XZero771679666304

I was 21, and my friend and I had been out golfing, but it started raining and there was lightning, so we went home early and turned on the game, it was the top of the 7th.

Really want to do a Vegeta meme about this, but I won't. DBZ is stupid, but that was amusing.

That ball was killed.

They were looking at Feldman's hand. Appeared to be a cramp. Like a finger cramp. He couldn't seem to straighten his index and middle fingers. It was weird, but it didn't look serious.

I always thought actual punishment over the BioGenesis flap was a longshot. But his name is pretty much mud at this point, so I'm fine with it.

Might be hard to OPS .1200 with an .800 SLG. You [expletive] nerds and your decimal points

That was Ted Lilly, was it not? NM, that game was at Wrigley, iirc.

I'll admit to tuning into Sox broadcasts, but only when they're getting blasted, just so I can hear the old dumb bastard mope like a child.

For christ sake Well, that, and the idea there's only three players there doing anything. But DeJesus, Schierholtz, Wood, Villanueva, Jackson, Castillo, Valbuena, Soriano, Barney, Russell, and Rondon don't count. Not sure why though. But they don't. It is what it is. Until those players are turned into quality ML players, which is what you're implying, the roster doesn't help Sveum's job. At the very least, DeJesus, Jackson, Soriano, Barney and Russell are all quality big league players. Not impact guys, but definitely quality players.

Yep. I'm expecting a dominate outing from him. Dominant. Sorry, pet peeve.

The manager will go before the GM or owner. That's why I am asking this question. It's not like the Cubs have had much to cheer about the last few seasons and it's a fair question. I don't dislike any of the management or front office, but you have to wonder what Theo and Company are thinking. If they Cubs continue to be a bad baseball team, they'll do something. The question is just when. This team isn't quite as bad as last year's, but it's going to be hard to hold Dale accountable for a losing season, unless things go catastrophically wrong (i.e. a season long continuation of this start).

I think so. On paper, the team this year shouldn't be nearly as bad as it has been. I think it's an acquisition or two from being decent, especially if we retain Garza, which I think is increasingly likely. With a good offseason, I could see the Cubs being a wild card contender next year. Well, first, people have been saying "the team . . . shouldn't be nearly as bad as it has been" for going on two years. Sure, they're going to win more games than they're on pace for, but, either way, this team stinks. Second, I've been arguing for quite awhile that a couple players could change a lot, but I'm not sure the necessary acquisitions fit in "the plan." I am a big fan of the Edwin Jackson signing, but I don't think two more similar additions is sufficient (other than hoping for 2012 Orioles luck--which is one reason we should all support such signings). I see last year as being a slightly different scenario, since the whole thing was always going to be blown up. I'm sure we'll see some trades, but not a full on fire sale this year. I'd be stunned if this team actually loses a 100 games. Objectively, we saw a different approach taken this past offseason than we did the year prior, and I think we'll see the trend of adding MLB or MLB ready (long term) assets continue after this season. I think we'll see at least one major trade of prospects for a high caliber MLB player.

Who's that and where the hell is Ryan Swope?

I think so. On paper, the team this year shouldn't be nearly as bad as it has been. I think it's an acquisition or two from being decent, especially if we retain Garza, which I think is increasingly likely. With a good offseason, I could see the Cubs being a wild card contender next year.

Theo could lose 100 games every year for 4 years and he'll be allowed to finish out his contract. That's kind of what I figured as well. Hopefully we won't ever find out. Yeah, he's not getting fired. But next year will be a make or break year of sorts when it comes to his plan. If the team isn't at least making the pretense of contending in 2014, things aren't going to be looking too hot on the five year plan front.

Gameday made it look like it was too close to take.

Well, technically, Epstein could have non-tendered Garza, right? If we're counting those players, throw in Castro, Samardzija and Barney. Those seven in aggregate are worth what they are getting paid, I'd imagine. It's one thing to argue that we're bad because Epstein has decided it's worth it to be bad for some long-term plan. But we're far past the point where we can say that we're bad because the front office didn't inherit enough from Hendry. They've had two offseasons now to build a team that they wanted, and they've done so. That's fair, but I think it's also fair to say we're not winning the division yet because the front office didn't inherit enough from Hendry. If they optimized the roster with the assets in hand in November 2011, they might only be mediocre to decent instead of awful to bad. And of course that might have entailed not acquiring some of the nicer pieces that they have, but we've been down that road enough times already.

By my count, 19 of the 25 men on the current active roster were either acquired or promoted to the roster by the Epstein/Hoyer regime. It's time they start getting the credit for what's happening. You can also look at it from the standpoint that Hendry still has close to 40 mill tied up in Soriano, Marmol, and Garza alone. Those 3 account for over 35% of our payroll. At least we'll see Marmol drop off, Garza too or become part of Theo's decision at least, and with how we're playing Soriano is likely begging to be dealt. I don't think the money is as much of an issue as the lack of talent in the upper minors, especially now that the only two real upper level prospects have developed into total question marks.

By my count, 19 of the 25 men on the current active roster were either acquired or promoted to the roster by the Epstein/Hoyer regime. It's time they start getting the credit for what's happening. And as we all know, the essence of the Epstein/Hoyer regime currently inhabits A-AA. As hard as it is to stomach for those in demand of instant gratification, by the time we can truly deem them as successes or failures, the time to extend them or let them walk will be drawing near. As I've said before, Epstein's put himself in a great situation. Either A. he brings the Cubs to glory and becomes the Curse Slayer B. leaves them as bad as they were when he found them, but with a much smaller payroll and his reputation allowing him to land another big contract or C. We're not quite where we want to be but have a strong farm system, which is all credited to his regime, and will either be extended, or land a big deal elsewhere. You don't think if he fails here, the bloom will be off the rose a little bit? I think the bloom was beginning to come off at the end in Boston. If this thing totally blows up, I think he's just another guy.

By my count, 19 of the 25 men on the current active roster were either acquired or promoted to the roster by the Epstein/Hoyer regime. It's time they start getting the credit for what's happening. Of course they do. Now the question is whether what is happening is a failure or what was intended (though I don't think what has happened thus far this season was intended, at least not for the team to be quite this bad). You might see losing 100 games last year instead of 85-90 or losing 90 games this year instead of 80 as failures, but I'm not inclined to agree with that. By and large, I think they are doing what they've set out to do fairly well; that is to acquire young talent to be the core of a future team that is good. The pretty clearly didn't care about last's year's results, and if the teams does decently (75-80 wins, which I feel is still well within the realm of possibility) this year, that's just a bonus. Now if the time comes when winning ball games is priority one and the results are still poor-mediocre, then we can start talking about how they're screwing the pooch. You might disagree with their methodology here, and it's you right to (and if we're still having this same discussion at this time next year, I will too), but my response to point out their culpability for what's happening on the field now is "yeah, so what?". Also, while it's fair to critique their acquisitions (or lack thereof), I think it's weak to try to hold heir promotions from within against them, since it's largely just making the best of the hand they've been dealt in terms of upper-minors talent.

To be fair, the programming on WGN is much, much better than it was 10-15 years ago. I mean I probably wouldn't turn to WGN just to watch TV, but it's not the total snoozefest it once was. That said, losing what few Cubs games they still carry would be a grievous blow to the network, and it seems all but certain that will happen at some point.

beer, lots and lots of beer (and thus drunk drivers) And cheese and sausages (and thus enormously fat people).

Yeah, it does. But it's the only one that really bothers me. Darvish stings a bit too, but to a much lesser extent. We were right there with Cespedes (apparently) and just botched it.

there is no realistic easy way to make the team better in a hurry if you've got virtually nothing to speak of at the high levels of the minors the Angels have done exactly what many people here were desperate to see (only with the benefit of already having Trout in the fold); i'll be very interested to see how it all pans out Which is a pretty big benefit, being that he's probably is the best player in the game (or at least was last year). Their TV megadeal hasn't hurt, either.

Want to believe that. The slightest doubt has begun to creep in now... I don't know that the Cubs will become the Yankees, but I am absolutely certain that they'll be closer to them than the Rays. And it was mentioned earlier, but the recent prolonged run of Yankee success began with a core of homegrown players, after a run of pretty bad seasons. I think people forget that in light of what they've become. With the added revenue from the renovation and a potential TV deal down the road, I think the potential for a Yankees-esque empire is there. But at the very least, I don't think the renovations, attendance and large market status will allow the Rickettses to run the club like a cash strapped small/mid market club without really, really taking some heat. We'll probably see relatively low payroll until the monies from the renovation start really rolling in, but not beyond that. Part of me has also considered that much of this "we need more revenue streams" tact has just been posturing to help their case for securing the rights to renovate. It's pretty flimsy, but I could see it. I really don't think that spending was in the cards for 2012 or 2013 as it was. Or maybe the Rickettses debt situation is worse than they anticipated and they really do need the money. Only time will tell, but I know I don't for a second buy that frugality for the sake of proving you can win being frugal was/is the plan. As for locking up our homegrown players, I think that we will see that done, unless it means going beyond the players' early-mid 30's. That's not only the smart way to do things, but the way things seem to be trending around the game.