David Kelton Granted Free Agency

Earth-shattering I know. Here's the link, although I'm guessing it requires a subscription. Wake me when the free agency period begins.


Joe Girardi your new Florida Marlins manager.

I don't know who's going to take a flyer on Kelton, but you can bet it will be another minor-league deal, maybe a spring training NRI if he's lucky. His third year at Iowa was hardly different than his first two, and nothing to write home about: Year AB HR RBI SB BA OBP SLG 2003 442 16 67 8 .269 .338 .446 2004 420 19 68 7 .245 .303 .448 2005 460 11 37 14 .283 .331 .420

I thought it was interesting to hear Girardi was holding off his decision to see what would happen with Baker (per ESPN on a Sportscenter Update).

If Baker were fired or let go when his contract is up after next season, would Girardi still be an option even though he would be under contract witht the Marlins? I don't know the rules, but I would assume that the Cubs would have to be granted permission by the Marlins to talk to him. I also wonder if he got something in his contract that would allow him to leave to take the Cubs job should it open. Just a thought.

I think that only works with colleg athletics, with coachs allowed to go to "dream" jobs.

Lou Pinella was traded. Who knows, maybe we could send Dusty Baker and Corey Patters for Jeremy Hermida and Joe Girardi

Meanwhile, back at the (Mesa) ranch KKKorey is working on his swing.

He could leave if the Marlins gave the Cubs permission to talk to him. Chances are some sort of settlement of his contract would need to be done between the Cubs and Marlins though if they ended up hiring him. I'm guessing he's not getting paid all that much anyway. Just cause Girardi wants the job doesn't mean he's even on Hendry's radar. See how the Marlins do first this year, they certainly should have enough talent to compete this year.

"Lou Pinella was traded. Who knows, maybe we could send Dusty Baker and Corey Patters for Jeremy Hermida and Joe Girardi" The rules have since changed - you may no longer trade a manager.

Girardi is taking the Marlins job and word had it from ESPN Radio that Cubs upper management weren't ever considering Girardi as a future manager of the Cubs....At least that is one good move they did.

Also, I am sure that the Marlins talked to Girardi about this situation of leaving to go to another job ASAP. I am sure he told them he will stay. Even so, the Marlins have him under contract and he can't manage anywhere else unless they relinquish that. I guess some Cubs fans just won't get past thinking of ways to get rid of a manger and instead focus on the much larger picture of trying to get fundamental, healthy, good defensive, headsy players on our roster, which Hendry hasn't exactly done much of lately.

weren't ever considering Girardi as a future manager of the Cubs....At least that is one good move they did. If your report is right then it wouldn't it have been a classy move to let Girardi know that? Instead he's been holding out hope for some reason.

What good does it do for Cub fans to concentrate on getting good players? Since when do we influence Jabba the Hendry?

CWTP: "If your report is right then it wouldn't it have been a classy move to let Girardi know that?" Maybe they did. But also, the Cubs have a manager under contract, AND have been talking about an extenstion with him the the GM, so what would make Girardi think he was next in line anyways?? I think he was holding out for the NYY job and as soon as Torre said he was coming back, he said OK to the Marlins.

Thanks for the dose of reality cubswinthepennant.... hehehe

CWTP: "What good does it do for Cub fans to concentrate on getting good players? Since when do we influence Jabba the Hendry?" Well the same can be said as to when do Cubs fans influence Dusty Baker? Fans have very little influence on anything, so should that mean we should concentrate on nothing? The most important thing for the Cubs right now (besides the CHW losing the WS) is to start getting the kind of players that I described above in order to finally build a Championship tyeam.

Don't mind Manny, he's sensitive to the idea of his boyfriend getting fired.

Thanks Big John Stud!! More classy personal attacks...making Ruz and the TCR community very proud.

It sounds like someone wants to get players that don't need to be managed. I don't see why we need a manager if he does no managing. Or better put, I don't think we need Baker to say "go get 'em." It's easier to blame things on the players than improve them. Dusty does it all the time so I'm not surprised to see it show up like this. Maybe we should just get cheap players who don't need coaching who will all put up MVP numbers? Then Dusty could relax and focus on being witty in the newspaper. This is all Hendry's fault! Fire him!!!

I've been waiting all day for someone to say, "Oh my G-d, we protected him for no reason and Andy Sisco is gone forever!"

in 6 years we can get sisco back in free agency, come on!!!!

actually 5 I suppose if they don't send him back down in the next few years.

re: #18 manny, i think after subjecting the readership of this blog to seeing "IN DUSTY WE TRUSTY!!!!!!" in big bold letters with exclamation points literally hundreds of times you're going to have to learn to take a few digs. For me it's became the cyber-equivalent of sitting next to Ronnie Woo Woo Wickers at a game. just saying.

Amen, man. I can take someone who's annoying, but someone who's annoying and whiny is something altogether different.

Bob Brenly in tonight's game: 'You've got to score one (run) before you can score three.' This is with 2 men on base. I guess things could be worse than having Dusty as manager.

Well, if I have to deal with the childish, personal attacks, you guys will have to deal with me whining about them. And oh yeah, JACK, I see how posting "IN DUSTY WE TRUSTY!!!", is equal to getting personally attacked. Thanks!!

is it even possible to get "personally attacked" on an anonymous internet forum? didn't mean to stir. but, in my non malicious opinon, "IN DUSTY WE TRUSTY!!!!!!!!" is annoying. that's all.

"I guess some Cubs fans just won't get past thinking of ways to get rid of a manger and instead focus on the much larger picture of trying to get fundamental, healthy, good defensive, headsy players on our roster, which Hendry hasn't exactly done much of lately." So batting Perez and KPat in the top of the order and playing Macias is NOT Baker's fault when he could have played Fontenot, Cedeno and Murton? C'mon. The Cubs team is flawed, yes, no argument from ANYONE on this board, however, Dusty has to go.

Jack- It may be annoying to you, but I haven't posted it at the end of my psots in like a year and only posted it when the Cubs won, which wasn't that much. So I guess small things annoy you. sorry...


Mazzone to the Orioloes?!?! Now we'll see what he's made of. And Atlanta without him... Yes, go 'Stros!

Jimbo, you're on to something. While Manny wouldn't admit it himself, he's finally saying what I and others have been saying for more than a year: Hendry needs to put together a near perfect "Dusty-Proof" team for the Cubs to have a chance at a championship. Its a shame too, Hendry came pretty close in 2004, but even that talent-loaded team wasn't good enough to overcome consistant mismanagment.

GO CUBS GO....GO CUBS GO.....HEY CHICAGO WHAT DO YOU SAY...THE CUBS ARE GONNA WIN TODAY. I"m not sure what's wrong with me, but I'm a bit delerious now that it's not a Sox/Cards World Series. Can't wait till next year, the world is not over.

Bleeding Blue: "While Manny wouldn't admit it himself, he's finally saying what I and others have been saying for more than a year: Hendry needs to put together a near perfect "Dusty-Proof" team for the Cubs to have a chance at a championship. Its a shame too, Hendry came pretty close in 2004, but even that talent-loaded team wasn't good enough to overcome consistant mismanagment." HA HA Where to start???? No, I will not admit that a team needs to be "Dusty proof" and implying that is what I am saying is of course putting words in my mouth. And in 2004, the team was nicely assembled except for two MAJOR things: INJURIES and bullpen. Both which together cost the team a playoff berth. Of course with revisionist history and all, people say the injuries and bullpen wasn't all that bad. But hey, everyone on here has their agendas and will spin things to fit what they want.

So Mazzone was truly availible and the Cubs weren't in the running??? Hendry signs Rothschild for another year instead of making a run at Mazzone. Get Madddux to make a call and see if he would be interested at least. Rothschild was here before Baker, so he is not one of his boys, so i am sure hendry had the final say here. Hendry must go.......

