goonys evil twin

I wouldn't fall off my chair for a Furcal signing. I would if he actually went out and solved the OF problem. But making marginal upgrades to a position that is not lacking in decent options wouldn't be a blockbuster to me. There's just been so much speculation already about that possible signing.

I've been figuring around $105, but leaving room for those all-so-important midseason acquisitions.

I view it as playing it safe and going for the gold. Every defense of Orton says the team is playing well despite his poor play, so don't fix what's not broken. That is a play not to lose mentality, or a cover your butt strategy. It's easy to say the Bears have won 7 games under Orton, so I'll stick with him. If they fall short, you can always say you stuck with the guy who brought you there. But the goal is not just to hang on and try to win the division. The goal is to be the best possible. It would be different if the returning veteran was a journeyman with no future on the team. I'm not asking them to reinsert Brad Johnson, Jay Fiedler or Kurt Warner. Rex can still be the franchise QB. By all accounts, they will still be counting on him to be the franchise QB next year. At the very least he's still in the picture. Orton was drafted as a backup plan and developmental project in case Grossman busts in the next couple years. Until Orton starts playing better, Rex has to be considered the better of the two. So play the better QB. Orton isn't playing well enough to win many playoff games against good teams. Rex could be the difference between making it to the NFC championship game or being happy with just making the playoffs. We know Orton isn't going to go into NY or Seattle and win a playoff game for the Bears on the strength of his arm. Playoff teams shut down one dimensional offenses. Rex is no guarantee to get it done, but he's got a better chance than Kyle. It comes back to what is your biggest motivation. Do you think the Bears are getting lucky and therefore don't want to mess with karma? If so, go the safe route, stick with Orton until he gets hurt or fails, then you can always say you were just playing the hot hand. Or, do you think the Bears are good and want to see the best player possible on the field at each position, in hopes that not only will you win the division, but may lock-up a first round bye and win in the playoffs? Then I think you have to let Kyle start this week, and unless he starts to improve a lot, and soon, then go with Grossman.

The meadowlands would be a mistake. Baseball in the NY area is primarily a public transportation sport. They need to be in an area with many trains, including easy access from Manhattan. The Devils and Nets failed in the swamp, so will a baseball team. Put them along the river in Hudson county, with close access to the turnpike, lincoln and holland tunnels, PATH and NJ Transit trains and ferry service. 40,000 people won't drive to the meadowlands 81 times a year. It's great for a football, a tailgating sport, bad for hockey and basketball, and terrible for baseball.

Yeah, I know that sounded weird. My point is that I agree with you to an extent. But you can go from early to late really quickly in the hot stove.

I'll take Adam Dunn and Eric Milton please. That's a pretty good analogy.

I don't mean to suggest you're wrong. But remember what happened in 2004 and 2005 during the seasons. A lot of people spent a lot of time talking about how early it was. I don't think it's really early anymore. I don't think it's even somewhat early. Now is the time to make your moves. Other teams are making big trades. In three weeks it'll be late.

You are missing a big piece here. They traded for Lowell, in part, must it was only a small part. They traded for Beckett and took on Lowell's salary, kind of like how the Cubs traded for Alfonseca and took on Clement's salary, or traded for Lofton and took on Ramirez's salary. I'm not missing anything - I'm not even saying it was a bad deal for Bosox - I'm just saying that 9 mil is a lot of money for someone who sucked as bad as Lowell did last year. Hopefully for them Beckett will make the deal worth it. I'm also saying that if Hendry spent 9 mil for a similiar player in a similiar situation we would be hanging him in effigy ( so to speak) on this board today. Not necessarily. The trade was for Becket, they gave up a prospect at a position they have filled, and they were desperate for starting pitching. Flip it around to fit the Cubs, imagine they traded for an extremely talented young former World Series MVP RF who was not going to be a free agent for a couple years, but he had to take on a bad contract for a starting pitcher coming off a bad year. But that starting pitcher had always been good before last year. Now, let's just say the prospect he gave up was Pie and a pitching prospect, but he already had Pierre for CF. That would be a similar scenario. Boston desperately need starting pitching but were fine in the hitting department, and had money to spend. So they found that pitcher, took on a formerly good hitter who probably isn't completely done yet and traded a position prospect from a filled position. The Cubs are desperate for RF help, but have a lot of pitching and had money to spend. They found that RF, took on a formerly good pitcher who probably isn't completely done yet, and traded a position prospect from a filled position. This isn't a perfect match, but imagine the Cubs had Pierre, then trade Pie and a pitching prospect for Abreu/Burrell and Lieber/Padilla. Would we really hang him?

