Who do we trade and what do we expect in return?

[bukie]

Schierholtz is nothing like LaHair/Hoffpauir. Terrible false dichotomy.

 

For now, I will ignore the multiple negation preceeding the dichotomy reference. Which begs the question, were you referring to a jointly exhaustive dichotomy or a mutually exclusive dichotomy?

 

Take some time, which you didn't when responding to my post, to actually look at the numbers and draw some conclusions. If you need me to do that for you then I can proceed with the Player A , Player B, and Player C format comparison. I'm thinking though, my time is better spent having meaningful discourse with fellow Cub fans rather than responding to: "Schierholtz is nothing like LaHair/Hoffpauir. Terrible false dichotomy"

 

There was a reason Shierholtz was non-tendered by the Phillies in the offseason.

There was a reason I responded with a one line response. Because it should be obvious. However, if you need it spelled out...

 

Micah Hoffpauir entered the majors at age 28 after several years in AAA. He had under 400 PA in the majors, during which he compiled a total of -0.2 WAR with an 88 OPS+ as a poor defensive 1B.

 

Bryan LaHair entered the majors for good at age 28 after several years in AAA. He had under 600 PA in the majors, during which he compiled a total of 0.0 WAR with a 106 OPS+ as a poor defensive 1B. Hist best stretch was a good two months of offensive production, which earned him an all-star nod because of it.

 

Nate Schierholtz entered the majors for good at age 25 after 1+ year in AAA. He has over 1600 PA over 6 years in the majors, during which he compiled a total of 5.3 WAR with a 103 OPS+ as a serviceable defensive OF. He was released by the Phillies after posting a .251/.321/.407 line last year, good for a .739 OPS and a 103 OPS+. He's being used strictly in a platoon this year to accentuate his positives and avoid his negatives.

 

Which one of these is not like the others?

[Guest]

LaHair and Hoffpauir are not major league caliber hitters. Including them in a comparison to Schierholtz as if he too will have a brief moment in the sun before becoming terrible again is a non-starter of a point.

 

Schierholtz was non-tendered for a couple reasons, chief among them that Ruben Amaro is bad at his job, and Nate is a tweener in that he's not someone you want to play every day, but he does offer value to a team. He's thriving this year because he's both in his prime and his playing time is being optimized by not putting him against LHP. Both will still hold mostly true next year as well, so there's no reason to think he'll crater if given the same role.

 

As for his trade value, contrary to the prevailing opinion of some, there's a good deal of value in letting Schierholtz play like a 3-4 win OF over 600+ PA between now and the end of next season. In the end he is a platoon player who should not be extended long-term, so you listen if someone wants to offer something with lasting value for him, but he's not to be discarded for whatever you can get.

[bukie]

Schierholtz is nothing like LaHair/Hoffpauir. Terrible false dichotomy.

 

For now, I will ignore the multiple negation preceeding the dichotomy reference. Which begs the question, were you referring to a jointly exhaustive dichotomy or a mutually exclusive dichotomy?

 

Take some time, which you didn't when responding to my post, to actually look at the numbers and draw some conclusions. If you need me to do that for you then I can proceed with the Player A , Player B, and Player C format comparison. I'm thinking though, my time is better spent having meaningful discourse with fellow Cub fans rather than responding to: "Schierholtz is nothing like LaHair/Hoffpauir. Terrible false dichotomy"

 

There was a reason Shierholtz was non-tendered by the Phillies in the offseason.

As for the unnecessary grammar "lesson", the false dichotomy you presented is either you get value for Schierholtz now by trading him, or you get nothing by keeping him as he fades into obscurity like LaHair/Hoffpauir. There was no multiple negation, you just presented a logical fallacy as basis for a bogus either/or scenario, or in seemingly simple, easy to understand terms, a false dichotomy.

[Layoutman]

There was a reason I responded with a one line response. Because it should be obvious. However, if you need it spelled out...

 

Micah Hoffpauir entered the majors at age 28 after several years in AAA. He had under 400 PA in the majors, during which he compiled a total of -0.2 WAR with an 88 OPS+ as a poor defensive 1B.

 

Bryan LaHair entered the majors for good at age 28 after several years in AAA. He had under 600 PA in the majors, during which he compiled a total of 0.0 WAR with a 106 OPS+ as a poor defensive 1B. Hist best stretch was a good two months of offensive production, which earned him an all-star nod because of it.

