Cubs will trade J. Jones "to anyone"

[badger1679666666]

Of Course Jockstrap loved Dusty. He wasn't held accountable for anything. Not his piss poor throwing, his piss poor baserunning, nor his piss poor approach at the plate. He always started. He knows that isn't gonna happen with Lou, so his lazy, horrid ass wants out. I say kick him hard on the way out.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Bruce debunks the idea that Jones has formally requested a trade.

 

Link.

 

One report out of Denver said Jones had "formally" requested a trade from the Cubs. That is "absolutely not true," according to one Cubs higher-up.

[atcfootball]

Were do we get the idea that if a team is TRYING to move a player,,, his value goes down?

 

This is like saying that if a free agent only deals with one team, his value goes up... huh? So I'm a free agent pitcher. I talk to one team and refuse to tell anyone else I'm a free agent, my value goes up? really?

I thought that if I talked to one team, two teams, three teams... My value would go up, because then I have 3 or 4 teams trying to sign me, why is the desire to trade a player any different?

 

Every year at the trade deadline there are players there that EVERYONE knows the team would like to move... Yet somehow, someway the team with said player ends up getting fair value if not more for the said player. The value in that situation was not lowered by everyone knowing the team wanted to move the player, so why would it be so this time?

 

Sosa and Patterson were very different stories... Lets look at Jones first, Jones is coming off one of his better years. He is owed about 4/5M for the next two years.

Sosa.... It was very clear to even JH that his numbers were falling, and falling fast. He was getting paid 17M a year. Need I say more?

Patterson.... As if I need to even say it, he was sent to the minors. He hit .219 or something like that. He was swinging at EVERYTHING.

In both cases the players value was not lowered due to the Cubs desire to move the player... the players value was lowerd simply by poor play and a LOT of money still owed.

 

After reading this board after Jones was signed nearly everyone did not like the signing! After reading the board now, most would say he had a good year, his pay is low.... but he can't hit LHP, he can't field the ball and he can't throw the ball. UHM, okay, why then do we seem to think we will get great returns on him anyways? If we are fans and can figure the above out, what makes you think that other GM's in MLB can't figure the same things out? Thus, lowering Jones trade value!

 

Just a thought!

[Electron Blue]

Were do we get the idea that if a team is TRYING to move a player,,, his value goes down?

 

This is like saying that if a free agent only deals with one team, his value goes up... huh? So I'm a free agent pitcher. I talk to one team and refuse to tell anyone else I'm a free agent, my value goes up? really?

I thought that if I talked to one team, two teams, three teams... My value would go up, because then I have 3 or 4 teams trying to sign me, why is the desire to trade a player any different?

 

Every year at the trade deadline there are players there that EVERYONE knows the team would like to move... Yet somehow, someway the team with said player ends up getting fair value if not more for the said player. The value in that situation was not lowered by everyone knowing the team wanted to move the player, so why would it be so this time?

 

Sosa and Patterson were very different stories... Lets look at Jones first, Jones is coming off one of his better years. He is owed about 4/5M for the next two years.

Sosa.... It was very clear to even JH that his numbers were falling, and falling fast. He was getting paid 17M a year. Need I say more?

Patterson.... As if I need to even say it, he was sent to the minors. He hit .219 or something like that. He was swinging at EVERYTHING.

In both cases the players value was not lowered due to the Cubs desire to move the player... the players value was lowerd simply by poor play and a LOT of money still owed.

 

After reading this board after Jones was signed nearly everyone did not like the signing! After reading the board now, most would say he had a good year, his pay is low.... but he can't hit LHP, he can't field the ball and he can't throw the ball. UHM, okay, why then do we seem to think we will get great returns on him anyways? If we are fans and can figure the above out, what makes you think that other GM's in MLB can't figure the same things out? Thus, lowering Jones trade value!

 

Just a thought!

 

pretty good point, but on the other hand is the desperation factor.

 

If you know a team is DETERMINED to get rid of a player, are you likely to offer a lot for him? not if they're desperate. . . in that case, you can wait them out, wait for the demands to drop . . . if it's announced that they intend to tradehim, eventually they will drop.

[BigbadB]

pretty good point, but on the other hand is the desperation factor.

 

If you know a team is DETERMINED to get rid of a player, are you likely to offer a lot for him? not if they're desperate. . . in that case, you can wait them out, wait for the demands to drop . . . if it's announced that they intend to tradehim, eventually they will drop.

 

Well put. Nothing wrong with letting teams know that someone is available in trade, but if you go all Corey Patterson on 'em and attempt to throw him in on every deal, you end up with Nate Spears.

 

Atlanta is playing it cool with Giles. Colorado is playing it cool with Jennings. That's how Hendry should be handling Jones.

[BigbadB]

And how much more does Jones' value increase if the Cubs stuck him out there in CF in 2007 and he does a good job?

[OBPMatters]

Bruce debunks the idea that Jones has formally requested a trade.

 

Link.

 

One report out of Denver said Jones had "formally" requested a trade from the Cubs. That is "absolutely not true," according to one Cubs higher-up.

