Building A Cubs Champion: 2010 Edition
Last year about this time, I made this post discussing what I thought should be the makeup of the 2009 Cubs.
Brave, isn't it, of me to post that link when I'd just as soon forget about it. I was shouted down and laughed at (people are still giving me grief for the Kevin Millar thing, and they were absolutely correct), and had the Cubs put that 25-man roster on the field last April, they'd undoubtedly have had a much worse season than they did in real life (case in point: Alex Hinshaw, who I thought was an up-and-coming LOOGY, threw only six major league innings in 2009, posting a 12.00 ERA).
So let me go about this project this year in a different sort of way. A year ago (actually, October 20, 2008 was the date I wrote the post about my proposed 2009 roster) we were all still stunned and angry that the 97-win team that had dominated the National League all season went three-and-out in the playoffs. This was before Lou's "we've gotta get more lefthanded" mantra led us to the Milton Bradley disaster, before popular favorites Kerry Wood and Mark DeRosa were let go, and a lot of us were wondering, "How can we make a team that good into one that will win 11 games in October?"
Jim Hendry and Co. were asking themselves the same question, obviously, but came up with the wrong answer. Without rehashing what we've rehashed all summer long, clearly, it didn't work -- and not just because of Hendry's moves, but because players like Alfonso Soriano, Geovany Soto and Mike Fontenot seriously underperformed their 2008 numbers by considerable margins and for various reasons, and because Aramis Ramirez, who is the Cubs' best hitter, missed 50 games with a dislocated shoulder and wasn't at full strength the rest of the season, eventually playing in only 82 games.
I believe in what new owner Tom Ricketts said at his introductory press conference: that the Cubs already have the talent that can win the World Series, and only need a few tweaks to bring the club back to pennant-contending level. I'm also going to assume that what we've heard about player payroll is correct: that it will be increased, if only "slightly", from 2009, and thus will wind up at (approximately) $145 million. That will rank third in baseball, behind the Yankees and Red Sox.
Thus, instead of trying to build a roster simply by picking pieces from here and there, let's use that $145 million to put together a winning team.
Let's begin with players we know will be with the team next year, and their payroll figures (all numbers from the excellent site Cot's Baseball Contracts). These players are under contract for 2010 and will definitely be on the team, followed by their contract amounts:
Alfonso Soriano, $19,000,000 Carlos Zambrano, $18,875,000 Aramis Ramirez, $16,500,000 Kosuke Fukudome, $14,000,000 Ryan Dempster, $13,500,000 Derrek Lee, $13,000,000 Ted Lilly, $13,000,000
That's $107,875,000 for seven players. The Cubs also owe Jeff Samardzija $1,000,000 on the major league portion of his deal (whether or not he throws a major league inning) and $500,000 to the long-ago-released Luis Vizcaino, who pitched 3.2 innings in a Cub uniform. We're now at $109,375,000, leaving "only" $35,625,000 for 18 more players to fill out the Opening Day 25-man roster. That means there are going to be a fair number of minimum-wage players in 2010, because among the players remaining, a number of them are arbitration-eligible, meaning they will be in line for raises.
The first order of business is to remove Milton Bradley from the premises. We have had many long debates about whether and for whom he should be traded, but I believe this is top priority for Jim Hendry and will happen sooner rather than later. Disagree if you wish, but I think the best of many not-so-great scenarios is to send him -- and Aaron Miles -- to the Giants for Aaron Rowand. Between Bradley and Miles, they are owed a total of $23.7 million; Rowand is owed $36 million. Since in doing a deal like this, you would be relieving the Giants, essentially, of $12 million (approximately) by taking the third year of Rowand's contract, Hendry should ask the Giants to split the difference and pay half of Rowand's 2012 contract, which would split the total dollars (approximately $60 million) between the two teams, about $30 million each.
This would also accomplish equalizing the 2010 payroll -- or come close -- to what Bradley and Miles would have been owed ($11.7 million) and what Rowand is owed ($12 million). I think the Giants would be willing to do this, because you are taking $6 million off their 2012 payroll, while leaving their 2010 and 2011 payrolls where they are now, since Bradley is owed $12 million in 2011.
I concede that Rowand has had two pretty poor offensive seasons in San Francisco (at least in part due to injuries). But in 2007, he had a fine hitting year in Philadelphia, and I believe that he has at least a chance to return to that level in Chicago. If you were looking at the possible acquisition of Rowand in a vacuum, you wouldn't do it -- but the necessity of removing Bradley from the team makes this probably about the best way to accomplish that. At best, this could turn into a Hundley-for-Grudzielanek-and-Karros sort of deal.
So, now the Cubs have a center fielder (with Fukudome moving back to his original position, right field, improving the outfield defense at two spots), but we are now at eight players and have only $23,625,000 left. They're fortunate that Geovany Soto is not yet arbitration-eligible, so let's say the Cubs bump him up to $825,000 from the $575,000 he made in 2009. That's a pretty good raise, given the bad year he had. Now we're at $22,800,000. Backup catcher Koyie Hill made $475,000 in 2009 and had a good year for a backup. Let's move him up to $600,000, leaving $22,200,000.
I'm going to leave the double-play combination alone for 2010. It's likely that by 2011, Starlin Castro will be the Cubs' starting shortstop -- but for now, because Lou and Jim like them, Jeff Baker and Ryan Theriot will return. Baker made $415,000 in 2009 and had a good run after he was acquired from Colorado -- one of Hendry's best moves last year. Let's pay him $500,000, and Theriot $700,000, both up from 2009. That's 12 players, and $21,000,000 remaining for the other 13 -- we're getting to the point where we can actually think about signing a free agent or two or making a deal.
Among our 12 signed players so far are nine hitters -- so, given the current fad of having 12 pitchers on your staff, we have room for four more offensive players. I like Andres Blanco and Sam Fuld -- both performed well in backup roles in 2009. Neither hits much, but both play outstanding defense and neither is going to be expected to start more than a handful of games. Fuld made $401,500 and Blanco $400,000 (the minimum) in 2009, and let's give them both raises to $425,000. We are at 14 players and have $20,050,000 left. We'll need one more outfielder and also a guy who could fill the role that was filled in 2007 and 2008 by Daryle Ward, and in 2009 by Micah Hoffpauir.
Sad to say, I'm non-tendering Micah. He's 30 in March and didn't really do well most of last year -- he's a one-dimensional player, since he's really not a very good outfielder, and didn't do well in the dimension (hitting) he was supposedly good at. Since we're no longer locked in to the "lefthanded" mantra of a year ago, the Cubs can put the minimum-wage Jake Fox -- bumped up to $500,000 for his good performance of a year ago -- in this slot, and re-sign Rowand's close friend Reed Johnson for $3 million to fill in when his buddy hits the brick wall at Wrigley too many times.
So, we now have $16,550,000 left for nine pitchers -- which means we're going to have to fill most of the bullpen with minimum-wage guys. That's actually fine with me -- look at the disaster that was Aaron Heilman last year (in my opinion, Heilman should be non-tendered) -- and the Cubs have a couple of real good prospects, in my opinion, to fill middle-relief roles in Justin Berg and Esmailin Caridad. They get the minimum $400,000 each, leaving $15,750,000 for seven more pitchers. It was reported earlier this week that the Cubs are negotiating a two-year deal with John Grabow; reported figures are "between $6.5 and $7.5 million" for the two years. Let's assume for this post that it's in between, and Grabow gets $3.5 million for 2010. We've got $12,250,000 left and six spots to fill on the pitching staff. Carlos Marmol is going to close; he made $575,000 in 2009, so let's bump him to $800,000. Angel Guzman will be his primary right-handed setup guy (Grabow's the lefty setup guy, or should be, if Lou would ever use him right). Guzman made $421,500 in 2009; he could be renewed at $500,000.
Our payroll drawer is nearly empty (you can almost count the remaining Benjamins, right?); we have $10,950,000 remaining and still need to fill three spots, one in the pen, and two in the starting rotation, and here's where it gets a bit dicey (and this is why I left this part for last). First, you can fill one of the starting spots with Randy Wells, who made the minimum last year and certainly deserves a raise; let's put him at $750,000 (or maybe even a bit less; he's renewable, meaning you don't have to give him that much of a raise until he's arb-eligible next year), leaving $10,200,000. The Cubs have five free agents: Rich Harden, John Grabow, Kevin Gregg, Chad Fox and Reed Johnson. I already re-signed Johnson and Grabow above; Gregg and Fox, thanks for your service, see you in another uniform next year (and please, Jim, not another minor-league invite for Chad Fox. He's done).
But what to do with Harden? If you offer him arbitration, he'll almost certainly accept. To paraphrase Longfellow's nursery rhyme, "When he's good, he's very, very good; when he's bad, he's horrid". If Harden accepts arbitration, he's likely to get pretty close to all the remaining dollars in the drawer -- so reluctantly, we say goodbye to Rich, without the arb offer, unless you can somehow agree ahead of time to get him to sign for $8 million or so. That's not unreasonable given his $7 million salary in 2009 and his mediocre performance.
For the sake of argument, then, let's say we have this $10,950,000 available for our two remaining spots. One of those spots is going to go to Sean Marshall, who, I believe, deserves another shot at the starting rotation after doing a good job as a swingman in 2009. Lou misused him as a LOOGY -- Marshall can clearly do better than getting one LH batter out -- and I'd like to see Sean, now 27 and with four major league seasons under his belt, get a shot at starting. Sean made $450,000 in 2009, and could be paid $600,000 in 2010. In this scenario Samardzija makes the team, likely because the Cubs are paying him the $1 million whether he makes it or not. Otherwise there are other possibilities, including Arizona Fall Leaguers John Gaub and Andrew Cashner, or maybe someone else who will have a good spring (and please, let's not have another David Patton scenario), for this final spot.
That leaves $10,350,000 (or just under $10 million if you use Gaub or Cashner, who would make the minimum). You could consider signing someone like Jon Garland, who just got his option declined by the Dodgers and is a free agent. Garland made $7.25 million in 2009 and had a "typical" Garland year, which is as an inning-eater; you could probably get him for about $8 million for 2010. Garland has made at least 32 starts for eight straight years, and has pitched no fewer than 191.2 innings in any of those eight. Doing that would take the pressure off the staff, especially if Ted Lilly isn't ready for Opening Day, and would let Marshall play the "swingman" role again. Or you could give that last rotation spot to Tom Gorzelanny, who made $433,000 in 2009, and save the money for a midseason acquisition.
Note that I haven't gone all DeRomantic here and proposed bringing back Mark DeRosa, although I think he'd still be a solid addition, even at age 35, for the right price, and a note in this St. Louis Post-Dispatch article indicates the Cubs may indeed make DeRo an offer. I also haven't retained Mike Fontenot, who could probably be traded -- I mentioned above non-tendering Heilman, but it may be possible that both Fontenot and Heilman could be dealt, even for low-level prospects. In fact, my 2010 team as proposed above has only two players (Rowand and Garland) who were not with the Cubs at some point in 2009 -- unless they decided not to go with Jake Fox in the bench role and instead signed a free agent (or one who soon will be) such as Ross Gload or Chad Tracy, whose option was declined by the Diamondbacks yesterday. Still, despite all the travails, injuries and bad performances in 2009, the Cubs won 83 games. With performances returning to career norms, better health and a little luck, just a few tweaks could have us returning to the postseason in 2010.
622 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not bad...
The only thing i wouldn’t be comfortable with is 5 outfielders who only play outfield. Last year we had the same thing with Gathright in the lineup and we know how that worked. I always believe your 5th outfielder should be able to play an infield spot too.
by RMRZisMYmanCRUSH on Nov 6, 2009 9:45 AM CST reply actions
That's why you keep Jake Fox...
… who can play LF also, as well as 3B and C.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
But that gives you 6 outfielders then?
Soriano, Fukudome, Rowand, Johnson and Fuld are your 5. Now throw Fox in there…? Too many.
by RMRZisMYmanCRUSH on Nov 6, 2009 10:13 AM CST up reply actions
Fox is there more to spell Ramirez and Lee, I would imagine.
In a pinch, he could be tossed to LF or RF. In extra innings, you have an emergency catcher, as well.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Fox is there to play multiple positions and be your late-inning PH.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
And that's probably his ceiling for this team, which is fine.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Though I've heard through the grapevine
That the Cubs do think he could be an everyday player – they still don’t know what position they want him to focus on playing, though.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Play every day while moving around the field at various positions?
Maybe.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I have no idea.
Just from what I heard, Fox was told in his exit meeting that the Cubs still had no idea on where he should focus defensively in winter ball.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Position
Just have him play all the positions – ala Bugs Bunny. LOL
I am not a Pirate! I am a Pre-Salvage Engineer. I get things before they get wet.
http://aleks-home.myminicity.com/
by horp the reckless on Nov 6, 2009 11:45 AM CST up reply actions
That I could be happy with
I imagine the first month Fox not getting much in the way of playing time but after that he could be playing 4 games out 7, which wouldn’t be too bad.
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
I do see Fox's value
I just think that would leave us pretty thin at the infield spots. Oh well, it’s just a best guess at this point.
I agree with others here that, although i really liked Reed’s performance these last two seasons, i think we can get about the same thing from Fuld, at a discount. And Fuld’s youth, if we develop him by playing him over these next couple seasons, gives us more financial flexibility in the future.
by RMRZisMYmanCRUSH on Nov 6, 2009 10:33 AM CST up reply actions
I don't think the Cubs would lack depth
A bench of Fox (corner IF), Fuld, Johnson, Blanco (middle IF) and Hill covers just about the entire field.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
It also might be time to get ARam a few games over at 1B
obviously a lot can happen by the time 2011 comes around (coughpujolscough) but isn’t the Vitters at 3B, move ARam to 1B still a plausible scenario? If so, is that 2011 or 2012?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Probably depends on how Vitters looks this year.
If he plays well at High-A and Double-A, I could see the timeline moving up to 2011; otherwise, I’d say 2012 is the year to look for Vitters at Wrigley, IMO.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
YES!!!
Maybe in spring training, but assuming Lee is healthy, there’s no way Lou would throw Ramirez out there at first base in season.
Given the fact that Ted Lilly is on the Cubs recovery time table
I would make signing Rich Harden my top priority with that $10 million left over.
Also I think that asking the Giants to take Bradley AND Miles AND split salary is probably unrealistic. I think you give them Miles instead of splitting salary, which I would do in a heartbeat. Though I think that if Harden isn’t coming back Hendry might have to try and get a starting pitcher back for Milton if possible. The starting pitching plan is what needs to be taken care of now.
Otherwise not a bad plan, though I wouldn’t be giving Geo that big a raise.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
agreed
after injuries, poor performance and controversy… i would think the cubs were being kind by paying him the same as last year.
by RMRZisMYmanCRUSH on Nov 6, 2009 9:54 AM CST up reply actions
You may have to change your sig
if the Rowand deal comes together ;)
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
Rich Harden ...
isn’t exactly the kind of injury insurance I would pay $10 million for.
Nice work!
However, unless we get DeRosa I’m not comfortable parting with Miles. :)
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
Don't Baker and Blanco kind of make DeRosa useless?
Baker showed he could play second, third, and first. Blanco can obviously handle both middle infield positions. I would say that Miles can go anyway, DeRosa might just be redundant.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
I was just kidding. You can put me in the anti-DeRosa camp.
Although I liked him and won’t be terribly upset if we got him, I think it’s a stupid idea.
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
The hinge in the whole premise is Rowland
What if the Rowland trade doesn’t materalize and we pick up someone different and possibly flip them in another deal? So much of our off season depends on getting rid of Bradley I think I’ll wait and see what happens there and go with my wants, needs and desires once that deal is made.
You made a good point of the money issues that will limit our off season. I wish I only had 10 million left after paying my bills.
This is only the beginning....Lou Pinella end of '07 season and Chicago Transit Authority (the band when they were really good).
Maybe he's thinking of Kelly...

Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Nov 6, 2009 1:20 PM CST up reply actions
Thanks Al.
Nicely stated. I also think Rowand would be our best bet in ridding ourselves of MB, but as nji stated above…I’m not sure the Giants take MB and Miles and split the salary.
Also, Rowand’s road splits were much better than home at 276/320/434, so maybe a change of scenery would get him closer to those 2007 numbers.
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
I've argued that Rowand can be a decent return on Bradley
but I don’t think he’s the best. If Bonderman is really out there, I’d rather take Bonderman and Mike Cameron than Rowand and Jon Garland.
Is he traded yet?
That'll cost you more money, probably.
I think I’d rather have Garland than Bonderman. Bonderman has more upside, possibly — but Garland will give you innings without getting hurt.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Because you KNOW someone's going to get hurt.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Which is why you have all three while only giving starting spots to two
and have other options in AAA.
Is he traded yet?
I'd rather have...
Mike Cameron and Rich Harden.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 6, 2009 4:27 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
... and as far as the cost is concerned...
I wouldn’t re-sign Reed Johnson, either. That’ll save you the difference in salaries between Harden and Garland.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 6, 2009 4:33 PM CST up reply actions
Not bad
One definite thing I would change though is not resign Johnson. Johnson and Fuld are redundant. With only 5 bench guys you need more flexibility. You have only one backup middle infielder and I’m not comfortable with Fox as the only backup for 1st base.
Agreed here.
I hope we can all agree that as long as Milton Bradley does not turn into Pat Burrell, it’s a win.
PHISH IS BACK!!!
HAMPTON, VA - MARCH 6, 7 and 8th!!!!
by TheBeerBaron on Nov 6, 2009 11:21 AM CST up reply actions
Well thought out
However, if there is $10M left as you speculate, I’d give serious thought to offering Harden arbitration.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 10:14 AM CST reply actions
I kind of like that idea, too
If he accepts, it takes a chunk. If not, you have a reserve for other moves, possibly into next season.
"When you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
Thanks for running all the money numbers in an easy-to-understand way.
My big question is on Harden. You say:
If you offer him arbitration, he’ll almost certainly accept.
Let’’s say you’re right (and I’m not sure you are) – why isn’t he tradeable on a one-year deal? I’d expect there to be a decent market for him on a one year deal.
Is he traded yet?
Depends on the amount of the deal, I'd guess.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
My thoughts exactly
If the Cubs don’t sign him, someone else certainly will. Arbitration will almost certainly set his pay lower than free agency. I realize other teams would probably rather kick in 1-2 Million than trade useful parts, but let’s look at the Cubs’ options on this:
1). Resign through arbitration and keep him at around $10M
2). Resign through arbitration and trade him for a few prospects or make an Iwamura type deal like the Rays just did
3). Offer him arbitration, Harden declines and signs elsewhere for more money, and the Cubs pick up an extra draft pick next year
4). Don’t offer arbitration and let him walk.
