CUBZ99

Wilkerson puts up decent numbers, but doesn't his incredibly high strike out numbers bother you at all? I'm just not sure its the best idea to get a guy that would have led the Cubs in Strike outs last year and expect him to be your lead off hitter or bat near the top of the lineup. I'm not saying that he is a bad option, but I hope that Hendry goes the Furcal/ Pierre route before settling for Wilkerson.

Would you be willing to spend more than the 2 yr $7.5 M offer the Indians have made to him?

BA's 2004 Top Ten Prospects per Team report. They said he worked in the 88-92 range, but could dial it up to 95 when the situation called for it. Thanks for digging that up. I didn't realize he could reach the mid 90's.

i didn't find it difficult to comprehend Good for you and thanks for making another post about nothing. You get one gold star. :D PMSing? That was original. Seriously, why do you keep wasting posts with nothing to say? Same reason you attempt to belittle those that disagree with your ideas. Why not just state your case without the petty attacks your posts are known for. :roll: With 8 pages of talk on Pierre, you want to keep digging up this topic?

If Hendry wouldn't trade Hill for Dunn, why would he trade him and another player for Pierre? And knowing Hendry's history of trades, doesn't it seem highly unlikely he would trade 2 of his top LH pitching prospects? Hah, didn't he trade D-Train to the Marlins? andy MacPhail was the gm that made that trade. Did MacPhail make the Garland for Karchner trade too?

i didn't find it difficult to comprehend Good for you and thanks for making another post about nothing. You get one gold star. :D PMSing? That was original. Seriously, why do you keep wasting posts with nothing to say? then end it by not responding, please. If you want to talk about Pierre talk about Pierre otherwise, please refrain from wasting space with these posts. It adds nothing to the discussion. Oh shut up. You're the one who started the mess by belittling a poster. Sorry my posts aren't of that type of quality. Jackass. Nice, very mature. Cubz, thanks for wasting yet another post about nothing. You get two gold stars. :wink: :lol: :lol: Can we get back to talking Pierre??

i didn't find it difficult to comprehend Good for you and thanks for making another post about nothing. You get one gold star. :D PMSing? That was original. Seriously, why do you keep wasting posts with nothing to say? then end it by not responding, please. If you want to talk about Pierre talk about Pierre otherwise, please refrain from wasting space with these posts. It adds nothing to the discussion. Oh shut up. You're the one who started the mess by belittling a poster. Sorry my posts aren't of that type of quality. Jackass. Nice, very mature.

If Hendry wouldn't trade Hill for Dunn, why would he trade him and another player for Pierre? And knowing Hendry's history of trades, doesn't it seem highly unlikely he would trade 2 of his top LH pitching prospects? I suppose it depends on how desperate he is and through what lens he views Pierre. Hendry, in all probability overvalues Pierre to the 10th degree. He sees tools-speed, defense, a sparkplug at the top of the order. He knows that a good chunk of the fanbase would be thrilled to get a "old school" leadoff guy, so he probably thinks he's worth more than he is. Having said that, I think the deal will fall somewhere between the 2 extremes. I don't think it'll be for Patterson/Mitre, and don't think it'll be for Hill/Marshall. I'd guess maybe Ryu and Nolasco. I agree with your assessment. I'm sure that Hendry will have to give someone of value to get Pierre, but I doubt it will be two of Hill, Marshall, and Pinto. Due to the 40 man roster crunch, the Cubs are unlikely to have the space to protect all of those guys anyways. Might as well get some value for them.

i didn't find it difficult to comprehend Good for you and thanks for making another post about nothing. You get one gold star. :D PMSing? That was original. Seriously, why do you keep wasting posts with nothing to say? then end it by not responding, please. If you want to talk about Pierre talk about Pierre otherwise, please refrain from wasting space with these posts. It adds nothing to the discussion.

Where did you see that Marshall threw mid-90's? :shock: Every scouting report I have seen, shows him throwing in the 88-90 range.

If Hendry wouldn't trade Hill for Dunn, why would he trade him and another player for Pierre? And knowing Hendry's history of trades, doesn't it seem highly unlikely he would trade 2 of his top LH pitching prospects?

i didn't find it difficult to comprehend Good for you and thanks for making another post about nothing. You get one gold star. :D PMSing? That was original. Seriously, why do you keep wasting posts with nothing to say?

i didn't find it difficult to comprehend Good for you and thanks for making another post about nothing. You get one gold star. :D

1st off, you're wrong about all of your assumptions. I know Pie isn't ready and he might not be after next year, that was one of my points. The Cubs like most teams should use Sept. to evaluate young talent at the ML level, that has nothing to do with what position they are in as far as the standings. If they are in a close race as they were in '03 and '04 fine, but if they finish like they did say 2 months ago, they should use it to evaluate their prospects. Of course, Cedeno didn't get much out of the last month. Show me a team who is in the playoff race and doesn't expand their roster with various prospects? If Pierre has a .370 OBP next year and leads the Cubs to the WS, you think he's going to sign a 2 year deal and block Pie for 3 years? He won't. 1st, if Pierre has a good year next year, the Cubs would still improve several positions on the team to become likely to make the playoffs. 2nd, if Pierre has a good year he'll be a prime target for FA and with Pie's potential progression the Cubs would likely not go after him. Pierre is a rental, a rental that will put the Cubs in a vulnerable position for '07 as far as either locking up Pierre long-term or handing it to Pie w/out enough experience to judge if he's ready. Pierre isn't the difference between a team making the playoffs and not making the playoffs, even with Baker as manager. Where did my post say anything about not calling Pie up or expanding the roster? Of course, if he is ready to be called up, he could be called up to help. But to make an argument that the Cubs should not get Pierre, because it may stunt Pie's growth is ridiculous. Jim Hendry should be concerned with putting together a winning team in 2006. The Cubs have a hole at the leadoff spot and in CF. Pierre fits both of those holes.

