goonys evil twin

Gee. Maybe you could just trade Mitre for Abreu. ABREU IS NOT GOING TO BE MOVED FOR A PILE OF DIRTY SOCKS! (not that Murton is a pile of dirty socks, but come on people!) What the hell is the point of this post, and how does Murton equate to dirty socks, and did you not read the "Murton in a deal for" part of my post? Didn't notice your change. But where do you get off saying "come on people"? I never said Murton straight up. Why don't you take the time to read a post next time before trying to ridicule it?

like a potatoe Good. Now, who would have liked for Hendry to give Giles a 3/45m contract if that's how much it would have taken to get him away from San Diego? I thought 3/30 was the price all along. I would have been willing to go 3/40 (maybe 45), with a team option for the 4th year coupled with a buyout of up to $5. And if he played X number of games in 2007/2008, it would become automatic (but X would be high).

If you traded for Kearns, would you consider trading Murton in a deal for Abreu?

Kearns would be a fallback option in my book. He's got some attractive positives, but when it's that questionable if he can even provide average production, you have to take pause. And it's not like you can even platoon him with a good lefty either, because his splits, while entirely unimpressive the past few years, are pretty even.

He's an INT machine. I would much rather see a competition between Orton and Grossman. I want Orton on the bench now, in part because I think it'll help him to take a step back and evaluate what he's been exposed to already. After 12 NFL games, a full offseason of work, and a full training camp with the big boys, I think he'll be better in September of 2006 than December 2005 or January 2006. And I think Grossman could easily be better than Collins, especially by next year.

And saying I don't know what I'm talking about, all while basing your theory on no more evidence than I based mine, which is an incredibly rude and arrogant remark.

Here we go again. It's not okay to question Hendry, instead, let's just bash the people on this board who don't like Hendry's moves. I know what I'm talking about, and I feel very comfortable stating that he put a lot of eggs in the Furcal basket and not enough in the Giles basket. If there were some secret backdoor negotiations that no media outlet picked up on or felt were worth reporting, where Hendry repeatedly tried to convince Giles and his agent to talk to the Cubs in the neighborhood of 3/30 or a little more, then I will admit I was wrong on this one. But I highly doubt that's the case. Instead of just attacking me, why don't you offer up your take on the subject with some sort of logical explanations based on what information is out there? It's not like I just pulled some wild conspiracy theory out of my butt with nothing to base it on. Why are you so interested in what other fans think about the Cubs, instead of what the Cubs are actually doing, or not doing? I'm not attacking you. We all pretty much get the same info when it comes to the offseason. I think Hendry did contact the Giles camp. I think he didn't get the reaction he was looking for so he started to look elsewhere. I do however feel that all along Furcal was priority number 1. I don't however agree with this. Giles was the perfect fit for the cubs, unfortunately he didn't want to come here. Hendry still has time to turn this thing around though. Ideally he could keep the infield intact, trade for Bradley and Wilkerson, then sing Millwood(assuming Williams is traded). Make those moves, or similar moves and imo we're in the playoffs. Then what is with all the "where is the proof" "you don't know what you're talking about" BS. You have no more proof than I do, but it's okay for you to state your opinion and not me? I have to wait until I have iron-clad proof before I write about what I think happened based on every report that has been made available?

This is the thread where I've seen the eggs/basket talk, not really anywhere else. I said he put a lot of eggs in one basket and not enough in another, not "all". I dislike his style as GM (let's just wait for the leftovers, but I'll overpay my own mediocre players as soon as possible, HEY WORLD I HAVE TO TRADE SAMMY AND WALKER AND FARNSWORTH, I am going to focus almost exclusively on one spot in the order and do whatever I can to fill that one spot then leave all the other big holes to fill later) and I think he's an average GM, with the proof being a top 5 payroll not being met with a top 5 record or top 5 offense and a bad 2005 team.

I agree. I've cooled on him. At this point, outside of Dunn or Abreu, I don't know who I want. The Trot Nixons/Kevin Menchs/Aubrey Huffs of the world just don't seem like nearly enough. A Mench/Nixon platoon would be awesome. Their splits cry out for a platoon. Combined, I could easily see them posting a 900+ OPS. Based on seniority, however, the platoon would end up being Murton/Mench and Nixon would play everyday.

