CubsWin

Wow. You'd pay him more thatn Aramis? How would you structure the deal? I'd give him a four million signing bonus and then have a deal that pays him 9 million in 06 and 07 and 10 million in 08 and 09. Why not the $10m the first 2 years of the deal, and the lesser amount when he's more likely to regress due to age? And BTW, I'd probably do that deal, too, but I'd also be prepared for ARam to opt out and renegotiate his deal after 2006. And what of the fact that he's pushing 36 years of age? Hold on there, RR. Let's not make Brian any older than he is. According to ESPN.com, Giles was born on January 20, 1971. That makes him 34. Also, from what I hear coming out of San Diego, the man is in terrific shape. He has made it through the first year of drug testing without coming up positive for any sort of steroids so, his physique is natural and thus sustainable. With the onset of greater nutritional understanding and training regimens, it is common for a baseball player to perform well into his late 30s. If the Cubs signed him to a 4 year deal, he would be 38 in the final year of his contract. That would be the only year that I would have concern about. Giles isn't slowing down. Check his numbers, and make sure to adjust for park factors in San Diego. And he isn't pushing 36, not yet anyway. What he is is the hands-down, clear cut target to be the next Cubs RFer.

When I read that Abreu rumor, I thought the exact same thing. Wow. Just wow. Any line-up that has the players to legitimately and logically have Aramis Ramirez bat 6th is okay by me. If only...

Great stuff, NA. I agree that the Cubs should not go after B.J. Ryan to be their closer. I also am convinced that a team like the Red Sox or Mets will throw gobs of money at him to be their closer so it won't even be an issue. But, that said, if the Cubs had the opportunity to sign Ryan for 5-6 million, I think they might have the financial resources to do it. With Murton and Walker coming cheap and the possibilty of resigning Nomar to an incentive laden contract, after the expense of landing Giles for RF and Lofton as a stopgap in CF, the Cubs should have some money left over. Given the choice between going after every 5th day guys like A.J. Burnett or Kevin Millwood for way more than 6 million or solidfying the bullpen with a guy who will appear in 75 games, signing a reliever like Ryan for 6 mill, starts to look a little better.

Just to recap. We have discussed SS, 2B, LF and we're now on RF, correct? 1. Nomar at 5 mill plus incentives with Cedeno backing up. 2. Pick up the option on Walker. (Possible trade) 3. Murton I see Giles taking this in a landslide, so I'm penciling him in RF. But this is just message board talk. If the Cubs actually sign Brian Giles, do we realize the impact he would have on this team? His one signing alone could change everything. He can be counted on to produce at the low end .290/.390/.510, and he's left-handed. Now add the emergence of Cedeno and the possibility of a healthy Nomar for 130 games. Now add the pretty strong possibility of Murton putting up .285/.360/.450 in LF. Walker is Walker. He'll give you an OPS around .800. He may miss a few games, but Cedeno is there. Now add Lee, who takes a couple of steps back but still puts up .290/.380/.520. Now add Ramirez, Barrett, and whomever in CF. That's better than good. But, if you remove Giles from that picture, the Cubs aren't that much different than what they were this year. I'll say it again. Break the bank if you have to, but sign Brian Giles.

Luis Gonzalez? Raul Ibanez? Why? How can getting these guys give the Cubs a better chance of winning a World Series than signing Brian Giles. The difference in production between Huff/Ibanez and Giles/Murton, is pretty big. The difference in OBP alone makes Giles/Murton the clear winner, and that's just from a production standpoint. Giles is likely to cost around 11-12 million a year. Murton will make league minimum. When you consider that Huff/Ibanez made just under 10 million last season, and that Giles/Murton wouldn't cost the Cubs any players to get, then one has to wonder why you are recommending Huff/Ibanez. About the only benefit getting Ibanez gives the Cubs is the ability to spend money on '06 free agents. Is that worth giving up on the entire '05 season? Of the players that are scheduled to be free agents in '06, who is that much better than Brian Giles that the Cubs should "wait" for him? Have you looked at Giles' numbers away from the spacious Petco Park this season? .333/.463/.545. That's a road OPS of over 1.000. I realize this next stat has a very small sample size, but over a three year span (2002-2004), Giles has hit .463/.593/1.073 in Wrigley Field. Enough with the penny pinching. Brian Giles is the answer. I wanted the Cubs to sign Beltran last year but not throw the bank at him. I want the Cubs to throw the bank at Brian Giles this off season. If he is at all willing to leave the west coast, then there are no excuses. Get it done.

