TheDude

I agree. If Jones wants out after hearing the reported 'targeted names' the Cubs are after this offseason, then he shows himself to be a selfish player interested in his personal stats over team wins. Lately the Cubs sure are getting out into the media the idea they want to win next year. Jones should want to be a part of that winning.

You only leadoff a game once guarenteed. And if you plug an OBP guy like Murton behind Soriano, a leadoff HR means you essentially now have you're best OBP guy leading off the inning right in front of Lee and Ramirez anyway, just with an early 1-0 lead. It's not 100% ideal, and perhaps some power potential is wasted, but if Soriano holds the cards (he does), and leadoff is what he wants (he does), and the team can afford to overlook him at 3-4-5 (Lee, Ramirez, Barret is just fine), then why not if it puts your team as a higher candidate in the player's eyes? I'd still rather spend the money on pitching first, but as fan, I don't think anyone should be unhappy at the prospect of Soriano in a Cubs uniform.

If there is, I'm sorry. I didn't know there was a transactions thread, and I didn't know this was a transaction. . Is there a speculations forum? :lol: I noticed you're new to the forum. I wasn't trying to give you a hard time. As a few already stated, speculation trades do go in the Transactions forum typically, and you'll see there is a 7 page A-Rod discussion under-way, where Zambrano's name is frequently tossed around. Welcome and enjoy.

Also keep in mind Soriano's career OBP at the leadoff spot is .340, higher than his career overall. 2006 leadoff OBP in 541 ABs - .368 2005 and 2004 leadoff numbers are not good (miserable actually), but it is also a just a 165 AB sample spread over 2 years, so no consistent at bats. 2003 leadoff OBP in 627 ABs - .342 What it basically shows is that when you give this guy everyday leadoff responsibility with stability, he produces a respectable OBP at the spot. The Cubs have run producers in Lee, Ramirez, and Barret. They can afford to stick a .340+ OBP at leadoff, especially if they stick Murton in the 2-hole. I have no issues with Soriano at leadoff. It isn't a perfect fit, but it certainly isn't a bad idea.

No. And the Yankees would not seriously ask for Zambrano. By the way, isn't this a Transactions thread? Better yet, isn't there already more than one thread in Transactions to cover this?

You really think Hendry is going out of his way to be more wily and manipulative than Dr. Claw? Seriously, is it difficult to think Hendry would pursue top talent? He went after Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra. He's gone after Soriano several times in the past as well. Coming off the season he just had, with a new manager ready, and a reported increased budget (not to mention he likely wants his own contract extended following a good year), Hendry probably recognizes this is the year he must show his worth to the organization, or he could be out after 2008.

Why not? Lou's done at Fox, he was when the ALCS ended. He's known about the position since at least July. He had to take a look at the team. He's managed in the AL, where Jones played, for years, and has to be aware of his limits. There might not be a need to announce a platoon today. But it would be asinine to wait until March to make that decision. You must know now what you plan on doing in March, so you can acquire the right players. You think it's asinine to wait. I think it's asinine to commit to roster positions now. I have no issue with filling your bench properly to handle a platoon, should that emerge, but you don't make that decision now.

I was actually thinking he might consider Murton the 400 AB 4th outfielder in that scenario, getting starts around the outfield and in all AL away games.

No clue. I'm simply pointing out that a major sports news outlet attributed the comment to Piniella, as opposed to ordinary random fanboy dream lineup speculation.

Why would Piniella make a judgement at this stage either way? He hasn't officially started the job, and is under contract for FOX until the WS is over. The team doesn't have a final roster and is expected to have some turnover. I don't see how this decision will be made before March of next year. I could see how the team acquires an appropriate bench player with everyday stop-gap potential just in case, but you don't announce a true platoon at this stage. Or even the next few stages.

ESPN Sportscenter last night also threw out a very brief one-liner when discussing the Piniella signing - they noted Piniella said he wants to pursue Alex Rodriguez in the offseason.

I don't think you will be disappointed, because you'll never know if or what they bid if they don't win. It's a silent bid, and I'm not aware that non-winning bids are revealed.

Goony, you have stated a few times that Schmidt is a risk, particularly for injury. Why do you think so? He has averaged 30.5 starts per year over the last 4 years, with 204.5 innings per year during that span as well.

I'm not sure kid in the rotation is all that bad. Some of the best pitchers in this year's playoffs have been very inexperienced. And many had very checkered pasts before this year. I think it's a bad idea to purposefully go into the season with a mediocre offense. It's not necessary to skimp in that area. Your lists don't take into account that the Cubs are in the top 25% in baseball in payroll, whichs means that, unlike other teams, they can afford to pay for pitching and hitting. I didn't mean to suggest that team ignore the offense. Just prioritize pitching first, and instead of chasing Carlos Lee or Soriano (at the recently reported price tag), you settle for Sheffiled or a similar les tier salary guy. The Cubs offense when healthy is already mediocre. Lee, Ramirez, Barret, Murton, and Jones is a respectable core. One more Barret level bat looks pretty good on paper, when healthy. My primary point is that a pitching first approach with the money is what I would like to see. The core pitching of the returning team is not nearly as solid as core hitting of returning team.

