Will Hendry make a move and if so for who?

[nilodnayr]

I honestly think Hendry will stand pat...it just doesn't really seem like a buyer's market this year. It sounds like Cincinnati is a pretty bad trading partner, although the rumored deal for Dunn that was discussed on this board last week is one I would have done, but I guess Hendry doesn't want to trade Rich Hill. There's been a lot of talk about Austin Kearns wanting to play for the Cubs and Hendry being interested in him, so I think, if we get anyone, it'll be him. I think we also have an outside chance at Huff, but there hasn't been any talk about that lately.

 

I'll just keep hoping for Dunn, but it seems unlikely. :cry:

 

Based on the comments lately and Bruce telling us that Hendry wouldn't do a Dunn for Hill straight up trade, I'm not sure we do anything. TSN said we were looking for a righty which means Kearns, but he just had one lucky year, I dont think hes an upgrade over what we have and getting a righty makes no sense. We should get a lefty to platoon with Murton. Huff (as expected) has been tearing it up in the second half (in July 314/352/616) near his with his post ASB numbers from 2002-2004 of 327/378/566. His OPS vs righties is 70 points higher against righties. We dont know how Nomar is going to do coming back, we do know he will be an upgrade over Neifi, but this team still needs a big bat to protect ARAM and Lee. Williamson looks like hes at top form so that will be a big boost. Wuertz, Novoa, and Williamson can split the 7th and the 8th and if Wood can come back thats becomes a really deep pen. Its been said by almost all in the game, its nearly impossible this year to improve your bullpen. Its a sellers market big time and anything we pick up for the pen is going to cost more than its worth.

[Guancous]

Lee's reputation is that of a second half monster. Huff's is as well. I would love to get Huff but LaMarr won't let him go unless we give him 5 top prospects. I call shenanigans to LaMarr. I'm also saying that Huff will never have a season like Derrek Lee is this year. Yeah, I'm going out on that limb.

[erik316wttn]

Why am I a bench player and you guys are all allstars?

 

If I don't get a chance to play how are you guys going to know if I'm any good!! :shock:

 

Because Dusty Baker happens to be the webmaster. ;)

[NorthsideAvenger]

I honestly think Hendry will stand pat...it just doesn't really seem like a buyer's market this year. It sounds like Cincinnati is a pretty bad trading partner, although the rumored deal for Dunn that was discussed on this board last week is one I would have done, but I guess Hendry doesn't want to trade Rich Hill. There's been a lot of talk about Austin Kearns wanting to play for the Cubs and Hendry being interested in him, so I think, if we get anyone, it'll be him. I think we also have an outside chance at Huff, but there hasn't been any talk about that lately.

 

I'll just keep hoping for Dunn, but it seems unlikely. :cry:

 

Based on the comments lately and Bruce telling us that Hendry wouldn't do a Dunn for Hill straight up trade, I'm not sure we do anything. TSN said we were looking for a righty which means Kearns, but he just had one lucky year, I dont think hes an upgrade over what we have and getting a righty makes no sense. We should get a lefty to platoon with Murton. Huff (as expected) has been tearing it up in the second half (in July 314/352/616) near his with his post ASB numbers from 2002-2004 of 327/378/566. His OPS vs righties is 70 points higher against righties. We dont know how Nomar is going to do coming back, we do know he will be an upgrade over Neifi, but this team still needs a big bat to protect ARAM and Lee. Williamson looks like hes at top form so that will be a big boost. Wuertz, Novoa, and Williamson can split the 7th and the 8th and if Wood can come back thats becomes a really deep pen. Its been said by almost all in the game, its nearly impossible this year to improve your bullpen. Its a sellers market big time and anything we pick up for the pen is going to cost more than its worth.

 

 

I still believe that Kearns will become a Cubs before the deadline. And I believe he is an UPGRADE over what the Cubs will be looking at during the OFFSEASON. I mean, I could definately live with a Murton/Pie/Kearns OF in 06.

[wilk]

UPGRADE over what the Cubs will be looking at during the OFFSEASON. I mean, I could definately live with a Murton/Pie/Kearns OF in 06.

