Backtobanks

I think Lahair is great, but I can't believe any team is going to make the kind of offer that some of you are talking about.

Agreed. It's also why for some reason... I have a gut feeling that Theo/Hoyer will shock everyone and trade for an impact player (could be like Justin Upton or King Felix for example) since there's only 2 that could be a FA this offseason. Although I'm not sure how they will get a guy like through a trade, but it's just a funny feeling I got. I don't see the pieces we currently have being nearly enough to get something like that done yet honestly. Especially since I really think we're counting on Brett moving forward and certainly Rizzo. I'm not sure they even know for sure which direction they're taking yet with Garza. If he's dealt, then the people saying we're 2014 or later before we're contending are right, in all likelihood. It looks like a lot of the missing pieces will have to come via trade. We have to hope that Brett and Rizzo both play up to their potential so that we can afford to trade other prospects in a blockbuster deal. Brett, Rizzo, a solid FA, and one blockbuster deal could make the Cubs solid contenders.

Nice analysis. The problem is that outside of Hamels and Upton, I don't see anyone standing out as an impact player. Some would make a nice addition to the team, but not really making them into an instant contender.

It all depends on the offer. It seems to me as though if it was a serious option, LaHair would have seen more time in the OF by now. Again, we really don't have any big power bats aside from Rizzo, so I'd really like to see LaHair and Rizzo in the lineup together at some point. Of course for the right offer, you take it. I'd certainly expect to see the Dodgers and Brewers come sniffing around if they're contending when the time comes. Maybe the Angels if their 1st baseman doesn't work out. Maybe an even exchange if they pick up 75% of his contract 8-) Why would we want Pujols at a deep discount when we called up Rizzo?

All we need to contend next year is: 1. Extend Garza 2. Sign Hamels 3. Sign Dempster to team friendly contract 4. Bring up Rizzo and Jackson and hope they both produce like Lahair has done this season so far 5. Put Lahair in LF and hope he keeps producing at a HOF pace I suppose all of those could happen next year, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

Thank God their offensive power numbers can counteract the bullpen numbers. :lol: Anyone who expected this Cubs team to be an offensive juggernaut is foolish. Those numbers are not a disappointment/surprise. The bullpen has been worse than expected, IMO. It was never considered great, but I didn't think it would've been this bad. Nobody expected an "offensive juggernaut", but 9 HRs in April is a joke. As for the bullpen, how could anybody be surprised when the 3 best relievers were traded, in the rotation, and on the DL. Marmol is what he is - unhittable one outing and horrible the next.

You said it best, we're trading our top starter for the possibility of getting a starter that projects as a future #1 or #2. With all of the teams extending their players and a bunch of big market teams looking to spend money, I'm not sure how you figure we could be favorites next year.

I agree. Trading Garza pushes back our chances for contending by another 2 years and I'm tired of waiting.

Thank God their offensive power numbers can counteract the bullpen numbers. :lol:

From MLBTR: •Tigers starters other than Justin Verlander and Drew Smyly have struggled so far this year, and rival executives expect Detroit to make a strong push for rotation help by the July trade deadline.

It's a nice story, but what FA is going to start dismissing possible suitors at this point. I would expect Hamels to be like 99% of the other FAs and go to whatever team gives him the most money.

If he is we may decide not to trade him. :lol:

I still find it interesting that some of you get upset by my "negativity" when some others are posting the same kind of comments. I guess my comment about a ton of holes to fill sounds negative instead of realistic. 1B, 2B, SS, CF, #1 starter, #3 starter look to be set long term. 3B is still a question mark until Stewart/Vitters/Lake prove they can deliver on a regular basis. Soto needs to get his act together or else catcher is a question mark. LF, RF, and #1/#2 starter are targets for free agency. The bullpen is really questionable with only Dolis and Russell looking like long term solutions.

Actually the 2012 Cubs are making me look very accurate about my predictions for this year and it's interesting to see how many posters are starting agree about this year's team. I am optimistic about Rizzo & Brett coming up, but there's still a ton of holes to fill for this year and next.

Agree to disagree. You don't think there's a realistic shot they could be a mediocre or bad team in 2014? We're getting into semantics now, but my expectation is that they're 5-7 games better than last year in 2012, and 5-7 games better than that(if not more) in 2013. I think this year is the last year for the forseeable future that winning less than 75 games is a significant/probable outcome. I don't know about 2014, but I'm not sure this team is going to be 5-7 games better than last year. Obviously 2013 is really a question mark with Rizzo and Brett starting and somebody having to replace Dempster.

