USSoccer

As other have pointed out, you have: Z Prior Marshall Marmol Guzman Hill Rusch Williams Ryu as candidates for starting games the rest of the season. Keeping Maddux means you have one less spot for Guzman and Hill to get acclimated to ML play. Going down to Iowa will accomplish nothing for Hill; he needs to be here. Guzman is getting back to where he needs to be; by September he should be here starting. Ryu can piggyback Marshall or Marmol to keep their innings down, and Williams and Rusch can go long for Z to keep his innings and pitch counts down. And that list doesn't include any other pitchers that might be added to the 40 man once another player is dealt. Bottom line is that Hill and Guzman need to be here, and need to be in a rotation the rest of the way. Maddux being here makes that more difficult. Z has a legit shot at the Cy Young, so I doubt they'll skip him much, and they can't skip Prior-they need him to work the rest of the season in preparation for 2007.

If true, the Orioles would be insane not to take that offer. Absolutely insane. Where do the Angels play Tejada, though? Would he agree to play 3B? Per ESPN, Tejada doesn't want to play 3B: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2534276

QFT

Unfortunately, Maddux isn't a surgeon. Perhaps the Cubs would have been better served hiring an MD and putting him on the 25-man roster, though knowing the Cubs, they would hire a Dr. Nick type. Or maybe just the money could have been spent on a trainload full of bubblewrap to encase the pitching staff and a jar full of clues for Hendry. When it comes down to the knowledge and insights that Maddux does share with pitchers, I'll have to rely on the mere decade+ of anecodatal evidence and testimony from pitchers and players and coaches and managers who believe that Maddux has been a great resource and has incredible insight into the game of baseball. And, in some cases, has changed the way they approach the game and game situations. No, Maddux doesn't have a magic wand filled with magical fairy dust that will make Marmol throw strikes, Wood's rotator cuff to heal itself or Rusch to lose weight and stop stinking. Sadly this organization is such a joke that Maddux can catch flak for not improving the entire pitching staff WHEN IT'S NOT HIS JOB TO DO SO AND HE NEVER SAID IT WAS. The Cubs organization consistently tries to coast on his credibility since they have none of their own. When it comes to Maddux and his own pitching, he's obviously not the guy who left in '92. I'm one of the few on this board who values what he has done in his second round as a Cub and I can point to anecdotal instances where Z (since he was mentioned above) has credited and/or referred to talks with Maddux as affecting how he approaches some pitching situations. I would love to see him traded to the Dodgers or another contending team. I will be sad to see him go again, mainly because the circumstances of his departure once again illustrate ongoing problems within the franchise and because after the embarrassments of the last of years, he's one player who still carries himself with some dignity and self-respect. I think he'd be a valuable addition to a team that's actually in the race and I suspect that there's a lot of posturing going on right now in terms of asking and selling prices. Finally, one can respect the use of stats and the use of analytical methods to improve the understanding of how baseball actually works ... and also recognize that there are human elements to a game that is still played by humans. Respecting the insights and the value added of a truly exceptional player like Maddux is not the message board equivalent of practicing voodoo or doing rain dances. Perhaps we just choose to emphasize different data sources when we draw our conclusions about the overall assets of players. Serena, I'm not saying that Maddux's job was to make the staff better. Far from it. I'm also not saying he might not have an effect on the pitchig staff through his experience. What I am saying is that an intangible reason like that is not a good enough reason to not trade him when there's only 2 months left in the season. I think the benefit of giving some guys regular rotation experience outweighs any benefit Maddux has on the staff through mentoring.

Well, my point is that given you cannot prove he has any positive effect, it's not a good enough reason to keep him. For example: WHIP ERA 2003: 1.32 3.83 2004: 1.30 3.81 2005: 1.34 4.19 I'm not even going to post 2006's numbers, because there'd be no point. You can see from 2003 to 2004, there was a piddling decrease in both WHIP and ERA for the team. Since our pitching staff was still relatively intact for 2004, and Maddux was here to "mentor" our guys, where is the statistical evidence he did any good? In 2005, our WHIP wasn't much higher but our team ERA jumped up half a point. Now, if there's any area that Maddux would be able to mentor our pitchers in, it would be control, right? Well, the team WHIP doesn't indicate any benefit. That said, that entire last paragraph was a waste of time to type. The point of me calling into question an intangible, immeasurable reason to keep a mediocre pitcher around for the last 2 months of a dead season is that intangible reasons like mentoring should not preclude you from doing what's best for the team long term. I can't prove there's no effect, nor can you prove there is a benefit to having him talk to other pitchers between starts, anecdotal evidence aside.

