goonys evil twin

I wouldn't want Garland at that contract.

I don't think Lee will come all that close to his 2005 numbers, but I think he'll be above his career mark. Maybe somewhere around a 950 OPS.

At one point Toronto was pulling in record attendance leves, around 4 million a year. This isn't a Marlins team that can't draw a crowd, win or lose. They still aren't spending nearly as much as the big boys. They've gone cheap in several spots so they can afford to spend big in others.

But those guys are often there. I'm not asking them to reach for a O lineman. Obviously we don't know how it will play out, but they could be picking very late in the 1st, and the top skill position players will likely be gone by then. The Bears have several positions where they could use some help, so I wouldn't put any arbitrary bonus or penalty on different positions. If anything, if there was a lineman graded the same as a RB or WR, I'd take the lineman this year, since they have no young depth there and do have some talented young receivers and a surplus at RB.

They wouldn't be getting a pitcher worthwhile of being in the discussion. Bederd wouldn't be a bad replacement. He would be for Prior. He's no more reliable than Williams for Hill. He's the oldest guy in the discussion and is no more accomplished than the others.

So not only does he pick against the Bears for like the 15th time this season, but he has no idea that Minnesota was eliminated from the Playoffs last week???? HAHA. I can't wait to see the playoff predictions. NY Giants 48, Bears 3. They are picking bad teams to score 3 TDs against the Bears, what do they think good teams would do? I'm pretty certain the Bears will lose this game and give up around 21 points.

They wouldn't be getting a pitcher worthwhile of being in the discussion.

So not only does he pick against the Bears for like the 15th time this season, but he has no idea that Minnesota was eliminated from the Playoffs last week???? I really don't understand how this guy built a reputation as an expert.

Never? There have been some amazing all-time great franchise tackles taken very early. Tait was a first round draft pick (14th overall). I would have no problem if they selected a top notch tackle in the first, they should be somewhere around the mid 20's, so they won't be getting a huge impact player, regardless. I'd wait until the 3rd or 4th for centers and guards though, and I'd take a late project for any O line position. I meant for the Bears. I don't believe in that kind of stuff. QBs don't work out for the Bears either, but I wouldn't stop trying to develop them. They've had no success with early RBs, but I wouldn't pass on one just because. Columbo was on his way to being a solid tackle before that injury. If there is not an impact TE available, and an olineman rates higher than anybody on the board, I would take that lineman without hesitation. The Bears are old on the line, and need reinforcements. That mid 80's offense was built around some very early O line draft picks. Covert and Van Horne were each first rounders.

Never? There have been some amazing all-time great franchise tackles taken very early. Tait was a first round draft pick (14th overall). I would have no problem if they selected a top notch tackle in the first, they should be somewhere around the mid 20's, so they won't be getting a huge impact player, regardless. I'd wait until the 3rd or 4th for centers and guards though, and I'd take a late project for any O line position.

No chance? Boston hasn't done a whole lot. The Yankees are a year older. I wouldn't pick Toronto, but I wouldn't say they have no chance. Remote is a better word. Didn't we just have this same discussion recently in reverse? :D Edit: Oh yeah, I said the Packers had "no chance" to beat the Bears. Seriously, nobody caught this? NL East AL East I thought you said GB had no chance against Seattle.

They look very hodge podge to me. Actually it's very similar to how I thought about the Red Sox back in the late 90's and early 00's. They were possibly the least talented very expensive team in the league, with guys like Daubach, Offerman, O'Leary and Nixon playing major roles at impact positions. And they were pretty much centered around one great starting pitcher and a bunch of mediocre guys. This Toronto team is strange. I've never been a Vernon Wells fan. Rios and Johnson don't impress me much. Overbay is a decent enough hitter, but hardly an impact 1B. I think the lineup is balanced, but not intimidating. They'll get on base a lot, but won't be knocking guys out early. They will be an annoying lineup to face. The rotation is pretty top heavy, but potentially the best in the division. I think that they'll need a pretty steep decline by the Yanks and Red Sox to have a chance, because I don't see Toronto winning 95 games. 90 is within reach, but 88 is probably more likely. If Baltimore and Tampa are as bad as they can be, maybe they can rack up a bunch of cheap wins.