Funny post, but if you are seriously asking that question, the answer is no.

An interesting read, but the author presupposes that it is just happenstance that Crain's DER is so much higher than everybody else. Essentially, the author chalks it up to luck because he lacks any other logical explanation. What if his ball moves late and so he gets more weakly hit ground balls than other guys, or he is deceptive enough in his delivery that hitter get fewer good swings on him than other pitchers and thus when they do make contact, its less likely to be a crisply hit ball and easier to field? I think the author might be right. But, I think he could also be missing the bigger picture. I guess only time will tell. Or someone a lot smarter than me.

I'm sleuthy like that. :wink:

How good of a rumor? What's the source? I ask because I would gladly trade some offense for Jesse Crain. Any clue what the deal is with his K rate? The last time I saw a K rate that low was Kolb last year, and well, the wheels kinda fell off his following year. Speaking of Kolb reminds me just how many bullets the Cubs dodged last year by not acquiring Kolb, Benitez or Percival. If the Cubs had successfully traded for Kolb and he blew up like that, almost everyone on this board would have blamed somebody for ruining him or not being able to turn him around. Yet, the God of pitching coaches, Leo Mazzone, couldn't do it either. It just goes to show, our analysis of who to blame, isn't always accurate. Back on topic, I can't explain Kolb's blow-up at all. But I don't think there is much evidence to suggest that just because someone shares one characteristic with Danny Kolb, a low strikeout rate, that he will befall the same fate as him. It is true that both Kolb and Crain don't strikeout a lot of guys. Whether a low strikeout rate is a clear portent for failure in the future is a whole different matter. Let's look deeper. Kolb has never been much of a strikeout guy on any level of baseball. From rookie-ball all the way to the majors, he has averaged less than a K per inning. He never even came close. His ERA has also been consistently average to above average. At rookie level, he had his best ERA at 2.20. In A-ball, it was 3.77, and at AA it was 4.14. In AAA, it was 2.94. His career ERA in the majors is 4.17. Maybe, Kolb is just an up and down, inconsistent pitcher from year-to-year and '05 was one of his down years while '03 and '04 were both up years. Whatever the reason, his history shows a pattern of inconsistency with his norm being that he is an average to slightly above average pitcher. I think he is better than '05 suggests and now would be the time to trade for him, keeping in mind, of course, that he isn't normally as good as he looked in '03 and '04. Crain's history is quite different. He did average more than a K per inning until coming to the majors. It then fell off quite a bit, but his effectiveness did not. Crain has been getting guys out at every level. I'm not aware of his injury history. I don't think he has one. But I do know that he has been used exclusively as a reliever throughout his minor and major league careers. so, there shouldn't be a lot of wear and tear on his arm. He is only 24. Scouting reports have his fastball in the mid-90s with the ability to touch 100 and a wicked slider that was described as "unfair". He was the 2nd round pick of the Twins in the 2002 draft and between rookie and A-ball that year, he appeared in 18 games, pitching 27 innings and finishing with an ERA of 1.00. In '03, he started in High A, pitched 19 innings before being promoted to AA where he pitched 39 innings finishing with a combined ERA of 1.40. He finished '03 at AAA Rochester posting a 3.12 ERA. Before being brought up near the end of '04, he pitched 50 innings at Rochester compiling a 2.49 ERA. Since reaching the majors, nothing has changed except his K rate has dropped. His career ERA currently stands at 2.29. That's both player's histories in a nutshell. What do you think?

How good of a rumor? What's the source? I ask because I would gladly trade some offense for Jesse Crain.

I believe the Cubs hold a 2 mil option on Williamson. Some notable non-closer relievers on the market are Felix Rodriguez, Guillermo Mota, Tim Worrell, Mike Timlin, Dotel (though he's injured), and Rudy Seanez, to name a few. Bobby Howry is another intriguing name. That's funny. Howry. He was the guy I wanted to get back in '98 instead of Karchner. But I didn't want to give up Garland to get him. Boy was that a bad trade.

What more does Dempster have to do to establish himself as a closer? He just went almost a full season only blowing 2 out of 35 save opportunities, and in the two blown saves, he got the win! If his name were Ryan Gagne, would you consider him more established? Just having a little fun with you, snood. I'm guessing you'd like to see him do it for more than just one season, and I can understand that. But, for me, I've seen enough. In my mind, he's established. Where we do agree is on the need for an established set-up man. I don't want to go into '06 with Novoa pitching the 8th.

