goonys evil twin

Could have a very productive offense just from adding another .400 OBP in there. Nobody else may ever get on base, score, or knock in a run, but the combo of Giles, Lee, Ramirez, and Barrett should put up a lot of offense. Add Walker and a healthy Nomar, and the offense has the chance to actually be good. Exactly. They'll need to establish another higher OBP guy at the top, that isn't Giles, but Giles would immediately create more offense from ramirez and whomever hits behind him. Why can't Giles be a higher OBP guy at hte top? I'd hit him 2nd, with Lee and Ramirez to follow. Giles doesn't have a ton of power, his greatest attribute is his OBP, so why not put him in front of the Cubs great SLG threats? I'd consider a Murton/Giles/Lee/Ramirez/Nomar/Walker/Barrett/whoever lineup to be pretty good.

Because most writers don't vote off the avg/obp/slg line, they pay more attention to team stats, like wins and RBI. Conventional wisdom.

I wonder if they'll be dumb enough to think that getting rid of attitudes will be enough to improve the team in 2006.

I really have no problem with Pie not setting foot in Wrigley until '07, except for maybe a September callup next year. If GMJ is signed to a 1 year deal, that's not a problem. Plus, Baker's contract expires after next year, so when Pie is ready we may(extreme emphasis on may) not have to worry about that. Plus, is there anything more definitive than "he's a bum"? What exactly is bummish about him? Pie doesn't belong anywhere near Wrigley in the first half of next year. I see no reason for him to step foot in the majors until September at the earliest. Somebody has to play CF next year and after the CPatt witch hunt I don't see many other options. I think GMJ is very similar to many of the bigger names bandied about so far, but probably 1/5th the cost, or less. In no way would he be a cog for the future, but he also wouldn't be in the way of somebody who supposedly needs to start next year. As for his stint with the Cubs, he was 26, and has put up better numbers ever since. While some contend he "blocked" Corey in the past, Patterson never should have been there in the first place. The Cubs were irresponsible to bumb him from low A to AA. He should have been in Daytona in '00, AA in '01, and saw his first action late in that year, with the possibility of being the starter in '02. It was the Cubs organization and blatantly screwed with the CF position, don't hold that against GMJ. Then again, I'm not going to campaign for the guy. I could live with a Hairston/Patterson competition next year, depending on who else is signed.

I like him better than Lofton, but that's not saying much for me. I remember him as a relatively patient hitter. But his numbers really aren't that impressive. I'd say my feeling is GMJ and Lofton are a wash, and that salary concerns in the only issue. Although GMJ might have the advantage in the field.

Furcal and Cedeno would not be a good offensive combo up the middle. This lineup is bad enough, it doesn't need to be saddled with an $8+ million mediocre bat like Furcal's.

He's too busy lamenting the lack of team speed and situational/clutch hitting. The guy is clueless. He's finally admitting they need more walks offensively, but that's only after 2 years of having the media repeatedly ask him about the problem. Actions speak louder than words though, and Dusty will continue to put speed at the top of the order instead of OBP.

I have never heard a coach so quick to offer excuses as Dusty. Most coaches/managers have that "don't make excuses, just win" attitude. Dusty makes an excuse for everything. If his players don't overcome his ineptitude his team will struggle.

I don't see the Cubs offering Nomar arbitration, which, in years past at least, would mean no pick.

Resign Nomar for less guaranteed, more incentives, have Ronny available for backup.

Ideally that could happen. But I think you have to give him some insurance for a season in between those numbers. I'd like the base to be less, but I could see incentives being justified starting at 250 PA, not big, but still something. The 500 mark is where he starts being valuable though. $2m base (thanks for signing) $500K for 250 PA (thanks for showing up) $500K for 300 PA (thanks for sticking around) now we're at $3m if he plays a little less than half the year. $2m for 400 PA (now you're helping the team and your total is $5m) $3m for 500 PA (hey, maybe Murton wasn't the only good thing from that trade) here Nomar's paid at the going rate for SS signed since 2002 and he's played most of the year. $3m for 650 PA (full year of Nomar, maybe his numbers won't be worth $11m, but they could be, and it's the incentive to sign such a cheap guarantee) $1m for 700 PA (ain't gonna happen, they probably have to rest him to keep him health for even 600 PA, but this brings him to $12m, the reported average salary he turned down in his last offer from Boston).

I think he would accept something that offers a low minimum $2-4m, if the incentives were realistic, based on playing time, and could bring the deal up to $10-11m. I think a 600 PA Nomar would be a great Nomar, and justify a $11m paycheck (what he could have gotten this year with incentives. You can't give an incentive for batting .300, or any other stats based achievement.

True on the Hampton front. I don't think they would have been better in 2001, but my point is they could have been better from 2000-2005 had they traded him. I don't think they're any worse in 2003, and could have been better. Assuming halfway decent use of that money, they could have been much better in 2004 and 2005, when he they didn't come close to getting value.

only if pie is called up but rots on the bench ...or Lofton is given a 3 year deal.

