BigbadB

I don't have to look at their WARP's or their ages. You can't justify that one guy is likely to regress and say they other won't. You just can't do it. It's a marginal upgrade no matter how you slice it. There is POTENTIAL for it to be a significant upgrade if Roberts were to repeat his career year 4 years ago, but I don't think we should assume that anymore than we should assume Mark DeRosa will all of a sudden forget everything he accomplished in the last 2 years.

Roberts as a lead off hitter in 2007: .288 .376 .424, 710 plate appearances, 101 runs scored Soriano as a lead off hitter in 2007: .308 .345 .579, 577 plate appearances, 92 runs scored. CLEARLY not a lead off hitter? I beg to differ. If Soriano had 710 plate appearances last year, he would have scored more runs than Roberts scored last year by quite a bit. And isn't that really what you want your lead off hitter to do? Even if the Cubs get Roberts, I have no issues with Pineilla batting Soriano and Roberts 1/2 in the order. And if the Cubs could get some better bats hitting 7th and 8th in the order, I think Soriano challenges the 100 RBI mark in 2008. To be fair, Soriano had much better hitters following him than Roberts did. To be fair, Soriano drove himself in (HR) quite a few more times than Roberts did. We can go back and forth on this, but if Soriano can put up a .345 OBP or better, I have no issues with him leading off. And as Raw pointed out in his recent response, if the alternative to hit 2nd behind Roberts is Theriot, I'll take Soriano/Roberts 1/2 all day long.

Roberts as a lead off hitter in 2007: .288 .376 .424, 710 plate appearances, 101 runs scored Soriano as a lead off hitter in 2007: .308 .345 .579, 577 plate appearances, 92 runs scored. CLEARLY not a lead off hitter? I beg to differ. If Soriano had 710 plate appearances last year, he would have scored more runs than Roberts scored last year by quite a bit. And isn't that really what you want your lead off hitter to do? Even if the Cubs get Roberts, I have no issues with Pineilla batting Soriano and Roberts 1/2 in the order. And if the Cubs could get some better bats hitting 7th and 8th in the order, I think Soriano challenges the 100 RBI mark in 2008.

You seem pretty convinced that DeRosa has a very strong likelihood of regressing in 2008, yet you ignore the fact Brian Roberts has the same likelihood of regressing in 2008. Brian Roberts OPS+ by year the last 4 years: 2004- 90 2005- 139 2006- 96 2007- 112 DeRosa's OPS+ the last three years: 2005- 97 2006- 108 2007- 102 Looks to me like Roberts likes to have an average year followed by a good year followed by an average year followed by a good year. Uh oh. Guess what kind of year Roberts is on pace to have in 2008? Marginal upgrade is the correct term.

Trading for Swisher doesn't hurt the White Sox in the least bit, unless he suffers some significant or lingering injury. The Sox could turn around and peddle Swisher for a better package of players than the one's the gave up later on if they want.

This team more than any other team in baseball should be concerned with rotation health risks. I do like Burnett, but he's a health risk. Plain and simple.

Marginal upgrade is a rather accurate description of Roberts replacing DeRosa at 2nd base. But, that is not where the comparisons should stop, necessarily. DeRosa as a bench player is a significant upgrade to the bench. DeRosa playing SS is a significant upgrade at SS. DeRosa in PH situations is a significant upgrade to the guy who would currently occupy that spot if we didn't get Roberts, say Cedeno. Yes, it's marginal from one aspect, but it's significant in other aspects. But, not marginal or siginificant enough to clean out the back half of the rotation, and likely not marginal enough or significant enough to trade away your best SS option (Cedeno) if DeRosa is not an option to play SS. But, it is marginal and significant enough to trade what will likely be a little used 4th outfielder (Murton), 1 of 2 potential end of the rotation starters (Gallagher or Marshall) and a non factor CF prospect (Patterson).

I support this signing! :D

He had plenty of time to practice, you know! I like how he believes he should receive "the benefit of the doubt" because of all the good he's done for the community. Yep, we should all be able to buy our innocence that way. I watched the 60 Minutes interview as well. I was patiently waiting for Wallace to drop the "lie detector" bomb on Clemens and was starting to wonder if he was ever going to ask Roger if he would be willing to take the test. This is where I think Clemens REALLY failed to look believable. Not that I needed a lie detector question to determine his innocence. Wallace asked Clemens if he'd be willing to take a lie detector test and Clemens really skirted that question, calling into question the validity of the tests. Wallace posed the question 3 or 4 different ways, and each response continued to call into question the validity of a lie detector test. So, if and when McNamee and Clemens each take a lie detector test and McNamee passes and Clemens fails, it will just be more icing on the cake. During the interview, I learned that McNamee had to be truthful to avoid prosecution. So, if I understand this correctly, and according to Clemens, McNamee risked his get out of jail free card and lied about Clemens taking steroids. Sure thing, Roger. :roll:

Very well stated. While you mentioned deals where the Cubs continue giving up young talent that depletes the farm system, I would also add that other similar deals where they didn't get young talent in return is also an example of poor management. I know everyone hates to see this in print, but Greg Maddux for Cesar Izturis is exactly what I'm talking about. If or when you are giving up on the season, you trade your assets (players who other teams find valuable that aren't necessarily in future plans) for players who have some potential rather than for a guy you know is going to suck.

