CubsWin

That said, here is my uninformed opinion on this signing. I think Hendry made a horrible decision. Jones better catch every ball hit to RF in order to make his bat worth something. And there is no reason to sign him to 3 years. Overpay and do what it takes to get one of these trades done, but don't stick the Cubs with three years of medicrity in a key offensive position like RF. Hendry better not be done.

What evidence. How do we judge the proper reaction so we can then go back and see what is too much or too little? I don't see why people care so much about whether or not other fans are too harsh on the Cubs' moves. Let people vent. Then when it's all over go back and talk about it rationally. Uh, I am letting people vent. I said nothing about "outlawing" overreacting. Or saying that venting was bad and shouldn't be allowed. I'm just calling it what it is, an overreaction. Often the content of venting is illogical. If when challenged that what they are saying is inaccurate (and often disrespectful as well), the venting poster would say, "Yeah, I know, I'm just venting", my reply would be,"Oh, okay, cool. Vent away." But rarely if ever is that the reply. In fact, I have seen unchecked assertions made in these "venting sessions" that many posters still hold as the truth later on. As far as the evidence you asked for, if you go back and read those threads, there were many posts labeling the Eyre and Howry signings as bad moves. These posters had their reasons, for sure, but many of those reasons were little more than hunches and opinions which were being treated as facts. And some posters simply condemned Hendry and the signing without providing any reasons. To me, that is an overreaction. Is overreacting wrong? No. It is very human. I've never said it was wrong or unallowable. I seek to stop no one from expressing any opinion they have. I only seek to remind everyone that these are just opinions, some better supported than others. Not the truth. And I think we often forget that. BTW, I love your sig, goony. :wink:

On the signing of Jones? No. Perez? No. But there is evidence to support "overreaction" in response to the signings of Eyre and Howry. But this Jones signing is very difficult to understand. I sincerely hope Hendry gets asked some very straightforward and angry questions about it at the convention. And I hope the fans come ready to make their point using stats, particularly OBP. I also hope that Hendry isn't done getting OFers or starters this off-season. But this signing makes me wonder if they are ever going to come.

Well this is a thoroughly disappointing signing that I do not understand in the least. Hendry is looking like he should not be given an extension after this move. The off season is far from over so he better not be done. The only way I can understand Jones joining the Cubs would be as a platoon player and that might still be the case, but why sign a platoon player for 3 years? I can't find any intelligent justification for signing Jones to a 3-year contract worth 16 million. Can anyone? I'm not saying the Cubs won't make the playoffs this year. Anything can happen. Moves are still to be made. But I'm not seeing how this signing improved their chances of making them...

I think when the Cubs missed out on Furcal, it changed the chances of Walker being traded. I disagree based on quotes from Hendry after the Furcal signing. He mentioned having three middle infielders (Cedeno, Perez and Hairston). He suspiciously didn't mention Walker at all which would lead most people to believe that Todd is on the block. Suntimes.com I was aware of that quote and thinking about it as I wrote the above post. I agree that it can certainly mean that Hendry has every intention of trading Walker. He also could have simply misspoke and we are reading a lot into it. Regardless, Walker is still with the team. There are no half way decent free agent 2B left and yet there are still teams that are in need of a 2B. I think his trade value is higher now that it has ever been. That said, I still don't want Walker to be dealt without getting someone of equal or better production at SS or 2B to replace him.

I think when the Cubs missed out on Furcal, it changed the chances of Walker being traded.

Well, Hendry picked up his option so we can safely assume two things. He thinks other teams value Walker at 2.5 million and he was okay with having him on the roster if he couldn't find a trading partner or couldn't sign Furcal. I hope Walker stays at 2B. The only scenario in which I would be happy with him being traded would be if the Cubs improved themselves at 2B or SS somehow. How many good 2B options are left in free agency? None. To me, that makes Walker's trade value go up. There are more teams who need a good 2B than there are good free agent 2B. Hendry's waiting to trade Walker has not only raised his trade value but has given the Cubs more options in the middle IF and improved the bench by keeping both Perez and Hairston on it. It is logically probable that Hendry sees Walker as his best 2B on the roster at the moment. Whether that means he won't be traded this off season, who knows?

Hendry has been quoted as saying something to the effect that, ideally, Hill will be at Iowa. I think the job is Williams' to lose. This is what I don't understand with Hendry then. If you are correct, why WOULDN'T he move Hill in the right trade, then? I mean, if he is writing off Hill for a year at AAA from the get-go, then what are the chances Hill makes a significant impact in 2007, as a 27-YEAR OLD rookie? Goodness, sell now while his value is highest..... He is willing to move Hill in the right trade. Just maybe your idea of the right trade and his are different. I think he would trade Hill in a package for Abreu or Tejada and there is evidence to support that according to Bruce Miles. For Huff or Wilkerson, he is sticking to his guns, and, for now, I don't blame him. Do you?