They have no chance of winning the NL east.

Yeah Moose, Bradley, Berrian and even Gage is a nice foursome to have in there. Especially if the latter 3 start to blossom. And the better Grossman gets, the better these guys will look too. Even at the Bears "weak" spots (with the exception of TE which you noted above), they have young talent that is hopefully only going to get better. I really think this Bears team is going to only continue to get better. This isn't like '03 where it's a fluke thing...I think this is really the start of a nice run here for the Bears. I think they can stay away from drafting WR early next year. TE is a must, and some younger O line depth would be valuable to develop. But I'd also like to see them keep drafting 3rd and 4th round defenders that they've had great success turning into solid regulars. These players are very cheap for their first few years, and can be used to plug holes when the current defenders start getting more expensive. I'd also like to see them draft a QB late. They should draft one every other year. With Rex and Kyle fighting for the starting job next year, a rookie could sit and learn for a few years without much pressure. With Orton's experience he'll be fine for the backup next season. And I'd rather have my 3rd guy be a potential starter down the road than a journeyman.

Then why would he want to come here? This is a really good point that should be expanded on. Why would Tejada want to come here? We don't have a winning tradition. We haven't made the playoffs since 2003. Teams don't become better when they trade 1 player for another of equal value when it just creates another hole somewhere else. If Tejada wants to win, I'm afraid he'd be going to the wrong organization if he became a Cub. He should want to be traded to the team that has Mark Prior. A combination of Tejada and Prior with a decent supporting cast will probably create a winner. How long will it take for Tejada to wear out his welcome? How long before he asks for another trade? The Cubs treat their Dominican superstars so well throughout their time with the team. Or maybe he just likes that the Cubs never dangle the names of their superstars out for trade proposals.

When the search tool is back up and running, I'm really starting to think that we need to document the number of imminent deals that Levine has discussed that didn't come through. He's not a particularly reliable source, though he does give us some fuel for the hot stove (albeit the dried cow dung variety). He's generated at least two enoormous threads on this bd. since May (Dunn and Tejada). I guess what irritates me the most is he never seems to get called out by the station (or anyone else) for these inaccurate reports, and/or never seems to explain himself when they turn out to be inaccurate. I wonder if something is getting lost in the translation from what he actually says to what people here write about what he says. I've seen the guy on Comcast a lot and have heard him on the radio from time to time, and while his style does not lend a lot of credibility to his words for me, I've never heard him talk the way some people report that he talks. Did he really say such and such deal was imminent, or did he say the Cubs are looking for a big bat, these are some examples of a big bat, they'd like to get something done sooner or later but nothing is imminent? Maybe the people on this board who start posts relaying what Levine reports need to pay a little closer attention to the whole story and not just look for key words like Prior, Tejada, trade. The way people tell the story he's going out there saying a trade is very likely, and then he comes right back the next day and denies ever saying a trade was likely. And this story has been played out at least a half dozen times. I find it really hard to believe this is actually how it's happening every time. You get a guy like Rogers in print and on the record constantly begging for the trades of Zambrano or Wood, and it's easy to have a discussion about him. He's not saying the Cubs are going to do something, he's just playing Sam Smith and saying he thinks they should do something, that's the difference between a reporter and columnist.

And one is a SS and the other is a corner OF. Couldn't you match up Sandbergs numbers with a corner OF guy too and make him not look as good? Granted, the player cost is a big difference but I don't see how comparing a corner OF with a middle infielder stats and seeing them as the same value. That's exactly what was about to point out. It's a meaningless comparison. It's meaningless if you use it to rank the two players. It's not meaningless if you're talking about what that guy would bring to the team next year. Either Gonzo or Tejada would be fine for the 5th spot in the order, and both would bring similar production. The difference is what kind of production they would be replacing, Murton or Cedeno. Theoretically Murton would still be getting time against LHers, either replacing Gonzo or Jones, depending on the day. Gonzo would be replacing Murton vs RHP. Whereas Tejada would be replacing Cedeno vs just about everybody. Murton is likely to produce a bit more than Cedeno, but a nice chunk of that production would be against LHP. Against RHP he's not going to be as good. Without concerns for what you give up, you'd rather have Tejada, obviously. But when you take into account their similar production, you'd be insane to prefer Tejada + Murton - Prior over Gonzo + Cedeno + Prior. It's not even a debate.

