goonys evil twin

I would say he got robbed, but then I noticed it was another fan voting poll. Fans are stupid, you can't expect proper distribution of this type of award.

I may be giving him too much credit but when it comes to knowing his team I'm quite sure he knows how they would react a lot better than some writer. That sounds an awful lot like the Dusty Baker defense (he knows more than some fan who has never "been there"). I would think Baker would know better then we would and I said that the first year he was in Chicago. It's his job and since it is his job I have to assume that he can do it better than we can. Hendry thought he was the best man for the job and I assumed he was right. It's one thing about listening to ideas and quite another when it comes to the daily things that go on behind the scenes with a ball team. But you make it sound like that SI writer has no business questioning Garner, just like many say we have no business questioning Dusty.

Baseball doesn't have sign and trades. It would make no sense to even try one.

Like I said before, I have no problem trading a guy like Lee if the team gets better, but as your post makes clear, it would be extremely difficult to make that work. First off, I'm not even sure you can get away with saying Konerko is Lee's equal. Prior to this year there was a case to be made. But Lee was often better, and he was never as bad as Konerko in 2003. Now, Lee did have a career year this season, but so did Konerko. I might expect Lee to decline a little further than Paul, but not enough to significantly close the gap. Furthermore, the chances of getting Konerko, after taking on that Manny deal are slim and none. There are lots of teams looking for 1B help, including the Yankees, Mets and Red Sox (+ LA, and if they have a brain, Anaheim). A Cubs team with Manny, Bradley, and Konerko might be better than last year's team, but I'm not sure I want Milton and Manny in the same OF. And you're getting worse offensively, and you still have SS issues to settle, with much less financial room to do it. And that's far too complicated to be sure you can pull it all off. Basically, you couldn't trade Lee unless you knew you could get Konerko, you couldn't sign Konerko until you'd already traded Lee. It's far too complicated for my taste. I'd much rather see them simply sign an impact RF or trade for one, and be done with it.

They would need at least 3 impact bats in return to justify that deal. I have no problem selling high, but you actually have to make the team better than it was with those guys. I think it would be far to difficult to significantly improve this team by trading Lee and Ramirez this offseason. There are two things a team can use to its advantage when making trades, money and talent. If you have a lot of talent, you can trade for a lot of talent. If you have a lot of money, you can also trade for a lot of talent. The Cubs need to use their enormous financial advantage to acquire more talent than the other teams.

I may be giving him too much credit but when it comes to knowing his team I'm quite sure he knows how they would react a lot better than some writer. That sounds an awful lot like the Dusty Baker defense (he knows more than some fan who has never "been there").

Lee for Manny? No thanks. The Cubs spend a whole lot more money, and don't get any better than the 2005 team. Depends on how much money you get from the Mets. Whether or not you improve from the 2005 team or not, Manny is a likely step up from what Lee will provide offensively next season. Just throwing it out there. Our best chance for landing an impact bat might be trading Lee + prospects for said impact bat and another quality player. Lee is an impact bat. I don't think he'll repeat his numbers, but I think he'll be a 900+ OPS hitter. That "quality player" would have to be another 900+ OPS hitter to justify a deal. This team needs to get better than they were in 2005. They couldn't take advantage of that career year by Lee, I don't see any way they'd win if they simply traded Lee for another impact bat, without acquiring a 2nd impact bat.

Lee for Manny? No thanks. The Cubs spend a whole lot more money, and don't get any better than the 2005 team.

Just like I'm sure you'd see nothing wrong with some white guy bemoaning the fact that baseball isn't nearly as white as it was decades ago, I'm sure. There would be a difference between crying that it's not all white, and crying that there aren't any whites. And? And what? If some bigoted hick went on the air and complained that baseball isn't as white as it used to be, he'd basically be pining for the good ole' days of segregation, which would make him an ignorant bigoted hick. Joe Morgan is bummed that fewer and fewer black kids, particularly inner-city youth, are getting involved in baseball. He loves the sport, and I think wants it to continue to grow and grow. And it seems clear to me that he thinks one of the best things for the sport would be to have more and more inner city teams with black kids playing the game. I don't see the problem. This "ignorant bigoted hick" could simply be referring to the days of, say, 1985, and be upset at the decline of the popularity of baseball in the white population. Your expectations, though, were precisely my point. I still don't see your point. There is no lack of white baseball players. The only way somebody could lamenting about the decreasing numbers of whites in the game is if he was talking about a time when only whites played.