Maholm is this year's Jeff Blauser. His career record is good at Wrigley Field is good because he faced the Cubs all those years not because he is good. By that logic, pretty much every hitter who faced the Cubs in Blausers era should have great numbers at Wrigley, and every pitcher who faced them in Maholms years with the Pirates should as well, and true or not, I'm too lazy to check the splits a good chunk of Maholms Pirates career was '07-'09 when the Cubs were good, or in the case of '08, great. My point was that just because some mediocre player has decent numbers against you, it doesn't mean that you ought to acquire that player. I guess that is a little too deep for some posters.

Maholm is this year's Jeff Blauser. His career record is good at Wrigley Field is good because he faced the Cubs all those years not because he is good.

I don't understand letting Stewart bat against a lefty in the 8th inning with 2 men in scoring position. Isn't that the reason (hitting lefties) that Baker and Reed Johnson are on this team?

I think that giving Lahair a decent shot at LF is a great idea (assuming we can dump Soriano). He's one of those guys that's probably more valuable to the Cubs than whatever you would get for him in a trade because I don't think he has very much trade value unless he's part of a package deal.

When we know how terrible they likely are going to be coming in I'm not sure why we can't point it out. It's not like this was a team expected to put up good numbers that has surprisingly underperformed. Do you expect BacktoHendry to talk about the team statline after 7 games if they put up 8 runs today? It's interesting that you criticize me for talking about the team offensive statline after 6 games when you brought up how amazing the front of the rotation guys have been and how bad our bullpen has been in the same 6 games.

Their offense has been terrible - .221/.294/.338 The offense has been the worrisome point since this team was put together. Obviously there's some cause for hopw when Brett & Rizzo are recalled, but we're in trouble until that happens. Lahair has been one of the bright spots offensively. I'm Backtobanks and I don't understand relativity. I don't undestand what relativity has to do with my response that the offense sucks after you posted that "they've actually looked good".

Their offense has been terrible - .221/.294/.338 The offense has been the worrisome point since this team was put together. Obviously there's some cause for hopw when Brett & Rizzo are recalled, but we're in trouble until that happens. Lahair has been one of the bright spots offensively.

I'm looking forward to the time that the Cubs are good again, but I'm more impatient than many of you. I've agreed with many of the long-time posters about not seeing the need to tank 2012 & probably 2013, but I didn't see the negative comments about the other posters. I've had a problem with the "Theo can do nothing wrong" mentality that many posters adhere to. My point all along has been that I'm afraid that with the new CBA, other teams locking up young stars before free agency, and competing with the other big-market teams that sat out this off season for the few "star" FAs in the future could prove unsuccessful. I do think that Theo will be successful in building a good solid team that is entertaining before the end of his current contract, but my expectation is for a World Series winner.

I keep having this nightmare scenario play through my head: 2012: We were too bad last season to make it worth adding a big-time contract. 2013: Ditto 2014: We almost made it to .500, but there's only a couple of impact players on the market, and the Dodgers and Yankees went to insane numbers on them and we should be thankful we didn't try to match that. 2015: Attendance has been down the last few years because of all the awful teams, and we still don't have the cable megadeal like those big market teams, so we have to be prudent. And/or the current management team proves as smart as we all hope/think they are, succesfully build from within, and enter the free agency season "one player away!" And the best player on the free agent market is . . . Alfonso Soriano II. That would be a bit different though, because we'd have a lot of cheap, young talent on the team when we added Soriano II. Plus this front office would never add a player with those type of flaws and demanding contract. Carl Crawford says "Hi".

To be fair, saying we passed on Darvish is incorrect - unless Theo/Jed knew the Rangers would outbid everybody else by a very wide margin (if the reports are accurate). I really wanted Darvish and wish we had gotten him, but we don't know that it was lack of effort on the Cubs' part that led to him being a Ranger. And on Prince, it was a very good decision not to give him that contract. I didn't say we should sign Prince, Darvish, Cespedes, or Pujols. My point was that Theo/Jed made a decision as to how much each of those players wre worth to the Cubs and "passed" when the terms got too high. We "passed" on both of those players because we have the resources to outbid any other team. Since Theo/Jed didn't think they were worth the extra money, they passed on them. We passed on Pujols and Prince for the same reason - their value wasn't worth they money that it would take to get them. I guess it's a pet peeve, but it really bugs me when folks pretend like this is eBay, and everyone's bid is transparent. It's stating the obvious, but there is all kinds of bluffing and gamesmanship involved, and every involved party has an incentive NOT to reveal what bids are on the table. The rumors had the winning bid in the $45-$50 million range before the winning bid of $51.7 million was revealed. If we were reading those rumors as to what the winning bid would be, I would assume Theo/Jed had some idea of how much they would need to bid if they really wanted to win the bid.