Perspective on Furcal from Atlanta

[nick23]

Yes you can base your offseason on improvements of health. It didn't work out for us last year. Hopefully it will this year. It worked out fine for the Cardinals last year. They assumed Carpenter and Morris were going to be healthy. They assumed right. Look, I'm not saying don't sign Giles. I'd be thrilled if we sign Giles. I'm just saying he's not the only way to improve the team. I happen to think Furcal will greatly improve the team. You don't. We just disagree.

 

If you're a top 5 payroll with $30m to spend, and you rely heavily on improved health to increase your team, your GM is an imcompetent moron.

 

This isn't an $85m payroll team that has to cut corners in spots and hope for things to work out. The Cubs' front office has been given the resources to pretty much guarantee a playoff spot, and make themselves among the favorites to win the world series, not just be in the picture.

I haven't seen any signs of him cutting corners. Have you? Sounds to me like he's pretty much in on everyone available. All we did last year was complain about OBP at the top of the order. How no one was ever on base when Lee was up to bat. Well he's addressing that. But I don't think assuming the rotation will be healthy next year means he's a moron or that he's cutting corners.

[goonys evil twin]

I haven't seen any signs of him cutting corners. Have you? Sounds to me like he's pretty much in on everyone available. All we did last year was complain about OBP at the top of the order. How no one was ever on base when Lee was up to bat. Well he's addressing that. But I don't think assuming the rotation will be healthy next year means he's a moron or that he's cutting corners.

 

I haven't heard of him being in on Giles, I haven't heard him express any sort of interest whatsoever. He could have gone balls out for improvements with all the money he had available, instead he wasted it on mediocrity and garbage like Rusch and Perez. The entire MacPhail era has been about cutting corners. Andy has always been about trying to contend within the division. Never have they talked about trying to be the best of the best, or going all out for a World Series. They're goal is to be in the NL Central race all year, and if they make the playoffs, just hope it works out. The OBP problem has been an enormous problem for years, and the Cubs ignored it year after year. The OBP problem is in fact strictly a BB problem. This team doesn't draw enough walks. The average has been there, the walks have not, and that's why the runs have also been lacking.

[BigbadB]

Yes you can base your offseason on improvements of health. It didn't work out for us last year. Hopefully it will this year. It worked out fine for the Cardinals last year. They assumed Carpenter and Morris were going to be healthy. They assumed right. Look, I'm not saying don't sign Giles. I'd be thrilled if we sign Giles. I'm just saying he's not the only way to improve the team. I happen to think Furcal will greatly improve the team. You don't. We just disagree.

 

If you're a top 5 payroll with $30m to spend, and you rely heavily on improved health to increase your team, your GM is an imcompetent moron.

 

This isn't an $85m payroll team that has to cut corners in spots and hope for things to work out. The Cubs' front office has been given the resources to pretty much guarantee a playoff spot, and make themselves among the favorites to win the world series, not just be in the picture.

I haven't seen any signs of him cutting corners. Have you? Sounds to me like he's pretty much in on everyone available. All we did last year was complain about OBP at the top of the order. How no one was ever on base when Lee was up to bat. Well he's addressing that. But I don't think assuming the rotation will be healthy next year means he's a moron or that he's cutting corners.

 

Goony's right. It's not just about the top of the order. The Cardinals were without Rolen most of the year in 2005, yet still carried the division by a lot. Can the Cubs do that without Aramis?

 

A .325-.350 OBP (Pierre and Furcal) only moderately improves the offense. I'm fine with that IF they get Giles. Giles and his .400+ OBP is significant. I hope Pierre and Furcal provide a better OBP than they did last year, but there is no guarantee. If Lee goes back to his career norms, someone will need to step up and make up for Lee's drop in production.

[nick23]

I haven't seen any signs of him cutting corners. Have you? Sounds to me like he's pretty much in on everyone available. All we did last year was complain about OBP at the top of the order. How no one was ever on base when Lee was up to bat. Well he's addressing that. But I don't think assuming the rotation will be healthy next year means he's a moron or that he's cutting corners.

 

I haven't heard of him being in on Giles, I haven't heard him express any sort of interest whatsoever. He could have gone balls out for improvements with all the money he had available, instead he wasted it on mediocrity and garbage like Rusch and Perez. The entire MacPhail era has been about cutting corners. Andy has always been about trying to contend within the division. Never have they talked about trying to be the best of the best, or going all out for a World Series. They're goal is to be in the NL Central race all year, and if they make the playoffs, just hope it works out. The OBP problem has been an enormous problem for years, and the Cubs ignored it year after year. The OBP problem is in fact strictly a BB problem. This team doesn't draw enough walks. The average has been there, the walks have not, and that's why the runs have also been lacking.

