Sammy Sofa

Unless Aramis just tanks this year I really just hope they exercise the team option and bring him back for 2012. Hopefully he's just so amazing he wins the MVP and his 2012 becomes guaranteed.

Was that his follow through on shoving Russell? So bitter.

No, you're wrong. I haven't been a fan of Ron in the booth for a while, but never at any point have I been lost as to what was going on in the game no matter what he was rambling about. abuck's right; if you can't follow the game because of their banter then just stop listening to games on the radio. The "formerly awesome" bit just shows how full of [expletive] you are right there. If anything, Pat's professionalism was even more obvious when he'd riff with Ron and still be able to call the game.

He can let it drop and sill spend big. It's not an either-or proposition.

Why? Shouldn't you be happy that the player on your favorite team is better than a player that went to your favorite school? ONLY SULLEY'S PLAYERS.

i'm too lazy to look it up, but i'm pretty sure that person wasn't saying that. very few people think that the cubs will be bad for several years simply because of the payroll resources they have. Then who cares what some nobody said.

IF, we are to assume that Ricketts will be interested in putting the freed up money back into the team. We don't know if he will do that quite yet. I'm not sure why anyone would think they wouldn't be putting any of the money back into the team. Really, think about for just a second. If you're saying that payroll could be locked in place or reduced, OK, but you seem to be saying that there's doubt that the Ricketts will spend any of the money coming off the books in the next two seasons.

take a look at how much of the reds' WAR last year came from players under 30. 4/5 of their rotation was 24 or under and that's not including volquez, who's 26 and didn't pitch for most of the year. Nobody's denying that the Reds have a good, young team. "Opposite directions," however, implies that the Cubs are moving to become cellar-dwellers like the Pirates for the foreseeable future. They're not. We're going to see a lot of turnover in the very near future of the Cubs getting better and younger. the comment about them going in opposite directions was made last offseason. i don't see how you can say it wasn't true when the cubs looked old and lousy last year while the reds got a huge amount of production out of young players. I'm saying it's an inaccurate statement. One year of diverging fortunes isn't "going in opposite directions." I guarantee that the person you're talking about was likely making it clear that he thought the Cubs were headed into the toilet for the foreseeable future and that's why people responded as they did.

take a look at how much of the reds' WAR last year came from players under 30. 4/5 of their rotation was 24 or under and that's not including volquez, who's 26 and didn't pitch for most of the year. Nobody's denying that the Reds have a good, young team. "Opposite directions," however, implies that the Cubs are moving to become cellar-dwellers like the Pirates for the foreseeable future. They're not. We're going to see a lot of turnover in the very near future of the Cubs getting better and younger.

The Cubs had some pretty significant under-performance in some critical areas, plus I disagree with the idea that they're headed in "opposite directions."

I don't think they will but I certainly don't think a person is immediately dumb if they think so. At least until further questioning. If they THINK so, they're probably pretty dumb. If it happens, it happens... but to look at the situation now and predict that those teams will finish ahead of a better team is pretty much the opposite of smart. Right. Thinking that could happen is reasonable. Thinking that it will happen or is likely to happen is being erik.

I really hope we sign Phillip Fielder.

That's really sad stuff that's been coming out. It sounded like Ditka and the NFL veterans support networks had helped him turn things around before that reunion special.

OK, THAT sounds awesome.

Eh, that's not the end of the world. If the response is talking in terms of having him hit 5th then I'm fine with it.

Much of it was the result of being tremendously unlucky, and the odds are against that carrying over to a second year in a row. But that has nothing to do with him being in a contract year. Give him normal luck, and his #s still aren't anything special. But as it was pointed out, he was also dealing with injuries, too. Look, the "playing for a contract" theory isn't a hard and fast rule, but it's something to consider. Not only is Pena playing for a big contract since he's 32, but he's trying to bounce back from a season where he severely underperformed. It wouldn't surprise me to see him have a really decent year in the wake of that so long as he's not dealing with injuries again. I wouldn't be surprised to see him have a good year based on a dead cat bounce, and not having horrible luck. I don't see how you can attribute any part of his success this year to him being a contract year. If he has another bad season, are you going to attribute it to him pressing too much due to the contract year. I need something more than picking and choosing what seasons are good because of a contract push (if they're good) and what seasons aren't (if they're bad) There's any number of reasons as to why he could have a bad or a good year. I simply stated some as to why I think he'll have a good year. It means nothing. Regardless of what I think, he could go out there and be even worse than last year.

Much of it was the result of being tremendously unlucky, and the odds are against that carrying over to a second year in a row. But that has nothing to do with him being in a contract year. Give him normal luck, and his #s still aren't anything special. But as it was pointed out, he was also dealing with injuries, too. Look, the "playing for a contract" theory isn't a hard and fast rule, but it's something to consider. Not only is Pena playing for a big contract since he's 32, but he's trying to bounce back from a season where he severely underperformed. It wouldn't surprise me to see him have a really decent year in the wake of that so long as he's not dealing with injuries again.

Much of it was the result of being tremendously unlucky, and the odds are against that carrying over to a second year in a row.

Pena and Aramis I'm pretty optimistic about since both are playing for their last big contracts. Short of injuries taking them down I'm really not worried about them at all.

Of course they'll beat those projections.

http://www.womansavers.com/images/grief.jpg http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_w1yDJeronhg/S_VhIvL_6TI/AAAAAAAAADw/tY80OJopFoQ/s1600/grief%2520day%25201%2520side.jpg http://www.funeralresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/grief-and-loss-counseling.jpg http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/1580-4/weeping-frenchman.jpg

Yeah, all of those numbers are smoke and mirrors anyway after tax write-offs. 70%-80% of the teams could fit a $20 million contract into their payroll if they choose to do it and probably 20%-30% could afford a $30 million contract. David Wright also thinks the Mets will be affected by the Madoff lawsuit who will be selling off up to 25% of the ownership to pay for the settlement of that case. Finances could become more of an issue than people think. This could very well be true, but I'm thinking we should wait to hear from someone other than David Wright on such matters. That said, even with such a sale it wouldn't surprise me if they found a way to get it done.

So are the Cardinals just cheap? It seems that with their fanbase they should be making more than enough money to send their payroll to the $130+ million range if they wanted to.

For Bears fans it really doesn't matter if the Packers win any more (or go to any more) SB in the next 5-10 years. Even if they don't they're still likely to be the main reason the Bears don't have a shot at the SB or even the playoffs during that time. They don't have to be a SB dynasty to just absolutely dominate this division for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, any money issues teams may seem to be having will go out the window if Pujols actually becomes available as a FA. Teams like the Mets and Dodgers will be lining up front and center as if any financial troubles they had were a thing of the past. There's really no way you can count any of the major teams out if he hits the market. They'll find the money.