More Brad Wilkerson talk

[NewUserName]

We would regret trading Murton for anyone over 30. Why would you acquire Wilkerson and then trade Murton. Why dont we go with the younger cheaper and probably at least as good player.

 

I will say this if our lineup next year is

Wilkerson RF

Bradley CF

Lee 1B

ARam 3b

Walker 2B

Barrett C

Murton LF

Cedeno/Perez SS

This would be a much improved and more consistent offense then what we put out there last year. It would still be in the top 5 in the NL in Slugging and would make a humongous improvement in OBP. This lineup would aslo be better than what the White Sox, Astros, Angels or Cardinals put out last year. If than either Wood or Prior come back and are Cy Young candidates we would be in good shape. This lineup would also make room for future growth and leave money to resign Prior, Lee, Z and ARam.

[WrigleyField 22]

We would regret trading Murton for anyone over 30. Why would you acquire Wilkerson and then trade Murton. Why dont we go with the younger cheaper and probably at least as good player.

 

I will say this if our lineup next year is

Wilkerson RF

Bradley CF

Lee 1B

ARam 3b

Walker 2B

Barrett C

Murton LF

Cedeno/Perez SS

This would be a much improved and more consistent offense then what we put out there last year. It would still be in the top 5 in the NL in Slugging and would make a humongous improvement in OBP. This lineup would aslo be better than what the White Sox, Astros, Angels or Cardinals put out last year. If than either Wood or Prior come back and are Cy Young candidates we would be in good shape. This lineup would also make room for future growth and leave money to resign Prior, Lee, Z and ARam.

 

I'd switch Walker and BRadle in that lineup.

And if thats our lineup we better throw some money towards starting pitching.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I would do Wilkerson for Williams in a heartbeat and not think twice about it.

 

I'd then turn around and make an offer for either Bradley or Pierre and call it an offseason.

 

I'd try to make both deals without including Walker.

 

Where does Hendry throw away all that money if he gets Wilkerson and Bradley? You know he has to spend it or people will riot.

 

Extensions for Lee, Prior, and Zambrano. Use the extra money to pay them more now so they'll accept a little less down the road.

 

Sounds good to me, but I hope Hendry doesn't go crazy on Lee's extension.

[NewUserName]

So basically you are saying we need to score way more runs than any other team to be good. I dont think it would work. I have stated before that I dont think what we do offensively will mean a hill of beans if either Prior or Wood are much improved.

 

If we overspend for offense this year we also may tie up our hands to resign our players the next couple of years.

[biittner77]

The advantage of getting both Bradley and Wilkerson is that it pretty much idiot proofs the lineup so long as Walker is still at 2nd and the SS bats 7th or 8th.

[stitchface]

The advantage of getting both Bradley and Wilkerson is that it pretty much idiot proofs the lineup so long as Walker is still at 2nd and the SS bats 7th or 8th.

 

the thing is though, the order of the lineup is much less a factor in runs scored than the players in it.

[CubsWin]

I would do Wilkerson for Williams in a heartbeat and not think twice about it.

 

I'd then turn around and make an offer for either Bradley or Pierre and call it an offseason.

 

I'd try to make both deals without including Walker.

 

Where does Hendry throw away all that money if he gets Wilkerson and Bradley? You know he has to spend it or people will riot.

Kevin Millwood.

[CubfaninCA]

I would do Wilkerson for Williams in a heartbeat and not think twice about it.

 

I'd then turn around and make an offer for either Bradley or Pierre and call it an offseason.

 

I'd try to make both deals without including Walker.

 

Where does Hendry throw away all that money if he gets Wilkerson and Bradley? You know he has to spend it or people will riot.

 

Give Walker $10 million. :o

[CubsWin]

If you get Wilkerson, then go after Bradley and Abreu. If you get 2 of the 3, then you can use Murton to help get you the third.

