Are there any more transactions coming?

[Pushfrog98]

A couple of real quick thoughts...

 

1) Am I correct in thinking that Mark Grace was the last position player the Cubs developed that turned into anything "solid" or am I missing someone else big? I keep thinking about Dunston, but as great as he was, he never really stepped up the way Grace did. Walton was a bust, and I am drawing a blank on anyone else.

 

2) What is the deal with everybody's ginormous man-crush on Michael Wuertz? Honestly, what has he done that has gotten him onto everybody's "Do not trade him even if its for the next Ted Williams/Babe Ruth/etc" list? Every time he takes the mound, I get nervous that he's going to spike another fastball into the dirt ala Jaque Jones, or float another breaking ball into the brick wall. Yet, the same people are quick to pull the trigger on Scott Eyre... I'd rather get rid of Will Ohman first (great guy, but a 4+ ERA last year... definately a LOOGY guy...)

[Rob]

Our farm system isn't "below average." It produced the likes of Murton and Hill. Have you checked out Wilken's draft record? We're going to be producing ML talent consistently from here on out.

 

Murton was a product of the Red Sox, not the Cubs.

 

I hope Wilken turns things around, but the Cubs farm system is currently below average.

 

I don't understand. 10 yrs from now hopefully no one will remember where Murton was drafted. They'll remember where he made his name. Is Ryne Sandberg a Phillie? I agree with your posts most of the time but Hendry picked Murton out of a million. He does deserve a little credit on that trade. I wish someone would come out and say he seen a little something in Murton. Where's Bruce Miles when you need him?

 

If I remember correctly, Murton was originally taken from the Red Sox in order to be sent to the Expos, but at the last minute they changed their mind on Murton and asked for Brendan Harris. Matt Murton fell into the Cubs lap. I'm a big Hendry supporter, but I don't believe he deserves all the credit!

 

You don't remember correctly.

 

Baseball America's 2005 Prospect Handbook says "The Expos weren't interested in getting Murton from the Red Sox in the trade, so Hendry offered to give up Harris and take Murton at the last moment."

 

Perhaps the Expos didn't explicitly ask for Harris instead of Murton, but the situation did still kind of fall into Hendry's lap. I will grant him the credit for capitalizing on it, but it's still partially due to sheer dumb luck.

[soccer10k]

2) What is the deal with everybody's ginormous man-crush on Michael Wuertz? Honestly, what has he done that has gotten him onto everybody's "Do not trade him even if its for the next Ted Williams/Babe Ruth/etc" list? Every time he takes the mound, I get nervous that he's going to spike another fastball into the dirt ala Jaque Jones, or float another breaking ball into the brick wall. Yet, the same people are quick to pull the trigger on Scott Eyre... I'd rather get rid of Will Ohman first (great guy, but a 4+ ERA last year... definately a LOOGY guy...)

 

Well, Wuertz posted the best ERA at 2.66 of any reliever on the team last year and the best ERA period for anyone who saw substantial time (Ryan O'Malley had a 2.13 ERA in only 12.2 IP). He also posted the second best WHIP for a Cubs reliever last year (behind Howry) and third on the team (behind hill as well). There was no reason he should have been in AAA for a couple months last year.

[nilodnayr]

2) What is the deal with everybody's ginormous man-crush on Michael Wuertz? Honestly, what has he done that has gotten him onto everybody's "Do not trade him even if its for the next Ted Williams/Babe Ruth/etc" list? Every time he takes the mound, I get nervous that he's going to spike another fastball into the dirt ala Jaque Jones, or float another breaking ball into the brick wall. Yet, the same people are quick to pull the trigger on Scott Eyre... I'd rather get rid of Will Ohman first (great guy, but a 4+ ERA last year... definately a LOOGY guy...)

 

Well, Wuertz posted the best ERA at 2.66 of any reliever on the team last year and the best ERA period for anyone who saw substantial time (Ryan O'Malley had a 2.13 ERA in only 12.2 IP). He also posted the second best WHIP for a Cubs reliever last year (behind Howry) and third on the team (behind hill as well). There was no reason he should have been in AAA for a couple months last year.

