Sammy Sofa

The information being out there in the Wittemeyer article is the evidence. It clearly came from people within the organization. Right, and the organization's official word should be "no comment." Zambrano's done enough to bury himself. This is just a repeat of a trending pattern seen when the organization seemingly does little or nothing to clamp down on internal trashing of a player who the organization has apparently soured on due to personality or behavorial issues (or vice-versa). OK, I thought you were kidding with this glib summation before, but apparently you're serious. It should be painfully obvious that the point of the coffee and Red Bull story isn't that he drinks coffee and Red Bull. You're talking about that like they're trying to somehow drag him down by pointing what he drinks. No, the point is that he apparently drinks those to excess to the point that it helps lead to the cramping that's been a consistent problem throughout his career. The story is framed to portray Zambrano as not caring what the trainers and medical staff told him would help him be a better pitcher. Now, it very well could be true and probably is true, but it's a stupid thing to be letting out there. I have no idea how can say that based on the Wittemeyer article, which is full of tidbits slamming Zambrano that could have only come from within the organization. It's not nearly as nefarious as you're trying to make it sound like I'm saying. The Cubs simply have a track record of happily slamming players once they've decided to run them out of town by not giving a damn what people within the organization say when the press comes a-callin'. It's not some Machiavellian orchestration behind the scenes; it's just petty and predictable and stupid. I'd simply prefer it if for once they attempted to take the high road in this type of situation. The stuff in that article you're so hopping mad about is just Wittenmeyer dredging up a bunch of old stuff. None of the "tidbits slamming Zambrano" are new, or even remotely recent. Specifically, the coffee and Red Bull stuff, and the cramping issue with the training staff is from a couple years ago. Where are the damning anti-Z quotes from the last couple weeks? There are none. And you darn well know every writer has been digging for them furiously. The only logical conclusion is they are on lock-down, they are issuing "no comments", and they are trying to take the high road. They've given the media nothing since this latest episode went down. Just like you want them to do. I'm not "hopping mad." The coffee and Red Bull details aren't new, but the accused refusal to cut back is. And a bunch of the stuff in the Wittemeyer article is referring to to responses made during the fallout from this latest incident. To me it's just a repeat of something we've seen too many times before, and I really don't care if you agree or not.

Chimichangas and siestas and not running out a pop fly.

The information being out there in the Wittemeyer article is the evidence. It clearly came from people within the organization. Right, and the organization's official word should be "no comment." Zambrano's done enough to bury himself. This is just a repeat of a trending pattern seen when the organization seemingly does little or nothing to clamp down on internal trashing of a player who the organization has apparently soured on due to personality or behavorial issues (or vice-versa). OK, I thought you were kidding with this glib summation before, but apparently you're serious. It should be painfully obvious that the point of the coffee and Red Bull story isn't that he drinks coffee and Red Bull. You're talking about that like they're trying to somehow drag him down by pointing what he drinks. No, the point is that he apparently drinks those to excess to the point that it helps lead to the cramping that's been a consistent problem throughout his career. The story is framed to portray Zambrano as not caring what the trainers and medical staff told him would help him be a better pitcher. Now, it very well could be true and probably is true, but it's a stupid thing to be letting out there. I have no idea how can say that based on the Wittemeyer article, which is full of tidbits slamming Zambrano that could have only come from within the organization. It's not nearly as nefarious as you're trying to make it sound like I'm saying. The Cubs simply have a track record of happily slamming players once they've decided to run them out of town by not giving a damn what people within the organization say when the press comes a-callin'. It's not some Machiavellian orchestration behind the scenes; it's just petty and predictable and stupid. I'd simply prefer it if for once they attempted to take the high road in this type of situation.

That's a pretty big one thing. And you're talking about him like he's a defensive monster.

My concern is that if there is this much negative publicity, it could impact who we hire as the next GM. I have no reason not to believe the media members that Kenney could be issue in the hiring process. They are around the Cubs and have their sources....I obviously don't. I understand there are no specifics other than what they are writing. Why would there be this many people lying? Again, where there is smoke, there's fire. Because part of their job is to create that smoke and start the fire. But, why is there that much smoke to begin with, both locally and nationally? Because if it bleeds it leads. Nobody's going to write a story that says "things look great for the Cubs!"

So you agree with them that Aramis Ramirez is a selfish, lazy player? I do think Ram has been lazy at times, but I don't think he's selfish. I could hav e cared less that he wanted to be w/ his family instead of a 4th replacement in the All Star game You're missing the point; you're placing so much stake into media speculation as being accurate when these are the same guys who have spent Aramis' career in Chicago railing against him for being a subpar player/teammate.

How much of a sports journalists' job ISN'T rumors and speculation? 10%?

