Furcal or Pierre?

[cubbyvirus00]

Which one would you rather have on the Cubs?

 

 

Oh, neither isn't an option.

 

The Cubs WILL get one of them, bank on it.

[XZero771679666304]

Furcal, no contest.

[ManCrushOnNomar]

 

The Cubs WILL get one of them, bank on it.

According to who?

[David]

Yup, Furcal, no contest.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I'm not a big fan of Pierre, but lots depends on what goes with each one. Furcal is a better player, but if having Furcal means Patterson or Preston Wilson in Cf, but having Pierre means having Nomar at SS, I think I'd take Pierre/Nomar over Furcal/Patterson.

 

But just on evaluation of the two players, Furcal.

[Backtobanks]

I'm not a big fan of Pierre, but lots depends on what goes with each one. Furcal is a better player, but if having Furcal means Patterson or Preston Wilson in Cf, but having Pierre means having Nomar at SS, I think I'd take Pierre/Nomar over Furcal/Patterson.

 

But just on evaluation of the two players, Furcal.

 

I agree with you Vance. You have to look at the total result. I would take Furcal over Pierre, but taking into account Furcal might get $40 million over 4 years makes it questionable. Actually, neither one excites me very much. Trading for Lugo, M. Giles, or Castillo would be better and cheaper options.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I'm not a big fan of giving Furcal 4/40 like he wants, but Pierre is ridiculously overrated. We don't need Neifi with speed batting leadoff.

 

Furcal.

[Jehrico]

I'm not a big fan of Pierre, but lots depends on what goes with each one. Furcal is a better player, but if having Furcal means Patterson or Preston Wilson in Cf, but having Pierre means having Nomar at SS, I think I'd take Pierre/Nomar over Furcal/Patterson.

 

But just on evaluation of the two players, Furcal.

 

I agree with you Vance. You have to look at the total result. I would take Furcal over Pierre, but taking into account Furcal might get $40 million over 4 years makes it questionable. Actually, neither one excites me very much. Trading for Lugo, M. Giles, or Castillo would be better and cheaper options.

 

Would you do Cedeno for Lugo? TB might bite on that...

[RockTheIvy]

I'm not a big fan of Pierre, but lots depends on what goes with each one. Furcal is a better player, but if having Furcal means Patterson or Preston Wilson in Cf, but having Pierre means having Nomar at SS, I think I'd take Pierre/Nomar over Furcal/Patterson.

 

But just on evaluation of the two players, Furcal.

 

I agree with you Vance. You have to look at the total result. I would take Furcal over Pierre, but taking into account Furcal might get $40 million over 4 years makes it questionable. Actually, neither one excites me very much. Trading for Lugo, M. Giles, or Castillo would be better and cheaper options.

 

Would you do Cedeno for Lugo? TB might bite on that...

 

I'm not so sure they would. I believe one of the reasons they would move Lugo is because they have Upton ready to go. At 2B, they have Cantu, who came up playing a lot of short for them. I'm not sure they need another SS/2B.

[BigbadB]

Tampa will be all about pitching. Or at least they should.

[DivineBovine]

I don't understand why people are so down on Pierre. Because he had ONE year in the last 3 years where he batted less than .300? Furcal might be a better offensive player (and its NOT a landslide)- after all, he did slug a whopping 12 homers this year and bat a whopping .012 points higher. But Pierre is a FAR FAR better fit for this team. We have 2 other possibilities at SS in Nomar and Cedeno. Walker is the 2B. I just think that spending that much money on a marginal improvement in the IF with 2 black holes in the OF is absurd. And Pierre is good.

 

I'd jump all over Pierre, and its not even close IMO.

 

And if not Pierre, I'd like to know who should play CF? Damon? CPatt? Pie?

 

Pierre is by far the best option for this team right now if he can be had for a reasonable deal, which seems to be the case. And I'm really not so keen on throwing Pie out there. Really.

Edited November 1, 2005 by DivineBovine

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I don't understand why people are so down on Pierre. Because he had ONE year in the last 3 years where he batted less than .300? Furcal might be a better offensive player (and its NOT a landslide)- after all, he did slug a whopping 12 homers this year and bat a whopping .012 points higher. But Pierre is a FAR FAR better fit for this team. We have 2 other possibilities at SS in Nomar and Cedeno. Walker is the 2B. I just think that spending that much money on a marginal improvement in the IF with 2 black holes in the OF is absurd. And Pierre is good.

 

I'd jump all over Pierre, and its not even close IMO.

 

Pierre struggled to outproduce Patterson in his(their) good seasons. His inability to hit for extra bases hurts him, his mediocre to poor stolen base percentage drags down his OBP's effectiveness, and he's a poor defender. If we're going to gamble on a CF returning to form after a crappy 2005, why not do it with the younger and better defender who doesn't cost you any players?

