biittner77

I mean I know teams who are jumping at the bits to trade "top notch players" for a CF who puts .223/.261(!)/.364/.625. Let's face...a Patterson trade won't hurt the Cubs, ala Brock. I like Patterson as a person, but as a baseball player, he is dumber then a box of rocks. You can't teach "baseball instints", and Corey have no baseball instints. If the Cubs could get a decent player or two for CPatt then jump on it. Cause the Cubs ain't getting a TOP prospect for Patterson, that ain't happening. If no one will give up much for Patterson, why trade him? If they aren't going to get anything in return they can always release him if it comes to that. As frustrating as Patterson has been to watch he's still better than whomever they could get for him. A Patterson trade has a better chance of hurting the Cubs than it does to help the team. With Pie in the wings, Greenberg and Bacon capable of filling in, there's no reason not to give Patterson one more chance. There have been players that had horrible seasons that were able to bounce back. Pat Burrell for example. That being said, the Cubs must solidify the other OF positions so that they can pick up any offensive slack left by whoever they put in CF.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Hendry will use that money to take on players whose contracts that are too expensive for their current teams. He'll do that through trades and the trades will be along the lines of the Ramirez deal but not as one sided. The question is whose soon to be FAs or arb eligibles would be available? I've heard that the 2007 FA class is much deeper (could it be much worse?) Those are the guys that he'll target. Thus I don't see any of the usual suspects (like Giles) playing for the Cubs next season.

I'll be pretty pissed. Hairston should be in CF and lead off. Cedeno in short. Same thing goes for tomorrow vs lowry. Will they get back to back starts? I hate giving up Patterson's defense in CF. I'd rather have Murton lead off.

Maddux has value as an innings eater, is occasionally very good and brings experience and success to the team. He 's reliable in that he doesn't get hurt. It's hard to argue that he's not contributing. The argument lies in whether or not he's worth what the Cubs are paying him. Also, is the money that they're paying him stopping the Cubs from using that money elsewhere? I would argue that very few MLB players are worth what they're getting paid. Some are worth more but many are worth less. To my mind Maddux is not worth $9 million next season but I don't really mind because the Cubs can still afford anyone they might want and Maddux is making a positive contribution.

I can't help wondering if the praise that St. Louis seems to get for doing the little things well will inspire other franchises to focus on those areas. Perhaps some of the success of the moneyball philosophy is that they've stopped asking the players to do things that they don't know how to do. Specificly, nobody really knows how to steal bases anymore. There are a few exceptions but it's not really as important a weapon as it once was. So rather than force players to take that risk, the moneyball philosophy is "don't bother, it's not worth the risk." I will never complain about anyone other than pitchers not being able to sacrifice bunt. PLayers don't get drafted because they were laying down sac bunts, they get drafted for driving the ball.

I fed this quote into the Dusty-to-English translator and got the following result: The Cubs are out of the race but they still have to motivate themselves to play. When Steve Garvey didn't feel like playing, he'd think about people that were less fortunate than himself and that got him through it. So Dusty has to pretend that the games still count so that he won't be tempted to let the young guys that actually want to play start while benching the guys that failed to keep the Cubs in contention. On a related note, I wonder if Baker would ever consider conducting an interview in a madlib. The reporter could write what he thought Baker might say but leave blanks for nouns, verbs and players names whcih Baker would write down on a separate sheet of paper.

What ever happened to Baker not calling out his players in the press?

So, Hairston was supposed to steal 2nd ahead of Lee instead of being bunted to 2nd. Wouldn't that still take the bat out of Lee's hands unless Cedeno got a hit? Surely Dusty didn't expect a mere rookie to get a hit, did he?

I agree. I don't see how they can extend Baker at this stage of the game. It represents a PR nigthmare and the columnists will tear the trib to shreads. They'd be better off waiting until the season is over and fewer people are paying attention. Also, does Baker even want an extension? It doesn't seem like he's enjoyed his stay on the North Side.

They were not drafted by the Cubs. Neither was he. Not very close. Sanchez and Vizcaino debuted with the Cubs. I don't understand why having drafted the player makes a difference. If they were acquired as minor leaguers presumably they learned to fien tune their games in the Cubs' system before being deemed ready.

