Sammy Sofa

I'll bet nobody wanted Johnson.

I dont know. At somepoint we have to stop making excuses for Hendry whether its our opinions about too much salary or not the right players in return. Others teams in the last couple of days have gotten very solid returns on their major league talent Hendry has made one meaningless trade and on this 90 plus loss team. This one is on him. So if the Rangers didn't make a very strong offer or if they demanded we pay Marmol's entire salary, Hendry should have taken the deal anyway because other teams are making trades? I'm in favor of dealing Marmol, but only if it makes the organization better, not simply because I want to see players traded. No kidding. This blindly oblivious mindset of "other teams made deals, so the Cubs should be able to make the same deals, hurdurdur" is getting silly.

Hendry left to his own devices? The latter. With the Ricketts in play? I honestly don't know. Yes, but the Ricketts for the most part have left Hendry to his own devices. Doesn't mean much to me in terms of how I think the offseason is going to play out. I'm still pretty confident that Hendry is going to be fired at the end of the season. I'm not as confident, however, that the Ricketts will let the new guy spend his way out of crappiness like we're hoping.

What the what? What supporters?

Hendry left to his own devices? The latter. With the Ricketts in play? I honestly don't know.

That would leave us with an outfield that could potentially have nobody with an OPS over .800. We're not competing with a team like that because the rest of the team probably won't be good enough to overcome that. Either Byrd stays in center while Jackson improves in AAA, or you trade Byrd because he's our most marketable trade piece right now, unless Hendry is getting offered garbage for him. And that could be a real possibility right now. Teams obviously know that Hendry's job is on the chopping block, and they could be trying to take advantage of a potentially desperate GM. I'm not saying Byrd in RF is ideal, but it might be the best solution to just hold down the fort until you can beef up RF via FA for 2013 so you're not stuck overpaying for some crappy 1-year-rental. And again, it's not like the Cubs can't trade him next year, too.

I know even you are not this dense. Yes, trading Byrd creates a hole in the lineup, especially if the Cubs are trying to maximize their spending dollars for next year. Byrd is a useful, productive player. He's only making $6.5 million next year. The OF FA class is uninspiring to say the least. If the Cubs are smart they should be keeping their eye towards having Jackson in CF and either Kemp or Ethier in RF in 2013. That means you've fortunately got a relatively cheap, productive OF in Byrd to help hold things down out in there over the next year, and that's important if they hope to compete since they have the big question mark of RF in the meantime. Trading Byrd now just creates another question that really can't be filled well for next year if he's gone. Plus it's not like they need to trade him now. If they end up sucking again next year they can just trade him then. This isn't a do or die scenario. And way to rag on his numbers like he didn't miss a ton of games this year because he was hit in the [expletive] face. Brilliant. And this justifies trading Baker...how? The organization values him because he's useful, and he is. Again, question marks at potentially both 2B and 3B next year. Baker's abilities against lefties and being able to play both spots makes him valuable to the Cubs as a bench and platoon player. On the flipside, his skills are limited to the point that he's not going to net much of anything in return. There's no pressing need to trade him now since, like Byrd, he can just be traded for a likely meaningless return next year instead of this year. Nobody is expecting them to come back next year with the exact same team. Don't be ridiculous.

Yeah, I'm surprised at the amount of people thinking this was some diabolical action on Holliday's part. He was trying to take Castro out, but like Truffle said, he was just really bad at it. Nail him in the back once if they feel they must, but anything more is just overkill. It's like people have never seen Holliday play before; outside of what he can do with the bat he's a clubfooted oaf out there.

I don't know why people don't understand how keeping Byrd is a good idea. Moving him creates a big hole in the lineup that the Cubs can't fill without spending more money on an unimpressive FA OF class. The only candidate to replace him is Jackson, but the ideal situation is that ultimately he comes up and mans center while Byrd shifts over to RF for the final year of his very, very affordable contract. And why in God's name does Baker keep coming up? I can understand why other teams would want him, but I can also guarantee that they're offering garbage for him. It's easy to see why he's more valuable to the Cubs given the questions they potentially have at both 2B and 3B next season given how well he hits lefties than just trading him off for squat. Baker is what he is; if the Cubs are garbage again next year they can move him for a similar return before the deadline then. Same with Byrd. Pena is a different story, since he's only signed through this year, but hey, if they're only being offered lousy deals then it's easily worth it to gamble on the comp pick. The bottom line is that the Cubs' poor teambuilding during Hendry's tenure have left them with a bad team where the guys you can move aren't going to net you much in return (Baker, Fukudome, Pena) and the guys you arguably should move or wish you could move you need next year (Aramis, Dempster, Byrd, Baker again). That's the fallout of having a bad FO.

Well, they potentially have Huff signed through 2013 (at least until 2012, and getting $10 million a year), and he was steadily improving over May and June from April...but then July was a regression. They're also paying $14 million for Beltran for the rest of this year, so they're likely not going to give up much of anything for Pena unless the Cubs are effectively picking up the tab. Lincecum is arb. eligible after this season and Cain's deal is up after 2012 so I'm sure that's in the back of their minds, too.

Yeah, I could see that especially with all of the FA's they would garner quite a few draft picks. On the other hand if they resign pujols, sign Jackson and carpenter for cheap, then maybe add willingham also for cheap; I still dont see how we are better than them with Fielder, Wilson, and no Ramirez. Pena and Ramirez this year could very feasibly be more productive than Fielder and Baker/Flarhety platoon. I think most people would be pretty happy with 20 hr's and 50 rbi from that platoon at this point next year. If we can agree that first base and third base changes are close to a wash with possibly a slight upgrade; I think most would agree that we are more than one pitcher away from competing. I'm not arguing that the Cubs have the more appealing team. I'm arguing that the Cubs have the mean to sign him closer to or actually meeting his contract expectations. You're the one who presented the "they're building a team for him option," which doesn't make much sense because it's not a very good team, but will be a very expensive team AND he'll have to drastically reduce his contract demands.