 

Wuertz had good peripherals, Eyre's were bad...Wuertz is the right side of 30 and under control for another 3 years at arbi prices vs Eyre who will turn 35 and is owed 7.3M for the next 2 years. I haven't heard anyone say to not trade him for the next best hitter in baseball history, just that he is a valuable reliever at a cheap price and we have others that should be traded ahead of him.

[Pushfrog98]

2) What is the deal with everybody's ginormous man-crush on Michael Wuertz? Honestly, what has he done that has gotten him onto everybody's "Do not trade him even if its for the next Ted Williams/Babe Ruth/etc" list? Every time he takes the mound, I get nervous that he's going to spike another fastball into the dirt ala Jaque Jones, or float another breaking ball into the brick wall. Yet, the same people are quick to pull the trigger on Scott Eyre... I'd rather get rid of Will Ohman first (great guy, but a 4+ ERA last year... definately a LOOGY guy...)

 

Well, Wuertz posted the best ERA at 2.66 of any reliever on the team last year and the best ERA period for anyone who saw substantial time (Ryan O'Malley had a 2.13 ERA in only 12.2 IP). He also posted the second best WHIP for a Cubs reliever last year (behind Howry) and third on the team (behind hill as well). There was no reason he should have been in AAA for a couple months last year.

 

Wuertz had good peripherals, Eyre's were bad...Wuertz is the right side of 30 and under control for another 3 years at arbi prices vs Eyre who will turn 35 and is owed 7.3M for the next 2 years. I haven't heard anyone say to not trade him for the next best hitter in baseball history, just that he is a valuable reliever at a cheap price and we have others that should be traded ahead of him.

I understand some of the stats points, but how often has he performed that well? Trust me, I hope last year wasn't a fluke, but I still get nervous every time he takes the mound...

[Ding Dong Johnson]

how often has he performed that well?

 

More times than not over the past 3 seasons. He's been an above average pitcher since making his debut and was phenomenal last season.

[CubinNY]

how often has he performed that well?

 

More times than not over the past 3 seasons. He's been an above average pitcher since making his debut and was phenomenal last season.

 

I totally agree Wurtz is worth keeping on the roster. However, I have a minor quibble. He's a reliever, short of Eric Gange circa 2002 any reliever should be traded in the right deal. They are a dime a dozen.

[NCCubFan]

Vance, Samardzija has 4 option years.

I always thought a player had three option years. Was that a change in the new CBA?

[A New Era]

No, the Cubs should not be given credit for "developing" Murton. I've written that. They do deserve credit for trading for him. When the trade was made, others in baseball were aghast that the Cubs came out of it with both Nomar and Murton. We'll see how the Cubs handle it from here. The jury is out.

 

I wish they would have stuck it out with Nomar another year, too, but I understand why they didn't. Yes, finding a position for him was probably a factor besides the fact the Cubs didn't really get their money's worth the 2 previous years.

 

We couldn't have predicted Cedeno would end up being as bad as he was. I was penciling him into RF, with a move to 1st being perfect for him when Lee got hurt. Jones/Murton in left would have been a good platoon last year with Nomar in RF.

 

I don't wish to dwell on that, however. Hendry does deserve kudos for getting Murton in that deal. I never said he didn't deserve it.

 

Yeah, I wish they would have kept Nomar, too. What a joy to be around. He really treated us media members well, probably because of his experience in Boston. I went up to him a couple times last year, and he was a true gentleman. In hindsight, he would have fit perfectly at first base when D-Lee got hurt, but who knew?

 

Bruce, you think the fact that all they had for 1B when dlee went down was macias/blanco/mabry (until they aquired nevin) is one of the reasons why they went after such a good bench this year? They found out 1st hand how having a lacking bench can really hurt last year. And I beleive Ward and Floyd coupled with Theroit and whoever else is a GOOD bench. If Lee has to miss a week at any point Ward at 1B sure looks better than anything we had out there last year. .

