papabear58

There's a perception that Daley, a notorious Sox fan, gives the Cubs a hard time when it comes to getting things that need his approval and such done through the city. hmmmmm, that's stupid. That kind of thing could easily backfire.

Pardon, but not being from Chicago, would someone please explain this Daley thing?

A lot of these boundries seem to be drawn so that the AAA teams are blacked out from the parent team too. It doesn't make much sense to me, but that's the appearance.

Sure, but I want to keep my cable company as they also have my phone and internet as well. I'm not interested in Satellite as here in upstate NY we get crapy reception when the weather gets really bad. If it had never been available I wouldn't be so mad, but it's the taking it away that has me upset!

Aha, I didn't know he was from Arkansas. You learn something new every day!

Poor Iowa! The don't even have a team and they have like 6 teams blacked out!

Well she has my big ears and my chubby cheeks, so I am only holding her back. Who knows? We even live in Arkansas, where The MAN is from. ?

Until you actually show me an example of it happening, I consider it a pretty big stretch to surmise that not getting along (even to an extreme) would cause players to hit or pitch less effectively than they normally would. You would think that in 100+ years of MLB history, you could come up with at least a few examples of the effect that you're suggesting (which, admittedly, a lot of other people also believe in). Look at Sosa. After the combination of the corked bat, the clubhouse demonor, the feeling of the fans turning on him, the Cubs parting ways with him, the distractions took their toll on his play. Roll that out to a team that is consistantly having infighting and distractions and it can effect a team. i think it probably had more to do with being hit in the head by an errant fastball. or it could have something to do with him just getting old. This season will definatly test that theory. He could very well be aweful as some people surmise. Or he could rebound and do well as he's mentally fresh, ready to play, and happy to be playing baseball again. We'll see what happens there. BTW I did take him in the last round of my fantasy draft on the off chance that he does rebound. If not, it's no big loss.

Until you actually show me an example of it happening, I consider it a pretty big stretch to surmise that not getting along (even to an extreme) would cause players to hit or pitch less effectively than they normally would. You would think that in 100+ years of MLB history, you could come up with at least a few examples of the effect that you're suggesting (which, admittedly, a lot of other people also believe in). Look at Sosa. After the combination of the corked bat, the clubhouse demonor, the feeling of the fans turning on him, the Cubs parting ways with him, the distractions took their toll on his play. Roll that out to a team that is consistantly having infighting and distractions and it can effect a team.

I could've sworn that team went to a World Series. ;) Yes, but look at the fallout the next season with Kent gone. If you had an entire team full of altercations like that it wouldn't be something easily overcome. Or more of the Sammy Sosa boombox things going on. Egos can play a lot in all sports, baseball included. Did it really matter on the field? The next year they won 93 games and won their division. And the Cubs with Alou's crazy antics and Sosa's boombox were a much better team in 2004 than without them in 2005. But look at it on a large scale. We're talking about isolated examples. Image that kind of a fireworks display all year long with huge egos and pouty stars. I don't think there would be the ability to overcome it despite their talent. I understand what you're saying. I'm just not seeing real world evidence to prove your point. Show me a case of chemistry actually trumping talent like you're suggesting. Just one. I'm not even trying to be argumentative, I'd just like to see some evidence. Since my argument is purely speculative and based entirely on opinon, it is impossible to give concrete evidence. It is rather a belief based on what I believe is poor play by teams after large distractions. In speculation I believe that a team with a season long distraction would have to daily overcome all kinds of mental trash and I don't believe it would be doable. It's not too far of a stretch to sumise.

I could've sworn that team went to a World Series. ;) Yes, but look at the fallout the next season with Kent gone. If you had an entire team full of altercations like that it wouldn't be something easily overcome. Or more of the Sammy Sosa boombox things going on. Egos can play a lot in all sports, baseball included. Did it really matter on the field? The next year they won 93 games and won their division. And the Cubs with Alou's crazy antics and Sosa's boombox were a much better team in 2004 than without them in 2005. But look at it on a large scale. We're talking about isolated examples. Image that kind of a fireworks display all year long with huge egos and pouty stars. I don't think there would be the ability to overcome it despite their talent.

I could've sworn that team went to a World Series. ;) Yes, but look at the fallout the next season with Kent gone. If you had an entire team full of altercations like that it wouldn't be something easily overcome. Or more of the Sammy Sosa boombox things going on. Egos can play a lot in all sports, baseball included.

Unless your players were so busy fighting in the clubhouse (ala Bonds vs. Kent) that they had a hard time focusing on baseball.

It's not as much about surviving, but it's more about the style in which they survive.

That is a valid concern, but if he'd keep Wrigley and allow for baseball people to run things it can't be all bad right? His success with the Mavs has been long-term. Snyder has never won at all. I don't see how the comparison is valid, although I certainly admit there's no way to predict with 100% certainty that Cuban would be successful here. Well if you look at involved owners, ala Jerry Jones and Al Davis, most of the time it's not a successful venture since the people you would be hiring to run things know considerably more then you. Snyder got Archuleta for crying out loud, and then stuck him in a position for a system that is the antithesis of everything that he's good at. Owners don't make the best decision makers usually. That's why they hire (hopefully good) presidents and GM's to do that for them.

That is a valid concern, but if he'd keep Wrigley and allow for baseball people to run things it can't be all bad right?

That has to be, as a Cubs fan and a father of 2 (3 & 1), one of the best things I've ever heard. Kudos to you and yours!

I, despite the travesty, have never traveled to the hallowed halls of Wrigley Field. Nor have I visited my mecca (Soldier Field). I do not live in nor have I yet visited Chicago, but I love my Bears, Cubs, Bulls, and Blackhawks and would feel that it is a horrible travesty if Wrigley Field ever was torn down or unused by the Chicago Cubs.

That's awesome dude! Congratulations, and way to go on the training :)

This comming from a guy with a picture of Bill Clinton.... Priceless :) What's that supposed to mean? A bit of political humor :D , and a jab at a statement about a subject that people are masochistically drawn to (Political feelings aside).

Not right, but entirely possible. I want to see them continue to play at Wrigley Field, but that will require rennovations. I think the best thing is if the City agrees to let them truly rennovate the stadium while keeping the three major historical pieces in place. If they don't I'm sorry to say that I seriously question the viability of Wrigley Field in this sale.

I agree 100%, but I wonder if a cold bottom line business man like Selig will step in and work on it from a sentimental side. The fact is that a new stadium with larger seating capacity will increase revenue which can be shared to the league. If it brings in more money to MLB, I don't see him stopping it.

The question is could you build enough seats to make a rebuild worth the money? If the rebuilding company doesn't get an increase in the money comming in either through raising prices or increased number of seats, then why would they? If you can't add enough seats then you're in the same canundrum.

It already is the same old. Prior has come to ST exactly once (2003) ready to play. Other than that, it's always something with this guy. I want to like Prior but it's his job to be ready to play when pitchers & catchers report. If he can't do that, then there's only one person who is to blame, and that's Mark Prior. =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

I just think that it's crucial to Wrigley Field that it be sold along with the Cubs. Or heck, maybe we could start a Stadium for the Fans thing going and just charge the new owners the maintenance and upgrade fees :wink: