Shortstop II + Fixing the Cubs + The Future

[SaorsaDaonnan]

Ok my 2 cents.

 

FIRST and foremost. While sammy has been good against lefties this year, and historically has mauled them, I think I'd be content with just platooning murton with floyd/jones. Either way though, I'd welcome Sammy in open arms, I love the guy.

 

2nd. The idea that a player can sway trade talks WITHOUT an NTC is just ridiculous, I think the examples of Soriano and Vazquez have already been brought up. Plain and simple, Sosa is just as likely to get traded if the GM wants it so as say, Ryan Theriot. THERE IS NO BASIS TO SAY OTHERWISE. The only reason that it wouldn't happen is if the GM's didn't want it to work out that way. Without an NTC, Sosa is as much a pawn as the next guy, 600 Home Runs or not. PERIOD.

 

3rdly, we won't get Sosa. Hendry isn't smart enough to see him as an upgrade, and wouldn't want him anyway, so this whole discussion is all for naught.

 

 

In general, this makes sense, but the argument you're giving is fairly abstract. It is possible, for instance, that Jon Daniels is an emotional man who would want to make sure that Sammy stays happy no matter where he is, or that Daniels made a verbal agreement with Sosa and is unwilling to break it without Sosa's consent. Although it is true that NTC-less players have no negotiating leverage built into their contracts, other factors sometimes apply.

[hankp101]

While I think Sosa or Glaus could each provide potential improvements to the team, I think both have extraordinary situations that make them highly unlikely acquisitions. Glaus would have to play out of position. Playing him a SS would be a calculated risk, but given the value this regime has put on defense, it seems unlikely. Playing him in RF when he has no history there (at least that I am aware of) strikes me as a risk a contender simply would not make. Sosa, model citizen in Texas or not, would threaten to upset the clubhouse chemistry that Hendry and Piniella seem to place a very high value on, as evidenced by the handling of Barrett. Outside of Griffey, I can't think of an available big bat that makes sense. When is Tejada supposed to come off the DL?

[Jazz]

Ok my 2 cents.

 

FIRST and foremost. While sammy has been good against lefties this year, and historically has mauled them, I think I'd be content with just platooning murton with floyd/jones. Either way though, I'd welcome Sammy in open arms, I love the guy.

 

2nd. The idea that a player can sway trade talks WITHOUT an NTC is just ridiculous, I think the examples of Soriano and Vazquez have already been brought up. Plain and simple, Sosa is just as likely to get traded if the GM wants it so as say, Ryan Theriot. THERE IS NO BASIS TO SAY OTHERWISE. The only reason that it wouldn't happen is if the GM's didn't want it to work out that way. Without an NTC, Sosa is as much a pawn as the next guy, 600 Home Runs or not. PERIOD.

 

3rdly, we won't get Sosa. Hendry isn't smart enough to see him as an upgrade, and wouldn't want him anyway, so this whole discussion is all for naught.

 

 

In general, this makes sense, but the argument you're giving is fairly abstract. It is possible, for instance, that Jon Daniels is an emotional man who would want to make sure that Sammy stays happy no matter where he is, or that Daniels made a verbal agreement with Sosa and is unwilling to break it without Sosa's consent. Although it is true that NTC-less players have no negotiating leverage built into their contracts, other factors sometimes apply.

 

But there you go, you said it yourself. Sosa isn't the reason, it's the GM's. It's Ultimately them that decide what he wants to do with a player without an NTC.

[brinoch]

Earlier in this thread, somebody said that they think Hendry often defers to his manager. If that's true, and I think it is to an extent, we should be asking ourselves what Piniella would think.

 

So, what would Piniella think? Would he be happy to get an upgrade, upset at the major media distraction Sosa would produce, neutral, or what? (Obviously, I'm not including in this question Lou's opinion of the guys we would send to Texas)

 

 

Edit: for the sake of clarity, let me say from the outset that I am not that exicted about Sosa and would prefer lots of other options, but that my opposition to getting Sosa is no different from how I would feel about a player with a comparable skill/injury/volatility set but none of the history)

 

I think Piniella would prefer Griffey. I think he would prefer Griffey a heck of a lot more than Sosa.

 

Personally, I'm not particularly in favor of Sosa -- he's old, and while he does mash against lefties, I don't see how he's an upgrade over Murton.