On Wednesday night, Houston Astros fans knew that their team had 4 games left all at home against the Cubs who would be without several key players due to injury. They were 2 1/2 games up on the Phillies. All they needed was any combo of Astro wins and Philly losses that equaled two. Two. They were sitting pretty. Now, it is Saturday, and they are still waiting for those Astro wins or Philly losses. Everything that they didn't want to happen has happened. They have lost their first two games of this final homestand and in excruciating fashion with Lidge blowing a save last night and losing 4-3 and losing the night before by the smallest of margins, 3-2. Meanwhile the Phillies got a day of rest on Thursday and barely held on to win last night by another 1-run margin, 4-3. Astros' fans must have no fingernails left. Houston's lead is now down to one game. Not to worry, though, they have Clemens going against Jerome Williams today. Easy win, right? Maybe, maybe not. Clemens' ERA for the month of September is 5.40 while Williams has a very Clemens-like ERA this month of 2.10. So its not just the Cubs that put their fans through the ringer. Its almost every team in baseball that does that. Heck, even Yankees fans are sweating. :wink:

As has been said enough times on this board that I'm sure you've seen it: he got the cubs offense so hot that they scored fewer runs with him around than without. But, was that really Lofton's fault? He provided a .327 AVG, .387 OBP from the lead off spot with the Cubs. He scored 39 runs in 56 games, with 20 XBH's, 12 stolen bases and 20 RBI's, all from the lead off spot. If the Cubs scored less runs with Kenny, the blame falls on the other players in the line up, not Kenny. Kenny's good OBP this year is exactly what this team needed this year. I'm not saying it has to be Kenny. Any good OBP will do. Sosa's OPS dropped 150 points in the 2nd half of the 2003 season. Alou's OPS dropped more than 50 points in the 2nd half of 2003. Lofton, Grudz and Ramirez basically carried this team into the playoffs in 2003, outside of the starting rotation. Without Lofton, I'm not so sure the Cubs are in the 2003 playoffs. I will agree that he didn't get the "line up" going. He just provided the spark that was missing from Sosa and Alou. Wait a second. You're applying logical analysis and using stats that make your point stronger. Thats no fair! Derwood said that he "really got that lineup going". To me that implies the team having more success than previously. It's not ambiguous, derwood stated that lofton improved the entire cubs lineup. The statistics do not bear that out. I'm not insulting his performance. He did a great job for us. But there are only 3 possibilities: 1: he made the cubs lineup worse with his presence 2: he had no effect on the lineup (beyond his own hitting) 3: he had a positive effect that was neutralized by negative effects from elsewhere, in which case we'll almost certainly never be able to sort out who did what I just don't see how you could be justified in making that claim. Well, it appears Derwood is saying thats not what he meant and is backing off "that claim". You can continue to argue that point, if you want. But it seems that you would be arguing with yourself. Getting back to the question at hand, is Lofton worth signing, I think the logic and stats that BBB threw out make a lot of sense. When you add his career OBP and what he has done in 351 ABs this season, and there is a pretty strong case for signing Lofton.

Choosing not to sign Giles or Damon seems quite likely. As does the likelihood of being unable to acquire an impact OFer at a cost Hendry is willing to pay. So, if those are the conditions for considering Furcal, then I think Furcal should remain under active consideration at least until we know Hendry is willing to pay the price required to get a knockout outfielder. It also seems plausible to both sign Furcal and get an outfielder. I think Furcal is a very good SS, both ways. The odds that Cedeno will be as good immediately, or ever, are not great. Furcal walks more than Cedeno ever has, he hits more HR's than Cedeno ever has, and he steals more bases than Cedeno ever has. He's a very good player. Further, he's equipped to be a leadoff man, now. With Cedeno's typically low IsoD's, and his inexperience, he's not a realistic candidate to lead off in 2006, and perhaps not ever. The number of big-spending teams likely to want a SS projects to perhaps be minimal. The Cubs might be able to get Furcal at relatively fair-value price, without a gross overpay. If Hendry can get an asset-SS who's plus defensively and offensively and who solves the leadoff problem at fair value, he should consider doing that. It's hard enough to ever get a quality FA at fair-value price; if that becomes possible, I don't think Hendry should pass on that simply because Furcal is a SS. I also don't think Cedeno would be wasted at 2nd. His defense is way better than Walker's. Whether you view Walker's as acceptable or as weak, Cedeno's would be a huge step up. And while the cost margin relative to Walker or the Grudz/Hairston's that populate 2B isn't as large as the savings relative to Furcal, it would still be substantial. If Cedeno's two-way combination is good value (especially at price) at SS, I don't see why it wouldn't also be decent value at price for 2B. And I think having middle-infield settled with two guys who can both field and run, and are young enough so that that should remain true for 4 years or more, would greatly stabilize the roster, the baserunning, the defense, the fundamentals, etc.. I'm not saying Furcal is the answer, or should be signed. But as I look ahead, I think it's possible that Furcal will be available at a much more reasonable price (given teams buying) than Giles or Damon, guys who may be targetted by multiple big-spending teams. If the market goes supply-demand overboard on Giles, who'll be 35, but is pretty fair on Furcal, it might make a lot better sense to sign the much younger guy at a more value-fair price, and put leadoff to bed for a bunch of years. Then we won't fuss with trying to force Pie into leadoff where his K-loving anti-walk profile will perhaps misfit. It will be easier to ease Pie into the lineup, batting low. Or Cedeno, batting 2nd or 7th or 8th. Or Murton, batting 2nd or 6th or whatever. Obvoiusly signing Furcal and starting Cedeno at 2nd could involve trying to get a fair-value trade for Walker. Should we do all that? Who knows. But I'd at least consider it. What makes you think that Hendry won't be willing to pay the price necessary to land someone like Giles? He has a lot more money to spend this offseason than ever before in his tenure. And this is his last year in his contract. I'd say motivation meets opportunity here and that tells me that he could indeed spend some big bucks.