While option 1 is a risk, one year of Harden at $10M won’t kill us, may help us a ton (considering Lilly’s health), and if he has a strong first half, may net us more in a trade at the deadline than dealing him now.
Options 2 and 3 both result in the Cubs getting SOMETHING for Harden rather than nothing.
Given options 1-3, option for is simply unacceptable in my mind. I would try to sign and deal Harden before making decisions on guys like Johnson and Grabow. If we get stuck with Harden, maybe we look for cheaper options than Johnson and Grabow. I think we’d be fine even under that scenario.
by Bradsbeard on Nov 6, 2009 11:26 AM CST up reply actions 7 recs
Rec'd.
Just letting Harden walk would be a bad move… especially considering Lilly’s uncertainty, Z’s z-ness, and the (hopefully remote) possibility of a Wells sophomore slump.
Even if it turns out we dont’ NEED harden, it’d be nice to have him heading in to spring training and even the first month of the season in order to get a grip on what the real needs are, and then try to turn him (and his presumably cheaper than MLB value contract thanks to arb) in to whatever it is that we DO need.
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Nov 6, 2009 11:55 AM CST up reply actions
Agreed
Since Harden is a type B (still can’t believe it) that’s not going to lower his price significantly on the market. Some other team will be interested in signing him.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Actually I don't think you can do #2
I think there is a rule about trading a player who is offered arb but someone else must know these rules better than me.
I disagree that option 4 is that bad. It appears 10 million maybe the sum total of payroll flexibility and I for one don’t want to spend it all on an oft injured inconsistant pitcher who rarely goes late into games.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 6, 2009 2:09 PM CST up reply actions
You can cut them before the season and only have to pay 20% of their salary
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Only if you can literally prove they suck
Does anyone know the rule on arbitration signing and trades ?
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 6, 2009 2:27 PM CST up reply actions
What did Philly do with Polanco when he accepted arb?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 2:24 PM CST up reply actions
I questioned that,
but I couldn’t find a definite answer. Maybe that is why this seemingly obvious answer isn’t being kicked around as an option…
I think
that the Cubs main reason against offering arbitration is because they fear that he’ll accept. Doesn’t sound that bad on paper, but the problem is, if he accepts, the team doesn’t really have any maneuvering room for the rest of the offseason. By most indications, pre-Bradley deal, we have around 10 millin or so … at max. Even after a Bradley deal, best case expectations wouldn’t raise that amount by that much. If that gets eaten, then the Cubs wouldn’t be able to do anything without moving another deal.
For a comparison, I’d note the situation with the Braves back in 2002, when Greg Maddux surprised the Braves and accepted arbitration, leading to the Braves having to rush and deal Kevin Millwood for Johnny Estrada. What’s our backup plan if Harden accepts? Dealing Ted Lilly creates the hole that you are hoping bringing back Harden would do. Who else is a movable contract?
I’d love to offer arbitration to Harden, but for the most part, I just don’t think it’s the best idea anymore. Simply put, it limits the Cubs options way too much. Now, there is the possibility that a team just says, screw it, we’ll sign him pre-arb offer deadline since he’s Type B. That would be the perfect scenario, allowing us to collect the pick.
by toonsterwu on Nov 8, 2009 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Well argued
but I’m tired of missing the draft picks we could be getting.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 8, 2009 5:11 PM CST up reply actions
the wood decision
i still think, was a poor one partly made in the effort of showing gratitude to Wood, so that he wouldn’t have to turn it down and that he could still play good guy to the chicago crowd.
this one, i can’t complain that much about. particularly because it’s also only a supplemental pick – nice, but i’m not going to lose sleep over it.
Ideally, a team willing to spend says, screw it, and we pick up the pick anyways, with said team signing harden before arb offer time. Realistically, I doubt that would happen.
Chad Tracy is an excellent idea.
And if we’re going to get a CF like Rowand, or perhaps Mike Cameron, or let me continue to bang to gong for returning Felix Pie who would fit this team perfectly and is probably available – anyway, if we’re getting a true CF, and also if we’re giving a role to Fuld, then Reed Johnson has no real purpose. From an OF, you’ll want more pop, unless that CF is LH and you don’t trust Fuld to keep hitting LHP. Why not plug Chad Tracy into RJ’s slot?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 10:20 AM CST reply actions 2 recs
I would plug Tracy into Fox's spot.
Tracy can play just about every spot that Fox would (aside from 3B or C), and he may hit better over the course of the year. Of course, having Tracy and Fox on the roster gives you both a decent RH and LH bat of the bench.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Tracy can play 3B
and I don’t think the Cubs plan to keep Fox. Anyone want to make the case that the Cubs should give Snyder a chance before spending anything on Tracy?
Is he traded yet?
Isn't Snyder regulated to corner OF status?
Tracy wouldn’t be a bad signing, IMO.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Oh, BRAD Snyder?
Seriously? He’s going to be 29 next year — kind of a poor man’s Micah Hoffpauir.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
He's the one.
I don’t see him reaching Chicago aside from drastic measures necessitating it during the year.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
There's no such thing as a poor man's Micah Hoffpauir
I’m not advocating Snyder – just wondering if someone would.
Is he traded yet?
He certainly deserves a ST invite
"If I were playing third base and my mother were rounding third with the run that was going to beat us, I'd trip her. Oh, I'd pick her up and brush her off and say, 'Sorry, Mom,' but nobody beats me." ~ Leo Durocher
I think BLou's right on this one
If Piniella believed he was a viable option, he’d already have had a real shot.
I’m not sold on his endurance, either. I think a swingman is probably a decent role for him.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 10:30 AM CST up reply actions
Marshall isn't even a number five starter
He has the stuff to be a starter, but I’ve seen him get knocked around far too much in the first inning. No thanks.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
agreed on Marshall
I’d much rather go with Gorzo.
I've see Dan Haren get knocked around in the first inning.
For that matter, Carlos gets knocked around in the first inning, it seems, every other start.
Is he traded yet?
The problem with Marshall is you expect this every outing
It’s hard to win when you’re already down a few runs in the first inning.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Interesting thing about Marshall's split stats -
He has a lot of trouble in the 1st and 4th innings.
Is he traded yet?
at the end of last season there was talk of Harden developing a third pitch
and this was one reason why he was anxious to just “shut it down” for the year as he wanted to focus on 2010 and his new approach—or so I thought that was what was going on at the time.
do we really want to just toss Harden out? I think Harden will be more than willing to do a one year deal for $8 or so. If he can prove more durable and deliver 3 pitches and be more efficient in getting batters out, this is no time to sign a longer term deal elsewhere.
my guess is he stays and is well worth taking a chance on again. the guy has lots of upside and plenty of pitching coaches would love to work with him. I think the question is as much about whether Rothschild can get anything out of guys as much as it is whether you resign Harden.
"Truth hurts. Maybe not as much as jumping on a bicycle with the seat missing, but it hurts." - Leslie Nielson
I'm not against signing Harden
A one-year deal would be fine given the lack of pitching available on the free agent market. Harden has a proven track record with the club, but if he won’t accept a one-year deal, give it up. He’s not worth a multiyear deal in this economy.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
If we can sign anyone for $8 I'd do it
Lol
"If I were playing third base and my mother were rounding third with the run that was going to beat us, I'd trip her. Oh, I'd pick her up and brush her off and say, 'Sorry, Mom,' but nobody beats me." ~ Leo Durocher
Very plausible scenario, Al.
However, since – as mrcubsfan pointed out above – so much of this depends on trading MB for Rowand, you really didn’t discuss what happens if Rowand’s a bust. I understand why you think he’ll rebound with a change of scenery, but given his injury history and the past two years of hitting woes, it’s also very reasonable to think he’ll continue to spiral downward.
Are you comfortable with Reed/Fuld as a Plan B for the possibly much of the season?
Here’s where I think Hendry needs to keep some of that $10M in reserve for not necessarily a mid-season acquisition, but a Plan B acquisition at any time. And not just CF but I suppose 2B could be a season-long question mark too.
Another approach could be Hendry and Ricketts agreeing beforehand that this is the best way to spend our budget, but hey – we may need a little something something if somebody (Rowand, Baker, etc.) doesn’t work out. Ricketts being a businessman ought to be familiar with the concept of allowing for 10% contingency, although for the Cubs it’s probably more like 5%.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Hmmm
Al, I was with you until you got to Reed. You’ve said before that Reed would stay a Cub at a discount if Rowand is on the team. How is $3 million a discount for Reed Johnson (when Mark Kotsay is earning $1.5 million)? As I’ve said here before, Reed will not return, unless he takes a pay cut, if Rowand is on the team. Friendship or not, they’re too similar of players for the Cubs to spend millions on Johnson.
I also think the Cubs’ rotation will end up being Z, Demp, Lilly, Wells and Gorzo, with Marshall as the swingman. That’s enough insurance for an injury. I really don’t know why the Cubs would pay close to $10 million to keep Harden after the year he had, considering his injury history AND considering the other options already on the team.
Without Harden and Reed, the Cubs have close to $12 million to spend. I’d look long and hard for a top flight middle infielder, and use Baker as the utility man who can back up in the infield and (it’s been said) at the outfield corners.
That makes a lot more sense to me than spending money on a fourth outfielder and a injury-prone pitcher (or a pitcher like Garland who might be outperformed by Gorzo).
Oh, and why would you give Soto a significant raise? He’d just spend it on (ahem) donuts.
This all seems somewhat realistic, but would leave us with a terrible bench and a shallow pen
I’m still not sure I understand why we’d need Reed Johnson if you’re getting Aaron Rowand. It would make a lot more sense to get a true utility guy who can play outfield and infield positions. I’ve also got grave concerns with batless guys like Blanco and especially Sam Fuld getting called on to be dependable bench bats.
My recommendation:
Forget Rowand (why take all of that additional salary for a guy who at best is only as good as Reed Johnson?). Instead trade for Pat Burrell, and slot him in as your bench bat and backup 1b / LF, or release him or dump him off on an AL team eating half of what he’s owed. At least this way you’re only eating money in 2010 and you’ve got a clean slate after that (a much better option than having yet another long-term contract with an aging overpriced outfielder).
Then sign Rick Ankiel and Reed Johnson to cheap deals and have them platoon in center. Keep Mike Fontenot and yes, Aaron Heilman.
Based on their readiness for 2010, sign one of the following pitchers to a relatively cheap incentive-laden deal: Ben Sheets, Justin Duchscherer, Kelvim Escobar or Erik Bedard.
Bring in Billy Wagner on a cheap deal to be the closer, and put Marmol back in the setup role where you can use in more high-leverage situations.
Sign one of the many right-handed relievers that’s available just to give your pen some depth.
I like the idea of giving...
… your minor league guys who have shown promise a shot at the bullpen. We’ve seen what has happened with signing guys like Heilman, etc. — middle relievers seem easy to find. Why not use the money elsewhere?
You’re assuming Wagner would take a “cheap deal”. That might not be possible; he threw pretty well for the Red Sox and might be looking for bigger money.
The idea of an incentive-laden deal for one of the injured guys isn’t bad, but I think I’d rather have Jon Garland.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Agreed on Wagner
It’s pretty unlikely he signs for a cheap deal unless he goes unsigned until ST. Even then I think he retires than take a bargain non-closer deal
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
I think Wagner's more concered about racking up saves than money
You’re assuming Wagner would take a "cheap deal". That might not be possible; he threw pretty well for the Red Sox and might be looking for bigger money.
…as evidenced by him declining his 2010 option.
The Cubs might be the best team that has an open closer job. It’s a good fit for him.
If Duchscherer gets his personal issues ironed out
I like his name the best of those four. Though I think I would take any of them, worst case we just need them to be healthy until Lilly gets back which will hopefully be May 1st (June 1st on the Cubs scale).
Rick Ankiel makes me want to puke, but he serves the purpose of playing all three outfield positions with decent defense and perhaps Rudy Jaramillo can help his bat get back to what it was in 2008
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Ben Sheets is a bit too fragile
Sheets has good stuff, but we’ve been through the fragile pitcher thing far too much.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Have we really though?
The Cubs medical staff showed that they could keep Rich Harden healthy enough to put up good numbers in his 1.5 years with the Cubs, and I think Sheets is a much more durable pitcher than Harden, even with his injury
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
That's a good point
Ben Sheets in a Cubs uniform would get a lot of Brewers fans swearing. If he performs well, then it would be worth it.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Do we know that for sure?
Sheets didn’t pitch at all in 2009, and had more than 30 starts only once from 2005-2008. I don’t consider that “durable”.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Sheets and Sabathia in 2008
A bit like Spahn and Sain and pray for rain. They did get the Brewers into the postseason ion 2008.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
*in
Postseason ion must be some new discovery I’m not aware of.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
I call that 'recovering from an ijury'
Which is much different from injury-prone. The guy is still much more of a horse than Harden ever will be, even though Harden has more talent.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
I agree with you regarding Harden.
But I’d be leery of Sheets — why is it that no one else seems to be after him?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Economy, maybe?
It’s hard to take a chance on a guy who has been out for a full season. Look at how long it took Pedro Martinez to come back and the Phillies probably would have been better off not getting Pedro.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
No one was after him because they'd have to give the Brewers 2 draft picks if they signed him before the draft
That’s not worth taking a flier on him mid-season. I don’t think he would have been ready to help any teams afterwords either. Obviously the Cubs should look into his medicals but I think it would be a smart signing if there aren’t any red flags
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Sheets will probably go to Texas
If he is healthy. Been hanging around there with some obscure pitching coach he has worked with in the past.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 6, 2009 2:10 PM CST up reply actions
I think you're counting on too many cheap deals
though I like this thinking in general.
In specifics, I find it ironic that you’re touting Ankiel while putting Aaron Rowand down.
Ankiel’s UZR/150 was -12 last year and – 8.7 the year before. Ankiel’s OPS+ last year was 16 points lower than Rowand’s.
I’d rather try Jody Gerut than Ankiel.
Is he traded yet?
That and I hate getting St. Louis castoffs
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Y'know, Gerut caught my eye on the non-tender list posted in another thread.
I’ve always liked him.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Ankiel is much much cheaper
And is left-handed.
Aaron Rowand would cost 3 years and $21M than Pat Burrell in Al’s scenario; Ankiel should be available for a much more reasonable amount – I’m thinking a 1- or 2-year $4M / year deal.
Neither are very good, but a platoon of Johnson / Ankiel is the best center fielder available on a budget.
No, because an Ankiel/Johnson platoon in CF
is not better than a Fukudome/Johnson platoon in CF and a RF who can hit for power.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:14 PM CST up reply actions
Can Burrell hit for power anymore though?
We know he can’t play defense at all.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Burrell needs to make contact before he can hit for power....
Anyway, Burrell would not be the guy I’d put in RF if Dome and Johnson are in CF.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:19 PM CST up reply actions
I don't disagree, but who do you suggest?
It doesn’t seem like there are many good right fielders available on our budget.
Depends on our budget.
But if we just stick with Dome in CF, we have more trade options for Bradley for one. I’d still prefer Tracy to Ankiel.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
How is Tracy an alternative to Ankiel?
And you’re being a little ridiculous here – you’re shooting down the Ankiel / Johnson platoon with Fukudome in right because it’s not as good as a Fukudome / Johnson and some mystery man who you can’t name but are pretty sure is out there.
Tracy can play RF.
The names depend on the budget, and the Bradley return, but there’s Ordonez, Dye, Huff, Matsui, and guys hitting arbitration like Hermida.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 2:27 PM CST up reply actions
Hermida just got traded to the Red Sox
I don’t think Matsui and Huff can play in the outfield anymore (Huff hasn’t played there since 2006 and Matsui’s just a DH at this point).
That leaves Ordonez, which I don’t think is an awful deal (though remember that even though the money lines up, all of his salary is due this year which hamstrings the budget; you’d have to get the Tigers to pay his entire salary for 2010 in exchange for us paying Milton’s in 2011 – and I’m not sure why they’d be interested in doing that).
So that leaves the aging Dye, who has been terrible for 3 years in a row now (negative WAR in 2007 and 2009, 1.7 WAR in 2008). A full time Fukudome is a better alternative than him.
Matsui
agreed — if he could play right, do you think there’s any reason Jerry Hairston would have started a WS game?
Because he wouldn't be a good RF
but that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be worth it.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 2:40 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think he can stay healthy long enough to trot out there
He’s not the iron man he used to be, he’s an old man who’s falling apart. I’m not sure he’d even want a full time outfield position.
Same with Vlad, who I’m a little surprised you didn’t mention.
Matsui's OF defense is horrendous, when he can take the field
He’s almost as bad as Dunn
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
But on the plus side,
he doesn’t have a .285 OBP.
Before I take Ankiel seriously as an option, I need to hear why it’s better to go with him in CF and Dome in RF and Baker at 2B than Fontenot at 2B, Baker at RF and Dome at CF.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 3:34 PM CST up reply actions
Because in 2008 when he was last healthy
Ankiel absolutely crushed righties.
He’s not a viable everyday option. You only get him as a platoon partner for Johnson.
Playing Fontenot everday seems like a bad idea, since he can’t hit lefties. I can do the homework for you if you want, but this lineup is much better than the one you’re proposing:
CF: Ankiel / Johnson platoon
RF: Fukudome
2b: Baker / Fontenot platoon
Baker and Fontenot as everyday players would be overexposed.
Alright I've followed your argument.
Now tell me how it’s different than “Aaron Rowand was last healthy in 2007…” other than that Rowand wasn’t miserable when he was unhealthy – he was average.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 5:36 PM CST up reply actions
Higher upside, lower risk
Also, Ankiel is 2 years younger.
Ankiel won’t require the huge commitment in years and dollars that trading for Rowand will bring.
If he recovers, a good Ankiel + Reed Johnson platoon is better and cheaper than a full time Rowand, even if he does somehow improve.
He crushed lefties in 2008
I agree he’s not an everyday player but he has the potential to be a great platoon guy.
If he was a great hitter, we wouldn’t be able to afford him anyway. The Cubs will be working on a tight budget and will have to take some high risk / high reward players on the cheap.
Whoops - obviously I meant righties
Given that I’m suggesting he be used in a platoon, all that matters is his splits vs righties.
And again
Let me add that I’m not really a fan of Ankiel, but that, given our budget, our best bet for center is a platoon of him and Johnson, in the hopes that Ankiel’s poor 2009 was due to his injuries.
It’s a much cheaper and more realistic hope than that somehow Aaron Rowand will be worth $30M over the next 3 years.
matsui wants
to be a regular. Best fit for him might be in new york … with the mets, where he could get some of time and 1st base time.