Wow, kudo's to the Orioles management. They have alot of young arms in the rotation (Damn good arms) and what better way to groom them than to go out and get the best pitching coach in the game. Meanwhile back on the ranch......-crickets- As for a Dusty proof team. That would require Giles, Manny, Furcal and a bullpen made up of Wagner and BJ Ryan. Oh and a bench with Nomar, Paul Konerko, and I don't know.....Barry Bonds. That is about what it would take to Dusty proof a team to keep him from going to his tired washed up veterans that do nothing but suck. Not just suck but suck far below the league average. Oh and did I mention bat in the 1st two spots in the order on a regular basis? Basically it is impossible to Dusty proof a team, injuries happen and our fearless leader will always choose the worst option. Happy times! Congrats to the Sox and Astro's, should make an interesting World Series. Great pitching matchups. I would like to see Houston win and Clemens go out in style. I would like to see the Whitesox win also to embarrass the Cubs franchise even more. Before we could look to Boston and the Whitesox and go, "Hey they are in the same boat as us." If the Whitesox win, we are all alone in the boat and the waterfall is coming up quickly.

What waterfall? What the hell are you talking about, MikeC? What's going to happen in 2008 if we haven't won a World Series in 100 years? Sox fans will make fun of us? They do that anyway, always have and always will. It makes the world go 'round.

"So Mazzone was truly availible and the Cubs weren't in the running??? Hendry signs Rothschild for another year instead of making a run at Mazzone. Get Madddux to make a call and see if he would be interested at least. Rothschild was here before Baker, so he is not one of his boys, so i am sure hendry had the final say here. Hendry must go......." - B I T C H - S L A P!!!!

"Hendry signs Rothschild for another year instead of making a run at Mazzone. " Mazzone would not have come here with Baker as a lame duck manager. He is very closer friends with Sam Perlazzo who just signed a 3 year deal to manage the Os. That's the main reason why I think he is leaving the comfort he has with Cox. He didn't take the Boss' money. We didn't even call him (assumedly), since we probably knew he wouldn't consider it. Now if we cleaned house, and hired a manager that Mazzone wanted to work for, that would be another story. But that will have to wait at least one more year.

I'm tired of these personal attacks. I'm tellinggggg! Ruzzzzz!

This whole organization is messed up. There is enough blame to go around for everyone from the Trib down to Gene Clines. To blame just Dusty, I'm no fan, is to blame a driver who veers off the road but before he hits a wall the car breaks down. I will say it again get rid of Wood, get a few starters, a bullpen, get an entire new outfield and a shortstop and then lets complain about the manager. Unless Mazzone is also a surgeon on par with Dr. Jobe I don't know how he can help this pitching staff.

Like I said Manny, I know you wouln't admit it, and I am putting words in your mouth. But you're making the same argument that I and others have been making about a Dusty-Proof team. You think Jim Hendry needs a team has overwhelming talent and doesn't need any coaching. I agree. As long as Dusty is manager, Hendry needs to put together a team that will overcome at least 5 losses a year because of mismanagment, with players that already have perfect fundementals and mechanics, because we all know the manager and coaching staff will do nothing about the problems players on the team already have. As far as 2004 goes, go back and look at the threads from August and September, you'll quickly see where the revisionist history is coming into play. At the time I told you repeatedly how frustrating it was to see that team piss away game after game, in large part because I knew it would take a very long time to get that level of talent on one Chicago Cubs team again.

Mazzone has a pretty good track record of keeping his starters healthy by making his pitchers more efficient. You know actually having his starters get through 6-7 innings on 70-80 pitches. Unlike the Cubs staff who goes 6 innings on 120 pitches. I wouldn't mind Mazzone bringing his, don't hold the runners on base philosophy, it is not like Michael Barrett has a chance in hell of throwing out anyone anyways. Oh and the waterfall is the 100 year anniversary. I am not sure about other sports but the Cubs could be the first franchise in America to achieve that infamous legacy. If the Cubs win before the 100 year mark it wont be that big of an issue. But if we go past the 100 year mark it will be something that will never be forgotten. It will be a stain on the franchise. Now to some of you 97 or 100 years doesn't mean much, it is just a few years difference. But it is a matter or pride. Everything in this organizations power should be done to prevent that from happening. Not only will the Cubs be the "Lovable Losers" but they will also be known to every sports fan as the team that went a 100 years and still couldn't figure it out. Like I said we could always pat Boston and the Whitesox on the back and say hey, you guys suck pretty hard also over the years. 80+ years? We know your pain. There was comfort in knowing other fans we pretty much in the same situation. If the Whitesox win, their is no franchise even remotely close to the situation we are in.

injuries... .300-.320ob% hitters...poor bullpens...poor bench and injury backups... who knew all that could solve that would be a manager change?

Perlazzo was Mazzone's best man. Dusty/Hendry could not have gotten Mazzone.

So Mazzone was truly availible and the Cubs weren't in the running??? Hendry signs Rothschild for another year instead of making a run at Mazzone. Get Madddux to make a call and see if he would be interested at least. Rothschild was here before Baker, so he is not one of his boys, so i am sure hendry had the final say here. Hendry must go....... - as x said, learn the facts next time. Mazzone and Perlozzo are close friends and Mazzone's deal is the same length as Perlozzo's. "Mazzone, 57, and Orioles manager Sam Perlozzo grew up together in Cumberland, Md. Perlozzo was the best man at Mazzone's wedding" http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/article... A valiant blind attempt to bash Hendry though.....of course no worse than the valiant blind attempts to bash Baker that float around here as well.

dlee, aram (missed 1 month), walker (missed appx 2 months), barrett (cant play everyday) were the only .800 ops hitters on the club. garciaparra didnt quite make it, but came on strong late...too bad he missed all but 2 months or so of the season. now look at who the backups for these guys are...hairston was the only backup worth a damn and he got his playing time. still...he was no pimp himself, just very servicable. he played for walker and he played for patterson once patterson sucked it up. as far as CF goes...it was hairston or macias...take your choice. no one has the arm for RF but burnitz no matter how you wanna shuffle it or believe for some reason ben grieve/etc. could play there. the bullpen was...well...we all saw what that was...and it wasnt latroy hawkins 19 stupid innings that killed the pen. 19 innings...19. the whole pen took turns blowing crap until the dumpster came along. as far as the arguement that the dumpster should have been closer all along...i wanna know where that logic comes from. look at dempster's historical #s. until this season, his WORST pitching period is pitches 1-15. now what about that screams "this guys can close"? a lot of his closer heat came from the injury concerns upon comeback vs. questions of his durability. now to me...all of this seems a bit more important of a factor than some coaches and a manager...and that's just this year. 2004 was a lot more messy.

Hehe. Nice to see that not much has changed and that the regulars here (and the Cubs franchise too!) still hold true to form. We'll get em next year, boys...

Jim Hendry was pretty adamant during training camp that Ryan Dempster should be the Opening Day closer. Dusty overruled Hendry, and then refused to remove Hawkins from the 9th inning role, even as Hawkins was blowing saves at an MLB-record pace. Ultimately, Hendry had to pry Hawkins from Dusty's hands. I'll say this - Dusty's lineup cards for 2006 had better come pre-printed with "M. Murton, LF" in the 2-spot. That's one small Dusty-proofing step we could take...

