jmajew

Sammy put up godly numbers and was loved until the numbers stopped coming. Latroy? He deserved what he got. Ramirez hasn't really been a target of the boo birds more so than any other player the last few seasons. Let's see if his leg injuries continue to be a problem along with his hussle before he gets booed. I think a lot of peolpe on this board are over reactive to way the media portrays players. you just wait. aramis is gonna sign for 13m a year or something and become the new scapegoat of the cubs. the media already hates his lack of hustle, they're gonna hate it more when he's the face of the franchise. I think you will be looking at something more like 6 years 100 million. 13 million a year is a pipe dream.

I think the problem is mostly Turner relying too heavily on Grossman throwing deep whenever possible, and abandoning the run. Grossman's mechanical flaws only seem to be exposed once the offense abandons the run and starts taking heat. When Grossmans mechanics are bad teams know they don't have to pay as close attention to the short and intermediate routes because they know Grossman will not be accurate. This allows them to be more aware of the deep routes. When Grossmans mechanics are good and can connect on the quick slants and the short-in/out routes it opens up the deep ball/which is what he does best. Grossman's mechanics breakdown when he is under pressure just like 95% of the QB's in the league. His mechanics in the first quarter were fine and he was very accurate on the first scoring drive. The interception in the 4th quarter Grossman was not under pressure. He was just on his pack foot and he let his arm drop. He didn't step into the throw because of earlier pressure in that series. Whatever, we are splitting hairs here. Grossman simply doesn't have the expierence the handle the situations that Turner puts him in. His mechanics to breakdown at times in the game, on that we agree. To me it seems pretty clear when he starts doing the "Techmo Bowl" dropbacks and throws off the back foot, he is worried about the pressure. Do we agree that he is worried about pressure that is sometimes non-existent?

I think the problem is mostly Turner relying too heavily on Grossman throwing deep whenever possible, and abandoning the run. Grossman's mechanical flaws only seem to be exposed once the offense abandons the run and starts taking heat. When Grossmans mechanics are bad teams know they don't have to pay as close attention to the short and intermediate routes because they know Grossman will not be accurate. This allows them to be more aware of the deep routes. When Grossmans mechanics are good and can connect on the quick slants and the short-in/out routes it opens up the deep ball/which is what he does best. It's not like he just goes into a game with bad mechanics. He starts to mess up when Turner has him dropping back and throwing deep every play. Grossman's bad mechanics don't effect him on his deep balls as much...it is more when he is throwing the short routes. He threw no picks when he was trying to go deep. In the second quarter he was picked off trying to dump it to Clark when he was rolling out of the pocket and it was picked off by Taylor. In the third quarter he tried to throw a short 5 yard pass to Clark but his arm dropped and he threw it well over his head. Again he was under pressure but he overthrew him not because he was avoiding the rush but because his elbow got low causing a bad angle to throw the ball 5 yards. In the fourth as i said he was under no pressure and overthrough Cage. Again he was on his back foot and his elbow dropped. Even last week against the 49ers on one of the touchdown catches i believe to Rasheed Davis he through off his backfoot, he got lucky on that one. When you throw balls deep the ball has a higher trajectory therefore if the arm angle is a bit low it doesn't effect the pass other than the pass possibly being underthrown because not enough force is generated from being on the back foot and the arm angle. On the short passes the trajectory is usually much lower so when the arm drops and you throw off the back foot the ball generally sails over the recievers head.

I think the problem is mostly Turner relying too heavily on Grossman throwing deep whenever possible, and abandoning the run. Grossman's mechanical flaws only seem to be exposed once the offense abandons the run and starts taking heat. When Grossmans mechanics are bad teams know they don't have to pay as close attention to the short and intermediate routes because they know Grossman will not be accurate. This allows them to be more aware of the deep routes. When Grossmans mechanics are good and can connect on the quick slants and the short-in/out routes it opens up the deep ball/which is what he does best. Grossman's mechanics breakdown when he is under pressure just like 95% of the QB's in the league. His mechanics in the first quarter were fine and he was very accurate on the first scoring drive. The interception in the 4th quarter Grossman was not under pressure. He was just on his pack foot and he let his arm drop.

I think the problem is mostly Turner relying too heavily on Grossman throwing deep whenever possible, and abandoning the run. Grossman's mechanical flaws only seem to be exposed once the offense abandons the run and starts taking heat. When Grossmans mechanics are bad teams know they don't have to pay as close attention to the short and intermediate routes because they know Grossman will not be accurate. This allows them to be more aware of the deep routes. When Grossmans mechanics are good and can connect on the quick slants and the short-in/out routes it opens up the deep ball/which is what he does best.

Bensen should be getting 20-25 carries a game and Thomas Jones should get 5-10 and be in on all third and longs. The problem with the offense is not necessarily Ron Turner. It is Rex Grossman sometimes getting lazy and throwing off his back foot and dropping his elbow to low which causes him to loft the ball. When Rex loses his mechanics he is not good. I can't beleive the coaches don't do more during the game to try to correct that, like maybe telling him about it. Ron Turner is part of the problem for passing to much but Grossman losing his mechanics is what is the main problem. You can tell in the first quarter if Rex is going to have a good game, simply by looking at his mechanics. When you see his mechanics are flawed we should be calling more run plays, thus putting less pressure on him.

