Banedon

Craig Wilson would've looked nice in RF if Hendry could get him.

For me, this is a case of "sell high". I just don't see Jacque being a part of a successful Cubs team. I think he's a defensive liability, and I don't see him maintaining this level of performance.

I flat disagree with this. We need guys with good OBP. We have Lee, Ramirez - who have a lot of power. For the foreseeable future, we have guys like JJ and Barrett, who can contribute 20-25 HR, and 15-20 HR respectively. Add that to the 30-40 HRs a healthy Lee & ARam will have - and we have good power in the middle. Could we use another power guy? Sure, who couldn't use more power. But, what we need is OBP and lots of it. We don't need a 25 HR guy who gets on base at a .310 clip. Now, as others have said elsewhere, Hendry has no idea of the importance of OBP. As between a toolsy guy w/ no OBP and no power and a toolsy guy with no OBP and a high SLG, I'll take the latter. Thus, I hope we get a guy like Soriano, b/c Hendry just doesn't think a guy like Dunn is that valuable. True. I think with those 4, we have what we need for power, but not by all that much. If we trade any of them, we would be in trouble again in that department. Our power problems were really accentuated when Lee went down. If all 4 of them stay then, I would agree that the first priority is guys with high OBP for the starting positions. Maybe some more power on the bench that could start if one of power guys go down? That might do it-at the beginning of the year though, we had 4 slap hitters on the bench, and so when Lee went down there was simply not enough power in the lineup. You know what...I'd be happy with either of the ideas you guys have, because frankly it would show a commitment to a type of baseball that the Cubs have not been willing to commit to in the past. I'm just not all that picky at this point...just show me a willingness to move in the right direction.

CSNY seems misplaced in a rock tourney.

Nobody, huh? :twisted: Electon Blue also mentioned Lofton.

Jacque in the last 7 days: .167/.167/.250 Of course that's a relatively small sample size, but I'm not sure if you can make an "If he plays like this" argument when he's not exactly tearing it up right now. Did I hear something like was 0 for his last 50-something at home? Well, yes-but I am saying his stats for the entire season-including his awful April. That last 7 days includes the All Star Break, does it not? I think it has to, since he had 3 hits last Sunday. No, he's not 0 for 50 something at home. He actually had an RBI hit last night-had a tough series against the Mets though with only 2 hits. That 0 for 52 stat you heard was his stats after getting into an 0-2 count all season. So, if he plays like his averages for the season, he will be getting us more value for his money than the average right fielder in the majors. You're right, it was the 0-2 stat...my bad. And you're probably right about the 7 day thing too...I blame Monday mornings.

Jacque in the last 7 days: .167/.167/.250 Of course that's a relatively small sample size, but I'm not sure if you can make an "If he plays like this" argument when he's not exactly tearing it up right now. Did I hear something like was 0 for his last 50-something at home?

There's a sticky on this in Baseball Discussions... Premium Non-Premium :D

We've all had a little bit of time to cool down, so I'm going to unlock this thread. I think it's imporant that all opinions, popular or not, be allowed to be expressed, and discussed with some reasonable civility. So lets try to do that here, ok?

I don't have the stats available, but I suspect that Walker's offensive stats compare more favorably vs average 2b production than Jones's does against average RF production. That's a guess on my part, and maybe I'm wrong.

QFT

Well there's why they want to get rid of Walker...

Yes, even Wayne knows he got screwed. Which is hilarious...why do the deal if you know it stinks?

What more does Rich Hill have to prove at AAA? Let's see if he can make adjustments at the big league level. Also, Guzman is still getting his arm strengthened after getting an 18-day vacation to the end of the big league bullpen. I'm fine with giving him another shot, but the guy just baffles me. He dominates in AAA but then gets shelled outing after outing in the majors. How many more chances do we give this guy to prove himself? ugh, i know. what's it been, 150 starts? enough already, you know? It's not like Glendon Rusch who really deserves a chance to work through his struggles.

Do you realize that Baker may get an extension if the Cubs "improve" because they've been without the horses? That's what my money is on. I was going to Chicago next year but not if this happens. I hate not enjoying baseball season. I really do.

SI's total readership is likely a bit more than NSBB. It isn't true just because SI says it, it just reaches more eyeballs that may otherwise only get Hendry/Baker's "hit, don't walk" philosophy. What Verducci says may be obvious to most, but clearly not to Hendry and Baker, the people that matter.

This thread makes me sad.

I'm done with this thread.

This almost seems like a white flag trade, but they're only 4 games out.

thirded. Just a baffling trade.

Why do the Reds do this deal?

What makes you think this will happen long term? So we have to sit through 3 or 4 years of a youth movement to put team-philosophy in place. Great plan. What necessary changes are that? Like I posted before if the Cubs get to the 0.500 mark that would mean the rookies, Murton, Cedano, Marshall, Marmol all did great job, along with Ar Ram coming out of his funk. The Hendry has a good start on what needs need to be filled. Right now there are to many needs to be filled because not one player is doing really great, Jones, Barrett maybe. So the 3-4 year plan . Your okay with. 3 to 4 years just to be competitive and maybe sniff 0.500 in those year. Again good plan. If they clean house and fire everyone and trade evryone that doesn't have a .400 OBP the only thing that'll be long term would be the Cubs World Series drought. I respectively disagree with you on the prediction thread, you and a lot of others. I would like to see good baseball in the second half by the Cubs. Not bad baseball. So, change won't help, but staying pat will?

You know what...I don't think it would take 3-4 years if it was done correctly, but if the Cubs meander around just barely hanging on this year, I think then your "barely sniff .500" thought may be the case. You and I both want the same things. It's just that I don't think current management can bring that, and you do apparently.

You're right...you're missing the entire point along with it. Prediction: What I think will happen, not what I want to happen. What I want to happen: New Cubs management and team-building philosophy. What will happen if the Cubs go better than .500 the rest of the way: Management decides that things are going in the right direction, and don't make the necessary changes What (I hope) will happen if the Cubs tank: Management will look for a new direction, as the current one is currently not working. They will get a manager that can help young talent grow into their potential. Granted, the last paragraph is wishful thinking, but it's the best "future" scenario that I can come up with, and because I want the Cubs to win long term, it's what I'm hoping for.