Trib says Walker "probably as good as gone"

[treebird]

i'm fairly certain imb wasn't advocating trading lee

 

That's not what I read. An argument was being made that if someone from the infield should be traded it should be Lee (and not Walker) because we can get more for him.

 

but nobody said we had to trade an infielder

 

thats like saying that if you have to shoot either a dog or a cat, and you shoot a cat, it means you want to shoot a cat.

[Blueheart05]

i'm fairly certain imb wasn't advocating trading lee

 

That's not what I read. An argument was being made that if someone from the infield should be traded it should be Lee (and not Walker) because we can get more for him.

 

but nobody said we had to trade an infielder

 

thats like saying that if you have to shoot either a dog or a cat, and you shoot a cat, it means you want to shoot a cat.

 

 

do not trade walker, this is probably the stupidest thing you could do.

 

hell, it makes more sense to trade lee than it does to trade walker.

 

if this happens, im going to complain a lot and then still watch every game next year.

 

It makes more sense to trade Lee? :shock: :shock: :shock: Walker doesn't make Lee better, in fact, the opposite is true. Lee's the anchor of the infield. Without DLee at first this team would be amazingly miserable defensively.

 

The love for Walker is beyond bizarre.

 

Yes, it makes more sense to trade Lee because his value is at its highest and is in the national stage as a possible triple crown and MVP candidate. Lees production/salary will probably be fairly equivalent to Walkers next year (Walkers was higher last year).

 

LOL, I guess I'm the only one that thought these posts had something to do with trading Lee over Walker.

[XZero771679666304]

i'm fairly certain imb wasn't advocating trading lee

 

That's not what I read. An argument was being made that if someone from the infield should be traded it should be Lee (and not Walker) because we can get more for him.

 

I think "if" was the operative word. He wasn't saying that we should trade Lee, just that if one had to be traded, Lee would net more in return.

[nilodnayr]

do not trade walker, this is probably the stupidest thing you could do.

 

hell, it makes more sense to trade lee than it does to trade walker.

 

if this happens, im going to complain a lot and then still watch every game next year.

 

that doesnt look like anyone needs to be traded to me. IMB was just using lee as an example of how great walkers production/salary is and how difficult it would be to replace a bat like his at his postition (as you can see by some one like Soriano who will make 10M at similar production).

[nilodnayr]

i'm fairly certain imb wasn't advocating trading lee

 

That's not what I read. An argument was being made that if someone from the infield should be traded it should be Lee (and not Walker) because we can get more for him.

 

but nobody said we had to trade an infielder

 

thats like saying that if you have to shoot either a dog or a cat, and you shoot a cat, it means you want to shoot a cat.

 

 

do not trade walker, this is probably the stupidest thing you could do.

 

hell, it makes more sense to trade lee than it does to trade walker.

 

if this happens, im going to complain a lot and then still watch every game next year.

 

It makes more sense to trade Lee? :shock: :shock: :shock: Walker doesn't make Lee better, in fact, the opposite is true. Lee's the anchor of the infield. Without DLee at first this team would be amazingly miserable defensively.

 

The love for Walker is beyond bizarre.

 

Yes, it makes more sense to trade Lee because his value is at its highest and is in the national stage as a possible triple crown and MVP candidate. Lees production/salary will probably be fairly equivalent to Walkers next year (Walkers was higher last year).

 

LOL, I guess I'm the only one that thought these posts had something to do with trading Lee over Walker.

 

they ARE about trading Lee over walker, but they are not about trading either of them

[Blueheart05]

i'm fairly certain imb wasn't advocating trading lee

 

That's not what I read. An argument was being made that if someone from the infield should be traded it should be Lee (and not Walker) because we can get more for him.

 

I think "if" was the operative word. He wasn't saying that we should trade Lee, just that if one had to be traded, Lee would net more in return.

 

I understand the difference and still think its a gross overstatement. Walker is a nice offensive player but not someone you build a team around.

 

Contrary to popular belief, I suspect the chances are high that Walker is gone by the deadline (while a trade of any kind for Lee is highly unlikely.) Look at it this way; Lawton, Hollandsworth, and Walker all cleared waivers for the Cubs. We all know what happened with the other two...

[nilodnayr]

i'm fairly certain imb wasn't advocating trading lee

 

That's not what I read. An argument was being made that if someone from the infield should be traded it should be Lee (and not Walker) because we can get more for him.

