davell

I've thought this could be the case, but I've not actually read anything saying that yet either. Where have you read that?

I don't get why the new thing is to blame Ricketts every time something goes wrong. By all accounts, Hendry was in on this until the end, meaning they weren't just "sitting on their hands." It's not Ricketts' fault he inherited a bloated payroll full of mediocre players and an old, small stadium that was falling apart. Long-term, he's doing the right things by trying to improve Wrigley (and maximize revenue) while diverting resources to the farm system. Of course, he's totally responsible for not firing Hendry. Until he actually diverts money towards the farm system instead of just saying it, it's hard to even remotely think about that being an excuse. And he basically said the same things last year and it didn't happen then either. If it were actually happening, I'd be totally on board with it. The edit I made after I posted originally actually kind of lets the Cubs(and Ricketts) off the hook here, if it's correct that he wanted to go to Boston. Because I could certainly see SD accomodating him as much as possible anyway. Of course, if the reason he wanted to go there and not here is because he's concerned that we couldn't afford him, then I take it back. Because we are a major market team and therefore should act like it.

Bumping this thread because he is evidentlyavailable for a pair of relievers, according to MLBTR. I don't know, but if he could be had cheaply, I think I'd be OK with him. Especially with him being able to play 3B as well.

I don't think Ricketts would OK a deal for Swisher, based on his salary. We'd probably be asking the Yanks for some salary relief in a deal for him. I don't think this one is too plausible. I'm starting to set my sites on Billy Butler. Which seems par for the course and very Cub-like. Lose out on the big prize, go find a solid, yet unspectacular piece that will probably be near the middle of NL 1B over the length of his future Cub career.

This pisses me off to no end. Kelly, Rizzo, Fuentes and a PTBNL? Unless that player is Ranaudo, we could have matched this deal with ease. Kelly and Archer are fairly comparable from a prospect status standpoint. Rizzo is someone we don't have in our system(1B) but he's a top 75-100 guy is all he is, in prospect terms. So, maybe try sending them Colvin and Lee instead possibly? Fuentes? I thought he was a disappointment last year personally, so maybe even Vitters is considered a MUCH better prospect than him. Bottom line is we easily could have matched this package in terms of talent given up. The question becomes whether or not we had the specific needs that the Pads wanted. The only thing we couldn't send them it appears would be a 1B, unless they would have taken Colvin. At any rate, I'm sure it helped that the Pads front office was extremely well acqainted with the Red Sox system. But, I'm pissed anyway, as this once again does nothing to change the fact that our team is sitting comfortably on their hands and it's not clear whether it's because of Ricketts or not. But, the more this happens, the more clear it is to me that Ricketts doesn't care about the ballclub as much as he does the damn ballfield. Edit: Also just read that Heyman said A-GON preferred to go to the Red Sox(who could blame him) but if that's the case, the Pads could have been asking for a ton more from us or anyone else in order for them to make a move that didn't accomodate his wishes.

My problem with this info, is also realizing that the entire Padre front office are former Red Sox employees, therefore being very familiar with their system already and probably having a great relationship with Theo. :banghead:

If this happens, I take back everything I said in the Dunn thread.

Unless the Cubs were the Yankees there is no justification for thinking one second that they can just decide a year out they want a guy and go get him. You play the cards you are dealt, you don't pretend you know what the hands are going to look like in a year. And Ricketts better not be playing a part in any of that decision making. Ricketts has the biggest part of the decision making whether we like it or not. Because he's the one that's writing the checks at the end of the day. If he doesn't have room in the payroll to add one of these guys, he's already MADE the decision for anyone else involved. Which is why I at least hold out SOME hope that with all the money dropping off next year, we'll be bigtime players for one of these guys. Not to mention the idea that it's basically a foregone conclusion that both A-GON and Fielder will be with different teams by the time 2012 rolls around. Whether it's by trade or it's by FA, the Cubs will have their shot at acquiring one of those two, even if they never get a shot at Pujols.

I'm not a fan of Bonderman at all and don't see the upside with him, to be honest. Penny would be my choice if we lose out on Webb though. That said, I actually think he's older than Webb, for what it's worth.

As much as I question Rickett's moves so far, not signing Dunn could wind up being smart. But only if we DO go get A-GON or Fielder. Or Pujols somehow. With Dunn, this upcoming team COULD contend for the division, but it's likely that we'd be relying on playoff "luck factor" to actually make noise. Possible, but not likely, if you ask me. Still, I certainly see the reasoning behind anyone saying "hey, if we have a shot at the playoffs, may as well go for it"....... However, if Ricketts' is smart(I don't think he is) and is actually just waiting to see this 40+ mill fall off the books and then goes out and spends it on A-GON and an ace, the missing out on Dunn is definitely acceptable. We'd have a better longterm outlook with one of the guys I just mentioned, than with Dunn. Bottom line is this: We won't know whether not signing Dunn is acceptable until these other shoes drop. That said, I'm preparing to be pissed off in about a year or so.

He had right shoulder bursitis, had exploratory surgery. Never found anything that appeared to be important. Rehab progressed extremely slowly though. Wanted to pitch near end of season, but wasn't allowed to do so. Is supposedly topping out in the low 80's right now. If I'm wrong on any of this, please correct me....... He was also injured all of 2009 right? Or most of it? It's been 2 years since he's been a healthy big league pitcher Oh yeah. He pitched one game in 2009, then missed the rest of THAT year. In fact, I think when the injury occurred, they didn't even think he'd have to go on the DL. I think the surgery was back in late 2009. August or September, maybe? At any rate, he hadn't pitched off a mound heading towards spring training-2010. He'd be throwing and just kept acting like things weren't right, is all I believe it was that was keeping him off the mound. At any rate, this kept him out all of 2010 as well, unless I'm missing something somewhere. I know Arizona kept him last year because they definitely expected him to pitch at LEAST the second half of the season, and hoped for more than that.