"like Hermida"
You set the bar low with Rick Ankiel who had an OBP of .285 last year and bad CF defense. Do you want an exhaustive list of better options – because Hideki Matsui and Aubrey Huff are still better OF options than Rick Ankiel.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 2:46 PM CST up reply actions
I'd love to hear Pat Hughes screaming:
“A thrilla from Godzilla! The Sayonara Kid strikes again!”
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
That would be sweet
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Ankiel is only one injury-plagued season removed from posting a .900 OPS vs righties
It’s significantly less ridiculous to expect that again from him than it is to expect Aaron Rowand to suddenly stop sucking.
I'll also add
Hideki Matsui and Aubrey Huff are still better OF options than Rick Ankiel.
This is laughably ridiculous.
A Soriano / Fukudome / Matsui or Huff outfield would be the worst defensive outfield in baseball.
The last time Huff played in right he posted a -47.9 UZR/150. Matsui’s never posted a positive UZR at any outfield position, and that was about 13 injuries ago.
The damage a part-time Ankiel could cause is a lot more contained than putting some broken-down geezer in right field full time.
I must admit...
…this Burrell thing is still making the most sense to me from a financial perspective. I mean, I get that Rowand would fill our need for a centerfielder and that he might rebound offensively at Wrigley. But getting Burrell seems like the quickest and cleanest way for the Cubs to extricate themselves from the Bradley quagmire. My question is: In light of the Hardy-for-Gomez trade, could the Cubs afford Mike Cameron for centerfield following a Bradley-for-Burrell trade?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
No, because you're still on the hook for the same amount of money in 2010
The savings of the Burrell deal aren’t realized until 2011 unfortunately.
Hm, that sucks.
And I can’t stand Rick Ankiel, so that would be a bitter pill to swallow.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Well Al, I don't mean to rain on your parade, but...
…that’s what I’m going to do.
The Aaron Rowand deal might go through simply because the Giants want to get rid of him. However, this post does not take into account the possibility that no one may want Milton Bradley. It’s a minor possibility, but given the stink he caused in Chicago, I’d be hesitant to unload even the worst contract for him. And then including Aaron Miles in the deal? Aaron Miles is D-O-N-E. In 74 games, his triple slash line was .185/.224/.242 and a pathetic 21 OPS+. No GM in his right mind is going to take Aaron Miles, let alone in a package with Milton Bradley. We have a good chance to trade Bradley, but Miles is a contract that will likely have to be eaten.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
that's a good point
and another reason why the Cubs won’t have $3 million to spend on Reed Johnson (when they likely will have to pay $2.7 million to Miles).
The reason you put Miles in that deal...
… is that you are taking a significant amount of money from the Giants.
If you have to eat the contract — sure, but I think he could be included in such a deal for money reasons.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Here lies the problem
We’re not negotiating from a position of strength. If we were, then you might be able to get the Giants to agree to take Miles. I see Milton only lasting one season with the Giants because he’ll likely burn his bridges there too. Miles has absolutely no upside whatsoever and I’d want a player with upside in this deal if I were a GM.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
If I'm the Giants GM...
… and want to trim payroll, I’d see that as a way to do it, even if I have to take Miles.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Probably
You also essentially have Miles for one year. It’s a lot easier to DFA him if necessary. The Cubs were not in a position to DFA Miles in 2009.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
I'm glad you're not advocating to blow up the team here like last year
This was a good baseball team who had really crappy luck last year. They won 83 games despite the fact that Ramirez missed 50 games with the shoulder injury (and obviously wasn’t 100% for some time when he came back), Soto had epically bad luck, Fontenot and Bradley underperformed, Soriano fell off a cliff after he injured his knee, and pretty much the entire rotation was on the DL at some point during the season. I still think they’re a better team with Bradley and hope the Cubs keep him but I’m not kidding myself into thinking that he won’t be traded for garbage like Rowand. I’d love for the Cubs to re-sign Harden or go after Ben Sheets, myself
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
JJ Hardy———————→ Twins
Carlos Gomez———————> Brewers
Mike Cameron is definitely available now
The Twins just robbed the brewers
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Yep, according to @JonathanMayoB3 on the twitter machine.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Yep, just saw it.
Here’s the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Expect to hear that Cameron is in talks...
to join the Cubs by Monday,
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
that would certainly scuttle ...
any plans to get Rowand. I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. But what do you do with MB?
I've leave that to Hendry to figure out...
I’ve stated my opinion, in that the best deal out there for all is a Bradley for Castillo swap. Past that, I’m happy to just sit back, and watch Jim wiggle himself out of this one.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 11:11 AM CST up reply actions
It's not that bold....
Cameron is held in VERY high regard by Lou. I would truly be shocked if he didn’t insist that the Cubs at least investigate the possibility.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 11:12 AM CST up reply actions
Are you speculating or have you heard anything?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Let's just say that...
I know a man crush when I hear one, and leave it at that.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 11:13 AM CST up reply actions
And if they do sign Cameron...
… I suppose Bradley is probably traded for Bonderman or maybe Dontrelle Willis.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Now I think you're starting to get warmer...
n/t
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 11:14 AM CST up reply actions
Dontrelle Willis...
We really could have used him earlier in his career, but we traded him to the Marlins. Now I wouldn’t take Willis for a bucket of baseballs.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
The problem is...
… there really aren’t a lot of good options in dealing Bradley.
Willis has talent and is only 28 (in January). If he can get help for his psychological issues, he might still become a productive player.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Sounds like... Milton Bradley!
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Nov 6, 2009 12:01 PM CST up reply actions
Um...
… completely different kind of psychological issues. You’re minimizing them.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Not trying to minimize anything...
… just surprised you’d advocate swapping one headcase for an arguably less productive headcase.
Granted, Dontrelle’s issues are health, while MB’s seem to be more about his attitude… but Dontrelle’s have a more direct effect on his play. Its been over two years since he’s been anything close to effective, right?
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Nov 6, 2009 12:11 PM CST up reply actions
Right.
But — Zack Greinke had very similar issues to what Willis has, got help, and you’ve seen the results.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Greinke never struggled with his mechanics though
Watch Dontrelle’s delivery from the last couple years – he’s all out of whack, and his delivery has changed completely from his glory years.
Dontrelle’s got anxiety issues, sure, but he’s lost the flexibility to kick as high as he used to and that really messed up his delivery.
Not to worry...
…Get him under the crack tutelage of one Larry Rothschild and we’re golden!
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Eh, it's not the hardest problem to fix.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
Ugh I hit enter
He’s flying open with his glove hand. You’re supposed to end with it either at your breast, or inbetween your hip and bellybutton. Willis ends with it behind his ass. Also, when he comes to the arm slotted position he flies open there, too. That’s probably one of the easiest problems to fix though.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
Maybe so...
… but they’ve been TRYING to get Dontrelle help… i believe he’s come back twice now under the assumption that they’d gotten the anxiety and whatnot under control, only to discover they hadn’t. You’d have to believe that good doctors have already worked on the issue, and that the Tigers had already gone out of their way to help him.
How could we assume the Cubs would be able to fix a problem others hadn’t been able to? Isn’t that, again, what got the team in hot water with MB?
I’m not debating that Willis could get better mentally, or that he could be productive. I’m just questioning the thought process behind taking the same risks two years in a row with one of our major off season acquisitions, especially in light of how it worked out the first time.
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
I'm really surprised...
… that you can’t tell the difference between Willis’ problems and Bradley’s.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
Wrong, Al. I'm fully differentiating between their problems.
In fact, just a few comments up i stated:
Dontrelle’s issues are health, while MB’s seem to be more about his attitude
The sort of problems they each have have nothing to do with my greater point, which you aren’t addressing.
What i’m comparing here is the fact that they both have issues and how that should be a red flag. We are talking about a guy (in Willis) who’s head issues prevent him from reaching his true potential, much like MB. And while MB’s issues may be more likely to mess with the entirety of the team, Dontrelle’s have, for at LEAST the last two years, prevented him from reaching HIS true potential. He simply hasn’t been any good since this thing became a problem.
I’m not comparing their issues. I’m not comparing the impact their issues have on the game or their teams. I’m comparing the situation – bringing a guy who has well known mental problems – on to a team as a major acquisition, and just hoping for the best.
WHY would we want that to be our strategy again? What is the purpose of dumping a pain in the ass who can, at least in theory, contribute to the Cubs, for a decent enough guy who can’t contribute? How does that increase this team’s chances of winning a world series next year?
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
To expand on this comparison to MB...
… we all seemed to agree that Chicago wasn’t a great place for him because of the pressures and expectations and attention and media and all that.
Does that sound like a good situation for a guy with diagnosed social anxiety?
Dontrelle Willis is NOT a good fit for Chicago, beyond his pitching mechanics.
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
You & I will never agree on this.
Milton Bradley approached everything to do with Chicago with a chip on his shoulder, as if we were the enemy.
Dontrelle Willis, from all accounts, was an outgoing, fan-friendly player who was popular with fans, teammates and the media, before his social anxiety disorder manifested itself.
The latter can be fixed — ask Zack Greinke. The former, apparently, cannot. I still don’t understand why you can’t see the difference.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Yes, they are different "conditions", for lack of a better term
but I believe AJS is looking at this more from the team’s perspective than the specific condition of the individual. At least, I am.
And if Dontrelle Willis can be fixed a la Zack Greinke (if indeed they are even similar situations to begin with) then why hasn’t he? What gives you the hope that we (the Cubs) know something the Tigers don’t?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Maybe it takes time to "fix" this...
… more time than the Tigers have taken.
Obviously, Willis has problems beyond his psychological issues. Maybe those can be fixed, too.
I’m not necessarily advocating getting Willis, only that the Tigers might suggest taking his contract in a swap for Bradley.
If the Cubs deal with the Tigers, Jeremy Bonderman or Magglio Ordonez would be better options.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I think the argument I'd make is this:
Willis has a problem that may be fixable. Bradley does too, but his problems aren’t going to be worked out in Chicago (or so it seems). The issue is a lot of guys the Cubs are rumored to be dealing Bradley for just don’t have the ability to be worth their salaries. Willis does, if his issues can be worked out.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 7, 2009 9:51 AM CST up reply actions
I also agree...
that Bonderman or Ordonez would be better options. Actually, of all the (reasonable) names I’ve heard bandied about, I like those two the most. Hopefully Dave Dombrowski wants MB.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 7, 2009 9:56 AM CST up reply actions
I only suggested Rowand as one possibility.
The problem with Bonderman is that he may still be recovering from injury.
The problem with Ordonez is that he busts the 2010 budget. Although the TOTAL salary due Ordonez is less than the TOTAL salary due to Bradley, the 2010 figure for Maggs is much higher.
Perhaps the Cubs could get Ordonez to defer some salary to make the deal doable.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
They'll all have issues...
I just prefer the issues of Ordonez and Bonderman (and Willis, for that matter) to the the issues of Matthews, Rowand, and Burrell.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 7, 2009 10:06 AM CST up reply actions
On Matthews & Burrell...
… I agree completely.
If a deal with Detroit can’t be made, Rowand might be the only other alternative that is worth exploring.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
That may be...
Like I said, I hope Dombrowski is interested.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 7, 2009 10:30 AM CST up reply actions
Agreed also.
Bradley would probably be a good fit in Detroit; I think Leyland could handle him and they could DH him most of the time.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I can see the difference but disagree
Willis has issues with his mechanics as everyone always knew he would.
He seemed like a great kid but I think he is done because he has far to freaky a motion.
Milton on the other hand has massive anger management issues but boatload of talent. I don’t know about “fixing” him but there is no doubt in my mind he will be a good player for some team and Willis will not.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 7, 2009 9:45 AM CST up reply actions
You are more interested in ditching MB...
… than improving the team.
And you are blindly believing that Willis could be fixed because Greinke was, and somehow ignoring the fact that the Cubs just signed a guy who was a bit off in the head and COULDN’T fix him.
If the media, the pressure, the fans, the expectations, the whatever else wasn’t the right situation for MB, how would you even begin to think it’d be a good situation for the anxiety ridden Willis? What makes you think he could be fixed? Blind hope? Isn’t that what got us in trouble with MB?
Would you really have an ineffective and broken (both mentally and mechanically) guy who can’t contribute but is “outgoing, fan friendly and popular with the fans” than a pain in the ass who could contribute if things went well and could be sent home again if he won’t?
If the answer is yes, you’d rather have a likeable but worse team, than so be it. I can understand and appreciate that. People have different interests.
I just don’t see how that helps the team we cheer for win a world series….
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Nov 7, 2009 11:38 PM CST up reply actions
Again, I don't see how you can't see the difference...
… between a man who pissed off his teammates, the media, fans and management with his bizarre behavior, and someone who has a social anxiety disorder.
Perhaps it’s true that Dontrelle Willis’ talent is no longer major-league quality. I acknowledge that.
But there is no doubt that if the treatment for the disorder worked, he would be a far better teammate than Milton Bradley.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I think Willis's mechanical issues
are far less fixable than his anxiety problems
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Yep
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 8, 2009 10:27 AM CST up reply actions
Possible, I suppose.
Again, if those could be fixed, I’d much rather have him than Milton Bradley.
I can think of several others I’d rather have ahead of him, too.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
No one has fixed them in 3 years
Sorry but "anyone " ( Rowand, WIllis, Wells, Silva) but
Bradley attitude is not a good thing. Like I keep saying you really hate him that much or think he is totally useless just “give him away” to whoever will eat a couple million of the contract but don’t be surprised if he turns into Cedric Benson or at least a damn good player for another team that the Cubs dump.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 8, 2009 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
Ugh.
We are just talking in circles here.
You keep accusing me of not being able to see the difference.
I keep saying, in spite of the differences, which i’m fully aware of, there are also similarities, and it’s unwise to go down that road again.
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
I see your point...
… and respectfully disagree with you.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Can i ask why?
I understand that Willis has likely already hit bottom and that his problems are easier to pinpoint and (hypothetically) treat, but in reality, about as much progress has been made with that as has been made on getting Bradley’s issues under control…
I’d rather see the team simply cut MB or bench him for two years than use him to acquire a whole new set of problems, or a guy who would likely eat up a roster spot without returning anything.
And i REFUSE to believe that the MB situation was handled so poorly that the team can’t find at least SOME value for him, above cutting / benching / trading for a worthless player.
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
Well, Cameron appears...
to be regarded as just below a family by Lou. I don’t know what the deal is with Hendry. I’d hope that he’d have let that Willis man crush go by now, but who knows?
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 11:19 AM CST up reply actions
Cameron...
… on a one-year deal, might be worth it.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
This is one of those cases...
As being the guy with a camera and notebook helps.
I’ve seen very little deterioration in Cameron’s game over the last year. He appears in good health, has a real good attitude, and a very good work ethic. While I think a third year could be a sticking point, I think you’ll find a number of teams will have no qualms about offering him a multi-year deal.
Whether it’s the Cubs or elsewhere, I’d be looking at something more like a 2/15, with a third year option.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 11:26 AM CST up reply actions
He'd be very worth it
He’s been very valuable to the Brewers the past 2 years, especially on defense. He’ll drive us all crazy with his K totals though
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Have you heard anything on the long-talked-about Burrell trade?
Is that likely off the table now?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Haven't heard.
And hope it IS off the table, because Burrell is absolutely worthless to the Cubs.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Even as a bench guy?
(Not to mention relatively quick-and-easy way out of the Bradley mess.)
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Pat Burrell is a DH.
The NL doesn’t have the DH, so you’d have an expensive right-handed pinch-hitter who’d get maybe 100 at-bats.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I guess.
But, just for the sake of argument, couldn’t the same be said of Jake Fox and Micah Hoffpauir – who, together, took up space on the Cubs bench for the entire 2009 season? So the Cubs live with a less-than-ideal bench bat for a season but effectively minimize the terrible price of signing Milton Bradley. Or maybe you give Burrell a month or so and, if he truly looks awful, you release him – as the Padres did to Jim Edmonds in ’08.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
But it takes a $9 million bite out of the cap
plus the couple of million you are likely throwing to the Rays for Bradley.
That's better than taking on additional money to get Rowand though
It makes no sense to take on any money whatsoever to get a player as bad as Rowand, when you can get the nearly identical Reed Johnson for considerably less.
I would argue that Rowand has at least a chance at being better than Johnson.
His good years are far better than Johnson’s best years.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
That's a lot of money to spend on a chance
Especially a remote one, given that it will have been 3 years since he was good, and he’s on the wrong side of 30.
Honestly when you look at his stats, 2007 and 2004 stand out as a little flukish. Every other season he’s been a .750-ish OPS player with 13 or 14 home runs.
By what measure?
I’ve really poured over this and it’s astounding how similar they are. Rowand is a slightly better center fielder (both are about or very slightly below average). Offense-wise, they’re nearly identical – exact same career OPS, their EQAs for the last 2 years are identical (Rowand’s career EQA is about 10 points higher, presumably due to his 2 20+ home run years).
But they are astoundingly similar players. Even their splits vs lefties are identical (.840 OPS).
So I’d love to know – by what measure is Rowand clearly a better player than Reed Johnson? Wall collisions?
Johnson seems to me...
… to be only a platoon player, hitting LHP better.
Rowand hits LHP better, too, but is far better vs. RHP (.766 career OPS) than Johnson (.707 career OPS).
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
And that's why the Ankiel / Johnson platoon is the best option
I’ll add that Rowand’s better OPS against righties is almost entirely due to his higher ISO; as his power continues vanishing in the next few years, so will his advantage over Reed vs righties.
I don’t think either of them are good enough to be everyday outfielders, and Rowand gets paid too much to take the shallow end of the platoon.
You're also leaving out of this analysis that Rowand
was playing through the kind of injury most players sit for last year. You can’t determine he’s on a trend line with such a huge injury on the table.
Meanwhile, Ankiel has a history of being productive and then falling off the table. Leave that aside, and just focusing on his plate discipline, will it be any surprise if he doesn’t have another productive season with the bat?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:27 PM CST up reply actions
This is the kind of analysis that gives statheads a bad name.
Reed Johnson has mostly been a platoon player; Rowand has mostly been a full-time player. To ignore this is to undermine all the other comparisons you are doing.
And the fact of the matter is that Reed Johnson does not belong on the field when a RHP is on the mound and we need a 4th OF who can hit RHP, because it’s become clear that Dome definitely needs regular rest and Soriano will also probably need regular rest.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:25 PM CST up reply actions
How am I giving "staheads a bad name"
…by pointing out that they are nearly identical defensively, nearly identical against left handed pitching, and that the main difference between them vs righties is in their ISO, which has been trending down with Rowand?
Rowand’s appeal is way out of whack with his baseball abilities.
You are arguing that they are "nearly identical"
while skimming over something that’s a huge issue – how often they play. If Aaron Rowand played as little as RJ, his play would be better because he’d be less banged up and more rested.
