JC

Blutarsky's GPA.

My question about Hastert was in general, not associated with the link provided. I didn't read the link that was supplied. I just can't stand it when he opens his mouth generally. Sorry if I implied my opinion was about the article. (However, I think the New Orleans should be rebuilt without question. To abandon it now is to abandon infrastructure, such as the pump stations and intact levee work, that remains. The water can be held back, its just a question of doing it the right way.)

Here is a can't lose trick, should the French Quarter resume Mardi Gras functions. On the way down, buy some of those wooden beaded car seat mats. You know, the ones that are supposed to be good for you back? Anyway, take them apart on the way down (assuming you are driving). String them on twine or string and make your own beads. You will be freaking amazed at the trade value. Amazed. Don't argue.

How in the hell do you people keep electing Hastert?

You're freaking insane. Burnitz has to go. The least you could sign him to is about $4m, and you would limit your options to actually improving the OF. My insanity is fostered by an underwhelming FA group. In addition, you underestimate what I'd offer to have him come back. No self respecting ballplayer would take a pay cut from $5M to the $2M I'd limit myself to. Thus, he'd be as good as gone.

Actually, Hollandsworth was told by Hendry that he was signed to be the starter. Didn't Dusty or Jim state at the convention that he'd start at least 140 games? I may have made that up.

Talk to the Dutch. They are masters at holding back the water. Something like 3/4 of their entire country is below sea level. Touring the canals and massive [expletive] systems throughout the country, particularly near Rotterdaym, is awe inspiring. They have a flood break dam that has massive, MASSIVE doors to control water flow. During the tour I took when I lived there, the guide said that it would take a flood of biblical proportions (See, Noah) to breach it. Further, these Dutch engineers have been utilized farther north on the Mississipi previously for irrigation and flood control. They are brilliant, and any recovery should start with them providing a plan. I'd like to think our engineers would say the same thing about our [expletive] systems. http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/WEATHER/09/01/katrina.fema.brown/story.sandbag.drop.pool.jpg I'll take the Dutch.

Cubs-Me 1. B-B Caveat: I'd offer a package for much less value than I believe the Cubs will. Also, Burnitz hinted at possible retirement yesterday. 2. A-A 3. B-C 4. B-C 5. B-C 6. A-B 7. A-A 8. B-A 9. B-B Caveat: I think Dempster gets re-signed, but I think the Cubs also go after a big name closer, with Dempster relegated to set-up man. 10. B-A Those are difficult question because the actual decisions don't occur in such a vacuum

Talk to the Dutch. They are masters at holding back the water. Something like 3/4 of their entire country is below sea level. Touring the canals and massive [expletive] systems throughout the country, particularly near Rotterdaym, is awe inspiring. They have a flood break dam that has massive, MASSIVE doors to control water flow. During the tour I took when I lived there, the guide said that it would take a flood of biblical proportions (See, Noah) to breach it. Further, these Dutch engineers have been utilized farther north on the Mississipi previously for irrigation and flood control. They are brilliant, and any recovery should start with them providing a plan.

I didn't realize it was so difficult to say, "Hey, try to go to the right side with the runner on second and no outs." Seriously, nearly the entire roster has been turned over since his arrival. We know he has input with Hendry. If his players are that lacking, or that unable to learn, who's fault is it, really? Dusty needs to shut up in the worst way.

New Orleans is perhaps the most unique city in the United States. Its lush history should be honored by restoring it. Sure, it was a disaster waiting to happen, but if the warnings were properly heeded, the expanse of the disaster could have been lessened. I would hate to lose the New Orleans culture.

Yes, you're right. Those were your exact words. But, its essentially the same thing. You later said that acquiring Matt Murton gave you hope that Hendry is placing greater value in OBP, true? How is it essentially the same thing? I basically said that he has made moves in the last couple years to lead me to believe he at least is aware that it's an important stat. Just because I argued that him acquiring players with high OBP potential, doesn't mean that I am arguing that he is specifically targeting similar players. If he was Hollandsworth, Burnitz, and Perez wouldn't have been regular starters for 3/4 of the season. For Pete's sake, I conceded the point. You're right. You never literally argued that Hendry was targetting high OBP guys. But, you, in fact, said that the acquisition of Murton gave you hope that Hendry was valuing OBP. I don't think it is such leap, or that big of a deal, to characterize the argument as I did. Further, because the issue had gone off on a tangent regarding the nuts and bolts of the acquisition of Murton, I thought that I could more easily summarize the argument that way.

Yes, you're right. Those were your exact words. But, its essentially the same thing. You later said that acquiring Matt Murton gave you hope that Hendry is placing greater value in OBP, true?

Hendry said there would be no deal unless they threw in Murton. No Murton, no deal. That push came from Hendry, not Epstein or any of the other GMs involved in the trade. Lets not get wrapped around the Maypole here with semantics. What I am saying is that Hendry never identified Murton as a part of this trade. In fact, based on my memory of the accounts, Hendry was resisting trading Harris, who Minaya was demanding. To easy Hendry's loss of Harris, Epstein stepped up and offered Murton. So, yes, the deal was likely dead without Murton. However, the topic arose in the context of discussing players acquired by Hendry which may or may not support his renewed value of OBP. So, the way in which Murton's name entered the deal is of some importance. If, in fact, Murton was tossed in by Epstein, at Epstein's suggestion, as I remembered, it lessens support for the argument that Hendry is targeting more OBP friendly batters.

