twothousandfive

Wise idea, but after Patterson, if Pie fails, I think they almost have to make a trade for someone who is more likely to hit -- Fuld is the all-glove, no-hit defensive CF. So I think Colvin is blocked, either by Pie or by failure of young CFs. You could even argue that Vitters and Donaldson, from the BA top 20, are blocked, by Ramirez and Soto. though I realize saying Donaldson is blocked by Soto is presumptious and exactly what Craig is cautioning against with Colvin. PTBNL is one way around that, Of course, then basically every position player is the minors is blocked. If they can make informed decisions on some of the arms, they could move the high minor league position players to fill holes in the majors, then see about moving the less talented arms in the high minors to fill-in gaps in the lower minors -- but trading prospects for prospects isn't all that common. Pitching aside, the need for replacements for the Major League roster is really three or four years away, right? Maybe they should load up on high schoolers this summer.

No matter how it shakes out, 6-7-8 have the potential to be pretty bad. DeRosa's OPS is .750, lifetime. he was way above that in 2006, dropped to .790 last year. Soto is an unknown, and could run into problems once he's a known. Then even if Pie gets it together, he'll move up with Theriot likely moving down -- all the while counting on Fukudome to be as advertised. There are going to be awful lot of easy outs this year, shortly after Ramirez bats.

I think it is a stretch to call Rich Hill's 2007 season a "break-out" year. 11-8 ERA of 3.92 just doesn't qualify. A WHIP of 1.2, after 2006s 1.25 is nice, as is the 8.45 Ks/9. And a lot of that is from the first 22 innings of the year, when he let up only 1 run. From there, he had one or two very good starts each month, mixed in with 2-3 poor ones in those same months. His ERA was 3.96 or higher every month after April. He looked good and continued to improve, but it was hardly a breakout. Especially since he was 27. Now, compare his second full season at age 27 to Erik Bedard's second real season, at age 26. Bedard in 2005 was 6-8 with an ERA of 4.00. WHIP of 1.4, K/9 of 7.94, but in only 141 innings. Bedard then improved in 2006, going 15-11, 3.76 in 196 innings. The he took the big leap last year, mostly due to 11 ks/p, up from 8 ks/9 in his three previous seasons. Hill dominated lefties, got his Ks/9 to 8.45 and limited his walks. Bedard is a great comparison for many reasons, but I think mostly because of age. If he wants to make the same leap as Bedard, he's going to have to win easily in most games where he dominates. 7 ks in 4.2 innings, but 4 earned runs against Cincy on Sep 17 (just after shutting down Houston)? That can't happen. And just before Houston, Pittsburgh knocked him around. If that silliness stops, he can be a breakout pitcher, like Bedard. If not, the Cubs will wish they'd moved him FOR Bedard.

And, if I've got it right, this has no impact on next season. In fact, if Patterson has one option left, the Cubs have no outfield commitments for next year -- Murton, Patterson (and Pie) can all play in the minors, and Hairston, Lawton, Burnitz, and Hollandsworth are free agents. The Cubs can after anyone they want back (Burnitz and maybe Lawton) and if they get turned down, they've got options. it can burn them, and it'd be great of they gotten Burnitz for two years (hindsight is great) but they've got first crack at any of those seven, and fewer commitments means more opportunity to go after free agents. Helps the Cubs stay competitive this year, zero impact (well, first dibs on Lawton but he hasto take more than a 20% pay cut, right?) on next year.