wastra

I think the smart money is that Grissom and Mabry see nearly as many at bats in left as Murton.

IMO, Mabry will see as much time backing up 3B and resting Aramis as he will in RF. (This assumes Dusty doesn't start him in left, which I sadly fully expect :roll: ) So you'll see the OF being: Pierre Murton Jones Patterson (unless he's traded) Grissom Since both Mabry and Hairston play IF positions also, it's not redundant to have them on the roster. Our IF will be: Perez MIF Cedeno MIF Lee IF RAmirez IF Mabry 1B/3B Hairston MIF With Blanco and Barret, that's 13, leaving us with 12 pitchers (again). If walker returns, we'd have to carry the standard 11 pitchers in a very anti-dusty fashion, but with a veteran pen, he might not put up too much of a fight.

Or if nobody else was offering a major league deal, maybe they realized they didn't have to. Or maybe he told his agent to talk to the Cubs because he wanted to play for Dusty (a notorious fan of veterans). Or maybe they just couldn't find the roster space right now, and told him they were going to clear some space soon and would therefore have to go minor league with him, for now. Regardless, he's not going to have to mash, he's just going to show that he's their 5th or 6th best bench option. Given the makeup of this team, the crappy bench, the likelihood that Walker and Patterson will be gone, and Dusty's fetish for old unproductive ballplayers, Grissom will not have to do a whole lot to make the team. He might just have to prove he's healthy and still able to run around the bases and catch fly balls. Yup. Grissom won't have to be good, he just has to be better than whomever ELSE the Cubs have at spring training as a backup outfielder with Major League bench experience. Since it looks like our outfielders are limited to: Jones Pierre Murton Mabry (who is also a 1B/3B, so they COULD take an extra outfielder, too) Patterson. That means that they could conceivably take noth hairston and Grissom since two of the 'outfielders' (hariston and mabry) are really jack-of-all-trades type of subs. My guess is the positional roster is: Pierre OF Lee 1B Ramirez 3B Jones OF Murton OF Barrett C Cedeno MIF Perez MIF Blanco C Mabry CIF/OF Grissom OF Hairston IF/OF Patterson or Walker (one of whom will be traded, IMO, for minor leaguers). If the cubs manage to stick to 11 pitchers, as they SHOULD (but won't), they could break camp with all of the above.

I always wondered about Cruz and his work habits. We we're privy to that information but something just didn't add up IMO. I see Rusch as having a good year, for him. 13-9 3.80 ERA kind of year. I like the OF's that the Cubs have ability wise to catch fly balls and that is what Rusch gives up quite a bit. I'll take that kind of year in a heartbeat from Rusch. I doubt we'll get it, but I'd be thrilled if it happened.

My sentiments exactly. You've got a vailid point, but for me, it's not just this year. We're how many years into the Hendry administration? I wonder how much money we've spent on FA in that time and who do we have to show for it? Neifi? We've passed on Vlad, Tejeda, Beltran, and Giles. Vlad sure would look sweet in RF right now for 5/75. Lee, Aram, and Barrett are to Hendry's credit. I'm still crossing my fingers that I get on NSBB and see we got Abreu. Trades are where Hendry excels, so I'm staying optomistic. Obviously, Hendry has done ab etter job with deadline deals than anything else, and offseason trades have been a definite plus as well. However, He doesn't get a free pass for the lack of FA hitters this year. We're not looking for a big hitter because of a sudden retirement or defection, we're looking for one because 2 years ago, hendry screwed up the outfield and tried to fix it by signing Burnitz- a very Jaque Jones-esque hitter. So Hendry doesn't geta a free pass on the lack of a signing this year- we're in the pickle due to his horrid mismanagement of the payroll and roster in the first place. I don't care what teh free agent crop looks like this year. With the highest/nearly the highest payroll in the NL for at least 2 straight years, there's no excuse to field this mediocre team AGAIN. We shold be pencilled in to win our division, or at least go head to head with the Cards, who've built a great roster the past few year, EVERY year with this payroll. Being talked about to finish 3rd with this is UNACCEPTIBLE.

