BigbadB

Eaton is another one that could be available. I wouldn't be interested in either of those deals. Especially the Klesko/Lawrence one. Klesko doesn't seem interested in waiving his no trade anyway. I don't see where that team will draw any interest from free agents and I don't see how they make themselves better through trades.

but san diego is where his family lives, plus, i've heard the weather is very nice. Sounds like he'll be back in San Diego after all.

It would be completely outside the realm of my comprehension if Hendry didn't want Giles. What is there not to want? Now that Burnitz is basically gone, Patterson seems to be on the market and Hairston is really a 2b, that leaves Murton as the only outfielder. The Cubs haven't had a "good" power hitter in the heart of the line up since I can't remember. McGriff was alright, and Burnitz wasn't the worst, but a good lefty power bat like Giles tucked in between Lee and Aramis makes a very promising heart of the order. Filling the rest of the line up isn't nearly as critical as signing Giles.

This is being discussed in the "62 players have filed for free agency thread".

Young is a 2b. He's only playing SS because Soriano refuses to move. I don't see Texas moving him. If they had it to do all over again, I'd take Prior over Tex again.

i don't understand the fascination either. the same people who criticize the cubs in the past for "waiting for the 3-run homer" are the same people who want him, which makes me scratch my head. That is not true, so please don't classify it as such.

We probably agree much more than you think! We agree on respecting his passion and desire to win, and I agree with you that worrying about your job everday is NOT a good situation. That said however, I personally think there's a "healthy" degree of fear that has a purpose as a real motivator to do the best job you can - I'm guessing it lies somewhere between George's impulsiveness and hot headedness and what we've seen from the Cubs the last few years. Agreed. Opposite ends of the spectrum for those two clubs. Dusty wouldn't even bench a guy who is too lazy to bend over and pick up a ball to throw it back in. Excusing that type of behavior encourages that type of behavior.

Towers would be a fool not to make the jump to AZ. I'd jump ship before the Padres ship completely sinks.

The way you just responded was not only articulate, but respectful which is all I expect from any discussion. For what it's worth - although I obviously can't prove it - I wouldn't have gone to any Cub games for the last 2 years even if I lived in Chicago. Your reasoning makes very good sense, however it also points out how much more "power" fans in Chicago and around Wrigley Field can weild by their actions than I can from here in New Hampshire. I'm just curious in general (not asking you specifically) - what other means do fans have for expressing their disappointment in the direction of their favorite team other than by letters to ownership and/or not attending games/buying merchandise? If people think going to the games and booing will change anything, that only works when the ownership has a competitive nature and hates to lose themselves - hates it enough to make changes when changes are necessary. If the ownership is primarily there to make a business profit, what the heck do they care if you go to the game and boo, as long as you spend money for tickets, hot dogs and beer. You keep saying that ownership doesn't care. If they don't care, why do they spend 100m on payroll? If the seats are getting filled regardless, couldn't they spend 100K? 30m? 50m? 70m? Why spend top 5 in payroll? Please answer this question. Direct your anger at the people who are not going out and spending that money wisely, but please acknowledge that spending 100m on payroll is a sign of caring. No - you're absolutely right and in one of my other responses I did respect the fact that ownership is spending a significant amount of money and I'm certainly not saying that they should be spending twice as much because that alone doesn't solve the problem - what I AM saying is that they should be getting value for the money that they are spending and they should be holding those who they hand the money over to accountable for how and where it's spent. Jim Hendry needs to get the most out of the money he's allowed to spend, and the "powers that be" should be evaluating and drafting the best possible players to help build the minor league system. You said it yourself that the Cubs are in or near the top 5 teams in baseball as far as payroll - that means if they are not in the top 5 teams in baseball as far as success is concerned, something is wrong. Injuries and bad years happen, but overall, there's little excuse for the Cubs organization to not be able to field a contending team 7-8 out of 10 seasons. Like I said before, it's time for Jim Hendry to step up and use the money he's being given to put together a contender, and if Dusty Baker and his coaches aren't capable of getting the most out of what's given to them to work with, then THEY need to be held accountable as well. Say what you will about George Steinbrenner, but I would take an owner as passionate about competition and winning as him any day of the week. We'll have to agree to disagree on Steinbrenner. You do have to like his passion, but as an organization, you can't possibly approve of everyone having to worry about whether they'll have a job every morning when they wake up. A lot of them end up losing their jobs.

