RynoRules

This thread got de-railed a bit. I am just hoping Cliff can be productive for the rest of the season, knowing that he will be getting mcuh of the PT. I'd rather see Murt play in general, but if Cliff get's hot and the Cubs win I don't care.

Why the hell are you breaking out splits? Murton was productive last year. Floyd was not. It's freaking simple. There's no need for clarification......................... So you'd agree that Jacque Jones was productive last year and there's no need to break out splits? WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING Good Lord. We should either be mindful of splits or we shouldn't. But you can't have it both ways. What in the bright orange squeaky hell are you talking about? The statement you're calling into question is that Murton has been productive recently and is more likely to perform productively in the futire, and that Floyd isn't. That has absolutely nothing to do with splits. Floyd is 1.8 bajilion years old. his power is gone, he's injury prone, and he's not very valuable. Murton has struggled, but he put up a .800+ OPS in close to a full season last year, and he's in his prime years. That's the point. Splits have jack to do with that, yet for some reason you keep bringing up splits. Have you even read anything you're responding to? And then you bring up Jacque Jones. Why did I even ask? Of course you're not actually reading what people are saying. I think it's you that's not reading what's being posted. Please see my enumerate point No. 1 above. I'm calling into question how anyone can say with a straight face that Murton has been productive over the last two years against RHP but Floyd has not. NOBODY SAID THAT. THAT'S MY POINT. Holy crap. Nobody said exactly that, but it was strongly implied via the statement that Murton has been productive and Floyd has not. I don't think that the splits bear that out.

Bat him leadoff for the love of G-d!!!!!

Nah, it's actually Cliff Robinson's nickname. I just lifted it and used it for Floyd.

:lol: Preach it.

My fave is the 84' highlights done to "Sweet Home Chicago". I have it on the legendary VHS, "Chicago and the Cubs: A Lifelong Love Affair", hosted by the late, great Mike Royko.

Great job coming back, makin' your pops proud, and getting it done in "the clutch". Keep it up - we need your bat.

So, yes. OK, so one person used the term and now this whole thread is "out of control"? Most of the analysis in here has been pretty tepid if you ask me. Almost everyone agrees they need at least one more position player and perhaps two. I am surprised no one else thinks they could use another starting pitcher.

Did anyone in here really say "makings of a dynasty"? The Cubs should be solid solid contenders for several years. If they are able to add a RFer with .900 - 1.000 OPS potential and perhaps a true no. 2 starter, they are very likely to be the class of the NL for the next 3-4 yrs, IMO. Just one of those two things would make them clearly the best team in the Central, IMO. The Brewers are young and fun, but their starting pitching has a long way to go.

Ding ding

Eckstein Kennedy Timlin Kline Suppan Edmonds (he didn't approach those nos with Anaheim, did he?)

No surprise here. I wonder if Ronny's days with this team have come and gone now that Theriot seems entrenched.

Piniella is an idiot. Ironic statement.

Maybe not - depends on how well those 7 guys (I assume they are Soriano, Lee, ARam, Zambrano, Lily, Marquis, and DeRosa?) play and if our young pitching continues to produce. I also don't see any reason why this team's payroll can't be $150 million considering the amount of revenue the franchise will clear in yr where there are in the playoff race. Pie (CF) and Theriot (SS) should be starters next season. Hill and Gallagher should still be in the rotation. Ward should be brought back. If Pie is in CF and Soriano is in LF, you need to decide who will play RF (Jones? Murt?), or add someone via trade or FA. Plus the catching situation will need to be addressed. Kendall seems pretty good to me so far and I'd be willing to give him 2 yrs and 8-9 mill if he keeps up his current pace. Kendall should NOT be given a two-year deal. That's begging for trouble. I've been one of his bigger supporters on here (mainly because I didn't think that trade warranted such vitriol), and I might support a one-year, small-money deal. Two years is a bad idea. I'd rather he get a one yr deal, but I am not sure how realistic that is.

Maybe not - depends on how well those 7 guys (I assume they are Soriano, Lee, ARam, Zambrano, Lily, Marquis, and DeRosa?) play and if our young pitching continues to produce. I also don't see any reason why this team's payroll can't be $150 million considering the amount of revenue the franchise will clear in yr where there are in the playoff race. Pie (CF) and Theriot (SS) should be starters next season. Hill and Gallagher should still be in the rotation. Ward should be brought back. If Pie is in CF and Soriano is in LF, you need to decide who will play RF (Jones? Murt?), or add someone via trade or FA. Plus the catching situation will need to be addressed. Kendall seems pretty good to me so far and I'd be willing to give him 2 yrs and 8-9 mill if he keeps up his current pace.

