Rob

You're reading too much into my phrasing, which was done simply as a contrast to cubsbearsmagic's post immediately preceding mine.

In a perfect world, yes... he'd be a fine addition to the team. He could face lefties as a pinch hitter or in a platoon role, get pulled for a defensive replacement late in the game, and almost never be allowed to face a right handed pitcher. But he wasn't going to be signed for that role. He was going to be signed as a guy who got into 100+ games by being in that platoon role, plus getting the starting nod should Soriano, Byrd, or Fukudome go down with an injury. And if he didn't have those assurances about his playing time, he wasn't going to sign. Since he was going to be expected to play defense and face righties, there are plenty of players who can put up more value for the league minimum. When you start talking about 3.3 mil plus possible incentives, that list grows even more. In the real world, for the amount of money he was going to command and the amount of playing time he would get, Jermaine Dye was never a good option for this team.

You're definitely one of something. Yeah, one of the people who correctly realized that Dye is worse than your average AAAA player at this point. I already said it.

As one of the people who correctly realized that Dye is worse than your average AAAA player at this point, I don't know if I'm happier that he turned the deal down or pissed off at the front office for offering him a ridiculous contract in the first place.

I hope most of that's not in the field. That's not meant to be a real slight to Nady, but if he's getting that kind of playing time... well, that means our better options (Fukudome, Soriano, and Lee) are either injured or not performing.

Yes and no. Personally, I'm in agreement that we should probably be in a wait-and-see approach till the deadline based on Castro's improvement, the standings, injuries, our 2B platoon's performance, etc... On the other hand, I don't see the difference between Theriot and Barney or Blanco to be more than two wins (probably closer to one)... and based on your assessment of our playoff chances and the fact that position players generally fetch significantly more in the offseason than at the deadline, it might make sense to move him if there's a willing trade partner out there now and you don't see us as particularly likely to be fighting for a playoff spot. Well the Cubs are certainly not approaching the season with the mindset that they're not particularly likely to be fighting for a playoff spot. That much is obvious. They're in the same win-now mode that they've been in for years. What's also clear, at least to most, is that their postseason chances are tenuous enough that they can't be giving away wins, whether it be one, two, or whatever. As we all know the difference between being in and being out was just a game or two in 03, 04, and 07. My own opinion is that the alternatives to Theriot should be expected to produce no better than replacement level, and further, that Theriot is more than 1 to 2 wins above replacement. 3 to 4 wins would be more like it, and depending on which website's metrics you prefer (fangraphs, baseball prospectus, etc), I suspect they're likely to agree. The only thing in that post I'm disagreeing with is the assumption that Theriot's replacement is likely to be replacement level. I was the biggest Darwin Barney hater in the world when he was drafted... but if his defense is as good as the latest rounds of scouting reports claim, he doesn't have to do much with the bat to be worth more than replacement. The same applies to Blanco. And that's to say nothing of Castro.

Bay was quite a bit better in the previous years, and was simply fighting a nasty knee injury at the time.

Yes and no. Personally, I'm in agreement that we should probably be in a wait-and-see approach till the deadline based on Castro's improvement, the standings, injuries, our 2B platoon's performance, etc... On the other hand, I don't see the difference between Theriot and Barney or Blanco to be more than two wins (probably closer to one)... and based on your assessment of our playoff chances and the fact that position players generally fetch significantly more in the offseason than at the deadline, it might make sense to move him if there's a willing trade partner out there now and you don't see us as particularly likely to be fighting for a playoff spot.

20 posts and nobody said "pixie dust" yet? You guys are slacking.

If we do sign Bedard, I just hope we're still well in the race by the time he comes back and is effective. Same with Lilly. I just fear our rotation until Lilly comes back, if he's even effective right away. If not, it could be a long April and May. I'm not too worried about April. Lou made a point at the Cubs Convention that we're likely to skip the 5th starter a couple times because of all the days off that month anyways.

In his particular case, I would have been looking for the words "minor league deal" in his asking price.

Nobody is supporting the idea of playing Dye fulltime. OK, that one dude was. The rest of us were discussing the idea of him in a platoon with Fukudome or off the bench against lefties, so don't freak out too much. Freak your mom out. And bad jokes aside, the point remains the same. If you get somebody who can't play in the field, they become much less useful. Especially when the manager is Lou "Double Switch" Piniella and he's working with a really short bench so he can have more pitchers available than he'll ever use. All the while, Soriano is a real injury concern and we're likely to need a good 4th OF at least for a time.

Nobody is supporting the idea of playing Dye fulltime.

Defense aside, would you take Nady over Dye based on hitting alone? I wouldn't even if Nady was healthy, let alone coming off a second TJS surgery. Now I realize Dye is horrible defensively, but I hold firm to the position that you sign bench players for their bats, not their gloves. The only time this is not the case is when you're talking about backup catchers or defensive specialists like Blanco or Fuld. Nady is neither. With an injury prone guy like Soriano in left and older players in center and right, having a guy on the bench who isn't a liability in the field is important, though. With the signing of Nady, if Soriano gets hurt for a month, we won't have to rely on only Fuld to replace him. If we had signed Dye, then we would have had the choice of starting Fuld every day or starting a DH in left every day. Nady is the superior option for this team. This would be fine if Nady wasn't injured himself. I'm reading reports that TJS takes a MINIMUM of 12-14 months to fully heal. Nady had the procedure last July. So if he can't hit we should have just went with Fuld as our 4th OFer. That's for pitchers. Hitters generally get through it in 6-8 months. Sometimes less.