Baldelli would be a great addition. I love the idea of adding young players who are already tied up for the next few years. Where was the source that said Baldelli was available? I have only heard that Crawford was.

It might be the best option. But what do you do if the team stays in the race all year? Let him walk at year's end? Sign him to a 3-year deal? Try and get him to change positions? If we are in the race and genuinely believe we can win the World Series we obviously keep him and then figure it out at the end of the year. I'd like to get him to switch positions but it would hurt his value. Could he play 2b? I know he has played SS in the minors. His numbers at 2b would be just as valuable as they are at C. If worst comes to worst he could be put in the OF, but out there he is clearly not as valuable. IMO we should either move him to 2b if he can or trade him now for pitching. I hate saying that cuz I love the guy but it is best for the Cubs organization.

I'm not sure being a c/3b is all that much more easy on the body than just being a catcher in the minors. There is a lot more use of DH's down there, and catchers often get to do that. That being said, 250 fewer games is meaningfuly, but it does not negate the 6200 major league innings, and the repeated injuries he's absorbed. I'm not saying he's going to fall apart today. I'm talking mostly about Barret post-2007, when he's a free agent with over 7000 innings behind the plate in the majors, and 31. Like Lee and Ramirez this past year, Barrett is a pending free agent. And I think he's a huge question. Sorry for just jumping in the convo, but wouldn't the best thing to do with Barrett keep him for the start of the season then trade him at the trade deadline if we are out of it. I'm sure teams like the Dodgers, Padres, and Angels would all love to have him at some point. His value will be much higher at the deadline. Sorry if all of this has already been said. Second, if we are going to trade Barrett we should look at trading him to the Tigers for Bonderman. They can have both Pudge and Barrett catchign and have Pudge catch 100 games a year and then DHing and then they can let Barrett catch the other 62 and then either use him at DH or third base. This is just a thought. I'm also sure Barrett could play 1b for them full time if they wanted.

Is WGN saying the same thing? ESPN? If not, saying something could happen 4-5 days from now is really saying nothing. And the Score is already famous for breaking stories that go nowhere. My dad told me he heard we were close to resigning Aram on the radio. He only listens to WGN so I'm assuming that is where he heard it.

I think Eyre for Sheff makes a lot of sense for both teams. Trading Jacque Jones for Mike Gonzalez probably won't work. But i'm pretty sure we could trade Jones for a decent left relievers. Losing Eyre wouldn't hurt us that much since we got Ohman.

In all reality if we lose Aramis our offseason will prolly look something like this. Julio Lugo 3/18, Soriano 5/80, Shea Hillenbrand 2/12, Schmidt 4/56. That would give us Lugo, Barrett, Soriano, DLee, Murton, Hillenbrand, Jones, Pie. Rotation of Zambrano, Schmidt, Hill, Prior/Miller/Marshall/Guzman.

If it's one thing that the Tigers have shown us, it's that if you overpay a player, they will come to you. With the potential of A-Ram off the books, as well as the Tribune kicking up the payroll and several other chunks of change from departing players, Hendry has the opportunity to overpay for talent. Given the dire straits the Cubs are in (if or when Ramirez leaves), that's the only recourse Hendry has. As you say, the Cubs don't have the minor league talent for trades, but they do have baskets of money at their disposal. I think the important thing to keep in mind is, will Hendry overpay for the RIGHT players. In that instance, I don't think he's the best judge. He's shown the ability to pay who he wants what it will take, but Since Ramirez is the best FA bat available, why wouldn't you overpay to keep him, instead of overpaying for the overrated Carlos Lee? You have 3 "premier" offensive FA's: Ramirez, Soriano and Lee. If you were going to overpay one of them, Ramirez would be the one to do it with. He's far and away superior to Lee, and he's better than Soriano as well. Of course Ramirez has not only put up the best numbers but he is also the youngest of those three. So you would be getting him during his prime. The Cubs need to offer up 5/75 and start from there. I'm sure Hendry has been low balling him. Dont' forget last year Konerko was the big bat on the market and the highest contract I believe he was offered was 5/65, but he settled for 5/60. With that said I can't see teams like the Angels, Orioles, Dodgers offering much more. I think as of now guys like Soriano, Aramis, and Carlos Lee are being very unrealistic. CLee should get no more than Konerko and and Soriano and Armais should only get marginally more than Konerko. Soriano 5/70 and Aramis 5/75. That is just my opinion though.

If any team is giving Soriano a 7 year deal they are morons. He will be 38 when the contract is over. If that is what he is asking and he won't take less than 7 years I say forget about it. Aramis must be thinking 7 years 130 million if Soriano is thinking 7/119. This just does not bode well for the Cubs. At this rate we will only be able to sign 2 free agents with these asking prices. That includes Aram.

