davell

Indians are signing Cabrera. Not sure if it's a ML deal or NRI.

I think we were probably MUCH higher on Samardzija than almost anyone else when we drafted him and gave him that kind of deal. And he's done literally next to nothing to show anyone else why we did that. And putting a salary dump into a trade with the Twins for a really good player wouldn't work on any level. They're maxed out money wise as it is most likely. I look at Liriano more as a guy for the deadline, if the Twins fall out of it, or over the offseason, where they're trying to get as much as possible before he walks. I think that they're definitely contenders this year, so trading him doesn't make a whole lot of sense right now, because you're not going to replace his production with the return. But, he should be seriously on our radar, if they do fall out of it.

Maybe so, but if I'm going to pay someone 300 million bucks, I want to be considered more than the probable division winner. I'd want to be considered one of the favorites to win the World Series. Don't get me wrong, I know once you make the playoffs anything can and does happen. But, if I'm spending that kind of money on a guy, I'm looking at how my team matches up with EVERYONE, not just the division. I guess I understand that sentiment, but in order to get better you have to have better players. Pujols provides an amazing amount of value for one position, and I think there's some positive externalities to having him on the team that don't necessarily show up in WAR too. Would you really pass on Pujols simply because Brett Jackson stumbled at AAA? It's a lot easier to be creative/lucky and come up with a 2 win CF than it is to come up with a 7 win 1B. No, not at all. I'm just outlining it this way, because of the monetary issues potentially involved here. If Brett Jackson struggles bigtime this year(I don't see it myself, I think he's a pretty safe bet to be at least an average starting CF in the majors) you always have the ability to go and draft someone else. Maybe a Jackie Bradley? But, what I am saying is that if you're the Cubs, you're probably looking at the CF spot as a position that they're going to need to make work for cheap dollars, during the 1st part of a Pujols deal, in all likelihood. Whether it's Brett or someone else.

I don't know that he'd cost more than Garza personally. In fact, i bet it'd be less. You'd have him for one less year and there's still an injury stigma over him, while Garza has the exact opposite stigma, as he's considered a workhorse. The key to making a deal like this, is it WILL kill your system right now. But, if the Cubs go out and spend big in this draft, the system probably doesn't skip a beat. Which is why spending big on overslots is so important. The bigger talent influx you have on a given year, gives you that much more flexibility to make these type of deals. You can lose a McNutt type, if you just drafted 2-3 guys that all profile to be potentially the same type prospect. Which is possible, because 1) This upcoming draft has tons of talent and 2) even if it didn't, some of the better guys fall anyway, due to their signing demands. I didn't like the Garza trade from a talent standpoint of what we gave up, but the Cubs basically did this with that trade. They gave up Archer because they thought McNutt was going to be just as good if not better and you add a proven guy to your major league team as well.

Maybe so, but if I'm going to pay someone 300 million bucks, I want to be considered more than the probable division winner. I'd want to be considered one of the favorites to win the World Series. Don't get me wrong, I know once you make the playoffs anything can and does happen. But, if I'm spending that kind of money on a guy, I'm looking at how my team matches up with EVERYONE, not just the division. To me, I don't think we'll lose Demp after this season personally. He loves it here and has his player option available, which I'd think he exercises. What I don't want to see though, is we restructure it to being slightly less than it is right now and add on another 2 years or so on top of it. But, in the end, this is why a guy like Liriano is much more valuable to me anyway. You'd be thinking ahead to the point where you've got his replacement already and you can let him walk and hopefully pocket some picks as well for him. Third base could be very interesting and could also be very problematic as well. I'm sure the Cubs want this: Aramis has an awesome season and we let him walk.(Not sure if we can decline his option AND then offer arb or not, does anyone know this?) Let someone else sign him for big money and watch him decline steadily over his next contract. Part two of the Cubs plan would obviously be for one of Vitters or LeMahieu to show enough that they look to be the longterm answer for them. Personally, I'm thinking this is not going to happen(other than I can see LeMahieu being a very solid hitting 2B, but not sure his body doesn't move him off there). At that point, maybe DeWitt could move to 3B? You're creating an offensive hole there that'd need to be made up elsewhere though. My best case scenario for the Cubs, other than one of Vitters or LeMahieu being able to handle it, would be for Aramis to have an "OK" season. Then, you give him a 2 year deal at less money and bide some time until another option is available during that time frame.

