Cubzfan64

I may have misworded what I said there, but your response is also taking what I said out of context. My response to marc_faust's idea's of what will happen in the offseason was basically that if the management and coaching staff don't undergo much change, the offensive "strategy" and "philosophies" don't change and the make up of the team isn't changed very much then I don't see much reason for enthusiasm. I expect there to be some changes in the offseason of course, and I hope they consist of something more than adding a couple bench players. I've gone into every season since the 60's with hope and expectations high, but my tolerance and patience is gradually being tested. I stand by what I meant by my comments that if we go into 2006 with basically the same group of ballplayers and the same ideas of how to play the game, I have no reason to expect any different results than .500 baseball.

I usually hate to single any one poster out, but I don't see your 2006 team being anything more than slightly better than this season's team. We've been basically a .500 ballclub give or take a little all season long - that's just not gonna cut it to make a run at a championship. For the amount of money this organization has spent on this team it should be producing much better than it does and I don't want to see us go into 2006 with the same cast of characters. I want this team to change their offensive strategy and get some guys in here who know how to make a pitcher work for outs, how to take walks when they're given to you and how to get on base and run the bases. I just don't see how we improve much if we follow your plan. I don't think anyone on this team should be considered untouchable if they can be moved to make the club better. About the only person I might even remotely consider untouchable is Mark Prior but even he could be had for the right price imho. I forgot the most importent ingredient, find a new managerial staff(Manager, Hitting Coach, Pitching Coach, Bench Manager etc.). But seriously, do you all see a major overhaul coming? There really are not very many viable options this offseason. I really do not like our chances of signing a top tier free agent like Giles Wagner or Burnett. Hendry is not wild enough to even consider moving Lee, ARam, Barrett, Prior, or Z. And Maddux and Wood arent going anywhere. Nomar, Dempster, Lawton, and Walker all have to be resigned so they wont get traded. That leaves a lot of marginal players and prospects. Since Hendry overvalues our prospects, I doubt teams will like packages he puts together. We may open the pocket books enough to add one major FA, but I am guessing that will be all we will get out of that market. I dont think we will add anything through trade, but maybe a marginal upgrade to what we already have. The single biggest/best move that can be made this offseason will probably be to find a new managerial staff. I really dont think a whole new team will be added this offseason. Unfortunatly we are pretty much stuck with the core of the team and small changes are all that will probably come. The core is not bad and has some young talent. But it is mismanaged and needs upgrades in a few spots. The OF, Pen, and another starter are holes that need filling. We may be able to fill one or two of those holes but i just dont see us filling all of them just like last offseason. I could sit here list a dream team of free agents and players from other teams, but I think this is what the team will look like next season. The title of the thread is a realistic look at 06 and beyond and that is what I think I came up with. Your point is well taken - unfortunately what you said is correct that your view likely is closer to the realistic view of what next year might look like than most others here (mine included) :-(. As much as you don't see the team really changing that much, I don't see the management organization (or philosophy for that matter) changing either. Sadly that doesn't give me much enthusiasm for the 2006 season :-(

I usually hate to single any one poster out, but I don't see your 2006 team being anything more than slightly better than this season's team. We've been basically a .500 ballclub give or take a little all season long - that's just not gonna cut it to make a run at a championship. For the amount of money this organization has spent on this team it should be producing much better than it does and I don't want to see us go into 2006 with the same cast of characters. I want this team to change their offensive strategy and get some guys in here who know how to make a pitcher work for outs, how to take walks when they're given to you and how to get on base and run the bases. I just don't see how we improve much if we follow your plan. I don't think anyone on this team should be considered untouchable if they can be moved to make the club better. About the only person I might even remotely consider untouchable is Mark Prior but even he could be had for the right price imho.

Fred - when the organization and management don't care about that and stock the big league club with many guys who don't care about working the count you get the results we've seen for 2+ years now offensively. We don't make things happen offensively for the most part, we just swing at everything and hope for the best. Until the management philosophy changes that statistic won't every change. It's extremely frustrating to see opposing pitchers not have to work hard to get our guys out :-(.

pathetic..... just pathetic :-(

It wasn't that long ago that guys like Fergie Jenkins, Rick Reuschel, Bob Gibson and many other starting pitchers tossed A LOT of complete games every season. I understand that the game has changed as far as the role of relief pitching, set-up men, closers etc..., but it seems like so many starters now just lose it in the 7th or 8th innings as though they've "burned" themselves out and starters are "nursed" along and watched closely so their pitch counts don't get too high. Were guys who could throw 10+ complete games per season just few and far between back in the pre-1980's or are starters now just mentally convinced that their job is to make it 7 innings? I'm just curious - I mean, I'm sure there were pitchers in the past who developed arm problems, but if pitch count records were even documented years ago, some of those guys HAD to be at 130+ pitches in plenty of their outings no? Just wondering if anyone here has any other theories or has heard any baseball professionals discuss this issue. Thanks

