dew1679666265

Agreed, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea to settle for a manager who does it too often like Brenly. Yeah, I don't get the Brenly thing either. The man had Schilling and Johnson, both in the prime of their careers, both having lights-out seasons. Dusty would have won in that situation too. So would a bunch of good managers. What's your point? I mean, I'm cool that people don't agree with me on him as a potential manager and all, I just think the "he had too much talent around him" reason is silly. That doesn't tell me a thing about him as a manager. I wouldn't be completely against Brenly from the start, but I don't think his philosophy would be the best at helping us win. Too much Dusty there, I think.

I hope not. It would be nice if they traded for something that mattered, like a person who can hit the ball, instead of a post 30 year old reliever who is nothing special away from cavernous pitcher's parks. This season he's got a better WHIP and K:BB ratio on the road than at home. His ERA is higher, but that's only because he gave up 3 runs in 13 innings (road) instead of 2 runs in 20 innings (home). He was much worse on the road last year, but in 2007 he was only slightly worse on the road than he was at home (better ERA on the road, .150 points worse WHIP on the road). Two out of his three years in San Diego he's been something special on the road.

We'd actually be taking on more money this season. In 09, Bradley is making $5 million while Castillo is at $6 million. If there's not room for Holliday now, there definitely wouldn't be after adding payroll.

Bradley has been as good as Hoff this year and the safe money is on Bradley being the better hitter the rest of the way. Fox has been very good to this point, but what if he regresses? I'd say it's more likely than Bradley improving. Smith would be very interesting, but what are we giving up for him? What's the Rockies' incentive to trade a young, cheap for a long time, productive outfielder? Smith is listed as their 5th OF, so I would think a decent package of prospects would get their interest. I would think they'd look to part ways with Hawpe or Spilborghs before Smith. Hawpe is 30 and Spilborghs is 29, while Smith is 26. Hawpe is also expensive ($7.5 in 2010 and $10 million club option in 2011). Spilborghs has more service time (just over 2 years) so he'll get expensive before Smith will. I could see them shipping off Hawpe if they fall out of contention, but otherwise I don't think they'd move an outfielder without pretty good compensation. And would that compensation be worth it for a guy who's had one terrific year (this year)?

LOL, love the eternal Bradley optimism! He's never finished a season with an OPS this low (save for his first couple of years in the majors), yet he's always had injury issues. Why is it that he won't rebound this year? The likelihood is that he'll rebound to right around his career averages, but won't begin to come near the lofty numbers of the past two seasons. Is there a clear reason why it's certain he won't do that? Here's the only thing I can come up with on Bradley: Mental. As far as I can remember, he's never come into a situation where he's the "big left-handed bat" a team has been counting on. He was very comfortable in Texas and walked into a Chicago situation he was not mentally ready for. His behavioral issues should be a surprise to no one. He told Hendry what he wanted to hear and the checkbook was pulled out. You may be on to something, but he was acquired by the Padres at the deadline as the "big bat" that would push them into the playoffs. He ended up injured, but while healthy he OPSd 1.004.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea to settle for a manager who does it too often like Brenly. Yeah, I don't get the Brenly thing either. The man had Schilling and Johnson, both in the prime of their careers, both having lights-out seasons. Dusty would have won in that situation too. He also had Luis Gonzalez OPSing over 1.100 in the World Series season.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea to settle for a manager who does it too often like Brenly. Yeah, I like Lou's general philosophy but he still does the small ball stuff. And I don't mind elements of it in an offense, but I keep thinking Brenly would lean toward doing it too much. Any manager is going to do it, it's just the amount they do it and what they teach other than that (i.e. Lou teaching patience and stressing OBP).

LOL, love the eternal Bradley optimism! He's never finished a season with an OPS this low (save for his first couple of years in the majors), yet he's always had injury issues. Why is it that he won't rebound this year? The likelihood is that he'll rebound to right around his career averages, but won't begin to come near the lofty numbers of the past two seasons. Is there a clear reason why it's certain he won't do that?

I've never understood this sentiment. In 2003, the Cubs slugged .416 and attempted 104 stolen bases. In 2004, they slugged .458 and attempted 94 SBs. But after that, they went to a .440 SLG and 104 SB attempts. Then to a .422 SLG and 170 SB attempts in 2006. Their best overall record out of those seasons (all under Dusty) was 2004 - highest SLG and lowest SB attempts. As the slugging dropped and SB attempts increased, their record got increasingly worse. In 2004 (their best year) their .458 SLG led the league, while they were below league average in SBs. They dropped to 2nd in SLG in 2005 and were third from the bottom in SBs. In 2006 (the worst year) they were 11th in the NL in SLG and 6th in SBs. They were very much a station-to-station team from 2003-2004 - and they were good teams then. As they became more of a small ball team - and brought in the players to play that style - their overall record got worse.

Likely managerial candidates: Alan Trammel Bob Brenly Larry Rothschild Ryne Sandberg Steve Stone? Davey Johnson? Willie Randolph I'm sure there are some young candidates I'm not thinking of, but this would be the primary group, I suspect. Jody Davis. ANy chance Bobby Valentine could be persuaded to come back to our side of the pond? He'd be an interesting choice. I don't remember enough about his tendencies to know how I'd feel about him. I've always liked his personality, though.

