TheDude

I wonder how many pages this chicken little will get up to.

If the Cubs lose out on Ramirez, I'd like to see them push for Garciaparra and DeRosa, with the idea that either of them could see time across the infield, but that each plays pretty much everyday.

It's a shame SD traded Barfield so quickly. Pie would have been a nice candidate to replace Cameron, and Barfield would have looked good in blue.

I agree, but ESPN is usually more responsible with its reporting than some random site with a rumor. If it's on ESPN's web site, it is much more credible.

He is still under 30 years old and a switch to the National League favors him. Yes he has an issue with walks. No he isn't Greg Maddux in his prime. But he is in the top 2 for FA pitchers this year (not counting Matsuzaka as an FA). And he does improve the Cubs pitching staff. I like Schmidt more, primarily because I think power wins more often in the playoffs, but Zito is good. You have to take what the market bears - it's not like the Cubs can summon up a better option than Zito or Schmidt.

Drew is the better CF and has more experience there, so leave Jones in RF. But, I agree that the Cubs are much improved by adding Drew, retaining Ramirez, and concentrating the rest of the money on pitching.

So what is Boras's position then? Why does he think he can get Matsuzaka back on the market at age 29 for the real payday?

They may pay it if Matsuzaka agrees to a low-ball contract. Many people were predicting a 5/50 deal for Matsuzaka with a 20 million posting fee. In essence, 5/70 or 14 million a season for him. The Red Sox may have bid 45 million, but only plan to offer him a 5/25 contract or a 5/30 contract. The total cost would roughly be the same. They may feel it's worth the risk. I have heard a few times Boras is going to want 3 years max on the contract. So a $45 million posting fee is more difficult to justify when the agent's position and starting point is known to be 3 years.

Thats great if you value a guy by using a stat he does not significantly control and the fact that he shows up. I show up to work every day and do a decent job within my group which happens to be succesful because we have a lot of other guys that do a good job too...pay me 15M. The guy did win a Cy Young, so he isn't just showing up. For a team desperate for reliable starters, targeting a guy who has never missed a start (and is generally regarded as an elite pitcher) is a good idea.

Average production at above average cost, not good. And he's just as likely to be below average as above. Jones is only acceptable in RF if they have massive improvements elsewhere. Jones is not above average cost. His contract, by current market, is a bargain. The Cubs are not going to field an all-star at every position, so we agree that assuming upgrades elsewhere, Jones is acceptable. I do find it highly ironic that Hendry got killed for not pursuing Giles on this board, and Jones dwarfed Giles production in 2006, in terms of slugging and OPS. Giles OPS+ 105 Jones OPS+ 107 I find it highly amusing how much you love Jim Hendry screwing up the Cubs. Jones is above average cost. You can't compare him only to free agents, that's absurd. He's not competing only against free agents. Smart teams find ways to get production above cost. Stupid teams spend big on mediocrity. So if signing Jones at his production and salary 'screwed up the Cubs', what would signing Giles at his production and salary have equated to? Giles makes nearly twice as much as Jones, for less production. Signing Giles could have been a much bigger bust, if you assume similar production. I don't love Jim Hendry. I just don't pile on his every move as bad or mediocre. I think the Jones signing was questionable at the time, and has turned out to be a pleasant surprise, because the team got plus production out of him last year for his current rate. Whether you think he is overpaid or not doesn't change the fact that the market dictates him as a value. If the Cubs can bring in good value by selling high on Jones, then great. If Jones is in RF next year, and the team makes upgrades as needed elsewhere, then great.

Or they could be gauging whether the bid is real. A bid that high might be a stall tactic, with zero real intention. I hope that is not the case, because that could put some serious tension on the entire posting process.

i disagree. to me, it doesn't seem like there is a great option out there for the Cubs to improve their offense. Soriano and Lee definitely can produce, but they both have the potential to be mediocre, and both will likely be highly overpaid. sure, last year was a stellar year for Soriano, but can he keep up his patience at the plate? i sure hope so, for the ridiculous amount of money he's sure to command. as far as Lee goes, i think he'd be a solid pickup, but where do you play him? he's certainly not going to platoon with Jock, and i sure hope he isn't going to take away playing time from a developing Murton. Drew is apparently available, and although i believe he's the best option for the Cubs this offseason, i'm not convinced he'll be a target of Hendry's, despite being exactly what this club needs. the free agent pitching market has even more questions. Schmidt is getting up there in age, and i believe that Zito is a serious risk to have an ERA in the 4.50 range next year as well. don't get me wrong -- i love Zito, and between him and Schmidt, i think i'd rather have Zito. but still, they have significant question marks to me. Matsuzaka is only 26, he has an established track record as a dominating pitcher in Japan, and he will be a young, exciting player that i believe will be a force for many years. sure, he could potentially be a bust, but after watching him pitch in the WBC and following this whole "posting" process, i really believe he is the premier free agent this offseason. the Cubs were terrible offensively and on the mound last year, and Matsuzaka would look great as the number 2 pitcher behind our boy Zambrano. if Hendry has money to burn this offseason, i'd much rather see him burn it on Matsuzaka rather than Soriano or Lee, and i'm going to be disappointed if the Cubs don't make a very serious bid to acquire him. i honestly don't believe they'll get him, but i can hope, dammit, i can hope. EDIT: oh yeah, we really really really REALLY need to re-sign Ramirez. but that's obvious. So how is it that all these established star free agents you named have question marks, but a Japanese player with zero MLB experience doesn't? Eveyone expects Matsuzaka to be good, me included, but it is not a given. IMO Zito and Schmidt are more predictable for production than Matsuzaka. Matsuzaka has just as many question marks as anybody else, and see zero reason to bank the entire offseason on him.

