UMFan83

Fun with arbitrary endpoints. 2003: 4.59 2002: 6.23 I'm much more inclined to say 04, 05, and 07 are the "flukes" (if we must cherrypick) than 02, 03, 06 and 08. The career totals tell a story that can't be brushed off as easily as rumors of arm problems. I didn't include 2002 and 2003 because they were the first 2 years in his career, one of which he made only 17 starts, and they weren't played at Petco Park, nullifying any H/R comparison not because they didn't fit my argument. Besides, in 2002 he had a 3.57 ERA at home and a 4.59 ERA on the road in 2003 and 2.56 ERA at home and a 6.23 ERA on the road in 2002, without the benefit of cozy dimensions and marine layer. So is the problem that he can't pitch on the road in general then?

I agree on the other points, but I think you are undervaluing Peavy. Road ERA by season 2008: 4.28 2007: 2.57 2006: 4.57 2005: 2.98 2004: 2.33 It should also be noted that in 2006 and 2008 Peavy was rumored to be pitching through pain and injuries. So which is the fluke 06 and 08 or 04, 05 and 07? Besides, its not like Wrigley is a launching pad most days. The NL West might have a lot of pitcher friendly parks, but its not like the NL Central is Bandbox Central. According to ESPN.com's Park Factors (as it pertains to runs scored) Chase Field: 2/30 Coors: 3/30 AT&T Park: 11/30 Dodger Stadium: 29/30 Petco: 30/30 Average: 15th Great American: 7/30 Wrigley Field: 8/30 Minute Maid Park: 14/30 Miller Park 22/30 Busch Stadium: 23/30 PNC Park: 27/30 Average: 17th I know this is really simple analysis, but point stands.

Nice work Len. Looking forward to you calling many more Cubs division championship clinchers, and then covering the Cubs for 3 more games afterwards on Comcast.

Marquis and Marshall? Maybe? I'm still crossing my fingers that JH brings Wood back. He would make all the difference, wouldn't he? Since the Cubs non-tendered him, he can't be signed till May. MLB updated that rule in the latest agreement. They still have a window to sign him. Eh, I hate changes. Man, even I knew that Ping.

I don't think teams should be able to host bowl games. It pretty much runs directly against the entire point of bowl games (which is two similarly talented teams meeting on a neutral field) Disclaimer: I'm a Big Ten homer (I know you're a PSU guy) How do you feel about USC getting to play in the Rose Bowl, LSU in the Sugar Bowl, ASU (once in a blue moon) in the Fiesta, or Miami in the Orange Bowl? Hawaii in the Hawaii Bowl, Georgia Tech in the Peach Bowl (or whatever they call it now), UAB in the GMAC Bowl, etc etc etc. College football bowls are littered with these examples.

Oakland certainly thinks they can compete next year. I find that odd.

Who or what is HJE HireJimEssian.com. It's an spinoff of Desipio.

If that is the hold up, then that's pretty dumb. Dunn shouldn't play RF with Soriano in the same OF. Any manager who would play Soriano in LF and Dunn in RF should be fired. On the spot. Am I the only one who can't find anything about the Cubs and Dunn in the linked blog: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3744094&name=olney_buster It's in the insider olney link on the bottom of the page (yes that olney part was intentional)

HJE was saying that they've love to have Dunn on the Cubs in theory, but ultimately he would not like the move because us geeks from the four letter site would wet ourselves in happiness.

Who is going to pitch out of the pen this year? So far we've let Howry and Wood leave, we are talking about non-tendering Gaudin and Marshall might go in a Peavy trade. Marmol Gagg - I mean Gregg Samardzija Cotts Guzman? Wuertz Ascanio?

The people that look forward to football as part of their Thankgiving traditions and hope to see at least one good football game all day. When one of the games is guaranteed to suck every year, it sucks.

Exactly. I really hate giving up Vitters. He's as close to a sure thing as we have in this organization, and in 1-2 years he'd likely command much more than being part of a 4 person package for Peavy. But when Peavy is on the table, you do it.

I'm really going to enjoy seeing how Greene does this year. This might completely validate Meph's theories, or it might ruin them forever.

This is the first Hawks game I've watched wire to wire in like 2 weeks and I really really enjoyed it.

The correct term is Bowls.

