Northsider

Given that the Cubs have very little starting pitching right now, and the fact that starting pitching is a premium on the market this year, would it be a good idea to go with a four-man rotation this year, getting another pair of pitchers that consistently have 200+ innings? Z is probably capable of starting 40 some games - and is better on three days rest, if I'm not mistaken. Hill seems to have enough stamina (2 CGs in 17? starts last year). Perhaps getting an FA(Lilly?) and/or Westbrook, then using Miller as fourth starter (if we get just 1) or long man, would be a better option than trying to fill out all 3 holes remaining in a 5-man rotation. Also, it would allow Hendry to keep his 7-man pen and still have 11 pitchers. Thoughts?

Last I checked, Rich Hill was putting up some really amazing numbers in his minor league career. Also, the only thing that seemed to be holding him back in the majors was some psychological issue that he seems to have gotten over. I won't be too surprised to see Rich Hill have a killer year next year, and surpass Z. I'll also say that I expect him to have 250 K if he has 200 IP.

On Dukes' attitude problems; haven't quite a few of the Tampa players become frustrated with that organization, even to the point where they'd call it out? Huff, I think, became frustrated with the organization, as did Upton (as was mentioned). I think I also read a quote from Young saying that everyone looked at it as way to get into the league, but would never consider staying there longer than that. It occurs to me that the whole organization may just be rotten, in which case a player who already has a bit of a temper might get pushed well beyond their limits. Therefore, I'd say, if Tampa is getting frustrated with him, try and snag him on the cheap and see if his temper simmers down in an organization that so many other players feel comfortable with. If he cools, we've got a heck of a steal. If he still causes problems, just cut him and we haven't lost much.

Also: Boof Bonser Gene Brabender Josh Booty Elliot Bigelow Karl Best Ray Blades I kinda cheated, Thanks baseball reference. (I only had time to look at the A's and B's sections, though, and mostly skimmed the lastnames.)

Urban Shocker: http://www.baseball-reference.com/s/shockur01.shtml

Is rotoworld suggesting Murton for Westbrook might occur? That sounds kinda ugly for us.

He's not a type A or B FA, Lou spoke shortly after his signing about wanting a solid bench, and when we were going nowhere we did him a favor by trading him to the contending Twins. Anyone else interested in trying to re-sign him?

All things considered, I'd rather have Murton. He'll cost MUCH MUCH less and he's much younger. I don't see why you couldn't have both though. Murton's OBP in his first 2 years is .370. Very solid. In case you didn't look it up, he hit .319/.390/.522 (.911 OPS) after the all star break. Please explain how Pierre had a solid year? Since when is a .330 OBP (especially for a leadoff hitter) and a .717 OPS "solid"? JJ had a good year last year, but Murton's was better. I believe people give Murton a little more slack because he's young. Young players are often very inconsistent. And just so you know, Soriano's career OPS is only .004 points higher than Murton's. Murton is only going to get better and Soriano is only going to get worse. I understand what you mean..But who cares about money right now..We have tons of it..Its not mine or yours..Its the Trib's...Spend whatever the hell it takes for us to win the world series...If your a pitcher, who would you rather face, Soriano or Murton? wihtout a doubt, its Murton..You wanna have those batters that scare the crap out of pitchers...Fpr example DLee and Ramirez..I know Murton had the Great OBP and is patient..But wouldnt you rather have someone like Soriano with 40+ HR potential up in the bottom of the 9th with 2 outs and runners on to save the game?? If we can kepe Murton and get Soriano..thats fine.. Im just talking about the man love for Murton that he gets, even when he blows... I rather hate to spoil your party, but Murton's worst game last year was a 5 AB 0 H 3 SO performance against the Cardinals. In June. And it was the only game in which he had more than 2 SOs the whole season. Soriano had a pair of 4/0/3 performance and one 5/0/4. When Soriano's bad, he's at least as bad as Murton, and he seems to do it more often - this was a career year for him, and was also Murton's 'Sophomore Slump' year. As for the 9th inning, runners on situation? Gimme Murton, he'll walk in a run. Soriano will just KO to end the game. Sori is more likely to make some pitcher's "bases loaded, two outs, full count" dream come true.

Schmidt and Drew are both type A, and I think Lugo is B. We can only sign two of those three. I still like the idea, but it is no longer possible. I very much doubt we get Schmidt, so it'd be interesting to see who else we could get in trade pitching-wise.

