scarey

It would help to have a 1B who can actually hit though, especially if they bring nothing to the table defensively. I don't know what you expect here. Do you want him on the bench? It's not gonna happen. There's not exactly a glut of good hitting first baseman immediately available, so why not move Soriano and grab one of the free agent outfielders. Or, save some money by having someone like Colvin or Jackson or Burke (if ready by then) move into the outfield. If a worth while 1st baseman becomes available in 2012, Soriano can move back to left field as there will be a vacancy in the outfield from Fukudome.

Also, keep in mind that he Cubs have acquired a bunch of near-MLB ready first base recently. Brian Lahair, Matt Spencer, and Ryne White. None of those guys look like they will be up to the task of being a full time first baseman, but I could see Lahair or Spencer being capable in a platoon roll.

I was thinking about Soriano to first at some point in his contract the other day. Why not next year? I understand we've grown to be spoiled by Lee's defense at first, but first base is not exactly known to have premiere defenders league wide. Hell, we've already brought up the idea of Dunn playing there. We know he at least has fielded ground balls at one point in his career. My thought is if guys like Konerko, Delgado, and Dunn can play first, surely a guy who at one time played 2nd base can play there. The other idea would be Nady to first base. We'll have to see how he plays this year though.

'08 alum. First became a full fledged Boiler basketball fanatic when I got there in '02 with Willy Deane flying all over the court and Kenneth Lowe dropping shots from Slater Hill.

Watch the game again. They did quite a notable job of defending Johnson and pushing him out of the low post. Kudos to them.

Listed weights of each player. Davis: 220lbs Tisdale: 235lbs Johnson: 215lbs

Looking at the play by play here: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/playbyplay?gameId=300512509 I looked at it individually. I noticed that they do not specify if a blocked shot was a jumper or a layup, but I don't remember any jump shots being blocked, so let's assume those were in the paint. Also, they do not specify when a foul was on a layup attempt or what not if the attempt was missed, so this is pretty flawed information really. However, based on that game log, the Illini were 4/15 in the paint while the Boilermakers were 8/22. Again, these do not account for the fouls in the paint, so this really tells us very little. I can tell you that the Boilermakers made it to the line 3 times before the bonus in the 1st half and 2 times before the bonus in the 2nd half. Illini went once all game before the bonus. So, unless there was a foul on a jumpshot at some point that I don't remember, it was at least 16 attempts in the paint for the Illini and 27 for the Boilermakers. That's a pretty large discrepency.

Lot's of individual things to address in this post, so I'm going to break it down. I respectfully disagree. Lewis Jackson was getting pushed around all game long. He always does in every game because he's just a smaller player. The Illini were playing him just as physically as Purdue was playing. Also, Johnson was getting pushed around all game too. You think there's a reason he was only settling for 15 footers? Every time he brought it inside he would have major body contact and not get the call. I can only commend your guys for the way they played Johnson (although I admittedly would be peeved if we had lost). I can't account for every single foul against Hummel, and I'm sure there were some very questionable ticky-tack fouls called. But again, it works both ways. I just listed three specific plays that went in favor of the Illini. Shouldn't that be game planned for though? If you know Kramer is going to flop, why allow Davis to slide into a screen on him after an inbound pass? Again, what Kramer was doing to your guards is what your guards were doing to Jackson when bringing the ball up the court. EVERYONE who has ever played a game of basketball does that. EVERYONE. I never asked for sympathy. I just find it a little hypocritical to call him out for it when you would be happy to have a guy that does the same thing for your team.

Because it's not basketball it's Wojo slap the ground bull [expletive]. It's not emphasizing a foul, it's acting like a clown They were fouls with our without the flop. It's true, they may not be called if not for the flop, but the bottom line is they were fouls. Don't foul you don't get called. I'm sorry, there's no other way to put it.

