jersey cubs fan

Completely agree. My next still hurts 5 years later from watching a Twins game at the dome sitting down the third base line (shallow left field). Those site lines were/are brutal. Your next?

guess not. no one else travels to other teams parks, and has an interest in when tickets go on sale? odd. If you want to know, you should check out the other teams' websites and see what information you can get. The times varied last year. I think a couple sold before the Cubs but most were a little later.

That's pretty ridiculous. What's so ridiculous about it? We are talking about profit not investment. You can't just decide that the money invested doesn't matter.

And NSBB still stands for northsidebaseball

That's pretty ridiculous.

Innocent until proven guilty. Just ask Rogers Clemens and Rod Blagojevich. Except no one has ever made a legitimate case against Sosa except "He had muscles and hit a lot of homers and spoke Spanish in front of Congressmen!" And he's a caught cheater in an era where it was the most common form of cheating. And Joe Morgan cheated in the same way that Sammy did. You guys aren't this naive are you? I'm fairly certain he took them, but there's less evidence than there is for any other high profile likely user.

I have no problem with that. They can keep raising ticket prices if they keep raising payroll. How many tickets are you purchasing to see a game? Family of 4? 5? People don't have an inalienable right to attend baseball games at a price that is conventient to them. I probably went to less than 5 games at Wrigley as a kid. When I started paying for myself I went a heck of a lot more often. And when I have kids, I'll probably buy a couple times per year. But you can get by going to a game as a family for less than $200. That's comparable to a lot of other family entertainment options. It's far cheaper than attending most amusement parks. It's cheaper than football, basketball or hockey games. It's not that hard for most families to scrape together the money needed to enjoy a game. Season tickets? Obviously not, but a game or two a year is not going to setback anybody. But regardless, the payroll isn't what determines ticket prices. Ticket prices rise to reflect demand, and they are kept artificially low already for PR reasons.

washington does have some history and so does ole miss, though i'm not sure that anyone cares they uw was great 20 years ago or ole miss was great 50 years ago. Yeah, I get washington has had some prestige in the past, but they've been a joke for a quite a while now. 5 consecutive losing season, no wins last year? I don't see how anybody could say that program has prestige. There's no "wow, Washington Huskies" factor with them. The only thing they have going for them are a couple alums working for ESPN.

Washington? Georgia Tech?

Innocent until proven guilty. Just ask Rogers Clemens and Rod Blagojevich. Except no one has ever made a legitimate case against Sosa except "He had muscles and hit a lot of homers and spoke Spanish in front of Congressmen!" And he's a caught cheater in an era where it was the most common form of cheating. And Joe Morgan cheated in the same way that Sammy did.

I could see Cashner as maybe being the closest possibility for the fast track if they decide to turn him into a short reliever like what they did with Smardz last year. I don't believe that's very likely but Piniella likes power arms and there's a pretty good chance they'll need one down the stretch. Yeah, but even if Cashner emerges as a bullpen candidate soon, that's still nothing compared to an Evan Longoria who actually significantly impacts the team.

That's great and all, but nobody ever accused the Phillies owners of being overly passionate must win owners, nor would they say that about the Cardinals. There was a time when Peter Angelos competed annually with the Yankees for highest payroll (and actually had the highest) and it did nothing. Steinbrenner is notoriously the most title hungry owner out there, but he spent 2 decades putting out disappointing teams. Sure, it would be great if the owner was committed to winning, but what's more important is they hire the right baseball people to run the operation. These are essentially the same thing, aren't they? No. Putting your money where your mouth is could easily lead to counting on conventional wisdom, treating any prospect as a suspect and trading them for "proven veterans" while spending big on past their prime veterans. A smart baseball person should be able to win big in a relatively cost effective manner, positioning the team to maintain a high level of success year after year, instead of counting on winning now and/or paying for it later. Baltimore showed a tremendous desire to win big, then fell apart as an organization.

Can we give a little more leeway on weekends? I don't regularly go online then, and if we somehow knock out a bunch of picks in a row, it's hard to get on in time. 12 hours is a short window, especially if it begins later in the evening.