 

I think "if" was the operative word. He wasn't saying that we should trade Lee, just that if one had to be traded, Lee would net more in return.

 

I understand the difference and still think its a gross overstatement. Walker is a nice offensive player but not someone you build a team around.

 

Contrary to popular belief, I suspect the chances are high that Walker is gone by the deadline (while a trade of any kind for Lee is highly unlikely.) Look at it this way; Lawton, Hollandsworth, and Walker all cleared waivers for the Cubs. We all know what happened with the other two...

 

I would say that is not contrary to popular belief according to the chicago sportswriters, unfortunately. Just because he cleared waivers doesnt necessarily mean he will be traded though.

[Blueheart05]

i'm fairly certain imb wasn't advocating trading lee

 

That's not what I read. An argument was being made that if someone from the infield should be traded it should be Lee (and not Walker) because we can get more for him.

 

I think "if" was the operative word. He wasn't saying that we should trade Lee, just that if one had to be traded, Lee would net more in return.

 

I understand the difference and still think its a gross overstatement. Walker is a nice offensive player but not someone you build a team around.

 

Contrary to popular belief, I suspect the chances are high that Walker is gone by the deadline (while a trade of any kind for Lee is highly unlikely.) Look at it this way; Lawton, Hollandsworth, and Walker all cleared waivers for the Cubs. We all know what happened with the other two...

 

I would say that is not contrary to popular belief according to the chicago sportswriters, unfortunately. Just because he cleared waivers doesnt necessarily mean he will be traded though.

 

I meant the popular belief of NSBB

 

Sportwriters and sports radio alike seem to agree that Walker will be traded.

 

You're right, clearing waivers in and of itself doesn't mean that a player will be traded however, a noticeable trend has emerged with respect to the Cubs trading players that cleared waivers...

 

We'll know soon enough.

[CubfaninCA]

SS's who become too fragile and have too little range to play short anymore don't move to 2B -- they move to 3B. I think it is extremely unrealistic to expect a Nomar move to 2B at this point. A move to 3B, however, makes a lot of sense for him.

 

If ARam wasn't around, Nomar @ 3b makes lots of sense. Not as many balls hit to him and he doesn't have to move around as much. I've noticed his throwing accurarcy is not good @ SS though. Seems that moving him to 2nd would take away some of the throwing pressure, as he doesn't have to throw as far. I always thought that 2b's had less balls hit to them than SS's, but after looking @ some fielding stats, I guess not. Very surprising.

[CubfaninCA]

Seems like Walker will be gone. They probably have something else up their sleeve and want to move in a different direction. Also, they may be tired of his big mouth. No big loss. Walker isn't a young man anymore.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

re: DLee...I love him. But what if you could trade him this offseason, straight up, for Johan Santana? Minnesota being a team desperate for offense.

 

I know, it's a dumb scenario, as neither team would do it. But you've got a Triple Crown and Gold Glove type position player for a Cy Young pitcher, looks even to me. Plus, a good 1B is easier to find than a dominant pitcher. And, (as we saw in 2003 with the Cubs and Marlins, or Astros 04 and 05) dominant pitching > big hitting. And no doubt you'd be selling Lee at his top; as good as he is, and as much as we like him, he's unlikely to match a season like this again.

 

There is precedent for such wild trades by the way. Many MANY years ago, the AL batting champ (Harvey Kuenn) was traded for the AL HR champ (Rocky Colavito).

 

I guess my point is, our team is in such dire straights, all possibilities should be on the table.

 

Just think--Santana, Zambrano, Prior, AJ Burnett, Wood. With any kind of bullpen and offense at all, who'd touch that team? Wow.

[Fred Hornkohl]

 

There is precedent for such wild trades by the way. Many MANY years ago, the AL batting champ (Harvey Kuenn) was traded for the AL HR champ (Rocky Colavito).

 

 

Right, and upon arriving in Cleveland, Kuehn's BA immediately dropped 50 points and his OPS dropped 100 points, so what did the Indians do.... they shipped him off to San Francisco where the former batting champ cracked the .300 mark once (.304) in four plus seasons, so what did the Giants do..... well, of course, they shipped him off to the CUBS (who else) where he stunk up our house for 2 partial seasons, barely staying above the Mendoza line. But it's OK.... we were able to sell him to the Phillies, (only franchise in MLB worse than the CUBS), they'll take anybody !!! Ah, the memories !!

