davearm2

A lot. I can't see Beane selling Harden unless he was getting a package worthy of an ace. Harden's health isn't going to give anybody much of a discount. If we came calling, I imagine he'd be asking for Hill and Pie to start. We could probably bargain Hill out of the deal, but it'd cost us most of the stuff on the top of our system. I dunno. Beane seemed to be pretty reasonable on the Swisher deal, and I can't imagine Harden approaching Swisher's value. Swisher's got all of the impact of Harden, but with a much more team-friendly contract, and none of the injury issues that Harden comes with.

A torn ACL would probably do the trick. (not that I'm hoping for it -- just answering the ?)

LOL if Fukudome had bounced into a DP on that 3-2 pitch, everyone would be complaining that Ramirez wasn't running.

The Rays had enough decency to put the kibosh on those ideas in about 4 minutes, rather than dragging things out for 4 months.

Yes, because it would've been much better to see Wood cough up 3 runs in the 8th and Marmol never get in the game.

Hindsight is 20/20. It's not even 20/20 hindsight. The fact that Hamilton was Cubs property for 5 minutes is a meaningless technicality. The reality is, Hamilton was never even on the Cubs' radar. They sold their Rule 5 pick to the Reds because they didn't plan on burning their 25th roster spot and last bench spot on a longshot who might contribute nothing to a team that was built to contend.

I can appreciate where you're going with this, but you're going to have to take at least one other big name out of the equation (Zambrano? Fukudome? Both?) before you've got an apples-to-apples comparo. Oh and also wipe out the playoff appearance in 2007 too.

Lieber can be traded if he consents to it... and why wouldn't he, if his alternative is the Cubs' bullpen?

I've been wondering that myself. There's been some speculation that possibly the Cubs and Twins can work something out that would make Lahey the PTBNL leftover from the Monroe trade.

is it better to have 2 IF backup players than 2 outfield backup players? I understand that you don't really want to platoon Fukadome,but chances are they are going to platoon pie so Johnson will get some plate apperances. What I worry about is the health of Soriano and the consistancy of the other two outfielders, especially Pie. If one goes down, you need another outfield...and I'm thikning about Soriano. I'd rather have Murton on this team as the the first bat off the bench than Cedeno. I don't see Cedeno as a good PH off the bench, and you have fontenot as a backup to give derosa or theriort a day off. If someone in the outfield gets hurt, then you call up cedeno, but it seems to me having a bench with Murton over Cedeno is the smart choice. Sending Cedeno to AAA isn't a choice though. He's out of options.

No, signing Soriano wasn't a good move. It will look even worse with each succeeding year until Soriano retires. CubinNY beat me to it, but no, I don't agree that signing Soriano was the right move. Among the things about which we disagree is whether Soriano is an elite or great player. Signing Soriano was bad b/c his contract is huge compared to the value he brings. The fact that we had a perfectly acceptable alternative for his position only makes it worse. Choosing to sign a FA that is overpaid that plays the position Murton plays is a choice Hendry made. The fact that it would block Murton is not coincidence. It was an obvious result of the decision he made. Why you maintain that Hendry's decisions regarding the makeup of this team and Murton's lack of position on the ML team are separate issues, I have no idea. So I see we're back to longing for the MacPhail Approach, in which any/every top-end free agent is passed over because of the pricetag, and seeking out affordable, serviceable guys is preferred to overpaying for impact guys. Look "overpaid" and "free agent" are redundant terms, especially if you're talking about the upper end of the market. There are no bargain shopping opportunities here. Either you're in or you're out. I'd prefer the Cubs be in, and as I said earlier, the real shame is that they didn't get in sooner on guys like Beltran and Vlad and Tejada. Better late than never, though. Yes, you've got me figured out. I've been saying all along that what I want is the Cubs to spend nothing and just run out league-average players at all positions. I haven't said that we shouldn't have overspent for Soriano because those resources could be better allocated elsewhere. I haven't said Hendry should have made better choices all along in building this team so that he didn't feel compelled to sign a 30+ overrated LF coming off a career year to a contract that will pay him well into his upper 30s. You don't have to bargain shop to spend wisely. Lee's contract, ARam's contract, heck, even Lilly's contract - better decisions. Soriano's contract was Hendry trying to save his own butt pure and simple. Soriano is not the upper end of the market. He may have been the "best" FA last year, but that only says bad things about last year's market. Hendry's inability to construct this team and complete lack of foresight made signing Soriano appear to be his best option - then he went out and signed him to an inexplicable 8 year deal. You're either intentionally misconstruing my posts or you're acting very dense. Soriano's deal isn't inexplicable. It's the going rate in this neighborhood. Like I said, you're either in or you're out. MacPhail's Cubs were always out, and the results speak for themselves. I for one am glad they're trying a different approach, even at the expense of collateral damage to serviceable guys like Matt Murton.

