Maddux and $$$ to the Dodgers for Cesar Izturis

[CubColtPacer]

I realize that. At the same time Greg Maddux is perhaps my favorite player of all-time and if we can't get anyone of any quality in return for him, I'd like to see him pitch 6 or 7 more times. I'm not saying it's going to be wonderful or I'll look back at these last two months with the fondest of memories. But I'd rather see him a few more times than seeing J.K. Ryu called up to get bombed.

I guess I also think that people are overstating the importance of opening up a rotation slot for a youngster. Who is really knocking down the door to get opportunities to start in the majors right now? Who do we have that we need to evaluate for a starting spot next year other than Hill, Marmol (both getting starts right now) and Marshall? Furthermore, I don't think you gain a ton of information in your evaluation of a young pitcher based on 5 starts in the majors.

 

That's my point. Allowing emotions to determine personel moves is a great way to ruin a franchise. The smart thing is to look for 2007, and keeping Maddux around stifles 2007.

 

Hill is only getting starts because Marshall isn't. Dusty is looking for any excuse to pull the plug after 1 or 2 outings. And since when does 2 months of baseball equal 5 starts for a pitcher? If Hill gets 4 days rest after every outing, he could get 12 more starts this season, which would blow away the "opportunity" he's been given so far in his career.

 

I care about the Cubs. It's been cool getting to watch Maddux and he's an amazing pitcher. But he hasn't been good since returning to the team and his only value to this team would be as trade bait.

 

Don't you think that if Maddux left that Dusty would just start Rusch instead of 3 rookies in the rotation?

[goonys evil twin]

I still think a lot of people are over-estimating what Maddux will fetch. Sure, if someone offers a top prospect, jump at it. I just don't see the offer coming. So if someone offers an suspect instead of a top prospect should we deal him? I still think in 2007 he could be as good as any other 5th starter in the league. Just an opinion though.

 

We should know in a little over an hour.

 

$9 million good? If he wanted to come back at $750,000 to be that 5th starter, fine, but the problem is Hendry feels obligated to pay him for what he used to be, as opposed to what he is currently. And people will worry about the "slight" of offering what he's actually worth. Waste several million on Maddux and you are going to have a tough time filling the many other needs this team has to fill. Just like wasting money on Rusch and Neifi makes it difficult to find actual producers.

Oh no...not at $9 million. Never in a zillion years. Bring him back at a greatly reduced rate.

 

You don't have that option. Maddux isn't going to sign at a salary that accurately reflects his contribution to the team.

[abuck1220]

 

You certainly cannot prove any causation or lack thereof from statistics, either, so this is as close as you can get to primary information. And its enough for me to say that his intangible value to the club is more than that of a "C" prospect. At this point, its a value judgment either way, as I believe that there is no quantifiable way to prove he's NOT helping the young players (as there is minimal foolproof evidence to prove he is), and as such, there's no real factual high ground here.

 

marshall and marmol's inconsistencies and recent struggles are more telling to the amount of help maddux has provided than what they say he has provided. come to think of it, i don't really recall either one of those guys (or hill, or guzman) heaping praise on maddux much this year.

[goonys evil twin]

Don't you think that if Maddux left that Dusty would just start Rusch instead of 3 rookies in the rotation?

 

Maybe, but he's not right now.

[ChiCubsFan]

Look if we can get an impact prospect or any of the rumored Dodgers prospects we've talked about who have upside and could be ML ready very soon, you make the deal and thank your lucky stars.

If you can only get C prospects for him, I'd rather just keep him and watch him pitch 6 more times.

 

I'd rather the Cubs think about 2007 and beyond, which means finding rotation spots for young guys now to both gauge what they can bring to the table, and let them work through whatever struggles they are inevitably going to encounter. Maddux's last 8 starts with Chicago will be meaningless when all is said and done. None of them will have any playoff implications (for the Cubs). In 2 years nobody is going to look back on Maddux's career and think about how wonderful it was that he got to start another handful of times in August and September 2006, when the team was 20 games under .500 and a pathetic joke across the league.

 

I realize that. At the same time Greg Maddux is perhaps my favorite player of all-time and if we can't get anyone of any quality in return for him, I'd like to see him pitch 6 or 7 more times. I'm not saying it's going to be wonderful or I'll look back at these last two months with the fondest of memories. But I'd rather see him a few more times than seeing J.K. Ryu called up to get bombed.

I guess I also think that people are overstating the importance of opening up a rotation slot for a youngster. Who is really knocking down the door to get opportunities to start in the majors right now? Who do we have that we need to evaluate for a starting spot next year other than Hill, Marmol (both getting starts right now) and Marshall? Furthermore, I don't think you gain a ton of information in your evaluation of a young pitcher based on 5 starts in the majors.

