Maddux and $$$ to the Dodgers for Cesar Izturis

[abuck1220]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

[A New Era]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

 

Not exactly. The further tutoring of Marshall, and possibly Hill/Marmol. There is something to be gained.

[jjgman21]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

 

if paying all the salary and not getting a decent prosect in return, I think they should keep him.

 

one reason is that, if I'm not mistaken, Marshall, Hill, Guzman are all either well over or fast approaching their career high in IP. only Hill has pitched the equivalent of a major league workload in his career before. I'd like to see those guys get the starts too, but I don't want any of them stretched farther than they should be.

 

there is some sentimentality to it too, but I don't think you need much of a reason to have a HOF'er end his career with the Cubs if it brings no other benefit, either salary wise or talent wise.

[Laura]

BTW, on BBTN Buster Olney pontificated that trading Maddux-the-Icon put Hendry in a very difficult position and that the only way Hendry could succeed in doing so was if Maddux publicly supported the trade.

 

He didn't reference Maddux's post-game comments and may not have been aware of them. To me, that's what Maddux already did.

 

Long Beach Press-Telegram[/url]"]

The Dodgers are believed to be among the primary suitors for two of the game's elite players in Baltimore shortstop Miguel Tejada and Washington left fielder Alfonso Soriano, as well as one of its all-time greats in Chicago Cubs pitcher Greg Maddux. ...

 

Maddux, 40, is in the final season of a three-year, $24 million contract and would amount to a two-month rental for the pennant race. As such, the Dodgers aren't likely to give up much in the way of valued prospects to get him, but the Cubs probably would want a marquee major leaguer in return to offset the public relations aspect of trading a 300-game winner, probable first-ballot Hall of Famer and Chicago icon.

[mhuber92211]

Some people here in LA would be willing to deal Joel Guzman for Maddux. I would do this in a heartbeat.

[C.C.]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

 

Just having him in the dugout is enough to keep him.

[RynoRules]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

 

Just having him in the dugout is enough to keep him.

 

Not if you can get a good young player for him.

 

I love Maddux. I loved him in 89' as the Cubs won a division title for only the second time in my lifetime, and my heart was broken when that putz Himes let him go in 92'. I welled up with tears of joy when JH brought him back three years ago.

 

But I still think we should trade him.

[wrigley23]

trading him or keeping him is a no-brainer. We are out of it this year & he will not be here next year so you move him for a part that can be utilized in the future.

[CubColtPacer]

BTW, on BBTN Buster Olney pontificated that trading Maddux-the-Icon put Hendry in a very difficult position and that the only way Hendry could succeed in doing so was if Maddux publicly supported the trade.

 

He didn't reference Maddux's post-game comments and may not have been aware of them. To me, that's what Maddux already did.

 

 

I think he sort of authorized a trade-the only thing that concerns me is that Maddux said if Hendry can find the right players. Basically, I'm wondering if Maddux is willing to be traded for any prospect or if the Cubs need to get something good in return. There are intangibles to keeping Maddux-the idea that he can continue to mentor the pitching staff is one. Two is player loyalty-I think a situation like this could have a minor influence the next time a free agent decides to sign with us, especially if that FA is a veteran. Third is the issue of the casual fan. The casual fan still is upset that Maddux was given away in the first place, and will be very upset if they learn that he was traded away for basically nothing-they don't see how he is now, they see Maddux the HOF still. I think all these intangibles give some benefit to keeping him. Now, if I can get a decent to good prospect, I trade him away. If nobody is willing to give very much, then I take the intangibles and keep him here.

[CubinNY]

BTW, on BBTN Buster Olney pontificated that trading Maddux-the-Icon put Hendry in a very difficult position and that the only way Hendry could succeed in doing so was if Maddux publicly supported the trade.

 

He didn't reference Maddux's post-game comments and may not have been aware of them. To me, that's what Maddux already did.