Go for Schmidt and Zito. Keep Ramirez. Win with dominant pitching and a mediocre offense, floated by two studs (Lee and Ramirez). I think that formula has a greater chance of winning than going after many big bats and relying on more than one kid in the rotation. Only 4 of the top 10 offenses in baseball made the playoffs this year, and only 2 of those are left (Detroit and NY). Same was true in 2005. But 7 of the top 10 pitching staffs made the playoffs this year, with all 4 remaining teams included. 2005 was similar. I am using Runs as the category of measure in both situations. I also think it is a very 'Hendry-esque' formula.

You could make an argument that Schmidt is more of a risk than Soriano. Schmidt wasn't good last year. He wasn't anything special in his 20's. He's older, and has had injury problems. He had a better peak year than Soriano, but he's no better on average. In the last 4 years he had more than 200 IP in all except one, when he had 172 IP. That is the only injury year, and was also the only one with an ERA over 4 and average numbers elsewhere. So his only 'average' season in the last 4 years was one he was injured. Otherwise he has been great to very good. He's 33 and has the make-up of a pitcher that can last up to 40. Knowing what pitching does for you in the playoffs, and thinking about a playoff rotation featuring Zambrano and Schmidt, and seeing repeatedly what happens to a Yankees team with a lineup full of Sorianos for the last 5 years, I'd take the gamble on the pitcher every time.

That's a big deal he turned down. I'd like to see confirmation from the club that they will raise the team budget before inking that kind of deal on Soriano. If the Cubs overpay, do so for Schmidt before Soriano.

What is it a sign of? Hendry is still in danger of losing whoever his top choice is. If it's Piniella, the Giants remain very interested in him. If it's Girardi, the Nationals are rumored to have him at the top of their list. After being publicly dismissed by Piniella, they aren't going to let Girardi string them along on the off-chance that the Cubs might offer him a job. If it's Bochy, Chris De Luca writes today that the Cubs still haven't requested permission to interview him: Although it was reported that the Cubs were intending to request permission, they apparently haven't gotten around to doing so yet. That jibes with what Towers said the other day. Towers also said that the first thing San Diego had on their off-season to-do list was hammering out a contract extension for Bochy. (realizing that there are also rumors that Alderson is willing to let them both walk) I've read much of the same material, but come away with a different perspective. The team, not coaches, control the pace right now. Of the few open positions out there, Girardi is thought to only land in Washington, if not Chicago. Piniella perhaps in San Francisco, but as an outside shot. Texas isn't interested in either if you believe Bruce Miles. There are only four teams hiring at this point, and for each highly speculated Cubs candidate, there appears to be two 'real options' (in other words, not a long-shot) - the Cubs and one other. I don't see where the urgency comes in at this point.

Hendry's existence in the Cubs front office is a sign of failure. Anti-Hendry sentiment was, and is, extreme because he's a pathetic GM that has screwed over Cubs fans. To me, that is unforgiving. With that line of thinking, and such a blanket out-of-context statement, you are turning all your opinions on a specific subject matter into irrelevent observations not worth reading. I am pretty sure everyone is aware of your hatred of Hendry. Not every individual conversation requires that turning of the jack-in-the-box crank response. My comment was specific to the context of hiring a manager within 48 hours of Bakers departure, which was the source of the ire in this thread and a dozen others the past week+.

I hope people are willing to accept that Hendry's patience isn't a sign of failure by now. The anti-Hendry sentiment for the first three days of the offseason was pretty extreme and unforgiving.

The entire A-Rod trade speculation really kind of peeves me. The Yankees defined the market for trading large salary with lots of years players and yet they can change that market now? If the Yankees can consistently acquire these players for next to nothing, why is it that they can deal these players off for very good talent? I don't get it. Or maybe I just don't want to get it. If they give up A-Rod and pay nothing on the contract, they shouldn't get back anything more than what they gave up when acquiring Abreu.

That's the worst argument I have heard this year. Good job.

The Yankees are expected to make serious runs at both Zito and Schmidt, which is another 26 million a year, or so. They are already looking to spend big-time, so it should not be a given they have the resources to outbid everyone else.

Bruce, do you believe (or better yet have knowledge) that the Cubs are interested in joining the bid on the posting process for Japanese pitcher Matsuzaka? Are the Cubs going to seriously entertain a bidding war with the Yankees for major pitching talent, like Schmidt or Zito? Thanks.

I think I've read a few articles questioning whether ARod could play SS again because he has bulked up since moving to 3B and might not have the range needed for SS. I'm thinking most folks are willing to find out. Rosenthal threw out a half-dozen team names likely interested in the pre-game show, and the Cubs was one of them. I think the A-Rod saga is actually going to stall the offseason market. If there are numerous teams interested, then clearly those teams are going to be going slowly while they see what happens.