Just having him in the dugout is enough to keep him. Why? Has there ever been any evidence that he has any impact on the rest of the pitching staff? Because looking at numbers during his 3 year stay only Z (who is great anyway) has improved year to year. I don't and never have bought into the whole "Maddux is a mentor" thing. That seems to be a load of bull. Just because he's a veteran pitcher who's won alot of games doesn't mean he can help Rich Hill spot his fastball, or Sean Marshall harness his control, or Mark Prior develop a changeup. He's a pitcher, not a pitching coach. Just need to chime in here. I had a pretty good friend who was a member of the Cubs pitching staff until he was traded away this Spring. I know for a fact that Maddux is absolutely a mento to many on the pitching staff, specifically the younger guys. That being said, he's not a miracle worker either. He can help guys like Marshall become better pitchers. This is Marshall's first year, and your expecting Maddux to help him becoming an All-Star already? It is far from a "load of bull". He can help young guys a whole lot. That being said, if you can get a good deal for him then trade him. But if there isn't going to be much value coming back in return, keeping him the final 2 months of the season isn't going to stunt any type of growth. Where did I say anything about Marshall needing to be an All-Star? I said Maddux cannot help these guys in the areas they need help in. Just because he may have a negligible, unprovable effect on other pitchers is no reason to keep him around. The 10 starts he has left would be better spent allowing guys like Hill and Guzman to get acclimated to consistently starting in the majors. It doesn't matter what you get in return. What matters is the developmental time given to players that are in this team's long-term plans being used to it's fullest.

Just having him in the dugout is enough to keep him. Why? Has there ever been any evidence that he has any impact on the rest of the pitching staff? Because looking at numbers during his 3 year stay only Z (who is great anyway) has improved year to year. I don't and never have bought into the whole "Maddux is a mentor" thing. That seems to be a load of bull. Just because he's a veteran pitcher who's won alot of games doesn't mean he can help Rich Hill spot his fastball, or Sean Marshall harness his control, or Mark Prior develop a changeup. He's a pitcher, not a pitching coach.

Hopefully Hendry knows this, and will make sure Aramis doesn't go anywhere. I always thought that stupid "opt-out" clause was a bad idea. Let's hope this is much ado about nothing, because you're right. There are maybe 2 players we could trade Ramirez for where we wouldn't be setting outselves up to suck in 2007. He's far too important a player to this team to deal him for prospects we won't be able to develop.

I hope that's not true...

Nick Adenhart at MiLB.com Boy, that would be a stupid, stupid trade. Let's deal our best run producer and our 3rd best player for a 19 year old Class A pitcher.

Heard it too. Shucks. I don't understand why we're holding on to pieces that aren't in the future. Why not try and get whatever you can for Maddux? The only reason I can see for Hendry not trading Maddux is that Hendry plans on trying to bring Maddux back next year, which would probably be the worst idea possible. Then if Maddux does get traded "for whatever you can" half the people will be bitching that's all he got (see: Willliamson trade) I'm not going to defend Hendry/Cubs but almost all of the decisions he's faced with it's going to be near 50/50 on if he pleasese people or he's the biggest moron on the planet. keep him = moron trade him for little value in return = moron I will go on record saying that if he trades Maddux, I will be happy that Maddux is gone. I will not care who we get in return. I though signing him in the first place was a waste of money, and I'd rather see some young pitcher get his 10 or so starts the rest of the way. Besides, he isn't very good anymore. I have no interest in watching a HOF get his brains beaten in.

