Are the Cubs contenders the next 2-3 years?

[Exile on Waveland]

 

 

Did anyone in here really say "makings of a dynasty"?

 

 

I sincerely believe they have all the ingredients right now for a dynasty. They just need to gel a teensy bit more.

 

I dont know if Id use the word dynasty, but we definitely have the type of team that will be in contention for years to come. We have the core of our team signed long term. The Brewers coukd be a threat for a while, but once their guys start coming up for free agency, and the Yanks, Mets, Angels, and Red Sox start throwing obscene contracts at them, the Brewers wont be able to match them. The Cardnals are going to ultimately have to realise that if thy want to win, they'll have to sever ties with the Albatross Brothers(Edmonds and Rolen) and go after some real talent.

 

So, yes.

 

That's one person that used the term "dynasty" towards the Cubs. He was immediately reprimanded. The second quote above -- while perhaps still too sunny -- disagreed with the term "dynasty." You picked out one overly optimistic fan and then portrayed the entire thread as being so.

 

This team should be in contention in the NL Central for the next couple/few seasons -- and even the resident Brewer fan, the one team that could distance itself, agreed.

[CubinNY]

 

 

Did anyone in here really say "makings of a dynasty"?

 

 

I sincerely believe they have all the ingredients right now for a dynasty. They just need to gel a teensy bit more.

 

I dont know if Id use the word dynasty, but we definitely have the type of team that will be in contention for years to come. We have the core of our team signed long term. The Brewers coukd be a threat for a while, but once their guys start coming up for free agency, and the Yanks, Mets, Angels, and Red Sox start throwing obscene contracts at them, the Brewers wont be able to match them. The Cardnals are going to ultimately have to realise that if thy want to win, they'll have to sever ties with the Albatross Brothers(Edmonds and Rolen) and go after some real talent.

 

So, yes.

 

That's one person that used the term "dynasty" towards the Cubs. He was immediately reprimanded. The second quote above -- while perhaps still too sunny -- disagreed with the term "dynasty." You picked out one overly optimistic fan and then portrayed the entire thread as being so.

 

This team should be in contention in the NL Central for the next couple/few seasons -- and even the resident Brewer fan, the one team that could distance itself, agreed.

 

I agree too but, being in contention in the division and being in World Series contention are two completely different things.

 

To me the general tone of the thread is overly optimistic. The Cubs are a medicore team and I see nothing on the horizon that suggests otherwise.

[Derwood]

Hendry has certainly accomplished his goal of "competing within the division"

[pitchcs]

Zambrano in my opinion is still not in his prime.

 

I think Lee is going to start to decline next year or the year after.

 

Soriano is already in his decline but he will still be solid throughout his contract barring injuries.

 

Wood could become one of the most dominant closers in the game if he gets his act together and doesn't get hurt.

 

Ramirez is in his prime now and I see him as having his career year within the next two years and then start to decline.

 

Lilly can provide us with 15 wins consistantly. I believe he can do this whole-heartedly if he starts getting better run support.

 

Hill and Marshall are still developing and both have potential to be great. Or hey trade them and get another ace.

 

If Prior can come back (LOL I KNOW I KNOW) then we could have a nice little rotation of: Zambrano, Lilly, Prior, Hill/Marhsall or whoever we trade them for.

 

Don't forget Hendry said that this off season they are going to focus more on trades than free agents, should be a wild ride.

 

In my conclusion, I think next year has to be the year with the future looking bleak after unless our farm system churns out a few monsters.

 

 

1) I think you've already seen that start

 

2) I think Lilly is solid as well, but he already has one of the best run supports in the league (something like 6 runs per game).

[jmajew]

The Cubs have the potential to be a good team for the next three years. But there are a lot of "ifs" that surround this team. We need Theriot to become our version of David Eckstein and we need DeRosa to keep up his 800 OPS. Even though more realistically we should expect 750-775. Most importantly we need Pie to become the player he is in Triple A, or atleast an 800 ops version.

 

I'm sorry if I believe a lineup of Soriano, Theriot, Lee, Ramirez, Jones, DeRosa, Pie, Kendall/Soto is one of the best in the NL.

