Bruce Miles

Kranitz is a great guy and a good pitching coach. He gets a lot of credit for helping Jaime Navarro when his career took a brief upturn for the Cubs.

This is where I disagree a little. As the LH half of a platoon, and facing all RH starting pitchers, Jones would get the lion's share of the playing time, since LH starting pitching is scarce. I absolutely agree no team would give a player $5.33 million per year to face only LH pitching, but it is not unthinkable for RH pitching, and Jones really does need a platoon partner, as he is certifiably horrible vs. LHP's. Very good point. I don't think they'd sit him against all lefties. Dusty will look at his "matchups," I'm sure.

Thanks. And maybe we can still get that big trade.

Possibly. He'd fill the bill of a right-handed hitter who could come off the bench and start now and then.

Bruce, why is Hendry still set on moving Walker? If he were the trade chip for a rightfielder, I could understand...but that spot is filled. What beneift could the Cubs get from trading him? Is there something about him that we don't know, or is Hendry that clueless? Boy would I love to hear a candid answer tothat question. I always give candid answers, both here and in the newspaper. The Cubs, as Goony mentioned, are stressing defense, for better or worse. They don't seem to like the way Walker plays the position compared with other second baseman. There are pitchers who've also voiced concern about the defense behind them. The Cubs feel, again right or wrong, that if the defense can turn the double play instead of extending the inning, their pitchers will have a better chance. I, too, am dismayed by the Cubs' seeming lack of emphasis on OBP and OPS. From an offensive standpoint, Walker certainly would look good in the No. 2 spot. And for the money _ and considering what they spent for a lot of mid-level guys _ Walker is an absolute bargain. Walker might annoy them with some of his comments to the media from time to time, but that really has no bearing on them not wanting to keep him. It's interesting to note, however, that Walker has worn out his welcome with other teams. If he does go, I'll miss him, not only because he provides provocative and juicy quotes. He's one of the best guys I've dealt with. Thanks again for your insight Mr. Miles, always EXTREMELY appreciated. So the Cubs are "stressing" defense this year are they?? Hmmm, don't we still have the nit-wit, toothpick soaked in idiot juice, self-serving clown in the dugout on a daily basis?? You know the guy who had no problem running Trinidad Hubbard/Gremlin Macias out to play center, or penciling in a "heavy" career pinch hitter at 3rd base on a daily basis, in one Lenny Harris? But NOW, Dunsty(the organization) has a problem with Walkers defense at 2nd, amazing. How about stressing fundamentals.... pitchers/players covering bases......communication on the infield and in the outfield on pop flys(the kind that seem to fall in 6 or 8 times a year on the northside), hitting cuttoff men, running the bases WITHOUT your head up your ... for a change........fielding bunts and making the throw, making sure the base coaches eyes have been screened recently....Who's job is it again to see to it that all of this is tight??? Quoth the manager: "Go ask Larry."

My weekly column on Fridays in the Daily Herald serves that purpose. Thanks for the offer, though.

Anything you can share regarding Brian Giles? Was there no interest in him? Did Giles not want to play in Chicago? Did Hendry assume or have some sort of first hand knowledge Giles had no desire to leave San Diego? Any help on this would be appreciated. Giles would have been my first choice, but the Cubs felt all along that he'd stay in San Diego or get an unbelievable offer from the Yankees. i think it just woud have made me, and probably others, feel better if they would have at least made an effort to go after him, instead of just assuming he was staying in SD. i mean, that's just kind of lazy. at least then i would have felt like the cubs didn't think jacque jones was better than giles. "Lazy" probably isn't a fair assessment. That's one thing Hendry isn't. But all organizatons target certain players and concentrate on them. This off-season, the Cubs felt they would spend money on Furcal and also try to land Pierre. I'm sure Giles' age worked against him coming to Wrigley, too, but that's just my speculation.

Remember that the front office had to sign Macias so don't put all the blame on the manager. The Cubs seemed to rationalize Macias' presence by saying, "All teams have a guy like this," meaning a marginal player who makes little money, is happy to be in the big leagues and maybe can do one thing well. Jose is a terrifically nice guy, but no way is he your No. 1 pinch hitter.

Thank you. I appreciate that.

Anything you can share regarding Brian Giles? Was there no interest in him? Did Giles not want to play in Chicago? Did Hendry assume or have some sort of first hand knowledge Giles had no desire to leave San Diego? Any help on this would be appreciated. Giles would have been my first choice, but the Cubs felt all along that he'd stay in San Diego or get an unbelievable offer from the Yankees.

Mr. Miles, It is my impression that Hairston is not well liked by Dusty. He made a number of comments about him missing signs and base running gaffes. Is this the case? Dusty seemed to have a distaste for Hairston right from spring training, for whatever reason. Hairston missed a number of signs during the season, and that certainly didn't endear him to the boss. But as the year went on, Hairston seemed to grow on the Cubs a little more _ Hendry also said as much at the winter meetings. He can be a valuable guy to have on a team, and he certainly wasn't the only Cub to make mental errors.