Ok Crunch...we get it. It wasn't JUST Dustbuster's fault that the Cubs stunk this year. No doubt about it. But he sure did insist on playing the immortal Todd Hollandsworth in LF, which weakened the Cubs in LF (hitting .197 in June)and on the bench, where Holly would have been an asset. He insisted on hitting K-orey leadoff the first 2 1/2 months...running out Neifi effing Perez in the 1-2 spots, where he just SUCKED from mid-May to August(great April and August)...I won't mention Macias, as he "only" had 177 AB's, which is 100 too many....(I know that too, that "Macias just isn't important")...also for just being pig-headed in getting Murton into the line-up during July-August...for just blantantly ignoring Ronny Cedeno....who isn't a savior, but, being 10 years younger and $2 million cheaper than Neifi, has to be considered, at least as a better option. I can't even talk about his management of the arsonists we called a bullpen...using Wuertz on consecutive days(knowing he struggles this way), bringing in Novoa with men on base(here comes a walk or 2)...and the whole Lefty-Righty mismanagement with Remlinger..... Christ, the Cubs wouldn't have won the pennant with a different manager, but I'd bet on 5-7 more wins....

the whole pen took turns blowing crap until the dumpster came along. as far as the arguement that the dumpster should have been closer all along...i wanna know where that logic comes from. I posted this at BCB a few weeks back... [Hendry] †"We are going to give Ryan Dempster an opportunity to do [be the closer] in spring training, if nothing else changes. LaTroy Hawkins did a terrific job in the eighth last year and didn't have quite as much luck in the ninth. In fairness to him, with Joe Borowski and Kyle Farnsworth being hurt, Hawk was put in a tough situation where he had to be overworked to a degree." However, Dusty Baker is quoted as saying, "Everybody talks about Dempster, but we don't know if he can do it; he never has done it. Joe Borowski might be healthy, we don't know yet. And LaTroy Hawkins might be more experienced than last year. He certainly has the stuff. . . LaTroy will be better if he knows the league himself." Do a google search for articles between Nov-Feb of last year and you get all kinds of talk about Hendry wanting to give Dempster a shot to close. Hendry gives Baker the roster, and then gets out of the way. He put Dempster on the roster, most likely had a discussion with Baker and Rothschild about how he could be an effective closer and the conversation most likely ended there. Same with Murton, called the kid up, said I wouldn't mind if he played and that's the extent of his meddling. He lets his coaches - coach, right or wrong as that may be. I was quite against the Dempster for closer argument at the beginning of the year too, but if you want to bash Hendry for poor bullpen and bench construction, give him his props for signing Dempster for closer duties, cause that's exactly why he did sign him. Baker and staff mucked up that one and I don't know how much clearer that can be.

all this about jim hendry making dumpster the closer dont mean a whole lot. dusty is the manager. ask dave miley what happens when a GM runs the club over the manager. or more importantly ask jiminez, kearns, dunn, mo pena, griffey, and casey. the GM doesnt bark orders down to his manager. if he needs to, he fires the manager and gets a yes-man like beane has out in oakland. hell, let hendry manage...he did pretty well in college. not bad for a highschool teacher anyway. besides...there's not much reason to believe hawkins 19 innings wouldnt have been wasted in the 8th. his 19 innings along with poor 1st halves by almost everyone but ohman really screwed a lot of things up in that pen.

remlinger worked full innings, not loogy situations. the handling of other pen guys like wuertz/novoa/etc...they improved in the 2nd 1/2...what's up with that, eh? and as far as the macias/neifi/etc/etc stuff goes...this goes back to the "look at the replacements" stuff...you got the choice of crap vs. crap. yeah, batting crap up top isnt the wisest move, but hey...you still got crap, period. none of this will change the fact the pen was full of gambles that didnt work...and i dont think there's a coach or manager you can blame for that. the bench was PURE ASS that was totally unprepared for the LF collapse, the CF collapse, or longterm injury to ANYONE...much less 2nd/3rd/SS (especially with SS injury replacement becoming a full-time player). some of you see "bad coaching"...i see bad players.

Good coaches can help take a bad team and get them to play somewhat better. But at the same time the players in the organization have to be willing to listen. Look at the Nationals franchise who very publicly said they as an organization were hacking too much at the plate and were preaching a more controlled approach when batting. This specifically meant seeing more pitches and working counts. The Cubs have the same problem but have you ever heard 1 of them say, "Hey we are trying to change how we approach the batting style of our team?" Not once, not ever. Just throw out a bunch of excuses and praise the team for being agressive. It is like with any alcholic, first you have to recognize the problem before you can fix it. The Cubs are just the drunk idiot who wakes up in the gutter every night and doesn't think he has a problem. Everything is under control.

"But he sure did insist on playing the immortal Todd Hollandsworth in LF, which weakened the Cubs in LF (hitting .197 in June)and on the bench, where Holly would have been an asset." .233avg .283ob% as a pinch hitter? yeah...cubs could use some of that magic. seriously...get over all this "but this over this" and look at WHO is available...that's my point. there was a lot of crap on this team...espeically on the bench and in the pen. the pen was a gamble that didnt work and the bench was full of dead weight unprepared for injury or a collapse of CF/LF. that's how it was constructed and all the chips fell in the wrong direction. i dont see how any manager/coach could polish this turd.

Ok boys, settle down. First of all, I don't often agree with Manny Trillo, but the man has a right to express his opinion without being personally attacked. Lets be a little more mature. Secondly, I think the best thing that could happen to the Cubs is the White Sox winning the World Series. It will put true economic pressure on the Cubs to improve their product or risk losing significant chunks of fan base (and revenue) to the Sox. Thats good for the customer(fans). Last but not least, we had several holes on the 2005 team. I strongly feel that Hendry's plan was to improve the weak spots at the mid season point. He felt he had enough major league ready talent to trade going into the season. The market fooled him. Trades were virtually unavailable. The level of parity kept too many teams in the race and the teams that were out of it had too many suitors. Hendry didn't see it coming. As for how Baker managed, I'd have to say the team still underachieved. This team may not have had the horses to win it all, but should have posted a winning record. Thats two years in a row the team has underachieved on Baker's watch. Hendry has shown a great deal of character and has accepted his share of responsibility, instead of putting the blame on Baker. The biggest challenge the Cubs organization faces is determining where they are and where they're going. I think the 5 yr plan is a thing of the past. They way the game has changed has made a 3 yr plan more realistic. That said, are we at the end of the 3yr plan or starting a new 3 yr plan? The last 3 yr plan was built around the arms of Prior and Wood. The last two years we've seen how fragile those building blocks are. Big Jim has his work cut out for him. I don't think short term contracts to guys like Burnitz is gonna get it done.

"A valiant blind attempt to bash Hendry though.....of course no worse than the valiant blind attempts to bash Baker that float around here as well." The Manager and the GM of a sub-.500 team with a 100mm+ payroll do deserve being bashed. I'm an equal opportunity basher. Hendry gave Dusty a crappy pen and a lineup that we knew lacked fundamentals. Dusty failed to get that team to live up to its own skillset or expectations. Then the players actually failed to deliever. And at the same time, we paid $50 per game to come and see this, and we reupped our season tickets, or we will wait in line to buy them again next year. Nobody should go without blame, from the fans to the players, to the Mgr, the GM, up to the ownership. This isn't about who to lay blame to. It shouldn't be "dusty haters" and "Hendry bashers" and other factions arguing here. There is enough blame to go around the horn. This was a team that was considered by most to be a contender, that finished 10 games out of the Wild Card.

"It will put true economic pressure on the Cubs to improve their product or risk losing significant chunks of fan base (and revenue) to the Sox." That's an interesting question... Will it? What % of the Cubs fans will choose to stick with the Cubs if they become, over an extended period of time, a significantly inferior product? Will attendance drop below 3mm? Will people stop watching WGN? Will they stop funding the ownership? Cuz only then will things change. I am not sure if the majority of the Cubs fans have the intestinal fortitude to do what it might take to convince the franchise that they need to change from being all about filling the park, and selling more beer to about winning championships? I think the franchise is morally bankrupt, chosing profit over victory, (I know - 100mm payroll, but the team generates so much more revenue than nearly any other franchise that 100mm is relatively not as much as it is absolutely.) and will be such until the paying fanbase sends a message. I know we criticize Sox fans for not filling their park. It is shameful to them that they had such a great year and only sold 2.3mm seats. But I'd like to start seeing some empty seats at Clark and Addison. It might put pressure on this team to stop looking for fan favorites and for profit maximization and start doing more of the things that win baseball games.

