Jehrico

It's only risky in the sense that small-minded old people might question it. I think you are wrong here. This thinking is pervaisive in NL minds, from the media to the scouts to the clubhouse to the GM and owners' booths. I have no idea how you can claim otherwise. Who are the pervasive minds in the NL? Small minded old people? I think you guys are talking about the same people.

I don't think the tackling was that bad throughout the game. There were a few plays that really stood out that had me cursing at the TV, but those were only a few plays, tackling as a whole throughout the game was probably maybe slightly below average (the average we would expect from the Bears, that is...). I was most concerned how long it took the line to adjust to the blitzes too. That was perhaps the worst game I can recall seeing out of Kruetz. I didn't realize it during the game, but I saw online that John Tait got hurt during the game? I may have been in the bathroom when that happened. Anyone got any updates on him?

Fixed. Here's pulling for that homefield advantage to really be a factor! This game may have big implications on whose stadium we're playing in if we face Seattle in the playoffs. IF we win this one, I can't see the Bears going worse than 13-3. If we lose, I think our worse case scenario is 11-5. I have a hard time seeing Seattle doing any worse than 12-4. If they beat us, I predict they'll finish no worse than 13-3 at years end.

Giles BABIP is well below his career average this year. He was pretty close in '05. That makes me think that although his power is decreasing, his numbers are this year are a little bit of a fluke. I don't expect him to put up numbers like he did in Pitt, but I think something roughly half way from this years numbers to last years is reasonable to expect. I would guess .390-.400 OBP w/ .425-.435 slg for next year. Since he's coming off of a down year, he could probably be had cheaper if he were on the market. But even if he were, I doubt he'd leave the west coast unless we just grossly bowled him over.

The Angels have expressed interest in A-Rod. The asking price is assumed to be Ervin Santana, Scot Shields, Chone Figgins and a top prospect. What can the Cubs offer that would closely resemble the talent the Angels would need to give up for A-Rod? The conversation would probably have to include Zambrano, which would immediately kill the deal for me. I could handle a package of Hill, Howry, Moore (or better yet, Izturis), and Pie for ARod, but I don't think that would be as enticing as the Angels package. On the other hand, I doubt the Angels would make that deal, so I don't know if we'd be competing against such a strong package. And why would the Yankees trade a franchise player for 3 relative unknowns and an old reliever? The Angels package looks much better. pure speculation, but I don't think tha Halos do that deal, so I don't think that is a package we have to compete with. We view ARod as a franchise player, but they sure don't act as if he is in NY. As far as the part about the aging reliever, since when has age ever scared the Yanks? They did want Howry last year... Let's hope the Angels do make that deal because that would reduce the number of suitors for ARam. Not really. If they get ARod, then the Yanks need a 3b instead, and the Halos will certainly deal Figgins to someone that needs a 3b. If Figgins goes to the Yanks, then whoever could have traded for him if he stayed in LA still needs a 3B instead of the Yanks. My guess is even if the Yanks got Figgins in the deal, they'd still go after ARam if he's available, then use Figgins in a package for some pitching. So even if they make that trade, the suiter would just change from LA to NYY, which is worse, IMO.

I'm going to predict the same score that I did for the Vikes... Bears 24, Seahawks 9. The defense keeps their O out of the end zone.

This has got to be as hard as winning the lotto... http://www.sportsline.com/mlb/story/9682835

He needs to know that if you are receiving a punt deep in your own territory, you never try to return a punt inside your own 10 unless it is a boomer and you have plenty of room to return it. But the big drop step that was called for when Grossman threw the interception was not smart. You have to run and get ourself out of trouble first. Grossman was lucky though cause he could have given up at least two more picks. But he picked himslef up and helped get the W. Let me say this: Tommie Harris is a flat out stud. Man is he good. Urlacher played terrible. The whole team couldnt tackle today. I am not sure if it the line or Jones, but the running attack needs to get better. Jones was running better at the end of the game though. He historically does do that. Suprised that Benson and Peterson didn't get in at all. But with the amount of pressure the Vikes were brining today, maybe Lovie wanted a RB who could block. The last play the Vikes did, I am not sure that the deep ball was the first option. It shouldn't have even been an option. But soem Bear was bringing pressure and I think Johnson just threw the ball up because that was al he could see. Still a really dumb play on 4th and 2 with the game on the line. We really haven't gotten much from Thomas Jones this year. I'm really surprised Benson didn't even have one carry today. I think we need to use Benson a bit more to see what we have in him. I'm also surprised Peterson hasn't been getting his one series a game. He averaged over 5 yards a game last year, you'd think he would at least have gotten a taste with how bad Jones was.

