Cubzfan64

I guess at least the "ball is in our court" to do with as we are able - if nothing else this will test the real ability of our team to compete when needed.

You all are correct that I may have overdramatized by using the word crap in naming those players, but look at it this way.... The Red Sox are likely looking to get a #2 or #3 starter, a closer and/or a 2B. Hairston to me doesn't fit the bill considering the other moves they made to bring back Kapler and pick up Hyzdu - plus I heard they may be getting Grafanino for 2B. Remlinger is serviceable, but I think they want more than serviceable and Mitre to me is too much of a "work in progress" to be put into any significant contending role for a tough town to play in like Boston. Rusch might be a fit, but I just honestly don't see Boston giving up Nixon for those guys. Word is that Mueller may go for a decent reliever from Minnesota (can't recall the name) leaving 3B open for Yukalis. Personally, if I'm Boston I find some way to package Millar and a prospect or two for a decent pitcher, put Olerud at 1B for the rest of the season and leave Nixon in RF to platoon with Kapler if needed. I just don't see the trade proposal here as something Boston would go for.

Take it from someone who watches a boatload of Red Sox games (only because I moved out here and can't get WGN). The Cubs DO NOT want Embree - whatever he had last year is absolutely 100% gone this year.

Yeah, but how many lefty starters would he face every 10 games in the NL? One or two? Fine. Let Murton start those games. Point taken - If I had a gun to my head right now and had to decide, I'd make the trade with Mitre or Rusch + Remlinger + Hairston for Nixon. I'm just almost positive the Red Sox would want "real" arms to give him up and I don't think I'd do that. We gotta stop thinking teams will be happy to take on a load of our crap for one of their good players :-)

I looked it up to be certain... Over the last 3 years, Nixon has had ~80% of his AB's against right handed pitchers (only 227 against lefties). When he's faced those lefties his stats are .220 AVG, .293 OBP and .348 SLG Those are far from outstanding stats against lefthanders and in my opinion he makes too much money to be a platoon player. This isn't to say if he got regular at bats against lefties he wouldn't improve, but I'm not sure we need someone who's in the "learning to hit lefties" portion of their careers either. Hard to say though - I might consider the trade nontheless I just doubt Boston would do it.

Tough call - Nixon makes a pretty penny ($7.5 mil per year?) and hasn't been a very big threat against left handed pitchers throughout his career (the big knock on him in Boston). He's not a butcher in the outfield but I don't know if I'd consider him to be more than average. We'd be putting together a lineup with an awful lot of lefthanded hitters also. I'm not sure he's much different than a Burnitz type player - although I think he probably has a bit more upside. I'm just not sure if it's that big of a net gain for us, but I suppose I'd think about it for Remlinger, Mitre and Hairston. I doubt the Red Sox would do that deal though. I've heard that Hanley Ramirez has been playing 2B at AA or AAA for the Red Sox and may get called up soon to replace Bellhorn. I think the Red Sox would want more as far as arms go than Remlinger, Mitre or Rusch to be honest.

The sad thing is that half of them are probably better hitters than Macias too :-P

This in from Rotoworld: Bah, we have Jose Macias and he is INFINITELY more valuable!!! :roll:

I'm not really all that big of a Corey fan, but outside of that I share your sentiments exactly. Considering I'm a Cub fan, I apparently have a soft spot for underdogs and "losers" hoping to become hero's. If Corey could turn things around for himself he could be the posterboy for "underdog turned hero."

I heard a rumor that when Dusty get's canned, Neifi is going to be handed the managerial duties :wink: Maybe his mind is on that (hehe)

back to the topic of the thread however.... I have more faith in Hendry than I have in any previous GM that I can think of (except perhaps Dallas Green). He landed Lee and Ramirez without giving up great talent. He got rid of Hundley and his contract somehow and I'm sure he's had a generous hand in the drafts since he's been around. He's made mistakes as well and I have a huge issue with his lack of addressing the OBP problem this team has had for over 2 years now, but I feel reasonably comfortable that he's working hard to fix some problems with this team.

Okay, maybe I'm wrong. I was probably the only one who thought he had a good chance of missing a lot of playing time in 2005. Crazy me. Damn, you're fast on the replies. You're right, you're far from the only one who thought he was gonna miss time this year, I just still can't figure out why. At the time of the season starting there wasn't really any overwhelming evidence IMO that he'd get injured. You turned out right after the fact and everyone seems to have jumped on the "shoulda seen this coming" bandwagon, but I really don't see why we should've seen this coming. Should we stay away from anyone coming off of a half season from now on because they're injury prone? I've had a problem with people jumping all over Nomar as being this "glass" SS as well. 1997 - 153 games 1998 - 143 games 1999 - 135 games 2000 - 140 games 2001 - hit by a pitch (not something he had much control over) 2002 - 156 games 2003 - 156 games 2004 & 2005 - well, we know the story of both those seasons so far. I personally don't think there was any real evidence that starting this season Nomar had a "good chance" of getting hurt and being out for a long time. If you honestly had that feeling, it had to be just a gut feeling for some reason because the evidence simply isn't there for that assumption.

