UK1679666180

I've been thinking about it since April. I'm guessing the Bears will be between 16-20. Without naming names I'd like to see O line (the oldest group on the team) addressed, but would be very happy with a defensive playmaker. There's a T/G out of LSU by the name of Livings, I like in the 3rd or 4th rd.

If the Bears come away with Lewis and Connor Hughes (K) from UVA, I'll be happy. Oh yeah, Hackney in the 7th. I'm such a dolt when it comes to the NFL draft.

Btw, is it too early to talk about the '06 draft? :) Marcedes Lewis would look good at the Bears starting TE next year, I'm pretty sure Raisin would agree.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/11/16/SPG8JFP54O1.DTL Good article on how players are still able to cheat. Yet, MLB and Congress cont. to pat themselves on the back on a job that is still incomplete.

I'll take your place at the Herald for you Bruce (during your vacation). :wink: It would just be propaganda towards various players.

http://www.ecnnews.com/cgi-bin/05/ntstory.pl?-sec-Sports+fn-nsoxgm.1116-20051116-+page_0 Moore takes his name out of consideration for Boston's GM position.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, and if I were a Cubs fan, I'd probably make the same argument. Words like "productive" are pretty arbitrary, though. Which stat do you want to use? Pujols finished ahead of Lee in Win Shares. That's a stat. Should that be the end of the discussion? I have 3 workers. One is on 1st shift, one is on 2nd shift, and one is on 3rd shift. The first shift worker is SLIGHTLY more productive than the other two, but tends to be a distraction to those around him, which makes them LESS productive than the folks working around the 2nd and 3rd shift employees (the 2nd and 3rd shift workers have motivational personalities, and the overall production on their shifts is better). So which employee would you rather keep? Simplisticly, you'd keep the first shift (slightly more productive) worker. When you look at the big picture, you might be better off keeping the other two. There are lots of ways to look at it. Apparently the voters went beyond "best OPS" or "best VORP". You don't have to agree with it, that's for sure. Like I said, I wouldn't, if I were in your shoes. There are enough stats to formulate an opinion, Win Shares is just one of them. I'd look at XR, BaseRuns (since the production is at the higher end of the spectrum), BR, RC, EqA, VORP etc. defensively I'd use FRAA, RF, ZR and the new one by Pinto not that UZR is gone. I'd be able to find the best candidate from those and eliminate the choice of being able to pick and choose which stat supports the argument. If you enter a person into a distraction or lack of motivational scenario and I try to apply this to Lee, if I search for evidence that Lee was a distraction, I'll find nothing. This is another "what if" that has nothing to do with Lee.

Cubs have been good at spending, just been bad at spending it wisely. They have the payroll to win it all, I question if they have the approach to win it all.

You're introducing more "what if" scenarios, I ignore them, b/c they go both ways and can't be proved wrong and more importantly unlike production, can't be proven right. I'd rather see the award and discussions based on which stats are the most accurate rather than which had the better teammates, that's the only reason why you'd give it Pujols over Lee, despite Lee being more productive. The award to me is about production, not playing for the best team, they might as well give it to the best player on the best team in each league and limit it to those 25 guys. Lee was more productive, Pujols played for the better team. Baseball writers get too romatic with awards that are based on production, most attach themselves to the past and refuse to look forward. Basing the CY on wins and the MVP on the team wins, further proves my point. Players and former athletes are just as guilty more time than not.

"What if" scenarios cannot overshadow actual production.

Pierre and Furcal don't greatly improve the offense, especially if they trade Walker. It improves it, but not to the point where it becomes of the better offense in the NL. If someone goes into next year expecting Lee to repeat and they're going into next year with the wrong approach. They'd have a much improved offense with Giles/Cedeno more so than the combo of Pierre/Furcal. They'd still need a CF'er, but there are still better options over Pierre. No one is saying that having Pierre and Furcal wouldn't improve the team, just that it wouldn't improve the team at a pace that would equal the salaries paid to them (or in the case of Pierre the likely players req'd to get him).

Eyre barely played under Baker (11IP) for the '02 season, that's not alot of time to form a relationship. I doubt it has any impact, although I hope it does. The years will be the deciding factor for him, he'll get 3-4 mil per, I assume. It'll be up to the teams to go beyond 3 years.

