Lee (fractures, 8-12 weeks) and Eyre (day to day) hurt

[srbin84]

Do you really think Prior, Guzman/Hill, Pie, and EPatt for Teixeira is a good deal?

 

I think it makes us a lot better for this year and next year, and that is why I would do it. It makes us legit World Series contenders and the Lee injury has no negative impact on the season.

 

Look at the lineup w/Lee:

 

Pierre

Walker

Lee

Teixeira

Ramirez

Barrett

Murton

Cedeno

Edited April 21, 2006 by srbin84

[RynoRules]

 

It has? How, aside from the Rolen deal--which was for a FA to be? They got fleeced on the Mulder deal.

 

To me, your proposal reeks a scent much more similar to the Nationals giving up Cliff Lee, Grady Sizemore and Brandon Phillips for Bartolo Colon. How is that trade working out for the Nationals?

 

In St. Louis's defense, everybody gets fleeced by Billy Beane in his trades. It's not really something to be surprised about.

 

Yeah, we really got hosed in that Miller for Barret deal.

 

Not.

[Danny82]

 

It has? How, aside from the Rolen deal--which was for a FA to be? They got fleeced on the Mulder deal.

 

To me, your proposal reeks a scent much more similar to the Nationals giving up Cliff Lee, Grady Sizemore and Brandon Phillips for Bartolo Colon. How is that trade working out for the Nationals?

 

In St. Louis's defense, everybody gets fleeced by Billy Beane in his trades. It's not really something to be surprised about.

 

They do?

 

I don't think the Cubs, Tigers, or Braves have been fleeced by Beane in their deals with him. In fact, they all appeared to have gotten the better of Beane.

[YearofDaCubs]

Come on guys let's be realistic. Texas isn't going to trade Teixeira for prospects. Cabrera from the Marlins isn't coming either. Unfortunately, at this momen there isn't much we could do and I don't see Hendry making these crazy trades either.

[mhuber92211]

I think calling those who are pessimistic or disappointed "trolls" is uncalled for.

 

Yeah, let's keep this thread non-personal, and not get the biggest news thread of the last couple years locked.

 

Oh for the love of God. I never insinuated or called any of the gloomy people "trolls". I merely pointed out that the lack of sucess of the Cubs will lead to less trolls.

 

I understand that people are upset and take it out on others, but why read into things that aren't there. If you have a question about what someone writes or their intention, ASK them before labeling what they say.

[Rooftop Bum]

Eh, we should just sell the farm for Miquel Cabrera.

[mhuber92211]

For all those people saying the season is over and tossing in the towel, they sure are coming up with a lot of solutions and a lot of posts. I guess NSBB won't be as busy in the coming weeks because so many people aren't goimg to be interested. Oh well, less trolls i guess.

 

Dude, get over yourself.

 

Oh holy people who worship the Cubs regardless of what happens!! We loley trolls who sometimes questions moves by the Cubs or get upset when the best player on the team gets injured are so unworthy of your greatness. I bow down to thee.

 

Just because people are having an emotional reaction to Lee's injury doesn't mean they "aren't going to be interested".

 

And This is a perfect example of the labeling I'm talking about. I get called out by 2 Mods for calling people trolls when clearly I am talking about the interest level in the Cubs and the first response goes unnoticed.

 

I take offense to the fact that the above post wasn't dealt with the same degree. I am not a "holy person who worships the Cubs" nor am I labeling any person upset at their misfortune. Rather then "getting over myself" why don't you ask my intentions rather then jumping to conclusions.

[KyHen]

Lemme offer my two cents on some of the things I've read:

 

Wood, Prior, Miller coming back. Definitely a plus. Prior is not good, he's great. When healthy, he is one of the best pitchers in baseball. The Cubs will have co-aces in Zambrano and Prior in a month or two.