 

Our pitching will need some work after Zambrano-Hill-Lilly.

[JeffH]

The Cubs certainly have the potential to avoid being a last-place, 90-loss team for the next few seasons.

 

I wouldn't bet on it, though.

[Exile on Waveland]

 

 

Did anyone in here really say "makings of a dynasty"?

 

 

I sincerely believe they have all the ingredients right now for a dynasty. They just need to gel a teensy bit more.

 

I dont know if Id use the word dynasty, but we definitely have the type of team that will be in contention for years to come. We have the core of our team signed long term. The Brewers coukd be a threat for a while, but once their guys start coming up for free agency, and the Yanks, Mets, Angels, and Red Sox start throwing obscene contracts at them, the Brewers wont be able to match them. The Cardnals are going to ultimately have to realise that if thy want to win, they'll have to sever ties with the Albatross Brothers(Edmonds and Rolen) and go after some real talent.

 

So, yes.

 

That's one person that used the term "dynasty" towards the Cubs. He was immediately reprimanded. The second quote above -- while perhaps still too sunny -- disagreed with the term "dynasty." You picked out one overly optimistic fan and then portrayed the entire thread as being so.

 

This team should be in contention in the NL Central for the next couple/few seasons -- and even the resident Brewer fan, the one team that could distance itself, agreed.

 

I agree too but, being in contention in the division and being in World Series contention are two completely different things.

 

To me the general tone of the thread is overly optimistic. The Cubs are a medicore team and I see nothing on the horizon that suggests otherwise.

 

I agree, contending in the NL Central isn't terribly impressive. I think the immediate future holds more seasons like this. Now, if they could add another big bat* -- which is doubtful as they are likely near maxed-out payroll wise -- that could change. Otherwise, I agree with you.

 

*Edit: Another starter may be needed, too.

[ConstableRabbit]

 

 

Did anyone in here really say "makings of a dynasty"?

 

 

I sincerely believe they have all the ingredients right now for a dynasty. They just need to gel a teensy bit more.

 

I dont know if Id use the word dynasty, but we definitely have the type of team that will be in contention for years to come. We have the core of our team signed long term. The Brewers coukd be a threat for a while, but once their guys start coming up for free agency, and the Yanks, Mets, Angels, and Red Sox start throwing obscene contracts at them, the Brewers wont be able to match them. The Cardnals are going to ultimately have to realise that if thy want to win, they'll have to sever ties with the Albatross Brothers(Edmonds and Rolen) and go after some real talent.

 

So, yes.

 

That's one person that used the term "dynasty" towards the Cubs. He was immediately reprimanded. The second quote above -- while perhaps still too sunny -- disagreed with the term "dynasty." You picked out one overly optimistic fan and then portrayed the entire thread as being so.

 

This team should be in contention in the NL Central for the next couple/few seasons -- and even the resident Brewer fan, the one team that could distance itself, agreed.

 

I agree too but, being in contention in the division and being in World Series contention are two completely different things.

 

To me the general tone of the thread is overly optimistic. The Cubs are a medicore team and I see nothing on the horizon that suggests otherwise.

 

I agree, contending in the NL Central isn't terribly impressive. I think the immediate future holds more seasons like this. Now, if they could add another big bat* -- which is doubtful as they are likely near maxed-out payroll wise -- that could change. Otherwise, I agree with you.

 

*Edit: Another starter may be needed, too.

 

Is there really that much of a difference between being in contention for the division every year and in contention for the world series? Maybe in Las Vegas standards, but I don't think that there is. (Note: I'm not saying it should be our goal to settle for "contending within the division")

 

If we make it to the playoffs, with the crapshoot that it is, we're automatically in World Series contention. Take the Cardinals, for example, who have gone to the playoffs 5 out of the last 6 years. They've won 2 pennants in that stretch. When they won 105 games (2004) they were swept in the WS. Last year, they won 83 games and took the series in 5.

 

Once you're in the playoffs, you need to win 2 consecutive series, and you're already in the World Series. For the next few years, I think this team has what it takes to get to the playoffs -- from there, we'll have to see what happens. Who cares if our division is the worst in the league?

