Transmogrified Tiger

UK can't stand the guy, but I think he'd be a good pickup.

I want to point out how hilarious it is that Fred has continually refused to capitalize our southside neighbor's moniker. Well done Fred.

Turning that question around, I wonder if the Cubs are more hesitant to get rid of Corey because of Eric's presence in the organization?

Lee for Manny? No thanks. The Cubs spend a whole lot more money, and don't get any better than the 2005 team. Depends on how much money you get from the Mets. Whether or not you improve from the 2005 team or not, Manny is a likely step up from what Lee will provide offensively next season. Just throwing it out there. Our best chance for landing an impact bat might be trading Lee + prospects for said impact bat and another quality player. Lee is an impact bat. I don't think he'll repeat his numbers, but I think he'll be a 900+ OPS hitter. That "quality player" would have to be another 900+ OPS hitter to justify a deal. This team needs to get better than they were in 2005. They couldn't take advantage of that career year by Lee, I don't see any way they'd win if they simply traded Lee for another impact bat, without acquiring a 2nd impact bat. Think of it this way. Once Giles is gone, the quality bats in the OF are nonexistent. So if the Cubs were to trade Lee and prospects for Manny and say, Milton Bradley(not a .900 OPS guy, and I have no idea of how that trade would work out), then they still have money to go out and sign Konerko to play 1B. So now they have someone who's just about Lee's equal offensively next year, plus Manny and Bradley, and the only real tradeoff is prospects plus the increase in salary. Just trying to explore all the possiblities here. First, Konerko is going to look for $50 million over 4 years and secondly, the only way he is Lee's equal is if Lee regresses to his previous career averages. I think it's much more likely Lee regresses to his career averages than him going over a 1000 OPS again. The point I'm trying to get across is that Lee has a very high perceived value, and he's really likely to not be worth that value again.

They have an excellent run defense, and their D is very similar to Nebraska's. That being said, we should win by at least two scores. I'd also LOVE a KSU upset over Colorado, but regardless we still have to beat Colorado next weekend. BUT, Kansas first. Oh man, if we win and KSU knocks off CU, then there's no excuse at all for us not to win the North. I really need to stop thinking about how good a position we're in right now, I'm setting myself up for a major disappointment.

Lee for Manny? No thanks. The Cubs spend a whole lot more money, and don't get any better than the 2005 team. Depends on how much money you get from the Mets. Whether or not you improve from the 2005 team or not, Manny is a likely step up from what Lee will provide offensively next season. Just throwing it out there. Our best chance for landing an impact bat might be trading Lee + prospects for said impact bat and another quality player. Lee is an impact bat. I don't think he'll repeat his numbers, but I think he'll be a 900+ OPS hitter. That "quality player" would have to be another 900+ OPS hitter to justify a deal. This team needs to get better than they were in 2005. They couldn't take advantage of that career year by Lee, I don't see any way they'd win if they simply traded Lee for another impact bat, without acquiring a 2nd impact bat. Think of it this way. Once Giles is gone, the quality bats in the OF are nonexistent. So if the Cubs were to trade Lee and prospects for Manny and say, Milton Bradley(not a .900 OPS guy, and I have no idea of how that trade would work out), then they still have money to go out and sign Konerko to play 1B. So now they have someone who's just about Lee's equal offensively next year, plus Manny and Bradley, and the only real tradeoff is prospects plus the increase in salary. Just trying to explore all the possiblities here.

Lee for Manny? No thanks. The Cubs spend a whole lot more money, and don't get any better than the 2005 team. Depends on how much money you get from the Mets. Whether or not you improve from the 2005 team or not, Manny is a likely step up from what Lee will provide offensively next season. Just throwing it out there. Our best chance for landing an impact bat might be trading Lee + prospects for said impact bat and another quality player.

Mets want a 1B? Lee to NY, Beltran to Boston, Manny to the Cubs. Mets send us some cash over the next several years.

VT will jump to number 2 after Mizzou exacts their revenge on Texas in the Big XII Championship game. On a more serious note, Mizzou travels to kU this weekend. Please don't suck against them, they're bad.

I'd be surprised if AJP has any loose cash after last weekend.

Yeah, IIRC, Williamson's deal is almost the exact same one Dempster got.

Why don't we ask the Mets to give us Cameron ($6M), Floyd ($6.5M) and Glavine ($9.5M) in a pure salary dump move for some prospects? With the $22M they save here, and the $15M freed up with Piazza as free agent, the Mets can trade for Mannys' $20M and Delgado's $16M. We fill the needs for CF, RF and a >200IP/<4.00ERA SP. And, all 3 guys we get are free agents after 2006. That's a good thought. Only trouble is that, unless CPatt were out of the picture, would it give Dusty an excuse to bench Murton? Put Patterson in the deal to the Mets. The Mets can then deal Beltran to Boston for Manny, and Kris Benson to Miami for Delgado. What's their rotation look like after dealing Benson and Glavine?? Pedro, Zambrano, Seo and?? Seems they need to pick up someone like Millwood in free agency to make all this work. Looks like they would have the money to do that after this particular sequence of deals. I really doubt that Minaya would be so bold. Nor am I sure that I'd want Glavine, Floyd, and Cameron.

