BigbadB

In total agreement with you there. I love it here. I'm never leaving (unless it keeps getting more expensive to live here).

If US presidents lost wars as frequently as Cubs GM lose games, I'd be pretty upset. But by and large, US politicians have been far more successful running this country, its states and cities than any Cubs GM I've ever met. Bush better than Hendry. It takes a lot to offend me, but this does it. :) Ha, something we agree on. :D

I was thinking something like Floyd, Pierre and Bradley or Wilkerson, with Murton as the super-sub. Murton should get lots of AB's since Floyd and Bradely may miss some time and Floyd can give Lee a day of rest from time to time @ 1b. This lineup could drive in some runs ~~ Pierre, Bradley/Wilkerson, Lee, Floyd, ARam, Soriano, Barret, Neifi/Cedeno I'd take that, minus Soriano anyway. I'm not sure the Cubs could afford to take on Floyd, Bradley/Wilkerson, Pierre AND Soriano. Especially if they still want to upgrade a starter.

Did you miss the memo? Neifi was signed to a 2 year extension. I sob each time I see the monetary amount, so I'll let someone else put that up here. Macias will not be as good as gone until he is gone. I have seen nothing yet that leads me to believe that he won't be back. We left good prospects unprotected rather than cut Macias. I know he signed for 2 years. I don't get all the memos but I noticed that one. I am not thrilled about it either (*exageration*). That is why I have spent time ever since trying to find a team that would actually be willing to take him. I also included some cash (CHC should have plenty) to make it more reasonable for Bowden to accept him. While it may be pie in the sky to say that Perez will be gone, my main point stands, that while it is sexy to add to the top of the roster, it can be just as effective to eliminate from the bottom and a team can save a TON of money. Unfortunately, baseball isn't known for teams signing guys to long term contracts and then trading them immediately. They can't trade him without his permission until June at the earliest. Would he accept a trade before June? If there was a starting job somewhere, maybe. Baker seems like he's pretty close with Neifi. Not many teams will be interested in Neifi considering the length or the amount of that contract either. I take that back. No team would be interested. I do understand where you are coming from as far as getting rid of the bad production from the bottom. We're stuck with Neifi and Blanco, so the improvement will have to come from the other 5 or 6 bench spots.

I really don't have a problem with Neifi as the utility bench guy. He's quite a bit overpaid for that role, but I didn't give it to him. If he does play, if he hits 8th, I'll be fine. If he replaces Walker late in games for defensive purposes, I'm fine with that too. Because he can hit "okay", he's probably not the worst option as a PH off the bench that the Cubs have ever sent out there. I would just hope he isn't the first option. That would mean we didn't do a very good job of putting a strong bench together. Macias, on the other hand, might just be the worst they ever sent out there.

i hope he's wrong. i'll take floyd or wilkerson over bradley any day. Why not both (Floyd and Bradley)? Can the Cubs pull off a trade for each? I think it's possible. Platoon Murton and Floyd in LF. because both murton & floyd should play full time. as i said, i would much rather have murton in lf & floyd in rf than bradley anywhere in the mix. Murton is no guarantee for 600+ PA of solid production, while Floyd is not a 600+ PA guy either. I'd take an OF of Murton (400), Pierre (400), Floyd (400) and Bradley (600), with Hairston and Mabry down the line. That would be affordable, flexible and productive. I'd love to get Murton 600 PA this year. But this offense isn't good enough to take the chance that he'll end up with a 750 OPS. Floyd would be nice to have, but he never plays a full season. Bradley would be great to have, and the worst that could happen is he's only out there for 200 PA (if he gets hurt or flips out), in which case you have Floyd and Murton to step in. Goony, I think that makes a lot of sense. It reduces some of the injury risk and also strengthens the bench which was a glaring weakness last year. Now just add Lugo and you would have something like this: Pierre Lugo Lee Floyd Ramirez Bradley Barrett Cedeno If you did what Goony suggests (stole my idea :P ), I don't think you need Lugo. Considering Tampa is standing firm that they want even more than Andy Marte for Lugo, I don't think Lugo is a realistic option anymore. Cedeno and Walker hold down the middle infield. The offense would be plentiful from the other 7 spots that even if Cedeno couldn't bat his weight, the Cubs could still put a lot of runs on the board. Pierre, Bradley, Lee, Floyd, Ramirez, Walker, Barrett, Cedeno