I don't think the Braves are going to undervalue one of their players, even with an 'off' season, especially with the crazy AFL season he's having. Schuerholz knows how to buy low and sell high. Also, I doubt Hendry would look at a player that can't help him right now, given that he's hoping to keep his job; remember, the stated goal is to win the WS in 2007. He needs starting pitching and OF help (and MI help, but Hendry is ignoring that). The only way he's going to make a deal for a new catcher is a. Can he get some starting pitching in the deal? b. Will the new catcher be able to play this year at a high level? I want Salty, and I think he'd be the better overall option for us, but I doubt Hendry is willing to play Salty this year. If someone could convince him that Salty is ready - which may be possible given McCann's jump to the majors - then he might go for the deal. That leaves only the pitching aspect of the deal to cover. Barrett is now expendable, since we have McCann or Salty to take his spot. Barrett apparently has some ability to play 3rd as well as catcher, which gives us more options. So, then, we should be looking at teams that have pitching and holes at either 3rd, catcher, or DH, and are willing to trade pitching/fill the hole. Teams with starting pitching: White Sox, Red Sox, Angels, Marlins, Indians, Twins?, Brewers, Pirates, Athletics, Dodgers, Giants?, Padres, Rockies? Teams with holes at 3rd or catcher: Blue Jays(DH), Red Sox(3b), Angels(3b), Marlins©, Phillies(C?/3b), Royals(all), Tigers(3b), Twins(3b?), Pirates©, Rangers(Blalock/trade?), Dodgers(3b), Giants(3b), Rockies© Note: these lists are rather rough estimates based on current Major-League rosters/stats and FAs, if you can please update and change them around. With both, based on previous lists: Red Sox, Angels, Marlins, Pirates, Dodgers, Giants, Rockies Red Sox have only 3 IF listed on their current roster, Barrett could fill in the remaining spot. They have some pitching, but are unlikely to give up anyone but Lester or Clement, leaving them with a Schilling Wakefield Matsuzaka Papelbon Beckett rotation. Angels want to sign Zito or Scmidt, we could probably get Santana off their hands, thus freeing a rotation spot, for Barrett. I thik this might be a slightly better option than getting Lester from the Red Sox. Marlins would want Salty or McCann, and don't want to take on salary. Not really an option for us. Pirates Have mostly young pitching, and would be reluctant to send a promising young arm anywhere within the division, so we might have to pay more for one of their guys. They need OF, too, so we might convince them that Jones is a good OFer. It'd be such a shame to lose him within the division. Then we might have a shot at Duke, thanks to a bad sophomore season. Dodgers could use a 3rd baseman. We'd have our best shot at Lowe or Penny, if we want to package Barrett, or Kuo and some if we aren't. Giants have also some young pitching, and could use an offensive upgrade at 3rd. Not sure how viable this trade idea would be, but we might be able to get Lowry for Barrett. Rockies have Francis and Jennings, could use an upgrade power-wise at catcher. Either might be available for Barrett. And I'll go on record as saying Veal will probably be needed to get Salty. And salary relief would be quite welcome for them.

Probably pitching and Cash considerations to cover the Hudson/Jones contracts. I could see a Veal + Novoa or Marshall + Rapada plus 5-7 mil getting it done. He didn't have the best-hitting season this year at AA, but his IsoD increased from .080 to ,123. His K/AB rose, however, from .216 to .227 while his power dropped off dramatically (.205->.150). He played at AA last year, too, and I'm not sure it would be best to bring him up right away, unless we upgraded at SS and made sure he batted 8th so he could just work on his hitting. I don't like that idea so much tho. We might be able to convice the Braves to send us McCann instead for a similar package, probably with a couple more pitchers, but Schuerholz is very proud of being constantly competitive, so I think we'd need to send a stopgap catcher in the package. I've read online (I forget where, please forgive this oversight) that the Angels would be interested in moving a pitcher so they could sign Zito or Schmidt (or Matsuzaka, though that chance is over). We might be able to move Barrett (who can play 3rd) and cash to them for pitching (probably Santana) and maybe Napoli, then get the McCann or Saltalamacchia trade done. The overall deal would probably cost us Barrett's and Santana's contracts, plus some salary relief to the Braves. I don't know what the exact cost of that would be, but we'd get a pretty good pitcher and upgrade defensively and offensively, not to mention age-wise, at catcher.

Don't know how much it's worth, but the Indians' most recent Official Website Mailbag Column mentions the idea of perhaps trading Byrd or Westbrook. Lee is not mentioned.

The Bears game must've done it this time. Except, being Prior, he couldn't have a heart attack like the rest of us, he just hurt his arm.

Over the short term, a *good* coach (unlike Dusty or Dusty-alikes) would be able to make decisions based on psychology - knowing a particular player is in the right frame of mind - that is to say, who's "on", or "hot", or "in the zone" or whatever, would influence field decisions, such as whether to have a player bunt or hit, or whether to use a particular player off the bench. Some managers, Stengel coming to mind, have the ability to put a player into the zone, resulting in, if not a hit, good, strong contact. A manager who has no interaction with his club, except through a computer, would not be able to accomplish this; neither would an AI (unless the AI is sufficiently advanced as to render the hardware difference irrelevant), which is a whole different can of worms. In the case of a 'sufficiently advanced AI', we would now have the problem of bias; we would have to assume, in this case, that all players *AND UMPS* have the same amount of respect for an AI as they would for a Human. Otherwise, close calls (and even not so close ones) would be very liable to go against the AI's team. Further, if the AI's players resent it, then they are less likely to perform as requested and instead do as they wish, making any sort of decisions useless. Admitted, I'm putting a bad face on for the computer; but baseball hasn't exactly been known in the past for being tolerant of 'outsiders'; see Jackie Robinson. The only fix for this would be to make the AI physically indistinguishable from humans. Another point: a good coach can make .230 hitters play better (over the long haul); that's what a coach is for. A sufficiently advanced (and, perhaps, disguised) AI might be able to pull of some of the same tricks, unlike a guy behind a computer, but the AI, like a human, would not necessarily know what specific method of teaching would get through to a player. Further, also like a human, the AI would not be able to 'brute force' the player by trying to cram a dozen different ideas or techniques into his head, as thinking of too many things can mess a player up. Therefore: Bad coach

