Transmogrified Tiger

By no means am I a big Corey fan like a lot of people on this board are, but... why would KPat in RF be a "horrible" idea? Assuming we land Tejada (I know, big assumption) I'd be completely fine with Corey batting 8th for the Cubs next year. At his best Corey would be an average right fielder offensively. His defensive strength is his range, not his arm, which means that he would be wasted/ineffective defensively in RF. Most of all though, Corey in RF is an absolute failure to get production from a corner OF spot. If you go into next season with Cedeno, Murton, AND Patterson in your lineup, you're just asking for trouble, and it doesn't really matter all that much if you get Tejada, you've still got about half your lineup that has a very real chance of falling completely on its face.

Patterson in RF would be a horrible, horrible thing.

And it was almost like a two level jump for him, since due to his 2002 injury he had only a little over 100 at-bats above A-ball before 2003.Do other organizations have as many injuries to their prospects like the Cubs do? It just seems there are a lot of injuries to our prospects. I think it's a combination of the following, in no particular order: 1. Bad luck 2. Drafting pitchers that are more prone to flaming out with injuries than others 3. Bad system that leads to more injuries than normal I don't know how much each plays into it, but I think all 3 are a factor.

Haha, that's true. Is that implying that it's easier to ride a winning horse to victory than it is to drive the best car to victory? I've never ridden a horse or driven a really fast car, so I wouldn't know. Or that the horse gets credit for the victory, while the car driver does as well.

In horse racing, why is the winner [Horse's Name], ridden by [Jockey Name], but in car racing it's [Driver name] driving a [Car Name/Brand]?

You realize you can't win at blackjack, right? The odds are always against you. I think that's a poor example. Did you see the example? If you hit on 19 and get a 2, does that make you smart? No, it makes you lucky. It's not a perfect example, but it's the idea of going against the best move and still having it work out. BTW, ever read "Bringing Down the House"? You can win at blackjack.

This goes back to Davhern's blackjack example. Williams took some gambles, and in some cases, he made straight out bad decisions. Having your team win the WS does not mean you were the best GM in baseball that year, or anywhere near it. It's the same reason that Dusty and Guillen and other horrible managers reach and win the world series, yet are not good managers.

Quite impressive that he managed to play 141 games with all that keeping him down.

Beane looks like Dr. Jonathan Crane in that pic.

Tejada making like his remarks were misconstrued makes him seem like a better employee, and may make more teams interested in him as well. That doesn't make sense to me. If a team inquired about Tejada and found he was still available, wouldn't they know that his remarks were just a ploy? Its about the desperation of the club that goes to the value you can expect in return. It has a very real effect on negotiations. But how is another team going to value Tejada more when they know that his comments were just for show? I think in this case, it's more about saving face than trying to drive someone's value up. I'm talking specifically about Jehrico's quote: "Tejada making like his remarks were misconstrued makes him seem like a better employee, and may make more teams interested in him as well."

Tejada making like his remarks were misconstrued makes him seem like a better employee, and may make more teams interested in him as well. That doesn't make sense to me. If a team inquired about Tejada and found he was still available, wouldn't they know that his remarks were just a ploy? Its about the desperation of the club that goes to the value you can expect in return. It has a very real effect on negotiations. But how is another team going to value Tejada more when they know that his comments were just for show?

I never said he was the best GM in baseball but a lot of you are discounting what he did. What's the difference between the White Sox in '04 and '05? Pitching, pitching, pitching, and some defense. If you want to give Williams credit for making the defense better, fine. But he had nothing to do with half their rotation pitching out of their mind.

Tejada making like his remarks were misconstrued makes him seem like a better employee, and may make more teams interested in him as well. That doesn't make sense to me. If a team inquired about Tejada and found he was still available, wouldn't they know that his remarks were just a ploy?

