Hendry to Nomar: Feel free to find a better fit...

[badgercub]

The people calling for the Cubs to re-sign Nomar are most likely the same people that complained that Hendry relied to heavily on players with a history of injuries. I think if the Cubs do not sign Furcal, Cedeno will be the starting SS and Walker will remain a Cub and be the starting 2b with Neifi backing up both.

 

I agree 100% badgercub

 

I think you need to look at this in context. Personally, I'm not upset that the Cubs have players with a history of injury on the team. What bothers me is that the fallback options in 2005 were weak. If you are going to have a Nomar on your roster, you can't afford to have a bench spot occupied by Macias. You need to make sure that you have better bench options.

 

Injuries are going to happen...even to people that don't have a history of injury. A player might get hit by a pitch and break a bone. A middle infielder might get hurt on a hard slide by a runner coming into second base. Collisions in the outfield happen (see Mike Cameron). You just need to make sure you have enough options so that if an injury does happen, you have someone you're comfortable plugging into that spot for an extended period of time. Either that or you need to have the resources and presence of mind to make a trade for someone that you can plug into that spot soon after the injury, if you anticipate that the injured player is going to be out for more than just a few weeks. You also need to have a productive enough lineup/pitching staff where if someone gets hurt, you can still manage to score/prevent runs.

 

If Nomar gets hurt, I'm comfortable with Cedeno starting everyday, with Neifi backing him up. You can't expect to replace the production of a Mark Prior if he gets hurt. That said, the Cubs have several people they can put on the mound every fifth day that should be somewhat effective.

 

But, if you look at last year's team they had players prone to injury at too many positions. Wood, Prior, Nomar, Hollandsworth, Ramirez. You just can't afford to carry reliable backups at all of those positions. I don't disagree that sometimes it is worth it to take a chance on an injured player, it is just when you assemble too many of them that you are going to run into problems.

[BigbadB]

We just prefer people giving their own opinions here, not other people's opinions, especially when they are wrong.

 

I've wanted Nomar back since the first day of the offseason, for many reasons.

 

1. He'd probably just be a 1 year deal.

2. He feels he has unfinished business in Chicago.

3. He's very productive for his position when healthy.

4. He's already a Cub, which makes bargaining with him easier.

5. He wanted to stay in Chicago, and would even change positions to do so.

6. Signing Nomar probably wouldn't remove the possibility of signing Giles. With signing Furcal, I'm not so sure they can still afford Giles.

 

I'm not against signing Furcal, but I have these concerns:

 

1. Coming off a contract year which saw less "laziness". He was averaging a high number of errors and much lower SB's in previous years.

2. The recent trend of free agents who sign big, fat, long contracts is to either be hurt or not play up to your previous standard. I could go on and on with comparisons, but I won't.'

3. We may miss out on Giles.

4. Cedeno could end up being as good as or better than Furcal.

[Wheelimus]

I don't take Hendry's comment as an "up yours" to Nomar, I take it more as a courtesy, to say "look, we won't want you starting at shortstop...we have a third baseman...and we're looking for an impact bat in right. So if you sign here, unless you beat out Murton for left field, you're probably going to be coming off the bench".

 

Which, if Nomar happens to not catch on as a starting shortstop somehow, I'd love to have him to cover the infield and outfields in an emergency :)

[mlarner]

I also think Hendry sees this year as vital, both because of a couple of recent down years and the success down on the South side. I would imagine he will go into the season with as few question marks as humanly possible (and I think this is why he'd stay away from Bradley in CF as well). You can go into the season knowing that some players will get hurt, that some of your relievers will come out of nowhere to be good and others that you had planned on taking major roles will stink, and all the craziness that happens in a 162 game schedule, but I see Hendry doing everything he can to minimize these possibilities as much as possible. He's also got the $ to do this as well. Other teams have to take more of these chances because of smaller budgets, but I don't think that applies too much in this instance.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

We just prefer people giving their own opinions here, not other people's opinions, especially when they are wrong.

 

I've wanted Nomar back since the first day of the offseason, for many reasons.

 

1. He'd probably just be a 1 year deal.

2. He feels he has unfinished business in Chicago.

3. He's very productive for his position when healthy.

4. He's already a Cub, which makes bargaining with him easier.

5. He wanted to stay in Chicago, and would even change positions to do so.

6. Signing Nomar probably wouldn't remove the possibility of signing Giles. With signing Furcal, I'm not so sure they can still afford Giles.