 

I have to agree with Don here. Wilkerson and Bradley could be a fallback but the Cubs ought to try and do better than that. Wilkerson and Pierre would be very disappointing.

 

Definitely. I'm just saying that trying for Abreu shouldn't preclude you from continuing to upgrade the OF. Ideally we'd use Murton in an Abreu trade in place of Pie after trading for both Wilkerson and Bradley.

The Phillies have stated that they want a "top of the rotation starter" in exchange for Abreu. They have little need for more major league ready OFers.

 

Unless they are willing to accept Wood, who are the Cubs going to trade to Philly to get Abreu? Vasquez would have to waive his no trade clause to Philly which isn't likely. And Wood has a limited no trade clause as well. I have no idea if Philly is on it. On top of that, Michaels is now the OFer the Phillies would rather trade instead of Abreu.

 

I agree that Hendry shouldn't quit on trying to get him, but we should also keep in mind that since Wagner didn't resign and they traded Thome, Philly is less likely to trade Abreu than they were before.

[CubfaninCA]

Unless the Cubs can find a way to work a 3-4 team deal where Zito goes to Philly, the deal's pretty unlikely. Few top line pitchers are available and it's highly doubtful that Wood will waive his NTC to go get booed by Philly fans.

 

Gotta hope that the Mets get Manny, which makes Floyd expendable.

[A New Era]

We would regret trading Murton for anyone over 30. Why would you acquire Wilkerson and then trade Murton. Why dont we go with the younger cheaper and probably at least as good player.

 

I will say this if our lineup next year is

Wilkerson RF

Bradley CF

Lee 1B

ARam 3b

Walker 2B

Barrett C

Murton LF

Cedeno/Perez SS

This would be a much improved and more consistent offense then what we put out there last year. It would still be in the top 5 in the NL in Slugging and would make a humongous improvement in OBP. This lineup would aslo be better than what the White Sox, Astros, Angels or Cardinals put out last year. If than either Wood or Prior come back and are Cy Young candidates we would be in good shape. This lineup would also make room for future growth and leave money to resign Prior, Lee, Z and ARam.

 

I'd switch Walker and BRadle in that lineup.

And if thats our lineup we better throw some money towards starting pitching.

 

I agree and I would be estatic if that was our line-up AND we got a ~3.50 ERA type pitcher. That's alot of very good OBP and nice mix of speed and power to go with our very good picthing. Pessimist tells me not to expect it. But that is a very reasonable and exceptable line-up.

 

Let's just hope something simular to that happens this OS.

[Diffusion]

Should the Cubs should trade value for Wilkerson or get Milton Bradley cheap?

 

Milton Bradley's probably the better player when you take into account his defence, and he's younger. Salary-wise there'll not too much to choose between them, and they're both not going to be free agents until after the 2007 season. Trouble is that Bradley's also more prone to injury and is obviously a far more volatile character. I don't think he's a bad person, quite the opposite in fact, I think he's well intentioned, but he just loses control. I'm not a big believer in clubhouse chemistry, but Bradley does make you at least pause for thought. Wilkerson will probably have the higher resale value if we need to move him to accomodate Pie in a year's time. There's a lot to consider, and I honestly don't know which way I'd go on it.

 

Given that, I'd make RF the first priority, and if we have to trade Jerome Williams, I'd rather trade him as part of a package to net a huge bat. Williams, Hill and Pinto, that enough to net Abreu and a throw-in? Williams, Hill and Pinto for Dunn? Would either get it done? If so, then you just go with Milton for CF and you're laughing. If not, then maybe Williams for Wilkerson, which I think is fair value, makes more sense. But I think you need to find out what Williams can get you and whether Milton's going to be non-tendered first.

 

If the Phillies and Reds say they're flat-out not interested in Williams, I guess then sending him to the Nationals makes more sense.

[Diffusion]

The other thing is that the Nats are one of the teams that would be all over Patterson if we put him out there. Better perhaps then to use Patterson and a prospect to net Wilkerson than to burn Williams unnecessarily.

