Garrett Anderson?

[CoolHandLuke]

I remember a conversation I had with a friend in 2003 discussing how under-rated GA was.

[CoolHandLuke]

I hope he retires, how rare is it now for a player to stick with one organization for their entire career?

[SouthSideRyan]

I remember a conversation I had with a friend in 2003 discussing how under-rated GA was.

 

Garrett Anderson was everyone's favorite "most underrated player in baseball" which of course wound up making him overrated.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I remember a conversation I had with a friend in 2003 discussing how under-rated GA was.

 

Garrett Anderson was everyone's favorite "most underrated player in baseball" which of course wound up making him overrated.

 

Funny how Milton Bradley gets a similar sentiment these days. Will we be having a similar thread on him 5 years from now?

[17 Seconds]

Is it really necessary to have you avatar and sig about Gathright? I mean, seriously, I don't get that. It's not like Hendry signed him to start or even compete. He's a bench player. I'm sure he knows that his offense is trash.

[BDWeav71]

Is it really necessary to have you avatar and sig about Gathright? I mean, seriously, I don't get that. It's not like Hendry signed him to start or even compete. He's a bench player. I'm sure he knows that his offense is trash.

 

 

Just about as necessary as this comment.

[mcgoobs]

Geez - I'm reminded of the reason I quit coming here so often. When I first joined, this was a great forum where you could bring up an idea and expect a little respectful discussion - even when people didn't agree.

 

For those of you who simply said no, or gave a couple reasons for why you would say no - thank you.

 

For those of you who can't come up with anything other than "lol's" or "why stop there?" or "that was my favorite part of the post," thanks for offering up some really well thought out reasoning.

 

Oh - and by the way, for the record I never said it would be a good idea - all I did was toss the idea out there because I hadn't heard his name come up and I knew Hendry seemed to want a LH OF'r. Personally, the only option I like is Bradley but I know the odds of him being healthy enough to play a full season are slim at best.

 

Some people really need to lighten up.

 

To be frank, I think the reaction is more a result of how low on Hendry's priority list going after Garrett Anderson should be. He's no longer a good player. In three out of the past four years his OPS+ has been below 100, he's never OBP'd above .350, his defense has been declining over the past years, and he turns 38 this year.

 

There's numerous better options for outfielders that Hendry should prioritize over Garrett Anderson.

[17 Seconds]

Is it really necessary to have you avatar and sig about Gathright? I mean, seriously, I don't get that. It's not like Hendry signed him to start or even compete. He's a bench player. I'm sure he knows that his offense is trash.

 

 

Just about as necessary as this comment.

 

Pretty poor comparison I'd say. I'm not a Jim Hendry fan but I don't understand why we have to give him crap for signing a bench player.

[BDWeav71]

Is it really necessary to have you avatar and sig about Gathright? I mean, seriously, I don't get that. It's not like Hendry signed him to start or even compete. He's a bench player. I'm sure he knows that his offense is trash.

 

 

Just about as necessary as this comment.

 

Pretty poor comparison I'd say. I'm not a Jim Hendry fan but I don't understand why we have to give him crap for signing a bench player.

 

 

I really don't care if you like Jim, or think its a good signing. Its the fact that your bringing it up in a thread about Garrett Anderson that makes it completely unnecessary. So that, in fact, does make it a solid comparison.

[17 Seconds]

Is it really necessary to have you avatar and sig about Gathright? I mean, seriously, I don't get that. It's not like Hendry signed him to start or even compete. He's a bench player. I'm sure he knows that his offense is trash.

 

 

Just about as necessary as this comment.

 

Pretty poor comparison I'd say. I'm not a Jim Hendry fan but I don't understand why we have to give him crap for signing a bench player.

 

 

I really don't care if you like Jim, or think its a good signing. Its the fact that your bringing it up in a thread about Garrett Anderson that makes it completely unnecessary. So that, in fact, does make it a solid comparison.

 

You're right. I guess I should have posted it in the "Discuss Westside Rooter's avatar and sig here" thread. My fault. I don't know what I was thinking anyways... ruining a groundbreaking thread arguing whether or not Garrett Anderson sucks really bad or just sucks pretty bad.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Is it really necessary to have you avatar and sig about Gathright? I mean, seriously, I don't get that. It's not like Hendry signed him to start or even compete. He's a bench player. I'm sure he knows that his offense is trash.

 

 

Just about as necessary as this comment.

 

Pretty poor comparison I'd say. I'm not a Jim Hendry fan but I don't understand why we have to give him crap for signing a bench player.

 

 

I really don't care if you like Jim, or think its a good signing. Its the fact that your bringing it up in a thread about Garrett Anderson that makes it completely unnecessary. So that, in fact, does make it a solid comparison.

 

You're right. I guess I should have posted it in the "Discuss Westside Rooter's avatar and sig here" thread. My fault. I don't know what I was thinking anyways... ruining a groundbreaking thread arguing whether or not Garrett Anderson sucks really bad or just sucks pretty bad.

 

I really dont know why Im even answering to this, but I have nothing better to do. To be honest, I dont really have anything against Gathright, its just the fact the he represents the fact that we're giving up on Pie prematurely.

[TheDude]

This has been my #1 fear all offseason. This would be a very Hendry move.

 

It really wouldn't be a Hendry move, unless his role was that of a 200 AB player.

 

You might have had a reasonable argument in 2005 or 2006, Hendry's worst performance years as a GM largely due to his allowance of Dusty Baker to push certain players, but since the Lou signing there is no evidence that Hendry would actively seek an Anderson type player to fill a full-time starter's slot.

 

It's true he has targeted veterans in recent years, but most in the age 28-32 range. The older guys have all been role players.

