cubsfan26

A trade never gets a GM fired, but you are right this trade makes no sense for Bradley/Silva straight up. Even with Bradley having almost no value. He has to have more then Silva at this point. Silva probably had one of the worse contracts in baseball right now. So this deal doesn't make sense unless were getting money or prospects in return.

#-o please let this deal benefit us in some way other then just Carlos Silva services. A talented young player, or 8-10m to use on another player would be nice. We have to be getting something else right? Otherwise why would Hendry do this deal right now, unless the Mariners gave in more then they were willing to in the past? I can't believe he would do this one over Burrell unless we were getting more in return then Silva and his crap contract.

Ehhh... Well I might be able to live with this trade, if we get say 8-10m back, and Silva has to earn a rotation spot going into spring training. But if it's just Bradley for Silva straight up and we don't get money or anything else. Well then this trade sucks for us.

Just curious but how good of a hitters park is Wrigley? If Wrigley is still a good hitters park, and the possible upgrade of hitting on the road due to more hitter friendly NL Central parks compared to AL West parks. Maybe the dropoff overall won't be all that big.

How do we know he sucked? We don't know if he was actually pretty decent that day. You need to tell me how well hit those singles were. If someone got a cheap single through the infield or a infielder wasn't in the right postion to field it. Also was the line-out softly hit or hard hit? Was the walk to set up a double play? He could have had bad luck to be in that postion in the first place and things evened out. Also you can show me game logs of just about every reliever having innings like that. It doesn't mean they were able to get the same results that Grabow has gotten the last few seasons. Or these type of innings happen to Grabow more then others. Again if these type of things happen alot then you might have a point. But you do realize that Grabow has been decent to pretty good when it comes to allowing inherited runners to score. I know your using this example to try to prove a point. But it doesn't prove anything, unless you can say these type of things happen alot. Your just assuming these things happen alot, because thats often the case when those "stats" tell you a guys era shouldn't be as good. But like I said those stats are flawed for reasons just like this. If you look at Grabow game logs. You would see that he gives up 1 or 2 base runners in innings sometimes but not much more then that very often and when he does it's when he gives up runs. The guy hasn't been saved by allowing other pitchers runs to score or other people bailing him out like you might think. Plus he's gotten the chance to start and finsh his own innings alot. Basically teams haven't hit him very well over the last two seasons. So if he does walk a hitter or give up a single. He rarely gives up two singles in a inning and if does, he doesn't usually walks people often on top of that. When he has done that is in games it's when he hasn't gotten good results. Exactly, and it's a waste of time. I really wish we would just drop this topic and agree to disagree. But these two guys feel the need to keep bringing it up. So I really gotta just stop responding to them, it's just as much my fault as there's.

#-o if his hits lead to good results then you might be right, but they didn't. Hits are only part of a hitters stats, what type of hits and taking walks are what equal the good results. For a pitcher, getting outs and not giving up runs is what leads to good results. All the other stats just show how pretty he made things look when trying to get those outs. Which can be a indication of if a pitcher can keep getting those results going forward or not. But at some point the excuse of luck runs out. But whatever I'm done with this topic. If you guys have nothing better to do then raze me, well then have fun. Wins are a team stat.

Funny or not, sorry that I still value actual results a pitcher gets in a season. But you wouldn't be correct because they don't use ERA alot. They talk about how many wins a pitcher gets.

It's funny watching Chicago Tribune Live and all the writers talking about how this is such a good move. Then Dave Kaplan and Steve Stone blaming the Cubs for not cutting the grass earlier in the 2006 season and using that as the reason why Pierre didn't have a better season. But Steve Stone still pointed out that Pierre had over 200 hits that season. I believe that fans these days pay too much attention to alot of these stats. But seriously these sports writers are just so clueless.

In previous seasons I think that fear would be warranted. But I don't think people realize that Hendry can't shell out big money this offseason, even if he wanted to. He probably can't give Marlon Byrd something like 3 year at 24m. The biggest contract he could probably give is something simliar to what Cameron got. But even that would probably be on the high end. Something like Byrd at 6m in 2010 and 8m in 2011, with some type of vesting option based on production is about as high as we probably can go. Which IMO is probably too high, so hopefully another team gives him something like 3 year at 20-21m.

I want nothing to do with Byrd unless we can get him for 1 year at like 4m or even two years at 8m. Thats most likely not going to happen. So I hope we miss out on Byrd, and add a outfielder through a trade or sign someone like Ryan Church instead. I doubt that the Cubs stepped up there pursuit for Byrd though. So I wouldn't get all worked up over this story. It's pretty common knowledge that the Cubs liked Granderson/Cameron/Byrd going into the offseason. So how that those guys are off the table, it's easy to write a story about the Cubs stepping up there pursuit for Byrd.

