XZero771679666304

It was really bad. I think the rest of the pen had like 24 or 25 blown saves.

The Trib is reporting the signing: Link

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then? Since when does "better than league average" mean "All-star?" How many teams have a guy whose above the league avg. at every single position? None that I can think of. Not even the Yankees. they very easily could though. it's not an impossible notion depending on how you want to define "league average production," ie OPS, BA, etc. Of course they could. But the idea that you need to have above average production at every position to be an elite team is just wrong. I would say an elite team should have above average production at 6 of the 8 positions, provided the other two aren't totally abysmal.

thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you So the NL All-star team then? Since when does "better than league average" mean "All-star?" How many teams have a guy whose above the league avg. at every single position? None that I can think of. Not even the Yankees.

Going into the 2004 season, the Cubs had the strongest roster in the league, IMO. Most predicted the Cubs would win the central, and with good cause. What happened in 2004 was a firestorm of managerial ineptitude and injuries. In 2005 the personnel just wan't there.

I will go with what I think could happen: Furcal - 10 million Howry - 3.5 million Mark Sweeney - 1 million Orlando Palmeiro - 1 million Via trade: Dunn/Floyd/Green 6-8 million And I have a feeling Hendry will make another run at Kearns, who could play CF.

Or increase the amount Hendry will spend to acquire him.

He basically insinuated that more moves would come via trade than via signing. Also that RH relief starting pitching would be addressed, and there will be an focus on defense, particularly in the infield.

Giles you may have a point about. There's no way in hell I'd give Burnett five years.

If they want to invest the money and years in him, let them go right ahead. It would make Giles much harder to acquire for them to boot.

After an arbitration raise to Zambrano, my guess is its closer to 20. Either way, it's drying up pretty rapidly with little to show. It's like eating out every night. Sure 10 bucks isn't much, but keep doing it every night and it adds up. I think you can pencil in 9-10 million more for Furcal. With the remaining money, I would not be the least bit surprised to see Mench/Kearns acquired later this offseason along with a few more spare parts. Or hopefully Dunn. The payroll would have to increase to accommodate Abreu. :?

lefthanded one out guy

I've said many times Giles isn't the only option, but RF is clearly the biggest need. How many times do I have to repeat that it's the only position on the team with no internal options? Does that not mean anything to anybody? They can get average production out of SS for minimal cost. They can't get crap out of RF for anything. This team appears to be more interested in creating a hole (dumping Walker) than filling the biggest hole (RF). =D> =D> =D> Great post. We have Ronny and Walker already in-house, and that's a decent starting point. If we can improve on it, we should, but the fact is that we literally have NO right fielder, and that is the position of greatest need, therefore it should be the position of most emphasis. With the current regime, thinking about what should be done is too depressing. I'm just looking at it like this: 1) Hendry is going to go after Furcal, likelihood of Furcal being a Cub = 99% 2) Giles isn't coming to the Cubs. 3) Baker won't use Cedeno or Murton at the top. 4) Baker will use Neifi to lead off unless he is provided with what he views as a better option. 5) Walker is trade bait, even if I don't like it. Now given those things (IMO) what is the best possible course of action? I am not going to sit here and think utopian thoughts about what should or should not be. I'll save that until Hendry and Baker are gone.

Ah...Goony...you remind me once again why you're my hero. To everyone preaching that we wait and see how the off season unfolds before crucifying Hendry and company, that's the exact same mantra that's been bandied the last few seasons. I bought in last year, so any criticism I levy is a result of waiting for the non-existant difference making moves last winter. If we get to the winter meetings and nothing has happened with the OF, then I will get worried. And I don't think too many expected too much last offseason. I know I didn't.

Yeah, I agree. IMO the huge dollar figures being bandied about for Furcal are only appropriate for players who have been kicking ass consistently for a long time. To be fair, Furcal has been more consitant than Beltran and far more than Beltre. If Renteria os worth marktet value, so is Furcal.

