RynoRules

CB is always a deep position. Unless a CB is a clear top 10 prospect, there's little difference from a mid 1st rounder to a 3rd rounder. Hes right about ILB, but im not a big Mosley fan. I thought Dennard and Gilbert are considered borderline Top Ten? I've seen them both going at 8 or 9 in several mocks.

Talk to me when Cashner tops 175 innings in a season. I think Cashner will do that this year. I think that if a frog had wings it wouldn't hit its ass when it hops.

I feel like this team is better than last year's. That ain't saying much, but I think they will flirt with .500 most of the year and settle with 78 wins.

You're probably right, just fantasizing about what having a decent catcher with a great hit tool would look like.... Ummm...perhaps I should have chosen my words more carefully.

There isn't a player like that in this draft. At least I haven't heard anyone say that about Jackson. I was being hyperbolic, but from what I have read he's the most polished hitter in the draft and is a catcher. That's a pretty rare combo, hence the Mauer reference. There are a lot of questions on whether he'll stay at catcher in pro ball. I've read that as well. I guess I am thinking his value is maximized by staying at catcher, but it makes sense that you'd want to preserve him in RF or at 3B based on his size. Supposedly he has the arm to stay behind the dish though.

I know this has been said a million times, but great job by Jed and Theo on that one. The Dempster trade was also well played. They are smart about finding trade partners with either multiple ML-ready redundancies (Rangers) or high-ceiling but allegedly damaged assets (Braves). Does Ramirez project as capping-out as a 4th starter?

There isn't a player like that in this draft. At least I haven't heard anyone say that about Jackson. I was being hyperbolic, but from what I have read he's the most polished hitter in the draft and is a catcher. That's a pretty rare combo, hence the Mauer reference.

What's the name of that catcher who is supposed to be the second-coming of Mauer? If he's there (doubtful) you grab him. EDIT: Nevermind - Alex Jackson.

Agreed. Pitchers - no matter how high-end their talent is - have less room for error.

I prefer the Yankees comp with Jeter, Posada, Williams, and Soriano. The other roadmap the Yanks laid out, IMO, was to have 4-5 core guys who you keep at all costs (Jeter, Posada, Williams, Pettite and Rivera). Everyone else is fungible. Yeah, Pettite was in Houston for a couple of years, but you get my drift. Now that I think of it, the fact that they let Pettitie walk in his 30's goes to show that keeping the hitters around is a more likely scenario for sustained success.

I still say this makes perfect sense. There is no way they feel comfortable relying on Tillman being healthy all year - who plays when he gets hurt? They may plan to go with more nickel, and in any case they are desperately thin in the defensive backfield. And what exactly is wrong with Dennard?

Apologies if this has been noted elsewhere, but where will Vogelbach and Rock Shoulders start this season?

Baez is the Real Slim Shady

6/360 anyone?

The most common addendum to that argument is that even if overpaid, those players are still good, so your team benefits even if it's not hyper-efficient. Here's the biggest FA deals(75 million and greater) of the Epstein tenure, with their age in the first year of their deal and the fWAR of their performance so far: Player Age Yrs AAV Year 1 Year 2 ====================================== Pujols 32 10 25 3.7 0.7 Fielder 28 9 24 4.8 2.2 Greinke 29 6 25 2.9 Hamilton 32 5 25 1.9 Reyes 29 6 18 4.1 2.2 Sanchez 29 5 16 6.2 Wilson 31 5 16 2.1 3.3 Upton 28 5 15 -0.6 So that's 12 seasons of performance. Three of those seasons are greater than 4 WAR, and all of them came during seasons when the player was still in their 20s. Six of those seasons, a full half, have 2.2 WAR or less. For comparison, Valbuena and DeJesus were both 2 WAR players as Cubs last year, in 391 and 318 PA respectively. I don't think it's out of order to question the notion that you're even guaranteeing "good" performance when paying for "great" performance since the new CBA has cut down on those who make it to free agency even further. I don't recall seeing a direct dollars/WAR argument before that guy's post, but I don't get why it shouldn't be taken seriously. It makes sense to me, at least on a surface level, and the numbers TT cites bear that out for the most part. Again, I'm not saying that it wouldn't be more emotionally satisfying for the Cubs to sign more expensive players with better track records. It clearly would be. I'm also not arguing that the approach we have taken has been anything less than frustrating considering the size of our market, team revenue, etc. (though I was somewhat swayed by the BN article about the team's debt load, Zell, etc.) From a cold-hearted logic standpoint, however, I don't want Hamilton, Reyes, Bourn, etc. at the numbers they command. What I would like is to be more aggressive in the trade market. When teams make ML or ML-ready players who are under team control for the foreseeable future available, we should be jumping all over that [expletive]. Adam Eaton comes to mind in this regard - that will be a steal for the Sox, IMO. Arb eligible in 16' and FA in 19'.

