Jump to content
North Side Baseball

davearm

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    673

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by davearm

  1. davearm
    I thought this was the reason this threat was started to chastise Hendry & MacPhail, not because Hendry was upset because Sullivan misquoted Jones. :roll: Apparently Sullivan himself indicated on WSCR that the entire incident was triggered by the alleged Jones misquote.
  2. davearm
    For clarity's sake, Sullivan said that Hendry chastized him for what Hendry heard was a misquote of Jones, not of Hendry. So Jones told Hendry that he was misquoted, and Hendry went after Sullivan. OK, so Hendry was essentially speaking out on Jones' behalf. Doesn't really change the fact that if Sullivan misquoted somebody, he deserved to be called on it.
  3. davearm
    Why shouldn't be able to express his displeasure? I assume you mean his displeasure over Sullivan writing something critical of the team, not his displeasure about being misquoted. The answer is, because Sullivan's simply doing his job, and if the team's failing miserably then it's his responsibility to write about how and why he thinks they're failing. Meanwhile a big part of Hendry's job is to be immune from this sort of criticism. It goes with the territory.
  4. davearm
    If he has a problem with being misquoted then fine, issue a statement saying you were misquoted, don't get yourself riled into a tizzy about it. You would think Hendry would have a lot bigger things to worry about than if he was misquoted in the paper. As a fan, it really is disappointing to hear the Hendry has time to throw a fit, when there are so many other problems that need fixing. You are in the big leagues now Jim, start acting like it. Enough with the excuses, it is time to do your job, you are sitting at the "Grown Ups" table now quit acting like a child. Issue a statement? Cmon now. If he was misquoted, then the correct course of action would be to confront the guy that wrote the piece and explain a) that's not what I said, and b) I don't appreciate you misrepresenting me.
  5. davearm
    If Sullivan misquoted Hendry (MacPhail) in an article in the paper, then Hendry (MacPhail) has every right to be POed and let Sullivan know he's POed. If Hendry (MacPhail) is POed because Sullivan wrote something critical of the team, then he should STFU and stop reading the paper.
  6. davearm
    So much better? They were virtually the same hitter in 2005 (barely better than crap), and they are again in 2006 (total crap). Mirabelli 2005: .228/.309/.412 Blanco 2005: .242/.287/.391 Mirabelli 2006: 6 for 37 Blanco 2006: 2 for 32 And we had our own Dustin Mohr when Restovich was up. That's a 40+ differential in OPS, it's not trivial like you're making it out to be. And there's also the fact that Mirabelli has the vastly superior career. Perhaps Restovich would be like Mohr, but we never gave him a shot. Look at Mohr's numbers v. LHP, he's the ideal platoon OF. Well let me ask you this. Would you use the term "threat" to describe a 35YO career backup catcher that's coming off of a .721 OPS and is doing significantly worse than that this year? Because what I'm hearing here is that the Cubs bench would be so much better if only we had that sort of "threat".
  7. davearm
    Personally I think that we're already seeing what we have in Cedeno -- great defense, solid average, little patience at the plate and few walks, modest pop. His comps are going to wind up being guys like Lugo, Eckstein, and *gulp* Neifi. And frankly, IMO the defense and especially the average are more likely to get worse, than the walks and power are to get better. I hope I'm wrong, but he doesn't figure to be much more than a league averageish SS.
  8. davearm
    Just because you put the word wash next to the names doesn't mean it's true. Just like putting the words "history of being a good pinch hitter" or "versatile decent player" doesn't make the guy a good bench candidate. The Cubs bench is doing nothing this year. They all stunk last year. Those others benches I mentioned all have threats that are actually doing something with the bat. They have their fair share of no-hit utility guys, but their entire bench does not consist of that type of guy. Many have a legit platoon option who puts up solid numbers against one type of pitcher (exactly what the Cubs need), some of them have guys who, while they might not have a good avg or obp, do provide a good power threat, or maybe they have no power, but they manage to get on base quite often. The Cubs bench has nothing. They suck. What are the names of these Red Sox and Cardinal bench players that you're so enamored with? Are you another big Doug Mirabelli fan?
  9. davearm
    So much better? They were virtually the same hitter in 2005 (barely better than crap), and they are again in 2006 (total crap). Mirabelli 2005: .228/.309/.412 Blanco 2005: .242/.287/.391 Mirabelli 2006: 6 for 37 Blanco 2006: 2 for 32 And we had our own Dustin Mohr when Restovich was up.
  10. davearm
    Atlanta, Arizona, Cincy, Minnesota, Boston, White Sox, Houston, Dodgers, Milwaukee, Philly, STL, Texas and Toronto all have more threats on their benches than the Cubs. The Cubs have no threats, and none of their bench players are doing anything good. Before I posed that question, I took a cursory look at some rosters around the league. Two that I looked at were Boston and StL. I'm sorry, but you're just not going to convince me that they're any better off than the Cubs. Boston Mirabelli - Blanco - wash Snow - Mabry - wash Cora - Neifi - wash Harris - Pagan - wash Mohr - Hairston - wash St. Louis is the same story, with Bennett, Aaron Miles, Spiezio, Taguchi, and Bigbie. Who exactly are the huge threats on those teams again?