 

Now... from there, I'm not as optimistic. Wade Miller has great stuff, but his arm is the epitome of brittle. He misses... a lot... of starts. Don't get me wrong, I believe it was a good, solid signing, but I don't believe you can expect a lot out of him.

 

And then there is Kerry Wood. He has a career ERA of 3.67. The thing that always strikes me when I watch Kerry Wood is how inconsistent he is. He's lights on one game, lights off the next.

 

That said, all three of those guys are upgrades over the current state of the rotation. Can they stay healthy? If I was a betting man, I would say it is unlikely that all three stay healthy... especially Wood and Miller. I'm hesitant to call Prior injury-prone, because he last couple of injuries (well, before the Spring Training one) were flukes.

 

 

The Mulder trade. On the surface, it does look like the Cardinals got fleeced in the Oakland trade, but there are a number of things to consider:

 

For starters, you cannot compare it to the Atlanta trade at all for a number of reasons. First of all, Mulder was the more valuable pitcher. He is younger, he is a lefty, and most importantly, he was under contract for two seasons (whereas Atlanta risked another JD Drew one-year-rental). So clearly the Cardinals were going to have to give up a lot more.

 

Dan Haren has emerged as an awesome starter, there's really no doubt about that. He's got filthy stuff.

 

What about production? What did Mulder/Hudson do? In his first year with the Cards, Mulder posted a 3.64 ERA with a 1.38 WHIP. Solid, but not ace-material. Hudson had a 3.52 ERA with a 1.35 ERA. Good, but also not ace material.

 

Now factor in the perspective. Who did the Cards give up? Haren, Calero and Daric Barton. Barton was a catcher at the time, and was regarded as one of the best hitting prospects in the minors. He has since converted to first base, because he doesn't possess an athletic build. What good does another first baseman do the Cards? They've got that Pujols fella. The only other logical place to put Barton would be in the outfield. The problem with that? Nothing -- but an elite-hitting catcher is a lot more valuable than an an elite-hitting outfielder. Since advancing to AA, Barton's power numbers have not developed nearly at the rate as expected. It's starting to look like Barton will be a DH with a good eye but average power for his position. Good? Yeah. But certainly not as highly-regarded as he once was.

 

And furthermore, you've got to remember the Cards had enormous question marks coming into 2005. Carpenter and Morris were both coming off of injuries. Who would be the ace of the staff? Mulder was certainly an intriguing candidate...

 

In hindsight, I think that the trade came out pretty even. Mulder and Haren put up comparable numbers, but it's more likely that Mulder will go back to his career averages and become the type of pitcher you can anchor a rotation around. Barton didn't do the Cards much good (except as a trading chip), and Calero (who missed a ton of 2005 by the way), was kind of like a throw-in.

 

 

Derek Lee's injury. It's huge. This is not comparable to losing Rolen, it's comparable to losing Pujols. I think the Cubs still have a shot, but they need the three injured pitchers to get back, and get back fast. And not only that, they need them to be productive, they need them to stay healthy, and they need some other bats to step up and fill the void.

[Danny82]

The very fact that Mulder and Haren "put up comparable numbers' makes the trade a fleecing for the A's. Haren is much cheaper and Barton, despite your questions as to his value, is still a top 100 prospect in the game who, if nothing else, has great trade value. You have to branch your analysis beyond 2005.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The Mulder trade. On the surface, it does look like the Cardinals got fleeced in the Oakland trade, but there are a number of things to consider:

 

For starters, you cannot compare it to the Atlanta trade at all for a number of reasons. First of all, Mulder was the more valuable pitcher. He is younger, he is a lefty, and most importantly, he was under contract for two seasons (whereas Atlanta risked another JD Drew one-year-rental). So clearly the Cardinals were going to have to give up a lot more.

 

Dan Haren has emerged as an awesome starter, there's really no doubt about that. He's got filthy stuff.

 

What about production? What did Mulder/Hudson do? In his first year with the Cards, Mulder posted a 3.64 ERA with a 1.38 WHIP. Solid, but not ace-material. Hudson had a 3.52 ERA with a 1.35 ERA. Good, but also not ace material.

 

Now factor in the perspective. Who did the Cards give up? Haren, Calero and Daric Barton. Barton was a catcher at the time, and was regarded as one of the best hitting prospects in the minors. He has since converted to first base, because he doesn't possess an athletic build. What good does another first baseman do the Cards? They've got that Pujols fella. The only other logical place to put Barton would be in the outfield. The problem with that? Nothing -- but an elite-hitting catcher is a lot more valuable than an an elite-hitting outfielder. Since advancing to AA, Barton's power numbers have not developed nearly at the rate as expected. It's starting to look like Barton will be a DH with a good eye but average power for his position. Good? Yeah. But certainly not as highly-regarded as he once was.

 

And furthermore, you've got to remember the Cards had enormous question marks coming into 2005. Carpenter and Morris were both coming off of injuries. Who would be the ace of the staff? Mulder was certainly an intriguing candidate...

 

In hindsight, I think that the trade came out pretty even. Mulder and Haren put up comparable numbers, but it's more likely that Mulder will go back to his career averages and become the type of pitcher you can anchor a rotation around. Barton didn't do the Cards much good (except as a trading chip), and Calero (who missed a ton of 2005 by the way), was kind of like a throw-in.

 

When Haren and Mulder put up comparable numbers last year(Haren was probably better all things considered), and Haren is still only 25 and is under team control for much longer and cheaper than Mulder, I don't know how you can say that it's an even deal. Add in that the Cards added their top hitting prospect plus a serviceable ML ready arm, and it's apparent that they were taken.

[Rooftop Bum]

I think if the Cubs want to compete this season they need to go out and actually pick someone up to help replace Lee's numbers. It's fine that they may send Walker or Mabry out to 1b. That would work for about 2 weeks. But Lee is out 8-10 weeks. Someone has to hit in front of Ramirez. No, I have no answers for who that would be except for Cabrera.

 

I think the Cubs could work out a nice offer to the Marlins. IF they wanted to go that direction. It does mean losing some fine rooks and minor leaguers. But you would get Cabrera and his bat on the team. When Lee comes back it's actually a little bit stronger. I just hope it's being considered.

 

But that's if the Cubs want to compete this season.

[ltb]

I think the Cubs could work out a nice offer to the Marlins. IF they wanted to go that direction. It does mean losing some fine rooks and minor leaguers. But you would get Cabrera and his bat on the team. When Lee comes back it's actually a little bit stronger. I just hope it's being considered.

 

This has been discussed over and over, and the general consensus seems to be that there is no way the Cubs can acquire Cabrera without essentially destroying their entire minor league system. A team like Arizona or Anaheim can make a reasonable offer with all of their top prospects to acquire Cabrera - much moreso than the Cubs can. I'd say there's no chance we can get Cabrera, so it's time to look at other options. Lee's numbers are not getting replaced, so maybe we can strengthen some other part of the lineup.

[srbin84]

I think the Cubs could work out a nice offer to the Marlins. IF they wanted to go that direction. It does mean losing some fine rooks and minor leaguers. But you would get Cabrera and his bat on the team. When Lee comes back it's actually a little bit stronger. I just hope it's being considered.

 

This has been discussed over and over, and the general consensus seems to be that there is no way the Cubs can acquire Cabrera without essentially destroying their entire minor league system. A team like Arizona or Anaheim can make a reasonable offer with all of their top prospects to acquire Cabrera - much moreso than the Cubs can. I'd say there's no chance we can get Cabrera, so it's time to look at other options. Lee's numbers are not getting replaced, so maybe we can strengthen some other part of the lineup.

 

What difference does it make if it costs the Cubs a lot in prospects? What's the point of putting out a team just good enough to compete for a playoff spot. The Cubs need to make a move that makes them one of the elite teams at least once.

