Rumored trade proposal (Pierre to Cubs for Hill/Patterson)

[mg420]

If Bruce Miles says that we wouldn't trade Rich Hill for Adam Dunn straight up, what makes us think he'd trade Hill and Patterson for Pierre?

 

i like hill alot but i find that very hard to believe.

[CubsWin]

I'd rather have Furcal. I'd rather have Lofton as a stop gap until Pie is ready.

 

Either of those can be had without giving up prospects.

Yeah, those were my thoughts, too.

 

Pierre is a question mark and so is Hill, at this point. Why settle for a question mark and give up someone who could be good when other, better options exist that can be had without giving up anyone?

 

On a side note, BBB, my two-year-old girl was on my lap as I was reading your post, and she exclaimed in a loud voice, "B! Blue B!" I'm thinking she likes your avatar. :wink:

[MPrior]

I think I'm in the "no way" camp as well. There are better options than Pierre, and ones that wouldn't cost us as much (Lofton). At the same time, if Pierre is our CF next year, my head won't explode (as it might if Jeromy Burnitz or Jose Macias are anywhere near this team). I could live with Pierre in CF and leading off. I just think there are better options that we wouldn't have to give players up for.

 

That said, I'm a fan of the rumor that Brian Giles is #1 on Hendry's radar, and that B.J. Ryan might also be targeted. Of course, I have no reason to believe either one.

[CUBZ99]

Better options are avail. over Pierre. I'd be disappointed if they made that deal, not b/c I value Hill and Patterson, but Pierre is very little in return.

 

You can't expect to get much more than that in return for a guy (Patterson) who has worse career numbers than a guy (Neifi Perez) that some consider one of the worst hitters ever.

 

Hendry has to do that trade if it is available. So what if Hill turns out to be a decent starting pitcher, the Cubs greatest need is getting a player who can lead off. Time to stop overvaluing the Cubs prospects and get something in return for them.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

[BigbadB]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Nicely done!

[BigbadB]

I'd rather have Furcal. I'd rather have Lofton as a stop gap until Pie is ready.

 

Either of those can be had without giving up prospects.

Yeah, those were my thoughts, too.

 

Pierre is a question mark and so is Hill, at this point. Why settle for a question mark and give up someone who could be good when other, better options exist that can be had without giving up anyone?

 

On a side note, BBB, my two-year-old girl was on my lap as I was reading your post, and she exclaimed in a loud voice, "B! Blue B!" I'm thinking she likes your avatar. :wink:

 

Tell your daughter I'm a married man. :D

[CubfaninCA]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Why didn't you list their stats for 2001? Also, Player A gets hurt alot unlike Player B. There's a pretty signifcant difference between the two. I want a little more for Patterson and Hill than just Pierre though.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Why didn't you list their stats for 2001? Also, Player A gets hurt alot unlike Player B. There's a pretty signifcant difference between the two. I want a little more for Patterson and Hill than just Pierre though.

 

 

Where's the significant difference? That Hairston is injury prone? The point is that Pierre isn't good, no one's calling for Hairston as the leadoff man we've been searching for, but for some reason people are enamored with Pierre. And I didn't list 2001 for the purposes of showing that they have been similar. The same way I didn't use their numbers from 2000, that favor Hairston in a similar sample size. But if you would like to post them and use the numbers from 5 years ago to prove that Pierre is significantly better than Hairston be my guest.

[BigbadB]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Why didn't you list their stats for 2001? Also, Player A gets hurt alot unlike Player B. There's a pretty signifcant difference between the two. I want a little more for Patterson and Hill than just Pierre though.

 

Is 2001 a better measure of what these two players might do in 2006? If it is, please explain why.

[HoopsCubs]

This IS a rumor:

 

Cubs would get: Juan Pierre

Marlins would get: Corey Patterson and Rich Hill

 

according to rumor, the marlins proposed this trade

 

Here is my source

 

It also talks about Hendry's #1 free agent to pursue being brian giles and about B.J. Ryan possible being pursued.