I really don't mind this signing from a purely objective viewpoint. It's very low-risk. If he's anywhere near his career average, he's fine. If not, he's signing a minor league deal, so who cares? But since I KNOW the Cubs, and I KNOW Baker, I'm worried because I can already tell you he's making the major league roster no matter is spring numbers and $1 says he sees more time in Left (over Murton) than in Right (over Jones). I want Hendry to stop signing these ancient, mediocre Giants.

I didn't bother to read the actual message that started this thread. I read the thread title, and the answer is always "yes."

Of course they could. My problem is that with their payroll advantage, the Cubs should win the division. They shouldn't just be contenders, they should be favorites. They should consistently win 90+ games, and with a top 5 payroll every year of his tenure, Hendry should have a great team by now. We shouldn't have to be like Twins fans who are hoping the rest of the division isn't all that good and that we get surpisingly large production/cost ratios out of several players. But the thing is, a good chunk of that $100 million payroll has been on the disabled list the last 2 years. I believe that this team was good enough to make the playoffs the past couple of seasons. Injuries have just killed us. If Wood, Nomar, and Ramirez don't go down last year I think we would've been right in the wild card hunt. Now if we would have suffered no injuries the past two seasons and still not won 90 games then something would be wrong. Just look at the 04 team. Wood, Prior, Aramis, Walker, Borowski, and Sosa all missed significant time and we still won 89 games. I understand we're not the Twins, but we're not the Yankees or Red Sox either. Didn't seem to slow down all the OTHER teams who had significant injuries and still finished over .500

I don't want to make this a contentious argument, because I, too value the sabermetric organizational philosophy, but do you really believe this stuff? To be clear, you're saying that Hendry intentionally avoids players based on high OBP? Even if deep down he thought they were better players? Could it not be that he believes that what he is doing is making the team better on its own merit (as misguided as that may be)? I doubt that he is trying to prove a point, rather, just trying to win. I don't understand why his moves are taken as a personal affront to those with different philosophies. If you have examples where he has stated the above (OBP means nothing, etc.), I apologize fully. I'm just not aware of any such quotes. I don't think he's fighting any holy war, I just think he's inept. he's made statements in the past regarding OBP that cause me to believe that he's just not concerned with it. i can't recall any specific quotes, but they are there. granted, i'm being a bit hyperbolic when it comes to his anti-OBP position, but i'm frustrated. he's continually spurned players with superior OBPs (and don't get it wrong, OBP is not a sabermetric, it's a very orthodox stat that is easy to see, understand, and value) for players with inferior OBPs. case in point, he doesn't even look or sniff at giles but signs jones to 3 years and 15 mil. furthermore, he has the anti-stathead, assistant GM gary hughes whispering in his ear--and hughes appears to be a much bigger influence than anyone else in hendry's life. he also makes up phrases like "i like players who can catch the ball". who does he think he is? Simply put, if you value OBP, you don't praise hte performance of guys with sub or near .300 OBP like Perez and bring them back, declaring you're happy if they start. You don't routinely sign guys like burnitz and Jones for right field. You don't consider trading one of your few decent OBP guys (Walker) to make room for your worst OBP guy (Perez). The bottom line is that Hendry is an old-school "toolsy" GM. He cares more about natural abilities than performance- always has. That's not bad when drafting and signing pitchers, because control is really a "learned" skill while "toolsy" guys iwth live arms can't be just "created." But at the major league level is leads to constant signings of guys like PErez, Macias, Jones, Burnitz, Hollandsworth, and Baker. It leads to imbalanced rosters with nothing but free swingers with lively bats but no clue how to use them. It is painfully obvious that while Hendry might recognize OBP, he clearly doesn't give it the value that statistics say it should get. And that's why, IMO, Hendry can never get us over the top as GM.

That's where I figure they'll be the strongest. I understand Dempster, Eyre and Howry's history, but I also like the potential of Wuertz, Ohman, and Williamson if they slip up. Ohman was pretty impressive last year when you consider he missed basically 3 years of baseball. Wuertz was good, got overused, then was great down the stretch. And Williamson is a much better pitcher than he showed last year. Odds are not all 3 of the late relievers will bust, although at least 1 will. Yeah- the pen is the area I'm least concerned with. While i or even two of our top 4 releivers might falter, we have a depth of good arms who could be fine replacements. If we were throwing all our eggs into the bucket of one or two arms, I'd be scared. But we'll have the problem of too MANY good arms this year, not trying to figure out who can hold a lead in the 7th.

