USSoccer

Um, OK. Nice reasoning there. How about, why not? I don't think that's enough talent in return for Lee. I'm not high on Zito, and while Kotsay is a pretty good player, him and Zito for Lee doesn't do it for me, especially when both are one year away from free agency. Plus, Oakland has Dan Johnson at first base. Kotsay signed an extension in June.

Getting P prospects from the Braves is like getting used gum from someone. That said, Hooray Holla is gone. Hooray there's room to add Van Buren onto the 40 man. No excuse now for Murton not to play 5 times a week.

I voted for Meh, but I work a lot of the lines into everyday conversation. Some say it makes it hard to talk to me. I say it makes it easier on me when all of my conversations are pre-scripted references.

Good. Get him ready to go by May

Given the track record of Hendry and Baker in regards to starting a rookie position player, it's hard for me to imagine a scenario where Cedeno would be the starting SS or 2B next year. Choi platooned with Karros until Baker phased Choi out Hill was passed over in favor of Grudz (no real complaint here, though) Dubois was yanked around in favor of a terrible Hollandsworth Murton was trusted only to play against LHP for some reason Cedeno didn'tt play much his second callup, and then only against LHP Conversely, you can't really find an example of where a guy was trusted to be the everyday player at a position if there was a veteran alternative available. In other words, I won't buy Hendry saying anything about Murton or Cedeno being counted on for 2006 until either Baker is gone or we see a final 2006 roster next spring.

Ugh. Just Say No.....

I'd do 3/$35 and I think Hendry would too, since it's not long on years.

I voted for Brandon Sing. Patterson needs to show another year before I get excited Harvey has waaaay too high a K rate Murton has too high a BABIP, but he's 2nd in my mind.

If he's costing that many runs, maybe. I just don't think that's the case. He may cost the staff a run here or there, but I don't think it's that big a difference. CERA is an unreliable stat and I've yet to see anything definitive that shows Barrett defensively is any worse than a league average catcher. He is far and away above league average for catchers offensively. That isn't disputed. I just think there are many other ways to improve this team than jettisoning Barrett and Walker who are very good and affordable at their positions. I agree that there are better ways to improve the team without selling off Barrett and Walker, but if the Cubs really intended on building around pitching, I don't see why we aquired Barrett. Walker I can see, because he's left handed, 2B isn't all that tough a defensive position, and we have mostly a strikeout staff anyway. Barrett, though, is indicative of Hendry's love for toolsy players. His offensive skills are there, but there is something about his defense and his handling of the staff that seems not to be there. It might come with experience, but I haven't seen a ton of improvment from last year to this year. He still drops many pitches he should catch-the Philly game is one example of this. He doesn't block the ball well, which is a problem with our mostly slider staff, and I don't think the staff really see him as a calming influence, but that's subjective, and I can only infer it from watching. He doesn't call the pitches, so I can give him a pass there, but I'd like to see him sacrifice a bit of the offense if it meant he'd allow fewer passed balls and help keep the staff's composure.

Alright? I think you at least have to admit that he's been a great offensive catcher this year. Again - not that he's untouchable, but he's been one of our most consistent producers this year. I didn't like trading Miller away either. But the offense would really be hurting if you subtracted Barrett's .857 OPS and replaced it with Miller's .710. I think we can admit that Barrett has good looking numbers. He does seem to tighten up at the plate when the pressure is on (eg, Tuesday night, struck with the bases loaded in 2-0 game and then doubles with the bases loaded in an 8-1 game; Wednesday, strikes out looking as the tying run at the plate on an 0-2 pitch). Also, he is not a good receiver, is very lazy at times about moving his body to block pitches. if another position is upgraded offensively, I would trade Barrett and replace him with a defensive-oriented catcher. This team seems to have no spark and has had none since '03. I think Barrett and Walker, despite their good-looking offensive numbers, are part of the problem and not part of the solution. His stats are great for this year and pointing out 2 situations in which he has not come through in a tight game proves nothing. He lead off the 9th w/ a single in a 2-run game last night, so does that prove he's a great clutch hitter? After last night he's hitting .292 with a .357 OBP and .503 SLG. It's just not plausible that all his hits, walks, and power come only when the Cubs are in a blow out. Barrett (.292/.357/.503) and Walker (.302/.351/.468) are part of the problem? I'm sorry, but that just doesn't make sense to me at all. I'm going to agree with you here. When looking at Barrett and Walker's numbers, they are definitely NOT part of the problem. The problem has been inconsistent starting pitching and an outfield of atrocious production. I don't see why people continue to want to unload the third and fourth best hitters on a team. Just for a minute assume that Barrett's skills as a reciever are subpar, and they are costing the staff .3 runs/game. Would trading his offensive production for improved pitching be an overall improvement, since our team is built around pitching (in theory) anyway? FWIW, I would trade Barrett, but only if it signifigantly improved another area of need.

