Soul

Injury prone, yeah. Average, no. There's a difference between being bad, and just being injury prone. Kerry is injury prone, but not near "bad". BTW, how's Ben Sheets' latest rehab going? :wink: Im not saying Kerry Wood is a bad pitcher i'm saying at this point he's average. Maybe that's due to all the injuries, but the last two years have been pretty average. Even in his best years ('01 and '03) he was only 8th and 9th in the league in era. Every year he's been in the top ten in K's he's also been in the top ten in BB. I don't think after all his injuries he can ever return to that 03 form, therefore I think of his as an average pitcher. Ben Sheet's rehab is going well, no set backs yet. He's on pace to start opening day for the 5th straight year. First ST game for him tomorrow. Wood's ERA+ for his career: 98: 128 00: 89 01: 126 02: 110 03: 133 04: 122 05: 101 Only one season has Wood had an ERA+ below average. Those numbers indicate an above average pitcher. Sheets ERA + 01: 93 02: 96 03: 98 04: 154 05: 127 While the last two years Sheets has been very good, his early seasons were what you would call average or slightly below average. Now certainly, both pitchers are young enough to do some great things, but there's nothing in the numbers that indicate Wood is any more average than Sheets is. (And before anyone construes me as anti-Sheets, Sheets is likely my favorite non-Cub pitcher as I watched him cut his teeth at ULM. What I am trying to show, that despite his injuries, Wood is not an average or below average pitcher.) No I totally agree. Wood's ability shouldn't be questioned. It's just......you know, # of starts/year. It wouldn't be hard at all to take his injuries if he was average. The fact that everyone's talking about it proves he's much better than average. ......and since you switched to Sasha, your posts are now the easiest to locate while scrolling down the page 8)

Truly amazing, haha :lol:

It's really the national media. I don't see Hendry, Baker, and MacPhail countering the notion though. I guess I don't expect them to. But I also think they're holding back on injuries, hoping they'll turn out O.K. What really bothers me is, even if they do so with the best of intentions, after this many years of letdowns with these two they should simply disclose all the tweaks, aches & pains and let them fall where they fall. Because right or wrong, they look like liars every time an unpleasant suprise happens. This knee injury probably started as a "tweak" and grew into a real problem (though it's not a full knee blowout obviously). They should just say it right up front. Hey, he's rehabbing from knee surgery and there's a tweak in his right knee we're looking at. And I think it's time we, as Cub fans, just accept he's not going to be that healthy horse like Zambrano. You're absolutely right: Z is the stud of this squad, and really has been since '04.

Injury prone, yeah. Average, no. There's a difference between being bad, and just being injury prone. Kerry is injury prone, but not near "bad". BTW, how's Ben Sheets' latest rehab going? :wink: Im not saying Kerry Wood is a bad pitcher i'm saying at this point he's average. Maybe that's due to all the injuries, but the last two years have been pretty average. Even in his best years ('01 and '03) he was only 8th and 9th in the league in era. Every year he's been in the top ten in K's he's also been in the top ten in BB. I don't think after all his injuries he can ever return to that 03 form, therefore I think of his as an average pitcher. Ben Sheet's rehab is going well, no set backs yet. He's on pace to start opening day for the 5th straight year. First ST game for him tomorrow. Only 8th and 9th in the league, eh? Out of how many starters? And that's not even factoring in BAA, WHIP, K/9ip... I'd say he's decidedly above average. Oh, for a bit of health! The stuff is so nasty. But he's like the proverbial fake rabbit at a dog race. Oh, so tasty!! If it would just slow down a little....

Let's all take a leap of faith that the print reports the last few days regarding Dontrelle Willis becoming available at some point in the next year are true. With that in mind, what would it take to get him? With Wood's current situation it is even more important that we add quality starting pitching. The great part about dealing with the Marlins at this point is they won't be looking for major league talent in return so Prior, and Z are safe. Would they take Pie + Guzman + Welly for Dontrelle? Would we do that? If the Marlins are seriously going to trade Dontrelle at the break or after this season, why wouldn't they just move him now for the right deal? It's not like they have a chance in hell of making a run with him this season. It's also not like he is going to bring in fans because they will suck so bad. Because the Cubs can't let go of Wood. He's kid K. He was supposed to be the next Clemens. It's almost like the Packers & Favre (not in terms of career success. of course). Everyone always dreams of a messiah coming to save the day. Very few give any thought to what should be done when he lets everyone down. Why would we have to let go of Wood? Not at this point anyway. I assume D would be very expensive. And besides, Wood's coming back! He's always coming back. Gotta keep that seat in the rotation warm for the saviour. :roll: I'm sick of being lied to by this franchise at this point. I don't believe for one second Hendry & Baker didn't know Wood's knee was a problem. They keep selling this idea of Prior & Wood dualing for the Cy Young. It's not going to happen. And I think it's time we accept it, even if they can't.

