ThePenguin11

Take Guzman, but make sure you wrap some duct tape around his arm so it doesn't fall off on the way over to Miami. He's damaged goods as far as I'm concerned.

Good post. People need patience. I bet the Cubs make a good pickup by the end of the week. I bet they make two or three. After all, the meetings just started yesterday.

'Jim Hendry stinks. The Cubs were better off without him.' Um, no. The Cubs wouldn't be anywhere without him. They have a large payroll - in large part because he made it happen. They have had their most successful 3-year stretch in many, many years whether you like it or not. If not for Dusty's mishandling of the great players that Hendry has acquired, the results should have been even better in the win column. Take a look around. How many GM's around the league are better than him? Not that many. He's doing his best. Save the blame for Dusty - he's the one who's managed to screw it up with the best ensemble of Cubs talent since Santo, Banks and Williams shared a field.

I'm curious to see what shape Maddux comes to camp in this year. Considering he retired his workout regimen in Atlanta, he should be sporting a 'Bro' this year. If he ran a mile every week or so, and maybe spent some time in the pool instead of the hot tub, he may be able to keep the ERA in the mid-3's and win more games than he loses. It might also help him to get past 85 pitches in a game.

They had to close up shop because they had a SMALL budget. They traded their stars for prospects and the process repeated itself. But they were real bad for a while and didn't have the luxury of adding All-stars for young players in their minor leagues. The Cubs are different. They have the money to go for it every year. This argument is stupid. BTW, Vance is in another thread posting new trade ideas for the Cubs, so I guess that didn't last very long.

This thread should probably be locked, it's an insult to the game of baseball.

Pay no attention to the marlins behind the curtain Pay no attention to their 2 World Series trophies!!! What? So it's okay to give up if you've won a World Series recently? No. They are a small/mid market team who has to make a run for it and unload for young talent when they get over budget. They work with a different system from ours. For a major market team to act like a small market team is irresponsible in fairness to the fans. Unless of course, your fans enable quitting.

Pay no attention to the marlins behind the curtain Pay no attention to their 2 World Series trophies!!!

That's crap. Then you pull 'tough' trades. Did you guys think the White Sox had any chance last year to win the WS? Think back to hot stove season...Anyone? Anyone? You make the best moves to improve your team in the best ways possible. Nobody just closes shop and gives up. Hendry wouldn't even consider it. That's a joke.

This thread needs John Belushi (Blutarski), because it's the most cowardly conversation topic in the history of Cubdom. Should we just give up now? Why? So Cubs baseball can suck and be totally unwatchable for a whole year? Give me a break. Just because Hendry doesn't have all the free agents in the world to choose from, doesn't mean he can't still pull something off with trades. There are still a few free agent SP's available. Man, it's like Hendry can't do anything right for some fans here. The only reason the Cubs have been alive in Chicago the past 4 or 5 years is because of him. Should give up and start investing in 2007? No. Never. Be a fan of another team if that's how you feel.

My bad, didn't know Rosenthal's article was as old as it was...

I prefer my eggs scrambled on toast, but I think it's Jim's right to have as many as he wants in a basket.

Unfortunately, I can guarantee that Neifi Perez and Jose Macias will be Cubs after this week.

The Cubs have signed Bobby Hull to a one-day contract to play against newly acquired White Sox player Minnie Minoso in this year's crosstown classic. http://www.chicagowolves.com/news/readstory.cfm?story=1303

Oh - my bad - I thought this was a thread regarding a possible comeback for Damon Buford. I still have hope I suppose.

Check out johnhanleyart.com for great sports art. He's usually a front page sponsor...

Pie would have to get traded to get one of those OF'ers, so adding Damon would become a necessity anyways.

This appears to me to be an 'ego' move for the new GM, Coletti. It really makes me wonder how MLB feels about baseball executives not being "fiscally responsible". I thought there were some whispers about MLB already being angry about teams overspending, I have to think this would be gas on the fire. The only saving grace for the Dodgers would be that they didn't offer that many years. I'll bet there's a player option for a fourth and maybe even a mutual option for a fifth.

