jjgman21

considering the respective years the two are having, why on earth would Anaheim make that trade? I wouldn't mind trading Prior in the right deal, but that's not one that would go down. Lackey is currently having a better season than Prior is capable of, better than Prior's 2003. he's also locked up for a few years at a favorable rate, and makes 30+ starts year after year. let's be realistic about what Prior would bring. hate to say it, but probably the best thing to do with Prior is play the Kerry Wood game. wait for him to have a healthy year.

Murton's 100% in my plans, only losing starts here and there to Cruz and Wilson. TT Abreu, I agree with 7897. the problem with his power outage is he would be batting in the middle of the order, and is high unlikely to repeat the absurd walk rate he has this year. he's never been a .450 obp guy before, he's been a .400 obp guy. thus the difference in obp's between Clark and Abreu will more likely be along the lines of 15-25 points...and the difference in salaries of about 10M. the difference in obp between a Cruz/Jones RF instead of Abreu would also be about 15-25 points, probably with more power, and cost about 5M less. plus, it wouldn't cost a boatload of young talent to get that rightfield. edit - also, for his position, Abreu's power has gone from really good to average. he was never a 40 HR guy, not even a 35 HR guy, and currently ranks 31 of 63 among all ML outfielders with 175+ PAs in slg. I see Abreu heading to Edmondsland in terms of production.

IMO, all defensive metric used these days are pretty useless, especially when it comes to shortstops. errors certainly means next to nothing in my opinion, unless you're a total error machine with little range. Cedeno may make 10 more errors this year than an 'average' shortstop, but he will get to 15-20 more balls that an 'average' shorstop, I don't care what the range metrics say. the reason I don't like the range metrics is teams with good pitching will inherently have good defensive range metrics. there's nothing a shortstop can do if a pitcher misses his spots or fails to pitch to his defense all together, and I don't think any range metric is capable of fully taking that into account. and with all that said, he's 23 with incompetent coaching. let Cedeno play and see if he develops into a solid major league player, improve the team in other areas and wait out the contracts of the big hitting shortstops and sign one of them in FA if you decide you need thump out of shortstop.

I wouldn't be concerned because he isn't a long term solution, and most of his value is derived from obp, not slugging, and he has maintained his obp. what's his line drive numbers like? I would be far more concerned about the lack of power out Abreu.

I think Clark can be had pretty cheap right now. Word is the Brewers are going to call up Tony Gwynn Jr before their game tonight. That gives them 3 CF's on the major league roster, and a 4th guy (Hall)who can play center. Clark has been losing at bats to Gabe Gross as it was, and seems to have fallen out of favor in Milwaukee dispite his OBP. He is due to make $3.8M next season, and the Brewers could make better use of the money since they aren't even playing Brady. I would offer Milwaukee Maddux, Dempster, and Neifi for Clark and Billy Hall. Plug Clark in at CF next year and Hall at 2B. They will both make under $4M, while Clark can give you a .380 OBP and Hall can hit 30 HRs with 40 doubles from the 2nd base position. Hall does struggles with OBP, and Clark has no speed or power, but they have strengths and financially they wopuld allow the Cubs to get two impact players (i.e. trade for Abreu and sign Schmidt). To get Abreu you could offer Marshall, Murton, and Pie for Abreu and a little cash. 2007 Cubs CF Clark C Barrett 1B Lee RF Abreu 3B ARAM 2B Hall LF Jones SS Cedeno SP Zambrano SP Schmidt SP Prior SP cheap FA pitcher (Weaver? Ohka? Meche?) SP Marmol/Guzman/Hill BP Howry BP Eyre BP Ohman BP Novoa BP Wuertz BP ??? Marmol? Guzman? that's a sick lineup, but it gets rid of too much young talent, without bringing any back, and pretty much has a one year shot to win before needing complete reconstruction (I think half of your lineup would be FAs in 2008), and costs around 60M for the starting lineup alone.

