SCCubbieFAN

I kind of get annoyed when everyone gushes in perfect harmony. It usually means people are getting wrapped up in sheep mentality. Couldn't someone at least have played Devil's Advocate? Have things sunk so low we're patting Hendry on the back and gushing for freeing up $3 million? What does $3 million buy in this day and age? Other teams celebrate great moves. We throw a party when Jim Hendry frees up $3 million! Give me a break. Put a mark in the "against" column - freeing up a paltry $3 million is part of an annoying reminder to me that this team doesn't spend what it should. What was Jeremy Affeldt's contract demand, I don't remember, if someone else could supply it - something like 4 years, $17 million? With demands like that on the free agent market, don't you think Ohman is worth more? He had a rough stretch where he got beat on by the Phils and Mets in a series where pretty much everyone did, but aside from that he was okay. Wrigley's a tough park to pitch in and Ohman's away numbers were a 1.45 ERA and an 0.70 WHIP. Infante looked okay for a utility guy. I thought his numbers away from Detroit were intriguing. But what angers me is the Jacque Jones trade. Why did we have to kick in money for the Jones trade? Guys like .773 career OPS Jose Guillen, one of the worst right field defenders in baseball last year, are getting 12 million a year for 3 years, and we have to kick in money for Jacque? Why, is Jones less than half the player Guillen is? Look at his seasonal averages. Oh but we "saved money" that may not mean anything, and if it does it could just get flushed down the toilet anyway. It's one thing to have a wait-and-see attitude on what precludes what. Okay. But now it seems like the board is reduced to crowing and mooning over any move that "saves money." I don't think it often makes a lot of sense to save money when the guys on the market are getting paid many times over more ridiculously than the guys you're cutting line of to save money. I reserve judgment until I see who these fantastic savings are spent on, and as for the Jones trade, I think as usual we sold too low. IIRC, the $$ sent in the Jones deal was for the remainder of his signing bonus, not any of his 08 salary which I believe is $5.5mil. Now that the Cubs won't have to pay anything to Infante in 08, the savings is greater than the $3mil originally thought to be the savings. didn't these moves also clear 2 spots on the 40 man? I agree tho that the Cubs sold too low on Jones.

And this is why we should know who is cheating and who isn't. If I were a GM I'd hire Jim Rockford for 200 bucks a day plus expenses and get the dirt on who's cheating and who ain't. But Rockford will get the word on the street from Angel Martin and that always leads to trouble! :D

Could you post a link please? I think he means Bruce's 11/20/07 article. the link is on page 16 of this thread.

:evil:

I have a bad feeling you may be right about that. certainly is one explanation for Infante & the Kaz rumors. :-k

God help us if the right side of our infield is Matsui and DeRosa. true, but it could also be Infante & De Rosa. :roll:

who do the Cubs have in house who can man 1B adequately if Lee is traded? De Rosa? could this be why we are seeing so much talk about acquiring Kaz because a trade involving Lee is being considered w/De Rosa shifting to 1B? just a thought.

I apologize for being a jerk. thanks. I appreciate that.

It would be a brilliant move on the Cubs part to get a guy like Carlos Gonzalez, however, it will never happen. The Cubs aren't willing to give their own prospects a chance. How on Earth is someone else's prospect going to get that chance? Because our prospects aren't very good. This guy is good. If the Diamondbacks need a SP, send them Marquis and a prospect. Gonzalez is a no brainer top 50 prospect and possibly/probably top 25. In other words...you've set the bar pretty high for most ridiculous trade proposal of the day. Thanks for being such an ass about it. u could have merely said that wouldn't get it done/be enough. It's replies like this that keep me away from most discussions on this board. Sorry, but when people propose receiving one of the best products in the game for a guy on our team that we couldn't give away for nothing, thats the response you are going to get. So what you are saying is don't expect any civility out of you/your response if you deem the post to be ridiculous, eh? you've been on this board quite awhile and I have never noticed your comments to be like this. I therefore would have expected better out of you. or perhaps I just haven't been paying close attention to your past remarks.