For the record the Cubs have won the last two division championships and the Cardinals haven't. The Cardinals may do somethings better than we do, but trading for a guy like Khalil Greene isn't it. The Cardinals have won 10 World Series titles since our last one. Division champions don't mean squat, and the people that brag about them are the people whose teams got swept in the first round. This is such a Cardinals move, picking up a guy with tons of potential when his value is at its absolute lowest. Not that I completely agree with Meph that Greene is an uber-stub, but I think Greene will have a really really good year with St. Louis.

It's going to be like this all year. Maddenly inconsistent play.

You can't suck and go 10-6. This team isn't great by any stretch. But teams that go 10-6 in the NFL are absolutely legit playoff teams and going 4-0 down the stretch is in no way shape or form "backing into" the playoffs. You can't suck, but you can be mediocre and be 10-6. See 2007 Cleveland Browns. They won over: Bengals (7-9) Ravens (5-11) Dolphins (1-15) Rams (3-13) Seahawks (10-6) Ravens (5-11) Texans (8-8) Jets (4-12) Bills (7-9) 49ers (5-11) Winning % of teams they beat: .343 (55-105) Bears have beat: Colts (8-4) Eagles (6-5-1) Lions (0-12) Vikings (7-5) Lions (0-12) Rams (2-10) Winning % of teams they beat: .326 (23.5-48.5) If they won out that would include a 4-8 team, a 6-6 team, a 5-7 team and another 5-7 team. I'm not doubting their deficiencies. I'm saying it's absurd to say that a 10-6 Bears team sucks, if they end up 10-6. And winning 4 straight to end the season isn't backing into the playoffs. Take a look at the AFC East teams who have fattened up on incredibly weak divisions. Arizona is going to have the benefit of having nobody in their division, and whoever the heck wins the AFC West will have benefitted as well. The competition is the competition, if the Bears win 10 games they will be a legit playoff team. If they lose some more games and still win because Minnesota falls apart, then that would be backing in. But that's a different story. You're right. Your previous comment just caused me to think about and create a comparison between the 2007 Browns and this years Bears. In the NFC, I can only definitively say that the Giants, Cowboys, Redskins, Panthers, and Buccaneers have better rosters top to bottom than the Bears. There might be a few more (Eagles, Vikings, Packers, Cardinals, Saints are up there). Did you forget about the Falcons or do you think it's all been smoke and mirrors? I did forget about the Falcons, but I would put them in the "maybe" category, not the "clearly better roster" category

I think most objective observers would say that's a reasonable discussion to have. Marshall is a decent backend starter but great in a swing role. Scott is a decent corner OF but great in a platoon role. Pie and Olson are also sort of pitcher/hitter mirror images inasmuch as both had good minor league numbers (Olson moreso) and were highly rated prospects (Pie moreso), but have stunk in the bigleagues so far (about equally). And Cedeno is a starting SS only in the most dismal circumstances. He's become Omar Infante, throw-in grade. Yeah so its even. We shouldn't have to throw in more than that. I personally think Marshall is better as a 4/5 starter than a swing guy.

Gotta love going back to OH.com.... They are arguing whether Pie, Cedeno and Marshall is enough for Scott and Olsen

Dammit, why is Hendry losing all these FAs from a 97 win team? First Wood, now Howry. Next you're going to tell me we aren't bringing back Daryle Ward.

This article affirms what we've been saying for awhile. Tiebreakers are not in our favor, and we probably have to win our last 4 games to get in. http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/1308682,CST-SPT-bear02.article

Be honest, Jim Hendry promised Chad a lifetime contract for as long as he wanted to play after Dusty broke him in 2005. Am I right?

Is this the big news that crashed the board for the last 5 minutes?

Yes and no. I'm carrying over the argument that I'm sure you've been reading all day on RealGM, but I feel that despite Gordon being the team's second best player, he can cause major problems for this team. Several times over the last couple of weeks, Gordon has looked like he is engaging in a power struggle for control of the team with Rose. This at times has caused Rose to change his style of play because he doesn't seem to want to disrespect a veteran. Rose took one shot in the OT. One shot. That's not acceptable. It's also not acceptable for Gordon to be taking the ball up the court by a 4:1 ratio over Rose in OT. Selfish play is going to get this team nowhere. Unfortunately, its unavoidable with Gordon's contract status and Hinrich's injury (which keeps Gordon on the floor a ton). Honestly, Hinrich's injury has hurt the team more than I thought it would. I think he would play a lot better alongside Rose.