 

What about Brian Giles? I'd say the ONLY concern with Giles is age, and I'd place more in Giles keeping it up for 3 more years than Kearns reaching that level. He wants to stay in San Diego or play with his brother and he'd take less to do either, but I'm not sure either team will give him enough to make "less" worth it. Giles has the 4th best EqA in the NL this year.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I don't think we make a major move and likely not a minor one either. Too many teams are in the hunt that there just isn't too much out there.

 

I wonder if Hendry has talked to the Giants about Alou? :-k

[rickrolled]

I don't think we make a major move and likely not a minor one either. Too many teams are in the hunt that there just isn't too much out there.

 

I wonder if Hendry has talked to the Giants about Alou? :-k

 

I think they've probably had discussions, but Hendry has said he wants to trade for players that'll help us in the long term as well, so I doubt we end up Alou. I really wouldn't mind in LF this year, though.

[sporrer17]

Like it was already said, Hendry seems to go for his guy rather than the popular choice. He wanted Ramirez over Lowell (plus Florida got hot and didn't need to deal him then) and he took Nomar over Cabrera (despite the fact that everyone assumed we'd get Cabrera because we needed a leadoff hitter)

 

Whether or not he can pull off a deal in such a weak market this year, that's another question. However, if he does get a player, look for the guys like Kearns or Pena...both are young, underachieving, very talented players who could benefit from a change of scenery and/or a playoff race.

 

I'd love to see a guy like Huff (career .290+ hitter with 25 HRs and 100 RBI) or Dunn (perennial HR leader potential) or even a Griffey (having a great year, and can still go get 'em in CF)....but I'd definately settle for just some flat out consistancy in LF. If they feel Murton's got enough talent to get the job done, great, let him play (personally I love the kid). If they think an upgrade is needed, GO GET ONE. However, don't yank Murton/Holla around and keep each of them in a role they shouldn't be in...

[NorthsideAvenger]

UPGRADE over what the Cubs will be looking at during the OFFSEASON. I mean, I could definately live with a Murton/Pie/Kearns OF in 06.

 

What about Brian Giles? I'd say the ONLY concern with Giles is age, and I'd place more in Giles keeping it up for 3 more years than Kearns reaching that level. He wants to stay in San Diego or play with his brother and he'd take less to do either, but I'm not sure either team will give him enough to make "less" worth it. Giles has the 4th best EqA in the NL this year.

 

Age is EXACTLY the reason why Giles is not on Hendry wishlist. While a fine player, he is beginning to become "overpaid" as he is getting older, and I believe Hendry isn't exactly to hot after a player---while a fine player, still---who will be 35 yrs old before next season. Hendry doesn't have a vision for the short-term, his version is of BOTH short-term and long-term, hence the reason why he is specifically trying to get Kearns or the OTHER OFer that has tremendous power.

[wilk]

Age is EXACTLY the reason why Giles is not on Hendry wishlist. While a fine player, he is beginning to become "overpaid" as he is getting older, and I believe Hendry isn't exactly to hot after a player---while a fine player, still---who will be 35 yrs old before next season. Hendry doesn't have a vision for the short-term, his version is of BOTH short-term and long-term, hence the reason why he is specifically trying to get Kearns or the OTHER OFer that has tremendous power.

 

I was speaking to you, not asking Hendry's mindset. It's nothing against you only, so don't take it that way, but it's pretty pointless when people say things like the "[EXACT] reason that Hendry isn't after Giles" when I'd say you have no idea if Hendry is after him or not. While I have no direct contact, I have several close acquaintances who do have direct contact with the Cubs' front office. When I asked them about Giles, they said Hendry does seem to have some quiet interest in him but would hypothetically not want to give more than a 2 year deal considering his age and a 2 year deal might not be enough to pull him away. Sure Hendry would rather have Kearns, but that's not exactly as easy as a decison. There will be considerable money that could be spent this offseason, and there aren't many appealing targets. We have the money to pay Giles for 2-3 years and there's nothing to suggest he'd fall apart in that span. He's not a player dependent on power or speed, and you don't exactly lose plate smarts. Giles-Lee-Ramirez is a 2-3-4 I'd kill for and let's not discussion short simply because you assume Hendry doesn't like 35 year olds. We did it for Alou and Maddux, for starters. Giles is a perfect fit, and one of the very few guys in baseball I'd give an extended consideration to. Kearns is perhaps a bigger risk with less value over the next 2 years than Giles even if he'd have more longterm value. What other free agents are out there and a better fit than Giles? If Hendry can pull the trigger for Kearns cheaply, then I'm all for it - I support Kearns more than most do. But even acquiring Kearns does not guarantee a ready OF. And I'm not sure how you can pencil in an OF of Murton/Pie/Kearns... That's some wishful thinking and I'd rather not rush a mostly undisciplined Pie into the majors. You get a guy like Giles, and then you can afford to hope Murton/Pie/Gerut can come through. You don't find a sure bet OF, and you need them to. Finding undervalued players is great and all, but we can afford to go after the guaranteed production. I'd be worried about that 3rd year, too. But I'd rather worry about the 3rd year than worry about the next three.

