jersey cubs fan

Not at all unpredictable, that a promising young arm would be lost because the Cubs have to find space for overpaid veteran relievers with no roster flexibility. It's a real shame they trade Marquis for an immovable object. Patton is a near 25 year old who spent last year in High A. He supposedly has good stuff and has had a strong spring, but let's not go overboard here. The odds of getting decent production out of Patton aren't so different than Vizcaino having a decent year. And Gaudin is a better option than Patton, without question. I'm not going overboard. He's a promising young arm. I never said he was a super star in waiting. I hate guaranteed big money contracts for marginal relievers. Vizcaino and Gaudin don't have track records of sustained success worthy of guaranteed spots. But their contracts virtually guarantee they will keep their jobs. Guys who aren't good enough to make rotations and aren't good enough to be top-end relievers, just don't have the consistent success to justify guaranteeing jobs. They sucked last year and suck now. There's no telling when or even if they will improve.

Bear football philosophy has been unplayable for 20 years. Maybe these rule changes will force them to adapt. During the last 5 years, don't the Bears have the third or fourth-best winning percentage only behind NE, Indy, and the Giants? Pit, Philly and Dallas have more wins during that time as well, and they are tied with Carolina. Multiple teams are right on their tail.

There's definitely some other positions that the Jets could fill here, but I'm going to continue the offensive skill position trend in the draft, selecting Donald Brown, RB UConn. Thomas Jones has been a nice RB, but he'll turn 31 before the season starts and has already carried the ball over 2200 times in his career. Very few RB have carried more and remained effective. It may be coincidence, but prior to 2008, Jones had his best season the year the Bears drafted Cedric Benson to take his job. Perhaps they can get one last solid season out of him with Brown pushing him and preparing to be the next solid cost effective back for 2010-2012.

Not at all unpredictable, that a promising young arm would be lost because the Cubs have to find space for overpaid veteran relievers with no roster flexibility. It's a real shame they trade Marquis for an immovable object. Actually, jersey the way I look at it is that the Cubs are prolly going to lose two "promising young arms" because of Gaudin and Viz. Unless Guzman gets mysteriously injured at the end of spring training, the Cubs would lose both Patton and Guzman, and that proposition sickens me, because both Gooz and Patton have higher upsides and future with the Cubs that Gaudin and Viz doesn't. Gregg Marmol Heilman Cotts Gaudin / Vizcaino Guzman Patton If one of Gaudin & Vizcaino exits the picture somehow, there should be room for both Guzman and Patton. I have my doubts that they'd manage to get rid of either.

Swinging early in a couple at bats hardly qualifies as openly defying your manager by refusing to be patient. Patience can only be measured over time, 5 pitches in 3 at-bats is something that happens to everybody. Maybe Lou overreacted to it. I'm not sure as I don't know exactly what was said. But I'm pretty sure a story at the time was that after Fox had swung at the first 3 pitches he saw and made 2 outs that by the 3rd at-bat Lou had him taking until he got a strike and Fox swung at the first strike he saw. Lou immediately pulled him from the game and then the Cubs announced they were going to ship him out before the next game. Fox wasn't going to get many opportunities. He had to implement Lou's suggestion immediately, and instead he went and did the exact opposite. Obviously the Cubs felt strongly about it as they have completely barred him since then when it didn't make sense to not bring him up. Their dislike for him might be getting a little bit less now though with the recent quotes from Piniella that he is getting closer to being a major league ballplayer. There's a perfectly good reason not to callup/use a guy who is essentially a potential DH. This team stresses defensive flexibility above everything else when it comes to their role players. He has no chance of being a Cub.

Bathroom reading. http://www.ratemyeverything.net/image/2239/0/Laptop_%2B_Bathroom_%3D_workaholic.ashx

Swinging early in a couple at bats hardly qualifies as openly defying your manager by refusing to be patient. Patience can only be measured over time, 5 pitches in 3 at-bats is something that happens to everybody.

there's so much funny about this. he's better than player a, unless he hits first, in which case player a is better than he is. I also love that they declare him to be a 20/20 player the "last few years," nevermind that he hit 33 home runs in 2007 and 29 and 2008 in the two shortest seasons of his career. And didn't actually steal 20 bases.

Disappointing words from Bruce Miles Not at all unpredictable, that a promising young arm would be lost because the Cubs have to find space for overpaid veteran relievers with no roster flexibility. It's a real shame they trade Marquis for an immovable object.

Bear football philosophy has been unplayable for 20 years. Maybe these rule changes will force them to adapt. Seriously, an offensive philosophy that relies on special teams to score your points is a bad philosophy. The Bears should be able to run an offense that can sustain 80-yard drives to score points. This special teams stuff wasn't a rule the past couple years, and the Bears still mediocred themselves all over the field.

wrong. some players don't stop developing until their late 20s. some guys stop developing well before then. just because the average player peaks around age 27-28 doesn't mean that every player follows the same development curve. do you want me to go back to his 2005 season, when he hit very well in iowa, was called up to the big club and hit very well there? should i quote my bp 2006 and ba 2006 handbook that say cedeno was ready to contribute at the big league level? ah right, so despite the arguments that i've laid out for why i didn't think cedeno would be a good player, i just have a "blind spot of hatred" for him. it can't be that someone actually has well-founded reasons to disagree with your opinion, can it? their opinion has to be irrational and wrong, while yours is well thought-out and correct. Seriously, your reasons don't seem very well thought out or logical. He was rushed to the majors and had a bad year, and that is enough reason for you to believe he can never justify a job in the majors. I was never a fan of Ronny's. I never understood the rush to roster him or the infatuation with his tools. But he was treated exactly how you shouldn't treat a raw toolsy player, given one legit shot and then shoved out the door in favor of stable mediocrity. What's the point in investing in toolsy players if you are going to bail on them so easily?