 

I'm not against signing Furcal, but I have these concerns:

 

1. Coming off a contract year which saw less "laziness". He was averaging a high number of errors and much lower SB's in previous years.

2. The recent trend of free agents who sign big, fat, long contracts is to either be hurt or not play up to your previous standard. I could go on and on with comparisons, but I won't.'

3. We may miss out on Giles.

4. Cedeno could end up being as good as or better than Furcal.

 

1. we've already gone down that road before and it didn't work.

2. how many millions has he taken off of us?

3. true, but his range is very limited with that groin injury SS isn't the optimum position for keeping him healthy.

4. the good will may be gone after the cubs org.'s Furcal love fest.

5. change positions to where? LF? 3B? None of those are feasible or reasonable given his production. He's a waste of money in LF and I'll take Ramirez over Nomar at 3B any day.

6. I'd love Giles in Wrigley too.

 

I agree with your assessment of the Furcal situation.

Edited November 14, 2005 by Meat&PotatoesMan

[nick23]

We just prefer people giving their own opinions here, not other people's opinions, especially when they are wrong.

 

I've wanted Nomar back since the first day of the offseason, for many reasons.

 

1. He'd probably just be a 1 year deal.

2. He feels he has unfinished business in Chicago.

3. He's very productive for his position when healthy.

4. He's already a Cub, which makes bargaining with him easier.

5. He wanted to stay in Chicago, and would even change positions to do so.

6. Signing Nomar probably wouldn't remove the possibility of signing Giles. With signing Furcal, I'm not so sure they can still afford Giles.

 

I'm not against signing Furcal, but I have these concerns:

 

1. Coming off a contract year which saw less "laziness". He was averaging a high number of errors and much lower SB's in previous years.

2. The recent trend of free agents who sign big, fat, long contracts is to either be hurt or not play up to your previous standard. I could go on and on with comparisons, but I won't.'

3. We may miss out on Giles.

4. Cedeno could end up being as good as or better than Furcal.

This is some of the worst reasoning I've ever heard. Resign Nomar because he has unfinished business in Chicago? Is this unfinished business going to hold his groin and hamstring together? And then don't sign Furcal because a couple of guys last year who signed big contracts got hurt. Also, assume we sign Nomar and he stays healthy. By reaching his incintives isn't he going to cost almost as much as Furcal?

[Mark Priors Calves]

I was so excited when the Cubs traded for Nomar in July '04 and almost as excited when they Cubs re-signed him last winter. What a disappointing ending to a very disappoint stint with the Cubs. Nomar, we hardly knew ye. :cry:

[mlarner]

Yeah, it had storybook ending written all over it. I really wished it had turned out differently, for both parties involved.

Man, that just makes me think about LaTroy closing and blowing all those games down the stretch that year. Grrrrrrr. I still can't believe I never threw anything into my TV that year! I mean the Mets for goodness sakes!

[BigbadB]

We just prefer people giving their own opinions here, not other people's opinions, especially when they are wrong.

 

I've wanted Nomar back since the first day of the offseason, for many reasons.

 

1. He'd probably just be a 1 year deal.

2. He feels he has unfinished business in Chicago.

3. He's very productive for his position when healthy.

4. He's already a Cub, which makes bargaining with him easier.

5. He wanted to stay in Chicago, and would even change positions to do so.

6. Signing Nomar probably wouldn't remove the possibility of signing Giles. With signing Furcal, I'm not so sure they can still afford Giles.

 

I'm not against signing Furcal, but I have these concerns:

 

1. Coming off a contract year which saw less "laziness". He was averaging a high number of errors and much lower SB's in previous years.

2. The recent trend of free agents who sign big, fat, long contracts is to either be hurt or not play up to your previous standard. I could go on and on with comparisons, but I won't.'

3. We may miss out on Giles.

4. Cedeno could end up being as good as or better than Furcal.

This is some of the worst reasoning I've ever heard. Resign Nomar because he has unfinished business in Chicago? Is this unfinished business going to hold his groin and hamstring together? And then don't sign Furcal because a couple of guys last year who signed big contracts got hurt. Also, assume we sign Nomar and he stays healthy. By reaching his incintives isn't he going to cost almost as much as Furcal?

