badger1679666666

It actually wasn't the entire article but I get your point. Main points... 1) Mark Prior for Bobby Abreu. Will not happen. 2) "the only pitchers the Cubs are interested in trading are relievers or prospects. " 3) "minimal interest in Aubrey Huff to fill their right-field vacancy" 4) another quote - According to one team that inquired about Pie, the Cubs "don't have very many untouchables -- but he's one." I don't know how the Cubs can hope for a good OF bat w\o moving Pie but we shall see. Would you believe you could trade: Hundley Hawkins A.Gone Brendan Harris/Francis Beltran Bobby Hill Choi And get significant to all star production back for many of them? Hendry has a good track record of trading.

He has a budget that he doesn't set himself. IMO, though some on here will differ, he couldn't do anything until he got rid of Sosa (hence the handcuffs). By the time that happened, no one but Burnitz and Ordonez were left for RF. He passed on many FA closers (thankfully) who all got injured, HE couldn't go after stud FA, because of Sammy's payroll. He created the difficulty in trading Sosa by devaluing him though, which is his fault. Make more sense?

Yes but Gilleck would laugh very hard in your face. :wink:

I could have sworn I responsed in this thread, but I can't find it. Raw sums up my thoughts pretty well. I wouldnt' be thrilled, but it wouldn't be a bad option either. It would hopefully leave room for other help (bench, RH platoon for Huff if he falters as starter, pitching) and would improve some weak positions. Ok, what I don't get is that you stress OBP, amonst other posters whose opinions I actually value, but then when a chance for two HUGE OBP guys is talked about, you're not thrilled? I just don't get it. We aren't gonna get Dunn, we aren't gonna get Abreu - we aren't giving up Prior or Z. So Let's move past those two pipe dreams. I just don't get how these two don't fit the exact bill that you argue for. Which ones are the "HUGE OBP" guys? . Wilkerson. For the record, I haven't talked much about Huff in this thread at all, Just Lugo and Wilkerson. Get Bradley and stick him in right and we have significant OBP improvement everywhere. Not just mediocre improvement, significant OBP improvement.

I could have sworn I responsed in this thread, but I can't find it. Raw sums up my thoughts pretty well. I wouldnt' be thrilled, but it wouldn't be a bad option either. It would hopefully leave room for other help (bench, RH platoon for Huff if he falters as starter, pitching) and would improve some weak positions. Ok, what I don't get is that you stress OBP, amonst other posters whose opinions I actually value, but then when a chance for two HUGE OBP guys is talked about, you're not thrilled? I just don't get it. We aren't gonna get Dunn, we aren't gonna get Abreu - we aren't giving up Prior or Z. So Let's move past those two pipe dreams. I just don't get how these two don't fit the exact bill that you argue for. Huge OBPs? Wilkerson and Huff both had down years in 05. They have put up good (not huge) OBPs in the past, but their 05's make it less of a guarantee. I think the point he, and I, were trying to make is that Lugo, Huff, and Wilkerson are not difference makers. The Cubs had/have a chance to add a difference maker. Whether it's a longshot or not, Abreu, Dunn, and Manny all are possibilities. And they are what a team with a $100M+ payroll should be after. Fine maybe not Huge, but very very good. .374, .380, .370 OBP in MON, RFK's #'s are a classic textbook case of park effects but he still walked a ton, his average was down which caused the OBP to sink. (Wilkerson) And Lugo I was mistaken on not a HUGE OBP at all, but a good one .340, .333, .340, .362 in the last four years with good DE, improving K:BB ratio, and good speed. I'm not high on Huff at all, though maybe a change of scenery would do him good.

I could have sworn I responsed in this thread, but I can't find it. Raw sums up my thoughts pretty well. I wouldnt' be thrilled, but it wouldn't be a bad option either. It would hopefully leave room for other help (bench, RH platoon for Huff if he falters as starter, pitching) and would improve some weak positions. Ok, what I don't get is that you stress OBP, amonst other posters whose opinions I actually value, but then when a chance for two HUGE OBP guys is talked about, you're not thrilled? I just don't get it. We aren't gonna get Dunn, we aren't gonna get Abreu - we aren't giving up Prior or Z. So Let's move past those two pipe dreams. I just don't get how these two don't fit the exact bill that you argue for.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. NO TRADE CLAUSE. (I feel better)

:shock: Are you a Cubs fan or a Cards fan?

