lumafia

Soto will probably hit for the pitcher if it gets there. Or am I experiencing a lag and he seriously let [expletive] 3 fingers bat for himself? He let him hit, attempt to bunt unsuccessfully, and then swing away with 2 strikes instead of trying to bunt again. Yea I have no idea That's just funny bad. I don't know many T-Ball coaches that would have allowed Hill to hit right there.

Hill with the Golden Sombrero!

I'm saying both. The Cubs don't want to trade him, and other teams don't want to give up prospects for his contract.

That's why there won't be a huge market for him. Again, I say trade them all. But I don't think A. many teams will take a chance on him this year or B. Hendry will trade him. I don't think the team is planning on being in contention this year, but I know Hendry wants to contend next year. Due to lack of options for 3B within our organization and through free agency, I would be VERY suprised to see Ramirez dealt.

It would probably be a good idea, but nobody is going to take a chance on him because of what happened this year, and it would be unlikely that we could find somebody who can be as productive as he could (if healthy) be for the same money. I think he's pretty much shown he's beaten whatever the hell was wrong with him earlier this year. And yeah, we're not going to find another ARam on the market, but if we could maybe get Cantu and then a slight upgrade to another position that makes losing Aram worth it. In a dream world, I say Cantu and Adrian Gonzalez as our new IF corners. Cantu and Gonzalez would be an upgrade over Lee and Ramirez, but Gonzalez won't be available until 2012 as a FA, or at best, 2011 via trade. The only team I've seen that has the payroll flexibility, needs offensive help desperately enough and would like to retain players through a trade beyond this year is the Phillies. I'm not sure if they would be willing to deal for Aramis.

It would probably be a good idea, but nobody is going to take a chance on him because of what happened this year, and it would be unlikely that we could find somebody who can be as productive as he could (if healthy) be for the same money. Yea there is noway thats even close to being true. The only GM dumb enough to give up prospects for a guy who has had the injury and production problems Aramis has had over the last 2 years as a 32 year-old 3B getting ready to make $14.6 million in 2011, is Jim Hendry. I don't think he'll trade Aramis to himself, but you never know.

It would probably be a good idea, but nobody is going to take a chance on him because of what happened this year, and it would be unlikely that we could find somebody who can be as productive as he could (if healthy) be for the same money.

Eat it, Josh Hamilton. I've seen him do it. It was in International waters so they couldn't prosecute him.

Based on what Howard got, you have to expect Dunn to get a deal somewhere in the neighborhood of 4/70. You could probably sign Dunn to a 3-year deal, but you are going to have to give him a minimum of $18 mil per to get him to agree to it.

It'd have to be a 3 team deal. Phils get pitcher from crappy team. Mystery team gets Werth. Crappy team gets prospects from mystery team. It doesn't have to be a 3 team deal. The Astros just want to cut their payroll down for next year, and they owe $16 mil to Oswalt for 2011.

If you remove his numbers from his first game back (he was 0 for 3 on 6/25), his numbers are: .367/.405/.848

It's not a core if you don't have your best players. The Blackhawks have a core, which is their best players. Any additions need to be role players. The Cubs need a freaking stud bat, which is the core of just about any really good team, and something the Cubs do not have. When you have to add a star to be able to contend, you don't have a core in place. You have a lot of role players and some nice pieces, but not a core. How would one define a stud bat? I'm not trying to be a jerk, but let's get into specifics here. Upon what criteria does a player walk around with a "stud" label?

Isn't a loss a result? Seems like splitting hairs. Siding with NG is never a good plan, really... I know. I rarely agree with him, but even a blind monkey finds a banana every once in a while.

Just out of curiosity, if not bad luck, why do you think he has fewer fly balls leaving the park than in the past? because he isn't hitting fly balls far enough to go out of the park? if a guy hits 20 straight medium depth fly balls, is he unlucky that none of them left the park? Why are those fly balls no longer going far enough to be home runs, though (if that's the case)? What's changed from the past few years and this year that makes him hit about the same number of fly balls, but have a smaller number of them leave the park? The number of fly balls hasn't really decreased, nor has his ability to make good contact (LD% is right on his career average). If he were injured, it would stand to reason that some of his other numbers would have taken a hit as well, but they haven't. I understand this doesn't prove that he's gotten a lot of bad luck this year, but that's easily the most likely explanation. His HR/FB is down from 7.4% to 6.9%. Not a huge difference. The .5% difference isn't dramatic if you consider the fact that the entire American League is down 1.2% from last year.

