Backtobanks

Now the only thing they have in common is 6-letter last names.

So it looks like pretty much everyone agrees (which is a first at NSBB), it's better to keep Prior in case he becomes healthy because he has zero trade value. I think it is safe enough to agree that if someone is willing to trade for him based on his pre-injury value, most of us wouldn't turn down that trade since it would certainly mean the Cubs would be receiving a big name player.

If all of the other components (luck, health, etc.) weren't important factors in determining the WS winner, we could just look at the stats and determine the WS winner on paper. Obviously, most years it would be the Yankees.

While I would love to have Andruw Jones, why don't we just trade Marshall + Guzman/Marmol/Gallagher/Veal for Baldelli and we get to keep Ohman. If Pie is everything he's cracked up to be (in 2008), we can get top value for either Baldelli or Murton in a trade.

Time will tell whether he knows what he's doing. Agreed. They were in a position to be very good with an addition to the roster here and there. They still can be, but if they don't make the necessary moves to be competitive this year, Williams is going to look pretty bad with these moves. Detroit has improved their team this offseason. Proof is the WS ring. There are no lucky WS championships. You win it, you've proven yourself. Cub fans may not like that because it's the WS, but believe me if the Cubs won one and people called it luck, we'd be crying foul. So let's be intellectually honest with ourselves, and admit Williams got it done, so he gets the credit. What happens if the team that won the world series improves significantly in the offseason and then doesn't even make the playoffs the next year? Would you then call it luck? I never call winning the World Series luck, no matter what. And my argument is, neither should you----or you risk being intellectually dishonest. Because you know damn well if someone else called the Cubs lucky for winning it, you'd be upset. Any arguments to the contrary are just fans being fans. Winning the WS is a combination of many things, one of which is luck. Health plays an important role too. The timing of when your team or certain plays get hot is also important. As has been mentioned often on this site, you have to build a good enough team to get to the playoffs and then it's a crapshoot. You have to hope for luck, health, and the right player or two to get hot and carry the team throughout the playoffs.

Soriano would serve the lineup better in the middle (#5), but he feels more comfortable in the leadoff position. After spending $136 million on him, I'm sure they will cater to his wishes.

I agree that they could potentially have a nice young stable of arms just like the Cubs had with Wood, Prior, and Zambrano and we saw what happened to that. This might be a great pitching staff in 2-3 years, but Dye and Crede will be gone, Thome will retire, Konerko and A.J. might regress and then what.

Time will tell whether he knows what he's doing.

Well, I'm not so sure. Williams also benefit from a staff of average pitchers having career years. I don't think even Williams thought that 2005 squad would win a WS. I think Williams gets far too much credit. We will see... Williams went from being a joke to being a genius. I agree with you that he gets too much credit for 2005. I do think that he is the right man for the WS and Reinsdorf though because they seem to be on the same page.

I have serveral life-time diehard Sox fans and they all called me saying the same thing. It might be good for long term or might not, but the fact remains if you can win now why plan for long term. Except for penny-pinching, I don't understand this deal. The Sox weren't that far out of it this year and a few good moves put them right back in it. Along with all of these prospects (and they are just that until they prove themselves), you've got a future of Thome digressing or retiring, Konerko regressing, and Dye leaving for FA. The only way some of these trades make any sense is if they use the young pitching in trade for young positional players (Crawford, Baldelli, Cabrera, etc.). Also, if they're going young, they had better trade Buerhle at some point.

Mike Schmidt has a column at foxsports.com saying that he thinks more players ought to be voted into the HOF. He points out that players like Dale Murphy, Lee Smith, Jim Kaat, Ron Santo, etc. ought to be in the HOF. He also discusses how he felt after first getting elected and how his feelings have changed. Let's hear it for Schmidt and I'm hoping he can convince some of the other voters.

After the Cubs have spent the money, I'm only interested in production and not the cost.

IIRC, Grace had more hits in the 90's than any other player in the game during that period. I could be wrong, though. He also led the league in slumpbusting. See, going into a slump isn't all that bad. He needed 3,000 hits to have any chance IMO. He should go into the Cubs HOF and even the Dbacks just for one hit alone. I don't think he'll get in, but if you compare his stats to Kirby Puckett, you'd think there's a glimmer of a hope. The big difference is Puckett got a ring, and for some stupid reason, that's a big discriminator. Puckett was the face of the franchise and the city. Grace was a crowd favorite, but never the star of the team. Also, I would imagine Puckett was way ahead of Grace with all-star appearances and MVP voting.

Didn't Gary Carter and Mazeroski play defense? A defensive 1B with little power will never make the HOF. Unfortunately, certain positions (2B, SS, etc.) are considered defensive positions whereas other positions (1B, OF, etc.) are not only considered offensive positions, but offensive with power positions. Unless you are someone like Tony Gwynn with 3000+ hits, you need to show some muscle.

