UMFan83

In which case we don't have to worry at all. I dont know about that, I could see us going into next season Fonty 3B, Castro SS, Theriot 2B, 1B Baker if the other 2 walk. That way Hendry can have middle infielders at every position, that would be his wet dream. I know you're mostly kidding, but I'm pretty sure if we lost $25 million in salary we'd find a way to replace it in the offseason. We could sign Dunn or Carlos Pena for 1B, but the 3B FA options are fairly poor. Either way we'd have the money to spend if we needed to pick up salary in a trade.

Hmm... I doubt it. Houston went 102-60 that year and led the NL in runs scored by a decent margin. It's probably about even. Houston scored 5.4 runs per game with a line of .280/.356/.436/.792. Tampa Bay averaged 4.96 runs per game with a line of .263/.343/.439/.782. Houston scored almost half a run more per game but the batting lines were very similar. I was going to argue that Houston has the edge because they were an NL team with pitchers ABs brining down that line (and I believe Shane Reynolds was a notably bad hitter at that point in his career). But then I realized that the 98 Houston team was in the heart of the steroid era, making their statline slightly less impressive.

Hmm... I doubt it. Houston went 102-60 that year and led the NL in runs scored by a decent margin.

You took a lot of high injury prone pitchers on your staff that would worry me if I had your team. If it helps, I'm looking into making a trade when I send Haren, Harden and Nunez and get back Greinke and Thornton (it's a holds league and I have none). There is surprisingly a few decent guys that are FA in the league right now. I typically like to have 1-2 dominant starters and make the rest patch work. I am a big fan of having spotstarters all the time if you know how to use them correctly.

I always enjoy looking at other people's teams and seeing how they've built their teams so I figured I would start this. I'll start with my team. It's a 10 team H2H league with R, HR, RBI, SB, OBP, SLG for hitting and W, K, SV, HLD, ERA, WHIP for pitchers. I tried a new and (for me) daring strategy to offensively lean towards speed/runs guys with healthy but not dominating power. I did ok sticking to it but definitely went against it at times. For pitching, I tried to stockpile closers to use as trade bait to improve my team. The basis for Speed (and or Runs) and Closers was because I felt these are 2 stat categories that are typically undervalued a bit in the draft, but immediately after the draft they become more valuable. C - Soto 1B - Fielder 2B - Roberts 3B - Youkilis SS - Tulowitzki CI - Helton MI - Weeks OF - Ichiro OF - Granderson OF - Cruz OF - Carlos Gonzalez UTIL - Matsui UTIL - Pierre UTIL - Borbon BN - Hafner (been reading decent things about him, last round pick figured I'd gamble) SP - Haren SP - Peavy SP - Garza SP - Harden RP - Broxton RP - Marmol RP - Aardsma P - Frank Francisco P - Capps BN - Sheets BN - Harang BN - Leo Nunez I'm not sure how to judge my team because it's not the type of team I usually build. I see potential though and with some trades I think it could be good.

Maybe Fred can shed some light on that game since he was there.

Can't say I'd take the perfect game. Don't get me wrong, major props to Buehrle, that was a terrific game and the kind of performance you only see a few times in a lifetime. It's probably in the top 30 pitched games of all time. But yeah Wood was unhittable that game. Yes he gave up a hit - a week grounder that a fielder with more range might have gotten to. I'd have to watch the game, but I don't believe that any balls were hit all that hard by Wood, or even aided by a good defense effort, but I can't say that with 100% confidence. If Buehrle's is top 30, Wood's is top 10. And I don't even feel like a homer saying that. In fact I think you'd get some Sox fans that agree. Not all but some.

Would be an interesting road season for us, playing on Thanksgiving in Dallas' season, still possibly opening up the season on Sunday night to christen the Giants new stadium and then going to Toronto for a Bills game. All we need now is to get in on that international game. Too bad those teams are already picked out.

Detroit is much better than their record obviously bc of injuries, but they also probably aren't as good as they've been in years past. Ideally let someone else that seemingly doesn't have a psychological hurdle to clear with Detroit face them in the first round and hopefully knock them out IMO.

No compelling reason? Because for the first decade in history (or at least post-FA history) the Cubs enter the decade poised to be amongst the top 4 in payroll all decade. Teams that were up there all last decade include the Yankees who made 9 playoff appearances, went to 3 World Series and won 2 of them, and the Red Sox who made 7 playoff appearances, went to 2 World Series and won both. So yeah there is a compelling reason why they should be more successful than the previous decade.

