USSoccer

I thought it was them who said that about Brownlie. But I didn't want to put it out there and falsely accuse them. Can Bobby even throw a fastball at 95 anymore?

Why would we invest $200m in a middle IF that wouldn't even be in the top 3 in baseball? top 3 most overrated MI in baseball. :lol: Hahahaha.

If everyone is overpaying. Therefore no one is overpaying. Good point. Remember last season when everyone thoguht the market woudl settle since there was so much talent out there, and then some idiot gave Christian Guzman about 10x what he was worth, and that set it off again?

Why would we invest $200m in a middle IF that wouldn't even be in the top 3 in baseball?

That is an insane contract for a reliever. If Toronto wanted to overpay, why didn't they overpay for a SP or a position player?

1-Felix Pie +10 +10 2-Reynel Pinto 3-Mark Pawelek +10 +8 4-Ronny Cedeno +10 +8 5-Rich Hill +10 +10 6-Sean Marshall +10 +10 7-Reynel Pinto 8-Ryan Harvey +10 +10 9-Angel Guzman +10 +4 10-Eric Patterson +10 +10 150

No way that's true USS....no way. Imagine how much Lee would want then? Exactly. This would result in Aramis opting oout of his deal and wanting like a Manny Ramirez contract, Lee wanting Pujols money, and Boras making Z bleed the Cubs dry for a giant contract of his own. This site either screwed up typing, or just plain made something up. I find it hard to believe. I mean, I know Hendry has overpaid everyone he's signed so far, but not by $50m.

No way. No way Hendry would decide that Furcal is worth more than Aramis and Lee combined, unless the budget is $200m. Maybe it was a typo, and it was supposed to say $10m per year, and not $100m. And if this comes true (which I completely doubt), Hendry will get torn to pieces around here, even by the more optimistic posters. That would be just a colossal waste of $16.6m/yr.

At least Giles is getting a little more ink when it comes to the Chicago papers. Public pressure can work wonders... :D

I think it's absurd to say Maddux is no more than a 5th starter. Have you actually looked at his numbers from last year? There pretty decent. I would be willing to bet that a fair amount of teams would take a 1.2 WHIP and a 4.2 ERA from their 3rd starter. In my opionion Maddux is a very good 4th starter. Maddux's numbers indicate he is a back-of-the-rotation innings eater. An ERA in the mid 4's is not good. I would have been so pleased to have had his option not vest, but oh well. Also, minor point to the earlier post: Unless Williams is traded, there's no way on earth Rusch can beat him out for the 5th starter's spot.

Aren't people being a little hard on Novoa? He made his pro debut this season, and showed flashes of brilliance, mixed in with inconsistency, just like you would expect him to. How many relievers come out of the minors to be lights out setup guys? Let's give him at least 2006 before we're calling him a stiff.

Unless Hill is moved for a big bat ( Dunn, Abreu) I figure he'll compete with Rusch for the fifth starter's role in ST and then be shipped to AAA to wait for another opportunity. What about Williams? I'm almost certain Williams will be traded, and I could see him going for a lesser option like Mench. That would be a big waste of a resource. I hope it doesn't come to that.

Unless Hill is moved for a big bat ( Dunn, Abreu) I figure he'll compete with Rusch for the fifth starter's role in ST and then be shipped to AAA to wait for another opportunity. What about Williams? He'll be the 4th starter when Wood starts the season on the DL. Then he will stay there when Wood returns, because Prior will be out after a line drive will bounce off of Marcus Giles head and hit him in the pitching hand as he's running to 2nd base, breaking 3 fingers. resulting in fans everywhere calling him injury prone. :P

If Pierre and Podsednik are in the same OF, then every player on every team in the league will run on balls hit to CF and LF. They have two of the three worst arms in baseball.

i think the red sox are being overly picky here.

Unless Hill is moved for a big bat ( Dunn, Abreu) I figure he'll compete with Rusch for the fifth starter's role in ST and then be shipped to AAA to wait for another opportunity. What about Williams?

I'm not. Guzman's injuries probably prevent him from being a main trade chip.

Now, see, if we give up another of our higher level prospects in addition to Pinto it will be a very poor deal. CPatt, I went to sleep after your post last night, but you made a comment about how trading for Pierre reduces the available trading chips for a Ramirez or Abreu, and admittedly it is a big concern. Ultimately I guess I feel that if the Cubs eat salary that can make up for not having a Pinto to deal as well. As far as Patterson being Pierre's equal in 2003-4, I know some metrics show that, but Patterson is less likely to rebound playing in Chicago in 2006 than Pierre is. I think mentally Corey is done in this city, and I wouldn't want to take a chance on Corey in CF unless he were flanked by one of the aforementioned RF trade targets. I really hope I'm wrong, but I don't see it happening. I'd be very suprised if he were a Cub by the time April rolls around.

