A New Era

YES!!

Soriano to Cubs, 8 years/135 million. Any everybody assuming that before they post the official "guaranteed" deal.

And you are? What if he repeats his 2005 and 2004 numbers? Wouldnt it be better to sign a guy who has great numbers in 2006, 2005, and 2004, like Drew? Especially since he will be cheaper and sign to a shorter contract? That paragraph right there sums up our point (as well as KC's marginal EqA analysis). Or his 2001, 2002, 2003, or 2006 #'s? I LIKE drew. However, I LIKE Soriano. I LIKE that the promise that John Mcdunnough made is coming true. It's TIME to win for the Fans, that was John's MO. On drew, you have to take into account he will miss atleast 40 games. So then you have to average his #'s out with whoever is replacing him for those 40 games. I really just don't see the point some of you are arguing. Ok I do see the point. I just don't know why such a big deal is being made about picking apart #'s and being so negative about Soriano. I see Soriano as a sign for CHANGE in the Cubs orginazation. Why not stop picking apart soriano's #'s and instead talk about what this means for the Cubs? Just this summer. . . Our manager was terrible, our coaching staff couldn't teach a stick to hit, our owners would never pay for a winner, and they would never sell the Cubs to someone who WOULD. Now we are at. . . Our manager is great, our coaching staff is great, our owner wants to give us a winner, and the Cubs might even be sold. There's no reason for negativity now, Cubs fans. This is a happy time to be a Cubs fan. .

Soriano is bad, we shouldn't have signed him. I won't be saying this if Soriano repeats his #'s next year. Oh wait, that's right. He won't. Because I am psychic.

SORIANO IS NOT AN EXTREMELY STRONG OFFENSIVE PLAYER Are me and Nilo the only people that understand that last year was an anomaly? Quoting nonsense like 40-40-40 and RBI is bad enough, but the entire point is that he had a career year and he's very likely not going to do that again. On a tangential note, how does everyone think Soriano's approach is going to age? He doesn't have the most compact swing in the world, which could lead to big problems once he loses a tick of bat speed. I owe you an apology TT. For I did not even read your response. Let me just say this. You can go ahead and keep pounding how this is a "bad deal". Hey I can agree with that. But I'll be over in the other room salivating about our line-up and really looking foward to the Cubs finally feilding a strong team next year!

Were not at $150m. We're more close to about $100mil so far. Where do you get $150m? Man, some of you guys are making things up just to be negative. I don't get it? soriano's 136 million + derosa's 13 million = 149 million. i think that's what kctigers was saying Ok, I thought that was about the yearly budget.

This quote looks like it is coming straight from Piniella's mouth in your avatar :D :lol: That's funny when I look at it.

Were not at $150m. We're more close to about $100mil so far. Where do you get $150m? Man, some of you guys are making things up just to be negative. I don't get it?

Good God. I tried to read this whole thread. But I stopped at page 5. I swear some people would complain about ANYTHING!! Point #1: We should shop smart, I don't like this signing. - The Tribune is finally PAYING OUT THE WAZOO to WIN and WIN now and you are complaining!!? Point #2: He's gonna suck at 38, he sucks now - He hit 40 HR, 40 steals, 119 runs in 2006. He's got very good states when teams have let him lead off. Lou already stated he plans him for lead-off. He does NOT suck, and furthermore you guys were commenting on a RUMORED amoung when infact it is more like 6/90 with 2 option years. I just can't beleive how many people in the first dozen pages I read were COMPLAINING about this. It just #*#*@*! boggles my mind. How can you not be happy about this? We get a couple above average pitchers and we are now the STRONGEST team in the NL Central by a large margin.

ALOOOOOOUUUUUUUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOU. . .

So if we miss out on Drew and Soriano (please god I hope not). Do you think chances improve Hendry would really go after Manny? (instead of getting average with upside guys like GMJr?)

I have read that the Sox may only want prospects for Manny. They want to dump his salary, not get equal value. I suspect Izturis and a combo of our top young pitchers could get it done. Perhaps if one of those pitchers is Hill. That's what I'm thinkin man. Boston is not going to give up Manny for Marshall, Guzman, and Veal (which is still somewhat an ok package) but instead we'd have to be giving up Hill, Pie, Murton (those types of packages to get Manny). So why not just beat Boston's bid for Drew instead of putting THEM at the advantage costing us a loss of good players just to get Manny.

that's cool. Just a day or two ago I remember it sounding like Boston all but had Drew signed. Now we are hearing, Lou Piniella's Cubs have matched it. I'm deffinatly really happy about that. Because Drew is good, very good for us.

