ThePenguin11

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2006/01/kaplan_cubs_try.html#comments can the m's throw in reed as well? Yeah, that would be nice. This is probably totally false, but it'd be nice to see us even package corey into a decent deal. Is it me or does being a Cub this offseason automatically mean you have no trade value? Walker - none. Patterson - zilch. Pie - not what it was last July. Hill - No one's kicking down Jim's door now. Prior - Not what it should be. What happened? Last year JH was in a position to tell teams that he wasn't trading Hill for Dunn and now Hill seems to have to be a throw-in.

FWIW someone on the chatboard at MLBtrade... is stating that Patterson for Meche is a done deal. Probably crap, but thought I'd throw it out there. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2006/01/kaplan_cubs_try.html#comments

I remember when MacPhail turned down a Patterson for Vlad, Vidro and Wilkerson deal many years ago. :wink: It's a good thing other teams overrate Cub prospects too or they wouldn't have Lee or Ramirez. Imagine how bad the Cubs would be if they didn't make those trades? What? There had to be more to that deal from the Cubs side of things, lots more. I just hope that five years from now we are not trying to trade Pie for a minor leaguer when we could get alot from him now... I was just kidding Bergy! I am curious on what MacPhail was offered for Patterson though. I'm pretty sure KC would have given us Johnny Damon for him like four (EDIT: five years) years ago. OOOOOPS!

But, if you honestly wanted to move Prior, wouldn't it make more sense to open up the bidding for his services to the other 29 teams in the league rather than just the Orioles, who don't seem to be giving Prior the respect he deserves? What would other teams pay for a guy who has #1 stuff? Would Phily give up Abreu, who basically is as good or better than Tejada at a position on the field that the Cubs have a much bigger hole? Right now, Baltimore is rejecting deals for Tejada that seem lopsided in their favor. If Prior is going to get dealt, I'd like to see a deal that was lopsided in our favor rather than the other way around. To quote Homer Simpson: "Exaaaaaaaaaaaaaactly."

I would probably give up 3-4 of the guys on most top 10 lists, while maybe throwing in a current bullpen arm and/or another lower ranked prospect. Would you give up Ohman along with Pie, Guzman and Hill? What kind of worries me is that the O's (Stockwell) know who is good and who isn't. I understand where you're coming from, but we can't give Stockstill too much credit here. The Cubs seem to overvalue many of their prospects, and many of them don't seem to pan out. They rarely ever call up the right guys for the right reasons so there's a chance that Stockstill isn't the greatest talent evaluator and believes the hype as much as anyone else. Or he could be really good at what he does. But the point is that we can't assume that were going to get fleeced out of our best prospects because the guy who scouted them (who has a bias for his former players) is helping the O's. In fact, it might even work in the Cubs favor, since Stockstill scouted these guys, he might even overvalue them still. The other thing to factor is that since he's so new in the Baltimore organization, they may not be taking full stock of his opinion in one of the team's biggest ever transactions since he's only been there for like six weeks. To answer your question, I'd probably hold off on Guzman at first, and see where that goes. If we're throwing all that at them, they'd need to take back salary or send back prospects or serviceable veterans with low, low salaries.

The Cubs have Fontenant (sp) at Iowa though and he would be a decent backup. They can have Fontenot back. We'll throw in Ray Fontenot in a package deal for a bucket, sans balls. Hell, I'll settle for a bucket to be named later.

For the record I don't think that Prior is involved in this rumored deal. I meant to say, "We'd trade Prior for Tejada, but Pie's off-limits?" I'm sorry if there was some confusion, but that's where I was going with this post. Pie + Prospects for Tejada should be done yesterday.

I didn't want to start a new thread about this, since we all know that mlbtraderumors posts a lot of garbage - but I do put a lot of stock in what information comes from Dave Kaplan. Link This is so Cub-like. They can have Tejada, but they don't want to give up Pie. Why not? So he can be the next can't-miss-Corey-Patterson? No matter how much we can sit here and say Pie is any different, we all thought Patterson was the next great thing when he was coming up. There is no guarantee that Pie will ever amount to All-Star level talent, so you have to make the deal. EDIT: Prior YES? Pie NO? EDIT #2: We'd trade Prior for Tejada, but we won't trade Pie for him? Something's wrong with Hendry's thinking if this is true. We don't even have a place for Pie to play now that Hendry's tied up the OF.

