jersey cubs fan

They are nice backups or fine plugging in with 2 or 3 other solid lineman. But they aren't core lineman. Well, that's where Williams, Beekman and hopefully one of the top 5 OGs (in a good guard draft) come in. Beekman is an unknown, and quite frankly, so is Williams at this point.

They are nice backups or fine plugging in with 2 or 3 other solid lineman. But they aren't core lineman.

Going down to massage parlor to get dong-yub.

Not really since the Cubs brought Gaudin back, and he was pretty much a lock to make the team until 2-3 weeks ago. But right now mixed with the way he struggled last year, and the fact that he's shown no signs of improving this spring. Now he appears to be in Lou doghouse, and could be the odd man out. Personally I hope Gaudin is on the roster on opening day. He's still a good pitcher to have a around who's struggling now. But once he figures it out he should help the roster. Lou doesn't do contracts. The Cubs could have non-tendered Gaudin, but that wouldn't make sense, because he was an asset. But Hendry keeping him around was meaningless with regards to whether or not Lou wants to use him.

in their prime or today? I think Bonds was quicker. Sheffield's entire approach at the plate was more violent and involved more movement, but I think Bonds always had the quicker bat.

Same here, or at least I assume I'll be ridiculously excited for opening day. I just set it to record on my DVR last night, because I'll be flying home earlier that day and may miss the first pitch.

You said that before, and it didn't make sense then, or now. Tait was a highly sought free agent who was paid big bucks to pry him away from his team. Shafer was passed over by his team for JSC. If that's the Bears line in 2010, I predict they suck big time. Omiyale and Shafer are both backup caliber guys, or people you throw in to a line that is solid at the other spots.

I would describe it more as addressing it halfheartedly (which is still better than completely ignoring it). The Bears preach building from the draft, yet the one spot they have most ignored via the draft, and have routinely brought in outside help, is the offensive line. Signing these stopgaps isn't really addressing the longterm question on the line. It's the same thing they did in 2004/05, when they acquired a couple guys who helped for a couple years. Kreutz isn't going to be around forever, and none of the people acquired this offseason are likely to be longterm stable solutions at right tackle. If I remember correctly, Angelo's Tampa teams routinely struggled with finding the right fit on the offensive line. Maybe he just don't know how to draft/develop them, and can only sign others' castoffs. Well......but they did make a big draft pick last year on OL, for the most important OL position. I don't consider Omiyale a stopgap if he's moved to OG. Shaffer is less of a stopgap if viewed as a OG. That's yet to be determined. What I really meant was that OL is obviously now taking up much of Jerry's brainspace, unlike the past several years. He's thinking about it, taking action. We'll see where it leads, but I like the effort. I understand what you're saying, I'm just thinking this is more about catching up and patching holes, than actually building a longterm solution. They did spend one big pick on it last year. But it's a 5 position group that typically uses 6-7 on a fairly regular basis. You can't count both of those guys as guards until/unless they actually get a legit RT. And center is going to be an issue in the not-too-distant future. Omiyale is pretty much what Garza was when they signed him. Shafer is another team's castoff that they replaced with a Bears castoff. These guys are just filling space, they aren't securing positions for years to come.

I would describe it more as addressing it halfheartedly (which is still better than completely ignoring it). The Bears preach building from the draft, yet the one spot they have most ignored via the draft, and have routinely brought in outside help, is the offensive line. Signing these stopgaps isn't really addressing the longterm question on the line. It's the same thing they did in 2004/05, when they acquired a couple guys who helped for a couple years. Kreutz isn't going to be around forever, and none of the people acquired this offseason are likely to be longterm stable solutions at right tackle. If I remember correctly, Angelo's Tampa teams routinely struggled with finding the right fit on the offensive line. Maybe he just don't know how to draft/develop them, and can only sign others' castoffs.

I don't see how this is acting like a troll. The guy makes a pretty good point. Some people may think the Hawks "took it to 'em" but in reality they got their asses handed to them. I'm sure Vancouver, and any other team, would love to trade the physical fight for the 4 goal win any time. It's not like the Blackhawks have any actual intimidating players. This relates to a question I always have about hockey people rating penalty minutes as though it's an asset. I see the value in having some enforcement and sticking up for guys and whatnot. But penalty minutes are bad. Being short-handed is bad. A couple games ago, some Blackhawks player, I want to say Seabrook, took back to back dumbass penalties for post whistle pushing and shoving, and the Hawks gave up a goal, and lost the game. For some reason his toughness was lauded by some reporters, although all he accomplished was making his team short handed where they gave up a goal.