 

Now.... tell us again who you want to trade Lee for ????

[illiniguy]

re: DLee...I love him. But what if you could trade him this offseason, straight up, for Johan Santana? Minnesota being a team desperate for offense.

 

I know, it's a dumb scenario, as neither team would do it. But you've got a Triple Crown and Gold Glove type position player for a Cy Young pitcher, looks even to me. Plus, a good 1B is easier to find than a dominant pitcher. And, (as we saw in 2003 with the Cubs and Marlins, or Astros 04 and 05) dominant pitching > big hitting. And no doubt you'd be selling Lee at his top; as good as he is, and as much as we like him, he's unlikely to match a season like this again.

 

There is precedent for such wild trades by the way. Many MANY years ago, the AL batting champ (Harvey Kuenn) was traded for the AL HR champ (Rocky Colavito).

 

I guess my point is, our team is in such dire straights, all possibilities should be on the table.

 

Just think--Santana, Zambrano, Prior, AJ Burnett, Wood. With any kind of bullpen and offense at all, who'd touch that team? Wow.

While I like your line of thinking, trade Lee while he has overvalue. I don't think that the Twins will block Mornuea.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Trading Lee over Walker isn't as crazy as it sounds. There's two factors at play here. First what you are paying the player, and what you could get for the player. First, Lee makes a lot more than Walker, so you'd expect greater production from a corner IF making that much money than you would from a 2b making 2.5 million as Walker is.

 

The other question is, would trading Walker bring back a player whose caliber makes it worth losing his production at 2.5 million? I don't think so.

 

Would trading Lee (something I'm not really advocating and don't think will actually happen) bring back enough to make it worth losing his projected production at 9 million? Maybe.

 

Here are some deals for Lee I'd consider: Lee + Mitre to the Reds for Casey and Dunn.

 

Lee and Williams to the Rangers for Teixeira and Mench.

 

Lee to the Braves for LaRoche and Francoer.

 

Lee to the Yankees for Rodriguez and cash.

 

Lee to the Nationals for Wilkerson and Cordero.

 

Lee to the Angels for Vlad.

 

Lee to the Brewers for Sheets and Fielder.

 

Now, I'm not saying any of those deals could realistically happen...but just saying I'd probably do each and every one of them if they did exist.

[hawkeyecub]

Trading Lee over Walker isn't as crazy as it sounds. There's two factors at play here. First what you are paying the player, and what you could get for the player. First, Lee makes a lot more than Walker, so you'd expect greater production from a corner IF making that much money than you would from a 2b making 2.5 million as Walker is.

 

The other question is, would trading Walker bring back a player whose caliber makes it worth losing his production at 2.5 million? I don't think so.

 

Would trading Lee (something I'm not really advocating and don't think will actually happen) bring back enough to make it worth losing his projected production at 9 million? Maybe.

 

Here are some deals for Lee I'd consider: Lee + Mitre to the Reds for Casey and Dunn.

 

Lee and Williams to the Rangers for Teixeira and Mench.

 

Lee to the Braves for LaRoche and Francoer.

 

Lee to the Yankees for Rodriguez and cash.

 

Lee to the Nationals for Wilkerson and Cordero.

 

Lee to the Angels for Vlad.

 

Lee to the Brewers for Sheets and Fielder.

 

Now, I'm not saying any of those deals could realistically happen...but just saying I'd probably do each and every one of them if they did exist.

 

I would too, but not a single one of those deals are very realistic.

[fromthestretch]

The love for Walker is beyond bizarre.

 

Even more bizarre is how some people can't see how he could be a valuable asset to have on the 2006 Cubs roster. Paying $2.5 million for a second baseman that can hit for a decent average with a bit of power from the left side while getting on base around 35% is a steal.

 

If the right deal came along, then sure, trade him. Otherwise, there's no need to create another hole on this team by trading away one of the few players in the lineup that can actually get on base.

[XZero771679666304]

The love for Walker is beyond bizarre.

 

Even more bizarre is how some people can't see how he could be a valuable asset to have on the 2006 Cubs roster. Paying $2.5 million for a second baseman that can hit for a decent average with a bit of power from the left side while getting on base around 35% is a steal.

 

If the right deal came along, then sure, trade him. Otherwise, there's no need to create another hole on this team by trading away one of the few players in the lineup that can actually get on base.

