"Cubs not interested in bidding war for Giles"

[abuck1220]

=D>

 

But it's ok to get into a bidding war for Furcal?

 

What bidding war? Between the Cubs and Braves? If he reports are to be believed, the Yanks and others are involved in the Giles sweepstakes. I'd say that's very different than the Furcal situation.

 

The Mets are involved.

 

If you are willing to even consider a 5/50 for Furcal, but won't get in on the Giles talks while the numbers are still in the 3/30 range, you're just a plain old incompetent GM.

 

exactly. why is 5/50 ok for a career .757 OPS, but 3/30ish is not ok for a career .955 OPS? nonsense.

 

i guess hendry only wants to get in a bidding war if it's against himself.

 

Because OPS isn't all there is in baseball. Because defense is important up the middle. See Chicago White Sox. Because Furcal is an excellent defensive player at an important defensive position who's just coming into his prime while Giles doesn't play an important defensive position and is past his prime.

 

homeruns are important in the lineup. see chicago white sox.

 

there's no way furcal's defense is that much better than cedeno's to make up for the 200 point difference in OPS between he and giles. it's not like the alternative to not signing furcal is leaving the ss position open and the cubs playing w/ 8 guys on the field.

[XZero771679666304]

Actually, I think priority #1 should be to get OBP for the top of the order. The main offensive problem last year was that nobody got on ahead of Lee and Ramirez. An impact bat is also sorely needed but secondary, IMO.

 

No, the main problem was that not enough people got on, throughout the lineup. Giles could provide a .400+ OBP from the 2 spot, blowing away any potential improvement Furcal would provide. Focusing strictly on the top of the lineup is a terrible mistake. It wasn't 1 or 2 spots that struggled, it was the entire lineup, outside of Lee, Ramirez, and to an extent, Barrett. Burnitz was awful in the middle of the lineup. He was like having Furcal in there, which nobody would try.

 

Of course OBP throughout the lineup was a problem. But when you have a guy perform like Derrek did and have as few RBI as he had, you have a problem. When you look at the lineups throughout the season, it is clear that the lack of OBP at the top was the most glaring problem.

 

You had Lee and Ramirez in the middle, and with even average OBP from the one and two spots, the team would have scored a lot more runs than placing that OBP anywhere else in the order.

 

And I didn't say focus strictly on the top, just that is where is should start. And I think you are nuts if you think Baker would bat Giles in the 2 hole.

[fromthestretch]

Actually, I think priority #1 should be to get OBP for the top of the order. The main offensive problem last year was that nobody got on ahead of Lee and Ramirez. An impact bat is also sorely needed but secondary, IMO.

 

The two main rumored targets for leadoff are Furcal and Pierre. Walker had a better OBP than both of them in 2005. Not to mention that he'll make signifcantly less money than Furcal and at least $1.5 million less than Pierre. His career OBP is the exact same as Furcal.

 

Get an impact bat and let Walker leadoff. If you can get an impact bat AND a legitmate leadoff hitter, great. If not, the impact bat should be the priority.

 

Well Walker is obvious. I have been a proponent of him leading off since day one, but if Dusty isn't going to bat him leadoff, then it is really irrelevant.

 

It wouldn't be irrelevant if Hendry would step up and either fire Dusty or make it very clear to him that Neifi Perez and Corey Patterson are not on this roster to leadoff.

[XZero771679666304]

Actually, I think priority #1 should be to get OBP for the top of the order. The main offensive problem last year was that nobody got on ahead of Lee and Ramirez. An impact bat is also sorely needed but secondary, IMO.

 

The two main rumored targets for leadoff are Furcal and Pierre. Walker had a better OBP than both of them in 2005. Not to mention that he'll make signifcantly less money than Furcal and at least $1.5 million less than Pierre. His career OBP is the exact same as Furcal.

 

Get an impact bat and let Walker leadoff. If you can get an impact bat AND a legitmate leadoff hitter, great. If not, the impact bat should be the priority.

 

Well Walker is obvious. I have been a proponent of him leading off since day one, but if Dusty isn't going to bat him leadoff, then it is really irrelevant.

