Transmogrified Tiger

I think you're 5+ to 3- is poor analysis. (who are the 4 very solid players he signed, I don't see 4) And I think D is perfectly reasonable. Hendry misappropriated his efforts. If you study for a test and end up spending 90% of your time on subjects other than the ones that will actually matter to the test, you're going to struggle and get a bad grade. That's what happened to Hendry. He mistakenly focused on less important positions, and because of it the team as a whole suffers. The 4 players are Pierre, Eyre, Howry,and Dempster (close enough to offseason). It's your opinion that Hendry studied for the wrong test because you want a different test (offense). Hendry wants pitching as top priority because pitching has proven to win championships, while offense has not. Hendry knows more about this business than all of us. I grade Hendry based on his ability to satisfy his own priorities for the club, not my own personal wishes (though I happen to be a pitching-first guy myself). If Hendry was never going to pursue top 5 offensive output players, then it is not right to grade him on a failure to acquire those players. Grading shouldn't be based on differing philosophies of club-building. Dempster is in this offseason? People aren't upset at the pitching acquisitions because they aren't offensive acquisitions. Check the threads for when each signed. People were upset because both had by and large marginal careers until their career years last year. Given their respective age and the wild variation in relief pitchers, they were poor selections for expensive and long term deals.

I know there are at least several people that are Schneider fans here, but I've never really been that enamored with him. His defense is great, and his offense was better away from RFK last year, but he's average offensively on the whole.

I care how many games the Cubs win in the regular season because the more you win the greater chance you have of making the postseason and the World Series. 88 wins is not good because most seasons that usually means you are on the outside looking in. An 88 win season isn't that good. An 89 win season isn't that good. It was good enough 2 of the last 3 years. I don't care if we're like the Padres and win 82 games. As long as we get in and advance to the Series. Obviously we'll take a playoff appearance any way we can get it. Looking at BK's post shows you the inherent disadvantage we'd have though.

Naturally once you're in the playoffs you want to make it as far as possible, but since the playoffs are pretty unpredictable, i.e. inferior teams beat superior teams, gauging the quality of the team should be mostly confined to the regular season.

Hairston is an average defender, some seasons he's been a little above average, some a little below. That makes him a little better than Walker, who has been consistently below average.

The decline of the team is due mostly to the pitching, but what is important to remember is that the team wasn't that good back then anyway. And the recent they weren't that good was because hitting held them back. Even with a top pitching staff each year they only accumulated the 4th and 6th highest win totals in the league. All of their success was due to pitching, even as limited as the success was. As unimpressive as that 2003 lineup was, it holds up against the current group. The 2003 OF was much much better than what the OF is right now. And they finished 9th in runs scored, just like the 2005 version, and probably close to what the 2006 version will be. So basically we're counting on a return to glory for the pitching staff, and even then the team is at the mercy of the competence of the competition, because 88/89 wins is no guarantee for anything. So being 1 game away from the World Series = not that good? Can you ever give this organization any credit?? That club was real good after the additions of Lofton & Ramirez. When it comes to comparing the quality of your team, there's very little difference between 1 out from the world series and getting swept in the divisional round.

But why do you think it's more valuable? Sure it sounds poetic to value speed over power, but in practice that sort of logic doesn't hold up.

I want to know why he thinks speed is so valuable. He's said that we need a speed guy, never explained why, then said that speed is underrated. I know what I think and I want to know why he has such convictions.

Why

McBride had at least one more dribble before he needed to shoot. IU holds on.

I understand why someone would want Hairston over walker. Why do we need another speed guy? In case Juan Pierre strikes out/can't get on base and we need someone to be able to run from first to third on a single or from second to home on a single by DLee or Aram? Honestly, if Hairston puts up a .378 OBP, I'd much rather have him at 2B. And I like Walker. There's a difference between "speed guy" and a station to station runner. We don't have a pressing need for someone who's fast.

I understand why someone would want Hairston over walker. Why do we need another speed guy?

Why

How's that working out for him? Kinda sucks, Boras made him sign over 7 MPH of his fastball as a commission.

Brownlie is a Boras guy, there may still be others.

Brian Randle held him to 6 points on two broken play threes I wouldn't call him a stud by anymeans. Players have bad nights. Is Dee Brown no good because of the Iowa game? Teams gameplan to stop Gardner and he still leads the B12 in scoring, and he shoots for respectable percentages.

The answer is MORE interleague play. Get rid of the DH, play a truly balanced schedule.

Yeah I read that after the game, but apparently all the fans were too into it to notice. Good thing it didnt come back to hurt us. When it happened my mom was even yelling about it towards the tv. Oh yeah, Quin is the coolest coach in the buisness. As he was being interviewed at the half he just blew off the sideline reporter not looking at her at all, kinda like how the big man on campus would a nerdy girl. I bet he is different when it is Erin Andrews though. Man I am starting to really like the Quinner. People just love to hate on Quin. He's the man. I hope he stays.

Yeah, I don't think you are going to get a top 15 prospect for a 5th starter. Yes, but what about Williams? He's a 3 starter at worst.

Craig and Moore can also play 1B/DH, and McGehee can also catch, so I don't think the buildup will be too severe. It does look like Lewis could be the odd man out.

That was the greatest sporting event I have ever attended. I saw Cubbies75 living it up on the floor after the game. M-I-Z

Ahem. *cowers*

Williams had an ERA, WHIP, K/BB, and OPS against that puts him in the top 30 starters in the NL. That's 2 or 3 starter material.

What about me? I was undefeated last year. I just checked the rotation Serena had in the thread from last year. Your name wasn't on it for some reason. Unless of course you're screwing with me and went 0-0.

I don't think you can have that many poll options. The best records from last year include: Roast 5-2 thrivein05 4-1 I'd say one of those two or Bhogg.