Backtobanks

Kenny Williams is POed.

No reason to be so negative. First, the Cubs will certainly be the favorites to win the NL Central again. Second, it's not a permanent injunction on spending money. Finally, I'm sure the Cubs will find a taker for Marquis once things start moving again (after 1/05/09). To tell the truth, it might force a trade for a younger and/or cheaper RF (Scott, Hermida, etc.) that might pay off in the future. While Bradley can add a lot with the bat, his cost and injury history could end up a problem.

2 reasons: 1. The Cubs need a RF and they have money. 2. Dunn knows the secret to playing on the awful, dangerous, crater-full OF.......remain stationary and hope the ball is hit right at you.

So that means your opinion will change by the third game of the season.

How do you sacrifice walks by shortening your swing? :-k :-k

Kaplan commented on his defense:"He wants to play here in the worst way." :lol:

Interesting stuff, but I can't believe he would be worse than the other names being thrown around (Dunn, Abreu, Ibanez, and Bradley).

I'd be happy with the $10 million you passed up to play for a contender.

My order of preference would be: McLouth Hermida Scott Bradley Abreu The first two are long-term solutions, but the first three give the Cubs lots of wiggle room in the budget. Solving the RF problem for $1-$3 million for the next few years leaves money for other needs.

Not when posters around here were suggesting Soriano-Fukudome-Dunn/Ibanez/Abreu/Bradley.

I've posted dozens of times about trying to get him. We seem to have lots of "spare parts" (Pie, Cedeno, Wuertz, Colvin, Marquis (plus cash), Atkins, etc.)that might help the Pirates. Many posters want Hermida, but McLouth would be my first choice. The other advantage to getting McLouth (or Hermida) is that they are young and cheaper than the big name FAs.

How about some wild theorizing? Hendry thinks he'll still get Peavy (and Bradley), and thinks Pie will be in that deal, so he needed Gathright for pinch running, double switches, etc. Time will tell about getting Peavy, but the acquisition of Gathright certainly means Pie is going somewhere in a trade.

100% no. and if they did, it wouldnt be to us And if they would trade him to us, by the time AM decided to agree to the deal Markakis would be 38 years old and ready to retire.

If we can't get Bradley, I'd like to trade for a younger OF that can actually play a little defense and will be around for a few years. (Hermida, McLouth, DeJesus, etc.)

The best part of signing Sheets would be that we get to keep Marshall. With Sheets and Harden in the rotation, you had better have another starter available. It would also mean Gaudin, Wuertz, Guzman, etc. had better be ready for long middle relief stints.

With the financial problems that the owner has, something has to happen eventually. That doesn't mean the deal will happen with the Cubs, but Peavy will be traded.

In other words, if only Dunn made contact more often. I stand by my statement, DH was designed for hitters like Dunn. Put him in the lineup (not in the field) and he'll hit 40 HRs, strike out 200 times, walk about 100 times, and not much else. Putting him on the field diminishes any positive offensive numbers that he produces.

Talk about picking the lesser of two evils.

I don't want him at that price, but 2y at 18m with a vesting option, or 3y at 27m I might consider. I have a feeling Hendry will add incentives based on health or games played in his contract, and get him at 7-9m base salary. I think Bradley will be a high 800 OPS or low 900 OPS guy playing half his games in Wrigley. From MLBTR: Milton Bradley is weighing his options with the Cubs and Rays. Joe Maddon and the Rays may be a better fit than Lou Piniella and the Cubs. And spending time at DH would allow him to "protect his oft-injured body." But will the Rays meet Bradley's asking price when they can turn to Bobby Abreu, Jason Giambi, Garret Anderson, or Pat Burrell instead? Rosenthal adds that the Reds, Angels, and Nationals are also interested in Bradley. This report sounds like Bradley will be asking for more than Abreu, Giambi, Anderson, and Burrell. I agree with you that Bradley would be a good fit at the right price.

What the hell is this? So because they both strike out and hit home runs that means they're the same? Give me a break. Soriano swings at everything. Dunn swings at strikes. There is a huge difference. To imply that they are the same player offensively is pretty ignorant. Pitchers would have their way with him? I assume you're saying they would throw him junk and he'd hack at everything and get himself out like Soriano. That is simply not true, seeing as how he is a walk machine. Dunn strikes out because he swings hard, he doesn't strike out because he swings at junk. What a weak comparison. Incorrect, and that's already been proven false. Ha. Yeah, just keep talking about numbers that actually prove that he's a good hitter. "Yeah guy, just keep talking about Pujols' average, his slugging, his ability to put the ball in play, his patience, his ability to cure cancer. Blah blah blah. I know what I see with my eyes, and that guy is a bum" Either that or people here tend to choose the option of proof/logic instead of selective memory. As if you couldn't make yourself look any worse, you end your post with this Ricciardi gem. Seriously, did you just say that? What evidence do you have, other than what some loud,mputh GM said? By the way, did you know that a few days later Ricciardi admitted that he was just pissed at the callers and that he hadn't really heard anything about Dunn not loving the game? I guess not. So not only are you bringing up an irrelevant point, but it's completely inaccurate as well. Good job. You make a full post full of outdated and inaccurate assumptions and hyperbole, then you go and prove how little you know about a player by saying something like that. The bottom line is that if you don't want a guy because he has a poor average w/RISP, then you need to open your mind a little bit and actually learn about what is valuable. Nice post, you spent a lot more time crafting a post that will fall on deaf ears than I did. For reference, Cubsclapp, do you know who has a higher Career OPS+ than Sosa, Utley, Henderson, Yaz, Magz, and is tied or within 1 of Carew, Winfield, Clemente, Boggs, and Palmeiro? I'll give you a hint! He is huge, the most underrated player in baseball, and his name is Adam Dunn! I realize you probably think OPS+ is worthless, but this illustrates how much of a bargain Dunn would be for us. First let me say that I'm not a Dunn fan. That being said, some of you act like he's the second coming of Babe Ruth. Contrary to what many posters believe, most GMs aren't idiots, so when there's a lot of reluctance to signing Dunn there must be something to it. There was a thread quite awhile ago that argued whether Dunn was a great hitter. My point is that Dunn can be called a great slugger, but certainly not a great hitter (or player). Putting his name in the same sentence as players like Yaz, Clemente, and Winfield only supports how some statistics will prove anything you want them to prove. The DH was designed specifically for players like Dunn.

I'm not sure I can answer the second question, but the answer to the first might be that it is a completely seperate deal. Marquis would go to the Padres and then the Padres would try to trade Marquis to some other team (Brewers?). Actually, I was thinking that Hendry ought to trade players like Marquis and Pie to SD in the Peavy deal and let Towers deal with getting the extra pieces that he wants. So are you implying that the Brewers are unaware of the Cubs needing to move Marquis to fit Peavy into the payroll? No I'm not implying that. My point is that Marquis can be traded to the Padres at a reduced rate. If the Padres can then find a taker (Brewers?) for Marquis at his reduced salary, they can trade him for the 2 prospects mentioned. I think Marquis @ $5 million will be in demand after the FA signings.

And that's probably the best way for this deal to go down, especially now that Philadelphia has seemed to move on. Um, not from the Padres perspective. They'd be damn sure to walk away from the deal with the players they want, not the players they don't want and take the chance that at some point in the offseason they might be able to use the players they don't want to get the players they do. The only way the Padres can walk away from a Peavy deal is if they have another team lined up. The Pardres have to trade Peavy and the last we heard, they have no leverage because he only wants to go to the Cubs. Now if he does expand his list of teams to be traded to, then the Padres gain some leverage. I think the only reason the discussions went on so long is that Hendry insists on trying to be fair. Most GMs would have laughed off Towers when he started asking for 5-6 players.

Never use Dunn's name with the term "can move" in the same sentence.

I'm not sure I can answer the second question, but the answer to the first might be that it is a completely seperate deal. Marquis would go to the Padres and then the Padres would try to trade Marquis to some other team (Brewers?). Actually, I was thinking that Hendry ought to trade players like Marquis and Pie to SD in the Peavy deal and let Towers deal with getting the extra pieces that he wants.

You're entitled to your opinion, but what constitutes "valuable property" depends on the teams involved and their specific situations. "Valuable" to a rebuilding team with lots of holes could be getting 6 or 7 good prospects for a player they can't afford to keep.