 

 

I think he sort of authorized a trade-the only thing that concerns me is that Maddux said if Hendry can find the right players. Basically, I'm wondering if Maddux is willing to be traded for any prospect or if the Cubs need to get something good in return. There are intangibles to keeping Maddux-the idea that he can continue to mentor the pitching staff is one. Two is player loyalty-I think a situation like this could have a minor influence the next time a free agent decides to sign with us, especially if that FA is a veteran. Third is the issue of the casual fan. The casual fan still is upset that Maddux was given away in the first place, and will be very upset if they learn that he was traded away for basically nothing-they don't see how he is now, they see Maddux the HOF still. I think all these intangibles give some benefit to keeping him. Now, if I can get a decent to good prospect, I trade him away. If nobody is willing to give very much, then I take the intangibles and keep him here.

 

If you take the intangibles how do you know what you've have beside a washed up pitcher taking a roster spot?

[CubColtPacer]

BTW, on BBTN Buster Olney pontificated that trading Maddux-the-Icon put Hendry in a very difficult position and that the only way Hendry could succeed in doing so was if Maddux publicly supported the trade.

 

He didn't reference Maddux's post-game comments and may not have been aware of them. To me, that's what Maddux already did.

 

 

I think he sort of authorized a trade-the only thing that concerns me is that Maddux said if Hendry can find the right players. Basically, I'm wondering if Maddux is willing to be traded for any prospect or if the Cubs need to get something good in return. There are intangibles to keeping Maddux-the idea that he can continue to mentor the pitching staff is one. Two is player loyalty-I think a situation like this could have a minor influence the next time a free agent decides to sign with us, especially if that FA is a veteran. Third is the issue of the casual fan. The casual fan still is upset that Maddux was given away in the first place, and will be very upset if they learn that he was traded away for basically nothing-they don't see how he is now, they see Maddux the HOF still. I think all these intangibles give some benefit to keeping him. Now, if I can get a decent to good prospect, I trade him away. If nobody is willing to give very much, then I take the intangibles and keep him here.

 

If you take the intangibles how do you know what you've have beside a washed up pitcher taking a roster spot?

 

Well, I wouldn't completely classify him as washed up-he is putting up average major league pitcher stats this year. And what do you mean about how do you know what you have? I know that Maddux has been helping the young pitchers, and as Olney said last night (I think he was quoting an NL GM at the time) that Hendry was in a tough spot because it is trading away a legend-which ties into my 2nd and 3rd intangible. Just because I can't measure them doesn't mean they don't exist, and all the other evidence points them to at least making a minor impact.

[CubinNY]

BTW, on BBTN Buster Olney pontificated that trading Maddux-the-Icon put Hendry in a very difficult position and that the only way Hendry could succeed in doing so was if Maddux publicly supported the trade.

 

He didn't reference Maddux's post-game comments and may not have been aware of them. To me, that's what Maddux already did.

 

 

I think he sort of authorized a trade-the only thing that concerns me is that Maddux said if Hendry can find the right players. Basically, I'm wondering if Maddux is willing to be traded for any prospect or if the Cubs need to get something good in return. There are intangibles to keeping Maddux-the idea that he can continue to mentor the pitching staff is one. Two is player loyalty-I think a situation like this could have a minor influence the next time a free agent decides to sign with us, especially if that FA is a veteran. Third is the issue of the casual fan. The casual fan still is upset that Maddux was given away in the first place, and will be very upset if they learn that he was traded away for basically nothing-they don't see how he is now, they see Maddux the HOF still. I think all these intangibles give some benefit to keeping him. Now, if I can get a decent to good prospect, I trade him away. If nobody is willing to give very much, then I take the intangibles and keep him here.

 

If you take the intangibles how do you know what you've have beside a washed up pitcher taking a roster spot?

 

Well, I wouldn't completely classify him as washed up-he is putting up average major league pitcher stats this year. And what do you mean about how do you know what you have? I know that Maddux has been helping the young pitchers, and as Olney said last night (I think he was quoting an NL GM at the time) that Hendry was in a tough spot because it is trading away a legend-which ties into my 2nd and 3rd intangible. Just because I can't measure them doesn't mean they don't exist, and all the other evidence points them to at least making a minor impact.

 

What other evidence? and if there are other evidence does that not make the intangible tangible? Marshall and Marmoll haven't shown that much progress.

 

All the romantic "Maddux is more than the sum of his parts" has an odor.

 

Maddux was good, he no longer is. The Cubs are way out of contention. It's time to get rid of old players who are not good. The Cubs have to look toward the future or they will find themselves in the exact same spot they are in right now. And nobody wants that intangible.

