wastra

Furcal is a Jim Hendry wet-dream. Lots of athletic ability. Swings hard, and hits it hard for a SS. Doesn't really get on base at a leadoff hitter's rate. Runs really well. Plays good defense. Sounds like almost every scouting report on every position player in our system (except Furcal has done it at a major league level). That being said, he's not an $8 or $9 million player, IMO, as he's not an outstanding guy at getting on base, which is what we'd want from a SS not named Nomar.

Kind of like message board policing, which is both childish and stupid. Aren't there some spelling errors and typos somewhere you can get excited about next? CubinNY is right. The board has a policy about such "nicknames" for Cubs. because you CAN skirt the software controls doesn't make it alright. Tim is doing a great job building this into the absolute BEST Cubs forum on the net, and we're seeing the results with various Cubs and staff in chats and such on this site. Insulting players unconstructively with little nicknames does nothing to further that effort, and in fact only hurts it. The maturity of the baseball discussions is what separates this board from the crap on other sites. So without attacking the poster or anything- let's just try to keep our level of baseball discussion higher than those other sites- it's what separates us from the riff-raff! :wink: :oops:

Has Hendry had the money to get the top guy?? Will the Trib even allow him?? Iirc he wasn't playing w/ much budget prior to 2002. They were paying Hundley, Gonzo, Alou & Sosa to name a few. He made a real nice pick up in Remlinger, and the Hundley for Grudz & Karros trade was pretty nice. Prior to 2003, they had a little more money w/ Hundley gone and he went out and got Hawkins, Walker and Maddux. I recall most people being pretty fired up. Last year he put a good amount of money into Nomar. Again I recall a lot of people being pretty fired up. I don't think they'll go after any FA who wants more than 4 years. The Trib's scared for some reason. However, I can see him making 3 or 4 signings for guys like Furcal and Millwood. Hopefully, it doesn't turn out like the year we got George Bell, Danny Jackson and Mike Morgan. :cry: EDIT: Can't believe I forget the Great Walker. I think Hendry will be doing great if he signs Furcal and Millwood. I have suggested in many posts that the Cubs ought to resign Walker, Rusch, and maybe Nomar (depending on Furcal signing). Using Walker, Rusch/Williams, Patterson, Mitre, Hill, Welly, and some of our other prospects ought to fill an OF position and a veteran reliever. A player like Lofton will come cheaply and be a stopgap until Pie is ready. 1B....Lee 2B.... Cedeno SS....Furcal or Nomar (Low base with high incentive contract) 3B ...Aram LF....Murton CF.... Lofton RF.... ??? (player acquired in trade mentioned above) C.... Barrett with Blanco as sub SP.... Prior, Zambrano, Wood, Maddux, Millwood/Rusch/Williams Bullpen....Wuertz, Ohman, Novoa, ???? (veteran acquired in trade above), Hill/Welly/Mitre/VanBuren/other prospects. Closer..... Dempster Bench....??????? I'm not convinced that roster is head and shoulder better than our current one. Lofton is a gamble, to say the least. Furcal is highly overrated and nomar is an injury risk. If Williams or Rusch is our #5, I'll vomit. It's not that a lot fo these guys aren't good, but that the additions to our current roster contain a TON of question marks. Lots of "maybes" would ahe to come through for that roster to be good. There aren't enough dependable bullpen arms, isn't a #5 and only a mediocre #4, questionable offense or injury) at short, potentially good players (but also potential ly players who could struggle in their first full years) at second and left, and an old guy in center who's having one resurgent year...a very Cubs-Circa-1990 type of signing. We have a TON of free money. I would hope that hendry uses it to land 1 or 2 truly IMPACT players via either trade or FA rather than a bunch of "bargains with question marks" like those additions seem to be.

Yes, Dusty. The reason we're fed up with your management is because of gambling. :roll:

I would hope Frucal finds somewhere else to play for $8MM+.

I have a hard time accepting a lineup with both Murton and Patterson enxt year as full-time starters. And no, it's not Murton who worries me. I want to give Murt a shot to start full time, but after this year, I hate to go into the season with both him and Patterson and expect to not have a gaping hole out there. I would prefer signing Giles and using someone else as CF next to Murton. If we're essentially keeping Nomar at a discount rate, and going with walker (value priced) and basically spending Sammy's money on giles, I'd like to think an upgrade can be found and afforded for CF as well. Obviously, that's easier said than done, because we'd have to give up value to get value. But there should eb at least one or two decent CFers out there who can be had for a reasonable price, and provide insurance. If Murton fails, and Patterson is okay, move CPatt to left. If it's the other way, bench Corey. Either way, it would require a solid OFer on the team.

