Bleacher Reconstruction Update -- December 8

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 1:06 PM CST in 2005-06 Bleacher Reconstruction Project Comment 86 comments

Yesterday, Howard called me, having driven by the ballpark, and he said there were "big things" going on, lots of new steel up, etc.

Naturally, I had to go and find out for myself. Thus, you now have nine new photos, taken this morning, Dec. 8, about 10:30 am. Note that the sun was shining. That was short-lived; we're expecting a couple more inches of snow tonight.

Top: view from across the street, corner of Waveland & Sheffield -- showing the curve of what will be the back walkway; a crane lifts a steel beam into place behind right-center; looking south down Sheffield at more steel beams being placed; the curve of the back ramp from Waveland

Middle: workmen behind center field; looking east down Waveland, workers cutting into concrete; a truck parked on Sheffield delivering steel beams; the view behind my old section in RF

Bottom: view looking north on Sheffield at CF

Photos by Al

0 recs | Comment 86 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Snow

The snow that you are talking about is most likely the system that is hitting where I go to school. I'm down in Macomb at WIU and it's been snowing for a bit now. It's not too heavy yet but it's been picking up.

AC 00 00 00 - BELIEVE

by mike on Dec 8, 2005 1:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the weather update...

... not snowing here in Chicago at this hour (1:10 pm CT).

Keep it away!

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 1:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

Work is going to be insane if it snows.

2006 -- AC036097 -- Eamus Catuli!

by priorpwnz on Dec 8, 2005 1:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Its really comin down meow

In Chicago

by Slaky311 on Dec 8, 2005 3:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the burbs

aren't much better.

2006 -- AC036097 -- Eamus Catuli!

by priorpwnz on Dec 8, 2005 3:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Meow?

How did that cat get in here?

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 4:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

HAH

I heart super troopers.

I also love lamp though.

2006 -- AC036097 -- Eamus Catuli!

by priorpwnz on Dec 8, 2005 4:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Great pics...

thanks as always. The bleachers are going to be huge!

by bison on Dec 8, 2005 1:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Boy, no kidding...

... it already looks weird to see that stuff there.

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 1:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

For what it's worth...

SDSMJ is a WIU grad...

How is ol' Macomb these days?

by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Dec 8, 2005 1:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Macomb,

It's doing alright. They took the theater on the square on converted it into a bar (cause apparently the town needed another) All the townies were excited cause the put in an Arby's and a Quizno's out on 136 by the Walmart. Other than that not much. I mean it's macomb, it's not exactly the most exciting place in the world.

AC 00 00 00 - BELIEVE

by mike on Dec 8, 2005 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Fantastic shots

Once again Al, those pictures are beautiful. By the way, in the last picture in the middle row, is that the outfield door that is open ?

by whitesux on Dec 8, 2005 1:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yes, it is...

... wish you could see the field better. It showed up much better in person than it came out in the photo.

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 4:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Great Pictures

The pictures are enticing. I'm really looking forward to our trip next May, and just hope we can get tickets for the games with Cincinnati. My wife and I are travelling by sleeping car on Amtrak, and will stop in St. Louis on the way back, and hope to watch the Cubs whip the Cardinals in the new Busch.

You have a great blog. Keep it up.

by tex on Dec 8, 2005 2:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

For anyone who cares

WSCR is going to have their baseball guy, George Ofman on in a little while (sounds like after 3pm). He is going to give a rundown of the behind the scenes happenings as to why the Cubs did not end up with Rafael Furcal.

Can be heard streaming on the internet at:
http://www.radiomat.com/register.php?action=register&station=WSCRAM

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 8, 2005 2:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

wow

I hope this isn't true.

by mike bornemann on Dec 8, 2005 3:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

fill us in

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 3:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

basically

says furcal asked for a little more per year, "pittance" was the exact word used, and people above Hendry said no. They also keep stressing how much Furcal really wanted to come here, and would have taken less than the L.A. deal if the Cubs had gone up the little bit.

by mike bornemann on Dec 8, 2005 3:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

but it was

okay to pay $18 million for Sammy not to play. What a f**~ing joke! Dammit!!!!!!!!!!!!

