JC

I'm glad time, effort and resources went into re-signing a redundant, replaceable and utterly unnecessary player when gaping holes in the outfield still exist. Oops. Sorry. I forgot that since Neifi signed a two year deal, we can't judge it until the 2007 offseason.

Reports are that Jim Hendry walked into the clubhouse late last year after Walker had lost a bet and was compelled to shove his mouth full of Lemonheads. Apparently, Hendry mistook the sour look on Walker's face for him being a general malcontent. As luck would have it, Neifi told Jim a knock-knock joke on the way out. From there on, it was a no brainer who was better for the clubhouse.

Better late than never. Welcome aboard. :wink:

I completely agree. But Giles for RF would completely set up the 2006 season to be a success. Everything else would be gravy. Hendry can get 2 of Giles, Furcal, Burnett, but there's only a steep dropoff from NOT getting Giles. If he does go with Furcal and Burnett, he would have to be very creative in the OF. I don't know if I trust his creativity. (Burnitz). Join. Its unconscionable to me that Hendry hasn't thrown up the full court press for Giles.

I never liked the move in the first place. yeah i miss jody gerut too :( I actually thought Gerut would have been a decent gamble for 2006, because his knees should be OK then. Unfortunately we needed someone who could help in 2005, and Gerut wasn't it. Of course, neither was Lawton. Ironic. The Cubs got rid of a RF who was widely suspected of using steroids, only to replace him, in part, with a player who gets caught for using steroids.

And exhausted a personal best 280 eyeliner pencils through the 2006 season.

So wait....paying 6 million plus whatever prospects it takes to get him for 1 year isn't overpaying for Pierre? No. Its grossly overpaying.

And I stand by what I said in August. I'd give my right arm to be Doug Dascenzo, there is certainly no shame in that. However, I don't see Adam as having the necessary physical traits to be an effective everyday player. There are few David Eckstein's out there (that is, small guys who aren't lightning quick that hold down regular ML jobs.) The few who are around seem to land in the IF, not the OF. I hope the best for Adam, I just have little confidence he is going to be an effective everyday ML OFer.

You mean Hollandsworth, look at the game logs from early on, it was a one sided platoon. It was a stupid idea to have a 4th OF'er as a starting LF'er. It's not like he didn't play. DuBois got 142 at-bats. They tried working him in there and he didn't produce after April. People want to complain about prospects getting no shot. Yet when the prospects get a shot and fail they like to wash their hands and blame it on Dusty and Hendry. If there's blame, it's on Hendry's poor assessment of DuBois. Of course, many had the same poor assessment. Jesus Christ. Can you make a single point without incorporating some levle of poster bashing? Yes, you're correct, there are those who may have overvalued Dubois. Then again, there are legitimate arguments that Dubois was not handled properly. Not to mention myriad other aspects/issues/components of the Dubois situation. But, you like to skew issues into black and white arguments in support of your often weak positions. Every freaking post doesn't need to have a shot at other posters, either specifically or generally. Do you think you are perhaps being a little overly sensitive? #-o You complain about his statement that many had a poor assesment, and then make a statement like Pot meet kettle. Not even remotely germane to what I referenced in my post. So, the over used and unclever "pot meet kettle" remark isn't applicable. Further, oversensitivity is not an issue because many times, my beliefs don't apply to his remarks. However, I fail to see why anyone needs to repeatedly point fingers at other posters. You can make your point without doing so. If you make it part of your common posting habits, it demonstrates that you are more interested in pissing people off than simply supporting your position.

You mean Hollandsworth, look at the game logs from early on, it was a one sided platoon. It was a stupid idea to have a 4th OF'er as a starting LF'er. It's not like he didn't play. DuBois got 142 at-bats. They tried working him in there and he didn't produce after April. People want to complain about prospects getting no shot. Yet when the prospects get a shot and fail they like to wash their hands and blame it on Dusty and Hendry. If there's blame, it's on Hendry's poor assessment of DuBois. Of course, many had the same poor assessment. Jesus Christ. Can you make a single point without incorporating some levle of poster bashing? Yes, you're correct, there are those who may have overvalued Dubois. Then again, there are legitimate arguments that Dubois was not handled properly. Not to mention myriad other aspects/issues/components of the Dubois situation. But, you like to skew issues into black and white arguments in support of your often weak positions. Every freaking post doesn't need to have a shot at other posters, either specifically or generally.