I know that many here feel that Hendry is dead set on trading Walker. But since he is still on the team, one is still allowed to dream, right? Pierre (decent table setter and proven base stealer) Walker (.800+ OPS) Lee (.900+) Huff (.800-.900) Ramirez (900+) Murton (.800-.900) Barrett (.800+) Cedeno (.700+) I know because many of us have been beaten down by a lifetimes worth of being a Cubs fan that we automatically assume that Cedeno and Murton will flop, but there is a good chance that they'll do quite well. With a solidified bullpen, an improved bench and hopefully one more starter signed in free agency, this team can contend. Where is the hole in that line-up? Perez is coming off the bench were he belongs...hopefully. Patterson is on the bench or gone. Pierre will get on more than the lead-off guy did last season creating more RBI chances for Lee, Huff and Ramirez. A full season of Murton has to be better than what Dubois/Hollandsworth did. That's an improved team. If a starter is signed, then when Wood returns, the rotation will also be improved and a lot deeper if/when someone gets injured. At the beginning of the off-season, I felt that the Cubs chances in '06 hung on them signing Brian Giles or someone like him. Huff is no Giles, but he isn't that far behind him. Giles will be 35 next season. Huff will be 29. They both bat lefty. Over the past 3 seasons, Giles has had OPSs of .904, .849 and .906. Huff's OPSs were .922, .853 and a disappointing .749. However, there isn't a lot of evidence to support the idea that Huff will continue to produce OPSs below .800. Given a change of scenery, sticking him in between Lee and Ramirez and putting him on a winning team might be all Huff would need to return to an OPS near or above .900. If that happened, it would be similar to having signed Brian Giles. His OBP would be a lot less and his defense would be a little worse but not by much. The Cubs are a long ways away from signing another starter and trading for Aubrey Huff. But if Hendry can manage to put those two moves with the ones he has already made this off-season, I believe the Cubs would once again be considered contenders. Come on, Jim.

Only problem is, this isn't a new rumor or a new offer made by Hendry. It is one that has been on the table for a while and has yet to be accepted by Tampa Bay while they hold out for something better. So don't expect anything to happen on this front soon because there is no reason for either team to do anything quite yet. They are still waiting for the other person to blink. However, if the deal does happen, whenever it happens, I will be a happy Cubs fan.

I'm in the camp that wouldn't do this deal if Hill were involved but am more than willing to deal Guzman and Welly for Huff. I like Huff. I wish he were better defensively, but I like his bat a lot. If Corey is kept on as a back-up OFer, he could easily sub for Huff defensively in the late innings when the Cubs have a lead to protect. Huff's bat can easily return to an .850-925 OPS. He is left-handed and will turn 29 in a couple of weeks. Short of Abreu or Dunn (who both seem like long shots), who would be a better fit for what the Cubs are looking for than Aubrey Huff? Clearly, the D-Rays are reluctant to do this deal. They want Hill. But short of that, who else would you include in this deal to get it done? And who do you think it would take for Tampa Bay to say yes? Given the depth in the bullpen, I would gladly include one of Wuertz or Novoa. From the 40-man, I would trade Aardsma as well, but I would prefer to keep Marshall, Marmol and Ryu in that order, but I'd give up Ryu if it came to that. If they had interest in Soto, Theriot and that would get the job done, they're gone. Elsewhere in the organization, I would part with Talley Haines, Buck Coats or Brandon Sing among many others. Who would you add to Guzman and Welly and who do you think would get the deal done?

We have a mutual friend and that allowed me to talk baseball for a bit with him over a beer, nothing more, nothing less. He was told about the Cubs because of the Royals interest in Gathright. Obviously, Tampa isn't likely to trade both Huff AND Gathright. Hence, the topic of the rumored Cubs offer for Huff came up, and he confirmed he'd heard it was on the table. Why not? They've just extended Baldelli's contract. They've got Carl Crawford and Jonny Gomes who can easily fill the other two positions, not to mention Delmon Young knocking on the door. I think they could easily move both of those guys. What makes you think they can't?

Offense is good too. And we don't have near enough of it at present. I agree completely. And its December 17th.

What about Wilkerson, Mench, Abreu, etc.? Just because the Rangers, Phillies, etc. haven't traded them by December 17th, doesn't mean that they aren't going to by the end of the off season. GMs posture in trade talks via the media all the time. Hendry doesn't want to have to trade what the other guy is asking so he releases to the media that he is considering signing Jones to a 3-year contract. Daniels wants to see if Jim will offer more in return for Wilkerson so he says he's off the table...for now. The same thing happened last season with Sosa. Hendry said almost all off season long that it looked like Sosa would be the starting RFer for the Cubs in '05, but was he?

Half? For 4 years running? I could see paying half of the guy's salary if there were one year left on his contract and it was clear that he wouldn't be very good in that one year, but not for 4 years. Would you rather guarantee zero production for 30 million over 4 years or risk Magglio producing like he can for 60 million over 4? The Tigers knew they were taking a risk by signing Maggs to that contract. And I think they know that they best way to get the most production out of that signing at this point is to hold on to him and hope he returns to form.

