Iceblink

Both made the hot list this week on BA. As did Jacoby Ellsbury (BoSox). I'd give my right arm to get him. Ok, maybe Neifi's right arm.

A righty Pierre with an even lighter bat. What's not to like? He does have a decent arm, and he'd certainly be a cheaper long-term option, but he's not remotely a lead-off man. Sadly, Hendry will think he is. We trade 3 pitchers to get Pierre, then consider trading one more so we can possibly let Pierre walk next year (fingers crossed). I think I've figured it out. Our AAAA GM feels more comfortable around AAAA players.

Yeesh. Just change the jersey number to 4-3.

Hehe. Noice.

I've heard a couple talking heads say Kearns himself is likely available, considering he's going to be a bit more expensive next year. I think Bowden wants to hang on to his old Cincy guys, though.

I'd be fine with seeing him back next year, depending on how his bat holds up the rest of the way. I do not, however, want to see him with a 3 year contract. I'd go for one year and no more. Someone will probably throw the 3 year deal at him, and I wouldn't match it.

Overpay for Freel, drastically overpay for a probably declining Abreu... A fine imitation of Wayne Krivsky. Why not just trade Cedeno, Aram, and Jones for David Weathers?

Wow. The Reds hosed themselves. You don't trade an even halfway decent everyday player for a reliever. You can trade Royce Clayton for a reliever like these two.

Is Pierre better than Tavares? Not by much if he is. So, Houston trades Ensberg for a Tavares clone that makes 15x more than Tavares does, and some B level prospect that "might" be a major leaguer someday? I don't see it. Tavares is totally one-dimensional. That's good if your dimension is 50 homers a season - but Tavares' dimension is getting infield hits. His career OPS might never sniff .700. Pierre's crappy 3 months aside, he's still a significantly better player than Tavares. Ensberg is almost 31 and has had a couple months that were worse than even the typical Cub month. No thanks.

I like Walker, and followed his whole career being an LSU fan - but he's been a stiff for the last 7 weeks. Theriot probably could've almost matched his numbers from June & July. As much as I like him, I don't understand overlooking how bad he's been offensively since May. He's got little value to a contender because defense matters so much in the postseason. Not a terrible stick off the bench, though. Might get another AAAA body for him.

As posted in the game thread - name someone who should be playing in front of Perez, at least while Perez is hot and Walker and Cedeno are swinging like good-hitting pitchers. (Assuming my math is right...) Neifi since June 1: .338/.355/.516 Walker since June 1: .244/.346/.286 Cedeno since June 1: .216/.252/.315 I would much prefer to see Theriot and Fontenot getting a shot to stick as utility guys who would free up major money for a while. I'd much rather see Perez on someone else's triple A team. Still, Walker has 4 XBH in over 100 AB since June 1 (all doubles). He hasn't hit lefties all year. Perez has 3 XBH in the last 4 games. Yes, it's absolutely small sample sizes. And yes, Neifi getting the ABs he has is criminal. And yes, I'm a big fan of Walker (huge LSU fan). However, advocating playing Walker over Perez while Walker is in a 6 week slump and Perez has been actually hitting well just doesn't make sense.

Walker has been total crap the last month plus. Neifi has been one of the best hitters on the team over that period. I'm a fan of Walker and would rather see him play - have been since he was at LSU. However, no manager worth his salt would be playing Walker over Perez given the way they've each performed lately. A good manager would take his best players and play them all the time, even during slumps, knowing that they would work their way through them and start producing again. A good manager would take his not as good players and keep them on the bench except for occassional spot starts during long stretches without a day off. A dumb manager like Dusty tries to put his players in and out of the lineup when they are hot and cold. It never works long term. What works is making sure your best players get the most AB's because over the course of the season that will mean you get the most production. Walker has 4 doubles in the last 5 or 6 weeks and nothing else besides a few walks and singles. His slugging percentage over that period is horrid. Six weeks hitting like that is beyond a slump, it's hurting the team. I hate seeing Perez get at bats, I'd rather see Theriot and Fontenot up and playing so they can become cheap, patient utility guys in the future. However, given what's on the major league roster, there's no good reason to play Walker over Perez until Walker shows something and Perez cools off. Walker doesn't have the glove to justify at bats when his OPS is around .600 for this long, no matter how much of a fan I am of him.