[Exile on Waveland]

 

 

Did anyone in here really say "makings of a dynasty"?

 

 

I sincerely believe they have all the ingredients right now for a dynasty. They just need to gel a teensy bit more.

 

I dont know if Id use the word dynasty, but we definitely have the type of team that will be in contention for years to come. We have the core of our team signed long term. The Brewers coukd be a threat for a while, but once their guys start coming up for free agency, and the Yanks, Mets, Angels, and Red Sox start throwing obscene contracts at them, the Brewers wont be able to match them. The Cardnals are going to ultimately have to realise that if thy want to win, they'll have to sever ties with the Albatross Brothers(Edmonds and Rolen) and go after some real talent.

 

So, yes.

 

That's one person that used the term "dynasty" towards the Cubs. He was immediately reprimanded. The second quote above -- while perhaps still too sunny -- disagreed with the term "dynasty." You picked out one overly optimistic fan and then portrayed the entire thread as being so.

 

This team should be in contention in the NL Central for the next couple/few seasons -- and even the resident Brewer fan, the one team that could distance itself, agreed.

 

I agree too but, being in contention in the division and being in World Series contention are two completely different things.

 

To me the general tone of the thread is overly optimistic. The Cubs are a medicore team and I see nothing on the horizon that suggests otherwise.

 

I agree, contending in the NL Central isn't terribly impressive. I think the immediate future holds more seasons like this. Now, if they could add another big bat* -- which is doubtful as they are likely near maxed-out payroll wise -- that could change. Otherwise, I agree with you.

 

*Edit: Another starter may be needed, too.

 

Is there really that much of a difference between being in contention for the division every year and in contention for the world series? Maybe in Las Vegas standards, but I don't think that there is. (Note: I'm not saying it should be our goal to settle for "contending within the division")

 

If we make it to the playoffs, with the crapshoot that it is, we're automatically in World Series contention. Take the Cardinals, for example, who have gone to the playoffs 5 out of the last 6 years. They've won 2 pennants in that stretch. When they won 105 games (2004) they were swept in the WS. Last year, they won 83 games and took the series in 5.

 

Once you're in the playoffs, you need to win 2 consecutive series, and you're already in the World Series. For the next few years, I think this team has what it takes to get to the playoffs -- from there, we'll have to see what happens. Who cares if our division is the worst in the league?

 

I'll agree that the playoffs are a crap-shoot, and, by that definition, maybe the Cubs are contender. Perhaps instead of "World Series contender" we should talk of "consistent 90+ win team." That's a much better barometer of yearly success than contending by squeaking into the playoffs with 83-86 wins.

[ConstableRabbit]

 

 

Did anyone in here really say "makings of a dynasty"?

 

 

I sincerely believe they have all the ingredients right now for a dynasty. They just need to gel a teensy bit more.

 

I dont know if Id use the word dynasty, but we definitely have the type of team that will be in contention for years to come. We have the core of our team signed long term. The Brewers coukd be a threat for a while, but once their guys start coming up for free agency, and the Yanks, Mets, Angels, and Red Sox start throwing obscene contracts at them, the Brewers wont be able to match them. The Cardnals are going to ultimately have to realise that if thy want to win, they'll have to sever ties with the Albatross Brothers(Edmonds and Rolen) and go after some real talent.

 

So, yes.

 

That's one person that used the term "dynasty" towards the Cubs. He was immediately reprimanded. The second quote above -- while perhaps still too sunny -- disagreed with the term "dynasty." You picked out one overly optimistic fan and then portrayed the entire thread as being so.

 

This team should be in contention in the NL Central for the next couple/few seasons -- and even the resident Brewer fan, the one team that could distance itself, agreed.

 

I agree too but, being in contention in the division and being in World Series contention are two completely different things.

 

To me the general tone of the thread is overly optimistic. The Cubs are a medicore team and I see nothing on the horizon that suggests otherwise.

 

I agree, contending in the NL Central isn't terribly impressive. I think the immediate future holds more seasons like this. Now, if they could add another big bat* -- which is doubtful as they are likely near maxed-out payroll wise -- that could change. Otherwise, I agree with you.