Couple things 1) Most agree that Pie is not ready for the Majors yet. 2) your argument assumes the Cubs are making call ups in Sept to evalute young talent which is ridiculous. (Yes, it is possible they could make the playoffs). Should the Cubs hold off on trying to win just to accomodate players in the minor leagues? Seems like you may be getting a little too carried away with what might happen to young players and not concerned enough about winning now. If Pierre comes to the Cubs he can block Pie for 3 years if he's putting up a .370 OBP and the Cubs win the World Series. Who cares if Pie's development is stunted in that situation? Step away from the Kool-aid. Pierre has had two seasons of .370 OBP and if one wants to factor in all the CS it gets worse. Again, Pierre is not going to be the missing peice that gets the Cubs to the WS. No one is saying the Cubs should not try to win. But as I worte earlier. What is the this organization's philosophy? Hendry was quoted by Gammons and others as saying Pie would be called up last year if he hadn't gotten hurt. So, what up Jim? That is not to say I think Pie is ready for I do not. But appearently someone in the Cubs organization does. Or is it did? Hendry prides himself on giving a good deal. I hope in this case it isn't true. Thanks for the reply but you may want to put some time into your reply so that you may actually make a point or better yet make some sense.

Couple things 1) Most agree that Pie is not ready for the Majors yet. 2) your argument assumes the Cubs are making call ups in Sept to evalute young talent which is ridiculous. (Yes, it is possible they could make the playoffs). Should the Cubs hold off on trying to win just to accomodate players in the minor leagues? Seems like you may be getting a little too carried away with what might happen to young players and not concerned enough about winning now. If Pierre comes to the Cubs he can block Pie for 3 years if he's putting up a .370 OBP and the Cubs win the World Series. Who cares if Pie's development is stunted in that situation?

Good news if its true. Except for Pie it doesn't really matter who they trade from the minors.

jaque jones? Yuck.

Julio Lugo and Jose Guillen are two players off the top of my head that were perceived crazy clubhouse cancers(Lugo had a similar incident as Bradley, Guillen got the same treatment from the Angels that T.O is getting). Now you don't hear anything about them being a disruption. In fact, there was nothing but rave reports about Guillen being a good guy from his Nationals teammates. read the link he posted. choking your pregnant wife doesn't fall into the "clubhouse cancer" category. :shock: I read the link, Lugo reportedly beat his wife as well. Yet there's no stigma with him anymore now that there's some time away from the incident. What does that have to do with anything? You are basically defending the guy by saying "player A did it and they dont' say anything about him anymore". Very poor argument. What's even worse is that Bradley is not that great of a player to be all love-striken over. It has plenty to do with anything. People don't want to acquire Bradley because he's supposedly some maniac that is a bad person and/or will be a bad influence on the clubhouse. Lugo and Guillen are evidence to the contrary. And Bradley is quite good especially considering how much he'll make, his age, and the fact that the Dodgers reportedly want nothing for him. There is a reason the Dodgers aren't looking for much in return. With Bradley, so far it has not been an isolated incident involving personality conflicts with one teammate or coach. He has had many problems and is also according to the article accused of choking and battering his wife at least three times. BTW that article was written this year. So yes, maybe it is possible to reform every accussed wife beater or person with a bad attitude, but why would you want the headache? You act like Bradley is Babe Ruth, the way you talk about him. He is a barely above avg. CF with potential and nothing more.

Julio Lugo and Jose Guillen are two players off the top of my head that were perceived crazy clubhouse cancers(Lugo had a similar incident as Bradley, Guillen got the same treatment from the Angels that T.O is getting). Now you don't hear anything about them being a disruption. In fact, there was nothing but rave reports about Guillen being a good guy from his Nationals teammates. read the link he posted. choking your pregnant wife doesn't fall into the "clubhouse cancer" category. :shock: I read the link, Lugo reportedly beat his wife as well. Yet there's no stigma with him anymore now that there's some time away from the incident. What does that have to do with anything? You are basically defending the guy by saying "player A did it and they dont' say anything about him anymore". Very poor argument. What's even worse is that Bradley is not that great of a player to be all love-striken over.

Julio Lugo and Jose Guillen are two players off the top of my head that were perceived crazy clubhouse cancers(Lugo had a similar incident as Bradley, Guillen got the same treatment from the Angels that T.O is getting). Now you don't hear anything about them being a disruption. In fact, there was nothing but rave reports about Guillen being a good guy from his Nationals teammates. read the link he posted. choking your pregnant wife doesn't fall into the "clubhouse cancer" category. :shock: I read the link, Lugo reportedly beat his wife as well. Yet there's no stigma with him anymore now that there's some time away from the incident. What does that have to do with anything? You are basically defending the guy by saying "player A did it and they dont' say anything about him anymore". Very poor argument. What's even worse is that Bradley is not that great of a player to be all love-striken over.

.350 OBP is low production for a leadoff hitting CF? Give me a break. BTW SS and CF aren't traditionally power positions, so your not really sacrificing anything.

Did anyone else notice the quote in the paper stating that Hendry wouldn't even listen to offers for Murton, Hill or Pie didn't say anything about Cedeno? Is Cedeno available for the right price?

This is the most important point to me - Hendry seems to at least be targeting some useful players and this is encouraging. He supposedly was targeting useful players last year and at the trade deadline too. Only problem was that he didn't get many of them. With offers like Patterson for Wilkerson, it is not difficult to see why. Not every team is like the Pittsburgh Pirates and willing to take the Cubs trash for a good player.

The guy has had problems with almost every organization he has been with, he hits aroung .300 with little power and although he has some speed he can't steal a base. Why is everyone so interested in him?