Walker since June 1: .244/.346/.286 Walker vs lefties for the year: .211/.322/.289 Perez since June 1: .339/.355/.548 Perez vs lefties for the year: .322/.323/.508 Why in the world would you send Walker up in that situation? Because of Neifi's stature as one of the worst hitters to keep a job in the major leagues, all time? Don't make me bust out an argument on small sample sizes. Neifi was a god for a month in 2004, remember? Sure, and why wouldn't you play him when he's in that good month and Walker is in a crappy 2 month period? Neither has much of a future with the club, and the one who's hitting better would seem to be the more likely to help you win.

Walker has been total crap the last month plus. Neifi has been one of the best hitters on the team over that period. I'm a fan of Walker and would rather see him play - have been since he was at LSU. However, no manager worth his salt would be playing Walker over Perez given the way they've each performed lately.

Walker since June 1: .244/.346/.286 Walker vs lefties for the year: .211/.322/.289 Perez since June 1: .339/.355/.548 Perez vs lefties for the year: .322/.323/.508 Why in the world would you send Walker up in that situation?

From today's Sun-Times: http://www.suntimes.com/output/deluca/cst-spt-deluca061.html A strong core? Where?

At the moment (Murton aside), those two motivations would unfortunately conflict. I'd still play the kids, but our kids aren't any more selective than the veterans. How about "play the kids and teach them how to take walks." (assuming that's a skill that can be taught)

You're right I'm sure we all could not agree on whoever Hendry picks. IMO the fans on this board will disagree about all of the transactions made by this team. It's up to Hendry to pick the right guy and give him some players and it's up to us to speak our opinion on the subject. Will the masses be right? Maybe. Will Hendry be right? Maybe. I like reading what choices posters here put up and it increases my knowledge of the subject. Yes I know that some will complain but if the Cubs are winning I'm sure the chemistry on the board will be just fine! Disclaimer...please don't play 650 ball from here on Cubbies because we might as well get a top 5 pick and go into 2007 strong! If the Cubs play .650 ball the rest of the way the Earth will be sucked into itself and vaporize. My 3 choices would be: Girardi Gonzalez Shines My first choice would be Girardi. I like what he's done in Florida this year. The fish would no doubt want some compensation though to let him go to Chicago. My first three would be the same - though Girardi is a pipe dream. Definitely wouldn't happen until spring at the earliest - and even then, the chances have to be close to zero. If you were Girardi, would you leave a team full of up & coming prospects for a disgruntled, overpaid, overly injured team with a GM that's been making bad moves for 2 years? Sure, the Fish might firesale again at some point, but by then he'll be ready to move to a bigger team. Other than the hometown dream, I don't see the motivation for Joe to come here. And his managing career is just starting - plenty of time to reconsider the hometown dream when the Cubs might actually be an attractive team to manage. I'd put it at something like: Girardi (not going to happen) Shines (admittedly overrating him because I'm underinformed and assuming the best like my Cub fandom demands) Gonzales ... ... ... Hellen Keller my dead cat the guy from the Karate Kid who kept screaming "Get him a body bag, Johnny!! YEAH!" Bob Brenley Lou Piniella Jimy Williams (3-way tie for last)

Brenley is often regarded as a terrible game manager. Not just bad, but terrible. Actually heard Patrick/Olbermann say the same today. Still, he can probably handle a veteran team that's ready to win. I'd have little faith he could guide this team back to respectability - even if Hendry suddenly developed personnel assessment skills. I hope we've learned from all the previous experiments with pulling announcers into the dugout.

Every team with a losing record has things to point fingers at. Even teams with winning records can do it. But good players don't. Whether he's right or not, you don't do that in the press.

Geeeaux Tigers!

ARod just hit a 3 run homer for his 7th RBI tonight. That's half of what ARam drove in for the month of May. These two are far enough apart to where ARam likely wouldn't be the best player we'd be offering. Prior or Z might be involved. Jones, too, to help with the injury situation - but he's an average player over his career and wouldn't be a huge chip.

Wow, the umpires were ChiSox fans today. Wouldn't have mattered, but inexcusable.

Cubs 12, Chisox 2. Both White Sox runs will be unearned and caused by bad umpiring calls. Garland's right arm will be hereafter possessed by the ghost of Karchner. AJP will strike out 4 times. On the 4th, a dog-eared copy of "Sheep and the Men Who Love Them" magazine (British, no less) will fall out of his back pocket. Barrett will punch him again on general principle. Ozzie will later be caught on mic tenderly consoling AJ in the dugout, explaining that sheep are ok, turkish bath houses aren't. Somewhere, a bass line will start playing. (Somebody's gotta make up for the lack of optimism.)

Right on.