Levine: Hendry secure but firesale could begin

[Backtobanks]

I can't believe you want to go down that road again. Nobody knows what Fielder will be like 6 years from now. Certainly not Pujols.

 

Holy crap, please stop. WE'RE NOT GOING DOWN ANY ROAD "AGAIN." Pujols and Fielder are not Soriano, no many times you attempt to compare signing them to signing him.

 

And you never know what any FA will be 6 years after you sign them. You're going to be signing big name FA who are pushing 30 (or past it) unless you develop them internally. Well, the Cubs have absolutely nobody even close to that on the horizon, thus they need to go out and spend. When you sign big names you've got to pay. The key, again, is overpaying for the right guys, and yes, you WILL be overpaying for players like that. Always. And the Cubs are a big market with lots of money to spend, so I don't know why you want them to just automatically not spend money on big contracts unless it's on a player they developed themselves. They have the money to make these kind of signings and SHOULD make them.

 

Yes, I wish the Cubs would develop players like Fielder and Pujols...but they haven't and they won't any time soon. In the meantime they need to sign good FA to go along with more and more players they hopefully develop from within who can be useful everyday players.

 

I actually don't think we're that far apart. I just think we should take our pain for a little while, develop our system, and then re-engage in the free agent market because I think it would result in shorter, relatively lower-cost deals.

 

I don't know how long you've been a Cub fan, but the pain is over 100 years old and counting.

[Soul]

I'd like to avoid the situation where we are hamstrung with a long contract for a player or players who aren't performing anywhere near their level of compensation.

 

Of course I want that happy medium. I think we just disagree on the best way to get there. I think we all want to get to that point where we are at that good mix of developed players and targeted, nicely-performing free agent acquisitions.

[Sammy Sofa]

Then you want the impossible. It's all but inevitable that you're going to be overpaying at some point if you're trying to lock up a superstar.

 

If you refuse to that then you have a team full of Darwin Barneys and Marlon Byrds with a few blips above or below them for the forseable future, and that's a recipe for mediocrity or worse for the next decade. I have no idea why you would prefer this route, but that's what you're getting and the Cubs go chicken-[expletive] and refuse to pay for superstar FA because they inexplicably decide they live in a world where nobody overpays for those kind of players (even though everyone does and has to).

 

I mean, you DO realize that not every player that gets a huge contract isn't Soriano, right? You do realize the Cubs are owned by very, very rich people and make a lot of money, yes? I'm not saying they spend just to spend, but it would be flat out stupid to not take advantage of the huge resources at your disposal, especially when players like Pujols or Fielder roll around right at the moment you have money to spend, you need an offensive superstar (well, at least a couple, actually), and you need someone to play 1B.

[XZero771679666304]

I'd like to avoid the situation where we are hamstrung with a long contract for a player or players who aren't performing anywhere near their level of compensation.

 

Of course I want that happy medium. I think we just disagree on the best way to get there. I think we all want to get to that point where we are at that good mix of developed players and targeted, nicely-performing free agent acquisitions.

 

You can't operate like you're scared of a contact turning into a burden, because that's a risk that's always going to be there. Well you can, by only signing good players to safe contracts and avoiding great players, but winners don't work that way.

 

And we don't have any impact players in our system. Sure, we'd all like to develop superstars internally, but for a large market team there simply isn't any reason to sit around for five years or more waiting for one to pop up. The ability to take a risk is a luxury a team with the Cubs' means has. There are nice role players in the system now, but no one near the caliber of Fielder or Pujols anywhere.

 

If the Cubs are going to be good anywhere in the foreseeable future, signing a big name free agent (and taking on that inherent risk) is going to have to happen. And again, a team with the Cubs' resources has no excuse to bide it's time until we draft and develop a superstar. To suggest that's the proper path for this franchise is lunacy.

[Sammy Sofa]

Pretty much everything I've been saying, but well said.

[dew1679666265]

I'd like to avoid the situation where we are hamstrung with a long contract for a player or players who aren't performing anywhere near their level of compensation.

 

Of course I want that happy medium. I think we just disagree on the best way to get there. I think we all want to get to that point where we are at that good mix of developed players and targeted, nicely-performing free agent acquisitions.

