NoDak

It could have been worse... Perhaps Furcal hits some pitcher's better than Giles?? Or perhaps you're really reaching to support a position without substance. After all, it's more likely that a pitcher who has already allowed one guy to reach is going to be a hittable guy. No. I just don't think stats tells the entire story. OK, I'll throw my two cents worth in on this one. It seems that some people want to argue from "incidental evidence." It is usually based on the fact that, during a season, all kinds of factors affect individual games and, while they may be minor, bizarre, instances, they may be the difference in a win/loss. And, after all, a win is a win and a loss is a loss. Then there are others who say, "I want to put together the team that will do the best in the most situations." Even if there are some instances where this will hurt, the end result will be better than any other way. I agree with Tim. He puts forth good evidence (not vague quotes from "lots of pitchers"). While there are instances where it would be valuable to have someone with Furcal's speed, it won't necessarily lead to more runs scored. As for statements like "Well, some hitters hit some pitchers better than others" this is accounted for by "sample size." Simply put, the best sample is a "Sample of 1" but this doesn't give much information as we lack perspective (which may lead us to believe that ANY ONE OF Lenny Harris'---aka "the Fat DeLino"---pinch hits proves he is the best hitter in history). The more ABs included the greater the likelihood that it is a true measure of the player.

I don't know that I would spend much money on Furcal. He is a solid player, but Nomar has had similar numbers and, provided he doesn't have a freak injury again, will likely out play Furcal. Put on top of that he will likely want a short term contract with incentives (so that he is free to leave after 06 if he succeeds). If he struggles or is injured, I wouldn't mind seeing Cedeno there. While it is based on a small sample size, he did have a line of .300/.356/.375/.731. While he lacks in the power dept POWER hasn't been the problem for CHC. I don't think that a line of .275-.280/.350/.400 is out of the question for him. He would also be an inexpensive option. I think Furcal will get lots of attention in a "down year" for FA. As for the Webb deal, I would pull the trigger. As Tim points out, it fills several spots, 1B is one of the easiest spots to fill (we have a prospect there already so we will be only signing a stopgap for a couple of years). Also, you can never have too many ground ball pitchers in Wrigley.

Tim, I don't know if I agree that Hendry has a "lack of creativity." I think it is a difference in philosophy. Let me make one thing clear, first of all: Adding Vlad or Giles when they were free agents would have been a good move. At the same time, I think Hendry is gun-shy about signing guys to large/long term contracts. Would CHC have suddenly been a division winner in 04 or 05 if he had made those deals? I think the team was more fundamentally flawed than that. Giles and Guerrero are the kind of players to sign when you are trying to "maintain" a spot at the top of the "success cycle." For instance, Giles was acquired by the Padres at the end of 03 too late to have much effect. The following year they finished 87-75 and 3rd in their division. This year they may win their division, but that is more by "default" than anything else. While CHC is a better team than the Padres, I don't know that Giles would make that much difference. The main thing that went right for CHC in 03 was that they stayed relatively healthy (Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Clement all had 200+ IP/ Lofton played well in CF, Karros was inexplicably effective...) The last two years CHC has struggled with injuries to significant players with them missing great lengths of time. I certainly don't want to pardon Hendry for re-signing Perez (unless he believed that Perez would only be used to give Nomar a break every couple of months and as a "late innings defensive replacement"), or the re-signing of Jose Macias. Again, I feel the claim of being "uncreative" is unfair. He got Nomar and Murton from BOS for Justin Jones, Frank Beltran, KGonz, Brendan Harris. He was creative enough to get 2 young pitchers for LaTroy Hawkins. While Guerrero and Giles would be wonderful members of the team, I don't know that they would have been worth the extra money it would have taken to acquire either of them.

Like most fans on this board, apparently, I put more of the blame on Dusty than on Hendry. Consistently batting Neifi Perez at the top of the order along with a dabbling of CoPat is/was inexcusable. Also, I wonder how much effect KW first ST game had on his season. He threw somethingl like 120-130 pitches. He was injured most of spring trainning and then Dusty decided that doing that would be a "good idea." While I am not always thrilled with Hendry's moves, he rarely gets completely fleeced like some GMs.

OK, I have a question for everyone. If I understand defensive efficiency correctly it is, basically, the percentage of balls put in play that are turned into outs. If that is the case, how does this mesh with the work of Vorros McCracken saying that a pitcher has no control over how many balls in play get turned into outs making SO, BB, HR a very good way to eval a pitcher. If I understand his study correctly it basically says balls in play turn into hits at a roughly random rate. Some pitchers are "really good" one year and "really bad" the next. I know that this is not necessarily true for batters and that some seem to have an ability to get hits at a greater (or lesser) than random rate, so is this the case for defense as well? Or do I fundamentally misunderstand all of this!