CubsWin

I have to say that it is true. We still haven't improved our offense one bit. Yes, that is accurate. The Cubs have yet to improve their offense over last season. Though, the order in which they acquire players is completely unimportant to me. I couldn't care less if the Cubs sign a starter next and then go get their OFers. What matters to me is how well those players are likely to perform and how much they cost to acquire.

Welcome to the forum! I must say, though, your line-up doesn't sound very realistic to me. The only unrealistic thing about that lineup is that Dusty will never put Murton in the 2-hole. You can pencel Neifi in there. Here is what I find unrealistic about it. Acquiring Weaver. Starting Perez who has only played as much as he has because of injuries. Acquiring Jones who has not been mentioned as being pursued by the Cubs in any articles and certainly there haven't been any actual quotes coming from anyone inside the Cubs about wanting Jones. And the idea of a Murton/Mabry platoon doesn't sound very likely to me, either. Angry cynics and those convinced of the ineptitude of Jim Hendry would probably disagree, however. I understand. I guess we'll find out who's right. I've certainly been wrong before.

:shock: man the insanity just doesn't stop in LA. What's next....sign Kobe Bryant to play LF? I like Billy Mueller a lot...but as a first baseman? Hmmm..... Oh yeah, anyone know what they plan on doing with Izturis? The thought right now is that he will slide over to 2B when he returns from his surgery around the all-star break. Kent will then move to first and Mueller, if signed, could move to the bench or 3B depending.

Wow. A lot of people are really depressed by the Cubs missing out on Furcal even though they would have had to pay him at least 13 million a year to get him. I just don't see the reasons to be so depressed. Its not like signing Furcal was the Cubs only chance to improve themselves. There are several players available via trade. Wilkerson, Michaels and Pierre are some of the more likely to be traded. Starter A.J. Burnett and Kevin Millwood are still available. Kenny Lofton is a pretty decent option in CF through free agency. And as far as SS is concerned, Ronny Cedeno has had two rather impressive years back-to-back with the bat. He has always had an excellent glove and arm. He will be just 23 this season and will cost the league minimum which will allow the Cubs to add OFers and a starting pitcher of note. The difference between Cedeno and Furcal in a season or two could be negligible, except for their price tags, that is. All is not lost, yo. Now, lets see if Hendry can get it done. This is make or break for him and the Cubs of '06.

Welcome to the forum! I must say, though, your line-up doesn't sound very realistic to me.

My game plan is start Cedeno at SS and Walker at 2B. Trade for Wilkerson. By several different accounts, the Nationals are looking for starting pitching, so it will probably take Jerome Williams and possibly some prospects to get him. Wilkerson will play either CF or RF depending on who the Cubs are able to acquire next. Then, get one of Michaels, Mench, Pierre, Bradley or someone else to fill the other OF spot. Nobody on this list has an expensive contract. So when combined with what Wilkerson will cost, there will be plenty of money left over to make very solid offers to Burnett or Millwood. Assuming the CFer the Cubs acquire is Pierre, the line-up would look something like this: Pierre Murton Lee Wilkerson Ramirez Walker Barrett Cedeno Prior Zambrano Millwood or Burnett Maddux Rusch or Wood Dempster Howry Eyre Ohman Williamson Rusch or Wood Wuertz/Novoa Blanco Mabry Hairston Perez FA They would have upgraded in the lead-off spot over Corey with Pierre. Upgraded in RF over Burnitz with Wilkerson. Upgraded over Perez at SS with Cedeno, plus Ronny would be batting 8th. Upgraded in the rotation by swapping out Williams for either Millwood or Burnett. Upgraded the depth of the rotation especially when Wood is healthy. Upgraded the bullpen drastically. And depending on who the FA bench player is, perhaps upgraded the bench as well. I'd be very surprised if this actually happens, but I'd take it.