 

In my estimate, free agent Jose Cruz would be a better acquisition than Juan Pierre and wouldn't cost anything in terms of players/prospects. Not saying he's the best player available to play CF, but it's a better use of resources than overpaying for the over-rated Pierre.

 

If we have to trade to get a CF, Milton Bradley is a better choice and equally available (in my opinion).

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

First, I doubt the validity of this rumor. It could be true, but it has a dubious source.

 

Secondly, there's no way I do this deal. Patterson for Pierre? ok. Maybe even Patterson and Wellemeyer or Leicester. Not with Hill included. Mo way.

 

Further more, compare these two players:

 

Pierre

2005: 276/326/354 57 SB/ 17 CS

2002-2004: 303/354/378 167 SB/ 61 CS

 

Lofton

2005: 335/392/420 22 SB/ 3 CS

2002-2004: 303/362/428 59 SB/ 15 CS

 

Pierre is younger, but Lofton is a FA and will command a lower salary and not have the player cost involved. If everything were even, I'd take Pierre over Lofton, but the two are too similar to trade a prospect of Hill's caliber for Pierre when you can just sign Lofton. If the Cubs pursue Lofton and miss out and then can't find a CF anywhere else, then I'd pursue Pierre.

[UK1679666180]

Better options are avail. over Pierre. I'd be disappointed if they made that deal, not b/c I value Hill and Patterson, but Pierre is very little in return.

 

You can't expect to get much more than that in return for a guy (Patterson) who has worse career numbers than a guy (Neifi Perez) that some consider one of the worst hitters ever.

 

Hendry has to do that trade if it is available. So what if Hill turns out to be a decent starting pitcher, the Cubs greatest need is getting a player who can lead off. Time to stop overvaluing the Cubs prospects and get something in return for them.

 

That might be a fair deal for Pierre, I don't want him, he's not what the Cubs need.

 

Ask yourself, if that would net Jason Michaels of Philly. If you say yes, then you'll know why I don't want Pierre if they could get someone like Michaels.

 

Michaels>Pierre in ability and salary.

[BigbadB]

First, I doubt the validity of this rumor. It could be true, but it has a dubious source.

 

Secondly, there's no way I do this deal. Patterson for Pierre? ok. Maybe even Patterson and Wellemeyer or Leicester. Not with Hill included. Mo way.

 

Further more, compare these two players:

 

Pierre

2005: 276/326/354 57 SB/ 17 CS

2002-2004: 303/354/378 167 SB/ 61 CS

 

Lofton

2005: 335/392/420 22 SB/ 3 CS

2002-2004: 303/362/428 59 SB/ 15 CS

 

Pierre is younger, but Lofton is a FA and will command a lower salary and not have the player cost involved. If everything were even, I'd take Pierre over Lofton, but the two are too similar to trade a prospect of Hill's caliber for Pierre when you can just sign Lofton. If the Cubs pursue Lofton and miss out and then can't find a CF anywhere else, then I'd pursue Pierre.

 

I'd also add that it probably wouldn't just be Lofton in CF, but rather a Lofton/Hairston platoon.

[CubfaninCA]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Why didn't you list their stats for 2001? Also, Player A gets hurt alot unlike Player B. There's a pretty signifcant difference between the two. I want a little more for Patterson and Hill than just Pierre though.

 

 

Where's the significant difference? That Hairston is injury prone? The point is that Pierre isn't good, no one's calling for Hairston as the leadoff man we've been searching for, but for some reason people are enamored with Pierre. And I didn't list 2001 for the purposes of showing that they have been similar. The same way I didn't use their numbers from 2000, that favor Hairston in a similar sample size. But if you would like to post them and use the numbers from 5 years ago to prove that Pierre is significantly better than Hairston be my guest.

 

Someone being injured consistently versus someone who isn't is pretty significant.