I'm not a fan of Millwood. Sure, he did good for the Indians this year but what about last year when he pitched for the Phillies? He might be more of a risk than Burnett. 2002: 1.15 WHIP, .230 BAA, .627 OPS 2003: 1.25 WHIP, .250 BAA, .691 OPS 2004: 1.46 WHIP, .278 BAA, .774 OPS 2005: 1.24 WHIP, .250 BAA, .696 OPS K/9 and K/BB stay basically constant all 4 years. Methinks that 2004 is more of an aberration than 2005. Possibly. His numbers are weird. He goes from a 4era to a mid 2era back to 4 back to 3 and so on. Very inconsistent. Last years ERA was his highest. I dont know what to make of it. Burnett You hate* Millwood for his inconsistency, but want Burnett? That seems odd to me. I'd call Burnett inconsistent before Millwood. Remember, Millwood was also affected by the opening of Philly's new park. Sorry, I shouldn't have said hate, it was more like distaste.

I'm pretty certain his 10/5 were in place by '98. There wasn't much of a market, Sosa openly said he'd like to go to the NYY. The seeds for the post 2004 smear campaign were sowed during this story. Andy, in his infinite wisdom, apparantly thinks its more important to please the fringe fans who make up the difference between a ho-hum 2.5 million attendance and 3.0 million attendence season. They clearly put way too much emphasis on fan backlash than baseball decisions. The trade could have been made, with or without Soriano, and it could have greatly benefitted the 2001-2005 Cubs.

The Cubs won in 98. I think Sosa should have been dealt in 2000. The broken down players is what the Cubs do. They look for bargins to go with their superstar marquee players. I want a team of good players not one superstar to bring in the sheep. If the Cubs actually decided to go after good players to go with with Lee then yeah...I agree with you but history has shown they do not. Do you remember the trade proposals the Yankees gave us for Sammy? A bunch of crap for the #1 slugger in the game. Wonder why we didn't take that. :roll: didn't they offer Soriano? Iirc it was Soriano, Ledee and a couple of garbage pitching prospects. If Soriano was offered, Sosa would've been on the Yanks. Soriano is the reason why the deal fell thru, the Yankees did not want to give him up and offered Jimenez instead. The deal was based around Ted Lilly, Ledee, and Soriano/Jimenez. The bigger benefit would have been the enormous amount of free cash flow that would have opened up to use on better players. I was a trade Sammy guy since 99, when it became obvious the 98 success would not be back for quite a while, and the team was years from greatness. There is no reason to hold onto expensive aging stars on a crappy team.

That's the only thing in Burnett's favor. But how meaningful is it. After 2003 Wood was the one who looked healthy. They've gone back and forth with their problems. My point is neither is reliable, and nobody would sign Wood to a big extension today, there's no justification for giving Burnett that contract instead. but in burnett's favor, he doesn't have the history of shoulder and forearm problems that wood does. he's had TJS, but one can hardly predict with any certainty that burnett's next 2 seasons will be comparable to wood's last 2. No, you can't predict they will be the same. But you can't predict Burnett will be better than Wood either. If you wouldn't give Wood a 4/50 right now, you shouldn't give one to Burnett (especially if you already have Wood at $12m+ and offense is a much bigger problem).

That's the only thing in Burnett's favor. But how meaningful is it. After 2003 Wood was the one who looked healthy. They've gone back and forth with their problems. My point is neither is reliable, and nobody would sign Wood to a big extension today, there's no justification for giving Burnett that contract instead.

I just don't understand this logic. Dusty doesn't control the signings. If Hendry doesn't want to resign Perez, he doesn't have to. Perez does not have to return, no matter how much Dusty wants it to happen. You're entire theory relies exclusively on the assumption that Dusty has the final say on Neifi this offseason and that's just not accurate.

some people are pretty high on milton bradley & being suspended for disciplinary reasons is only one of several negative incidents on his resume. i certainly hope they stay away from guys like these and pursue other options. all the cubs need now is another albert belle type pycho. I would take an Albert Belle type hitter. It's not psychos, malcontents or bad clubhouse chemistry that holds down this team, it's lack of productive players. Last offseason was the offseason of "attitude purge", and it turned into a disaster.

He's exactly the type of guy that Boston or NY could fight for. He could be great, he could miss half his starts. A pitching starved team with loads of cash should strongly consider taking the chance on him, especially when they already have a great offense. An offensively challenged team with lots of arms should probably spend their money elsewhere.

Why not compare him to Wood. They are the same age (AJ is 5 months older). They've each pitched in parts of 7 seasons. Wood has 1109 IP in 174 starts. He is 70-54 with a 3.67 ERA, 1286 K's, 538 BB, 856 H. Burnett has 854 IP in 131 starts. He is 49-50 with a 3.73 ERA, 753 K's, 377 BB, 719 H. AJ missed most of 2003 and a good portion of 2004. He's been on and off disabled lists with many different ailments. Wood has been the more effective pitcher throughout his career using just about any measurement. Both are injury risks, neither is particularly reliable. They are very similar.

As long as his salary is no more than $3M, and the duration of contract is 1 year, this should be a no brainer move for the Cubs - Hendry and Baker like Lofton, and he likes them. They are all about the same age, aren't they? :wink: That's awesome.

why new york or boston? i think we have a decent shot with the money we have to spend. I have no idea why the Cubs would even consider signing him. He's no more reliable than Wood, and no more accomplished. Would you sign Kerry Wood to a 4 year $50m contract this offseason? I wouldn't, and I sure wouldn't sign Burnett to one either.