RynoRules

I guess I disagree. If he wants 4 years, he gets 7-8 mill from me. I'd happily do 2 yrs at 9-10, with an option for a 3rd at 11 or so.

Yeah we could get Nen to just hang around too and play I Palindrome I. Ah, shoot, why not bring back Stan Javier, Mark Gardner, Danny Darwin and William van Landingham while we're at it? Dude! Kurt Manwaring (sp?), Robby Thompson, Matt Williams. Where are they?

Wow. You'd pay him more thatn Aramis? How would you structure the deal? I'd give him a four million signing bonus and then have a deal that pays him 9 million in 06 and 07 and 10 million in 08 and 09. Why not the $10m the first 2 years of the deal, and the lesser amount when he's more likely to regress due to age? And BTW, I'd probably do that deal, too, but I'd also be prepared for ARam to opt out and renegotiate his deal after 2006. And what of the fact that he's pushing 36 years of age?

Considering his shrunken body and minuscule stats I think the thing Sammy doesn't have this year is steroids... :roll: Three posts. I think that's a record. Please explain why it is out-of-bounds to suggest that he was on steroids. In light of the fact that he is a confirmed cheater (cork) and liar (game 162 a year ago), I'd say its perfectly reasonable to do so.

I like Giles, don't get me wrong. But, as I have poisted several times, Manny is a once-in-a-time hitter, arguably the most consistent in the game over the last 5-7 years. His career OPS is 1.1.00, his on-base is always over .400, and he's two years younger than Giles. The notion that Manny is a "butcher" in the field has taken on a life of its own at this point. You don't win a title with a guy in LF who can't play; and remember, half of those games are not in Fenway. If we get a CFer with good range, that should compensate. I know that Giles is an FA, so we only need fork over some dough to get him. But, c'mon fellas, lets take this talent we have been stocking in the minors for a ride! Epstein wants talent, yes, but he also craves payroll flexibility, much like his mentor. Manny is an amazingly consistent hitter and a HOFer. Lets do this.

Man-e Man-e Man-e My name is Manny. Let there be only the finest meats and cheeses for my teammates.

I'll take it seriously. I think that, with a winter away from baseball to reset his mind, Corey *could* be considered an option to bat 8th and play a good defensive CF given a good ST, but be a prime candidate to be replaced via a trade deadline move. I think that the days of Corey being considered a top player, or even a guy who just needs time and patience to become a star, are over. I think the best he could hope to become is Mike Cameron. I think the Cubs probably trade him for cents on the dollar this winter at the GM meetings, though. He has little to no chance of success here in Chicago. I agree. Here here.

Candid? He spent the whole article blowing sunshine up his own posterior. The only trade he'd take back is the Ohka trade, but he basicaly blames its result on injuries, implying that it was beyond his control (sound like someone else we know?).

Or better yet - be a man and take responsibility. Work hard. Play hard. Do both. Make no excuses.

No, unless that big bat belonged to someone of Manny Ramirez's ilk.

not much, but he had a terrible payroll to pare down and a system to cultivate. it's not like you can just change the course of a franchise in 3-4 years. So you're admitting that Ricciardi has done nothing to warrant the thoughts of him being better than Hendry. why do you hate him so much? does it bother the "old school" fan in you? it must also bother you that beane continues to be successful in oakland despite losing his 2 top starters, a move that many "smallballers" said would be his undoing because his "system" doesn't work. That's a major genralization. The topic here is whether we'd take JP over JH. My answer is simply, "no" b/c he his teams haven't been to the playoffs and their talent level, top to bottom, is not greater than the Cubs', IMHO. I don't know why I have to repeat this for the thousandth time, but here it goes: I don't dislike Beane's methodologies. For the most part (w/ some exceptions) I think they are thoughtful and effective. However, based on how he was depicted in "Moneyball", I don't particularly like his personality. And re this bd.: IMHO, some (not all; not even most) of the posters here appear to follow his philosophies to the letter and take their defense of the same to extremes.

Yikes. Where would that package start? Mitre, Hill, Marshall, Walker, Harvey... Two established MLers who are amongst the best hitters at their positions (including a former MVP and likely Hall of Famer), though one has had recent injury issues and is aging (33). Jones: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5164 Jones has a .407 OBP this year, career of over .400. That's pretty darn sweet if you ask me. Giles: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6624 To me, Giles is the no-brainer part of this deal. You pause at Jones b/c of his age and injuries combined his salary. I dunno. Its very tempting. If I knew Jones were going to be healthy, I'd part with almost anyone in our minor leagues.