If that bat has Tejada's name on it, yes, he'll move whatever he has to move to get him. Beyond that, he'll look for some backup help.

Bruce, why is Hendry still set on moving Walker? If he were the trade chip for a rightfielder, I could understand...but that spot is filled. What beneift could the Cubs get from trading him? Is there something about him that we don't know, or is Hendry that clueless? Boy would I love to hear a candid answer tothat question. I always give candid answers, both here and in the newspaper. The Cubs, as Goony mentioned, are stressing defense, for better or worse. They don't seem to like the way Walker plays the position compared with other second baseman. There are pitchers who've also voiced concern about the defense behind them. The Cubs feel, again right or wrong, that if the defense can turn the double play instead of extending the inning, their pitchers will have a better chance. I, too, am dismayed by the Cubs' seeming lack of emphasis on OBP and OPS. From an offensive standpoint, Walker certainly would look good in the No. 2 spot. And for the money _ and considering what they spent for a lot of mid-level guys _ Walker is an absolute bargain. Walker might annoy them with some of his comments to the media from time to time, but that really has no bearing on them not wanting to keep him. It's interesting to note, however, that Walker has worn out his welcome with other teams.If he does go, I'll miss him, not only because he provides provocative and juicy quotes. He's one of the best guys I've dealt with. That is interesting to hear. I suppose it possible there is a reason no one wants him. Can't imagine what that reason is. I thank Mr. Miles for his answer. I am left wondering if he has any idea or theory why Walker appeared to wear out his welcome with a number of other teams. There has to be some reason why several teams have gotten rid of him or just let him walk. Maybe it is just his defense. Maybe not. Some of it was defense, and some of it was teams not liking his outspoken ways. The Cubs would rather have their players not pop off, but they can live with it. In other words, it's not a tradeable offense. Looks like they have settled on nefei at 2nd? Not necessarily. If they wind up with Tejada or another shortstop, they'd be fine with Cedeno at second with Neifi as the backup. I believe Hendry knows you can't play Neifi every day and thus expose him. And you must never, ever bat him 1 or 2. I have a feeling Hendry is working on things nobody has even talked about. The Derrek Lee trade came literally out of nowhere. The did a good job keeping the Blanco signing quiet _ everybody assumed they'd re-sign Bako. The Cubs also would be comfortable with Hairston getting a good number of starts at second, too. He seems to be the forgotten guy here.

Bruce, why is Hendry still set on moving Walker? If he were the trade chip for a rightfielder, I could understand...but that spot is filled. What beneift could the Cubs get from trading him? Is there something about him that we don't know, or is Hendry that clueless? Boy would I love to hear a candid answer tothat question. I always give candid answers, both here and in the newspaper. The Cubs, as Goony mentioned, are stressing defense, for better or worse. They don't seem to like the way Walker plays the position compared with other second baseman. There are pitchers who've also voiced concern about the defense behind them. The Cubs feel, again right or wrong, that if the defense can turn the double play instead of extending the inning, their pitchers will have a better chance. I, too, am dismayed by the Cubs' seeming lack of emphasis on OBP and OPS. From an offensive standpoint, Walker certainly would look good in the No. 2 spot. And for the money _ and considering what they spent for a lot of mid-level guys _ Walker is an absolute bargain. Walker might annoy them with some of his comments to the media from time to time, but that really has no bearing on them not wanting to keep him. It's interesting to note, however, that Walker has worn out his welcome with other teams.If he does go, I'll miss him, not only because he provides provocative and juicy quotes. He's one of the best guys I've dealt with. That is interesting to hear. I suppose it possible there is a reason no one wants him. Can't imagine what that reason is. I thank Mr. Miles for his answer. I am left wondering if he has any idea or theory why Walker appeared to wear out his welcome with a number of other teams. There has to be some reason why several teams have gotten rid of him or just let him walk. Maybe it is just his defense. Maybe not. Some of it was defense, and some of it was teams not liking his outspoken ways. The Cubs would rather have their players not pop off, but they can live with it. In other words, it's not a tradeable offense.

Bruce, why is Hendry still set on moving Walker? If he were the trade chip for a rightfielder, I could understand...but that spot is filled. What beneift could the Cubs get from trading him? Is there something about him that we don't know, or is Hendry that clueless? Boy would I love to hear a candid answer tothat question. I always give candid answers, both here and in the newspaper. The Cubs, as Goony mentioned, are stressing defense, for better or worse. They don't seem to like the way Walker plays the position compared with other second baseman. There are pitchers who've also voiced concern about the defense behind them. The Cubs feel, again right or wrong, that if the defense can turn the double play instead of extending the inning, their pitchers will have a better chance. I, too, am dismayed by the Cubs' seeming lack of emphasis on OBP and OPS. From an offensive standpoint, Walker certainly would look good in the No. 2 spot. And for the money _ and considering what they spent for a lot of mid-level guys _ Walker is an absolute bargain. Walker might annoy them with some of his comments to the media from time to time, but that really has no bearing on them not wanting to keep him. It's interesting to note, however, that Walker has worn out his welcome with other teams. If he does go, I'll miss him, not only because he provides provocative and juicy quotes. He's one of the best guys I've dealt with. What do you think they are going to try and aquire for him? Thanks! I wish I knew. It looks to me like they now need a right-handed hitting backup outfielder. The Tejada thing is still alive, at least as far as the Cubs are concerned. Hendry hasn't ruled out more pitching help. How it all gets packaged (taking into account Patterson and prospects, too) I'm not certain.

