mg420

How about a call-up if performance dictates it? nt

i agree. those two guys along with novoa will be the ones 1st called up if/when wuretz & williamson have issues. howry on the other hand looked horrible.

359/404/555/959 in the minors Sheesh, that kid is good. I'd do it. Much harder to find MIFers who can rake like that. Forget EPatt - trade him as part of a package for an OFer who can help in RF. whos to say pie cant play rf? i dont see the cubs trading pie or ep anytime soon.

why would the cubs even consider trading for a 2b when they have ep? he could be starting at 2b for the big club in 2007 if he tears up aa like he did a ball.

9 with wade miller...

i guess its all but official that marshall is the #4: http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=260&p=2&c=514978&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fcubs.scout.com%2f2%2f514978.html

The Cubs bench is in dire need of a slugging RH bat. it seems silly to me to waste a 25 man slot on a 1 dimensional bench guy. people are talking about how the mets basically gave pagan away so he cant be that good but i think restovich was released by the devil rays so what does that say about him?

btw restovich and sing are more likely to be this year's version of die hard than pagan. at least pagan is a switch hitter with great speed who can play all 3 of positions as opposed to being a big right handed hitter who either strikes out or hits a homer and can only play 1b.

The Mets supposedly compared him to Beltran (although it was probably one overly zealous drunken scout and not the organization) and then somebody started this thread saying he's heard that before and that there is some sort of credence to that comparison. There is nothing to base that comparison on. Pagan can't hold Beltran's jock. He'll never come close to being as good as Beltran. Being a better major leaguer than minor leaguer is one thing. It wouldn't take much for Pagan to have better numbers in the majors, because his minor numbers weren't good. But talking about him being a diamond in the rough who turns into Beltran, or anything close to that is just unrealistic. i agree that it is virtually impossible for pagan to put up #'s anywhere near beltran but again he doesnt have to to be able to contribute. how would a .280 ave. with 15 hr's & 40 sb's look in cf? even if he never gets close to those #'s starting, he can still be a good 4th of.

What is the opposite of that? Guys who have done nothing in the minors then turned into Carlos Beltran? Just because a guy hasn't played in the majors doesn't mean you can't have a pretty good idea of what his limitations will be in the majors. Of course not. The opposite is a player who comes into the League with little or no expectations (or strictly as a backup) but proves his worth when he's able to play everyday. He doesn't have to develop into Beltran to have value. Minor League productivity doesn't always equate to ML success. see gary scott & rosey brown to mention a few You are completly turning your arguement on it's head. We are not talking about a guy with great minor league numbers here. We are talking about a washout who was purchased for next to nothing. He had a good spring and people have compared him to: Carlos Beltran Scott Podsednik Eric Gange Tori Hunter actually the point is that minor leauge success/failure does not always translate to big leauge success/failure. alot of guys do great in the minors and never have any major leauge success just as some guys dont shine until they get in the bigs. imo you are the one missing the point.

What is the opposite of that? Guys who have done nothing in the minors then turned into Carlos Beltran? Just because a guy hasn't played in the majors doesn't mean you can't have a pretty good idea of what his limitations will be in the majors. Of course not. The opposite is a player who comes into the League with little or no expectations (or strictly as a backup) but proves his worth when he's able to play everyday. He doesn't have to develop into Beltran to have value. Minor League productivity doesn't always equate to ML success. see gary scott & rosey brown to mention a few

what kind of #'s was dlee putting up at 24? tori hunter was 27 when he broke into the bigs with the twins. pagan seems to have all the tools to be a fine ML outfielder. some guys just put it together later than others. he doesnt have to be as good as beltran was to be a starter on the cubs. just as some guys who tear it up in the minors never pan out in the bigs, some guys dont perform well in the minors but have success in the majors.

perhaps pagen's performance has changed the cubs thinking on pierre as far as a contract extention goes. if angel can bring some of his ST success to the big leauges in 2006, the future outfield might be murton, pagan & pie.