 

It wouldn't be irrelevant if Hendry would step up and either fire Dusty or make it very clear to him that Neifi Perez and Corey Patterson are not on this roster to leadoff.

 

I totally agree, but since Baker hasn't been fired we have to assume his rule will continue, and adjust our suggestions accordingly.

[erik316wttn]

Of course not. Why would Hendry want to pay for someone talented when there are Scott Eyre's, Neifi Perez's and Jose Macias's out there just waiting to collect a hefty payday for being crappy?

[goonys evil twin]

Of course OBP throughout the lineup was a problem. But when you have a guy perform like Derrek did and have as few RBI as he had, you have a problem. When you look at the lineups throughout the season, it is clear that the lack of OBP at the top was the most glaring problem.

 

You had Lee and Ramirez in the middle, and with even average OBP from the one and two spots, the team would have scored a lot more runs than placing that OBP anywhere else in the order.

 

And I didn't say focus strictly on the top, just that is where is should start. And I think you are nuts if you think Baker would bat Giles in the 2 hole.

 

For all the talk about the specific oddity of Lee having so few opportunities, wasn't there a similar stat where Burnitz had the most opportunities but came through the fewest times? OBP all around is much more of a problem than OBP in the leadoff spot. Order isn't that important. What matters is overall production. The fact that the Cubs are so intent on narrowing their focus to one spot is disturbing, while the apparant willingness of a large segment of the media and fan base to applaud that focus is just bewildering. This was not a team that was a leadoff hitter away from championship. They had candidates for the spot, but chose not to use them.

 

I refuse to justify inefficient personel moves with the "save Dusty from himself" theory. It's Jim's own fault that Dusty is here, he can't get a free pass for bad moves just because they were made in an effort to stop Dusty from screwing up too much. That is called throwing good money after bad, and it's a piss-poor management philosophy.

[goonys evil twin]

I totally agree, but since Baker hasn't been fired we have to assume his rule will continue, and adjust our suggestions accordingly.

 

That's just plain wrong. You don't try and correct bad decisions by compounding them with more bad decisions.

[hawkeyecub]

Of course not. Why would Hendry want to pay for someone talented when there are Scott Eyre's, Neifi Perez's and Jose Macias's out there just waiting to collect a hefty payday for being crappy?

 

Scott Eyre is "crappy"?

 

Last year he had a 2.63 ERA, 1.08 WHIP and a .200/.282/.288 line against.

Lefties hit .182/.270/.242 against him last year. In the last three years they've hit .200/.264/.302 against him.

 

Yeah those numbers are really "crappy."

[frostwyrm]

Does anyone here actually think there's a realistic chance the Cubs will get Giles? I don't.

[Andy]

Does anyone here actually think there's a realistic chance the Cubs will get Giles? I don't.

I'll be shocked if he ends up anywhere other than STL or Anaheim.

[XZero771679666304]

Of course OBP throughout the lineup was a problem. But when you have a guy perform like Derrek did and have as few RBI as he had, you have a problem. When you look at the lineups throughout the season, it is clear that the lack of OBP at the top was the most glaring problem.

 

You had Lee and Ramirez in the middle, and with even average OBP from the one and two spots, the team would have scored a lot more runs than placing that OBP anywhere else in the order.

 

And I didn't say focus strictly on the top, just that is where is should start. And I think you are nuts if you think Baker would bat Giles in the 2 hole.

 

For all the talk about the specific oddity of Lee having so few opportunities, wasn't there a similar stat where Burnitz had the most opportunities but came through the fewest times? OBP all around is much more of a problem than OBP in the leadoff spot. Order isn't that important. What matters is overall production. The fact that the Cubs are so intent on narrowing their focus to one spot is disturbing, while the apparant willingness of a large segment of the media and fan base to applaud that focus is just bewildering. This was not a team that was a leadoff hitter away from championship. They had candidates for the spot, but chose not to use them.

