Soul

Have to say that fans have already put a statue out in front of Wrigley with the stuff being said. I have to say that Kevin Hart looked really good last year and people were going to name babies after him. He did look good against the Marlins but is that a team you want to compare him to. The Marlins have no plate discipline and are free swingers and swung at some bad pitches. Lets wait a few games when he goes against a few veteran teams and they are laying off those pitches. Then you throw him in the middle of a playoff race with a team trying to win now and also lets see how he bounces back after his first rough outing. I'm not saying that he's not going to be a good pitcher but realistically how bout we wait till he's thrown a few more innings..... The difference between Samardzija and Hart is that Jeff has shown better stuff in these first few innings. His pitches look like he can dominate. With Hart, he needs to hit his spots and cannot rely on what his stuff alone. I will not say that Samardzija is or will be Kerry Wood right up front, but pitchers who can throw the ball like this don't have to be on to pitch well. Kevin Hart is much more hittable. The Marlins may be free swingers, but they have a higher OBP than the Cubs and are right up there in HR overall. I don't think that you are giving enough credit to a team that is also in the middle of a pennant race. This said, I am not someone who is hailing Samardzija as the savior of the bullpen, but he certainly is capable of helping this team more than some of the other guys that we have seen this year. If he can settle in as the 7th inning guy, I'd be very happy. Yeah, the Marlins are a pretty respectable offensive team. I don't agree with trying to minimize Shark's results because it was "only" against the Marlins. They're definitely in the playoff race, a pretty solid ballclub. And they've been coming from behind in the late innings too -- except they couldn't against Jeff. Obviously this is only a first taste of Shark, so nobody knows what will happen once teams develop a good scouting report on him and hitters have had a chance to see him. The early returns are good though. We'll just have to see.

I don't want to take anything off the table, but at the same time I don't think it's a good idea to empty out what little we have left in our system because our offense has slumped a little lately and we're working through a few issues in the bullpen.

If Shark's FB is 95MPH with movement, that's a hell of a pitch. The slider could become pretty good too -- that's it, solid pitcher right there. I'm also struck by this because the gun @ Principal had his FB at 90. So that's a pretty bad gun. I wonder if people are partially saying Shark didn't look as good down there because of that slow gun. A couple of us were sitting there laughing at the readings because what was coming out of his hand was so inconsistent with what was being posted on the scoreboard. This guy's good -- I find it likely he's *always* been good. From what I've been hearing from Cubs people in the media, there's never been any real doubt in their minds, even on the day they drafted him. I choose to believe the Cubs just outscouted everyone on this guy. It happens -- the Cubs are actually quite capable of producing pitching talent.

My guess is Angelo told the agent to tell Devin, "Remember when Urlacher showed up to OTA and then they signed him?" They probably refused to sign him while he was holding out, and told him, show up, and then we'll sign. That could be true. At any rate, I'm listening to alot of silly hand-wringing on the radio this morning about how this is "typical Bears" and they should have "given Hester his money long ago." Honestly, do most Bear fans feel this way? Looking at the picture, I really don't see how the Bears have botched their negotiations this offseason. I think they've actually done a pretty good job. Hester's a player under contract -- he has asked for more money. The Bears have agreed to negotiate a new contract. What else can reasonably be expected here? I had to defend the Bears at work this week. Everybody thought the Bears were stupid because Hester wasn't signed long-term yet. I got all the "he's their only way of scoring points". People don't realize that Hester has only played 2 years. He hasn't been a factor on anything but special teams until last year when the season when the season was no longer in doubt. I think it is more to Hester's benefit to be in camp than it is to the Bears. Hester wants to be paid like a #1 WR. Yeah, the Bears want him in that role, but if he isn't it's not like they don't have other options. I defended the Bears and told everyone that a 455K/year player wouldn't hold out for long at 15K/day. What other options do the Bears have? There's a mix of young guys, a special teams superduperstar, and middling veterans. Whatever good options the Bears have is directly a result of the NFL's salary cap structure and nothing they've done. It's not like they have a quarterback who is going to disguise weaknesses in the WR corps either. The point is, it's still the offseason and the Bears never, ever so much as hinted at the idea that they wouldn't work with Hester. Complaining about the order that players are negotiated with during the offseason is pointless and silly. The deal got done, the Bears said they would work him. End of story. Whether it got done in June or late July is largely immaterial. It cost Hester a couple days of TC, and he was at all OTCs. Big deal -- not worth all the energy people are putting into bitching about it.

