UK1679666180

Between Berrian, Gage, and Wade, I think Berrian is the one to be the most productive of he 3. Perosnally, none of them are starting WRs at this stage.

That's what the problem is. Hendry has set up this offseason to be another failure. His lack of moves last offseason when decent options were available are really going to hurt us now that not many options are available this offseason. I want to be optimistic about this offseason but I just can't. Hindsight can be clouded. I see this said all the time but it isn't a very complete or fair statement. Many of the marquee big names signed last offseason by other teams spent many games on the DL and (assuming same injury in Cubs uniform) would have been labeled a JH failure anyway. I don't think so, say the Cubs signed Drew, Beltran, or Ordonez (at a reduced rate than what he signed for). I would've had no problem to this day about the signing. Their backgrounds would a higher indicator of future success than Burnitz or Hollandsworth.

Btw, Hendry did have a plan for the '05 OF, it was just based on a couple of incorrect projections. 1)Hollandsworth could be a decent starting LF'er 2)Burnitz could be a decent starting RF'er away from Coors. I don't fault him for Corey's regression. Nothing worked out and the Cubs had the worst OF in the majors, Murton was the only bright spot later on. I liked the trade for Lawton as well, but unlike Burnitz and Hollandsworth, I don't fault him for that either.

He's an expensive insurnace policy once a starter gets hurt. I just wonder who'll be the #5 between Williams and Rusch, it better be Williams.

My high is 177. Me and bowling don't mix.

This is the same budget that was dictated by the Sosa debacle. There were limited options at the time b/c free agency was coming to an end and all potential options had already been signed. Had the Cubs used any foresight, they would've known if they had to trade Sosa it would've been key to find a RF'er ASAP once they made the decision they were going to trade him instead of few possible options such as Burnitz. Hendry had to sign Burnitz, he had to sign him b/c the Cubs waited so damn long in trading Sosa and deciding not to sign anyone until after the trade was completed likely b/c of budget constraints and potentially eating more than they already did. The flaw isn't in signing in Burnitz, it's waiting till he's the last avail. option. Actually, I think the budgetary concerns were nonexistent. We picked up most of Sosa's salary anyway-did Hendry think he was going to be able to unload all of it on some other team, especially considering the hackjob the Tribune pulled on Sosa. If Sosa's 18m was a hinderance to singing a top flight RF, it would have been a hinderance if he were traded or not, so what's the difference? Beteween Hairston, Burnitz and Sosa's salary we ate, we lost money on that deal. I think the team uses Sosa's trade as an easy out to the question of: Why didn't you sign a FA OF? At the very least they could have brought back Alou. He signed, what, a $7m contract with a $6m option for 2006? The excuse for not bringing him back was that Hendry wasn't sure he could move Sosa, so he didn't want to commit money to Alou just in case. Then he signed Burnitz for $4.5. Hendry couldn't have found an extra 2.5m somewehre in the budget to accomodate that? It's in that chain of events like overpaying for Macias, Perez and, to a lesser extent, Blanco came back to bite Hendry. As irritating as Alou was to us (especially Tim), an Alou/Patterson/Whoever OF would have been light years better than the one we ended up with. At that time, they were coming to an end financially. They had to have known they'd be eating most if not all of his contract. But, the 7 or so mil did help land Burnitz and I don't think they would've been able to if they didn't get Balt. to pay part of Sosa's '05.

Isn't Young abysmal on defense, too? As a SS yes, I thought he was avg. defensively as a 2B, although I haven't seen the stats. Is he really that bad? I know his fielding percentage at SS is around league average, but I honestly know nothing about what kind of range he has. As far as range, not as bad as putting a china cabinet out there, but it could be close.

This is the same budget that was dictated by the Sosa debacle. There were limited options at the time b/c free agency was coming to an end and all potential options had already been signed. Had the Cubs used any foresight, they would've known if they had to trade Sosa it would've been key to find a RF'er ASAP once they made the decision they were going to trade him instead of few possible options such as Burnitz. Hendry had to sign Burnitz, he had to sign him b/c the Cubs waited so damn long in trading Sosa and deciding not to sign anyone until after the trade was completed likely b/c of budget constraints and potentially eating more than they already did. The flaw isn't in signing Burnitz, it's waiting till he's the last avail. option.

