Interesting Notes on the Cubs from the GM Meetings...

[stitchface]

I think there is a better than average chance neither murton or pie ever has an OPS over .900 and there is certainly a good chance abreu does.

[JeffH]

Not really the point, but whatever.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I don't think Abreu is the answer. he's a big name and his production was great up until 2005. is this the beginning of the end or is it just one bad season? i think it's the beginning of the end. check out how his SLG has trended over his career. it looks like '04 was the outlier and '05 was right where it should be.

 

link

[RockTheIvy]

I don't think Abreu is the answer. he's a big name and his production was great up until 2005. is this the beginning of the end or is it just one bad season? i think it's the beginning of the end. check out how his SLG has trended over his career. it looks like '04 was the outlier and '05 was right where it should be.

 

link

 

But would you rather have two years of Abreu or 4 years of Giles, who is almost certainly going to decline?

[mg420]

I saw VERY little of Hill, and I know we can't judge him based on that cup of coffee he had last season, but I see no reason to cling on to him like grim death. He might be good, but he might be really mediocre, too. He's not a can't-miss guy we should be making off-limits.

Hopefully, O_O is correct, and it's simply negotiating tactics.

neither was dontrell and look how he ended up. if hill can come up with a decent 3rd pitch (like a cutter or straight change) to go along with the low 90's fb & awesome curve, he will end up being a very good ml starter.

You do know that Dontrelle is two years younger than Hill, right?

 

what does that matter? hills still young. it just took him longer to harness his stuff & find his control. hill has better stuff than dontrell imo. alot of willis's success has to do with his command & deceptive delivery.

 

Why does dontrelle matter? You can't evaluate every players value based on one guy you misjudged. Willis should have absolutely nothing to do with how you evaluate Hill.

 

I'm pleased to hear Hendry is considering Bradley though - its encouraging that he isn't completely close-minded. Given what is being sought, Bradley, Pierre, Mench, Hendry should be turning away from offering Pie, Murton or Hill. Those names should be reserved for discussions about players like Dunn or Abreu.

 

actually MacPhail traded dontrelle, not hendry. that said, the point was regarding a "cant miss" prospect" of which there is no such thing imo. hendry obviously thinks enough of murton, pie & hill to make them untouchable (according to the report) in trade talks.

[mg420]

I don't think Abreu is the answer. he's a big name and his production was great up until 2005. is this the beginning of the end or is it just one bad season? i think it's the beginning of the end. check out how his SLG has trended over his career. it looks like '04 was the outlier and '05 was right where it should be.

 

link

 

But would you rather have two years of Abreu or 4 years of Giles, who is almost certainly going to decline?

 

as has been said many times before, it depends on what abreu would cost prospect wise. i dont see hendry giving up murton, pie or hill for anyone at this point. giles will only cost $$ (assuming he even wants to play for the cubs).

[RockTheIvy]

I don't think Abreu is the answer. he's a big name and his production was great up until 2005. is this the beginning of the end or is it just one bad season? i think it's the beginning of the end. check out how his SLG has trended over his career. it looks like '04 was the outlier and '05 was right where it should be.

 

link

 

But would you rather have two years of Abreu or 4 years of Giles, who is almost certainly going to decline?

 

as has been said many times before, it depends on what abreu would cost prospect wise. i dont see hendry giving up murton, pie or hill for anyone at this point. giles will only cost $$ (assuming he even wants to play for the cubs).

 

Nah you are right, I was just saying that I personally would rather have Giles and that Abreu is probably worth his 15 million considering what Giles will probably make.

[mg420]

I don't think Abreu is the answer. he's a big name and his production was great up until 2005. is this the beginning of the end or is it just one bad season? i think it's the beginning of the end. check out how his SLG has trended over his career. it looks like '04 was the outlier and '05 was right where it should be.

 

link

 

But would you rather have two years of Abreu or 4 years of Giles, who is almost certainly going to decline?

 

as has been said many times before, it depends on what abreu would cost prospect wise. i dont see hendry giving up murton, pie or hill for anyone at this point. giles will only cost $$ (assuming he even wants to play for the cubs).

 

Nah you are right, I was just saying that I personally would rather have Giles and that Abreu is probably worth his 15 million considering what Giles will probably make.

 

i agree. i would rather have giles too.

[stitchface]

Not really the point, but whatever.

 

What is the point? Why should Hendry be fired for trading prospects for a solid if not spectacular rightfielder? It certainly makes more sense than signing Neifi and Glendon and he didn't get fired for that. I will be surprised if either Pie or Murton has even one season (albeit happily surprised) that surpasses Abreu's 2006.

[CubsWin]

Not really the point, but whatever.

 

What is the point? Why should Hendry be fired for trading prospects for a solid if not spectacular rightfielder? It certainly makes more sense than signing Neifi and Glendon and he didn't get fired for that. I will be surprised if either Pie or Murton has even one season (albeit happily surprised) that surpasses Abreu's 2006.

I don't know what came before in this thread so I'm only commenting on trading Pie and others for Abreu.

 

While I agree that Abreu's offensive numbers in 2006 will likely be better than anything Pie will put up during his career, what we are really talking about is a couple of years of Abreu at his best or near his best for the entire career of Felix Pie and more importantly those years when Pie is young, great and cheap.

 

I admit, I want Abreu bad because he would give the Cubs a shot at the WS in the next couple of seasons. But at this point, it is difficult to quantify just how many more chances at the WS Pie will give the Cubs. His OBP and plate discipline may never improve and he could be just a good bat with great glove and lots of speed and he would be that for the league minimum for several seasons giving the Cubs the opportunity to acquire Abreu or someone like him in free agency a year or two down the road. Or Pie could be the next boy wonder. He could improve his plate discipline, his power could continue to improve (.903 OPS at AA while a 20-year-old this season), and he could be a great player while at near league minimum for several seasons.

 

I believe that last scenario is likely enough to not trade away Felix Pie even for a couple of years of Bobby Abreu.

[stitchface]

maybe. but if abreu puts the cubs over the top, I make the trade. if neifi is starting and batting 2nd, I agree with you. You have to see that Pie is still more likely to become corey patterson than carlos beltran.

 

I should add that I never suggested we trade pie for abreu, just that if I would listen if his name came up in that kind of trade, not if it in came up in a bradley or pierre trade.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I don't think Abreu is the answer. he's a big name and his production was great up until 2005. is this the beginning of the end or is it just one bad season? i think it's the beginning of the end. check out how his SLG has trended over his career. it looks like '04 was the outlier and '05 was right where it should be.

 

link

 

But would you rather have two years of Abreu or 4 years of Giles, who is almost certainly going to decline?

 

Abreu is going to cost us quite a bit in prospects. Giles costs us only money. It's not as simple as asking whether you'd have player A or player B.

 

Hypothetically, I'd take Abreu. Realistically, I'll take Giles, who'll only cost us a draft pick and some dinero.

[stitchface]

I would take Abreu because he looks like Sammy and reminds me of happy days.

 

actually, were those happy days? I expect Giles will age well and only cost us a 2nd round draft pick.

[Jehrico]

Given what is being sought, Bradley, Pierre, Mench, Hendry should be turning away from offering Pie, Murton or Hill. Those names should be reserved for discussions about players like Dunn or Abreu.

Am I the only one who thinks Hill at best will pan out to be a setup man? He has a knee-buckling curve, a mediocre fastball, and not much else. A good reliever can get by on those, but not a starter. A starter would have to have a good 3rd pitch to go to with his underwhelming fastball to have sustained success, but Hill doesn't.

[RockTheIvy]

Given what is being sought, Bradley, Pierre, Mench, Hendry should be turning away from offering Pie, Murton or Hill. Those names should be reserved for discussions about players like Dunn or Abreu.

Am I the only one who thinks Hill at best will pan out to be a setup man? He has a knee-buckling curve, a mediocre fastball, and not much else. A good reliever can get by on those, but not a starter. A starter would have to have a good 3rd pitch to go to with his underwhelming fastball to have sustained success, but Hill doesn't.

 

No I agree. Hill seems like a one-trick pony. Hopefully others don't see him that way, so he can net us some impact players if he is traded.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

More of the same from another source.

 

The Cubs are lining up several possible trades involving outfielders with Los Angeles' Milton Bradley the most interesting name that popped up at the GM meetings. Others were Juan Pierre (from Florida for Corey Patterson) and Texas' Kevin Mench.