I see what you're saying, but Carroll? If cost effectiveness and patience is what you're looking for, just put Fontenot in there(who looks like a better version of Carroll looking at there minor league careers). fine with me! I just looked at his numbers and had no idea he was having such a solid year. if he's capable of anything close, he'll do just fine, plus he's lefty, isn't he? use Walker/Wuertz as more trade bait to land minor league sticks or keep Wuertz for the pen. it just goes to further show my original point. the team is not that far away. a simple change in management, Cruz (or similar) for Maddux, signing Craig Wilson and a pitcher, and a few in house moves, and this team is pretty damn good! edit - and has a better future by getting young sticks for the farm with the trading chips.

It wasn't brought up when Baylor was fired. Like I said before, there is a difference getting mad and arguing at a fan because the fan yells, "You suck" vs. a fan getting personal with the insults. I wasn't there and most of us weren't, but if the fan(s) started yelling about his wife, mom, etc, I think Jacque had every right to yell back. It's amazing how "liquid courage" seems to make fans feel like they're entitled to make asses of themselves. so, we weren't there so we can't assume jones was out of line, but we can assume the fan was drunk and insulting his mother? Even if he was, Jones responding is idiotic and pointless. the way for Hendry/Trib/Chicago to get around the race card thing is do what many here advocate anyway. hire the guy from the Braves. he's hispanis, isn't he? kind of a bunch of crap when Chicago is better about hiring minority managers/coaches than any other major sports city. Cartwright, Guillen, Guillen's predecessor, Baylor, Baker, Smith.

crap. lost my reply. the short version: the point of the Cruz/Maddux trade is also to get some value for Maddux. even if Cruz could be had via FA, he's not likely to sign with a team that won't give him a full time spot, or at least two years. trading for him and picking up the option (I didn't know it was an option) takes the choice out of his hands and keeps alot of personnel flexability in the outfield, while being productive in 07. the point of the Carroll trade is to get low cost value out of second until you see if EPatt/Fontenot/Theriot/Lewis can take over the position in 07-08. put him in the 2 whole and take advantage of his patience and obp in front of the bobbers. the team I put together likely has an OPB of .360+ out of 7 positions, and hits 200+ HRs, and leaves about 50M to build the pitching staff.

if you folks may recall, the last time a young lefty with similar cache as Zito was on the market, MacPhail/Hendry put out the best offer in baseball. Mike Hampton.

I like the idea of building a "big three in the middle" but a big three of Lee, Abreu, and Barrett will likely not be a vast improvement over a big three of Lee, Aram and Barrett. so why give away those other trading chips for what would probably be a 20 point gain in OBP, but an 80-100 point drop off in SLG? I don't think this team requires a whole lot to get back on track. it all starts with coaching changes, but in terms of players, I don't think it takes two or three give away trades as suggested. I also think the Cubs are in a position to both rebuild the team for next year and bolster the farm system. I like the idea of Clark, but I don't think they would want Maddux, or that Maddux would approve the trade, or that it would take all that much to get him. I think some relief help might get the job done. Howry for Clark, straight up. this also gets the Cubs out of Howry's contract, which I don't think he will live up to in 07-08. a possible destination for Maddux is the Dodgers, who need starters and would do well in Dodger stadium. Maddux also might approve this trade. with the emergence of their young guys they have a surplus of outfielders. Maddux straight up for Jose Cruz Jr. there's your right field platton partner for Jones, and he could share some time with Murton in left. even though their pitching has held up surprisingly well, the Rockies are always in the need for pitching help, and at only 4 games out may think they could make a run at the playoffs. Walker and Wuertz for Jamey Carroll. this gives you a lineup of: lineup Clark Murton/Cruz Lee Aram Barrett Jones/Cruz Carroll Cedeno P not necessarily in that order. cap the offense off by signing Craig Wilson for back up at five positions, sort of like Mabry, but not lefty, and not so sucky. bench OF - Cruz/Jones/Murton, Pagan IF - Perez, Theriot/Fontenot IF/OF/C - Wilson C - Soto not necessarily in that order. you have the big three, actually a big four if the platoon of Jones/Cruz produces to their split norm. it also gives you three guys likely to have .360 OBPs around those guys. then you use Mabry, Nevin, Novoa, Williamson, Pierre, Ryu/Guz/Hill/Marshall, Rusch, maybe Eyre/Dempster as trade bait to build the farm with some good sticks. sign one of the big FA arms, and maybe an inning eatter as well. rotation Z Schmidt/Zito/Japanese guy Prior innings eatter/Marmol Marshall/Hill/Guz/Ryu/Marmol build your bullpen around Dempster and/or Eyre, Ohman, the guys you don't trade, the remaining minor leaguers and a signing or two.