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better. He did though resign Nomar. How could he have known CPat would tank like that, or that Nomar would miss most of the season. I also honestly think he thought Dubois would get more playing time than he did. Yes, last year he assumed Kerry would be healthy. Well, why wouldn't he? At that point Wood had 2 dominating seasons before missing time in '04. Basically what I'm trying to say is that I've seen no evidence of this team cutting corners. I seriously doubt Hendry is satisfied with just contending in the central. I think the moves he's made throughout his tenure point to him trying to win the whole thing.

[UK1679666180]

Cubs have been good at spending, just been bad at spending it wisely. They have the payroll to win it all, I question if they have the approach to win it all.

[CubfaninCA]

Yes you can base your offseason on improvements of health. It didn't work out for us last year. Hopefully it will this year. It worked out fine for the Cardinals last year. They assumed Carpenter and Morris were going to be healthy. They assumed right. Look, I'm not saying don't sign Giles. I'd be thrilled if we sign Giles. I'm just saying he's not the only way to improve the team. I happen to think Furcal will greatly improve the team. You don't. We just disagree.

 

If you're a top 5 payroll with $30m to spend, and you rely heavily on improved health to increase your team, your GM is an imcompetent moron.

 

This isn't an $85m payroll team that has to cut corners in spots and hope for things to work out. The Cubs' front office has been given the resources to pretty much guarantee a playoff spot, and make themselves among the favorites to win the world series, not just be in the picture.

 

Every team relies heavily on health. If 2 of your top 3 pitchers go down, you're done. NY and Boston's juggernaut offenses couldn't overcome subpar pitching.

[BigbadB]

I haven't seen any signs of him cutting corners. Have you? Sounds to me like he's pretty much in on everyone available. All we did last year was complain about OBP at the top of the order. How no one was ever on base when Lee was up to bat. Well he's addressing that. But I don't think assuming the rotation will be healthy next year means he's a moron or that he's cutting corners.

 

I haven't heard of him being in on Giles, I haven't heard him express any sort of interest whatsoever. He could have gone balls out for improvements with all the money he had available, instead he wasted it on mediocrity and garbage like Rusch and Perez. The entire MacPhail era has been about cutting corners. Andy has always been about trying to contend within the division. Never have they talked about trying to be the best of the best, or going all out for a World Series. They're goal is to be in the NL Central race all year, and if they make the playoffs, just hope it works out. The OBP problem has been an enormous problem for years, and the Cubs ignored it year after year. The OBP problem is in fact strictly a BB problem. This team doesn't draw enough walks. The average has been there, the walks have not, and that's why the runs have also been lacking.

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better. He did though resign Nomar. How could he have known CPat would tank like that, or that Nomar would miss most of the season. I also honestly think he thought Dubois would get more playing time than he did. Yes, last year he assumed Kerry would be healthy. Well, why wouldn't he? At that point Wood had 2 dominating seasons before missing time in '04. Basically what I'm trying to say is that I've seen no evidence of this team cutting corners. I seriously doubt Hendry is satisfied with just contending in the central. I think the moves he's made throughout his tenure point to him trying to win the whole thing.

 

I'm sure Hendry does want to win the whole thing. However, he has either a very poor way of evaluating talent or he has let Dusty do his thinking for him.

 

The Cubs penciled in Patterson to lead off in 2005. A career OBP below .300 is probably not a good idea at lead off. When he failed, Neifi Perez got the nod. He's even worse. Jose Macias seemed to be next in line. He's even worse.

 

This organization has valued aggressiveness at the plate for the entire time they've been here. The walks have dropped and so has their run production.

 

If either Hendry or Baker had a clue last year, they would have seen that Todd Walker was their best lead off candidate and Murton was the best #2 option. Neither got the opportunity. Cubs management did not maximize the potential of the starting line up at any time last year. If it's because Hendry didn't want to interfere with Baker's decisions or if he agrees with Baker's philosophies, either way this organization is flawed in their thinking.

 

Considering Baker's aggressive approach, won't Furcal and Pierre love the fact that they will have the ability to now become free swingers just like all the other Cubs who have been assembled here in the past by this management? What will happen to Furcal and Pierre's OBP's when that happens? Have we thought of that?

 

Just because we now have speedy lead off hitters like Baker wants doesn't mean that Baker will all of a sudden fall in love with the walk over an aggressive swing at everything approach.