The title of the thread says "typical Cubs loss", not "typical Cubs result". I'm with NG on this one. As far as losses go, this one was atypical.

Just out of curiosity, if not bad luck, why do you think he has fewer fly balls leaving the park than in the past? Injury or mechanical issue?

We should trade him because he could be an injury risk due to his delivery and young relievers are typically inconsistent

I bet Jim's phone blows up with GM's asking about Lilly after today. Barring a complete meltdown, of course.

Because Ryan Howard hits lefites like I do True, that still might be better than Ben Francisco does though. Howard hits at a .740 clip versus lefties with 7 HR's. Fransisco is at .655 OPS with 1 HR. Yeah I would have made Francisco beat me. However, in their career, Howard has a .750 OPS versus lefties, while Fransisco has a .759 OPS versus lefties. It's really a toss up. You don't walk him, but you don't throw him BP either.

Because Ryan Howard hits lefites like I do True, that still might be better than Ben Francisco does though. Howard hits at a .740 clip versus lefties with 7 HR's. Fransisco is at .655 OPS with 1 HR.

That sounds about right. The media loved it when he was all "fiery" and "emotional" when he was good. Now that he is having a bad year, it's a problem. His emotions, and how he succumbs to them is what made him so good for so long. The problem is that when he sucks, those who have no idea on how to explain why he sucks, just blames it on his emotions. He needs to be "rehabbing" whatever physical ailment that has his velo down. I'm not sure you can just rehab age and overuse. Most guys lose velocity with age, especially those that rack up lots of innings at a young age. HGH can overcome age and overuse. I've always thought Zambrano was a couple of years older than his listed age.

That sounds about right. The media loved it when he was all "fiery" and "emotional" when he was good. Now that he is having a bad year, it's a problem. His emotions, and how he succumbs to them is what made him so good for so long. The problem is that when he sucks, those who have no idea on how to explain why he sucks, just blames it on his emotions. He needs to be "rehabbing" whatever physical ailment that has his velo down.

I wouldn't expect him to become best friends with Byrd, but I would expect any player to shake his hand and tell him "good job". Not liking the Cubs because they are a rival is different than not appreciating a job well done. Methinks Voto has a little inferiority complex. I bet he has tiny feet.

And that would be a mistake. You don't trade away guys because you think they are cancers. Trading away a cancer doesn't make the team better. You trade away a guy when you can get better value in terms of play on the field. But that is exactly what the Cubs would be doing by trading Lilly for the guys mentioned. And I disagree with trading him for those players, as they would not provide any value financially for the future of the Cubs or on the field (which I believe I already said). So, why are you disagreeing with me, when we obviously agree. Are you just in the mood to disagree? Wait a minute.....are you my wife? I'm just stating that there is no reason to qualify the statement "don't trade Lilly away for nothing". I can qualify it if I want. There are many examples of why the Cubs would trade away a player like Lilly for nothing. Here are 10 reasons. 1. His lucky socks that he hasn't washed in 8 months smell terrible 2. He doesn't laugh at Dempster's impersonations 3. He thinks Colvin should play 1st next year 4. He's a St. Louis Cardinal fan 5. The other players are jealous of tedlillyfanclub.blogspot.com 6. He openly supports Wins and Losses as the primary indicator of evaluating a pitcher 7. He keeps hiding Lou's dementia medication 8. He blames Wrigley Field for the championship drought 9. He stands too far in front of the rubber 10. He prefers Koyie Hill

And that would be a mistake. You don't trade away guys because you think they are cancers. Trading away a cancer doesn't make the team better. You trade away a guy when you can get better value in terms of play on the field. But that is exactly what the Cubs would be doing by trading Lilly for the guys mentioned. And I disagree with trading him for those players, as they would not provide any value financially for the future of the Cubs or on the field (which I believe I already said). So, why are you disagreeing with me, when we obviously agree. Are you just in the mood to disagree? Wait a minute.....are you my wife?