goonys evil twin

I just saw Goonys head explode. It almost did when I read Bruce's article this morning. This is set-up as the quintessential Hendry bidding against himself situation. Rusch is in a position to decline his own option and get a lot bigger committment from the Cubs. He's due for another brutal season anytime now (4.88 career ERA, 4.52 in 2005). If this guy is counted on as anything more than the last man in the pen....., hey, they like Macias, they like Burnitz, they liked Alfonseca and Estes for Christmas sake. Sometimes I think that $100m payroll does more harm than good. Too much comfort wasting millions.

The staff is virtually the same as it was in 2003 and 2004, and that was the number 3 team ERA both seasons. There's no reason they can't return to that level, and there's no reason why a top 3 ERA in your league can't win the series. Florida's was worse in '03, and Boston's was worse in '04.

Well, that of course is the truth.

I don't think it's a mistake to take chances on guys like that with creative contracts (Dempster). It's a mistake when you rely so heavily on guys with recent injuries, and don't have a decent backup plan. This is a contradiction to your other notion that Hendry is directly responsible for not improving the Chiacgo Cubs in 2004 and 2005 partially because of signing too many high-risk injury contracts, isn't it? No, it's not. Guaranteeing small money is not high-risk.

I think that's a terribly flawed approach. Sure, you can get lucky and squeeze into the playoffs with that theory, see Houston. Or you can have all your pitchers pitch the best they've ever pitched and come out of nowhere with a great year. But you can also struggle to contend if all you do is prevent runs, and don't score enough. It's not a terribly flawed approach at all if you believe the games is changing (as I do). And even in the steroid era there are plenty of examples of teams making the playoffs with excellent pitching an an average offense. It's terribly flawed because with a top 5 payroll there is no excuse to purposefully go into a season with an average offense. A $60-75m payroll team might be forced to go that route, but a $100m gives you the luxury of great offense and great hitting, and there is absolutely no reason to not go for that approach.

I think you have to offer him greater chance for big money. Dotel was a proven pen stud. Dempster was not. Appearance/IP totals should be included to let him earn up to $5-6m this year.

I think that's a terribly flawed approach. Sure, you can get lucky and squeeze into the playoffs with that theory, see Houston. Or you can have all your pitchers pitch the best they've ever pitched and come out of nowhere with a great year. But you can also struggle to contend if all you do is prevent runs, and don't score enough.

Pitching, pitching, and more pitching. The need to improve their offense as well as their pitching. You got that right; better pitching and better offense but better pitching first (and second). Both at the same time. How can you really improve this pitching staff this offseason? 4 starting spots are all but locked up. I guess you could overpay AJ and sign Ryan, plus 2 more relievers. That'll give you a very talented, and extremely expensive staff. But Burnett is no more reliable than Wood, you could easily lose both this season, and be stuck with no offense again. For $100 million you better build an all around team. They can be top 5 in Runs scored and top 5 in ERA, without question. The offense has sucked on this team for the last 3 years. The pitching has been good for 2 of the 3. I say it's pretty clear that the lineup needs the most improvement. The pitching can use some reinforcements, but not nearly as much as the lineup needs. Remember, STL had a great staff, and HOU makes people think you can go all pitching at the expense of hitting. But right behind those two were NYM, WAS and MIL in ERA in the NL this year. The Cubs had a worse offense than all but Washington in that group. You have to get more hitting this offseason.

I take it you haven't involved yourself in many Corey related threads on this board. Dozens have been explicit in their feelings about his work ethic.

I don't think it's a mistake to take chances on guys like that with creative contracts (Dempster). It's a mistake when you rely so heavily on guys with recent injuries, and don't have a decent backup plan.

I'm all for getting better OBP, but I'm having a tough time understanding why that is the biggest problem on the team. The Houston Astros scored 9 fewer runs than the Cubs this year, and the White Sox, when the DH is factored in, were no better offensively than the Cubs. Yeah, and the Cardinals and Red Sox blew the Cubs away offensively last year. You can find a team to defend your position if you try hard enough. The point is, over time, great OBP gives you a great chance to score more runs, and scoring more runs is good. The Cubs need pitching to, but they can't go out and sign Clemens and Oswalt. And there's no guarantee that the Sox staff will be nearly as good next year. A small step back next season, and that team will suffer big time if that offense stays lackluster.

If all they wanted was speed at the top, they could've stuck with Patterson in the leadoff role. Speed and contact is what they want. Unfortunately, neither of those is guaranteed to equal production.