[Sever82]

The short answer is 'oh god no'

 

The long answer is that he's a 37 year old guy who cant really hit well and cant play the outfield. He would be an absolutely horrible player to sign.

 

You're better off playing Pie everyday than signing Anderson.

 

 

Wow you see I really dont get the point to a post like this. First of all where is the reasoning to say you would rather have Pie out there than Anderson. Looking at Anderson's numbers the past few years they're pretty much average numbers. What in the world has Pie done for the Cubs to make you think he would be better than anderson out there. I'm a big Pie fan and still feel he has potential but i'm not dumb enough to say i'd rather have him than anderson. By no means am i saying that the cubs should sign him because i'd prefer them not too but then again I wouldn't be mad if they signed him to a cheap contract. I'm pretty sure the same idiots posting those smartass remarks are the same ones who said "oh good no", "Sign Gaetti" when the cubs ended up signing Edmonds and how did that work out. Just because the guys is old doesn't mean he can't be of some use, its not the cubs would be signing him to a multiyear deal.

[bukie]

The short answer is 'oh god no'

 

The long answer is that he's a 37 year old guy who cant really hit well and cant play the outfield. He would be an absolutely horrible player to sign.

 

You're better off playing Pie everyday than signing Anderson.

 

 

Wow you see I really dont get the point to a post like this. First of all where is the reasoning to say you would rather have Pie out there than Anderson. Looking at Anderson's numbers the past few years they're pretty much average numbers. What in the world has Pie done for the Cubs to make you think he would be better than anderson out there. I'm a big Pie fan and still feel he has potential but i'm not dumb enough to say i'd rather have him than anderson. By no means am i saying that the cubs should sign him because i'd prefer them not too but then again I wouldn't be mad if they signed him to a cheap contract. I'm pretty sure the same idiots posting those smartass remarks are the same ones who said "oh good no", "Sign Gaetti" when the cubs ended up signing Edmonds and how did that work out. Just because the guys is old doesn't mean he can't be of some use, its not the cubs would be signing him to a multiyear deal.

Pie has potential, Anderson had production. Pie makes the league minimum, Anderson would cost several million. Anderson would be a signing that makes no sense at any level. Pie at least makes sense monetarily and with the hope of the type of production he's actually had in the minors given regular time in the majors.

[Sever82]

The short answer is 'oh god no'

 

The long answer is that he's a 37 year old guy who cant really hit well and cant play the outfield. He would be an absolutely horrible player to sign.

 

You're better off playing Pie everyday than signing Anderson.

 

 

Wow you see I really dont get the point to a post like this. First of all where is the reasoning to say you would rather have Pie out there than Anderson. Looking at Anderson's numbers the past few years they're pretty much average numbers. What in the world has Pie done for the Cubs to make you think he would be better than anderson out there. I'm a big Pie fan and still feel he has potential but i'm not dumb enough to say i'd rather have him than anderson. By no means am i saying that the cubs should sign him because i'd prefer them not too but then again I wouldn't be mad if they signed him to a cheap contract. I'm pretty sure the same idiots posting those smartass remarks are the same ones who said "oh good no", "Sign Gaetti" when the cubs ended up signing Edmonds and how did that work out. Just because the guys is old doesn't mean he can't be of some use, its not the cubs would be signing him to a multiyear deal.

Pie has potential, Anderson had production. Pie makes the league minimum, Anderson would cost several million. Anderson would be a signing that makes no sense at any level. Pie at least makes sense monetarily and with the hope of the type of production he's actually had in the minors given regular time in the majors.

 

I agree that Pie has potential but saying that Anderson would be a signing that no sense at any level makes no sense. I wouldn't mind having Anderson in there as a backup or platoon type of player. He's not going to cost several million because i doubt anyone will give him a 7-8 million dollar contract. for 3 million maybe. For the Cubs Anderson makes more sense than Pie because the cubs are built to win now and have no room to wait for Pie to develop on the go. With Anderson at least you know what you'll get and what you get at this point, is more than what you'll get from Pie.

[17 Seconds]

The short answer is 'oh god no'

 

The long answer is that he's a 37 year old guy who cant really hit well and cant play the outfield. He would be an absolutely horrible player to sign.

 

You're better off playing Pie everyday than signing Anderson.

 

 

Wow you see I really dont get the point to a post like this. First of all where is the reasoning to say you would rather have Pie out there than Anderson. Looking at Anderson's numbers the past few years they're pretty much average numbers. What in the world has Pie done for the Cubs to make you think he would be better than anderson out there. I'm a big Pie fan and still feel he has potential but i'm not dumb enough to say i'd rather have him than anderson. By no means am i saying that the cubs should sign him because i'd prefer them not too but then again I wouldn't be mad if they signed him to a cheap contract. I'm pretty sure the same idiots posting those smartass remarks are the same ones who said "oh good no", "Sign Gaetti" when the cubs ended up signing Edmonds and how did that work out. Just because the guys is old doesn't mean he can't be of some use, its not the cubs would be signing him to a multiyear deal.

Pie has potential, Anderson had production. Pie makes the league minimum, Anderson would cost several million. Anderson would be a signing that makes no sense at any level. Pie at least makes sense monetarily and with the hope of the type of production he's actually had in the minors given regular time in the majors.

 

With Anderson at least you know what you'll get and what you get at this point, is more than what you'll get from Pie.

 

With Anderson all you know is that you're going to get pretty crappy production and bad defense. With Pie you're going to get extremely good defense and questionable offense. I'd take Pie. You pretty much know Anderson is going to suck. At least Pie has a chance to be good and at the very least you'll get excellent defense.