Backtobanks

I hope you meant "or" not "and". Marmol might be replaceable, but we don't want to create a gigantic hole at catcher.

I don't think I could do a better job of being a MLB GM than Hendry. That doesn't prevent me from thinking that he's horrible at it, is better qualified to be setting pins in a bowling alley, and should have been replaced years ago. I'm not saying I could do better than Hendry. I'd probably run the team into the ground. But I know enough about baseball to know when someone is doing a bad job. It's like when a Cubs player is having a terrible season... is he immune from criticism from us because none of us could do any better? I am saying, though, that the Cubs could most likely do a lot better than Jim Hendry, and Ricketts shouldn't let him handcuff this team any more before making the change. Even after he's gone, we'll still be feeling his influence upon this team for quite some time. He's done some good, yes, but I think those are overrated (Nomar and Lee fell into his lap, and the Pirates were in fire-sale mode with Ramirez and he was just the first guy to call them. Harden was a good deal, though. I'll give him that, but he negates that move by not even offering arbitration.) He's done more harm to this team than good, let a completely incompetent manager ruin two of the best arms this franchise has ever seen, gave out no-trade clauses like they were candy thereby severely handcuffing us in making necessary personnel moves, and giving out completely baffling contracts to players who didn't deserve it. There are worse GM's than Jim Hendry, but the fact that "the next guy might not be better" isn't a good reason to not fire him. If you suck at your job, you'd be fired, and your boss wouldn't even consider what your replacement might be like. It should be the same here. I'm always amazed that so many of you give him no credit for Nomar, Lee, and Ramirez. How come Nomar and Lee didn't "fall into" some other GM's lap? How come no other GM called the Pirates first to get Ramirez when they were having a fire sale? The reason might be that he's always on the phone trying to make a deal that makes the team better. I will agree that he has some faults (mostly in NTCs and paying too much for "fringe" players), but the Cubs have been a competitive team throughout most of his tenure. (Now we'll get all the comments about the high payroll) While we're at it, he deserves some credit for the young players who are starting to come to the ML. I've been a Cub fan for 55 years and watched them go for years without having anything close to a winning season. We'll see if the next GM is "lucky" enough to have all-stars "fall into his lap".

I don't think I could do a better job of being a MLB GM than Hendry. That doesn't prevent me from thinking that he's horrible at it, is better qualified to be setting pins in a bowling alley, and should have been replaced years ago. You're entitled to your opinion, but the only opinion that counts belongs to Ricketts and before him the Tribune Company. Apparently they have had enough confidence in him to keep him on the job and increase the payroll he has to work with. With all of the money they've spent over the years, I'm sure they could have hired a "better" GM if they weren't satisfied with his performance.

That's quite a statement without knowing who the new guy might be. Are you kidding me? Are you honestly implying we should keep Hendry because the next guy might not be any better? Really? There's been a ton of discussion about Hendry's competence and while he has many faults, the overall consensus is that he's certainly not in the bottom five. I don't think we will have to worry about after this year because he won't be extended if the Cubs don't win the WS. If the Cubs do win the WS, he will be extended and deserves to be. Whew. I was worried there. But now that I know Hendry is not in the bottom 5 GMs, I feel pretty good. The bottom line is that a lot of the "Hendry hate" comes from the fact that we're all passionate about the Cubs. I'm sure most passionate fans have an equal amount of hate for their GMs too. If the measure of a GM is winning the WS, then there's only one successful GM per year and the rest are failures. Actually everything I've read puts Hendry somewhere in the middle of the pack, but I knew if I posted that everybody would have to chime in. As I've often posted, all of us think we can do a better job than Hendry while we sit here fantasizing about trades and free agent signings.

That's quite a statement without knowing who the new guy might be. Are you kidding me? Are you honestly implying we should keep Hendry because the next guy might not be any better? Really? There's been a ton of discussion about Hendry's competence and while he has many faults, the overall consensus is that he's certainly not in the bottom five. I don't think we will have to worry about after this year because he won't be extended if the Cubs don't win the WS. If the Cubs do win the WS, he will be extended and deserves to be.