He most certianly does not fill any need. Walker can lead off just fine Cedeno can cover SS just fine The Cubs current needs: 1. OBP 2. OBP 3. RF 4. OBP 5. Left handed bat 6. Someone to tell Hendry to release Macias 7. CF There is no way anyone can convicne me that Furcal is a 10 million dollars worth of upgrade over Cedeno (who BTW, is having a fantastic season in Winter ball) or a 7.5 million dollar upgrade over Neifi. Help me to understand, how is Furcal that good? I love your list of Cubs needs. Not only is it accurate, its pretty darn entertaining as well. I agree that if the Cubs don't sign Furcal, they have lead-off options and SS options already on the team. I think Cedeno can do a pretty good job, but the Cubs would have to make him their weakest link in the batting order. That means getting the best offensive CFer and RFer possible. The Phillies are rumored to want a front of the rotation pitcher for Abreu. If Wood weren't rehabbing, he might be a fit but he has a no trade clause. I doubt the Cubs would part with Zambrano or Prior at this stage in their careers. It has also been reported that the OFer the Phillies are most willing to move now is Michaels. Given Bradley's tempestuous nature and penchant for getting suspended, Michaels might be the best offensive CFer out there. If Hendry was able to follow that up with Wilkerson, the Cubs would then have a line-up of: Michaels Walker Lee Wilkerson Ramirez Murton Barrett Cedeno Its pretty right handed at the bottom, but so what. I'm not certain what the Cubs would have to give up to get those two guys, but if they did get them, I could live with that line-up. Especially because neither Michaels or Wilkerson are that expensive freeing up money to go after one of the free agent starters like Burnett or Millwood.

Has anyone else reported this?

Absolutely agree. Think about this folks: 5 years and $45M for a guy, who has never achieved an OPS over .795, and who's OBP has not been above .352 in the last 4 seasons. This is just not smart. Ronny at shortstop. Trade for the biggest RF bat you can possibly get, throw all the trade chips at him. I'm thinking Abreu-size. Walker at 2B. Plug CF. Bradley when the Dodgers non-tender would do. Barrett, Lee, Ramirez and Murton to fill it out. I just Abreu-sized my lunch order and I'm regretting it. But I don't think the Cubs would regret doing the same. So long as they don't trade Pie. He is the only guy that could make the Cubs regret trading him away for someone like Abreu.

The huge difference between Thome's ability to produce and Sammy's has a lot more to do with what the Cubs got back than any appearance of desperation. Sammy was done. His declining numbers over the previous three seasons provided plenty of evidence to that effect. Thome's numbers previous to his injury-riddled 2005 were right in line with his career averages. He was still pumping out a .970 OPS in '04 which is the last full season he played. The numbers he put up in '03 and '04 are very similar to the numbers he produced in '99 and '00. The statistical evidence to support Thome being able to produce like that in the coming season is there. That same evidence just wasn't there for Sammy. Neither logic, statistics nor the direct quotes of the time support the position that the reason why the Cubs got back what they did for Sammy is because Hendry was sending the message that the Cubs were desperate to get rid of him. Look, there are plenty of things to criticize Hendry for. This just isn't one of them.

That sounds like revisionist history to me. I can recall several articles last off season in which Hendry was quoted as saying that it looked like Sammy would not be traded. He was willing to hang on to him and go into next season with Sammy in RF. Doesn't sound to desperate to me. Now the releasing of the videotape showing Sammy leaving early was dumb, but that is not the same thing as announcing to the world that you are desperate to trade the guy.

What? All of the players I listed at first have been mentioned multiple times in rumors, some(in the case of Bradley and Wilkerson) directly to the Cubs. AJ Burnett has been linked to the Cubs in the media, you think we'll sign him? Manny Ramirez has been linked to Seattle, you think they'll sign him? You have to be realistic. On some, he is. The latest out of Philly is that the OFer they are most willing to part with is Michaels. That lessens the possibility of Abreu being traded, but raises the possibility of the Cubs at least being able to acquire Michaels. Bradley is very attainable. Lugo can be had. Giles was available. Furcal still is. Sure, some on his list are long shots, but some are also very reasonable to hope for. And there is no rule against hoping for a long shot is there? Now, I agree, if you then hold it against the GM for not being able to reel in your longshot, then we have a problem.

