jersey cubs fan

I see your point. 10 games would be fair. Maybe it just needs to be changed and made clear that the pitcher's start must be skipped entirely. Lee started the fight. Had Lee gone to first there is no fight and no suspension for anybody. I don't see why he should be subject to more time served simply because Lee chose to throw a punch. 5 games is 5 games, it's going to throw off their rotation regardless. He's going to miss out on the money.

This is absurd. 1 game for a starting position player does not equal one start for a pitcher. First off, 5 games is the equivalent of missing 5 days worth of pay for both guys. Second, if anything, a pitcher should get an extra couple days, maybe 6 or 7, if the equivalent player got 5. But the fact is Lee threw the first punch and that pitch was most likely not intentional. Had Lee gone to first base there is no suspension for anybody. 5 games out of an every day player's season is equivalent to 3% of his season, which is equivalent to less than 1 start for a pitcher.

This is from Peter King. The SI-Rex Grossman Hatred Parade Continues. I dont care that Grossman is a bear. I want him to piss all over the league, next year. I want him to go bananas. I never personally rooted for another player in any sport like I do for him now. Is he talking 27th out of all the QB's in the league? If so give me a damn break. 27th out of all starting QB's, 27/32. JP Losman ranks higher. Eli Manning, every bit the erratic young passer that Grossman is but without an NFC title ranks higher. Matt Schaub who has done absolutely nothing in this league ranks considerably higher. Jason Campbell is higher. Peter King is a moron when it comes to Rex Grossman, but he's not alone. This weekend some fool on ESPN repeatedly said a team can't win with Rex as the QB. THE FREAKING BEARS MADE THE SUPER BOWL WITH GROSSMAN AT QB. Obviously it is possible to win with him there. Vince Young, Jon Kitna and Brett Favre all have negative td/int ratios but rank in King's top 15, even though his biggest complain about Rex is his erratic turnovers.

brown is staying in tennessee http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-070618-bears,1,4469990.story?coll=chi-sportstop-hed

At first, yes, but that's only because that is how somebody described it before I saw it. But it was fair by so much that there's no way that was his intention.

It's the exception that proves the rule, kind of like being satisfied with an 83 win team because STL won it that way or not worrying about a very slow start because Houston had a great second half. Detroit didn't just draft and develop their own though, the whole team was pretty much brought in from other teams. Trades were made. People are clamoring to stay the same, and even talking of signing Kobe as a free agent. With the salary cap, it will be impossible for them to keep all their players (and sign them to the contracts they will require) then sign Kobe. 1 team out of the past however many dozens of champions has done it without a superstar. I think it's a huge mistake to try and repeat that sort of flukey result.

I think the difference is whether or not it's a routine. Admiring a HR for a few steps everytime is showboating, but if you take extra long one time with some other theatrics, thats' showing somebody up.

Sounds about right. The question now is when is the best time for Lee to serve. I would think he'd want to appeal at least to give Ramirez time to return. But I wouldn't want him missing the Brewers series. It might be best to have him serve the week before the all star break. What did Perry do? I only got to listen to the radio broadcast and see the highlights.

I predicted the Brewers would win the division before the season started actually. And everyone laughed at me. What's with the "woe is me" routine? Quite a few people picked the Brewers. I doubt everybody laughed at you if you did pick them.

It surprises me how willing many Bulls fans are to wait and be patient. NBA basketball teams don't really seem like they develop to me. You either have a great player, and therefore a chance to win, or you don't. There's a certain amount of improvement, but the Bulls are 4 years into the Skiles era, with a lot of time already invested in the development of players that so far don't seem capable of winning but 1 series in a weak conference playoff. The idea of waiting for free agents doesn't make much sense either, with the Bulls awful history of signing quality free agents and with so few teams succeeding in the free agency game. I would think the chances the Bulls ever win a title by drafting and developing their own is extremely small. Detroit pretty much toyed with this bunch and the Pistons were embarrassed by Cleveland, who has one thing the Bulls clearly don't, a great player. Do people really think this Bulls core stands a chance of winning 60 and a title in the next couple years without going outside the organization to get a great player? I think calling for them to stick with what they have is just begging them to try and win 50 and have a respectable showing in the playoffs, but nothing more. Outside of Detroit, which didn't even draft and develop it's own, when was the last title won by a team that lacked a superduperstar?

I think you're a little paranoid. I'm not sure why you think everybody would know you're a girl in the first place. I doubt people are purposefully ignoring you. If you haven't written much people won't know who you are, and if you write something that nobody responds to, it's probably because they don't have any response, not because they are out to get you or hate girls.

I would bet it was just a matter of a writer looking for a utility player making millions on a team that may be looking to sell.

God I hope not.

Using a comment like "get your facts straight" is probably going to create reactions you deem to be an attack. Had you simply made a comment, and not added that bit, I don't think anybody would have said anything.