Whether or not Hendry expected the team to contend, resigning Perez and Rusch-especially to 2 year contracts-was a stupid move. If you don't think you can contend, give Cedeno, Hill and Murton starting roles. Let them develop so you can see which direction to go in the 2006 offseason. If you think you can contend, Perez and Rusch are barely replacement level players, so the salary you gave them prohibits you some flexibility for a real impact player, either via trade or FA. The only reason they were brought back was Baker, and Hendry's over-loyalty to average veterans. It's disappointing to see an ex farm director mismanage his farm system the way Hendry has, since now we have to rely on Baker to play Cedeno and Murton everyday and let them develop for good or bad, and we all know how that will turn out. I agree totally. that's one reason I have so little faith in this roster or management team.

They've been significantly better year after year. They haven't regressed enough, and the Cubs haven't improved enough to make up the difference. Jones is not better than whoever they throw out there in right, Encarnacion is very similar, and quite possibly better since he's younger and coming off a better season in a pitchers park. Pujols is likely going to be much better than Lee this year. Lee is probably going to regress from last year a bit, with Pujols staying the same (although he has a shot to be even better). I'm not about to guarantee Cedeno will hit as well as Eckstein, and besides, Neifi will get a lot of time out there, and guarantee less production than Eck. Likewise, Murton, and whatever hack veteran Dusty replaces him with are not guarantees to outproduce STL LF. You can't compare offenses with simple ><= looks at each position. I agree. the bottom line is that St. Louis' lineup has been VASTLY superior to ours in the results columns for several years at least, and replacing Walker and Sanders (both of whom missed a huge portion of the season) with Taguchi and Encarnacion isn't enough of a drop-back toexpect them to come to our level, when simply replacing Patterson and Burnitz with Jones and Pierre (and Nomar and possibly Walker with Perez/Cedeno) doesn't drastically improve our own lineup.

If the season started today, the Cubs would battle Houston and a slim chance battle w/Milwaukee for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. None would make the playoffs, and Houston and the Cubs will likely finish around 85 wins. 88 is the max # of wins I have this having. That's exactly my feeling on this roster. Our sole hope is a lot of ifs (some more likely than others)- IF the pitching remains healthy and effective IF Pierre returns to at elast average form (for him) IF Walker returns and hits second IF Jones is healthy and better than 2002 IF Murton can keep it up for a full Major League season then I can see this team winning 90 as the absolute best-case, everything falls our way, God loves us in 2006 scenario. However, those same"ifs" could, if the majority of them (or just the pitching) turn out for the negative, leave us as an 80 win or sub-.500 team as well. I'm not encouraged.

Given that I have serious doubts as to this team's ability to compete for the division anyway, I can't imagine why they'd want Perez OR Rusch taking up spots. It's painfully obvious that unless Hendry is nuts, he's not expecting this to be a pennant winning team either, so I don't know why he doesn't give Hill a shot either.

I thought about that too. Healthy years from Wood, Aramis, Prior, et al. But with all those guys, what was our record when they weren't on the DL? IIRC, even WITH Aramis, we were below .500.

I'm trying to keep a positive outlook here, so I'm going ot do everything in my power to NOT let this become a rant. I'm looking at our team and how our 2006 roster looks to shake out, and I can't find too much to be thrilled about. For a team that finished under .500, I can't find reason to beleive we will be signifcantly improved ENOUGH to think we can compete with other teams in our division. Offensively, from the team that struggled the entire 2005 to consistantly score runs, we've replaced Burnitz with Jones, which is really looking to be a wash, IMO. Pierre should be an upgrade over Patterson's 2005, even if he just repeats last year's poor performance. Hendry is looking to dump Walker, from all indications, which means our 2b offense will likely be a step down if shared between hairston, Perez, and Cedeno. I can't imagine Lee putting up the same numbers as last year- he'll be good, but I don't know that he can repeat a year THAT good (he may wind up having a worse year, but driving in more runs, actually). Our starting pitching is the same cast. I expect another slight decline for MAddux. We Rusch, whom I don't expect much from. Wood, Prior, and Z should be solid IF healthy. The Bullpen is really the only area that looks singificantly improved. that's not a minor thing. However, I don't thinka strong bullpen is the difference between finishing 4th and finishing 1st in this division. Not by a long shot. I guess I'm just fishing for a reason to think this team can truly compete for the division in '06. I've been pretty close the past two years in my predictions, and I'm predicting this roster will battle to stay above water and finish slightly over .500 on the year (4-5 games over.) Can anyone give me more reason to hope? I am just having a really jaded view of this roster?

