NY Post Rumours: CF Blues and Pitching News

[CubfaninCA]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

and the offense would be left with what exactly?

 

Isn't durable and innings eater the same thing?

 

Trade for Floyd.

 

If you haven't noticed, pitching wins titles.

 

EDIT: Aren't you the same guy who said "Don't expect alot from Murton next year."

Edited October 26, 2005 by CubfaninCA

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Why not just keep Williams as our #5 and look to trade minorleaguers for OF help.

 

I'd trade Hill before others figure out he has only one ML quality pitch, even as good as it is. With his major problem being HR allowed, perhaps he would be better suited to Dodger Stadium.

 

He has a low 90's fastball to go with that curve. I'm not opposed to trading Hill, but he wouldn't be the first chip I'd offer up.

 

A very straight and hittable low 90's fastball. And I wouldn't throw him away, but I wouldn't hesitate for a nanosecond to trade him for any significant offensive help.

 

The key word there being "significant." I would definitely include Hill in a deal for the right player. By right player, I mean Wilkerson, Dunn, Manny, Marcus Giles, or players of that caliber.

 

I'm not sure I'd be eager to include Hill in a deal for Jose Guillen, Raul Ibanez, Cliff Floyd, or players in that tier.

 

A lot depends on what I'm getting.

[CuseCubFan69]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

I know it may seem crazy, but I don't trade Williams and Murton for Zito.

 

Me either.

[XZero771679666304]

Why not just keep Williams as our #5 and look to trade minorleaguers for OF help.

 

I'd trade Hill before others figure out he has only one ML quality pitch, even as good as it is. With his major problem being HR allowed, perhaps he would be better suited to Dodger Stadium.

 

He has a low 90's fastball to go with that curve. I'm not opposed to trading Hill, but he wouldn't be the first chip I'd offer up.

 

A very straight and hittable low 90's fastball. And I wouldn't throw him away, but I wouldn't hesitate for a nanosecond to trade him for any significant offensive help.

 

The key word there being "significant." I would definitely include Hill in a deal for the right player. By right player, I mean Wilkerson, Dunn, Manny, Marcus Giles, or players of that caliber.

 

I'm not sure I'd be eager to include Hill in a deal for Jose Guillen, Raul Ibanez, Cliff Floyd, or players in that tier.

 

A lot depends on what I'm getting.

 

I'd trade him for Milton Bradley.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

and the offense would be left with what exactly?

 

Isn't durable and innings eater the same thing?

 

Trade for Floyd.

 

If you haven't noticed, pitching wins titles.

 

So, I trade a young starter and a cheap productive outfielder to get Zito. And then I have to trade even more young, cheap talent for Floyd, even though I'm still not certain he can stay healthy.

 

I'm not sure I make those moves. I would still have to find a CF, RF, and SS.

 

With Murton in LF, I can still look to trade for a fifth starter or use Williams and I only need to find a CF, RF, and SS and still have the players to trade for one. I'm not sure those series of moves you suggest would improve this team. It just moves the problems around.

[XZero771679666304]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

I know it may seem crazy, but I don't trade Williams and Murton for Zito.

 

Me either.

 

Not for one year of Zito, anyway. 2006 is his FA year, right?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Why not just keep Williams as our #5 and look to trade minorleaguers for OF help.

 

I'd trade Hill before others figure out he has only one ML quality pitch, even as good as it is. With his major problem being HR allowed, perhaps he would be better suited to Dodger Stadium.

 

He has a low 90's fastball to go with that curve. I'm not opposed to trading Hill, but he wouldn't be the first chip I'd offer up.

 

A very straight and hittable low 90's fastball. And I wouldn't throw him away, but I wouldn't hesitate for a nanosecond to trade him for any significant offensive help.

 

The key word there being "significant." I would definitely include Hill in a deal for the right player. By right player, I mean Wilkerson, Dunn, Manny, Marcus Giles, or players of that caliber.

 

I'm not sure I'd be eager to include Hill in a deal for Jose Guillen, Raul Ibanez, Cliff Floyd, or players in that tier.

 

A lot depends on what I'm getting.

 

I'd trade him for Milton Bradley.

 

If the Dodgers are looking to move Bradley, I don't think it's necessary to trade Hill to get him. If it was Hill for Bradley straight-up, I might look to do that. I seriously doubt I'd offer Hill + something to get Bradley, unless that "something" was stuff I didn't want.

