Sammy Sofa

13 carries, 109 yards, 8.3 ypc :shock: 'Nuff said. Jones, your service is appreciated, but it's time to dance and twirl your way over to the bench. Honestly, I think the roles should be reversed. Benson should be getting 25+ carries a game and Jones should be getting 5-10. I think they'd be a solid 1-2 punch, with Benson being the 1. Works for me. As long as Benson is the one out there when it's 3rd down and they have 2-3 yards to the 1st, I'll know he's gonna try his hardest to pound through if he can't find an opening. Jones still looks great often, but he can't seal the deal most of the time when it comes to punching in that 1st down.

Why don't we? Because the Bears have looked unbelievably good at times this year. They've also looked unbelievably awful. It's hard to say if we'll be 1 and done or not because no one knows what team and quarterback is going to show up. The problem is that they haven't looked "unbelievably good" in about two months now. All of that awesomeness was in the first 5 weeks and they've been slowly getting less awesome ever since, a lot of it masked by a relatively easy schedule and a really awful division. No, they're not bad...but they're sure as hell not Super Bowl good these days. Not even close.

I sadly agree 100%, and have felt that way since about the 9th or 10th week. I hope to God I'm wrong, but I have the sickening feeling in my gut I'm not.

13 carries, 109 yards, 8.3 ypc :shock: 'Nuff said. Jones, your service is appreciated, but it's time to dance and twirl your way over to the bench.

There aren't just no reasons for Benson not to be getting most of the carries...there's actually NEGATIVE reasons as to why he's not getting most of the carries.

? I didn't watch the Dallas game today, but Romo's QB rating was over 100, wasn't it? Either way, the Bears D should be fine against either QB. It's the offense that I'm worried about. I'm saying that if Dallas somewhow win the next game with a smacked around and poorly-playing Romo, then the Bears have a shot at stopping him. I'm much more worried about the defense. For last year and most of this year, they've been able to hold the bleeding in check and even make some things happen to keep the Bears in the game or even put them ahead. For the last month they haven't been doing anything even remotely close to that. Teams are almost scoring with abandon on them as long as they focus on the pass. Again, I didn't watch, but did Romo have a bad game today? He completed more than 66% of his passes for over 300 yards and two touchdowns. For the love of God, I'm talking about when the Bears would potentially play Dallas, which would be after Dallas' game next week, when Romo would hypothetically play as badly as I'm talking about, thusly leading to a "reeling Romo" in Chicago who hopefully wouldn't be able to throw through the massive swiss holes the Bears are putting into their cheesy passing defense.

? I didn't watch the Dallas game today, but Romo's QB rating was over 100, wasn't it? Either way, the Bears D should be fine against either QB. It's the offense that I'm worried about. I'm saying that if Dallas somewhow win the next game with a smacked around and poorly-playing Romo, then the Bears have a shot at stopping him. I'm much more worried about the defense. For last year and most of this year, they've been able to hold the bleeding in check and even make some things happen to keep the Bears in the game or even put them ahead. For the last month they haven't been doing anything even remotely close to that. Teams are almost scoring with abandon on them as long as they focus on the pass.

The Bears' pass defense has been hideous over the past month. Not bad, not mediocre...HIDEOUS. Short of them masterfully disguising their real passing D against scrub teams before the playoffs, there's zero excuse for it. They will lose their first playoff game if they don't shape it up, drastically. They better pray they face a craptacular Eli or a reeling Romo in that 2nd round.

You'd rather have, say, Jose Macias over Mark Prior? I have to say, the lengths you're willing to go to to repeatedly slam Prior with this absurd notion of "baseball toughness" is beyond ridiculous at this point.

Exactly. Aim for the sky and sort it out when the season gets close. I'd like to be in the situation, just once, where we're having trouble finding room for the quality players. That means the time will likely be winning and they can trade some spare parts to stock up the farm or tighten up for a playoff run. There's no excuse for Hendry to not be aiming for Jones short of the cost being absurdly high talent-wise.

If traded for wisely, A. Jones makes this team a contender NOW, playing any of the OF positions. Pie is still a huge gamble. CF is a gaping hole on this team right now, and they need another big hitter desperately. Jones in CF doesn't make this team a contender. The only thing that will make us a contender are the successes of Hill and Prior. A CF, even one as good as Jones, doesn't make enough of a difference offensively to overcome a rotation of 1 ace, a #3 (Lilly), and some veteran projects (Marquis and Miller). I'm obviously not equating Jones into somehow magically fixing the pitching staff. If you wanted me to be specific and say "offensive contenders," fine, there. The starting rotation potentially sucking doesn't mean we ignore the rest of the flaws.

If traded for wisely, A. Jones makes this team a contender NOW, playing any of the OF positions. Pie is still a huge gamble. CF is a gaping hole on this team right now, and they need another big hitter desperately.

In a better world? Neither. In reality? I like Lilly's deal a LOT more than either of them. If I have to pick between these two? Suppan, I guess. What a horrible thing to have to decide.

Mike Brown in that 2nd awesome pic. *Sigh*

Lets see what has happened the past 3 weeks We have had 1 of our 2 starting cornerbacks sit games (Vasher 2, Tillman 1) Todd Johnson while he may not be Mike Brown is a improvement over Manning who has continually missed plays the last few games. the idea ever cross your mind that they were doing more testing and showing off a bit so teams in the playoffs have to gameplan more? A lot of my negativity stems from the defense pretty much blowing it when it came to the playoffs last year combined with the last 3 games. Like I said, I don't want to be right at all and I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong. I think a lot of it is just their spotty playoff history in the last 15+ years...at least this time it's a consecutive visit with pretty much the same team, and yeah, Tank will be back. They know the drill and they have something to prove...so let's see 'em do it!

