katway

The Nats will try to resign him, but they are comfortable letting him walk since they will get significant picks for him. Bowden believes he does a better job drafting players than most and values those picks over what he was being offered before the deadline.

Tejada And "light-hitting" Walker? If you think Walker/Cedeno was light-hitting, wait until you see Cedeno/Izturis. Dude. I didnt say Cedeno was light hitting.... Walker was tho... i mean he only has about 45 rbi and we are 100+ games into the season. There is no reason he shouldnt have at least 55 or 60 rbi. Cedeno is a kid and this is his first full season in the bigs... so I expected him to have a rough go of it. As for Tejada. I dont think he will go anywhere until his contract is up and he is 36. would I like to be wrong on that thought??? You bet... I would love to see him roming at short or even 2nd or 3rd but I dont think he will be any time soon. One very simple reason is that no one on this team gets on base. How can he drive in the non-existent runner?

Why? Crisp is younger, is good for a better OBP and OPS than Pierre, and has a better arm in center field. IF the ARam rumors are true, package Pierre with him and get back more. I think ARam and Pierre to Anaheim would net a nice package. All Pierre needs to do is throw to the cut-off man. Please tell me that was a joke. He's got a horrendous arm in center field, and runners take advantage of it frequently. Very limited perspective to say that all he has to do is hit the cutoff man. When you catch the ball 30 feet behind 2nd base and runners still score on you, your arm hurts the team. Just as an aside, they both have poor arms. Coco is good at chasing down flies, but he has one of the worst arms in center field. So, he probably isn't an upgrade in this area. Nonetheless, Boston will not trade Coco for Maddux. They apparently approach the White Sox with an offer of Coco for one of the White Sox starters, all of which are better than Maddux and are more than a 2 month rental.

Orioles already turned down Santana from the Angels... No chance they settle for Chacon and filler.

Probably because we don't have enough to offer. Apparently, they turned down an offer from the Angels that included Ervin Santana. while the Orioles are listening, they aren't going to give him away without getting the best of the deal.

Barrett is a great hitting catcher, but he's not a great catcher (he has a lot of room for improvement in defense, handling pitchers, etc.). If someone did approach the Cubs with a good offer, they'd have to consider it because his hitting may not be replaceable from the catcher position, but the rest of his game is easily replaceable. in any event, there really aren't contenders that may need a catcher. The only team that comes to mind is Texas, but they already have enough hitting elsewhere in the lineup.

Wait a sec. now? The job was his to win in ST and both Guzman and Marshall out pitched him. So lets not here the Cubs don't give Rich Hill many chances. It's not how many chances you are given. It's how you take advantage of those chances when you are given them.. So that's why I haven't won the lottery. Hill hasn't been given a chance. The worst thing is, I believe he still won't be given a chance. He'll get 3 maybe 4 starts and that's if he is good in his first one. Then when Marshall comes back he'll be moved to the bullpen or sent back to AAA. Why does Marshall pitch for the Cubs and Hill doesn't? Because Marshall did what he had to do to make the Cubs and Rich Hill didn't. Simple as that... Hill has without a doubt blown his opportunities. But, this ballclub can still afford to have given him a greater opportunity and keep him out there for a full year to develop at the big league level when our other options are Glendon Rusch and other nonaccomplished pitchers. We can lose with him and lose without him, I'd rather lose with him as he develops at the big league level since he's proven to have gone as far as he can go in the minors.

Don't see Boston trading Crisp. He's not having a great year but has had to recover from a broken hand and a kidney stone thus far. Before these ailments, he looked great in spring training and the first few games. Boston will hang onto him. Pena was acquired to platoon with Trot and take over right if Trot leaves via free agency. They have very little confidence with Pena manning center full-time

There's nothing preventing us from working out a trade contingent on Soriano signing an extension with the Cubs. The real problem is that we have little to trade and Soriano will probably not sign an extension with the Cubs because the Cubs are in the National League and he would have to remain an outfielder. There's no harm in asking him, but do we really have anything of value that the Nats would want?

