jersey cubs fan

It's chess man, you don't understand. He needs CHANGES.

Hopefully soon. I know theriot is doing well but I'd still trust Fuku more in the 2hole According to some, the only way that happens is if they find a LH 5th hitter to "protect" Ramirez.

He'd started all but one game this season at several positions. He's not an everyday player, and he's been struggling for about a week. He needs rest, and the fact that the Cedeno needs to play, it makes perfect sense to give him 3 days off in a row (counting the off day).

Players? Yes. Coaches? Yes. Trainers? Yes. Staff? Yes. Media? No. The media is not employed by Major League Baseball or it's teams. The media are guests in all clubhouses. IMO, they shouldn't be allowed in. That's what post game press conferences are for. Your opinion on what it should be like doesn't matter. The precedent is longstanding and clear. Media is allowed, as are others guests. This isn't some privately owned fraternal clubhouse.

Your opinion on what it should be really doesn't matter. The major league clubhouse is not for players only, it's for players, coaches, trainers, staff and media.

I am appreciating more and more the option of DVRing the beginning of the games and then fast-forwarding up to real-time and missing most of the clutter.

it's not at all. what's terrible logic is assuming that because some other hitters improved a lot, then so can cedeno. in the cases of the players discussed in this thread, they showed in their first full seasons that they had some of the skills - be it patience or the ability to pick a pitch and drive it for doubles/home runs - that are required to become a good major league player. cedeno showed none of the batting attributes needed to become an average or above-average player at the big league level. saying "hey mike schmidt sucked at 23 and he got good!" is a lazy argument. you're comparing apples to oranges. since i'm so wrong, there should be plenty of examples of guys who were God-awful hitters in their first full seasons, but became average or better. i'm surprised that you guys haven't found all these examples to put me in my place once and for all. The examples have been given before. You just insist on ignoring them. That bolded part is so incredibly dumb. The fact that others hitters have improved a lot is exactly the type of logic that makes sense when saying Cedeno can. Not that he definitely will, or obviously will, or will clearly be great. But he can. That's the whole freaking point that you've so blindly ignored.

Brenly has a strange hatred for Felix also. He's bashed him consistently for the last week and a half in the games I have seen. I feel like that's been a trend all year.

I agree with Thom. Have a catch is a stupid phrase I've only heard in the northeast.

I always loved that Chuck Swirsky was not a made-up name. And according to wiki: He is a big fan of Dairy Queen's blizzards and cherry coke.

He would clearly be worth it but there's no chance that happens.

Chris Simms is a popular name. I don't have a problem with Kyle Orton as the backup. He's shown he can play without looking like crap. I think 2008 is going to be a sink or swim season with these guys. I don't see much value in a safe veteran backup. Such a player isn't going to be the difference.

It'll likely be one of those two. If D'Antoni's teams can play D, the Bulls can win a championship. Doesn't matter who the coach is, they'll still need to acquire a star.

I thought they were hot for Mark Jackson. He's the fan/media favorite, from what I can tell.

If Soriano misplays one with Carlos on the mound, he may get Barrett-ed. I've seen a couple misplays with Zambrano on the mound this year, and it looks like his new tactic is to laugh.

You said Cedeno and Hall of Famer in the same sentence, therefore you think Cedeno is going to become a Hall of Famer and because of this I can no longer put any stock into what you say. Good day sir.

Barring injury, Wood could have easily been a 15-22 win guy year-in, year-out, taking several K titles with a low 3s ERA and most likely several postseason victories. I think he would have lived up to expectations very easily. I doubt fans were thinking 20K was going to happen on a regular basis.

Pie went 1-3 with a walk last night. That's a 833 OPS. The average 8 spot hitter in the NL is OPSing 642, just slightly better than what Pie has done this year. There are 7 teams in the NL getting less OPS than what Pie has done this year. The Cubs offense has been pretty darn good, their defense has been spotty at best. It's mindboggling why Pie has become such a target of hate and blame by Lou. He's singled out like the most incompetent baseball player to ever step on the field. He's been bad, but over an extremely short period of time. And his replacement has been worse against RHP (the most common type of pitcher). There's really no justification or defense for the idiocy that would be needed to even contemplate this move.

