Soul

Wow. Link yet?

Yet they are 20th in offensive yards and 3rd in defensive yards. (This is probably true, but I dont remember the source of the info) I think much more important is the fact that they're dropping in the rankings. Let's see what rank they are for the month of December after the 31st. That will be a much better indicator. With Tommie & Brown gone, it's really not correct to lump in the spectacular numbers of the defense with those two, when it's pretty clear the unit is not nearly as stout without them.

Really? I see it as close to 100% that Pie will suck offensively. How will that increase his trade value----when he's posting .280 OBPs and whiffing more than once per game? I don't get it.

I don't see how spring training will tell us much about Pie. Spring Training stats rarely mean anything. If they did Sing would be our 1st baseman. I just think this is a bad idea. We need someone else.

I thought we were assuming Jones is long gone. And Lee----we're just going to pencil him in for 40 homers even though he struggled long after his wrist injury was healed? I've had a major wrist break before. It can take longer than a year to really feel better. Used to have all kinds of pain in it long after the break, sometimes just from the change in barometric pressure from storms. Nasty stuff. I was thinking Lee, more like 25 homers. Jones gone. The argument, I thought, was whether we were going to have Pagan getting significant time, with perhaps even Pie being the starter. I think that's pretty bad.

crapity crap crap. bad news. gettin' me down. crap.

I don't know exactly what the Nats have asked for Church, but it's likely they've started with Rich Hill. They're famous for this kind of stuff. It's possible a trade could happen late in the off-season or during spring training. I've not heard the name of Gross mentioned with the Cubs. Schuerholz complained about that crap in his book. Some GMs think it's fantasy baseball time come trade time. He also mentioned that Hendry doesn't do that and he's a great guy to deal with, expects to give and get value and doesn't waste time making ridiculous offers and negotiating down to a fair price. LOL, if they started with Rich Hill then I can totally see why Hendry is looking elsewhere. How stupid. That could explain a lot.

Crap. I just heard about this. Come ON, there's always something that ruins a good run by a Chicago team.

i hate that name and i cant stand jeff joniak Why (hating Joniak)? i dont like his voice for whatever reason, he calls a good game, his voice just annoys me though. I've grown used to it. And I've grown to dislike the accepted "professional play-by-play" voice that so many guys have trained themselves to imitate. Well, more like grown tired of hearing the same vocal tone over & over again from guys. Joniak's original sounding, if a little amateur-ish. And he knows Bear football very, very well. If I didn't have the DirecTV delay I'd turn down the volume and turn on the radio broadcast every game.

i hate that name and i cant stand jeff joniak Why (hating Joniak)?

There's a name I haven't heard in a bit. Wasn't Huff going to sign with the Stros?

I think he might be good too. Or Wood. I don't think we have a closer 'problem'

I'd rather see a 4-man rotation than a 6-man rotation. Why is that? Too hard to get your good SP's the appearances they need to lift the ballclub on their shoulders. Also---many people believe SP's start to get rusty after too much time off. There's a school of thought that says the old way (4 man rotations) was actually better because it taught SP's to lay off their arms and learn to pitch, and it also made them do it more often so they got better at the "art" of pitching. Now guys take the extra day of rest and just try to destroy everyone without investing the energy into learning to hit spots, choose the correct pitch, etc. I'm not saying I totally buy it, but I accept it as a decent argument. Really hard to put together 6 good pitchers, too...

Well, if that's the case, let's start a pool on when Wood will be on the DL next. Never. Woody will be ready to be full-time closer or middle relief by season's beginning. I'm telling you all. I've got a great feeling about this thing. It was the 140-pitch outings that destroyed Wood. He can do the 25-30 outings regularly. Big time hunch, I'll admit that. I just feel good about it.

On a team that appears to still be power-challenged, I'd say Pagan is someone who should be avoided. Even kept off the 25-man entirely. We still need more pop.

Is anyone else even interested in Floyd? I wouldn't mind seeing him signed---for a decent price. Just wondering. Doesn't sound like we have much competition.

