NorthsideAvenger

[i mean, come on...who doesn't want to see Brian giving Marcus "knoogies" in between innings, while they are paper football?

Hey, what are the Giants doing go after an "unproven youngster" like Klesko? I thought their mandate was to acquire "veterans" players?

I understand fully why teams "Retire numbers," but I don't agree that they should retire numbers. The number on the jersey didn't make the player as great as he was....it was his ability to play the game. Said player made the number famous, not the other way around. The ONLY number that should ever be "RETIRED" where Jackie Robinson, Larry Doby, and Roberto Clemente for not what they did as ballplayers(that would be gravy), but what they did for the game of baseball, and the significance of breaking down barriers of social equality and fairness, not to mention humantiarian efforts. Those are the ONLY numbers that should legitimately be retired. These great players should have something done for them for their contributions to the franchise and baseball, but IMO, retiring numbers shouldn't be the options, because sooner or later we are going to run out of numbers to be worn. Bottomline: The number a'int retired. The Cubs have no plans to retired the number. If Jason Marquis wants the number, the Cubs can't do anything about it, outside of making a suggestion, which I doubt they would offer. (and if they don't make the suggestion, it doesn't mean they are "classless".) Neither can the fans who can only identify players by the number on the jersey, instead of their names.

then who cares if bonds hits 756 homeruns. it's just a NUMBER. a FRIGGIN' number at that There is a difference, Rocket. we are talking about a STATISTICAL numbers in the record books, of said player accomplishment on the field. Whereas the number on the back of a players jersey has NO bearing on said player's career. So rocket, there is a BIG difference, and YOU know it, yet you use a worthless point to continue the argument. I am going to say it again........ #21 is not retired. The Cubs have no plans on retiring it in the near future. Sammy Sosa isn't offically retired, nor is he in the HOF. That means....it is to the discretion of the organization about how they issue numbers. It is not a classless move to allow another player to wear a UNRETIRED number, so get off the high horse. More mediocre to crappy players have won the number 31 after Jenkins, and in between Maddux's stints in Chicago, then there have been players to wear the #21. So where's the arugment about #31(Ayala/Guthrie/Lieber)? Or #8 (Girardi/Barrett)? Or #17(Patterson/Hill/Mabry)? If Marquis wants to wear number #21, fine, let him, it's HIS preference. If the Cubs don't stop him from choosing #21, it doesn't make the org classless. What's next, keeping Soriano from wearing #12, because it has the same numbers as #21, but in reverse order?

Only is said player is worthy to have his number retired. Santo yes...Billy Williams yes...Ernie Banks, Ryne Sandberg, yes. Maddux/Jenkins (no and yes), but Sosa doesn't, IMO deserve. I mean he only had six yrs out of 13 with the Cubs, that his numbers were considered "great" and those numbers between 1998 and 2003 are under suspicion. And the other 7 seasons with the Cubs, his numbers were VERY mediocre as a whole. http://www.baseball-reference.com/s/sosasa01.shtml So half his career with the Cubs he was pretty much average, the other half he was ABOVE-AVERAGE. When you put the full 13 yrs together, Sosa really isn't "number retiring" quality without serious debate. So, until the Cubs decide Sosa's number should or shouldn't be retired, his number should be made available to anybody who wants to wear, just like 31 was, and 8, and 17. NO EXCEPTIONS. The only numbers that are off-limits are the numbers worn by Santo/Williams and Banks with #31 being close to being off the market, so to speack. So, again, 21 should will be made available, and if Marquis wants to wear, he SHOULD be welcome to wearing it. Marquis wearing won't disrespect what Sosa did in the numbers. You're stretching it now. You're comparing entertainment that only affects us 8 months out of the yr, and not personally to that of current events that affect our day-to-day life and history? Nah...there is a different. People are dying to protect the freedoms that this country is founded on, and to compare that to players choosing to wear another player's numbers....is beyond stretching a point to fit into your argument. Again, if you need a number to remember the "greatness" of a player, then maybe the player wasn't so great after all, or you weren't paying attention to said players career. It is "just a number." Or should players pull a "Futurama" and start wearing fractions as numbers (ie 1/8....2/5)? So, again it is "just a number", and to make it out to be bigger then it supposed to be, is beyond nonsense.

