Soul

:shock: And this all started when Lee got injured...... His injury might cost us 10 games in the standings if we keep this up.

If it's still this bad when June rolls around, then I think it will be time to just let the young guys play and to hell with the race. Right now I'm still holding out a little hope, but the problem is our young guys will need to pull along the deadweight on this roster until the big 3 get back. That's not real comforting.

Like it or not, you are Cub fans for life. There's no escape. Mwahahah.

Best of 7. How many do the Iowa Cubbies win? Bet they could take 2.

Great. Now Murton's going to suck too?

Fer Cryin' OUT LOUD man!!! :evil:

I would say players who have bad seasons, in relation to expectations, can be blamed. But if guys play to expectations, it's the GM and managers fault when they fail. And if a good player has a bad month, I'll give him some slack. Also, when players routinely make outs swinging at garbage, I still blame them, somewhat, for not fixing that problem. If a player routinely grounds into DPs with the same pathetic slap it to 2nd swing, I blame him. But when I complain about sucky players for sucking, it's implied that I blame their presence on the roster or in the lineup or on the mound for the troubles. Most of my hostility is directed at management for poor planning. I just blame everyone. It's much easier that way. .....and you save alot of money on steno pads and pencils :P

At hitting Home Runs? At being a walking crash n' burn without trying I sort of miss him. That piece where he was interviewing someone and asked about a mutual friend, only to be told "um....Joe, he's dead" was incredible. I about died myself :lol:

Me either. But I think this is the Bonds "compromise." He knows he did it, everyone else knows----he's too stubborn to ever admit it, so his way of "making it right" with the world is to retire one step short of Aaron. After that, in Barry Bonds mind, he will have atoned for himself. Hey--whatever helps you sleep at night, Barry.

I'm not tired of it. It's exactly what they should be doing. They have an obligation to their customers to be as forthright as possible, and to be open and honest about injuries. You hear every other team talking about timelines. Sometimes they are met, sometimes they are not. The Cubs, in their pathetic pansy way take offense when they are called out on it, so they hide in their little shell and pretend nothing is behind the green curtain. It's a sad yet perfect depiction of the all-around ineptness of this organization. Somebody refered earlier to the concept that the Cubs can do no right in this situation. I think that's exactly the point. They are a bunch of bumbling buffoons who can't figure out anything injury related. They can't figure out the one problem that has killed this team for years offensively. They can't figure out how to get pitchers to throw strikes. They can't figure out how to win ballgames. This front office has had a dozen years to get things right and they've failed miserably. They foolishly tried to become the next Braves, when they should have tried to be the next Marlins. If you put all your hopes on a couple arms, the odds are you will fail because arms are extremely unreliable. If they put an ounce of energy into the offense, and more than a minute of thought beyond the tools, it would be a lot easier to win games without absolutely perfect pitching. And I'm sure that would go over well with the board. I know that probably would have meant a World Series title or two, but how many people would honestly like it if the Cubs just traded ALL of their good players right after winning? How many people would want Hendry's head on a platter for doing that? Maybe not after the first World Series, but definately after the second. Remember, the Braves did win a World Series title during their run and I would much rather emulate them than the Marlins. I think the point is, the Braves are a much less likely model to be able to emulate than the Marlins. Honestly, I don't get the whole Marlins=bad mentality. There's nothing wrong with what they did. They went out, built up 2 World Series champions, and then started over each time. Translate that to the Cubs: we go out, win 2 World Series, and in between we lose, just like we are right now. How is this bad, again? At least it would mean the organization has the ability to build a winner.