I'm starting to think the most interesting part was your fascination with ice water. Hill should be starting in front of Rusch and Williams. Its inconceivable that he isn't positioned in the rotation.

Actually I think I read something today or yesterday that said the deal almost died because Minaya didn't want Murton, so Hendry gave him Harris and took Murton instead. Another thread referenced a BP chat, I think, that worded the transaction a little odd. I am relying on what I remember from remarks made by both Epstein and Hendry. Hendry at one point provided a detailed account of how the day unfolded.

pic plz Among the worst requests ever communicated on this board.

Can we all agree that throwing in Murton was Epstein's idea so that the deal would get done? According to every account I've heard, the deal was dead when Minaya demanded Brendan Harris. At the last minute, Epstein offered to compensate the Cubs with Murton. Thus, I don't see Murton's acquisition as any appreciation for OBP. As far as Bellhorn, he was a middle infielder that his 27 home runs. My money says that got Hendry's attention moreso than his OBP. In fact, my guess, based on Hendry's conventional approach to the game, is that he was satisfied with Belly's rather low AVG. at 3B, as long as he kept the prototypical 3B power. We know what happened thereafter.

Just for the sake of persepctive.... the 44 players who entered Serena's Predictions Contest for the season guessed, on the average, that the CUBS would win 91.2 games, with a high guess of 99 and a low of 79. That's a good 10-12 games worth of Blue, Kool-Aid, eh? For purposes of that game, I can tell you that my guesses were based on best case scenerios and the assumption that Nomar would remain healthy, along with the rotation. I think you have to account for a little positive bias. Fans don't want to think the worst about their team right before the season starts.

Don't blame it on the outfield, Tenderfoot.

Does he really value OPB though? To me, Hendry is moreso trying to emulate the Yankees than show legitimate concern for OPB. For example, the Yanks collect superstars. Sheff, Giambi, ARod, etc. are all players brought in by the the Yankees because the are superstars. Sure, their stardom arises partially due to their strong OBP statistics, but those are likely incidental to the fact that the Yanks want them. Due to payroll constraints (as everyone has who aren't the Yankees), Hendry is kind of the poor-man's Brian Cashman. He collects lesser star players on the cheap. He appreciates that Lee, ARam and Nomar have potential to produce, but OBP is incidental. Hendry hasn't shown a willingness to chase, or force the play of, high OBP players with limited power like Boston or Oakland does. OBP just doesn't seem to be a priority in the supporting cast.

if hendry didn't 'agree with baker' then he shouldn't have hired him. people are acting like hendry and baker have drastically different philosophies. dusty's philosophy/strategy/reputation was well-established when hendry hired him. if hendry is now unhappy with how dusty has run the team, then it's hendry's fault for not knowing what he was getting himself into and i don't know how much credit i want to give hendry for not trading walker. he didn't trade lee for humberto cota either, but i'm not about to throw him a parade for that. keeping walker was a no-brainer. A deft observation.

I think the idea of a manager being good or bad based on the team he is managing doesn't hold water. If the argument is that Dusty is not a bad manager with a more veteran team, one that requires less oversight and allows for more consistent line-ups and pitching substitutions, then I'd counter that a monkey could do the same thing. Being an effective manager means, to me, that the person is adaptable. That adaptability shouldn't be a stretch as it ought to be based on the fact that you are playing the best players to win and putting the club in the best position to succeed. Those goals should be constants, regardless of the make-up of the team. When you argue that Dusty just doesn't have the right team, it seems like you are bending over backwards to find positives for him. Not everyone is placed in the ideal situation for their employment. As such, you are measured by what you do with what you have. Admittedly, I didn't follow the 2002 Giants that closely (being a Cub fan). I did watch the playoffs with particular interest because of the rampant speculation that Baker would be the next Cub manager. Based on what I saw, if he managed the entire season like he did the post season, I would still argue that Baker was a detriment to that team. Thus, the idea that he flourished due to a more veteran team doesn't resonate with me. I am harsher on Baker than most. I recognize that. I don't like his decision making, excuse making, feeble explanations, self promotion, oversensitivity, pouting, etc. However, I have tried to be open minded about him as a manager. Alas, I always come to the same conclusions: that his 2002 and 2003 teams succeeded in spite of Dusty, not because of him.

Chicago NL Chicago AL Los Angeles NL Also teams like Seattle (a lot of young SS talent, but all unproven), Philly (if they can get rid of Rollins), St. Louis (not sure of Eck's situation), Washington (if they admit Guzman was a monumental mistake), and Florida's a darkhorse for everyone. I thought the Dodgers were content with Izturis. If they are indeed in the market, I'd wager they'd go after Nomar. After a solid 2004, Uribe sucks this year, so the ChiSox likely would have interest. I can't see St. Louis paying $8M for Furcal in light of Eck's year, or Philly getting rid of Rollins. In the same vein, I can't see Bowden admitting the Guzman mistake or MLB letting him buy his way out. (No, I don't believe they will have an owner in place by 2006). I didn't see Seattle in the market due to their young talent, but I really have no sense of what they want to do. So, it looks like there are indeed players out there. If someone other than the Cubs want to pay $32M, more power to them.

How do you feel now?