Exile on Waveland

Just 'cause I'm like that/ Haha, but I meant NO quoting. Seriously. No, really, I mean it. At least, everyone else must have thought so. Or maybe they didn't care what I had to say. That's probably more likely.

Random thoughts, so no quoting: 1. I would be extremely reluctant to deal Murton. Not sure how he'll produce next year, but the Cubs need him in LF. As far as I'm concerned LF is the only outfield position that's settled. I wouldn't trade him and Williams for Zito; wouldn't even think about it. It opens up too many holes elsewhere. Trading him for a stud outfielder is acceptable, obviously, though. 2. I do, however, have interest in Zito. I wouldn't trade the farm, but he'd fill out the rotation nicely with a lefty -- which I think is important, maybe only because opposing managers think it is and react to it -- who's also still pretty young. 3. If Prior's a No. 3, the team's in trouble (unless Oswalt or Santana is No. 1, which ain't happening). I don't think the Cubs need a front of the rotation starter. A solid, innings-eater is what's called for, in my opinion. The Cubs have the talented (though, perhaps boom-or-bust) frontline guys. This may be senseless labeling, I admit. 4. I wouldn't just dump Hill for anyone, but I also wouldn't hesitate to trade him. I have serious questions about his ability to be a good major league starter. I'd agree that it's very possible this is the highest his trade value will be. That's my opinion. 5. I would trade Hill for Bradley, but I don't think it would be necessary. The Dodgers are in all-out dump Bradley mode, a la Cubs and Sosa. 5. I agree with Goony that the Cubs, with their payroll, should feature a top-5 offense and a top-5 pitching staff. However, I think it's going to be difficult to get the offense into the top-5. It would take Giles and another equivalent. That's not going to happen. Heck, I doubt the Cubs get one player like that. First priority would be to get a stud OF. If that fails -- which I expect it will, unfortunately -- I'd be very, very tempted to go overboard with pitching. Deal for Bradley (hopefully the Bradley-Castillo-Lowe or something of the like comes through), either sign Furcal or re-sign Nomar (my vote) for shortstop and full-court press the pitching. Sign Ryan or Wagner, Dotel and trade/sign for a pitcher like Zito. It's not perfect, the offense would still be lacking as more than tweaking is needed -- who in RF? -- but it may be the best reasonable course of action.

OK, so I should have specified "under the current financial situation." And, under the current financial situation, I think it's clear that a few cities cannot support their teams.

Seriously, Pods deep off of Lidge? This is ridiculous.

Actually, no. I live about 50 miles from Indianapolis, which in three years very well may have the best NBA and the best NFL facilities in the nation. Not to mention two of the best teams in each respective league. Now, with all the baseball teams in neighboring states, it may be difficult for Indy to support a team -- I'd question whether it could. However, even if it could, I have no desire for an MLB team in Indy. I also have no doubt we'll see 48 then 64 then 1,280 teams. It's all about the money. That doesn't make it right. Would you consider Portland close to San Fran or Seattle? What's the closest market to Charlotte? Las Vegas is a minimum 3 hour drive to the closest market that currently has a team. I could go on. Just because Indy may not be able to support it doesn't mean no one else could. First, you asked me a question about if I lived in a market that could support a team, would I want one there. I said I basically do live in a market that conceivably support a team, but still wouldn't want one there. That was an example to answer your question of me. Second, again, that's why relocation is needed and not expansion. Yeah, maybe Portland can support a franchise. Obviously, Tampa Bay cannot. So move them. I'll say it again, relocation can remedy that.

No arguments here. It's just that as much as I think Pierre is overrated, I know he's still better than Hairston. That was the extent of my point -- either way, forget Pierre and focus on Giles and RF (at least as target No. 1).

I'm in no way in favor of this trade. Pierre is overrated. I wouldn't be against having him in center, depending on what other moves are made and what the Cubs would have to give up, but he shouldn't be a huge target. However, I find it extremely hard to believe that, all things being equal, a team with Pierre in center wouldn't be better than a team with Hairston in center. The proposed trade isn't worth the smallish upgrade, but it would be an upgrade, no doubt.

Actually, no. I live about 50 miles from Indianapolis, which in three years very well may have the best NBA and the best NFL facilities in the nation. Not to mention two of the best teams in each respective league. Now, with all the baseball teams in neighboring states, it may be difficult for Indy to support a team -- I'd question whether it could. However, even if it could, I have no desire for an MLB team in Indy. I also have no doubt we'll see 48 then 64 then 1,280 teams. It's all about the money. That doesn't make it right.

Unfortunately, getting Giles would be a change in philosophy. I mean, c'mon, the guy has only hit 20-23-15 homers the past season, with 88-94-83 RBI's. You gotta get more power and run production from corner outfielders. Not to mention the fact he's a dirty base-clogger.

