beowulf28

:roll: :D

I hope Clemens gets lit up, and the Astros plummet! I hate the Astros. (The team, not the players...except for Lance Burkman! :roll: )

You are correct, sir! The problem is, those who must make them go, must go as well. C'mon, Trib! Sell our Cubbies to Mark Cuban! :D

I guess it depends on what shade of lipstick satan is wearing. I have read enough to know that satan is passionate and not the horned, red skinned demon looking thing with a forked tounge and tail. One good looking win last night. It's step number one to the drive toward .500. Last night was the same old song and dance. Nothing is being changed. Great, everybody made contact last night. A team of NSBBers could hit well against ineffective pitching occasionally. Heck, Cubs opponents have been doing it all year, and last night was no exception. The team also only drew 2 walks last night. Until they start showing some patience at the plate and taking some freebies, this team won't amount to squat. Their approach is horrible. With their poor SLG and AVG, they should be doing anything and everything they can to improve their OBP. They should be doing everything they can to knock pitchers out of games earlier with high pitch counts. About the bolded paragraph: Bingo!

You're right about that! I heard Hendry talking to David Kaplan on WGN's Sports Central last night, and it seemed to be just more of the same drivel. While Hendry's made good moves in the past (D. Lee, Aramis), he's made more bad moves. I agree with the person who also can't figure out why Dusty gets frustrated about teams getting on base and scoring runs against us, and then can't figure out how good that would be for our team. I just don't get this regime. Oh yeah, great article, Bruce! =D>

Yes, that is my point and I agree they could be more profitable with a winning team. It's just that with the Cubs, winning is not a must to be profitable. And personally I believe that is what is wrong with corporate ownership. Winning is not always a priority. I can guarantee you that if the Cubs had not been making money the last 10 years changing would have been made. I don't agree with corporate ownership, either. It's better for the team if one owner, or a consortium of ownership occurs. As long as the owner(s) really love the sport, and aren't afraid of making changes when needed.

I don't buy this. If this is how the Trib is run, it's run terribly. As an example, take McDonald's. They run an obviously very profitable business. By your theory, why should they change anything? Why should they make changes to their menu, change their advertising strategy, make adult happy meals and try to present a healthier option for food? Profitable business stay profitable by constantly making changes and improvements. The Tribune obviously recognizes this to a certain extent, as they've made "improvements" to Wrigley. Fielding a winning team will only make the team more profitable. This should be a goal for the Tribune. By your standards MacPhail, Hendry, and Dusty would already be gone then. MacPhail has been here 10 plus year and the team has made the playoffs twice. Hendry was given an extension after 2 very disappointing years in which the team under performed from what they were projected and Dusty is going to get his extension before the seasonm is over. The Cubs have made a profit during the time each man has been employed by the Trib. Why else are they still around. Certainly not for the championship trophys lying around. Actually, as has already been said, the whole regime needs to change. McHenDust :lol: needs to be changed. Ownership needs to go; and despite the Tribune saying that the team is not for sale, it may not matter. Besides, we all know, as Banedon has said that a winning team is good business. It just makes sense. But we all know that the Tribsters don't want to change anything because of what was said before about changing what isn't broke. They may have no choice in the future. I just hope whoever buys the team when/if that does happen really wants to win. About the original question...I try to root against the Cubs, but I still get excited by home runs hit by the Cubs, and I was very excited when we beat the Cardinals 2 out of 3 and the very hot Reds 3 out of 4. But I do know that failure now should provide change in the future...just not enough change.

Man, I hope it comes true. C'mon Cuban! Me too! :twisted:

Are you saying Marshall is a better starting option than Kerry Wood? I can't see Wood being effective out of the bullpen right now. With all the shoulder stiffness he's been having there's no way he could pitch in back to back games or even 2 every other day. What I think is Marshall is better than Miller. He has proven he can be a reliable (and good) starting pitcher. What I'd like to see is keep Marshall on regular rest. You just KNOW at some point Wood or Prior are going to miss a start. That's when you use miller. Marshall is a rookie, so he doesn't have a major league track record. I agree with Vance. And I don't think the Cubs should send Marshall down. I like the idea of six starters, with Wood, Prior, and Miller being given extra rest is a good idea. The question is--and I'm sorry if I posted and the answer was already given--is the idea workable?

If you want fun and nostalgia then I'm all for Zim. If you want wins then I'm against hiring Zim. The '89 season made him look better than what he was -- and if it weren't for career years by Walton and Smith, we wouldn't have won the division. If you want to bring back somebody it should be Dallas Green as GM. If the stupid Trib (I think it was Stanton Cook) wouldn't have given him the ultimatum of being field manager or leaving, we would've at least made one WS (maybe more) appearance -- definitely more postseason appearances than what we did. He's still the best Cub GM in my lifetime. He got productive players and still was able to produce top talent in the minors. And Sutcliffe had a career year in 84. It often takes players having career years for the Cubs to win. Let me also add Zim also let the rookies play. I have no problem with Green as a GM either. Yes, Dallas Green as GM! :D

Thanks for the info, MMike!