 

Is all of it the worst reasoning you've ever heard? Or just the part you singled out?

 

I did say that I wasn't against signing Furcal. But, I do have reservations. The length of the contract, the cost (in comparison to what similar production might cost).

 

Not every long term free agent signing last year was hurt. Beltre and Beltran come to mind.

 

My personal opinion is that Nomar still has the capacity to play a healthy season. Furcal is no guarantee to come here. I think if we miss out on Furcal, we may come to regret not bringing Nomar back, especially if he has a good, healthy year somewhere else.

[BigbadB]

Im not sure this is so much a ploy having to do with positioning for other players, sending signals, etc. as much as just the realization that Nomar is not wanted by the team as next year's SS. Partly due to injuries, and partly that he was never the best defensive SS in the first place, I think, means the Cubs are done with the experiment. Don't get me wrong, the storyline was there for Nomar to come to the Cubs and help them get to the WS (especially after he is traded by the Sox and they go all the way) and I was as excited as anyone else, but going into another year depending on him is just a mistake IMO. Its been said on here that his values is probably higest at 3rd base, and obviously thats a spot where the Cubs are set. I don't know where (or even at which position!) he will end up, but I certainly wish him well and Im glad that Hendry is being up front with him.

 

 

 

 

The people calling for the Cubs to re-sign Nomar are most likely the same people that complained that Hendry relied to heavily on players with a history of injuries. I think if the Cubs do not sign Furcal, Cedeno will be the starting SS and Walker will remain a Cub and be the starting 2b with Neifi backing up both.

 

The PEOPLE who say "the people calling for this or that" are people who are labeling other posters, and it is NOT WELCOME here! Please stop. I believe this is the second warning I've given you recently.

 

I wanted Nomar resigned because he'll likely come fairly cheap, provides excellent production offensively (which offsets his defense) at a position that can be difficult to find good production. There is the matter of health, but with Cedeno backing up, we should be covered.

 

I never said a word about Hendry relying to heavily on injured players.

 

Settle down, No one was singling anyone out or labeling anyone. There has been much debate on this board about signing and relying on players with injuries that have limited their playing time in the past. Just stating facts, not being derogatory to anyone. Quit acting so holier than thou.

 

This matter has been settled by PM. It was a case of mistaken identity and I have apologized to Badgercub in regards to the exchange between Badgercub and I. I also apologize to anyone who saw this exchange before it was deleted.

 

Okay, back to baseball chatter.....

[Mark_R]

Not every long term free agent signing last year was hurt. Beltre and Beltran come to mind.

 

I believe Beltran's inactivity on the basepaths (one of the main intrigues that made him a hundred millionaire) was a result of him battling a leg injury all season long.

[gflore34]

Given the Cubs recent history with injuries and their luck I don't blame Hendry for being apprehensive about re-signing Nomar. Furcal is not a guarenteed sign but, I rather Hendry go all out in pursuit of a frontline SS who's a pretty good bet to play 150+ games than one who may miss a 1/3 or more of the season.

[nick23]

We just prefer people giving their own opinions here, not other people's opinions, especially when they are wrong.

 

I've wanted Nomar back since the first day of the offseason, for many reasons.

 

1. He'd probably just be a 1 year deal.

2. He feels he has unfinished business in Chicago.

3. He's very productive for his position when healthy.

4. He's already a Cub, which makes bargaining with him easier.

5. He wanted to stay in Chicago, and would even change positions to do so.

6. Signing Nomar probably wouldn't remove the possibility of signing Giles. With signing Furcal, I'm not so sure they can still afford Giles.

 

I'm not against signing Furcal, but I have these concerns:

 

1. Coming off a contract year which saw less "laziness". He was averaging a high number of errors and much lower SB's in previous years.

2. The recent trend of free agents who sign big, fat, long contracts is to either be hurt or not play up to your previous standard. I could go on and on with comparisons, but I won't.'

3. We may miss out on Giles.

4. Cedeno could end up being as good as or better than Furcal.

This is some of the worst reasoning I've ever heard. Resign Nomar because he has unfinished business in Chicago? Is this unfinished business going to hold his groin and hamstring together? And then don't sign Furcal because a couple of guys last year who signed big contracts got hurt. Also, assume we sign Nomar and he stays healthy. By reaching his incintives isn't he going to cost almost as much as Furcal?