[HoopsCubs]

Which one would you rather have on the Cubs?

 

 

Oh, neither isn't an option.

 

The Cubs WILL get one of them, bank on it.

 

Furcal worries me a bit. I'll go with Pierre. By the way, Tampa Bay just picked up Lugo's $4.95M option. But I view that move as a similar move to the Cubs picking up Walker's option. It doesn't mean they'll keep him, it doesn't mean they'll trade him, it means they see value in having the option.

[DivineBovine]

I don't understand why people are so down on Pierre. Because he had ONE year in the last 3 years where he batted less than .300? Furcal might be a better offensive player (and its NOT a landslide)- after all, he did slug a whopping 12 homers this year and bat a whopping .012 points higher. But Pierre is a FAR FAR better fit for this team. We have 2 other possibilities at SS in Nomar and Cedeno. Walker is the 2B. I just think that spending that much money on a marginal improvement in the IF with 2 black holes in the OF is absurd. And Pierre is good.

 

I'd jump all over Pierre, and its not even close IMO.

 

Pierre struggled to outproduce Patterson in his(their) good seasons. His inability to hit for extra bases hurts him, his mediocre to poor stolen base percentage drags down his OBP's effectiveness, and he's a poor defender. If we're going to gamble on a CF returning to form after a crappy 2005, why not do it with the younger and better defender who doesn't cost you any players?

 

 

I cannot believe that Patterson vs. Pierre is even coming up. Patterson cannot compare to Hairston Jr., much less Pierre,

 

1) "In their good seasons"- well CPatt has had one. And Pierre has had many. In their bad season, Pierre still managed to hit .276 and steal 57 bases. Pattterson managed to be arguably the worst offensive player in all of baseball.

 

2) You are rigging the stats by taking into account slugging pct. The Cubs need a leadoff man. I don't care how many home runs Pierre hits. We all know he's going to have a crappy SLG%. I care that he gets on base. Patterson will NEVER touch Pierre in OBP. Just because CPatt can hit a bunch of solo shots late in meaningless games really does nothing for me. For me, there is no comparison.

 

3) The highest OBP CPatt has even put up is .329. That's it. Even in the minors he couldn't do much better. Pierre has been above it, usually WELL above that in 5 of the last 6 years.

 

 

 

If CPatt is anywhere near CF this year, I'll be upset.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I cannot believe that Patterson vs. Pierre is even coming up. Patterson cannot compare to Hairston Jr., much less Pierre,

 

1) "In their good seasons"- well CPatt has had one. And Pierre has had many. In their bad season, Pierre still managed to hit .276 and steal 57 bases. Pattterson managed to be arguably the worst offensive player in all of baseball.

 

3) The highest OBP CPatt has even put up is .329. That's it. Even in the minors he couldn't do much better. Pierre has been above it, usually WELL above that in 5 of the last 6 years.

 

 

The number of SB doesn't matter. The rate does.

 

 

It's pretty obvious that CPat has no plate discipline and isn't likely to develop any sometime soon. I don't imagine we'll be batting CPat leadoff, so who cares what his OBP is? He can keep CF warm with good defense until Pie arrives (or we can get a cheap leadoff hitter in Lofton for less money and prospects than it will take to get Pierre).

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I don't understand why people are so down on Pierre. Because he had ONE year in the last 3 years where he batted less than .300? Furcal might be a better offensive player (and its NOT a landslide)- after all, he did slug a whopping 12 homers this year and bat a whopping .012 points higher. But Pierre is a FAR FAR better fit for this team. We have 2 other possibilities at SS in Nomar and Cedeno. Walker is the 2B. I just think that spending that much money on a marginal improvement in the IF with 2 black holes in the OF is absurd. And Pierre is good.

 

I'd jump all over Pierre, and its not even close IMO.

 

Pierre struggled to outproduce Patterson in his(their) good seasons. His inability to hit for extra bases hurts him, his mediocre to poor stolen base percentage drags down his OBP's effectiveness, and he's a poor defender. If we're going to gamble on a CF returning to form after a crappy 2005, why not do it with the younger and better defender who doesn't cost you any players?

 

 

I cannot believe that Patterson vs. Pierre is even coming up. Patterson cannot compare to Hairston Jr., much less Pierre,

 

1) "In their good seasons"- well CPatt has had one. And Pierre has had many. In their bad season, Pierre still managed to hit .276 and steal 57 bases. Pattterson managed to be arguably the worst offensive player in all of baseball.

 

2) You are rigging the stats by taking into account slugging pct. The Cubs need a leadoff man. I don't care how many home runs Pierre hits. We all know he's going to have a crappy SLG%. I care that he gets on base. Patterson will NEVER touch Pierre in OBP. Just because CPatt can hit a bunch of solo shots late in meaningless games really does nothing for me. For me, there is no comparison.

