PDA

View Full Version : Which was a better acquisition?


Viva Magglio
12-19-2001, 12:10 PM
Which was a better acquisition?

cheeses_h_rice
12-19-2001, 12:16 PM
Apples and oranges, I say. You can't compare a $9M player with a $1M (or whatever) pitcher. Obviously Alou is a good player, but the Flubs are giving up quite a lot of dosh to get him aboard, and he'll be 38 or 39 when the contract expires. It's hard to say that's a better trade than the Sox trade, but there's no doubt Alou will contribute bigtime to the Cubs' lackluster offense this year.

NUCatsFan
12-19-2001, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by ˇViva Mágglio!
Which was a better acquisition?

Does this question really need to be asked? On one hand you have a young #2 or 3 starter. Still needs work, but a definite innings eater and will only get better with better run support. On the other hand, you have a 36 year old outfielder who has averaged only 131 games the past 2 years (he didn't play in 99). Alou's OPB has only been about 50 points higher than his batting average the past 2 years. Doesn't strike out much (about 50 per over the past 2 years), but doesn't walk, either (54 per over the past 2). Doesn't have the speed anymore (averaging ~ 4 SBs, 1 3B, 30 2B). Certainly seems like a player in decline, but that is the kind of player the Cubs usually pick up.

chisoxt
12-19-2001, 12:37 PM
Hand down , it has to be the acquisiton of Alou. The Cubs gave up nothing (besides money) to get him. Plus, he is more of an established star.

PaleHoseGeorge
12-19-2001, 01:00 PM
Sorry folks, Alou has to be the better deal. If you add a player to your roster without giving anything up, that improves your team. The marginal value of Ritchie is trimmed considerably given that the Sox traded three pitchers to get him.

:KW
"I've been told not to sign any free agents, which is okay since I'm so creative when it comes to making trades."

:kipper :sean :fogg
"Yep."

:reinsy
"Hands down, this is a better deal for my bottom line."

:ohno
"We won't be winning a championship anytime soon with you as the owner."

Bmr31
12-19-2001, 01:01 PM
Alou, without even a second thought.

Kilroy
12-19-2001, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
...If you add a player to your roster without giving anything up, that improves your team.

Didn't we add :jaime to the Sox without giving anything up?

PaleHoseGeorge
12-19-2001, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Kilroy
Didn't we add :jaime to the Sox without giving anything up?

Well, there are always exceptions! :gulp:

:schueler
"Tell me about it!"

cheeses_h_rice
12-19-2001, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Sorry folks, Alou has to be the better deal. If you add a player to your roster without giving anything up, that improves your team. The marginal value of Ritchie is trimmed considerably given that the Sox traded three pitchers to get him.

They didn't give anything up? How about $27 million over 3 years? That's "something" in my book.

Acquisitions are a give and take proposition. The Sox don't want to spend $ so they send players instead; the Flubs are spending a hell of a lot of $ on one player.

Again, apples and oranges here. If you are talking strictly about who improved their team more, without regard to the dollar cost of the transaction, of course the Cubs win. But it came at a very steep cost, IMO.

Kilroy
12-19-2001, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by cheeses_h_rice
Again, apples and oranges here. If you are talking strictly about who improved their team more, without regard to the dollar cost of the transaction, of course the Cubs win. But it came at a very steep cost, IMO.

I think that on paper, the sCrUBS improved their team more. I think in reality, we'll see something quite different.

Paulwny
12-19-2001, 02:06 PM
I hope Big Frank isn't getting upset about all the money being thrown around.

KempersRS
12-19-2001, 02:19 PM
Wow, I didn't realized we were that biased. It's Alou without a doubt.

Moses_Scurry
12-19-2001, 03:02 PM
I think the chubs helped themselves more than the Sox, but I think the chubs will still finish 3rd while the Sox have a very good chance of winning the division. All based on divisional strength. The Sox would likely finish 3rd in the cubs' division as well. St. Louis and Houston are both pretty good.

czalgosz
12-19-2001, 03:57 PM
Well, the Cubs are sort of rolling the dice for next season. If Alou and McGriff both produce like they did last season, they'll make the playoffs. Their lack of offensive production was their failing last season, and getting Alou is a major step towards answering that.

That said, they are killing their chances to be good two or three years down the line, unless the Trib. corp does a complete 180 on their spending policies to date. When Lieber and Wood come due for the big paydays they'll be getting, look for the Cubs to wave bye-bye to them.

Huisj
12-20-2001, 09:19 PM
No way McGriff produces like he did last year. Go back to his last few years before last season, and he wasn't really anything special. How old is he now? 37, 38? I can't remember. But anyways, i bet he'll hit .265 with 20 homers tops, and that ain't much in wrigley.

DrCrawdad
12-20-2001, 11:48 PM
Alou was the better pick-up.

The Cubbies didn't have to give up anyone for Alou, all it cost Tri-borg Inc was money - which they have.

Ritchie hopefully will do well for the Sox for the next two or three years, but the Sox had to give up a talented young arm in Wells and an effective arm in Lowe.

I will say this though, Alou is old and the Cubbies signed him to a three year contract. Alou and Sosa in the outfield has the makings for an old, slow and crappy outfield. I really haven't seen Alou's defense, but IMHO Sosa is a poor outfielder now, what will he be like in a couple of years?

If Alou is all that the Cubs media is making him out to be, why did the Yankees pass over Alou and sign Rondell White?

nut_stock
12-21-2001, 12:01 AM
Alou is the better pickup, but to answer your other question, his defensive skills didn't impress me last season. I remember him atempting a foolish basket catch and dropping the ball. I was at the game and just about died laughing (it was against the Cardinals late last season).

RichH55
12-22-2001, 07:41 AM
Originally posted by KempersRS
Wow, I didn't realized we were that biased. It's Alou without a doubt.


Sounds about right to me....Alou in this one


:hitless
All he cost is money? Well I can do better than that! I'm addition by subtraction baby...try and top that Mr. It only cost 9 million a year