No they don't. He's been screwing up all year. The Bears are in a tight race for not only homefield advantage in the first playoff game, but throughout the playoffs, and even just making the playoffs. They can't afford to let Orton lose another game for them. Decent QB play wins each of the 3 losses, with the only possible exception of Cincy. The Bears have been lucky in that bad QB play hasn't killed them. But they are in a spot where 2 more losses could mean byebyeplayoffs and definitely mean byebye homefield.

Here we go again. It's not okay to question Hendry, instead, let's just bash the people on this board who don't like Hendry's moves. I know what I'm talking about, and I feel very comfortable stating that he put a lot of eggs in the Furcal basket and not enough in the Giles basket. If there were some secret backdoor negotiations that no media outlet picked up on or felt were worth reporting, where Hendry repeatedly tried to convince Giles and his agent to talk to the Cubs in the neighborhood of 3/30 or a little more, then I will admit I was wrong on this one. But I highly doubt that's the case. Instead of just attacking me, why don't you offer up your take on the subject with some sort of logical explanations based on what information is out there? It's not like I just pulled some wild conspiracy theory out of my butt with nothing to base it on. Why are you so interested in what other fans think about the Cubs, instead of what the Cubs are actually doing, or not doing?

It's possible, but still not a good enough explanation for me. My personal view of the situation is that Hendry didn't prioritize Giles at all. He did not value Giles skillset or realize just how big a hole RF is right now. Hendry has a thing for guys like Encarnacion, Wilson, Jones and Burnitz, so he was more than happy to wait on RF, and pretty much ignored Giles and his .400+ OBP. Considering he was offering 5/50 and maybe more, for Furcal, 3/30 for Giles was more than fair to the Cubs, but I don't think he even tried to negotiate there.

I am so annoyed by this part of the story. Their infatuation with a stereotypical leadoff man is going to bite them in the butt. You can't build a team like this. You have to find players for each position in the field, then let them hit wherever is best. Find a team with quality from 1-8 and you'll be much better than a team that goes hard after leadoff and settles for mediocrity from 2, 5 and 6. Try to assemble the best catcher, first base, second base, third base, shortstop, leftfield, center field and rightfield you can find, then put them in the best order. Don't limit yourself to a spot you've already admitted is close to barren in terms of availability. Hendry and Baker have spoken at length about the complete lack of the "true leadoff hitter" in today's game. That lack of supply drives up price when met with high demand. The Cubs irrationally high demand is making it harder for them to find a guy. Go out and get the best hitters you can find at CF and RF, and don't worry about the order, you'll score more runs and win more games.

How exactly do you know this? Is it that hard for you to accept that maybe, just maybe, Giles didn't want to play for Chicago? It's very hard for me to accept that Hendry apparantly didn't even try to talk him into the move, like other GMs have done with players who used to be against playing for that team. Like I asked before, How exactly do you know this? Well, we didn't get Giles, so that alone says he didn't do enough. But no, I don't know this as fact. None of this crap we talk about is known as fact. But any reasonable person who has read up on the situation would have to come to the conclusion that Hendry didn't really try hard to get Giles. If you disagree with that statement, or the statement that he did try really hard to get Furcal, than go right ahead and say it. But don't ask me to prove every statement, or else make sure you do that to every other poster who makes an educated assumption based on several reports by many baseball media outlets.

Same lack of quality.

How exactly do you know this? Is it that hard for you to accept that maybe, just maybe, Giles didn't want to play for Chicago? It's very hard for me to accept that Hendry apparantly didn't even try to talk him into the move, like other GMs have done with players who used to be against playing for that team.

I'm sure the people in Bristol need more fans like you. WHat does that mean? What are you complaining about? You're listening to The Score and telling us what they say. Why do you listen if you don't like it? I listen to lots of Cubs games and often don't like it.

But are they all 40 man guys? And how much other space was cleared? Plus they have to have some worthless veterans who will just be told to walk away, freeing up space. And maybe they had some lesser prospects on the list who they are taking off.