 

Nate Schierholtz entered the majors for good at age 25 after 1+ year in AAA. He has over 1600 PA over 6 years in the majors, during which he compiled a total of 5.3 WAR with a 103 OPS+ as a serviceable defensive OF. He was released by the Phillies after posting a .251/.321/.407 line last year, good for a .739 OPS and a 103 OPS+. He's being used strictly in a platoon this year to accentuate his positives and avoid his negatives.

 

Which one of these is not like the others?

 

Don't go into this rant about platooning in any comparison. The collect trio were all members of a platoon due to bad LHP splits. You proved my point for me. To help clarify my point - How old is Shierholtz right now? 29 I could care less when Shierholtz got into the league I'm not arguing service time nor am I arguing who has accrued the best WAR over ANY season. All three of them had their best season at roughly the same age.

 

From my original post: "Shierholtz is at that magical age where fortune has shined on the likes of Hoffpauer and LaHair"

 

I'm taking you to task over this statement: (Schierholtz is nothing like LaHair/Hoffpauir. Terrible false dichotomy)

 

The trio have more in common than they do differences.

 

They all put it together rather late in their MLB careers around the ages you mentioned in YOUR post for LaHair and Hoffpauir . All three were parts of a platoon as the LHP splits were bad. The trio peaked at basically the same time frame in their perspective careers. When you look at the peripheral percentages they look like triplets to me.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

They're all adult men. They all play baseball. I don't know how much clearly the comparison can be.

[Guest]

There was a reason I responded with a one line response. Because it should be obvious. However, if you need it spelled out...

 

Micah Hoffpauir entered the majors at age 28 after several years in AAA. He had under 400 PA in the majors, during which he compiled a total of -0.2 WAR with an 88 OPS+ as a poor defensive 1B.

 

Bryan LaHair entered the majors for good at age 28 after several years in AAA. He had under 600 PA in the majors, during which he compiled a total of 0.0 WAR with a 106 OPS+ as a poor defensive 1B. Hist best stretch was a good two months of offensive production, which earned him an all-star nod because of it.

 

Nate Schierholtz entered the majors for good at age 25 after 1+ year in AAA. He has over 1600 PA over 6 years in the majors, during which he compiled a total of 5.3 WAR with a 103 OPS+ as a serviceable defensive OF. He was released by the Phillies after posting a .251/.321/.407 line last year, good for a .739 OPS and a 103 OPS+. He's being used strictly in a platoon this year to accentuate his positives and avoid his negatives.

 

Which one of these is not like the others?

 

Don't go into this rant about platooning in any comparison. The collect trio were all members of a platoon due to bad LHP splits. You proved my point for me. To help clarify my point - How old is Shierholtz right now? 29 I could care less when Shierholtz got into the league I'm not arguing service time nor am I arguing who has accrued the best WAR over ANY season. All three of them had their best season at roughly the same age.

 

From my original post: "Shierholtz is at that magical age where fortune has shined on the likes of Hoffpauer and LaHair"

 

I'm taking you to task over this statement: (Schierholtz is nothing like LaHair/Hoffpauir. Terrible false dichotomy)

 

The trio have more in common than they do differences.

 

They all put it together rather late in their MLB careers around the ages you mentioned in YOUR post for LaHair and Hoffpauir . All three were parts of a platoon as the LHP splits were bad. The trio peaked at basically the same time frame in their perspective careers. When you look at the peripheral percentages they look like triplets to me.

It's probably best to just stop. You're not winning.

[bukie]

The numbers I posted show how different they are and how wildly ridiculous your comparison is.

 

Schierholtz put up a 123 OPS+ at the age of 24 in San Fran as a real honest to goodness prospect that is a serviceable MLB hitter that is well above average in a platoon, which the Cubs are utilizing.

 

LaHair and Hoffpauir were unable to put up even a single season of MLB quality hitting when they finally made the majors at 28, which is why they are now playing overseas.

 

If you fail to see the difference there, there's not point in even discussing it further.

[MWV]

Also, begging the question doesn't mean what you think it means.

[jersey cubs fan]

Halfway through that I assumed layoutmans point was the complete opposite of what it ended up being.

[dcvalpo]

layoutman just earned himself a chapter in the book.

[Guest]

that's already like the 5th time i've seen that guy fail with tags

[Sammy Sofa]

that's already like the 5th time i've seen that guy fail with tags

 

Well, you it's tough to be patient when you're scrambling to post an argument THAT good.

