ThePenguin11

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?

Now that I've taken a long look at our options (Pierre, Bradley and Patterson), I've thought about all the factors in aqcuiring (or keeping) all of these players - and come to this conclusion: Trading (and possibly overpaying) for Pierre as a one-year stopgap and trading for Bradley (a misfit and supposed clubhouse-cancer) are almost not worth the effort. I thought I'd never say it but - Why not roll the dice on Patterson for one more year? His best numbers are better than Bradley's (although Bradley does K less, and play better D) and his teammates like him. If Hendry can focus his efforts on RF and SS, he can bury CP in the 8-hole and consider any positive production gravy. If he was to get Furcal and trade for an impact bat in RF, I think the Cubs would be just fine. Is anyone else thinking this way?

^Well if that's not the perfect example^

Well, other than the fact that they already have an All-star caliber shortstop, no manager and a new general manager, I can't figure out what the Dodgers are doing here. Why the hell would Furcal put himself in that position. That's even worse than going somewhere to a team that thinks their current SS is an all-star (Neifi), an absent minded manager, and a very good GM. If anything at least we're better than the Dodgers. I wouldn't blame him if he state in Atlanta with Cox and Schuerholtz, but we are offering more money and years - and those tend to do the talking nowadays.

Yeah, it better be Manny. After all JVB was about the 15th guy on the staff. Manny can't be a ptbnl. Not that he ever would be, but why can't he? He's been placed on waivers, you'd think he could be a PTBNL...

Uh-oh, Rotoworld updates: Rafael Furcal - SS - Braves ESPN's Jayson Stark said he's not as confident that Rafael Furcal will join the Cubs as he was two days ago. Talks are continuing, and it's possible no deal will be reached before the end of the weekend, as was previously expected. The Arlington Heights Daily Herald is reporting that the Cubs have offered Furcal $50 million over five years. The Dodgers also appear likely to beat the Braves' four-year offer. Agent Paul Kinzer met with the Braves yesterday and will continue to do so. "I'm based out of Atlanta. I'd love to keep him here," Kinzer said. "Ultimately it's going to be his decision. There has not been a decision made." Dec. 1 - 5:12 pm et

The problem with moving JVB is that we never even had a chance to see him over an extended period of time. JH must be getting something decent otherwise there are easier players to lose on the 40-man IMO.

So what's up w/ the server here? Has everyone else been having trouble getting in here?

40-man/rule 5 move: Jermaine Van Buren - R - Red Sox Red Sox acquired RHP Jermaine Van Buren from the Cubs for a player to be named. We assume it will be a pretty good PTBN, but the Cubs will just block him by signing the 2008 versions of Bobby Howry and Scott Eyre three years from now. Van Buren, 25, has spectacular minor league numbers the last two years -- 59 hits allowed and 134 strikeouts in 112 IP. His low-90s fastball and slider should combine to make him a useful reliever, perhaps even a quality setup man in time. Dec. 1 - 1:48 pm et

Is it wrong that I don't think Adam Greenberg will never be more than a fringe MLB player? I don't understand why everyone is so high on him. He's a really fast guy who might be a decent hitter. I'm thinking he's the caucasion answer for Tom Goodwin.

FWIW, George Ofman just mentioned that the Cubs have some interest in Brad Wilkerson.

Wow! A real rumor?! Wow... just wow. I've never heard of such of thing! ;) What else am I supossed to call it? I think what he means is that nothing about a rumor is 'real'. Until a rumor is confirmed or denied, it's just a leak or someone's imagination.

Ummm....Ditto that.

Me? No, apparently not. It is an old joke on the board. There was a picture of a Cards fan holding a sign saying something to the effect, "Get a clue Morans!" Since then moron has been spelled moran by a lot of people as a light hearted salute to that picture. Fair enough. That's fine until he starts directing it at others. Which he did.

Ease up on the personal attacks. It's just a difference of opinion. No mine was an opinion. Then he called me a moron. So I threw it back at Mr. Intelligence.

Me? No, apparently not.

