vance_the_cubs_fan

Before we signed Eyre, we had these candidates for the pen: Rightside: Dempster, Novoa, Wuertz, Mitre, Williamson Leftside: Ohman, Rusch, Koronka, Hill We're already in a roster crunch and I know we have money to spend. I'd just prefer we spend that money on places where we have no adequate replacements and then look to the bullpen. As it is now, we've spent the equivalent of Furcal or Giles and have a bunch of spare parts to show for it.

I think it's going to take a deal greater than Williamson, but much less than what we had to pay Scott Eyre.

I've been of the persuasion that the bullpen should have been the final focus after lead-off, shortstop, and the gaping hole in rightfield. We have a number of arms for the pen. But if I were going to gamble three years on a reliever, Dotel please. First off, I second your "Dotel please" Secondly, your thinking is good in theory - but it has somewhat resulted in our bullpens the last couple years. Isn't it possible that we could take care of all of these 'problems' in a somewhat similar timeframe? I know watching Eyre sign a contract might keep him busy, but not so busy he can't call Furcal up and tell him to c'mere. I will admit that our bullpen wasn't good last season. But I also think throwing FA dollars at a bullpen, other than a few select guys, is never a great idea. We've thrown a lucrative three year deal at the bullpen two of the last three years and it hasn't helped. It's very difficult to predict the success of a reliever from year to year. Who thought Eyre was a great reliever before this past season? How quickly does a guy become lights out in the pen only to flame out the year before? Given the nature of the bullpen, I'd address it, but not with long term big money deals unless it is for someone that has proven to get it done year in and year out. Dotel fits that description. Wagner does as well. Eyre does not. Why not bring back the Farns? He's had more good seasons than Eyre.

I've been of the persuasion that the bullpen should have been the final focus after lead-off, shortstop, and the gaping hole in rightfield. We have a number of arms for the pen. But if I were going to gamble three years on a reliever, Dotel please. I'f Im going to give a reliever 3 years I'm going to give it to the guy who's proven he can throw in 70+ games, not a guy 4 months removed from TJ surgery. I think over the course of three years, Dotel will prove to be the better signing. At least Dotel hasn't had only one good season.

I've been of the persuasion that the bullpen should have been the final focus after lead-off, shortstop, and the gaping hole in rightfield. We have a number of arms for the pen. But if I were going to gamble three years on a reliever, Dotel please.

But even if we bury Neif on the bench, which I do hope happens, we're overpaying him for that priviledge. I think that's what is most upsetting. Had we not given Rusch 3.5 million and Neifi 2.5 million, I would probably not even raise an eye brow about this signing. But when we've signed two roster fillers and a loogy for the price we could possibly land Giles for it's frustrating...especially when Hendry doesn't seem willing to go three years to Giles when he went three years to a reliver who is more likely to be a bust than Giles.

That's Furcal or Giles right there. Watch us miss out on those guys over a couple of million dollars. OML...this offseason is going in the crapper rapidly.

Who needs Giles when you have Scott Eyre. :puker:

Why are we wasting resources, much less a three-year deal on Eyre. Right now, assuming a rotation of Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Maddux and Williams, we have the following candidates for the bullpen: Dempster Williamson Ohman Wuertz Rusch Hill Mitre JVB Koronka While I don't have a problem adding a reliever, adding a mediocre one at a three year deal borders on insanity.

Is Eyre really any better than Will Ohman?

It would be smarter to try to trade for him assuming the Dodgers are reasonable in their demands. If he does become a FA, I'd hope the Cubs at least make him an offer. He's productive inspite of his problems.