 

The Cubs' problem really hasn't been having a bunch of albatross contracts hamstringing them. The problem has been because the farm system didn't produce much of anything in the mid 2000s, we've had to spend significant money on almost every single position on the roster.

 

The Cubs have had no players since Sosa make more than $20 million a year and only two players making more than $15 mil per year since Sosa (Soriano and Z). Those two players make up just $37 million of a payroll between $134 and $144 million the past three years. $100+ million is plenty of room to fill out 23 spots on the roster if you can mix young players in with the vets. The problem is, the Cubs had five players making $10-14 million per year over that period and another 3-4 each year making $5+ million. Most of those guys weren't significantly overpaid, but there were just too many middle range players the Cubs were having to pay because they weren't developing young, cheap production.

 

There's no reason a team with the resources of the Cubs shouldn't have any trouble having 1-2 players signed to 6-8 year contracts who they know will be significantly overpaid for 2-3 years. The key is to pick the right guys to give those contracts to (guys like Fielder and Pujols who will give you great production early in the deals to offset the poor production late) and having young, cheap production fill in a large part of the roster. The problem hasn't been having too many big money deals, it's been those latter two issues - not getting the great production from the huge contract and having very little cheap production over that time frame.

[dew1679666265]

By the end of the 2012 season, there's a good chance the Cubs will have 6-7 cheap, productive players in significant positions on the roster.

 

Starlin Castro (SS starter), Andrew Cashner (starter or setup man/closer), Darwin Barney/DJ LeMaheieu (2nd base starter), Ryan Flaherty (utility or 3rd base starter), Brett Jackson (CF starter), Trey McNutt (starter), and Chris Carpenter (setup man) could all be playing significant roles on the team by that time. All of those guys are seen as fairly sure things to be at least somewhat productive major leaguers and relatively soon and the Cubs haven't seen that amount of young, cheap production in a long time. Not having players like those in the past is the reason the Cubs are in the financial state that they are and now that they have them on the cusp of the majors, they can afford to spend big on the right superstars in FA.

[MSG T]

I can't believe you want to go down that road again. Nobody knows what Fielder will be like 6 years from now. Certainly not Pujols.

 

Holy crap, please stop. WE'RE NOT GOING DOWN ANY ROAD "AGAIN." Pujols and Fielder are not Soriano, no many times you attempt to compare signing them to signing him.

 

And you never know what any FA will be 6 years after you sign them. You're going to be signing big name FA who are pushing 30 (or past it) unless you develop them internally. Well, the Cubs have absolutely nobody even close to that on the horizon, thus they need to go out and spend. When you sign big names you've got to pay. The key, again, is overpaying for the right guys, and yes, you WILL be overpaying for players like that. Always. And the Cubs are a big market with lots of money to spend, so I don't know why you want them to just automatically not spend money on big contracts unless it's on a player they developed themselves. They have the money to make these kind of signings and SHOULD make them.

 

Yes, I wish the Cubs would develop players like Fielder and Pujols...but they haven't and they won't any time soon. In the meantime they need to sign good FA to go along with more and more players they hopefully develop from within who can be useful everyday players.

 

I actually don't think we're that far apart. I just think we should take our pain for a little while, develop our system, and then re-engage in the free agent market because I think it would result in shorter, relatively lower-cost deals.

 

 

For one, even if they wait, they won't get any impact players on shorter more cost effective deals. Secondly, if they are able to produce those players occasionally, how do propose to keep them if you are wanting the Cubs to avoid long term, expensive contracts?

 

How will you be able to guarantee that when a Vogelbach, a Baez or a Maples ( all purely examples) are entering their FA years and their prime at the same time, similar to Fielder, that they will earn their long, expensive contract it will take to keep them? One way or another, either resigning your own player or going the FA route, you will have to spend eventually, and yes, a few will end up like Soriano, but others will be worth the money it takes to sign them. But the problem is, you can't possibly know that until you are well into or after the contract term.