HAHHAH yet all of these pieces got them to the WS. Why the hate? Is it bitterness? Hey, I'm a Cubs fan and I give credit where it's due. KW deserves credit for winning. It's bitterness, yes, but all these moves were much more likely to be bad ones than good ones. The fact that all of these guys ended up having their best years ever (or in Dye's case, his best year this millennium anyway) is just plain lucky. I call BS. It is not lucky. It was risky yes but some of these players were quality. A team wins a WS and it's all about luck? Come on. There's more to it than that. So if the Cubs win the WS this year, does that make all the bad moves Hendry made good? Of course not. Every team has a chance to win the WS, winning it doesn't mean you made the right moves, or even competent ones. The white sox had Rowand who the previous year had a breakout year yet didn't do so great last year. Dye was a solid pickup for them in RF. Podsednik was their leadoff hitter. Upgraded the catcher position. The pitchers were huge for them but let's not forget most of them came here via trade, waiver pickups, and FA signings. He also picked the manager to take them to the WS. A manager that is better than ours. If we win the WS I will give credit to Hendry, the manager, and the players for getting us there and winning. It's a combination of a lot of things and not all luck. The White Sox did it, we are still waiting and probably for a long time to come. If you want to argue that Williams made good moves, go ahead. I'll disagree mostly, but that's different than saying "He won a WS, so he's good". That's just backward logic.

I think you grossly undervalue Tejada. And completely ignore the situation the Cubs face. They are getting a crap RF regardless. It's either Jones/Encarnacion/Wilson + Tejada, or one of those guys without Tejada. If they can get Abreu, great. But I don't see them getting anybody of value for RF. And I don't see them getting any better player via trade with these guys in the future. How can you say they are getting a crap RF for sure on December 13? How much would you give up for Cliff Floyd? He's likely going to outproduce Tejada with similar defense at a much cheaper cost(years, dollars, and players) at a position without a cheap alternative. On the other hand, he's 3.5 years older and plays a less scarce position. If we're giving up this much just so that we avoid the worst case scenario for this year, why not give up less to get more production for '06?

HAHHAH yet all of these pieces got them to the WS. Why the hate? Is it bitterness? Hey, I'm a Cubs fan and I give credit where it's due. KW deserves credit for winning. It's bitterness, yes, but all these moves were much more likely to be bad ones than good ones. The fact that all of these guys ended up having their best years ever (or in Dye's case, his best year this millennium anyway) is just plain lucky. I call BS. It is not lucky. It was risky yes but some of these players were quality. A team wins a WS and it's all about luck? Come on. There's more to it than that. So if the Cubs win the WS this year, does that make all the bad moves Hendry made good? Of course not. Every team has a chance to win the WS, winning it doesn't mean you made the right moves, or even competent ones.

Only Nolasco and Guzman on that list has a difficult to replace upside, and Nolasco is already gone. Marshall, Gallagher, Ryu and others are down there waiting to climb the list. EPatt could be rostered as early as 2007. None of these guys is a can't miss prospect, or an extremely highly rated prospect. They are all very similar to somebody else in the system maybe a year behind. The Pierre trade was more painful, considering they gave up a similar package just without the bat, and it was for a much less impactful player. The Cubs don't have a star studded system, they have a depth filled system. The best way to use prospect depth is by trading it, before you lose them to Rule 5, before they crap out, and before Dusty gets to run them out of town. The top 2 prospects would still be here, as would be the rest of the top hitting prospects, and several arms. Who are the others? Marmol? Johnson? Petrick or Blasko? You're trading from the depth for sure, but you're completely eliminating it. Tejada isn't worth that, plus the issue of still needing a RF, and now a SP with significantly fewer trading chips, and 12 million fewer dollars.

I think it is a pretty common belief that tearing your groin running out of the batters box is a fluke injury. CPatt...If the Cubs offered Nomar a deal of gauranteed 5 mil with 7 million in incentives you don't think he would have taken that over the gauranteed 9 mil? If he truly believes he is healthy I think he would have taken it. I know this is all speculation and we can't do anything about it. I just think we have no good options left for Right and I feel like we didn't give Nomar enough look at Right. I'm just talking out of frustration. No, I think the last 2 years would've proved to Nomar that the chance of 3 million more with incentives isn't worth risking 4 million more guaranteed.