Every indication was the Bears judged Rex as the better QB this summer. I can't see how Orton's play could have changed that, and I don't think Grossman's injury takes that away. I'm not sure Kyle hasn't lost games, his inability to do a thing in the Cleveland and Washington games was a big reason for those losses, and he most definitely lost the Bengals game. What would happen if Grossman sucked? First off, the Bears wouldn't be the first team to make a QB change and then reverse course after things didn't go well. But the point is you make this change because you know Rex is better than Orton right now. I think worrying about what if Rex sucks is a waste of time. You play to win games, not to avoid sucking. If Rex sucks, make the change then. I don't buy the don't change a good thing theory, not when you'd be changing the least impressive thing about the good thing. Either way, I let this game play out, and probably even the GB game before I make a change. It's not a pressing matter now, but the Vikings play nobody the rest of the way and could easily go 5-1. I wouldn't wait until after they make it close to make a move. There's a good chance Orton gets injured, plays like crap or the Bears lose a couple in the next few weeks. That'll make the move easier. And if the Bears do make the playoffs, I wouldn't just give the job to Orton if Rex is better, which all indications say is the case. I'd like to see the best team they can field in the playoffs, and that change should be made before the playoffs.

I don't know if rebuilding is even the word, as it doesn't sound like they're willing to put a little extra money in the team in the next 5 years if these prospects do pan out to put them over the top. If they're going to hold the budget down until they move to another stadium, I wouldn't call what they're doing rebuilding. They're going young and they're probably going to stay young for awhile, they may not keep all these guys around for a title shot as they start to mature and make a little more money. The same thing was said after 1997. They said their payroll will reflect their revenue. If revenues go up, they can expand payroll.

You are missing a big piece here. They traded for Lowell, in part, must it was only a small part. They traded for Beckett and took on Lowell's salary, kind of like how the Cubs traded for Alfonseca and took on Clement's salary, or traded for Lofton and took on Ramirez's salary.

It hurts my brain. He's such a reactionary conventional wisdom type of fan. All of his analysis is of the postgame type, saying things like "after X happened, you just knew they were going to win." On one hand he was always wrote rationally about the foolishness of believing in the curse, but then all of his analysis is based on emotions (you just look at a guy like that and you know he won't help you win). He did a 180 on Clement, going from 100% support and excitement to total distrust, initially blaming the ball to the face, then the pressures of Boston, and completely ignored that Clement is just pitching like Clement pitches.

With Lowell, Delgado, Beckett and Burnett all gone, what motivation do they have to trade Pierre or Castillo? The payroll can't be more than $25m right now. They aren't strapped with those guys. They probably don't feel like they have to dump either.

I see some contradictions here. In one breath you say Kyle isn't the reason they are winning, but then you talk of Kyle winning the games, when he's never been the reason they've one a game, and isn't likely to be a reason you win. I think it's a cop-out to say the team is winning therefore we cannot change. That's similar to saying the team is winning despite a leadoff hitter who doesn't get on base, so I won't change. Or Joe Borowski isn't pitching well but he's completed 8 save opportunities in a row so he's my closer. The Bears were winning with Edwards at fullback, but they didn't have a problem making a change when better options returned from injury. Yes, FB is different than QB, but on this team, the QB isn't much more than a role player. I do give more credence to the concept of chemistry and intangibles in football than in baseball, but not a whole lot. Remember, this Oline was great a week after two of its members brawled. Every report indicated the team loved Rex when he was healthy. If Grossman is healthy and practicing well, and Orton keeps playing like he's been playing, I'd go with Rex. The only way I'd consider staying with Orton is if his play improves dramatically or the team doesn't lose again. Either way, I'm excited about a summer 2006 QB competition between Orton and Rex.