That's quite a statement without knowing who the new guy might be.

I don't remember where I saw it, but a baseball scout used the term "Hanley Ramirez" to describe Starlin Castro. I'd be careful about trading "anyone in the organization".

you misread something. next year will be the last year of his contract and he'll make 12m No, it's his signing bonus. They had deferred it until 2011, before it starts getting paid. By the looks of what was said in the original post, we'd be on the hook for all of it..... my fault, it was me that misread it. u read it as 15 mil a year from 11-15 so would the cubs definitely be on the hook for that? if so, that would be a garbage trade. millwood is terrible. so who is ready for an april rotation of zambrano/dempster/millwood/wells/marshall? ugh. we thought last offseason was ugly. i think this one is going to top that. Getting Millwood as a #4 or #5 starter is great. Don't forget that his ERA should improve by moving to the NL. When Lilly comes back, Gorz, Shark, and Marshall will provide lots of depth for the rotation. Millwood might end up being a trade chip at the deadline if one of the younger pitchers does well. The bottom line is that any deal that gets rid of Bradley and Miles in one swoop can't be all bad.

I understand your point, but that's assuming Blanco can hit well enough until Castro arrives and then hoping Castro is the real deal. Blanco, Granderson, and Fukudome could get really ugly against LHP.

I'm sure Hendry doesn't want to take a chance on the team until Blanco/Castro proves they can hit consistently at the ML level. If Marmol gets back in the groove, you would be creating quite a hole on the ML roster to protect Vitters. Theriot or Marmol in a smaller package (one other player) might be okay for Granderson, but some of the posts were suggesting a 4-player package with Theriot and/or Marmol.

That's the kind of package I was thinking of, even if we had to include another mid-level prospect. The names that were being thrown out there (Vitters, Castro, Theriot, Marmol, etc.) were too much, especially in a package of 3-4 players.

That's what my gut tells me. But otoh, there's no guarantee Castro becomes what we think he will become. Granderson is an established commodity, a good bat at a defense first position, which also happens to be a position of relative need. I would go for the bird in hand, but it could be all those years of our top prospects tanking. If I did cough him up, they wouldn't get much more. Maybe Castro/Fox/Marshall. That's my feeling as well. As mentioned above, I wouldn't want to move Castro, but since HJ Lee is in the system, I could stomach it. I could stomach trading Castro, but not for a guy as flawed as Granderson is. Stars do not become completely incompetent when facing LH pitching. He is established as a guy who cannot hit lefties. That is a very bad thing when trying to justify trading away top talent for him. If you deal your top prospects, and a guy like Castro who has rocketed up most people's lists this year, you better get back a real star, and not some limited guy like Granderson. I totally agree. When some of the supporters of this trade post that re-signing Reed Johnson (or the like) to face tough lefties would give us amazing production out of CF, they're basically admitting he needs to be platooned. Granderson is a great fit for the Cubs if he is acquired for mid-level prospects or spare parts. A package of 3-4 players like Colvin, Casner, Fox, Marshall/Gorz, Berg, Stevens, etc. are the type of players that I would put out there. If they get a better offer, sign Byrd or Cameron.

So the Angels are going to give up some good prospects to get an expensive DH? Why don't they just sign a FA like Blalock, Matsui, Huff, Vlad, Thome, Byrd, Dye, Nady, Tatis, etc. to DH for less money than Konerko ($12 million) and no prospects? Hey, I didn't make up the trade idea. I didn't mean to make it sound like I was criticizing you, just trying to point out that the deal doesn't make much sense from the Angels side. Basically the deal makes it sound like the Angels are trying to help the WS get Gonzalez.

