jersey cubs fan

You know he wouldn't? What crystal ball do you use? I know he won't because baseball lineups aren't machines. They can't be finely tuned. They will win or lose based on the players on the field.

guaranteed american in the finals. i need to see andy roddick win a wimbledon championship. Huh? You are guaranteeing Roddick wins?

Once again, show me ANY team that has won the WS that wasn't talented. This is just a ridiculous stance to take. "Oh, Brenly had a good team, so that's why he won". :roll: But your stance is they won because he personally figured out a way to maximize their scoring chances. Why did they stop maximizing a couple years later?

If he's so good, why has he managed one team for four years? He won a WS and was fired 2.5 years later, and hasn't gotten a job sense despite all sorts of turnover. If he is capable of making offenses click at a better rate than other managers, why hasn't anybody seen fit to give him a job in the 5 offseasons since he was canned? He's just a guy who held the title. He's not a guru. He will not make an offense better. He will not maximize scoring opportunities or create a well oiled finely tuned machine.

It's the economy stupid. Sorry, not calling you stupid, just using the quote. There have only been 4 deals signed that average over $6m per year. The NHL did reasonably well this year, but a lot of that was on the back of a resurgent sleeping giant in Chicago, and a star filled finals matchup. The economy may have stabilized, but this is the first offseason since the crap hit the fan. It's quite possible Havlat won't get nearly the deal he thought he could get in free agency, and it's quite possible he could prefer to wait until next year in hopes of getting a bigger deal in what would hopefully be a better economic environment. Take $7m right now to return to Chicago, then try and get a 4-5 year deal between $6-7m next year. How many teams want to risk longterm big money right now for a guy who has one healthy season under his belt? If he plays on a 1 year deal, he could make more in 2009/2010 than if he signed longterm, and if he stays healthy again, his price will go up next year.

Id say Im more upset about Soriano than Fukudome. Fukudome is just repeating last year. Soriano has always been either really hot or really cold, but I dont believe hes ever been this cold for this long before. Yeah, we were supposed to get our Summer hot streak from him by now. Just hasn't happened this year. We were supposed to get decent production out of him for the first 4-5 years of the contract. He's 33, in just his 3rd year. I don't even want to think about him at 36, 37....

According to the site I linked earlier, they are currently $10m under.

I have no idea. Maybe that's the time that he'll be in the US? I think he still lives in Japan and will visit then or something. Make Fukudome spring for the flight change fee and be done with it.

I know they won't lose them next yr, but I am talking in a couple of yrs. And I agree I think Sharp/Buff (I would hate to lose either) are definately expandable if it means keeping Toews and Kane. Besides I think ultimately, Aliu and Beach could essentially replace both them in a yr or so (if they are banned from hockey). If they can keep those guys next year, they can keep them longer term. I think Toews is going to get a long term deal. Kane may only get something like a 3-year deal, same with Keith. But I don't see the point in being worried about that now. There's no way in knowing where the cap will be in 4 years, and they only have Hossa and Campbell signed that long. One thing is certain, it won't be the same team. They have some trade bait, and they have some guys that would be nice to move.

Because in Basball, you fail far more then you succeed. If you at least have productive outs, where you are hitting the ball to the right side to move the runner to third with a man on second and no outs, you're chances of scoring have increased by giving an out for a base. All the next guy has to do is out the ball in play, rather to HAVE TO get a hit to score that run. The Cubs have been so bad in this area and it's costs them a lot of wins because of the inibility to play fundamental baseball. Brenly is all about fundamental baseball, which, IMO, translates to winning baseball. Actually no, the guy doesn't just have to put the ball in a play. A pop up on the infield is worthless. A shallow fly is worthless. A line drive out is worthlees, a hard hit grounder is worthless. And of course there is no guarantee that guy will even put the ball in play. People talking about moving runners over and putting the ball in play like once you decide to do that it's a guaranteed success. It's not. It fails, a lot, and in the meantime, you've taken the bat out of one guy's hands and made the pitchers job easier by allowing him to get an out with just one pitch thrown.

Why does it have to be in Philly in mid-July?

What the heck is well balanced and efficient? And how many dimensions does a manager have? Does he also dabble in football? These are all just words, and they didn't "shoot down" anything. Why couldn't Brenly's brilliant strategy figure out how not to suck a few years later? Or is that just an efficient way of getting a higher draft pick and all part of the plan?

