How about Marcus Giles in 2007?

[rawaction]

I think Marcus Giles is on his way down. I think he peaked early, and will continue to put up numbers similar to what he has this year. Spot in the order has nothing to do with it. Injuries do, but he's one of those guys who injuries like to find. He's going to age faster than the norm, IMO.

[sherwood921]

I have always been a big fan of Giles. He does always seem to be dinged up though, I'm not sure if that's because of his style of play or what. I definately think now would be the time to go for him as he's having a down year. I wouldn't mind Theriot backing him up either.

[goonys evil twin]

Your leadoff hitter should be a guy with atleast a .370 OBP,

 

And yet you're all about Juan Pierre.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

If you bat Giles in the leadoff spot, that means you have a weakness in your team.

 

Why?

 

He is a 2 hitter, not a 1 hitter.

 

Why?

 

On a good team, Giles is your #2 hitter.

 

Why?

 

When the Cubs traded for Lofton, their team was much more better. Now they could bat Grudzielanek in the 2 hole where he excelled.

 

Fun fact: The Cubs offense scored more runs before they acquired Lofton than after.

 

Pierre and Giles at the top of the order could be a huge asset for the Cubs in 07.

 

Giles, yes. Pierre, emphatic no.

 

If your batting Giles in the leadoff spot, you lacking a true leadoff hitter. Giles is better suited for the #2 spot. You can take advantage of his hitting skills in the #2 spot in the order. Leadoff hitter gets on, Giles bunts him over. Another example is, leadoff hitter gets on, you can hit and run with Giles.

 

Giles leading off, is like having Jason Kendall leading off. Both are excellent #2 hitters. Your lineup would be 100% better, when they are in the #2 spot in the order.

 

Your leadoff hitter should be a guy with atleast a .370 OBP, you would prefer to have him bat left-handed, a guy who will make contact, and a guy who can steal a base.

 

Please don't ever ask Giles to bunt. He's too good a hitter to give up the out.

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

Your leadoff hitter should be a guy with atleast a .370 OBP,

 

And yet you're all about Juan Pierre.

 

I was wondering about that myself.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Your leadoff hitter should be a guy with atleast a .370 OBP,

 

And yet you're all about Juan Pierre.

 

I was wondering about that myself.

 

Me three.

[baseball7897]

Pierre has had a OBP over .370 the past couple of months. If he didnt have such a terrible start to the year, he would be batting over .300, and would have a OBP near .370.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Pierre has had a OBP over .370 the past couple of months. If he didnt have such a terrible start to the year, he would be batting over .300, and would have a OBP near .370.

 

If? If Hendry would have signed Vlad, Tejada...

[baseball7897]

Pierre has had a OBP over .370 the past couple of months. If he didnt have such a terrible start to the year, he would be batting over .300, and would have a OBP near .370.

 

If? If Hendry would have signed Vlad, Tejada...

 

Your bringing up a totally different subject.

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

Pierre has had a OBP over .370 the past couple of months. If he didnt have such a terrible start to the year, he would be batting over .300, and would have a OBP near .370.

 

If? If Hendry would have signed Vlad, Tejada...

 

Your bringing up a totally different subject.

 

He's making a correlation with the word "if".

 

The point being is that you can't take out Pierre's slump and and say "if" he had not had that slump he would be over .370(obp).

 

Just as the Cubs/Cubs' fans cannot hoist a World Series trophy and claim that they were denied it solely because of not having signed Vlad or traded for Tejada.

 

The Cubs failed to sign/trade for Vlad and Tejada just as Pierre failed to get the job done earlier in the year. The outcome being that his obp is around .330 and not .370 or higher.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Pierre has had a OBP over .370 the past couple of months. If he didnt have such a terrible start to the year, he would be batting over .300, and would have a OBP near .370.

 

But he did have those months.

 

In seven seasons, Pierre has had TWO seasons in which he posted a better than 370 OBP. He's not likely to do that again.

 

This year his OBP is 330. It was 326 last season. His career OBP is 351. A few hot months does not erase his entire career.

 

If you want a lead-off hitter with a better than 350 OBP, you shouldn't look to Pierre. He's not likely to best that mark.

[baseball7897]

Pierre has had a OBP over .370 the past couple of months. If he didnt have such a terrible start to the year, he would be batting over .300, and would have a OBP near .370.

 

But he did have those months.

 

In seven seasons, Pierre has had TWO seasons in which he posted a better than 370 OBP. He's not likely to do that again.

 

This year his OBP is 330. It was 326 last season. His career OBP is 351. A few hot months does not erase his entire career.

 

If you want a lead-off hitter with a better than 350 OBP, you shouldn't look to Pierre. He's not likely to best that mark.

 

There really isnt anybody else out there.

 

Who would you suggest?

[cheapseats]

 

There really isnt anybody else out there.

 

Who would you suggest?

 

Marcus Giles.

[stitchface]

my problem with this is the young pitcher - I don't think the Cubs can afford to give up anymore young pitchers at this point. I would look to the free agent market.

 

btw, why oh why can't we have jason bay? Pittsburgh doesn't need him . . .

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Pierre has had a OBP over .370 the past couple of months. If he didnt have such a terrible start to the year, he would be batting over .300, and would have a OBP near .370.

 

But he did have those months.