I agree. There is plenty of talent. Maybe if we didnt' see guys like Jose Macias getting occasional starts or pinch hits... But, as long as their is an end of the bench, guys like this will always have jobs whether you have 32 teams or 16, etc... Player talent may not be down, but location/city talent certainly is. I don't understand what this means. It means with expansion, you get less and less viable major league cities. Now, some cities currently without teams may be viable, but we know that some cities with teams are not. That's why I advocated relocation instead of expansion.

I agree. There is plenty of talent. Maybe if we didnt' see guys like Jose Macias getting occasional starts or pinch hits... But, as long as their is an end of the bench, guys like this will always have jobs whether you have 32 teams or 16, etc... Player talent may not be down, but location/city talent certainly is.

The more divisions you have, the more necessary the wild card becomes. Because as the number of divisions increases, the more likely you'll have NYY and Boston will win 95-100 games and some AL-version of the Padres win 82. One of the two east teams would be left out in favor of the loser divison winner. That may have been a possibility with just two divisions, but highly unlikely. You cannot have eight divisions without a wildcard. I'd be for contraction, not for expansion, however. I'd could go for the current six divisions or a revert back to two big division in each league, but with two wild card teams. The wild card has added excitement and revenue, as has the divisional series round. But no more teams, there are already too many as it stands. If Las Vegas or Portland or New Jersey needs a team, fine, move one of the crap franchises with no support like Tampa Bay.

They have done nothing to convice me they even know what the team's weakness is.

Exactly. Getting Giles isn't going to change them as much as getting him might change us (Cubs). They already are winning 100 games every year. So what if they win 5 more. Point is: I think that our focus should be on making us better and not keeping guys away for the Cards. Yes, the Cubs focus should be on improving themselves. However, this is one case were the two (improving your own team and blocking another) are concurrent. That's why Giles MAY be doubly important.

No, but the fact it would pretty much clinch the division for them is reason to sign him. (Assuming my previous exception of Ramirez, Abreu or Dunn playing in the OF for the Cubs, Giles to the Cards cements them as the best team in the NL, if not baseball) I don't know about that, but they would be one helluva offensive force in the NL. I'm still waiting for the Cards pitching to come back to earth. It looks like I'm wrong but I don't fear that staff. Yeah, I keep waiting for that, too, but I don't think it's gonna happen. Listen, the Cards are already the best team in the NL, and especially the NL Central. (They may lose in the NLCS, but the regular season proves the best team). If they then sign the best offensive player on the market, all while preventing another divisional team from improving their area of need, then, yeah, barring a rash of injuries, they're gonna win the NL Central again. But, probably the only way they don't win again next year is if the Cubs do get a big stud for RF or, of course, the injury thing.

Not saying Jones is that sensational or that he should be a #1 priority but there's not any guarantee that Giles or any other names floated on this board are dying to come to the Cubs. Point = Cubs fans need to be flexible and realistic. Jacque Jones SPLIT OBP SLG OPS Season 319 .438 .757 Career .327 .455 .792 Why does flexible and realistic = accept garbage? Jones improves this team in exactly zero ways. This team needs improvement. This OF is desperate for production. Jones is not productive. He's past his prime, and his prime wasn't any good. Jones would be a terrible option for this team, unless they end up with ARod at short and keep Ramirez, Walker and Lee on the IF. At 35, is it possible that Giles is past his prime? Say he doesn't want to leave SD and his family for the Cubs, who do you propose plays RF for the Cubs in 2006? Burnitz? As long as Giles keeps putting up a .400 OBP, I don't think he's past his prime. And, if he is, so what? This year he put up 423/483/906 in a pitcher's park. His career OBP is .413. He's had a .400 OBP seven of the last eight years. He's left-handed and plays RF. He's exactly what the Cubs need. Sure, if he was younger he'd be absolutely perfect for the Cubs, but, even still, he's pretty darn close.

No, but the fact it would pretty much clinch the division for them is reason to sign him. (Assuming my previous exception of Ramirez, Abreu or Dunn playing in the OF for the Cubs, Giles to the Cards cements them as the best team in the NL, if not baseball)

Right! The first step in solving a problem is realzing you have a problem. I don't know if the Cubs have made that step although Baker and Hendry have at least discussed it. I could see a line up: Furcal SS Cedeno 2nd Lee 1st Rameriz 3rd Floyd Rf Wilson CF Barrett C Murton LF Likely, a little better than this year, but I don't think it is a playoff calibur everyday line up. I don't like that lineup, but it is better than this year's version, I'd think. The Cubs need to go into next season with a stronger lineup than that -- though I'm expecting something similar. However, if the pitching stayed relatively healthy -- a huge IF -- that lineup would probably be good enough for playoff contention. Not division contention, which is what the Cubs should be shooting for, but the wild card would be a possibility, I think.