If anyone's a betting man out there, I'd recommend taking Va Tech against Louisville. Louisville has a strong offense, but is without one starting defensive end AND their golden-boy QB. Running Back Michael Bush returns from an ankle injury, and he's a future 1st or 2nd round draft pick, but UL lives and dies through the air, and without their atarting QB, VaTech should win by 2+ TDs.

There are a lot of different factors to weigh here. 1. His numbers were far better than his career averages. 2. He has a different stance and swing now. This could mean that he's closed holes/increased vision/etc. Possibly, though, he just hit a long hot streak. 3. He's batting higheri n the order. He hit 6th in Florida most of the time, with the bottom of hte order behind him. At Chicago, he's had Ramirez who, before the season, was talked about by many as an MVP candidate. 4. He didn't have his normal 3-4-week slump to start the season. If you take the 3 or 4 worst weeks from most good players' seasons and replace them with really great weeks, their numbers start looking REAL good. So IMO, Lee should be better than his career numbers had been but he'll have a hard time duplicating 2005. He's maturing (still fairly young, mind you) and seems to have really grasped onto the new approach at the plate. He actually has the team's best hitter BEHIND him now in chicago unlike Florida. He's in a more hitter-friendly park than Florida was. He's now had two full seasons to adjust to the day games and colder weather. Ultimately, he's simply progressed. I don't know if that first-half of 2005 is easily repeatable or not, though I'll admit that it will be tough, but either way, he was a different hitter in '05 than before, and the outside factors are in his favor for being better than he was in Florida.

Starting last year, we had a marginal lineup, and it was expected to be: CF Patterson 2B Walker SS Nomar 3B Aramis 1B Lee RF Burnitz LF Dubois/Hollandsworth C Barrett This year, we have: CF Pierre (likely upgrade) 2B Walker (same) 1B Lee (wouldn't be surprised if his numbers are down a touch from last year) 3B Ramirez (same) RF Jones (offensive wash) LF Murton (hopefully upgrade) C Barrett (same) SS Cedeno (Wash or slight upgrade) So is this offense much better than last year's that finished under .500? Not by much. But then again, we have to consider pitching into that record. The pen should be much better, and we hopefully can keep 3 or 4 pitchers without sending them all on the DL this year. But I fail to see how this team can go from last year to competitive with a team like the Cards who have just been exponentially better than us for the past 2 years. I don't think that our lineup, with 2 stars surrounded by 7+ very average pedestrian hitters is a playoff caliber roster. Our staff simply will have to be dominant on a level they have not yet shown to be in order to overcome that. I call that bad planning. I STILL can't figure out, when looking over our roster, it's a $100M payroll.

I'm done with Hendry. He's clueless and needs to go. anyone who looks at our roster and can convince us that it's worthy of a $95m+ payroll should be working in bookkeeping for Enron.

For the life of me, I can't fathom how that list of scrubs and at least wo near-rookies plus 4 or 5 good players is a $95m payroll. that's not even a playoff caliber team IMO. Andy; the sooner Hendry is gone, the better.

Hendry is a buffoon if the outfield he hands to dusty is Patterson, Murton, Jones, Pierre, Murton, and Mabry. I GUARANTEE you that Mabry starts 50 games in the OF, and I GUARANTEE that we'll again be the worst or second worst offensive OF in the division.

If we begin the season with an outfield of Pierre, Patterson, Murton, and Mabry, jim Hendry should not only be fired the very day 3 of those 4 take the field together, he should be tarred and feathered before being shipped in a packing crate and sent to live in exile in New Jersey.

Jim Hendry is lost.