Wilkerson maybe, but several different outlets have been onto Bradley being on the Cubs radar. Of course, I never said that we had to get these players or bust, I was just asked to name players I liked, and I responded with some of the names that have been discussed. ESPN, I believe, was reporting that the Nationals were actively shopping Wilkerson for Vasquez. So he is definitely on the market and being shopped. Whether the Cubs would be willing to part with someone that would bring Wilkerson to Chicago is another matter, but to be wanting and hoping for Hendry to acquire Wilkerson isn't out of the realm of possibility. Now, accusing Hendry of falling down on the job if he isn't willing to trade Zambrano for Wilkerson would be unsupportable but I haven't seen you do that.

Weeny?

You may have looked at the wrong list of players, I don't know. CP20 made two lists, maybe there was some confusion. But the list he made of players that he would like the Cubs to acquire were all players that are available. He mentioned Bradley, Michaels, Abreu, Wilkerson, Giles, Furcal and Lugo. All of them have been mentioned in very recent trade talks or are free agents.

Well, technically speaking, if Cedeno can play 2B, the Cubs already have three secondbasemen. :wink: Four, if you include Macias. :shock: But that is no reason not to improve at that position. The question on the table is, is Luis Castillo better than Todd Walker? Since Cedeno can play SS rather well defensively, which would be the better infield when you consider both defense and offense? Cedeno and Walker or Cedeno and Castillo? You can expand the question to include Furcal and Nomar if you wish. Then our choices are: Furcal and Walker Furcal and Cedeno Nomar and Walker Cedeno and Nomar Cedeno and Castillo Cedeno and Walker and, what the heck, one can dream can't they... Furcal and Castillo

I would do what I could to acquire Luis Castillo to play 2B instead of Nomar. The Marlins firesale may not be over and he could be had. Castillo can lead-off and would fill that position just like Furcal could. He would be less expensive than Furcal, but the Cubs would have to give up players to get him. Castillo just won another Gold Glove, IIRC, so the middle infield defense would be improved while giving up some SLG but gaining OBP at the 2B position over last season. And if anyone here thinks that Cedeno can't improve upon the numbers Neifi put up last season, I liked to hear their argument.

No they arent. Obviously 05 is the exception, the question is will he revert back to the norm, when he was useful, or will the exception (worthless) become the norm. I mean, really, we're just arguing semantics. I imagine we both have the same feelings about Pierre. I don't even think we are arguing semantics. :lol: The question you described..."will he revert back to the norm...or will the exception become the norm" is the exact same question I described. Let me ask you this, what evidence should one consider when trying to answer that question?

It's a good question especially in light of the new developments but I don't want Nomar back. I still think the Cubs need to concern themselves with guys who are both good offensive and defensive players. Nomar (and Todd Walker) are liabilites. I'd like to get a SS and let Cedeno play second. Or perhaps swing a deal for Castillo and play Ronnie at SS. How do you know Cedeno will be good offensively? The sample size isn't big enough for me. If he is horrible offensively, would it have been a good trade off to give up Walker's bat for Cedeno's defense? I agree that his major league sample size isn't large enough. But when you combine it with what he did at AAA while just 22 years old and the kinds of numbers he put up at AA while 21, the sample size is pretty big. Is there a chance that he won't put up good numbers in the majors next season? Sure, there's a chance. But I believe the chances are greater that he will put up at least decent numbers (.270/.330/.385) with excellent defense. And that isn't even considering the chances of him putting up numbers like he did last season. He will be 23 this season. He is going to continue to improve. He will be cheap and likely pretty darn good for a long time. You gotta start playing him sometime, and I think the sample size shows he is a gamble worth taking.

