Tony Clark says he is willing to waive his no-trade clause..

[Rob]

Funny how some of the same logic isn't afforded to Pierre after having a bad year last year when he had two very good years the years before.

 

Two very good years?

 

He was the centerfield equivalent of Jeromy Burnitz circa 2005 the two years in question. WARP1's of 4.4 and 4.9, versus Burnitz with his 4.5 last year (mind you, those numbers are adjusted for position).

 

I don't remember hearing a whole lot of commotion everytime somebody called Burnitz merely adequate or even horrible. But god forbid somebody says that about a fast guy with numbers that aren't good for his position...

[Danny82]

I really don't care what his WARP1, or whatever it is, was.

 

He was a leadoff hitter who led the league in hits in 2004 and had OBPs of .374 and .361. Good years.

 

But that is a discussion for another thread that I'm sure has been hashed out a thousand times.

 

My point was that a good year like Clark's gets downplayed because of what he did the couple of years before, YET Pierre's down year last year gets the focus in lieu of what he had done the years before last. Neither appears to get the benefit of the doubt in situations that practically the exact opposite of each other. You'd think one of the two would be more apt to get that benefit, but maybe not.

 

Just an interesting observation.

[noisesquared]

I really don't care what his WARP1, or whatever it is, was.

 

He was a leadoff hitter who led the league in hits in 2004 and had OBPs of .374 and .361. Good years.

 

But that is a discussion for another thread that I'm sure has been hashed out a thousand times.

 

My point was that a good year like Clark's gets downplayed because of what he did the couple of years before, YET Pierre's down year last year gets the focus in lieu of what he had done the years before last. Neither appears to get the benefit of the doubt in situations that practically the exact opposite of each other. You'd think one of the two would be more apt to get that benefit, but maybe not.

 

Just an interesting observation.

 

I agree 100% - there's a weird double standard here. I know there's a time and place for discounting one season of abnormal production, and Clark's case would seem to fit this mold. Clark age-wise is on the decline, but Pierre is still in his prime. So by the same argument, Pierre should be judged on career numbers, not last year.

[RynoRules]

There's no reason a first basemam with a good eye can't do it again in his mid to late 30s.

 

 

There's no reason he can't, but there's quite a possibility he won't.

 

Is this the "refute the argument by stating the opposite" approach? If not, please support your argument with something other than a naked conclusion.

 

i think the argument that an old first baseman who had a crazy good season preceded by two terrible ones probably wont do it again stands pretty well on it's own.

 

The point is he had a good year, and it was last year. To simplify it for you (since you appear to be having trouble grasping the concept), he has had several good years (not just one, as your post implies), a few bad, and his most recent season was a good one. In addition, he plays a position that lends itself to productive seasons during the later years of one's career. There is no reason that a player like Calrk, who does not rely exclusively on batting average to maintain his OBP, cannot remain productive in his late-30s.

 

If you don't want him for whatever your reason, that's one thing. But don't pretend that he isn't a productive player when he gets the chance, b/c that isn't the case.

[E.J.]

Looks like Gary Hughes has been hanging out in Arizona scouting Clark.

 

The Trib

 

With the Cubs hitting just .198 against left-handed pitching and their top right-handed hitter, Derrek Lee, on the disabled list, rumors are spreading that the Cubs may be interested in Arizona's Tony Clark.

 

The switch-hitting Clark, an 11-year veteran, has lost his starting job at first base to rookie Conor Jackson and is hitting just .194 in 19 games. Last season he hit .304 with 30 homers and 87 RBIs. It is known that Gary Hughes, special assistant to Cubs general manager Jim Hendry, has been watching the Diamondbacks of late, including Sunday, when Clark started.

 

Clark's salary is manageable at just over $1 million, but the Cubs probably would have to part with young pitching to get him in a trade.

 

Hendry may feel the need to bring in a hitter to help the Cubs against left-handed pitchers. They are 3-6 against lefties, including Sunday's 9-0 loss to the Brewers' Chris Capuano and a 16-2 loss Saturday to Doug Davi

[NorthsideAvenger]

To be fair this is Tony Clark's numbers at Wrigley. I know, I know it is only 16 at-bats, and a very small sample, but still it is encouraging:

 

.313 .389 .688 1.077

[ltb]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

[Ding Dong Johnson]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

 

It appears to me as though they're waiting to see if they can get Pena.