[nilodnayr]

The only problem with Giles is I dont see the padres trading him.

[wilk]

I meant in the offseason.

[nilodnayr]

I meant in the offseason.

 

Ahh, gotcha. Yeah I'd much rather pay in dollars to have him in the offseason than in prospects to have flukey Kearns now. I'm sure Giles loves San Diego, who doesn't, but he absolutely rakes in Chicago and many players chose us despite the weather. But you are right, it doesn't make any sense to sign him to more than 2 years. However, it doesnt make sense for really any team to sign him for more than two years so at least we have that. I'd be very happy to have him man a corner opening day 2006.

[NorthsideAvenger]

I was speaking to you, not asking Hendry's mindset. It's nothing against you only, so don't take it that way, but it's pretty pointless when people say things like the "[EXACT] reason that Hendry isn't after Giles" when I'd say you have no idea if Hendry is after him or not.

 

Well, anything dealing with what Hendry might or might not do is purely SPECULATION from the fans part, anyways. But going after Giles would be counteracting what he has ALREADY have stated. He has said he wanted players that help for this yrs, and for the next few yrs. Giles SIMPLY does not meet those qualifications. That is not to say if the "right price" comes along, Hendry wouldn't go after Giles, but as of right now, I simply don't see him going after Giles, considering Giles would PREFER staying near his home in California.

 

 

I have no direct contact, I have several close acquaintances who do have direct contact with the Cubs' front office. When I asked them about Giles, they said Hendry does seem to have some quiet interest in him but would hypothetically not want to give more than a 2 year deal considering his age and a 2 year deal might not be enough to pull him away.

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but this "friend who knows a friend" situation seems to fishy to me. Just because ""acquaintances" says Hendry might have some "quiet interest" in Giles, doesn't mean jack. You said "I was speaking to you, not asking Hendry's mindset," but doesn't you "acquaintances" also speculate about Hendry mindset. So it is alright for somebody who claims to have "direct contact" to speculate about Hendry's mindset, but not a fan? You know.....you can't have your cake, and expect to have mine.

 

Sure Hendry would rather have Kearns, but that's not exactly as easy as a decison. There will be considerable money that could be spent this offseason, and there aren't many appealing targets. We have the money to pay Giles for 2-3 years and there's nothing to suggest he'd fall apart in that span. He's not a player dependent on power or speed, and you don't exactly lose plate smarts. Giles-Lee-Ramirez is a 2-3-4 I'd kill for and let's not discussion short simply because you assume Hendry doesn't like 35 year olds. We did it for Alou and Maddux, for starters. Giles is a perfect fit, and one of the very few guys in baseball I'd give an extended consideration to. Kearns is perhaps a bigger risk with less value over the next 2 years than Giles even if he'd have more longterm value. What other free agents are out there and a better fit than Giles?

 

Alou, and Maddux WERE SPECIAL CASES. Alou was brought in at the request of Sammy Sosa. Had Sammy not been here at the time.....Alou would NOT have signed with the Cubs. Chalk that up to Sosa wanting Alou. Maddux was a TREMENDOUSLY special case, because he was chasing down 300, and the Cubs wanted to rake in on the profit. Giles/Ramirez/Lee would be a killer 3-4-5 (not 2-3-4), but the goal of the Cubs is to win the World Series, FIRST, but also build a CORE for a long-term. Again Giles---while a fine player---is not a player Hendry should be concentrating on. If it was Bobby Abreu. Ok. Who said Giles WOULD EVEN leave California. If I am not badly mistaken, but a couple of yrs ago (while a Pirate) he refused a trade to the White Sox. So, that tells me, that he would have reservations about going to Chicago. The Cubs don't need to build an "MVP Baseball" type lineup, which you are implying they should, they should build a team that can win now and in the future.

