nick23

While I disagree with some of the moves Hendry made this offseason, I do think the team is improved. The bulpen was a weakness last year and now it's a strength. Say what you want about Pierre but he's still a huge upgrade in center. We should get better production out of the corner outfield spots and shortstop as well this year. If Wood and Prior can stay healthy all year there's no reason we shouldn't be in the playoffs come October.

I would hope Tampa would do that. But why in the world would the cubs? I wouldn't trade Prior alone for those three. Much less Prior and Williams.

So if the Marlins were to ask you to trade either Prior or Z for Cabrera you would trade Z? I'd trade Prior. I'd tell 'em to "shut it"... I'd tell them to take their pick.

I was referring more to team momentum. Also I would disagree with "hot hand" in basketball not exhisting.

There has been a lot of talk here recently about "clutch hitting". And are certain players more clutch than others. I personally don't believe in clutch players but some people do. My question though is, what is your take on "momentum"? It obviously can't be measured, and I'm assuming there is no real stat that includes it. But I believe it exhists. I certainly can't prove it or back it up with any stats. But I think it is there. I'm the oppisite, but I would assume that the people on here that believe in clutch players also believe in momentum. While the more heavy stat guys don't. Just wondering some of you guy's opinions on it. Thanks.

Alex Gonzalez! :D Well that goes without saying. No player was better in the clutch than Kgonz. Unless we're talking about defense. :(

One question for you guys believing in clutch hitting. Let's pretend like Jauque Jones outpreforms Derrek Lee this year in "clutch" situations by a decent size margin. Now lets pretend that we're playing Houston in a one game playoff for the wild card. There's 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th inning and Brad Lidge is on the mound. Runners are on 1st and second. Very, very crucial situation. Now remember, Jones has clearly outpreformed Lee this year in terms of clutch hitting. Who would you rather have up Derrek Lee or Jauque Jones?

I don't think it makes sense to compare across sports. Why not. People were debating whether clutch was real, and I gave an example of an athlete that was by far the most clutch player in sports history. I'm generally for objective analysis but I don't think statistics tell you all there is to know about every ball player. You could have two equal players based on basic metrics, but one might just respond better to pressure situations. I don't think that concept is so foreign that it should be mocked (not saying you are mocking it goony - but treebeard sort of did). I wouldn't make 90% of my decisions based on it, but as former assistant coach/private coach I had an idea of who I would want under pressure, and I certainly didn't study numbers. It's simple. You want your best player up in crucial situations. Not the guy who seems like he always comes through. Edit: I have no idea why my font is so large. It's on normal.

Ugh. Cabrera and Erstad combined aren't half of what Manny is offensively, not even including Clement. I've read and heard a few rumors that Kenny Williams is ready to pounce on the O's if the Boston deals fall by the wayside - his latest offer is Contreras, Uribe and 2 prospects. I'm not at all familiar with the White Sox organization. Who do they have as far as prospects go? Could we not easily top that offer?

I myself would love to believe that Dusty will use Grissom correctly and Platoon him with Jones. But after these last 2 years it's just impossible to give him the benefit of the doubt. I just can't believe we're going in to next season with a RF platoon of Jauque Jones and Marquis Grissom.

I think you've been reading a little too much Scoop Jackson. I see no correlation at all between race and sabermetrics. Any true fan of a sports team doesn't give a crap what color the players on the team are, as long as they perform.

Or at the very least, the LA Dodgers. By the way, I have confirmed (just yesterday in fact) that the Cubs had no interest in Giles, and hence, did not even try to talk to him or his agent. If this is true, it's really just frightening to think of how far Hendry could run this team into the ground.

Of course they could. My problem is that with their payroll advantage, the Cubs should win the division. They shouldn't just be contenders, they should be favorites. They should consistently win 90+ games, and with a top 5 payroll every year of his tenure, Hendry should have a great team by now. We shouldn't have to be like Twins fans who are hoping the rest of the division isn't all that good and that we get surpisingly large production/cost ratios out of several players. But the thing is, a good chunk of that $100 million payroll has been on the disabled list the last 2 years. I believe that this team was good enough to make the playoffs the past couple of seasons. Injuries have just killed us. If Wood, Nomar, and Ramirez don't go down last year I think we would've been right in the wild card hunt. Now if we would have suffered no injuries the past two seasons and still not won 90 games then something would be wrong. Just look at the 04 team. Wood, Prior, Aramis, Walker, Borowski, and Sosa all missed significant time and we still won 89 games. I understand we're not the Twins, but we're not the Yankees or Red Sox either.