So the Angels are going to give up some good prospects to get an expensive DH? Why don't they just sign a FA like Blalock, Matsui, Huff, Vlad, Thome, Byrd, Dye, Nady, Tatis, etc. to DH for less money than Konerko ($12 million) and no prospects?

Reading these trade proposals is making me hope we get Marlon Byrd.

From Foxsports: Tigers sending Granderson to Angels? — 11:38 a.m. Newsday's Ken Davidoff is reporting that the Tigers and Angels have discussed a trade that would send Curtis Granderson to Anaheim. If Granderson is indeed on his way out of Detroit, Orange County might be the best possible destination. Granderson has traditionally played very well at Angel Stadium, with a 1.133 OPS and eight home runs in 21 career games. Granderson has said publicly that he enjoys playing in the ballpark, because of how comfortable it is to hit and play defense there. Also, Granderson would probably welcome the chance to play alongside Torii Hunter. Granderson is not averse to playing left field and has spent some time there in the past. The two developed a mutual admiration while playing in the American League Central — Granderson for the Tigers, Hunter for the Twins. And Hunter has made his feelings about Granderson well known. "When I first met him, I knew he had good qualities, man — good character and everything," Hunter said in a 2007 interview. "We went out to eat years ago, when he first came up. We had a good conversation. You can (learn) a lot about a person by talking to him and listening to his words. And he chooses his words carefully. He's a good, quality guy. "I'm telling you: Lock him up for five, six years if you can. When he gets older, I think he's going to be hitting in the third hole. You can put money on that. As far as hitting, man, it's there. Defense, it's there. "He's a superstar." Of course, the Tigers did lock up Granderson to that long-term contract. But now economic realities have forced them to consider something that seemed inconceivable a short while ago. At this time last year, there was plenty of speculation about whether the Angels would make a push to acquire Magglio Ordonez from Detroit. What was true then remains true now: The Angels have organizational depth at catcher and the middle infield positions, areas of interest to the Tigers for 2010 and beyond; and Reagins has pitching to spare in the upper levels of his farm system.

Rogers is terrible, but I always have a problem with most of the "experts". Some of them assume that the Cubs need a CF, so they're automatically interested and the Tigers want young players, so automatically it's Castro and Vitters without doing any leg work. I swear that some of them steal ideas from NSBB.

I agree with you on the Bradley thing, but that's simply not going to happen. I think when talking about this winter we need to just assume he's gone. Whether or not that's the right move is a completely different debate. As far as Byrd goes, I have to disagree with you wholeheartedly. Defensively, he has a good reputation, and according to UZR he's almost exactly average, with a -6 last year, +5.9 in 08, and a +.3 in 2007At worst he's probably a little above average, which considering he would allow us to move Fukudome to RF he would still give us a pretty good net gain in the outfield defensively. And he's a type B FA, so there is no cost in players for him. As for Home/Road splits, I think those might be a minor issue, but nothing huge. First off, there's generally a gap in guys with regards to home/road splits. For instance, in 2009 the average MLB player hit .267/.340/.429 at home and .258/.326/.406 away. Also, Wrigley Field is a pretty damn good hitters park too, so there shouldn't be much of a dropoff going from Texas to Wrigley. I mean he's not a guy to go "Oh my God it's Marlon Byrd!" But he's a pretty good player that can probably be gotten relatively inexpensively. When a guy plays in Texas and has huge splits, it's an issue. If we got Byrd I think we could expect like a .750 OPS. Arlington kind of has Coors syndrome, where home/road splits are more pronounced because the other parks in the division heavily favor pitchers. that's a good point. ok .780 .780 plus we get to keep Castro, Vitters, etc. ain't bad.

I don't have a problem with Harden being here all year. I'm sure we can find 22-27 starts for Harden when Lilly is starting the season injured, Zambrano always manages to miss a few starts, and wondering if Wells can duplicate what he did last year.