What are you talking about. He is the 2nd best offensive catcher in the majors and quite possibly the 2nd worst defensive catcher mhuber- for a catcher, his numbers are good, but they are down from last season, and I'm pretty sure PECOTA predicted a decline. I'm just curious as to how big of a decline. Errr... 2004: 287/337/489 16HR 65RBI 33BB/64K 2005: 290/356/501 13HR 53RBI 33BB/48K Not sure if I see a decline there. Weird...I thought he was hitting .279...weird...my bad.

What are you talking about. He is the 2nd best offensive catcher in the majors and quite possibly the 2nd worst defensive catcher mhuber- for a catcher, his numbers are good, but they are down from last season, and I'm pretty sure PECOTA predicted a decline. I'm just curious as to how big of a decline.

Wow, that was bad....remember when our lineup was Nomar/Ramirez/Sosa/Lee/Alou/Walker? sigh....

Wow, Barrett is less than stellar this season...what did PECOTA predict for him?

he's a Cub killer, that's about it. If we got him, i'd gurantee you he'd suck it up for us. He looks good because he's hitting against Rusch. Think Jeff Blauser when you think of Pierre vs. the Cubs....

Wow...we're so bad....

That's a bad, baaaad Cub team out on the field today...and think about in in the context of the fact that we only have 1 everyday player hurt (Ramirez). Just removing 1 player makes us look like an expansion team. Good offseason, Jim. Well put together. It almost, *almost* exonerates Dusty for being so inept. Look at what he has to work with.

You sooner go after BJ Ryan than Billy Wagner, but overpaying for bullpen help is a great way to waste money. Relievers are the most unpredictable things ever. Save it for Giles. Save it for extensions for Z, Prior and Ramirez. Keep some in reserve in case you want to trade for a LF midseason next year...

:lol: Now THAT I believe. Isn't that a line from Full Metal Jacket?

:x

That's something I can see happening to the Cubs...

Well, yes, I agree with that as well....I think with a better manager, Z's ERA would be about .5 lower. I wonder if we could figure out opponent rbi's after 100 pitches. I bet its a lot. But Dusty doesn't trust the 'pen, so he leaves his starters in too long. That may make sense if you think the games are all sooper dooper important. I don't think it does, but I'll concede it might to other folks. It makes zero sense to anyone to risk Mark Prior on a day like today. If Prior had struck out Furcal its still a terrible risk to leave him in on a meaningless game. Its time to start managing like the Cubs are out of it, so even Dusty will be pulling guys before anything is at risk. I have a friend I post with on a Utah Jazz message board that gurantees me that Dusty is going to ruin all three of the Cubs' aces before next year is over. One down (granted, a strong assist from Riggs)...two to go. I'd be more upset at Wood's idiot H.S. coach before I was upset with Riggs.

No way do I give Lee a deal worth more than Aramis' deal. He's had one excellent season. It very well may be (and is likely to be) a career year. I'd actually consider trading him before I gave him a new deal for more than 4/40.

Because Dusty wants this season to be Glen-DONE sooner than later. Because he decides to let Prior throw 128 P in 7 innings on regular rest; imagine how fast our arms would go down if we started skipping guys?

On the bright side, we'll get to watch Kyle mow us down in the 9th....