So what else is new: CINCINNATI -- Ken Griffey Jr. broke his left hand in an accident at home, the latest in a series of injuries that have derailed the career of the All-Star outfielder. Griffey's throwing hand will be in a hard cast for three weeks, then will be re-examined, Reds spokesman Rob Butcher said Friday. from espn.

May I be the first to vote for Izturis/Womack. That would be the best middle infield since Perez/Macias.

There is no way outside big injuries that the cubs will finish only 8 games better than they did last year. Agree to disagree, the pitching is terrible, offense mildly improved. Lee will help of course. Agree to disagree with you on this one. The starting pitching should be improved over Zambrano and 4 AA pitchers. If (and it's a big if) Prior returns to health, it could be an excellent starting rotation. I think the bullpen is one of the strongest in baseball, especially if the starters consistently pitch into the 6th or 7th inning. A full season of Hill certainly should be an improvement over half a season of Hill. A full season of Lee automatically improves the offense, let alone Soriano instead of Pierre. If the Cubs sign Floyd, the bench would be definitely stronger with Ward, Floyd/Murton, and Theriot. There's still a few moves to make, but I would think this is a team that should win 83+ games.

Advice to parents: Teach your kid to throw left-handed.

If Hendry wants to platoon Floyd, here's an idea, sign Craig Wilson to platoon in RF with Floyd and move Soriano to CF. Murton plays everyday in LF, Jones gets traded, and Floyd/Wilson gives you great production in RF and strengthens the bench.

I can understand the frustration with Marquis, but to say Prior, Miller, and Guzman are better than he is "without a doubt" and that the Cubs have 7-8 guys who can match his performance is certainly questionable. Prior, Miller, Guzman, and the other young pitchers have a lot of question marks next to their names.

The same reason every Cub trade rumor involves Pie or Hill.

Dawson, no question. Santo, it's a little fuzzier there. I'm a big proponent of comparing players to others that have played their given position. If a guy is one of the ten best 1B, 2B, etc., he belongs in. Looking at 1B, Gehrig and Foxx were unquestionably better than Bagwell. The next tier would have to be McGwire, Bagwell, Greenberg (better player, but shorter career), Johnny Mize, Eddie Murray, Killebrew, Cap Anson, McCovey and Frank Thomas. Ignoring the whole steroid business, I'd probably rank them as: 1. Gehrig 2. Foxx 3. Greenberg (I think guys should be given credit when they missed some of their prime years due to the war - not penalized for this) 4. McGwire 5. Mize 6. Bagwell 7. Thomas 8. Killebrew 9. Murray 10. McCovey whereas 3B I would go: 1. Schmidt 2. Eddie Mathews 3. George Brett 4. Boggs 5. Santo 6. Home Run Baker 7. Molitor 8. Brooks Robinson 9. Stan Hack 10. Rolen So even though Bagwell was clearly the better hitter, I'd call him and Santo about even based on where they rank at their respective positions. I agree with your criteria, and by using it both Bagwell and Santo not only should be in the HOF, but probably 1st ballot HOFers. We all know how that turned out for Santo.

Jones for Jones (Andruw) as long as we're dreaming.

I'm with you 100%. I think the original question is somewhat of a strawman - of course the Cubs will try to win every year, but as far as trades and (especially) FA signings it should be recognized that future years' chances to win are affected just as much as next year's. The Cubs have spent money like a drunken sailor in this off-season so far. I have no problem with them spending money with a sense of urgency to win; it's just agonizing to see how poorly they've spent it. It would have been better to wait for a more talented FA class. And while you're waiting for a more talented FA class, you might realize that one might not come along and you've grown old waiting. I wouldn't be surprised to see more teams signing their stars long-term to big contracts like the Blue Jays did with Wells. At least you know what you're getting for the money. I don't disagree with you in principle but I agree more with frostwyrm that this was a particularly awful year to open the vault. Your point about Wells is well-taken; I really wish the suddenly-spending Cubs would have made a #1 priority of securing Zambrano this off-season. The real problem lies in player (mis)valuations. I don't have a lot of faith that the Cubs would have spent the money more wisely if this were a stronger FA class, but at least the margin for error would be higher. There's always mediocrity out there, and the Cubs have a long history of overvaluing it. That is the real problem and it will continue to be a problem until there's a change in the GM. The other problem with a strong free agent class is that you would have to outbid all of the other big spenders (Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, etc.). If someone like Cabrera or Santana became a FA, do you think Steinbrenner would be outbid?

I really hope he's not the Cubs starting CF. The Cubs can't afford anymore potential black hole spots in the lineup. I think the Cubs are going to wait until somebody makes a decent offer for Jones. That might not be until spring training. I've posted before that Hendry has made so many moves that we go crazy because he doesn't make one for a week or two. I do think he will trade Jones, but he's not going to give him away for nothing. As many posters have written, Jones in CF is not perfect, but it's not a disaster either.