RichHillIsABeast

Speir needs to be retained for his glovework w/ Ramirez. I think that could help Aramis stay, even if we have a hard-nosed manager. All the managers we are looking at except Brenly are hard-nosed guys. Well, BB seems jovial in the booth, but he's a competitive guy. I don't think he'd put up with ARam's slacking. ARam just needs to hustle. It's not hard. It's a lot easier to hustle and play the game the right way compared to dealing with the "you don't hustle and you make how much" rants from fans.

Drew spends a lot of time on the DL. We should be trying to avoid that kind of player, if the last two years has taught us anything. So have a good backup for the 30 games he'll miss. The 125 games he's in the lineup, he'd be a force. He's been pretty healthy this year. I like the idea. If he gets injured (which is likely for about 30 games or so) you could just platoon Pie and Restovich during that time. Drew has himself a lucious OBP and now I'm really liking this scenario. Someone get Hendry on the phone. He's making 11M a year through '09. You don't pay that much money for a guy who's a good bet to spend significant time on the DL. Every acquisition we make needs to take into account durability. There's better ways to spend 11M a season, or roughly 10% of our payroll.

Girardi was very professional in his handling of the Marlins situation, which the exception of the Loria "shut up" comment. He didn't air out his differences in the public domain. The Marlins FO did. That is unprofessional and childesh. Disagreements should remain in house as much as possible.

I saw that too. I saw the 11 before he threw it though. It was a reminder. Some things just don't change. But, but, but...my shoulder is injured! :cry:

Nice job, MLB.

I think we need to get a top of the rotation starter this offseason, either via trade or FA. We're not going to fix the rotation in one offseason, but it'll help. I like your offense. It's pretty much what I want too.

not with a rotation of Z/?/?/Hill/?... :(

I'm there, dude. 8)

We would have been luckier if Hendry had Just Said No to the LA pusher. I don't think LA fans are staying up nights cursing that deal. Impressive since you registered here 2 months ago. :wink: It's called lurking.

Here you go: http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2000/04/possible-free-agents.html

I'll take Theriot over Izturis any day of the week. Izturis is a wizard with the glove. He can't hit a lick though. Theriot is average defensively at 2B. I haven't seen him at SS, but I doubt he has the range to be ML average at that position. I love that he can take a walk, but if he starts struggling at the plate, which is very likely IMO...Izturis is the better option. Izturis hits like Neifi and fields like a god. Personally, I like watching him and pitchers love him. Actually, Theriot is a plus defender at 2B, and came up as a SS, where he would still be at least adequate. And it makes the izturis trade look worse and worse. Because here we have a guy, who could be an adequate SS in Theroit. Yet we are paying Izturis around $4-$5 m. He's not a plus defender from what I've seen although he was rated very highly out of college defensively, IIRC (as a SS). We're lucky to have unloaded Maddux. LA wasn't offering ML ready prospects. Hendry tried to go that route and they weren't buying. Izturis was what they were pushing on several clubs. I'm pretty sure this board was pushing Ronny Cedeno over Furcal last offseason, so forgive me if I'm dubious about Theriot starting after a couple good ABs this season.

In ST Hendry was sitting behind home plate giving the ump a bad time. I thought it was hilarious. Girardi had better have a good backstory to relate come interview time. It very easily could have just been the straw that broke the camel's back for Girardi. We don't know the full story and I doubt we ever will. Hendry will at least hear Girardi out, which is encouraging considering Hendry's close ties to the Marlins FO.

They won't give up their first round pick, that's for certain, but not their 2nd - 4th round picks. Of course, they might do away with compensatory picks completely. But we could get an extra first rounder if Pierre is a Type A FA. If Ramirez opts out, he'd definitely be a Type A. Do we forfeit those picks if we grab some Type A's of our own? I think it's pretty likely we sign at least one Type A, if not more.

I'll take Theriot over Izturis any day of the week. Izturis is a wizard with the glove. He can't hit a lick though. Theriot is average defensively at 2B. I haven't seen him at SS, but I doubt he has the range to be ML average at that position. I love that he can take a walk, but if he starts struggling at the plate, which is very likely IMO...Izturis is the better option. Izturis hits like Neifi and fields like a god. Personally, I like watching him and pitchers love him.

Scouts project Theriot as a backup utility type. Stats gurus think pretty much the same based on his minor league numbers. It's pretty optimistic to think Theriot can be a viable starter at 2B. I like Theriot a lot and he definitely deserves a spot on the '07 roster - as a bench player. He'll see lots of time with Izturis as the starting SS. :wink:

Why? Are you kidding me? He managed a team with a $14 million dollar payroll, and had them in contention for the wild card untill the last 2 weeks in the season. Everyone predicted the marlins to lose over 100 games this year. The team didn't have a winning season, had some of the best young talent in baseball and he was responsible for sending one of their best young pitchers out after a long rain delay. The pitcher then had a season ending arm injury in the same game. He is infatuated with the sac bunt, made poor personnel decisions at the begining of the year and was told to make changes. I don't see any reason why the cubs better pick him. The Marlins' season needs to be put in context. Only one team in the last 10 years has managed a winning record with a payroll less than $15M. The 2006 Marlins had the 4th best record of the smallest payroll teams in that time frame. Yes, Girardi was given a team with talent, but it was largely unproven ML talent. Either it was flat out luck or Girardi (and his coaching staff) had something to do with it.

The Marlins had the fourth most wins in the last 10 years with the smallest payroll...and two of those teams had higher payrolls than the Marlins. 1996 Expos $15.4M 88 2001 Twins $24.1M 85 1997 Pirates $9.0M 79 2006 Marlins $15.0M 78 Info courtesy of ESPN. :wink: What the Marlins did was amazing. But...THEY HAD A LOSING RECORD!!!