About all I have to say about that is if Baker knew how to handle a pitching staff, we'd never be having this conversation, since either Prior would have been pulled sooner in Game 2, thus giving him maybe 15-20 extra picthes in Game 6, or, failing that, Baker would have had Farnsworth up after the Pierre double, or, finally, not had him immediatly throw 4 high and outside to the first guy he faced, or decided to go with the Alfonseca v Harris matchup in Game 1, or... I guess I could go on, but I'll get even more angry. My point is, Kyle was the least of the problems in the NLCS. Gawd, choosing to face Lowell over Harris has got to be the single stupidest managerial move of all-time. Even compared to typical Dusty lunacy, that's just incredible. It angers me just thinking about. Lowell over Harris? Crap, how stupid. On Farnsworth: I don't believe he choked in that series, he was good during the playoffs. Once again, Dusty didn't put him in the best situation to succeed. However, all hits are not created equal nor are hits given up to certain players. Taking last night's game, I can't imagine claiming Lidge "choked" by giving up a homer to Pujols. Pujols is awesome. If he'd given the homer up to Eckstein or Grudzielanek or Nunez, well I'd think that'd come awful close to a "choke."

You won't be the only one. I'm already upset at the apparent ambivalence towards Giles. If he stays at home in SD or the west coast or signs cheap to play with his brother in Atlanta it's one thing. But if he goes to the Cardinals I'm gonna be super-upset -- unless the Cubs trot out Manny Ramirez, Bobby Abreu or Adam Dunn. The Cubs can NOT allow Giles to go to St. Louis. The Cubs have more money to begin with, more money to spend and just as big a need at Giles' position. It's easy to say you can never overpay for someone, but this is the point where they need to. They made their bed, now they may have to overpay. If Giles would rather play for the Cardinals, offer him more money (Yankee-style) and make sure he chooses the Cubs.

You just ruined my day. Ugh. What makes it worse is that's close to what I expect to see. Now, it may not be Burnitz in RF, but I'm expecting someone Burnitz-like. And Cedeno possibly will be "named" the starting 2B, but, with Neifi around, I doubt that lasts long (unless he's absolutely awesome, which I doubt).

But it's not like the Crawford boxes are only there when the Astros are up. The visiting team can also take advantage of the short porch there. Mel Ott hit most of his home runs over a wall that was 275 feet away. Should we take him out of the hall because he probably got a few "cheapies" in his career? It works both ways. I know it works both ways, I just think it's a stupid layout. Even when the Cubs hit a home run into those boxes, even if it's a game winner, I think it's a cheap shot. That damn hill is just dorky as all heck. Why not just put a clown face (with holes cut out in the eyes, nose and mouth) and a windmill in the outfield? It's cheesy. It's over-the-top. There's just too much going on. Paying homage to old ballparks is one thing, but do so here and there. Don't just cram in every possible trick or trend. I hate Minute Maid. The Crawford boxes are ridiculously short, the hill in center is dumb, the cut-out is worthless and the train that can only go back-and-forth like 100 feet is so completely moronic.

Not that it matters, but Izzy threw both the 8th and the 9th. Oops. Like I said, I was watching my Colts roll to 6-0.

As a Colts fan, I just sporadically saw the baseball game. However, when Edmonds walked, I pretty much expected a HR. Lidge wasn't his typical self and Pujols nearly hit one off him the other game (forget which game, though). I didn't see the HR, but when I switched back over and Izzy was in, I pretty much knew what happened. I definitely would have walked him. Heck, that thought might've crossed my mind if the bases were loaded. He's come up big so many times before in the clutch -- but, considering it doesn't exist, he surely can't be a clutch hitter, can he? :wink: I still think the Astros will probably win the series with Oswalt and Clemens going. But it's the exact same situation as last year, now with the Cards having all the momentum from a walk-off homer. This game was huge, what a clutch play by a great player.

They should be 0%. But why haven't they already dumped him? They spoke glowingly of his play all season, and have not given any indication that they were unhappy with his production. The fact that he isn't already gone frightens me. Hendry has an inexplicable love for JB, and he's had it for years. Even if they don't exercise the option, they will pay the buyout, and possibly even another $4-5m to comeback. They like the guy with absolutely no justification. Just to reiterate, the Cubs were 12th, 16th and 15th in OPS in the NL from their LF, CF and RF, respectively. Yes, that's right, their RF produciton ranked lower than their LF production, despite all the talk about LF all year. And I don't believe for a second that Hendry is even aware of that stat. That's my fear. The area in most need of improvement is the OF. I'm not sure the front office understands or even realizes this. While CF needs to be upgraded, it's a more difficult position to fill, and Patterson isn't a terrible option in my mind. What needs to be filled, and filled with a big-time player, not some Burnitz-clone, is RF. Right field. Right field. RF. RF. It can't be said enough. The team has to imrove by getting a right fielder with superior production. Short of some dream scenario involving ARod at SS and Manny in LF, every other move will be rendered useless if RF is not dramatically improved.