KaiserCesar

I think for another team Wood could start, and he may want to at some point and leave, but with the Cubs, there will likely be little room for such a risky proposition in the rotation.

My initial thoughts are that the Bears are either eyeballing a certain player or are looking to trade up (according to points they can trade up to around 15 with their first 2 picks). Regarding losing Jones, the step down from Jones to Benson (step up actually) and Adrian Peterson (maybe step up actually) is only an issue in case of injury. The gripe you can have with this deal is that you could have gotten more, but there is not a strong market for running backs and there are/were a lot of quality backs in free agency. The Packers were not an option being in the division and maybe only a Jones/Briggs combo to the Giants would have been feasible if they continue to be unwilling to give up a 1st for Briggs. Overall, the Bears will be better because of this move.

I like Quinn and think he's the most sure thing of the QBs, but that blanket statement is a little too much in my opinion. I fully expect Quinn to have the better career. But he can't touch Russell talent wise. I see this as a situation similar to last year's with Leinart and Vince. Leinart was more of a sure thing, Vince had far more upside (but was less likely to be good). Except Young's upside came from unbelievable athleticism that Russel doesn't have at all. Russell is definitely very athletic, he just doesn't use it in the same way Vince does. Russell can be a very good thrower when he's on, Vince is frankly bad most of the time throwing the ball. Thus, Russell doesn't have the need to show his athleticism as often as Vince does. The #1 problem with Russell is his inconsistency and oftentimes poor decision-making. Vince, on the other hand, while a bad passer (though I've seen signs of him getting better slowly) makes the plays late in a game when he needs to. The run against the Texans in OT, the run against the Bills late in the fourth, multiple third down completions to keep drives alive. Russell is the better pure QB right now, but he's less consistent and falls apart when he struggles early. Agreed, Young has a ways to go in the professional passing game, while he developed a passing game in his senior year of college rather quickly, but that 6.7 YPC rushing will go a long way towards easing growing pains for the titans

The run stopping ability of the Seahawks sure didn't get helped here. They need the offense to return to its high scoring levels in order for their formula to work.

I like Quinn and think he's the most sure thing of the QBs, but that blanket statement is a little too much in my opinion. I fully expect Quinn to have the better career. But he can't touch Russell talent wise. I see this as a situation similar to last year's with Leinart and Vince. Leinart was more of a sure thing, Vince had far more upside (but was less likely to be good). Except Young's upside came from unbelievable athleticism that Russel doesn't have at all. Size, strength, arm strength. And I do think Russell is a better athlete. I think Quinn is as polished as it gets as a college QB. How much better can he get in the NFL? Russell put up great numbers against better competition than Quinn and still has some development left. You are talking as if arm strength is some sort of limit to development and that a quarterback develops until he reaches some point met by his arm strength. There are other areas to improve, and really, if Quinn is able to do what he did in college over the last two years, he will be a great NFL QB. I think Russel still needs to develop areas of his game to reach the level of Quinn, and he will likely never catch up in certain unlearnable attributes (to an extent) such as decision making and accuracy.

Well, I am just trying to state the case that perhaps this was more about Clayton saying teams with QB issues should not pass on Quinn. I'm not advocating the Lions go one way or the other. 1) I said you don't have to throw him out there right away. Kitna is fine, as long as you're developing somebody behind him. It's not very smart to stick with Kitna as your starter with no real prospect behind him. 2) If no team is years from contending, explains the Lions. The Jets were no better in 2006 than they were in 2004. They were bad in 2005 because Chad was gone. The NFL system makes it possible for teams to improve in a couple years, but it's not simple. And Detroit is nowhere near ready. They suck top to bottom. 3) It's not that hard to build a competent line without #1 picks. I've heard Detroit is fine keeping their QBs as is, and I think that's nuts. Also, another thing to add is that even though the Jets were 10-6 and made the playoffs, would anyone really consider them contenders outside of residents of insane asylums? Moving from "bad" to "contender" is a heck of a lot harder and a longer process than "bad" to "playoffs in a pretty lucky year"

This year could function as a "rehab" year with a possibility of a return to the rotation eventually, kinda like Smoltz. Everything depends on him performing well and team need.

It wasn't an analysis-it was just an informal poll of people in baseball-that was just how they ranked them. Well, there was some analysis, not really factoring into the ranking process that used a bunch of conventionals. Pretty typical MLB.com article

I like Quinn and think he's the most sure thing of the QBs, but that blanket statement is a little too much in my opinion. I fully expect Quinn to have the better career. But he can't touch Russell talent wise. I see this as a situation similar to last year's with Leinart and Vince. Leinart was more of a sure thing, Vince had far more upside (but was less likely to be good). Except Young's upside came from unbelievable athleticism that Russel doesn't have at all.

I like Quinn and think he's the most sure thing of the QBs, but that blanket statement is a little too much in my opinion. I fully expect Quinn to have the better career. But he can't touch Russell talent wise. What exactly in terms of talent? Pure arm strength?