If the Cubs ended up with Manny, I'd probably go for Durham over Soriano. Manny provides the power we need and choosing Durham over Alphonso frees up money to help get some more pitching. If we sign Soriano, we still need someone who can play 2b. Nevermind, I forgot about Theriot...

I won't concede any more to them. They didn't "neutralize" our defensive front...they managed less than 100 yards on the ground, less than 200 in the air, and only put up 3 FGs. They did a decent job keeping us off of the QB, that was about it. Considering they gave Johnson as good of protection as they could conceivably expect, it didn't boost the offense at all. We knew our weakspot was our offensive line, you did do a good job exploiting that, I'll give credit there. That was a close one on the road, I'm predicting a lopsided contest in Chicago next time. I disagree. Our o-line is still coming together and the right side is a work in progress. I think it will get better and the running game will develop. We did neutralize your defensive front to the extent that you weren't in our backfield much at all. I really don't think this team will be blown out at much at all this year and not against the Bears. Our defense is good enough to keep us from getting blown out and we won't turn the ball over much. That will keep us in most games and we showed that we can rattle Rex. The APs take on it... You guys did have Rex rattled there for awhile, but I liked how he stepped up and responded late in the game.

Anyone else not impressed with Jones? I was disappointed APete didn't get his usual series to change the tempo up a little. I hope Benson gets more of a look next week too.

Here's hoping they have a down day next week... edit: They = the seahawks, of course :wink:

I won't concede any more to them. They didn't "neutralize" our defensive front...they managed less than 100 yards on the ground, less than 200 in the air, and only put up 3 FGs. They did a decent job keeping us off of the QB, that was about it. Considering they gave Johnson as good of protection as they could conceivably expect, it didn't boost the offense at all. We knew our weakspot was our offensive line, you did do a good job exploiting that, I'll give credit there. That was a close one on the road, I'm predicting a lopsided contest in Chicago next time.

Had they won, the Vikings would have been lucky to win that game. All their offense could muster was 3 FGs. We committed a ton of penalties, threw the ball right at them several times, and played generally sloppy all day. The Metrodome is a tough place to play on the road, and the Vikings had home field advantage. Neither team looked particularly sharp, but I think the Bears made several more unforced mistakes, yet still managed to win on the road. My opinion of Minnesota's defense is up *a little*, my overall opinion of them remains largely unchanged. I predicted they'd score 9 points on us, I should have specified that was all the defense would have give up (darned INT...).

Careful or you will hear from the stats junkies who will find some statistic to downplay his offense. No, you won't. What you will find is some solid evidence suggesting it'd be foolish to expect him to achieve those feats again. There's no reason to be optimistic that he's capable of repeating this years success. It's a fluke and it's out of line with his last few years. But even if he doesn't achieve those feats again, his career averages would be a huge upgrade at 2B or CF for the 2007 Cubs. One probem with that...he can't play 2b. You may as well put Barrett out there in the middle IF if you're that desparate for offensive production from 2b that you'd completely disregard defense altogether. I haven't watched him in the OF this year...he's got the arm and the speed for CF, but I dont' know whether or not he could hack it, so I won't say he'd be a bad idea there either. Also, there's no guarantee he'll come close to those kinds of numbers next year either. He hit about as bad as Neifi away from Arlington last year. No exaggeration there, his road OPS really was close to Neifi's. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't RFK a pitcher's park? Either way, Soriano has a .944 OPS at home and a .921 OPS on the road this year. This year...he's going to get paid big because of this year, and this year is waaaay out of line with his last couple of years. That's the problem, and that's why he's so risky to give big money to. There's a very good probability this year will turn out to be a fluke.

Epstein is a smart guy. He'll trade Manny in a heart beat if it improves the organization, simple as that. I think he's looking less at winning now though and looking at winning long-term. He's been in "win now" mode the last few years. He's farmed out a lot of homegrown talent in trades, so I think he's going to look for a haul of prospects in return to restock the farm. Boston's got money, so I'm prone to believe he'll pick up a large chunk of his salary in order to widen the pool of teams that can compete for him, so he can bring in more of a haul for him. I'd honestly be extremely surprised if Manny finished his contract in Boston. I think he'll be traded next off-season if not this one.

Careful or you will hear from the stats junkies who will find some statistic to downplay his offense. No, you won't. What you will find is some solid evidence suggesting it'd be foolish to expect him to achieve those feats again. There's no reason to be optimistic that he's capable of repeating this years success. It's a fluke and it's out of line with his last few years. But even if he doesn't achieve those feats again, his career averages would be a huge upgrade at 2B or CF for the 2007 Cubs. True, but if he does regress to his career averages, would he be worth the huge contract we'd have to give him? I've stated before that I don't think Hendry will win a bidding war for Soriano and I don't think he's worth the money he's going to get. Personally, I have trouble believing about 80% of the players are worth what they get. Change that to 90%, and quoted for truth.

