BigbadB

My official answer is whatever it takes. But if I have to give a number, I think the Cubs could afford 50 million over 4 years, and I think Giles would be worth it. My only concern is his range in RF. But I am confident that his bat will remain productive at a level comparable to his career averages for the first 3 years of this contract. He's played plenty of LF as well, so it shouldn't be a problem. Heck, he can still play a little CF when you need an offensive boost. He played 17 games there last year. Right, but it isn't a question of whether Giles can play other positions than RF. It is a question of whether the Cubs will have anyone who can be a better defensive RF than Giles. Right now, it is unclear whether Murton has the arm to play RF, but I doubt he does. Giles isn't a protypical CFer, thats for sure, so, if signed, he will be stuck playing RF unless the Cubs decide to sit or trade Murton. That is the only reason why I bring up Giles' arm strength. As far as trading Murton, I love the kid, but depending on who you can get in return, it might not be a terrible idea to trade him for a good offensive and defensive RFer. I don't see that happening, but that would be the only condition I can think of in which I would agree to trade Murton. I agree. A trade for Murton would have to yield a really good player. Murton will be inexpensive for the next several years. You just don't trade good production guys that make league minimum unless the return would have an immediate AND long term impact.

Yeah, those were my thoughts, too. Pierre is a question mark and so is Hill, at this point. Why settle for a question mark and give up someone who could be good when other, better options exist that can be had without giving up anyone? On a side note, BBB, my two-year-old girl was on my lap as I was reading your post, and she exclaimed in a loud voice, "B! Blue B!" I'm thinking she likes your avatar. :wink: Tell your daughter I'm a married man. :D

Nicely done!

I'd rather have Furcal. I'd rather have Lofton as a stop gap until Pie is ready. Either of those can be had without giving up prospects.

They just barely had a better record than the Padres had this year in winning the division. IF the Cubs had that record, they would not only have not won their division, but they wouldn't have been the wild card either. Just like this year, they were the only team in the division they played in that had a winning record.

Well, .333 is not a horrible OBP. And I count 8 guys with over 100 at bats that had a better OBP than .333. Mix in a guy with an OBP that's almost .600 and you can have some .333's in place of some .350's and equal run support. As far as the pitching is concerned, I'd bet just about any team in baseball would be thrilled to have 5 starters all go 185+ innings and average a 3.83 ERA. I'd rate that just a tad bit better than mediocre. Mix that in with a solid bullpen and you have a pretty good pitching staff.

The Dodgers scored a whopping 574 runs that year. Yikes.

You can call the '98 team crap, but look at those fat OBP's on that team. Morandini had a .380 OBP Blauser had a .340 Grace and Glenallen Hill were over .400 Gaetti had a .397 Sosa was at .377 Brant Brown was at .348 Henry Rodriguez was at .334 Mieske was at .373 Lance Johnson .335 They got people on base. They scored 831 runs in 1998 compared to 703 this year, 789 last year and 724 in Dusty's first year. Under Baylor, they scored 706 in 2002, 777 in 2001, and 764 in Baylor's first year. Riggleman did much more with much less.

What's the weather like today in Chicago?

Yeah, maybe I should have said "since the dead ball era". The Cardinals offense in 1968 was very generic in comparison to nowadays. Better yet, look at those ERA's and IP'd by that Cardinal pitching staff.

I suppose I can see that argument. However, how do we know they have a clue what the real problems are? They didn't address them during the season last year when there was time to address them.

What will the Kazuo Matsui contract do to signings out of Japan? Will we see a drop in signings? A drop in how much they get signed for? Shorter contracts? What would fix Kaz here in the states? A trade to a smaller market? Would the Mets trade him while assuming a big portion of his contract? I've always wondered how good he might be if you got him out of the Zoo.

Last year, there was all kinds of news about the Cubs wanting to go after Beltran. This year, the news has been Furcal. Do they pick and choose their spots to drop a bomb on the media? I agree, Hoops. I need to be patient and let things materialize the way Hendry prefers to do it. But, why can't he at least address what the problems with this team are, so that we know that he knows what those problems are? For example, "we need to improve OBP throughout the line up". Or, "we need to reduce the pitch counts and walks from our pitching staff." This isn't naming names. It's telling your fan base what problems will help fix this team. That's all I really want. I don't want this "we know what we need to do to right the ship" crap.

My official answer is whatever it takes. But if I have to give a number, I think the Cubs could afford 50 million over 4 years, and I think Giles would be worth it. My only concern is his range in RF. But I am confident that his bat will remain productive at a level comparable to his career averages for the first 3 years of this contract. He's played plenty of LF as well, so it shouldn't be a problem. Heck, he can still play a little CF when you need an offensive boost. He played 17 games there last year.