I love posters who overreact to some rumor. We should have fired Hendry when he signed Ankiel, Posednick, Contreras, etc. As I 've posted before, Hendry gets bashed whether he makes a move or not. It's not a matter of whether he gets the deal done. The idea that these are the players he deems worthy of pursuing is very troubling. I'd have checked in on all three of those guys to see what their asking prices were.

Defense aside, would you take Nady over Dye based on hitting alone? I wouldn't even if Nady was healthy, let alone coming off a second TJS surgery. Now I realize Dye is horrible defensively, but I hold firm to the position that you sign bench players for their bats, not their gloves. The only time this is not the case is when you're talking about backup catchers or defensive specialists like Blanco or Fuld. Nady is neither. With an injury prone guy like Soriano in left and older players in center and right, having a guy on the bench who isn't a liability in the field is important, though. With the signing of Nady, if Soriano gets hurt for a month, we won't have to rely on only Fuld to replace him. If we had signed Dye, then we would have had the choice of starting Fuld every day or starting a DH in left every day. Nady is the superior option for this team. Should I post the math yet again that proves that if they have to play the field Sam Fuld is a better player than Jermaine Dye?

Defense aside, would you take Nady over Dye based on hitting alone? I wouldn't even if Nady was healthy, let alone coming off a second TJS surgery. Now I realize Dye is horrible defensively, but I hold firm to the position that you sign bench players for their bats, not their gloves. The only time this is not the case is when you're talking about backup catchers or defensive specialists like Blanco or Fuld. Nady is neither. Nady after an injury is a bit risky, but Dye at his age and taking his precipitous decline into account is just as risky. Considering their bats are similar, I'll take the guy who is just bad in the outfield, as opposed to abysmal. That said, I'd have honestly preferred we go after Spilborghs or Reed Johnson again... somebody who can function defensively at all 3 OF spots (above average in the corners) while mashing on lefties.

The fact anybody in this thread still supported Jermaine Dye is horrifying.

He also wanting a 4-5 year deal last offseason, coming off of wrist surgery. Now he was pretty much completely healthy this last year so he could still be asking for a 3-4 year deal as well. He's also a Type A free agent FWIW, even though we're pick #16, it is a protected pick. So we'd only lose the 2nd rounder.

amazingly well? he hits a bunch of singles 2009 vs RHP - .291/.344/.360 2008 vs RHP - .298/.355/.413 2006 vs RHP - .292/.339/.399 fontenot has a career OPS of like 35 points higher than inglett Say what you want, but for $500,000 a year, I would be very happy with those numbers for my left-handed #2 hitter against RHPs. Mike Fontenot might hit .236/.301/.377 again (last year's numbers) and get paid twice that. Or Fontenot could hit .302/.393/.518 versus righties like he did in 2008. And I don't know where you've gotten the idea that Inglett is a good defender, but he really isn't. Honestly, Fontenot is better than Baker too, their fluke years heading in opposite directions last year notwithstanding.

It's not about greed, it's just the way the system works. Players have absolutely no leverage whatsoever on their contracts for the first three years of major league service time and so are vastly underpaid compared to their market value. Hell, he's still being vastly underpaid compared to his market value. I agree he's WORTH the money he's asking for, based on production. But, if Theriot was an actual free agent this offseason, you think he would have commanded MUCH MORE than the 3.4 he's asking for? I'll give you the fact that at his age, he'd get a multi-year deal. Probably 3-4 years actually. But, with the market turn we've seen over the last couple of years, I doubt we'd see a team give him more than 3-4 mill per year honestly. That's hard to say. Pretty much everybody was signed before the downturn in contracts, signed a team-friendly long term contract to get some financial security, or is still under team control. The only FA SS who have signed recently have been Marco Scutaro (2 years/12.5 mil, 7.5 WAR over the last 3 years), Cristian Guzman (2 years/16 mil, 5.2 WAR), Edgar Renteria (2 years/18.5 mil, 6.1 WAR), and Rafael Furcal (3 years/30 mil, 6.6 WAR). Theriot has been worth 7.5 WAR in the last 3 years. That's not to say Theriot would get the same contract. It's worth noting that Coletti, Sabean, and Bowden are/were 3 of the dumbest GMs in the game. Then again, Theriot wouldn't have the same warts that all those guys have either... This is why Theriot still has trade value today as his 2010 season will be under market value whether he wins or loses the arb hearing. Given the expected bump next offseason, though, that value will be pretty much gone after this season is complete. Well, there's something to be said for getting a player who, at worst, would be getting a one year deal at market value. Still, I think we're in general agreement that we'd like to see Castro manning SS for us by the all-star break and Theriot getting moved to a team that had an injury and is desperate to overpay.

Nah, it comes down to that 12th man in the huddle. If not for that, it was an automatic run call for the next play and Longwell probably would have come through. Bingo Favre could have tucked it and run, picked up a few yards and gotten them back to where they likely would have been had they not had the penalty. He didn't have to try to force a throw like he did. But he wouldn't have had to make that questionable decision if it weren't for a significant mistake immediately prior. As the mistake that started the cascade of issues that lead to their defeat, you have to say the 12th man penalty was what the game really hinged on. As to the question of whether or not the time out call itself was a mistake, I have to think it wasn't. 50 yard field goals are still pretty long. I can understand the desire to use your 3rd down to try to improve your field position by a bit.

Nah, it comes down to that 12th man in the huddle. If not for that, it was an automatic run call for the next play and Longwell probably would have come through.

Money in the bank.

Who calls heads? Tails never fails, baby.