GaryWoods

What? No love for Robin Yount??????? His 1982 season was a thing of beauty for a SS. Oops. I always think of Yount as an OF for some reason. Is he usually considered a SS or an OF by baseball historians? The Hall of Fame lists him as a shortstop, so I'd gues that's how most historians would view him.

I disagree. While Hundley's contract may have provided little return in retrospect, it was a decent contract when signed. I still believe that Hundley's struggles with the Cubs resulted from Don Baylor's mishandling combined with Hundley's immaturity. It may have had something to do with his inability to keep his eye on the middle ball after a night out on the town, to. Totally agree about Baylor, though. Didn't he frequently give Todd a day off the game after a solid performance at the plate? Hard to get anything going that way. And about the contract: 3 years, 3.5mil-6.5mil-6.5mil really doesn't seem bad at all for a solid defensive catcher coming off a .384/.375/.579 season and returning to the team his dad played for.

I don't think you have to get stoned to say Eric Karros. I'm not stoned, and I just said it. You might have to be stoned to WANT to say it, though.

as much as it pains me to say it: joe morgan was the superior player that set the offensive standard for all modern 2nd basemen to be judged. Agreed, the position is the key. If Dawson were a 2B and Morgan were an OF, neither of them would have made been listed on the ballot for two years; Dawson because he'd have been a first-year selection, and Morgan because he'd have dropped off with about 7 votes. joe morgan ops+ 132 jim rice ops+ 128 Good stat, and relevant to intelligent discussion of the true value of players as opposed to their sheer talent. But, I simply don't think HOF voters are that sophisticated yet. Some are, but not nearly enough to swing an election. They would be more likely to look at more simplistic numbers like Morgan's 268 homers and compare him to someone like Jim Wynn, who finished up with 290 and didn't get a single HOF vote. Of course voters do love intangibles like awards and World Series rings, but it's to hard to speculate what a bizarro "Morgan in the outfield" world might be like with a typical 1970s middle infielder inserted into the Reds lineup in place of either Cesar Geronimo, Ken Griffey, or George Foster. By the way, I did a little research on the OPS+ numbers for all the HOF second basemen who have played since the '50s. Morgan's 132 ties him for first with Jackie Robinson; Rod Carew is a close second with 131. Sandberg's is fourth at 114. The next two serious HOF contenders, Alomar and Biggio, are tied at 116. I've never really thought of Jeff Kent as a serious contender because I view him as a power hitter who happens to play second more than a second baseman who hits for power. But just to leave no stone unturned, his OPS+ is 126. I looked at some OF numbers, too, but I don't have time to go into detail on those because my wife is making me go to bed.

I'd give you this one if Sammy had played poorly early in the season and rebounded to lead the Cubs in the pennant race, but the opposite is true: He was .303/346/.573 in April, and steadily declined through September when he was .206/.268/.490. He did rebound to go .308/.455/.577 in the NLCS; but the Cubs lost, so he really didn't "help them" do anything they couldn't have done with Tom Grant or Wayne Nordhagen in right field. I'd suggest Gary Matthews, who looked washed up at age 32 with the Phillies in 1983 (although he did redeem himself in the NLCS), and came back to lead the Cubs to the playoffs in 1984. Thad Bosley played for the Cubs from age 26-29, so I don't know if you could call him "past his prime;" but four teams had already given up on him by the time he became a valuable pinch-hitter and reserve OF for the Cubs. Chris Speier didn't exactly set the world on fire with the Cubs, but he did perform better than he had in several years and posted a .400+ BA as a pinch-hitter during his tenure here. Richie Hebner was a vital part of the Cubs' bench in 1984. Manny Trillo posted his 2 career best OBP and AVG in his second tour with the Cubs. There may have been a few pitchers besides the ones already mentioned, but when I think of theCubs signing past-their-prime hurlers, I usually think of guys like Larry Gura and Matt Keough

as much as it pains me to say it: joe morgan was the superior player that set the offensive standard for all modern 2nd basemen to be judged. Agreed, the position is the key. If Dawson were a 2B and Morgan were an OF, neither of them would have made been listed on the ballot for two years; Dawson because he'd have been a first-year selection, and Morgan because he'd have dropped off with about 7 votes.

Dawson's problem is one shared by several current OF candidates: Too much parity. It's tough to say Dawson should go in without also saying that Jim Rice, Dave Parker, and Dale Murphy should also go in. Heck, even Chili Davis compares favorably to those guys when you look at his career stats; he dropped off after one year with just 3 votes (not saying Davis was anywhere near as Hall-worthy as the other guys, just noticed that BR had him listed as similar to some of them and was surprised to look at his overall numbers). If I recall correctly, Hawk received about 50% of the vote last year, which was a significant jump from previous years. Not much of a jump. He got 45% in 2002, 50% in '03 and '04, and 52% last year. Moving in the right direction, for sure, but hardly by leaps and bounds. Rice seems to have the better shot right now, having been named on 59% of the ballots in his 11th year of eligibility last year. Which is somewhat unfortunate; while he was easily the best hitter of the four named for both power and average, he's also far and away the worst fielder and runner of the group. Parker and Murphy will probably drop off in a year or two. Murphy's lack of support stems from his sharp dropoff at a relatively early age, and the fact that he's a Mormon (just kidding). Parker is hurt by the fact that he fell down in Wrigley Field and allowed Ron Cey to waddle around the bases for an inside-the-park home run in 1983. His inconsistant play in the early 80's, his sometimes surly demeanor, and his alleged involvment in the Pittsburgh drug ring didn't help either. He had the most overall talent of this group, though. If he had kept his nose clean, he might have ranked ahead of Dave Winfield as the best overall outfielder of the era. Man, I didn't mean to be so windy. I'm worn out from all that thinking!

