KingCubsFan

there are a few names that have no business being on this list. konerko was traded twice - at age 21 and age 22 - once for the old "proven closer" (jeff shaw) and then the next time for mike cameron. the two years he was traded he was OPS'ing over 1.000 in AAA, so he certainly didn't flop for one organization before turning good for another org. hafner was inexplicably traded for einar diaz; at the time of the trade hafner was one of the better 1b prospects in baseball. i would argue against gonzalez being on this list because he was still young when florida traded him for something of value (ugie urbina) and then by the time he was dealt to san diego for another player of value (chris young), he was raking in AAA and was blocked by teixeira. david ortiz was still a solid hitter for minnesota, then his power/steroids blossomed with the red sox. but he wasn't a bust by any means. and joe nathan was one of the better setup men in baseball the year before the giants traded him to the twins (and what a bad trade that was) There's obviously going to be variations in how much value is given up, but most of these guys (I forgot Nathan was healthy for a year before the Twins traded for him) were either blocked or had disappointed in their organization (or organizations). Yes, Konerko was traded for Mike Cameron, the same Mike Cameron who had just hit .210 with a .621 OPS for the White Sox. It's not as if the guy's value was at an all time high. And Konerko, despite destroying AAA, had just finished a season where he OPS'd .608 in the majors. This trade was basically one disappointing player for another, and the White Sox got more value out of Konerko than the Reds ever got out of Cameron. I'm not sure how Gonzalez being blocked by Teixera refutes my point. He was a former top prospect who was somewhat disappointing (the Rangers valued guys like Hank Blalock over him) and could be easily acquired because he was blocked by a superior player. This would be similar to the Cubs going out and getting Yonder Alonso right now (which I think they should try). Same thing with Hafner. He was traded for crap, meaning his organization didn't value him enough. And Ortiz was non-tendered by the Twins. These are obviously some of the best cases, but I think the Cubs should try and hit similar homeruns. I would never advocate giving a lot of playing time to guys like Francouer or Melky Cabrera, because they had never really had sustained success in the minors. The first player I would target would be Matt LaPorta. With Sizemore out, start with Byrd and see if you can pry him away. Someone above mentioned Clement, but his recent BB/K ratio decline worries me. I doubt the Blue Jays have given up on Travis Snider yet, but he'd be another one. I mentioned Alonso above. Chris Nelson will never play SS for the Rockies, let's see if we can get him. I'd rather have him play 2B for the rest of the year over guys like Barney and Dewitt (although not LaMahieu). Matt Gamel is another one. See if we can get them for relatively cheap, and see how they perform for us for the rest of the year. If we don't get Fielder or Pujols, I'd rather roll the dice with someone like LaPorta rather than bringing back Pena for another 10-12 million.

Not sure why the focus is on a guy with 55 at bats who lived in a trash can last year and Melky Cabrera. There's obviously some risk (and luck) involved, but smart teams who identify the right type of player have been able to get a ton of value out of this practice. Even the Cubs have had success, but they don't do it enough. Through the years, there's been some really good players who failed in their first organization and revived their careers (some of these guys had more success than others in their first organization): Carlos Pena Paul Konerko Kelley Johnson Carlos Quentin Bobby Jenks Matt Thornton Travis Hafner Adrian Gonzalez David Ortiz Jon Rauch Joe Nathan Ryan Ludwick Jayson Werth Sure, the Cubs have a lot of money, but they're not the Yankees. They need to plug holes with cheap production, and this is one of the best ways to do it, particularly when your minor league system isn't producing impact offensive talent.

I think Ethier might be the better buy just because he's not tricking anyone into believing he's a CF. I know I sound kind of crazy for saying this, but if I was to go after a young maybe available player currently playing CF it'd be BJ Upton. I think Upton can basically be Mike Cameron 2.0 with sick D and solid offense with good power in CF. I like Rasmus, but like Kemp I feel like there just might be a chance that he's more COF than CF. For w/e reason I buy him as a CF moreso than Kemp. It might be because Rasmus came up as a CF all the way through. If you're targeting BJ Upton, you may as well just stick with Brett Jackson.

