samhainn77

No, it was no risk, no potential. Forget about what Jim Edmonds used to be. it's like signing babe ruth's corpse. he used to be great but if you wheel him out to home plate, he's not going to do anything for you. same with edmonds; all you've done is give at bats to a guy who had already proven in his performance elsewhere that he had nothing left. edmonds hasn't been pretty bad, he's been a detriment to the team. actually nobody complained about picking a coke head in the rule V draft and only morons complained about trading him to cincy. Yeah...you're right. 1 month of playing time in a season that started on the DL is a fantastic sample size. Nobody in this thread has made the argument that it was a GOOD move just that it was not a move worthy of deeming Edmonds the most hated cub ever. For what it cost the club in terms of cash and playing time (over Reed Johnson against righties, not Pie...you won't find me arguing for either one of our current CFs getting playing time over Pie) it was pretty close to a non-move. It certainly was less of a move than resigning and starting Neifi, trading for Trachsel, etc. As far as nobody complaining about Hamilton...It thought I remembered people poking fun at Hendry not sticking to his "Character Guys" or stating that it would have been a good move years earlier but that he had no chance of contributing. Also, I never stated that those who would complain no matter what are not morons. The bottom line of this whole thing is: Who cares about Edmonds? He's a turd we spend a few hundred k to try to polish. If the complaint is that he is stealing ABs from Pie, then the same applies to Johnson and I agree with said complaint.

me too, but maybe because i also live among the heathens. they still worship him. Yeah, I'm in hell too. Really ready for the pixie dust to wear off this year.

Edmonds >>>>> Neifi > Trachsel > Blauser > Macias > Hundley The only downside to signing Edmonds is Pie not starting. If Edmonds signed with somebody else for nothing and started hitting like he did 2 years ago, people would be complaining that Hendry didn't sign him. No they wouldn't. Edmonds is a player that most Cub fans never ever wanted. That's never stopped many of the posters here from 2nd guessing/complaining about Hendry. Please reference Josh Hamilton. I fail to see how the situations are similar. Low Risk, High yet unlikely potential, costs the organization virtually nothing. OMG, I totally forgot, EDMONDS WAS A CARDINAL, EDMONDS WORE EYELINER, EDMONDS LIKES GUYZ LOLZ! My point was that people would find something to complain about no matter what. People complained when we picked up a coke head in the Rule 5. People complained when we traded him for jack to Cinci and he produced. Edmonds was a good bet to be a bust, but Johnson getting the starts againt righties anyway it was a low impact attempt to catch lightning in a bottle. No lightning, DFA, who cares?

Edmonds >>>>> Neifi > Trachsel > Blauser > Macias > Hundley The only downside to signing Edmonds is Pie not starting. If Edmonds signed with somebody else for nothing and started hitting like he did 2 years ago, people would be complaining that Hendry didn't sign him. No they wouldn't. Edmonds is a player that most Cub fans never ever wanted. That's never stopped many of the posters here from 2nd guessing/complaining about Hendry. Please reference Josh Hamilton.

Edmonds >>>>> Neifi > Trachsel > Blauser > Macias > Hundley The only downside to signing Edmonds is Pie not starting. If Edmonds signed with somebody else for nothing and started hitting like he did 2 years ago, people would be complaining that Hendry didn't sign him.

Agreed, wtb more nsbb.com and less cubs.com

I was at the game too. I remember the sound off of his elbow so distinctly. It nauseated me at the time...I didn't think there was ever any way he'd come back.

