BigbadB

Verlander had an okay day, eh?

I agree with the other names (especially Guerrero and Beltran) but Magglio Ordonez? 7 years, over 100 million dollars, and he put these 2 lines up his first two years in Detroit: .302/.359/.436 (in only 82 games) .298/.350/.477 He wouldn't have been able to put up his monster season that he is this year in Chicago, because people would have wanted him traded already for making that much money for that little production. In fact, Burnitz's 2005 and Jones's 2006 are roughly comparable to Magglio's first 2 years, and they cost 20 million dollars less over that time. Magglio is also 33 with injury problems, and so the later years of that deal will not be pretty. So Vladimir and Beltran-yes, the Cubs should have gone after one of those. Magglio? It would have been a terrible signing, amazing year he's having so far this year or not. Who is to say that the Cubs would have been forced to give Maggs a 7/100m contract? From what I recall, he was going to give a significant discount to the Cubs if he didn't have to move out of Chicago. Detroit was overpaying for everyone at that time. They paid ridiculously for Pudge, Vina, Percival and Urbina, also. Detroit entered the Maggs sweepstakes quite late, IIRC. If the Cubs were interested, they could have potentially landed Maggs at a much shorter term on the contract and significantly less money. And another IIRC, wasn't Maggs' injury in 2005 unrelated to the injury troubles he had in 2004? Could that injury have just been a fluke injury that he may not have suffered if he was wearing a Cub uniform that year? Well, considering the incredible injury history with anything Cubs, that last paragraph is kind of funny. But, you probably understand my point. Maggs wasn't signed until February 7th.

I can't believe how all of you ignore Izturis' value to this team. It's pretty clear that his value to the team is to play like he plays, thereby making everyone else on the team look much better than they actually are.

he screwed the pooch when he failed to show any interest in guys like: Magglio Ordonez Carlos Beltran Vladmir Guerrero Miguel Tejada

What's a better trade off? 1) Keep sending the same hack out there and falling even further under .500 in hopes that the hack increases his trade value. 2) Eat the salary, dump the hack and put a better hitter in his spot in the order, increasing the chances of winning more games than you lose. I've always been under the impression that baseball is played to win games, not to improve someone's trade value.

that would definitely reward people with EI. Why not do the same with hitters? I have yet to see a hitter have a -20 point night. I was only joking, Juan.

I'm "apoolgod" at Yahoo and I'm BrianSDAPA at AOL.

New rule: A player can be dropped from a team the moment he starts really sucking on the mound, thereby limiting the damage. Whaddya think? This is two weeks in a row that my first pitcher has blown chunks.

I have no doubt Minaya loves Z very much. But, not that much. There are 3 options at this point. Option 1) Sign Z to a long term contract Option 2) Let Z walk at the end of the year Option 3) Trade him Considering the Cubs organization is somewhat in limbo due to the sale, signing him is probably not likely. Considering what Z will command on the market if he becomes a free agent and how much the Cubs already have stockpiled in guaranteed contracts, some other team will easily outbid the Cubs for Z. Z has expressed loyalty, but money talks when the bidding starts getting serious. If you let him walk at the end of the year, the return is probably 3 or 4 years down the road, and the potential for no reward on that return is high. Trading him makes sense. If you want to be stubborn and hold out for Jose Reyes, expect Option 2 to happen. There are trade partners right now. Anaheim and NYM seem like the best candidates. Colon has been horrible and Anaheim looks like a serious threat to make the playoffs. They will likely show lots of interest in Z. Moreno, IMO, would be VERY intersted. They have many prospects worthy of a close look, like Mathis, Adenhart and Brandon Wood. The Mets have some really good looking prospects as well, like Pelfrey, Martinez, Gomez and Milledge. There probably isn't a person here who wouldn't trade Z for Reyes straight up right this very minute. However, it takes two to tango, and the Mets won't be on that dance floor. Z has a ton of value in this market. But, he's a free agent at the end of the year. That decreases his overall value. His workload over the last several years also weighs heavily on his overall value. A team is just not going to trade a franchise player for a 1/2 year rental that's not performing at his highest potential. They might mortgage their future for a shot at the World Series by trading some really quality prospects, and that's the most likely scenario. If you are going to hold out for Jose Reyes, be prepared to watch Z walk at the end of the year with compensation picks as the lonely return.