 

3) The highest OBP CPatt has even put up is .329. That's it. Even in the minors he couldn't do much better. Pierre has been above it, usually WELL above that in 5 of the last 6 years.

 

 

 

If CPatt is anywhere near CF this year, I'll be upset.

 

I'm fine with Walker as a leadoff guy, we don't need to overpay for a subpar player because he's a "leadoff hitter".

 

WARP2

 

Patterson: 2.9 in 2003(projects to 6.0 with the amount of PA's Pierre had), 4.8 in 2004

 

Pierre: 4.2 in '03, 4.9 in '04

 

The Runs Created numbers support this as well, but I don't have the time at the moment to get them, I'll edit later.

[YearofDaCubs]

I would rather have Furcal but Pierre in CF and Nomar at SS sounds nice as well.

[DivineBovine]

I don't understand why people are so down on Pierre. Because he had ONE year in the last 3 years where he batted less than .300? Furcal might be a better offensive player (and its NOT a landslide)- after all, he did slug a whopping 12 homers this year and bat a whopping .012 points higher. But Pierre is a FAR FAR better fit for this team. We have 2 other possibilities at SS in Nomar and Cedeno. Walker is the 2B. I just think that spending that much money on a marginal improvement in the IF with 2 black holes in the OF is absurd. And Pierre is good.

 

I'd jump all over Pierre, and its not even close IMO.

 

Pierre struggled to outproduce Patterson in his(their) good seasons. His inability to hit for extra bases hurts him, his mediocre to poor stolen base percentage drags down his OBP's effectiveness, and he's a poor defender. If we're going to gamble on a CF returning to form after a crappy 2005, why not do it with the younger and better defender who doesn't cost you any players?

 

 

I cannot believe that Patterson vs. Pierre is even coming up. Patterson cannot compare to Hairston Jr., much less Pierre,

 

1) "In their good seasons"- well CPatt has had one. And Pierre has had many. In their bad season, Pierre still managed to hit .276 and steal 57 bases. Pattterson managed to be arguably the worst offensive player in all of baseball.

 

2) You are rigging the stats by taking into account slugging pct. The Cubs need a leadoff man. I don't care how many home runs Pierre hits. We all know he's going to have a crappy SLG%. I care that he gets on base. Patterson will NEVER touch Pierre in OBP. Just because CPatt can hit a bunch of solo shots late in meaningless games really does nothing for me. For me, there is no comparison.

 

3) The highest OBP CPatt has even put up is .329. That's it. Even in the minors he couldn't do much better. Pierre has been above it, usually WELL above that in 5 of the last 6 years.

 

 

 

If CPatt is anywhere near CF this year, I'll be upset.

 

I'm fine with Walker as a leadoff guy, we don't need to overpay for a subpar player because he's a "leadoff hitter".

 

WARP2

 

Patterson: 2.9 in 2003(projects to 6.0 with the amount of PA's Pierre had), 4.8 in 2004

 

Pierre: 4.2 in '03, 4.9 in '04

 

The Runs Created numbers support this as well, but I don't have the time at the moment to get them, I'll edit later.

 

 

I really don't know what WARP2 means, so I can't really comment much on that. But if you're saying that we shouldn't overpay for Pierre, that's fine. We shouldn't overpay for anyone. But no matter what WARP2 means, I can't possibly see how any comparision between Patterson and Pierre is even close.

 

Pierre only beat CPatt 4.9 to 4.8 this year? Can you honestly say that Pierre's .276 Average only beat Patterson's .250 OBP by that much? Well whatever those numbers mean, I just don't buy them. Maybe you can explain.

 

The Cubs were near the bottom again in OBP, and near the top in slugging and home runs. I don't see how it makes sense giving Patterson another shot. He put up a .254 OBP this year. Ouch.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I don't understand why people are so down on Pierre. Because he had ONE year in the last 3 years where he batted less than .300? Furcal might be a better offensive player (and its NOT a landslide)- after all, he did slug a whopping 12 homers this year and bat a whopping .012 points higher. But Pierre is a FAR FAR better fit for this team. We have 2 other possibilities at SS in Nomar and Cedeno. Walker is the 2B. I just think that spending that much money on a marginal improvement in the IF with 2 black holes in the OF is absurd. And Pierre is good.

 

I'd jump all over Pierre, and its not even close IMO.

 

Pierre struggled to outproduce Patterson in his(their) good seasons. His inability to hit for extra bases hurts him, his mediocre to poor stolen base percentage drags down his OBP's effectiveness, and he's a poor defender. If we're going to gamble on a CF returning to form after a crappy 2005, why not do it with the younger and better defender who doesn't cost you any players?

