Illini Iceman

No, that will just be the Rays being the Rays (cheap as usual and making a financial decision over a baseball decision). It really is a very similar situation. History says Dusty will send down young players so he can start vets. And in this case he did it again. History says the Rays will send down young players that are good enough to make the team so they can delay starting their arbritration / FA clock and save money long term. And in this case they are going to do it again. Fans of neither team should be surprised by the decisions because it is consistent with the track record of Dusty and the Rays.

I remember thinking " yes, got rid of DeJesus and got Bowa" didn't have a clue who Sandberg was. Pretty decent trade. In the Cubs division winning season of '84 Bowa put up an awesome line of .223 BA, .274 OBP, .269 SLG. Ouch. Imagine how good their offense could have been without that black hole. But can you believe that in '81 DeJesus had a line of .194 BA, .276 OBP, .233 SLG and the Cubs still gave him 401 at bats? And then the Phillies were so impressed that in the offseason they traded for him and threw in Sandberg to sweeten the deal. Yikes.

Wow. There are few statements on here I disagree with more than that. That's pretty much the goal of all farm systems - to turn your players into guys who get a cup of coffee and are never heard of again. I mean just think of where our player development production would be without guys like Francis Beltran or Buck Coats or Jason Dubois or Todd Wellemeyer or Felix Sanchez. We're the envy of all the other teams who just wish they could develop all the 5 minute call-ups we have! Or maybe the guys at Rotoworld are just bad evaluators of talent. If they had put Soto, Marmol and Hill into that top ten they would probably have three guys that are going to have pretty good major league careers. In 2008 the Cubs will most likely have 3 homegrown starters in their opening day lineup, two guys that were obtained by using minor league talent in trade and then three players that came via free agency. Rotation will be 40% from their own system with a bunch of guys (eg - Marshall, Gallagher) knocking on the door. About half their bullpen will be guys from their system. Overall it is not a bad percentage considering they are a big market team that is expected to go out and spend the money to bring in higher price free agent talent on a regular basis.

Even his released statement isn't funny. I thought he was a Mets fan?

That says it all right there. It is frustrating to see the Cubs mishandle young prospects over and over again. I am all for winning a spot on the team, but with the numbers that Pie put up in AAA and with his tool set, they should give him the benefit of the doubt and use him as the starting CF for the first 2 months minimum. If it was for anyone other than Marquis and Fuld I would pass, but for those two it is worth the risk. Even if they go with Pie as the starter it would be a lot better to have Crisp as an insurance policy / bench player than Fuld. There are concerns about Crisp's attitude, but the same concerns would be there for Marquis (since right now it seems that Lieber and Dempster have the inside track for the rotation spots). I think having Crisp and, for example Hart, would make the Cubs a better team than having Fuld (or some other scrub utility guy) and Marquis.

seriously, especially since Rotoworld does the same thing for free you get Insider free with their crappy magazine -- I got a 3 year subscription on ebay for about $6 Mine just started showing up every month in the mail. Never signed up for it, but they some reason they started sending it to me for free. And that is about what it is worth.

Sears

I would agree with you with one exception. There's no way the Cubs break camp with exactly 1 SS on the roster. 1 of Cedeno or Cintron will make the team (likely Cedeno unless he's traded). I don't think they keep Fuld and Pie. Whoever does not win the starting job goes back to AAA.

In a heartbeat. I just don't see it happening anymore. Meh. If a team wants him they will still need to give Hendry fair value. He is under contract so the Cubs can always just keep in the pen as a mop up reliever / spot starter instead of give him away for nothing. A "you take my problem, we take yours" trade with Boston of Marquis for Crisp, however, would seem to look more likely. But I think Hendry has been looking to move him all offseason so this new development probably doesn't change his plans much. You would think Baltimore would want him in the Roberts package (maybe to help the Cubs offset Payton's salary). They seem to love Tracshel and Marquis is actually a step up from him at this point (sad as that may be).

