All his eggs in one basket?

[BigbadB]

Maybe no one else remembers this, but Bruce Miles did come on this board and say the Cubs weren't really interested in Giles because of his age and "declining production." So our most reliable inside source said the Cubs weren't that hot on Giles. Take that for what it's worth.

 

I do remember that, but only now that you rementioned it.

 

I took offense to the "declining production" then, and I take offense now. The only thing he has declined in is HR's, and the park he plays in, IMO, has a lot to do with that decline.

 

Age, I can understand. But, Hendry got good production out of an aging Moises Alou in 2004, so I can't agree with it. Giles is a better player than Alou.

[CubinNY]

How about we just drop this whole "how do you know" stuff, otherwise I'm locking this thread.

 

like a potatoe

 

Good. Now, who would have liked for Hendry to give Giles a 3/45m contract if that's how much it would have taken to get him away from San Diego?

 

Yes. RF is the Cubs biggest need area and Giles provides everything and in good quantity. I have to believe Petco took away some of his power numbers. But hey, surf's up.

[BigbadB]

How about we just drop this whole "how do you know" stuff, otherwise I'm locking this thread.

 

like a potatoe

 

Good. Now, who would have liked for Hendry to give Giles a 3/45m contract if that's how much it would have taken to get him away from San Diego?

 

I thought 3/30 was the price all along. I would have been willing to go 3/40 (maybe 45), with a team option for the 4th year coupled with a buyout of up to $5. And if he played X number of games in 2007/2008, it would become automatic (but X would be high).

 

3/30 was the price St. Louis and some other team were offering. Toronto offered more, but if Giles wasn't interested in Chicago, surely he couldn't have been interested in Toronto, so why were they making offers?

 

3/45m to me gets Giles attention. 15m is a lot better than 10m. To me, 10m is a bargain for his production. Is Abreu 5m better than Giles? Shawn Green gets more than that, I believe. 3/45m gets Giles attention.

 

No one offered that. He went back home. My opinion, of course.

[BigbadB]

Can someone give their best guestimate of how much Preston Wilson would be worth per year to be the Cubs RF?

 

3m? 4m? 5m? 6m? 7m?

 

I'm sure it will be somewhere in that neighborhood. If you say 3m, what will you say if Hendry gives him 7m? Would the 4m that you feel Preston is being overpayed to play RF be better or worse than the 5m more that you feel Giles would be getting overpaid if they gave him 15m to be their RFer?

 

Preston may not come here, so this little test may not have any real point. My point, is that I would have gladly overpaid for Giles. The need, the availability, and the difference he could have made to this offense.

[Backtobanks]

Speaking of all your eggs in one basket, I'd love to have someone like Abreu in RF, but when people propose trading, Pie, Zambrano, Lee, Ramirez, or Prior, you had better make sure Abreu will put you into the WS because the Cubs would be out of it for the near future.

[badger1679666666]

Can someone give their best guestimate of how much Preston Wilson would be worth per year to be the Cubs RF?

 

 

I think he'd be worth about 50 cents.

[CubfaninCA]

Making such a claim is just a way to get people riled up. Surely, Hendry has many lines in the water.

[BigbadB]

Making such a claim is just a way to get people riled up. Surely, Hendry has many lines in the water.

 

Interest has been expressed. How much did Burnitz get last year?

 

If Pie is asked for in trades for Huff, Pierre, etc.. the likelihood of Preston Wilson becomes more realistic.

 

We expected better than Burnitz in RF last year.

[badger1679666666]

Making such a claim is just a way to get people riled up. Surely, Hendry has many lines in the water.

 

Interest has been expressed. How much did Burnitz get last year?

 

If Pie is asked for in trades for Huff, Pierre, etc.. the likelihood of Preston Wilson becomes more realistic.

 

We expected better than Burnitz in RF last year.

 

We all know he had handcuffs on last year, He doesn't have those same handcuffs this year. Let's be fair here.

[BigbadB]

I'd be willing to be more fair if I hadn't heard rumors that Hendry had interest in Preston Wilson. I'll end it there.