Patterson has been fairly good for a CF in the past?? LOL!!! He's had one fluke six week stretch of good baseball in a 5-year career. The opposite holds true for Pierre because already in his career--he came up to the big leagues the same time as Patterson! (2000)--he has three times put more than 200 hits up in a year, three times put an OBP of 360 or better on the board out of the leadoff spot, and EVERY year (including this one) put 45 or more SBs on the board. He had an off year. The evidence suggests he's capable of much more, unlike Patterson. Kess, I do not often agree with you, but if the choice is between CPatt and Pierre, give me Pierre every day and twice on Sunday.

well...JP uses stats/probability to pick a player. it isn't a full proof method, but the likelihood of him picking a solid player over the traditional scout method is appreciably greater. it may take time before we see it, but it will happen given enough time. BASED ON WHAT?? Everyone keeps spouting off old-schoolesque cliches about Ricciardi and nobody seems to have a single shred of evidence as to why he's a better GM than Hendry. =D> I just don't get this convo. What - other than pure speculation - makes all of you think that he is a "better" GM than JH? IMO, he's shown a lack of judgment in his offseason acquisitions. Koskie is a nice player, but they already had guys to play on the corners of the IF. What they needed was some back-end bullpen help, or even another starter to take the pressure off of Halladay (Lily, who Riccardi has constatly touted, has been brutal). I prefer not to say this (b/c it almost always comes off as antaganistic), but I think some of you like this guy simply due to his former association w/ Mr. Beane. For reference purposes: Koskie in 2005: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6110 And career: http://www.baseball-reference.com/k/koskico01.shtml Jay's roster: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/roster?team=tor

Oh, c'mon Goony. You are a veteran and respected member of this community and you know that's nonsense. I respect that you wish to criticiize Hendry, and he certainly bears some responsibility for this team. Many of us, however, disagree with those who say he has done a poor job. I am one of them.

That's not much of an argument, IMO. Do you really believe those three guys would have been difference makers on this team? Farns is an overgrown frat boy who cannot be counted on. Merker acted like an unprofessional baby last year w/ his stupid and insubordinate attacks on Stone. And do I really have to show you Sosa's stats? Please show me the evidence you have that Hendry was responsible for getting rid of Stone. And Dusty earned the right to fail last year and a second chance this year b/c he got a recently horrendous team within 5 outs of the WS. However, I agree that his time has now come.

Thanks for expanding on my point for me - I was at work when I made it and did not have time to go into detail: I think some of us have forgotten (or may not know b/c of youth) just how poorly run the scouting dept and front office were between Dallas Green and Hendry (and arguably, Green did nothing to help the minor leagues get any better, so you can go back even farther than that if you wish). Hendry's arrival has lead to some pretty good drafts and a consistent top ten talent pool in our minor leagues. I know that some of you will not like this as a comparison, but the organization's overall talent is leaps and bounds ahead of where it was 10 years ago, when we were a joke. The majority of Hendry's ML acquistions have been very good, with some exceptions, but I challenge you to find someone with a perfect record. He has been active in acquiring top level talent without giving up our highest rated propects (Willis was not in our top ten at the time he was traded). The fact that Nomar has been hurt is not his fault, and may I remind you that Murton came from that deal also, and he looks the OF that we on this bd have been waiting for. The new challenge is to change the club's culture, and I - and may of you - believe that starts with the manager. Dusty's Kool Aid worked in 03', but hasn't since, and thus its time for change in the dugout, not the GM's box.

That's a completely unfair statement in light of both the Nomar and ARam/Lofton deals. Read what Vance said in his last post. I meant that Hendry isn't creative enough to trade for 2 players he doesn't need and probably doesn't want. To be fair, not many people are. The Marlins are the only team that comes to mind that trades for players they don't intend on keeping (Piazza, Hampton). I really don't know why the Cubs were even suggested in a trade for Delgado and Lowell. I think what you mean is that Hendry does not trade for guys w/ an eye towards towards flipping them to someone else shortly thereafter. OK, I get it. That said, I think that's pretty nit-picky. I mean, if you want to criticize him for fixating on trading Sosa last year and getting little in return, that's fair. But, unlike the manager, JH has had done more good than bad in the last couple of years.

That's a completely unfair statement in light of both the Nomar and ARam/Lofton deals.

I think he'd run pitchers into the ground if they were productive enough down in TB. Price held him back in Seattle, but he still managed to overwork pitchers like Garcia. I forgot about Garcia. He seems to have a better handle on whom to use in the pen at any given time than Dusty, but that doesn't seem hard. These are fair points, but to counter, if we compare most managers' strengths to Dusty's weaknesses (most of which are severe), you always end up concluding, "but that doesn't seem hard".

I've said this before, I know, but I do not understand the anti-Piniella animus on this bd. Other than his current stop in baseball's version of purgatory, he's done nothing but win, including a WS and one of the greatest regular seasons in history. More importantly, in direct contrast to our current manager, he would never put up the stupid mistakes and lack of "fundamentals" that the Cubs have been known for over the past two seasons.

I'd be okay w/ Wilk if we had a corner OF like Dunn. That said, I think Wilk is their Kotsay and he ain't going aywhere.

Me too. And it reminds me of Jerome James' response to Sonics coach Nate McMillan's calling him selfish: "I don't know what he's talking about, cause I just worry about Jerome."

Hi, Len. Than you much for being part of our community and agreeing to answer our fan-boy/girl questions. What its like sharing the booth w/ Bob Brenly? It seems like the two of you sort of felt each other out for a month or two, and now there's great chemistry. Would you agree? Thanks for doing such a nice job in spite of disappointing season.

Yeah, I think we should all save our energy for figuring out how to fill out the rest of the rotation, finding three OFs for next year, and reforming our ghastly bullpen.