 

Walker was selective at the plate and Baker had him hitting 6th just about as often as 2nd. Walker never did lead off this year, and I can distinctly remember 2 other organizations who DID use him as a lead off hitter.

 

The Cubs sent the wrong message this offseason in not firing Baker. They sent the wrong message when they decided that Neifi Perez and his sub .300 OBP was worth retaining at nearly double the price AND double the years.

 

The Cubs were in the Beltran sweepstakes last year. They said early that they were interested and you constantly heard reports that they'd love to have him. I hear nothing about the Cubs and Giles this offseason. I hear all kinds of Furcal and Pierre rumors. They aren't playing their cards too closely to the vest on these guys. Where is the Giles interest?

 

If the Cubs want to win next year, they can't be marginally better. They need to be MUCH better. They have the resources to do it.

 

I do not want to hear at the end of this offseason that the guys they wanted weren't available or they were too expensive or any other excuse. They had 40m to spend this offseason, umpteen Rule 5 guys who can be unloaded along with talent at the major league level available in trade, and guys available in free agency who can help this team.

 

There will not be any excuses that will satisfy me if they end up with a less than stellar offseason.

[Guest]

Every team relies heavily on health. If 2 of your top 3 pitchers go down, you're done. NY and Boston's juggernaut offenses couldn't overcome subpar pitching.

I dont know... their 372 combined wins over the past two years makes me think they're doing OK.

[craig]

I don't see Hendry "cutting corners". He's had a growing budget, and he's spent the money he's received.

 

The issue isn't "cutting corners". He's going to spend the $30 million, if indeed he has that much (or more) available.

 

The question is whether he's spending the money he has available rightly.

 

MacPhail, Lynch, and Hendry have always taken a spread-it-around philosophy. I'd have liked to see $30+ focused on Giles, Furcal, and Burnett. And improvise beyond that. Hendry is more likely to spread it around: $3 Rusch + $2.5 Neifi + $9.5 Furcal + $6 Pierre + $3 Howry (or MacDougal or Heilman or whomever they can get in trade for Walker plus a prospect), + $3 Eyre + $3-6 on some mid-priced RF (Wilkerson or Jacque Jones or Mench or Kearns or maybe even Nomar or Burnitz or some other RF to be determined later...) + $2-8 on some mid-priced rotation pitcher (Aaron heilman or Vasquez or Adam Eaton or Kip Wells or Washburn or Doug Byrd or Esteban Loiza or Jason Jennings or Derek Lowe or Kyle Lohse or some rotation pitcher to be discovered later...)

 

With those numbers, if both the RF and the rotation pitcher are each $5 guys ($5 is below the average salary for a starter on a $100+ payroll team...), those numbers would sum up to $37 million! Perhaps some of those pickups would involve some odds-and-ends salary going away; maybe Walker's $2.5 is going out in exchange for riske or MacDougal or Heilman or whichever pitcher they deal him for. Maybe Jerome Williams at $1.5 or whatever will be involved in a package for the RF or Pierre. Maybe Corey's $2.5 is outgoing in one of the deals. Seems to me that if you subtract Corey and Walker's salaries, and add that spread-it-around list (beyond Neifi and Rusch add one rotation starter, one RF, one CF, one Furcal, one LH reliever, one RH reliever), you end up right in the salary ballpark that Hendry's budget calls for.

 

Is spreading it around like that idiotic? That's a matter of opinion. But I think there is considerable reason to think that can be an effective, valid, justifiable approach to going after the next season.

 

In Lee, Aram, Barrett, you have three players capable of being well above league average offensively. Well above. In Z, Prior, and Wood, you have three pitchers who still have a chance to be well above average in terms of pitching. You may not have all six of those guys healthy and producing at an exceptional level. But if you can get things such that you are getting average or better production throughout the rest of the roster, I think being a Lee, Aram, healthy Prior, healthy Wood, and healthy Z above average could make you a WS winner.

 

In past, we've often been above average at some spots (Lee and Aram this year, in past Sandberg and Dawson and sometimes Grace, for example...), but so far below average at other spots that the below-average spots offset the gain of the above average spots. (Last year closer was killer bad early; LF most of year; CF most of year; Koronka-era rotation for a while...)

 

I don't think it's an idiotic notion to try to spread it around and improve all the liability spots into average-or-above-average situations.

 

I don't think I'd have gone that way myself, I'd key in on the fewer impact players. But I'm not sure Hendry is a dope to be choosing this path. Given the potentially inflated prices that Burnett and giles may get (and the depretiation potential both have, Burnett with his injuries and Giles with his age...), Hendry's course may be the right one.

