CardsFanInChiTown

Thanks SouthSideRyan but make no mistake I hate the Cubs! As for the issue at hand... I guess I'm somewhere in the middle in the Lee vs. Pujols MVP debate. On one hand I do believe Lee had a better year stats wise. On the other hand I think the fact that AP was the glue that held the Cards injury-plagued offense together during their playoff push should also mean something. I think there has to be some wiggle room in the voting for ”intangibles” (yes, the dreaded word). If AP was out of the discussion and it was just Jones and Lee would those ”intangibles” be enough for Jones to win over Lee's stats? Not a chance! Another thing - do we really want our awards generated by a computer? My view is Lee and Pujols are both worthy - it’s just a matter of taste. There is no right or wrong answer on this one. edit - made things a little more clear

Comparing 2004 Edmonds totals to 2005 Edmonds splits isn't really fair. I have no clue what you're getting at. ](*,)

Alex Gonzalez. Alex Gonzalez? Alex "The Out Making Machine" Gonzalez!!! Oh god please let me see a Alex Gonzalez/Nefei Perez Cub DP combo. :wink:

I really disagree with you on each points of this post. First, the secret was out pretty fast with DLee. Second, you are overvaluing the impact pitches a player sees because of another player in the lineup.

What is your definition of an "established closer"?

Such a stud... http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2224952

The Cubs being in the playoff hunt would have made it more interesting.

I'm actually more shocked that he didn't atleast get a few more 1st and 2nd votes.

AP never deserved the award over Bonds.

The BWAA are stupid. It was a pretty close race: The St. Louis Cardinals first baseman received 18 first-place votes and 14 seconds for 378 points in balloting by the Baseball Writers' Association of America. Jones, the Atlanta Braves center fielder, got 13 first-place votes, 17 seconds and two thirds for 351 points.

\:D/ \:D/ =D> =D>

Why don't you see a trade with Cincy? They need cheap, good pitching. We have cheap, good pitching. We can give them quality or quantity. Because Cincy is too stupid to realize that we match up pretty well as trading partners. That's why... Do they? I don't think the Cubs have a A level pitching prospects required to get Dunn. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the Cubs have a lot of B and C guys. Guzman was an "A" level prospect until his injury woes. He's not there now, but he definitely has the stuff and potential to be a staff ace. I agree, before his injuries he was an 'A' level prospect.

I'm pretty sure that's not Bill James. Hah, not even close.

i didn't find it difficult to comprehend Good for you and thanks for making another post about nothing. You get one gold star. :D PMSing? That was original. Seriously, why do you keep wasting posts with nothing to say? Same reason you attempt to belittle those that disagree with your ideas. Why not just state your case without the petty attacks your posts are known for. :roll: With 8 pages of talk on Pierre, you want to keep digging up this topic? no one reply to this.

What is Pierre's salary next season?

Pierre isn't very good. I'd rather improve at RF and SS and keep Corey at CF. What if Corey, in a package, could help the Cubs get an impact RF? Go get Michaels, Bradley, Wilkerson, even GMJ. Those guys will most likely cost the Cubs more prospects wise. I'm not sure I would wanna do that with Pie waiting in the wings.

Pierre isn't very good. I could easily see him having a .350 OBP year. As long as the Cubs don't give up too much I could see him being a nice stop gap. Not everyone on your team can be a superstar.

If Hendry wouldn't trade Hill for Dunn, why would he trade him and another player for Pierre? And knowing Hendry's history of trades, doesn't it seem highly unlikely he would trade 2 of his top LH pitching prospects? Hah, didn't he trade D-Train to the Marlins?

Why waste a year stunting his development in a platoon? How is a LH'er in a R/L platoon stunting his development? It's just protecting their ass if he struggles by giving the Cubs an additional option. It's not an all or nothing as far as throwing him out there for 160 games or stunting his development in '07. A platoon is different than having a backup option. In any case, if the cubs aren't WS bound, who cares if he struggles? In a platoon, he doesn't face lefties, this will slow his development. the best way to learn to hit lefties, is to face them. CP20 - Dusty needs to go. I think we all agree this would be best for the future of the Cubs in a large number of ways. I'd like to think the Cubs would be a contender for the WS in '07. Of course, Hendry would have to improve his ability to acquire players, Baker would have to go or improve as well. You're not going to get a quality CF'er and not platoon him w/Pie if they did follow my scenario. My ideal scenario would still be... Whatever is being offered to get Pierre, use it to get Michaels, Michaels is the starting CF'er and hitting leadoff in '06. Pie does well in '06 at Iowa and gets ready for '07 in the majors. The Cubs platoon Michaels and Pie with Michaels getting scattered ABs in LF/RF and vs. various RH'ers. Pie would get the majority of the RH ABs and scattered ABs vs. Lh'ers. Ideally, Pie would get around 350 ABs and Michaels around 300. Michaels is really too good to platoon. Besides he'll cost the Cub's a lot more then Pierre.

Why waste a year stunting his development in a platoon? Beat me to it.

How would it be different with someone else in center? I think committing to keeping Pie in the minors all of next year is a good thing. Lets not Corey him. I don't understand your argument at all - all it seems to show is that Dusty should be replaced for failing to use his expanded roster to give young players a chance. The Cedeno argument is not a great one though because he got hurt. Offer the same proposal to Philly for Michaels, get a better player, and he's under contract/arby eligible for '07. That puts the Cubs in a position to platoon Pie/Michaels, something that wouldn't happen if they traded for Pierre and did or did not sign him long-term. I agree, Pie should get all of '06 at AAA and become a Sept. callup when the Iowa Cubs are done. As far as Pierre and his upcoming FA and how the impacts Pie. There isn't a scenario where the FA negatively impacts Pie. If you're getting a stop-gap, do it with someone that can ease Pie into a starting Cf'er rather than having him go straight from AAA to the majors w/out any other decent options. You assume the Cubs wouldn't have any other options in place going in to 07 - that's some time from now. I agree with Poudre Moose on this one.

Why would KC give up a promising cheap player for an older one year rental? I don't like this deal for either side.

Pierre is not a marquee name. He's known but even the casual fan knows he's not a star. Yeah, I guess marquee is a little strong. However, he's the kind of player that gets way over hyped by the media.

Why don't you see a trade with Cincy? They need cheap, good pitching. We have cheap, good pitching. We can give them quality or quantity. Because Cincy is too stupid to realize that we match up pretty well as trading partners. That's why... Do they? I don't think the Cubs have a A level pitching prospects required to get Dunn. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the Cubs have a lot of B and C guys.

Remember guys, to the causal fan and stupid reporters Pierre is a “marquee” guy. I bet a team will have to overpay a little to get him because of the great PR he'll generate.