Rob

Link Yeah I posted that earlier in the day Vance. It proves that once again, Bruce Levine has no earthly idea what he's talking about. 0% chance of a deal being made? Yeah right. Muskat proves nothing. She's a clueless ape.

Count me in.

That's one thing I've always loved Beane for... he just abuses how much people overrate "proven" closers.

Bah. If you believe the critics, nobody played good baseball in the 80's except for Rickey, Schmidt, Brett, Boggs, Yount, and Nolan Ryan. Everybody else would be in AAA if they tried to play now.

Sosa's last year with the Cubs: .253/.332/.517 Soriano last year: .299/.337/.560 The difference isn't that much...

I'd be up for that as well.

I just assumed the PTBNL was Littlefield.

We're very likely to have two prospects in the top 30 in baseball this year. Just curious, who? I'd guess Vitters and Colvin. holy crap, if colvin is considered one of the top 30 prospects then a lot of baseball people are even dumber than i thought. He's considered top 50, but not top 30. Interestingly enough, I've heard his skillset likened to Tony Gwynn. I hope you enjoy that laugh as much as I did.

I was under the distinct impression that it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that Crede was going to be shipped off for some crappier crap, and that Owens would ride the pine (but Ozzie would still feel a need to get him 250 PA). C - Pierzynski 1B - Konerko 2B - Richar? Uribe? SS - OCab 3B - Fields LF - Quentin CF - Swisher RF - Dye DH - Thome Then again, that could just be my imagination...

No, he really isn't. All-in-all, they have comparable value as hitters, no matter where they are in the order. Besides, Roberts can't be an upgrade over Soriano if he isn't replacing him; he's replacing DeRosa. I fully realise that this is nothing more than a semantic argument. But the issue is simply that Brian Roberts is not valuable because he can hit at the top of the order and steal a few bases. Brian Roberts is valuable for one reason, and one reason alone. He gets on base. It doesn't matter if he's batting first or eighth; he is valuable soley for his ability to get on base. Agreed, I would want Roberts batting near the top of the order in most cases. But if the choice is to mess with Soriano, who may very well convince himself that he can't hit down in the order... or just leave him there and bat Roberts 2nd... it's really not even a choice.

I've been tending to some family-illness issues, but here are a few thoughts some info on what I've been told: First, Hendry doesn't "float" rumors and neither does MacPhail. I can see MacPhail hating how this is playing out, and I'm sure he'll put it on his to-do list to stop leaks like this. Second, the Orioles might be asking for Hill and Pie and whomever, but they will not get them. Hendry absolutely will not trade them for Roberts. Period. A package that includes parts of Gallagher, Marshall and/or Cedeno is what the Cubs have in mind. Third, from what I've been told today and earlier this week, nothing is imminent. The Cubs would like Roberts, but if the O's decide to move him, it's 50-50 the Cubs will get him. Fourth, the writer Peter Schmuck was mentioned above. This guy is good. He's a former Orioles beat writer who is very plugged in there. If he says it's 70 percent Roberts won't be moved, I'd tend to go with that. But that doesn't mean things won't change. Fifth, I'm told MacPhail's first order of business will be trade Bedard (no, the Cubs are not in on this). Once that get settled, then he'll turn his attention to Roberts. Thanks for the heads up, Bruce... and I hope all is well with the family.

"How do you half-expect something?" "It's just a turn of phrase."

Honestly, I half expect that this means that Samardzija will be getting a handful of starts this year.

The teams that score the most runs each season are the teams who put up the best team OBP. The more your team is on base, the more the team scores, the more plate appearances guys get. If you go back to Derrek Lee's 2005, not only did Lee suffer on plate appearances because of the poorly constructed line up, he had limited at bats with runners on base. His 99 XBH's that season ranks among the top offensive seasons in baseball history. It is absolutely mind boggling that with that production while hitting number 3 in the lineup that he barely reached 100 RBIs. He led the league in: BA SLG OPS Hits Total Bases Doubles Runs Created XBH In the top 5 in: OBP (4th) Runs (2nd) HR (2nd) But finished distant 7th in RBI That's what happens when you put Neifi Perez batting 1st or 2nd. Yeah, but DLee wouldn't have had so many runs scored if all the good hitters on the team weren't batting behind him.