 

Player A has

8 years

a career .334 obp,

102 stolen bases

played 644 games

 

Player B has

6 years

a career .355 obp

267 stolen bases

played 845 games

[HoopsCubs]

I'd also add that it probably wouldn't just be Lofton in CF, but rather a Lofton/Hairston platoon.

 

Similar to what the Phils did with Lofton and Michaels, right?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Why didn't you list their stats for 2001? Also, Player A gets hurt alot unlike Player B. There's a pretty signifcant difference between the two. I want a little more for Patterson and Hill than just Pierre though.

 

 

Where's the significant difference? That Hairston is injury prone? The point is that Pierre isn't good, no one's calling for Hairston as the leadoff man we've been searching for, but for some reason people are enamored with Pierre. And I didn't list 2001 for the purposes of showing that they have been similar. The same way I didn't use their numbers from 2000, that favor Hairston in a similar sample size. But if you would like to post them and use the numbers from 5 years ago to prove that Pierre is significantly better than Hairston be my guest.

 

Someone being injured consistently versus someone who isn't is pretty significant.

 

Player A has

8 years

a career .334 obp,

102 stolen bases

played 644 games

 

Player B has

6 years

a career .355 obp

267 stolen bases

played 845 games

 

So, what's the difference between Lofton and Pierre? Sign Lofton and keep Hill would be the wisest course of action.

[BigbadB]

I'd also add that it probably wouldn't just be Lofton in CF, but rather a Lofton/Hairston platoon.

 

Similar to what the Phils did with Lofton and Michaels, right?

 

Sure, why not. I will admit that after looking at Michaels career stats, I would love to see him leading off for the Cubs next year. Good call, UK.

[BigbadB]

Pierre is about to become Damon-like expensive and he won't be worth the cost. He would also block Pie. Lofton is a short term stop gap who can be platooned with Hairston. Equal OBP for a much lower cost, which in turn allows you to spend bigger on RF, SP and SS if that is your desire.

[USSoccer]

If it were Patterson for Pierre straight up with Florida picking up a million dollars, i'd probably take the deal. It's more than I anticipated Corey being traded for anyway this winter, since i really think Hendry would give him up for a decent prospect at this point. And considering that I really don't like Pierre at all, that tells you what my expectations are for what Corey could net in a trade.

 

Including Hill in that deal? Pass. Maybe Corey and Leicester, or Corey and a couple of the Rule 5 guys. Not Corey and Hill. I don't think Pierre is worth giving that much up for, as he is just not that good.

[USSoccer]

Pierre is about to become Damon-like expensive and he won't be worth the cost. He would also block Pie. Lofton is a short term stop gap who can be platooned with Hairston. Equal OBP for a much lower cost, which in turn allows you to spend bigger on RF, SP and SS if that is your desire.

 

Isn't Pierre a FA after 2006? If he is, I don't see how that blocks Pie. If anything, it keeps Hendry from the temptation of bringing him up too soon.

[Diffusion]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Why didn't you list their stats for 2001? Also, Player A gets hurt alot unlike Player B. There's a pretty signifcant difference between the two. I want a little more for Patterson and Hill than just Pierre though.

 

 

Where's the significant difference? That Hairston is injury prone? The point is that Pierre isn't good, no one's calling for Hairston as the leadoff man we've been searching for, but for some reason people are enamored with Pierre. And I didn't list 2001 for the purposes of showing that they have been similar. The same way I didn't use their numbers from 2000, that favor Hairston in a similar sample size. But if you would like to post them and use the numbers from 5 years ago to prove that Pierre is significantly better than Hairston be my guest.

 

Someone being injured consistently versus someone who isn't is pretty significant.

 

Player A has

8 years

a career .334 obp,

102 stolen bases

played 644 games

 

Player B has

6 years

a career .355 obp

267 stolen bases

played 845 games

 

96 CS for Pierre too, for a 73.6% success rate, only just above the breakeven point. In other words, those 267 steals are nowhere near as valuable as you might think.