I'll trade him forgiveness for a playoff RBI

Yes he did. Sight for sore eyes (meaning Blackhawks fans). I can only hope he's getting the confidence of being the starting goalie and he can get back on track and play well like he's been doing this year.

Big win. Hawks have 2 games in hand over Phoenix who is 2 points behind, an 1 game in hand over SJ who is 1 point behind. And all the bickering about blowing Saturday's game aside we did take 3 points in 2 games against a red hot Phoenix team.

Never been more upset about a 2 goal lead.

Yeah I was just about to say Dolan (yes the fading star in the Cubs blog world as I regrettably put it) did a pretty good write up on this article.

Yeah, that's the philosphy to go through life with! And it's gotten you so far. it has gotten him far. extremely far. he not only made it to the majors, but he is getting paid tens of millions of dollars to play a sport. Did you not read the rest of my post? His attitude and personality has gotten him nowhere. His luck of being uniquely skilled in skill set that is rewarded hansomly. I suppose hard work is a positive trait that helped him get to where he is today as anyone who has had to play baseball has had to work hard to get there. But all the hard work in the world wouldn't have mattered if he didn't have god given ability to play the game. Show me one instance where his attitude and personality helped him get even $1, because that's what were talking about. Bradley said he's not changing anything about his personality, specifically his behavior towards umpires in this instance because it's gotten him this far. i just think it's funny that you imply he hasn't made it far when he is one of the slect few to make it to the majors, and one of the even more select few to get a huge contract that he could live comfortably off of for the rest of his life. milton bradley has a life most people dream of. he's a multi million for playing baseball. That's why I asked you if you read the rest of my post, because in it, I clearly state that he has made it far on his god given talent and hard work. I never said he wasn't far. What I meant by "and it's gotten you so far" is it's gotten him in a situation where teams have to take on Carlos Silva just to get rid of him. He's one of if not the most hated person in baseball, and that fact that even the casual baseball fan will admit that the umps probably have a vendetta against him says a lot about his perception around the game. One day he's not going to have the skills to play baseball anymore, and for the next 50 years of his life he's either going to have to learn how to deal with human beings or lead a sad and lonely existence.

You would Sox fan.

A little of both, he's been looking for them since he came back, but the D is almost always going to sag off him when he's behind the line until he proves he can hit that shot consistently. It's nice to see. I think VDN said he's been working on it for awhile.

It sure looks like that's the case doesn't it? I think what Tim said is mostly correct. Bonds is an extreme case and he had a lot of issues surrounding him to scare off other teams. However, Bradley has already alienated himself from a big chunk of the league and is known as baseball's biggest a-hole. Bonds kept getting deals because he was putting up awesome numbers and the fans hadn't turned on him. Albert Belle kept getting deals for the same reason until his hip gave out. Bradley is not on the level of Belle and Bonds, even when healthy. How many times is he going to piss someone off until a team trys to dump him and there are no takers? This time around, a team was so desperate to rid themselves of Bradley they took on a garbage pitcher whose contract would be the worst on the team for any team in baseball but the Cubs. What's going to happen when the Mariners tire of him? I didn't ask what MLB GMs thought, I asked what you think. Well like someone else pointed, for 16 teams it probably did. I don't know what AL teams were thinking. It was probably steroids+dark cloud surrounding bonds+he's a huge [expletive]+he's 43 I'd rather see if X player can give me similar production. If your asking me point blank if I would sign a hitter who had a 1.045 OPS in his age 42 season, despite being a huge [expletive] absolutely I would and wouldn't think twice about it. Anyways, this is getting way too far away from my original comment, which is still true, that Bradley's surley personality has not made him $1 in the sport of baseball, and it never will, where as if Kevin Millar spends 1 day on the Cubs 25 man roster he'll make infinately more for his personality than Bradley ever will. And it's a stupid argument to begin with because we are talking about 2 extreme cases, and 99.5% of the time your personality doesn't and should not play any part in determing a players value.

