17 Seconds

keep in mind this is a guy who knocked himself out during a touchdown celebration

gus was either faking it or he's the softest player in the nfl

that was definitately a dirty/late hit, but it seemed like frerrote was miling it. that or he is extremely fraill. be basically just bumped into him and gus went flying for some reason

i don't care how good peterson is... that was just atrocious tackling.

yeah i'm an idiot

Wait, I thought it was dead right when the first guy touched it?

lovie what hell... your guys had a full tv timeout to look at that play and realize it wasn't even close, yet you still waste a timeout on it

You could tell as soon as the ball hit his hands it was going to be 6

He has a family

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread I think it's pretty significant that they are trying to move Lee. Think of the second order effects besides Peavy... We don't know that they're "trying" to move Lee. They might just be "willing" to move him. There's a big difference. Either way, the context in which Churchill told me that implied that it was part of a Peavy trade, so I posted it in here. Earlier this month, one of Chicago's beat writers (I don't remember which) said Hendry was going to try to trade Lee, so this seems to corroborate that. That's part of why it's significant. What were his exact words? Again, there is a huge difference between "trying to trade" someone and just listening to offers. I remember the article you're talking about and I think it was more of a "they're open to trading Lee" type thing. Do you remember the exact quote or the article? I think you're splitting hairs at this point. I don't recall the exact quote because I can't recall which writer it was. I can't recall if it was a trib, suntimes, or herald writer either. Anyone else out there remember? I don't really think it's splitting hairs. I'm sure there are a lot of guys on the team that they'd be willing to trade if it helped them get somebody else they really wanted. That doesn't mean they're trying to trade them. I'm not sure which of those categories Lee falls into, but I bet it's the latter. The team displayed unsolicited interest in trading Lee previously. I think the intent is pretty clear, they don't want to be stuck with him for the rest of his contract. Again, where did they show unsolicited interest? I haven't seen that anywhere. I think they only will trade it if it's necessary to improve the team. I don't they'd do it just to dump salary.

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread I think it's pretty significant that they are trying to move Lee. Think of the second order effects besides Peavy... We don't know that they're "trying" to move Lee. They might just be "willing" to move him. There's a big difference. Either way, the context in which Churchill told me that implied that it was part of a Peavy trade, so I posted it in here. Earlier this month, one of Chicago's beat writers (I don't remember which) said Hendry was going to try to trade Lee, so this seems to corroborate that. That's part of why it's significant. What were his exact words? Again, there is a huge difference between "trying to trade" someone and just listening to offers. I remember the article you're talking about and I think it was more of a "they're open to trading Lee" type thing. Do you remember the exact quote or the article? I think you're splitting hairs at this point. I don't recall the exact quote because I can't recall which writer it was. I can't recall if it was a trib, suntimes, or herald writer either. Anyone else out there remember? I don't really think it's splitting hairs. I'm sure there are a lot of guys on the team that they'd be willing to trade if it helped them get somebody else they really wanted. That doesn't mean they're trying to trade them. I'm not sure which of those categories Lee falls into, but I bet it's the latter.

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread I think it's pretty significant that they are trying to move Lee. Think of the second order effects besides Peavy... We don't know that they're "trying" to move Lee. They might just be "willing" to move him. There's a big difference. Either way, the context in which Churchill told me that implied that it was part of a Peavy trade, so I posted it in here. Earlier this month, one of Chicago's beat writers (I don't remember which) said Hendry was going to try to trade Lee, so this seems to corroborate that. That's part of why it's significant. What were his exact words? Again, there is a huge difference between "trying to trade" someone and just listening to offers. I remember the article you're talking about and I think it was more of a "they're open to trading Lee" type thing. Do you remember the exact quote or the article?

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread I think it's pretty significant that they are trying to move Lee. Think of the second order effects besides Peavy... We don't know that they're "trying" to move Lee. They might just be "willing" to move him. There's a big difference. Either way, the context in which Churchill told me that implied that it was part of a Peavy trade, so I posted it in here.

I don't care what anyone says...I like Drew Gooden. I liked him when he was on the Magic too

He wanted out and last year midseason he basically said there was no way he'd play for the Bulls this year

This should have it's own thread, not be in the Peavy thread. Well he probably would have been traded as part of a Peavy deal, or at least a in a move that sets it up. Either way, I don't really think that info deserves it's own thread

It's odd for Churchill to name his source outright like this. Why Does Lee's agent want this out ? My guess is that nobody would believe some guy on an internet message board. Then again, he did share other info with me in the e-mail who he claimed was from a very well known/high up source and told me to keep it to myself because the guy told it to him in confidence (nothing important though, so don't even ask.)

