Soul

I thought Havlat was skating in practice. But no, I don't really know. They keep acting like bulin is day-to-day or something. Yet he's been out for quite awhile. It's almost like clockwork if the Hawks have a 1 goal lead they will blow it in the 3rd period. You could probably make a good deal of money off it if there was a way to put money on it.

I see a player right there who Atlanta tried & tried & tried with, finally gave up on. Then Texas got a good year from him. Eh.......I think it's a 50/50 deal whether he'll produce for us. I did notice he played 60 games in RF last year.....40 @ 3B and only 26 @ 2B. Seems more like a utility guy than a bone-cold starter. But that's just me.

I completely agree. ...depends on how far out of it they are by January.

I thought Ben did a great job on Yao tonight. 20 points in 38 minutes is a so-so game for Ming these days. Perhaps. I'm seeing a small basketball club that is struggling to defend effectively many nights though. Add to that the sketchy shooting, and you get 3-5. We should be able to get some better shooting at some point, but the size is just going to be a shortcoming all year long.

So a top free agent is going to sign because the cubs signed DeRosa? doubtful. I don't know if Hendry has a plan in place and is fitting the pieces together. I sure hope so. Hard to give him the benefit of the doubt after the last two offseasons though. I have said all along that the DeRosa move has to be put in context. Hendry definitely overpaid and I'm just praying he isn't the starting 2b. An argument could probably be made that if DeRosa doesn't start, then he's even more overpaid and it's an even worse deal.......from a financial perspective.

how is he preventing him from doing his job? i think you know what i mean but if we have to play these games i will spell it out for you, he is not physically stopping him from doing his job, i am saying to let him complete his body of work before you judge it. for a lame example: a painting looks like a bunch of crap slopped together before it is completed and becomes a master piece. i am in no way calling hendry's work a master piece though just an analogy. I don't understand why someone should wait........longer. In '05 I felt the way you do. We were coming off a disappointing season, but hey there was still a chance to bounce back. Let Hendry do his job, right? Of course. But then '05 Then '06. How much more waiting should someone do before concluding he's been doing a poor job with the club? Obviously if he manages to turn it around opinions will change. But you know what? That still doesn't erase these past few years of pain (some of the most painful I ever remember as a Cub fan...and that's saying something).

Yeah, but the travel was blatant. Yep, it was. Very disappointing loss tonight. I especially liked how the defense stepped it up the final 12 minutes, but otherwise sucked the first 36 minutes. Nice intensity, guys. I don't think teams can go full-bore 100% of the time. Sometimes you have to rest up a little, allow your natural basketball skills to just keep you in the game until the next burst. It just seems that we are now too undersized to compete. There's no size. My god, we looked like midgets trying to guard the jolly green giant tonight.

He's trying to find some semblance of size, but there's nothing. It's a team of pip-squeaks in a league of monsters.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm starting to panic. We're now the smallest team in the NBA and regularly giving up 100+ points per game. Add to that the fact we are a streaky shooting ballclub? This is not good.

Nothing can overcome the fact that Hendry had a WS contender in '03 and by '05 it was trash.

I don't need a perfect GM performance in the offseason, but when you need 2 quality SP and maybe even 3, hearing your GM talk about Marquis & Ted Lilly makes one feel a sudden need to locate a bomb shelter before April rolls around.

I've been on this planet a long time, and seldom have I heard or read a statement so glaringly wrong as this one.

Yep, this is the time of year. Everybody is going everywhere.

Except for in the second half of 2006, when he posted a 3.12 ERA and struck out 35 in 34.2 innings, while holding opponents to a .198/.277/.347 line. I'm not saying that I oppose the trade, but Aardsma certainly showed that he can be a successful reliever. I'm not saying Aardsma will never succeed, just that he hasn't proven it for anything that would be considered a decent period of time. One half of a season, on a team that was out of contention, doesn't qualify as proof IMO, that's all. Cotts did it for a whole year on a WS Champion. A bit different, wouldn't you agree? I wish Aardvark all the best. I hope he does well, and he certainly might. I'm not comparing Aardsma to Cotts. You said Aardsma hasn't shown that he'll be able to succeed at all. His performance this year shows that he certainly can succeed. Regardless of whether or not the Cubs were in contention, Aardsma still had pressure to prove he could get the job done and pitch at the major league level, and he did just that. I'm not saying it's a bad trade. Cotts gives the Cubs four potential left-handers out of the pen (Eyre, Ohman, and Rapada being the other three). That gives them some flexibility to trade one of them for something of value, and if they're able to use that to their advantage, I'm certainly not going to badmouth this deal. ...success to me means something more long-term, but whatever. Sorry I should have been more clear.

I'm very optimistic regarding my other sports teams(check the Bears/Bulls threads.) I've simply had it with this organiztion, espcecially our garbage/inept GM. I understand. Anyone who has groaned at my posts over the years knows I speak the truth :) But hey---if the Cubs really have the cash to overpay for DeRosa, and he puts up mediocre numbers and sort of subs in/out with Theriot? Eh......depending on the rest of the lineup & pitching, maybe I'll be alright with it.

Except for in the second half of 2006, when he posted a 3.12 ERA and struck out 35 in 34.2 innings, while holding opponents to a .198/.277/.347 line. I'm not saying that I oppose the trade, but Aardsma certainly showed that he can be a successful reliever. I'm not saying Aardsma will never succeed, just that he hasn't proven it for anything that would be considered a decent period of time. One half of a season, on a team that was out of contention, doesn't qualify as proof IMO, that's all. Cotts did it for a whole year on a WS Champion. A bit different, wouldn't you agree? I wish Aardvark all the best. I hope he does well, and he certainly might.