 

Of course, that will require that the guys he's getting really do prove to be at least average and in some cases above average. If Furcal and Pierre and Murton hit .265, if you go for Kearns and he hits .228, if Rusch goes 4.9 and Cedeno .243 and you spend $6 on Eyre/Howry and they both go 4.6, it's going to be failure city.

[goonys evil twin]

Yes you can base your offseason on improvements of health. It didn't work out for us last year. Hopefully it will this year. It worked out fine for the Cardinals last year. They assumed Carpenter and Morris were going to be healthy. They assumed right. Look, I'm not saying don't sign Giles. I'd be thrilled if we sign Giles. I'm just saying he's not the only way to improve the team. I happen to think Furcal will greatly improve the team. You don't. We just disagree.

 

If you're a top 5 payroll with $30m to spend, and you rely heavily on improved health to increase your team, your GM is an imcompetent moron.

 

This isn't an $85m payroll team that has to cut corners in spots and hope for things to work out. The Cubs' front office has been given the resources to pretty much guarantee a playoff spot, and make themselves among the favorites to win the world series, not just be in the picture.

 

Every team relies heavily on health. If 2 of your top 3 pitchers go down, you're done. NY and Boston's juggernaut offenses couldn't overcome subpar pitching.

 

They overcame it to the point of a pair of 95 win seasons.

[goonys evil twin]

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better.

 

I'm wrong? You think he put together a great team in 2004 and I'm the one who is wrong?

 

Wow. Need I remind you that team won 89 games, the same as Texas, fewer than 10 other teams. That team was so far from great it's almost laughable that you tried to paint it that way. The Cubs have been nowhere near great in the MacPhail tenure. I don't deny that Hendry has tried to make them better, but it's pretty clear this administration has no interest in doing whatever they can to be the best. They settle for mediocritry, and overpay for it, whenever possible. It's not about contending. Half the teams in the league can call themselves contenders in a season. Contending is settling. It's about winning it all, and being the best. There is no reason why the Cubs couldn't have been a 95+ win team at some point in the past 3 years. They started the 21st century with by all accounts a top 3 farm system in place, and they went from a 12th ranked payroll to a top 5 quickly, at a time when nearly everybody else was cutting costs.

[nick23]

I haven't seen any signs of him cutting corners. Have you? Sounds to me like he's pretty much in on everyone available. All we did last year was complain about OBP at the top of the order. How no one was ever on base when Lee was up to bat. Well he's addressing that. But I don't think assuming the rotation will be healthy next year means he's a moron or that he's cutting corners.

 

I haven't heard of him being in on Giles, I haven't heard him express any sort of interest whatsoever. He could have gone balls out for improvements with all the money he had available, instead he wasted it on mediocrity and garbage like Rusch and Perez. The entire MacPhail era has been about cutting corners. Andy has always been about trying to contend within the division. Never have they talked about trying to be the best of the best, or going all out for a World Series. They're goal is to be in the NL Central race all year, and if they make the playoffs, just hope it works out. The OBP problem has been an enormous problem for years, and the Cubs ignored it year after year. The OBP problem is in fact strictly a BB problem. This team doesn't draw enough walks. The average has been there, the walks have not, and that's why the runs have also been lacking.

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better. He did though resign Nomar. How could he have known CPat would tank like that, or that Nomar would miss most of the season. I also honestly think he thought Dubois would get more playing time than he did. Yes, last year he assumed Kerry would be healthy. Well, why wouldn't he? At that point Wood had 2 dominating seasons before missing time in '04. Basically what I'm trying to say is that I've seen no evidence of this team cutting corners. I seriously doubt Hendry is satisfied with just contending in the central. I think the moves he's made throughout his tenure point to him trying to win the whole thing.

 

I'm sure Hendry does want to win the whole thing. However, he has either a very poor way of evaluating talent or he has let Dusty do his thinking for him.

 

The Cubs penciled in Patterson to lead off in 2005. A career OBP below .300 is probably not a good idea at lead off. When he failed, Neifi Perez got the nod. He's even worse. Jose Macias seemed to be next in line. He's even worse.

 

This organization has valued aggressiveness at the plate for the entire time they've been here. The walks have dropped and so has their run production.

 

If either Hendry or Baker had a clue last year, they would have seen that Todd Walker was their best lead off candidate and Murton was the best #2 option. Neither got the opportunity. Cubs management did not maximize the potential of the starting line up at any time last year. If it's because Hendry didn't want to interfere with Baker's decisions or if he agrees with Baker's philosophies, either way this organization is flawed in their thinking.