[Rob]

2) What is the deal with everybody's ginormous man-crush on Michael Wuertz? Honestly, what has he done that has gotten him onto everybody's "Do not trade him even if its for the next Ted Williams/Babe Ruth/etc" list? Every time he takes the mound, I get nervous that he's going to spike another fastball into the dirt ala Jaque Jones, or float another breaking ball into the brick wall. Yet, the same people are quick to pull the trigger on Scott Eyre... I'd rather get rid of Will Ohman first (great guy, but a 4+ ERA last year... definately a LOOGY guy...)

 

Well, Wuertz posted the best ERA at 2.66 of any reliever on the team last year and the best ERA period for anyone who saw substantial time (Ryan O'Malley had a 2.13 ERA in only 12.2 IP). He also posted the second best WHIP for a Cubs reliever last year (behind Howry) and third on the team (behind hill as well). There was no reason he should have been in AAA for a couple months last year.

 

Wuertz had good peripherals, Eyre's were bad...Wuertz is the right side of 30 and under control for another 3 years at arbi prices vs Eyre who will turn 35 and is owed 7.3M for the next 2 years. I haven't heard anyone say to not trade him for the next best hitter in baseball history, just that he is a valuable reliever at a cheap price and we have others that should be traded ahead of him.

I understand some of the stats points, but how often has he performed that well? Trust me, I hope last year wasn't a fluke, but I still get nervous every time he takes the mound...

 

How often has Scott Eyre performed that well?

 

If we look at something even as crude as ERA, Eyre has topped that 2.66 mark twice in 10 seasons... one of those times being in a season where he only threw eleven and a third innings. His other mark that topped Wuertz was his 2005 season, where he posted a 2.63 ERA, in a better park for pitchers.

 

And then we have to consider that Wuertz is much younger and much cheaper... while being just as effective as Eyre, but without the higher perceived market value.

[RichHillIsABeast]

A couple of real quick thoughts...

 

1) Am I correct in thinking that Mark Grace was the last position player the Cubs developed that turned into anything "solid" or am I missing someone else big? I keep thinking about Dunston, but as great as he was, he never really stepped up the way Grace did. Walton was a bust, and I am drawing a blank on anyone else.

 

2) What is the deal with everybody's ginormous man-crush on Michael Wuertz? Honestly, what has he done that has gotten him onto everybody's "Do not trade him even if its for the next Ted Williams/Babe Ruth/etc" list? Every time he takes the mound, I get nervous that he's going to spike another fastball into the dirt ala Jaque Jones, or float another breaking ball into the brick wall. Yet, the same people are quick to pull the trigger on Scott Eyre... I'd rather get rid of Will Ohman first (great guy, but a 4+ ERA last year... definately a LOOGY guy...)

 

He's not spiking fastballs into the dirt. They're sliders. And funnily enough, guys swing at that all the time.

 

You know you're slider is good when you throw nothing but sliders in an AB on a regular basis.

 

Wuertz is awesome. He'd be a better closer than Dempster, that's for sure.

 

* I like Eyre too. Ohman is a LOOGY, you're right. And a darn good one at that.

[Wrigley Rat]

Our farm system isn't "below average." It produced the likes of Murton and Hill. Have you checked out Wilken's draft record? We're going to be producing ML talent consistently from here on out.

 

Murton was a product of the Red Sox, not the Cubs.

 

I hope Wilken turns things around, but the Cubs farm system is currently below average.

 

I don't understand. 10 yrs from now hopefully no one will remember where Murton was drafted. They'll remember where he made his name. Is Ryne Sandberg a Phillie? I agree with your posts most of the time but Hendry picked Murton out of a million. He does deserve a little credit on that trade. I wish someone would come out and say he seen a little something in Murton. Where's Bruce Miles when you need him?

 

If I remember correctly, Murton was originally taken from the Red Sox in order to be sent to the Expos, but at the last minute they changed their mind on Murton and asked for Brendan Harris. Matt Murton fell into the Cubs lap. I'm a big Hendry supporter, but I don't believe he deserves all the credit!

 

You don't remember correctly.

 

Baseball America's 2005 Prospect Handbook says "The Expos weren't interested in getting Murton from the Red Sox in the trade, so Hendry offered to give up Harris and take Murton at the last moment."