 

I refuse to justify inefficient personel moves with the "save Dusty from himself" theory. It's Jim's own fault that Dusty is here, he can't get a free pass for bad moves just because they were made in an effort to stop Dusty from screwing up too much. That is called throwing good money after bad, and it's a piss-poor management philosophy.

 

First off, I have said the entire lineup needs to be addressed as far as OBP is concerned. Two or three times now. Having said that, not all the needs are equal.

 

I am sorry Goony, but when you have guys like Perez and Patterson leading things off and two guys with .900+ OPS following them and you aren't scoring runs, it doesn't take a slide rule to figure out what is wrong. Lee had a OBS of 1.080, Ramirez .926, Walker .829, Barrett .824, which is decent combination of pop and OBP for the heart of the order. Burnitz's .322 OBP hurts for sure, but Neifi's .298, Hairston's .336 and Corey's .254 rotating around the top was the killer.

 

Now adding OBP to RF and CF should be a priority, but putting people in the lineup that will get on base and Dusty will actually bat at the top is most important. I would put it this way: the need for OBP at the top is dire, the need for OBP lower in the lineup is serious. Hopefull both will be addressed, and I think they will. But if you had to choose one, OBP at the top should be it.

 

Now I am not trying to defend Baker or Hendry, but with them in place, you have to take their stupidity into account. You can't assume players will be used in useful or innovative ways, you must assume Dusty will use players in the fashion he always has. Walker won't lead off, and Giles wouldn't be batted second. This isn't excuse making, it is reality of Baker, and until he is canned or leaves, we will just have to deal with it.

 

I for one have accepted the reality of Hendry and Baker, and am hoping like hell Furcal gets signed and Hendry manages to trade for a good outfielder or two.

 

Ignoring Furcal to pursue a player who we are longshots to get is pure foolishness. Furcal is available, there is a minimum of competition, he fills a need, and he is publicly open to playing in Chicago. Giles is available, there is more competition from teams he has a preference to play for, he fills a need, but has not been linked to the Cubs much at all.

 

I say secure what we can first, then focus on the things that will take more work.

 

To me it seems that too many people here are too focused on Brains Giles . It's like and thing not Giles related is met with derision.

[goonys evil twin]

To me it seems that too many people here are too focused on Brains Giles . It's like and thing not Giles related is met with derision.

 

I've said many times Giles isn't the only option, but RF is clearly the biggest need.

 

How many times do I have to repeat that it's the only position on the team with no internal options? Does that not mean anything to anybody? They can get average production out of SS for minimal cost. They can't get crap out of RF for anything. This team appears to be more interested in creating a hole (dumping Walker) than filling the biggest hole (RF).

[BigbadB]

Of course OBP throughout the lineup was a problem. But when you have a guy perform like Derrek did and have as few RBI as he had, you have a problem. When you look at the lineups throughout the season, it is clear that the lack of OBP at the top was the most glaring problem.

 

You had Lee and Ramirez in the middle, and with even average OBP from the one and two spots, the team would have scored a lot more runs than placing that OBP anywhere else in the order.

 

And I didn't say focus strictly on the top, just that is where is should start. And I think you are nuts if you think Baker would bat Giles in the 2 hole.

 

For all the talk about the specific oddity of Lee having so few opportunities, wasn't there a similar stat where Burnitz had the most opportunities but came through the fewest times? OBP all around is much more of a problem than OBP in the leadoff spot. Order isn't that important. What matters is overall production. The fact that the Cubs are so intent on narrowing their focus to one spot is disturbing, while the apparant willingness of a large segment of the media and fan base to applaud that focus is just bewildering. This was not a team that was a leadoff hitter away from championship. They had candidates for the spot, but chose not to use them.

 

I refuse to justify inefficient personel moves with the "save Dusty from himself" theory. It's Jim's own fault that Dusty is here, he can't get a free pass for bad moves just because they were made in an effort to stop Dusty from screwing up too much. That is called throwing good money after bad, and it's a piss-poor management philosophy.

 

First off, I have said the entire lineup needs to be addressed as far as OBP is concerned. Two or three times now. Having said that, not all the needs are equal.