[CubColtPacer]

BTW, on BBTN Buster Olney pontificated that trading Maddux-the-Icon put Hendry in a very difficult position and that the only way Hendry could succeed in doing so was if Maddux publicly supported the trade.

 

He didn't reference Maddux's post-game comments and may not have been aware of them. To me, that's what Maddux already did.

 

 

I think he sort of authorized a trade-the only thing that concerns me is that Maddux said if Hendry can find the right players. Basically, I'm wondering if Maddux is willing to be traded for any prospect or if the Cubs need to get something good in return. There are intangibles to keeping Maddux-the idea that he can continue to mentor the pitching staff is one. Two is player loyalty-I think a situation like this could have a minor influence the next time a free agent decides to sign with us, especially if that FA is a veteran. Third is the issue of the casual fan. The casual fan still is upset that Maddux was given away in the first place, and will be very upset if they learn that he was traded away for basically nothing-they don't see how he is now, they see Maddux the HOF still. I think all these intangibles give some benefit to keeping him. Now, if I can get a decent to good prospect, I trade him away. If nobody is willing to give very much, then I take the intangibles and keep him here.

 

If you take the intangibles how do you know what you've have beside a washed up pitcher taking a roster spot?

 

Well, I wouldn't completely classify him as washed up-he is putting up average major league pitcher stats this year. And what do you mean about how do you know what you have? I know that Maddux has been helping the young pitchers, and as Olney said last night (I think he was quoting an NL GM at the time) that Hendry was in a tough spot because it is trading away a legend-which ties into my 2nd and 3rd intangible. Just because I can't measure them doesn't mean they don't exist, and all the other evidence points them to at least making a minor impact.

 

What other evidence? and if there are other evidence does that not make the intangible tangible? Marshall and Marmoll haven't shown that much progress.

 

All the romantic "Maddux is more than the sum of his parts" has an odor.

 

Maddux was good, he no longer is. The Cubs are way out of contention. It's time to get rid of old players who are not good. The Cubs have to look toward the future or they will find themselves in the exact same spot they are in right now. And nobody wants that intangible.

 

Yes, they do need to look towards the future. Getting prospects (like the Williamson deal) that most likely will not make the majors doesn't really help though. If we can get something decent for him, I'm all for trading him. Last week, I would have been upset that they didn't deal him. Now, after hearing that nobody is willing to give very much for him, I guess I just won't be very upset either way. If you are gambling on bad prospects making it or gambling on Maddux's intangibles making a difference, it really will end up making very little difference to the future of this team either way.

[oldstyle81]

Third is the issue of the casual fan. The casual fan still is upset that Maddux was given away in the first place, and will be very upset if they learn that he was traded away for basically nothing-they don't see how he is now, they see Maddux the HOF still.

 

1, Casual Fans would have No idea what happened nor would care

2, he wasant traded, he wasant given a contract and signed as a free agent with the Atlanta Braves

[Southpaw191679666239]

Third is the issue of the casual fan. The casual fan still is upset that Maddux was given away in the first place, and will be very upset if they learn that he was traded away for basically nothing-they don't see how he is now, they see Maddux the HOF still.

 

1, Casual Fans would have No idea what happened nor would care

2, he wasant traded, he wasant given a contract and signed as a free agent with the Atlanta Braves

 

CCP never said he was traded, so your 2nd point is a moot one.

[CubColtPacer]

Third is the issue of the casual fan. The casual fan still is upset that Maddux was given away in the first place, and will be very upset if they learn that he was traded away for basically nothing-they don't see how he is now, they see Maddux the HOF still.

 

1, Casual Fans would have No idea what happened nor would care

2, he wasant traded, he wasant given a contract and signed as a free agent with the Atlanta Braves

 

I know-didn't say he was traded the first time. I do have to disagree with the casual fans part, because I have a whole family of them. They watch a few games a year, check the scores every once in a while, but have no idea who any of the young players are. They still blame the Tribune company for not signing Maddux in the first place as a main reason we were terrible for most of the 90's, and they were thrilled when he came back. If he gets traded, they'll come to a person like me and ask what value if any we got out of the trade. If it is second-tier prospects, they will say that is the same old Cubs-now, that won't be the reality of the situation, because we know that getting something for Maddux is better then nothing, but that's not how it will be percieved by many Cubs fans-especially ones outside of Chicago who don't get to read articles on the team by just picking up a newspaper, and aren't big enough fans to try to find out the information.