I have to think this might be a major reason the Cubs aren't set on bringing Todd back. After last year, they seem intent on placing the ever slusive "chemistry" stat #1 above production. Todd has had a habit of saying things to the media that make him seem a little more displeased with Chicago than he appears to his teammates. I've never got the feeling anyone thought he was trying ot make trouble, or hated his teammates, but I definitely get the feeling the Cubs would prefer if he'd shut his yap at times.

Even with that ability to leg out a few infield hits mroe than another player, Furcal only gets on base at a .340 clip. That is neither good enough to hit leadoff, nor is it worth his projected $7MM+.

Actually, prior to Nomar's return and hot start to August, the Cubs were at the bottom of the league in terms of SS OPS. They are still bottom half at about 679. They need more than that. Yes, but as bad as our SS have been our OF has been far worse. It's cheaper/easier to build a good outfield than to find a good-hitting SS, so that's where I would focus my offseason attention. If we can construct an average-good OF for 2006, I think our top-of-the-line hitters at C, 1B, 2B, and 3B could easily cover for a below-average starter at short. That is perfectly said. We can spend the same $8MM on an outfielder and get much better production than $8MM on a shortstop. I think that the difference between an $8MM (Furcal, for instance) shortstop and a $4MM shortstop (Lugo, for instance) is far less than the difference between an $8-10MM Right Fielder (Giles, for example) and a $4MM right fielder (2005 Burnitz, for example).

I ahve to ask why anyone thinks Furcal is a good buy at $8 MM. He is a sub-par offensive player. Period. With all the holes we have to fill, if we're spending $8MM on a position player, he had BETTER be a better offensive player than Rafael Furcal, or Hendry needs to go. (This is assuming we don't run a $110MM payroll next year and put $8MM players at EVERY opening).

Anyone with time could do a simple mathematical projection to compare our average runs per game and the standard deviation vs. other teams'. Basically...If we score 12 runs one day, and 3 runs the followign day and 3 runs the day after, we're averaging 6 runs per game, but barring stellar pitching, we're likely 1-2. Another team who scores 5-5-5 with jsut "decent" pitching is averaging fewer runs per game, but probably has a better chance to win 2 or 3 games. Obviously, you would prefer to have a team that scores 4-5 runs EVERY game than one that scores either 10 or 0, even though the totals and average of runs per game are going to be similar. So if anyone had the time or inclination to enter in # of runs in each game a team scores into excel, they can run a "mean" and "standard deviation" calculation and tell us if our total runs scored is a smokescreen for an INCONSISTANT offense day-to-day.

No offense to Williamson, but hopefully his arm falls off just enough so that Hendry won't re-sign him, but not enough to prevent another team from signing him.

I think a hundred points' difference in OPS is indicative that Perez has most definitely NOT outhit Burnitz all year. That being said, Burnitz' level of suckiness was exactly what nearly everyone predicted before the year began. Neifi's level of worse-suckiness-than-Burnitz-but-better-than-his-usual-level-of-suckiness is a moderate surprise.

I'm sorry to laugh at the Cubs' misfortune, but I really did bust out in a laugh when I got home, saw the score, and then checked the lineup. LOL! Great managing, Dusty. Truly great.

I think that if you can find 3 solid outfielders, you can afford to take some chances on the infield. You can afford to have, for instance, Cedeno as the primary infield backup or even a starter. If you wanted, you could even afford to give a one-year deal to Nomar as either SSor 2B for $4MM + big incentives. If he goes down, Cedeno is the replacement anyway. If not, you've got one of the best offensive SS/2B in the NL. Either way, you know his backup will get lots of playing time, injury or no. But it all hinges on doing a good job filling the outfield holes and the pitching holes FIRST. there is only one Yankees organization that can have a $8MM all star at every spot. If we're spending $8 MM+ on a position player, he damn well should be a better hitter than Rafael Furcal.

Yet Walker w/ his .353 obp and lightning speed is great @ leadoff. Furcal's speed generates runs and distracts the opposing pitcher. The Cubs need some intangibles. They have to be the worse situational team in baseball. Walker doesn't hit leadoff for us.