Thats another great article by Bruce. He is asking why and so should someone in the front office. I didn't pick up on the mocking or the bitterness, that JC did, however. It seemed pretty fair and straightforward to me. Keep it up, Bruce. Hopefully, your writing will result in someone inquiring into what is missing in the Cubs current approach.

It doesn't. I don't know why you think that it would or that Dusty was saying that it did. He was asked about whether Chicago was a "tough town" for managers. That has nothing to do with the team being able to win. It has everything to do with people expressing their displeasure with a manager right to his face, sometimes even dishonorably and inaccurately. That would make a town "tough" to manage in, IMO. The reason why gambling and fantasy baseball affect how people respond to a manager (or whether or not they choose to go up and speak to him at all) is because that manager's decisions are now affecting people on a more personal level. Either they lost a fantasy game that they take a lot of pride in or they lost money gambling because of a decision Baker made. This makes baseball towns that may have been more laid back in the past, less so now. When you are as recognizable as Baker, people come up to you at dinner or on the street. I don't know why you would assume that he would be stopping to talk to these people about gambling. These comments are likely being said to him without much of a response from Dusty. I hope that helped.

Thats wut I'm talkin' 'bout. Too bad Larry Beinfest isn't...

So then what is it going to take to sign him? If its a 4-year deal, I do it. Giles at 38 will probably still be pretty good. At 39, he could fall of some, but if I have to pay for a 4th year to get the first 3, I do it. If its getting a proven lead-off hitter, I sign Lofton as soon as possible to show him we're serious. As far as trading for his brother Marcus, I like that idea as well, but I'm uneducated as to what the Braves would ask in return. If they are unloading his contract to help resign Furcal, then it should be a little easier to get him, but still, I would imagine, a hefty asking price. The Braves don't seem to be dummies when it comes to making deals. Plus, I'm not certain how badly they will need to save money given the amount of rookies that are currently filling out their line-up. The Braves have Wilson Betemit to take over SS in case Furcal leaves and they have Pete Orr who could take over 2B if Giles is traded. It all depends on who they value more, whether they truly believe that either Betemit or Orr are ready, and what their asking price is for Marcus. Come on, Jim. You've pulled off miracles before. First with Hundley, then with Ramirez and next with Lee. Get us the Giles brothers and Lofton.

As has been said enough times on this board that I'm sure you've seen it: he got the cubs offense so hot that they scored fewer runs with him around than without. But, was that really Lofton's fault? He provided a .327 AVG, .387 OBP from the lead off spot with the Cubs. He scored 39 runs in 56 games, with 20 XBH's, 12 stolen bases and 20 RBI's, all from the lead off spot. If the Cubs scored less runs with Kenny, the blame falls on the other players in the line up, not Kenny. Kenny's good OBP this year is exactly what this team needed this year. I'm not saying it has to be Kenny. Any good OBP will do. Sosa's OPS dropped 150 points in the 2nd half of the 2003 season. Alou's OPS dropped more than 50 points in the 2nd half of 2003. Lofton, Grudz and Ramirez basically carried this team into the playoffs in 2003, outside of the starting rotation. Without Lofton, I'm not so sure the Cubs are in the 2003 playoffs. I will agree that he didn't get the "line up" going. He just provided the spark that was missing from Sosa and Alou. Wait a second. You're applying logical analysis and using stats that make your point stronger. Thats no fair!