Let's all take a leap of faith that the print reports the last few days regarding Dontrelle Willis becoming available at some point in the next year are true. With that in mind, what would it take to get him? With Wood's current situation it is even more important that we add quality starting pitching. The great part about dealing with the Marlins at this point is they won't be looking for major league talent in return so Prior, and Z are safe. Would they take Pie + Guzman + Welly for Dontrelle? Would we do that? If the Marlins are seriously going to trade Dontrelle at the break or after this season, why wouldn't they just move him now for the right deal? It's not like they have a chance in hell of making a run with him this season. It's also not like he is going to bring in fans because they will suck so bad. Because the Cubs can't let go of Wood. He's kid K. He was supposed to be the next Clemens. It's almost like the Packers & Favre (not in terms of career success. of course). Everyone always dreams of a messiah coming to save the day. Very few give any thought to what should be done when he lets everyone down.

Curry dominating us. And the 3's. Ouch. Another bad Bulls season. '05 was fun while it lasted, *sigh*

Funny how D-Train becomes a pipe dream just a few years after we already had him in our stable. What happened to the guys we traded for him again? Another year and I might not be able to even recall their names...

From what I've seen, it takes time for Wood to regain his control after he's been on the shelf. I wouldn't expect much of a contribution until after the All Star break. Same goes for Miller.

Corrected.

Bulls/Knicks Bulls leading by 1, about a minute left in the 1st half...

Why? Sounds like a decent location to me.

The only player that the development question pertains to is Pie. There are plenty of other younger candidates who deserve at least as much of a chance as Grissom, who is not a known quantity. A known quantity is a player whom you have a pretty good idea what he will do with the job. Grissom could be worse than Macias next year, or he could be an acceptable bench player, we don't know. His age and career path makes him an unknown. You'd be foolish to just hand him a job. If anybody should get the benefit of the doubt it's Restovich, who at least stands a chance to be good for a few years and contribute to the team. Haha, I read this thread from the bottom and assumed when Grissom was mentioned as a "known quantity" it was referring to the fact that he will, indeed, suck. It never occurred to me that someone would think he might return to his younger form. That would shock the hell out of me. I view him as a player who is finished, but just can't accept it.

I don't know if you've been paying any attention, but Gordon's been starting since around the second or third week of the season. Well, he's averaging about 30 minutes per game. I think that's low. So sue me.

It depends on the two players. If the Bulls traded Gordon and Deng plus their two first rounders for Garnett, would the resulting team be any better? Or would it be a borderline playoff team with a superstar? Seems more like the latter to me. Ford's suggested trade of Deng and the two first rounders for Garnett appeals, though. Garnett-Chandler-Noch-Gordon-Hinrich -- yep, that would work. skiles would probably play songaila over garnett in 4th quarters, though. Sulley's quest against Skiles is laughable. This team has the pieces and assets to make a run for a title in a few years. i'll believe it when i actually see a skiles-led team make a title run. Do NBA teams actually develop? I was always under the impression that you either win by drafting a great player and hope he develops into an elite within 3 years (doesn't look like any current Bull will come close to that), or you sign/trade for somebody else's superstar. Is there much of a history of sub .500 teams gradually getting better with the same group of players, without at least one of those players turning into a superstar, or trading for a superstar? I can't imagine the Bulls ever going far with Skiles as the coach. He seems to be more interested in sending messages than winning. That's fine, actually it can be great to develop some guys, but usually you have to change the coach to then go to the next level. Not saying Gordon would ever be like Mike, or even like Dwayne Wade. But there's exactly zero chance he will develop into any kind of a consistent impact player from the bench. And that's 100% on Skiles. Now I hear rumors of Gordon being traded? Wonderful. Let's just throw away every player with potential because he won't kiss management's feet. 25 wins, heading nowhere. I hope nobody is wondering why.

I need a drink.

How can a ballclub be this bad for so long if it is really trying? It doesn't make sense to me. If you're putting forth the effort, eventually the payoff will come, won't it? It always has in my life. I can trace every success in my life to effort, and any sustained failure to lack of sustained effort. Sometimes you fail when you really try, sure. But 100 years? Even 20 years. I can't explain the pre-tourist-attraction Cubbies lack of success, as you said. Maybe they just didn't give a damn about anything back then? But I can tell you most of the country expects the Cubs to be a non-playoff team this year, including many Cub fans. Hasn't stopped the gate, though. I don't think fans are buying 2006 tickets at the predicted sell-out rates because they think the Cubs are a genuine contender. Maybe in 2004, yeah. But my point is, if you are the Trib why continue at 2004's level of effort when the revenue stream is largely the same? As you call tell, I'm just very frustrated. Sorry...

