USSoccer

Let me clarify my frustration: I didn't expect Hendry to be able to sign him, especially given the fact that he had already brought Rothschild back. However, I am irritated that this offseason is showing signs of last offseason, in which poor decisions were made, some hasty, some belated, and most of which were bad. I want us to be more involved, even if at first that just means rumors of us showing movement in the right direction, and I'm dissapointed we didn't hear so much as a cursory interest in someone who could really, really help our pitchers. I'm worried that this will carry over into the FA/Arb portion of the winter, and we'll see lukewarm interest at best in Giles, and more rumors pointing towards the Wilsons of the world, while keeping the blights on this roster around for another season of versatility, clutchness, and, ultimately, futility.

And SSR, if you say "How do you know he didn't make a phone call", well, let me put it to you this way. The Chicago Cubs have not had serious interest in a signle marquee name over the past 2 seasons other than Greg Maddux, and his marquee status is debatable. If Hendry or the Cubs were interested, one of the beat guys would have picked up on that interest, and thusly reported it.

So unless all of your arguments was that the Cubs should've hired Perlozzo as the manager in the past couple weeks, your anger is misplaced. I don't think expecting Hendry to even inquire about his availability is too much to ask. Do you want Hendry to inquire about the availability about every top of the line coach/manager/player/prospect in baseball?? And how does anyone know that it wasn't widely known that Mazzone wasn't available short of the O's? The answer to your first question is: Yes. Yes yes yes. Yes a million times over. If it could make the Chicago Cubs a better baseball team I expect him to do anything and everything in his power to make the team better, and if he isn't, he has no business being the General Manager of this team. Let him go be the GM in Tampa Bay if he's not willing to go the extra mile for the most loyal fans in any sport, and for his players. That includes inquring about the availability of the best pitching coach in the game at some point durint the week in which the NY Yankees were first given permission to talk to him. He went from the Yankees, to the O's. That's 2 teams. Why didn't Hendry make a stupid phone call to his agent and say "Hey, we have Maddux, Prior and Zambrano. Is Leo interested? We'll pay him much more than the $200k he's getting right now."

So unless all of your arguments was that the Cubs should've hired Perlozzo as the manager in the past couple weeks, your anger is misplaced. I don't think expecting Hendry to even inquire about his availability is too much to ask.

But, he is sitting back quietly with his cards close to his vest as the world slips right on by......... Just like it did last season. Or maybe I'll get yelled at again for thinking Hendry has to get everything done by a certain time... You're backwards on this one, though. He moved to fast to re-up with Larry. Touche. But if he's moving too fast on one hand, and the end result is a bad decision, and moves too slowly on the other, and the result ends up the same, what does that mean then? Is Hendry capable of making sound decisions about the future of the team? Example: He risked Aramis going to FA by waiting until opening day to extend him. He also waited until every key FA OF was signed before signing the worst option available. His offseason consisted of 2 moves: trading Sosa and signing Burnitz. What was he doing the rest of the time?

But, he is sitting back quietly with his cards close to his vest as the world slips right on by......... Just like it did last season. Or maybe I'll get yelled at again for thinking Hendry has to get everything done by a certain time...

Yeah it would have been nice to see the CUbs at least try to get in on this but it would appear it wasn't just about money for Leo as he turned NY down. This is all purely my opinion but in addition I think it was either working with Perlozzo or staying put. According to some rumblings I've read (at SoSh and elsewhere) Mazzone wanted one big payday and Atlanta wasn't gonig to pony up the kind of cash he wanted. Not taking the NY job just means he didn't want to deal with Steinbrenner and the Tampa Mafia, the NY media, and the assembled crap they have on their pitching staff. And it would have been nice for Hendry to show at least cursory interest in the best pitching coach in the game.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5007138 Unbelievable how we couldn't get in on this. Just damn unbelievable

As much as I dislike both teams, I have respect for St Louis as a baseball organization. As a Cub fan, we can only dream about having our team run and hide 2 years in a row, having the division wrapped up in July, and having a General Manager that generally makes intelligent moves that keep his team competitive. I am rooting for the Cards, because I think they are the best team in baseball, and thus have earned my respect. Not my like, but my respect as a rival.

Which is why it's important to figure out now what you want to do. Indicate to Nomar you want him back, and worry about whatever else later. Signing Nomar doesn't preclude you from signing Furcal, or Giles, or whoever. Maybe we could get Nomar 400 AB's playing SS, spelling ARam at 3rd, Murton in LF, and whoever at 2B. Maybe we get outbid for Furcal, but at least we still have Nomar, and Cedeno ready if his legs blow up again.