I hope that's not true when the Cubs have about $40 Million to spend to be even with last year.

Did McFail strike again?

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 3:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

sounds like

offman is guessing 5/53 would have done it. Pure speculation though. This gets old.

by mike bornemann on Dec 8, 2005 3:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

what I don't buy...

... is that if it indeed was "a mere pittance" and if Furcal wanted to play so badly in Chicago, why isn't he here? Yeah, the Cubs could have forked over the money, but Furcal also could have said "screw the "mere pittance", I'm going to play there anyway".

I doubt we'll ever know exactly what happened totally. It's interesting to hear this perspective, but the Cubs were offering a lot of money, more than the Braves.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 8, 2005 3:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

I thought that too, I guess that's where greed comes into play.

by mike bornemann on Dec 8, 2005 3:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hendry didn't say no...

The report was that "someone above Hendry" said no, not Hendry. Speculation it was MacPhail, but it might have gone higher due to the financial situation of the Tribune Company. The Cubs had already gone beyond their normal limits by guaranteeing a 5th year and my guess is that the someone above Hendry said enough is enough.

(and a pittance to Furcals agent may not be a pittance to everyone else)

Kasey

by kaseyi on Dec 8, 2005 3:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

this had

nothing to do with the financial situation of the Cubs. They have about $30 million left to equal last year's payroll. That's hogwash.

Look at the scoreboard/ad board, new seating, new bleachers, and new arrangement with roof top owners and try to tell me the Cubs don't have newer revenue streams to pay another 1 or 2 million to get him in town.

Sorry, this pisses me off. It wouldn't have happened to the Red Sox or Yankees.

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 3:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

they mentioned

the finacial troubles the Tribune Company has been going through, wonder of the Cubs are gonna start carrying the rest of the company.

by mike bornemann on Dec 8, 2005 3:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i read a report a while back...

...that the trib owns the LA times, and that the LA times is one of their ventures that they are losing money on. Now we have a Chicago Business losing money on an LA company that they own and to top it all off they are losing ball players for their Chicago team to the LA team. Does something seem seriously wrong and yet very ironic here?

Madog93. There is only one good season of the year -- BASEBALL SEASON!

by madog93 on Dec 8, 2005 3:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Financial revenue...

... isn't a good reason to make a bad decision. I'm not saying Furcal was or wasn't worth an extra "pittance", but the Cubs clearly did. They wanted Furcal, set their price, and went with that. But additional revenue shouldn't lead you to make bad decisions, and clearly they felt that paying Furcal more than their offer was a bad decision.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 8, 2005 3:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I never said

financial revenue = bad decisions.

Clearly the money is avilable to pay him in acquiring his services.

I don't see how you say "bad decision" when we don't have top of the order hitters and a proven quality SS who is entering his prime. Nothing about this scenario screams "bad decision." Is that how you felt about getting Furcal?

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 3:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Furcal

Getting him was a good decision. Getting him for $11M a year was a bad decision. Yes, filling holes is important but you have a finite amount of resources to spend. How you alocate those resources is part of the decision making process.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 8, 2005 4:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

why is that bad?

it's what the market bears for his services.

Not much of a difference between 11 mil and 12 mil to lock up your #1 target this off-season. Money doesn't matter if you have it to spend without crippling your franchise and have identified the player your team needs.

The Cubs still would have had about $20 million left to spend on payroll this winter with Furcal, Eyre, and Howry signed. And take it down a nothc to $14 million with Pierre's addition. Clearly this wasn't breaking the bank.

Let's let Cedeno and Walker man the IF, bring up Trenidad Hubbard for RF, let Maddux and Wood walk next year, Zambrano and Prior after that, and we can be a $40 million payroll team just like Tampa and Kansas City. <sarcasm has now ended>

We wait around and lose players. Hendry better have some serious trades going on or we are looking at 4th place in '06 as the Cubs offense would rival the Bears.

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 4:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

But, the point is...

... that "breaking the bank" on Furcal might have shorted the ballclub on another area -- maybe the bench, or being able to pick up another starting pitcher, or a power bat in right field.