[moorecg]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

 

It appears to me as though they're waiting to see if they can get Pena.

 

And if they can't...they just happen to be in Arizona on Wednesday...won't even have to pay for his flight to catch up with the team!

[Danny82]

I think it would be great if they can sign Pena, but being that would be a FA and could go anywhere he wanted, would he want to come to Chicago where there is no way in heck that he would be starting in 2 months?

 

Or would he just want a chance to showcase himself?

[goonys evil twin]

I think it would be great if they can sign Pena, but being that would be a FA and could go anywhere he wanted, would he want to come to Chicago where there is no way in heck that he would be starting in 2 months?

 

Or would he just want a chance to showcase himself?

 

There's no way he would start over a healthy Lee, but I'm not sure if you can definitively say that'll be in 2 months.

[SouthSideRyan]

I think it would be great if they can sign Pena, but being that would be a FA and could go anywhere he wanted, would he want to come to Chicago where there is no way in heck that he would be starting in 2 months?

 

Or would he just want a chance to showcase himself?

 

Cause I don't think there's any team in baseball that he'd go to and be a starter for the full season.

[RynoRules]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

 

That's a darn good point. Pena's OBP is consistently 90 - 100 points over his BA. If you could get the guy to hit just .275, he'd likely have nos as good or better than Clark's, and he's 10 yrs younger.

[NorthsideAvenger]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

 

That's a darn good point. Pena's OBP is consistently 90 - 100 points over his BA. If you could get the guy to hit just .275, he'd likely have nos as good or better than Clark's, and he's 10 yrs younger.

 

The problem with Pena, is that the Cubs have too MANY lefty handed bats off the bench. They NEED a RH pop off the bench, hence the reason why the momentum is toward acquiring Clark, and not Pena.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

 

That's a darn good point. Pena's OBP is consistently 90 - 100 points over his BA. If you could get the guy to hit just .275, he'd likely have nos as good or better than Clark's, and he's 10 yrs younger.

 

The problem with Pena, is that the Cubs have too MANY lefty handed bats off the bench. They NEED a RH pop off the bench, hence the reason why the momentum is toward acquiring Clark, and not Pena.

 

Clark is much better as a LH hitter though.

[NorthsideAvenger]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

 

That's a darn good point. Pena's OBP is consistently 90 - 100 points over his BA. If you could get the guy to hit just .275, he'd likely have nos as good or better than Clark's, and he's 10 yrs younger.

 

The problem with Pena, is that the Cubs have too MANY lefty handed bats off the bench. They NEED a RH pop off the bench, hence the reason why the momentum is toward acquiring Clark, and not Pena.

 

Clark is much better as a LH hitter though.

 

Not really. I just look at his career numbers, and they are close. He has more pop from the left side, but he has solid pop from the right side. Clark knows that his role would be, and is willing to accept it. Carlos is still young enough to believe he can start, which he wouldn't get with the Cubs in less then 2 months. It's no question...I prefer Clark (and give up Wuertz, or some decent arm, ONE arm that's it) to Pena.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

 

That's a darn good point. Pena's OBP is consistently 90 - 100 points over his BA. If you could get the guy to hit just .275, he'd likely have nos as good or better than Clark's, and he's 10 yrs younger.

 

The problem with Pena, is that the Cubs have too MANY lefty handed bats off the bench. They NEED a RH pop off the bench, hence the reason why the momentum is toward acquiring Clark, and not Pena.

 

Clark is much better as a LH hitter though.

 

Not really. I just look at his career numbers, and they are close. He has more pop from the left side, but he has solid pop from the right side. Clark knows that his role would be, and is willing to accept it. Carlos is still young enough to believe he can start, which he wouldn't get with the Cubs in less then 2 months. It's no question...I prefer Clark (and give up Wuertz, or some decent arm, ONE arm that's it) to Pena.

 

His career numbers are pretty irrelevant at this stage of his career compared to the last 3 years.

 

Last 3 years

 

as a lefty: .255/.323/.569/.892

as a righty: .264/.334/.464/.798

 

He's not bad as a RH hitter, but significantly better from the left hand side.

[NorthsideAvenger]

ugh

i hope they're not considering sending pitching to arizona for clark when they can have carlos pena for nothing tomorrow...