 

Do we really expect someone in the organization to say, "Jones wants out."

[Electron Blue]

pretty good point, but on the other hand is the desperation factor.

 

If you know a team is DETERMINED to get rid of a player, are you likely to offer a lot for him? not if they're desperate. . . in that case, you can wait them out, wait for the demands to drop . . . if it's announced that they intend to tradehim, eventually they will drop.

 

Well put. Nothing wrong with letting teams know that someone is available in trade, but if you go all Corey Patterson on 'em and attempt to throw him in on every deal, you end up with Nate Spears.

 

Atlanta is playing it cool with Giles. Colorado is playing it cool with Jennings. That's how Hendry should be handling Jones.

 

Indeed. I actually see no reason to announce publicly intentions to trade someone. It should be easy enough to privately contact another GM. Of course the whole reporter-leaking (I'm talkin' to you, Mr. Miles! ;)) . . . is another story.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Bruce debunks the idea that Jones has formally requested a trade.

 

Link.

 

One report out of Denver said Jones had "formally" requested a trade from the Cubs. That is "absolutely not true," according to one Cubs higher-up.

 

Jacque also said that on ESPNews earlier. I got the impression that he might have told Hendry that he wouldn't put up a fight if he wanted to deal him but that he never actually requested to be dealt.

[Andy]

Bruce debunks the idea that Jones has formally requested a trade.

 

Link.

 

One report out of Denver said Jones had "formally" requested a trade from the Cubs. That is "absolutely not true," according to one Cubs higher-up.

 

Do we really expect someone in the organization to say, "Jones wants out."

Bruce isn't in the organization and the next time he doesn't report something just to keep up a player's trade value will likely be the first.

[UBlink]

Were do we get the idea that if a team is TRYING to move a player,,, his value goes down?

 

This is like saying that if a free agent only deals with one team, his value goes up... huh? So I'm a free agent pitcher. I talk to one team and refuse to tell anyone else I'm a free agent, my value goes up? really?

I thought that if I talked to one team, two teams, three teams... My value would go up, because then I have 3 or 4 teams trying to sign me, why is the desire to trade a player any different?

 

Every year at the trade deadline there are players there that EVERYONE knows the team would like to move... Yet somehow, someway the team with said player ends up getting fair value if not more for the said player. The value in that situation was not lowered by everyone knowing the team wanted to move the player, so why would it be so this time?

 

Sosa and Patterson were very different stories... Lets look at Jones first, Jones is coming off one of his better years. He is owed about 4/5M for the next two years.

Sosa.... It was very clear to even JH that his numbers were falling, and falling fast. He was getting paid 17M a year. Need I say more?

Patterson.... As if I need to even say it, he was sent to the minors. He hit .219 or something like that. He was swinging at EVERYTHING.

In both cases the players value was not lowered due to the Cubs desire to move the player... the players value was lowerd simply by poor play and a LOT of money still owed.

 

After reading this board after Jones was signed nearly everyone did not like the signing! After reading the board now, most would say he had a good year, his pay is low.... but he can't hit LHP, he can't field the ball and he can't throw the ball. UHM, okay, why then do we seem to think we will get great returns on him anyways? If we are fans and can figure the above out, what makes you think that other GM's in MLB can't figure the same things out? Thus, lowering Jones trade value!

 

Just a thought!

 

pretty good point, but on the other hand is the desperation factor.

 

If you know a team is DETERMINED to get rid of a player, are you likely to offer a lot for him? not if they're desperate. . . in that case, you can wait them out, wait for the demands to drop . . . if it's announced that they intend to tradehim, eventually they will drop.

 

If I know a team is DETERMINED to get rid of a player it still doesn't impact what I'm likely to offer for him if I think other teams might want him too. I want to offer as little as I can as long as it's more than the other teams are offering. Whether or not his current team wants him is not nearly as important as whether other teams want him.

[NCCubFan]

yeah cubs give up jones and ohman, and get burrell, lieber and money.

Money could really help the Cubs. He's fresh and well-rested. :D

[Fred Hornkohl]

yeah cubs give up jones and ohman, and get burrell, lieber and money.

Money could really help the Cubs. He's fresh and well-rested. :D

 

Man.... he's almost as old as you, eh?? :wink:

[NCCubFan]

yeah cubs give up jones and ohman, and get burrell, lieber and money.

Money could really help the Cubs. He's fresh and well-rested. :D

 

Man.... he's almost as old as you, eh?? :wink:

His rookie year was the year I first started following the Cubs, the ill-fated 1969 season. I remember him from his days with the Phillies (the days of Wine and Rojas, as Harry liked to say).

[Fred Hornkohl]

yeah cubs give up jones and ohman, and get burrell, lieber and money.

Money could really help the Cubs. He's fresh and well-rested. :D

 

Man.... he's almost as old as you, eh?? :wink:

His rookie year was the year I first started following the Cubs, the ill-fated 1969 season. I remember him from his days with the Phillies (the days of Wine and Rojas, as Harry liked to say).

 

I used to marvel at the plays of Wine and Rojas. :wink:

[CubsWin]

pretty good point, but on the other hand is the desperation factor.

