How about just signing Giles??

[AramisRamirez]

all this furcal talk which i completely agree with, but how would we stand with the loan addition of giles. say its 3/35 for him what is our lineup shaping up as?? maybe something like this:

 

SS cedeno

2B walker

1B lee

3B ramirez

OF giles

C barrett

OF murton

OF pie or patterson

 

not bad, not bad. i think cedeno will be nice fit at any part of the order, but with no furcal we need cedeno up there. he'd be our only base-stealing threat considering corey patterson refused to make a commitment to being a serious threat.

 

giles would add so much because we were so desperate for a legit 5th hole hitter. burnitz just isnt consistent and giles' OBP would fit in perfectly. between giles and walker sandwhiching lee and aramis, we got nice OBP in our murderer's row.

 

i cant wait for us to make a serious transaction. whether its furca or giles, we really could use one.

[Sabermetrician]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

[BigbadB]

Giles would have been my #1 offseason target from day 1. If Furcal costs 9m and Giles might be 11m, I'll take Giles.

 

If Giles AND Furcal cost 20m and Giles and Cedeno cost 11m plus league minimum, I'll take Giles and Cedeno and spend the rest of the money saved upgrading center/lead off and pitching.

 

I'm leary of Cedeno. I don't know what kind of player he may end up being. He could be a Furcal or he could be a Neifi or somewhere in between. The Cubs didn't help that situation by bringing Enrique Wilson when Nomar went down and leaving Neifi in there when the season was basically over. I wish we knew more about Cedeno.

 

If Pierre can be had cheaply to lead off, Giles in RF and Furcal at CF would be a good team. If I had to pick one to eliminate of the 3, I'd probably eliminate Furcal because of the years and the money.

 

I won't be heartbroken if we get Furcal. But, if Jacque Jones or Juan Encarnacion is in RF, I'm going to be mad.

[EricG]

could just leave team as is:

SS cedeno

2B walker

1B lee

3B ramirez

RF Hairston

C barrett

LF murton

CF patterson

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I honestly think that with just the addition of Giles, this team could contend. I'd like to add Giles and re-sign Nomar...but even with just Giles, we would have a formidable middle of the order.

 

On the other hand, if we only add Giles, we'll still have some issues with lead-off hitter. That's nothing that signing Kenny Lofton couldn't fix though.

[UK1679666180]

They have to fix the OBP at the top and it appears they have no intention of letting Murton/Walker hit 1/2 based on their inability to scoot.

[The Voice of Reason]

could just leave team as is:

SS cedeno

2B walker

1B lee

3B ramirez

RF Hairston

C barrett

LF murton

CF patterson

 

 

and finish fifth.

 

 

If no Furcal, why not add Giles, Pierre, Eyre and Burnett or Millwood.

 

CF pierre

2B walker

1B lee

3B ramirez

RF Giles

C barrett

LF murton

SS Cedeno

[goonys evil twin]

They have to fix the OBP at the top and it appears they have no intention of letting Murton/Walker hit 1/2 based on their inability to scoot.

 

Giles would look great in the 2 hole. Let Atlanta resign and overpay Furcal (who has never been great and never will be), then help them offset the cost by taking the other Giles off their hands. Giles/Giles in the 1/2 slot would solve all of this team's offensive problems - except for the problem of Dusty being stupid enough to think Neifi needs playing time.

[Hacking Out Machine]

I'll tell you what....with his somewhat diminishing power and off the charts on base skills, I would strongly consider leading Giles off, or at least hit him third in front of Lee and Ramirez. I think batting him 5th would diminish his potential value as a run scoring machine if there weren't run producers behind him.

 

Having said that, 10-11M for an on base guy is a bit of a stretch, but the Cubs have the cash...or at least they did before they dumped $6M into Rusch and Dempster's collective laps.

[nick23]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

[stitchface]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

 

Giles has the type of skills that don't rapidly decline. Is Marcus Giles really much better than Walker? I would sign B Giles, Nomar and turn my attention to the pitching staff.