Pie may be the worst-case scenario, but the larger point is you suffer through a whole lot of Felix Pie's before you stumble into a gem. Most flameouts stayed flamed-out. Some organizations have better success rates than others at this. Knowing Hendry, we'd probably fail at this, as we'd try and sign athletes like Pie over guys such as Carlos Quentin or Travis Snyder who, despite all indications that they should succeed in the majors, have been disappointing for whatever reason. And I feel like a broken record saying this, but the White Sox have been really good at this practice for quite a while.

If they had to trade one of their best prospects for a mediocre (and possibly expensive) rent-a-player, my guess is that they'd rather just bring up Goldschmidt. I think the best we can hope for is a package similar to what we got for Derrek Lee last year.

I'm a Cashner fan, but you can't really count on him to do anything for the rotation next year. Anything he can contribute should be seen as a bonus. He'll have likely thrown a grand total of 6 innings in 2011, and not that many in 2010 either. If the Cubs still see him as a starter long-term, we're better off having him pitch most of the year in AAA and limiting his innings.

Why did Nelson Perez get sent back down? He wasn't doing terrible in AA. If they don't think he can handle upper level pitching, they might as well stop wasting time and convert him.

The walk is more exciting for him than the home run at this point. At this point, he'll probably never walk enough, so he better start hitting for some legit power.

Is this really true or is this based on reputation? I don't put much stock into defensive stats, but they suggest he's pretty bad out there and the only thing that impresses me when watching him is his accurate arm. He basically has one skill, and that's getting on base. His walk rate is at a career low this year and he's getting older. I wouldn't mind him as an insurance policy/4th outfielder, but there's no reason to give him starter money.

Philly's payroll was fairly flat through the era of Gillick's tenure when the team became a dominant force. It didn't skyrocket until after they won a world series when the higher ups chose capitalize on a resurgent fan base by telling them they weren't going to pull an Arizona and fall apart. Winning a world series doesn't make you a great GM. Being well over .500 every year and winning 90+ with regularity sure does. Kenny Williams has barely outperformed Jim Hendry but he got lucky with one title to sooth the masses and his boss. Other guys were pump and dump GMs but that is an entirely different scenario. So Brian Cashman and Theo Epstein are the only "great" GM's in baseball?

All of those are pretty defensible. Brownlie was a Top 10 talent who slipped because of signability. Harvey was a possible #1 pick, while Markakis was thought to be a reach where he was drafted as a hitter (most saw him as a pitcher). Pawalek, again, was a top 10 talent who dropped because of signability. And Vitters was a consensus top 5 talent as well. Hayden Simpson or Tyler Colvin are one thing, but none of these were questionable in terms of overall talent. Development is/was a different story, of course.

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market. I think it's a mistake to assume Soriano won't get any worse going forward. Right. And why would we even need to go on the open market to replace Soriano? Colvin could play put up a .744 OPS with an OBP under .300 for the league minimum. I don't think he could. Fair enough. I have my doubts as well, but it's not unreasonable to think that Colvin could be close to Soriano's equal over the next few seasons, and the 7 or 8 million we could theoretically save could be put to better use. I personally think Soriano is essentially untradeable.

