Sammy Sofa

This game is just the pinnacle of all around sloppiness.

Yeah, it's too bad the Cardinals are involved. It would be massively entertaining otherwise.

by productive out i assume you mean "cut the cards' win probability in half" Lol numbers don't mean a thing to them. Still flogging that one, eh?

Here be baseball madness.

Reyes, easily. Prince is fat, but fortunately he doesn't have a history of injury to worry about.

This post is so obviously right it hurts.

That's why I want to move him. I really can't see the 2012 team contending. For this reason, Byrd is the guy with some legit trade value. His value likely isn't very high right now given how last season went and the Cubs would be foolish to write off 2012 just yet. There's little pressing need to trade him ASAP. They'll have plenty of time to move him before the deadline, and hopefully by then he'll have worked some of that value back.

Byrd is essentially a serviceable placeholder at best. Perfectly tolerable give how little he makes and that he'll be gone after this coming season.

I agree. And potentially the greatest player of all time is the time you make an exception. Exactly why this comparison is so flawed. There's a much higher chance that Pujols is useful to good late in his career than there was with Soriano, there's a lot further for Pujols to fall than there was with Soriano, and Pujols will provide us with far more production early in the contract than Soriano did. As for Pujols OPSing .850+ when he's 38-40, it probably is very unlikely but if there's going to be a player who beats the odds, Pujols very well could be that player. Comparing Pujols' skillset to Soriano's is flawed. Comparing their ages and contracts is not flawed. It's the latter we're doing here. How is it not flawed? Comparing their ages and contracts is hinged on what type of players they are. It's flawed because I don't think there's a strong connection between skillset and aging curve. The notion that Soriano should be expected to decline faster than Pujols because his game is more predicated on speed seems specious. The studies I remember seeing have shown the relationship to be weak or nonexistent. I'm open to being shown otherwise, though. But it's not just his speed; Soriano has always been an obviously flawed, streaky player. Failing speed was hardly the only major concern, as that guys like him tend to not age well as their relatively limited skillset starts to decline.

I agree. And potentially the greatest player of all time is the time you make an exception. Exactly why this comparison is so flawed. There's a much higher chance that Pujols is useful to good late in his career than there was with Soriano, there's a lot further for Pujols to fall than there was with Soriano, and Pujols will provide us with far more production early in the contract than Soriano did. As for Pujols OPSing .850+ when he's 38-40, it probably is very unlikely but if there's going to be a player who beats the odds, Pujols very well could be that player. Comparing Pujols' skillset to Soriano's is flawed. Comparing their ages and contracts is not flawed. It's the latter we're doing here. How is it not flawed? Comparing their ages and contracts is hinged on what type of players they are.

Mantle, DiMaggio, Snider and Griffey all had careers cut short due to chronic serious injuries (mostly with their knees). Pujols obviously isn't impervious or invincible, but he hasn't he had the repeated and serious issues those guys dealt with for long periods of time (or even the entirety of their careers). Foxx's career was sidelined by him being a ridiculous drunk. Ott did indeed fall off a cliff production and ability-wise, but that was after playing 18 120-game or more seasons (4 in the 120's, the rest all 135 and up), so it's not like he didn't have a very long career and fell out of the game prematurely; the guy was a full time player when he was just barely 19. Throw it all under "[expletive] happens". Like you said, Pujols isn't immune to [expletive] happening. Even if we can't envision where the [expletive] will come from as we sit here today. Nobody is, including players under 30. Yes, obviously the risk is inherently higher as they get older, but looking for insight into what can be expected/hoped of Pujols with players like seems pretty faulty since he's been fortunate to not suffer all the knee (and booze) problems those guys were wracked with. The risk is not only inherently higher as guys get older, but also as the contract gets longer and the dollars get larger. Obviously Pujols is a special player, but this is the proverbial perfect storm. You've heard me say this before: the Cards benefitted colossally from Pujols' massively underpaid peak years -- let them suffer from his massively overpaid decline years too. You need to overpay for good FA, much less one of Pujol's caliber. That's a given. The Cubs are fortunate enough to be a team that can eat big contracts, even one as big as what Pujol's might command. The primary risk is in whether or not you get enough of a return from his above average years. If you think those aren't going to last long enough to justify what he's likely to get, so be it, nothing is going to convince you otherwise.