I'm not sure about the jest. I don't view the multipe position thing as that much of a positive, because you'd never want him starting at any of your positions, unless he somehow repeats his fluke 2004 numbers. Outside of 2004 he's been a pretty bad hitter, with his decent career OBP mostly propped up by good seasons in his mid 20s. Since the age of 28 he's had bad seasons more often than good seasons.

Since I know your feelings on the QB situation, let me run this by you. Let's say that Grossman is healthy this weekend and that Lovie, despite a 6 game win streak and a nice game by Orton this past weekend, decides that Grossman shouldn't lose his starter status to injury and starts him. Now, just for the sake of arguement, lets say that Grossman has some bad games, with a couple of key interceptions and that we lose to both Tampa Bay and Pittsburgh. What then? Would you ride Grossman out win or lose and possibly let Minnesota catch us? Or do you go back to Orton and say "I know you weren't good enough 2 weeks ago, but now you are"...? Barring injury, and barring Orton just completely falling apart, I just don't see how Lovie starts Grossman this season. I don't see how you take the only Bears quarterback to start 10 games since what...'95 or so...a rookie no less...and say "Sorry...7-3 isn't good enough...we're gonna let the guy who's started 6 career games have the start ahead of you." I just don't see it. The most popular guy on any football team is the backup/injured QB. I see your hypothetical is unrealistic. There's no way Rex starts Sunday, and there's no way he should start Sunday. At this point, I think the Bears can wait for two bad games in a row before replacing Orton. Rex needs time to get back into the swing of things anyway. If the Bears lose to Tampa and Minn wins. Then you start talking about a change. But even then you can afford one more week of sticking with Kyle and easing Rex back into the game. If the Bears are 7-5 going into the Pitt game, and Minn is 7-5, I think you absolutely have to make a change. If they still have a lead and Orton has been okay, you can stick with Kyle. Odds are Rex will be starting a game before the season ends. Let's not fool ourselves in thinking Orton is the reason this team is winning. It's been the defense, the schedule and the running game. My prediction is if the Bears lose 2 of the next 3, Rex starts vs Atlanta. If they win all 3, Kyle stays. If they win 2 of 3 and Minn wins 3 in a row, then you have to have an honest assessment of Kyle's play and not get caught up in just the final score. If you do that, you'll probably go with Rex.

That is an enormously large if. Reyes walks less frequently than Patterson. He's a sketchy leadoff option, and wasn't much better than Matsui last year, outside the stolen base category. If Dusty was batting him there we'd be going nuts. If they keep spending more and more, I could see the offense improving, which it must when you add Delgado. But they could just as easily end up trading Floyd and then they become Beltran, Wright, Delgado and nobody else. Plus, their pitching staff is far from set. They have Pedro, who is great, but probably due for another sub 200 inning seasons soon. But there isn't a whole lot more to rely on out there. Seo is a 29 year old flyball pitcher who doesn't strike people out and the Mets have never shown much faith in him to be a regular. Glavine is okay, but really old and near the end of his line. Nobody else in the rotation can be passed off as good. I still see a team that's just trying to throw money at everything.

I'll blame the cumulative effect of these signings and the Neifi/Rusch signings along with the likely Macias raise. These signings alone can't handicap this team, but overpaying by a million+ on 4-5 different guys can be the difference between going after Giles or Jacque Jones.

Before he went to NY and flopped people talked about him like they are talking about Burnett this year. Vasquez is a good pitcher. But Yankee inflation has made him not worth the contract. yankflation?

