Cubs offer to FLA for Pierre is....

[USSoccer]

CPatt-

 

Isn't a better slugging player best used lower in the order to drive in runs?

 

Ideally we'd be able to put that in every spot, but considering that we aren't low on players that can slug(Lee, ARam, Barrett), I'll take more slugging from the guy on our team that will get the most PA's.

 

So why not hit him 2nd? That would be a better balance. After all, as the argument goes, a leadoff hitter is only once per game.

 

If it were me, I'd put Walker and Murton 2nd or 6th.

 

but then who hits first?

 

I was operating on the assumption that we land Pierre. If things end up as they are now, the best possible lineup would have Walker and Murton 1-2, but I think we'll end up with one of the 4 "leadoff" guys that are out there.

 

oh, i assumed that we were arguing about walker's leadoff merits because we were seeing if he was a better leadoff option than Pierre. If Pierre is on the team, I guess you hit him first and Walker second. Though, if things play out like last season, id rather do Walker first, Murton second and Pierre 8th.

 

No way Dusty has two lefties at the top of the order.

 

he batted Patterson/Walker a few times 1-2 in 2004.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

It's not about keeping the prospects, it's about getting appropriate value. If you're willing to give up those two, then do it for Wilkerson or Bradley, who are both superior to Pierre. That way we add a player that can get on base AND hit more than singles, so it improves the offense more.

[CubfaninCA]

Please give me the stats Todd Walker had batting leadoff.

 

Compare those to Pierre.

 

 

Even if Walker is marginally better, I'd rather have Pierre batting first.

 

No, because there's several better options still out there that very likely cost significantly less than what it will apparently cost to get Pierre.

 

What players are you speaking of, on the trade block, that'll bite at an offer of Nolasco/Pinto?

 

Wilkerson and Bradley.

 

Walker career leadoff: .291/.349/.443/.792

Pierre career leadoff: 304/.354/.375/.729

 

Walker's better, it's pretty clear.

 

If Baker was going to leadoff Walker, he would have led off last year. It's not going to happen. Give it up.

You mean like baker had him leading off in 2004?

 

Classic.

 

Last year = 2005 when Macias, Nef and Patterson led off.

[YearofDaCubs]

good lord, no.

 

possibly our top three minor league arms for one year of a .680 OPS? if true, i have no faith in hendry. none.

 

I don't care about Pierre's SLG% as much as other do, but if his OPB is below .360 next year then we overpaid.

 

That's a tough call for a guy with a career .355 OBP

Although, he's eclipsed that mark 3 times in his career, including 2003. :twisted:

 

Fine, .350. But you get my point :D . He should rebound somewhat from 2005, so it depends on how high the rebound will be, and what effect the Wrigley grass will have on his game.

Curious to knwo what his Road/Home splits are.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Everyone here SO overrates our prospects. Understandable, but not being objective. You need to look at these guys from OTHER team's perspectives for once.

 

Nolasco--low Top 10 Cub prospect. Ceiling is as a projected #4 starter. Two plus pitches, but nothing dominating. Failed miserably his first time at AAA. Good control, but if he doesn't pinpoint his spots, he can get hit hard.

 

Pinto--borderline Top 10 Cub prospect. Electric stuff, lefty and young. But extremely wild, and has made little progress in harnessing his control. Hit very hard his first time in AAA, has not looked good in winter ball this year. Ceiling is as a projected #3 starter, but if the control doesn't improve soon, the bullpen may be his eventual home.

 

I have no problems giving up these two for a guy that can help your big league team right now, at a time of extreme duress, at a position they desperately need filled.

 

I don't think that is the issue. The issue is Juan Pierre and his value.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

It's not about keeping the prospects, it's about getting appropriate value. If you're willing to give up those two, then do it for Wilkerson or Bradley, who are both superior to Pierre. That way we add a player that can get on base AND hit more than singles, so it improves the offense more.

 

I think it's going to cost more to get Wilkerson or Bradley.

