CubColtPacer

I think Hill has a good chance at a good start tonight, but I'll take the under.

I would love if everybody in the entire league got to wear #42 because people are right that Robinson changed the game for everyone. If they are only going to allow one player from some of the teams though, it makes sense that they should offer it to the African-Americans first-Robinson changed it for everyone, but he had the most direct impact on changing the barrier for African-Americans. If all those players decline, then it should be offered to all the other players and a team shouldn't decline to have a player wear it before they have offered and had it declined by everyone.

So Hawkins was blowing saves because he was distracted? That must be what injured Nomar as well. I'll be damned. It's still all speculation, not evidence. The arguement might have more validity if players were saying they couldn't perform as they usually did because of said distractions. That's not the case. Players do say from time to time though that they didn't play the way they usually could because of distractions. I'm not sure if anybody from the 04 Cubs did, but players do say that from time to time-Nevin even said that about the 06 Cubs.

The Panthers sign Carr to a 2 year deal: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2827930

Just posting this here because while it doesn't directly involve the Briggs talks, it might involve the Redskins #6 pick, which of course would end the Briggs talks-now, the Redskins are speculated to be after Asante Samuel, and offering way too much for him: http://washingtontimes.com/blogs/storyview.php?StoryID=20070405-110752-5413r&TopicsID=skins

If a team makes a player unhappy, they can still trade him. If a coach is unhappy, all that happens is that the coach can ruin the team the next year. Technically, coaches are not free to look at other offers unless the team gives permission, but the team usually does because the cost of an coach who doesn't want to be there anymore is simply too high with little reward.

Here we go again. Maybe he can pad those stats in August and September when the games don't mean anything... Jacque before the All-Star break in 2006-.306/.336/.526 After All-Star break-.261/.332/.465 He was definitely better in the first half of the season. And in May, when the games definitely mattered (remember, the Cubs had a winning record at the beginning of May) until the Cubs spiraled out of control during May, Jones was one of the only ones hitting well. He had a bad April and July, but his other 4 months were very good, and he definitely wasn't just padding his numbers after the Cubs were out of it.

why in the heck would calipari insist on staying at a c-usa school? is he that married to a kid a who'll probably only play one year for him anyway? Nah, Calipari wanted to stay at Memphis last year as well-he's made a few stops now, so maybe he just had found a job he feels comfortable at and doesn't need to jump schools-he still schedules well enough that Memphis can get one of the top seeds most years.

Well, he has walked once, so I would say yes :D

Technically, Barrett has never had a .900 OPS (except for 23 at-bats in his first year, high of .885 after that). His offense still is worth a lot more than any deficiencies he has on defense though, especially because he's not terrible behind the plate, just not great.

travel day btw, why is Rich Hill not the #3? Lou didn't want back to back lefties? Yeah, he said early in camp that Lilly would be #2 and Hill #4 to break them up and get as much R/L/R/L as possible.

My guess is that Lou feels the same way-he probbaly just didn't feel the difference between Murton and Theriot defensively was enough to lose Theriot for the game. If picking a guy to sub, Murton would probably haved gotten the call, but since Theriot had already been called on to bunt it was easier for him to stay in.

I'm almost glad Izturis swings at teh first pitch every time. Makes him go away faster HEY. If it weren't for him we'd be losing 1-0, so no bashing Izzy today. All of his at-bats have been pretty patient-he walked his first time, then singled on a 3-1 count his second time, then took two strikes before getting out on the third pitch the third time.

I may have to put him on my HACKING MASS team instead of Sean Casey. He platoons with Scott Hatteberg doesn't he?? Yeah, that's what I heard on Monday that those two are a platoon.