[LoneStarCubFan]

I would do Wilkerson for Williams in a heartbeat and not think twice about it.

 

I'd then turn around and make an offer for either Bradley or Pierre and call it an offseason.

 

I'd try to make both deals without including Walker.

 

Where does Hendry throw away all that money if he gets Wilkerson and Bradley? You know he has to spend it or people will riot.

A raise for Macias?

 

Brutal. I nearly spit out my soda when I read that. Well done.

[soapy]

I can live with Wilkerson if the Cubs also acquire someone like Bradley (as opposed to Pierre). If you are taking moderate to low production in RF (relatively speaking) you are going to need above average production in CF (which Bradley provides). The only drawback being that the Cubs are then without a lead-off hitter unless the get Lugo at SS (I don't believe for one second that Dusty would have Wilkerson lead-off). I don't know that all three of those trades can be made, but it would probably leave you with:

 

Lugo SS

Bradley CF

Lee 1B

Ramirez 3B

Wilkerson RF

Barrett C

Murton LF

Perez/Cedeno 2B

 

I expect more from a 100+ million dollar payroll team, but I guess it's not bad. I'd also be interested in pursueing Floyd to play RF instead of Wilkerson.

[biittner77]

The advantage of getting both Bradley and Wilkerson is that it pretty much idiot proofs the lineup so long as Walker is still at 2nd and the SS bats 7th or 8th.

 

the thing is though, the order of the lineup is much less a factor in runs scored than the players in it.

 

But the players in that lineup would get on base and hit the ball hard- unless Perez is a starter.

 

No matter what any statistical analysis says, I have trouble accepting the notion that Perez batting 8th would not be any different than having him lead off.

[Jehrico]

The advantage of getting both Bradley and Wilkerson is that it pretty much idiot proofs the lineup so long as Walker is still at 2nd and the SS bats 7th or 8th.

 

the thing is though, the order of the lineup is much less a factor in runs scored than the players in it.

 

But the players in that lineup would get on base and hit the ball hard- unless Perez is a starter.

 

No matter what any statistical analysis says, I have trouble accepting the notion that Perez batting 8th would not be any different than having him lead off.

 

If anything, the leadoff hitter should get over 100 more plate appearances over the course of a year than an 8 hitter. 100 less appearances of Neifi is a good thing, in any book.

[mg420]

I can live with Wilkerson if the Cubs also acquire someone like Bradley (as opposed to Pierre). If you are taking moderate to low production in RF (relatively speaking) you are going to need above average production in CF (which Bradley provides). The only drawback being that the Cubs are then without a lead-off hitter unless the get Lugo at SS (I don't believe for one second that Dusty would have Wilkerson lead-off). I don't know that all three of those trades can be made, but it would probably leave you with:

 

Lugo SS

Bradley CF

Lee 1B

Ramirez 3B

Wilkerson RF

Barrett C

Murton LF

Perez/Cedeno 2B

 

I expect more from a 100+ million dollar payroll team, but I guess it's not bad. I'd also be interested in pursueing Floyd to play RF instead of Wilkerson.

 

i wouldnt consider a .875+ ops as being moderate to low production. if he's healthy, wilkerson can be a 30+ hr, .375+ obp .500+ slg right fielder. he also good defensively & has a very good arm. i would like to see abreu in rf but if not, either wilkerson or floyd would be a good fit.

[goonys evil twin]

i wouldnt consider a .875+ ops as being moderate to low production. if he's healthy, wilkerson can be a 30+ hr, .375+ obp .500+ slg right fielder. he also good defensively & has a very good arm. i would like to see abreu in rf but if not, either wilkerson or floyd would be a good fit.

 

That would be acceptable production for RF, but it's not close to a guarantee, and wouldn't even be top notch. Wilkerson, if anything, is likely to be in the low to mid 800s in OPS next year, very solid for a CF.