I agree, a "pittance" can be viewed in two ways. Sure, maybe the Cubs could have offered more. But if Furcal REALLY wanted to play here, why not say "screw the pittance" and play?

These players, I swear, some of them are so greedy that they lose sight of what this game is about, over what? Maybe $3 million out of $50 million? Criminy. Furcal has enough money to buy the entire Dominican Republic now. Why does he need a "pittance" more?

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 4:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

look

I agree that the money is enough.

But can someone share with me where the extra 2 million per year it would have taken to land Furcal is "breaking the bank" or shorting the Cubs bench or costing them another player. I just don't see it.

If it's because they are close to getting Abreu at $15 mil and didn't want to go that extra $2 mil, OKAY. But I don't believe that at all.

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 4:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe it's the attitude...

... that Tribco people said, "Look, we're giving him $50 million and he wants MORE??"

I could see an executive thinking that this smacks of greed, and not wanting that attitude around the team.

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

in any other franchise maybe

I would expect them too see greed and admire it.

by mike bornemann on Dec 8, 2005 4:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe...

... but not in a prospective employee!

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 4:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

whoops

My point was that I woudl expect any other comapny besides the Tribune company to make a rational decision like that. Tribune Company should not be calling anyone greedy until they look in the mirror.

by mike bornemann on Dec 8, 2005 4:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Market

Well, I guess if one team is willing to pay a certain amount, that indeed is what the market will bear. But just because the market will bear something doesn't mean it's wise to pay that amount. IMO, what the Dodgers were willing to spend and therefor what the market did bear was an unwise amount.

As far as saying that money doesn't matter if you don't cripple your franchise, I disagree with this. I hope that Hendry and Co have a higher standard than "not crippling" the Cubs when they decide if a deal is worth it. My standard would be deals that leave the club adequate flexibility and financial resources to spend on other improvements. Based on your standards, if the Cubs had $100M to spend this offseason, it would've been okay of pay Furcal $20M a season.

The Cubs are going to have a $100-105M payroll. The Furcal decision or lack there of does not change that. But clearly they decided that paying Furcal another $1M a year above and beyond their final offer was not a good use of their resources.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 8, 2005 4:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

time will tell

if I were Hendry and I looked at my team, I would notice a lack of speed, lack of top of the order hitters, lack of LH hitters, and huge holes at SS/CF/RF. Furcal would answer 3 of the biggest needs: SPEED, LH bat, Top of the Order hitter. As you say, I have $100 million to spend and he would cost me only $20 of my budget, I do it NOW and as quickly as possible.

I think that's smart and wise and didn't break anyone's bank.

The Cubs have always been accused of spending poorly from bad decisions. A guy entering his prime is the time to risk, not the 34 year old coming off his career year.

It's good to have differing views so we can go back later and either eat crow or thump our chest.

What's your plan now for SS?

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 4:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

DP combination

I'd be happy with Cedeno at SS and Walker at 2B.

If the Cubs can get someone like Huff or another left handed power hitter in RF, I'd be fine with this line-up:

Pierre - CF (L)
Murton - LF (R)
Lee - 1B (R)
Huff - RF (L)
Ramirez - 3B (R)
Walker - 2B (L)
Barrett - C (R)
Cedeno - SS (R)

Perhaps this lacks the big boppers but I think there is good balance here. The Cubs have some good OBP guys in the 1-2 and 6-7 spots. Cedeno is a questionmark (as I guess Murton is, too) and perhaps moving him to the 7 spot may help him in his first full season.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 8, 2005 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

DP Combination

This doesn't look bad at all. It does lack the power that we've had but where did that get us?

by Blue Monster on Dec 8, 2005 5:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It doesn't really lack power...

... there are three genuine power threats there: Lee, Ramirez and Huff.

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 5:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Huff in RF...

...concerns me. My understanding is that his defense is pretty bad. Pierre, despite the MSMs fawning, is at best an average CF.

by jolietconvict on Dec 8, 2005 9:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

it's scary

to place such a huge burden on rookies. I wouldn't be comfortable with this, but we may soon find out.

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 5:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Why is it scary?