1. Male 2. Yes 3. Of course 4. No chance 5. Sure 6. Inept management, poor player development, crucial errors in the postseason, injuries, bad luck

No, signing Soriano wasn't a good move. It will look even worse with each succeeding year until Soriano retires. CubinNY beat me to it, but no, I don't agree that signing Soriano was the right move. Among the things about which we disagree is whether Soriano is an elite or great player. Signing Soriano was bad b/c his contract is huge compared to the value he brings. The fact that we had a perfectly acceptable alternative for his position only makes it worse. Choosing to sign a FA that is overpaid that plays the position Murton plays is a choice Hendry made. The fact that it would block Murton is not coincidence. It was an obvious result of the decision he made. Why you maintain that Hendry's decisions regarding the makeup of this team and Murton's lack of position on the ML team are separate issues, I have no idea. So I see we're back to longing for the MacPhail Approach, in which any/every top-end free agent is passed over because of the pricetag, and seeking out affordable, serviceable guys is preferred to overpaying for impact guys. Look "overpaid" and "free agent" are redundant terms, especially if you're talking about the upper end of the market. There are no bargain shopping opportunities here. Either you're in or you're out. I'd prefer the Cubs be in, and as I said earlier, the real shame is that they didn't get in sooner on guys like Beltran and Vlad and Tejada. Better late than never, though.

I'll remind you that this path started when you suggested that Murton's demotion was a result of coincidence and not Hendry's decisions. I've never said Murton should prevent you from signing the premiere FA. Though it would be nice if that premiere FA were actually elite or at least great. When the premiere FA is wildly overpaid for what he brings to the table and his age, it's having a complimentary player like Murton at the same position that allows you to pass on him and better allocate your resources. Of course, you can only pass on him if you haven't spent the last 5 years making horrible decisions about how to build a baseball team. B/c if Hendry hadn't done that, we wouldn't need Soriano - or at least hopefully Hendry wouldn't think we needed him - and we'd have a lot more money to spend on a lot better players where we have no useful alternative (for the last several years, CF, SS, and C w/ the exception of Barret's few good/really good years, SP would be a good one this year). So we agree then: given where the Cubs were after the 2006 season, signing Soriano was the right move, even though it came at the expense of Matt Murton's shot at an everyday role on this team. And I maintain that the latter was indeed a coincidence and not a conscious choice to phase Murton out of the picture. Look the guy they needed most happens to play Murton's position. That's an unfortunate coincidence, because as you have said, Murton's a useful complimentary player. And I'll remind you that how the Cubs got to where they were after the 2006 season, and the decisions Hendry made that led them there, is a separate topic entirely.

I wish the sort of pay-up-for-top-talent approach that led to the Cubs signing Soriano had been implemented 5 years ago too.

It better not be, or that is one hell of an expensive platoon player. I wasn't suggesting a traditional platoon. What I was suggesting is that it might make the most sense for Lou to fit in Fukudome's 1 or 2 days off per month on games when there's a tough LHP going. These happen to be days when we should anticipate Pie to be sitting also. Thus, Silver's plan to have Fukudome in CF when Pie sits pretty much falls apart. Fukudome better not be sitting more than a handful of games this year. When he does sit, there's no reason Pie couldn't play. You can't sit him against all lefties. Personally, I'd be thrilled if nobody on the Cubs started 150 games. Everybody benefits from a couple of days off a month, even beyond the travel days. And Fukudome probably could use a few more than most, given the transition he's making. With Johnson onboard now, I'd be fine with Pie sitting against every LHP. That amounts to what, 30 or 40 games? Fine by me. Johnson's a solid player that really excels against LHP. Keep throwing him out there, I say.

What you're doing is excusing all of Hendry's past mistakes by saying he had to get Soriano. Hendry never had to get Soriano. This should have been a 90-win team years ago. If Hendry was any good at seeing the value of his assets, and could plan beyond today, he wouldn't have been in the position he was in when he grossly overpaid for Soriano. He could have easily fit Murton into a championship caliber team a long time ago if he wasn't just so incredibly incompetent. Instead, he throws good money after bad by continually forcing himself to cover up his own mistakes with bigger and more expensive ones. I'm not trying to excuse all of Hendry's past mistakes. What I'm trying to do is shift the focus away from Hendry's general merits as a GM, and keep it focused on Murton's career path with the Cubs specifically. I'll say it again -- Murton is a good ballplayer, a legit starting LF in this league, and a guy that's very likeable to boot. But one thing he's not is a guy that keeps you from pursuing the premiere free agent in baseball, especially when you're coming off of a disastrous season, as the Cubs were after the 2006 season. Now is Hendry largely to blame for the disaster? Of course he is. Nevertheless, the course of action he chose at that time, given the mess he was complicit in creating, was not only understandable but probably correct as well -- the proof is in the pudding as they say, and in 2007, Soriano was instrumental in the Cubs rebounding all the way from 90 losses to the postseason. Had he passed on Soriano to go with Murton, the Cubs are watching the NLC champ Brewers in the playoffs last year. As was suggested by another poster, declining to pursue Soriano because of Murton's presence would be directly comparable to the decisionmaking that led to the Cubs passing on Tejada because of Alex Gonzalez, passing on Beltran because of Corey Patterson, and passing on Furcal because of, uh, who exactly? So many here were so thrilled to be rid of that mindset with MacPhail's departure, yet here's the same philosophy being preached once again. The bottom line is if you want to break the padlock off of the wallet and go get impact players in free agency, then "complimentary" players like Murton are going to be victims. The alternative is to pass on the impact guys, go with the complimentary guys, and watch October baseball on TV.