[Wheelimus]

And plus, it's all in how it's presented. If he's traded to a solid contender and makes some sort of nice statement in the Tribune on his way out, it'll be fine. Hendry's company line can just be that Mad Dog deserved to play on a winner at this stage of his career, and it improved the Cubs going forward. Maybe even mix in a complimentary "we'll be one of the first clubs calling him in the offseason if he wants to pitch again", knowing of course you're only bringing him back at a greatly reduced rate if at all.

[USSoccer]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

 

Just having him in the dugout is enough to keep him.

 

Why? Has there ever been any evidence that he has any impact on the rest of the pitching staff? Because looking at numbers during his 3 year stay only Z (who is great anyway) has improved year to year.

 

I don't and never have bought into the whole "Maddux is a mentor" thing. That seems to be a load of bull. Just because he's a veteran pitcher who's won alot of games doesn't mean he can help Rich Hill spot his fastball, or Sean Marshall harness his control, or Mark Prior develop a changeup. He's a pitcher, not a pitching coach.

[bhogg]

since when do the cubs give a rat's ass what the fans think?

[jjgman21]

 

Why? Has there ever been any evidence that he has any impact on the rest of the pitching staff? Because looking at numbers during his 3 year stay only Z (who is great anyway) has improved year to year.

 

I don't and never have bought into the whole "Maddux is a mentor" thing. That seems to be a load of bull. Just because he's a veteran pitcher who's won alot of games doesn't mean he can help Rich Hill spot his fastball, or Sean Marshall harness his control, or Mark Prior develop a changeup. He's a pitcher, not a pitching coach.

 

I think that is a silly way of looking at it. has there ever been any evidence that Rothschild has a negative impact? neither are really the type of thing that can be measured by tangible evidence to the exclusion of other factors.

 

during games when neither was pitching, the camera often showed Maddux and Marshall sitting next to each other and obviously talking about pitching. although I don't think Maddux mentors young pitchers unless they seek it.

 

 

 

I think people may be arguing different points here. IMO, you shouldn't keep Maddux if you can get something decent, but I think alot of the people advocating keeping him are doing so because of the note earlier in the thread that says suitors are offering only a mid-tier prospect and demanding the Cubs pay all his remaining salary...aka they want to give the Cubs nothing.

 

if it's a choice between nothing and sentamentality + not over extending the younger pitchers, I go with the later.

[Bruno7481]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

 

Just having him in the dugout is enough to keep him.

 

Why? Has there ever been any evidence that he has any impact on the rest of the pitching staff? Because looking at numbers during his 3 year stay only Z (who is great anyway) has improved year to year.

 

I don't and never have bought into the whole "Maddux is a mentor" thing. That seems to be a load of bull. Just because he's a veteran pitcher who's won alot of games doesn't mean he can help Rich Hill spot his fastball, or Sean Marshall harness his control, or Mark Prior develop a changeup. He's a pitcher, not a pitching coach.

 

Just need to chime in here. I had a pretty good friend who was a member of the Cubs pitching staff until he was traded away this Spring. I know for a fact that Maddux is absolutely a mento to many on the pitching staff, specifically the younger guys. That being said, he's not a miracle worker either. He can help guys like Marshall become better pitchers. This is Marshall's first year, and your expecting Maddux to help him becoming an All-Star already?

 

It is far from a "load of bull". He can help young guys a whole lot.

 

That being said, if you can get a good deal for him then trade him. But if there isn't going to be much value coming back in return, keeping him the final 2 months of the season isn't going to stunt any type of growth.

[USSoccer]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

 

Just having him in the dugout is enough to keep him.

 

Why? Has there ever been any evidence that he has any impact on the rest of the pitching staff? Because looking at numbers during his 3 year stay only Z (who is great anyway) has improved year to year.

 

I don't and never have bought into the whole "Maddux is a mentor" thing. That seems to be a load of bull. Just because he's a veteran pitcher who's won alot of games doesn't mean he can help Rich Hill spot his fastball, or Sean Marshall harness his control, or Mark Prior develop a changeup. He's a pitcher, not a pitching coach.

