JC

Dance with who brought ya. There is nothing to applaud about this offseason. It is a trainwreck that has been three years in the making. Its a confluence of misidentification of needs, misapplication of resources, and misevaluation of talent. Further, it is a product, in large part, of an excruciatingly lacking in foresight regarding the availability of FAs and the preparedness of the farm system.

If he had been acquired by the Cubs, the trainers would have given him two aspirin and encouraged him to "work the kinks out in the Dominican league." Hendry would support the decision by stating that Furcal could postpone surgery and still be available by opening day. Of course, Hendry would be half right...opening day 2007.

While arthroscopic surgery is less invasive, it is still invasive nonetheless. These aren't nano scopes that are used, but equipment that still requires forcing muscle, ligaments and other soft tissues out of place while the "scope" is performed. Hence, there is a healing period that the body needs regardless of arthroscopy's less invasive nature.

*** JC was referencing the opening day lineup. I was extending it to all the positional players then on the roster. To the extent that it has remained relevant (and strictly in the interest of clarification), my original post, quoted above, sought information regarding the 2003 opening day positional roster, not the line-up. The reason I qualified the roster as "positional" was due to the fact that I was aware of some holdover pitchers on the roster.

In the Trib/AP article, Hendry indicates that the lack of playing time that Corey would get as a bench player here would hamper his re-development. Yeah, but I'd make him a semi-platoon player. Rotate him through the three OF spots to get him a sufficient number of starts against pitchers where he has good matchups and have him work the cages like crazy on the other days. Heck, wait until the end of ST when everyone has rosters set and see if you can pass him through waivers down to Iowa. As has been pointed out ad infinitum, there isn't a whole lot of demand for him out there at $3M. He could also see ABs in AL parks where those that think Murton is a liability can use him as a DH. Coupled with rotation in the OF, those ABs aren't insignificant.

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

My favorite had to be the game referenced above when he tied the game with a homer late, avoided Dusty in the dugout, then hit the walkoff later, only to have Dusty continue to harp in his ear. The worst: easily after he tore his knee up, and Cub trainers let him walk off the field with his knee bowing back and forth. It was Thiesmanesque sick.

Can someone tell me if either of the guys from Baltimore are required to be on the 40 man? Apologies if this was covered early on.

How did I belittle you? Because I said you don't get it? Well, you don't. that isn't belittling you. That is pointing out that you are missing the point, either intentionally or unintentionally. If you want to cry about it, go ahead. The rest of your post is just bullocks and makes no sense. As I said earlier, we really don't have anything to discuss.

It is sorely evident that you, along with others, are choosing not to comprehend certain components of this discussion.

You just don't get it. At all. If you can't support your argument with any facts, you can always try to attack the poster? LOL! If you feel attacked, get some new skin. My entire argument is about how you approach negotiations. Its about one's philosophy. What "facts" are you necessarily looking for? Like I said, you just don't get it. That isn't an attack, that is a fact.

That might be the case. Then again, there may have been absolutely no such report. Nobody is saying they have any special insight guaranteeing that Corey will improve. The point is that it is nearly impossible for Corey to be any worse than he was during his 2005 tailspin. If one admits that point, then it is equally reasonable to conclude that Corey would garner a higher bounty on the trade market. Of course, there is a chance Corey gets worse. It comes down to how big of a payoff you are looking for and resources. If Corey couldn't be traded and completely failed early in 06, there are other options (Hairston if Pie isn't ready or Pie himself). Now, Pie is in limbo with the acquisition of Pierre. The entire scenerio is just a mess.

You just don't get it. At all. But, you can spell.

It is possible that Hendry would have gotten zero in return for Patterson. Corey has shown absolutely nothing as major leaguer and it is doubtful that he ever would as a Cub. It is difficult to see why you would get so excited over losing a guy with worse career numbers than Neifi Perez. If that is sincerely your opinion, we have nothing to talk about. Transactions are about gambles. I think its a far better gamble to hold on to Patterson (as I set forth clearly earlier wherein I suggested he start the season in center rather than trade for Pierre) rather than unload him for non-factor players who Hendry will likely clog the roster with and save a couple of million. So you would rather have a career sub .298 OBP guy in CF than a career .350+ OBP guy? It may be possible that you over value Patterson. Yeah, that is exactly my point. Are you trying to oversimplify (thereby mischaracterize) my arguments? They are plain to see, but you pick and choose the portions that support your argument, seemingly just to be obstinant.

Well, you've made the point for me. He had no leverage. At all. Thus, it makes more sense to gamble into creating some leverage through 1) better play at the ML level; 2) better play at AAA; or 3) need created though injury in ST or the first part of the season. Negotiating is all about leverage. Trading players without any is just stupid when you know a player has talent (e.g. Corey). If it were some clown like Macias, when you are unlikely to get anything more than you've seen over his stay with the Cubs, then the likelihood of gaining leverage is low if not non-existent. But, that isn't the case with Corey. It is bad negotiating, pure and simple. It is always easier to make comments like this after the fact. Why, pray tell, is that the case? I have been anticipating this lackluster move (as have many) since October. Hendry moved Sammy at his lowest value (and, in fact, contributed to lowering his value). Hendry is more interested in a clean clubhouse rather than addressing messes that he had his hand in manufacturing. Don't try to diminish my point by making me appear as if I am only preying on hindsight. It doesn't take a clariavoyant or baseball executive to derive the opinion that this was a trade in which Hendry would be hard pressed to get less value at a later date. I am 100% certain that Hendry at some level decided to move Patterson prior to the Convention so as not to repeat the 05 Sosa debacle. His moves regularly have a tinge of panic to them as of late. When should we have moved Corey then? Didn't I already address this? No, he wasn't. He made a poor trade because he is shortsighted.