And Isringhausen/Wilson/Pulsipher.......

Disagree I agree with the Disagree! NO ONE should wear #21 in a Cub uniform again. Plain and simple. quote] Sorry, but IT'S A NUMBER.....A NUMBER....For goodness sake. All this fuss about a FRIGGIN' number. If Marquis wants to wear #21, fine, if he doesn't fine.

Let me ask this question again: Why is Marquis wearing number #21 such a big deal? Fact: Sosa hasn't retired and/or made the HOF. Fact: The number is not retired. Fact is...the number isn't retired, and is available for anybody to wear. I'm sorry some people here don't want to see #21 worn by another player, but it looks like that's going to happen. Marquis wearing #21 should not make you forget the memories of Sosa. If Marquis wants to wear #21, so be it, and the people who have a problem with this, needs to find a legit problem to worry about.

First: If you need a number to remember certain players and their accomplishments, then you prolly didn't notice the accomplishments as they are being played out. I know what you are saying, but I believe players accomplishments are measured by what he does on the field/rink/court and not by the numbers he wears. The numbers, to me, is nothing more then a self-promotion gimmick, no better then say a "wrestling gimmick." You remember the player, not the number. Second: Did you already forget Devin "Mr. Bear 23" Hester?

I doubt it. Boston may try to regotiate some "incentives" into the contract before making it official. I would play the lottery and expect to win, if Drew was healthy for a 150+ game season.

Yes. No, it's not. If a player is playing for the number/name on the back of the jersey, then he sure as heck isn't playing for the name on the front of the jersey. (Regardless of the team on the fron tof the jersey benefitting from said player's "motives".) Look, Bobby Ayala, Jon Lieber, Mark Guthrie (among others) ALL wore 31, between Maddux's stints in Chicago, nobody put up a fuss, considering the history made by Jenkins wearing the number. So, why are people putting up a fuss over the #21? The number issue is NO ISSUE. If Marquis wants to wear 21, so be it. The number isn't retired, the Cubs have no plans to retire(imo, rightfully so, until it's proven what Sosa did was legit, and NOT created), nobody else wants the number, what's the big deal? Would we be having this debate, if the player was say less bad then Marquis? Go ahead, Marquis wear the number.

Talent wise, I agree, but unlike Bobby Jenks (whom, I don't like that much, as some already know) Sisco has no sense of wanting of ever wanted to live up to his talent. In other words....you got nothing for nothing, talent aside. Trust me, and Cubs fans, you guys WILL NOT like Sisco.

I am going out on a limb and say the White Sox will not be Andy Sisco's last professional team he plays for. I see Sisco making the rounds like Mike Morgan. Now, it will be fun to see Ozzie trying to talk smack while having to look up to Sisco. That scene would remind me of a child asking for candy. Good luck Sisco, good luck Ozzie. And maybe Sisco should consider wrestling as an option, after Kenny Williams moves him before 2007 is out.

Hmm........... :-k

No you wouldn't. :lol:

I prefer Mr. T over Willy T. in CF.

According to Ken Rosenthal Vernon Wells and the Blue Jays have agree to the 7 yr $126 mill deal. It's on rotoworld.

Krivsky has to be rapidly getting there as well. He certainly is. The way I see it, it goes... 1. Coletti 2. Krvisky 3. Bavasi 4. Bowden Bowden has absolutely mangled Krvisky and Bavasi lately, so there does need to be a gap between them. What about Brian Sabean and his fetish for extremely OLD players?

About five yrs ago, people would have been screaming the Nats/Expos did not get enough for Vidro, who was then MLB's best hitting 2nd baseman. Man, how times have changed.

Man, the Astros are gunning for third place, aren't they?

