srbin84

I did not know that. Well, he'd help with platoons I guess. But the Cubs also suck against RH pitchers. And is there any likelihood of facing a string of lefties like they did before (really, I don't know, I've blocked that time out and don't remember who it was). He'd be the equivalent of a LOOGY, Ohman but much older and with no upside and 5-6 times the cost. The only good thing might be that Dusty would bench Jones in his favor against lefties. I assume that make would most of the Cub-loving world happy, including yours truly. I would like this trade, and your assumption is correct....15 years experience vs. 7 for Jones, so Dusty would probably view Conine as the better player. Not to mention, he's loves the really old guys the most. Dusty likens players to a fine wine, the older, the better.

I was serious though about when I asked if anyone knew how much they paid to get the Expos. Saying they have an extra 14 mil in their pockets is like selling a car and saying you have an extra whatever the amount is in your pocket. You still payed for it in the first place.

It depends on how much they need that 600 million right now. To put it another way, if you owned a $500,000 two story apartment building that made around $20,000 a year in rent after expenses/taxes, would you sell it for $600,000? I wouldn't.

I agree with you on wanting Cuban as the owner because he does what it takes to win. However, I don't think winning 10 or so more games a season would really increase the value of the Cubs much more than it is or much more than it would cost to do it. The value of the Cubs is so high because they have a gauranteed profit every year from the ticket sales, etc. If sales are already close to maxed out, where is the potential for more profit by winning and paying to do so on top of that? Average attendance is 38,999 so far this season. It's good, but that leaves an average of 2,119 empty seats per game based on official capacity. Obviously that'll improve over the summer, but September sales could be pretty lackluster if the team doesn't improve. As I mentioned earlier, playoff games could generate a significant amount of more money, especially since playoff game ticket prices are higher than any regular season game. After several years of this, though, demand is going to drop. There is a pretty good reason for whoever owns the team to make sure the team is competitive, especially if they're already spending the money. Let's say it goes up in the summer, down in September and ends up about where it is. The revenue from selling those extra 2000 seats a game will fall far short of an extra 10 million spent. Yes, they could make a lot of money in the playoffs, but with making the playoffs consistently being as hard as it is, the more practical choice is to put in no more money than they already are.

I don't like Hendry and would have fired him in 2005 if I was making the choice, but I'm beginning to think the scouting department is a HUGE part of the problem. Those scouts could have been there for 10, 20 or even 30 years for all we know. That would explain a lot.

He talked about it on ESPN radio.

I agree with you on wanting Cuban as the owner because he does what it takes to win. However, I don't think winning 10 or so more games a season would really increase the value of the Cubs much more than it is or much more than it would cost to do it. The value of the Cubs is so high because they have a gauranteed profit every year from the ticket sales, etc. If sales are already close to maxed out, where is the potential for more profit by winning and paying to do so on top of that?

Sorry if this was said, but didn't the Cubs pay in part for the Nationals already, and if so, how much was that?

To the answer the question, probably nobody anybody here would suggest.

Committing Uberous Baseball Slip-ups

I saw Koronka in person and on tv and think he sucks, not just on the results but he didn't look like he had any out pitches at all. However, I also remember Joe Borowski coming up as a starter and getting killed a few times at the beginning of his career. He also looked like he had nothing, but he made something happen and had a good 2002 and great 2003. I wouldn't be surprised to see Koronka win 15 games this year and post an ERA in the low 4's, which imo, is worthy of being at least the fifth starter on any team in the major leagues....only for one year though.

Would have been nice to see Theriot get his first AB against Mexican League pitching.

May as well, we're already having AAA guys face major league hitting.

Alright, didn't know anybody would take it as a personal offense; I was fighting for people who don't get to sit in front of the tv and have to look on from work, again, my deepest apologies.

nope. really old rule. Alright, anybody wanting to know what happened who isn't watching or listening to the broadcast doesn't know what happened, and what if he scores the tying or go ahead run in a game? He's still the worst hitting player (with qualified numbers) in baseball history? What do I win? I can't wait to see Neifi drive in or score a game winning run and see nothing. That will be hilarious.

nope. really old rule. Alright, anybody wanting to know what happened who isn't watching or listening to the broadcast doesn't know what happened, and what if he scores the tying or go ahead run in a game?

So it's a new rule not to acknowledge anything good Perez does or something?

Neifi and Cedeno getting something going.

Someone who is going to hit 45+ homers this year. And would have won the Cubs the Series in 2003 IMO if we signed him. He'd of stopped Alou from having a toddler-like tantrum, prevented Gonzo from booting a routine grounder, helped Prior pitch, and forced Dusty to get off his behind to go out and calm everyone down? No, he would have overcome all of those things with production. We wouldn't have even played the Marlins in the NLCS, probably division series as the NL reg. season champ. Everything would have unfolded differently.

Someone who is going to hit 45+ homers this year. And would have won the Cubs the Series in 2003 IMO if we signed him.

But it won't affect their playing time because of Baker. For somebody like Millar, that could be attractive.

Good point. I'm also sure I wasn't the only Cub fan who wanted to trade Sosa and sign Vlad at the time.

Agreed. I was against it too, but since it happened, I was interested to see how he would do in the role and was impressed with his performance.

What's the difference between the Braves signing Andruw Jones to a huge contract and the Cubs signing him to a huge contract?...unless you're saying to get rid of guys when they reach a certain pay rate. Because the Braves can sign him to a huge, long-term contract at age 24 that takes him through his productive seasons. The Cubs would be signing him for the seasons where he starts getting worse and worse, as we didn't have the opportunity at age 24. Ok, bad example, maybe a better one is Zambrano, who will get a huge UFA type deal whether he stays with the Cubs or not. I'm strongly opposed to letting him leave because of price.

I'd rather be rich than stupid. If you signed Jones, you're rich and stupid. I think being less rich, stupid and winning more games is better.