jersey cubs fan

I would love to see the Cubs win the division and still manage a top 10 pick. I think they could do it.

That's the thing, given the fact he's past his prime and doesn't have a great track record to begin with, even if he does manage to adapt to OF over the offseason and next spring, he's no sure thing to be a significant improvement over a guy like Murton. And there's just no way he handles the move to 2B. So now you have a guy who is going to be a free agent, and you are going to have to commit serious cash to him without knowing his ability to handle the spot.

Even if true, that's a bit harsh, isn't it? I've never heard Barrett speak and thought to myself, "he's a total moron." Its his actions not his words. Actions and words. How many times does he make the wrong throw and then say to himself "I know I shouldn't have done that"? He reminds me of Chris Farley getting pissed at himself for asking stupid questions over and over to Paul McCartney. Besides all the ill-advised throws, everytime I hear him speak just confirms to me the guy is a mimbo. Seems nice, by all accounts, and has great intentions, but not a lot going on upstairs.

How is Barrett to 2nd even considered a possibility? He's logged exactly zero innings there in his major league career. 3B is the only position he's put up any reasonable amount of time. I think he might be okay at 1B, but obviously his bat isn't enough to justify the spot. There's a slim chance he could handle left field, but there's absolutely no way he handles a move to 2B.

This situation, GM fighting for his job on a team still "in the race" but with bullpen issues, just screams for a Garland/Karcher part II.

The clutch talk only distracts from the real issue. Lee isn't hitting and his power has been gone all year. The distraction of his doubles streak has caused many to ignore it, but the lack of power is a huge problem for a guy expected to be a middle of the order force.

A) He's dumb as a box of rocks, the move would probably only confuse him more. B) He's not patient. He may not be as bad as some of the hackers this team has had the past couple years, but the guy has never drawn more than 40 walks in a season. C) He had an excellent 2006 at the plate. His 2005 was good, but lacking in OBP - the most important stat, and his 2004 was the same. D) He's already completed his peak seasons, and did so by logging a lot of innings at a very physically demanding position that has worn him down just like it has done for most catchers throughout history. E) There may be a few catchers who have done it, but the two most prominent examples are Biggio, Bench and Berra. Biggio switched out of catcher in his early 20's, while Bench was logging time at 3B, 1B and the OF from the time he was 22, and he never had one full productive season once he made the switch more or less full-time. Berra was a full-time catcher throughout his 20's and started to make the gradual switch in his early 30's. But Berra's career dwarfs that of Barrett's to this point, as he consistently put up solid numbers year in and year out, with an OPS+ that matched or beat Barrett's career year 7 times by the time he was Barrett's age. Not to mention Bench is a hall of famer while Biggio is a likely hall of famer. Barrett couldn't hold these guys' jocks. Barrett has pretty much been just a catcher (with a little DH time and 6 games at 1B) for 7 years now. This isn't switching a LF to RF (and we know how good the Cubs have been at that). Bottom line is I see no way he makes the switch this year. You would need at least all offseason and next spring to get him acclimated. And even then there is no guarantee he'd be a more productive corner OF than Murton, but you would have to sign him to a free agent contract. Plus he'd have another full season of catching duty under his belt, just wearing him down even further.

Intriguing. I could almost guarantee that his offense would go way up if he was able to focus almost solely on that. Put him in RF. I'm sure he's got a good arm. If he doesn't have to catch I would bet he is good for something like .290 / .370 / .475 and 20-25 HRs. I'd be more than willing to take the other side of that bet.

I don't think they have a whole lot to sell. I wouldn't be for dealing Lee and Ramirez at this point. The Cubs have the ability to contend within the next year or two with a competent GM. And those guys will be a part of it if it happens. Soriano is untradable. Nobody else among the position players is worth much of anything on his own. I would be up for dealing Barrett if somebody wants him, because I have no interest in seeing them extend him this winter (and he's a moron who isn't particularly good at baseball - despite a couple solid years at the plate). As for pitchers, I'd be fine if they traded away Zambrano for some solid youthful talent, but again, other than him, who do they have that they could deal as sellers?