I was on board for a deal that brought Roberts, but I liked the originally rumored deals much better than I like these current rumors. I like Murton, but he's a 4th outfielder on this current roster and not expected to see much playing time with the likes of Kosuke and Soriano manning the corner outfield spots and DeRosa supposedly handling super sub/ph duties. Patterson is not a significant loss to the major league club, either, considering the depth the organization has in CF. Gallagher hurts, but we would still have Marshall to stick in the rotation. This latest proposal makes no sense. First off, Murton for Payton is just plain stupid. Murton is more valuable than Payton and he makes less money. Cedeno is currently my #1 option at SS going into '08 if Cubs management refuses to let DeRosa play there. We have zero depth at SS if Cedeno is traded, and I have nothing good to say about Alex Cintron as a veteran back up. Trading Gallagher AND Marshall is beyond stupid as well. Basically, the depth of the rotation would be wiped out, and I'm not really sold that we even have any depth in the rotation with both of them still with the club. As has been pointed out numerous times, Roberts would be a slight upgrade to DeRosa at 2nd. DeRosa strengthens the bench significantly, so overall adding Roberts wouldn't be the worse idea ever. I'd like it even more if DeRosa would be considered for SS. But, when you deal away talent for improvements to your team, you deal from your strengths not from your weaknesses. Currently, the starting rotation and shortstop are weaknesses and would be weakened even further by removing these parts. If that's the proposed deal, I'd pass. Cedeno at SS, DeRosa at 2nd and one of Gallagher or Marshall in the rotation is better than Roberts at 2nd, Theriot at SS and some crappy veteran high risk low reward has been starting pitcher occupying the 5th rotation slot.

The fact that Cedeno was mentioned and not Murton makes me think, that if Roberts were to come to the Cubs, that Lou would make DeRosa the starting SS. While I would hope that would happen, I don't see it happening. Cubs management seems to think Theriot is the guy for the job at SS, and they have also made it sound as if they like DeRosa in a Super-Sub role.

New? Please define new.

Ha! Mets now have Carlos Beltran and Carlos Beltran Jr. backing him up.

Sounds like the Mets might be about ready to make a big deal involving Carlos Gomez.

Wow. Looks like Fuld has a leg up on the 5th outfield spot. Unless the Cubs bring in some veteran hack.

Every single with Kendall behind the dish is basically an automatic double waiting to happen. Sure glad he's someone else's problem.

the title will get changed if something happens

Wrigley, let's talk. Theriot isn't good at getting on base, don't be fooled like I was, look at his OBP!!!!! He's a really nice option at super-sub, that's it! Theriot would not be a really nice option at super-sub. Theriot would be "okay" as a utility player.

He'd likely do less damage in the NHL, too. Drafting, signing and trading for guys he knows nothing about might be better than knowing what he's getting and making deals to get them anyway. :wink:

Cleveland, Yes. San Diego, No. San Diego currently has Brian Giles, Jim Edmonds and Scott Hairston penciled into the outfield, and not much of a bench behind those guys. It's rumored that they may move Chase Headley to LF and have him platoon with Hairston, but you still have some major question marks with Giles and Edmonds health. The Padres did sign Tadahito Iguchi to play 2b, but there would still be room for Patterson to back him up and play CF when Edmonds is on the DL. Also, the Padres have a pretty solid front 4 with Peavy, Young, Maddux and Wolf, but the 5th spot right now is up for grabs for a bunch of rehab projects. Gallagher could slot right in there ahead of Estes, Rusch, Prior and Germano. Gallagher, Patterson and Fox would be good fits for San Diego, and Murton is fairly comparable to Scott Hairston, so not so much. But, San Diego would want Cedeno since they don't really have anyone decent to play SS if they did trade Greene. I don't think he's going anywhere anyway.

Article: http://www.rotoworld.com/content/features/column.aspx?sport=MLB&columnid=3&articleid=29767 Where do I sign for that line??? Jason Kendall is in the NL Central. I'll be pissed if Soto only steals one base all season. :D I don't know if Soto can even steal a base on Kendall. There are a lot of things he's good at, but speed isn't exactly one of them. I'd put him as the slowest player on last year's team. There's a reason that Soto spent 3 years in AAA and in that time stole exactly 0 bases :D It was sarcasm. Since Soto is going to win the Triple Crown this year, stealing a base or not isn't going to matter in the big picture. :wink:

Article: http://www.rotoworld.com/content/features/column.aspx?sport=MLB&columnid=3&articleid=29767 Where do I sign for that line??? Jason Kendall is in the NL Central. I'll be pissed if Soto only steals one base all season. :D

Don't worry. No one else really cares. Come on now. I care. I think it's great that Fuld won the AFL MVP. I'm not going to write off a guy simply because someone else wants to make a blanket statement that anyone who wins an AFL MVP award is comparable to or will never be anything more than Kevin Orie. That's silly. Whether Fuld amounts to anything remains to be seen. But, if his success in the AFL and future success in AAA or as the 5th outfielder for the Cubs increases his trade value or gives us a cheap bench option for the next few years, I couldn't be happier. Why wouldn't anyone not care at all? There are numerous examples of guys who were not projected as top prospects that ended up having long and great careers in the major leagues. I liken cheering for a guy like Fuld to rooting for the underdog. And there's really nothing wrong with that at all.

i'd hate to sound like i'm lying, but i'd like to think that i'd try to be loyal to the team that drafted/scouted me. OK, Chicago DID NOT OFFER A CONTRACT to Mark. He was non-tendered. So, he should just not sign any contracts on the off chance that Chicago would re-sign him. Both sides need to agree to the contract and CHC did not offer him one. I, for one, do not blame Prior one bit and wish him the best of luck (outside of Cubs games). I don't think this has anything to do with "loyalty." In fact, I could argue that the Cubs gave up their loyalty to him by not offering a contract. Dude, where have you been hiding? Welcome back!