 

My guess is Hendry is throwing out a lot of feelers for players such as Bradley, Mench, and Pierre. He'll likely take the best of the deals he can and then use free agent dollars to fill the other holes.

 

Of those mentioned, bring on Milton Bradley.

[Mizzou]

Why is Hendry so adamant about not trading Hill? He has two pitches - a fastball and a curveball. The dude is simply not that good.

[muntjack]

Why is Hendry so adamant about not trading Hill? He has two pitches - a fastball and a curveball. The dude is simply not that good.

 

Barry Zito has a mediocre fastball and a knee-buckling curveball. He ocassionally mixes in the change, but not too often.

 

Funny that Hill has similar stuff, and still K's people at such a high rate. If Hill has the mental makeup, he can be a very effective pitcher, IMO.

[Mizzou]

Why is Hendry so adamant about not trading Hill? He has two pitches - a fastball and a curveball. The dude is simply not that good.

 

Barry Zito has a mediocre fastball and a knee-buckling curveball. He ocassionally mixes in the change, but not too often.

 

Funny that Hill has similar stuff, and still K's people at such a high rate. If Hill has the mental makeup, he can be a very effective pitcher, IMO.

 

His curve is good and I think he CAN be an effective pitcher too, but not until he develops another pitch. You aren't going to be successful when you only have two pitches.

[Backtobanks]

Why is Hendry so adamant about not trading Hill? He has two pitches - a fastball and a curveball. The dude is simply not that good.

 

I agree with you, I just don't see what Hendry is sseing in this guy. To put him on the same "untradeable" level as Pie is ridiculous. Having said that, I hope Hill learns a third pitch and proves me wrong.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Why is Hendry so adamant about not trading Hill? He has two pitches - a fastball and a curveball. The dude is simply not that good.

 

I agree with you, I just don't see what Hendry is sseing in this guy. To put him on the same "untradeable" level as Pie is ridiculous. Having said that, I hope Hill learns a third pitch and proves me wrong.

 

a changeup is super easy to learn and only makes your fastball better. at 78 mph changeup with a 90 mph fastball would be very nice indeed.

 

why doesn't he throw the changeup? i have no idea. maybe he does, but isn't sold on using it. that's usually the problem getting pitchers to throw the changeup. it's the same thing as a fastball delivery-wise with a deeper grip. mastering the grip is fairly easy. it's not like a slider, which takes quite a while to figure out the pressure you need to apply with your fingertips.

[UK1679666180]

Change-up is difficult to learn b/c it messes with your muscle memory. Getting the drop in velocity and slight movement down and away isn't as difficult to do, but keeping the same arm angle and speed is.

[JeffH]

What is the point? Why should Hendry be fired for trading prospects for a solid if not spectacular rightfielder? It certainly makes more sense than signing Neifi and Glendon and he didn't get fired for that. I will be surprised if either Pie or Murton has even one season (albeit happily surprised) that surpasses Abreu's 2006.

 

The point is that money is an extremely valuable commodity (I can't believe I had to type out that sentence).

 

Gillick is hamstrung by the money he owes Abreu. Hendry is in great shape with all the money he has available.

 

It would be beyond stupid to help Gillick out of his money mess and give him cheap, top young talent in addition.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Change-up is difficult to learn b/c it messes with your muscle memory. Getting the drop in velocity and slight movement down and away isn't as difficult to do, but keeping the same arm angle and speed is.

 

what? you're not changing arm speed or delivery from your fastball if you're doing it right.

 

it's the resistance the ball sees that slows the ball down, not arm speed. the forces on the arm should be the same.

 

12 year olds learn this pitch. it should be the second pitch you learn (after the fastball).

[Tim]

Change-up is difficult to learn b/c it messes with your muscle memory. Getting the drop in velocity and slight movement down and away isn't as difficult to do, but keeping the same arm angle and speed is.

 

what? you're not changing arm speed or delivery from your fastball if you're doing it right.

 

it's the resistance the ball sees that slows the ball down, not arm speed. the forces on the arm should be the same.

 

12 year olds learn this pitch. it should be the second pitch you learn (after the fastball).

How many pitchers in MLB have a really effective changeup? It is an easy pitch to learn to throw. It is hard to learn to be deceptive enough with it to be effective.