This makes absolutely no sense. First off, he's not driving in runs. He has only 28, which is a bad total for a #3 hitter at this point. He's on pace for just 100. And while that sounds like a nice round number for many, it's not anything to be excited about for a #3 hitter in today's game. But more importantly, what is the point of waiting until after the problem is obvious to show concern? Lee's lack of HR has been a problem for 2 months now. Just because his other numbers have held up does not mean it wasn't a problem. Lee's lack of power will translate into the rest of his numbers by seasons end. He's already down to a 937 OPS for the year, and is only at 809 in May. That's not killing the team bad, but it's certainly not dependable middle of the order hitter good either. Lee is struggling. Lee was bad at the end of 2006 and the wrist ramained a concern throughout the offseason. It's now May 29, Lee is 5th on the team in HR for a team that is in the bottom half of the league for HR as a whole. It's a very big problem, one of many, no doubt, but a very big problem. If Lee doesn't start hitting homeruns, his average is going to plummet, and his overall production numbers will be lower.

I agree. I was just showing that number for the heck of it, not building a case around it. It's the Jeff Blauser rule.

Lilly, Marquis, Hill, Marshall...............Cotts/Holliman/Gallagher? Ohman, Eyre, Howry, Wuertz, Marmol, Guzman............Cherry?

They definitely are growing to dislike Abreu here, although considering how good he was for them when they made the trade, I'm not sure they are itching to get rid of him. Dempster and Jones are owed $17.25 m for the rest of 2007 and 2008, combined. Abreu is owed $13.25 for the rest of this year plus the $2m buyout, or $27.25m for this year and next combined. Obviously Abreu is going to cost more for the rest of this year $11.25 than Jones and Dempster ($6.75m). It's possible the Yankees would be willing to even out some of the money. And in the for what it's worth category, Abreu's career line in Wrigley is .352/.433/.759

Which follows a 3 game set in Houston. Given the nature of September rosters, this changes the ramifications of the doubleheader, since presumably both teams could have an extra starter or two on the roster, and a couple extra bullpen arms. The only other option was a trip in late July. Hopefully these will still be meaningful games for the Cubs by then.

I'm fairly confident he'd be good enough. It's hard to say if he'd move. But ARod moved to 3B, and he was inline to being the greatest SS of all time. Chipper moved to the outfield, and then back to third. Guys move positions pretty frequently. If the Cubs traded for him, I don't think he'd sit out, or grumble. And if they offered him a market friendly contract, I'd bet he'd be willing to stay as a corner OF instead for forcing himself to another team where he could play 1B.

Apparantly he's going to make one last minor league appearance. I believe Hendry will look to trade him by then, or he will grant him his release after X amount of days with no action.