I'll take Greg Maddux for $9 Million, Alex. I'll take Jon Garland over Mr. #5 starter anyday. Maddux's 3-year pre-retirement/retirement campaign with the Cubs has really disappointed me. I wonder if he will come into camp with another 15 lbs. this spring. The day Maddux takes one for the team and finishes what he started is the day I'll respect him again. This HOF and supposed "team-guy" begs out of more games than anyone in the league and works less than anyone on this team. Pop Quiz: Who faced the most batters for the Cubs in '04 and '05? Answer: Greg "beg out" Maddux. Garland's 3 previous seasons before last year weren't as good as Maddux's '05. Maddux is better quality than a #5 starter. That's assuming you generously peg a #5 starter as league average. The point is Maddux doesn't care. He's out-of-shape and has one foot out the door. The point is he could be so much better if he still wanted to work at it. Maddux gets by on the knowledge he's attained over the years and has very little physical talent left. He's made no adjustments over the past few years and no better than a fifth starter on a contending team. In short he stinks for 50-60% of the year and gets paid like a #1-2 starter. I know he's a legend and noone has a bad thing to say about him. But I said it. I think he's the biggest 'me' guy on the team. So much for the guy who'd help Wood and Prior better pitchers. They were better before Maddux joined the Cubs. Actually, he's better than every contending team's 5th starter.

If I remember correctly, Bruce Miles said yesterday on this board that Hendry would move whatever he had to, to get Tejada.

The only way we get Manny Ramirez is, if Boston decides to hire Hendry as their GM. Then we could turn around and send them Rich Hill, Jaun Pierre, and Neifi for Manny. If that doesn't get it done we can just remind him that Glendon Rusch is a left handed pitcher who can be used as a swing man, and then include him in the deal. No way the Hendry I know turns that deal down. Also we could tell him that Manny is moody and is not good for team chemistry.

I see it as just the opposite. By now the FA pool has dried up and teams are looking at trades to fill holes. Now is the time of year that Tampa can really fleece a desperate team who thinks they can contend. Maybe they think a player like Huff could put them over the top, so they overspend to get him.

What does a 5 tool player have to do with a 3 starter. 5 tool players are much more rare than #3 starters. And what are examples of #3 starters the Cubs could get for Walker? Are you talking somebody like Kris Benson? A highly compensated pitcher with a dubious injury history and highly unimpressive results. Are we talking Trachsel? I think you got to be more specific than just the generic #3 starter, which can mean a lot of things. Walker gone means Neifi everyday, Neifi everyday in this already weakened lineup means the pitching would have to be absolutely outstanding if the Cubs want to win a lot. #3 starters are, by definition, not outstanding. And a 3/27m #3 starter (the recent going rate) doesn't come close to equaling the value of a 1/2.5m Walker at 2B, especially in this offense. Have to be a package deal cause Walker's not even worth a #3. I was just hypothetically speaking, but will look around and find someone who needs a 2b. Adam Eaton might have been nice. So you'd rather have Neifi and Adam Eaton over Walker and Jerome Williams? Do you realize just how bad Neifi Perez is? I think you're really undervaluing Walker.

No way does Neifi start over Walker. It's not happening. And what does 5 tool player have to do with anything? Corey Patterson is a 5 tool player, do you think he should play 2nd? How can a guy who can't hit or take a pitch be considered 5 tool?? When you hear the term 5 tool player, taking a pitch is not one of the tools being referred to. Just trust me on that.

No way does Neifi start over Walker. It's not happening. And what does 5 tool player have to do with anything? Corey Patterson is a 5 tool player, do you think he should play 2nd?

If you perhaps name me a few left side of the platoon players that are earning more than $5m per in a multi-year deal, that'd be cool. Thanks in advance. Trot Nixon at $19.5/3Y. Matt Lawton at $27/4Y, though I think that one just ended. Ryan Klesko signed a $16.5/2Y extension. Obviously, I'm not saying Jones compares favorably with any of those guys, nor am I saying that those are good contracts. But these things do happen. I don't think Lawton or Klesko are platoon players. And when Nixon signed his contract I'm pretty sure he wasn't a platoon player.