People want to address obp yet bring back one of the biggest obp killers. If Nomar goes down again, the Cubs are stuck w/ a backup again. Yes, Cedeno could be alright, but as goony says, there's no guarantee of that. Who is the OBP killer you are talking about? The guy who posted an obp of .000 for 100 games this year. Let him go to LA and sit on their DL. Going 0 for 20 would give you an OBP of .000, going 0 for 0 means nothing.

People want to address obp yet bring back one of the biggest obp killers. If Nomar goes down again, the Cubs are stuck w/ a backup again. Yes, Cedeno could be alright, but as goony says, there's no guarantee of that. Who is the OBP killer you are talking about?

Mr. Mom would kick Tobey's butt.

Dont forget: "You're risking a patient's life!" That's the one I was trying to remember.

There will be 2 blowout games. Roger clemens will go no more than 6 innings and give up 3 or 4 runs in one of his starts. The White Sox bullpen will give up a lead. Nobody will throw a complete game. Pettite will give up 4 runs in 6 innings, end up with the win and receive undue praise for being such a great big game pitcher. AJ won't be involved in any controversy. Berkman will pretend he got hit by a pitch. More time will be spent talking about the Cardinals, Yankees and Red Sox than every other team in baseball combined. Chicago style pizza will get more airtime than Chicago style hot dogs. NBC will cancel a show before the series ends. The nation will have a new "Give me back my son!" or "His father is the district attorney!" before all is said and done. Over/under on nose picking closeups in the dugouts - 7.5. William Ligue will make a special appearance. Joe Buck will make love to his own ego. McCarver will praise it, but after breaking it down on tape for 45 minutes, he'll say it wasn't done as crisply as it was in the 60's. Over/under on caught stealings - 6 Somebody will either bunt into a strikeout, pop-out or double play. A game will be won by a three run homer, but the writers will focus on the fantastic ground ball to the right side that moved the runners to 2nd and 3rd before the HR. Astros in 5.

2004 sucked, but you had the feeling the team could still salvage the good things and work toward a championship with some smart moves. But the offseason after 2004 was brutal, and it doesn't appear that Hendry and Co. have any interest in changing things for the better this year. Watching it all go down the toilet, and the door start to shut on this group was an incredibly long, and incredibly painful experience, with very little hope for improvement without regime change.

That's a bit harsh considering the offseason hasn't even started yet, isn't it? The offseason started October 2 after the game. Resigning all the coaches was a decision made in the offseason. That's the only thing that's been done, and it was a terrible move. Who cares? The Cubs can win in spite of the coaching staff if they get better players. They got to the NLCS with this coaching staff. And if they go out and make the moves they should make, they can compete for a title with this coaching staff. Granted, it's still a bad move to keep them, but I see this as Hendry accepting the blame for 05 and giving his guys 1 more year before he tears it all apart. Well, aside from the pretty obvious point that the coaching staff is incompetent (can anybody in this crew help a hitter?), I was making a point that the offseason has indeed started, and the Cubs, as usual aren't off to a good start.

That's a bit harsh considering the offseason hasn't even started yet, isn't it? The offseason started October 2 after the game. Resigning all the coaches was a decision made in the offseason. That's the only thing that's been done, and it was a terrible move.

But, he is sitting back quietly with his cards close to his vest as the world slips right on by......... Actually, in this case he should be criticized for moving too fast, right? Didn't he re-sign Rothschild before it came out that Mazzone was available? If he had held his cards tight, he would have been more able to jump on this. But because he did what everyone is clamoring for -- moving fast -- he missed this opportunity. Be careful what you ask for. Nobody asked him to move fast just for the sake of moving fast. They asked for him to make some right moves. Resigning all the coaches was incredibly stupid. Just like contemplating bringing Jeremy Burnitz back is stupid, or keeping Macias on the roster.

I think pitchers get away with a lot more "mistake" pitches than people acknowledge. I've seen plenty of smashable pitches go by. Two pitches, they both hang in the zone. On one the batter doesn't swing because he's sitting dead red. On the other he knocks it out of the park. The pitcher didn't do anything better or worse on either pitch (assuming he didn't tip on one). A lot of pitches that get too much of the plate and are critiqued by analysts are the same exact pitch that earlier got a guy out. Not all big hits come off mistakes, and not all "mistakes" turn into big hits.

Thinking Patterson was a good option at the top was one of the dumbest things this organization did last year.

Makes no sense to me.

I'm sorry, but there is no logic in keeping Macias, and giving him a raise as well. Sisco was a bad move. It was a calculated risk with some logic behind it, but when framed against the idea of keeping Macias, it was stupid.