His 20+ errors are going to be a big help with a rotation that issues walks to anyone with a pulse. The only problem with Soriano in LF is it displaces Murton, which sucks. I'd rather trade Jones and stick Murton in RF. At least he doesn't spike throws into the grass instead of hitting the cutoff man. Obviously most people would. How likely do you think it is that the Cubs trade Jones though? Realistically, Soriano straight up replaces Murton in LF. End result, the Cubs 2007 team has more power, gets on base less, and scores enough runs to be around average instead of horrible. gets on base less? I'm not sure that's true. Murton's .055 ISOD is less than impressive. Murton is at .297/.362, putting his IsoD at .065. simple math eludes me - still not impressed. Murton is a safe bet to get on base at a .350 clip. Soriano has the potential to fall around .300. Murton is 24 and still rising towards his prime with his best years in front of him. Soriano is 30, likely wiyh only a couple of good seasons left that could justify putting him out ther instead of Murton. Theres really no reason to expect us to compete for the WS next year, so we trade a young improving guy like Murton for 1-2 more productive years of an overpriced Soriano who is no safe bet to even come close to repeating his performance?

The Angels have expressed interest in A-Rod. The asking price is assumed to be Ervin Santana, Scot Shields, Chone Figgins and a top prospect. What can the Cubs offer that would closely resemble the talent the Angels would need to give up for A-Rod? The conversation would probably have to include Zambrano, which would immediately kill the deal for me. I could handle a package of Hill, Howry, Moore (or better yet, Izturis), and Pie for ARod, but I don't think that would be as enticing as the Angels package. On the other hand, I doubt the Angels would make that deal, so I don't know if we'd be competing against such a strong package. And why would the Yankees trade a franchise player for 3 relative unknowns and an old reliever? The Angels package looks much better. pure speculation, but I don't think tha Halos do that deal, so I don't think that is a package we have to compete with. We view ARod as a franchise player, but they sure don't act as if he is in NY. As far as the part about the aging reliever, since when has age ever scared the Yanks? They did want Howry last year...

Careful or you will hear from the stats junkies who will find some statistic to downplay his offense. No, you won't. What you will find is some solid evidence suggesting it'd be foolish to expect him to achieve those feats again. There's no reason to be optimistic that he's capable of repeating this years success. It's a fluke and it's out of line with his last few years. But even if he doesn't achieve those feats again, his career averages would be a huge upgrade at 2B or CF for the 2007 Cubs. One probem with that...he can't play 2b. You may as well put Barrett out there in the middle IF if you're that desparate for offensive production from 2b that you'd completely disregard defense altogether. I haven't watched him in the OF this year...he's got the arm and the speed for CF, but I dont' know whether or not he could hack it, so I won't say he'd be a bad idea there either. Also, there's no guarantee he'll come close to those kinds of numbers next year either. He hit about as bad as Neifi away from Arlington last year. No exaggeration there, his road OPS really was close to Neifi's.

Yeah, that too. I felt like a little kid who woke up on Christmas, went downstairs with great expectations, and found coal in his stocking when that happened.

Too bad for Nick...I always thought this guy could be a star if he could stay healthy... http://www.sportsline.com/mlb/gamecenter/recap/MLB_20060923_WAS@NYM

Really? I'm probably the most hopeless Bear fan on the planet. But what exactly did we win last year? I'm certainly not satisfied with a division championship and a quick, unceremonious exit from the playoffs. The deficiencies of the Bears last year eventually caught up with us, and we lost. Turns out, those Bear fans were right, IMO. Good to see we have some offense this year, because if we play Carolina with this offense? We don't go 3-and-out every possession of the 1st quarter and get down 13 points before we can blink. And the secondary....jury's still out, but I like our position at safety and our depth overall better now. Hopefully that all plays out and we continue with those strengths-----put teams down early and dare them to try and come back against our defense. That's more of a formula for Super Bowl success than last year's "we can't score, but neither can you" philosophy. Believe me. Because good teams in big games? Often times, yes they will score. And sometimes you just have to be able to match fire with fire when that happens. Ironically enough, we didn't lose because of those deficiencies. We lost because our defense picked the wrong game to lay an egg.

If Boston eats half of the contract, they should get an A+ prospect for Manny, regardless of the baggage he comes with.

Careful or you will hear from the stats junkies who will find some statistic to downplay his offense. No, you won't. What you will find is some solid evidence suggesting it'd be foolish to expect him to achieve those feats again. There's no reason to be optimistic that he's capable of repeating this years success. It's a fluke and it's out of line with his last few years.