jersey cubs fan

In the end it may just make the most sense to work Colvin into a platoon situation with Soriano and when push comes to shove just release Soriano in a year or two. Given the timing of his most recent slump I'm not sure you can trade him now without eating the majority of the money, which is just kind of pointless.

So we're gonna ignore all context here that he was a closer in college being transitioned into a reliever. You really think it's a fair comparison to count inning totals for 3+ seasons (that being a month and a half after being drafted, a full season as a starter, 1/3 a season as a starter, 2/3 of a season as a starter, and 1 start as a starter) This isn't the first time you've claimed he's a 4-5 inning pitcher as a starter. This still doesn't make it accurate. He was averaging just over 6 innings as a starter just last year before being moved to the pen. I'm not ignoring any context. The fact that he had to transition from a reliever in college was, and remains, an obstacle. The fact that he's never shown an ability to be an effective starter over even a moderate amount of time is a problem. It was never a safe bet that he would successfully transition to starter in the first place, but now that he already had that cut short in 2010 due to perceived bullpen needs and in 2011 due to injury, and likely again in 2012 due to rehab, the obstacles are bigger than ever.

Most people would rank center about even with left guard in terms of importance. They make some line calls, but what is most important is a lineman's ability to block, and you need it most at LT, RT and RG. You don't want your best lineman to be the center, unless maybe he's an all-time great at the position (which Kreutz is not).

Again, what has all that respect and leadership gotten them? An offensive that regularly ranks near the bottom of the league due in large part to a bad offensive line. If he was the de facto leader of a top notch line that consistently got the job done, you probably want to bring him back just to not rock the boat. But they suck, and he's part of the reason why.

The odds are very heavily in favor of that being the case. He's 24 years old and has one 100 inning season under his belt. He's never shown any inclination that he can handle a 30/200 type season. What inclination has he shown that he can't? When it comes to being a starting pitcher at the major league level, the onus is on the player to prove he can do it, not the skeptic who is pointing out his flaws. But to answer your question, he's got less than 250 innings pitched in 3+ seasons of professional baseball. He's already been hurt without much of a workload. When working as a starter he's basically been a 4-5 inning guy. The Cubs themselves have already strongly hinted that when he returns it will be out of the bullpen. He's already going to be 25 before this season ends and he'll be lucky to work back up to a 100 inning workload by next season. By the time 2013 comes around, he'll have very little track record as a reliable starter.

Maybe. Colvin had a big June in AAA but overall he's been awful and he's had a terrible July. I do think he should be able to give Soriano a run for his money the next three years, but it's not a sure thing.

The odds are very heavily in favor of that being the case. He's 24 years old and has one 100 inning season under his belt. He's never shown any inclination that he can handle a 30/200 type season.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/site/newspaper/sports/ct-spt-0720-haugh-olin-kreutz-bears-c20110720,0,60639.column I am getting sick of all these nonsensical stories about how the Bears absolutely must pay up for Kreutz or risk sabotaging their season. The guy has been overpaid for a while now. He's mediocre at best. The fact that he was their best lineman in the middle part of the last decade is both pathetic (your center is the least important position) and meangingless. The Bears could replace his effectiveness in a heart beat probably at a lower cost. Sure, for stability's sake you probably want him back, but there's no reason to go crazy about it. He's not the difference on the line. It's not like he was able to prevent them from being terrible in recent years. The smartest move would probably be to find a cheap replacement and spend money on a better guard. What does Kreutz have on the Chicago media? Does he threaten them?

They haven't sucked as bad as everyone else, but it was always a mistake to pencil in at least Wood as a dominant back of the bullpen guy. He was a fun acquisition for nostalgic reasons but not all that effective. It was also pretty dumb to lock-up Marmol longterm.

Mike Quade is bad.