 

Perhaps the Expos didn't explicitly ask for Harris instead of Murton, but the situation did still kind of fall into Hendry's lap. I will grant him the credit for capitalizing on it, but it's still partially due to sheer dumb luck.

 

Thanks for finding that Rob - it would have driven me crazy! I also agree with your comments.

[Bruce Miles]

No, the Cubs should not be given credit for "developing" Murton. I've written that. They do deserve credit for trading for him. When the trade was made, others in baseball were aghast that the Cubs came out of it with both Nomar and Murton. We'll see how the Cubs handle it from here. The jury is out.

 

I wish they would have stuck it out with Nomar another year, too, but I understand why they didn't. Yes, finding a position for him was probably a factor besides the fact the Cubs didn't really get their money's worth the 2 previous years.

 

We couldn't have predicted Cedeno would end up being as bad as he was. I was penciling him into RF, with a move to 1st being perfect for him when Lee got hurt. Jones/Murton in left would have been a good platoon last year with Nomar in RF.

 

I don't wish to dwell on that, however. Hendry does deserve kudos for getting Murton in that deal. I never said he didn't deserve it.

 

Yeah, I wish they would have kept Nomar, too. What a joy to be around. He really treated us media members well, probably because of his experience in Boston. I went up to him a couple times last year, and he was a true gentleman. In hindsight, he would have fit perfectly at first base when D-Lee got hurt, but who knew?

 

Bruce, you think the fact that all they had for 1B when dlee went down was macias/blanco/mabry (until they aquired nevin) is one of the reasons why they went after such a good bench this year? They found out 1st hand how having a lacking bench can really hurt last year. And I beleive Ward and Floyd coupled with Theroit and whoever else is a GOOD bench. If Lee has to miss a week at any point Ward at 1B sure looks better than anything we had out there last year. .

 

I'd say you've got this sized up pretty well. Remember, too, that Walker had to play some first base.

[Soul]

The bench is finally respectable. Before this year is over, I'm betting we're going to reap the benefits. Somebody's going to get injured and this year we've got a few players who can keep us playing good baseball until the starter comes off the injury list (unlike last year).

[Ding Dong Johnson]

how often has he performed that well?

 

More times than not over the past 3 seasons. He's been an above average pitcher since making his debut and was phenomenal last season.

 

I totally agree Wurtz is worth keeping on the roster. However, I have a minor quibble. He's a reliever, short of Eric Gange circa 2002 any reliever should be traded in the right deal. They are a dime a dozen.

 

I don't disagree. There isn't a reliever that I wouldn't trade in the right deal, 02 Gagne included.

[nilodnayr]

2) What is the deal with everybody's ginormous man-crush on Michael Wuertz? Honestly, what has he done that has gotten him onto everybody's "Do not trade him even if its for the next Ted Williams/Babe Ruth/etc" list? Every time he takes the mound, I get nervous that he's going to spike another fastball into the dirt ala Jaque Jones, or float another breaking ball into the brick wall. Yet, the same people are quick to pull the trigger on Scott Eyre... I'd rather get rid of Will Ohman first (great guy, but a 4+ ERA last year... definately a LOOGY guy...)

 

Well, Wuertz posted the best ERA at 2.66 of any reliever on the team last year and the best ERA period for anyone who saw substantial time (Ryan O'Malley had a 2.13 ERA in only 12.2 IP). He also posted the second best WHIP for a Cubs reliever last year (behind Howry) and third on the team (behind hill as well). There was no reason he should have been in AAA for a couple months last year.

 

Wuertz had good peripherals, Eyre's were bad...Wuertz is the right side of 30 and under control for another 3 years at arbi prices vs Eyre who will turn 35 and is owed 7.3M for the next 2 years. I haven't heard anyone say to not trade him for the next best hitter in baseball history, just that he is a valuable reliever at a cheap price and we have others that should be traded ahead of him.

I understand some of the stats points, but how often has he performed that well? Trust me, I hope last year wasn't a fluke, but I still get nervous every time he takes the mound...

 

How often has Scott Eyre performed that well?

 

If we look at something even as crude as ERA, Eyre has topped that 2.66 mark twice in 10 seasons... one of those times being in a season where he only threw eleven and a third innings. His other mark that topped Wuertz was his 2005 season, where he posted a 2.63 ERA, in a better park for pitchers.

