Interest in Edmonds?

[NorthsideAvenger]

If Pierre prices him outside the Cubs range---which is possible---I would rather bring up a kid like Sam Fuld or Chris Walker to play CF, instead of going after some crappy veteran, just because they are there, and Baker or Hendry wants them. At worst, stick Pagan in CF.

 

Edit: The ONLY position I would rather see Jones move to is....LF. I don't see Jones being all that more productive in CF then Pierre.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

i probably wouldn't be a cubs fan next year if they signed him....ajp is the only other person in baseball that i hate more than edmonds.

 

I'd still be a Cubs fan, but I pretty much agree with the assessment of those two players.

[Laura]

If Pierre prices him outside the Cubs range---which is possible---I would rather bring up a kid like Sam Fuld or Chris Walker to play CF, instead of going after some crappy veteran, just because they are there, and Baker or Hendry wants them. At worst, stick Pagan in CF.

 

Over Pie?

 

I'd like to see Walker get a promotion. Fuld is on the DL; my understanding is that he's been battling some ongoing back problems (disc problems?) that have affected his play recently, even before going on the DL.

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

If Pierre prices him outside the Cubs range---which is possible---I would rather bring up a kid like Sam Fuld or Chris Walker to play CF, instead of going after some crappy veteran, just because they are there, and Baker or Hendry wants them. At worst, stick Pagan in CF.

 

Over Pie?

 

I'd like to see Walker get a promotion. Fuld is on the DL; my understanding is that he's been battling some ongoing back problems (disc problems?) that have affected his play recently, even before going on the DL.

 

Since I rarely see Sam Fuld discussed, here's my opportumity to slip in the fact that Sam is in a documnetary that is about the Cape Cod Baseball League. The documentary is called "Touching the Game". I rented it from Neflix a couple of months ago and also noticed that Matt Murton is briefly in it.

 

Here's the trailer if you haven't seen it before.

[biittner77]

It may not seem like a serious question but what can Pierre do that Pagan can't?

 

Neither walk much. Neither are great defensively. Pierre can steal bases but Pagan hits for more power and matches Pierre in the speed department.

 

As far as I'm concerned Pagan is a lateral move from Pierre except that he is significantly cheaper. I'm not suggesting that Pagan is a long term solution but as a stop gap until Pie's arrival the Cubs can and frequently have done much worse.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I think it's sad that in the past couple of weeks there has been debate over the 2007 lineup in regards to:

 

- who is the better SS option, Izturis or Neifi

- who is the better CF option, Pierre or Pagan

 

For the love of all that is good and holy, is that what this team has done to us? Picking the lesser of 2 evils?

[soapy]

I think it's sad that in the past couple of weeks there has been debate over the 2007 lineup in regards to:

 

- who is the better SS option, Izturis or Neifi

- who is the better CF option, Pierre or Pagan

 

For the love of all that is good and holy, is that what this team has done to us? Picking the lesser of 2 evils?

 

Wow. That really is sad.

 

By the way, the answer to both of those is, "it doesn't matter".

[NewUserName]

I would rather have Jim Edmonds for 5-6 mill for a couple of years than CLee for 15 mill for 4 to 5 years.

[cheapseats]

I would rather have Jim Edmonds for 5-6 mill for a couple of years than CLee for 15 mill for 4 to 5 years.

 

Ditto.

 

Edmonds is performing below his 10th percentile projection in PECOTA. That's very unusual. If his problem really is a treatable injury, he might be a bargain if the Cardinals don't bring him back. His projected OBP's for the next four seasons: .396, .392, .401, .419.

[CubColtPacer]

I would rather have Jim Edmonds for 5-6 mill for a couple of years than CLee for 15 mill for 4 to 5 years.

 

Ditto.

 

Edmonds is performing below his 10th percentile projection in PECOTA. That's very unusual. If his problem really is a treatable injury, he might be a bargain if the Cardinals don't bring him back. His projected OBP's for the next four seasons: .396, .392, .401, .419.