The system penalizes success. It's nearly impossible to have sustained success because of all the restrictions. I'm not saying not to have a salary cap at all, but the NFL's system takes parity to the extreme IMO. That is hysterically lame. What do you want, the Yankees and Braves winning every single year? New England has won 3 of 4 Super Bowls. SF had a nice stretch under the salary cap era. Philly has sustained success for quite a while. I can't believe how unbelievably ridiculous some of these complaints are against the NFL. Why do people want to see the same team win every year? The best of the best compete for the title for a good stretch of years. The middle of the road is constantly churning. All the while the bottom of the barrel can change quickly with competent management. And it's all due to the system they play in. There's a reason this postseason has bit the bullet. Nobody cares about the contestants because they've never seen them. The Yankees/Red Sox/Braves have been shoved down our throats for a decade, and the entire league suffers because of it. I'm not saying I want the same team to win, but I definitely think it's unfair for the majority of teams to have to outright cut some of their best players every year because of cap penalties and restrictions. Making it more difficult for the teams who do things right shouldn't be the goal.

The system penalizes success. It's nearly impossible to have sustained success because of all the restrictions. I'm not saying not to have a salary cap at all, but the NFL's system takes parity to the extreme IMO.

Welcome to the Forum!

Ugh for a corner OF. For a CF, not really. I'd say he's about average. Had Cameron played enough CF to qualify, his .819 OPS would have been 5th of 19 CFers. His career .782 OPS would've been one point away from Vernon Wells at 9th.

Soccer's a different game, and the kids are half the age of your high schoolers Cuse. There are plenty of things you can do. You can tell the team not to shoot until they have X amount of passes strung together, or with their off foot, or at a more advanced age, to try and score on aerial balls. Kids at 7-9 are pretty prone to giving up when their hopelessly outmatched. Not scoring(or putting restraints on your team) is the sporting thing to do out of courtesy.

with all due respect, wagner and remmy aren't a comparable duo. unless you're talking about the fact that they have been largely overpaid. And are LH relievers that have reached free agency in their mid to late 30's. Take a look at Remlinger's seasons before he came to the Cubs. Sub .200 BAA 2 of 3 years, more than a K per inning 2 of 3 years, sub 1.25 WHIP all 3 years, etc. And with a pitcher who relies on heat like Wagner, he should deteriorate more quickly than someone who relies on deception and location like Slingblade.

NO Wagner. Learn from Remlinger.

an outfield of suspect arms. super. dunn has an average OF arm (no way does he have the gun for RF). murton and pierre both throw rainbows. i love what dunn brings to the table offensively though and his range isn't horrible for his size. we just can't have an OF full of crappy arms. we've done it before, re: 2003. please. you aren't honestly comparing the offensive production from sosa, alou, and lofton/cpat to lofton (years later), murton and dunn. lmao. great comparison. '05 dunn is roughly equal to '03 Sammy offensively, and '03 lofton was appreciably better than '06 lofton will be...so you're saying murton is far and away better than '03 alou offensively? :lol: He was obviously referring to their defense and throwing arms, IMO. no. he referred to being successful despite having crappy OF arms in '03. success comes from both defense and offense. '03 OF offensive production made up for the weak arms. that's what he's saying. by looking at the offensive production from that made up lineup (dunn, lofton, murton), it's easy to see the offensive production wouldn't be anywhere near the '03 OF, and therefore wouldn't make up for the runs given up due to crappy OF arms...and wouldn't be as successful as the '03 OF. Our offensive production from the infield is much better than '03. Ramirez wasn't great in '03 after the terrible production before his arrival. The Choi/Karros/Simon platoon wasn't as good as Lee, and we'd be hard pressed to be worse than Gonzalez offensively. Also, re: Dunn '05 v. Sosa '03, a 30 point OBP differential isn't a small thing.

Haha, preach that vigilante justice Ozzie.

Not at that age. When I was that age or slightly older, when our team got up big our coach just told us not to shoot. We played keepaway. Even more productive is seeing how many passes you can string together instead of scoring. Just running down the field and scoring can demoralize the other team, especially at that age and competition level.

Two more worth throwing out there: Frankie Muniz: LA Clippers Billy Crystal: LA Clippers Anyone who doesn't find it embarrasing to call themselves a fan of the Clippers is a true fan. John Cusack lives and dies with the Cubs. He goes to many games each year, and he usually refuses preferencial treatment. He likes to sit in the bleachers, or anywhere he can be with the fans. http://mlb.com/images/2005/10/12/oi7BlUW4.jpg

I don't think it's feasible to sign that many FA's of that caliber. I don't think it's possible(read: legal) to do so either.

I have the second lowest points this week, yet I win if Dunn holds my 3 point lead over the Jets D.