I'm undecided. :)

Exactly, if the Olympics can test for it, congress should push around MLB some more and get this included as well. I am curious to see what testing pitchers for meth will do. Meth? Yep, methamphetamines/crystal meth It is the most common drug used in MLB, pitchers are the dominant user of it. Are you serious? Meth would not be good to use in a game situation. I find it very hard to believe pitchers smoke meth before a game. I can think of no way that would improve their game. Pitchers have been tripping on LSD during games, not too out of the ordinary to have them hyped up on anything.

You're right, even though meth has the same effects as an upper, just more drawn out (60 hours at a time).

Exactly, if the Olympics can test for it, congress should push around MLB some more and get this included as well. I am curious to see what testing pitchers for meth will do. Meth? Yep, methamphetamines/crystal meth It is the most common drug used in MLB, pitchers are the dominant user of it.

Although, thankfully I'm not Goony :) I think you could live with that depending on your 7 other position players, that's a typical (not ideal) #8 hitter. In fact, that OBP and SLG is where I'd put Neifi's ceiling, I don't see him hitting that well, but it's within the realm of possibility. I think Cedeno can hit in low to mid 7s as far as OPS, better than Neifi and solid enough for a #8 hitter. As far as being able to afford Furcal with several young cheap players? Yeah, they could, but it still is overpaying for a player that doesn't merit that high of a salary. 4 or 5 years doesn't bother me as much as dollars per.

I disagree with Pujols winning it over Lee, but not much angst over it, but Lee was the most productive player. The question.. who was the most valuable player in MLB? Ortiz, A-Rod, Pujols, Lee, or Jones?

Exactly, if the Olympics can test for it, congress should push around MLB some more and get this included as well. I am curious to see what testing pitchers for meth will do.

I don't like players with two 1st names as their 1st and last name. :) Jason Michaels is pretty darn close. Bingo... You were able to find the irony. My name is the same as well.

UK cont's to play poorly as Lipscomb is hanging in there. They need to start Sims and get Morris back.

I don't like players with two 1st names as their 1st and last name. :)

Michaels or Bradley wouldn't cost as much to obtain as Pierre based on mistaken perceptions of Pierre. Michaels has been in a platoon and can still be used in a platoon as he has for all of his career.

Why waste a year stunting his development in a platoon? How is a LH'er in a R/L platoon stunting his development? It's just protecting their ass if he struggles by giving the Cubs an additional option. It's not an all or nothing as far as throwing him out there for 160 games or stunting his development in '07. A platoon is different than having a backup option. In any case, if the cubs aren't WS bound, who cares if he struggles? In a platoon, he doesn't face lefties, this will slow his development. the best way to learn to hit lefties, is to face them. CP20 - Dusty needs to go. I think we all agree this would be best for the future of the Cubs in a large number of ways. I'd like to think the Cubs would be a contender for the WS in '07. Of course, Hendry would have to improve his ability to acquire players, Baker would have to go or improve as well. You're not going to get a quality CF'er and not platoon him w/Pie if they did follow my scenario. My ideal scenario would still be... Whatever is being offered to get Pierre, use it to get Michaels, Michaels is the starting CF'er and hitting leadoff in '06. Pie does well in '06 at Iowa and gets ready for '07 in the majors. The Cubs platoon Michaels and Pie with Michaels getting scattered ABs in LF/RF and vs. various RH'ers. Pie would get the majority of the RH ABs and scattered ABs vs. Lh'ers. Ideally, Pie would get around 350 ABs and Michaels around 300.

I think it is important to look at the context in which the decision to bring up Pie was made. The Cubs were desperate for offense from LF and CF. RF was producing only moderately well, but it wasn't nearly as desperate of a situation as CF and LF. Murton proved to be ready without any AAA experience but he already had the plate discipline. Pie probably wouldn't have performed very well once pitchers found his weaknesses, but he could have provided a spark for the rest of the team. Who knows? We also don't know that just because Hendry was thinking of bringing him up in July with Murton that he intended him to remain with the Cubs for the rest of the season no matter what. It could have just as easily been a "lets give him a look and see how he does" situation. So assuming that Hendry thinks Pie is fully ready for the bigs and is going to bringing him too soon simply because he was going to bring him up last July is unwarranted. This is the problem with Hendry - he would have burned an option year on a 21 year old if he sent him back down (is that how that works?). No way should Pie be up as a starter this year. If a player is on the 40 man roster and he starts the season off the 25 man roster, he already used the option for that year, regardless if he gets call up and sent back down.