[Careless]

 

well, a main part of his job is evaluating FA talent so he must not be that good at being a GM.

 

I think he's great at trades:

 

The Good:

 

Lee acquisition for a mediocre/bad Choi

Ramirez/Lofton/Simon acquisition

Karros/Grudz acquisition for freaking Hundley

Nomar/Murton acquisition for crap

Barrett acquisition (he was traded for correct?)

Clement part of the acquisition (Willis was thrown in at the very end as a throw-in no one thought he'd be great)

 

The Bad:

 

Sosa trade

Farnsworth trade

Cruz trade

 

 

So basically when Hendry devalues a player, the trades suck (pretty intuitive) and when he doesn't devalue them he fleeces opposing GM's, for the most part.

 

I'd say he sucks at FA but is good at trading, making him an average to slightly above average GM. I think he just focuses too much on "toolsy" guys.

You forgot the macias trade.

[Coach.]

Sosa devalued himself. Who in their right mind would have paid a premium for him if Hendry would have made smiley faces? No one.

[Schwarber Fan]

 

well, a main part of his job is evaluating FA talent so he must not be that good at being a GM.

 

I think he's great at trades:

 

The Good:

 

Lee acquisition for a mediocre/bad Choi

Ramirez/Lofton/Simon acquisition

Karros/Grudz acquisition for freaking Hundley

Nomar/Murton acquisition for crap

Barrett acquisition (he was traded for correct?)

Clement part of the acquisition (Willis was thrown in at the very end as a throw-in no one thought he'd be great)

 

The Bad:

 

Sosa trade

Farnsworth trade

Cruz trade

 

 

So basically when Hendry devalues a player, the trades suck (pretty intuitive) and when he doesn't devalue them he fleeces opposing GM's, for the most part.

 

I'd say he sucks at FA but is good at trading, making him an average to slightly above average GM. I think he just focuses too much on "toolsy" guys.

You forgot the macias trade.

 

It was a signing

[BigbadB]

Nope. Macias was traded for. Wilton Chavez for Macias, straight up.

[Soul]

Well, Hendry put all his eggs in the Furcal basket but I guess there wasn't much else he could do.

 

I suppose he could go after Damon for a leadoff hitter. But if you don't want to overpay, then Jonny Damon is probably not a good option :lol:

 

We're basically doomed to have no leadoff hitter again. Which means we won't be able to put pressure on defenses, and Derek Lee will have vastly deflated numbers once again just like he did last season. When all the homers are solo shots and very few of the doubles plate baserunners, how can you possibly stay in a race for MVP? It's impossible---and I'll bet D is pretty darn frustrated about it too.

 

Now our eggs are all in another basket: the Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, and Z basket. Because if these three guys don't find a way to put in full seasons pitching the way they were supposed to from the beginning, we're looking at another below .500 season and probably 4th place.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Giles wanted to stay in SD. There is no denying that.

 

That's a valid point. If I were G.M. I woulda liked to see what he'd say to 3 years and 35 million. I don't know if the other published offers were really that high or if he didn't want to go there. But, I would have tried, nonetheless.

 

The Dodgers did offer Giles 3/34.5, so I don't think 3/35 would have caused him to come to the Cubs. 3/40 maybe.

[wade]

Giles wanted to stay in SD. There is no denying that.

 

That's a valid point. If I were G.M. I woulda liked to see what he'd say to 3 years and 35 million. I don't know if the other published offers were really that high or if he didn't want to go there. But, I would have tried, nonetheless.

 

The Dodgers did offer Giles 3/34.5, so I don't think 3/35 would have caused him to come to the Cubs. 3/40 maybe.

 

Well, I missed that.

 

As for the eggs in the basket reference, Jay Mariotti echoed that in today's Suntimes, so great minds think alike. 8-[

[NoDak]

Now our eggs are all in another basket: the Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, and Z basket. Because if these three guys don't find a way to put in full seasons pitching the way they were supposed to from the beginning, we're looking at another below .500 season and probably 4th place.