  11. davearm
    Well, I'm not saying there's no way to fit him into a roster. But when he's your primary threat, you are in trouble. You can't just say Mabry has a history of success as a pinch hitter and can play a couple positions, and therefore Hendry did a good job. The makeup of the bench his horrible. There is no threat. Mabry is the prime backup at all 4 corner spots, and that is a joke. Jones needed a platoon partner, Murton probably could have used one as well (a corner OF of Murton/Mabry and Jones/anybody who can hit a lefty) might have provided for better bench threats. But when your first option is a washed up 38 year old coming off a disastrous season, you aren't doing enough for your bench. Ryan Theriot could have Neifi's job for an 1/8th of the cost, leaving a couple million for an actual threat in the OF. But no, Hendry overspent on crap players and failed to field a decent bench. There's no reason for excuses or talking around it. That's just a fact. What team's bench are you really impressed with and envious of? It should be cake to come up with 10 or so teams that are significantly better, if ours is so miserable.
  12. davearm
    The situation with the O's is actually somewhat less favorable than you're letting on Vance. Not only would the O's have no interest in our main veteran trade chips (Maddux, Williamson, etc.), but their farm system's depth is pretty much parallel to ours... several nice pitching prospects, but a scant few high-end position guys, and almost nothing that's approaching ML-ready. Consequently, if they were to move Tejada, a package consisting of at least 1 or 2 promising bats that could step in virtually right away would likely be the requirement. That's not something the Cubs could provide nearly as readily as several other teams... if they were so inclined, of course.
  13. davearm
    But the whole point is that Tejada is *not* a quick fix. He's a long-term investment, just like ARam and DLee. The only difference is you have to trade to get him, rather than just sign him. So if you believe he could help enough in the long term to be worth the investment, then regardless of the team's current record, the only reason to wait until the offseason to make the trade is if you're confident you could get him for less at that point, or our guys will be worth more then. I'm not sure why you'd think the former, and the latter carries a fair degree of risk.
  14. davearm
    Well as mojo indicated, the young players' value could go up... or it could go down. Right now might be the only time you could get a Tejada for, say, Cedeno+Marshall+Hill. That deal gets laughed off the table come the offseason, if our kids struggle. And with respect to Tejada, this whole argument that the Cubs should not get him because they're not going to contend this year is silly. Tejada is signed through 2009. The only reason *not* to get him is if you think the team will not field a contender in 2006, 2007, 2008 *or* 2009. I'm not ready to write off 2006, and I sure as heck think Tejada could be a major contributor to a winning team for the three years after this one.
  15. davearm
    The Leyland quote is a good one. I also seem to recall that our friend Ozzie wasn't shy about ripping the Sox in the press after a lackluster stretch of games long about the middle of September last year. We know how that turned out.
  16. davearm
    I don't disagree that Vlad has turned out great for Anaheim. But let's not lose sight of the fact that he very well could have turned into the *worst* FA signing in the last 10 years. He had some pretty serious, chronic back problems while in Montreal. He missed a good chunk of 2002 on the DL, and played through pain before that, IIRC. He was a pretty big gamble, that so far has paid off big.
  17. davearm
    Wow, you have some pretty good inside knowledge there. Bradley plus another prospect (Antonio Perez) were traded for a player from the Texas League (Ethier). I have a hard time believe the Cubs couldn't top or equal that. FYI, Andre Ethier is drawing comparisons to our own Felix Pie, from John Sickels The Cubs could equal that. Does Pie for Bradley and Antonio Perez interest you?
  18. davearm
    You're talking about the same GM that has recently pulled the plug on "his" guys like Hawkins, Farnsworth, Patterson, etc. when they weren't working out. Hendry's not above admitting mistakes on guys. Frustratingly slow, I'll give you.
  19. davearm
    Adam Kennedy figures to be on the move at some point this year, with Howie Kendrick moving in. And of course there's Soriano.
  20. davearm
    Tony Clark is very inexpensive. Around $1M for 2006. He does have a NTC though. But what do we do with Clark when Lee comes back? Clark can only play 1b, and he's not going to get much time with Lee in front of him. Doesn't seem to be a fit for the Cubs IMO. The Cubs need a 1B, for the next 2 months. How's that not a fit? And when Lee is back, then Clark takes a seat on the bench next to guys making even more than him (Hairston, Mabry, Neifi, Blanco).
  21. davearm
    Tony Clark is very inexpensive. Around $1M for 2006. He does have a NTC though.
  22. davearm
    OK then, John Mabry's elbow made Craig Wilson less available.
  23. davearm
    Are you certain about that? I thought the purpose of the rule was to prevent sign-and-trade transactions, not to protect the player.
  24. davearm
    John Mabry's elbow made Craig Wilson unavailable.
  25. davearm
    Nomar can't be traded until June.
×
×
  • Create New...