Excellent question. Lets go over a short list of teams that could go after Granderson, a very solid center fielder who will be up for a contract soon: Red Sox: They have a solid center fielder in Ellsbury, but could Granderson be a cheaper option for them than Bay or Holliday? Mets: They're looking for another bat. Again, would be cheaper than Bay or Holliday. Braves: They have stated that they want another outfield bat, but they want a righty. Cardinals: Do they have the trade chips left after last season? and of course.... The Yankees: If they choose to let Matsui and Damon go, and not shell out for Bay or Holliday, he could be an option for them. With all the money on their books, they might prefer a trade over another massive contract. The Cubs are right up there. we definitely have the need for a center fielder. Granderson would fit our bill. Hes owed 5.5 mil in 2010, and then goes up to 8.25 in '11 and 10 mil in '12 and then a 13 mil option for '13. I say we go for it. Maybe start with a package like Fontenot, Marshall, Colvin, and a prospect or 2, and see where it goes from there. I don't have a problem with the package deal you suggested because Fontenot, Marshall, and Colvin are extra pieces. In my opinion, giving up young ML players who are a vital part of the team or top positional prospects that we've been waiting for isn't the right route to go for Granderson. that's fine, but you aren't getting him that way. he's a very good player and there's no reason for the tigers to accept mediocrity for him. Its a starting point. A lot of people are seriously undervaluing Granderson if they arent willing to part with Theriot for him. Id do that in a heartbeat and happily live with Blanco at the 8 spot in the lineup. The above package is a starting point, but something along the lines of Theriot, Samardzjia(Im sure hed waive his NTC at this point), Colvin, Gaub/Stevens sounds very fair. If they demanded Marmol instead of Shark along with Theriot, even that would be worth it as long as were willing to go out another closer such as Valverde or Soriano. I agree it's a starting point, but I disagree with the notion that posters are undervaluing Granderson. If you look at the trade proposals, you would think we're trying to get Pujols, Halliday, or Hanley Ramirez. I would love to have Granderson, but he absolutely can't hit LHP. In other words, he's either a platoon player or a sure out against lefties. In my mind, that doesn't justify the kind of packages people are discussing. Granderson (2007-2009) vs. LHP - .202/.261/.309/.570 Aaron Miles (2007-2009) vs. LHP - .288/.355/.352/.707

I still don't understand why the Cubs aren't offering arbitration, especially with the Lilly situation. Go in offering him $7-8 million and he'll probably ask $9-10 million. Even if he wins, you've stabalized the starting rotation and you can trade him at the deadline if other pitchers step up.

Excellent question. Lets go over a short list of teams that could go after Granderson, a very solid center fielder who will be up for a contract soon: Red Sox: They have a solid center fielder in Ellsbury, but could Granderson be a cheaper option for them than Bay or Holliday? Mets: They're looking for another bat. Again, would be cheaper than Bay or Holliday. Braves: They have stated that they want another outfield bat, but they want a righty. Cardinals: Do they have the trade chips left after last season? and of course.... The Yankees: If they choose to let Matsui and Damon go, and not shell out for Bay or Holliday, he could be an option for them. With all the money on their books, they might prefer a trade over another massive contract. The Cubs are right up there. we definitely have the need for a center fielder. Granderson would fit our bill. Hes owed 5.5 mil in 2010, and then goes up to 8.25 in '11 and 10 mil in '12 and then a 13 mil option for '13. I say we go for it. Maybe start with a package like Fontenot, Marshall, Colvin, and a prospect or 2, and see where it goes from there. I don't have a problem with the package deal you suggested because Fontenot, Marshall, and Colvin are extra pieces. In my opinion, giving up young ML players who are a vital part of the team or top positional prospects that we've been waiting for isn't the right route to go for Granderson.

I'll bet we're the only site suggesting 4-5 prospects or our starting SS and closer for Granderson.

I think his value would be in flipping him to some other team. Give me Baker or Baker/Fontenot.

Sign Holliday, Bay, and Lackey. DFA Soriano (pay full contract).