Are we supposed to ignore his '05 numbers? No. You are supposed to consider whether they are the norm or the exception. No. You need to decide whether at this stage, he is worth the risk of banking on it not turning into the norm. That is exactly what someone does when they "consider whether they (his '05 stats) are the norm or the exception". So you may have wanted to start your response with the word "yes" instead of "no". I dont think it is. Obviously his 05 numbers are the exception so far, everyone who says "HE HAS A CAREER .350 OBP" points this out pretty well. The question isnt whether 05 is an exception or the norm, its whether it will be. Again, that is the same thing. When one is trying to figure out whether what just happened recently is the exception or the norm, they are essentially trying to predict the future. So...

What makes you think that Hendry didn't offer Van Buren and Leicester to the Marlins already? He would have to be pretty stupid to trade away guys for PTBNLs without first gaging his most active trading partner's desire to acquire them, don't you think? Common sense tells us that if a guy is able to trade Todd Hundley for Mark Grudzielanek and Eric Karros, or trade Bobby Hill and garbage for Aramis Ramirez, or trade Hee Seop Choi for Derrek Lee, or trade Alex Gonzalez, the injury prone Justin Jones, and Brendan Harris for Nomar Garciaparra and Matt Murton, then he certainly should be able to figure out whether the Marlins would have traded us Castillo for Van Buren and Leicester.

That would have been a pretty good line up. Patterson and Novoa, Wuertz or Welly to LA for Bradley. Walker and Cedeno to Florida. Resign Nomar and throw a ton of money at Giles. Trade prospects for relievers. The entire line up is .350+ OBP, good power, speed and improved defense. Done. I disagree. Walker and Cedeno is way too much to pay for Castillo considering his health, contract and the fact that his team is dumping salary. Also considering that Nomar would be playing SS, Cedeno will be needed to cover him if/when he gets injured. Unless, of course, you think that Cedeno's stick is no better than Neifi's which I doubt you do. The consensus around baseball is that Nomar lacks the mobility to play SS effectively anymore. His stick is still plenty strong, especially for the SS position, but doesn't defense count for anything anymore? Doesn't sabermetrics account for someone's ability to prevent runs as well as create them? I thought it did. Cedeno can put up similar offensive numbers to Furcal's and perform similarly defensively as well. About the only thing he doesn't do about as well is steal bases, oh, that and consume payroll. Cedeno might not be as good as I think he is. But he is still very young and the sabermetric numbers he has put up over the last two seasons have got to count for something. Right? Bradley, I'll take. :wink:

I don't think anyone on this board is claiming that Pierre is a great player. Anyone with a career OPS like his can't be considered great. But as far as what force he represents, clearly ballplayers are human beings and not a bunch of numbers. Their impact on a team's ability to win will always be more than simply what their stats show us. I don't have any idea what kind of force Pierre brings to a team's ability to win. I'm not necessarily swayed by what was written in this article. It reads like it was penned by his agent. But regardless of what was written about Pierre in this article, intangibles exist. And they are called intangibles precisely because they cannot be quantified. Now, as to the impact of one player's intangibles, I have no idea. I doubt any one player's attitude would have much impact on a team's ability to win unless he was able to lead others to join him in a very high work ethic (i.e., getting to the ballpark hours earlier and doing all the things he does). If he can lead a group of men to work harder than they ever have before and raise their standards of excellence and professionalism, then perhaps one player's intangibles can have an impact on a team's ability to win. I don't see it as very likely, however.

Are we supposed to ignore his '05 numbers? No. You are supposed to consider whether they are the norm or the exception. No. You need to decide whether at this stage, he is worth the risk of banking on it not turning into the norm. That is exactly what someone does when they "consider whether they (his '05 stats) are the norm or the exception". So you may have wanted to start your response with the word "yes" instead of "no".

Are we supposed to ignore his '05 numbers? No. You are supposed to consider whether they are the norm or the exception.