Except that it's not. He never had a season with a significant number of starts where he's more than 2 games under .500. Look at who else has been number 5 or better on the Cubs recently -- Rusch? Mitre? Estes? Maddux? Clement? They are all still floating around, and though Maddux is a wonder, Marquis is a clear upgrade on the others. Look at it this way, if your #5 starter is two games under .500, and your #4 starter is at .500, it's reasonable to expect your team to be at least 20 games over .500, with a strong performance from the pan and the rest of the rotation. Zambrano and Dempster have held up their ends this year, the others haven't. Yet, the problem in the rotation is the number 5 starter, even though they are .500 in his starts, and he has a better ERA than Lilly? There is every reason to believe Marquis will get bumped in the second half. Until then, he is performing exactly as would have been expected -- as a major league #5 starter. And no one has done enough to take that job away from him. We're picking starters based on W/L record? Wow. Well how else is one supposed to value a pitcher's worth? You act like there are other statistics (that are not team dependent) that are indicative of a pitcher's performance as an individual contributor. :blink: This should be in sarcastic green. Sorry, I'm from St. Louis. Morans around here must be having a negative influence on me. I fixed the post.

Except that it's not. He never had a season with a significant number of starts where he's more than 2 games under .500. Look at who else has been number 5 or better on the Cubs recently -- Rusch? Mitre? Estes? Maddux? Clement? They are all still floating around, and though Maddux is a wonder, Marquis is a clear upgrade on the others. Look at it this way, if your #5 starter is two games under .500, and your #4 starter is at .500, it's reasonable to expect your team to be at least 20 games over .500, with a strong performance from the pan and the rest of the rotation. Zambrano and Dempster have held up their ends this year, the others haven't. Yet, the problem in the rotation is the number 5 starter, even though they are .500 in his starts, and he has a better ERA than Lilly? There is every reason to believe Marquis will get bumped in the second half. Until then, he is performing exactly as would have been expected -- as a major league #5 starter. And no one has done enough to take that job away from him. We're picking starters based on W/L record? Wow. Well how else is one supposed to value a pitcher's worth? You act like there are other statistics (that are not team dependent) that are indicative of a pitcher's performance as an individual contributor. This :blink:

I am just messing with him, I would say most on this board are pretty good about seeing the huge flaws on our own team. It ain't about seeing the flaws. It's about temping the fates!!! Those terrible little harpies lurking around in the shadows that come to life at the first sound of Cubs fans taunting any other team. I don't believe in that crap. I had a whole freaking year of Kansas fans teasing and prodding at me about how bad my team is and how great they are and they win a national title. I don't buy into that crap at all anymore. You know, Cubs fans have tried not to tempt fate for years and look how that turned out. Maybe the key is to tempt fate. Clearly the last 100 years have been punishment for too many fate tempting Cubs fans slipping through. I think the resolution is clear - exterminate cocky Cubs fans. Cardinal fans can be dbags all day long and only be rewarded for it. We are forced to play by a different set of rules. I alone am responsible for 2003 for getting my first feeling of confidence for the season 2 innings prior to to the meltdown. :blackeye:

Isn't that Bobby Rayburn? What a tandem he and Juan Primo could have been.

Sad but true :cry:

I think it is a little much as well. I do, too. I think Gallagher is going to be good. Cedeno, who knows. It really depends on who the other players in the trade are. If the Cubs are giving up somebody like Veal, then definitely not. If its Patterson or Fontenot, cool. If they give up Murton, it would be nice to get Sherrill coming back. If the Cubs do go through with this, it is definitely a trade to win now which always means giving up more long term value. I'm okay with that so long as it isn't done too often. The question remains, however, will Roberts make enough of an impact to justify the deal. He might. It all depends on the difference having a more balanced line-up will make. Does getting better match-ups against relievers noticeably impact a team's ability to win games? Will having three lefties in the line-up mean that the Cubs will get deeper into their opponents bullpen and face less talented pitchers late in the game? Will Soriano actually be moved to the middle of the order and if he does, will that result in more runs being scored? How big of an impact will DeRosa coming off the bench and filling in for injured players really make? We've seen the stat lines of DeRosa and Roberts being compared a lot in this thread, and they aren't that different, but it is these other more subtle advantages that will make this deal worth doing or not. I think Soriano leads off regardless. No Roberts means Theriot hits 2nd, Fukudome 3rd. Roberts means Roberts hits 2nd, Fukudome 5th, Theriot 8th. This is why I want Roberts. If there was any chance they'd bat DeRosa 2nd, I wouldn't. I know batting order "doesn't really matter", but I just want the top of the Cubs lineup to not suck for once. I definitely want Theriot nowhere near the top of the order either, but him and Pie in some combination of 7/8 is going to make for a brutal last 3rd of the lineup. If Roberts ends up coming, I'd probably do this- Soriano Roberts Lee Ramirez Fukudome Soto Pie Theriot The top 6 looks really good, but the last 3 look brutal. I think the lineup will wind up that way, if Roberts is a Cub. But I'd also like to see: Roberts Lee Fukudome Ramirez Soriano Soto Pie Theriot And we'll probably see Lou experiment with: Roberts Theriot Lee Ramirez Fukudome Soriano Soto Pie I'd pay good money to see: Roberts Fukudome Lee Ramirez Soriano DeRosa Soto Pie