Look if you want to be a good time you have to bring up kids from the minors and let them play. The Braves played at least 10 rookies last year, we're talking about playing two young players, neither of whom are technically rookies anymore (I could be wrong on Cedeno).

by jolietconvict on Dec 8, 2005 9:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Furcal

was going to where the most $$ was. If Cubs upped their offer, who is to say that the Dodgers wouldn't have upped theirs. I think the Cubs made a more than fair offer if the 5/50 amount is accurate. I think the talk radio person wants some controversy to raise listenership....

by LT on Dec 8, 2005 4:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

hmmm

i seriously doubt the veracity of what ofman said. for the past couple weeks ofman has been practicing inflammatory journalism--twisting the truth into whatever will make people listen to their station the most. the score is in full-on jay mariotti/mike north mode where you say whatever it takes to make people listen, even if it either 1)doesn't make sense or 2) isn't true.

first of all, if hendry truly believed that he could land furcal for 500,000 to 1,000,000 more per year i would be VERY surprised if he didn't do it--his career is on the line here.
Second, the Cubs offered what he wanted in the first place. For him to shop that offer around and then come back and ask for more is pretty slimy if you ask me--maybe that's what an effective agent does to get every last nickel, but its slimy nonetheless if you ask me.
Third, Scheurholtz (or however you spell it, the braves gm) was publically peeved that Kinzer had him sign with the dodgers without giving him the courtesy of the opportunity to match the offer.
Fourth, good for Hendry for not getting into a bidding war for a guy whos contract had clearly exceeded his value. Going over 5 years/50 million would not be sound vision for a team, even if he would be a nice fit in the cubs lineup and on defense. He's just not worth it. And who knows, maybe the cubs and braves were just pawns this whole time to drive up his contract.
If they can still get Huff to play right, which if you listen between the lines when Hendry talks seems like is his intention, he will have done a nice job this off-season in my opinion. Maybe a few moves to make yet, but a nice job nonetheless.

by tomas21 on Dec 8, 2005 3:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Whoo hoo! Quiznos!

Yep -- sounds like Macomb. But they get pleasure from little things, which isn't so bad. But too bad about the theater, I saw many movies there.
(Some of the biggies!!! I won't date myself, but it had something to do with "Star" and "Wars.")
The good thing about Macomb -- it's not Monmouth.

by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Dec 8, 2005 3:01 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

above Hendry

Sounds like the Trib screwed up the whole Furcal thing, or possibly McPhail. Once again the Cubs need to be sold to a fan with deep pockets.

Madog93. There is only one good season of the year -- BASEBALL SEASON!

by madog93 on Dec 8, 2005 3:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

as I posted earlier

Fill us in

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

just read above

Basically George Ofman is saying that the Cubs could have very easily had Furcal and Pierre at the top of the order. That would have slid Cedeno over to second and the whole infield is set. Then they would have only needed a Right fielder. Why do I do this to myself?
Would some rich Cub fan please offer the Trib the 500 mil they are going to be asking for the team. We need another nutcase to run the asylum. The Trib is still only interested in money.

Madog93. There is only one good season of the year -- BASEBALL SEASON!

by madog93 on Dec 8, 2005 3:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Facts or Opinions?

Did the report cite any facts to back up the claims? Sounds awfully speculative to me and I think that at least one other person has pointed out that WSCR (the new home of the ChiSox) ain't too friendly with Trib Co, WGN, Cubs etc.

This is exactly the type of report that is going to get us all wound up. To me it sounds like they're trying to turn this into the same scenario wherein the Cubs let Maddux go, except that in that case he was actually wearing a Cubs uni in the prior season. Until there is some corroborating evidence that this did in fact occur, I intend to reserve judgement.

by blueisthecolor on Dec 8, 2005 3:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with this analysis..

.... I can only imagine what Chuck's going to say when he finds out about this.

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 4:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd like to hear from Jessica too

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 4:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ok

First of all I DON'T Believe it. If it were even true it would not
be remotely close to how we lost Maddux who at THREE SEPERATE times agreed to a contract only to have it pulled A long and horible story that we need not rehash

As for Furcal, I think this is his agent's revisionist spin. A few things that make me VERY suspicious. Apparently
the Dodgers offer was TAKE OR LEAVE IT NOW and no
checking with Cubs or Braves. How does that mesh with the
Cubs not going higher ( though I doubt they would have )
to counter this. Also Furcal's camp says there was a sticking
point on a 6th year option. Ok so he passes the 50/5 ish offer
because he does not get a good 6th year option but takes
the 3 year /39? Did he want MORE years or less?

