dew1679666265
-
Posts
20,547 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by dew1679666265
-
As much as I liked Bradley's production potential, his injuries were too much for me. I wasn't a big Ibanez fan either, though. I wanted Dunn.
-
Yeah, I think it had more to do with giving up a pick and the fact that his best career OPS+ was 108 before this year. As for injuries, he's only played less than 100 games once in his career - his rookie year. He's not comparable to Bradley in that aspect.
-
Hendry likely didn't want Hudson because he doesn't have the reputation of being able to play SS. Miles has that rep. I don't agree with that line of thinking, but it's likely what Hendry thought. Heh. Miles doesn't have the reputation to bat 3rd either, but Hudson sure is doing it. I can't knock Hendry on Hudson. Hudson is about as injury prone as Bradley. That's probably why Hudson ended up getting such a cheap contract. But, Hendry sure can make deals that swing back around and smack him in the back of the head so hard that he can't see straight for weeks on end. I wasn't the biggest fan of Hendry's offseason moves, but he's gotten some awful luck as well. There was no reason to think Bradly would perform this poorly, same with Marmol, Soto should be at least a decent amount better and Soriano's awful slump is getting a bit out of the ordinary. I thought injuries would hurt us if anything did this season, but some unexpected poor performances have really made things look worse than they should be.
-
Hendry likely didn't want Hudson because he doesn't have the reputation of being able to play SS. Miles has that rep. I don't agree with that line of thinking, but it's likely what Hendry thought.
-
Why? It might actually get us an ok live arm from A ball that way. And it's not Rich's fault that there was no spot here. Yeah, Cubs fans should be rooting for him to do well since it'll improve the return we get for him. I've seen people talk about getting "bothing at all," and that's not the case. If he has a good year this year, I wonder what type of prospect we'd be looking at. I am pretty sure that when the trade was announced, we were told that how Rich Hill performed would not change the PTBNL. The group of players that could be selected have already been determined. I could be misremembering, though. It is a conditional pick, so if he performs very well, we'll get a better prospect. My main question is, how good are we looking? I suspect not a top prospect no matter how well Rich does, but if he approaches 2007 numbers (by chance) then we should get at least a decent prospect.
-
yup it's hendry's fault for not waiting for the market to completely tank like it did and everyone in baseball knew it except him. :roll: The market was slow all offseason. There were plenty of players Miles' level and better who signed minor league deals or cheap one-year deals before and after Miles. As for Heilman and Gregg, I don't have much of a problem with either of them.
-
Haha, agreed. I was thinking the same thing when re-reading that article.
-
Even if the 9 teams interested wasn't true (and it may well have not been), it's still accurate that the Cardinals were in on Miles and that there may be a market for his services at $2.5 million. I've also never said Hendry should have given that deal to Miles. I've opposed it since day 1.
-
Here's what St. Louis Today's Derrick Goold said about it: This was after Miles signed with the Cubs, so he wouldn't have been making up the offer to try to ratchet up the supposed interest. LaRussa wanted him back, whether it was logical or not. Also, from the same story: This was from his agent, but again the story was written after he signed with the Cubs - after it would have been beneficial for the agent to throw out fake offer estimates.
-
I think they would. There were multiple teams interested in him at the price Hendry ended up paying at the time the Cubs signed him.. Did his agent tell you that or Jim Hendry? Nobody was signing anybody at the time they got Miles. The only active teams were the Yankees signing the big tickets items, and everybody else was sitting on their hands waiting out the market. And Hendry got aggressive going after an unnecessary utility man who was non-tendered by a division rival that has to actually think when they spend money. The reports that I read said that Miles had an offer from the Cards for about the same money when he signed with the Cubs. Yeah, I remember the Cards had an offer (and remember, LaRussa is on record loving Miles) and I think one or two teams had lesser offers on the table as well.
-
I'm almost certain he was out of options and they weren't comfortable being forced to keep him in the majors all year after the struggles of last season. I'm definitely pulling for him to do well.
