jersey cubs fan

Why does it matter? No sense throwing Lilly out there and taking a chance of something bad happening. Let the kids play the rest of the year It seems as though they are auditioning guys for the 5th rotation spot to see if its worth re signing Harden in the off season. While Harden is beter than Marshall, Gorzolanny, and certainly Shark, is he really worth the 10-11 mil hed probably end up getting? Yes. Especially if it's a one year deal. And even more especially when you consider the fact that you don't have to give up those guys in order to keep Harden. It's not an either or situation. It's Harden + plus those backup options, or just a bunch of backup options.

Chicago is a 2.5 point favorite right now. I think I'd have to give the points. But it sure would be nice if Olsen stopped sucking royally, kept his feet and held onto the ball this week. Cutler's INTs and Forte's lack of yardage have gotten the headlines, but nobody has talked about how disappointing Olsen has been this year after all the hype that he would be the leading receiver.

Well that's mighty kind of you, I hope he appreciates the opportunity.

The results were positive but in my first look at Colvin, and in my completely untrained eye, he looks to have a long loopy swing that requires a lot of effort to make relatively minimal impact on contact.

Stop reading Rick Reilly.

It's saying the video is no longer available. I just watched it off the link

The Reds owe the Cubs a favor for drafting and trading Josh Hamilton. Time to call that favor in. :D If Dusty is still around that might not be a bad idea. Milton and Dusty would be a match made in heaven. The Cubs apparently were interested in signing Milton prior to the 2006 season and Dusty and Milton met and apparently that didn't go well. If they eat much of Milton's contract, and acquire somebody else to fill an OF spot and/or middle infield, I don't see anyway they bring Harden back. I think they think they can get by with the current staff minus Harden.

Zambrano is an outlier with pitcher hitting. I think the point would not be to try and pinpoint hitter contributions to the decimal point in value for everyone, but to recognize that Zambrano definitely adds value with the bat. A couple years ago he was worth a couple million dollars for his hitting compared to other position players, so I think you definitely have to account for his hitting when getting an accurate picture of his value. That was last year and it was a completely flukey year that was twice as good as his normal hitting. You can account for his hitting, but it has to be extremely small.

If you ask me it's really not worth noting that he was really good for 10-15 games.

Because their fans aren't as dumb as ours? people are really trying to blame the fans for this? I'd probably put it at something like 50% Bradley's fault, about 30% the media's, and about 20% the fans. That's really really stupid

Because their fans aren't as dumb as ours? people are really trying to blame the fans for this?

played well for a team nobody gives a damn about

Pittsburgh, Indy, Arizona and New Orleans were among the least effective rushing teams last year. It's not nearly as vital as people like to say. Yes, you'd like to have that weapon, and yes you'd like to see significant improvements, but it won't be the determining factor in how this season goes.

I'm sorry that I didn't recognize that I needed to spell it out, but in saying top of the order bat, I was emphasizing the degree to which said individual gets on base. Again, you look at the Cubs lineup, and one glaring issue this year with the lineup, that is far different from the league average, is a top of the order bat that gets on base. To not acquire a top of the order bat would be failing to maximize the team's potential to succeed next year. Top of the order bats don't necessarily get on base at a high rate. People put bats at the top of the order because they are fast or make lots of contact. Lee and Ramirez get on base a lot, but I don't think anybody would call them top of the order bats. Instead of spellling it out, what you have done is make something overly complicated. Say they need a guy with high OBP. You are right, I should've qualified in the initial post that we need a top of the order bat with a high enough OBP, but as to the rest of the response, you are making my point for me. Again, what I've emphasized in the last two posts is that you can't simply say OBP in of itself isn't enough to fill the Cubs need because the Cubs need someone at the top of the order. As you note in your example (Lee/Ramirez), simply having a high OBP isn't enough to fill said role, but you oddly limit the response to saying OBP is all we need (last sentence). In that respect, you are making it overly simplistic. Let's take an example to illustrate the point. I think you've acknowledged that we need something ahead of the middle of the order bats. Let's leave that open for now. There's a current smattering of "Let's get Akinori Iwamura" out there on other Cubs sites, with the idea being for him to leadoff. People will point to his capable enough OBP and his past experience leading off (although his OBP leading off was never that good ... .344 if I recall correctly). Is he passable? Sure ... but this is only slightly better than Theriot level passable as a top of the order bat. I wouldn't want Iwamura at the top of the order unless we're in dire circumstances ... like ... this year. He strikes out too much for my tastes at the top of the lineup, and he lifts the ball too much (leaving aside his mediocre defense and his age for now). Making things more complicated shouldn't be a negative in this situation. We need more than simply a high OBP ahead of the middle of the lineup bats. Now ... if you are okay with an Iwamura at the top of the order and find it alright ... then fine, I'm making it more complicated, and I think you are making it too simplistic, and we can leave it at that. You are not making any sense.