I doubt Barrett comes cheap in the offseason. Somebody will pay him decent money and likely in the AL where he can DH. Who would pay Barrett big money to DH? His bat isn't that valuable by DH standards. Pretty sure he meant to keep him fresh, like 80-100 games at catcher, 40-60 at DH. It should also be noted that only 7 AL teams are getting an OPS over 800 from the DH spot. Despite the presence of prototypical DHs like David Ortiz and Gary Sheffield, most teams are using a mix of players out there who are far from ideal. Only 5 guys qualify for the batting title from the DH spot. There's not a lot of true DH candidates. Barrett could be relatively valuable with an AL team if he was able to cut down on his games caught, to the tune of 80-90 games per year, then just concentrate on hitting for 2-3 days a week. The Angels, for instance, are getting very little production from both their DH spot and C.

He has an opt-out clause, a trade kicker, and a no-trade clause in his current contract. No trade clauses are unheard of in the NBA. He won't be eligible for one with his new team. I don't think he'll be anxious to tear up his existing contract in favor of a new one with his new team. Kobe holds the majority of the cards here with his no-trade and opt-out clauses in hand. Sounds like he does, but it also sounds like he will have to compromise if he really wants to be traded.

Sure. How does that get rid of the opt-out clause? That's in his current contract. It would give Kobe more incentive to stay, but he could still leave after two seasons. i would assume that the extension would include erasing that clause Don't see Kobe doing that. He's got four years left on his max contract deal with a trade kicker in it already. If he were traded, I suspect he'd talk possible extension with his new team in two years time and use the opt-out as leverage. But that doesn't mean he won't use it. If he really wants to get traded, he's going to have to compromise. LA isn't going to give him away, and nobody is going to trade for him without assurances he'll stick around.

When you're talking about a 25 year old who put up respectable numbers the last two years, not to mention his minor league career (better than the guy(s) replacing him) who has struggled for about 100 sporadic at-bats...yes. If we were the Devil Rays or 20 games out, then sure. Instead, we're a team that has both a legit shot to win its division and a fairly weak, RH-heavy lineup. Given Murton's performance at the plate, in the field, and on the bases, Floyd is and has been a better option. It's up to Murton to hit his way into the lineup, even if he has to do that from the bench. It's not up to the manager to continue to start him until he does that, especially if it means a far more productive bat is on the bench. The supposed RH heavy lineup is a fallacy. Anybody who has paid any attention knows this team's biggest weakness is the ability to hit LHP. It has been for a few years. They are not RH heavy. There's no such thing as hitting your way into the lineup from the bench. A manager that requires such a thing from his young players is not going to get good production out of young players. Bobby Cox does it the right way, giving a guy a job and letting him hit through slumps. That's what players like Murton need.

Maybe because he was only the GM for two years of his tenure here? Get your facts straight. You definetly work for the Tribune company. Why, because I told him to get his facts straight? Those are the facts. MacPhail was Cubs GM from July 2000 to July 2002...TWO years. I just happen to pay more attention to the business side of the game because it fascinates me. That doesn't mean that I work for Tribune Company. I think the responses to my post shows why I don't have a lot of posts for the number of years that I have been a member of this community. And why is that exactly?

I'm sure there are a few knuckleheads in our system that MacPhail is in love with. Dopirak, Harvey, and Luke Hagerty for Tejada? :lol: Doesn't the OPS drop (100 pts) YTD vs previous two years norms and the fact that he's owed $31MM over the next two season's bother anyone? I'm just not sure the cost that it would take to acquire him at this stage of his career would be a wise move to make. Not when that OPS is 200+ points higher than our current SS rotation sits at.

After several years where the Cubs stressed the "ability" to play several positions over the ability to play any of them well, while still producing, it is rather refreshing to have a guy who isn't a drag on the roster.

I'm all for a future 2B situation where Theriot, Fontenot and Patterson battle it out, but I'm not that interested in saving money by giving DeRosa away at this point. He's needed for 3B help, he's needed for RH pop help as well. I'd like to see him be the guy playing RF when Floyd sits for the time being. I'm nowhere close to being in the mood for dumping everybody for an overhaul. Maybe if they stay right where they are I'll be in the mood on July 31st, but there's no reason to trade DeRosa now.

I think the same should be said about the Cubs. The White Sox are 10.5 games out with 3 teams to climb over, the Cubs are 6.5 with 1 team ahead of them. The White Sox are in a free fall and have a worse record than the Cubs while playing in a tougher league and division, and have an expected w-l that suggests things could get even worse. The Cubs are treading water in a winnable division and have an expected w-l record that suggests they could be a bit better than the record. I don't think they are in the same boat.

The only way I see them trying to sell high is if the team falters but he keeps playing well, and they get further out of it. They've had a nice stretch, and I don't see them dealing Abreu now. With Giambi's situation a mess and lacking any real 1B, I think they will try and hold onto him for the duration.

hummm........... thats interesting. I thought for sure he would at least finish the year in the pen. what are his numbers in relief? I thought they made it clear he was going back to the rotation some time this year, but I wasn't thinking it would be this soon. According to his page on milb.com, he had 4 outings, totalling 7 2/3 innings, giving up 4 hits, 3 ER, 2 K and 2 BB.