Rob

toonster is gonna need Hernandez on before too long.

I thought it was surely you. he's at least a couple down for me. ;) I still like him more than most, but he's probably floating around 10 for me.

I voted for Vizcaino, but I think Vogelbach should be closer than he is. I am a bit disappointed in the fact my inner monologue included a semi-convincing argument for Junior Lake's all-tools / no-polish approach this early in the list.

Schierholtz makes a lot of sense given the FO's current plan. He's cheap and could pretty easily combine with a decent platoon partner to give us 2-3 WAR in RF. He'll be easy to flip or push to the bench later. Very little downside here, and decent upside. That said, the point of trying to find all these bargains is that you free up money to spend elsewhere. I'm a patient man, but there have been players at reasonable contracts that would make sense for this org. I'm beginning to get frustrated.

Theo traded Nomar and Manny at the deadlines in years the Red Sox were going for it.

Vogelbach doesn't necessarily have to have defensive value. His prospect value takes a nice leap in the AL, and it's likely his ultimate benefit to the Cubs is as trade bait.

Yes. Mostly the first one. And while Vizcaino is being painted as nearly ready, he has like 23 innings above AA. And if somebody views Vizcaino ultimately as a pen arm, it's pretty easy to lean towards Vogelbach. I'm undecided, myself. But I find it odd Tim was so surprised to see a non-Vizcaino vote. This one warrants real consideration. Edit: perhaps Tim was just trying to stimulate conversation.

Totally fair, as he definitely is. I just don't wanna see Keppinger at age 35, I suppose. Plus, having some power around is always fun at least. Gotta sell those shirseys. Keppingers career OBP/SLG is .337/.396 Reynolds was at .335/.429 last year. .332/.475 for his career. Reynolds power is the only advantage he has. And that took a bit of a dip last year. Keppinger is actually capable of playing defense, will likely require less of a commitment, and would be easier to keep around in a platoon or utility role should we find a better option at 3B later.

Not sure how I feel about that. LOL Honestly, I'd be OK with both Reynolds and Keppinger(even at 3-12) I'd much rather have Keppinger than Reynolds. Defensively motivated, I'm guessing? Yup. Reynolds is a complete butcher in the field. With Keppinger we at least have the option of an eventual platoon.

Not sure how I feel about that. LOL Honestly, I'd be OK with both Reynolds and Keppinger(even at 3-12) I'd much rather have Keppinger than Reynolds.

That sounds like desperation. Is that a bad thing? He had to make pretty major changes to be anything more useful than a decent 4th OF. I'm comfortable with the risk of screwing that up.

Given how close the voting is, should this be a "2a and 2b" situation?

This

Unless the last CBA changed things and I didn't hear otherwise, without a clause granting FA, these players wont receive it at the conclusion of their contracts. That said, it does seem to be standard operating procedure for japanese imports, at the least. I'd be surprised if this deal didn't contain one. And davell, Fukudome's contract had that provision.

As always, it depends on the quantity and quality of the prospects. I do have a hard time seeing an in-house replacement for his production though. If we do unload him, it diminishes whatever small chance this team has of getting lucky and making the playoffs. I'd want to get something worthwhile for making me lose interest in May instead of Mid-July.

As I said earlier, I'd go 2-3 years on Hamilton. Or even 2-3 years with a couple of club options. But I absolutely would not go beyond 3 guaranteed under any circumstances. Then you're not serious about signing him. Unless the money/years are just right, we shouldn't be. For most of his career, he's been a 4-5 fWAR guy in a full, healthy season. The one truly terrific year was boosted by a crazy .390 BABIP. He'll be 32 next year, is chronically unhealthy, and has plenty of other issues. If we were projected for around 85 wins next year, sure... you take that risk to put you over the top. But he's not the sort to build around.

Nice move for the Nationals. I'd trade a good low level pitching prospect to have Span at 2/12 with an option for 3/21. ...if we were planning on competing in the next few years. I'm taking the seemingly complete lack of interest in Upton and Span as a sign the front office might be more hopeful in Brett Jackson's future than I had assumed.

Don't you think part of the reason that was unsuccessful was that each and every coach did things differently? Jed worked with Deer in San Diego, I believe. I would imagine that the same philosophy will be espoused by Deer that is being espoused by the rest of the staff. It's just a way for more of our players to get one-on-one time. It's a good thing.

You think he survives waivers? Not now that I realize he has to pass through them. For some reason I kept thinking "oh yeah, he's still got options."

What does that have to do with this thread? I like the fact that Feldman has some bullpen potential if he doesn't cut it as a starter or we find five better ones at some point in the season. I think he'd play very well in a setup role. It says right there that they assured him that he'll be a permanent member of the rotation. Obviously, they can go back on that promise, but it just seems like an odd reply. I really think pushing Wood to the bullpen must or should be the plan. I assumed Feldman must have been assure a rotation slot, since I can't fathom why a guy taking a one year deal would compromise his future value by accepting the possibility of a bullpen role. And I feel like the FO is looking add one more SP, this time from the more talented pool. I'd rather see Wood at AAA getting in reps than garbage time as the long man in the pen.

Solid pickup. After watching the disaster that was 2012's pitching staff, I really want to see the Cubs go 7-8 deep on a rotation. Letting Casey Coleman out there is a recipe for disaster.

Hahaha yea it'd be a bit late to start now Perhaps PR was the wrong word. Loria has one remaining marketable asset. And who better than Cubs fans to recognize what a superstar hitting towering home runs can do for attendance and merchandise sales? There may also be some slight need to placate Bud Selig by not making a complete and utter mockery of his franchise (if he hasn't already).

Absolutely agree. If now is the time, act. I just sincerely doubt now is the time. The Marlins asking price has to be insane with their PR situation. And the teams with the pieces to do something (Texas) are generally the well-run types that would rather wait one season than overpay.

It's been discussed before, but I'm about as negative as you can get about Stanton. There are a lot of minor indications that he may not age gracefully. His size is a part of what allows him to generate such incredible power, but it also puts a tremendous amount of strain on his joints. I'm concerned not only with his ability to stay on the field, but also what effect his size may eventually have on his defense and baserunning - I'd even go so far as to say we've probably already seen him at his peak in both those respects. The BABIP is likely to be unsustainable at last year's .344 mark given his flyball tendencies. Sure, you can say he hits the hell out of the ball, but Adam Dunn (.288) and Jose Bautista (.270) don't exactly have sterling BABIPs. I'd also have hoped not to see his plate discipline regress this past season. He's also about to start getting expensive. That said, he's still an easy 4-5 win player and if he stays healthier than I expect or somehow manages to cut down on the strikeouts, he could be in MVP consideration more often than not. Given the PR hit they're currently taking, the Marlins would have to be absolutely overwhelmed to move Stanton now. This is not a great time to attempt to acquire him. The Cubs gain little hope of competing in 2013 even with Stanton, so they'd be smart to wait until next offseason to make their move. He should be cheaper then anyway, with one less year of team control and his salary beginning to escalate. It's not like extending him will be an option for the Marlins at any point. I appreciate the sentiment behind the posts that say things like "blank check" - I'd love to see the Cubs putting a more competitive team out there. But I anticipate most teams will attempt to wait out the Marlins. I'd like to see the Cubs get the best deal possible.

It might be cheaper than you think. Given his reaction to the recent fire sale, everybody knows that the Marlins have no real ability to extend Stanton. Sure, they can keep him around a couple season to extract some merchandise sales, but it's just a matter of time until they're forced to trade him. All you have to do is outbid the competitors for the right to pay him as he begins to get expensive.