soccer10k

I concur, but it's debatable between him and Pierre. Career OPS+ of 90, JP was at 87 entering this year. Career high of 109 - 2002, compared to Juan's 107 in 2004. Career line of .263/.337/.420 compared to JP's .302/.351/.377. JP will get the longterm deal because of reputation, not necessarily production. I wouldn't want either one next year. I completely agree. My statement wasn't saying that I want Pierre over Matthews Jr. I'm with you, I don't want either of them donning a Cubs uniform in 2007.

My lock is whichever team is playing the Raiders.

I predict that the Raiders will not lose this week. :D

I would like to go on record as saying that even though I like Theriot more than a lot of people here, I would be all in favor of signing Soriano to play 2B next year. We do need an offensive upgrade and if the best/easiest way of doing so is getting Soriano to play 2B, then by all means the Cubs should for it and I would back the decision 100%.

Congrats to Matthews Jr but I don't want the Cubs to sign him to a deal. I think he is having a career year that he's unlikely to have again.

He was running with the pitch. He was only allowed to stay on 2nd because the foul tip went directly into the glove, which counts as a strike. If it hit the dirt, or was bobbled, it would have been a foul ball. It's the same for striking out on a foul tip. I didn't know this either. Thats interesting.

It's good to see him back. I hope he can return to Baseball Tonight next year.

Just curious Fred, but are there any states you haven't been to? And this counts states you just drove throught.

Wow. I figured an Oregon player recovered the ball, was down, and then somebody pulled the ball away and then OU got the ball. But yeah, that wasn't close. OU got screwed twice on the same play.

I just saw this online as well and posted a thread in the Baseball Discussions forum. Wow. What a crazy ending. Just saw the highlights on SportsCenter as well.

First the Rockies beat the Giants 20-8 today. Then the Dodgers beat the Padres (to regain first place) on a walk off 2 run homer in the bottom of the tenth by NOMAAHHHH after the Padres scored one in the top of the 10th. This game was 4-4 going into the eighth inning. The Padres were winning 9-5 going into the bottom of the ninth as well but the Dodgers hit back to back to back to back (yes that's right, 4) home runs to start the ninth inning to tie the game at 9. WOW.

Casey Clausen will also win 3 Heisman's, or at least Beno Cook will say so. I will never bet on ND over Michigan State. Pretty impossible considering Casey exhausted his college eligiblity six years ago. Although I'm not sure why Truffle is so positive either, to be fair, the Irish have won the last two in East Lansing. Because ND looked flat at home and Truffle doesn't think Weis will allow them to come out flat again?

If he's hurt, then he collects. If he retires, then he does not. I don't know exactly how it works, but would the bereavement list work for something long term like this? Where the Cubs could essentially give Lee a year or so off if he needed it? But again, this is getting too morbid and serious for my liking, I really don't want to think about such things. Agreed. I just want to think that all will be well with his daughter and he will report healthy for Spring Training next year.

Would that be followed shortly after by Air Mail?

They have been winning divisions as long as I can remember.

Again, WE ARE AN NL TEAM. We compete against teams in the NL for the playoffs. We play in a division with 5 other NL teams. Every single NL team has a gaping hole in the pitchers spot. You know that no matter who you pick up and don't pick up, that the pitcher still has to bat. Ok you made your f****** point. FOR THOSE OF US WHO DIDN'T KNOW, THE CUBS ARE IN THE NL!! Regardless, we need to upgrade our team on offense and pitching this off-season. If we better one at the expense of the other, we still may not be in the playoffs, hitting pitchers be damned. Who says we couldn't upgrade both the offense and the pitching without doing so at the expense of the other?

If that's true, I don't see why it would be any harder to call a guy offsides based on being past or being a yard past. Because you don't have a yardstick to tell you exactly what a yard is. The way it is now, either the attacking player is past the defender or he isn't. Making it a yard would bring a lot more judgement into the decision. Well, it doesn't have to a yard, it could be something like "significantly past". I've seen quite a bit of controversy over the current calls with the "he is or he isn't" system, I don't see why it would be anymore with a different system. agreed, I was called three times on great two on one break-outs and my girl was no more than a half step , if that, in front of the defender. It penalized the more agressive team and penalizes the swifer athlete. Now there should be a rule for cherry picking by the defenders goal. That's why you teach them to run laterally until the ball is played and then you turn upfield. Either way, you are going to gain an advantage because you are already moving while the defender is either standing still or moving in the opposite direction. EDIT: And how do you know your girl (the attacker) is the swifter athlete? Couldn't the defender that stepped up to cause the offsides be considered swifter?

Again, WE ARE AN NL TEAM. We compete against teams in the NL for the playoffs. We play in a division with 5 other NL teams. Every single NL team has a gaping hole in the pitchers spot. You know that no matter who you pick up and don't pick up, that the pitcher still has to bat.