I found the quote I was questioning. Your explanation about slap hits makes more sense and could certainly be a valid argument. Thanks

I'm interested in Pierre, but only at a certain cost, that said however...... PLEASE don't try to use 31 at bats over 3 years to imply anything even remotely resembling statistical significance. I don't mean this as any personal attack, but it drives me nuts to see stats tossed around like each and every number has 100% relevance. If there's anything I've learned about using statistics in my work place, it's that you can make almost any statistic look good or bad depending on how it's "twisted" and presented. If we were able to get Pierre somehow without giving up anything significantly affecting the current team or the future I say go for it - Hendry has worked some magic in the past, I have no reason to think he can't do it again. Oh, and someone mentioned in an earlier post that long grass in Wrigley will hamper Pierre's ability to bunt for hits - I'm not sure I understand that theory - in fact I always thought it would work the other way around. What am I missing?

Because some around here tend to overvalue Cub prospects? I really think it is that simple. While this wasn't a trade that brought in major improvement, I think it improved the team just the same. I guess we'll see. I think it improved the team as well - maybe not drastically, but every little bit helps. I also agree wholeheartedly that teams and fans in general tend to overvalue their prospects more than other teams and that's where you have to put at least some faith in your GM to know what he's doing. Hendry has done more good things than bad imho, so he gets a "pass" by me on every trade until I feel like I can make a decent evaluation on my own. In this case, I think the Cubs let go of a DH (maybe 1B down the road) who may hit 20-30 HR's but will likely strike out once every three at bats and be unable to effectively field in the outfield. In return they got a quicker player who has a bit more proven ML experience who can definitely field, work the count, make contact and show maybe half the power that Dubois shows - he's also a lefty. I don't see how anyone can rate this as a bad trade - especially not yet. As an aside, I see so many posts suggesting trading a package of our crap for 1 good player from another team. Does anyone really think there are THAT many GM's out there who sit back and say "well, let's see - 3 of your crappy players aren't enough - my quality guy is worth at LEAST 5 or 6 crappy players."

The umps really let that mess get out of hand

Kyle has immensely more talent than Adams had - his problem has always been consistency. He'd look like an All Star one second and a A league pitcher the next. I recall when the Cubs made the trade that Kyle's father mentioned that hopefully this would be a wake-up call for him - so far in 2005 I'd say that's true - he's been one of the better late inning relief pitchers in the big leagues so far. I sure wish he could have put all that together for Chicago - he would have been an instant hero.

Kyle Farnsworh is putting together an excellent season for Detroit and it'll be interesting to see if he gets put into the closer role now with Percival out and if so, how he will perform. My questions are along the lines of: 1. Is this just another "flukey" season of Farnsworth's that happens to be an up year? 2. Was the trade from Chicago a "wake up call" to him which caused him to finally connect the raw talent with consistent performance? 3. Are the Cubs unable to effectively coach underperforming players (like Farnsworth and Patterson) where another team may have that ability? 4. What do you think the odds are we'll look back on the Farnsworth trade and wish we hadn't have made it? Just curious what the general concensus is on Kyle - he was a real piece of work that's for sure but I have to wonder if maybe the Cubs organization just isn't good at dealing with younger players who need coaching.

Yah, some of us actually have to work for a living and can't watch the game :twisted: My head told me he was out to give the bullpen some work, but my gut was telling me he felt another "twinge" or something. Hope it was just the bullpen needing work cause it was nice to see Wood and Prior with back to back excellent performances.

You know, I honestly don't mind the idea of Wilson in LF - especially if Murton doesn't pan out (if he gets the chances). He's a versatile player (1B, LF, RF, C) who admittedly strikes out too much (so he'll fit in perfectly :-P), but he's had a down season and might be available inexpensively in a trade. He's had decent OBP results and he's still only 28 and should be on the verge of the better years of his career if he can stay healthy. He wouldn't be that "impact" player we could use in our offense, but I think he'd give us steady results. The high strikeout totals are the only thing that would scare me away - we really don't need more guys who know how to swing and miss. For an inexpensive trade package, I'd consider it.

Overall Burnitz has been a pleasant surprise - not what I expected from my few recollections before we signed him. I expected a few more home runs from him by this time of the season, but I expected worse fielding, a little worse average and even more strikeouts.

It might make sense for Boston, but realistically they could throw Olerud or Youkalis at 1B for the rest of the season and be fine. Their REAL #1 need right now is pitching - definitely relief pitching and possibly starting pitching. If Boston trades any of their good prospects, it will be for pitching.

It's very very hard to say - Raffy had the power we could have used for all those years, but Grace was pretty much mister consistency his entire career (fielding and hitting) day in and day out. What we SHOULD have done is been the ones to put Raffy in the outfield - then we could have had them both.

Living in the Boston area now I'm confused as to why Houston would be looking at Millar if they need a bat :twisted: Ok, that was a bit harsh, but Millar has looked pretty pathetic this season so far and opens his mouth every time he has an opportunity when he isn't started. The only thing he ought to be upset about is his poor performance this year - Boston has Olerud and Youkalis who should by every right should be sharing the starting duties at 1B for the rest of the season. I personally think it would make Houston a worse team if they traded for Millar, so here's hoping they do it.

I don't quite understand this trade either - Payton has already let it be known that if he isn't a regular, he's going to be vocally unhappy which nobody wants on a ballclub. If he were going to ride the pine, why not do it in Boston where at least he has a chance for a WS ring. I have to believe Oakland has something else in the works.