MeatampPotatoesMan

It sounds like Kinzer is just trying to drive up the price, but if Furcal really was serious about changing positions, this only benefits the Cubs, IMO. It would increase the chances of Hendry not overpaying for Furcal.

It's easy to say that, but can you come up with the alternative to Eyre/Howry production via trade or other FA signing? How do you know that wasn't market value for Eyre/Howry? The fact that they've already signed, it not even being December, hints at as much. You statement sounds very speculative to me. Do you have 1st hand knowledge that neither Eyre or Howry have negotiated/talks with other teams? Do you have 1st hand knowledge that Eyre or Howry were had for below market value or even fair market value? It goes both ways. Were did I ever state that Eyre & Howry were had @ below market value? Answer: I didn't, so please do not put words in my mouth. IIRC, I did read an article stating Eyre had discussions with Torre & the Yankees were very interested in him. I will try & locate that article. Don't get so touchy. I never quoted you as saying anything. I actually gave you more room to prove your point by pointing out another possibility for Howry/Eyre to not be paid over market value. I was trying to say that there isn't concrete info either way, so dismissing someone's argument b/c it is "speculative" isn't valid in this case.

So you're implying I'm stupid? Well I'm not implying you want it, but you'll never earn my respect saying stuff like that. People will disagree with you pretty much every day in the workplace, etc., you better get used to it. I'm not implying anything. It is a general statement. You made it pretty clear that you are not interested in looking at the statistical side of baseball. I find that attitude to be ignorant in many respects. It's like the caveman throwing a fit b/c the round wheel wasn't what he used before. Stick with that square wheel. I'm not attacking you. I'm disagreeing with your approach. You can get all bent out of shape about it, but that doesn't help advance your idea. Where have you attempted to argue, with actual evidence, against the use of stats? No where that i've seen. You just throw out unsubstantiated opinions and get mad when people don't agree. I still think you owe me an apology, but whatever. I do care about stats, I've said in a few other threads I find great importance in OBP. Another stat I think isn't used enough is WHIP for pitching. I guess my point isn't that VORP or whatever isn't useful, I highly doubt any GM in professional baseball uses it to weigh making a deal. It's a fun hobby, and predicting transactions is what this forum is for, but I don't think it ever carries over to the real world. I really cant even see Theo sitting at his desk musing "Hmm, let's go with Player A due to his filthy VORP rating." JP Riccardi and Beane use VORP (they probably use their own in house stats with greater reliability). Actually Theo was a stats guy, although he didn't just dismiss scouts' opinions like Beane does, who is completely a numbers guy. Stats do carry over into the real world. how is it that stats can be used in just about every aspect of life with great effect (realizing that they do have limitations) but can't find traction in baseball? the good ol' boys don't like it. i have yet to see a convincing argument as to why stats shouldn't be used that doesn't boil down to "this is the way we've always done it and it works fine." at the very least they should be used to complement the old school approach to baseball.

It's easy to say that, but can you come up with the alternative to Eyre/Howry production via trade or other FA signing? How do you know that wasn't market value for Eyre/Howry? The fact that they've already signed, it not even being December, hints at as much. You statement sounds very speculative to me. Do you have 1st hand knowledge that neither Eyre or Howry have negotiated/talks with other teams? Do you have 1st hand knowledge that Eyre or Howry were had for below market value or even fair market value? It goes both ways.

Would living by the long ball be so bad if you had decent OBP on your team? The A's are proof that station to station baseball wins games. Sit and wait for the 3 run jack. Are you implying that small ball produces more offense? As far as 2004 goes, I'd put failing to make the playoffs on Hawkins, Dusty, and the choke artists down the stretch. 2005's disaster wasn't a result of living and dying by the long ball. you can blame it on a lot of things like lack of OBP, injuries, Dusty, a shaky pen,... can you give me some examples of how living and dying by the long ball hurt us? did Cincy live and die by the long ball last year? how effective was their offense?

So you're implying I'm stupid? Well I'm not implying you want it, but you'll never earn my respect saying stuff like that. People will disagree with you pretty much every day in the workplace, etc., you better get used to it. I'm not implying anything. It is a general statement. You made it pretty clear that you are not interested in looking at the statistical side of baseball. I find that attitude to be ignorant in many respects. It's like the caveman throwing a fit b/c the round wheel wasn't what he used before. Stick with that square wheel. I'm not attacking you. I'm disagreeing with your approach. You can get all bent out of shape about it, but that doesn't help advance your idea. Where have you attempted to argue, with actual evidence, against the use of stats? No where that i've seen. You just throw out unsubstantiated opinions and get mad when people don't agree.