I'm probably going to reveal my math ineptitude here, but oh well... Doesn't the mean have to be .500? If each game always results in a win and a loss, and there are X number of games, then there will always be just as many wins as losses each season leaguewide. Now---in each division it's not necessarily the case of course. No. The mean is the average. The median is the middle and the mode is the number that comes up at the highest frequency. When people talk about regression toward the mean it means that the performance is likely to revert to an historical average. For example if St. Louis regress toward the mean of the last 5 years, this year they will likely win 96 games (100,105,85,97,93/5). Not so good for us Cub fans. Ouch. Let's find a string of seasons where St. Louis was terrible and call that their historical average instead! :D

I'm probably going to reveal my math ineptitude here, but oh well... Doesn't the mean have to be .500? If each game always results in a win and a loss, and there are X number of games, then there will always be just as many wins as losses each season leaguewide. Now---in each division it's not necessarily the case of course.

Trouble is, if we don't stop this slide we're going to regress much further than the mean...

Woot!! We found another Neifi without even trying! 8) Anywhoo........it's May now so if slappy doesn't pick it up soon, no more excuses. :wink:

Not sure what to think anymore. Part me thinks Prior is going through a rash of bad luck, and another part wonders if he has become a bit too sensitive to any discomfort that comes along. I hope it's the former. At any rate, the situation is obviously very frustrating for everyone. Same with Wood, though I'm more certain in Woody's case he's just putting a ton of strain on his arm and it's not holding up.

I need some Jack.

Alright, I'm declaring it officially "OK" to boo Jones now. That's just reeeeeediculous. :x

Christ!! Jones has Hundley's penchant for K's and Alou's baserunning! NOT A GOOD COMBINATION! :evil: :evil:

He also won a World Series with a bad offense, but that doesn't mean it was the right offense to have. And throwing too many pitches usually won't take a toll on previously healthy pitchers in one or two seasons. The risk is for future health. Angel was brought up out of a perceived necessity. His pitching wasn't 100% yet and they knew that. They also knew just how much time he's spent rehabbing over the past three years. You have to adjust standards based on who the pitcher is. Of course, with Angel, you're worried about his immediate health. It's the same reasoning why (hopefully) Wood's pitch count will be limited at least for a few starts when he gets back. You're not going to leave him out of the rotation until he's actually 100% in terms of pitching. Hmmmmm......it doesn't? Object is to win the World Series, isn't it? Who cares if you have a world-beater offense if you can get that done? Maybe I'm missing something here.... The goal is to put together the best team possible, not just rely on great pitching performances. For every 2005 White Sox team, there are quite a few more 2005 Cubs teams. Having a bad offense doesn't exactly give you much insurance if the pitching doesn't work out just as you hoped. Understood. But I wouldn't characterize the Sox's offense last year as "bad." It was adequate. Some good timely hitting, if not copious hitting. I agree you always try to put together the best team possible. You surely must agree that hope for a less-than-perfect team is a good thing----especially being a Cub fan :)

He also won a World Series with a bad offense, but that doesn't mean it was the right offense to have. And throwing too many pitches usually won't take a toll on previously healthy pitchers in one or two seasons. The risk is for future health. Angel was brought up out of a perceived necessity. His pitching wasn't 100% yet and they knew that. They also knew just how much time he's spent rehabbing over the past three years. You have to adjust standards based on who the pitcher is. Of course, with Angel, you're worried about his immediate health. It's the same reasoning why (hopefully) Wood's pitch count will be limited at least for a few starts when he gets back. You're not going to leave him out of the rotation until he's actually 100% in terms of pitching. Hmmmmm......it doesn't? Object is to win the World Series, isn't it? Who cares if you have a world-beater offense if you can get that done? Maybe I'm missing something here....

The real problem is, it's just too darn nice down in Arizona. We need to "dirty up" the facilities down there a little bit. Yes, that was sarcasm.

I'm partial to the Elia tirade, but the Weaver one is truly hilarious. It's almost like they planned it before the show started, because you can hear both of them laughing under their breath towards the end. I think Earl just had enough of the B.S. and told the interviewer (Tom something--?) he was going to let one loose. The "little fleas gettin' picked off" sequence at the beginning never fails to take me off my chair :lol:

What an ordeal. Too much for an old man on Monday night 8)

This is just embarrassing. 1 run against the Pirates? Whoa.

I've just about had it with Mabry [-(