That was you?!? http://forumimages.footballguys.com/style_emoticons/default/bowtie.gif LOL.....sorry Chocolate :) No Rex-bashing allowed, darn it!!! ...but colorful nicknames are. Will it be Turnoversaurus Rex next weekend? 8) are you one of the guys who wants to play kyle orton because he "didn't lose games" last season? apparently, people forget about the 5 INT cincinnati game. i'll never understand it. not many quarterbacks can play well when their line is being demolished. rex has made some bad throws this year, no doubt, but he's 12-4 over the course of his career-he doesn't lose many ballgames either....and he's never had a 5 INT performance while throwing a minimum of passes. I don't think Soul was trying to bash Grossman at all, despite the reference to the "Turnoversaurus Rex," nickname. In fact, he made the exact same point you just made (about QB's not playing well under pressure) on the page before this. LOL, now I see how easy it is to be suddenly labeled a "Rex basher." Sulley, I'm a huge Rex fan. Just trying to make jokes and have a little fun, that's all.

It's their close games-8 of their 9 games have been 8 point or less games, and they have won 5 of those games. The other game? They got drilled 41-0 by Jacksonville, which is a big reason their stats are farther down then they probably should be. They have simply managed to play at exactly the level of their opponents every game. They did it against the Colts (with the help of an onside kick recovered, multiple 4th down conversions, and a kickoff return for a TD) and the Colts just barely survived. I don't think the Bears will have much problem with the Jets-the Jets rely on their short to intermediate passing game to survive, and I can see the Bears just completely shutting that down. I think it will be a Bears blowout unless the Jets find the way they have all season to make some sort of crazy play to stay in it. It's got to be just crazy plays and luck, because teams that rank that low sometimes don't have more than 2 wins at the end of the entire season. Ranking-wise, this is far and away the worst team we've faced this year. Yet they just beat the Pats, and are over .500. Trap game? I sure hope not. And I hope the Bears aren't looking ahead to the Pats, either. Because a win against the Jets will almost make that Pats game meaningless, since we would still come out of our toughest stretch 9-2, heading into what can only be considered an easy final 5 games of the year.

I can see the Cubs giving a ridicilous contract to Soriano, but I cannot see them landing Drew. If they lose out on Soriano after Drew signs that will be bad. I'd rather them sign Drew (if that is truely their intention) and see what happens with Soriano. Pill Roger's comments not withstanding, I don't think the Cubs are interested in Drew. It makes too much sense. Much more so than signing Soriano to a ridiculous contract and asking him to play a position he's never played and at the age of 31 no less. CF is much tougher to play than either RF or LF. I hear you. Soriano in CF for mega-bucks seems like the more Cub-ish move. I'm with some other people though: I look at our team and see a void of talent, especially in the outfield, so I would still welcome Soriano despite the shortcomings. That might explain why I can't see it happening with either guy. No history of success to fuel any hope.

I'm OK with it. Cotts is young, has succeeded in the majors before, and done it on a World Series champ. He likely just needs a little rest after a long year in '05 and first half of '06. Aardsma hasn't shown he'll be able to succeed at all, ever.

I'm having a hard time picturing either in a Cub uni. I know----that's a real scientific analysis 8)

Hahaha, Mike North. Yeah. It's not like he makes it difficult to dismiss his idiotic rantings.

All those numbers does us no good if he can't stay healthy. We don't need him to stay healthy, we need him to be healthy most of the time. I think in a 5 year deal, you'd get at least 3 semi-full to full seasons out of him. And then 2 of the seasons he's going to miss some games. But that's probably why you can get him for around $14m, when Soriano might get $17-18m. Look at how the Mets handled the Pedro situation. They signed him for 4 years, and pretty much acknowledged they weren't going to get 4 strong years out of him. If the Cubs were a $65 million team, Drew isn't worth the risk. If they were a very good offensive ballclub, there probably isn't much reason to sign such a player. But the Cubs are desperate for a hitter that does exactly the things JD does. They need an impact bat. Their offense could be awesome with him, and all they'd need to do was try and tread water when he misses games. For all the issues he's had, JD has never crippled a team with his problems. Give JD the same profile, but make him 34 or 35 right now, and my story would probably change. But the Cubs need this type of player, and from age 31 through age 34 or 35, they should be able to get a ton of production out of him. Hmmm...Good way to look at it, and if you think about it you are taking the same gamble with Aramis. Yeah, but the more injury-ridden guys you have, the more chance you'll never be able to get your footing. I'm not saying I wouldn't want Drew to come here. But the fact that Soriano stays healthy is definitely a positive.

So much for the "Hendry is doing well" theory. That took a cozy 3 days. Back to the old Jim. Marquis will get 5/50.

The Jets are 25th in overall offense at 2626 yards. They are 31st in overall defense at 361.1 yards per game. They're +1 in the turnover ratio, which puts them somewhere middle of the pack (there's a few with the same ratio, like the Giants, Cinci, and Jacksonville). By comparison, the Bears are +7, even with the two really bad games of Arizona and Miami. I absolutely do not understand why this team is 5-4. But I hope the Bears figure it out, and quick. The numbers don't make much sense, and I'm sure many other teams like the Patriots took them lightly because of their rankings. I just wonder if people are overlooking them and then playing down to their level because their stats really stink. That would suck for the Bears to lose to a club like this by underestimating them.