[USSoccer]

It's not about keeping the prospects, it's about getting appropriate value. If you're willing to give up those two, then do it for Wilkerson or Bradley, who are both superior to Pierre. That way we add a player that can get on base AND hit more than singles, so it improves the offense more.

 

Bradley misses a lot of time due to injury. His career high in games is 141, then 101, and then it falls off the map. I wouldn't give up these 2 for him. That wouldn't be appropriate value. Wilkerson is a different story.

Edited December 7, 2005 by USSoccer

[badger1679666666]

It's not about keeping the prospects, it's about getting appropriate value. If you're willing to give up those two, then do it for Wilkerson or Bradley, who are both superior to Pierre. That way we add a player that can get on base AND hit more than singles, so it improves the offense more.

 

Couldn't we get Pierre for Center and Obtain Bradley for RF. He can play right if i'm not mistaken. Get Lugo for SS move Cedeno/Walker to 2nd and call it a day.

[Mizzou]

CPatt-

 

Isn't a better slugging player best used lower in the order to drive in runs?

 

Ideally we'd be able to put that in every spot, but considering that we aren't low on players that can slug(Lee, ARam, Barrett), I'll take more slugging from the guy on our team that will get the most PA's.

 

So why not hit him 2nd? That would be a better balance. After all, as the argument goes, a leadoff hitter is only once per game.

 

If it were me, I'd put Walker and Murton 2nd or 6th.

 

but then who hits first?

 

I was operating on the assumption that we land Pierre. If things end up as they are now, the best possible lineup would have Walker and Murton 1-2, but I think we'll end up with one of the 4 "leadoff" guys that are out there.

 

oh, i assumed that we were arguing about walker's leadoff merits because we were seeing if he was a better leadoff option than Pierre. If Pierre is on the team, I guess you hit him first and Walker second. Though, if things play out like last season, id rather do Walker first, Murton second and Pierre 8th.

 

No way Dusty has two lefties at the top of the order.

 

he batted Patterson/Walker a few times 1-2 in 2004.

 

But was that after trying all other combinations or was it early in the year? I'm asking because I don't remember.

[UK1679666180]

I think it's a strech to say these 2 guys could bring Michaels but they might bring Bradley (who knows?).

 

I would be more annoyed about the money then the prospects.

 

Those 2 guys could get Michaels and I think if the offered Williams, Philly would take it as well.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Fine, .350. But you get my point :D . He should rebound somewhat from 2005, so it depends on how high the rebound will be, and what effect the Wrigley grass will have on his game.

Curious to knwo what his Road/Home splits are.

 

Since coming to Florida his AVG has been 20 or more points worse away from Pro Player, and his OBP and SLG have followed.

[Outshined_One]

It's not about keeping the prospects, it's about getting appropriate value. If you're willing to give up those two, then do it for Wilkerson or Bradley, who are both superior to Pierre. That way we add a player that can get on base AND hit more than singles, so it improves the offense more.

 

I think it's going to cost more to get Wilkerson or Bradley.

 

I can tell you right now that Pinto and Nolasco are much better than Saarloos and Ramos. If those two A's prospects are all it takes to get this deal done, then I fail to see how Nolasco & Pinto wouldn't trump it.

[YearofDaCubs]

It's not about keeping the prospects, it's about getting appropriate value. If you're willing to give up those two, then do it for Wilkerson or Bradley, who are both superior to Pierre. That way we add a player that can get on base AND hit more than singles, so it improves the offense more.

 

Couldn't we get Pierre for Center and Obtain Bradley for RF. He can play right if i'm not mistaken. Get Lugo for SS move Cedeno/Walker to 2nd and call it a day.

Personally, I wouldn't mind that one bit.

[badger1679666666]

Everyone here SO overrates our prospects. Understandable, but not being objective. You need to look at these guys from OTHER team's perspectives for once.