a guy is an idiot because doctors failed to provide the expected level of care, and in so doing probably cost him millions of dollars? if it turns out there is no merit, fine, he's an idiot. but if what is alleged in that article is properly plead and true, he wins. not giving an MRI is clearly outside of what an ortho at a Chicago teaching hospital would ordinarily do in providing care to a professional athelete. I think that post was a play on how Kenny Williams reacted to Frank Thomas' reaction when he wasn't retained by the White Sox. Williams was angry with what Thomas said and called him an "idiot". seemed to me his play was using Williams words in another context to express his opinion of Thomas's lawsuit.

a guy is an idiot because doctors failed to provide the expected level of care, and in so doing probably cost him millions of dollars? if it turns out there is no merit, fine, he's an idiot. but if what is alleged in that article is properly plead and true, he wins. not giving an MRI is clearly outside of what an ortho at a Chicago teaching hospital would ordinarily do in providing care to a professional athelete.

exactly. the having the extra day after the all-star game is what results in the 23 day stretches without an off day. same with having two days off in the first week of the season. both imo are terrible for a team, and both happen to the Cubs year after year.

Barrett was a butcher at 3rd and has said he doesn't want to change positions. Barrett's offense from the catching position makes him valuable. His production as a corner infielder would make him very ordinary. I don't think he should be moved to third, but if Barrett were a third baseman this year and had enough ABs to qualify, he would rank 6 of all ML thirdbasemen in OPS. that's not ordinary.

damn Ronnie my hope. the better play is because they know Dusty is gone, not because of any magic dust Dusty sprinkled.

what's with the pantomime punch?

Why not compare the Romans vs todays USA to see who would a war between the 2? You're also dealing with what if's and I'm talking about players playing against the competition of their day. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree because we see things 2 different ways on how to compare players from different era's. I think I can do a little better than a wisecrack about your sig. it just occurred to me that you said this earlier which is it? take a comparison through time or isolate on the way they played against the competition. you seems to want the best of both arguments. despite what you say, Mikan was completely dominant. scoring and rebounding titles up the yang, as well as rings. so why are you so quick to discount his greatness?

Bingo. Wilt's 50.4 ppg average will never be touched. Wilt changed the game, not Mikan. Mikan forced them to change the shotblock rule, the width of the lane, and institute the three second rule. not sure what rules you are saying they changed for Wilt. Chamberlain forced rule changes as well. obviously my mistake. again the relative greatness of Mikan and Brown is not relevant to point I was making. Mikan changed the game 10x more than Wilt did Mikan was the first dominant player in the proffessional basketball, face facts. huh? that was my point. your barking up the wrong tree. I was just incorrect about who they changed some of the rules for.

I missed this part in my haste... hey, another little dance around the no personal attacks rule, that's twice in one thread. I'm the only one that said it, Vance. it's obviously directed toward me. yeah, I know 'what you said was stupid' and 'your claims are ignorant.' big diff. NY makes the point. when a guy is lingering around 10, and probably not in single digits, he isn't in the discussion, and no reference to his team generated stats or how well he followed his blockers (Walter/Barry/ Juice say 'huh? what's that?') changes the fact that he simply wasn't as good as probably a dozen others. maybe we should start discussing Mantle with Cobb, Ruth, Williams, Aaron and Bonds.