I remember that being talked about a lot when they made the switch. I could be crazy, but I though that's what it was. I don't remember hearing anything about the change being related to them breaking.

Not official talk from the Cubs, but they walk on egg shells every day with his arm, and readily admit there is some concern with him being behind at this point. Theoretically he could start in NY and then make his first real start a week later. But Harden's value to the Cubs lies in October. There's no reason to rush to have him ready in April.

Shaffer just isn't that good, and he isn't young either. He's a placeholder who probably works best as a backup. Omiyale is a backup and is probably slated for guard duty. And remember, we still don't know much of anything about Williams. Pace would give the Bears 3 tackles, protection in case Williams falters, and time to deal with replenishing the rest of the line. The Bears don't have an exceptionally high paid player on offense, which means they can afford to pay a little more for role players. This would do very little to affect the longterm viability of the line, they'd still have to draft guys this year and/or next. But it would be a solid short-term solution to what has been a huge problem the last couple years.

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to ask for that kind of price. Due to Regional games, fans from the town their team plays in can generally watch their team on TV for free. Out of market fans are the ones who would order Sunday Ticket the most. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to make that statement. They ask for that price because they can ask for that price and they continue to increase sales.

I don't know what it is right now. But I want to say that all in (sunday ticket plus HD superfan) it's getting up toward $300. Yes, I have directv, and it will start to show up on my bill right around August. I don't understand why the NFL only lets directv use the ticket, but I read that directv will pay the league regardless of whether there is a season in 2011, which is the season that might see a huge CBA fight. I was curious about what bars pay and found this on their site: Fire Code Occupancy 2008 Season Fee 1-50 51-100 101-200 201-350 351-500 501-750 751-1,000 1,001-1,500 1,501-2,000 2,001-5,000 5,001-10,000 10,001+ $899.00 $999.00 $2,399.00 $3,299.00 $3,699.00 $3,999.00 $4,999.00 $7,999.00 $9,999.00 $18,999.00 $37,999.00 $45,799.00

Not that I disagree, but we're not exactly in a position where we have anyone who can fill the void in house starting with the 2010 season. It's probably a good year and a half before Josh Vitters will be ready if he's still with the organization. Big time free agent first baseman are rare. Next year there's Adam LaRoche and Nick Johnson. In 2011 there's Carlos Pena and Adam Dunn. None of those guys are really any better than Derrek Lee, by then they may be, but none of them are great. Adrian Gonzalez can be an FA after 2011, but I can promise you he never goes on the market, he'll be snapped up in a trade before then and signed long term by someone. Really the Cubs' best bet to replace Derrek Lee after next season is do stop gaps until Vitters is ready or make a trade. If the first method is the desired course of action and Derrek Lee's productivity slips (to the point where not a lot of teams would want him), then he's not going to be a bad guy to extend for a season or two until Vitters is fully ready to take over. If the Cubs sour on Vitters or he doesn't pan out or he's traded then the Cubs are probably going to have to make a move, unfortunately our system sucks and shows very little signs of improvement so we're going to be at a disadvantage to Boston or whoever is in the market for the same bats in 2011. The lack of a suitable replacement is one of the the main reasons why I wouldn't put him on the top of the delete list, right now. But by deleting Jim Hendry presumably we could find somebody who may know how to effectively utilize the dollars saved starting in 2011 to find more production. If DLee accepted a huge pay cut in that year, he might be a tolerable guy to keep around in some sort of platoon, but players generally don't accept such paycuts graciously. But he'll be 35 by then, and I don't know many successful tall lanky decent hitters remains viable options into their mid 30's.

Something tells me the Canucks didn't leave that game worried about getting pounded.

At least Lee is gone after 2010. It's probably more important to delete Jim Hendry so he doesn't sign Lee to an extension.