 

*Edit: Another starter may be needed, too.

 

Is there really that much of a difference between being in contention for the division every year and in contention for the world series? Maybe in Las Vegas standards, but I don't think that there is. (Note: I'm not saying it should be our goal to settle for "contending within the division")

 

If we make it to the playoffs, with the crapshoot that it is, we're automatically in World Series contention. Take the Cardinals, for example, who have gone to the playoffs 5 out of the last 6 years. They've won 2 pennants in that stretch. When they won 105 games (2004) they were swept in the WS. Last year, they won 83 games and took the series in 5.

 

Once you're in the playoffs, you need to win 2 consecutive series, and you're already in the World Series. For the next few years, I think this team has what it takes to get to the playoffs -- from there, we'll have to see what happens. Who cares if our division is the worst in the league?

 

I'll agree that the playoffs are a crap-shoot, and, by that definition, maybe the Cubs are contender. Perhaps instead of "World Series contender" we should talk of "consistent 90+ win team." That's a much better barometer of yearly success than contending by squeaking into the playoffs with 83-86 wins.

 

That's fair. I'm not opposed to creating the best team possible obviously, and I don't think we're a great team by ANY standards, but if we could win a world series, I'd be willing to forget about that for a little while :D

[TheDude]

I really like this team right now looking at '08. An infield of Lee, DeRosa, Theriot, and Ramirez is solid, and DeRosa, Lee, Ramirez makes for a good 2-4 lineup. Theriot can work as an everyday player provided other things happen in the offseason.

 

The outfield is probably the biggest project. Soriano is clearly penciled in, but CF and RF are up in the air. Hopefully Hendry tries to move Jones and Eyre and puts the money into a quality OF. This will be the one real offseason move. Use that pitching depth in the farm system to make it happen. Go with cheap production in Pie or Murton in whatever OF slot doesn't get filled by the other OF move.

 

A starting three of Zambrano, Hill, and Lilly is also very solid. Marquis is likely there because he is signed, and is a serviceable #5. Use a Cubs farm product at #4.

 

The bullpen is still pretty solid, and the Cubs have a stockpile of good young arms. This is the area where the Cubs can save the most money.

 

I'd like to Soto get a shot at everyday catcher, again saving money.

 

That's a start I can excited about for certain.

[JeffH]

The problem in adding a big bat is that there aren't really any top offensive outfielders with the defensive profile to play RF likely to be available.

 

The best idea would probably be to move Soriano to RF and then look into Dunn or Burrell for LF.

[TheDude]

The problem in adding a big bat is that there aren't really any top offensive outfielders with the defensive profile to play RF likely to be available.

 

The best idea would probably be to move Soriano to RF and then look into Dunn or Burrell for LF.

 

If RF is the big bat acquisition, then Pie plays CF everyday. With Pie's range, the RF doesn't need anything better than average or even slightly sub-average defense.

[pitchcs]

The problem in adding a big bat is that there aren't really any top offensive outfielders with the defensive profile to play RF likely to be available.

 

The best idea would probably be to move Soriano to RF and then look into Dunn or Burrell for LF.

 

If RF is the big bat acquisition, then Pie plays CF everyday. With Pie's range, the RF doesn't need anything better than average or even slightly sub-average defense.

 

 

I think possibly he meant the OF's are all CF's (Hunter, Jones, etc.), correct?

[JeffH]

The problem in adding a big bat is that there aren't really any top offensive outfielders with the defensive profile to play RF likely to be available.

 

The best idea would probably be to move Soriano to RF and then look into Dunn or Burrell for LF.

 

If RF is the big bat acquisition, then Pie plays CF everyday. With Pie's range, the RF doesn't need anything better than average or even slightly sub-average defense.

 

 

I think possibly he meant the OF's are all CF's (Hunter, Jones, etc.), correct?

 

Kind of. Even via trade, try to find someone that you think would be a big offensive upgrade in RF who wouldn't make you cringe every time a ball is hit his way.

 

I've done a fifty-yard dash through MLB and there aren't any guys like that.