I have some faith that they are on that path. And in my occasional spreadsheet dream rosters I've included lots of these guys going through the end of the decade and slowly increasing payroll each year. The problem is that at their best, Zambrano and Prior were both putting up Cy Young caliber performances for minimal cost. I doubt the Cubs will produce anything similar soon, either MVP hitters or CY pitchers. Any GM with a top 5 budget and 2 Cy caliber pitchers taking up a very small portion of that would do anything they could to take advantage. And there's nothing to say another window won't open. We just know there is one open now, and it will close. You aren't guaranteed anything more than that.

Why can't baseball players just come out and say it? This is ridiculous. He makes over 9 mil a year, I'm not sure Chicago is any closer to PR than Arizona, even if it is, I doubt there's any money consideration in terms of cost to visit home. I have little respect for people that can't come out and say what the mean or what they want. Why can't he just come out and say "I didn't sign with AZ, I don't like the direction the franchise is going, I don't want to play here anymore." Well, for starters that player would get ripped to shreds. And I'm not entirely convinced Javier isn't somewhat sincere on this one.

And if ownership sees that a decades worth of heavy investment in the farm system basically produces no results, I could see them shy away from such longterm concepts, and starting to revert to the old ways of just filling out the roster with whatever free agent they can find each year.

I don't hate Howry. I love his 2005 WHIP. He's mostly been a good reliever in the majors. But I'm fearful of another 3-year deal, and distrustful in this team's taste in relievers. Perhaps the best thing going for him is that Bruce Miles has been promoting this guy for a while, and I trust Bruce's judgement, as he was pretty good with the Wuertz hype, which proved true until Dusty had him throwing everyday. But he's just a middle reliever. I doubt he repeats that '05 dominance. Relievers come and go, and they have a short shelf life. I'm pretty certain that his next three years won't be better than the 3 best he's already had. That's part of the problem of buying other people's relievers. Most of the best teams do what they can with one year fixes or develop their own guys cheaply. I don't know of a lot of 3/9-12m bullpen contracts that have worked out well.

Given your assumptions, I would do the same thing. Your logic is very sound, as I see it. One of your assumptions, that Pie won't likely be very good for 3 years has already been challenged. I would like to question another of your assumptions, namely the the Cubs have a brief window of opportunity to make a run at a World Series with this group of pitchers. Besides the fact that no Cub currently has a contract beyond the 2008 season, so there really is no way to tell who will be around 3 years from now, there is nothing about this group of pitchers that I can see that makes the Cubs window of opportunity a brief one. Prior is 25. Zambrano is 24. Dempster is 28. If you think Wood will rebound and be here he is only 28. Williams, if kept, is only 23. So what about their pitchers makes this window so brief? The window that matters is the window when these guys outperform their contracts. No matter how you go about building a team, unless you are at the absolute top of the payroll food chain, it's necessary to get overperformance. Great players generally outperform their salary for at least their first 4-5 years, and sometimes their 6th. Zambrano and Prior are there right now, but won't be for long. So, it's possible to spend in other areas, and occasionally withstand some underperformance. In a couple years these guys will be maxed out, or near maxed out in pay. They will be great pitchers still, but no longer providing great value for the dollar spent. So you won't have as much money to fill in the other holes, and you'll need a whole new set of outperformers. Zambrano and Prior have been the two best Cubs prospects-turned-big leaguers in the MacPhail era. The quality of prospects has gone down, however, in recent years. So the odds of the Cubs getting similar outperformance elsewhere in the near future are lower. And since the Cubs tend to spend a player's first couple years of cheapness in small roles, they don't maximize that value. Starting in 2007 and then more so in the future, the Cubs will need a whole new batch of cheap internal pitching options, and assuming Lee's salary nearly doubles in his next contract, another couple young position players (in addition to Murton and Cedeno). They have to introduce roughly one arm and one bat/glove every year to help deal with the higher costs of what is now their best players. All the windows in the house won't be shut in just a couple years, but the giant sliding glass door will be.

Who's Howry? Don't know, could he have helpd the Bears in that tough Super Bowl loss?