Looks like the Cardinals may jump in before we get a chance. They're looking to add Kearns. That would allow them to keep Dunn. Hendry needs to act fast. Austin Kearns - OF - Reds The Cardinals and Reds have had discussions involving outfielders Austin Kearns and Wily Mo Pena. Cards GM Walt Jocketty might be willing to part with Jason Marquis, but it's unclear how much interest the Reds would have in a pitcher one year away from free agency. If the Reds want to go younger, they could target Brad Thompson and Adam Wainwright. Anthony Reyes is likely unavailable. Dec. 4 - 2:15 am et Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch

I think it's time to get involved in the expensive Johnny Damon sweepstakes. Would he take 5 years / $50 Million? Probably. Is he worth it? Maybe?

He's 100% right. He already said he didn't want to go into a detailed post saying how wrong that is, that's not childish or arrogant. Runs and RBI are terrible to use since they are entirely dependent on your teammates, and partially your spot in the order. HR are nice, but using them to make a point about how one player is better than the other isn't effective. Numbers like SLG(which Sulley posted) do a much better job. Same with SB. They're useful to show how often a player is effective at their percentage, but SB% is much better. Plus, those numbers together show you nothing about the most important parts of hitting, getting on base, and how often they get past first base by themselves. The only numbers you can compare in this situation are career statistics. SLG is almost the same. Bradley obviously edges him out in OPS because Patterson can't take a walk. SB%? Advantage Patterson. I never said Patterson was better - or even equal. I said we should MAYBE focus on SS and RF to get impact players there, since Bradleys marginally better statistics combined with his self-destructive personality and injury-risk might not make much of a difference. Basically what I was getting at this: Keep Patterson if you can get someone like Dunn in RF and lock up Furcal at SS. Read all my posts and you'll find that is the case.

i didn't really mention any sabr stats, and any arrogance in my tone is purely inferred, not implied. but for the record, you don't have to be Bob's Keeper to realize that corey, at this time, would be far less productive than bradley. My point is to lose Walker in order to bring in baseball Satan, for a decent statistical upgrade is not worth all effort, when Hendry can focus his time with other teams and greater statistical upgrades. Maybe they're not considered sabermetric stats - but you get what I mean. To say that my statistical comparisons are worthless, and yours (based on injury and suspension shortened seasons) are totally valid, comes off as arrogant or at the very least - childish.

patterson has never put up close to .321/.421/.501/.922, so how are corey's best numbers superior? Patterson's HR, RBI, R and SB numbers are all even or better. Since Bradley has only played more than 101 games in a season (141 in 2004) his one season with an impressive OBP holds very little water with me. He is more of an injury risk than Patterson, he's kind of a jerk and very statistically sporadic. You just can't expect him to have a good OBP. I'm not saying Patterson is a better baseball player, but I am saying since their numbers are close, then why go through all of the trouble to get a headache for one year? a. I don't really want to explain to you why the stats you mention are practically worthless when comparing players. but you get the picture. b. bradley has a career IsoD of .081, which means he'll put up an impressive OBP more than likely. so yes, compared to patterson, i can almost guarantee that he'll have a better OBP. c. their numbers aren't close. patterson: .252/.293/.414/.707 bradley .269/.350/.426/.776 Bradley even bests corey in SLG, which is supposedly patterson's strength, and a much more telling stat than HRs or RBIs. d. don't care if he's a jerk, we won 10 more games with jerks in 2004 than we did with angels in 2005. e. the only salient point you can make about bradley is that he's an injury risk, but then again, this team would have been in better shape had corey been more of an injury risk last season. anything we get is an upgrade, even pierre at this point. Bradley's statistics are up and down and his season's have been too short to use as a fair sample size. Yes, Patterson's saber stats blow. Noone disputes that. For the record, I read Moneyball and put a lot of stock into the statistical research used in it (as a supplement to other means of predicting statistical success). I haven't made it my life's work to study every statistical category of sabermetrics, but you sure do have an arrogance in your tone when you speak of these statistics. Get over yourself.

I'd rather go with Castillo only and get Bradley for CF. Of course, I guess you could always put Pierre in CF and Bradley in RF. Not a very powerful OF, but one that could probably get on base pretty well. Furcal Pierre Castillo Lee Ramirez Bradley Barrett Murton P It would be a nice problem to have, but a wierd lineup having all these 1-2 hitters. It would probably turn out to be one of the best in the NL for run production though.

Wouldn't Pinto, Cedeno and Walker be more than enough for Castillo and Pierre? It would probably be worth it, too. (If we signed Furcal first, of course.)