jersey cubs fan

I doubt it. They will probably be pretty good, assuming they make (some of) the necessary improvements. I doubt they're picking as high as 14 next year, barring a trade. 10 wins is a reasonable expectation.

The problem with franchising Berrian is you go from paying him like a #1 to paying him like a superstar. But that deadline has passed so it's not an issue. I think Bradley and Hester can come very close to producing what Moose and Berrian give you (which isn't much), numbers-wise. 100+ catches for 1100 yards and 8 TDs? Add in more numbers for Olsen, and another receiver to the mix who should be able to the replace what your 3rd WR gave you last year, and it can be done. Catches aren't that hard to replace in football, as long as you keep throwing the same amount. In my opinion you have the elite, the second tier, and then everybody else. The entire Bears WR crew has been "everybody else" and replacing them with others should not be a problem.

I guess in my point of view, unfortunately right now he is our best option @ #1. While the Cubs can get away with paying non-stars like Soriano superstar money, in a salary cap environment, the Bears can't really justify paying #1 WR money to a WR who isn't close to being a number 1. It doesn't matter if he's their best or not. Personally I think Hester could very quickly get to Berrian's level, which isn't all that high. I'd love to have a legit #1, but I'd rather have properly paid 2's and 3's than an overpaid #1.

I agree. And the Bears could still take another solid WR prospect possibly in the 2nd rd. idk, with the WR FA market this offseason as it is, your looking at a guy who has abot 1/2 the production as BB and will likely command a simular salary as BB. I'd just stick with who we have. I think a major problem is a lot of people apparently think Berrian has had about twice the production he's actually had. He's done very little in the NFL for him to be thought of as a #1 receiver. Very little.

The replies to this story on the tribune site have set us all back a couple dozen years.

Yay, my first request has been granted. Nice to see somebody sees how awful he was this year, even if the coaches insisted on starting him every game for not good reason.

I'm sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about. I'm going to have to agree with david. Soriano hit 7/8/9 as a rookie with the Yankees. His 2nd and 3rd years in NY he led off. Then he spent two years in Texas, hitting primarily 3rd one year, and primarly 5th the other. In '06 and '07, with WAS and CHC, he was returned to the leadoff role. Amongst the six after his rookie year, Soriano's four best years were the four he spent leading off. His two worst years were the two he spent in Texas, not leading off. The above points are exacerbated when one considers that Soriano's home parks in NY and WAS were pitcher-friendly, and his home park in TEX is hitter-friendly. The obvious takeaway here is that this whole "move him down in the order because he's a power hitter not a leadoff hitter" strategy has been done before, by Texas' braintrust. It failed. So I'm wondering why some are so intent on abandoning that which has worked repeatedly, in favor of that which has failed repeatedly. cause and effect your analysis is faulty Wow. Compelling arugment you made there. If you choose to ignore both history and all logic when deciding where you'd like to bat Soriano, then go ahead. I want to have a good team. In order to have a good team, I believe it's necessary to use your players where they perform best. It's really not a difficult concept. I've yet to hear a a valid argument from people that insist Soriano will produce just as well down in the order other than "Nah, it's just a coincidence!", a claim that has quickly been refuted by evidence and logical reasoning. now I understand the problem. I prefer to have a bad team, unlike you, with your good team preferences. Now all makes sense. Once again. you do nothing to back up your claims. Well done. I've provided all that I am able to provide.

I'm sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about. I'm going to have to agree with david. Soriano hit 7/8/9 as a rookie with the Yankees. His 2nd and 3rd years in NY he led off. Then he spent two years in Texas, hitting primarily 3rd one year, and primarly 5th the other. In '06 and '07, with WAS and CHC, he was returned to the leadoff role. Amongst the six after his rookie year, Soriano's four best years were the four he spent leading off. His two worst years were the two he spent in Texas, not leading off. The above points are exacerbated when one considers that Soriano's home parks in NY and WAS were pitcher-friendly, and his home park in TEX is hitter-friendly. The obvious takeaway here is that this whole "move him down in the order because he's a power hitter not a leadoff hitter" strategy has been done before, by Texas' braintrust. It failed. So I'm wondering why some are so intent on abandoning that which has worked repeatedly, in favor of that which has failed repeatedly. cause and effect your analysis is faulty Wow. Compelling arugment you made there. If you choose to ignore both history and all logic when deciding where you'd like to bat Soriano, then go ahead. I want to have a good team. In order to have a good team, I believe it's necessary to use your players where they perform best. It's really not a difficult concept. I've yet to hear a a valid argument from people that insist Soriano will produce just as well down in the order other than "Nah, it's just a coincidence!", a claim that has quickly been refuted by evidence and logical reasoning. now I understand the problem. I prefer to have a bad team, unlike you, with your good team preferences. Now all makes sense.