Tell me why they didn't sign him then? Because of steroids and the possibility of jail time? That's partially correct. Whether or not you or I believe in the effect of "chemistry" effecting a team, Bonds has been known as a complete [expletive] his entire career, and it certainly didn't aid him in getting teams to line up to sign him. And that was my point. And my point is (still) that teams are idiots if that is why they didn't sign him. I have a hard time believing that all 30 teams are run by drooling morons So you think all 30 teams passed on a player who put up a .480 OBP because they were scared he might go to jail during the season (which he still hasn't done)? Do you think Bonds's surly demeanor outweighed the fact that he would've been the best hitter on most of the teams in baseball? It sure looks like that's the case doesn't it? I think what Tim said is mostly correct. Bonds is an extreme case and he had a lot of issues surrounding him to scare off other teams. However, Bradley has already alienated himself from a big chunk of the league and is known as baseball's biggest a-hole. Bonds kept getting deals because he was putting up awesome numbers and the fans hadn't turned on him. Albert Belle kept getting deals for the same reason until his hip gave out. Bradley is not on the level of Belle and Bonds, even when healthy. How many times is he going to piss someone off until a team trys to dump him and there are no takers? This time around, a team was so desperate to rid themselves of Bradley they took on a garbage pitcher whose contract would be the worst on the team for any team in baseball but the Cubs. What's going to happen when the Mariners tire of him?

Tell me why they didn't sign him then? Because of steroids and the possibility of jail time? That's partially correct. Whether or not you or I believe in the effect of "chemistry" effecting a team, Bonds has been known as a complete [expletive] his entire career, and it certainly didn't aid him in getting teams to line up to sign him. And that was my point. And my point is (still) that teams are idiots if that is why they didn't sign him. I have a hard time believing that all 30 teams are run by drooling morons So you think all 30 teams passed on a player who put up a .480 OBP because they were scared he might go to jail during the season (which he still hasn't done)?

Tell me why they didn't sign him then? Because of steroids and the possibility of jail time? That's partially correct. Whether or not you or I believe in the effect of "chemistry" effecting a team, Bonds has been known as a complete [expletive] his entire career, and it certainly didn't aid him in getting teams to line up to sign him. And that was my point.

Perhaps his personality has given him motivation to work hard and prove wrong all his detractors (be they real or imaginary)? How many players have earned money on the field due to their personalities? I bet Bonds is really pissed at himself that he could've made more money if he just would've smiled more. Yeah as long as Bonds continued to hit HRs at a high rate, he outperformed the public hatred of himself. As soon as his knees went and he could longer play the field adequately, the Giants chose not to resign him and the rest of the league avoided him like the plague, even teams in the AL who could put him in as a DH and watch him produce. As soon as Milton Bradley's God given talent starts deteriorating, he'll quickly be thrown to the curb, much earlier than a player who isn't a selfish jackass because most teams don't want that crap infesting their team unless he's going to produce quite well for him. He's certainly not going to be able to hang around when he's 38 showing up to Spring Trainings because of his personality. I doubt he'd make it past this contract if he doesn't hit all that much better than he did with the Cubs last year. The point was, his personality has done him no favors in his career. All it has done is burned bridges with almost every person he has encountered in his career. To say "I'm not going to change my attitude because it got me this far" is implying that his attitude is actually aiding his career or his life in general and although I'm no insider with intricate knowledge of Bradley, from afar it's pretty obvious that it couldn't be farther from the truth.

I generally agree. I think it's hard to agree with him that "everything went our way" in the last decade - the Prior disaster and the booted DP ball were killers. But the article wasn't bad. WHAT ABOUT BARTMAN!?!?!?!?!!?!!?!? /stereotypical Cub hater who assumes we obsess over that name when the only time we think about him is when fans of other teams bring him up. But seriously, everything going out way doesn't include Lowell's basket HR in G1 of the NLCS, Victor Diaz with 2 outs in the 9th with a 3 run lead, in general the offense collpasing the last week of 2004 season, Derrick Lee's brutal wrist injury coming off a 46 HR monster season that seemed to take 2-3 years to fully recover from, potential HOF pitcher's career derailed with random, sometimes freak, injuries, Ted Lilly's glove throw in the 07 NLDS/Chris Young in the series, Loney's Grand Slam in 08 after just barely getting a piece of a foul tip that would have ended the inning a few pitches before, every member of the Cubs IF making an error in a 2 inning span, etc etc. Some of that is just bad play, some of it is bad breaks, all of it happens to other teams (well almost all of it), but by far all of it amounts to hearing the statement "the Cubs got all the breaks this decade" and laughing at how ridiculous it is.

But that's not what he said, he called it the golden age of Cubs baseball. Golden age is specifically defined as "a time period when some activity or skill was at its peak". Maybe I'm being too technical but like TT said, my biggest gripe is about the fact that he's assuming that even with the Cubs resources we are headed for a down decade and will wish we were back in the "golden age" of Cardinals and White Sox winning championships while the Cubs suffer epic collapses or whatever. I don't know, Leitch rarely has anything nice to say about the Cubs, and I read this as a passive agressive way to rip on the Cubs.