goonys evil twin

First off, are they really throwing in the towel by playing Zimmerman and Church instead of Castilla and Guillen? Second, no, I wouldn't be pissed in your example. Each team has to do what is best for them. If that means playing youngsters to get ready for the following year, then so be it. IIRC, we were playing Cincy a lot down the stretch in 2003 and they were playing a whole bunch of kids. I don't remember anyone around here complaining about that! To your first question, no. But I read that to mean pretty much all the starters would sit, including the pitchers, which was never definitively stated one way or the other. To the second point, yes. And there would be plenty of people on here upset (including me) if we were battling the Phillies for the wild card (especially if we were a game or two behind) and the Nationals weren't trotting out anything remotely resemebling their best possible lineup. Who cares if others are upset? The Cubs aren't in the business of making Philly fans happy. The only concern is the good of the Cubs. There should not be one smidgen of thought put into how other fans or teams will react.

He's a high character guy and you build around MVP's. I wouldn't be surprised to see him put up a 1.000 Ops next year. Sounds like he made some adjustments to his swing last offseason, so he should continue w/ the power. Can't see him batting for as high of average though. He's hit .295/.390/.597 since the all star break, I think that's the type of line you could realistically expect next year. That is still very good, and well above his career numbers, but significantly off the pace of your typical MVP candidate. Would a .987 OPS be significantly off the pace of a typical MVP candidate? I don't know if it is, and I guess it would depend on how many HR were included in that .597 SLG and how many RBI he had. If Lee had a .987 OPS this year, it would be good enough for 3rd in the NL and 6th in the game. There are only 5 players in all of baseball with a 1.000+ OPS and Ortiz is at 1.001. With Bonds and Pujols in this league, and young guys like Cabrera, Bay, Dunn already mashing and getting better and better, I think a sub 1000 won't hold up to the best of them. Perhaps I phrased it poorly because a lot of writers get hung up on the definition of MVP, but I just look at it in terms of the most productive avg/obp/slg player in the league, and I think Lee won't be top 2 next year in that department.

Just remember, when the team has several glaring holes and fades down the stretch despite a very talented team and high payroll, the best way to improve the team is by ridding the roster of malcontents who don't fit the manager's ideal. I mean, it worked well last offseason.

I would not consider that for a second.

He's a high character guy and you build around MVP's. I wouldn't be surprised to see him put up a 1.000 Ops next year. Sounds like he made some adjustments to his swing last offseason, so he should continue w/ the power. Can't see him batting for as high of average though. He's hit .295/.390/.597 since the all star break, I think that's the type of line you could realistically expect next year. That is still very good, and well above his career numbers, but significantly off the pace of your typical MVP candidate.

It's this kind of thinking that caused the Alfonseca trade; look at save totals, ignore peripherals.

Depending on what happens in the OF, taking a shot at Wilson isn't the worst thing that could happen providing he costs next to nothing. Under what possible circumstance would Jack Wilson, and his career line of .264/.304/.369 be even remotedly acceptable. Cedeno would clearly be the better option at that point. The only way Wilson makes sense is if you could convince Philly to trade you Abreu and Burrell, and they insisted on getting Cedeno in return. He made $3.2m this year, and he'll make $2m+ easily next year, because in baseball, salaries rarely go down significantly unless you had a very down year and are getting old.

Nobody will give up pitching? How do you know? Pitching gets dealt every year, why would this year change? I'd just as well take a couple bats for Lee. I'd rather keep Aram than Lee, since Lee is the one more likely to suffer a decline (the numbers Ramirez has put up, given his age, suggest he's much more likely of consistently producing in the coming years), Ramirez is already locked up for the next 3 years while Lee might require a new huge deal as he reaches his 30s, and it's much easier to find productive 1B than 3B.

My preference for SS in 2006: 1) If he'll sign for $2m guaranteed and PA based incentives, go with Nomar. 2) If you have to spend big to solve the OF problems, and get really solid bats, go with Cedeno. 3) I'd have no problem with a $1m Neifi as the backup for either Nomar or Cedeno, however, since Dusty will likely find any excuse to play Neifi as often as possible, and place him atop the lineup, I think they have to go with somebody else. I'd consider using Theriot as a backup, given his history of solid OBP in the minors and decent k/bb numbers.

No clue. Obviously you'd need a guarantee that he would willingly play out there before any deal could be made. What about opening up talks of moving Lee for a huge return and moving Jones to 1B. Just a thought.

Consistency is overrated? A lot of guys have the "stuff" to justify a 3/24 contract. Not all of them back it up with repeatable success. Dempster's one year of success as a closer, without dominant peripherals, has justified a pretty significant 2 year deal. However, if you go to 3 years, and you spend that much per year, there are better options. Dempster at 3/24 is equivalent to Ryan at something like 4/40. Ryan is much more dominant than Dempster, and much more reliable. Wagner, same thing. I don't see those guys getting those deals, and Dempster shouldn't get anything that contends with those numbers. again, look at how consistant remmy & hawkins were before they got to chicago. granted, they were not used very well at times by baker (no suprise there) but they were not very effective compared to their history the whole time they were here. if hendry signs dempster to a 24/3 contract and he stays healthy & saves 45 games a year, it will have been a great move. if dempster gets hurt or blows up, it will have been a bad deal. if you are talking about bj ryan btw, i dont see how 34 saves in 39 with a 2.55 era ops is "much more dominate" than 30 saves in 31 ops with a 1.98 era. Save percentage is not a great sign of dominance, especially when you are talking about a time frame of under one season. Ryan has been a consistently dominating reliever for 3 years, with excellent peripherals numbers that should lead to confidence in his ability to maintain that dominance. Dempster has less than a season's worth of success as a reliever with less dominant peripherals. Things like k/9, bb/9, k/bb, WHIP are all leaning pretty heavily toward Ryan.