[Andy]

could just leave team as is:

SS cedeno

2B walker

1B lee

3B ramirez

RF Hairston

C barrett

LF murton

CF patterson

The day that a team does anything with Jerry Hairston Jr batting 5th is the day I sprout four more limbs.

[UK1679666180]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

 

Giles has the type of skills that don't rapidly decline. Is Marcus Giles really much better than Walker? I would sign B Giles, Nomar and turn my attention to the pitching staff.

 

You still need a CF'er, putting Corey at the btm of the order for 140 games is asking for trouble given the amount of time you'll see Perez, Blanco, and of course the SP in the same batting order.

 

CF/RF/Nomar at SS would do wonders for the batting order. Of course, the bench would consist of Perez, Macias, Cedeno, Blanco, and one open spot. Offensively, that bench is horrible.

 

They likely need two relievers at this stage as far as addressing pitching.

[goonys evil twin]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

 

The difference is that Furcal was never great at his prime. His price is being driven up by the hype surrounding the theory that he is the best young position player in free agency. He's past his prime, but his prime wasn't all that special. Giles was an absolute stud in his prime, and still brings far more to the table now than Furcal. Furcal's unspectacular production (750 OPS) is being glossed over because of his defense and position. But I know one thing, adding a 750 OPS to this lineup isn't going to do much to solve the team's immense offensive woes, especially when the cost of adding that 750 OPS will likely force the Cubs to once again go mediocre, or worse, in the biggest need position on the team, RF. Giles, far and away, adds greater improvement to this team than Furcal does.

 

The Cubs were 10th in the NL last year in SS production, and were just 011 points of OPS from being 6th in the NL. On the other hand, they ranked 15th in OPS from RF last year, and were 050 points from cracking the top 10, 077 from the top 6. Cedeno could easily provide them a chance to be at least average at SS next year. They have no similar fallback option for RF, and based on the many rumored names, they are likely to get no better than minimal improvement from the disaster that was Burnitz.

 

The fact is they can afford to get both Furcal and Giles, and I'd be ecstatic if they did. But if there is only a chance for one, there is no debate that Giles would be the more helpful acquisition.

[BigbadB]

Goony, where have you been? I can't tackle all these guys by myself. :D

[stitchface]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

 

Giles has the type of skills that don't rapidly decline. Is Marcus Giles really much better than Walker? I would sign B Giles, Nomar and turn my attention to the pitching staff.

 

 

 

 

 

You still need a CF'er, putting Corey at the btm of the order for 140 games is asking for trouble given the amount of time you'll see Perez, Blanco, and of course the SP in the same batting order.

 

CF/RF/Nomar at SS would do wonders for the batting order. Of course, the bench would consist of Perez, Macias, Cedeno, Blanco, and one open spot. Offensively, that bench is horrible.

 

They likely need two relievers at this stage as far as addressing pitching.

 

You can replace Corey in-season if he stinks it up again. Or you can trade for a cheap CF now (Wilkerson or Pierre would be decent options if the price is right). I wouldn't trade too much to get a mediocre CF though and I certainly wouldn't sign Furcal. Why do you have Macias on the bench? He should be gone and replaced by Hairston in that spot (I could live with Hairston in CF as well with the cubs staff and homepark). The Blanco/Corey combination is no worse than say everett and ausmus - well not much worse anyway. The greatest improvement to the bullpen would be to manage it correctly. Unfortunately, that won't happen with this staff. Dempster is likely to regress next year leaving the Cubs with virtually no one I trust out there. Van Buren should be traded while he has some shred of value.

[nick23]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

 

The difference is that Furcal was never great at his prime. His price is being driven up by the hype surrounding the theory that he is the best young position player in free agency. He's past his prime, but his prime wasn't all that special. Giles was an absolute stud in his prime, and still brings far more to the table now than Furcal. Furcal's unspectacular production (750 OPS) is being glossed over because of his defense and position. But I know one thing, adding a 750 OPS to this lineup isn't going to do much to solve the team's immense offensive woes, especially when the cost of adding that 750 OPS will likely force the Cubs to once again go mediocre, or worse, in the biggest need position on the team, RF. Giles, far and away, adds greater improvement to this team than Furcal does.