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market. I think it's a mistake to assume Soriano won't get any worse going forward. Right. And why would we even need to go on the open market to replace Soriano? Colvin could play put up a .744 OPS with an OBP under .300 for the league minimum.

that'd be fine with me. you'd be getting better production at a cheaper price. but willingham should be more than $5m a year (though he'll potentially be undervalued because he's not a big name and is having a down year in oakland's cavernous confines). He'll also be 33, so it's questionable what he would get, so I was being conservative. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs had to pay anywhere between $9 million and $13 million a year to ship off Soriano. $9 million was just a shot in the dark. There's a very, very good chance the Cubs would end up still spending approx $18 million in LF. If they can upgrade, great, but I'm not so sure Willingham is that upgrade. Yes, he's in Oakland, but that's a pretty steep drop in production. He's coming on very strong in the last month so hopefully it was just a slow start in a new ballpark, but his age needs to be considered in all of this. I mean, how long would you be signing him for? Ideally it would just be for a year, but who is available as an OF FA in 2012? I know Kemp hopefully would be, but I'd figure that if the Cubs went for him they'd try and and figure out CF and RF between him and Jackson. I don't know if I want to pay Ethier the big contract he's likely to get. Who else is out there? Since you talk about Kemp so often, what do you think he could reasonably command in the 2012 offseason? Not that it really matters; the guy is my favorite position player since Griffey and I'd be ok giving him whatever he requires. Monetarily speaking. Kemp is a tough call, just because his defense in CF isn't exactly stellar and one his main strengths (speed) will deteriorate during his next longterm contract. Of course, if he has another year like this, I'd play him anywhere and not worry about stolen bases.

The only problem I had with Lou in the playoffs was playing Fukudome in 2008. He was clearly done for the season, and Fontenot should have been out there. Obviously wasn't the reason we lost though.

it was bonus demands. his line for his junior year was .427/.547/.772/1.319. I think that was the year before. He broke his ankle his junior year and missed most of the season. http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-basebl/spec-rel/030301aaa.html

Prior wasn't just another top 10 pick though. You need to compare him to guys like Verlander, Beckett, Strasburg, etc. Guys that only come along once in a while and are head and shoulders above everyone else. In hindsight, it's easy to say we should have taken the guy who has had a great career, but it would have been roundly criticized at the time, and rightfully so. IIRC, Teixera didn't exactly have a stellar year prior to the draft, which caused him to slip.

We're terrible, he may be gone at the end of the season, and he's the only real trade piece on the team that could possibly bring back something of value? I also see point of keeping him in order to bring him back next year, though.

Hiring Dusty Baker was clearly the most damaging move to the entire franchise. It really set the Cubs back years and permanently damaged 2 of the most talented players the organization had developed in recent times. Juan Pierre was far and away the worst trade (and should be attributed somewhat to the hiring of Dusty since Pierre was the kind of player he wanted).

Seriously?

Do you think signing Dave Bush is distracting him too much to make trades as the deadline approaches, or do you think he thinks signing Dave Bush plugs a hole, and now he doesn't have to worry about the rotation going forward? Personally, I just think it was a waste of time in general. I highly doubt that he thinks that Bush plugs any kind of hole any more than Davis, Ortiz, or Lopez did, but on the other hand, if they are looking for another starter, they should just call up Coleman, Jackson, or Cabrera, who have been bad, but theres a chance that they could have some kind of future. If your a team on the brink of contention, it would make sense to keep trying out every retread you can get your hands on in hopes of finding lightning in a bottle, but as is, 12.5 games out of 1st and 19 under .500, I just dont get it. I can understand looking at washups that were once good like Colon, Garcia, and Milwood, but we just keep picking up these guys who were decent at best when they were in their prime. I strongly doubt they'd want to destroy what has to be shaky confidence in Jackson and Cabrera right now. The way they have pitched this year, they would be destroyed in the majors. Is that what you want to see? Agreed, but isnt Casey Coleman a fingey enough prospect who seen enough big league action that they could just call him up and see what hes got? We've seen what Coleman's got, and it's not good.

Doesn't really make sense since part of the reason for the trade is to have Jon Jay in center. That would be a steal for the Rays though.

Lee is #7, in between Mesoraco and Desmond Jennings. St. Louis now has 2 of the top 4 prospects in baseball too.

Keith Law did his midseason top 50 and, somehow, Hak-Ju Lee is now a top 10 prospect in all of baseball. How can he possibly be ranked over Profar?

I didn't know Josh Vitters joined the board