BigbadB

With Giles STILL on the market, is it a good idea to spend money like it's going out of style (overpaying for bench players Rusch and Neifi), then realize later you HAD the money to sign him, but you don't anymore?

If it cost the same money to have: Giles Bradley Furcal Fontenot Cedeno Williams spot/long relief Burnett than it would Jacque Jones/Juan Encarnacion Juan Pierre Furcal Perez Cedeno Rusch Burnett Assuming that 5m would be the difference between Giles and Jones or Encarnacion, which team would you rather have? If with 11m you could have had Brian Giles or Juan Encarnacion, Glendon Rusch and Neifi Perez, I'll take the Giles deal 100 times out of 100. It's a no brainer.

I personally cannot deal with having Neifi as the starter. I dont care who we sign or trade for having Perez here and starting when last year we had options like Nomar, Walker, and Cedeno is a bad idea. When did Neifi ever start over Nomar and Walker? (Besides when they were injured) Did you answer my previous question regarding Murton batting 2nd? Macias had more at bats in the top two spots in the order last year than Murton and Cedeno combined. To answer your new question, it doesn't appear as though Nomar or Walker will be here next year. What we do know is that Hendry and/or Baker thought Enrique Wilson was a better choice over Cedeno last year. How many more at bats has Cedeno gotten since that time to prove he can be better than Enrique Wilson, let alone Neifi Perez?

I don't see it that way, Don. The Trib has opened the coffers over the last 5 years. They've gone from a 65m a year team to a 100m a year team. They have loosened the purse strings and allowed the President, GM and manager have the cash to spend to put a winner on the field. Unfortunately, the Tribune Co. does not know how a successful baseball team is put together. They are trusting that the management they put in place knows what they are doing. It's easy for Hendry and MacPhail to report to the Tribune Co. that injuries and poor defense were the main culprits of their lost season last year. They can point to a playoff appearance in 2003 and a winning season in 2004 to prove that injuries played the biggest part in their losing. Why wouldn't the Tribune Co. buy into it. It's true, injuries did play a big part in their downfall. The Tribune Co. won't see a need to replace Hendry or MacPhail until the team completely bombs and/or attendance figures start dropping. Unfortunately, neither of these will likely happen, since Hendry does have such a big budget to work with. We all know that Neifi doesn't belong on this team. We all know he is being overpaid to be on this team. Why Hendry doesn't see that is beyond my scope of imagination. Only Hendry could put together a subpar team for 100m in back to back years. Oops. I said I would reserve judgment, and I'll keep that promise. In the end, it will not have been the Tribune's fault if this team fails. It will be the baseball people they put in place to put together a winning team. Unfortunately, it will likely take several years for a more competent GM to fix the damage that is getting done here.

I said I would hold out until this offseason was over before I made my final judgment on Hendry, but he's making this very difficult for me. Technically, Hendry could still put a formidable line up out there even with these signings. I could deal with Neifi if I knew he was just a back up. I could probably even deal with him as the everyday starter if we had Giles in RF, Bradley in CF, Murton in LF and Furcal at SS. But, Neifi would have to hit 8th and Cedeno would have to prove 100% that he couldn't play better than Neifi. What's the likelihood that the Cubs sign Furcal, Giles and trade for someone like Bradley? I would venture to guess no chance. There is absolutely zero reason Neifi should have been resigned. There is absolutely zero reason he should have been resigned for such ridiculous money. One more roster spot wasted. One more guy who will be exposed to the Rule 5 draft. One more guy that Dusty will prefer over a rookie. I'm biting my lip.

Murton whom JH did trade for. Oh never mind! Sorry, boys! I didn't mean to ruin the pessimist party. I have some homework for you. How many times did Murton bat second last year? How many times was Macias AND Perez chosen to hit at the top of the order over Murton? Maybe you shouldn't mock people's anger unless you have evidence to support your theory. Murton had 10 lead off at bats, and 1 at bat in the 2 hole. He had more at bats in each of the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th spots in the order than 1st or 2nd combined. Cedeno had 24 at bats in the 2 hole. That's 2 more than Enrique Wilson got. Remember Enrique Wilson? Cedeno got sent down when the Cubs picked up Wilson. Macias hit in the 1/2 spot 48 times. That's more than Cedeno and Murton combined. That's NOT Neifi Perez. That's MACIAS. I'm not even going to bother with Perez, because he hit at the top of the order a ridiculous amount of times. What about history tells you Murton will bat 2nd for the 2006 Cubs? I'm dying to know.