 

And then we have to consider that Wuertz is much younger and much cheaper... while being just as effective as Eyre, but without the higher perceived market value.

 

Actually, that was just a partial year (2002). He put up a 4.46 for that season on a whole. And the other year he topped that mark (2005) his BABIP was a lucky 261.

[Rob]

2) What is the deal with everybody's ginormous man-crush on Michael Wuertz? Honestly, what has he done that has gotten him onto everybody's "Do not trade him even if its for the next Ted Williams/Babe Ruth/etc" list? Every time he takes the mound, I get nervous that he's going to spike another fastball into the dirt ala Jaque Jones, or float another breaking ball into the brick wall. Yet, the same people are quick to pull the trigger on Scott Eyre... I'd rather get rid of Will Ohman first (great guy, but a 4+ ERA last year... definately a LOOGY guy...)

 

Well, Wuertz posted the best ERA at 2.66 of any reliever on the team last year and the best ERA period for anyone who saw substantial time (Ryan O'Malley had a 2.13 ERA in only 12.2 IP). He also posted the second best WHIP for a Cubs reliever last year (behind Howry) and third on the team (behind hill as well). There was no reason he should have been in AAA for a couple months last year.

 

Wuertz had good peripherals, Eyre's were bad...Wuertz is the right side of 30 and under control for another 3 years at arbi prices vs Eyre who will turn 35 and is owed 7.3M for the next 2 years. I haven't heard anyone say to not trade him for the next best hitter in baseball history, just that he is a valuable reliever at a cheap price and we have others that should be traded ahead of him.

I understand some of the stats points, but how often has he performed that well? Trust me, I hope last year wasn't a fluke, but I still get nervous every time he takes the mound...

 

How often has Scott Eyre performed that well?

 

If we look at something even as crude as ERA, Eyre has topped that 2.66 mark twice in 10 seasons... one of those times being in a season where he only threw eleven and a third innings. His other mark that topped Wuertz was his 2005 season, where he posted a 2.63 ERA, in a better park for pitchers.

 

And then we have to consider that Wuertz is much younger and much cheaper... while being just as effective as Eyre, but without the higher perceived market value.

 

Actually, that was just a partial year (2002). He put up a 4.46 for that season on a whole. And the other year he topped that mark (2005) his BABIP was a lucky 261.

 

Thanks for the correction. My research is bound to be on the sloppy side when I'm sloppy drunk.

[A New Era]

Yeah, I wish they would have kept Nomar, too. What a joy to be around. He really treated us media members well, probably because of his experience in Boston. I went up to him a couple times last year, and he was a true gentleman. In hindsight, he would have fit perfectly at first base when D-Lee got hurt, but who knew?

 

Bruce, you think the fact that all they had for 1B when dlee went down was macias/blanco/mabry (until they aquired nevin) is one of the reasons why they went after such a good bench this year? They found out 1st hand how having a lacking bench can really hurt last year. And I beleive Ward and Floyd coupled with Theroit and whoever else is a GOOD bench. If Lee has to miss a week at any point Ward at 1B sure looks better than anything we had out there last year. .

 

I'd say you've got this sized up pretty well. Remember, too, that Walker had to play some first base.

 

Yeah, true. But Walker wasn't meant as a 1B backup. You've gotta remember, when Walker went to 1B, you had to throw out Neifi at 2B, and that was ugly. .

[gus_dog]

You don't have to worry about any of this. There is no such deal being discussed.

How do you know that for sure? No offense, but I doubt Hendry tells reporters all the deals that he's discussing.

 

OK. Believe what you will. I think my track record holds up pretty well.

 

No offence, but the last thing I consider is your track record. I don't care. I care about the Cubs making themselves better.

 

It may be all BS, but maybe not. I'm only reporting what my buddy told me.

 

Either he's all wet, or you are.

 

Time will define the truth of the matter.

 

That is one of the most illogical comments I have ever read.

 

Perhaps my comments were rash, and they did not perfectly relate my thoughts.

 

It seemed like the comments I passed on were being transformed into some kind of street cred pissing contest, and I'm not into that.