Yeah, but those teams have won the World Series. Isn't that the goal? Yes. But you still haven't explained how tearing down Wrigley is going to help us accomplish that goal. I have tried to. But alas, it appears my explanation is not acceptable :( I just want to win before I die. I sat and watched my Dad die without ever having seen his beloved Cubs win it. I don't want to be the same. And you know, I don't think that's going to happen when the Trib can count on a packed house to watch a last place ballclub.

Yeah, but those teams have won the World Series. Isn't that the goal?

So what exactly is your argument? That the Trib doesn't mind spending money on the team, but they just don't care if it wins? Isn't that completely backasswards logic? Considering they'd make more money by winning with competent management? That is if they're the money grubbing take advantage of lemmings owners you portray them as. Spending money isn't the same as a commitment to win. Not sure what it will take to get that through people's thick skulls, but hey----the record speaks for itself.

Soul's convoluted logic(correct me if I remember wrong) says that if we had a new ballpark, then we wouldn't have a guaranteed revenue through ticket prices. Then in order for ownership to make money, they'd have to make sure the product was good, which means firing front office people in addition to supplying a high payroll. We'll ignore the parts about Cub fans coming out no matter the stadium, and that new management(while I'm certainly not against getting rid of Hendry/Baker/etc.) is no guarantee of success. Even if fans stopped coming to the new stadium, then any owner ever is going to lower payroll, which will lead to a worse product, and so on... If the fans will still attend no matter what even in a new ballpark, then we're screwed. Lower payroll doesn't always equal a worse product, BTW. That's pretty interesting logic on your part. Did you miss the Marlins, Angels, and White Sox World Series recently? So if a team can't be successful with a high payroll, lowering it gives it a chance to succeed? I don't know why I'm even arguing this after "If the fans will still attend no matter what even in a new ballpark, then we're screwed.". I'm not sure why I'm arguing with you, either, to be honest. Some ballclubs win with a high payroll philosophy, some win with a lower payroll philosophy. Just because a team had to switch from one to the other doesn't mean they automatically lose. Marlins have won it both ways in handful of years, while we continued to lose. There's a ballclub that needs to win to put people in the seats. And so they do. You're a smart guy, so figure it out. I'm going to bed.

Soul's convoluted logic(correct me if I remember wrong) says that if we had a new ballpark, then we wouldn't have a guaranteed revenue through ticket prices. Then in order for ownership to make money, they'd have to make sure the product was good, which means firing front office people in addition to supplying a high payroll. We'll ignore the parts about Cub fans coming out no matter the stadium, and that new management(while I'm certainly not against getting rid of Hendry/Baker/etc.) is no guarantee of success. Even if fans stopped coming to the new stadium, then any owner ever is going to lower payroll, which will lead to a worse product, and so on... If the fans will still attend no matter what even in a new ballpark, then we're screwed. Lower payroll doesn't always equal a worse product, BTW. That's pretty interesting logic on your part. Did you miss the Marlins, Angels, and White Sox World Series recently?

You like Miller Park. That's fine, but the fact that you think it's a "great new ballpark" is all that really needs to be said to discredit your views on this matter. I actually never said that. But hey----why let what I really said stop you from twisting my words? What do you actually think of it? Parking: better than Wrigley. SightLines, % of seats with a good view: better than Wrigley Amenities, cleanliness: better than Wrigley Seats: better than Wrigley Atmosphere: much worse than Wrigley, obviously Area of town: worse than Wrigley, though there's no crime around Miller Park, there's not much of anything else, either. History: much worse than Wrigley I believe I said Miller Park is a more fun place to watch a ballgame than Wrigley. Which to me it is. Now----after the game, or as far as the entire experience of the neighborhood, the history, that's different.

I appreciate that's your opinion. I happen to disagree with it. We genuinely *TRIED* to win in 2004, after the Cubs had a taste of success in '03. Once '04 tanked, the desire and effort to win from this organization took a nose dive. The results speak for themselves. We need to ask ourselves why only one year? Why didn't they keep trying like they did in '04? No motivation. That's why. Why is there no motivation? Because that ballpark is filled no matter what. The sales stay pretty much constant no matter what--or at least more than almost every other team.

Is it the clothing you find horrifying, or Jeff Gordon's wry mug, or both? J/K It's going to get to that point no matter what. Is it going to stop you from watching the games though? That's the real question. My guess is, it will not.