 

Nolasco--low Top 10 Cub prospect. Ceiling is as a projected #4 starter. Two plus pitches, but nothing dominating. Failed miserably his first time at AAA. Good control, but if he doesn't pinpoint his spots, he can get hit hard.

 

Pinto--borderline Top 10 Cub prospect. Electric stuff, lefty and young. But extremely wild, and has made little progress in harnessing his control. Hit very hard his first time in AAA, has not looked good in winter ball this year. Ceiling is as a projected #3 starter, but if the control doesn't improve soon, the bullpen may be his eventual home.

 

I have no problems giving up these two for a guy that can help your big league team right now, at a time of extreme duress, at a position they desperately need filled.

 

I don't think that is the issue. The issue is Juan Pierre and his value.

 

I also think other teams know what we need so they can take advantage of us more. Whenever teams know about your shortcomings, they have the advantage we have to pay a little more to get it.

 

The Phillies know it too and if smart, would ask for more than nolasco/pinto because they know they have the trading advantage.

[Mizzou]

It's not about keeping the prospects, it's about getting appropriate value. If you're willing to give up those two, then do it for Wilkerson or Bradley, who are both superior to Pierre. That way we add a player that can get on base AND hit more than singles, so it improves the offense more.

 

Bradley misses a lot of time due to injury. His career high in games is 141, then 101, and then it falls off the map. I wouldn't give up these 2 for him. That wouldn't be appropriate value. Wilkerson is a different story.

 

I didn't know he had such a history. I've been torn on Bradley so far, but I'm not sure if I want to go after an injury risk like that when John Mabry will likely be the everyday player if he does get injured.

[USSoccer]

Curious to knwo what his Road/Home splits are.

 

Home: .315 .369 .391 .760

Away: .291 .340 .366 .706

 

those are 3 year splits from 2002-2004

[YearofDaCubs]

Fine, .350. But you get my point :D . He should rebound somewhat from 2005, so it depends on how high the rebound will be, and what effect the Wrigley grass will have on his game.

Curious to knwo what his Road/Home splits are.

 

Since coming to Florida his AVG has been 20 or more points worse away from Pro Player, and his OBP and SLG have followed.

Didn't he come from the Rockies?

[badger1679666666]

Fine, .350. But you get my point :D . He should rebound somewhat from 2005, so it depends on how high the rebound will be, and what effect the Wrigley grass will have on his game.

Curious to knwo what his Road/Home splits are.

 

Since coming to Florida his AVG has been 20 or more points worse away from Pro Player, and his OBP and SLG have followed.

 

Do you have his stats at Wrigley?

[nilodnayr]

There was a Bradley plus two top prospects for Zito, but I don't think it has much behind it.

 

But you never know with the LA system. I'd do Zito for Bradley, Billingsley and LaRoche so fast your head would spin. Heck, I'd do Zito for Bradley, Billingsley/LaRoche.

 

IIRC, the rumor was Bradley, Joel Guzman, and Edwin Jackson. Could've been garbage from the getgo though.

 

Not a horrible deal considering its only for one year of Zito, although I would have to think the A's wouldn't settle for only Jackson after his value has plummeted the last few years. Plus they have Crosby blocking Guzman so Guzman would have to move to second base depleting his value. Beane could definitely improve the team dealing with LA (especially after the Sori for Broxton trade). Jackson and Guzman vs Billingsley and LaRoche is a decent place to stat negotiations.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Pierre, a glimpse of hope?

 

:oops:

[abuck1220]

 

For Christsakes that's not what hes saying. Really convenient to twist it like that. He's saying taking a chance on Pierre isn't bad because he's had at least 3 .370 OBP years. Some people and their ridiculous arguments. :roll:

 

If I checked last Agone has never given you a glimpse at a .370 OBP so that would be a foolhardy chance taken. Pierre has done it several times.

 

Now if you just don't like Pierrre, you just don't like him, but I can't stand seeing people twist others arguments that blatently.