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then? Since when does "better than league average" mean "All-star?" How many teams have a guy whose above the league avg. at every single position? None that I can think of. Not even the Yankees. they very easily could though. it's not an impossible notion depending on how you want to define "league average production," ie OPS, BA, etc. Of course they could. But the idea that you need to have above average production at every position to be an elite team is just wrong. I would say an elite team should have above average production at 6 of the 8 positions, provided the other two aren't totally abysmal. I agree. I don't think it is the way to go. I was just saying that it is possible (after some moran decided "above average at every position" meant "all-star team"). Some 'morans' don't even know how to spell moron. And the funniest part is when they call out a GM in their avatar for being a 'moran' and have no idea how 'moronic' it looks.

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then? Since when does "better than league average" mean "All-star?" How many teams have a guy whose above the league avg. at every single position? None that I can think of. Not even the Yankees. Gee, then I guess you could say it would take the All Star team to do it. I sit uncorrected.

I'm not saying I'm content with their lack of success. I'm saying look at this team now. There are studs all over the field compared to the crap that used to take the field. I don't blame hendry for any of this. The buck stops at the desk of Dusty Baker. He's had the players all along. Every year this team gets better and he finds a way to burn them out and get the least out of them. Think about the group of misfits who won the wild card in '98. Led by Morandini, Gaetti, Henry Rodriquez and Hernandez (and of course Sosa) and a rag tag bunch of arms the Cubs had more success than this team with an enormous amount of talent. Put Bobby Cox in charge of these guys and you're not complaining about finishing 4th in the Central. It's on Baker, not Hendry. hendry hired baker. hendry could've fired baker. hendry has wasted money on garbage like neifi perez and scott eyre. hendry is the one pursuing juan pierre and jock jones instead of brad wilkerson and brian giles. sorry, hendry gets a lot of the blame too. Oh, I didn't realize that Washington was champing at the bit to rid themselves of Brad Wilkerson. He's not available. And I didn't realize Giles wasn't in his mid-30's asking for $10 Million+per year. I stand corrected. Hendry's totally foolish for not aqcuiring the unaqcuirable and not overpaying for an aging outfielder. Giles is worth no more than 3 years / $24 Million.

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then?

I'm not saying I'm content with their lack of success. I'm saying look at this team now. There are studs all over the field compared to the crap that used to take the field. I don't blame hendry for any of this. The buck stops at the desk of Dusty Baker. He's had the players all along. Every year this team gets better and he finds a way to burn them out and get the least out of them. Think about the group of misfits who won the wild card in '98. Led by Morandini, Gaetti, Henry Rodriquez and Hernandez (and of course Sosa) and a rag tag bunch of arms the Cubs had more success than this team with an enormous amount of talent. Put Bobby Cox in charge of these guys and you're not complaining about finishing 4th in the Central. It's on Baker, not Hendry.

You know what I don't understand? Where all the anti-Jim Hendry sentiment has come from? I see so many spoiled-brat attitude Cubs fans with this mentality, and it really doesn't make sense. The only reason there are expectations for the Cubs now and for the past 5 years is because of what he has been able to accomplish. It's a tough market right now and he's doing all that he can to make this team better. Sometimes you have to overpay to get what you need (and who the h cares when its Trib money anyways?). And what is with the Pierre sucks sentiment? Is he supposed to make a trade for Ichiro (impossible)? Leadoff hitters are one of the hardest commodities to find in baseball and he's going after the two that are the most available. He's taking the path of least resistance. I see names like Gathright and Gomes thrown out there for possible solutions and laugh. Top prospect / future star leadoff hitters would cost Ramirez, Lee or Zambrano. Sometimes I just can't take this sense of entitlement from fellow Cub fans. I'll go away now.

Is the Howry signing official yet? Yes, pending a physical.

Ofman says Pinto + 2 prospects not named Pie for Pierre could be very close. He says he 'expects' that deal to come down.

It wasn't me, I swear. I just got back from Blockbuster - surely they'll vouch for me.