From article on USA Today.com by bob Nightengale on the Yankees retooling for 2006. "Bernie Williams won't return, not even in a part-time role. The Yankees simply don't want him around, know that Torre would start playing him every day." Hmm. Sound familar?

Sorry-- The quote should say--..."knowing that Torre would start playing him every day."

All you have to know about not showing up is that they are adding about 2000 seats to the bleachers this year. This is a business, not a beer league. They only care about the dollar, Wrigley bought this team to sell gum, and the Trib bought it to sell papers and WGN. And there is your 100 years of ineptness.

Anyone can have a bad century.

i agree with MikeC on the Cubs' organization-wide lack of smart hitting. It's really remarkable that they can go year after year, decade after decade and assemble the same type of team. Powerful and slow with a profound inability at the top of the lineup to reach base. You look at the Dopiraks, Harveys and Pies who strikeout once every 4 or 5 PAs and walk once every 14 to 23 PAs and you wonder if these guys are even being coached. Thank God Murton came over at the age he did. If he spent four years in the Cub system he'd probably end up in a straight-jacket banging his head on a wall. But what can you say about an organization's ability to produce position players when that organization hasn't been able to pencil in, for any decent amount of time, a home-grown regular third baseman or second baseman since Santo and Hubbs? It's mindboggling when you think about it. You'd think that they just would have ended up with one by mistake at some point.

and the Trib bought it to sell papers and WGN If I only had a brain... http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/q... 52 week performance (down from $44 to $31; down 30%) The Tribune as a publicly traded company has been a short sellers dream the last year, look at that 1 yr chart. The Cubs don't amount to a hill of beans regarding that large a company but if the Cubs were run poorly and the company as a whole was run well, some heads would be rolling (can you spell McFail). McFail's gang is doing about as well as any other portion of the Tribune as a whole (not a good thing)...slightly below mediocre, with mediocre products. Mediocre equates in baseball terms to .500, does it not? The Cubs as a business are a no brainer, run by no brains (it runs itself but only the high level management make money on this company). Hoping the White Sox success motivates them to do better is like peeing into the wind and expecting to feel relieved (but realizing you're still particularly smelly).

At this point I think its down right foolish to blame the Trib for the Cub's shortcomings. They have done nearly everything they could to build a winner. If you want to blame the McFails (intentional) and Hendry's for getting the wrong types of players or making bad deals, fine. But you cannot accuse any organization that spends 100 million on payroll for not trying to win. What more do you want from them?

OK that was strange.

"look at that 1 yr chart." [shakes head] "The Cubs don't amount to a hill of beans regarding that large a company " That's just not true...not if you look at the impact they have on other TRB businesses, and the significant gain on the purchase price of the assett when put in the diversification, yet synergize strategy that TRB has. They make money at a rate far higher than any other TRB business. The Newspaper business suck right now. I'm not crying for the poor old Tribune corp.

"But you cannot accuse any organization that spends 100 million on payroll for not trying to win. What more do you want from them?" I want them to spend proportionally to the net income.

Are you kidding? That is no way to run a business. If you can build a championship team on 100,000,00 then why spend a nickel more? That is ridiculous!

BIG JOHN STUD: "B I T C H - S L A P!!!!" ANOTHER classless attack on TCR. I think you just took the lead for the year. I wonder what Ruz or the "writers" will give you as an award if you hold onto the lead. CONGRATS!!!!

Well clearly the Cubs have proven that they don't know how build a championship team on 100,000,000. And so did the Red Sox, for that matter.

Bleeding Blue: "You think Jim Hendry needs a team has overwhelming talent and doesn't need any coaching." HA HA WHERE did I say this??? I want Hendry to sign players who know how to play good defense, can stay healthy, run the bases well and perform the fundamentals that they should of learned in Little League. Not too much to ask I think... if you want to call it aq Dusty proof team, then those are your words, but I think ANY team would like those players no matter the manager.

Rob G.: "as x said, learn the facts next time. Mazzone and Perlozzo are close friends and Mazzone's deal is the same length as Perlozzo's." So how is Mazzone close to Torre?? And where did he come out and say he was going to only interview at places where he was close with the manager? It was worth a shot to at least bring him in and talk. But they wanted to keep Rothschild...

CARMEN FANZONE and X- Great back to back #56 and #57 posts. I pretty much agree with them totally...Except for wanting the White Sox to win to get the Trib more motive to win.

Froze, I never said that they know how to do it. I proposed the concept of not needing to spend more than that in order to win.

if you want to call it aq Dusty proof team, then those are your words, but I think ANY team would like those players no matter the manager Sure, any team would like a group of players that don't need to be coached. The difference, other team find ways to win without a perfect team. Its nice to say "get players who know fundamentals that should be learned in little league." Guess what, if your boss doesn't care how you do your job, after a while you start cutting corners. Sure there will be individuals that are better or worse at fundamentals than others, but there's a reason why certain teams are known as fundamentally sound ballclubs. Dusty's teams make excuses as to why its not the manager or coaches fault when groups of players make the same mistakes over and over. Which is why we agree that Hendry's in the position of finding a team of perfect "Dusty-Proof" players that don't need coaching.

"ANOTHER classless attack on TCR. I think you just took the lead for the year. I wonder what Ruz or the "writers" will give you as an award if you hold onto the lead. CONGRATS!!!!" ANOTHER whiny reply. Ruz and the "writers" are probably "laughing" because they know that I'm "kidding". You, on the other hand, wouldn't know a joke if it SLAPPED you in the face. You're too busy saying the same thing over and over... Hendry should of signed players who are invincible, don't get hurt, run the bases well, play good defense, perform fundamentals they should of learned in little league. Is that too much to ask? You never take Dusty to task. Hendry admitted he didn't make the right moves last winter... Dusty on the other hand is a fuckin' excuse machine. He points the finger anywhere he can and still lives under the illusion that he's one of the top managers in the game. His arrogance is disgusting. A good manager makes the best of what they have. Dusty makes excuses.

How do you know he didn't ask? Maybe the Braves only gave permission to AL teams, maybe Mazzone hates Baker, maybe Baker hates Mazzone, maybe Mazzone stole Hendry's girlfriend in college, maybe he only interviewed with the Yanks cause they were going to make him independently wealthy or needed some leverage so the O's didn't lowball him? maybe hendry knew that mazzone had no interest in coming here and the cubs would never approve the cost it would take to buy out his Braves contract and get him here for a manager that may or may not want him. maybe, just maybe hendry didn't feel the need to waste time on something that had no hope of ever happening and is choosing to spend his time trying to improve the team in ways that are possible, rather than putting on a show to make Cubs fan happy. But no, you're probably right, the only possible conclusion in this scenario is that Hendry wants Rothschild and no one else. That's why he gave Rothschild permission to interview with another team and instead of trying to match the Tigers mutiple year offer, he stuck to the original one year contract. Cause he really wanted Rothschild back no matter what. (sarcasm) And let's also not forget that Baker asked for the entire coaching staff to come back next year. I don't recall him mentioning anything about not including Rothschild in that deal. Does anyone else?

Chad, Fair enough, but when you have the resources at your disposal, why limit yourself to an arbitrary figure simply because other teams have shown it feasible to do so and win. If the Cubs can't win with a $100 mill payroll, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't go out and spend $130 million--they can certainly afford it and still turn a huge profit. It's not bad business to spend money as long as you are still profitable and especially when you can project future profits from spending money now. And if the Cubs were to win the world series, that would undoubtedly create a lot of dollars down the line through merchandising and future fans. Of course, the accountants running the team won't see it the same way, but that's just because unlike the Yankees and Red Sox (and I think the Angels under Arte Moreno as well), they want to try to put a monetary value on winning and accountants don't understand opportunity cost like economists.