I would say at least a 100 point higher OPS(maybe 150). Lets not pretend 34 is super old. Soriano still has a few good years left before we can start saying he's old. LOL no it's not. At this point you are just commenting on my post to comment. Last offseason I said hey lets give some of these moves a chance after people were jumping all over Hendry. Since he made a bunch of moves before that people didn't love and they worked out. I only made those comments after watching people calling for Hendry head after he just had a very good 08 season as GM. In hindsight I will admit you guys were mostly right to bash the moves he made last offseason. That though has nothing to do with what I'm saying right now. I'm saying lets see WHAT WE DO FIRST before we judge the TEAM. We haven't even added any players to the team yet, so our offseason hasn't really even started. Yet people are talking like this team is ready to go to Spring training. If people don't like the moves Hendry ends up making thats fine. But lets at least make some moves before we call this a horrible offseason. With the way the players performed last year they weren't better then 83 and 78. What I questioned if the team is mediocre right now. Since I expect a good amount of players on the roster to have better seasons and I think our bullpen has a chance to be better as well.

I somewhat agree, but I think were better then mediocre and could be pretty good with a little luck. I also think were gonna add 2 or 3 players that will help us a good amount(or least I hope). Plus there's really only a 6-8 game swing in a season that makes a team mediocre and a playoff contender. Heck if Kevin Gregg doesn't blow and lose half of the games he did. Then the Cubs are contending for a playoff spot the final few weeks of the season and don't shut down Rich Harden. Well I still think some minor moves could be made that might appear minor but end up helping us alot. Who we get and how good the CF is gonna be a big factor(I'd be ok with Cody Ross, David DeJesus, Ryan Church/Reed Johnson platoon or Marlon Byrd at the right price). But if we are able to add someone like Capps, or sign someone like Jonny Gomes to platoon with Fukudome or get another pitcher on a bargin. Those moves could help the team alot overall. Thats why I said lets see what were able to do before judging the team. Yeah but overall alot of things went wrong for the Cubs last season. When you think about it's almost surprising that this team finshed 5 games above 500. Soriano had his worse season and was hurt, Soto had horrible luck and other issues, Zambrano, Lilly, Dempster and Harden all spent time on the DL. We got almost no production from 2b. Ramirez missed half the season, forcing us to have line-ups that included Fontenot and guys like Andres Blanco or Aaron Miles. Reed Johnson missed alot of time, which probably gave Fukudome a few extra starts against LH pitching then we wanted him to. Milton Bradley was bad hitting with runners in scoring postion hitting only 205 with a 701 OPS. Not to mention the bullpen blew alot of games for us. So even though Lee had a big season, and Lilly and Wells were awesome. I don't think those drop offs will be anywhere the potential improvements we could have offensivly and in the bullpen. Sure we can't expect everything to go right either, but even if Ramirez gives us 130-140 games and we even get decent years out of Soriano and Soto the offense will be much improved. Plus I wouldn't be shocked to see better years out of Zambrano or Dempster either. Zambrano hopefully will be in better shape and alot of people think Dempsters struggles early had alot to do with issues he was having with his daughter. I just see so much potential improvement from within compared to last year, and feel with a few good moves this offseason this team will have a chance to contend again.

Aren't we a little dramatic? I wasn't asking you or anybody to ignore bad moves Hendry has made or asking you to give them a chance. I said hey lets see what the heck we do this offseason, before we complain how mediocre the team is going to be. Also if you think Hendry is not capable of making good moves, then I don't know what to tell you. But lets at least see what moves we make this offseason before we make these type of judgements or start killing people. Exactly, Cameron was the top guy I wanted and I'm disappointed we didn't get him. But the Cubs still have a very talented team, and they still can make some good moves to make them better this offseason. Especially with so many guys still on the market. This will probably be a slow moving market with good players still out there in mid to late January. So people need to be patient and not call this a horrible offseason, because we haven't done anything yet in mid December.

You probably said that going into 2008 too. Plus there's still tons of time left this offseason and no team outside maybe the Phillies looks good right now. If the Cardinals resign Matt Holliday they might be added to that mix. But just about every NL team has simliar questionmarks or issues as we currently have. Our offseason hasn't even really started yet. It's not like were about done and just added a bunch of crap players. Scott Podsednik didn't get signed to be the everyday CF and leadoff guy and Hendry didn't name Aaron Miles(the fact he's off the team is a postive) the everyday 2b and number 2 hitter. So can we chill with the doom and gloom stuff in December please? Or at least until the team actually makes some moves.