Hairston + Patterson to LA for Bradley? (I still don't believe Patterson alone is enough) What prospects are we talking for Floyd? (Williams, Hill, less?) Pierre CF Walker 2B Lee 1B Ramirez 3B Floyd/Murton LF Bradley RF Barrett C Cedeno/Perez SS :thumright: *comes back to reality* Name some teams that can afford to take on Cliff Floyd's contract for 2006 that would be willing to also give up a significant prospect to get him? That should answer your question as to what type of prospect it would take. I'm thinking Koronka or Wellemeyer. NYM need to move Floyd to make salary space for Manny. Every team will know this. The team with the most appealing average prospect gets their man. Of course, we could add Jose Macias into any one of those deals, also. :D

i would say they are wrong as the "baseball insiders" quite often are. hendry really seems to like murton and looking at his performance last year he is almost sure to be penciled in as the starting left fielder. it doesnt hurt that he is the only player left from the nomar trade and that hendry reportedly insisted on him being included for the deal to go down. Hendry really liked Choi, and we saw how that turned out. Hendry really liked Dubois, and we saw how that turned out. Hendry really liked Cedeno and Murton this offseason, but Neifi got signed to a 2/5m deal and he's not done toying with the outfield yet. My prediction is that Murton will platoon in the outfield in '06, and Neifi will get 3/4 of the at bats at what ever position he and Cedeno share.

OHMY GAWD, how could they trade Dewon Brazelton?? He was Tampa's #1 prospect, you can't trade a guy like that!! He was at the top of BA's prospect list, that is the bible, they're never wrong. Tampa is stupid and overpaid. :roll: i dont get it That's okay. I don't either.

Floyd crushes RHP. I think it would be a tad bit ironic that Hendry wouldn't be able to get the impact player this offseason, but he'd help the Mets get the most significant impact bat of the offseason. [-(

I would not offer a significant prospect for Floyd. Especially if they want us to pay the remainder of his contract. Not only did the Mets do us no favors on Sosa last year, but they helped hamstring the situation to what it became. Chaos. If they want us to take Floyd to help them reduce salary enough to take on Manny, they get Jon Koronka or someone of even lesser value. Other than that, I do like Floyd. Not sure about his ability to play 162 games. Not sure about his ability to play RF. I wouldn't mind a Floyd, Murton, Pierre, Bradley outfield though. Floyd and Murton split time in LF.

Did you miss the memo? Neifi was signed to a 2 year extension. I sob each time I see the monetary amount, so I'll let someone else put that up here. Macias will not be as good as gone until he is gone. I have seen nothing yet that leads me to believe that he won't be back. We left good prospects unprotected rather than cut Macias.

I agree with everything you said, except the part about Pierre being a downgrade at lead off. Walker never hit lead off last year for Dusty, so it can't be assumed that Walker would have batted lead off. If Neifi is Dusty's back up option to lead off, then Pierre is a significant upgrade to lead off. If it's Wilkerson or Bradley, then it's basically a trade off rather than an upgrade, or potentially a downgrade if Bradley provide equal OBP, yet more power. Considering the OBP of the Cubs as a whole in 2005 from the lead off spot, Pierre is definitely a significant upgrade at that spot. He's not the guy I would have targeted for lead off, but he's still significant nonetheless.

I've got the feeling, nothing to back it up mind you, that Murton would make a pretty good #2 hitter. I have that feeling myself. But, Dusty is the manager, so I don't believe Murton would be an option.

