TheDude

Four years in a row and still not even back to where they were in 2003 is NOT going in the right direction. To be going in the right direction they'd have to progress beyond where they were in 2003 (which would mean making the World Series). But if you want to consider three steps forward after taking four steps back going in the right direction, be my guest. The 2004 and 2007 teams were both better than the 2003 team talent-wise, so you're off-base in your steps forward and backward comments. People need to move on from their Hendry hatred from the 2006 season. While there is certainly inefficiency in the roster salaries that can be directly attributed to Hendry, who has made a reputation overpaying for B-D grade players, the economics of baseball is a flawed world and anyone searching for a truly efficient baseball line-up financially needs to invest in an xbox. Baseball players get paid for service time as much as talent, and having a veteran team equates to having an overpaid team. Hendry is not an 'A' grade GM, nor is he an 'F' grade GM. People are free to debate the grades in the middle, and its all fair game, but I take issue with the all-despair attitude. Regarding 2008, the Cubs have a nice solid core under contract and many of the names in the rumor mill are respectable improvements over the 2007 lineup that address the team's most glaring hole (OBP). Some might argue SS is the biggest hole, but from a team perspective its OBP, which will drive a higher OPS on an already pretty decent SLG team. Fukudome projects much higher OBP than Jones ever could, while chipping in the same moderate power and better defense. Roberts also gets on base at a high clip and facilitates a move that many, many people around here have bashed the Cubs for not doing already (move Soriano down in the lineup). Personally I believe Soriano's numbers will drop if moved down based on history, but I wouldn't object to the move in principle if it drove an OBP-minded top of the order. Soto projects as the everyday catcher and represents a significant improvement at that position. These are all right-direction decisions if they happen, because the team allows its youth talent to play while also moderately improving team speed and defense, but most importanly, improving team OBP pretty significantly. None represent a top 20 player acquisition or upgrade the likes of a Rodriguez or Cabrera. But far too many people around here equate success at GM to obtaining the best available player year each year. But collectively these rumors do improve the line-up and do put a higher talent product on the field for 2008. Given Lee's drop-off in power numbers, but continued success with strike zone management and gap power, it would not surprise me to see Lou move him up to the 2-hole behind Roberts (assuming that deal happens). Now you project a combined 1-2 OBP combo over .370 and have a 3-6 combo (Fukudome, Ramirez, Soriano, Soto) that projects at 110+ each for HRs and doubles, and with moderate overall OBP. I don't see how anyone could look at those projections as steps backwards. Yes Theriot is a hole at full-time SS. Yes DeRosa becomes displaced everyday. Yes 7-8 are questionable, low production spots. But it's not backwards movement overall.

You have to expect that at least 2/3 of Soriano, Lee, and Ramirez will regain more power numbers. All 3 should be in the 30+ range, and really producing 100+ between the three of them. I would love one more true power bat as well, but its not like the team is devoid of power with that core plus DeRosa, Soto, Fukudome, and Roberts likely to chip-in the teens (assuming the rumors work out). Folks should be glad that all three hot rumor targets are OBP capable, at .350+ each.

They wouldn't settle for less than Hill.

Are the Cubs actually out of it, or is the SD talk purely speculative?

Figgins will be 30 come opening day. Fukudome is 30 and will be 31 for most of next season. Roberts is 30. I just wish some of the guys we're pursuing would be in the 26-28 range.. You and everyone else in baseball. The asking price for players in the prime years is very high. The reality is that these guys aren't available unless you give up similar talent - Hill is the only such qualified talent on the Cubs MLB roster. Besides, the one possibly available talent at that age is Crawford, and many people around cried at the news the Cubs had interest, despite the fact it probably would have been a solid move. As soon as the cost of Hill was announced, nobody around here wanted to pursue, and that pattern repeats on this board.

I don't get the thinking that anything more than marginal upgrades is truly available. People can throw out names of upgrades, but if those players aren't truly available, it's just xbox nonsense. Besides Cabrera and Rodriguez, what significant upgrade names are/were truly out there to be had? And are/were they worth the handful of MLB talent prospects the club has (or do the Cubs even have what it takes)? My point is this: if Hendry can't acquire one of the handful of names that represent significant upgrades, then he is best served making marginal upgrades in several places. By adding Roberts and Fukudome, using DeRosa at 400+ ABs as a supersub, and giving the Catching duties to Soto, you've made upgrades in 4 places from the division winning team of last year and you've held onto your top young MLB-level talent in Hill, Marmol, and Pie. It's not grade A off season, but it's not a failure either if it happens this way.

Why would it end when no such player has yet to be acquired? I'm not saying I agree with the idea of McLouth, but if you're shopping for tomatos and haven't purchased any, why would you stop?

These guys also seem to favor the 'effectively wild' guys with hard breaking stuff, even if they aren't the hardest throwers.

Wouldn't the end result still equate to about 4x his Japanese salary (if he gets what's projected)?

Anyone who is British or of British heritage. So many, many people.

The better question is how many opportunities have there actually been? Prior, Zambrano, Hill, and Marmol. What other young talent has come up from the farm and shown 'sell high' value? The list is slim, and if Hendry had moved Pior or Zambrano, or moves Hill or Marmol, it would trigger a wrath-storm.

The Cubs don't have what it takes to get an elite player, only a good player. And why not target a good player coming into his 27-year season?

Semantics. How about former prospect, or young talent? For me it comes down to this: the Cubs don't have anyone like Crawford coming in the system. The Cubs have plenty of pitching to try out in the system. This thread shows why the argument that Hendry never sells high is bunk. Anytime the Cubs have a player worth selling high on, the board freaks out.