What drove me nuts for years with Dusty at the helm was creating line ups that had crappy hitters at the top of the line up. Neifi Perez should never have hit at the top of the order. With that said, Soriano is not your prototypical lead off guy. However, I'll take a premium type hitter hitting at the top of the order all day long over some weak OBP hack that shouldn't ever be in the line up, period. A typical box score from 2005 and 2006 would have Neifi going 0-5 and Derek Lee going 2-4, with Neifi making the last out in the game. In what screwed up universe should Neifi come to the plate more often than Derrek Lee? Soriano's OBP so far this year is .369. While that is certainly not great for a power hitter like Soriano, it's excellent OBP at the top of the order. It's also on par with his OBP last year when he hit lead off. What you want more than anything from a top of the order hitter is a guy who doesn't make a lot of outs. Soriano currently meets that objective.

The Indians are building a team that rivals the team that dominated their division from 1995 to 2001. Even though they were a bit young and inexperienced this year, I picked them to win their division.

I don't have any complaints about the draft so far. They need position players.

Hey, 2 more outfielders and a 1b and we'll have ourselves a whole team. :D

I don't like Pujol's chances. I see him breaking down physically in his upper 30's. A-Rod, on the other hand, could DH on a team well into his 40's if he so desired.

I don't remember him coming back. I think his back problem forced him to just give up.

He'll just be a placeholder for A-Rod anyway, so it doesn't really matter all that much. I predict A-Rod breaks the new record before he turns 40.

I like the Vitters pick. Although I preferred Wieters. But, then again, I would have really preferred a super stud SS in the draft that fell to #3. Doesn't sound like there is one this year, however.

Signability issues? We aren't the Twins or D'Rays here. What kind of signability issues would the Cubs have with Wieters?

-25.75 Anybody ever have a worse score than that?

OMG Halladay. Jesus! My hitters are 5-7 so far today with 2 doubles, 1 HR, 2 RBI, 4 runs scored, and my team has scored -6.25 points for the day. Thanks Roy.

No, whoever picked up Thorman can have him. Salty's going to steal all of his at bats eventually, anyway. Like I said earlier, I didn't mean to make it a federal case. It just didn't seem right to allow a guy in the majors to be placed in the minors when I couldn't drop a guy to my own minors. Since I actually could do that, I don't have an issue with it at all. I'm sure we could all help put together the rules, Juan. Let's start a thread that pertains to all the rules that we need to list, and then from there we can create a new thread that incorporates all the rules into one neat and organized sticky. My apologies for the confusion.

Well, hell. That's where all my confusion stemmed from. I dropped Perkins and Thorman this year when I could have just stuck them back in my minors. I thought once you promoted them, they couldn't be put back in the minors unless they were sent down. I don't really want Perkins back, but Thorman got picked up by someone else. Oh well. He sucked for me anyway.

What we need more than anything is a set of rules that are easily accessible. I wasn't really trying to turn this into a federal case. I was simply asking the question since I can't look it up myself. But, I do disagree that the rules are consistent. If I promote a guy up to my major league team from my minors, can I send him back down to my minor leagues the next week if he still meets eligibility requirements and even though he hasn't actually been sent back to the minors? I believe the answer is no to that one. Which is why I cut Glen Perkins earlier this year. Can I pick Perkins back up and stick him in my minors? Which is why I ask the question. You can pick up a major leaguer and stick him in your minors, but you can't demote a guy from your major league roster to the minors. To me, it doesn't make sense.

Yep. That's the way it should be. If you are lucky enough to grab a guy before he gets the call, you can keep him in your minors. It makes zero sense to allow current major league players to be picked up off of free agency and stashed in the minors.

Sonnanstine and Escobar are different. Sonnanstine has been in my minor leagues, therefore I should be able to leave him in my minors until I decide to promote him. Escobar was a free agent playing in the big leagues. It makes absolutely zero sense that you can pick up a free agent who is currently on a big league roster and tuck them away in the minors. But, if those are the rules, all I can do is shrug my shoulders.