vance_the_cubs_fan

Two times for this nonsense...I vote for b&.

Not only is it a loss for the Sox, but it was a humiliating butt-kickded kind of loss. Let's hope this slide continues.

ESPN talked about this yesterday. They said that Ozzie received over 500 e-mails after the game 1 loss to the Indians and that he said the messages were messages of support. Did WSI do another call out to the "White Sox Army" again? :lol:

Bonds was a multiple MVP long before steroids. Steroids, or more accuarately HGH, placed him on a level above anything we've ever seen. I can't state with any certainty how much steroids improved Bonds, but he has been the best hitter I've ever seen play. There's no doubt about that.

If you like getting autographs, try Fitch Park. The minor league guys were more than accomodating. Take plenty of sun screen. Very few of the seats at HoHoKam are in the shade. I'd really go with the hotel package. While you may pay a little more, the ease of having your tickets purchased in advance and waiting for you at the hotel is really nice. Also, the seats we received were great!

It would probably take a lot of persuading. I'm sure he's been impressed with the way his kids have played this season. Yeah, but I'm sure the Cubs could pay him double what he's making in Beer Town.

That's a misconception people have about Hollandsworth in 2004. He was good off the bench, but not as a starter. His numbers in PT duty were so good, they masked his inefficiency once he took over as a starter much like Neifi's hot April and earl May this season masked his atrocious play over the rest of the season. In 2004 as an OF, Hollandsworth hit 261/333/414 in 111 ABs. As a pinch hitter, he went 563/611/1.063 in 16 ABs. As you can see, Hollandsworth's numbers when playing in the field were not anything that should have earned him a starting position. Not over Dubois. Not over Murton. Hell, Greive or Kelton likely could have put up that kind of line.

I'm all for replacing Dusty, but Piniella would not even make my top five to replace him. If we get rid of Dusty, let's look in this order: 1. Fredi Gonzalez 2. Davey Johnson 3. Larry Dierker 4. Ned Yost (if he could be presuaded to leave Milawukee) 5. Jim Leyland

Here's how I'd vote. AL Cy: Johan Santana AL MVP: David Ortiz NL CY: Roger Clemens (though this one is close enough that I might change my mind in the next two weeks.) NL MVP: Albert Pujols (I love Derrek, but Lee has cooled off considerably.)

I think Patterson's tenure with the Cubs is over. I'm not sure where he'll be traded to, but I have no doubt he'll be traded.

Couldn't Hairston be the RH part of a CF platoon?

Actually, I did like the Lawton trade and even said so at the time. We didn't give up much to get him. My point was, and still is, that if Murton had been given playing time, we may have chosen to make another deal. Lawton was an upgrade over Hollandsworth. If Hollandsworth is the starter, then we have a problem. The Lawton trade helped answer that. On the other hand, if Murton had hit in a regular role as he has done since being given that role, we likely would not have made the trade for Lawton. We could have done something else. Who knows? My problem isn't that Lawton was traded for and hence Murton sent down. It's more that Murton should have been given his opportunity in July to show waht he could do, but instead we were treated to the craptacular play of Hollandsworth.

As I've stated in a couple of the threads in "Trasactions," I think that Kenny Lofton could be returning for a one-year deal as Pie develops a little more. Lofton could fill in at CF while also answering that pesky lead-off question.

I don't think Neifi was a better option, but in the case of Cedeno we really didn't get to see him play enough to make the analysis that we can with Murton and the stiffs that played in his stead.

So what if Murton wen 2-30 against righthanders? Did Hollandsworth or the newly acquired Lawton do any better? And based on Murton is doing now and what he did in the minor leagues prior to being called up and during his second trip down this year, it's highly unlikely that he would have wen 2-30. Have you read what Cox has said about Kelly Johnson going 0-22 in his first chance? It's in a thread somewhere here. Cox knew Johnson could play, had always been a starter, and left him in to take his lumps. Johnson went on a tear shortly afterwards. If Murton had been called up to sit because an obviously better player was in front of him, that would have been one thing. Instead, he hit from the moment he got here and still had to sit while Todd Hollandsworth got playing time. Surely you can see the ridiculous nature in that! Furthermore, he didn't get to play against all lefties. Remember prior to the ASG, Holly got a start against a lefty because 5-7 days is too long to sit without losing your stroke. Baker's words, not mine. If that is true for a craptacular veteran like Hollandsworth, then why isn't it true for the rookies? Baker trying to take credit for Murton's success is ridiculous. In fact, what Murton's success shows is how much Baker has been a detriment to this team. Murton should have been the starter on July 8th and on ward and not had to wait until September.

I don't believe a whole lot in "protection". But if there is something to it, I don't think great OBP forces a team to pitch to the previous hitter. If anything, the combination of OBP between the first 4 hitters in that lineup would give Ramirez a chance to flirt with Sammy Sosa's best RBI seasons. I'd be pretty happy with that lineup, but I'm not a huge Lofton fan. He's much more likely to put up something like his 2001-2004 numbers than come close to repeating his 2005. Oh, I'm not a "huge" Lofton fan either, but it's clear we need both a lead-off hitter and a stop gap in CF while we wait on Pie. I think Lofton fits that bill at a decent price better than any other options. If we keep Hairston or even Greenberg for the bench, either one of those could start in the place of Lofton against a tough lefty. Even if he puts up a 340-350 OBP, it's still better than what we have had there this season and last.