And Furcal had a good year in his contract year. So did Adrian Beltre last year. So did Beltran last year. That list goes on and on. Giles is productive every year. Are you skipping out on compiling a list of players that compare to Giles for much less than what Giles would make that would be available for the Cubs? Compare Julio Lugo to Furcal. Look at their stats. Same guy. Lugo will make just under 5m this year and Furcal will make 10m plus for the next several years. The Cubs have so much trade commodity it's not even funny. I'm not worried about it costing players for someone in trade. At least plenty of trade commodity to land a Lugo or a Wilkerson or someone of the like. Compiling a list of players who could prduce like Giles seems pointless. I have never said there were better options out there. He could produce like Ruth for 350K and if there are places he'd rather be that will pay him the same it is totall irrelevant. My feeling is that Giles isn't coming here regardless. And that abundance of trade commodity can just as easiyly be used to acquire an outfielder.

That's just plain wrong. You don't try and correct bad decisions by compounding them with more bad decisions. What? You think if we close our eyes and hope hard enough Hendry and Baker will go away? And what bad decision are we talking about? Giles isn't coming here, he never was. Sure, Brian hasn't dictated that directly to Moses to be presented to us as hard evidence on stone tablets, but the writings are on the wall. This has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity. He either wants to stay with his family or win now. It is circumstantial evidece that states this, but there is a mountain of it. What do you suggest, that Hendry put everything else aside and go full bore after Giles? I think a more sorry epitaph to the offseason would be one that tells of how Hendry focused to much on one player and missed other opportunities. Hendry wouldn't need to dedicate the entire offseason to signing Giles. All they would have had to do is court him like you are supposed to. Call him and say "Brian, you are the guy we've targeted as the guy we want on this club. If you come to Chicago, we'll give you 3 years at 14m a year to be our RF." When Giles then says, I'm not interested, Hendry can announce to the world he tried, but Giles has no interest in the Cubs and move on. Hendry has been salivating over Furcal all offseason, and he's no closer to being signed than Giles. Funny, Atlanta gave their top dollar for Furcal and it was after that he announced to the world (or to Hendry since the Cubs seem to be the only other team falling all over themselves for Furcal) that it would take 50m to get him. Atlanta wants him back and they can't go over 8m a year. Apparently, he wouldn't mind going back. If it takes 50m to convince him to not to back to Atlanta, I say go back to Atlanta, we have internal options that might be better. If not, we'll trade for one who is. There is no secret that the Cubs want Furcal. Why is the Giles thing a secret? It gives me the appearance that Hendry wants Furcal and not Giles. I think that's not thinking clearly. How do we know thaere hasn't been preliminary discussion with Giles' agent, and there didn't seem to be enough interest to justify any further effort? And if there wasn't, what does arguing here about it accomplish? For whatever reason, Hendry doesn't seem to be inclined to pursue Giles. If he isn't going after him, he isn't going after him. It may be because Giles doesn't want to come to the Cubs, or it may be because Hendry doesn't want him, or it may because of Giles demands. Regardless, the end result will likely be the same. Hendry has been incompetant recently, so none of this should be a revelation. There are other fish in the sea, and we can hope he is going after them.

