jersey cubs fan

I don't think this is true. Some people underrate him, but as a Jeter basher myself, I'm more than willing to admit that he has been excellent. He's just not the baseball saint he's made out to be. And it's a lot more than just Yankees fans. Baseball fundamentalists adore him. The dream weaving myth makers of the media can't get enough of him, and believers in things like clutch and curses think he's much better than he is. Just look at Bill Simmons. He's an avid Red Sox fan who respects the hell out of Jeter and can't stand ARod, why? Because Jeter has won rings and Simmons "can feel" that Jeter will hurt them in the clutch while ARod will choke.

what the hell, give me the Cashner guy

:-k

I would too, which is why I'd have no interest. Greinke is somebody I'd have interest in though. He's about to start making the big bucks in arbitration, which could entice them to trade, but he's still got a couple years before free agency.

These answers probably say more about you than those you are attempting to distance yourselves from. Am I the only one suprised that goony of all people won't go see a movie alone? Actually, he hasn't said that. And the question wasn't "Will you go see a movie alone?" It was "Do you to the movies alone?" Those are very different questions. I answered no for the second question, but I'd answer yes to the first. I did say "never have never will" in the other thread. Although I probably shouldn't say never will. I doubt I ever will though, at least until I'm an old man. I don't go to many movies as is though, so when I do it's with at least my wife, if not some others as well.

I've never really hated Favre, and the fact that the Bears more or less own him now anyway makes it easier. That being said, it's not like Favre would equal Super Bowl. I'd probably be fine with him on the Bears.

that you're paranoid

Eh, the Cubs could get away with it easily. They have 2 guys on the staff with 1 inning over the past week, and that's been the case throughout much of the season. It's a waste of a spot. Baseball people are inherently stupid though, so I'm not predicting it's demise, it's just a ridiculously overdone trend. Most teams have interchangable parts on their 40-man roster who can easily come up and down when needed. If you run into trouble then call up the 12th man for a week or so.

These answers probably say more about you than those you are attempting to distance yourselves from.

Jeter and its not particularly close. Just look at the RC. It's almost laughable. Jeter is 34, appears to be on the decline, and is making $21M a year. There is just about no player I would take him over with that salary. Who said anything about salary. Jeter's decline and Theriot's incline will never meet. It's almost a joke of a question. I really don't understand the level of Jeter hate on this board. Just look at his numbers. the question was about this this season, as well as through the end of their careers. I'm pretty sure I'd take Jeter this season. But salary has to be part of the equation, and that makes Jeter very unattraction going forward.

As has been pointed out, there's not enough roster spots for that to happen. There aren't enough roster spots for 5 OF? Who are you dropping from the squad to make room? I know you were one of the big proponents of 2 backup middle infielders. I'm not the one making the deal, nor am I aware of who has been talked about as trade bait. I was just responding to the assertion that there aren't enough roster spots for 5 OF. I don't know what you mean about being a big proponent for 2 backup middle infielders, but I have mentioned in the past that I'd doubt the Cubs would go without a backup SS. I am a big proponent of doing away with the 12-man pitching staff.

As has been pointed out, there's not enough roster spots for that to happen. There aren't enough roster spots for 5 OF?

The system was highly rated with Hendry at the helm, but was it actually any better? The Cubs have actually begun to produce big league talent since Hendry left the minor league matters to others. Prior to Hendry becoming GM, the system produced Zambrano, Cruz, Choi, Hill, Patterson, and I suppose Wellemeyer. Z is the only guy to have sustained success. Patterson had the 1.5 good seasons, Wellemeyer has had a nice 1st half this season, and Cruz is a decent reliever. Post-Hendry GM has produced Soto, Theriot, Fontenot (who shouldn't count since he wasn't from our system), Murton (ditto), Gallagher, Hill, Marshall, and Marmol. The post Hendry years are more productive, and it's not really that close. It depends on how you define post and pre-Hendry (i.e. drafting). Prior, Nolasco, Theriot and Soto were drafted the summer before Hendry became GM. Marmol was signed 2.5 years before Hendry became GM. But all of them were developed after he became GM, but you could say the same for guys like Z, Cruz and Wellemeyer (some of their development came after Hendry was promoted). True. You could split hairs on this one. One could also question how much Hendry or Wilken have to do with the actual development of the players they sign/draft. Wasn't Hendry assn GM the summer before he became GM? Was he even doing the draft at the time those guys were brought in? I thought he had other people running it at the time.