 

Just need to chime in here. I had a pretty good friend who was a member of the Cubs pitching staff until he was traded away this Spring. I know for a fact that Maddux is absolutely a mento to many on the pitching staff, specifically the younger guys. That being said, he's not a miracle worker either. He can help guys like Marshall become better pitchers. This is Marshall's first year, and your expecting Maddux to help him becoming an All-Star already?

 

It is far from a "load of bull". He can help young guys a whole lot.

 

That being said, if you can get a good deal for him then trade him. But if there isn't going to be much value coming back in return, keeping him the final 2 months of the season isn't going to stunt any type of growth.

 

Where did I say anything about Marshall needing to be an All-Star? I said Maddux cannot help these guys in the areas they need help in.

 

Just because he may have a negligible, unprovable effect on other pitchers is no reason to keep him around. The 10 starts he has left would be better spent allowing guys like Hill and Guzman to get acclimated to consistently starting in the majors. It doesn't matter what you get in return. What matters is the developmental time given to players that are in this team's long-term plans being used to it's fullest.

[NCCubFan]

I had a pretty good friend who was a member of the Cubs pitching staff until he was traded away this Spring.

An educated guess based on your location, are you referring to Todd Wellemeyer?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

There's been many comments from younger pitchers about talking to Maddux and sticking around him to hope to pick up nuggets of information here and there. That said, is keeping Maddux around for 8 weeks going to make a significant impact for the young starters who have already been around him for a while(since March in Marshall's case)? I don't think that's the case, and then there's the catch-22 of him taking up a spot in the rotation for other players he'd be able to mentor. With Zambrano, Prior, Marshall, Marmol, Hill, and Guzman, I'm not significantly worried about overworking the rotation, especially since Rusch will still be around to suck for a day if someone really needs it. And if Maddux is traded for a player that doesn't take up a 40 man spot, then you might even see Wells or Gallagher take that role and become an option by September, which also brings up the fact that it's nigh impossible to overwork a pitching staff once the rosters expand.

[Bruno7481]

i don't get the 'might as well keep him' idea. what possible benefit can come from him staying? even if the cubs give him away, at the very least it opens a rotation spot for hill/guzman. nothing can be gained by keeping him.

 

Just having him in the dugout is enough to keep him.

 

Why? Has there ever been any evidence that he has any impact on the rest of the pitching staff? Because looking at numbers during his 3 year stay only Z (who is great anyway) has improved year to year.

 

I don't and never have bought into the whole "Maddux is a mentor" thing. That seems to be a load of bull. Just because he's a veteran pitcher who's won alot of games doesn't mean he can help Rich Hill spot his fastball, or Sean Marshall harness his control, or Mark Prior develop a changeup. He's a pitcher, not a pitching coach.

 

Just need to chime in here. I had a pretty good friend who was a member of the Cubs pitching staff until he was traded away this Spring. I know for a fact that Maddux is absolutely a mento to many on the pitching staff, specifically the younger guys. That being said, he's not a miracle worker either. He can help guys like Marshall become better pitchers. This is Marshall's first year, and your expecting Maddux to help him becoming an All-Star already?

 

It is far from a "load of bull". He can help young guys a whole lot.

 

That being said, if you can get a good deal for him then trade him. But if there isn't going to be much value coming back in return, keeping him the final 2 months of the season isn't going to stunt any type of growth.

 

Where did I say anything about Marshall needing to be an All-Star? I said Maddux cannot help these guys in the areas they need help in.

 

Just because he may have a negligible, unprovable effect on other pitchers is no reason to keep him around. The 10 starts he has left would be better spent allowing guys like Hill and Guzman to get acclimated to consistently starting in the majors. It doesn't matter what you get in return. What matters is the developmental time given to players that are in this team's long-term plans being used to it's fullest.

 

Show me your negligible, unprovable data that he doesn't have an effect.

 

Maddux was described to me as being the hot girl in high school. You just want to be around him, hang out etc. He will not approach you and say "your doing this wrong", "I wouldnt do it that way." Instead he allows guys to come to him, and if they want some advice he is more than happy to help them.