My first Cubs game was somewhere in 1978-1980 against the Mets at Wrigley. The day before the game was rained out but my parents agreed to stay in Chicago overnight and go to the game the next day. That day I believe it was rain delayed at least twice and then ended up going into extra innings (I think it was a 3-3 tie). The Mets scored 6 runs in the 11th (I think) and the Cubs came back to score 5 - including a PH grand slam by Mike Vail. I do remember also that the last two outs of the game came on balls hit to the wall in left and left center field (I think one was hit by Steve Ontiveros). I'll have to search around and see if I can find a box score from that game. That however was another time the Cubs hit a GS in extra innings and lost.

DLee is indeed worth more imho than ARam - especially when you consider what our infield defense would be without him. That said, I have to believe if I'm Lee and I'm looking out for myself from a "business" sense, there's NO WAY in heck that I DON'T test the free ageny market after 2006 unless the Cubs offer me a long term high dollar contract that I can't turn down (and I don't think they should). If Lee even drops to his career norm in 2006, mark my word that there WILL be teams out there that WILL outbid the Cubs for his services unless he's willing to take some kind of "home town" discount. The Red Sox will be just about done with Manny's huge contract and that frees up a ton of cash for them (Theo has salivated after D Lee for at least 3 years now). The Yankees will also likely be looking to fill a void at 1B. If Lee wants to make as much money as he can, I'm guessing he'll have a better shot at doing that somewhere else and again, from a business standpoint it would be silly not to test the market and go with the highest bidder. That's the main reason why I condone looking to make a trade this offseason with either Lee or Ramirez (and if I had my preference I would move Ramirez). Unless the Cubs are willing to jack up the payroll, I just don't see us being able to upgrade our OF and starting pitching with proven quality guys while paying Lee, ARam and Prior the money they could get on the free agent market - I just don't see it happening.

Need is probably a little bit of an exaggeration - I'd like to have all 3 wins, but even 2 of 3 is acceptable right now - slow and steady will get us within striking distance. On the other hand - losing all 3 would be devastating

If they threw curveballs in batting practice, THAT would have been a good example of one.

The only comment I can make here regarding Nomar is based on what I've heard on the Boston sports talk shows. Nomar is generally not loved amongst the sports talk guys I hear - alot of it is bitterness over how he left - they don't believe he really had an ankle injury near the end and said he was a cancer in the clubhouse and didn't want to play for the Red Sox anymore. That said, the discussion has come up numerous times over the last few months about Nomar and steroids - with only a couple exceptions, the majority of Boston radios sports guys who cover(ed) the team and spent time with the players said that Nomar had one of if not THE most rigorous training programs of all the players during his great days with the Sox. Of course as others have said, steroids could have played a part in it and we'll never know, but even the guys who don't like him on the radio admitted that his "ripped" look at one time could very well have been a result of his massive exercise regimen that he followed.

It would be VERY uncharacteristic of the Cubs to consider trading Ramirez in the offseason, but if I were Hendry I would seriously consider seeing what kind of offers you could get. The guy has had 2 excellent offensive seasons, but as a "home team fan," you get to watch him play many more times than opposing teams do and I think Cub fans overrate Ramirez imho. Yes he may be hurting and that could have alot to do with him not running hard etc..., but he's likely at his high mark right now in trade value at a prime position and he since he came over with a "non hustling, poor work ethic" baggage and really has not done a lot to dismiss those theories, I don't have any problem with shopping him for the right deal. On the other hand, you can't fill every position with 5 tool players who can do everything great - Ramirez gives you the offense you want from 3B, but doesn't give you some of the other things - as long as Lee is at 1B, he'll veil Aramis' throwing problems from 3B. All in all, I don't think Ramirez is a problem, but I don't think he's anything all that outstanding either. Could he be? Absolutely - give him Pete Rose's attitude on the field and get him into a stretching/flexibility regimen in the offseason and he could become one of the best at 3B, but that's up to him I guess.

Top 4 "all around" players of today imho - and I won't put them in any particular order because I'm guessing a case could be made for any one of them to be #1: ARod, Vlad, Pujols, Tejada, Beltran I also agree with others that to be an all around player you need to be able to: 1. Defend your position with a minimum of above average ability 2. Throw the ball with accuracy and strength 3. Hit for power 4. Hit for average 5. Be considered either a good basestealer or someone who has a better then average ability to run the bases. Barry Bonds of today does not fit into those criteria - he used to, but not anymore. D. Lee is in the top 10 in my book, but not the top 5

I can't stand so many of our starters constantly being at 35-40 pitches thrown in the first 2 innings!!!! There - got that out of my system until the next game.