moose hasn't lived up to his billing, has publicly embarassed his QB, and dropped more than a few important passes. grossman needs to get in his face on his next drop. It's hard for me to be upset at Moose for getting in Orton's face. I think that played a part in Lovie finally making the necessary switch. And I don't think any good would come from Rex getting in Moose's face. The drops are getting pretty ridiculous, but he's also been the Bears only receiver threat, and is covered by 2 or 3 guys at all times. I'd say he's been about a C+. Playing receiver in this offense is not easy. When Orton did get the ball to him it was rare that the pass was in a nice catching zone. He's done enough to earn more than a D or F. I'm just hoping they can get a couple nice playoff games out of him and then one last hurrah next season. Because by year 3 of this contract he probably won't be much of a big time threat, and by year 4 might have to be cut.

I might have mild interest in Davi Dellucci (possibly platoon with Murton) and Jose Guillen (platoon with Jones) at the right price if I was certain my manager would use them appropriately. Milton Bradley could be a huge free agent with a breakout year. Jim Edmonds would be very interesting. I could see Boston throwing big money at him if their CF position is still in question. He'd be a huge risk at his age with his style of play, but you could probably pencil him in for an 850-900 OPS for 140 games in both 2007 and 2008. Cliff Floyd, at 34, would be a bit scary. But if he repeats his 2005, he's going to get a lot of interest.

He hates paying taxes.

http://www.mlb4u.com/0607FA.html

I will say this, if Hendry trades for Tejada without giving up Prior or Zambrano, I'll take back every negative thing I've ever said about his work. And if he gets to keep Pie as well, I'll bow down to the shrine of Jim everyday.

I baited you? Did you read what you wrote to me? Apparantly you think I can't read and can't form a coherent arguement. You've been incredibly antagonistic in this argument. I am simple stating a pretty simple idea, Brett Favre circa 2005 isn't as good as Brett Favre circa 1995-1997, and that his team's misfortunes can be partly blamed on his declining play. You, and many Favre apoligists, like to claim that his astronomical INT rate this season is due entirely to him just trying so much harder now than he did before, to make up for his teammates lack of ability. I take a much more simple approach. In his peak he had a 2.59 TD/INT ratio, and his team was consistently great. Since 1998 he's had a TD/INT ration of 1.33, and his team has ranged from mediocre to good, and is now terrible. I've stated that I don't think he's done, that I think he can still win in this league and that he's still a threat. But his body, at 36, can't do what it once did. And for a guy who relied so heavily on risk taking and his extreme physical talents, that will take a toll. You can name guys like Elway (TD and the OLine won him his Super Bowls), Young (had the benefit of not getting as banged up early in his career, not to mention the best receiver in NFL history), Moon (please, the guy was never a threat for greatness in his later years), Marino (put up numbers but not many results in his 30's) and Gannon (another late bloomer without much wear and tear when he emerged who also had 3 great receivers) and say they've had some success in their 30s. But I'm not saying Favre can't have any success. All I'm saying is he has declined, the results speak for themselves and it shouldn't be surprising to anybody. It's hardly an indictment of the guy. I hate that he's owned the Bears, but respect the hell out of his game. He's been more fun to watch than any Bears player over the past decade, and would probably go down as the greatest Bear ever if he played for this team. I'm much more happy that the Bears beat Favre twice this year than I would have been if they beat Rogers. He's had a great career, and can still be pretty good, but he's not the same. And people should stop pretending that he is.

This pitching staff can be quite good with Zambrano and Prior at the top of their game, with or without Wood at his best. But take away Prior, and then Wood's status becomes an enormous obstacle.

No. I hope not, but i think so... I really have no idea, but I'm going to guess something happens here. There's usually not a lot of smoke around Hendry moves unless they actually end up happening (Maddux, Barrett, Nomar, Jacque), or at least get very very close (Furcal).