nick23

Wow, that's an awful line for Walker. I wonder how they came to that conclusion?

I have a question. If he starts throwing in January, why is that a telling sign that he won't be ready by spring training? Isn't January when pitchers usually start to throw?

Kerry Wood - R - Cubs Dr. Timothy Kremchek wa spleased with the progress of Kerry Wood (shoulder) after examining him last week. Would is expected to begin throwing next month. When Wood underwent surgery, it was with the goal of being ready for Opening Day. However, the Cubs probably aren't even going to let him try to begin the season in the rotation. Instead, they'll use Glendon Rusch and Jerome Williams behind Carlos Zambrano, Mark Prior and Greg Maddux in the rotation. Dec. 19 - 4:27 pm et

Based on what? I'm still railing to get an answer on this. What makes you think he has potential? His 03 numbers and the fact that he's only 26 years old. He's never going to have plate discipline, or have a good OBP like many people hoped. But he still has the capability of putting up a good enough OPS to be an above average corner outfielder IMO.

I am by no means saying that outfield is ok. I just think that Patterson is the best option out of the available free agents. Yes, that lineup is very weak. But if Corey can duplicate his 03 numbers for a full year, that .511/.840 would look very good in the 6 or 7 spot.

I agree that if we're just going to sign a Jones/Wilson/Encarnacion type player for right, then we might as well just save the money and keep Patterson there and bat him 7th. Of course that would mean we'd have to keep Walker at 2nd. That lineup would be very weak, but if the pitching stays healthy you never know. On the other hand, I want Huff very badly. I have no stats to back me up on this, but I just have a feeling that he's going to have a big year. And that left handed power bat in the middle of the order would look mighty nice.

What does any of that have to do with anything I wrote? Are there any good GMs in the world? Does any GM deserve any credit for anything he's done? If Kenny doesn't deserve credit for his team's success, than what GM is worthy of some sort of credit? Are there more than 5? No one has ever said he doesn't deserve credit. He made some moves and they worked out. So you're telling me that if Hendry signs Jaque Jones to play RF this year and then Jones goes out and puts up a .700 ops, but we somehow end up winning the WS, you'll give him credit for the Jones signing and then say he's done a great job so far as our GM?

You don't have to say he did a great job, and you don't have to base it solely on the fact that they won it all last year. But look at the big picture: 5 straight seasons of 81 wins or more, with nothing but a middle of the road payroll. Included in there was one great season and that WS. Plus the fact that he is still aggressively improving his team this year, and still has enough prospects to both fill into the roster this coming season and either develop for future years or trade for future players. If you can look at those facts and not say he's done a good job as GM, you're either just a strict anti-White Sox fan, anti-Ken Williams, or just plain old not fair. Furthermore, given those facts, you'd have to say he's done a better job than Hendry, to date. You can knock any individual deal all you want. A lot of people looked at Pods for Lee as stupid. Pods isn't as good as Lee. Fine. But for the cost of Lee, he got Pods, Dye and Iguchi, plus money left over. Dye was more productive than Lee on his own, Iguchi was a fantastic little middle infield addition, and while Pods was nothing special last year, he was better than the previous season, and as productive as Juan Pierre has been on average in his career. If you can't look past your own personal opinion of any one deal or group of deals, and look at the big picture of results at the end of the season, or group of seasons, then you aren't doing a good job of analyzing what matters. Ok, well Hendry has had 3 straight years of 79 or more wins. And without a total meltdown in 03 he might also have a WS ring. That doesn't change the fact that I think Hendry has done a poor job over the last 2 years. If we happen to luck up and win it this year it's not going to change my opinion of this offseason.

What would you prefer the measuring stick for performance be? Isn't the goal of every GM to get to the World Series? 30 GM's failed at that last year. So Kenny Williams did a better job than every other GM last year? I just don't believe that. I'll turn it around. Who did a better job last year? I don't know enough about every other team to answer that. But winning the WS doesn't mean that your GM did the best job that year IMO. Empty argument. It has legs, but without support, its empty. How is my argument empty? Because I don't know every move of every GM last year? That's ridiculous. I suppose you think the Astros GM did the second best job last year. I don't. What I do think is the Stros had 3 completely dominant starters that carried them in the second half of the season and on into the World Series.

What would you prefer the measuring stick for performance be? Isn't the goal of every GM to get to the World Series? 30 GM's failed at that last year. So Kenny Williams did a better job than every other GM last year? I just don't believe that. I'll turn it around. Who did a better job last year? I don't know enough about every other team to answer that. But winning the WS doesn't mean that your GM did the best job that year IMO.

What would you prefer the measuring stick for performance be? Isn't the goal of every GM to get to the World Series? 30 GM's failed at that last year. So Kenny Williams did a better job than every other GM last year? I just don't believe that. Why not? Did you think heading into the season that the White Sox were a championship caliber team? KW and Ozzie Guillen led this team out of a horrible end of season slump into a dominant postseason run. He sure did something right. No I didn't think heading into last season they were a championship caliber team. Which is why I'm making this arguement.

What would you prefer the measuring stick for performance be? Isn't the goal of every GM to get to the World Series? 30 GM's failed at that last year. So Kenny Williams did a better job than every other GM last year? I just don't believe that.