If I was Cleveland, I'd work a deal for Soriano or Kent before I'd make a play on Walker. Actually, why not offer up Crisp to San Diego for Loretta? San Diego could then improve their outfield defense and promote Josh Barfield.

Plenty of options there. I think it is important to nail down Furcal first, if that is Hendry's intent, so the leadoff hitter thing is resolved. That means the CF option no longer must be a leadoff man, opening up additional possibilities. There are the obvious choices: sign Kenny Lofton, trade for Milton Bradley, trade for Mike Cameron, trade for Juan Pierre. But my favorite choice would be a trade with Cleveland. How about: Walker + Rich Hill + Ricky Nolasco for Grady Sizemore and Rafael Betancourt? Or if that is a bit too rich for Cleveland, substitute Coco Crisp for Sizemore. Walker is expendable, Hill doesn't fit in the Cubs' rotation plans if they are going to sign a free agent like Burnett or Millwood, and Nolasco is a promising prospect, but still, a prospect. Cleveland solves their need for a 1B/2B option that can hit, they get a young starter to plug into their rotation (or use in the bullpen) in Hill, and they get the free option on Nolasco, who would likely pitch AAA for them in '06. Murton, Sizemore and Abreu in the OF, with Furcal and Cedeno up the middle, I really like that.... 8) Absolute pipe dream if you think Cleveland gives up Sizemore. I hope Pie ends up being as good as Sizemore appears to be. How many guys hit nearly .290, 111 runs scored, 70 XBH's and a .348 OBP at the age of 22? Tack on that he provides this kind of production from CF and will make 300K for a few more years yet, and you have what we like to call our top prospects, "untouchable".

Of the players labeled malcontents, how many were considered malcontents prior to their arrival in Wrigleyville? None! Me thinks that Dusty breeds malcontentia. Wasn't it the same year that Bonds and Kent got into a cat fight that the Giants went to the World Series?

Welcome to NSBB. Nice first post. I'd settle for that line up, though Brian Giles is #1 on my radar.

Yay, I'll be able to go to all the Dodger/Padres games in SoCal this year. I might even make arrangements to go to Arizona or Colorado this year as well.

:shock:

Cleveland won't trade Sizemore for anyone. He just turned 23, so the numbers he put up this past year was at 22 years of age. 70 XBH's, 22 stolen bases, 111 runs scored. Those are the kinds of guys you build around, not trade.

Yes, you are correct. Randa was traded. But, the original point is still accurate. The Padres have already given up on Burroughs.

No, San Diego gave up on Burroughs already. They signed Joe Randa to play 3rd this past year.

And because Cedeno has the potential to be a .260/.320 guy just as much as he has the potential to be a .310/.360 guy, I'd rather sign Nomar to a 1 year deal and give Cedeno plenty of chances to prove he should be an everyday starter.