Barrett never saw the #2 hole in '05, and going off of memory alone, he didn't do very well in limited time there in '04. But you could make the argument that the #8 spot doesn't agree with him at all. Barrett AB R H 2B 3B HR TB RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS batting 4th 12 4 4 2 0 0 6 0 1 1 0.333 0.429 0.500 0.929 batting 5th 56 10 19 5 1 3 35 10 9 4 0.339 0.431 0.625 1.056 batting 6th 89 9 34 9 0 5 58 18 8 14 0.382 0.439 0.652 1.090 batting 7th 70 3 10 3 1 1 18 2 7 13 0.143 0.221 0.257 0.478 batting 8th 191 23 48 10 1 6 78 31 13 27 0.251 0.305 0.408 0.713 batting 9th 6 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 0.333 0.500 0.333 0.833 Totals 424 49 117 29 3 15 197 61 39 61 0.276 0.343 0.465 0.808 Do you think it would be better to have Barrett hit 7th and Murton hit 8th?

I think Patterson is faster than either of them but doesn't use his speed as well. I am kinda of lukewarm on this trade - I don't mind who we gave up but I wish we had traded for Bradley, Wilkerson, or Rios instead. Pierre is a significant upgrade over what we had last year and hopefully he will rebound in a contract year and his trend of playing well in day games will continue. My hope he is our pest ala Eckstein for the Cards. Nice to see some optimism & realism from a poster on this board. It's a nice change. GJ! It would be even nicer if someone didn't follow up an optimistic and realistic post with a slam on everyone else. Please stop!

AHAHAHA AHAHAHA Royals are offering Mike Sweeney to the Anaheim Angels for Casey Kotchman and Brandon Wood. Even we couldn't come up with something so lopsided. :D

I thought he did just explain.

I agree on Soriano. I just fear that Baker would bat him 2nd where he would hurt more than help. I'd rather have Walker than Soriano. But, if the Cubs did trade for Soriano, would you rather have Soriano or Neifi batting 2nd? I think I'd prefer Soriano. Remembering that Dusty is the manager, it would probably be one of those two rather than Murton. I'd want Bradley batting 2nd. The only reason I'd want Soriano on the team is if Bradley was in right. Oh, sorry. I didn't have Bradley on the roster. I'm assuming his price tag will be too steep now, since Pierre is off the market. I'd have Bradley there too if he was on the roster.

I see no reason for the As to have interest in Mench. A's are shopping for a RH power bat. Very odd considering how stacked they are in the OF. Rumor is they want to DH Dan Johnson and move Swisher to 1b. Johnson, Swisher, Chavez and Kotsay are all lefty hitters. Well, Swisher is a switch hitter. I'm just passing along the rumor. Don't shoot the messenger.

I see no reason for the As to have interest in Mench. A's are shopping for a RH power bat.

I agree on Soriano. I just fear that Baker would bat him 2nd where he would hurt more than help. I'd rather have Walker than Soriano. But, if the Cubs did trade for Soriano, would you rather have Soriano or Neifi batting 2nd? I think I'd prefer Soriano. Remembering that Dusty is the manager, it would probably be one of those two rather than Murton.

Hasn't Bradley's stock risen since the trade for Pierre? The Yankees still want a CFer. Boston might need one. Detroit is talking to Damon. I'm sure other teams do as well, since there were so many teams interested in Pierre. Are we willing to overpay dramatically for Bradley? When is the non tender date? Probably won't matter since Bradley would probably not pick the Cubs if he's non tendered. We have a CF now and that's the position he prefers. We should have locked up Bradley rather than Pierre, or at least before trading for Pierre. But, what's done is done.

Patterson does have 5 tools. He just hasn't put them all together. Maybe he will some day, maybe he won't. Did you hope he would fail while many of us cheered for him to succeed? So you can say "I told you so"? Are you saying that you hoped that Patterson would fail just so you could rub people's noses in it? Did you place more importance on this than the Cub's winning? Because you say so? I'm sold. :roll:

I agree that if you deduct the caught stealing (and picked off first base) from Pierre's OBP, you also have to consider each of his successful steals as equal to a double. That makes for a lot of doubles. Does anyone worry that Baker would use the #2 hitter to bunt Pierre (who steals 2nd) to 3rd like Baylor used to do ALL THE TIME?