I totally disagree for one simple reason - Perry doesn't take himself 1/10 as seriously as Rogers takes himself. Perry also is pretty smart, I definately don't think he's some sort of goon. Whoever had that Podsednik comment, you're a hypocrite. About 99.999999% of us advocated that Lee for Podsednik trade. [-( Podsednik sucks. Thanks to people like Joe Morgan and Co., some individuals actually think he's good. He doesn't "suck" anymore than Hendry is a "moran". He is overrated in terms of being labled an All-Star, just like Hendry has made some good moves, and some not-so-good moves. Podsednik ranked 14/21 in OBP, 21/21 (dead last) in SLG, and dead last in OPS last year among qualified AL left fielders. He had a 72 SB% which is just above the break even mark. He ranked 10/14 in VORP among AL LF with 400+ PA. He sucks. It's really not fair to call him a left fielder - his true position is CF, the Sox have just misused him. Fair enough. He would rank 8/10 for qualified AL CF in OPS, 3/10 in OBP (nice), 10/10 in SLG. He'd also rank 10/14 in VORP among AL CF w/ 400+ PA. As a CF, his OBP is a solid addition to his team. Putting him in LF just throws that away, especially since you can easily get more production out of LF than CF looking at the player pool.

I totally disagree for one simple reason - Perry doesn't take himself 1/10 as seriously as Rogers takes himself. Perry also is pretty smart, I definately don't think he's some sort of goon. Whoever had that Podsednik comment, you're a hypocrite. About 99.999999% of us advocated that Lee for Podsednik trade. [-( Podsednik sucks. Thanks to people like Joe Morgan and Co., some individuals actually think he's good. He doesn't "suck" anymore than Hendry is a "moran". He is overrated in terms of being labled an All-Star, just like Hendry has made some good moves, and some not-so-good moves. Podsednik ranked 14/21 in OBP, 21/21 (dead last) in SLG, and dead last in OPS last year among qualified AL left fielders. He had a 72 SB% which is just above the break even mark. He ranked 10/14 in VORP among AL LF with 400+ PA. He sucks. You, sir, only care about stats. I don't think you see anything else. If you asked players on the Sox they'll tell you that Podsednik and Iguchi set the tone for the rest of the order day in and day out. I don't even know what the hell VORP is, no do I care. No one cares. People only care about winning, and Podsednik, unarguably, helped that team win. What you are failing to grasp through your statistical rantings is that you can twist numbers to suit whatever point you're trying to make, don't you pay attention to politics? Man, lay off the numbers pal - and look at the PLAYERS. You, sir, are afraid of new ideas like applying statistics to baseball b/c it would actually make you think. I do look beyond the numbers. They only tell part of the story. However, I'm not closeminded enough to ignore evidence, whether it is in numerical format or not. People say you can twist stats to say what you want, but that is b/c most people are too dense to understand what is being said. Educate yourself.

I totally disagree for one simple reason - Perry doesn't take himself 1/10 as seriously as Rogers takes himself. Perry also is pretty smart, I definately don't think he's some sort of goon. Whoever had that Podsednik comment, you're a hypocrite. About 99.999999% of us advocated that Lee for Podsednik trade. [-( Podsednik sucks. Thanks to people like Joe Morgan and Co., some individuals actually think he's good. He doesn't "suck" anymore than Hendry is a "moran". He is overrated in terms of being labled an All-Star, just like Hendry has made some good moves, and some not-so-good moves. Podsednik ranked 14/21 in OBP, 21/21 (dead last) in SLG, and dead last in OPS last year among qualified MLB left fielders. He had a 72 SB% which is just above the break even mark. He ranked 10/14 in VORP among AL LF with 400+ PA. He sucks. edit: changed AL to MLB

I totally disagree for one simple reason - Perry doesn't take himself 1/10 as seriously as Rogers takes himself. Perry also is pretty smart, I definately don't think he's some sort of goon. Whoever had that Podsednik comment, you're a hypocrite. About 99.999999% of us advocated that Lee for Podsednik trade. [-( Podsednik sucks. Thanks to people like Joe Morgan and Co., some individuals actually think he's good.

I don't think our bench can be Dusty proofed other than undeniable success. Murton needs to deliver right out of the gate if he wants to be the everyday starter in LF.

can we afford Giles with Pierre, Furcal, Eyre, and Howry?

I wasn't crazy about Eyre, but Howry is a much better deal, IMO. If Dempster starts blowing games regularly, we'll have someone capable of stepping in to close (howry). I would have rather spent the money on the offense rather than on the bullpen, but WELCOME TO CHICAGO MR. HOWRY!!! :D Have 3 awesome seasons, please. 8)

Ease up on the personal attacks. It's just a difference of opinion. He's responding to someone calling JH a moran is their avatar. You may want to ease up on your hate for some of the Cubs. I don't "hate" any of the Cubs TBCF. I don't like some of them as players, and have criticism of moves, but I don't "hate" them. Look, I just want everyone to get along. If you disagree with those of us that are critical of JH's decisions, or whatever, fine, that great, but let's debate that instead of talking about how we don't know what we're talking about. Likewise, there's no reason for any of "us" to call anyone a moron, or a moran, or a "Moran", unless your last name is Moran. In any case, let's just chill. Let's agree to disagree. Or, let's have a constructive argument. :D I agree, but there is a double standard on this board which allows attacks on certain members of the Cubs(JH,Neifi,Dusty,Macias,etc) & doesn't allow attacks on Sosa & Patterson. Defending someone who calls JH a moran in their avatar is hating on the Cubs. Sorry, if you don't like it, but I call it the way I see it. I don't think USSoccer was defending me. Actually he was telling me to chill out. he just got confused on who used "moran" first (ie me).

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then? Since when does "better than league average" mean "All-star?" How many teams have a guy whose above the league avg. at every single position? None that I can think of. Not even the Yankees. they very easily could though. it's not an impossible notion depending on how you want to define "league average production," ie OPS, BA, etc. Of course they could. But the idea that you need to have above average production at every position to be an elite team is just wrong. I would say an elite team should have above average production at 6 of the 8 positions, provided the other two aren't totally abysmal. I agree. I don't think it is the way to go. I was just saying that it is possible (after some moran decided "above average at every position" meant "all-star team").

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then? Since when does "better than league average" mean "All-star?" How many teams have a guy whose above the league avg. at every single position? None that I can think of. Not even the Yankees. they very easily could though. it's not an impossible notion depending on how you want to define "league average production," ie OPS, BA, etc. C'mon now...if I wanted I could make an argument to prove that I am Almighty G-d, but that's not true either. don't be insipid. seriously. define league average and then figure out how much those players make. it is fiscally possible. teams just choose to go a different way, with several studs who make the big $ and the necessary parts (below league average) as fillers.

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then? Since when does "better than league average" mean "All-star?" How many teams have a guy whose above the league avg. at every single position? None that I can think of. Not even the Yankees. Gee, then I guess you could say it would take the All Star team to do it. I sit uncorrected. You are confusing impossible with the examples from every day life. Just b/c someone doesn't do it, doesn't mean they can't. You could very easily trade your super-star players for several above average major leaguers. why would you do that? there's your answer as to why it isn't done. it's usually better to have a couple studs and a few duds than a team of mediocrity all the way around.

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then? Since when does "better than league average" mean "All-star?" How many teams have a guy whose above the league avg. at every single position? None that I can think of. Not even the Yankees. they very easily could though. it's not an impossible notion depending on how you want to define "league average production," ie OPS, BA, etc.

Some people seem to think the Marlins lost b/c they didn't get "equal value." They're not trying to acquire players to help them now. They're getting players that will contribute for years at the league minimum. I might actually like the Marlins now that they're not buying a team.

we don't have an infinite budget. every million matters. :wink: who wants gathright or gomes to lead off? what's ridiculous is the notion that you have to put speedy guys at leadoff.

I'd also add that he has a greater likelihood of being really bad than really good, since his ceiling isn't that fantastic. My question would be is Pierre an upgrade to what the Cubs had last year at the top of the order? Yes. I like the trade and think he'll set the table nicely for DLee and Aramis. Now Hendry needs to get the Furcal deal done and the top of the Cubs order will be stacked. Another point I'd like to make is that Pierre is considered below average defensively because of a poor throwing arm, he can go get 'em with the best of them, even covering the vast expanses of Pro Player Stadium. If this trade goes through, it will be nice to see Hendry heading in the right direction. You could stick just about any player in there and have an improvement over last year. That isn't really an argument for Pierre specifically. He doesn't really have a lot of range even though he has above average speed. His reads on the ball aren't too quick, which limits him. He does throw like a girl (no offense to the ladies with cannons). People actually complained about Patterson's arm last year. Wait till you see 140+ games of Pierre in CF. Keep in mind that Pierre is a one year rental unless Pie is dealt off and we get an extension with Pierre (which i'm not in favor of).

i'm waiting to see what those prospects are before judging. 3 prospects? for a rental?

He catches the ball good, but I can't see Hendy re-signing him with all the trade action going on.

This is the Cards we're talking about. Boone is going to play like he's in his prime again.

Wouldn't theRed Sox likely rather rid themselves of Clements dollars instead of Wells? Also, the Red Sox may want to keep a LH starter around as well. My guess would be that Wells is the one dealt, but I don't think you can rule out that they may be willing to trade Clement. Oh, definitely. From the Red Sox perspective i can see getting rid of Clement's contract. However, Wells wants out. If Clement goes while Wells stays, it will be against Wells's wishes. I guess they could get rid of both if they wanted. It looks like whoever is in charge over there is willing to let top prospects go, so they could have a lot of attractive options. The winter meetings should be very interesting.