inari

I wouldn't be so sure that the Mariners aren't capable of competing, especially if they were to sign Jason Bay. That said, I doubt Bay signs there because of his defense.

I like Lee, but I don't think it's lateral at all. Lee is not as good as Halladay. Also, where does Milton Bradley fit into all of this?

Wow, that was stupid.

Hm. This is a bit of a stunner. If the Phillies were going to get Halladay, I would've never thought it would involve parting with Cliff.

Wow. Never would've called that one a few years ago.

He's simply not racking up enough W's.

To my knowledge, Harden has always used a fastball and a variety of changeup grips. I'm pretty much positive on this one.

Because his velocity isn't what it once was. There were too many starts last in which he was strong at one point and then dropped off the next start. Harden definitely has something wrong either on his shoulder or elbow, he's become a two pitch pitcher and he's not affective if his fastball is hitting 89 because his changed up is at 85 so there isn't much drop off. He has become a two pitch pitcher? He's always been a two pitch pitcher.

Or, maybe something else besides these two things. mmmmmmm ok. Point of this post was? That they could kill him, also. Likely not an ideal option.

You know whose personality I hated even more than Bradley? Todd Hundley.

Take out "to the White Sox" and your post gets better. In the end it doesn't matter where the fans or sponsors go, if/when they pull out. It's money out of the Cubs' pocket regardless. And in the end, none of that will have anything to do with Milton Bradley. Nor a single sponsor nor more than a handful of stupid fans would leave because of Milt.

No it wouldn't. The Cubs aren't going to lose money because Milton Bradley is around. They aren't going to lose fans to the White Sox. The only fans that would leave the Cubs because Milton is around would be racist white people, and I don't see any racist white people who are Cubs fans rushing to support the White Sox. The Cubs will lose fans, and money, if they wallow around in mediocrity much longer. If they go back to the 2005/2006 let's just make sure we're all nice guys who get along no matter how much we lose ways, then they will lose fans and money. The way to make money in Chicago sports is to win. Wrigley didn't become the place it is today until after 1998, and it didn't become the year-in-year-out sellout until 2003 when fans were given the taste of what could be. Nice guy teams and PR strategies don't sell tickets. Winning does. I'm not worried about the Cubs losing fans (racist or not) to the White Sox. The real worry is losing advertising dollars and sponsors to the White Sox. Most companies are pretty conservative and may not want to be associated with a mediocre team with a loony-toon acting out weekly. Most companies want to get their product out to the largest audience possible which means they will advertise during Cubs games. If you think there is a single company that would stop their association with the Cubs because of Milton Bradley, you're nothing short of delusional.

Why exactly is Sammy on that list? Point taken. He shouldn't be. Er, I'm inclined to disagree with both of you as to the distinction you're drawing. I think there is some confusion here between nationality and race. It makes perfect sense for Sammy Sosa to be included in that list. Being an "African-American" versus being a Dominican of African descent doesn't put Sammy in a different racial category. Probably not the time or place to get into it, but I doubt he was purely of African descent. I could be wrong about that, though. However, there seems to be enough doubt about it to not include him on the list when others like Jacque Jones, LaTroy Hawkins, Corey Patterson or dozens of others could have been used instead. It's certainly possible, but there's not much reason that we have to believe that Sosa is any less African than those players. This is a murky issue that has no right answer, I just don't buy the idea of calling someone out on including Sammy Sosa on that list when we really have no basis to do so.

Why exactly is Sammy on that list? Point taken. He shouldn't be. Er, I'm inclined to disagree with both of you as to the distinction you're drawing. I think there is some confusion here between nationality and race. It makes perfect sense for Sammy Sosa to be included in that list. Being an "African-American" versus being a Dominican of African descent doesn't put Sammy in a different racial category. It's a cloudy area, but calling davearm2 out for including Sammy out for the reasons I have outlined (please correct me if I'm wrong on those) is... well, inaccurate.

No it wouldn't. The Cubs aren't going to lose money because Milton Bradley is around. They aren't going to lose fans to the White Sox. The only fans that would leave the Cubs because Milton is around would be racist white people, and I don't see any racist white people who are Cubs fans rushing to support the White Sox. The Cubs will lose fans, and money, if they wallow around in mediocrity much longer. If they go back to the 2005/2006 let's just make sure we're all nice guys who get along no matter how much we lose ways, then they will lose fans and money. The way to make money in Chicago sports is to win. Wrigley didn't become the place it is today until after 1998, and it didn't become the year-in-year-out sellout until 2003 when fans were given the taste of what could be. Nice guy teams and PR strategies don't sell tickets. Winning does. Wow you're way out of bounds playing the race card there. Being turned off by Bradley's antics doesn't make a fan a racist. It's not his skin color that's creating this animosity. I'm turned off my his antics as well. But I'm not going to stop being a Cubs fan because he's a around? Would you? If I do, am I a racist? Until now the only person who thought race had anything to do with this ugly mess was Bradley himself. I guess we can add your name now too. Well you're both way wrong. If you'd really stop supporting the Cubs because of Milton Bradley being on the team; yeah, you probably are.

I don't care about Bradley's anger issues. I don't care that he's a jerk. Bring him back anyway.

LOL I agree with everything you wrote. The problem is alot of those people buy tickets, and the last thing Ricketts will want is those people booing Milton Bradley every game. Plus they will be flooding sports radio with dumb comments about the subject as well. This is just another reason why there's probably no chance Bradley is back. I bet the last thing he wants is people booing the whole team because they suck because they ruined their financial situation even more.

Safe bet is going a little far, but that would be possible. Still ask your self who pitches in those other 10-16 starts? What does it do to your bullpen when Harden leaves the game in the 3rd or 4th inning? Stop just looking at Harden numbers and thinking would be worth it, and consider what it does to your team. Who pitches in those other 10-16 starts? Hm. Dunno. But they're going to pitch in all 30+ now.

120+ innings is a safe bet for Harden. 7.5 mil is a reasonable price for that.

Definitely equally plausible to Derrek Lee having been named the team captain without me being aware of it. Definitely.

This is just getting embarrassing.

I don't think there is anything that Hendry could do to draw criticism from CF26.

God I'm angry.

ummm yes it does because how do you know that Cashner isn't a terrible pitcher. How do you know he's a good pitcher by just looking at the numbers. Its not like samardijza didnt post decent numbers. Cashner's numbers are eye poppin. Hey you answered your own question! That's how I know he isn't terrible.

Heh, "a reliever" was not the first thing that came to my mind when you compared Cashner to a terrible pitcher; being terrible was. Me not having seen him pitch definitely has nothing to do with that.