Do you understand the absurdity of this statement. Based on the history of baseball in Chicago, there is nothing simple about winning a WS. Good point, other than the fact that it has nothing to do with what I wrote. I'm not saying it's simple to win a WS. I'm saying that I'm not going to concede that KW is a good gm who did a great job assembling a team last year solely based on the fact that they won it all. Just like if Hendry stands pat this year and we happen to win it all, I'm not going to say that Hendry is a genuis because he saw what no one else saw regarding this team. Would I be happy? Without a doubt. But it wouldn't change the fact that Hendry has a done a poor job this and last offseason. It would mean that more than likely we had healthy and outstanding pitching.

Your question basically answers itself - you can't put that many "ifs" and assumptions into a question and not have the answer be luck. It's putting all your eggs in one basket and you have a team which could very easily end up in last place just as easily end up in first. I want a team that both on paper and on the field is above average and gets themselves into a situation where they can contend every year. Yeah, I agree with you. I was just responding to the posts about KW doing a great job last year simply based on the fact that they won the WS.

I have a question. Say we end up signing Jaque Jones for RF. The starting pitching stays healthy, Jerome Williams has a career year, the pitching starts getting hot towards the end of the year and we just ride the rotation into the playoffs and on to a WS title. Would you guys say Hendry put together a great team? Or would you say we got really lucky and everything just kind of fell into place? I would say we just got lucky. Which is exactly what I say about Kenny Williams. He got great pitching last year and he had an average offense. Our offense this year will probably be better than their's last year.

I keep seeing these posts that say Hendry's teams have regressed every year since he took over, and he hasn't improved the team since the "not so good" 2003 team. I 100% disagree with this. Hendry very much improved the 2004 team. He traded for Lee, signed Maddux, Latroy and Dempster, then traded for Nomar at the break. We were loaded that year IMO. He can't help the injuries. I'll admit he did a very poor job assembling the 05 team, but to say he's been asleep at the wheel just isn't accurate.

You read that whole post and that's the line you respond to? And you don't even respond, just leave a smartass line? Do we have to get into this fact or not a fact debate everytime signings are debated? The Cubs have not rumored to be serious in talks with any Japanese players in recent years. They haven't gotten any, while supposedly lesser GM's like Williams has. And the whole point of that Iguchi mention was to point out that with the Money saved from dealing the much overrated Carlos Lee, KW got Pods, Dye and Iguchi, who combine to make less money, while Dye alone is more productive. But if you want to ignore the actual debate and just harp on semantics, go right ahead. The reason some people ask you how you know these things is because sometimes in the middle of your Hendry rants you start spouting things out as if their facts. Then whenever someone calls you on it you get all defensive. Like the other day when you stated that Hendry didn't try to bring Giles here. I asked you how you knew this and you blew up. If you're just going to make things up when bashing Hendry try not to get so defensive when called on it. You call enough people out that you'd think you would understand this.

May be Young will pan out and may be he won't, but the Sox traded from a position of strength (or at least depth) to once again upgrade their rotation with a proven SP who is, at worst, a no. 2 in any rotation in the game. I think the Sox done good. This also allows Williams to spin off one of the other SPs to improve his offense. If he's considered to be a number 2 starter in any rotation, then so does Maddux. Since Maddux outpreformed him in almost every category over the last 2 years.

I don't see what conventional wisdom has to do with it, and I don't see how there is NO WAY a 35 year old third baseman could be slower laterally than Todd Walker. What does his age have to do with anything? I watched Walker play almost every game last year. And I can truthfully say that there can't be many players in baseball slower than him. He's ugly white guy slow.

Huff Floyd Wilkerson Bradley I really think Huff would look good batting 5th for the Cubs. I'm concerned about Bradley's health, and I just don't think Wilkerson would be used correctly. I vote for Huff.

Check out what one GM had to say about the Soriano trade. It's such a depressing feeling that we have to put our hope and trust in the hands of guys that actually think this. I just hope this wasn't a quote from our GM. By the way, I got this from Jason Stark's article on ESPN.com. Rangers (Host-City Division): There might have been more grumbling about new Texas GM Jon Daniels from his fellow GMs than about any other GM on the premises. Because he was looking to make a big deal in his debut, Daniels overpriced his most attractive commodity, Kevin Mench. And then, when he dealt his other big chip, Alfonso Soriano, he got a package back that, surprisingly, included no big-league-ready starting pitchers. There was immediate talk that Texas would deal away Brad Wilkerson, obtained in that deal, for pitching. But the price tag on him might scare more clubs away. "Unless they can flip those guys for pitching, that deal makes no sense," said one assistant GM. "And I wouldn't trade Soriano in the first place. Wilkerson and [the second player] Terrmel Sledge could play for a lonnngggg time and never put up the numbers Soriano does. He's an underrated guy for me."

And so it begins.

I asked this in another thread and it never really got answered. Is it just common knowledge that Pierre is not a good centerfielder? I've never heard anyone speak bad of his defense before all the Pierre to the cubs talk started. Is he considered worse than Patterson in center? I'm asking because i honestly thought he was considered a good CF. I've always known about the weak arm but have never heard all of this talk about bad routes and late jumps. Wher is the information coming from? And who does he compare to defensively in CF?

I'm assuming he's going to bring up the OBP of Soriano. Which is fine, I just like his pop from the 5th spot. That SLG% would look real good behind Lee and Ramirez.

I agree on Soriano. I just fear that Baker would bat him 2nd where he would hurt more than help. I'd rather have Walker than Soriano. But, if the Cubs did trade for Soriano, would you rather have Soriano or Neifi batting 2nd? I think I'd prefer Soriano. Remembering that Dusty is the manager, it would probably be one of those two rather than Murton. I'd want Bradley batting 2nd. The only reason I'd want Soriano on the team is if Bradley was in right.