Philly got the waterboy back, Brian (Bobby) Boucher

So be it. I can live with Huet for now.

http://www.nhlnumbers.com/overview.php?team=CHI&season=0910 One name that is rarely discussed is Sharp, who I think is probably not long for this team. I think Hossa replaces Sharp more than he replaces anybody else. His $4.1 million cap hit the next three years is replacable. I'd much rather see him moved in the next year or two than lose somebody like Versteeg. And I wouldn't dismiss the idea of trading Buff either, and his $3m hit the next 2 years. The $7.1m combined for Sharp and Buff in 2010 should allow them to keep whoever they want. I would love to see them trade Huet and resign Khabi for 2 years, and Havlat for one. Then next year deal Sharp and Buff and bring back all the younger stars. But I can live with Huet for another few years.

If your problem is with Hendry re-signing Bell next year, I can't argue either way there. I can't predict what Hendry will do. I can say that making this trade upgrades our team in an area of weakness now, though, and I'm in favor of upgrading the team - at a reasonable cost. A pitcher who wasn't a top 30 prospect in a (then) bad system who is currently pitching well above his head and is likely to regress sooner than later is a reasonable cost for a very good reliever. And what are the chances that Wells keeps up this performance all year and into future seasons? He could, but his stuff and the expectations surrounding him entering this season don't favor him continuing to be a dominant starter. I'm not saying don't trade him, I'm saying don't trade him for another freaking reliever. And I don't know what there is to say about a potential resigning. He's not free agent eligible, and Hendry is not going to non-tender him. He'll get a deal. If Wells' value is higher than Heath Bell, then I'm all for getting more for him. I just doubt his value has skyrocketed from Mitch Atkins level to worth a significant value. At worst if Hendry tenders him and he returns, he is a reliever who is more productive than Gregg at a slightly cheaper price. And Gregg is gone after the year as well. I don't care what his 1 for 1 value is, don't trade him for a reliever. Include him in a package for somebody that will make a difference. A team that cannot score runs needs bats, not an 8th reliever.

E.J. Hradek (3:20 p.m. ET): I'm hearing the Edmonton Oilers are hot and heavy for Nikolai Khabibulin. Stay tuned

So can you confirm that the cap hit is the average, $5.2m, and not whatever he is making in that year? Because if so, that is a good deal for both sides. Front loaded deals make sense for teams that can afford them, and the Blackhawks clearly can. Hossa taking up $5.2m of your space is better than Havlat taking $6.5m.

Baseball offenses are not well oiled machines. They are a collection of individuals putting up individual performances that turn into a range of bad, mediocre decent and good team totals. A manager does not make that happen.

What's the salary structure likely to be with Toews, Kane, Bolland, Hossa, Keith and Seabrook next year? It seems to me Huet and Campbell have to be on the block.

If your problem is with Hendry re-signing Bell next year, I can't argue either way there. I can't predict what Hendry will do. I can say that making this trade upgrades our team in an area of weakness now, though, and I'm in favor of upgrading the team - at a reasonable cost. A pitcher who wasn't a top 30 prospect in a (then) bad system who is currently pitching well above his head and is likely to regress sooner than later is a reasonable cost for a very good reliever. And what are the chances that Wells keeps up this performance all year and into future seasons? He could, but his stuff and the expectations surrounding him entering this season don't favor him continuing to be a dominant starter. I'm not saying don't trade him, I'm saying don't trade him for another freaking reliever. And I don't know what there is to say about a potential resigning. He's not free agent eligible, and Hendry is not going to non-tender him. He'll get a deal.

Has to be a Bowman related move. I don't see the point. Hopefully he's not making anything.

Yup, exactly. The key here is "maximizing scoring chances", not just bunting and playing small ball because it's your "philosophy". Maximizing scoring chances is just meaningless words. What the heck does it even mean? It's called "making things happen" which is what managers do to make themselves look involved and important. Conventional wisdom does not criticize a manager for making things happen, if a sac bunt attempt fail, he's still congratulated for trying it.

I haven't read the whole thread, but for my part, the point is that we DON'T have that on the Cubs, so expecting some grand result just because we switch to Brenly is highly unrealistic. Give me the equivalent of Schill/Johnson in the rotation, and Gonzo OPSing in the stratosphere? Take your pick of managers, we're going to win, unless the rest of the roster is completely laughable. So why didn't we win in 2003 with Sosa and Prior/Wood? Sorry, but that's just a really easy question to ask given your logic here. Because the AZ guys stayed healthy all year and were better.

My guess is, because they are desperate. That's my guess. If they were a game back and hitting okay as a team, I think Ramirez would not be coming back until July 16. I think the primary motivation is the problem with the rest of the team, not that Ramirez is as healthy as he is going to get, or on target with expected return dates or 100% ready. They were talking about "around" the ASB, which is normally a euphemism for after the ASB. Now it's a full week before the break? Ramirez was quoted last week saying something like "I don't know where Lou got that, I have no idea when I'll return". Now suddenly he's definitely coming back Monday? Sounds strange to me. Looks like a rush job.