I disagree. Gooz needs to log innings, not just get a few ML innings. His stuff will translate to the major leagues. It's just too good not to. He needs to show he can handle the workload of a starting pitcher (last year was the first step). You don't waste a pitcher with 3+ above average pitches in the pen, especially when you have a pen loaded with arms as the Cubs 'pen is. He needs to be starting. I don't mind him going to the pen if he gets regular innings and translates to him becoming a starter soon. But I don't think he'll be afforded that opportunity if he makes the team as a reliever. I don't think he'll get enough innings as a reliever no matter what, especially with the amount of quality arms down there now and a pretty solid rotation that can consistently get into the 6th inning. Just a reminder, here are Guzman's IP starting with 2000 32.2 76.2 156 89.2 47.2 18.1 131.2 If you have plans to jump him into the major league rotation anytime soon, and at age 25, it should be pretty soon, he is going to have to start being able to throw more innings, or he is going to have a rough first full season starting.

I generally don't like the save and blown save stat, but the ERA and peripherals tell you that Dempster may not have what it takes this coming season. There will likely be more save opportunities, and whoever your closer ends up being is going to need a day off when they have the lead. Dempster would be ideal to step in against 3 righties if Wood, Wuertz or whoever aren't 100% to go that day or need a day off before a bigger series. Also, different save situations have different demands. For 3-4 run leads, I'd be more willing to go to Dempster and save the "closer" aka best reliever for high liverage situations. If a lefty heavy spot in the lineup ends up coming up, you'll probably have one of the 3 lefties in the pen. Not quite a closer by committee, since I'd like to have 1 guy do all 1-2 run close games, but there needs to be some discretion.

And JaMarcus Russell is a sure thing? Close to one, but look towards South Bend for another

i agree. he need a full year starting in iowa imo. he has never had a full season pitching in the minors so it is not reasonable to think he could make 30+ starts in the ML. Why does he need more minor league time when he's major league ready and better than a few of the potential starters already? Not the best of news on Gallagher. Not too surprising since it's his first major league invite. What makes Guzman that much better besides potential and a report out of the first week of spring training? He has pretty nice peripherals in AAA last year and got killed in the majors. And as said in the posts that you quoted, his arm which has not logged a lot of innings recently would be able to be brought along in a more controlled fashion in AAA.

As good as Johnson may be, I don't think I could take a WR with a top pick, they are just too far away from the ball. For a team whose best QB since Rich Gannon was Kerry Collins, they are in serious need of a sure thing starting caliber QB (which Stanton is not, so I'm not advocating a trade down)

A thought.... with some voters going with the not voting for anyone in the steroid generation route or having serious doubts about the credibility of numbers from that period, do some become more sympathetic to the "old schoolers" who most definitely had no artificial help?

I must admit I'm confused on the methodology - or there's an error. I can't imagine that the Cubs could be the best run scoring team in the NL - including besting the Mets (predicted 785 RS)? I could see it with favorable projections of Murton and the assumption of a smart platoon where Jones doesn't face a lefty. Those two combined make quite the source of production along with Lee, Soriano, Barrett, ARam and Floyd making up the other spots. Sure, the middle infield is weak, but both Derosa and Izturis are capable of putting up servicable numbers.[/i]

I'm a little concerned about talk of being willing to put him in the rotation right away. Last year was his first 100+ IP season since 02. A lighter load in AAA would be the smart choice, unless a lot of injury makes a major league start necessary.

I think it would be more fitting to blame the teams who created this market and environment of spending rather than those who are just trying to survive in it. Neither Sabean nor Hendry were bidding against themselves and just artificially increasing value, so it should be acceptable for them to pay, but still troubling for baseball as a whole.

Is it really fair to give only one season at 23 years old to him? I think if Cedeno can get improve his approach in AAA and return to 05 form while Izturis doesn't rebound as well as expected, he could easily be seen again starting. The 2B might say they are planning on him being a backup middle infielder who can play both positions. He's got the potential to at least be a cheap bench option for a few years as long as he develops a little more.

a young guy, but not Z, who was already starting. I think i was pushing for Juan Cruz at the time. Estes did come up big in that start at the end of the season. It was Cruz that many of us wanted in the rotation, because he did well in 2001 before Baylor messed with him in 2002. He did start 6 games in 2003. IIRC he was tearing up Iowa, but Dusty wanted to keep the lefty in the rotation and Cruz only got his shot when Prior went down. I think I remember back to back Estes and Cruz games against the Astros one weekend where they each went about 6 IP 2 ER.

That Van Bommel goal for Bayern was pretty sweet and he has since apologized for his obscene gesture afterwards. They looked pretty strong in the second half and I think I like them to beat out Madrid in the second leg. http://www.eurosport.com/football/uefa-champions-league/2006-2007/sport_sto1093367.shtml

Yeah, the Cubs may be leading candidate for the bench role (starting is a pipe dream) not because of a potential Jacque trade necessarily, but the team lacks a natural center fielder or a defensive outfielder. I don't know how great Pagan would be in center and if he is all that great of a basestealer despite his speed. He could probably outhit Finley though, so its close between the two.

Woohoo?

I think the ultimate plan is to move Jacque out and Pie in in the near future with the alignment depending on how Soriano does in CF defensively. IMO a Jacque trade earlier this year would result in a stop-gap CF acquisition with Pie getting time in the minors no matter what.