 

I suppose you could sign one of the veteran CFs and play Pie or Jones in RF, but that doesn't appeal to me.

 

Dunn-Pie-Soriano

Burrell-Pie-Soriano

[Drew Doughty]

how about abreu (assuming the yanks don't excercise his option)? 1000 ops since the all-star break.

[TheDude]

The problem in adding a big bat is that there aren't really any top offensive outfielders with the defensive profile to play RF likely to be available.

 

The best idea would probably be to move Soriano to RF and then look into Dunn or Burrell for LF.

 

If RF is the big bat acquisition, then Pie plays CF everyday. With Pie's range, the RF doesn't need anything better than average or even slightly sub-average defense.

 

 

I think possibly he meant the OF's are all CF's (Hunter, Jones, etc.), correct?

 

Kind of. Even via trade, try to find someone that you think would be a big offensive upgrade in RF who wouldn't make you cringe every time a ball is hit his way.

 

I've done a fifty-yard dash through MLB and there aren't any guys like that.

 

I suppose you could sign one of the veteran CFs and play Pie or Jones in RF, but that doesn't appeal to me.

 

Dunn-Pie-Soriano

Burrell-Pie-Soriano

 

Sounds like you're strictly talking FAs, otherwise you're then saying there isn't a RF upgrade in all baseball. I'm advocating the Cubs deal from farm strength (pitching) to get an OF (either CF or RF), then plug Murton or Pie in the remaining spot. Or include Murton in the deal and plug Pie RF if the target is a CF.

 

There are quite a few options out there, and they don't have to be over the hill. A team stocked with young OF (say TB), but short on pitching might be willing to deal, even if the Cubs have to overpay a bit. Hell, I'd offer Hill and target Crawford, for example, then run Soriano, Pie, and Crawford as the fastest OF in baseball (with 60+ HR expectation).

[jersey cubs fan]

give up the farm for cabrera.

[C.C.]

give up the farm for cabrera.

 

wouldn't be enough.

[jmajew]

The problem in adding a big bat is that there aren't really any top offensive outfielders with the defensive profile to play RF likely to be available.

 

The best idea would probably be to move Soriano to RF and then look into Dunn or Burrell for LF.

 

If RF is the big bat acquisition, then Pie plays CF everyday. With Pie's range, the RF doesn't need anything better than average or even slightly sub-average defense.

 

 

I think possibly he meant the OF's are all CF's (Hunter, Jones, etc.), correct?

 

Kind of. Even via trade, try to find someone that you think would be a big offensive upgrade in RF who wouldn't make you cringe every time a ball is hit his way.

 

I've done a fifty-yard dash through MLB and there aren't any guys like that.

 

I suppose you could sign one of the veteran CFs and play Pie or Jones in RF, but that doesn't appeal to me.

 

Dunn-Pie-Soriano

Burrell-Pie-Soriano

 

Sounds like you're strictly talking FAs, otherwise you're then saying there isn't a RF upgrade in all baseball. I'm advocating the Cubs deal from farm strength (pitching) to get an OF (either CF or RF), then plug Murton or Pie in the remaining spot. Or include Murton in the deal and plug Pie RF if the target is a CF.

 

There are quite a few options out there, and they don't have to be over the hill. A team stocked with young OF (say TB), but short on pitching might be willing to deal, even if the Cubs have to overpay a bit. Hell, I'd offer Hill and target Crawford, for example, then run Soriano, Pie, and Crawford as the fastest OF in baseball (with 60+ HR expectation).

 

I'm all for going for Crawford. He would without a doubt be an upgrade. I just don't know how you would set up a lineup with him and Soriano. To me they seem to be very similar players.

 

My preference is to trade for Burrell who will only be 31 next year. I'm pretty sure a deal of Murton and Marshall could net us Burrell. Then we would have an ideal lineup of Theriot, Soriano, DLEE, Burrell, Ramirez, DeRosa, Soto/Kendall, Pie.