Think outside the box, abuck. Outside the box. Well if Hendry, as someone suggested, was saying how happy he was as a way of touting Izturis, then Cleveland is simply trying to get Murton for less by saying that they're only interested in a position which the Cubs obviously have nothing to offer them. Obviously I meant that Hendry is thinking of new, creative ways to make this team worse: "Hmmm, I currently employ no less than five players who could, in a pinch, function as a back-up shortstop. How about I give them a cheap, young, productive and improving starting left fielder instead? Eureka!" Hmm. Could you point to where in the article Jim Hendry said, I will not trade you a shortstop. I will give you Matt Murton instead?

I don't think it's enough. There's still only 2 legit power threats in Lee & Ram in the middle of the order. I agree with the pitching that seems to be shaping up (or lack thereof), this lineup wouldn't seem to be able to lift us to many victories----though it is better than last year. Side note: I've always thought Barrett would shine best in the 2 hole rather than lower in the order. I agree 110% about Barrett. Bat him #2 and when he sits slit Murton in there. Don't you DARE slit Murton!!

Switch Murton and DeRosa. And then platoon DeRosa with Jones and let Theriot play 2nd. Or move Soriano back to 2nd and sign JD Drew. No, I wouldn't stop tinkering after signing Soriano. Izturis, DeRosa, and the P (other than Z) potentially give us 3 big black holes in the lineup. We're in the NL. We play NL teams. You cannot count the P as a "hole". We have 2 "holes" in the line-up if you want to count Derosa. But I don't.

uhhhh...no. Why? Outside of his anomoly of a season last year in a hitters paradise, DeRosa was never really good. I know it was a small sample size, but Theriot was pretty damn good last year when he got a chance. Theriot also showed a great approach at the plate from what I saw, so I don't see him entering a Cedeno-like slump. You realize you are arguing against yourself. DeRosa had a good year, but yeah your realize Theroit had sort of a great part of a year. It's silly. You say you like Theroits approach. How many at bats did you watch Derosa bat this year? Just curious. Maybe once or twice I saw DeRosa. You do realizing that I am arguing that I want Theriot at 300K vs DeRosa at 4 million. Derosa over 162 games will not be heads and shoulders better than Theriot over 162 games. Well I want Derosa at second and Theroit at SS. So I can't argue against Theroit. However, I think it was blindsighted of you to favor Theroit in his approach when neither of us know how much DeRosa's stance has changed.

When have the Cubs ever been a top bidder for a player? I'd like to give Hendry the benefit of the doubt, but too often he is just a day late and dollar short. Do we know how much JH offered or if he is still waiting to meet with him?

They did say on WGN radio in a way to make it seem like JH likes having 3 lefties now. . More of just a hint of "oh boy we are set now".

uhhhh...no. Why? Outside of his anomoly of a season last year in a hitters paradise, DeRosa was never really good. I know it was a small sample size, but Theriot was pretty damn good last year when he got a chance. Theriot also showed a great approach at the plate from what I saw, so I don't see him entering a Cedeno-like slump. You realize you are arguing against yourself. DeRosa had a good year, but yeah your realize Theroit had sort of a great part of a year. It's silly. You say you like Theroits approach. How many at bats did you watch Derosa bat this year? Just curious.

Well we could have gone 16M, but we just HAD to sign DeRosa. When a stud like that is on the marketplace in a position that you don't already have filled for league minimum, you jump on that ASAP. Exactly. Why not just ink Drew :twisted: You realize Drew actually has to want to come here right? I admit I am angy on why the heck aren't we hearing (but cubs may top offer). But it's possible Jim already talked to drew, really wants drew, is willing to give more, but drew just might want to play in Boston instead? I get tired of hearing people always blaming hendry. It's understandable on mediocre signings. But JH can't MAKE people play here, even if his offer is better than others.

Honestly, I mean truthfully. How likely do you think it is that we could actually get Manny? I expect Theo would STILL want alot of talent for him. I mean, are the Red Soxs DESPERATE to trade him? I don't think so. WE are the desperate ones. So if you really want Manny, expect to spend some good players. .

jere ya go duud. http://www.ganjatalk.com/forum/images/smilies/joint.gif. By the way, what are you reffering to? Cotts!?

Assuming for a second that what you said actually makes sense, what the hell does it mean? Hendry appears willing and ready to go out and pick up as much trash as possible. The first drop in the bag being DeRosa. Man, are you always this negative? You ready to eat SERIOUS crow if DeRosa puts up good #'s next year?