 

Couple that with Abreu in RF and suddenly you've got a very good offense, with good production in the OF as a whole.

[XZero771679666304]

i wouldnt consider a .875+ ops as being moderate to low production. if he's healthy, wilkerson can be a 30+ hr, .375+ obp .500+ slg right fielder. he also good defensively & has a very good arm. i would like to see abreu in rf but if not, either wilkerson or floyd would be a good fit.

 

That would be acceptable production for RF, but it's not close to a guarantee, and wouldn't even be top notch. Wilkerson, if anything, is likely to be in the low to mid 800s in OPS next year, very solid for a CF.

 

Couple that with Abreu in RF and suddenly you've got a very good offense, with good production in the OF as a whole.

 

I agree, but everything I have heard is that the Phillies want a front end SP, the Cubs aren't going to give them Prior or Z. I would trade Patterson to the Nats for Wilkerson, and throw Williams, Hill, Pinto and spare parts at the Reds for Dunn.

[mg420]

i wouldnt consider a .875+ ops as being moderate to low production. if he's healthy, wilkerson can be a 30+ hr, .375+ obp .500+ slg right fielder. he also good defensively & has a very good arm. i would like to see abreu in rf but if not, either wilkerson or floyd would be a good fit.

 

That would be acceptable production for RF, but it's not close to a guarantee, and wouldn't even be top notch. Wilkerson, if anything, is likely to be in the low to mid 800s in OPS next year, very solid for a CF.

 

Couple that with Abreu in RF and suddenly you've got a very good offense, with good production in the OF as a whole.

 

but still no true leadoff hitter. i think that cf will be the leadoff guy (pierre most likely) and rf will be abreu, wilkerson, floyd, etc. i cant see the cubs using wilkerson to leadoff as henry seems to really want a speed guy at the top of the lineup.

[mg420]

i wouldnt consider a .875+ ops as being moderate to low production. if he's healthy, wilkerson can be a 30+ hr, .375+ obp .500+ slg right fielder. he also good defensively & has a very good arm. i would like to see abreu in rf but if not, either wilkerson or floyd would be a good fit.

 

That would be acceptable production for RF, but it's not close to a guarantee, and wouldn't even be top notch. Wilkerson, if anything, is likely to be in the low to mid 800s in OPS next year, very solid for a CF.

 

Couple that with Abreu in RF and suddenly you've got a very good offense, with good production in the OF as a whole.

 

I agree, but everything I have heard is that the Phillies want a front end SP, the Cubs aren't going to give them Prior or Z. I would trade Patterson to the Nats for Wilkerson, and throw Williams, Hill, Pinto and spare parts at the Reds for Dunn.

 

i have also heard that perhaps the phillies dont want as much as people think for abreu. even if they do, if they dont get any bites initially, perhaps they will lower their price in the hill, williams pinto range. i would rather have abreu than dunn anyway. abreu can run and has a pretty good glove as opposed to dunn.

[CubinNY]

 

but still no true leadoff hitter.

 

What is a "true" leadoff hitter. Paint a picture for me. Give me some numbers to work with.

[WrigleyinEngland]

I keep reading that trading will be better this year because of the poor FA class. If you look at a guy like abreu, who can the phillies replace him with if they move him? They might have to wait till next year to aquire a replacement. So in fact the FA class just pushes the price of average players up, Pie for pierre ? come on.................

[goonys evil twin]

 

but still no true leadoff hitter.

 

What is a "true" leadoff hitter. Paint a picture for me. Give me some numbers to work with.

 

If he's saying not a true leadoff hitter in the Cubs eyes, I think I understand. The Cubs have their central casting version of the true leadoff hitter, and when they are focused on one thing, they usually get it. Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a true leadoff man, and narrowing down your search for greater production to fit the mold of your scouts' preconceived notions of what each position should look like is only doing a disservice to your team.

 

If he is saying that Wilkerson isn't a good option for leadoff, then I completely disagree with him.