jersey cubs fan

Dempster was guaranteed a starting spot, so was Randy Wells, Ryan Theriot (either SS or 2B), Fukudome, Byrd, Lilly, Marmol etc. I just don't see the point of rolling heads. Sit them a little more frequently, sure. Move them around in the order, fine. But that's not really head rolling. And this team isn't going anywhere if Lee and Ramirez aren't performing, so them losing their jobs doesn't solve anything, it just makes their lack of production more related to a lack of a job. This isn't a good baseball team. If things were going better, they might be .500. The smart money sure didn't see them winning many more than half their games. It may not look the way we thought it would look, but in the ender maybe we're seeing this team perform to the level they were expected to perform, which is not well.

I've got an idea. Spend 300M to build a new stadium in an inconvenient location that will undoubtedly lower the appeal of the team to the common fan, and thus worsen the franchise as a whole. Wow. I guess you're saying that all the Cub fans that come out in droves to see the Cubs play on the road are just there because of Wrigley? Listen, I understand what you are saying. And I understand that Wrigley does make them some money. However, my personal opinion is that Wrigley has served it's purpose. Wrigley served the purpose of converting the casual baseball fan who came out to see a game into a Cub fan. The Cubs have one of the largest fan bases in all of baseball and it has nothing to do with today's Wrigley field. If you build it, they will come. The fact is that Wrigley will inevitably limit the revenue opportunities for this franchise. The fewer advertising opportunities and activies available at the ballpark will simply inflate ticket prices, and people will stop coming anyway. Wrigley's days are almost over. It's time for the organization to pre-emptively begin the search for a new location. It'll be cheaper than waiting for fans to stop coming because of high ticket prices and the city or contractors hold them hostage for an overly-ridiculous price. I'm not sure how it would be cheaper. At a minimum you are probably talking about a $600,000,000 investment. And when you want to build a new stadium, there are just as many hurdles to deal with city/state officials, not to mention the corrupt entities that would actually build it. You aren't getting public money for such a project anytime soon. And in the end, you might end up in some crappy suburban location that's convenient for the handful of people who live near it, but absolutely nobody else.

If this were some kind of powerful ballclub that should be winning 95 games this year, I might agree with your sense of urgency. However, they suck, and any decision that is made should be made with the future as the primary concern. If Ricketts is poised to hire a new president and/or president/GM type, then by all means start the head rolling. But if all they are going to do is give Hendry another coaching move to try and right the ship, then I say, take your time. Granted, if it were me I would have canned Hendry on Day 1. But it is completely rational and acceptable for Ricketts to take time to figure out how his business is being run, and more importantly, exactly how it's being run poorly, so he can make an informed decision on the next man to take power.

But they didn't make the super bowl, so how could that be the case? The point is it's a stupid point to make, since just last year more than one team saved their coach's job by winning, most notably Childress. And it's been done many many times.

He absolutely does come extremely close to saying that. The first thing he does is compare it to the Cowboys and Wade Phillips being a super bowl or bust team every year, and says that is what Lovie is up against. That is why I said he insinuates. But thanks for trying to read.

Well thanks for clearing that up.

Me likey

That's what the DirecTV website showed me as well. When I checked this morning I could have sworn I saw the Sox on CSN. But now my guide says it's the Cubs. Did they change it for Castro?

I'm caught between a rock and a hard place with Soto no longer in the 8 hole. If he's going to hit so low anyway, why not let him and his patience hit 8 and give Castro a better chance to see some pitches.

September callup would mean no risk of burning an option. July/August callup would keep that risk to a minimum. Early May callup means we've got an entire season of worrying what Lou will do with him. Early May callup after getting swept by the Pirates moving well under .500 and 5 games out of 1st puts a lot of expectation on him to be the savior. If he's handled properly, though, he could help turn this team around if he hits well. My expectations aren't real high for this year, but if he's ready to contribute – which, while opinions are split on whether he should have been called up, most seem to feel he can produce at this level – then this speeds up his development. I agree there's risk involved in this move, but I don't agree with assuming awful handling any more than I agree with assuming great handling. The move in and of itself is fine to me. Now it's important that Lou uses Starlin well. We'll have to wait and see if he does, though. Well I just think that's naive on your part. The Cubs suck at this. Why wouldn't you assume poor handling?