Sorry about the wait everyone-I just got in to Indiana 10-15 minutes ago. When considering my pick, I narrowed it down to LB, DT, and WR. None of the other positions need a possible 1st round pick. Of those, LB is out-the Colts do not like to draft a linebacker anywhere near that high unless he is a very special talent, and there is none on the board. They like to promote from within-expect them to draft a linebacker on the 2nd day again. I thought hard about WR, but I just couldn't do it. Meachem would have been the pick, but with him off the board none of the picks made enough sense. Rice and Jarrett do not fit in the Colts offense well at all, and Anthony Gonzalez and Steve Smith are much better fits but are a little too much of a reach to take a receiver here. Instead Polian finally decides to take a position of need-DT. I considered 2 people here, but the person I selected is: Colts select: DT Demarcus Tyler, NC State Tyler is a 1 gap DT that should give the Colts size while not giving up their penetrating into the backfield style that the Colts like to play. He is continuing to improve. This is a little bit of a surprise to see Tyler this high, but the Colts have never had the same type of player rankings as other teams-this simply continues it.

Very solid pick in my opinion. I never understood the "best player available" strategy. I mean, even if Adrian Peterson is still on the board at 14, would it really make sense for Carolina to pick him, already having Foster and Williams? You can always spin off the pick to someone who wants AD at that spot - it's not like there would be a shortage of teams to pick from. There has to be a limit to the BPA strategy, and you're right that you cannot pick BPA in football as much as some of the other sports. With so many football picks being busts though, if you have a player who you rate much higher than anybody else on your board, it makes sense to take him-rosters fluctuate so much that you usually can find a spot for them to play. That isn't the case at QB, OT if both your tackles are secure, and S if you have two great safeties, but every other position I think you can work players in somewhere. Now, if two players are similar, you always want to have need be the deciding factor on anything that is anywhere near a close call. Of course-I'm biased because the Colts have taken two offensive guys in the first round in the last 6 years, and have been criticized for it badly because they didn't draft for the obvious need on their defense-those two were Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark, who were not needed at the time but now are integral parts of the team.

Well, in fairness-he's a fan of their rival. It's a lot easier to shake off one baseball loss than to hear your rival talk all the next year about their 3 titles in just over a year.

Yeah, I'm looking at him. I also was considering Griffin too, jerk. You don't want him-you really don't want him :D To let everyone know, I'm driving out of state in the morning-I will be in to a computer again, but I will be without any access for several hours. I was hoping my pick would come by tonight, but if my pick does not come up in the next 2-3 hours then I'll pick as soon as I can (tomorrow afternoon-early evening) Edit: If it's the particular receiver I'm thinking of anyway-which my guess is that it is, but I realized that there could be 2-3 different receivers that would fit in the Chargers better than this receiver, and so now I'm not sure.

I guess I just don't understand the argument very well. There are certainly more inexpensive entertainment options out there. They are not in the same class though because of two things 1) In entertainment, you have to pay a premium to see something live, to actually be there when it happens 2) These are the best at their profession When you take those two into account, and compare MLB to other top of the line parts of other entertainment options such as concerts, plays, opera, symphonies, and other sports, what do you get? Baseball is easily the most inexpensive option among all those things. So I just don't understand the argument-if you want to see the best live, you'll have to pay for it-and baseball has done a better job of keeping its prices down than a lot of other similar options.

You don't see a problem when it costs nearly $300.00 for a middle income family of 4 to go to a single baseball game (done the right way, of course)? To each their own, I suppose. Can you tell me how a family of 4 would spend $300 to go to a single baseball game? I'm sure it's possible, but it's not close to the average of what a family would spend.

This is *almost* right, I think. You can have different lineups every day. Each day's lineup contributes to your total score for the week, and whoever does best overall with total score in each category gets the "win" at the end of the week. Does that help? So are you saying that the "BN" spot does not contribute even if they play a game that day? So for example I have a util 2B guy playing tonite but my regular 2B is not playing, should I but the util 2B guy in to get some extra points? Yes-your guys are on the bench are partly there to handle the off days of your regular players. If your regular is not going to play, then put your bench guy in his place, and then put the regular back in for tomorrow's games. Points from guys who are on the bench the day they play do not count.