The big issue here is whether you believe Rowand is on a definite trend on the past two years, or if you think his injury is dragging down his stats. If he’s trending down, then he will be a drag for three years. But it’s worth looking at his health records and seeing how much SF will pay.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:53 PM CST up reply actions
Wait, can you actually back that up?
I feel like you’re just hand-waving here. I could see the playing time thing going either way, everyday players would probably have an advantage over part-time players statistically just due to getting consistent playing time.
I have no idea which way that goes, but I suspect you don’t either.
All of Rowand’s peripherals have declined steadily in the last 2 years, especially his defense. He’s not young anymore, I just don’t see why you guys are enamored with a player who’s best-case scenario is mediocrity.
His best case scenario isn't mediocrity.
His best case scenario is still within his three year prediction window. That’s a .900 OPS with a 10 UZR.
His likely scenario is that he’s an average ML bat with slightly above average CF defense.
Yes, there is a downside, but all you’re talking is the downside.
Meanwhile, I’m surprised that you think hard-nosed players like Rowand and RJ aren’t affected by all their injuries.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
I guess I'm not sure what difference that would make
No one here is advocating getting Rowand as a platoon player, so if we’re talking a full-time Rowand vs a part-time Johnson, and Rowand playing full time hurts his stats because he can’t, um, soften up his nose, I’m not sure how that makes him the better option.
I’ve no doubt they’re affected by their injuries. If, in a part-time role, Reed Johnson is equal to a full-time Rowand, and costs 1/4th he price, how does Rowand come out as the better option? Rowand defying the odds and getting back into 2007 form isn’t worth the gamble of bringing him on for 3 years. He’s never put together back-to-back quality seasons, what makes you think that not only will he recover but he’ll recover for 3 good years?
I'm not arguing for Rowand either
If they were available, I think I would look at Bonderman/Willis. I’m still not convinced that Bradley will be moved either.
If we were so lucky...
We could unload Bradley on TB and then trade Burrell for something useful. A man could dream, right?
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
At $9 million for next year
I don’t think there will be many people willing to give anything for a 33 y.o. DH that hit .221 / .315 / .367. If the Cubs get Burrell, it is because no one else wanted Bradley.
How much money would we have to put in
to get Cleveland to swap Burrell for Wood?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:28 PM CST up reply actions
Flipping Burrell
I can’t conceive of a situation where Burrell could be flipped to an AL team. If an AL team wanted him as a DH, why not trade with the Rays, who obviously want to get rid of him? Likewise, if the Rays want Bradley more than Burrell, wouldn’t other AL teams? The DH market is flooded this offseason. You have Thome, Matsui, Blalock, Huff, and so on and so forth. I think the only way you take Burrell is if you are will to only let him platoon with Fukudome in right and be the power of the bench. Not a terrible situation as long as we can slip Fukudome, Fuld, or Johnson into right in the last inning when Burrell starts in the field.
Assuming it's a straight-up Bradley-for-Burrell deal
The Cubs could eat most or all of Burrell’s salary and still come out ahead financially.
All those DH options you list are LH.
Cleveland might have a good bit of playing time out there for Pat the Bat. But we know they won’t take Milton back.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:29 PM CST up reply actions
Bonderman is probably the lesser evil
In all the Bradley trade proposals being thrown around. He still has the most upside of anyone who’s been reasonably discussed. Willis on the other hand would be the worst pickup IMHO
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Willis is useless
He’s shown absolutely no signs of regaining any of his past talents – he hasn’t pitched even decently since 2006.
by Wreckard on Nov 6, 2009 1:24 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Officially?
There’s some time left. Unofficially, ….
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 11:13 AM CST up reply actions
No thanks
to me, he’s just Soriano lite. Same holes in his swing…better glove for CF though. Get him cheap, maybe.
Scott Bora$ is satan.
by Canadian Cubs Fan on Nov 6, 2009 11:37 AM CST up reply actions
possible
but i wouldn’t be surprised if cameron ends up in new york with the yankees. they pondered him before, and if he’s willing to take a short term deal, they might just prefer that. it would fit in their desires to go cheaper, particularly since holliday is unlikely to go to new york, and bay might end up sticking in boston.
Wow the Twins stole a SS
I guess the brewers believe in Escobar, but damn you would think they wanted a pitcher of some sort for Hardy
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Plus, doesn't Carlos Gomez have some attitude problems?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
He certainly doesn't come off as the greatest guy
He came off as quite the little showboat in our series against the Twins this year. His defense is amazing though.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Apparently, with Gomez in house...
… the Brewers are going to let Cameron go, and spend the difference on pitching. If they can.
Of course, Gomez has been pretty putrid offensively in Minnesota.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I could see Joel Piniero going to the Brewers
He fits what they are looking for.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
That wouldn't scare me too much.
I could see Piniero falling apart outside the watchful eye of Dave Duncan.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I was thinking the same thing.
In which case, I’m all for it – it hurts two division opponents with one move.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
I'm not going to be scared of him either
He probably wants about 4 years and 40 million I would guess, and that is fine for me. Of course the Mets might want him too.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
That seems like a match made in bad Mets contract heaven
Isn’t Marquis from that area?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
I believe he is.
In fact, I think he grew up a Mets fan.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I still wish he never went to St. Louis.
Duncan destroyed that dynamite slider of his.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
I hope they get him and I mean that in a nice way
I think it would be nice for him to be able to play where he lives.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 6, 2009 12:53 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking of.
I’d guess he’ll fit in quite well on the showboating Brewers, much to our collective annoyance.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Escobar does
Check out this article about him. What a jerk.
http://www.jimmyscottshighandtight.com/node/937
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Wow, if that's true, "jerk" is putting it mildly.
Very sad.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
This is a pretty plausible scenario, but I don't see the Cubs going into the season with only
one backup MI. I think they’ll bring someone in over keeping Johnson in a case like this. I don’t really see the value to keeping Johnson on this team. They have cheaper, equally as good options in house. Save the money he would take and use it elsewhere. I like the idea of signing Sheets or Bedard because we do have depth at SP and could afford to baby them a bit.
Great post, Al.
I always find it impressive when anyone can think things through this thoroughly – particularly keeping in mind the payroll, which I always struggle doing.
I noticed the Jon Garland thing yesterday, too, and agree that he’d be a nice option for a veteran No. 5 starter. And he’d enable the Cubs to preserve their rotation depth.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Al, you make it sound so easy.
Thank you for the very interesting article. I hope your FLP is better than last year’s.
However somehow “fill most of the bullpen with minimum-wage guys” sounds vaguely worrying. The one place I would not want to skimp on is pitching, in my humble and ignorant opinion.
Eamus Catuli
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
In reality...
… the only place I do that is with Berg and Caridad. The rest of the bullpen has experience: Grabow, Guzman, Marshall, etc.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
But Grabow, Guzman, Marshall, etc. aren't minimum wages players, surely?
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
They are close to minimum wage...
…. the point about “minimum wage” wasn’t necessarily the price, it was the experience.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Skimping on starting pitching = bad.
Skimping on relief pitchers = good. Relievers are way too hard to predict once you get past the Mariano Riveras and the Brad Lidges. (Did I just say Brad Lidge? I think that proves my point.) You’re better off trying internal options and seeing who sticks than trading for guys like Aaron Heilman.
You very well may be correct from an economic pov.
But I still find the thought a bit worrying – I am something of a small ball, pitchers duel, purist I suppose.
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
Wasn't the Mets problem injuries, not necessarily payroll?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Injuries and pitching
They had an All-Star DL.
Reyes, Beltran and Delgado missed significant time. Maine was out for a long time, also, and Wright had his concussion.
Oliver Perez was awful, Mike Pelfrey didn’t have as good of a year as they’d hoped and the bullpen was so-so at best.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 11:48 AM CST up reply actions
Yes, and why did they have an All-star DL?
Because they signed too many long-term contracts to players who’s value would be diminishing.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 12:07 PM CST up reply actions
The age issue plays into it for the Cubs too
Outside of Soto who will be 27 which isn’t exactly young, the Cubs position players are getting older. You have to expect more injuries.
Reyes, Wright and Maine are under 30
Beltran is 32.
Try again.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 1:26 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
And Delgado?
and Sheffield? Both old. Both big contracts.
Sheffield didn’t get old on the Mets. He has old when they signed him.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 1:48 PM CST up reply actions
I named 4 names, you named 2.
You haven’t really supported your claim yet. I think Minaya’s a terrible GM, but the players’ ages had little to do with their season.
Sheffield was signed because Manuel refused to give Church a chance to play regularly and Murphy struggled before being moved to 1B.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 1:58 PM CST up reply actions
It's not 2 vs 4
I’m saying the Cubs are starting to look like the Mets of this year. And some previous Mets team – bloated, inflexible payrolls with signed players on their last contract.
The player’s age is definitely a factor in their season over season performance. See Jeff Baluser, Mickey Morandini, and Henry Rodriguez.
The Mets lose Delgado and Sheffield for 2010. That alone may take them to a winning record.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 2:16 PM CST up reply actions
I see, but Sheffield wasn't in the original plan - he was added later
And I thought it was a mistake right away.
Certainly, an individual’s age is a factor, but what I’m saying is, a healthy Wright, Reyes and Beltran probably makes for a lot better season – regardless of how old the rest of the team is.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 2:36 PM CST up reply actions
um
what? losing delgado and sheffield will suddenly give them a winning record … particularly considering they would still have to replace sheffield’s production from last year.
if you want to argue that being at full health would put them at a winning record, fine. i don’t see how the act of losing carlos delgado and gary sheffield gives them a winning record, though. they still have issues in the rotation, pen, defensively, offensively … even at full health.
My 2 Cents on Rowand
My problem with getting Rowand is the 3 years on his deal, not the money per se. By 2012, hopefully Brett Jackson and/or Kyler Burke is ready to contribute, if not starting on the big league team. We’ll have three untradeable, old, overpaid veterans in the OF (Soriano, Rowand, Fukudome).
I think I would prefer platooning Burrell for a year than get stuck with 3 years of Rowand.
You'd groan at how bad Burrell's defense would be.
He’d be worse than Adam Dunn in RF, and not as good a hitter.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
What are you basing that on?
Burrell’s been a better defender than Dunn historically in left, that would project him to be better in right.
They’d both be awful though.
Burrell hasn't played any major league right field.
Except for one game.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Hey, that's what spring training is for!
(Semi-sarcasm?)
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
But you can predict right field defense by looking at someone's left field defense
There’s a pretty standard dropoff for all players going from left to right. A better left fielder will naturally be a better right fielder than a bad left fielder.
Both are bad but Burrell was better; I’d expect him to be a better right fielder as well.
Of course,
I’d rather not go Burrell if there were a better option. I’d rather go for Bonderman or Magglio Ordonez, but between Rowand and Burrell, I lean towards Burrell. He gets one or two starts a week in right max, gives us a good bench bat, spells Soriano in left maybe, is gone in a year (or traded to a desperate AL team later in the year).
Dat's what I'm sayin'.
Well, sorta. I’m not married to any of these Miltonian Doomsday Scenarios – but this one definitely appears the most expedient.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Agreed.
The Rowand thing seemed the most logical to me. Magglio Ordonez is another possibility, but that costs the Cubs a lot more, at least in 2010.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
The Rowand thing seems somewhat logical strategically...
…but I can still see Wreckard’s point about it being a bad move financially. I guess I just like the more cut-and-dried simplicity of the Burrell trade – even though, granted, Pat the Bat doesn’t exactly fit any of the Cubs’ needs.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
OK, so we have one proposal...
… that might not work moneywise, and another one that would get us a useless player.
The Maggs thing is looking better by the moment.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Maggs
It seems to make sense for the cash strapped Tigers too, moreso than the Rays who would be taking on more salary. Detroit can pay Ordonez $18M this year with a possible vesting option for $18M more in 2011 or they can take on a younger player with more upside for $21M over two years. Detroit doesn’t seem like a place where Bradley would be under too much scrutiny, I can kind of see Leyland handling him, and he can play OF better than Ordonez and rest up at DH once in a while. From the Cubs standpoint, we lose the headache and get a strong veteran contributor who won’t clog up the payroll for multiple years. They $18M is a big chunk, but if we can fit it into the budget I think it would be worth it.
I also think the Cubs can justify limiting Orodenez to around 400 at bats by making him split time with Soriano in left and Fukudome in right. This way all the “old” guys get more rest, and, hopefully, stay more productive as a result. I would think this could hold up to union scrutiny.
Yes, just like the Cubs this year
Alfonso Soriano, $19,000,000 – Injured
Carlos Zambrano, $18,875,000 – Injured
Aramis Ramirez, $16,500,000 – Injured
Kosuke Fukudome, $14,000,000 – Not Injured
Ryan Dempster, $13,500,000 – Injured
Derrek Lee, $13,000,000 – Not Injured
Ted Lilly, $13,000,000 – Injured
Injuries to key/high payroll players limits your options during the year. And which of these players will get better with age? But they’ll all keep getting paid.
Just bad decision making by the Cubs.
Does anyone see a core 4 here – Jeter, Rivera, Posada, Petitte? I don’t.
Doesn't an injury to a key/low-payroll player limit your options, too?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
No - you can trade around that
The Cardinals did not have DeRosa, Holliday, or Lugo at the start of the season. All 3 were acquired mid-year and started for them in the playoffs.
What moves did the Cubs make? 2 lefties from PIT? Why – no payroll room.
Both the Marlins and Twins had much lower payroll than the Cubs and both finished with better records. The Twins, winning their division.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 12:05 PM CST up reply actions
psst . . . "reply" is your friend
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 11:49 AM CST up reply actions
Sheesh.
Dempster’s injury was a freak.
You’re acting as if the Cubs will have $100 million + on the DL all year. All of those guys could be healthy and perform well in 2010.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
agreed on Demp
But the rest do have sustained injury histories …
Lilly?
Who didn’t miss a start his first two years with the Cubs?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
He is coming off shoulder surgery, Al
And he missed a month last year.
Right, but that's not...
… a “sustained injury history”.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
But the Cubs better plan for Soriano, Lee and Ramirez
to all miss 20 games. They are all getting older and have had issues in the past. Hopefully Hendry will start the season with a backup 3rd baseman unlike last year.
that's why you have another middle infielder on the bench
The problem last year was that no one on the roster had any MLB experience at third — except Aramis.
Well, I would guess...
…that, even if he “starts” at second base, he’d be starting in much the same way Mark DeRosa did – with the implicit caveat that he’d occasionally back up third base and perhaps first base and an outfield spot as necessary. At least that would seem the wisest use of him, IMHO.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Or they might not
It’s not just a large payroll, or injuries, or age, or a poor performance. It’s all four combined.
Too many things HAVE TO go right for the Cubs in 2010. Things have to go right because of the high payroll commitment. There is not much flexibility with that payroll.
Thanks for the link to the contracts. Love the numbers.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 1:20 PM CST up reply actions
Great Write Up Al
Loved the details. Hope it works out like this or at least close to it. You need to sneak in and see Rickets and get him to start reading this site. LOL
Remind me again – what does LOOGY stand for?
I am not a Pirate! I am a Pre-Salvage Engineer. I get things before they get wet.
http://aleks-home.myminicity.com/
by horp the reckless on Nov 6, 2009 11:47 AM CST reply actions
Or
Left-handed One Out GuY
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 11:50 AM CST up reply actions
OK, OK...
… so I missed the proper capitalization.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Just trying to help the horp
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 1:27 PM CST up reply actions
Thanks
Now it makes sense.
I am not a Pirate! I am a Pre-Salvage Engineer. I get things before they get wet.
http://aleks-home.myminicity.com/
by horp the reckless on Nov 6, 2009 11:50 AM CST up reply actions
Harden...
Here’s the thing with him. He doesn’t seem like the kind of guy that truly LOVES being here, and that would settle for a small one year deal. I just don’t get that impression from him. So in order for him to be enticed to take a 1 year, 8M deal, I think the Cubs are going to have to offer a pretty good second year option for him. Say, at 14M. But, for it to make sense for the Cubs, it wont kick in unless he has X amount of starts. Say, 25. That seems win-win to me. If he’s healthy, the ball is in his court to return in 2011.
Well, he's not exactly the most extroverted, emotional guy.
So it’s hard to get any sort of impression from him. I believe Rich has gone on record as saying he was quite comfortable with the conditioning program the Cubs had him on. In any case, I agree – I’d like to see the Cubs take a shot at keeping him.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Im good with Rowand
if it meant getting rid of MB and Miles.
I would put Marshall in the bullpen and Gorzo at the five spot.
Let Harden walk.
With those 8-10 Mil and instead of Wells in the four spot, why not trade him while his value is high. Wells + prospects for a two type starter. I don’t have a name yet but it should be looked into. I loved what Wells did last year, a really nice surprise, I just don’t think he can do it again. Now he might, its possible, but I rather flip him for more of a sure thing.
Chicago
Cubs
We are the better CC.
by Zy Toro Young on Nov 6, 2009 12:37 PM CST via mobile reply actions
Let us know when/if you come up with a name.
No one exactly jumps out to me.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
FYI
Here’s a complete list of this year’s free agents.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I think he's suggesting trading Wells (and, gulp, prospects) for a mysterious No. 2 starter.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I was thinking Wells and lower level prospects
for a proven vet. Couldn’t really find one better some of the free agents out there.
I wasn’t aiming this high but an intriguing name I saw was Brandon Webb. He has one year left at 8.5 and he won’t be traded now but at the deadline in July. Cost would be high but not as high as Halladay and can be just as good. I would trade Wells and anyone but Castro to get him. July should be fun.
Chicago
Cubs
We are the better CC.
by Zy Toro Young on Nov 6, 2009 2:12 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Hm, yeah, Webb's definitely a good choice.
For anyone who hasn’t heard, the D’Backs have picked up Webb’s option.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I think ZTY is talking about a mid-season acquisition
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 2:51 PM CST up reply actions
The team option they picked up
Is for next year. He has one year left but for 10 mil not 8.5(incentives reached).
Chicago
Cubs
We are the better CC.
by Zy Toro Young on Nov 6, 2009 3:03 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Take one from column A and two from column B... ;-)
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
Why are so many convinced that Wells is going to flop this year?
That amazes me. And to trade him? Come on.
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Nov 6, 2009 1:38 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not convinced
But I do think its possible that he might regress. He came out of nowhere and surprised everyone. As I said above, its possible he can have another good year but its unknown and somewhat of a risk. Are you convinced he will have another good year?
I’m not usually the ‘they had some success now trade em’ guy but I am in this case.
Chicago
Cubs
We are the better CC.
by Zy Toro Young on Nov 6, 2009 2:47 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
If there were any signs of a let down the 2nd half of last season...
….I might be a little less convinced, but 8-6 with a 3.32 ERA convinced me this kid is for real. Overall, 165 IP and a 3.05 ERA is pretty damn impressive.