 

The Cubs were 10th in the NL last year in SS production, and were just 011 points of OPS from being 6th in the NL. On the other hand, they ranked 15th in OPS from RF last year, and were 050 points from cracking the top 10, 077 from the top 6. Cedeno could easily provide them a chance to be at least average at SS next year. They have no similar fallback option for RF, and based on the many rumored names, they are likely to get no better than minimal improvement from the disaster that was Burnitz.

 

The fact is they can afford to get both Furcal and Giles, and I'd be ecstatic if they did. But if there is only a chance for one, there is no debate that Giles would be the more helpful acquisition.

But what was the cubs OPS from SS last year? Sure adding a 750 OPS doesn't sound like a big deal but I"m assuming Neifi's OPS wasn't even approaching 700. Well now you're talking about a major improvement. Giles would definitely be a huge upgrade but for some reason Hendry sounds like he's looking to improve RF through trade. And I don't know if I disagree with him. Like I said in an earlier post I'd rather wrap up Furcal now and then explore my options in right, rather than pass on Furcal and just hope Giles signs with us. I can just see that approach ending in disaster. Much like last year's offseason.

[stitchface]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

 

The difference is that Furcal was never great at his prime. His price is being driven up by the hype surrounding the theory that he is the best young position player in free agency. He's past his prime, but his prime wasn't all that special. Giles was an absolute stud in his prime, and still brings far more to the table now than Furcal. Furcal's unspectacular production (750 OPS) is being glossed over because of his defense and position. But I know one thing, adding a 750 OPS to this lineup isn't going to do much to solve the team's immense offensive woes, especially when the cost of adding that 750 OPS will likely force the Cubs to once again go mediocre, or worse, in the biggest need position on the team, RF. Giles, far and away, adds greater improvement to this team than Furcal does.

 

The Cubs were 10th in the NL last year in SS production, and were just 011 points of OPS from being 6th in the NL. On the other hand, they ranked 15th in OPS from RF last year, and were 050 points from cracking the top 10, 077 from the top 6. Cedeno could easily provide them a chance to be at least average at SS next year. They have no similar fallback option for RF, and based on the many rumored names, they are likely to get no better than minimal improvement from the disaster that was Burnitz.

 

The fact is they can afford to get both Furcal and Giles, and I'd be ecstatic if they did. But if there is only a chance for one, there is no debate that Giles would be the more helpful acquisition.

But what was the cubs OPS from SS last year? Sure adding a 750 OPS doesn't sound like a big deal but I"m assuming Neifi's OPS wasn't even approaching 700. Well now you're talking about a major improvement. Giles would definitely be a huge upgrade but for some reason Hendry sounds like he's looking to improve RF through trade. And I don't know if I disagree with him. Like I said in an earlier post I'd rather wrap up Furcal now and then explore my options in right, rather than pass on Furcal and just hope Giles signs with us. I can just see that approach ending in disaster. Much like last year's offseason.

 

 

Is there a reason to assume the Cubs can't sign Giles before Furcal signs somewhere?

[UK1679666180]

I'd trade for one (CF) now, I want Michaels and I'm encouraged that Philly has been in contact w/Lofton's agent.

 

Corey on the Cubs is a bad fit, I'm afraid he'll likely struggle and reduce his already diminished trade value b/c mentally I think he needs a change.

 

But, Houston should look to address the btm of their order, that's a weakness that has been exposed in a similar fashion as it has been on the Cubs.

 

I want Macias gone as much as anyone else, but I said that last year and the Cubs gave him a raise. They love his ability to hit from both sides and play multiple positions. Unfort., he doesn't hit well from either side and defensively isn't strong as any of the positions, versitility is lost when you bring nothing to the table at any of the multiple situations.

 

Agreed on bullpen management, but they have to cater to Baker's inability to manage a pen and make it a cookie-cutter pen with established LOOGYs, set-up, 7th inning, and long-relief. He's going to burn one of them out by the AS break, it's just a matter of which one.