About a season and a half really.

I'd rather some folks miss some sarcasm on occasion than have to read the green font. I'd rather some folks miss some sarcasm if only for the entertainment value, let alone not having to kill my eyes.

September callup would mean no risk of burning an option. July/August callup would keep that risk to a minimum. Early May callup means we've got an entire season of worrying what Lou will do with him. Early May callup after getting swept by the Pirates moving well under .500 and 5 games out of 1st puts a lot of expectation on him to be the savior.

http://blogs.dailyherald.com/node/4014

it decreases every day he's down though. part of the issue is him not being settled into an everyday role by the time his options are up. 3 years is a long time. If Castro doesn't develop to the point that they want to send him down in 2014, then 1) they probably wouldn't have a problem getting him through waivers, and 2) he isn't going to pan out to make the fretting over the option worthwhile. Or he tore his ACL or robbed a bank or something. It wouldn't take much for it to become an issue. Send him down sometime this year. Maybe he's banged up a little next season and suddenly it's 2012, he's burned 2 options and it's now or never time, and he's only 22 years old.

it decreases every day he's down though. part of the issue is him not being settled into an everyday role by the time his options are up.

Oh...maybe he was... Yes, that was my point. A week or so ago it was reported to be imminent and people scoffed at the idea. I don't get the point in criticizing people for fearing another reported potential move just because it's "only Sullivan speculating". It was speculated that Zambrano could go to the pen but considered unthinkable, until it actually happened.

No, you are wrong. I refuted his point that they aren't jeopardizing him just by calling him up. My point is just calling him up exposes him to the potential for mishandling. That's where it begins. The caveat that as long as he gets playing time is meaningless. Sure, if they handle it great it's not a problem, but the point is the de facto position with the Cubs is almost always handling things poorly, thus bringing him here in the first place is placing his development in jeopardy. It's not ruining him, it's jeopardy.

It's still a risk. If he spends a few months sitting too frequently, then gets sent down, burning an option, then that puts a little more urgency into the situation. The move in and of itself won't hurt his development, though. It's the handling of him after the move that could. Right. Promoting him in and of itself isn't necessarily detrimental to his development. I mean, I don't even understand why Gooney had to point out it would be detrimental if he didn't get regular playing time when I put that caveat clear as the day in the post he quoted. Because the jeopardy is they are exposing him to Lou. The problems won't kick in until the next step happens, but that's what everybody has been saying all along. Caveat or not, that's where it all hinges, which is why it's risky.

It's still a risk. If he spends a few months sitting too frequently, then gets sent down, burning an option, then that puts a little more urgency into the situation. The move in and of itself won't hurt his development, though. It's the handling of him after the move that could. Which is where the jeopardizing comes into play and where most of the concern has been placed.

Who was it that reported Castro's promotion was imminent?

It's still a risk. If he spends a few months sitting too frequently, then gets sent down, burning an option, then that puts a little more urgency into the situation.

Isn't that pretty common for highly-touted rookies when first called up? Take some pressure off before their home debut. Yes, but this is the Cubs we are talking about here. I think the Cubs have tried to do that quite often.

http://www.thejazzyjew.com/realshiznit/_Media/lawrence_taylor_hall.jpg Are you really 19? http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_qcWjCO8idGo/SgC41l6phCI/AAAAAAAAUDM/V9tWpPW8MKE/s400/Jennifer_Jason_Leigh_Fast_Times_at_Ridgemont_High_4.jpg Yeah, yeah I'm really 19.

forecast looks pretty decent until late night.