 

If Hendry can pull the trigger for Kearns cheaply, then I'm all for it - I support Kearns more than most do. But even acquiring Kearns does not guarantee a ready OF. And I'm not sure how you can pencil in an OF of Murton/Pie/Kearns... That's some wishful thinking and I'd rather not rush a mostly undisciplined Pie into the majors. You get a guy like Giles, and then you can afford to hope Murton/Pie/Gerut can come through. You don't find a sure bet OF, and you need them to. Finding undervalued players is great and all, but we can afford to go after the guaranteed production. I'd be worried about that 3rd year, too. But I'd rather worry about the 3rd year than worry about the next three.

 

I understand your concerns about a Pie/Murton/Kearns OF, which is why I fully believe Pie will start 2006 in AAA and stick with Hairston. But Murton I have NO DOUBTS about him producing. All great hitters start with the ability to take a pitch, which Murton has shown. Matt Murton will be a player in this league for the next 10 yrs. And on Kearns...I am a little more comprehensive about him producing, but getting him out of Cincy and away from the organizational turmoil, could do nothing BUT help him relax. And if you haven't notice, RELAXED ballplayers tend to become productive players (Aram)

 

I just don't see Hendry going after Brian Giles older type veterans, when he has in-house candidate, who given the opportunity, would produce at a much LOWER salary. Hendry is trying to build a dynasty, not a "lightning in a bottle."

[wilk]

Well, anything dealing with what Hendry might or might not do is purely SPECULATION from the fans part, anyways. But going after Giles would be counteracting what he has ALREADY have stated. He has said he wanted players that help for this yrs, and for the next few yrs. Giles SIMPLY does not meet those qualifications. That is not to say if the "right price" comes along, Hendry wouldn't go after Giles, but as of right now, I simply don't see him going after Giles, considering Giles would PREFER staying near his home in California.

 

How does Giles not help for the next couple years? I'd take Hendry's point as he's not trading for a rent-a-player or a guy who will give us a year. Giles is 34, with a 3 year contract he will not play a game with us at 38. You talk as if I'm saying to get Biggio. Giles this year has the 4th best EqA in the NL so far. I'd say even a drop off helps us in coming years. I've stated that the 3rd year is tricky because, theoretically, that's when you might start worrying about decline. Front-load a contract, and we'll get premium production for at least the next two years. That is NOT countering what Hendry has stated. And it's not as if there are 5 or 6 better free agent targets. This isn't a guy who's been declining, or showing signs of regression (any surface difference can be attributed to Petco, look at the normalized numbers). Giles SIMPLY does meet the qualifications of a player that'd help put us over the top for the next 2-3 years. Giles would prefer to play in San Diego or play with his brother (in Atlanta). That doesn't mean San Diego or Atlanta will give him it. There were talks of the Padres trading him if they fell out of it - they didn't, so they're keeping him but that doesn't necessarily mean they plan on bringing him back. Towers has been wishy-washy on the topic, though he's said he would plan to keep a winning team intact. Giles has hinted that he'd like to be a free agent and attempt to sign with Atlanta. Atlanta is playing their kids and I'm not so sure they'd give Giles a fair enough deal, even discounted. Giles isn't pledging any allegiance... But I'm not suggesting it's in any way a sure bet. Of course we'd have competition. I fail to see how that rules him out of discussion.

 

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but this "friend who knows a friend" situation seems to fishy to me. Just because ""acquaintances" says Hendry might have some "quiet interest" in Giles, doesn't mean jack. You said "I was speaking to you, not asking Hendry's mindset," but doesn't you "acquaintances" also speculate about Hendry mindset. So it is alright for somebody who claims to have "direct contact" to speculate about Hendry's mindset, but not a fan? You know.....you can't have your cake, and expect to have mine.