Average production at above average cost, not good. And he's just as likely to be below average as above. Jones is only acceptable in RF if they have massive improvements elsewhere. Jones is not above average cost. His contract, by current market, is a bargain. The Cubs are not going to field an all-star at every position, so we agree that assuming upgrades elsewhere, Jones is acceptable. I do find it highly ironic that Hendry got killed for not pursuing Giles on this board, and Jones dwarfed Giles production in 2006, in terms of slugging and OPS.

The offseason doesn't ride on Matsuzaka.

I think you're absolutely right. The market for a .500 pitcher with stuff is 7 million a year already.

Why is the 3rd best OPS in the NL for his position subpar? Ramirez had the 3rd best OPS for his position in the NL as well, so I guess he is subpar also. I'm not a huge fan of Jones, but Jones in RF is not the problem with this team. He had a barely above average OPS+. His OPS was SLG heavy, which is less valuable than a OPS that is OBP heavy. Jones in RF is not the problem with this team only because this team has more than one problem. He certainly is one of the problems. He's a part of an impotent OF, and does not do enough on his own to help the team. Jones would be fine if he was a 26 year old pre-arbitration player. But as the single biggest addition to an already horrible offense last year, he was a terrible option. It's not his fault he isn't good. But it is Hendry's fault that the Cubs OF wasn't any good and that Jones played a big part in that. But we're not talking about last year's offseason anymore. Looking at this offseason, Jones is acceptable in RF if the team upgrades elsewhere. Adding Drew in CF, retaining Ramirez, and targeting and signing 2 FA/posted pitchers for the rotation makes Jones acceptable. The only reason to move Jones is if the team gets a good deal for an upgrade. But there are not many available upgrades on the market. His pricetage is very reasonable, and he gives you average or better production. When considering the list of priorities for this Cubs team, I would place 'replacing Jones' as at least the 5th priority.

Why is the 3rd best OPS in the NL for his position subpar? Ramirez had the 3rd best OPS for his position in the NL as well, so I guess he is subpar also. I'm not a huge fan of Jones, but Jones in RF is not the problem with this team.

So in one breath the bid went down to 13 million, and in another it went up to 30? I think it's best to just wait and not dig up rumors, because clearly someone is way off, and someone else has a lucky guess.

I'm of the opinion that absolute declarations rarely, if ever, hold-up.

Easy to say now, but look at the reaction on Ramirez. It took adding the opt-out clause to sign him also, and the pitch-forks are being readied. Personally, I think Drew's opt-out is the best news for the Cubs. It gives the Cubs a legitimate CF option that allows them to retain Murton in LF. And, having a 2-year opt-out clause for Drew is a good thing for the Cubs, because it doesn't block Pie indefinately.

Flip-flopping from one extreme to the other without consideration of a middle isn't going to resolve the argument. You have repeatedly trashed Hendry, and Hendry alone, for the Ramirez situation. All people have been trying to accomplish is to show that Ramirez and his agent hold more more sway on this process than Hendry. Two parties, one has has more leverage. That's it.

Perfect example of using stats as a drunk would use a light pole. In 2004 Aramis was 4th in OPS in MLB for 3rd baseman In 2005 Aramis was 4th in OPS in MLB for 3rd baseman In 2006 Aramis was 5th in OPS in MLB for 3rd baseman. He is top five 3rd baseman in baseball. Pay him like one. You are incapable of discussion without insults. It's unbelievable. OPS is generally regarded as the most important stat for a player, so I don't see how stating the fact that his declined three consecutive years is a crutch. It's a bloody basic observation on value. I have no problem with paying him good money. But he wants top 10 in baseball money, and he has never been in the top 10 in production. At 5/75 he will be one of the most overpaid players in the league.

That's a whole lot of money for a player with declining OPS every year for three straight years.

I'll take Sheffield if he is not displacing Murton. When Sheff has something to prove, he usually does it.

That's a very good question. His production is outstanding, but he also has three consecutive years of declining OPS. Folks around here love trends and splits, so it has to at least be acknowledged. The trouble is, there is no other replacement on the market, even at the lowest of those three years OPS.