 

Considering Baker's aggressive approach, won't Furcal and Pierre love the fact that they will have the ability to now become free swingers just like all the other Cubs who have been assembled here in the past by this management? What will happen to Furcal and Pierre's OBP's when that happens? Have we thought of that?

 

Just because we now have speedy lead off hitters like Baker wants doesn't mean that Baker will all of a sudden fall in love with the walk over an aggressive swing at everything approach.

 

Walker was selective at the plate and Baker had him hitting 6th just about as often as 2nd. Walker never did lead off this year, and I can distinctly remember 2 other organizations who DID use him as a lead off hitter.

 

The Cubs sent the wrong message this offseason in not firing Baker. They sent the wrong message when they decided that Neifi Perez and his sub .300 OBP was worth retaining at nearly double the price AND double the years.

 

The Cubs were in the Beltran sweepstakes last year. They said early that they were interested and you constantly heard reports that they'd love to have him. I hear nothing about the Cubs and Giles this offseason. I hear all kinds of Furcal and Pierre rumors. They aren't playing their cards too closely to the vest on these guys. Where is the Giles interest?

 

If the Cubs want to win next year, they can't be marginally better. They need to be MUCH better. They have the resources to do it.

 

I do not want to hear at the end of this offseason that the guys they wanted weren't available or they were too expensive or any other excuse. They had 40m to spend this offseason, umpteen Rule 5 guys who can be unloaded along with talent at the major league level available in trade, and guys available in free agency who can help this team.

 

There will not be any excuses that will satisfy me if they end up with a less than stellar offseason.

Hendry doesn't make out the line-up card. And contrary to popular belief, Baker hasn't done enough to get fired. And as far as your theory about Pierre and Furcal's OBP's dropping because of Baker... Can you explain Lee, Ramirez, Murton, Walker, and Barrett? Because their OBP's either stayed at their career norms or got better last year. They must have just been tuning Baker out when he told them to just hack away.

[goonys evil twin]

Yes you can base your offseason on improvements of health. It didn't work out for us last year. Hopefully it will this year. It worked out fine for the Cardinals last year. They assumed Carpenter and Morris were going to be healthy. They assumed right. Look, I'm not saying don't sign Giles. I'd be thrilled if we sign Giles. I'm just saying he's not the only way to improve the team. I happen to think Furcal will greatly improve the team. You don't. We just disagree.

 

If you're a top 5 payroll with $30m to spend, and you rely heavily on improved health to increase your team, your GM is an imcompetent moron.

 

This isn't an $85m payroll team that has to cut corners in spots and hope for things to work out. The Cubs' front office has been given the resources to pretty much guarantee a playoff spot, and make themselves among the favorites to win the world series, not just be in the picture.

 

Every team relies heavily on health. If 2 of your top 3 pitchers go down, you're done. NY and Boston's juggernaut offenses couldn't overcome subpar pitching.

 

Everybody relies on health to an extent, but no top 5 payroll team has the right to count on improved health to improve their team. You make your improvements with personel acquisitions. If you get healthier than you were before, that's all the better. But this organization has to build a team that can withstand injuries, not wilt in their presence.

[nick23]

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better.

 

I'm wrong? You think he put together a great team in 2004 and I'm the one who is wrong?

 

Wow. Need I remind you that team won 89 games, the same as Texas, fewer than 10 other teams. That team was so far from great it's almost laughable that you tried to paint it that way. The Cubs have been nowhere near great in the MacPhail tenure. I don't deny that Hendry has tried to make them better, but it's pretty clear this administration has no interest in doing whatever they can to be the best. They settle for mediocritry, and overpay for it, whenever possible. It's not about contending. Half the teams in the league can call themselves contenders in a season. Contending is settling. It's about winning it all, and being the best. There is no reason why the Cubs couldn't have been a 95+ win team at some point in the past 3 years. They started the 21st century with by all accounts a top 3 farm system in place, and they went from a 12th ranked payroll to a top 5 quickly, at a time when nearly everybody else was cutting costs.

Need I remind you that Prior and Wood missed significant time that year. Also Ramirez missed a month, Borowski got hurt and Latroy didn't come through. Despite all that, they were leading the wild card with a week or so to go. That team was good.

[CubinNY]

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better.

 

I'm wrong? You think he put together a great team in 2004 and I'm the one who is wrong?