I'm sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about. I'm going to have to agree with david. Soriano hit 7/8/9 as a rookie with the Yankees. His 2nd and 3rd years in NY he led off. Then he spent two years in Texas, hitting primarily 3rd one year, and primarly 5th the other. In '06 and '07, with WAS and CHC, he was returned to the leadoff role. Amongst the six after his rookie year, Soriano's four best years were the four he spent leading off. His two worst years were the two he spent in Texas, not leading off. The above points are exacerbated when one considers that Soriano's home parks in NY and WAS were pitcher-friendly, and his home park in TEX is hitter-friendly. The obvious takeaway here is that this whole "move him down in the order because he's a power hitter not a leadoff hitter" strategy has been done before, by Texas' braintrust. It failed. So I'm wondering why some are so intent on abandoning that which has worked repeatedly, in favor of that which has failed repeatedly. cause and effect your analysis is faulty

I'm sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about. I'm going to have to agree with david.

credibility does not last forever. Those who choose to claim things are done and things are over, over and over again, put their credibility on the line, and deserve scorn when they've cried wolf for the 1000th time.

I do not want to give up Hill in a trade for Bedard and I have no interest in Gary Mathews Jr. nor any of his contract.

If he can develop a decent splitter he may be able to miss some bats. Here's to hoping it happens. And get some more groundballs. Yeah, I'd guess he'll never miss a significant amount of at bats. It's all about whether he can turn into an extreme groundball pitcher or not.

I prefer virtual confirmation.

Now if that was what the convention was like, I would be interested in attending. Jim does seem like a pretty good guy, too bad he's not a pretty good GM (especially when you consider how backwoods stupid so many GMs are).

Dopirak is 3 years removed from the only season that resembled huge. He was horrible in 2002 and 2003, as well as 2005 and 2006. In 2007, he was mediocre as a 23 year old repeating high A, and horrible in AA. He stinks.

Was he at all interested in coming here? I think it's safe to say any free agent would be interested in coming to the Cubs. There's no reason to assume otherwise. I don't know about that. Jennings grew up in Dallas and went to Baylor. He wasn't too far from home with the Rockies and Astros, plus he just signed with a team right in his backyard. It could be possible that he wanted to stay close to home in Texas rather than head elsewhere. After all, plenty of other teams beyond the Cubs would have been interested in his services (see: St. Louis). Why didn't he sign with them? Perhaps nobody else was interested in him.

Was he at all interested in coming here? I think it's safe to say any free agent would be interested in coming to the Cubs. There's no reason to assume otherwise.

Mark Prior has thrown over 200 innings since Carlos Zambrano's last shutout. Mark Prior has thrown ZERO innings since Rich Hill's last shutout. guh? Yes, Rich Hill threw a 9 inning, CG SHO in 2006, a year where he was averaging 5 2/3 IP per start. Blind Squirrel, meet nut. Scott Eyre throwing a complete game shutout would be a blind squirrel finding a nut. Hill is a very good starting pitcher who has as good a chance as almost anybody, and definitely any Cubs pitcher, to throw a complete game SO.

Colvin only has one major flaw, as far as I'm concerned: his lack of walks. The high reward I see in him is if he sticks in CF and if he manages to pull an Alexis Rios/Jose Reyes and starts talking more walks. If that's the case, he has the potential to be an All Star OF. That said, I don't have much faith in this organization to teach him better patience at the plate. Other than the high draft pick and contract given to him, I actually think of him as low risk low reward. I think he's a decent bet to make it in the majors, but never be good enough to star.

I don't know why anybody would assume that. He's a big fat 38 year old coming off surgery. He was basically just above average at his best. And barely hanging onto average recently. I would not assume that he'll be able to maintain averageness even if he is healthy. Grow up. Is it really necessary to call him fat? You've done so several times in this thread. Yes it is. He's fat and he hurt his foot because he couldn't carry his load. It's also an indication he doesn't take care of himself very much, which could lead to steeper decline, and/or inability to recover from the injury. Players' weight is a valid topic.

What's that exactly?

I wouldn't. Unless he's too injured to start the season, he'll start. He's always said the right things. But he's going to be in the rotation if he's healthy enough to start the season.

The only thing to wonder is if there is a trade. Because if nobody is moved, it's a near lock to be Zambrano, Lilly, Hill, Marquis and Lieber.

That is some rather strange logic.