1) Jeromy Burnitz a. Cubs will pick up his $7M option in 2006 b. Cubs will buy him out at $500K and will re-sign him to a lower amount. c. Cubs will buy him out at $500K and say goodbye. C. but the Cubs choose B (2) Todd Walker a. Cubs will pick up his $2.5M option and he'll be the opening day 2B in 2006. b. Cubs will pick up his $2.5M option and then trade him in the offseason. c. Cubs will let him become a free agent. A. for both still no reason to trade him unless blown away. Who would give up lots of talent for Walker in the off-season? (3) Corey Patterson a. Cubs will non-tender him. b. Cubs will trade him. c. Cubs will sign him to a 1-year deal to avoid arbitration. d. Cubs will sign him to a multi-year deal. C for both Patterson gets one more chance. The cubs can always trade or cut him later when they think Pie is ready. (4) Jerry Hairston a. Cubs will non-tender him. b. Cubs will trade him. c. Cubs will sign him to a 1-year deal to avoid arbitration. d. Cubs will sign him to a multi-year deal. B and C I'd trade him assuming Perez is back. Cubs bring him back in case neither Patterson nor Pie can handle CF. (5) Where does Jerry Hairston play, if signed? a. everyday 2B b. everyday CF c. super-utility d. sits on the bench C He's more valuable as a role player (6) Nomar Garciaparra a. gone b. 1 year deal c. 2 year deal A. and A. he can't play SS and he's not going to replace Ramirez at 3rd (7) Where does Nomar play, if signed? a. SS b. 2B A. He doesn't have the range for 2nd either ( Derrek Lee a. gets multi-year extension during this offseason b. gets multi-year extension in spring training c. gets multi-year extension during 2006 season d. gets multi-year extension in 15 day exclusive period after 2006 season e. is offered and accepts arbitration after 2006 season f. Cubs say goodbye B That's been the Cubs' MO (9) Ryan Dempster a. gone b. re-signed to be a closer c. re-signed to be a starter B He'll come much cheaper than any other closer options and can always be traded if say Wood was moved to closer. (10) Glendon Rusch a. forced to trade, if he picks up his $2M player option b. happy to keep, if he picks up his $2M player option c. breathe a sigh of relief because another team offers him a multi-year deal I'd love to be able to answer C but I don't see it happening especially after he loses his spot in the rotation which should come soon. I'll go with A [/b]

Actually, Hollandsworth was told by Hendry that he was signed to be the starter. Didn't Dusty or Jim state at the convention that he'd start at least 140 games? I may have made that up. I seem to remember Baker saying that Hollandsworth would start 140 games. I refuse to believe that any knowledgable baseball person would say something like that and actually mean it. Hendry doesn't make out the lineup card so it would be silly for him to say who will or won't play.

Hi Mr. Pink! Originally, I was going to reference Mr. Pink. I also considered a reference to Scottie "no tippin'" Pippen- a notorious cheapskate.

I don't believe Hendry ever envisioned Hollandsworth and Perez starting as many games as they did. Is not too much of a stretch to believe that Hendry thought Dubois would takeover in LF. OBP was one of his strengths throughout Dubois' minor league career. Perez was supposed to back up Nomar. back up MI that get on base a lot are pretty hard to find. As for Burnitz, by the time he was signed there weren't many other options available.

Dusty Baker does a lot of unconventional things. I think it was Neyer who said he was "The crack smokingest manager in the big leagues". There have been times when these crazy lineups etc. have worked. Batting Neifi 2nd during his hot streak is an example. I think we are more aware when these things go wrong and rarely credit him for occasionally being right. I'm convinced that the player's do like to play for him based on the interviews I've heard. Baseball players are typically not talented enough to fake it when it comes to these things. Besides, why shouldn't they like playing for him? He stands by them no matter what. He doesn't play the kids but they're too happy to be there to take that personally.

For me, the offseason comes down to 3 things 1. The injury to Wood had the biggest effect on the team. Wood going down kept Dempster in the rotation longer. It also weakened our overall depth by pushing everyone up a spot. The problem is that no one could replace Wood's potential contribution to the team. 2. The Cubs could have withstood Nomar's injury if they had a more productive hitter in LF or if Patterson hadn't forgotten how to hit. Hendry had a back up plan in case Nomar got hurt (Perez) but he neglected to account for the loss of production. 3. With the entire OF providing modest production - and that's being generous- Hendry should have pulled the trigger on a deal even if he had to overpay. Perhaps he tried but couldn't due to the depleted depth caused by injuries.

Rey Sanchez (almost 5,000 ABs) and Jose Vizcaino (over 5,000 ABs)

Why not call it a Harvey Wall Banger?

The other day I went into a Subway and noticed that there was a tip jar by the register. I was wondering how people felt about tipping at a place like Subway

If your plan is to start Cedeno and Murton or Sing in the OF, you'll need to fire Dusty Baker first. The most logical course of action in CF is to start the season with Patterson. If he can somehow figure out how to use his talent he will be very valuable. If he continues to flail away he at least buys time for Pie to work out some of his issues at AAA. I keep seeing the argument to bring up Pie and not worry about his offense. If offense from CF is a bonus than why not take a chance on Patterson turning it around? If starting the year with Patterson isn't appealing, than start the year with Greenberg. Perhaps Greenberg isn't ready either but given a choice of rushing Pie or inserting Greenberg I'd rather take my chances that Greenberg won't ruin his career by playing in the majors next year. If Murton is on the team I want he and Walker to bat 1-2 and don't particularly care in which order. With Baker's love of balance, Walker 2nd makes more sense. LF- Murton 2nd Walker 1st Lee RF LH hitting acquisition 3rd Ramirez C Barrett CF Patterson/ Greenberg/ Bacon SS Cedeno

Manny Ortiz? I thought this thread was going to be about John Kerry not being able to name a single Red Sox player.

It's times like these that make me glad I don't really know what VROP is.

Are they going to put Frank at 2nd? Why put Frank at 2nd, the Cubs already have Neifi to play 2nd.

That's not funny.

"I spoke with Dr. Kremchek and this was what he was hoping to find when he got in there," Cubs trainer Mark O'Neal said before Wednesday's game against the Los Angeles Dodgers. "This is exactly what he was looking for. We're very pleased with that." He continued, "Last time I did surgery on Kerry's shoulder I left my class ring in there. I've been looking for that darn thing for weeks." Jostens declined to comment on the amount of throwing discomfort caused by one of their products.