I'm sorry, but I'm having very little doubt the Bears are going to lose that first playoff game. I know the season is winding down and the starters will play less, but the defense has just been way too average or worse these last 3 weeks. I don't really see anything besides Tank coming back that indicates anything will drastically change between now and that first playoff game. I hope to God I'm wrong but I am not optimistic at all.

In a better world, he's already broken Aaron's HR record.

Slow pitch Softball swing. Not a real good baseball swing. Too many players have emulated this swing with not much effectiveness. Corey Patterson comes to mind. Griffey is without a doubt a HOFer. Considered the best player in baseball for about 10 years. Noone except for maybe Dale Murphy with that kind of stature has ever been left out of HOF. It may not be the best, but I definitely agree with it being the "prettiest" I've ever seen. When he knocks one out, it just looks so perfect. I'm not saying it is...it just looks that way.

I sure did. It's hard not to when someone pitches as flat out awesome as he has for the Cubs. It's not like he's come across as some kind of terrible human being...why wouldn't people "warm up" to him?

Unless a players name is "Edmonds" or "Pierzynksi," I don't think any Cubs fan, "average" or otherwise, would boo a player based on what team he played for, and even those guys are a stretch if they showed up and produced.

yup you're right, if the cubs don't win the world series in the next two years, they'll be the worst team in baseball Too late.

So what's the general consensus as to how much rest the starters should get before the playoffs? Personally, I think they should play this week and then sit the last game and then have the bye. Something about resting your top players for 3 weeks before the playoffs doesn't seem too smart. I understand wanting to have people healthy and ready to go, but I don't want them too "out of the loop" by the time that 2nd playoff week rolls around. The selfish part of me really wants to see the starters wail the snot out of Brett and the Packers that last week.

ahahahahahahaha While that caller is a bit, uhm, "special," I am worried along those lines that the Bears are going to get knocked out in their first playoff game just like they did last year...with the defense crapping the bed. The D has been pretty ugly this week and last.

Alot, if theres one thing you never count on a pitcher for, its injuries. ESPECIALLY with someone with as many warning labels as Z. But there are just as many arguments for keeping him around. I agree there are some things Z does that I wish he'd change, but you can say that about pretty much any pitcher out there. Even guys with "perfect mechanics" end up with DL time. I guess I just wonder where it would stop...why bother keeping any pitcher beyond the age of, say, 28? As time goes on the chance of injury is only going to increase, so should any stellar pitcher be moved by then because of "just in case?" But what we're talking about in the last few posts isn't an issue of control...it's that he's trying to strike more guys out as opposed to just letting them hit it. It's not something he seems to have no control over...it seems like he wants the k uber alles and as such is giving up more walks instead of maybe trying to just put the ball in play. Now this is just a guess on my part, but that's what it seems like, and given that strikeouts have been held in such absurdly high regard by this club, it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch. I think something like that is correctable. True, but Z is only 25. Again, where is the cut off point? Why have pitchers past the age of 30? 28? 26? Where does it stop. I'm not disagreeing with the idea of Zambrano, just the idea that it's a such an urgent race against the clock. Yeah, he's had back pains...not a good sign, but pitchers get aches and pain. It's part of being a pitcher. It would be one thing if he was missing significant time for those pains or anything else, but he's not. Bottom line, pitchers with his talent and apparent stamina are a rare breed...what are the odds the Cubs trade him "smart" and get the value in return? Unless you're getting someone along the lines of Cabrera or even Pujols, it's a massive risk. You could get a ton of prospects, but how many of them are going to actually pan out? How many of them could potentially be felled by these potential injuries? I'd still want him. I'm sorry, it would be foolish to turn away from a pitcher like that. Yeah, it's a gamble, but any pitcher is potentially a gamble. Again, look at Mark "perfect mechanics" Prior. Sometimes you need to take those chances. I'm not opposed to the idea of trading Zambrano for a big gain. Sign him to a 5 year extension and trading him when he's about 28 for a quality return is something that would be very do-able if done smart. I just don't see him breaking down by then. I could be wrong, but we've seen him stand up to the wear and tear for over 3 years now. I'm willing to take that gamble. This is a guy you can anchor your pitching staff around for years to come.

True, which makes the walk rate going up even more worrisome A sign of him being overworked? Much more likely than a sign of guaranteed health and dominance. And as far as Z = Maddux, how likely is it that Z becomes one of the top 5 pitchers of all time? Cause Maddux is right behind Clemens in my mind. I think the walk rate is a direct result of Z going for more strikeouts than being happy inducing ground balls. i.e. he's trying to throw more unhittable pitches than ones that can be put in play. Thats a bad thing isn't it? Getting a K isn't as important as getting an out. And the fact that it's causing his walk rates to rise past very bad levels is not good. It's forcing him to throw more pitches. Which is going to lead to him getting tired. Which is going to lead to him adjusting his mechanics to try to make up for it. Which leads to potentially straining a part on his arm. Considering his already violent mechanics, back problems, and weight problems, a serious injury could be right around the corner. It's all conjecture, but theres more saying its likely than there is saying its unlikely. It's potentially also something very fixable if he's going for more strikeouts. How many seasons does that guy have pitch virtually injury-free before he can be declared one of the rare "horses?" I'm not saying his invulnerable, but there's just as good an argument that he won't see serious DL time outside of a freak injury anytime soon.