 

I am sorry Goony, but when you have guys like Perez and Patterson leading things off and two guys with .900+ OPS following them and you aren't scoring runs, it doesn't take a slide rule to figure out what is wrong. Lee had a OBS of 1.080, Ramirez .926, Walker .829, Barrett .824, which is decent combination of pop and OBP for the heart of the order. Burnitz's .322 OBP hurts for sure, but Neifi's .298, Hairston's .336 and Corey's .254 rotating around the top was the killer.

 

Now adding OBP to RF and CF should be a priority, but putting people in the lineup that will get on base and Dusty will actually bat at the top is most important. I would put it this way: the need for OBP at the top is dire, the need for OBP lower in the lineup is serious. Hopefull both will be addressed, and I think they will. But if you had to choose one, OBP at the top should be it.

 

Now I am not trying to defend Baker or Hendry, but with them in place, you have to take their stupidity into account. You can't assume players will be used in useful or innovative ways, you must assume Dusty will use players in the fashion he always has. Walker won't lead off, and Giles wouldn't be batted second. This isn't excuse making, it is reality of Baker, and until he is canned or leaves, we will just have to deal with it.

 

I for one have accepted the reality of Hendry and Baker, and am hoping like hell Furcal gets signed and Hendry manages to trade for a good outfielder or two.

 

Ignoring Furcal to pursue a player who we are longshots to get is pure foolishness. Furcal is available, there is a minimum of competition, he fills a need, and he is publicly open to playing in Chicago. Giles is available, there is more competition from teams he has a preference to play for, he fills a need, but has not been linked to the Cubs much at all.

 

I say secure what we can first, then focus on the things that will take more work.

 

To me it seems that too many people here are too focused on Brains Giles . It's like and thing not Giles related is met with derision.

 

Guys the Cubs had last year that had a higher OBP than Furcal had last year that were capable of leading off:

 

Walker

Murton

Cedeno

 

Guys who can be traded for that would provide a comparable or better OBP at a much lower cost:

 

Lofton

Lugo

Pierre

Bradley

Michaels (if available)

Wilkerson

 

Why put all your eggs in one basket for a guy (Furcal) who can be replaced by 1 or more of the guys listed above?

 

Give me a list of guys we can use in place of Brian Giles and his production that we have in house or from the outside like I have above and who would come considerably cheaper. Don't forget, I'm looking for equal production. Have fun......

Edited November 17, 2005 by BigbadB

[XZero771679666304]

I totally agree, but since Baker hasn't been fired we have to assume his rule will continue, and adjust our suggestions accordingly.

 

That's just plain wrong. You don't try and correct bad decisions by compounding them with more bad decisions.

 

What? You think if we close our eyes and hope hard enough Hendry and Baker will go away? And what bad decision are we talking about? Giles isn't coming here, he never was. Sure, Brian hasn't dictated that directly to Moses to be presented to us as hard evidence on stone tablets, but the writings are on the wall.

 

This has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity. He either wants to stay with his family or win now. It is circumstantial evidece that states this, but there is a mountain of it.

 

What do you suggest, that Hendry put everything else aside and go full bore after Giles? I think a more sorry epitaph to the offseason would be one that tells of how Hendry focused to much on one player and missed other opportunities.

[goonys evil twin]

What do you suggest, that Hendry put everything else aside and go full bore after Giles? I think a more sorry epitaph to the offseason would be one that tells of how Hendry focused to much on one player and missed other opportunities.

 

That's exactly what he's doing right now.

 

RF is the biggest hole. SS isn't an urgent need, yet he seems to be putting 90% of his efforts into finding another SS, and the other 10% into overpaying for mediocrity at other spots (thus limiting the financial flexibility to fix the enormous RF problem).

[XZero771679666304]

Of course OBP throughout the lineup was a problem. But when you have a guy perform like Derrek did and have as few RBI as he had, you have a problem. When you look at the lineups throughout the season, it is clear that the lack of OBP at the top was the most glaring problem.

 

You had Lee and Ramirez in the middle, and with even average OBP from the one and two spots, the team would have scored a lot more runs than placing that OBP anywhere else in the order.