I'd really prefer something more specific: Dusty Sucks Hendry Sucks Trib Sucks Neifi Sucks Jacque Jones Sucks Against Lefties Rusch is Fat etc. I like: MacPhail Sucks Hendry Sucks Dusty Sucks Rothschild Sucks Clines Sucks You get the idea! :x

I don't understand all the infatuation with Dubois. What was so great about him? Maybe it's my frustration, but with all of our failures, I'm not sure that our farm system is very good. But I've also lost all my confidence in MacPhail/Hendry, etc,... he had a pretty remarkable year production/power-wise in 2004 (AAA) and was consistent enough through his minor league career that people thought he could successfully transition to the majors Thanks, Derwood.

Wonder if they're going to replace Paul Sullivan on the Cubs beat? MacPhail and Hendry cussing the sports writers for telling the truth! Imagine. What would it take to get those goons replaced in the Cubs Ivory tower? I wish Andy would resign, but I'm sure he won't.

I don't understand all the infatuation with Dubois. What was so great about him? Maybe it's my frustration, but with all of our failures, I'm not sure that our farm system is very good. But I've also lost all my confidence in MacPhail/Hendry, etc,...

Farnsworth for Novoa & Moore. Patterson for whoever we got. Nolasco, Pinto and Mitre for Pierre. Koronka for Freddie Bynum. Take away the Farnsworth and Patterson deals (we needed to get rid of them for their own sakes' as well as ours), and you're correct. However, we can't forget Derrek Lee. He was well worth Hee Seop Choi and whoever else we gave up for him. And then there's Aramis...although he really hasn't done much this year. Actually, I don't think I can trust Hendry and MacPhail to get the right young players since they haven't done a very good job lately.

You mean that he should be more "positive" regarding his coverage of the Cubs? :roll: The same BS that the Cubs management tried to persuade Paul Sullivan with? :roll: The Cubs should replace Paul Sullivan with this guy: http://dunamai.com/Humor/BagdadBob/images/bagdad_bob_large.gif "Have no fear, my friends! The Cubs are just lulling the opposition into a false sense of security! Things will all get better! Dusty Baker and Jim Hendry are the right people to lead this team!" :lol:

You mean that he should be more "positive" regarding his coverage of the Cubs? :roll: The same BS that the Cubs management tried to persuade Paul Sullivan with? :roll:

I give you respect for having played catcher. I've only played it a few times in softball, which doesn't count. And I have been bowled over by someone much bigger than me. I didn't suffer any long-term effects from the collision, but my thumb was bent backwards. Having said that, I totally agree with the people who think Barrett's reaction was totally uncalled for. Stupid. macho behavior like Barrett exhibited was totally uncalled for. Would y'all react the same way if AJP or any other catcher for that matter would've punched Barrett in the face after he'd slam into them. And don't think MB wouldn't do that either. Even he said AJP's slamming into him was clean. And as for Dusty, why would you want him to stick up for a player who acted like a classless thug?

The Angels won when they were owned by a corporation. What good does it do to have one owner to blame? true, disney won a title. everything went right for anaheim the year they won it all. i'll bet tho that they have a much better winning percentage w/ moreno as owner. iirc the angels mostly sucked under disney. also, i recall how the dodgers went downhill when fox bought them. First, Goony, I want to appologize. I'm venting, which seems to be common for a Cubs fan these days. :oops: :roll: Second, I realize that the Angels won a WS under the Disney company, but as CubfaninCA said, everything went right for them the year they won it all. I also look at the Atlanta Braves, who are owned by Time Warner, and although they appear to be doing well, how much of the team was already a part of the team that Ted Turner owned. I'm not just talking about Chipper or Andruw Jones, but the young guys. How many of them were in the system from Ted Turner's ownership? But really, I'm just venting right now.

The Angels won when they were owned by a corporation. What good does it do to have one owner to blame? Accountability...with corporate ownership, there's no accountability. There's only a figurehead.

I don't agree at all. I think ownership who cares can make a big difference. When you have a single owner--such as George Steinbrenner or Jerry Reinsdorf--there is one person out there to blame. There is one person you can credit or blame, unlike with a faceless corporate entity. Sure, there's probably a face they put out there to take the heat, but he may just be a figurehead. Remember, corporations have shareholders, and they may or may not like sports. They may feel that any amount of money sunk into the sports entity they own is a waste of money. Give me a situation like the Angels...or White Sox, DBacks, etc, have. You won't win every time, but at least you'll have ownership that generally wants to win.

I agree. I'd rather keep Marshall, but I wouldn't mind giving up Guzman if it meant getting a power bat...like Cabrera! :D

Thanks Salazar89 and YearofdaCubs!

I just read on CBS Sportsline that the Los Angeles Dodgers are interested in Torii Hunter and Shannon Stewart from the Twins, AND Craig Wilson from the Pirates. I wish Mr. Hendry would do the right thing, and swoop in there and give the Pirates some prospects for Mr. Wilson. Let's scoop those Dodgers and get someone before them for a change. Sorry that there was already a Craig Wilson bandwagon thread. I just saw that in the Rumors section of cbssportsline.com.