Count me out on Asik for Lee. There's too much of a chance for serious regret there quickly if we did that. Lee would help, but he's not a difference maker. Obviously, Asik getting traded isn't the end of the world, but I'd rather see him as part of a package that nets us something that's more of a difference maker.

I don't necessarily think it's a longterm payroll decline though. If they do it the right way, they're going to build the system up more, then use some of that newly added talent to acquire guys just like this, if you ask me. If he's wanting a 3/39 extension, I don't think that's all that unreasonable for a guy who just turned 27. It'd buy out 2 post arb years in the process and you're not getting into the mid or upper 30 seasons which are the scary ones. To me, this is the kind of pitcher we need to be looking at, due to the fact we're going to be losing Z in 2 seasons and Demp in the same time period. You'd be replacing their contracts with a younger guy who's just as good(maybe better if he gets back to his previous form) and at a cheaper cost as well.

The Mineo kid we signed this past summer went to the Australian summer league, so that's probably where they'd all go most likely.

By the way, I think that something the Cubs will have to seriously consider if Pujols hits the market is this: How soon do you think you're truly going to be a contender? I would think that ANY team interested in signing Pujols would HAVE to think they're going to be a contender almost immediately, because you're probably going to get about a 4-5 year window of Pujols playing at his best(or near it), followed by a dropoff from that point forward. So, for the Cubs to be in this position, I'd think that they're going to have to see Castro take another step or two forward, same with Cashner showing he's going to be a frontline starter, and possibly even Brett Jackson showing he's going to be a solid CF option. If those 3 guys show these things, it'd allow the Cubs plenty of financial flexibility to go along with having an elite closer in Marmol, a very solid hitting catcher in Soto, a frontline starter in Garza and hopefully a solid hitting OFer in Colvin all being paid below their market value. It leaves the bullpen to be addressed, which is likely to be fine with what we've got in it now and what we've got on the horizon. It leaves 2B and 3B as question marks for the future and an OF spot that's likely to be reserved for an aging Soriano, due to his contract. It'd also leave a couple of spots in the rotation open once Z and Demp are off the books(or resigned cheaper than what they're getting now. One of these spots almost would have to be filled with an "ace" type guy and the other two could be filled with guys from the system or cheaper options at least. But, for me anyway, we need to basically have one of 2B or 3B filled with a very solid bat and one bigtime pitching addition to the rotation, to go along with Castro, Cashner, and Brett jackson all contributing, if we're going to try and make Pujols or even Fielder work for us to the point where the money laid out can actually pay off with a championship over the next few seasons.

Just read this could be true, over at MLBTR. Hey, we need a lefty in the rotation, right? I'll fall into that line of thinking if it means he's a mid-season target for us. That said, I don't see how we could deal for him without crippling our system basically at this point.

If he's not signed by the Cards before the season, I wonder what kind of reaction he'll get at Wrigley this year?

Actually, what he said was overall baseball payroll would be the same basically, but that more money would be allotted towards player develoment and scouting. And so far this year, the Cubs have spent 1.7 million on a pair of Cuban players, 1.4 million to keep Matt Szczur from playing football and are talking about buying land in Central America to build the nicest facilities in baseball to help with things down there. I've been one of the biggest questioners' of Ricketts motives around, but even I'll give credit where it's due and so far this offseason, they've lived up to exactly what they've said. If they spend more on the draft and INT FA in July, then I'll be on board with what they're doing.

I understand being disappointed with specific plays. But I don't know how anyone can be disappointed with the season a 2nd year, 5th round draft pick, out of Abilene Christian who had 51 catches, for 960 yards, 5 TDs, and a league's 5th best 18.8 yards per reception. Just like Hester before him, Knox is a victim of being thrust into the wrong situation as the #1 WR. Get a legit WR and watch him get better. Yeah, that's my feeling on Knox as well. Much better than I would have thought, just put in a role he's clearly not ready for now. To me, a WR is the number 1 priority through FA.

