jersey cubs fan

I know the clubhouse attendants sacrifice a virgin at his locker before every game, but I didn't think it was every inning.

Lee's down year still projects at 22 HR, 37 2B, 90 Runs, 89 RBI, and .833 OPS. That level of production (assuming all others remain constant) puts Lee at 12th in the MLB for 1B in OPS. You say that like it's a good thing. It is a good thing, but not a great thing. Anytime you get above average league production from a position player having an off-year, it's a good thing. No realistic expectations of Lee would have included 2005-like production. An .870 OPS was probably a good expected baseline for Lee for 2008. And there are still at least 15 other starters at first base with worse production so far this year. Lee's production this year is basically a microcosm of the entire team. There isn't an everyday player in the field on this team that anyone would say is a top 10 overall player, MLB-wide. Maybe not top 20. One illustration: do a sort on OPS for all MLB players and the first Cub you hit is Aramis Ramirez at 39th (Soriano has too few ABs to qualify officially). But the team is 2nd in MLB for team OPS, which is .802. 2nd in Runs. 1st in OBP. That's with Ramirez and Lee having down years. Hendry built a strong team without a genuine star in the field. Obviously if you can make the team better, trade Lee and sign Texiera. But the trade would not be a dump or forced move, and it would only happen on Hendry's terms, which are probably going to be too high, even if half the league could use Lee as an upgrade. I want much better than average for any highly paid player. And I'm not so sure this is an off year as much as it's a reasonably expected year from a soon-to-be 33 year old who has only had one great season in his career. Agreed. But that doesn't mean you trade him for a younger, more expensive player who is marginally better. I think Texeira is more than marginally better. And considering he just turned 28 this season, while Lee turns 33 this season, he's going to remain better for a fair amount of time. Plus, it's not a 1 for 1 trade, it's trade Lee for something good and then sign Teixeira, thus, improving 1b while also getting improvement elsewhere.

When you were VERY young Goony? Regarding your interleague breakdown, it'd probably be the best way to do it in that situation, but I really don't like the stretch run having interleague games. Sure, most of the time those last place teams are going to be last place teams again, but you also can have situations where this years Rays team is playing the Nationals with 3 to play and tied with the Yankees. You'd at least like to have a team in the same league as them being the one to challenge them late. Sure, but it would only be three games, and who is to say they won't clinch before then? And why would it be that much better for them to play Baltimore rather than Washington? It would still be teams that aren't in the race and have nothing to play for but the pride of being a spoiler. There's a flaw in everyone of these plans. But going by the assumption that interleague is not going away, and with the desire to see them balance the leagues at 15/15 for now, and 16/16 later (when it would no longer be necessary to have interleague all year long), I think this is the best option.

It's the 15-day DL and yes, they can come off whenever ready after the 15 days. If he can pitch without pain, and feel fine the next day, I'm not sure how much chance there is a reinjuring a blister.

Lee's down year still projects at 22 HR, 37 2B, 90 Runs, 89 RBI, and .833 OPS. That level of production (assuming all others remain constant) puts Lee at 12th in the MLB for 1B in OPS. You say that like it's a good thing. It is a good thing, but not a great thing. Anytime you get above average league production from a position player having an off-year, it's a good thing. No realistic expectations of Lee would have included 2005-like production. An .870 OPS was probably a good expected baseline for Lee for 2008. And there are still at least 15 other starters at first base with worse production so far this year. Lee's production this year is basically a microcosm of the entire team. There isn't an everyday player in the field on this team that anyone would say is a top 10 overall player, MLB-wide. Maybe not top 20. One illustration: do a sort on OPS for all MLB players and the first Cub you hit is Aramis Ramirez at 39th (Soriano has too few ABs to qualify officially). But the team is 2nd in MLB for team OPS, which is .802. 2nd in Runs. 1st in OBP. That's with Ramirez and Lee having down years. Hendry built a strong team without a genuine star in the field. Obviously if you can make the team better, trade Lee and sign Texiera. But the trade would not be a dump or forced move, and it would only happen on Hendry's terms, which are probably going to be too high, even if half the league could use Lee as an upgrade. I want much better than average for any highly paid player. And I'm not so sure this is an off year as much as it's a reasonably expected year from a soon-to-be 33 year old who has only had one great season in his career.