Gillick would replace Kenney? Or would a new role be established for him? Removing Crane Kenney would be a positive step, even if we can't rid ourselves of Hendry. Replacing Kenney but not Jim Hendry would be absolutely pointless and would do nothing to improve the Cubs chances on the field. A baseball guy isn't going to be a better businessman than Kenney, and a baseball guy who wants Jim Hendry to run this team isn't going to make a lick of difference.

very confusing title.

Stamkos resigned with Tampa for 5 years with a cap hit around 7.4m. 5 years is an interesting number, considering the guy is 21 years old. He should be a huge target in a few seasons, and if Tampa doesn't start drumming up more interest with a successful run they would have to trade him before that time comes around.

Except they weren't producing good drafts. You don't think Wilken's produced good drafts? Really? Where did these good prospects we have in our system come from? What good prospects? Yes, it's been 5 years and the Cubs have a mediocre system. 5 years of good drafts would have produced a much better system by now.

The semantic argument is there, however, because if you word it that Josh Hamilton was drafted by the Cubs, then people get all up in arms that we didn't keep him. The fact is, we never had the opportunity to keep Hamilton because we didn't draft him, the Reds did in a previously agreed upon deal. However you want to word the semantics it doesn't change that the Cubs didn't possess Hamilton and there was no real reason to draft him in the first place. Never had the opportunity? Didn't draft him? Didn't possess him and there was no real reason to draft him? For somebody trying to justify the use of semantics you are doing a terrible job at arguing your point.

Rollercoaster? I consider those examples speed bumps on the way to hell. It's that kiddie rollar coaster where you just go around in circles and occasionally go up a 1 foot incline while your child cries to get off and you lose your wallet while the kid in front of you pukes on your shoes. Then it gets stuck.

He was an everyday player at the top of the lineup when he sucked.

Except they weren't producing good drafts.

I don't get the Barney hate. Sure I love to see more OBP, maybe some pop but he's making the league minimum, plays good defense and hits .300 I would love to get more production out of 2B but with so many other glaring issues and aging/high priced turds with this club I'm not going to hate this kid. how many times has he hit .300 during the course of a minor or major league season? hint: the answer is not greater than zero. but what SSR was not "hating" barney. utility infielders have value. people hated theriot and wanted him to go away; nobody is sying that we should get barney off the team and replace him with whoever is lying around. I think many (of the most vocal) people here are overcritical of Barney, especially in his rookie season. However, besides his defense (which is already pretty good) the only way he will really be useful as a starter is to be a good on-base guy. If he can't do that he's probably role player. Who are these most vocal people? The thing I've heard the most is essentially they don't want the Cubs to turn Barney into Theriot 2.0. That is, don't hand the guy a starting job based on a short period of competence and then get yourself committed to overpaying him because he's some scrappy fan favorite. Barney is perfectly fine as a role player, just like Theriot was perfectly fine as a role player. Don't count on him to be a dependable top of the order starter at 2B in the future. Do view him as a useful asset.

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market. I think it's a mistake to assume Soriano won't get any worse going forward.

And once in a generation pitchers fail often enough that taking the sure thing college bat was still the better choice.

Hiring Dusty is an easy number 1 in my book. It was a predictable disaster that pretty much ended exactly how one would think and resulted in a lot bad things that happened along the way. And a personal nuisance of mine is drafting Prior over Teixeira. I think Hendry was in charge of the draft back then, when he was director of player development or whatever that title was. Pitchers are so much more volatile than hitters. Can't miss stud college bats are must drafts. And if you are going to adopt essentially a "rub some dirt on it" mentality to the health of your young arms, it's a no-brainer. Regardless, handing those arms over to Dusty was a travesty.

Nobody has to wonder that. It's been the built in excuse for everybody in the system. The Cubs did not lack for resources allocated to the system. Nobody was handcuffed. If they can only do their job when they have the biggest budget, that is not a good thing.

Quade having a dust up with Dempster and then going off on the umpires the way he did, along with guys like Kerry Wood following suit makes me think things won't be so quiet for very long.

A QB can survive and thrive while getting knocked around if he has top end talent at WR.