That's absurd. Nobody has a clean sheet. Everybody's past matters. Asking people to not pre-judge a player is asking them to pretend that numbers and statistics don't matter, which is asking them to lie to themselves. If the Cubs signed me to be the SS next year, you would be darn well justified pre-judging me and being pissed that I was the Cubs SS next year. That is because I have not put up the numbers to justify such a role, not because I haven't done so in a Cubs uniform. Why is it absurd? Just because I disagree with you, gooney? While I do agree that "everybody's past matters", it doesn't mean he is going to repeat his past mistakes. People forget that Marquis was not exactly a favorite of LaRussa, and Tony made sure Jason knew that. I am not saying that stats don't matter, but stats do tend to lie, or even cover up the actual production of said player. So, while I am not going to get into a battle of stats, (because I have a life, and I don't need to go that far to prove my point), but I do know that is to already have a pre-conceive judgement of said player, makes very likely that unless he performs like a "Cy Young" caliber pitcher, people are going to boo Marquis, regardless of production. I'm not saying to ignore the facts, but moving to a new city, means a new opportunity for Marquis, and it is up to Jason to show that he is better then his stats suggest.

Then according to Chris Carpenter's "past performances", http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/carpech01.shtml he would had continue to be a talented, but crappy pitchers. "Past performances" is not the best predictor, because doesn't take into account different variables.

And what makies Duncan and Mazzone so special as PC? Mazzone lived off of Smoltz, Maddux, and Glavine for atleast 14 yrs. Outside of those three HOFers, Mazzone was pretty much an average pitching coach. And outside of Carpenter, Duncan hasn't done much in St. Lou. He has had more talented pitchers lost then pitchers he help. I mean Smith, Ankiel, Al. Benes, etc, etc. So again...why are Mazzone and Duncan the end all to all pitching coaches? Duncan repeatedly has turned mediocre journeymen into solid pitchers. And Mazzone has been the PC for an enormous number of pitchers' best seasons, including Kevin Millwood, Steve Avery, Kyle Farnsworth, Mark Wohlers, Ligtenberg and a host of other more or less mediocre middle relievers that he got the most out of. Both of their staffs have routinely been better than those of Larry Rothschild. I just don't buy that if "Mazzone and Duncan can't turn the kid around he is useless" theory that seems to be popular on this board. Duncan and Mazzone gets more credit then they deserve to be honest. The Cards for the past 8 yrs have fielded if not the best, one of the best defense in ALL of baseball, and IMO, had the best calling defensive catcher in baseball in Matheny, so I think he had as much influence in developing those pitchers in St. Lou as Duncan. And ATL, I mean come on....they play in a VERY LARGE park, and AJ conitnues to cover ground like a fat man at a buffet. So I don't buy the Mazzone and Duncan BY THEMSELVES are responsible for the rebirth of several pitchers. Judge the kid by what he does in Chicago, not pre-judge him because of what he did in St. Lou and ATL, is all I asking for. Im not expecting much from Marquis, but atleast I am giving him a clean slate.

Because he is a bad play-by-play guy? Perspective? Let's just say that....out of all the announcers who are homers towards the home team (like Scully, Santo, S. Caray) Hawk Harrelsonis definately the worst, and he doesn't even try and hide it. If you listen to a White Sox game (trust me the headache of hearing Hawk Harrelson voice will go away after a good night of drinking) there are several times during a game (not just once, but several times, mind you) that there will be "silence" in the booth between Hawk and DJ. And during this silence, as a viewer, you just get this awkward feeling. Hawk doesn't know how to call a game, or even carry a conversation during the game. And the fact that the White Sox haven't fired his sorry excuse of an broadcaster, is beyond mindboggling.

And what makies Duncan and Mazzone so special as PC? Mazzone lived off of Smoltz, Maddux, and Glavine for atleast 14 yrs. Outside of those three HOFers, Mazzone was pretty much an average pitching coach. And outside of Carpenter, Duncan hasn't done much in St. Lou. He has had more talented pitchers lost then pitchers he help. I mean Smith, Ankiel, Al. Benes, etc, etc. So again...why are Mazzone and Duncan the end all to all pitching coaches?