 

And I didn't say focus strictly on the top, just that is where is should start. And I think you are nuts if you think Baker would bat Giles in the 2 hole.

 

For all the talk about the specific oddity of Lee having so few opportunities, wasn't there a similar stat where Burnitz had the most opportunities but came through the fewest times? OBP all around is much more of a problem than OBP in the leadoff spot. Order isn't that important. What matters is overall production. The fact that the Cubs are so intent on narrowing their focus to one spot is disturbing, while the apparant willingness of a large segment of the media and fan base to applaud that focus is just bewildering. This was not a team that was a leadoff hitter away from championship. They had candidates for the spot, but chose not to use them.

 

I refuse to justify inefficient personel moves with the "save Dusty from himself" theory. It's Jim's own fault that Dusty is here, he can't get a free pass for bad moves just because they were made in an effort to stop Dusty from screwing up too much. That is called throwing good money after bad, and it's a piss-poor management philosophy.

 

First off, I have said the entire lineup needs to be addressed as far as OBP is concerned. Two or three times now. Having said that, not all the needs are equal.

 

I am sorry Goony, but when you have guys like Perez and Patterson leading things off and two guys with .900+ OPS following them and you aren't scoring runs, it doesn't take a slide rule to figure out what is wrong. Lee had a OBS of 1.080, Ramirez .926, Walker .829, Barrett .824, which is decent combination of pop and OBP for the heart of the order. Burnitz's .322 OBP hurts for sure, but Neifi's .298, Hairston's .336 and Corey's .254 rotating around the top was the killer.

 

Now adding OBP to RF and CF should be a priority, but putting people in the lineup that will get on base and Dusty will actually bat at the top is most important. I would put it this way: the need for OBP at the top is dire, the need for OBP lower in the lineup is serious. Hopefull both will be addressed, and I think they will. But if you had to choose one, OBP at the top should be it.

 

Now I am not trying to defend Baker or Hendry, but with them in place, you have to take their stupidity into account. You can't assume players will be used in useful or innovative ways, you must assume Dusty will use players in the fashion he always has. Walker won't lead off, and Giles wouldn't be batted second. This isn't excuse making, it is reality of Baker, and until he is canned or leaves, we will just have to deal with it.

 

I for one have accepted the reality of Hendry and Baker, and am hoping like hell Furcal gets signed and Hendry manages to trade for a good outfielder or two.

 

Ignoring Furcal to pursue a player who we are longshots to get is pure foolishness. Furcal is available, there is a minimum of competition, he fills a need, and he is publicly open to playing in Chicago. Giles is available, there is more competition from teams he has a preference to play for, he fills a need, but has not been linked to the Cubs much at all.

 

I say secure what we can first, then focus on the things that will take more work.

 

To me it seems that too many people here are too focused on Brains Giles . It's like and thing not Giles related is met with derision.

 

Guys the Cubs had last year that had a higher OBP than Furcal had last year that were capable of leading off:

 

Walker

Murton

Cedeno

 

Guys who can be traded for that would provide a comparable or better OBP at a much lower cost:

 

Lofton

Lugo

Pierre

Bradley

Michaels (if available)

Wilkerson

 

Why put all your eggs in one basket for a guy (Furcal) who can be replaced by 1 or more of the guys listed above?

 

Give me a list of guys we can use in place of Brian Giles and his production that we have in house and who would come cheaper. Don't forget, I'm looking for equal production. Have fun......

 

Who is putting all their eggs in one basket? It's still November for God's sake. Furcal won't cost us any players, has expressed a desire to play for the Cubs, and only has one or two other suitors. Getting involved in a war for Giles to the exclusion of others would be a MUCH bigger risk, and one far less likely to pay off.

 

And again, Walker, Cedeno and Murton don't matter much IF DUSTY WON'T USE THEM. There were there last year and Dusty didn't use them, so why would he now when he can just turn to Neifi again? It is truly pathetic that our manager can's maximize the talent provided, but it is our lot whether we like it or not.