[nick23]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

 

The difference is that Furcal was never great at his prime. His price is being driven up by the hype surrounding the theory that he is the best young position player in free agency. He's past his prime, but his prime wasn't all that special. Giles was an absolute stud in his prime, and still brings far more to the table now than Furcal. Furcal's unspectacular production (750 OPS) is being glossed over because of his defense and position. But I know one thing, adding a 750 OPS to this lineup isn't going to do much to solve the team's immense offensive woes, especially when the cost of adding that 750 OPS will likely force the Cubs to once again go mediocre, or worse, in the biggest need position on the team, RF. Giles, far and away, adds greater improvement to this team than Furcal does.

 

The Cubs were 10th in the NL last year in SS production, and were just 011 points of OPS from being 6th in the NL. On the other hand, they ranked 15th in OPS from RF last year, and were 050 points from cracking the top 10, 077 from the top 6. Cedeno could easily provide them a chance to be at least average at SS next year. They have no similar fallback option for RF, and based on the many rumored names, they are likely to get no better than minimal improvement from the disaster that was Burnitz.

 

The fact is they can afford to get both Furcal and Giles, and I'd be ecstatic if they did. But if there is only a chance for one, there is no debate that Giles would be the more helpful acquisition.

But what was the cubs OPS from SS last year? Sure adding a 750 OPS doesn't sound like a big deal but I"m assuming Neifi's OPS wasn't even approaching 700. Well now you're talking about a major improvement. Giles would definitely be a huge upgrade but for some reason Hendry sounds like he's looking to improve RF through trade. And I don't know if I disagree with him. Like I said in an earlier post I'd rather wrap up Furcal now and then explore my options in right, rather than pass on Furcal and just hope Giles signs with us. I can just see that approach ending in disaster. Much like last year's offseason.

 

 

Is there a reason to assume the Cubs can't sign Giles before Furcal signs somewhere?

Just that it helps my argument.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I too find it mindboggling that the Cubs are after Furcal so much at possibly $9 million a season when all indications say Giles can be had for $11-12 million. Giles is the type of player that does almost everything right, so I don't expect much of a decline from him from the next 3 years. Furcal is just past prime age (27), I think a 5 year deal for him might be more of a gamble than a 3 year deal for Giles...thoughts?

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime.

 

The difference is that Furcal was never great at his prime. His price is being driven up by the hype surrounding the theory that he is the best young position player in free agency. He's past his prime, but his prime wasn't all that special. Giles was an absolute stud in his prime, and still brings far more to the table now than Furcal. Furcal's unspectacular production (750 OPS) is being glossed over because of his defense and position. But I know one thing, adding a 750 OPS to this lineup isn't going to do much to solve the team's immense offensive woes, especially when the cost of adding that 750 OPS will likely force the Cubs to once again go mediocre, or worse, in the biggest need position on the team, RF. Giles, far and away, adds greater improvement to this team than Furcal does.

 

The Cubs were 10th in the NL last year in SS production, and were just 011 points of OPS from being 6th in the NL. On the other hand, they ranked 15th in OPS from RF last year, and were 050 points from cracking the top 10, 077 from the top 6. Cedeno could easily provide them a chance to be at least average at SS next year. They have no similar fallback option for RF, and based on the many rumored names, they are likely to get no better than minimal improvement from the disaster that was Burnitz.

 

The fact is they can afford to get both Furcal and Giles, and I'd be ecstatic if they did. But if there is only a chance for one, there is no debate that Giles would be the more helpful acquisition.

But what was the cubs OPS from SS last year? Sure adding a 750 OPS doesn't sound like a big deal but I"m assuming Neifi's OPS wasn't even approaching 700. Well now you're talking about a major improvement. Giles would definitely be a huge upgrade but for some reason Hendry sounds like he's looking to improve RF through trade. And I don't know if I disagree with him. Like I said in an earlier post I'd rather wrap up Furcal now and then explore my options in right, rather than pass on Furcal and just hope Giles signs with us. I can just see that approach ending in disaster. Much like last year's offseason.