Yes, this team's fortunes rely heavily on the starting pitchers. Wood, Prior and Zambrano have to be great. But they shouldn't make it any harder on them by weakending the lineup any further. Another 5th starter isn't going to help this team. I'm not talking about getting another 5th starter. A true third starter (with Wood out) would be ideal. Williams/Rusch/Maddux (with Hill as the fall back) is scary to me. I like Williams but relying on him to be the 3rd guy isn't a good thing. Rusch is a 5th starter and Maddog is 4/5 depending on the other guys. Teams can win with weak offenses and great pitching. Walker isn't Tejada so if he can be used to better the rotation I'm all for it. This lineup as it stands really really needs Todd Walker in it.

I disagree. This team will win or lose with its pitching. Walker isn't a big enough difference maker on offense so if he can be used to acquire a quality starter, the Cubs need to trade him. The Cubs rotation is littered with question marks. We need another starter. I disagree. The dropoff from Walker to Neifi is a very big one. I just can't see Walker netting us a starter that's any better that what we already have(Williams).

This is interesting. While I don't find it very probable. What kind of deal could be swung with the BoSox for Manny. I would say it would take a lot, but it may be worth a lot to get one of the best hitters in the game today. Realistically, my idea for the trade would be: Cubs get: Manny Boston gets: Patterson, Williams, Wellemeyer, and at least another ML ready prospect. I still dont know if that is enough for Boston to bite. They would still have a hole at shortstop, so they might ask for Cedeno as well. The money involved obviously is not equal as well. In conclusion, it's going to be difficult and expensive to trade for Manny. Would Tejada be cheaper? They'd also have a pretty big hole in left.

STL and the Cubs were very close in sacrifice hits and sacrifice flies last year, in the middle of the NL pack. Sacrifices, and the little things, are not why STL had success. The big things are. The Cards ranked 3rd in OBP, and 3rd in runs scored. There's your correlation for offensive success. And they pitched extremely well. There's your overall success. Washington, San Francisco, Florida, Pittsburgh, and San Diego were among the most sacrificial teams in the league last year. Those little things are things that weaker offensive teams do, and they don't correlate to success. total sacrifices: chicago- 106 st louis- 112 walks: chicago- 419 (dead last) st louis- 534 but i'm sure that there was some special kind of magic in st louis sacrifices that gave them the out back or something. i'll say it again, wasting an out is stupid if it's not the pitcher making it. Maybe the official number of sacrifices is the same, but that doesn't mean they (the Cubs) were anything CLOSE to the Cardinals fundamentally speaking. Again, things such as first to thirds (they do this a LOT), situational hitting (moving runners over), SBs (in key situations), and overal base path awareness gives them a HUGE advantage over the opposition. While I'm on this subject I'd like to clarify a misperception many (not specifically) have. Just because 2 teams have about the same number of runs, the same number of hits, the same number of _____ (what have you) doesn't make them equal (and I'm not necessarily comparing the Cubs or Cards). There are times when these things are more importnat than others, namely close games. Tell me, how many times do the good "small ball" teams seem to eke out runs (situational hitting, bunts, sacrifices, SBs, etc.) in 1 run/ tied games? A hell of a lot more than the Cubs do. Point is those one to 2 runs every now and again ARE HUGE. Instead of having your "keep it close" BP guy in the game you have your closer. Instead losing the game you win. You multiply this out over the course of the season and I'm fairly confident it gives the good teams 6-7 (sometimes more sometimes less) wins. In contrast, it probably costs the inept teams at leat 3-4. What would you classify this team as??? I'd say inept. And I'd also say I'm 2,000,0000 and 10 percent confident in saying the lack of the above cost this team at LEAT a handfull of wins. It wouldn't have been enough to make this team contenders but they certainly would have been better. This is why I get frustrated (again not you just in general) when so many people get "tunnel vision" when it comes to OBP. There are so many things that can make a player better that stats don't quantify to where its idiotic to judge players solely on these stats (which is why I usually try not to comment on players I haven't see play). Things such as defense, awareness, baseball acumen, and fundamental hitting are such an imortant part of the game. OBP is EXTREMELY important too, its just not the only thing. Fact is this team was SOOOO BAADDD at so many things that every one contributed to its demise. If we can improve, not solve, all of these things this team will be pretty good. And I may also be in the minority in saying it may not take a whole lot. Young, seemingly fundamental palyers like Cedeno, Pierre, and Murton seem like a start, but they're definately not the finish. Then again we won't really know until June or July...if even then. You must watch a lot of Cardinal games.