If Hester can become a solid #1 WR in addition to being the best return man in history, then we're talking about a hall of fame type player and that contract is fantastic.

i see nothing wrong with bringing this thread back...it is relevant... please hendry, get mahay From the Member Guidelines: It's been over 2 months, and the reason for resurrecting this one was to proclaim how right he was about something. If that's the way it's done now then fine. I'm saying I've been chastised in the past for this exact same thing, so if this is now OK I'd like a member guidelines clarification.

I thought it would be OK to let it slide for 7/25's game, but I guess I was wrong. Alright Cubs, win..... http://dsimple.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/kittens.jpg .....or I can not be held responsible for what happens to them.

It's OK to drudge up threads from more than 2 months ago now? I just wanna know because I've been chastised for it in the past. If this is allowed to slide then I expect to be able to do it in the future. ....just saying.

I think Lou is waiting for "2nd half Bob." I don't think that person is going to show up.

People have taken a good understanding of probability and misapplied it. The Brewers' 8 game-streak doesn't tell us much about the quality of the team, because of sample-sizes. That's certainly true. But their underlying ability level is irrelevant. What matters is the results in this season, not the theoretical results of a million Monte Carlo simulation-seasons. And an eight-game streak in THIS season, lucky or not, has a profound influence on their playoff odds and by extension, ours. Losing the number of games in the standings that we have over the last few games is a serious matter. It can't just be shrugged off, because it does seriously change our playoff odds. We are almost sure, at this point, that we are one of the two best teams in the NL. Certainly one of the three best. But being one of the three best does not guarantee that you won't lose 2 games on the Brewers and 4+ games on someone else over two months. And a month ago, this team had every reason to believe it was virtually guaranteed to be in. Who would challenge us for the Wild Card, assuming the Cards do fade away and Milwaukee can't be beat? 85% is still a pretty darn good number. What were our chances last year at this time?

And we aren't? Dude seriously, it's easy to bag on a team that is in a slump and easy to pump up a team when they are playing great. The fact remains is the Brewers and the Cubs are two very good ball clubs and they will be battling all summer long. Get used to it. With only two months remaining and the lead we had built being virtually completely gone, the fact that we are a very good team now means a lot less than it did a week ago. A great team needs all six months to separate themselves from the pack. If they fail to do it, they risk being beaten by a slightly inferior team over a small sample. That's a position I never wanted to see this Cubs team put themselves into. Before today we were 5-5 in our last 10 games. It's not like we are losing 10 games in a row. It just so happens that the Brewers have been tearing it up. The Brewers are not going to keep up this pace and we will play better. We still have the best record in the NL, it just so happens that the Brewers have the 2nd best record in the NL. We just got to ride it out. Did you really believe we would keep up the frantic pace we set in the 1st half of the year? Very much likely to happen, but all conjecture at this point. Just like the Cardinals, they very well may fall out of the NLC and WC races, but they might not either. Only time will tell. I just can't see the Cards. Especially after that series with Milwaukee. The Crew showed them what they really are. They played well until September last year too and then just collapsed on a titanic level. That should happen again, only earlier. The Crew are a great team though. Unfortunately we've known they were coming for awhile now. Well -- they're here. We're going to have to deal with them somehow, but this isn't really a suprise to me.

If the Brewers and one wild-card contender have a great two months and squeak ahead of us, am I supposed to be okay with it? What should have been a sure bet is now down to a good bet, and I see no reason not to be very unhappy about that. Yes, I think a well-managed team could have easily maintained the frantic pace we set in the first half of the year. Just because we're used to winning division titles with 88 games doesn't mean 100 is impossible. To be fair though, the Brewers weren't playing nearly this good earlier. It could be that we're pretty equal and just decided to have the spurt at a different time. At the moment, we are still talking about 2 teams with top-tier records. I'm still upset we're not tearing it up anymore because I hate losing, but I'm also trying to maintain some objectivity here.

You'd think they were in a brutal slump and losing ground so fast it's hard to keep track or something. Hey, guess who has the better track record? The people predicting doom for the Cubs or the people telling them not to? 3-5 over 8 games. Let's just end the season now. Might as well. Hey-guess who is less annoying? The people predicting doom or the rational people who understand that an 8 game stretch in July means virtually nothing in a 162 game season? It's called a game thread.

Will Howry ever pitch again without a run scoring?

Wanna make a bet the Cubs have sole possession of first after the Milwaukee series? Internet bet....sure. I want in. What's at stake? Public humiliation on NSBB?