 

I guess I'll never understand these projections very well. I really don't understand why it would project a 36 year old player who has had an OBP above .385 only once in the last four years can project a player to have above .385 each year for the next four years, including a .419 at age 40.

[NewUserName]

This year is the only year since joining the Cardinals that Edmonds has had an OBP under .385. I am not saying that Edmonds would be my first choice. For the money that is going to get paid he will probably put up close the same OPS as CLee for the next couple of years and still be a solid CFer. If the Cubs are going to resign Juan Pierre they should certainly entertain Edmonds instead if he is available. Probably about the same kind of money and a declining Edmonds is going to be more productive than a really good Pierre. Defense shouldnt even have to be brought up. Also with a good manager this would make room for Pie to be worked in in 2008. I really dont want Pie to be blocked by Juan Pierre which is probably going to happen.

 

 

Along this subject I was thinking of players that I really hate as a Cub fan. Guys who get under my skin or the skin of other fans for various reasons. I dislike Edmonds because he is a Cub killer and does things like outsmart Sammy. Its not because he is a me guy or supposedly gay or a clubhouse cancer. The reasons I dislike him are the reasons I would love him if he were a Cub.

[jjgman21]

This year is the only year since joining the Cardinals that Edmonds has had an OBP under .385. I am not saying that Edmonds would be my first choice. For the money that is going to get paid he will probably put up close the same OPS as CLee for the next couple of years and still be a solid CFer. If the Cubs are going to resign Juan Pierre they should certainly entertain Edmonds instead if he is available. Probably about the same kind of money and a declining Edmonds is going to be more productive than a really good Pierre. Defense shouldnt even have to be brought up. Also with a good manager this would make room for Pie to be worked in in 2008. I really dont want Pie to be blocked by Juan Pierre which is probably going to happen.

 

 

Along this subject I was thinking of players that I really hate as a Cub fan. Guys who get under my skin or the skin of other fans for various reasons. I dislike Edmonds because he is a Cub killer and does things like outsmart Sammy. Its not because he is a me guy or supposedly gay or a clubhouse cancer. The reasons I dislike him are the reasons I would love him if he were a Cub.

 

I hate him because he is a showboater for the Cubs biggest rival. if he showboats for the Cubs and still makes the plays and does't get hurt by showboating, I couldn't give a damn.

 

even if he declines even more next year, he is better than any non-creative option, and Hendry is not capable of creativity, so why not.

[RynoRules]

More or less agree.

[Magnetic Curses]

I would rather have Jim Edmonds for 5-6 mill for a couple of years than CLee for 15 mill for 4 to 5 years.

 

Ditto.

 

Edmonds is performing below his 10th percentile projection in PECOTA. That's very unusual. If his problem really is a treatable injury, he might be a bargain if the Cardinals don't bring him back. His projected OBP's for the next four seasons: .396, .392, .401, .419.

 

I guess I'll never understand these projections very well. I really don't understand why it would project a 36 year old player who has had an OBP above .385 only once in the last four years can project a player to have above .385 each year for the next four years, including a .419 at age 40.

 

this is the first year in the last 7 that edmonds hasn't posted a +.900 OPS and +.500 SLG.

 

wait, you're the same person saying that juan pierre can still be a very productive player, yet would object to the cubs acquiring a much more valuable player in edmonds? shouldn't you like edmonds because he's good defensively?

 

i'll never get your love for sub-.700 OPS players and hatred of +.900 OPS players, it just doesn't make much sense.

 

izturis and pierre are great but edmonds isn't worth acquiring. that's the bigegst friggin joke i've ever heard in my life.

[CubColtPacer]

I would rather have Jim Edmonds for 5-6 mill for a couple of years than CLee for 15 mill for 4 to 5 years.

 

Ditto.

 

Edmonds is performing below his 10th percentile projection in PECOTA. That's very unusual. If his problem really is a treatable injury, he might be a bargain if the Cardinals don't bring him back. His projected OBP's for the next four seasons: .396, .392, .401, .419.

