MeatampPotatoesMan

thank god. prior/zambrano for abreu isn't going to happen. hendry flat out said no.

said Kearns would most likely be involved in a 3-way with Washington with Wilkerson coming to Chicago. we're not interested in Soriano, who won't move to the OF and plays brutal defense.

Well, if it is Williams + Nolasco, I'd still do it, not b/c I think it's a great trade. We might actually be losing a little on this one. I really like Williams. I'd do it b/c Hendry would most likely go out and get another decent innings eater, improving our rotation overall even though I'd have to suffered through Rusch starting.

I'd never do Prior for Abreu straight across. That's just plain silly. Prior is 24 and Abreu is 32. The only reason Prior's numbers haven't been stellar the last two seasons is freak injuries. I'll take Abreu, Michaels, Bourn, and Hamels. Anything less and keep on steppin'. (basically, this would never happen)

it could also depend on when Muskat asked that question or who she heard it from, etc.

They're in the same class offensively. Defensively, though, Mench is a LF who would be masquerading as a RF. Kearns is a top RF defender. Kearns Before ASB: .224/.306/.394/.700 After ASB: .253/.353/.498/.851 Mench Home: .273/.340/.486/.826 Away: .254/.317/.452/.766 Before ASB: .291/.356/.551/.907 After ASB: .235/.300/.382/.682 Mench is pretty decent in Ameriquest. As bad as Kearns played in the first half of 2005, Mench played worse in the second half. But hey, Kearns got sent down, lol. Add in Kearns's defense and I don't see how the two should be viewed in the same light. Kearns has also had injuries (which do scare me) and a crowded OF to deal with.

exactly. the price for kearns in no way inhibits Hendry from pulling off a blockbuster. I agree. If that original deal to get Kearns is true (who knows) then you aren't trading away a lot of high prized talent to get him. Worst case scenario, you have Murton and Kearns as your corner outfielders. That's not good, but it's better than what they have now (and at least has a chance to be productive). The other evaluator is whether Kearns can net you in trade more or less than Mitre and Nolasco would have netted. Personally, I think Kearns has more value than Mitre and Nolasco. Would the A's trade Mark Kotsay to the Cubs for Kearns? Would they trade Kotsay to the Cubs for Mitre and Nolasco? Not necessarily advocating a Kearns/Kotsay trade. I just know the A's want a power righty bat and Kotsay is a CF that can lead off. But, of the two trade proposals, I would imagine the A's would be more tempted with Kearns. That makes the trade even more worth it. I agree with you about the relative trade value of Kearns and Nolasco+Mitre, but I don't think Kearns is a Beane-guy. He Ks way too much. I'm willing to bet Beane doesn't care too much if Kearns ks. How's that? He means that Beene is smart. You CAN'T K too much if you have a good OPS. That's one of the 10 commandments of 'Moneyball'. Does anyone here care about Dunn's K's? Sosa's when he it 66 HR and hit for average? Now, if Kearns (or anyone) K's a bunch and doesn't get on base...then he just sucks. K's or no. Kearns doesn't have good OPS. He's right around ML average.

good point. it's part of the reason i was happy we didn't get furcal. this isn't checkers.

Not to stick up for Neifi, but his defense is pretty good. His offense is horrible, but at least he isn't totally worthless. macias *cough*

I think that if Wood and/or Prior miss significant time we're going to be far back come mid-season. The lineup won't matter. Even Abreu in RF won't dig us out of that hole. I worry more about Hendry not having enough good pitching. Re-signing Rusch was a freaking joke.

exactly. the price for kearns in no way inhibits Hendry from pulling off a blockbuster. I agree. If that original deal to get Kearns is true (who knows) then you aren't trading away a lot of high prized talent to get him. Worst case scenario, you have Murton and Kearns as your corner outfielders. That's not good, but it's better than what they have now (and at least has a chance to be productive). The other evaluator is whether Kearns can net you in trade more or less than Mitre and Nolasco would have netted. Personally, I think Kearns has more value than Mitre and Nolasco. Would the A's trade Mark Kotsay to the Cubs for Kearns? Would they trade Kotsay to the Cubs for Mitre and Nolasco? Not necessarily advocating a Kearns/Kotsay trade. I just know the A's want a power righty bat and Kotsay is a CF that can lead off. But, of the two trade proposals, I would imagine the A's would be more tempted with Kearns. That makes the trade even more worth it. I agree with you about the relative trade value of Kearns and Nolasco+Mitre, but I don't think Kearns is a Beane-guy. He Ks way too much. I'm willing to bet Beane doesn't care too much if Kearns ks. How's that?

