Soul

I'm rooting for the game to still be interesting at around 6:30pm, which is roughly the time I'll be arriving at my hotel.

The obligatory all star for a team with Ryne Sandberg? There were a few years there when Biggio was good and you had Steve Sax and Tommy Herr displacing Sandberg here and there. Hell, if you listen to Joe Morgan, he may have still been playing in it those years. :lol: Sandberg was there every year from 1984-1993 So it definitely wasn't obligatory. I must be a bad Cub fan, I don't even remember Dunston in the AS game.

This has already been answered, but there are a lot of players that get drafted by other teams and decide to stay in school or move on to college. Slot money is pretty important to these players. I would imagine the team that drafts them probably plays a smaller role, but could factor into the decision as well. Mark Prior was drafted by the Yankees (don't recall whether it was the previous year or fresh out of high school), but Prior elected to stay in school. What's weird about the June Amateur Draft is that anyone can be drafted, they don't necessarily have to declare themselves to be drafted. For an undersclassman to make themselves available in the draft in the NBA and NFL, they have to actually declare they are coming out. Tons of baseball players get drafted every year and refuse to sign a deal with the respective team that drafted them. In Prior's case, it worked out very well for him to stay in school. Not only did he finish up his degree, but he vaulted up to a consensus #1 pick after his final year. I believe Mark Teixiera was the consensus #1 pick that year before the college baseball season got under way. Anyway, Prior got a guaranteed major league contract with the Cubs, which is likely not something he would have gotten had he signed with the Yankees the year they drafted him. Granted, Minnesota elected to go with Joe Mauer with the overall #1 pick in 2001 ahead of Prior, but that had more to do with signability issues rather than who was the top talent in the draft. Bobby Hill was drafted twice by other teams before he was drafted by the Cubs. He was drafted in 1996 in the 5th round by the Anaheim Angels. I'm guessing that was after his senior year in high school. In 1999, he was drafted by the White Sox in the 2nd round. I believe a contract couldn't be worked out between WS and Hill and Hill was a senior in college, so Hill was drafted by the Cubs out of an independent league the following year, once again in the 2nd round. Teams make late round gambles on big names all the time. If you can afford to waste a late round pick, it's not a bad way to waste one. While I can't recite any good examples, depending on the financial situation or social situation of a particular player, there is always the possibility that a late round draft slot could land you a guy you never would expect to sign to a deal if they were drafted in a late round. I want to say Bobbie Brownlie was expected to be a top draft pick the year the Cubs drafted him. And I also want to say that he had Scott Boras as his agent. The Cubs took him with their first pick, but it wasn't a top pick and it was predicted that Brownlie wouldn't sign and if I recall correctly, it came down to the final days before they worked out an agreement that made him a Cub. It was a good call on Brownlie's part, because he was injury riddled, and based on his first minor league season with the Cubs, his stock could have fallen dramatically the next year in the draft, which I believe would have been his senior year in college. That is weird, and it's a dynamic that I was not aware of. Thanks for the explanation.

I think this is dead-on. He's not a lefty, he's not a top of the order hitter, and he has a low batting average. Hendry won't be interested, even though he should be. Yes but in Hendry's mind shortstops are suppose to be poor to mediocre hitters with "moxy" "spunk" "grit" ect... I dont think we've had a good shortstop since Dunston. We talk every year about the glaring hole at SS when Hendry simple doesnt see it. He's happy with fielding crap at that possition for some reason. It's funny to think that Shawon was an all star for us...twice. I never thought of him as really that good, at least with us. He was always this huge potential guy, but it was never fully realized. I think it's been since Banks that we had a truly great SS. Fyi, Dunston's all-star seasons 1988 .249 .271 .357 1990 .262 .283 .426 Ew. I don't even remember. It sounds like he was the obligatory all-star for a horrible team, but I could be wrong and I don't care to look.