Of course, but since Nomar knows the worst that he can do in a hearing is near his old salary, you probably won't get much of a discount. One of MacPhail's prided points is that he has never gone to a hearing with a player.

It does feel sort of like we are emptying the shelves, doesn't it? Only of the oldest prospects. Cedeno is expendable if you are trading for a stud SS. I'd like to keep one of either Hill or Williams, because I see them contributing to the team this year. Guzman's best value to the team might be in a trade for stud, going to a team that wants a guy with huge upside. This would open up several 40 man spots for the next wave of young prospects coming through, and it also keeps all of the youngest prospects, like Pie, Harvey, Pawelek. The only good bat leaving is Cedeno, and they would still be left with lots of arms in the system. I might try and get them to take a combo of Ryu and somebody else instead of one of the arms, but, it's still intriguing. You would have to get another starting pitcher, somehow. If you make that deal, there is no next wave of prospects coming through on the 40 man. Maybe Marshall, Marmol, or Ryu, but when you trade away Pinto, Nolasco, Mitre, Hill, Williams, Cedeno, and Guzman, there isn't a lot coming up.

If I'm Hendry, here's how I outline a package for Tejada. Pie is in the deal. Pick one of Williams/Hill/Guzman. If you pick Williams, then a lower level prospect finishes the deal. If you pick Hill, pick between Harvey/Dope/EPatt. If you pick Guzman, Cedeno is the 3rd player. So, they have Pie, Williams, lower prospect, or Pie, Hill, Harvey/Dope/EPatt or Pie, Guzman, Cedeno. EDIT: If they are interested in Patterson, try to substitute him in as necessary, starting by substituting for Pie and on down until you reach a deal.

I would not say it is logical. Nomar's groin tear last year was a freak injury. When he came back he was playing like his old self. Granted I don't think he can handle playing short more than three times a week but he still would have been a good fit for this Cubs team. Hendry should never have closed down all possibilities with Nomar. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2223720 There is no doubt he would have been solid in the Outfield this year for the Cubs. His OPS after he returned from his injury was right around .900. That is better than anything we would have been able to get in the free agent market. I think Hendry dropped the ball on this one. It seems to me that he was focusing on one thing all offseason, a leadoff hitter. I am upset about this because I think by not giving Nomar arbitration we took away a very good option for this team. Hendry made a mistake and burnt all bridges with Nomar when he told him he needed to find a better fit. Now we are looking at Jacque Jones, Juan Encarnacion, and if we are lucky Reggie Sanders in Right. The Cubs could have resigned Nomar played him at once every once in a while but most of the time play him in right. If he stayed healthy for the first half of the season we coudl have traded for a new rightfielder and moved Nomar back to short if the offense needed a boost. A lineup with Nomar and Pierre would have looked pretty good to me. Pierre Walker Lee Ramirez Nomar Barrett Murton Cedeno The logic to me would have been to keep all options open. I don't think Hendry did this. Hendry either had to sign Nomar by December 7th, which wasn't going to happen, or offer him arbitration. Nomar would almost be guaranteed to accept since he wouldn't get an offer where he was virtually guaranteed his salary from last year anywhere else. Another year of Nomar at the same price, when it's unclear whether or not he's capable of SS, is not the gamble I would take last week. It's a logical decision on Hendry's part.

Well, at least Oakland gave up a top prospect for him. Wonder what this does to Oakland's OF situation. Are they going to go into the season with Swisher, Kotsay, and Bradley?

*Insert Rant about Tejada not worth selling the farm over, and leaving us with no trading chips here*

Less than if he were in CF, but he has the potential to be a very good corner OF.