I guess it's nice that Angelo is being selective but I doubt we'll see a better offer than that. I'm dissapointed. briggs is a 2-time all-pro selection after 4 years in the league. a sure-thing. letting the redskins get away with swapping picks would be absolutely criminal. Briggs is as good as gone. Letting him walk and getting nothing in return would be criminal. briggs isn't in any kind of position to be dictating what the bears do. the seahawks went through this for a couple of years with walter jones. no one has ever held out after being tagged. Sean Gilbert is one example of a player who held out the entire year after being franchised. More and more players have also shown they are willing to hold out until week 10-Joey Galloway held out until week 10, Keenan Mcardell was at week 8 or 9 when he was traded, and the Patriots traded Branch after week 1 last year when it became apparent he wasn't coming back are all examples in the last few years of a player holding out for a long, long time. Is there a decent possibility that Briggs comes back? Sure-but there is also a decent possibility that he wouldn't come back until week 10 either following the examples of these other players. but hadn't gilbert been franchised before that? i'm not sure and don't know much about it, so i could be wrong. nonetheless, it's still a mistake to let one player run a team. let him hold out if he wants, i still doubt that he would sacrifice one of his prime years just to prove a point. anyway, i know that you don't want him to come back, the bears are a pretty good team with him, capable of challenging for a superbowl. Yup-the Bears are a very good team with him-definitely capable of winning a Superbowl and definitely the best team in the NFC. Still, if I wanted the best thing for the Colts, I would want the Bears to sign Briggs to a huge deal because I believe that would be a huge misallocation of resources. When I talk in this thread, I try to never go with that perspective, and instead always think of what's best for the Bears. Besides, I'm not sure Briggs feels that he would be wasting a season. If he doesn't force a trade, he still can play 6 games and make millions. As far as setting an example to show that the team is bigger than the player, I'm not sure how well that works in today's culture. It might set a precedent for 2-3 years, but is that precedent for 2-3 years worth more than he could get in trade? I don't think so, but maybe it is.

I guess it's nice that Angelo is being selective but I doubt we'll see a better offer than that. I'm dissapointed. briggs is a 2-time all-pro selection after 4 years in the league. a sure-thing. letting the redskins get away with swapping picks would be absolutely criminal. Briggs is as good as gone. Letting him walk and getting nothing in return would be criminal. briggs isn't in any kind of position to be dictating what the bears do. the seahawks went through this for a couple of years with walter jones. no one has ever held out after being tagged. Sean Gilbert is one example of a player who held out the entire year after being franchised. More and more players have also shown they are willing to hold out until week 10-Joey Galloway held out until week 10, Keenan Mcardell was at week 8 or 9 when he was traded, and the Patriots traded Branch after week 1 last year when it became apparent he wasn't coming back are all examples in the last few years of a player holding out for a long, long time. Is there a decent possibility that Briggs comes back? Sure-but there is also a decent possibility that he wouldn't come back until week 10 either following the examples of these other players.

Yeah, after looking at those batter/pitcher matchups I'm not too enthusiastic either. Let's hope they can drive up Arroyo's pitch count and get him out early.

Anyone who buys the Cubs will be A) A Cubs fan B) Someone who wants the Cubs because they are profitable No prospective owner will care whether Soriano's OBP slips. If anything, he is a benefit because he is one of the most marketable, popular players in the league and will most likely remain so for the next few years. Soriano's popularity will disappear very quickly if he can't hack it in CF and puts up an OPS slightly above .800, as he did in TX for the 2 years before 2006. Then he'll be a barely above average corner OF who's owed another $126 mil. That's not something a buyer would consider attractive. Soriano even if he regresses will likely be a 30/30 player (he has only missed once on each of those in the last 5 years, and with Lou running the team, he'll have many more chances to run the bases than in Texas, and he'll likely get enough at-bats from the leadoff spot to have 30 home runs). Soriano would be very overrated if he regresses like that and wouldn't be a great asset to help the team win, but his home runs and steals would make him very popular with the fans.