Why not compare the Romans vs todays USA to see who would a war between the 2? You're also dealing with what if's and I'm talking about players playing against the competition of their day. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree because we see things 2 different ways on how to compare players from different era's. weren't you supposed to change that sig?

Bingo. Wilt's 50.4 ppg average will never be touched. Wilt changed the game, not Mikan. Mikan forced them to change the shotblock rule, the width of the lane, and institute the three second rule. not sure what rules you are saying they changed for Wilt. Chamberlain forced rule changes as well. obviously my mistake. again the relative greatness of Mikan and Brown is not relevant to point I was making.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AtV1pWQ5zx2RAxqhRwnoryURvLYF?slug=cnnsi-bakerhastogo&prov=cnnsi&type=lgns nothing we haven't heard said here. but good to see the momentum building. please delete if previously posted.

for the first part...then stop arguing with people about the greatness of Andy Pettitte. for the second part, where do I look up the stat for all the pancake blocks Payton put on blitzing linebackers?

You're comparing a 6'8" that can move to guys that are shorter but what your missing is that Mikan didn't dominate the game like Brown did. Yes, Mikan was a cordinated big guy but Brown owned defenses like no other. Chamberlain made the NBA change the key rule not Mikan. Mikan was an inovator but don't confuse that with being the best ever and IMO that's what you are doing. Mikan dominated every bit as much as Brown. they had to change all the rules because of Mikan, or he would've dominated even more. you're still missing the point. I never said Brown wasn't the great. I repeatedly said he was great and would have been in any era. the point is he played with that body in that era. had he played with that body in a later era, he would not have had the mind boggling stats he did. That can be said about a lot of players. Campbell or Bo Jackson could have that said about them. I understand what you're saying and maybe I'm not expressing what I'm thinking well enough. Yes, both Mikan and Brown had superior bodies to their opponents. I don't understand why you would punish them for it though? If some RB could run a 3.6 40 in the NFL and rush for 2500 yards per year I wouldn't say that just because he can do that he should not be considered one of the best. I think that's what you are saying and IMO it's wrong for you to claim that against them. Just because he can do things others can't isn't his fault and shouldn't be counted against him. what I am saying is Mikan dominated because of talent, AND because he was 6'10" when everone else in the game was 6'4" and shorter. Brown dominated because of talent, AND because he was bigger than all the linemen and linebackers he faced. today Brown would be a nice big running back, not one of the biggest players in the game, and the fastest/strongest to boot. put his body and his skills in today's game, and he's damn good, but not average 5+ ypc over the course of his career good. But you're holding the fact that they both had bigger and better bodies against them and I don't see how that's fair? I could see it if blacks or another race wasn't allowed to play but in Browns case that isn't it. What if there is a 6'8" 320 pound RB that could run a 3.8 40....is that his fault that others can't? Should that be held against him in the future when there may be scores of RB's that are that size and can run that fast? I look at how a player dominated their particular era and Brown was a man among boys and I think he should get credit for that and not compared to how he would do now. Besides, Jim is in his 60's and even averaging 4 a carry would be pretty good for a guy that age. I'm very much holding the fact that they had bigger and better bodies against them. that's the entire point. it is not a question of talent, it is a question of what would they have done if they had to play in an era where they didn't have bigger and better bodies. I'm trying to put things into context so there is a reasonable basis for comparison. put any of today's all pro running backs into the backfield of 1950-60's NFL, and they too probably would have approached Brown's numbers. so who's not being treated fairly in the comparison?

Bingo. Wilt's 50.4 ppg average will never be touched. Wilt changed the game, not Mikan. Mikan forced them to change the shotblock rule, the width of the lane, and institute the three second rule. not sure what rules you are saying they changed for Wilt.