NCCubFan

That's correct. I think mlb.tv may have some spring games, but not Extra Innings.

Emergency NSBB board

What the last two Florida teams did should be completely irrelevant to whether THIS year's team gets in. They need to be judged by the same criteria as everybody else. It would be unfair for a team to be left out because another team was given preferential treatment because of what happened in the past.

I'd take that bag of beans if the other team picks up Marquis' entire salary.

Here's a thought, Jason: Shut our big mouth, EARN a sopt in the rotation in Spring Training, and you won't have to worry.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Julia_Roberts_in_May_2002.jpg

They might have to win out to get that. Memphis UCLA Tenn UNC Duke Kansas Texas I think the last one comes down to them or Georgetown. Even then that is assuming Wisky or IU doesn't win out. Where's Xavier? I believe they're in Cincinnati. :lol:

Bobby Scales

Because there is such a thing as minor league fillers. Every MLB team has guys like this bouncing around AAA. They are necessary. Who cares? It is the 2nd ST game of the year, none of this really matters. I know it doesn't matter. I'm just surprised Walrond is still in the organization. If nothing else, you need players at the AAA level who can step in and replace players who may be called up to the majors to fill in for an injured player.

I agree. Wasn't Randy H better on defense than Davis? I believe he was, and Jody was better on offense. Hundley wasn't a great hitter, but back then if a catcher was good defensively any hitting at all was considered a bonus. There were .230-ish hitting catchers that were considered an asset to their teams back then.

Your post count shows up for me. It's 7722.

Me too, since Santo is referred to as Ronnie.

To avoid any confusion I'm locking this poll because a new one was started with the Peerless Leader included.

yeah, not a lot of competition there Neifi Perez and Rey Rnez beg to differ. http://www.northsidebaseball.com/Forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif

He also had the nerve to ask to actually be paid what he was worth, which I recall being his real undoing as a Cub.

My recollection is that Regan was one of the better relievers of that era, before managers started limiting closers to one inning. 1968 and 1969 were his best years, but I think he was fairly good in 1970. For the Cubs I think that qualifies him as one of the best by default. Randy Myers should be included. He had 168 relief appearances for the Cubs from 1993 through 1995. He had 53 saves in 1993, 21 in 1994, and 38 in 1995.

yes No.

No Gary Scott? Santo easily (for now). Aram might give him a good run if this poll were run five years from now. Bill Madlock would have been a possibility if more of his career had been with the Cubs (I'll never forgive the Cubs for trading Madlock for Murcer and Ontiveros).

Had Dawson played his entire career as a Cub I think he'd easily be in the top 3. Since he didn't it's Sammy, Sweet Swingin' Billy, and Wilson.

If Jody Davis is included as a catcher choice I think Randy Hundley should too. But either way I think catcher is a no-brainer.

The Bears already have the poor man's Adrian Peterson. :D

That's what we have the trade deadline for. I can almost guarantee that if the Cubs make the playoffs, you'll see new faces on the playoff roster. Why is it acceptable to wait until the trade deadline to make improvements that you know are neccessary? So we can pay more? There are bound to be players not currently available that will become available by the deadline. There are always teams that consider themselves contenders going into the season that realize they aren't as the deadline approaches.

No; he thinks it's spelled Yost. Meph knows better. :D

What's the reason why it won't work now but it worked in the old format of NSBB? Someone more knowledgeable about the board software than me would have to answer that.

Whoa; calling them a bunch of jerks is going way overboard. They reacted to a tough situation emotionally rather than logically. That makes them human, not jerks. They shouldn't have skipped practice; I'm not denying that. However, they did all reportedly show up for last night's walk-through. Had they followed through on their threats then maybe stronger criticism would be warranted. However, I don't think they can be faulted for showing support for their coach, even though the way they did so was misguided. I disagree. They could have showed their support any number of ways that would have expressed their frustration but not made them look like petulant children. How about a short statement to the media? A letter? An e-mail? If they can't be trusted to control their emotions (in part, a sign of maturity), then they could have spoken through their parents/guardians. The long and the short of it is: they acted stupidly and aligned themselves with a cheater. I stand by my comments. I'm not disputing that what they did was wrong. What I am disputing is that letting their emotions get the best of them doesn't make them jerks. We're all human, and we all do stupid things at times and react emotionally rather than rationally. That doesn't make us jerks. I agree we all let our emotions get the best of us. It happens, and it does not make us any worse than anyone else. However, what they did reveals a major flaw in their characters, IMO. They essentialy threatened to abandon their teammates and the school because they did not get their way. That indisputably arrogant behavior makes them jerks, IMO. We may be basically in agreement but just arguing semantics over the word "jerk." To me that word implies that somebody is a bad person. That's not the case here. They did something they shouldn't have, but everybody does at times. That doesn't make them bad people.