JC

Burrell's fielding still scares the bejesus out of me. But, in the absence of a better option, I'd take him. His OBP has been strong, even in the midst of a bad AVG. year last year. Complete, baseless, idle speculation: Thome seems like a good fit for Boston next year. I wonder if Boston would consider sending Manny to Boston for Thome and Burrell, with Philly spinning Manny off to the Mets for Beltran? Does Beltran have a no-trade clause?

I was going to make some snide comment about the author but I think Tim wrote it best. Off topic, but who was Snidely Whiplash? Was he Dudley Doright's antagonist?

Very cool gesture, Ron.

Based on salary concerns before the season started, I wonder if we could have landed him for Farnsworth and Patterson? Of course, that is a strictly hindsight driven scenerio. But, its kind of interesting nonetheless.

As you are well aware, I am incredibly disenchanted with Hendry. But, however deep that disenchantment runs, I'd go with Hendry 7 days a week before I'd give the reins of my team to Steve Phillips. Twice on Sundays.

i gotta say cuse, your posts are getting increasingly weird as this season progresses down the toilet...I take it that you're pretty well disgusted wth Johnny B.'s antics? Frustrated beyond my control 29yl. Sarcasm is my only hope for Cub sanity at this point. Look at the bright side. You have the owners' meetings coming up after the season where there will be a lot of hype with little action. Then, you'll have the Winter Meetings thereafter, again with a lot of hype and little action. Next, hope will spring eternal as rumors will swirl up until ST that the Cubs will acquire some difference making player. After that, news will come forth that Hendry has signed and extension. News of Dusty's extension will closely follow. To top it off, Matt Murton will hit .654 in ST. Of course, he will start the year in Iowa where Ronnie Cedeno will still be rehabbing gangrene infection that the Cubs failed to properly diagnose following surgery to fix his broken hand.

I think 2005 was his break year. It has been a brutal season in which the Cubs have seen themselves get blown out of contention in the division, and turn belly up in the Wild Card after two consecutive seasons over .500. The offseason was excruciating, in large part due to Hendry's mishandling of Sosa and the subsequent deals made to that debacle. If you bought into Hendry's insistance that money should be kept back for mid-season additions, well, I give you Matt Lawton. Everyone from MacPhail to Baker should lose their jobs, including Hendry. who do you think should get hendry's job? I haven't put a lot of thought into that, Sulley. Partly due to the fact that I don't know the qualifications or availability of candidates. That doesn't stop me from wanting him removed. I would never accuse Jim of not being a hard worker, but I don't see much creativity in what he does. I don't like his negotiating style and I don't like how narrow minded he can sometimes be with respect to players he covets. While some of his moves have certainly been beneficial to the Cubs, I don't agree with most of his decisions. Most distressingly, his relationship, evaluation of, and loyalty to Dusty causes me too much concern to keep him at the helm. So, I don't know who I'd choose to replace him. However, were I in the baseball field, I'm confident I could find a candidate more in line with how I think the organization should be run.

I kind of mentioned that earlier, which justifies his value being over what it would be if he played in Wrigley. However, he is still way overpriced.

Yeah, if they really cared about winning they would've kept Sosa! That way they could've had an even greater sinkhole in the OF and had a 100 million dollar payroll. Then they'd care about winning to you, and that's all that matters. Good point. People who say paying off bad contracts shouldn't count on payrolls should consider the alternative. What alternative, that we kept Sosa and his salary? While I acknowledge Sosa's massive decline, Jeromy Burnitz didn't lead us anywhere to speak of. The organization's obsession with moving Sosa was an obvious distraction to bettering this team. While the club fielded an $87M team with respect to the "talent" under contract, it is unfair to blur the line and call it a $100M team that is inflated due to bad business decisions. Their may be $100M in expenditures toward the 2005 budget, but their isn't close to $100M in talent on the team. That is why its a lie in the context in which it has sometimes been used. 100 million in talent? We're paying Zambrano and Prior a combined 7 million. The point that LoneStar made was that the "illusion" of a 100 million dollar payroll is the fault of the Trib. If you want to say the talent doesn't reflect the payroll, then blame Hendry. The Trib isn't at fault. :scratch: I must have missed something. My intention wasn't to fault anyone for the amount of money spent. Rather, I was just agreeing that the roster isn't a $100M roster as some in the organization have tried to argue.