 

I guess I'll never understand these projections very well. I really don't understand why it would project a 36 year old player who has had an OBP above .385 only once in the last four years can project a player to have above .385 each year for the next four years, including a .419 at age 40.

 

this is the first year in the last 7 that edmonds hasn't posted a +.900 OPS and +.500 SLG.

 

wait, you're the same person saying that juan pierre can still be a very productive player, yet would object to the cubs acquiring a much more valuable player in edmonds? shouldn't you like edmonds because he's good defensively?

 

i'll never get your love for sub-.700 OPS players and hatred of +.900 OPS players, it just doesn't make much sense.

 

izturis and pierre are great but edmonds isn't worth acquiring. that's the bigegst friggin joke i've ever heard in my life.

 

Can you point out to me where I thought he wouldn't be worth acquiring? The answer is I do think he is worth it-if we signed him to a couple year deal, I would have no problem paying him a good amount of money. I wouldn't sign him to any longer of a deal because his age and declining production combined probably means that his numbers might level out, but probably won't return quite to his numbers that he was putting up in his prime, and if he keeps declining he's a risk-and the longer you sign him for, the more risk you're taking. As you said, he has been very productive though in his career. I did take exception to the projections though, which seem very unrealistic when compared to his previous four years and his age. Edmonds is a better player then Pierre and Izturis, and I've never said otherwise. I only defend players like Pierre and Izturis because I don't think they are as big of liabilities as most people on the board do. Are they players in the lineup you fear like Edmonds has been for part of his prime? No-but I feel they can serve a role on a team and not make the team extremely likely to be a failure either. I think they are fine role players-that's why if somebody wants to give Pierre 10 million a year, I hope Hendry doesn't sign him-because that's the money you give stars like Edmonds was for most of his career and might still be, not good role players.

[jjgman21]

I've been trying to think of a parallel, and I think I have one.

 

for those that don't want Edmonds because they hate him and also happen to be Bulls fans...

 

did you not want the Bulls to get Rodman? do you have any regrets that they did?

[RynoRules]

I've been trying to think of a parallel, and I think I have one.

 

for those that don't want Edmonds because they hate him and also happen to be Bulls fans...

 

did you not want the Bulls to get Rodman? do you have any regrets that they did?

 

That's a pretty good comparison. If you object to going after him b/c he has been one of the main parias (sp?) on the rival team for a bunch of years, then there isn't much to say. Its a dumb reason not to want him.

 

If you don't want him b/c you think his production is likely to continue to decline, that's a different matter.

[d_money]

I've been trying to think of a parallel, and I think I have one.

 

for those that don't want Edmonds because they hate him and also happen to be Bulls fans...

 

did you not want the Bulls to get Rodman? do you have any regrets that they did?

 

That's a pretty good comparison. If you object to going after him b/c he has been one of the main parias (sp?) on the rival team for a bunch of years, then there isn't much to say. Its a dumb reason not to want him.

 

If you don't want him b/c you think his production is likely to continue to decline, that's a different matter.

 

The Cubs are not the Bulls. I believe the Bulls picked up Rodman after already winning 3 WC's. Getting a guy in the winter of his career from a rival only spells doom = we depend on him being healthy (which he won't - see history) and if he is healthy, he's not a fit w/ the Cubs. Its not happening.

[RynoRules]

I've been trying to think of a parallel, and I think I have one.

 

for those that don't want Edmonds because they hate him and also happen to be Bulls fans...

 

did you not want the Bulls to get Rodman? do you have any regrets that they did?

 

That's a pretty good comparison. If you object to going after him b/c he has been one of the main parias (sp?) on the rival team for a bunch of years, then there isn't much to say. Its a dumb reason not to want him.

 

If you don't want him b/c you think his production is likely to continue to decline, that's a different matter.