Furcal just doesn't solve a lot of problems for us other than defense. He is NOT a top-quality lead off hitter. A .340 OBP is not solid for lead-off, it's bad. So we're talking about paying $8MM for a guy who can't really hit lead-off even as well as 2-3 guys already on our team, or $8 MM for a good glove #8 hitter. That is not a great use of funds when we have at least 4 other major holes to address this offseason PLUS a bench.

Furcal's going ot get $8MM for his .340 OBP. No thanks. O-V-E-R-R-A-T-E-D

I don't entirely blame Dusty, but he is one of several piecesof hte puzzle that failed miserably this season. Would we be 10 games better without him? I don't know. How many games did we see Patterson/Perez at the top of the order? Every one of those games is a game in which our chance to score runs and win was intentionally diminished. After his infamous "Remmy can't get lefties out" speech, how many times did Baker bring him in to face a lefty? (including THAT VERY DAY) If you trace some of our pitchers' injuries to Baker, how many more games would a healthy Wood have won for us? How many games did Dusty keep a sub-Mendoza (or nearly) Hollandsworth in the lineup at the time that Dubois was still hitting? How many times with teh game on the line did Dusty trust someone like Macias to be hte primary bench option? How many times did Macias or Perez get starts over better regular starters who WEREN'T injured? There's more, obviously than that. But add up all those instances and find out what our record was in those games. If it's under .500, you have to think that Baker may not of cost us wins directly, but he definitely made it far harder than a manager should have for us to win.

There's really no point in talking those obscure specific situations when thinking about how to structure a team. Yeah, Furcal can steal. Everybody knows that, but how often will you be down by 1 late with Furcal on base? The key is getting on base in the first place, and Furcal isn't particularly good at that job. Instead of worrying about specific instances when somebody like Furcal is preferable to somebody like Walker, you have to think of the players' production as a whole. Furcal would have to provide $8-10m worth of production above and beyond Cedeno to justify signing him, and you would have to find equivalent production from the other positions where that money will not be going to. As things stand now, it appears the Cubs only have two cheap internal options for next season, Cedeno and Murton. They have to fill holes at all 3 OF spots, SS and possibly 2B. If they don't use Cedeno, then that's another spot that has to be filled externally, which is always more costly. Exactly. Don't forget about the bullpen...there's bound to be one or two new faces there as well who need to be paid.

I know there's still some bad blood now. So letting it slide for a few years isn't the worst thing that could happen...especially while he's still playing. But once elected (and I don't see how there's any way he ISN'T elected to the HoF), they should welcome him back into the Cubbie fold and retire his number. Like him or hate him, he is the most prolific Cub hitter of all time.

I don't disagree with that. I like speed as much as anyone. But signing him for big bucks ($8MM+) for a .340 OBP? That's not solving our problems. The bottom line is that he just doesn't get on base like an $8MM leadoff hitter should.

Nobody has argued that in this thread at all. I agree that Furcal would NOT be the best use of alloted funds...but that's not been what this back and forth has been about. My point was people keep saying he should be priority #1, and how important it is for us to add him, and I disagree. I think he's highly overrated on this board. I think Furcal shouldn't even be a high priority for this team compared to outfield bats and bullpen arms.

The market determines it. If you look at the money and years that players like Guzman, Renteria, Cabrera, and Nomar got.....in that case, Furcal is "worth" way more than $5M. Not at all. Those people got contracts based upon superior past performance (in Carberra's case, LONG past performance) and the expectation they would equal or surpass it with their new teams. Furcal does not have a track record of superior hitting. He's never bee nsuperior. At best he's been upper-average among shortstops in the majors, not even elite at the plate. Now- let me say this: If Hendry signs Furcal AND manages the finances to get top-quality players in at all 3 outfield spots and second base and the pen, then I don't mind if ALL of them are overpaid. If we want to suddenly be the Yankees, that's fine. I'll welcome the wins. But if giving Furcal $8 MM means we have to try to get 'creative' (i.e. reclamation project, or Rockie no one else wants) for an outfield bat or bullpen arms due to salary restrictions, I'll lose it. But I don't think it's absurd to say that $8 MM in the outfield positions will return better-quality offensive numbers than at Short. And if that's the case, and we're paying ot get an average (at best) offensive shortstop, why not spend half that and get any number of good glove, mediocre hitting guys and splurge on the positions where there are legit upgrades available?

I think if a GM spends $8MM on a position player and get under .350 OBP or under .750 OPS, he's a fool. I'd rather spend $8MM+ on a left fielder who can post an .850+ OPS. I really don't think a .340 OBP or .746 OPS is rare enough to spend big bucks and call it an upgrade.