Syracuse missed the tournament once with 10 Big East wins and I believe Penn State or someone else missed the tourney last year with 10 Big Ten wins. Syracuse doesn't ever count when they're on the bubble because they play 14 D2 teams in non-conference every year. I really think they'll get in at 11-7. Whether they beat Minny and Michigan or lose one of those and beat UW I don't think matters. Also, possibly one of the most homer reffed games I've ever seen today. Absolutely awful. The scout board had a breakdown on shot types, Purdue shot 6 more layup/dunks and went to the line something like 20 more times. Awful. I hadn't seen the comments made here, and maybe I shouldn't be bringing this back up, but really? Are you implying that Purdue went to the line on jump shot fouls? I think some of you Illini fans saw Kramer flopping on two calls, looked at the free throw desparity, and automatically assumed the refs gave it away. 6 of the free throws that Purdue shot were from intentional fouls at the end and 2 free throws were from Weber's T. That's a 5-20 free throw differential which is understandable seeing as Purdue had a huge differential in points in the paint (and is a reason I don't believe the breakdown on shot types you referenced). Also, Illinois got plenty of calls in that game. Kramer got nailed in the nose on that drive and didn't get a call. That foul on Jackson when he clearly tied up Tisdale for a jump ball. The tipped pass that McCamey deflected out of bounds that went to Illinois. Sometimes calls are gonna go your way, sometimes they don't. Not to mention that the flops by Kramer were in fact fouls! Davis slid into that screen. I agree, it's not going to get called all the time, but it's not Kramers fault for flopping, it's Davis' fault for not positioning himself well in the first place. Kramer's feet were set on the Cole charge and the blocking foul by Cole, he was still moving up to his spot. They were all fouls! If Kramer flops to emphasize a fould and try to give his team the advantage, how can you blame him for that? As a Purdue fan, I don't care if people think he's a [expletive] for it, he's giving my team an advantage. What sucks is I was thoroughly impressed by the Illini, but you guys are overshadowing it by the complaints about the refs. I didn't realize your guys spaced the floor and shot so well. The defense was excellent as well. Your bigs had their feet on Johnson't neck all game long. If you get to the tourney, you have a great chance to upset a few higher seeds. Best of luck going forward except if Purdue and Illinois meet in the conference tourney.

Position player I'm looking forward to is Ryan Flaherty. If he can keep his power numbers up at A+/AA, he could become a very valuable prospect. The pitcher I'm looking forward to is Cashner. I'm hoping he starts to regularly pitch 4-6 innings per outing and can rack up more strikeouts.

Well, don't forget that Santo could fall out of the booth and die on impact, President Obama could attend a game and eat a tainted hotdog causing fatal food poisoning, and the sky could fall. Other than those exemptions, I think you have a great outlook on the upcoming season... I'm not saying the Cubs will go 59-103. That list shows they're far from a lock for 95 wins and a playoff berth. Thoughts like considering Zambrano's elbow and/or shoulder may finally give out is just a little too much over the top pessemism for me. That's all I'm saying.

Well, don't forget that Santo could fall out of the booth and die on impact, President Obama could attend a game and eat a tainted hotdog causing fatal food poisoning, and the sky could fall. Other than those exemptions, I think you have a great outlook on the upcoming season...

Doesn't Cashner's fastball have a lot more movement than Gregg's ever did?

I was a little surprised by Truffle's comment on Gaub too. I've heard he has very good stuff and there has to be a reason for striking out almost 13 per nine innings in the minors.

I find the fact that you're very specific in your predictions a little weird (no offense). Also, I think Huseby could bust, but I don't think it will be due to the fact that he gets hit hard at any point except maybe the majors. This is how I see things just in terms of the big league roster. Keep in mind, this is strictly in terms of who is in the Cubs organization at this time. Similar to how BA does their projected lineups. C- Soto 1B- Vitters 2B- Flaherty SS- Castro 3B- Lee LF- Soriano CF- B. Jackson RF- Burke SP1- J. Jackson SP2- Zambrano SP3- Rhee SP4- Carpenter SP5- Antigua Bench- Watkins Bench- Barney Bench- Guyer Bench- R. White Bench- Clevenger LR- Coleman MR- Cales MR- Guzman MR- Gaub SU- Parker SU- Huseby CL- Cashner Nothing too surprising other than maybe Lee at 3rd. If they don't end up trading him, I think they might move him over because of his arm despite the fact that they would be losing a lot of power from the hot corner, but I think Jackson in center and Flaherty at 2nd makes up for it. It would just be a shame to waste his range over there. I could see him getting traded in the long run though.

There's always the chance that some guys could get their opportunity as a result of an injury. 1B we are not really very prepared for although Lahair or Ryne White could be possibilities. Barney or Thomas will get called up if we lose a middle infielder as long as Castro isn't the obvious choice . Marquez Smith may get an opportunity if Aramis has another major injury. Colvin is the obvious first outfielder up. And Clevenger, Chirinos, and Robinson will probably have to make themselves stand out to get picked out in the case of a Soto or Hill injury. If a starter goes down mid season, Samardzija, Gorzo, Marshall, or Caridad would obviously be first in line. But if all of them are working relief in some capacity or already starting with the Cubs, I would guess Atkins, Coleman, or possibly Jackson would get an opportunity. I think there are so many relief candidates lined up in waiting that it's not worth mentioning.