 

Um, it wasn't supposed to lend any sort of validity. No one is trying to prove anything. The point was that you claim Hendry has an "EXACT" reason as to which he is not considering Giles. It's contrary to what I've heard, and since I trust what I've heard, it leads me to believe you're simply telling me what YOU think and attributing it to HENDRY'S mindset. I said it wasn't you personally, but so many people who tend to do it and I find it pretty unnecessary. We're talking to each other, not trying to show each other up over who thinks from Hendry's mind the best. Quiet interest means that it's not something he's ever said he's had interest in. It mean's it's speculative but definitely not shot down. The ol' Brian Giles is a top notch player and you always have to be open to that talent, but we're going to make the moves that look best for the ball club at the time, yadda yadda. Point being, yes, as you put it best - doesn't mean jack. It doesn't mean Hendry wants Giles, and it doesn't mean Hendry said "his age is EXACTLY why I don't want him, Giles SIMPLY does not meet those qualifications." That was my whole point, but you somehow spun it otherwise. I said very clearly that I DO NOT have direct contact, but you go ahead to say the exact opposite. I don't get it. It wasn't a Cubs.com "who's sources are better." It was a NSBB "I'm pretty sure we're mostly smart baseball people and it seems a decent portion of us talk to the right people, so please discuss it instead of just assuming our own opinions as "EXACTLY" or "SIMPLY" anything Hendry has never stated." Forget it.

 

 

Alou, and Maddux WERE SPECIAL CASES. Alou was brought in at the request of Sammy Sosa. Had Sammy not been here at the time.....Alou would NOT have signed with the Cubs. Chalk that up to Sosa wanting Alou. Maddux was a TREMENDOUSLY special case, because he was chasing down 300, and the Cubs wanted to rake in on the profit. Giles/Ramirez/Lee would be a killer 3-4-5 (not 2-3-4), but the goal of the Cubs is to win the World Series, FIRST, but also build a CORE for a long-term. Again Giles---while a fine player---is not a player Hendry should be concentrating on. If it was Bobby Abreu. Ok. Who said Giles WOULD EVEN leave California. If I am not badly mistaken, but a couple of yrs ago (while a Pirate) he refused a trade to the White Sox. So, that tells me, that he would have reservations about going to Chicago. The Cubs don't need to build an "MVP Baseball" type lineup, which you are implying they should, they should build a team that can win now and in the future.

 

SPECIAL CASES? Alou was not brought in at the request of Sosa. They went after Alou after White turned down a two-year deal, and Alou seemed the perfect protection for Sosa and McGriff. They thought Alou's 2004 would happen all three years. Sosa tried to convince Alou to come, but it only happened after the Cubs were already targeting him. Alou wanted 4 years, remember? Maybe Sosa HELPED, but it wasn't Sosa who signed Alou. It wasn't a "SPECIAL CASE" for Sammy Sosa. They didn't sign Maddux for #300. What's with these crazy ideas? They hoped Maddux would mentor the young staff, and expected the consistency he showed his whole career. And yes Giles/Lee/Ramirez would be a killer 2-3-4 (not 3-4-5 ...ha, I adore that, by the way.) Who said Giles would leave California? Well, Brian Giles. I'd say Giles is plenty much a core. A core doesn't mean "as young and raw as possible." That core has fluid outer core and a solid inner core. Sure we can have all that youth and potential and energy, but you also need the solid production. Giles has been nothing but solid production to date. What is it about Giles that's no good? Are you simply convinced he can no longer play baseball at 36? And I don't get the "MVP Baseball" lineup reference... I haven't played the game so what's the reference? Fantasy? Which is it, is Giles no good for this team or is it wishful child thinking? I'm pretty confident Giles can help them win now and in the future. How much into the future do you find necessary? 5 years? 6 years? I don't Hendry is going to be handing out many contracts bigger than the one I propose for Giles. So, how is it that Giles can't help this team for the next 2-3 years? Are you convinced that Kearns will help "now and in the future"? Is that not as big, or bigger of a risk?

 

 

I understand your concerns about a Pie/Murton/Kearns OF, which is why I fully believe Pie will start 2006 in AAA and stick with Hairston. But Murton I have NO DOUBTS about him producing. All great hitters start with the ability to take a pitch, which Murton has shown. Matt Murton will be a player in this league for the next 10 yrs. And on Kearns...I am a little more comprehensive about him producing, but getting him out of Cincy and away from the organizational turmoil, could do nothing BUT help him relax. And if you haven't notice, RELAXED ballplayers tend to become productive players (Aram)

 

I just don't see Hendry going after Brian Giles older type veterans, when he has in-house candidate, who given the opportunity, would produce at a much LOWER salary. Hendry is trying to build a dynasty, not a "lightning in a bottle."