Just because there isn't a hard and fast number you have to stick to doesn't mean you should ignore trends and avoid moderation. Dusty is an extreme abuser. Wood repeatedly suffered "off games" following high pitch count games. Common sense tells you that 120+ pitches repeatedly isn't good, and that you should pull a guy back when possible. Dusty never uses common sense in handling his pitchers, making excuses for that behavior isn't going to accomplish a thing. The bottom line is you can try and prevent injury, and "carry-over letdowns" by not routinely extending your guys, especially not the ones with a history of arm trouble. You can't prove a link, but you can't prove there is no link. A smart organization would play it safe and at least try to practice some level of caution. The Cubs ignore the possibility that there could be a link, instead deciding to search for the breaking point.

Consistency is overrated? A lot of guys have the "stuff" to justify a 3/24 contract. Not all of them back it up with repeatable success. Dempster's one year of success as a closer, without dominant peripherals, has justified a pretty significant 2 year deal. However, if you go to 3 years, and you spend that much per year, there are better options. Dempster at 3/24 is equivalent to Ryan at something like 4/40. Ryan is much more dominant than Dempster, and much more reliable. Wagner, same thing. I don't see those guys getting those deals, and Dempster shouldn't get anything that contends with those numbers.

That is not true in every occupation.

I could see it, but Colorado would be stupid to pay him much of anything. Sammy at $5m playing in Coors (start every home game, and half the away games) would be an interesting investment for that squad.

It'll certainly cost more than Joe's deal. I wasn't trying to compare them dollar for dollar. If some other team is willing to go 3/24 on Dempster, I'd much rather go 3/30 on Wagner, or 3/27 on Ryan.

I think I'd take the risk even if I didn't know. Heck, you could add Murton to that trade if you could sign BGiles (which you could afford). That lineup would potentially be top 3 in the NL. I'd run the risk of Chipper making it through the year just for the chance of great success. Even though I don't want him rushed, I'd settle for Pie in CF, as long as they aren't counting on him as a catalyst at the top of the order. Cedeno and Pie in the lineup offsets the costs of Giles, Giles, Lee, Jones, and Ramirez.

i would consider 30/31 in saves with an era under 2.00 as being "dominant" myself. after what they went through with jobo & hawkins, i would hope the cubs will do everything they can to resign him - maybe 24mil/3 yrs? Remember, that what they "went through" with JoBo was a year of great pitching in the setup role, followed by a year of great pitching in the closer's role, then a meltdown. Dempster has been no more dominant than Joe was in their first years as closers. 3/24 is way too much at this point. I'd consider as much as 2/12, but Ryan has never shown any consistency in his career (aside from consistently missing the plate), so 3 years is a bit too long to guarantee that type of salary. As bad as Joe turned out to be, the financial hit was pretty low since Jim stayed relatively smart with that deal.

It might not even take that much. 2 productive OF bats and 1 great arm could make this team great. But it'll take a lot of work to get those guys.

I may be wrong, but I could have sworn that after yesterday's game, Len said something about the Cubs' record in 1-run games, and it was positive, something like 24-19?

However it's being leaked, this is about the 10th time where Dusty has discussed publicly with the media something about a player that he has apparantly not discussed with the player. If Dusty said he talked to so and so about picking up signs, and that player said nobody ever talked to him, then I'd assume the manager was telling the truth and the player was avoiding an uncomfortable topic. However, when that same situation comes up with half the team about several different subjects, I have to believe that talk of Dusty as a players' manager is being exposed as a fraud. This isn't an isolated event. Even if some backstabbing front office person was leaking this to the media to set-up Dusty, it's up to Baker not to take the bait. This is exactly the type of thing Torre would reply "no comment".

Isn't it the fans' fault that they view it as a "I don't care" attitude? I see no reason to make personel changes based on the perceptions of fans who aren't willing to view the situation without bias. Corey doesn't refuse to bunt, he actually bunts quite a bit, he's just not that good at it. Choking up is no cure all. And he has tried to lay off the high pitch. It's been pretty clear he's made a big effort there, the problem is just that he has so many holes right now that even if he lays off 2 straight high fastballs, pitchers can get him with just about anything else. And when he is making contact, all the swing adjustments in recent years have basically turned him into a soft ground ball to 2nd or popup to center hitter.

I wonder what Mazzone could do with Mitre. I'm a big Walker supporter; it's not very easy to find that productive a LH bat from the 2nd base position. But I'd love to get Giles instead. I'd be pretty happy if the Cubs got Chipper for LF and Giles for 2B.

It all goes back to the day he was drafted. They repeatedly said despite his size, speed and position (and to an extent, his skin), people shouldn't stereotype him as a leadoff hitter, that he was not a leadoff hitter, would not be a leadoff hitter, and they drafted him to be a guy who drives in runs. He was a 3 hitter in the minors. He was brought up to become a 3 or 5 hitter. He should have started as a 6/7 hitter. It was management's inability to stick to a plan that probably did it's most damage. (and while I do believe Corey was somewhat victimized by misuse, I do acknowledge he played a major role in his own demise)

You do not have to show that link. If a corporation repeatedly misses earnings estimates, but each time they do so there is a seemingly innocent reason why, do we say it's a healthy company. The trend is your friend. Anybody who was genuinely surprised that Nomar suffered a serious injury in 2005 should be ashamed of themselves. Then you cannot exclude Prior from your analysis. You can't call Prior's elbow "flukish" because he has a history as well. A history of getting hit by a line drive? No, Prior's linedrive injury was a fluke. His other stuff wasn't. Nomar's groin was not a fluke. If he broke a hand by a pitched ball, I'd call that a fluke. There's a pretty clear difference, and it's not difficult to see.