According to LA Times: The Angels notified teams that Jeff Weaver is available, offering to pay a chunk of what's left on his $8.325-million contract, but found little interest. The Angels have discussed a trade that would sent Ervin Santana to Tampa Bay for outfielder Carl Crawford but are extremely reluctant to part with one of their best young pitchers. According to Orange County Register: The long-term solution to the Angels' starting pitching logjam might involve a trade. The Angels have until July 31 to trade Jeff Weaver, though that could be difficult given his 3-9 record and $8.25 million salary. They also have told teams they would be willing to trade 23-year-old right-hander Ervin Santana to acquire an impact hitter. --- Can't think of much the Cubs have to offer at this point other than Aramis.

Carlos Lee is not worth that much (4 for $50M), but if we can get him for market value (around 4 for $38 ) it would be a good signing. Like D Lee, his numbers probably improve playing in Wrigley. As for Soriano, why would the Cubs want him at this point. He has made it clear that he doesn't want to be in the NL, will be a free agent after this year, and the Cubs aren't a Soriano away from contention. In essence, the Cubs would trade prospects for a guy going to the Yankees next year.

EK would be good because his heart would be into it. Based on his Tribune add a few years ago, he seems to understand how special it is to be a Cub and the experience of playing in Wrigley. I've always had the feeling that Baker's heart really isn't in it when it comes to the Cubs.

Cubs can lose with him or without him... really no preference.

I'd go for an even lower number because, in all likelihood, Bond's playing career (at least 6 years longer than his father's) has been extended by the juice and the increase in bat speed allows a hitter to no only hit the ball further, but also wait back on a pitch a little longer to make better contact.

This is the best post out of all of them on the subject. I mean it will suck not having Barrett, but AJP is an idiot and needed a good punching...plus, his take on the fight i don't take a lot of stock into...he could have avoided barrett on the walk to his helmet.......plus, it made my saturday a lot more bearable Agreed. I'm tired of these "high morals" people (not naming anybody in particular)who think Barrett should had been the bigger person and not slug AJ. AJ's bowling over Barrett may have been considered "clean", but ask anybody in the clubhouse of any team(maybe outside of White Sox) and they will tell you...that AJ was in the wrong. You DON'T take out the cathcer, if he doesn't have the ball, regardless if he has the ball or not. How much simpler can I get. AJ should had done a hook slide, plain and simple. And I am GLAD Barrett punch AJ. Besides Barrett did not "sucker punch" AJ. Sucker punch means not to see the punch coming. AJ clearly was looking at Barrett, when he was swinging. AJ knew the punch was coming, just he couldn't react in time to block. It's not just "high morals" people, "low morals" people like myself just don't think there was enough there to warrant sucker punching AJP. Whether or not is was a sucker punch may be semantics, but the universal definition is to punch a person suddenly and without warning. It doesn't matter if one sees the punch comming, the whole point of a sucker punch is that the person on the receiving end can't react because he/she was not warned that punches were going to be thrown. A person can stand face to face with another and still throw a sucker punch. There's also a big difference for punching someone for no reason (i.e. walking up to a stranger on the street and smacking him) and punching someone with provocation. No one here can tell exactly what provocation Barrett had, for all we know, AJP was talking smack the game before and earlier that day, and smacking the plate coupled with running him over when there was plenty of room to slide around him was enough provocation to push Barretts emotions over. Again, this is a far cry from the random street mugging some of you are making it out to be. Of course it's not a random street mugging our anything of that nature. It's not like a premeditated thing. Barrett lost his cool in the heat of the game. Still like Barrett, don't think of him as a thug, and he remains one of my favorite players. But, there really isn't an adequate excuse for his actions.