BBB, How's San Diego treating you and the fam? Sorry I missed you when the Cubs came to town. Maybe we can hook-up next year. From what you are hearing in the San Diego papers and knowing his history, is Giles at all open to leaving the west coast? If he is, then I am right with you on this plan. I know that both Giles and Lofton are old(er), but Giles clearly is the best bat on the free-agent market. Its difficult to know at this point who can be had in a trade, so, for now, Giles is the top guy. I don't expect his ability to get on base to fall off much as he ages. His power might, but not much else. Lofton would likely be only a one-year signing, so his age isn't that big of a deal. However, if the Cubs can somehow land Wilkerson, then the CFer's age is even less of a concern. Targeting Giles, Wilkerson and Lofton for the OF is the best idea I've heard yet. I'm on board. When those players are combined with a resigned Nomar and Murton in LF, the offense is successfully made over. That might even qualify as an extreme make over. I know this thread is about the OF, but I think it is important to remember that the team make over isn't complete until the bullpen gets addressed. B. J. Ryan and/or Jesse Crain would look nice in Cubbie Blue.

Of the in-house options, I think Fontenot would be more likely to produce the OBP we are looking for than Theriot. I'm not certain that trading Walker is a good idea at this point. Cedeno has very little time in at 2B and Nomar has less. If Cedeno shows that he can play a good 2B and produce next year while filling in at 2B (and SS) during the first 3 months of the '06 season, and Cubs still have bullpen needs, then we can revisit trading Walker in July. But penciling in Cedeno as your full-time 2B now is taking an unnecessary risk. The presence of Hairston on our roster mitigates that risk a bit, but unless CF is filled by someone else, Hairston's availability might be limited.

I agree. I think Nomar is capable of .290/.345/.470 with 20+ HRs over 130 games. It makes too much sense on too many levels not to try to resign Nomar. He'll be less expensive than Furcal, and the money could be used to sign someone like Giles or pay a more expensive OFer that the Cubs get in a trade. He will produce better offensive numbers than Furcal, if healthy. And Nomar won't present a long term block of the SS position allowing the Cubs the possibility of having an inexpensive yet still effective middle infield. In time, I think Cedeno can produce .280/.340/.425 at the major league level, maybe more. His defense isn't in question, and he is still quite young. He and EPatt (or some other inexpensive 2B) could allow the Cubs to spend money elsewhere and retain all-star caliber players at several other positions extending the Cubs window for winning a world series. Re-sign Nomar.

Concerned LSCF, sure and it's going to happen too. That's why you give Dusty Cedeno, Nomar, Hairston and Theriot for his middle IF and not Perez or Macias. If Hendry can't figure this out then it might be time for him to go as well. Hopefully Jim Bowden's idiocy will continue and Neifi will be a Nat next year. I'm afraid that this off season we will see that Hendry and Baker are closer than we think. :loco: In that case, when the beat writers write up their post-mortem on this season (I know Bruce will), they need to educate the common fan that Neifi's .275 BA is not a plus when it's accompanied with a .290 OBP. They need to be educated that Macias's versatility means nothing, since doing everything poorly isn't a plus. If people are educated, maybe the image conscious Trib will think twice before green lighting any dopey signings. I never thought that Hendry would be that narrow minded until now and this off season is going to be his defining moment. I will be thrilled if he proves me wrong. I hope for the Cubs sake that Hendry does realize what you just wrote and if intellegent writers like Bruce do somehow keep pounding this thought...it can't hurt. It can hurt when it comes to Baker though because being proved wrong makes you less of a man. I don't disagree with the sentiment that having someone on the bench with a higher OBP than Macias and Perez is a good idea, but what makes Theriot a sure thing or even a good bet to be that guy? I realize he had a good year at AA this season and has usually been around .350 in OBP at the lower levels of the minors, but Dubois had a much better OBP at every level than Theriot and he didn't make the jump to the majors very well. So why choose Theriot over somebody more proven like Walker? If Walker is still on the squad, then Cedeno and Hairston can be the back-ups.

You're right. I completely forgot to mention Hairston. For me, he is third on the depth chart at 2B and SS. We'll get to CF later. Ideally, he is my super-sub.