Garcia would be a perfect 3. He has been pitching in the AL his entire career. His whip last year was only 1.28. In 30 IP vs the NL this year he gave up 7 runs and allowed 33 baserunners. So if his ERA was 4.53 last year in the AL my bet is it would be under 4 in the NL. Making 9 million next year seems pretty fair for that kind of production. My bet is we could trade Eyre straight up for him.

That kind of sucks for Sheffield. Not only do the Yankees not want him but they wont' even let him decide on his own where he gets to play. Sheffield brought it all on upon himself by negotiating his own contract.

I completely agree. No team will trade a 25-27 year old top of the rotation pitcher for Crawford. They will be willing to trade a 20-22 year old pitcher who is still in the minors that has the potential to be a top of the rotation guy. With that said I think Veal, Mateo and Marshall would get the job done in a heartbeat and if I were Hendry I'd offer that as soon as he can. Side note: The more I think about the more I like it. I'd love to trade for both Crawford and Burrell and then sign Lugo. Lugo, Crawford, DLee, Ramirez, Burrell, Murton, Barrett, Theriot/Izturis has me salivating.

I thought he was signed through 2008 with club options through 2010. That doesn't put him near free agency for quite awhile. Yeah I believe he would make atleast 7 million a year starting in 2008 and as high as 11 million. The Dude: Sorry I didn't read everything clearly.

I agree. To deal that much talent to get Pierre w/o some sort of guarantee that he'll resign is risky at best. Middle of 2006 and I was wishing that Nolasco was still wearing Cubbie blue with all the injuries and poor performance of the starting staff. I think both of these observations are irrelevant to the Crawford deal discussion. None of the prospects that went Florida for Pierre would have been enough of a centerpiece for Crawford. The Devil Rays should command a very, very good pitcher in return for Crawford. A Kazmir level prospect. As well as Nolasco pitched last year, I very much doubt he couldn't have been a good start for a Crawford deal. With the benefit of hind-sight, sure. But that's not how it works. If Nolasco isn't traded to Florida, he gets only a fraction of the MLB experience. Maybe he folds under Dusty Baker's management, or gets hurt like all the rest of them. It's difficult to say what could have been, but certainly Nolasco had more opportunities in Florida to mature than he would have in Chicago. Crawford should command an MLB elite pitching prospect, and it's not likely Nolasco is the prospect if still with the Cubs organization. So you think they would take Veal and Marshall?

The more I think about it the riskier it sounds to try to sign the guy. If we make a bid we will have to wait 30 days to hear back if we got him. That would put us around mid december. If we don't get him we are royally screwed. By that time Zito and Schmidt both could have signed with another team. Going after Daisuke puts all of our eggs in one basket, with regards to our pitching staff. I hope the team would be willing to have one of Zito/Schmidt and then Daisuke. Kind of like getting Daisuke as a bonus.

http://www.northsidebaseball.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=35656 They woudl supposedly want a top of the rotation starter.

IF Aram leaves we are left with a huge hole. However, it can be filled through either signing or players or trading for players. Keep in mind if you lose Aramis, you have to then aquire 2 above average offensive players to improve. That's much easier said than done. I never said it was easy but it is possible. If Hendry can do it I'd be surprised I think other GMs would be able to fill the hole a bit better.

I don't think ARam is going anywhere, but obtaining ARod or Tejada is a step backward because ARam matches them in production and the Cubs don't have to give up players for him. The only thing with that is that Ramirez's money will come off the books as well, which will allow the Cubs to sign another big-time FA. Don't get me wrong-I'll be very disappointed if the Cubs don't re-sign Ramirez. I definitely think it is a big priority that the Cubs sign him. Right now, the team is looking at signing or trading for one big hitter. If Ramirez leaves, they will hopefully just take the money and go get two big hitters instead. There is not a single FA that can match Aramis's production. IF Aram leaves we are left with a huge hole. However, it can be filled through either signing or players or trading for players. The problem I have is that Hendry did not see this coming, if he really wants to stay with the Cubs we should have had an extension worked out by the All-Star break. If we hadn't gotten him gaurenteed then we should have traded him. Do you know how many teams would have taken Aramis at the trading deadline? Probably every contending team. I guarentee you we could have gotten Ervin Santanna or John Lackey straight up for Aramis. I just can't stand the thought of losing him for nothing. I know hindsight is 20/20. But the signs had to be there.

If Aramis doesn't want to be here then so be it. I don't think the team should overpay him just to get him to stay. If a player doesn't want to be in a certain city but is stuck there his numbers may not be up to his full potential. If Aramis does leave if we sign Huff, Soriano, Lugo and trade for Burrell I think our offense will still be vastly improved. The only problem with that is will Hendry actually make all those moves, most likely not.

I'd love to see the Cubs sign Lugo and Soriano. Lugo could bat leadoff and then Soriano second. This way we don't totally waste Soriano's potential to be an RBI machine leading off. Lugo, Soriano, DLee, Ramirez, Murton, Jones, Barret, Pie/Theriot (depends were Soriano plays) is a veyr good lineup.