Transmogrified Tiger

Pierre isn't very good. I could easily see him having a .350 OBP year. As long as the Cubs don't give up too much I could see him as a nice stop gap. Not everyone on your team can be a superstar. He could have a .350 OBP, but he's going to make .335-.340 OBP's worth of outs, he doesn't hit for extra bases, and he's an average defender at best. Oh, and he had a SUB 700 OPS last year. Why is he our(not you CFICT :wink:) first option for CF?

Pierre isn't very good.

Among other things. He's taken to the Duke appearance of conceit quite well.

You said OSU by 3. Now he's talking about UM-ND.

Tennessee, BYU, or Pitt would be ND's second best win. You could debate on which one is exactly second, but they're similar. How are Pitt and Tennesse similiar? Every game Tennessee lost was to a top 25 team. A few of those games could have gone either way. Pitt is just bad. Sorry, for some reason I thought Pitt was already at 6 wins, where the 2 extra W's evens out the schedule difference a bit. My bad.

Why waste a year stunting his development in a platoon? Beat me to it. He'll only be 22 for all of 2007, easing him into his role like that is the way I would do it, as long as the platoon partner is competent. Remember as a lefty he'll get the majority of the AB's in a platoon. Like Choi? That's a whole different argument, you know that. How is it a different argument? You have to put things in context. If Baker is still here, you have to remove his options or he won't let the young player play. I only see the platoon as a viable option if Baker is gone and the Cubs are close to winning the world series. Otherwise, I don't see the point (and yes this whole discussion is based on a very solid 2006 at AAA). I wouldn't mind seeing the platoon late 2006. If Baker's tendencies are keeping you from appropriately developing a player, then you get rid of him, that's the separate argument.

As I said in the other thread, Boston is doing much better than better teams have fared in Cameron. In other news, it only took me a couple minutes to not be able to stand McRoberts, Duke's freshman bigman. 19-18 BU, 8 mins left in the first half. Mizzou tips off against Sam Houston State momentarily.

Why waste a year stunting his development in a platoon? Beat me to it. He'll only be 22 for all of 2007, easing him into his role like that is the way I would do it, as long as the platoon partner is competent. Remember as a lefty he'll get the majority of the AB's in a platoon. Like Choi? That's a whole different argument, you know that.

Why waste a year stunting his development in a platoon? Beat me to it. He'll only be 22 for all of 2007, easing him into his role like that is the way I would do it, as long as the platoon partner is competent. Remember as a lefty he'll get the majority of the AB's in a platoon.

Tennessee, BYU, or Pitt would be ND's second best win. You could debate on which one is exactly second, but they're similar.

Isn't it Cody Ransom?

Jenks is around 4 years younger and has much better stuff. Working in MacDougal's favor is the fact that he hasn't lit his arm on fire.

No fun. I heard Penn St. cheats and uses 13 players when they play but the refs let them off cause they're related to Paterno. I wish UCLA's defense would cheat. Then, maybe they could stop the run. Same with Mizzou or MSU. :(

Welcome.

Very disappointing? That seems a little harsh. I'm not a huge Pierre fan either and have my doubts if it would be the right move. But depending upon the players we would have to give up, it could be a good move. If nothing else it would stop the organization from rushing Pie too fast, and if Pie is successful we would probably have plenty of takers for a so-called "true leadoff man" in Pierre. Goony summed up the way I would feel about it. I have my doubts but if he produces the way he did in '03 (.361 OBP) or '04 (.374 OBP/.407 SLG) it would be a big boost. If he produces the way he did last year, it doesn't help so much. With the options on the CF market this year, I think Pierre is a good choice if we aren't giving up too much. We wouldn't have to be stuck with him long-term, but he could be a great stop-gap. It's awful early to be settling for someone like Pierre when there are some other quality CF's possibly on the trade market(Bradley, Wilkerson, Michaels, etc.)

Pierre is a free agent after the season.

For one of the most productive 2B in the game at only 2.5 million, I'd hope for more than a gamble on a late bloomer. At least try and get Gotay.

This is very disappointing.

Walker was the 6th best 2B in baseball last year OPS wise, and only makes 2.5 mil this year. I think he's worth more than a reliever with a career WHIP near 1.5

ND is guaranteed a spot if they are in the top 8, or if a non-BCS team is in the top 6, gets an at-large, and ND is in the top twelve with 9 or more wins. So right now they aren't in a BCS bowl?

That's the thing. As UK pointed out the Cubs are desperate for a leadoff guy and Furcal and/or Pierre seem to be the targets. Cedeno IMO isn't deemed as a leadoff guy by the Cubs and for some reason the non-scooting (UK again) abilities of Walker and Murton will not give them the chance toi hit at the top of the order. Giles would be wonderful but would he be worth getting if Baker has Perez leading off? The leadoff guy doesn't have to come from SS though. And this doesn't mean you can't pursue Furcal, just that given our resources, Giles should be our top priority.

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime. The difference is that Furcal was never great at his prime. His price is being driven up by the hype surrounding the theory that he is the best young position player in free agency. He's past his prime, but his prime wasn't all that special. Giles was an absolute stud in his prime, and still brings far more to the table now than Furcal. Furcal's unspectacular production (750 OPS) is being glossed over because of his defense and position. But I know one thing, adding a 750 OPS to this lineup isn't going to do much to solve the team's immense offensive woes, especially when the cost of adding that 750 OPS will likely force the Cubs to once again go mediocre, or worse, in the biggest need position on the team, RF. Giles, far and away, adds greater improvement to this team than Furcal does. The Cubs were 10th in the NL last year in SS production, and were just 011 points of OPS from being 6th in the NL. On the other hand, they ranked 15th in OPS from RF last year, and were 050 points from cracking the top 10, 077 from the top 6. Cedeno could easily provide them a chance to be at least average at SS next year. They have no similar fallback option for RF, and based on the many rumored names, they are likely to get no better than minimal improvement from the disaster that was Burnitz. The fact is they can afford to get both Furcal and Giles, and I'd be ecstatic if they did. But if there is only a chance for one, there is no debate that Giles would be the more helpful acquisition. But what was the cubs OPS from SS last year? Sure adding a 750 OPS doesn't sound like a big deal but I"m assuming Neifi's OPS wasn't even approaching 700. Well now you're talking about a major improvement. Giles would definitely be a huge upgrade but for some reason Hendry sounds like he's looking to improve RF through trade. And I don't know if I disagree with him. Like I said in an earlier post I'd rather wrap up Furcal now and then explore my options in right, rather than pass on Furcal and just hope Giles signs with us. I can just see that approach ending in disaster. Much like last year's offseason. Read his post again. Difference between Giles and other RF option > Difference between Furcal and Cedeno.

That would be quite an accomplishment, and bad news for the downtown area it demolished as it rolled toward the Mississippi.

Wow, those computer polls must love Michigan.

if we give up that much for pierre, i'm not going to be happy. Pierre doesn't come for nothing. Patterson has minimal trade value right now and Hill is a hit or miss prospect. I think you're overrating the Cubs players in this deal. Rich Hill led all of the minor leagues in strikeouts while he was there last year. Patterson and Pierre have been identical in production 2 of the last 3 years. Pierre is coming off a down year.