Hurry? The season is over. Teams let go of dead weight when the season is over. A lot of teams have already made moves, declining options, picking up options, outrighting guys, firing coaches, hiring coaches, claiming players. A lot of dead weight is gone by this time of year. The problem is the Cubs think Macias has value, and they will keep him. They think Neifi Perez is fine for SS. They think Burnitz is a fine RF. They think the problem was health, luck, chemistry and attitude. They have failed to recognize the single biggest problem on this team for years, and not one major front office person has been replaced, nothing makes me think they finally understand the problem and are willing to fix it. To expand up what Goony's point is, it's not as if this team was 15 over .500 and missed the playoffs by a couple games. There was a serious regression here, and nothing and no one has been held accountable. Macias being let go would signal a change, or at least an admission that the roster was flawed going into 2005. That's the least we could expect as vested fans: an admission of failure, and a signal that the club intends to correct the flaws in this team. I still don't understand....why the haste? Yeah, mistakes were made and the season was a failure but nothing can be done to add a player to your team until after the World Series is over so I agree with Hendry's patience in the matter. The hurry is that last offseason Hendry waited, and waited, and waited, and concentrated all of his efforts on trading one player, and it resulted in an 83 loss season. That cannot happen again, and the sad part is that while it was happening there were a few of us who were predicting exactly what was happening. If you ignore the past, you are doomed to repeat it. Instead of waiting and playing his little poker game, Hendry needs to get down to brass tacks, because this team has a lot of work to do in order to contend. Why not get the easy stuff out of the way now, instead of having it waste time that would be better spent working on Giles, Furcal, or other moves?

Hurry? The season is over. Teams let go of dead weight when the season is over. A lot of teams have already made moves, declining options, picking up options, outrighting guys, firing coaches, hiring coaches, claiming players. A lot of dead weight is gone by this time of year. The problem is the Cubs think Macias has value, and they will keep him. They think Neifi Perez is fine for SS. They think Burnitz is a fine RF. They think the problem was health, luck, chemistry and attitude. They have failed to recognize the single biggest problem on this team for years, and not one major front office person has been replaced, nothing makes me think they finally understand the problem and are willing to fix it. To expand up what Goony's point is, it's not as if this team was 15 over .500 and missed the playoffs by a couple games. There was a serious regression here, and nothing and no one has been held accountable. Macias being let go would signal a change, or at least an admission that the roster was flawed going into 2005. That's the least we could expect as vested fans: an admission of failure, and a signal that the club intends to correct the flaws in this team.

Has anyone done something yet? Is Macias a free agent or a possible non-tender? Yes. Anyone has done something yet. Several managers have been cut loose, coaches have been fired, GM's have been let go...... Nomar has suggested he'd love to be back in Chicago and would be open to playing whereever they want him. However, management doesn't seem interested in retaining his services. The offseason for the Cubs basically started September 1st, and Jose Macias and Neifi Perez batted 1/2 while Cedeno sat. We have so little info on Cedeno, we won't know if he could be an everyday starter or a AAAA player. I could go on and on. It is my opinion, but I don't like the vibe coming out of Chicago. Getting back to another post you recently made in this tread.... Would you like Burnitz as a 4th outfielder if you know Murton is one of the starters? Isn't that Hollandsworth/Dubois all over again? Unless Baker definetly feels that Murton showed enough in his 150 AB's to warrant less skepticism, I'd steer clear of any veteran corner OF, especially one who bats lefty. I don't want Nomar back unless he's playing SS, or as a supersub, but not as an everyday OF. I'm irritated that Macias hasn't been non tendered yet. I'm not shocked that Perez hasn't been, since I doubt Hendry saw what every objective observer saw last season. He'll wait til the SS situation is settled, or at least clearer, to move on Macias. No excuse for Burnitz's option being declined. It's a bad option, so it shouldn't be picked up even if Hendry wants him back.

per Bruce Levine this morning the Cubs have zero interest in Girardi for this or next year.

if Houston and St Louis keep meeting in the NLCS, that rivalry will be huge.