It's a man baby! :shock: :lol:

exactly. the price for kearns in no way inhibits Hendry from pulling off a blockbuster. I agree. If that original deal to get Kearns is true (who knows) then you aren't trading away a lot of high prized talent to get him. Worst case scenario, you have Murton and Kearns as your corner outfielders. That's not good, but it's better than what they have now (and at least has a chance to be productive). The other evaluator is whether Kearns can net you in trade more or less than Mitre and Nolasco would have netted. Personally, I think Kearns has more value than Mitre and Nolasco. Would the A's trade Mark Kotsay to the Cubs for Kearns? Would they trade Kotsay to the Cubs for Mitre and Nolasco? Not necessarily advocating a Kearns/Kotsay trade. I just know the A's want a power righty bat and Kotsay is a CF that can lead off. But, of the two trade proposals, I would imagine the A's would be more tempted with Kearns. That makes the trade even more worth it. I agree with you about the relative trade value of Kearns and Nolasco+Mitre, but I don't think Kearns is a Beane-guy. He Ks way too much.

exactly. the price for kearns in no way inhibits Hendry from pulling off a blockbuster.

If we're looking at Jacque Jones for RF, I'd rather have Kearns, who puts up better offensive numbers (over the last two seasons anyways) and save the team millions per year. Kearns also has the potential to be a whole lot better offensively. I really don't see Hendry pulling off the blockbuster for Dunn or Abreu.

I guess it's a question of how much is a real shot at a WS worth to Burnett. For a difference of $5-$10 million I would go where I might actually get to win a WS or two. $50 million is already enough money for multiple lifetimes. He's already won a WS so maybe it's all about the cash right now. He did grow up a Cards fan. I'd definitely take the paycut to play for the Cubs were I in Burnett's shoes. That's a dream that people can't buy for 5-10M dollars.

The only real chip we're giving up is Nolasco. I'll take a flier on Kearns for that price, even though he had the BABIP driven debut. Just don't count on him to be the solution. Getting him at this juncture would seem to be hedging our bets on Murton. hopefully one of the two will shine and Mabry won't get much playing time.

moran

i'd sign with the cards. winning is fun and so is counting your millions.

I like Kearns for Novoa + Mitre. Kearns isn't a stud, but he's worth more than Novoa and Meat Tray, who are both pretty mediocre. If nothing else, we get a guy with a rifle arm that can play limited action in the corner OF spots. Man, Kearns always gets it rough from the Wrigley bleachers. It would be funny to see the same people showing him love just b/c he has a new uniform. :lol: edit: oh, it's nolasco, not novoa. hmmmm. i don't know.

IMO this is such a no brainer if CPatt and a young pitcher is all it takes. If our young arms aren't going to get shots in the rotation or the pen, I'm less hesitant to trade them.

What is a "true" leadoff hitter. Paint a picture for me. Give me some numbers to work with. If he's saying not a true leadoff hitter in the Cubs eyes, I think I understand. The Cubs have their central casting version of the true leadoff hitter, and when they are focused on one thing, they usually get it. Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a true leadoff man, and narrowing down your search for greater production to fit the mold of your scouts' preconceived notions of what each position should look like is only doing a disservice to your team. If he is saying that Wilkerson isn't a good option for leadoff, then I completely disagree with him. The latest from Rosenthal The Cubs continue to push hard for Marlins center fielder Juan Pierre, but the Nationals' Brad Wilkerson could emerge as another option. Nationals GM Jim Bowden has long been interested in Cubs center fielder Corey Patterson, and the Cubs have a number of young pitchers who might appeal to the Nationals. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5141070 Wilkerson in CF, please. Forget Gathright and Pierre. I hate Pierre. Gathright's not horrible, but if we're going to give up a ton of talent, let's get someone that can produce at the ML level, since we're going to lean on them to set the table for Lee and Ramirez. I realize Wilkerson had a power drop, which may/may not be b/c of RFK, but he lead off for a good portion of the year. He probably wasn't trying to demolish the ball, just get on base.

If anyone knows how it goes down at Wrigley, it's Ryno. This is depressing. :(

I don't know about putting eggs in baskets, but Hendry is starting to look a lot like Humpty Dumpty.

It's like Hendry wants to screw up this team, but the baseball gods won't let him.