He had right shoulder bursitis, had exploratory surgery. Never found anything that appeared to be important. Rehab progressed extremely slowly though. Wanted to pitch near end of season, but wasn't allowed to do so. Is supposedly topping out in the low 80's right now. If I'm wrong on any of this, please correct me.......

I agree completely. If he pitches, we probably have an ace type guy. If he doesn't, we can use one of the youngsters anyway.

Can anyone explain why Martin was cut? He seemed like he was going to be a mainstay in the Dodgers lineup. His OPS dropped sharply the past two years, but he still seemed a good player. I wouldn't exactly say he was cut. They non-tendered him, right? He made $5m last year and I would assume he was going to look for a big raise this season. LA probably didn't want to spend that much of a guy who could be a declining catcher. He wanted 5 mill again, but with a mill in incentives he could reach.

I agreed with you on Cerda over Carrillo and also threw out Rhee over Beliveau, but only if he's going to be allowed to throw his splitter again. Also think Alcantara should be SOMEWHERE in the top 38, but he won't make the top 20, so I don't have a real issue if any of these guys get left off the prelim list.

Russell Martin will get a starting gig somewhere.

RIP Ronnie. Not sure what to say here other than he gave me and all Cub fans tons of great memories.

I truly think Ricketts is over his head here. I also don't buy the angle that he's waiting for bad contracts to fall off either. I expect us to always be in the top 3-4 payroll teams in the NL, but considering how big the Chicago market is and how much money he's going to be making, I'm not enamored with that, by any stretch. Basically, I think he's going to be happy with putting out an average product as long as the seats are filled. Which is kind of what he grew up with. When you here things like "build from within" it's great if you're doing the things to make that happen. But, there are cases where you have to fill needs from outside your own organization and if you continually go "cheap" instead of landing the big fish on occasion, I think we're heading towards a long run of mediocrity.

I'll play devil's advocate here for a second, even though I was the one that started this thread AND think it was extremely stupid to offer Hill arb....... But, maybe the reason they're doing this is because they know that one of Castillo or Chirinos IS getting dealt this offseason and they already have an agreement in place with Hill for less than he made this past season(80 percent of his previous year's contract is the least they can offer). Considering that the pitchers DO(unfortunately) appear to really like throwing to him, if we kept him for less than what he made in 2010 AND played him alot less, it wouldn't be THAT bad, I suppose. Don't get me wrong, I expect him to get a raise, expect us to keep 4 catchers on the 40 man all season and expect Hill to receive 50 starts or so, because, well, this is the Cubs we're talking about here, but maybe, just maybe, there's a sliver of chance that there's a method to their madness here.

Baker can pound lefties. It's not crazy to keep him around on a team with such limited offense. But Hill is stupid. Yeah, I kind of think the same way on Baker. I'm not pissed we're keeping him, because he does serve a purpose anyway. Just with the supposed money situation, I was thinking he'd likely be gone. But, he'll likely not get much more than 1.2 or so. Offering arb to Koyie Hill though is mind-numbingly stupid.

Marmol, Soto, Gorzelanny, Marshall, Baker, and Hill all expected to be offered arb. Per Bruce Miles. In a year where money is clearly an issue with us, why in all of blue hell are we offering arb to Hill and even Baker, for that matter....... :banghead:

I think age can impact rankings either way honestly. Most of the times, the teams with guys further up the food chain are ranked higher than teams with more guys still in the lower levels. Without going through their entire system, I like the Dodgers quite a bit, at first glance anyway. I think I'd have them higher than the Cubs, but it's fairly close. I doubt we're separated by more than 2-3 teams either way when system rankings come out. I think we could be a team that gets the benefit this year because most of our top prospects will either start the year in AA or AAA. Which is nice for right now, but the bottom end of our system is extremely weak at the moment. The money that's supposedly been allocated to player development had better actually get spent or else we're going to have a very thin system again within 2 years.

That's totally fitting. I'm sure he'll stick it to us a few times too. But, in the end, we should all rejoice. Because the Cards just added a very, very bad baseball player to their team.

Lebron was always looked at in such a positive light, always said the right things, did the right things, etc. Then came The Decision and he hasn't said or done anything right since then. I think that quite a bit of what Dan Gilbert said at the time of his departure must have had some merit to it. No one seems to be protecting him at this point and it's been "foot squarely into mouth" ever since he left there. His rep has changed more than any player in any sport I can remember, in such a short period of time, without doing anything criminal anyway. Favre? I think Favre and LBJ are the same guy. I thought about him, but I think his was a more gradual turn of "Im getting tired of this guy" than an immediate turn of "you're a complete jackass" which I think Lebron did. I think one of the original analogies I remember with Lebron was it was like Hulk Hogan joining the NWO and I kind of agreed with that.

Lebron was always looked at in such a positive light, always said the right things, did the right things, etc. Then came The Decision and he hasn't said or done anything right since then. I think that quite a bit of what Dan Gilbert said at the time of his departure must have had some merit to it. No one seems to be protecting him at this point and it's been "foot squarely into mouth" ever since he left there. His rep has changed more than any player in any sport I can remember, in such a short period of time, without doing anything criminal anyway.