Soul

You mean stop the hands of time? I'd love to, but my Mom told me it doesn't work that way.

I haven't been ticked off before now at anything personally. The homeplate signage was inevitable. The Bud Light bleachers, eh. The computer scoreboards around the park, yes, please. But this is needless and stupid. All these things you speak of were sources of great angst when they were announced. Now they're just passing memories. It's all inevitable. All ballparks will eventually have many more ads. Wrigley field will eventually be called "Bank One Park at Wrigley Field" or some such nonsense. The old grandstands will eventually be replaced. EVERTHING will eventually be replaced. The past is the past. Let's win a World Series, shall we?

Wowza. 5th round pick for Carr? Wouldn't just about every team jump into those trade talks? I think that's low. Carr's failures have clearly been partially due to an inept franchise.

Pax has followed that plan so far. Pau's four years younger than Garnett, and their production's within shouting distance this season -- KG, 25.39 to Pau, 23.63. I adore the Big Ticket but I'm not sure I'd give up much more for him than I would for Gasol at this point. I think the point is, do we think of the solution in terms of getting another player? Or do we need to think about whether we've reached the ceiling of what Skiles can accomplish as an NBA coach? I don't believe in coaches that can only take a team so far. I think you are either a good coach or a bad coach. Skiles is a good coach. Wasn't Tony Dungy perceived as a coach who couldn't get his team "over the hump"? Yet he was the coach that brought home the Lombardi trophy to Indianapolis. Do you think if Skiles was the coach of the Bulls teams in the 90s that they wouldn't have won a Championship? I'm pretty sure they would have. My biggest problem with Skiles is that he isn't playing Tyrus Thomas enough. I think we will, however, see more of TT in the 2nd half and into the playoffs. I'm pretty sure that Bulls team would have run Skiles out of town. Jordan owned that ballclub; Jackson was able to get out of the way enough, I don't think Skiles would. And that's what I'm getting at. There's a certain player Skiles works best with. Often they aren't the superstars. Gasol's a good example. Everyone wants to bring him in. Have you seen Gasol? This is not the kind of player who will react well when Skiles screams at him, in my opinion. He'll likely shut down until he's traded. He just seems very low-key to me. If you want to build a team of tough, gritty journeymen then Skiles is your guy. He did a good job pulling us out of the doldrums----taking players who just wanted to work hard and using them to put up respectable records. But championships in the NBA are about superstars. And I question whether Skiles is the right coach to work with a true superstar player. Or whether he will allow any of the potential stars on his team to flourish enough to reach their potential.

It's been a long time since DeRosa played SS for significant games. I know Izzy's weak at the plate, but DeRosa/Soriano up the middle would likely be nightmarish. Plus, that outfield is no better than last year's, and probably worse offensively since Pie is likely to struggle. I like the idea of plugging Soriano in the outfield better to boost offensive output while hopefully minimizing the defensive damage he can do.

Pax has followed that plan so far. Pau's four years younger than Garnett, and their production's within shouting distance this season -- KG, 25.39 to Pau, 23.63. I adore the Big Ticket but I'm not sure I'd give up much more for him than I would for Gasol at this point. I think the point is, do we think of the solution in terms of getting another player? Or do we need to think about whether we've reached the ceiling of what Skiles can accomplish as an NBA coach?

Chandler is doing well. Curry is scoring but is a huge creampuff who can't rebound or block shots. Curry's PER is 17.87 to Chandler's 15.37. Eddie's more than holding his own even if you factor in defense. Chandler's flourishing away from Chicago. That's absolute damnation for Skiles. I think the bloom is off the rose, gentlemen.

Aren't Chandler and Curry both doing well? Something's wrong here. I suppose the solution is to give away Deng and watch him become an all star somewhere else. I don't know what to do. Maybe fire Skiles. This team should be better, even without a big man. Christ, other teams don't have big men who can score but can still beat the friggin' Bobcats.

So it's Murt/Soriano/Jones, with Floyd subbing in. Maybe a little smattering of Ward Do we have a real defensive outfield option?

I could care less. Tear down the Ivy and put up billboards across the entire outfield if you want. What's the difference? Some of you act like this is still the Wrigley field of yore. It's no longer close. And more pieces are scheduled to be replaced in the coming years, too. The Wrigley of our childhood is gone, people.

Even White Sox fans would not do this to us.

The one thing he has to consider is injury. If he doesn't sign before the year starts, and he blows out his arm during the season, that's a ton of money blowing out the window. Isn't that what every player in Z's position has to think about? They might sign with their current club for many reasons, but the biggest one is because they can get a little less guaranteed right now-----if they play Russian Roulette with their arm and come up lame, that's something that haunts them for the rest of their life.