 

I was simply passing on some info related to me. I'm not staking any kind of reputation to it, because I don't have one to stake. I hope it's true, but I don't know.

 

Take the info FWIW.

Edited February 4, 2007 by gus_dog

[gus_dog]

You don't have to worry about any of this. There is no such deal being discussed.

How do you know that for sure? No offense, but I doubt Hendry tells reporters all the deals that he's discussing.

 

OK. Believe what you will. I think my track record holds up pretty well.

 

No offence, but the last thing I consider is your track record. I don't care. I care about the Cubs making themselves better.

 

It may be all BS, but maybe not. I'm only reporting what my buddy told me.

 

Either he's all wet, or you are.

 

Time will define the truth of the matter.

 

How can you not consider somebody's track record? Aren't track records the only thing we really have to go on? Has your imaginary friend given you good info before? If so, what? If not, why would you believe him? Sorry to butt in, but I've been coming here a couple years and Bruce never starts unsubstantiated rumors, and it's pretty irritating when jealous a-holes give him crap.

 

Totally uncalled for.

 

I agree with Bruce here, but that's no reason to insult anyone.

Sorry about that; I got carried away.

 

Apology accepted, since I guess I was the one you were referring to as a jealous anal sphincter with make believe friends....

[SAMMYWHO]

Our farm system isn't "below average." It produced the likes of Murton and Hill. Have you checked out Wilken's draft record? We're going to be producing ML talent consistently from here on out.

 

Murton was a product of the Red Sox, not the Cubs.

 

I hope Wilken turns things around, but the Cubs farm system is currently below average.

 

I don't understand. 10 yrs from now hopefully no one will remember where Murton was drafted. They'll remember where he made his name. Is Ryne Sandberg a Phillie? I agree with your posts most of the time but Hendry picked Murton out of a million. He does deserve a little credit on that trade. I wish someone would come out and say he seen a little something in Murton. Where's Bruce Miles when you need him?

 

I didn't say anything about not giving him credit for the trade. The words used in the original post were that the Cubs "produced" the likes of Murton. No, they didn't. Boston drafted him and they produced him until the Cubs traded for him. The Cubs can have some credit for continuing his progression, but Boston drafted him.

 

Prior was pretty much a finished product before the Cubs ever drafted him, but I would still say that the Cubs "produced" him, because the Cubs drafted him and he progressed through their system. Ryne Sandberg was a product of the Phillies. There's nothing wrong with recognizing a good prospect and trading for them, but you don't get to take the credit for drafting them and developing them into major leaguers.

 

So, I do give credit to Hendry for the trade. I do not give him credit for developing him into a major leaguer. And I'm still a bit shocked that Hendry did trade for Murton, because he doesn't fit the mold of the skill set Hendry likes. Hendry likes tools guys and Murton does not fit the description. And when the season starts, we still don't know who will get the bulk of the at bats, Floyd or Murton.

 

I guess my point was I remember reading the Nomar thread here and didn't recall anyone being excited about Murton coming along too. If my memory serves me correctly, I don't remember anyone thinking Murton would be called up when he did. Pie was the chosen one.

I also don't agree with the Cubs system being below average. We have what everyone wants, Pitching. I realize we have to start developing position players but pitchers are far and away more valuable than position players. As far as Murton goes, it's just funny to look back and see how well we came out of that trade with no presence from Nomar.

[Illini Iceman]

Our farm system isn't "below average." It produced the likes of Murton and Hill. Have you checked out Wilken's draft record? We're going to be producing ML talent consistently from here on out.

 

Murton was a product of the Red Sox, not the Cubs.

 

I hope Wilken turns things around, but the Cubs farm system is currently below average.

 

I don't understand. 10 yrs from now hopefully no one will remember where Murton was drafted. They'll remember where he made his name. Is Ryne Sandberg a Phillie? I agree with your posts most of the time but Hendry picked Murton out of a million. He does deserve a little credit on that trade. I wish someone would come out and say he seen a little something in Murton. Where's Bruce Miles when you need him?