Not happening. Theo said as much today. We've made a huge mistake. LOL. Well, you know Theo and Eddie are buds. Theo was on Waddle and Silvy and said eventually EV will be playing at Wrigley. That song gives me goose bumbs. A very fitting typo.

Not happening. Theo said as much today. We've made a huge mistake.

First order of business: ban Vedder from Wri-guh-lee Field.

Mantle, DiMaggio, Snider and Griffey all had careers cut short due to chronic serious injuries (mostly with their knees). Pujols obviously isn't impervious or invincible, but he hasn't he had the repeated and serious issues those guys dealt with for long periods of time (or even the entirety of their careers). Foxx's career was sidelined by him being a ridiculous drunk. Ott did indeed fall off a cliff production and ability-wise, but that was after playing 18 120-game or more seasons (4 in the 120's, the rest all 135 and up), so it's not like he didn't have a very long career and fell out of the game prematurely; the guy was a full time player when he was just barely 19. Throw it all under "[expletive] happens". Like you said, Pujols isn't immune to [expletive] happening. Even if we can't envision where the [expletive] will come from as we sit here today. Nobody is, including players under 30. Yes, obviously the risk is inherently higher as they get older, but looking for insight into what can be expected/hoped of Pujols with players like seems pretty faulty since he's been fortunate to not suffer all the knee (and booze) problems those guys were wracked with.

Holy [expletive] [expletive] in a [expletive] tree covered with [expletive] sauce all full of [expletive]. That wouldn't even be fair.

Sexcellent.

Oh, of course he will. Just like all the other managers who "do things the right way" and won't take any [expletive].

Mantle, DiMaggio, Snider and Griffey all had careers cut short due to chronic serious injuries (mostly with their knees). Pujols obviously isn't impervious or invincible, but he hasn't he had the repeated and serious issues those guys dealt with for long periods of time (or even the entirety of their careers). Foxx's career was sidelined by him being a ridiculous drunk. Ott did indeed fall off a cliff production and ability-wise, but that was after playing 18 120-game or more seasons (4 in the 120's, the rest all 135 and up), so it's not like he didn't have a very long career and fell out of the game prematurely; the guy was a full time player when he was just barely 19.

No. There's a difference between saying that he sucks (which he does as an old man) and pointing out how he was so hugely overrated defensively in his prime years. That's why it was such a meme with sites like FJM.com, because you had so many meatballs practically knocking each over to slobber over Jeter like he was amazing at all aspects of the game. Jeter was a solid defensive SS as he matured, but some spoke about him like he was this defensive whiz.

It makes me laugh that so many of the people who would rather wait for Votto to be a FA seemingly think he's a lot younger than he actually is. If the Cubs sign him when he'd be a FA next he'd be 30.

You're kidding, right?

What the hell are you talking about?

The Cards reported max so far was 9 years/$195 million right? No problem.

I really don't. I think it's more likely that Fielder or Pujols is their big splash and not much else in terms of big FA moves (like signing Wilson) before next season. Re-signing Pena is just...dumb. The Cubs desperately need a middle of the order bat and a 1B and Pena is neither a long-term solution, nor do they have anyone in the system to play 1B, nor is the 1B market looking like much at all for a couple years. Theo was reportedly "wowed" by Ricketts' plans for this team, and I can't imagine for a guy like Theo (and the guys he's bringing in) that he would be so swayed by something that included "uh, yeah, you know how badly we need a #3 hitter and 1B? And how Fielder and Pujols are out there? Sorry, your choice is Pena or worse."