goonys evil twin

The bolded section is what I disagree with. I think they're a pretty average team, and I don't think they have any real "strength". The defense isn't particularly imposing, and neither is the offense. They manage to do things ok and hang around. Both the Vikings and Bears have played teams that are now 0-2. Minny barely beat both of the teams they played. My personal opinion is that the Vikings are overrated, as it seems they are many years. I don't know if they are overrated, I mean, they are underdogs at home. And nobody is going gaga over their start. But I agree with your assessment. I think they are a decent team. 9-7 caliber, but might win 10 thanks to the schedule. But they aren't great in any aspect of the game, while the best teams always seem to be great at something.

They actually moved the ball well at times, but then the Bears would come up with a big play or a turnover. And it was completely clear the Bears were beating the Lions in the individual matchups, which lead to just a slew of Lions penalties. The Lions had a couple decent runs, and seemed to connect on quite a few 10-15 yard pass plays. But with the score the way it was so early, they were bound to give up yardage eventually.

I can't see him being any worse than Pierre in CF. It might be smarter to find a stud RF and platoon Jones with Murton, the problem is there's no chance in hell Hendry even considers such a move.

Marshall and Mateo have done nothing to indicate they could outperform Padilla next year, and neither is a safe bet for 200 IP (probably Hendry's biggest desire). I'd be happy with giving Padilla a 3/21m deal, it's not like his signing will mean there is no room for anybody else. Even if he's here, there would be 2 spots open. The Cubs can't ignore other pitchers because of the guys they already have.

Looks like the Bears are giving 3 points this weekend, one of 6 road favorites.

I know it's petty, but it seemed to me that Peter spent more time giving props to the Jets for making it a game than to the Bears for destroying the Lions.

It would be really cool if the Bears defenders carried him outside and forced him to eat dirt. That's dominance.

Well, they want somebody who is a decent bet at 200 innings. Padilla was a reliever, then turned into a 200 IP guy overnight. I believe that quick increase in workload played a part in his 2004/2005 setbacks, as he was always hindered by nagging type injuries, as opposed to TJS season ending stuff. From what I remember, he was having triceps issues and groin issues, but not major shoulder and/or elbow problems. I think he's quite capable of giving a team 115 or better ERA+ next year over 200 innings, which is exactly what the Cubs are looking for. Marshall and Mateo don't erase that need.

Strange things happen when a team is at home and the Humpty Turf Dome is a pretty significant HFA for the Queens. That said, I think the Bears will win, but its not going to be a blowout like the first two games. I just want to mention how many people were saying this about the Lions game..."It's going to be a test"..."Defensive battle"...yadda yadda. I don't think the Vikings really have a great offense. I think we can get pressure on Johnson, and he'll throw balls away. I'm not sure what to expect out of the Bears offense. I would love to say that I have complete confidence in them putting up a bunch of points each game, but it's hard to reverse all that bad offense mojo that I've witnessed for so long. I need to see it against Minny and Seattle before I'm convinced. That said, I think the Bears win 17-3 I was wrong about the Lions game, hope not this week. Because I feel they'll handle the Vikings. I always fear decent teams playing at home after a disappointing loss. But what about that same team playing a week after a lucky win? I think the Vikes would be set-up for a letdown much more than the Bears, who have a legit chip on their shoulder when it comes to the "respect" angle. Nothing the Vikings do impresses me that much. They do things well, but not outstanding, the Bears offense is good, and the defense is outstanding.

Same here. I wanted Marcedes Lewis so bad. I was so angry at that draft. However, we got a great returner in Hester, and what appears to be a good returner in Hester and Manning. Angelo and Lovie obviously knew something we didn't. Clark looks great, and utilizing TEs is what good offenses do. I love what the offense has shown so far. I don't want to claim an I told you so on this one, but I was never all that excited about getting a TE in the draft. I've always liked Desmond, and thought he was as good as the vast majority of NFL TEs. If they could have gotten a Gates, great, but I didn't see one out there. Boy, was I wrong about this game. I thought the line was way too big, did it end up hitting 9? That was a blast.

I've really lost a lot of respect for Beane on this one.