No, BBB, I know they can't just try and outddo St Louis, but I was trying to make a point that it might be, realistically, one of the things that kicks Hendry into paying market value for the one impact player in this years crop. Well, wouldn't it be somewhat nice if there was a small leak or two to the baseball press gods that the Cubs were at least slightly, remotely, considerably and minutely interested in one, Brian Giles? Why do I have to read that all these other teams are already expressing interest in taking him away from home? It's probably considered tampering to even talk to him at this point, but I see nothing wrong with posturing. Maybe Bruce Miles should help us out and write a nice Giles to teh Cubs? piece :D

About all I have to say about that is if Baker knew how to handle a pitching staff, we'd never be having this conversation, since either Prior would have been pulled sooner in Game 2, thus giving him maybe 15-20 extra picthes in Game 6, or, failing that, Baker would have had Farnsworth up after the Pierre double, or, finally, not had him immediatly throw 4 high and outside to the first guy he faced, or decided to go with the Alfonseca v Harris matchup in Game 1, or... I guess I could go on, but I'll get even more angry. My point is, Kyle was the least of the problems in the NLCS. Yeah, but, well, he's still a choker of mad dogs or something like that. Were you looking for "gutless, choking dog"? Mmmm, that's good hyperbole!

No, BBB, I know they can't just try and outddo St Louis, but I was trying to make a point that it might be, realistically, one of the things that kicks Hendry into paying market value for the one impact player in this years crop.

You just ruined my day. The sad part is if you flipped Murton and Perez, and replaced Burnitz with someone else, it's a better lineup than we had last year.

About all I have to say about that is if Baker knew how to handle a pitching staff, we'd never be having this conversation, since either Prior would have been pulled sooner in Game 2, thus giving him maybe 15-20 extra picthes in Game 6, or, failing that, Baker would have had Farnsworth up after the Pierre double, or, finally, not had him immediatly throw 4 high and outside to the first guy he faced, or decided to go with the Alfonseca v Harris matchup in Game 1, or... I guess I could go on, but I'll get even more angry. My point is, Kyle was the least of the problems in the NLCS.

See, that would be worth Premium to see. Would Modzilla have to calm you down? Cause that would be ironic. :P Seriously, though, if St Louis got seriously into the Giles bidding, I can really see Hendry making a very strong push to keep Giles from St Louis. There's going to be a lot of pressure on Hendry to improve when compared to the Cards, given the way they've run away with the Central the past 2 seasons. So, maybe the Cards getting involved would end up being a good thing, because it would force Hendry to get into a bidding war. Kind of like what happened when St Louis was rumored to be close to signing Moises Alou in 2002.

If that's all we do, we won't have Giles in RF for 2006. That will need to be a player option to even come close to getting it done. How about 3/39 with a vesting option based on plate appearances? what does everyone else think bout that?I have asserted for a long time now that without a guaranteed fourth year we don't get him off the west coast. I agree. It will take a guaranteed four years and at least 12 million a year to get him. Anyone who suggests less hasn't paid attention to what the guys signed for last year. There will be as many teams with money this year as there were last year and fewer quality free agents. The floor fr Giles is 4/48. I'd go 4/52 or 5/60. Vance, he's still Brian Giles, and not Babe Ruth. He'll be 35 this year and you would lock him up at 12 mill per through his 40th b-day? Unless his name is Bonds or Clemens I ain't doing that. I know the wisdom is that it will take 4 guaranteed to het him off the coast, but if its me, I offer 3yrs at 11 mill per, with an option for a fourth that includes a hefty raise. Give him the cash when you know (or have evidence to suggest) that he will be most productive. And when he signs the 4 yr deal with St. Louis this board will erupt like never before. Even bigger than the Choi thread? :D

Murton has nothing to prove to me. If I'm the GM, he's my 2006 LF, end of story, I move on to more pressing matters like SP, bullpen, RF, CF and middle infield. We have a lot of holes. That's pretty much how I feel. If you run him out there everyday for 3 months and he struggles, make a move, but going into the year he's the left fielder. Also, as you said, we do have a lto of holes, so if we have a chance at filling a OF spot at league minimum, we should be all over it.

I think Murton is capable of an 800 OPS, but I sure am not penciling him in at that number. I would expect him to provide at least a 750 OPS, and that would be fine at his cost, as long as they get production from the other corner spot. It would have been fine to hand the LF job to Dubois this year, as long as they went with somebody much better than Burnitz. Don't you think Murton's 2005 sample size at the ML level makes him much more of a sure thing than Dubois ever was?

Why would he accept 5/50 when he's likely to get 4/48 from someone else? How about 3/46 with a player option for a 4th at $10m?