1. Josh Vitters 2. Starlin Castro 3. Andrew Cashner 4. Jay Jackson 5. Brett Jackson 6. Hak-Ju Lee 7. Chris Carpenter 8. Kyler Burke 9. Ryan Flaherty 10. Blake Parker I realize it's a little unorthadox.

Then why are we supposedly not trying to compare the guys to Castro? That's my point. Castro isn't some icon that cannot be referred to when describing other prospects. There's nothing wrong with comparing others to him. He shouldn't be excluded from the conversation with "we aren't trying to find the next" language. Castro is a very rare case where a young kid produces against advanced competition. Whether he pans out and becomes an elite MLB player is irrelevant to my comment. Right now, Castro's perceived value as a prospect is extrodanary. My point was it's unlikely that any of these rookie level players will go the same route as Castro because it is so rare. I don't think there's too many people that are already predicting an .800-.900 career OPS for Castro. I'm pretty sure the Ryan Harvey's and Brian Dopirak's of the past have kept everyone's long term expectations in check.

Because the last 4 years he's averaged an .800 OPS to go with 50 steals at 80+% and elite defense. Again, this is a corner outfielder we're talking about. Sure, he's better than Fukudome, but not nearly as great as he's been made out to be. We should expect more than an .800 OPS from a corner outfielder. The stolen bases and the defense make him extremely valuable. He was a 5 win player last year, that's about top 5 for all outfielders. His AVG driven OBP does not concern you?

Because the last 4 years he's averaged an .800 OPS to go with 50 steals at 80+% and elite defense. Again, this is a corner outfielder we're talking about. Sure, he's better than Fukudome, but not nearly as great as he's been made out to be. We should expect more than an .800 OPS from a corner outfielder.

Why is it that so many people are enamored with the idea of signing a corner outfielder after 2010 that will be turning 29 and to this point has a career OBP of .335 and OPS of .772?

I worry about even making this point because I can sense the ensuing lynch mob, but what makes you think the spending spree was totally on Hendry? Yes, the Tribune gave Hendry an increase in payroll, but at the same time they were in the early stages of getting ready to sell the team. I have no definitive proof in support or opposition of it, but I always felt like the Tribune directed Hendry on some of the contracts he signed. Afterall, what did they care? They wouldn't be picking up the tab of most of the contracts anyway. So, overpay to put a good product on the field (no matter what you say about them going forward, Soriano and Zambrano are big reasons for recent success) and try to pull in a couple extra million in the transaction. I'm not giving Hendry a free pass, or saying anything he did was acceptable. All I'm saying is a lot of people here act as if we're doomed until we unload Hendry when the truth is... getting the Cubs away from the Tribune company and Zell was at least half the battle. Yes, he's still giving out stupid contracts to middle relievers, but I don't think Hendry is going to sign older players to lucrative, long term deals going forward regardless of the payroll constraints. I realize we may never know if that's true or not, but I believe Hendry over paid knowing it was for short term value. I don't think Ricketts will be buying into that philosophy since he's planning on keeping the franchise for a little while.

That's the testimonial I'm looking for.

A whole lot of nothing is Ryno's own words. And who of the people bashing Sandberg in this thread have heard or seen words of his on this particular topic? If you have a source, I would love to read it. If you're referring to his hall of fame speech, I think you're blowing it way out of proportion. I don't think he's saying that star players should learn the value of sac bunting... he himself had all of 31 SHs through his whole career. I think he's saying there's is a time and place for it and certain players that should be able to do it don't know how to effectively. See: Mike Fontenot However, that's just how I interpret it and that's mostly based on the fact that he really doesn't bunt much relative to a guy like Lou who doesn't use the sac bunt particularly often. He had a series of articles written for Yahoo sports back in 2006 that were much more disastrous than his HOF speech. I'm sure they're still available if you search for them. I'll check them out. I just want to reiterate: I'm not saying that he does not bunt often. I'm saying I don't know for sure and I believe nobody really does know for sure unless they've actually watched a fair amount of the games he's managed. I'm also saying that the statistics don't seem to back up the idea that he over emphasises sac bunting. Should he be the next manager of the Chicago Cubs? I don't know. But he shouldn't have a strike against him because he likes to sac bunt all the time IMO because as far as I can see... he doesn't.