I wouldn't want him as a bench player. No thanks.

That's about, what, a five minute trip in the NL West? I think it's a little more bold than you think it is. Colorado is in this division. San Diego was 6th in attendance, has ridiculous prices at the gate and they had a playoff caliber team. After next year, Klesko and Park will be off their books. They have plenty of money to spend this offseason, but they won't. They will settle for Miguel Olivo behind the dish in replacing Hernandez, they'll go with Jacque Jones in place of Brian Giles and they'll sign a starter to combat the fall off in offense they will expect. This is a team that shouldn't have any problem spending 80m+.

The way you just responded was not only articulate, but respectful which is all I expect from any discussion. For what it's worth - although I obviously can't prove it - I wouldn't have gone to any Cub games for the last 2 years even if I lived in Chicago. Your reasoning makes very good sense, however it also points out how much more "power" fans in Chicago and around Wrigley Field can weild by their actions than I can from here in New Hampshire. I'm just curious in general (not asking you specifically) - what other means do fans have for expressing their disappointment in the direction of their favorite team other than by letters to ownership and/or not attending games/buying merchandise? If people think going to the games and booing will change anything, that only works when the ownership has a competitive nature and hates to lose themselves - hates it enough to make changes when changes are necessary. If the ownership is primarily there to make a business profit, what the heck do they care if you go to the game and boo, as long as you spend money for tickets, hot dogs and beer. You keep saying that ownership doesn't care. If they don't care, why do they spend 100m on payroll? If the seats are getting filled regardless, couldn't they spend 100K? 30m? 50m? 70m? Why spend top 5 in payroll? Please answer this question. Direct your anger at the people who are not going out and spending that money wisely, but please acknowledge that spending 100m on payroll is a sign of caring.

I think a lot of players can be influential in who a club goes after. I sure wish you didn't interrupt Dempster when he was trying to tell you that the Cubs were going to sign Furcal, Burnett and Giles.

Sure, don't listen to me. I've been saying all along that SD was blowing him off and they've given him zero reason to want to stay. Unfortunately, I think this is the order in which I think he'll sign. 1. Atlanta 2. Wherever Atlanta trades Marcus Giles 3. St. Louis 4. Cubs It sounds like Ramon Hernandez won't be back in San Diego either. I'm calling it right now, San Diego goes from first to worst this year.

Victorino didn't impress me when I saw him. I believe he reminded me of Doug Dascenzo.

I think if everyone stopped creating new threads about the White Sox, there wouldn't be that many people discussing it at all.

Bottom line, Epstein brought a World Series to Boston. Epstein got them back to the playoffs again this year, even with Schilling hurt most of the year. To say Epstein isn't worth it is debatable. In the end, it's his decision to decide how much he's worth and whether or not Boston should pay it is theirs. If it's me, I would be taking this down to the last day too. Besides honoring my contract, I brought a Championship to Boston. Pay me or I'll go somewhere else.

If you want to really put OBP into perspective, the difference between the Cubs and White Sox this past year is a perfect example. Derrek Lee hit .325 AVG in the 3 spot with a 1.058 OPS. He had 81 RBI's in 510 at bats. Frank Thomas, Carl Everett and Aaron Rowand combined for 557 at bats and had AVG's of .218/.249/.266 and had 97 RBI's combined in the 3 spot. As a whole team hitting 3rd in the order, the Cubs had a .308 AVG and 93 RBI's. As a whole team hitting 3rd in the order, the Sox had a .234 AVG and 103 RBI's. I'd say the #1 thing the Cubs need to address this offseason is the .299 OPB lead off spot and the .317 OBP #2 spot in the order. The White Sox had a .338 and .335 OBP from their top two spots.

I think trading for Marcus Giles will spark Brian Giles interest. If they want to play together, this is probably the only year they can make it happen. I just wouldn't have the slightest clue what Atlanta would want from us to give up such quality talent. I wonder if it would require taking Chipper Jones or Mike Hampton? Hampton being injured makes that nearly impossible. I'd certainly be on the phone with them.

They were both lucky and good. They didn't have major injuries, they had good years from unexpected players, etc.... But, as bad as their offense was at scoring runs and putting runners on base, at least they weren't sticking below .300 OBP guys at the top of the batting order. They had respectable OBP's hitting the most often (top of the order) and also right in front of their most productive bats. The pitching is what made them win more than anything.