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Nov 6, 2009 4:39 PM CST up reply actions
Expectations do need to be tempered.
I think 200 IP, 3.80-4.00 ERA is a reasonable expectation for him. That’s not as good as he was this year but it’s still a pretty valuable season.
Right.
Wells will likely have a career as an inning-eater, 4th or 5th starter. Nothing wrong with that.
Here’s a guy that I think Wells’ career will be similar to.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I like a lot of your ideas,
that is subject to change in 9 months. haha The one thing I was thinking while reading was why would the Giants take Bradley? Besides the obvious baggage, I think in order for MB to be successful he needs to be in a DH role. Despite playing way more in the field than I expected, don’t you think playing the field had something to do with the power drop?
Also, I’m starting to think that Z’s days as a Cub should be over. I have a completely unsubstantiated story of a Cub being at a bar (I believe the person I was talking with, I realize that doesn’t help the story much), saying that Z is disliked by the majority of his teammates and caused a few rumbles in the clubhouse. Bottom line, I’m beyond sick of his antics, I’d assume most of his teammates, coaches and organization feel the same. Please don’t come back with his stats; he is a really good pitcher, eats a lot of innings, and on any given night can be unhittable but at some point don’t the Cubs need to move on?
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
Well, given your rock-solid sourcing on that anecdote, we really have no choice, do we?
DUMP HIM, JIMBO!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Do it, Jim
Zambrano for Bradley…
Oh wait.

And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Is that you Kaplan?
I mean I think we should trade Z too. Go into the season with a rotation of Dempster, Wells, Shark, Gorzo, and Marshall. That is a playoff bound rotation if I’ve ever seen one. That bum Z can go be a good pitcher somewhere else.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Please do not call me Kaplan,
not a bad guy, but he seriously annoys me.
Few things…Dat cubfan, I gave a disclaimer before the story. I happened to believe it based on the person that told it to me, and I don’t think Z causing issues and starting fights sounds that far fetched, do you?
NJI, I’m not saying we should go into the season with the rotation mentioned above, if anyone would take Z we would be able to make a trade or sign other players with his nearly $19 million salary. Is there a market for him? Further, where have we gotten with Z as our ace, no where. Do you really feel comfortable with Z starting game one of a playoff series? I know Lou doesn’t.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
First I'll bet Lou wishes he could go back and start Z in game 1 in 2008
Second you cannot trade our top pitcher when we already have one guy on the DL. Zambrano is coming off a rough season, his trade value is low right now. He is most valuable to us, you won’t get much for him. You sure as hell won’t replace him for next season.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Hindsight is 20-20
I think most were ok with Dempster starting.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 2:38 PM CST up reply actions
Well he's good.....
if the power goes out and you need to light up a room
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
The Cubs have made the playoffs three times with Carlos Zambrano in their rotation.
And, yeah, I would feel comfortable with Z starting game one of a playoff series.
That said, I’d certainly entertain relatively realistic, well-thought-out trade scenarios involving Carlos. There have been a couple. But it sounds like you want to dump him because of hearsay involving his clubhouse popularity and your general dislike of his behavior. Sorry, I’m not buying.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
let's not forget
Z was quite good in Game 1 of the 2007 NLDS and pitched fine in Game 2 in 2008 (the defense let him down).
(I’m agreeing with you daver)
Yep - dumping just to dump him would be foolish
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 2:39 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not saying dump him for nothing
but getting rid of that salary to be able to add other players. I just don’t ever see the Cubs winning a World Series with someone as unstable as Z being the ace, I promise I hope I’m wrong.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
Maybe it would help if you stopped...
…considering him or waiting for him to become an ace. He is what he is – a good pitcher who struggles with his consistency, emotions and, lately, health. Losing his salary could absolutely free up a lot of dollars, but it could also leave the rotation in even worse shape.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I consider him an ace because he is paid like an ace.
I think his emotional state, and health issues which often come from a lack of commitment are more detrimental to the team than the overall benefit of being able to bring in other pitchers in either FA due to the free’d up salary space or through a trade.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
Fair enough - but you really do sound like David Kaplan.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I don't like the whole "he needs to play at the level he's paid" attitude.
Players are paid based on many, many factors. What they are not paid for is the performance they will give over the course of the contract. No one can predict that – not the GM, not the player, not the agent, not even bloggers.
When Ken Griffey Jr signed his contract with the Reds, people thought he had taken less than he should have gotten. When he left Cinci, people thought he was an overpaid disappointment. I doubt there was anyone more disappointed that Griffey didn’t live up to his potential than Griffey himself.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 9, 2009 5:30 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
People tend to underestimate the value of his batting as well
…which adds more than you’d think to his value.
Also: rec’d.
You would be comfortable
with Shark, Marshall, AND Gorzo all locked in the rotation???
Even with Lilly relieving one of them at some point, that’s a bit of a stretch.
Again,
the idea is you can go get more pitchers with Z’s salary space.
I appreciate your Griffey Jr comparison, but I don’t think Griffey was constantly hurt due to lack of preparation, actually cared when he didn’t perform up to his capabilities, and wasn’t a distraction constantly.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
Do you really know whether any of those things are true?
Also, I’d disagree that Carlos is a constant distraction. It only seems that way.
(By the way, you replied to the wrong comment.)
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I had a few to respond to, so I picked one.
As many say, perception is usually reality.
We disagree, and I don’t think that is changing. I don’t think the Cubs can win the world series with Z as the ace of the staff, and you do.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
That's not exactly what I think.
I think the Cubs could win the World Series with Carlos Zambrano in their starting rotation. Period.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
From your post above:
“The Cubs have made the playoffs three times with Carlos Zambrano in their rotation. And, yeah, I would feel comfortable with Z starting game one of a playoff series.”
Ace’s start series barring a scheduling issue, I can’t remember a team this decade that won a series without a legit #1. I don’t think that is Z.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
Um
I can’t remember a team this decade that won a series without a legit #1.
The 2008 Phillies just called.
If Cole Hamels is an ace then so is Zambrano
Cole Hamels’ career ERA+: 121
Carlos Zambrano’s career ERA+: 127
Maybe,
but at least in the playoffs and world series he was an ace, that is without question.
My original point has been lost through all of this…I’m just sick of the ups and downs with him. I want the Cubs to win World Series and I don’t believe with him as our ace that will happen. For the millionth time, I hope I’m wrong.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
And once in the playoffs David Eckstein was an MVP
I’m actually not saying that Hamels isn’t an ace, that title seems to be assigned or revoked arbitrarily when people want to find a problem with an otherwise good pitcher.
Z is a good pitcher, no question
but with his talent his career should be headed in the direction of having the “is he a HOFer or not” conversation. It isn’t anywhere near that conversation because of himself, and that distraction has become too much in my opinion.
Get something for him, use that 18-19 million a year we can free up on other pitchers. Don’t ask who, I’m too lazy and will leave that to Hendry.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
Again
Since when does “he’s not as good as he could be” mean that “he’s not good enough to keep around”.
Cubs fans like yourself have set up this false dichotomy that if he isn’t an ace he’s not worth keeping. He might be very slightly overpaid (it’s hard to value him because stats like $WAR don’t take hitting into account, and he’s one of the best-hitting pitchers in baseball) but I really don’t understand why that’s such a grave sin that we should get rid of him and replace him with someone worse.
If there was a guy at your work
that was paid the most based on potential, rarely worked hard, his production rarely matched what he was getting paid, constant distraction, would you resent him?
Further, please don’t say “Cubs fans like yourself”. I think we can all agree nothing is more annoying than any sports fan who judges other fans. Have your own opinions, try and sway mine based on your prospective and stats, anything beyond that I’m not interested.
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
But see that's just not true
Zambrano’s provided more value to the Cubs than he’s been paid for over the course of his career. His current salary isn’t all that far out of line with his production.
So to say that you just want him gone simply because he’s not worth what he’s paid is disingenuous. If Zambrano isn’t meeting your expectations, maybe the problem is your expectations, not Zambrano.
You obviously haven't read everything
I’ve written about this subject. I give up…
Chicago Cubs baseball is on the air...
I have
And your argument basically boils down to “he isn’t as good as he should be.” Never mind the fact that he pitches to the same level as other people you consider aces, or that if he was a free agent this season he’d be the best pitcher on the market (which means if you got rid of him, you’d be replacing him with an inferior pitcher).
Your hung up on this “ace” thing which as I said is just some arbitrary talking point that a certain contingency of Cubs fans have latched onto as being Zambrano’s “problem”.
I would trade Big Z but
there are not too many teams that want to take on his near $60MM contract.
I like what he can do. But he just didn’t do that enough in 09.
Z and Marmol look similar when the try to over-throw the slider and it ends up in the left-hand batter’s box.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 1:02 PM CST up reply actions
FYI
@Haudricourt: Brewers GM Doug Melvin confirms that Mike Cameron is out now with the trade for Gomez.
@Haudricourt = Tom Haudricourt, Brewers beat reporter
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
More good news from the Brewers camp:
@AdamMcCalvy: Also sounded like #Brewers will be players for LHP Mark Mulder. Fits “bounce back” mold that Milw. will have to target to improve pitching
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Wow
Mulder is a left-handed Mark Prior. He hasn’t pitched meaningful/healthy innings since 2005. Doug Melvin must like losing. How long until Prince Fielder is traded?
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
That really does seem like his only option for significantly improving their starting staff.
And it appears he really doesn’t want to pull the trigger. All the better for us, I suppose.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
It is what you call trying to compete with a low salary budget
The Brewers have to gamble and hope they get lucky with guys like this.
i really think
that they’ll try to lock down prince long term. there’s a lot of young pitching in the system in the lower levels that look really promising for the brewers. i think they’ll sign mulder and ponder dealing gamel for another young arm and hope to keep a core of say, fielder/braun/hart together and wait for the young pitching to develop.
they made a mistake, imo
they should’ve accepted the bowden for hardy deal. bowden should be a solid end of the rotation option at least, an upgrade from last year. sign a mulder if you want, or another injury guy, and go get a cheap center fielder.
Now that the Brewers are basically not bringing him back, Cubs need to strongly consider signing Mike Cameron.
He offers superb defense, good offense, and the ability to play center field, plus is perennially underrated and will come relatively cheap for his production. Fukudome moves back to right, we trade Bradley to whoever for whatever, Soriano (hopefully) comes back strong, and just like that we have a good outfield again.
At age 37?
with 156 Ks last season? The Cubs can grow the strikeouts internally.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 1:38 PM CST up reply actions
He's still one of the better defensive centerfielders in the National League.
And he hit 24 home runs to go with those strikeouts and wound up with an OPS+ of 108. Plus, the Cubs could move Kosuke back to right field, further improving the defense. If they can keep him to a two-year deal, Cameron would be one of the better options out there, IMHO.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
What's a realistic price tag for Cameron?
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Nov 6, 2009 1:39 PM CST up reply actions
Actually it was $10
The $7mm was in 2008, he had a $10mm option for 2009
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
The last four years he's been paid from 6.3 million to 7.3 million.
I’d say max he gets is 2 years at 10 million per.
Getting past the Rowand angle -
Everyone keeps focusing on the Aaron Rowand trade idea, despite the fact that Miles and Rosenthal both said we wouldn’t have to eat the whole salary. What if we thought about a trade more like this:
Bradley, Fox, and 6 M to the Mariners for
Jose Lopez
If I was the Mariners, I do this. So, why shouldn’t it be an option? Baker and Lopez compete for 2B playing time with Lopez playing 2B v. all LHP and Baker RF v. all LHP. We clear the money for a CF.
Is he traded yet?
Why?
The Mariners are going to trade away their 25 y.o. starting second baseman for a RF’er when they already have a RF’er and CF’er? Is Fox going to play 2nd for them next year?
I see this as another one of these trades that make sense because the Cubs want it.
The M's don't like Lopez.
See M’s fan Dave Cameron’s plan here. Bradley and Fox can play LF, DH, and 3B for them.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 6, 2009 1:58 PM CST up reply actions
His trade was for Danks
From M’s fan Dave Cameron’s plan “Trade Jose Lopez, Mark Lowe, and Jason Vargas to Chicago for John Danks.”
No way Kenny would do this. That’s a fantasy trade.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 8:50 PM CST up reply actions
Taking a quick look at Lopez's numbers, I like the idea.
But I don’t really know enough about the Mariners to weigh in on how realistic this would be.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
The problem with the make a splash theory
is that’s what the Cubs have been doing year after year:
Carlos Zambrano rhp – 5 years/$91.5M (2008-12), plus 2013 vesting option
Alfonso Soriano of – 8 years/$136M (2007-14)
Aramis Ramirez 3b – 5 years/$75M (2007-11), plus 2012 club option
Derrek Lee 1b – 5 years/$65M (2006-10)
Ryan Dempster rhp – 4 years/$52M (2009-12)
Ted Lilly lhp – 4 years/$40M (2007-10)
Kosuke Fukudome of – 4 years/$48M (2008-11)
Milton Bradley of – 3 years/$30M (2009-11)
Unfortunately, almost every move Hendry made before the 2009 season turned out bad – Bradley, Gregg, Miles, trade away DeRosa, trade for Heliman, trade away Marquis for Vizcaino.
In 2008, Hendry caught lightning in a bottle a couple of times – pick-up Reed, pick-up Edmonds.
And sometimes that’s what you need – some luck.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 9:11 PM CST up reply actions
don't really care for lopez
don’t buy the power surge and he’s an average 2nd baseman at best. if the power goes back down, he loses a lot of value.
I don't really care for him either.
I just think that if you aim low enough and offer a young player Lou has no use for (Fox), you shouldn’t have to eat that much of his contract.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 8, 2009 2:12 PM CST up reply actions
One big flaw in your numbers, Al.
You seem to be under the impression that the contracts of guys like Theriot and Marmol can simply be renewed for <$1 million. Those guys are arbitration-eligible and will probably get $4 million +
Really?
Neither Marmol nor Theriot had as good a year in 2009 as they did in 2008. For that to get a $4 million contract? Doubtful.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
You're right, of course...
But I do think your arbitration figures are pretty low.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 6, 2009 2:09 PM CST up reply actions
Kevin Gregg got 4.2 million last year.
After posting an ERA of 3.41 in ‘08. What was Marmol’s ERA last year? 3.41. I’d say 3.5 million to 4.5 million is a good estimate for him
And now that I look at some past arbitration results, I’m gonna set 3 million as my official guess for Theriot’s contract.
Guzman, Marshall, and Baker will also probably get at least a little more than you’re postulating.
And Johnson will get more than a 1-year $3 million deal now that he’s on the open market.
I don't know
enough about salary arbitration to make guesses at numbers.
That said, Gregg’s arb number in particular was surely inflated by his number of saves rather than ust based on ERA.
saves played a big factor
in gregg getting that arb number.
i don’t think reed will get more than a 1 year for 3 million in all honesty, in terms of aav, at least, not in terms of base. maybe with incentives. hard for me to see a backup of getting a high aav coming off an injury riddled season.
I hadn't read it - can you give a short description?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 1:59 PM CST up reply actions
***Deep breath***
He proposed reinventing the infamous Comiskey Park “Disco Demolition” incident at Wrigley Field as “Window Vista Demolition,” whereby we all bring our copies of Vista and destroy them. This suggestion was met with an endless succession of high-larious FAIL pics.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Thanks.
Dang, now I really wish I’d have clicked on it.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 2:10 PM CST up reply actions
Aw gee golly jilly winklers (or something like that) - sounds like it was fun...

Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
I didn't delete it.
Adam must have deleted it. Too bad — it was fun.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
What was it?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 2:06 PM CST up reply actions
But was it surreal?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
But they were grieved.
They wept greatly, saying, How shall we go to the Gentiles and preach the vista of the Windows of the Son of Gates? If they did not spare Him, how will they spare us?
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
2010 Champion?
The current Cub roster isn’t nearly good enough to compete for the NL crown. This team had a dismal record against teams with winning records and the only hope we have is to try to make some significant changes. It’s a shame that our lame GM gave NT contracts to Sorryano, Fuku, and Z. If any one of them would agree to waive their NT clauses, Hendry would be wise to pursue a trade. BTW, I know this won’t happen, but I would start with Sorryano. He is killing us both offensively and defensively. Too bad we can’t eat some of his contract and trade his sorry ass for Rowand.
Is that you BLou?
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Isn't that George Costanza's ...
back-up kid name?
How Lou dicrous
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
A quick thought on Garland...
I’ve always liked Garland since his days with the White Sox, but I’m not sure he’s someone the Cubs really need to be targeting. He’s extremely consistent, but I’m not sure how much the Cubs really needs a ~$8M inning-eater. He’s not that much better than Jason Marquis during any given year & we ran Marquis out of town. Barring an unforeseen injury, Garland will give you 6-7 innings/start of mid-4 ERA ball, but the Cubs starting rotation in 2009 already did this, if not exceeded it.
That said, I certainly wouldn’t complain to see Garland pitch for the Cubs in 2010—I only wonder if someone like Sean Marshall/Tom Gorzelanny + $6-8M spent elsewhere (or held in reserve in case we need to make a move to respond to injury) doesn’t make more sense.
Psh, Garland...
Let’s go get Matt Karchner back!
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
Some trades look bad in retrospect...
…but that one didn’t even make any sense at the time. A journeyman reliever for a 1st round pick who had barely a season in A ball?
I guess this is OT, maybe not
Maybe we should bring back Sammy, he’s looking good these days.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Horror show...
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
No kidding
Too soon, but . . . reminds me of MJ.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 3:54 PM CST up reply actions
Wow... so many questions!
Whats wrong with his face? Why is his jacket so shiny? Who is that woman? Whats wrong with HER face? Whats wrong with her CHEST? And on and on and on…
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
That would be Sammy's wife.
Here’s another photo of him with her from a year ago.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Looks like its been a rough year on BOTH of them.
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
Being out of baseball
been berry berry bad to Sammy.
"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." ~Winston Churchill
He looks like a clown.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
Does he amuse you?
Does he make you laugh?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 8:54 PM CST up reply actions
Al, I agree with most of this...
as your main premise this year seems to be to “stay the course.” I think that’s wise, given the strong nucleus of talent to build around and the lack of payroll flexibiltiy that comes with the contracts of the players that compose that nucleus.