 

The Cubs are not the Bulls. I believe the Bulls picked up Rodman after already winning 3 WC's. Getting a guy in the winter of his career from a rival only spells doom = we depend on him being healthy (which he won't - see history) and if he is healthy, he's not a fit w/ the Cubs. Its not happening.

 

You just made my point for me. If you think he won't help this team b/c he can't play anymore or will experience a decline that will make him a bad risk, fine, I get that. But to argue that we shouldn't sign merely b/c some people don't like him is dumb.

 

I don't understand the "he's not a good fit" argument; what does that even mean?

[Laura]

Rick Hummel / St. Louis Post-Dispatch[/url]"]La Russa, after reading Edmonds' earlier comments to Joe Strauss, in effect challenged Edmonds to put up numbers worthy of the Cardinals or anybody else giving him $10 million.

 

"If (La Russa) wants to speak about it, that's his choice," said Edmonds, pleasantly. "I didn't know that he was doing the negotiating for the contracts anymore.

 

"I have the utmost respect for Mr. Jocketty (general manager Walt Jocketty) and I don't want him to think that I was unhappy with the situation. I wasn't trying to be rude. I was just trying to be honest. I don't know what's going to happen.

 

"But my agent has told me that nothing is going to happen until whatever date they've set for the decision. Mid-November, I think."

 

La Russa, reiterating his position Friday, said, "The way I look at it, if he's worth $10 million, we give him $10 million. If he's worth $5 million, we've got to offer him a $2 million contract (plus the $3 million buyout for 2007)."

[jjgman21]

Rick Hummel / St. Louis Post-Dispatch[/url]"]La Russa, after reading Edmonds' earlier comments to Joe Strauss, in effect challenged Edmonds to put up numbers worthy of the Cardinals or anybody else giving him $10 million.

 

"If (La Russa) wants to speak about it, that's his choice," said Edmonds, pleasantly. "I didn't know that he was doing the negotiating for the contracts anymore.

 

"I have the utmost respect for Mr. Jocketty (general manager Walt Jocketty) and I don't want him to think that I was unhappy with the situation. I wasn't trying to be rude. I was just trying to be honest. I don't know what's going to happen.

 

"But my agent has told me that nothing is going to happen until whatever date they've set for the decision. Mid-November, I think."

 

La Russa, reiterating his position Friday, said, "The way I look at it, if he's worth $10 million, we give him $10 million. If he's worth $5 million, we've got to offer him a $2 million contract (plus the $3 million buyout for 2007)."

 

anyone hear any updates on this minor controversy?

 

in case anyone was still wondering why guys like playing in St. Louis...if this exchange took place on the north side of Chicago or another bigger market, this scab would be continually picked at by the media until it became a gapping, festering wound.

[Laura]

Joe Strauss / St. Louis Post-Dispatch[/url]"] "Our payroll allows you to allocate significant money for superstar players," Jocketty said. "If you have the budget of Milwaukee or somebody else, you can't afford to do that. But we have that luxury while having room to surround them with solid players. If you're starting a club, a lot of people would like to start with Pujols, Rolen and Carpenter."

 

Edmonds ($12 million), Marquis ($5.15 million), Mulder ($7.75 million) and Suppan ($4 million) command a total of $28.9 million this season. Minus the $3 million buyout it would pay Edmonds if it declines his option, the club would have about $26 million to fill the vacancies. The Cardinals are increasingly unlikely to assume Edmonds' $10 million option for 2007, an issue complicated by the Gold Glove outfielder's ongoing struggle with post-concussion syndrome, according to club sources.

 

"The only thing I'm aware of is that there are fewer commitments and there's a chunk of money that's available to make some decisions next year," La Russa said. "But beyond that I spend absolutely zero amount of time on what that means right now. Everything is involved in playing out the season."

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Mike Matheny has the same issues and it looks like he might be out of baseball because of it.

[littleburr24]

I feel a huge decline in production, if he has to shower in wrigley's cold showers before every home game.

 

That's just the away team's showers, I though.

[Balsa]

Just stay away Hendry. Stay away.