For them, that positive is huge. The team sucks, and has way too much payroll tied into one player. They are in need of a major overhaul. Opening up that cash flow allows them to talk to Konerko to fill there first base spot, and fill multiple holes at once. Sing is probably either ready to at least make a roster, or never do anything in the majors. He's 25 this season, with over 2500 pro plate appearances, including back to back bigtime seasons. He's always had a solid K/BB. I think Colorado could make good use of a bat like that.

It'll take much more than a tweak. The problems that have plagued this team, have plagued them for years and are not being exaggerated. The Cubs were 9th in runs scored this year. They were that low because of low OBP, and the low OBP was because they took few walks. It would take 1 or 2 bats to turn things around if those 1 or 2 were big impacts like Giles. But things will not be fixed with Furcal and a mediocre RF. They need impact out there. No matter what you do with the pitching staff, there's no way to guarantee a top 1 or 2 staff, with the fragile nature of that aspect of the game. You can't put all your emphasis on pitching and just think this offense will get fixed with tweaks. They've been tweaking it for 3 years and it just keeps getting worse.

The Mets want and need a 1B. They have no use for another CF, with 2 expensive ones already on the roster. Maybe you get another 4 way deal with NYM getting Helton somehow. Chicago Beltran Looper cash for Beltran down the road Boston Diaz Williams/Hill Mets Helton and Manny Colorado Corey Sing a couple Mets prospects a couple Cubs B arms

I would say maybe as well. When we were talking about the floyd, cameron, glavine 3-some yesterday, I wrote a paragraph asking this very question. What I wonder is how much of Beltran's deal would NYM eat, and how much would you want them to eat? Plus, what talent would have to be given up? I'd take on most of Beltran's deal and give up decent talent in return. But I'm not sure exactly what the details would have to be. I think they'd be interested in Walker, with their weak 2B situation. Beltran doesn't start making a ton of money for a couple years. I think he's still at $11m, but it goes up to $18m later. I'd like to see the Mets take on $2-3m of that each year, then take my chances that he'll be back over the 900 OPS mark in Chicago. But you'd still have to do something with RF. Let's go one step further and discuss what would happen if they added Matsui in that deal. Assume the Mets want to clear money now, but are willing to pay toward Beltran down the road (not unrealistic given their somewhat stagnant payroll situation), and accept less talent for taking on their problem. The Cubs take on an overpriced Matsui this offseason, giving him a shot for leadoff, with Cedeno there to take his job if Matsui sucks. Then you have Beltran hitting 2nd. Crazy moves. I'm not sure I'd do any of it, but it would be an interesting and creative plan of attack by Hendry.

I thought it was a silly outburst from Garner. His team hasn't been able to hit all season. I don't understand why he just seems to have figured that out. I could see if this was a great hitting team that disappeared in the playoffs, but they've been lucky to score as much as they have so far. What about Roy crapping the bed? I think Garner failed big time in that game, and blaming it on hitters failing (when those hitters have proven time and time again they will fail a lot more than others) is weak.

and the offense would be left with what exactly? Isn't durable and innings eater the same thing? Trade for Floyd. If you haven't noticed, pitching wins titles. EDIT: Aren't you the same guy who said "Don't expect alot from Murton next year." I want a top 5 offense. There's no reason this team can't have a top 5 ERA and top 5 runs scored in the NL, with at least one of those being top 3. I would not assume Murton will give you great production in LF. I would expect him to be fine for a $300,000 LF. But I would construct the rest of my roster with the expectation that Murton won't be the rookie of the year (I know he's ineligible). In other words, get a productive RF bat. If you deal Murton and Williams for a pitcher, then you not only have to get a productive RF, but now you have to also get a LF. It's opening up another hole, and counterproductive.