The one thing I’d quibble with is the decision NOT to retain Harden. If you’re going to go after Jon Garland at ~$8M/season why not pony up the extra $1-2M it would take to retain Harden through arbitration? The problem with Harden is never his performance level, it’s in his health. Given the young arms in the system, I’m OK with paying a guy that’s not an innings eater. The Cubs have Cashner, Jackson, Marshall, Samarzija, and Gorzelanny. All those guys could be in the mix for the 5 spot in the Spring, and you’ll likely be able to do with having more than one in the rotation for periods when Harden (and/or others) are out with injury.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 6, 2009 4:00 PM CST reply actions
I also am not a fan of getting Rowand...
but the Cubs are sort of handcuffed there. I’d prefer they trade him for an overpriced injury risk type of player (such as Willis or Bonderman) and look elsewhere (Mike Cameron?) for CF. But I wouldn’t quibble too much with a deal for Rowand, as there are worse deals the Cubs have been rumored to be pursuing.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 6, 2009 4:11 PM CST up reply actions
Cashner and Jackson...
… project mostly as relievers, don’t they? And so does Samardzija, at least I think so, even if the brass differs.
You might be right about Harden; but again, even though he was (reasonably) healthy in 2009, he didn’t pitch well much of the time.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Harden had horrible luck in 2009
The HR/FB numbers he put up just weren’t sustainable. True talent wise he was easily the best pitcher on the staff
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
That's about right.
Harden’s results weren’t terrific early in 2009, but a lot of that was bad luck. We predicted his HR/FB numbers would come down, and lo and behold they did… and once they did he was an outstanding pitcher.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 6, 2009 10:36 PM CST up reply actions
I don't know, Al...
Every pitcher is going to have bad outings. You’d be hard-pressed to find a pitcher with a better record than Harden’s in terms of the ability they show when on the mound. Harden’s problem is staying on the mound, not what he does when on it. If you doubt he’ll stay healthy or be able to pitch enough innings to be worth a rotation slot, that’s a better argument.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 6, 2009 10:38 PM CST up reply actions
Harden...
… pitched virtually the same amount of time in 2009 that he did in 2008 — 26 starts to 25, almost the same # of innings and batters faced in both years.
In 2008, he had only ONE start that could be considered “a bad outing”. In 2009, he had at least six of those. Is that due to injury? What other explanation could there be?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Luck.
Harden’s K and BB rates were in line with his career totals. His LD rate was lower in 2009 than in 2008. His FB rate was lower His GB and IFFB rates were higher… yet somehow his BABIP against was higher. There’s a good chance the higher BABIP was due to luck. Similarly, his FB rate was lower, but his HR rate was higher. Again, there’s a good chance that was due to luck.
It’s not that he didn’t have bad outings — he did. But you have to look deeper than “how many bad outings” did he have. You have to try to ask “why did he have those bad outings,” and perhaps more importantly ask “can we expect him to continue to have them?” In Harden’s case the answers to those two questions appear to be “poor luck” and “not as much as last year.”
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 7, 2009 9:34 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
It's the HR/FB rate that's the equalizer for Harden
He gave up nearly twice as many HRs this season than his career numbers prior to it would suggest
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Yup, and...
when he was giving up a lot of HR’s early in the season, a high percentage of them were “just enough” HR’s and not many of them were “no doubters.” This is what you’d expect if the higher HR/FB rate was due to poor luck on fly balls.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 7, 2009 11:09 AM CST up reply actions
I think Cashner and Jackson both project as SPs.
Jackson definitely. There’s a little bit more uncertainty with Cashner I believe.
both cashner and jackson
will likely be worked as starters until they can’t do it. Cashner still needs to work on going deeper into games, and he has to improve his changeup. On the other hand, Jay Jackson has a solid starting pitching arsenal, although he has tighten up the control a tad. That said, Jay’s control issues aren’t on, say, the Donald Veal level.
It’s possible all three of our top arms (including Carpenter) end up in the pen, but at least with Carpenter and Jackson, there are two arms that project well enough, as of now, as starters, and Cashner will be worked there until he can’t. Considering his plus-plus fastball and potential plus slider, as long as Cashner has a show me change and can work deeper, he’ll have a shot.
Bitter?
Nah. I have been a Cubs fan for 54 years. Why should I be bitter?
Goody
next year I won’t have to worry about a summer internship or college applications crap, so I’m gonna be able to actually watch Cubs baseball.
Good thing I was too busy this summer to have to care
I'm a lefty, maybe Lou should give me a shot for a position in the bullpen!!
In Brief
Without reading all 300-some posts, my view is that the team as Al has constructed is going to be way too similar to the 2009 version. Money aside, that offense would be middle of the pack, or worse. Counting on the declining No. 12 is foolhardy…even if his contract might be prohibitive to do otherwise.
Likewise, I’d love to have Ramirez for a full 162 games, but we all know that isn’t likely. If he’s around for 140, the Cubs can consider themselves fortunate. How Soto bounces back from an awful 2009 is obviously a huge factor but to count on a full resurgence is probably not wise.
The Rowand for Bradley deal elicits little from me since everyone is on point about moving Bradley. However, no matter the addition by subtraction issue, the offense would likely be worse with Rowand in a full-time capacity.
I won’t touch on the pitching staff other than to say it needs work. Another top flight starter is needed if this club has visions of contending in the NL…and if Harden leaves, they’ll need two.
But for my money, and hopefully for the Ricketts’ money, I am a firm believer that they need to make a splash. They need to get in on the Bay or Holliday matters immediately….and worry about where each would play at a later date. Obviously you could stick one of them in RF and despite the UZR crap, they wouldn’t lose as many games for the Cubs as having a very mediocre offense that is similarly limited defensively. Of course the defensive point should be moot anyway if the team has the idea to continue to clog up the middle of the diamond with Theriot at SS.
I don’t care about the money. I don’t care about budgets. I want a winner in Wrigley Field and if the Ricketts seriously want to get within the bounds of competing, they are going to have to add players…and payroll. It’s that simple.
Who needs a stinkin' tag line? What are they for anyway?
No offense, but this is not a good plan
Where do you think the money is going to come from?
Another top flight starter is needed if this club has visions of contending in the NL…and if Harden leaves, they’ll need two.
But for my money, and hopefully for the Ricketts’ money, I am a firm believer that they need to make a splash. They need to get in on the Bay or Holliday matters immediately….and worry about where each would play at a later date. Obviously you could stick one of them in RF and despite the UZR crap, they wouldn’t lose as many games for the Cubs as having a very mediocre offense that is similarly limited defensively. Of course the defensive point should be moot anyway if the team has the idea to continue to clog up the middle of the diamond with Theriot at SS.
Go out and get a “big name” just for the sake of doing so? And damn the torpedoes, we’ll figure out where he plays later? Wow.
I don’t care about the money. I don’t care about budgets.
The owners do. Always fun to be cavalier with someone else’s wallet. This isn’t a public trust, you know. It’s still a business.
I want a winner in Wrigley Field
So do most of us. And not for one year. What you are proposing is neither realistic nor a recipe for long-term success.
BTW – Ramirez’s games played in 2006-2008: 157, 132, 149. Not Ripken, but hardly a paper tiger.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 4:42 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
You didn't have to tell us you didn't read all 300-some posts - it was pretty obvious...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Wow
Quit acting like you guys have the only ideas or that your popular idea may not be shared.
Ballhawk, shake your head all you want. Disagree all you want. But to insult an opinion is ignorant.
You guys act like Bay and Holliday are stiffs. That is hardly the case and both of them would be better in RF than anyone on the Cubs current roster, save Fukudome. You guys may not believe that offense is in serious need in Chicago, I tend to disagree.
As for the money, you guys can play fantasy GM all you want, the reality is that the money end of things is far out of your control. Unless of course you’re going to protest the club by refusing to spend a dollar on attending games, buying merchandise…etc. If you don’t believe the Ricketts should get in on the major offensive free agents, fine. I do.
And the hilarity of a long term fantasy about the Cubs being “winners” is just that. Win one title…just one…and then go from there. Then worry about creating the “dynasty” approach.
Who needs a stinkin' tag line? What are they for anyway?
Where to begin?
Ballhawk wasn’t “shaking his head” – that was DMCub.
After that . . . so much irony.
No one said either player was a stiff – implying that we did is absurd as your roster philosophy, which is analogous to, “Hey, Mauer is due for free agency soon – maybe he could play 2B for the Cubs if they don’t need a catcher. After all, get the bat first, then throw him somewhere in the field.”
YOU are the one playing fantasy GM. We’re talking about reality. The payroll is NOT going to be $200M.
Finally, throwing resources at an ill-conceived plan thinking that it will win just one title is “hilarious”. Spending wisely enhances the chance of winning. Spending haphazardly does not – and handicaps the team in the mid-term.
None of this is meant to be an insult, but this is simply not feasible. This isn’t an insult, either, nor a swipe at your credibility, but my guess is that you’ve been following the Cubs for about 10 years or so and the recent modicum of success has you antsy. This just isn’t the way to build a long-term successful organization.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 8:37 PM CST up reply actions
No one said either player was a stiff – implying that we did is absurd as your roster philosophy, which is analogous to, "Hey, Mauer is due for free agency soon – maybe he could play 2B for the Cubs if they don’t need a catcher. After all, get the bat first, then throw him somewhere in the field."
no, its absurd because the cubs are obviously going to trade baker patton and hoff for utley
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 6, 2009 9:01 PM CST up reply actions
jc for the win!
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 9:02 PM CST up reply actions
No insult to your opinion(s) was intended
I just take slight issue with the folks who come into threads and post their missives without bothering to read what’s already been posted. Even more so when the poster goes out of their way to announce that they haven’t bothered to read any of the other comments. Guess it’s just a societal failing of mine, but from my perspective, it gives off the sense that you might think the rest of the comments aren’t worthy of being read.
Granted, 300+ comments is a lot to read, but that only goes to show that a lot of people put a lot of time and effort into posting their thoughts and opinions on this topic. If you’re not going to read theirs, why should they read (and care) about yours?
I realize sometimes there may be extenuating circumstances for doing such a thing, and I’ve been guilty of being too quick to judge on this before. So if you had some valid reasons for not having the time to read all the previous comments, then I apologize for my previous sentiments.
But if not… well, maybe next time just don’t include a reference to not reading the other comments. You still get your opinion(s) out there and my feathers don’t get ruffled. Win win.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 6, 2009 10:02 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Didn't see that as overly insulting.
I just think it’s a terrible mentality. Seriously expecting everyone to read every post before offering their opinions is silly.
Well...
… I read every post, or at least try to, because it’s my site. I wouldn’t expect everyone to do that, but if you’re going to be part of the conversation, it’s respectful to at least try to see where it’s going.
Calling someone “dumb” isn’t my idea of good conversation, incidentally.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
So in other words...
If I have an opinion on something, but yet don’t get to the site until hours in the day go by, and someone else has already posted that same opinion, then don’t bother posting it because that conversation has already been had?
That’s ridiculous. If that’s how it’s going to be, then basically the only people who get to post their opinions are the ones who check the site multiple times per day and can post their thoughts shortly after a topic is brought up.
And I didn’t call ballhawk dumb; I said it was a dumb mentality to have.
No, I'm not saying that at all.
I’m just saying it wasn’t necessary to call it “dumb”.
Obviously, if there are 300 comments, taking the time to read them all would be very time-consuming.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
we obviously think different(ly)
If you don’t want to make the effort to read what others have already posted before posting your opinion, that’s fine. You have your modus operandi, I have mine.
It’s when someone comes right out and blatantly says “I didn’t read all the other posts”, that’s the part that tends to rankle me – and I think others as well. It just comes off poorly for reasons I outlined above. And I suppose I may come off poorly for being sensitive to such things. So be it – I yam what I yam…
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Sure, it would be nice
if we could go out and grab a john lackey this offseason, add a matt holliday. I’d love that … I could live with defensive replacements late in game for the of if need be.
and sure, people are only playing fantasy gm. Here’s hoping your dreams for 2010 come true. I just don’t see us jumping past the red sox and yankees to have the highest payroll in baseball, when the Ricketts will have to work to pay off that debt for many, many years. The simple act of raising payroll for 2010 was already more than i expected.
The problem with the make a splash theory
is that’s what the Cubs have been doing year after year:
Carlos Zambrano rhp – 5 years/$91.5M (2008-12), plus 2013 vesting option
Alfonso Soriano of – 8 years/$136M (2007-14)
Aramis Ramirez 3b – 5 years/$75M (2007-11), plus 2012 club option
Derrek Lee 1b – 5 years/$65M (2006-10)
Ryan Dempster rhp – 4 years/$52M (2009-12)
Ted Lilly lhp – 4 years/$40M (2007-10)
Kosuke Fukudome of – 4 years/$48M (2008-11)
Milton Bradley of – 3 years/$30M (2009-11)
Unfortunately, almost every move Hendry made before the 2009 season turned out bad – Bradley, Gregg, Miles, trade away DeRosa, trade for Heliman, trade away Marquis for Vizcaino.
In 2008, Hendry caught lightning in a bottle a couple of times – pick-up Reed, pick-up Edmonds.
And sometimes that’s what you need – some luck.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 6, 2009 9:16 PM CST up reply actions
LOL, great - sign the sexy name and ignore the reality of payroll.
Git ’er dunn, Jimbo!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
De-Ro = MOJO
The way I see it, just resign Derosa. He platoons 2nd with Fontenot, and RF with Fukodome, Reed Johnson plays CF, platooning with Fukodome when Derosa plays
RF…It’s no secret that Miles was a Cardinal, essentially we swapped players and they got the MOJO, time to get it back,ohhhh and yes, let Harden walk and sign Garland. The team really needs an innings guy, like Lilly and Dempster, to keep the bullpen fresh.
Forget Rowand forget Milton, Derosa’s presence is huge, trade Bradley for a PTBN
In today's homily, we talked about the works of St. DeRosa
We learned how St. DeRosa healed the sick, could bilocate and his chicken wings were just plain awesome.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Hey Hey - The first use of the BCB fail whale...
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
Hey Hey - The first use of the BCB fail whale...
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
Great post.
I offer Harden arb. first thing.
I know some are down on Dye, I like the guy, I am sure his UZR and WAR are down, however he is a run producer who would fit in the lineup. The only issue is what in the hell do you do with Bradley. I will spend my waking hours trying to figure it out with Dye in the lineup.
I would look into Garland as the 5 starter. I am not sold on Gorzo, Shark or Marshall as the 5th starter.
I am not high on Cameron because of the “K’s”, love the glove but to many swings and misses.
And the freaking Twins just stole Hardy.
A few names
Here a few names that might be available via trades/FA and why I think they are worthy of consideration.
1. Lead -off – Granderson, Upton, Crawford. (ask yourselves how many teams win without good lead off men
2. Second base – Uggla (has averaged 90 RBIs for the last 4 years)
3. SP – Javier Vasquez (eats innings and still very effective)
4. RP – Wagner (still throws 97)
i really still don't buy that granderson gets moved
they’ll slide sizemore in at 2nd, meaning that the only remaining major hole might be at shortstop and in the pen. I’m hard pressed to see them give up granderson to fill those two holes.
I’m also not sure the Rays deal Crawford, who’s a clubhouse leader there. Not impossible. Also, Crawford hasn’t played that much CF.
Javy Vazquez would be nice … but the Braves are looking for immediate offensive help. We don’t really match up.
Which is why Lowe for Bradley makes sense to me
and seems to be one of the best bad contracts to take back if offered,
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 8, 2009 2:13 PM CST up reply actions
if they are willing
i’m easily game … Bradley going into LF makes sense for them (assuming Heyward is up sooner than later).
I’m just not sure how game they are to put MB with those prized kids. That said, it’s possible.
Why would I ask myself when I can ask you?
ask yourselves how many teams win without good lead off men
Please answer this question and back it up with facts.
the somewhat funny thing is that
i don’t really even consider two of them to be good lead off options (Granderson/Upton). Passable to solid, sure. Not good, though. Both are, imo, better off hitting later in a lineup.
I enjoy that many Cubs fans want Granderson for leadoff
But think that Soriano is a terrible leadoff hitter.
by Wreckard on Nov 9, 2009 10:53 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Listen to Lilly
Ted Lilly, arguably the team’s most understated player, practically begged for them to bring back Derosa, he said he was the best teammate he had ever had, made it sound like basically, we lost a clubhouse “gel” guy and brought in a clubhouse turd that stunk it all up – CHEMISTRY is the key to consistency over a long season
I think you miss the point
Yeah. You get rid of a team player and a nice guy like Mark DeRosa and bring in a selfish jerk like Milton Bradley, it’s not going to be pretty. It looks like the team did just fine when Bradley was finally suspended, so it may have been just a case of kicking the buddy out and bringing the jerk in. Of course you’re gonna miss your buddy when you have to work with a jerk that won’t pull his own weight.
Now if the Cubs could get Mark DeRosa for cheap, I’d be all for it. The guy doesn’t have much upside at this point, but his batting average at Wrigley is good enough to where I wouldn’t mind it. There are better options out there than Mark DeRosa and the aim is to win a championship. As much as the guys like Mark DeRosa, did he help them win any championships? No. It didn’t help the Cardinals either.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
Whoa! Looks like I missed a party.
Agreed with Al on most everything except the Marshall Plan. He was well below average when he started. He shouldn’t be a LOOGY either. Also, I’m not a fan at all of the Rowand Plan. Don’t think he’d be the missing link.
Have a lovely weekend everyone.
Very well written, Al
Though when I read the first part, it makes me pretty upset that Hendry isnt being held accountable for what a lousy job he did in 09 and how poorly he spent in prior years.
I dont know how we can reasonably expect anything from Castro or Vitter anytime soon, given our dearth of hitting prospects, its not safe to assume they’ll contribute, which certainly compounds our problems.
I suppose we could do worse than Aaron Rowand for Bradley
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
I'm surprised we're not hearing...
WE NEEDZ ADAM LIND!!!!
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
OMG GETIT DON EJIM!1!!!1!
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 6, 2009 9:01 PM CST up reply actions
AND ROY HALLODAY!!!!!!!!!
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
I’t would be nice if Jim Hendry considered moving Big Z to the Dodgers. I think he would welcome the change of scenery. In exchange I would ask the Dodgers for Andre Ethier a solid left handed replacement for Milton Bradley. Ethiers 2009 salary for was 3.1 million. I’d also want the young clayton kershaw the 21 year old lefty that I believe would be a nice addition to our rotation. his salary for 09 was 404,000. Assuming the Dodgers really would want Carlos we could save an additional 15 million that could be used to acquire a leadoff man who can steal bases. My choice would be Jose Reyes from the Mets. He only played in 36 games last year and I look for his numbers to bounce back. his salary for 09 was 6.1 million so the Mets may be looking to deal him. That still would leave plenty of money for middle relief help or a another utility man like dero who I think the cubs sorely missed in 09.
I don't really get
who else you would be trading away. Turning Z into Reyes, Ethier, and Kershaw would be the most remarkable haul this decade.
No way, in that scenario they use the extra money to
Trade Fuld, Fox, and Derrek Lee to the Cardinals for Pujols and Carpenter. It’s a no brainer. GET IT DONE JIM
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
that's really nice
and if we could do that, ethier and kershaw for zambrano, i’d jump all over it.