However one I find most interesting ( and damning) of the
idea that cheap Tribco let this great player who REALLY
wanted to play for the Cubs walk over a few million dollars
is Sheurholtz ( sic) response. I have the uttmost restpect for
him and consider him the top GM around. He is FUMING that
Furcal's people lead him down the garden path by claiming
he really wanted to stay and then never even called them
for a counter offer ( which I am sure they would not have matched)

Furcal is more than entitled to take 13 million a year from
the Dodgers but lets not pretend it was the Tribune's fault
for being "cheap". I suppose IF he had been allowed to call
they could have offered 40 million for 3 years.

by jessica on Dec 8, 2005 6:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

WSCR

First off, I diagree with the anti-Cubs analysis of WSCR. Several of their hosts are Sox fans, that's true, but a lot of other folks there, including Ofman are Cub fans. Yeah, they've been anti-Dusty and anti-Sammy in the past, but I disagree with the anti-Cubs assessment. Being anti-Cubs would be pissing away a substantial portion of their listening audience and that makes no sense.

As for the report, Ofman said that the report was backed up by a second source, so that leads me to believe that he didn't just make this up nor did he take the drippings offered by the agent and ran to the phone.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 8, 2005 4:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i wouldn't characterize

them as anti-cubs, at least not all of them, certainly not mike murphy.
but i do not respect their journalistic integrity anymore. the are intersted in taglines and teasers, not truth. sports in general has been creeping towards that the last 5 years or so, but they have been taking it to a new level lately. maybe they need to drum up some money to pay for the sox or something.

by tomas21 on Dec 8, 2005 6:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Majority of Guys at WSCR..

do seem anti-Cubs..Murphy being an exception, and Terry Boers to some extent as well. It's depressing to hear them rip the Cubs.

by mikew on Dec 8, 2005 8:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Boers and Bernstein...

...are anti-everything. Look Sox fans will tell you all the hosts hate the Sox. It's sports radio the overall tone is going to be negative. It's hard to get people to call and say "Everything is great". They need to generate controversy to bring in the callers.

by jolietconvict on Dec 8, 2005 9:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Murph

Mike Murphy is a Cubs fan but he is probably the most anti-Cubs management at WSCR. He's a jackass, to be brief. He lacks the comprehension of how things work and oversimplifies things to make MacPhail look bad.

I don't listen to Mike North. He's racist, closed minded and him behind a microphone is just plain dangerous.

I listen to a few other shows, mainly Boers and Bernstein. They don't like Dusty, neither do I. They hated Sammy, so did I. But they have reasoning behind their stuff and that's why I like them. Bernstein is a Sox fan (I actually have met him a few times, he's a good guy), and the frustrations that they can have with Cubs nation is the same things we complain about.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 8, 2005 10:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

al

is that your shiny black beamer in the first pic?

if so, is channel 7 hiring? i like nice cars

by tomas21 on Dec 8, 2005 3:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Oh, lord, no...

.. no way would I drive one of those!

If you've been reading here for a while, you know that I just bought a Prius.

That BMW was, incidentally, illegally parked. The owner is in the picture, too -- he's standing at the mailbox on the corner.

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 4:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Winter update

For those Felix Pie lovers, he is not ready and needs 600-800 at bats in AAA. In the hitter friendly Dominican League, Felix is hitting .224 in 85 at bats with a 4/17 BB/K ratio. In words he would surely understand, "NO BUENO!!!!"

Ronny Cedeno is putting together a nice campaign hitting .356 in his first 104 at bats. But the alarming thing is his BB/K ratio of 6/15.

Two top prospects in our organization with the same flaw as KKKKKKKKorey.

Isn't it time to get rid of all Cub minor league hitting coaches and start over with a fresh philosophy. Our guys don't walk and always K a bunch. An acceptable ratio is 10% of at bats for walking.