 

Is all of it the worst reasoning you've ever heard? Or just the part you singled out?

 

I did say that I wasn't against signing Furcal. But, I do have reservations. The length of the contract, the cost (in comparison to what similar production might cost).

 

Not every long term free agent signing last year was hurt. Beltre and Beltran come to mind.

 

My personal opinion is that Nomar still has the capacity to play a healthy season. Furcal is no guarantee to come here. I think if we miss out on Furcal, we may come to regret not bringing Nomar back, especially if he has a good, healthy year somewhere else.

As far as your bring back Nomar reasons, 1-5 were worthless reasons. The Furcal concerns 1,2, and 4 were bad reasons not to sign him. As far as your recent post, I also think Nomar has the capability to play a healthy season. I just don't trust him to do so. I want the sure thing. Furcal to me is the sure thing.

[BigbadB]

As far as your bring back Nomar reasons, 1-5 were worthless reasons. The Furcal concerns 1,2, and 4 were bad reasons not to sign him. As far as your recent post, I also think Nomar has the capability to play a healthy season. I just don't trust him to do so. I want the sure thing. Furcal to me is the sure thing.

 

Why is the Cedeno concern unreasonable? The Cubs saw something about him at age 20 that made them want to protect him on the 40 man roster. Last year, he hit:

 

.355/.403/.518 at AAA

.300/.356/.375 at Chicago

 

Granted, the at bats in Chicago were a small sampling, but what if he really is a .300/.356 type hitter? With Nomar coming back for 1 more year, we have the opportunity to get a better look at Cedeno and find out. With Furcal signed for at least 4 years, Cedeno doesn't get that opportunity. Cedeno is a SS, not a 2b. Maybe he can make the transition, maybe he can't.

 

Cedeno at SS leaves the door open for Giles. Furcal probably doesn't.

 

RF is the biggest position of need, IMO, just ahead of the need for a lead off hitter. If the Cubs trade for Pierre, lead off is addressed, but RF is still a black hole. If Cedeno is the real deal, he's wasted as a back up if we do get Furcal.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

As far as your bring back Nomar reasons, 1-5 were worthless reasons. The Furcal concerns 1,2, and 4 were bad reasons not to sign him. As far as your recent post, I also think Nomar has the capability to play a healthy season. I just don't trust him to do so. I want the sure thing. Furcal to me is the sure thing.

 

Why is the Cedeno concern unreasonable? The Cubs saw something about him at age 20 that made them want to protect him on the 40 man roster. Last year, he hit:

 

.355/.403/.518 at AAA

.300/.356/.375 at Chicago

 

Granted, the at bats in Chicago were a small sampling, but what if he really is a .300/.356 type hitter? With Nomar coming back for 1 more year, we have the opportunity to get a better look at Cedeno and find out. With Furcal signed for at least 4 years, Cedeno doesn't get that opportunity. Cedeno is a SS, not a 2b. Maybe he can make the transition, maybe he can't.

 

Cedeno at SS leaves the door open for Giles. Furcal probably doesn't.

 

RF is the biggest position of need, IMO, just ahead of the need for a lead off hitter. If the Cubs trade for Pierre, lead off is addressed, but RF is still a black hole. If Cedeno is the real deal, he's wasted as a back up if we do get Furcal.

 

Well said. I have never been a big fan of Furcal, and I think money could be spent better elsewhere. Provided there is an offensive upgrade in CF and RF, I am all for Ronny/Nomar at SS.

[nick23]

As far as your bring back Nomar reasons, 1-5 were worthless reasons. The Furcal concerns 1,2, and 4 were bad reasons not to sign him. As far as your recent post, I also think Nomar has the capability to play a healthy season. I just don't trust him to do so. I want the sure thing. Furcal to me is the sure thing.

 

Why is the Cedeno concern unreasonable? The Cubs saw something about him at age 20 that made them want to protect him on the 40 man roster. Last year, he hit:

 

.355/.403/.518 at AAA

.300/.356/.375 at Chicago

 

Granted, the at bats in Chicago were a small sampling, but what if he really is a .300/.356 type hitter? With Nomar coming back for 1 more year, we have the opportunity to get a better look at Cedeno and find out. With Furcal signed for at least 4 years, Cedeno doesn't get that opportunity. Cedeno is a SS, not a 2b. Maybe he can make the transition, maybe he can't.

 

Cedeno at SS leaves the door open for Giles. Furcal probably doesn't.

 

RF is the biggest position of need, IMO, just ahead of the need for a lead off hitter. If the Cubs trade for Pierre, lead off is addressed, but RF is still a black hole. If Cedeno is the real deal, he's wasted as a back up if we do get Furcal.

I'd rather gamble on Cedeno making the transition from SS to 2b, than gamble on him hitting .300/.356. We all know that this team needs a power bat in right. Well, we also need a SS and a leadoff hitter. Furcal fits in perfectly on this team. I don't want to pass on Furcal then try all offseason to sign Giles, only to watch him sign somewhere else. IMO that would be a lot more damaging than signing Furcal and possibly losing out on Giles.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

As far as your bring back Nomar reasons, 1-5 were worthless reasons. The Furcal concerns 1,2, and 4 were bad reasons not to sign him. As far as your recent post, I also think Nomar has the capability to play a healthy season. I just don't trust him to do so. I want the sure thing. Furcal to me is the sure thing.

 

Why is the Cedeno concern unreasonable? The Cubs saw something about him at age 20 that made them want to protect him on the 40 man roster. Last year, he hit:

 

.355/.403/.518 at AAA

.300/.356/.375 at Chicago

 

Granted, the at bats in Chicago were a small sampling, but what if he really is a .300/.356 type hitter? With Nomar coming back for 1 more year, we have the opportunity to get a better look at Cedeno and find out. With Furcal signed for at least 4 years, Cedeno doesn't get that opportunity. Cedeno is a SS, not a 2b. Maybe he can make the transition, maybe he can't.

 

Cedeno at SS leaves the door open for Giles. Furcal probably doesn't.

 

RF is the biggest position of need, IMO, just ahead of the need for a lead off hitter. If the Cubs trade for Pierre, lead off is addressed, but RF is still a black hole. If Cedeno is the real deal, he's wasted as a back up if we do get Furcal.

 

Cedeno is a risk. He had one good season. that's not a good track record.

 

Taking a risk with one starting position player's spot just to have a chance at Giles seems a little unreasonable to me.

 

Hendry won't pay for giles b/c of the $ and years he's likely to get above what Hendry is willing to pay, not b/c of some of our other acquisitions taking up too much of the payroll.

[wilk]

Granted, the at bats in Chicago were a small sampling, but what if he really is a .300/.356 type hitter? With Nomar coming back for 1 more year, we have the opportunity to get a better look at Cedeno and find out. With Furcal signed for at least 4 years, Cedeno doesn't get that opportunity. Cedeno is a SS, not a 2b. Maybe he can make the transition, maybe he can't.

 

Cedeno at SS leaves the door open for Giles. Furcal probably doesn't.

 

RF is the biggest position of need, IMO, just ahead of the need for a lead off hitter. If the Cubs trade for Pierre, lead off is addressed, but RF is still a black hole. If Cedeno is the real deal, he's wasted as a back up if we do get Furcal.

 

Why is this argument always used for bringing back Nomar - Cedeno might be good. OK, but why can't we consider it Furcal AND Cedeno? I want them both playing. Nomar doesn't change whether Cedeno plays. If we kept Nomar, Cedeno would play. If we sign Furcal, Cedeno will play. Changes nothing. And why couldn't Cedeno make the "transition" from SS to 2B? More importantly, why does this problem not exist if we keep Nomar instead of Furcal? Does Nomar not have this significant "transition" that the better (defensively) Cedeno does? I don't see why anyone can consider an infield of Furcal and Cedeno a problem - especially if Cedeno does turn out to be the player you expect. He's played 2B plenty in his career, there will be no transition problem.

 

 

And I don't think the decision to go after Giles is so dependent on Furcal. I don't think the Cubs would give Giles would it'd take, regardless of Furcal. They're concerned with a "decline" and the number of YEARS on the contract it'd take. Hendry seems set on filling RF by trade, and I think it's the method he'd choose either way.

