XZero771679666304

I have faith in Hendry to the extent that I think he's capable of keeping this team in contention for the longterm. But the fact is he's fielded an 88 and 89 win team and did so with an ever growing payroll during a period in time when most of the rest of the league was cutting costs. This year's team will have to really turn it on to even get to those levels. And considering the goal is World Series, the inability to even field 90+ win teams with a top payroll is pretty disturbing. At some point we need some results. And contrary to some Cubs fans who are satisfied with merely a winning record, the results I'm talking about are much more. When Hendry inherited the job, he was blessed with the top system in the game. Of course, he built that system. Now the question is can he turn what was once the top system (and is now further down the line) into the top team, or is he merely a great minor league coordinator and not a great GM? I have my doubts, but that's not to say I don't think he can. Like everybody else in baseball, it's up to him to prove his ability. It's hard to fault Hendry at all for last year. The Cubs were the most talented team in the division, but were absolutely decimated by injuries. 2003 was supposed to be a building year. This year, a degree of balme can be assigned to him for not solidifying the bullpen and the bench. Blaming him at all for last year would be silly, IMO.

ARod? And didn't Dawson do it for the Cubs in the late 80's? 1987? Gah, I'm too tired to think straight. Either way, if Lee finishes the season batting .350+ with 45 or more homers and over 120 RBI, I can't see how it would be anybody else.

You're right, IMO. Some of Hendry's fisrt comments were to point out and reinforce that Gerut could play center. Add in that the orginaztion is unhappy with Hairston and Patterson, and you have some motivation. I for one think we have seen the last of Patterson as a Cub, and possibly Hairston. Since Hairston is even less of a natural OF than Gerut, it is not outside the realm of possibility that Jody may even end up the everyday CF before all is said and done.

Agreed. Dubois was always overvalued. This is a swap of two flawed players, who's strengths better fit what their new clubs need. I don't know that Gerut fills a role on this team that's not already filled by the 2 other lefty left fielders. I don't know that DUbois was overrated, but I know many people here thought he could put up decent numbers if played everyday. It didn't pan out, though. Gerut is a far superior defender than either Grieve or Holla, and is the offensive equal of either. Dubois had no future with this team. Worst case scenario: Hendry slightly improved the club or added some trade bait. No one can logically say this was a bad trade, IMO. I posted career numbers for Gerut and Grieve like 300 pages back, but the gist of them was that Grieve is slightly better offensively. I'm not sure how Gerut stacks up against Hollandsworth, but practically speaking I don't know that there's really any difference between the 3 other than age. Defensively, I'm not sure what Gerut's range factor or whatever is compared to the other 2, so you might be right. I don't really think it was a bad trade; I think it is a redundant one. That said, it's not the first move this year that seems redundant to me. Carrying Wilson, Macias, Perez and Hairston all at once seemed to be redundant as well, so who knows. I put zero stock in defensive stats, and for good reason. All you have to do is look at the lists for ZR and RF to see how flawed they are. I am saying Gerut is a far superior defender because I have watched him play. The man plays on another level when comapred to Holla and especially Grieve. The bottom line in my mind is that while the trade is a bit lateral, we got a better player than the one we gave away, and I am sure more moves are to come. As for Dubois and overrating prospects, I have to say I felt a whole lot better about Jason when he was tearing it up as a PH. When he had that stretch of nearly a month getting the majority of the starts, he looked positively exposed. I am not basing that on his numbers, but how increasingly overmatched he looked. That was the league getting a book on him and exploiting his weaknesses. He did tear up AAA, but I can't help but be reminded of Roosevelt Brown, who many thought of as highly or moreso than Dubois, and thought he just need a chance. Well a few orginazations and chances later, we know how that turned out. I know alot of people here thought he would be good given time, including myself at one point. But a consesus does not the truth make. Hendry and his staff know a whole lot more about these things than we do.

Agreed. Dubois was always overvalued. This is a swap of two flawed players, who's strengths better fit what their new clubs need. I don't know that Gerut fills a role on this team that's not already filled by the 2 other lefty left fielders. I don't know that DUbois was overrated, but I know many people here thought he could put up decent numbers if played everyday. It didn't pan out, though. Gerut is a far superior defender than either Grieve or Holla, and is the offensive equal of either. Dubois had no future with this team. Worst case scenario: Hendry slightly improved the club or added some trade bait. No one can logically say this was a bad trade, IMO.