For once, I'd like to see us go get a pitcher who has great stuff AND has actually put it together. It's that second part that's so difficult for the Cubs to understand. Z & Prior?? Last guy like that who I can remember being available in free agency is Bartolo Colon. Pedro Martinez in last year's free agent pile. Yup. Pedro got overpaid though. Agreed, but that wasn't part of the equation you stated :-P Seriously though, great pitching is so hard to come by that the really smart teams are the ones who do an excellent job of developing young pitchers and focus on that in their drafting and minor league systems. If a team can do that and then evaluate that talent really well, they can keep at least an above average staff of inexpensive starters, let them go via free agency when the time comes or trade them and "sell high" picking up the good position players they need to fill out the rest of their team.

True - the Yankees need pitching way more than they need a 1B I guess.

For once, I'd like to see us go get a pitcher who has great stuff AND has actually put it together. It's that second part that's so difficult for the Cubs to understand. Z & Prior?? Last guy like that who I can remember being available in free agency is Bartolo Colon. Pedro Martinez in last year's free agent pile.

For once, I'd like to see us go get a pitcher who has great stuff AND has actually put it together. It's that second part that's so difficult for the Cubs to understand. How many pitchers are ever available that have both the stuff and have put it all together? Oh yeah, we can get AJB this offseason... Tim, don't you think that because of the weak free agent pool coming up that AJB will have his pick of whatever fortune teams like the Yankees, Boston and others will throw at him? I just think both the money and contract length are going to be excessive for what we'd be bidding on.

I agree that he should say it and hopefully they can find a way to believe it - AND although at this point it would be a major miracle if they were to achieve it, until they are mathematically eliminated there's always a chance. Keep in mind that "only" being 7.5 games out doesn't sound all that terrible until you consider there are 6 teams above us and 2 snapping at our heals. The odds of making up ground with that many teams above you becomes much worse than if we were in 2nd place in the wild card and the same 7.5 games out. Not impossible, but highly improbable.

Anyone know if ARod has a no trade clause as well? I thought I remembered seeing somewhere when Sheffield was possibly being offered around that he is one of the few Yankees without one. If ARod as a no trade clause I'd be surprised if he'd accept a trade to Chicago, but if it allows him to play SS again, maybe he would - hard to say. Would I do Lee and Corey for ARod - yah, definitely. Would the Yankees go for it - maybe?

Ummm, I hate to the bearer of bad news Mr. Baker, but at least for 2005, You might want to GET USED TO IT!!

See the highlighted comment above - One thing I would REALLY like to see the Cubs do is set up a conditioning program for Aramis that involves alot of flexibility/stretching. This is two seasons in a row where he's had leg problems - I'd like to see him get those kinks knocked out in the offseason if at all possible.

I know we've had seasons before where plenty of pitchers were sent down, then brought up, then sent down etc... (see Juan Cruz), but I honestly don't think I can remember a season where we've had SO many guys - both position and pitcher coming and going. It's gotta be tough on their mental states.

Without a doubt, if I'm Jem Hendry I contact all the other GM's and say Lee is available and just let someone try to knock his socks off with a deal and see what's out there. In my heart I still believe there's a deal with Lee to be made with the Red Sox - Theo has "man love" for D. Lee and has wanted him for 2-3 years - I say we take advantage of that and see what he'll offer us in return. It never hurts to look at all options. Will Cub onwership do that? Highly unlikely - we fall in love with players who have excellent seasons and think "aha - now we have out superstar!!! sign him to a big, long term contract!" Many many times that doesn't work for teams. I'd start with a Lee for Manny deal and see what other options can be thrown in from both sides to get it done.

I don't know what other team's situations are at the SS position, but considering what Nomar has/has not done in the last 2 seasons I just don't see anyone offering him much in the way of $ or years - if he's interested in staying with Chicago, I give him a lowball salary of 2-3 mil with a bunch of incentives that could take him up to 5-6 or something along those lines. As much as I hate to say it, keep Neifi as your backup and give Cedeno as much playing time as possible down in Iowa. In this case, if we get production out of Nomar it's a plus and he earns his money - if we don't, we're out very little in the form of $ and if Cedeno is ready to go he becomes our #1 SS with Neifi still as backup. The 2 keys to this are 1) Cedeno keeps progressing & 2) Hendry (or whoever) behind the scenes demands that Cedeno takes over at SS if Nomar gets hurt - Neifi is a backup SS for this team and that's it. How likely are any of these things to happen? Probably not very if Baker is still managing the team, but with the other options likely available for SS, and if Nomar is willing to be signed to an incentive laden contract like that I say we have little to lose and a lot to gain.