 

If I remember correctly, Murton was originally taken from the Red Sox in order to be sent to the Expos, but at the last minute they changed their mind on Murton and asked for Brendan Harris. Matt Murton fell into the Cubs lap. I'm a big Hendry supporter, but I don't believe he deserves all the credit!

 

You don't remember correctly.

 

Baseball America's 2005 Prospect Handbook says "The Expos weren't interested in getting Murton from the Red Sox in the trade, so Hendry offered to give up Harris and take Murton at the last moment."

 

Perhaps the Expos didn't explicitly ask for Harris instead of Murton, but the situation did still kind of fall into Hendry's lap. I will grant him the credit for capitalizing on it, but it's still partially due to sheer dumb luck.

 

Thanks for finding that Rob - it would have driven me crazy! I also agree with your comments.

 

The Expos not wanting Murton was not the issue. The issue is that they REALLY wanted Harris and Hendry did not want to include him in the deal. The Twins part was set with Justin Jones for Mientkiewicz. The Cubs were in agreement to send Cabrera and Mientkiewicz to Boston for Nomar. However, the Expos were holding up the deal for the Cubs to get Cabrera because they insisted that Harris be included and Hendry didn't want to do that. Theo really was motivated to get the deal to go through because he needed a first baseman in Mientkiewicz and wanted to get rid of Nomar. He sweetened the deal for the Cubs by adding in Murton to the Cubs / Red Sox trade if the Cubs would give in on including Harris to make the Expos trade work. I guess you could say that Murton fell into Hendry's lap or you could say that he took advantage of Theo's urgency to get the deal done in order to extract some more value. To me that is what makes a good negotiater.

 

In retrospect it all seems rather silly that the Expos and the Cubs were making an issue over Harris who turned out to be nothing special, but it worked out well for the Cubs.

[davearm]

Our farm system isn't "below average." It produced the likes of Murton and Hill. Have you checked out Wilken's draft record? We're going to be producing ML talent consistently from here on out.

 

Murton was a product of the Red Sox, not the Cubs.

 

I hope Wilken turns things around, but the Cubs farm system is currently below average.

 

I don't understand. 10 yrs from now hopefully no one will remember where Murton was drafted. They'll remember where he made his name. Is Ryne Sandberg a Phillie? I agree with your posts most of the time but Hendry picked Murton out of a million. He does deserve a little credit on that trade. I wish someone would come out and say he seen a little something in Murton. Where's Bruce Miles when you need him?

 

If I remember correctly, Murton was originally taken from the Red Sox in order to be sent to the Expos, but at the last minute they changed their mind on Murton and asked for Brendan Harris. Matt Murton fell into the Cubs lap. I'm a big Hendry supporter, but I don't believe he deserves all the credit!

 

You don't remember correctly.

 

Baseball America's 2005 Prospect Handbook says "The Expos weren't interested in getting Murton from the Red Sox in the trade, so Hendry offered to give up Harris and take Murton at the last moment."

 

Perhaps the Expos didn't explicitly ask for Harris instead of Murton, but the situation did still kind of fall into Hendry's lap. I will grant him the credit for capitalizing on it, but it's still partially due to sheer dumb luck.

 

Thanks for finding that Rob - it would have driven me crazy! I also agree with your comments.

 

The Expos not wanting Murton was not the issue. The issue is that they REALLY wanted Harris and Hendry did not want to include him in the deal. The Twins part was set with Justin Jones for Mientkiewicz. The Cubs were in agreement to send Cabrera and Mientkiewicz to Boston for Nomar. However, the Expos were holding up the deal for the Cubs to get Cabrera because they insisted that Harris be included and Hendry didn't want to do that. Theo really was motivated to get the deal to go through because he needed a first baseman in Mientkiewicz and wanted to get rid of Nomar. He sweetened the deal for the Cubs by adding in Murton to the Cubs / Red Sox trade if the Cubs would give in on including Harris to make the Expos trade work. I guess you could say that Murton fell into Hendry's lap or you could say that he took advantage of Theo's urgency to get the deal done in order to extract some more value. To me that is what makes a good negotiater.

 

In retrospect it all seems rather silly that the Expos and the Cubs were making an issue over Harris who turned out to be nothing special, but it worked out well for the Cubs.