Oh, you mean a manager who is aggressive and plays smart baseball? That's a problem? :scratch: It's also argued that all of that is giving away outs and playing for one run instead of the big inning. If we could score 4-5 runs a game on a consistent basis, we'd be in first. I'm sure Brenly could find a way to do just that. Lou is going through the motions out there. Brenly's teams scored 5 runs a game his first two seasons, 4 runs a game in 2003 and 3 runs a game in 2004. The Cubs under Lou have scored 4 runs a game in 2007 and 5 runs a game in 2008. They're scoring 4 runs a game so far this year.

Those are the kinds of player managers target to play small ball. While with the Diamondbacks, Brenly brought in players such as Craig Counsell, Junior Spivey and Alex Cintron. Similar players to the guys I mentioned.

Oh, you mean a manager who is aggressive and plays smart baseball? That's a problem? :scratch: Lots of sac bunts, steals, and hits and runs is not smart baseball. It's usually dumb baseball. Stealing bases and hit and running is dumb baseball? Hehe. Good one. Yes, I prefer the brand of Baseball we have seen for decades and decades. Bad fundamentals and slow, dumb sluggers. Throughout the Dusty years we had guys like Neifi Perez, Corey Patterson, Jose Macias, Freddie Bynum, Jerry Hairston, etc. playing the kind of baseball you're promoting. Last year was the first year in a while that we've been an OBP-heavy, patient team (maybe 2007 as well, though that was a bit of a transition year).

Oh, you mean a manager who is aggressive and plays smart baseball? That's a problem? :scratch: It's also argued that all of that is giving away outs and playing for one run instead of the big inning.

It's not a bad idea, I just don't think it improves us at all. And I think Soriano will be better than Zito over the next 5 years.

Likely managerial candidates: Alan Trammel Bob Brenly Larry Rothschild Ryne Sandberg Steve Stone? Davey Johnson? Willie Randolph I'm sure there are some young candidates I'm not thinking of, but this would be the primary group, I suspect. Jody Davis. Didn't he show interest before Hendry hired Lou? I've also got to throw out the obligatory mention of Larry Dierker as well.

Why not? Because Brenly was a pretty bad manager who rode an amazing starting rotation to a WS. I'm not saying this as a fan of Lou because I was not a big fan of hiring him in the first place, but I definitely do not want Brenly. Bob seems like good people and I really like him as the color guy but I do not want him managing the Cubs. I'm very curious if people wanting Brenly managing now wanted him for the job back after 2006. Wanting Brenly just screams of change for the sake of change. Plus, let's be clear: if Lou quits or is fired before the end of the season Trammel will finish the job. I don't think I'd have much of an issue with Brenly managing. I don't disagree with much of anything I hear him say on the air. And any manager that wins championships usually has a star player or two (or three, or four), so I think its pretty shortsighted and at worse unfair to hold that against him. With that said though, if I had a choice, I'd rather give a shot to Trammell. edit - to the other subtopic in this thread, I thought fontenot would be half decent as a starter too. I didnt expect that 900 ops from his utility role last year, but I did expect like a 775-825 ops coupled with way better defense and consistency. The main problem a lot of people have with Brenly is that he'd likely be a very hands-on manager - i.e. lots of sac bunts, double switches, steals, hits and runs, etc. I think he did a good deal of that in Arizona as well.

Likely managerial candidates: Alan Trammel Bob Brenly Larry Rothschild Ryne Sandberg Steve Stone? Davey Johnson? Willie Randolph I'm sure there are some young candidates I'm not thinking of, but this would be the primary group, I suspect.

The thing is, on paper, Hendry didnt put together a bad team, not this bad anyway. Granted, he over paid for these players, but they're still good players that should be scoring runs. Theres no point firing Hendry now, not until the off season anyway. Its not like firing him will undo the moves he made. I agree with this completely.

Per dollar, it is. No, that would be the Mets. They have a higher payroll and similar record. Hoff and Fox are better right now, so if one is interested in what's best for the team, there's nothing wrong with that move. Fox is playing third and doing fairly well. Bradley and Hoff have been pretty much equal this season and Bradley has major league success to give reason to think he'll turn it around. We don't know what Hoff will do the rest of the way. As for DLing/benching Soriano, I wouldn't be against it to give him a few days off and give Hoff more ABs.

Lou is the reason those players are underperforming? Theres something going on. This is not a 0-3 run/game team. Someones doing something wrong, and someone needs to figure it out. So far, it hasnt been Lou. The team is scoring 0-3 runs a game because the batters are not performing up to the level they should be. I strongly doubt firing Lou would correct that problem - especially since the replacement would likely be Alan Trammel.

You're not getting rid of the contract, though. You're just transferring a bad outfielder's contract to a terrible pitcher's contract. And honestly, I'd think it's unlikely the Cubs would send Zito to the pen before they'd send Soriano to the bench. Neither would happen immediately, but if both underperform long enough, I think both would be likely to find the bench/bullpen. It wouldn't be a terrible trade. But I think Soriano is more likely to be productive for the next 5 years than Zito is. Thus, since we're not saving any money at all, I'd prefer the player I think will be more productive over the course of the contracts.

Wells for Bell straight up would be a good trade, I think. It's unlikely Wells will keep up this level of production and, if he doesn't, we won't be able to get this much for him when/if he regresses. Thus, trade him at his highest value for a proven productive closer who is very cheap this year and will probably still be fairly inexpensive next year. The only problem is, the Padres will likely consider all that and ask for more than just Wells for him.

Lou is the reason those players are underperforming?

Bell is 31 years old Crap. I keep forgetting that for some reason. It seems like he's so much younger. Even still, a cheap, productive pitcher with the closer tag very well may cost more than he ought to.