Are you saying Schilling won the World Series all by himself?

Sure he won a series, but with a massive payroll, and he has only been a GM for 3 years. You can't even say he has a track record. You can't justify paying him as much as guy like Shuerholz, who had put together 14 consecutive division winners. It's not like he is a super genius. He let both Lowe and Martinez walk this year and did little to improve the bullpen when it was obvious it was pretty bad, and that is why they went out of the playoffs like lambs. I give him credit for Ortiz, Schilling, Millar and Foulke, but I think a lot of guys could have put together a winner with 140 million dollars. He is a good GM, but not elite just yet. What do you hire a GM to do? Win the World Series. Maybe more than once if he can. He did it. He went out and got the players that would win a World Series and they did it. They did it going head to head against a 200m payroll team. If Schilling was healthy all year this year, they might have done it again this year. If the GM who puts together a 140m team can't be afforded 1.5m or whatever it is he actually wants, I don't know what to say. Without him, they may have been sitting at home in October last year. There have been a few average-poor GM's who have won titles. Kenny Williams is a prime example. Should he get top dollar? It's not the amount alone that bothers me, but the amount relative to other general mangers who are better. Sustained success is more indicative of a good GM than one WS title. I just can't see how you can pay a guy with only 3 years experience mor ehtan a guy like Schuerholz, who has overseen the management of 14 consecutive division titles, 3 pennants and a Championship. Epstein is a neophyte GM, and you can't just pay him more money than guys who have done far more than he has, and done it for longer. Giving Epstein top dollar would be like making Miguel Cabrera the biggest contract in the game right now. Yes he has been impressive, but it been over too short a period to anoint him elite. Let him win a few more division titles and pennants. Who made more than Derek Jeter before A-Rod signed his contract? Why should a team (Boston) that has 4 times the salary base as another team (Tampa) pay the same amount for their GM's? Who sets the bar for this? If I'm Epstein, I have done nothing with my team, except win and I want this much money to stay here. If you don't give it to me, I'm going somewhere else. It's pretty simple. If I'm Boston, I give him what he wants or I look for someone else, someone else who may not do as good a job as Epstein.

Sure he won a series, but with a massive payroll, and he has only been a GM for 3 years. You can't even say he has a track record. You can't justify paying him as much as guy like Shuerholz, who had put together 14 consecutive division winners. It's not like he is a super genius. He let both Lowe and Martinez walk this year and did little to improve the bullpen when it was obvious it was pretty bad, and that is why they went out of the playoffs like lambs. I give him credit for Ortiz, Schilling, Millar and Foulke, but I think a lot of guys could have put together a winner with 140 million dollars. He is a good GM, but not elite just yet. What do you hire a GM to do? Win the World Series. Maybe more than once if he can. He did it. He went out and got the players that would win a World Series and they did it. They did it going head to head against a 200m payroll team. If Schilling was healthy all year this year, they might have done it again this year. If the GM who puts together a 140m team can't be afforded 1.5m or whatever it is he actually wants, I don't know what to say. Without him, they may have been sitting at home in October last year.

Ya know, I'm sure it really hurts...... But if you stick your bat and hands out in the strike zone on a check swing and the ball hits your hands, you do not deserve first base. That is not HBP. That should be unlucky for you. That goes for Dye and Tavares, even though Dye never got hit in the first place. Get back up there and tough it out.

So, who would want Epstein if he became available? Not me. Other than bring in Schilling, what has Epstein done for the Sox? Not much, IMO, other than allow his world championship team to become significantly worse. Of course, it was Epstein that put the World Championship team together. :-s Did he? I am probably wrong, but wasn't the core of that team already there when he took over? What exactly did you want him to do? He did what no other GM for Boston had done since before my grandfather was born. Won a World Series. What has he done since? He made it to the playoffs again this year, and almost beat out the Yankees for the division. If I'm Epstein, I'm thinking that I deserve quite a bit. Why should he make less than any of the guys who work for him (at least the starters)? If Towers goes to Arizona, Epstein would probably be welcomed back to San Diego. He won't get Boston money, but by standing his ground, he's dictating the situation rather than letting it be the other way around. As young as he is, he'll make a lot of money before he's done. For what he's done so far, he deserves every bit he can squeeze out of them.