Yepper. It's an oddity, but that's about all it is. This doesn't mean ERA is meaningless, it means it doesn't tell you everything. But there's plenty of other things to tell you how a guy pitched. Not that big of a deal.

In a couple years, maybe. But it's pointless to think about it in the short-term. Kerry and the Cubs came to grips with the fact that his arm can't handle the long outings. It's not going to happen. If he finishes the year healthy, maybe, perhaps, possibly he'd do it next year. But as as a free agent, I'm guessing he'd sign a deal with a team that would want him as the closer and want to keep him healthy. I would bet if he ever starts again, it won't be until 2010 at the earliest.

I wonder if there's anything to it. Either way, was there any way that Grossman was going to lose out to Orton in a TRAINING CAMP battle of all things? Rex is a god in practice. On the field, during the actual games, the gap might be a bit narrower, but I don't think it's even close on the practice field (at least, not from what I've seen the few times I've been to TC)... I don't think this is all that meaningful. Rex has been the starter and is the more talented player. It's not that big of a deal to me if a receiver assumes Rex is still the starter or will be the starter. But were you talking about Biggs or Briggs?

The three you mentioned are and were better prospects than Vitters. A lot of people were projecting Josh to fall after a terrible senior year. How the heck does a team with our money let great prospects drop past us because of signability? On draft day, not all 3 of them were better prospects. Porcello certainly was a better prospect ("best HS pitcher since Beckett") and only fell to Detroit because of signability. Wieters arguably was a better prospect (but it was not a consensus amongst scouts; many questioned whether Wieters could stick at C and felt his bat wouldn't be as valuable if he changed positions...of course defense was and is a big knock against Vitters too). Parker was certainly not a consensus top 5 pick, there were a few knocks on him. He was an interesting prospect rising up draft boards and Parker was mentioned as the 2nd most likely guy the Cubs would have picked but on draft day but I don't think I saw any place where he was rated ahead of Price, Porcello, Wieters, Moustakas and Vitters. Vitters was held in high esteem by scouts for his successful seasons prior to his senior year and because he did well in the HS tournaments (especially the AFLAC game, IIRC) which scouts put a lot of emphasis on and came away with the excuse of down numbers his senior year due to the pneumonia. Whether those are good reasons to rate a prospect so highly is another conversation; those are just reasons why his stock did not fall during his senior season. To add to what CCP said, BA, BP, PG Crosschecker, etc. were all very high on him and they based many of their reports on what other scouts said. Vitters wasn't my favorite guy (admittedly, my opinion is based on reports I've read on the Internet; obviously I'm not qualified enough to argue the merits of various potential baseball draft choices) but he was a consensus top 5 guy - the Cubs didn't reach on him as they had the year before. Regardless of whether or not it's a failure based on reaching, or a failure on simply taking the wrong guy, if it turns into a failure, it's a failure, and can and should be held against those making the decisions.

The combination of Hendry trying so hard to get rid of him and Jones so openly hating his time in Chicago makes me think we will not be seeing anymore Jacque in Chicago.

IDK about that. The Bears still has there defense that went to the Super Bowl sans Chris Harris. Position by position defensively, the Bears and Vikes are equal. The Bears have the better or more talented secondary, both have very good linebackers. The Bears have the best DT, but the Vikes have a more talented DL, but the Bears is slightly deeper. The difference, the Bears went from Rivera to Babich lst yr. I expect the defense to return to glory in 2008. All in all, the Bears=Vikes defensively. Offensively, the Vikes do have a better line, and better RB. But like the Bears, the QB and WR are BIG ??? for the Vikes. Grossman/Orton .v. Jackson/Ferrotte/JD booty. No advantage. Rice/Nance/Berrian/Wade and Robert Ferguson .v. Booker/Hester/Bradley/Bennett/Davis (or whoever makes the team for both teams). So, outside of the OL/RB I don't see where you can argue that the Vikes are a better team, on paper or on the field. If they are equal on defense, at QB and WR, but the Vikings clearly have the better offensive line and RB, how can you come to any conclusion other than the Vikings are the better team?

Don'tblow Cubs don'tblowwwww Don'tblow Cubs don'tblowwwww