Which means that the lineup will be: CF Juan Pierre SS Neifi Perez 1B Derrek Lee RF Jacque Jones 3B Aramis Ramirez LF John Mabry 2B Ronny Cedeno C Michael Barrett SP Carlos Zambrano SP Greg Maddux SP Mark Prior SP Glendon Rusch SP Jerome Williams CL Ryan Dempster I'm guessing Dusty thinks they signed John MAYBERRY.

Just making a couple of random guesses; he could reverse the numbers and go with 12, or add them together and wear 3. Forgive me if those numbers have been retired by the Pirates; I'm not familiar at all with what their great players wore besides Clemente.

I remember Dickie Noles being traded to the Tigers for Dickie Noles back in about 1986.

how could they invite dusty when an up-and-coming comedian like michael floorwax was available? "Up-and-Coming?" Dude, Lewis and Floorwax have been around for years. Steve Garvey probably had migraines because his hair was a solid piece of plastic.

Or if the "starter" is under 30 and Dusty is still the manager.

Tony Perez is in the Hall of Fame.

Does it bother anyone else that Vince Coleman is our baserunning instructor? Sure he stole a lot of bases; but that's because he was fast, not because he was a good baserunner. Last I checked you couldn't teach raw speed.

I'd guess about 2M. Possibly 3M, but not likely. And of course he won't get any more multi-year offers. In that case, I really think the Royals should offer him 2.5 for a year ... Their attendance is down and nobody in the state of Kansas cares about the team much any more. What about people in Missouri? That's where they play, after all. :wink:

Why is that a reason to sign him? Does having an All-Star starter on your team give you a couple of free wins or something these days? If Cedeno/Nomar is a better overall combination than Nomar/Walker, then move him to second. If Cedeno as SS and Nomar in LF is more productive than Nomar at SS and Murton/Lawton/Hairston/Burnitz/whoever else in LF, then move Nomar to LF. Signing a player to play a certain position just because he has a chance to be an All-Star starter at that position would quite possibly be the worst reason in history to sign someone. it's a way to market the team. sell jerseys Nomar has been with the Cubs for over a year now. Most people who want Nomar jerseys have them. Those that don't have one by now probably aren't going to buy one regardless of whether or not he starts an All-Star game. As far as marketing goes, the Cubs have been one of the top 2-3 teams in baseball in terms of fans outside their geographical area for years, even when they were represented in the AS game by guys like Steve Trachsel, Randy Myers, and Vance Law. I think they have marketed themselves just fine. The only thing they can do better as far as marketing is win; so it only makes sense to field the team that give you the best chance to do that regardless of whther or not any of them start the All-Star game.

Why is that a reason to sign him? Does having an All-Star starter on your team give you a couple of free wins or something these days? If Cedeno/Nomar is a better overall combination than Nomar/Walker, then move him to second. If Cedeno as SS and Nomar in LF is more productive than Nomar at SS and Murton/Lawton/Hairston/Burnitz/whoever else in LF, then move Nomar to LF. Signing a player to play a certain position just because he has a chance to be an All-Star starter at that position would quite possibly be the worst reason in history to sign someone.

I found this quote from the article interesting: The article states that neither the Seminole tribe of Florida or Oklahoma have a problem with FSU using "Seminoles" as a nickname. So, Bob, if neither group that shares a name with the FSU athletic teams has an problem with it, why does anyone care how the rest of the country feels? If it's the Indians, Redskins, Redmen, Chiefs, etc, then sure, decendents of all Native American peoples should have a voice. But we're talking about the specific monniker of a specific nation; actually two nations, in this case. But since both are in agreement that it's not a problem, then it shouldn't be a problem.

Athletic teams from my alma mater, Western Illinois University (then known as Western Illinois Teachers College), originally sported the monniker "Fighting Teachers." They reportedly changed it to "Fighting Leathernecks" because they were afraid that the image of fighting teachers might deter some students from attending.

I thought this thread was actually going to have something to do with the greatest songwiter in American history (with apologies to Stephen Foster and Hank Williams). Hilarious tune, though.

Eddie Murray was a 3-time Gold Glover.

Sandberg started out as a speedy slap-hitter who was strong enough to occasionally lift a line drive into the basket for a home run. At the time it seemed fitting that he came over with Larry Bowa because it really looked like he was going to develop into the same king of hitter, but with a little mroe power. It was Jim Frey who changed history when he took Sandberg aside in the spring of 1984 and said, "You're a big, strong guy; why don't you try to drive the ball a little more?" Without that advice, Ryno would have to buy a ticket to get into the Hall of Fame.

What does Mark Prior picking his nose have to do with anything?

has a broadcaster ever jumped from the booth to the dugout b4? Interesting question. Lou Boudreau, Jerry Coleman, Larry Dierker . . . ......Bob Brenly..... :wink:

How often does a player who is placed on waivers for the purpose of making a trade get claimed? Hardly ever. I only remember it happening once in the last 20 years or so. GMs don't usually mess with each other like that, because they never know who they might need to deal with down the road.