 

Pierre had a bad year, the probable decline of Lofton has been well documented here, and the others we don't know are available, and what cost in players it would take.

 

If we don't get a leadoff candidate, you will see Perez leading off. I'd bet the farm on it.

[BigbadB]

I totally agree, but since Baker hasn't been fired we have to assume his rule will continue, and adjust our suggestions accordingly.

 

That's just plain wrong. You don't try and correct bad decisions by compounding them with more bad decisions.

 

What? You think if we close our eyes and hope hard enough Hendry and Baker will go away? And what bad decision are we talking about? Giles isn't coming here, he never was. Sure, Brian hasn't dictated that directly to Moses to be presented to us as hard evidence on stone tablets, but the writings are on the wall.

 

This has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity. He either wants to stay with his family or win now. It is circumstantial evidece that states this, but there is a mountain of it.

 

What do you suggest, that Hendry put everything else aside and go full bore after Giles? I think a more sorry epitaph to the offseason would be one that tells of how Hendry focused to much on one player and missed other opportunities.

 

Hendry wouldn't need to dedicate the entire offseason to signing Giles. All they would have had to do is court him like you are supposed to.

 

Call him and say "Brian, you are the guy we've targeted as the guy we want on this club. If you come to Chicago, we'll give you 3 years at 14m a year to be our RF."

 

When Giles then says, I'm not interested, Hendry can announce to the world he tried, but Giles has no interest in the Cubs and move on.

 

Hendry has been salivating over Furcal all offseason, and he's no closer to being signed than Giles. Funny, Atlanta gave their top dollar for Furcal and it was after that he announced to the world (or to Hendry since the Cubs seem to be the only other team falling all over themselves for Furcal) that it would take 50m to get him. Atlanta wants him back and they can't go over 8m a year. Apparently, he wouldn't mind going back. If it takes 50m to convince him to not to back to Atlanta, I say go back to Atlanta, we have internal options that might be better. If not, we'll trade for one who is.

 

There is no secret that the Cubs want Furcal. Why is the Giles thing a secret? It gives me the appearance that Hendry wants Furcal and not Giles. I think that's not thinking clearly.

[BigbadB]

Lofton in decline can still put up an OBP as good or better than Furcal. And he wouldn't cost anymore than 1/5th of what Furcal would cost.

 

It's putting all your eggs in one basket to blow a tremendous amount of your available offseason money on a SS when you already have one. You no longer have any money to spend on a decent RF option.

[Bluescale]

You mean, like win?

 

If this was a franchise, or even a management team, with a strong history of making the right moves to make a winning ballclub, I'd be able to have patience when thinking about what will happen with the Giles situation in particuliar, the RF position in general and the team overall. But this front office has no legs to stand on. Andy's regime has brought on many more losses than victories. It's there job to prove us wrong, not our responsibility to just assume they have everything under control.

 

Ah...Goony...you remind me once again why you're my hero.

 

To everyone preaching that we wait and see how the off season unfolds before crucifying Hendry and company, that's the exact same mantra that's been bandied the last few seasons. I bought in last year, so any criticism I levy is a result of waiting for the non-existant difference making moves last winter.

[XZero771679666304]

I totally agree, but since Baker hasn't been fired we have to assume his rule will continue, and adjust our suggestions accordingly.

 

That's just plain wrong. You don't try and correct bad decisions by compounding them with more bad decisions.

 

What? You think if we close our eyes and hope hard enough Hendry and Baker will go away? And what bad decision are we talking about? Giles isn't coming here, he never was. Sure, Brian hasn't dictated that directly to Moses to be presented to us as hard evidence on stone tablets, but the writings are on the wall.

 

This has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity. He either wants to stay with his family or win now. It is circumstantial evidece that states this, but there is a mountain of it.

 

What do you suggest, that Hendry put everything else aside and go full bore after Giles? I think a more sorry epitaph to the offseason would be one that tells of how Hendry focused to much on one player and missed other opportunities.

 

Hendry wouldn't need to dedicate the entire offseason to signing Giles. All they would have had to do is court him like you are supposed to.