 

Back to Meph's original point -- where to upgrade -- I'd use internal options for SS and RF (Theriot/Cedeno and Murton). BP's Pecota projection for Pie have him at a .271 EqA for the season, and while it's a risk, I'd probably just use him there rather than a Jones/Pagan platoon.

 

Unless you're going to go out and get a true impact player, I just don't see wasting prospects and cash for a marginal upgrade over our available internal options. Granted, I'm not in a decision-making position, but this seems pretty self-evident to me.

Edited July 22, 2007 by brinoch

[reds44]

What could the Cubs offer for Griffey?

 

I think we're past the point where we were a few years ago of the Reds be willing to dump him off basically just to get rid of his salary.

 

Griffey to the Cubs does make alot of sense though. I would look into dealing Griffey, but I don't think Krivsky has the forsight to see that.

[Jazz]

Yeah I'm of the opinion that any addition we have been talking about making is not worth the players we would trade, and I'd be content with standing pact with the offense. On the otherhand, I could go for another SP......

[Mephistopheles]

Unless you're going to go out and get a true impact player, I just don't see wasting prospects and cash for a marginal upgrade over own available options. Granted, I'm not in a decision-making position, but this seems pretty self-evident to me.

 

That's the problem. They may just be "marginal" upgrades but when you're around 89-90 runs each win brings your chances of making the playoffs up so much. All wins aren't created equally. Wins between 88 and 92 are the most valuable in baseball, economically and on the field wise.

[Jazz]

What could the Cubs offer for Griffey?

 

I think we're past the point where we were a few years ago of the Reds be willing to dump him off basically just to get rid of his salary.

 

Griffey to the Cubs does make alot of sense though. I would look into dealing Griffey, but I don't think Krivsky has the forsight to see that.

 

I think if the cubs REALLY wanted Griffey, they could get him. Package Marshall, Epatt, and Murton together, and take a bad reds contract along the way. Too bad that probably would not be in our best interest.

[Jazz]

Unless you're going to go out and get a true impact player, I just don't see wasting prospects and cash for a marginal upgrade over own available options. Granted, I'm not in a decision-making position, but this seems pretty self-evident to me.

 

That's the problem. They may just be "marginal" upgrades but when you're around 89-90 runs each win brings your chances of making the playoffs up so much. All wins aren't created equally. Wins between 88 and 92 are the most valuable in baseball, economically and on the field wise.

 

are you saying a win in april isn't as important as a win in september?

[reds44]

What could the Cubs offer for Griffey?

 

I think we're past the point where we were a few years ago of the Reds be willing to dump him off basically just to get rid of his salary.

 

Griffey to the Cubs does make alot of sense though. I would look into dealing Griffey, but I don't think Krivsky has the forsight to see that.

 

I think if the cubs REALLY wanted Griffey, they could get him. Package Marshall, Epatt, and Murton together, and take a bad reds contract along the way. Too bad that probably would not be in our best interest.

Honestly, I would have a hard time saying no to that deal.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

One of the things that is obvious in this thread is the dearth of quality options for an upgrade.

 

Sosa is an upgrade in an effort to help out a platoon situation, but he's not going to radically improve this team.

 

Glaus has been mentioned, but he'd be out of position. Would he be sufficient? That depends on how reliable one believes Meph's defensive estimations to be. I have some doubts, but it's more speculation and reservation than anything specific.

 

What else?

 

Posada isn't likely to be available.

 

Griffey or Dunn would be a possibility. Those two probably represent the best chance for improvement.

 

There really isn't any true shortstops who would provide much improvement available.

 

There are bullpen options, but any starting pitchers have concerns and warts. It's going to be tough to make any significant upgrades over the next 11 days.

[brinoch]

Unless you're going to go out and get a true impact player, I just don't see wasting prospects and cash for a marginal upgrade over own available options. Granted, I'm not in a decision-making position, but this seems pretty self-evident to me.

 

That's the problem. They may just be "marginal" upgrades but when you're around 89-90 runs each win brings your chances of making the playoffs up so much. All wins aren't created equally. Wins between 88 and 92 are the most valuable in baseball, economically and on the field wise.

 

are you saying a win in april isn't as important as a win in september?

 

No. He's saying that 92 wins will get you into the playoffs whereas 88 will generally see you sitting at home.

