Moises a loo

That's a good point. And I don't want to give the impression that I dump the Cubs at the drop of a hat, just that I believe everyone has a point where it ceases to be worthwhile to stick with any particular endeavor. I have the same emotional attachment that most here do, and it's not necessarily easy to just stop caring. But it grates a bit when people act like it's literally impossible. And for the record I do hope for TV shows I like to do well in the ratings, so they'll stick around longer.

I think you're confused about what a "copout" is. So are you saying I have a responsibility to stand by the Cubs, no matter how poorly run they are, no matter how unpleasant they are to watch? No matter how many predictably stupid moves they make, even though I'm powerless to change these things? Okay, then, I happily admit I'm "copping out" of my sacred responsibility as a Cubs fan, whenever it suits me. My point was that people are responsible for their own choices, and if you reach a point where your decision to be a Cubs fan is making your life miserable, it's a copout to say you can't change it. Whether or not to follow the team is ultimately the only power you DO have in this situation, and you'd be a fool to rule it out over some archaic romantic idea that it's in your blood or some crap like that. I never said it was some kind of "sacred responsibility:" I just don't see the point in giving up on a team one has rooted for all or most of their life because they're often bad. If that's the idea, why root for any team ever for any prolonged period of time unless they're winning? There's also a huge difference between choosing to not watch or follow a team and actually becoming a fan of a different team altogether. Of course anyone here COULD change being fans of the Cubs: any statements along those lines should be obvious hyperbole. The point of giving up on the team would be that it's no longer fun to root for them. Like I said, when the show you're watching sucks, you change channels. You watch in the first place because you hope it will be fun, you have an emotional attachment to the uniform, or whatever. But to say that you could never root for another team, to me, is like saying you grew up watching "Wheel Of Fortune", you LOVE "Wheel of Fortune", and you would NEVER watch another game show, because you're a "Wheel of Fortune" fan, darnit. I see nothing wrong with someone channel-surfing their baseball teams if it makes them happy. I already know I'm rooting for the Phillies in the playoffs again this year. Love that lineup.

I think you're confused about what a "copout" is. So are you saying I have a responsibility to stand by the Cubs, no matter how poorly run they are, no matter how unpleasant they are to watch? No matter how many predictably stupid moves they make, even though I'm powerless to change these things? Okay, then, I happily admit I'm "copping out" of my sacred responsibility as a Cubs fan, whenever it suits me. My point was that people are responsible for their own choices, and if you reach a point where your decision to be a Cubs fan is making your life miserable, it's a copout to say you can't change it. Whether or not to follow the team is ultimately the only power you DO have in this situation, and you'd be a fool to rule it out over some archaic romantic idea that it's in your blood or some crap like that.

I have an emergency backup team in case the Cubs become unbearable, like they did early in 06. This is supposed to be fun, you know. I won't feel the same joy the diehards will if they ever win it all, but I don't go through the same pain year after year either. Life's too short to place your personal happiness in the hands of a bunch of spoiled jocks who don't know you exist. If a TV show sucks, you change the channel. The Cubs are a TV show that lasts a lifetime. When they suck, you change the channel. Saying you don't have a choice is a copout, IMO. That said, they've been relatively good this decade so we're way luckier than some earlier generations were.

I agree that he shouldn't be traded, but everything I've heard and read sounds like the Cubs want to get rid of him. Unfortunately, there's no way to "free up the payroll" because the only options the Cubs will have is to eat most of his contract or take a bad contract in return. I don't see why. A team like the Reds would be absolutely perfect for Bradley, and they certainly need offense and have room in the corners. Jocketty's moves have been downright dreadful since the Mulder trade, so I'm not assuming Hendry would have to contribute any salary. edit: I was unclear. No reason to take on Cordero considering how much the Reds need offense. The Reds don't have any money to spend; Cordero is the one big contract they'd really like to move, but they can't take on more without freeing it up somewhere.

You wouldn't be paying $12 million for Cordero, you would be paying the difference between Cordero and Bradley. If the "experts" are right, the Cubs will weaken their team (dump Bradley) and most likely add payroll (paying Bradley plus a replacement). The question is should we receive something useful in return. First let me explain that my original post was based on the absolute declarations by the "experts" (writers and broadcasters) that Bradley has to be removed from this team and that Hendry is going to have to eat a huge chunk (80% ?) of his remaining contract. Rather than paying $7 million next year and $10 million in 2011 for Bradley to play somewhere else while we receive nothing (low A-ball player) in return, I suggested taking Cordero. I totally agree that Bradley (at his salary) is more valuable than Cordero (at his salary), even considering Bradley's baggage. I understand what you're saying. Bradley was a horrible fit here; he'd be a much better fit in Cincy. Cordero is a luxury the Reds can't afford & the Cubs can. Ideally, Bradley continues to hit and provide decent value for the next couple years. BUT if the team has decided he's "killing their chemistry" or something and has to go, I think swapping bad contracts for a guy we can actually use may be a better idea than paying Bradley to play for someone else. You make a valid point and don't deserve to be ridiculed by the geniuses around here. That said, I doubt either team would do it, not because it doesn't make sense but because no GM wants to admit he screwed up. But you never know.

