pccubfan

I didn't expect it to happen but thought there was a small chance. If the Cubs were willing to offer a deal that was as good as anyone else maybe it could happen. I really don't expect the Cubs to even be in the bidding if this goes south.

i think we've heard enough in regards to his willingness to be traded if it helps the cubs and his willingness to go to atlanta that i'll be right to be upset if he doesn't go. I understand why some would be upset, and I wouldn't necessarily blame them. Yep, and I don't know that I'll be that "upset", but definitely disappointed. If he shoots the deal down, how does that sit with the FO, as far as looking to re-sign him in the offseason? I wouldn't anticipate it happening.

He was supposedly taking a nap yesterday afternoon when this trade talk was happening. I think you're on to something here.

I don't think that is what is upseting Dempster. He's not upset that a deal was made with the Braves, he's upset that the FO didn't tell him before he was hit with a question about the trade from the media. There really isn't much to get upset about at this point. He hasn't rejected the trade.

Thanks for the insight. I watched the Saturday home run and it looked like he was well inside the box. The footage was quick and didn't really offer a good perspective of how he attacked the pitch. If he is taking all the space just inside off the plate when he is swinging, then that really doesn't give these A ball pitchers much room to miss inside.

I thought about the breaking stuff and just wondered if someone who had seen him play noticed anything. Hopefully, one of these don't turn into an injury that slow his development. Any chance of him being a raging douche and these other young guys taking it out on him? Not that I really care unless it leads to him getting hurt. Usually great players are all douches. From the sound of it he is pretty high on himself, with his I'll do whatever the F I want. But I would think we would be hearing about beanball wars if these were deemed intentional.

I thought about the breaking stuff and just wondered if someone who had seen him play noticed anything. Hopefully, one of these don't turn into an injury that slow his development.

Thanks. I originally was going to say double digits, but I thought that would be a bit much. Any idea why this is happening so often? It didn't appear as if his stance was on top of the plate in the home run video from Saturday.

It looks like Hoilman had already doubled twice in today's game while Baez was hitless. That makes it a little more understandable, but it still isn't ever the right move.

This is obviously an extreme example, but teams certainly passed on Barry Bonds because of a stigma. He'd have certainly played longer based on performance. We see guys signed on a positive reputation that has no basis in numbers all the time. Neifi Perez had a career based on it. If GM's pay attention to positive reputations like that, I think it's possible that a negative one could influence them as well. But what besides being grossly overpaid was negative about Soriano?

Broke his bat on it. Singled after Hoilman was intentionally walked. HA. That manager must not have major league aspirations.

$44 of $46 million? There better be a top prospect in that kind of deal, that's absurd to get next to nothing in return for giving Soriano away for $1 million per year for the rest of the contract. Seriously, what would be the point unless you received a great prospect back. I can't imagine any GM making such a stupid statement. I can believe someone thinking it, but then to say it.

I think he will hit for more power than Randa did.

He didn't really put it together though, it was put together and winning 90+ when he took the reins. He began to tinker and didn't do much damage early on but it's quickly falling apart. Keeping a team that good for that long isn't easy and comes with some issues. He's going to have earn being competitive from this point. If he can continue to make the team competitive then he's doing his job.

So, what good stuff has he done? You already tried to attribute a WS team to him that he was not in charge of. Can't believe I'm going to defend Amaro, but the fact that he has put together a team that has averaged over 97 wins the past three seasons is something. Hasn't helped them in the crapshoot that is the playoffs, but the regular season win totals have been pretty legit. The Phillies payroll is also 74 million higher than it was in 2008. He was also handed a good farm system to make trades with. 5 of the 8 offensive starters were already there, and 2 starters as well. Amaro has done some good things, but he had a ton to work with. He also managed to take a team that should have been good both now and later, and instead the future has been turned into a huge question mark despite their 170 million dollar payroll. He's been using all his available resources on his current team over and over again with no regard for the future, and that's a terrible way to run a baseball team. And now the future is quickly catching up to him. Their payroll should partially save him, but it gets tougher as the hole continues to get deeper. I won't argue that he was placed in a good position but winning 97 games per year over a three year period is pretty tough to do. He added some top line starters to the team that just didn't pay off in WS titles. Would you rate him any differently had the Phillies won two of the last three titles? He has made his job more difficult in the coming years with the contracts, but maybe he can make things work. Maybe he'll surprise us.

Vitters has struggled every time he has been promoted. In his repeat he has improved substantially in every instance, not necessarily great numbers, but decent considering age and league. Even this year he started off slow at Iowa but has been good after April. If he can remain at 3B, I don't see any reason why he can't be above average at the position down the road (especially if he continues to improve his walk rate). I don't think he will be a star but a solid contributor at a club-friendly price into his prime.

So, what good stuff has he done? You already tried to attribute a WS team to him that he was not in charge of. Can't believe I'm going to defend Amaro, but the fact that he has put together a team that has averaged over 97 wins the past three seasons is something. Hasn't helped them in the crapshoot that is the playoffs, but the regular season win totals have been pretty legit.

Yes. There's nothing wrong with Ryan Sweeney, but thinking of him as a target of sorts is pretty goofy. He's 28, already has 4+ years of service time, and hasn't been all that good. From a value standpoint, I don't really see a compelling difference between him and Campana, and certainly not a difference worth giving up trade assets for. Thanks. I thought I had missed something. There is a pretty wide chasm between what was written in that article and the man love one poster seems to think Theo has for Sweeney.

Where is this Sweeney love coming from? The Boston article claiming that Sweeney might be a piece of a phantom Garza trade?

You mean the 2012 National League All-Star 1B Bryan LaHair? I'm pretty sure that's who he means. The guy who out OPSed Vitters by 200 points. To be fair, was that a 22 year old LaHair in AAA? No, he only out OPSed him by 50 his first time through AAA. He was promoted the last couple months of the season, as a 24 year old. How'd he do the following year as a 25 year old playing his first full year at AAA? Looks to me like Vitters has out OPSed him to date by a good 100 points. I'm not pushing the idea that Vitters is ready because I don't think he is, but you can at least be fair in comparing two players.

You mean the 2012 National League All-Star 1B Bryan LaHair? I'm pretty sure that's who he means. The guy who out OPSed Vitters by 200 points. To be fair, was that a 22 year old LaHair in AAA?

Come on now, this is lazy. Everybody knows that isn't true. Not lazy, just how I remembered it after nearly 30 years. Looking it up I remembered wrong.

The big difference for me was that the Cubs were supposed to win in 1984. They blew the Pads out in the first two games and things were going great and then boom, Steve Garvey didn't make another out (or it seemed like he didn't). The home team won every game and the Cubs were supposed to have home field advantage but lost it because the networks wanted night games. 2003 things just seemed to be going the Cubs' way until game six. It wasn't like they had the best team, things just were going well. Being younger, 84 made me think that the Cubs will find a way to win one soon. As time passed and then 2003 happened, I'm not sure I'm going to see any more WS titles than my 95 year old grandfather has.

Not sure if I'm happier that Dempster is starting or the fact that Volstad isn't.

So it went from being pre-cautionary to sitting for a month. As a GM, that would concern me. Dempster isn't going to get traded until the very end of July, if then, and isn't going to net near as much as we had hoped.