 

In my mind the mistake we made this offseason was signing Soriano over Carlos Lee. I would have much preferred a lineup of Theriot, DeRosa, DLEE, CLEE, Ramirez, Floyd, Jones, Kendall over a lineup of Soriano, Theriot, DLEE, Ramirez, DeRosa, Floyd, Jones, Kendall. But hindsight is 20/20.

[Electron Blue]

The problem in adding a big bat is that there aren't really any top offensive outfielders with the defensive profile to play RF likely to be available.

 

The best idea would probably be to move Soriano to RF and then look into Dunn or Burrell for LF.

 

If RF is the big bat acquisition, then Pie plays CF everyday. With Pie's range, the RF doesn't need anything better than average or even slightly sub-average defense.

 

 

I think possibly he meant the OF's are all CF's (Hunter, Jones, etc.), correct?

 

Kind of. Even via trade, try to find someone that you think would be a big offensive upgrade in RF who wouldn't make you cringe every time a ball is hit his way.

 

I've done a fifty-yard dash through MLB and there aren't any guys like that.

 

I suppose you could sign one of the veteran CFs and play Pie or Jones in RF, but that doesn't appeal to me.

 

Dunn-Pie-Soriano

Burrell-Pie-Soriano

 

Sounds like you're strictly talking FAs, otherwise you're then saying there isn't a RF upgrade in all baseball. I'm advocating the Cubs deal from farm strength (pitching) to get an OF (either CF or RF), then plug Murton or Pie in the remaining spot. Or include Murton in the deal and plug Pie RF if the target is a CF.

 

There are quite a few options out there, and they don't have to be over the hill. A team stocked with young OF (say TB), but short on pitching might be willing to deal, even if the Cubs have to overpay a bit. Hell, I'd offer Hill and target Crawford, for example, then run Soriano, Pie, and Crawford as the fastest OF in baseball (with 60+ HR expectation).

 

I'm all for going for Crawford. He would without a doubt be an upgrade. I just don't know how you would set up a lineup with him and Soriano. To me they seem to be very similar players.

 

My preference is to trade for Burrell who will only be 31 next year. I'm pretty sure a deal of Murton and Marshall could net us Burrell. Then we would have an ideal lineup of Theriot, Soriano, DLEE, Burrell, Ramirez, DeRosa, Soto/Kendall, Pie.

 

In my mind the mistake we made this offseason was signing Soriano over Carlos Lee. I would have much preferred a lineup of Theriot, DeRosa, DLEE, CLEE, Ramirez, Floyd, Jones, Kendall over a lineup of Soriano, Theriot, DLEE, Ramirez, DeRosa, Floyd, Jones, Kendall. But hindsight is 20/20.

 

really not an issue... if you have a good player and a similar player is available, go get him: then you'll have two good players :) But seriously, lineup construction is not a big deal, at least not to the degree that it should affect out interest in Crawford.

 

Hell, look at Pierre. JH went hard after him because he went after players based on what he expected a lineup to look like.

[jersey cubs fan]

give up the farm for cabrera.

 

wouldn't be enough.

 

You could make it work.

 

Colvin, Pie, Murton, Gallagher, Veal, Marshall, Hill, Wuertz, Marmol, Patterson are all names that could be intriguing to a team in need of cheap talent. Some lower level guys, like Burke, may have made enough of a name for themselves this year to also add value to a trade.

 

Cabrera is going to make over $10 million next year. He should be signed to a longterm contract, and I can't see Florida wanting to do either thing. Yes, other teams have more to offer than the Cubs. But, that doesn't mean those others teams will be willing. People don't generally trade their top prospects, especially when they are elite.

[CubinNY]

give up the farm for cabrera.

 

wouldn't be enough.

 

You could make it work.

 

Colvin, Pie, Murton, Gallagher, Veal, Marshall, Hill, Wuertz, Marmol, Patterson are all names that could be intriguing to a team in need of cheap talent. Some lower level guys, like Burke, may have made enough of a name for themselves this year to also add value to a trade.

 

Cabrera is going to make over $10 million next year. He should be signed to a longterm contract, and I can't see Florida wanting to do either thing. Yes, other teams have more to offer than the Cubs. But, that doesn't mean those others teams will be willing. People don't generally trade their top prospects, especially when they are elite.

