Sammy Sofa

[expletive] yessssssssssssssssssssss.

Noah is [expletive] horrible.

I think they've been working him at third. EDIT: I thought I heard that but tried to look it up and couldn't find anything. Is it defense keeping him from staying at catcher? I thought it was trouble keeping the weight down. Hell, I wouldn't want him at catcher regardless. this was the bp scouting report last offseason. i haven't heard much about his weight being an issue. Maybe it's just his size, period.

PUT HIM IN THAT DUMPSTER.

I think they've been working him at third. EDIT: I thought I heard that but tried to look it up and couldn't find anything. Is it defense keeping him from staying at catcher? I thought it was trouble keeping the weight down. Hell, I wouldn't want him at catcher regardless.

WE KNOW.

Who are you even talking to?

Uh, we only tolerate teensy-tiny salaries around here, pal.

BUT HIS NAME IS SO CLOSE TO BEING DUMPSTER.

No, it wasn't. The closest Hendry came to doling out a contract like that was Soriano's. Soriano's best single-season WAR just barely edges out Pujols' worst. The rest aren't even close.

There's nothing wrong with people being negative over a bad season. I've said I have confidence in the FO if they do decide to completely rebuild and it takes 2-3 seasons, but it's not going to be fun in the meantime and the optimism of how it could play out doesn't exactly make it palatable while they're wallowing in crap.

gooney killing it with this one.

Yeah, the old "didn't have a 2nd QB issue" was always hanging over his head. Hahahahahaah!

Why? Most people don't want to pay to watch crappy baseball. We HAVE been watching crappy baseball, and I for one had next to zero hope that things would get any better anytime soon. Maybe at best the Cubs might could win a Wildcard one year, get swept, then back to sucking for a few years. If attendance drops noticeably this year then yes, we stinks as a fanbase. We got the front office we almost universally were hoping to get, and he seems to have an actual plan on how to build a franchise. You might not agree with it, but he knows what he's doing. I for one will watch to see how this complete shift in philosophy plays out. If we don't tune in if the Cubs suck in YEAR FREAKING ONE, then I think that's terribly short sighted and BS. Why? The Cubs have the highest ticket prices in baseball. Why should anyone feel obligated to shell out for that if the product is garbage? Hey, great, they want to build for the future; I'll actually pay to watch them in the future as well, but not now if the team is bad. If someone wants to go, good for them, but you shouldn't begrudge people if they don't want to pay while the team sucks.

Why? Most people don't want to pay to watch crappy baseball.

Oh, for [expletive]'s sake. WANTING GUYS LIKE WILSON OR FIELDER OR PUJOLS OR DARVISH OR THE CUBANS ISN'T WANTING A "HENDRY-LIKE MANNER."

Man, no wonder he was banned.

Zowee!

He's got some malware again.

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get. They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical. It's hilarious that you think Scott Boras sells elite FAs to MLB GMs the same way used car salesmen sell 10 year old Civics to HS dropouts. It's hilarious how you apparently think there's absolutely no history of Boras doing this.

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get. They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical. You are arguing semantics. Here's the thing. Positional players are generally worth more to baseball teams than designated hitters because they can do more stuff (play the field). Fielder and Boras are not, at this juncture, looking to settle for DH type money if they can get a team to pay for Fielder as an every day 1B. No one is saying inexplicably that he will not or can not be signed as a DH. You infer that. I do not imply it. My point is that this is not how he is being currently marketed and not how they want him to be seen or signed. He will potentially make more money for more years if signed now as a positional player. Boras is working to get his client the most money and the best deal he can. That is his job. Fielder is on record as saying that he would "consider a move to DH" (the unwritten part being only if he is forced to do so). The reason he does not want to do this is because of the drop in price of a top tier 1B to that of a DH. Fielder may very well end up signing somewhere as a DH. If that is the case, it will be because no one offered him the type of money they thought Fielder could command going into the off-season. Simply stated, we're not there yet and it would mean he then is getting paid far less than what he is asking for today. Wow.

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get. They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical.

No, it was in response to KingKonky.

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

My only concern is that he'll continue to get worse, to the point where teams won't even want to waste a guaranteed roster spot on him. If you can trade him now with a few million in salary relief for the next three years, I say do it. I highly doubt his value is going to rise much. But if your only upside to trading now is a few million bucks, then it makes more sense to keep him since he could have a good year, making it possible to unload even more money, if needed, or possibly get a prospect. As a big market team with room in the payroll you can afford to gamble a few million dollars on the chance you'll get more in the future. Yeah, no kidding. His value is pretty much rock bottom right now, so the Cubs would probably save, what, $5-6 million from the rest of his contract if they're just looking to unload him? I know that's not nothing, but come on; if they're still scraping for (relative) dollars then it's just ridiculous.