 

I'm not saying I don't any individual of those players. It's the collective whole that you are suggesting that worries me. We cannot rely on a "Murton/Pie/Kearns" outfield, which you now seem to agree with. But you put Brian Giles in the mix, and you have a LOT more room to breath and "relax." You think Kearns can relax in an outfield where he's the veteran and expected to produce the most? Include Giles, and everyone can relax, and you can afford to have Kearns or Murton take their time. You can afford to let Pie develop as he should. In the same breath that you concede this concept, you shot down what Giles would bring to this club. It's definitely not lightning in the a bottle... Who would call Brian Giles hoping on lightning in a bottle? You know Giles is a .300 career hitter with a .413 OBP, right? A .959 career OPS. .297 BA / .434 OBP / .940 OPS this year with the 4th best EqA in baseball. How is he EXACTLY and SIMPLY contrary to what the Cubs need? How would signing him need an extra TREMENDOUSLY SPECIAL CASE? ...

[c3ci1]

First, let me introduce myself! I'm Weltazar!!

 

The biggest Cubs fan in Central Missouri!!

 

Are you a wizard? I'd wanted to ask that from the first post in the thread & kept thinking better of it, but I waited it out & wizard question won. Welcome to northside.

 

Edit to note that I also spot ninja's better than avg.

Edited July 29, 2005 by c3ci1

[YearofDaCubs]

The more I think about it the more I think we will not make a move. Once again, it looks like it might come down to us and the Astros. They have been playing unreal right now.

[LoneStarCubFan]

Don't be surprised if Soriano winds up a Cub. Not saying it'll happen but that's just the kind fo surprise deal Hendry would pull off.

[AAApittsburgh]

Don't be surprised if Soriano winds up a Cub. Not saying it'll happen but that's just the kind fo surprise deal Hendry would pull off.

That would suck. I'm hoping Hendry has something better than that up his sleeve.

[LoneStarCubFan]

Don't be surprised if Soriano winds up a Cub. Not saying it'll happen but that's just the kind fo surprise deal Hendry would pull off.

That would suck. I'm hoping Hendry has something better than that up his sleeve.

 

It wouldn't suck but unless he's going to play CF I don't know what they plan to do with him unless Walker's going somewhere.

[YearofDaCubs]

Unless Soriano can play OF no thanks.

[AAApittsburgh]

Don't be surprised if Soriano winds up a Cub. Not saying it'll happen but that's just the kind fo surprise deal Hendry would pull off.

That would suck. I'm hoping Hendry has something better than that up his sleeve.

 

It wouldn't suck but unless he's going to play CF I don't know what they plan to do with him unless Walker's going somewhere.

It has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum. Soriano is absolutely brutal away from Ameriquest. Almost Neifi-like, with a bit more pop. I wouldn't want him even if he could play CF. He's just not a big enough upgrade.

[gflore34]

Don't be surprised if Soriano winds up a Cub. Not saying it'll happen but that's just the kind fo surprise deal Hendry would pull off.

That would suck. I'm hoping Hendry has something better than that up his sleeve.

 

It wouldn't suck but unless he's going to play CF I don't know what they plan to do with him unless Walker's going somewhere.

It has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum. Soriano is absolutely brutal away from Ameriquest. Almost Neifi-like, with a bit more pop. I wouldn't want him even if he could play CF. He's just not a big enough upgrade.

 

Given Soriano' splits away from Texas the Cubs, if they wish to trade for and play Soriano in the OF, could gain such a player without making a trade. Just call up Corey Patterson.

[Weltazar]

First, let me introduce myself! I'm Weltazar!!

 

The biggest Cubs fan in Central Missouri!!

 

Are you a wizard? I'd wanted to ask that from the first post in the thread & kept thinking better of it, but I waited it out & wizard question won. Welcome to northside.

 

Yes I am! I like to think I have the Cubs under my spell, although it doesn't seem to be working very well so far this afternoon. I thought for sure I had Dusty under my spell when he started Murton, but he pulled Murton in the 5th!!

 

Lets get some runs!!!

[Beer_Bong]

Matt Murton has played so good thus far....i would really hate to see the Cubs give up on him already by aquiring another LF. I hope the Cubs give him more playing time, and at least let him finish this season before they decide to upgrade or not.