If I were them, and could get a good deal for Rich Harden, I would be. As Vance said, Beane goes all in or all out. If that 5-6 becomes 8 prior to 7/31, he'll sell if we offer a good deal. Yeah, if you were Beane, but Beane is Beane, and Beane never sells. Perhaps he's looking at the pythag and thinking his team should be in first. Odds are it's going to take a huge offer to entice him to make a move. But what if I am Beane? Then I'd like to work on patching you through to Hendry's receptionist.

If I were them, and could get a good deal for Rich Harden, I would be. As Vance said, Beane goes all in or all out. If that 5-6 becomes 8 prior to 7/31, he'll sell if we offer a good deal. Yeah, if you were Beane, but Beane is Beane, and Beane never sells. Perhaps he's looking at the pythag and thinking his team should be in first. Odds are it's going to take a huge offer to entice him to make a move.

The fact that they drafted a college reliever, who they may or may not turn back into a starter, should have absolutely no effect whatsoever on their willingness to trade Ceda, or any other prospect. He hasn't thrown a professional pitch yet. And even if he makes it, there's still a need for at least 6 relievers at once, more likely 7, and then a handful of others each season. And again, not sweating giving guys up because we have others around doesn't mean you should just keep adding those names to offers. My point was not so much to say that Ceda is expendable because of Cashner, but that relievers shouldn't block you from a deal that makes you better. I'm not trying to pull a Truffle/Weiters thing here. Would you really hesitate on getting Harden over Jose Ceda? Do any of those names strike you as untouchable? no name is untouchable. But the fact that they are touchable doesn't mean all of them can or should be included.

While those guys aren't the same as drafting or signing your own, I think they should still be partially attributed to the system, somehow. They each spent significant time in the minor league system before coming up to the majors and achieving some success.

The fact that they drafted a college reliever, who they may or may not turn back into a starter, should have absolutely no effect whatsoever on their willingness to trade Ceda, or any other prospect. He hasn't thrown a professional pitch yet. And even if he makes it, there's still a need for at least 6 relievers at once, more likely 7, and then a handful of others each season. And again, not sweating giving guys up because we have others around doesn't mean you should just keep adding those names to offers.

There's been some nice finds, there. But it is a hit and miss list. Cabrera is a superstar among the Latin American guys, but the rest aren't anything exciting. Hit and miss? I see Cabrera and Wang? Am I missing somebody else that should be qualified under the hit category?

The system was highly rated with Hendry at the helm, but was it actually any better? The Cubs have actually begun to produce big league talent since Hendry left the minor league matters to others.

He's got 3 HR against somebody? That's 11% of his career HR.

Wait, what? You realize those numbers aren't even close to each other, right? Yes, but that doesn't mean Hill is "better" per se, his ERA may be a hell of a lot "lower", and the WHIP are completely "different", but all things being "equal" they are the "same" and none is "better" than the "other".

I highly doubt it. I have never believed in the theory that Maddux makes his fellow pitchers better. People talk about it. Guys claim they've learned so much from him, but I haven't seen any evidence that pitchers actually improve upon his arrival to the team. I don't think he'd make all of them better but I think he would be a good teacher for Hill. I wouldn't like to see a bunch of people putting imput into Hills had though, it reminds me of CPatt and all the input he received, I think it hurt him overall listening to too many people and I'm a little worried this might happen to Hill. Hill has already spent some time around Maddux, and he wasn't really any good until Greg was traded. I just don't see any reason to suspect Maddux would or could help. And I really don't want to see them go after what is essentially another bottom of the rotation pitcher.

I highly doubt it. I have never believed in the theory that Maddux makes his fellow pitchers better. People talk about it. Guys claim they've learned so much from him, but I haven't seen any evidence that pitchers actually improve upon his arrival to the team.

He is on the 40-man and I don't think building endurance would be all that much of an issue. It's not like he's been on the DL and not throwing. He's been throwing quite a bit, I believe. He hasn't been able to last more than 50-65 pitches though in a long while though, because he can't find the plate. He does need to build his endurance back up, but it shouldn't take too long. Yeah, but my point was that the endurance will not likely be the issue that keeps him off the roster before Aug 31. It'll all be about consistency. If he consistently threw strikes he could be back up to 90-100 pitch counts by the end of July, if not sooner. Joba went from a 28 pitch relief outing to a 100-pitch start in 3 weeks. Hill doesn't really have that far to go, endurance wise.