TheDude

Pagan's problem with stolen bases is reading, not speed. When he and Reyes were in the minors together, they had a foot race based on a clubhouse bet, and Pagan won. Reyes is generally regarded as the fastest kid in the NL. As for starting in CF, my thinking is in line with Goony's. Not a bad fall back option for Pie. I'd like to see Pagan play some concentrated CF in winter ball or ST. If Pagan were an everyday player, I'm certain he would produce 20+ doubles and 10+ triples a season. With some excellent coaching, maybe he can learn to steal 40. I'm just not sold on his ability to get on base without a hit, which is a Cubs need and therefore makes him a fallback option.

It's only risky in the sense that small-minded old people might question it. I think you are wrong here. This thinking is pervaisive in NL minds, from the media to the scouts to the clubhouse to the GM and owners' booths. I have no idea how you can claim otherwise. Who are the pervasive minds in the NL? Small minded old people? I think you guys are talking about the same people. I answered that question - Did you see that I listed media, scouts, clubhouses, GM, and owners? It's more than just the old-timer coaches and scouts.

It's only risky in the sense that small-minded old people might question it. I think you are wrong here. This thinking is pervaisive in NL minds, from the media to the scouts to the clubhouse to the GM and owners' booths. I have no idea how you can claim otherwise.

However, Yahoo failed to mention that his biggest asset is his high OBP, instead focusing on the fact that he's not fast, making him an odd choice. The writer was correct to focus in on the lackof speed. That is the story: the Padres are projected to go against the NL book next season. Numerous people around here will nods their heads and say 'about time' that OBP and not speed be looked at as prime leadoff material, but the fact is this is a risky, untraditional move. That is what makes it story in the first place. Untraditional? Perhaps. Risky? Hardly. They aren't the first team to do this. Brian Downing hit leadoff for California and Texas late in his career, and he was slower than Giles. Youkilis for the Red Sox is a much more recent example. If you have a guy that can get on base at a .380+ clip with mediocre power, bat him leadoff. He doesn't have to have Rickey Henderson speed to be a good leadoff hitter. Note that I bolded NL in my own quote. every example you just gave was an AL example. we're talking NL baseball here. Yes it is risky for their management. If it works, then maybe other NL teams pay attention and it sparks a shift in thinking for NL baseball. If it doesn't work, then all the NL old school baseball minds nod to each other behind closed doors about 'playing the game the right way'.

The fact that Hendry doesn't think its a problem makes me think it will be a problem. People can have their criticisms of Hendry, but I think they should at least apply to the man's record. Hendry has a strong history of being able to sign/acquire the men he targets. It is legitimate to question the men he targets if you don't go for his brand of team building, but I don't think your observation holds up when compared to his record. It's actually quite the opposite, Hendry has often been credited with being a strong GM when it comes to sealing the deal with the guy he wants (that's why the Furcal deal was so shocking last year).

However, Yahoo failed to mention that his biggest asset is his high OBP, instead focusing on the fact that he's not fast, making him an odd choice. The writer was correct to focus in on the lackof speed. That is the story: the Padres are projected to go against the NL book next season. Numerous people around here will nods their heads and say 'about time' that OBP and not speed be looked at as prime leadoff material, but the fact is this is a risky, untraditional move. That is what makes it story in the first place.

Watching Jim Leyland bat Neifi in the top 2 spots in the order several times this year (among other things) makes me think he'd be just as bad as Dusty, even though he's probably going to win the MOY. Right place, right time, if you ask me. To give Leyland credit he did bench Perez and he hasn't played much since. Baker would have let him hit out of his slump in the 2 spot. Jim Leyland does nearly all of the things that standard Dusty bashers list every week, including the ultimate hair-pulling early inning sacrifice bunts. I watched a game three weeks ago where Leyland laid down 4 sacrifice bunts before the 7th inning.

Hendry was right. It will only take about 5 moves to bring the team back to contention.

Getting Castillo is a good choice if we can answer the lack of slugging somewhere else. If we trade for A. Jones, then signing Castillo makes a lot of sense. If we bring back Pierre, getting Castillo would likely not be a good move. Agreed. If the Cubs are truly pursuing Soriano in CF as has been stated, then getting Castillo at 2nd is an excellent move. He's a quality lead-off man to satisfy both the old-school and the new new-school baseball fans, and we all know satisfying the fans is the name of the game ;).

Yes the Cubs are going to consider it.

This quote says absolutely nothing about the Cubs coaching staff and should not be construed to do so. Keep people's quotes in the context they were spoken within.

I think Maddux did share knowledge...whether or not the kids on the staff are good enough to execute is a different issue altogether.

If the Twins do not pick-up Castillo's $5.75 million option for 2007, then I would target him as the second best choice after Soriano. But I've been after Castillo in a Cubs uniform for 4 years now.

