oldcubsfan

You can use background info to help decide who to hire. Most companies feel character counts. the laws governing background info in the hiring process are strictly defined. allegations from newspapers are not valid reasons for denying unemployment. convictions are. how would you like it if someone accused you wrongly of spousal abuse and you were no longer allowed to hold any job other than a cook at McDonalds? after all, character counts. You sound like a law student who seems to know the basics, but companies don't have to tell you why you aren't hired. They just choose the other candidate. Most jobs create numerous applicants and it is very easy to screen out those you aren't comfortable with.

You can use background info to help decide who to hire. Most companies feel character counts.

"There is no way an employer would get away with denying employment to an employee b/c of alleged conduct away from the job outside of baseball (unless there were national security issues)." What are you talking about? Companies do background checks all the time. People do not get jobs because of it. You are wrong on this or you just have little experience in the business world. Let's just say you and another are up for the same job and I find out you have an arrest record, guess who I'm hiring, hint - not you. It is perfectly legal and not only that, it is prudent. Not one thing illegal about it.

It's more likely that Hendry help set the market by giving ridiculus money and years to two mediocre middle relievers. There was a quote from one agent suggesting as much. An agent said it? OMG it must be true! So Hendry giving 3 year deals for $4M or less pressured the Jays into giving Ryan 5 years at over twice as much per year? If true, that seems like quite an exaggerated response. More likely is that the Mets flirting with Wagner is what pushed the Jays into that offer. It is one thing to debate a point and quite another to take a point and run. Keep running you might get somewhere someday. As to my post. Agent's use figure to establish market value. Those figuers are know because of the collective bargining agreement. I do not know for certian that Hendry's overpaying of Howry and Erye led to Ryans outrageous contract, but here is what I do know. http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-051118cubseyre,1,6706818.story?coll=cs-cubs-headlines This leads me to believe that Hendry's offer was so far beyond what anyone else was going to give Eyre he did even need to look for other offeres. http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-051123cubshowry,1,7027563.story?coll=cs-cubs-headlines Now Howry signed for 3 years for 12 million. I'd expect that these two signing had something to do with Ryan's contract. But that is just me. I like to form my opinions on evidence. I'm kind of crazy like that. How do you form yours? Exactly what in the articles provides your evidence other than conjecture by unnamed sources?

I think Hendry was sharp in signing these guys before the market was set. I think if he waited the cost would have been higher with more competition for them. These guys fill a substantial need for the Cubs and he got them.

Arm strength is only one component of defense. LF is one of the positions that can most tolerate that deficiency. Murton's range is pretty good and his instinct are solid. After watching Dubois, he looks like a gold glover, lol. Actually, I thought they were pretty similar. Obviously, it's the bat.

Arm strength is only one component of defense. LF is one of the positions that can most tolerate that deficiency. Murton's range is pretty good and his instinct are solid. After watching Dubois, he looks like a gold glover, lol. Actually, I thought they were pretty similar. Obviously, it's the bat.

Jehrico you are being kind describing Murton's defense. He has one of the worst arms I've ever seen from left, but hopefully his bat makes up for it.

He never said they were getting Dunn. He said they were close, and as far as I know they were, until Cinn. decided to do nothing. Remember the Griffey to the Sox talk? Cinn. backed away from all deals.

He also doesn't have a big long-term contract or require you to take on Mike Lowell. Better player doesn't necessarily mean that he will require more in a trade. There are plenty of other factors that go into a player's "worth". It also seems to me that teams don't give up elite prospects for a guy who will be a free agent after the season. BTW, Lowell isn't a bum, and I'd look for a big year in Fenway for him.

I agree from what I've heard and read. Who do you think is the most reliable writer in Chicago when it comes to trades? Bruce Miles, although he sacrifices breaking the big story for reliability. I appreciate that after all the Bruce Levine disasters. Agreed. Miles' credibility almost makes it as if a story does "break" when he confirms it. It never bothers me when Miles is scooped, as I genereally won't believe it until confirmed by Miles. I think some people are too hard on Levine, though. Even if Hendry were reporting rumors himself, he's have several ones that never pan out. Sometimes deals fall apart at the last minute, and the guys that break these rumors are left with eggs on their faces despite having reported accurately that "a deal is near..." Now, when they are reporting that "something is done," when it in fact isn't (ala the Pudge episode a couple of years ago), that's a different story. Levine, for the most part, is a pretty decent beat reporter. I agree with you on Bruce Levine. He is far superior to George Ofman who seems to read the papers for his "scoops". I'll go with Bruce Miles and Bruce Levine as the two best in Chicago. Levine at least admits when he is wrong, unlike many of the others.

It seems to me that of all the reporters, columnists and radio guys, Phil Rogers is the least reliable and with the fewest contacts within the Cubs. Juan Pierre is not going to command elite prospects. He is not Carlos Delgado or Josh Beckett. Rogers speculates and seems to be very lazy in his columns. Just my opinion after reading his columns for years.

It might be bogus, but it is fun to read about. The lineup would be great. However, instead of Pie starting, I'd use CPat until Pie proves ready. I think it's too early to totally give up on Patterson or worse yet, just give him away. Batting 8th would take a lot of pressure off him and we need a lefthanded bat in the lineup. Like I said, I'm sure it's bogus but it was a fun read.

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/11/24/Rays/Miles_away__Friedman_.shtml

I'll say the announcement will come tomorrow. Then the bullpen will be in shape(hopefully) and Hendry will move on to the offense. The winter meetings will be fun to watch this year, a lot of trades and more free agents after Dec. 7 date to non tender people.

If he was an extra base threat 3 teams would not have given up on him. He's a walk threat, that's it. Limited RBI's, and that is what you want from a PH/1B and he really doesn't provide that.

Looks like LA is giving up on Choi. Being an old cubs fan, would you say that the trades for Lee & ARam are 2 of the top 10 in Cub history, if not top 5?? The Sandberg and Sosa trades are in the top 10 obviously. Absolutely. Gave up nothing for 2 all stars.

Well, Hill didn't prove a whole lot, but maybe you are right.

Unless a team is desperate for a 1st baseman in their system, I don't think there is much chance of losing him.

If a utility infielder's release causes 2 pages of posts, how many pages will we have when the Dodgers don't tender Choi a contract? He's gone and if they can't trade him, he'll be one of many non-tendered in December, when a whole new list of free agents are created. Has anyone picked up Bellhorn yet? I think he was released, I may be wrong though.

Don't overestimate the intelligence of the Pirates organization. You can't assume there's a logical reason behind anything the Pirates do. I can reasonably assume they know more about a player than people like me, who only read the papers and occasionally get to see a player. I'll bet the Cubs don't jump on him either.

I'm actually pretty disapointed that he let Sing exposed. The guy had a very good season last year in double A. If he had no future with the Cubs, he would have provided a good trading chip, especially to an AL team who could use him as a DH. The move doesn't mean he doesn't have a future, just not an immediate one. He didn't have a season that would make teams give up a spot on the 25 man roster to have him. Most teams have similar prospects and no one has ever claimed he is a can't miss type.

Looking at the list, the only one who may be drafted is Brownlie and his fastball has never returned to previous levels. Not many teams are going to draft mediocre prospects to sit on the bench. Sing, Bacon aren't the type of prospect to sit on the bench taking up a spot on a 25 man roster.

I think the move tells you Hill has other problems that the Pirates didn't want to deal with besides lack of range.