David

If there were any semblance of logic in the O's front office, we would have Roberts. Can't really blame Stone for not foreseeing that kind of stupidity. Big mistake by them. Anyway, Hendry has a history of getting major deals done when the Cubs are legit contenders at the deadline (last year notwithstanding). With the Cubs on the cusp of a possible championship season, I could see him giving up whatever it takes (if he has enough, that is) to attempt to secure that championship. We'll see. Possibly. Hendry has never been in a position where he was overwhelmingly ahead of a playoff spot, which is where he would be if the Cubs kept winning at a decent clip. I could easily see Hendry being content with a team that is playing at a 103 win pace and assume that if its good enough to win in the regular season, its good enough to win in October, which we all know its not. I have to take issue with the bolded. It's good enough to win now, and it's good enough to win in October, especially if we have home field advantage. Adding a pitcher would just further improve those chances.

Come 7/31, we and they'll probably have a much better idea what chance they actually have at a playoff spot. Do you honestly see anyone else running away with that division? Cleveland bound to make a run sometime this year. What I think right now is completely inconsequential when the trade deadline actually comes up.

If there were any semblance of logic in the O's front office, we would have Roberts. Can't really blame Stone for not foreseeing that kind of stupidity. Big mistake by them. Anyway, Hendry has a history of getting major deals done when the Cubs are legit contenders at the deadline (last year notwithstanding). With the Cubs on the cusp of a possible championship season, I could see him giving up whatever it takes (if he has enough, that is) to attempt to secure that championship. We'll see.

Come 7/31, we and they'll probably have a much better idea what chance they actually have at a playoff spot.

Isn't even better, then, that the Cards are doing the same?

Basically saying that Hendry WILL go after and get a frontline starting pitcher at the deadline to "slot in after Zambrano and dominate." Boers chimes in, "Well, that's if Cleveland stays where they are, right?" (paraphrasing) Stone went, "It could be the big boy from the Indians..." but that regardless, he seemed pretty sure of the fact that Hendry will go this route and has what "a lot of Major League teams want" - major league ready young pitching (and hitting, for that matter). Bernstein went on to make the same joke made here about needing a bigger post game spread. lulz I'm not sure if he's basing that on any info he may have or if he's just logically coming to that conclusion, but again, he seemed very certain of it.

you're missing boxers or briefs

Good point. I think Lou is a fine manager, but using W-L record probably isn't the best way to prove that. I give him credit for instilling a good approach with the team, and for appearing to be a pretty good judge of talent. For all the crowing about certain players not getting enough time, Lou has done a decent job of getting the right players into prominent roles (yes, I know someone is going to bring up Marquis or Reed Johnson or whatever). Tactically, he has issues. But every major league manager has tactical issues. We just see Lou's more frequently because we watch the Cubs every day and are more invested in their success. But I've said all this before, and no one cares. I agree completely. I'm incredibly happy with the team's offensive approach now (outside of a few qualms with stealing bases and hit and runs and crap) and I think that's at the very least partially Lou's doing. He really needs to figure out what the hell he's doing with the bullpen, though.

I'm not saying that I agree with the people that say Lou is terrible, but using the Cubs record as evidence that he's not is a beyond horrible way to argue the point. You really would think Cubs fans would know better after Dusty Baker.

I don't. I don't either, projections be damned.

They are pretty bad heh

Wow. Edmonds.

I think "many" is an overstatement. I projected them to mid-80s when their pythagorean record is 27-30, which shows I expect some improvement. But to get to 90 wins from where they are now, they'd have to play at a .581 winning percentage. Their Pyth% this season is .473, and over the past two seasons is .502. To get to .581 from that, they'd have to take a quantum leap forward. And that's just to get to 90 wins, which right now is on the very bottom end of the Cubs' likely projection. They have two young bats that make people drool, and a couple more that are above average for their position. And they have an ace pitcher who can't stay healthy. Is that enough to lead a team to 90 wins? They don't really have anything else. Their bullpen is bad. Their defense is really bad. They have a few pitching prospects, but big whoop, so does every other team in the majors. Brewers fans I read right now are basing their hopes on two things: The Cubs' turnaround last season and the fact that they lost their No. 2 pitcher and they believe we haven't lost anything. And their high point last season, June 23rd, here was the two teams' run differentials: Brewers: +29, Cubs: +22. The two teams had been almost identical, but a combination of good and bad luck had put them 8.5 games ahead of the Cubs. Luck caught up and the Cubs pulled ahead. This season, the run differentials are Cubs +92, Brewers -14. You are quickly becoming one of my favorite posters.

Brewers. Meh.

While I'm nowhere near ready to claim the Cubs are having success with the Edmonds reclamation project, how awesome would it be to actually be the team that has the coaches that pull stuff like this off now and then? I heart Gerald Perry.

Those stupid Cubs. They're so dumb, putting together the best team in baseball and winning all the time. Hendry and Lou should be fired. Demoting Pie and signing and playing Edmonds has nothing to do with the Cubs winning. But, if it makes you happy... Chances are, with Pie up here playing instead of Edmonds, they wouldn't be any better off this year anyway. Long term, on the other hand, they're obviously probably worse off. I'm not all that high on Pie but it would've been nice to see him get an extended look and a chance to struggle.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/982329,CST-SPT-cub02.article

Yea. Or....sometimes you do.

Walk off Walk by Walkah

I'd be worried about teams within 5 games of us. When the Brewers get there, I'll care about them.

What'd that d-bag say?

Thread title says Marshall. I was like wtf

Um, the phrase is "moo point" No, it's "moot point" http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moot_point If this was an inside joke or something else that went over my head, forgive me. No, it's moo point. Duh. Like a cow's opinion. It doesn't matter.

Imagine if we had a CF and maybe another starting pitcher.

I love this terrible song. Gives me goosebumps hearing the huge crowd singing it.