[XZero771679666304]

 

I'd trade him for Milton Bradley.

 

If the Dodgers are looking to move Bradley, I don't think it's necessary to trade Hill to get him. If it was Hill for Bradley straight-up, I might look to do that. I seriously doubt I'd offer Hill + something to get Bradley, unless that "something" was stuff I didn't want.

 

That is true. But personally, I don't think Hill's value is going to increase. I am not at all confident about his ability to sustain success at the ML level, and I would prefer to get something for him sooner than later, because his value will decrease with exposure, IMO. I would shop him heavily this winter, and see what I could get.

Edited October 26, 2005 by XZero77

[goonys evil twin]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

and the offense would be left with what exactly?

 

Isn't durable and innings eater the same thing?

 

Trade for Floyd.

 

If you haven't noticed, pitching wins titles.

 

EDIT: Aren't you the same guy who said "Don't expect alot from Murton next year."

 

I want a top 5 offense. There's no reason this team can't have a top 5 ERA and top 5 runs scored in the NL, with at least one of those being top 3. I would not assume Murton will give you great production in LF. I would expect him to be fine for a $300,000 LF. But I would construct the rest of my roster with the expectation that Murton won't be the rookie of the year (I know he's ineligible). In other words, get a productive RF bat. If you deal Murton and Williams for a pitcher, then you not only have to get a productive RF, but now you have to also get a LF. It's opening up another hole, and counterproductive.

[CuseCubFan69]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

I know it may seem crazy, but I don't trade Williams and Murton for Zito.

 

Me either.

 

Not for one year of Zito, anyway. 2006 is his FA year, right?

 

I don't know but I assume that it is. I still don't want this guy to be a Cub because I just have a feeling he's on his way down and not worth the players the Cubs might trade for him. Now if they trade a bunch of Rule 5 guys they would lose anyway fine but I doubt that would happen after what the A's got for Hudson and Mulder.

[CubfaninCA]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

and the offense would be left with what exactly?

 

Isn't durable and innings eater the same thing?

 

Trade for Floyd.

 

If you haven't noticed, pitching wins titles.

 

So, I trade a young starter and a cheap productive outfielder to get Zito. And then I have to trade even more young, cheap talent for Floyd, even though I'm still not certain he can stay healthy.

 

I'm not sure I make those moves. I would still have to find a CF, RF, and SS.

 

With Murton in LF, I can still look to trade for a fifth starter or use Williams and I only need to find a CF, RF, and SS and still have the players to trade for one. I'm not sure those series of moves you suggest would improve this team. It just moves the problems around.

 

Well, I said Zito and another player. They may be able to get Floyd for Walker. Then move Cedeno to 2b. Alot hinges on getting Furcal though. That's the first domino that needs to fall in place.

[HoopsCubs]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

I know it may seem crazy, but I don't trade Williams and Murton for Zito.

 

It's not crazy at all. Now, I might be deemed crazy for saying this, but I think Matt Murton should be considered untouchable unless we're getting Dunn or Abreu. It appears the Cubs finally found a guy who is young and understands plate discipline. Stick him in LF, let him bat #2 and move on Mr. Hendry.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I think Rich Hill's ceiling is Barry Zito. He may not reach that, but it is within his ability to do so.

[biittner77]

Don't the A's still need a 2nd baseman? What about Walker and junk prospects for Zito?

[BigbadB]

Why not just keep Williams as our #5 and look to trade minorleaguers for OF help.

 

I'd trade Hill before others figure out he has only one ML quality pitch, even as good as it is. With his major problem being HR allowed, perhaps he would be better suited to Dodger Stadium.

 

How do you figure he has a major problem with HR allowed? I can't find what he did in the minors this year, but he never had more than 9 in a season coming into 2005. Coming into 2005, he'd given up 14 in over 200 innings of work. He gave up 3 as a Cub this year. Too small of a sampling to get any kind of a read on him.

 

From what I can see, Hill gave up 23 HR this year.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/H/rich-hill.shtml

 

I've always thought his two problems were control and HR allowed.

 

Looks to me like his first real problem with HR's was this year. Here's a guy who bounced from High A, AA, AAA and the majors.