That said, I don’t think the Dodgers would deal Kershaw straight up for Zambrano, even if we assumed Zambrano’s entire contract. Kershaw’s too good.
I think you've got an extra $500,000 to play with.
I read an article that when the Cubs went through bankruptcy (as part of the deal between Zell and the Ricketts family), the $500,000 owed to Vizcaino was wiped out. Assuming that actually happened in the bankruptcy (it would surprise me if Vizcaino didn’t try and fight that, but given that the bankruptcy went fairly quickly, it is unlikely any fighting occurred), there’s an extra half million available.
Amazing, isn’t it, that half a million dollars is minimal money at this level? Oh, for some talent at baseball (coupled with some youth)!
IF IT TAKES FOREVER!!
by Cubfansince1957 on Nov 7, 2009 12:33 AM CST reply actions
I reread the Cot's Baseball Cubs page.
That $500,000 was listed on a page where all the future obligations were listed. You might be right — or was the $500,000 also eliminated when the Indians signed him?
That does pay for another minimum wage player.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
ballhawk...
You are right on with bashing anyone for jumping in without reading the whole content of the thread. Each thread takes on a life of it’s own, and changes constantly.
well, I wouldn't want to call it bashing and it's not my intent for it to seem that way
I’d like to think it’s more like a gentle nudging on a good day, and a slightly grouchy “harumph” on a bad day, or anywhere in between. I’d say I was slightly grouchy yesterday…
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
speaking
of burrell anyone want tampa bay burrell shirts for 5 bucks? that shows you the kind of season he had here in tampa. but i doubt they would still be hard up enough to take bradley though. dont be surprised if crawford is available at the trade deadline next year so save some money.
Al, the more I look at your 2010 edition, the more I like it.
Maybe it’s just because you’ve found ways to retain my favorites(Johnson, Fuld) and rid us of the ones I’d rather take a pass on (Miles, Harden), but I’m sold .
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
Can't keep spending like a drunken sailor and acquiring 30-something veterans
There is NO FUTURE in that strategy. And if Al and others can’t see the fundamental flaws with this current roster that go WAY BEYOND simply adding another pricey veteran then I just don’t know what to say.
Hence why it is depressing that Tom Ricketts didnt’ simply cut to the chase and fire Jim Hendry right now. It is time to take a breather and build the organization and the team on the field the RIGHT WAY. That is going to take patience. Let some of these wretched contracts expire or try to move who you can move.
Aaron Rowand? God no. $36 million for a modest upgrade over Reed Johnson. Teams like the Yankees and Red Sox and Angels mock moves like this.
"Cubs will win 79 to 83 games." BLou (7/21/09)
Did you not even read what I wrote?
You’re not simply acquiring Rowand just to do it. You’d do it to get rid of Bradley, and the cost isn’t $36 million, it is at MOST $15 million (the difference between the total of the two contracts), or less if you can get the Giants to take Miles.
Firing Hendry? Well, he didn’t have a good offseason. But Ricketts is taking the right approach — he’s new to the baseball business, and wants to learn and see if the people in place can accomplish their mission. On the one hand you preach patience, on the other hand you say “fire right now!”
I’d hate to work for you.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Re: the question in your subject line, I'm gonna take a wild guess and say, "No."
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Spending
like a drunken sailor might be the equal to going out and hiring the slam dunk of a Sandy Alderson. Boy he really helped the Padres!!
“Alderson will come in with the Ricketts crew.” BLou (10/05/09)
BLou - here's the list of offseason events I customized just for you
actually, I didn’t have to customize them much at all – they all pretty much came from you. Just arrange them in order of most likely to happen and you’re all set.
- Cubs will swallow Bradley’s remaining $20 million whole as opposed to assuming an even nastier contract situation of the overrated and horrendously overpaid Aaron Rowand.
- Ricketts will simply cut to the chase and fire Jim Hendry NOW
- Cubs will skip the 2010 season
- Hendry will NEVER dip into free agency again
- Ricketts will build a player development system FIRST.
- Ricketts will hire a serious baseball man to be Jim Hendry’s boss.
- Hendry will outbid himself for some hack veteran free agent shortstop.
- Bud the Dud Selig will take a flamethrower to the umpires union
- Ricketts puts a padlock on Jim Hendry’s checkbook.
- To get rid of Milton, Cubs will take on somebody else’s baggage and bad contract
- Brian Cashman and Joe Girardi fully will move Phillip Hughes into the rotation next year
- Joba Chamberlain will be moved back to the pen in 2010.
- Yankees will bring Johnny Damon back on a one or two year deal.
- Hideki Matsui will be back with Yankees on a one year deal.
- Rip Taylor chokes to death during a bizarre confetti throwing mishap
- Ricketts family plays hardball with the neighborhood, Tom Tunney and Mayor Daley when it comes to renovation of Wrigley.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Al what about leadoff? How about Podsednik
The Cubs havent had a good leadoff hitter since Kenny Lofton was not re-signed. Thus condemning us to Corey Patterson and blowing the next season with endless solo home runs.
A true OBP guy who can steal. I like Podsednik., He played great for the Sox and can get on and steal and create opportunities for our RBI guys. He can play RF , average at best but no worse than Milton. He wouldnt cost a lot either. If you sign Cameron you have more K’s in the middle of the lineup. The top of the lineup needs work most. Soriano- Lee- Ramirez- Soto- Baker can drive in runs but need guys on base to drive in.
I would rather us dump Milton for pitching than take Rowand, who costs a lot and ties up the payroll long term and isnt a great OBP guy. Fukodome can play CF and bat second.
Then focus the money on upgrading the pitching. De Rosa could be re-signed to play 2b and help in the OF or maybe not..
Of the ideas floated above, I like Mags better than Rowand. But then you stil lhave the no OBP guys at the top of the lienup. This lineup needs speed and an igniter.
by cubsmakemecrazy on Nov 7, 2009 11:00 AM CST reply actions
Apparently Pods is looking for a 2/15 deal
(dying laughing) good luck with that one, Scott
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
No kidding.
I’d stay FAR away from Podsednik.
The Cubs HAVE a leadoff man. His name is Kosuke Fukudome. Just get on base. This misguided idea of “we need a speedy leadoff guy” harks back to the worst days of Dusty Baker.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Respectfully Disagree
Speed puts pressure on the defense. Fukodome has decent but not great OBP and cant run. We are always big and slow and wait for the HR.
Lou has said the problem last year was much fewer runs. A leadoff hitter who is a threat to steal second and third created scoring opportunities.
I think we have all forgotten how great Lofton set the table and what a difference maker he was those last few months he was here.
If not Pods, someone like him….
by cubsmakemecrazy on Nov 7, 2009 7:50 PM CST up reply actions
Lofton set the table because he could get on base, not because he could steal bases
I think we have all forgotten how awful Juan Pierre was, whose entire game was being a ‘threat’
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Nov 7, 2009 9:47 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
You and I don't often agree.
But you are 100% correct. Rec’d.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I was a big Kenny Lofton fan...
and wanted him kept around longer. But… the team actually scored fewer runs per game after they acquired him than before. The notion that he “sparked the offense” is a fallacy.
True,
but in general, you can’t deny that higher OBP at the top of the order -→ more runs scored in general
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
I seem to remember a fast guy on the team who is smart baserunner.
I think he crashes into walls and takes a lot of walks too.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 8, 2009 10:30 AM CST up reply actions
I don't share your optimism
I believe in what new owner Tom Ricketts said at his introductory press conference: that the Cubs already have the talent that can win the World Series, and only need a few tweaks to bring the club back to pennant-contending level.
It’s more like “had” the talent to contend. The OF is a horrible overpaid mess, the middle IF can’t defend well enough to win a pennant, nor can the middle relief keep a lead until the late innings. Not one pitcher resembles a #1 ace, with a fairly weak argument to be made for Lilly. The Phillies, Dodgers, Rockies, and the Cards will all be significantly better than the Cubs. Even if they’re fortunate enough to make it back to the playoffs they’ll most likely bow out without winning a game again. No dominant lefty pitchers to go against the Phils, or effective lefty hitters against the Dodgers/Cards power righties…..good luck.
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
Is it possible
to have a negative opinion about a team that failed miserably this past year without getting lambasted?
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
You mean a loaded question?
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
Hahaha
the middle IF can’t defend well enough to win a pennant,
Because if there’s one thing this year’s Yankees proved, it’s that a team with a poor-defending middle infield could never win the World Series.
They're an exception
The Cubs don’t have their pitching (includes best closer in history), or capable hitting to offset their defense.
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
We're talking about the Cubs here
When was the last time the Cubs were able to successfully overcome something like sub-standard defense and actually win something of value? i.e WS title..
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
Hmm. I can't decide which picture is more fitting, so I'll post both:

I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 10, 2009 3:57 PM CST up reply actions
You're moving the goalposts
Your initial statement indicated that a team with bad middle infield defense couldn’t win a pennant. I cited 2 of the last 4 World Series winners who both had subpar defensive middle infields.
And I'm saying
Nothing will change from this year’s team to next year’s team. Do you really think a veteran-laden, over-valued, overpaid team with no ace, with bad middle relievers, a horrible OF, no legitimate lead-off hitter, and erratic closer be able to overcome bad IF defense? Ricketts specifically mentioned the key to success is to build from within. He knows full well this team is a cluster**** right now, and has a long-term vision to right the ship. You keep telling yourself ‘10 is the year, just like ’09 and ’08, and I’ll have more of a realistic view.
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
What difference does overpaid make?
People get so caught up in that. It’s so strange, like they need their teams to be working-class heroes or something. Teams succeed all the time with overpriced players, see this year’s Yankees for an example – loaded with overpaid players but it doesn’t really matter if you’re winning.
What I do think is that we had a lot of players play way below their true talent levels this year and odds are they’ll go back to being themselves next year. I think that despite down years by Soriano, Soto, Fontenot, Ramirez, Bradley, Miles, and Harden that we managed to finish in 2nd place to a very over-achieving Cardinals team that will very likely get worse in the off-season.
I think calling a team a clusterfuck because of a severely, severely unlucky year is either hilariously ignorant or completely disingenuous.
I think you’re confusing wrist-slashing for realism.
It doesn't when they're performing
but unfortunately the entire outfield isn’t. For all we know, Soto could very well be a flash in the pan since he hasn’t enjoyed an extended amount of success at any level. Fonty will never come close to playing the way he did in ‘08 and will most likely be cut or traded. Bradley is as good as gone, while Miles is completely worthless beyond words. That leaves Soriano, who will undoubtedly get injured for an extended period of time and belongs in the AL. Aram is also injury prone, and there’s no guarantee that he’ll regain his pre-shoulder injury form. If he does, there’s a good chance he’ll get hurt again cause he’s on the wrong side of 30.
I believe you’re confusing delusion with optimism.
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
I guess
I completely disregarded the projection system that predicted the Cubs to win in ’10.
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
Realism
Calls for trying to find the best moves, within the constraints that you have (budget, contracts in place, etc.), to make your team as good as possible.
Noone here thinks that this means that the Cubs are all set for 2010. On the contrary, there are serious doubts with this team. However, there are also serious upside possibilities, and Doom and Gloom is not inherently more realistic than cautious optimism.
"When you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
Certainly
there’s a middle ground, but I think a lot of positive “moves” need to be made in the off-season for the Cubs to have a chance. With his hands tied, Hendry will be hard-pressed to accomplish some of these aforementioned moves. We’ll see if he can work some magic.
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
Stopped clocks, etc
Which do you think is right more often – you or a good projection system?
Hint: it’s not you.
Provide some proof
Then give me a link that projects a Cubs turnaround. Minus Soto (that’s if he takes baseball seriously), all of their declining veterans are now a year older or more apt to get re-injured. The blind optimism on this site is truly mind-numbing.
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
Here is a link
http://www.anothercubsblog.net/site/comments/2010-bill-james-projections/
The blind optimism on this site is truly mind-numbing.
Yes, I’m a blind optimist. Your stunning ability to peg people is rivaled only by your ability to use reason.
Give me a break
Jake Fox with the highest slugging on the team? Yeah, if pitchers exclusively threw him fastballs.
The team can’t count on Sori enough for him to compile 30 HRs and 3rd most ABs because of the inevitable injuries. Hell, he’s probably still not 100% healthy. He’s averaged exactly 113 game played the past two seasons. Sorry, not very likely to happen.
MB has averaged exactly 326 AB over his career- how in the heck does anyon expect him to get close to 150 more in ‘10? Well it doesn’t matter anyways, cause he’s almost as good as gone along with Harden.
Win Talent 83.4- did you just conveniently disregard this?
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
There were a lot of words in that article
Win Talent 83.4- did you just conveniently disregard this?
Words that you clearly didn’t read.
Well whatever. If you aren’t even going to read the articles you’re asking me to post then there really isn’t much hope that this discussion is going to go anywhere.
If only Bill James had your smug ability to intuitively predict player performance, he wouldn’t have to embarrass himself year after year with a projection system like this.
I'm sure
those predictions were similar to last year’s as well. No one could predict the Cubs meltdown, nor can those projections predict them winning a pennant.
The article was mostly filled with predictions on who will do what, but not much on why except this…
It’s pretty sad that the Cubs are going to let the best Cubs pitcher walk when they could sign him for around $10 million. Zambrano is projected to be the best among the other starters.
That directly goes against any turnaround for the Cubs, based on their roster now, in ’10. People like you who expect a better year with no significant changes are clearly delusional.
People who don’t care don’t respond, and people who do care do respond. Does that make sense Bronco fans trying to validate the trade?
I’m sure those predictions were similar to last year’s as well.
Are you? You’d be wrong.
That directly goes against any turnaround for the Cubs, based on their roster now, in ’10.
Did you paste the wrong quote there maybe? All that says is that the Cubs could be even better by signing Harden, which they won’t. I’m not sure how that supports your, er, point.
People like you who expect a better year with no significant changes are clearly delusional.
Once again you’re accusing facts of delusion. Bill James’ projection system has a Cubs team with no right fielder (literally – there is no right fielder in the table that calculates projected wins) and a bunch of replacement-level scrubs in the bullpen winning as many games as they won last year. To put that another way: this means that if Hendry didn’t make one single move in the off-season (and cut Bradley without getting anything back) the Cubs would, despite losing two of their best players, win as many games as last year, solely due to the improved play of the people who had off years in 2009.
At any rate the Eeyore act is getting a little old; I’ve given you what you asked for – a well-respected projection system by one of the smartest men in baseball which predicts the Cubs to improve. All you’ve really countered with is a lot of hand waving and “won’t happen”s.
Did Bill James predict the 2007 Rockies?
I don’t think so. Done deal sealed, end of discussion.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
Poor-defending middle infield? But... but... but... Jeter just won a Gold Glove!!!!
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Here's what i would think about doing....
I would look into the trade value of derek lee. I think the cubs should trade high in his situation. He’s coming off a phenomenal year and has a lot of value going into his contract year. Maybe we can get a good SP and a couple prospects in return?
I would then move ARam over to first base and go out and sign a third baseman (maybe mark derosa). Derosa could make up for the lost leadership in a DLee trade. Not only could we possibly pick up another good SP and a couple good prospects, we would also open up a few more million dollars to spend on the free agent market!
No
Lee is too valuable to this team. He’s the only healthy strong bat. The rotation does need some help but not enough to completely toss out the offense.
That’s just the offense. Want to see how bad Ryan Theriot REALLY is at SS? Replace your gold glove caliber 1B with a guy who has never played the position. See how many errors he can get in a month
"If I were playing third base and my mother were rounding third with the run that was going to beat us, I'd trip her. Oh, I'd pick her up and brush her off and say, 'Sorry, Mom,' but nobody beats me." ~ Leo Durocher
That’s just the offense. Want to see how bad Ryan Theriot REALLY is at SS? Replace your gold glove caliber 1B with a guy who has never played the position. See how many errors he can get in a month
itd kind of be like limbo… except with errors!
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 8, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions
on the whole
I’m not against shopping Derrek Lee … but I would only do it if the Cubs had something else lined up, someone better lined up, to take over at first base (fantasy would be Adrian Gonzalez). Otherwise, you are better off playing out the string with Derrek Lee and clearing his money from the books after next year, which is what I think will end up happening.
Agreed.
If Hendry could somehow turn Derrek Lee into Adrian Gonzalez, I would bronze a statue of Jimbo myself. And I’m a huge Derrek Lee fan.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Has anyone heard what Franklin Gutierrez's likely destination is this offseason?
If I remember, the Mariners only had him on a 1 year contract, and I haven’t noticed anything about them resigning him yet (though I may have just missed it).
Since no one has mentioned him, I assume he must not be an option. But he’s the kind of pickup I’d like to see in Wrigley this offseason. (Though admittedly, he’s due to make a lot more than the 450K he earned last year).
(I assume this is a reply to me?)
That’s what I had initially thought because I hadn’t heard much about him. But I know the Mariners traded for him in December ’08 and then resigned him to a year contract a few months later.
I looked on Cots and it says:
1 year/$0.455M (2009)
acquired by Seattle in three-way trade from Cleveland 12/10/08
signed by Seattle 3/1/09
I’m not sure how to read that. Is that a one year extension to the end of the 2010 season? I.e. the 1 year extension doesn’t take effect until the end of the contract acquired via the trade? Or is a one year contract signed in 2009 mean that is covers the 2009 season? I.e. he’s a free agent for the 2010 season?
I haven’t figured it out. Either way, I think Gutierrez would be a good, somewhat inexpensive pick up if it was possible to get him, whether this year or later.
by CubsWin!Oregon on Nov 8, 2009 12:36 AM CST up reply actions
His contract was up at the end of 2009...
… but he is still under club control. The only way the Cubs could get him is via trade, or if the Mariners non-tendered him.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Ah ok.
Thanks Al. I’m not very familiar with the nuances of baseball contracts, negotiating rights, etc. :) Thanks for the explanation.
by CubsWin!Oregon on Nov 8, 2009 12:29 PM CST up reply actions
Wood wasnt traded
he was a FA. Me thinks u made a typo Al.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Cubbie Tim!
I haven’t seen you in these parts in a while…though perhaps that has more to do with the fact that I haven’t been around in a while either. :)
Howdy! :)
by CubsWin!Oregon on Nov 8, 2009 12:34 PM CST up reply actions
How about this?
I propose the following three way trade:
Braves get: Milton Bradley, Aaron Miles
Dodgers get: Kelly Johnson, Derek Lowe
Cubs get: Juan Pierre (.308BA, .365OBP, 27 K, 27BB)
We need a fast leadoff man with speed that can play CF, and he could fit right in there. He’s tough to strike out and only doesn’t play in LA because of their surplus in the OF.