No because he walks. Alot. He's had over a 100 BB's in a year. That doesn't happen with this team. I don't care how much he K's if he leads off and gets on bace at a .360-.380 clip that's ALOT more RBI chances for Lee and Ramirez.

Can you make more trolls who declare Miggy and Willis a cub too. And Clemens.

I still want to know how Hendry got Williams AND Aardsma for Hawkins. That's up there with the Hundley fleecing and the Aramis fleecing

Last 3 years Team G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS 2003 MON 146 504 78 135 34 4 19 77 89 155 13 10 .268 .380 .464 .844 2004 MON 160 572 112 146 39 2 32 67 106 152 13 6 .255 .374 .498 .872 2005 WAS 148 565 76 140 42 7 11 57 84 147 8 10 .248 .351 .405 .756 Seems there might be a park effect playing in RFK. I like his OBP and his +.800 OPS. At wrigley I would assume the numbers would return to .260/.360/.480/.840

He hired Baker, and hitched his wagon to him, that's his own fault. And I completely disagree that he brought in great players. He started the 2005 season with an absolute joke of an OF. Baker made things worse, but Hendry didn't give him much to start with. In all fairness to JH, he didn't have much of a choice last offseason but to wait untili Sosa was gone. Then again he might have created that monster by devaluing him so much.

Wilkerson, Bradley, Lugo please. Any of them Bruce would do. TEll me we have a shot or there are some whispers at least. Throw me a bone.

How bout no more relievers until we get a CF and RF.

Well, I don't agree with the "he doesn't work hard" comments. And while like any immature American male, I do giggle at some of the donut jokes, I think they are pointless. I think Hendry works his butt off. But much like his use of the Cubs payroll and this team's offensive philosophy, I think he's terribly inefficient at his job, working too hard for the results he gets (or should I say getting much worse results than what his work ethic should achieve), spending too much for the production he acquires. I do question Andy's level of "trying". He's all about "competing within the division", and I think that hampers Jim to a degree. But he can still work within those parameters to field a better team than he has so far. One thing I will agree with you on: We should have a better team for 100 million dollars. I'm just scared JH is gonna have 30 milion to spend and no one to spend it on, and he's gonna throw it at some crap player because he knows he can't go into this year after losing season with a 70 million dollar payroll. I'd rather he waste money on contract renogotiations, Bradley, giving money to the Nats for Wilkerson etc. than on come crappy FA he feels like he HAS to spend money on.

yea Huff had a Burnitz-type year, but he's got more upside I believe, not as old as Burny. Not as good defensivly, but better offensive upside, but of the three listed he's the one I want least. I'm really high on Lugo and Wilkerson.

The A's haven't made the playoffs in the past two years, just like another team some of us follow. I wouldn't say "just like", they won more games and did so with little more than half the payroll. Is that their GM or their Manager? I have a strong feeling that we would have made the playoffs in 3 straight years (who knows how we would have done IN them) if Cox was our manager and not Dusty. (Yes I do realize Hendry can fire him, but since he's making 4 mil a year maybe his higher ups said, no you can't.)

I think you are misconstruing what people are saying. Nobody compared it to mastering a McDonald's counter. Practically anybody who can walk, talk, chew gum and count can do the latter. But some are treating a GM position like its similar to being a CEO of Ford (absolutely absurd - although Ford is being run into the ground much like many baseball teams....). You also don't know the educational background, the current jobs or just plain old intelligence of any of these people talking about Hendry. I think, given the parameters I laid out before, that I could do the job. I also think there's 1000s of other people similar to me who could do a similar or better job. If somebody thinks they couldn't do it, fine. If you think I can't do it, fine. If you think others can't do it, fine. If you think there's only a tiny fraction of the population that could possibly master the complexities of the job, fine. Hopefully the competition for a job will be all that much smaller when I win the lottery and can justify changing careers. In all fairness, I don't think it matters much what I think. There are times that I've outloud said I should be the GM of the Cubs, but then I realize there is alot more that goes along with that than saying, get Bradley, Wilkerson, Lugo, and a quality SP. And in all fairness, I don't think it matters much if people think they can be GM, because they aren't. It's just a little irritating to read some stuff - especially stuff about Hendry not working hard, because despite his crappy off-season last year, and his crappy off-season thus far this year, there aren't many managers who are pretty uniformally accepted to work as hard as Hendry does.