I don't think things look bleak by any stretch moving forward. We've got plenty of money coming off the books starting next year and quite a bit of it is from useless players that are easy as hell to replace for alot cheaper than what we're paying them. We've got a solid group of youngsters that are going to be cheap for a while and we should be able to make trades or sign big name guys starting next year. Add in the fact that if things go right this year, we could win the division, I'm OK with our situation honestly. It's not perfect and we're paying for some past sins, but we're definitely not in the mess that the Mets or Dodgers are either.

AZPhil mentioned Byrd, Silva, Wells, and Dolis for Young and Chris Davis. I wouldn't do that personally, but he said it'd only add a mill to our payroll in 2011 and give us a 3rd baseman next year assuming we don't keep Aram. Like I said though, I wouldn't do this, unless the Rangers were kicking in some solid money over those last 2 years. Like maybe half or so.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/baseball/mlb/02/09/albert.pujols/index.html Heyman says it's a longshot to get done in time.

I think we're going to finish 4th, behind the Brewers, Reds, and Cards in that order. But, we could win the division too. I really don't see all that much separation between these 4 teams.

I don't remember there being a true reason why he dropped, but I do think I remember hearing that if he didn't go 1 overall, he could really tumble quite a ways before getting taken. It seems like he was prepared for it, if I remember correctly.

How often(if ever) do the July 2nd signees show up in the US immediately and make an appearance in rookie league ball before they turn 17? Does it ever happen? As for Toonster's question, I think the Cubs will become a bigger presence down there if they're going to spend that type of money on new facilities. I wouldn't really see the point in going this route if you don't honestly. I'm sure they'l still sign a bunch of lower priced guys too and having better facilities and instruction will certainly help with those guys too, but if you're going to spend lavishly on the new digs, you gotta have some bigtime boom or bust talents using them, to make it work, if you ask me.

Fielder is also significantly worse and fat. I know he lost a ton of weight in the off-season but its still something to worry about. BTW, it would be hilarious if the Cards were forced to trade him a la John Santana because they know they can't re-sign him This is why I said there was probably a 3 WAR per year difference between them. What Hendry and every other GM who's interested in these 2 next year(assuming they both hit the market, which is still highly unlikely if you ask me) is whether or not 3-4 extra wins per year is worth 100 million spread out over a decade? Then, if he decides that it is worth it, you have to ask if Pujols elbow problems are going to be an issue going forward the older he gets? Did he put off TJS, for instance? If so, how much, if any, damage has he done to his elbow since that time. A physical is going to help with some of this obviously, but you have to account for possible physical problems going forward, at any rate. Kind of like what was NOT done when we gave Soriano his contract. Finally, if it's me, I'm debating this: Is the gap between Pujols and Fielder going to widen or close during the middle and late years of this deal? Is Fielder at 30 going to be closer to Pujols when Albert is 34 or will the gap have widened? If I can get Fielder for 8 years, but have to give Albert 10, am I better off with a 34 year old Fielder playing his last year or am I better off paying Albert at 41 for the same scenario?

If Hendry has a reason to choose Fielder over Pujols, it's because Fielder is 4 years younger(at least) and will come a 100 million dollars cheaper for the difference of about 3 less WAR per year most likely.

http://www.csnchicago.com/02/08/11/Kaplan-Ricketts-aiming-to-buy-land-in-Do/kapman_article.html?blockID=406647&feedID=661 Looks like they're going to spend some serious money on a new facility down there.

Young requested a trade today. In the end, I don't see the Rangers finding a taker though. I don't think they'll be wanting to eat very much of the deal and I definitely don't see teams lining up to pay anything close to 16 mill a year for the next 3 for a 34 year old. I'll be surprised if he gets moved.

That's cool. It'd probably be a pretty cool game to go see when they pitch against each other this season. I can't imagine how many scouts would be there for that.

Not without having a pretty down year. I said earlier I could see one of Purke, Cole, or Rendon falling to us and giving it a 50/50 shot. But, it's not because of teams unwillingness to spend money on the draft at this point. I was basing it more on my odds of one of them having an off year and dropping because of that. Boras already has Rendon, Garrit Cole, Starling, Josh Bell(HS OFer) that has extremely varying views right now from what I can tell and one of either Jackie or Jed Bradley. I'm pretty sure there are some teams out there that don't want to deal with him, so maybe Rendon or Cole could possibly fall a bit because of that as well, but not to 9, unless they give teams a reason to pass on them.