That's great and all, but nobody ever accused the Phillies owners of being overly passionate must win owners, nor would they say that about the Cardinals. There was a time when Peter Angelos competed annually with the Yankees for highest payroll (and actually had the highest) and it did nothing. Steinbrenner is notoriously the most title hungry owner out there, but he spent 2 decades putting out disappointing teams. Sure, it would be great if the owner was committed to winning, but what's more important is they hire the right baseball people to run the operation.

I've actually tried to figure it out myself. She's not very attractive and is pretty much just skin and bones. And who's her brother? I don't know, but when she first hit it big, there were all these weird stories about her relationship with her brother. They'd apparantly kiss somewhat passionately, and there were incestuous stories. I was kidding a bit, but it's still part of her skanky persona.

What the hell was the point of this? What an ass. I was thinking the same thing. No need.

Hallowed?

He's the 5th starter right now, unless you think Samardzija/Hart/Gaudin beats him out. if you had to construct a rotation today, then yes he'd be the 5th starter. i strongly believe that another starter will be acquired though, whether that be peavy or someone else, making marshall the swingman. But the point is, it would be better to have Peavy as the 5th guy than to have Marshall as the swingman.

FYI... Fukudome was middle of the pack in this regard in RF. Wasn't he out there for like 2/3 of the season? Were they just rounding, or did he get in inordinately low amount of opportunities for some reason?

RANK PLAYER POS. ORGANIZATION '08 RANK #AGE 98 Jay Jackson RHP Chicago Cubs TOP '08 LEVEL: A (Daytona) IE 21 Call this one a hunch. Jackson may end up a starter, but if the Cubs choose to leave him in the pen, he could shoot to the majors this year or early next year. Jackson was the No. 1 starter at Furman last spring while also playing the outfield, leading the Paladins in slugging percentage, and earned notice in the spring with a 91-94 mph fastball and a potential out-pitch slider in the mid-80s with good tilt and a very sharp, late break. The consensus on him before the draft was that he was a reliever in pro ball, which allowed the Cubs to grab him in the ninth round, but that is already looking like grand larceny. Jackson does throw a curve and changeup if he's left in the rotation, but neither is an average pitch and his height (maybe 6-1) means he doesn't get any downhill plane on his fastball, which may make him too homer-prone to be a starter. If he can improve his fastball command just a little bit, however, he has a chance to be a dominant short reliever in the majors.

RANK PLAYER POS. ORGANIZATION '08 RANK #AGE 38 Pedro Alvarez 3B/1B Pittsburgh Pirates TOP '08 LEVEL: N/A IE 21 Alvarez needs to consider hiring a publicist, as just about every story about him over the past seven months has been unflattering, from the minor scandal when he and his agent, Scott Boras, called the Pirates out for violating the terms of the CBA and then settled for a $250,000 dollar increase in Alvarez's signing bonus to recent reports that he was out of shape in the Pirates' mini-camp and is already experiencing tendinitis in his knees. Conditioning has always been an issue for Alvarez dating back to his freshman summer with Team USA, and it's the main reason he's likely to end up at first base. At the plate, Alvarez is strong and has a high-effort swing that produces big power and lots of hard contact, mostly to right and right-center, but he has struggled with left-handers. In general, he didn't make enough contact in the SEC after coming back from a broken hamate (hand) bone. His setup, with an extremely wide base that doesn't give him much chance to adjust to offspeed stuff, isn't helping, but it's fixable. Plus, you can't teach the kind of raw power Alvarez has. The bonus kerfuffle cost him any chance to play in 2008, even in winter ball, so all we have now are year-old scouting reports and questions about his conditioning and commitment. He could be in the top 10 next year with a full, healthy season in which he addresses concerns about his ability to make contact.

He was a tough sign, wasn't he? Yeah, if memory serves. What I was trying to say is that we got him signed when there was reasonable doubt that he wouldn't. Bobby Hill?

John Canning was the favorite from day 1, but that was many days ago.

He was a tough sign, wasn't he?

Do the chefs have a coaching staff yet? No idea who the Chefs are, but the Chiefs have yet to officially terminate Herm Edwards. :wink: That said, the rumors are flying that he'll go either this year or next.