 

You seem to be saying you want them to go the small-market route and build from within and use FA to get fringe players to fill sparingly. Sorry, but you can't wait around hoping you produce a Pujols, Bonds, Maddux or Clemens. If you want those types of players, you have to go get them when they are available. Even if the Cubs create the best MiL system in the MLB, they may never produce that kind of player, so how long do you wait? If you are a large-market team, with the ability to have a top 5 payroll, you use everything at your expense to build a good team.

 

Many on here have been saying the Cubs don't have to wait around to develop a winner. They're right. The Cubs have what, $62 mil coming off the books this year? And another $40-42 mil next year? If that isn't enough to fill the holes they have coming up (essentially 3 this year, 3B, RF/CF and 1B), they will NEVER be able to do it. I don't know if they'll be able to win the WS next year, but damn sure should be able to put together a team that can compete for the division or WC.

[NCCubFan]

http://www.fortheartofit.com/storage/Red-October-Quade.jpg

[Soul]

I can't believe you want to go down that road again. Nobody knows what Fielder will be like 6 years from now. Certainly not Pujols.

 

Holy crap, please stop. WE'RE NOT GOING DOWN ANY ROAD "AGAIN." Pujols and Fielder are not Soriano, no many times you attempt to compare signing them to signing him.

 

And you never know what any FA will be 6 years after you sign them. You're going to be signing big name FA who are pushing 30 (or past it) unless you develop them internally. Well, the Cubs have absolutely nobody even close to that on the horizon, thus they need to go out and spend. When you sign big names you've got to pay. The key, again, is overpaying for the right guys, and yes, you WILL be overpaying for players like that. Always. And the Cubs are a big market with lots of money to spend, so I don't know why you want them to just automatically not spend money on big contracts unless it's on a player they developed themselves. They have the money to make these kind of signings and SHOULD make them.

 

Yes, I wish the Cubs would develop players like Fielder and Pujols...but they haven't and they won't any time soon. In the meantime they need to sign good FA to go along with more and more players they hopefully develop from within who can be useful everyday players.

 

I actually don't think we're that far apart. I just think we should take our pain for a little while, develop our system, and then re-engage in the free agent market because I think it would result in shorter, relatively lower-cost deals.

 

 

For one, even if they wait, they won't get any impact players on shorter more cost effective deals. Secondly, if they are able to produce those players occasionally, how do propose to keep them if you are wanting the Cubs to avoid long term, expensive contracts?

 

How will you be able to guarantee that when a Vogelbach, a Baez or a Maples ( all purely examples) are entering their FA years and their prime at the same time, similar to Fielder, that they will earn their long, expensive contract it will take to keep them? One way or another, either resigning your own player or going the FA route, you will have to spend eventually, and yes, a few will end up like Soriano, but others will be worth the money it takes to sign them. But the problem is, you can't possibly know that until you are well into or after the contract term.

 

You seem to be saying you want them to go the small-market route and build from within and use FA to get fringe players to fill sparingly. Sorry, but you can't wait around hoping you produce a Pujols, Bonds, Maddux or Clemens. If you want those types of players, you have to go get them when they are available. Even if the Cubs create the best MiL system in the MLB, they may never produce that kind of player, so how long do you wait? If you are a large-market team, with the ability to have a top 5 payroll, you use everything at your expense to build a good team.

 

Many on here have been saying the Cubs don't have to wait around to develop a winner. They're right. The Cubs have what, $62 mil coming off the books this year? And another $40-42 mil next year? If that isn't enough to fill the holes they have coming up (essentially 3 this year, 3B, RF/CF and 1B), they will NEVER be able to do it. I don't know if they'll be able to win the WS next year, but damn sure should be able to put together a team that can compete for the division or WC.

 

That just seems like a resigned attitude when it comes to developing our own players. These guys come from somewhere. I don't think it's chance. It's great scouting and development.

 

There's no guarantee it will happen that way. There's no guarantees period. I'm glad we've got a lot of money coming off the books. Now let's spend it wisely, not blow it all on a guy who will make us feel better right now, and quite possibly feel terrible years down the road.

 

I don't view this as a small market attitude. I'm not saying we don't spend anything on the FA market. I'm saying there's got to be a way to introduce balance into this equation. And while I see teams like the Yankees & Red Sox winning plenty, I also see it done by teams with a different approach too. They aren't always the ones who win.