[hankp101]

What SP is available that you would want? Vazquez maybe? Who do you move out of the rotation? I suppose it would have to be Marshall via trade, Marquis is making too much money and hasn't performed poorly enough to lose his spot (given that salary). Isnt Vazquez or any other available starter over Marshall just another marginal upgrade like we have discussed at positions? How about a dominant left setup guy that would allow us to put Eyre out to pasture.

[Mephistopheles]

Unless you're going to go out and get a true impact player, I just don't see wasting prospects and cash for a marginal upgrade over own available options. Granted, I'm not in a decision-making position, but this seems pretty self-evident to me.

 

That's the problem. They may just be "marginal" upgrades but when you're around 89-90 runs each win brings your chances of making the playoffs up so much. All wins aren't created equally. Wins between 88 and 92 are the most valuable in baseball, economically and on the field wise.

 

are you saying a win in april isn't as important as a win in september?

 

No. I'm saying this:

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/images/uploads/Pennants_Added_2.gif

 

where we are at it looks like each win makes the probability we play in october go up 10%.

Edited July 22, 2007 by Mephistopheles

[reds44]

One of the things that is obvious in this thread is the dearth of quality options for an upgrade.

 

Sosa is an upgrade in an effort to help out a platoon situation, but he's not going to radically improve this team.

 

Glaus has been mentioned, but he'd be out of position. Would he be sufficient? That depends on how reliable one believes Meph's defensive estimations to be. I have some doubts, but it's more speculation and reservation than anything specific.

 

What else?

 

Posada isn't likely to be available.

 

Griffey or Dunn would be a possibility. Those two probably represent the best chance for improvement.

 

There really isn't any true shortstops who would provide much improvement available.

 

There are bullpen options, but any starting pitchers have concerns and warts. It's going to be tough to make any significant upgrades over the next 11 days.

Out of all the options, Griffey makes sense. It just seems like a fit.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Unless you're going to go out and get a true impact player, I just don't see wasting prospects and cash for a marginal upgrade over own available options. Granted, I'm not in a decision-making position, but this seems pretty self-evident to me.

 

That's the problem. They may just be "marginal" upgrades but when you're around 89-90 runs each win brings your chances of making the playoffs up so much. All wins aren't created equally. Wins between 88 and 92 are the most valuable in baseball, economically and on the field wise.

 

are you saying a win in april isn't as important as a win in september?

 

That's not it at all. He's saying if you are an 80 win team and add two more to become an 82 win team, that's not a big deal. You're still not a playoff team. But if you are an 89 win team and can become a 91 win team, you greatly improve your chances at the postseason.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

One of the things that is obvious in this thread is the dearth of quality options for an upgrade.

 

Sosa is an upgrade in an effort to help out a platoon situation, but he's not going to radically improve this team.

 

Glaus has been mentioned, but he'd be out of position. Would he be sufficient? That depends on how reliable one believes Meph's defensive estimations to be. I have some doubts, but it's more speculation and reservation than anything specific.

 

What else?

 

Posada isn't likely to be available.

 

Griffey or Dunn would be a possibility. Those two probably represent the best chance for improvement.

 

There really isn't any true shortstops who would provide much improvement available.

 

There are bullpen options, but any starting pitchers have concerns and warts. It's going to be tough to make any significant upgrades over the next 11 days.

Out of all the options, Griffey makes sense. It just seems like a fit.

 

Except for the cost to get him. The issue with Griffey is the Reds will likely want a package that includes one of Hill or Marshall, and without adding another starter, the Cubs can't afford to pay that price.

[Jazz]

Unless you're going to go out and get a true impact player, I just don't see wasting prospects and cash for a marginal upgrade over own available options. Granted, I'm not in a decision-making position, but this seems pretty self-evident to me.

 

That's the problem. They may just be "marginal" upgrades but when you're around 89-90 runs each win brings your chances of making the playoffs up so much. All wins aren't created equally. Wins between 88 and 92 are the most valuable in baseball, economically and on the field wise.

 

are you saying a win in april isn't as important as a win in september?

 

No. I'm saying this:

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/images/uploads/Pennants_Added_2.gif

 

we're we are at it looks like each win makes the probability we play in october go up 10%.

 

Yes I'll definately agree with that. But ehh, marginal upgrades quickly into marginal downgrades sometimes. I like impact better =\.