For all the talk about the specific oddity of Lee having so few opportunities, wasn't there a similar stat where Burnitz had the most opportunities but came through the fewest times? OBP all around is much more of a problem than OBP in the leadoff spot. Order isn't that important. What matters is overall production. The fact that the Cubs are so intent on narrowing their focus to one spot is disturbing, while the apparant willingness of a large segment of the media and fan base to applaud that focus is just bewildering. This was not a team that was a leadoff hitter away from championship. They had candidates for the spot, but chose not to use them. I refuse to justify inefficient personel moves with the "save Dusty from himself" theory. It's Jim's own fault that Dusty is here, he can't get a free pass for bad moves just because they were made in an effort to stop Dusty from screwing up too much. That is called throwing good money after bad, and it's a piss-poor management philosophy. First off, I have said the entire lineup needs to be addressed as far as OBP is concerned. Two or three times now. Having said that, not all the needs are equal. I am sorry Goony, but when you have guys like Perez and Patterson leading things off and two guys with .900+ OPS following them and you aren't scoring runs, it doesn't take a slide rule to figure out what is wrong. Lee had a OBS of 1.080, Ramirez .926, Walker .829, Barrett .824, which is decent combination of pop and OBP for the heart of the order. Burnitz's .322 OBP hurts for sure, but Neifi's .298, Hairston's .336 and Corey's .254 rotating around the top was the killer. Now adding OBP to RF and CF should be a priority, but putting people in the lineup that will get on base and Dusty will actually bat at the top is most important. I would put it this way: the need for OBP at the top is dire, the need for OBP lower in the lineup is serious. Hopefull both will be addressed, and I think they will. But if you had to choose one, OBP at the top should be it. Now I am not trying to defend Baker or Hendry, but with them in place, you have to take their stupidity into account. You can't assume players will be used in useful or innovative ways, you must assume Dusty will use players in the fashion he always has. Walker won't lead off, and Giles wouldn't be batted second. This isn't excuse making, it is reality of Baker, and until he is canned or leaves, we will just have to deal with it. I for one have accepted the reality of Hendry and Baker, and am hoping like hell Furcal gets signed and Hendry manages to trade for a good outfielder or two. Ignoring Furcal to pursue a player who we are longshots to get is pure foolishness. Furcal is available, there is a minimum of competition, he fills a need, and he is publicly open to playing in Chicago. Giles is available, there is more competition from teams he has a preference to play for, he fills a need, but has not been linked to the Cubs much at all. I say secure what we can first, then focus on the things that will take more work. To me it seems that too many people here are too focused on Brains Giles . It's like and thing not Giles related is met with derision. Guys the Cubs had last year that had a higher OBP than Furcal had last year that were capable of leading off: Walker Murton Cedeno Guys who can be traded for that would provide a comparable or better OBP at a much lower cost: Lofton Lugo Pierre Bradley Michaels (if available) Wilkerson Why put all your eggs in one basket for a guy (Furcal) who can be replaced by 1 or more of the guys listed above? Give me a list of guys we can use in place of Brian Giles and his production that we have in house and who would come cheaper. Don't forget, I'm looking for equal production. Have fun...... Who is putting all their eggs in one basket? It's still November for God's sake. Furcal won't cost us any players, has expressed a desire to play for the Cubs, and only has one or two other suitors. Getting involved in a war for Giles to the exclusion of others would be a MUCH bigger risk, and one far less likely to pay off. And again, Walker, Cedeno and Murton don't matter much IF DUSTY WON'T USE THEM. There were there last year and Dusty didn't use them, so why would he now when he can just turn to Neifi again? It is truly pathetic that our manager can's maximize the talent provided, but it is our lot whether we like it or not. Pierre had a bad year, the probable decline of Lofton has been well documented here, and the others we don't know are available, and what cost in players it would take. If we don't get a leadoff candidate, you will see Perez leading off. I'd bet the farm on it.

That's just plain wrong. You don't try and correct bad decisions by compounding them with more bad decisions. What? You think if we close our eyes and hope hard enough Hendry and Baker will go away? And what bad decision are we talking about? Giles isn't coming here, he never was. Sure, Brian hasn't dictated that directly to Moses to be presented to us as hard evidence on stone tablets, but the writings are on the wall. This has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity. He either wants to stay with his family or win now. It is circumstantial evidece that states this, but there is a mountain of it. What do you suggest, that Hendry put everything else aside and go full bore after Giles? I think a more sorry epitaph to the offseason would be one that tells of how Hendry focused to much on one player and missed other opportunities.