 

and i think you're overstating the importance of getting to see your favorite pitcher pitch for your favorite team a few more times.

 

Probably, I fully admit that. It's my opinion, nothing more.

 

But can you answer the questions in my last paragraph? What will be gained by shipping him off just to ship him off and then giving starts to someone who may or may not be ready when you can't really make a good evaluation based off those starts?

The only way the Cubs are really helped out in this whole situation is if we can land a quality prospect or more. If he starts for us the rest of the year nothing is gained and if we get C or lower prospects in return nothing is gained. Given that choice, I'd rather see him be the one to get the starts.

 

I'd rather see what the kids can do so we know where we stand going into next year. Z, Prior, Marmol, Guzman, Hill. I'm sure Prior will be back on the DL by the time Marshall is ready to come back.

[goonys evil twin]

But can you answer the questions in my last paragraph? What will be gained by shipping him off just to ship him off and then giving starts to someone who may or may not be ready when you can't really make a good evaluation based off those starts?

 

A) There are a lot of starts left this season to get a good idea.

B) The fact that they may or may not be ready is why you give them the chance, to get a better idea of if they will be ready by next year.

[hawkeyecub]

I realize that. At the same time Greg Maddux is perhaps my favorite player of all-time and if we can't get anyone of any quality in return for him, I'd like to see him pitch 6 or 7 more times. I'm not saying it's going to be wonderful or I'll look back at these last two months with the fondest of memories. But I'd rather see him a few more times than seeing J.K. Ryu called up to get bombed.

I guess I also think that people are overstating the importance of opening up a rotation slot for a youngster. Who is really knocking down the door to get opportunities to start in the majors right now? Who do we have that we need to evaluate for a starting spot next year other than Hill, Marmol (both getting starts right now) and Marshall? Furthermore, I don't think you gain a ton of information in your evaluation of a young pitcher based on 5 starts in the majors.

 

That's my point. Allowing emotions to determine personel moves is a great way to ruin a franchise. The smart thing is to look for 2007, and keeping Maddux around stifles 2007.

 

Correct but I'm not a GM and don't have the responsibility of making that decision.

 

Again, all sentimentality goes out the window if we can get a solid prospect in return for Maddux. I have no problems with that whatsoever and really hope that we can make something happen with LA.

 

I just don't think there is as much to be gained from opening up a slot in the rotation as others do.

[Chocolate Milk]

We're getting pretty close to the deadline. Has there bee any other news on this front? Are we all just kind of waiting around?

[abuck1220]

 

But can you answer the questions in my last paragraph? What will be gained by shipping him off just to ship him off and then giving starts to someone who may or may not be ready when you can't really make a good evaluation based off those starts?

The only way the Cubs are really helped out in this whole situation is if we can land a quality prospect or more. If he starts for us the rest of the year nothing is gained and if we get C or lower prospects in return nothing is gained. Given that choice, I'd rather see him be the one to get the starts.

 

what's gained by keeping maddux? you may not be able to evaluate hill in that time, but you'll have a better chance to evaluate him if he starts than you will if he rots in AAA or on the bench.

[UBlink]

You don't have that option. Maddux isn't going to sign at a salary that accurately reflects his contribution to the team.

 

Are you saying that his contribution will be greater for another team or that someone will make an offer based on an inaccurate projection of his contribution? Because if he truly wants to pitch one more year he'll have to take what the market offers.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

For those who want to see Maddux finish his career as a Cub, think on this.

 

If Maddux is on the Cubs at the end of the season, there is almost no chance he'll pitch here next season.

 

Think of how the arbitration deadline will affect things and wo is Maddux's agent.

 

First of all, there's no way the Cubs offer Maddux arbitration. At his age, he's only going to get a one-year deal, so he'd love to jump at an arbitration offer and use his career stats to get a 10-11 million dollar deal.

 

So, by not offering him arbitration, the Cubs would have to re-sign him by the early December date. That is usually the start of the Winter Meetings.

 

That leads me to the second point. There's no way Maddux signs an "economically" favorable deal by that point. His agent is Boras who loves to play the waiting game. The only way Boras lets Maddux jump at an early deal is if it's a good one. Boras will expect 6+ million for Maddux.

 

So, there's no way he signs that early. By keeping Maddux for the remainder of the year, the Cubs guarantee he's not back next season. By trading him, the Cubs could continue to work on a deal to bring him back in the offseason with no artificial deadlines affecting the progress.

[Fro]

ESPN News saying Dodgers still talking to Cubs about getting Maddux. Sounds like the Dodgers are the front-runners for Soriano too at the moment.