I'm not sure Hendry has changed. I think it may be more a case of Dusty likes that type of player but Piniella has this habit of liking players who can actually play. So, basically Hendry is a G.M. who is a little too attuned into what his manager wants. Considering that Hendry is pretty good at contracts and trades for the most part, maybe we just need to hire somebody with only 1 job-to hire the manager :D. I hate to repeat myself, but I think we should all consider the fact that Dusty and MacPhail departed more or less together, and Hendry did not lose his job.

Its easy to have this opinion after the fact. Wonder what he would have said had they let him walk: Rogers' 20-20 hindsight

I dunno about you all, but the thing I lose track of most when involved in a two or three team divisional race is where we stand in the loss column with respect to the wild card. I think it is worth keeping an eye on. As of today we are two back of The Fathers in the loss column (we have 59 losses):

Yup. Plus his change wasn't all that bad, IMO.

While this is true, he not only got Nomar for virtually nothing but he got the Red Sox to give the Cubs Matt Murton as well. But its easier to ignore the facts that disfavor your argument (see the comment about the Lee aquisition above), like the fact that we have had better young pitching under the Hendry regime than perhaps at any other time in franchise history. The pure hate towards Hendry is strange to me. He has done a poor job during at least half of his tenure (if you measure season by season), but he has also done some good things. There also seems to be some discounting or ignorance of MacPhail and Baker's roles in all of this. I don't understand why it is so hard for some of you to acknowledge the things Hendry has done well. It's like the guy owes some of you money. I don't understand why you want to put blame on Baker and MacPhail. Hendry hired Baker and may have been willing to give him an extension before the team tottaly bit the big one. I don't hate Hendry. I have no feelings toward him personally. I do hate what has happend since 2003. The Cubs seemed to be on the brink of something special. Its not difficult to quantify why I blame Baker - we have all been over it a million times. And if you look closely and view MacPhail's tenure not just through the prisim of his time as Prez but also what he did as GM for both the Cubs and Twins, I think you might see what I am getting at here.

I believe Andy MacPhail had a hand in the hiring of Dusty Baker and had a rather large say in payroll considerations. But I think he left much of the roster work to Jim Hendry. MacPhail did a lot of work for Major League Baseball (seemed like he was Bud Selig's right-hand man for a while there), leaving him little time to deal with many of the roster moves Hendry pulled off. While Hendry has done a pretty fair job trading, he's made more of his fair share of head-scratching roster moves. I think if we took a look at the rosters over Hendry years, we'd find a lot of players who played for the Cubs, then never wore another major league uniform (Jose Macias and Freddie Bynum come to mind). To me, if you have players that no one else wants when you're done with them, they pretty much had no reason to be on your roster in the first place. Agree completely. It just seems as though that approach isn't being taken this year, which makes me wonder who was really behind it.

While this is true, he not only got Nomar for virtually nothing but he got the Red Sox to give the Cubs Matt Murton as well. But its easier to ignore the facts that disfavor your argument (see the comment about the Lee aquisition above), like the fact that we have had better young pitching under the Hendry regime than perhaps at any other time in franchise history. The pure hate towards Hendry is strange to me. He has done a poor job during at least half his tenure (if you measure season by season), but he has also done some good things. There also seems to be some discounting or ignorance of MacPhail and Baker's roles in all of this. I don't understand why that is so hard for some of you to acknowledge the things Hendry has done well. It's like the guy owes some of money. The Hendry regime has been disappointing. I remember being very excited when Hendry was promoted to GM. At the time I believed- as did a lot of other people- that the guy that built the #1 farm system in baseball would not squander those resources. I believed Hendry could establish the Cubs as a perennial contender. Yes, Hendry added a lot of young, homegrown pitching but then he hired the worst possible manager to lead the team. Hendry has made some good trades but he has also overpaid for a lot of crappy bench players. Basically Hendry has been very mediocre. I don't take issue with anything you wrote, except that I think "medicore" implies "average". I think Hendry's overall performance has been below avg., but I still wonder how much that had to do with MacPhail and his adoration of certain methods, player-types, and manager-types.

While this is true, he not only got Nomar for virtually nothing but he got the Red Sox to give the Cubs Matt Murton as well. But its easier to ignore the facts that disfavor your argument (see the comment about the Lee aquisition above), like the fact that we have had better young pitching under the Hendry regime than perhaps at any other time in franchise history. The pure hate towards Hendry is strange to me. He has done a poor job during at least half of his tenure (if you measure season by season), but he has also done some good things. There also seems to be some discounting or ignorance of MacPhail and Baker's roles in all of this. I don't understand why it is so hard for some of you to acknowledge the things Hendry has done well. It's like the guy owes some of you money.

Agreed. It would be sweet if we started by sweeping the Cards and putting them in the hole.

I posted this in another thread, but I think this was a good job of negotiating by JH. You have to give something to get something. Cubs get: An ace pitcher for all of the peak years of his career at a below-mkt price per yr. Z gets: Extra guarateed yrs on his contract at a rate that he may not "earn" during the last two to three years of the deal. That's negotiating in a nutshell.