Good call, it was the first of the old ones. As such, here is a Murt circa 2008 pic: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2218/2261395871_7c6f9e4926.jpg?v=1202874474 Eff I wish he would get a fair shot. I'm really going to miss him.

I would have preferred both and trade Pie+ for a real SS.

You're wrong! What an assinine thing to say!

I did define the constant: C =(LgR/LgOut)/.260^2.5 Ok, it clicked. Thanks. Good lord, after rereading your original post I'm not sure how I misinterpereted.

Great Post, thanks Meph! Quick question (and I'll probably look stupid in the process): Instead of using a constant to make an attempt represent league avg as .260, is there a logical measurement that can be derived from the leagues in a separate formula to make this less arbitrary? In other words, In your mind is there a correlation that can be drawn from cJapan = 4.9, cNL = 5.2, and cAL = 5.7 that would give us a more accurate variable to plug in for the constant? Or am I clueless and missing the point? The 5 just seems like a "This hurts my head, just plug in a constant since the variance will be negligible." Anyway, thanks again!

Sounds like they should be equally as pissed at Roberts for not being able to catch, play center, or play short. I was a fan of the Roberts trade, mostly because I thought it might mean that Derosa could move to short. But if it's going to cost us this much, just break camp with what we've got and keep some trading chips for the deadline.

Jeff Blauser, Steve Buchelle, and Antonio Alfonseca in a 3 way tie for me.

You guys think Cedeno could get some of the CF duty against tough Lefties? I have no idea if he's any good in center, but if he's serviceable, that would further the chance of Cedeno being a valuable member of the team. We have a huge hole @ SS, regardless of what our organization thinks about Theriot. I expect it will become apparent to even them if Theriot is given the starting job. I think thats rather obvious. Lou has shown no real signs of sticking with a crappy player when he has a better option floating around. Lou is shooting alot of BS. On Friday's Chicago Tribune Live, Lou pointed out that the only spot open for competition is CF and never once mentioned Cedeno as a possibility at SS. I think Cedeno is going to be traded because Lou doesn't have the confidence in him to give him a chance to compete for a job. If there is one thing we should have learned about Lou last year, it was that everyone was given a chance to compete for every job. Everyone acts like Lou was Dusty-stubborn last year. If Theriot starts slow or has a bad spring training and Cedeno is lighting it up, you are crazy if you don't think Lou will make a switch. Matt Murton disagrees...but otherwise I think this is a fair statement.

Until tomorrow. The only way this deal (and this thread) is dead is if Roberts is traded to another team, until then it's alive and well. If that's the case, thanks Pete!

Omg I called it! Brian Roberts' official photographer is going to be a cub!

EqA, OBP, and a few other things. It doesn't matter if its dempster or not, hart sucks. who ever we put there would be at least 20 runs worse than marshall. i didnt project RA, just RS. A trade for Burnett would probably keep our pitching production near its 2007 level (~700 RA). A trade for Bedard w/o Hill would do about the same. Theyre interchangeable. Id prefer Burnett myself. 839.4 runs, + 14.1 Thank you!

According to my sources, there were 9 new pages in this thread when I got home from work tonight and no news! :( BTW Meph, any chance you could run the same simulation swapping Derosa for Theriot in the second lineup?