Yup.

While I can see how some view this as a somewhat lateral move, I cannot understand how anyone could think this was a bad trade. Hendry traded a player who was old for a prospect, a butcher in the field and had a gaping hole in his swing. What he got in return was a player who is relatively young, can work the count, has decent power and is a stellar defender. Dubois may develop, but I sincerely doubt he will ever become the .280/.330 guy with 30+ homers that some here envisioned. IMO, Dubois best projection is Jody Gerut with a few more homers and awful defense. I also sincerly doubt this is a move that Hendry sees as a "problem solver". He traded a spare part for one of higher quality, IMO. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I also think the fact that Hendry was quick to point out Gerut can play center was very telling. I really think that Hairston and/or Patterson are going to be history. I am positive that if/when Corey starts ripping it up in AAA, he will be traded.

I don't think Dubois will be DH'ing for the Indians, seeing as they have Travis Hafner filling that spot. He's not much of a fielder himself. With Crisp, Blake and Sizemore in the OF, I can't see Jason getting much PT anywhere else. He will probably just end up at the short end of another platoon. I don't think Jason's luck is going to change much at all. Regardless, he will make a better AL player when all is said and done.

Here is my take on the trade. Doobie has DH written all over him. He can produce enough to overcome the massive hole in his swing, but not the hole and the fact he is a butcher in the field. One thing that people seem to be missing is that while Gerut's offensive numbers are similar to Grieve and Holla's, his defense is far superior to either, and thayt does count for something. He can work the count, strikes out infrequently and is a wizard in the OF. He is simply a better player than Jason is. IMO, if Doobie has a shot at becoming an everyday player, it is as a DH. Now of course this could be part of a bigger picture, but I would rather have Gerut in LF than Grieve, Holla or Dubois.

I don't get that statement. Without Albert Pujols, aren't the Cardinals... the White Sox? He's clearly the smartest and best hitter on the team, and I can't imagine Eckstien, Edmonds, and Sanders being good enough and consistent enough to make them good. The just become a team relying on scrappy hitters, fast runners, and lots of homeruns for run production. Well, seeing as how the Sox have the best record in baseball... I don't know if the Sox are a smoke and mirrors team, but I'm starting to believe that they're the real deal. Like I said in another thread, I think the Sox are alot like the 2000 Mariners. The thing that is lacking is their offense. It is fine now, but in a short series agains a staff with a couple of ace type starters, they may be dead, IMO. The have many good hitters, but no great hitters. They lack the type of offensive players that can produce runs even when facing an ace on top of his game. The Cards have Pujols and when he is healthy, Walker that fit this bill - a hitter with no glaring holes. I would say Edmonds, but if you have a pitcher who is locating very well, he can be neutralized. The Sox have a lineup full of role players, but no stud (Frank is past his prime).