Oh man, I'd take Leiber and Abreu and all their salaries. -Need SP depth? Check. -Need a slugging OF? Check. -Are there any good FA OF's this winter? Nope. This should be something we're all over.

Why would we need a 3B? He can play anywhere in the IF, and I don't think he'd be a great fit at 3B; his bat would be nice at SS or 2B though. I guess the real question would be, why would the Dodgers trade anything of value for Greg Maddux? Maddux is not very good anymore.

Of all the players of his generation, he will be the most difficult for the USMNT to replace. IMO he was far more important than Reyna, and what's worse is that while we have some midfield talent to replace Reyna, we don't have anyone ready to replace McB. Do you guys think that Johnson has enought talent to fill that role? In the current system Johnson is an off forward alongside a target guy. The wings cross in or play up top to the target, who wins 50/50 balls in the air and knocks the ball down for the parter forward or the outside mids. I don't think using him to fill in for McB would be a wise use of his skillset. Right now the guys who would technically be replacements would be Brian Ching, and maybe Taylor Twellman and Nate Jaqua, which is why a new system is needed. Note that McBride was a world class single target man-type player up front. He is not easily replaceable. Exactly my point, and another reason for why Klinsmann would make an excellent USMNT coach. His attacking style is not dependent on knocking the ball up front to a target forward.

Why would we need a 3B?

Following up on the Freddy Adu discussion: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=374404&root=mls&cc=5901

No No No No NO. Trading Ramirez for anything less than a proven ML run producer is uselss. Trading him for prospects with this organization and coaching staff is meaningless. They might as well give him away for nothing. No part of me thinks the Cubs can develop an everyday ML player. I don't want him traded. He should stay. If you trade him and don't get back one run producer and another everyday player, you might as well trade Lee and Barrett, because it means we won't contend until 2009.

The very concept that they could extend Baker is just mind blowing. Absolutely baffling. And whatever long term outlook this franchise has does not include Baker, and at this point likely shouldn't include Hendry either.

Just what the Cubs need, a 1B that they just sent to AAA. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Cubs have a 1B. Good. Trading Aramis for prospects is a waste unless he's a lock to opt out, and even then I'd explore other possibilities.

Of all the players of his generation, he will be the most difficult for the USMNT to replace. IMO he was far more important than Reyna, and what's worse is that while we have some midfield talent to replace Reyna, we don't have anyone ready to replace McB. Do you guys think that Johnson has enought talent to fill that role? In the current system Johnson is an off forward alongside a target guy. The wings cross in or play up top to the target, who wins 50/50 balls in the air and knocks the ball down for the parter forward or the outside mids. I don't think using him to fill in for McB would be a wise use of his skillset. Right now the guys who would technically be replacements would be Brian Ching, and maybe Taylor Twellman and Nate Jaqua, which is why a new system is needed.

Way out of it? That trade was in 2002, and as of the trade deadline in 2002 they were leading the division by 5 games. That was a classic buy from a buying team and has no relevence to the Cubs current situation. The main point that he and others are trying to make, though, is that the Cubs should never really be unloading. Given their payroll and market, they should always be looking to reload. If Abreu is available, Hendry should be inquiring because Abreu is better than any FA available this coming winter.

I hope he does nothing. The best thing he could do is nothing.

Of all the players of his generation, he will be the most difficult for the USMNT to replace. IMO he was far more important than Reyna, and what's worse is that while we have some midfield talent to replace Reyna, we don't have anyone ready to replace McB.

Agreed. Led Zeppelin is IMO the greatest band ever, and if they lose to the band that has put out the same album 6 times in the last 15 years... I'll probably cry. How do you figure? The first 3 albums of the 1990's are nothing like the last 2, structurally, sonically or lyrically. And FWIW, U2 is amazing live as well.

Trading Ramirez for prospects means you are completely writing off 2007. Also, Do you have any faith at all that this organization can properly develop any prospects you get in return? The only kind of deal I would ever entertain for Aramis is as part of a package for ARod, or for a comparable bat in the OF AND a decent 3B, like Goony said. He's far too valuable for the Cubs to just get a couple prospects for. That said, I hope they don't trade him, and I hope he stays.