 

Read his post again. Difference between Giles and other RF option > Difference between Furcal and Cedeno.

[CuseCubFan69]

I'd trade for one (CF) now, I want Michaels and I'm encouraged that Philly has been in contact w/Lofton's agent.

 

Corey on the Cubs is a bad fit, I'm afraid he'll likely struggle and reduce his already diminished trade value b/c mentally I think he needs a change.

 

But, Houston should look to address the btm of their order, that's a weakness that has been exposed in a similar fashion as it has been on the Cubs.

 

I want Macias gone as much as anyone else, but I said that last year and the Cubs gave him a raise. They love his ability to hit from both sides and play multiple positions. Unfort., he doesn't hit well from either side and defensively isn't strong as any of the positions, versitility is lost when you bring nothing to the table at any of the multiple situations.

 

Agreed on bullpen management, but they have to cater to Baker's inability to manage a pen and make it a cookie-cutter pen with established LOOGYs, set-up, 7th inning, and long-relief. He's going to burn one of them out by the AS break, it's just a matter of which one.

 

Maybe a color by numbers pen for Baker might be a good idea? Baker has already asked for more vets in the pen so maybe you're on to something.

[CuseCubFan69]

Read his post again. Difference between Giles and other RF option > Difference between Furcal and Cedeno.

 

That's the thing. As UK pointed out the Cubs are desperate for a leadoff guy and Furcal and/or Pierre seem to be the targets. Cedeno IMO isn't deemed as a leadoff guy by the Cubs and for some reason the non-scooting (UK again) abilities of Walker and Murton will not give them the chance toi hit at the top of the order. Giles would be wonderful but would he be worth getting if Baker has Perez leading off?

[goonys evil twin]

But what was the cubs OPS from SS last year? Sure adding a 750 OPS doesn't sound like a big deal but I"m assuming Neifi's OPS wasn't even approaching 700. Well now you're talking about a major improvement. Giles would definitely be a huge upgrade but for some reason Hendry sounds like he's looking to improve RF through trade. And I don't know if I disagree with him. Like I said in an earlier post I'd rather wrap up Furcal now and then explore my options in right, rather than pass on Furcal and just hope Giles signs with us. I can just see that approach ending in disaster. Much like last year's offseason.

 

It was 677, while the RF position was 746. Cedeno could probably crack 700, and could conceivably put the Cubs in the top half of SS production in the NL next year. Furcal would no doubt bring them higher, but SS is a pretty tight range of production. Nobody gets great production out of SS in the NL. 4 teams in all of baseball got an OPS over 800 from the position. On the other hand, half of MLB got an 800+ from RF. RF must be productive. The formula is Cedeno + Giles is far and away better than Furcal + (pick your piece of crap RF that Hendry thinks can catch the ball).

 

Why not wrap up Giles now? Why is it "hoping for Giles" but not "hoping for Furcal". Right now it seems Hendry's plan is to hope Furcal doesn't resign with Atlanta. That approach has as much a chance for disaster as your "hope for Giles" theory. It's not about hoping, it's about filling needs with obvious and available talent. RF is the only position on this team that is an immediate need but does not have even one internal candidate who gives you a chance for average or better production. RF cannot be solved by second rate players.

 

The problem is the people in charge of this team are too clueless to even understand that RF was a major disappointment last year. They think they were fine out there, and that somehow defense was the real reason they lost, as opposed to the two problems that were much much worse, first and foremost no OBP (again, Giles beats Furcal easily there), and secondly weak pitching.

[TheDude]

There are too many posts to quote. So I'll just say it:

 

Furcal at 27 is nowhere near past his prime. It's a total strawman argument. If you don't like his skillset, fine. Just say you don't like it and you don't think he is a fit for the Cubs. But to claim at 27 year old is past his prime or will rapidly decline is absurd. Especially given the numbers prove otherwise, so there isn't even a possibility of propping the argument up with anything.

 

As for the topic - Giles is a great acquisition and a great fit. I would be very happy to have him in Wrigley. I take issue with the hypocrisy that Giles won't decline over a 3 year contract, but guys 5-8 years younger will.