Football is a what have you done for me lately, bottom line business. Baseball is much more of an established, status quo, seniority and tenure, sport. The NFL is loaded with 20-something through 40-something coaches, while in baseball, any coach under 50 is practically a kid. The only way to get respect in baseball is to be around for a long time. Football is all about results. If you win at 35 it doesn't matter how old you are. That's not to say there aren't exceptions, clearly I'm just talking in generalizations. But you don't have to look much further than how coaches treat veteran players who lost a step and rookies. Vets lose their jobs every year to undrafted free agents simply because football coaches want bang for their buck, not nostalgia. The Neifi Perez's of the world wouldn't stand a chance with guys like Ryan Theriot (similar or better production for far less money) around in the NFL.

Ok, so um, maybe Hill can be the co-ace next year.

below 9 now

I would think that what we see as the #1 priority will never be what Angelo sees. Didn't he have a reputation of ignoring O line in Tampa?

I was thinking it was mostly about not having to run. But for some reason, I remember the pregame stretching thing as well. For one it's worth, I've never seen anymore than a handful of players stretching on the field before the game.

koo koo ka choo, the walrus has his ERA below 10.

I was a little more interested in the 15th pick. Probably didn't have the tools they were looking for though.

Exactly. Imagine, if you will, the Cubs pull off a couple moves with teams looking to cut some payroll. They end up with Andruw and JD (while trading jacque in the process), sign Durham, resign Ramirez, and sign two veteran starters, of the 4-5 ERA innings eating variety, one for $7m, one for $4.5m (for these purposes, I used Padilla and Lilly. Plus, they resign Wood for the bullpen. This is what such a roster could look like, at $107m. 4 Durham 6.00 9 Drew 11.00 3 Lee 13.00 5 Ramirez 12.00 8 Jones 13.50 2 Barrett 4.00 7 Murton 0.35 6 Izturis 4.50 Soto 0.35 Theriot 0.35 Cedeno 0.35 Pagan 0.35 Bynum 0.35 Zambrano 10.00 Padilla 7.00 Prior 4.00 Hill 0.35 Lilly 4.50 Mateo/Marmol/Guzman 0.35 Wuertz 0.35 Ohman 0.75 Wood 2.50 Howry 4.00 Eyre 3.00 Dempster 5.00 Now, maybe the deals aren't all that possible, and maybe 107 is higher than they'll go. But certainly, this team can find a place from some actual upgrades in the OF and at 2B, without settling for players like Theriot starting.

No, you can't do that. You can't just compare them to another team and say next year they have to be better because.... What if SF is getting lucky while Washington is simply performing as expected? Washington isn't "supposed" to have a better offense next year, just because. That's like saying it was heads this year, it's going to be tails next. As for the last statement, the Cubs BAA overall, and with men in scoring position is very close. You can't make the claim that you attempt to do, with the evidence you are attempting to use.

The Cubs have had 2 first picks right? Dunstan and Montenez? Montanez was 3 overall. Who went 1-2 that year? That may illustrate the end to finish "ahead" of the D-Rays & Royals. http://www.thebaseballcube.com/draft/2000/Round-1-1.shtml

that wouldn't seem to be the case in this thread. I don't think the embarassment is any worse if they finish 30th. The Royals are a better team either way. Why this thread? The first post has nothing to do with the draft, the 2nd post references the draft position, while at the same time making a joke about spoilers. And the 3rd post again had nothing to do with the draft. Then you made your post, and then the next 3 people agreed with you. Doesn't seem like much of an obsession to me. The only reference was in a joke post.

You might be right, but then HR and walks allowed are accounted for in OPS against right? You would think it would reflect more consistently. It's not perfect, never is. The extremes, high BB, high HR, low AVG, are likely offsetting what would be a more typical OPS/R correlation.

The Cubs have had 2 first picks right? Dunstan and Montenez? Montanez was 3 overall.

I think the so-called "obsession" is more of a case of a bunch of Cubs fans who like talking about the Cubs but don't have anything else to talk about with regards to the team. A lot of this talk is pretty clearly a running joke, to me at least. Plus, there's the added theory that the worse the team finishes this year, the bigger the embarrassment, and the more likely an overhaul would become.