I see no reason to single Pierre's 2005 season out as "awful". The difference was BA, and specifically singles, which I would attribute to a random fluctuation. Unless he's lost a step running to first, and I don't believe he has, I would expect him to revert to his career BA of ~.300 and OBA of ~.350. Not that great, but not awful.

Juan Pierre would improve the Cubs in 2006. He is an easy, obvious solution to a real problem.

We've been seeing easy, obvious "solutions" from Hendry a lot the last few years. On occasion he seems pretty creative, but for the most part his approach is one of "Our bullpen was bad. I must spend a lot of money on the bullpen."

I'm not supportive of acquiring Pierre at all, for a number of reasons. But I do think there's a good chance that he will be a positive contributor for the next couple of years. Also, while I agree that Michaels (or even Lofton or Patterson for that matter) would be better options, he does get to see an inordinate number of lefties and that has probably improved his stats.

CF is an interesting situation. It really seems like the Cubs only need a stop-gap for this season. That's why I'm against Pierre. There is no long term solution for RF in the minors right now (maybe Harvey, but he's years away). I think that should be more of a priority.

Odds and ends from Rosenthal's latest column (posted 2 hours ago):

A.J. Burnett update: The Cubs are unwilling to go five years . . . .

(snip)

The market for lesser free-agent outfielders like Wilson, Jeromy Burnitz and Juan Encarnacion isn't expected to take shape until after the Giles and Johnny Damon sign their new deals. The Cubs and Rangers are among the clubs that have expressed interest in Wilson. The Cubs have not pursued Giles, preferring to focus on Furcal. They also have yet to learn what the Marlins might want in a trade for center fielder Juan Pierre.

Yes, because it's not like we could ever sign Furcal and Giles. What's that? We could have? But we decided to spend $14 million on relievers instead? Oh, OK then.

On a different note, Rosenthal seems to think that the Pierre trade isn't as close to being done as some are reporting. Something has to happen today, though, if Howry is added to the 40-man.

Looks like Hendry may have found Murton's replacement -- er, platoon partner. From mlbtraderumors.com:

The word over at Bernie's Buzz via Viva El Birdos is that the Cubs have signed 35 year-old OF/1B/3B John Mabry to a one-year contract for $1MM. Mabry is coming off a poor season during which he hit .240/.295/.407 in 246 at-bats.

#4 on Mabry's B-R comp list? None other than our beloved Uncle Joey.

No idea whether this rumor is true but, really, why would you make this one up?

I have been a supporter from day one of the FREE JASON MICHAELS campaign.

<<I see no reason to single Pierre's 2005 season out as "awful". The difference was BA, and specifically singles, which I would attribute to a random fluctuation. Unless he's lost a step running to first, and I don't believe he has, I would expect him to revert to his career BA of ~.300 and OBA of ~.350. Not that great, but not awful.>>

Awful was a bit harsh - I guess Pierre's lack of extra-base power magnifies his flaws in my mind, but the .257 EQA he put up is adequate and, as you say, his seasons will fluctuate due to chance more than the average hitter. However, the fluctuations that a low BB, singles-hitter demonstrates isn't exactly something to recommend him either, as some wise comments to my previous post on Glendon Rusch pointed out. That's another reason I like Michaels better - he walks more than Pierre and has better extra-base power so his performance is more predictable. As you suggest, he is a lefty-masher, but his OBPs of .350, .361 and .363 against RHP the last three seasons aren't too shabby and for two to three million less than Pierre will fetch, I'm satisfied.

I agree with Ross. Michaels has a good OBP against righties, and hits lefties well. Pierre's OBP will be around .350, which is what Michaels has been getting against righties.

And I think he'd do a good job of balancing the the heavy slugging Pie gives us.

Michaels also was arrested for allegedly slugging a cop last year. He has a reputation as a hard partier, and the media has made some allusions to a drinking problem. This doesn't mean he can't play baseball next year, but I could understand a team wanting to keep this guy off their roster.

michaels is better than pierre? well that's damning with faint praise for sure.

pierre aside, i don't understand the obsession over michaels. he did OK in a platoon role last year, but by all acounts he was below average defensively last season. are you guys talking about getting him for 1 year? 2 years? a guy that is already below average in the field at a very very important defensive position does not seem to me like anything more than a stopgap solution, and i don't think you want to give up young players for a stopgap solution.

Michaels also was arrested for allegedly slugging a cop last year. He has a reputation as a hard partier, and the media has made some allusions to a drinking problem.

This makes me want Michaels even more.

I don't see the Cubs acquiring Michaels -- if anything, I see them taking another spin at Kenny Lofton.

I do think that Anderson Cooper might be an interesting alternative, however.

Shouldn't there be brackets around forget in the title?

Boy choosing between Juan Pierre and Kenny Lofton - it's like a contest for the most overrated player from 2003. Fans here 'win' either way, given the ferocious amount of credit Kenny Lofton is given for the Cubs run that year.

Let's not forget the Cubs will still need an additional OF after they find a RF anyways...all the more reason to go after Michaels. I like this idea. If they Mabry rumors are true, and if the Cubs were able to pry Michaels off of Gillick, we're looking at the first truly useful bench the Cubs have had in years. With only Neifi! to f things up (if used for anything more than the defensive replacement he is) this bench would almost be Dustiny proof as well. Hendry could be very close to being finished then:

1. sign Mabry
2. sign Furcal
3. trade for a quality RF
4. trade for Michaels

That's at least a 90 Win team if I ever saw one...with a little depth to boot.

Under that scenario, who do you anticipate would play LF and CF?

What *would* happen is that we'd see a platoon of Murton/Mabry in LF and Michaels/Patterson in CF, along with between 80-83 wins.