SouthSideRyan

Do they purposely keep showing that guy in the Cardinals t-shirt and sports jacket to let the world know how big of tools Cardinal fans are?

[expletive] you you piece of [expletive]

He's matched his career high in bWAR

OH MY GOD

So many of you are going to love this line. And humble.

Usually they like to have a former player/coach in the color spot. It's all politics what about a talk show host? I don't think you really thought this through.

Usually they like to have a former player/coach in the color spot. It's all politics

But thats exactly why hes valuable. Nobody really is dying for an overpaid Boozer or a nicked up Deng. But paired with Butler and a pick? Suddenly they're much more tempting. Gonna have to give up value if we want Love. You are correct, except that their value lies in their contracts, both of which create a ton of cap room to pursue FA's after the 2014 season. Boozer is a net negative in any trade

It's probably going to be a light switch, again you guys don't deserve him.

At what?

In the alternate universe where the Cubs go down 1-2-3 in the 9th.

The current money is coming from the jumbotron, increased signage, concerts and more night games. That's the *entire point* of all these negotiations. The Cubs don't have the cash to just do the renovations. They need to pay for it along the way with new revenue streams, which wouldn't exist if they were building a new stadium. This is a moot point (no way they move) and I don't know why I'm bothering but... You do realize a new stadium would have all those things also??? Hell, it could have a 12,000 sq ft Jumbotron, even more signage and a lot more night games and concerts. Maybe even receipts from parking that they don't get now. Probably a bigger hotel too and nicer restaurants (I love Wrigley but the food is crap). Heck, sell the naming rights (Boeing Ballpark?). To question how they could raise money for a new ballpark is nonsensical. Also, you cut out the part where I said they could possibly get some public financing but Rosemont has since said they'd be open to just that. -More signage they'd get less money for. -More night games they'd draw less people to -More concerts that nobody would care about going to because they'll be at Boeing Ballpark -More parking for less dollars per spot -A bigger hotel and nicer restaurants that fewer people want to frequent -Public Financing that would never come because Rosemont can't afford it.

Am I missing something here? Hairston plays when Sappalt does. Nope, not missing anything. Maybe the user name

He hasn't

Aren't they like 9-16 now without him? 7-17. When you compare that to their 48-40 record without Rose, you have to wonder why people didn't build up the MVP case for Kirk

#branehurding

I realize now my picks were mismatched in the West, so SA over LAC in the WCF

Why?

It's gonna have to be another MJ Flu game because Nate has caught the mysterious bug that Deng and Taj have and is now questionable. Late night at Four Winds?

I'd like his nervous system process cut out.

Unfortunately so does this guy

I want to throw Beth Murphy off a rooftop

Again we're back on the look how convenient Rosemont is guys!!??

Not sure I buy that when the TV contract money is virtually guaranteed to be coming in and we're not spending a dime of it. I still worry about how much we're actually going to get given that it's less than half their games that will be available and that it's almost two years away. If MLB changes the TV rules in that time frame, we're screwed. The Dodgers didn't wait until March 30th, 2014 to sign their TV deal. ETA: The Rangers, whose new deal begins the same year ours would signed their deal in 2010.

What about minor league games? How will I be able to predict how many times Brett Jackson will strike out every 30 PAs if I don't have data from major league games? ct can provide that.