Well then I guess that takes Oakland out of the mix, unless Beane does envision a buy low sell high opportunity.

I'm sorry that I didn't recognize that I needed to spell it out, but in saying top of the order bat, I was emphasizing the degree to which said individual gets on base. Again, you look at the Cubs lineup, and one glaring issue this year with the lineup, that is far different from the league average, is a top of the order bat that gets on base. To not acquire a top of the order bat would be failing to maximize the team's potential to succeed next year. Top of the order bats don't necessarily get on base at a high rate. People put bats at the top of the order because they are fast or make lots of contact. Lee and Ramirez get on base a lot, but I don't think anybody would call them top of the order bats. Instead of spellling it out, what you have done is make something overly complicated. Say they need a guy with high OBP.

They need bats, regardless if they fit into somebody's preconceived notion about what a top of the order bat is.

What does that mean? And why would the Cubs makes matters worse by spending even more money to get even less production? If you are trading Bradley and picking up the tab, you have to get quality back. If you are getting nothing back, you have to get the other team to pay the salary. You can't get crap back + pay more money. Except your not getting less production in Rowand, at least this yr anyways. the 2009 numbers (.265/.320/.432/.752 .v. .257/.378/.397/.775) suggests that they have been virtual equals in terms of production. Bradley has been a better OBP guy whereas Rowand shows more pop. I'm not saying this would be a great move or anything, but seeing as the Cubs are going to be limited in what they can do with Bradley, this could just a move they consider. As for the money aspects, I think the Giants would have to kick in some money for this to work. Given the fact that OBP is more valuable than SLG, and Bradley has a larger OBP advantage compared to Rowand's SLG advantage, no they are not virtually equal. Bradley is disappointing. Rowand sucks.

Oakland works since nobody cares about anything there and he won't be talking to any press. I was mainly looking at it from the angle that he had already played there and they wouldn't want to deal with his [expletive] again, but Beane will probably look at it like it's essentially a free walk-machine, since we're going to eat 80 percent of his contract, anyway. I don't know any details of his time there, but I believe that was the season he was traded to SD for a halfway decent arm. Oakland seems to like bringing guys back there, unless I'm just making that up and Giambi is the only one. I'd bet Beane could look at a chance to get Bradley hitting for half a season and maybe spin him for something more than he dealt away.

Oakland works since nobody cares about anything there and he won't be talking to any press.

What does that mean? And why would the Cubs makes matters worse by spending even more money to get even less production? If you are trading Bradley and picking up the tab, you have to get quality back. If you are getting nothing back, you have to get the other team to pay the salary. You can't get crap back + pay more money.

Since when is 6'4" a bit short for a QB?

A one year contract with him might be one of the only options, but he might be signing his last contract this offseason, and I'd bet would be looking for 2-3 years, which I'd have little to no interest in given his age (37). A 1-year deal means you have to maximize cash, which could be very difficult for this team to pull-off.

I would like this quite a bit, but unless somebody will take Milton's salary, we probably can't afford $10 million. I think the Cubs have enough overpaid 30-something outfielders on the team.

What the hell does "man up" have to do with anything?