 

If you know a team is DETERMINED to get rid of a player, are you likely to offer a lot for him? not if they're desperate. . . in that case, you can wait them out, wait for the demands to drop . . . if it's announced that they intend to tradehim, eventually they will drop.

 

Well put. Nothing wrong with letting teams know that someone is available in trade, but if you go all Corey Patterson on 'em and attempt to throw him in on every deal, you end up with Nate Spears.

 

Atlanta is playing it cool with Giles. Colorado is playing it cool with Jennings. That's how Hendry should be handling Jones.

True, but what in the article gives you the idea that Hendry is DETERMINED to trade Jones?

 

Hendry didn't get a lot for Patterson. No argument here. The Sosa deal was handled poorly. Yes. He did a great job with Hundley and Lee. Okay. So what? None of those deals have much to say how he will do with Jones. And certainly nothing in that article can give us the impression without totally reading our own bias into it that he is giving Jones away. So where is all this coming from?

[goonys evil twin]

True, but what in the article gives you the idea that Hendry is DETERMINED to trade Jones?

 

Pretty much everything Jim has done this winter has given me, and a lot of others, that he is determined to trade Jones.

 

At this point, I'd be surprised if he doesn't. And while I'm not big Jones fan, I feel that what we end up with is likely to be worth less than what we had.

[daske17]

There was mention in the Tribune this morning that the Giants may be interested in Jones. Would anyone be willing to do a Vizquel-Jones trade? It would make Izturis a infield sub, and gives us a switch-hitter at SS.

[RynoRules]

There was mention in the Tribune this morning that the Giants may be interested in Jones. Would anyone be willing to do a Vizquel-Jones trade? It would make Izturis a infield sub, and gives us a switch-hitter at SS.

 

Giants don't have much (other than Cain and Lowry) who I'd be interested in.

[TheDude]

True, but what in the article gives you the idea that Hendry is DETERMINED to trade Jones?

 

Pretty much everything Jim has done this winter has given me, and a lot of others, that he is determined to trade Jones.

 

Except that he hasn't done or said anything with respect to Jones other than cryptic GM-speak. This is a media driven issue alone.

[goonys evil twin]

True, but what in the article gives you the idea that Hendry is DETERMINED to trade Jones?

 

Pretty much everything Jim has done this winter has given me, and a lot of others, that he is determined to trade Jones.

 

Except that he hasn't done or said anything with respect to Jones other than cryptic GM-speak. This is a media driven issue alone.

 

No it isn't. He signed a guy to play Jones's position. He's said he tries to accomodate players who request trades, and insinuated that he knows Jacque doesn't want to be here. He's talked about getting other LH OF help, and has stated repeatedly that Murton will remain. And there are other baseball people out there saying that Jim seems intent on dealing Jones. That's not media driven. Just because he didn't come out and say, "I am going to trade Jacque Jones this winter" doesn't mean he hasn't done or said anything with respect to Jones being dealt.

 

It seems pretty clear to me Jones won't be back. The odds are heavily in the favor of a trade.

[BigbadB]

Yeah, I think Jones is the one who wants out and Hendry is doing his best to accomodate him.

 

However, Hendry's best tends to leave a lot to be desired.

[TheDude]

True, but what in the article gives you the idea that Hendry is DETERMINED to trade Jones?

 

Pretty much everything Jim has done this winter has given me, and a lot of others, that he is determined to trade Jones.

 

Except that he hasn't done or said anything with respect to Jones other than cryptic GM-speak. This is a media driven issue alone.

 

No it isn't. He signed a guy to play Jones's position. He's said he tries to accomodate players who request trades, and insinuated that he knows Jacque doesn't want to be here. He's talked about getting other LH OF help, and has stated repeatedly that Murton will remain. And there are other baseball people out there saying that Jim seems intent on dealing Jones. That's not media driven. Just because he didn't come out and say, "I am going to trade Jacque Jones this winter" doesn't mean he hasn't done or said anything with respect to Jones being dealt.

 

It seems pretty clear to me Jones won't be back. The odds are heavily in the favor of a trade.

 

You ignored the fact that Hendry noted Jones would CF. That negates your two points regarding Soriano and Murton. The "other baseball people" I presume are peple covering the winter meetings...in other words media. So that is each of your points refuted.

 

I have no issues with people speculating Jones will be traded. I think it is a possibility. But this idea that he must go is media-driven.

[goonys evil twin]

You ignored the fact that Hendry noted Jones would CF. That negates your two points regarding Soriano and Murton. The "other baseball people" I presume are peple covering the winter meetings...in other words media. So that is each of your points refuted.

 

I have no issues with people speculating Jones will be traded. I think it is a possibility. But this idea that he must go is media-driven.

 

You haven't refuted a thing.

[LuckyPup]

There was mention in the Tribune this morning that the Giants may be interested in Jones. Would anyone be willing to do a Vizquel-Jones trade? It would make Izturis a infield sub, and gives us a switch-hitter at SS.

 

Giants don't have much (other than Cain and Lowry) who I'd be interested in.

Winn? perhaps if we lose out on Lofton/Church?