Bruce, why is Hendry still set on moving Walker? If he were the trade chip for a rightfielder, I could understand...but that spot is filled. What beneift could the Cubs get from trading him? Is there something about him that we don't know, or is Hendry that clueless? Boy would I love to hear a candid answer tothat question. I always give candid answers, both here and in the newspaper. The Cubs, as Goony mentioned, are stressing defense, for better or worse. They don't seem to like the way Walker plays the position compared with other second baseman. There are pitchers who've also voiced concern about the defense behind them. The Cubs feel, again right or wrong, that if the defense can turn the double play instead of extending the inning, their pitchers will have a better chance. I, too, am dismayed by the Cubs' seeming lack of emphasis on OBP and OPS. From an offensive standpoint, Walker certainly would look good in the No. 2 spot. And for the money _ and considering what they spent for a lot of mid-level guys _ Walker is an absolute bargain. Walker might annoy them with some of his comments to the media from time to time, but that really has no bearing on them not wanting to keep him. It's interesting to note, however, that Walker has worn out his welcome with other teams. If he does go, I'll miss him, not only because he provides provocative and juicy quotes. He's one of the best guys I've dealt with.

The Cubs didn't give Jones $16 million to platoon him. The Cubs will probably try to see what the O's want for Tejada, but I don't see Baltimore doing a deal for some of the names bandied about here. They probably want a big name in return. (If they were smart, they'd load up with prospects because I don't see them having much of a chance in 2006.) Beyond that, Hendry will try to move Walker and Patterson.

Without a doubt. Considering his recent health, I wouldn't be surprised to see him take a 2 year extension and run. Could be a wise business decision. Washington is a team without an owner and as such is in no position to be offering contract extensions like this. This "deal" is not in the realm of possibility. Is there any chance Kerry will get dealt to another team this offseason? No. "No-trade clause" means just that, especially in Wood's case. Not to mention that he's coming off surgery.

Without a doubt. Considering his recent health, I wouldn't be surprised to see him take a 2 year extension and run. Could be a wise business decision. Washington is a team without an owner and as such is in no position to be offering contract extensions like this. This "deal" is not in the realm of possibility.

Prior did not reach "Super Two" status after last season. He is now arbitration eligible and may opt to file for arbitration this winter.

Not happening.

No. These are separate deals that have been in the works for some time before the Tejada thing came up.

Or he didn't see the question, or he would rather write about it in his paper. Trust me, he doesn't login for Q & A. He stopped by a watering hole frequented by Cubs fans. He wants to know what is on our minds. Correct me if I'm wrong. Best columnist of Chicago = Mike Royko. Miles learned from the master. He found the place to go to find what was on the mind of the intelligent rabid Cubs fan's mind. Let him come and go freely. When he has the time, he'll hang. Mike Royko was indeed the best. I enjoyed reading him the most. (Good observation) I don't know the trade proposals. The Cubs have been pretty tight-lipped. If I knew, they'd be in the paper.

Bruce, if you stop by and see this, I was just wondering what the reason for this might be. Is it that Baker came away from his meeting less than impressed with Bradley? Are the Dodgers now considering keeping him? Has the asking price by the Dodgers gotten to high? Is Bradley not willing to play rigthfield? I'm just curious as to what has now made Bradley a dim proposition to the point that we would begin to look at Jones. Let's remember that it takes two teams to make a trade. From everything I've heard, the Dodgers seem to be in no hurry to trade Bradley to the Cubs.

I don't recall there ever being a Hill/Dunn trade being discussed. I do recall a comment from Bruce Miles that Hendry valued Hill so much, that he wouldn't trade him for Dunn, but that's all I recall. Refresh my memory on the proposed Dunn trade that would have included Rich Hill. That was last year. Hill is no longer an untouchable. Music to my ears. Any chance that means he might be heading to Baltimore? There's always a chance. They're so early in the process right now, but as I wrote today, I think all the old presumptions are out the window. Would this include Pie, as well??? Possibly. Bruce, You're just getting our hopes up. So, could you see the Cubs offering Pie, Hill, and Marshall all in a deal for Miggy? I could see some version of that. Talks are in the exploratory stages at this point, and a lot will depend on what Baltimore values, how the Orioles see their chances to compete in 2006 and beyond and what other teams are offering.