goonys evil twin

Can we hold his decision making ability against him, since he chose to go there? :D

wow, none of those things are particularly important for a 1 or 2 hitter. Are you kidding me? Have you watched the Dertroit Tigers? Granderson gets on base, then Polanco moves him over with a bunt, or the hit and run. Works out pretty well for them. Whitesox used it in 05 also. So you think their offense is based on Polanco moving Granderson over? First off, their success is based on league leading pitching. Their offensive success is based on very high HR totals.

Need more options. If it means Hendry thinks all he needed was a crotchety old manager to spice up the clubhouse, then I hate it. If it means Hendry is going to pull out all the stops to win in 2007, I might like it, depending on what players he actually acquires.

He's also far more of a threat to get caught stealing, which is far more damaging than a stolen base is positive. OBP should count first and foremost for a leadoff guy.

I don't know, there's a pretty big difference between 3/24 and 5/75, and those are two of the more frequent deals I've heard for each guy. I thought I had heard more than that for Juan but I could be wrong. Given those $'s who would you prefer in cf? Soriano, easy. Pierre's upside is quite low, and downside is very low. Soriano will at least likely be a well above average CFer for a few years, and could have a great season or two. Pierre only has 2 seasons where his OPS+ was better than Soriano's worst season. Soriano has a 29 point advantage in career OPS+, and the odds are quite favorable that he would be over 110 most of the time. He'd be fantastically overpaid if he's giving you 110 and making $15m per year, but it's nothing a savvy GM wouldn't be able to work around. I'll always maintain it's better to have overpaid good players than overpaid bad ones.

Mortsenson sounds drunk on ESPN right now.

I don't know, there's a pretty big difference between 3/24 and 5/75, and those are two of the more frequent deals I've heard for each guy.

You don't believe different parks affect players?

I've said Soriano is overrated for a long time, and I maintain that. I've never said you can't trade for guys with OBPs below .375. I have said that if you are going to overpay for guys, at least do it with guys who stand a chance of being really good, or great. Soriano has been inconsistent. His production has varied greatly during this career, but since he achieved a level of notoriety on a WS champion Yankees team, he's been hailed as something he is not. He's not really worth $10 million, and his career pre 2006 proved that. If you think you'd have been happy paying $10m per year for the Soriano that played from 2001-2005, I'd bet otherwise. FWIW, I've said many times that I realize "my way" is not the only way to win, but I disagree with the Hendry way, and those that like that sort of thing, because it means there is an inefficient use of resources. But, if you have a top 5 payroll, efficiency isn't as important.

I don't think Hendry is going to improve OBP anyway. So, I'd rather he at least get some SLG, as well as guys who are above average in production for their position. Soriano in CF or 2B is almost a lock for above average production, and he'll bring SLG. Plus, if a $115m payroll is true, it'll be easier to deal with overpaying him based on hype.

I like every word of that, especially the part about Soriano in CF. Prepare to be bombarded by the "Soriano is overrated and sucks" faction. Last year the guy was a bum who didn't get on enough and was going to stink now that he's not in a hitters park and low and behold...40/40. Seriously, what is your problem with posters on this board? Soriano is overrated. But he's still good. Most everybody on this board would be happy with him being here next year, especially when you consider the limited options. And, if he's in CF, all the better.

We were probably helped by Piniella's awful Tampa teams, by the fact that he didn't manage last season, and by the fact that he'd pretty much eliminated any alternatives, whereas Dusty could have gone anywhere with a vacancy. Hendry mistakenly believed there was a market for Dusty, and since he was coming off a WS appearance, he was a hotter name. 3/9 was probably much closer to Dusty's actual worth at the time, since the Mets had no interest, and no other team got involved. Piniella is coming off unemployment and 3 straight terrible seasons. There just isn't the hype to drive up the price. And as ndistops points out, there was no competition.

Ugg great, I wouldnt think he will out live Hendry who will most likely be gone when his contract expires, which is after the 2008 season right? I assume the Cubs would can Hendry if 2007 is a disaster, let him continue if it's mediocre, and extend him if it's good. I would hope if they go to a new GM, that guy would have a chance to hire whomever he wants at manager.

Miami is getting games 3 years apart because they picked up the New Orleans' Super Bowl.