What evidence do you have to back that claim up? Hendry loves old ballplayers. He was, by all accounts, behind the Alou and Remlinger signings, he went hard after Maddux. He obviously likes older bench players, choosing to guarantee mediocrity rather than risk failure in the pursuit of greatness. Show me a longterm contract Hendry worked out with a player 35 years old or older. Greg Maddux and Mike Remlinger. So that's two guys for Hendry's tenure. Both pitchers, who typically play the game longer than position players. And both of them received 3 year contracts maximum with full vesting. That isn't exactly a history of offering 3-4 year contracts to aging playing in my book. Meanwhile, on the contrary, Hendry did go after Lee at 28, Ramirez at 24, and Barret at 27 as long-term solutions. It seems pretty clear to me that if Hendry has a preference for mid-twenties guys he can lock-up to build around more than 35+ guys that are anything more than stop-gaps. Which is exactly why I wouldn't be surprised to see Mench (28) as the Cubs rightfielder next year.

Apparently, Joe Torre has personally called Giles to recruit him for the Yankees. Link.

Such as? And how many ABs did they get in Chicago? The Cubs haven't had any recent call ups that deserved a shot. At least Hendry and Hughes seem to be able to evaluate minor league talent. Too bad they can't evaluate the talent before they draft. if they're so good at evaluating talent, we'd have productive young position players in Wrigley more than once every blue moon. While Hughes has been lampooned on this board, to say he doesn't recognize talent is a joke. While in Montreal as scouting director he was responsible for locating, drafting, or developing Moises Alou, Cliff Floyd, Larry Walker,Carlos Perez, Delino Deshields, Ugueth Urbina, Mark Grudzielanek, and Marquis Grissom. So to say he doesn't know how to evaluate talent is a joke and completely off base.

I would love for the PTBNL to be among this group: Sinisi, Nivar, or McDougall.

Roast, Murton is a renewable contract, so I think you can pencil him in at 350K.

It all depends on the language of the trade. Usually a pool of players is determined at the time of the trade and the club who receives the the PTBNL chooses at a later time. Sometimes it's done differently.

Cubs giving up way too quickly? It was either get rid of him or watch him leave. We're not giving up on anything. Does Rotoworld even know that Leicester was a Rule 5 guy? Leicester wasn't a rule V guy. He was already on the 40-man. He's likely being moved because he doesn't figure into the Cubs plans and they need the spot to protect another prospect. Leicester was out of options and would have had to make the club out of spring training. That decision could have waited.

Hendry is trying to clear room for the rule V guys. I doubt the PTBNL will amount to anything, but Leicester likely didn't figure into the plans anyways.

So basically, Cubs fans are right, and the rest of America is wrong? Didn't BP do a feature a while back touting Lee for MVP? As did Dayn Parry for Fox Sports. As did you. So what? Two guys like Derrek Lee. Do you want me to show you the links that say that Pujols should be the MVP? You insinuated only Cubs fans thought DLee should've won it. they proved you wrong. I think that was the point there. Obviously I was making an exaggerated point when I said "the rest of America". I guess I should clarify. The vast majority of America, outside of Cubville, believes that Pujols was the most valuable player in the National League this year. At one time the vast majority of the people believed the earth was flat too.

So basically, Cubs fans are right, and the rest of America is wrong? Didn't BP do a feature a while back touting Lee for MVP? As did Dayn Parry for Fox Sports. As did you. So what? Two guys like Derrek Lee. Do you want me to show you the links that say that Pujols should be the MVP? Nah, my idiot list is long enough already.

So basically, Cubs fans are right, and the rest of America is wrong? Didn't BP do a feature a while back touting Lee for MVP? As did Dayn Parry for Fox Sports.

This ridiculous analogy might actually hold water if there was any evidence at all Lee was a clubhouse problem. If we were talking about Gary Sheffield or such a character in the MVP race then fine. But to more accurately appy this analogy, you'd have to say what if the first shift work is slightly more productive, but the stupid employer put him with a bunch of deadbeats. You'd still keep him and reward him and certainly not hold him accountable for the deadbeats he had no control over.

Let's trade Baker for Lowe and Bradley. We'll take two of their problems for one of our own. :D