So you agree with them that Aramis Ramirez is a selfish, lazy player?

This tract is [expletive] goofy as hell.

I feel like this is some kind of elaborate satire. Even if his PH numbers aren't great he's still shown relative tremendous value in his ability to hit LH pitching. How many of those 151 PA as a PH were actually against LH pitchers? Why are you looking at his value only as a PH? A bench guy like can still have significant value since he can multiple positions and he has excellent numbers as a starter against LH pitchers. You seem to have this idea of finding a bench player who is OK at everything, which isn't terribly practical.

Quiet.

SLG: 2011: .495 Career: .536 OBP: 2011: .371 Career: .364 UZR has him as a very good fielder at second and inconsistent at third. I'll concede this one to you. He's got enough power and patience in a platoon role, however. All numbers are against lefties. he doesn't need a lot of patience if he hits .355 against lefties and he's used exclusively against them. he's a valuable bench player, i have no idea why someone would want to get rid of him. Lets see,his lifetime ba vs lefties is well below .355 (.317) .he is a lifetime .190 pinch hitter,cant hit righties for [expletive], is a rather poor fielder,has no power,never walks,has no speed,and makes over a million dollars per. He would have to improve to be considered one dimensional,right now he would have to be considered 1/2 dimensional at best.Glad you like him,though. You're being deliberately obtuse, right? You can't see the value in a platoon player? Baker's career numbers against LH pitchers: .317 .364 .536 .900 in 535 PA You really can't see the value in that?

Well, he can't be tied with Youk. Because, well, you know...

Yeah, I thought most of the offers were in the realm of 6 years and around $100 million.

Oh, no, that had everything to do with #2-4. Nobody cares about #1, stranger on the internet.

Nobody said that. That's the only way paying an injury-prone 35-year-old OF $12-15 million a year makes any damn sense. After the mess the previous manager left the team in, that's the last thing that the next one is going to want to do. Yeah, I really have zero interest in Beltran given the other FA available who better address some of the team's needs both now and in the long run. Plus guys like Kemp and Ethier likely being available after 2012.

I tried to read all of the thread and jubilation but had to stop at this post. Well said and a much better summary than any other blog or writer so far. In the 9 years Hendry was GM, the Cubs became more successful than any other time during my life. He had some colossal successes and some colossal blunders. However, many of those blunders are now seen with hindsight that I suspect even he would agree with. Looking at a "top 5" list of failures on another site, Hendry's mistakes are poor now but put in perspective of the moves at the time, weren't as poor as they seemed. Zambrano's contract was actually a savings from what the market value that year was (although the no trade clauses he always gave were poor management). Soriano was market value as well and despite many prognosticators being right on the number of years becoming an albatross, that deal was not Hendry's fault. The Willis trade for Alfonseca is hardly a bad trade and was pretty even at the time given Clement's success. I think that for all the jubilation about the dismissal (and justifiably so) we should be fair to the last 9 years and look back on the Jim Hendry era with fondness for all that went right as well as all that went wrong. The last 9 years have been some of the highest cubs fans have ever been and some of the lowest. At least it was always this low Soriano was not "market value." It's pretty well known at this point that Hendry blew away the closest offers at the behest of the owners. Yes, he was the biggest FA in that offseason and Hendry was told to spend, but let's not act like that contract was something he was going to get from another team.

Can you crumple up the list of questions flyseye just gave you, set them on fire and then pee on the ashes?

Green font.

Nobody said that. That's the only way paying an injury-prone 35-year-old OF $12-15 million a year makes any damn sense.

He's been pretty bad this year. Teams taking him on are going to be doing so out of the hope that he rebounds at least somewhat next season. I havn't been following as closely as I have in years past, but hasn's Z actually been pretty close to his career averages but been brought down by a handful of disasterous outings? I'd have to double check. I know that was the case for most of the first half, but not sure if that's carried over since.

He's been pretty bad this year. Teams taking him on are going to be doing so out of the hope that he rebounds at least somewhat next season.

I don't disagree with any of this, hence why I said "past success." Again, my point in this is mostly that it just reflects badly on the Cubs. It's enough of a mess of a situation already without them further dragging through the mud, even if the effect on trading him is minimal.

Why is Beltran only signing a 1-year contract?

If more than one team wants him, then the Cubs aren't over a barrel. If he still has value to other teams, the Cubs can get that value. Relatively speaking, sure. But in the grand scheme of things they're unfortunately over a barrel. They're not going to trade him without either getting a horrible contract back in return, paying for most of Zambrano's 2012 contract or simply getting scraps. Given that he's still 30, his significant past success and his relative offensive value the Cubs shouldn't be in that kind of corner...and yet, here we are.