I'm sorry, but that's BS. We have a better team than most of teams ahead of us in the WC. Do we have a division winning team? probably not. But we have more than .500 talent. I simply disagree. One of the worst outfields in baseball, and a bullpen that's very, very shaky. It's a .500 ballclub, or thereabouts. We have a better roster than Atlanta, and look at them. We have a better roster than Houston, Philly and the Mets. The Cubs now have the best rotation talent-wise in the league and a lineup with 2 .350+ OBP guys at the top and 2 consitent thumpers following them. We have a good offensive catcher and a good RF. So what if the outfield isn't that good when you have one of the best offensive infields in the game? This team has the talent to win. Mismanagement and lack of execution are the problem, not the lack of talent. Yeah, but the Braves always overachieve in the regular season. You know that. Plus, they'll win the East. Nationals will fade. It's us, Florida, and the Nationals for the Wild Card. We're better than the Nationals but they've got the magic dust. Florida has a better roster than we do, they've been scuffling but watch out late. Houston better slow down or they'll finish better than us despite having a lesser roster. And I'm not totally convinced the *are* worse than us roster-wise I don't see us finishing better than 6 or 7 games over .500 It's not going to be enough at any rate. We will see----I just don't see it. We're throwing Cedeno, Murton, and Greenberg out there on a regular basis. Burnitz & Hairston are considered "solid starters" on this team. Neifi Perez is our "bench depth." Why are you convinced this team has an abundance of talent? We really don't. Did I say an abundance? No. Enough to win the majority of the games we play with our rotation? Definitely. How many more games would the Cubs have won if Dempster was the closer, Rusch a starter and Hawkins and Fox setup men from the get go? You see, the Cubs struggles have not been a talent issue. Prior, Wood, Zambrano, Maddux and Williams are the best rotation in the league, talent wise. Our bullben is shaky, but is a good set-up man from being good with the emergence of Dempster. Hairston and Walker are good table setters. Lee is all world. Ramirez is a consistant all star slugger. Burnitz is a streak slugger who consistantly gets on base. Barrett is an above average offensive catcher. Neifi sucks and Holla is below average. That is enough talent to win games. You say Atlanta overachieves, and you are right. But isn't that my point? If the Cubs even performed in a manner consistent with their talent level, they would have won many more games so far. This isn't about magic dust. It is about maximizing your talent. We haven't, but that doesn't mean we aren't good enough to win. As for Houston, they will fade. Go take a look at who they put their "streak" together against. When they hit a tough stretch, they are going right back where they came from. And if you can compare their roster to ours (especially their offense) and tell me it's equal or better than ours, I think you're nuts. And Greenberg has been "thrown out there on a regular basis"? One AB? And Cedeno on a regular basis? I don't think so. If Hendry aquires a LF, which is likely, Holla goes back to the bench. When Nomar comes back, as it appears he will, Neifi goes to the bench. Then you have a bench of Holla, Grieve, Neifi, Macias and Blanco. That is a good bench. The Cubs don't have the greates team, but things are not as bleak as you make them out to be.

Yes, in the form of Scott Podsednik, Tadahito Iguchi, Jermaine Dye, and A.J. Pierzynski. Yep, it's a real murderer's row. Completely compatible with Pujols, Edmonds, Rolen, anyone. Those 4 combined lines (assuming my math was correct) 271/333/418 IMO, the 2005 Sox = 2000 Mariners Win a boatload of games with marginal talent, hit the playoffs and go out.

Raffy has to be in. And I can't believe some people think Raffy was on the roids. The guy has been the same size his whole career. 3000 hits and 500 homers? How is this even a debate?

Against the Reds? Williams and Maddux may give up some runs, but you can't forget that despite today's game the Cubs offense has been hot and the Reds can't pitch.

I'm sorry, but that's BS. We have a better team than most of teams ahead of us in the WC. Do we have a division winning team? probably not. But we have more than .500 talent. I simply disagree. One of the worst outfields in baseball, and a bullpen that's very, very shaky. It's a .500 ballclub, or thereabouts. We have a better roster than Atlanta, and look at them. We have a better roster than Houston, Philly and the Mets. The Cubs now have the best rotation talent-wise in the league and a lineup with 2 .350+ OBP guys at the top and 2 consitent thumpers following them. We have a good offensive catcher and a good RF. So what if the outfield isn't that good when you have one of the best offensive infields in the game? This team has the talent to win. Mismanagement and lack of execution are the problem, not the lack of talent.

So if Z would have pitched today, we lose what? 1-0? What's the difference? We would have lost either way. But 5 out of the last six isn't bad. I had a feeling that we would lose today.

I'm sorry, but that's BS. We have a better team than most of teams ahead of us in the WC. Do we have a division winning team? probably not. But we have more than .500 talent.

The ump really helped Duke out today. It's hard to deal with that curveball when you are behind in the count and it's being called high and low. A whole lot of defensive swings today from the Cubs because of it.

Craptastic.

Time to park one Jeromy.

Hard to be patient when theyre calling strikes below your knees and above your letters. It hasn't been just today.

That high strike call on strike 2 didn't help. Apparently Grieve will PH for Murton. Yeah, but he has been chasing a lot of first pitches out of the zone as well.

Is it just me, or has Derrek seemed a lot less patient lately?

$%^&^*(&&*&)&%##%@%$$^*&(^**&()*%%$#@$@$#