Certainly seems to me that the Rangers would be more willing to trade Dellucci than either Mench or Wilkerson so this could be doable, but what evidence is there that shows Blasko has any trade value at this moment?

You are going to have to pair down your list, DKWG. Some of those guys are not likely to be traded very easily, are they? Why would the Mets trade Milledge at this point? Why would Young be traded? Sure, some of those guys are blocked, but for many others it is going to take a lot to get him and if we are going to trade a lot of talent, why would we want to get someone unproven when the Cubs need to win now. If you are going to have to trade pitching and Walker and whatever else the Cubs can trade right now, why not go after Wilkerson or even Abreu if you can get him.

Hey Rational, If the Sox finished last season with the same record the Rangers did and then handed 2B to a guy who has never played in the majors and didn't really tear up AAA and did so without getting a proven veteran 2B on the roster who could fill in for that guy if he flops, would you be happy with your GM? The Rangers would be really dumb to not want Todd Walker on their roster. That said, I don't think Walker would be enough to land Wilkerson or even Mench. But Hill/Williams and Walker for Wilkerson and a prospect would be fair in my estimation.

I think Rich Hill is in Hendry's plans for the rotation this season. Now that doesn't mean that he won't trade him. It will just have to be for the right guy. Hendry doesn't want to have to count on Hill to perform well at the major league level so he re-signed Rusch. He also doesn't want to have to count on Wood being healthy, so he signed Eyre and Howry to help with the bullpen allowing Williams and Rusch to be in the rotation without seriously depleting the talent in the pen. Hendry now has options. Younger players who have shown promise in the pen like Ohman and Wuertz and to some extent Novoa can battle it out for the final spots in the bullpen or be traded. Teams are always looking for bullpen help (especially during spring training). Wood can be allowed to return without being rushed. Hill can be allowed to compete with Rusch and possibly others for the 5th spot in the rotation. He also has enough money left to sign someone like Millwood or Weaver. If he does, he can afford to trade players like Williams, Hill or both for a really good OFer. Options. Goooood stuff.

Geez. Hill's a decent pitcher, but somehow I think if he threw with his other hand he wouldn't be getting half the hubbub he's been getting. If Hendry can get a good RF with a package including Hill, CPatt, and prospects then do it. I don't know. If a right-handed pitcher had a killer, knockout curve and a low 90s fastball and put up numbers like 11-4, 3.31, 194 Ks against just 35 BBs in just 131 innings in the high minors last season, I still think he would rate as a future starter in the major leagues. Of course, it doesn't much matter what I think. However, it does matter what other GMs around baseball think, and, if this Jayson Stark article is to be believed, they think Hill will be pretty good too.

Why should we wait to bash the Cardinals' incomplete offseason if we aren't going to wait to bash the Cubs' incomplete offseason? :lol:

I'm guessing this means Millwood will not be going to Seattle. I'm also guessing that the Cubs still have plenty of money left to spend. Hmmm....

Its seems to me that we are talking about two different kinds of patience in this thread. Should Cubs fans be being patient with the team overall and possibly sacrifice this season to win later down the road? Hell no. Should Cubs fans be being patient with this off season so far? Considering that we haven't reached the non-tender and arbitration acceptance deadlines yet, yes, we shouldn't be judging this off season as if it is complete and we should have patience still. Also, I think it is important for those of us that are looking ahead and don't like the possibilities for RF that they are seeing to remember something. If you choose to criticize Hendry, thats fine, but in order for the criticism to hold any water you must present the alternative route that he should have and conclusively could have taken. For me, that route was signing Brian Giles. Whether he was ever interested in coming to Chicago, we just don't know. The fact that he signed in San Diego for what seems to be a lot less money than other teams were reported to be offering tells me that he never really seriously intended to leave San Diego. But if Hendry could have signed Giles and didn't, then I believe he can be criticized for that. But after that move, what else could he have done to handle RF by now?

Not when there are still many months to go in the offseason. There are a lot of possible trades still out there but it isn't even December 20th yet. Most GMs, unless they have other reasons, are going to wait until they get the offer they are looking for. But its kinda like a game of chicken because if they wait too long, then they might get desperate and take something less if they are locked into trading the guy. So at this point, I would only trade Lee if we could get an improvement at 1B. There are simply too many options still left to fill the Cubs holes without taking a step down in production at another position.

If Walker can help the Cubs land an OFer like Wilkerson, I say go hard after Vidro, put Cedeno at SS and go hard after Wilkerson. Then, if money allows, sign the best FA starter you can. I think the Rangers are pretty keen on putting Ian Kinsler at second base next year, so I don't think Walker would help land Wilkerson. IIRC, Kinsler hasn't seen one major league pitch yet. Its not like he lit AAA pitching up last year either (.274/.348/.464). The Rangers may plan on starting him, but they will also want an inexpensive veteran option in case he pulls a Jason Dubois. Todd Walker is perfect. And with Williams or Hill headlining the deal, he wouldn't be the main piece the Rangers would be getting in return for Wilky.