Colbrunn has played in 42 games since 2003. He's been a super-sub his whole career and wouldn't be a bad NRI, but you've got to wonder if there's anything he has that would warrant holding a younger prospect alternative back from getting experience in the bigs. The fact that he was out of baseball last year (injury?) is a concern.

Sorry Orioles. You're bargaining chips are decreasing. Might want to pick up a Baseball America Prospect Handbood and start scouting prospects. Can you hear me O's? No Prior, jerks.

Check this out: http://redsox.bostonherald.com/redSox/view.bg?articleid=119987 "According to sources, at least two teams have offered the Orioles a more attractive package than the current Ramirez and Clement offer the Red Sox have been dangling." Ramirez and Clement sounded pretty attractive. What 2 teams topped that, and with which players? Is it possible Detroit offer Guillen, Bonderman and a prospect? Detroit would be insanely stupid to trade for Tejada. They're not going to win this year. Tejada won't want to play there. He'll ask for a trade next offseason (which can allow him to be a free agent if they don't) and they'll be out of luck, and have lost Guillen, Bonderman and a prospect. (By the way, I'm not trashing your proposed deal - just asking why Baltimore and Detroit are talking in the first place. It defeats the whole purpose of Tejada wanting to leave to go win with another team.)

Baltimore (Or Bartimole as 'slammin sammy' would say) is not really in a position to get greedy. There is plenty of time for this thing to spin out of control if they cannot make Tejada happy. Combine that with the fact that they continue to make iffy transactions and Tejada is likely to blow up again. I would think his agent is orchestrating this, so they can expect his outbursts to become progressively more intense (and more often if need be).

One stat that's very worthwhile is that Craig Wilson strikes out at a much lower rate vs. lefties. He'd be the perfect platoon partner for Jones with a .900+ OPS vs. LHP. His other strength is that he can play other positions. If I'm not mistaken he can even play catcher. (Edit: 1B, C, LF, RF) EDIT: 2003-2005 Splits: Versus RHP Wilson has 0.25 BB/K. Versus LHP Wilson has 0.73 BB/K. That is a dramatic difference.

Mark Prior - S - Cubs Mark Prior voided the final year of the contract he signed when he was drafted, making him eligible for salary arbitration. The Cubs were expecting this. Prior would have earned $2.5 million under the terms of his deal. As an arbitration-eligible player with three-plus years of service time, he could earn $4 million-$5 million this year. He won't be eligible for free agency until after 2008. Jan. 4 - 8:50 pm et

Can they agree to a long-term deal now? Or will a one-year agreement to bypass arbitration be the likely scenario?

Adam Greenberg was on his way to becoming one of the game's best fourth outfielders? The fact that not a single team claimed him a few weeks ago strongly suggests otherwise and is telling of how much we (Cubs fans) overvalue our own guys at times. Seriously. Adam Greenberg. Perfect example. I've seen half-a-dozen threads started about the pending fate of Adam Greenberg. Who cares? If he sniffs a starting position in the majors for a full season at any point in his career, I'll name my next child LaRussa or Pujols.

I'm glad he didn't. Nothing like shutting the door when other options (ones that don't include Mark Prior, mind you) may be available. But if Hendry's determined not to trade Prior (and I've gradually come to this conclusion), it is important to "hang up laughing." If you don't, you may show hesitation or weakness, letting the O's dictate what's fair what's not fair in each proposal. There are better ways of doing that than humiliating another GM. Business relations and ethics are just as important in baseball as they are in any business. Not only do you close a door with the team you insult, but the word will get around the league and give you a reputation as being a jerk. Other GMs won't give you a sniff at a decent offer if you build that kind of a rep. (See Lamar, Chuck)