There are reports that this deal isn't official yet-the Red Sox are apparently a little jittery about Beckett's shoulder (he was shut down for his last start and Andrews looked at him twice last year). This may not be set in stone yet.

A lot of people on this board just expect all-stars at every position, they can't accept that it's not going to be that way... It's not that. I got in a huge fight with some people during the summer about how Pierre was overrated. I don't think Pierre is that good, but in this scenario, I'd rather trade for him than overpay for Furcal. It's just funny how things can change. I'm not singling out any one person, it's just the thing I've noticed over the years from posting here. People are satisfied with good options, they like to dream about the best whether it's realistic or not. Another thing that drives me nuts about that is that we have no idea what goes on between GMs. If some guy is continually suggesting to trade for Player X, how do we know Hendry hasn't asked about him anyway and was told he isn't avaliable? In that case, what's he supposed to do about it? But that's the fun/frustrating part about being on the outside. Speculation can make for rousing debate.

A lot of people on this board just expect all-stars at every position, they can't accept that it's not going to be that way... It's not that. I got in a huge fight with some people during the summer about how Pierre was overrated. I don't think Pierre is that good, but in this scenario, I'd rather trade for him than overpay for Furcal. It's just funny how things can change.

Signing Furcal doesn't cost you any players of value, and is/has the capability of being a much better offensive player than Pierre while being a far superior defender at a more difficult position to fill. Trading for Pierre is a step backwards, signing Furcal might be a necessity(ideally I'd like Cedeno to back up middle IF next year). EDIT: That said, we've already screwed part of this up by signing Neifi, Eyre, and Howry. I normally agree with you that it's always better to spend money than prospects, bu as Diffusion pointed out, this is Pinto's last option year. The other 2 players are not likely to be of note, so it's not like giving up Pie, or Guzman circa 2003. Also, I'd disagree that Pierre is a step backwards. Our CF's last season were awful Pierre is not as good as people think, but I don't think he's as bad as 2005 would indicate, but even if the truth lies in between, Pierre is a giant step forward over any in-house option we have at CF right now. Also, look at the possible combinations. Would you rather have Furcal + Kearns or Mench (just examples) or Pierre + Abreu or Giles? Yeah, I framed that unfairly, but the point is, if we sign Furcal there goes our last type A FA this winter. It also locks up a huge amount of cash when, coupled with Lee and Aramis' contracts, and Z and Prior's raises, really locks down our payroll for the next couple years. Gosh, I never thought I'd be defending trading for Pierre. :!:

I'd prefer losing Pinto over losing Marshall or Hill. I'd prefer not trading any of them for Pierre. In fact, I'd prefer not trading anyone for Pierre. Would you rather trade for Pierre at his salary for one year or overpay Furcal for multiple years? None of the above. But if I had to choose...... I'd probably overpay Furcal. Why? Both are overrated by Hendry and the rest of the league. Why not grab the one at the position you don't have a 2006 ML ready alternative, and that's at a lower cost? With Pierre and not Furcal, you're likely to have enough money to be a serious player for an impact RF (over the long term-their 2006 salaries will be fairly similar, but Pierre is a 1 yr expense only).. Now, let me qualify this by saying that that's the only way Pierre is the best fit-if we also get a really good RF. If it's Pierre and Jones, then it's a totally bad move. If trading Pinto and the other 2 players save us enough cash to make a play for Abreu, Giles or Manny, then it's worth it. Maybe we can eat salary to make up for our lack of ML ready players that Boston or Philly would want.

I'd prefer losing Pinto over losing Marshall or Hill. I'd prefer not trading any of them for Pierre. In fact, I'd prefer not trading anyone for Pierre. Would you rather trade for Pierre at his salary for one year or overpay Furcal for multiple years? My guess is that we'll do both. I really think this is a move designed to keep that from happening. Hendry and the Cubs generally shy away from high dollar, multi year deals. Maybe that's why he's willnig to give up Pinto. Maybe Hendry really feels that Walker/Cedeno/Perez up the middle at their cost is good enough.

I'd prefer losing Pinto over losing Marshall or Hill. I'd prefer not trading any of them for Pierre. In fact, I'd prefer not trading anyone for Pierre. Would you rather trade for Pierre at his salary for one year or overpay Furcal for multiple years?