 

Wow. Need I remind you that team won 89 games, the same as Texas, fewer than 10 other teams. That team was so far from great it's almost laughable that you tried to paint it that way. The Cubs have been nowhere near great in the MacPhail tenure. I don't deny that Hendry has tried to make them better, but it's pretty clear this administration has no interest in doing whatever they can to be the best. They settle for mediocritry, and overpay for it, whenever possible. It's not about contending. Half the teams in the league can call themselves contenders in a season. Contending is settling. It's about winning it all, and being the best. There is no reason why the Cubs couldn't have been a 95+ win team at some point in the past 3 years. They started the 21st century with by all accounts a top 3 farm system in place, and they went from a 12th ranked payroll to a top 5 quickly, at a time when nearly everybody else was cutting costs.

Need I remind you that Prior and Wood missed significant time that year. Also Ramirez missed a month, Borowski got hurt and Latroy didn't come through. Despite all that, they were leading the wild card with a week or so to go. That team was good.

 

This team sucked when everyone was healthy. Besides, no team is healthy all the time. Great teams overcome injuries. Excuses are for losers.

[YearofDaCubs]

I haven't seen any signs of him cutting corners. Have you? Sounds to me like he's pretty much in on everyone available. All we did last year was complain about OBP at the top of the order. How no one was ever on base when Lee was up to bat. Well he's addressing that. But I don't think assuming the rotation will be healthy next year means he's a moron or that he's cutting corners.

 

I haven't heard of him being in on Giles, I haven't heard him express any sort of interest whatsoever. He could have gone balls out for improvements with all the money he had available, instead he wasted it on mediocrity and garbage like Rusch and Perez. The entire MacPhail era has been about cutting corners. Andy has always been about trying to contend within the division. Never have they talked about trying to be the best of the best, or going all out for a World Series. They're goal is to be in the NL Central race all year, and if they make the playoffs, just hope it works out. The OBP problem has been an enormous problem for years, and the Cubs ignored it year after year. The OBP problem is in fact strictly a BB problem. This team doesn't draw enough walks. The average has been there, the walks have not, and that's why the runs have also been lacking.

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better. He did though resign Nomar. How could he have known CPat would tank like that, or that Nomar would miss most of the season. I also honestly think he thought Dubois would get more playing time than he did. Yes, last year he assumed Kerry would be healthy. Well, why wouldn't he? At that point Wood had 2 dominating seasons before missing time in '04. Basically what I'm trying to say is that I've seen no evidence of this team cutting corners. I seriously doubt Hendry is satisfied with just contending in the central. I think the moves he's made throughout his tenure point to him trying to win the whole thing.

 

I'm sure Hendry does want to win the whole thing. However, he has either a very poor way of evaluating talent or he has let Dusty do his thinking for him.

 

The Cubs penciled in Patterson to lead off in 2005. A career OBP below .300 is probably not a good idea at lead off. When he failed, Neifi Perez got the nod. He's even worse. Jose Macias seemed to be next in line. He's even worse.

 

This organization has valued aggressiveness at the plate for the entire time they've been here. The walks have dropped and so has their run production.

 

If either Hendry or Baker had a clue last year, they would have seen that Todd Walker was their best lead off candidate and Murton was the best #2 option. Neither got the opportunity. Cubs management did not maximize the potential of the starting line up at any time last year. If it's because Hendry didn't want to interfere with Baker's decisions or if he agrees with Baker's philosophies, either way this organization is flawed in their thinking.

 

Considering Baker's aggressive approach, won't Furcal and Pierre love the fact that they will have the ability to now become free swingers just like all the other Cubs who have been assembled here in the past by this management? What will happen to Furcal and Pierre's OBP's when that happens? Have we thought of that?

 

Just because we now have speedy lead off hitters like Baker wants doesn't mean that Baker will all of a sudden fall in love with the walk over an aggressive swing at everything approach.

 

Walker was selective at the plate and Baker had him hitting 6th just about as often as 2nd. Walker never did lead off this year, and I can distinctly remember 2 other organizations who DID use him as a lead off hitter.

 

The Cubs sent the wrong message this offseason in not firing Baker. They sent the wrong message when they decided that Neifi Perez and his sub .300 OBP was worth retaining at nearly double the price AND double the years.

 

The Cubs were in the Beltran sweepstakes last year. They said early that they were interested and you constantly heard reports that they'd love to have him. I hear nothing about the Cubs and Giles this offseason. I hear all kinds of Furcal and Pierre rumors. They aren't playing their cards too closely to the vest on these guys. Where is the Giles interest?

 

If the Cubs want to win next year, they can't be marginally better. They need to be MUCH better. They have the resources to do it.