This lineup would also look good if we got Andruw Jones: 1b: Lee 2b: Neifi Perez SS: Izturis 3b: Ramirez LF: Murton CF: Jones RF: Jones C: Barrett Either way, we'd still have a huge hole So you don't think those lineups are capable of scoring runs and aren't playoff quality lineups? No, I think those lineups are capable of scoring runs, but with potentially three holes in the lineup (2B, SS, P) - they probably won't score enough. Combine that with average or below average pitching, and you've got problems. You can't cite the pitchers spot as a gaping hole because there is no better option. The Cubs are in the NL. The pitcher has to bat. How do you know the Cubs will ave "average or below average pitching" as well? You don't. That lineup plus a decent rotation (depending on who they pick up) equals a contending team. I'm describing the Cubs pitching as average or below average because that's what it is right now - and I can't see it changing in the near future, barring significant moves. If we want Andruw Jones, we'll have to trade for him, and we'll probably trade some of our young pitchers away, thus reducing our depth even further. I could play your game and say that a team of 1B Lee 2B Below average player SS Below average player 3B Ramirez LF Murton CF Jones RF Jones C Barrett SP Zambrano SP Zito SP Prior SP Liriano SP Carpenter is good too, but that's projecting too much now isn't it? Yup, that's my game right there. Unrealistic offseason moves. You hit it right on the head. I believe I stated "decent rotation" not "all-star rotation". We are a major market team. There is no reason we shouldn't be able to add a big bat and a solid starter to the rotation in the offseason.

This lineup would also look good if we got Andruw Jones: 1b: Lee 2b: Neifi Perez SS: Izturis 3b: Ramirez LF: Murton CF: Jones RF: Jones C: Barrett Either way, we'd still have a huge hole So you don't think those lineups are capable of scoring runs and aren't playoff quality lineups? No, I think those lineups are capable of scoring runs, but with potentially three holes in the lineup (2B, SS, P) - they probably won't score enough. Combine that with average or below average pitching, and you've got problems. You can't cite the pitchers spot as a gaping hole because there is no better option. The Cubs are in the NL. The pitcher has to bat. How do you know the Cubs will ave "average or below average pitching" as well? You don't. That lineup plus a decent rotation (depending on who they pick up) equals a contending team.

This lineup would also look good if we got Andruw Jones: 1b: Lee 2b: Neifi Perez SS: Izturis 3b: Ramirez LF: Murton CF: Jones RF: Jones C: Barrett Either way, we'd still have a huge hole So you don't think those lineups are capable of scoring runs and aren't playoff quality lineups?

What people are saying is that our offense is so bad we can't afford to give him that chance. And if we give up on next season, then there are players more deserving than Theriot that should get a shot. Why would we even consider giving up on next season? Ridiculous. If the choice was between Ronny Cedeno or Ryan Theriot starting at second base next year, who would you pick? I wouldn't think twice before choosing Theriot. We've seen what Cedeno can do playing full time and .612 OPS is horrendous. 23 year-old middle infield prospects typically don't have great offensive seasons in their first full year, particularly when they have been rushed and have had only 1/2 a year of AAA. I think you're giving up on Cedeno too early. While I agree with many that having an Izturis/Cedeno combo would be horrible offensively, I'd rather have it than a Theriot/Izturis combo, simply because Cedeno has more potential. If you're going to rebuild, you should have the players out there with the most potential. And if you're going for the playoffs, you probably shouldn't have either out there with Izturis. Let's just throw out a hypothetical here. What if the Cubs acquired Andruw Jones? A starting lineup of... 1B: Lee 2B: Theriot SS: Izturis 3B: Ramirez LF: Murton CF: Jones RF: Jones C: Barrett would be a solid lineup. Three big bats in the middle along with J. Jones, Barrett, and Murton. You are making it sound like we need a lineup like the Yankees here.

What people are saying is that our offense is so bad we can't afford to give him that chance. And if we give up on next season, then there are players more deserving than Theriot that should get a shot. Why would we even consider giving up on next season? Ridiculous. If the choice was between Ronny Cedeno or Ryan Theriot starting at second base next year, who would you pick? I wouldn't think twice before choosing Theriot. We've seen what Cedeno can do playing full time and .612 OPS is horrendous.

Theriot has 5 HR in over 2300 Minor League plate appearances. His IsoP is an almost humorous .066. He was old for his leagues too, he simply hasn't shown any ability to hit for power. Well, power isn't the "end all/be all" to making a ballplayer. There are plenty of solid players with little to no power...guys like David Eckstein, Mark Loretta have made careers out of playing the game hard, and playing it right. Besides power is a requirment out of 2B, unless you have a Jeff Kent/Jose Vidro/ type 2b. Theriot for 2b in 07. Even lightweights like Eckstein and Loretta had minor league IsoP's pushing .100. Power is a requirement out of every position, some you're able to get more than others, but hitting as few XBH's as Theriot does just isn't going to cut it. If he's the only option we might as well bring up EPatt and see if he isn't overmatched before trotting out Theriot regularly. Or play Mike bloody Fontenot, even though he came down with a mysterious injury at the end fo the year. Yeah, let's bring somebody up to the ML too early and have him fail. That's a brilliant idea. I've seen that ending before.

I just don't see how you can be so definative about something like this. While I agree that it's not likely, you just can't be 100% sure about this sort of thing. You can go ahead and cite all the minor league statistics you want and compare Theriot to any player you want to but the fact remains that there is just one Ryan Theriot and you don't know what his major league career is going to end up looking like. To say he is a "bench player. Period." is just stupid. Let the guy perform. Give him a chance.