SLG isn't everything, despite what this site preaches. This site disregards the importance of OBP? That's one of the more original criticisms levied against it. Anyway, leaving aside the fact that I despise OPS, you're absolutely right that SLG isn't everything, but then again neither is OBP everything either. As a result, Ichiro just is not as good as might be supposed from his reputation and thus his salary. Certainly he's a very good player, and the best leadoff hitter in the game. But his lack of power does prevents him from rightfully being classed a great player. Furthermore, Ichiro's now 32 years old, and his skill set of average and speed isn't particularly well suited to ageing. If they slip, Ichiro won't have much left to his game. If he only hits .280, his on-base/slugging aren't likely to be much higher .330/.400. That's problematic. But don't get me wrong, Ichiro's worth every cent that he makes simply because of the Japan factor, and I'll take him as the Cubs CF every day! And I mean everyday, Ichiro has missed just 14 games in 5 years in the majors! And then put Brian Giles in right... CF Ichiro Suzuki, RF Brian Giles, 1B Derrek Lee, 3B Aramis Ramirez, SS Nomar Garciaparra, 2B Todd Walker, C Michael Barrett, LF Matt Murton !! All the same, you have to be aware that Ichiro alone wouldn't represent the necessary offensive improvement that the Cubs have to be seeking this winter. And that's why Brian Giles would be necessary too. One other thing I want to get off my chest: the absolutely irrationality of the concept of not doing anything particularly too drastic about the centre field position for the sake of "keeping it open for Felix Pie". Felix Pie is still nothing but a prospect, albeit a very good one at that. Prospect failure rates being what they are, sometimes because of a lack of talent, or a lack of talent compatible with the majors, sometimes because of a lack of effort or dedication, sometimes because of injury, it makes little sense to pencil Pie in at this stage as the Opening Day 2007 centre fielder. It makes a lot more sense to work on the assumption that Pie will not make it, or better yet that Pie doesn't exist. Then the worst that can happen is that the continguency plan proves unnecessary, and you have an embarrassment of riches and an in-demand trading chip, in an AJ Pierzynski/Joe Mauer/Joe Nathan/Francisco Liriano/Boof Bonser kind of way, assuming of course that you were sensible as always when it came to the contracts. On the other hand, if you work on the assumption that Pie will make it, it's possible that you can end up with absolutely no-one, and thus put yourself into a weak and disadvantaged negotiating position when it comes to filling the vacancy. The Cubs have continuously done this over the years: they've purposely held spots open for people that have never come. Especially after this last season, Hendry must learn that a continguency plan too many is better than none at all. I agree with the top part, but disagree on the concept of not "holding" a spot for a rookie. What exactly is Phily going to do. They have one of the best prospects in the game sitting in AAA because the guy ahead of him is now old, oft injured and making a crap load of money for the next several years. Phily must be kicking themselves. I'm all for not just handing any rookie a spot to sink or swim. I definitely think that's the wrong approach on Cedeno. I'd rather see Cedeno earn it. Who blocks Pie now that either couldn't be traded or benched if Pie keeps improving like he has? My idea of going after Lofton gives us a bunch of guys who could keep centerfield productive in '06. Signing Damon to a long term deal to play center would be pulling a Philadelphia move, which could really come back and bite you.

Not many teams would be the slightest bit interested in trading for Lee. They'd have to give up something significant and Lee only has a year remaining on his contract.

And if Cedeno ends up being a mediocre offensive player (.260/.320), where does that help them in the grand scheme?

Maybe I'm just confusing Texas with Kansas City.

Yes

Where's Jerry Rice??????? :D

I thought they moved the fences back at Arlington, which neutralized the hitting advantage. Soriano had 92 XBH's for the Yankees a few years back, and it's not one of the more friendly parks for right handed hitters. Your reference to Soriano's defense is duly noted.

The problem is that we have lots of candidates for #4 and #5 (Maddux, Rusch, Williams, etc.) and most of the people you mentioned aren't much better than what we have. Valid point. I, for one, though have been wondering why we haven't heard Washburn rumblings considering JH's apparent love affair with a left handed starter any way he can get one. His name is Glendon Rusch.

And honestly, I wouldn't trade Mike freakin' Wuertz for Alfonso Soriano. Soriano sucks (for reasons that have already been documented on this website which I will not take the time to rehash). Wood's trade value is probably at the lowest it has ever been. I, for one, still think he has some mileage in left in his arm and am still optimistic that he can be effective. If you are going to trade him, at least wait until he gets back on track and his trade value rises commensurably (at which point any suggestion of a trade will probably met with howls of protest). Even I (Mr. OBP) don't think Soriano sucks. I'd gladly take him at 2nd base if I had very good to excellent OBP in the other 7 spots in the order. Not many 2b's give you 81 XBH's in a season. Heck, I'd take that kind of production out of Patterson. But, once again if the other spots in the order had very good to excellent OBP's.