 

Of course, Hairston is worse, with 48 CS for a 68% success rate. So Hairston would have been better off having not once attempted a steal.

 

And Pierre is a better fielder than Hairston, simply because it's hard not to be. And Pierre is a better hitter too. All the same, the point is that the difference isn't particularly big.

Edited October 24, 2005 by Diffusion

[CubfaninCA]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Why didn't you list their stats for 2001? Also, Player A gets hurt alot unlike Player B. There's a pretty signifcant difference between the two. I want a little more for Patterson and Hill than just Pierre though.

 

 

Where's the significant difference? That Hairston is injury prone? The point is that Pierre isn't good, no one's calling for Hairston as the leadoff man we've been searching for, but for some reason people are enamored with Pierre. And I didn't list 2001 for the purposes of showing that they have been similar. The same way I didn't use their numbers from 2000, that favor Hairston in a similar sample size. But if you would like to post them and use the numbers from 5 years ago to prove that Pierre is significantly better than Hairston be my guest.

 

Someone being injured consistently versus someone who isn't is pretty significant.

 

Player A has

8 years

a career .334 obp,

102 stolen bases

played 644 games

 

Player B has

6 years

a career .355 obp

267 stolen bases

played 845 games

 

So, what's the difference between Lofton and Pierre? Sign Lofton and keep Hill would be the wisest course of action.

 

Age, but that's about all.

 

I have no problem w/ Lofton in CF. With the rumors of Pierre and Preston Wilson, I wonder if the Cubs want to move Pie to rf in the future?? If so, then Pierre goes up in value, as he'd be a long-term fixture in cf.

 

As for the rumored trade, I'd want something more. Am wondering what's the deal w/ Guillermo Mota. He was an awesome set-up man w/ LA. Did he get hurt this year?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

Age, but that's about all.

 

I have no problem w/ Lofton in CF. With the rumors of Pierre and Preston Wilson, I wonder if the Cubs want to move Pie to rf in the future?? If so, then Pierre goes up in value, as he'd be a long-term fixture in cf.

 

As for the rumored trade, I'd want something more. Am wondering what's the deal w/ Guillermo Mota. He was an awesome set-up man w/ LA. Did he get hurt this year?

 

But Pierre is a FA after 2006, so he's not a long term solution either. We would still have to compete for Pierre's services in 2007.

 

The best course if for the Cubs to ignore Pierre as long as Lofton is available. Sign Lofton to a one-year deal and let him platoon with Hairston. Then if you want Pie in right, but I don't see why, sign Pierre as a FA.

 

In this case you still have Hill to use or to trade for something you can't get in FA.

[CUBZ99]

Player A

 

2002: .268/.329/.376/.705

2003: .271/.353/.372/.725

2004: .303/.378/.397/.775

2005: .261/.336/.368/.704

 

Player B

 

2002: .287/.332/.343/.675

2003: .305/.361/.373/.734

2004: .326/.374/.407/.781

2005: .276/.326/.354/.680

 

Both are subpar defensive centerfielders. One is on our team, the other is Juan Pierre. Anyone think the difference between Hairston and Pierre is worth Rich Hill, nevermind Patterson?

 

Nicely done!

 

To compare Hairston to Pierre is ridiculous. Hairston has yet to have even a decent year while playing more than part time.

 

Player A

 

Avg. less than 80 games a year

 

Player B

 

Has avg. 150+ games a year

 

Also, please give your reasoning behind calling Pierre a subpar defensive CF.

 

From Espn scouting report :

" His defense remains a huge plus at spacious Pro Player Stadium. His range allowed the Marlins to get by with Miguel Cabrera and Jeff Conine flanking him for the first four months. Pierre's arm probably precludes him from Gold Glove consideration, but he never gives up on balls in the gap and makes his share of highlight catches. His resemblance to a young Mickey Rivers remains eerie.

 

Hardly sounds like a "subpar" defender.