It would be a brilliant move on the Cubs part to get a guy like Carlos Gonzalez, however, it will never happen. The Cubs aren't willing to give their own prospects a chance. How on Earth is someone else's prospect going to get that chance? Because our prospects aren't very good. This guy is good. If the Diamondbacks need a SP, send them Marquis and a prospect. Gonzalez is a no brainer top 50 prospect and possibly/probably top 25. In other words...you've set the bar pretty high for most ridiculous trade proposal of the day. Thanks for being such an ass about it. u could have merely said that wouldn't get it done/be enough. It's replies like this that keep me away from most discussions on this board.

It would be a brilliant move on the Cubs part to get a guy like Carlos Gonzalez, however, it will never happen. The Cubs aren't willing to give their own prospects a chance. How on Earth is someone else's prospect going to get that chance? Because our prospects aren't very good. This guy is good. If the Diamondbacks need a SP, send them Marquis and a prospect.

Jones is still under contract for 08 whereas Monroe is not. Jones is due something like $5.5 mil in 08 PLUS the remainder of his signing bonus. Monroe is only arbi eligible and MAY get as much as Jones. No reason for the Cubs to send any money in the Monroe deal since he currently isn't OWED anything.

In what universe do you trade a starting outfielder for a utility player and then turn around and non tender the utility player? In a universe where you are trying to free up as much cash as possible to make other moves. Yes, Hendry could have just asked for a prospect in return, but I'm holding out hope Infante will be used in another trade, and if he isn't, the option of non-tendering him is still there.

It appears Infante is not under contract for 08 but is arbi eligible, and he made $1.3mil in 07 but had a mediocre year, so what makes anyone think he will get $2mil in 08? Even if he gets a 20% arbi raise he will make just $1.56mil. The Cubs could end up non-tendering him freeing themselves of most of Jones' $5.5mil and also clearing up a roster space. I'm withholding judgment on this one till all the dust has settled.

Not a bad move on their part. Then again, it'll be pretty hard to top the stupidity the Pirates have had to deal with these past few years. where did u get that pic in your sig. is that thing real and if so, what is it?

I vote for Charlotte. And it has to be an NL team so the Cubs come every year. :D seconded

You guys keep forgetting that if the Cubs make a deal with the Sox for Pods that involves a player the Cubs have to place on waivers to make the trade happen, it is unlikely another team will claim the Cubs' player (since the Cubs will simply pull him back) unless it is to block the trade. The only other scenerio I can think of is if another team claims the player and then offers the Cubs a sweeter deal than someone like Pods.

Which Cubs placed on waivers have cleared? If none, then I believe the only players the Cubs can trade for Pods are those not on the 40 man roster.

Pray for no rain tonight. I will be with a group watching the game at one of the rooftop venues on Sheffield tonight. We're having a surprise party for my bro's 50th b-day there and I'll be sporting my NSBB t-shirt.

Again, if Church is placed on waivers so he can be traded to the Cubs because the Cubs & Nats have worked out a deal, a team like Florida won't claim him since the Nats will simply pull him back. Florida really has no insentive to block the trade by claiming Church since it is out of the race this year.

It is my understanding that in waiver deals, typically a deal is worked out between 2 teams prior to placing the players on waivers so the only hitches the 2 teams need to worry about are from teams that might put in a claim to block the trade, not from teams who think they can make a better offer for one or more of the players placed on waivers.

Perhaps because it is harder to make a trade when players have to pass thru waivers therefore, Hendry's bargaining position is better. Just a thought.

Jon Heyman in SI said Pie for Laird. I'm fine with trading Pie, but you better be damn sure you're getting a difference maker and not some replacement level player who does nothing special. Could you live with Pie for Church straight up?

JJ's obp for July is .375, and .370 since the asb. Not bad production for a centerfielder.

I'm just glad to see Ronnie produce in his first game back as opposed to going o-fer. Has to be a big confidence boost for him.