thats what i thought too but his spring #'s are quite good. he must have regained some if not all of his lost velocity. williamson is a big risk imo and has pretty much said he wants to close again anyway so why not deal him? If it wasn't for Wuerz's unforeseen troubles and Novoa's illness, Williamson probably would have been dealt. agreed. good thing ryu & ardsma are having such good ST's.

thats what i thought too but his spring #'s are quite good. he must have regained some if not all of his lost velocity. williamson is a big risk imo and has pretty much said he wants to close again anyway so why not deal him? Why in the world do you want to trade an effective relief pitcher in Williamson? Why weaken your teams strength? Keep Williamson! You have Williamson, Howry, Eyre, and Dempster and it's a 5-6 inning game... because his health is a major issue. it's a gamble but at least he's worth something now. with ardsma & novoa & perhaps wuretz, it might be worth the risk to trade him and get something of value instead of waiting until he blows out his elbow.

thats what i thought too but his spring #'s are quite good. he must have regained some if not all of his lost velocity. williamson is a big risk imo and has pretty much said he wants to close again anyway so why not deal him?

According to the papers Williamson is fine and threw a bullpen session yesterday. It will be interesting to see what the Cubs do. Wellemeyer has nasty pitches but his control is just terrible Damn shame. good news about williamson. with ardsma doing so well though, they might be better off trading williamson and get something for him before he ends up like chad fox. i wonder if the rockies are still interested in wellemeyer?

so who gets the 2 open pen spots? do wuretz & novoa go to AAA with wellemeyer traded or released. is williamson ok or will he start the season on the dl? i think ryu & ardsma will get the spots until a 5th starter is needed.

yes and yes. speaking of lohse btw, is gallagher a lohse type pitcher or does he have a higher ceiling?

it is probably because there are a few guys ahead of him like hill & guzman. looking at the guys we have now without wood, prior & maddux , i still think the cubs starting pitching can be a major strength after 2006. with miller doing well in rehab a rotation of z, miller & williams/rusch to go along with 2 others from the hill, marshall, guzman & ryu list looks very good to me talent wise. while i'm glad the cubs are going with cedeno instead of trading for tejada, maybe it wouldnt be a bad thing if prior & wood were both gone. in hindsight, i wonder if the cubs wish they would have taken texeria instead of prior. Where is Prior going? If you include Miller in the rotation for next season, why would you not also include Prior? He's not a free agent, and I don't think anyone is looking at trading him, so why wouldn't he be there? If you say that he isn't included because he will probably be hurt, then shouldn't you speculate the same thing about Miller since he has the same rep for being injured a lot? my point is that perhaps there is hope for the cubs pitching without prior & wood in the mix. the difference between miller and prior is that people dont hinge the success of the cubs on the health of miller as they do with prior & wood. if miller can come back healthy & start, anything he gives will be a bonus. if not, the cubs havent lost much (as opposed to the huge $$ they have shelled out to mark & kerry).

it is probably because there are a few guys ahead of him like hill & guzman. looking at the guys we have now without wood, prior & maddux , i still think the cubs starting pitching can be a major strength after 2006. with miller doing well in rehab a rotation of z, miller & williams/rusch to go along with 2 others from the hill, marshall, guzman & ryu list looks very good to me talent wise. while i'm glad the cubs are going with cedeno instead of trading for tejada, maybe it wouldnt be a bad thing if prior & wood were both gone. in hindsight, i wonder if the cubs wish they would have taken texeria instead of prior.

kirby passed away today according to the score. may he rest in peace.

moyer seems to have done well with pretty much only a low 80's fb & a great change. i dont see why hill with a high 80's to low 90's fb & great curve couldn't do something similar.

if the cubs were at all interested in huff, they would have traded for him instead of signing jones. i dont see any way he has a place on the current roster with a set outfield of murton, pierre & jones/?. if the cubs want to ruin murton like they helped to ruin cp, they will trade for huff and platoon him (ie give him 500 ab's) with murton.

why would the cubs want to trade him anyway? walker & jhjr at 2b seems like the best option for 2006 imo. if the cubs dont like him because he speaks his mind maybe they should worry more about what goes on on the field instead of off the field. unless it's vidro (and who knows how healthy he is), whoever they trade him for would most likely cost more and be less productive.