[Post Count Padder]

I don't know if this was posted here, but according to Rotoworld, the Dbacks approached the Cubs late last night about Maddux. Rotoworld also says that Hendry is demanding two top prospects for Maddux.

[cubfan1955]

I still think a lot of people are over-estimating what Maddux will fetch. Sure, if someone offers a top prospect, jump at it. I just don't see the offer coming. So if someone offers an suspect instead of a top prospect should we deal him? I still think in 2007 he could be as good as any other 5th starter in the league. Just an opinion though.

 

We should know in a little over an hour.

 

$9 million good? If he wanted to come back at $750,000 to be that 5th starter, fine, but the problem is Hendry feels obligated to pay him for what he used to be, as opposed to what he is currently. And people will worry about the "slight" of offering what he's actually worth. Waste several million on Maddux and you are going to have a tough time filling the many other needs this team has to fill. Just like wasting money on Rusch and Neifi makes it difficult to find actual producers.

Oh no...not at $9 million. Never in a zillion years. Bring him back at a greatly reduced rate.

 

You don't have that option. Maddux isn't going to sign at a salary that accurately reflects his contribution to the team.

Yes I would. I would not give him that kind of money and then he can walk if he doesn't like what I offer. I'd risk losing him for nothing to be the 5th starter in 2007 before I'd trade him away for a nothing prospect. Now if Hendry can get a "good" prospect then I agree...trade him.

[goonys evil twin]

I just don't think there is as much to be gained from opening up a slot in the rotation as others do.

 

Is that because you mistakenly believe the young pitcher could get only 5 starts out of that open slot?

[Caryatid]

At this point, I think it comes down to the issue of entertainment. I watch the game because its fun. If the question is between seeing Maddux pitch a few more times and seeing the Cubs get some worthless prospect, as a fan-I'll take the enjoyment of watching Maddux pitch. If its a question of seeing Maddux pitch 6 more times or getting a worthwhile prospect that will help this ballclub win in the future, I'll take the prospect.

 

But, seeing as how ABOVE all else, this is entertainment, I'll take what I can for entertainment in this horrible season.

[ChiCubsFan]

You don't have that option. Maddux isn't going to sign at a salary that accurately reflects his contribution to the team.

 

Are you saying that his contribution will be greater for another team or that someone will make an offer based on an inaccurate projection of his contribution? Because if he truly wants to pitch one more year he'll have to take what the market offers.

 

No, he'll have to take what HENDRY offers. I don't know what that is, but I know it will be way too much for a fifth starter.

[frostwyrm]

There's way too much gooey sentimentality in baseball. Sentimentality was likely the primary reason Maddux was offered his current contract, and it's the only reason I can think of for not trading him immeditately.

[abuck1220]

i'm actually still holding out hope that hill gets traded.

[UBlink]

There's way too much gooey sentimentality in baseball. Sentimentality was likely the primary reason Maddux was offered his current contract, and it's the only reason I can think of for not trading him immeditately.

 

Yeah, we need more Goony sentimentality!

Edited July 31, 2006 by UBlink

[Sammy Sofa]

There's way too much gooey sentimentality in baseball. Sentimentality was likely the primary reason Maddux was offered his current contract, and it's the only reason I can think of for not trading him immeditately.

 

It's not just a business.

[cubfan1955]

There's way too much gooey sentimentality in baseball. Sentimentality was likely the primary reason Maddux was offered his current contract, and it's the only reason I can think of for not trading him immeditately.

I think most people are just saying don't trade him for a nothing prospect. If we can get something decent then do it by all means.

[goonys evil twin]

i'm actually still holding out hope that hill gets traded.

 

Yeah, I am as well, but I think Hendry has this wierd hangup about trading prospects for veterans in a down year, because it's just not what losing teams do. I can't imagine a Hill for another prospect deal working out, but I was thinking another team with financial issues wouldn't mind trying to work a cheap Hill into their rotation next year.

[Caryatid]

There's way too much gooey sentimentality in baseball.

 

"Gooey sentimentality" is what makes sports fun. My job has no gooey sentimentality, and that's why people don't pay $50 for a seat watching people file reports in cubicles.

 

I don't necessarily want a GM with too much of it, but if it didn't exist, what would be the point of watching sports? Isn't this supposed to be about fun? What's wrong with a little sentimentality?

[hawkeyecub]

I just don't think there is as much to be gained from opening up a slot in the rotation as others do.

 

Is that because you mistakenly believe the young pitcher could get only 5 starts out of that open slot?

 

You're right, I exaggerated and someone called up now would likely get twice that many starts IF they were inserted in the rotation immediately and were left in there for the remainder of the season.