I too am a little pessimistic, but theres absolutely no place LESS reliable than the Score unless it's that mlbrumors website.

How do you know this? Are you good friends with a GM? OR is this going on assumptions.

My complete lack of faith in Dusty, and my growing lack of faith in Hendry in no way compells me to believe that anyone who just "wants to be a GM" could be a great one, like it's as easy as mastering a McDonalds counter. If people want to believe they could be great GM's, then fine. I think that ideas is ludicrous on most levels save a few people on this site, I doubt that most could even come close to having the worth ethic, drive, knowledge, interpersonal connnections etc. to be a great GM. Hence there aren't many out there. But regular posters on NSBB.com should take over GM'ing for all of baseball.

I was insulted because you called me a fan that is happy with paying 6 dollar beers and that I'm the type of fan that is mocked by everyone else. But I'm over it. No one here is advocating for paying Neifi 2.5 million. That deal was ludicrous on all levels. No one here is advocating wasting 2.5 million on Rusch. I don't want to overpay furcal because I don't feel he's worth 14 or 15 million a year. I would have liked Giles, but HE DIDNT WANT TO LEAVE SD. If you believe Lugo or Wilkerson are AAAA players, you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Lugo's numbers are *slightly* worse than Furcals but not significantly. Wilkerson's numbers are above average for a CF (more pop, higher OPS than the average CF). How would we be settling for AAAA players

Furcal is better but not much. When you add in the fact that Furcal makes about 8 million more than Lugo will, Lugo is the better player for the money. Enough said. Lugo G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS 2003 TB 117 433 58 119 13 4 15 53 35 88 10 3 .275 .333 .427 .760 2004 TB 157 581 83 160 41 4 7 75 54 106 21 5 .275 .338 .396 .734 2005 TB 158 616 89 182 36 6 6 57 61 72 39 11 .295 .362 .403 .765 Furcal G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS 2003 Atl 156 664 130 194 35 10 15 61 60 76 25 2 .292 .352 .443 .795 2004 Atl 143 563 103 157 24 5 14 59 58 71 29 6 .279 .344 .414 .758 2005 Atl 154 616 100 175 31 11 12 58 62 78 46 10 .284 .348 .429 .777 You wanted to pay more than 13 million a year for Furcal? No thanks. I thought the 10 we were offering was too much for him coming off a career contract year. Giles didn't want to leave SD - it was plain obvious, unless you gave him 15 million a year - no thanks once again. Who else did we lose out on. Good of you to personally insult me and then not respond.

keep the laughs coming, this is good stuff. :lol: :lol: I'm still waiting for any substantive reason why Jim Hendry is somehow eminently more qualified that me to be the Cub GM. First, you know nothing about me, so you can't even subjectively compare our qualifications for the job. Moreover, you haven't even identified any job responsibilities that only a "long time baseball guy" can fulfill. I don't think "only a long-time baseball guy" can be GM, but I think people underestimate the difficulty of the position. The easy stuff is budget/rules of transactions/ etc. Having to work with management above you, work with other teams effectively, evaluate player talent and project that talent much into the future is all very difficult stuff. It's one thing to say you want OBP, it's another to work with teams and not get fleeced, or work with agents and get what you want etc. But go ahead if it makes you feel better. I'm sure you'd make a wonderful GM. No one can prove otherwise since you aren't actually gonna try. I can make non-falsfiable declarative statements as well and ask people to prove me wrong - but hence the definition of non-falfiable, those statements can't be proven wrong. I would make a great SP, better than Roger Clemens. I just don't feel like spending the 10 years working my butt off to lift weights, train, and get good. But I could if I wanted to, prove me wrong.