[Guest]

I'd rather gamble on Cedeno making the transition from SS to 2b, than gamble on him hitting .300/.356.

If you're that concerned about Ronny's production then moving him from short to second makes even less sense. The replacement level for offense from a second baseman is higher than it would be from a shortstop. If we're serious about giving him a shot, it makes the most sense to do it as a shortstop where he has the most value.

[nick23]

I'd rather gamble on Cedeno making the transition from SS to 2b, than gamble on him hitting .300/.356.

If you're that concerned about Ronny's production then moving him from short to second makes even less sense. The replacement level for offense from a second baseman is higher than it would be from a shortstop. If we're serious about giving him a shot, it makes the most sense to do it as a shortstop, where he has the most value.

You misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not concerned about his production. I was saying that i'd bet on it being easier for Cedeno to move from short to second than it would be for him to hit .300/.356. And I don't see why he has any more value at SS than he does 2nd. I don't believe in this nonsense that offense has to come from certain positions. It's absurd.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I'd rather gamble on Cedeno making the transition from SS to 2b, than gamble on him hitting .300/.356.

If you're that concerned about Ronny's production then moving him from short to second makes even less sense. The replacement level for offense from a second baseman is higher than it would be from a shortstop. If we're serious about giving him a shot, it makes the most sense to do it as a shortstop, where he has the most value.

You misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not concerned about his production. I was saying that i'd bet on it being easier for Cedeno to move from short to second than it would be for him to hit .300/.356. And I don't see why he has any more value at SS than he does 2nd. I don't believe in this nonsense that offense has to come from certain positions. It's absurd.

 

So a C should be as offensively valuable as a RF? Go ahead and look up the stats. it's not even close.

[wilk]

And I don't see why he has any more value at SS than he does 2nd. I don't believe in this nonsense that offense has to come from certain positions. It's absurd.

 

More than ebing absurd, it's exaggerated. A shortstop who can hit .300/.350 has more value than a 2B who can but Cedeno doesn't lose value because he plays 2B in our lineup. He doesn't forget how to play SS and he still has that value. His production isn't more or less valuable within our lineup depending on whether he's playing SS or 2B on the field. I think what people have to come to understand is that the plan is to put Cedeno in the lineup regardless. With Furcal, Cedeno will play 2B. Without Furcal, he'll probably play SS. In either scenario he will provide us the same production. If there's an argument to be made, it's whether we risk another year of Nomar or go after Furcal. Furcal has less punch than a healthy Nomar but much more speed, much better defense, the ability to leadoff and much less risk. We're making a move for durability, speed and defense and Furcal fits it - Nomar does not.

[nick23]

I'd rather gamble on Cedeno making the transition from SS to 2b, than gamble on him hitting .300/.356.

If you're that concerned about Ronny's production then moving him from short to second makes even less sense. The replacement level for offense from a second baseman is higher than it would be from a shortstop. If we're serious about giving him a shot, it makes the most sense to do it as a shortstop, where he has the most value.

You misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not concerned about his production. I was saying that i'd bet on it being easier for Cedeno to move from short to second than it would be for him to hit .300/.356. And I don't see why he has any more value at SS than he does 2nd. I don't believe in this nonsense that offense has to come from specific positions. It's absurd.[/quote

 

 

So a C should be as offensively valuable as a RF? Go ahead and look up the stats. it's not even close.

That's not what I said. I said offense doesn't have to come from certain positions.

[frostwyrm]

Cedeno's primary value is at SS, and I hate that the organization wants to move him to 2B. SS is the hardest position to fill, has the lowest offensive expectations and the highest defensive expectations. If we get Furcal I'd like to see Cedeno traded while his value is high rather than be stuck at 2B fighting for playing time with Neifi until 2008.

[Andy]

Not every long term free agent signing last year was hurt. Beltre and Beltran come to mind.

 

I believe Beltran's inactivity on the basepaths (one of the main intrigues that made him a hundred millionaire) was a result of him battling a leg injury all season long.

What about Beltran's 2004 hitting (.367 OBP, 38 HR .540+ SLG, .900+ OPS) versus his 2005 hitting (.330 OBP, 16 HR, .414 SLG, .714 OPS)?

 

That's not a concern at all with Furcal, who also had a great, and unusual, year in 2005?