If I were king for a day, Dusty and his entire coaching staff would be on the gallows. (not chris spier ofcourse) :) So the only person you would keep is the drunk? I, for one, admire the fact that he waited this long into the season to drown his sorrows. He's got a ton of fortitude . . .

Just on the topic of speed . . . check out Herzog's book, I think it's called "You're missing a great game". His book praises speed, defense, pitching, and the basic fundamentals (see some of his stories about Casey Stengel). He praises speed quite a bit in that book.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Weaver supposed to have the same problem Clement had before coming to the Cubs (that is, he hadn't gotten it together yet)? And isn't he supposed to have better stuff? If so, I don't think I'd mind giving him a two-year with a club option . . .

Oh right. I forgot about that. What was the stat line? I can't find it online. :? G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI TB BB SO SB CS OBP SLG AVG 24 92 15 31 11 1 1 14 47 7 12 3 1 .396 .511 .337 http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/app/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Matt%20Murton&pos=OF&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=444875

I'm wondering how popular this would be, and I'm not sure how willing the player would be, but maybe try offering 5 mil to Frank Thomas for a year, and play him off the bench, occasionally spot start Lee or Ramirez. If he'd be willing to come North to prove that he can still play while limiting action so he doesn't get injured . . . I don't think ANYONE up here would mind having him. Just a thought.

Is it a coincidence that the end of Maddux's player contract (ends next year, If I'm not horribly mistaken) coincides with the long-awaited End of Dusty's mangerial contract? Could Hendry be aiming to replace Dusty with Maddux? And, if so - would it be a good idea? I personally think Maddux would work, but I'm wondering what you all have to say. Any major objections to Maddux? Again, just a random thought.

Ok, true, I did oversimplify - I only skimmed over the numbers, and didn't really take as much time going over them as I should. Actually, looking back on Nomo's stats, he had one stellar year (1995, rookie year) and 5 other really good years ('96,'97,'01,'02,'03). Also, Sasaki(2000 rookie) did very well for himself, although he was only a really good closer his first year (37/40 converted as opposed to 45/52, 37/45, 10/14). Hasegawa(1996 rookie), unfortunately, was a closer only one year (2003) when he had absolutely stellar numbers, but came back to earth after that. Before that, he doesn't appear to have been too bad of a reliever, just fair - he typically held his opponents to around .700 OPS. They've had some success, and I don't know their pre-MLB numbers, but 3/4 (Shingo included) had their best season their first year. Only Hasegawa, a middle reliever, had his career year later. Other than those years, they seem (at least to me) to be a bit more average than above average. And then there are those that are more or less average throughout their careers such as Ohka. The hitters seem to have had more success. Iguchi, Hideki Matsui, and Ichiro have all hovered around .280-.300/.350+/.450-.500. Only Kazuo Matsui breaks this trend. Small sample size in both cases, but the hitters seem to have more success and more consistent success, whereas the pitchers seem to have a career year to start things off, then become less stellar. Again, I would also take Matsuzaka, but trade him at the end of the year while his value will most likely be at it's highest.

It seems to me that pitchers coming over from Japan seem to have lots of success their first year or so, like Nomo and Shingo, but fall off the table afterwards as the leagues get used to them. The hitters, like Ichiro, Hideki Matsui, and Iguchi seem to be a bit more durable. I like the idea of getting Johjima, who looks like he could be Barrett with Defense, and either trading Barrett + prospects to someone who needs a catcher (I think Arizona could use one) and getting OFs in return (maybe we could command, say, C. Jackson or C. Quentin?). That all said, I WOULD get Matsuzaka, if only just for one year, in order to get the insane pitching he'll bring and possibly letting Rothschild stealing the gyro off of him. Then trade him for an impact elsewhere while he's at the top of his value.

If on were to trade Derrek Lee, we'd have to drop Nomar and Aramis because of their wild throws. If Nomar could throw accurately, I'd say move him to third and trade DLee, Aramis, Walker to the Marlins for Delgado, Lowell, Castillo, and Miguel Cabrera (who could go in right field or take Murton's spot as Murton goes to RF). Then we sign Furcal and pack Lowell off in the proposed dodgers trade to get Bradley. Bullpen still needs fixing, but we now have a solid offensive-defensive IF with an OF that can hit, and Patterson can sit in the minors until he becomes a zen master of the bat. A bit of a stretch, but fun to think about. One can hope, no?