 

But you're probably right.

 

I wish there was a chart though that could give us a prediction based on the recent swing of winning we're having. Not based on our rate since June or so, but some kind of probability based on the schedule and predicted success.

[Mephistopheles]

I really think we should look to Boston, Cleveland, Oakland or Toronto and trade one of them Matt Murton. They'd probably be the four teams to value his talents the most.

[hankp101]

I would like to thank this Cubs team for creating a situation that allows us to have this interesting of a discussion late on a Saturday in mid-late July.

[Jazz]

I really think we should look to Boston, Cleveland, Oakland or Toronto and trade one of them Matt Murton. They'd probably be the four teams to value his talents the most.

 

 

they'd probably value him alot more if he could get some playing time.

 

which in turn would raise his value up with us, thus defeating set train of thought :P

[Mephistopheles]

I wish there was a chart though that could give us a prediction based on the recent swing of winning we're having. Not based on our rate since June or so, but some kind of probability based on the schedule and predicted success.

 

we do have that and it's at 57 percent.

[reds44]

One of the things that is obvious in this thread is the dearth of quality options for an upgrade.

 

Sosa is an upgrade in an effort to help out a platoon situation, but he's not going to radically improve this team.

 

Glaus has been mentioned, but he'd be out of position. Would he be sufficient? That depends on how reliable one believes Meph's defensive estimations to be. I have some doubts, but it's more speculation and reservation than anything specific.

 

What else?

 

Posada isn't likely to be available.

 

Griffey or Dunn would be a possibility. Those two probably represent the best chance for improvement.

 

There really isn't any true shortstops who would provide much improvement available.

 

There are bullpen options, but any starting pitchers have concerns and warts. It's going to be tough to make any significant upgrades over the next 11 days.

Out of all the options, Griffey makes sense. It just seems like a fit.

 

Except for the cost to get him. The issue with Griffey is the Reds will likely want a package that includes one of Hill or Marshall, and without adding another starter, the Cubs can't afford to pay that price.

I think the Reds would be willing to package Kyle Loshe into any deal. He's going to be traded, the question is where.

Edited July 22, 2007 by reds44

[SaorsaDaonnan]

Ok my 2 cents.

 

FIRST and foremost. While sammy has been good against lefties this year, and historically has mauled them, I think I'd be content with just platooning murton with floyd/jones. Either way though, I'd welcome Sammy in open arms, I love the guy.

 

2nd. The idea that a player can sway trade talks WITHOUT an NTC is just ridiculous, I think the examples of Soriano and Vazquez have already been brought up. Plain and simple, Sosa is just as likely to get traded if the GM wants it so as say, Ryan Theriot. THERE IS NO BASIS TO SAY OTHERWISE. The only reason that it wouldn't happen is if the GM's didn't want it to work out that way. Without an NTC, Sosa is as much a pawn as the next guy, 600 Home Runs or not. PERIOD.

 

3rdly, we won't get Sosa. Hendry isn't smart enough to see him as an upgrade, and wouldn't want him anyway, so this whole discussion is all for naught.

 

 

In general, this makes sense, but the argument you're giving is fairly abstract. It is possible, for instance, that Jon Daniels is an emotional man who would want to make sure that Sammy stays happy no matter where he is, or that Daniels made a verbal agreement with Sosa and is unwilling to break it without Sosa's consent. Although it is true that NTC-less players have no negotiating leverage built into their contracts, other factors sometimes apply.

 

But there you go, you said it yourself. Sosa isn't the reason, it's the GM's. It's Ultimately them that decide what he wants to do with a player without an NTC.

 

 

I dunno, it seems sort of facile to say that it depends only on the GM in a situation where the GM has decided to defer to the player. When a GM binds his future options by making a promise to a player, he gives up some of his decisionmaking power. When a GM promises a player that he will make every effort to accomodate him, then, insofar as the GM is honest, he has indeed transferred some power to the player.

[Mephistopheles]

I really think we should look to Boston, Cleveland, Oakland or Toronto and trade one of them Matt Murton. They'd probably be the four teams to value his talents the most.

 

 

they'd probably value him alot more if he could get some playing time.

 

which in turn would raise his value up with us, thus defeating set train of thought :P

 

not really. all four of these teams respect the minor league translations.