I wonder if there is a font for pompous... So I'm pompous for pointing out that 39 year olds don't just bounce back from off years? If you're looking at a guy like Grissom and seriously considering him a decent option on this team, you can only do that by highlighting the positives and completely ignoring the negatives. Maybe I read it wrong, but it sounded a lot like you were trying to demean me by saying I don't make any sense or that I'm blindly try to paint whatever pretty picture I can for the Cubs. However, I withdrew my comment due to the fact that the tone of one's voice cannot be conveyed it the printed word, giving you the benefit of the doubt. I based my original comments due to your seemingly unending amount of pessimism and negativity as well as what often comes off as a condescending tone. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

You simply cannot use the "until last year" phrase when talking about a 39 year old baseball player. He's coming in as another veteran for Dusty to overuse. The likelihood of him using Jones/Grissom in a proper platoon is extremely low since Dusty has shown little ability to properly platoon players, wait through the slump of an inexperienced player, limit the playing time of unproductive veterans, and properly read splits. You absolutely can when the sample size was nearly 1/4 of a normal major league season. Perhaps it was so small because he's so old and so bad that like his game, his body was falling apart and even the Giants couldn't justify using him more. If you're talking about a 32 or 33 year old, you're making some sense (although trusting Dusty to do it right is a stretch), but when you're talking about a 39 year old, and you're just assuming the previous disaster year was a fluke and that he'll be just fine next season, well, you're glossing over the harsh realities and just trying to paint the prettiest picture you can. EDIT: You don't have to sugarcoat your true feelings.

And Grissom hit .217 .245 .261 against LHP last year. Dusty would find a way to use Grissom over Murton, and he would never be able to figure out a proper platoon between Jones and Grissom (not that one exists since they aren't good enough to be your RF). A sample size of 137 at bats season for that matter is basically useless. Marquis Grissom is basically useless. You'd have to care very little about the outcome if you're willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a 39 year older player with substandard career numbers coming off a disastrous age 38 season. I'm pretty comfortable looking at that limited sample size and theorizing that Grissom won't help the Cubs at all this year. Fair enough, you might be right. But the point is that you can't make any real conclusions based on that small of a sample size. What you can do is use the three year split from 2003-2005 (which includes his poor performance from last year) and factor a 5-10% decline in order to try and estimate what to expect for 2006. That would still place him well over .800 vs. LHP.

You simply cannot use the "until last year" phrase when talking about a 39 year old baseball player. He's coming in as another veteran for Dusty to overuse. The likelihood of him using Jones/Grissom in a proper platoon is extremely low since Dusty has shown little ability to properly platoon players, wait through the slump of an inexperienced player, limit the playing time of unproductive veterans, and properly read splits. You absolutely can when the sample size was nearly 1/4 of a normal major league season.

And Grissom hit .217 .245 .261 against LHP last year. Dusty would find a way to use Grissom over Murton, and he would never be able to figure out a proper platoon between Jones and Grissom (not that one exists since they aren't good enough to be your RF). A sample size of 137 at bats season is basically useless.

I think everyone needs to calm down a little about this possible signing. Until last year when Grissom was injured and only played in 44 games, he absolutely terrorized left-handed pitchers. He's coming in as a suitable platoon partner for Jacque Jones. His OPS vs LHP: 2003-2005: .926 2002: .971 2003: 1.056 2004: .933 Because he missed out on Byrnes he'll grab Grissom for probably less than $1 Mil per year. That's not bad at all. Let's not just assume Hendry's an idiot and wants to start him over Matt Murton. The only obvious need for a platoon is in RF. It's not a sexy signing, but its a very smart one.

Beane is all about stockpiling young talent. Hill, Pie and Williams would be my best guess. I'd give him two if we could get Zito extended for 2+ years.

Rotoworld's take: Barry Zito - S - Athletics David Kaplan on WGN radio said he believes the Cubs are discussing a Barry Zito deal with the Athletics. Matt Murton or Felix Pie would be nice, but the A's probably aren't going to deal Zito without getting some immediate help and the Cubs don't have a lot to offer. We're skeptical that the A's would trade Zito for one of the outfielders and either Jerome Williams or Rich Hill. Dec. 30 - 12:22 am et