The Sox Won the Pennant shit

"It's not bad business to spend money as long as you are still profitable and especially when you can project future profits from spending money now. And if the Cubs were to win the world series, that would undoubtedly create a lot of dollars down the line through merchandising and future fans. " I would propose to you that as long as fans keep showing up, they won't see any reason to spend the extra 30mm as they won't make more than that back. Remember merchandising isn't Cubs profit, it is MLB profit and redistributed evenly as revenue sharing. It is extra concessions/vending money, but that's limited too. "the accountants running the team won't see it the same way" That's the problem with corporate ownership (Tribune Corp) vs individual ownership. An individual may put value on winning. A corporation and its board has a fiduciary obligation first to its shareholders, not to the fans of the team.

If the Cubs can't win with a $100 mill payroll, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't go out and spend $130 million Just from a business and advertising sense. The Cubs viewership locally has shut down from about late August. Not being in a playoff race loses sponsors from the exposure they hoped for and possibly next year advertising if the ads don't get eyes/ears. The free press in the media for the pennant drive and playoffs is "in credit card terms"...PRICELESS. Not to mention future fan base that isn't garnered because some fella's 10 year old son did get to go (or in the Cubs case-DIDN"T get to go) to a playoff or World Series game. That fan development is also...PRICELESS.

I've been posting here for about 3 years now. I had to take a break in September from here because it was an awful season. I figured I would come back much later when cooler heads prevailed. I obviously came back too soon. First off, my best friend is a Sox fan. Aside from all the arguments we have had, he made it a point to mention we are bitter fans now. The thing is--he's right. We may not all get along, or like each other--but we are all here because we all love the Cubs. Yes, we will disagree on players, managers, or whatever. Respect everybody's opinion. For one, nobody is right or wrong. There's no way to prove the Cubs would be better without Baker. In fact, this team couldn't beat our Iowa team 3 or 4 years ago before Baker. So there's a fair argument to be made whether it is Baker or the players. The point is the beauty of it is we can argue. It shouldn't be personal. We have lost some guys who gave good input because of this crap. We have others that no longer post because they don't want to get lynched for posting their opinion. I assume we are all adults here, so let's start acting like it. Let's go back to the fans we were before 2005. Let's not become fans like those of the Raiders, White Sox, etc where everyone hates us. I'll step off my soap box now. Play on. Mazzone was not going to come to the Cubs. If the word is true, Mazzone made up his mind a while ago when Perlozzo was hired full time. Second, I honestly don't think the amount of money that is spent makes a difference. It is how you spend it. This team needs a lead off hitter, and bullpen help. After that, I would prefer another starting outfielder and another starting pitcher.

For all Mazzone backers here are a few names you might want to keep in mind: Kerry Litenberg John Rocker Mark Wohlers All these guys devloped Rick Anikel diease under Mazzone. If Mazzone was perfect why couldn't they get a closer during the early to mid 90's. NO pitching or hitting coach is perfect and they are held hostage to their talent.

Big John Stud: "You're too busy saying the same thing over and over..." And you don't...HA HA

and they are held hostage to their talent. and he didn't fix Farnsy when the spotlight was on him this fall. Same old, same old. on another topic... It sure is sickening that sports talk radio in this town has become unlistenable. Given the playoffs and WSCR becoming an outlet for the sux next year, they've gone off my dial...they've become a wall to wall wsox advertising outlet, with only one cub fan on the air and they put him in the worst possible time slot. I'm sure that was part of the Reinsdorf effect too.

Brian (Vegas)- Great post...hopefully those personal attackers start respecting everyone so we can have a civil discussion about the Cubs. If not, more people will leave. Obviously people just ignoring these personal attackers doesn't work as that is what some have suggested, but they continue to attack people. They need to be called out and exposed. Again, Brian, good post.

lame What a fucking whino. I've never seen someone who kept coming back for more self induced punishment and then complains b/c of it. Say something, whine...say something, whine...ad infinitum (latin for all the time - roughly). Go ahead and talk shit all the time, whine for someone to come save you - whine after they do - whine after they don't - whine b\c you like it - and that's why. Any attention is better than no attention.

Back to money again. Why should the Cubs spend more money when they don't have to. Steiny proved that it takes more than a deep pocket to win a World Series. The Astros + the Sox payroll is less than the Yanks. I think that you can assemble a fine team for 100 mil and win a championship. lets get a couple more bullpen arms and either a left fielder or short stop that can put up numbers. I could live with Neifi at short if we had ManRam in left. OR, I would be happy with Murton in left IF we had a healthy Nomar at short.

Of course Mazzone isn't perfect, but there's little doubt on the positive influence he puts on a pitching staff and his track record of turning marginal pitchers into above average pitchers for their time in Atlanta is outstanding. I know Rob Neyer did a respectable study on this awhile ago and came to the conclusion that Mazzone deserved to be in the HOF. I think the closer issues Atlanta has is an organizational philosophy. Have they ever paid big money for one? Smoltz, but he was converted from a starter to help save his shoulder/elbow woes and the money was already spent. Rocker was pretty good for awhile, but didn't his falloff coincide with his unfortunate remarks? Wohlers had some good seasons too before some serious arm troubles I believe. The one myth about Mazzone is that he keeps pitchers healthy. I know I read a pretty good study that this really wasn't the case. He probably has a slightly better track record than most organizations, but it's nothing compared to let's say the A's, who for a few years didn't have any organizational arm injuries and only have had a few since Peterson left. (Obliques, backs and hips are another story) A few Mazzone examples... Hampton Wohlers (was it an arm injury or the Leyritz HR? I forget) Smoltz Avery Odalis Perez John Thomson I know there's many more.... Here's one article (not the one I was thinking of) that debunks the Mazzone myth a bit http://longgandhi.com/091105.html not sure i agree with it, but interesting stuff.

Felix Pie's first outing... -- Dominican Winter League - TM PLAYERS AB R H RBI BB SO AVG CHC F. Pie CF 4 2 2 1 1 1 .500 - 2B, 3B

Thanks for your opinion Jumbo. But I wouldn't have to be a "whino" if some posters didn't feel the need to personally attack or be immature with their posts. The easy way to get me to stop whining is to get those to stop attacking....GOOD LUCK with that.

wow i have been posting on this site forÖa month maybe? i gotta say it does seem like some guys get excited over nothing. somebody says your post was way off or puts a word or two in your mouth? jeez, big fucking deal! what would be the point if everybody had no reaction to what others posted? is there a law that says you must only make positive and encouraging commentary regarding the posts of others? donít you guys that go way overboard in your reactions (and you know who you are) have any drinking buddies or friends that you watch sportscenter with? you know, sitting on the couch talking shit over a cold one, shooting holes in eachothers opinions and theories regarding the sporting life? do you fly off the handle at your buddy when he tells you youre full of shit because you think we should keep nomar or whatever? do you fly off the handle if your buddy calls you a fag or says you need a bitch-slap cuz you like our chances with orton, or say benson needs more carries? of course fucking not, because youre buddies! thatís the thing i see here, is an unneeded nastiness that you just donít see when buddies are just talking about the sporting life (in this case the cubs). i donít completely agree with brian(vegas), because while i donít think it necessary to make so called ìattacksî on individuals, i think when you say things like ìlets all be adults hereî and all that, youre forgetting were talking about a kids game that people get riled up over and take very seriously, and sports fans are prone to give their buddies shit over stuff. so hey, what I guess im trying to say is, donít take shit so fucking personal cuz its all in good fun, try to keep in mind the ìbuddies just talking shitî mentality, and when somebody says you need a bitch slap over what you said, fucking let is slide for chrissakes its just a fucking jibe you fucking weenie! by the way, how many of you have an autographed picture of you and Ernie Banks shaking hands? i do, biyaaaaatch.