I'm going to guess none. Hopefully he's on offense by next season. I think he can be a servicable nickel back, simply based on speed. Even when he got beat this year, he was in a position where a better CB could have made a play. Torry Holt never flat out burned him in the StL game. The TD he gave up in the Probowl is a perfect example of a play that a more experienced CB could have broken up. Hester has horrible technique and can't tackle. I don't think he'll even play nickel. He might be good on offense for gadget plays, though. Just faking it to him could put someone out of position.

http://baseballcritic.wordpress.com/2007/01/22/zambrano-on-the-zito-trail/ I never saw that quote before. Is there a better source than a blog? Sure-here you go. http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/220720,CST-SPT-csep20.article Thanks. I'm going to take the optimistic stance on this one, and believe that Z would very much LIKE Zito money, but isn't opposed to negotiation. I hope I'm right. After all, I would very much like Zito money too. But I think my employer can ultimately secure my services for a great deal less 8-)

I know what you mean, and I don't think either of our guys run down the field with their arms flailing because they have no clue, but yes Vasher in particular shows great body control. Both our CBs had very few pass interference calls, which is a real credit to them with these rules. I think we'll get them back without much trouble, mostly because I feel they are both slightly underrated.

There might be some real........issues, defensively, in the OF this year.

I know the Raptors have been playing well, but I'm looking at this Bulls team and seeing an early exit. We need something. Obviously a big man who can score would be nice. How about a commitment to playing 48 minutes per game at 100%? Something's not right here. I feel we should be better than this, even without the big man.

"GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FIRST POST." 670 the score radio I know at noon every day Mike Murphy talkes about the cubs ALOT. He focuses on the cubs mostly because he is a cubs fan. People will tell you he is stupid and a moron. But I find that unfair. He is just a crazy cubs fan. Maybe not stupid and a moron, but he finds these little details and blows them up into a holy crusade. I've never seen a guy who can take something as minor as which foot a guy led off first base with, and turn it into an hour of ranting and raving about why the manager should be fired. It's patently ridiculous at times. That said, I still listen to him, so Murph wins.

What was the Indinas' record in 1-run games? Hasn't it been accepted that one's record in 1-run games has a lot to do with luck? I think luck can play a big role in a team's overall record. How much of it is luck though? For example, hasn't it also been accepted that teams with very good closers will win more 1-run ballgames than those with terrible closers?

Sullivan should know better than that. The last thing we need is more rampant, un-informed speculation about pitching injuries.

Teams don't throw at Vasher nearly as much as Tillman-I've heard that Tillman got thrown at twice as much as Vasher this year-in fact, Tillman was one of the league leaders at balls thrown his way. Because of this, it seems to reason that Tillman's stats would be a lot better than Vasher's, but he's not necessarily better. Edit: Here's the quote, from Football Outsider's Superbowl Preview: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2007/02/01/ramblings/game-previews/4913/ He did a good job then, I don't recall a high profile mistake such as with Steve Smith a year earlier. He had 11 PDs, and topped both NFC pro bowl CBs in INTs.

http://baseballcritic.wordpress.com/2007/01/22/zambrano-on-the-zito-trail/ I never saw that quote before. Is there a better source than a blog?

There are plenty of people calling him a selfish prick (or similar) and questioning his loyalty (to the point of ridiculousness, IMO). All for expecting to be paid the same amount as someone who is performes below his level. To each his own, I guess. We'll see what happens. I'm sure there are some people on the board who were hoping that Zambrano appreciated the Cubs and truly wanted to be a Cub for a long time. I think from a fan standpoint, it is easier to cheer for a player that truly enjoys playing for the team you root for rather than a guy that is simply looking for the biggest payday. And yes, there are more things involved than money regarding a contract extension. There are many examples of players that signed home town discount deals for below what they could have gotten on the open market. In the NL Central alone, Carpenter and Oswalt could have possibly made much more on the open market than the deals they signed. Wood could have made more signing with another team this past off season. I don't blame a player for being soley about the money, or wanting to get the biggest payday he can get. But I can see why many fans would be or are upset over a player only concerned about money. Did Z mention specifics about what he wants though? I thought his main difficulty was that there hasn't been any real negotiating taking place, no real push to get a deal done and he wants one done. We're all speculating as to what he would really sign for. I thought he mentioned having a Zito like contract. Here's what I saw: Maybe there's something else that I didn't see, but I don't view that as laying down the law that the money must be Zito's.

I do like Cleveland. I think the deal is whether 4th place means 4th place. I think it does, though I realize it's likely they will do better this year. And I hope they do-----for some reason I like Cleveland. I went to an Indians ballgame a few years back and just had a lot of fun there. Actually, I shouldn't pretend to not know the reason. I like the Twins too. And the Royals. If you catch my meaning :)

There are plenty of people calling him a selfish prick (or similar) and questioning his loyalty (to the point of ridiculousness, IMO). All for expecting to be paid the same amount as someone who is performes below his level. To each his own, I guess. We'll see what happens. I'm sure there are some people on the board who were hoping that Zambrano appreciated the Cubs and truly wanted to be a Cub for a long time. I think from a fan standpoint, it is easier to cheer for a player that truly enjoys playing for the team you root for rather than a guy that is simply looking for the biggest payday. And yes, there are more things involved than money regarding a contract extension. There are many examples of players that signed home town discount deals for below what they could have gotten on the open market. In the NL Central alone, Carpenter and Oswalt could have possibly made much more on the open market than the deals they signed. Wood could have made more signing with another team this past off season. I don't blame a player for being soley about the money, or wanting to get the biggest payday he can get. But I can see why many fans would be or are upset over a player only concerned about money. Did Z mention specifics about what he wants though? I thought his main difficulty was that there hasn't been any real negotiating taking place, no real push to get a deal done and he wants one done. We're all speculating as to what he would really sign for.