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 3:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

On Cedeno

Relax. It's a small sample size. He's averaged about .52 BB/K so far in his career.

by jolietconvict on Dec 8, 2005 9:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

before telling me to relax

try to understand my post. It was in reagard to WALK PERCENTAGE, not BB/K. And an organizational context of low walk percentages and bunches of K's from our top hitters. I put those numbers in there to show how they are doing right now. Thanks for the small sample size comment--I couldn't tell that myself.

by socalbob on Dec 9, 2005 12:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

a little off subjec but...

looks like Neifi is the new whipping boy around here, IF we get rid of patterson

by DTJchris on Dec 8, 2005 4:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Look people,

Mr. Furcal (just like the NYT would write) has seemingly become a First ballot Hall Of Fame Shortstop in our eyes, hasn't he? I think we are all getting just a little out of line about this. He is an OK player, will never be a superstar, would have been OK at the top of the Cubs line up, but he isn't Luis Aparicio, Don Kessinger, Derek Jeter, and Ozzie Smith in one complete package!

This must be the Beltran effect! Let's hope the Cubs overpay somebody because we are all desperate for a title (which we are) but the Dodgers are idiots for giving this guy this deal. This may be their way to take some of the attention away from the Angels, who now have the PR crown in the Los Angeles market.
Don't drink the Kool-Aid. I'll bet a year from now this deal will not look very good.

by Smooth Jazz Man San Diego on Dec 8, 2005 5:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I agree...

This is not the kind of non-signing that we should be discussing 2 days or 2 years from now (i.e. Tejada). We missed out on an above average SS who is now getting paid Superstar dollars. We need to move on. He isn't wearing Cubbie blue right now, and there is no way he is ever going to be in the near future. Let's drop it.

by DTJchris on Dec 8, 2005 5:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

dollars are irrellevant

you are worth what someone is willing to pay you for your services. He would be a tremendous upgrade and fill many needs. No one is clamoring for his Hall of Fame induction, but rather his play in the 2-hole for the '06 Cubs. But it ain't gonna happen and Ronny Cedeno is not the starting SS on a championship caliber team in his rookie year. By not adressing SS wisely, we are looking at 1 bad April from seeing Neifi get 100 at bats in May.

I hope I'm proven wrong.

by socalbob on Dec 8, 2005 5:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

He wasn't a rookie, but...

... 23-year-old Jhonny Peralta was the starting SS for a 93-win Cleveland team last year.

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 5:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I know i'm dreaming...

but ESPN just posted an article that says Miguel Tejada is demanding a trade from the Orioles...

by hateembutloveem on Dec 8, 2005 6:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

The money fits...

Tejada is due $54 million over the course of 6 seasons ($2 million signing bonus in 2006, 2010, and 2011 included although he's eligible to be a free agent at the end of the 2009 season). $10 million in 2006, $12 million in 2007, and $13 million each in 2008 and 2009.

If the Cubs offered Furcal a $53.75 million deal, isn't $54 million in their price range or does the quarter million force them into bankruptcy?

The Cubs, even as cheap as they may be, certainly have the money to acquire Tejada. Do they have the talent that Baltimore would demand? If they do, would Hendry be willing to give it up?

by Maddog on Dec 8, 2005 6:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

which

i just saw is already a diary. My bad!

by hateembutloveem on Dec 8, 2005 6:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Tejada

Anybody have any idea whit it would take to take Tejada off the O's hands? I know they can use some pitching, but which ones would they ask for?

by Blue Monster on Dec 8, 2005 7:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

It doesn't matter.

I'd give them any one of our "prospects". Williams. Hill. Guzman. Whoever.

Think, people. Tejada is an MVP caliber player!!