[dew1679666265]

I don't view this as a small market attitude. I'm not saying we don't spend anything on the FA market. I'm saying there's got to be a way to introduce balance into this equation. And while I see teams like the Yankees & Red Sox winning plenty, I also see it done by teams with a different approach too. They aren't always the ones who win.

 

The other teams that are able to win here and there without signing marquee guys are the teams that don't have the resources the Cubs do. They're the small-mid market teams. If you want the Cubs to not sign any players like Pujols or Fielder then the Cubs will become a team that spends around $90-100 million a year and wins every now and then.

 

However, because of the resources the Cubs have access to, there's no reason not to go out and get a guy like Fielder or Pujols who will be significantly overpaid late in their contracts, but will give you 6-8 wins a year early in the deal. Doing smart things like that is what pushes teams like the Yankees and Red Sox into WS contention every year and not just when everything falls into place.

[XZero771679666304]

Signing either one of Fielder or Pujols won't be "blowing it all", even if they flame out. Great scouting and development are the thing, but the simple fact of the matter is we don't have a potential impact player in the system, and even if one of the new draftees were to become one, it'll be 3-5 years before they get here.

 

No one is "resigned" to anything. It's just that there is no reason whatsoever to wait for the system to produce a superstar or two.

 

There is no perfect FA, but this situation literally screams out for the Cubs to sign Pujols or Fielder. We have cheap support players in place and more lined up, a hole at 1B and more than enough money to afford them for years, even if they under produce.

 

I'm sorry, but to suggest the Cubs wait until they produce a home grown superstar and then build around him because we need to wait for some mythical ideal situation is just hogwash.

 

The money is going to be spent. Better to spend it on one or two impact players than to spread it around on role players and filler, which is what has put the Cubs in the mess they've been in, not Alfonso Soriano. For the first time in years, the team can plug most of it's holes with decent/good homegrown talent. What they system can't give us right now is a Pujols or Fielder.

 

To not spend now in a situation that calls for it and instead wait for a homegrown answer is absolutely a small market approach. This isn't Milwaukee, it's [expletive] Chicago.

[Backtobanks]

 

That just seems like a resigned attitude when it comes to developing our own players. These guys come from somewhere. I don't think it's chance. It's great scouting and development.

 

There's no guarantee it will happen that way. There's no guarantees period. I'm glad we've got a lot of money coming off the books. Now let's spend it wisely, not blow it all on a guy who will make us feel better right now, and quite possibly feel terrible years down the road.

 

I don't view this as a small market attitude. I'm not saying we don't spend anything on the FA market. I'm saying there's got to be a way to introduce balance into this equation. And while I see teams like the Yankees & Red Sox winning plenty, I also see it done by teams with a different approach too. They aren't always the ones who win.

 

Developing our own players is going to take a long time with the improvements in scouting and the minor leagues. It's a lot like the economy, everybody expects an immediate answer to a problem that took decades to develop. I think the balance has to come by making trades for younger players with some experience (Garza, Chris Davis?, Upton?, etc.), developing our own prospects (Castro, Flaherty/LeMahieu, Cashner, Jackson, McNutt,etc.), and mixing in an overpaid FA (Fielder) when necessary. This team can contend next year and be in contention for the foreseeable future with a decent trade or two, a wise FA signing or two, and a little luck with some of our prospects.

[MSG T]

I can't believe you want to go down that road again. Nobody knows what Fielder will be like 6 years from now. Certainly not Pujols.

 

Holy crap, please stop. WE'RE NOT GOING DOWN ANY ROAD "AGAIN." Pujols and Fielder are not Soriano, no many times you attempt to compare signing them to signing him.

 

And you never know what any FA will be 6 years after you sign them. You're going to be signing big name FA who are pushing 30 (or past it) unless you develop them internally. Well, the Cubs have absolutely nobody even close to that on the horizon, thus they need to go out and spend. When you sign big names you've got to pay. The key, again, is overpaying for the right guys, and yes, you WILL be overpaying for players like that. Always. And the Cubs are a big market with lots of money to spend, so I don't know why you want them to just automatically not spend money on big contracts unless it's on a player they developed themselves. They have the money to make these kind of signings and SHOULD make them.

 

Yes, I wish the Cubs would develop players like Fielder and Pujols...but they haven't and they won't any time soon. In the meantime they need to sign good FA to go along with more and more players they hopefully develop from within who can be useful everyday players.

 

I actually don't think we're that far apart. I just think we should take our pain for a little while, develop our system, and then re-engage in the free agent market because I think it would result in shorter, relatively lower-cost deals.

 

 

For one, even if they wait, they won't get any impact players on shorter more cost effective deals. Secondly, if they are able to produce those players occasionally, how do propose to keep them if you are wanting the Cubs to avoid long term, expensive contracts?

 

How will you be able to guarantee that when a Vogelbach, a Baez or a Maples ( all purely examples) are entering their FA years and their prime at the same time, similar to Fielder, that they will earn their long, expensive contract it will take to keep them? One way or another, either resigning your own player or going the FA route, you will have to spend eventually, and yes, a few will end up like Soriano, but others will be worth the money it takes to sign them. But the problem is, you can't possibly know that until you are well into or after the contract term.

 

You seem to be saying you want them to go the small-market route and build from within and use FA to get fringe players to fill sparingly. Sorry, but you can't wait around hoping you produce a Pujols, Bonds, Maddux or Clemens. If you want those types of players, you have to go get them when they are available. Even if the Cubs create the best MiL system in the MLB, they may never produce that kind of player, so how long do you wait? If you are a large-market team, with the ability to have a top 5 payroll, you use everything at your expense to build a good team.

 

Many on here have been saying the Cubs don't have to wait around to develop a winner. They're right. The Cubs have what, $62 mil coming off the books this year? And another $40-42 mil next year? If that isn't enough to fill the holes they have coming up (essentially 3 this year, 3B, RF/CF and 1B), they will NEVER be able to do it. I don't know if they'll be able to win the WS next year, but damn sure should be able to put together a team that can compete for the division or WC.

 

That just seems like a resigned attitude when it comes to developing our own players. These guys come from somewhere. I don't think it's chance. It's great scouting and development.

 

There's no guarantee it will happen that way. There's no guarantees period. I'm glad we've got a lot of money coming off the books. Now let's spend it wisely, not blow it all on a guy who will make us feel better right now, and quite possibly feel terrible years down the road.

 

I don't view this as a small market attitude. I'm not saying we don't spend anything on the FA market. I'm saying there's got to be a way to introduce balance into this equation. And while I see teams like the Yankees & Red Sox winning plenty, I also see it done by teams with a different approach too. They aren't always the ones who win.

 

I don't have a problem with them developing their own players, but when you have a hole, at say 1B, and two of the best players at that position over the last 10 years are both going to be FA when you have that hole, and you have no one at that position coming up through the system, then you do what you can to sign a player like that.

 

It will be next to impossible for the Cubs system to be loaded enough and balanced enough to fill every conceivable hole every year. It just can't happen. You might have a hole at 3B next year, with a guy in the minors that's still 2 years away. Evan Longoria is available now, but it will take a 5 year contract to get him. Are you going to pass up the chance to get him because a guy that might be ready in 2 years is sitting in your system? And instead sign some crappy player for two years, because he's available and needs a job so he's willing to sign for cheap? No, you get the known commodity at the price that it takes to get him over the guy who might not ever make it.

 

Being willing to sign expensive, long term FA when you have the means, are willing and they fill a need doesn't mean you are forsaking the signing and development of good young players. It's the kind of thing an organization with a brain does. A good organization should be able to do both, not one or the other.

 

I'm excited that it appears Ricketts is evidently willing to have Wilken draft the best available players and actually be intent on signing them. I'm thrilled he's wanting them to try to go after the best available Latin and Asian talent. I'm also hoping he'll let whoever is the GM this fall/winter go after the best available FA that fill immediate needs for the team. Ideally, as someone above pointed out, in a few years, this team is made up of mainly guys developed from within, with a couple of key trade acquisitions and a couple of big-name FA sprinkled in. I don't have a problem building from within, but they have to fill holes. And when that hole can be filled by a Pujols or Fielder, that's when you do everything in your power to make it happen.

 

As I said before, and others have said, they should be able to compete, next year. The Cubs, being a major market team with the ability to have a top 5 payroll, should NEVER have to rebuild. They should always have the ability to do one of the following... someone ready to step up from the minors, the players available to trade for a need or the money to sign someone to a 5/$100 mil contract. Period. They should never have to scrap a season before it's played because they don't have the ability to fill needs this year, probably from within.

 

Edit: I should add that the Longoria reference is purely an example. I fully realize he isn't a FA this off-season.

Edited July 16, 2011 by MSG T

[Sammy Sofa]

I'm really pulling for you, Soul. You seem trapped in a really weird, depressing perception of how the Cubs should be run, and one day you'll be free of that.

[Guest]

Apparently the Cubs don't intend to trade Jeff Baker. Odd.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/07/cubs-do-not-intend-to-trade-jeff-baker.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[Sammy Sofa]

Apparently the Cubs don't intend to trade Jeff Baker. Odd.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/07/cubs-do-not-intend-to-trade-jeff-baker.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

Is it? It's still up in the air as to how 2B and 3B will play out for the Cubs next year, and Baker could play a big part in either.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I don't know whether this has been posted, but according to Boers & Bernstein, each of their sources are telling them that Mike Quade is nearly 100% certain to be gone after this season. They also discussed that Jim Hendry may have survived another season if not for Quade's performance, but there is no way the Cubs will allow Hendry to hire a 4th manager, so it is extremely likely that the Cubs will be starting fresh next season (once again with the possible exception of Crane Kenney on the business side)

[Little Slide Rooter]

Apparently the Cubs don't intend to trade Jeff Baker. Odd.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/07/cubs-do-not-intend-to-trade-jeff-baker.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

Is it? It's still up in the air as to how 2B and 3B will play out for the Cubs next year, and Baker could play a big part in either.

 

Beside rent-a-players like Fukudome and Pena, Baker is one of the few guys we have that other teams actually want, and could overpay for. I know theres a big ? at 3B next year, but if they just sign Aramis, it will be erased. Even if we don't, just let Vitters, DeWitt, Flaherty, LeMahiue, and Smith battle it out. I like what Bakers done for us for cheap, but we've seen far too many guys who made great backups and utility players flounder when they tried to make them everyday players. I cant see Baker ending up any better than Fontenot if made an everyday player, and our system has enough guys who could be utility middle infielders next year that if anyone shows interest in Baker, we should be listening very intently. Its BS that we have 2 guys in Wood and Baker that teams could be willing to overpay for and we dont want to move them for one year or another. But for the record, the source of this report is Ken Rosenthal, so, um, yeah.

[dew1679666265]

Beside rent-a-players like Fukudome and Pena, Baker is one of the few guys we have that other teams actually want, and could overpay for. I know theres a big ? at 3B next year, but if they just sign Aramis, it will be erased. Even if we don't, just let Vitters, DeWitt, Flaherty, LeMahiue, and Smith battle it out. I like what Bakers done for us for cheap, but we've seen far too many guys who made great backups and utility players flounder when they tried to make them everyday players. I cant see Baker ending up any better than Fontenot if made an everyday player, and our system has enough guys who could be utility middle infielders next year that if anyone shows interest in Baker, we should be listening very intently. Its BS that we have 2 guys in Wood and Baker that teams could be willing to overpay for and we dont want to move them for one year or another. But for the record, the source of this report is Ken Rosenthal, so, um, yeah.

 

To be useful next year, Baker wouldn't have to be an everyday starter. He'd just have to be the right handed side of a platoon at either 2nd or 3rd (isn't Flaherty a lefty?). That's his best role and one he could thrive in.

 

Also, I'm not sold that Baker would garner that much interest in trade. A team with a pressing need for right handed power might overpay, but it was just a couple of years ago that we got Baker for Al Albuqerque, a nice reliever now but a lightly regarded prospect at the time. Baker's done more since the Cubs acquired him, but he's still the same basic player he was then - a power bat against lefties, bad against righties and a couple years older.

[Sammy Sofa]

Beside rent-a-players like Fukudome and Pena, Baker is one of the few guys we have that other teams actually want, and could overpay for. I know theres a big ? at 3B next year, but if they just sign Aramis, it will be erased. Even if we don't, just let Vitters, DeWitt, Flaherty, LeMahiue, and Smith battle it out. I like what Bakers done for us for cheap, but we've seen far too many guys who made great backups and utility players flounder when they tried to make them everyday players. I cant see Baker ending up any better than Fontenot if made an everyday player, and our system has enough guys who could be utility middle infielders next year that if anyone shows interest in Baker, we should be listening very intently. Its BS that we have 2 guys in Wood and Baker that teams could be willing to overpay for and we dont want to move them for one year or another. But for the record, the source of this report is Ken Rosenthal, so, um, yeah.

 

To be useful next year, Baker wouldn't have to be an everyday starter. He'd just have to be the right handed side of a platoon at either 2nd or 3rd (isn't Flaherty a lefty?). That's his best role and one he could thrive in.

 

Also, I'm not sold that Baker would garner that much interest in trade. A team with a pressing need for right handed power might overpay, but it was just a couple of years ago that we got Baker for Al Albuqerque, a nice reliever now but a lightly regarded prospect at the time. Baker's done more since the Cubs acquired him, but he's still the same basic player he was then - a power bat against lefties, bad against righties and a couple years older.

 

Right, WSR is again vastly overrating a Cubs player when it comes to what they're likely get in return for a trade. Obviously, if there's a good offer out there, go for it, but Baker has relatively limited use that arguably is more valuable for the Cubs next year than shipping him off. Re-signing Aramis is a big if, and just assuming that it'll get done is foolish.

[TruffleShuffle]

I don't know whether this has been posted, but according to Boers & Bernstein, each of their sources are telling them that Mike Quade is nearly 100% certain to be gone after this season. They also discussed that Jim Hendry may have survived another season if not for Quade's performance, but there is no way the Cubs will allow Hendry to hire a 4th manager, so it is extremely likely that the Cubs will be starting fresh next season (once again with the possible exception of Crane Kenney on the business side)

 

quade's performance? he was given a mediocre roster that suffered a lot of injuries, so they turned into a downright bad team. granted, quade has managed those bad players poorly, but i really hope they weren't pinning this poor year on mike quade. the guy just doesn't matter that much.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't know whether this has been posted, but according to Boers & Bernstein, each of their sources are telling them that Mike Quade is nearly 100% certain to be gone after this season. They also discussed that Jim Hendry may have survived another season if not for Quade's performance, but there is no way the Cubs will allow Hendry to hire a 4th manager, so it is extremely likely that the Cubs will be starting fresh next season (once again with the possible exception of Crane Kenney on the business side)

 

quade's performance? he was given a mediocre roster that suffered a lot of injuries, so they turned into a downright bad team. granted, quade has managed those bad players poorly, but i really hope they weren't pinning this poor year on mike quade. the guy just doesn't matter that much.

 

Yeah, I really don't care if Quade came back for his final year, but if him getting the boot means that Hendry would be gone, well, then it's bye-bye Mike.

[C.C.]

I don't know whether this has been posted, but according to Boers & Bernstein, each of their sources are telling them that Mike Quade is nearly 100% certain to be gone after this season. They also discussed that Jim Hendry may have survived another season if not for Quade's performance, but there is no way the Cubs will allow Hendry to hire a 4th manager, so it is extremely likely that the Cubs will be starting fresh next season (once again with the possible exception of Crane Kenney on the business side)

 

Duh! I would be shocked if Hendry and Quade are here next year.

 

and Ryno is gonna be our next manager. Book it!

[Illini Iceman]

I don't know whether this has been posted, but according to Boers & Bernstein, each of their sources are telling them that Mike Quade is nearly 100% certain to be gone after this season. They also discussed that Jim Hendry may have survived another season if not for Quade's performance, but there is no way the Cubs will allow Hendry to hire a 4th manager, so it is extremely likely that the Cubs will be starting fresh next season (once again with the possible exception of Crane Kenney on the business side)

 

Duh! I would be shocked if Hendry and Quade are here next year.

 

and Ryno is gonna be our next manager. Book it!

 

I would be surprised if a new GM comes in and the first thing he does to put his imprint on the team is hire Ryne Sandberg as manager.