Dave van Dyck is speculating it's done. And all the talk of Pie (by writers, Lou and others) makes me think they really want Felix to win the CF spot this year. I don't see them signing Floyd and keeping Jones, so, it's probably one or the other. What if they just keep everything intact from here. That would make LF a platoon of Murton and Jones, which would be really productive. And CF would be a mix of Pie, Jones, Pagan and maybe Theriot, which could end up anywhere from terrible to fantastic. And if Soriano needs a day off here and there, Jones plays there. I just don't like the idea of Jones still being on the team next year. He isn't likely to repeat his numbers, so I'd prefer to deal him now. I also don't like the idea of a platoon w/ Murton since there are more RHP in the world than LHP. Murton has enough experience that we should run him out there every day. If he struggles mightily for 3 months, maybe he's not meant to be an every day player. But if he rarely faces RHP, we're not going to know that. The days of Jones, Pie, Izturis, Blanco, P in the 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 spots are going to be really tough. Especially b/c that lineup also features DeRosa in the 2-hole most likely. Yikes. Jones put up an .833 OPS in 2006. If he put up those numbers as a CF, he would have ranked 8th in the majors among regular centerfielders, behind Mike Cameron and ahead of Torii Hunter. His three year avg. OPS is .777, which would have ranked him 11th in the majors among centerfielders in 2006, behind Eric Byrnes and ahead of Curtis Granderson. His contract isn't that bad considering the market. If the Cubs can get good talent in return for him, they should make a deal. But having Jones in CF in 2007 doesn't necessarily handicap this team offensively. I not saying Jacques killed us last year, I'm saying I don't think he'll repeat those numbers. I'd rather trade high now than see him repeat his '04/'05 numbers next year. And he wasn't really lights out defensively in right, so I'd prefer he not patrol CF next year. He really didn't finish all that much higher than his career numbers: 2006: .285/.334/.499 Career: .280/.328/.461 A move from the stronger AL to a weaker NL could certainly be argued to account for that. I don't see why you are so convinced his numbers are going to drop. 30 is the new 20, you know :wink:

Was he ever a realistic possibility? I don't see why not. Hendry wants LH bats, he wants CF help, but not anybody that would require a longterm solution. And Washington could be willing to get rid of him. I don't see how it couldn't be realistic. I agree - it makes a lot of sense. I'm just basing it on the past couple comments I've heard where Cub officials haven't even mentioned Church, combined with the reports that the Nats are asking alot in return. It just seems like they took him off the table and are looking for other options.

I believe Church to Chicago is deader than a doornail.

Anyone hearing what Jim's saying this morning? I can't listen to it because I had to go to work :(

We were desperate at the time for anything. Walker seemed good----still good in comparison to DeRosa, IMO. Dubois was just desperation: "please learn to hit or we're sunk" kinda thing. Of course, as it turns out, we were sunk :wink:

Cubs will sign Zambrano. I have no doubt about this. Honestly, any talk of a "budget" and "Cubs" is silly. There's no budget associated with this team, other than some self-imposed "we'd rather not go over this much" type of limit. The money's there. I'm not worried.

wise thinking by Lovie Smith. A guy like that can be very versatile because he's made a name for himself, and people will look out for him. You can put him in to run a couple of deep routes, run a couple of sweeps or end-arounds, or just a WR screen. At the very least, he'll serve as a good decoy if he's only in the game for 5 or 10 offensive plays a game. Either Lovie is angling for the element of surprise come playoff time, or he has simply changed his tune since then. We'll see. I harken back to another famous Lovie comment:

Well, it would certainly be fair to question the use of the stat to rank individual seasons, but as far as simply identifying them, I think it's quite useful. John Rocker really did have a very good season in 1999. Dustin Hermanson was fantastic in 2005. Kim was dominating in 2002. Turnbow had an ERA under 2.00 in 2005. Not saying they didn't have good seasons, but I watched seasons like Turnbow's in '05 and Kim's in '02. Good, but I wouldn't call them special. This stat concoction thing has gotten a bit out of hand. People are making stuff up, posting it on the internet, and then everyone's thinking it actually means something. I rebel against you, stat-maker-uppers! Personally, I'd be ecstatic if someone in the 2007 Cubs pen has a season like Turnbow's or Kim's. Is there a better way to judge "closer" performance? I rebel against your rebellion. :twisted: I don't know of one. I trust my eyes, and watch out for one-year wonders ;) BTW, I'd take Turnbow's '05 too. But it doesn't make him a great closer. Makes him a guy who had a good year.

Yeah----that's the quote I was thinking of. That sounds like Lovie might be mulling over a few plays on offense.