Am I really the only one who thought this was funny? Seriously, though, this team is fine the way it is. Everything is proceeding according to plan.

I apologize in advance for those who don't care for this sort of thing. This thread title has done inspired me to compose a Broadway Musical about the Cubs, based on The Sound of Music. Here is a brief track list: How Do You Solve A Problem Like Alfonso? The Hills Are Alive, With The Sound of Losing D'oh! A Curse! A Billy Goat Curse We're In Second Place, Going On Third Place These Are A Few Of My Huge NTC's

Wells does have an NTC. Wells in center field is a little worse defensively (according to UZR) than Soriano in left. Soriano has been a better hitter overall than Wells to this point, but part of making this trade would be on the belief that a 30-year-old Wells is more likely to be productive than a 33-year-old Soriano. That would be the Cubs' reason for doing the trade. The reason the Jays would do the trade is that they save a few million from 2012 to 2014. It would sweeten the pot if they thought Soriano projected to be better, but it's not necessary. I think getting that production from CF rather than left would also be a motivating factor. One of the reasons they threw so much money at Soriano was they thought he'd be able to play any OF spot; having him blocking LF for 8 years is killing them. If this trade magically happened, they could put Wells in center, move Fukudome back to right, and put Bradley in left where someone like Fox could easily fill in when he misses time. My unparalleled expertise tells me this has almost no chance of happening, for a number of reasons.

I still love this idea too, but my problem is this: I can imagine the Cubs wanting to do it. I can imagine the Giants wanting to do it (sort of). I can even imagine Soriano waiving his NTC after getting a taste of the bench. What I can't figure out is why Zito would waive his NTC. Face it, they're stuck with the guy. He'll probably start hitting again eventually. I bet the Reds would take Bradley for Cordero though.

Thank you. If he's healthy (which he hasn't been for 2 years), he'll be on a mission. I spent most of 2005 fantasizing about trading Wood and Prior for Dunn and Freel. Seriously.

Everything is unfolding beautifully

Thank you; he's like, the only one that came to my mind.

I'd rather get Valverde

Jiggly Field

Why get excited? They could run away with the division and there would still be no reason to think they won't suffer another humiliating first round sweep. Yeah, I know. Whatever. Then why bother following baseball ever? That's a good point. Maybe I'll take up needlepoint or something.

Why get excited? They could run away with the division and there would still be no reason to think they won't suffer another humiliating first round sweep. Yeah, I know. Whatever.

He's like everything else in life. You take the good with the bad. Where the Cubs never seem To be living up to your dreams

Ew. Dude. And have we forgotten Dusty already? Let's try to appreciate what we have.

Pea-vy or not Pea-vy,-- That is the question: -- Whether 'tis nobler for the NL Central to suffer the slings and arrows of an outrageous rotation, or to take arms from our mediocre farm system, to dominate in the regular season, perchance to get swept again in the playoffs. For in that sweep of death what dreams may come. Sorry, bored

Now now Veruca, don't you worry. Daddy will get you an oompa-loompa right away

Are you effing kidding me? What a stupid comment. Spoiled? The occasional division championships is by no means spoiling fans. Maybe "spoiled" wasn't quite the right word, though some people around here sure come across that way at times. I totally stand by the "neediest" comment, though.

You shouldn't be content with just making the postseason. The last 2 seasons were abysmal failures. Getting swept in the NLCS by 2 teams that didn't even make it to the World Series is embarassing. You should try being a Pirates fan, see how you like it. Cub fans are the neediest bunch of spoiled crybabies ever.

I see why you are having such a tough time grasping this. YOU are the one that's NUTS! It is BOSTON that is desperate, not the Cubs! The Cubs would be dealing from a position of strength, and regardless wouldn't be putting Soto or any regular, other than Soriano, in such a package. Most teams wouldn't be willing to give up such an offensive threat, and that makes a deal for Soriano even more attractive. Remember, I didn't say this was GOING to happen, only that it might. But if the Red Sox were indeed willing to see Beltran as a real offensive threat, how much more valuable would Soriano be to them? Are you Alfonso Soriano's mom or something? No, the old timers on this board know who I am, but for your info, I am someone that reads a lot of "lines", and because of my pedigree in the game, I know what needs to be done, and how to get it done. I am also able to read between those "lines", and keep my ears open. Although my contacts in the game are diminishing due to age and health issues, I still have a few of those, too. I'd love to believe you have a clue what you're talking about. Most people here would love to believe Soriano has positive trade value. But most people here live in reality, where it's clear that Soriano's contract was atrocious even when they thought he could stay healthy and play center field. Now that we know he can't do either of those things, the Cubs are stuck paying a superstar salary to a pretty good but declining player who is already more trouble than he's worth. You're talking two different things: Whether I have "clue" or not, and whether Soriano has any trade value. The answer to the latter is YES, how much will be settled like most barters, by what you get in return, WHEN that bartering is finished, not before! We'll see if Boston can get what they are looking for without coming after Soriano. Is that possible? Sure! Not likely, but sure! To the first, I'll debate any portion of the game you or anyone else would care to debate, but I'd hate to embarrass anyone, that's not my thing...but sometimes I have to come close just to get the attention of some of these dolts! oh you're gettin attention all right, well done there

We don't need him, we have Harden to get our hopes up and crush them now