So you don't have a problem with the team being under .500 during his tenure? The bottom line is Hendry has done a terrible job putting together a ballclub. Yes I have a problem with the team being under .500 during Hendry's tenure. I also have a problem with all of the "experts" who post critcizing every move he makes (or doesn't) make. All of the "experts" don't criticize every move he makes. Although when you have one of the highest paid teams in baseball, and have a sub .500 record, obviously more often than not your moves are going to deserve criticism. If he made moves that couldn't be criticized, this team would win 95 games every year. Name the last move Hendry made that wasn't followed by dozens of pages of posts (most of them critical) by all of us "experts." Actually, there are dozens of pages of posts (mostly critical) of the moves that Hendry didn't make. He does deserve criticism for the poor record of this team, but I do get upset by the "damned if he does and damned if he doesn't" attitude on a daily basis. Again, all of us have hindsight and the right to change our minds in our favor. Why do you put mostly critical in parenthesis? Isn't your whole point about the "mostly critical" aspect? You comletely misconstrue reality. There are dozens of pages, but that is usually only because there are multiple tangents in any of those threads. A thread usually only ends up with many pages when people take opposing views, then arguments ensue. Obviously with 100s of members, somebody is going to disagree with something in nearly every thread. Somebody is going to hate a move, or like a move. The most obvious example, however, of a transaction that didn't get blasted was Nomar. Coincidentally, it occurred around the last time this team was any good. Ever since then it's been a series of mistakes, blunders and letdowns, culminating in an atrocious record. But I'd argue the Soriano signing response was mostly positive. There were a few that were 100% against, but a heck of a lot more that were 100% for it, and even more who were more or less excited about the acquisition, if only fearful of the financial impact. And of course, most everybody responded happily when Dusty was let go and Neifi was traded. The Greg Maddux signing was widely accepted as very good for the team, even if people like myself pointed out it was an awful lot of money for a more or less average pitcher. And the Todd Walker signing was, I believe, roundly praised as a smart, affordable price to pay for a nice piece to add to the team. Regardless, you act as if there is a large amount of people criticizing moves that don't deserve criticism. That's simply not the case. We're not talking about Yankees fans criticizing a 97 win roster here. We're talking about a team that has gone in the tank due primarily to a GM who simply has done a terrible job putting together a team. Furthermore, his belief structure clashes almost perfectly with the wants and wishes of multiple posters, so obviously, many of the things he does are going to be in the opposite direction of stuff some people would like to see.

that would be quite cool Would we have enough to give them in return though? I'd love to have Tex on the team. One would be free agent for another......Zambrano for Tex Perhaps. Or they could trade Murton, Jones and multiple young arms, guys like Veal, Gallagher, Marshall, etc. You could think about sending Colvin. While guys like Fox and Matt Craig would make interesting additions.

Are you honestly saying Jeter is not a good baseball player? I'm no Yankee lover, but Jeter is a hell of a player. He catches a lot of crap just because he plays for the Yankees in my opinion. He catches a lot of crap because of how he has been elevated by some. He is very good, but not nearly as good as his worshippers, and that includes many in the media, portray him to be.

that would be quite cool

No way. He's hardly remembered right now. The career numbers are great, but he won't be remembered as a legend, at least not nationally.

The fact that a select few sports writers no longer dominate the story probably means we will never have the same sort of reverence for these guys when their careers are over. I just don't see people pining over anybody of this era the way people talked about Mantle, Dimaggio and guys of that era.

I honestly don't get the inclusion of Ichiro. The luster has already worn off that one. He was a nice addition to the ballclub, and I'm sure still a huge star in Japan. But Ichiro is not going to be remembered as some sort of legend in America unless some very significant things happen in the near future, like a World Series run where he dominates or if he starts breaking records. He plays on a pretty mediocre team, and is already approaching his mid 30's, without having done anything truly remarkable other than for a few short stretches. I just can't imagine people talking about him in 40 years the same way some people talk about a lot of former legends. Jeter is the only lock to be talked about this way, because he's a Yankee who has won titles. Ortiz, maybe, since he was a central figure on the Red Sox championship team, but he could just as easily be lumped in with every other very large masher of this era. Pujols could end up like this if he maintains his career path of absolute greatness for a while.

So you don't have a problem with the team being under .500 during his tenure? The bottom line is Hendry has done a terrible job putting together a ballclub. Yes I have a problem with the team being under .500 during Hendry's tenure. I also have a problem with all of the "experts" who post critcizing every move he makes (or doesn't) make. All of the "experts" don't criticize every move he makes. Although when you have one of the highest paid teams in baseball, and have a sub .500 record, obviously more often than not your moves are going to deserve criticism. If he made moves that couldn't be criticized, this team would win 95 games every year.

Yeah, there doesn't seem to be any merit to this theory. The Cubs problem is, as it's always been, bad, personel. It's not the wrong personel for Wrigley. It's not Wrigley itself. It's not cheap owners, dumb fans, wind, luck, curses or anything else. They've simply come up short in the personel department, and for the past 10 years, at least, refused to come to grips with the emerging value of objective analysis, which has changed the way many have built their teams (but not the Cubs).