They won without him producing last year. I just don't see how they need him to produce this year if they are going to win as a team. Obviously one would hope he improves a little bit from last year's production. I don't want him to miss the season. But if last year's team thrived despite Lee "not showing up" for 5 months, I think this years team could likely survive if Hoffpauir has to replace him for a month or two.

do i really need to tell you why i think guys like milton bradley will get hurt? We weren't talking about Milton Bradley or Alfonso Soriano or anyone on the pitching staff like Rich Harden or Carlos Zambrano or any other player/position on the roster. We were specifically talking about first base, Derrek Lee and Micah Hoffpauir. Obviously other guys could and probably will get hurt, but you specifically singled out 1B/Lee/Hoffpauir and said if Hoffpauir is our starting 1B man (i.e. Lee is hurt) we're screwed. If you wanted to bring other players into the mix, you should have added that. Not to mention that even if Lee gets hurt, it's not a lock that he's hurt at the same time as anyone else on the team. The health of Derrek Lee isn't going to make our break our season. Actually, you said we'd be fine without Lee, if ARam, Bradley, and Soriano are all healthy. There's a good chance that each of those players will miss a significant chunk of the season, so it's fair to not accept your premise. I meant that if they're healthy at the same time that Lee is hurt, i.e. not having two bats injured at the same time. If Lee gets hurt and misses April and May but those other guys are all healthy in April and May, the Cubs will be fine. And the general point still stands - Lee's health will not be the determining factor in how the season goes. No it doesn't stand. Last year is last year. True, if the health problem he has is some sort of infectious disease that manages to take out the actual good players on the team, it could be a problem.

Apparently Directv doesn't publish that number: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/california/ci_11989270 It also sounds like by 2012 there will be some sort of broadband version of ST offered to non-Directv subscribers. I don't even subscribe to ST because it's ridiculously expensive and I'd rather pay for Center Ice and Extra Innings, but I like having the option to do so. Yeah, but it's dirt cheap to go watch the games at the bar, if you don't count the food and drinks. Unfortunately, if you don't live in Bear Country, you're not going to get much luck getting sound with the Bears games. Seriously, between the lack of choice viewing space at any bar around here, and the extra money I'd spend if I went to the bar 16 Sundays a year, paying for Sunday Ticket is a no brainer for me.

The fact that he's yet to grab the closer role may indeed create some doubt in some people which would prevent them from offering as much money as they would if he erased any doubts about his "ability" to close by actually doing it. But it only takes one team to pay him. And, if he does spend 6 major league seasons doing what he's done so far, people are going to be so blown away with what will have to be unprecedented numbers for non-closing relievers, that dangling a proven closer tag will pale in comparison.

You can understand win and save totals are not the most important thing while still acknowledging they do play a role in determining the market price of a player.

The problem is, Marmol will have less of a negotiation base if he never assumes the closer role with the Cubs. Teams will pay - and pay dearly, I'm sure - for Marmol's arm and stuff. But, if Marmol's agent can't start the negotiations with "Carlos racked up 85 saves the last two years for the Cubs," he might not be able to get as much as he otherwise could. Does Francisco Cordero get the huge contract from the Reds without his background as a "proven" closer? I doubt it. Does Kevin Gregg cost us Jose Ceda if not for his history as a "proven" closer? Probably not. Both of these guys still would have had varying amounts of value as very good relievers, but an agent has a much better basis with which to start negotiations from if his client has X number of saves on his resume to add to the arm and stuff, etc. Now, this may just be the difference between Marmol getting $8 million in FA instead of $12 million a year, but it's still likely it'll have an effect on his paycheck - if he never assumes the role, of course. There is a difference between 2nd tier arms making more money because they've racked up saves, and 1st rate arms making a little less because they haven't racked up saves. I highly doubt a non-closing Marmol will lose out on money in free agency if he somehow spends 6 years as a shutdown reliever without spending time as a closer.

If Marmol keeps doing what he's done so far, and never works as a closer*. He'll almost definitely make as much or more than any free agent reliever, closer or not. He will lose out on money he could have earned in arbitration by racking up saves, but it's doubtful he would earn less via free agency. It would only take one team to sign him, and if he does keep pitching the way he has, he will get paid by somebody. Part of the reason for this is if he does spend 6 years as a lockdown non-closing reliever, there is going to be a ton of attention paid to the fact that relievers can be as valuable, or more valuable, as closers, by pitching in situations other than the 9th. *The lone exception is if he dabbles in closer capacity and blows a few, and therefore remains a strictly a set-up man.