I'll be willing to bet that Cabrerra and Willis will be traded this offseason.

 

Florida is averaging 17k fans/game.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/attendance

 

As a side note, I see Boston is averaging 101 % (36k/game). The Cubs are second @ 97. 101% that is amazing.

[TheDude]

Sounds like you're strictly talking FAs, otherwise you're then saying there isn't a RF upgrade in all baseball. I'm advocating the Cubs deal from farm strength (pitching) to get an OF (either CF or RF), then plug Murton or Pie in the remaining spot. Or include Murton in the deal and plug Pie RF if the target is a CF.

 

There are quite a few options out there, and they don't have to be over the hill. A team stocked with young OF (say TB), but short on pitching might be willing to deal, even if the Cubs have to overpay a bit. Hell, I'd offer Hill and target Crawford, for example, then run Soriano, Pie, and Crawford as the fastest OF in baseball (with 60+ HR expectation).

 

I'm all for going for Crawford. He would without a doubt be an upgrade. I just don't know how you would set up a lineup with him and Soriano. To me they seem to be very similar players.

 

My preference is to trade for Burrell who will only be 31 next year. I'm pretty sure a deal of Murton and Marshall could net us Burrell. Then we would have an ideal lineup of Theriot, Soriano, DLEE, Burrell, Ramirez, DeRosa, Soto/Kendall, Pie.

 

In my mind the mistake we made this offseason was signing Soriano over Carlos Lee. I would have much preferred a lineup of Theriot, DeRosa, DLEE, CLEE, Ramirez, Floyd, Jones, Kendall over a lineup of Soriano, Theriot, DLEE, Ramirez, DeRosa, Floyd, Jones, Kendall. But hindsight is 20/20.

 

Regarding Crawford, having him and Soriano in the same lineup is one hell of a good "problem" to have. Some combination of Soriano, Crawford, Lee, Ramirez, and DeRosa makes up 1-5. Soto 6. You could drop Pie and Theriot to 7-8 to ignite the bottom of the order with speed and hustle. The lineup is stacked with both amazing speed and very respectable power, and it's a excellent defensive team on top of that, which is gravy.

 

The problem with your Burrell suggestion is the team suddenly looks old. Murton and Marshall are cheap and productive talent, while Burrell is an anomalous, aging, expensive talent. Simultaneously, adding 31 year old Burrell to a core that is already 29+ (Soriano, Lee, Ramirez) and you've shortened your window for success a bit and downgraded defensively.

 

The real point is the Cubs have a window for success right now, and to maximize that window you give up the best of the farm that is blocked or replaceable for a 26-28 year old stud that figures to make too much for its current team.

[davearm]

The good thing is that the Cubs have allocated their payroll well.

 

If you have $100M to spend, you'd want to distribute it to:

~5 big-dollar stars in the $10M+ category

~5 solid complementary players in the $4-$7M category

2 or 3 vets making a few million or less

~12 or so young guys making pre-arb money

 

The thing you want to avoid is having to pour a big chunk of your payroll into too many guys in that $4-$7M middle class, forcing you to to skimp on the star, impact guys because your farm system can't adequately stock the bottom price tier. Fortunately the Cubs aren't in that situation.

 

Then with that roster/payroll framework in place, you need your stars to produce like stars (Z, Lee, Soriano, ARam, Lilly); your complementary veterans to fill their roles (Jones, Marquis, Howry, Dempster, DeRosa); your veteran depth to contribute (Blanco, Floyd, Ward); a few of your kids to provide production that far exceeds their cost (Hill, Pie hopefully, Marmol); several more to hold their own in significant roles (Theriot, Wuertz, Fontenot, Marshall, Murton); and the rest to be adequate bench/bullpen contributors (Fox, Pagan, Pignatiello, Cherry, Petrick, Gallagher, etc).

 

The Cubs certainly have the personnel in place to carry out the plan, so I feel pretty good about the future. Ideally, they'd use their surplus of guys in the bottom price tier in trades to upgrade their overall talent pool (in RF, particularly) without adding significantly to the payroll. Guys like Brad Hawpe and Alex Rios would be targets.