-
I think they would. There were multiple teams interested in him at the price Hendry ended up paying at the time the Cubs signed him. We wouldn't get much of a prospect for him either way, but if we basically get a bag of balls for him, I think somebody would take the 2010 salary. That said, the Cubs aren't trading Miles, I don't think.
-
Yeah, you're right - he was on the DL to start the year. I had forgotten. I just wonder what, if anything, the Os fixed with him. And whether or not the Cubs would have found the same thing.
-
You knew he was going to turn into a decent pitcher that we got zilch in return for. Always happens. Wasnt the Cubs return based on his performance? Yep. hopefully he wins the cy young and we get wieters, markakis or adam jones. It'll probably end up being Scott Moore that we get . . .
-
Why? It might actually get us an ok live arm from A ball that way. And it's not Rich's fault that there was no spot here. Yeah, Cubs fans should be rooting for him to do well since it'll improve the return we get for him. I've seen people talk about getting "bothing at all," and that's not the case. I hold nothing against Rich and I'm not pissed at him. I hope he does well. I'm pissed b/c whatever we get won't be as good for us as if Rich had pitched in '08 and beyond like he did in '07. Not saying it's his fault, just pissed at the circumstances. It's no guarantee he would have turned it around for us, however. Also keep in mind he was in the Orioles' minor league system for a while before being called up. He wouldn't have had that luxury on the Cubs.
-
The problem is going to be Hendry and Lou feeling they need to trade Miles. I think they like him. Trading Miles for nothing would be pointless. The problem with Miles isnt Miles, hes a perfectly average backup infielder. The problem is the 2 year 5 million dollar deal that average backup middle infielders should never get. That's true, but if we could get out from under the second year of his deal, that would be the point.
-
He'd probably have to pay for his salary this year and some of next. Teams do look for those types of players, they typically don't give out 2 year multi million dollar contracts to get them though. If he paid the remainder of this year's contract, that may be enough. Basically then a team is getting two years of Aaron Miles for $2.5 million total. That's a much more reasonable deal.
-
I thought we went with 10 last year. ESPN's stats from last year have us with only 9 pitchers seeing action. Those 9 + Howry and Lilly. You would be correct. Don't know where I got the idea that we went with 10 pitchers then.
-
Why? It might actually get us an ok live arm from A ball that way. And it's not Rich's fault that there was no spot here. Yeah, Cubs fans should be rooting for him to do well since it'll improve the return we get for him. I've seen people talk about getting "bothing at all," and that's not the case. If he has a good year this year, I wonder what type of prospect we'd be looking at.
-
I thought we went with 10 last year. ESPN's stats from last year have us with only 9 pitchers seeing action.
-
I think his primary point was that you shouldn't over-react about a short stretch like the postseason (echoing sentiments expressed here many times, surprisingly enough :shock: ) by making drastic lineup changes. As a part of that argument, he made the point that Hendry appeared to be building toward the playoffs far too early to be doing so. That's how I took it at least. He also strongly lamented the Cubs' trading of DeRosa, which I also completely agreed with.
-
You knew he was going to turn into a decent pitcher that we got zilch in return for. Always happens. Wasnt the Cubs return based on his performance? Yep.
-
The problem is going to be Hendry and Lou feeling they need to trade Miles. I think they like him.
-
uh no. Fukudome and Reed are perfectly fine - if not very good - as a platoon in CF. Reed doesn't need to be starting every day, though. And I agree with Joe Morgan. I think there was an over-reaction to the playoff collapse and the team got worse in the process. I don't think we're as bad as our record/performance to date would indicate, but this team is not as good as last year's 97 win team.
-
First off, I don't think we'll carry 11 pitchers into the postseason. With only 4 starters (max), we can probably go with 9-10 pitchers and be fine. That would drop off Waddell if we go 10 and Wells if we go 9. Offensively, Miles will almost certainly be there. If we go with 10 pitchers, I'd think you would just add Miles and maybe swap Fontenot and Scales. If we go with 9 pitchers, we'd probably go with Miles and both Fontenot/Scales. And Fontenot has more power (at least normally) than Scales and I think he'd almost be a certainty to be on the postseason roster.