I think 2005 was his break year. It has been a brutal season in which the Cubs have seen themselves get blown out of contention in the division, and turn belly up in the Wild Card after two consecutive seasons over .500. The offseason was excruciating, in large part due to Hendry's mishandling of Sosa and the subsequent deals made to that debacle. If you bought into Hendry's insistance that money should be kept back for mid-season additions, well, I give you Matt Lawton. Everyone from MacPhail to Baker should lose their jobs, including Hendry.

Yeah, if they really cared about winning they would've kept Sosa! That way they could've had an even greater sinkhole in the OF and had a 100 million dollar payroll. Then they'd care about winning to you, and that's all that matters. Good point. People who say paying off bad contracts shouldn't count on payrolls should consider the alternative. What alternative, that we kept Sosa and his salary? While I acknowledge Sosa's massive decline, Jeromy Burnitz didn't lead us anywhere to speak of. The organization's obsession with moving Sosa was an obvious distraction to bettering this team. While the club fielded an $87M team with respect to the "talent" under contract, it is unfair to blur the line and call it a $100M team that is inflated due to bad business decisions. Their may be $100M in expenditures toward the 2005 budget, but their isn't close to $100M in talent on the team. That is why its a lie in the context in which it has sometimes been used.

I know what you mean. Spending what is available in the budget for this year is fine, I guess. The only other option is tucking it away for a rainy day, but the Cubs likely wouldn't do that. Just don't use it with the intention of matching the same funds for years to come in long term contracts for mediocre players. That is where you get killed.

The duplicative nature of the comment was not lost on myself. I enjoy that type of banter. Are you wearing a smoking jacket and holding a snifter of brandy?

I'm surprised at the amount of dislike for Hunter. However, Hunter's center field prowess would be lessened by the fact that he wouldn't be able to rob homeruns in Wrigley. In Minneapolis, his height and jumping ability is worth more than if he played in Chicago.

Spoken like a sellout.

...and announcers not giving the players nicknames. Nice addition, Cornstalk.

If you could acquire both, would having Mitre/Marte be akin to having a pity party?

But the fact is they don't have high OPS guys in the OF and they aren't likely to have them next year. Downgrading the offense from catcher would only increase the number of upgrades they'd need elsewhere, and considering how difficult it will be just to fill the current needs, it doesn't make sense to make more holes. Slippery Pete: What is dis? Costanza: Thats the outlet. Slippery Pete: What is that do? Costanza: Its where the electricity comes from! Slippery Pete: Oh, you mean the "holes".

I don't think Moorad is the sharpest knife in the drawer. I could see him bringing Dusty in. In fact, its the only scenerio that I've heard of that I think is remotely plausible to get Dusty out of Chicago. Let the trade talk of Dusty for Connor Jackson begin!

I genereally like Boston and their knucklehead persona. But, those guys need to learn to shut their freaking beaks. Whether its Manny, Millar, Damon, Schilling or Foulke, take a vacation from the drama, boys.

I don't know if anyone else caught it, or if it has been addressed elsewhere, but Peter Gammons on BBTN said that there was a possibility that Dusty could wind up in Arizona. The reasoning was that Jeff Moorad was Dusty's agent who arranged the deal to the Cubs. Of course, Moorad is now in the D'Back's front office. Gammons said that perhaps some sort of "deal" could be done, but thinks Dusty will likely be offered an extension to stay.

Does he take the place of beer, wine or liquor?

Aren't those things supposed to be calibrated daily?

There should be a thread devoted to words coined at NSBB called the Dickpoletionary

But it wasn't his fault, the books were old, the air conditioning was on the fritz, the curve shifted, his favorite teacher went on maternity leave, they switched his schedule, the test was immediately after gym, he's young. Well, unfortunately Son, I happen to know that your school has the highest budget in the state, they've brought in a lot of talented teachers and they're teaching you stuff you should already know......I for one am HIGHLY dissapointed. Yeah, well, I guess this is a good time to tell you that mom is shagging the neighbor. I guess we all get disappointed sometimes.