Well Cubby I wish I was sitting next to you watching SportsCenter so I could B-I-T-C-H SLAP you because your post is nothing but STUPIDTY. ***Hey if there is nothing wrong with it, I am going to start doing it too. It is only a joke anyways, right, so just let it slide. :)

Chad- I do agree with you that $100 million should be enough for Hendry to play with to get a championship team. As long as the Trib continues to let him have a payroll in the top 10, money shouldn't be much of an issue. He just needs to fill the clearly defined holes that we all see. Hopefully he can with players that don't get hurt.

Cubster, If you are going to give a pitching coach credit for Drunk Tightpants you should be praising Bob Cluck. Farns pitched well for DET before getting traded. The way people talk about Mazzone is ridicious. Lets say Mazzone was our pitching coach last year would we have been a .500 team?

if the cubs get to play with the 16m that was sitting in baltimore via sosa they didnt get to count toward their "100m team" they could have a hell of a team. hell, imagine what the 05 club would have been with that 16m...a "real" LF'r and a pimp reliever minimum. then again they'd probally find a way to both get injured and miss 2/3rd of the season =p

Yeah crunch....say $12 million for a real stud LF and $4 million for a stud reliever. That would of solved many ills. But like you said, they would of been injured anyways, so it doesn't matter :)

i think somebody mentioned how cubs teams of not too long ago couldnt even beat the iowa cubs, and i agree, not literally, but on that our current situation is WAY better than it used to be. though there has been some let-down considering the expectations, its much more enjoyable being picked by people to contend for the playoffs rather than being expected to finishing 5th before opening day has even come. we might not always make good on the predictions, but i for one like being among those considered to be in contention. i think the current trend is good, going for high profile managers, signing bigger-name talent, getting rid of fan favorites not projected to help us any further ala sammy, etc. i think we just need to be patient and that 100Mil will prove to be enough. regarding rooting for the sox or the stros, i think i like what lovie smith said, about if the sox can win one, then maybe itll bring some good mojo to the city and start a championship run for the bears, bulls, and cubs to follow as well. i mean its just something the guy said, but hey, thats positive thinking for you and i like it. what do the cubs and their fans have to lose if the sox win it? is it really that bad? im not a sox hater because simply i dont really care one way or another what happens in the junior circuit aside from it being good baseball entertainment, and frankly im too busy hating the goddam cards, mets (yep, i STILL hate the mets) and the rest of the NL central. to be honest though, i got what i wanted when the damn stros beat the fucking cards, and i want houston to lose more than i want the sox to win, cuz hey, SCREW the houston astros dammit. im definitely NOT going to say "go sox" though, the hell with that bullshit.

Wow guys, I think Manny needs a hug... Somebody spit in his face.

I thought AZ Phil mentioned a little while ago that the Cubs had some moves they needed to make within 10 days of the end of the regular season. Has anyone heard of the moves they made?? Or was the deadline wrong. Thanks!!

Cubby post #93. You said it better than I ever could. Great post dude. Some people just want to try and control what others post and say.

seriously, though...if it doesnt matter if people put words in your mouth i guess it doesn't matter if you want to have credibility or not. if you got very little to say but ranting, it doesn't matter much. if you try to pass on real-life info along with your opinions, it kinda matters. ive let things pass...ive taken some things to task. believe me, ive definately not called out every piece of "drama" thrown at me. you let some things go...you take some things on. i guarentee if i put words in any of you guy's mouths enough you'd get tired of it, too. no, im not saying im being picked on. no, im not trying to shut anyone up. im just dealing with reality. if you call someone out you should expect a responce anyway, especially if you're assuming things or calling names. if its every time or when you've had enough crap, it dont matter much. everyone's gonna handle it differently. i've taken on the wrong end of some of these issues myself, and ya know what...ive taken responsibility for it and given appologies when applicable. do i expect everyone or anyone to do what i do? no...this is the internet. people gonna do what they want and im not an ethics teacher. you can only let so many issues pass before you gotta pull the chokechain on a barking dog, imo. it leads to people thinking you're something you're not in some cases...and that can cause a whole lot more "junk" posts than dealing with the issue before it gets too stupid. some people are here to just talk smack...some are here to pass information...some are here to give their opinion...MOST of us are a mixuture of all of this with a bit of others things along side.

The Cubs only needed to make some 40 man roster moves to protect players from being minor league free agents. The list thanks to AZ Phil... Cliff Bartosh Enrique Cruz Nate Frese Talley Haines Mark Johnson David Kelton Casey Kopitzke Kevin McGlinchy Calvin Murray Phil Norton Cody Ransom Brandon Sing Aron Weston The only one I've heard about that was given free agency was Kelton and it didn't seem like an official press release, rather some inside info from Inside the Ivy. The Cubs are either keeping a low profile cause of the White Sox and saving all their news for later OR all those players were free to become minor league free agents. Some may have been immediately resigned to a new minor league deal. I highly doubt the date was wrong because if you check rotoworld a bunch of teams made some 40 man roster moves around that day although a few teams made announcements past the deadline.

once the series ends the minor league (and major leage) FA pools appear. some people get early release, though its not common. chances are no official announcement will come til the series is over. 100K for a pickup...nice time for some gambles. cubs picked up peter bergeron last year...dunno what happened to him. KC picked up emil brown...kaching. not much comes outta it, but hey...100K.

what i hate is the way i felt after the bit on mlb.com about corey working on his swing. the way they give keller credibility by mentioning manny ramirez etc and then quote him saying "absolutely yes" on what he thinks about corey in the bigs. not to say i was swayed to any significant degree in how i feel about the first-pitch wonder right now, which is dump his ass, but just that i even considered for a second that it would be worth it to invest more actual games on him in '06 because of what some "roving instructor" said about him after he has already failed at 1 attempt to get him out of his so called comfort zone or whatever the fuck theyre blaming for his ineptitude. christ i mean nomar came back from his crotch ripping apart, played in 62 games and had 230 at bats, and still had only 4 less rbi and 20 less runs scored than corey in 126g/451ab!! not to mention corey fanning 118 times!!! no, no more. let him be a superstar for somebody else, if it happens, so be it, but im sick of this dude and his "its just a game" bullshit, whether its to psyche himself out of a funk like that shrink said or not. we need more studs like derek lee, todd walker, these guys who think losing fucking SUCKS and the cubs faithful deserve better. i mean, people called this guy the prototype leadoff man with power, and he goes 0 for 4 at-bats having seen 6 total pitches? WHAT!!? and you fucking wonder why normally docile or whatever the hell they brand cubs fans to be are now lustily booing his ass?

"If Mazzone was perfect " Chifan - I missed the part where anyone said he is perfect. Can you go back and find that?

"Well Cubby I wish I was sitting next to you watching SportsCenter so I could B-I-T-C-H SLAP you because your post is nothing but STUPIDTY." That's good fun... Really, I have to think that even if Corey's still around next year that he's the backup plan for CF.

Entering his second arbitration year, that would be a lot of money to pay a guy who very few (if anyone) actually thinks will be able to turn the corner here. The problem is his value is so low right now that I'm not sure the Cubs want to move him either.

It is amazing how stupid some of the posters here are. Posters like Cubby and MikeC and Big John Stud are just cum dumpsters. Spit on MannyTrillo? Maybe you want him to blow a load on you. Man you guys are really big men, calling people names and acting all tough on the internet. Obviously you are trying to make up for the shortcomings in your real life. There should be an age requirement or least a maturity requirement to post here, but TCR must like these kinds of posts and posters as they do nothing about it. By saying nothing they encourage it. I don't agree with everything manny says, but at least be civil. You guys complain that all he does is support Dusty, well many of you only bash Dusty. Sounds hypocritcial to me. I can see why many of the good posters over the past year or so (DC, KJK and others) have left or rarely post here. Bad enviorment when you can't post something without getting ripped.