Isn't Young abysmal on defense, too? As a SS yes, I thought he was avg. defensively as a 2B, although I haven't seen the stats.

If the Cubs don't land Giles, they might have to consider taking Milton and a % of his contract to get Dunn. Of course given the winds at Wrigley, he'll have a 50/50 of being helped or hurt by the confines.

Lugo: (among SS) Vorp 5th Win Shares (total) 7th Fielding WS 14th RC-6th

http://www.northsidebaseball.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=17410&start=20 (From January) Since, I like to prove anything against hindsight arguments. 5th post down.

You mean Hollandsworth, look at the game logs from early on, it was a one sided platoon. It was a stupid idea to have a 4th OF'er as a starting LF'er. It's not like he didn't play. DuBois got 142 at-bats. They tried working him in there and he didn't produce after April. People want to complain about prospects getting no shot. Yet when the prospects get a shot and fail they like to wash their hands and blame it on Dusty and Hendry. If there's blame, it's on Hendry's poor assessment of DuBois. Of course, many had the same poor assessment. He played after his hot April and Hollandsworth's horrible April. Dubois didn't produce and Hollandsworth was terrible as well. Dubois deserved the shot from the beg., they waited for a career 4th OF'er who played much of his career in CF to try and produce like a LF'er and it was obvious it wasn't going to happen. Hendry failed in bringing a LF'er and a RF'er, I wanted Dubois to come off the bench in '05, but when Hollandsworth was the LF'er brought in, I wanted Dubois. B/c Hollandsworth isn't a starting LF'er and never should've been considered. I'm not in MLB, so my opinion might not be valid. Now if you to shift the theme towards how various posters view Baker, go for it. Just remember who Hendry brought in to be the starting LF'er as well as RF and I shouldn't have to say more, b/c it's so obvious how poor it was. Factor in the circumstances on why they settled for Burnitz and it compounds the poor moves to build the '05 OF, the worst in MLB.

Hard to imagine the Bears having a 2 game lead b/c of tiebreaker in the division while going 3-0 in the division.

What an amazing win, it would've been a hell of a tough climb to win without Jones and a decent kicker.

They always say sprain in the knee, but they'll do the MRI and find a tear more than likely. I'll be shocked if he is back this year, it was ugly.

You mean Hollandsworth, look at the game logs from early on, it was a one sided platoon. It was a stupid idea to have a 4th OF'er as a starting LF'er.

What a moronic decision to not cont. to go for the win. This conservative BS has to stop.

Why does FB have to be indoors? I'm glad the Bears and the city thought against the retractable roof. It isn't worth having the Super Bowl every 10-15 years for it. Detroit is putting 8 in the box, Orton is making them pay, I'd like to see the pass set-up the run in the second half by using play action on this 1st drive.

Miss St. is driving down the field they are on UK's 4yd line down 13-7 on the final drive of the game. MSU fumbles and UK wins 13-7. Beyond tonight's game, these two teams have defeated Murray St., Idaho St. (I-AA), and Tulane this year.

Not that Texas/OSU as well as UCLA aren't important games, but UK is up 13-7 over Miss. St. in the 4th. 2-9 will look better than 1-10. :x

That article metions trading for a RF'er with speed. How many current RF'ers have speed and no power beyond Ichiro? Poor writing again from Sullivan.

I think 3 dominant relievers is almost a must at this stage. The Cubs have 3 pitchers who can rack up 120 pitches by the 6 and a manager who'll leave them out there. I agree with Raisin. You get a dominant set-up guy and a LOOGY and hope Dusty doesn't run them into the ground. I think the Cubs can find lightning in a bottle from Williamson and I expect Wuertz to do well. I'd feel more comfortable if the Cubs had Williams as the fallback option as the #5, instead of Rusch at this. Hendry still likely goes under the assumption that Wood it'll get him 30 starts per and it just isn't likely, especially with the potential of him just getting recovered in time to go every 4 days. I like Jerome Williams, but they'll need a #5 starter or a #4 starter once an injury occurs.

Finally...you have seen the light. Don't you feel better now? I'll feel better when the Cubs sign Furcal to 9-10 per year b/c he's fast.

Michaels would be an ok pickup, I'd rather sell the farm for Pierre though. He's a better bunter who likes to spend extra time judging the IF and how the ball rolls down the 3B line. That's mas important than actual baseball ability.