[ltb]

I think the Cubs could work out a nice offer to the Marlins. IF they wanted to go that direction. It does mean losing some fine rooks and minor leaguers. But you would get Cabrera and his bat on the team. When Lee comes back it's actually a little bit stronger. I just hope it's being considered.

 

This has been discussed over and over, and the general consensus seems to be that there is no way the Cubs can acquire Cabrera without essentially destroying their entire minor league system. A team like Arizona or Anaheim can make a reasonable offer with all of their top prospects to acquire Cabrera - much moreso than the Cubs can. I'd say there's no chance we can get Cabrera, so it's time to look at other options. Lee's numbers are not getting replaced, so maybe we can strengthen some other part of the lineup.

 

What difference does it make if it costs the Cubs a lot in prospects? What's the point of putting out a team just good enough to compete for a playoff spot. The Cubs need to make a move that makes them one of the elite teams at least once.

 

Cabrera might not push the Cubs over the top. If that's the case, the farm system is ruined for years to come. Is that worth it?

[KyHen]

For a player entering his prime, I think it's a lot more likely that Mulder will pitch more closely to his "glory days" (per se) than compared to what he did last year.

 

Why did the Cards get Mulder? For October. In the playoffs, he had a 1.96 ERA.

 

And yes, Haren is more valuable for years to come, but the Cards are clearly in a win-now mode, whereas by trading Mulder and Hudson, the A's were in a rebuilding mode for the future. (Even though they did contend)

 

Granted, I did say that Haren and Mulder pitched comparably, but I also said one could reasonably expect Mulder to pitch better this season. In the second half of 2005, he had a 2.77 ERA.

 

Maybe saying the trade was even is a little off. But I do think it's a lot more even than it is a "fleecing."

[srbin84]

I think the Cubs could work out a nice offer to the Marlins. IF they wanted to go that direction. It does mean losing some fine rooks and minor leaguers. But you would get Cabrera and his bat on the team. When Lee comes back it's actually a little bit stronger. I just hope it's being considered.

 

This has been discussed over and over, and the general consensus seems to be that there is no way the Cubs can acquire Cabrera without essentially destroying their entire minor league system. A team like Arizona or Anaheim can make a reasonable offer with all of their top prospects to acquire Cabrera - much moreso than the Cubs can. I'd say there's no chance we can get Cabrera, so it's time to look at other options. Lee's numbers are not getting replaced, so maybe we can strengthen some other part of the lineup.

 

What difference does it make if it costs the Cubs a lot in prospects? What's the point of putting out a team just good enough to compete for a playoff spot. The Cubs need to make a move that makes them one of the elite teams at least once.

 

Cabrera might not push the Cubs over the top. If that's the case, the farm system is ruined for years to come. Is that worth it?

 

I think it easily be the best team the Cubs have had at least since 45. That makes it worth it to me.

[KyHen]

Cabrera might not push the Cubs over the top. If that's the case, the farm system is ruined for years to come. Is that worth it?

 

At this rate, Cabrera is on his way to the Hall of Fame. While a lot can change, I would say that, yes... Miguel Cabrera is worth it.

 

Do you think Pie projects to be a Hall of Famer? Hill?

[ltb]

I think it easily be the best team the Cubs have had at least since 45. That makes it worth it to me.

 

I'm not sure you understand the magnitude of top prospects it would require to obtain Miguel Cabrera. Look at one of the other threads - one poster made a very good post regarding the Beckett trade and the amount of prospects the Red Sox had to give up to get him. Not only is Beckett injury-prone, the Red Sox had to take on Mike Lowell's contract, as well. Cabrera is much more valuable than Josh Beckett, so the cost in terms of players to obtain him is going to be astronomical.

 

Simply put, the Cubs cannot obtain Miguel Cabrera without completely destroying their farm system and obliterating any chances to compete for years to come.

[ltb]

Do you think Pie projects to be a Hall of Famer? Hill?