So. At the very least, if the Cubs got involved, they could have upped the price a little, and taken away money for San Diego to play elsewhere. From all accounts, the Cubs didn't even come close to talking seriously with Giles. There is no telling what they would have had to do to get him back, but at several points it looked like SD had no chance. Before Schilling when to Boston there were several reports about how he had no desire to play in Boston. When a GM actually recruits a player, anything can happen. You have to try instead of just assuming, even when you are shot down at first, try harder.

He did put a lot of eggs in the Furcal basket, but lucked out when somebody else overpaid. He didn't put enough eggs in the Giles basket.

I thought about him too, but he's just as big of an injury risk, more expensive, right handed, and older. I'd say his availability level is greater than Drew's though. Any way the Tigers throw in Carlos Guillen? Was he hurt for the first half of last season, or the second half? He'll be 32 in January, for the record. He came back from his knee injury for spring training, then suffered a sports hernia. After missing 1/2 off the beginning of the season, he came back and hit somewhere around .300. If memory serves, he had about a 20-25 game hit streak in the second half of the year. Yeah, something like that... his numbers have been very good. I wouldn't be opposed if Detroit ate some of his contract, but it would definately be a risk. Are you talking about Maggs or Guillen? Maggs is way overpaid, stunk in 05, and wasn't special in 04 either. I wouldn't want him.

And it would be a terrible trade for the Cubs.

Three things: Using just last year to define a hitter is not wise. While he did have the best numbers in the NL, he did so without enough PA to qualify, which takes away some value (ie. he's not a franchise catcher). There are multiple AL catchers who are better. Only 7 catchers in baseball qualified. That's not a huge indictment IMO. Setting 300 PA's as a benchmark, Barrett was 3rd in MLB in Catcher OPS. And, just using last year is a mistake, plus, his OPS relies very heavily on SLG, whereas he's a little lower on the list for OBP. He's a good hitting catcher, but he's not the best out there, or significantly better than guys right behind him. And, his defense negates some value. But I would say he's better than LoDuca.

Hendry has changed his approach this year, offering too much to Furcal, overpaying for Neifi, ignoring top RF help, ignoring Nomar, putting a for sale sign on Walker's neck, covetting Pierre, etc. etc. etc.

williams + novoa/wuertz probably isn't as good as backe + qualls...but if the cubs throw in both novoa and wuertz (or perhaps ohman, who i think is expendable) + prospects, they could match/beat houston's offer. if the phils are looking for something along the lines of clement + trot, i don't know if the cubs can put together a similar package. That's what I was thinking. We can't match Trot + Clement, but we could probably match Backe + Qualls. What I couldn't figure out was when Stark said that Trot + Clement may not be enough. Trot is a platoon guy in the OF right now. He can't hit lefties, at all, and he hasn't been a full time starter for a full season since 2002. The Cubs don't have an exact replica, but Walker would give him a run for his money in terms of production (unfortunately, they don't need a 2B, but they do need 3B) and he's significantly cheaper. Likewise, Clement is an extremely expensive average pitcher. Yes, we all know he has the stuff, but we have to stop pretending he's a top of the rotation starter. Again, I think Jerome Williams compares favorably to Matt. No, he doesn't have the same stuff, but, from what I can tell, his ERA+ is right there, his career ERA compares favorably. And it's not like you can give Clement the nod on durability either, as he's failed to throw 200 innings for 2 straight years, and he's maddeningly inconsistent. If you can tie in a 3rd team, I see no reason why you can't throw together Walker (going to the 3rd team - who would send similar value back to Philly), Williams, Mitre, Wuertz/Novoa and a prospect and be considered along a Nixon/Clement deal. Philly saves money with the Cubs offer, gets, at worst, a slight downgrade in pitcher quality, but a significant upgrade in quantity, and fills multiple holes. 3 team deal Cubs get: Abreu Soriano Philly gets: Williams Mitre (sinker in Philly is a must) Wuertz/Novoa Mench/Dellucci Texas gets: Walker Matt Craig Cubs pitching prospect Texas frees payroll, gets similar production from 2B, might need more from Cubs pitching depth. Philly frees payroll, fills rotation spots with cheap innings eaters, fills a bullpen spot and gets a decent OF bat. Cubs fill RF hole, replace Walker's production with similar bat, take on salary and free up some 40 man roster space.