CuseCubFan69

If it's true that Hendry wouldn't give up Hill for Dunn I hope to God he wouldn't trade him for Pierre.

Definitely. And honestly I would take Pierre as a replacement for Corey if a Corey trade landed us an impact RF bat. I just don't think it'd be necessary to replace Corey with Pierre. Me either but the lineup maker is going to put Perez at the leadoff otherwise until a typical leadoff guy is found.

Pierre isn't very good. I'd rather improve at RF and SS and keep Corey at CF. What if Corey, in a package, could help the Cubs get an impact RF? Then good for us. But I still don't think that means we need to get Pierre. It wouldn't be hard at all to find someone else who could give us a sub .700 OPS without giving up prospects. But you have Baker and Hendrys goofy ideas on what a leadoff hitter should be and this is what we have to deal with. I do not agree with them but IMO we might have to geuss the players they want and are going to get not the ones we would like to see aquired. That's the frustrating part...guessing unproductive players and who the Cubs will give up for them.

Pierre isn't very good. I'd rather improve at RF and SS and keep Corey at CF. What if Corey, in a package, could help the Cubs get an impact RF? Go get Michaels, Bradley, Wilkerson, even GMJ. I don't pretend to know what Hendry is thinking but which would you rather have: Pierre and impact RF or Michaels/Bradley/Wilkerson/GMJ and Burnitz type in right?

Pierre isn't very good. I'll take him for a couple of Rule 5 guys that wouldn't make the 40 man if Hendry can swing that. Depending on the price I'd be pretty okay with it. It keeps Dusty from EVER batting Neifi leadoff, it doesn't necessarily preclude us from signing Furcal if we want to, but it gives us leverage. He's a FA after this year, and will probably be a A type FA, so we get a draft pick if/when he walks, and he will be an improvment over the tripe we had at the top last year. Having said all that, it all swings on the player cost to aquire. If it's reasonable, then it's a good move. If we give up a Pie, Hill, Pinto or Masrhall, it's not. I agree. I can't imagine Pie or Hill but I really see Pinto as a guy that may go in this trade.

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? Lynch did that beauty.

Pierre isn't very good. I'd rather improve at RF and SS and keep Corey at CF. What if Corey, in a package, could help the Cubs get an impact RF?

That is a part that scares me....the prospect. There's no way it could possibly be better than like Leicester or someone like that. I have many things crossed right now hoping you're right!

Pierre isn't very good. I'll take him for a couple of Rule 5 guys that wouldn't make the 40 man if Hendry can swing that.

Let's keep on topic here please. No more name calling or criticizing other posters and let's talk or debate the thread not each other. Thank you

That is a part that scares me....the prospect.

This year Syracuse is a no win situation for the Irish unless strength of schedule doesn't count anymore.

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. You're preaching to the choir CPatt. The one that makes the lineup thinks otherwise so I'm just saying what we are up against as Baker has certain hitters can only be certain things in that old school mind of his. I don't really like Pierre, but I'd much rather have Pierre, Giles, Lee, Ramirez........Cedeno, than Pierre, Furcal, Lee, Ramirez, (ball catching RF). Me too but remember the Cubs will have Perez at SS and Cedeno if he's lucky at 2nd. The Cubs have so many good options available I hope Mr. Hendry takes advantage of them.

Wanna back that up? Let's look at the numbers: Runs Created Arod: 138 Papi: 136 you could've stopped there, provided the next line was this: Defensive Value Arod: some Papi: none Papi can't catch the ball and Alex is very good at it. Mr. Hendry please get ARod.

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. You're preaching to the choir CPatt. The one that makes the lineup thinks otherwise so I'm just saying what we are up against as Baker has certain hitters can only be certain things in that old school mind of his.

Sure. I was just trying to see hwo the different stats measure up and since I'm not that into stats you guys that are would know more than I do.

Sammy brings some intense emotions like a bad divorce. It just might take me awhile but I'm sure I'll appreciate all the wonderful things he did for the Cubs more later than I do now.

How about in front of you, so that you can easily see over him? And you can even use his head as a beer holder!

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?

Maybe a color by numbers pen for Baker might be a good idea? Baker has already asked for more vets in the pen so maybe you're on to something.

So a 1 loss WVU is in. However if they lose to South Florida they are out, even though they have a better all around record then SF, in the same conference? If they are tied I think one tie breaker is the polls. If WV is 5 or more spots ahead in the polls they go.

Awesome huh? If FSU wins the ACC some team is going to get really screwed out of a spot they deserve. Didn't FSU go to a BCS game a few years ago with a 7-4 record? Question: Does every team have the same requirements as ND? The reason I ask is because if scUM beats O$U, they could very well be in the BCS top twelve with 8 wins, not the 9 required for ND. This is why these playoff games bother me. The Big East has all these rules that they have to abide by but the other 5 don't to play in the BCS games. Florida St. can lose to Florida and still go to a BCS game while West Virginia could get booted if they don't finish in the top 12 even if they only have one loss. I agree with your point. But the year that FSU went when they were 7-4 there was no ACC playoff. This is the first year for that. I think I just got confused. Isn't every BCS conference champion guarenteed (sp?) a BCS game, or does the BCS pick who goes out of the Conference champs and the at-larges? I always thought FSU went every year because they won the ACC. And didn't Miami always get in because the won the Big East? I thought the Big East champ was guarenteed a spot. I don't think it possible for WVU to not go if they win out. I thought they changed it this year because of Pitt getting in last year but I may be wrong.

Thanks..that's very interesting. Where both teams managed by the same kind of manager?

Awesome huh? If FSU wins the ACC some team is going to get really screwed out of a spot they deserve. Didn't FSU go to a BCS game a few years ago with a 7-4 record? Question: Does every team have the same requirements as ND? The reason I ask is because if scUM beats O$U, they could very well be in the BCS top twelve with 8 wins, not the 9 required for ND. This is why these playoff games bother me. The Big East has all these rules that they have to abide by but the other 5 don't to play in the BCS games. Florida St. can lose to Florida and still go to a BCS game while West Virginia could get booted if they don't finish in the top 12 even if they only have one loss.

It's like they all just got back from an Amway convention and found their key phrase.