Damn, that would make me feel better.

Is there a decent chance they'd get a pick? I figured it would be a no go with as bad as he was last year.

$22 million is pretty far from his asking price of $30 million. Couple that with them apparently not being willing to offer him more than 6 years, the only way I could see him taking something like $22 million is if they bend and give him the 10 years he wants. They're going to have to either bend on on the money or the years; he can shave a little off either way for the hometown team, but I'd have to imagine he'll be getting a ton of pressure from the union to not settle like that. And these other changes really don't sound all that impressive. Again, Rasmus gone = downgrade. In your scenario Furcal's bat is essentially replacing Berkman's = downgrade. Jackson is arguably an upgrade over Carpenter at this point, but then you have the question of what to do with Wainwright. His deal is effectively up this year as well unless they decide to go ahead with the team options in 2012 and 2013. If anything it seems like they're gathering pieces to potentially build a team post-Pujols as opposed to one "for" him.

How exactly should the Cubs have gotten those guys? Anderson was traded because 1B is locked down by A-Gon and they have Ortiz DHing. Uehara is obscenely good. Who did the Cubs have that would have been comparable offers? Please tell me where I said the Cubs could have gotten those guys? Regardless, I would have to say both the Orioles and A's won those trades and it seems to me that contending teams are getting desparate. Don't you think the Cubs could have gotten similar for Marshall as the O's got for Uehara??? Imagine what they could get for Garza! But, sadly it seems that Hendry won't trade these guys or even someone like Pena who's contract runs out after this year. If you didn't think the Cubs could have or should have gotten those guys then why even bring them up? If the Cubs couldn't fill the needs then it's completely redundant. And no, the Cubs couldn't have gotten the same or similar for Marshall. Look at Marshall's numbers. Pretty good, right? Look at Uehara's numbers and then try to contain your baseball boner. They're THAT good. He's disgustingly good. THAT'S the rare reliever that teams look at and think "yup, gonna have that guy close after we sign him to a new deal," not a soft tossing LH. And again, why would they trade Garza? He's young, an excellent pitcher and under their control for years. Trading him creates a gaping hole in a starting rotation that already needs a major pickup. Trading him like the A's moved Harden makes no sense. The A's can spare Harden. The Cubs can't spare Garza.

Jackson is also only signed through this year. Heath Bell is only signed through this year. So their plans to make a better team to get him to stay is a bunch of guys that they'll have to pay a ton of money to to keep next year, either via re-signings or options...and trading away Rasmus. Brilliant strategy. And Pujols is going to, what, stay out of the goodness of his heart? What about Carpenter? Either they use the team option for 2012 and pay him, too, or they let him go and downgrade the starting rotation. How are they going to pay Pujols anywhere near what he wants by adding all of these salaries?

How exactly should the Cubs have gotten those guys? Anderson was traded because 1B is locked down by A-Gon and they have Ortiz DHing. Uehara is obscenely good. Who did the Cubs have that would have been comparable offers?

If this year's Randy Wells is the Randy Wells we're getting from here on out, I agree we need a couple of starters. I don't think we can just assume that, though. And Wilson has been far better than a solid starter the past couple of years. He's one of the best pitchers in baseball right now. As for the lineup, you'd have to play the left/right matchups well, but both Baker and Soriano have destroyed lefthanded pitching in their careers and that includes this year for both of them. Against righthanders who you put behind Fielder would be more nebulous and would depend largely on how Jackson and Flaherty were hitting them. The rotation would still clearly have to carry the team, but I think with a top three of Garza/Wilson/Dempster, the rotation would be capable of it. Especially when you consider we could be looking at a Cardinals team without Pujols and a Brewers team without Fielder. A .500 team might win the Central next year. its looking less and less like Pujols is leaving the cardinals especially considering the team they are putting around him. What team? Furcal's contract is up after this year unless the Cardinals opt for the $12 million team option. That doesn't seem to increase the chances of bringing back Pujols since, one, Furcal sucks, and two, he'd be expensive. And they traded away Rasmus for garbage. If anything, they've downgraded the team and their chances of re-signing him with these latest moves.

Why? I don't understand what people are looking at that's being covered up by a thin grid or square. I mean, I get that people are apparently missing something they're looking for; I just don't know what it is. It's not like I can't see the hitter, and I really don't care if I can't see all of the catcher. I'm always following the ball then anyway.

In fairness to Meph, projections for Fukudome were universally good. PECOTA predicted .400/.500 for him, and even the lower end projections expected more than he ever showed over a full season. He's been a pretty big disappointment, and it's not like Meph was the only one banging that drum. Eh, true.

I apologize for spending 3 years after HS busting my ass to save up money to go to college, then working 40-60 hours/ week at 3 different jobs while in college AND working an unpaid internship that eventually lead to me getting hired on full-time. Wait, nevermind. I don't apologize. You should. I hope the misery practically smothered you.

Man, this is disheartening. I was really happy with the drafting and draft spending this year, but now it seems like an ominous omen, as if the new owners have potentially bought TOO much into the idea of developing your talent. I'm suddenly a lot less confident about them spending on guys like Prince or Wilson or Pujols this offseason. Depressssssssssssssing.

You're a spaz because you furiously spaz out in about 95% of your posts. That was a measured, well thought out, non-spazzy bit of analysis by raw.

I really don't understand what's it's distracting anyone from seeing. Isn't that where we're all looking anyway?

Yeah, I have to go work my second job so I can pay my bills this month. Poor baby has to go to a baseball game. I FIGHT YOU FACE.