From Churchill-

I didn't read the article, but where are you getting that from? The excerpt shows nothing like that. I've seen similar things in other articles as well. I also saw a quote from Wood where he was like "I would have considered a one year deal" instead of "I would have accepted a one year deal" I'm not following how he's full of it because his agent never raised the possibility. His agent's job was to get him the maximum contract possible. It would have been stupid for him to offer a 1 year possibility before he could even shop Kerry around to check out the market for him. So he says he'd "have done anything to stay with the Cubs" and that he "would have accepted a one year deal", but he didn't think to tell the Cubs that? Okay. I guess he meant "I'd have done anything....accept tell the Cubs I'd have taken a one year deal. They have to figure it out on their own." If he was telling the truth, then he'll accept arbitration. Pretty simple. Probably, but I said about a month ago, there's a certain insult to accepting arbitration from a team that told you you're not wanted anymore. They said they can't afford him, not that they don't want him. Him and Hendry are good friends Semantics. They can't afford him because they want to spend their money on other people. They don't want him at the price he'll command. That's fine, but if he doesn't want to accept arbitration (which I wouldn't expect him to) then he shouldn't say that's he'd do "anything" to stay with the Cubs. I have no problem with Wood chasing the money.... everybody does. I just wish he wouldn't act like he would have stayed for one year when I don't think that's true.

I didn't read the article, but where are you getting that from? The excerpt shows nothing like that. I've seen similar things in other articles as well. I also saw a quote from Wood where he was like "I would have considered a one year deal" instead of "I would have accepted a one year deal" I'm not following how he's full of it because his agent never raised the possibility. His agent's job was to get him the maximum contract possible. It would have been stupid for him to offer a 1 year possibility before he could even shop Kerry around to check out the market for him. So he says he'd "have done anything to stay with the Cubs" and that he "would have accepted a one year deal", but he didn't think to tell the Cubs that? Okay. I guess he meant "I'd have done anything....accept tell the Cubs I'd have taken a one year deal. They have to figure it out on their own." If he was telling the truth, then he'll accept arbitration. Pretty simple. Probably, but I said about a month ago, there's a certain insult to accepting arbitration from a team that told you you're not wanted anymore. They said they can't afford him, not that they don't want him. Him and Hendry are good friends

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=297233&page=38 hah

Dude, don't even try to compare Scott to Griffey and Garrett Anderson. He is significantly better than them and much more than just a "minor" upgrade, even if those guys don't decline more.

I didn't read the article, but where are you getting that from? The excerpt shows nothing like that. I've seen similar things in other articles as well. I also saw a quote from Wood where he was like "I would have considered a one year deal" instead of "I would have accepted a one year deal" I'm not following how he's full of it because his agent never raised the possibility. His agent's job was to get him the maximum contract possible. It would have been stupid for him to offer a 1 year possibility before he could even shop Kerry around to check out the market for him. So he says he'd "have done anything to stay with the Cubs" and that he "would have accepted a one year deal", but he didn't think to tell the Cubs that? Okay. I guess he meant "I'd have done anything....accept tell the Cubs I'd have taken a one year deal. They have to figure it out on their own." If he was telling the truth, then he'll accept arbitration. Pretty simple.

I think at this point, Hendry is going to do whatever it takes (well at least, I hope so). For the RF thing, would we be content with Luke Scott? He's cheap, but put up some alright numbers last year. He's the left-handed bat we're looking for. I don't know...we'll see what Jimbo can do. I would personally not like to see Luke Scott in a Cubs uniform. I don't know who else we could get, but Scott played LF last year with a poor AVG and OBP. He also was worse during Day games and on the Road. I see him, at best, as a platoon partner with Mark DeRosa in right, which makes Fontenot a starter versus LHP's. Luke Scott is also 30 years old with "lukewarm" numbers over his career. I would rather see Hoffpauir platoon there if we can't afford someone better. And I realize his defense in right will be bad. .257/.336/.472/.807 ^^^^^^^ Those are Scott's numbers in 2008 and while they are not great numbers, but they are certainly serviceable numbers and they are definately better then "poor average and OBP." I'm not saying he's great, but for his cost (less then a $1 million dollars) I would say they could be a decent under the radar move for the Cubs. Well to be fair, that's definitely a poor average (which doesn't really matter) and a poor OBP. I think he's a bit better than that though. He was pretty streaky last year. Those were his worse numbers since his rookie yr in 2005 and he still posted an OPS+ over 100. He K:BB remain virtual the same but his power went up from 10-18-23 in three yrs. .266/.353/.497/.850 is his career numbers, and he is only 30 yrs old, so it's reasonable to think he can put up a couple more yrs of that said line. Considering his salary is still under $1 mill, I'd say he is worth taking a flier on. Did you quote the wrong person? I pretty much already said everything you just did. I'm agreeing with you. I'm just saying that you you can't deny that guy's claim that his average/OBP were bad last year, which you did.

I didn't read the article, but where are you getting that from? The excerpt shows nothing like that. I've seen similar things in other articles as well. I also saw a quote from Wood where he was like "I would have considered a one year deal" instead of "I would have accepted a one year deal"