 

In seven seasons, Pierre has had TWO seasons in which he posted a better than 370 OBP. He's not likely to do that again.

 

This year his OBP is 330. It was 326 last season. His career OBP is 351. A few hot months does not erase his entire career.

 

If you want a lead-off hitter with a better than 350 OBP, you shouldn't look to Pierre. He's not likely to best that mark.

 

There really isnt anybody else out there.

 

Who would you suggest?

 

There are currently 89 qualified major leaguers with an OBP at 350 or better this season. It shouldn't be too terribly hard to find one.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Pierre has had a OBP over .370 the past couple of months. If he didnt have such a terrible start to the year, he would be batting over .300, and would have a OBP near .370.

 

But he did have those months.

 

In seven seasons, Pierre has had TWO seasons in which he posted a better than 370 OBP. He's not likely to do that again.

 

This year his OBP is 330. It was 326 last season. His career OBP is 351. A few hot months does not erase his entire career.

 

If you want a lead-off hitter with a better than 350 OBP, you shouldn't look to Pierre. He's not likely to best that mark.

 

There really isnt anybody else out there.

 

Who would you suggest?

 

I would use Giles there if I weren't able to acquire a better option.

 

I've already posted what I'd do.

 

If I could trade for Giles, I'd attempt to get Sheff on a one-year deal and hope for good health.

 

2b Giles

LF Murton

1b Lee

RF Sheffield

3b Ramirez

CF Jones

C Barrett

SS Izturis

 

That could have the makings of a very potent line-up.

 

I also might be tempted to see how much it would take for the Braves to trade both Giles and A. Jones.

[jmajew]

I have always believed that Marcus Giles would be a better 2nd hitter than leadoff. I know the stats don't prove this other than this year. So i really have no basis for saying this other than what i remember vaguely. I could deal with a lineup of Pierre, Giles, DLEE, Ramirez, Barrett, Murton, Jones, Izturis. If Murotn progesses and you mix it up for RH and LH starters it could be pretty successful. Get a platoon for Jones and bat them 5th, Craig Wilson.

[A New Era]

The thing is, we were all (almost all) for getting Pierre because we knew we had baker, and knew we probably needed a "steriotypical" lead-off guy that baker would actually put there.

 

And just my opinion, but I think Pierre needed some time to adjust to wrigely and also maybe he tried to hard to impress his new fans and when Lee went down tried even a little too much harder then going into a slump because of that.

 

He's showing what he can do right now, he's showing the real juan pierre. And it's not just a little hot streak (which he had earlier) but it is an extended period of time where he is playing well. I think he will do better next year and we should keep him. And just add to that by getting a guy like giles. Or maybe keeping murton and getting soriono and you could use murton in the 2 spot.

[NCCubFan]

my problem with this is the young pitcher - I don't think the Cubs can afford to give up anymore young pitchers at this point.

I agree. With all the injury problems they've had, especially if Prior isn't productive next year, they may need the whole bunch to keep a decent rotation going next year.

[David]

If your batting Giles in the leadoff spot, you lacking a true leadoff hitter. Giles is better suited for the #2 spot. You can take advantage of his hitting skills in the #2 spot in the order. Leadoff hitter gets on, Giles bunts him over. Another example is, leadoff hitter gets on, you can hit and run with Giles.

 

Giles leading off, is like having Jason Kendall leading off. Both are excellent #2 hitters. Your lineup would be 100% better, when they are in the #2 spot in the order.

 

Your leadoff hitter should be a guy with atleast a .370 OBP, you would prefer to have him bat left-handed, a guy who will make contact, and a guy who can steal a base.

 

Outside of having a high OBP, I completely disagree with everything you said.

 

QFT

 

Oh, and how exactly do you come up with "your lineup would be 100% better" with Kendall or Giles in the #2 spot?

[David]

The thing is, we were all (almost all) for getting Pierre because we knew we had baker, and knew we probably needed a "steriotypical" lead-off guy that baker would actually put there.

 

I don't remember it that way, at all.

[goonys evil twin]

The thing is, we were all (almost all) for getting Pierre because we knew we had baker, and knew we probably needed a "steriotypical" lead-off guy that baker would actually put there.

 

I don't remember it that way, at all.

 

Yeah, that isn't anywhere close to the truth.

[jmajew]

The thing is, we were all (almost all) for getting Pierre because we knew we had baker, and knew we probably needed a "steriotypical" lead-off guy that baker would actually put there.

 

I don't remember it that way, at all.

 

Yeah, that isn't anywhere close to the truth.

 

I think most people would rather have signed Lofton and gotten basicall the exact same production. It would have only cost us a lot less.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

The thing is, we were all (almost all) for getting Pierre because we knew we had baker, and knew we probably needed a "steriotypical" lead-off guy that baker would actually put there.

 

I don't remember it that way, at all.

 

Yeah, that isn't anywhere close to the truth.

 

I think most people would rather have signed Lofton and gotten basicall the exact same production. It would have only cost us a lot less.

 

I wanted Lofton.

[soapy]

The thing is, we were all (almost all) for getting Pierre because we knew we had baker, and knew we probably needed a "steriotypical" lead-off guy that baker would actually put there.

 

I don't remember it that way, at all.

 

Yeah, that isn't anywhere close to the truth.

 

Yeah, I'd say the majority of this board was against that trade.