Ok so who should he have signed? Beltan? Lowe? Pavano? Let's face it, last offseason looked promising on paper, but most of them have been busts. And expensive busts at that. I'm d#$@ grateful we didn't get tied down to someone who can't hold their weight now. EDIT: I'm sure glad we got rid of Sosa somehow though. He would have been a nightmare in RF this year. I thought Pavano would be a FA bust and never had any interest in Lowe. I thought the Cubs should have directed their attention to Drew and Beltran. I'm not going to go through my entire arguments for these two, but Hendry's failure to even express interest in these two in light of 1) the Cubs' 2005 OF woes, 2) the anorexic 2006 FA class, and 3) the lack of potent OF in the Cub system to contribute immediately, was pathetic. Nobody wants to be weighed down by big contracts. But, sometimes overpayment is necessary if you put yourself in such a position. It was the Cubs own fault that the were in a position forcing overpayment. They chose not to, and our 2005 OF was insufferable, and the brightest spot in the 2006 OF is Matt Murton. The point is, Hendry didn't properly evaluate the state of his OF in 2005, and it will continue to cost us in 2006. Lastly, even if Sosa wasn't dealt last year, there is no way his option would have been picked up this year, so your nightmare never really was an issue.

shhhh This is another issue that people want to ignore when showering praise on Hendry and management. Hendry unequivocally said that it wouldn't matter when Kerry went under the knife, that he'd be ready for ST regardless. The fact that its even newsworthy that there are now reports indicateing that he will be ready for ST directly conflict with Hendry's understanding of the nature of Kerry's injury and the surgery to repair it. Its like a freaking Keystone Cop routine.

LOL. Sure, just like at the end of the 2005 offseason, the Hendry loyalists asserted that you can't make a judgment about him until the season played out. But, now, apparently no judgments can be made until 2006. Hell, if Hendry plays his cards right with an extension, he may be immune from judgment until the Tehran Tigers are welcomed into the league in the 2054 expansion.

Only if Hendry himself is part of the trade. That would be the best part about it.

I can't believe Rusch would agree to come back unless he was guaranteed a rotation spot. He started to make noise about that at the end of the year, IIRC.

Where do you get 4 years? The reported offer is for 2. I think he is including the previous two years, suggesting the Cubs have already been living on borrowed time with a pitcher who has mediocre periphrials.

Cool it with the "trillion" talk. You don't want to give Hendry any ideas when he starts bidding against himself again.

Key-riced, Hendry. Go back to Creighton.

Not terribly relevant. IIRC, James' theory on closer by committee was misapplied in Boston. The theory is dependent on having specific types of arms, which Boston did not have.

I suppose its not surprising, but while I don't know if he would be a good GM, I certainly see no evidence to point to that he would be a poor GM. Even if he is pompous (which I continue to believe is a ridiculous assessment) that wouldn't preclude him from being a good GM. Frankly, I wouldn't mind one bit to have a GM with a bit more backbone when it comes to holding the line with star players. Part of the problem with Sosa was organizational deference to him.

What makes you think they'll be playing this weekend? Packing today. Leaving tomorrow. Returning Sunday. So, I couldnt' go to a game two even if tickets were available. I hope you're gone by the time I get to the Big Apple. That city ain't big enough for the two of us.

Its freaking hilarious is what it is. However, I am disappointed that more Cub fans don't pick up the slack. Even though its the Sox, its a reflection on Chicago as a baseball town. If I wasn't going to New York this weekend, I'd grab some tickets and go, and I live 3 hours away.

Maybe not serious, but he has admitted to still having linger effects from his Damian Jackson concussion. That is kind of spooky. Further, it seems like he is starting to suffer more frequently from pulls and strains. Perhaps that is a peception problem on my part. Regardless, these conditions concern me.

I seem to recall that Florida demanded him. If my memory is not faulty, it goes as another example of other teams out scouting/evaluating our own prosects.

Every pitcher is going to give up runs. Also, he shouldn't have been in there in the ninth. The granny was the most damaging, so that was what I was referencing. But, if you want to paint him as a terrible pitcher because of this one outing, be my guest. You might as well include Prior and Wood in the same category for giving up leads late in playoff games in which their team lost.