The first bolded quote is really stupid. I think the $24M three year contract pretty much covers his family for a couple generations whether he starts, pitches out of the pen or sweeps the clubhouse, so he can save the hyperbole. The second bolded quote is fine. There is nothing wrong with that attittude. It would be more concerning if he said he didn't care where he pitched as long as he got paid. He is competitive and feels like he should be in the rotation. And he is right that he just needs to get guys out and the rest will take care of itself.

Meph, 16 days ago you accused me and/or my source of fabricating a story. You should know this: I will continue to post rumors from sources, who I believe to be credible based on my history with them regardless of how unreasonable or unrealistic you think the trade scenarios are. I am not in the business of fabrication. I am always very clear on this board differentiating between deals I've heard vs. deals I am suggesting. And considering that Bruce Miles (who I think we can all agree has an absolute stellar reputation for facts in addition to being very generous with his time here), has chimed in twice in the last 7 days that there may have been/may be some discussions going on, at least now I feel good for my source, who you unfairly through under the bus. The information that the 2 teams had or are having discussions was not only credible, it was real and confirmed regardless of what your stamp of approval may or may not think. Your source said the Cubs had solid interest in Crisp and Bruce Miles did not support that at all. He said the Cubs were not particularly interested because they don't want to block Colvin and Pie and that they don't consider Crisp much of an upgrade. Only now does he say they "may have to explore it" out of desperation. Personally I find your contributions interesting, but I think based on what Bruce has brought to the table your source here was off about the level of Cubs interest.

My favorite part of the Couch article: And then he goes on through the rest of the article pretty much doing exactly that.

Gotta wonder why no other teams have been mentioned for Roberts. Even if no other team is interested in trading for Roberts the O's can obviously choose not to move him if the price is not right. No one at this point can say for sure what Hendry has offered or if he has moved at all off his original proposal. However, even if he has sweetened the pot to try to make the trade happen it would not be fair to say he is bidding against himself because at the very least he is bidding against the O's option of not trading Roberts to anyone.

In all fairness, other than Prior and Cruz I don't see how Dusty would have had an impact on the development of any other prospects on that list. I mean, c'mon, Nic Jackson?

I don't really agree with that. If Gallagher is on the team, I think he'll have a legit opportunity to start ahead of Dempster/Lieber/Marquis (if he's on the team). We all know how Lou feels about Marquis, and I doubt he feels much better about Dempster starting. Well, Gallagher may be able leapfrong Marquis, but he has an uphill battle over Dempster and Lieber. This is such a stupid organization at times. Thank goodness they were able to buy themselves out of alot of problems. It seems like right now Gallagher is the golden boy among a lot of posters here. He seems to have pretty good minor league numbers, but I don't see anything from him that would suggest he should be given the inside track to a rotation spot. I guess I can understand people not liking Marquis, but how can it be justified that Gallagher gets considered in front of a guy like Marshall that has actually had success at the big league level? I think if Marquis or Lieber were to lose their spot the next guy in line would be Marshall, not Gallagher.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3237261 Could get ugly.