This would make the Cardinals alot better next season. But it's not a smart move for a middle market team like the Cardinals long term. Like it not but we can afford a few Soriano type contracts on the roster due to the market we play in and the money the team makes. Of course the problem now is we have about 8 guys making big money and thats too many. But for a team like the Cardinals it's gonna be hard for them going forward with 4 or more guys making big money.

I'd rather keep Fukudome in CF and sign Xavier Nady or heck even Brian Giles then Winn at this point. But I doubt they would consider that. I think they are deadset on adding a CF and moving Fukudome to RF. Also there's just about no chance at all that Bradley is on the team next season. The decision has been made and they won't go back on it now. Even if they have to settle for C,D and F options and eat more salary then they wanted to with Bradley.

Personally I don't even consider Scott Podsednik a option for CF, even if a few reports claim the Cubs have interest. Lou already has said he's looking for another middle of the order hitter and said they are looking to improve the outfield defense. Pods isn't anything close to a middle of the order bat, and isn't his defense crap? Especially in CF? So maybe they are looking at him as a 4th outfielder, and will consider him if the price drops pretty low on him. Just like they would have interest in Joel Pineiro if the price drops pretty low on him. So it's probably going to be Marlon Byrd, Rick Ankiel or Ryan Church. With Ankiel and Church mostly brought in to be part of a platoon. Unless of course they are able to pull of a trade for a guy like Cody Ross or David DeJesus. I'm most worried about them overpaying Marlon Byrd(something like 2y at 16m). But it looks like he is currently out priced himself from the Cubs with him asking for a 3 or 4 year deal at 8m plus per year, and it looks like Ankiel is doing the same. If Byrd lowers his demands to something like a 2 year with a option on a third year I could see the Cubs signing him though. But I doubt they would overpay on Ankiel. I think they like him a cheap option for CF and not someone they would consider giving big money to.

If we don't get Cameron, I say lets just sign Ryan Church and resign Reed Johnson. A platoon of Church/Johnson in CF will be pretty productive and cost less then what Byrd will get or what Scott Boras wants for Ankiel. I guess a platoon in CF and RF isn't ideal. But we could probably also use Baker in RF to play against some LH pitching.

Crap, Hendry better step in and get a deal done. But I dunno if I would want him to get in a bidding war for Bradley or give him a two year deal.

I dunno why someone wouldn't wanna take a chance on Pat Burrell with his long track record of success before last season. I'm sure the Cubs would have to eat some of his salary. But I dunno why a team wouldn't want him for say 4m or so next year.

There's no chance of that because need to dump some of Burrell salary now so they can go after Cameron or whoever in CF. They won't have all that money tied up to Burrell with him being a 4th outfielder. Plus I don't think Luis Castillo is a option anymore, since the Mets don't want Burrell. I'm basically for whatever saves the Cubs money so they can get Mike Cameron and some other pieces.

FWIW Bob Nightengale of USA Today just wrote this on his Twitter

Well hopefully they won't suck, and if a few things go right they could be pretty good. But the Cubs won't really be hurting there financial situation that much worse. Since anyone they bring in this offseason will probably be on a one year deals(probably a CF, reliever and back up outfielder). Plus they will get back some money from the Bradley trade. If we do get Burrell, we will still be able to flip him to another team and get some money back for this year. Also I really doubt that the Cubs will have to pay the full 2011 salary. They hopefully will get at least 3m or so back there too. Overall they should hopefully at least get 6-7m back(otherwise they would consider releasing him), which will be at lot less then the 13-15m they hoped to get back going into the offseason.

LOL I agree with everything you wrote. The problem is alot of those people buy tickets, and the last thing Ricketts will want is those people booing Milton Bradley every game. Plus they will be flooding sports radio with dumb comments about the subject as well. This is just another reason why there's probably no chance Bradley is back.

Do you, perhaps, have anything other than conjecture to make this argument? I pay attention to those human elements, but think that you are weighing those far too heavily. I am willing to change my opinion here, because I would like to feel more comfortable about losing Harden for nothing, but you have said nothing that's even come close to changing my mind. Does this guy have anything but conjecture behind any argument? The number of falsehoods that he passes along as fact are truly staggering, as if nothing exists outside of every baseball myth ever promulgated by hack columnists, managers, and nostalgia addicts as these cliche-powered machines soldier on, demonstrate the sad irony, that ignorance is bliss. :-)) :-))