What the heck is wrong with a city going gaga over a team playing for the championship? How is there any justification in labeling that mania as hypocrisy? I've lived in NY for ten years, so I know what it's like to watch obnoxious fans' arrogance grow ten fold in October. Regardless, I'm really disappointed in how willing Cubs fans have been to take the bait and let this affect them. Worry about the Cubs. If somebody gets off acting like an ass because his team is winning this year, it just reflects poorly on him. Hell, I'm getting married soon and half my chicago family that's coming is Sox fans who will be very willing to remind me about the Cubs record. I don't care. I think you people who are so upset about this need to take a step back and stop taking it so seriously. And quit acting like Sox fans who can't get over the other team in town and how they affect their lives.

I'd trade Hill before others figure out he has only one ML quality pitch, even as good as it is. With his major problem being HR allowed, perhaps he would be better suited to Dodger Stadium. How do you figure he has a major problem with HR allowed? I can't find what he did in the minors this year, but he never had more than 9 in a season coming into 2005. Coming into 2005, he'd given up 14 in over 200 innings of work. He gave up 3 as a Cub this year. Too small of a sampling to get any kind of a read on him. From what I can see, Hill gave up 23 HR this year. http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/H/rich-hill.shtml I've always thought his two problems were control and HR allowed.

and the offense would be left with what exactly? Isn't durable and innings eater the same thing?

Personally I thought it was rather interesting to see how white the stands were in Houston. After years of seeing Yankees crowds, and two days of Comiskey crowds, that Houston crowd looked odd. Has there ever been a larger collection of 43 year old white people, outside a Republican convention that is? I doubt there's racism against players in that organization. But I wouldn't doubt if they weighed heavily the value of marketing a white star to the fan base.

Did it do the Marlins any good? If you have a poor fan base, a championship (or even two) does little to change anything, beyond a momentary burp in attendance. The White Sox winning the WS may have an effect, but I sincerely doubt that the Cubs stranglehold on the Chicago market is any real danger. I just can't see too many Cubs fans jumping from one side to the other, especially considering the animosity. I don't think there's a good comparison with Florida. The White Sox have a long history, and have, at times in the past, been more popular than the Cubs. I don't think this WS would completely change everything, but I fully expect a large upswing in attendance and ratings next year for the WS, and after two consecutive disappointments, there will be a decline with the Cubs. Sox fans abandoned that team in the 90's, and have been slow to return. But they're still out there, and they'll be back. I don't think it'll have a negative effect on the Cubs though. The Cubs have a lot more to worry about with their own ineptitude than with any Sox success.

Frankly, I'm pretty annoyed at how obnoxious some Cubs fans are being in their hyperbolic hatred for the White Sox. I used to think it was the Sox fans who were obsessed with all things Cubs that needed to get some perspective. Unfortunately it looks to me that just as many Cubs fans are turning into that whining paranoid Soxaphobe. Maybe it comes from living in NY for a decade with all their overly arrogant Yankees fans, but I don't see the big deal here. As a Cubs fan, my concern is the Cubs. I spend nearly every ounce of energy I spend on baseball thinking about what the Cubs can do to get better.

Just like I'm sure you'd see nothing wrong with some white guy bemoaning the fact that baseball isn't nearly as white as it was decades ago, I'm sure. There would be a difference between crying that it's not all white, and crying that there aren't any whites. And? And what? If some bigoted hick went on the air and complained that baseball isn't as white as it used to be, he'd basically be pining for the good ole' days of segregation, which would make him an ignorant bigoted hick. Joe Morgan is bummed that fewer and fewer black kids, particularly inner-city youth, are getting involved in baseball. He loves the sport, and I think wants it to continue to grow and grow. And it seems clear to me that he thinks one of the best things for the sport would be to have more and more inner city teams with black kids playing the game. I don't see the problem.

Just like I'm sure you'd see nothing wrong with some white guy bemoaning the fact that baseball isn't nearly as white as it was decades ago, I'm sure. There would be a difference between crying that it's not all white, and crying that there aren't any whites.

Leicester is a lost cause in my book. I'm not holding out much hope for Welly either. The Cubs have to start looking at guys who give up fewer walks.

I disagree with your interpretation. I don't think he's playing a race card. He's simply talking about a subject he's worked closely with for many years. Joe is one of the most vocal supporters of baseball's attempt to get more black kids involved in the sport. He's bummed that the number of black players has declined over the years. I see nothing wrong with him pointing that out and saying it's a shame. I think he's a terrible tv analyst, writer and overall baseball spokesperson, but I see nothing wrong with what he's doing in this field.