For all the talk about the specific oddity of Lee having so few opportunities, wasn't there a similar stat where Burnitz had the most opportunities but came through the fewest times? OBP all around is much more of a problem than OBP in the leadoff spot. Order isn't that important. What matters is overall production. The fact that the Cubs are so intent on narrowing their focus to one spot is disturbing, while the apparant willingness of a large segment of the media and fan base to applaud that focus is just bewildering. This was not a team that was a leadoff hitter away from championship. They had candidates for the spot, but chose not to use them. I refuse to justify inefficient personel moves with the "save Dusty from himself" theory. It's Jim's own fault that Dusty is here, he can't get a free pass for bad moves just because they were made in an effort to stop Dusty from screwing up too much. That is called throwing good money after bad, and it's a piss-poor management philosophy. First off, I have said the entire lineup needs to be addressed as far as OBP is concerned. Two or three times now. Having said that, not all the needs are equal. I am sorry Goony, but when you have guys like Perez and Patterson leading things off and two guys with .900+ OPS following them and you aren't scoring runs, it doesn't take a slide rule to figure out what is wrong. Lee had a OBS of 1.080, Ramirez .926, Walker .829, Barrett .824, which is decent combination of pop and OBP for the heart of the order. Burnitz's .322 OBP hurts for sure, but Neifi's .298, Hairston's .336 and Corey's .254 rotating around the top was the killer. Now adding OBP to RF and CF should be a priority, but putting people in the lineup that will get on base and Dusty will actually bat at the top is most important. I would put it this way: the need for OBP at the top is dire, the need for OBP lower in the lineup is serious. Hopefull both will be addressed, and I think they will. But if you had to choose one, OBP at the top should be it. Now I am not trying to defend Baker or Hendry, but with them in place, you have to take their stupidity into account. You can't assume players will be used in useful or innovative ways, you must assume Dusty will use players in the fashion he always has. Walker won't lead off, and Giles wouldn't be batted second. This isn't excuse making, it is reality of Baker, and until he is canned or leaves, we will just have to deal with it. I for one have accepted the reality of Hendry and Baker, and am hoping like hell Furcal gets signed and Hendry manages to trade for a good outfielder or two. Ignoring Furcal to pursue a player who we are longshots to get is pure foolishness. Furcal is available, there is a minimum of competition, he fills a need, and he is publicly open to playing in Chicago. Giles is available, there is more competition from teams he has a preference to play for, he fills a need, but has not been linked to the Cubs much at all. I say secure what we can first, then focus on the things that will take more work. To me it seems that too many people here are too focused on Brains Giles . It's like and thing not Giles related is met with derision.

The two main rumored targets for leadoff are Furcal and Pierre. Walker had a better OBP than both of them in 2005. Not to mention that he'll make signifcantly less money than Furcal and at least $1.5 million less than Pierre. His career OBP is the exact same as Furcal. Get an impact bat and let Walker leadoff. If you can get an impact bat AND a legitmate leadoff hitter, great. If not, the impact bat should be the priority. Well Walker is obvious. I have been a proponent of him leading off since day one, but if Dusty isn't going to bat him leadoff, then it is really irrelevant. It wouldn't be irrelevant if Hendry would step up and either fire Dusty or make it very clear to him that Neifi Perez and Corey Patterson are not on this roster to leadoff. I totally agree, but since Baker hasn't been fired we have to assume his rule will continue, and adjust our suggestions accordingly.

No, the main problem was that not enough people got on, throughout the lineup. Giles could provide a .400+ OBP from the 2 spot, blowing away any potential improvement Furcal would provide. Focusing strictly on the top of the lineup is a terrible mistake. It wasn't 1 or 2 spots that struggled, it was the entire lineup, outside of Lee, Ramirez, and to an extent, Barrett. Burnitz was awful in the middle of the lineup. He was like having Furcal in there, which nobody would try. Of course OBP throughout the lineup was a problem. But when you have a guy perform like Derrek did and have as few RBI as he had, you have a problem. When you look at the lineups throughout the season, it is clear that the lack of OBP at the top was the most glaring problem. You had Lee and Ramirez in the middle, and with even average OBP from the one and two spots, the team would have scored a lot more runs than placing that OBP anywhere else in the order. And I didn't say focus strictly on the top, just that is where is should start. And I think you are nuts if you think Baker would bat Giles in the 2 hole.

The two main rumored targets for leadoff are Furcal and Pierre. Walker had a better OBP than both of them in 2005. Not to mention that he'll make signifcantly less money than Furcal and at least $1.5 million less than Pierre. His career OBP is the exact same as Furcal. Get an impact bat and let Walker leadoff. If you can get an impact bat AND a legitmate leadoff hitter, great. If not, the impact bat should be the priority. Well Walker is obvious. I have been a proponent of him leading off since day one, but if Dusty isn't going to bat him leadoff, then it is really irrelevant.