MANNY T: Ten days after the end of the regular season (every year), any player who qualifies as a "six-year minor league player" becomes a free-agent. Unlike major league free-agents, six-year minor league free-agents do not have to "file" for free-agency. It's automatic. However, just because a minor league player becomes a free-agebnt does not mean he has to sign with a new organization. He can re-sign with the same organization if he so desires (and if his previous organization wants him back). Last year, Jermaine Van Buren (who had been the closer at AA West Tenn in 2004) was a six-year minor league free-agent, but chose to stay with the Cubs organization and signed a AAA contract with Iowa for 2006, probably because he received an invivation to Spring Training with the Cubs as a non-roster player. But even after signing a AAA contract and receiving an invitation to Spring Training, Van Buren still could have been lost in the Rule 5 Draft. But he wasn't. On the other hand, Jim Hendry DID choose to add Will Ohman and John Koronka to the Cubs 40-man last year (on October 13th) before they could become six-year minor league free-agents. Adding Ohman and Koronka to the 40-man roster (instead of trying to sign them to a AAA contract with an inviation to Spring Training as a non-roster player) at that time means either that Hendry could not (unlike Van Buren) get either one of them to agree to a AAA contract, or, that he was not willing to take the chance of losing either of them in last year's Rule 5 Draft even if one or both were willing to sign a 2005 AAA contract. But it's very rare that a GM will add a player who will be a six-year minor league free-agent to the club's 40-man roster after the close of the regular season. It's even more rare when he adds two (as Hendry did last year). Usually, players in this class are brought up to the major league team during the regular season after rosters are expanded on September 1st. This year, Brandon Sing wa eligible to be a six-year minor league free-agent, but has apparently chose to remain with the Cubs organization (though it was not announced), because he was given a "Cubs slot" in the AFL, and players cannot play in the AFL without a "sponsor." The problem is that even though Brandon Sing (like Van Buren last year) must have signed a AAA contract with Iowa for 2006 and probably has already received an invitation to Spring Training with the Cubs as a non-roster player (the list of non-roster invitees to Spring Training is usually not released until sometime in December or January), Sing WILL be subject to the Rule 5 Draft if he is not added to the 40-man roster prior to the 40-man rosters being "frozen" on November 19th (in preparation for the Rule 5 Draft). Hendry is still probably trying to decide which prospects he wants to add to the 40-man roster (he has another month to decide), because he has not announced the namex yet. How Brandon Sing performs in the AFL may go a long way toward deciding whether he gets added to the Cubs 40-man roster. Even if he makes the AFL all star team, there still might not be room for Sing on the 40-man roster, depending on how many slots Hendry decides to leave "open" for "wiggle room" (free-agents and trades). The Rule 5 Draft takes place at the Winter Meetings in December, and during the period of time between the rosters being frozen on November 19th and the Rule 5 Draft, players on minor league rosters cannot be traded, released, or moved up to a 40-man major league roster. Players on 40-man rosters can be ASSIGNED to minor league rosters during this "frozen" period, however. So if a club signs a free-agent sometime between November 19th and the Rule 5 Draft, and has to drop a player from the 40-man roster to make room for the free-agent, a player on the 40-man roster CAN be sent outright to a minor league roster. A couple of years ago, the Cubs acquired Derrek Lee from the Florida Marlins for Hee Seop Choi and a player to be named later (Mike Nannini) during Thanksgiving week. The reason Nannini could not be identified or immediately sent to Florida was because the trade was made during the "frozen" period prior to the Rule 5 Draft, and the Cubs could not actually send Nannini to Florida until the Rule 5 Draft was completed. Nannini COULD have been selected by another club in the Rule 5 Draft, in which case the Cubs and Marlins would have had to agree on a different player as the "player to be named later." Presumably, there was a Plan "B" in place, but it wasn't necessary because Nannini passed through the 2003 Rule 5 Draft without being selected. Another type of roster move that MUST be made within ten days after the close of the regular season (or else the club has to wait until Spring Training, and no more than 25 days prior to the start of the regular season) is the outright assignment of an injured player to the minor leagues. This is per the CBA. Last year, the Cubs assigned Nic Jackson to Iowa the same day they added Ohman and Koronka to the 40-man roster, and they had to do it by that date (or else wait until 25 days prior to the start of the following season) because Jackson was physically unable to play at the end of the 2004 season (he spent most of the year on the West Tenn DL). What is significant about being classified as an "injured player" is that the player can be removed from the 40-man roster and assigned to the minor leagues without having to be placed on irrevocable "outright waivers" (so he cannot be claimed by another club), although such a player is subject to the Rule 5 Draft. One other roster issue that applies to injured players, is that any player who has been optioned to the minor leagues and subsequently spends at least 90 days on a minor league disabled list, is not charged an option year and will receive an additional option year IF the player has less than five separate FULL seasons (minimum 60 days as an active player in each given season) on a major league or minor league roster in a given season. This applies to Angel Guzman, because he spent more than 90 days on the West Tenn DL this year, and was not recalled by the Cubs after September 1st. In only three previous seasons (2002, 2003, and 2004) did Guzman spend at least 90 days as an active player on a minor league roster (he played in "short season leagues" in 2000 and 2001). So he gets a fourth option year, as long as it's used prior to him completing five separate "full seasons" on a major league or minor league roster. So Guzman has used up one option year (2004--he was added to the Cubs 40-man roster in October 2003), and (because he was injured this past season) still has two left. Thus, the Cubs can option Guzman to the minor leagues in both 2006 AND 2007, if necessary and if they so desire. The "fourth option" will probably also apply to David Aardsma, not because of injury, but because he signed a "major league contract" with the Giants after being selected in the 1st Round in the 2003 First Year Player (Rule 4) draft, and was immediately placed on the Giants 40-man roster. He was optioned to the minors in 2004 and 2005, and will presumably be optioned by the Cubs to Iowa next Spring (2006). So 2006 would normally be his third and final option year. But because he will have less than five "full seasons" as an active player (barring injury, "full seasons" in 2004, 2005, and 2006), he will get a fourth option year in 2007 (presuming he is still on the Cubs 40-man roster at that point in time!).

I think we are seeing posters tired of the blind faith MannyTrillo where anyone who critiques the Cubs is not a real Cubs fan. I know we have seen dozens of times Manny question other posters on being a fan because of this. And then we got the my opinion is fact and I what I say is the gospel Crunch. And for both of them anytime anyone picks apart what they say they going off whining and crying like little babies. They can't handle one ounce of disagreement on their viewpoints. It is either their way or the highway. They are also like robots. They both say the same thing over and over and over. Eventually wearing down other posters who simply give up and go away. You can't argue with someone who doesn't even accept anyone elses arguement and dismisses it when 1 little piece of it might not add up but the other 99% of it rings true. I am sure they will have some choice words for me now, but hey I have heard from them over the months and year to already know. I am one of the few people left of the old days of TCR. Before the homers and blind faith people showed up like Crunch and Manny. There was hardly ever any discourse on the boards. We had intelligent conversations and people seriously read what other people said and formed and deformed opinions. Those days are long gone. Never to return. So before people like Cubbiefan spout off at the mouth maybe you shold learn the history of this board to find out where it started going down hill.

Oh and about this putting words in your mouth. Crunch's favorite arguement is, "I don't understand why YOU people (insert subject)." The "YOU people" is all the people who disagree with him. For example lets take the highly controversial subject of Dubois from earlier in the season. "I don't understand how YOU people think Dubois is the answer in LF." That sounds a lot like putting words in the mouth of other posters does it not? You do it with many other arguements but I am just using this example. The people argueing against you never suggested Dubois was ever the answer or the solution. We simply wanted him to get a real shot, good or bad, it didn't matter. But time and time again that point just flew over your head. And you kept come back with the "you people" arguement. I was one of the first people to argue early on that if Dubois was not going to play then the Cubs should bring up the hot hitting Matt Murton from AA. Because I believe you keep trying someone from the minors till you actually find someone who can play regardless of starting their clock. He doesn't have to be the top rated prospect. Some joe blow who no one ever thought would make it to the majors could be your next all-star. But you can never find that out if your going the tired old veteran route. That is all the arguement was for Dubois and the rookies. But time and time again Crunch your arguement was putting words in the mouth of other posters. While you didn't specifically say one certain person you were clearly putting words into the mouth of a whole group of people. But you know what? It is something that never occured to me before. Nor is it something I care about or look for. But now that I look back on it I just see how much of a hypocrite you are Crunch. You have been doing this since you started posting, and you have the balls to accuse me? If I ever put words in your mouth I got a hell of alot of catching up to do with you.