Interesting post by a reader over at Deadspin that cross-references the Cubs' approach: I largely agree. Do I wish the Cubs would shell out a bit more towards objectively productive free agents so I could at least get some short-term enjoyment out of this team? Yeah. But am I broken-hearted that we aren't locked into the deals that Bourn and Cano (as examples) received? No. As for Cabrera, ESPN is reporting that GM's and owners across baseball are pissed about the deal. I have to think most of that anger is centered in Anaheim, but if guys like Baez and Bryant turn out to be what we hope / think they will, it doesn't help us either. Really the deal is loco - the kind of thing that Steinbrenner would have done in his 80's heyday. I know that Miggy is a once in lifetime player -if he keeps this up he will finish as one of the Top 5 of all time. But if they want him to be productive (not great - just productive) until the end, he probably needs to be a nearly full-time DH by age 34, IMO. Turn him into Edgar Martinez. EDIT: And is this now the worst trade of all-time?: December 4, 2007: Traded by the Florida Marlins with Dontrelle Willis to the Detroit Tigers for Dallas Trahern (minors), Burke Badenhop, Frankie De La Cruz, Cameron Maybin, Andrew Miller and Mike Rabelo.

With Kalish and Olt on board and an allegedly improved 'pen, I'm all of a sudden feeling like this team could win 80 games....

Bold stuff by Emery. They really, really need to address DB through the draft. I still say the better of Dix - Dennard - Gilbert at 14, and DT in 2nd Rnd.

That's bizarre.

Wonder if the Panthers are thinking of trading up to get Watkins. If that doesn't work, Evans.

Just until Nate gets traded. They may have lucked-into a very nice 3rd / 4th OF'er with Kalish. I really want to see Olt stick on the roster. If this team has any chance to be decent they are going to need guys with high-ceilings to play well, as opposed to squeezing the dry-sponge re-treads that also populate the roster. To that end, I'll take 66- 75% of Olt's potential production over 90% of Murphy's. Ryan Kalish is not a nice 3rd OF by even our standards. That's the high-end / best-case scenario. More realistically, he could be Sweeney.

I hope he doesn't sink our chances at the division. You forgot the green font. Some folks around here are grinding their teeth and might not understand. Seriously, the only reason not to start Castro is if he's in danger of further injury. This team will need to be very lucky to compete for a WC. Might as well trot out the most talented players every day.

The only reason to give Luis more starts at 3B is to attempt to increase his trade value. Beyond that, IMO, he should be platooning at 2B and Olt should be getting 4-5 starts a week at 3B.

Just until Nate gets traded. They may have lucked-into a very nice 3rd / 4th OF'er with Kalish. I really want to see Olt stick on the roster. If this team has any chance to be decent they are going to need guys with high-ceilings to play well, as opposed to squeezing the dry-sponge re-treads that also populate the roster. To that end, I'll take 66- 75% of Olt's potential production over 90% of Murphy's.

To me, he'd be the only S on the roster that would be a shoe-in starter. I think he'd be the SS, with Conte and Mindy competing for starting FS. I'd personally would rather have a draft pick used on a S rather than sign a 30 year old who is going to be gone after 1-2 years. So if Ihedigbo prevents drafting a young S then im against it. Though, I guess you could still draft a guy and cut all or most of Steltz, M.D. Jennings and the other scrubs they signed. On a related note, its nice to go into the draft without any glaring holes in the starting lineup, but at some point, you gotta throw some guys right in there. You can't keep losing a year of development for your young players. And im sure it didn't help Bostic playing all camp, then sitting for 5 weeks. As I see it, the Bears need to draft a S, CB, DT, DE and maybe a LB in this draft. But as it stands right now, none of those picks would start. Not horrible until you realize they wouldn't stay over guys like Tillman, Ratliff, Young, Williams and Ihedigbo (if signed).....all guys over 30 and on very short term contracts. Clinton Dix would start. Prob Dennard too. Nothing wrong with moving Peanut to safety.