 

I'd give him a little more time to settle in before branding him with a HR problem. Also, his walks are not great, but put them together with his hits allowed, and I'll take it. Not a bad WHIP at all this year (excluding his major league stats).

[CubfaninCA]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

and the offense would be left with what exactly?

 

Isn't durable and innings eater the same thing?

 

Trade for Floyd.

 

If you haven't noticed, pitching wins titles.

 

EDIT: Aren't you the same guy who said "Don't expect alot from Murton next year."

 

I want a top 5 offense. There's no reason this team can't have a top 5 ERA and top 5 runs scored in the NL, with at least one of those being top 3. I would not assume Murton will give you great production in LF. I would expect him to be fine for a $300,000 LF. But I would construct the rest of my roster with the expectation that Murton won't be the rookie of the year (I know he's ineligible). In other words, get a productive RF bat. If you deal Murton and Williams for a pitcher, then you not only have to get a productive RF, but now you have to also get a LF. It's opening up another hole, and counterproductive.

 

Tweak the offense some and it can sneak into the top 5. The problems w/ the offense are over-dramatized here. Hendry just needs to get 1 and 2 hitters who are more likely to stay healthy than what they had. In all, I'd rather have a #1 or 2 pitching staff and a 5 or 6 offense, than a 1 or 2 offence and a 5 or 6 rotation. The current rotation is quite shaky. Hendry needs to sure it up.

[CubfaninCA]

Could Williams and Murton get the Cubs Zito and another player? Zito would basically give the Cubs a #2 starter, who is durable (BIG PLUS) and can eat some innings.

 

and the offense would be left with what exactly?

 

Isn't durable and innings eater the same thing?

 

Trade for Floyd.

 

If you haven't noticed, pitching wins titles.

 

EDIT: Aren't you the same guy who said "Don't expect alot from Murton next year."

 

I want a top 5 offense. There's no reason this team can't have a top 5 ERA and top 5 runs scored in the NL, with at least one of those being top 3. I would not assume Murton will give you great production in LF. I would expect him to be fine for a $300,000 LF. But I would construct the rest of my roster with the expectation that Murton won't be the rookie of the year (I know he's ineligible). In other words, get a productive RF bat. If you deal Murton and Williams for a pitcher, then you not only have to get a productive RF, but now you have to also get a LF. It's opening up another hole, and counterproductive.

 

Tweak the offense some and it can sneak into the top 5. The problems w/ the offense are over-dramatized here. Hendry just needs to get 1 and 2 hitters who are more likely to stay healthy than what they had. In all, I'd rather have a #1 or 2 pitching staff and a 5 or 6 offense, than a 1 or 2 offence and a 5 or 6 rotation. The current rotation is quite shaky. Hendry needs to sure it up.

[HoopsCubs]

Tweak the offense some and it can sneak into the top 5. The problems w/ the offense are over-dramatized here. Hendry just needs to get 1 and 2 hitters who are more likely to stay healthy than what they had. In all, I'd rather have a #1 or 2 pitching staff and a 5 or 6 offense, than a 1 or 2 offence and a 5 or 6 rotation. The current rotation is quite shaky. Hendry needs to sure it up.

 

 

I don't think you can ignore either side CubfaninCA. Both offense and pitching need to be significantly shored up. Need a lead-off hitter for sure, and definitely need better OPS from all 3 outfield spots (playing Murton everyday should take care of LF). And then, to your point on the rotation, it would be great to get a #2 starter - Zambrano 1, Prior 3, Maddux 4, Wood or Williams 5. There is ample money available to do it all. It's going to require some savvy trades, though, especially if Giles goes somewhere else.

 

Hoops

[LuckyPup]

Tweak the offense some and it can sneak into the top 5. The problems w/ the offense are over-dramatized here. Hendry just needs to get 1 and 2 hitters who are more likely to stay healthy than what they had. In all, I'd rather have a #1 or 2 pitching staff and a 5 or 6 offense, than a 1 or 2 offence and a 5 or 6 rotation. The current rotation is quite shaky. Hendry needs to sure it up.

 

 

I don't think you can ignore either side CubfaninCA. Both offense and pitching need to be significantly shored up. Need a lead-off hitter for sure, and definitely need better OPS from all 3 outfield spots (playing Murton everyday should take care of LF). And then, to your point on the rotation, it would be great to get a #2 starter - Zambrano 1, Prior 3, Maddux 4, Wood or Williams 5. There is ample money available to do it all. It's going to require some savvy trades, though, especially if Giles goes somewhere else.