 

 

I cannot believe that Patterson vs. Pierre is even coming up. Patterson cannot compare to Hairston Jr., much less Pierre,

 

1) "In their good seasons"- well CPatt has had one. And Pierre has had many. In their bad season, Pierre still managed to hit .276 and steal 57 bases. Pattterson managed to be arguably the worst offensive player in all of baseball.

 

2) You are rigging the stats by taking into account slugging pct. The Cubs need a leadoff man. I don't care how many home runs Pierre hits. We all know he's going to have a crappy SLG%. I care that he gets on base. Patterson will NEVER touch Pierre in OBP. Just because CPatt can hit a bunch of solo shots late in meaningless games really does nothing for me. For me, there is no comparison.

 

3) The highest OBP CPatt has even put up is .329. That's it. Even in the minors he couldn't do much better. Pierre has been above it, usually WELL above that in 5 of the last 6 years.

 

 

 

If CPatt is anywhere near CF this year, I'll be upset.

 

I'm fine with Walker as a leadoff guy, we don't need to overpay for a subpar player because he's a "leadoff hitter".

 

WARP2

 

Patterson: 2.9 in 2003(projects to 6.0 with the amount of PA's Pierre had), 4.8 in 2004

 

Pierre: 4.2 in '03, 4.9 in '04

 

The Runs Created numbers support this as well, but I don't have the time at the moment to get them, I'll edit later.

 

 

I really don't know what WARP2 means, so I can't really comment much on that. But if you're saying that we shouldn't overpay for Pierre, that's fine. We shouldn't overpay for anyone. But no matter what WARP2 means, I can't possibly see how any comparision between Patterson and Pierre is even close.

 

Pierre only beat CPatt 4.9 to 4.8 this year? Can you honestly say that Pierre's .276 Average only beat Patterson's .250 OBP by that much? Well whatever those numbers mean, I just don't buy them. Maybe you can explain.

 

The Cubs were near the bottom again in OBP, and near the top in slugging and home runs. I don't see how it makes sense giving Patterson another shot. He put up a .254 OBP this year. Ouch.

 

WARP is Wins Above Replacement Player

The 4.9 to 4.8 is 2004. My comparison of the two was their good seasons, and both were very bad this past year(Patterson obviously being worse).

 

I'm not campaigning for Patterson to be in CF next year, I'm one of the biggest Milton Bradley proponent's around here. On the other hand, I don't think it would be as bad an idea as some to put him there if the necessary improvements are made elsewhere(highly unlikely). My point is that Pierre isn't that great either, and I wouldn't be thrilled with either in CF. Even less so with Pierre given age, defense, and cost situations.

[NewUserName]

Personnally I still think paying Frucal 10% of the Cubs payroll is going to bite them in the behind in a couple of years. Especially since they have options that are almost as good and alot cheaper. Ask the Cards if they would rather be paying Renteria or Cabrera or Eckstein. The first 2 are still better players(maybe not this year but in their careers) but Eckstein is alot better value. Cedeno or Garciaparra or both would be better value than Frucal. It would free up the money to fix 2 humonguos holes in CF and RF. I wouldnt mind getting Pierre but would be setting the bar a little higher if I could.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

Neither.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

Keep in mind that with Pierre, you're only on the hook for one more season--he's a free agent for 2007--and he's paid $6MM in 2006, which will be several millions less than Furcal gets.

 

If you're someone wanting to wait on Pie and let him get one more year of minor league seasoning, then Pierre or Lofton for CF are the solutions that make sense.

 

Myself, I say nutz to both and let's get Giles and Abreu. :-) With Giles, Abreu, Lee and Ramirez in the middle of your order, it wouldn't matter much WHO you had for your leadoff hitter. Walker. Murton. Cedeno. Hank White. We'd still score a ton of runs.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

Wait...he makes 6 million dollars next year? Wow...

[mg420]

i would rather see pierre. look what scott pod did for the sox in 2005 and i expect similar things from juan if the cubs trade for him. pierre had an off year in 05 (similar to s pod in 04) so i see no reason why he cant return to his .750 ops with 50 sb year form. whoever signs furcal will probably way overpay (in years & $) anyway and 1 year of pierre will allow cedeno to start at ss in 06 & perhaps pie in cf in 07.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

i would rather see pierre. look what scott pod did for the sox in 2005 and i expect similar things from juan if the cubs trade for him. pierre had an off year in 05 (similar to s pod in 04) so i see no reason why he cant return to his .750 ops with 50 sb year form. whoever signs furcal will probably way overpay (in years & $) anyway and 1 year of pierre will allow cedeno to start at ss in 06 & perhaps pie in cf in 07.

 

The White Sox scored less runs in '05 than '04, and at last check didn't score any more consistently than the Cubs's offense.