I'd throw the name out Girardi out there but unfortunetly I'm the only one on the board who thinks Joe deserves credit for fostering the development of the young players down there, and bringing out their "talents" So IMO, there are managers that can bring out the best in players. Joe is one. Brenly I see as a guy who needs established talented vets to succeed. Did Girardi really win without talent? His team was still below .500. They had a nice run, and surely out-performed expectations, but they didn't exactly win. So, if winning without talent is the criteria here, let's throw out Girardi, because while he exceeded expectations, he didn't exactly win. For the payroll, it ranks as one of the winningest seasons in modern baseball. It's ridiculously tough to win with that small of a payroll.

Drew spends a lot of time on the DL. We should be trying to avoid that kind of player, if the last two years has taught us anything. So have a good backup for the 30 games he'll miss. The 125 games he's in the lineup, he'd be a force. He's been pretty healthy this year. If I new we could count on at least 125+ games, I'd be all for it. But, looking at his games played, I don't think that's a great bet. 1999: 104 2000: 135 2001: 109 2002: 135 2003: 100 2004: 145 2005: 72 2006: 146

Are you my long lost twin or something? Because I've said the exact same things. 8)

That's one of the more insulting things to be directed at me on this site in a long time. As someone who does lead people day in and day out, I'm aware of what leadership is, and it is something that's earned. It just doesn't happen because you attempt to assert leadership-type qualities. I explictly stated that "leaders just are." How you get that leadership can simply be asserted out of that is amazing. I still don't get exactly where our miscommunication is coming from. I believe that leadership is more innate than taught. It can be improved, but never instilled in someone that doesn't have it. You can learn how to be a manager, but not a leader. That's what I mean by "leaders just are." If you put a leader in a group of people, guess what they tend to do? Lead. I haven't met a leader yet who didn't quickly insert himself/herself into that role (where the "sooner rather than later" comes in). The trust and other factors that come with leading a group of individuals at peak performance (who may be leaders themselves) does come with time. Is that what you were saying? I definitely would agree with that. Leading is definitely a process, but guys who are true leaders tend to grab the reins rather quickly. Sorry for offending you earlier, US.

That's one of the more insulting things to be directed at me on this site in a long time. As someone who does lead people day in and day out, I'm aware of what leadership is, and it is something that's earned. It just doesn't happen because you attempt to assert leadership-type qualities. I explictly stated that "leaders just are." How you get that leadership can simply be asserted out of that is amazing.

What does that mean? Girardi isn't planning a battle or running for governor. To me what matters is: (a) what are his in game strategies (b) what is his track record © how does he handle a pitching staff I can't say that I don't want Giardi, but one of the reasons to want or not want him has nothing to do with his rah, rahness. What does that mean? It's called leadership. (a) Girardi's in game strategies are old school, just like anyone else we'll see in a Cubs management position with Hendry doing the hiring. That's a given. (b) Girardi's track record is as good as can be expected for his age. It's ability that matters, not age or experience. Experience can be a good indicator of an older person's ability, but lack of experience shouldn't be mistaken for inability. © Willis and a bunch of rookies (many from AA) winning 10+ games apiece is a good sign. Those rookies weren't considered by many to be ML ready and it took the right coaching (mostly pitching coach who was chosen by Girardi I believe) to get that success. A lot of rawish talent developed quickly under Girardi's watch. With the amount of young Cub pitching coming up in the next couple of years, I'd like someone with some success overseeing the development of young arms successfully. * I don't cite Girardi's fire as the main reason for his hire, but it certainly doesn't hurt. Same with discipline.

Drew spends a lot of time on the DL. We should be trying to avoid that kind of player, if the last two years has taught us anything.

Well, that's what you're going to see b/c the people doing the hiring subscribe to that baseball philosophy. No Dierker. Maybe a Francona, but he's seemingly not available anymore. Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type. Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers. We need his fire and discipline in this clubhouse. A fat lefty setup man who complains about the fans needs to get his priorities straight. Winning is what matters, not keeping the media, fans, or the Front Office happy. Girardi made that clear in Florida. Are we really back to the "fire and discipline" argument? Those are not the 2 traits that kept us from winning this season. Those are not traits than really ever make a difference between a winning team and a losing team. Those are not important traits in a manager of a baseball team. Yeah, we do need discipline, but that wasn't the main part of my post. "Girardi is a guy that leads by example. Personally, I've always prefered that type. Guys like Girardi are leaders. Guys like Baker are managers." We need discipline less than we need better players. Much less. Furthermore, Baker is a bad manager. His bad managing has nothing to do with leadership. I have no idea what kind of manager Girardi is, but leadership is something you earn over time. No manager is going to walk into a situation and be considered a leader. It's impossible to say whether or not Girardi would accomplish this better than anyone else. Finally, how is Girardi going to lead this team by example? He wasn't a very good baseball player; is he going to show his players how to take pitches? More discipline isn't a bad thing on this team. That should be obvious if you've watched Baker the last 4 years. Girardi made his players run in ST (hard) and got out there with them. He lifts weights with them, etc. Leading by example. It's not "go on guys, go get it done." It's "follow me." Managers don't do anything but put players in positions where they can potentially succeed based on natural ability. Leaders push players to do more with their God given talents. Leaders make the whole function better, not just the whole function. No one is going to walk into a situation and be a leader? Leaders just are. They'll assert themselves sooner rather than later (like Girardi did in ST with the Marlins). I guess you've never run into a real leader. It's pretty obvious you're not one yourself from your confusion on this issue (no offense). You're down on Girardi b/c you don't know what his philosophies are in certain areas. Fair enough. I'd imagine we'll hear more in the interview process.