I think this is dead-on. He's not a lefty, he's not a top of the order hitter, and he has a low batting average. Hendry won't be interested, even though he should be. Yes but in Hendry's mind shortstops are suppose to be poor to mediocre hitters with "moxy" "spunk" "grit" ect... I dont think we've had a good shortstop since Dunston. We talk every year about the glaring hole at SS when Hendry simple doesnt see it. He's happy with fielding crap at that possition for some reason. Hendry wants a defensive shortstop, the other terms you throw out are superfluous. Greene is outstanding defensively. Combine that with the fact that Hendry already tried to trade for Greene last season, and your reasoning quickly falls apart. Let's also conveniently forget that the Cubs drafted Greene when Hendry was in charge Hahaha. I think I've heard Hendry say somewhere that he's "baffled" at the lack of position players coming from our minor leagues. How about because you don't have the first clue how to develop them, Jimbo? Not that I disagree, but what does that have to do with the previous post? So Greene was our ballplayer, and Hendry helped in drafting him.....so yet another ballplayer of ours has to go somewhere else to become major-league ready. This doesn't seem to have anything to do with the post bolded above to you? Greene was never our ballplayer. The Cubs drafted him in the 14th round after his junior year, and Greene chose to continue playing college baseball so that he could be drafted higher and get more money. He was drafted in the first round by the Padres the next year. This had absolutely nothing to do with the Cubs problems in player development. OK, so I didn't know that. I've got better things to do than to know the nuances of every player the Cubs draft. My post has plenty to do with the previous post, AS POSTED. If it would have given more detail, obviously I wouldn't have said that.

I think this is dead-on. He's not a lefty, he's not a top of the order hitter, and he has a low batting average. Hendry won't be interested, even though he should be. Yes but in Hendry's mind shortstops are suppose to be poor to mediocre hitters with "moxy" "spunk" "grit" ect... I dont think we've had a good shortstop since Dunston. We talk every year about the glaring hole at SS when Hendry simple doesnt see it. He's happy with fielding crap at that possition for some reason. Hendry wants a defensive shortstop, the other terms you throw out are superfluous. Greene is outstanding defensively. Combine that with the fact that Hendry already tried to trade for Greene last season, and your reasoning quickly falls apart. Let's also conveniently forget that the Cubs drafted Greene when Hendry was in charge Hahaha. I think I've heard Hendry say somewhere that he's "baffled" at the lack of position players coming from our minor leagues. How about because you don't have the first clue how to develop them, Jimbo? Not that I disagree, but what does that have to do with the previous post? So Greene was our ballplayer, and Hendry helped in drafting him.....so yet another ballplayer of ours has to go somewhere else to become major-league ready. This doesn't seem to have anything to do with the post bolded above to you?

I think this is dead-on. He's not a lefty, he's not a top of the order hitter, and he has a low batting average. Hendry won't be interested, even though he should be. Yes but in Hendry's mind shortstops are suppose to be poor to mediocre hitters with "moxy" "spunk" "grit" ect... I dont think we've had a good shortstop since Dunston. We talk every year about the glaring hole at SS when Hendry simple doesnt see it. He's happy with fielding crap at that possition for some reason. Hendry wants a defensive shortstop, the other terms you throw out are superfluous. Greene is outstanding defensively. Combine that with the fact that Hendry already tried to trade for Greene last season, and your reasoning quickly falls apart. Let's also conveniently forget that the Cubs drafted Greene when Hendry was in charge Hahaha. I think I've heard Hendry say somewhere that he's "baffled" at the lack of position players coming from our minor leagues. How about because you don't have the first clue how to develop them, Jimbo?

I think just because of what the Pats are going for lots of people will be watching. Granted, most of them will want the pats to lose in heartbreaking and/or blowout manner. But oh well. Yeah, you're probably right. I'm so sick of the Pats :x

I think this is dead-on. He's not a lefty, he's not a top of the order hitter, and he has a low batting average. Hendry won't be interested, even though he should be. Yes but in Hendry's mind shortstops are suppose to be poor to mediocre hitters with "moxy" "spunk" "grit" ect... I dont think we've had a good shortstop since Dunston. We talk every year about the glaring hole at SS when Hendry simple doesnt see it. He's happy with fielding crap at that possition for some reason. It's funny to think that Shawon was an all star for us...twice. I never thought of him as really that good, at least with us. He was always this huge potential guy, but it was never fully realized. I think it's been since Banks that we had a truly great SS.

ZZZZzzzzzzzz j/k. I probably won't be able to watch much of this game. Let's see if the Giants can make it close. It is going be another fairly regional SB though, kind of like last year. I'm not sure how much "super" interest it's going to generate away from the East Coast.

I think this is dead-on. He's not a lefty, he's not a top of the order hitter, and he has a low batting average. Hendry won't be interested, even though he should be. I haven't heard the slightest inkling that Hendry would be interested in him. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean anything, but still. Seems like we would have heard at least a rumor by January 21st.