Wow! So now Carl Crawford is Juan Pierre? This is absurd. I'm honestly baffled at the response on this message board to the Cubs interest in Crawford. The kid is a stud in the making, is only 26, and under contract for several years at below market value. You're talking about a guy who, coming into his 27/28 prime years looks to put up an .850 OPS, 60+ xbh, and 50 SB. Your looking at acquiring a guy for what will likely be his 2 best seasons as a pro. Juan Pierre part II? Did you just forget your smiley or something? Did the point really fly that far over your head? Crawford isn't JP, but Hill, Marmol, & Cedeno aren't Pinto, Nolasco and Mitre either. The comparison is wildly overpaying for a marginal improvement in our team (though you could easily argue that JP wasn't an improvement at all). At least that's how I took it. And I think when you look at JP and what we gave up to get him v. Crawford and what we're rumored to be giving up to get him (at least if it's really Hill, Marmol, Cedeno), I think it's a fair comparison. This board overvalues its prospects tremendously. This is the only place you'll find people thinking of the trade as overpaying. I would like to keep Marmol, and part with Hill, Cedeno, and a different prospect. But the Cubs have more Marmols and Hills coming.

Wow! So now Carl Crawford is Juan Pierre? This is absurd. I'm honestly baffled at the response on this message board to the Cubs interest in Crawford. The kid is a stud in the making, is only 26, and under contract for several years at below market value. You're talking about a guy who, coming into his 27/28 prime years looks to put up an .850 OPS, 60+ xbh, and 50 SB. Your looking at acquiring a guy for what will likely be his 2 best seasons as a pro. Juan Pierre part II? Did you just forget your smiley or something?

The Cubs have plenty of guys to fill the rotation, which most definitely is not decimated by this deal if true.

The only part of the deal I don't like is the inclusion of Marmol instead of a prospect. Otherwise it's a fair deal.

The Cubs need one or two pieces. An overhaul isn't even close to what's needed.

Yes please. I love the thought of Crawford, Pie, Soriano. I love the thought of Soriano, Crawford, Lee, Ramirez.

The price for CFs in baseball has become even more ridiculous than that of RPs. Considering what guys like Pierre, Matthews, and Rowand are commanding, plugging in Pie is a no-brainer.

The Phillies just gave JC Romero 3/12. I don't think sanity is coming soon.

What gives you the impression that all eggs are in the Fukudome basket? How did one report that the Cubs have interest in him turn into now he's the one and only target for the offseason?

Dempster is below market value because he's not very good, though since I believe closer is an overrated position, I believe Dempster does the least damage there. Certainly, as a starter, he's way overpaid. I'll take Sean Marshall over Dempster any day. The Marquis contract is especially egregious. But, frankly, rather than continue arguing specifics about player x or player y, I want to emphasize the trend: Hendry pays too much for crappy players. By the way, I make this complaint every offseason. It's not unnecessary or exaggerated piling on. This is a specific, valid critique of Hendry as the Cubs GM. And a further point, I don't care whether or not other GM's do this. That doesn't make it smart. In fact, to my mind, it demonstrates that baseball GM's consistently overvalue bullpen pitching. Given that we know reliever performance is highly variable from year to year, paying for past performance here is a bad idea. Instead, use your minor league system to develop a solid relieving corps, keep them through their early arby years, and either trade them or let them go as they get expensive. Let other teams spend their cash on relievers while you save money to sign a worthwhile starter or a slugging SS. Here is the trouble - you can't simply ignore what other baseball GMs do out of convenience. Market values are established, this can't be changed. Your model calls for signing only elite veterans and utilizing the farm everywhere else. I don't know how realistic this is. The Marquis signing was only egregious for years, not value. Marquis was going to make that value wherever he signed, but he did not deserve three years. So my point is this: rather than state 'Hendry pays too much crappy players', I think you ought to be stating 'crappy players make too much money everywhere'. Hendry does slightly overpay even on inflated market values, and he has a bad habit of adding one year too many, which is no doubt annoying and frustrating, but relative to the market value, the difference is not significant (total sum on these discrepancies would be under 5 million). These players would be earning similar salaries anywhere in baseball. Even GMs like Beane and Scheurholtz overpay for veteran guys with average talent. They all do it. So I'm not concerned with what may be 'smart', because baseball management doesn't follow your or my version of smart. I look the scope the way it is, not the way I think it ought to be. The reality is that you can expect average veterans with inflated salaries on every team in baseball. The best you can hope for out of Hendry conforming to your model is to simply *not sign* any average veteran, or minimize these signings.

You're really making a lot of assumptions here. Firstly, Marquis, Ohman, and Dempster are making market value. One could argue Dempster is making below market value for a closer. Eyre and Blanco are overpaid by 3 million compared to the league averages for veterans in those slots. Yes these players could be replaced by farm products at significantly reduced cost - I'm not going to argue that point because its correct. But this notion that Hendry is alone among GMs and teams around the league by having overpaid average veterans is off-base. Even the most heralded and lauded GMs in baseball have contracts like these on their teams. It seems like unnecessary and exaggerated piling on.

Furcal? Hendry wanted him or Pierre and wound up with one. Last season he said he would get Soriano and he did. If he wants Fukudome just as bad, I can only hope he would be able to get it done. Even if it means overpaying at the end of the contract? Like he did with Soriano. What is the Salary expectations for this guy? You can't get an impact bat without paying for it if you're farm system isn't producing it. There is no other option.