strange and unusual in st louis? In suburban areas? Yes. In downtown St. Louis? No. But then again look at how deserted downtown St. Louis is. If terrorists set off a small nuclear device during a non-game evening in downtown St. Louis, the only people they would kill would be the few lonely cleaning crews, some security guards and maybe a dozen hotel guests. Any time I've been to St. Louis when there isn't a Cardinal game, the downtown is a ghost town. I think that's probably true for most small-market baseball cities. Using Chicago as your curve is a little unreasonable. Chicago is on another level. Iowa City and Cedar Rapids, Iowa are more happening at night than St. Louis. I don't know about Cedar Rapids, but Iowa City is a major college town, and you're right....... it's bustling. Of course, there's not much "downtown" to cram everybody into, so it's going to look a little busier.

? are deer strange and unusual in st louis? In suburban areas? Yes. In downtown St. Louis? No. But then again look at how deserted downtown St. Louis is. If terrorists set off a small nuclear device during a non-game evening in downtown St. Louis, the only people they would kill would be the few lonely cleaning crews, some security guards and maybe a dozen hotel guests. Any time I've been to St. Louis when there isn't a Cardinal game, the downtown is a ghost town. I think that's probably true for most small-market baseball cities. Using Chicago as your curve is a little unreasonable. Chicago is on another level.

Spoken like a true Cardinal fan. Give me (a healthy) Beltran and Tejada and the Cubs wipe the floor with the NL. Try to keep things in context. Nobody said anything about Beltran and Tejada. It was an either/or discussion. Somebody made a point that Cuban would break the budget by a few million ($3-5 mil) in order to sign a guy like Beltran or Tejada. Nobody said anything about spending $26 mil to land BOTH of them.

In the Cubs' case, I don't think it's a matter of them not spending enough money. They need people in positions to spend it wisely. The Cubs had higher payrolls than 3 of the 4 teams playing in the LCS's in 2005. I agree that in a general sense, it's not a matter of spending enough money. On the other hand, I don't believe that Cuban would allow 2-5 million over budget to prevent him from acquiring the FA he wants. You think that the Cubs were only $2-$5 mil away from competing, though? In the case of Tejada, they didn't pursue because of Alex Gonzalez's 5 million. That wouldn't have gotten in Cuban's way. He would have likely signed Tejada and then traded Gonzalez eating whatever $$ were necessary. In the case of Beltran, he wouldn't have allowed the unresolved Sosa issue to get in the way of things. And I think it was about 5 million that got in the way. That was what we couldn't fit into last year's budget. Signing Beltran would have been huge mistake, in my opinion........ I don't care how rich you are. Beltran has a career OPS of .829, and put up a .744 OPS in 2005. He would have made the Cubs much poorer, but they still wouldn't have been competing. Tejada wouldn't have been the difference-maker, either. $13 mil per year for 6 years, for a guy with a career .815 OPS isn't smart money management, in my opinion. The Cubs weren't "one player away" on 2004 or 2005, in my opinion. They don't need more money.......... they just need to be more wise with the money that they have. Signing Tejada and Beltran aren't the type of moves that are going to get them over the top, if they don't spend wisely on bullpen and bench help.

In the Cubs' case, I don't think it's a matter of them not spending enough money. They need people in positions to spend it wisely. The Cubs had higher payrolls than 3 of the 4 teams playing in the LCS's in 2005. I agree that in a general sense, it's not a matter of spending enough money. On the other hand, I don't believe that Cuban would allow 2-5 million over budget to prevent him from acquiring the FA he wants. You think that the Cubs were only $2-$5 mil away from competing, though?

In the Cubs' case, I don't think it's a matter of them not spending enough money. They need people in positions to spend it wisely. The Cubs had higher payrolls than 3 of the 4 teams playing in the LCS's in 2005.