Think more along the lines of Williams, Pie, Gallagher. The Reds, if they trade Dunn, are going to want the top prospect of a team's system (Pie), they'll want someone young and cheap to contribute right away (Williams) and at least one pitching prospect with a high ceiling (Gallagher). The names may change some, but that is what I think it will look like. I doubt Walker interests them, and Williams, Nolassco, and Sing just isn't going to be what they're looking for.

If we get Giles and Furcal, which we won't, there's no need for Floyd too. Murton has earned his playing time in left at a fraction of the cost to Floyd. Yep, Furcal and Giles is a pipedream, but IF a miracle occurs and the Trib gets some cajones, ya gotta still go w/ Floyd over Murton. The window of opportunity may not stay open too long. Realistically, I can see something like this next year, Furcal, Lofton or Pierre, Lee, Floyd, ARam, Murton, Barrett, Cedeno... Bye bye Nomar. I think the line-up I posted above is doable and would look very good. Sign Lofton to a one-year 1.5 million deal with incentives. Get Nomar locked into a one year deal with a 5 million base plus incentives. That leaves the money to go after Giles. The line-up would look like this: 1. Lofton CF (He keeps the spot warm until Pie is ready.) 2. Walker 2B (He's cheap and the ideal number two hitter) 3. Lee 1b 4. Giles RF (His great OBP would put pressure on teams to pitch to Lee) 5. Ramirez 3b 6. Nomar Garciaparra (He may be declining some, but at the right price excellent fit) 7. Murton LF (Great production for a league minimum salary) 8. Barrett C The line-up would be solid top to bottom with very few easy outs. There should be enoug money to sign Nomar, Giles, and Lofton and still improve the bench and bullpen. Cedeno becomes the middle infielder to sub off the bench. If Nomar or Walker gets hurt, we'll have Cedeno to sub in. Also, Nomar might give Ramirez a spell at third and Cedeno could get some starts in there as well. I think we could easily contend with the above line-up.

If we get Giles and Furcal, which we won't, there's no need for Floyd too. Murton has earned his playing time in left at a fraction of the cost to Floyd.

You compare Pierre to Jones, but there really is no comparison. Jones has always been a good fielder, though accused of being lazy at times. Pierre is average at best. Jones always had more offensive upside than Pierre. Jones isn't a one trick pony like Pierre. If the Marlins would trade Pierre for Patterson, I could see going that route. I highly doubt they will. While Patterson could have more upside, I assuming his days as a Cub are over, so I would do that deal. My guess is the Marlins would not. First, I don't see the Mets trading Floyd for Walker. They have Kaz and Reyes for the middle infield. Reyes isn't going anywhere and they're paying Kaz too much money to relegate him to bench duty. Finally, Walker's three-year line of 287/345/439 at 2.5 million compares favorably to Floyd's 280/364/502 at 6.5 million. I'm not opposed to Floyd, but I don't see why it's necessary to trade Walker to get him. Walker's production at 2b at the price we'll have him at means that unless we're making an extemely productive move, it makes little sense to trade him.

But the fact of the matter is that if Murton had been given full-time status in early July when he was first called up instead of Hollandsworth, who had done nothing all season, then we may never have had to make the trade for Lawton in the first place. The fact is, we called up a young guy and Dusty wouldn't play him, even though he hit from the moment he arrived. Now that he is playing nearly everyday, Dusty is trying to take credit for it, when it is possible this team would be in a much better position had Murton played everyday when he arrived and not since mid-August.

Len is the best! Thanks, Len.

Len picks Clemens as Cy Young. It has spoken, so it shall be. :D

A better line-up: 1. Kenny Lofton CF 2. Todd Walker 2B 3. Derrek Lee 1B 4. Brian Giles RF 5. Aramis Ramirez 3B 6. Nomar Garciaparra SS 7. Matt Murton LF 8. Michael Barrett C Cedeno is around to back up Nomar and Walker. There should still be adequate money to spend on the bullpen and bench as well.

I see this has more to do with your dislike for Walker than anything else. Walker provides excellent offense with adequate defense at a reasonable cost. There should be little motivation to trade him. Pierre provides adequate defense, with a one-dimensional offense output, at a much higher cost (in dollars and players.) And while the Cubs might could "use" Pierre a 28 yr old CF, he'll be a FA after next season. In that regards, his age matters little, only what he'll produce next season. Because after next season, he'll be gone or we'll have to pony up the dollars. With Pie waiting in the wings, it would be a one year rental regardless. There's no reason to give up the price you intend to for a one year rental of a one-trick pony. It makes no sense, especially when a player like Lofton will be on the market. Walker, isn't more of the same. He works the count, has a decent OBP along with some pop, and gives a solid bat from the left side. My guess is that you don't like the fact that he speaks his mind and that has influenced your opinion of his play. But even if you feel Walker needs to go, you package him with Hill and Dopirak and give the Marlins cash?!?! That is why the whole idea you proposed is ridiculous.