There's nothing 'sort of' about it. He came right out and said Murton should be the guy next year. And yet he won't start him everyday right now. I'm not backing Dusty, I'm just taking his quote in context. He did specifically state 'next year' as the point of reference for the comment. I don't have the first clue as to why Murton is not everyday right now. Maybe Dusty is just trying to give everyone playing time, since the time really doesn't matter. He probably wants to leave with no enemies.

Wow, good point about Soriano's walks. If he keeps walking so much, he may turn Hendry off to him. That's just silly.

Is anybody taking into account pay raises in their numbers or buyout amounts (if any)?

The Cubs have one of the youngest teams in the league already. The fully healthy ideal projected pitching staffs are all 30 and under (Miller, Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Hill) and the only two everyday position players over 30 are Jones and Lee, who are both 31. This is a very young team.

There's nothing 'sort of' about it. He came right out and said Murton should be the guy next year.

Neither of these observations make any sense. Whether Aramis opts out of his contract or not, why do the Cubs need to move Lee, Barret, Jones, Izturis, Murton, Zambrano, Prior, Hill, Eyre, Wuertz, Howry, Dempster, etc.? During the offseason we're likely to see 3 or 4 news-worthy acquisitions and a few bench players.

I've answered this in numerous other threads as well, and 'my' team looks very much like Vance's. To go more generically, and just speaking strategically, the Cubs must do the 3 following things IMO: - Sign a top of the rotation starter - Sign a premiere power bat, likely in LF (excepting the first option of Soriano at 2B) - Bring in an all-around performing, on-base minded 2B if the power bat comes from LF. My ideal scenario is much like Vance's, because it involves Schmidt and Soriano. In that case, the third point falls on Murton in LF.

You've got nothing to worry about. The business isn't run this way. The only non-rookie player who some fans on this board would quickly dispose of that appears to be playing for next year is Pierre. That is not going to happen, whether the Cubs win or lose the rest of the way. There isn't a team in baseball (besides the $200 million Yankees) that sports an entire daily lineup of .350 OBP or better. There are 4 teams with a team OBP of .350 or higher (2 of which are at .350 exactly), and they are all American League teams (DH naturally) whose team totals are inflated by exceptional individual numbers from the best names in baseball (Manny Ramirez, Travis Hafner, etc). Only the Yankees have what you desire.

Before this thread quickly becomes a pile on Dusty Baker thread because it's easy, a devil's advocate voice should point out that likely 80% or more of the managers in baseball would use Pierre as a lead-off hitter. I think it's closer to 95% myself, but I'm allowing for more slack. The perceived problem with Pierre as a lead-off hitter has much more to do with the old-school/new-school argument than it has to do with Dusty Baker.

If we could get Lugo signed rather than Pierre, Pie's position for the next 10 years won't be blocked. There's your lead off guy. Either Izturis or Lugo can play SS or 2nd. But I can easily see Hendry viewing Soriano as a lead-off man, negating the need to pay for Pierre's services. If Soriano is signed to play second, I don't see Hendry going after Lugo. He'll have his SS in Izturis, and I think if Soriano is brought in, it will be to play secondbase. I don't see Hendry slotting a 40 HR at the lead-off slot, speed or not.

I can see that approach being used in a mid or low market team. But I don't see the Cubs or any other large market team gambling on more than one young non-stud position player in the everyday lineup (the Mets with Reyes and Wright are an exception, because those two are exceptional players). The Cubs will be expected to reload instead of rebuild. In other words, I think Murton has an edge over Theriot as that one guy to gamble on, unless Murton pushed out for a power LF. Then maybe Theriot gets the job. In order to consider both Murton and Theriot, you'd have to really improve SS and CF, but the market for those positions is tighter than LF and 2B, and the current GM has a love affair with guys already on the roster at those positions (Izturis and Pierre). if thats the way the cubs think they they deserve to lose. they only thing they should be "expected" to do is win. if they havent learned yet that they arent going to win by signing high priced free agents instead of looking to their own system, there is little hope for the future imo. I'm sorry but this point is a bit naive. Big market teams don't build from within these days. If you're a $100+ million team, you can afford to run with 4 or more $10 million plus players and slot and handful (maybe 4-5) roster positions for cheaper, productive youth. It's an entirely diffeent discussion as whether or not you or I can respect this approach, because personally, it's not the approach I want to root for as a fan. But reality is what it is. On a big market team, assuming no injury replacement scenarios, only the cream of the farm system has a shot to break through, and these names are usually names people recognize from hype.

I can see that approach being used in a mid or low market team. But I don't see the Cubs or any other large market team gambling on more than one young non-stud position player in the everyday lineup (the Mets with Reyes and Wright are an exception, because those two are exceptional players). The Cubs will be expected to reload instead of rebuild. In other words, I think Murton has an edge over Theriot as that one guy to gamble on, unless Murton pushed out for a power LF. Then maybe Theriot gets the job. In order to consider both Murton and Theriot, you'd have to really improve SS and CF, but the market for those positions is tighter than LF and 2B, and the current GM has a love affair with guys already on the roster at those positions (Izturis and Pierre).