 

Call him and say "Brian, you are the guy we've targeted as the guy we want on this club. If you come to Chicago, we'll give you 3 years at 14m a year to be our RF."

 

When Giles then says, I'm not interested, Hendry can announce to the world he tried, but Giles has no interest in the Cubs and move on.

 

Hendry has been salivating over Furcal all offseason, and he's no closer to being signed than Giles. Funny, Atlanta gave their top dollar for Furcal and it was after that he announced to the world (or to Hendry since the Cubs seem to be the only other team falling all over themselves for Furcal) that it would take 50m to get him. Atlanta wants him back and they can't go over 8m a year. Apparently, he wouldn't mind going back. If it takes 50m to convince him to not to back to Atlanta, I say go back to Atlanta, we have internal options that might be better. If not, we'll trade for one who is.

 

There is no secret that the Cubs want Furcal. Why is the Giles thing a secret? It gives me the appearance that Hendry wants Furcal and not Giles. I think that's not thinking clearly.

 

How do we know thaere hasn't been preliminary discussion with Giles' agent, and there didn't seem to be enough interest to justify any further effort?

 

And if there wasn't, what does arguing here about it accomplish? For whatever reason, Hendry doesn't seem to be inclined to pursue Giles. If he isn't going after him, he isn't going after him. It may be because Giles doesn't want to come to the Cubs, or it may be because Hendry doesn't want him, or it may because of Giles demands. Regardless, the end result will likely be the same. Hendry has been incompetant recently, so none of this should be a revelation.

 

There are other fish in the sea, and we can hope he is going after them.

[BigbadB]

Pierre had a bad year, the probable decline of Lofton has been well documented here, and the others we don't know are available, and what cost in players it would take.

 

If we don't get a leadoff candidate, you will see Perez leading off. I'd bet the farm on it.

 

And Furcal had a good year in his contract year. So did Adrian Beltre last year. So did Beltran last year. That list goes on and on.

 

Giles is productive every year.

 

Are you skipping out on compiling a list of players that compare to Giles for much less than what Giles would make that would be available for the Cubs?

 

Compare Julio Lugo to Furcal. Look at their stats. Same guy. Lugo will make just under 5m this year and Furcal will make 10m plus for the next several years.

 

The Cubs have so much trade commodity it's not even funny. I'm not worried about it costing players for someone in trade. At least plenty of trade commodity to land a Lugo or a Wilkerson or someone of the like.

[frostwyrm]

And Furcal had a good year in his contract year. So did Adrian Beltre last year. So did Beltran last year. That list goes on and on.

 

Yeah, I agree. IMO the huge dollar figures being bandied about for Furcal are only appropriate for players who have been kicking ass consistently for a long time.

[BigbadB]

I totally agree, but since Baker hasn't been fired we have to assume his rule will continue, and adjust our suggestions accordingly.

 

That's just plain wrong. You don't try and correct bad decisions by compounding them with more bad decisions.

 

What? You think if we close our eyes and hope hard enough Hendry and Baker will go away? And what bad decision are we talking about? Giles isn't coming here, he never was. Sure, Brian hasn't dictated that directly to Moses to be presented to us as hard evidence on stone tablets, but the writings are on the wall.

 

This has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity. He either wants to stay with his family or win now. It is circumstantial evidece that states this, but there is a mountain of it.

 

What do you suggest, that Hendry put everything else aside and go full bore after Giles? I think a more sorry epitaph to the offseason would be one that tells of how Hendry focused to much on one player and missed other opportunities.

 

Hendry wouldn't need to dedicate the entire offseason to signing Giles. All they would have had to do is court him like you are supposed to.

 

Call him and say "Brian, you are the guy we've targeted as the guy we want on this club. If you come to Chicago, we'll give you 3 years at 14m a year to be our RF."

 

When Giles then says, I'm not interested, Hendry can announce to the world he tried, but Giles has no interest in the Cubs and move on.