"I am about to punch you. Are you ready? It's gonna hurt. Because I'm strong. So I'm gonna punch you. Okay, on 3. No wait, it'll be on Go. Okay. 1....2....3....GO" So, if someone taps your shoulder, you turn and they punch you, have you been sucker punched? After all, you were looking at him/her when the punch was thrown. Fair warning could be as simple as "I'm going to kick your ***". It doesn't take much. Barrett gave no fair warning.

This is the best post out of all of them on the subject. I mean it will suck not having Barrett, but AJP is an idiot and needed a good punching...plus, his take on the fight i don't take a lot of stock into...he could have avoided barrett on the walk to his helmet.......plus, it made my saturday a lot more bearable Agreed. I'm tired of these "high morals" people (not naming anybody in particular)who think Barrett should had been the bigger person and not slug AJ. AJ's bowling over Barrett may have been considered "clean", but ask anybody in the clubhouse of any team(maybe outside of White Sox) and they will tell you...that AJ was in the wrong. You DON'T take out the cathcer, if he doesn't have the ball, regardless if he has the ball or not. How much simpler can I get. AJ should had done a hook slide, plain and simple. And I am GLAD Barrett punch AJ. Besides Barrett did not "sucker punch" AJ. Sucker punch means not to see the punch coming. AJ clearly was looking at Barrett, when he was swinging. AJ knew the punch was coming, just he couldn't react in time to block. It's not just "high morals" people, "low morals" people like myself just don't think there was enough there to warrant sucker punching AJP. Whether or not is was a sucker punch may be semantics, but the universal definition is to punch a person suddenly and without warning. It doesn't matter if one sees the punch comming, the whole point of a sucker punch is that the person on the receiving end can't react because he/she was not warned that punches were going to be thrown. A person can stand face to face with another and still throw a sucker punch.

I saw it on WGN and AJP was going after his helmet. His helmet clearly went behind Barrett. Yeah you could tell because Pierzynski was mouthing "look my helmet" and dragged his hands along the ground in a direct path towards the helmet. Does anyone really think AJP got up to go after Barrett? If AJP actually was going after Barrett, then that's the worst attempt I've seen to chase someone down. According to the players, Barret grabbed AJP and said, "I didn't have the ball ****," then threw a right cross. AJP didn't say anything before getting hit. see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBTECs-G0F4&search=barrett%20cubs

Slowed it down on Tivo and AJP turned his body when he saw Barrett getting up. Looked like AJP would have angled around Barrett before Barrett grabed him. HE TURNED HIS BODY TOWARDS BARRETT Ever turn to the side to avoid or get around someone?

Q: Why would a catcher block the plate? A: To prevent the runner from scoring by forcing the baserunner to chose between a difficult slide or collision. Any catcher knows there is a possibility that the baserunner will chose a collision. The better question than whether or not a baserunner should slide is whether a catcher has the right to fight a baserunner than choses not to slide.

Slowed it down on Tivo and AJP turned his body when he saw Barrett getting up. Looked like AJP would have angled around Barrett before Barrett grabed him.

I saw it on WGN and AJP was going after his helmet. His helmet clearly went behind Barrett.

Michael Barrett is 100% responsible for the actions of Michael Barrett. AJP acted within the rules of the game.

What Barrett did today, while entertaining just to see a Cubs player with a pulse, was embarassing and stupid. If he wants revenge, then get it on the field -- call an excellent game, make the big play, get the big hit, etc. A Cubs win hurts the Sox a lot more than a slap in the face of AJP. Barrett's reaction was just another nail in the coffin that is becoming this season.

Murton has a great approach to hitting. He still has time to find a power stroke. With his aproach, he's very likely to develope into a Mark Grace type hitter with 15 to 20 homers and lots of doubles. He's also the kind of hitter that would do real well batting in front of a power hitter (not true for most hitters in our lineup) since he is a smart situational hitter and the current lineup just doesn't give him that kind of opportunity to shine. It's a little early to give up on him.