Is anyone else having a deja vu moment? I could have sworn that the Miles excerpt was from an article written weeks ago in response to something Phil Rogers posted at the Tribune... Uh, no. It's just that after nearly 180 pages of discussion here and stuff that's been nothing more than speculation on mainstream media blogs (see Trib) and blogosphere blogs, certain truths have been constant: The Cubs have been steadfast in saying they weren't going to trade Hill, Pie or Colvin. That was true earlier, and it's true now. Talks between the Cubs and Orioles have never gotten to the "yes" or "no" stage despite a report during the convention that the Baltimore owner nixed a 7-for-2 trade. The Cubs remain interested in Roberts. The names I've put out there are the ones I've been led to believe they'll discuss with the Orioles. The Cubs feel it's too early in Colvin's developmental stage to trade him, especially after investing a top draft pick. The Orioles are going to finish last or next-to-last with or without Roberts. The way I read it, the Cubs feel that MacPhail might as well take a decent offer for Roberts and not try to hold people up or risk being stuck with him, if "stuck" is the right word. I've read all kinds of things about deals being close. Nothing has been close. That may change in the next few days, but it seems to me the Cubs are ready to move on with or without Roberts. Thanks, Bruce. I'd offer a package of high ceiling lower level prospects that includes players like Veal and Ceda and maybe a Murton or Patterson and tell MacPhail to take it or leave it. That's about right. But I do doubt very, very much the Cubs will be trading Ceda any time soon. They really like him. Hey Bruce, what are your odds on this trade happening? And what other players do you feel Hendry is unwilling to trade? Anyone we haven't heard mentioned? I'd say the odds are 50-50 at best on this trade happening. Nobody is an "untouchable" in the right trade, but guys like Colvin, Hill, Pie and Ceda aren't going in this kind of deal. I'm sure MacPhail had a hard enough time selling the owner on the Bedard trade. Can you imagine Andy telling Angelos he's going to trade his favorite-son player for a guy or guys he's never, ever heard of, especially guys who haven't played above Double-A ball? I would rather that the Cubs just stand pat at this point. Hopefully Cedeno and Pie can have breakout years. I think that what happens with those two makes or breaks the season. The Cubs offense can not afford for both to disappoint because that would mean two big holes in the lineup - Pie in CF and Theriot at SS since Cedeno doesn't win the job from him. My problem with the Roberts trade from the beginning is that acquiring him would use quality assets from the organization but not solve either of the two lineup concerns (SS and CF). It would only make sense if DeRosa or Roberts had been able to move over to SS and replace Theriot but from what I have read neither is a viable option there.

No, I'm pretty sure the insiders were full of crap. Yea, you're right. It's not like any other deals by the Baltimore Orioles recently were being reported as done or almost done by legitimate news outlets only to wind up mysteriously muddied up in a flurry of denials and odd half-truths by the organization. If the Insiders are full of crap then so are Adam Jones, Ken Rosenthal and MLB.com. This really did seem to be a done deal by all accounts.

Ok, you're really off base here. Really. You should spend a little more time reviewing Hill's numbers then get back to everyone about why you think he is so expendable. Marmol did a great job last year but no way IMO an eight innning set up guy is going to be as valuable as a solid starting pitcher over the course of a season.

Ok, you're really off base here. Really. I think it's kind of like buying a signed baseball on E-Bay. Of course there is the chance it's fake, but if you just don't spend time stressing out about whether it is authentic or not it will bring you the same enjoyment whether or not it is real. I don't know if these guys are true "insiders" or not, but they come up with some good stuff that it fun to read and it is a lot better then just sitting around waiting for an official press release about a trade.

I find it strange that you continue posting this over and over and over and over and over and over. Yes, we get what Steve Stone thinks. Maybe he is Steve Stone.

Few points: 1) Greene overrated? By who? I don't even see him rated/talked about that much. 2) What makes you think he'd hit top of order? 3) We went down in 3 straight, not 4. Yeah, but in all fairness it probably would have been 4 if they had played another game. :P

Since you have a 25 man roster every year wouldn't you always be +/- 0? Or is the assumption that adding a crappy FA is always better then giving a quality prospect a shot at the starting job? The Cubs get a -1 for letting Kendall walk and giving Soto the C position? This makes my brain hurt.

Still need more, at least Gallagher. I also don't believe the Padres would turn over Greene and replace him with a risky player like Cedeno. Teams who want to contend don't do that. My impression is that Hendry really likes Theriot and based on that I doubt he is going to give up a huge amount to replace a guy that he does not see as a liability. If Greene were to fall into has lap with a package of something like Murton, Patterson, and Marshall I could see him doing it but I can't see him making a big reach to get it done.

You have as good a chance of knowing who will be able to buy the club as I do. Sorry. See it works when I do it, too. Just make a statement and pretend I know more than everyone else. Also, since you are making this statement on a message board on the internet I have to assume I can't believe it. Your rules.