XZero771679666304

That's bullisht. Why can't you? If a ship is sinking I'm not going to keep pouring more water into it. You can, but you'll have to deal with any fuss that ensues. I don't think scrubby guys should be let in, but if we're seriously going to debate the HOF merits of a guy like Thome given some of the guys who are in, that just ridiculous. The hypocrisy can only go so far.

Good article but I don't like the argument that I hear so often of "well a guy like Rabbit Maranville is in, so to keep a guy like Player X out is obscene." Just because there are weak HOF candidates already in the hall shouldn't be an excuse to put "Hall of Very Good" players in. I'm a small hall guy, so naturally that argument is flawed to me. I hear where you're coming from, but on the other hand it is hard to justify keeping some guys out when unquestionably inferior players are in. You can't all of a sudden start maintaining more stringent standards because you want a small hall. That ship has sailed.

This sort of thing doesn't always translate over the TV, but the sound it made was incredible.

Yeah, pretty shocking.

Nice, very nice.

It's been awfully quiet for the last 5 minutes...

Yeah, I thought it was some sort of temporal disturbance for a second.

Yeah, that thought is definitely lurking in the back of my mind.

If he pans out, people can dust off their Shawon-O-Meters.

Yeah, he's gonna be in the doghouse. So if Maples is signed, will it be for seven figures as well? the rumor was that maples had a $2m price tag, so it would be extremely shocking if he didn't sign for seven figures. especially considering that the cubs have been meeting or exceeding pretty much everyone's price tag. Yowza. Hasn't Bud been pushing for a hard slotting system? This has to drive him crazy.

Yeah, he's gonna be in the doghouse. So if Maples is signed, will it be for seven figures as well?

Yeah, he gets in first ballot. No ties to PEDs, great reputation and universally liked.

I'm planning on using some sort of Hitchhiker's Guide reference. Unless he has lost weight he has the look of a Vogon, that's for sure.

The fact that Soriano, who doesn't seem to say anything about anyone, tore into Z and called him a mental midget speaks volumes. That was shocking to me. Byrd's comments were benign, but he hasn't been here very long.

No, but Hendry typically talks himself into a corner by enraging the meatheads to the point that no solution is acceptable other than the banishment of said player. GMs will lowball him because they know he HAS to make a move. Had all parties just shut up and kept the clubhouse business in the clubhouse, no one would be wise to any of this today. If the player has value to multiple teams, the fact that we have to move him becomes somewhat irrelevant. But when you paint the guy as a disruptive force, you're diminishing his value. Obviously Hendry finds merit in that sort of thing, so it would be naive to assume other GMs don't. You can't pretend essentially saying "this guy is a problem we need to rid ourselves of" isn't going to have bearing on how much perceived net value he has and how much others will give up for him. You basically put youself in a position where the player is persona non grata on your team, and other teams have all the leverage. Come on. That's not happening because of Hendry. Everyone in baseball knows what Zambrano is at this point. Everyone saw what was happening last night. Everyone saw the deliberate throwing at players to get tossed. That all happened before Zambrano's clubhouse antics came to light. Hendry's not going to be able to cover for that. Quit painting this as Hendry's fault. Look, I don't like Jimbo either. But Zambrano's simply a lunatic. Everyone already knows it. We're way, way past any usual tactics to keep truths behind closed doors. That horse left the barn long ago. If you were actually reading my posts you'd realize I was talkng about Sosa in that last post contrasting that situation with the Z situation, which I painted in the same light you did. Read the post above the one you quoted.

No, but Hendry typically talks himself into a corner by enraging the meatheads to the point that no solution is acceptable other than the banishment of said player. GMs will lowball him because they know he HAS to make a move. Had all parties just shut up and kept the clubhouse business in the clubhouse, no one would be wise to any of this today. If the player has value to multiple teams, the fact that we have to move him becomes somewhat irrelevant. But when you paint the guy as a disruptive force, you're diminishing his value. Obviously Hendry finds merit in that sort of thing, so it would be naive to assume other GMs don't. You can't pretend essentially saying "this guy is a problem we need to rid ourselves of" isn't going to have bearing on how much perceived net value he has and how much others will give up for him. You basically put youself in a position where the player is persona non grata on your team, and other teams have all the leverage.

Sammy didn't have a great deal of value, but when a team vilifies a player, they lose leverage. The whole fiasco at the end of Sammy's tenure was totally contrived, and trading him was approached more like taking out the trash than moving an asset. What Hendry is saying now is [expletive], but I just don't think Z's value could be much lower. You can't really say anything that will make him less attractive to other teams at this point. Z dealt the deathblow to the chances of him being traded for anything of value or without absorbing virtually all of his remaining salary, and the damage was done before Hendry even opened his mouth on the subject. The damage that Hendry can do is by releasing him or trading him and paying all of his remaining salary.

I agree, but I'm not sure how much further damage can be done at this point. Z's value as far as a trade goes probably hit bottom before Hendry said a word about the incident. Having to pay for an empty rotation slot next year will hurt, though. With Sosa he would have had more trade value had Hendry and Co. not smeared him. You can't really say the same thing about Zambrano. No one wanted him anyway.

No, what he's saying is that the Ricketts intend to keep him on. Whether he's right or not is the question.

That's what I was thinking. Thus the question mark.

I can't believe anybody would rather have Casey Coleman pitching for us next season than Carlos Zambrano... especially when we wont be getting anything in return for Zambrano. I really don't think Coleman is the alternative we'd be looking at.

lol this isn't 2007 Fixed