The biggest rush was unnecessarily 40-man rostering him when there was no way another team would keep him on a big league club for a full season.

who cares and most likely. his postseason performances will get him in.

the vast majority of players who completely flop at the big league level (over the course of a full season) do so because they're just not good enough or can't make the necessary adjustments against big league pitching, not because they're too young or whatever. i don't care if ronny was 23 or 33, his performance in 2006 showed there was a strong chance that he could not become an adequate major league player. soto and hoffpauir weren't given the chance at age 23 because they had not seemingly mastered lower levels of play, as it seemed that cedeno had. but once you've done well against AAA pitching then you should be ready to face major league pitching. age really doesn't matter here. your "argument" is bad. Suggesting age doesn't matter does not make sense to me. Age clearly matters. Lots of players have flopped at an early age and had decent careers.

ok. I see that line of reason, but if I'm Angelo, I make it publically known that I'm going after Cutler, who grew up a Bears fan, hoping he takes notice and forces a trade. what I see the Jets doing right now is what I want to see Angelo do and EVERYTHING might be lowballing Denver when it comes to the drought the Bears have had at QB I don't see any value in going public. The player is under contract for 3 more years, Denver doesn't have to trade him.

No it's not. Suburban baseball stadiums just don't work, and football fields do not work for baseball. There isn't a single successful football stadium in the middle of nowhere where a baseaball team plays. It doesn't work, and it won't work with an expension team especially.

If that's what they sell for on the secondary market, why shouldn't the team sell them at that price? but do they really sell for that much on the secondary market? i've bought and sold plenty of tickets through that avenue, but that seems ridiculously high. even for yankees red sox. You've bought and sold Yankees tickets on the secondary market? Yankees tickets in general, and Yanks/Sox tickets in particular, are different than most. Put the best seats out there, and it's a whole 'nother beast. There are so many bandwagon Yankees fans in this city, and so many that have some money, that prices can go crazy. In the mid-90's, when I got here, the team was nothing special and it wasn't hard to get good seats. As they won more and more, you could still get nosebleeds and bleachers, but better seats became extremely scarce. Add in the rivalry, and the fact that there are tons of Red Sox fans in NY, plus many who just want to experience what became a cultural event, and it's not surprising to me.

It doesn't really take away from your point - but why jerseys? I didn't go to many games when I was a kid. But when I did, we brought in a bag of peanuts, maybe bought a coke, and that was it. There's no reason why you have to buy all that extra stuff, and there's really no reason why you have to buy a hat, or any merchandise for that matter. I don't get why they always talk about the price of 4 tickets, 4 dogs, 4 drinks plus merchandise. Buy your ticket, eat beforehand and enjoy the game if cost is an issue.

If that's what they sell for on the secondary market, why shouldn't the team sell them at that price?

A stadium that hosted what, a half dozen college games per year? A new baseball stadium is a different animal, hosting 81 gamers per year, many during the night. It will change the neighborhood in some way shape or form. Not if nobody cares about the team. "Nobody" is relative. It takes time to build fan bases. Florida has a couple titles which I'm sure created some passion that can grow. The issue now is creating a team that contends on a regular basis. Win and dismantle might work for a team like the Cubs, whose fans are dying for just one, but it's safe to say it doesn't work with expansion teams. Nobody shows up to or cares about Pirates games, because they are god awful every year. Florida still hasn't won a division title, they've finished 4th or worse nine times. If you are consistently noncompetitive and play in a god awful baseball stadium, you just aren't going to draw fans. A stadium alone won't bring them out for long (although it's better than nothing), a stadium plus competition will make them as viable as several other baseball cities.

I will say this, they have appeared completely disinterested in just about every other potential offseason upgrade they could have had. However, they have been surprisingly non-dismissive about the Cutler situation. I still think Denver has no intentions of trading him. But I'm not convinced the Bears are out of the running if he is on the market.

A stadium that hosted what, a half dozen college games per year? A new baseball stadium is a different animal, hosting 81 gamers per year, many during the night. It will change the neighborhood in some way shape or form.

That's where I'm putting my money as well.

It passed because the right palms were greased on the city commission. I cannot think of a worse place to put the ballpark. It will be like where the Yankees play only worse b/c they won't have near enough police. i agree...just awful. id much rather go the football stadium in a decent part of town to watch a game than get anywhere near little havana at night. Stadiums going up in bad neighborhoods is nothing new. Without Comiskey would anyone ever venture toward that neighborhood? What about Camden Yards, Yankee Stadium, Shea, Philly, Pittsburgh. One of the worst places in the country, Camden, New Jersey, has a fairly successful 25,000 person concert venue located there. Well known hell-hole Newark, New Jersey is now home to a minor league baseball stadium and a hockey arena. I don't think you can compare simply walking through the area today with what it will be like once there is an actual stadium with thousands of people showing up.

My understanding is that most languages have the "proper" way to say things, but that generally is not the simplest way to say it. So, they find easier ways to say things even if they're not truly "proper" by the book. My brother lived in Argentina for 8 months after high school and they called Mexican spanish what would translate to sissy spanish because everything was slang. I guess Argentina and Spain speak Spanish by the book and Central America uses a lot of slang. It's like the difference between the U.S. and England is what my brother compared it to. Except the English don't really know how to speak their own language.