If you can get him, DO IT!

by Al on Dec 8, 2005 7:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tejada

Don't you think they would want an MLB ready starter as well?

by Blue Monster on Dec 8, 2005 7:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Don't literally bet "the farm"

Frankly I doubt you COULD get him for Williams, Hill
Pie & Cedano but it would be a very bad idea if you did
Williams is no longer trade bait, he is essentional unless you
are going to sign an FA pitcher. There is NO way you can assume
Wood is healthy for Opening Day, Mitre was good for about
8 weeks of starts that would keep you in the game but no longer
an option. You want Koronka as your 5th starter? You want to give up both of the position players you can get out of your farm system ( and Cedano is ready now)
Tejada is a great player but he would not make up for all the
holes this year and in years to come if you trade your top
4 or 5 guys possibly including two on your 2005 roster
( Williams & Cedano). We don't have the caliber player to trade
for him with one or two prospects which is the only realistic
deal that will get him

Get back to reality and find a RF

Jessica

by jessica on Dec 8, 2005 7:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

There

are plenty of reasonably priced free agent starting pitchers out there that could be signed if we needed to move Williams and others to the Orioles to get Tejada. Getting Tejada would also lessen the offensive ability required out of our right-fielder. (ie no need for Abreu.)

"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!" -Homer J. Simpson

by Whitebacon on Dec 8, 2005 7:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Payroll Status?

Does anyone know the amount of the payroll based on the Cubs current roster?

I am wondering how much money is left before the Cubs reach the magical $100 million dollar payroll.

by SonnyJ9 on Dec 8, 2005 7:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

The current payroll is...

about $93 million and change. That includes estimates for Zambrano, Hairston, Patterson and Pierre in arbitration of $6 million, $2.5 million, $3 million, and $5 million. That is for the entire 40-man roster.

by Maddog on Dec 8, 2005 11:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Name one

Seriously what "reasonably" priced starter is there on the FA
market? Washburn and Millwood are the best starters left
and they won't be reasonable . Morover you HAVE to sign someone BEFORE you consider dealing for Tejada or you end
up really, really screwed. Everyone on this list goes nuts with the thought of trying to get Abrau. Manny , Tejada etc and give up everything to get them. Thing is we don't have THAT much
to give without giving up EVERYTHING we have to trade and
I don't think you can say that there is any ONE player out there
that would make the Cubs an odds on favorite to win a WS.

Way too many uncertainties to assume their is a magic bullett
I would be THRILLED if the O's would take Cedano, Guzman
& Hill for Tajada but somehow I don't think that is going to happen.

Jessica

by jessica on Dec 8, 2005 7:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

that's why

when you have money you spend it. you don't wait till after the gm meetings or july to trade.

by mike bornemann on Dec 8, 2005 8:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

But they did "spend"

Is Hendry gonna get ANY credit for locking down
Dempster & Rusch and signing Howry and Eyre for what
are in the new hyper inflated market bargain prices?
Can you imagine where would be if he had NOT done
that.?
Is there ANY free agent ( not counting Giles who went for
the home town discount) that you think the Cubs should have
signed for at least as much and presumably more than they got?

Also Hendry clearly TRIED to trade for Pierre BEFORE the
meetings but Marlins were smart enough to hold out

Jessica

by jessica on Dec 8, 2005 8:40 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yabut

Rusch isn't really all that great, especially if he's going to be the fourth or fifth starter, depending on Wood's health and what happens with Williams. I would rather have seen his 2.5 million per year or whatever he's getting go towards Millwood or even Weaver. If Wood is healthy, we don't really need Rusch, because Williams is better. If he's not, wouldn't it be better to have his roster spot and dollars going to a better pitcher?

"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!" -Homer J. Simpson

by Whitebacon on Dec 8, 2005 8:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Don't blame Hendry

He is working with what the Trib co.gives him and in my opinion he's doing well with the cards that he's been dealt. He still needs to make 1 ot 2 more moves and I think he will. Let's be a little patient and Jimmy will come through for us eventually.

by Blue Monster on Dec 8, 2005 9:01 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

You people are SO..

hung up on Neifi Perez! Was it his fault he took over for the injured Nomar? This guy is going to be coming off the bench this year -- he will not be a starter, please calm down here. There are more moves to be made. If we didn't re sign him -- I guarantee teams would be lined up to put him on their bench. Neifi is a valuable role player Get off this guy. Jose F. Macias is gone -- and you know what? How's about NOT having somebody to blame? You want problems? Go over to the Marlins blog.

by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Dec 8, 2005 9:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs