Clogged Basepaths

fyi, he signed a 2 yr. deal with a 3rd yr. option. $ has not been confirmed yet. But I was enjoying my rage at the 3rd year so much! At least tell me it's a players option so I can continue the rage! Please! Neifi alone cannot bear the brunt of the rage.

That's a dangerous way to think. We need like backups, and backups for the backups after Dusty burns out those guys. He did it to Weurtz last year. What's to stop him from doing what he's done the whole time he's been here. Hell, in 2003 he rode Farnsworth/Borowski into the ground. Remember when we had to go to Dave Veres because the rest of the guys were gased?

Hendry has no damn clue. I'm starting to question if he has the vision to put a contending team together in 2006. I'm going to hi-jack the thread and say something that I'm sure I've said before among my 17,000 posts. I think Hendry had a plan and a clue when he took over. As much as the 2003 success was exhilirating, I think it (and having Baker as manager) caused Hendry to toss his plan into the crapper and try to turn a mirage (2003 team) into a reality. We've made moves that jeopardized the long term health of this team, and we're still doing it. You're thinking of the 2001 Bears causing harm to the future (i.e. Jauron/Shoop being retained). Hendry's plan was to stockpile young, fireballing starting pitchers. His plan went awry when they got injured. The reason for this can be attributed to his misstep in choosing a manager. I agree part of the problem has been the health of the rotation. I'm not going to debate that. And my feelings for the incapable weilder of toothpicks are well known. But the window of opportunity is closing with Zambrano and Prior about to get very expensive and this team still hasn't figured it out. I spent half of last year begging for Hendry to just blow it up. Like, blow it up big time. Like the A's would do. Get people to WAY overpay in prospects/players for stud SPs who are still cheap (for maybe another year). Use the money to add a bat and fill out the bullpen. Then again, this is a big market. Big market teams don't need to reload, in theory. But that is predecated upon us continually making deals for players like DLee/Aram who are still cheap for a few years. At a certain point, we either have to blow it all up, or start integrating a couple league minimum type players. For the love of jebus, I don't know if I'll be able to watch this team next year if Cedeno/Murton are not playing 130+ games.

This, in general is the problem with MLB. We're all on here complaining about the $ and length of the deal. If this was the NFL, nobody would give a crap. We'd be discussing the player. As we should be now. Any budget discussion is ridiculous because we are not soothsayers and thusly cannot foresee who else we will sign. For all we know, Hendry is planning on leaving "room to add players through trade during the season" again. (You'd certainly hope not, but he sang that song all last offseason, and it worked out...great?)

Hendry has no damn clue. I'm starting to question if he has the vision to put a contending team together in 2006. I'm going to hi-jack the thread and say something that I'm sure I've said before among my 17,000 posts. I think Hendry had a plan and a clue when he took over. As much as the 2003 success was exhilirating, I think it (and having Baker as manager) caused Hendry to toss his plan into the crapper and try to turn a mirage (2003 team) into a reality. We've made moves that jeopardized the long term health of this team, and we're still doing it. You're thinking of the 2001 Bears causing harm to the future (i.e. Jauron/Shoop being retained). Hendry's plan was to stockpile young, fireballing starting pitchers. His plan went awry when they got injured. The reason for this can be attributed to his misstep in choosing a manager.

You make a very good point. But I already pointed out that I don't feel we can actually 'count' on Ohman to even be healthy, let alone good this year. He 'could' fill the role is the sticking point. He's been so banged up over his career that I almost can't believe he's back on the big league club. As we've seen recently, it's not 'easy' to acquire a quality left reliever through a trade during the season. What would we do if Ohman exploded in April? If Ohman fills the role, that's even better, as we'd have 2 lefties capable of being good out of the bullpen. I, for one, do not want to see Rusch and his giant WHIP out there in any inning, let alone the last couple. While concerns over Ohman's health/performance are certainly valid, I still don't think they justify giving a eight figures to a player with extremely limited success. (Going by the numbers, Rusch is a better bet to provide more value than Eyre over the lives of their respective contracts.) Well, thankfully we've got them BOTH locked up! This team is the anti-sabr team. It makes me so sad. It really isn't that complicated, is it? OBP=GOOD. BAVG=POINTLESS. GUHHHHHHHHHHH. I mean, go Neifi!

