Sammys Boombox

I like it. It could go like this. Aa-ron Miles. Aa-ron Miles. Every gameday you peeve me. Small and white. TLR's black knight. You look happy to screw Hendry. Blossom of snow may you bloom and grow, bloom and grow to 5-foot-4. Aa-ron Miles. Aa-ron Miles. I will curse you forever.

This may be one of the most divisive topics on this board. It's been an interesting read.

Lonely Goat Curse (Lonely Goat Herd) I'm coming up empty thinking of equivalents for Climb Every Mountain and Edelweiss. Kevin Greggs solo: Blow Every Ballgame Better as a duet with Aaron Heilman. Edelweiss is going to be difficult. Can't we just keep So Long, Farewell as the original title?

I'm probably in the small group of people that didn't want Bradley when we got him but now wants to keep him. I understand his frustrations with umpires. I honestly think he very seldom gets the benefit of the doubt. I often see him taking pitches that aren't even close and they are called strikes. For some reason the pitch that is BOTH up and away gets called on him a lot. If you take pride in something you do at work like Milton does with his pitch selection and you executed perfectly but you still "failed," wouldn't you be ticked? I think Milton should just shut-up sometimes, but you know reporters egg it on. The time he claimed to not notice the cheers when he scored from first on a double by Soriano in the late July game where the Cubs overtook the Cardinals for first place would have been a great time to shut-up and let the fans warmup to him. Of course, a reporter did ask him if he heard them. Is he perfect? No. But can he really contribute to a good team? Yes. If the rest of the team didn't tank the last few weeks, everybody would be singing the praises of Milton and Fukudome.

Haha. All three outs came during Mike Cameron AB. Struck out to start the inning and the double play to end it.

6-6 after 9. Braun thrown out at home trying to score on a sac fly from Mike Cameron.

Brewers were down 6-1 going into the bottom of the ninth. It's 6-5. Bases juiced. 1 out.

Um, well, uh...

I remember some of the players talking about how to keep focused during a long season that will inevitably lead to the playoffs. I remember fans on this board saying how after the playoffs last year, they won't give a damn about the regular season and start caring when the playoffs started. I remember a manager talking about how to keep focused during a long season that will inevitably lead to the playoffs.

What has transpired the last few weeks doesn't even seem real.

fixed It has nothing to do with him. I'm not tricked by his numbers this year. It's just that his team has won their respective division every single season he has pitched in the majors. Actually, the ML team that has owned him since he was drafted has won their division.

If I were a GM Jason Marquis would be on my team every year no matter how old he was. His team is somehow in the playoffs no matter what.

According to Baseball Tonight, Chad Fox is playing in replace of Soriano. Also, the Cubs are "toast."

I'm sure the Cubs will use that pick on a great player that will be a 12 time all-star and hall of famer. That's what usually happens with the Cubs high draft picks, right? I'd really like to finish above .500 as I don't believe that the Cubs have finished above .500 for three straight seasons for a very long time.

15 K after 8.0 IP. No 20 K game here.

Make that 15 K through 7.1 IP.

Greinke has 14 K through 7 IP.

I keep thinking the funk will end, that they'll start playing well again. Maybe not well enough to catch up, but to end with a respectable record. Then the game starts.

Here you go optimists! Cubs need just 47 of the remaining 76 Cubs + Cardinals games (73 actual games but three of them count as a Cubs game and a Cardinals game) to go their way to clinch. 46 to tie. They need a .618 "winning percentage" in those games to win the division (.605 to tie). The Cardinals need a .408 "winning percentage" to win the division (.395 to tie).

Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. I said I wasn't defending Hendry. I agree with everything you are saying about him. I was being sarcastic (although looking back at my post I didn't make it as obvious as I thought) about the 88-win seasons. The fact of the matter is, the Cubs have only had one "top dog" team so far under Hendry. I agree with that. We haven't enjoyed a single measly playoff victory in what will be 6 years. I'm just as frustrated as you are.

Never blamed Kenney for being cheap. I just stated that I thought that his only goal was to make as much profit off of the Cubs for Sam Zell. Which he did say in that radio interview I mentioned earlier. Although you can't blame him. Zell wouldn't have kept him around if he didn't at least portray that attitude. I didn't realize that he was here before Zell, which does change my opinion of him somewhat. While my facts were incorrect (Zell hiring Kenney). My conclusion based on the incorrect "facts" is one I think most of the posters would have come to. 1. Zell hired Kenney to squeeze as much money out of the Cubs as possible. 2. Zell is finally done with the Cubs. 3. Ricketts is keeping the man who was brought here for intentions that didn't include a WS winner. 4. Ricketts made a bad decision in keeping Kenney.

I'm just not sure what he could possibly say that would make his potential departure more important than Jim Hendry's. While I can't stand Hendry, that is mostly founded upon what he has done the last two offseasons. I think Kenney staying means that the number in the profit column will be more important than the number in the W column. He does understand that winning makes it easier to make money, but I don't believe his number one goal is to win a WS. I don't question Hendry's intentions. I could be wrong, but wasn't Kenney hired by Zell? I thought he was brought in to squeeze as much out of the team as possible for the Tribune. If that meant making the team or the stadium more valuable or whatever, that's what his job was. Again, could be wrong, but that has been my impression. You're way off. Kenney was with the Tribune and took over when McDonough left. He was basically the last suit standing. And the payroll skyrocketted under his watch. Being overly tight with money is the least of his issues. And it shouldn't just be what Hendry has done lately that has you concerned. Do you not know what happened in 2005 and 2006? He inherited a very talented franchise that was primed for success, enjoyed financial dominance over the competition, and came away with one lousy 90-win season (out of 7 so far). I was wrong about when and why Kenney came, as I said I may be. This does change my perspective on him, at least somewhat. I do know what happened in 2005 and 2006. Keyword in my post before would be "mostly." I'm not really standing up for Hendry. I want him gone as well. It's funny you chose 90-wins as a benchmark. While he may only have one 90-win season, he does have three 88-win seasons...

I'm just not sure what he could possibly say that would make his potential departure more important than Jim Hendry's. While I can't stand Hendry, that is mostly founded upon what he has done the last two offseasons. I think Kenney staying means that the number in the profit column will be more important than the number in the W column. He does understand that winning makes it easier to make money, but I don't believe his number one goal is to win a WS. I don't question Hendry's intentions. I could be wrong, but wasn't Kenney hired by Zell? I thought he was brought in to squeeze as much out of the team as possible for the Tribune. If that meant making the team or the stadium more valuable or whatever, that's what his job was. Again, could be wrong, but that has been my impression.

Fan-Fricken-tastic! :banghead: In my opinion, Rickett's is 0-for-1. I would rather Hendry stay than Kenney, by a long shot. Why? Hendry affects players on the field. Kenney doesn't. I remember an interview (I don't remember when or where) that I heard on the radio and while I don't remember all that was said, I remember thinking that I didn't want him anywhere near the Cubs. I know, not exactly a great argument, but I just know that I didn't like him then, and I doubt I would like him now.

Fan-Fricken-tastic! :banghead: In my opinion, Rickett's is 0-for-1. I would rather Hendry stay than Kenney, by a long shot.