The argument is that having 15 teams in each division makes it very hard to schedule games. The only way it could happen is if interleague play went on all year long. Ok that makes sense, year round interleague would suck, but I still haven't really accepted that the Brewers actually "belong" in our division. I also would like to go on record as saying I hate the way interleague is set up, and seeing us play the Rays and Blue Jays doesn't thrill me at all. If you were so young then why is it an issue. I wasn't that young, and I feel that Milwaukee fits in very well in the NL Central. When I was very young, teams like Cincy and Atlanta were inexplicably in the NL West. While the White Sox and Twins were AL West teams, Milwaukee was AL East. It was next to impossible for them to get a decent rivalry going. I think they should got 15/15 for now, splitting interleague into a combination of 1 rivalry series per year (not home and home), along with an NFL style 1st vs 1st, 2nd vs 2nd, etc. You can open and close the season with the less than intriguing matchups of last place teams.

The Vegas problem is much more of a PR problem than an actual "integrity of the game" problem. The watered down talent pool is an overblown story. MLB is very healthy right now, and I think they could handle an expansion soon. I doubt MLB wants to get rid of the DH, but I wonder if the MLBPA would be open to getting rid of the DH if the league added 2 new teams.

I think the interesting thing is that day brought his August OPS up to only 1333, because he was 1-7 the first two days.

It looked to me like Zambrano was on the verge of arguing with the ump, and as animated as Geo looked during that discussion, I thought maybe the ump told him to go out there and shut Zambrano up before he gets in trouble. You could tell by Z's reaction that whatever Soto said (or in this case, didn't say) got through and nearly made him laugh.

He was referred to as a potential "best of the rest" QB around draft time. Kiper said something about him being a 3rd or 4th round talent who needed some time to learn in the NFL. He'll probably suck in 2008 if he plays, but there's reason for optimism about the future.

Here is where you are off. When a group wants to bid for a club, said group must sign a release which states that they have no recourse if they are not chosen as the winning bidder for the ballclub...i.e., cannot sue. Tribune had to sign a similar agreement. BTW, yes, Kenney (the self proclaimed chairman) was the lead General Counsel and was involved in M&A with Tribune on the legal side of things. This saying, he was involved with the acquisition of Times Mirror Company which quite frankly began the downward spirla of the Tribune Company and why they are where they are today. Why on earth would the Tribune sign something limiting thier legal options? What possible benefit would they get from that? They signed it to get the right to purchase the Cubs in the first place. But that was a long time ago, and it still does not mean they can't and won't file a lawsuit.

Lee's down year still projects at 22 HR, 37 2B, 90 Runs, 89 RBI, and .833 OPS. That level of production (assuming all others remain constant) puts Lee at 12th in the MLB for 1B in OPS. You say that like it's a good thing.

But I'm fairly certain upper management's change in approach has been influenced significantly by Lou, who has talked repeatedly about getting baserunners and having plate discipline.

He was an oft-injured mid 30's corner outfielder who'd lost defensive value, who wasn't any good at all in his first year, just decent in his second and had only one valuable season during his three year contract.

Or just show how dumb it is to say that "anything but a sweep is a failure." Not saying anyone in particular... don't even know who said it. I love how people who are so stat driven and realists think that a fan on a computer have anything to do with an outcome of a baseball game. I do? If you don't why the hell do you care if someone says it? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. And if somebody's opinion is dumb, everybody else has a right to let them know. I don't think he was saying the fan on a computer has anything to do with the outcome, rather he was saying it's stupid to predict sweeps and say anything but a sweep is a failure.

