Sammy Sofa

Bwaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaah!!!

Yeah, it's really ridiculous. How someone can think signing those guys would be a "Hendry movie" is beyond me. If that's a Hendry move than Hendry is still the GM today and the Cubs probably have at least 1 WS in the last 8 years.

I could see it, but I think it would be a mistake. The Cubs remain starved for 1B in the system and there are two great ones available who are on division rivals. This type of player doesn't become available every year, and most of the time when they do, the two biggest spenders, Boston and NYY are much more likely to get those players. An improved system should also lessen the negative impact of a decline by either player 5-6 years from now. I don't think it would be a mistake at all. I don't think either Pujols or Fielder are good choices to give huge long contracts to. That's a Jim Hendry move. No and no. yes and yes, throwing a heap of money at this team is not going to make it a contender, especially when the money is thrown at the wrong people. It has to many holes. Fielder is not the type of player you want to try to build a team around. Pujols is aging. My opinion, we'll see. I trust whatever Theo decides to do, but I think a lot of the people on this board just want to see them make a big splash and spend a lot of money because they can. This team can throw a heap of money around, and should. Spending big money isn't automatically a bad thing. Not spending money isn't automatically a good thing. Spreading around your money to make middling improvements in several areas isn't worth it if you're avoiding an obvious slam dunk. The Cubs have a gaping whole both in the middle of the lineup and at 1B and they have two excellent candidates available in Fielder and perhaps The Greatest Hitter of All Time. They'd be stupid to not try and pursue one of them, since both will almost certainly give you at least 5 years of excellent play and ARE guys you can build a team around. Personally, I'd prefer Pujols because his unearthly level of play ideally puts him in a position where despite his age his decline will still have him hitting while above most (or atleast around the top of the pack) past his mid-30's.

I could see it, but I think it would be a mistake. The Cubs remain starved for 1B in the system and there are two great ones available who are on division rivals. This type of player doesn't become available every year, and most of the time when they do, the two biggest spenders, Boston and NYY are much more likely to get those players. An improved system should also lessen the negative impact of a decline by either player 5-6 years from now. I don't think it would be a mistake at all. I don't think either Pujols or Fielder are good choices to give huge long contracts to. That's a Jim Hendry move. No and no.

DELICIOUS.

Holy [expletive] [expletive]. I can't believe I just watched the last half hour.

So well played.

[expletive], I forgot about that. That belongs in the Theo celebration thread. Garza rules.

MOO-HOO-HOO-HA-HA-HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!

Come on, you Italian bastard.

Homina-homina-homina-WHAAAAAAA?!??!?

I don't either. Wait, what? You both don't know why people here with at least a couple brain cells between them find the stories that try to paint Kenney as the root of what's wrong with the Cubs to be rather ridiculous? People here almost act as though they know him and know the things being said aren't true. How the hell do we know he isn't a source of ridicule throughout baseball? Where there's smoke, there's fire. There are enough stories of what an epic tool the guy is that I am inclined to believe there is truth to them. You edited out the part where I said I don't really care as long as he's not impacting the product on the field, though. I just don't understand defending him. I'm not defending him so much as scoffing at the shitty sports journalism in this town. Basically I think everything indicates he does a good job handling the business side of things. So long as this focus I really don't care about him. The repeated efforts to villainize him are just funny.

Because his main job is handling the business aspect of the Cubs. If the Ricketts want to keep going forward and totally reshape the FO further and give him the boot, fine, I'm not going to lose sleep over it, but the continued stories that try to make it sound like he's attempted to run the baseball side of things are flimsy at best.

I don't either. Wait, what? You both don't know why people here with at least a couple brain cells between them find the stories that try to paint Kenney as the root of what's wrong with the Cubs to be rather ridiculous?

I remember buying a framed poster with the 2004 pitching staff (minus Clement) on it thinking it would be something special that would hang in my house for years to come. I'm not sure I even have the poster anymore, but if I do it is buried in my storage shed along with my laminated Mark Prior "Chicago Hope or Hype" Baseball Weekly cover. Such high expectations and disappointing memories... [expletive], if you don't want the former anymore I'll buy it off of you.

He is, but his curveball is [expletive] nasty tonight.

I am absolutely baffled as to how Kenney has been made into this bizarre baseball supervillain.

Why should we give a [expletive] if another team would do this or not?

Not married. Don't care. Please start a blog or something about your creepy sex life. Wait. You are the one talking about Theo sexiness and I'm the creepy one? Annnnnnnnd there it is. THEORY CONFIRMED.

Not married. Don't care. Please start a blog or something about your creepy sex life.

FINE, LET'S ALL TALK ABOUT HIS AFFAIR OR WHATEVER IT IS.

Only one in particular.

STOP IT.

Bueno.

I think a hat and no jersey would be better. So you want Theo up there in nothing but a hat? You randy devil.