The question was never was if the Bears would pay Hester, the question is, what market do you use for him? You obviously CANNOT use the WR market to re-sign, cause Hester hasn't proven he is an NFL reciever, but offering him PR/KR is a severe insult. It wouldn't surprise me, if the two sides agree on a short extension (say 2 yrs), and if Hester shows he can be a WR, then they would renegotiate the contract to better suit the WR market. The amiguity has to be a problem, true. But didn't Lovie & Turner both say they thought Hester had #1 WR potential? That will probably make its way into the negotiation somewhere.

POTD dammit, rocket beat me to it. what did cubbette say for those of us who missed it? Edit: sorry, I see it's posted above :oops:

My guess is Angelo told the agent to tell Devin, "Remember when Urlacher showed up to OTA and then they signed him?" They probably refused to sign him while he was holding out, and told him, show up, and then we'll sign. That could be true. At any rate, I'm listening to alot of silly hand-wringing on the radio this morning about how this is "typical Bears" and they should have "given Hester his money long ago." Honestly, do most Bear fans feel this way? Looking at the picture, I really don't see how the Bears have botched their negotiations this offseason. I think they've actually done a pretty good job. Hester's a player under contract -- he has asked for more money. The Bears have agreed to negotiate a new contract. What else can reasonably be expected here? Exactly....the Bears might have tense negotiations with players, but how many players have left the team or went another direction because of the Bears tough negotiations. Alex Brown, Vasher, Urlacher, Briggs, Hester, even Gould all went public with their negotiations, and all of them are still here. Briggs is the prime example. He said he would never play another down for the Bears, finally accepted the Franchise Player tag with the goal of unrestricted FA next year, and he ended up coming back to the team for less than we all thought. Briggs doesn't seem too angry now. Yep, I think the outcome is more important than whether or not a player expresses displeasure during the process.

He's probably trying to keep his arm healthy. That's a good thing right?

:? Uh-oh, did I break some board taboo? :oops: no, i think he posted that because it's beaucoup, not buco. In Uhmericuh it's spelled BUCO! If you don't like it you can giiiihhhhhout And here I thought it was just one of those words some dude made up one day because it sounded cool :)

It is important to be nice. Yep. See what happens when one is not nice? OFF TO JAIL.

In his situation though, it's probably just not worth the additional aggravation. I could be wrong, but my understanding is that Bartman's fine. He's not destitute. He's not unemployed. He's just a guy who is living his life like everyone else, and wants to be left alone. I can't understand why people just don't let it go. They should go back and watch the game, objectively: the Cubs were still winning after Bartman. The situation on the field hadn't changed one bit after the "Bartman incident." I understand the raw emotion of the moment but now that it's 5 years in the past, it's time to look at it objectively and realize the Cubs lost that game because they stopped playing good baseball in that very inning. Cause sports media is full of lazy morons. That's why they won't let it go. They think they're comedians, they're just pricks. I agree, and too many fans continue to regard it as something worthy of listening to, worthy of giving creedence to.

So this story broke on Tuesday. Then the Cards proceed to get beat in a series of late-inning meltdowns to the Crew Tues, Wed, Thurs (one of those was the CC shutout, but you get the point). I'm guessing this talk will be heating up. The Crew just showed the whole world what LaRussa must have known all along: that BP isn't going to hold many leads against solid teams. On a side note, we could use some more BP help before the deadline too.

Not any chance that he would pitch better than Marquis this year. and this is based on? It's most likely the fact that Marquis has been about a league-average pitcher this season. While it's possible Samardzija could pitch better than that, it's not something I would bet on at this stage in his career. For all the grief that Marquis gets from people, he's been a solid #5 starter. His WHIP for the season might not be all that impressive, but he's managed to limit the damage by keeping the ball in the ballpark. Since May 18 11 starts, 5-3 record, 3.95 ERA, 1.23 WHIP, 6 IP/start He may have started slowly, but he certainly hasn't been hurting this team over the past couple months. I've been mildly pleased with Marquis' continued league-average starts. Lord knows we need it with this bullpen. Trouble is, you never know when he'll decide it's the 2nd half of the season and therefore time to start sucking again. As for Samardz, does this seem like "too much too soon" to anyone else? He really hasn't been pitching well for very long, from what I understand. I find it likely he'll struggle up here, especially on the control front. Someone talk me down.

In his situation though, it's probably just not worth the additional aggravation. I could be wrong, but my understanding is that Bartman's fine. He's not destitute. He's not unemployed. He's just a guy who is living his life like everyone else, and wants to be left alone. I can't understand why people just don't let it go. They should go back and watch the game, objectively: the Cubs were still winning after Bartman. The situation on the field hadn't changed one bit after the "Bartman incident." I understand the raw emotion of the moment but now that it's 5 years in the past, it's time to look at it objectively and realize the Cubs lost that game because they stopped playing good baseball in that very inning.