 

If "1 basket" isn't limited to "1 player" then EVERY team puts all their eggs in one basket. That basket being defined as 40-man roster! :lol:

[NoDak]

 

well, a main part of his job is evaluating FA talent so he must not be that good at being a GM.

 

I think he's great at trades:

 

The Good:

 

Lee acquisition for a mediocre/bad Choi

Ramirez/Lofton/Simon acquisition

Karros/Grudz acquisition for freaking Hundley

Nomar/Murton acquisition for crap

Barrett acquisition (he was traded for correct?)

Clement part of the acquisition (Willis was thrown in at the very end as a throw-in no one thought he'd be great)

 

The Bad:

 

Sosa trade

Farnsworth trade

Cruz trade

 

 

So basically when Hendry devalues a player, the trades suck (pretty intuitive) and when he doesn't devalue them he fleeces opposing GM's, for the most part.

 

I'd say he sucks at FA but is good at trading, making him an average to slightly above average GM. I think he just focuses too much on "toolsy" guys.

You forgot the macias trade.

 

The Macias trade wasn't good by any stretch, but we don't know what we would have gotten in that place on the roster. While it is hard to imagine much worse, it could have been. I will grant you, though, it probably does belong on the "bad deal" list.

[JeffH]

We got far more value in Macias than we would have gotten from Wilton Chavez.

 

It could be argued - and quite strongly - that the trade hurt us because we should have had someone better than Macias on the bench, but Macias has contributed more to the Cubs than Chavez ever would have.

[goonys evil twin]

We got far more value in Macias than we would have gotten from Wilton Chavez.

 

It could be argued - and quite strongly - that the trade hurt us because we should have had someone better than Macias on the bench, but Macias has contributed more to the Cubs than Chavez ever would have.

 

Simply being on the team doesn't mean you bring value. Just like having a manager think you can play any position doesn't mean you can actually play any of them well. It can be argued, quite easily actually, that Macias has brought negative value to the Cubs, seeing as how his production has been well below what a typical replacement player could bring, and his paycheck has been more than twice the minimum, which would be the cost of a replacement player.

[JeffH]

Simply being on the team doesn't mean you bring value.

 

Of course it does, unless you never get a hit or make a putout.

 

It can be argued, quite easily actually, that Macias has brought negative value to the Cubs, seeing as how his production has been well below what a typical replacement player could bring, and his paycheck has been more than twice the minimum, which would be the cost of a replacement player.

 

Didn't I just say that?

[Magnetic Curses]

We got far more value in Macias than we would have gotten from Wilton Chavez.

 

It could be argued - and quite strongly - that the trade hurt us because we should have had someone better than Macias on the bench, but Macias has contributed more to the Cubs than Chavez ever would have.

 

i would argue that macias has had a negative impact, a very negative impact. instead of spending a roster spot on a capable backup, we get macias, who, due to dusty being manager, has been routinely misused (and by that i mean used at all) throughout his cubs career, probably costing us a few ballgames.

 

if you put me on the 25-man and let me bat 150 times you could probably say, in way, i've contributed more to the team than chavez as well. the other side of that is that chavez on the 40-man, at triple-a, is infinitely more valuable than me on the 25-man getting starts at 3rd base and CF.

[goonys evil twin]

Simply being on the team doesn't mean you bring value.

 

Of course it does, unless you never get a hit or make a putout.

 

No it doesn't.

 

If you go 1/50, are you bring value because of that 1 hit? No, of course not. It's not just adding up the counting stats that matters, it's the rates, and Macias's rates have been abnormally low for a major leaguer who plays as much as him. He makes far too many outs and brings no defensive value, making his "value" negative.

[Magnetic Curses]

Didn't I just say that?

 

no, you didn't. you said that macias has brought more value to the cubs than chavez ever will. we're saying that chavez, in the minors, never seeing the light of day in the majors, is more valuable than macias at the major league level, because chavez in the minors does not have a negative impact on the big league team. while macias DOES have a negative impact, a very real one.