We should then do the other following moves:
—Re-sign Reed Johnson
—Sign Mark DeRosa to play 2B
—Trade for Adam Dunn to play RF
We can fit all of these moves in the budget. This gives us a line-up of:
Pierre CF
Theriot SS
Lee 1B
Dunn LF
Ramirez 3B
DeRosa 2B
Fukudome RF
Soriano LF
Soto C
Rotation: Zambrano, Lilly, Dempster, Wells, Samardzija/Marshall/Gorzellany
Pitching was not our problem last year—offense was. We should spend less time talking about the rotation and bullpen and talk about some big bats for our line-up. Replacing Bradley with washed up guys or signing stop gaps will not improve this team.
No thanks to Juan Pierre
The guy is just an offensive zero. His game is all speed, which doesn’t age well and isn’t valuable in this run-scoring environment. Also, you have 9 position players in that lineup. Soriano and Dunn can’t bloth play LF
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
You have two LF's
And nine batters without a DH or the pitcher’s spot.
Trading for Dunn is a waste, we have no spot for him. He knows LF and RF, both of which are taken up if you make the trade for Pierre. You can’t sit Fukudome, he’s our best OF’er.
"If I were playing third base and my mother were rounding third with the run that was going to beat us, I'd trip her. Oh, I'd pick her up and brush her off and say, 'Sorry, Mom,' but nobody beats me." ~ Leo Durocher
I'm not sure the Braves would want Bradley
due to Heyward likely taking over in RF soon. Also not sure that the Dodgers have the ability to take on that much money.
and I don’t really care for Pierre either.
♪♫ I wouldn't touch that plan with a thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole...Mr. Griiiiiiinch ♪♫
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by daver on Nov 9, 2009 10:05 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
random sunday thought
the money would match up well in this deal, but there is bradley’s off-field problems and kosuke’s no-trade to contend with among other things, but…
kosuke fukudome, milton bradley and a PTBNL to the braves for derek lowe, kelly johnson and ryan church.
church and johnson are both non-tender candidates and lowe could slot into harden’s spot in the rotation. this deal might make the braves too left-handed depending on what they do at 1B. johnson would likely be the starter at 2B and church would be a platoon CF/4th OF. RF could go to Colvin, Fox, Baker or the cubs could look at a low cost FA option like Xavier Nady.
No thanks.
Lowe had a crappy year last year and will be 37 in June. You’d be making the offense AND pitching worse.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I don't think the Braves take that deal
But how does adding a pitcher make the team worse? Lowe is 37 but has had a very consistent career to this point, and his peripherals were still pretty good in 09. I’d take Lowe over the Gorz/Marshall/F7 5th starter muddle in a heartbeat
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
statistically similar
Al, before you dismiss derek lowe take a look at his numbers compared to jon garland’s:
jon garland 204 IP – 9.9 H/9 – 1.0 HR/9 – 2.7 BB/9 – 4.8 K/9 – 1.79 K/BB
derek lowe 194.2 IP – 10.7 H/9 – 0.7 HR/9 – 2.9 BB9 – 5.1 K/9 – 1.76 K/BB
granted, lowe is far older than garland but he has had a solid career and has rebounded from poor seasons in the past. lowe led the league in hits allowed but he wasn’t helped any by the braves defense which wasn’t very good (as measured in uzr/150). the cubs infield defense rates much higher than the braves and for a ground ball pitcher like lowe that could make quite a difference.
by circuitclout on Nov 9, 2009 2:12 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
if the braves would do that
I’d do it. as noted in another thread, i buy that Lowe can be around a 4 FIP guy for the remainder of the deal. Would he be overpaid? Sure, but I doubt it’d be by that much. After 2010, you’d likely have to add another arm anyways, with Lilly becoming a FA. It would leave a big OF issue that would need to be addressed. I’d ask Kelly Johnson to be a 2nd/CF (played some CF in the minors) and platoon with someone, and utilize Ryan Church as a bench bat. That wouldn’t clear that much money for 2010, but 2011 would offer the org a ton of flexibility.
That said, I’m not sure that the Braves do that. I’m not real sure that regime would necessarily want Bradley there with key youngsters like Hanson and Heyward likely to be up and anchoring the organization in the near future. I’m also not sure that Fukudome/Bradley is enough of an offensive jolt, and do they really want to take on the Fukudome/Bradley contracts for 2011, even if we pay a chunk of it?
meant to have paranthesis around the likely to be up
another issue is that, when heyward comes up, that means they would have to either bench bradley or fukudome, which would make for an expensive bench player and could make for an uneasy clubhouse. add in fukudome’s no-trade protection.
short of it is, while i’d love it, i just don’t see it coming togehter.
I'll get around to some specific fantasy gm'ing at a latter time
What I am hoping to see, and what I believe we will see soon, is that Milton Bradley needs to be aggressively dealt. Everyone is focusing on this allowing Hendry to have a clear idea of how much he has to play with and to clear the issue from the deck of something to ponder. Another thing to keep in mind is that, there may be a lot of potential non-tenders this year. If that expands the FA market, our options with Milton Bradley would shrink.
After that, I would advocate taking a slow, patient approach. Let’s face it – this team isn’t, despite some wishes, going to go after most of the elite FA’s this offseason, due to a likely lack of money (there is room for one big deal if they really wanted it). This team also isn’t going to fire sale. Furthermore, there are few open spots that can be offered. If the non-tenders do bloat the FA market, as many anticipate, that could lead to good deals down the line. Although, what we may end up seeing/are seeing is a surge in early trading if some teams decide to pluck potential non-tenders (such as the Hermida and Hardy deals). It’s just tough to figure out how the offseason storylines will play at this early stage.
There are 4 main things I am ideally looking for this offseason – improved OF defense in some fashion, better bottom of the order hitting, a veteran pen arm, and a top of the order bat. I want more than OBP – I want a guy that can situationally hit, a guy who runs the bases well (doesn’t have to be a top notch speed guy). A lot with what we do in the OF will be dependent on the end result of a Milton Bradley deal. On a general note, while I am not against dealing any minor leaguer in the right deal, I’d rather hold onto all the guys and let a youth movement slowly take over, starting in 2011. Short of it is, I’d rather add some pieces, let this “core” play out, clear the contracts. I’d also like to add another starter, but that’s not a pressing issue.
I do think, though, that the OF is being prioritized, and part of this is the Starlin Castro effect in that the Cubs don’t want to block any spots for him. As such, I’m not completely sold on the idea that MB will be dealt for Rowand. I think the org is shooting higher on addressing the OF situation. On a side note, if you add Rowand, there’s no need for Reed. I just don’t see the purpose of putting the two of them together on the same bench, particularly with Fuld very likely to grab one backup OF spot.
Anyhow, I’ll get to some specific fantasy gm’ing at another time, but I wanted to toss out a name. If Marco Scutaro would take a 2 year deal for, say, 4 million a year to play 2nd and backup at shortstop, that’s something I might ponder this offseason. That said, he’s one of the better shortstops available, so I’d imagine someone would offer him a deal. As noted, I’m not against Jeff Baker as the starting 2nd baseman, and he is a guy that could fill one key area in improving the bottom of the lineup, but there are so few places that this team can fill holes at. I don’t think Scutaro is all that great, but he takes his walks, sees pitches, runs the bases well. That said, I wouldn’t go to 3 years on Scutaro, and I probably wouldn’t give him an AAV of more than 5 million a year.
On a side note, I do believe that the organization might not prioritize the top of the order as much, and may be focusing on an impact bat. I think that’s flawed, but everything suggests that they may be pondering seriously that approach. The reason I find that flawed is because even if you buy Fukudome as developing into a solid leadoff hitter, the question becomes … who hits 2nd? I mean, by default, it might Theriot, and that’s worrisome to me. The 5-7 spots could be improved with either
a) Healthy Soriano being better than last year
b) Baker being a capable offensive player
c) Soto bouncing back
Not ideal, but this isn’t an ideal offseason with many ideal answers out there. I’d prioritize adding another top of the order bat and hoping some combination of those three things happen and shore up the bottom of the order.
add one more to that list
d) Improving Fukudome’s bad slugging months would make him … a decent 5-7 spot bat. Granted, moving Fukudome down would require adding another top of the order bat.
Short of it is, the is some hope for internal improvement in the 5-7 holes, whereas the options at the top of the lineup are still limited.
I agree with a lot of your general take here.
I think a big question is whether or not Jim Hendry should be in a rush to trade Bradley. If Jim can wait until after one or both of Bay and Holliday sign, I think the market gets a lot better for Bradley – especially if Bay signs for 4/50 or more.
Say for example, we wait out the market and don’t change our team beyond minor bullpen pieces. The Giants lose out on Bay, and are left asking – do we re-sign Winn or trade for Bradley? How does it not make sense for them to trade, say, Kevin Frandsen, for Bradley and much of his contract?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 8, 2009 2:24 PM CST up reply actions
certainly, it's too early to guess some things
but what happens if my scenario occurs and non-tenders flood the market, something that has been rumored? Or what if teams continue being proactive about dealing for potential non-tenders?
the market for bay and holliday will be somewhat limited due to the costs, but if any of the two non-tender scenarios happen, that could potentially eat into any MB trade scenario. Of course, maybe the non-tender situation doesn’t happen, but when you factor in peace of mind and getting a clearer picture on what can happen in the offseason, an aggressive early move with MB still strikes me as the best approach to the situation.
While waiting may improve the the return we could get on Bradley...
… it also greatly increases the risk of us getting stuck with him. And I just don’t think the Cubs are prepared to deal with that possibility.
I seriously doubt Hendry waits out the market on this one. The perceived risk is just too great.
And I say “perceived” only because for me personally, I don’t think it would be as bad as most folks think it would be if MB were here next year. But whether or not something happens is based on what Hendry thinks, not me.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
pondering scutaro
and i don’t think it’s the worst idea if you can get him at 2 years and a reasonable AAV (and convince him to play 2nd, or move Riot to 2nd). That could be a potentially you could potentially land a 2nd top of the order bat option, allowing you to focus on spending more resources on an OF for the middle of the lineup.
Now, Scutaro isn’t ideal in any way/shape or form to begin with, but that’s magnified by his Type A status. I wouldn’t fork over a 2nd rounder for him, so have to wait and see how that plays out.
I'd steer clear of Scutaro.
He’s 34 and just had a career year — and at that, “only” a .789 OPS and 109 OPS+.
Someone is going to overpay him and get production resembling Neifi Perez. Let that someone be a team other than the Cubs.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
fit
Sure, he probably had a career year on the power front. I know that. But … he would bring another top of the order bat to the table. He walks, he sees pitches, he runs the bases fairly well. Age shouldn’t dramatically change things. It’s not as if he was tremendously lucky the last couple of years. Not ideal by any means, but there are few ideals. He also wouldn’t cost long term, in all likelihood. I wouldn’t go crazy and offer him more than 2 years or a huge AAV. But we’re most likely going to sign another middle infielder, and if Castro is ready next year, he becomes an expensive backup MI for a year.
That said, the two things about Scutaro would be
a) The Type A status would be an absolute no for me. Not even a 2nd round pick is worth Scutaro.
b) With so few quality shortstops available, I think he might find a shortstop job somewhere.
sort of a side comment
if we could get the Ryan Theriot of 2008, I could live with him as a top 2 spots in the lineup type of guy, though it’s not my preference.
okay, the aside part is that, sure, everyone knows that he started trying to drive balls a bit more last year. speaking to someone the other day, they intimated that one of the first tasks for rudy jaramillo would be theriot, as a pet project of sorts.
I guess I just have a hard time seeing an aggressive hitting coach like Rudy bringing back the Theriot of 2008. Theriot of 2008 saw 3.77 P/PA vs. his 3.68. While not a huge difference, there is a difference, and ideally, I’d like to see that number close to 3.8 or 3.9 if you want to use Theriot at the top of the order.
doesn't mean rudy can't help, or that theriot can't do it on his own
as noted, twas a side comment.
I feel strongly that Theriot is a sell-high candidate of the highest order.
If I have to choose between playing Theriot and playing Baker – it seems an obvious choice. But I don’t expect the Cubs see it the same way.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Nov 8, 2009 9:09 PM CST up reply actions
I'd like to rain on the parade a bit...
According to Cot’s, the following guys are arb-eligible:
Cotts – probable non-tender
Mármol – finished the season as closer, probably gets $3-4M
Riot – 2.5 years as starting SS, probably $1.5-2M
Koyie – at least $500K, possibly $600K
Marshall – both starting and relief success and LH, probably $800K-$1M
Gorzo – SP and LH, probably $1.5M
Guzman – set-up man with good numbers, probably $750K
Baker (Boras client) – projected starting 2B, good 2009 numbers, probably $800K
LBR might be a Super Two; if so, he would probably be non-tendered
If you keep these guys, you won’t have $6M for a SP, let alone DeRo (who I don’t think will be a Cub in 2010 even if Derrick Goold does). I think Gorzo, Marshall, and Spellcheck will have to cover #5 and Lilly’s spot unless Hendry gets lucky with a dumpster-dive.
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
i've run the numbers several times with different arb guesses
at the very low end, i usually come up with around 6 million to 8 million to work with, before dealing Bradley. at the high end, it can be around 10 million, if not a tad more, pre-Bradley. certainly, not much, but you might be able to sign a cheap veteran SP gamble if you wanted. For example, I’d still advocate Chien-Ming Wang, if he is let go, as has been speculated. That said, SP shouldn’t be a priority – other areas need to be addressed first.
Don't forget Fuld will only cost a little over $400.000
Same for Wells, I will be curious what happens with Soto. I don’t think he is arb eligible.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 9, 2009 12:28 AM CST up reply actions
Kiko Calero
that might be a cheap guy to pick up for the pen. Very productive season. Only a Type B, and considering history, might not be a costly pen signing.
3 things
1. Jeff Baker is not a starting 2nd baseman. I live in Co. and watched him w/ the Rockies. The o-fers and lousy defense aren’t worth the pop. We should be seriously considering O. Hudson or Felipe Lopez here, or even thinking about signing Miggy and moving Theriot back to 2nd.
2. How about Mike Gonzalez? With Grabow, would form a nice pair of leftys in the pen and give insurance for Marmol.
3. Anybody see a way to deal Soriano? How about packaging him w/ Vitters for Carlos Beltran?
re:
a) Baker was real solid offensively and defensively after he joined us. Miguel Tejada is a horrible shortstop and an average offensive player. I would much rather have Baker/Theriot than Theriot/Tejada at 2nd/SS respectively. I’m fairly confident that Baker can put up a similar offensive output to Tejada and be average at 2nd.
b) Mike Gonzalez, is a type A guy, I think. I’d like to add him, but not at the expense of a pick. I think Atlanta offers him arb.
c) I don’t see anyway someone takes Soriano without us eating basically the entire contract, considering the years left, the money left, and the down year. Soriano and Vitters for Beltran makes little sense for the Mets. They don’t need depth at 3rd, they have a slugging first baseman in Ike Davis. They’d have to find a CF and go with Soriano in LF, neither situation all that appealing in that park.
I'm pretty sure...
that the Cubs 1st-round pick is protected. So if they sign Gonzalez (they should if he’s cheap, but he won’t be) they would lose their 2nd-round pick and not their 1st-rounder.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Nov 9, 2009 7:16 PM CST up reply actions
yes i know
i wouldn’t give up a 2nd rounder for gonzalez either. i noted that specifically in another post. in short, i wouldn’t give up any pick for a reliever, not when the system has enough middle relief option, meaning that they could focus, pen wise, solely on one late inning addition, which should prevent a need from a pick.
personally, i think gonzalez ends up back in atlanta as their closer and they let soriano go.
I share concerns about Baker; but I'm also optimistic.
For me the real issue is comparing him to Theriot. Baker is like Theriot plus power, minus the annoying things – I’d rather trade Theriot and get a SS than get a 2B.
As for Soriano – it would be nice to swap him for Beltran somehow. I don’t think the Mets will do it – can we get Jose Reyes instead?
Is he traded yet?
Baker's defense looked fine to me - both at second base and at third base.
He didn’t get all that much regular playing time in Colorado, so maybe you just caught him on some bad days. And even if Jeff wins the starting second baseman’s job, I still think Lou will probably use him in a DeRosa-esque role – playing third base and some outfield.
And, seriously, why would the Mets give us Beltran for a monster contract like Soriano’s and a prospect – even a good one like Vitters?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Don't be to hasty . . .
Once they agree to that, Hendry tells Minaya that they have two third basemen, so he trades Miles for Wright.
GET IT DON EJIM!!
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 9, 2009 2:28 PM CST up reply actions
Baker plays a decent 2b, and it's nice that he has experience at 3b too, but I agree with you
He hit really well last year, but starting him every day next year would be a mistake in my opinion. He’s hit right-handers terribly in his career – his platoon splits are even bigger than Reed Johnson’s
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
I am trying to figure out who we would have to give up to sign Roy Halladay? The ideal situation woud be Carlos Zambrano but I don’t think he would agree to it. I think he would however agree to a trade to the Dodgers. It would be worth looking into to see what the Dogers would offer in return. I like Andre Ethier as a capable replacement For Bradley if they would be willing to let him go. His 09 salary was 3.1 million and we could probably get him in a two year deal for 10 million. The other longshot is Claton Kershaw who would compliment Ted lilly nicely. His salary for 09 was 404,000 and the Dodgers most likely won’t part with him. I mentioned earlier that Jose Reyes only played in 36 games last year and would be a great leadoff man for us who could steal a lot of bases. His 09 salary was in the 6 million range so the Mets will probably be looking to unload him. Maybe we have someone the Mets would like in return?
I don't think
a) that the Dodgers would contemplate an Ethier for Z swap, in all honesty.
b) that Minaya will deal Reyes when Omar’s likely in a make or break year, barring a ridiculous deal that is a detriment to the team adding Reyes.
Halladay isn’t that crazy, but it’s still a longshot.
I'm not sure I understand the point in suggesting these trades...
…if you think they’re unlikely – which they are. Highly.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
If you don’t at least raise the possibility, Then nothing ever gets considered. Heck maybe someone from the cubs actually takes the time to read these comments.
If they do, you may want to figure out the reply function so they know what you're talking about.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Hey-O!
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 10, 2009 3:32 PM CST up reply actions
$800,000...
seems a little low for Carlos Marmol. I would expect a figure closer to the $1.5 million to $2 million range, given his success out of the Cubs pen and the fact he’s already been named closer for 2010.
"I intend to live forever-- so far, so good." - Steven Wright
by Drunk Cubs Fan on Nov 11, 2009 12:03 PM CST reply actions

by 

