It better not be, or that is one hell of an expensive platoon player. I wasn't suggesting a traditional platoon. What I was suggesting is that it might make the most sense for Lou to fit in Fukudome's 1 or 2 days off per month on games when there's a tough LHP going. These happen to be days when we should anticipate Pie to be sitting also. Thus, Silver's plan to have Fukudome in CF when Pie sits pretty much falls apart.

Murton was sort of collateral damage from the Soriano signing. The Cubs wanted/needed to make a big splash after the disaster of 2006, and it just so happened that the best available FA that year (Soriano) plays the only position Murton's shown himself to be competent at. Under ideal circumstances, the best available FA that year would've been a SS or a 2B or even a RF, and Murton would've been able to remain the everyday LF -- and I bet the Cubs would agree with that. (Next best outcome would be for Murton to display an ability to play a passable RF... he hasn't, at least not in Lou's eyes.) Unfortunately those weren't the circumstances, and so here we are... not by design so much as by coincidence. Coincidence? No, we're here b/c our GM is terrible at building a baseball team. Let's focus on the topic at hand please. Would Hendry have built a better baseball team if he had installed Murton in LF and passed on Soriano? How about if he had installed Murton in RF and passed on Fukudome? Which of those two guys is Murton better than? Recall that since the Soriano signing, the Cubs have made efforts to get Murton regular PT. First Soriano did not work out in CF, necessitating a return to LF; then Murton did not work out in RF because of his defensive shortcomings (real or perceived). So am I to ignore all of your comments because I'm focusing on the topic at hand or did you mean "focus on the topic at hand...after I get my arguments in." Either way, Murton's not better than Soriano or Fukudome, but that's not really the point. Jim has done a terrible job of building a baseball team. Signing Soriano is just one example of this. Sending Murton down so you can carry 12 pitchers in April and carry Mike freaking Fontenot is just the latest example. Matt Murton is one topic. "Our GM is terrible" is a completely different topic. Murton's a good player, and I really like him. But he's not the kind of player that prevents a team from pursuing an elite, impact FA like Soriano. Murton's fate with the Cubs has been sealed since the day Soriano signed. Ill-fated attempts to play both guys out of position (Soriano in CF, Murton in RF) couldn't prevent the inevitable. That's not a reflection on Hendry, that's just the way things are. UNLESS you want to take the opposite position, namely that Hendry shouldn't have signed Soriano because he already had Murton to play LF. The problem there is that you've already admitted that Murton's not better than Soriano, so it kinda blows a hole in your "terrible job of building a baseball team" rant to argue that a better idea would be to use a lesser player over a superior one. That's not the way to win more games. How are Hendry's signings not a reflection on Hendry? That's asinine. He signed a 30+ LF to a huge contract when he had an adequate player in LF that was cheap. And Soriano's not elite. If he could play 2B, fine, but in LF, he's not a guy you spend over $15m a year for. And you clearly didn't read my response or it went right over your head. Soriano's the better player, but Hendry shouldn't have signed him. Since he signed him, certainly he has to play over Murton, but that's not the point. The point is Hendry's bad a building a baseball team. He overspends for a player that blocks a good source of cheap production - which is mismanagement of limited resources. As I said, Soriano is but one example. If Hendry had done a better job of building this team and managing his resources and assets, he wouldn't have felt compelled to spend whatever it took to get Soriano to save his job. But he did, so here we are. Sending down a cheap, 26-year-old LF that would be a perfect complimentary player. But that's not Hendry's fault. He's just the GM. He can't possibly be responsible for managing the roster and resources. Look this is very simple. The team you propose, with Murton in LF and no Soriano, would win fewer games than the one Hendry's built, with Soriano in LF and Murton in limbo. In fact your team likely doesn't make the playoffs last year... the team Hendry built so poorly did make the playoffs. And what's amusing is, you even admit as much, but yet still tear into Hendry. As I said, under ideal circumstances, there would be room for both Soriano and Murton. But if it's one or the other (and it clearly is), well, sorry Matt.