 

Yeah, his production/salary ratio is outstanding. A guy who in a full season will likely give you .300/.350/.800 with 15 HR and 60+ RBI for 2.5 million is nothing to give away. His defense isn't that bad.

[RonCey]

Don't want to break up the Derrek Lee dreaming, but this is from Tuesday's Cleveland Plain Dealer:

 

 

General Manager Mark Shapiro would not comment directly on reports in Chicago that the Indians are working on a trade that would bring infielder Todd Walker from the Cubs.

 

The waiver deadline for trades is Wednesday.

 

Walker, 32, is hitting .298 with nine home runs and 31 RBI in 84 games with the Cubs. He's appeared in 75 games at second base, four at first.

 

"We have investigated every single bat available," Shapiro said, "and I can say there are not a lot out there.

 

"I will not comment on individual players."

 

Walker, who has previously played for Boston, Cincinnati. Colorado and Minnesota, signed a one-year, $2.5 million deal with the Cubs in December.

 

Link at: http://www.cleveland.com/sports/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/1125394390193750.xml&coll=2

[Blueheart05]

re: DLee...I love him. But what if you could trade him this offseason, straight up, for Johan Santana? Minnesota being a team desperate for offense.

 

I know, it's a dumb scenario, as neither team would do it. But you've got a Triple Crown and Gold Glove type position player for a Cy Young pitcher, looks even to me. Plus, a good 1B is easier to find than a dominant pitcher. And, (as we saw in 2003 with the Cubs and Marlins, or Astros 04 and 05) dominant pitching > big hitting. And no doubt you'd be selling Lee at his top; as good as he is, and as much as we like him, he's unlikely to match a season like this again.

 

There is precedent for such wild trades by the way. Many MANY years ago, the AL batting champ (Harvey Kuenn) was traded for the AL HR champ (Rocky Colavito).

 

I guess my point is, our team is in such dire straights, all possibilities should be on the table.

 

Just think--Santana, Zambrano, Prior, AJ Burnett, Wood. With any kind of bullpen and offense at all, who'd touch that team? Wow.

 

I would argue that a top tier everyday player is more valueable than a pitcher (even an ace). That's not an even trade in my eyes; the Cubs would have to get more. Santana only pitches once every 5 days and the Cubs are not 1 pitcher away from a World Series Championship.

Edited August 30, 2005 by Blueheart05

[Transmogrified Tiger]

re: DLee...I love him. But what if you could trade him this offseason, straight up, for Johan Santana? Minnesota being a team desperate for offense.

 

I know, it's a dumb scenario, as neither team would do it. But you've got a Triple Crown and Gold Glove type position player for a Cy Young pitcher, looks even to me. Plus, a good 1B is easier to find than a dominant pitcher. And, (as we saw in 2003 with the Cubs and Marlins, or Astros 04 and 05) dominant pitching > big hitting. And no doubt you'd be selling Lee at his top; as good as he is, and as much as we like him, he's unlikely to match a season like this again.

 

There is precedent for such wild trades by the way. Many MANY years ago, the AL batting champ (Harvey Kuenn) was traded for the AL HR champ (Rocky Colavito).

 

I guess my point is, our team is in such dire straights, all possibilities should be on the table.

 

Just think--Santana, Zambrano, Prior, AJ Burnett, Wood. With any kind of bullpen and offense at all, who'd touch that team? Wow.

 

I would argue that a top tier everyday player is more valueable than a pitcher (even an ace). That's not an even trade in my eyes; the Cubs would have to get more. Santana only pitches onces every 5 days and the Cubs are not 1 pitcher away from a World Series Championship.

 

Lee gets 4-5 Plate appearances and several fielding chances everyday, but Santana faces 20-25+ batters every 5 days. If they were willing to trade Santana for Lee, we'd be stupid not to.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Don't want to break up the Derrek Lee dreaming, but this is from Tuesday's Cleveland Plain Dealer:

 

 

General Manager Mark Shapiro would not comment directly on reports in Chicago that the Indians are working on a trade that would bring infielder Todd Walker from the Cubs.

 

The waiver deadline for trades is Wednesday.

 

Walker, 32, is hitting .298 with nine home runs and 31 RBI in 84 games with the Cubs. He's appeared in 75 games at second base, four at first.

 

"We have investigated every single bat available," Shapiro said, "and I can say there are not a lot out there.