Maybe Ohman is now possible trade bait. Also, I'm not going to judge this signing until I see how Eyre does in a Cubs uniform. I guess all the "Mr. know it Alls" here know what the market is regarding LOOGY's as FA's. NOT!!!! Give it a chance all you pessimists & overreacter's! Maybe the optmists should give it a rest. Almost 4 mil for a loogy. Yeah! Just because he is left handed doesn't mean he has to be only a LOOGY. Christ, look at his BAA against righties. Very solid. Hi, I'm Dusty Baker - I don't think we've met? I didn't know you posted here! Quick question: who was the league leading walker last year? I'm sorry, I mean can you tell me an anecdote about Hank Aaron, he sure was good.

I said that earlier. Adding a SS and OF and another setup will make this a successful offseason. That all depends on who that SS and OF are. Right now we're down to about 20 million do fill our needs with. After the Rusch signing, we had 30 million to fill the roster. Had we used the internal options, we could have spend on Giles and Furcal or Giles and Burnett or Furcal and Burnett. Now, our options are being more limited based on money spent needlessly. Well, obviously it'd depend on who it was. My earlier posts said "above league average" - I was not referencing Neifi and like...Neifi (but in the OF).

Well, if we don't get at least one of Furcal/Giles or someone comparable in a trade, then we're not winning in 2006 anyway, no matter how many Scott Eyre's we have. If Hendry has determined not to pursue Furcal or Giles for those reasons, then he'd be best served using 2006 as a rebuilding year evaluating the prospects and use the freed money to make down payments to Prior, Zambrano, Lee etc. I wasn't saying I was against either Furcal or Giles. I'd like to have them both, but any deal they would actually sign - would not be met happily here. That was the only point.

I said that earlier. Adding a SS and OF and another setup will make this a successful offseason.

Using the Braves as a comparison to anything Cubs related is just going to make us all sad. Let's see how their farm system would stand up to Dusty "The Elbow Devourer" Baker.

You make a very good point. But I already pointed out that I don't feel we can actually 'count' on Ohman to even be healthy, let alone good this year. He 'could' fill the role is the sticking point. He's been so banged up over his career that I almost can't believe he's back on the big league club. As we've seen recently, it's not 'easy' to acquire a quality left reliever through a trade during the season. What would we do if Ohman exploded in April? If Ohman fills the role, that's even better, as we'd have 2 lefties capable of being good out of the bullpen. I, for one, do not want to see Rusch and his giant WHIP out there in any inning, let alone the last couple.

I completely understand the angst over the cumulative sum of the deals we've inked so far. But... It's gotten to the point where the waters are so poisoned by it that I am struggling to conjure a (realistic) FA signing that wouldn't get torn apart. Furcal will result in too many years, or too much money, or both. Same with Giles, but most likely years. Wagner/Ryan would be years/$ respectively. We're so angry (rightfully so) with the results/excuses the last 2 years basically nothing will make us happy. Trades, are a different story obviously, as 'winning' in any trade will still make the peasants rejoice. But FA's are basically dead to us at this point it seems.

I agree with you again BBB, but like I was saying the years/$ of this deal is just a result of the market/climate now. Doesn't mean we have to be happy about it, but until we get a pitching coach that can routinely work wonders with reclamation projects - this will have to be what we do.

The problem with that list, is that Mitre makes me sad. Also, Rusch will never be used correctly in the bullpen. Koronka/Hill are starters, and even though Koronka is destroying some random league this offseason - would you rather have him than Eyre? We can spare the extra $3 mill for a proven quantity. Would we even be having this argument if Rusch and Neifi were floating around in the big FA pool still? I don't really think so. I'm not sure we can. That 3 million could be the difference in Giles in RF or Juan Encarnacion. I disagree, the $3 million is sitting on the bench backing up the middle infield. You can't judge all signings unfairly because of wasted funds on another player. This deal on its own is not bad. Owners have lots of money to spend this winter (satellite radio $, record attendence figures, even the DRays/Royals are going to increase payroll), and not that many players to spend it on. I'm just waiting for another RP to sign a deal that makes this one look good.