I wonder if Lou will consider sitting Pie AND Fukudome against tough lefties, moving Johnson to CF, DeRosa to RF, and Cedeno to 2B. We'll have to wait and see how Fukudome's splits are, but that's quite possibly a better alignment than the two Silver compared.

Exactly. Let Murton go tear up AAA until we need him to replace an injury, or some other team needs him enough to offer something intriguing. We lose nothing by holding onto him. It's not a bad situation at all (unless you're Murton).

Murton was sort of collateral damage from the Soriano signing. The Cubs wanted/needed to make a big splash after the disaster of 2006, and it just so happened that the best available FA that year (Soriano) plays the only position Murton's shown himself to be competent at. Under ideal circumstances, the best available FA that year would've been a SS or a 2B or even a RF, and Murton would've been able to remain the everyday LF -- and I bet the Cubs would agree with that. (Next best outcome would be for Murton to display an ability to play a passable RF... he hasn't, at least not in Lou's eyes.) Unfortunately those weren't the circumstances, and so here we are... not by design so much as by coincidence. Coincidence? No, we're here b/c our GM is terrible at building a baseball team. Let's focus on the topic at hand please. Would Hendry have built a better baseball team if he had installed Murton in LF and passed on Soriano? How about if he had installed Murton in RF and passed on Fukudome? Which of those two guys is Murton better than? Recall that since the Soriano signing, the Cubs have made efforts to get Murton regular PT. First Soriano did not work out in CF, necessitating a return to LF; then Murton did not work out in RF because of his defensive shortcomings (real or perceived). So am I to ignore all of your comments because I'm focusing on the topic at hand or did you mean "focus on the topic at hand...after I get my arguments in." Either way, Murton's not better than Soriano or Fukudome, but that's not really the point. Jim has done a terrible job of building a baseball team. Signing Soriano is just one example of this. Sending Murton down so you can carry 12 pitchers in April and carry Mike freaking Fontenot is just the latest example. Matt Murton is one topic. "Our GM is terrible" is a completely different topic. Murton's a good player, and I really like him. But he's not the kind of player that prevents a team from pursuing an elite, impact FA like Soriano. Murton's fate with the Cubs has been sealed since the day Soriano signed. Ill-fated attempts to play both guys out of position (Soriano in CF, Murton in RF) couldn't prevent the inevitable. That's not a reflection on Hendry, that's just the way things are. UNLESS you want to take the opposite position, namely that Hendry shouldn't have signed Soriano because he already had Murton to play LF. The problem there is that you've already admitted that Murton's not better than Soriano, so it kinda blows a hole in your "terrible job of building a baseball team" rant to argue that a better idea would be to use a lesser player over a superior one. That's not the way to win more games.

Murton was sort of collateral damage from the Soriano signing. The Cubs wanted/needed to make a big splash after the disaster of 2006, and it just so happened that the best available FA that year (Soriano) plays the only position Murton's shown himself to be competent at. Under ideal circumstances, the best available FA that year would've been a SS or a 2B or even a RF, and Murton would've been able to remain the everyday LF -- and I bet the Cubs would agree with that. (Next best outcome would be for Murton to display an ability to play a passable RF... he hasn't, at least not in Lou's eyes.) Unfortunately those weren't the circumstances, and so here we are... not by design so much as by coincidence. Coincidence? No, we're here b/c our GM is terrible at building a baseball team. Let's focus on the topic at hand please. Would Hendry have built a better baseball team if he had installed Murton in LF and passed on Soriano? How about if he had installed Murton in RF and passed on Fukudome? Which of those two guys is Murton better than? Recall that since the Soriano signing, the Cubs have made efforts to get Murton regular PT. First Soriano did not work out in CF, necessitating a return to LF; then Murton did not work out in RF because of his defensive shortcomings (real or perceived).

Murton was sort of collateral damage from the Soriano signing. The Cubs wanted/needed to make a big splash after the disaster of 2006, and it just so happened that the best available FA that year (Soriano) plays the only position Murton's shown himself to be competent at. Under ideal circumstances, the best available FA that year would've been a SS or a 2B or even a RF, and Murton would've been able to remain the everyday LF -- and I bet the Cubs would agree with that. (Next best outcome would be for Murton to display an ability to play a passable RF... he hasn't, at least not in Lou's eyes.) Unfortunately those weren't the circumstances, and so here we are... not by design so much as by coincidence.

Awful. I'll just second (third?) what UMF said. At least I like the decision in the thread title. Murton to AAA was a foregone conclusion as soon as Johnson signed. (Well actually it dates back to when Soriano signed, but that's another topic.)