That guys arm will fall off any day now. Perhaps it is the walk that teams should spend more focus on now that steroids are having their impact on offense. The Cubs ranked 2nd in the NL in SLG. Only Florida had a better team batting average than the Cubs in the NL. NO ONE IN THE NL WALKED LESS THAN THE CUBS. NO ONE! It wasn't even close. The Cubs walked 419 times. Feel free to do some digging and find out how many teams that walked 419 times or less finished anywhere better than the Cubs finish this year. Good luck! You can disagree with this theory if you wish, but have some statistics that prove your argument rather than simply calling people names, like "walk romanticists".

The Giants had a good offense and good pitching in 2002. Top 3 in AVG, top 3 in HR's, top 3 in OBP, top 3 in walks, top 3 in runs, etc.... Actually, they were better than top 3 in many of those. Did not hit particularly well? Top 3 is a good thing. San Fran was second in the league in ERA. They gave up the least amount of home runs that year. They gave up the third least walks. Why Dusty's Giants teams were able to do all those things, but the philosophy is completely different in Chicago is beyond me. The Cubs once again led the league in HR's that year. All those home runs led to an 11th place finish in runs scored.

Riggleman is currently being looked at in Tampa. Or, at least he was.

Cardinal fans are morans. End of story. :D

They clearly don't make stuff as good as they used to. Therefore, I'd trust the thing that's been standing for 90 years over something that's been standing only a few weeks. Fenway is still standing, meanwhile many stadiums that were built LONG after Fenway have already been torn down, should be torn down or are no longer safe enough to use, etc.... The Padres didn't just decide to build a new ballpark. They used the structure of Qualcomm in need of major repairs as their bargaining chip.

I'm assuming that's part of the reason why you have a pitching coach. Someone can chart his pitches and see if he's major league caliber. The pitching coach can evaluate, instruct and educate to identify whether there would be a need to bring Rusch back as insurance. This mess is of their own making.

I have never said I'm down with Furcal. Not once. I think he's a very solid SS. However, he is not currently in the Cubs stable and there is no guarantee he will be. The Cubs seemed pretty intent on getting Beltran last year and everyone here was loving the idea of it. But, when Beltran's price soar as high as it did, was everyone still under the impression that they should outbid the ridiculous bids that were being made? No. That very well could happen with Furcal. He is not only a good lead off hitter, but he's also playing a position that is difficult, and there is little else on the market that compares. As far as leading off, I really don't care that much about speed. Walker is a nice lead off option. His OBP is better than Furcal's and Walker won't get caught stealing as often as Furcal will, which is another boost to Walker's OBP in comparison to Furcal's. Derek Jeter led off for the Yankees this year and his OBP was .391. He scored 119 runs. He had 712 plate appearances as a lead off hitter. As a team, the Yankees had 767 plate appearances. The better OBP a team has, the more opportunities the rest of the team has to make something good happen with someone on base. That's why.... The Cubs need to improve OBP throughout the line up, not just lead off. A team with a 100m payroll has no excuse for putting sub .300 OBP's anywhere in the line up. NO EXCUSE! The Yankees pitching staff was not good this year. Their offense carried them. Their .350+ OBP got them where they were this year. Obviously, a combination of good offense and good pitching is where you want to be. I'd like to see the pitching improve, and it probably will with the guys they currently have. But, there are glaring holes on the offense. I certainly do not want to see them sacrifice offense for defense. Poor defense will cost you a game here and there, but bad offense can cost you games all year.

We? Okay, I'll help if that's what it takes. I'll give every cent in my pocket right now... Do you guys think $0.25 will do the job? I'll run down the street and ask him....

I believe dealing with Cincinnatti for Griffey is a possibility, but I don't see why they would want Corey Patterson. They already have a logjam in the outfield, and chances are they don't wouldn't want to replace a productive outfielder with one whose OBP didn't even crack deuce and a half (or .250) last season. The more young, talented pitching we offer, the more likely a deal is with Cinci. Perhaps Guzman, Hill, Williams, and Brownlie could get it done. That's a lot to give up, but Junior's stock has risen greatly over the last year. For that price, they can gladly keep Griffey. It would be horrific to trade Guzman in the same style the Cubs have traded Sosa, Juan Cruz, LaTroy Hawkins and are likely to trade Corey Patterson. The worst time to trade a guy is when his value is at his worst. Guzman is on my untouchable list right now. Not just because he is finally showing signs of being over his injuries, but because no one would offer anything equal to his value IF he were healthy.

We? Okay, I'll help if that's what it takes.

I think it's viable. You're basically looking for moderate production on the bench with different strengths for different guys. A .250/.320/.440 line would be acceptable for RH power threat. Sing is capable of that. I'm not saying he'd be a lock, but at 25 next season, he's not too young, and he does have over 2200 pro at bats, a pretty significant amount. It would depend on how the OF is constructed, and how the rest of the bench looks. I'd be happy with Blanco, 2 vets with good history and 3 minimum wage kids. Dubois was not the first pinch hit bat off the bench this year. Baker wouldn't use Sing as the first bat off the bench either.