Soooo disappointed in you people. -5 degree weather this weekend and you couldn't even push this thing to 130 pages? For shame.

yes its almost funny looking Every time they showed Tom last night, my wife would pipe up with "Just looking at that guy make me look cold!! Look at him!" This while numerous other guys were in giant thermal coats and ski masks. Anyone else get the comedy of announcers constantly preaching that this is a quarterback's league and you can't make any noise without a good QB, but the last 2 NFC QB's are Eli Manning and Rex Grossman? I'm just sayin... I wonder how Tiki Barber feels right about now. Wasn't he the guy who said Eli doesn't "have it" and blah blah blah?? Oh man, excellent point. I hope he's choking on his words right now. I really liked him better when he was playing football and not talking. It goes to show us -- just because a player was in the same locker room with a guy doesn't mean he has a clue how his career will turn out. This must be sweet vindication for Eli...

yes its almost funny looking Every time they showed Tom last night, my wife would pipe up with "Just looking at that guy make me look cold!! Look at him!" This while numerous other guys were in giant thermal coats and ski masks. Anyone else get the comedy of announcers constantly preaching that this is a quarterback's league and you can't make any noise without a good QB, but the last 2 NFC QB's are Eli Manning and Rex Grossman? I'm just sayin... I wonder how Tiki Barber feels right about now. Wasn't he the guy who said Eli doesn't "have it" and blah blah blah??

And that's why we would've been blown out. I'm taking this loss pretty well. Mainly because I knew we would've been killed in the Super Bowl and because our run is just beginning. I'm still going to avoid all of the sports networks for the next two weeks. Why? It's going to be all about how even though the Pack lost, it was such a great resurgence for Favre, and blah blah. You Packer fans have always had it easy when it comes to this -- whenever you lose, the media just falls back on the Favre legend. When the Bears lose, you'd think it was Armageddon by comparison.

they almost beat NE in week 17 tho Yeah, when the Pats had everything sewn up except the perfect record. Means little, if anything. They both played their starters the whole game. So? So? The Patriots players publicly said that they considered it a special game and one of the most important of their lives. The Giants got their best shot in week 17, they didn't hold anything back. I'm sure they'll tell the media whatever they want to hear. They're not going to say what the reality is: if they lose the game, it means absolutely nothing in terms of the actual goal, which is winning the Super Bowl. First off, did you happen to be able to get a chance to see that game? Teams that have nothing to play for often don't play at the huge intensity level that was present in the Patriots-Giants game. And it's not in the Patriots public interest to say that they were interested in going for 16-0. If they wanted to be "correct", they should have said the outcome of the game didn't mean anything to them. The fact that they said the incorrect thing made the chance that they were being completely honest much greater. This Patriots team wanted to go 19-0 for a long time now. They've won Super Bowls, they wanted perfection, and they wanted all the records. LOL, yeah telling their legions of fans that the perfect record isn't the ultimate goal and therefore that game wasn't paramount would have gone over real well. Players aren't stupid. They know what the real goal is. You can try to psyche yourself up for the "perfect record" all you want, but these games now are *elimination* games -- they affect careers, they affect salary levels -- how far you go now can directly affect your very lifestyle. There's no way you can say there's no difference. Watch and see in 2 weeks how much of a difference it makes.

Pats by 20, at least.

they almost beat NE in week 17 tho Yeah, when the Pats had everything sewn up except the perfect record. Means little, if anything. They both played their starters the whole game. So? So? The Patriots players publicly said that they considered it a special game and one of the most important of their lives. The Giants got their best shot in week 17, they didn't hold anything back. I'm sure they'll tell the media whatever they want to hear. They're not going to say what the reality is: if they lose the game, it means absolutely nothing in terms of the actual goal, which is winning the Super Bowl.

Unless he retires after a Super Bowl win, every season is going to end like this in one way or another.

they almost beat NE in week 17 tho Yeah, when the Pats had everything sewn up except the perfect record. Means little, if anything. They both played their starters the whole game. So?

they almost beat NE in week 17 tho Yeah, when the Pats had everything sewn up except the perfect record. Means little, if anything.

Yep, and I'll be on a plane for most of it. I doubt I'll be missing much.

Super Bowl final score: Patriots 45 Gnats 13

Gnats win, wow. Great game.

Tynes from what? 48?