rainbow@ihuxe.UUCP (10/05/84)
>The Cubs are just too tough >this year, but given the number of free agents eligible to leave the Cubs >after the playoffs, this may be their last hurrah together. Face it, >the Cubs did what the Yankees (may their stadium be burnt to the ground and >their owner eaten by one million Army Ants) did in 76-78 - bought themselves >a winner. Watch out for the Mets if the Cubs lose a few players.... Since when is trading considered buying a winner?????!!!!! The cubs traded for all their new player's this year. And last. We're talking Sandberg, Bowa, Dernier, Mathews, Sutcliffe, Frazier, Eckersley. Other players have been around for some time now. So, are you of the opinion that any team that wins who has made a trade in the past year is guilty of buying a winner alla Yankees? The Yankees went out and spent big bucks on free agents. Not the cubs. Thats why they're so lovable. And now to continue the flame, since when are cub players considered free agents?????!!!!! Just because a few player's contracts happen to expire at the end of this season is irrelevent. That means all players on all teams are free agents. And tell me, do you have a problem with a team signing their own players to new contracts? I don't see how you can compare this to going out and buying a winner by stealing players from other clubs whose contracts have expired. According to your logic, you disapprove of any team which re-signs it players and you disapprove of any team which signs free agents from other teams. So tell me, how do you propose to get a team together. And then keep it. You obviously are not a sport's fan. More fortunately, not a cub fan. You'd give us a bad name. Robert
rokhsar@lasspvax.UUCP (Dan Rokhsar) (10/21/84)
1. What exactly is a free agent? 2. What happens if a non free agent player and his team cannot reach an agreement (Dwight Gooden, for example) At what point, if any, can the player negotiate with other teams? Please help me - the second question is keeping me awake nights! Dan Rokhsar