That's not how Jim Hendry recalls things.

 

"Theo, in the last 10 to 15 minutes, offered Murton to Omar, but Omar preferred Harris," Hendry recalls. "I said, 'Heck, I'll take Murton.' We liked him then. We really like him now. That's probably the best (throw-in) we've gotten."

 

I've also heard versions of the story where things happened so quickly in the final minutes, that Theo Epstein didn't realize Murton was going to the Cubs (he knew Murton was in the deal, but thought one of the other teams was getting him).

[Illini Iceman]

Our farm system isn't "below average." It produced the likes of Murton and Hill. Have you checked out Wilken's draft record? We're going to be producing ML talent consistently from here on out.

 

Murton was a product of the Red Sox, not the Cubs.

 

I hope Wilken turns things around, but the Cubs farm system is currently below average.

 

I don't understand. 10 yrs from now hopefully no one will remember where Murton was drafted. They'll remember where he made his name. Is Ryne Sandberg a Phillie? I agree with your posts most of the time but Hendry picked Murton out of a million. He does deserve a little credit on that trade. I wish someone would come out and say he seen a little something in Murton. Where's Bruce Miles when you need him?

 

If I remember correctly, Murton was originally taken from the Red Sox in order to be sent to the Expos, but at the last minute they changed their mind on Murton and asked for Brendan Harris. Matt Murton fell into the Cubs lap. I'm a big Hendry supporter, but I don't believe he deserves all the credit!

 

You don't remember correctly.

 

Baseball America's 2005 Prospect Handbook says "The Expos weren't interested in getting Murton from the Red Sox in the trade, so Hendry offered to give up Harris and take Murton at the last moment."

 

Perhaps the Expos didn't explicitly ask for Harris instead of Murton, but the situation did still kind of fall into Hendry's lap. I will grant him the credit for capitalizing on it, but it's still partially due to sheer dumb luck.

 

Thanks for finding that Rob - it would have driven me crazy! I also agree with your comments.

 

The Expos not wanting Murton was not the issue. The issue is that they REALLY wanted Harris and Hendry did not want to include him in the deal. The Twins part was set with Justin Jones for Mientkiewicz. The Cubs were in agreement to send Cabrera and Mientkiewicz to Boston for Nomar. However, the Expos were holding up the deal for the Cubs to get Cabrera because they insisted that Harris be included and Hendry didn't want to do that. Theo really was motivated to get the deal to go through because he needed a first baseman in Mientkiewicz and wanted to get rid of Nomar. He sweetened the deal for the Cubs by adding in Murton to the Cubs / Red Sox trade if the Cubs would give in on including Harris to make the Expos trade work. I guess you could say that Murton fell into Hendry's lap or you could say that he took advantage of Theo's urgency to get the deal done in order to extract some more value. To me that is what makes a good negotiater.

 

In retrospect it all seems rather silly that the Expos and the Cubs were making an issue over Harris who turned out to be nothing special, but it worked out well for the Cubs.

That's not how Jim Hendry recalls things.

 

"Theo, in the last 10 to 15 minutes, offered Murton to Omar, but Omar preferred Harris," Hendry recalls. "I said, 'Heck, I'll take Murton.' We liked him then. We really like him now. That's probably the best (throw-in) we've gotten."

 

I've also heard versions of the story where things happened so quickly in the final minutes, that Theo Epstein didn't realize Murton was going to the Cubs (he knew Murton was in the deal, but thought one of the other teams was getting him).

 

I concede that is a variation, but the point still stays the same. The Expos wanted Harris, Hendry didn't want to give him up, Theo tried to push the deal through by including Murton, the Expos still did not budge, but Hendry jumped in and gave up Harris in exchage for also getting Murton. Point is that if Hendry had just agreed to give Harris up in the first place Murton never would have come into play. Theo probably couldn't care less who got who, as long as he got the players he wanted out of the deal. For some reason he really coveted Mientkiewicz.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Vance, Samardzija has 4 option years.

I always thought a player had three option years. Was that a change in the new CBA?

 

A draftee gets four option years if he's signs a major league contract. Otherwise, it's still three option years.