Are you comortable with Hill as a reliever? I'm not. Novoa was all over the place last year. Wuertz has his moments. Koronka???? Based on past experience the Cubs have 3 guys i'd classify as "reliable-to good." Those being Dempster, Williamson, and now Eyre. I liked what I saw from Ohman last year, but it has just been one year. Rusch does seem like he's caught in the middle. I think Eyre is a good addition. I think he's more effective and reliable than Mitre, Hill, Koronka, Novoa, and Wuertz. Stop making all these logical points! What am I supposed to say now? I also agree with Vance's post about offense. There is no reason for us to spend the money we do and have such a middling offense (especially when you have DLee/Aram in said lineup). At this point, we are above league average at 3 positions offensively (1B, 3B, C). We need to be above average at 1, maybe 2 more spots (SS at least). The rest we merely need to be around league average to be fine. The talk of Mench would be some logical step to that (assuming we upgrade at 2 other spots).

The problem with that list, is that Mitre makes me sad. Also, Rusch will never be used correctly in the bullpen. Koronka/Hill are starters, and even though Koronka is destroying some random league this offseason - would you rather have him than Eyre? We can spare the extra $3 mill for a proven quantity. Would we even be having this argument if Rusch and Neifi were floating around in the big FA pool still? I don't really think so.

I think it's going to take a deal greater than Williamson, but much less than what we had to pay Scott Eyre. I dunno, wasn't Williamson's deal for $2mill this year? I was just assuming the $ would be higher for the Dotel deal (it is a year later, and Dotel has way more success). The whole point is, if Hendry signs Furcal, acquires an OF (or 2) with good OBP, and gets ANOTHER set up type guy, this deal starts to look better. As a "5th most important deal" he's a pretty good player to get. As the centerpiece of your offseason...not so much.

I disagree that the Hawkins deal was bad. He was borderline insane in the setup role. That was the only role he was suited for. He was not used correctly. If he indeed was signed with the intention of him miraculously becoming a good closer - then it was bad. But it seemed to me that it was a signing for him to be a setup guy. Not that it matters now, he's a grand slam machine now.

The thing about counting on Ohman as your only lefty (that pitches like a lefty statistically) is that he's had TONS of injuries. I think he made his major league debut when I was still a fetus. Then he had some arm problems, then last year he was good. Counting on players like this is what explodes giant holes into lineups and bullpens. I enjoy having some redunancy on the roster. Unless we're talking Neifi and his pop star brother Rubbo. Although, Rubbo might amuse me more...tough one.

Why would we need to offer Dotel a 3 year offer anyway? I'm confused this is even an argument, as I just assumed we'd be offering him a nearly identical deal to Williamson.

I don't have the exact stats in front of me, but hasn't Eyre had a few good seasons, and then this last 'great' one?

I've been of the persuasion that the bullpen should have been the final focus after lead-off, shortstop, and the gaping hole in rightfield. We have a number of arms for the pen. But if I were going to gamble three years on a reliever, Dotel please. First off, I second your "Dotel please" Secondly, your thinking is good in theory - but it has somewhat resulted in our bullpens the last couple years. Isn't it possible that we could take care of all of these 'problems' in a somewhat similar timeframe? I know watching Eyre sign a contract might keep him busy, but not so busy he can't call Furcal up and tell him to c'mere.

Makes you wonder what in the heck is Rusch and his 3mil going to do now that Eyre has been signed... Well, Hendry seems to love having that "swing" guy. Unless that means he really don't want to rely on Wood staying healthy to have 5 good starters. (not calling Rusch a good starter). I'm not responding to you just to pick on you. You bring up things that kind of boil my blood a little bit. Swing guy is another one that bugs me. When does the long man come into a game? When the starter gets hurt or if he's getting whacked around. Since the starter isn't getting hurt early in games all that often, it's really when the starter is getting beaten up. In those games, aren't you pretty much toast anyway? Why pay a guy 3m+ to save the bullpen some innings? Take a guy like Mitre who makes league minimum and see if you can get any trade value out of him in a roll like that. Rusch wasn't exactly effective as a swing guy either. He struggled when left in the rotation too long, and he didn't seem to grasp switching to pitching every other day too well, either. Haha, dude we totally agree. In no way was I saying that the "swing" guy concept was good. I 100% agree with what you said there.

Hammond got 2/4.6m after a 0.95 ERA in Atlanta, from George Steinbrenner. Enough said. But also, don't you consider Eyre to have way more success than Hammond had when he got that deal? That deal was also a few years ago, inflation is no fun either.