You may want to learn how to spell the word "argument" given the frequency with which you seem to need to use it.

mike... your sorry job of covering your ass is just that...sorry. now you wanna say i'm putting words in other people's mouths? now you wanna change what you think you said about dubois pre-season and ignore the crap you flung on me? now you wanna try to say i'm the guy instigating this? now you come to the realization that you think im a hyprocrite? you need to quit while you're ahead. and you REALLY need to quit putting words in my mouth. if you're not getting your way you need to whipe the snot from your nose and get on with life, especially if you're gonna keep saying how much you dont care. you seem to think you're protecting everyone from me... saying i'm doing it doesn't make it so. your damage control is as weak as your reasoning on this matter. you cannot turn your situation on me...you live with it. you cannot take things you've done and say that i'm the one doing it. quit acting like a damn victim for christ's sake. live with what you've done and move on. don't try to change history to fit the view you want on it. AND YOU NEED TO QUIT TRYING TO DEMONIZE OTHERS IN ORDER TO TAKE THE HEAT OFF YOU. that is just low as hell.

btw... mike, have you noticed that even though you share popular opinions with others you're constantly one of the most embattled persons on this board. before i even posted here i saw mikec vs. ??? wars going on where you lashed out at people for one reason or another. ive also seen you use your "turn the tables" tactic where you counter-accuse someone of what you're being accused of. this is nothing new, dude. and btw, you're the only person who's trying to tell everyone what conspiracy i'm up to as far as me pushing my views on people. your campaign to demonize people dates back before my first post even landed on this board. you can't just attack people like you're some kind of gift to this board and expect people not to call you out for it. just because you want to revise your comments mid-arguement and lay blame on people for calling you out doesn't mean you didnt earn what you're hearing. you're not protecting anyone from me...you're not making people realize things about me...you're not the voice of reason...and you are constantly involved in conflict. im sick of it...deal with it...i gotta deal with you. no one's gonna rescue me from it. hey, you do what you gotta do, but trying to revise history and using selective memory isnt gonna get it done cuz i'll continue to call bullshit on you. quit making stuff up and trying to pin your self-determined psychoanalysis on me...it might help you get a point across if you even care to make one. calling people names and counter-accusing isn't dealing with an issue. why do you think you attract all this conflict anyway? i suggest you go back and read some of your posts and how you respond to percieved threats.

AZ Phil- Thanks for the clarification...like Rob G., just dying for some news and the hot stove to start up.

Is this all because the White Sox are in the series? Usually things don't get testy around here unless the Cubs are mucking about. Although this is the internet and a global community, I was born and raised in the States. So banning, deleting and modyfing comments just isn't in my nature, screams censorship to me personally. Speaking completely for myself, when things go overboard, I'll step in but DO NOT EXPECT and certainly DO NOT ASK that I do something about it.I do not have the time, nor desire, to police a bunch of adults. Okay.... Mike C. and Crunch, your ongoing dialogue about putting words in people's mouth, etc, is tiresome. No one hear wants to read it, so don't waste the space. Neither of you is better than the other, nor are your opinions. I WILL begin deleting those posts if there is nothing baseball related in them. Sorry, but it's for the better of the TCR community. Take it behind closed doors, find a chatroom, email, whatever, okay? We don't care, your not going to shine the light of truth on anything and your obviously not going to change each other's opinions. So knock it off.. For everyone else, keep it civil, no personal attacks, keep it to baseball. You have a problem with some one, either take it behind closed doors or email one of the TCR writers. Stop using this board to push your agendas and one up each other. Alright? Just cause, "I've been saying" so and so since whatever might have made right on one point, doesn't mean your right on the next point, okay? No one here is all-knowing, cause baseball is too darn unpredicatble. I've said my peace, please respect TCR and that it's a community to talk about our favorite team. Our method of cheering and certainly our ideas for what constitutes winning baseball will always differ. Please respect that difference. And please respect each other. You want to change how things work around here, then lead by example, not by contributing to the problems.

Recent comments

Subscribe to Recent comments
The first 600 characters of the last 16 comments, click "View" to see rest of comment.
  • Cubster 1 hour 27 min ago (view)

    The Jared Porter story gets worse and does involve the Cubs...

    "The Jared Porter situation is equally a Cubs and a Mets problem. The Mets need a new GM. The Cubs need to reevaluate themselves as an organization.


  • Cubster 4 hours 16 min ago (view)

    and they are including amusement tax, healthcare costs (Doc Adams doesn't come cheap!), social security and political donations to the City and the Governor of Nebraska. 


  • bradsbeard 4 hours 41 min ago (view)

    It all depends what you count as "payroll." If you include the $11M in Lester and Descalso's buyouts plus the $3M sent in the Darvish trade you get to somewhere like $145M. If you include the $15M in estimated share of player benefits, you get to $160M. I think that last year, including player benefits, they were slated to be up around $205M for MLB payroll before the pandemic. 


  • crunch 14 hours 24 min ago (view)

    not sure, but i think it's around 130-135m right now even with bryant/baez/contreras still on board...including the 3m to set darvish free and other random $$ expenses on the roster.

    tack on another 3-4m for happ when that gets settled....plus other odds/ends that have a chance to make the roster (s.miller, a.morgan, j.holder, etc) and other pre-arbitration guys...

    cubs still need someone to back up contreras (if he sticks around, which i wouldn't be surprised to see him stick around)...not sure if taylor gushue is gonna be that guy and m.amaya is too young.


  • George Altman 15 hours 14 min ago (view)

    Seriously, what's the 2021 payroll number? Currently at approximately $165M and after they trade Bryant, Baez, & Contreras  - $130M. Is that it, $135-140M.


  • crunch 15 hours 18 min ago (view)

    Q to the angels...supposedly 1/8m


  • crunch 1 day 13 min ago (view)

    pete ricketts (the governor of Nebraska ricketts) is a key part of an anti-gambling Nebraska group called "Gambling With The Good Life" that actively lobbied their open legislature...including a speech by pete...to keep gambling illegal in Nebraska.

    he last spoke for the group to the state government in-session 3 months ago.

    ...it's also worth mentioning all of this is separate from the Draft Kings/Wrigley Field deal that flew under the radar toward the end of the season that will put a sportsbook directly in wrigley field, itself.


  • Charlie 1 day 49 min ago (view)

    Of all the things, why does this most make me want to punch


  • Cubster 1 day 6 hours ago (view)

    I thought the Cubs had lost a rising star in Porter, seems the just got lucky with him leaving the organization. 


  • crunch 1 day 13 hours ago (view)

    jared porter...damn dude...mets gm, ex cubs director of scouting...


  • crunch 1 day 17 hours ago (view)

    cubs freeing up that chatwood + lester loot sure did help...wait...sigh.


  • Cubster 1 day 17 hours ago (view)

    Plus Chatwood signing w Bluejays is done.


  • crunch 1 day 19 hours ago (view)

    ...and done.  1 year deal with a mutual option.


  • Cubster 1 day 20 hours ago (view)

    Dolorous in discussions with the Washington Schwarbs.


  • crunch 1 day 20 hours ago (view)

    that's where i'd put my money.  he gave up an alarming amount of HR last season, giving pause.  still, he's shown he's better than a 5 slot guy...


  • Cubster 1 day 20 hours ago (view)

    God knows, the pitching staff needs more Garlick but the offense needs to ward off those strikeout demons.