jersey cubs fan

I agree. I was just showing that number for the heck of it, not building a case around it. It's the Jeff Blauser rule.

Lilly, Marquis, Hill, Marshall...............Cotts/Holliman/Gallagher? Ohman, Eyre, Howry, Wuertz, Marmol, Guzman............Cherry?

They definitely are growing to dislike Abreu here, although considering how good he was for them when they made the trade, I'm not sure they are itching to get rid of him. Dempster and Jones are owed $17.25 m for the rest of 2007 and 2008, combined. Abreu is owed $13.25 for the rest of this year plus the $2m buyout, or $27.25m for this year and next combined. Obviously Abreu is going to cost more for the rest of this year $11.25 than Jones and Dempster ($6.75m). It's possible the Yankees would be willing to even out some of the money. And in the for what it's worth category, Abreu's career line in Wrigley is .352/.433/.759

Which follows a 3 game set in Houston. Given the nature of September rosters, this changes the ramifications of the doubleheader, since presumably both teams could have an extra starter or two on the roster, and a couple extra bullpen arms. The only other option was a trip in late July. Hopefully these will still be meaningful games for the Cubs by then.

I'm fairly confident he'd be good enough. It's hard to say if he'd move. But ARod moved to 3B, and he was inline to being the greatest SS of all time. Chipper moved to the outfield, and then back to third. Guys move positions pretty frequently. If the Cubs traded for him, I don't think he'd sit out, or grumble. And if they offered him a market friendly contract, I'd bet he'd be willing to stay as a corner OF instead for forcing himself to another team where he could play 1B.

Apparantly he's going to make one last minor league appearance. I believe Hendry will look to trade him by then, or he will grant him his release after X amount of days with no action.

So you don't have a problem with the team being under .500 during his tenure? The bottom line is Hendry has done a terrible job putting together a ballclub. Yes I have a problem with the team being under .500 during Hendry's tenure. I also have a problem with all of the "experts" who post critcizing every move he makes (or doesn't) make. All of the "experts" don't criticize every move he makes. Although when you have one of the highest paid teams in baseball, and have a sub .500 record, obviously more often than not your moves are going to deserve criticism. If he made moves that couldn't be criticized, this team would win 95 games every year. Name the last move Hendry made that wasn't followed by dozens of pages of posts (most of them critical) by all of us "experts." Actually, there are dozens of pages of posts (mostly critical) of the moves that Hendry didn't make. He does deserve criticism for the poor record of this team, but I do get upset by the "damned if he does and damned if he doesn't" attitude on a daily basis. Again, all of us have hindsight and the right to change our minds in our favor. Why do you put mostly critical in parenthesis? Isn't your whole point about the "mostly critical" aspect? You comletely misconstrue reality. There are dozens of pages, but that is usually only because there are multiple tangents in any of those threads. A thread usually only ends up with many pages when people take opposing views, then arguments ensue. Obviously with 100s of members, somebody is going to disagree with something in nearly every thread. Somebody is going to hate a move, or like a move. The most obvious example, however, of a transaction that didn't get blasted was Nomar. Coincidentally, it occurred around the last time this team was any good. Ever since then it's been a series of mistakes, blunders and letdowns, culminating in an atrocious record. But I'd argue the Soriano signing response was mostly positive. There were a few that were 100% against, but a heck of a lot more that were 100% for it, and even more who were more or less excited about the acquisition, if only fearful of the financial impact. And of course, most everybody responded happily when Dusty was let go and Neifi was traded. The Greg Maddux signing was widely accepted as very good for the team, even if people like myself pointed out it was an awful lot of money for a more or less average pitcher. And the Todd Walker signing was, I believe, roundly praised as a smart, affordable price to pay for a nice piece to add to the team. Regardless, you act as if there is a large amount of people criticizing moves that don't deserve criticism. That's simply not the case. We're not talking about Yankees fans criticizing a 97 win roster here. We're talking about a team that has gone in the tank due primarily to a GM who simply has done a terrible job putting together a team. Furthermore, his belief structure clashes almost perfectly with the wants and wishes of multiple posters, so obviously, many of the things he does are going to be in the opposite direction of stuff some people would like to see.

that would be quite cool Would we have enough to give them in return though? I'd love to have Tex on the team. One would be free agent for another......Zambrano for Tex Perhaps. Or they could trade Murton, Jones and multiple young arms, guys like Veal, Gallagher, Marshall, etc. You could think about sending Colvin. While guys like Fox and Matt Craig would make interesting additions.

Are you honestly saying Jeter is not a good baseball player? I'm no Yankee lover, but Jeter is a hell of a player. He catches a lot of crap just because he plays for the Yankees in my opinion. He catches a lot of crap because of how he has been elevated by some. He is very good, but not nearly as good as his worshippers, and that includes many in the media, portray him to be.

that would be quite cool

No way. He's hardly remembered right now. The career numbers are great, but he won't be remembered as a legend, at least not nationally.

The fact that a select few sports writers no longer dominate the story probably means we will never have the same sort of reverence for these guys when their careers are over. I just don't see people pining over anybody of this era the way people talked about Mantle, Dimaggio and guys of that era.

I honestly don't get the inclusion of Ichiro. The luster has already worn off that one. He was a nice addition to the ballclub, and I'm sure still a huge star in Japan. But Ichiro is not going to be remembered as some sort of legend in America unless some very significant things happen in the near future, like a World Series run where he dominates or if he starts breaking records. He plays on a pretty mediocre team, and is already approaching his mid 30's, without having done anything truly remarkable other than for a few short stretches. I just can't imagine people talking about him in 40 years the same way some people talk about a lot of former legends. Jeter is the only lock to be talked about this way, because he's a Yankee who has won titles. Ortiz, maybe, since he was a central figure on the Red Sox championship team, but he could just as easily be lumped in with every other very large masher of this era. Pujols could end up like this if he maintains his career path of absolute greatness for a while.

So you don't have a problem with the team being under .500 during his tenure? The bottom line is Hendry has done a terrible job putting together a ballclub. Yes I have a problem with the team being under .500 during Hendry's tenure. I also have a problem with all of the "experts" who post critcizing every move he makes (or doesn't) make. All of the "experts" don't criticize every move he makes. Although when you have one of the highest paid teams in baseball, and have a sub .500 record, obviously more often than not your moves are going to deserve criticism. If he made moves that couldn't be criticized, this team would win 95 games every year.

Yeah, there doesn't seem to be any merit to this theory. The Cubs problem is, as it's always been, bad, personel. It's not the wrong personel for Wrigley. It's not Wrigley itself. It's not cheap owners, dumb fans, wind, luck, curses or anything else. They've simply come up short in the personel department, and for the past 10 years, at least, refused to come to grips with the emerging value of objective analysis, which has changed the way many have built their teams (but not the Cubs).

I don't know if that's true. I think if Jones starts playing well and Pie tanks, they will view it that way. But I feel Hendry has been itching to get Pie to the bigs for a long time, and apparantly has been looking to deal Jones for a long time. If he could, I think he'd deal him.

I think there is room for worrying about more than one player. Soriano, Lee, Barrett, they've all come up short of expectations. Has Lee really come up short of expectations? #1 in MLB in batting, #9 in OPS, .429/.510/.714 with runners in scoring posisiton. Nike needs to start running the chicks dig the long ball commercials again. In a different manner than other people, yes. I think Lee's AVG is completely unsustainable. He had a great run there with the doubles, but there was always a concern about the lack of HR, and nothing that has happened since that concern was raised has changed that. His numbers are falling fast. I think most people expected something other than the 2005 career year version of Lee. I don't think anybody expected a guy on pace to hit 12 HR for the season. He's hitting in the exact same weather conditions as Ramirez, who is on pace for a career best 42. It appears that concerns about his power returning with the wrist issue have been validated. If Lee is not going to be hitting HR, you can be pretty certain that AVG/OBP/SLG are going to keep dropping. If he doesn't significantly increase his HR pace, the numbers simply won't be there in the end. You can make fun of the "chicks dig the long ball" mentality all you want, but HRs truly are vital to a player like Lee's production. I just don't see the point in ignoring Lee's struggles just because we have other players to worry about as well.

Jones + Floyd = 546 in the past 7 days. Jones in May has essentially been Ronny Cedeno - .194/.239/.323 Jacque has really built himself a heck of a hole to climb out of, at .243/.295/.333, well off his pace of 2006, when he was already up to .278/.317/.474 by this time, relatively close to where he finished the season.

Jones + Floyd = 546 in the past 7 days.

Just noticed the awful Cardinals are a game and a half behind the Cubs.

Who on earth said that? The same guys who said Brownlie threw a 97 MPH curve? Here's one: I've seen others like that, so I'm not just going by the word of that source alone, but that's an example. http://www.baseball-fever.com/archive/index.php/t-39433.html It's one thing to have your fastball touch 95, it's a completely different thing to have some sink action to it. I am dubious he's throwing any type of sinker anywhere close to 95.

I would be a bit surprised if the Yankees looked at any middling NL starters to fill their rotation. They've been burned repeatedly with guys coming from the NL and not fulfilling their expectations with the Yanks, notably, Pavano, Johnson and Wright.

I don't believe this team is as feast or famine as it used to be, but still, it carries over some of the many characteristics. Going back to comparisons with the Mets, the Cubs have scored 0 or 1 run 8 times this year, the Mets have been held that low just 4. Likewise, the Cubs have been held to 4 or less 23 times this year, the Mets have done so 18. That's just 27.2% of the way into the season. If trends hold those spreads will widen substantially. Maybe some people think it's unfair to compare the Cubs to the best offense in the league, but personally, I'm only interested in seeing this team be the best. The Cubs are 7th in OBP, 7th in SLG and 7th in runs scored right now (although 5th in R/G). They are scoring and pitching well enough to be a little over .500 overall, but those 0 and 1 run outings, where they are predictably 1-7, really hurts. There are all sorts of weird categories where the team is substantially below .500 though, so it's not like this is the primary issue. It's just symptomatic of the fact that many issues are hovering over this team, and they aren't just a rejiggered bullpen away from running away with the title. As for luck in 1 run games, or blaming the bullpen, of the Cubs 10 1-run losses, in only two of them did they score an above average 5 runs. It's hard to blame pitchers or luck when you are scoring 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 runs and losing by 1. When you score that little (below average) you are supposed to lose. And of course, you can't erase all the early season losses, so the Cubs bad start now means they have to play .591 ball if they hope to get to 90 wins, a real stretch when you see even their pythagorean record doesn't bring them to that type of pace.

Not really much of an analysis, with a bunch of "seems" "mights" and "ifs". It's not entirely off the mark though. The issue I have is more about how they got here, and the motivation behind some of the moves. It's a lot of reshuffling without a lot of substance, trying to be passed off as big developments.

I don't want to roast him myself. I'm annoyed with some of his tendencies, but I can live with him as manager. The key remains Hendry and the roster.