 

"I will not comment on individual players."

 

Walker, who has previously played for Boston, Cincinnati. Colorado and Minnesota, signed a one-year, $2.5 million deal with the Cubs in December.

 

Link at: http://www.cleveland.com/sports/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/1125394390193750.xml&coll=2

 

Sizemore please.

 

 

Seriously though, some combo of Riske, Betancourt, Crisp, etc. might work, although trading Walker because someone is willing to trade for him isn't the wisest of choices.

[Blueheart05]

re: DLee...I love him. But what if you could trade him this offseason, straight up, for Johan Santana? Minnesota being a team desperate for offense.

 

I know, it's a dumb scenario, as neither team would do it. But you've got a Triple Crown and Gold Glove type position player for a Cy Young pitcher, looks even to me. Plus, a good 1B is easier to find than a dominant pitcher. And, (as we saw in 2003 with the Cubs and Marlins, or Astros 04 and 05) dominant pitching > big hitting. And no doubt you'd be selling Lee at his top; as good as he is, and as much as we like him, he's unlikely to match a season like this again.

 

There is precedent for such wild trades by the way. Many MANY years ago, the AL batting champ (Harvey Kuenn) was traded for the AL HR champ (Rocky Colavito).

 

I guess my point is, our team is in such dire straights, all possibilities should be on the table.

 

Just think--Santana, Zambrano, Prior, AJ Burnett, Wood. With any kind of bullpen and offense at all, who'd touch that team? Wow.

 

I would argue that a top tier everyday player is more valueable than a pitcher (even an ace). That's not an even trade in my eyes; the Cubs would have to get more. Santana only pitches onces every 5 days and the Cubs are not 1 pitcher away from a World Series Championship.

 

Lee gets 4-5 Plate appearances and several fielding chances everyday, but Santana faces 20-25+ batters every 5 days. If they were willing to trade Santana for Lee, we'd be stupid not to.

 

Sorry, I just don't view it that way. Lee has the opportunity to impact the game daily while Santana can only do so every 5 days. I think this all boils down to people not believing that Lee will duplicate this season. I doubt the same trade talks would be said about Pujols, Sammy (in his prime), or a host of other top tier players. Lee is not making that much money therefore trading him deteriorates the infield defensively and the team offensively. Derrek Lee is the type of player teams build around. The Cubs can solve their problems without making any changes at the infield corners.

[UK1679666180]

Sorry, I just don't view it that way. Lee has the opportunity to impact the game daily while Santana can only do so every 5 days. I think this all boils down to people not believing that Lee will duplicate this season. I doubt the same trade talks would be said about Pujols, Sammy (in his prime), or a host of other top tier players. Lee is not making that much money therefore trading him deteriorates the infield defensively and the team offensively. Derrek Lee is the type of player teams build around. The Cubs can solve their problems without making any changes at the infield corners.

 

Santana faced 880 batters last year, that can't be ignored when looking at a typical 650 plate appearences by a batter.

 

Potentially, Lee could impact every game in a positive way, but that never will happen or he could impact the game in a negative way.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

re: DLee...I love him. But what if you could trade him this offseason, straight up, for Johan Santana? Minnesota being a team desperate for offense.

 

I know, it's a dumb scenario, as neither team would do it. But you've got a Triple Crown and Gold Glove type position player for a Cy Young pitcher, looks even to me. Plus, a good 1B is easier to find than a dominant pitcher. And, (as we saw in 2003 with the Cubs and Marlins, or Astros 04 and 05) dominant pitching > big hitting. And no doubt you'd be selling Lee at his top; as good as he is, and as much as we like him, he's unlikely to match a season like this again.

 

There is precedent for such wild trades by the way. Many MANY years ago, the AL batting champ (Harvey Kuenn) was traded for the AL HR champ (Rocky Colavito).

 

I guess my point is, our team is in such dire straights, all possibilities should be on the table.

 

Just think--Santana, Zambrano, Prior, AJ Burnett, Wood. With any kind of bullpen and offense at all, who'd touch that team? Wow.

 

I would argue that a top tier everyday player is more valueable than a pitcher (even an ace). That's not an even trade in my eyes; the Cubs would have to get more. Santana only pitches onces every 5 days and the Cubs are not 1 pitcher away from a World Series Championship.