 

I do not want to hear at the end of this offseason that the guys they wanted weren't available or they were too expensive or any other excuse. They had 40m to spend this offseason, umpteen Rule 5 guys who can be unloaded along with talent at the major league level available in trade, and guys available in free agency who can help this team.

 

There will not be any excuses that will satisfy me if they end up with a less than stellar offseason.

Hendry doesn't make out the line-up card. And contrary to popular belief, Baker hasn't done enough to get fired. And as far as your theory about Pierre and Furcal's OBP's dropping because of Baker... Can you explain Lee, Ramirez, Murton, Walker, and Barrett? Because their OBP's either stayed at their career norms or got better last year. They must have just been tuning Baker out when he told them to just hack away.

Maybe you don't agree with most here but I can give you several reasons why Baker has done enough to get fired and any other organization would have fired him by now, no question. Even in 2004 with a nice looking lineup on paper we had holes on the team, and what was troubling about that more than anything Hendry didn't make the right trade to get us into the post-season and that is trade for a closer. Hawkins and the lack of offense killed us at the very end.

Edited November 16, 2005 by YearofDaCubs

[goonys evil twin]

I don't see Hendry "cutting corners". He's had a growing budget, and he's spent the money he's received.

 

The issue isn't "cutting corners". He's going to spend the $30 million, if indeed he has that much (or more) available. .

 

And he's spent it like a freaking moron. When guys like Tejada and Vladdy are out there, he's giving raises to Alfonseca, Macias and Neifi. Before he even gets a chance to spend on the impact players, he spends significant chunks on replacables like Rusch. He cuts corners repeatedly. I'm not saying he doesn't eventually spend the money. I'm saying he spends it on mediocrity, and that is exactly why this team has been barely above average under his control.

[BigbadB]

Hendry doesn't make out the line-up card. And contrary to popular belief, Baker hasn't done enough to get fired. And as far as your theory about Pierre and Furcal's OBP's dropping because of Baker... Can you explain Lee, Ramirez, Murton, Walker, and Barrett? Because their OBP's either stayed at their career norms or got better last year. They must have just been tuning Baker out when he told them to just hack away.

 

He's done enough that I would have fired him by now.

 

Getting back to the OBP of the guys you listed.....

 

Murton-What are you comparing? This was his first year in the bigs. Baker loved his OBP so much, he batted him at the bottom of the order all year.

 

Barrett-slight improvement on OBP from previous year.

 

Ramirez-worse OBP than the previous year. Moreso than Barrett's improvement.

 

Lee-What would you expect from a guy who was hitting everything in sight?

 

Lee was a huge increase in OBP. After that, Barrett had a slight improvement. Murton wasn't on the team in 2004, so he can't really be counted. It's probably a safe bet that Murton's OBP in the majors was worse than his OBP in AA this year since his batting average practically matched his major league OBP.

 

After Lee and Barrett, every other player on the 2005 team had a worse OBP than the previous year. Aramis, Corey, Hollandsworth, Nomar, Macias, Hairston and Burnitz. Whoops, Walker stayed the same.

[nick23]

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better.

 

I'm wrong? You think he put together a great team in 2004 and I'm the one who is wrong?

 

Wow. Need I remind you that team won 89 games, the same as Texas, fewer than 10 other teams. That team was so far from great it's almost laughable that you tried to paint it that way. The Cubs have been nowhere near great in the MacPhail tenure. I don't deny that Hendry has tried to make them better, but it's pretty clear this administration has no interest in doing whatever they can to be the best. They settle for mediocritry, and overpay for it, whenever possible. It's not about contending. Half the teams in the league can call themselves contenders in a season. Contending is settling. It's about winning it all, and being the best. There is no reason why the Cubs couldn't have been a 95+ win team at some point in the past 3 years. They started the 21st century with by all accounts a top 3 farm system in place, and they went from a 12th ranked payroll to a top 5 quickly, at a time when nearly everybody else was cutting costs.

Need I remind you that Prior and Wood missed significant time that year. Also Ramirez missed a month, Borowski got hurt and Latroy didn't come through. Despite all that, they were leading the wild card with a week or so to go. That team was good.

 

This team sucked when everyone was healthy. Besides, no team is healthy all the time. Great teams overcome injuries. Excuses are for losers.

Good argument. You're wrong though.

[goonys evil twin]

Need I remind you that Prior and Wood missed significant time that year. Also Ramirez missed a month, Borowski got hurt and Latroy didn't come through. Despite all that, they were leading the wild card with a week or so to go. That team was good.