I wouldn't have been looking to move him in the first place. Paying $16M for him to play elsewhere was silly to me. If I had to move him, I sure as hell wouldn't have devalued him the way the Cubs systematically did. The only thing we know is that last year's formula didn't work to get the Cubs in the playoffs. So, I don't want to hear that Sosa would have made the season any worse.

It is possible that Hendry would have gotten zero in return for Patterson. Corey has shown absolutely nothing as major leaguer and it is doubtful that he ever would as a Cub. It is difficult to see why you would get so excited over losing a guy with worse career numbers than Neifi Perez. If that is sincerely your opinion, we have nothing to talk about. Transactions are about gambles. I think its a far better gamble to hold on to Patterson (as I set forth clearly earlier wherein I suggested he start the season in center rather than trade for Pierre) rather than unload him for non-factor players who Hendry will likely clog the roster with and save a couple of million.

Leverage, what leverage? As Bruce Miles stated on this forum just a few days ago Corey was not a hot name at all throughout the baseball world. Well, you've made the point for me. He had no leverage. At all. Thus, it makes more sense to gamble into creating some leverage through 1) better play at the ML level; 2) better play at AAA; or 3) need created though injury in ST or the first part of the season. Negotiating is all about leverage. Trading players without any is just stupid when you know a player has talent (e.g. Corey). If it were some clown like Macias, when you are unlikely to get anything more than you've seen over his stay with the Cubs, then the likelihood of gaining leverage is low if not non-existent. But, that isn't the case with Corey. It is bad negotiating, pure and simple. It is always easier to make comments like this after the fact. Why, pray tell, is that the case? I have been anticipating this lackluster move (as have many) since October. Hendry moved Sammy at his lowest value (and, in fact, contributed to lowering his value). Hendry is more interested in a clean clubhouse rather than addressing messes that he had his hand in manufacturing. Don't try to diminish my point by making me appear as if I am only preying on hindsight. It doesn't take a clariavoyant or baseball executive to derive the opinion that this was a trade in which Hendry would be hard pressed to get less value at a later date. I am 100% certain that Hendry at some level decided to move Patterson prior to the Convention so as not to repeat the 05 Sosa debacle. His moves regularly have a tinge of panic to them as of late.

Leverage, what leverage? As Bruce Miles stated on this forum just a few days ago Corey was not a hot name at all throughout the baseball world. Well, you've made the point for me. He had no leverage. At all. Thus, it makes more sense to gamble into creating some leverage through 1) better play at the ML level; 2) better play at AAA; or 3) need created though injury in ST or the first part of the season. Negotiating is all about leverage. Trading players without any is just stupid when you know a player has talent (e.g. Corey). If it were some clown like Macias, when you are unlikely to get anything more than you've seen over his stay with the Cubs, then the likelihood of gaining leverage is low if not non-existent. But, that isn't the case with Corey. It is bad negotiating, pure and simple.

But isn't this better than not tending him a contract? I mean I think (K)orey pretty hit rock bottom here and needs a change of scenery. Hendry totally mishandled the Sosa and Farnsworth deals, but I think this is different. If he never pans out, then this isn't a terrible trade, IMO. Corey has flashed enough talent that, as has been said over and over, it is nearly impossible for him to be worse than he was in '05. When the Cubs' best prospect is a CFer who was projected to be a late call-up last year barring injury, it makes far more sense to me to start with Corey in center and use the Pierre resources elsewhere. If Corey fails, Pie comes up and ends the Corey experiment for good. It makes fiscal sense to me and gives a glimmer of hope that the Cubs can develop SOME positional talent. Instead, we have a costly, no-power center fielder who's best talents are [expletive] (in part) by his new surroundings who is on a one year contract but is likely to be extended, further questioning Pie's future with the club. Run-on sentence or not, its a position in which few clubs likely find themselves envying the Cubs.

I haven't read the 8 pages of this thread. I just want to exress my disappointment in the Cubs once again settling on making a deal with no leverage whatsoever. There is just no sense in the manner in which this management team negotiates, evaluates or makes transactions in general.

Do ya mean "intention" there Dan? While it is likely a typo, I wouldn't be surprised if Duquette did say that. He never was a guy that you'd expect to find fighting over that last chair in the Mensa Musical Chairs game.

Phew. Along the same lines, I was scared that Pierre wouldn't be blocking anyone and that Felix wouldn't experience that awkward rookie sensation of: "Hey, I'm better than that guy and cheaper. Why am I still living here at the Days Inn in Des Moines?"

=D>

I agree. I've never been a fan of the "he was rushed" explanation for his struggles. Corey's failure is related to his inability and/or unwillingness to learn/adapt, and the Cubs' inabiliy to find a way to get through to him, regardless of the level. I still haven't seen a good reason why you try to dump him when his value is at its lowest.