 

Lee gets 4-5 Plate appearances and several fielding chances everyday, but Santana faces 20-25+ batters every 5 days. If they were willing to trade Santana for Lee, we'd be stupid not to.

 

Sorry, I just don't view it that way. Lee has the opportunity to impact the game daily while Santana can only do so every 5 days. I think this all boils down to people not believing that Lee will duplicate this season. I doubt the same trade talks would be said about Pujols, Sammy (in his prime), or a host of other top tier players. Lee is not making that much money therefore trading him deteriorates the infield defensively and the team offensively. Derrek Lee is the type of player teams build around. The Cubs can solve their problems without making any changes at the infield corners.

 

Lee also turns 30 next week and will be a free agent after next season who will likely command more than he's worth. And yes, there's plenty of reason to believe that Lee won't repeat next season, whether it's his career numbers, his regression in the second half, his lucky BABIP/LD numbers, etc. I agree that we can improve the team without trading Lee, all I'm pointing out is that it might be an opportunity to improve the team if we can get more value out of him.

 

For example, if we were able to spin Lee for A-Rod + Cash(example only, not saying it's feasible or likely) and then make a deal for Overbay, that would be significantly better than Lee at 1B and whoever at SS.

 

Great, now I'm going to be thinking about a deal that would work all morning. Me and my imagination making sense :x.

[Blueheart05]

re: DLee...I love him. But what if you could trade him this offseason, straight up, for Johan Santana? Minnesota being a team desperate for offense.

 

I know, it's a dumb scenario, as neither team would do it. But you've got a Triple Crown and Gold Glove type position player for a Cy Young pitcher, looks even to me. Plus, a good 1B is easier to find than a dominant pitcher. And, (as we saw in 2003 with the Cubs and Marlins, or Astros 04 and 05) dominant pitching > big hitting. And no doubt you'd be selling Lee at his top; as good as he is, and as much as we like him, he's unlikely to match a season like this again.

 

There is precedent for such wild trades by the way. Many MANY years ago, the AL batting champ (Harvey Kuenn) was traded for the AL HR champ (Rocky Colavito).

 

I guess my point is, our team is in such dire straights, all possibilities should be on the table.

 

Just think--Santana, Zambrano, Prior, AJ Burnett, Wood. With any kind of bullpen and offense at all, who'd touch that team? Wow.

 

I would argue that a top tier everyday player is more valueable than a pitcher (even an ace). That's not an even trade in my eyes; the Cubs would have to get more. Santana only pitches onces every 5 days and the Cubs are not 1 pitcher away from a World Series Championship.

 

Lee gets 4-5 Plate appearances and several fielding chances everyday, but Santana faces 20-25+ batters every 5 days. If they were willing to trade Santana for Lee, we'd be stupid not to.

 

Sorry, I just don't view it that way. Lee has the opportunity to impact the game daily while Santana can only do so every 5 days. I think this all boils down to people not believing that Lee will duplicate this season. I doubt the same trade talks would be said about Pujols, Sammy (in his prime), or a host of other top tier players. Lee is not making that much money therefore trading him deteriorates the infield defensively and the team offensively. Derrek Lee is the type of player teams build around. The Cubs can solve their problems without making any changes at the infield corners.

 

Lee also turns 30 next week and will be a free agent after next season who will likely command more than he's worth. And yes, there's plenty of reason to believe that Lee won't repeat next season, whether it's his career numbers, his regression in the second half, his lucky BABIP/LD numbers, etc. I agree that we can improve the team without trading Lee, all I'm pointing out is that it might be an opportunity to improve the team if we can get more value out of him.

 

For example, if we were able to spin Lee for A-Rod + Cash(example only, not saying it's feasible or likely) and then make a deal for Overbay, that would be significantly better than Lee at 1B and whoever at SS.

 

Great, now I'm going to be thinking about a deal that would work all morning. Me and my imagination making sense :x.

 

Lee deserves to get a bigger contract and some would argue that 30 is the prime of a baseball player's career. I would also say that his increased numbers are due to more than luck, he did make some physical changes to his batting stance.

 

His second half dip is most likely due to a combination of injury and overuse. Historically, he is someone who plays almost everyday. The Cubs will need to give him more days off next year to preserve him throughout the season... I also disagree that Overbay is a better defensive player than Lee. Overbay doesn't have Aramis, Nomar, or Todd making wayward throws that have to be scouped up routinely. I think Lee is a better defender than Helton as well.