 

That's a darn good point. Pena's OBP is consistently 90 - 100 points over his BA. If you could get the guy to hit just .275, he'd likely have nos as good or better than Clark's, and he's 10 yrs younger.

 

The problem with Pena, is that the Cubs have too MANY lefty handed bats off the bench. They NEED a RH pop off the bench, hence the reason why the momentum is toward acquiring Clark, and not Pena.

 

Clark is much better as a LH hitter though.

 

Not really. I just look at his career numbers, and they are close. He has more pop from the left side, but he has solid pop from the right side. Clark knows that his role would be, and is willing to accept it. Carlos is still young enough to believe he can start, which he wouldn't get with the Cubs in less then 2 months. It's no question...I prefer Clark (and give up Wuertz, or some decent arm, ONE arm that's it) to Pena.

 

His career numbers are pretty irrelevant at this stage of his career compared to the last 3 years.

 

Last 3 years

 

as a lefty: .255/.323/.569/.892

as a righty: .264/.334/.464/.798

 

He's not bad as a RH hitter, but significantly better from the left hand side.

 

I still prefer Clark to Pena.

[XZero771679666304]

 

I still prefer Clark to Pena.

 

I prefer signing Pena to giving up a good player for Clark. The difference between the two is not enough to give up a good prospect for, IMO.

 

Plus, Tony isn't exactly off to a hot start this season.

[NorthsideAvenger]

 

I still prefer Clark to Pena.

 

I prefer signing Pena to giving up a good player for Clark. The difference between the two is not enough to give up a good prospect for, IMO.

 

Plus, Tony isn't exactly off to a hot start this season.

 

Maybe so, but I don't think Pena is going to sign with the Cubs, when there are teams that have bigger needs for a 1st basemen. I do think Clark makes more sense for the Cubs then Pena, tho.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

there are teams that have bigger needs for a 1st basemen.

 

Who? And why didn't they pick up Pena when they had the chance?

[XZero771679666304]

 

I still prefer Clark to Pena.

 

I prefer signing Pena to giving up a good player for Clark. The difference between the two is not enough to give up a good prospect for, IMO.

 

Plus, Tony isn't exactly off to a hot start this season.

 

Maybe so, but I don't think Pena is going to sign with the Cubs, when there are teams that have bigger needs for a 1st basemen. I do think Clark makes more sense for the Cubs then Pena, tho.

 

I think Pena would be well served to sign with the Cubs. He knows he'd get to play everyday for at least 2 months, long enough to show what he's got. He would likely be traded after Lee returns. IIRC, Pena was out of a job for a while before the Yanks signed him, so it's not like he will have a ton of suitors.

[Wilson A2000]

Which is a better scenario: trade for Clark or bring Pie up to play left and move Murton to first base? The Cubs were so confident in their second baseman, but when push comes to shove Walker is really the only everyday player.

[Rob]

Which is a better scenario: trade for Clark or bring Pie up to play left and move Murton to first base? The Cubs were so confident in their second baseman, but when push comes to shove Walker is really the only everyday player.

 

If we're gonna bring up Pie, I'd rather see us trade off Pierre for a first baseman. Moving Murton over would be kinda messy to start with in-season.

[NorthsideAvenger]

 

I still prefer Clark to Pena.

 

I prefer signing Pena to giving up a good player for Clark. The difference between the two is not enough to give up a good prospect for, IMO.

 

Plus, Tony isn't exactly off to a hot start this season.

 

Maybe so, but I don't think Pena is going to sign with the Cubs, when there are teams that have bigger needs for a 1st basemen. I do think Clark makes more sense for the Cubs then Pena, tho.

 

I think Pena would be well served to sign with the Cubs. He knows he'd get to play everyday for at least 2 months, long enough to show what he's got. He would likely be traded after Lee returns. IIRC, Pena was out of a job for a while before the Yanks signed him, so it's not like he will have a ton of suitors.

 

I know short-term the Cubs would be an ideal fit for Pena, but as I mentioned earlier, the Cubs DON'T have a legit RH pop off the bench, unless you count Hairston and Blanco as RH pop off the bench. Signing Pena would make the Cubs too predictable with their options off the bench. I wouldn't lose any sleep over Pena, but he wouldn't be my first choice. I'd still prefer Choi (if the Cubs were going after a lefty first baseman) to Pena, and I'd prefer Clark to both.