I really hope that the next time Ryno's in the crapper, Carmelo smacks the door and says, "I hope you had a hell of a piss Arnold!"

can you explain that position a bit? Someone could probably do it better than me, but it has to do with fewer sharp cuts with the routes they take. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Griffey hasn't had alot of joint problems, but rather a lot of hamstring problems. I would think that sharper cuts are harder on the joints, and all-out sprinting in the outfield is harder on the hamstrings. So if you think CF is easier from that point of view, it's still the worst place for Griffey to be playing. And other than the one weird RF injury, haven't all his leg injuries been on the bases? I'm pretty sure his calf blew-up in CF against the Cubs.

Yeah everybody, quit being so mean to the big money pitcher who absolutely sucked in the second half last year and is well on his way to repeating that feat this year. I mean, it makes no sense why Cubs fans with dreams of glory would be upset with a pitcher putting up a 7 ERA so far since the ASB with an OPS against over 900. Smart fans would applaud this effort.

I think it's shaping up to be the classic Cubs fall behind early but ultimately win game.

They rarely do. Theres 0 realism in thinking that we can pound the tar out of a team that we already pounded the tar out of when they had a solid heart of the lineup now that they dont. what was I thinking. Were screwed. Ryan Doumits going to eat us alive. And zgod help us if we get to the bottom of the 9th down a few runs, as is a save machine. Theres all the basis in reality in the world. While that was a smart trade for the Pirates future, as of now, their lineup isnt much better than the Iowa Cubs, and no, thats not exaduration. While it's nice to take an optimistic approach on the series coming up, one should consider being somewhat guarded that the most hopeful outcome doesn't always happen. Plain and simple. There isn't one pitcher that's ever pitched a significant amount of games at the major league level that's beaten every single below .500 team every time they've pitched. Just as easily as the Cubs could sweep the Pirates, the Pirates could catch a little lightning in a bottle and sweep the Cubs. They've been swept by teams as bad or worse than the currently constructed Pirates. You're setting yourself up for a letdown if you go into the series expecting the Cubs to blow out the Pirates all three games. Guarded optimism where you hope and cheer for a 3 game slap down is much better than expecting it. I don't know about just as easily.

Very discouraging. He hasn't put together anything more than a 3 or 4 game hot streak, then goes like 1 for 18. I am still willing to give him some more time, but expecting anything from him as far as ML success goes is probably not a good idea. Willing or not, I realize there's nothing to do but give him more time. I assume there won't be a promotion in his future, but, who knows.

He pitched well the first time this year, but got progressively worse. 6 IP, 6 H, 7 K, 1 BB, 1 R, 1 ER 6 IP, 4 H, 1 HR, 3 K, 1 BB, 3 R, 2 ER 5.3 IP, 7 H, 1 HR, 2 K, 3 BB, 3 R, 3 ER He hasn't had a disaster start and has kept them in games, but with Marquis I think it's less about the opponent and more about whether or not he has it that game.

They aren't dictating, they are talking, as well they should. Part of their duty is to steer the big ship, and like it or not, the future of Favre/Packers influences the big ship. They aren't telling them what they have to do, but they are involved with the process, and have a right to voice their opinions. They've hardly been overbearing. This isn't David Stern. And what happens when they set the precedent of "gently nudging" a team to do something with a player? Isn't that detrimental to the long term health of the league? I highly doubt this is precedent setting. They have to do something with Favre's paper work. They've given GB time by waiting as long as possible to actually reinstate him. And by the way, this is nothing like MLS.

i may fly down for those games... Did anybody else see the Yeti look-a-like at yesterday's game? I think it had something to do with a guy jumping after a foul ball.

They aren't dictating, they are talking, as well they should. Part of their duty is to steer the big ship, and like it or not, the future of Favre/Packers influences the big ship. They aren't telling them what they have to do, but they are involved with the process, and have a right to voice their opinions. They've hardly been overbearing. This isn't David Stern.