 

Don't put words in my mouth.

 

I hope you understand it's going to cost a whole lot more than Pie and Hill. A whole lot more.

[YearofDaCubs]

Teams like Texas and Florida are not going to give up guys like Cabrera and Teixeira. I don't care what prospects you throw at them the chance of them actually making that trade is very slim.

[ltb]

Teams like Texas and Florida are not going to give up guys like Cabrera and Teixeira. I don't care what prospects you throw at them the chance of them actually making that trade is very slim.

 

This is another good point. Who even says Cabrera is available? A couple talking heads in the media saying that's the case doesn't necessarily make it true.

Edited April 21, 2006 by ltb

[srbin84]

I think it easily be the best team the Cubs have had at least since 45. That makes it worth it to me.

 

I'm not sure you understand the magnitude of top prospects it would require to obtain Miguel Cabrera. Look at one of the other threads - one poster made a very good post regarding the Beckett trade and the amount of prospects the Red Sox had to give up to get him. Not only is Beckett injury-prone, the Red Sox had to take on Mike Lowell's contract, as well. Cabrera is much more valuable than Josh Beckett, so the cost in terms of players to obtain him is going to be astronomical.

 

Simply put, the Cubs cannot obtain Miguel Cabrera without completely destroying their farm system and obliterating any chances to compete for years to come.

 

The team they would have with Cabrera would keep them competitive for years to come though. I'd say you would have 3-4 years to develop new prospects.

[ltb]

I think it easily be the best team the Cubs have had at least since 45. That makes it worth it to me.

 

I'm not sure you understand the magnitude of top prospects it would require to obtain Miguel Cabrera. Look at one of the other threads - one poster made a very good post regarding the Beckett trade and the amount of prospects the Red Sox had to give up to get him. Not only is Beckett injury-prone, the Red Sox had to take on Mike Lowell's contract, as well. Cabrera is much more valuable than Josh Beckett, so the cost in terms of players to obtain him is going to be astronomical.

 

Simply put, the Cubs cannot obtain Miguel Cabrera without completely destroying their farm system and obliterating any chances to compete for years to come.

 

The team they would have with Cabrera would keep them competitive for years to come though. I'd say you would have 3-4 years to develop new prospects.

 

I disagree. Take this to one of the plethora of threads about Miguel Cabrera (and I suggest you read them thoroughly, as you are doing nothing but rehashing arguments that have already been made) - this is not the place for it, as this is beginning to hijack this thread.

[srbin84]

I think it easily be the best team the Cubs have had at least since 45. That makes it worth it to me.

 

I'm not sure you understand the magnitude of top prospects it would require to obtain Miguel Cabrera. Look at one of the other threads - one poster made a very good post regarding the Beckett trade and the amount of prospects the Red Sox had to give up to get him. Not only is Beckett injury-prone, the Red Sox had to take on Mike Lowell's contract, as well. Cabrera is much more valuable than Josh Beckett, so the cost in terms of players to obtain him is going to be astronomical.

 

Simply put, the Cubs cannot obtain Miguel Cabrera without completely destroying their farm system and obliterating any chances to compete for years to come.

 

The team they would have with Cabrera would keep them competitive for years to come though. I'd say you would have 3-4 years to develop new prospects.

 

I disagree. Take this to one of the plethora of threads about Miguel Cabrera (and I suggest you read them thoroughly, as you are doing nothing but rehashing arguments that have already been made) - this is not the place for it, as this is beginning to hijack this thread.

 

This thread is about what to do now that Lee is hurt. The only argument you could make is that the Cubs wouldn't be able to afford to keep such a talented team together.

[Laura]

This thread is about what to do now that Lee is hurt. The only argument you could make is that the Cubs wouldn't be able to afford to keep such a talented team together.

 

It deals with a proposed transaction, so it would be best if the Cabrera conversation shifted to one of the threads in Transactions. Thanks.