I think he should suggest to them that maybe they could throw a strike once in a while? The # of base on balls our staff gave up this year is hard evidence of incompetence on someone's part. So I suggest to you that A) our pitchers all suck or B) our pitching coach/pitching philosophy sucks. Id have to lean more toward A since a lot of our pitchers came from AA and probably shouldnt have even been there or never should have been resigned (like Rusch). You can try to tell someone how to throw a strike, try to show them but in the end the ball is in the pitchers hand not the pitching coach's. Rich Hill sure did make a big turn around from when he first was brought up till the end of the season, how much of that was Larry's coaching and how much of it was Hill making the proper mental adjustments on his own? Hard to say, Larry had alot of young unproven pitchers and some real big pieces of crap to work with this year, I dont blame him. Injuries happen and alot of them because of Bakers stupid desicions. Larry has been the pitching coach for 5 years now. This year's batch of AA pitchers is only a small part of that issue. Control has been an issue every year. Do you think that a new pitching coach would change that? I think throwing strikes has more to do with talent and ability than with coaching. If you didnt throw strikes in the minors your not going to be brought up and then shown by the pitching coach how to throw strikes and suddenly have pinpoint control. Control is an issue for most teams. You can be agressive in the strike zone and get the poop hammered out of you if you dont have good movement or deception with your pitches. If your pitching philosophy as a coach and as an organization was that you won't be in the majors until you can throw strikes on a semi consistent basis than yes I would expect to see more strikes. If a pitching coach can't help his pitchers learn to throw strikes then what good is he? I just dont think that a pitching coach's job is to make his pitchers throw strikes. I think there are plenty of things you can try to teach a player that migh help him with his control but in the end it comes down to having the talent and ability to make it happen. It certainly is part of his job. Isn't Larry's philosophy for pitchers to pitch for the strikeout? Does he not preach something akin to missing bats? The Cubs have long been league leaders in the K department, which suggests they have plenty of talent and ability. They've ignored the walk problem, both by hitters and pitchers, and that has hurt. Larry has been around for that ride. If the pitching sucks during a pitching coach's reign, and he's got no control over that, then why give him a job in the first place?

I think he should suggest to them that maybe they could throw a strike once in a while? The # of base on balls our staff gave up this year is hard evidence of incompetence on someone's part. So I suggest to you that A) our pitchers all suck or B) our pitching coach/pitching philosophy sucks. Id have to lean more toward A since a lot of our pitchers came from AA and probably shouldnt have even been there or never should have been resigned (like Rusch). You can try to tell someone how to throw a strike, try to show them but in the end the ball is in the pitchers hand not the pitching coach's. Rich Hill sure did make a big turn around from when he first was brought up till the end of the season, how much of that was Larry's coaching and how much of it was Hill making the proper mental adjustments on his own? Hard to say, Larry had alot of young unproven pitchers and some real big pieces of crap to work with this year, I dont blame him. Injuries happen and alot of them because of Bakers stupid desicions. Larry has been the pitching coach for 5 years now. This year's batch of AA pitchers is only a small part of that issue. Control has been an issue every year.

I have to admit, I do appreciate a good Lou picture.

I've assumed Piniella was going to be the manager for a while now, so it's kind of hard to react one way or the other. My timetable for serious thought on this team is once Hendry starts making player decisions. It will be pretty annoying to read about how much of a difference Piniella made if they do win next year, but if they win, I'll live with that annoyance. It seems pretty clear that Hendry believes Detroit will win the WS, going with the crotchety old manager who won't accept failure approach. I really doubt that's why Hendry hired Piniella. I believe (just guessing) that if the TRIB does raise salary (115mil) the upper management as well as Hendry prolly want someone that has experience. Maybe so, but it sure does fit his style. I'd be surprised if there was a press conference and Leyland's name doesn't figure prominently.

I've heard opposite personality, but I've seen nothing to indicated opposite in the other things. Maybe you're just not listening as hard as I am then. Possibly, but then again, maybe I'm just not hearing things that aren't really there. Yeah, you obviously hear everything, so I must have imagined it. Never said I did hear everything. I've just yet to hear anything to suggest Lou is the opposite of Baker, other than his fire and brimstone approach. I think it's pretty obvious as to what you were insinuating. Yeah, I was insinuating that either I haven't heard the evidence to support your claim, or there is no evidence to support the claim.

I've assumed Piniella was going to be the manager for a while now, so it's kind of hard to react one way or the other. My timetable for serious thought on this team is once Hendry starts making player decisions. It will be pretty annoying to read about how much of a difference Piniella made if they do win next year, but if they win, I'll live with that annoyance. It seems pretty clear that Hendry believes Detroit will win the WS, going with the crotchety old manager who won't accept failure approach.

I've heard opposite personality, but I've seen nothing to indicated opposite in the other things. Maybe you're just not listening as hard as I am then. Possibly, but then again, maybe I'm just not hearing things that aren't really there. Yeah, you obviously hear everything, so I must have imagined it. Never said I did hear everything. I've just yet to hear anything to suggest Lou is the opposite of Baker, other than his fire and brimstone approach.

I would like a pitching coach to not turn one of the best collections of young talent into one of the worst pitching staffs in the game.

WSCR is bush league. I dont believe anything they say anymore. I want this dude and that hardcore WMVP hater to argue. Who was that guy again?

I've heard opposite personality, but I've seen nothing to indicated opposite in the other things. Maybe you're just not listening as hard as I am then. Possibly, but then again, maybe I'm just not hearing things that aren't really there.

I've heard opposite personality, but I've seen nothing to indicated opposite in the other things.