 

And you called them great, which they were not, because Hendry hasn't come close to putting together a great team and doesn't yet seem to know how to.

[BigbadB]

I don't think you could be any more wrong. I think in '03 and '04 Hendry made every effort to try and win the whole thing. Don't forget that Hendry put together a great team for '04. Traded for Lee, signed Maddux, that team should've contended. For whatever reason it didn't. Last year he could've done better.

 

I'm wrong? You think he put together a great team in 2004 and I'm the one who is wrong?

 

Wow. Need I remind you that team won 89 games, the same as Texas, fewer than 10 other teams. That team was so far from great it's almost laughable that you tried to paint it that way. The Cubs have been nowhere near great in the MacPhail tenure. I don't deny that Hendry has tried to make them better, but it's pretty clear this administration has no interest in doing whatever they can to be the best. They settle for mediocritry, and overpay for it, whenever possible. It's not about contending. Half the teams in the league can call themselves contenders in a season. Contending is settling. It's about winning it all, and being the best. There is no reason why the Cubs couldn't have been a 95+ win team at some point in the past 3 years. They started the 21st century with by all accounts a top 3 farm system in place, and they went from a 12th ranked payroll to a top 5 quickly, at a time when nearly everybody else was cutting costs.

Need I remind you that Prior and Wood missed significant time that year. Also Ramirez missed a month, Borowski got hurt and Latroy didn't come through. Despite all that, they were leading the wild card with a week or so to go. That team was good.

 

This team sucked when everyone was healthy. Besides, no team is healthy all the time. Great teams overcome injuries. Excuses are for losers.

Good argument. You're wrong though.

 

Not really. The Cubs were leading the Wild Card toward the end of 2004 and everyone was healthy when they tanked.

[nick23]

Need I remind you that Prior and Wood missed significant time that year. Also Ramirez missed a month, Borowski got hurt and Latroy didn't come through. Despite all that, they were leading the wild card with a week or so to go. That team was good.

 

And you called them great, which they were not, because Hendry hasn't come close to putting together a great team and doesn't yet seem to know how to.

They were great enough to win it all IMO. You just can't overcome all those injuries (Sosa, Aram, Wood, Prior, Holla, Walker, Borowski, Remlinger, KGon. That team was good enough to win it all. And almost everyone on this board believed that.

[goonys evil twin]

Need I remind you that Prior and Wood missed significant time that year. Also Ramirez missed a month, Borowski got hurt and Latroy didn't come through. Despite all that, they were leading the wild card with a week or so to go. That team was good.

 

And you called them great, which they were not, because Hendry hasn't come close to putting together a great team and doesn't yet seem to know how to.

They were great enough to win it all IMO. You just can't overcome all those injuries (Sosa, Aram, Wood, Prior, Holla, Walker, Borowski, Remlinger, KGon. That team was good enough to win it all. And almost everyone on this board believed that.

 

I don't remember a consensus opinion of greatness about that 2004 team.

 

 

There is a difference between having the ability to win it all if things go your way, and just being a great team who is among the most favored to win it all. That team dragged their heals all season, when they were hurt or healthy, it didn't matter. And they collapsed when healthy, then the GM did nothing to improve the team in the following offseason besides hope for health and chemistry.

[YearofDaCubs]

Need I remind you that Prior and Wood missed significant time that year. Also Ramirez missed a month, Borowski got hurt and Latroy didn't come through. Despite all that, they were leading the wild card with a week or so to go. That team was good.

 

And you called them great, which they were not, because Hendry hasn't come close to putting together a great team and doesn't yet seem to know how to.

They were great enough to win it all IMO. You just can't overcome all those injuries (Sosa, Aram, Wood, Prior, Holla, Walker, Borowski, Remlinger, KGon. That team was good enough to win it all. And almost everyone on this board believed that.

 

I don't remember a consensus opinion of greatness about that 2004 team.

 

 

There is a difference between having the ability to win it all if things go your way, and just being a great team who is among the most favored to win it all. That team dragged their heals all season, when they were hurt or healthy, it didn't matter. And they collapsed when healthy, then the GM did nothing to improve the team in the following offseason besides hope for health and chemistry.

The team from 2004 to 2005 regressed badly. What a slap in the face to all Cubs fans 2005 was.

[Careless]

 

The Cubs penciled in Patterson to lead off in 2005. A career OBP below .300 is probably not a good idea at lead off.

For the record, patterson's obp coming into 2005 was 313. This year crushed that.

edit: it's entirely possible I screwed that calc up, btw