David

I know Carroll isn't usually dependable for transaction rumors, but I really hope he's right about possibly dealing Eyre and Dempster. The big preemptive offer to Kosuke seems to fit Hendry's MO too. Hope that other teams save Hendry from himself with regard to Murton and we keep him at least as a 4th OF or the RF with Fukudome in CF if Pie struggles hard core.

Anybody who has any desire to trade Mark Prior at this point is basing their opinion on irrational emotion and not a semblance of reasoned logic. This is assuming, of course, that no team would offer a deal worth a damn at this point. Obviously, if you get an offer you can't refuse, you take it. Who knows? Maybe some team would. I highly, highly doubt it, though. The fact is, in all likelihood, his value at this point is nowhere near worth giving up the risk vs. reward of keeping him around.

This is so ridiculous. I don't even understand this perceived huge need for a left handed bat. Did Lou and Jim just forget that our greatest struggles last year were against LEFT FREAKING HANDED PITCHERS??? ](*,) ](*,)

Brian Schneider is talented? Talented might not be the correct word, but the Nats liked him enough to get rid of Barrett some years ago. Barrett was pretty terrible for the Expos.

Here's the thing that bugs me... People react so freaking strangely to different kinds of cheating. The public's reaction to the cheating rarely has any correlation to how much of an actual advantage it gives the player who was caught cheating. When a guy standing on second base steals signs from the catcher, it's considered part of the game. When a manager goes out and barks at the umpire to start calling balls and strikes he wants them called, and gets what he wants, it's considered good managing. Hard slides into second base? Catchers blocking the plate? That's all part of baseball! Gaylord Perry? He was a Hall of Famer who was never proven to have doctored the ball. People usually talk about him in wistful tones reserved for better times long past. Well, guess what? THAT'S ALL CHEATING! Every single thing I listed above is illegal under the rules of baseball. When Eddie Harris was talking about the sheer number of chemicals on his body in Major League to help him gain an edge, it was funny. If someone on those Indians talked about the sheer amount of HGH, steroids, and greenies he had taken in a similar fashion, I don't think people would have found it funny. I would like someone to tell me with a straight face how PEDs give an unfair advantage to a player in a way worse than some of the examples I listed above. Keep it out of the legal context since certain illegal drugs (cocaine, amphetamines) can help aid player's performance, as can illegally obtained prescription drugs. Let's face it, we can make anything criminal if we really wanted to. However, I don't think Neifi Perez will be facing criminal prosecution any time soon. You can greatly help your team through cheating without engaging in criminal activities. You can also cheat in a criminal fashion, but not help your team in any meaningful way. Let's face it, the way cheating is handled in baseball is arbitrary, hypocritical, and sometimes downright disgraceful. Gaylord Perry is a Hall of Famer despite being heavily suspected of doctoring the ball, yet Barry Bonds might find himself blackballed from playing another game and kept out of the Hall of Fame because he's been suspected of steroid use? Tell me how this makes sense. I think this is one of the most utterly stupid things going on with baseball right now. They need to quit hyping this crap up like it'll clean up baseball once and for all. Quite frankly, I think it's so stupid that baseball has been throwing the spotlight on itself with all of this crap. They could have taken care of this internally, quietly, and effectively, but instead, they've been trying to do it loudly and publicly. It makes them look like they're actually doing something (who knows if they really are?), but it backfires on them through publicity that's way worse than it otherwise would be had they simply dealt with this quietly. Great, great post. Sums up my thoughts on this whole matter nicely.

Mulder is much closer to pitching again vs. Prior. I'm not so sure of that. From varying reports, Prior could be pitching in the early half of next year (certainly not opening day, though), while Mulder, according to that link, isn't expected to pitch until AT LEAST midseason 2008. At worst it looks like their current timetables are similar, with Prior's being slightly ahead. That Mulder link was from January of last year talking about how he wouldn't pitch until midseason 2007, not midseason 2008. Heh, my bad. I didn't even realize Mulder pitched this year (what little he did).

Mulder is much closer to pitching again vs. Prior. I'm not so sure of that. From varying reports, Prior could be pitching in the early half of next year (certainly not opening day, though), while Mulder, according to that link, isn't expected to pitch until AT LEAST midseason 2008. At worst it looks like their current timetables are similar, with Prior's being slightly ahead.

It's a business move for me. He has had problems staying healthy along with imo, a steroid user. I just don't see him being better than an average pitcher from here on, if that. Hey, I may be wrong but that's my opinion. He's had problems staying healthy because he has been pitching hurt for the last couple years. The problem has finally been addressed with surgery. You have absolutley no basis for singling out Prior as a steroid user. This follows the pattern I mentioned before. I can't judge what is in your mind, but to me it seems that you are fed up with seeing him unable to pitch and because of it are coming to baseless conclusions (for example, he's on steroids). I'm sure he has tons of anecdotal evidence to nail Prior as a steroid user. Lost velocity, for one (not like that could be attributed to his injury). Or maybe the ever popular, "His calves shrunk," argument. Not to mention his involvement with Tom House. I'm not even being sarcastic. Of course, there's tons of players you can say stuff like this about. It's a witch hunt and it's getting a bit ridiculous.