Care to elaborate? Yes, people on this board need to take the blue tinted sunglasses off and realize this deal is a steal for us. We getting one of the best leadoff men in baseball, an all-star and another great club house guy for pretty much nothing. You guys are blowing your loads over the 2 pitching prospects that have showed us NOTHING. Ok, stop referring to him as a leadoff man already. There is absolutely no such thing. Roberts plays 2nd base, not some artificial lineup position with imaginary responsibilities.

If I can get PMed when it's my turn to pick, I'd be up for it.

This really isn't going to happen, but w/e. Making up stuff is fun. I could see them trading Crede and Konerko for Figgins and either prospects or some pitching help. CF - Figgins SS - OCab 1B - Swisher DH - Thome RF - Dye 3B - Fields C - Pierzynski LF - Quentin 2B - Uribe That seems like something KW and Ozzie would be pretty interested in.

The Cubs don't need to improve "leadoff hitter" one tiny iota. Improve the quality of the players on the field, and the lineup will resolve itself.

About 2.5 wins... and then perhaps another win based on DeRo getting all the extra reserve at-bats instead of guys like Fontenot.

FWIW, simply being able to trade Brian Roberts is a huge step in taking control back from Peter Angelos and his reign of terror.

Actually, studies have proven that the hitters are actually the ones who suffer when a "disruptive" runner is on the basepaths. I'm not a psychologist, so I'm not going to pretend I can tell you why, but the fact of the matter is that stolen bases mean almost nothing to teams now. Roberts, stealing at that clip, might add five runs a season on offense. And if you believe the studies, the batter behind him might give that right back up. Nobody is saying that Roberts isn't a good hitter, or that he wont help this team. He is a darn good hitter (no matter where he hits in this lineup), and he certainly would help the team. The problem is that the resources needed to acquire him can be better utilized elsewhere.

That Trachsel deal is really coming back to bite us in the ass right about now. If we still had Scott Moore, we could afford to trade either him or DeRosa in a follow-up deal for another pitcher or (ideally) a new SS, and we'd still have an adequate backup for when Aramis gets gimpy. If we still had Rocky Cherry, we could stick him in the pen, keep Hart stretched out in the rotation at AAA, and not feel the sting as much from dealing Gallagher and Marshall in this ill-advised deal. It may not seem like it at the time, but all these little "let's just go for it" deals that don't make much of a difference on the overall talent level of the team can have far-reaching implications for the next season, or the season after that, or the one after that, etc... The trick has always been pretty simple... put a product on the field that is fairly likely to get you into the playoffs, and then cross your fingers. Pissing away all our tradeable assets for marginal upgrades (Marshall to Trachsel, Murton to Monroe, DeRosa to Roberts, etc...) is simply not going to help us. Can you imagine how much easier our lives would be with guys like Moore, Cherry, Blevins, Rapada, etc... in our system while we try to make trades that are real upgrades? We still might not have the pieces to bring in Santanas or Cabreras, but we'd be able to get guys like Burnett without freaking out about how we have no depth left in the system. We'd be able to take risks on real difference makers, and that's what well-managed clubs do.

I could have sworn Pagan had another year of options... perhaps even two, considering all the injuries affecting his service time.

Yes, the guy who took fewer pitches than anyone else on the team has a "good eye at the plate." Theriot does have a good eye. The fact that his P/PA is last on the team is misleading. Most of his at bats came as the 2 hitter in the lineup. Batting in front of Lee, he naturally got a lot of good pitches to hit. Pitchers weren't going to throw him junk out of the zone (because they knew he had a good eye, and wouldn't swing at it) and walk him in front of Lee. They knew that he was a contact hitter that hits the ball on the ground a lot, so they threw him pitches to hit. You can fault Theriot for several things, but having a good eye is not one of them. All you have to do is watch a few games and you'll see that he knows the strike zone very well. Just looking at his P/PA and concluding that he doesn't have a good eye is simply wrong and a great example of how stats don't tell you everything. You're reading way too much into this... If you want to make the argument that P/PA is not good enough to determine a batting eye, the logical explanation in Theriot's case is that, while he may have a good eye, pitchers throw him stuff right down the middle because they know he can't do any real damage with it.

I find it somewhat disturbing that so few people cannot empathize with Leyritz. Not a single one of us here can honestly say they've never made a mistake. This certainly wasn't something Leyritz had planned. This was a mistake on Leyritz part, and I wont disagree that it is a horrible one, but it's still something unintentional that will have devastating implications for Leyritz, his family, and his friends for a very long time. Leave it to the Republican to show some empathy... goodness.