Rob

I'm not suggesting to blow things up. Theriot is a complimentary piece, but is not core to the team in any way. If you can get value for him, I don't think the overall decline in production is that severe going to Blanco, Barney or some other stop gap option whether that is all year or until Castro is ready. I'd expect the difference between Theriot and his likely replacement to be about one win by the all star break, two wins all season. Does that make him a core piece? No. But it could certainly make a difference in a pennant chase should we find ourselves in position to make a run at it. If we're trying to squeeze the most out of our roster this season (as should always be the goal until we find ourselves not worrying about whether or not we make the playoffs), holding onto Theriot for just a bit longer seems like a good idea.

I'm not opposed to trading Theriot, but the timing is still a bit off. This team as constructed can still compete in the NL Central. Now, its obvious that the core is aging and we're getting ready to go through a changing of the guard, so I wouldn't exactly commit multiple years to marginal guys in an attempt to go for it one last time. But we can certainly wait until closer to the deadline to see if our guys cant force the issue on us. And who knows what might be available then? And of course, if our team isn't in contention at that point, I wouldn't be opposed to moving many of our pieces. DLee, Aramis, Lilly and Theriot could reap a small fortune of prospects. But that's then and this is now... and right now, I'm not ready to fold on the 2010 season yet. Starting to dismantle this team early just doesn't seem to be the prudent course of action.

Back to a previous conversation, davearm, where did you find payroll figures for all teams the last 7 years?

I'm sorry, but this is pretty useless. What you would need to do is calculate marginal payroll (actual payroll minus league minimum times 25) over marginal wins (actual wins minus how many games a replacement level team would win [depending on the definition, usually between 30-50 games... probably on the higher side of that now that BP has adjusted their silly idea of replacement level fielding.]). And for what it's worth, the last few studies I've seen done like that had the Cubs in last or next to last.

Five years ago, you could still believe in wins as a stat and simply be considered behind the times. But if you don't have some sort of evidence that you were in a coma, monastary, or frozen Encino Man style, we have to assume that you're choosing to remain ignorant rather than attempt intelligent conversation. Stop wasting our time. Sorry, Rob. But you and your confused ilk have yet to provide any stat that is more important than wins for a starting pitcher, especially one that is paid over $18 million a year. What's more important WHIP? :wink: Other stats have importance but not to the degree of wins. Your expectations seem quite low and indicative of your understanding. I posted this exchange last time you came in here espousing outdated philosophies. Agreed judging pitchers value by season-season wins is going to give you very mixed results on how good a pitcher actually is. However I do think wins can be used, to a point, for judging the value/effectiveness of a pitcher over a whole career. Along with all the other things like whip, era+, k/9, h/9, etc. No, you can't. The assumption that Wins might mean something in the long run is based on the idea that a pitcher is likely to be on an equal number of bad teams and good teams. Careers just aren't long enough to make that assumption, especially considering how long a team has control over a player when they break into the league. There are numerous, better metrics to use in evaluating a player. I'd barely even bother to gloss over wins when trying to judge a player's worth.

Five years ago, you could still believe in wins as a stat and simply be considered behind the times. But if you don't have some sort of evidence that you were in a coma, monastary, or frozen Encino Man style, we have to assume that you're choosing to remain ignorant rather than attempt intelligent conversation. Stop wasting our time.

The Yankees wont offer anything of real worth besides financial relief and a junk piece like Cabrera and there isn't anywhere on the market we could spend that extra money to cover the loss in production. They wont trade Cano. They wont trade Joba. They wont trade Montero. Yeah, on the surface if they offered Hughes and Gardner plus taking on the whole contract, we'd probably be coming out ahead in the deal. But we're right around the tipping point of really competing versus not, and losing that marginal production Zambrano gives us over what those two would provide simply makes any deal not worth it... not unless they're willing to give up more than we'd expect.

good lord, who would take him? Any chance Bavasi can get a job before the season starts? The way our offseason is going, he may very well end up the Cubs GM.

Nyjer Morgan was excellent last season, but I just don't see him as having enough power to keep pitchers honest and keep that walk rate up.

In all honesty, with the way Theriot has reacted compared to the way the rest of the Cubs clubhouse has, I'm starting to wonder if Theriot isn't a pretty big dick.

Illegal behavior is just that. Teammates actually forgive that, also. Heck, Michael Vick kills puppies and he's still playing pro sports. The question is how is anything Milton said or did this year affecting the play of his teammates? No, the question is how would committing a crime affect the play of his teammates? Who ever said that it would?

I'd rather go with Fuld than Colvin for now.

3/17

Sure, if he killed somebody, or raped a chick or something like that I would strongly advise not bringing him back to the team. Why that's not going to make his teammates hit any worse or forget how to catch the ball etc etc so who cares what he does off the field. Right? Personally, I've been pretty consistent in saying that I draw the line at breaking the law. DUIs, wife beating, PED using, etc... Last I checked, being a dick wasn't illegal.