 

Hoops

Hoops have you heard Giles' name at all from any sources?Do you feel like the cubs have a legit shot at him?I personally don't see him leaving So Cal but any word on him being on the rada?

[HoopsCubs]

Hoops have you heard Giles' name at all from any sources?Do you feel like the cubs have a legit shot at him?I personally don't see him leaving So Cal but any word on him being on the rada?

 

Sorry BD. I have no relevant information about the Cubs interest in Brian Giles. That's not to say he isn't on the radar, but rather, I don't know if he is or isn't. All I can say is that I have verified through my sources that Jim Hendry is aware that Giles is a free agent. :roll:

 

As for my personal opinion, I'm 90% confident the Cubs have more money available to spend this offseason than any other NL team. I base that comment by taking the 2005 payroll for each club and subtracting off 2006 guaranteed contracts. That puts the Cubs at about $43-44M. The Mets have about $39-40M. The Cards, Padres and Braves have about $29-32M. So, if Giles is looking for the most money, the Cubs and Mets can offer him the most money. But, if he's looking to win consistently, the Cards and Braves do have enough money to make it happen. It would be terrible if he went to St. Louis. He could end up in Atlanta if he provides a bit of discount to play with his brother. SD can afford him too. But unlike St. Louis, who has the majority of their guaranteed contracts in guys like Pujols, Edmonds, Rolen, Mulder and Isringhausen, or Atlanta, who has Jones, Jones, Smoltz and Hudson, the Padres have their guaranteed contracts in Chan Ho Park and Ryan Klesko. Assuming Giles does not want to play in the NY spotlight, does not plan to give his hometown Padres a discount, and prefers to play for a consistent playoff team, I see Atlanta 1, St. Louis 2 and the Cubs 3 in the Giles sweepstakes.

 

Hoops

[AlamoCub]

Don't the A's still need a 2nd baseman? What about Walker and junk prospects for Zito?

 

Not really. They have Mark Ellis who is only 28, and he put up a solid .316/.384/.477 this season in 122 games.

[goonys evil twin]

Tweak the offense some and it can sneak into the top 5. The problems w/ the offense are over-dramatized here.

 

It'll take much more than a tweak. The problems that have plagued this team, have plagued them for years and are not being exaggerated. The Cubs were 9th in runs scored this year. They were that low because of low OBP, and the low OBP was because they took few walks. It would take 1 or 2 bats to turn things around if those 1 or 2 were big impacts like Giles. But things will not be fixed with Furcal and a mediocre RF. They need impact out there.

 

No matter what you do with the pitching staff, there's no way to guarantee a top 1 or 2 staff, with the fragile nature of that aspect of the game. You can't put all your emphasis on pitching and just think this offense will get fixed with tweaks. They've been tweaking it for 3 years and it just keeps getting worse.

[stitchface]

I find it amusing that Prior is now labeled a "#3" starter and Wood a "#4" starter. Of course those labels are meaningless, but the Cubs don't need a #2 starter nearly as badly as they need those two to be healthy. The point being that you are much better off spending your resources on offense as the risk is far less than the risk with pitchers. Plus, the Cubs have been far more successful in drafting and developing pitchers than hitters.

[Backtobanks]

I find it amusing that Prior is now labeled a "#3" starter and Wood a "#4" starter. Of course those labels are meaningless, but the Cubs don't need a #2 starter nearly as badly as they need those two to be healthy. The point being that you are much better off spending your resources on offense as the risk is far less than the risk with pitchers. Plus, the Cubs have been far more successful in drafting and developing pitchers than hitters.

 

With everyone healthy, Zambrano, Prior, & Wood are all #1 or #1A starters. Of course, using the name "Wood" and the word "healthy" in the same sentence is ridiculous.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I find it amusing that Prior is now labeled a "#3" starter and Wood a "#4" starter. Of course those labels are meaningless, but the Cubs don't need a #2 starter nearly as badly as they need those two to be healthy. The point being that you are much better off spending your resources on offense as the risk is far less than the risk with pitchers. Plus, the Cubs have been far more successful in drafting and developing pitchers than hitters.

 

Agreed. There is no way Prior is a #3 starter. Zito is not better than Prior. It is ridiculous to even suggest that he is.