 

he didn't have an argument, so it's impossible for me to twist it. his 'argument' was 'you gotta take chances'. my argument was that you didn't...there are other CF on the market and the cubs have other leadoff possibilities. he hasn't came back w/ anything for that other than 'pierre could be good again'.

 

i'm not comparing gonzalez to pierre, i was just making an argument like he did...w/ nothing backing it up other than 'you gotta take chances'.

[USSoccer]

Fine, .350. But you get my point :D . He should rebound somewhat from 2005, so it depends on how high the rebound will be, and what effect the Wrigley grass will have on his game.

Curious to knwo what his Road/Home splits are.

 

Since coming to Florida his AVG has been 20 or more points worse away from Pro Player, and his OBP and SLG have followed.

 

Do you have his stats at Wrigley?

AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS

Wrigley Field 50 15 14 2 0 0 4 4 3 2 8 0 .280 .368 .320 .688

[Hector Villanuevas Pants]

Make the deal.

 

The Cubs' biggest need this off-season is at leadoff. Like him or not, Pierre is a proven lead-off guy who played on a world series team. In two of the previous three seasons he has posted an OBP over .360. He had a down year last season, but is only 28. He still has some good years left. Most importantly, he is the kind of leadoff guy Dusty wants. There will be certainty at the top of the order.

 

I don't think Pinto and Nolasco are a particularly high price. Let's be real, they are two mid-level prospects at best. They are the type of prospects we like to over-value because it make us feel better about the farm system. They may turn out to be OK major league players, but it's not realistic to think that you can always trade crap and get something decent in return.

 

It's time to make a move. If this is it, fine. Getting Pierre does not preclude picking up Bradley or Wilkerson or another outfielder as RF is still a need.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Fine, .350. But you get my point :D . He should rebound somewhat from 2005, so it depends on how high the rebound will be, and what effect the Wrigley grass will have on his game.

Curious to knwo what his Road/Home splits are.

 

Since coming to Florida his AVG has been 20 or more points worse away from Pro Player, and his OBP and SLG have followed.

 

Do you have his stats at Wrigley?

 

.282/.354/.366/.721

 

76 PA's

[CubfaninCA]

Getting Pierre keeps Neifi out of the leadoff spot. I won't be mad if his obp is .370 either.

 

And what if it's .326 like it was last year?

 

That's the chances you have to take. At least it's about .200 points better than Patterson right? ;)

 

why is that a chance you have to take? that makes no sense.

 

He's posted .378, .374, and .361 too.

 

and a .332. what's your point?

 

yeah, he could be a decent leadoff guy, but there are only a few one year rentals that i give up the top 3 minor league arms for -- and slappy mcgee ain't one of them.

 

and unless you're finding a way to get dunn, abreu or manny (w/o your top minor league arms, who you traded for your dreamboat, once in a lifetime, 'prototypical leadoff guy, mind you), this team isn't going anywhere next year anyway. so what's the point in giving up the farm for a guy that can help you win 81 games instead of 79?

 

Sorry you can't comprehend my point (taking chances). Pretty simple concept.

 

This team isn't going anywhere next year?? That's a great attitude.

 

gee, i hope the cubs can fight through my bad attitude to win the world series next year.

 

i don't get your point because you don't have one. all you said, was, 'you have to take chances'. and i say, no you don't. you don't hav anything to back up your 'gotta take chances' claim.

 

should the cubs trade hill, pinto, paw, pie, nolasco and everybody in the system for alex gonzalez? no? well, you gotta take chances, and that's the extent of my argument. i win.

 

For Christsakes that's not what hes saying. Really convenient to twist it like that. He's saying taking a chance on Pierre isn't bad because he's had at least 3 .370 OBP years. Some people and their ridiculous arguments. :roll:

 

If I checked last Agone has never given you a glimpse at a .370 OBP so that would be a foolhardy chance taken. Pierre has done it several times.

 

Now if you just don't like Pierrre, you just don't like him, but I can't stand seeing people twist others arguments that blatently.

 

Bingo.

 

He's just trolling tonight. I commend his effort. :)