This was an awful deal, there's no doubt about it. Hendry manufactured Bradley's low trade value and refused to just hold onto him. But just so people have a better idea of what they're looking at, here's Silva's xFIP the last few years. 3.94, 4.81, 4.57, 4.64, 5.53 Now nobody is gonna mistake Silva for a decent pitcher; he isn't. But aside from last year, he's been relatively healthy in his career. I wouldn't be surprised to see some Jason Marquis type value out of Silva...

Sorry man, but "we" the fans are not to blame. There were small pockets of idiot fans who contributed to the problem, but I sure as heck didn't participate, and the vast majority of people I saw in Wrigley in the 2 games I attended immediately following that meltdown weren't participating either. Are you really trying to argue semantics? And your vast majority is different from everybody else I've talked to.

Why? It's not like we booed a good player to the point he had to be traded for an awful pitcher with an awful contract. So all of a sudden this is just the fans fault? There's a lot of blame to go around and you make it seem Bradley is a little angel who can do no wrong. The reality is Bradley is a head case who could not handle the pressure. Hendry made things worse by suspending him and ensuring he lost all of his trade value in the process. There's plenty of blame to go around. Hendry's suspension killed the trade value. By all accounts Lou's insistence that Bradley talk to the media (despite his attempts to avoid them entirely) helped cause some of this mess. Irresponsible writers making it their mission to crucify him. Bob Brenly trying to turn every Cubs fan watching TV against him. And the fans have to answer for their part of it too. Far too many of them let themselves get swept up by the media's crusade against him. The reaction in the stands after he called a few fans racist will forever blow my mind... Does Bradley get a pass? No. He's a jackass and he could have handled things better. But to pretend that we didn't let people stack the deck against him... to pretend that we as fans aren't at least partly to blame for the fact that we have to watch Carlos Silva pitch in a Cubs uniform next season... well, you'd be fooling yourself.

Why? It's not like we booed a good player to the point he had to be traded for an awful pitcher with an awful contract.

I sure hope the idiots who spent all of last season booing Bradley and exacerbating the issue are happy with this move. Not that moving Bradley was in any way the right move, but I honest to god would have just cut him and ate the money owed before I let Carlos Silva pitch an inning for us.

The DH rule does take some strategy out of the game, and I'd prefer if it is never adopted in the NL. However, the quality of play absolutely goes up when pitchers aren't hitting, and guys who can really hit but cant field have a way to play the game. Not to mention DH's get paid like starters, and the pitchers don't get paid half their salary because they aren't hitting, so the Union will never ever allow the DH to be removed without some major concession which are likely to change the game just as much. It's here to stay. Deal.

Isn't Wrigley on the National Registry of Historic Places or something? As such, you cannot tear it down. The footprint of Wrigley is too small for a modern park anyways. The Marquee and the Scoreboard are protected, I'm not sure that anything else is.

I still think it's silly to focus on leadoff as though it were a position, but Crawford would be somebody worth going after in the offseason. He's two years older than Ellsbury, but is pretty much better across the board and would only cost money.

Ellsbury's baserunning was worth about 5.6 runs last year, total. 7.5 runs year before last. His total offensive contributions (batting and baserunning) are in Kosuke territory, given about the same amount of PA. And last year at least, UZR had him as one of the worst defensive CF in baseball (along with Kosuke, Fowler, and Wells) How many of our top prospects would you give up for another Kosuke? But, wouldn't you expect Ellsbury to still get better, given his age? Add in his cost factor and I think he'd be a very welcome addition, especially given our payroll situation. That said, I don't see us going after him, nor San Diego wanting to part with him, IF they even acquire him. He's 26, so he's just entering his prime. Still, his swing and body aren't exactly conducive to adding a bunch of power and from what I've seen, it seems the big green monster is responsible for a nice chunk of his doubles power already. So do I see him getting better? No, not significantly. Ellsbury is a nice little player, I'm not trying to deny him that. However, the marginal value that he provides over somebody like Fuld simply isn't worth the cost in prospects it would take to acquire him. In all likelihood the Cubs would be best served to hold onto those trade chips and wait til midseason to see if a better player doesn't become available.

Ellsbury's baserunning was worth about 5.6 runs last year, total. 7.5 runs year before last. His total offensive contributions (batting and baserunning) are in Kosuke territory, given about the same amount of PA. And last year at least, UZR had him as one of the worst defensive CF in baseball (along with Kosuke, Fowler, and Wells) How many of our top prospects would you give up for another Kosuke?

Jury's still out on Ellsbury's defense. UZR and PMR agree he was pretty good in 2008, and UZR has him as poor this past year. The Fan's Scouting Report rates him at least average the last two years. Anyone know how +/- sees him? Even if he's not a plus defender, he still has plenty of value. A .750-.775 OPS with 60 steals at a great percentage is plenty valuable, and if his defense is average then he's nearly a 4 win player going forward. Most of his defensive value in 2008 came from the fact that he was primarily playing the corner OF spots, not CF.