 

Hendry has been salivating over Furcal all offseason, and he's no closer to being signed than Giles. Funny, Atlanta gave their top dollar for Furcal and it was after that he announced to the world (or to Hendry since the Cubs seem to be the only other team falling all over themselves for Furcal) that it would take 50m to get him. Atlanta wants him back and they can't go over 8m a year. Apparently, he wouldn't mind going back. If it takes 50m to convince him to not to back to Atlanta, I say go back to Atlanta, we have internal options that might be better. If not, we'll trade for one who is.

 

There is no secret that the Cubs want Furcal. Why is the Giles thing a secret? It gives me the appearance that Hendry wants Furcal and not Giles. I think that's not thinking clearly.

 

How do we know thaere hasn't been preliminary discussion with Giles' agent, and there didn't seem to be enough interest to justify any further effort?

 

And if there wasn't, what does arguing here about it accomplish? For whatever reason, Hendry doesn't seem to be inclined to pursue Giles. If he isn't going after him, he isn't going after him. It may be because Giles doesn't want to come to the Cubs, or it may be because Hendry doesn't want him, or it may because of Giles demands. Regardless, the end result will likely be the same. Hendry has been incompetant recently, so none of this should be a revelation.

 

There are other fish in the sea, and we can hope he is going after them.

 

Obviously, we argue about this stuff because it's a message board.

 

I'm not into the "I told you so" game that can be played when not signing Giles costs us another pennant next year. I just want to win. Sign him and move on the next hurdle.

 

You are right. We don't know. But, we know that Hendry told Nomar don't bother, we are going a different route. We know that Walker will be on the first train out of town when the right trade comes Hendry's way. We know how badly Hendry wants Furcal. We know he is interested in Wilkerson, Bradley, Pierre and the guy Texas.

 

We don't know what his feelings are on Giles. I'd like to know why. Until I know, I'll probably continue venting my frustration here. My apologies if it offends you.

[XZero771679666304]

Pierre had a bad year, the probable decline of Lofton has been well documented here, and the others we don't know are available, and what cost in players it would take.

 

If we don't get a leadoff candidate, you will see Perez leading off. I'd bet the farm on it.

 

And Furcal had a good year in his contract year. So did Adrian Beltre last year. So did Beltran last year. That list goes on and on.

 

Giles is productive every year.

 

Are you skipping out on compiling a list of players that compare to Giles for much less than what Giles would make that would be available for the Cubs?

 

Compare Julio Lugo to Furcal. Look at their stats. Same guy. Lugo will make just under 5m this year and Furcal will make 10m plus for the next several years.

 

The Cubs have so much trade commodity it's not even funny. I'm not worried about it costing players for someone in trade. At least plenty of trade commodity to land a Lugo or a Wilkerson or someone of the like.

 

Compiling a list of players who could prduce like Giles seems pointless. I have never said there were better options out there. He could produce like Ruth for 350K and if there are places he'd rather be that will pay him the same it is totall irrelevant. My feeling is that Giles isn't coming here regardless.

 

And that abundance of trade commodity can just as easiyly be used to acquire an outfielder.

[mg420]

You mean, like win?

 

If this was a franchise, or even a management team, with a strong history of making the right moves to make a winning ballclub, I'd be able to have patience when thinking about what will happen with the Giles situation in particuliar, the RF position in general and the team overall. But this front office has no legs to stand on. Andy's regime has brought on many more losses than victories. It's there job to prove us wrong, not our responsibility to just assume they have everything under control.

 

Ah...Goony...you remind me once again why you're my hero.

 

To everyone preaching that we wait and see how the off season unfolds before crucifying Hendry and company, that's the exact same mantra that's been bandied the last few seasons. I bought in last year, so any criticism I levy is a result of waiting for the non-existant difference making moves last winter.

what does it matter anyway? if the cubs win it will not be because of us and if they lose it will not be because of us. i love the cubs as much as anyone but it's only a game (and one in which all of us are only spectators who have no real after effects of them winning or losing). for hendry it his his lifes work and his career. i'm sure hendry & his staff dont care one bit about a few fans think about him and his moves and neither would i if i were in his position.