[Little Slide Rooter]

So from our projected opening day roster we've flipped:

 

-Carlos Marmol for Matt Guerrier. In the long term it's a likely wash, but it was that or nothing for Marmol and Guerrier could be flipped between now and the waiver deadline as either a throw in or for another PTBNL.

 

-3 monts of Scott Feldman and organizational fodder Steve Clevenger for Jake Arrieta, a potential middle rotation starter with 3 years team control and Strop, a potential back end reliever with 4 years team control.

 

-Scott Hairston for Ivan Pineyro, an intriguing pitching prospect.

 

-2 months of Matt Garza for Mike Olt (likely Cubs top 10), a potetial superstar, though that ship may be sailing, with 5 years control, high ceiling pitching prospect CJ Edwards (Likely Cubs top 15-20) and a cost effective 4-6 starter in Grimm with 5 years control.

 

-Alfonso Soriano's age 38 season for an intriguing pitching prospect who could squeeze his way into our top 20-30.

 

Also, between Lillibridge, Gonzalez, Takahashi, Hairston (2?) and Garza, there's still several PTBNL (or cash) to sort through, though I suspect that Garza's will be the only one of any value.

 

Say what you will about the Epstein plan, but it's hard to deny that he's doing just what he said he would.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

We've saved money in the trades for Feldman, Garza, Hairston and Soriano so far. Anyone doing a decent job of tabbing it up and seeing where the projected MLB payroll for the year stands?

[Guest]

We've saved money in the trades for Feldman, Garza, Hairston and Soriano so far. Anyone doing a decent job of tabbing it up and seeing where the projected MLB payroll for the year stands?

 

Rounding heavily, I think it's in the neighborhood of 10 million this year, 7-8 million in commitments for next year.

[davell]

We've saved money in the trades for Feldman, Garza, Hairston and Soriano so far. Anyone doing a decent job of tabbing it up and seeing where the projected MLB payroll for the year stands?

I think we've saved around 7.5 or so. My guess is we can figure 2-2.5 of it goes into IFA overage penalties, once Jimenez is signed. With any IFA signed after him being counted as well, at double the cost, with the overage.

[Guest]

that's already like the 5th time i've seen that guy fail with tags

 

Some of the tags look right. He must be disabling BBCode for some reason.

[Clem Fandango]

that's already like the 5th time i've seen that guy fail with tags

 

Some of the tags look right. He must be disabling BBCode for some reason.

 

He doesn't use BBCode because... he lost a family member to BBCode once.

[Guest]

Jon Morosi ‏@jonmorosi 1m

Jason Grilli now projected to miss between 1 and 2 months. Needless to say, look for Pirates to become more involved in pen market.

 

Possible Gregg landing spot if anyone still wants him

[mul21]

Jon Morosi ‏@jonmorosi 1m

Jason Grilli now projected to miss between 1 and 2 months. Needless to say, look for Pirates to become more involved in pen market.

 

Possible Gregg landing spot if anyone still wants him

 

That actually would probably work pretty well since they're sliding Melancon into the closer role and will need a set up guy to fill his slot. What do they have that would be worth it? And do they need OF help as well?

[Guest]

If Jed & Theo could pull off Kingham for Gregg, I'd forever sing their praises.

[davell]

I think there's probably enough teams dangling bullpen arms that our shot at moving Gregg for anything remotely useful has passed. That said, I'd shoot bigger with the Pirates and see if we could pry Glasnow away with Schierholtz and Russell.

[TheDude]

Any predictions from the board on how many spots the Cubs farm system climbs in the various farm system rankings published due to the deadline deals and draft? The only one I recall off the top is KLaw had the Cubs at #5 pre-season.

[davell]

Any predictions from the board on how many spots the Cubs farm system climbs in the various farm system rankings published due to the deadline deals and draft? The only one I recall off the top is KLaw had the Cubs at #5 pre-season.

Parks has us 2nd right now, behind the Twins. Depending on who's rankings it is, the only teams I can see ranked above us by anyone would be the Twins, Red Sox, Astros, Cards, and Pirates.

[Guest]

Any predictions from the board on how many spots the Cubs farm system climbs in the various farm system rankings published due to the deadline deals and draft? The only one I recall off the top is KLaw had the Cubs at #5 pre-season.

Parks has us 2nd right now, behind the Twins. Depending on who's rankings it is, the only teams I can see ranked above us by anyone would be the Twins, Red Sox, Astros, Cards, and Pirates.

 

And I believe he had us there and in the conversation for #1 before any trades.