Aside from all that, could you imagine what a boost it would be for our hopeless looking future if Prior rebounds after he FINALLY had his injury diagnosed/repaired? Even Prior in 2005 form would be a very solid addition to this staff.

Great idea. Selling as low as possible is always smart. Almost as smart as spending 14 for a guy on the DL. Who, aside from a poster here, said anything about $14M? There's not a chance in hell he gets that much. Wait, wait, wait...I said it, and only as the high end estimate of a deal where he likely met all of the incentives in the deal offered. Please don't toss that out there like I said the Cubs or anyone should just pay him $14 million per, because nobody said that. I don't think that's what I did.

Great idea. Selling as low as possible is always smart. Almost as smart as spending 14 for a guy on the DL. Who, aside from a poster here, said anything about $14M? There's not a chance in hell he gets that much.

Great idea. Selling as low as possible is always smart.

once again, you clearly watched the whole thing lawl... I wonder how many people are going to post without actually watching the end of the video.

Reeeepost

Yep, that's the guy. My opinion holds - if the Cubs didn't have Ramirez and Crede's back was healthy, I'd love to see him at 3B for the Cubs. The worst thing about Joe Crede is Scott Boras. Hmm, maybe my link isn't working on your computer. Try these instead: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6411 http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/6411 http://www.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=150317 Thanks, those links all worked great, as did the last one you provided. I know Crede doesn't measure up to all the fantastic third basemen the Cubs have had historically, but I still liked what I saw of him before his back went out. He was progressing and developing in the year and a half before his back problems limited him in 2007, much the way Aramis has developed as a defensive player since his Pittsburgh years. Some people still say that Aramis sucks defensively, too, and they're wrong. It's obvious that the Cubs won't acquire Crede, but there's a big difference between sucking and being a servicable major-league ballplayer, and that's the point I'm trying to make. He's not the best all-around 3B in the world, but in no way would I say he sucks. He falls between the "suck" end of the spectrum and the "OMG" end of it. No, with his offensive numbers (particularly that wonderful career .305 OBP) at a corner infield position, you can pretty much say he SUCKS. And I'm not sure how the Cubs history of bad 3B fits into the argument, other than the fact that he'd fit right in with that horrid bunch.

Wow... Can Houston please save Hendry from himself??

That one was bad, but it wasn't monumentally bad. Not nearly as ridiculous as Rollins winning it this year, IMO.

Whoops

WINNAR

If all that is true, in a few years, if things don't change around here, we will be chasing the Pirates in the standings. Book it.

Ugh. Levine just reaffirmed the Cubs' strong interest in Matsui and said that he would play 2B and DeRosa would go into a "Tony Phillips like utility role." Jim can't do a damn thing right. ](*,) ](*,)

It'll look even better on April 5, when there are players on the field and my son turns 21 and buys me a beer at the Cubs-Astros game. _________________________________ Sandberg>Mazeroski>Morgan You've got it all wrong. You're supposed to buy HIM the beer.

My guess would be...during this project. :wink: Looks like you are correct judging by the before and after pictures. I didn't know if it was done during the season and I just didn't realize it. I like the circle look better. I pointed out before in the thread that I thought I was the only person sick enough to notice this, but that's not all that's different. As is made obvious by the before and after pics now, the cutouts at 1B and 3B are different (smaller, more rounded), and the cutout down the first and third baselines are gone. Oh, and those old-school on deck circles are gone. Those weren't on-deck circles, they're places for the coaches to hit fungos down onto so they don't wear out the grass during infield practice. Kinda upset they took them out because it gives a more old-timey feel to fields in my opinion. Ah, my bad. Either way, don't mind the new look myself. It'll look even better once they put the chaulk lines and mow-patterns in.

My guess would be...during this project. :wink: Looks like you are correct judging by the before and after pictures. I didn't know if it was done during the season and I just didn't realize it. I like the circle look better. I pointed out before in the thread that I thought I was the only person sick enough to notice this, but that's not all that's different. As is made obvious by the before and after pics now, the cutouts at 1B and 3B are different (smaller, more rounded), and the cutout down the first and third baselines are gone. Oh, and those old-school on deck circles are gone.

Before: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/Cubbies2166/wrigley.jpg After: http://cubs.truelook.com/timages/live20/chicagocubs/chicagocubs_wrigleyfield_camera2/imgbuf/buf_310/1195137383695161.jpg